Ariz. Sheriff Faces His Own Words in Civil Lawsuit
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
Like Tree32Likes

Ariz. Sheriff Faces His Own Words in Civil Lawsuit

This is a discussion on Ariz. Sheriff Faces His Own Words in Civil Lawsuit within the Politics forums, part of the Main Category category; PHOENIX (AP) — When Joe Arpaio, the tough-talking Arizona law enforcement official, found himself in the awkward position of having ...

  1. #1
    mmckee1952 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    2,388

    Default Ariz. Sheriff Faces His Own Words in Civil Lawsuit

    PHOENIX (AP) — When Joe Arpaio, the tough-talking Arizona law enforcement official, found himself in the awkward position of having his own words used against him in a discrimination lawsuit, the usually brash sheriff was unusually quiet.

    The Maricopa County sheriff, testifying in the lawsuit accusing his office of racially profiling Hispanics, spoke in a hush. He said he was suffering from the flu.

    Quietly, and clearing his throat often, Arpaio sought to clarify his own public statements that are being used in a lawsuit to prove prejudiced thinking and claims of systematic racial profiling. If lawyers for a group of Latinos win, Arpaio's office would have to make policy changes, though he won't face any jail time or fines.

    If the sheriff wins, then the U.S. government would have a harder time proving similar claims in a separate Justice Department lawsuit against him.

    The case represents the first time the sheriff's office has been accused of systematic racial profiling. It will serve as a precursor to the federal government's civil rights lawsuit, which is much broader.

    Arpaio has long denied racial profiling allegations. He said Tuesday: "We don't arrest people because of the color of their skin."

    The plaintiffs, a group of Latinos, say they were discriminated against during sweeps to flush out criminals and illegal immigrants in Maricopa County, which includes the metropolitan Phoenix area. During such sweeps, sheriff's deputies flood an area of a city — in some cases, heavily Latino areas — over several days to seek out traffic violators and arrest other offenders.

    The group accused Arpaio of launching some sweeps based on emails and letters from residents who complained that "dark-skinned people" were congregating in a given area or speaking Spanish. The group says deputies in the sweeps pulled over Hispanics without probable cause, making the stops only to inquire about the immigration status of the people in the vehicles.

    The sheriff has said that people are stopped only if authorities have probable cause to believe they have committed crimes and that deputies later find many are illegal immigrants.

    Arpaio's office maintained that illegal immigrants accounted for 57 percent of the 1,500 people arrested in the 20 sweeps conducted since January 2008, according to figures provided by the sheriff's department, which hasn't conducted any such patrols since October.

    Arpaio was asked whether a white person was ever arrested on an immigration violation during the first two years of such sweeps. He replied: "I can't recall."

    Lawyers for the group also asked him: Why did you call illegal immigrants "dirty?"

    The sheriff said the statement was taken out of context. He added that if a person were to cross the U.S.-Mexico border on foot over four days in the desert, that person "could be dirty."

    "That's the context on how I used that word," he said.

    Lawyers brought up another statement, one that Arpaio made on a national TV news show. The sheriff had called a 2007 comparison between his department and the Ku Klux Klan "an honor."

    Arpaio responded that he doesn't consider the comparison an honor, adding that he has no use for the KKK.

    Attorneys also turned to Arpaio's practice of putting county jail inmates in pink underwear, recalling his statements to an anti-illegal immigration group in Houston in 2009.

    He said his official reason — "so I can win the lawsuits" — was that the color made the underwear less likely to be smuggled out of jail and sold on the black market.

    "And then I have my reasons," he went on. "And my reason is they hate pink. They do. They may like it in California, but they don't like it in Arizona."


    He was asked whether he says one thing in court and does another when he leaves.

    "This is in humor," Arpaio said. "I make sure we do things properly in case I get sued."

    Letters in the sheriff's immigration file also took center stage during his more than five hours of testimony. Plaintiffs' lawyers say Arpaio endorsed calls for racial profiling by passing along ambiguous and racially charged complaints to aides who planned the sweeps and carried out at least three patrols after receiving the letters.

    They point out that Arpaio wrote thank-you notes to some who sent complaints.

    Arpaio's attorneys denied that the letters and emails prompted patrols with a discriminatory motive.

    His lawyers called the complaints racially insensitive and said aides — not Arpaio himself — decided where to conduct the patrols. They also said there was nothing wrong with the thank-you notes.

    "He sends thank-you letters because he is an elected official," Tim Casey, the lawyer leading Arpaio's defense, said during opening arguments.

    One of the letters he marked for a thank-you was from August 2008, when a woman suggested that the sheriff investigate a Sun City restaurant. It read: "From the staff at the register to the staff back in the kitchen area, all I heard was Spanish — except when they haltingly spoke to a customer."

    Arpaio noted in the margins, "letter thank you for info will look into it" and that the complaint should be sent to aide Brian Sands, who selects locations for sweeps, with a notation saying "for our operation." The sheriff's office launched a sweep two weeks later in Sun City.

    Arpaio said Tuesday about the particular letter that speaking Spanish is not a crime and that he sent the note to Sands for "whatever he wants to do with it."

    Arpaio also said he generally passed along requests for immigration enforcement in a particular area to his subordinates, but didn't do the planning for the sweeps.

    "I just send this info to my subordinates so they could ask for it. I don't agree with every letter I receive," Arpaio said.

    "We should never racially profile," he said. "It's immoral, illegal."

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    3,399

    Default

    A lot of criticism has been aimed at the sheriff but he has done an overall good job in office. There is a Latino group that is after his scalp and accusing him of racial profiling. There are so many Latinos in Arizona so I think it would be literally impossible to be profiling like they are asserting. Any arrest or stop could, under their assertions, be called profiling. The biggest complaint about the sheriff is that he is doing his job and has had the cajones to stand up to the Federal government. We should have more like him.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Creswell, Oregon
    Posts
    3,593

    Default

    If the fed would do their job, Arpaio could stick more to local sheriff duties. In my opinion political correctness has gotten way out of hand. The sheriff is looking for illegal immigrants, that means they are braking our laws, from Mexico. Is he suppose to stop people that don't speak Spanish or white people or orientals. How do you expect to solve any crimes if you don't profile. It's because of profiling the Israelis have been able to prevent highjacking on their airplanes. Political correctness has created more problems then it will ever solve. But the lawyers love it.
    "You can get a lot accomplished if you don't care who gets the credit" - Ronald Reagan

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    florida
    Posts
    3,056

    Default

    i take what the associated press says with a shaker of salt
    gun control is being able to hit your target

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Upper East Tennessee
    Posts
    152
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    profiling? everyone profiles. what about redneck, honky,cracker? isn't that profiling? to me, if it looks like a duck..........the man is just doing the job the feds won't.
    Hillbilly proud.... you have a problem with that?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    850

    Default

    We need more sheriff like Joe Arpaio.
    “An armed society is a polite society.”

  7. #7
    araczynski's Avatar
    araczynski is offline NotASheep.Enabled = True;
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    NE
    Posts
    166

    Default

    this whole mess is both right and wrong. he's doing a job that needs doing, but he's not going about it in the right way. unfortunately there's no easy answers here.

    i think people should be able to come here if they want, without having to act like animals (crossing deserts/digging tunnels/etc) or be subject to being treated like slaves during the process (coyotes) or after arriving (employers).

    but i also think that we don't need to extend all the benefits onto these people that we automatically do either.

    it should be how it was, work hard, and earn what you desire. above all, learn the damn language of the country you want to live in.

    every race/culture has good and bad people in it. i've seen plenty of mexicans/families that are good honest down to earth people that just want a better future for their kids than their country can provide. of course there's plenty of bad apples as well. but that is the same as many americans, there's plenty of good families working hard for their kids, just like there is plenty of american trash here that you wouldn't trust with a dollar.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    3,399

    Default

    If these people want to come to the US, there are legitimate procedures by which they may do so. If they follow the rules and are admitted,, that is fine. We have laws covering immigration and, to be effective, must be enforced. The Federal government will not do so and are coming down on Arpaio because he will. We can not have free borders and not protect our country. In case you haven't noticed, the world has become a very dangerous place and all Arpaio is doing is trying to protect us from having that danger come into our country. There are good people everywhere and there are bad. The good ones do things right.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    north east Iowa
    Posts
    1,251

    Default

    We have a country in which lawlessness is becoming more prevalent. This is a dangerous precedent. The president and law enforcement are deciding on their own which laws to enforce. Eric Holder has politicized the Justice Department to a level that has never happened before. Not only is selective enforcement unconstitutional, it is a very dangerous example to set for the people in this country. People will not obey the law when the see their government officials breaking laws on a regular basis. Sheriff Joe may not be right but he is trying to do his job. If the feds would do their job Sheriff Joe would not have to try to enforce immigration laws. Lawless in government breeds lawlessness in the citizens.

  10. #10
    Ringo's Avatar
    Ringo is offline Politically Incorrect
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    3,993

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldgrunt View Post
    If these people want to come to the US, there are legitimate procedures by which they may do so. If they follow the rules and are admitted,, that is fine. We have laws covering immigration and, to be effective, must be enforced. The Federal government will not do so and are coming down on Arpaio because he will. We can not have free borders and not protect our country. In case you haven't noticed, the world has become a very dangerous place and all Arpaio is doing is trying to protect us from having that danger come into our country. There are good people everywhere and there are bad. The good ones do things right.
    OPEN BOARDERS IS THE AGENDA.

    The Bilderbergers, Council on Foreign Relations, Tri-lateral Commission, Club of Rome and the New Age Movement have colluded setting up the final form of world power. Proof of which is in the everyday words being used by these same people such as New World Order. This was once a hush hush phrase but no more. They are haughty in their belief no one can stop them now and is why they are not afraid to use this term. Kissinger a member of the all the above went so far as to say Obama was prepared to lead the New World Order. Bush senior made over 144 references to the term. Everything is in place but naming the one-world government dictator. The creation of central banks, IMF, NAFTA, GAAT, WTO and World Bank which has been taking place for over 100 years was necessary for these evil men to concentrate the wealth into the hands of a few by dictating monetary policy for the nations. Secretary of the Treasure Tim (I don't pay my taxes) Geithner is part of this cabal as well as Chairman Bernarke of the Federal Reserve (U.S. central bank). For that matter, for many years the various departments of that make up the Executive Branch of Government has been run by members of this cabal. To make matters worse, even many of those we elected are also members. For example, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson of Texas is on the steering committee of the Bilderberger Group and that is why she supports Open Borders and the implementation of the North American Union. She worked closely with "W" to push this agenda.

    Anyway,they decide when we have inflation, deflation, recession, depression and so on. They have manipulated the various currencies of the world for some time now. I'm sure most of you have noticed how one section of the world's economy is booming while another is sucking buttermilk and then a switch is made to turn it around and this goes on and on in a circle. This is done by design through manipulation of the currencies. These reprobates have broken the world down into ten world entities (Regions), which is the combination of nation states in a given area of the world. This is done for micro-managing the world's economy more efficiently and to put down rebellion more effectively. For example, the creation of the North American Union, which includes Mexico, Canada and the U.S. is part of this strategy to break the world down into regions for management purposes. The reason there is resistance to securing the border is the powers that be want these open borders to facilitate their plans. The Tran-Texas Corridor was a major part of this expansion. They called it the Security Properity Partnership or SPP if you will recall, which is code for making these entities one nation state. If you have a Sam's card notice what is on the label of meat packages as to where it was made. It will say Canada, U.S. and Mexico but not which one specifically. Why, because in the minds of these reprobates they are already one entity. These ten regions are U.S. Canada and Mexico, South America, Australia and New Zealand, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, Japan, South Asia, Central Asia, North Africa and the Middle-East and the remainder of Africa.
    AMERICA...Harmless To It's Enemies - Treacherous To It's Friends

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •