Federal Probe Finds Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Office Violated Rights of Latinos
Published December 15, 2011Fox News Latino

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio answers questions during a news conference to announce his latest crime suppression enforcement patrols Thursday, April 29, 2010, in Phoenix. (AP)




The report, which includes findings from a three-year investigation by the federal agency, says the Arizona sheriff's office engaged in a pattern of racial profiling and discrimination, and carried out heavy-handed immigration patrols based on racially charged citizen complaints

The report was obtained by The Associated Press ahead of its release.

The Justice Department's conclusions in the civil probe mark the federal government's harshest rebuke of a national political fixture who has risen to prominence for his immigration crackdowns and became coveted endorsement among candidates in the GOP presidential field.

Apart from the civil rights probe, a federal grand jury also has been investigating Arpaio's office on criminal abuse-of-power allegations since at least December 2009 and is specifically examining the investigative work of the sheriff's anti-public corruption squad.

The civil rights report said federal authorities will continue to investigate complaints of deputies using excessive force against Latinos, whether the sheriff's immigration efforts damage trust with the Hispanic community and a large number of sex-crimes cases that were assigned to the agency but weren't followed up on or investigated at all.

SUMMARY
The civil rights report by the U.S. Department of Justice, which conducted a three-year investigation into complaints about profiling, said Latinos are four to nine times more likely to be stopped in traffic stops in Maricopa County than non-Latinos and that the agency's immigration policies treat Latinos as if they are all in the country illegally.
The report took the sheriff's office to task for launching immigration patrols, known as "sweeps," based on complaints that Latinos were merely gathering near a business without committing crimes. Federal authorities single out Arpaio himself and said his office, known as MCSO, has no clear policies to guard against the violations, even after he changed some of his top aides earlier this year.

"Arpaio's own actions have helped nurture MCSO's culture of bias," wrote Thomas Perez, who heads the Justice Department's civil rights division, adding that the sheriff frequently gave such racially charged letters to some of his top aides and saved them in his own files.

The report will require Arpaio to set up effective policies against discrimination, improve training and make other changes that would be monitored for compliance by a judge. Arpaio faces a Jan. 4 deadline for saying whether he wants to work out an agreement. If not, the federal government will sue him and let a judge decide the complaint.

Arpaio, the self-proclaimed toughest sheriff in America, has long denied the racial profiling allegation, saying people are stopped if deputies have probable cause to believe they have committed crimes and that deputies later find many of them are undocumented immigrants.

Arpaio's own actions have helped nurture [a] culture of bias.
- Thomas Perez, head of Justice Department's civil rights division

Arpaio has built his reputation on jailing inmates in tents and dressing them in pink underwear, selling himself to voters as unceasingly tough on crime and pushing the bounds of how far local police can go to confront illegal immigration.

The report also said he and some top staffers tried to silence people who have spoken out against the sheriff's office by arresting people without cause, filing meritless lawsuits against opponents and starting investigations of critics.

One example cited by the Justice Department is former top Arpaio aide David Hendershott, who filed bar complaints against attorneys critical of the agency along with bringing judicial complaints against judges who were at odds with the sheriff. All complaints were dismissed.

The anti-corruption squad's cases against two county officials and a judge collapsed in court before going to trial and have been criticized by politicians at odds with the sheriff as trumped up. Arpaio has defended the investigations as a valid attempt at rooting out corruption in county government.

The civil rights report said Latinos are four to nine times more likely to be stopped in traffic stops in Maricopa County than non-Latinos and that the agency's immigration policies treat Latinos as if they are all in the country illegally. Deputies on the immigrant-smuggling squad stop and arrest Latino drivers without good cause, the investigation found.

A review done as part of the investigation found that 20 percent of traffic reports handled by Arpaio's immigrant-smuggling squad from March 2006 to March 2009 were stops -- almost all involving Latino drivers -- that were done without reasonable suspicion. The squad's stops rarely led to smuggling arrests.

Deputies are encouraged to make high-volume traffic stops in targeted locations. There were Latinos who were in the U.S. legally who were arrested or detained without cause during the sweeps, according to the report.

During the sweeps, deputies flood an area of a city -- in some cases, heavily Latino areas -- over several days to seek out traffic violators and arrest other offenders. Undocumented immigrants accounted for 57 percent of the 1,500 people arrested in the 20 sweeps conducted by his office since January 2008, according to figures provided by Arpaio's office.

Police supervisors, including at least one smuggling-squad supervisor, often used county accounts to send emails that demeaned Latinos to fellow sheriff's managers, deputies and volunteers in the sheriff's posse. One such email had a photo of a mock driver's license for a fictional state called "Mexifornia."

The report said that the sheriff's office launched an immigration operation two weeks after the sheriff received a letter in August 2009 letter about a person's dismay over employees of a McDonald's in the Phoenix suburb of Sun City who didn't speak English. 

The tip laid out no criminal allegations. The sheriff wrote back to thank the writer "for the info," said he would look into it and forwarded it to a top aide with a note of "for our operation."

Federal investigators focused heavily on the language barriers in Arpaio's jails.

Latino inmates with limited English skills were punished for failing to understand commands in English by being put in solitary confinement for up to 23 hours a day or keeping prisoners locked down in their jail pods for as long as 72 hours without a trip to the canteen area or making nonlegal phone calls.

The report said some jail officers used racial slurs for Latinos when talking among themselves and speaking to inmates.

Detention officers refused to accept forms requesting basic daily services and reporting mistreatment when the documents were completed in Spanish and pressured Latinos with limited English skills to sign forms that implicate their legal rights without language assistance.

The agency pressures Latinos with limited English skills to sign forms by yelling at them and keeping them in uncomfortably cold cells for long periods of time.

The Justice Department said it hadn't yet established a pattern of alleged wrongdoing by the sheriff's office in the three areas where they will continue to investigation: complaints of excessive force against Latinos, botched sex-crimes cases and immigration efforts that have hurt the agency's trust with the Hispanic community.

Federal authorities will continue to investigate whether the sheriff's office has limited the willingness of witnesses and victims to report crimes or talk to Arpaio's office.

"MCSO has done almost nothing to build such a relationship with Mariciopa County's Latino residents," Perez wrote.

This story contains material from The Associated Press.

Jihadin wrote:1. Whats the latino pop in LA?
2. I lived in far worse then what the prisoners have
3. SO they're allowed a phonecall like once per 72 hrs. Think mine was two weeks at least to two months
4. Who's going to steal pink underwears?
etc etc etc. I reelect him

Frazzled wrote:

Jihadin wrote:1. Whats the latino pop in LA?
2. I lived in far worse then what the prisoners have
3. SO they're allowed a phonecall like once per 72 hrs. Think mine was two weeks at least to two months
4. Who's going to steal pink underwears?
etc etc etc. I reelect him

Arizona actually. Its the overwhelming majority.

Jihadin wrote:Okay

Mention age bracket anywhere?
Actually the type of vehicles being pulled over?
What I'm aiming out I'm betting are half the stops are "Fast and Furious" vehicles
Kind of wish they were more indepth with it

Jihadin wrote:Might have to borrow your weiners

Joseph M. "Joe" Arpaio (born June 14, 1932) is the elected Sheriff of Maricopa County in the U.S. state of Arizona. First voted into office in 1992, Arpaio is responsible for law enforcement in Maricopa County. This includes management of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, county jail, courtroom security, prisoner transport, service of warrants, and service of process. Arpaio styles himself as "America's Toughest Sheriff."[1][2] He is well known for his outspoken stance against illegal immigration.[3] Arpaio has become a flashpoint for controversy surrounding Arizona's SB1070 anti-illegal immigration act.[4]

Arpaio was once widely popular among voters in Arizona.[5] However, his popularity has waned since 2007, but remains positive among registered Republicans.[6][7]

History and law enforcement background

Arpaio was born in Springfield, Massachusetts to Italian parents both from Avellino, Italy.[8] Arpaio's mother died while giving birth to him, and Arpaio was raised by his father, a grocery store owner. Arpaio completed high school and worked in his father's business until age 18 when he enlisted in the United States Army.[9] Arpaio served in the Army from 1950 to 1954 in the Medical Detachment Division and was stationed in France for part of the time as a military policeman.[10]

Following his discharge in 1954, Arpaio moved to Washington, D.C. and became a police officer, moving in 1957 to Las Vegas, Nevada. He served as a police officer in Las Vegas for six months before being appointed as a special agent with the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, which later became part of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).[11] During his 25-year tenure with the DEA, he was stationed in Argentina, Turkey and Mexico, and advanced through the ranks to the position of head of the DEA's Arizona branch.[12]

In 1992, Arpaio successfully campaigned for the office of Maricopa County Sheriff. The voters of Maricopa County re-elected him in 1996, 2000, 2004, and 2008.[13]

Arpaio married his wife, Ava, in 1958. Together they have two children and four grandchildren.[14] They currently reside in Fountain Hills, Arizona.[15]

Actions as Maricopa County Sheriff





Sheriff Arpaio at the 2011 Veterans Day parade in Phoenix, Arizona, along with his wife, Ava.
[edit] Television

In late 2008 and early 2009 Arpaio appeared in Smile...You're Under Arrest!, a three-episode Fox Reality Channel series in which persons with outstanding warrants were tricked into presenting themselves for arrest.[16]

On June 9, 2011 Sheriff Arpaio was interviewed on Fox News on KSAZ-TV about a song on iTunes titled, "F#@K Sheriff Joe" by Contraband, describing him on his deathbed battling his own mortality.[17]

[edit] Jails

Arpaio's practices include serving inmates surplus food[18] and limiting meals to twice daily.[19] He has also banned inmates from possessing "sexually explicit material" including Playboy magazine after female officers complained that inmates openly masturbated while viewing them or harassed the officers by comparing their anatomy to that of the nude models in the publications. The ban was challenged on First Amendment grounds but upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.[20]

In February 2007, Arpaio instituted an in-house radio station he calls KJOE.[21] Arpaio's radio station broadcasts classical music, opera, Frank Sinatra hits, patriotic music and educational programming. It operates from the basement of the county jail for five days a week, four hours each day.

In an ongoing case, federal judge Neil V. Wake ruled in 2008 and 2010 that the Maricopa County jails violated the constitutional rights of inmates in medical and other care related issues.[22][23]

Tent City

Arpaio set up a "Tent City" as an extension of the Maricopa County Jail.[24] Arpaio has described Tent City as a concentration camp.[25] Tent City is located in a yard next to a more permanent structure containing toilets, showers, and an area for meals.[26] It has become notable particularly because of Phoenix's extreme temperatures.

On July 2, 2011, when the temperature in Phoenix hit 118 °F (48 °C), Arpaio measured the temperature inside Tent City at 145 °F (63 °C). Some inmates complained that fans near their beds were not working, and that their shoes were melting from the heat.[27] During the summer of 2003, when outside temperatures exceeded 110 °F (43 °C), Arpaio said to complaining inmates, "It's 120 degrees in Iraq and the soldiers are living in tents, have to wear full body armor, and they didn't commit any crimes, so shut your mouths."[28] In 1997, Amnesty International published a report on Arpaio's jails which found that Tent City is not an "adequate or humane alternative to housing inmates in suitable . . . jail facilities."[29] Tent City is criticized by groups contending that there are violations of human and constitutional rights.[30] Those critical of Arpaio also point out that the vast majority of inmates within Tent City have not been convicted; rather, they are merely awaiting trial.[31] Arpaio's claim that these inmates committed crimes, they argue, reflects Arpaio's contempt for the American Constitution and the explicit right it grants to a "presumption of innocence."[citation needed]

[edit] Volunteer chain gangs

In 1995, Arpaio reinstituted chain gangs. In 1996, Arpaio expanded the chain gang concept by instituting female volunteer chain gangs.[32] Female inmates work seven hours a day (7 a.m. to 2 p.m.), six days a week. He has also instituted the world's first all-juvenile volunteer chain gang; volunteers earn high school credit toward a diploma.[33]

[edit] Pink underwear

One of Arpaio's most visible public-relations actions was the introduction of pink underwear, which the Maricopa County Sheriff's website cites as being, "world-famous."[34] Arpaio subsequently started to sell customized pink boxers (with the Maricopa County Sheriff's logo and "Go Joe") as a fund-raiser for Sheriff's Posse Association. Despite allegations of misuse of funds received from these sales, Arpaio declined to provide an accounting for the money.[35]

Arpaio's success in gaining press coverage with the pink underwear resulted in his extending the use of the color. He introduced pink handcuffs, using the event to promote his book, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, America's Toughest Sheriff.[36]

[edit] Selective Service registration and organ donors

In 2001, Arpaio was the first sheriff to require all inmates aged 18 and over to register for the Selective Service System. Registration is required by federal law for all U.S. males between 18 and 26 years of age, as well as for resident aliens of the same age, regardless of their immigration status. Since 2001, a total of 28,000 inmates (including 9,000 aliens) have registered for Selective Service.[37][38]

The Sheriff also started the "Have a Heart" program in which inmates may volunteer to be organ donors.[38]

[edit] Sheriff's Posse

Building upon Maricopa County's 50-year-old program, Arpaio expanded the all-volunteer citizen posse through heavy recruiting. The volunteers perform many duties for the sheriff's office:
search and rescue
emergency communications
prisoner transport
traffic control
backup for sworn deputies
office administrative duties
Holiday Mall Patrol (which provides motorist assistance and security for shoppers during the holiday shopping season)
deadbeat parent details targeting men and women with outstanding arrest warrants for failure to pay child support
Assisting in immigration sweeps





Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. standing in the blue suit behind Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce
In November, 2010, Arpaio created an armed illegal immigration operations posse, to help his deputies enforce immigration law. Members of this posse include celebrity actors Steven Seagal, Lou Ferrigno, and Peter Lupus.[39]

[edit] Controversies

Main article: Maricopa County Sheriff's Office controversies#Joe Arpaio

Arpaio has been a controversial sheriff. Arpaio's practices have been criticized by organizations such as Amnesty International,[40] the American Civil Liberties Union, the Arizona Ecumenical Council, the American Jewish Committee,[41] and the Arizona chapter of the Anti-Defamation League.[42] The editorial board of The New York Times called Arpaio "America's Worst Sheriff".[43] Controversial issues surrounding Arpaio have included allegations of racial profiling, in which the ACLU has sued the sheriff.[44][45]

[edit] Unconstitutional Jail Conditions

U.S. District Court Judge Neil V. Wake ruled in 2008, and again in 2010, that the Maricopa County jails violated the constitutional rights of inmates in medical and other care related issues.[22][23] This ruling was a result of a lawsuit brought by the ACLU, which alleged that "Arpaio routinely abused pre-trial detainees at Maricopa County Jail by feeding them moldy bread, rotten fruit and other contaminated food, housing them in cells so hot as to endanger their health, denying them care for serious medical and mental health needs and keeping them packed as tightly as sardines in holding cells for days at a time during intake."[46]

In a ruling issued in October, 2010, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered Arpaio to follow U.S. District Court Judge Neil Wake's 2008 ruling, which required Arpaio to end severe overcrowding and ensure all detainees receive necessary medical and mental health care, be given uninterrupted access to all medications prescribed by correctional medical staff, be given access to exercise and to sinks, toilets, toilet paper and soap and be served food that meets or exceeds the U.S. Department of Agriculture's dietary guidelines.[47][48][49][50]

[edit] Department of Justice Civil Rights Lawsuit

Since March, 2009, the United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division has been investigating Arpaio amid accusations of discrimination and unconstitutional searches and seizures. The investigation has been conducted under the authority of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which forbids discrimination related to programs that receive federal funds. On July 7, 2009, Arpaio held a press conference, and announced that he would not cooperate with the investigation, either by providing documents, or permitting interviews with personnel. On September 2, 2010, the Department of Justice filed suit against Arpaio,[51] to compel his cooperation with the investigation. A spokeswoman for the Justice Department stated that it was unprecedented for an agency to refuse to cooperate with a Title VI investigation, and that this is the first time the Justice Department has sued to compel access to documents and facilities.[52][53][54] The suit was settled in June, 2011, after Arpaio allowed federal officials to interview Sheriff's office employees, and review hundreds of thousands of documents for the investigation.[55] [56] On December 15, 2011, the U.S. Justice Department released their findings after a three-year investigation of Arpaio's office amid complaints of racial profiling and a culture of bias at the agency's top level.[57] The Justice Department's conclusions in the civil probe mark the federal government's harshest rebuke of a national political fixture who has risen to prominence for his immigration crackdowns and became coveted endorsement among candidates in the GOP presidential field. Apart from the civil rights probe, a federal grand jury also has been investigating Arpaio's office on criminal abuse-of-power allegations since at least December 2009 and is specifically examining the investigative work of the sheriff's anti-public corruption squad.[58]

[edit] Abuse of Power

In February 2010 Judge John Leonardo of Pima County Superior Court found that Arpaio "misused the power of his office to target members of the (Board of Supervisors) for criminal investigation."[59]

In 2008 a federal grand jury began an inquiry of Arpaio for abuse of power, in connection with an FBI investigation.[60][61] Arpaio is being investigated for politically motivated and "bogus" prosecutions, which a former US Attorney called "utterly unacceptable".[60][61] Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon has called Arpaio's "long list" of questionable prosecutions "a reign of terror".[61]

The targets of Arpaio's alleged abuse of power have included or currently include: Phil Gordon, Phoenix Mayor;[60] Dan Saban, Arpaio's 2004 and 2008 opponent for the office of Sheriff of Maricopa County;[60] Terry Goddard, Arizona Attorney General;[60] David Smith, Maricopa County Manager;[60] The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors;[60] Barbara Mundell, Maricopa Superior Court Presiding Judge;[60] Anna Baca, former Maricopa Superior Court Presiding Judge;[62] Gary Donahoe, Maricopa Superior Court Criminal Presiding Judge[60] Daniel Pochoda, ACLU attorney;[60] Sandra Dowling, former Maricopa County School Superintendent;[61] Mike Lacy, Editor, Phoenix New Times.[61]

To date (July 10, 2010) of the above only Sandra Dowling has been successfully prosecuted.[61] Indicted on 25 felony counts, Dowling eventually pled guilty to patronage for giving a summer job to her daughter, a single class 2 misdemeanor which was not among the original counts, although as part of the plea bargain she also agreed to recuse herself from the Maricopa County Regional School District. Dowling has since filed suit, alleging negligence, malicious prosecution, abuse of process and several constitutional violations.[63]

[edit] Feud with Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and Maricopa Superior Court

Over the two years prior to September, 2010, feuding between Arpaio and former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas on one side, and the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors on the other side cost at least $5.6 million, most of which was paid to private attorneys. Arpaio and Thomas filed several lawsuits against the Board of Supervisors, including a federal civil-racketeering suit against the supervisors, four judges and attorneys who work with the county. Arpaio and Thomas lost every case, either by ruling of the courts, or by dropping the case.[64]

In early 2010, Arpaio and Thomas sought to have a grand jury indict a number of Maricopa County Judges, Maricopa County Supervisors, and employees of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. The grand jury, in an unusual rebuke, ordered the investigation ended. This action has been described as meaning that "...the case is so bad, there's no further evidence that could be brought [to substantiate it]". Legal experts agree this is a rare move.[65] Thomas and a subordinate attorney on his County Attorney staff face a hearing later in 2011 before the Ethics Committee of the Arizona Bar, the result of which could be a number of sanctions up to permanent loss of their law licenses.

In November and December, 2010, lawsuits naming Arpaio were filed by Judge Gary Donahoe, retired Maricopa County Superior Court judges Barbara Mundell, Anna Baca, and Kenneth Fields, County Supervisor Don Stapley, Deputy County Manager Sandi Wilson, and Susan Schuerman, executive assistant to Supervisor Don Stapley.[66][67][68][69][70][71] Conley Wolfswinkel (a business associate of Stapley) filed suit in January, 2011.[72][73] Other targets of Arpaio's investigations, including Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox,[62] and Maricopa Deputy County Manager Sandi Wilson[65] have filed notices of claims (the precursor to filing suit) totalling about $56 million dollars.[65]

[edit] Election Law Violation

During the month of July 2010, a committee established by Arpaio, the Campaign to Re-Elect Joe Arpaio 2012, funded advertisements critical of Rick Romley, a candidate in the Republican Primary for Maricopa County Attorney and Arizona Attorney General candidate Tom Horne, despite the fact that Arpaio is not currently running for re-election (his term does not expire until the end of 2012).[74]

An order issued on the behalf of the Maricopa Elections Department on August 24, 2010, found that one of the advertisements, a direct mailer, advocated the defeat of Romley, and was an in-kind contribution to Bill Montgomery (Romley's primary election opponent), in violation of Arizona election law. The order stated that the Campaign to Re-Elect Joe Arpaio 2012 will be fined three times the amount of money that was spent on the mailer.[75] In September, 2010, Arpaio's campaign was fined $153,978 in this matter.[76] Montgomery ultimately defeated Romley in the primary election, with Romley stating Arpaio's ads "hurt" his results.[77]

[edit] Misuse of funds

An analysis by the Maricopa County Office of Management and Budget, completed in September, 2010, found Arpaio has misspent almost $100 million in taxpayer dollars over the previous 5 years.[78][79]

The analysis showed that money from a restricted detention fund which could only legally be used to pay for jail items, such as food, detention officers' salaries and equipment, was used to pay employees to patrol Maricopa County.[78] The analysis also showed that many Sheriff's Office employees, whose salaries were paid from the restricted detention fund, were working job assignments different from those recorded in their personnel records. Arpaio's office kept a separate set of personnel books detailing actual work assignments, different from information kept on the county's official human-resources records.[79]

Arpaio used the detention fund to pay for investigations of political rivals, and activities involving his human-smuggling unit.[78][79]

The analysis also showed a number of inappropriate spending items, including a trip to Alaska where deputies stayed at a fishing resort, and trips to Disneyland.[79][80]

Separate investigations by The Arizona Republic uncovered widespread abuse of public funds and county policies by Arpaio's office, including high-ranking employees routinely charging expensive meals and stays at luxury hotels on their county credit cards.[81]

The Republic also found that a restricted jail enhancement fund was improperly used to pay for out-of-state training, a staff party at a local amusement park, and a $456,000 bus, which was purchased by Arpaio in violation of county procurement rules.[78][82]

[edit] Munnell Memo

In September, 2010, a 63 page internal memo, written by Maricopa Deputy Chief Frank Munnell, was made public. The memo alleged years of misconduct and mismanagement by Arpaio's second in command and other top MCSO officers, including the use of a public-corruption task force to conduct politically motivated probes into political opponents. The memo alleged that top officials in the MCSO "willfully and intentionally committed criminal acts by attempting to obstruct justice, tamper with witnesses, and destroy evidence."[83] Arpaio forwarded the memo to the Pinal County Sheriff's Office, requesting they conduct an administrative investigation. Former top MCSO staffers have claimed that Arpaio knew of the acts alleged in the Munnell memo, but took no action to stop them.[84] Arpaio has not commented publicly on the allegations.

In October 2010, the US Attorney for Arizona confirmed that the FBI and Department of Justice have received copies of the Munnell memo, and are conducting criminal investigations into its allegations.[85]

AustonT wrote:I've never got the impression he was racist. But I Hae the audacity to think profiling is an effective law enforcement tool. He claims 1/4 of total US deportations last year. Fun fact his numbers are up sharply, Obama has deported more people in his three years than Bush did in eight.
DHS also cut his 287G program which verifies immigration status...you know doing DHS and specifically ICEs job. Which our county seems to be doing singlehandedly already. This is probably going to turn into a political goat rope.

ShumaGorath wrote:Is there a point at which the spam rules are actually enforced? Or do they only apply to me and Dogma these days?

Frazzled wrote:

Jihadin wrote:Okay

Mention age bracket anywhere?
Actually the type of vehicles being pulled over?
What I'm aiming out I'm betting are half the stops are "Fast and Furious" vehicles
Kind of wish they were more indepth with it

Maricopa County is also a primary route for drug and human trafficing.

KingCracker wrote:
Well that would certainly make sense. I hear this same thing out where I live, because Flint isnt very far away, so our news always covers the crap that goes on in that city. And they always cry its a racial thing when the police pull them over as well in Flint. Worst part is, its usually black males in their lower 20s in cflashy cars with big rims. Why? Because most of the drug dealers out in that area, drive those same cars. Racial profiling? I dont think so personally, I think its more along the lines of, if you want to look like your a gang banger/drug dealer, then be prepared to be looked at like your one.

Seaward wrote:

KingCracker wrote:
Well that would certainly make sense. I hear this same thing out where I live, because Flint isnt very far away, so our news always covers the crap that goes on in that city. And they always cry its a racial thing when the police pull them over as well in Flint. Worst part is, its usually black males in their lower 20s in cflashy cars with big rims. Why? Because most of the drug dealers out in that area, drive those same cars. Racial profiling? I dont think so personally, I think its more along the lines of, if you want to look like your a gang banger/drug dealer, then be prepared to be looked at like your one.

The outward appearance of your car rarely constitutes probable cause.

KingCracker wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Jihadin wrote:Okay

Mention age bracket anywhere?
Actually the type of vehicles being pulled over?
What I'm aiming out I'm betting are half the stops are "Fast and Furious" vehicles
Kind of wish they were more indepth with it

Maricopa County is also a primary route for drug and human trafficing.

Well that would certainly make sense. I hear this same thing out where I live, because Flint isnt very far away, so our news always covers the crap that goes on in that city. And they always cry its a racial thing when the police pull them over as well in Flint. Worst part is, its usually black males in their lower 20s in cflashy cars with big rims. Why? Because most of the drug dealers out in that area, drive those same cars. Racial profiling? I dont think so personally, I think its more along the lines of, if you want to look like your a gang banger/drug dealer, then be prepared to be looked at like your one.

sebster wrote: lots of words

Jihadin wrote:Ex LRG Duncan Donut with cream and sugar says he's just going to meet the standards before 4 Jan and just the standards.

Jihadin wrote:It individuals that enforce the standards not just one individual. Granted one indivdual sets the "atmosphere" on how his/her organization is to abide by the standards so its on the individuals to put everyone in check. For a "corrupt" official there's no smoking gun on him. Figure a 3 year investigation would have found something to nail him.

Also there's two faction at play here. How the gov't views him and how the locals view him. From the vote results of his reelections he's effective in their eyes. From the gov't view he's not effective unless he meets standards. Double standards in a political ring I'm guessng

There are numerous smoking guns, but misuse of power and harassment of judges and other officials isn't what this thread turned out to be about. That's unfortunate too, because the allegations are seemingly numerous, well backed, and serious but all you people want to talk about is dem furriners that he's taking a hard stance on and not the laws and ethics he's breaking to protect himself.

Jihadin wrote:From the vote results of his reelections he's effective in their eyes. From the gov't view he's not effective unless he meets standards. Double standards in a political ring I'm guessng

Jihadin wrote:

There are numerous smoking guns, but misuse of power and harassment of judges and other officials isn't what this thread turned out to be about. That's unfortunate too, because the allegations are seemingly numerous, well backed, and serious but all you people want to talk about is dem furriners that he's taking a hard stance on and not the laws and ethics he's breaking to protect himself.

With a smoking gun then wouldn't he be like in jail? Fired? Removed from office? Allegations to me so far.

ShumaGorath wrote:

There are numerous smoking guns, but misuse of power and harassment of judges and other officials isn't what this thread turned out to be about. That's unfortunate too, because the allegations are seemingly numerous, well backed, and serious but all you people want to talk about is dem furriners that he's taking a hard stance on and not the laws and ethics he's breaking to protect himself.

Paul Babeu wrote:I have little faith and trust in the U.S. Department of Justice after the actions, subsequent cover up and failure to accept responsibility regarding Operation Fast and Furious. The fact they chose today to release their findings was only done to take the attention away from themselves. Today marks the one year anniversary since the murder of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry... The timing of the release of the MCSO investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice was only done today in an attempt to take away the negative attention from their responsibilities for Brian's murder and the murders of hundreds of people in Mexico.

Jihadin wrote:How in fact is he corrupt.

KingCracker wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Jihadin wrote:Okay

Mention age bracket anywhere?
Actually the type of vehicles being pulled over?
What I'm aiming out I'm betting are half the stops are "Fast and Furious" vehicles
Kind of wish they were more indepth with it

Maricopa County is also a primary route for drug and human trafficing.

Well that would certainly make sense. I hear this same thing out where I live, because Flint isnt very far away, so our news always covers the crap that goes on in that city. And they always cry its a racial thing when the police pull them over as well in Flint. Worst part is, its usually black males in their lower 20s in cflashy cars with big rims. Why? Because most of the drug dealers out in that area, drive those same cars. Racial profiling? I dont think so personally, I think its more along the lines of, if you want to look like your a gang banger/drug dealer, then be prepared to be looked at like your one.

Jihadin wrote:So the senators that have allegations of insider trading against them are not corrupt?

Jihadin wrote:But still in the job. You think he be in jail by now wouldn't you?

“President Obama and the band of his merry men might as well erect their own pink neon sign at the Arizona-Mexico border saying ‘Welcome all illegals to your United States’, our home is your home,” the Maricopa County sheriff stated.

He also vowed that he will never resign, and that there were some instances where his staff did not comply with federal regulations.

The U.S. Justice Department has given Mr. Arpaio 60 days to implement changes to his enforcement practices of the Arizona illegal immigration law, or the MCSO will risk losing federal funding.

Jihadin wrote:You assuming I'm ignoring the convictions against him? [/my corrections/emphasis]

Jihadin wrote:I went through the drawdown of the military under the Clnton Admin. Why would I defend him. He deployed the military 20 plus times while cutting our throat. Besides the only thing I have an personnal issue with Clinton is Lewinski. He should have tried to topped JFK in that arena

Nixon no clue since he's like beyond my time line

Wo wo wo now. How the do you top Marilyn Monroe?

Jihadin wrote:Living condition of his camps are golden compare to some of the places I've been to. I feel no remorse for them.

CptJake wrote:I'm having trouble seeing how anyone arrested and being detained pending trial deserves better than other prisoners...

Melissia wrote:

CptJake wrote:I'm having trouble seeing how anyone arrested and being detained pending trial deserves better than other prisoners...

Because you are not yet proven guilty before the eyes of the law.

CptJake wrote:And? What part of my post is inaccurate?

CptJake wrote:So, do you think pretrial confinement is inherently wrong?

CptJake wrote:So, do you think pretrial confinement is inherently wrong?

ShumaGorath wrote:

Jihadin wrote:But still in the job. You think he be in jail by now wouldn't you?

If justice worked that way sarah palin would be in a jail cell, not commanding hundred thousand dollar speaking fees. Cheney would probably get the firing squad (he might even shoot himself this time!)


Conservatives don't care if you break laws, violate human rights, and are generally a scumbag. They care that you're "Doing something" which they "want done". Mexicans are apparently scary and rich old white people don't have much to fear from corrupt police so they support the guy. Constitution be damned these days it seems.

CptJake wrote:I'm not, I'm trying to figure out your position.

We seem to have agreed that folks in pretrial confinement are going to spend that confienment in the available jail.

You seem to think since they are not yet convicted that is wrong, if I am understanding you.

So, do you think pretrial confinement is inherently wrong?

If not, and you don't think the guy should be in jail, what is your solution?

Melissia wrote:

Jihadin wrote:Living condition of his camps are golden compare to some of the places I've been to. I feel no remorse for them.

This might surprise you, but not everyone who is arrested is guilty.

Why should someone be forced to suffer illegally and unnecessarily because of a piece of gak disguised as a human being?

(No, I don't care about your experiences in the military in regards to this topic; it is irrelevant, you chose to join the military, you weren't forced to, unlike someone who is under arrest an therefor forced to endure the conditions of cells regardless of guilt or innocence)

ShumaGorath wrote:

Jihadin wrote:But still in the job. You think he be in jail by now wouldn't you?

If justice worked that way sarah palin would be in a jail cell, not commanding hundred thousand dollar speaking fees. Cheney would probably get the firing squad (he might even shoot himself this time!)


Conservatives don't care if you break laws, violate human rights, and are generally a scumbag. They care that you're "Doing something" which they "want done". Mexicans are apparently scary and rich old white people don't have much to fear from corrupt police so they support the guy. Constitution be damned these days it seems.

Melissia wrote:

CptJake wrote:So, do you think pretrial confinement is inherently wrong?

Did I say it was? Hint: I didn't.

I don't even understand where you get such an assumption from. No, I stated that noone should be unnecessarily punished until they are guilty. Holding them in a cell is fine, if the judge believes that is necessary to ensure the trial will go forth.

Stuffing them into cells with convicted felons like sardines, denying them care for medical and mental health issues, housing them in cells so hot they risk dying, giving them rotting and contaminated food, or beating them senseless, as Arpaio does, is not.

That you seem to believe that the only two solutions are torture or no pretrial confinement at all is disturbing.

CptJake wrote:Be undisturbed. Your perception of what I believeis not all that accurate (no surprise there though). But if you enjoy beating that straw man, have at it.

AustonT wrote:This might suprise you but Tent City is only for convicts, detention without conviction is in regular jails.

Jihadin wrote:

Wo wo wo now. How the do you top Marilyn Monroe?

The fact he didn't even try to top Marilyn Monroe. Besides why impeach him on a adultry charge? Didn't think a brand of cigars was ultra secret or something

Melissia wrote:

AustonT wrote:This might suprise you but Tent City is only for convicts, detention without conviction is in regular jails.

Not from what I read.

Even if it was, Arpaio is still scum.

housing sentenced inmates in the tents seemed a good solution.

Rented Tritium wrote:If he's keeping people in tent cities pre-trial, he may be crossing the line as far as conditions for pre-trial incarceration.

It seems like there's some disagreement about if that's happening or not? It really sounds like he is though because a sheriff will only be holding convicts who broke county and city ordinances and there can't be that many of those.

AustonT wrote:If tents are good enough for the troops, they are good enough for convicts.

Melissia wrote:

AustonT wrote:If tents are good enough for the troops, they are good enough for convicts.

That argument is so mind-bogglingly inane that I cannot think of a single polite way to respond to it.

AustonT wrote:Oh please make a case for why people who willfully break the law, and then are either convicted by a jury of thier peers or plea bargain are entitled to better treatment than soldiers. I would love to see this line of argument.

Melissia wrote:

AustonT wrote:Oh please make a case for why people who willfully break the law, and then are either convicted by a jury of thier peers or plea bargain are entitled to better treatment than soldiers. I would love to see this line of argument.

1: Not everyone who is in jail "willfully broke the law", so your question is stupid before I even attempt to answer it.

2: The soldier can walk away from that life at any time. That they don't is great-- but a prisoner cannot do the same, they're stuck there whether against their will or not, and it is the state's job to provide for them because the state put them there-- regardless of your (false) assumption of choice.

2: The soldier can walk away from that life at any time. That they don't is great-- but a prisoner cannot do the same, they're stuck there whether against their will or not, and it is the state's job to provide for them because the state put them there-- regardless of your (false) assumption of choice.

If, because of the incompetence, negligence, or malice of the state in forcing a prisoner to endure life-threatening conditions, the prisoner dies, then the state is at fault and deserves a harsh penalty indeed. If it were any country other than America, you'd probably call it torture, but apparently because a conservative did it it's okay.

Jihadin wrote:What life threatening conditions? If its the 110 degree and the facility doesn't provide water then yes by all means string up the authority

Melissia wrote:

Jihadin wrote:What life threatening conditions? If its the 110 degree and the facility doesn't provide water then yes by all means string up the authority

Think Arizona summers, but with no access to air conditioning, sinks, liquid foods, etc. He also denied them medical care, including ongoing medications for both physical and mental ailments.

AustonT wrote:Oh please make a case for why people who willfully break the law,

AustonT wrote:either convicted by a jury of thier peers or plea bargain

AustonT wrote:Oh please make a case for why people who willfully break the law, and then are either convicted by a jury of thier peers or plea bargain are entitled to better treatment than soldiers.

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:

AustonT wrote:Oh please make a case for why people who willfully break the law,

Wow. You really think everyone arrested "willfully broke the law" huh? Ever heard of a not guilty verdict?

AustonT wrote:either convicted by a jury of thier peers or plea bargain

Oh, I guess not. Nevermind.

Think Arizona summers, but with no access to air conditioning, sinks, liquid foods, etc. He also denied them medical care, including ongoing medications for both physical and mental ailments.

AustonT wrote:I'm surprised someone who lives in Austrailia has such a verbose opinion of a county sheriff in Arizona. That said, a lot of what you wrote is spot on. He's misappropriated funds, threatened local politicians, and three of his senior deputies has been dismissed or quit due to corruption charges. In the town where my wife's family and we live in they failed to investigate over 400 sex crimes in the period where the PD was closed. So I can see the "Wall of distrust" argument, as this is primarily a spainish speaking community.

Sheriff Joe lives off his anti illegal immigration stance, and when the protests of SB 1070 (our illegal immigration legislation) were outside the 4th avenue jail were waving Mexican flags, I have trouble not seeing his point. It's not like were being overrun by French Canadians. So I have little doubt that Latinos feel targeted. If they are legal immigrants or citizens and they had their rights violated then I want Sheriff Joe taken to the cleaners, if not I want the illegals out. /shrug. I wish Paul Babeu was our Sheriff but he won't run against Joe.

Jihadin wrote:It individuals that enforce the standards not just one individual. Granted one indivdual sets the "atmosphere" on how his/her organization is to abide by the standards so its on the individuals to put everyone in check. For a "corrupt" official there's no smoking gun on him. Figure a 3 year investigation would have found something to nail him.

Jihadin wrote:But still in the job. You think he be in jail by now wouldn't you?

dogma wrote:That being said, in areas where either the perception of crime, or crime itself, are relatively high it isn't unusual to see voters adopt a preference for politicians that are "tough on crime". regardless of whether or not those measures are effective. In essence, people generally prefer feeling good about what their elected officials say to electing officials that produce consistently positive results.

PHOENIX—Dozens of Sheriff Joe Arpaio's jail officers lined up at a news conference in Phoenix Wednesday to ceremoniously hand in their federal credentials a week after they were stripped of the ability to verify the immigration status of inmates.





Arpaio spoke at the same news conference, saying he's going to hold the federal government to its promise to send 50 federal agents to do such screening in his jail. But he predicted there will be illegal immigrants in jail who won't be deported and will be put back on streets.


"I want to see how many agents are going to be coming to our jail," the sheriff said. "I want to see how long it will take for 50 agents from across the country to work in our jails."


The Department of Homeland Security announced Dec. 15 that more than 90 of Arpaio's Maricopa County jail officers could no longer check whether inmates were in the county illegally.


The decision followed the release of a scathing Department of Justice report that said Arpaio's office has a pattern of racially profiling Latinos, basing immigration enforcement on racially charged citizen complaints and punishing Hispanic jail inmates for speaking Spanish. The sheriff has denied the allegations.


Homeland Security officials had no immediate comment on Arpaio's comments on Wednesday, but later pointed to a Dec. 21 letter that Immigration and Customs Enforcement sent to a county official, saying federal agents will staff the county's jails on a 24-hour, seven-day-a-week basis and that immigrants who pose public safety threats will be taken into federal custody and won't be released, Morton said in the letter.


On Monday, the agency said in a letter to U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl that it would send immigration agents to screen jail inmates in Arizona's most populous county. Arpaio's aides say only one Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer has worked at the county jails since last week.


Homeland Security's decision wasn't the first time Arpaio's federal immigration powers were cut.


In October 2009, Immigration and Customs Enforcement stripped Arpaio of his power to let 100 deputies make federal immigration arrests, but still allowed his jail officers to determine the immigration status of people in jail.

AustonT wrote:Melissa's mixed messages hurt my head.