-
Former Republican 09/01/2009 9:39:00 PM
What a bunch of criminals and these are the same officers who destroy other peoples' lives in heartbeat on a daily basis. We need a recall of the MCAO, MCSO and MCBOS, clean house and start over if Arizona is to selvage itself.
-
Former Republican 2 08/01/2009 2:44:00 PM
An obvious omission in all this is, why isn't County Attorney Thomas showing his face on his usual 24/7 grandstanding? His absence on TV on this matter is sending red flags. Why so silent? This whole thing is disgraceful.
-
Tina 07/31/2009 8:42:00 PM
After reading the article, I just skimmed through the comments here. In light of the now public disclosure, the names (and dollar amts) of those who contributed to the SCA fund which was then "donated" to the Republican party, here's one from Joel Fox (apparently addressed to writer Fenske) that makes no sense or is doublespeak.
"I never told you that David Hendershott was not an SCA donor. I told you the donations that went to the Republican Party did not come from him or Sheriff Arpaio."
-
FormerRepublican 07/31/2009 5:11:00 PM
Joel - you've again amused us all with your double talk. In your latest blog entry, you said "You throw words around with no regard whatsoever where they land or what damage might result, and words like "liar" and "scandal" are no exceptions..."
That is exactly what your department does. Check out your own facts. They have accused publicly many innocent people. Is it okay for your department to publicly harm the reputations of dozens of people while you complain about your reputation?
Pathetic.
-
Joel Fox 07/31/2009 6:00:00 AM
Ray,
You throw words around with no regard whatsoever where they land or what damage might result, and words like "liar" and "scandal" are no exceptions.
You've given up any sense of journalistic integrity you ever had to keep a job at the New Times. If it was the New York Times, I might understand better...but the New Times? Perhaps you can see why your opinion means nothing to me, nor anyone else, for that matter.
Nonetheless, you still go on about a scandal, yet cannot even allege a crime. You are just doing what has been going on all along...digging to satisfy curiosity. I've explained to you repeatedly what SCA means, and about my conversation with Pullen, and simply because you choose not to believe my answer, you just keep writing new posts that suggest I'm avoiding the questions.
OK, Ray...you win. You get paid to spend all day writing whatever you want with no regard to the truth, and I simply don't have the time, energy or inclination to continually respond to the same questions.
-
david saint 07/29/2009 10:44:00 PM
Joel you just dont learn do you.
From what i read from one comment of yours, you admit the SCA accounts were opened with a MCSO computer? If so, id say thats a firm association with MCSO, making Allens statement out to be the usual bs she spits, and your spin of the context of that statement just more of the same.
Next you try to defend the deaths in the jails. Joel, if you are strapped to a restraint chair, and beaten, tased, and strangled to death by 14 guards wouldnt you want some justice? Rather than what actually happened, like how some have been promoted instead of jailed, and MCSO not only lost the evidence that proved murder (crushed larynx) but tried to play it off as an accident to begin wiht. That instance alone makes joes continued statements of "I uphold the law equally" complete horse shit.
To say MCSO doesnt racial profile is lunacy, considering there are documented cases of Americans with brown skin not even asked for papers or ID, just arrested and accused of being illegal. That includes a 12 year old boy pulled from his house and zip tied for hours. Trying to defend that just makes it that much worse, rather than acting like a professional LEA and addressing the problem. But no, politics comes before the law according to MCSO and joe. Which brings me to a quick question. Is it THAT hard to believe that over 100 volunteers, with no certification (IE REAL training), make procedure mistakes during these "sweeps" that can lead to these issues? If the idea is to catch illegals under 287g, why are volunteers, rather than ICE trained deputies, doing the saturation patrols? How do you determine that they didnt join the posse due to hatred of illegals, causing them to involve personal feelings while operating under MCSO's authority? LOL, becuase they say so doesnt count either. Ive seen pictures of some, and recently a video showed a likely posse member covering his license plate with a towel and driving into traffic. SO, because he did it and got away with it, shouldnt I?
As for that article that seemingly got you upset, no i wasnt using the article as fact. I was using 2 facts in particular mostly. Those were the demotion of someone who by all accounts did a superb job, for not supporting joe. While you, who helped with the election in some facet, were promoted in their place. Then, when subordinates voiced concerns over lack of training, THEY ARE INVESTIGATED? GOD forbid a cop wanting to put safety first while carrying an automatic rifle, engaging in shootouts in neighborhoods! The fact that you refused to listen to them tells me right off the bat your not a good leader. Being skilled to be on SWAT, and leading it, are 2 completely different animals, and i think as a former ranger you know this. Also, if your going to lay claim to being a former ranger, you might want to remember that oath you took to defend the Constitution, not to mention the oath you took to uphold the laws of this state and its Constitution when you became a cop. Im sure there were words like honor, duty, courage, somewhere in one of those. Just as im sure there wasnt anything about defending arpaio or MCSO employees when they break the law in it either.
Personally i think all of MCSO should be canned and start over, but it will never happen. So the best i can hope for is that some of you, who we entrust to uphold the law daily, finally come around and start working for us like your supposed to instead of joe and his version of the law.
-
Stacy 07/29/2009 7:27:00 AM
Joel,
I recommend that you come clean with bank statements. I hope that the judge or prosecutor that will have this case subpoenas the bank statements and all record pertaining to that account, including copies of deposits as well as copies of checks cashed. This ought to clear things up.
Unless you'd like to clear your reputation here on the this newspaper and turn over an authorization to release financial information to the New Times so that they can make a request of any and all records on the SCA bank account. This ought to be the same account that had the automatic payroll deposits as well as the one that is claimed to have been circulated among some of those guys in Texas, they just happen to come across this account number and by your account state that they wanted to deposit money to do as you please with it.. right? Yeah, right.
So, Joel.. Are you willing to sign over an auth to release banking information to the New Times so that they can request this info to help clear your name???
-
Coz 07/29/2009 6:27:00 AM
How knows about Ellman, he was probably lied to.
But one thing is for sure, ALL the command staff knew what was going on which is obvious by their names on the list.
>>Did Steve Ellman know what you were doing? Did you lie to him about the purpose of this "SCA" bank account? Did ANY of these donors know where the money was really going? If they didn't, why didn;t you tell them the truth?
-
EnoughisEnough 07/29/2009 5:02:00 AM
Okay Joel Fox,
One question you HAVEN'T answered but has been asked several times....
DID STEVE ELLMAN KNOW WHAGT HIS 25,000 WAS PAYING FOR?
DID ANY OF THE OTHERS?
-
Paul Revere 07/29/2009 3:32:00 AM
Well then, Mr. Fox, I'm going to have to insist you pay your retainer fee in full up front. Because if this is your "truth" . . . well like I said, pay in full up front. And here's a real news flash, Jason Rose, Candy Thomas' main election campaign man, just privately announced that we can "expect a major announcement" from Candy in the next 45 days or so . . . And here's my take - Candy is stepping down to announce his run for governor, especially in light of Brewer's wishy-washy announcement that she "might" run for the gov job she fell into. (Candy couldn't run for Guv if she announced she IS running because there's an unsaid rule in the AZ GOP that you don't step on an incumbent's toes . . .) Candy MUST step down to raise one DIME (ala lest he wants the same troubles Mr. Fox finds himself in and can't shut his mouth about) So, add that to the mix Mr. fox - you and Arpaio are about to lose your best ally in Candy (the Bof S will make sure a more astute and capable person takes over, rumors have it as Judge Keppel or maybe even recently retired Judge Sylvia Arellano) And Arpiao will lose his best and only defense - a friendly in-the-pocket shill head persecutor of Nickel Bag Joe's camp ! ! ! Keppel's a natural perfect fit for the job and is a well respected no-nonsense fair-minded jurist with actual major felony trial experience both as a prosecutor and judge - unlike Candy who's had zero felony trial experience and came from the ranks of Phoenix City Court where he was not even respected there. Back to you Mr. Fox - all I can say is the prisons are FULL of those that claim their innocence and the "truth (as they squeeze it) will set them free". Good luck sir.
-
TommyC 07/28/2009 10:38:00 PM
Juan, quite a diatribe you got yourself on. While I agree in principle with some of what you said, I think you are being unfair with the general population of the state of Arizona. What you read in the national news about the Phoenix basin area certainly is NOT indicative of the behavior of most of the state. You owe us an apology for generalizing in that regard.
You see, Juan, many of us here are working to affect change and make Arizona a better place to live. Yes, we realize we have a long way to go, but we are making strides, and with time I am expecting this to be a much better place to live and visit. I've been to Seattle a number of times and do enjoy the environment and have friends living there.
Now, I have to go out back and bring in the horses for the evening, and I have some cute sheep I am thinking about inviting in for after dinner. Hope you don't mind.
As far as our sports teams go... who knows? Did the Seahawks go to the Super Bowl last year? I guess I missed that one. :-)
-
juan 07/28/2009 9:41:00 PM
the entire nation is already aware of what's going on in arizona. your state's backward antics are hilarious and entertaining to us. I seriously read AZ news on a daily basis because it makes me laugh. I can't believe you guys are actually afraid of arpaio. He wouldn't last two minutes in any REAL city. I am a mexican and I can't imagine why any mexican would consider his life better off by moving to AZ. you might as well just stay in mexico rather than having to work for peanuts for a bunch of dirty trashy people with long dirty hair, tattoos, and pit smell. Come to Seattle. we have something called TECHNOLOGY here. let me explain that in arizona talk. it be computerz n fancy doo hickeys ya'll. we actually have green plants here and not a bunch of anal retentive police who weren't man enough to cut it in any of the civilized states. arpaio acts like AZ is some paradise that needs to be protected from the mexican invasion. your state really cannot get much worse than it already is. lets say all of the mexicans did get deported...then what would you have. you would have 50000 meth users, tweakers, police with the iq's of a 4 year old, and other miscreants. all of you would be so strung out on meth that you wouldn't be able to tend to your cactus gardens or do any of the other work that the mexicans do. "hey pa.....there ain't no more tomaters to put on mah burgers since all them mexicans been deeported." "ain't none of us smart enuff to pick them tomaters so we be hongry." that's what you'll be saying. so basically, quit treating the mexicans as unwanted guests and thank them for being the only people on earth who actually WANT to be anywhere near your trashy selves. oh yeah......the cardinals SUCK. the diamondbacks suck....arpaio is a pussy who should go sit on one of your many cactuses and then think about how the people who he is constantly demeaning have done more than he ever has. Mexicans do a lot of labor work. our contributions to this country aren't just olive gardens on every corner and bad mobster films like arpaio's people's. We actually DO stuff.
-
Coz 07/28/2009 5:40:00 PM
>>Hey Ray,
Was actually meant for Joel the Fox.
-
Coz 07/28/2009 5:39:00 PM
Hey Ray,
>>Where I come from, you don't call someone else a liar, especially when not just their reputation but their career is at stake, unless you can prove they lied. No one should bear the burden having to prove themselves innocent.
Funny how that works out totally the other way around when it�s Bozo Jokes goons investigating someone else. I know, been there and done that already. So your totally full of shit there.
>>Where I come from, you don't call someone else a liar, especially when not just their reputation but their career is at stake
What career ? I�d say your career in law enforcement is pretty much over, unless of course you continue working with the most corrupt SO in the US, which I�m sure you will continue to be more than welcomed by Fat Boy Hendershott, the Old Man and the rest of the Goons. The MCSO Goons call everyone a liar, (except themselves) all the time, so what�s the big deal�..can�t handle the same medicine your Goon buddies throw around all the time ?
>>You know Hendershott gave an insignificant amount.
Doesn�t matter the amount. The fact is he gave money and YOU lied about it.
If I stole 10.00 or 100,000.00 dollars, stealing is stealing. Oh but that�s right, same ethics and morals don�t apply to the Goons at MCSO as they do for everyone else, do they ?
Tell you one thing Joel, you sure got the spin bullshit down pat, is Spinning Bullshit 101 a required educational class for working at MCSO ?
-
TommyC 07/28/2009 5:38:00 PM
Another fine piece of reporting by Sarah Fenske. Thank you so much for your efforts.
Paul Revere, you make some very good points and Mr. Fox should listen and thank you later, but he won't do either.
He is so enamored by the complexity of the SCA thing, and trying to prove his innocense, or guilt, as may be, that he simply can't see the forest for the trees.
Yes, Sarah, he is the fall guy and it seems most of us see and understand that. Perhaps Mr. Fox will someday look back and see his mistakes, as he tries to cover his mistakes.
The public arguing with those who post here is doing Mr. Fox no good, other than perhaps as an outlet for the stress he is dealing with.
Bottom line: This is just one very small chapter in this novel called arpaio. Fox is just one very small character who will be eliminated when he is no longer able to do arpaio any further good, or at least distract media away from arpaio.
In the meanwhile, the reporting continues and more information is forthcoming, likely along with civil and criminal charges involving a good number of employees of MCSO.
I am thinking some of them must have eaten tainted corn from drop houses.
The MCSO sheriff is mentally ill. Mr. Fox chooses to believe and support a mentally ill person. I suppose that will help him in his new career.
-
Coz 07/28/2009 5:22:00 PM
Different subject, but must see. Just got this from Dennis G.
This is some raw footage Adolfo sent me of one of Arpaio's deputies or posse removing American flags from his truck and covering his license plate before he gets to the sweep. Its pretty funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYukhOn-1a4
-
Ray Stern 07/28/2009 2:58:00 PM
Joel,
In my business, you don't use the words "liar" or "lie" lightly. But I don't see any mitigating factors for you on this issue of you writing that none of the money came from Hendershott, which is why I've not minced words.
You stated in writing on the NT site that the money did not come from Hendershott, and then you showed everyone some of the money did come from Hendershott. You need to re-examine the context of your statement about Hendershott -- you specifically referred to the money collected for the SCA over two years.
I can't help but notice that Hendershott hasn't come to your defense, either. Hendershott hasn't even tried to help you bolster your claim that somehow, even though the SCA money was apparently pooled together, none of Hendershott's money made it into the $105,000 to the Republican Party.
As far as why I and others are curious about the name "SCA" -- duh! It's because "Sheriff's Command Association" has a certain ring of "assocation" to it. Haven't you claimed there is no "association" or members of the SCA? Well, then, you've had enough time to come up with something -- go ahead and explain who came up with the name and what it means.
You wrote:
"As for Pullen's understanding...I really don't know. If you actually check his testimony to accurately report what was said under oath, you'll see that he confirms that we spoke only once, on the phone. What your question does indicate, however, is that you really don't have much of an understanding of the facts in this case. In other words, there is much you do not know."
As I mentioned, I'm not aware that Pullen redacted what he wrote in the letter to state elections. It was so specific, about the three calls to SCA and the assurances the names were coming. And all you can say is you "don't know" about that? Give us a break. You're essentially accusing Pullen of lying in his letter to state elections.
If you want to know why Pullen wrote that he talked to SCA THREE TIMES and got assurances the names were coming each time, why don't you two get together and hash it out? Because until your two stories match, the public is left with a major discrepancy -- and one that you're apparently unwilling to address.
-
FormerRepublican 07/28/2009 7:31:00 AM
Joel,
after reading your latest post, here are a few more questions:
1. If these people who donated to SCA really thought their money was going for a "boost" to the perception of MCSO, why DIDN'T the money go for that purpose? If they wanted to finance ugly smear ads against Dan Saban, why didn't they just mail in their checks to the Republican party instead of funneling it through your campaign?
2. Do you expect this to just die down and go away? I read the public documents - it appears you've been ordered to turn in the checkbooks for the time period covered by these allegations. Have you done that already?
3. Are you anticipatiing being placed on leave of some sort pending the outcome of any criminal charges against you? How about the others who donated?
4. Are you involved in any way in the MACE operation? If so, what involvement do you have with MACE?
5. Where is the county attorney to investigate fully this matter? Or for that matter, has the Sheriff begun an investigation into you or the others based on the information that is now available to the public?
-
EnoughisEnough 07/28/2009 7:17:00 AM
Joel
You have said that none of Hendershott/Black or the other MCSO individuals had their monies sent to the republican party to finance the smear ads.
Why, in fact, did you feel a need to raise money to use for such ugly purposes? Aren't there enough causes out there that don't require such questionable activity?
Did Steve Ellman know what you were doing? Did you lie to him about the purpose of this "SCA" bank account? Did ANY of these donors know where the money was really going? If they didn't, why didn;t you tell them the truth?
-
WhoKnows 07/28/2009 5:23:00 AM
Joel...
Let's say you gave me $10, and Ray game me $10. I put all the money in my pocket. I then go into a store and spend $9 on beer.
Am I spending your $9 or Ray's $9? I probably say I'm spending $4.50 from each.
That's EXACLY the game you're playing with the Hendershott/MCSO big dog money vs the money from others. If it was all in the same pocket (bank account)you're spending some of "everyone who's donated" money.
So yes, many see it as a lie when you say that while Hendershot had given you money to put in your "pocket", not a dime went to the AZ GOP. His money went to the AZ GOP in proportion to the total!
And I've sure a full audit of all SCA funds would say the same thing.
I'm just dumbfounded that Wilencheck hasn't told you to stop commenting here, as you seem to be making claims and statements that could be used against you if this turns into a criminal thing.
-
Joel Fox 07/28/2009 1:20:00 AM
Ray,
Where I come from, you don't call someone else a liar, especially when not just their reputation but their career is at stake, unless you can prove they lied. No one should bear the burden having to prove themselves innocent.
You are, of course, free to disagree, and to print your disagreements and questions, but you chose a different path: you outright called me a liar on a point that you know is just your opinion.
You know the total amount collected by SCA.
You know Hendershott gave an insignificant amount.
You know that $100,000 came from donors outside MCSO.
You know that we only talked about the donation to SCA, and nobody ever thought to ask if there was other money.
Yet you still call Hendershott a "main contributor" and you still say I lied about his involvement in your desperate attempt to justify calling this a "scandal".
Knowingly printing a false statement is malicious, even when it's about a public figure. You know that, too. You also know that failing to correct it after being notified compounds the damage.
And thanks to your many commenters, you can see what your lie does. It changes from just lying about Hendershott to lying about the involvement of all the MCSO participants, which of course, is a misstatement of your lie, let alone a mistatement of the facts, yet it shows the damages that result from such reckless behavior.
I have already forgiven you, Ray, but it does you no good without repentence. You can still fix it...it's just a webpage that you can easily edit.
We corresponded extensively about what SCA stands for, and Sarah even captioned a tiny part that suited her purpose for her article. Yet you write "you never have talked about what the SCA stands for". Another lie.
You've never said what difference it would make, despite my asking you three times, and so, enjoy your suspicions.
As for Pullen's understanding...I really don't know. If you actually check his testimony to accurately report what was said under oath, you'll see that he confirms that we spoke only once, on the phone. What your question does indicate, however, is that you really don't have much of an understanding of the facts in this case. In other words, there is much you do not know.
But that doesn't stop you from pretending to know, does it?
EnoughisEnough's attempt to identify crimes fails to identify an actual crime, but since this is the first and only attempt to do so, I think it deserves an answer:
1. Lying to the public regarding the involvement of MCSO
I have not lied to the public regarding the involvment of MCSO, and neither has anyone else. The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, in it's official capacity, has nothing to do with SCA. Yes, some donors to SCA are employed by MCSO, but nothing was done on duty. Many MCSO employees also give to United Way, but no one would say that the two are in any way intertwined.
2. Coverup of your actions regarding SCA
I did not cover up any actions regarding SCA. I was accused of being a politcal committee and I disagree, so I sought a judgment through an impartial hearing, as is my right as a citizen. Contesting charges or allegations is not a cover up.
3. Failure to legally file your "campaign" according to State regulations
I still disagree that SCA meets the definition of a political committee, but I did pay a fine of $450 to settle the matter and conclude it. The fine was civil in nature, not criminal, and hardly indicates corruption or a scandal.
4. Failure to provide the public full disclosure into the donors of said campaign
I have provided full disclosure of the donors to SCA, following the impartial hearing I mentioned in #2.
5. Trying to HIDE donations made for an illegal purpose
The donations were not made for an illegal purpose, and there has never been any allegation that there was. The investigation found no earmarking and no tie to the ad that everyone is so fired up about. If you can remove the assumption that SCA paid for an ad that it did not pay for, you will see that there is nothing illegal.
6. Money Laundering? Isn't that what they call what you did when you "separated" according to your words above, the donations made by MCSO brass from the others (i.e. Steve Ellman, etc.)
Money laundering involves taking the illicit proceeds from an offense and converting it into seemingly legitimate income for a fee. There is nothing whatsoever about this case that even remotely suggests money laundering. The money donated to SCA did not come from ill gotten gains, it was not converted into anything, and I received no compensation for it.
I also did not separate the donations made by MCSO "brass" from the others. I simply said that none of Hendershott's money was sent to the party. Ray still accuses me of lying because I said none of the money came from Arpaio, Hendershott or Arpaio's campaign, and the sole support for calling this whole thing a scandal seems to be that Hendershott gave about 2k to SCA, even though SCA had more than 112K altogether. You (and some others) have embellished this accusation of lying to include the rest of the MCSO donors, but it, like the rest of the allegations, has no basis in fact.
For PaulRevere and others concerned about my responses, you need not worry. My story has never changed and it will never change because it is the truth. If I do end up facing criminal charges, my story in court will be the same story I have told here. You see, with the truth, it does not change, and so of course everything I write here will be used in court because it is the same story.
I must say that I do find it interesting that after the lot of you condemn, convict and sentence me, all the while accusing me of a cover up, and criticizing others for not coming forward and answering your questions that you now want me to stop. Had I not answered your questions, you would have criticized me for hiding, but since I do answer your questions, you accuse me of being a fool. Perhaps you fear that the intelligent reader will consider my words and see this so called journalism as nothing more than the conjecture and trash that it is?
-
Coz 07/27/2009 6:08:00 AM
Absolutely, this has been going on with Bozo Joke Arpaio and the Goons for years...
But I have a feeling this is all going to come to an abrupt end for the MCSO Goons real soon...
>>By the way, I resent and challenge you to tell the public WHY you believe this should not have been investigated by the infamous MACE unit PRIOR to it being dragged through the courts. It sounds like selective prosecution of others to me. Anybody else agree?
-
Jane D 07/27/2009 1:12:00 AM
Joel says he is being represented by Wilenshit. But Wilenshit already represents MCSO on a few cases, now doesn't he? So, is Wilenshit just adding criminal defense repesentation to the bill under a different billing scenario? There are 6 or more MCSO people involved. Wilenshit is doing that for free? Hopefully the records requests are already pouring in - if Fox is lying about there being no taxpayer expense to defend him or the others, it will be very evident when the bill is due to be paid. I think Andrew Thomas should resign to run for Governor. After he loses that election, he can seek shelter in a law firm. Maybe then he'll get some attorney experience with actual cases.
-
Paul Revere 07/27/2009 12:25:00 AM
Joel, for the love of God, shut up ! ! ! I am a lawyer and you're a lawyer's worst nightmare soon-to-be client ! ! ! Let's get some things very clear - you ARE going to be charged criminally (whether you choose to believe that or not is irrelevant). And you ARE your own worst enemy ! ! ! And after reading all your nonsense, twisted arguments and outright false statements, the very cronies you're trying so hard to protect will be forced to abandon you and leave you swinging in the wind ! ! Your statemetns here will come back to haunt you ! ! They can be used in a court of law when they are traced back to you (what will you do, DENY these satements as yours, yet make the same claims in your own defense? ? ? or, worse yet, make OTHER different claims in your defense? ? ?) If you're speaking the "truth" here, you'll be stuck with these statements anyways ! ! Good God, man, shut up ! ! ! (and don't think the cronies you're defending will help you, they won't - and remember, the potential criminal charges you'll eventually be facing have a long statute of limitations time . . . Longer than your corrupt cronies will ever be in office (Thomas will be gone soon enough by his own volition when he steps down to run for Guv, he's just trying mastermind who'll step into his steed - which is an unreported "battle" already looming within the BofS chambers and his office - and when this County gets a REAL Sheriff, you'll be target "A" on a long, long list of domino effect to clean up Maricopa County politics. Just friendly "free" legal advice (unlike the tax payer paid representation you all are already getting) ! ! !
-
Bill L 07/26/2009 6:58:00 PM
Fox says None of the money came from Arpaio,or Hendershott or Arpaio's campaign, or anyone associated with Arpaio's campaign, nor did it come from any corporation or labor organization or any other illegal contributor. It was all private funds, solicited over a period of about 2 years.
Now it is uncovered that is EXACTLY WHERE THE MONEY came from. Hendershott, MCSO captains and Joel Fox.
Corruption, campaign finance fraud, money laundering and donations exceeding the maximum amount allowed. All of which warrant criminal investigation and criminal charges.
It isn't good enough to just pay a fine and be forced to do the right thing in terms of public disclosure. These actions were and are illegal. Let's get the prosecution started. I smell a cannonball starting here.
-
FormerRepublican 07/26/2009 6:37:00 PM
Joel Joel Joel -
Your lies are now legendary. You doth protest too much, I'm afraid. Now you have set in stone the story of how you separated funds you solicited - the good guys from your office (I guess that includes you, eh?) - their money went for "legal" purposes while the other bad guys - their money went for the illegal smear ads.
You are a farce and so is the rest of your group. You have absolutely no credibility and should not be allowed to carry a letter opener much less a weapon. And you are charged with enforcing the laws of this County? You have used extremely bad judgement - perhaps the public needs protection from the likes of you. I can't wait until you are called upon to use your background in a court of law. I believe anything you would do at this point would be challenged. You tried to hide your actions from the public - llies on top of lies - and this carefullly orchestrated scheme within MCSO may in fact be what brings the whole lot of you down. You have no business in law enforcement. Your actions have spoken much louder than your words. I hope you and all involved are subjected to a crininal trial. Let's see what 12 average folks feel about your criminal actions.
-
EnoughisEnough 07/26/2009 6:17:00 PM
Joel Fox continues to ask the readers of this story exactly WHAT types of crimes they think he may have committed. Okay Joel, here goes:
1. Lying to the public regarding the involvement of MCSO
2. Coverup of your actions regarding SCA
3. Failure to legally file your "campaign" according to State regulations
4. Failure to provide the public full disclosure into the donors of said campaign
5. Trying to HIDE donations made for an illegal purpose
6. Money Laundering? Isn't that what they call what you did when you "separated" according to your words above, the donations made by MCSO brass from the others (i.e. Steve Ellman, etc.)
You want the public to believe that Ellmans money and outher "outsider" money was the money spent to run the smear ads while Hendershott, Black, yours and the other monies donated went to ...what....administrative costs? Fundraising expenses?
Joel, you have gotten yourself knee deep with your own lies. Anything you do at this point short of resigning looks like further cover up. I will NOT be surprised if, after the checkbooks and money trail is examined further, you don;'t end up with some felony indictments, along with others on the MCSO staff.
By the way, I resent and challenge you to tell the public WHY you believe this should not have been investigated by the infamous MACE unit PRIOR to it being dragged through the courts. It sounds like selective prosecution of others to me. Anybody else agree? It takes the actions of MCSO and shows how selectively they harass others while covering up for their own.
FELONY INDICTMENT TIME.
-
Richard 07/26/2009 6:48:00 AM
Leonard Stop with your damn spam.. we're all sick of it.
If you want to see Arpaio recalled then I suggest that you not do it. I would like to join a recall movement but not with a lunatic like you at the head. You, my dear man, are nuts.
First of all, you come across as crazy as Arpaio; like a foaming at the mouth hyperactive kid who can�t stop jumping up and down. If I�d known you in grammar school I probably would�ve kicked your ass because I hated hyper kids like you.
Secondly, everything you�ve done in the past smells of mental instability:
In 2000 you ran for the state senate and everyone laughed at you.
** In 2002 you ran for the legislature and you lost miserably.
** You ran for Glendale City council several times and lost. You show up to most Glendale city council meetings and always made asinine comments in every public comment section of the council meetings. Didn�t you ever notice that even the members of the city council rolled their eyes every time you�d take the microphone?
** In 2004 you ran for the state house of representatives as a clean elections candidate and didn�t have the community support to collect enough $5 dollar contributions therefore could not qualify to get funded by clean elections.
** In 2005 you went to serve in the war in Iraq and kept sharing secret information putting your fellow officers at risk and blogging about how terrible it was being in the war while showing complete disrespect for your fellow soldier and ultimately got arrested and thrown in the brig and dishonorably discharged.
** In 2006 you ran against John McCain using a stupid campaign committee name and slogan: The Damn Liberal Inner City School Teacher Desert Storm/Iraq War III Vet and Democratic Candidate for the U.S. Senate in Arizona:
IMPEACH THE KING: GEORGE W. BUSH ! NOT ONE MORE OF MY FELLOW AMERICAN SOLDIERS SHOULD BE KILLED IN IRAQ! N.O. M.A.S. !
** In 2007 you and your crazy lunatic no teeth hillbilly friend William Crum launched a recall on John McCain and Jon Kyl. You filed but never got the support to put it on the ballot.
** In 2008 you ran for the house of rep. in the state legislature on one of the most ridiculous committee names I�ve ever seen: LEONARD CLARK AND ARIZONANS FOR IMPEACHMENT OF KING BUSH! Again you could not raise any funds therefore your political signs were photocopies of hand-made signs accusing the speaker of the house of being a child molester. They looked like a dyslexic grade school kid wrote it with his feet and they were taped all over magazine racks and phone booths, it was ridiculous.
** Now in 2009 you have this ?? Oh, jeeeze!
What I�m trying to tell you is that you have zero credibility, everyone knows you never succeed at anything you do, you have a track record of being crazy.
If you are serious in having Arpaio recalled you should let some one else take it on - any one but you because with you heading the recall effort many like myself will not sign up. I don�t wanna be associated with you yet I want to see Arpaio recalled.
Having you as a spokesperson of this recall is like having ... (OMG, I can�t think of anything more outrageous !! that�s how bad it is.)
Can�t you just step aside so that a real effort can take place? Do you even know what it would take to get this on the ballot? The signatures needed? The amount of money needed IF it gets on the ballot to launch a campaign and also a candidate to fill in� you�re such a dimwit, I don�t think you�ve thought that far ahead, albeit.
Leonard, you need help and the last thing we need is for you to be a spokesperson for this, you�re crazy. Go take your meds and get off this soap box.. it�s not your soap box so step off.
p.s. I still wish I would've known you in grammar school; I'd teach you a lesson.
-
Ray Stern 07/26/2009 6:42:00 AM
Joel, I called you a liar because you wrote that line about the money not coming from Hendershott, when we now know it did. I'm just going by the best evidence available.
All we know is that the $105,000 came from the same pool of money to which Hendershott and the others gave. You haven't proved Hendershott's money -- which rolled into the SCA account over two years -- can be distinguished from the $105,000 donation to the Republican Party. Maybe you didn't lie -- but it sure looks you did. Your Hendershott statement resembles a bald-faced lie so well, you'll just have to forgive me and any other reader who thinks it's a lie.
"I am done talking about what SCA stands for with you," you say. Yet you never have talked about what the SCA stands for -- it's one of the things you absolutely refuse to talk about. But it stands for something, that much is obvious! It seems you're just not interested in telling the truth about where the name came from. Your credibility is stretched to the breaking point on this issue.
"I did take the call from Chairman Pullen, and I have no idea why he would characterize our conversation as an assurance that donor's names were coming. I felt assured that my money would be returned."
When Pullen wrote that letter about you giving him assurance you'd reveal the names, the conversation was still pretty fresh -- it had happened just a few weeks before. Now you're claiming he mis-remembered what happened.
But here's the funny part: Pullen's October 31 letter says the SCA was contacted TWICE before the Saban smear ad ran, and each time Pullen says he was told the names were coming.
Pullen then wrote he called the SCA a third time and was again assured the names were coming. (Access Pullen's letter from our November 7 blog post: tinyurl.com/n8ks7f)
Later, Pullen called you on October 7 and asked you for the names, and you asked him why it was necessary, the letter says.
So here's another question for you, Joel: If you'd talk to Pullen three times by then, why did you ask if divulging the names was necessary on Pullen's FOURTH conversation with you?
Then again, Pullen doesn't say who he talked to the first three times. For all we know, he was talking to Hendershott or Steve Ellman on one of those occasions.
So to recap, you say you "took the call" from Pullen. Who was Pullen talking to the other two times (before the 10-7 phone call)?
And why would Pullen be so stupid as to think he was getting assurances the names were coming on no less than three separate occasions? Honestly, we think Pullen's memory is better than that. Someone gave him assurances, even if you "have no idea" why Pullen would claim he received assurances.
Three assurances the names would come, Pullen says, Joel -- three.
Pullen hasn't retracted the statements he made in the October 31 letter, and if he does, it would be interesting to hear how he could get the point of those three conversations so wrong.
-
Coz 07/26/2009 6:00:00 AM
Hey Joel, are your eyes brown ?
Because you are so full of shit they have to be.
-
Kevin 07/26/2009 3:39:00 AM
This is my favorite spin of them all.
"I can say that the death rate and suicide rate is higher outside jail than inside, and I can also say that most, if not all, of our problems in the jail are directly related to Correctional Health, which is not part of MCSO, and not part of the Sheriff's responsibility. "
So, Joel, you are saying that the death of Juan Mendoza Farias was Correctional Health's fault? How about the inmate that was beaten to death while a guard was on his cell phone? What about Scott Neurnburg (sp?), not "your" fault? The bullshit and cover ups have been going on for years and you really expect people to believe what comes out of any of MCSO Brass mouths'. You, sir, are a fool and I hope when it all caves in you are on the bottom taking the full brunt of it. At first I felt bad for you, I thought you were the fall guy. You should have never posted on NT, because now we all see you for who you really are. A piece of shit fool, hiding behind Arpaio and Hendershott.
-
WhoKnows 07/26/2009 3:13:00 AM
Joel.. OK, now I see Ray's post - you must have been responding to that.
As a mature adult, I'll admit I was wrong, and take my lumps.
Will you?
-
WhoKnows 07/26/2009 3:02:00 AM
Joel, why are you addressing your comment to Ray, as Sarah was the author of this piece? Seems you are confused, yet again... Not surprised, as you've seem very confused in all your posts. The only one that believes you is you!
As far as "scandal or corruption", neither dictate a crime. That's up to PROFESSIONAL Law enforcement to determine - the AG, the FBI, the DOJ, etc.
We know that MACE/Hendershott/Thomas don't in any way indicate professionals. Just folks to seek vengeance on a perceived threat.
So how's Wilenchek working out as your lawyer? Is he advising you to comment in public? Seems you still have a fool for a lawyer.
-
Joel Fox 07/26/2009 1:04:00 AM
Ray,
We've corresponded about this already, and I suppose you simply refuse to accept anything contrary to your forgone conclusions, but all we ever talked about, prior to donor's names being released, is the $105,000 donation to the party. I never discussed other donations to SCA, and nobody ever asked me about other donations to SCA.
None of the $105,000 that I sent to the party belonged to Arpaio or Hendershott or Arpaio's campaign.
"Proven liar" implies you have some proof. Can you prove that David Hendershott's money was part of the $105,000? Or is it just your opinion that money in a bank account cannot be segregated?
I am done talking about what SCA stands for with you. Enjoy the suspicions.
I did take the call from Chairman Pullen, and I have no idea why he would characterize our conversation as an assurance that donor's names were coming. I felt assured that my money would be returned.
If you review Chairman Pullen's testimony at the hearing, (which is a public record) you will not find him saying that he asked me several times for the names of contributors. Writing that Pullen said under oath that I was asked several times for the names is a lie.
If are to call me a liar over your disputed opinions, I would think you could at least fact check your articles.
If you can quote from many of my comments, why can't you quote any other comments of crimes that have been committed? Simply saying that they exist doesn't say anything, except that you know they don't, and you hope your readers are too stupid to check.
If other readers, or comments, or any other person has actually suggested a criminal violation that they think occurred, why don't you print it? And if you can't identify a crime, why do you insist on referring to this as a "scandal" or corruption?
You are attempting to manipulate people, and you know it.
-
Coz 07/26/2009 12:43:00 AM
MCSO and Joel Fox......so many lies and so little time to tell them all...
-
Ray Stern 07/26/2009 12:02:00 AM
Joel Fox is a proven liar. Before he was forced to expose the names of the SCA due to threat of a $315,000 fine, he wrote this on our blog about the money collected in the bank account over two years:
"None of the money came from Arpaio,or Hendershott or Arpaio's campaign, or anyone associated with Arpaio's campaign, nor did it come from any corporation or labor organization or any other illegal contributor. It was all private funds, solicited over a period of about 2 years."
The meaning of "SCA" is obviously a key to something here, which seems to be why Joel is still keeping secrets. Who came up with the name SCA and what does it stand for? It's suspicious to me that he wants to talk about everything but that.
I believe readers have suggested what crimes may have occurred, so maybe Joel should go back and check those comments. Also, the readers are right -- the sheriff's office habitually throws suspicion around without naming a crime. That's what is happening to Mary Rose Wilcox right now, so for Captain Joel Fox of the sheriff's office to complain about being treated like his office treats others, well, this is another area where Joel is full of bull.
Another area Joel is being disingenuous is where he says:
"Pullen never "said under oath that he asked me several times for the names of contributors", and never said that I refused to provide them. Your statement is simply false. If you actually review the record in the case, what he said under oath was that we had a single phone conversation in which he asked for the names and said the money would be returned if he didn't get them."
Here is how I previously summarized the letter from Pullen about this situation:
"Pullen says the party requested the names of the donors behind SCA and 'were assured we would receive them.' They asked again on September 29 and 'were told it was coming.'
On October 2, the due date for the post-primary report, Pullen and crew "asked again." With no response, the party decided to file its report late to give the generous benefactors a few more days to cough up some names of donors. Finally, on October 6, Pullen writes that he decided to call 'Mr.' Joel Fox."
I believe that Joel has since written in his comment that he was the one who had taken Pullen's initial calls. If Joel took the call and "assured" Pullen the names would be coming, he lied to Pullen. If someone other than Joel "assured" Pullen the names were coming, who was it?
-
Peter Z 07/25/2009 6:47:00 PM
To all the readers of this ongoing saga regarding Joel Fox and the SCA/MCSO involvement. I suggest you contact your local FBI office and talk to investigators - request that the corruption by this supposed Law Enforcement Agency be investigated. You pay your taxes. You are entitled to protection against this farce called the anti corruption task force - a shield the MCSO has been hiding behind since it came into being. When law enforcement not only tries to hide corruption within its own department - but fails to treat wrongdoing equally (even when it involves several of their own), there is a real smell of coverup. Also, contact your county elections department to get the information on this campaign. Now it is time to see the checkbooks from this so called mistake that Joel Fox would like us to believe transpired. Perhaps many more answers will be provided once the checkbooks are open. Also, I have no idea why search warrants were not issued with relation to the entire SCA campaign. Perhaps that is coming. Campaign Finance Fraud is Campaign Finance Fraud. Period. No different for Joel Fox and the others than it is for any other registered campaign in the State of Arizona. Why are we even being subjected to this sort of trickery? I looked on the Sheriff's website and did not see any press releases regarding this whole ordeal? Why is he so silent about this? How about the County Attorney? Could it be that the checkbooks will find some of his attorneys donating to this campaign that financed the ugly ads against another candidate illegally? I still cannot believe that Joel Fox continues to state that there is no problem here. It is hard to imagine that someone with a professional law enforcement background would continue to lie and try to cover tracks even after all these donations have been exposed. When does he finally turn and admit that this was a clear violation from the beginning?
-
taxpayerofmaricopacounty 07/25/2009 6:16:00 PM
This quote is fantastic from Joel Fox = "MCSO deputies are not racists, not murderers, and are not corrupt, and despite non stop pressure from special interest groups, local media, and self promoting democrats for over 16 YEARS, nobody has ever come up with one shred of any evidence to support their many accusations."
JOEL, ISN'T YOUR SCA REPORTING SCANDAL ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT ACCUSATIONS OF CORRUPTION? YOU MUST BE TERRIBLY DELUSIONAL OR HAVE BEEN DRINKING TOO MUCH OF THE MCSO KOOL-AID. STATE AND COUNTY ELECTIONS HAVE UNCOVERED MANY SHREDS OF EVIDENCE AGAINST YOU. HAVE YOU BEEN SLEEPING THROUGH THE LAST FEW MONTHS?
-
shawn R 07/25/2009 6:06:00 PM
Again, Joel..you say" Every single accusation against MCSO comes from a person either with an ax to grind, or with a political agenda". Not true at all. What ax to grind would elections have with you? They were notified by the State of your SCA activities..YOU never attempted to prepare proper filings until you were caught. THEY have an ax to grind with you? And if you do something illegal, it's SOMEBODY ELSE that has a vendetta against the Sheriff's office? You cry foul but you brought ALL of this on yourself. You deserve a full scale outside investigation. At what point are you opening up the checkbooks from your "campaign" for SCA? Is Elections still waiting for that one? That should provide even more answers as the money trail is followed. And finally..if everything is great except for a bunch of naysayers..why DID you wait for so long, and try so hard to keep the donors names from the public? It's okay for everybody else to have their political donors named but not you? What pretense were you using to justify that? You wanted the donors to remain secret so THEY wouldn't bear any of this burden? What were you afraid of, that this would turn into the circus it has already turned into?
-
FormerRepublican 07/25/2009 5:59:00 PM
Joel.....go back and look at what you have written. You have said that "I've been challenging readers and writers on these blogs for days now to identify a crime that was committed. Chad, even if MACE could investigate this case, what crime would you allege? Are you expecting to call the police and say "something fishy is going on here...you should investigate"?
Since when does the MACE Task force have to have any concrete allegations? They have a political agenda and have spent countless man hours and resources harassing people. Just recently they visited the homes of donors of another politicians campaign (for a non paying office) to speak to folks about whether any promises were made. Why haven't your donors been visited by deputies? Why haven't we heard the word "criminal investigation" associated with your name yet? Look at the Attorney General - 27 months of being under "criminal suspicion" according to MACE. And look at the county folks (I believe there are 37 of them) - recently visited at home in the evenings by deputies to question them about listening devices within the County building. And you will try to tell us all that YOUR case lacks any merit? WHO do you think YOU are writing to? A bunch of idiots? What is good for the rest of Maricopa County is good for you. If the Sheriff did NOT know where this money was going (to a campaign that failed to file the proper paperwork) then where is the sense of justice in failing to open a full scale media "investigation" as he has done on so many others? Where are the press conferences like he held along with Andrew Thomas on other folks? I recently read that the Sheriff sent a letter to the Secret Service "alerting" them to another politican's upcoming trip to Washington. Where are the warnings issued about you? Are you getting preferrential treatment because Hendershott and the other Chiefs are involved? Surely you have been advised that criminal charges could result from your activities. Isn't that enough to warrant a full outside investigation by someone other than the same folks who benefited from your actions? Each time I've read the paper about something the Sheriff is "investigating" the media is alerted, the "cloud of suspicion" goes out to the public. Who are you to be treated differently? And...how about that Brady List? Are you on it? Do you testify at any trials? If you do, I'd like to be there. And lastly..are you involved in Joe's latest campaign for funds for another election? if so....we can all sit back and have a good laugh. If Steve Ellman or the other "donors" who were over the maximum have to pay a fine, are YOU paying it? Any chance that you'll be involved in politics in the future?
-
FormerRepublican 07/25/2009 5:36:00 PM
Joel,
you ARE mistaken, I'm afraid. The donors who gave, OVER THE MAXIMUM, and to funnel money for a smear campaign ARE crooks. Plain and simple. You, and all the rest of the donors need to be held accountable. And you talk about bad media? YOU????? How about the media you worked to finance to smear the Saban campaign? How is that for bad media? You are a wart on the nose of Maricopa County. Try getting another job in law enforcement...after your illegal activities were all over the net, I hope you find another career, because you are NOT an honest, above board le officer. You lied, you covered up and now you are trying to cover up some more. I'm waiting for the criminal subpoenas to fly........................................
-
Stacy 07/25/2009 5:14:00 PM
I love the follow up story.. I wonder how you can put it back on the front page.. the follow up deserves some mention in the front page regarding combing over the campaign fiance reports and finding that many many contributions come from MCSO employees.
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2009/07/sheriff_joe_arpaios_campaign_f.php
In case others can't find it.. I commented on it and then couldn't find it later.
Don't forget to look at the expenses that Joe paid out for his campaign. Those are fishy too. There's one in particular:
The last page (expenditure report) on the top one the expenditure for food and beverage is for $653 or something like that. The name of the business is a pet grooming business yet when you google the address on Agave drive you'll see it's a private residence and you look up the address on the county assessor's office you'll see that the home is registered to Lisa McPherson.. Could this be our Lisa Allen McPherson?
Here's the list.. these take a while to investigate.. have fun!
This one is 40 pages long
http://156.42.40.50/CampFinDocs/pdf/2008_24558.pdf
-
Coz 07/25/2009 2:42:00 PM
They are, the show is called Reno 911.
>>" MCSO is not corrupt" how can you say this with a straight face? why arent you and your band of merry men on comedy central?
-
Concerned Citizen 07/25/2009 4:37:00 AM
These power abusers in a position of trust do belong in Tent City. People have been sent there for hardly anything and who is allowing this abuse to go on while the taxpayers foot the bill? Where's the County Attorney protecting the people's interest and safety? Or is this like the New Jersey group - someone from the outside has to take them all down since they're all in it together?
-
bert 07/25/2009 3:23:00 AM
wow does joel sound scared, EXPOSED TO THE PUBLIC that is what you get for getting involved with dishonest crooked thugs. " MCSO is not corrupt" how can you say this with a straight face? why arent you and your band of merry men on comedy central? YOu got greedy for promotion, and got caught,
I think article well written and the ONLY place to get the truth is Phoenix NEW Times, !!
this group deserves to be in tent city, try and get them there by August.
-
Joel Fox 07/25/2009 12:51:00 AM
Well, I certainly hope you're not afraid of me, Chad. I'm not a very scary guy.
FormerRepublican finally used the right word. "Embattled". Yes the MCSO is embattled, not because of anything wrong, but because of different people's various political agendas over the years and most of it is complete foolishness.
MCSO deputies are not racists, not murderers, and are not corrupt, and despite non stop pressure from special interest groups, local media, and self promoting democrats for over 16 YEARS, nobody has ever come up with one shred of any evidence to support their many accusations.
I'm not saying that we are perfect, and I am not saying that an occasional bad apple doesn't make it through the stringent hiring process. Every last one of us is human, and we are prone to the same errors and misjudgments that any other human is prone to, but that does not justify vilifying those mistakes to your political advantage.
Every single accusation against MCSO comes from a person either with an ax to grind, or with a political agenda. And if they happen to be in the media, they use passionate and inflammatory language to encourage continued readership. If you think the New Times or Ray Stern or Sarah Fenske is writing any of this because they are somehow "standing up" against corruption, you are sadly mistaken. His posts are carefully crafted to elicit the most emotional response possible because he knows the more emotional you are, the more likely you will come back... and the more visitors he gets to the site, the more they charge for advertising.
The only exception would be those who have lost friends and family members while they were in MCSO custody. I have never worked a jail, but I do know that ANY death or injury that occurs in a jail is a tragedy and, in a perfect world, preventable. It is our goal to prevent every death and every injury of any person in our custody, and I know we have not been successful in that goal, no matter how much I wish we were. I cannot make any excuses for it, and no excuse would ever be good enough.
I can say that the death rate and suicide rate is higher outside jail than inside, and I can also say that most, if not all, of our problems in the jail are directly related to Correctional Health, which is not part of MCSO, and not part of the Sheriff's responsibility. MCSO has tried to have control over Correctional Health, but the Board of Supervisors has denied it, so we remain a "customer" of theirs, and a not very happy one at that. It seems to me that things have gotten better lately, but I think there is still a long way to go.
I also do not believe that MCSO jails are worse than similar sized jails, and are in fact better, both in health related issues, and in inmate care. The campaign claims of MCSO suffering more lawsuits than the other top 4 jails in the country was an absolute lie, and easily verified on the internet. Search for jails in LA, Chicago, and Houston and you will see huge differences in the amounts of lawsuits paid out, and MCSO is easily the lowest, using any time period over the past 16 years of Arpaio's control.
Here again...basing your opinions of MCSO on newspaper articles will result in false conclusions.
Anyone with any sense will know that neither Arpaio nor Thomas can investigate anything to do with SCA. If either of them determined that no charges should be filed, the cries of cover up and corruption would just get louder. These men are politicians, after all, and not stupid.
Speaking of stupid, perhaps we could be a bit more careful throwing words like "corruption" around. There was a big case that just broke in New Jersey that involved corruption...you should read about it, so you can get an idea of what corruption really is.
I've been challenging readers and writers on these blogs for days now to identify a crime that was committed. Chad, even if MACE could investigate this case, what crime would you allege? Are you expecting to call the police and say "something fishy is going on here...you should investigate"?
As an attorney, you should know better than anyone else...so...What's the crime?
And for the rest of you, if you can't even identify a crime, perhaps you could refrain from shouting corruption so often...you are living up to the lynch mob mentality that I predicted, but nonetheless, it just makes you look more prejudice than the people you are calling prejudiced.
And finally, for the umpteenth time, nothing I have ever done in relation to SCA or this case was on duty. I attended the hearings on my own time, prepared my case on my own time, and even responded to the media on my own time. I drove my own car to the hearings, used my own gas, had papers I printed from own computer in file folders I bought at Staples (since Office Depot has the county contract)and even wore my own suit.
The direct deposits would have to be set up at work, but those take less than 2 minutes, and can only be done from a work computer because it is a county intra-net site, accessible only from a county networked computer. The same would be done if an employee opened a new savings account, or IRA or college fund, or any other human resources type function. Employees get two 15 minute breaks per day, and must set up their own direct deposits.
It would not be possible to use taxpayer money to pay for attorneys under these circumstances. All such expenditures would have to be approved by the Board of Supervisors (which means it would also be a public record) and could only occur if there were legal challenges to duties performed in their official capacity, AND conflicted out by the County Attorney. Neither is true in this case.
Any suggestion that taxpayer money is being used in this case is preposterous, and easily verified. If it were the case, I can assure you Ray would be writing about it.
I really wish you folks with such vehement opinions would at least read what is already on this very website before continuing to ask the same questions over and over. The fact that you're asking the questions just proves that you don't really know what you're talking about and you're jumping to conclusions unsupported by any facts. While I already know this to be true, I wouldn't think you'd want to broadcast it to the rest of the world.
-
Free Hal Turner 07/24/2009 11:13:00 PM
I think it is time for the home addresses of Fox, Allen, Henderblimp and others to be released. Watch this space.....
-
Chad Snow 07/24/2009 4:07:00 PM
Joel Fox,
If everything was so on the up-and-up like you claim, why did you go to such great lengths to keep the list of donors to SCA secret for so long? Why did it take the threat of a $315,000.00 fine for you to finally cough up the list? Why did the Republican Party feel compelled to return your dirty money? Why did the independent counsel and the judge find that what you'd done was wrong? You just don't get it - Arpaio and his cronies have lied to us so many times for so long, that you all have ZERO credibility. We are not all that stupid - 45% of us know better.
You all must feel like that scene in Star Wars where Luke, Han, Leia, and the Wookie (Hendershott) are in the trash room, surrounded by shit, with the walls closing in.
As Adolfo says, my name is Chad Snow and I'm not afraid of you.
-
Shawn R 07/24/2009 6:34:00 AM
Will Fox and the others who are suspected of criminal activity be placed on the BRADY LIST? Surely the lies told by these so called "professional law officers" would place any court case in which they testify in jeopardy.
Also, can someone please tell me WHERE the infamous Andrew Thomas is with an investigation of this whole sad tale? He was quick, along with the Sheriff, to announce investigation after investigation to the media - very few of them ever coming to fruition.....where is this coward now when he supposedly runs the TASK FORCE along with Arpaio? And, if Arpaio really didn't have any knowledge of this, why isn't HE launching a full scale investigation. If it weren't so pathetic it would be funny. This thing stinks of criminal violations and corruption. I agree with the other writers to get rid of all of them. They have no business enforcing laws that they break themselves.
-
FormerRepublican 07/24/2009 6:09:00 AM
This scenario just keeps getting worse and worse. How can a department so embattled like the Sheriff's office continue to operate for the good of the people? This office, if I remember correctly, was never intended to abuse and harass - it's purpose is to provide professional law enforcement. The entire kingdom appears to be folding...with corruption and perhaps criminal charges lurking around the corner for some fairly high level MCSO officers it would appear that the time has come to investigate fully the entire appearance of corruption within the Sheriff's office. Federal law enforcement officers will be needed to sort out this SCA fiasco....there appears to be enough here to raise reasonable suspicion of criminal activity . If that activity is verified, I think there is no alternative but to send all these folks to the federal grand jury. There is no TRUST and no integrity within the MCSO and I'm pretty sure Arpaio must be feeling that now.
-
FormerRepublican 07/24/2009 6:02:00 AM
Mr. Joel Fox,
You say:..."I'm a taxpayer too, and I would rigorously oppose any public funds being spent on any kind of personal matters, let alone defending allegations of civil or criminal law violations' but that's not really true, is it? How much time was spent to set up the "direct deposits" or the "payroll deductions" - however you wnat to describe it...and wasn't that done on the time clock? How about your appearances before the Elections Dept and the State Departments? Wasn't that done on the county time clock? And...what about the attorney you were asked about...are you saying to all of us readers that legal representation is being either paid for personally or provided WITHOUT TAXPAYER involvement? I'd like your answer on that one, please.
-
Drew Gibson 07/24/2009 5:07:00 AM
I love Phoenix and Arizona, but we will forever be a second rate city and an embarrassment until we clean up the political scene by throwing out the trash. Arpaio, Fox, Henderchott, Thomas, Lisa Allen, and the lot need to go. As an independent, I believe both sides of the political Isle, Dems and Republicans are to blame for letting Arpaio become the defacto celebrity ruler of our state. Arpaio and his henchmen have hurt our state, it's citizens, the local economy, and our future. With civic leaders like we have endured in our state for so long, we continue to deserve the reputation as uneducated, redneck, and out of date. Unfortunately the reputation Phoenix has earned for being a well managed city, speaks more to the cooperation Arpaio receives from other leaders, all too afraid to challenge his celebrity and put to risk their own selfish political ambitions.
I give kudos to Phil Gordon, our mayor for denouncing Arpaio's racial profiling, the ACLU for suing him to stop racial profiling (which a Federal judge this February ruled in favor of the ACLU's case to go forward), and for the city of Guadalupe having the brass to sue him as well. It isn't enough though... our trusted political leaders on both sides from our governor, to our Senators McCain and Jon Kyle, should stand up and denounce Arpaio and his clan. Yeah, that'll be the day...when McCain does anything more than fumble over the subject of Arpaio...
Mostly, kudos to Sara Fenske for writing this hard hitting look into the crooked way Arpaio has secured his cushy tyrant's job and positions of privilege for cronies like Joel Fox and the band of fork tongued, evildoers.
Sarah, If I were you, I would hire body guards, go incognito, while continuing to try and "write" the wrongs...
-
Joel Fox 07/24/2009 12:25:00 AM
Cops are held to the same standard as everyone else, if not more so. Investigators, prosecutors and judges do not want to face allegations that they were "soft" on cops, so they are typically more strict. No one can name a recent case (in the last 20 years or so) that a cop got off easy.
There are no, and there have never been, any public funds expended in relation to SCA. I have not even responded to media inquiries on duty, or answered emails sent to my MCSO address. I'm a taxpayer too, and I would rigorously oppose any public funds being spent on any kind of personal matters, let alone defending allegations of civil or criminal law violations.
When Lisa Allen commented that this situation has absolutely nothing to do with the sheriff's office, I'm sure that she is referring to the official capacity of the office, since that is all that she comments about. Lisa Allen does not comment on the personal lives of the people who work at MCSO, and when not on the clock, our lives are our own. Anything I do on my own time is my own business, and Lisa Allen would not, and should not, comment on it, and the same goes for any other employee.
And for "David Saint" - I sincerely hope you are not using the article from the East Valley Tribune as your source for "facts". The article doesn't even say anything about my promotion. I tested for Captain in February '04, promoted in May, collected 8-10 signatures on a nomination petition in July, and Arpaio was subsequently re-elected the following November.
If you are trying to say that I was unqualified for SWAT, you are wrong. Mark Flatten, the "reporter" who wrote that story, was told about my full qualifications:
I was a part time member on the team for 4 years, which means I did all the training and all the missions, as well as my regular duties which was in Lake Patrol at the time; I participated in over 400 missions.
I was also a decorated US Army Ranger Sgt/Squad leader and am an expert in weapons, explosives, tactical planning, and a number of other mission critical tasks.
At the time, I was a 16 year veteran of the Sheriff's Office with a proven track record of leadership, planning, and effectiveness.
I would put my skills in this arena up against anyone.
But all this was reduced down to "a part time SWAT officer in the 1990's"
Mark Flatten knew this, but refused to report it because it didn't help his story. This pattern of lies, misinformation, and innuendo was the impetus for setting up the SCA account, and has very little relation to the truth.
I was actually surprised to find out Flatten didn't get hired by the New Times, as the EVT collapsed...he'd fit right in.
-
AZ double standard 07/23/2009 10:07:00 PM
david saint made a compelling point: "Its time to see MCSO employees held to the same laws as you and I, with the same punishments or worse (they know the law, they are held to a higher standard for this reason in my eyes). The law was clearly broken, now lets sit back and see who has the integrity and fortitude to do the right thing..."
-
EnoughisEnough 07/23/2009 9:48:00 PM
Mr. Fox:
You have not yet responded to the question of WHO is paying for your legal bills. Are the attorneys working pro bono? If so, we need to make a note of that...we all could use a freebie here and there. Despite how you may view it, the public HAS a right to know if they are paying for your mistakes. In addition, have any complaints been filed against you as a result of your potentially illegal involvement in political campaign corruption with the agency that licenses law enforcement officers? If criminal charges could be pending against you, would that affect your ability to continue to represent MCSO as a Captain? What about the others who donated? If criminal charges against them might be filed, or if a criminal complaint is opened, does that affect their positions within MCSO? I'd like to hear some factual answers, please. We've heard enough of the BS.
-
david saint 07/23/2009 9:35:00 PM
just for you Joel, since you are defending your promotion..written by EVT, not new times...
Rumors that there was going to be a shake-up in the SWAT team began almost immediately after Arpaio was re-elected Nov. 2. Members of the unit were told in early November by their former commanders, Capt. Phillip Babb and Lt. Michael Mitchell, that they were going to be replaced by Trombi and Fox. Fox had served as a part-time SWAT officer in the 1990s. Trombi, who had been the sheriff �s public information officer, had no experience on the team.
Also, members of the K-9 unit, who had long provided the "containment team" � making sure suspects don�t escape when SWAT officers enter a building � were going to be replaced by deputies in Squad Five, a unit of officers without regular beats who filled in on different patrol sectors throughout the county.
The K-9 officers had SWAT training themselves, and also trained closely with the tactical team, Pearce and Argetsinger said. Their expertise provided better protection for the entry team and allowed SWAT officers to concentrate on what was happening inside.
A departmentwide shakeup involving almost 300 officers took effect Nov. 22. About a week later, Fox met with members of the SWAT team and laid out the new directives. Pearce said it was an "ugly" meeting in which Fox was confrontational.
According to Pearce, Fox told SWAT team members they would be given regular patrol assignments because the department�s new priority was to reduce response times. Their training time would be cut from two days per week to two days per month. The National Tactical Officers Association recommends that a full-time SWAT team spends 25 percent of its time training.
Pearce said SWAT officers responded that two training days a month were not enough to maintain the proficiency of the unit, especially because they also had to train for specialty assignments, including methamphetamine lab raids and bomb disposal.
"We brought these issues up to Fox and he just continued to tell us how training wa sn�t important," said Pearce, who is a certified bomb technician.
"On this incident where we had two of our guys hurt, I think that our training allowed us to get out of that situation without having anybody else injured. You don�t rise to the occasion in a situation like that. You fall back on your training. If you train properly then you are going to react properly."
CONTINUED TURMOIL
On Dec. 1, the new patrol assignments became effective. Argetsinger began working in New River. Pea rce wa s assigned to Sun City, but as the senior deputy on the SWAT team he had administrative duties to wrap up before he began patrol. He also was responsible for helping the SWAT team�s sergeant, Todd Hoggatt, scout locations where future search warrants were to be served.
Both Pearce and Argetsinger said no one on the SWAT team objected to being assigned patrol duties. Even before the shake-up, SWAT officers would frequently go out on patrol when they had completed their weekly training and had no other assignments; they just didn�t want to lose training time because of patrol, they said.
On Dec. 13, the SWAT team got word that it would be serving the search warrant in east Mesa. The following morning, Pearce and Hoggatt did surveillance on the home and began developing their tactical plan. Pearce said it was clear early on that their options were limited.
The unit was understaffed, Pearce said. While the team originally had two sergeants, one had been transferred and not replaced. Two deputies were out of town, and another was on light duty because of an injury. A fourth was off on family medical leave.
That left six members of the team to serve what was deemed a high-risk warrant, Pearce said.
More troubling was the containment team issue, Pearce and Argetsinger said. The Mesa warrant was to be the first tactical assignment for the new men from Squad Five, who had undergone only five hours of training, including three hours of basic pistol training, they said.
"None of us was willing to say we trusted any of those guys with three hours of pistol training," Argetsinger said.
The team also did not have the opportunity to go over the assault plan as thoroughly as they normally would, according to Pearce and Argetsinger. Some members of the team were in distant parts of the county on patrol the night before the raid. Others, including Pearce, were working a DUI detail.
Pearce said that he raised his concerns with Trombi when they first met to go over the tactical plan.
"I specifically told Trombi as I pointed to the ops (operations) plan, �We are doing a homicide search warrant with six guys. That�s unacceptable and it�s unsafe,� " Pearce said.
Ultimately, the deputy on family leave was called in, making him the seventh man on the team.
LIMITED OPTIONS
On the morning of Dec. 16, the full SWAT team met at 5 a.m. to go over the tactical plan. Pearce had worked the DUI detail until about 2 a.m. The planning process, which might normally take hours, was done hurriedly in a remote corner of a shopping center not far from the neighborhood of tightly-packed mobile homes on unincorporated county land in east Mesa.
The warrant was to be served at 6:30 a.m.
From the beginning things did not go well.
The deadbolt on the door was strong, so it took longer than it should have to break through, Pearce said.
When the door finally did pop open, SWAT team members called out that they were sheriff�s deputies with a search warrant, both in English and Spanish, and stormed inside.
Both Pearce and Argetsinger declined to discuss the shooting itself since it is still under investigation. But a narrative report released Friday by the sheriff�s office provides details of what went on inside the trailer.
Pearce broke left upon entering the trailer, followed by deputy Rod Jackson and Argetsinger. The other members of the team went to the right to secure the back of the mobile home.
A curtain covered a doorway that separated the kitchen, where the deputies entered, from the living room. As Pearce started to pull back the curtain, gunfire erupted from a bathroom at the far side of the living room.
The first slug smacked Pearce in his body armor. The second slipped under the ballistic vest and went into his abdomen.
Pearce dropped, calling out that he was hit. Jackson stepped over him, shielding the fallen officer while returning fire, according to the report. Jackson also was hit, but his body armor stopped the bullet.
As Argetsinger was raising his weapon, a bullet hit him in the hand and he dropped his assault rifle. Argetsinger tried to pull his pistol with his left hand, but was unable to hold it. He then grabbed Pearce and began dragging him out of the trailer. Jackson saw the suspect duck behind a wall in the bathroom and opened fire, hitting the gunman through the wall, according to the report.
Jorge Luis Guerra Vargas was taken into custody with bullet wounds to his face and arm. He has since been indicted on seven counts of aggravated assault.
CHAOTIC SCENE
Argetsinger and another deputy dragged Pearce out of the mobile home and into a driveway. Later, they moved him to a safer position in the street.
Both Pearce and Argetsinger described the scene outside as chaotic, a sharp contrast to what had happened inside the trailer, where SWAT team members responded just as they had practiced in "officer down" drills during training.
"You get outside and it�s total chaos," Argetsinger said. "We are left bleeding in the street for way longer than we should have been. We�re both sitting there bleeding, and we�re kind of laughing � ain�t this a sight?"
No one had notified Rural/ Metro Fire Department that the deputies would be serving a high-risk warrant in the area before the raid, something Pearce said is normally handled by the lieutenant in charge of the SWAT team, in this case Trombi.
Rural/Metro was first notified of the shooting at 6:38 a.m. and arrived on scene about 6:45 a.m, according to Alison Cooper, spokeswoman for the fire department.
Pearce said Trombi knelt beside him on the ground and told the wounded man everything would be all right. Pearce recalls he looked up and told Trombi: "Now do you want to talk to me about the lack of training?"
Both Pearce and Argetsinger were flown to Maricopa Medical Center in Phoenix.
As she stood in the hospital corridor, Pearce�s wife, Melissa, was aware of the changes being made in the SWAT unit, and the stress that had put on her husband and other members of the team. She told the Tribune on Thursday that she took no comfort when Arpaio, surrounded by his top administrators, told her he was sorry about her husband.
"I understand he has to be there and I�m fine with that," Melissa Pearce said. "But I didn�t want to be around him."
A nurse overheard Melissa Pearce say she didn�t want to be around the sheriff and moved her to another waiting room. The sheriff and his chief deputy, David Hendershott, followed them. The nurse moved the family again, this time to an empty patient�s room. Again, Arpaio and Hendershott tried to follow.
"I�m thinking, �Can they not get a clue?� " Melissa Pearce said. "I stood up and I said, �We got this private room so we don�t have to see people from the sheriff�s office like you.� "
Finally, Arpaio and Hendershott left, she said.
CONCERNS REMAIN
Both Pearce and Argetsinger face long recoveries. Argetsinger may never be able to work as a law enforcement officer again.
Both men say they worry that disbanding the experienced SWAT team, especially in the abrupt manner it was done, will mean that the lives of deputies and the public will be at risk.
"It�s not a gamble that I think we can afford to take," Pearce said. "You are putting deputies at risk because they feel an obligation to resolve things without a tactical unit. You put the public at risk because these guys don�t have the equipment or training to work that kind of a situation, and the people that were trained and did have the equipment were sent to other assignments."
-
Commodore 07/23/2009 8:52:00 PM
Lord, why do the people of Arizona put up with this? It's sad to know these same people also enforce the law.
-
Mark 07/23/2009 7:56:00 PM
Mr. Fox,
Your continuing protests are laughable. The meaning of SCA absolutely has a bearing on things!!! If the meaning is Sheriff Command Association (as in the MCSO is meddling in politics instead of law enforcement) then we need to know!!
Please stop trying to cloud the issue. I hope a federal law enforcement agency steps in on this case and REALLY investigates it. Joe has a habit of intimidation and false investigations against any state or local person or agency that does not to "his" line. Maybe if we get some officers and attorneys in here that he has no sway over, we might see the "blue wall" go down. It would be nice to see LE officers held to the same laws they are sworn to uphold!!
-
Krono 07/23/2009 6:51:00 PM
Bob Burns? he was standing outside the poll both , and adding comments against arpaio and thomas,
ride a bike bob burns, if I had known that ... humm not too late,
Thank you for all the digging I do not have time to do and keeping them accountable, hopefully we can find someone who is not corupt as these individuals. Hopefully someone will listen, very sad state of affairs. Pitiful liars.
Ill sign that petition. just announce the spots where they are located.
the law man in mesa has left he knows the truth , think he was threatened???? jokers way.
-
EnoughisEnough 07/23/2009 5:25:00 PM
Okay JOEL FOX. You have continued to write blogs...now please answer for JOE Q. PUBLIC.....WHO is paying for this fiasco? How about for Lisa Allen? How does a spokesperson for the MCSO keep a job when she LIES in a press release about the involvement of top MCSO officials in the SCA scandal? Criminal investigation into this should be an absolute. Are you all paying for it yourselves? We as taxpayers DO NOT want to foot your bill for something WE had no control over. Your bad judgement and criminal activity should NOT be treated as a minor civil matter paid for by the taxpayers. RESPOND JOEL......
-
EnoughisEnough 07/23/2009 5:05:00 PM
WHO is paying for Wilenchick to represent the MCSO employees? Are they paying out of their own pocket for his legal representation? I for one will be OUTRAGED as I'm sure many of us will be, if we find out that Hendershott and the others are treated to a "criminal" defense at the expense of the taxpayers. WHY is this MACE unit allowed to continue to operate with such obvious conflict and enough criminal suspicion by top MCSO officials? When will Andrew Thomas officially PULL the plug on the involvement by MCSO in the Anti Corruption Task Force? Why hasn't the federal government stepped in to consider criminal charges? IT'S TIME FOLKS.
-
WhoDoWeTrust? 07/23/2009 5:52:00 AM
Great job, Sarah, once again, outstanding investigative reporting. What's wrong with the rest of the "big city" media for ignoring this corruption. They all need to be swat teamed and sent to jail and held non-bondable, like they would do to any one of us that had "probable cause". Since there is no presumption of innocence or due process given to people in the county or state then this group needs to receive the same treatment.
-
Joel Fox 07/23/2009 4:49:00 AM
Sarah,
You assume SCA was a political committee from it's inception, but even County Elections says SCA did not become a politcal committee until August 22nd, 2008, when I sent money to the Republican Party. But that's only because they assume, like you do, that giving money to a political party is, by default, for the purpose of influencing an election. Unless stated otherwise, money given to parties must be for elections, right? Wrong. The law does not make this assumption, although judges sometimes do. In fact, the law specifically says that money used by parties may be for purposes specifically NOT for the purposes of influencing elections, so how my money fell into the imaginary default position of election related, I can only imagine, but it certainly is not based on any law.
Pullen never "said under oath that he asked me several times for the names of contributors", and never said that I refused to provide them. Your statement is simply false. If you actually review the record in the case, what he said under oath was that we had a single phone conversation in which he asked for the names and said the money would be returned if he didn't get them.
I think he ended that conversation thinking that I would send the names, and I ended that conversation thinking the money would be returned. I knew that if I assigned my donation to other people who never agreed, it would be Giving in the Name of Another, which is a felony.
Had you asked Lisa Houser about Giving in the Name of Another, I'm sure she would have told you that...or did you ask her, and not print it because it doesn't aid your fantasy?
I was not promoted following the 2004 election, as you repeatedly suggest. I was promoted to captain in May, 2004, 6 months before the election, and 2 months before collecting nominating signatures. It is true that I was transferred to SWAT shortly after the election, and I was highly qualified for the position, but it is not a promotion...I was a captain before the transfer...a captain after the transfer...and I am still a captain. I have not been promoted since May of 2004, and I haven't been the SWAT commander since 2007.
I explained all of that a couple times in different comments to your blog posts. You pay such close attention to my jokes, but you don't care to report the truth. You don't even have to take my word on this one. All it would take is a phone call to confirm it, if you really feel you have to, but you'd much rather print your lies without finding out for sure, because then you can always say you didn't know...right? I mean, it's not malicious or libelous unless you know it isn't true, right? So if you just pretend not to know, and fail to check the facts, you can print whatever you want without regard to the truth or consequences...right?
Is that what you tell yourself so you can sleep at night?
How do you figure my post office box was a coincidence? I never said that. I've never heard anyone else say that. I had one PO Box. I see no reason to rent a second PO Box. This is criminal? What did Lisa Hauser say about that? Did you ask her?
I was laughing when I wrote "second chance apples". I was making fun of Ray because he is so fixated and focused on what SCA stands for, when it actually has no bearing on anything. Kinda like the single PO Box. If I called my account "Joel's Account" and rented a second PO Box, would you think everything was prefectly legal and above board? No, you wouldn't. You'd just pick something else to fixate on.
I never told you that David Hendershott was not an SCA donor. I told you the donations that went to the Republican Party did not come from him or Sheriff Arpaio. At the time you asked the question, you didn't know if there was more than $105,000, anyway, so we only talked about the $105,000...we never discussed additional donations to SCA. Although I can see how you might not like my accounting style, or agree with how I divide up the money in the SCA account, I find it very telling that you characterize this as a "lie to your face" that makes me "wily", and that this somehow shifted your sympathies.
You've been writing false and abusive articles about this series of events since just a few days after the democrat's complaint in October. Following the hearing, obviously feeling very sympathetic, you write an article that says I'm confused, resorted to a"Clintonesque chestnut", and that my testimony hardly helped my cause. My sister attended this hearing, and wondered if you were really there. And now you say that you were sympathetic...and I am the liar.
Your most reliable statements of the whole article come from Lisa Hauser, and you're nice enough to include her comment that what is needed here is a "comprehensive look at the facts", which obviously, you have not done. You are "convinced it has absolutely everything to do with the Sheriff's Office" admittedly without a comprehensive look at the facts. You get convinced without looking at the facts? What kind of journalism is that?
Apparently, it is impossible for a person to do anything after work hours, or have an actual life, outside of work, or do anything without immediately reporting it to the Sheriff or Chief Deputy. According to your imagination, all us "dummys" over at MCSO really do get put away at the end of the day, locked in some chest until the Sheriff or Chief Deputy lets us out the following day and pulls our strings so we can walk and talk.
I can see now why you don't want me to raise money to refute the lies told in the media about MCSO deputies and detention officers....If I did, you'd be held accountable.
And that would ruin all your fun.
-
Coz 07/23/2009 3:45:00 AM
I think the list of SCA donors is the perfect list to start with by putting the people whose name's are on it, in jail.
The we move on to Lisa Allen and MacInWeasel just for the hell of it.
-
Chad Snow 07/23/2009 3:10:00 AM
I'm not sure which is more unconscionable - the corruption at MCSO or the fact that the rest of the Valley "media" has barely made a peep out of this latest clear case of corruption at the county's top law enforcement agency.
If Terry Goddard has an ounce of integrity and fortitude, he will make sure that this is fully investigated. That's his job. If he doesn't, he wouldn't be any better of a Governor than Arpaio - just another self interested politician covering his own ass.
-
david saint 07/22/2009 10:57:00 PM
Great article, and very pointed and factual as always Sarah!
I think what it boils down to is who ISNT afraid of Arpaio, and who still step up and do the right thing.
As much as I wish the AG would get knee deep into this, one must remember that Nelson is a part of the AG's staff, thus creating a REAL conflict of interest (as opposed to a useless, worthless investigation opened merely to keep him at bay).
I say let Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu run the investigation. He has shown he can be fair and impartial, and i doubt he is afraid of Joe. Im sure which ever agency does get put in charge of this, will get the usual harrassment and intimidation from hendershott and arpaio. So who ever it is must possess a proven level of integrity, and a big pair of stones.
The only thing you forgot to mention Sarah, is that while Hendershott is in charge of the MACE task force, he clearly was involved in corruption himself. Which brings into question the validity of any investigation it has ran, or is currently running. One could suggest that the Republic has it pegged right, ITS A FRAUD..much like the fraud they clearly committed by this PAC.
Its time to see MCSO employees held to the same laws as you and I, with the same punishments or worse (they know the law, they are held to a higher standard for this reason in my eyes). The law was clearly broken, now lets sit back and see who has the integrity and fortitude to do the right thing...
-
Leonard Clark 07/22/2009 10:49:00 PM
Hello everybody ! Just writing to announce that we have finally filed official recalls on Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas. We are going to let the nation and world know that the image of ignorance and hate that Joe Arpaio, Andrew Thomas, Pierce, Bob Burns et. al. have sent out from Arizona is a false one ! Arizona, will hence forward be a state known for Love, humanity and justice !
The image of our state is very important in that the above individuals and their thuggish accomplices hope to discourage nice people from moving to Arizona and instead attract those that physically threaten and hate those that disagree with their un-constitutional and anti-human rights behavior ! In this way, these elected "haters" will ensure themselves never getting out of elected office ! Because those that hate the constitution and civil rights and support Joe Arpaio will out number those that support the constitution at the ballot box.
We should thank all those politicians like Phil Gordon who stand against hate and racism especially knowing that their going to be threatened by these racist thugs who constantly threaten and intimidate with violence. The racists and the un-constitutional thugs will no longer rule our Maricopa County nor our beautiful state of Arizona !
Please, help us any way you can whether through prayer, signing one of our petitions or helping circulate them and getting other people to sign them. We have almost no funding except for pennies to print the tremondous amount of petitions it will take to get these two thugs recalled so please donate whatever you can no donation is to small to help fight for the constitution, human rights and justice here in Maricopa County Arizona !
We are in the process of getting paypal set up on our website: arizonarecall.com so please if you can, go over to our site and help us in any way you can. Even if you just spread the word about our recall or post the news of it everywhere you can that will be blow struck in defense of our constitution. The Main Stream Media is not going to publicize this campaign against ignorance and hate unless we force it to the point where they can no longer pretend we don't exist.
We pledge our lives to you in the name of restoring peace, love and humanity to our Maricopa County and beautiful state of Arizona
Sincerely,
Leonard Clark Chair of the recall committees for Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas.
website: arizonarecall.com phone: 623-206-2039 email: leonardclark385@hotmail.com
July 22th, 2009
