The Colorado Supreme Court on Monday censured an ex-trial judge from Summit County who, days after returning from suspension – which the Supreme Court previously ordered for his judicial and criminal misconduct – threatened to put two attorneys in jail and promised to humiliate them in front of 80 jurors for missing a deadline.

Former District Court Judge Mark D. Thompson resigned in January in the face of disciplinary proceedings. The Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline recommended the Supreme Court censure Thompson for a second time, after Thompson agreed he violated multiple tenets of judicial conduct.

In an unsigned May 15 order, the Supreme Court approved the censure. Chief Justice Brian D. Boatright and Justice Carlos A. Samour Jr. did not participate.

The highly unusual second censure of Thompson came nine months after the Supreme Court ordered him suspended for 30 days without pay. The decision came subsequent to Thompson pleading guilty to a misdemeanor, stemming from a domestic incident where he allegedly threatened his stepson with a semiautomatic rifle. The presiding judge in charge of attorney discipline separately placed Thompson on probation for year while he took “anger management treatment” as part of the criminal case.

A mere two days after returning from his suspension, Thompson held a telephonic hearing in a civil lawsuit in which the plaintiff injured himself on the defendant’s property. The defendant died over the summer and Thompson ordered the parties to file certain paperwork for the trial, which was scheduled in late November.

At the Nov. 15 hearing, Thompson asked the parties for an update, but quickly grew hostile. Summit Daily News obtained and posted audio of Thompson castigating the lawyers.

“My order specifically says do stuff on time or there will be sanctions,” he said. “I don’t issue these orders so they can be ignored. And both of you have ignored them.”

The lawyer for the plaintiff, William R. Falcone, said he “was not aware of the process” when a party to the case dies.

“Open a book,” Thompson shot back. Of the defendant’s attorney, Christopher J. Metcalfe, the judge said he had not “done squat either.”

He then berated both men for “neglect of the highest order.” Thompson said he would turn them in to attorney regulators and was dismissing the case for “gross failure to satisfy even any part of this court’s order.”

Thompson vowed he was “not taking the blame for this” and ordered Falcone and Metcalfe to show up for trial, with the summoned jurors, and explain why the lawyers were at fault for inconveniencing them.

“You know, maybe what I should do is make you all come in here and get in front of the 80 people that are going to show up next Tuesday and explain to you – to them, why they’re here and you’re not ready for trial,” Thompson said. “That would be terrific. And then I can send them all home. Maybe that’s an even better idea.”

“I certainly am not happy about that and I don’t want to inconvenience them,” Falcone replied.

“Why do I have to tell them that? It’s not my fault,” snapped Thompson. “You’re going to tell them what your names are and how proud of yourselves that you are for inconveniencing them. That’s what you’re going to do. And it’s going to be really crummy and uncomfortable for both of you.”

The judge then threatened both men with arrest if they failed to demean themselves.

In the following weeks, Falcone and Metcalfe both filed requests for Thompson to reconsider.

“I was frightened and still am fearful of how I will be treated in this courtroom in the future. Quite honestly, I felt unable to provide an explanation as I was being screamed at by the court and being threatened with various repercussions including jail time,” wrote Falcone.

Thompson then walked back his courtroom comments in a pair of orders. He quickly rescinded his directive for the men to appear in front of jurors and embarrass themselves. The judge also wrote that he was “disappointed” in himself for his “intemperance” and rescheduled the trial.

The judicial discipline commission, in its filings with the Supreme Court, described Thompson as having “berated counsel in a tone that was rude, condescending, and mocking.” Thompson maintained it was “appropriate” for him to be stern and to suggest the lawyers face consequences for failing to abide by his order.

“The Commission disagrees that these described circumstances in any way excuse Judge Thompson’s conduct,” wrote the commission.

The Supreme Court censured Thompson for letting his temperament create an appearance of impropriety, for failing to be dignified and courteous, and for creating an “appearance of personal animus.”

The judicial discipline commission’s summary of events also noted that Thompson, the day after exploding at the hearing, held a conference call in a parenting case in which he said that “God willing,” the children will “get as far away from these two parents as they possibly can.”