Victory charges dropped as part of plea deal

Advertisement

— Dr. Colleen “Kelly” Victory, a local anti-medical marijuana advocate who was vocal in the fall about ballot initiatives to ban dispensaries, was sentenced Wednesday after pleading no contest to disorderly conduct.

The charge stemmed from the morning hours of Feb. 18, when police said Victory displayed a .38-caliber handgun while fighting with another woman after an event at the top of Steamboat Ski Area headlined by political commentator Ann Coulter. Victory was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol and using a weapon in a prohibited manner, according to police.

Victory’s attorney Charles Feldmann said Thursday that by pleading no contest to misdemeanor disorderly conduct, Victory was able to bring an end to the painful legal process.

“She was not going to admit to something that she did not do,” Feldmann said. “This was a way to put things behind her and move forward.”

Feldmann said Victory rem­ained adamant that she did nothing wrong.

No contest pleas are treated by the court the same as guilty pleas.

Victory was sentenced to perform 24 hours of community service and will be on six months unsupervised probation. She already had surrendered her concealed weapons permit and underwent an alcohol evaluation.

As part of a plea offer, the charges of driving under the influence of alcohol and using a weapon in a prohibited manner were dropped.

The incident started after a post-event gathering at a restaurant at the base of the ski area when Victory got into an argument with her friend, Lisa Watts, who advocated with Victory in the fall for banning dispensaries.

According to a statement written by Victory in Routt County Court, she and Watts had dropped off Coulter at her condo, and she and Watts began arguing about the execution of the night’s event. The women then argued about whether Victory should drive home, and it escalated into a physical altercation, which is when Victory’s concealed weapon was shown.

“I admonished Lisa to ‘cut the histrionics and drama,’ and I took my holstered weapon from my purse and laid it on the counter, functionally removing it from the equation,” Victory wrote. “I told her that all I wanted to do was end the night, go home and go to bed.”

According to police, Watts said that Victory threatened to “shoot her” if she tried to take away Victory’s car keys and that Victory then displayed a handgun.

Victory wrote that she and Watts continued to argue in a parking garage and that she agreed to have her husband come and pick her up, but she had to move her car out of the garage.

Steamboat Springs Police Department officers arrived and subsequently arrested Victory.

Victory wrote that she refused field sobriety tests but that she wanted to have a blood test and officers refused to take her to have one done.

Feldmann said that in light of the incident, Victory’s medical license was reviewed by state officials.

“They are not recommending any action in regard to her medical license,” Feldmann said.

To reach Matt Stensland, call 970-871-4247 or email mstensland@SteamboatToday.com

Comments

Dan Hill 2 years, 3 months ago

"Victory wrote that she refused field sobriety tests but that she wanted to have a blood test and officers refused to take her to have one done."

Seems like a significant allegation of incompetence on the part of the Police. Did the Pilot not think to ask the PD for a comment on this?

0

bill schurman 2 years, 3 months ago

This whole mess will not go unanswered,. More to follow.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 3 months ago

Has she also lost her driver's license? Refusing a field sobriety test should result in license revocation.

And her statement is amazing! She mentions talking with Wiggins numerous times that evening. She claims the arrest was entirely improper. That she was put into the patrol car without knowing she was being arrested and so on. That officers repeatedly refused to even acknowledge her request for an alcohol blood test. That the arrest, booking and subsequent interview were all highly improper.

If this paper is going to put up her witness statement then it should ask about the investigation and evidence such as officer statements and dept video regarding her allegations. A person that is a local Tea Party leader after an event by the conservative SB Institute hosting Ann Coulter in a signed statement is alleging serious police misconduct Certainly worth publicly revealing the evidence and results of any investigation of whether police officers in liberal SB acted improperly towards a leading local conservative after an event featuring a nationally known conservative.

0

Matt Stensland 2 years, 3 months ago

Hi, Scott, Thanks for your thoughts, and yes, she did lose her drivers license for a year.

Matt Stensland Reporter/Photographer Steamboat Pilot & Today 1901 Curve Plaza P.O. Box 774827 Steamboat Springs, CO 80477 mstensland@steamboatpilot.com 970-871-4247 (office) 970-367-7531 (cell)

0

Kevin Chapman 2 years, 3 months ago

I'm going to go out on a limb here. Someone has some anger issues, and those issues seem to manifest themselves when this person has too much alcohol. How about trying some of that marijuana you have been so adamantly opposed to. It's not very classy for anyone to get into a "physical altercation" much less someone that has pledged the Hippocratic oath. Don't forget....... Primum non nocere!

0

james Patterson 2 years, 3 months ago

Let me get this straight..... a gun is in a secure holster in a purse, there's an altercation, the gun is removed from the secure holster and purse and put on a table "functionally removing it from the equation". Seems to me that a gun left in a holster in a purse is "functionally removed from the equation" and a gun put on the table is functionally in play. This woman having a conceal permit to begin with makes me want our state to rethink it's conceal law. A "what if" question..... what if Colorado had a "Stand you Ground" law like Florida? These types of laws are promoted by T-baggies and their like. I suspect Victory and those like her have never been around lead flying threw the air. It has a habit of hitting unintended targets. I for one feel a lot safer knowing at least one "crazy's" conceal permit has been removed.

0

bill schurman 2 years, 3 months ago

Scott says in part:

"If this paper is going to put up her witness statement then it should ask about the investigation and evidence such as officer statements and dept video regarding her allegations. A person that is a local Tea Party leader after an event by the conservative SB Institute hosting Ann Coulter in a signed statement is alleging serious police misconduct Certainly worth publicly revealing the evidence and results of any investigation of whether police officers in liberal SB acted improperly towards a leading local conservative after an event featuring a nationally known conservative."

I could not agree with you move. And, in my curiosity in publishing her self-serving "statement" I must challenge this newspaper to take a look at all of the facts that led to the filing of appropriate charges and put this case in the full light of day. Surely the police reports are available (through open records law if necessary) and the good name of the Steamboat Police Department might be restored. The real issue regarding this paper is how was it possible that the Court allowed the prosecution to drop the DUI charge and permit a plea to a non-DUI charge? C.R.S. 42-4-1301 (4) states in pertinent part (for the prosecutor to drop a DUI charge): the prosecutor must make" a good faith representation by the prosecuting attorney, that the attorney could not make a prima facie case (for DUI or the lesser included offense of DWAI") if the defendant were brought to trial on the original alcohol related offense... or related offense". How was it possible for the prosecutor to state this in open court? Did the prosecutor say that? If not, why not ? After all, he had evidence that Ms. Victory was intoxicated (read the Order of Revocation form that the officer filled out); the observations of the reporting party (Lisa Watts); the movement of her vehicle from the underground lot OUT via the IN entrance; the fact of her refusal to submit to a chemical test( as shown by the officer signing the Order of Revocation) ; AND, as found by the Department of Motor vehicle in revoking her driver's license for a year pursuant to a finding by said Department that the officer had probable cause to arrest Ms. Victory for DUI and that he requested that she submit to a chemical test; and the fact pursuant to C.R.S. 42-4-1301(6)(d) that her refusal to submit to a chemical test is ADMISSIBLE at trial: and, all of the arresting officer's reports that are with in the prosecutor's file. ALL of the above taken separately or as a whole establishes PROBABLE CAUSE to arrest and proceed in good faith to trial. Clearly the minimum legal standard of a "prima facie" showing.

0

bill schurman 2 years, 3 months ago

In order to finish:

"... "prima facie" showing was met.

Why did the prosecutor "roll over" in spire of the above evidence "? And, as far as Ms. Victory is concerned the good news is that the DUI and Prohibited Use of a Firearm can NEVER be erased. That's the problem with bad karma.

0

Phoebe Hackman 2 years, 3 months ago

Lord knows, we wouldn't want Ms. Victory to suffer through a "painful legal process". Good grief.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 3 months ago

Bill, Maybe she drove her car only on private property within the parking lot. Would that make a difference in being charged with DUI?

Do you know if SB police officers have video? Regardless, her description of booking and subsequent interview should both be on video. And with her statement that she had nothing to drink and the numerous mentions of Wiggins including having dinner with him then did the police get a statement from Wiggins asking if she did have anything to drink?

Maybe Mr Torres should say he fired the bullet into the wall at the Tap House since he was "functionally removing it from the equation" because in the gun's chamber it was a threat, but was now harmless in the wall.

0

bill schurman 2 years, 3 months ago

Driving ANYWHERE in the State Of Colorado is against the law while DUI or DWAI.

The booking process is not recorded. Only a picture is taken along with finger prints. Her booking picture shows her to be laughing. I would think that Wiggins would have been sought out by the defense to disprove intoxication. Remember, Ms. Victory only mentions to the "world" (outside of her legal team) her "version" of the events (which mentions Wiggins) in the statement which she presented to the Court at sentencing.

0

mark hartless 2 years, 3 months ago

In many states, just mentioning that you have a gun, while involved in an altercation/ argument, is considered brandishing.

James Patterson starts off right when he says the gun was in a better place in the purse, in a holster. In fact, if the person was not justified in killing an assailant, she was not justified in brandishing the weapon... period.

However, true to form for much of the anti-gun crowd, he ends with his "feelings", whuich have NOTHING to do with reality of how concealed weapons serve society. I do agree that the whole notion of concealed carry permits is ridiculous but probably for a very different reason than James. I would never, ever ask anyones permisson to carry a weapon and I would never produce a weapon unless I was justified in using it.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 3 months ago

That was a sentencing statement? Reads more like it was written within hours of being arrested because contains such venom.

DA/police didn't have that until yesterday and she choose to submit that?

0

james Patterson 2 years, 3 months ago

Mark.... I am far from anti-gun. I hunt and own many guns. That being said, I find the t-baggie mentality that society would somehow be safer if everyone carried a weapon to be absurd. I know many folks that carry 24/7, but if they are ever in the situation where they feel they have to use their weapon, I want to be far, far away. Most folks that carry are not trained to use it under duress. It's one thing to hit a target at the range, it's quite another to point it at a human and squeeze the trigger, esp if one is excited and/or or feels threatened. (ever had buck fever?) That mentality, combined with their promotion of legalized murder (stand you ground laws) in no way makes for a safer society. The baggies seem to feel that this mentality somehow makes them a more patriotic American or some such thing. For me, it only makes them dangerous to their fellow Americans.

0

mark hartless 2 years, 3 months ago

James, I completely agree about the duress, the false sense of patriotism, and the general lack of composure that overwhelms many folks who carry guns.

However, it is not a "t-baggie mentality" that armed societies are safer. Nor have I heard ANYONE associated with the Tea Party say that "everyone" should carry a gun. To suggest that is their position is false (a lie).

Nor is it "legalized murder" for a person to stand between his wife and kids when some lunatic on God-knows what drug breaks down the door of his home ( his "castle") in the middle of the night. "Stand-your-ground" laws give a man a legal right to do only that which common sense already suggests.

0

james Patterson 2 years, 3 months ago

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. The "second amendment" is a t-baggie focal point (at least their interpetation of it) and they have been known to prove their point by wearing weapons to rallies and the infamous "from my dead fingers" comment. You are right, they don't say "everyone", just everyone they approve of should carry. Your example of the justification for the stand your ground law is touching..... not quite as touching as a young man walking thru a neighborhood minding his own business, being confronted by an armed, gung-ho neighborhood watch patrol like he's doing something wrong, standing HIS ground, then being shot to death for standing his ground against an unjustified confrontation.
When is the last time your example happened in SBS? Routt County? Colorado?
Lastly, why is it you assume that the wife can't protect herself? (are women so weak/incapable?)..... that the intruder is on God-knows what drug? (only drugged up folks break into houses?) It is this type of stereotyping rhetoric that the fear mongers rely on.....

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 3 months ago

Well, gun carry laws got a lot stricter in the 60s when the Black Panthers advocated carrying guns and showed up to a political rally in Sacramento all carrying weapons. That scared a lot of people and even conservative states passed laws against carrying to stop the Black Panthers from holding a similar rally in their state.

If Obama did something like holding a rally encouraging everyone to come carrying then I doubt that many in the gun right's lobby would be happy. We would hear how those people shouldn't be allowed to carry.

0

james Patterson 2 years, 3 months ago

Scott-so true. I don't mean to sound off topic, but I can't believe the DA did not pursue the weapon charge more vigorously. A tragic situation was a second from becoming a reality, yet that seems to be okay. The situation was very emotionally charged, a weapon ( I assume loaded) was taken from a secure place (which means it was handled-could be discharged) and put in a place accessable to both parties. One emotional based action and someone is dead. If that had happened, the community would be sadden, outraged and left wondering how something like that could happen in their protected bubble. The mentality that carrying a lethal weapon is okay, having laws that make it legal to use lethal force if you feel threatened is okay, that there are unpatriotic, non-Americans in our mist that we must defend against.... these attitudes lead to tragedies that we narrowly avoided...... this time. With the current mentality in our country, a Trayvon Martin situation could happen anywhere..... including our beautiful SBS. Unfortunately, hate and fear is in every community in America...... thanks, in part, to the media fear machine and a segment of our society that draws us/them lines. We are all Americans and are all in this together-despite what some factions would have us believe. Citizens carrying guns is not something that will unite us, or protect us. As long as the us/them mentality exist we will not feel safe, no matter how many guns we carry.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 3 months ago

I remain appalled how lightly Kelly got off considering the severity of the charges. This will have no punitive or corrective effect, serving to prevent similar behavior in the future -- if anything, quite the opposite, since it is apparently so easy to get away with it. This lady is obviously very troubled and in need of professional help, which she is now not going to get. Either Feldman is one helluva lawyer, or "Dr." Victory has special pull in high places. Perhaps we should summon Rob Douglas to apply his acute political corruption snooper skills.

0

james Patterson 2 years, 3 months ago

Just have to do it..... tried to ignore it...... just couldn't do it. Mark... go to Teapartypatriots.com. There you will be able to read their stance on the 2nd amendment-comments section to the NRA article is particularly enlightening. Their postion is very clear..... the government has no jurisdiction over a person's "right" to bear arms..... carry a weapon, concealed or not. I think this qualifies my position that they promote "everyone" carry a weapon as truth, not "a lie".

0

rhys jones 2 years, 3 months ago

Then everyone is Wyatt Earp. This should be fun.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 3 months ago

James -- I may have mistaken your point -- but I hope mine is clear.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 3 months ago

With the exception of Virgil, the Earp boys were a bunch of insecure bullies who got their strength in numbers, displaying the substitute for sexual organs in their holsters for all to see -- much as "Dr." Victory (what a name) and some contributors here are wont to do.

0

james Patterson 2 years, 3 months ago

<p>correction.teapartypatriots.org, not .com Highway..... my point is that when I stated the tea party promotes the carrying of guns, I was speaking the truth-Mark claimed I was lying. The mentality that it's okay for folks to have concealed weapons, stand your ground laws, etc may not be conductive to a productive society and the tea party promotes such mentalities. The irony of the Victory situation is that their own stance could have cost one of them their life-they unwittingly demonstrated exactly why folks shouldn't run around with guns. The TP's rigid stance on this topic, along with the NRA's, prevents the country from having a conversation on what place we, as a society, want weapons to have and what controls, if any, we want. Without that conversation we stay with where we are....... you are right..everyone is (can be) a Wyatt Earp..... Gives "duck and cover" a whole new meaning.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 3 months ago

James -- Thank you for the clarification -- I think we are on the same page. It's interesting to note that in Tombstone, Wyatt was a self-appointed Federal Marshall. And you are absolutely correct: Any healthy person who's been around flying lead wants to see as little of that as possible.

0

mark hartless 2 years, 3 months ago

So the Tea Party wants prisoners, mental patients in the physc ward, and children regardless of age to carry guns? Hmmm? I aso am not aware of the Tea Party advocating for convicted felons to carry or legally even posses guns. Perhaps you can dig that up for me.

Giving the Florida/ Travon Martin case as an example when neither you nor anyone else in the general public really knows what happened indicates you are willing to assume whatever "proves" your point. The case hasn't even been to trial yet. How the heck do you know what happened?

And what in the world does Wyatt Earps gun toting habits have to do with ANYTHING? That happened over 130 years ago.

From within the very small chambers of very small minds comes an assumption that all (or even most) of those who carry guns want to use them. Also assumptions like you are the only two people on earth who have been in heated situations. Please.

Further ignorance is revealed by a statement such as: "...what place we, as a society, want weapons to have..." That's the point of the second ammendment, James... IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT YOU WANT, James ...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Pretty clear. And the supreme court took that position in 2008.

Would you be so naive as to say that if "we as a society" wanted to make it illegal for you, James or Rhys to speak your mind that it would be OK to do so? If "we as a society" want to put all black folks back on the plantation is that OK? So what is the difference between the first and second ammendment? To me, it is quite simple. The Constitution is basically saying you have a right to say what you want and a right to defend yourself after you said it.

Besides, you act as if I am defending Dr. Victory when I am most certainly not. I have never defended her. I think her positions are irrational and hypocritical. I also agree that more serious charges might have been in order. But lumping in one physco local and one wanna-be neighborhood watch nut with an entire segment of society is absurd.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.