It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Arizona Law Enforcement becomes self-serving, self-preserving.

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 11:41 AM
We all know that Law Enforcement doesn't protect and serve the individuals, but it does protect and serve the community in which it is charged with serving. But what happens when Law Enforcement bites the hand that feeds, and turns on it's owners?

Maricopa County in Arizona just found out.

County Deputies Raid County Building

Maricopa County sheriff's deputies on Wednesday stormed into a county building, seized control of a computer system and threatened to arrest county employees if they tried to stop them, according to county officials.

County management responded by asking a Maricopa County Superior Court judge for a temporary restraining order against the Sheriff's Office.

Apparently this comes about due to an Interagency Agreement in 2003 that the Maricopa County Sheriff filed suit in April of this year to back out of. Rather than wait for due process of law from the County, the Sheriff's Department decided to take matters into their own hands, and seized control of the Servers that run all other County services, including the Circuit Court and District Attorney's Office which are involved in the law suit.

Swanson said that the deputies' "aggressive action" of seizing the system is "unsupportable, unwarranted and unprecedented." "The sheriff did not receive permission from - or give notice to - any other elected official or stakeholder agency before barging in with armed officers and demanding that he be given exclusive control," he said. County Manager Smith called the action "the lowest common denominator of a thug, which is the use of force. (Sheriff Joe Arpaio) has no authority in law - or business practice - to do this. He just decided . . . to send in deputies and take over and kick the staff out. It's a misappropriation of public assets."

But wait...there's more...

So what happens when a Judge issues a Court Order demanding that passwords and control of these Servers be turned back over to the Court?

The Sheriff refuses and dares the Judge to find him in Contempt and sentence him to jail!

Sheriff's Office Defies Judge on Order for System Password


Sheriff Sticks to His Guns...Literally

So, what happens when the Sheriff's Department no longer serves the County and no longer answers to the County Manager and the Board of Supervisors, considers themselves to be THE Law, and no longer respects the Judicial System or answers to Judges?

Sounds like Old Yeller needs to be taken out back and put down.

Keep your eyes on Maricopa County, because I suspect we are going to be seeing a lot more of this all throughout the nation in years to come.

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 11:45 AM
reply to post by fraterormus

what are they arguing over?
I'm totally confused


posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 11:51 AM
reply to post by warrenb

Yea I'm not seeing who is the bad guy here.

Are the cops doing something wrong by taking the computers?

Why are they taking the computers?

Is the county doing something wrong by trying to keep the cops from taking the computers?

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:01 PM
Now this is an interesting story, the sheriff they are talking about Joe Arpaio, is the one that is being investigated by the feds for racial profiling, because he enforces immigration laws that the feds refuse to enforce.

Now we hear this tid-bit of info. In the last link that was posted it was mentioned that legally he has a case when it comes to the computer system and criminal database. It is the way he went about getting the computer which is the problem.

I'm torn on this issue, I don't feel like what the Cops did was right, but then again don't feel what the county did was right by allowing civilians access to a criminal database. I don't know.

The only problem that I really see is the fact that the cops ran up in the joint and took the computer system. I'm sure there is more that meets the eye than what we are being told.

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:11 PM

Originally posted by warrenb
what are they arguing over?
I'm totally confused

Don't feel bad that you're confused. It took me all weekend sorting through various news articles to make heads or tails of it.

Budget Cuts back in 2003 for the County of Maricopa required the County to consolidate IT Services for all County Agencies, including the Sheriff's Department.

Then, Joe Arpaio becomes Sheriff and starts suing the County left and right for everything from a proposed County Building to policies.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio then decides that he doesn't trust the County to manage the Servers for the Sheriff's Department, afraid that his bosses, or any other County Employee might be able to read his e-mail. So, he sues the County for requiring all County Agencies to consolidate their IT Services.

Rather than wait for the lawsuit to go to trial and for a Judge to rule on it, he decides to take matters into his own hands by seizing the Servers himself, afraid that other County Employees, including the Circuit Court, will use what is contained on those Servers against him in his lawsuit (which they still could even while they are in his possession with a subpoena). In the process, he took down the very same Servers that were running all services for the rest of the County Departments, preventing even the Courts from functioning.

Basically, Sheriff Joe Arpaio burned bridges in his County, and is now trying to barricade himself in and keep power and control over the County. He is doing so by abusing his powers as Sheriff, and misusing Public Assets to do such. He is defying the Courts and Judges and making his own Laws and refusing to submit to any other Law other than his own.

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:31 PM
As a resident of maricopa county let me shed some insight.

What is posted above me is basically true.

The county department have a pending lawsuit against the sheriff department because of his illegal immigrant practices and a whole slew of other problems. Because the computer in question was not legally ruled to be handed over to sheriff joe again yet, the county department was holding on to it as possible evidence in the lawsuit.

Sheriff joe acting on his own agenda decided to raid the offices and confiscate the computer in question. He did this as an attempt to protect himself from whatever negative things may be on that computer.

On a side note -- sheriff joe is questioned year after year for his practices. For more information see tent city, green meat for sandwiches (with meals that cost the jails less than 25 cents a day), pink underwear and prison garb etc. etc.

Basically this guy treats prisoners worse than animals with rabies. People that are in jail for things such as DUI's or white collar crimes are living in the worst conditions imaginable. However, the elderly population in Arizona (called snowbirds to us) love the guy for his tuff as nails stance against criminals, so year after year he is voted back in.

His practices on illegal immigration and raids are a whole other depressing issue.

For more information on this current event and all other things evil joe related, check out these sites: (website for local paper the Arizona Republic) (main talk radio/news website for Phoenix)

those two sites will have the most up to date and fairly non biased information on the current problem.

I dream of a day when sheriff joe is out of power, and arizona is no longer ran like the wild wild west

And on a side note - We just passed a law here allowing people to bring concealed weapons into bars and clubs...

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:35 PM
reply to post by White Chocolate

Worse conditions imaginable?

You have a really, really bad imagination. They have pink underwear, live in tents without AC and eat bologna sandwhiches.

OH THE HORROR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:37 PM
Isn't this sheriff the same dope who bragged about the cost of feeding his canines being far greater than the cost of his inmates? He bragged about how hot it was in his jails during the summertime, as it saved him money. He bragged about the tiny portions of food, saying that all of the prisoners could afford to lose weight. He bragged about locking up "dope smokers," saying that they shouldn't be doing it anyway. It is obvious he is a warped human being who quite enjoys sowing seeds of misery. I hope the people in this part of Arizona have the courage and honesty and decency to remove this jerk.

Edit: Somebody already mentioned this. This guy is a brute. It also says something about a citizenry that wants a man like him in office. Those of his ilk are what is wrong with this world. They are the real criminals. These people perpetuate war, strife, deception, domination, and division.

[edit on 17-8-2009 by orwellianunenlightenment]

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:37 PM
Funny, I was just talking with my cousin about how lucky we are here to not have a sheriff like Joe Arpaio. I figured the people would vote him out by now.

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:41 PM
reply to post by jd140

lets see. it's 108 outside today. So there are countless people dying from dehydration being stuck in a tent in 108 degree heat, eating food with next to no nutritional value, on top of being humiliated during the whole process.

Let me also remind you that these are people who are facing MISDEMEANOR criminal charges.

Before you sit here and mock the people who suffer in these "tent city" jails, I would like to see you go sit outside for days in a row with food that does nothing to give you any sort of vitamins or nutrients, while dealing with 110 degree temperatures and clouds of dust flying all over you.

It's nice to see you care so much for the average human. These people are not hard criminals. Please keep your cold bitter heart to yourself.

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:43 PM
Disputes are handled in a court of law. Where is the mayor in all this? Doesn't the mayor have authority over the sheriff?

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:47 PM
reply to post by White Chocolate

So what if its hot outside?

People live and work in weather as hot or hotter. Bologna sandwhiches are very good, my family being poor when I grew up meant I ate alot of them. Want me to give you a number of dishes I had that substituted hamber or chicken with bologna? You never had hamburger helper unless it was made with bologna.

I have lived in tents when the weather was hotter then 108 and I have worked 14 hours working a shovel in weather hotter then 108.

Maybe you should step outside your air conditiioned office and do a hard honest days work outside so that you can appreciate the hot summer sun.

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:48 PM
The mayors here almost always keep their mouths shut in regards to sheriff joe because, basically, you dont want to get on his bad side. He has public officials working in fear.

And yes he brags about how his canines eat more expensive meals than the inmates in our jails.

And yes, it is very very sad that people support him 100% without thinking about the suffering that really happens to people. Spending time in a sheriff joe jail doesn't teach you to change your act and improve as a person, it makes you even more upset at the government and people that have power over you.

There are too many old folks here in arizona to be able to get him out of power. The old people will vote him into another term every time he is up for re election, they love how hard and "old fashioned" he is.

I mean the guy breaks protocol and laws all the time and the general public of phoenix turns a blind eye because in the end he technically is still arresting criminals...even if he is doing it completely outside of the rules and regulations of a sheriff's department.

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:49 PM

Originally posted by cloakndagger
Disputes are handled in a court of law. Where is the mayor in all this? Doesn't the mayor have authority over the sheriff?

A Mayor is a Municipal authority. The Mayor oversees the Police. In a County, which are generally incorporated, there is a County Manager who answers to a Board of Directors that oversees the County Sheriff.

This dispute came about because the Sheriff is embroiled in multiple lawsuits with the County Manager and the County Board of Directors that are his bosses. They can't fire him while there is ongoing litigation. I don't believe they can even put him on Administrative Leave without opening themselves to yet another lawsuit.

Also, some Counties have their Sheriff as a Representative post, rather than an Appointed post...which if Maricopa County falls into the former rather than the later, then the County would have to hold a Special Election to replace him, which could cost the County about 30 million dollars it may not have.

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:50 PM
reply to post by fraterormus

Sheriff joe is voted for re election every 4 years I believe. So I don't know what category that makes him fall into, but he is definitely voted into power and has to "run" for re election every 4 years. And he usually wins by a land slide.

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 01:10 PM
Isn't this exactly why there's a militia? As far as I can recall there was once an incident with a seriff who decided to count the votes to his re-election behind locked doors. The people wouldn't have it and the militia was dispatched to take the votes back with force if necessary. Turns out the sheriff lost. Such incidents where the police go beyond law the people have to take action right?

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 04:12 PM
reply to post by White Chocolate

I'm pretty sure you have no clue what the "worst conditions imaginable" are. I've toured the "tent city" as a federal employee, and I can tell you, conditions there are 100% better than almost any prison south of Texas. Hot? Yes. So was every Arizona citizen before air conditioning. Joe will never actually lose an election, so the Phoenix lefties (9% of the population) will have to yank him out through the back door.

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 04:18 PM
If the county is in some way breaking the law, Go for the gold son!
But if there are deeper issues, Which no doubt there are, just whom is answerable to whom?

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 04:35 PM
Star, and Flag to the OP for good investigation.

I think it is the beginning of the entire US un raveling.;

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 04:47 PM
Regardless of what people think about the sheriff, is he acting above the law if he disobeys a court order?

How can he upload the law when he is disobeying it at the same time?

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in