TheAgitator.com
The Drama Builds in Marakafka County
Tuesday, December 1st, 2009As I wrote in a previous post, yesterday was the deadline by which Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe gave Dep. Adam Stoddard to apologize for swiping documents from a defense attorney’s file in open court last month. In response, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio vowed that Stoddard will not apologize.
Sure enough, last night Stoddard called a press conference to announce that he wouldn’t be apologizing to anyone. Here’s the video:
Freelance journalist Nick Martin was there:
Before Stoddard walked off in defiance of his court-ordered deadline, Craig Mehrens, a veteran Phoenix attorney who has agreed to represent Cuccia in the case, called out to him through the crowd: “See you in jail.”
Stoddard’s lawyer, deputy county attorney Tom Liddy, stepped in to try to answer reporters’ questions. But the heckling by Mehrens continued.
Mehrens insisted several times that the detention officer had not written the prepared statement himself, implying that Stoddard was little more than a yes man for his boss, Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
I still think Donahoe was wrong (and possibly exceeded his authority) to order Stoddard to apologize. He should have just held him in contempt from the get-go. Now the county may be on the verge of a constitutional crisis. That’s bad for Donahoe, whose court now faces a crisis of legitimacy if he can’t find a police agency to carry out his order. But it’s entertaining as hell for the rest of us.
Mehrens is the man of the hour. A good heckling is exactly what the doctor ordered.
I hope a good jailing is exactly what the judge orders.
Ahhh, to be young (Stoddard) and in love with facism.
+100 to Mehrens. Any citizen not heckling press conferences by the state isn’t paying attention.
If I were president here’s what I’d do to Sherrif Joe,
I’d send in an entire armored division, order him to surrender, get detailed documents of where EVERY single officer in his department lives and if they do not turn themselves and their weapons in by a deadline, they would be treated as domestic terrorists and shot on sight.
As I said before, the judge has already held him in contempt. What the judge said was that he would skip jailing Stoddard for his contempt today if Stoddard would debase himself with an apology before today. These sorts of conditions have been found to be legal in other circumstances.
Put another way, the judge didn’t order him to do anything, but gave him the crappy choice between self-humiliation or jail. Looks like Stoddard foolishly chose jail, likely at the behest of his other boss.
The problem is that the judge is a COUNTY judge and Sherrif Joe is the COUNTY sheriff. I can’t think of any other police jurisdiction that the judge could order Stoddard encarcerated in. Now, if he were a state judge, he could have the state troopers take him in. But, since he has no jurisdiction over the staties, whom will he order to arrest Stoddard?
I think Joe knows this and knows that the judge has painted himself into a corner. I see the judge backing down here, not Joe.
I see the judge backing down here, not Joe.
Maybe that’s what the heckling lawyer is hoping for. IMNAL, but I believe causing a showdown like this may drop-kick this case into a higher state or federal court.
Lawyers? What say y’all?
Nando, from my understanding it appears you’re incorrect in saying Donahoe is a county judge.
The Superior Court is the state-level court in Arizona. Donahoe is the Superior Court Judge for Maricopa County, as each county is required to be assigned at least one Superior Court judge.
Donahoe’s a state judge, assigned to Maricopa County, not a Maricopa County judge.
Maybe the judge will throw Stoddard in jail and Stoddard will sue Arpaio claiming “he made me do it”.
I hope Stoddard spends some time in the slammer, but judges have no business threatening someone with prison if they don’t publicly extol a government viewpoint, whether or not in involves humiliation.
A Superior Court Judge in Arizona works for the State not the County. He trumps Arpaio. But there are some political considerations…
Radley, it’s Marikafka County. You’ve had it right before.
Joe seems pretty stupid. Just convince him to become chief of police in one of Mexico’s drug trafficking cities and let nature do the rest.
Actually I kind of agree with the deputy on this one. If he doesn’t think what he did was wrong then he shouldn’t lie by pretending he’s sorry for it. But, likewise, if he doesn’t think what he did was wrong, he should be transferred to a desk job somewhere or fired outright.
Dave, you’re looking at this in reverse. The judge didn’t pick Stoddard out of the crowd and tell him to “say these words or go to jail”. Stoddard’s already in trouble and already heading to jail. The judge simply said “if you say these words before Dec. 1 when you’re going to jail, you won’t have to go to jail.” There’s nothing wrong with that, because Stoddard had already earned the jail time independent of the apology.
Since I have no plans of illegally swiping documents in a courtroom from a defense attorney who’s looking the other way, this doesn’t affect me. Since no honest person ever would perform that action, this doesn’t affect any honest person. It only affects criminals like Stoddard.
” But it’s entertaining as hell for the rest of us.”
for all the BS in this incident, this is what I find most truthful.
I love how Stoddard is obvious with his lies and doesn’t care. There is no way he could know that “oh that sheet of paper over there, I didn’t review it so now I must go look at it during court so I am doing my job”. I would think that job function is not that broad, and he is fantasizing about things. There’s no way a job function to review all papers would exist, as that violates privacy on many levels, and it’s impossible to review every piece of paper for key words to determine if there is a crime, which is impossible considering writing things isn’t a crime, e.g. “I am going to rob the bank on the corner of 5th and Applejacks in downtown Podunk at 7pm on March 4, 1974″.
I just wish there was something a little weighter than contempt of court that they could charge him with. What would happen if the defense attorney casually strolled over and took a sheet from the prosecution.
I assume (hope) he’ll order Arpaio to arrest him. If Arpaio flatly refuses, it seems like something interesting might happen, such as somebody, like some university law students or an appeals lawyer looking to make a name for themselves, might file an appeal with a higher court. Also, the media might care for 15 minutes if that happened, which would be helpful.
But I think the most likely outcome is the judge backs down. I think the second most likely outcome is the judge orders him jailed and Arpaio buries it by playing along but not really, such as by giving Stoddard work shifts in the jail so he can claim he’s “in jail”.
Just checking Google News, Donahoe has apparently kept up his end of the bargain and ordered Stoddard to jail. If Stoddard doesn’t go, there’ll be a bench warrant issued for his arrest. This could get interesting.
[...] exception this time. We are supposedly a nation of laws, not men and no-one is above the law. From The Agitator: [...]
He’ll go to jail. And remember who runs the jail? It’s gonna be free 5 star hotel treatment for this guy. Internet, room service from fancy restaurants paid for by the taxpayers, conjugal visit, whatever the hero wants.
Unless a direct threat is delivered to courthouse personnel (eg: a bomb threat), I still don’t understand how a piece of paper with “keywords” on it can be considered dangerous.
And if Stoddard does find himself in one of Arpaio’s jails, I don’t expect he’ll be made very uncomfortable at all.
#16
Shot on sight. After all, defense attorneys are the enemy of the state.
“..Doing a job I’ve been trained to do.” Sounds a lot like “All procedures were properly followed.” Cuz you know, training and procedures are just as important as individual rights and the Constitution.
I’m not sure why you think the judge may have overstepped his authority. Judges order people to apologize to the police all the time.
I have to wonder if Arpaio would have fired Stoddard if he had apologized.
#13 says, “Dave, you’re looking at this in reverse. The judge didn’t pick Stoddard out of the crowd and tell him to “say these words or go to jail”. Stoddard’s already in trouble and already heading to jail. The judge simply said “if you say these words before Dec. 1 when you’re going to jail, you won’t have to go to jail.” There’s nothing wrong with that, because Stoddard had already earned the jail time independent of the apology.”
I’d counter that you are looking at it backwards. Yes stoddard is already in trouble. The judge in this case shouldn’t be allowed to give him a get out of jail free card. I don’t think Dave disagree’s with the jail sentance its the ability to commute that sentance indiscriminately. ‘Creative’ punishments like this seem like they would have to fall into one of two categories. Either preferential treatment that is undeserved, or cruel and unusual punishment which is unconstitutional. Letting some deputy off with a slap on the wrist where I would definately be going to jail is pretty distastful.
In this particular instance it seems extra distasteful as controlling our opinions is ‘thought police’ as Dave mentioned previously. If he’s not sorry, I respect and applaud him for not lying to the public and saying he is. I’m also glad he’s going to jail and hope he and whoever trained him is fired.
@Nando: Your distinction is incorrect. The Superior Courts in Arizona are created by the Arizona State Constitution (See Art. 6, Sec. 10; see also 12 Ariz. Stat. § 121) and they are state officers, not county officers (compare Art. 5, Sec 10 of the Ariz. Const. with Art. 12, Sec. 3). I am curious why you think otherwise.
“I’m not sure why you think the judge may have overstepped his authority. Judges order people to apologize to the police all the time.”
Then they overstep their authority all the time. That they do it often doesn’t make it more acceptable. Your probably right that they do it all the time and it may even be an officially accepted part of their playbook. That doesn’t make it something I support.
This is CONTEMPT of court. As I said on another thread, the judge is REQUIRED to give the contemnor the keys to his own cell (i.e. apologize and you can get out).
As for saying “I don’t want to lie” – get over it. The court had a trial, you presented a defense, the court found your excuse was full of sh!t, told you you were wrong and you can apologize for being wrong or go to jail.
The officer is confusing “lying” with being found to be in the wrong and apologizing for that.
The judge is not out of line but this whole situation scares the heck out of me. If the court backs down or if the officer is not jailed, then there is NO legal system out there, only rule by Arpaio. That is very, very bad.
#29 is exactly right, although this probably should be the criminal rather than the civil version of contempt (since some have indicated this violates state criminal laws) in which case the jail time is served regardless of any corrections by the accused. But I do believe he was found in contempt only civilly so he can undo jail by his own compliance.
I really hope Sheriff Joe arrogantly refuses the judges order. Then the judge can hold him in contempt too. I wouldn’t be the first time a Sheriff was held in contempt.
http://www.wrdw.com/news/headlines/37246529.html
Unfortunately, contempt of court isn’t a crime of moral turpitude, or we could try to get his LEO certifications revoked.
I don’t think the judge can specify where he gets held; I know that in Federal court, the judges can make suggestions and the DoC either takes them or not, and I figure it would be similar for AZ state judges.
One thing to note about contempt, though, is that there isn’t a definite sentence length. You are in there until the judge decides that you’ve had enough. People have spent years in jail (for example, reporters spend long times in jail for contempt because the judge will only release them when they give up the source, and it turns into a waiting game.)
@SusanK: That’s not true. For cases of indirect contempt where the person is being held for refusing to follow a court order, then the person can purge the contempt by complying. In other forms of contempt (direct contempt; criminal contempt), there is no requirement that the person be permitted to purge the contempt, but there is no requirement that jail be imposed, either. I know plenty of lawyers who have been found in contempt and ordered to pay a fine. A finding of contempt for a prior, completed action necessarily defies the concept of “purging” the contempt.
There may be a compelled speech problem here (I am not a First Amendment scholar), but that’s another issue.
Also, there is some confusion above about findings of contempt. Direct contempt can (and usually does) have a definite sentence attached to it; it is not indefinite in the way indirect contempt in civil matters is handled.
Does anyone have a copy of the actual show cause order or the other documents issued by the judge in this case?
The saddest part of all this is the ending statements by the reporter.
“Cuccia says, she is also fearful of retaliation, she’s having to be escorted into the courthouse”.
How in the hell can be?
Prosecutors of the Mafia, Bloods, Crips, Hells Angels, Outlaws, terrorists, Skins Heads, Neo-Nazis, and mass murdering psychopaths have less to fear then someone who’s rights were violated by the police.
Generally, direct contempt is punished as criminal contempt because it happens in the courtroom in front of the judge. There’s no trial right because it so clearly occurred.
The indirect contempt is something that occurred outside the courtroom (like not paying child support).
Here, the incident happened in a courtroom, but not THE courtroom of the judge who held the contempt hearing, which is why I think it’s civil/indirect (of course, seeing the actual order would be best, but I’m too lazy for that).
In Nebraska, civil contempt can only be punished by jail of up to 180 days. Every state is different.
Also in Nebraska, the judge can send you to the county jail OR to the state Department of Corrections. Don’t know if Arizona lets the courts pick.
@23
“Cuz you know, training and procedures are just as important as individual rights and the Constitution.”
God that’s probably the best thing I’ve heard on the whole internet. What a perfect way to say what I think.
Here’s the order of contempt:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/MediaRelationsAndCommunityOutreach/CourtCases/Rulings/rulingsReaditem.asp?autonumb=324
It is, inexplicably (to me) a finding of indirect civil contempt and the apology is explicitly the mode of purging the contempt. Whether a compelled apology is permissible under the First Amendment is something of which I am not sure and don’t have time to research (noting, however, that compelled speech is generally not permissible), but that should dismiss the argument about “preferential treatment,” I should think.
Who knew the self proclaimed toughest sheriff in Amerika was a afeared of people singing.
I bet American Idol makes him poopie in his pink panties.
http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/062168-2009-12-01-arpaio-visit-to-asu-cut-short-by-singing-protesters.htm
Shouldn’t he now turn himself in? His training and procedures dictate that if an individual has an outstanding bench warrent they have to be arrested.
No, because he is an LEO, and they are a special class of citizen and the rules, laws, and regulations don’t apply to them.
fucking sheriff’s officer looks younger than me.
If the deputy doesn’t believe what he did was wrong, he should probably be made to repeat kindergarten. One of the first things they teach you there is not to takeother people’s belongings. His position that the “paper posed a threat” is 100% bullshit for at least two reasons: (1) paper is not harmful unless you are choking on it and (2) whatever was written on the paper was in control of the defense attorney. I don’t practice criminal law (I do some other kinds of law), but didn’t the prosecutor, in the interest of full disclosure, have access to the information on the paper?
a crappy ruling by the judge and now he’s painted into a corner. unless he has an ace up his sleeve, sheriff joe’s got him- public sentiment is automatically against defense attorneys and for cops and ’safety’. the judge issued an unconstitutional order.
this sucks to so clearly have joe by the balls and pull a seemingly knuckleheaded blunder like ordering a press conference and apology.
@Wayne: No. Communications between the attorney and the client in connection with the representation are privileged. Moreover, the defense attorney has a duty of confidentiality to the client not to reveal the contents of the communications to anyone.
Most of the time, the defense has no obligation to disclose anything to the prosecution (I am not sure what the specific rules are in Arizona), while the prosecution generally has to disclose information to the defense, at least to the extent the information is exculpatory, and in some states a lot more.
As I said, I look forward to Stoddard spending time in jail, but my comment about judges was more general. I don’t like the state being able to coerce someone into making statements supportive of a state perspective. It may be great fun in this case to see Stoddard grovel in order to avoid jail time, but this is just one case.
The justice system has established quite a long history of intimidating people to get them to make declarations that support the state’s point of view. Hell, most convictions are plea bargains where the state convinces a defendant to declare himself guilty (ie: confess to a crime) in exchange for a promise of leniency (after often having been over-charged to begin with).
Then you have celebrities convicted of drug crimes whose punishment is essentially reduced provided they agree to use their notoriety to dispense government propaganda that favors the drug war as a “community service”.
And let’s not forget that the state regularly rewards informants with lesser penalties if they help convict someone else (not that anyone would ever think to perjure himself in exchange for cutting a few measly years off a prison sentence).
Back during the McCarthy hearings, naming communists was the easy way out of state intimidation.
None of these people are “picked out of a crowd” and told to agree with the government or else. They are all accused of something. It’s the accusation that gives government the leverage to squeeze them and its the accusation that isolates them from any public support.
I oppose, in principle, the state having the power to coerce any statement from someone under threat of prison. And, make no mistake, when the choice is to do something or go to prison, it’s coercion. All it takes is an accusation and not even innocent people are safe from accusations these days.
Regarding compelling an apology–
In general, I don’t like shaming punishments, but I really don’t see the problem here.
First, judges have considered contrition and remorse since time immemorial in determining the necessity and nature of a sentence. In the federal system, this is now essentially codified in the Sentencing Guidelines, in section 3E1.1, on “Acceptance of Responsibility.” There’s nothing novel about a judge considering this here, just because the “victim” was the State and the integrity of its court system. In fact, the entire system of leniency following a guilty plea is, in essence, a strong incentive for adhering to the State’s version of events.
Second, this is a sheriff’s deputy here, not some citizen whose forced adherence to the State’s point of view is being commanded. The whole point of this guy’s job is obeying and enforcing the rules of the court in which he serves in a trusted role. If he wants to have his own opinion on what should or should not happen inside court, he should go to law school, become an attorney, and run for judge. Or he can quit. But I think there are very few trial lawyers or judges (or, for that matter, sheriffs and their deputies) who have a bit of sympathy for him, because it’s his job to get his opinion on this topic from the court, who has told him that he’s wrong.
There’s no confusion. Remember, “law enforcement” types are NEVER wrong, therefore they never lie. If one is always right, then their statements are always truth, therefore anything contrary is a lie.
Oh, I almost forgot. Hahahahaha……pass the popcorn.
Hes going to report to report to jail.
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2009/12/detention_officer_will_report.php
http://www.abc15.com/content/news/phoenixmetro/central/story/Arpaio-Officer-who-took-lawyers-paperwork-will-go/2JOJCPeEM0OHrPiRKh0a-g.cspx
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2009/12/detention_officer_will_report.php
Arpaio has now given up and says that Stoddard will report to jail.
“My officer will surrender,” says Arpaio at a news conference.
This is turning out interesting. Seems Sheriff Joe has given in, but is digging up dirt on Donahoe. Also, Donahoe is going to be a defendant in a large federal racketeering lawsuit against many officials in Phoenix:
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2009/12/thomas_launching_federal_racke.php
What a mess.
“Hes going to report to report to jail.”
We really need an edit feature. I have no idea how that happened. :(
Hmmm my first comment says awaiting moderation. Second with same email addy posted just fine. Was it the links that threw it off? Ill try just one once. He will be reporting for jail.
“Detention Officer Will Report to Jail in Contempt Case, Says Sheriff Arpaio; Claims Judge is Biased”
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2009/12/detention_officer_will_report.php
Heh, the order is open-ended. In order to get out of jail, he is going to have to apologize. This is gonna get good. Yesterday i stocked up on microwave popcorn. Coincindence? Possibly. Possibly not.
claude: with any luck, it will last until the next election.
aw man, I was hoping for a constitutional crisis. Well you can bet he won’t be wearing pink or busting rocks. This will be the grandest imprisonment that anyone in Marakafka county has ever seen.
I bet the sheriff will work something like this (jailgate) out for the guy:
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2004-08-26/news/jailgate-explodes/1
According to this:
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2009/12/detention_officer_will_report.php
it looks like the deputy is headed to “jail”. I put that in quotes because we all know he won’t be dealt with like an actual prisoner.
FTA:
#51 Claude:
Sorry bout that, didn’t see your link.
Baloney sandwiches, Striped uniform, chain gangs and tent city for the deputy!!!!
Not really germane, but I’m in a cranky mood tonight: Stoddard looks like a little punk ass.
“My officer will surrender,” Arpaio said during a news conference, adding that he wouldn’t say exactly where officer Adam Stoddard will be, because of security concerns.
He’ll probably be imprisoned at The Phoenician under an alias.
Don’t the “training, regulations, policies and procedures” that these guys hold as gospel dictate the way all inmates are to be treated?
I suspect they will find more than a little leeway in their procedures when one of their own becomes subject to them
Update: He reports, but the jail is unable to book him because of a clerical error. http://www.heatcity.org/2009/12/officer-supposedly-spared-from-jail-tonight-by-clerical-error.html
Yeah. Right. Clerical error.
*munches some more popcorn*
We’re gonna need more popcorn but this should be on pay per view.
come to think of it, I’ve never seen the constitution jump out of its glass case in the museum and throw itself between a cop and his victim. That judge is about to learn that unless you have an armed division to enforce your orders then you are powerless. guys with the guns win round one.
He’s going to spend the night in jail anyway.
http://www.heatcity.org/2009/12/against-attorneys-advice-stoddard-spends-the-night-in-jail-after-all.html#more-833
Apparently he’s figured out that playing paperwork games is only going to get the judge even more pissed off at him.
“My officer will surrender,” Arpaio said with his pinky toes crossed, followed by the following under his breath, “When donkeys fly, neener-neener pumpkin eater.”
I wonder whether the judge could have simply refused ever to accept any evidence from that officer in any case until the officer does whatever he needs to do to purge the contempt. It’s hard to see how he could function as a police officer in those circumstances, at least for any case that ends up before that judge.
Since when did rifling through the files of attorneys become a “court room security issue”?
Do we now have blow up pieces of paper that can be identified at a glance?
The little smart ass should have been pantced, hauled out front and caned! Ta hell with putting him in jail with his friends as caretakers.
Beat his ass in public, remove him from any courtroom duty EVER!!! Fire him if you can, place a mark upon him that nobody would ever cast a trusting eye upon him in the future. (ok maybe too far).
His big problem is that he does not understand that he is nothing but fodder for Joe.
Cornellian,
Well I got the impression he wasn’t a real police officer. He’s basically a baliff. Just providing security duty to the court. So it’s unlikely that he has any cases that would go before the court.
He’s basically a 13-year-old playing cops.
The boy looks slightly retarded.
I’m actually starting to feel sorry for him.
lol, same here. If he honestly believes that is what is job was and his Boss fully supports him and agrees, as it appears Sheriff Joe does. We got the wrong guy sitting in Jail. On the other hand ignorance of the law isn’t much of an excuse especially after a Judge tells you that you did something wrong. So you think he’d get a clue by now.
Or maybe he’s smarter than he looks and thinks Sheriff Joe has gone way over the line. By staying in jail Joe’s getting a lot more bad press than he would have with a simple apology. But that would be one heck of an acting job since he does apear to be truely pretty clueless.
They’re raising the stakes. He went to jail last night; today his “brother officers” refused to show up to protect the courthouse.
elmo, brilliant! that’s what I’m hoping for-a showdown between these two powers. Our legislative and judicial branches have cowered down for too long to cops and now its coming back to bite them in the ass.
Hahahahaha! Maybe the cops and judges will arrest each other. Maybe the state police will have to come in and arrest the county police. Either way its very entertaining.
Arpaio called Stoddard a political prisoner.
[...] Edited to add: I forgot this one. By way of the Scalz, homeowner’s association tries to tell a 90-year-old Medal of Honor recipient he can’t have a flagpole in his yard. Get the popcorn, folks, this should be almost as much fun as the ongoing situation in what Balko calls Marakafka County. [...]
I look at the still from that video above and all I can see is the Baron Harkonnen drooling over Feyd:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGX2xSjND_0