Alan Keesee charged with assault: Thank you, Mr. Montgomery.

I asked Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery about this tonight - looks like I fell behind on that one. He's already charged former detention officer Alan Keesee with assaulting William Franklin Hughes, III last fall, in the psychiatric wing of the Lower Buckeye Jail, in a tag team attack on the bound prisoner with officer Kevin Gerster.

In fact, as you can see from the calendar below, he did so over a month ago. Can't believe it's almost time for the May Day Rally already, and this is the first time I've checked up on that in so long.

Keesee just had a preliminary hearing today - check here for updated minutes. Be at his future dates if you can, and write about it for the rest of us. I'm just starting to discover I can't be everywhere at once anymore...

Thanking a prosecutor may seem like a funny thing for an abolitionist to do, I know. Remember that I'm just another traveler on this journey - not the guru. I don't know yet what restorative or transformative justice looks like for people in uniform who abuse the vulnerable like that - at this point, I'm reserving a few cells for them.

Those men betrayed all of us when they assaulted William - anyone's child or brother or mother could have been him, dragged off to jail instead of the hospital in a disorganized, confused mental state, be it due to a psychiatric or developmental disability, Alzheimer's, or a brain tumor. Such abuse of power is among the worst kinds of crimes, I believe; unfortunately, our state constitution assures that victims like William - and like Marcia Powell - are the least protected. We need to change that, folks...

Mr. Montgomery had some interesting remarks at last night's meeting, which I'll report more on soon. I was mainly grateful that he recognizes that too many folks with serious mental illness are ending up in the criminal justice system who could have been successfully treated in the community, if we put more of our resources at the front end - in mental health, rather than the back end - in the prisons. The police officers discussing the specially-trained crisis-intervention units that divert people with mental illness from the CJ system at their level (where it needs most to be happening) argued that the program demonstrated an increase in participant involvement in outpatient mental health services among high-risk homeless adults, and a decrease in criminal activity.

Unfortunately, while the police arm of the effort is still fully operational, the agencies providing the community support staff it depends on have been hit by cuts, so nighttime outreach isn't what it needs to be. The trick is how to redistribute all these resources when the AZ Department of Corrections maintains an investment in maintaining their own status, power, and funding. The whole CJ system as currently designed reinforces the perpetuation of the status quo, when "public safety" is positioned first and foremost in the dialogue as the state's primary responsibility to the people - and is put out there as a police matter.

In fact, the public welfare depends on education, health care, inpatient psychiatric treatment options, affordable housing, and a range of supports being available at the community level to meaningfully decrease the incidence of crime and victimization. Those are always the first to go in economic downturns, though - not because we don't have the resources, but because we're driven by fear and defer to the "experts" in power in our collective decision-making, instead of allowing our public policy to be crafted by both our values and non-partisan research, based on principles of evidence-based practice...

Anyway, thank you, Mr. Montgomery, for so graciously letting me know that you're already on top of prosecuting some of these abuses of power in the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office. If you drop his office a line this week, please let them know the community appreciates seeing things head in that direction. Their contact info is:

Maricopa County Attorney's Office
301 W. Jefferson St.
Phoenix, AZ 85003

The number for victims' services (the public seems to be a legitimate victim in this case) is (602) 506-8522.

Let your voices be heard on this, since William doesn't have the right to have his heard by the court, under the AZ Constitution...then give your legislators a piece of your mind about what changes need to be made in the Arizona Revised Statutes to keep us all safe from the likes of Gerster, Keesee, and Arpaio. Send hard copies to legislators - if you have a personal connection to this issue, hand write it - those kinds of letters have the most impact. Their address is:

AZ State Legislature
1700 W. Washington St.
Phoenix, AZ 85007

602) 926-3559 (Leg INFO LINE)

Make sure to cc your letters to Cecil Ash, Chair of the AZ House Health and Human Services Committee. Ask for him to convene legislative hearings on the AZ Department of Correction's deaths due to prison violence, suicide, and medical neglect, while you're at it.

Mr. Montgomery said he'd explain after the meeting why these officers aren't being charged with higher level felonies under the vulnerable adult statute for the assault on William while he was in the psychiatric wing in handcuffs and shackles (how much more vulnerable can a person be?).

I had to leave early, though, with the mother of prison homicide victim, Dana Seawright, so will follow-up on that issue in a separate post. Dana's mom, Kini Seawright, had the chance to confront ADC Director Chuck Ryan with her grief during the Roundtable - he was in the audience when she stood and told her story.


We thought he was going to flee the scene at first, because he saw us chalking the walk out front and headed back to the parking lot, but he returned and toughed it out: he's either more brave or more heartless than I thought. More on that in a later post, too.


Kini will be speaking about her experience as both an ex-felon and the mother of a prison homicide victim at the May Day Rally this weekend at Margaret T. Hance Park, somewhere around 1:30pm.

Tough on Crime MCAO prosecutes William Franklin Hughes III.

Maricopa County Superior Court House (March 11, 2011)

Just so folks know, William Franklin Hughes III plead guilty last week to one misdemeanor charge of indecent exposure and one misdemeanor charge of criminal damage. He was originally up on 5 misdemeanors and 2 felonies, so I guess you could say that they cut him a deal. Considering that William was assaulted repeatedly in custody and has evidence of a serious mental illness, though, I think the Maricopa County Attorney's Office should have cut the guy loose after he took that beating. This stuff can accumulate on one's record and come back around again to haunt you, so it's never really a "favor" when they pursue prosecutions of people for the symptoms of their mental illness instead of divert them out of the CJ system altogether, though. They really stick it to people with a mental illness in this town, and they do it with a smile.


The folks I saw ten or fifteen years ago cycling in and out of county jails and shelters are now going to prison because they didn't get adequate public mental health care and they racked up such a record of misdemeanors living on the streets, not because they became more hardened criminals. That's how they end up doing 27 months for prostitution, like Marcia Powell, in the first place. That's pretty pathetic; hardly a sign of an evolved society.


That's $20,000 a year we're willing to put into incarcerating each mentally ill citizen - more, since we tend to put them in high security settings - but we aren't willing to invest it in keeping them from suffering from the symptoms for their illness and poverty. William was having such a rough time the night before he was even assaulted that his judge didn't think he was competent to stand trial, though - if he had been, she probably would have released him on bail at that time. I have no idea why the MCAO thinks he was criminally competent the night he was arrested; I don't think people with mental illness are really getting due process in this place.


William, if you're out there, please sue the hell out of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, or they'll keep doing to others what they did to you. I wish I had the satisfaction of at least knowing that you managed to moon the cops or something while you were being taken down, too.


Let's see if the MCAO is really "tough on crime" or just on the people: will they let MCSO Detention Officer Kevin Gerster walk with misdemeanors now, after beating Hughes up? They already let the guy slide by not charging him with class 6 felonies under ARS 13-3623, which is supposed to protect vulnerable adults. And will Alan Keesee even get charged for his assaultive behavior? As far as I know, he's still on paid leave from the MCSO.


Stay tuned...Gerster's final pre-trial management conference is May 18 at 8:45am, in front of Judge Verdin. Trial is on May 25 at 8am.

Police Brutality Watch: Gerster February update.

Been taking care of my family today and didn't make it to Kevin Gerster's pretrial conference as planned. There doesn't appear to be any news coverage on him from the past week, and the notes from today's proceedings aren't posted to the Superior Court website yet, so if anyone else out there knows what may have transpired this AM, let me know. I'll post the time/date of his next hearing once it shows in the record. No news yet on the charging of officer Alan Keesee for his assault on a prisoner in the psychiatric unit. As far as I know, he's still on paid leave with the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office.

What I can tell you is that - much to my surprise - the Maricopa County Attorney's Office has not only not swept this under the rug, but they've been hitting Gerster with allegations about historical priors and multiple counts for offenses committed on separate occasions - they filed those last week, apparently (see here, here and here). I still think class 6 felonies are too low for what he did (below is the Arizona Revised Statutes 13-1204 description of aggravated assault). But kudos to Montgomery and crew for going after him on allegations as doggedly as they go after the rest of us...

Damn. I shouldn't be encouraging vindictiveness or prosecutorial excess; this is really a perfect opportunity to talk about what transformative justice could look like when applied to state agents like Gerster and Arpaio - the people I really want most to see get punished. I'll work on that and get back to folks once it perks for awhile. Send me your thoughts.

------------------------------------------

ARS 13-1204. Aggravated assault; classification; definition

(L10, Ch. 241, sec. 1 & Ch. 276, sec. 2)

A. A person commits aggravated assault if the person commits assault as prescribed by section 13-1203 under any of the following circumstances:

1. If the person causes serious physical injury to another.

2. If the person uses a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument.

3. If the person commits the assault by any means of force that causes temporary but substantial disfigurement, temporary but substantial loss or impairment of any body organ or part or a fracture of any body part.

4. If the person commits the assault while the victim is bound or otherwise physically restrained or while the victim's capacity to resist is substantially impaired.

5. If the person commits the assault after entering the private home of another with the intent to commit the assault.

6. If the person is eighteen years of age or older and commits the assault on a child who is fifteen years of age or under.

7. If the person commits assault as prescribed by section 13-1203, subsection A, paragraph 1 or 3 and the person is in violation of an order of protection issued against the person pursuant to section 13-3602 or 13-3624.

8. If the person commits the assault knowing or having reason to know that the victim is any of the following:

(a) A peace officer, or a person summoned and directed by the officer while engaged in the execution of any official duties.

(b) A constable, or a person summoned and directed by the constable while engaged in the execution of any official duties.

(c) A firefighter, fire investigator, fire inspector, emergency medical technician or paramedic engaged in the execution of any official duties, or a person summoned and directed by such individual while engaged in the execution of any official duties.

(d) A teacher or other person employed by any school and the teacher or other employee is on the grounds of a school or grounds adjacent to the school or is in any part of a building or vehicle used for school purposes, any teacher or school nurse visiting a private home in the course of the teacher's or nurse's professional duties or any teacher engaged in any authorized and organized classroom activity held on other than school grounds.

(e) A health care practitioner who is certified or licensed pursuant to title 32, chapter 13, 15, 17 or 25, or a person summoned and directed by the licensed health care practitioner while engaged in the person's professional duties. This subdivision does not apply if the person who commits the assault is seriously mentally ill, as defined in section 36-550, or is afflicted with alzheimer's disease or related dementia.

(f) A prosecutor.

(g) A code enforcement officer as defined in section 39-123.

(h) A state or municipal park ranger.

9. If the person knowingly takes or attempts to exercise control over any of the following:

(a) A peace officer's or other officer's firearm and the person knows or has reason to know that the victim is a peace officer or other officer employed by one of the agencies listed in paragraph 10, subdivision (a), item (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) or (v) of this subsection and is engaged in the execution of any official duties.

(b) Any weapon other than a firearm that is being used by a peace officer or other officer or that the officer is attempting to use, and the person knows or has reason to know that the victim is a peace officer or other officer employed by one of the agencies listed in paragraph 10, subdivision (a), item (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) or (v) of this subsection and is engaged in the execution of any official duties.

(c) Any implement that is being used by a peace officer or other officer or that the officer is attempting to use, and the person knows or has reason to know that the victim is a peace officer or other officer employed by one of the agencies listed in paragraph 10, subdivision (a), item (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) or (v) of this subsection and is engaged in the execution of any official duties. For the purposes of this subdivision, "implement" means an object that is designed for or that is capable of restraining or injuring an individual. Implement does not include handcuffs.

10. If the person meets both of the following conditions:

(a) Is imprisoned or otherwise subject to the custody of any of the following:

(i) The state department of corrections.

(ii) The department of juvenile corrections.

(iii) A law enforcement agency.

(iv) A county or city jail or an adult or juvenile detention facility of a city or county.

(v) Any other entity that is contracting with the state department of corrections, the department of juvenile corrections, a law enforcement agency, another state, any private correctional facility, a county, a city or the federal bureau of prisons or other federal agency that has responsibility for sentenced or unsentenced prisoners.

(b) Commits an assault knowing or having reason to know that the victim is acting in an official capacity as an employee of any of the entities listed in subdivision (a) of this paragraph.

B. A person commits aggravated assault if the person commits assault by either intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causing any physical injury to another person, intentionally placing another person in reasonable apprehension of imminent physical injury or knowingly touching another person with the intent to injure the person, and both of the following occur:

1. The person intentionally or knowingly impedes the normal breathing or circulation of blood of another person by applying pressure to the throat or neck or by obstructing the nose and mouth either manually or through the use of an instrument.

2. Any of the circumstances exists that are set forth in section 13-3601, subsection A, paragraph 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6.

C. Except pursuant to subsections D and E of this section, aggravated assault pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 1 or 2 or paragraph 9, subdivision (a) of this section is a class 3 felony except if the victim is under fifteen years of age in which case it is a class 2 felony punishable pursuant to section 13-705. Aggravated assault pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 3 or subsection B of this section is a class 4 felony. Aggravated assault pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 9, subdivision (b) or paragraph 10 of this section is a class 5 felony. Aggravated assault pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8 or paragraph 9, subdivision (c) of this section is a class 6 felony.

D. Aggravated assault pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 1 or 2 of this section committed on a peace officer while the officer is engaged in the execution of any official duties is a class 2 felony. Aggravated assault pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 3 of this section committed on a peace officer while the officer is engaged in the execution of any official duties is a class 3 felony. Aggravated assault pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 8, subdivision (a) of this section resulting in any physical injury to a peace officer while the officer is engaged in the execution of any official duties is a class 5 felony.

E. Aggravated assault pursuant to:

1. Subsection A, paragraph 1 or 2 of this section is a class 2 felony if committed on a prosecutor.

2. Subsection A, paragraph 3 of this section is a class 3 felony if committed on a prosecutor.

3. Subsection A, paragraph 8, subdivision (f) of this section is a class 5 felony if the assault results in physical injury to a prosecutor.

F. For the purposes of this section, "prosecutor" means a county attorney, a municipal prosecutor or the attorney general and includes an assistant or deputy county attorney, municipal prosecutor or attorney general.

MCSO Brutality and Sunbelt Justice: getting what we "deserve"?

Maricopa County Sheriff's Office detention officer Kevin Gerster, seen in video in the previous post assaulting already-restrained mentally ill prisoners made his $36,000 bond and is out of jail already.

Bet he didn't get cuffed, shackled, bagged and beaten by our beloved defenders of public trust and safety during his brief stay. His jaw probably wasn't broken by some thug with a badge while he was in 4-point restraints in the jail's psychiatric wing. I doubt anyone will be sending an armed intruder to his home to slice up him and his loved ones, either. He's actually pretty fortunate that most of us don't endorse his brand of "justice", and that the cyber-bullies who applauded him following the news articles about his crimes are all just as cowardly as he is.

Gerster's next court appearance is Monday, December 6, 2010 at 8:30am at the Maricopa County Central Court Building at 201 W. Jefferson St in Phoenix on the lower level. Anyone who cares about real justice should be there to make sure that not only the cops, but also the courts and prosecutors are held accountable, too.

No word yet on when his colleague, officer Alan Keesee, will be arrested and arraigned. It does not appear as if any of the officers who witnessed the assaults and did nothing (or even those who helped restrain the victims) are being charged. Nor is any of the MCSO leadership, of course.

During his press conference about Gerster's arrest Arpaio seems to justify that conduct by stating "being a detention officer is a difficult job". The Lower Buckeye Jail's chief of custody, Jerry Sheridan, goes on to attribute the assault of the most recent victim to him "mouthing off". I don't believe there's ever a case in which violence is justified by mere insult - especially coming from a mentally ill person already bound in chains - but for some reason law enforcement officers seem particularly inclined to think it does.

The Maricopa County Sheriff Office's history of human rights' abuses suggests that Officer Gerster's disposition to repeatedly assault helpless people was fostered by his boss and the workplace culture Arpaio has cultivated there. Savagery and criminal misconduct by law enforcement agents of the MCSO is a well-established pattern and practice - one which this state's deluded electorate sadly seems to embrace.

For those of you who missed it, the PHX New Times did a thorough investigation in 2007 of how the MCSO treats prisoners: Inhumanity Has a Price. Read it and weep. I did. As of the time that article was written, the Maricopa County jails - under Arpaio - had already killed 11 prisoners in as many years as a direct result of violating their constitutional rights. For all you right-to-lifers who think the jails just house rapists and murderers who "deserve whatever they get": the death toll included the unborn child of a woman who hadn't even been convicted of anything yet.

By contrast, according to the MCSO website page dedicated to their fallen officers, "In the Line of Duty", since 1994 two officers died in car accidents and one died by gunshot. To hear the rhetoric that keeps justifying the massive build up of weaponry, the round-ups of "criminal aliens", and the brutality they display towards all those dangerous characters they throw in the local lock-up, you'd think the deputies were being slaughtered out there. According to the Goldwater Institute, Arpaio and his crew aren't even going after the real bad guys, though. It's actually the rest of the public that's in danger of getting killed by the MCSO.

Sunbelt Justice in the title of this post, by the way, is a reference to a very worthwhile read about crime and punishment in Arizona. Pick it up before the next legislative session, and recommend it to State Senator Ron Gould, the new chair of the AZ Senate Judiciary Committee. He has a lot to learn.

Again, if you care at all about the abuses of power occurring here, show up for Kevin Gerster's next hearing, stay tuned for Alan Keesee's (check for court records on both here, once they're posted, or call the criminal court office at 602-506-8575), and show the rest of this community that at least some of us won't stand for it.

Arpaio's cowardly deputies brutalize prisoners.

Look close - the guy in the MCSO uniform brutalizing the prisoner is really a criminal. The only real shocker here is that other cops actually reported these two thugs (what big brave men to beat up mentally impaired people in chains), and they've both been charged with assault. One is even in jail (the other, for now, gets "paid administrative leave"). I think stepping on a handcuffed person's neck constitutes assault with intent to murder, frankly. It's certainly a reckless disregard for human life.

I suspect the criminal charges are to make the good Sheriff look like these goons are an exception to an otherwise professionally run outfit that never violates people's rights - and to distance him from liability in the civil suit sure to follow. Of course, if he had charged and arrested Gerster - or even fired him - when he broke the first prisoner's jaw (in June), this poor kid could have been spared the trauma of his abuse.

Unfortunately, according to the Arizona Constitution, the victim here doesn't even have the rights of other victims because he's "in custody for an offense" (check it out yourselves). Likewise, if he was killed in this assault, his family wouldn't have the legal standing of other murder victims' family members, either. It's no wonder cops here feel so free to violate their prisoners. That means we become less than human once we get arrested - even if the cop with his hands on us is the real criminal.

Think about that.

Shame on all the legislators, the state's prosecutors, and the victims' rights groups that endorsed that provision. I think that law encourages this kind of behavior, and the state of Arizona should be sued by every victim of this kind of violence for not extending equal protection to all of us regardless of whether or not the state has us in custody when we're beaten or killed by its agents.

Imagine how many others the MCSO has brutalized in Sheriff Joe's jail that no one ever hears about - especially when it comes to the mentally disabled. By the time they get back into court (after nine months of being berated, beaten and "restored to competency") they plead guilty to whatever they've been charged with just to escape the kind of mental health "care" - even if it means years in prison for something they didn't do or weren't competent enough to be culpable. I see it happen far too often. That's coercive plea bargaining and the ultimate subversion of justice.

More another time - I'm too disgusted and enraged. From the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office to the Phoenix PD to the AZ Department of Corrections, there are way too many violent criminals with badges and guns and keys. I hope our new county prosecutor and state Attorney General have the ethical foundation and guts to nail them all.

I guess we'll see...

I don't buy the Sheriff's distancing act, here. Not only is this not a "rare occurrence";
this kind of sickness spreads from the top down.

Joe Arpaio should be prosecuted, not sued.

I don't know what the big deal is about the feds "suing" the MCSO. I know a lot of folks celebrated this news yesterday, but all it did was piss me off more - that man should be arrested, disarmed, and awaiting trial in a jail cell. He sure shouldn't be out doing more "crime suppression sweeps". We haven't been marching and writing and waiting this long for the feds to sue our county. Arpaio's been sued by plenty of people - and he's never the one who pays, even when he's responsible for killing someone. While good people are being prosecuted as criminals for resisting that man's evil, the DOJ is just stalling until his term expires so they don't have to take responsibility for how he's treated people. I think he does a lot of their dirty work, anyway.


What a mistake to even hope that the Obama administration would come to our rescue in Maricopa County. Look at who the president tapped for Homeland Security, after all - she did nothing but enable this guy. Joe Arpaio may entertain a lot of the nation, but he shouldn't be dismissed as just a clown, a controversial politician, or an incompetent sheriff (though he is all those things): he's an armed and dangerous criminal. After all, what's false arrest if not kidnapping? Racial profiling if not a hate crime? Misuse of public funds if not stealing by both deceit and force? Vindictive investigations and prosecution if not destruction of livelihood and threat to life and limb?


We prosecute young people for terrorist conspiracies just for plotting to drag a few newsboxes into an intersection to momentarily stop the madness of an exploitative, vicious, greedy world. That's not terrorism - that's disrupting the flow of traffic. Using violence or intimidation to coerce political figures or communities is terrorism - which means that Janet still has a job to do here. If anyone else did what Arpaio has been doing, Homeland Security would have swooped in with the DOJ long ago - except that the feds think he's been doing it to people that they really don't give a shit about, either. As I suggested above, it just means less work for them, and by contrast they end up looking like the "good guys", even when all they do is play this game of chastising him.


America is hardly the land of the free or the home of the brave, but most of the rest of the world figured that out a long time ago. We throw the truly courageous and liberated souls into prison like murderers, lest they expose the brutal, corrupt nation we are. So, the feds can slap Sheriff Joe on the wrist or give him a medal - unless they prosecute him as the criminal he is, though, they can take my citizenship and shove it.


They, like Arpaio, are just tools of this hateful, white supremacist, patriarchal empire - they sure aren't serving the People. Arpaio and his kind are heroes only to those who benefit from perpetuating a slave state, and those who have been conditioned to fear the consequences of true justice. They and their kindred invaded and reproduced in this region with an explicit agenda in mind - gaining and maintaining their own wealth and power by impoverishing and criminalizing everyone who resists. It never ceases to amaze me how people like Russ Pearce manage to twist the truth of our collective history. It seems so blatant that I just don't understand how the rest of the country keeps falling for their lies and histrionics. We are indeed a nation of fools.


Well, I'm descended from the Pilgrims and soldiers of the American Revolution - I even carry Brigham Young's genes - but what I learned growing up (from my Young Republican parents, even) was that my family's relative privilege and our presence in this hemisphere by violent conquest makes me all the more responsible for preventing similar injustices from occurring here and now. It sure doesn't entitle me to subordinate the rest of those who populate this land, regardless of where our government erects borders and points its guns.


So, fuck you, your Keystone cops, and your source of power, Sheriff Joe - you are a corruption of what America has claimed to be. That's a claim that's led many young people to kill and die for the ideals of freedom and democracy - which you've done everything you can to subvert. Fuck the feds, too - they didn't come to our rescue - they just keep sending reinforcements to finish us off. And shame on every other American citizen who isn't resisting Power in this place - especially those citizens who lack color. You're like the so-called Christians who owned slaves, or felt a little guilty about it but looked the other way at the auction. I don't know what's so difficult about understanding that someone like Christ would never have voted for those who do violence in His name.


There are many ways to defeat racism and colonialism like this, but you are mistaken if you think you've found a neutral place from which to comfortably watch, tuning in once in awhile for to either vent about evil or scapegoat those being victimized by it. In fact, if you're comfortable with any of what's going on in Arizona - and not at least boycotting this place - then you're already with them, condoning the repression, deportation, incarceration, and even slaughter of people America once so gladly welcomed. The condition was that they had to remain in perpetual servitude - it was only when they began seeking liberty and justice that we decided that migrants were all criminals and aliens. Now the good Senator Pearce wants their children to be born into slavery, too.


What has become of us?


There's never been any consistency in the enforcement of law in America, but in Arizona it's especially biased and mean. Power here demands that people like Arpaio seduce the already-sympathetic, and brutalize everyone else into submission. It's already made sure he doesn't have to go out of his way to put people like me behind bars. The law of this land and its enforcers have no credibility with me; they have my contempt. I guess that makes me another radical preaching anarchy. Call me an outlaw, too, then: I haven't carried state ID since SB 1070 was passed - I know very well who I am, and a good many of the people who would incarcerate me do, too.


I've already said what I think of the DOJ - they're worse than a joke because invested in them is a lot of people's hope. I've been begging them for help for a year and they've answered with nothing but silence as people keep suffering and dying in these prisons. But if I refused to comply with them in the face of an investigation, I'd be charged with obstruction of justice and held without bond while search warrants were issued for everything they wanted - including my DNA for their database. They sure as hell wouldn't be suing me in civil court. What are they doing dancing with our Sheriff around this, then?


Law enforcement officers should be held to a higher standard of non-violence against citizens than anyone else precisely because they already have the guns, the training, and the benefit of the judge's and jury's doubt. Besides, they have a sworn duty to protect and defend us. Instead, however, it's the public that's held to a higher standard when it comes to the welfare of cops, whatever uniform they wear. Even the FBI is guaranteed to brutalize us if we cross them in any way, and the courts will back them up by dishing out solitary confinement for life, if they want - the Black Panthers are a prime example. So, I'm not really optimistic about the DOJ doing anything to rein in anyone's excessive use of force - not by the MCSO or anyone else. A lot of the violence against those targeted by police is done by prosecutors, anyway, in concert with the powers that be - far more than by cops walking their beat.

Case in point: the Arpaio 5. The feds are here because the Maricopa County Attorney wouldn't lift a finger to stop the MCSO from assailing the community (Andrew Thomas was in cahoots with him, anyway), even though tens of thousands of us have demonstrated repeatedly. But the MCA has no problem charging some of those youth who protested police tactics at last January's anti-Arpaio march as violent criminals for the chaos that erupted near the end with the Phoenix PD. There's a double standard, alright.

some of the more colorful anarchists

at the January 16, 2010 anti-Arpaio march.

No one who was there or has seen the multitude of videos can agree on what really happened - much less who was most to blame for police actions - so the default version of the "truth" is, as usual, the one told by the cops (and the Phoenix New Times - thanks a lot, Lemons). Those poor, frail officers (in body armor) were assaulted, obstructed and resisted by a handful of kids half their size who were being trampled by police horses and bikes, blinded by pepper spray, and threatened by a well-equipped cavalry.


Had I been there, I could have easily bumped (or been pushed) into a cop while trying to get out of the way, or arrested for interfering while trying to keep a friend from getting killed in the melee. But apparently it doesn't matter to the county attorney what your intent or your actual capacity to hurt anyone was: if you touch a cop with anything from a banner to silly string, your ass is theirs - especially if you call yourself an anarchist, wear all black, and dare to talk back to state authority. You're really in trouble if you're a woman on top of all that.


So I keep thinking, if Justice is really blind and one's purpose apparently doesn't matter in assault, then shouldn't the cop who hit toddlers with pepper spray be charged, too? Regardless of what frightened her or who she really intended to blind and cause pain (I really doubt she was aiming for the kids), totally innocent children got hurt - the videos and witnesses are pretty clear that little ones were screaming and all red and teary-eyed because they got sprayed. Relatively speaking, that seems to have been a far more serious "assault" than crashing into someone - even if that someone was a cop. If that officer doesn't do time for injuring bystanders by deploying her weapon - be it in self-defense or out of carelessness in all that confusion - why do the kids who got nabbed in the heat of the moment get screwed?


I'm especially disturbed that there's no semblance of proportionality in terms of what the Arpaio 5 are being accused of and what they might be charged with if they don't surrender their right to trial now. They clearly aren't considered to be a threat to public safety, since they aren't being held without bail and the plea deals being offered don't all entail jail. If they maintain their innocence, however, some are being promised the violence inherent in incarceration if they don't prevail in court - one has been told that if she puts up a defense she'll be prosecuted for a serious felony that would carry a mandatory minimum sentence of over ten years in prison.

That floored me - that's literally 100 times more severe than what she'd get if she just pleads guilty now. If the county attorney really thought this young woman was a danger to society, she'd be on her way to prison already. They're coercing her with a promise of harsh retaliation for resistance, not a deal negotiated in the interest of justice. The state isn't trying to protect the public, or even the police. They're trying to repress and silence these young people - and all their friends, by making an example of them - for their defiance of police authority, not for perpetrating violence on police officers. Yet how often do courts punish the cops with incarceration for harassing, pepper spraying, or wrongfully arresting one of us - much less beating or killing someone? They seldom ever treat it as criminal. All they're usually willing to do is let us sue the department they work for - like the DOJ is suing Arpaio.


The DOJ is basically a big fat cop, and thus isn't much different than anyone in Maricopa County - or the State of Arizona - for failing to press criminal charges against anyone at the top of the MCSO, letting Arpaio and his goons off the hook for the criminal harm they've done to so many people. Regardless of how embarrassing he is to the rest of law enforcement, he's still one of their own, so different standards of conduct - lower standards - apply than those which the rest of us are held to. Similarly, neither Thomas' nor Romley's office would prosecute any of the prison guards for Marcia Powell's homicide. Why not? They told me that despite 10,000 pages of testimony and evidence (and a year to investigate), they still couldn't sort out who did what. There were just "too many conflicting stories".


What??? Of course they're all pointing fingers at each other - no one ever wants to take the rap. Prosecute them ALL, then, and let them sort it out in plea bargains like you'd do to any of us. Don't let them off with the modified Nuremburg defense ("No one was following policy; it wasn't just me. Breaking the rules was SOP.") Who else would duck a negligent homicide charge in that situation but agents of the law? They may all tell a different story, but the story they tell is that it wasn't them. Again, the default version of the truth is theirs.

That's pathetic. I just don't believe that the Maricopa County Attorney can't even come up with a misdemeanor charge against one of sixteen (16) prison guards (officers of the law) who mocked or ignored a woman they had locked in a cage in the desert sun, leaving her for over 3 hours without water to defecate on herself, suffer horribly, and finally die with second degree burns on her body. There was enough culpability in her death for the prosecutor I discussed it with to say that it's unfortunate no one can find survivors with standing to sue the AZ Department of Corrections - that's the only way justice would be done, apparently, not through the efforts of the Maricopa County Attorney's office to find it. They're too busy prosecuting kids for challenging the police.

If Marcia Powell had been a child in the care of a parent, the MCA would be looking for someone to execute within days of her death, not closing the file a year later. At the very least negligent homicide charges would be brought. They'd be quicker to prosecute someone if Marcia was a dog, actually - and then they'd erect a memorial for the poor thing. Being "tough on crime" apparently doesn't apply if the perpetrator wears a badge and the victim is a whore with no family to bury her remains. I can tell you from the hits on my blog and the emails in my box about Marcia Powell: the entire world is disgusted with us - all of us, not just the AZ Department of Corrections.


I don't know where the original cancer in this place started - I think it was long before Arpaio, though. The MCSO is just one of the worst sites it metastasized to; it certainly isn't the only one. Nevertheless, Joe Arpaio and his cronies should be excised from this community immediately if we are to ever know the meaning of justice here. The DOJ isn't promising that, however. What consequences does Arpaio face if he loses this round to the feds, anyway? A big fine, perhaps? No - the rest of the county has to pay that part, most of which will come out of lifesaving resources for the poor, of course. They don't even broach the issue of restitution for his victims. Does he actually have to step down (with a healthy pension), or maybe just promise to "reform"? No indication that they have that in mind, either - he could run for office again, for all we know. So, what are all those civil rights laws for, anyway, if they leave abusers in power and enjoying the fruits of their crimes? I really don't know what the point of their lawsuit is, except for the feds to say they did something (even if it amounts to nothing beyond them reclaiming a few million bucks).


Even though it's a rare thing for the Justice Department to sue a police agency, this lawsuit is still petty bullshit when you stack it up against what the man and his machine have done. As far as I'm concerned, Arpaio is worse than the schoolyard bully that too many people dismiss him as. He's more like a gang leader being allowed to run loose with deadly weapons, commandeering an army of thugs who, at his orders, are kidnapping people, committing hate crimes, terrorizing communities, collecting protection money, and persecuting his enemies with threats of violence under the color of "law" - all while he's "under federal investigation" for civil rights violations. How is it not a real crime to violate someone's civil rights, anyway - especially when you chain them up in the process?


Maybe the documents Arpaio refuses to release hold evidence of corruption that could be criminally prosecuted - if so, they have or will be destroyed before he lets them destroy him. I doubt that man will ever get sentenced to jail or prison time, like some of the Arpaio 5 might. Marcia Powell was killed while doing a 27-month prison sentence for offering a cop a blow job, while Arpaio has prostituted himself to White Power for as long as he's been in office, spreading his racist, misogynistic venom in the community like an STD. He's a far greater threat to public safety than either the Arpaio 5 or Marcia could possibly be. So how is it that in the nation which incarcerates more of its citizens than anyone else in the world, this man is not worried about going to prison? I find this to be a very disturbing miscarriage of justice all the way around.


I can't imagine what more the DOJ needs to investigate to prosecute Arpaio. There's no lack of witnesses or evidence here to his criminal conduct: he's publicly boasted about it to no end. He should be arrested immediately and held without bail so the communities he persecutes don't have to keep living in fear. Unfortunately, no one with power in this state defends the common people or human rights - people like Russ Pearce cultivate bigoted, selfish, abusive men (and women) like him. They know Arpaio and his henchmen will enforce only those laws they make to protect their own interests - against those who resist or can be bullied - with the consent of a largely "Christian" public that votes from their fear, rather than from what they profess is their faith.


My bet is that I'll be the one who ends up in jail before the feds pack up and go home - not Sheriff Joe. If any of the Arpaio 5 are doing time there, though, I'd be more free in their company for cursing the state than I would be if I silently empowered the evil holding the keys to our chains.

one of the Phx PD's more dangerous hoodlums:
"Remember Marcia Powell"

-----------------------------------------------

Department of Justice Sues Maricopa County Sheriff's Office for Refusing to Cooperate With Investigation

Friday 03 September 2010

by: Nadia Prupis, t r u t h o u t | Report

The US Justice Department (DOJ) filed a lawsuit against controversial Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio on Thursday for alleged civil rights violations and refusal to cooperate with a federal probe.

Arpaio, who leads the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) and calls himself "America's toughest sheriff," has drawn both criticism and support as one of the country's most outspoken opponents of illegal immigration. Arpaio is also an active participant in 287(g) - a program funded by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that trains and authorizes state police departments in enforcing federal immigration laws. The MCSO has deported more than 26,000 immigrants in the past three years, one-quarter of the national total of 115,841.

Since March 2009, the DOJ has attempted to investigate Arpaio for a litany of alleged civil rights abuses, including racial profiling, unconstitutional searches and seizures and enforcement of English-only policies in his jails, but Arpaio's office has refused to produce all the requested documents. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits federally funded programs such as 287(g) from discriminating on the basis of race, color and national origin, and grant recipients are required to provide the DOJ full access to documents, facilities and staff during investigations. To receive federal funds for its participation in 278(g), the MCSO signed contractual agreements that assured its compliance with Title VI and promised its full cooperation with discrimination probes.

This DOJ investigation is not the first time Arpaio has faced federal charges for civil rights abuses. A separate probe launched this year by a grand jury is looking into abuse of power charges against Arpaio after he conducted baseless prosecutions of political opponents. In 1997, the DOJ also investigated Arpaio for civil rights abuses within his jails, alleging that he deliberately failed to discipline guards who subjected inmates to excessive use of force. Arpaio's compliance in that case led to the implementation of more humane jail policies, including the limited use of pepper spray, stun guns and restraint chairs.

Thursday's lawsuit marks the first time in more than 30 years that the DOJ has had to sue a police force for compliance. Arpaio refused to comply with an August 17 and a September 10 deadline to produce documents requested over 15 months ago.

"The actions of the sheriff's office are unprecedented," said Thomas E. Perez, assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division. "It is unfortunate that the department was forced to resort to litigation to gain access to public documents and facilities."

Arpaio's attorney Robert Driscoll wrote in a letter to Judy Preston, acting chief for the Special Litigation Section, that the MCSO "certainly did not agree that every document DOJ requested is required to be produced in a Title VI investigation ... If DOJ seeks to dictate every deadline and maintain the position that it, in its sole discretion, can determine what it wants and when, without any reasonable limitations on scope and without any input from MCSO, what DOJ truly seeks is compelled or coerced compliance. MCSO is committed to providing DOJ with a reasonable amount of information and documents based upon which DOJ can investigate allegations of national origin discrimination."

The MCSO and Arpaio's alleged crimes violate not only Title VI, but also the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 and the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. According to the lawsuit, if the MCSO is found guilty of discriminatory behavior, Maricopa County stands to lose an estimated $113 million in federal grants. The funds also go toward programs such as assistance for low-income families and health care for the homeless.

During a press conference Thursday morning, Arpaio expressed disappointment in the ongoing investigation. "I thought we were really close to getting this resolved," Arpaio said. He also promised to proceed with his current operation of 278(g), stating, "I'm going to continue, maybe tomorrow, to enforce all the illegal immigration laws ... As [State Senator Russell Pearce] always says, 'Take the handcuffs off the cops.' I'm not going to be intimidated by the federal government going to court against us."

Conditions of confinement: Sheriff Joe's jail is our responsibility, too.

The following is a revised and somewhat more radical version of my post from AZ prison watch earlier in the night. It seemed appropriate for this blog, too. No one is listening to us at the Governor's office or ADC, so try the DOJ now. Please call or write today.

Amnesty International poster: Write a letter, save a life.

For those who missed Stephen Lemons' review of Shaun Attwood's new book, "Hard Time: A Brit in America's Toughest Jail", it's worth the read. I'd post it here but I've already packed in too much for the night. It is, of course, about the Maricopa County Hell they call a jail. Hit Shaun's blog, "Jon's Jail Journal" too, if you haven't already. He posts letters from prisoners there, and is a good friend to many who would otherwise have no audible voice.

As for the conditions of confinement in our jails and prisons: I don't understand why the Department of Justice hasn't held Arpaio criminally responsible for his abuse of so many people over the years - from medical negligence to conspiracies to deprive us of our civil rights. Their failure to do so thus far is akin to the feds' consent for every harm he's done under his tenure, and complicity with every additional prisoner he neglects or kills. I'm really starting to worry that they plan to make some kind of closed door deal with him, then pack their bags and walk away.

The Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act covers prisoners precisely because the People so often end up needing protection from the sadistic cruelty of those wielding power in our name, and few in America are more disenfranchised and vulnerable than those disposed of in jails and prisons - citizens and "aliens" alike. They include our elderly, our poor, our sick, troubled youth, our mentally ill, our developmentally disabled - all those people we once institutionalized elsewhere (and have thrown out into the streets) are thrown into the stew.

Of course, the more vocal idiots in our community argue after every article about prisoner abuse or suicide that because they are in a jail or prison they deserve whatever they get, whatever that may be. Just because those readers like to stone prostitutes, though, doesn't mean they are themselves without sin. Nor do they represent all of us. Those people are twisted bullies hiding behind fake identities looking for someone to kick who's already down. They've probably commented on this blog of Stephen's, in fact.

That's a tangent I can't stop from exploring in this context. The media shouldn't give such people the platform on which to celebrate brutalization, suicide, and murder, including among prisoners, in the first place. That's not supporting freedom of speech - it's just intimidating the voices of reason and humanity into silence. Giving hateful people our shared public space empowers them to use shame to perpetrate cruelty, and it perpetuates the stigma felt by prisoners' families who read "good riddance" from the community after their loved ones die. They screen such things out of printed "letters to the editor"; why not moderate their public forums? Only abusive and rich people seem to get amplified when they speak - the rest of us get censored, even if we head the nightly news.

Frankly, most of "free" Arizona should be locked up, looking at the multitude of laws that require jail or prison for those who break them - and at how unbelievably easy it is to put someone away, especially in this state. We are just privileged or very lucky if we've escaped such a fate so far. Those who think they will never be prosecuted because they really aren't "criminals" need to check out the Arizona Justice Project. There are all sorts of innocent people behind bars.

Once in a while the law reaches out and touches us where we never thought it would - and since it's not a common occurrence in our white, middle class communities, we are sure that there is just a deviant in our midst, or it is a fluke of the justice system that will work itself out. Dad's in an accident while on painkillers following surgery and goes to prison because he had an old DUI. Presumably he will get treatment in prison, but he's already been sober for 5 years - instead he just loses time from his kids' lives and his ability to support his family. The neighbor is arrested for embezzling to save the house from foreclosure and her kids from homelessness - losing everything and everyone in the process. We pay over $20,000 a year to incarcerate her for five years - and God knows how much to put the kids in foster care - while her banker gets a bonus from the taxpayer bailout.  

I hope everyone out there finds those images as disturbing as I do. It happens all the time.

As for the wrongfully-accused: Americans don't really presume innocence, which is why Joe's jail was allowed to get so bad. We recoil from the accused as soon as they hit the news because the possibility that agents of the almighty law might be corrupt or wrong threatens our sense of social order. We sacrifice Innocence like she's the designated virgin just to maintain the illusion that the guilty among us are eventually caught, and that those who are caught are always guilty. 

People who are innocent tend to believe that the truth will prevail, and if it doesn't they end up being punished worse than the real criminals who make a deal. Real-life case in point: Courtney Bisbee, the school nurse accused of touching a 14-year old liar and branded as a child molester, was a feather in the cap of the detective who arrested her and the prosecutor who got the conviction. To assure that the rest of us got our taste of blood, the judge slammed her with 11 years for fighting it out in court instead of taking a plea bargain that would have had her back home with her child by now.

Stephen Lemons even investigated Courtney's case and advocated on her behalf (here and here, too), but no one wants to hear the new evidence that would exonerate her because it implicates incompetence - or worse. For law enforcement's ego and our sense of order, she's been in prison for at least 6 years now. Maybe Romley is the man who will have the courage to help set her free - we'll see. He was the Maricopa County Attorney when she was originally prosecuted, so if he steps up to the plate and looks at it in a new light, I'll be impressed. Andrew Thomas was too much of a political coward.

In these ways the brutality of our courts, Joe's jail, and Ryan's prisons hits home. It's not a freakish thing for families to be ripped apart by "justice" in poor and minority communities - it's all too common. The legal system works exactly as it's designed to there, oppressing resistance to white supremacy and defiance of the rules of capitalism at every turn. Justice is the sheep's clothing that America dons to promote the interests of the few, and the myth that we are a model of democracy is what blinds us - and Her - to the deceit. 

But Justice is not supposed to prey on the rest of us "ordinary Americans"- it is supposed to protect us. It only seems to be when we fall from grace ourselves (or get falsely accused and imprisoned) that we begin to see the system for what it is. We get inside and see people doomed to spend the rest of their lives in prison for charges as petty as fraud, while murderers walk away with money in their pocket after 15 or 20 years. Looking around, we also realize that the majority of the people behind bars are not a public safety threat - most are public nuisances, eyesores, "sinners" and surplus laborers who legislators thought would be better hidden away. Those still claiming their innocence are all too often out-maneuvered by the state in legal proceedings, and seldom have the luxury of an attorney to help them once appeals are exhausted. 


Look closely and you'll see that America's prisons and jails have, by and large, replaced our mental hospitals, poorhouses, and plantations. And they are major money-making machines for those in power, as long as they skimp on human rights and basic needs like food and health care. That's why the prisoners who would expose them are discredited, discounted, and silenced in every way possible.

Never mind that the desperate and vulnerable are being relegated and abandoned in these hellholes to sociopaths who will rape and torture them for the fun of it, or even kill them just to score a new gang tattoo. To the private and public prison industries alike, each new body is just an addition to their growing empire - they have no interest in anyone's innocence or special circumstances, and no reason to help prevent or reduce the effects of crime in our communities. 

Despite lamenting about the high recidivism rate (usually as an excuse to be better funded and more brutal), jails and prisons are just as well-paid for recycling the people they chewed up once already. Buying the industry's line of BS, a terrorized public decides that parole officers and prosecutors are always professional and responsible and work in a functional system, so it must be the criminal's own fault for getting put back in - he should have learned his lesson the first time. Our perceptions are too often shaped by the expectation that what we pay nearly 10% of our state budget for includes some effort at "rehabilitation" (hence the AZ Department of Corrections' designation as such, not the "Department of Confinement"). The criminal justice system isn't rehabilitating anyone - they're spending our money lobbying the governor and legislature to pass more laws and assure more prison sentences for less serious crimes than ever.

The prison industrial complex as a whole (of which Sheriff Joe is actually just a small part) cultivates the rest of us to feel exploited and victimized, though, so that we seem defenseless and helpless without them. Then they glorify themselves as our protectors (though they usually arrive after the crime, not in time to prevent it), and we willingly pay them some other kid's lunch money to keep it up. It's a racket. Actually reducing crime and making us all more safe would just cut into their power and profit margins.  

Anyone who believes such a system really upholds justice or promotes the public good is delusional or has been duped. Law enforcement is an integral part of the fascist decimation of our rights, not the power protecting them. We - the People - are the only power that will protect liberty and justice for the future, but only if we have our eyes wide open and are ready to risk jail, prison, defamation, and even execution in the process. If we are not, then we have surrendered that which is most important in life for nothing more than illusion. We are on a leash, instead of in a cage. At least some prisoners, with their integrity intact, mange to remain free.

The DOJ is grossly negligent for failing to act aggressively under CRIPA against the MCSO, and therefore shares the blame for emboldening our greedy, bigoted, fear-mongering lawmakers and enforcers to continue to imprison, injure, and kill those of us whose nationality or skin color or gender or politics or religion they hate. But we are also responsible for letting this go on so long without holding either the feds or Arpaio accountable ourselves. So, here are the names and contact info for the people at the DOJ who should be investigating the real public enemies - and taking action - under CRIPA, regardless of what else they're doing. Please call or write on behalf of those fighting  a losing battle to defend their lives. Don't wait for your loved one to end up in trouble: he or she may be the next prisoner of the MCSO or Arizona Department of Corrections to die.

So could you or I.

------------------------

DOJ - Special Litigation Section

Mailing Address

Special Litigation Section

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, PHB
Washington, D.C. 20530
For FEDEX: 601 D Street, NW, Washington, DC 20004

Telephone Number
(202) 514-0195
toll-free at (877) 218-5228

Fax Numbers
(202) 514-0212
(202) 514-6273

---

Acting Chief
Judy Preston
(202) 514-6258
Principal Deputy Chief
Tammie Gregg
(202) 616-2009
Deputy Chiefs
Julie Abbate (Acting)
(202) 353-4637
Mary Bohan (Acting)
(202) 616-2325
Luis Saucedo (Acting)
(202) 353-0299

One for the good guys: Arpaio loses again.

YAY!!!!

The good guys won this one!!!!

(When are the people of this county going to finally just run that man out of office?)

Anti-Arpaio protesters awarded settlement from 2008 arrests

by Craig Harris and Yvonne Wingett - Jul. 9, 2010 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic

Seven political activists claiming their civil rights were violated after they were arrested and cited for protesting against Sheriff Joe Arpaio's immigration policies recently were awarded nearly $475,000 by Maricopa County.

The settlement, reached this week, was nine times more than what the county's self-insured trust had originally authorized in February, and significantly higher than what the county planned to offer just days before the settlement, according to memos obtained by The Arizona Republic.

The settlements skyrocketed during negotiations because two lawyers working for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and a county risk manager persuaded the trust's board to pay up to $100,000 per plaintiff, records show. The money will come from the county's general fund, whose reduction this year caused layoffs and budget cuts.

Cari Gerchick, a county spokeswoman, said the earlier authorization "was an unreasonable amount" for the plaintiffs, and it would not have settled the case. She said the county's goal was to "minimize taxpayer exposure," and settling the case was far less expensive than going to trial.

But Chief Deputy David Hendershott of the Sheriff's Office called the settlement a "fraud on the taxpayers." He said the county should have settled for far less or forced the activists to go to court. Hendershott accused the county of settling to keep supervisors from being questioned in depositions.

The Sheriff's Office, he said, would have been allowed to participate in the depositions and would have questioned Supervisors Don Stapley and Mary Rose Wilcox about criminal investigations the Sheriff's Office had conducted against them. Investigations into questionable financial dealings by Stapley and Wilcox resulted in indictments, but all charges have been dropped.

Gerchick called Hendershott's allegation "ridiculous" and said the settlement had nothing to do with the ongoing battle between the Sheriff's Office and the supervisors. The settlement stems from the arrests and citation of protesters on Dec. 15, 2008, on the 10th floor of Maricopa County's administration building and two days later at a Board of Supervisors meeting. Some protesters wore animal masks and pig snouts.

All were later acquitted. They sued the county for wrongful arrest, malicious prosecution and civil-rights violations. The activists have been vocal critics of Arpaio and his immigration policies.

The settlements, reached Tuesday evening, will pay:

• Monica Sandschafer and Kristy Theilen each $99,999.

• Jason Odhner and Joel Nelson each $75,000.

• Guillermina Bethancourt and Ayensa Millan each $50,000.

• Raquel Teran $24,700.

County Manager David Smith said the settlement was a business decision. He estimated that going to trial on the cases could cost "at least $1 million in the first six months, just to defend them."

"You'd end up going round and round, grinding up all kinds of resources and spending two to three times the amount," Smith said. "Once again, the Sheriff's Office is creating these liabilities against the county. If it's 'fraud,' it's a fraud committed by virtue of bad acts."

The county expects to make the payouts within the next few weeks.

Records obtained by The Republic show the county intended to pay much less.

Maria Brandon is an attorney who works in the county's office of special-litigation services. She was appointed to represent the Sheriff's Office.

In memos sent to the Sheriff's Office days before the July 6 mediation hearing, Brandon stated that the county intended to start discussions with an offer of $2,000 per person and had no intention of giving away a lot of money. She indicated she received approval from the county trust in February to pay only up to $7,500 per plaintiff.

The county increased the payouts because, according to one of Brandon's memos, attorneys Brad Keogh and Wade Swanson, who report to the Board of Supervisors, and Assistant Risk Manager Rocky Armfield later went to the trust without her knowledge and received authority to pay up to $100,000 per plaintiff.

"I don't know why they did what they did, and I'm sure they have their reasons," Brandon said in an interview.

Swanson and Keogh declined to answer questions. Armfield could not be reached regarding Brandon's claim.

In a July 2 memo, Brandon stated that she and Armfield argued about the protesters, and he said it was OK to protest at the county's headquarters.

"He says the animal masks and pig snouts are for 'fun.' I said, 'Will they like it the next time if it is skinheads and neo Nazis?' " Brandon wrote.

Randy Parraz is another activist who filed a claim and is asking for $500,000. He withdrew from mediation and said negotiations are ongoing.

"In the event it doesn't get resolved, we have a lawsuit that's ready to be filed," Parraz said. "We're still engaged; we're still talking."

Boycott this Brutal, Murderous State.

After hearing a brief report about this reported undocumented migrant's murder on KJZZ, the local NPR station around 5:00 or 6:00 this AM, and finding the article I originally posted below about it (along with a separate one which identified the suspects as citizens, but didn't identify the victim as an undocumented or illegal immigrant), I headed downtown to the Phoenix Police Department to find out the full story. 

They referred me to their public records office on the other side of town. 

They in turn, sent me to Maricopa County's Superior Court complex where the suspects were to be arraigned, but since I didn't have their names with me and "this happens all the time", no one there could direct me to the right court room. Besides, someone said, they were probably being arraigned in the jailhouse courtroom, not there.

So, since I was in the same building as the HQ for the Maricopa County Sheriff's office, I stopped in and asked them for help, certain that they would have the suspects names and maybe even a press release by then, since they apparently handled the arrests - nothing was forthcoming from the information desk, however, except the phone number of their press office (not even a name). 

Now, I checked the MCSO website before leaving home on this excursion. Since the "crime of the week" featured there this AM was not the murder of immigrants, but rather, sex offenses (featuring a complete cast of suspects of color in their mugshot line up) - and there was absolutely nothing on the site about the murder - I didn't bother calling the MCSO press officer to try to get more information.

Instead, I actually paid for an Arizona Republic, sure that there would be at least a blurb in there, giving me the names I'd read earlier on the KPHO website, so I could get to the arraignment and find out first hand what was going on. Not a word. 

By then I was pretty steamed, so I called the Republic, and spoke to J.J. Hensley. He was aware of the body found in the fire last Wednesday, but not the story that unfolded Sunday as I relayed it to him - the MCSO was keeping that pretty hush hush. He was sure interested, though, and Googled the same info I found as we spoke, promising a follow-up from their paper.

So, what follows is the result of the AZ Republic's "investigation", published a few hours after that conversation - which conveniently leaves a few blanks to fill in after making sure we all know that the still-anonymous victim brought this on himself by having sex with the poor murderer's mother. 

No one seems to know or care whether or not this man was so casually murdered and set ablaze because he was undocumented. Or, maybe the Republic is just exercising responsible journalistic restraint, not wanting to make a bad situation here worse by reporting that undocumented migrants aren't all criminal aliens and murderous drug dealers - many are in fact victims of crime at the hands of citizens who count on no one caring what they do to them.


I don't think it's journalistic ethics that dictated the lines - and the blanks between them - in the story below, though. I think the Republic is in bed with the power elite here who just don't want more bad publicity; the "truth" be damned. This state has no journalistic integrity - save for a few good folks at the Phoenix New Times. 

For perspective: flash back a week or so ago to that deputy who was shot by "suspected illegal immigrants" who were "believed to be smuggling bales of marijuana" (on foot through the desert, of course, pursued by this lone deputy) at the time he was fired on with AK-47's. Or the rancher a few months ago who law enforcement "suspected" was murdered by illegal immigrants involved in drug trafficking. 

Where was the journalistic restraint seeking all the facts before reporting speculation then? And what about the MCSO's fiery press releases about how they're protecting us by rounding up undocumented brown-skinned drivers, and all of Russ Pearce's histrionics about how many citizens are being murdered and raped by illegal immigrants? 

So, read this story now having put things into context. Doesn't it seem like something's missing here? Like maybe some sense that the life that was lost was sacred, valued, innocent, even worth being elevated to nobility for having been so brutally victimized? Maybe even a candlelight vigil to remember him and all the other migrants whose lives have been so brutally taken by good Arizonans?

Here's the problem, I think: In the Arizona storyline, the victim is supposed to be a US citizen; the perpetrators are supposed to be criminal aliens (from Mexico, of course), and the murder is supposed to justify SB 1070 and shame those calling for a boycott into silence. What's the truth that should be reported here? That we have so devalued the lives of non-citizens that their murders (which "happen all the time here", as I was told in Superior Court earlier) aren't news - only their crimes are. The Republic doesn't even say what the victim's or suspects citizenship status are - and we all know that those details these days matter a great deal. And even KJZZ hasn't mentioned the story again since before the morning rush hour commenced.

BOYCOTT this ugly place, America. Bring all these bastards to their knees. Don't worry about the poor they say you're going to hurt by doing so; they sure don't care about us - we're already screwed by them anyway. Don't give this state another dime until they account for all their crimes and make restitution to their victims' families. 

That means repealing a whole lot more than just SB 1070. Otherwise, this kind of thing will never end.

---------------------------------------

Slain Phoenix man reportedly slept with suspect's mom

by Jessica Testa - May. 10, 2010 01:12 PM
The Arizona Republic

Three men were arrested Sunday in connection with death of a man who was beaten and had his throat slit in Phoenix, apparently because he slept with another man's mother.

Adan Gonzalez, 20, Matthew Moreno, 19, and Booz Moreno, 23, are suspected of attacking a man who they thought was having an affair with Gonzalez's mother, according to court documents released Monday.

Last Wednesday, the trio apparently went to the man's house near 35th Avenue and Baseline Road, forcing their way in armed with a shotgun. They are suspected of beating the man who lived there.

The trio was accused of using a shotgun and a steel pipe to beat the man, eventually slitting the man's throat with a knife and setting fire to the house after stealing several items.

Witnesses reported seeing the men approaching the house, entering and then leaving a short time later as the house went up in flames, the court documents said.

The witnesses provided police with descriptions of three men and their vehicle's license-plate numbers. Police used the information to track down the three men.

The men were arrested on suspicion of first-degree murder, arson, kidnapping and burglary.

The documents noted that Matthew Moreno and Gonzalez initially said they were not connected to the case, but eventually said they beat and killed the man.

Booz Moreno was found to be friends with the homeowner's son, according to the documents. He has been charged with extreme DUI and is being held without bail. Matthew Moreno is being held on $1 million bond.