By Ray Stern
By Ray Stern
By New Times
By Amy Silverman
By Stephen Lemons
By Stephen Lemons
By Monica Alonzo
By Chris Parker
See, reporter John Dickerson's cover story "Inhumanity Has a Price" (December 20), part of New Times' "Target Practice" series, called Sheriff Joe Arpaio out as the most-sued Sheriff in the United States, costing county taxpayers a whoppin' $41.4 million in lawsuit-related money because of the inhumane conditions in his jails and the numerous in-custody deaths occurring in them.
Even if you don't give a hummingbird's heinie about how prisoners are treated in Joe's gulags, you should at least care that such cases vacuum moolah out of your wallet. Well, unless you're a complete Arpaio-suckup. You know, like the faux-journos at KPNX Channel 12.
These fourth-estate nimrods did a short news segment on Dickerson's cover story, asking MCSO flack Paul Chagolla for a comment. Chagolla, or "Chicken Little" as he's known at MCSO HQ, spewed a non-denial denial.
"Most of what the New Times says are lies and innuendos," squawked Chagolla. "We won't dignify this with a response."
If Channel 12's fourth-estaters had bothered to check it out for themselves, they could've easily found that all the numeral facts came from federal court dockets and from Maricopa County Risk Manager Peter Crowley.
In response to a query from New Times, Crowley sent records covering payouts during Joe's tenure.
"For the period January 1, 1993, to [November 29, 2007], the county has paid $30,039,928.75 on Sheriff Department General Liability claims," state the docs. "This figure includes all payments, attorney fees, other litigation expenses, settlements, payments on verdicts, etc."
Additionally, New Times asked Crowley how much the lawsuit insurance policy that also covers the sheriff has cost taxpayers. Crowley croaked, "The county has paid for General Liability coverage for the period 3-1-95 to 3-1-08 total premiums of $11,345,609.50."
Keep in mind that this liability coverage figure is high, in part, because of all those lawsuit payoffs to relatives of dead inmates.
From 1995 to 1998, the county paid $328,894 a year for an insurance policy with a $1 million deductible.
Today, Maricopa County pays a yearly premium of $1.2 million for outside insurance with a $5 million deductible. For any lawsuit that costs $5 million or less, the county foots the entire bill. It's the best policy the county can buy because of Arpaio's terrible track record.
This truculent tweeter knows adding is, like, real hard for the county's top law dawg and his goons, but even a freakin' fourth-grader can punch $30.04 into a calculator, press the plus sign and add $11.35 to get the figure of $41.39 million, then round that out to $41.4.
The Bird's beginning to understand why the Sheriff's Office is waist-deep in its own sea of red ink. The MCSO doesn't have a calculator! All the time they've been tryin' to do their maths like Jethro Bodine in The Beverly Hillbillies. You know, with their fingers and toes. Once you get into them millions, with all them "aughts," you start to run outta protuberances.
The week Dickerson's story ran, this feathered fiend caught up with the county's numerically challenged top cop near M.D. Pruitt's Home Furnishings, where he was holding court among a gaggle of dentally challenged nativists. The Bird hollered at Joe, asking him, "Hey, when are we taxpayers getting our $41 million back?"
Joe first derided our accounting skills, telling us math wasn't our strong suit, then claimed, "That was because of CHS, not me," CHS being Correctional Health Services, the county entity that provides healthcare to inmates.
Bzzzzzt. Wrong again, Grecian Formula head!
The lawsuit figure does not include CHS. Perhaps Joe forgot to take his Alzheimer's medicine that day. Or could it be that he really doesn't know how much he's cost taxpayers? Come to think of it, Chief Deputy David "Jabba the Hutt" Hendershott — the guy who really runs the MCSO — likely doesn't bother ol' Joe with such nigglin' details.
Now on to the figure mentioned in the Dickerson piece of 2,150 "prison condition" lawsuits since 2004. Anyone with two licks of sense can go online at pacer.psc.uscourts.gov, or dockets.justia.com, enter "Arpaio" into the federal court docket, then count the lawsuits that name "prison conditions" as the cause. Count back to 2004, and as of mid-December, that number was more than 2,150.
The same search for the top jail custodians in L.A., New York, Chicago, and Houston nets a total of only 43 "prison condition" lawsuits.
Remember, those 2,150 lawsuits against Arpaio are only in federal court. There are hundreds more listed online with the Maricopa County Superior Court, at superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/docket/civilcourtcases/.
This heron can only hope that if no one at the MCSO can do the math, maybe the voters can. Meanwhile, The Bird will be counting the days until the general election for sheriff.
PEARCE THE PUNK
This dastardly dodo was right disappointed to read in the East Valley Tribune that racist Republican state Representative Russell Pearce punked out of a possible throwdown with Congressman Jeff Flake this year in the AZ CD-6 Republican primary. Why disappointed? Because the Taloned One was looking forward to watching the Paleolithic Pearce get his ass handed to him on a platter.
Ok, I understand.
I was just being contrary for the sake of being contrary. But unlike debate club, peoples lives are actually being affected by these discussions and the people they influence.
Thanks for explaining it to me.
"Lemmons quotes the 14th amendment that all "persons" born on American soil are citizens, but he forgots to mention the phrase "and subject to the juridisdiction thereof", and forgot to mention that the original meaning and intent of the law was to make the children of former slaves citizens, not to enable a mass ethnic invasion of our country by another in the form of anchor babies."
Weather the law was intended for slaves at that time you will not find anywhere in the sections of the law refer it as "for slaves" it doesn't even have the word slave anywhere because it was ALSO created to prevent from denying citizenship to anybody in the future not just slaves but Jewish, Mormons, etc. nowhere in the section it mentions to whom it specifically applies so therefore until the 14th Amendment is change to specify and say that it doesn't apply to anybody who's parents are illegal, until then anybody who is born in U.S. Soil is protected under the great 14th Amendment!, here's the Section 1 of the 14th amendment.
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Lemons states that illegals "cross our borders to pick our vegetables, clean out hotels and cook our food".
Can Lemmons document what percentage of illegals actually work in any of those three occupations?
In addition, how many vegetables are there to be picked in the Phoenix Metro Area, where the vast majority of illegals appear to live?
Also, how about the gangbangers, drug cartels, coyotes and fecund women... are they just here to perform menial labor, or are their demands for welfare, medical, benefits, housing, eduction, voting rights and citizenship just a ruse to distract us from their attempt to corner the menial labor market?
If so, why has the hispanic crime rate gone up consistently with the influx of illegals?
Also, if illegals are just here to perform menial labor, then whey do they need in state tuition at our colleges and universities?
What menial job requires a college degree?
Lemmons quotes the 14th amendment that all "persons" born on American soil are citizens, but he forgots to mention the phrase "and subject to the juridisdiction thereof", and forgot to mention that the original meaning and intent of the law was to make the children of former slaves citizens, not to enable a mass ethnic invasion of our country by another in the form of anchor babies.
Such an abuse of the law is clearly a subversion of it's original meaning and intent, so Lemmons argument is suspect at best.
Lemmons questions Pearces association with Ready and pro-white groups, but is Lemmons also ready to question Barack Obamas affiliation with pro-black groups?
Then when Ready offers the plausible explanation that it was Ready who was following him [Pearce] around at the anti-immigration event, Lemmons ignores this plausible explanation and resorts to an ad-hominem attacks of calling Pearce a "crybaby", as well as a "punk".
Is that what passes for respectable "journalism" in the offices of the New Times?
If so, it's no wonder that the vast majority of Maricopa County residents don't take the New Times political opinions seriously, and continue to vote for Sheriff Arpaio, Andrew Thomas, Russell Pearce, and anti-illegal alien legislation... because the Lemmons and the New Times opposition to these officials on this issue is absolutely substanceless.
Does Nickel Bag Joe really use Grecian Formula? If so that might explain why he acts like such a buffoon. That stuff is full of nasty lead and was pulled off of store shelves in Europe.
If he has been plastering that smelly stuff on his head for the last decade he could be suffering from lead poisoning which would make him act like a 'tard.