Sheriff Arpaio tells officer not to follow judges orders re: the officer stealing doc

[Reason]

YouTube - More Evidence Cops Have ZERO Respect For The Law! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAYKQTn6drM)

[Reason]

Also...

Inmate deaths and injuries under Arpaio


Family members of inmates who have died or been injured in jail custody have filed lawsuits against the sheriff’s office. Maricopa County has paid more than $43 million in settlement claims during Arpaio's tenure. [62] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-wake-61) [63] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-East_Valley_Tribune-62)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=20)] Charles Agster

In August 2001, Charles Agster, a 33-year-old mentally handicapped man, died in the county jail three days after being forced by sheriff's officers into a restraint chair used for controlling combative arrestees. Agster's parents had been taking him to a psychiatric hospital because he was exhibiting paranoia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoia), then called police when he refused to leave a convenience store where they had stopped enroute. Officers took Agster to the Madison Street jail, placed a "spit hood" over his face and strapped him to the chair, where he had an apparent seizure and lost consciousness. He was declared brain dead three days later. A medical examiner later concluded that Agster died of complications of methamphetamine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine) intoxication (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intoxication). In a subsequent lawsuit, an attorney for the sheriff's office described the amount of methamphetamine in Agster's system as 17 times the known lethal dose. The lawsuit resulted in a $9 million jury verdict against the county, the sheriff's office, and Correctional Health Services (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Correctional_Health_Services&action=edit&redlink=1).[68] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-67)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=21)] Scott Norberg

One major controversy includes the 1996 death of inmate Scott Norberg, a former Brigham Young University (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigham_Young_University) football wide receiver, who died while in custody of the Sheriff's office.[69] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-68) Norberg was arrested for assaulting a police officer in Mesa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesa,_Arizona), Arizona, after neighbors in a residential area had reported a delirious man walking in their neighborhood.[70] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-69) Arpaio's office repeatedly claimed Norberg was also high on methamphetamine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine), but a blood toxicology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxicology) performed post-mortem was inconclusive. According to a toxological report, Norberg did have methamphetamine in his urine, though "there would be no direct effect caused by the methamphetamine on Norberg's behavior at the time of the incident".[71] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-70) During his internment, evidence suggests detention officers (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Detention_officer&action=edit&redlink=1) shocked Norberg several times with a stun-gun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stun-gun). According to an investigation by Amnesty International (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amnesty_International), Norberg was already handcuffed and face down when officers dragged him from his cell and placed him in a restraint chair with a towel covering his face. After Norberg's corpse was discovered, detention officers accused Norberg of attacking them as they were trying to restrain him. The cause of his death, according to the Maricopa County medical examiner, was due to "positional asphyxia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positional_asphyxia)". Sheriff Arpaio investigated and subsequently cleared detention officers of any criminal wrongdoing.[72] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-71)
Norberg’s parents filed a lawsuit against Arpaio and his office. The lawsuit was settled for $8.25 million (USD) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_dollars).[73] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-72)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=22)] Brian Crenshaw

Brian Crenshaw was a legally blind and mentally disabled inmate who suffered fatal injuries while being held in Maricopa County Jail for shoplifting. The injuries that led to his death were initially blamed on a fall from his bunk but were later discovered to have been the result of a brutal beating by jail guards on March 7, 2003.[citation needed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] A lawsuit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawsuit) filed in the Maricopa County Superior Court of Arizona by the lawyer for Crenshaw's family stated:
An external examination report of the Maricopa County Medical Examiners Office concluded that Brian's death was caused by "complications of blunt force trauma due to a fall." This conclusion was reached largely on the [Maricopa County Sheriffs Office]'s relation of their "history" of Brian's injuries to the Medical Examiner's Office; a history that included the MCSO's implausable story that all of Brian's injuries were caused by a fall from his cell bed. The Maricopa County Medical Examiner conducted no autopsy; nor was the Maricopa County Medical Examiner informed by MCSO or [the Correctional Health Services] about Brian's beating on March 7, 2003 and/or related events. An independent autopsy report later narrowed the cause of Brian's death to peritonitis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peritonitis) and sepsis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sepsis) secondary to the duodenal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duodenal) perforation. A fall from Brian's 4-foot, 2 inch bunk could not have simultaneously caused a broken neck, broken toes, and a duodenal perforation.[74] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-73)
The lawsuit against Arpaio and his office resulted in an award of $2 million.[75] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-74) As in the Scott Norberg case, it was alleged that Arpaio's office destroyed evidence in the case. In the Crenshaw case, the attorney who represented the case before a jury alleged digital video evidence was destroyed.[76] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-75)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=23)] Richard Post

Richard Post was a paraplegic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraplegic) inmate arrested in 1996 for possession of marijuana and criminal trespass. Post was placed in a restraint chair by guards and his neck was broken in the process. The event, caught on video, shows guards smiling and laughing while Post is being injured. Because of his injuries, Post has lost much of the use of his arms.[77] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-76) Post settled his claims against the Sheriff's office for $800,000.[78] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-77)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=24)] Jeremy Flanders

In 1996, Jeremy Flanders was attacked by inmates at Tent City who used rebar tent stakes, which were not concreted into the ground. Although these stakes had been used as weapons in a previous riot at the facility, the Sheriff's office chose not to secure them properly. During the trial, the plaintiff "presented evidence that, among other things, the Sheriff and his deputies had actual knowledge that prisoners used rebar tent stakes and tent poles as weapons and did nothing to prevent it." Furthermore, "the Sheriff admitted knowing about, and in fact intentionally designing, some conditions at Tent City that created a substantial risk of inmate violence." After the attack: "another inmate entered the tent and found Flanders unconscious, gasping for air, and spewing blood out of his mouth, nose and ears. Flanders had been bloodied and beaten so badly that the other inmate initially did not recognize Flanders." Flanders suffered permanent brain damage as a result of the attack. On appeal, Flanders was awarded $635,532, of which Arpaio was personally responsible for thirty-five percent.[20] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-Cates-19)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=25)] Ambria Renee Spencer

In 2006, inmate Ambrett Spencer, who was incarcerated for drunk driving and was nine months pregnant with a girl, complained of severe stomach pains and asked for medical attention. The infirmary nurse, who had no prenatal training, believed the pain was not an emergency. It was two hours before an ambulance was called for Spencer, who in the meantime had passed out from severely low blood pressure and lost so much color that the EMT who arrived at the scene said he knew she was "not getting enough blood to [her] organs and skin." At the hospital—four hours after first reporting pain—Spencer gave birth to a dead daughter, Ambria Renee. It was determined that Spencer's pain had been caused by placental abruption (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placental_abruption), internal bleeding resulting in loss of blood to the baby.
Ambrett Spencer has filed a lawsuit against Maricopa County, which as of November 2008 has not yet gone to trial. The county claims that the ambulance service is at fault for not transporting Spencer to the hospital fast enough.
Other female inmates have had miscarriages while incarcerated in Arpaio's jail and have reported physical abuse or neglect which they believe contributed to the loss of their pregnancies.[79] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-Phoenix_New_Times-78)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=26)] Jose Rodriguez

On March 26, 1996, Jose Rodriquez, 39, died in a pool of his own vomit on a jail floor. His cries for help went ignored by Arpaio's jail employees. Rodriguez's dehydration, fever and twitching ultimately led to his death, even while inmates shouted for help.[79] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-Phoenix_New_Times-78)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=27)] Phillip Wilson

In 2003, Phillip Wilson was serving two months in Tent City for a nonviolent offense. Wilson was attacked by the Aryan Brotherhood (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan_Brotherhood) prison gang and bludgeoned into a coma. He never recovered.[79] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-Phoenix_New_Times-78)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=28)] Deborah Braillard

Deborah Braillard, 46, was documented as a diabetic in the jail's health records. Her cellmates say a nurse did not give Braillard insulin, and then detention officers ignored her when she went into diabetic shock. Braillard died on January 23, 2005, ultimately from lack of insulin.[79] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-Phoenix_New_Times-78)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=29)] Clint Yarbrough

In December 2005, Clint Yarbrough suffocated in a jail restraint chair. On April 18, 2007, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors approved an undisclosed settlement payout to Yarbrough's family in excess of $1 million.[79] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-Phoenix_New_Times-78)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=30)] Thomas Bruce Cooley

Months before Thomas Bruce Cooley, 44, was found hanging by the bed sheets in his jail cell, a federal inspector had warned Arpaio that the jail psych ward was a suicide waiting to happen. A 1996 Department of Justice report specifically cautioned that inmates could use "overhanging structures" to hang themselves. Three more inmates died in the same way as Thomas Cooley while in Arpaio's custody: Kevin Holschlag, Michael Sanderson, and Juan Vasquez.[79] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-Phoenix_New_Times-78)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=31)] Icelandic extradition refusal

An Icelandic court in 1997 refused to extradite Connie and Donald Hanes to Maricopa County after hearing evidence about the county jail.[80] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-79)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=32)] Enforcement acts of deputies and posse

[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=33)] Blocking civilian access to law enforcement databases

On August 13, 2009, deputies took control of a computer system linked to sensitive criminal justice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_justice) databases by forcefully changing its password to prevent civilians from accessing the data. Two days later, a Maricopa County judge ordered the Sheriff's Office to divulge the password, threatening to hold Chief Deputy David Hendershott in contempt of court (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_court) if he did not comply. Hendershott said he was prevented from sharing the password by federal law. Federal and state laws require that access to the National Crime Information Center (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Crime_Information_Center) (NCIS) and similar Arizona databases be managed by a criminal justice agency. Hendershott said the Sheriff's Office is conducting a criminal investigation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_investigation) into suspected mismanagement of the system by court and other county personnel.
He said the investigation targets Superior Court presiding Judge Barbara Mundell, County Manager Smith and other county personnel, but he did not provide details on the investigation."[81] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-80)
On August 17, Hendershott agreed to provide the new password to avoid contempt charges.[82] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-81)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=34)] Botched raid

In 2004, the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office SWAT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWAT) team led a raid on an Ahwatukee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahwatukee) home in a gated subdivision, looking for illegal weapons. No illegal weapons were found, but during the raid, the house burned down, SWAT officers forced a dog back into the building where it subsequently died, and an armored vehicle rolled into a neighbor's parked car as a result of brake failure.[83] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-82)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=35)] Prostitution sting

In an undercover sting operation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sting_operation) in November, 2003, sheriff's deputies arrested over 70 people for prostitution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution) and solicitation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solicitation) of prostitution. The officers arrested alleged prostitutes and their alleged customers in more than thirty homes and ten massage parlors (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massage_parlor) in the Phoenix area. Records indicated that several of the officers and civilian posse members disrobed, fondled the breasts and genitals of the alleged prostitutes, and allowed their penises to be touched during the operation in the hopes of convincing the women they were not law enforcement officers. The Maricopa County Attorney's Office stated that the Sheriff's office had gone too far in allowing this behavior, and sixty of the cases were thrown out. Several of the customers in the case were prosecuted successfully.[84] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-83)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=36)] Conflicts with local news media

[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=37)] Arrest of Phoenix New Times executives

In October 2007, Arpaio's deputies arrested Village Voice Media (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Voice_Media) executives and Phoenix New Times (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_New_Times) editors Michael Lacey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Lacey) and Jim Larkin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Larkin) on charges of revealing grand jury (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_jury) secrets. In July 2004, the New Times had published Arpaio's home address in the context of a story about his real estate dealings, which the county attorney's office is investigating as a possible crime under Arizona state law. A special prosecutor served Village Voice Media with a subpoena ordering it to produce "all documents" related to the original real estate article, as well as "all Internet web site traffic information" to a number of articles that mentioned Arpaio. The prosecutor further ordered Village Voice Media to produce the IP addresses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_address) of all visitors to the Phoenix New Times website since January 1, 2004, as well as what websites those readers had been to prior to visiting. As an act of "civil disobedience,"[85] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-84) Lacey and Larkin published the contents of the subpoena on or around October 18, which resulted in their arrests the same day.[86] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-85) On the following day, the county attorney dropped the case after declining to pursue charges against the two.[87] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-86) The Attorney General's office has since been ordered to appear before Judge Ana Baca due to missing documentation - including the original grand jury subpoenas - in the case file for the investigation of the New Times publication.[88] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-87)
On November 28, 2007, Judge Baca ruled that the subpoenas in this case were not validly issued. The special prosecutor filed the grand jury subpoenas without the consent of the grand jury. Baca's justification was a statute that had been clarified by case law and by subsequent legislation to bar such subpoena authority, unless certain reporting requirements are met. The prosecutor had not met those reporting requirements.[89] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-88) In April, 2008, the New Times editors filed suit against Arpaio, County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Special Prosecutor Dennis Wilenchik, alleging negligence, conspiracy and racketeering, and State and U.S. constitutional violations of free speech rights, false imprisonment, retaliation by law enforcement and abuse of process.[90] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-89)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=38)] Alleged harassment of New Times reporter

On June 11, 2008, Ray Stern, a reporter for the Phoenix New Times (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_New_Times), was surrounded by several deputies while trying to examine public records at the City of Phoenix public records counter.[91] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-90) Stern called City Attorney Gary Verburg, who came down and instructed the deputies that Stern had the right to view the records. The deputies then threatened to simply arrest Stern on the spot. Later, a city "conflict resolution manager" walked up and laid down an Arizona law book. She pointed to the section of public records law that essentially says anyone can look at any public record during business hours. City Attorney Verburg told the deputies again that Stern had the right to look at any public record. Upon hearing that, the deputies warned Stern again that if he tried to look at the documents he would be arrested.
The events reported by the New Times are substantively verified in a memo drafted by Maricopa County Sheriff's Office Commander James Miller. In this memo, Miller states that the deputies did threaten to arrest Stern if he touched any of the records, and that he (Miller) held one of the records out in front of Stern, saying "take it", to create a pretense to arrest Stern. Miller also reported that the situation escalated into a standoff with the Phoenix Police, when they warned him not to attempt to arrest Stern.[92] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-91)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=39)] FOIA requests to mayor and other officials

In situations where government officials have been at odds with Arpaio, his office has used the Freedom of Information Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act) to make broad requests for records of their email and correspondence. The requests have been targeted against Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, Maricopa County Court Administrator Marcus Reinkensmeyer, and most recently, Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon.
Starting in March, 2008, Gordon spoke out, in a number of high-profile speeches, against racial profiling by Arpaio. On April 24, Arpaio's deputies issued a public-records request seeking the mayor's e-mails, cell phone records, and meeting calendar, as well as e-mail correspondence for Phoenix Police Chief Jack Harris, City Manager Frank Fairbanks, and all of Gordon's administrative staff. The request covered every e-mail written by more than a dozen Phoenix staffers, from November to the date of the sheriff's demand.[93] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-92)
[edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Arpaio&action=edit&section=40)] Arrests of critics

At a December 17, 2008 meeting, four audience members at a County Board of Supervisors meeting were arrested for suspicion of disorderly conduct and trespassing, after they applauded an anti-Arpaio speaker.[94] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-93) [95] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#cite_note-94)

[youngbuck]

Isn't he the guy that who's the rabid supporter of the war on drugs in Arizona? He just loves it because it provides a steady supply of people for him to manage/control.

[NoHero]

Isn't he the guy that who's the rabid supporter of the war on drugs in Arizona? He just loves it because it provides a steady supply of people for him to manage/control.

Yeah, he tried to set up road blocks on the federal interstates to search for drugs. He's a mediawhore. He had a undercover in the jail set up an 18 yr. old make a bomb to blow up Joe in 1999. The sheriff's office even paid for the materials, and he had the media there to film the arrest. Ending up costing the county big to settle the lawsuits.

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2008/10/arpaios_phony_murder_plot_cost.php


Taxpayers spent $1,102,528.50 this year to settle another of Sheriff Joe Arpaio's lawsuits, New Times has learned through a public records request. The suit was brought by a man whom Arpaio framed in 1999 in a staged murder plot against the sheriff.

The payout, nine years after the wrongful arrest, is an indicaton that the aging lawman's publicity-driven, unsavory antics may keep costing taxpayers big money well into the future. The county is already struggling with a huge budget deficit, and the excessive costs of Arpaio's operation isn't helping matters.

In 2004, victim James Saville’s family sued Arpaio for $10 million, after Saville was found not guilty of attempting to kill the sheriff. The county recently settled with Saville for an undisclosed amount. It only had to pay the above amount out of public coffers; its insurance policy covered the rest.

Before you wish that you could collect $1 million by getting framed for Arpaio's murder, consider that Saville spent four years in county jail, awaiting trial as a result of the made-up crime

[heavenlyboy34]

Isn't he the guy that who's the rabid supporter of the war on drugs in Arizona? He just loves it because it provides a steady supply of people for him to manage/control.

Yes. :p:mad: We had a good LP candidate to replace him last time, but the media wouldn't cover her. :p:mad:

[qh4dotcom]

Wow

[devil21]

Im not a big fan of Arpaio but unless I see a direct quote from him instructing the deputy not to follow the court order, I'm skeptical. While Arpaio isn't the role model for the WoD, he's a staunch opponent of illegal immigration. He's been targeted lately in the media over his detention of illegals and he seems to be connected to a lot of negative media reports lately. I wonder why?

The incident in the video still amazes me. The judge is showing more backbone that I thought she would though. I'd love to be in the courtroom to watch the judge order the deputies to take the deputy into custody. I bet he'll apologize instead of risking being thrown in jail. If he's fired for refusing a lawful court order he would have grounds to sue the Sheriff and the County for unlawful termination. If he doesn't apologize, he'll get thrown in jail and he'd lose his job anyway for now having a criminal record and from then on, every action he takes is scrutinized by defense attorneys. He couldn't work there anymore.

[Chester Copperpot]

amazing...

[EndDaFed]

That deputy should be charged with theft and tossed in the clink. The judge is going way too soft on him. Arpaio should be sent to the unemployment line. Lunatics shouldn't be in positions of power.

[apropos]

I admit, Civil, after reading a rather uncivil post of yours like the following from a few weeks ago:


Originally Posted by CivilRadiant
I guess your /dice roll worked out great for you so fuck everyone else.

I wonder how many nights you would have to stare at your children as they wasted away from hunger before you jumped a fence for a better job?

a week? a month? would you let them die?

There is nothing wrong with remembering that this issue is centered around human beings; not just some political concept we can debate callously without regard.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=214860

I can't help but wonder if it is really the spirit of the law that leads you (or Mr. Sanchez, for that matter) to focus on a obscure corner of the country like Maricopa County, or if rather your outrage here comes from personal disagreement with Arpaio's enforcement of immigration laws.

If this deputy is guilty of corruption, should we expect to see your future threads about other, greater acts of police corruption? If the concern is police corruption and civil rights violations, it makes sense to criticize the greater corruption first and the lesser afterward. If that is your concern, I admit surprise that I have not seen your threads and passion about Mexico's police corruption (for example), which is by every measure more systematic and widespread.

It seems that, if police corruption and civil rights were your true concern, you would first criticize the greater display of the behavior you wish to highlight to us all and then, at a later date and after working your way through the ranks of corruption, visit the topic of Arpaio's deputy.

But you have not, which makes me question your true motivation toward this topic.

[constituent]

I can't help but wonder if it is really the spirit of the law that leads you (or Mr. Sanchez, for that matter) to focus on a obscure corner of the country like Maricopa County, or if rather your outrage here comes from personal disagreement with Arpaio's enforcement of immigration laws.

So just to clarify, you do support individuals enforcing unconstitutional laws simply b/c they're "on the books." Correct?

If not, how do you reconcile this with the quoted text above?

Thanks.

[talkingpointes]

Joe is well known in AZ as a piece of shit. Seriously the guy treats people like animals in prisons here. And not murderers and rapists, most are I'm guessing non-violent drug offenders. His voting bloc here is located in Sun City or retirement land. (Voters of 65 generally don't exercise the most intelligent choices) Sun city actually has a volunteer police force, but they choose to vote in the worst of candidates for sheriff. His whole opposition to immigration is bull shit, raiding houses and rounding up families isn't something I think we need to promote. This police raids can break up families as well so try putting yourself in someone elses' shoes.

[EndDaFed]

So just to clarify, you do support individuals enforcing unconstitutional laws simply b/c they're "on the books." Correct?

If not, how do you reconcile this with the quoted text above?

Thanks.

It's okay to violate the 4th amendment so long as Arpaio and his army go after those dirty Mexicans. /sarcasm

[Promontorium]

Does anyone know what that deputy was taking? I'm pretty much on the fence on this, certainly it looks like a clear case of theft, but if that document was the "Daily Report to the Sheriff's Department" I think he should apologize. If it has nothing to do with that deputy, or the sheriff's department, I think he should be prosecuted.

[devil21]

Does anyone know what that deputy was taking? I'm pretty much on the fence on this, certainly it looks like a clear case of theft, but if that document was the "Daily Report to the Sheriff's Department" I think he should apologize. If it has nothing to do with that deputy, or the sheriff's department, I think he should be prosecuted.

It shouldn't matter what the document was, but no I haven't seen what it was and I've been following this. Regardless, he broke the spirit of the law blatently, in addition to the letter of the law. You don't touch a defense attorney's files and you CERTAINLY don't send a stolen doc to be copied without stopping the hearing to notify the judge of whatever the document is (if it's so important) and let the judge issue an order. If it's terror threats or whatever, wouldn't the deputy have acted more "concerned"? He just didn't think anyone would care that he did it...and that's a bad road for LE to start going down.

Attorney files are scanned for weapons and contraband when the attorney enters the courthouse. There's no security reason for a deputy to be looking in her file. Everything inside it carries attorney-client privilege.

[devil21]

bump

The deputy refused to apologize and was jailed for contempt of court. GO JUDGE!!! I must say Im pleasently surprised.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/12/02/20091202doincustody1202-ON.html


Dec 2 09

Maricopa County Sheriff's detention officer Adam Stoddard turned himself in to the Sheriff's Office Tuesday night to serve a court-ordered sentence for removing documents from an attorney's files during a sentencing hearing in October.

Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe gave Stoddard an ultimatum: Make a public apology by Nov. 30 or start serving a jail sentence of undetermined length by Dec. 1.

Stoddard called a press conference on Monday night but said he couldn't apologize to the attorney, Joanne Cuccia, because he'd done nothing wrong.
Due to a paperwork error, Stoddard's attorney said the detention officer was not booked Tuesday night, but voluntarily surrendered to sheriff's custody to satisfy Donahoe's demand.

Stoddard's location is being kept a secret for his safety, and no one knows how long he'll remain behind bars.

Donahoe's order stated that Stoddard would remain in custody "until such time as proof is presented to this Court that he has purged the finding of contempt."

Tom Liddy, an attorney from Maricopa County's civil division representing the Stoddard, said he would appeal Donahoe's order, but he needs access to the document Stoddard took during a sentencing hearing for Antonio Solis Lozano.

Stoddard testified that he saw four words - "going to," "steal" and "money" on a document in Cuccia's file that he had not screened. Cuccia was representing Lozano in front of Judge Lisa Flores on Oct. 19 when the incident occurred.

Donahoe reviewed the document and determined it posed no security threat.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio
called the matter a "personal vendetta" from Donahoe and said Stoddard was just trying to do his job when he took the documents.

"My officer will go jail. We're going to appeal it," Arpaio said. "All I'm going to tell you is he's going to jail and I'll leave it at that."

Other sources are saying he could be locked up until Christmas. I can only hope.


Deputies have been holding candlelight vigils for him like he's on death row or something. (AP sources)
http://kfyi.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=118695&article=6409533

http://kfyi.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=118695&article=6399847

[evilfunnystuff]

it is shocking anyone can be on the fence about this or even ok with it so long as he "rounds up the mexicans"

he is actively supporting violations of attorney client privilege and i cant believe there are people here who would be ok with that

[Cowlesy]

wtf --- you can't just take counsel's files out of their folio!!!!!!!!!!

Throw the bum in the tank.

[angelatc]

It was wrong. But they can't press charges against the deputy unless the prisoner agrees to allow the contents of the letter to be intorduced as evidence, which he refused to do.

Apparently the prisoner is a member of a Mexican gang, and another lawyer was recently caught smuggling out gang messages on behalf of another member of the same gang.

Having said that, this paper reportedly already carried a stamp indicating that it had been approved by the court. Even if the deputy saw something he deemed suspicious, that stamp on the document should have prompted him to put it right back down.

[LibForestPaul]

Deputy, and it looks like Sheriff, are whores.

Deputy could of taken the document to the Judge and all parties (prosecutor, defendant's lawyer, Deputy, and Judge) could have discussed this letter in private in chambers. The Deputy choose not to follow the law. Fuck him.