Arpaio profiling case may expand
A racial-profiling case against the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office that has already spanned eight years and promised tens of millions of dollars in operational overhaul is now almost guaranteed to expand.
A Friday status conference addressed a broad range of topics with varying degrees of relevance to the case and its offshoot — ongoing contempt proceedings against Sheriff Joe Arpaio and four of his top aides.
Status conferences, typically reserved for on-the-record housekeeping matters, have evolved into their own sideshow in a case that becomes more convoluted by the day.
U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow seemed undeterred by the growing distractions to the case, promising Friday to exhaustively flesh out each topic in the coming months.
The biggest developments from Friday’s hearing:
There could be more plaintiffs
Hundreds of residents could join those considered victims of the sheriff’s racial profiling from the original trial. The original case centered on those stopped or detained by deputies during traffic-patrol operations, but plaintiffs’ attorneys say the scope should also include those who were contacted during Arpaio’s trademark worksite raids.
“Those are a part of these proceedings; they were class members if they were transported in vehicles while in detention,” said plaintiffs’ attorney Stanley Young.
Snow seemed to agree, and recited the definition of the plaintiffs’ class in the case: all Latinos who, since January 2007, have been or will be stopped, detained, questioned or searched while driving or sitting in a vehicle or on a public roadway.
That could include a suspect from a work-site raid driven to a Border Patrol official by a Sheriff’s Office employee. “They’re doing it on a public roadway,” Snow said.
Defense attorney Michele Iafrate objected to expanding the scope of plaintiffs.
“I can tell you that in my review (of) pretrial discovery (and) testimony at trial, everything that was anticipated (had been) resulting from traffic stops,” she said.
New trial for internal affairs?
Plaintiffs say new revelations stemming from the death of a problematic deputy point to major deficiencies on the part of the agency’s internal affairs.
Former Deputy Ramon “Charley” Armendariz received a barrage of complaints before his death last year but remained on active duty for years. A stash of drugs and evidence was found in his home after he committed suicide.
“In the discovery that we have received since the search on Deputy Armendariz’s home … we believe additional remedial measures are needed in order to protect the rights of the plaintiffs’ class,” said plaintiffs’ attorney Cecillia Wang via conference call.
“The internal-affairs processes that they had in places were not sufficient to deal with the kinds of constitutional violations found,” Wang said.
Snow said he may make a determination on this or reset the matter for a whole new trial.
Criminal-contempt option
Snow and attorneys have previously discussed a compensation fund for victims of racial-profiling — those who were stopped or detained by deputies after Snow’s December 2011 order for the agency to stop enforcing federal immigration law.
By Friday, it seemed clear to Snow that it would be nearly impossible to locate, and therefore compensate, all the victims.
“I feel like if I can’t give, and I’m not likely able to give, adequate remedies, that does make some difference to me as to whether I should order up for criminal contempt,” he said.
CIA may be tapped to review info
In last month’s contempt proceedings and at the behest of Snow, Arpaio testified that his office hired Dennis Montgomery, a known scammer from Seattle, to conduct covert operations for the agency.
According to Arpaio, Montgomery provided information that federal agents had tapped phones and e-mails of Snow, Arpaio and others.
Snow subsequently ordered Arpaio’s attorneys to turn over all documents related to these investigations, as well as documents involving an investigation into a comment reportedly made by Snow’s wife.
On Friday, Iafrate said Montgomery had done a “file dump” of information he claims to have procured from, and without the authorization of, the CIA.
The content, in the form of 2 terabytes of data on a hard drive, reportedly includes a number of names, addresses and phone numbers of individuals who may be victims of identity theft.
While Snow acknowledged challenges to Montgomery’s credibility, he ordered Iafrate to contact the CIA to “see if they wish to take any protective measures.”
Montgomery wants in on the case
Attorneys from Freedom Watch Inc. have asked that Montgomery be admitted as a party in the case.
According to the motion, and as relayed by Snow, “one of the witnesses doesn’t know that he’s talking about. He wants to correct the record; he would be happy to do that however the court deems best fit.”
Snow, however, expressed concerns of conflict of interest by Montgomery’s attorneys at Freedom Watch, who also represent Arpaio in an immigration-amnesty case against President Barack Obama.
Freedom Watch attorneys and Montgomery announced Thursday that they had filed a motion to disqualify Snow in Arpaio’s contempt trial.
What it all means
Legal offshoots, dramatic revelations and a continually growing list of parties signal that there is no end in sight for the landmark case.
What’s next?
Snow cleared his and attorneys’ schedules for weekly status conferences leading up to a June continuation of the contempt hearings, and he added another week in June to flesh out the remaining issues.