Racist Daisy-Chain

The Bird wasn't the only one scratching its head feathers at that one.

"It is not clear what documents are referred to as 'documents that should have been part of the Clerk's file,'" wrote Baca in response to Wells' elusive verbiage. "The court now clarifies its prior order and directs the MCAO to supplement its . . . report to the court."

Fred Harper

Bosom buddies: J.T. Ready (left) and Russell Pearce at an anti-immigrant fest in June. Photo from the Web site of the racist White Knights of America.

Related Content

• Russell Pearce -- Infamous Already for Assaulting Arizona's Economy -- and His Bigoted Ban Amnesty Now Attack Local Businesses With Boycott
  March 29, 2012
• Joe Arpaio's "Birther" Friends Quiz Arizona Politicos on Obama Eligibility, Nobody Cares
  April 11, 2012
• SB 1070: Why Obama Is Partly to Blame for the Racist Bill
  May 3, 2012
• Russell Pearce's Ban Amnesty Now Announces Boycott of New Times
  March 27, 2012
• Russell Pearce Just Like Raul Grijalva Says Pearce Opponent Bob Worsley
  April 10, 2012

More About

• Russell Pearce
• Joe Arpaio
• Dennis Wilenchik
• Hate and Extremist Groups
• U.S. Republican Party Politics

Like this Story?

Sign up for the Weekly Newsletter: Our weekly feature stories, movie reviews, calendar picks and more - minus the newsprint and sent directly to your inbox.

Privacy Policy Cancel Continue

By the time this column hits the boulevards, the MCAO will have made its supplemental report. But why would anyone have, er, misplaced the original subpoenas? Copies of the subpoenas are attached to other docs in the court file, and the infamous, overly broad subpoena against New Times and its readers was published by The Bird's bosses Mike Lacey and Jim Larkin in their cover story "Breathtaking Abuse of the Constitution" (October 18). You know, the one that got Sheriff Joe's Selective Enforcement Unit slapping the cuffs on the duo in the middle of the night.

Lacey wrote in his November 1 column, "He Just Doesn't Get It," that Wilenchik "anointed himself the grand jury," instead of facilitating the grand jury. The special prosecutor was required by law "to report to the grand jury foreman and the presiding judge the existence of a subpoena within 10 days of issuing it." Wilenchik didn't do that.

Could the subpoenas be missing because they might offer proof that Wilenchik did not play by the rules?

This songbird doesn't want to cast aspersions. Maybe it's just a lil' legal mix-up. After all, law offices, including esquire Wilenchik's and the MCAO's, must be choked with paperwork.

Plus, can you imagine, in your wildest dreams, either Dennis Wilencheckbook (who's raked in $2 million in county funds and counting) or the CA's Office being less than 100 percent honest? Perish the thought, Portnoy!