Link to Video
A political feud among county officials in metro Phoenix that led to a
spate of costly lawsuits and unsuccessful public corruption
investigations against some participants in the disputes has cost
taxpayers at least $49 million.
County officials on Monday
released the nearly final price tag for the disputes that mired county
government from 2006 through 2010 when Maricopa County Sheriff Joe
Arpaio and then-County Attorney Andrew Thomas squared off against county
officials and judges.
The disputes centered on cuts to agency budgets, a plan to build a new court building complex and other issues.
Arpaio and Thomas lost most of the key battles.
"I
was unjustly prosecuted," said Mary Rose Wilcox, a Maricopa County
supervisor who was one of the people targeted by Arpaio and Thomas.
"[I was] hit with 44 felony counts and I was cleared of everything. But it was hell," she continued.
Monday,
documents obtained by CBS 5 News shows that $49 million in taxpayer
money was spent on litigation costs and other settlements.
"No one was ever prosecuted. None of the cases stood. Everything fell apart. It was political vindictiveness," said Wilcox.
CBS 5 News reached out to Thomas by phone and through email. He never responded. Arpaio, however, released this statement:
"My office is only a small piece of the county's past internal disputes. I am glad those difficult days are behind us."
Arpaio
and Thomas loomed large in many of the disputes, but other officials
also took part in power struggles that, in some instances, didn't
involve the sheriff or prosecutor.
Showing posts with label Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Show all posts
Monday, January 27, 2014
Wednesday, May 09, 2012
Joe Arpaio Facing Justice Department Lawsuit Over Alleged Civil Rights Violations
Federal authorities said Wednesday that they plan to sue Arizona
sheriff Joe Arpaio and his office over allegations of civil rights
violations, including the racial profiling of Latinos.
The U.S. Justice Department has been seeking an agreement requiring Arpaio's office to train officers in how to make constitutional traffic stops, collect data on people arrested in traffic stops and reach out to Latinos to assure them that the department is there to also protect them.
Arpaio has denied the racial profiling allegations and has claimed that allowing a court monitor would mean that every policy decision would have to be cleared through an observer and would nullify his authority.
DOJ officials told a lawyer for Arpaio on April 3 that the lawman's refusal of a court-appointed monitor was a deal-breaker that would end settlement negotiations and result in a federal lawsuit.
The "notice of intent to file civil action" came Wednesday from Assistant U.S. Attorney General Thomas Perez in a letter to an Arpaio lawyer.
Perez, who heads the DOJ's civil rights division, noted that it's been more than 100 days since the sheriff's office received the DOJ's findings report and federal authorities haven't met with the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office counsel since Feb. 6 to discuss the terms of a consent agreement.
At a news conference Wednesday afternoon, Arpaio defended himself in the face of the pending lawsuit.
"If they sue, we'll go to court. And then we'll find out the real story," he said. "There's lots of miscommunication emanating from Washington. They broke off communications.
"They're telling me how to run my organization. I'd like to get this resolved, but I'm not going to give up my authority to the federal government. It's as simple as that," Arpaio added.
Last
December, the DOJ released a scathing report accusing Arpaio's office
of racially profiling Latinos, basing immigration enforcement on
racially charged citizen complaints and punishing Hispanic jail inmates
for speaking Spanish in Arizona's most populous county.
The DOJ also accused Arpaio of having a culture of disregard for basic constitutional rights.
The civil rights allegations have led some Arpaio critics to call for his resignation, including the National Council of La Raza, a prominent advocacy group for Latinos.
The sheriff's office also is facing criticism over more than 400 sex-crimes investigations – including dozens of alleged child molestations – that hadn't been investigated adequately or weren't examined at all over a three-year period ending in 2007.
Arpaio has apologized for the botched cases, reopened 432 sex-crimes investigations and made 19 arrests.
Separate from the civil rights probe, a federal grand jury has been investigating Arpaio's office on criminal abuse-of-power allegations since at least December 2009. That grand jury is examining the investigative work of the sheriff's anti-public corruption squad.
The self-proclaimed toughest sheriff in America has been a national political fixture who has built his reputation on jailing inmates in tents and dressing them in pink underwear, selling himself to voters as unceasingly tough on crime and pushing the bounds of how far local police can go to confront illegal immigration
The U.S. Justice Department has been seeking an agreement requiring Arpaio's office to train officers in how to make constitutional traffic stops, collect data on people arrested in traffic stops and reach out to Latinos to assure them that the department is there to also protect them.
Arpaio has denied the racial profiling allegations and has claimed that allowing a court monitor would mean that every policy decision would have to be cleared through an observer and would nullify his authority.
DOJ officials told a lawyer for Arpaio on April 3 that the lawman's refusal of a court-appointed monitor was a deal-breaker that would end settlement negotiations and result in a federal lawsuit.
The "notice of intent to file civil action" came Wednesday from Assistant U.S. Attorney General Thomas Perez in a letter to an Arpaio lawyer.
Perez, who heads the DOJ's civil rights division, noted that it's been more than 100 days since the sheriff's office received the DOJ's findings report and federal authorities haven't met with the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office counsel since Feb. 6 to discuss the terms of a consent agreement.
At a news conference Wednesday afternoon, Arpaio defended himself in the face of the pending lawsuit.
"If they sue, we'll go to court. And then we'll find out the real story," he said. "There's lots of miscommunication emanating from Washington. They broke off communications.
"They're telling me how to run my organization. I'd like to get this resolved, but I'm not going to give up my authority to the federal government. It's as simple as that," Arpaio added.
The DOJ also accused Arpaio of having a culture of disregard for basic constitutional rights.
The civil rights allegations have led some Arpaio critics to call for his resignation, including the National Council of La Raza, a prominent advocacy group for Latinos.
The sheriff's office also is facing criticism over more than 400 sex-crimes investigations – including dozens of alleged child molestations – that hadn't been investigated adequately or weren't examined at all over a three-year period ending in 2007.
Arpaio has apologized for the botched cases, reopened 432 sex-crimes investigations and made 19 arrests.
Separate from the civil rights probe, a federal grand jury has been investigating Arpaio's office on criminal abuse-of-power allegations since at least December 2009. That grand jury is examining the investigative work of the sheriff's anti-public corruption squad.
The self-proclaimed toughest sheriff in America has been a national political fixture who has built his reputation on jailing inmates in tents and dressing them in pink underwear, selling himself to voters as unceasingly tough on crime and pushing the bounds of how far local police can go to confront illegal immigration
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Sherriff Joe Arpaio in Trouble for Destroying Evidence
A federal judge has imposed sanctions on the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office for destroying evidence in a racial-profiling case, and Sheriff Joe Arpaio must answer questions regarding an immigration file he kept.
U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow's order, released Friday, also calls on the Sheriff's Office to try to recover e-mails that were deleted and to swear under oath to steps it took to gather the records.
The racial-profiling lawsuit was filed in December 2007 following a sheriff's crime-suppression operation in Cave Creek that included the arrest of Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres.
Melendres is seeking to stop what he calls "illegal, discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against Hispanics in Maricopa County." The case now includes five individuals who claim deputies have detained them because of the color of their skin, and their lawyers have sought records from the sheriff's crime-suppression operations.
The Sheriff's Office has denied it engages in racial profiling, but the office has acknowledged it destroyed records from those sweeps and deleted e-mails among employees regarding those operations.
Peter Kozinets, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said the ruling would give his clients access to e-mails if they are recovered, and the Sheriff's Office must describe in detail the measures it took to recover the electronic messages.
A key part of the order, Kozinets said, was the requirement that Arpaio answer questions about his 800-page immigration file that was turned over in late January.
"The judge clearly recognizes in the order the (Sheriff's Office) had an obligation to preserve other relevant evidence, and it destroyed the evidence," Kozinets said.
Arpaio on Friday evening said he and his office would comply with the judge's order.
"This is just another case. It's the nature of doing business," said Arpaio, who has faced numerous state and federal lawsuits.
Arpaio said he has won 12 straight federal cases filed against him, with most coming from county-jail inmates, and he expressed confidence his office would again prevail.
A hearing is set for March 19, when the judge will determine what additional information attorneys for the plaintiffs may seek from the sheriff based on new documents that may be produced.
U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow's order, released Friday, also calls on the Sheriff's Office to try to recover e-mails that were deleted and to swear under oath to steps it took to gather the records.
The racial-profiling lawsuit was filed in December 2007 following a sheriff's crime-suppression operation in Cave Creek that included the arrest of Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres.
Melendres is seeking to stop what he calls "illegal, discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against Hispanics in Maricopa County." The case now includes five individuals who claim deputies have detained them because of the color of their skin, and their lawyers have sought records from the sheriff's crime-suppression operations.
The Sheriff's Office has denied it engages in racial profiling, but the office has acknowledged it destroyed records from those sweeps and deleted e-mails among employees regarding those operations.
Peter Kozinets, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said the ruling would give his clients access to e-mails if they are recovered, and the Sheriff's Office must describe in detail the measures it took to recover the electronic messages.
A key part of the order, Kozinets said, was the requirement that Arpaio answer questions about his 800-page immigration file that was turned over in late January.
"The judge clearly recognizes in the order the (Sheriff's Office) had an obligation to preserve other relevant evidence, and it destroyed the evidence," Kozinets said.
Arpaio on Friday evening said he and his office would comply with the judge's order.
"This is just another case. It's the nature of doing business," said Arpaio, who has faced numerous state and federal lawsuits.
Arpaio said he has won 12 straight federal cases filed against him, with most coming from county-jail inmates, and he expressed confidence his office would again prevail.
A hearing is set for March 19, when the judge will determine what additional information attorneys for the plaintiffs may seek from the sheriff based on new documents that may be produced.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Staff Fears Sheriff Joe Arpaio
As conflicts between Maricopa County's Board of Supervisors and the sheriff and county attorney escalated in 2009, rank-and-file county employees were plunged into a yearlong emotional roller coaster.
This month's announcement of a federal grand jury entering the fray brought county workers some relief and hope for an end to the extraordinary tensions. The grand jury is looking into allegations of abuse of power by Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his chief deputy, David Hendershott, in their dealings with judges and county officials.
Now, as they wait to see what will happen, a cross-section of county employees spoke with The Arizona Republic, talking publicly for the first time about life inside the county offices during the political battles, lawsuits and arrests going on above them at the highest levels of county government. Most have little connection to the conflicts. Still, their runaway fears were such that they worried that Arpaio's deputies would come after them as well.
Fears first spiked in December 2008, when county administrators spent $10,000 to sweep county offices for illegal wiretaps they worried had been installed by Arpaio. None was found. But rank-and-file workers still became terrified of possible surveillance, lawsuits or even arrest. Arpaio's frequent retort to critics that the innocent had nothing to worry about did not allay their concerns.
Unsure what or whom to believe, many county workers quit talking about sensitive matters on the telephone or in e-mails, even when using their personal home computers.
Conversation in hallways and elevators stopped.
Some feared they would be arrested while pulling into the same parking garage where deputies took Supervisor Don Stapley into custody.
Others worried that even minor infractions - a chipped windshield, having a beer before driving home after work - would be an excuse for deputies to pull them over or arrest them.
One Superior Court judge moved meetings with her staff and other judges to the chamber restroom, believing it would be a less likely spot for a listening device.
Working for a county often at war with itself put employees on edge and stressed relationships with co-workers and spouses.
Anxiety at work
Worries took hold at work immediately after the wiretap sweeps and grew through 2009 with each exchange among the sheriff, board and county attorney.
As a compensation supervisor, Darrien Ellison spends a lot of time researching money requests from the Sheriff's Office.
In the course of his normal work over the past year, he denied two pay-raise requests for a high-ranking Sheriff's Office employee. Later, the thought crossed his mind several times that authorities might come after him. When he had to call sheriff's staff, he assumed he was being recorded. "Who knows what they would use from a conversation on one of their employees against me," he said.
Dexter Thomas is a senior management and budget analyst who works with the judicial branch's budgets.
He loved his job, but then, the easygoing atmosphere at work changed. After wiretap sweeps around him on the 10th floor, Thomas wondered who might be spying on him.
He instructed his wife and daughter to never call him on his work phone. He stopped using e-mail for personal matters. When colleagues copied him on chain e-mails, he asked to be removed from the distribution list in case authorities were reading his e-mails.
"You never know who's watching," Thomas said. "You look over your shoulder before you push the button to the 10th floor. And I don't talk to anyone anymore."
Supervisor Max Wilson was once an Arpaio supporter, even volunteering for years as a member of Arpaio's volunteer-posse program.
But as the infighting intensified, so did Wilson's stress levels. He braced for his own arrest. His wife, like many county worker spouses, tensed up whenever sheriff's cars cruised through the neighborhood.
In March 2009, Arpaio warned in a speech that Wilson "better be careful on cutting my budget." Wilson took that as a threat and pulled in his chief of staff to talk about whether he should resign.
Wilson stopped volunteering with the posse. Later, his son-in-law also turned in his posse-member badge.
Fears at home
Fear followed employees home. Many talked with their wives, husbands and children to warn them deputies might show up or follow them around town.
Marla Schofield is a compensation analyst who studies salary data and personnel information. At first, she doubted sheriff's deputies would ever have a reason to contact her.
Then, the battles heated up over the county's decision to build a new court complex.
Deputies showed up at her home twice one summer weekend to ask questions. She didn't answer the door. A deputy left his business card on her car windshield, just below a crack in the glass.
Later, she went out for groceries and gas. She scanned the road and parking lots for sheriff's deputies. She worried the card was strategically placed to send her a message about the cracked windshield, "a tactic to pull me over."
She quickly had the crack repaired.
Compensation supervisor Darrien Ellison and his family were away visiting in-laws last summer on the day deputies came to his house to question him.
When he didn't come to the door, deputies talked to his neighbor. They asked about Ellison and his job at the county. Later, Ellison felt like some kind of suspicion had been cast on his family.
"Your neighbors obviously probably think something has been done wrong," he said, asking how does anyone explain that it's "just politics."
Lee Ann Bohn is a deputy budget director. She led last year's budget negotiations with the Sheriff's Office. Later, while she was out of town with her two daughters, sheriff's deputies questioned employees from her department. Her personal cellphone voicemail filled up with messages from workers asking for help. One employee was so rattled she could barely speak.
From then on, Bohn was extra careful about driving under the speed limit. She also took good care of her swimming pool so it didn't turn green and provide anyone an excuse to enter her property.
Stress takes a toll
As the conflicts continued through 2009, the months of fear at work and home took its toll on county employees.
Scott Isham is chief of staff to Wilson. He tried not to let fear of arrest take hold of his family or staff. But, as time went on, he also tried to be realistic.
Isham called a criminal defense attorney for advice. He asked how much it would cost to get him out of jail. He put the attorney's phone numbers in his cellphone and business cards in his car. Regular after-work beers with his buddies ended. Isham told his wife to be careful. No U-turns. Never leave the kids in the car when returning videos. Who knows what they might call child endangerment?
Kenny Harris oversees construction of the county's court tower. It's the most expensive project in county history, a major point of contention between the warring factions of the county and the target of one of Arpaio's investigations.
In December, Harris got a panicked call from his 70-year-old mother-in-law. Deputies had been at the door of their home. His two young daughters asked if he was in trouble.
As a budget supervisor, Ryan Wimmer works on financial matters
involving the sheriff and county attorney.
Wimmer felt like a likely target. Early on, he didn't expect to be arrested or subpoenaed. But, after Stapley's arrest, Wimmer had more restless nights. Then, deputies came to his apartment with questions about the court-tower project.
Wimmer lay awake after that wondering: How would he find an attorney? How would he pay for an attorney?
Sometimes, Wimmer worked at home. He wondered if they could seize his home computer.
Wimmer stopped expressing any personal opinions about county officials and operations. He struggled to explain to his girlfriend and family what was happening at work.
"Everything I do," he said, "I just assume it will be used against me."
This month's announcement of a federal grand jury entering the fray brought county workers some relief and hope for an end to the extraordinary tensions. The grand jury is looking into allegations of abuse of power by Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his chief deputy, David Hendershott, in their dealings with judges and county officials.
Now, as they wait to see what will happen, a cross-section of county employees spoke with The Arizona Republic, talking publicly for the first time about life inside the county offices during the political battles, lawsuits and arrests going on above them at the highest levels of county government. Most have little connection to the conflicts. Still, their runaway fears were such that they worried that Arpaio's deputies would come after them as well.
Fears first spiked in December 2008, when county administrators spent $10,000 to sweep county offices for illegal wiretaps they worried had been installed by Arpaio. None was found. But rank-and-file workers still became terrified of possible surveillance, lawsuits or even arrest. Arpaio's frequent retort to critics that the innocent had nothing to worry about did not allay their concerns.
Unsure what or whom to believe, many county workers quit talking about sensitive matters on the telephone or in e-mails, even when using their personal home computers.
Conversation in hallways and elevators stopped.
Some feared they would be arrested while pulling into the same parking garage where deputies took Supervisor Don Stapley into custody.
Others worried that even minor infractions - a chipped windshield, having a beer before driving home after work - would be an excuse for deputies to pull them over or arrest them.
One Superior Court judge moved meetings with her staff and other judges to the chamber restroom, believing it would be a less likely spot for a listening device.
Working for a county often at war with itself put employees on edge and stressed relationships with co-workers and spouses.
Anxiety at work
Worries took hold at work immediately after the wiretap sweeps and grew through 2009 with each exchange among the sheriff, board and county attorney.
As a compensation supervisor, Darrien Ellison spends a lot of time researching money requests from the Sheriff's Office.
In the course of his normal work over the past year, he denied two pay-raise requests for a high-ranking Sheriff's Office employee. Later, the thought crossed his mind several times that authorities might come after him. When he had to call sheriff's staff, he assumed he was being recorded. "Who knows what they would use from a conversation on one of their employees against me," he said.
Dexter Thomas is a senior management and budget analyst who works with the judicial branch's budgets.
He loved his job, but then, the easygoing atmosphere at work changed. After wiretap sweeps around him on the 10th floor, Thomas wondered who might be spying on him.
He instructed his wife and daughter to never call him on his work phone. He stopped using e-mail for personal matters. When colleagues copied him on chain e-mails, he asked to be removed from the distribution list in case authorities were reading his e-mails.
"You never know who's watching," Thomas said. "You look over your shoulder before you push the button to the 10th floor. And I don't talk to anyone anymore."
Supervisor Max Wilson was once an Arpaio supporter, even volunteering for years as a member of Arpaio's volunteer-posse program.
But as the infighting intensified, so did Wilson's stress levels. He braced for his own arrest. His wife, like many county worker spouses, tensed up whenever sheriff's cars cruised through the neighborhood.
In March 2009, Arpaio warned in a speech that Wilson "better be careful on cutting my budget." Wilson took that as a threat and pulled in his chief of staff to talk about whether he should resign.
Wilson stopped volunteering with the posse. Later, his son-in-law also turned in his posse-member badge.
Fears at home
Fear followed employees home. Many talked with their wives, husbands and children to warn them deputies might show up or follow them around town.
Marla Schofield is a compensation analyst who studies salary data and personnel information. At first, she doubted sheriff's deputies would ever have a reason to contact her.
Then, the battles heated up over the county's decision to build a new court complex.
Deputies showed up at her home twice one summer weekend to ask questions. She didn't answer the door. A deputy left his business card on her car windshield, just below a crack in the glass.
Later, she went out for groceries and gas. She scanned the road and parking lots for sheriff's deputies. She worried the card was strategically placed to send her a message about the cracked windshield, "a tactic to pull me over."
She quickly had the crack repaired.
Compensation supervisor Darrien Ellison and his family were away visiting in-laws last summer on the day deputies came to his house to question him.
When he didn't come to the door, deputies talked to his neighbor. They asked about Ellison and his job at the county. Later, Ellison felt like some kind of suspicion had been cast on his family.
"Your neighbors obviously probably think something has been done wrong," he said, asking how does anyone explain that it's "just politics."
Lee Ann Bohn is a deputy budget director. She led last year's budget negotiations with the Sheriff's Office. Later, while she was out of town with her two daughters, sheriff's deputies questioned employees from her department. Her personal cellphone voicemail filled up with messages from workers asking for help. One employee was so rattled she could barely speak.
From then on, Bohn was extra careful about driving under the speed limit. She also took good care of her swimming pool so it didn't turn green and provide anyone an excuse to enter her property.
Stress takes a toll
As the conflicts continued through 2009, the months of fear at work and home took its toll on county employees.
Scott Isham is chief of staff to Wilson. He tried not to let fear of arrest take hold of his family or staff. But, as time went on, he also tried to be realistic.
Isham called a criminal defense attorney for advice. He asked how much it would cost to get him out of jail. He put the attorney's phone numbers in his cellphone and business cards in his car. Regular after-work beers with his buddies ended. Isham told his wife to be careful. No U-turns. Never leave the kids in the car when returning videos. Who knows what they might call child endangerment?
Kenny Harris oversees construction of the county's court tower. It's the most expensive project in county history, a major point of contention between the warring factions of the county and the target of one of Arpaio's investigations.
In December, Harris got a panicked call from his 70-year-old mother-in-law. Deputies had been at the door of their home. His two young daughters asked if he was in trouble.
As a budget supervisor, Ryan Wimmer works on financial matters
involving the sheriff and county attorney.
Wimmer felt like a likely target. Early on, he didn't expect to be arrested or subpoenaed. But, after Stapley's arrest, Wimmer had more restless nights. Then, deputies came to his apartment with questions about the court-tower project.
Wimmer lay awake after that wondering: How would he find an attorney? How would he pay for an attorney?
Sometimes, Wimmer worked at home. He wondered if they could seize his home computer.
Wimmer stopped expressing any personal opinions about county officials and operations. He struggled to explain to his girlfriend and family what was happening at work.
"Everything I do," he said, "I just assume it will be used against me."
Thursday, January 14, 2010
American Law Enforcement Must Demand the Removal of Sheriff Arpaio from Duty
In my 29-year career as a police officer and detective with the Madison Police Department, in Madison, Wisconsin, I have witnessed and experienced many instances of hatred, violence and racism. In most cases, those negative things were not initiated by law enforcement; sometimes, unfortunately, they were.
The 95% of us who sincerely strive to "serve and protect" are tarnished by the 5% of us who intentionally "disserve and destroy." Nowhere is this more apparent in current American law enforcement than in Maricopa County, Arizona, where Sheriff Joe Arpaio has taken the law into his own hands, at the expense of the Constitution, professional ethics, and proper police conduct. Earlier this year, the mayor of Phoenix wrote a letter to the U.S. attorney general's office, asking the FBI and the U.S. Justice Department's civil rights division to investigate Arpaio's aggressive illegal immigration crackdowns. Mayor Phil Brown wrote that Arpaio's sweeps show "a pattern and practice of conduct that includes discriminatory harassment, improper stops, searches and arrests."
Using local law enforcement to enforce Federal immigration laws, as Sheriff Arpaio is doing, weakens the very community links local police and sheriffs' departments work so hard daily to maintain and build upon. Having community members who are afraid of local police should not be the goal of a department; instead, a far more wide-reaching and positive effect is gained by police-community trust, interaction and collaboration.
This might sound too much like social work to Sheriff Arpaio, whose top-down, dictatorial methods favor humiliation, degradation, prisoner abuse, racial profiling, terrorizing Latino residents, and cavorting with local neo-Nazi groups. And according to a 2008 policy report on effective law enforcement by the Goldwater Institute, a libertarian-leaning watchdog group based in Phoenix, Sheriff Arpaio's department "falls seriously short of fulfilling its mission." The report found that Maricopa County has "diverted resources away from basic law-enforcement functions to highly publicized immigration sweeps, which are ineffective in policing illegal immigration."
As we all know, police need the community's trust to help solve crime and make our country stronger and safer for everyone living here, regardless of immigration status. I'm sure Sheriff Arpaio's department is having a terrible time finding Latino witnesses and victims of crimes willing to report incidents or testify, but that supposes that he cares about them enough to take reports or help develop their cases for court in the first place. Dehumanizing is another strategy used by Sheriff Arpaio, parading inmates through the streets in funky clothes, "sheltering" them in sweltering desert tents, treating them like vermin, forgetting that he is as bound to them by a universal bond of humanity as much as he is bent on eradicating them.
When chief executives of local law enforcement agencies effectively target subgroups of persons who are not committing crimes, they not only alienate the community, they make it much harder for their agencies to recruit high caliber persons with integrity who reflect the faces of the community to take on the very hard job of policing. A sheriff like Joe Arpaio must have the hardest of times making those hires, and the more the world hears about him, the harder it is for more grounded, public spirited police agencies to hire the best of the best.
American law enforcement must demand the removal of Sheriff Arpaio from duty. He is truly a menace to the residents of Arizona, and our country. Simply stated, Sheriff Arpaio has marred the reputation of law enforcement for generations to come.
His warped sense of "justice" has no place in our society, unless we support Japanese internment camps, the ghetto-ization of African-Americans, and the deaths of countless Latinos attempting to survive their own countries' destruction at the hands of US foreign and economic policies by struggling to come here to live, work and protect their families. I call upon the International Association of Chiefs of Police, as well as the US Department of Justice, to work diligently to remove him from the office he has squandered with racism and hate. Those of us in law enforcement working hard to build bridges of respect and trust with our communities don't need another Theophilus Eugene "Bull" Connor erasing our progress.
Originally posted on Imagine2050, by Detective Alix Olson, Madison Police Department, Wisconsin
The 95% of us who sincerely strive to "serve and protect" are tarnished by the 5% of us who intentionally "disserve and destroy." Nowhere is this more apparent in current American law enforcement than in Maricopa County, Arizona, where Sheriff Joe Arpaio has taken the law into his own hands, at the expense of the Constitution, professional ethics, and proper police conduct. Earlier this year, the mayor of Phoenix wrote a letter to the U.S. attorney general's office, asking the FBI and the U.S. Justice Department's civil rights division to investigate Arpaio's aggressive illegal immigration crackdowns. Mayor Phil Brown wrote that Arpaio's sweeps show "a pattern and practice of conduct that includes discriminatory harassment, improper stops, searches and arrests."
Using local law enforcement to enforce Federal immigration laws, as Sheriff Arpaio is doing, weakens the very community links local police and sheriffs' departments work so hard daily to maintain and build upon. Having community members who are afraid of local police should not be the goal of a department; instead, a far more wide-reaching and positive effect is gained by police-community trust, interaction and collaboration.
This might sound too much like social work to Sheriff Arpaio, whose top-down, dictatorial methods favor humiliation, degradation, prisoner abuse, racial profiling, terrorizing Latino residents, and cavorting with local neo-Nazi groups. And according to a 2008 policy report on effective law enforcement by the Goldwater Institute, a libertarian-leaning watchdog group based in Phoenix, Sheriff Arpaio's department "falls seriously short of fulfilling its mission." The report found that Maricopa County has "diverted resources away from basic law-enforcement functions to highly publicized immigration sweeps, which are ineffective in policing illegal immigration."
As we all know, police need the community's trust to help solve crime and make our country stronger and safer for everyone living here, regardless of immigration status. I'm sure Sheriff Arpaio's department is having a terrible time finding Latino witnesses and victims of crimes willing to report incidents or testify, but that supposes that he cares about them enough to take reports or help develop their cases for court in the first place. Dehumanizing is another strategy used by Sheriff Arpaio, parading inmates through the streets in funky clothes, "sheltering" them in sweltering desert tents, treating them like vermin, forgetting that he is as bound to them by a universal bond of humanity as much as he is bent on eradicating them.
When chief executives of local law enforcement agencies effectively target subgroups of persons who are not committing crimes, they not only alienate the community, they make it much harder for their agencies to recruit high caliber persons with integrity who reflect the faces of the community to take on the very hard job of policing. A sheriff like Joe Arpaio must have the hardest of times making those hires, and the more the world hears about him, the harder it is for more grounded, public spirited police agencies to hire the best of the best.
American law enforcement must demand the removal of Sheriff Arpaio from duty. He is truly a menace to the residents of Arizona, and our country. Simply stated, Sheriff Arpaio has marred the reputation of law enforcement for generations to come.
His warped sense of "justice" has no place in our society, unless we support Japanese internment camps, the ghetto-ization of African-Americans, and the deaths of countless Latinos attempting to survive their own countries' destruction at the hands of US foreign and economic policies by struggling to come here to live, work and protect their families. I call upon the International Association of Chiefs of Police, as well as the US Department of Justice, to work diligently to remove him from the office he has squandered with racism and hate. Those of us in law enforcement working hard to build bridges of respect and trust with our communities don't need another Theophilus Eugene "Bull" Connor erasing our progress.
Originally posted on Imagine2050, by Detective Alix Olson, Madison Police Department, Wisconsin
Sheriff Arpaio Investigated for Abuse of Power
The chief financial officer for the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office has been summoned to appear this week before a federal grand jury that's examining whether Sheriff Joe Arpaio and others on his staff abused their power.
Loretta Barkell, who manages the sheriff's $271 million budget, said Monday the FBI asked her to appear at 1:30 p.m. Wednesday at the federal courthouse in downtown Phoenix.
Barkell said she was issued a subpoena on Dec. 18.
Barkell will be at least the third Maricopa County employee testifying that day as County Manager David Smith and Deputy County Manager Sandi Wilson are slated to give their testimony that morning.
Barkell has worked nine years for the sheriff.
Arpaio last week denied knowledge of the grand jury, but Barkell said she told the sheriff and Chief Deputy David Hendershott about the subpoena right after she received it. She said both men told her to tell the truth. Barkell said she has not been told what kind of questions the U.S. Attorney will ask.
Federal grand juries are composed of local residents who meet once a month to hear testimony and determine if there is enough evidence to hold a trial. The proceedings are secret. Witnesses are free to say if they have been subpoenaed.
Loretta Barkell, who manages the sheriff's $271 million budget, said Monday the FBI asked her to appear at 1:30 p.m. Wednesday at the federal courthouse in downtown Phoenix.
Barkell said she was issued a subpoena on Dec. 18.
Barkell will be at least the third Maricopa County employee testifying that day as County Manager David Smith and Deputy County Manager Sandi Wilson are slated to give their testimony that morning.
Barkell has worked nine years for the sheriff.
Arpaio last week denied knowledge of the grand jury, but Barkell said she told the sheriff and Chief Deputy David Hendershott about the subpoena right after she received it. She said both men told her to tell the truth. Barkell said she has not been told what kind of questions the U.S. Attorney will ask.
Federal grand juries are composed of local residents who meet once a month to hear testimony and determine if there is enough evidence to hold a trial. The proceedings are secret. Witnesses are free to say if they have been subpoenaed.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
ICE Strips Sheriff Arpaio of His Immigration Powers
Xenophobic Arizona Sheriff, Joe Arpaio, has raised a lot of eyebrows. Besides his very public hatred of Hispanics, he's also established ties with a Neo-Nazi group in his home state. Arpaio's obliteration of civil rights has finally caught up with him and the Obama Administration is finally pushing back:
A controversial Arizona sheriff known for taking a hard line against illegal immigrants has been stripped of some of his powers in what he described as a political move by the Obama administration.
Under a two-year-old agreement with the federal department of homeland security, Arpaio and his deputies had been authorised to enforce federal immigration law by arresting suspected illegal immigrants in the field and by checking the immigration status of people arrested on other offences.
But after drawing thousands of complaints and a civil rights investigation from the justice department, Arpaio was this week stripped of his federal authority to make immigration arrests. County attorney Andrew Thomas, one of Arpaio's supporters, condemned the "setback in the fight against illegal immigration". Read on...
This is a positive sign and I applaud the White House for taking making this happen. It's long overdue.
A controversial Arizona sheriff known for taking a hard line against illegal immigrants has been stripped of some of his powers in what he described as a political move by the Obama administration.
Under a two-year-old agreement with the federal department of homeland security, Arpaio and his deputies had been authorised to enforce federal immigration law by arresting suspected illegal immigrants in the field and by checking the immigration status of people arrested on other offences.
But after drawing thousands of complaints and a civil rights investigation from the justice department, Arpaio was this week stripped of his federal authority to make immigration arrests. County attorney Andrew Thomas, one of Arpaio's supporters, condemned the "setback in the fight against illegal immigration". Read on...
This is a positive sign and I applaud the White House for taking making this happen. It's long overdue.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Sheriff Joe Arpaio At It Again
Sheriff Joe Arpaio's arrest of Supervisor Don Stapley is outrageous (Stapley arrested by deputies, Tuesday)!
Although the sheriff has the legal power to arrest people who have committed a crime, to do so for 100 alleged financial crimes without involving a county attorney and therefore without an indictment, especially when public safety is not threatened and the suspect is not a flight risk, is a misuse of that power.
Obviously, humiliating a perceived political foe is more important to Sheriff Joe than following the customary procedure of turning over the results of his office's investigation to the prosecutor.
Thankfully, our megalomaniac sheriff is not also the judge and jury.
Although the sheriff has the legal power to arrest people who have committed a crime, to do so for 100 alleged financial crimes without involving a county attorney and therefore without an indictment, especially when public safety is not threatened and the suspect is not a flight risk, is a misuse of that power.
Obviously, humiliating a perceived political foe is more important to Sheriff Joe than following the customary procedure of turning over the results of his office's investigation to the prosecutor.
Thankfully, our megalomaniac sheriff is not also the judge and jury.
Monday, May 25, 2009
Judges Finds Sheriff Arpaio Attempted to Intimidate ACLU Director
PHOENIX
A federal judge ruled late last week that the arrest of an ACLU legal director by Maricopa County's controversial Sheriff Joe Arpaio was an attempt to intmidate the director "from future First Amendment activity." The judge found that the deputies who arrested legal director Dan Pochoda knew of his position with the ACLU and conferred with Arpaio or a representative about arresting him after he attended a demonstration against the sheriff.
Arpaio and three of his officers sought dismissal of the suit, claiming they had probable cause to arrest Pochoda as he left the demonstration. But U.S. District Judge Neil V. Wake found that Pochoda's arrest was an attempt to "intimidate (him) from future First Amendment activity" since the officers knew of Pochoda's position in the ACLU, saw him speaking with the protest's organizer and consulted with Arpaio "or his representative about whether to arrest him on a misdemeanor charge."
Pochoda said two deputies who were patrolling a parking lot near the demonstration approached him on Nov. 3, 2007 and questioned him for five minutes. He says the officers told him he could not park in the lot and stood between him and his car. After Pochoda asked one of the deputies to identify himself, since he was in street clothes, Pochoda says he was handcuffed, taken to the county jail and booked on criminal trespassing charges.
Pochoda claims that the officers violated his Fourth Amendment rights by stopping him from leaving the parking lot.
But Judge Wake found that the officers had the right to stop and question him after. However, once Pochoda made it clear that he was leaving the property, the officers should have let him go, Wake said.
Judge Wake ruled that the deputies "are not immune from Pochoda's claim of unlawful detention and arrest" because Pochoda never refused to leave the parking lot and was prevented from doing so by the officers.
The sheriff and the officers denied Pochoda's claim of malicious prosecution, saying they had probable cause to arrest him, but Judge Wake found the arrest motivated by "deterrence or retribution for First Amendment activities."
________________________
http://www.courthousenews.com
A federal judge ruled late last week that the arrest of an ACLU legal director by Maricopa County's controversial Sheriff Joe Arpaio was an attempt to intmidate the director "from future First Amendment activity." The judge found that the deputies who arrested legal director Dan Pochoda knew of his position with the ACLU and conferred with Arpaio or a representative about arresting him after he attended a demonstration against the sheriff.
Arpaio and three of his officers sought dismissal of the suit, claiming they had probable cause to arrest Pochoda as he left the demonstration. But U.S. District Judge Neil V. Wake found that Pochoda's arrest was an attempt to "intimidate (him) from future First Amendment activity" since the officers knew of Pochoda's position in the ACLU, saw him speaking with the protest's organizer and consulted with Arpaio "or his representative about whether to arrest him on a misdemeanor charge."
Pochoda said two deputies who were patrolling a parking lot near the demonstration approached him on Nov. 3, 2007 and questioned him for five minutes. He says the officers told him he could not park in the lot and stood between him and his car. After Pochoda asked one of the deputies to identify himself, since he was in street clothes, Pochoda says he was handcuffed, taken to the county jail and booked on criminal trespassing charges.
Pochoda claims that the officers violated his Fourth Amendment rights by stopping him from leaving the parking lot.
But Judge Wake found that the officers had the right to stop and question him after. However, once Pochoda made it clear that he was leaving the property, the officers should have let him go, Wake said.
Judge Wake ruled that the deputies "are not immune from Pochoda's claim of unlawful detention and arrest" because Pochoda never refused to leave the parking lot and was prevented from doing so by the officers.
The sheriff and the officers denied Pochoda's claim of malicious prosecution, saying they had probable cause to arrest him, but Judge Wake found the arrest motivated by "deterrence or retribution for First Amendment activities."
________________________
http://www.courthousenews.com
Thursday, May 07, 2009
Detention Officer Jillian Lybarger Charged with Prostitution
PHOENIX
A 23-year-old Maricopa County Sheriff's Office detention officer has been arrested by Phoenix police and charged with prostitution in connection with a second wave of arrests in the Desert Divas case, said Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Jillian Lybarger was placed on administrative leave shortly after Wednesday's arrest, Arpaio said.
She was booked into the Fourth Avenue Jail and was released on her own recognizance.
A 23-year-old Maricopa County Sheriff's Office detention officer has been arrested by Phoenix police and charged with prostitution in connection with a second wave of arrests in the Desert Divas case, said Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Jillian Lybarger was placed on administrative leave shortly after Wednesday's arrest, Arpaio said.
She was booked into the Fourth Avenue Jail and was released on her own recognizance.
____________________
Friday, April 24, 2009
Sheriff Joe Arpaio Being Investigated Again
The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office arrested 22 people yesterday, including 14 illegal immigrants, as part of a crime sweep in the West Valley.
Sheriff Joe Arpaio said at least two of those arrested were violent criminals. The crime sweep is continuing Friday.
Arpaio has conducted similar sweeps in Mesa, Phoenix and Guadalupe. Critics of the sheriff, including the American Civil Liberties Union and Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, charge the actions unfairly target Hispanics. The ACLU and Hispanic activists filed a federal lawsuit against MCSO’s sweeps, and the U.S. Justice Department is investigating its sweeps and raids.
Some of those raids have been conducted at businesses suspected of hiring illegal immigrants.
The sheriff has said many times that criticism of his actions is unjustified and he’s simply enforcing the law.
Arpaio on Friday derided attempts by political opponents to move forward some kind of county or state measure that would make sheriff’s positions appointed rather than elected. Some Arpaio critics are looking at a statewide referendum that would make sheriff and perhaps county prosecutor positions appointed by their county boards, not chosen by voters.
Arpaio was elected to a fifth four-year term in November.
“It’s never going to happen,” Arpaio said of his job becoming an appointed position. “I would leave in one second. I get my strength from the people.”
A recent poll by Rasmussen Reports shows Arpaio remains popular among Arizona voters -- more popular than President Barack Obama.
Sixty-eight percent of state voters have a favorable view of Arpaio, compared with a 53 percent approval rating for Obama and 57 percent for new Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer.
Forty-seven percent disapprove of Obama’s performance during his first months in office, compared with a 37 percent disapproval rate for Brewer and 26 percent for Arpaio.
The poll surveyed 500 likely voters in March.
Sheriff Joe Arpaio said at least two of those arrested were violent criminals. The crime sweep is continuing Friday.
Arpaio has conducted similar sweeps in Mesa, Phoenix and Guadalupe. Critics of the sheriff, including the American Civil Liberties Union and Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, charge the actions unfairly target Hispanics. The ACLU and Hispanic activists filed a federal lawsuit against MCSO’s sweeps, and the U.S. Justice Department is investigating its sweeps and raids.
Some of those raids have been conducted at businesses suspected of hiring illegal immigrants.
The sheriff has said many times that criticism of his actions is unjustified and he’s simply enforcing the law.
Arpaio on Friday derided attempts by political opponents to move forward some kind of county or state measure that would make sheriff’s positions appointed rather than elected. Some Arpaio critics are looking at a statewide referendum that would make sheriff and perhaps county prosecutor positions appointed by their county boards, not chosen by voters.
Arpaio was elected to a fifth four-year term in November.
“It’s never going to happen,” Arpaio said of his job becoming an appointed position. “I would leave in one second. I get my strength from the people.”
A recent poll by Rasmussen Reports shows Arpaio remains popular among Arizona voters -- more popular than President Barack Obama.
Sixty-eight percent of state voters have a favorable view of Arpaio, compared with a 53 percent approval rating for Obama and 57 percent for new Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer.
Forty-seven percent disapprove of Obama’s performance during his first months in office, compared with a 37 percent disapproval rate for Brewer and 26 percent for Arpaio.
The poll surveyed 500 likely voters in March.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Sheriff Joe Arpaio Finally Being Investigated
You might not be familiar with Joe Arpaio. He is the sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona.
Joe gained fame for making inmates wear pink underwear. He literally brags about it.
QUOTE: [ The MCSO uniform is now black and white stripes for every inmate and of course our world famous pink boxer shorts....And of course most men, especially those in jail, do not like the color pink.]
Joe also brags about having the only all-female chain gang in history. Yeah, he brought back chain gangs.
Joe has crossed the line on quite a few occasions. Last year, a class action suit was initiated against Joe.
In July 2008, five individuals and Somos America, a Latino community-based coalition, sued Arpaio, the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) and Maricopa County, claiming that they or their members were unlawfully stopped and mistreated by law enforcement agents because they were Latino.
The county, of course, asked the U.S. District Court in Arizona to dismiss the lawsuit. This past February, the ruling was handed down.
A federal judge denied a request by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio to dismiss a lawsuit against him that alleges his deputies have racially profiled Hispanics.The ruling Tuesday by U.S. District Judge Mary Murguia allows lawyers for the Hispanic civil rights group Somos America and other plaintiffs to continue pressing their allegations in court.
Now, the U.S. Justice Department is getting involved.
The U.S. Justice Department has launched a civil-rights investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office after months of mounting complaints that deputies are discriminating in their enforcement of federal immigration laws.
Officials from the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division notified Sheriff Joe Arpaio on Tuesday that they had begun the investigation, which will focus on whether deputies are engaging in "patterns or practices of discriminatory police practices and unconstitutional searches and seizures."
An expert said it is the department's first civil-rights probe related to immigration enforcement.
What's the big deal with Sheriff Joe Arpaio?
*Ole Joe has been ordering deputies to "scour" Latino neighborhoods looking for illegal immigrants based on skin color.*
Joe refuses to grant female inmates reproductive rights. Joe refuses to allow female inmates access to abortion clinics without a court order. Why? Joe claims he doesn't run a taxi service from jail to an abortion clinic and back.
Ambrett Spencer was nine months pregnant when she was serving her sentence for drunk driving. Unfortunately, she was in Joe's jail. Joe's sergeant on duty decided that Spencer was not top priority. The baby was born dead.
While Spencer is suing Joe, that is just one lawsuit of the more than 2,500 jail conditions lawsuits that have been filed against Arpaio in federal court alone.
Joe doesn't allow female inmates to see their babies after birth.
Joe has built a tent city to house his inmates. Temperatures can reach 138 degrees. Joe's response to complaints? "It's 120 degrees in Iraq and the soldiers are living in tents and they didn't commit any crimes, so shut your mouths."
Believe me...those examples are merely samples. There is more. But not everyone thinks Joe is a dick.
Despite criticism from Amnesty International, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Arizona Ecumenical Council, and the Anti-Defamation League, The Fox Reality Channel offered Sheriff Arpaio a reality TV show entitled, "Smile, You're Under Arrest." The show centers around elaborate sting operations run by Sheriff Arpaio to capture people wanted on outstanding warrants.
Ah...family programming.While the U.S. Justice Department is investigating, a petition has been created to urge Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to suspend Arpaio’s 287g agreement that allows him to enforce Federal immigration laws.
Joe gained fame for making inmates wear pink underwear. He literally brags about it.
QUOTE: [ The MCSO uniform is now black and white stripes for every inmate and of course our world famous pink boxer shorts....And of course most men, especially those in jail, do not like the color pink.]
Joe also brags about having the only all-female chain gang in history. Yeah, he brought back chain gangs.
Joe has crossed the line on quite a few occasions. Last year, a class action suit was initiated against Joe.
In July 2008, five individuals and Somos America, a Latino community-based coalition, sued Arpaio, the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) and Maricopa County, claiming that they or their members were unlawfully stopped and mistreated by law enforcement agents because they were Latino.
The county, of course, asked the U.S. District Court in Arizona to dismiss the lawsuit. This past February, the ruling was handed down.
A federal judge denied a request by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio to dismiss a lawsuit against him that alleges his deputies have racially profiled Hispanics.The ruling Tuesday by U.S. District Judge Mary Murguia allows lawyers for the Hispanic civil rights group Somos America and other plaintiffs to continue pressing their allegations in court.
Now, the U.S. Justice Department is getting involved.
The U.S. Justice Department has launched a civil-rights investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office after months of mounting complaints that deputies are discriminating in their enforcement of federal immigration laws.
Officials from the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division notified Sheriff Joe Arpaio on Tuesday that they had begun the investigation, which will focus on whether deputies are engaging in "patterns or practices of discriminatory police practices and unconstitutional searches and seizures."
An expert said it is the department's first civil-rights probe related to immigration enforcement.
What's the big deal with Sheriff Joe Arpaio?
*Ole Joe has been ordering deputies to "scour" Latino neighborhoods looking for illegal immigrants based on skin color.*
Joe refuses to grant female inmates reproductive rights. Joe refuses to allow female inmates access to abortion clinics without a court order. Why? Joe claims he doesn't run a taxi service from jail to an abortion clinic and back.
Ambrett Spencer was nine months pregnant when she was serving her sentence for drunk driving. Unfortunately, she was in Joe's jail. Joe's sergeant on duty decided that Spencer was not top priority. The baby was born dead.
While Spencer is suing Joe, that is just one lawsuit of the more than 2,500 jail conditions lawsuits that have been filed against Arpaio in federal court alone.
Joe doesn't allow female inmates to see their babies after birth.
Joe has built a tent city to house his inmates. Temperatures can reach 138 degrees. Joe's response to complaints? "It's 120 degrees in Iraq and the soldiers are living in tents and they didn't commit any crimes, so shut your mouths."
Believe me...those examples are merely samples. There is more. But not everyone thinks Joe is a dick.
Despite criticism from Amnesty International, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Arizona Ecumenical Council, and the Anti-Defamation League, The Fox Reality Channel offered Sheriff Arpaio a reality TV show entitled, "Smile, You're Under Arrest." The show centers around elaborate sting operations run by Sheriff Arpaio to capture people wanted on outstanding warrants.
Ah...family programming.While the U.S. Justice Department is investigating, a petition has been created to urge Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to suspend Arpaio’s 287g agreement that allows him to enforce Federal immigration laws.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Sheriff Arpaio Under Federal Investigation
The man FOX network dubbed America’s toughest sheriff, and perhaps the last true 20th century style big city political boss, Arizona’s Sheriff Joseph Arpaio according to reliable reports, is the focus of a multi faceted federal investigation.
Till recently “Boss” Arpaio wielded influence in local and state politics comparable to other historical political figures like Chicago’s Richard J. Daley and Missouri’s Tom Prendergast.
The nearly eighty year old Arpaio, ever addicted to limelight and publicity apparently declined to get out of politics while the getting was good. He now faces the music for what critics claim is more than a decade of documented abuse, financial irregularity and in some cases out right murder. A litany of political and criminal villainy ignored by the Bush Justice department and suppressed by State officials and loyalist Judges who were products of the Arpaio political machine.
There was a time in Arizona when even Governors cow towed to sheriff Joe, and politicians who made the mistake of rousing his sore displeasure, found themselves in his jail facing trumped up charges. Their careers destroyed long before their supposed crimes faded from the front page of the Arizona Republic or local fox news affiliate and were dismissed by the courts.
The Sheriff is still beloved by a large majority of neo conservatives who call Phoenix home and use the appropriate code words and political speak to express their pride in being mighty white, but in recent years the influx of people from other parts of the country has made Phoenix the Nation’s 5th largest metropolitan area and changed the balance of power. The Sheriffs grip is no longer absolute and the 2006 midterms saw his handpicked congressional delegation fall apart.
While no single event in particular is responsible for the decline in Sheriff Arpaio’s political fortunes, a multiplicity of bungled publicity stunts attempted by the sheriff to get back on top, combined with the return to a rule of law at the federal level is creating a snowball effect of negative consequence. The snowball first drew national attention when sheriff Arpaio arrested a couple reporters for negative articles. To his surprise the Sheriff discovered he wasn’t actually allowed to put people in jail for writing stories he disliked.
Then the democrats who had won both the Attorney General and Governors office said something to offend him, which resulted in one of his famous press conferences where he announced he had been conducting another of his super double top secret investigations into political corruption and the attorney general was the target. Unlike past publicity stunts where the politician named would eventually be perp walked before the press, the attorney general called his own news conference to more or less chuckle, saying his office would no longer be taking calls from the Sheriff much less responding to his silly behavior.
That event seemed to open the flood gates, other elected officials and Mayors began to openly oppose the sheriff who responded by conducting midnight raids at city halls of mayors who spoke ill of as is Joes habit to refer to himself in the third person, the office of sheriff.
Unfortunately while the image of dozens of black hooded deputies armed to the teeth invading city hall’s across the valley played well to his base and the local fox affiliate, it didn’t go over so well with everyone else. Now the Justice department in democratic control is looking into year’s worth of complaints about abuse, civil rights violations and suspicious “death while in custody incidents.”
In the run up to the Presidential election, sheriff Arpaio gambled he could cultivate the immigration debate into some serious local and National political capitol. He began staging what amounted to massive armed occupations of poor and mostly Spanish neighborhoods in Phoenix and surrounding cities. His army of deputies and “volunteers” he calls the sheriff’s posse, people given uniforms, badges and in some cases guns, now assist him in enforcing immigration policy.
While ample video and first person accounts detail a couple thousand incidents where the civil rights of Americans are being openly violated by the sheriff and his supporters simply because they have brown skin, It has yet to deter Arpaio who claims he is answerable only to the voters who elected him. The raids still play well with the locals he calls on to help keep Phoenix safe from the brown horde, but I speculate by this time next year, the sheriff will be hoping the federal pool from which his jury will be selected, does not have any of the brown looking folks his volunteers profiled and stopped under color of authority to prove they were in this country Legally.
That’s my view yours may be different
Till recently “Boss” Arpaio wielded influence in local and state politics comparable to other historical political figures like Chicago’s Richard J. Daley and Missouri’s Tom Prendergast.
The nearly eighty year old Arpaio, ever addicted to limelight and publicity apparently declined to get out of politics while the getting was good. He now faces the music for what critics claim is more than a decade of documented abuse, financial irregularity and in some cases out right murder. A litany of political and criminal villainy ignored by the Bush Justice department and suppressed by State officials and loyalist Judges who were products of the Arpaio political machine.
There was a time in Arizona when even Governors cow towed to sheriff Joe, and politicians who made the mistake of rousing his sore displeasure, found themselves in his jail facing trumped up charges. Their careers destroyed long before their supposed crimes faded from the front page of the Arizona Republic or local fox news affiliate and were dismissed by the courts.
The Sheriff is still beloved by a large majority of neo conservatives who call Phoenix home and use the appropriate code words and political speak to express their pride in being mighty white, but in recent years the influx of people from other parts of the country has made Phoenix the Nation’s 5th largest metropolitan area and changed the balance of power. The Sheriffs grip is no longer absolute and the 2006 midterms saw his handpicked congressional delegation fall apart.
While no single event in particular is responsible for the decline in Sheriff Arpaio’s political fortunes, a multiplicity of bungled publicity stunts attempted by the sheriff to get back on top, combined with the return to a rule of law at the federal level is creating a snowball effect of negative consequence. The snowball first drew national attention when sheriff Arpaio arrested a couple reporters for negative articles. To his surprise the Sheriff discovered he wasn’t actually allowed to put people in jail for writing stories he disliked.
Then the democrats who had won both the Attorney General and Governors office said something to offend him, which resulted in one of his famous press conferences where he announced he had been conducting another of his super double top secret investigations into political corruption and the attorney general was the target. Unlike past publicity stunts where the politician named would eventually be perp walked before the press, the attorney general called his own news conference to more or less chuckle, saying his office would no longer be taking calls from the Sheriff much less responding to his silly behavior.
That event seemed to open the flood gates, other elected officials and Mayors began to openly oppose the sheriff who responded by conducting midnight raids at city halls of mayors who spoke ill of as is Joes habit to refer to himself in the third person, the office of sheriff.
Unfortunately while the image of dozens of black hooded deputies armed to the teeth invading city hall’s across the valley played well to his base and the local fox affiliate, it didn’t go over so well with everyone else. Now the Justice department in democratic control is looking into year’s worth of complaints about abuse, civil rights violations and suspicious “death while in custody incidents.”
In the run up to the Presidential election, sheriff Arpaio gambled he could cultivate the immigration debate into some serious local and National political capitol. He began staging what amounted to massive armed occupations of poor and mostly Spanish neighborhoods in Phoenix and surrounding cities. His army of deputies and “volunteers” he calls the sheriff’s posse, people given uniforms, badges and in some cases guns, now assist him in enforcing immigration policy.
While ample video and first person accounts detail a couple thousand incidents where the civil rights of Americans are being openly violated by the sheriff and his supporters simply because they have brown skin, It has yet to deter Arpaio who claims he is answerable only to the voters who elected him. The raids still play well with the locals he calls on to help keep Phoenix safe from the brown horde, but I speculate by this time next year, the sheriff will be hoping the federal pool from which his jury will be selected, does not have any of the brown looking folks his volunteers profiled and stopped under color of authority to prove they were in this country Legally.
That’s my view yours may be different
Monday, February 09, 2009
Sheriff Joe Arpaio Makes Arizona a Laughing-Stock
Arizona's recent claims to fame have included the Cardinals' improbable and heart-wrenching trip to the Super Bowl and a mammoth budget deficit that has led the State Legislature to make sizeable cuts in education, health care and public services. But the state's perennial national blemish is none other than four-time re-elected sheriff of Maricopa County, the infamous Joe Arpaio, better known simply as Sheriff Joe.
Sheriff Joe is known to his supporters as "America's Toughest Sheriff," and to his many detractors, including Amnesty International, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Arizona Ecumenical Council, the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League as an alarming public official, prone to flirting with human rights violations in order to maintain his "tough" reputation. Famous examples of his flouting prisoner's rights include reinstating the archaic practice of chain-gangs, feeding prisoners just twice a day and with expired food, housing them in tents that can reach 150 degrees Fahrenheit in Arizona summers, and obliging them to wear pink underwear emblazoned with the words "Go Joe."
In 2005, Sheriff Joe forced 700 maximum-security prisoners to march four blocks between jails in nothing but pink boxer-shorts and flip-flops. His excuse was that he didn't want the inmates to be able to hide weapons in their clothes, but the march served as just another publicity stunt to dehumanize and disgrace the detainees.
Recently, Sheriff Joe has been at his best. In an exploit that caused the Huffington Post to name Arpaio its "unconscionable idiot of the week," he arranged massive media coverage and on Feb. 4 paraded 200 undocumented immigrants dressed in old-fashioned striped prison garb and shackles from the county jail to Tent City, where they will await trial. That's right: none of the hundreds of detainees has even been sentenced yet. Arpaio claimed that the event was a "cost-saver," an excuse I can't even begin to fathom. How is outfitting 200 untried men in new prison uniforms and orchestrating a full-fledged media circus a cost-saver?
With Sheriff Joe's notorious dearth of transparency, we'll probably never understand that excuse. But even so, when has cutting costs ever justified gross Constitutional and human-rights violations? The New York Times called Arpaio "off the rails" in a Feb. 5 editorial about the incident. If one county's sheriff is drawing the notice and antipathy of the largest metropolitan newspaper in the United States, then Arizona has a major public relations problem.
To add insult to injury, Sheriff Joe stars in a reality television show on Fox Reality. "Smile… You're Under Arrest!" aired Dec. 27, 2008. The show's premise is that people with outstanding warrants are hoodwinked into presenting themselves for arrest, with stunts like fake movie casting calls or fashion shows. At the end of each episode, Sheriff Joe and his costars arrest the unwitting crooks.
Clearly, Arpaio has a strong taste for publicity at others' expense. But he's an elected official and as such, this sort of behavior is unacceptable. How does the sheriff of the fourth-most-populated county in the nation have time for a television show? Still, he manages to fulfill his other self-proclaimed duties, chief among them barefacedly breaching prisoner's rights and terrorizing undocumented migrants.
And here we come to why residents of Maricopa County continue, unfathomably, to re-elect Sheriff Joe. He is "tough on illegal immigration." Well, yes, but Joe McCarthy was famously "tough on Communism." Toughness does not indicate sound policy, and Arpaio is nothing more than a dangerous buffoon whose fear-mongering will do little to improve Arizona in the long run. All he will really do is make himself, and our fair state, a national laughing-stock. Thanks, Joe!
Sheriff Joe is known to his supporters as "America's Toughest Sheriff," and to his many detractors, including Amnesty International, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Arizona Ecumenical Council, the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League as an alarming public official, prone to flirting with human rights violations in order to maintain his "tough" reputation. Famous examples of his flouting prisoner's rights include reinstating the archaic practice of chain-gangs, feeding prisoners just twice a day and with expired food, housing them in tents that can reach 150 degrees Fahrenheit in Arizona summers, and obliging them to wear pink underwear emblazoned with the words "Go Joe."
In 2005, Sheriff Joe forced 700 maximum-security prisoners to march four blocks between jails in nothing but pink boxer-shorts and flip-flops. His excuse was that he didn't want the inmates to be able to hide weapons in their clothes, but the march served as just another publicity stunt to dehumanize and disgrace the detainees.
Recently, Sheriff Joe has been at his best. In an exploit that caused the Huffington Post to name Arpaio its "unconscionable idiot of the week," he arranged massive media coverage and on Feb. 4 paraded 200 undocumented immigrants dressed in old-fashioned striped prison garb and shackles from the county jail to Tent City, where they will await trial. That's right: none of the hundreds of detainees has even been sentenced yet. Arpaio claimed that the event was a "cost-saver," an excuse I can't even begin to fathom. How is outfitting 200 untried men in new prison uniforms and orchestrating a full-fledged media circus a cost-saver?
With Sheriff Joe's notorious dearth of transparency, we'll probably never understand that excuse. But even so, when has cutting costs ever justified gross Constitutional and human-rights violations? The New York Times called Arpaio "off the rails" in a Feb. 5 editorial about the incident. If one county's sheriff is drawing the notice and antipathy of the largest metropolitan newspaper in the United States, then Arizona has a major public relations problem.
To add insult to injury, Sheriff Joe stars in a reality television show on Fox Reality. "Smile… You're Under Arrest!" aired Dec. 27, 2008. The show's premise is that people with outstanding warrants are hoodwinked into presenting themselves for arrest, with stunts like fake movie casting calls or fashion shows. At the end of each episode, Sheriff Joe and his costars arrest the unwitting crooks.
Clearly, Arpaio has a strong taste for publicity at others' expense. But he's an elected official and as such, this sort of behavior is unacceptable. How does the sheriff of the fourth-most-populated county in the nation have time for a television show? Still, he manages to fulfill his other self-proclaimed duties, chief among them barefacedly breaching prisoner's rights and terrorizing undocumented migrants.
And here we come to why residents of Maricopa County continue, unfathomably, to re-elect Sheriff Joe. He is "tough on illegal immigration." Well, yes, but Joe McCarthy was famously "tough on Communism." Toughness does not indicate sound policy, and Arpaio is nothing more than a dangerous buffoon whose fear-mongering will do little to improve Arizona in the long run. All he will really do is make himself, and our fair state, a national laughing-stock. Thanks, Joe!
Thursday, January 01, 2009
Joe Arpaio World's Worst Sheriff
Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., which includes Phoenix and its sprawling surroundings, is an aggressive self-promoter with a new claim to fame: a reality show on Fox called “Smile … You’re Under Arrest!” It’s a “Candid Camera” for crooks, with actors luring fugitives into compromising situations, for laughs.
It’s easy to snicker at the sight of a publicity-addicted law-enforcement official wallowing with the dregs of reality TV, sharing a channel with shows like “My Bare Lady,” “The Glutton Bowl” and “World Famous for Dicking Around.”
But Sheriff Arpaio is armed and dangerous. He is a genuine public menace with a long and well-documented trail of inmate abuses, unjustified arrests, racial profiling, brutal and inept policing and wasteful spending.
For years he has won fawning press coverage by playing the role of “America’s Toughest Sheriff.” But now another side of the story — that is, the truth — is leaking out.
The latest example is a report released this month that sums up, in devastating detail, the cost of Sheriff Arpaio’s reign. It was issued not by the sheriff’s usual critics — whom he routinely dismisses as a band of bleeding-hearts — but by the Goldwater Institute, a think tank dedicated to the principles of the late Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater, an obelisk of conservatism.
Read a summary here, or the full pdf.
Here’s the gist.
What has risen on Sheriff Arpaio’s watch: violent crimes (up 69 percent overall from 2004 to 2007, with homicides up 166 percent in those three years), 911 response times, unserved arrest warrants, racist sweeps of Latino neighborhoods, and dollars paid out in budget overruns, overtime and lawsuit settlements.
What has declined: the arrest rate, the number of satellite booking stations, public access to department records, Sheriff Arpaio’s reputation.
The Goldwater report must bring some comfort to the residents of Maricopa County who have spent years raising the alarm about Sheriff Arpaio, with little effect outside Arizona.
They include a Web site, barriozona.com, that has tracked the sheriff’s terrorizing sweeps through Latino neighborhoods, and a dogged reporter, Stephen Lemons of The Phoenix New Times, who keeps the heat on Sheriff Arpaio in his blog. Mr. Lemons recently posted some chilling video from a public meeting of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, where Sheriff Arpaio’s deputies arrested citizens … for clapping.
Sheriff Arpaio was elected to a fifth term in November and is riding high, at least in the worlds of bad policing and jackass television.
But pride, they say, goes before a fall. Here’s hoping!
It’s easy to snicker at the sight of a publicity-addicted law-enforcement official wallowing with the dregs of reality TV, sharing a channel with shows like “My Bare Lady,” “The Glutton Bowl” and “World Famous for Dicking Around.”
But Sheriff Arpaio is armed and dangerous. He is a genuine public menace with a long and well-documented trail of inmate abuses, unjustified arrests, racial profiling, brutal and inept policing and wasteful spending.
For years he has won fawning press coverage by playing the role of “America’s Toughest Sheriff.” But now another side of the story — that is, the truth — is leaking out.
The latest example is a report released this month that sums up, in devastating detail, the cost of Sheriff Arpaio’s reign. It was issued not by the sheriff’s usual critics — whom he routinely dismisses as a band of bleeding-hearts — but by the Goldwater Institute, a think tank dedicated to the principles of the late Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater, an obelisk of conservatism.
Read a summary here, or the full pdf.
Here’s the gist.
What has risen on Sheriff Arpaio’s watch: violent crimes (up 69 percent overall from 2004 to 2007, with homicides up 166 percent in those three years), 911 response times, unserved arrest warrants, racist sweeps of Latino neighborhoods, and dollars paid out in budget overruns, overtime and lawsuit settlements.
What has declined: the arrest rate, the number of satellite booking stations, public access to department records, Sheriff Arpaio’s reputation.
The Goldwater report must bring some comfort to the residents of Maricopa County who have spent years raising the alarm about Sheriff Arpaio, with little effect outside Arizona.
They include a Web site, barriozona.com, that has tracked the sheriff’s terrorizing sweeps through Latino neighborhoods, and a dogged reporter, Stephen Lemons of The Phoenix New Times, who keeps the heat on Sheriff Arpaio in his blog. Mr. Lemons recently posted some chilling video from a public meeting of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, where Sheriff Arpaio’s deputies arrested citizens … for clapping.
Sheriff Arpaio was elected to a fifth term in November and is riding high, at least in the worlds of bad policing and jackass television.
But pride, they say, goes before a fall. Here’s hoping!
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Four People Arrested for Opposing Sheriff Joe Arpaio
PHOENIX
The authorities arrested four people Wednesday at a meeting of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, a development that heightened months of tension between county officials and a vocal group of activists who oppose Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Those arrested, during the public comment part of the meeting, had been warned by the board earlier that they were being disruptive with their applause for speakers critical of the sheriff.
Finally, after standing and applauding another such speaker for 20 seconds, they were seized by sheriff’s deputies and county security agents. All were charged with suspicion of disorderly conduct and trespassing, said Lt. Brian Lee, a spokesman for the Sheriff’s Office.
One of the four accused is Jason Odhner, who was identified by the director of the anti-Arpaio group Maricopa Citizens for Safety and Accountability as a member of the organization. The three others are Joel Nelson, Monica Sanschafer and Kristy Theilen, who all belong to Acorn, the activist group whose members have frequently worked alongside the Maricopa Citizens organization in an anti-Arpaio campaign.
The groups want the Board of Supervisors to have greater oversight of Sheriff Arpaio, whose get-tough tactics have gained him nationwide attention but who has been accused by critics of racial profiling and maintaining deplorable conditions at the county jails, among other things.
The crackdown at the meeting brought the tally of arrested anti-Arpaio activists to nine in the last three months. Four people affiliated with Maricopa Citizens for Safety and Accountability, including Ms. Sanschafer and Ms. Theilen, were arrested Monday for refusing to leave the lobby outside the office of the chairman of the Board of Supervisors. And on Sept. 29, a co-founder of the Maricopa Citizens group was arrested outside a Board of Supervisors meeting on suspicion of trespassing on government property and disorderly conduct.
Sheriff Arpaio, who was not at Wednesday’s meeting, said the arrests there were justified.
“When you’re in a government building,” he said, “when you have a forum, when you’re trying to have proper decorum and they keep interfering, they violated the law.”
************************
This JACKASS needs to be removed from office!!! He degrades men by making them wear pink underwear, feeds people spoiled food, and just degrades them at every turn. The fucker needs to be treated by some bad ass criminals the way he has treated them. Maybe one of them will take his sorry ass life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)