Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You've heard of the Goldwater Institute, a conservative Arizona native think tank and organization founded on Barry M Goldwater's ideals. This is a a republican organization mind you (although the foundation is libertarian; most characterize Arizona's brand of republicanism as libertarianism on the national level).
This is what they have to say of Arpaio:
Quote:
At the prestigious Goldwater Institute, Clint Bolick, the director of the Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation, released a study, “Justice Denied: The Improper Clearance of Unsolved Crimes,” on the failure of Arpaio’s office to properly investigate serious felony crimes. The study found the sheriff’s office doesn’t comply with FBI crime-reporting procedures.
The study profiled the rape investigation of a 14 year-old girl, which was improperly cleared by exception following an investigation that was described as “delayed, incomplete and showed a strong bias against the female victim.” The study concluded “MCSO’s practice of declaring unsolved cases solved presents a clear, present, and urgent danger to public safety.”
In the Pulitzer Prize-winning Tribune series “Reasonable Doubt” by Ryan Gabrielson and Paul Giblin, it was discovered when El Mirage contracted with Arpaio for police services, deputies failed to properly follow up on numerous violent crimes, including at least a dozen rapes of women and children.
More info:
Quote:
Even with our millions of dollars and 160 federally certified 287(g) immigration enforcement deputies, Arpaio doesn’t lead the county in immigration arrests. Phoenix police Chief Jack Harris does. Phoenix police arrested more than 7,300 illegal immigrants during 2008. Second place belongs to Mesa police Chief George Gascón, whose officers arrested more than 1,200 illegal immigrants and investigated 60 drop houses last year. Phoenix and Mesa made more than 8,500 immigration arrests during routine policing operations by following well-formulated city policies, state and federal laws, and without legislative meddling.
And Arpaio? According to the sheriff’s office, since April 2006, deputies have arrested a little more than 3,000 illegal immigrants.
Beyond Phoenix and Mesa leading the charge in immigration enforcement, FBI records show major drops in serious crime in those two cities while serious crime in areas under Arpaio’s sole jurisdiction skyrocketed. According to FBI and sheriff’s office records, in 2004 there were 6,971 serious felony crimes in areas under Arpaio’s sole jurisdiction. By 2008, there were 10,168 serious felonies reported. Gabrielson and Giblin revealed sheriff’s detectives’ arrest rates dropped from 10 percent in 2005 to 3.5 percent in 2007. Serious crime in Mesa has dropped by 35 percent since Gascón’s arrival in 2006.
And the Legislature wants to command police departments and local governments to emulate Arpaio?
It’s time for folks at the state Capitol and other elected officials who dance when Arpaio fiddles to quit drinking Sheriff Joe’s Kool-Aid and get serious about real crime fighting, including immigration law enforcement.
The facts are in and flagrantly obvious — Harris and Gascón do it right and Arpaio does it his way.
The numbers don’t match Arpaio’s hype | Voices | eastvalleytribune.com (http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/139717 - broken link)
Last edited by fcorrales80; 09-07-2009 at 02:31 PM..
"HUH? you are making no sense...What is a "hard-nosed" definition of race, LOL! As far as I know there is only one definition of race."
Look, I could care less what you call it--that does not matter. You said three or four times that the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office discriminates hispanics and prejudges them. That is the serious accusation that should not be thrown around lightly (and I'm sure those who are employed by the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office would take a strong offense to). If you don't want to call it racism, I don't care. Call it "ethnicityism" or whatever. The word that symbolizes what you said does not matter because we know the intent of what you said.
"Yes you'd be held in detention"
Yes, exactly right. Your issue with this is with the accomodations. But like I said before, tent city is good enough for men and women serving in uniform across the world. If it is good enough for them, it is more than good enough for someone in the custody of the state awaiting trial. In fact, I wish there were more tent cities across the country, I think it is a great idea. Nothing in the state or federal constitution specifies what accomodations are appropriate and what ones are not. It is just your opinion that tent city is not appropriate. Great, I'm glad you have an opinion, because I have an opinion too and it is just as valid as yours.
"An innocent person should NOT be punished until they are proven innocent. This is the American way and a value I hold high because it's basic premise makes this one of the greatest countries in the world (in my opinion)."
To insinuate that my opinion is unAmerican because it is different than your opinion is wrong. What law was violated in holding these folks in tent city (please specify)? A judge ordered them there, so is the judge unAmerican? Is the process unAmerican across the country in every county and state as accused folks are held in prison while awaiting trial? It's a process that is everywhere, and no matter where in this country you go, you'll find it. You can't escape it. So is the whole legal process in America "unAmerican"? And Sheriff Joe was elected. Does that make everyone who voted him in unAmerican? Is the election process unAmerican?
"many times they are found innocent. Do you know the rate of innocent vs guilty judgements in Maricopa County?"
Do you?
Most of the time they are found guilty. Other times they enter a plea bargain or have a mis-trial (and later re-trial). Not very often, but sometimes, the person is found innocent. If the innocent vs. conviction rate is too high for you, demand a new D.A. This has nothing to do with Sheriff Joe.
Last edited by Ritchie_az; 09-07-2009 at 06:24 PM..
Look, I could care less what you call it--that does not matter. You said three or four times that the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office discriminates hispanics and prejudges them. That is the serious accusation that should not be thrown around lightly (and I'm sure those who are employed by the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office would take a strong offense to). If you don't want to call it racism, I don't care. Call it "ethnicityism" or whatever. The word that symbolizes what you said does not matter because we know the intent of what you said.
Yes it is a serious acquasation and something that is being fought about in court and unfortunately is money WE are losing as tax payers. However, you should really understand the basic premise of the problem. It is not a racial issue, even though some want to say that; it is an issue of discrimination due to national origin, status, etc. There is no such thing as ethnicityism. It is the same as the English having similar policies against the Irish and Scottish in years past that lead to awful "civil" war in the Isles...Now obviously that isn't racism since they are the same race...
You don't see the sheriff raiding Charles Schwab looking for expired work visas or permits because he doesn't get "tips" about illegals there. But he does raid workplaces of mostly hispanic people who turn out to be more than not all citizens. He arrest 4 or 5 or so here and there out of 100,200, 300 employees but really??? You don't have to be all that intelligent to figure out what is going on...
Quote:
Yes, exactly right. Your issue with this is with the accomodations. But like I said before, tent city is good enough for men and women serving in uniform across the world. If it is good enough for them, it is more than good enough for someone in the custody of the state awaiting trial. In fact, I wish there were more tent cities across the country, I think it is a great idea. Nothing in the state or federal constitution specifies what accomodations are appropriate and what ones are not. It is just your opinion that tent city is not appropriate. Great, I'm glad you have an opinion, because I have an opinion too and it is just as valid as yours.
No, it is NOT good enough and it is very un-American. Sorry but these people should not have the same accommodations as convicted people serving time. There needs to be a separation for the two. This would be ethical and within the guidelines of the constitution. As mentioned in posts before, we've paid out more than $41 million dollars in taxpayer money for constitutional violations and unethical conditions in the jails and particularly tent city when it comes to those being held awaiting trial and even those who weren't healthy enough to live in those conditions. And honestly, I've been to Iraq twice. Many times, our tents are air conditioned, we are given real meals, etc. We volunteered for the "experience" and can't help were we are sent. However, we are America. We have a different standard (or should) for how we treat our guilty, sick, insane, etc. This is true of those who still have their innocence, well at least in the rest of the nation outside of Maricopa County.
Quote:
To insinuate that my opinion is unAmerican because it is different than your opinion is wrong. What law was violated in holding these folks in tent city (please specify)? A judge ordered them there, so is the judge unAmerican? Is the process unAmerican across the country in every county and state as accused folks are held in prison while awaiting trial? It's a process that is everywhere, and no matter where in this country you go, you'll find it. You can't escape it. So is the whole legal process in America "unAmerican"? And Sheriff Joe was elected. Does that make everyone who voted him in unAmerican? Is the election process unAmerican?
No it isn't, I can opine as I wish since this is America. What was violated you ask... Read the above posted information regarding lawsuit payouts that we've paid because of unethical and unconstitutional violations. Being held in a proper cell while innocent is different than being held in tent city which should be used to house the guilty and those that can survive the environment. How do you go from unconstitutional conditions to un-American election process? LOL, this is like the same argument made against gay marriage and Obama's health plan; let them marry and people will marry their pets next ; if we pass the health plan we'll be socialists who send grandma to the death panels ... Really, people should learn pragmatism and sensibility.
Quote:
Do you?
Most of the time they are found guilty. Other times they enter a plea bargain or have a mis-trial (and later re-trial). Not very often, but sometimes, the person is found innocent. If the innocent vs. conviction rate is too high for you, demand a new D.A. This has nothing to do with Sheriff Joe.
Really? As I have done, please post a link to verify your claim. You've stated before that 99% of those held in tent city are convicted; please prove this. I don't know the number; nonetheless, innocent people should not be punished while awaiting trial. It has EVERYTHING to do with the sheriff. If he had proper detention facilities for the innocent then there wouldn't be an issue!
"You've stated before that 99% of those held in tent city are convicted"
I said specifically that it was a guess, and made that clear. You said 70% and named a study that you've yet to share with us, even though you've been asked to post a link.
You and homekid should read others posts if you are going to respond. From an earlier post:
Quote:
Carey is one of many Maricopa County residents who've never been booked into Sheriff Joe Arpaio's jails but who are paying dearly for conditions inside his lockups.
Vermin, filth, medical care suggestive of POW camps, chronic mismanagement, the wanton destruction of records, and a steady parade of corpses in Maricopa County jails have cost taxpayers an astonishing -- and until now, undisclosed -- 41.4 million dollars.
Joe Arpaio has perpetuated his reign as "America's toughest sheriff" with an open checkbook.
Your open checkbook.
The Sheriff has captured the imagination of voters with his almost cartoonish contempt for the prisoners in his charge. He's subjected inmates to pink underwear, chain gangs, and rancid bologna sandwiches, and he's garnered big wins at the polls. But Arpaio's jail policies have generated a tsunami of lawsuits from prisoners and their families.
There simply isn't another jail system in America with this history of taxpayer-financed litigation.
New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston, for example, collectively housed more than 61,000 inmates per day last year. From 2004 through November of this year, these same county jails had a combined 43 prison-conditions lawsuits filed against them in federal courts.
In the very same three-year time frame, despite housing a mere 9,200 prisoners per day, Sheriff Arpaio was the target of a staggering 2,150 lawsuits in U.S. District Court and hundreds more in Maricopa County courts.
With a fraction of the inmate population, Arpaio has had 50 times as many lawsuits as the New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston jail systems combined.
Based on records produced under the Freedom of Information Act, a review of federal and state records and a comparison with other correctional facilities, the picture that emerges is clear: Cruelty costs.
Maricopa County Sheriff's Office spokesman Paul Chagolla refused to arrange an interview with Arpaio for this story.
Earlier this month, the front pages of local daily newspapers were dominated by stories about the sheriff exceeding his budget by a million dollars. The courthouse was shuttered for a day. Positions were slashed, and visiting hours for attorneys and court personnel were cut drastically. Naturally, that meant another lawsuit (Arpaio lost and has appealed).
County taxpayers have footed an undisclosed fortune to sustain Arpaio's image as a tough lawman. The $41.4 million taxpayers coughed up to insure for, defend, or settle lawsuits is just the edge of the cesspool -- one result of inhumane conditions that have long made Arpaio's jails the target of investigations from both the federal government and advocates like Amnesty International.
Arpaio has an 11-year history of ignoring expert warnings his jails violate basic tenets of the U.S. Constitution and threaten life and limb. At least 11 inmate deaths have directly resulted from Arpaio's refusal to heed such warnings.
In that time, the deductible for the county's insurance policy to cover lawsuits against the sheriff has jumped from $1 million to $5 million. The annual premium has quadrupled in recent years.These dollars come out of the county's coffers, not from Arpaio's annual budget of $288 million, which he's already overrunning this year.
And which is $60 million more than the sheriff budget in a county jail of similar size in Houston.
While the sheriff has long argued his crude jails prevent crime, a study his office commissioned, and cost $20,900, found Arpaio's jails have no effect on inmate recidivism.
Name the Arizona or federal statute that tent city violates, please.
this is the problem, many believe Joe A's office is doing things that are illegal. unfortunately for those who dont like Joe A's practices, there is nothing illegal being done by his office. its truely one of those "we dont like it" issues. its very difficult to fight something that, under federal/state/local law, is legal.
i commend fcorrales80 post #230, very involved. these orgs along with the ACLU should be able to muster up the votes needed to oust Joe, but then again, Joe has been there for quite some time now, and will most likely be there until he decides to retire. as this issue escalates i am sure i will be voiceful on the pro-GoJoe side.
now, i will go look to see if these orgs are voicefully against Joe A's office:
Arizona Association of Chicanos for Higher Education (AACHE)
National Hispanic Peace Officers Association (Police, Highway patrol men, deputies, etc)
Southwest Hispanic Culture Association
National Society of Hispanic MBA's
Arizona Project Vote (Hispanic Vote Project)
Equality Arizona (mostly a gay rights organization)
and i just noticed that there is a federal contract between Joe A's office and federal dept of homeland security. so my guess is, Joe A's office also has federal backing. its gonna be like sending fighting a forest fire with a garden hose.
I said specifically that it was a guess, and made that clear. You said 70% and named a study that you've yet to share with us, even though you've been asked to post a link.
This is one published study with the ASU findings that upset Joe; there are more but if you don't have my access you must pay or register; here are the links for your reading enjoyment:
Abstract Despite the increasingly punitive public policies of the past three decades and the concomitant ‘get tough’ rhetoric aimed at reducing prison and jail amenities, little is known about inmates’ perceptions of punishment. Prison and jail administrators often justify their efforts to increase the “pains of imprisonment” for incarcerated offenders on the basis of retribution and deterrence, but these policies appear to be more symbolic than substantive in nature. Using interview data from 232 inmates about to be released from a large county jail renown for its ‘get tough ’ policies, this study examined inmate perceptions of their unusual conditions of confinement. Findings suggest that many of these policies were benign or even counterproductive to the extent that they promoted a defiant response from offenders.
this is the problem, many believe Joe A's office is doing things that are illegal. unfortunately for those who dont like Joe A's practices, there is nothing illegal being done by his office. its truely one of those "we dont like it" issues. its very difficult to fight something that, under federal/state/local law, is legal.
Actually, this is not the determination of the courts as they have sided with the plaintiffs and have accordingly awarded MILLIONS! Yet, we've continued to allow him to violate the tenants of the constitution in which we end up paying and losing money.
Quote:
i commend fcorrales80 post #230, very involved. these orgs along with the ACLU should be able to muster up the votes needed to oust Joe, but then again, Joe has been there for quite some time now, and will most likely be there until he decides to retire. as this issue escalates i am sure i will be voiceful on the pro-GoJoe side.
The ACLU doens't "muster up votes" they are a legal entity that isn't in the electoral scene.
Quote:
now, i will go look to see if these orgs are voicefully against Joe A's office:
Arizona Association of Chicanos for Higher Education (AACHE)
Supporter of (because of family members and loved ones):
National Hispanic Peace Officers Association (Police, Highway patrol men, deputies, etc)
Southwest Hispanic Culture Association
National Society of Hispanic MBA's
Arizona Project Vote (Hispanic Vote Project)
Equality Arizona (mostly a gay rights organization)
LOL, ok you go do that!
I have a feeling he won't win the next election. Especially with his declining support. Remember he only won by 54% of the vote...won't take much to get the additional support to get in a reliable law enforcement official. Oh, and I'd like to read about the sheriff's contract or agreement with Homeland Security...please post a link.
Last edited by fcorrales80; 09-07-2009 at 07:27 PM..
Actually, this is not the determination of the courts as they have sided with the plaintiffs and have accordingly awarded MILLIONS! Yet, we've continued to allow him to violate the tenants of the constitution in which we end up paying and losing money.
The ACLU doens't "muster up votes" they are a legal entity that isn't in the electoral scene.
LOL, ok you go do that!
I have a feeling he won't win the next election. Especially with his declining support. Remember he only won by 54% of the vote...won't take much to get the additional support to get in a reliable law enforcement official. Oh, and I'd like to read about the sheriff's contract or agreement with Homeland Security...please post a link.
neither does the NRA, but they were a big voice on SB1113!!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
However, you should really understand the basic premise of the problem. It is not a racial issue, even though some want to say that; it is an issue of discrimination due to national origin, status, etc. There is no such thing as ethnicityism. It is the same as the English having similar policies against the Irish and Scottish in years past that lead to awful "civil" war in the Isles...Now obviously that isn't racism since they are the same race...
You don't have to be all that intelligent to figure out what is going on...
