OT Privilege? Deputy in contempt? RFTH potential?
theget
table behind her back.
The issue is ongoing http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/11/16/daily57.html
has a link to video of the deed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIoyJ-LyAaE
I admit this amazed me. It seems that not only were the papers
lifted, but they were photocopied as well.
It looks like the judge may have messed up a little by trying to give
the deputy an out by allowing him to apologize. That raises some
interesting 1st Amendment issues.
I wonder if there are any consequences for the guy who was being
sentenced. His rights were violated by the state. I wonder if that
can reduce his sentence.
Does anyone else thing that lawyers are going to ask to review video
tape of their court appearances to see if there were other incidents?
Theget
Ray O'Hara
"theget" <the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote in message
news:c4d0f371-08eb-49c1...@m13g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
I can see the 4th amendment being violated but the 1st, how?
David Johnston
<the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
>In Maricopa county a deputy takes some papers off a defense attorney's
>table behind her back.
>
>The issue is ongoing http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/11/16/daily57.html
>has a link to video of the deed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIoyJ-LyAaE
>I admit this amazed me. It seems that not only were the papers
>lifted, but they were photocopied as well.
>
>It looks like the judge may have messed up a little by trying to give
>the deputy an out by allowing him to apologize. That raises some
>interesting 1st Amendment issues.
>
>I wonder if there are any consequences for the guy who was being
>sentenced. His rights were violated by the state. I wonder if that
>can reduce his sentence.
>
Rights violations have no bearing on sentencing. In theory such a
thing could lead to an appeal of the conviction which if granted could
lead to a new trial, but only if the appeal court could be convinced
that this might have changed the outcome of the trial. Since I
believe he was pleading out, that seems unlikely.
A little context is called for, though. The deputy noticed the note
which was sticking out, was apparently written by a fellow prisoner.
Since communication in and out is supposed to be monitored, he took
the note.
theget
There seems to be some opinion, at least by online commentators who
probably aren't lawyers, that the judge can't order someone to say
something that they don't believe.
I once saw Judge Wapner order two kids to shake hands and apologize to
each other. They didn't look happy. But the deputy isn't a kid he's an
adult.
Given that if the guy gets sent to jail he'll have to serve in a jail
that his boss administrates, I think, I expect this case to have some
interesting twists and turns. Maybe.
Theget
theget
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:04:30 -0800 (PST), theget
>
>
>
> <the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
> >In Maricopa county a deputy takes some papers off a defense attorney's
> >table behind her back.
>
> >has a link to video of the deed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIoyJ-LyAaE
> >I admit this amazed me. It seems that not only were the papers
> >lifted, but they were photocopied as well.
>
> >It looks like the judge may have messed up a little by trying to give
> >the deputy an out by allowing him to apologize. That raises some
> >interesting 1st Amendment issues.
>
> >I wonder if there are any consequences for the guy who was being
> >sentenced. His rights were violated by the state. I wonder if that
> >can reduce his sentence.
>
> Rights violations have no bearing on sentencing. In theory such a
> thing could lead to an appeal of the conviction which if granted could
> lead to a new trial, but only if the appeal court could be convinced
> that this might have changed the outcome of the trial. Since I
> believe he was pleading out, that seems unlikely.
>
> A little context is called for, though. The deputy noticed the note
> which was sticking out, was apparently written by a fellow prisoner.
> Since communication in and out is supposed to be monitored, he took
> the note.
In the video I saw, it looks like the deputy walked across the room
and started reading. It also looks to me like he pulled some sheets of
paper out of the middle of a stack and started reading those, and
those are the ones he took. I'm not quite sure how he could have
noticed those from across the room.
Also, if the communications in and out of prison are supposed to be
monitored (although presumably there's an exception for lawyers and
their clients) the time to do that is when the original communication
is made. Not when it's in someone else's hands. Particularly not
when that communication is in the hands of someone who might count
that as a privileged communication. If he wanted to even read it, he
should have appealed to the judge. IMO however IANAL so I may be
wrong.
Theget
David Johnston
<the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
Yup. He had no right to do it.
D.F. Manno
<c4d0f371-08eb-49c1...@m13g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
theget <the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
> In Maricopa county a deputy takes some papers off a defense attorney's
> table behind her back.
>
> The issue is ongoing
> http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/11/16/daily57.html
From the cited article:
> Arpaio refuses judge�s demand for deputy�s apology
<snip>
> The incident has provided more fodder for Arpaio critics who say the
> Sheriff and the MCSO sometimes flaunt the rule of law.
Sometimes? Arpaio thinks he's a law unto himself. And the people who
should be a check on him seem content to let him, if they're not
outright supporting him.
--
D.F. Manno | dfm...@mail.com
Religion ... the only winning move is not to play!
theget
> In Maricopa county a deputy takes some papers off a defense attorney's
> table behind her back.
>
> has a link to video of the deed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIoyJ-LyAaE
> I admit this amazed me. It seems that not only were the papers
> lifted, but they were photocopied as well.
>
Replying to my own post with a little followup again.
The deadline the judge set for the apology is only a few hours away,
and it looks like there may be breaking news coming up.
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2009/11/sheriff_arpaios_office_plans_s.php
theget
> On Nov 20, 3:04 pm, theget <the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
>
> > In Maricopa county a deputy takes some papers off a defense attorney's
> > table behind her back.
>
> > The issue is ongoinghttp://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/11/16/daily57.html
> > has a link to video of the deed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIoyJ-LyAaE
Yet another followup.
He didn't apologize so he has until midnight to report to jail.
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2009/12/detention_officer_defies_judge.php
With video of the press conference.
http://www.examiner.com/x-536-Civil-Liberties-Examiner~y2009m12d1-Arizona-officer-to-be-jailed-for-refusing-courtordered-apology
theget
> On Nov 30, 10:56 pm, theget <the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 20, 3:04 pm, theget <the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
>
> > > In Maricopa county a deputy takes some papers off a defense attorney's
> > > table behind her back.
>
> > > The issue is ongoinghttp://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/11/16/daily57.html
> > > has a link to video of the deed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIoyJ-LyAaE
>
Followup.
The judge who cited the deputy for contempt might be charged
himself.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/12/09/20091209donahoecomplaint1209-ON.html
theget
> On Dec 1, 4:47 pm, theget <the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 30, 10:56 pm, theget <the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 20, 3:04 pm, theget <the...@bigmailbox.net> wrote:
>
> > > > In Maricopa county a deputy takes some papers off a defense attorney's
> > > > table behind her back.
>
> > > > The issue is ongoinghttp://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/11/16/daily57.html
> > > > has a link to video of the deed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIoyJ-LyAaE
>
> Followup.
Stoddard is out for the moment.
http://www.kpho.com/news/21921585/detail.html
People are starting to take notice and write about Sheriff Joe.
http://sonoranweeklyreview.com/?p=1303&cpage=1
No evidence but charges anyway?
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2009/12/andrew_thomas_offers_no_eviden.php