I only have a minute sandwiched between my Habitat for Humanity project and a social event to put a place holder for this story. Federal Judge G. Murray Snow ordered Friday that Sheriff Joseph Arpaio and three associates be referred for prosecution for criminal contempt of court for their actions in violation of court orders in the Melendres v. Arpaio lawsuit. Also referred were defense attorney Michele Iafrate, Chief Deputy Sheridan and Captain Bailey.
Read about it at AZCentral.com and the order at the Phoenix New Times.
Poor Sheriff Joe. He may have to drop out of his re-election race to prepare his defense, and be forced to live off the $10 million in unspent campaign contributions.
I wonder what Vogt and Booth will think about this….
http://www.cbs5az.com/story/32801428/judge-recommends-criminal-prosecution-of-arpaio-in-racial-profiling-case
The Phoenix New Times version of the story:
Arpaio, Subordinates, Referred for Criminal Prosecution by Judge Snow, Could Face Prison Time
Arpaio made Drudge Report this morning:
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2016/08/19/arpaio-criminal-contempt-decision/87587572/
I wonder what Arpaio thinks about drawing Judge Bolton? I imagine they weren’t celebrating.
Mighty Dawg at the Fogbow noticed the strong hint Judge Snow sent the US Attorney:
One could read into this that Judge Snow is suggesting that the US Attorney could look into perjury and obstruction not only on the part of the named contemnors but also others.
Editorial Opinion of AZ Central:
http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/editorial/2016/08/20/sheriff-joe-arpaio-criminal-contempt/89023172/
I can’t wait, although it looks like I must, to see the trogs at BR begin to call Barney Fife a martyr and political prisoner once he is convicted.
Shurf Joe should be aware (if that’s possible) that, if I recall correctly, Bolton was briefly involved in the Melendres v. Arpaio case. Was it during the attempt by Arpaio to recuse Judge Snow?
New article:
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/arpaio-subordinates-referred-for-criminal-prosecution-by-judge-snow-could-face-prison-time-8568664
I don’t recall Judge Bolton ever being involved in Melendres v Arpaio. The original judge in that case was Judge Mary Murguia.She was replaced by Judge Snow. Arpaio asked Murguia recuse herself based on the fact that her twin sister was president of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy group that’s been critical of Arpaio. She did recuse herself in 2009.
If La Raza sounds familiar it is because Trump tried to play the La Raza card against Judge Gonzalo Curiel in the Trump University lawsuit.
The first recusal in Melendres worked against Arpaio when he tried to get Judge Snow kicked off the case since you only get one “free” recusal in federal court.
Judge Snow requested Judge Bolton’s opinion on a particular issue that I’m still trying to locate.
It was Judge Boyle, not Judge Bolton.
—
Judge Boyle was the magistrate judge assigned to the case.
There are no limits on recusal for appearance of bias. In federal court, there are also no “free” (i.e., no explanation needed) recusals.
OK Bob thanks. I thought it was much easier to get the first recusal than subsequent ones. I put “free” in quotes for that reason. I know it isn’t automatic.
I seem to recall this came up in some of the briefs back when Arpaio filed to request that Judge Snow recuse himself after the information that Arpaio was investigating Judge Snow’s wife became public.
I was reading the comments on Facebook in one of the news feeds. Its a glorious feast of RWNJ tears, accompanied by a symphony of foot stomping. “But but but…Hillary!” is the main whine I see repeated. It is funny to see professed die-hard Republicans throwing W. under the bus, for appointing Judge Snow.
They sure do love the letter of the law…until they don’t.
Arpaio needs good legal counsel–where’s john when you really need him!?
I was just thinking the same thing. I’m waiting for John to revive his suggestion that Arpaio drag this out by pulling the Vincent “The Chin” Gigante ruse. Of course, pretending that he is senile might damage Arpaio’s re-election chances.
Pretending?
He can’t even remember the name of his attorney.(Because he has so many of them.)
Doc’s Girly Gate-sPam-Wall caught me on the other link (not blaming Doc) But maybe the laughs got to him too. IDK
But I’d suggest some pretty strong walls exist when it comes to litigating “Crazy” in Court when an Election hangs in the Balance.
OBAMA’S LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE FRAUD MAY GO TO CRIMINAL COURT YET!
“No, I’m just telling you what you’re doing is crazy and you should stop.”
ABI Journal
Current IssueArchived IssuesJournal TopicsJournal ColumnsJournal AuthorsSubmission
GuidelinesAdvertise
The Boundaries of Litigation Privilege
Jul/Aug 2003
Straight & Narrow
Journal Article:
Sources abound warning of the vices of gossip, and while most people’s experiences confirm those caveats, the lessons are perhaps nowhere more cemented than in the checks that pass hands following defamation actions. Professionals of all types have been unfortunate enough to find themselves in such a suit, either for having a loose tongue or from being subject to the repercussions of reputation-shattering lies. Lawyers must remember that they are not exempted from the rules of the game of law, and that in some situations they are held to higher standards than others. In particular, attorneys must exercise diligent restraint from making derogatory publications regarding other attorneys.
Despite these cautions, a recent case came to the Illinois Appellate Court involving defamation by one law firm of another firm’s reproachable behavior during bankruptcy actions. Edelman, Combs and Latturner v. Hinshaw and Culbertson, No. 1-01-3638, slip op. (Ill. App. Div. 2003).
The defendant’s inability to justify its defamatory publication by relying on either litigation or qualified privilege serves to remind attorneys of their obligation to carefully discern and stay within the often vague ethical boundaries of professional responsibility.
http://www.abi.org/abi-journal/the-boundaries-of-litigation-privilege
OBAMA’S LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE FRAUD MAY GO TO CRIMINAL COURT YET!
“No, I’m just telling you what you’re doing is crazy and you should stop.”
http://www.azfamily.com/clip/12672491/birther-investigation-comes-up-in-arpaio-deposition
That kind of shocked me. . Because it opens up the “Fraudulent Claim of the long form Birther Certificate of Obama’s ” into the Court to dismiss the Case based on libel.
Certainly, Arpiao doesn’t have to be subjected to the label of “Crazy” by a lawyer who lacks “expert status” in the Court as a Psychological Expert, as well an expert in the investigation.
Yeah! Open up that can of crazy and swing away. Might be interesting to see the definition of “Crazy” in Court with Obama’s long form birth certificate as the definition subject to all kinds of Experts and Court subpoena powers Arapio now has for his Defense in a Public Criminal Trial.
Is that the rabbit hole you’re all excited to run down? I hope they Prosecute because that’s exactly what it needs.
Heck the WHITE HOUSE already has four versions going. That’s what I’d call athe least one Domestic manufacturing plant😂Obama hasn’t Exported yet!
https://accidentalpatriot4.wordpress.com/2014/01/21/a-tale-of-four-fraudulent-obama-birth-certificates/
Well, Shurf Joe is now famous in the UK. Wow, he sure loves publicity.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3750030/Criminal-contempt-case-against-Arpaio-sent-judge.html
There was the issue of Snow’s brother-in-law working for the plaintiffs’ attorneys’ firm. Snow disclosed the relationship, and no one asked for recusal then. Only once the case had gone south did Arpaio suddenly have concerns about the brother-in-law.
Point taken!
Alright! Arpaio and company now get full due process rights afforded to them. First is delay, delay, delay. First seek a recusal of the judge then enter a motion to dismiss. Then ask for a change in venue. If a trial by jury is to set up, Arpaio and Company should seek to have complete medical and physical examinations by the court. This necessary to insure the Arpaio and Company have a fair trial. If for example, Arpaio has trouble seeing or hearing, court accommodations must be made to prevent objections every 5 minutes of “I can’t hear the witness.” or “I can’t see the evidence.” Next, medical conditions must all be accommodated for like if Arpaio has low blood sugar problems, he will require meal breaks every hour and if Arpaio is allergic to dust, the court will have to be dust free to prevent sneezing attacks which could occur in open court. Next, the jury has to be set up correctly. If Juror #2 is taller than Juror #6, then juror #6 might not be able to see the evidence correctly which would compromise Arpaio’s right to a fair trial. Finally, the lawyers’s movements must be chorographed, so a lawyer does not block the view of a witness when examining as one juror might not be able to see the winess’s reaction.
john has very interesting fantasies about the constitutional rights afforded to criminal defendants.
That’s our john! You do know that both the prosecution and defense gets a limited number of peremptory juror strikes don’t you? They put great effort into using them wisely. The rest of your nonsense suggestions would be quickly laughed out of court.
John, your mother either drank too much when she was pregnant with you, or not quite enough to finish the job. I’m not sure which.
John seems to insinuate that Arpaio, et al have not received due process. They have, of course.
But he seems to believe it’s a really good thing that they are now facing criminal charges so they now can have that due process. Other than the due process part, which is nonsense, I would agree with John that it’s a very good thing they at now facing criminal charges. 🙂
—
You’ve forgotten the skunk.
That’s right. The night before the trial, they could Arpaio went outside and surprised a skunk and got sprayed. Another situation could be that Arpaio was mowing his lawn and he accidently fell into a vat of poison ivy which completely covered his body. (Does poison Ivy grow in AZ?). Susquently, it would be very difficult for Arpaio to sit in court without itching all over the place.
—-
Ya know, John, I’m starting to see it your way. Maybe it would be just if Arpaio were to spend his remaining days stinking of skunk and covered with poison ivy.
At that point, the prosecutor might suggest clumsy Arpaio “be invited” to spend his down time somewhere a bit more safe, like a jail cell.
—–
And the warden might put Arpaio on administrative solitary confinement so that the joint’s general population won’t have to smell him and watch him scratch.
Or he could just walk out into traffic and wait for the *splat* . That’ll end the trial real quick.
I don’t recall ever seeing poison ivy anywhere in Az. Poison oak, lots, poison ivy none.
Indeed! Birther Report may have withered on the vine, but john remains a perennial blossom of silliness.
Lol what? A vat of poison ivy? So Arpaio just keeps big vats of poison Ivy in his yard? Do you know what the word Vat means?
He could also say he got into a fight with Batman the night before.
Of course, Arpaio already carries the stench of birtherism.
I know its probably late now but Arpaio should be the hypocontraract arguing that he is allergic to the wood in the court room tables and chairs after all, the wood might have bacteria in them that could subject Arpaio to harm by the court since he is of older age and the court needs replace the wood tables and chair with metal or plastic ones. During the Vietnam War, the VC argued for months over the shape of the table during negoations. Further, does court provide bottled water or tap water to the parties and to the jury. Definitely should have his own water expert test the water. If the water is bad, especially to the jury, then some of them could get sick which would compromise the jury and not give Arpaio his right to a fair trial.
You were dropped on your head as a child. Daily. You’re a bigger idiot than I already take you for, if you think any of the idiocy you’ve suggested would work. The judge would tell the fat sack of crap to pipe down, or be held in contempt.
So lets recap:
Motion for recusal
Motion to Dismiss
Motion to change in Venue
Motion for a complete physical and medical background examination of all defendants in the case. This is necessary to insure the proper order of the court free of distraction and difficulty essential for right to a fair trial and to provide accommodations for any and all medical conditions that could cause problems. Such examples would include:
Allergic to dust – could promote severe sneezing fits in open court especially during the prosecutor’s opening statements.
Low Blood sugar problems or diabetic problems which could promoting fainting spells in open court.
Hearing Problems – Which would promote repeated objections of “I can’t see the evidence.” in open court
Vision Problems – Which would promote repeated objections of “I can’t hear the witness.” in open court.
The list goes on and the court is to evaluate each medical problem making reasonable accommodations for each one to insure the right to a fair trial is not compromised.
Here’s the weak link, that affects all of that. This is reality, not the B-plot of a 1980s sitcom starring John Larroquette.
—-
Again you forgot the skunk. I thought it was your best suggestion.
Apparently you don’t think Arpaio has a defense.
Another problem with john’s “helpful ideas”, is that if Shurjoke, did somehow pass himself off as blind, deaf, sickly and generally unfit, he wouldn’t be Sheriff any more come election time.
John:
“Low Blood sugar problems or diabetic problems which could promoting fainting spells in open court.
Hearing Problems – Which would promote repeated objections of “I can’t see the evidence.” in open court
Vision Problems – Which would promote repeated objections of “I can’t hear the witness.” in open court.
The list goes on and the court is to evaluate each medical problem making reasonable accommodations for each one to insure the right to a fair trial is not compromised.”
Let’s not forget, Honesty problems — which have gotten him into this situation.
To quote Mark S. from DOONESBURY a long time ago (and it seems a country far far away):
“GUILTY! GUILTY! GUILTY!”
I hear pink underwear helps with these nasty skin conditions.
Translation: Even John knows Arpaio is both guilty and f*cked.
Arpaio is the skunk!
http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/67ab71856bbe34d0ba74dab0235372e4b4c8d209/c=141-0-3781-2737&r=x513&c=680×510/local/-/media/2016/08/20/Phoenix/Phoenix/636072592037995239-benson-arpaio.jpg
I wish I had a dollar for every false equivalence people have been trying to make between this and Hillary Clinton’s situation.
You and be both! I’d have enough cash to empty my Steam wish list, and its a big one!
Become a RWNJ news outlet. Then you would get cash for all the false equivalents.
I guess I missed my calling.
Mike Zullo is coming on Lyin’ Carl’s Fact Free Friday soon to explain to us that criminal contempt charges are no big deal.I am sure that will be comforting to Shurf Arpaio.
I know this one RWNJ who is very good at pointing out that Hillary or Obama or another liberal did the exact same thing that I complain about with Trump or another conservative.
He thinks it’s somehow hypocritical for me not to condemn Hillary or Obama or whatever if I’m going to complain about the politicians I support.
In the real world, you can’t get out of accepting responsibility for something by pointing out that others do it too, so how can you do that in politics?
And by the way, is it really true that whenever you complain about something a politician does, there is a good chance that a politician you support did the exact same thing at one time or another?
Easy for Zullo to say, seeing as how he isn’t being charged. But he sure was sweating it out when he was taking the fifth.
And Orly will be screeching that it’s actually A Good Thing™, because it means that “He gets deescovereeee!!!”.
By having a voter base with a high concentration of emotional 8-year-olds who’ll buy “Billy started it!” because they either use it, themselves, or would like to.
If it doesn’t involve crime scene photos that your local newspaper will refuse to print, probably. The moral question usually arises when you decide how to respond after you find out about it.
My usually response to “What about when Hillary did this…?” is usually “We’re not talking about Hillary right now. What she did us irrelevant. We’re talking about Donald Trump right now and what he did.”
I refuse to let them deflect. I tell them that the other candidate’s bad behavior is irrevlent. and tell them to stick to the topic.Either defend It ot shut up.
Does that sound like a good way to do things?
Probably it’s “what’s gonna blow the whole thing open” [tm].
Remember birther claims along the lines of “now he has full discovery rights”, thinking that will allow to re-open the BC issue.
Yeah this whole someone else started it nonsense is like playground stuff. “She started it”. I usually just ask even if she started it how does that absolve the donald?
And the reality is that Judge Snow doesn’t care about the birth certificate “investigation.” He cares about the fact that he was being investigated by Arpaio through Montgomery, and of course that Arpaio and his lackeys refused to implement the court’s orders and then lied about it.
You mean Mike “Zullo” Moore who really lives/d in Clewiston, Florida, my hometown as well as Pablo Escobar and Mike Volin’s just to name a few
Can you say Space Shuttle/teacher/astronauts go “boom, boom?” No big deal.
According to court transcripts Zullo brought in Dennis Montgomery as the CI to Arpaio. A good portion of the Criminal Contempt Order is focused on 3 court orders that Arpaio failed to comply with, one of which was failing to turn over 50 hard drives that Zullo had obtained from Montgomery in Seattle. No, I think Zullo is not out of the woods yet. There could be all sorts of IA investigations and court appearances in his future. We can only hope.
I don’t think the Kommandant needs to worry about the contempt prosecutions, but I think he should be sweating bullets over the fraud and misuse of funds issues that may well come up from Internal Affairs investigations.
That looks to me almost a given. And what about Gallups and all the unknown people who have hidden evidence for safe keeping?
I don’t think the judge cares about the investigation. I think the judge cares a great deal about the lying and obstruction Arpaio did to conceal the investigation.
Funny, I saw a documentary about Escobar. You weren’t mention. Not once. I was shocked. It’s like you made the whole thing up. Go figure
I agree that Zullo need not worry about contempt proceedings. Nor do I think he need worry about Internal Affairs, as he doesn’t work for the MCSO.
I was thinking more along the lines of the IA investigation turning up fraud against the department that they could refer to the county and/or state for prosecution, since there was fraud against the MCSO and I am fairly certain there was a good deal of misappropriation along the way that the Kommandant could come in line for..
People very close to the situation indicate that volunteer posse members are subject to Internal Affairs investigations. The could pose a problem for the Kommandant.
From a 2012 MCSO Training Manual as posted in an article here on this site:
“Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office training provides clear direction to ensure all employees lawfully, effectively, and ethically carry out their duties as deputies, detention officers, civilians and posse volunteers.”
Once again, the Kommandant may have a problem.
You mean the guy I asked you about a year ago and you had no idea who either Mike Volin or Zullo were but then decided to retcon them into your fantasies?
Just for the fun of it, I looked up the Elbert County Sheriff’s Office in Colorado to see what they say about their volunteer posse.
“The Elbert County Sheriff’s Posse, (an IRS 501 C3 non-profit) has been a part of Elbert County for most of 70 years and perhaps longer. It has also been known as the County Posse or just The Posse. The Posse is an organized group of citizens who volunteer their time to the community through local law enforcement. Posse members are unpaid volunteer employees of the Sheriffs Office who perform services in support of the Sheriffs Office without promise, expectation, or receipt of compensation for the services rendered…”
Once again, it’s not so unusual that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office considers their volunteer posse members as employees. And, just like the posse in Arizona, the Colorado sheriff’s posse is a 501 C3 non-profit.
http://www.elbertcountysheriff.com/posse.html
The fraud is already well known: reporters (like Lemons) have been on the beat for years, and much came out during the federal court hearings. There is little extra to be gained from an Internal Affairs investigation that isn’t already known, and there hasn’t been any action thus far.
* * *
Who are these “people”? Do they have a guideline, manual, policy, etc. to guide their indications? Do they have evidence of a prior instance of a posse member being disciplined by Internal Affairs?
Saying Zullo will be punished “any day now” is akin to thinking that the California state bar will yank Taitz’s license.
You mean Mike Moore. Why is he using a fake name?
Con job. Suckers.
bob
“Saying Zullo will be punished “any day now” is akin to thinking that the California state bar will yank Taitz’s license.”
I never said he would, only suggested it’s a possibility. Actually, it’ seems to me to be very similar to people saying the birth certificate investigation and Zullo would never be brought up in the Melendres v. Arpaio trial. Well both Zullo and the birth certificate investigation did come up in the Melendres trial. Who’d of thought that would happen? Not many. As far as your other comment, I really can’t go into it.
An infinite amount of things are possible, but possibility is not probability.
I have no idea who those people were, what statements were made, or when.
Absent any evidence that posse members are subject to Internal Affairs investigations, I’ll continue to think they are not. And I’ll continue to believe that Zullo will not be punished (notwithstanding him deserving it).
bob
“Absent any evidence that posse members are subject to Internal Affairs investigations, I’ll continue to think they are not. And I’ll continue to believe that Zullo will not be punished (notwithstanding him deserving it).”
We’ll just have to wait and see, bob. I’m told that volunteer posse members are subject to IA investigations and I have no reason to doubt the source. But again, let’s wait and see what happens. My source has impeccable credentials.
bob,
One more comment. My source informed me that the Court in Melendres v. Arpaio, mandated specific actions and training for all MCSO “…deputies/volunteers/employees…” and failure to follow the Court Order would result in separation. It would seem that the Court considered volunteer posse members in the same category as MCSO deputies and employees.
Court Order CV-07-2513-PHX-GMS, May 15, 2014.
Would “your source” have a copy of that order? Because there doesn’t appear to be a court order from that date.
Regardless, that the court considered posse members in the same category as deputies and employees with respect to the injunction against the MCSO’s racially discriminatory actions doesn’t mean Zullo is going to be hauled into Internal Affairs’ office for the Seattle caper.
And, more basically, if the State of Arizona or U.S. government wanted to investigate Zullo, Montgomery, etc., they could have (and still can). The inaction in the past speaks volumes to anticipated inaction in the future.
“In November 2014, the Court Implementation Division (CID), in conjunction with the Posse Personnel Management Unit (PPMU),provided what was termed a baseline number of 1,033 Posse personnel requiring the mandated training.CID indicated that this number was created from the actual number of Posse personnel who had completed the mandatory training.For this reporting period,26 Posse personnel completed the mandatory training on Bias-Free Policing,and Fourth Amendment,Detentions, Arrests, and the Enforcement of Immigration-Related Laws
according to the “ 2014 Required Training ELS Passed Posse (March 2015)” report.
CID has advised that failure to complete the training results in mandatory de-selection from the Posse Program. During this reporting period,the PPMU identified a total of 1,673 Posse members.This number includes all active, resigned, separated,or terminated members dating back to 2007.Currently,active Posse members total 1,084,according to the “Master Posse Roster” with 1,062 compliant by the report “Posse Training Compliance–
March (Required Training).Under thesupervision of the PPMU lieutenant, reporting for all Posse issues has dramatically improved.The Training Division did not issue a Quarterly Training Report.
A report entitled “Civilian Training Compliance–March (Required Training)” indicated
that 11 civilians had received the training on Bias-Free Policing, and Fourth Amendment, Detentions, Arrests, and the Enforcement of Immigration-Related Laws, but only 10 had completed testing.The inability of MCSO to link together the Skills Manager Database, the MCSO Sworn Training Compliance Report, the Posse Training Compliance Report,the Reserve Training Compliance Report, and the Retired Reserve Training Compliance Report with Master Rosters continues to hamper documentation of training, and will continue to do so as the volume of training increases with the development and delivery of other Order-mandated training in order to achieve compliance, such as EIS and the use of Body Cams.Mandatory Supervisory training has yet to be scheduled.MCSO is not in compliance with this Paragraph.
Compliance Status:
Phase 1:Not in compliance
Phase 2:Not in compliance
https://www.scribd.com/document/271654842/Melendres-1170-D-Ariz-2-07-cv-02513-1170
Here you go. All 122 pages. (The May 15, 2014 date is apparently when some of the Court mandates were implemented.) And yes, Posse members can be subjected to IA investigations.
Nothing you quoted says the posse is subject to an Internal Affairs investigation.
Regardless, if Zullo was investigated, his response to Internal Affairs would range from “GFY” to “Fifth Amendment!”
If Internal Affairs was curious about the Seattle caper, they could investigate the actual MCSO officers involved. (Who would also lawyer up.)
Yet, crickets.
In my opinion, Zullo fears he will somehow get pulled into Arpaio’s fate, if he gets chatty, so he’s gonna stay nice and quiet until the case is said and done.
When you think about it, Joe going down gives Zullo an easy out in all of this. He can go “Well, Sheriff Arpaio WAS the investigation, without him, I am not authorized to go any further.”, then scurry away into the night without explaining anything to anyone. Why, the little scrub might even be able to walk freely in daylight, if Joe takes the fall.
bob,
“Nothing you quoted says the posse is subject to an Internal Affairs investigation.”
Nothing I quoted says that the posse isn’t subject to IA investigations. It’s pretty clear that the volunteer posse along with civilians and deputies and reserve deputies are considered employees. Let’s wait and see who’s right about IAs.
Who ever thought that Zullo would have made a guest appearance in the Melendres trial? Just food for thought.
Joe Arpaio, America’s Scofflaw Sheriff – Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/americas-scofflaw-sheriff/2016/08/25/9199b2ae-697c-11e6-ba32-5a4bf5aad4fa_story.html?postshare=6471472170919916&tid=ss_tw-bottom&utm_term=.0694ffc00585
To whom is it clear? What is the basis for this “clarity”?
A few over at the Fogbow predicted Zullo would be on the monitor’s radar even before Lemons’ first story broke.
“Any day now.”
Being “right” about Internal Affairs isn’t the point: the concept that the MCSO’s Internal Affairs is going to, somehow, break ground that other governmental agencies have shown no any interest in investigating is the type of exuberant thinking associated with birthers.
“Any day now.” Cute.
Possibly, one day. With the Montgomery situation so prominently mentioned in the Court’s Finding of Facts, and the Criminal Contempt Order and the disclosure in those documents that the MCSO was defrauded, and with Mr. Zullo playing a prominent role in bringing in the CI to the MCSO, one would assume that independent investigators and the Court Monitors overseeing the MCSO Internal Affairs Investigations, may want to take a closer look at exactly what happened and what Mr. Zullo’s role was in the whole affair. Currently, it’s my understanding that all of the MCSO policy and procedures are now being reviewed and revised according to the Second Supplemental Injunction Order. Once the dust begins to settle, and the media discovers that the MCSO was “defrauded”, I could see them putting pressure on Arizona governmental agencies to investigate this issue. It may not make any sense to you, but it does to me. Granted, with the Arizona Attorney General’s previous involvement with Mr. Montgomery, it is a tough call.
Justice Department WILL probe Sheriff Arpaio.
http://www.wrcbtv.com/story/32852505/justice-department-will-probe-metro-phoenix-sheriff-arpaio
Meaning not the U.S. Attorney in Arizona. The can is being kicked to D.C. In other words, more delay, more not investigating.
The media (and everyone else) already knows about Montigomery’s fraud. You can believe (or “assume”) that Internal Affairs will suddenly take interest in Zullo or the Seattle caper, notwithstanding its lack of previous interest, and the lack of the interest of any other government agency. Like the local federal prosecutor.
I will continue to assume the monitor will focus on eradicating the MCSO’s discriminatory practice, i.e., the basis of the lawsuit and the reason for the monitor’s authority.
“Meaning not the U.S. Attorney in Arizona. The can is being kicked to D.C. In other words, more delay, more not investigating.”
It means just one more opportunity for a Joe Arpaio reelection campaign fund raising letter. Send money! Lots of money!
“bob”
“The media…already knows about Montigomery’s fraud.”
Would it be possible to for you to show me one mainstream news organization that has published or produced a detailed news account about the MCSO being defrauded? I’d really be interested in reading or viewing an account of the fraud.
Jude Joffe-Block of KJZZ (an NPR station) has been covering the case extensively. Here’s but one article that describes Montgomery’s “problems”; Joffe-Block quotes Snow order: “First, Mr. Montgomery committed a fraud on the MCSO.”
The Arizona Republic also has (surprisingly) good coverage. The Seattle caper has made the NYT. It isn’t a dirty secret “confined” to Stephen Lemons (whose coverage has been extensive, groundbreaking, and award worthy) of the Phoenix New Times.
The US Attorney for Arizona has declined the Arpaio case, citing conflict of interest, or the appearance of conflict of interest. They have referred the case to the Department of Justice’s criminal division public integrity section.
http://www.cbs5az.com/story/32852511/us-justice-dept-will-handle-investigation-of-sheriff-joe-arpaio
While I haven’t thought that Mike Zullo’s involvement in the Seattle Operation had much relevance in the case, I am starting to think otherwise. Arpaio’s defense to the charge that he investigated the judge is to throw the blame on Mike Zullo.
That’s the way I’m beginning to see it. He will sacrifice anyone to save his skin.
Do Republicans and conservatives really listen to a radio station affiliated with National Public Radio? And the articles that I’ve read from the Phoenix New Times on the internet are also quite good, but it’s going to take more than sources seen most likely by Republicans as “left wing” like these to wake up diehard Republican Arpaio zealots. If all the Phoenix FOX, CBS, ABC, NBC, affiliates were to extensively expose and hammer on the alleged fraud against the sheriff’s office, and ask what’s being done about it, maybe, Republicans would wake up and rethink their support for Arpaio and maybe, governmental authorities in Arizona would investigate the fraud. There needs to be a full court press to expose Arpaio and what he has allowed to happen, IMHO.
Of course understanding Loretta Lynch’s position on “intent” we know Sheriff Joe was indeed on the front lines of our National Security just trying to do his job like Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Of course in her position with the Meetings in Office with 50% who also contributed to The Clinton Family Charity , and her deleting emails related to yoga and the Pay-for Play Action , we know subverting every American’s Safety and Security surpassed Little Ole Sheriff Joe’s by leaps and bounds …
With much consideration we find we just cannot start a trend of prosecuting officials acting under color of State law politically or the opposing Political Party will prosecute ours when they get into trouble… right?
So.. .. knock yourself out but no reasonable prosecutor would take up the Case and have to live with that on the resume.
Oh wait.. what about Justice? Well , we all know Justice for us little guys is completely different from those Elected and Appointed/Confirmed by the Elected.
Right?
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ARIZONA_SHERIFF_RACIAL_PROFILING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-08-26-23-59-56
Plus Clinton has promised to keep Lynch on as Attorney General… if .. she’s NOT prosecuted before the Election.
This is just a reminder that Justice can be bought and Justice for all is … in the pledge of allegiance needs to be extended to … Justice for all who can pay.
Citing Reference Judy v. Obama 14-9396 where indeed appearing before the SCOTUS at 200% below the poverty line access to the Court was denied based on Poverty.
I can’t say if they do or don’t, but Arpaio’s woes have received nationwide coverage in decidedly mainstream sources. And I suspect local conservatives do read the Arizona Republic, whose coverage has been pretty good. The local NBC affiliate (KPNX-12) has been on the story as well.
The media could provide more and better coverage, sure, but the notion that it (generally) doesn’t know about Arpaio, Montgomery, etc., requires some fairly heavy selective reading, cherry picking, and goal-post moving. Nor can the media’s less-than-full-throttle attack on Arpaio somehow explain the lack of action by governmental agencies.
The much simpler explanation is that the concerned authorities do know about Montgomery, Zullo, etc., and have decided to use their limited resources on frying other fish.
* * *
It depends on exactly which charges the U.S. DOJ (or special prosecutor) decides to proceed upon.
Reading has never been Judy’s strong suit, but the article clearly says that D.C. deciding what to do with Arpaio’s case, not that it has rejected prosecuting Arpaio’s case.
The local prosecutor said his office couldn’t prosecute because it regularly works with the MCSO on joint task forces and other law-enforcement activities unrelated to this case. Which is, ultimately, plausible.
Judy lies, as his application was denied simply because he couldn’t follow directions.
And, yet again, Judy derails an otherwise interesting conversation by making it about himself.
Comment by Reality Check at the Fogbow:
“I agree with [Mighty Dawg]. I think the referral was appropriate and probably a bad thing for Joe Arapio and the other defendants in the long term.”
I’m in agreement.
bob,
“The much simpler explanation is that the concerned authorities do know about Montgomery, Zullo, etc., and have decided to use their limited resources on frying other fish.”
…and possibly protecting their own butts. Wasn’t there a Montgomery “free talk” between Montgomery and the Arizona Attorney General’s Office?
From Arizona Politics. Paperwork for USAO, Arizona Division for Arpaio criminal contempt order recusal.
http://arizonaspolitics.blogspot.com/2016/08/read-arpaio-friends-criminal-contempt.html?m=1
Maricopa County BOS to have Executive Session, next week. Oh, to be a fly on the wall…
Arizona Politics:
http://arizonaspolitics.blogspot.com/2016/08/breaking-maricopa-county-board-of.html?m=1
Probably wondering how they are going to sell the next round of property tax increases to cover Joe’s latest round of spiraling out of control criminal and civil expenses.
You really need to learn to keep up. That story has been thoroughly debunked.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/08/25/heres-how-trump-got-the-ap-story-on-clinton-foundation-donors-all-wrong/
I wonder how many on that list have met with other Secretaries of State? I bet there is a large overlap.
Good point. AP puts out a lot really poorly composed articles these days. I removed the AP module from my Yahoo home page for that reason.
The outrage over the Clinton Foundation is really disgusting. The Foundation does a lot of good work and has a very low expense ratio compared with other charities. It’s just another example of how the right will use anything to smear you if your name is Clinton.
There was. And Montgomery ripped off the federal government (see “Pay Any Price”), yet was never prosecuted.
That Zullo and Montgomery are worthy of punishment; that government authorities (and the media) are aware of their misconduct; and that some government authority will prosecute either of them are very different concepts.
—
Cody, there is something I’ve been wanting to tell you for some time. I read your comments, well, at least some and probably most of them. I care a lot about the legal rights of people, especially the legal rights of people who cannot afford sufficient representation or who struggle to pay the costs of litigation. A lot of your comments suggest that readers/commenters here don’t care about the pro se plaintiff who is indigent, which I don’t believe is so.
And now, I read your accusations against one of the most reputable and efficiently administered charities on the planet; making accusations only because it suits you to do so.
I’ve known a lot of poor folk who have suffered unfairness in this life and in the judicial system, and some of them have done more/harder time than you. Often they move on to devote much of their energies to helping others who need and seek access to justice. And I support their efforts.
I say all this to make a point — I would be inclined to support your efforts, if only your efforts had some semblance of common sense and virtue. Yet, you and your cause(s) are remarkably unsympathetic. As if you’ve learned nothing.
Instead, you promote the likes of Sheriff Joe, who regularly and enthusiastically and lucratively abuses the detainees in his charge. You slander the courts, just because they don’t do what you think they outta do, even when attorneys explain things to you pro bono. Now you are spreading baseless innuendos about an important legitimate charity that helps poor and sick people across the planet. I suppose next you will complain that former-President Carter is spending too much of his time meeting with donors/volunteers to Habitat for Humanity… There is a lot of actual injustice in this world, but for whatever reason you don’t focus your energies in dealing with that. Too bad.
And HuffPo did a thorough re-write of the AP article to add back in the stuff that the AP decided to leave out in order to make a sensationalist impact.
Here’s How The AP Should Have Written Its Hillary Clinton Article
Judy isn’t interested in facts, he is only interested in Judy.
Yeah, that.
I would be more sympathetic to Mr. Judy if he had an actual grievance that wanted redressing.
Judy’s grievance is that he is ignorant and illiterate, and thus self dooms his every effort. His legal blather is incomprehensible and impossible to make sense of, and then he whines and is infuriated when the courts choose NOT to try and read his mind to find some scintilla of claim in all the word salad. Judy has NO legitimate grievance, and has never been able to state a claim that passes the WTFDTM test.
So, “nobody is paying attention to me,” isn’t an actual grievance?
Donald Trump would consider that the worst possible grievance.
Specifically, in his latest legal fail the Court of Appeals ruled that Judy had failed to cite any legal basis for his claim for relief:
First, addressing whether he adequately stated a claim for relief, Judy cites no basis in law for his claim that he is entitled to damages under §1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act. Even taking all his allegations as true and construing them in the light most favorable to his case, we see nothing even suggesting that he would ever be entitled to any sort of relief for President Obama’s (and the other Defendants’) supposed wrongdoing. Judy cannot point to a single case that construes any of these statutes in a way supporting his claims for relief.
Instead of addressing the reasons for which his lawsuit was dismissed, Judy chose to use his largely incomprehensible SCOTUS petition to re-argue Obama’s eligibility. So his cert petition was doomed from the outset, regardless of whether he was granted in forma pauperis status.
Ignoring Orly is treason, at least in her mind.
Tonight Arpaio won the primary:
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/08/30/arizona-primary-election-updates-results-august-2016/89266480/
Sheriff Joe is using the criminal referral as a fundraising tool:
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/arpaio-sees-judges-criminal-contempt-referral-as-fundraising-opportunity-8589991