Homeless in Arizona

Babeu urged to lower budget bid

By Lindsey Collom The Republic | azcentral.com Wed Apr 24, 2013 10:27 PM

FLORENCE -- Pinal County supervisors have asked Sheriff Paul Babeu to pare down a request for an extra $12.1 million in the coming fiscal year to avoid throwing the county into bankruptcy by fiscal 2016.

Babeu had asked to increase his spending capacity by an estimated 20 percent in order to hire new deputies, buy equipment and raises salaries to compete with market values.

According to county budget office projections, granting the sheriff’s request while implementing a planned countywide 2.5 percent merit-pay increase would deplete the county’s contingency fund within three years unless the Republican-controlled Board of Supervisors raised the primary-tax rate, an option it has declined to entertain so far.

Supervisor Anthony Smith, who cited the projections before making a motion to postpone voting on Babeu’s proposal for a month, said he wasn’t pointing fingers at the sheriff but wanted to “encourage all departments to help us find ways to make government more efficient.”

The board unanimously agreed.

“The board basically did what they had to do in respect to ensure that we assume our fiduciary responsibility in balancing the budget now and into future years,” said Supervisor Pete Rios, the board’s lone Democrat. “I think it was the board’s gracious way to tell the sheriff, ‘No, but if you want to bring something back in a work session, we would certainly consider it.’ ”

Board Chairman Steve Miller had warned elected officials and department heads in February that budgets will be frozen at current levels except in instances tied to “specific, mandated state or federal programs.”

But Babeu told supervisors on Wednesday that an estimated 20 percent budget increase was necessary to keep Pinal County safe and that a no vote was tantamount to supervisors not prioritizing public safety.

Included in the Sheriff’s Office proposal:

$1 million for holiday pay and related expenses.

$5 million for 69 new positions (most are deputies), 5 percent specialty pay, and related expenses, such as retirement contributions.

$950,000 for equipment, software, leasing of office space, training and fuel.

$3.9 million for 65 new vehicles, and an extra $1.1 million (on top of the $1.5 million already set aside) to help replace 44 vehicles.

In justifying the staffing expenses, Babeu presented supervisors with a study by the Segal Co., a benefit-analysis firm based in Washington, D.C. In conducting its research, the company compared the Sheriff’s Office staffing levels and pay ranges for select sworn and civilian positions with five local law-enforcement agencies.

“The last countywide survey which polled our residents gave the Pinal County Sheriff's Office the highest ranking of any government entity with a 75% approval rating,” Babeu said in a written statement. “The same survey showed 97% of those surveyed support our law enforcement efforts to lower crime rates. The Pinal County Board of Supervisors has asked our office to come forward during the budget process with proposals which would continue to improve public safety. As part of the process, a nationally renowned staffing expert conducted an independent review of our needs. ... Together we presented his findings to the Board of Supervisors to open the dialog during this budget process.”

In a 24-page memorandum dated Tuesday, Segal’s senior vice president said the Sheriff’s Office is understaffed by 79 to 116 deputies compared with similar agencies.

The study indicated that Pinal County sheriff’s deputies earn more than their counterparts in Maricopa and Pima counties when comparing minimum, midpoint and maximum pay ranges, but less when matched against police officers in Chandler, Tempe and Mesa. Pay ranges for select command staff in both sworn and civilian ranks were below market.

In setting the stage for the presentation, Babeu introduced a Pinal County K-9 deputy who recently accepted a job with the Chandler Police Department for a $12,000 salary boost. The deputy, who has been with Pinal County for seven years, told supervisors that Valley law-enforcement agencies are luring good employees from Pinal County to better support their families.

Babeu said his office’s turnover rate is 4 to 6 percent; the industry average is 3 to 5 percent.

Medical marijuana will create 1,500 jobs in Arizona

I think two thirds of the people in Federal prison are there for victimless drug war crimes. I am not sure of the percent in Arizona prison for victimless drug war crimes, but the number is huge.

Source

Study: Medical marijuana will create 1,500 jobs in Arizona

Posted: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 1:35 pm

By Julia Shumway, Cronkite News

When Arizona voters approved the use of medical marijuana in 2010, Steve Cottrell saw a way to combine his laboratory background and his interest in the plant he’d been studying since his 11-year-old son died of cancer more than a decade before.

Cottrell is now the owner of AZ Med Testing, a medical marijuana testing laboratory in Tempe. Dispensaries pay Cottrell and his business partner, Brenda Perkins, to test marijuana samples for mold and pesticides.

“We’re making money, but we definitely have our challenges,” he said. “But now that dispensaries are open, it’s moving forward.”

According to a study sponsored by the Regulated Dispensaries of Arizona Association, the two jobs at AZ Med Testing are among estimated 1,500 that will be created by Arizona’s medical marijuana industry.

Tim Hogan, an Arizona State University research associate who authored the study, used information from Oregon’s established medical marijuana industry to estimate the size of Arizona’s market

“It’s a pretty simple industry,” he said. “There’s not too much nuance. The main driving mechanism is how many patients.”

Hogan found that the industry had the potential to create not only 1,500 direct jobs for marijuana growers and dispensary employees but up to 5,000 indirect jobs at places like grocery stores.

Arizona has approximately 38,000 medical marijuana cardholders and is allowed 126 dispensaries, a percentage of the state’s operating pharmacies. Only a handful are open now.

Hogan said his study models only the straight economic impact of the industry instead of offering a more extensive cost-benefit analysis. The industry is small but should contribute to Arizona’s economy, he said.

“Given the size of the industry, it seems it will generate substantial income and tax revenue,” Hogan said.

In Colorado, which legalized the use of medical marijuana in 2000, dispensaries brought in nearly $200 million in sales and paid about $5.5 million in state sales tax in 2012, according to that state’s Department of Revenue.

Beth Wilson, an economics professor at California’s Humboldt State University and a faculty member in the school’s new Humboldt Institute for Interdisciplinary Marijuana Research, said much more study on medical marijuana is needed.

She said it’s possible that more states legalizing the drug for medical or recreational use could lead to marijuana mega-farms run by tobacco companies instead of small businesses.

“No one can know for sure what the impact is,” Wilson said.

Michelle LeBas worked as an office administrator at a car dealership before becoming a dispensing agent at Bisbee’s Green Farmacy Natural Relief Clinic. She verifies that patients have valid medical marijuana cards and then teaches them about different strains of the plant.

LeBas said the dispensary, which has three employees and an on-site doctor, faced some scrutiny when it opened in late March.

“People just thought it was an excuse for stoners to do it,” she said. “But we’ve overcome that and we have people coming in here that genuinely need it. We’ve given them a completely new form of care.”

Green Farmacy Natural Relief Clinic serves about 100 patients and has provided 25 with new medical marijuana cards.

Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery has sought to block the state’s medical marijuana law since it went into effect. He said any study that discusses medical marijuana’s possible economic benefits is inherently flawed because the state loses more in criminal prosecution.

“It’s crock,” Montgomery said. “None of those studies that purport to show an economic impact take into account the criminal impact.”

It’s important to remember that all marijuana is illegal at the federal level, said Carolyn Short, chairwoman of Keep AZ Drug Free, a committee that formed in opposition to the 2010 ballot proposition that legalized medical marijuana.

She said economic models like the study commissioned by the Regulated Dispensaries of Arizona Association have to be done in a bubble because every part of the medical marijuana business violates federal law.

“Every single time a dispensary sells a joint or an ounce, they’re doing something illegal,” Short said.

At AZ Med Testing, Cottrell said the possibility of federal prosecution or a raid by the Drug Enforcement Administration hangs over his head each day. However, he said he remains focused on doing his job well.

“Sure, they could come down and knock our door down and arrest us for this plant material,” Cottrell said. “But there’s far more dangerous non-law-abiding people who are doing a lot worse than testing plants for pesticides, and we have to believe the DEA is going after them.”

Disbarred Maricopa County Attorney Thomas to run for governor

Of course I wouldn't like him any better then Hitler, Bush, Mecham or Brewer. But Steve Benson would have 4 years of editorial cartoonist fun making fun of the moron in the Republic editorial cartoons

Source

Disbarred former Maricopa County Attorney Thomas to run for governor

By Alia Beard Rau The Republic | azcentral.com Thu Apr 25, 2013 6:14 PM

Disbarred former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas has announced he will run for governor in 2014.

In an e-mail to members of the media, the Republican said he file paperwork today with the Secretary of State’s Office.

“I’ll be focusing on the need to protect public safety, ensure border security and fight corruption, among other issues,” Thomas said in the e-mail. “Voters will be urged to watch the video of my State Bar hearing and see for themselves how honest prosecutors are railroaded for fighting corruption in this state.”

Thomas served as county attorney from 2005 until he resigned in 2010 to unsuccessfully run for Arizona attorney general. He was stripped of his law license last year after a court panel found he acted unethically.

Thomas was once a conservative Republican icon, making his name pushing immigration control at the state and county levels. His political downfall came after he was accused of using his prosecutorial powers while in office for political purposes.

A disciplinary panel convened by the Arizona Supreme Court found clear and convincing evidence of ethical misconduct that merited disbarment.

Among the most serious findings were that he and his former prosecutors pressed unwarranted criminal charges, obtained indictments, filed a federal racketeering lawsuit and initiated investigations against his political enemies and those of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio from 2006 to 2010. Targets included judges, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and other county officials.

Thomas did not respond to an e-mail from The Arizona Republic seeking additional comment about his decision to run for governor.

Thomas joins a growing list of candidates.

Democrat and former Arizona Board of Regents Chairman Fred DuVal, Republican and former Tempe Mayor Hugh Hallman and Americans Elect party candidate John Mealer have already formally filed to run. Republicans Sen. Al Melvin and Secretary of State Ken Bennett have formed exploratory committees, and numerous others have indicated an interest.

What about Fifth Amendment rights?

Letter: What about Fifth Amendment rights?

Posted: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 7:16 pm

Letter to the Editor

Every time I am stopped by the police I tell them I am taking the Fifth and refusing to answer their questions.

I even refuse to tell them my name.

I am not a criminal, but I figure that since the founders died to get me those rights I should use them or lose them.

The next things that usually happens is the cops tell me I don’t have any Fifth Amendment rights in “this case.” I am confused on that because Miranda v Arizona says “If the individual indicates ... he wishes to remain silent, the interrogation must cease”

And of course things then get worse. The cops usually illegally search my wallet, and all my pockets looking for my ID, drugs and guns. I don’t carry an ID, and I don’t use drugs or carry a gun so they never find anything.

Yes, I know Terry v. Ohio allows the cops to give you a pat down search of your outer garments looking for weapons, but a search of my pockets and wallet is clearly illegal per the 4th Amendment and Terry v. Ohio.

Then, I am usually handcuffed and falsely arrested while the police make all kinds of threats on what is going to happen if I don’t answer their questions. After an hour or two the cops release me and tell me I am a jerk for thinking I have “Constitutional rights”.

With that in mind, I can understand where the cops are going in attempting to force Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the Boston Marathon bombing suspect, to answer their questions without reading him his Miranda rights.

Our Constitutional rights were not created to protect criminals. They were created to protect the innocent from government tyrants, like the police that have a number of times falsely arrested me, illegally questioned me and illegally searched me. I guess I should be glad, because I have not been beaten up, yet, for thinking I have Constitutional rights.

Mike Ross

Tempe

34% of teens say pot improves driving

When I was in high school they fed us nothing but lies about the effects of using drugs and alcohol. They even showed us the movie "Reefer Madness" in an attempt to scare us into not using marijuana.

About the only thing I remember from that stupid movie is that if a Black man smokes a joint, it will cause him to go out and rape 6 White woman. Yea, sure!!!!!

I suspect the one of the reasons the kids falsely think that smoking pot improves their driving skills is because they are used to the government schools feeding them lies about drug use.

I suspect if the government stopped feeding high schools kids the lies they currently feed them, and only feed them factual information about drugs many of these kids would not think that pot improves their driving skills.

On the other hand I will have to admit that driving when you are stoned on pot is much safer then driving when you drunk. Marijuana doesn't wipe out your motor skills like booze does. But even so I certainly don't recommend driving when you are stoned.

Source

Poll: 34% of teens say pot improves driving

By Zachary Tracer Bloomberg News Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:41 AM

NEW YORK — Most teenagers who drove under the influence of marijuana said the drug either improves their performance behind the wheel or is no hindrance, according to a survey by insurer Liberty Mutual Holding Co. and a safety group.

Thirty-four percent of those who have driven while high say the drug makes them a better motorist, and 41 percent said it had no effect, Boston-based Liberty Mutual said. Among teens who drove under the influence of alcohol, 62 percent said drinking affected their driving for the worse.

Teens’ attitudes show that parents need to do a better job of educating children about safe driving, Liberty Mutual and Students Against Destructive Decisions said in a statement Thursday disclosing survey results. They found that 23 percent of teens had driven under the influence of alcohol, marijuana or prescription drugs used illegally.

“We’ve been stressing the dangers associated with drinking and driving, and drugging and driving, for years and years and years,” Dave Melton, who helps oversee safety initiatives at Liberty Mutual, said in an interview. “Our kids are still doing the same kinds of things.”

Parents need to set a good example for their children and enforce driving rules to keep them safe, Melton said.

While there’s a clear association between alcohol and increased car-crash risk, the link between marijuana use and accidents is less certain, according to NORML, which seeks to decriminalize marijuana use by adults. Stoned drivers may slow down and require greater time to respond, the organization said on its website.

“This reaction is just the opposite of that exhibited by drivers under the influence of alcohol, who tend to drive in a more risky manner proportional to their intoxication,” NORML said on its site.

Still, the organization said people shouldn’t drive after being impaired by marijuana use.

Teen drivers say using a mobile phone is at least as distracting as driving under the influence of alcohol, marijuana or prescription drugs, Liberty Mutual found. Three quarters of teens said driving while high on marijuana is at least slightly distracting, and 86 percent said the same of driving under the influence of alcohol.

The data are based on completed surveys from 1,708 11th and 12th graders at 26 high schools across the U.S., according to Liberty Mutual.

Melton said he was shocked by teen acceptance of driving after marijuana use.

“I don’t understand how they think it improves their driving,” he said. “Maybe they think that their senses are enhanced as a result of using a mind-altering drug. I just can’t say, I have no idea.”

MCSO Commander Bob Rampy under hacking inquiry

Ex-MCSO commander under hacking inquiry

By JJ Hensley The Republic | azcentral.com Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:59 PM

A former Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office commander whom the office suspects of hacking into its computer system is the subject of an ongoing federal investigation spurred by the security breach.

Federal investigators earlier this month served a search warrant on the home of former Cmdr. Bob Rampy, who federal court documents say is suspected of committing “fraud and related activity in connection with computers.”

Investigators searched Rampy’s home April 9 and recovered at least one hard drive, several computers, notebooks, e-mails and other computer-related materials, according to court documents.

Rampy, 56, retired last September from the Sheriff’s Office, where he commanded the technology bureau.

Rampy’s attorney and federal officials declined to comment on the investigation.

The federal search warrant contains few details about why FBI agents sought authorization in early April from U.S. District Judge Lawrence Anderson to serve the warrant. It includes only a single reference to a violation of U.S. criminal code for fraud, and prosecutors sealed a probable-cause statement in which they would typically describe the crime they believe was committed.

The warrant authorized investigators to seize records related to accessing the Sheriff’s Office’s secure network, information on the office’s digital network architecture, records on three specific devices that control access to computerized media and at least one Toughbook laptop computer of the type frequently assigned to sheriff’s deputies.

The Sheriff’s Office first noticed something amiss with its computer systems in January and asked the Department of Public Safety, which regulates access to criminal-justice databases, if something was wrong on the state’s end, said Lisa Allen, a spokeswoman for Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Allen said DPS assumed the problems were coming from the Sheriff’s Office.

“We clearly recognized then that there might have been some sort of security breach and that it was coming from outside the systems,” Allen said. “Looking at the type of breach it was, it obviously required some significant expertise to breach that system.” At that point, the Sheriff’s Office contacted the FBI, Allen said.

The Sheriff’s Office is conducting a criminal investigation of Rampy, Allen said. That investigation has not produced information that leads detectives to believe there are other employees involved in the breach, Allen said.

Rampy figured in some of the disputes between the Sheriff’s Office and other county agencies during the past five years. Some of those disputes led to allegations that Rampy used his expertise to violate the privacy of the office’s enemies.

In 2010, when the Sheriff’s Office and other agencies were embroiled in a dispute over who should have access to and control of a sensitive criminal-justice database, attorneys representing county administrators wrote a letter asking the Sheriff’s Office if Rampy was conducting surveillance on county officials.

“It has been brought to our attention that Commander Rampy has been observed on numerous occasions parked across from the Chambers Building watching (county Office of Enterprise Technology) employees from his unmarked SUV with radio and satellite equipment on the roof,” the letter stated.

Rampy claimed the letter, and its release to the media, was part of an orchestrated campaign among county administrators to smear him. He filed a notice of claim against the county in February 2011, calling the letter “the first salvo in a series of unwarranted, public attacks on Commander Rampy’s impeccable personal and professional reputation.”

He offered to settle the dispute for $750,000. The county never responded to the claim, and Rampy never filed suit.

Another dispute with Rampy arose in June 2011, involving allegations that his wife illegally accessed a criminal-justice database. The accusations were contained in a three-page handwritten complaint sent to Maricopa County supervisors and the FBI.

At the time, Rampy said the accusations took him by surprise. “Actually, using my wife as a mechanism like that doesn’t make any sense at all. When asked where I work, she doesn’t even say that I work for the Sheriff’s Office because some of the cases I work on are life-threatening,” Rampy said in a June 2011 interview. “It’s really bothering me. My laptop is secure; there’s nobody else that can get on it. I carry it with me.”

Rampy retired from the Sheriff’s Office last fall to work in the private sector, Allen said.

Federal officials announced in late August that they had closed a four-year investigation into allegations that Arpaio’s office engaged in civil-rights violations, misuse of public money and perjury. An assistant U.S. attorney said prosecution was declined because of a lack of evidence or an insurmountable burden of proof. Arpaio said at the time the investigation’s closure absolved him and members of his office of the accusations.

Yavapai County deputies had lied in probe

Report: Yavapai County deputies had lied in probe

By Dennis Wagner The Republic | azcentral.com Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:49 PM

Two Yavapai County deputies who belonged to a motorcycle club known as the Iron Brotherhood lied to Prescott police about a December bar fight on Whiskey Row and criminally hindered the investigation, according to an internal report released Thursday by the Sheriff’s Office.

Three sheriff’s employees — Capt. Marc Schmidt, Sgt. William Suttle and Deputy Mark Boan — were subjects of the probe, which concluded that Schmidt and Suttle were “deceitful” on the night of the altercation, and all three deputies showed more loyalty to the biker club than to their sworn duty as peace officers.

At least 16 members of the Iron Brotherhood, a law-enforcement club, were partying at saloons on Dec. 22 when a fight broke out at Moctezuma’s Bar. Justin Stafford, 23, was hospitalized with a possible broken nose after allegedly being struck several times by club member Eric “Guido” Amado, whose police agency was not listed.

In a news release, Sheriff Scott Mascher apologized to county residents “for any trust we may have lost as a result of this event. I know the badge has been tarnished and we will work relentlessly to regain the community’s full trust and confidence.”

None of the Yavapai County deputies involved could be reached for comment. Schmidt and Suttle resigned while the internal probe was under way; Boan faces discipline for alleged conduct unbecoming of an officer. A criminal investigation by the Arizona Department of Public Safety was to be released today.

Cmdr. Rex Gilliland, who conducted the internal review, compared the 26-member Iron Brotherhood with outlaw organizations such as the Hells Angels Motorcycle Club, noting that it is an all-male outfit that uses similar membership “patches” — a skull with blue eyes and an iron cross. Iron Brotherhood vests display the number 92, using the ninth and second letters in the alphabet to indicate the club initials, IB. Hells Angels display the number 81 for HA.

A website for the Iron Brotherhood says it was founded in 2006 as a national fraternity for biker officers who do not associate with “1 percenters,” a nickname for outlaw motorcycle clubs.

Gilliland wrote that Suttle, a police supervisor for more than two decades, is the club’s vice president and goes by a nickname, “Mongo.” On the night of the fisticuffs, he said, Suttle attempted to influence local officers by telling them that Prescott’s deputy police chief, Andy Reinhardt — also an Iron Brotherhood member — had been present. Evidence later revealed that Reinhardt had left his companions and gone to another bar before the brouhaha. He has since resigned from the biker club.

The altercation began when Stafford accosted another lawman in the Iron Brotherhood, Prescott Valley Police Chief Billy “Tarzan” Fessler, reportedly grabbing at his “colors,” or vest. Fessler, the club’s Whiskey Row chapter president, quit the biker fraternity in December and resigned from the Police Department last month, according to the Daily Courier of Prescott.

Gilliland concluded that Suttle and Schmidt untruthfully denied knowing the names of fellow club members and gave other false or misleading statements. “It is this investigator’s opinion and belief that Suttle’s allegiance and loyalties are first to the club and not to his position as a law enforcement officer,” he wrote. “I believe Suttle was reluctant and in fact misled and lied to Prescott police.”

No bribery charges for Mesa justice of the peace Markel K. Chiles

According to this article, Mesa judge Markel K. Chiles who is accused of shoplifting at Walmart offered Mesa Police officers Rich Rivera and Steve York a $1,000 bribe to make the charges go away won't face any bribery charges.

If that is true, I wonder how many bribes Mesa Judge Markel K. Chiles has taken to make cases go away in his East Mesa Justice Court???

Source

No bribery charges for Mesa justice of the peace

By Jim Walsh The Republic | azcentral.com Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:19 PM

An east Mesa justice of the peace told two Mesa police officers that he would pay $1,000 to make a shoplifting case disappear, but will not face bribery charges.

Chiles made the comment to Officer Rich Rivera and Officer Steve York during a meeting in his chambers at East Mesa Justice Court, according to a Mesa police report released Wednesday.

Police cited Chiles on a misdemeanor for a $40 speaker he allegedly took from a Walmart and will not pursue a bribery charge, said Mesa police spokesman Steve Berry.

“We were aware of the comment. It was not perceived as an attempted bribe,” he said.

Berry said police consider the statement an off-hand comment and that Chiles made no overt attempt to hand over money to the officers.

The report, released after The Arizona Republic and 12 News filed a public records request, said that a Walmart undercover security officer noticed that Chiles was wearing his badge from the court on his belt during the March 28 incident. Police accuse Chiles of removing the iBoost speaker from a package, hiding it under a jacket and leaving the store without paying for it.

The officers went to Chiles’ court on April 3 and told him that the undercover security officer watched as the judge paid $157 for nine videos, but walked out of the store without paying for the speaker, then loaded the speaker into a canvas bag before driving away on his motorcycle, according to the report.

“I really don’t know what an iBoost speaker is,” Chiles first told police.

When officers explained that it is a small external speaker that can be hooked up to an iPhone, iPad or a laptop to play music, Chiles said he planned to use it for his iPad, according to the police video.

“I really thought I had bought it. It was a speaker,” Chiles said.

Rivera asked Chiles to return to his house, find the stolen speaker and return it to police.

Rivera told Chiles that Walmart knew of his position at the court and “they are not looking to make a big deal out of it,” according to the video. “They just want to get their speaker back.”

Chiles asked the police if he could pay for the speaker, but the officers told him that was not an option. They also said he could not buy another speaker as a replacement, that they needed the original speaker back.

But later that day, Chiles told police he couldn’t find the speaker at home. He went to Walmart, bought another speaker and attempted to hand it over to police.

The officers would not accept the speaker Chiles purchased and cited him on suspicion of shoplifting.

“I am dumbfounded. I’m embarrassed. I am so very sorry,” Chiles said on the videotaped recording. “I’ll give you $1,000 if we could make this go away.”

Later, he said he would have no motive for such a petty theft.

“I don’t know, I have no idea,” he said when asked why he stole the speaker. “I don’t know why I would take it. I have plenty of money. I own three houses free and clear.”

He said he had spent $1,000 buying rifles at Walmart recently.

The speaker theft occurred between 4:40 a.m and 6:30 a.m. March 23.

Chiles worked at the court on April 3 and on the morning of April 4, but agreed to take a voluntary leave of absence during the lunch hour that day at the suggestion of C. Steven McMurry, the presiding judge of Maricopa County Justice Courts.

The courts handle misdemeanor cases, which can include shoplifting. He is scheduled to appear a pretrial conference before Judge Victor Ortiz on May 13.

Brian Strong, Chiles’ attorney, did not return a call from a reporter seeking comment.

On Tuesday, Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Rebecca White Berch ordered Chiles reassigned to other duties pending the outcome of his case. He earns $101,500 a year.

Sheryl Rabin, a Justice Courts spokeswoman, said the justice courts have no authority to withhold Chiles’ salary while the case is pending.

Judge Don Calender has been appointed as judge pro tem for the East Mesa Justice Court until the state Commission on Judicial Conduct decides what discipline Chiles will face.

Chiles has been reprimanded and censured in the past by the commission for violations of judicial conduct. He has served as the East Mesa Justice of the Peace since 2006.

Andrew Thomas for governor

Source

Posted on April 25, 2013 4:46 pm by EJ Montini

Andrew Thomas for governor (curse for Arizona, blessing for the media)

Along with a number of my brothers and sisters in the news business I received this precious gift of an e-mail this afternoon from disbarred former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas:

“Dear Members of the Media:

“I will be filing my paperwork at the Secretary of State’s Office tomorrow at 3 p.m. to run for Governor of Arizona. I will be making a few remarks and answering a few questions for media organizations that attend. Joining me for the filing will be some key supporters.

“I am confident public surveys will show upon my filing that I am a leading candidate for Governor.

“I’ll be focusing on the need to protect public safety, ensure border security, and fight corruption, among other issues.

“Voters will be urged to watch the video of my State Bar hearing and see for themselves how honest prosecutors are railroaded for fighting corruption in this state.

“Andrew Thomas

“Former County Attorney”

Dear Mr. Thomas,

Thank you.

Maricopa County to settles Andrew Thomas Sheriff Joe lawsuit

County to settle another lawsuit over Thomas-Arpaio corruption probes

By Michael Kiefer and Michelle Ye Hee Lee The Republic | azcentral.com Fri Apr 26, 2013 10:26 PM

The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors reached settlement Friday in the next to the last of the lawsuits filed in the wake of the 2008-09 battles among former County Attorney and current gubernatorial hopeful Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Joe Arpaio with county officials, judges and citizens associated with them.

Conley Wolfswinkel, a longtime Valley land developer, and two of his sons will receive $1.4 million to compensate for search warrants served on the developers’ offices by sheriff’s deputies looking for evidence of fraud. Wolfswinkel was a friend and business associate of former County Supervisor Don Stapley. Stapley, incidentally, is the remaining claimant against the county who has not yet settled.

“The board voted to settle this case to avoid incurring additional attorneys’ fees including the possible imposition of plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees at trial,” said county spokeswoman Cari Gerchick. “The cost to the county of defending this case is significant because there are seven different defendants who each required separate attorneys.”

Wolfswinkel’s is the ninth settlement stemming from the so-called corruption investigations carried out by Thomas’ and Arpaio’s offices. The county has now paid $4,190,110 in settlements for the lawsuits, according to Gerchick. Another settlement offer — $975,000 — approved for Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox has not been paid and is being disputed in court. Those totals do not include millions of dollars more in attorneys’ fees for the plaintiffs and costs to defend the county against the lawsuits.

“Conley and the family felt obligated to try to right this wrong,” said Lawrence Wright, one of the Wolfswinkels’ attorneys. “They felt the need to take a stand against the reign of terror that was being conducted by Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Andrew Thomas.”

Thomas still contends that he was only doing his job, rooting out corruption. He filed criminal charges against Stapley, Wilcox and Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe, and filed a civil racketeering lawsuit in federal court against those same defendants and others. Many of the allegations had to do with the construction of the Superior Court’s south tower, which is now in service.

Thomas and one of his deputies were disbarred because of those actions; another deputy was sanctioned. Former sheriff’s Chief Deputy David Hendershott, who helped mastermind the corruption investigations, was fired.

Thomas announced Thursday that he will run for governor of Arizona.

Stapley was indicted twice. At the time that search warrants were served on the Wolfswinkels, Stapley faced 118 criminal counts related to properties and real-estate deals that prosecutors said he did not include in his annual financial-disclosure forms. Some of those deals related to business associations with Wolfswinkel, who was convicted of felony check-kiting in the 1990s and was a figure in the savings-and-loan scandals of the 1980s.

According to a search-warrant affidavit from 2009, investigators were looking for evidence of fraud and bribery involving Wolfswinkel. Investigators also believed Stapley voted on “land-related issues” regarding property in which he had business interests.

All of the criminal charges and the racketeering suit were dismissed.

Miranda rights silenced Boston bombing suspect

Miranda rights silenced Boston bombing suspect

By Richard A. Serrano, Ken Dilanian and Brian Bennett

April 25, 2013, 7:09 p.m.

WASHINGTON — Federal agents had to end what they termed "an urgent public safety interview" with Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev when a judge came to his hospital room, officials said Thursday, a disclosure that has renewed the debate over how the government should handle terrorism suspects.

Tsarnaev has not answered any questions since he was given a lawyer and told he has the right to remain silent by Magistrate Judge Marianne B. Bowler on Monday, officials said.

Until that point, Tsarnaev had been responding to the interagency High Value Detainee Interrogation Group, including admitting his role in the bombing, authorities said. A senior congressional aide said Tsarnaev had asked several times for a lawyer, but that request was ignored since he was being questioned under the public safety exemption to the Miranda rule. The exemption allows defendants to be questioned about imminent threats, such as whether other plots are in the works or other plotters are on the loose.

After being briefed on the sequence of events, lawmakers from both parties questioned Thursday why the Justice Department didn't seek to delay the judge's appearance on the grounds that the public safety interview was continuing. Legal experts said that once documents charging Tsarnaev with using a weapon of mass destruction were signed Sunday night, criminal rules of procedure require that he be brought before a judge "without unnecessary delay," which usually means the next business day.

Lawmakers were told Tsarnaev had been questioned for 16 hours over two days. Injured in the throat, he was answering mostly in writing.

"For those of us who think the public safety exemption properly applies here, there are legitimate questions about why he was [brought before a judge] when he was," said Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank), a former federal prosecutor who serves on the House Intelligence Committee.

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), chairman of the committee, wrote Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. asking for a full investigation of the matter, complaining that the court session "cut off a lawful, ongoing FBI interview to collect public safety information."

Justice Department officials Thursday did not address the question of why they signed documents charging Tsarnaev on Sunday night, knowing that could start the clock ticking toward an appearance by a magistrate. Once that was done, they said, they had no legal way to stop the hearing from going forward.

A congressional official said interrogators left the hospital room about an hour before the judge arrived, after they were told she was coming.

Dean Boyd, a Justice Department spokesman, said, "The prosecutors and FBI agents in Boston were advised of the scheduled initial appearance in advance." One Justice Department official put it another way: "You don't tell a federal judge to put off a hearing."

Eugene Fidell, a professor at Yale School of Law, said it was past time for Tsarnaev to have been read his rights, because the Constitution requires it.

"The notion that the public safety exemption was going to allow them all the time in the world is preposterous," he said.

In other developments in the case Thursday:

A source familiar with the inquiry said that the FBI two years ago linked the phone number of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the second bombing suspect and Dzhokhar's older brother, to two people who were investigated for possible terrorist ties. But the matter was not pursued because the cases were closed for lack of evidence.

The source, speaking confidentially because the case is still underway, added that the brothers' mother, Zubeidat Tsarnaeva, told an associate at the time that Tamerlan was "going over to the dark side" — another sign that he was becoming radicalized.

Meanwhile, New York Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said Dzhokhar Tsarnaev told federal interrogators while he was still talking that he and his brother Tamerlan had planned to drive to New York to set off another series of explosions in Manhattan's Times Square. They had another pressure-cooker bomb like the ones used in Boston and five smaller pipe bombs in the car when they were stopped by police in Watertown, Mass., Kelly said.

Kelly said the younger suspect described how he and his brother had carjacked a motorist in a Mercedes three days after the bombing and then "decided spontaneously on Times Square as a target. They would drive to Times Square that same night."

But the police commissioner said the plan "fell apart" when they stopped for gas and the Mercedes owner fled and called police. A shootout ensued. Tamerlan was killed shortly after midnight; Dzhokhar was arrested Friday night.

Kelly also said Dzhokhar was caught by surveillance cameras in Times Square on April 18, 2012, and again in New York in November. But, he added, "we don't know if those visits were related" to plans to attack the city.

Law enforcement officials also revealed that the FBI in Boston was looking into whether two Kazakh men tried to remove items from Dzhokhar's dorm room at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth after his name surfaced as a bombing suspect.

Dias Kadyrbayev, 19, and Azamat Tazhayakov, 20, were arrested in New Bedford, Mass., on Saturday on administrative immigration violations, and investigators believe they were social friends with Dzhokhar.

The two men had entered the U.S. from Kazakhstan on academic visas to attend the school, but the visas had since terminated, an official said. They are being held by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the Suffolk County House of Correction at South Bay in Boston but have not been charged with a crime.

Investigators at this point do not believe the men were accomplices, an official said. An evidence team Thursday searched several city dumps hunting for sales receipts, discarded bomb parts or other clues.

richard.serrano@latimes.com

ken.dilanian@latimes.com

brian.bennett@latimes.com

David G. Savage and Lisa Mascaro in the Washington bureau contributed to this report.

Recorded interrogations should be the norm

Recorded interrogations should be the norm

By Laura H. Nirider My Turn Mon Apr 22, 2013 8:03 AM

President Ronald Reagan once famously said: “Trust, but verify.”

That phrase — originally uttered about the Soviet Union’s nuclear program — has since become a rallying cry for those concerned about government transparency here at home.

But in Arizona, transparency only extends so far. In fact, one of the most crucial, potentially life-changing interactions that a person can have with the government is often cloaked in secrecy. I’m talking about police interrogations.

In Arizona, police aren’t required to electronically record interrogations. Instead, a person can be subjected to government questioning behind closed doors for hours on end — all without any objective record of what happened.

This state of affairs lies at the heart of a federal appellate court’s recent decision to overturn the capital conviction of Phoenix resident Debra Milke, who was convicted in 1990 of soliciting the murder of her 4-year-old son.

Milke’s conviction was overturned because the only evidence against her was a detective’s claim that she had confessed to him at the police station during an unrecorded interrogation. Milke, on the other hand, denied ever confessing. In short, the only evidence against her was the detective’s say-so.

But that detective, it turned out, had said a lot of things in the past that weren’t so. He had a long history of misconduct, including repeatedly lying under oath in order to secure convictions. He even accepted sexual favors from a female motorist in exchange for leniency and then lied about it. In tossing out Milke’s conviction and death sentence, the court’s chief judge said of the detective’s testimony: “No civilized system of justice should have to depend on such flimsy evidence.”

In this case, our system relied on trust alone — and a potentially innocent woman paid a horrific price.

Let’s learn from Milke’s case. The Arizona Legislature should trust, but verify: It should require police to electronically record all interrogations from start to finish. Nineteen other states already have such a requirement, ranging from New Mexico to Ohio to North Carolina.

Even setting aside the possibility of police misconduct, there are plenty of other reasons for police to record interrogations. For one, it protects police from baseless claims of misconduct. One Mesa police officer who voluntarily records his interrogations has found that “the act of recording automatically brings with it the air of disclosure and avoids accusations of impropriety during the interview.”

And there are practical benefits, too.

A Gilbert police officer who records his interrogations has explained that it helps him question suspects more effectively: “In addition to the detective not having the distractions of note-taking, the absence of notes frequently makes the subject more at ease and does not alert him/her to key phrases, which may be of special interest at a later time.”

Even while some Arizona officers are already recording their interrogations, many others are not.

Indeed, the detective who questioned Milke was ordered by his superiors to record her interrogation — but he refused. So let’s change the law to require all police to get out the video cameras — or even their smartphones.

It’s not hard, and it’s not expensive, especially when weighed against the financial and moral costs of a case like Milke’s.

Most of us trust the police, and most of the time we’re right to do so. But we also need to verify what happens during police interrogations. That’s our duty to each other as citizens. And in this case, it very well might be the duty that we owe to Debra Milke.

Laura H. Nirider is co-director of the Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth at Northwestern University School of Law in Chicago.

180 arrested, cash and drugs seized in central Phoenix crime sweep

In this article the Phoenix Police are bragging about making lots of big time arrests, but if you read the article they didn't mention any arrests of people for real crimes, other then mostly petty victimless crimes.

Sure the sweep was a waste of our tax dollars, but I am sure the cops who raked in overtime making the arrests loved every minute of it.

Source

180 arrested, cash and drugs seized in central Phoenix crime sweep

By Cecilia Chan The Arizona Republic-12 News Breaking News Team Wed May 1, 2013 6:13 PM

Law enforcement officers arrested 180 people, seized nearly a 1,000 pounds of drugs, $830,000 in cash and 18 guns during a two-day crime sweep in central Phoenix, Phoenix police said Wednesday.

“Not only was it a success in the number of arrests and citations and DUIs we did but it was a success in the bringing together of law enforcement from all the different agencies,” police spokesman James Holmes said.

The police department’s special units such as vice partnered with five other state and county agencies in the sweep dubbed “high tide.” The 42-hour operation kicked off April 19. More than 100 law enforcement personnel were out on the street at any given time. The Arizona Department of Public Safety and the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office were among the agency to participate.

Officers targeted an area bounded by Indian School Road to Northern Avenue and from 19th Avenue to 35th Avenue, due to its crime numbers, police said.

Holmes said another operation is expected sometime later this year in the city. The area the operation will focus on will depend on a number of factors, including crime numbers, Holmes said.

Law enforcement officers stopped vehicles with expired registration tags or suspected drunken drivers. Officers also went to homes of people with outstanding warrants.

The operation set up a makeshift command center in a parking lot near 27th Avenue and Camelback Road.

Vehicles impounded from drunken drivers, drivers without registration, men who solicit prostitutes and other violations also were taken to the area and then towed to an storage yard.

One man who ran from police when he was pulled over for a traffic stop died after he complained of feeling hot. He was taken to the hospital, went into cardiac arrest and pronounced dead, police said.

Holmes said that was the only death during the operation.

Holmes also said one man was arrested twice during the two-day sweep. The man was arrested the first day on a warrant and while he was in jail his family served him with an order for protection, Holmes said.

The man was released from jail the second day and was arrested shortly after for violating that order, he said.

Operation High Tide results include the following

• Arrests: 180
• Tows: 64
• New Civil Violation Citations: 358
• Cash Seized: $830,054
• Guns Seized: 18
• Vehicles Seized: 3
• Cocaine: 1 pound, 3 grams
• Marijuana: 938 pounds
• Spice vials: 36
• Heroin: 5 pounds
• Hash: 50 pounds
• Property seized: Scales, syringes, ballistic vests, rocket launcher

Source: Phoenix Police

County attorney blocked from Horne campaign case

County attorney blocked from Horne campaign case

By Lindsey Collom The Republic | azcentral.com Thu May 2, 2013 7:51 PM

A Maricopa County Superior Court judge has ruled that a campaign-finance case against Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne and an aide that was due to be heard next week cannot move forward because of legal technicalities and procedural failings by the Secretary of State's Office.

The ruling issued Thursday prevents Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery from taking any further action against Horne and employee-turned-staffer Kathleen Winn, dismisses a related administrative proceeding, and awards the pair attorneys fees.

But the case against Horne and Winn isn’t dead. The matter now goes back for review to the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office, which has already determined that reasonable cause exists to believe a campaign-finance violation occurred and can still pursue the case through another prosecutor.

Horne and Winn are accused of unlawfully coordinating campaign spending during the 2010 election, when he was the Republican candidate for attorney general and she was chairwoman of Business Leaders for Arizona, an independent-expenditure committee. Both continue to deny any wrongdoing.

Stephanie Grisham, an Attorney General’s spokesperson, said Horne did not want to comment on the ruling, except to say that the decision speaks for itself. Winn said she looks forward to an independent prosecutor’s review of the case.

“We want to get the facts out, but not with someone who has already declared you to the public as guilty,” she added.

In the ruling, Civil Presiding Judge John Rea said Secretary Ken Bennett did not follow the enforcement procedure outlined in statute, which dictates that Bennett’s office must send campaign-finance allegations involving statewide officeholders to the attorney general, meaning to Horne himself. Bennett referred the case to Montgomery.

“Going through the seemingly formalized dance of the Secretary referring the matter to the Attorney General and the Attorney General recusing himself and the matter going to another agency is not senseless or meaningless,” Rea wrote in his judgment. “The fact that observance of the express statutory procedure would require a few extra steps in these circumstances does not justify simply abandoning it.”

According to Montgomery, a 14-month inquiry by the FBI and his office revealed that Horne collaborated with Winn’s committee to quickly raise more than $500,000 to run negative ads against his Democratic foe, Felecia Rotellini. Montgomery issued a civil order last October for Horne and Winn to revise their campaign-finance reports and refund about $400,000 in donations to bring them into compliance, or face three times that amount in penalties.

Horne and Winn appealed to the Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent arbiter over decisions made by certain state agencies, boards and commissions. An evidentiary hearing that was scheduled to begin May 7 is now moot.

In a statement issued after the ruling, Montgomery said he disagreed with the outcome but his office will transfer the matter to the Secretary of State’s Office for further handling.

“I will not appeal. That would only further delay a review of this matter on the merits,” Montgomery said. “In my judgment, it is more important for the issues in this case to be fully and fairly addressed and resolved as soon as possible so that the people of Arizona can determine whether or not a statewide law enforcement official violated the law.”

But Winn’s attorney, Tim LaSota, said the ruling throws Montgomery’s entire case against his client into question.

"It's now obvious that our civil accuser, he’s the one who hasn’t followed the law and I think now his actions have been repudiated,” LaSota said. “Here we have someone who has gotten the law wrong in such a critical respect, why would we assign any credibility to the civil allegations against Kathleen and the attorney general?”

Tom Horne will decide who will investigate Tom Horne

Posted on May 2, 2013 4:44 pm by Laurie Roberts

Tom Horne will decide who will investigate Tom Horne

From the only-in-Arizona files: Attorney General Tom Horne will get to decide who will investigate Attorney General Tom Horne.

No…really.

A judge on Thursday tossed out a finding by Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery that Horne violated campaign-finance laws.

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge John Rea ruled that Secretary of State Ken Bennett erred in asking Montgomery to investigate Horne. Instead, state law required that Bennett send the complaint about Horne to Horne.

Montgomery last year initiated a civil enforcement action against Horne at the request of Bennett. Montgomery found that the attorney general violated campaign-finance laws by working with a so-called independent campaign committee to order to raise a truckload of cash to fend off Democrat Felecia Rotellini in the 2010 AG’s race.

As a result of that fundraising blitz, the independent campaign was able to launch $500,000 worth of last-minute attack ads against Rotellini, allowing Horne to eke out a win.

Horne has denied any wrongdoing and was due before an administrative judge next week to appeal Montgomery’s civil enforcement action. Meanwhile, he petitioned Superior Court to dismiss the case, contending that Bennett didn’t forward the case to the proper authority — himself, that is.

In his ruling, Rea, agreed that Montgomery had no authority to cite Horne under ARS 16-924(A).

“Ignoring a clear statute for the sake of expediency means that we are no longer under a rule of law but the rule of some official or court’s notion of convenience and practicality,” Rea wrote.

So the case against Horne and Kathleen Winn – the independent campaign chairwoman who now works for the AG’s office – returns to Bennett, who will have to send the case to Horne, who will, presumably, declare a conflict and send it along to some other prosecutor’s office.

The judge makes it sound so simple, as if it is merely a matter of a few extra steps.

“Going through the seemingly formalized dance of the Secretary referring the matter to the Attorney General and the Attorney General recusing himself and the matter going to another agency is not senseless or meaningless,” Rea wrote. “The fact that observance of the express statutory procedure would require a few extra steps in these circumstances does not justify simply abandoning it.”

The problem is, those extra steps result in a wholesale trampling of the public’s trust.

So now Horne will decide who should take the case against Horne — perhaps a prosecutor a bit friendlier than Montgomery.

Only in Arizona could the state’s top law enforcement officer get to decide who will investigate the state’s top law enforcement officer.

Sanctions upheld against Thomas aide Alexander

Source

Sanctions upheld against Thomas aide Alexander

By Sean Holstege The Republic | azcentral.com Thu May 2, 2013 9:57 PM

The Arizona Supreme Court upheld sanctions Thursday against a former Maricopa County prosecutor who was involved in then-County Attorney Andrew Thomas’ corruption investigations against judges and county officials.

After a lengthy 2012 hearing, Rachel Alexander was suspended for six months and a day by a court disciplinary panel for her role in bringing a doomed federal racketeering lawsuit against Thomas’ perceived political enemies.

However, the high court reduced the suspension by one day. That means Alexander won’t have to go through a rigorous rehabilitation to work again as a lawyer. The judges reasoned that such penalties have been reserved for cases when a lawyer knowingly misled a jury. She was also ordered to take 10 hours of ethics course work.

The court agreed that Alexander violated six rules of conduct. Her transgressions include filing a frivolous case, incompetence and interfering with the course of justice.

Judges wrote that Alexander had not exhibited a pattern of misconduct or acted with malice or dishonestly. Nor had she breached four other rules of conduct, the court ruled, reversing the findings of the court’s Office of the Presiding Disciplinary Judge, after an independent investigation on behalf of the State Bar of Arizona.

Thursday’s rulings stem from Alexander’s handling of a 2009 civil Racketeer Influenced, Corrupt Organizations case that fizzled three months after it was filed.

“Alexander’s most serious misconduct was maintaining the RICO lawsuit while knowing it lacked legal and factual merit, thereby violating the duties she owed to the public and the legal system,” the court ruled.

In that case, then-Deputy County Attorney Lisa Abuchon alleged that county officials, including elected supervisors, conspired with their attorneys to commit bribery and extortion. The theory was that county officials were illegally trying to thwart a joint investigation by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and County Attorney’s Office into corruption allegations related to the building of a new court tower.

When the case went nowhere, the county attorneys added the names of judges to the list of defendants. The case was dropped, and none of the allegations stuck.

Abuchon and Thomas were disbarred. Abuchon appealed, and that case is pending. Thomas did not. Last week, another deputy county attorney and Alexander’s boss, Peter Spaw, accepted a two-year probation for his role.

Alexander could not be reached by phone or e-mail for reaction to the decision, which can only be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In her appeal to the state Supreme Court, Alexander tried to shift blame onto superiors. She argued that she acted on their advice and under their direction.

The Supreme Court disagreed.

“She was ethically required to assess her legal skill level and refuse the assignment as beyond her capabilities,” the court wrote.

It based that finding on the fact that Alexander had never tried a case. Before taking over from Abuchon, she had served on a grant committee, worked on the department’s social-media outreach and made community presentations.

The court noted that Spaw and outside attorneys told Alexander that the racketeering complaint was “dead on arrival” and that she needed to beef up the allegations with solid facts or it would be like “rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.”

But, in preparing a motion to keep the case alive, Alexander never got Abuchon’s investigative file, help from case investigators or saw a police report, the court found. Instead, when asked in an earlier disciplinary hearing to back up the allegations, she could not recall specific facts and vaguely cited “hundreds of documents.”

Lives were damaged by her refusal to drop the case. The court cited three examples:

A lawyer accused of bribing a judge spent $300,000 to clear his name and had his reputation maligned.

A judge “became severely depressed.”

Another judge resigned rather than let her presence on the bench tarnish the court and her colleagues.

“Alexander impeded the administration of justice by demonstrating to all judges in Maricopa County that they risked having to defend against a civil damages suit if they made rulings that displeased MCAO,” the court ruled.

Phoenix City Council members are gun grabbers

Source

Phoenix police to hold gun-buyback event Saturday

New law soon will hinder similar efforts

By JJ Hensley The Republic | azcentral.com Fri May 3, 2013 10:11 PM

Three months before a new state law goes into effect requiring police to sell any weapon they receive, Phoenix officials plan to destroy as many guns as residents bring them.

Those efforts begin Saturday with a gun buyback at three churches in the city, and two more events are scheduled later this month.

After that, gun buybacks coordinated with Phoenix police will likely cease.

A law Gov. Jan Brewer signed this week requires police to sell any weapons they receive, whether the guns are abandoned, lost or forfeited to the agency through a court order. A bill with the same intent — requiring agencies to sell weapons instead of destroying them — was approved last year, but officials in Phoenix, Tucson and other cities took a literal reading of that legislation and determined that it applied only to weapons that departments receive through court-ordered forfeiture.

Police have until the new law takes effect to continue their current practices. In Phoenix, that means destroying weapons.

“There’s been no emergency clause indicating that (the law) is going to go into effect immediately,” Phoenix police Sgt. Steve Martos said of the legislation.

The checks that police want to run on each weapon, which include records queries to ensure that the gun was not reported stolen and a ballis-tics test to determine if the weapon was used in a crime, will take additional time, Martos said.

“Obviously, there’s a little bit of pressure,” said Martos, a department spokesman.

The buyback is anonymous, with no information collected on the donor, and police ask that weapons arrive unloaded and in a trunk or pickup bed where officers can safely remove the guns.

As long as the guns are functioning, they can be exchanged for gift cards.

“It’ll almost be like a drive-through process,” Martos said.

The buybacks should not result in additional costs for police personnel.

The events will be staffed with Phoenix’s neighborhood-enforcement team officers who would already be on the clock and do not typically have “first-responder” duties, Martos said.

A group called Arizonans for Gun Safety donated $100,000 to purchase grocery-store gift cards that will be given out in exchange for weapons, including $200 for assault weapons and $100 for handguns, shotguns and rifles.

That’s far more than police have offered at similar past events, Martos said.

Phoenix police brought in a little more than 200 weapons at the city’s last buyback in 2011, when they had $10,000 worth of gift cards.

“We almost had to start turning people away because we were running out of gift cards,” Martos said.

An event in Tucson in January produced similar results — about 200 weapons for $10,000 worth of grocery gift cards — but came with an unanticipated wave of controversy.

Tucson City Councilman Steve Kozachik organized the event, which was paid for through private donations he coordinated in about two weeks.

Charles Heller, spokesman for a Tucson-based non-profit that promotes gun rights, said the event was a self-gratifying effort put on by people who want to believe that removing a few hundred weapons from circulation could somehow impact the crime rate.

The new legislation has spurred Tucson residents into action, Kozachik said.

He added that there is no shortage of ideas about how to get around the new law, including suggestions that the weapons be auctioned with a minimum bid of $100,000 to thwart buyers or sold for 1 cent to artists who will melt them down and use them in installations.

He applauded Phoenix’s effort to beat the legislative clock.

The buyback events will be held at from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. at Southminster Presbyterian, 1923 E. Broadway; Sunnyslope Mennonite Church, 9835 N. Seventh St.; and BetaniaPresbyterian, 2811 N. 39th Ave.

For more information, call 602-547-0976 or go to www.azfgs.com.

8 Reasons not to vote for Andrew Thomas for Governor

Top Eight Reasons Why Nobody Should Vote for Andrew Thomas for Governor in 2014

By Ray Stern Fri., Apr. 26 2013 at 5:33 PM

Andrew Thomas is running for governor. Here are our eight top reasons why he shouldn't get a single vote.

Andrew Thomas followed up on last year's rumor that he might run for governor with an official announcement today.

Knowing that anything's possible in Arizona, the so-called meth lab of democracy, we thought we'd put out this helpful voting guide.

So, without further ado, we offer you our best eight reasons why you'd have to be nuts to vote for Thomas:

See also: Andrew Thomas, Disbarred and Disgraced Ex-Prosecutor, Is Actually Running for Governor

8. Two words: Cuckoo, cuckoo. When we heard he'd announced, we grew more worried than ever for his mental health. Powerful evidence he's lost it: Thomas said he believes a survey would show he's the most popular candidate among voters for the 2014 election. Since his disbarment, Thomas has been known to bring a piece of lumber to interviews like he thinks he's Buford Pusser.

7. He's a loser. Sure, Thomas won two elections to become county attorney, in 2004 and 2008. But his political career is better defined by his losses. Thomas blew a bid for Arizona attorney general in 2002, failing to win against Democrat Terry Goddard. Seeing that his political career was on shaky ground following his legal abuses from 2008-2010, Thomas resigned from his office in April of 2010 and launched another campaign for state attorney general. It was close, but he lost to Tom Horne. A couple of years later, Thomas lost the biggest the fight of his life -- for his law license. Thomas didn't even bother to appeal the state's decision to disbar him.

6. Thomas is a Harvard-educated moron. You know what we mean -- he's book-smart and very well-educated, but without a lick of common sense. Why did he think launching a dirty attack on a newspaper that criticized him (this one) would be a good idea? Of course he ended up making a public apology for that one. Stoo-pid!

5. Thomas has displayed a severe lack of judgment in picking his allies. He put a great deal of his trust in Dave Hendershott, Sheriff Arpaio's ultra-shady former chief deputy, who told others that Thomas was an "idiot."

4. Maricopa County voters have long though of themselves as "tough on crime." Thomas, an ideologue who once wrote a book on crime that suggested a return to public stockades, took the concept to abusive ends. He failed to make plea deals when appropriate, threw the book at nearly everyone and brought criminal charges when none were warranted. "He horrendously overcharged cases," says Valley lawyer Marc Victor. Back in 2007, Victor represented a woman who's brother loaded a gun without the woman's knowledge, leading to an accident in which the woman grazed her daughter with a bullet. Thomas' office wanted the woman convicted for a designated "dangerous" offense that would have given her mandatory prison time, even though the daughter hadn't wanted to press charges.

3. The bigoted policies he pushed against undocumented immigrants were a failure. Immigrant criminals were not deterred by the possibility that they might not be able to post bail. Immigrant smugglers continued to work the Phoenix metro area; the general decline in immigrants of the past few years is due to the weaker economy and boosted border enforcement, not fear of Thomas or Sheriff Arpaio. A scheme started by Thomas and continued by County Attorney Bill Montgomery that jails and prosecutes low-level immigrants for conspiracy to smuggle themselves into the country has brought only extra suffering to would-be workers, not stemmed the tide of immigrants.

2. Thomas is dishonest. He's a disgrace to the legal profession. He's a liar. He's a perjurer. He's a corrupt politician and grand-stander. He's incompetent. He's vindictive. He's a bad lawyer, in general. And that's just what the legal panel that disbarred him had to say about him. Some folks think he's even worse.

1. His misguided sense of "justice" and inability to play nice with others has cost Maricopa County many millions of dollars. The financial damage he could cause to the state if put in an even more powerful position could run into the billions. Just today, the Board of Supervisors voted to approve a hefty, $1.4 million settlement to more of the victims of Thomas and Arpaio's ill-fated political schemes. As we noted in a blog post about the settlement, Arizona simply could not afford Thomas as governor.

State Take-Back day gathers 13,000 lbs. of prescription medication

And remember these cops who are effectively working a janitors throwing away old unused drugs are very well paid. In Arizona most local cops start at $50,000 a year and many easily make over $100,000 a year. A few make $150,000 a year. Federal cops are paid much more.

Source

State Take-Back day gathers 13,000 lbs. of prescription medication

Posted: Saturday, May 4, 2013 1:35 pm

Douglas W. Coleman, Special Agent in Charge of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), announced Thursday that Arizonans turned in 60 percent more pills than last year's Take-Back event, demonstrating the public’s continued appreciation and need for the opportunity to discard unwanted, unused and expired prescription drugs from medicine cabinets, bedside tables and kitchen drawers.

On April 27, 13,069 pounds (6½ tons) of prescription medications were collected from members of the public at more than 95 locations manned by over 60 state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies that partnered with DEA on the event. When added to the collections from DEA’s previous five Take-Back events, more than 48,000 pounds (24 tons) of prescription medications have been removed from circulation.

“We are pleased at the response of our communities once again, and we thank them for participating and contributing to the battle against prescription drug abuse,” said DEA Special Agent in Charge Doug Coleman. “Our take-back events highlight the problems related to prescription drug abuse and give our citizens an opportunity to contribute to the solution. “These events are only made possible through the dedicated work and commitment of our state, local and tribal law enforcement partners, and DEA thanks each and every one of them for their efforts on behalf of the American people.”

The DEA’s Take-Back events are a significant piece of the White House’s prescription drug abuse prevention strategy released in 2011 by the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Disposal of unwanted, unused or expired drugs is one of four strategies for reducing prescription drug abuse and diversion laid out in Epidemic: Responding to America’s Prescription Drug Abuse Crisis. The other strategies include education of health care providers, patients, parents and youth; enhancing and encouraging the establishment of prescription drug monitoring programs in all the states; and increased enforcement to address doctor shopping and pill mills.

U.S. used severe torture on detainees

Mercury News editorial: U.S. used severe torture on detainees

Posted: 05/03/2013 01:00:00 PM PDT

It is indisputable that agents of our government used severe torture techniques on detainees suspected of having terrorist ties. That is the conclusion of a report by an independent panel after an intense, two-year investigation into America's treatment of detainees.

Most of us already figured that was the case, and some -- former Vice President Dick Cheney -- comes to mind -- probably don't care. But to have it confirmed by a credible source is agonizing.

The Constitution Project's Task Force on Detainee Treatment found that the interrogation techniques used were "cruel, inhuman or degrading" and violated U.S. laws as well as international treaties. They ran counter to the values of the Constitution Americans claim to hold sacred.

And despite assertions in the movie "Zero Dark Thirty," the report says little credible information was derived from such techniques, especially as to the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden.

The panel acknowledges that it had no subpoena power and that some people claim national security prevents disclosure of what was truly learned. But the task force decided to accept the assertions of the Senate Intelligence Committee, which had access to sensitive documents, and found no connection.

The Constitution Project -- a watchdog group that has been around for about 15 years -- undertook the detainee project because no one else would.

Both President Barack Obama and Congress refused to do so. Obama said it would be "unproductive to look backward" and Congress rejected a proposal by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., to investigate.

The report is the opposite of unproductive. An honest self-examination is vital to the very essence of democracy and informs future decisions.

For example, panel extensively examined issues surrounding the infamous U.S. prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba; whether it should be closed and, if so, what should be done with the detainees who are there. Fortunately, Obama is again raising the topic of closing the prison. We suggest this report as good reading for him and Congress as they move forward.

The lengthy report is nonpartisan, fair and doesn't bash individuals. It notes that while much of the rendition activity was prompted by Sept. 11 fear and occurred during the Bush administration, such practices began in the Clinton administration. It also acknowledges that those who undertook questionable measures did so "as their best efforts to protect their fellow citizens."

The Constitutional Project has no veiled agenda. It is co-chaired by Asa Hutchison, a former Republican congressman who served in the Bush administration, and James Jones, a former Democrat congressman who Camp Delta military-run prison, at the Guantanamo Bay US Naval Base, Cuba. (Brennan Linsley/AP) was chairman of the House Budget Committee and later U.S. ambassador to Mexico. The membership list includes such luminaries as William Sessions, FBI director under three presidents. It conducted on-the-ground fact-finding in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Lithuania, Poland, the United Kingdom and, yes, Guantánamo Bay.

Every American should read the findings. The report is online at www.detaineetaskforce.org.

Former U.S. Rep. Renzi’s corruption trial set

Former U.S. Rep. Renzi’s corruption trial set

By Dennis Wagner The Republic | azcentral.com Sat May 4, 2013 9:28 PM

Six years after his congressional career ended amid an FBI corruption probe, former U.S. Rep. Rick Renzi is expected to get his day in court with a trial that opens on Tuesday in Tucson.

The three-term Republican House member, who pleaded not guilty, is accused of extortion, fraud, racketeering, money laundering and other crimes involving his insurance business and his conduct as a legislator.

The U.S. District Court case file reveals a web of political intrigue amid a tangle of legal complications. So far, three dozen attorneys have taken part in litigation, which has produced more than 1,145 motions, briefs, responses, judicial rulings and appeals.

Among the mysteries as the trial convenes: Who tipped off federal investigators? Why? What will Renzi’s defense strategy be? And will he take the witness stand?

The defense team declined comment, but it is clear from legal papers that the trial will involve contrasting depictions of the 54-year-old businessman turned politician.

Prosecutors are poised to describe Renzi as a manipulator who embezzled money from business customers, funneled the cash into his election treasury and used his legislative power to profit from an extortion conspiracy.

The defense is geared to present Renzi as a pragmatist whose private and public dealings overlapped but were not criminal; or, perhaps, as the victim of political enemies who dragged him down with help from overzealous federal agents.

Spelling out narratives likely will require more than a month of the trial, dozens of witnesses and tens of thousands of pages of evidence.

“This is just going to be fascinating,” said Mike Black, a Phoenix attorney who briefly represented one of Renzi’s co-defendants. “I might even go down there just to watch.”

Winding through appeals

Renzi was first indicted in February 2008 and eventually faced 49 felony counts.

The charges arise from two sets of allegations that, if true, would constitute a betrayal of the public trust and corruption of the U.S. political system: First, Renzi is accused of defrauding clients at his Patriot Insurance Agency by taking funds that were intended as premiums and using the money to win his first House race in 2002. Second, Renzi is charged with orchestrating a land-swap deal after taking office to benefit a real-estate investor who owed him money.

While it is not unusual for white-collar cases to defy the speedy-trial model of justice, Renzi’s litigation has been particularly glacial due to rare constitutional issues that come with prosecution of a former member of Congress.

Delays included two appeals handled by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and numerous hearings to resolve disputes.

Defense attorneys partially succeeded in efforts to get charges thrown out and evidence suppressed but failed in a bid to disqualify the Justice Department team based on claims of prosecutorial misconduct. Among the pretrial issues that had to be sorted out by U.S. District Judge David Bury:

FBI agents who monitored wiretaps improperly listened to phone calls between Renzi and his attorneys, destroyed their notes and misled a judge about the conversations. Bury found the government’s conduct egregious and suppressed all evidence from electronic surveillance. [Sadly the police routinely act like the criminals they are trying to arrest. When FBI agents and other cops routinely lie in their daily work, how can we possibly expect them to tell the truth in a trial.]

Defense attorneys contended that charges of embezzlement were bogus because, as Renzi’s companies were structured, he merely borrowed money. The Appeals Court agreed.

Perhaps most significantly, defense lawyers contended that all charges related to the land-swap deal should be dropped because a clause in the U.S. Constitution prohibits the criminal investigation of a federal lawmaker for legislative acts.

Under the so-called Speech or Debate Clause, Renzi’s attorneys argued, the Justice Department violated U.S. law not just by wiretapping the congressman, but by interviewing his staffers and obtaining his records.

The constitutional provision was drafted to prevent the executive branch from using its law-enforcement authority as a political weapon against opponents in Congress. Members of the House and Senate are generally immune to criminal prosecution for their legislative conduct.

In this case, House lawyers filed briefs supporting Renzi’s legal position while the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington argued on behalf of the government.

The Speech or Debate question went to the 9th Circuit, which ruled that Renzi’s conduct was not protected.

Still, the issue is likely to resurface during the trial, and House lawyers have asked to remain as players in future courtroom disputes.

Setbacks for prosecutors

The government has suffered a number of setbacks leading up to the trial.

Sixteen counts against Renzi have been dismissed so far, including a tax charge that was thrown out a few weeks ago. Andrew Beardall, Renzi’s lawyer in the insurance case, was acquitted. Dwayne Lequire, the insurance-company accountant, was found guilty but the Appeals Court overturned his verdict and issued an acquittal.

The investigation and prosecution have cost U.S. taxpayers and defendants untold millions. Lequire is now seeking more than $400,000 from the government as compensation for his legal expenses. His attorney, Mark Willimann, said the Justice Department keeps losing in Renzi’s case because prosecutors went “well beyond the realm of decency” in filing charges.

Although the case was launched under the administration of Republican President George W. Bush and former U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton, also a Republican, Willimann said he believes it was orchestrated by Democrats to oust a GOP incumbent.

“This is purely political,” he said. “Renzi did nothing wrong here. ... I think the government is in (cover-up) mode. They’ve got a tiger by the tail, and they didn’t realize the tail was long enough for Mr. Renzi to turn around and bite them.”

A Justice Department spokesman declined comment.

Controversial mine plan

Richard George Renzi, an insurance and real-estate entrepreneur who also owned a southern Arizona vineyard, was elected to Arizona’s 1st Congressional District in 2002, the year he got his law degree. He was viewed as a conservative Catholic with 12 kids and a wide-open political future.

In 2005, Resolution Copper Mining was seeking to trade about 5,000 acres of private property for 2,400 acres of government land near Superior — a parcel containing one of America’s richest remaining copper deposits. Mining plans call for excavation up to 7,000 feet underground to exploit an estimated $61 billion in ore, providing 3,700 jobs.

Such real-estate swaps require congressional approval.

According to prosecutors, Renzi vowed to block legislation unless Resolution purchased and included a 480-acre alfalfa field from business associate James Sandlin, who owed him money. On the other hand, if Sandlin’s property was part of the deal, Renzi ensured approval, according to prosecutors. [If you ask me that sure sounds like a conflict of interest.]

Sandlin, convicted by a Texas jury in 2008 on related charges of filing false financial information, is going to trial on Tuesday with Renzi to face additional charges. His attorney did not respond to an interview request.

The indictment says Resolution balked at Renzi’s extortion attempt. A group of other speculators, including former Arizona governor and ex-Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt, then bought Sandlin’s land and agreed to make it part of the exchange, according to the indictment, and Renzi introduced legislation to authorize the deal.

That bill died after FBI agents raided Renzi’s home and news leaked of a possible indictment. It is impossible to say whether the scandal damaged future prospects for the controversial land swap. However, 11 bills have failed in Congress so far, opposed by some conservation groups, the Apache tribe and Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz..

In December, Resolution announced that it was dismissing 400 workers and essentially abandoning the project.

Two months later, Arizona’s congressional delegation offered a 12th version of the land-exchange bill. That, too, appears to be stalled.

Grijalva said he has repeatedly voted against the project because Resolution and its congressional sponsors will not agree to an environmental review and a more careful valuation of the copper reserves before the deal is struck. He said the Superior mine could have severe ecological impacts but would be nearly impossible to stop if land is transferred into private ownership.

Grijalva said Renzi’s trial may bring out more information about the land-exchange deal and the mining company’s role.

“It puts Resolution Copper front and center,” he said. “I think there’s some exposure that’s going to happen. ... And I believe the asset in the ground — the copper — is worth much, much more than the trade we’re getting.”

Grijalva and others said Resolution officials have been portrayed as “white hats” — good guys who blew the whistle on corruption — but Renzi’s defense attorneys likely will challenge their motives and credibility.

“This trial is as much a difficult situation for the company as it is for Renzi,” he said. “The defense is going to be vigorous, and it has to be against the company.”

Resolution Copper has been represented by lobbyist Ron Ober, a longtime Democratic Party operative who once served as chief of staff for former Sen. Dennis DeConcini, D-Ariz. Ober works with public-relations specialist Troy Corder, a former staffer for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and former Arizona Govs. Fife Symington and Jane Dee Hull.

Neither Ober nor Corder would comment on the Renzi trial or its impact on the planned copper project in Superior.

Jennifer Russo, director of communications at Resolution’s parent company, Rio Tinto Copper Group, said the land-swap bill was affected by Renzi’s controversy while he was in office, but today’s legislation is moving forward with bipartisan support. She emphasized that, in the criminal case, Resolution “did nothing wrong and is a cooperating government witness.”

If a land swap is approved, Russo said, a full environmental report will be completed before mining gets under way.

“We are pleased with the progress being made in the 113th Congress,” she added, “and we are working through all issues and concerns that have been raised.”

Reach the reporter at dennis.wagner@arizonarepublic.com.

Timeline

2001

Republican Rick Renzi runs for Congress. Authorities later allege that he funneled money from insurance clients into his campaign treasury.

2002

Renzi wins election over Democrat George Cordova.

Federal Election Commission orders audit of Renzi campaign finances.

2004

FEC audit says Renzi made $369,000 in “impermissible” loans to his campaign.

Renzi is re-elected, defeating Paul Babbitt.

2005

Resolution Copper begins trying to orchestrate a real-estate swap to obtain copper-rich federal land near Superior.

Authorities allege that Renzi told Resolution that there will be no deal unless property owned by business associate James Sandlin is included. Resolution reportedly balks.

2006

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington names Renzi among 20 “most corrupt” members of Congress.

Department of Justice secretly approves FBI wiretaps and search warrants targeting Renzi.

News leaks of possible indictment.

Renzi is elected to a third term, defeating Ellen Simon.

2007

FBI raids Renzi’s business.

Renzi resigns from House Intelligence Committee, then announces he will not seek a fourth term.

2008

Renzi is indicted on 35 counts.

A superseding indictment lists 49 felonies.

2010

All wiretap evidence is suppressed from Renzi’s future trial due to FBI misconduct.

Judge refuses to disqualify Justice Department team for prosecutorial misconduct.

2011

9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refuses to throw out case based on claims of congressional immunity.

2012

After failure of 11 land-swap bills, Resolution Copper shuts down planned operations near Superior.

2013

Members of Arizona delegation introduce new land-exchange measure.

May 7: Renzi trial scheduled to begin.

Source: U.S. District Court records and Arizona Republic archives

Imprisoned at Guantanamo - America's Honor!!!!

Police officer accidentally shot in leg by fellow cop

Source

Police officer accidentally shot in leg by fellow cop

By Rosemary Regina Sobol and Adam Sege Tribune reporters

7:33 a.m. CDT, May 7, 2013

A Chicago police officer was shot in the leg by a fellow officer who had fired at a charging dog Monday night in the Englewood neighborhood, authorities said.

The shooting happened about 9 p.m. in the 1200 block of West 72nd Place as Englewood District officers were responding to a call of a burglary in progress, according to a police statement.

Two officers and a supervisor went to the second-floor landing of the building, where they were confronted by a "vicious dog," according to police.

When the dog charged toward them, an officer fired a single shot that struck the dog and also hit another officer in the thigh, according to a police source. It was unclear if the bullet struck the officer or the dog first, the source said.

Paramedics took the 42-year-old officer in good condition to John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital of Cook County, where he was treated and released, authorities said.

Investigators from the Chicago Independent Police Review Authority responded to the scene, spokesman Larry Merritt said.

chicagobreaking@tribune.com

San Jose cop frames man for rape with phoney lab report!!!

Next if you are naive as a 3 year old you probably think San Jose Police officer Sgt. Matthew Christian was fired and sent to prison for his crimes. Again don't make me laugh!!!

However, the police officer, Sgt. Matthew Christian, remains on the job and is now assigned to the Traffic Investigations Unit, said SJPD spokesman Albert Morales.

In hopes of extracting a confession, Christian created a "ruse" crime report indicating that Kerkeles' semen had been found on a blanket, while the actual report revealed no semen. Such a tactic is legal -- at that stage of a case.

If you read up on the "9 Step Reid Method" you will discover it is a modern variation of the old "beat em with a rubber hose" method used to get confessions by the police.

Only the physical rubber hose is replaced with a "mental rubber hose", and the physical beating is replaced by a "mental beating".

The "9 Step Reid Method" routinely gets false confessions.

Source

San Jose poised to settle case involving cop and phony lab report

By Tracey Kaplan

tkaplan@mercurynews.com

Posted: 05/06/2013 06:12:00 PM PDT

SAN JOSE -- A local man who was held over for trial on the basis of a phony lab report cooked up by a police officer and presented in court by a prosecutor is poised to win a legal settlement with the city for $150,000.

On Tuesday, the San Jose City Council is expected to approve the settlement with Michael Kerkeles of San Jose. Under the agreement, the city must also pay Kerkeles' legal fees, which could be at least $1 million because the federal civil rights case dragged on for six years and included a hard-fought appeal.

Kerkeles declined to comment, but one of his lawyers said the case has taken a major toll on him. Not only was Kerkeles at work when the sexual assault of a developmentally disabled woman supposedly occurred, the lawyer said, but his wife also was in her home office, steps from where the alleged rape took place.

"It's a significant sum, but Mr. Kerkeles certainly wouldn't trade the money he got for what he went through," lawyer Matt Davis said.

Fake crime report

The evidence that Kerkeles' rights had been violated was bolstered last year when prosecutor Jaime Stringfield admitted she misled the court about the lab report. She was suspended for a month by the state Supreme Court, based on a recommendation by the State Bar, which licenses attorneys. She had already resigned from the District Attorney's Office to pursue a teaching career, but is currently licensed to practice law.

However, the police officer, Sgt. Matthew Christian, remains on the job and is now assigned to the Traffic Investigations Unit, said SJPD spokesman Albert Morales.

The injustice unfolded after Kerkeles was accused in 2005 of sexually assaulting the developmentally disabled neighbor with the mental acuity of a 7-year-old.

In hopes of extracting a confession, Christian created a "ruse" crime report indicating that Kerkeles' semen had been found on a blanket, while the actual report revealed no semen. Such a tactic is legal -- at that stage of a case.

Kerkeles asked for an attorney, so the report was never actually used as a ruse. Instead, it was presented in court after the District Attorney's Office lost two preliminary hearings in the case.

'Huge mistake'

On both occasions, the judge found the woman was not a competent witness and there was insufficient evidence to hold Kerkeles over for trial on charges.

But at the third preliminary hearing, then-prosecutor Stringfield elicited testimony from officer Christian regarding the contents of the ruse report. The officer's testimony was that semen had been found on the blanket, prompting the court to find there was probable cause to hold Kerkeles over for trial.

"In our view, that was a huge mistake," San Jose City Attorney Rick Doyle said, referring to the presentation of the phony document in court and Sgt. Matthew Christian's testimony about it.

There were several indications that the report was false. For one thing, the officer used a phony name for the crime lab analyst. It was also dated within a day of the evidence being seized -- contrary to normal DNA examinations, which take considerably longer to complete. Stringfield had in her file a real report that did not find semen on the bedspread.

"It's a good number ($150,000) to settle the case for," the city attorney said, "given the (legal) risks."

Contact Tracey Kaplan at 408-278-3482. Follow her at Twitter.com/tkaplanreport.

AZ deputy from Glendale pleads guilty in assault in N.D.

Former AZ deputy from Glendale pleads guilty in assault in N.D.

Associated Press Tue May 7, 2013 9:44 AM

An Arizona sheriff’s deputy accused of driving to North Dakota and assaulting a man who had an affair with his wife has pleaded guilty to felony aggravated assault.

A sentencing date was not immediately set for 41-year-old Timothy Abrahamson, of Glendale, Ariz. He faces up to five years in prison.

Abrahamson was accused of driving to West Fargo last September and confronting Jason Swart in Swart’s driveway. Court documents state Swart lost part of an ear in the assault.

The Forum newspaper reports (http://bit.ly/13f8fdo) that Swart was a high school classmate of Abrahamson’s wife.

Abrahamson no longer works for the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department in Arizona.

———

Information from: The Forum, http://www.in-forum.com

Source Former Arizona sheriff's deputy pleads guilty in West Fargo attack

FARGO – A former sheriff’s deputy for Maricopa County in Arizona pleaded guilty Monday in a Cass County court case that alleges he drove to West Fargo to beat up a man who slept with his wife.

Timothy Abrahamson, 41, of Glendale, Ariz. pleaded guilty to one count of Class C felony aggravated assault.

Charging documents state Abrahamson drove to West Fargo Sept. 16 and confronted the victim, Jason Swart, in the driveway of Swart’s home.

Swart, an high school classmate of Abrahamson’s wife, reconnected with her on Facebook. Court documents state Swart lost part of an ear in the assault.

The judge ordered a presentencing investigation. A sentencing date hasn’t been set.

It's not about justice, it's about jobs for cops and prison guards.

Source

Pinal County hopes to alter ICE contract

By Lindsey Collom The Republic | azcentral.com Wed May 8, 2013 10:27 PM

Members of Arizona’s congressional delegation have agreed to intervene on Pinal County’s behalf in hopes that the Department of Homeland Security will renegotiate a more equitable contract to hold immigration detainees at the county jail.

Pinal County supervisors voted during a standing-room-only session Wednesday to make a last, friendly effort to “bring ICE to the table.” They decided not to threaten to sever the jail contract after Sheriff’s Office detention workers and their families pleaded with the board for help to keep their jobs.

Up to 200 jobs would be in jeopardy if the county was unable to recoup operating costs associated with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement contract.

A recent internal audit revealed that Pinal County annually spends about $2 million more than it receives from the federal government to house ICE detainees and carry out the contract’s terms.

County Manager Fritz Behring’s multiple attempts to initiate negotiations have been rebuffed by ICE officials who say they cannot consider any rate increases because of sequestration and budget concerns for fiscal 2014.

In a letter to ICE’s congressional liaison Wednesday, U.S. Reps. Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Flagstaff, and Paul Gosar, R-Prescott, pushed for the federal government to take action and pay its share. Sheriff Paul Babeu said he appealed to Kirkpatrick and Gosar for help earlier this week.

“Federal unfunded costs should not be imposed on the taxpayers of Pinal County, Arizona — such costs are the sole and exclusive responsibility of the federal government,” Kirkpatrick and Gosar wrote. “If the costs of housing an inmate are in fact higher than the federal reimbursement rate, there is a serious issue that must be addressed.”

The pair included in the letter an offer to facilitate a meeting between ICE officials, the Sheriff’s Office and county supervisors “so that all parties may come to a reasonable solution.”

County officials have warned for months that, if the daily rate paid to Pinal County for each federal detainee is not increased, the only foreseeable option to stem the negative cash flow is to cancel the contract, lay off up to 200 detention employees and shutter portions of the jail.

“These Board of Supervisors see nothing but paper and numbers, but we’re people,” said Sandra Price, a detention officer who spoke Wednesday before the board. “We have children; we have medical insurance to pay for; we have people to put through college. I’m 53 damn years old, and I should not be worried about losing a job that I love and I am dedicated to because they don’t want to negotiate.” [How can you love a job that jails people for the victimless crime of searching for a better life in America. I wonder if the jail guards that helped Hitler round up and murder the Jews also loved their jobs!!!]

The supervisors who signed off on the ICE contract in 2006 are long gone, as are the key administrators who were part of the negotiations.

Since then, officials have operated on the assumption that the contract was paying for itself, covering the debt from a $62.1 million detention-facilities expansion and sparing taxpayers any expense. The reality was far different, according to a recent internal audit that found Pinal County has forgone millions of dollars in potential revenue.

County officials admit the contract has been poorly administered but say they are now taking steps to correct the situation.

“If the feds will not renegotiate, what are we to do?” Supervisor Pete Rios asked board-meeting attendees Wednesday. “I don’t want these employees to lose their jobs, either. But we also need to look at property taxes that people don’t want increased, and we have to balance the budget.”

The board had been slated to vote on a motion directing Behring to give ICE an ultimatum: Work with Pinal County, or find another jail for immigration detainees.

Board Chairman Steve Miller said the idea was to apply pressure and determine whether ICE was truly interested in keeping its detainees at the county jail. In the latest correspondence, an ICE official said Pinal County is “an important partner in ICE’s mission.”

“Our office (Office of Acquisition Management) has been directed to not take any action that would result in a bed day-rate increase unless it is related to the Service Contract Act or some other mandated federal regulation,” contract specialist Grace Garrity told Behring in an April 2 e-mail.

She added that the office needed “a more clear idea of the budget constraints and fiscal priorities” before considering a rate hike and that that could happen in September or October at the earliest.

Miller admitted the federal government has no incentive to renegotiate. More than a dozen agencies in Arizona besides Pinal County have similar contract agreements with ICE, but with a prisoner per diem rate of $59.64, no one has given the feds a better deal.

“We need to figure out how to stop the bleeding,” Miller said. “We’re losing money every day, and we cannot afford to do that. If we want to get our arms around it, bring the levy down, the burden to each and every citizen of Pinal County, we cannot continue to lose money. Unless we can break even, we’ll have to pursue another way to address the issue. We’re doing the best we can.”

Tom Horne pays fine for hit and run accident.

Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne is one of the government tyrants who is trying to flush Arizona's voter approved medical marijuana law down the toilet. That is Prop 203.

Source

Horne pays $300 traffic ticket tied to probe

By Yvonne Wingett Sanchez The Republic | azcentral.com Wed May 8, 2013 10:54 PM

Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne announced Wednesday that he has settled a traffic ticket that arose as a result of a federal investigation into allegations of campaign-finance violations.

In a statement released by his press secretary, Horne said he paid a $300 fine and reiterated prior comments that the hit-and-run fender-bender last year in a downtown Phoenix parking garage “at most left a paint scratch and no dent.” [I wonder if the cops would let me go if I claimed the hit and run accident I was in caused almost no damage. Probably not. I guess AG Tom Horne thinks he is special because he is a royal government ruler.]

Records from Phoenix Municipal Court indicate Horne pleaded no contest and will pay a total of $582, which includes the fine plus a surcharge. [Wow those fine surcharges almost doubled the fine bumping it from $300 to almost $600 or $582 to be exact!]

Horne received a misdemeanor citation alleging that he caused paint damage to the bumper of a parked vehicle during the March 27, 2012, incident that he did not report. The citation was for one count of leaving the scene of a crash with an unattended vehicle, a Class 3 misdemeanor.

Horne had argued that he was being unfairly targeted for prosecution for the fender-bender. [Why??? Does Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne think elected officials and government bureaucrats should be above the law???]

The accident was witnessed by two FBI agents who were tailing Horne as part of a joint investigation with the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office into the alleged campaign-finance violations. Last week, a county Superior Court judge ruled that the campaign-finance case against Horne and an aide that was due to be heard this week cannot move forward because of legal technicalities and procedural failings by the secretary of state.

The campaign-finance case now goes back for review to the Secretary of State’s Office, which has already determined that reasonable cause exists to believe a campaign-finance violation occurred and can still pursue the case through another prosecutor — after first submitting it to Horne in his role as state attorney general.

The FBI turned the information about the car accident over to the County Attorney’s Office, which referred the matter to the Phoenix Police Department.

Public records obtained by The Arizona Republic from the County Attorney’s Office detail the accident. County attorney’s Detective Mark Stribling wrote a memo in April last year describing how FBI Agents Brian Grehoski and Merv Mason watched the crash and the minutes leading up to it.

Stribling wrote that agents saw Carmen Chenal, a longtime Horne confidante and employee, leave the Attorney General’s Office during lunch hour, get into a borrowed Volkswagen car and drive to a downtown Phoenix parking garage.

Horne then left the office and drove his gold Jaguar into the same garage.

Horne and Chenal then left the garage, with Horne driving the vehicle originally driven by Chenal, Stribling wrote. Chenal was in the passenger seat. Horne was wearing a baseball cap as they drove to Chenal’s home.

After the accident at Chenal’s apartment complex, the Phoenix report states, Horne “stopped for an estimated 10 to 20 seconds.”

“Neither Tom nor Carmen got out or opened the windows to look out to see the damage,” the report said. “Tom pulled away and parked the vehicle in another area of the parking garage, and the two of them walked through the resident gate and went into Carmen’s apartment.”

Authorities concluded that Horne, a married man, did not leave a note so that he could hide a relationship with Chenal.

Students Face Child Porn Charges in Nude Sexting Scandal

I guess not.

And I guess it's a lot safer for the cops to hunt down and arrest teenagers who take nude photos of themselves instead of hunting down real criminals like bank robbers and rapists.

Source

Students Face Child Porn Charges in Nude Sexting Scandal

ETIWANDA, Calif. (KTLA) — They are nude self-portraits, taken by teenage girls, now on display in cyber space for everyone to see.

A sophomore boy at Etiwanda High School who tweeted nude pictures of at least four underage girls at nearby Rancho Cucamonga High created more than teenage Twitter drama.

His actions have now led to a criminal investigation.

The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department is investigating the incident as a suspected case of child pornography.

But it’s not just the teenage boy who tweeted the nude photos who may have committed a felony, according to a department spokesperson.

Any underage girl who takes a nude self-portrait and texts it from her phone is committing the same crime.

Fellow students believe the boy collected the nude pictures from the girls’ ex-boyfriends, then sent them out in order to gain popularity on Twitter.

–Carolyn Costello, KTLA News

Why does justice take so long and cost so much?

I suspect the legal system is pretty much the same. It has evolved from serving the people, to serving the judges, lawyers and government bureaucrats that run it.

Source

Posted on May 10, 2013 2:36 pm by Robert Robb

Arias trial: Why does justice take so long and cost so much?

From the political notebook:

* I watched not a minute of the Arias trial. I followed the news about it only casually and haphazardly. It was a cultural phenomenon I was quite happy to just pass me by.

In the aftermath, what strikes my dull mind is the timeline and cost.

Travis Alexander was killed June 4, 2008, four years and 11 months ago. Jodi Arias was arrested for the murder July 15, 2008, four years and nearly 10 months ago. It was another three and a half years before she came to trial. The trial took another 4 months. It cost taxpayers millions.

Did it really require nearly five years and millions of dollars to decide whether Arias did the deed? [A good example is the OJ trail. Even if OJ was innocent, the legal system is so expensive that it bankrupted him. For poor people who can't afford lawyers, the system usually just railroads them, because they don't have any money for the lawyers to grab]

The Arias trial is, of course, a monumental exception. Most criminal cases are disposed of through assembly-line justice. An overworked prosecutor strikes a plea bargain with an overworked public defender in a case regarding which both have only a passing familiarity. [I think 99 percent of the criminal cases are done with plea bargains. People cop pleas because they can't afford a lawyer to properly defend themselves. And sadly most of these people were not arrested for real crimes, but for victimless drug war crimes.]

Does justice have to take so long and cost so much? Has it gotten so expensive that we can only afford it as an exception rather than the rule?

The same question plagues the civil justice system, except that there isn’t really an official assembly-line alternative. The civil justice system has become a place where large corporations can settle business disputes and severely injured people can receive compensation. The process is just too expensive and time-consuming for anyone else. [One way around this is to use binding arbitration, which is offered, not by the government, but by the private sector. And ALL the parties must agree in advance to the conditions.]

So, we now have criminal and civil justice systems that don’t really dispense justice for average Jacks and Jills.

That’s obviously not a good thing. The problem with reform is that doing anything meaningful would probably require rethinking the adversarial ethos that is the heart of the American justice system.

In our system each side gets a lawyer-gladiator who is supposed to do his best, not to ensure that truth emerges, but to get the best result for his side. Public prosecutors are supposed to keep an eye out for justice, but the competitive nature of the process distorts the lens through which that is evaluated. [That's a lie. Public prosecutors look out for themselves and the government, not the people they pretend to serve. I have posted numerous articles where people were framed by prosecutors who hid evidence that would have set them free. As of now 300+ people have been freed from death row when DNA testing proved they were framed by the police and prosecutors. I suspect that is just the tip of the iceberg]

In the American credo, everyone deserves his day in court, so there is great caution about limiting what the lawyer-gladiators can do. The result, however, is a justice system that is too costly and time-consuming for most people and most disputes.

Someone needs to be thinking about big reforms.

* Congressional Democrats are making a mistake in piling up the political sandbags on Benghazi.

Yes, Republican investigations into Benghazi are politically motivated. It’s Washington, D.C. That’s a given.

Nevertheless, there are three salient questions Republicans are raising:

Was security at the Benghazi consulate negligently neglected?

Could more have been done to save American personnel at the consulate during the attack?

How did a terrorist attack get inaccurately described as a protest over a video gone amuck?

The first two involve the kind of judgment calls for which clear-cut answers are unlikely.

There are always more legitimate requests for resources than there are resources. There’s at least some indication that the Benghazi consulate was partially, and perhaps principally, a CIA cover. There was no firepower close at hand that could have come to the rescue. Whether firepower elsewhere could have arrived in time, and whether it would have been wise to deploy it given the uncertainty on the ground, is speculative.

On the third question, however, things are starting to stink. At this point, it is clear that reporting from Libya and the conclusion of frontline analysts was, from the beginning, that this was a terrorist attack. The false video-protest-gone-amuck description was developed someplace higher up. Where and why are important and unanswered, although answerable, questions.

Congressional Democrats aren’t going to be able to protect the Obama administration on this. And there are risks to them in appearing indifferent to what frontline officials are risking their careers to say.

* The person who was most hurt by the false video-protest-gone-amuck story was U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, who was put on all the weekend talk shows to spread it. At the time, she was being profiled to boost her chances to succeed Hillary Clinton as secretary of state. Instead, her appearances killed them.

Maybe she should be put in charge of finding out who in the administration decided that was to be the story.

Two good reasons why you should take the 5th and refuse to answer all police questions!!!!

Remember the police are experts at questioning people and do it day in and day out, and become experts at manipulating people. Many of the questions the police ask are rigged and any answer you give will be an admission of guilt, which can be used to arrest you.

Susan Sanchez who is a Maricopa County public defender told us about how the cops rig the questions they ask people suspected of drunk driving at the "Know your rights forums" she used to give for Phoenix Copwatch.

The cops ask people how drunk they are on a scale of one to ten. A person who has only had one beer or drink will answer "one".

And of course that is admitting you are legally drunk because under Arizona law ANY amount of liquor which impairs your driving ability is considered to make you guilty of the crime of DUI.

Of course the only way to answer the question is to say an answer that officer friendly doesn't give you when he asks the question, which is the answer of ZERO.

Remember the cop doesn't ask you how drunk you are on a scale of zero to 10, he asks how drunk you are on a scale of 1 to ten, because if you give him the answer he asked for that is all it takes for him to tell a jury you admitted to driving drunk.

Of course this all sounds like bullsh*t and it is bullsh*t, but when a jury hears the cop say that you admitted to being drunk when he questioned you, that will almost certainly cause the jury to convict you. And even if it doesn't it is going to cause your lawyer to do a lot of work to undo the damage you cause by telling the cop you were drunk.

So remember just say NO to any and all police questioning.

Last but not least, I wouldn't put it past the TSA thugs to have framed this guy by ripping out a page of his passport to use as a lame excuse to arrest the guy.

Source

Saudi traveler with pressure cooker arrested at Detroit airport

By Tresa Baldas Detroit Free Press Mon May 13, 2013 12:48 PM

DETROIT -- Federal agents arrested a suspicious traveler with an altered Saudi Arabian passport at Detroit Metro Airport over the weekend after discovering a pressure cooker in his luggage.

According to a criminal complaint filed Monday in U.S. District Court, the passenger, Hussain Al Khawahir arrived Friday at the Detroit airport from Saudi Arabia via Amersterdam. He had a visa and a Saudi Arabian passport and told officers in the baggage control area that he would be visiting his nephew at the University of Toledo, the complaint said.

In the baggage area, two customs officers interviewed the passenger and noticed a page had been removed from the man’s passport, the complaint said.

The man said he did not know how the page was removed and stated that the passport was locked in a box that only he, his wife and three minor children had access to in his home, the complaint said. His hometown was not listed in court documents.

While at the airport, customs and border officials also examined his luggage and found a pressure cooker inside. When questioned about it, the man initially said that he brought the pressure cooker for his nephew because pressure cookers are not sold in Saudi Arabia, the complaint said. The man then changed his story and admitted his nephew had purchased a pressure cooker in America before, but it “was cheap” and broke after the first use.

Pressure cookers were used in last month’s Boston marathon bombings.

Then a U.S. Customs and Border Protection enforcement officer read Khawahir his Miranda rights.

The man acknowledged that he understood those rights, both verbally and in writing at 4:25 p.m. Friday. A minute later, he invoked his right to remain silent, the complaint said.

On Monday afternoon, Kawahir was in federal court in Detroit, making his initial appearance on charges that he knowingly used an altered Saudi Arabian passport with missing pages, and made a materially false statement to a customs officer about the pressure cooker in his possession, all to gain entry into the United States.

Customs and Border Protection officials and the FBI declined comment.

On Christmas Day 2009, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a Nigerian student turned al Qaida operative, tried to blow up a Detroit-bound jetliner by concealing a bomb in his underwear. The bomb fizzled, a flight attendant put out the flames and passengers subdued him. He was sentenced Feb. 16, 2012, in U.S. District Court in Detroit to multiple life sentences.

Some previous articles on Sheriff Paul Babeu and his minions in Pinal County!!!

And here are even some more articles on Sheriff Paul Babeu and his minions in Pinal County!!!