Indeed, Farnsworth never wanted to go before a judge "with egg on my face," he said. As a devout member of the Mormon Church, he regularly advised his clients that it was better to work things out in counseling rather than have the marriage go asunder.

Farnsworth had little to gain and everything to lose had it been his inclination to include an untrue statement. One glance at the Pearce petition, and the knowledge that Russ was but a lowly sheriff's deputy back then, quickly informs that there was no big money at stake. Why would a lawyer risk his practice for a routine divorce filing?

Mrs. Pearce's statement is too specific and does not suggest having been invented by someone else. It bears repeating here:

"Further, the husband, RUSSELL KEITH PEARCE, is possessed of a violent temper, and has from time to time hit and shoved the wife, the last time being on February 3 [1980], when he grabbed the wife by the throat and threw her down."

Did Mrs. Pearce commit perjury when she made this accusation? Or is she now simply trying to protect her husband? The latter would be understandable.

"I never filed a petition, ever, where I didn't sit down with a client," explained Farnsworth, "go through the petition, and make sure that they understood they were signing it under oath, on pains of perjury, and that everything contained in the petition was what they told me and was true."

If Roberts and the rest are unconcerned with Pearce's temper in 1980 and what it might say about the man now, they might at least show some curiosity about the judge Pearce is badmouthing left and right.

Finally, The Bird has also acquired from the Mesa Police Department an incident report from 1974 detailing how Russell Pearce busted down a door to get to his then-estranged first wife (not LuAnne, who is his second wife). According to the apartment manager where the deed allegedly went down, Pearce was trying to catch his wife with another man. Pearce accused his first wife of plying an underage lover with beer.

"[His first wife] said she went to bed and went to sleep," states the report. "She said that she heard a noise, got up, and went into the living room. At this point, Russell came crashing through the front door."

Does something that happened so long ago matter? Well, in the opinion of this avian, yes, because it tends to back up LuAnne's 1980 contention that her husband was "possessed of a violent temper." And since this is a police report, there's no attorney on whom to lay the blame.

« Previous Page
 |
 
1
 
2
 
3
 
All
 
My Voice Nation Help
7 comments
JT Ready
JT Ready

Does it strike anyone else as strange that Zionists and La Raza scum are never labeled as "racist supremacists" or "hate" groups? It is only a crime if you are White these days. By the way, no Sun Wheel ("swastika" for you ignorant types) was lit at the Omaha rally in front of the Mexican consulate. There are many inaccuracies in many statements made by these three blind mice. I cringe to think of these congressmen in charge of any intelligence of a national security level. Furthermore, it seems that those who trumpet free speech, freedom of the press, the right to assemble, and democracy the most, are the first and most viciously vocal to oppose those very same principles when someone whom they disagree with exercises those same exact rights. These tyrants can not battle my ideals with better ideas. So they use bully tactics to try to harm me. But this just helps to prove my point that I am right. So, thanks for the endorsement Franks, Shadegg and Flake.

Emil Pulsifer
Emil Pulsifer

Evidently Steve Saulka can't read. The article succeeded in pointing out that Pearce has a record of snuggling up to neo-Nazis and of domestic abuse.

Pearce also has a strange record of "accidents".

He "accidentally" emailed copies of neo-Nazi literature, claiming that he had only read the first few pages and didn't see the anti-Semitic content of the rest. (The fact that he read several pages of a neo-Nazi screed and LIKED WHAT HE SAW enough to forward hundreds of copies to others, speaks for itself.)

He "accidentally" broke and entered the apartment of his sleeping, estranged wife. Fortunately for Pearce he was a Sheriff's Deputy at the time and had the foresight to get the apartment manager to unlock everything but the chain-bolt.

According to a March 3, 2001 article in the Arizona Republic, "Lawmaker In Dispute Over Back Pay Claim", Pearce "accidentally" filed a claim for back pay at the Department of Transportation. That is to say, he filed the claim, for $37,000 of back pay, covering every hour he had been employed, including time spent on vacation; then, after the Arizona Attorney General contested it, saying that Pearce didn't qualify, Pearce dropped the claim, saying, "They just sent me a form and I filled it out" and "If I had realized what I was filing for I never would have filed it".

According to the same article, Pearce was fired from his job as director of the Motor Vehicle Division "in 1999 after subordinates, reportedly as a political favor, changed the driving record of a Tucson woman who was charged with driving under the influence twice within 10 months. And Pearce 's son, who also worked at the Motor Vehicle Division, was prosecuted in the production of falsified IDs for his friends."

No word on whether THAT was an accident too.

Pearce also has a long record of "no" votes on legislation designed to protected domestic abuse victims. In one case he was the only "no vote" on a piece of legislation that had to be passed in order for Arizona to be in compliance with federal law.

The same Arizona Republic article mentions that Pearce proposed a measure which would have required Child Protective Service caseworkers to report clients suspected of being in the country illegally to federal immigration authorities. Incredible.

What difference does it make whether Nathan Sproul has ulterior motives? Pearce, as far as I'm concerned, is a nasty piece of work and should be voted out of office. Thank goodness somebody has the spine to work to that end, regardless of their motive in doing so.

Steve  Saulka
Steve Saulka

Your blitz against Pierce would perhaps find more sympathybut for the reason behind your tirade. Whatever Pierce's outlook, your screed succeeded only in pointing out:

- that Pierce supports the economically vital need for a nation to control its borders (Mexico certainly does), and;

- you do not.anti

Emil Pulsifer
Emil Pulsifer

Reading over some of the comments here, the question which Republican leaders should be asking themselves is whether Russell Pearce and his allies will grow more, or less, insufferable as they consolidate their political power. Will they increasingly dictate the terms of debate, while targeting their political enemies one by one for retribution as opportunity arises? Because in a clash of political principles and philosophy with fanatics, one side or the other must end up being marginalized.

Not to stretch the, ahem, Munich Analogy beyond its breaking point, but is a policy of appeasement the best way to deal with a bully? Or would they prefer to end up, like some victims of domestic violence, passively hoping it will all get better if they "don't make him angry"?

Native Arizonan since 1956
Native Arizonan since 1956

Hey Lynch,There are a lot more of us that are AOK with Arizona being a mix of white, black, red, brown, Democrat, non-Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Wiccan, whatever. If you can't live with that, there's a compound up in Idaho that will roll out the welcome mat for you.

Lynch M All
Lynch M All

Maybe the reason these people are welcomed in this state and keep getting support from the populace is because most of us in Arizona are of like mind. That is we are tired of these illegal criminal Mexicans dragging their filthy, disease ridden asses into our state, commiting crimes, straining our healthcare and school systems, driving drunk and uninsured, and in general turning it into a third world hellhole like the one they just came from albeit with welfare banefits. I support these groups thaat operate above the radar to keep these animals in their own country and I support the efforts of groups that operate underground and commit violence and street-justice towards them. They are the ones that are really doing something about the problem.

If you are so fucking liberal maybe you sgould move to California and be Nancy Pelosi's boy-toy or Taxechusetts and change Ted Kennedy's diapers, although there would be nothing to muckrake about in those places and stirring things up is how you have made your name. There are still a hell of a lot of us that want to keep Arizona straight, White, Christian, gun-owning and Republican.

Emil Pulsifer
Emil Pulsifer

Bravo, Mr. Lemons, for this lucid exposition and for another journalistic scoop. It will be interesting, now that you've established a pattern of behavior, to see whether the media establishment will finally condemn the Iago of East Mesa or rush to his aid yet again. According to the evidence so far gathered by you, which no one has been able to convincingly gainsay, Pearce was a wifebeater and possessed of a violent jealousy. And those are merely two known instances. Meanwhile, he's done everything in his professional power as a politician to obstruct a series of legislative bills proposed to protect women from abuse.

Frankly, I've been scratching my head in bafflement watching the rush to defend Russell Pearce against Nathan Sproul's clever, well-designed, and -- here's the damning part -- undeniably true public service flyers. The fact that Mrs. Pearce has since recanted her own sworn testimony should surprise no one familiar with domestic abuse cases. For all we know, she may have endured countless episodes of similar abuse in the decades since. (She may also have been influenced by the Mormon doctrine of obedience to her husband and an old-fashioned abhorrence of admitting scandalous events to outsiders, much less the general public through the mass media.)

The fact that Mr. Sproul may have ulterior motives -- scarcely an earth-shaking revelation in the realm of politics -- does not in any way detract from his arguments. Pearce is unquestionably an asp in the bosom of the Arizona Republican Party, and faced with such a threat one does not attempt to cajole the serpent out the door: one chops its head off.

One would imagine that even the usual media dotards would grasp the applicability of the term "loose-cannon" when applied to Pearce, a politician who has previously referred to party big-wigs like Kyl and McCain as "traitors" for their refusal to blindly support his rabid and obsessed positions on immigration.

The reaction of the establishment media (one is tempted to refer to them as The Usual Suspects) is reminiscent of the response of Henry L. Stimson, Secretary of State to Herbert Hoover, who shut down MI-8, the State Department's cryptographic office, in 1929, with the quip "Gentlemen don't read each other's mail". Apparently they don't send it, either.

 
Phoenix Concert Tickets
Loading...