Fear & Loathing in Maricopa County
The Republic yesterday had a depressing story about how what it calls the “rank and file” in Maricopa County government have been coping with the tensions induced by Joe Arpaio. With the grand jury investigating Arpaio, some employees are talking.
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.
Among the details:
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.
7:05 PM
Joe Arpaio's popularity takes a dive
From an unbylined Republic political blog:
The new Rocky Mountain Poll from Behavior Research Center showed support from Arpaio has dropped to 39 percent of those polled who thought the sheriff was doing an “excellent/good” job from a high rating of 64 in March 2007.
The pollsters noted that Arpaio’s job approval was dropping most precipitously among Independent voters and has “softened” among Republicans while remaining low among Democrats.
An editorial in tomorrow’s paper rubs it in:
It isn’t just Arpaio who should worry about these stunning poll numbers. The political fortunes of County Attorney Andrew Thomas and as-yet-unannounced Senate candidate J.D. Hayworth, both Republicans, ride largely on the sheriff’s coattails. Without a popular Arpaio preening as America’s Toughest Sheriff by their sides, their prospects may diminish.
It has been a while since Arpaio has been viewed purely as a nails-tough lawman. For two years, he has been a politician first. And this is the price politicians pay.
5:52 AM
PHXations, January 20, 2010
Stephen Lemons has been covering the disputes over who caused a spate of violence at the immigration march on Saturday. A mounted police officer got involved with a crowd of self-styled anarchists who had attached themselves to the march. The cop ended up hitting the crowd with pepper spray, with predictable results. Lemons has been looking at video of what happened, noting along the way that he hadn’t seen anything that backed up the anarchists’ contention of being aggressively attacked by cops. In fact, today he notes some photos that seems to show a black-clad protestor hitting a cop’s horse.
… As part of the Scottsdale Museum of Contemporary Arts’s ongoing Rewind Remix Replay exhibition, which explores the design of electronic musical instruments and sound systems, there’s a DJ night at the museum Thursday, Jan. 21. Featured: Mark Chan and World Famous Rani “G.” It starts at 7 p.m. and its free. Details here.
7:00 AM
Joe Arpaio being investigated by a grand jury—a federal grand jury
The papers are all atwitter with confirmation that the U.S. attorney is finally going ahead with an investigation into the crackpot sherrif’s office being run by Joe Arpaio. Seems like Channel 5 broke the story:
Maricopa County Manager David Smith and County Budget Director Sandi Wilson both said they had been subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury next week to testify about their interactions with the Sheriff’s Office.
As PHXated has noted before, this (inevitable) development and its probable denouement (Arpaio’s indictment on a slew of offenses) will make a lot of the timid coverage of Arpaio’s actions, particularly in the national media, seem a little embarrassing.
An interesting question will be whether the process, which could take months, will at all cow Arpaio’s behavior. ON the one hand you can bet not: his success has been built thus far on blustery denials and bullheaded actions.
Still, his professional life will be made much more difficult as his henchmen lawyer up and start to realize how legally vulnerable their crackpot leader has made them.
The Channel 5 report says specifically that the jury is targeting Arpaio’s use of his police power to retaliate against his political critics.
A wrenching sign of how strained things are at the EVT: The Tribune’s story on this key development … is an AP story.
7:00 AM
E.J. Montini: Hey Sheriff Joe—What am I, limburger?
The Republic columnist wants to know why everyone’s getting arrested but him:
It seems that with each passing day, a new and different critic of Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Joe Arpaio is investigated, charged, indicted and arrested.
And with each new investigation, each new charge, each new public vilification that is orchestrated and carried out by the two most powerful law-enforcement officials in the county, I get more and more angry.
[…]
How could you look at the slings and arrows that have been aimed at you, at the number of times you have been subjected to what you believe to have been unfair, unjust criticism, and bust these individuals ahead of me?I mean, really, what’s a guy got to do to get arrested in this county?
7:00 AM
The Maricopa County craziness rachets up a notch
The reporter wanted to come film the raid. (?!) The judge, Barbara Mundell, went code red. She went to the Arizona Court of Appeals to block her offices’ being raided. But at the hearing, an assistant county attorney said no warrants were being issued.
Heat City’s Nick Martin cites this as an example of hair-trigger tensions in the court system, as Arpaio and his Dimmer Twin, County Attorney Andrew Thomas, have used just about any aspect of their police and legal powers to harass and intimidate enemies.
The journalist in question is identified only as a TV reporter, and no gender was cited. Unanswered is where the reporter got the tip. According to Martin, the ADA at the hearing said no warrants had been “sought or obtained.” That could mean a) the reporter was lied to; b) the reporter was given a good tip but somehow got the judge in question wrong (a possibility, since he or she seemed to have a screw loose in any case*); or c) Thomas’s office was choosing its words carefully in front of the judge to obscure the fact that some sort of action was about to be taken against Mundell.
Martin says the judge has reason to find herself on Arpaio’s enemies list:
In May, Mundell told a Phoenix TV station she thought Maricopa County’s judges were facing serious intimidation by the sheriff, including possible investigations and retaliation. She said the sheriff was upset, in part, because a judge had just criticized his office for bringing inmates late to their court appearances.
Mundell also fought the sheriff’s office as far back as 2007 over whether his deputies should have access to thousands of emails she and other court officials had sent or received that year. Mundell and Superior Court Administrator Marcus Reinkensmeyer denied the request, and the sheriff’s office eventually sued.
- By which I mean it’s inappropriate for a reporter to find out a raid is about to happen and then call up the target of it to ask permission to film.
7:00 AM
The Arpaio Follies begin to get some national reviews
Both the LA Times and Talking Points memo have major pieces up on Joe Arpaio and Andrew Thomas, the Dimmer Twins.
The Times story concentrates on the continuing range war between arpaio and his political enemies, with a special focus on just trying to lay out the scope of it all. The thing is 1200 words long and still manages to glide over a lot of Arpaio’s nuttiness.
You don’t hear much about the the tag team legal brutality he engages in with Andrew Thomas, and the the story doesn’t even mention the late-night arrests of the owners of the Phoenix New Times.
The result is long passages like this:
has escalated his tactics in recent months, not only defying the federal government but launching repeated investigations of those who criticize him. He recently filed a racketeering lawsuit against the entire Maricopa County power structure. On Thursday night, the Arizona Court of Appeals issued an emergency order forbidding the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office from searching the home or chambers of a Superior Court judge who was named in the racketeering case.Last year, when Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon called for a federal investigation of Arpaio’s immigration enforcement, the Sheriff’s Office demanded to see Gordon’s e-mails, phone logs and appointment calendars.
When the police chief in one suburb complained about the sweeps, Arpaio’s deputies raided that town’s City Hall.
My biggest criticism of the LAT piece is its over-reliance on he-said/she said balance.
Sure: We hear lines like, “It’s just extraordinary, the kind of thing that takes place in Third World dictatorships”—but they come not from a neutral observer but from Don Stapley’s lawyer, which minimizes the force of it in readers’ minds.
Further, the story contains no hint of what will be Arpaio’s ultimate role, which will be target of a federal investigation. When the criminal sheriff is ultimately removed from office, stories like this will seem pretty timid.
Meanwhile, Talking Points Memo has a good overview of the current shenanigans created by the Dimmer twins in a new round of intimidation tactics against local judges. The writer, is less complacent about federal intervention:
The Justice Department could step in and end Arpaio and Thomas’s reign of terror, which threatens the integrity of the entire judicial and law enforcement systems for the nations’ fourth-most populous county. But DOJ appears to be working at a leisurely pace: its probe has been underway for over a year, and there’s no sign that it’s having any effect in checking Arpaio’s actions.
And finally, speaking of New Times, Michael Lacey, the chain’s top editor and one of the owners who was arrested in 2007, has an expansive cover story this week called The Pink Negro.
The title is a reference—one I find pretty indigestible—to Norman Mailer’s essay “The White Negro.” (The idea is that Obama is a buttoned-up preppy black.)
Leaving that aside, Lacey’s thesis is that the Obama administration is taking too long is investigating:
Yes, [Obama’s] federal investigators are here examining the assaults against human rights perpetrated by Sheriff Joe Arpaio and County Attorney Andrew Thomas.
But, after 20 months, we must ask: Are they unearthing evidence or burying it?
There is, as yet, no remedy, no redress, no recourse.
President Obama, unwittingly, put the glacial timeline of his Arpaio/Thomas investigation into perspective during his speech to America last week. He said his troop surge will see our soldiers depart Afghanistan after 19 more months of combat. In other words, the war with al-Qaeda and the Taliban will end triumphantly in less time than the feds have spent — without result — probing Arpaio and Thomas.
Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon formally summoned a Justice Department task force in April 2008. As we usher in 2010, federal officials have yet to contact the very first political victim of the sheriff and the county attorney. Critical documents remain unexamined.
In the source of making its case the extravagantly long piece is an effective overview of the current state of Arpaio’s many, many criminal enterprises.
7:00 AM
The Adam Stoddard case gets crazier
As someone who recently returned to Arizona after some years in those parts of the country that supposedly looks down their noses at rubes in the desert, I can say with some authority Arizona’s reputation is not as bad as it might be.
Joe Arpaio isn’t doing the state any favors, of course, and, yes, the Daily Show has taken a couple of shots at various goings-on.
But it’s not like most folks in DC or the Bay Area can, off the top of their head, recite Arizona’s place in the hierarchy of most markers of social advancement. (For the record, they are generally just a few hairs above those in the Deep South.)
However, if Andrew Thomas and Joe Arpaio keep it up, the rest of the country is going to take a closer look at how backwards and comical the state’s political system has become.
Back to the Adam Stoddard affair. After a couple of days of sickouts by sheriff’s deputies assigned to the courts, Arpaio is now apparently refusing to supply inmates to the judge’s courtroom. Heat City has the story:
The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office has apparently stopped delivering inmates to the courtroom where a one of its detention officers was caught in an uproar that landed him in jail.
In a statement released late today, Superior Court Judge Lisa Flores said the sheriff’s office has flat-out stopped bringing inmates to her courtroom for their scheduled appearances.
The cutoff comes in the context of …
Since [Stoddard’s] jailing, Maricopa County’s justice system – one of the largest in the nation – has been thrown into a state of chaos, plagued by protests and a likely sickout by Stoddard’s coworkers, as well as bomb threats from a still-unknown source.
Stoddard’s boss, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, has described the detention officer as a “political prisoner” in his own jail. Arpaio’s supporters call Stoddard a victim of the ongoing disputes between the sheriff and other county leaders, including some judges.
Meanwhile, Stephen Lemons notes that the Goldwater Institute, in the form of director Clint Bolick, is slamming Arpaio’s handling of the case:
“Sworn law-enforcement officers take an oath to uphold the law. By effectively shutting down the very justice system they are employed to protect, the sheriff’s officers displayed contempt toward the rule of law. Taxpayers should hold them accountable for abrogating their essential duties.”
7:00 AM
A "Joe Arpaio Meets the Press" post-mortem
PHXated was working on another project today and is just getting caught up to the coverage of the aborted Joe Arpaio appearance at the Cronkite School last night.
PHXated’s live blogging of the event is here.
Stephen Lemons, of New Times, and I argued about the disruption afterward; he makes his case in favor of it here:
I spoke briefly to Cronkite School Dean Christopher Callahan about the disruption, which he naturally abhorred. But, I wondered, wasn’t it to be expected? What if ASU had invited President Lyndon Johnson’s Defense Secretary Robert McNamara to speak during the height of the Vietnam War? Wouldn’t he have anticipated civil disobedience, and far more upheaval?
“Quite frankly,” he said, “if the Defense Secretary came in to give a speech during the Vietnam War, I think it would be protested intensely. Do I think that if you had a group of journalists grilling Secretary McNamara on Vietnam policies, do I think that would be protested? Honestly, no.”
I’ll admit, as I’m sure many will point out to me, the analogy is by no means precise. The carnage of Vietnam is not parallel to the sufferings of the undocumented here in Ari-bama. But the treatment of the undocumented is a moral issue that requires a response, and civil disobedience is a response, a disobedient response.
I’m Lemons’ biggest fan, but he is off his rocker here. Callahan’s right: This wasn’t in any way a speech or a soap box for Arpaio. It was the opposite. Not only were the protesters wrong to disrupt the event, they were being dumb, which is worse.
But of course, they are students; they are allowed to be dumb. Defending them, however, is morally reckless.
In fact, I disagree with Callahan and the school’s handing of the disruption; I heard afterward that the school didn’t want to be in the position of dragging students exercising free speech rights out of a venue called the First Amendment Forum.
But that’s the point: At a First Amendment Forum, goons shouldn’t be allowed to shut down a public event. As a matter of first principles, they should have been removed and the event allowed to go on.
Indeed, absent some clearly amusing or exacerbating circumstance (like, say, if Arpaio were speaking to a bunch of ASU fat-cat donors at an exclusive luncheon, or if student money were used to pay someone as compromised as Arpaio to appear), it would have been wrong for the students to disrupt things even if it had been a regular speech.
I was in the crowd and everyone around me was yelling shut up at the people who disrupted the event. And as Callahan pointed out when he was trying to calm the students up, they had disrupted the questioning just when the professors had gotten around to asking Arpaio about his Civil Rights violations.
All in all, it wasn’t a good night for any of the parties involved.
12:00 AM
Joe Arpaio's deputy: I won't apologize
There are many of them right now—this one we’ll call the Case of the Purloined Letter.
During a trial Oct. 19, a sheriff’s deputy working in court surreptitiously swiped a letter out of a defense attorney’s case file where her back was turned. The incident was caught on video tape.
The officer, Adam Stoddard, says that he saw some words on the letter that made him think that the lawyer’s client was planning a crime, and that grabbing it was justified. A judge disagreed, and ordered him to apologize.
Last night, the officer spoke publicly on the courthouse steps, saying … he wasn’t going to. Nick Martin was there:
Judge Donahoe has ordered me to feel something I do not.” Stoddard said. “He has ordered me to say something I cannot.”
The young detention officer, dressed in his brown duty uniform and wearing a badge, told the pack of journalists and other observers in front of the county’s main courthouse in downtown Phoenix that the judge had essentially “put me in a position where I must lie or go to jail.”
“I will not lie,” he said.
Stoddard has the backing of his boss, Joe Arpaio. As I understand it, Stoddard a) stole something; b) violated attorney-client privilege in two ways (first by looking at the lawyer’s papers and then stealing one); c) isn’t too awfully bright (he seems to have forgotten the room was being taped); and d) is possessed of that peculiar penchant of law-and-0rder types who, when caught doing something they shouldn’t, don’t apologize or evince a sense of shame but rather stonewall and bluster.
Stoddard was supposed to report to jail tonight but was not taken in because of a clerical error, Martin reports.
12:00 AM
Joe Arpaio at the Cronkite School: The zoo approacheth
The Arizona Republic and KPHO have both posted stories about Monday’s live “Meet the Press”-style interview of Joe Arpaio at ASU’s Cronkite School of journalism.
Arpaio’s going to be questioned by three profs from the school at 7 p.m.
Both stories are pretty incompetent. The Republic story says that interest in the event will surely swamp the smallish school atrium where the interview will be held, so the school’s going to show it on a large video screen and stream it over the internet.
The paper doesn’t bother to tell readers where the screen will be, or what the web address for the stream is.
For the record, the video will be shown in the public mall just south of the Cronkite building, which is on the east side of Central Avenue between Polk and Fillmore.
The video stream will be here, according to the school.
The KPHO story is equally unhelpful; worse, it lets the sheriff natter on about how good he is with the press:
“There have been blips about some weekly newspaper — we didn’t give an answer to a request — but that’s been straightened out. But I think it’s great. If there’s anyone who has an open door policy, I think it’s the sheriff,” said Arpaio.
As anyone who reads the New Times knows, there are three inaccuracies in merely the first sentence alone. The KPHO reporter doesn’t bother to ask him about them.
The Republic story doesn’t mention that some students plan to protest the event; the KPHO story does, but neither note that local Tea Party activists are showing up as well.
PHXated’s background on the event is here and here.
12:00 AM
Is the Cronkite School's "Meet the Press" night with Joe Arpaio going to be a zoo?
As you might know, Sheriff Joe Arpaio is going to be interviewed by three journalism professors onstage at the Cronkite School on Central at 7 p.m. Monday. The event is looking more and more like it’s going to be a spectacle.
First, a bunch of misinformed ASU students have decided that, since audience members don’t get to question Arpaio at the panel, the school is somehow giving him a platform to spread his views unchallenged.
The students are planning a protest outside the event.
But as the title of the session—"Meet the Press"—makes clear, the point is to have the sheriff questioned closely by some informed professionals.
It’s uncool to say it in this Age of Everyone’s a Journalist, but this serves the public a lot better than having a bunch of Arpaio’s opponents declaiming at him from a microphone. The students should shut up and come watch the session. If it turns out to be filled with lobbed softballs, then they can protest.
(By the way—Stephen Lemons notes here that CBS 5 has a new investigative report on Arpaio scheduled to run tonight at 10 p.m.)
Now the Sheriff Joe contingent is getting into the act, too. Below is a press release I just got from the Phoenix Area Tea Partyers. (Note the slur on the students half-way down.)
Looks like Monday is going to be quite a scene:
Time: November 30, 2009 from 7pm to 7pm
Location: First Amendment Room-Second Floor
Organized By: American Citizens United
Event Description:
This is an event I saw posted on Resistnet and thought our group may be interested.
American Citizens United is organizing a rally in front of the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism.
There is a great push from the Hispanic students of Journalism (some of them children of illegals and others illegals themselves).
They have been encouraged by “La Raza” and other local pro-amnesty organizations to go into journalism so they can have an influence on public opinion. And you can guess what opinion they want to change to get amnesty.
Please keep it orderly, no yelling or name calling. Resist the anger we all feel when our country and those who protect it get attacked. We must remain civilized to be credible.
12:00 AM
Will Joe Arpaio really "Meet the Press" at the Cronkite School?
It’s been an unobtrusive line at the bottom of the this semester’s ASU j-school event calendar:
Meet the Press: Sheriff Joe Arpaio
The title at once says it all and nothing; but the idea, if it works, will be an unusual opportunity for a few serious journalists to question Arpaio about his record and methods live on a stage.
Those scheduled to be asking the questions are three profs from the school: Rick Rodriguez, Susan Green and Steve Elliott. The event will be held at 7 p.m. Monday in the second floor atrium of the Cronkite School, which is on the corner of Taylor and Central downtown, just two blocks north of Van Buren.
Already, the event has been misinterpreted; Stephen Lemons of New Times is, unusually for him, off the mark on this issue today in his blog:
As mind-numbingly impossible as it is to imagine, Sheriff Joe, avowed enemy of a free press and brown people everywhere, will be the guest speaker at the ASU Cronkite School of Journalism’s “First Amendment Forum” this Monday, November 30.
Talk about eating turkey after Thanksgiving. Arpaio lecturing at a First Amendment Forum? Too bad Idi Amin’s not around anymore. ASU could have him come chat about human rights.
From the start, the idea was exactly the opposite; Arpaio will not be lecturing, he will be being questioned by three journalists.
That’s why the student activist Lemons cites, who says she’ll be protesting the event because the audience won’t be allowed to question the sheriff, is off the mark as well.
Sure, it’s an old media model—but in this case, it could be revelatory. Arpaio’s a slippery figure, and it will be interesting to see if the three interlocutors, if they’re prepared, can pin him down on the facts he’s so casual with.
And let me just say this about that dull old Old Media format: There’s no substitute from questioning by smart and prepared people; the idea to sacrifice that so that a bunch of political opponents of Arpaio declaim at him from a mike on the floor is not a smart one.
Arpaio could as yet back out, the questioning could turn out to be pallid—but it’s wrong to criticize the school for giving Arpaio free reign to speak when that’s not the idea at all.
12:00 AM
Did Joe Biden meet with Arpaio today?
The Republic says he did:
Vice President Joe Biden offered a strong endorsement of the federal stimulus in Phoenix on Monday and introduced some of the Arizonans personally touched by it.
He also met privately with Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, although details of that meeting weren’t immediately available.
Sheriff Joe tweets the same:
Just got done meeting with the Vice President of the United States.
The PBJ, however, throws water on that scenario:
Vice President Joe Biden’s office has a different take on what Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio termed a “short meeting” Monday in Phoenix.
[…]
Arpaio said he had discussed the need for more deputies with Biden.
But Biden’s office said Arpaio was not invited to the event and did not have a meeting with the vice president. He simply shook hands with the vice president as Biden was exiting the building, according to Biden spokeswoman Annie Tomasini.
12:00 AM
County audit slams Arpaio
You remember the sheriff’s half-million-dollar bus. The county instituted a purchasing freeze last year, but the sheriff’s office, taking money out of its jail fund, bought it anyway.
It’s one of the many infantile points of contention between Arpaio and the county. Supervisors have kept the bus in a garage since they found out about the purchase in May.
Now an audit (which probably cost the county money to perform) shows the obvious: That Arpaio violated county guidellines when he bought it.
“There is no evidence that the bus was acquired for the best price, or that procurement controls meant to protect and account for public funds were followed,” the audit states.
Republic story here.
On a related note, PHXated was talking to some courts people recently and heard some anecdotal but plausible stories about the effects of Arpaio’s deliberate slowdown of his office’s work in transferring prisoners to the court system.
Arapio has a certain genius in smelling what ways he can essentially not do his job that don’t elicit public outrage or opposition.
According to the people I spoke to, the sheriff’s office brings prisoners to the court only two days a week, which makes scheduling difficult. Even with those limitations, prisoners frequently aren’t where they are supposed to be, creating cascading waves of delays. (The process also costs defendants, or the state, money, as lawyers sit around on the clock doing nothing.)
In fact, this happened at the case I was watching.
One lawyer said he’d seen judges deliberately let people out on bond who otherwise would not be when the likelihood of a non-appearance by a defendant could have hampered progress on a particular case or hearing.
12:00 AM
Joe Arpaio's performance ...
… at a press conference yesterday found some reporters barely refraining from suggesting that the sheriff is getting out of control. The EVT:
“It’s all politics,” said Arpaio, who spent much of an afternoon news conference Tuesday wagging his finger, waving his arms and snarling at reporters.
Looks like the journos at today’s Joe Arpaio presser practically had to jump out of the way of the spittle flying forth from the sheriff’s kisser. As I suspected it would be, the whole show was an excuse for a tirade on the part of our spoiled lawman, a fit thrown by a puerile 77 year-old after someone took away his new toy and stuck him in a time out.
The Republic story, by contrast, doesn’t mention anything about Arpaio’s demeanor at the appearance. I can’t link to it because I can’t find it on the AZCentral site … it doesn’t come up when you search for Arpaio.
(I"m reading it off the rain-soaked terrestrial edition I got on my driveway this a.m. The Arizona Republic sucks at delivering the news in so many ways.)
The JJ Hensley story from before the press conference, however, has a weird little link to the right that gives you a slide show, apparently from the conference itself.
So I went to the AZCentral front page to hunt for it. A fiery Joe Arpaio press conference would be there somewhere, right?
I noticed a button for “”http://www.azcentral.com/news/“>Arizona News.” Aha! Here’s what I got:
Here’s a closeup of the story links:
Nepal … Anna Nicole Smith … Dinosaurs in France … and Saudi sex talk.
That’s Arizona news?
6:00 AM
Two more compromising Arpaio stories
The Republic fired two shots across the bow of Joe Arpaio over the weekend.
The first contains the incredible contention that the country sheriff’s office leases cars to get to and from work for more than fifty deputies, including Arpaio himself. Maricopa is a large county and perks for the top officials might be warranted, but fifty seems extreme. The charges seem to average close to $800 a month per vehicle:
The office will lease 53 vehicles – mostly expensive new sedans, trucks and sport-utility vehicles – at a cost of more than $500,000 this fiscal year, which began July 1. During this time, more than 1,000 deputies and civilian employees are being forced to take seven unpaid furlough days to help balance the department’s budget.
The story doesn’t really dwell on the inappropriateness of so many people getting the perk. The reporters, Craig Harris and JJ Hensley, focus on where Arpaio gets the $500K from:
The money comes from cash and assets seized primarily during drug investigations. Under the state and federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, police agencies and prosecutors can keep confiscated cash and sell assets for money to be used for gang prevention, substance-abuse education and fighting numerous crimes.
Although there are guidelines, law-enforcement agencies have wide discretion in spending the money, and there is little oversight.
The second story detailed how an exec at the car-leasing company Arpaio uses has been a donor to his campaigns, as have members of her family:
Shirley Garner, in charge of leasing vehicles to the Sheriff’s Office, donated $390, the maximum amount, to his re-election campaign last year, records show. Through one of her other companies, $1,500 was donated to a political-action committee that supported Arpaio but is now under criminal investigation.
The story says her husband has donated to Arpaio as well.
6:00 AM
Did the Dimmer Twins (accidentally) hit pay dirt with Wilcox?
Reading the two Republic stories on the matter today—here and here—one feels that the charges filed against Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Anne Wilcox aren’t entirely spurious.
That isn’t often the feeling one gets when reading about most of Joe Arpaio and Andrew Thomas’s brutal use of their police powers.
Wilcox hasn’t as yet given her side of the story, and there are I’m sure all sorts of ways the acts could be benign. But here’s a precis from the paper:
Elected county officials must file the financial-disclosure forms with the clerk’s office by Jan. 31 each year, said Fran McCarroll, clerk of the board. The forms are required by law to help avoid a conflict of interest or the appearance of one.
A Republic review showed that Wilcox did not disclose the loans from Chicanos Por La Causa. A spokeswoman with the non-profit said Wilcox and her husband, Earl, received a $7,500 loan in November 2000, a $50,000 loan in July 2005 and $120,000 in October 2008.
According to Thomas—and the paper—she didn’t file conflict-of-interest disclosures either.
9:58 PM
"I have been framed," he said, using a turn of phrase that equates a wooden adornment around a picture with a manufactured criminal charge.
From a 12 News report on the AZ Central web site:
One day after his arrest, Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley tells 12 News he is the victim of an “inquisition” by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, making a reference to a medieval tactic to scrutinize an individual without regard to his rights.
6:00 AM
Don Stapley arrested again
Maricopa County Sheriff’s deputies arrested County Supervisor Don Stapley Monday morning at a county building, three days after a prosecutor moved to dismiss charges against Stapley in a forgery and fraud case.
A sheriff’s official said Stapley was arrested on a “different case” but could not elaborate on the nature of the new charges.
6:00 AM
Another legal salvo from Andrew Thomas against county supervisors
The Arizona Republic says he’s indicting Don Stapley and Mary Rose Wilcox on separate charges:
A grand jury indicted Wilcox on allegations that include perjury, forgery and conflict of interest related to votes she made as a supervisor to fund the Hispanic non-profit group Chicanos Por La Causa, Thomas said.Stapley’s counts include fraud, theft, perjury and forgery largely related to the use of funds Stapley received in his effort to become president of the National Association of Counties. Stapley also obtained mortgage loans under false pretenses, Thomas said.
[…]
Thomas said the counts were based on Wilcox obtaining five different loans through Prestamos, the lending arm of Chicanos Por La Causa, and continuing to approve funds for the organization in her role as supervisor without filing any type of conflict notice.
Farther down, the paper notes:
The indictments from a Maricopa County grand jury are the latest allegations Thomas and Sheriff Joe Arpaio have leveled against county elected officials and administrators, many of which have been dismissed. Despite the history of Thomas and Arpaio’s allegations against other county officials petering out as they work through the justice system, the sheriff maintained confidence in his investigations.“Let’s wait to see what the criminal justice system does before you start criticizing my investigations,” Arpaio said.
5:02 AM
Live, from the Cronkite School!
Live-blogging as Joe Arpaio meets the press.
* PHXated is live-blogging the event as it happens. Refresh for updates *
Thus endeth the live-blogging.
In the end, a little anti-climactic. The professors did a good job, but Arpaio just blandly deflected the inquiries.
The students who disrupted the event are still milling around upstairs. Seems odd that the school had no way to shut them up or hustle them out. It’s a bad precedent that ten or twenty people—I’m guessing—can disrupt the desires of hundreds of others.
They seem to be ending it.
This is wrong. The event is over. Callahan is trying to lecture the disruptive students. He points out they’ve lost twelve minutes of questioning. And that they’ve effectively left Arpaio to have his views unfiltered in other media venues.
Wide applause from those left here.
A disruption. Protesters are singing a parody song to the tune of Bohemian Rhapsody. Arpaio puts a funny hat on, but then took it off.
Callahan is trying to quiet the crowd.
This is embarrassing for the school. It’s wrong to disrupt an event in a venue called a “First Amendment Forum.”
Callahan can’t be heard from the dais. Some students are yelling “Shut up” to the idiotic protesters.
RR is asking him about racial profiling and targeting political opponents. Are you above the law?
Why have there been so many officials saying they were targeted?
A: Implies he got his question from someone else. RR: My words came from me.
A: I don’t know about police chiefs who don’t like me. I don’t know about mayors. RR: Phil Gordon. A: Well him.
He’s getting pressed on making records available—another thing he’s been getting dinged on. He says they are getting better.
SG presses him on releases video of a certain inmate. “I’m not too familiar with that one. I”m sure they got the information."
What do you consider a reasonable amount of time? There’s been an unwritten law of ten days, but when they ask for thousands of pieces of information it takes time.
Steve Elliott: Presses him on his home address being publicized. I found your address in public document in five minutes.
A: There might be some slipperage but it’s still a violation. I have a lot of threats on me.
A: What’s the saying? “The buck stops here? There?” I feel comfortable when I go home at night. Blustering: “I will continue to deal with the media!”
A: “I have nothing to hide. I want to thank you students. You are the future of journalism. I love this Cronkite.”
SG: Have you rethought that? A: No, there are times you might re-evaluate.
SG: Do you stand by what was done? A: I’m saying it was a learning process.
“Everyone’s afraid to drink with me. The media is not my enemy.” He’s getting a little unhinged.
Would a normal politician agree to this? Green: Absolutely.
A: “I kinda like the media!”
Green bring up his subpoena of all New Times’ information from its web site, including IP addresses of visitors for three years.
A: Not going to go into all the reasons things were done.
He pleads litigation again. But concedes he’s “learning.”
No one’s laid a glove on him yet.
RR brings up New Times. They do hard-hitting reporting. They published your home address. In Oct. 2007, you arrested the editor and publisher of the paper i the middle of the night, on a misdemeanor. I was an executive editor of a paper. We often reported on grand jury testimony. I was never threatened with arrest. Were the arrests appropriate? Was it a mistake?
A: They increased my popularity.“By the way, it’s a free weekly paper.” (Groans from the crowd. A deputy, he said, made the decision to arrest the pair. Most arrests are for misdemeanor. Can’t talk more—litigation.
RR: Is publishing grand jury testimony automatically grounds for arrest in AZ now?
A: It all depends.
Steve Elliott asks him about not sending press releases to the EVT. The scrape wound up in court and the paper won. The judge said you were petty. Did you act properly?
A: Two issues. The judge never ruled against us. “You have to improve,” he said. They had a way to get press releases. They could drive downtown. (!) He said the problems were fixed. We did improve. The releases are now on the web.
Susan Green asks what about those not allowed to a press conference?
A: I average 200 interviews a month with media.
SG: People have shown up and been denied access to press conference.
A: One or two out of thousands. Security reasons. They use the press conference to sandbag me, or disrupt it.
She presses him: They are doing the stories that aren’t so favorable. Are you using access as a weapon?
A: I’m not afraid to face the media. They ask questions that are off the subject of a press conference.
This is a specious point. He has a crazy idea of what a press conference is. She should be pressing him on the fact that he doesn’t allow himself to be questioned on hard topics.
Rick Rodriquez starts off the questioning. “It’s going to be a learning experience for students.”
Q: Media relationships—he got great press coverage for being tough. Your son in law works for Republic. Other side: Journos who do critical stories get frozen, even arrested. Deputies have threatened to arrest a report. Is media a tool or the enemy?
There’s protest noise from outside
A: I have to get to people I serve. I have an open door policy. You can come to the tents. I don’t have to have handlers. [I’m paraphrasing] Sometimes there are problems with media. I’m human. I’m still going to deal with the media.
I’m still here, will continue to do my job. I report to the people directly. I have nothing to hide and I do my job.
RR presses him. What about threatening to arrest a reporter asking for public records? A says he’ll arrest anyone who breaks the law.
Callahan asks for “respect” from the audience and says he’ll stay after and answer questions. His mike is going in and out.
Callahan is explaining the format—he notes there’s been some "misunderstanding"about the “Meet the Press”-style format. He’s referring to the rabble-rousing by Stephen Lemons and some student activists. He’s making the case that it’s appropriate to have profs question Arpaio without letting the audience at him. It’s sad he has to do it, but whatever.
Then he amps it up to “misreporting.” He’s not paying Arpaio. It’s not “a speech, an interview or a debate.” It’s journalists asking questions of a political leader.
See below for background on the three interviewers.
About to begin. The session will last one hour, Dean Callahan just said. Arpaio just walked in, to smatterings of applause.
Some early photos from the event.
The live internet stream of tonight’s event will be here, the school says.
The event will also be shown on video on the pedestrian mall just south of the school. It’s on Central Avenue between Fillmore and Van Buren.
One of the benefits of the event tonight is that I will be able to indulge my fondness for the word interlocutor. Our interlocutors this evening, as described on the school’s website:
The interviewers are three Cronkite professors and veteran journalists: Steve Elliott, digital news director of Cronkite News Service and former Associated Press Phoenix bureau chief; Sue Green, broadcast news director of Cronkite News Service and former managing editor of ABC15; and Rick Rodriguez, the school’s Carnegie Professor of Journalism and former executive editor of the Sacramento Bee.Meanwhile, Nick Martin, at Heat City, is tracking one of the many ongoing Arpaio legal sideshows:
An all-out showdown could be in the works today over whether one of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s officers will apologize for taking an attorney’s confidential files. It all goes back to an Oct. 19 incident in which Maricopa County detention officer Adam Stoddard was caught on a courtroom security video swiping a document from the files of a defense attorney while her back was turned. Superior Court Judget Gary Donahoe has since ordered the detention officer to hold a news conference to apologize for taking the document. If he refuses to do so by the deadline – set for today – Donahoe said he would throw the officer in jail for contempt of court.Stephen Lemons, at New Times, continues to be skeptical that the Cronkite School profs will be hard-hitting enough tonight:
Arpaio and his PR staff are practiced media manipulators. I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see Arpaio play the profs like a flute tonight. Though out of pride, if nothing else, you would hope these J-school teachers would not wish to be bested like that.
The site tonight is the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication. It’s a key part of ASU’s move into downtown Phoenix; the school sits in a distinctive orange building on Central Avenue, just across the street from the new Civic Space Park and a massive piece of public sculpture, Janet Echelman’s “Her Name Is Patience.”
The school’s Monday evening events are held in its second-story atrium, which allows room for several hundred students to sit in front of the stage and on steps and balconies above it.
Arpaio’s relationship with the press can be said to be dismal. The East Valley Tribune won a Pulitzer Prize this year for its investigation into his various managerial and legal deficiencies.
The series, “Reasonable Doubt,” can be read here.
The Phoenix New Times has spent untold resources over the last few years investigating Arpaio’s practices as well. There’s a fairly complete rundown of its work here.
During the course of one of these series, County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Arpaio actually sent deputies to arrest the editor and publisher of the New Times chain, Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin, in the middle of the night.
While the arrests drew national attention (New York Times story here?) the reaction against Arpaio in Arizona was something less than wholesale outrage, suggesting either that the image of the press is much worse than one might expect … or that Arizonans, being Arizonans, haven’t thought too hard about the implications of mass arrests of journalists.
For the convenience of readers, I’m inserting my previous coverage of this event below.
Live, from the Cronkite School: Joe Arpaio meets the press.
If you’re just coming to the story of Joe Arpaio’s appearance at the ASU journalism school tonight, here’s a precis of developments thus far:
Many months ago the school got Arpaio to agree to a “Meet the Press”-style grilling at the school. The interlocutors will be three professors: Rick Rodriguez, Susan Green and Steve Elliott. The event is at 7 p.m. Monday, that’s tonight, in the second floor atrium of the Cronkite School, which is the east side of Central Avenue downtown, between Van Buren and Fillmore.
(The session itself is open only to students; the school’s going to show the event on video on the mall just south of the building, and will stream it live here.)
Arpaio’s talks a lot—blusters, really—in public, of course, but he’s a slippery figure; who wouldn’t want to see him in an enclosed space questioned closely by three journalists?
Besides the obvious—the extraordinary number of inmate deaths in Arpaio’s jails, the myriad documented cases of mismanagement, his excessive use of his police powers against rival elected officials, and any number of other abuses of power—it will be interesting, given the setting, to hear Arpaio talk about the decision-making processes that lead to the 2007 early-morning-hours arrests of the editor and publisher of the Phoenix New Times alternative newspaper.
Well, this is Arizona, and things don’t always make sense. Some students, misapprehending the nature of the event, have said they will protest, saying they were “outraged” that there won’t be questions from the audience.
PHXated went to Berkeley and is, uh, not unsympathetic to the idea of student protest. In this case, it’s dumb. It’s a rare chance to see a public figure as brittle and indefensible as Arpaio in a controlled situation. Why not see how it plays out?
As PHXated has written before: It’s uncool to say it in this Age of Everyone’s a Journalist, but this serves the public a lot better than having a bunch of Arpaio’s opponents declaiming at him from a microphone. The students should shut up and come watch the session. If it turns out to be filled with lobbed softballs, then they can protest.
And speaking of dumb, now the local tea party folks are riding to Arpaio’s defense. Again, this being Arizona, they’ve managed to trump even the misguided students. Here’s a press release I got the other day:
American Citizens United is organizing a rally in front of the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism. There is a great push from the Hispanic students of Journalism (some of them children of illegals and others illegals themselves). They have been encouraged by “La Raza” and other local pro-amnesty organizations to go into journalism so they can have an influence on public opinion. And you can guess what opinion they want to change to get amnesty.Again, it’s tonight at 7 p.m. MST. Let the zoo begin!
Arpaio at the Cronkite School: The zoo approacheth
The Arizona Republic and KPHO have both posted stories about Monday’s live “Meet the Press”-style interview of Joe Arpaio at ASU’s Cronkite School of journalism.
Arpaio’s going to be questioned by three profs from the school at 7 p.m.
Both stories are pretty incompetent. The Republic story says that interest in the event will surely swamp the smallish school atrium where the interview will be held, so the school’s going to show it on a large video screen and stream it over the internet.
The paper doesn’t bother to tell readers where the screen will be, or what the web address for the stream is.
For the record, the video will be shown in the public mall just south of the Cronkite building, which is on the east side of Central Avenue between Polk and Fillmore.
The video stream will be here, according to the school.
The KPHO story is equally unhelpful; worse, it lets the sheriff natter on about how good he is with the press:
“There have been blips about some weekly newspaper — we didn’t give an answer to a request — but that’s been straightened out. But I think it’s great. If there’s anyone who has an open door policy, I think it’s the sheriff,” said Arpaio.There are three inaccuracies in merely the first sentence alone. The KPHO reporter doesn’t bother to ask him about them.
The Republic story doesn’t mention that some students plan to protest the event; the KPHO story does, but neither note that local Tea Party activists are showing up as well.
PHXated’s background on the event is here and here.
Is the Cronkite School’s “Meet the Press” night with Joe Arpaio going to be a zoo?
As you might know, Sheriff Joe Arpaio is going to be interviewed by three journalism professors onstage at the Cronkite School on Central at 7 p.m. Monday. The event is looking more and more like it’s going to be a spectacle.
First, a bunch of misinformed ASU students have decided that, since audience members don’t get to question Arpaio at the panel, the school is somehow giving him a platform to spread his views unchallenged.
The students are planning a protest outside the event.
But as the title of the session—”Meet the Press”—makes clear, the point is to have the sheriff questioned closely by some informed professionals.
It’s uncool to say it in this Age of Everyone’s a Journalist, but this serves the public a lot better than having a bunch of Arpaio’s opponents declaiming at him from a microphone. The students should shut up and come watch the session. If it turns out to be filled with lobbed softballs, then they can protest.
(By the way—Stephen Lemons notes here that CBS 5 has a new investigative report on Arpaio scheduled to run tonight at 10 p.m.)
Now the Sheriff Joe contingent is getting into the act, too. Below is a press release I just got from the Phoenix Area Tea Partyers. (Note the slur on the students half-way down.)
Looks like Monday is going to be quite a scene:
SUPPORT SHERIFF JOE
Time: November 30, 2009 from 7pm to 7pm
Location: First Amendment Room-Second Floor
Organized By: American Citizens United
Event Description:
This is an event I saw posted on Resistnet and thought our group may be interested.American Citizens United is organizing a rally in front of the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism.
There is a great push from the Hispanic students of Journalism (some of them children of illegals and others illegals themselves).
They have been encouraged by “La Raza” and other local pro-amnesty organizations to go into journalism so they can have an influence on public opinion. And you can guess what opinion they want to change to get amnesty.
Please keep it orderly, no yelling or name calling. Resist the anger we all feel when our country and those who protect it get attacked. We must remain civilized to be credible.
Will Joe Arpaio really “meet the press” at the Cronkite School?
It’s been an unobtrusive line at the bottom of the this semester’s ASU j-school event calendar:
Meet the Press: Sheriff Joe ArpaioThe title at once says it all and nothing; but the idea, if it works, will be an unusual opportunity for a few serious journalists to question Arpaio about his record and methods live on a stage.
Those scheduled to be asking the questions are three profs from the school: Rick Rodriguez, Susan Green and Steve Elliott. The event will be held at 7 p.m. Monday in the second floor atrium of the Cronkite School, which is on the corner of Taylor and Central downtown, just two blocks north of Van Buren.
Already, the event has been misinterpreted; Stephen Lemons of New Times is, unusually for him, off the mark on this issue today in his blog:
As mind-numbingly impossible as it is to imagine, Sheriff Joe, avowed enemy of a free press and brown people everywhere, will be the guest speaker at the ASU Cronkite School of Journalism’s “First Amendment Forum” this Monday, November 30. Talk about eating turkey after Thanksgiving. Arpaio lecturing at a First Amendment Forum? Too bad Idi Amin’s not around anymore. ASU could have him come chat about human rights.From the start, the idea was exactly the opposite; Arpaio will not be lecturing, he will be being questioned by three journalists.
That’s why the student activist Lemons cites, who says she’ll be protesting the event because the audience won’t be allowed to question the sheriff, is off the mark as well.
Sure, it’s an old media model—but in this case, it could be revelatory. Arpaio’s a slippery figure, and it will be interesting to see if the three interlocutors, if they’re prepared, can pin him down on the facts he’s so casual with.
And let me just say this about that dull old Old Media format: There’s no substitute from questioning by smart and prepared people; the idea to sacrifice that so that a bunch of political opponents of Arpaio declaim at him from a mike on the floor is not a smart one.
Arpaio could as yet back out, the questioning could turn out to be pallid—but it’s wrong to criticize the school for giving Arpaio free rein to speak when that’s not the idea at all.
6:44 PM