Updated: January 17, 2012, 8:37 PM
A top Justice Department official says that Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s actions “cast considerable doubt” on the claim that he and his office are cooperating following accusations that they use discriminatory policing methods. Indeed, the actions of Arpaio’s Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office suggest their “true goal is further delay,” the official wrote.
Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez, who heads DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, also chastised Arpaio for claiming that the federal investigation into his office’s activities, which began during the Bush administration, was all about politics.
“This investigation is about public safety, not politics, notwithstanding Sheriff Arpaio’s continuing claims to the contrary,” Perez wrote in response to a letter sent by Arpaio’s attorney earlier this month. “It is about breaking down the ‘wall of distrust’ between MCSO and significant segments of the community. It is about transforming MCSO into a fully effective, lawful sheriff’s office — one which has polices and practices in place that reduce crime, respect the Constitution, and earn the confidence of the entire community.”
DOJ announced back in December that their review of the practices of the MCSO found that Arpaio had “promoted” and “encouraged” discriminatory behavior against Latinos in Maricopa County. Arpaio’s team has asked DOJ to present all of its evidence in the name of transparency, though most of the evidence was the very same material and interviews that MCSO provided.
Perez wrote that Arpaio’s team had tried to set “unworkable preconditions” on their cooperation, “including a prodigious discovery request containing 106 different demands for information such as the identity of victims of MCSO’s retaliatory actions and the identity of MCSO officials who made comments critical of the agency.”
DOJ’s new letter describes Arpaio’s comments that their investigation was all about politics as “dismissive” and “inaccurate.”
“Despite a long record of complaints about racial profiling of Latinos, litigation and media reports documenting bias and the investigation of the United States, MCSO has deliberately chosen not to collect complete data regarding its police practices, such as is routinely collected by police departments across the nation,” Perez wrote. “These data would permit MCSO to identify and address concerns about potential racial profiling of Latinos and adjust its practices to ensure constitutional policing.”
DOJ also said it was “false” to claim, as Arpaio did in a Jan. 6 interview with Megyn Kelly, that the MCSO had “been cooperating for three years.” “As much as you now claim that you client’s cooperation was voluntary, the fact is that MCSO’s ‘cooperation’ only came as a result of a lawsuit and the reality that your legal position was untenable.” The letter maintains that announcement of the findings of the report at a press conference was entirely consistent with practices in other cases.
“The nature and extent of the document request strongly suggests that your real goal is not ‘transparency’ and ‘cooperation’ but rather further delay,” Perez wrote.
Still, DOJ is willing to meet with MCSO to discuss the letter of findings and talk about potential solutions. Perez wrote that discussions must take place within the 60 day period noted in their findings, otherwise DOJ will assume they do not want to come into compliance with the law through voluntary means.
Late Tuesday, the sheriff’s attorney said he was disappointed that Perez refused to provide any more details of the investigation. But the attorney, Joe Popolizio, added that the sheriff’s office wants to avoid a lawsuit.
“We are encouraged that the Department of Justice apparently agrees with our position that costly litigation can and should be avoided,” Popolizio said in a written statement.
He welcomed the chance to sit down with Justice Department officials before the deadline. However, he continued to urge them to turn over more details.
“Only with a clear picture of the evidence can Sheriff Arpaio and the MCSO have a real opportunity to move forward,” Popolizio said. The attorney and his colleagues plan to review Perez’s letter and respond in more detail “in the near future.”
Nick Martin contributed to this story.
Ryan J. Reilly
Ryan J. Reilly is a D.C.-based reporter for TPM. Prior to joining TPM, he worked for a news website covering the Justice Department and was a researcher for Bloomberg News. His email address is ryan(at)talkingpointsmemo.com.
Soon Perez and the DOJ will have to produce hard evidence, including valid field research and statistically robust investigative reports, that validate allegations made by DOJ that accuse the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office under Arpaio’s direction with engaging in a policy of systematically harassing Hispanics so as to purposely deny them their civil rights under federal law.
So far, Perez has not been able to demonstrate that the Obama administration has anything on Arpaio other that isolated incidents and anecdotal evidence.
Is there a possibility of a prison sentence here?
Oh, delicious irony! Maybe he'll meet some of those "varmints" he crossed paths with when he had that tin star on his chest.
"DOJ also said it was “false” to claim, as Arpaio did in a Jan. 6 interview with Megyn Kelly, that the MCSO had “been cooperating for three years."
And that, my friends, is where the buck stops, when the "journalist" fails to challenge her subject when he states something that is a bald-faced lie. Or else the good sheriff's definition of "cooperation" is that he is not shooting back?
Caption for that photo: "I would have gotten away with it too, if not for those meddling kids!".
richard_thunderbay
Dagnabit!
this is news?
I don't believe that delaying a case is the worst charge that Sheriff pink pants is worried about. He's just going all in 'cause at this point, there is no retreat. May as wsell yeehaw it all the way to the end, the bitter end.
Sheriff Joe must not be allowed to run out the clock. Not only is this a favorite tactic of the GOP Microsoft Engineers but one, Sheriff Joe will waste huge amounts of taxpayer money, all the while whining that it's the Democrats' fault for investigating him. Two, Prosecutors wlll accept ANY lesser guilty plea to a lesser crime -- and believe me there will be lots from Sheriff Joes' mouthpieces -- in order to get this thing off their desks.
One: He can't "run out the clock" by intentionally placing obstacles in the way of investigation. Two: Prosecutors will not accept ANY plea to a lesser crime. Three: I happen to know this because I prosecuted for 26 years.
I think Shirreff Joe may well be gone before this is resolved dwqwerty09, and that is what fargo116 had in mind. If he retires,or is voted out of office before the resolution is final, then the focus will of course change when the head of the snake is no longer making the decisions or available to answer for his crimes.
Rick Shreinerdwqwerty09 That is correct. And prosecutors go for a reduced charge ALL the time.
"He welcomed the chance to sit down with Justice Department officials before the deadline. However, he continued to urge them to turn over more details.".... like the names and addresses of people interviewed by the DOJ...
"They want names of those stopped so MCSO can interview them as well. They want proof of discriminatory jail practices. They want evidence of the claims that MCSO retaliates against individuals who criticize their practices." http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_phoenix_metro...
Got that? They want the names of people so they can "interview" them and they also want evidence that they retaliate against individuals who criticize their practices..... Ummm..... am i missing something here? It's like Ted Bundy saying "give me the names of the people who said I tired to kill them... I want to err.... interview them"
My god! I just hope they miss the 60 day deadline so Holder can appoint a new sheriff town......................
andrewrbussiere If Joe wants to know who is accusing him of crimes he can find out just like everyone else does. In court.
maitaiquinn His lawyers don't want to go to court for some reason..... Probably because the evidence is so overwhelming.
andrewrbussiere One of the weird things about American jurisprudence. You don't get a choice about going to court in criminal proceedings.
@maitaiquinn, i think the point was that you can avoid TRIAL (not court) if you just plead guilty, or find other plea-bargaining tricks up your sleeve . . .
andrewrbussiere Arpaio must be doing a good job. There is no crime in Maricopa County so he has all the time in the world to bust day laborers and street vendors.
firenze_30fps "There is no crime in Maricopa County . . .".
If you don't count 400 uninvestigated sexual assaults, many of them against children, in those statistics . . .
I guess my question is kinda simple.
He's been doing this for a long time. People have been complaining for years about his treatment -- hell the pink underwear has been known around the world...
Why have they taken this long to a) not recall him; b) not find someone good to run against him, and c) seriously kick him out of office?
To leave in the midst of the DOJ investigation and it's final report to go and 'politic' for Perry speaks volumes about how he feels about being a small-time, elected official.
And why does the Sheriff of an Arizona city have a PR person?
Cynner He's been re-elected 4 times since 96. The people who keep electing him eat this crap up...
andrewrbussiereCynner yes they do, and they don't give a damn how corrupt he is and how much tax money he wastes, so long as his boot is on the neck of brown people. It is really that simple.
firenze_30fpsandrewrbussiereCynner I don't live in AZ, or anywhere close, but lots of folks around me love him. They genuinely feel he is the only person in law enforcement who is going to stop the takeover of America by the brown people. They could not care less if he is corrupt.
Cynner His base is a bunch of ignorant white racists in Maricopa County. He feeds them red meat and they gobble it down. He has cost the county tens of millions of dollars in legal judgements (hasn't won a single case) but since he plays to their prejudices they keep electing him. If a Democrat cost them that much, they'd throw him out - not that one would be elected by these morons in the first place...
I am certain it is common practice in America where someone under investigation by the federal government gets to say "I don't agree".
maitaiquinn
Not when that "someone" is a public official say like a County Sheriff... Arpaio has been saying "I don't agree" for the last 5 years...
The DOJ doesn't just bring charges like this for political reasons, they need to be sure they have a open and shut case before they make the moves they have taken to this point. If Arpiao wants to say "I don't agree" he can go to court... They OBVIOUSLY don;t want to take this to court because evidence shows that this guy is racist hack.
You want proof? Look to the more than 400 cases of sexual assault on Latinos in Maricopa County that were mishandled and ignored by the MCSO under command of Arpiao.
They are giving him a long rope and then he will hang himself.
louisegertrude Unfortunately the a**hole is so old, he won't dance the end of that rope too long.
Arpaio's strategy is obvious:
1) delay until November and hope a Republican wins the White House.
2) run against Obama and illegals (Joe is up for re-election this year). Turn the race-baiting up to 11.
The irony is that if Arpaio goes full-bigot, he *might* win re-election but he also might help re-elect Obama if he gets enough Hispanics riled up that Arizona's 11 electoral votes go to the president.
I would recommend all of you - especially Ryan - go visit phoenixnewtimes.com and read Michael Lacey's column in the current issue about Joe Arpaio. Arpaio has a stunning track record of defying court orders and shredding/destroying/losing key documents. He's done it over and over and over again. It will be no different this time, Arpaio will not cooperate and he will boldly defy DoJ.
If you or I did this, we'd be in prison. I hope this time Arpaio's arrogance costs him his freedom as well as his office.
My gramma used to call guys like this a COB, for cranky old bastard.
Oooh... Tough fist. I have fear from his massive masculine machismo.
We need to look forward. The past is forgotten. Why open up old wounds? I am sure that sheriff Joe has turned over a new leaf.
Ottis Hollon Thanks for the laugh.
Ottis Hollon "I am sure that sheriff Joe has turned over a new leaf."
The he had it deported to Mexico. Double the oops factor because the leaf had blown in all the way from Nebraska. the leaf was brown, and sheriff Joe has a low tolerance for brown leaves.
Ottis Hollon LOL
“This investigation is about public safety, not politics,....." said Perez. Yeah, right.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Like