- Jul 2, 2003
- 145,072
- 17,410
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Made my day!
Upvote
0
Not at all. Arpaio is primarily known for his anti-immigration crusade and his sadism to his inmates. Google "pink underwear baloney sandwiches" for early stories that delighted the nation.
This birther kick of his is new.
This is a good profile, but fairly lengthy.
Ick.
...what else do you want to discuss? The only reason this is big news is because the sherrif is a birther. You want to discuss the birther issue? In that case, let me direct you here.
Feud with Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and Maricopa Superior Court
Over the two years prior to September, 2010, feuding between Arpaio and former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas on one side, and the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors on the other side cost at least $5.6 million, most of which was paid to private attorneys. Arpaio and Thomas filed several lawsuits against the Board of Supervisors, including a federal civil-racketeering suit against the supervisors, four judges and attorneys who work with the county. Arpaio and Thomas lost every case, either by ruling of the courts, or by dropping the case.[72]
In early 2010, Arpaio and Thomas sought to have a grand jury indict a number of Maricopa County Judges, Maricopa County Supervisors, and employees of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. The grand jury, in an unusual rebuke, ordered the investigation ended. This action has been described as meaning that "...the case is so bad, there's no further evidence that could be brought [to substantiate it]". Legal experts agree this is a rare move.[73] Thomas and a subordinate attorney on his County Attorney staff face a hearing later in 2011 before the Ethics Committee of the Arizona Bar, the result of which could be a number of sanctions up to permanent loss of their law licenses.
In November and December 2010, lawsuits naming Arpaio were filed by Judge Gary Donahoe, retired Maricopa County Superior Court judges Barbara Mundell, Anna Baca, and Kenneth Fields, County Supervisor Don Stapley, Deputy County Manager Sandi Wilson, and Susan Schuerman, executive assistant to Supervisor Don Stapley.[74][75][76][77][78][79] Conley Wolfswinkel (a business associate of Stapley) filed suit in January, 2011.[80][81] Other targets of Arpaio's investigations, including Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox,[70] and Maricopa Deputy County Manager Sandi Wilson[73] have filed notices of claims (the precursor to filing suit) totalling about $56 million dollars.[73]
It is always cheaper to pollute and that is what companies do in the absence of enforced regulation. But I understand you've made a decision about the role of government and won't let history or reason stand in your way.
It's kind of interesting how those on the Far Right think it is horrible to saddle our future generations with debt but have no problem at all with saddling them with a polluted and destroyed environment. Personally, I would rather have the first than the second.
Sheriff Joe Arpaio remainds me of J. Edgar Hoover - another American demagogue!
Not at all. Arpaio is primarily known for his anti-immigration crusade and his sadism to his inmates. Google "pink underwear baloney sandwiches" for early stories that delighted the nation.
This birther kick of his is new.
This is a good profile, but fairly lengthy.
Ick.
ther jails get sued, of course. The Phoenix New Times found that, between 2004 and 2008, the county jails of New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Houston, which together house more than six times as many inmates as Maricopa, were sued a total of forty-three times. During the same period, Arpaios department was sued over jail conditions almost twenty-two hundred times in federal district court. Last year, the National Commission on Correctional Health Care withdrew the health accreditation of Maricopa Countys jails for failing to meet its standards, and a federal judge refused to lift a long-standing consent decree on the jails, finding that conditions remained unconstitutional for pre-trial detainees. (The consent decree mandates that the jails be monitored. But it hasnt had much effect.)
Unconstitutional jail conditions
Neil V. Wake ruled in 2008, and again in 2010, that the Maricopa County jails violated the constitutional rights of inmates in medical and other care related issues.[25][26] This ruling was a result of a lawsuit brought by the ACLU, which alleged that "Arpaio routinely abused pre-trial detainees at Maricopa County Jail by feeding them moldy bread, rotten fruit and other contaminated food, housing them in cells so hot as to endanger their health, denying them care for serious medical and mental health needs and keeping them packed as tightly as sardines in holding cells for days at a time during intake."[49]
In a ruling issued in October 2010, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered Arpaio to follow Judge Wake's 2008 ruling, which required Arpaio to end severe overcrowding and ensure all detainees receive necessary medical and mental health care, be given uninterrupted access to all medications prescribed by correctional medical staff, be given access to exercise and to sinks, toilets, toilet paper and soap and be served food that meets or exceeds the U.S. Department of Agriculture's dietary guidelines.[50][51][52][53]
Reports show that, under Arpaio, the MCSO may be improperly clearing as many as 75% of cases without arrest or proper investigation.[54][55][56][dead link][57] The sheriff's office has failed to properly investigate serious crimes, including the rape of a 14 year old girl by classmates,[58][59] the rape of a 15 year old girl by two strangers,[60][61] and the rape of a 13 year old girl by her father.[60][62][dead link] These cases were "exceptionally cleared" without investigation or even identifying a suspect in one case which are not in accordance with the FBI standards for exceptional clearance.[60][63]