9th circuit filing re: Murder of Sheriff Joe's crony
By Ray Stern
By Ray Stern
By New Times
By Amy Silverman
By Stephen Lemons
By Stephen Lemons
By Monica Alonzo
By Chris Parker
Brown people in this county just need keep their yaps shut, particularly when it comes to something that concerns them directly, like the anti-Latino bigotry that has so thoroughly infected the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office.
In an unsigned (read: cowardly) opinion piece published this week, these idiot elitists advised county Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox to "butt out" of any discussion or vote on the ACLU's big racial-profiling lawsuit Melendres v. Arpaio.
Actually, Republic columnist Laurie Roberts took up the cudgel first, commenting on a move by Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery to block Wilcox from discussions on Melendres in executive sessions of the county Board of Supervisors and from a pending BOS vote on whether county taxpayers should pony up the dough to appeal federal Judge G. Murray Snow's May 24 decision in the case.
Snow concluded that the MCSO has engaged in prejudiced policing toward Latinos. His exacting 142-page ruling ordered the MCSO to lay off Latinos and enjoined the MCSO from enforcing civil immigration law.
At a June 14 hearing, Snow informed both plaintiffs and defendants that he was inclined to appoint an independent monitor to oversee the changes in policy and training required to rid the MCSO of its bigoted ways.
Post-hearing, Arpaio's chief deputy, Jerry Sheridan, explained to me, "We feel very strongly we were not racially profiling."
You know, despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary. Hence, the need for the monitor.
An appeal of "findings of fact" following a trial in federal court is a tough nut. The ACLU's Dan Pochoda tells me that such findings would have to be "clearly erroneous" for them to be overturned on appeal. Legal scholars I've spoken with second that opinion.
Melendres already has cost the county more than $1 million in lawyers' fees. And currently, the county owes the plaintiffs for their legal bills, expected to be more than $1 million. If the county appeals and loses, it could be out another million or two.
Add in the tab for the U.S. Department of Justice's lawsuit against the MCSO for racial profiling and a host of other constitutional transgressions. So far, it's more than $837,000.
Gee, this bigotry stuff is expensive.
For years now, the Board of Supervisors has been discussing Melendres, in executive session mostly, with its legal beagles. Wilcox has been part of these discussions.
But in a June 6 letter to Wilcox, County Attorney Montgomery advised her that she has a conflict of interest in the case. He cited a state law under which Wilcox could be charged with a class-six felony and removed from office if found guilty.
Why is Wilcox supposedly conflicted in Melendres?
Montgomery maintains it's because his office appealed the $1 million settlement in Wilcox and her husband Earl's federal lawsuit against the county. The pair sued for getting put through the legal wringer by Arpaio and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas, the sheriff's since-disbarred and disgraced lackey.
In fact, Montgomery is following in the footsteps of Thomas in more ways than just pandering to the sheriff.
See, Monty's invoking a conflict-of-interest statute that Thomas used to indict Wilcox. First time around, Thomas hit her with 36 bogus felony charges. Second time around, 42. Many were for alleged conflicts of interest.
This was in retaliation for Wilcox's outspoken opposition to Arpaio's immigration sweeps and work-site raids targeting the Latino community.
Ultimately, the charges Thomas brought against Wilcox were thrown out, and this abuse of his power as a prosecutor became part of the State Bar of Arizona's case against him.
The statute in question, A.R.S. 38-503, states that a public officer must recuse him- or herself if he or she has a "substantial interest" in the matter at hand.
"Substantial interest" is defined as "any pecuniary or proprietary interest," meaning a financial interest of some kind.
You can argue that Wilcox has a political interest in Melendres, but so do Arpaio's supporters on the Board of Supervisors. Wilcox is the lone Democrat in a den of Republicans.
However, she does not stand to benefit financially from Melendres. Even the plaintiffs in Melendres are not seeking damages.
The outcome of Monty's appeal of the Wilcox settlement does not affect Melendres. Vice versa, Melendres could go down in flames tomorrow, and it will not affect the Wilcox settlement.
(An aside: The U.S. Department of Justice's claim against the MCSO is much broader and includes political retaliation against Arpaio's enemies, such as the Wilcoxes. Since Wilcox is named in that suit, she has recused herself from discussions concerning it.)
It really steams the Rep's Roberts that Wilcox scored a $1 million settlement from the county, though several county officials, employees, and judges have negotiated settlements ranging from $75,000 for the county's former information officer Steve Wetzel to $1.27 million for former Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe.
I reckon reasonable people can disagree. Personally, I don't think you check your civil rights at the door when you become a public servant. And if Roberts were in Wilcox's position or that of former Supervisor Don Stapley, I doubt she'd eschew damages and content herself with mere legal fees.
Anyway, Roberts backed Monty's call, writing, "I can think of one million reasons why Wilcox should not have a say in whether to appeal the Snow ruling."
Either that was a deliberate red herring or Roberts misread the law, assuming she looked it up. As stated above, Wilcox's settlement, currently drawing interest as Monty pursues his likely-to-fail appeal, does not hinge on anything that transpires in Melendres.
Which brings us to the editorial board's opinion piece this week, telling Wilcox to "butt out." (That's how the title read in the electronic version.)
Evidently, someone explained the law to the editorial board, because it concedes, unlike Roberts, that "legally, we believe [Wilcox] retains a right to discuss and vote on an appeal."
Yet, the Rep board still claims that she shouldn't do so because "a river of bad blood separates Wilcox and the sheriff."
That's an assertion that could be made of nearly all Latinos in Maricopa County. And the Rep comes pretty close to stating that brown folk cannot help but be biased when it comes to Arpaio.
"It is an article of faith among Wilcox's Hispanic constituents that Arpaio's 'crime-suppression sweeps' profiled them ruthlessly, and this case is the first proof of it," writes the editorial board.
Correction, ofays: Latinos in this county don't need "faith." They can rely instead on a federal judge's findings of fact. Arpaio's Hispanic-hunting sweeps did target their community, which is why the Supes' sole non-Anglo, non-male, non-Republican voice should be part of the board's discussions on Melendres.
Otherwise, a third of this county's residents effectively will be shut out of the process. When the Rep tells Wilcox to butt out, it's telling them to butt out. Ditto all those who agree with her, no matter their ethnicity, whose opinions are not echoed by those four conservative white Supes.
Wilcox has filed a claim in Superior Court seeking a declaratory judgment that will allow her to exercise her First Amendment rights without fear of arrest.
Amazing, the lengths Hispanics must go to in this racist county in order to achieve parity with their Anglo counterparts.
9th circuit filing re: Murder of Sheriff Joe's crony
Look at all the Racist Comments, and Vile Foul Racist labels being thrown out in these Blog Comments.
These Comments Prove how infected the M.C.S.O. is with Bigotry!
Everyone wants to shut Wilcox up. She blows nothing but hot air. Wilcox is the lone Democrat in a den of Republicans and maybe they will eat her up.
The caption of this article should have instead said "Montgomery, the Republic, Arpaio and JoeArpaioFan Want Mary Rose Wilcox to Zip it on Melendres".
Yes that skanky whore should shut her mouth.
Mary Rose Wilcox should make up her own mind on how to proceed. To take the advice of a bigoted little weasel like Monty makes no sense. Considering all the cases Monty has fought and lost she might want to ask his advice and do the opposite... Mary Rose Wilcox shows more of the courage and tenacity that used to characterize respected Arizona politicians like Carl Hayden or Barry Goldwater than Monty and his republican bozos in the legislature could ever muster. Give them Hell Mary Rose, you have my respect and admiration!
MCSO, Surprise AZ police and GIlbert AZ police have intimate knowledge concerning the murder/suicide of Justin M. Nelson... ...
Nelson recounts my assault by detectives from the County Attorneys office here...
This document was filed under oath in federal court. Any investigation of the County Attorney? No...
The filing of yesterday concerning Arpaio and his now dead crony Nelson.
Nelson's quote is at the end of the filing.
Arpaio crony dead at 36. Murder or suicide. Media blackout.
Justin M. Nelson died last October with zero media coverage (not even a obituary) under very suspicious circumstances.
Nelson is the central figure in a federal case being considered by the 9th cir court of appeals in San Francisco alleging MCSO and other law enforcement corruption. In that case Nelson is quoted recounting his meeting with Sheriff Arpaio regarding the law enforcement targeting of activist Scott Huminski.
There was an attempted murder of Huminski in May of 2012.
Nelson was not buried until last month, 9 months after his death because of law enforcement involvement.
Now there is one dead and an attempted murder of another concerning this Arizona law enforcement case.
MontyPug, ever the loyal Arpaio lap-dog.
Apparently he's willing to risk both his political career and his law license in an attempt to muzzle MRW.
Apparently he forgot what happened to Candy Andy and the Miscreants only a year ago.
MontyPug, go back to law school. Stop embarrassing yourself and the people of Maricopa County by playing politics with this very serious issue. It's obvious you don't know what a conflict of interest is.
It really shouldn't matter if you like Mary Rose Wilcox or not. What is happening here is very wrong in any democracy.
When Candy Andy had his hatchet man Dennis Willenchik order the arrest of the Voice execs, he obviously didn't expect much blowback. Perhaps Monty is laboring under the same misconception.
@JoeArpaioFan Arpaio's people certainly know how to treat a lady. Your pejorative is a shining example of the sewage that flows from that bunch.
@JAFFYDUCK. U DON'T HAVE ANY SAY ON THIS BITCH, fucking deluded moron. If U want to reconstruct something, U should reconstruct UR fucking POS life, starting with finding UR "Illegal" allien daddy, and ask him why R U such a retard. Then try to reconstruct UR mom's life, ask her why is she such a whore, pairing with an "illegal", which BTW, U hate so much. FUCKING DELUDED MORON.
@mrwally373 That's an accurate way to say it... Mary Rose "BEANER" Wilcox. Now that's a bitch who has cost Maricopa County taxpayers plenty! A poor excuse for a politician and human being.
@dkessler4 Screw Wilcox.
@scott.huminski Burials don't happen overnight. How long did they keep your mother on ice before they buried her?
@scott.huminski Who are you and why should we care? This is off topic.
@scott.huminski You are so full of crap. Just shutup already please.
...and Bozo Joe Arpaio has built his career and bank account on death, torture and violating the rights of the many.
Joe Arpaio makes Wilcox look like a saint in comparison.
@yourproductsucks Point is, she's the only supervisor who has consistently been critical of Joe over the past 6 years. There is no conflict in this case. And in the Thomas stuff, it was all thrown out. The reason why Arpaio & Thomas went after her is because she spoke out. The reason why Monty and Arpaio want her to shut up is because they don't want her speaking out.
Christ, she's outgunned 4 to 1 on the BOS. What are these crackas so worried about? That she might try to talk some sense into them?
Monty needs to be the next one to go.
@JoeArpaioFan Fuck you and Fuck Arpaio
MotherJones, Scott explains below that he is a victim of the Flaccid Failure and he has evidence the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will rule against AARPaio. He's genuine.
@JAFFYDUCK.And U R so full of cum, I don't need to tell U to shut up, 'cause if U open UR mouth all that stuff is comming out and that is 1 of UR favorite meals. LICKER
@Cozz You can make a comparison other in order to justify WIlcox if you'd like. It doesn't change that she is a POS that needs to leave the Board of Supervisors.
@JAFFYDUCK. UR pappy ARPUTO is going to B fucked up very soon, since the DOJ is comming back to finish their case, get him while he is down, pile on the MoFckr. Hopefully chrarges R filed against U at the same time. It'll B a day 4 celebration, seeing both COCKROACHES IN HANDCUFFS.HA HA HA. HASTA LA VISTA PENDEJO
@Arpaio's Butt Monkey;
I would gladly tell Arpaio and his Butt Monkey to their Face.
Would it anger the mighty Oz?
@JAFFYBOI, Do U have any evidence to the contrary?, if so, prove it or shut UR dick sucking hole up. SON OF A DONKEY.
@MaskedMagician1967 Scott was never a victim of anybody.. He's just a whiner and when he can't get his way he cries like a baby.
@MaskedMagician1967 He is as illegitimate as they come. He clogs the system with frivolous litigation. All of his links are to information written by him.
@yourproductsucks I know, you say she is a POS,that needs to vacate the BOS and I am saying compared to whom? To Kunasek? I could say the same of Kunasek and it would be as valid as ur objections to MRW.
Actually YPS I've always said I don't think she's any better than Arpaio when you come right down to it.
@MotherJones If you read his statement, you see his comparison other is arpaio, not kunasek. He's justifying Wilcox's nefarious activities by comparing them to arpaio's.