Main Menu

Birther sheriff Arpaio found in contempt of court

Joe Arpaio and Chief Deputy Sheridan had already admitted to being in contempt in the Melendres v. Arpaio racial profiling lawsuit. The findings of fact in this civil contempt decision state:

In short, the Court finds that the Defendants have engaged in multiple acts of misconduct, dishonesty, and bad faith with respect to the Plaintiff class and the protection of its rights.

In addition to the two counts of contempt decided against Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Chief Deputy Gerard (Jerry) Sheridan, retired Chief Brian Sands and Lt. Joe Sousa were found in contempt on one count each.

A hearing is set for May 31, 2016 at which time “appropriate relief” will be discussed and the court “will shortly thereafter enter any applicable orders and determine if it will refer any matters for criminal contempt.”

One knowledgeable observer who reviewed the findings of fact described them as “devastatingly awesome.”

In a statement today, opposition candidate for Sheriff Paul Penzone (who narrowly lost to Sheriff Arpaio 4 years ago) stated:

Sheriff Arpaio and his top deputies violated the law and U.S. District Judge Murray Snow delivered his findings this afternoon. This is another example of Arpaio’s culture — one where violating the rule of law is an acceptable practice. His defiance has become our debt. This case, alone, has cost taxpayers more than $60 million. The fault is his, the debt is ours. It’s time to move Maricopa County forward. It’s time to end this era of waste and lawlessness.

Read more:

, , , ,

73 Responses to Birther sheriff Arpaio found in contempt of court

  1. avatar
    bob May 13, 2016 at 9:12 pm #

    Although the judge spends relatively little time on Zullo, Montgomery, the Seattle caper, etc., it is clear he considers them all to be lying through their teeth.

    The judge specifically disbelieved the testimony that Arpaio considered the judge to be a victim of the conspiracy theory “discovered” (read: invented) by Montgomery. The judge found Arpaio hired Montgomery to investigate the judge, and that Arpaio’s under-oath denial of it was a lie.

    Arpaio’s universe is shattering.

  2. avatar
    Arthur B. May 13, 2016 at 9:25 pm #

    It’s also amusing that Judge Snow persistently refers to our friend Mikey as “Posseman Zullo.”

  3. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy May 13, 2016 at 9:45 pm #

    The Phoenix papers are talking about another $13 million in costs to the County over the Melendres case. I wonder if the court costs might be reduced if Sheriff Joe loses the election, or whether the monitors will remain at full costs.

  4. avatar
    bob May 13, 2016 at 9:48 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    The Phoenix papers are talking about another $13 million in costs to the County over the Melendres case. I wonder if the court costs might be reduced if Sheriff Joe loses the election, or whether the monitors will remain at full costs.

    Good question. The judge’s findings indicate the judge believes that MCSO’s upper management is rotten. It will take more than just Arpaio’s departure.

  5. avatar
    Curious George May 13, 2016 at 10:20 pm #

    Well, it’s been a long wait, but well worth it. May 31, 2016 will open the doors to Arpaio’s future plight. With Judge Snow’s use of the word “intentional” to define Joe’s disagreeable activities, I see a criminal referral roaring down the road. This ruling should be a must read for Volin, Gallups, Rondeau, Gellar and all the other misled souls at Birther Report. You can’t say we didn’t warn you about Joe.

    Melendres v Arpaio – Arpaio Civil Contempt Order
    https://www.scribd.com/book/312520002

  6. avatar
    gorefan May 13, 2016 at 11:50 pm #

    Curious George:
    This ruling should be a must read for Volin, Gallups, Rondeau, Gellarand all the other misled souls at Birther Report. You can’t say we didn’t warn you about Joe.

    IMO, their take will be that Zullo was not charged with obstruction of justice or perjury therefore his testimony has been vindicated.

  7. avatar
    CarlOrcas May 14, 2016 at 12:59 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    The Phoenix papers are talking about another $13 million in costs to the County over the Melendres case. I wonder if the court costs might be reduced if Sheriff Joe loses the election, or whether the monitors will remain at full costs.

    I doubt Snow will just walk away if Joe is out of the building.

    A new sheriff is going to have to fix the system that Arpaio built and he/she will need all the help Snow can provide. I suspect the judge will outline how things have to change…..new sheriff or old….and then monitor for a couple years…..at least.

  8. avatar
    john May 14, 2016 at 1:19 am #

    If it goes criminal for Arpaio, President Donald Trump will pardon him.

  9. avatar
    bovril May 14, 2016 at 3:10 am #

    Alas Johnny Boy, Der TrumpenFuhrer has already stated he loathes ‘loooosers” so, no pardon for loser OûrPieHole

  10. avatar
    Lupin May 14, 2016 at 3:34 am #

    john:
    If it goes criminal for Arpaio, President Donald Trump will pardon him.

    This goes with Baseball legend Albert Einstein or Slapstick comedian Richard Nixon.

  11. avatar
    Pete May 14, 2016 at 3:50 am #

    Arthur B.:
    It’s also amusing that Judge Snow persistently refers to our friend Mikey as “Posseman Zullo.”

    Don’t be a posseman.

  12. avatar
    CarlOrcas May 14, 2016 at 4:34 am #

    Pete: Don’t be a posseman.

    And don’t take your guns to town son.

  13. avatar
    Curious George May 14, 2016 at 8:27 am #

    john:
    If it goes criminal for Arpaio, President Donald Trump will pardon him.

    John boy. No, Trump won’t pardon your dishonest Arpaio. Even Donald Trump will see that Arpaio is a scofflaw who’s endorsement is no longer wanted or needed. No, John boy, Arpaio has just officially destroyed any future career in law enforcement. Once you are seen as a dishonest cop, you become worthless and are a danger to the public. Hopefully, even the brain dead Arpaio supporters will finally realize that Shurf Joe has monetarily taken Maricopa County for a ride, thumbed his nose at the constitution and the laws that he has sworn to uphold. Paul Penzone as Maricopa County Sheriff may soon become a reality.

  14. avatar
    john May 14, 2016 at 9:30 am #

    Curious George: John boy. No, Trump won’t pardon your dishonest Arpaio.Even Donald Trump will see that Arpaio is a scofflaw who’s endorsement is no longer wanted or needed.No, John boy, Arpaio has just officially destroyed any future career in law enforcement.Once you are seen as a dishonest cop, you become worthless and are a danger to the public.Hopefully, even the brain dead Arpaio supporters will finally realize that Shurf Joe has monetarily taken Maricopa County for a ride, thumbed his nose at the constitution and the laws that he has sworn to uphold.Paul Penzone as Maricopa County Sheriff may soon become a reality.

    Sheriff Arpaio is getting pretty old. He’s going to be 83 soon. Even if he wins reelection, that would make him almost 88 years old in 4 years. That’s pretty old to still be Sheriff. Regardless, I think Arpaio needs to retire. You also have to consider if Arpaio is found guilty criminally, I mean how long would Snow make him serve. He’s pretty old to serving 10 years at 83 years old.

  15. avatar
    CarlOrcas May 14, 2016 at 10:12 am #

    john: You also have to consider if Arpaio is found guilty criminally, I mean how long would Snow make him serve. He’s pretty old to serving 10 years at 83 years old.

    Couple things, john: If Judge Snow refers the matter for possible criminal contempt charges it will be out of his hands. The DOJ will handle it and it will be assigned to another judge for trial.

  16. avatar
    J.D. Sue May 14, 2016 at 11:03 am #

    bob: Arpaio’s universe is shattering.

    —-
    Bob, procedurally, do you know off hand what happens with these findings of fact at a criminal contempt trial? I figure they must be treated as res judicata. And with these hundreds of findings of fact, what is left for a jury?

  17. avatar
    Pete May 14, 2016 at 11:25 am #

    In their testimony during the evidentiary hearing, Sheriff Arpaio and Chief Deputy Sheridan made multiple intentional misstatements of fact while under oath.

    Let’s see. I think there’s a specific legal term for that. Hmm… now what is it? There’s a particular, special word. Kinda slips my mind at the moment…

  18. avatar
    J.D. Sue May 14, 2016 at 11:33 am #

    john: If it goes criminal for Arpaio, President Donald Trump will pardon him.

    —-
    Oh how the mighty have fallen, huh John? I’m reminded of your comment just ten days ago:

    “I love it! Trump is our GOP nominee. . . . Also it appears Joe Arpaio has been vindicated:
    http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/appeals-court-rules-in-favot-of-sheriff-arpaio-in-workplace-raids-controversy

    Joe Apraio for VP!”

    One day you think he should be VP, another day you think he’s too old to run for reelection or do time in ‘la pinta’.

  19. avatar
    J.D. Sue May 14, 2016 at 11:41 am #

    Pete: There’s a particular, special word.

    —-
    In the business, it’s called Testilying.

  20. avatar
    Pete May 14, 2016 at 12:06 pm #

    …the Court finds that the Defendants intentionally failed to implement the Court’s preliminary injunction in this case, failed to disclose thousands of relevant items of requested discovery they were legally obligated to disclose, and, after the post-trial disclosure of additional evidence, deliberately violated court orders and thereby prevented a full recovery of relevant evidence in this case.

    Defendants also initiated internal investigations designed only to placate Plaintiffs’ counsel. Defendants did not make a good faith effort to fairly and impartially investigate and discipline misconduct or to discover other materials responsive to Plaintiffs’ pretrial requests. To escape accountability for their own misconduct, and the misconduct of those who had implemented their decisions, Defendants, or their proxies, named disciplinary officers who were biased in their favor and had conflicts, Defendants remained in control of investigations in which they themselves had conflicts, Defendants promulgated special inequitable disciplinary policies pertaining only to Melendres-related internal investigations, Defendants delayed investigations so as to justify the imposition of lesser or no discipline, Defendants misapplied their own disciplinary policies, and
    Defendants asserted intentional misstatements of fact to their own investigators and to the court-appointed Monitor…

    …Defendants intentionally withheld documents involving the Plaintiff class. In doing so, they again violated court orders, made intentional misstatements of fact to the Monitor about the existence of such documents, and made additional intentional misstatements to the Monitor in an attempt to justify their concealment.

    In their testimony during the evidentiary hearing, Sheriff Arpaio and Chief Deputy Sheridan made multiple intentional misstatements of fact while under oath.

    In short, the Court finds that the Defendants have engaged in multiple acts of misconduct, dishonesty, and bad faith with respect to the Plaintiff class and the protection of its rights. They have demonstrated a persistent disregard for the orders of this Court, as well as an intention to violate and manipulate the laws and policies regulating their conduct
    ————————-
    Hmm… wonder about the chances for a criminal referral here…

  21. avatar
    Pete May 14, 2016 at 12:16 pm #

    J.D. Sue: In the business, it’s called Testilying.

    Hmm. That’s definitely a nice word, but somehow I don’t think it’s quite the word I was looking for.

    Let’s see… surgery? No, that’s not it. Different profession.

  22. avatar
    Curious George May 14, 2016 at 12:23 pm #

    Pete:
    …the Court finds that the Defendants intentionally failed to implement the Court’s preliminary injunction in this case, failed to disclose thousands of relevant items of requested discovery they were legally obligated to disclose, and, after the post-trial disclosure of additional evidence, deliberately violated court orders and thereby prevented a full recovery of relevant evidence in this case.

    Defendants also initiated internal investigations designed only to placate Plaintiffs’ counsel. Defendants did not make a good faith effort to fairly and impartially investigate and discipline misconduct or to discover other materials responsive to Plaintiffs’ pretrial requests. To escape accountability for their own misconduct, and the misconduct of those who had implemented their decisions, Defendants, or their proxies, named disciplinary officers who were biased in their favor and had conflicts, Defendants remained in control of investigations in which they themselves had conflicts, Defendants promulgated special inequitable disciplinary policies pertaining only to Melendres-related internal investigations, Defendants delayed investigations so as to justify the imposition of lesser or no discipline, Defendants misapplied their own disciplinary policies, and
    Defendants asserted intentional misstatements of fact to their own investigators and to the court-appointed Monitor…

    …Defendants intentionally withheld documents involving the Plaintiff class. In doing so, they again violated court orders, made intentional misstatements of fact to the Monitor about the existence of such documents, and made additional intentional misstatements to the Monitor in an attempt to justify their concealment.

    In their testimony during the evidentiary hearing, Sheriff Arpaio and Chief Deputy Sheridan made multiple intentional misstatements of fact while under oath.

    In short, the Court finds that the Defendants have engaged in multiple acts of misconduct, dishonesty, and bad faith with respect to the Plaintiff class and the protection of its rights. They have demonstrated a persistent disregard for the orders of this Court, as well as an intention to violate and manipulate the laws and policies regulating their conduct
    ————————-
    Hmm… wonder about the chances for a criminal referral here…

    I’d venture to guess the chances are way above a certainty. Maricopa County needs to clean out the rodents that have infested the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office for far too long. What a disaster!

  23. avatar
    Pete May 14, 2016 at 12:57 pm #

    As someone noted, it was clear from the beginning that Arpaio was in contempt of court. He admitted it.

    The real question was whether that contempt of court was was accidental or intentional. Judge Murray Snow’s 2-1/2 page summary of his conclusions, backed up by about 160 pages following of specific findings, uses words and phrases that indicate deliberate intention, by my count, over a dozen times.

    And as I understand it (IANAL), that intention is the difference between civil contempt and criminal contempt.

  24. avatar
    Pete May 14, 2016 at 3:23 pm #

    Reading Judge Snow’s ruling. Very entertaining.

    Chief Deputy Sheridan is the second in command at the MCSO and is
    responsible for all of its operations. (Doc. 1043 at Tr. 822:10–11, 23–25, 864:7–9.) Within the MCSO, only he and Public Information Officer Lisa Allen report directly to Sheriff Arpaio…

    Despite his position as second in command at the MCSO, Chief Deputy
    Sheridan testified that he remained ignorant of the preliminary injunction until March 27, 2014. (Doc. 1043 at Tr. 887.) This testimony is demonstrably false.

  25. avatar
    Rickey May 14, 2016 at 6:08 pm #

    Pete: Hmm. That’s definitely a nice word, but somehow I don’t think it’s quite the word I was looking for.

    Let’s see… surgery? No, that’s not it. Different profession.

    I suspect that you’re looking for the P word!

  26. avatar
    ZixiOfIx May 14, 2016 at 6:23 pm #

    So, for years birthers have been telling us that sheriffs are the most powerful law enforcement entities in United States, and that Sheriff Joe was as honest as the day is long.

    They insisted that he was free to do as he liked, and law enforcement couldn’t touch him, because he was elected by “We the People”.

    Were the birthers… wrong? Is that possible?

    Bwahahaha!

  27. avatar
    Rickey May 14, 2016 at 6:34 pm #

    john:
    If it goes criminal for Arpaio, President Donald Trump will pardon him.

    I see that it is time to educate John again.

    A pardon is an expression of the President’s forgiveness and ordinarily is granted in recognition of the applicant’s acceptance of responsibility for the crime and established good conduct for a significant period of time after conviction or completion of sentence…Pursuant to the Rules Governing Petitions for Executive Clemency, which are available on this website, a person is not eligible to apply for a presidential pardon until a minimum of five years has elapsed since his release from any form of confinement imposed upon him as part of a sentence for his most recent criminal conviction, whether or not that is the conviction for which he is seeking the pardon.

    Your beloved sheriff would have to serve his prison sentence before he could even apply for a pardon.

    Now, he might prefer to have his sentence commuted, which would let him out of prison before his sentence is up, but commutations come with their own conditions:

    To be eligible to apply for commutation of sentence, a person must have reported to prison to begin serving his sentence and may not be challenging his conviction in the courts.

    https://www.justice.gov/pardon/frequently-asked-questions-concerning-executive-clemency#1

    Besides, I doubt that President Clinton will have any interested in pardoning Arpaio or commuting his sentence. If Arpaio is convicted of criminal contempt, he is likely to do at least some prison time, regardless of who the president is.

    I find it fascinating that “law and order” Republicans are always so anxious to grant clemency when the criminals are Republicans.

  28. avatar
    Pete May 14, 2016 at 7:05 pm #

    You gotta love some of this s***.

    Chief Deputy Sheridan called the Monitor after this meeting, around 5:15 in the evening. (Doc. 1043 at Tr. 848:16–20.)

    In that telephone call, Sheridan made the false statement to the Monitor that Chief Trombi sent the email without his knowledge. (Id. at Tr. 848:24–849:2

    228.Chief Deputy Sheridan testified at the evidentiary hearing that his statement to the Monitor was not a false statement, even though he knew when he called the Monitor that he had ordered Chief Trombi to send out the email and that Trombi had done so. (Doc. 1043 at Tr. 849–51.) Sheridan maintained, “[J]ust because I told him to send an e-mail doesn’t mean that I knew he had already sent it.”

    230. Chief Deputy Sheridan wrote a letter that same night, May 14, 2014, to the Monitor. (Doc. 1043 at Tr. 853:20–23.) In that letter, Sheridan again intentionally and untruthfully stated that neither he nor Chief Trombi remembered who directed Trombi to send the email, and that Trombi stated it was a collective decision of all parties. (See id. at Tr. 853:20–855:9, 856:14–20.)

  29. avatar
    Pete May 14, 2016 at 7:36 pm #

    The Court’s findings of fact confirm that a significant cover-up was going on, involving the MCSO and their lawyer Ms. Iafrate:

    …Chief Deputy Sheridan, Captain Bailey, and Ms. Iafrate violated the specific and direct orders of this Court without a justifiable basis for doing so.

  30. avatar
    Pete May 14, 2016 at 7:43 pm #

    368. For example, part of the Court’s order required the MCSO to engage in community outreach. (Doc. 606.) In October, Sheriff Arpaio and an accompanying sergeant pulled over two automobiles, each of which contained four Hispanic occupants. Arpaio stated that turning on the flashing lights of the patrol car and effecting traffic stops of cars containing Hispanic occupants constituted the “community outreach” ordered by the Court.

    I had no idea community outreach was so easy to do.

  31. avatar
    Reality Check May 14, 2016 at 9:52 pm #

    I gather Judge Snow didn’t buy into Posseman Zullo’s emotional testimony that they were only trying to protect Judge Snow from the evil NSA/CIA/DARPA cabal?

  32. avatar
    john May 14, 2016 at 9:56 pm #

    It might a long time if anything happens. Arpaio is likely to appeal to the circuit which will take at least 3 to 6 months. Then he will appeal to SCOTUS which could take another month. Assuming all appeals are lost, it will several more months for criminal proceedings to even start. It might more than a year or more before anything happens. And if Trump becomes POTUS, it may even be longer assuming anything even happens.

  33. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy May 14, 2016 at 10:55 pm #

    With the notable exception of President Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon before he was convicted of anything.

    Rickey: Your beloved sheriff would have to serve his prison sentence before he could even apply for a pardon.

  34. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy May 14, 2016 at 11:00 pm #

    That would make a great political cartoon caption.

    Pete: I had no idea community outreach was so easy to do.

  35. avatar
    J.D. Sue May 14, 2016 at 11:24 pm #

    john: Arpaio is likely to appeal

    —–
    Really, John? On what basis?

  36. avatar
    john May 14, 2016 at 11:29 pm #

    J.D. Sue: —–
    Really, John?On what basis?

    I’m not sure. It’s a civil case so one many not have as much rights as a criminal one. But, anyone will tell you. You can appeal anything. Appealing isn’t necessarily about winning but it is usually delay delay delay.

  37. avatar
    Rickey May 14, 2016 at 11:44 pm #

    john:
    It might a long time if anything happens. Arpaio is likely to appeal to the circuit which will take at least 3 to 6 months.Then he will appeal to SCOTUS which could take another month.Assuming all appeals are lost, it will several more months for criminal proceedings to even start. It might more than a year or more before anything happens. And if Trump becomes POTUS, it may even be longer assuming anything even happens.

    Appealing the finding of civil contempt would be tricky, considering that Arpaio and his lackeys already admitted that they are guilty of civil contempt.

    A referral for criminal contempt cannot be appealed. The referral will be made to DOJ, which will decide whether to seek an indictment. If there is an indictment, a trial will follow.

  38. avatar
    Rickey May 15, 2016 at 12:01 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    With the notable exception of President Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon before he was convicted of anything.

    Point taken. Of course, that was an unprecedented action.

    John seems to believe that a pardon would be tantamount to exoneration. But the Supreme Court ruled in Burdick v. U.S. (1915) that “[A pardon] carries an imputation of guilt; acceptance a confession of it.”

  39. avatar
    bob May 15, 2016 at 12:47 am #

    john: I’m not sure.It’s a civil case so one many not have as much rights as a criminal one. But, anyone will tell you. You can appeal anything. Appealing isn’t necessarily about winning but it is usually delay delay delay.

    The judge’s ruling isn’t an appealable order. The circuit court lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal.

    No delay for Arpaio.

  40. avatar
    J.D. Sue May 15, 2016 at 1:10 am #

    Rickey: Appealing the finding of civil contempt would be tricky, considering that Arpaio and his lackeys already admitted that they are guilty of civil contempt.

    —-
    Yes. And Judge Snow’s findings of fact are essentially unappealable. Appellate courts are very deferential to a trial court’s findings of facts, especially when the trial court makes credibility determinations. How many times did Judge Snow mention credibility? Judge Snow nailed Arpaio.

  41. avatar
    Reality Check May 15, 2016 at 8:14 am #

    Here are my predictions:

    -Criminal contempt referrals for Arpaio, Sheridan and Bailey with possible additional charges of perjury added on by the DoJ
    -MCSO placed in receivership for until Arpaio is no longer Sheriff.
    -No charges for Zullo but I think the Cold Case Posse’s days are numbered.

  42. avatar
    Reality Check May 15, 2016 at 10:30 am #

    I think Sands should be mighty worried too.

  43. avatar
    The Magic M (not logged in) May 15, 2016 at 10:38 am #

    Pete: Don’t be a posseman.

    Don’t pay the posseman
    Don’t fall for his nonsense
    Don’t pay the posseman
    Until he shows you all his evidence

    (with apologies to Chris de Burgh)

  44. avatar
    Curious George May 15, 2016 at 10:49 am #

    Reality Check:
    Here are my predictions:

    -Criminal contempt referrals for Arpaio, Sheridan and Bailey with possible additional charges of perjury added on by the DoJ
    -MCSO placed in receivership for until Arpaio is no longer Sheriff.
    -No charges for Zullo but I think the Cold Case Posse’s days are numbered.

    I would ask any lawyers here if there is an additional possibility. Judge Snow’s ruling mentions that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office was apparently a victim of fraud by one Dennis Montgomery. According to the ruling the Sheriff’s office paid funds to Dennis Montgomery and obtained bogus information. Commander Zullo was apparently the principal actor who put Dennis Montgomery together with the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. Is there a possibility that the Arizona Attorney General’s Office could or would take action against various parties to recover the funds fraudulently obtained from the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office?

  45. avatar
    Yoda May 15, 2016 at 11:29 am #

    john: I’m not sure.It’s a civil case so one many not have as much rights as a criminal one. But, anyone will tell you. You can appeal anything. Appealing isn’t necessarily about winning but it is usually delay delay delay.

    The judge protected himself by having an extensive finding of fact. Appeal courts accept the findings of fact and will affirm so long as the facts support the findings. In other words, Barney Fife is toast.

  46. avatar
    CarlOrcas May 15, 2016 at 1:35 pm #

    Reality Check: -MCSO placed in receivership for until Arpaio is no longer Sheriff.

    I’m beginning to think (hope?) this is a real possibility to insure that the mess Arpaio created is cleaned up.

  47. avatar
    CarlOrcas May 15, 2016 at 1:39 pm #

    Curious George: Is there a possibility that the Arizona Attorney General’s Office could or would take action against various parties to recover the funds fraudulently obtained from the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office?

    A receiver would be the best solution here. He/she could go after Montgomery (and others?) in federal court to recover misused/misspent funds and, if necessary, refer for criminal charges

  48. avatar
    Curious George May 15, 2016 at 2:42 pm #

    CarlOrcas: A receiver would be the best solution here. He/she could go after Montgomery (and others?) in federal court to recover misused/misspent funds and, if necessary, refer for criminal charges

    Thanks Carl. I think receivership would be a very good option for this situation.

  49. avatar
    gorefan May 15, 2016 at 3:39 pm #

    CarlOrcas: I’m beginning to think (hope?) this is a real possibility to insure that the mess Arpaio created is cleaned up.

    Similar situation to Oakland a few years back.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27/oakland-police-department_n_1237785.html

    “As part of a negotiated settlement three years later, the city was ordered to take 51 specific steps toward reform or else lose operational control of the department. Despite numerous deadline extensions, Oakland has failed to make significant progress on said reforms.”

    “The court remains in disbelief that Defendants have yet—nine years later—to achieve what they themselves agreed was doable in no more than five years,” Henderson wrote in his decision earlier this week.”

    “Henderson’s order prevents both department brass as well as embattled Oakland Mayor Jean Quan from making any significant changes—such as granting promotions—without first getting approval from independent monitor Robert Warshaw. Warshaw, a former Drug Enforcement Agency official, has been overseeing the OPD for years; however, his role had solely been in an advisory and reporting capacity.”

    Warshaw is the MCSO monitor.

    In the end I think Oakland avoided receivership.

    Currently the DOJ in New Orleans has asked the Courts to put the parish jail run by the sheriff into receivership.

    “The U.S. Department of Justice and a group of inmates who have sued over conditions at the Orleans Parish jail have asked a federal judge to strip Sheriff Marlin Gusman of his authority to operate the troubled facility.”

    http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2016/04/marlin_gusman_opp_jail_court.html

    http://media.nola.com/crime_impact/other/Orleans%20Parish%20Jail%20Memo.pdf

  50. avatar
    CarlOrcas May 15, 2016 at 4:49 pm #

    gorefan: Similar situation to Oakland a few years back.

    I forget where I read it but the writer was making the case that Snow, via a receiver in the cases he is handling, is in a much better position to mete out punishment (short of jail time) for Arpaio, et al and impose reform on the MCSO than anyone else.

    Let us hope.

  51. avatar
    bob May 15, 2016 at 5:15 pm #

    CarlOrcas: A receiver would be the best solution here. He/she could go after Montgomery (and others?) in federal court to recover misused/misspent funds and, if necessary, refer for criminal charges

    A receiver couldn’t “refer” criminal charges; as best, the receiver could request them.

    And it isn’t as if Montgomery wasn’t known to state and federal law enforcement before the judge’s findings. It would appear prosecutors have already decided that going after Montgomery isn’t worth the effort, and I don’t think the judge’s findings are going to change anyone’s mind. Remember: Montgomery duped the CIA, and was never charged for that.

    Also: Going after Montgomery because he fed Arpaio bogus info is a slippery slope: lots of confidential informants supply law enforcement with bunk. What is more interesting is the MSCO’s “curious” decision to make Montgomery a confidential informant (likely done to hide the operation from the monitor) rather than employ Montgomery as a contractor/consultant/vendor.

  52. avatar
    Arthur B. May 15, 2016 at 5:27 pm #

    Well!!, all that, and it looks like we’re not even going to see the Reed Hayes report!

  53. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy May 15, 2016 at 5:52 pm #

    A frivolous appeal is sanctionable. Ask Linda Jordan.

    john: Appealing isn’t necessarily about winning but it is usually delay delay delay.

  54. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy May 15, 2016 at 7:07 pm #

    In the interests of full disclosure, I decided to make a campaign contribution to Arpaio’s opponent, Paul Penzone, after writing this article.

  55. avatar
    Joey May 15, 2016 at 7:27 pm #

    This case is taking me back to the Whitewater Trials of the Clintons. Clinton friend Susan McDougal was cited for Civil Contempt for refusing to answer Ken Starr’s questions. “From September, 1996 until March 1998, McDougal spent the maximum possible 18 months imprisonment for civil contempt, including 8 months in solitary confinement, and was subjected to “diesel therapy” (the practice of hauling defendants around the country and placing them in different jails along the way). In her case, Susan was shuffled from Arkansas to Los Angeles to the Oklahoma City transfer center, and then on to the Pulaski County Jail in Little Rock, Arkansas.”
    McDougall was also indicted for Obstruction of Justice and referred for criminal contempt.
    A jury found her not guilty of obstruction and the jury was hung 7-5 toward acquittal on criminal contempt.–Wikipedia

  56. avatar
    Curious George May 15, 2016 at 7:29 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    In the interests of full disclosure, I decided to make a campaign contribution to Arpaio’s opponent, Paul Penzone, after writing this article.

    I believe that was a wise decision. Penzone is a sharp guy.

  57. avatar
    roadburner May 15, 2016 at 8:40 pm #

    i’m more than convinced that arpaio will pull a Pinochet and suddenly become `very ill’ and go for some major sympathy.

    the chances of him ever wearing pink boxers are pretty much zero in that respect.

  58. avatar
    Pete May 16, 2016 at 1:09 pm #

    Hmm. It seems the shurf is up for reelection.

    Has a Facebook page.

    Of course, it’s full of comments from fawning toadies.

    Like this one:

    Don Jones Go Joe……gonna keep voting for you
    Obama soon will be history

    Yeah, I guess Shurf Joke has finally about driven the Usurper(TM) from office.

    What a pretty sight it would be to see Arpaio stripped of his authority and position.

  59. avatar
    Pete May 16, 2016 at 1:11 pm #

    By the way, john, I seem to recall you were all in favor of the good Sheriff destroying as much evidence of his malfeasance as possible.

    It appears that he took your advice.

    How’s that workin’ out for him?

  60. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy May 16, 2016 at 5:48 pm #

    This is just inexpert speculation, but since Sands is retired, no penalty the court could impose on him would serve the goal of getting him to obey the court order. I suppose criminal referral is possible, since the Court determined that Sands knew about and understood the order, but failed to carry it out. Perhaps that case is not worth prosecuting.

    Of course I’m biased in favor of Sands because of his book.

    Reality Check:
    I think Sands should be mighty worried too.

  61. avatar
    bob May 16, 2016 at 6:38 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    This is just inexpert speculation, but since Sands is retired, no penalty the court could impose on him would serve the goal of getting him to obey the court order.

    True, but part of civil contempt is making the plaintiffs whole. I would not be surprised if Sands will be on the hook, for example, for a portion of the plaintiffs’ attorneys fees connected to the contempt proceedings.

  62. avatar
    CarlOrcas May 16, 2016 at 7:35 pm #

    bob: True, but part of civil contempt is making the plaintiffs whole.I would not be surprised if Sands will be on the hook, for example, for a portion of the plaintiffs’ attorneys fees connected to the contempt proceedings.

    How about other costs…..like the monitor? But for their obstruction a monitor might not have been necessary.

  63. avatar
    Rickey May 16, 2016 at 8:01 pm #

    Joey:
    This case is taking me back to the Whitewater Trials of the Clintons. Clinton friend Susan McDougal was cited for Civil Contempt for refusing to answer Ken Starr’s questions. “From September, 1996 until March 1998, McDougal spent the maximum possible 18 months imprisonment for civil contempt, including 8 months in solitary confinement, and was subjected to “diesel therapy” (the practice of hauling defendants around the country and placing them in different jails along the way).In her case, Susan was shuffled from Arkansas to Los Angeles to the Oklahoma City transfer center, and then on to the Pulaski County Jail in Little Rock, Arkansas.”
    McDougal was also indicted for Obstruction of Justice and referred for criminal contempt.

    A jury found her not guilty of obstruction and the jury was hung 7-5 toward acquittal on criminal contempt.–Wikipedia

    McDougal believed that Starr was setting a perjury trap for her. She would have testified that Bill Clinton did not lie during his Whitewater testimony, and she was convinced that Starr would charge her with perjury if she testified that Clinton did not lie. Rather than run that risk, she refused to answer.

  64. avatar
    bob May 16, 2016 at 10:05 pm #

    CarlOrcas: How about other costs…..like the monitor? But for their obstruction a monitor might not have been necessary.

    Not the monitor. In addition to being rather downstream at this point, it would start to get very speculative about how much did intentional post-injunction acts extend or expand the scope of the monitor’s job.

  65. avatar
    tes May 16, 2016 at 11:07 pm #

    Rickey: A referral for criminal contempt cannot be appealed. The referral will be made to DOJ, which will decide whether to seek an indictment. If there is an indictment, a trial will follow.

    Just a clarification. I agree that a criminal contempt referral cannot be appealed.

    As I understand it, however, IF a judge refers a matter for criminal contempt, there WILL be a criminal contempt proceeding.

    Per Fed. R. Crim. Proc. 42, the DOJ has the discretion to decline to prosecute the matter … IF “the interest of justice requires the appointment of another attorney. If the government declines the request, the court MUST appoint another attorney to prosecute the contempt.” (all caps added); see also USAG Criminal Resource Manual § 768. Indirect Criminal Contempt—Role of the Prosecutor).

    In other words, if the DOJ declines the matter, the Judge will appoint a special prosecutor to handle the case.

  66. avatar
    Rickey May 18, 2016 at 2:03 am #

    tes: Just a clarification.I agree that a criminal contempt referral cannot be appealed.

    As I understand it, however, IF a judge refers a matter for criminal contempt, there WILL be a criminal contempt proceeding.

    Per Fed. R. Crim. Proc. 42, the DOJ has the discretion to decline to prosecute the matter … IF “the interest of justice requires the appointment of another attorney. If the government declines the request, the court MUST appoint another attorney to prosecute the contempt.” (all caps added); see also USAG Criminal Resource Manual § 768. Indirect Criminal Contempt—Role of the Prosecutor).

    In other words, if the DOJ declines the matter, the Judge will appoint a special prosecutor to handle the case.

    Thanks. I didn’t mean to imply that a referral would automatically mean that DOJ would seek an indictment.

  67. avatar
    Curious George May 19, 2016 at 9:04 pm #

    Arpaio appeal for 90 day extension shot down in U.S. District Court. May 31st date still on.

    https://www.scribd.com/doc/313212964/Melendres-1682-ORDER-Denying-Motion-to-Delay

  68. avatar
    Pete May 20, 2016 at 1:04 am #

    The Court will not permit Defendant Arpaio “to raise substantive challenges to the Court’s Findings of Fact.” (Doc. 1680 at 5). As he notes, there have been 20 days of hearings on this issue. The Court advised the parties that all issues of fact must be presented during the hearing and gave the parties a full opportunity to make arguments pertaining to that factual evidence. The Court will not now, after its detailed review of the evidence and exhaustive factual findings, provide any party with a new opportunity to reargue the facts.

    Universe-shattering!

    Yum! Yum! Birfer tears!

    Now in strawberry flavor!

  69. avatar
    Lupin May 20, 2016 at 2:38 am #

    My guess is that Arpaio is going to end up a broken old man whose pile of money is going to be eaten away by the lawyers.

  70. avatar
    Pete May 20, 2016 at 1:33 pm #

    I don’t generally wish misfortune on my fellow man. However, Arpaio certainly does not seem to deserve a nice retirement in the lap of luxury.

    Nor does his having a nice retirement in the lap of luxury set a good example.

    One could wish that he might end up discredited and stripped of his power and wealth, living a comfortable enough but entirely toothless retirement in some cheap apartment, dependent on social security to pay the monthly bills.

    Although he will undoubtedly have a fat pension of some sort.

  71. avatar
    Pete May 23, 2016 at 2:41 pm #

    The ads just write themselves:

    We now know:

    Sheriff Arpaio and his chief deputy intentionally broke the law.

    Both lied in court, multiple times – committing the additional crime of perjury.

    Joe Arpaio ignored the law because he believed it would help him get reelected as Sheriff.

    He hid the evidence of his wrongdoing.

    Arpaio’s entire office engaged in a full-scale coverup.

    Joe Arpaio’s misdeeds in office have cost the people of Maricopa County more than $60 million.

    It’s time for the Arpaio cesspool to stop.

    Vote for change. Vote for (Arpaio’s opponent).