Aurora Theater Shooting

James Holmes defense accuses prosecutors of reckless disregard for the truth

The 18th Judicial District has made public another document in the James Holmes/Aurora theater shooting case -- a so-called register of actions for the past week. And it contains some intriguing revelations. Among them: word of a motion in which Holmes's attorneys accuse prosecutors of reckless disregard for the truth and a filing that likely pertains to a person cops reportedly quizzed as a suspect before clearing him of any collusion with the killer.

The register notes Judge William Sylvester's ruling on the topic of the August 23 hearing -- access to Holmes's education records at the University of Colorado. It reads, "The Court finds certain pages may be released to the People [prosecutors] with certain redactions of confidential information."

This ruling came down on Monday, the same day as a reference to a "Motion for Sanctions Resulting From Prosecution's Reckless Disregard for the Truth."

No specifics are included, but this motion almost certainly involves prosecutors' claims at the August 23 hearing and in a subsequent document that Holmes had been banned from the Anschutz Medical Campus, where he had been a student in the neuroscience program, for making threats the month before the massacre. Shortly thereafter, a University of Colorado spokeswoman told us this was incorrect: Holmes hadn't been banned from the campus as a whole owing to threats, although he'd lost key-card access to restricted areas owing to his withdrawal from the program.

On Tuesday, there's record of an order regarding this motion, but that's a little misleading. Laurie McKager, district administrator for the 18th Judicial District Court, says the order is about the scheduling of a hearing to discuss the motion and possible sanctions. She says prosecutors have indicated that they'll file a written response to the motion, which is at least tentatively scheduled to be discussed at the same September 20 hearing at which Sylvester will again address the matter of doctor-patient privilege -- the subject of yesterday's court session.

Meanwhile, another mysterious entry appears on the register: "People's Pleading P-18 Position Regarding Release of Motion to Intervene Filed by Person Identifying Themselves By Name With Initials YPL."

Who's YPL? In all likeliehood, Yeom Pyo Lee, who in the hours after the attack on the Aurora Century 16 was identified by Fox31 as a possible person of interest in the case.

The original Fox31 article is now down, but according to this GlobalGrind post that references it (and includes the dead link), Lee is a native of South Korea who moved to Colorado to seek a doctorate in the same CU program from which Holmes dropped out. He allegedly came to the attention of police after cops "received a message from his telephone threatening violence if James Holmes was not released from police custody." After being questioned, however, he was quickly cleared of any wrongdoing.

By the way, Lee's Facebook page is now offline as well.

What is a "motion to intervene"? Here's the definition provided by

Normally, a lawsuit involves the plaintiffs (who bring the suit), and the defendants (whom the suit is brought against). Sometimes, a person who is not a party to a lawsuit in progress wants to become a party. Such a party must file a Motion to Intervene. Generally, to be admitted into the lawsuit, the intervenor must have an interest in the subject matter of the original suit.

No additional information is provided about this motion or a lawsuit in which YPL might want to intervene. As such, it raises more questions than answers -- like so many other things involved in this case.

Here's the complete register of actions:

James Holmes Case: Register of Actions August 24-30

More from our Aurora Theater Shooting archive: "James Holmes hearing: Decision delayed about whether key package is privileged."