"Outrageous Conduct !!!!" Topic

My position prevents me from being critical of the judiciary but I can certainly comment on the actions of law enforcement in this matter.

link

Last time I checked the Judge was responsible for the proceedings in the court room. Guess I was wrong. Seems the Arizona Gestapo is hard at work!

mjc

!?

Can't access the page so don't know what that story is about but I assume it's about something about Sheriff Arpio and the Maricopa County Sheriffs' Office . but you may want to try and get some true fact before you start throwing around insults like Gestapo. Pretty much all that gets written about them outside Arizona is from Illegal Alien advocacy groups and political opponents and that includes the Arizona Republic so called newspaper who have a very vicious grudge against them because they are enfocing the Law.

jdginaz

jdginaz,

Please look at the video before you start defending the Arizona Gestapo.

Eye witness testimony can be questioned; transcripts sometimes don't tell the whole story; but when it's on tape and you can watch the whole thing -- start to finish!!!! I think I have the whole story.

Here's a brief description:

"Court detention officers (in contrast to sworn police officers, which I will differentiate in a minute) do not get to rifle through any papers they see willy nilly. Even the "plain site [sp]exemption" is severally limited in scope in a courtroom because of the very reason attorneys are present and the attorney/client privilege. All attorneys and their belongings (briefcases) must go through a screening process to even enter the building so once in the courtroom there is an expectation that they and their belongings are proper.

The job of the court detention officer is to serve at the pleasure of the judge. The judge is an impartial officer, so must the detention officer, his allegiance is to the judge, not the prosecuting attorney.

The actual document swiped was a handwritten letter from the con to his attorney and it was in a stack of papers that was on the "defense" table. The ONLY thing that could possibly get his attention was if he saw something analogous like ,"I'm going to kill the judge at my sentencing hearing", and even then, the proper procedure would be to bring it to the attention of the judge so that she could deal with it."

Glad I wasn't the criminal defense attorney, I'd probably be spending the weekend in jail for contempt.

Gestapo is not an insult here -- it is a descriptive term!

mjc

Quote from the site.

Cuccia was justifiably upset, and requested a hearing. That hearing was last week. According to freelance journalist Nick Martin, who writes at the Heat City blog, Stoddard's story changed several times over the course of the hearing. His main defense was apparently that he spotted "keywords" on the document that made him think it contained threats to the courtroom. The problem with that story is that if you watch the video, he swiped the document from the middle of the file. It wasn't lying in open view. Which leaves open the question of why, in open court, he went snooping through a defense attorney's file in the first place.

…

As usaul, you get less than half the story from the video. So rather than take that loony-left web site's propaganda as the gospel, try waiting for the facts.

"Arizona Gestapo" ?
Someone needs a nap.

Wow. Case of Southwestern Judge Dread syndrome, we is the law.

I'd advise defense attorneys in that court to get a briefcase with a good lock and some handcuffs so you can chain it to the table.

As usaul, you get less than half the story from the video.

Who you going to trust the law enforcement officials or your damn lying eyes.

LLC aka Ron

YouTube link

Watch the video. The deputy just mosied over to the defense attorney's table and started rummaging through her files. He then called over another deputy, and handed off the Good Stuff to him.
You can't get more arrogant than that. I will believe my eyes, and I don't think I need "the rest of the story".

I am a card carrying right wing nutjob too.

I'm with John on this one no way that was justified.

Looks like the deputy got bored wandered over to the files and started reading something got him excited and he removed a page from the folder got even more excited and he called over his partner to actually remove the document from the courtroom to make a copy.

No defending this action those documents were not part of public record and what that deputy did on video was clearly a violation of the defendants rights….

From another card carry8ing right wing nutjob

That's why we have the appeals process.
-Kle.

It may take a while but absent the whole court system being fully corrupt, that Deputy should be toast.

And if you think the police and the prosecutors offices are always the good guys, unicorns are your friend and the land of rainbows and jelly beans is where you call home.

Meh, I think if the dirtbag didn't want anything of his read, public or no, he shouldn't have been been there in the first place.

Follow the rules, and you don't get a pretty jumpsuit…

I will neither defend or ridicule the officer.

Amazing -- just amazing that anyone would try and defend this kind of conduct.

"When they came for the Jews, I said nothing because I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for the Catholics, I said nothing because I wasn't a Catholic.

. . .

When they came for me, there was no one left to say anything!"

If you don't object to violations of the civil rights of others, you might as well kiss your's goodbye as well. The only way you can be sure that your rights will be observed when it counts is to make sure law enforcement does their job right each and every time. This kind of violation isn't right wing or left wing -- it is so basic it hurts and yes, to my shame, it is 100% American.

Further, this guy (the criminal) has just had a section 1983 action handed to him on a silver platter. He's going to have lawyers lining up to represent him because this kind of thing gets him damages, punitive damages, and attorney fees (perhaps with a multiplier!) It's on tape! No one can possibly defend this! A Federal Judge is going to find a violation on Summary Judgment! AND the good people of Arizona will be writing this criminal a check -- no doubt about it -- because a bone head detective can't do his job.

Tell me Tin Dictator, how do you feel about the County government spending your tax dollars to compensate a convicted criminal (and pay his attorney fees) for something that is 100% avoidable?

This guy was already convicted. Already going to jail. What in the world could possibly be gained by the deputy's actions?

You going to show up at the next County Commissioner's meeting and donate funds to pay for the 1983 civil rights violation judgment against Deputy Dog?

Naw, I didn't think so.

If this happened in Washington I wouldn't be stopping with the Deputy. There are at least two other people that have a lot of explaining to do.

mjc

I'll happily ridicule the officer. He is a worthless incompetent douchebag.

There is simply no way any sane rational person can justify what he did within the laws of the United States.

Further, this guy (the criminal) has just had a section 1983 action handed to him on a silver platter. He's going to have lawyers lining up to represent him because this kind of thing gets him damages, punitive damages, and attorney fees (perhaps with a multiplier!) It's on tape! No one can possibly defend this! A Federal Judge is going to find a violation on Summary Judgment! AND the good people of Arizona will be writing this criminal a check -- no doubt about it -- because a bone head detective can't do his job.

Precisely.

The system is already set up to deal with this kind of abuse when it occurs, and it will inevitably be dealt with.

So, what's the problem, exactly?
-Kle.