Melendres # 662 140304 Transcript - D.ariz. - 2-07-Cv-02513 - 662 - Transcript - Mar 24 2014 Hearing

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 662 Filed 03/26/14 Page 1 of 78
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Plaintiffs,
6
7
8
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
vs.
Joseph M. Arpaio, et al.,
Defendants.
Phoenix, Arizona
na
March 24, 2014
14
9:05 a.m.
OG
10
CV 07-2513-PHX-GMS
S
Manuel de Jesus Ortega

Melendres, et al.,
BO
.C
OM
11
EF
12
13
TH
14
REPORTER'S
OF PROCEEDINGS
RT 'S TRANSCRIPT
RTE
TR
TRAN
16
BEFORE THE HONORABLE G. MURRAY SNOW
OF
15
17
(Status Conference)
18
ND
19
20
IE
21
FR
22
2
23
24
25
Court Reporter:
Co
Gary Moll
401 W. Washington Street, SPC #38
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 322-7263
Proceedings taken by stenographic court reporter

Transcript prepared by computer-aided transcription
A P P E A R A N C E S
1
2
For the Plaintiffs:
4
5
6
Lesli Rawles Gallagher,

r, Esq
Esq.
.
COVINGTON & BURLING,
L.L.P.
, L.L.
L.
L.P
P.
9191 Towne Centre Drive
6th Floor
San Diego, California
lifornia
ifornia 92122-1225
9
(858) 678-1807
07
BO
8
9
10
OG
Daniel J.
. Pochoda
Pochoda,
, Esq.
AMERICAN
LIBERTIES
AN
N CIVIL
IVIL LI
FOUNDATION
DATIO OF
DATION
F ARIZONA
A
77 E.
E. Columbus
Columbu Avenue
Suite
uite 205
2
Phoenix,
85012
Phoenix, Arizona
A
(602)
(602
602) 650-1854
6
65
11
EF
12
16
17
18
19
20
21
RI
22
2
23
24
25
OF
15
Andre
Andr
dr Segura, Esq.
AMERICAN
CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
AM
125
Broad Street, 18th Floor
1
New York, New York 10004
(212) 549-2676
TH
13
14
Stanley Young, Esq.

COVINGTON & BURLING, L.L.P.
333 Twin Dolphin Drive
Suite 700
Redwood Shores, California 94065
94
(650) 632-4704
.C
OM
Cecillia D. Wang, Esq.

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
FOUNDATION
Director
Immigrants' Rights Project
39 Drumm Street
San Francisco, California 94111
(415) 343-0775
A P P E A R A N C E S
1
2
For the Defendants:
4
5
6
7
Thomas P. Liddy
Deputy County Attorney
ttorne
ttorney
MARICOPA COUNTY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
TY
Y ATTORNEY
Civil Services
es Division
Divisi
222 N. Central
tral
ra Avenue
Suite 1100
00
Phoenix,
x,
, Arizona
rizona 85004
(602)
) 506-8541
506
4
BO
8
9
OG
10
11
EF
12
13
TH
14
18
ND
19
17
OF
15
16
20
IE
21
FR
22
2
23
24
25
Timothy J. Casey, Esq.

James L. Williams, Esq.
SCHMITT, SCHNECK, SMYTH,
CASEY & EVEN, P.C.
1221 E. Osborn Road
Suite 105
Phoenix, Arizona 85014-5540
-5540
(602) 277-7000
.C
OM
P R O C E E D I N G S
1
2
3
THE COURT:
Thank you.
THE CLERK:
This is Civil 07-2513, Melendres v.
.C
OM
Please be seated.
Arpaio, on for status conference.
09:05:54
Counsel, please announce your appearances.

.
MR. POCHODA:
MR. YOUNG:
BO
Stanley Young, Covington

for
ton & Burling,
Burlin
rl
plaintiffs.
10
11
Dan Pochoda for plaintiffs.

ffs.
ffs
.
MS. GALLAGHER:
Lesli Gallagher,
Covington & Burling,
agher,
agher
, Covi
Cov
OG
for plaintiffs.
12
MR. SEGURA:
13
MS. WANG:
14
Good morning,
Honor.
g, Your Hono
on
15
THE COURT:
T:
morning.
Good
d mo
m
16
MR. CASEY:
CASEY:
Good morning, Your Honor.

Goo
09:06:05
EF
Andre Segura for the plaintiffs.
OF
TH
Cecillia
for the plaintiffs.
llia
ia Wang f
09:06:14
Tim Casey and
James Williams
Schmitt, Schneck, Smyth, Casey & Even
i ms
s at the
t
18
law firm,
rm
m, and also Tom Liddy for the Maricopa County Attorney's
19
Office.
fice
ice.
ND
17
20
THE COURT:
T
Good morning.
Can I ask, is there
somebody who principally plans to speak on behalf of plaintiffs

somebo
someb
22
at this hearing?
FR
IE
21
09:06:25
24
matter that you indicated you'd like to discuss this morning.
25
I'm planning to address any dates in the order that you might
2
23
MS. WANG:
Judge Snow, we've divided up the subject
09:06:40
want to talk about, Mr. Segura will handle any matters relating
to the October briefing, Mr. Young will handle our request for
publication of the Court's orders, and Mr. Pochoda will handle

e
matters relating to the community outreach and the community

ity
y
liaison.
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
11
Well, I'll ask you

u to keep
track of that.
10
All right.
THE COURT:
Thank you, Your Honor.
appreciate it.
We appreci
appre
BO
09:07:01
Mr. Casey, is there

e somebody who's going
to principally speak on behalf of the

he defendants?
defenda
defendan
MR. CASEY:
09:07:09
OG
.C
OM
I'll principally
on behalf of the
ipally
pally speak
pe
defendants.
I may, at various
defer particularly to
us times,
time , d
times
13
Mr. Williams in my office

things.
e on some t
14
prefatory comments, however

owever you
u want to direct it.
15
number of people here,

he
her
Your
our Honor, in addition to those you
16
ordered, that I would

introduce to the Court, but we can do
woul in
17
that at the
time.
e appropriate
appropria
ppropr
18
COURT:
THE
HE C
R
IE
ND
S
OF
TH
EF
12
All right.
I have some
I have a
Unfortunately, we do have a
limited
amount of time.
mited
ite amoun
20
accomplish what we need to accomplish, but I have a day of
21
sentencings, so I don't mean to be rude to anybody but I may be

senten
sente
22
a little bit directive.
FR
19
2
23
09:07:22
I hope we have enough time to

09:07:35
Let me just say, for purposes of those who are in
24
attendance, that there is a rule in the District of Arizona
25
that court hearings are not to be recorded, and so I'm going to
09:07:49
ask you to abide by and comply with that rule.
There is a
publicly available transcript that can be obtained but I'm
asking you not to record the hearing.
.C
OM
That does not mean that you cannot tweet or otherwise

rwise
is
4
5
record it -- or not record it, but type on your laptop,

p, so long
on
as you do so in an unobtrusive manner.
marshals that if they detect anyone recording the hearing,

hearing
because that is in violation of the rules of

you
f this
thi district,
dist
i
will be removed from the hearing, so I do request that you
BO
But I have directed the

t
please honor that rule.
OG
10
Let me introduce, and I believe th

that he is known to
12
all of the parties here, Chief

Warshaw,
who is -- who
ef Robert
Robe
W
13
the Court appointed as the

monitor.
he monitor
14
Chief Warshaw as an officer

the court in mid-February of
fficer of
f t
15
this year to assume

role.
me his
s monitor
mon
moni
16
team, but a representative

number of the monitor team are
epresen
epresentati
17
available h
here,
they are in the jury box.
re
e, and
d t
introduce
troduce
roduce to me who's here on behalf of the defendants, but now
20
be the appropriate time.

would probably
prob
ND
19
IE
FR
2
23
24
25
09:08:43
OF
Not all of his monitor
so I don't know, Mr. Casey, if you want to

And
nd s
18
22
09:08:23
I swore in deputy -- or
TH
EF
11
21
09:08:07
09:09:02
Plaintiffs, if you have any other introductions, I'd
be glad to hear those, too.

MR. CASEY:
Yes, Your Honor.
I'll speak loud enough.
I'm not on a mike.

The duly elected sheriff of Maricopa County, Joseph M.
09:09:19
Arpaio, is in attendance pursuant to the Court's order.
His
chief deputy, Jerry Sheridan, is also in attendance in uniform
sitting right behind counsel table.
.C
OM
I would also like to have lieutenant commander --
Lieutenant Larry Farnsworth, commander of the MCSO's court

ourt
rt
compliance division, stand up, and if he would introduce

roduce his
is
team members that are present here today in the

MCSO's
e MCSO
MCSO'
's court
co
compliance division.
BO
CAPTAIN FARNSWORTH:
I'm Captain
in Larry
Larr Farnsworth.
F
Fa
This is Hector Garcia -- Hector Martinez,

tinez
inez,
, our community liaison
11
deputy, Sergeant Ben Armer, and Lieutenant

Lieutenan Russ Skinner.
OG
10
THE COURT:
13
CAPTAIN FARNSWORTH:
RTH
H:
14
MR. CASEY:
TH
CHIEF
F TROMBI:
TROMB :
TROMBI
Sheriff's O
Office.
fice
ic .
MR CASEY:
MR.
ND
19
Dave Trombi with the Maricopa County
Good morning.
And the gentleman to your left, please.
CHIEF TROMBI:
C
20
To the left of me is Deputy Joaquin
09:10:20
MR. CASEY:
All right.
Thank you, sir.
FR
IE
Enriquez with our media relations.

Enriqu
Enriq
22
2
23
THE COURT:
Thank you.
All right.
24
MR. CASEY:
And I apologize.
25
09:10:09
Good
morning.
Go
COURT:
THE
HE C
R
18
21
Good morning.
have Chief David Trombi, head of

We also
lso hav
ha
OF
17
Good morning.
rning.
rning
.
enforcement, and if you

introduce yourself, please, sir.
y u would
wou
woul
16
09:09:56
EF
12
15
09:09:38
was "captain."
I said "lieutenant"; it
I apologize to Commander Farnsworth.
09:10:30
THE COURT:
I have sent out a rather detailed notice
indicating what I want to cover in this hearing, and in that
notice I indicated that there were three matters, essentially,

,
that concerned me about the training that occurred in October.

ober
er.
Most of it was done by Chief Deputy Sheridan.
comments that I included in there in which Sheriff Arpaio

Arpai
apparently, to me, ratified Chief Deputy Sheridan's

training
dan's
dan
s train
and made a few other comments.
.C
OM
BO
I realize those three matters are
Chief Deputy Sheridan's training concerning

this Court's
ncerning th
t
11
holdings, findings of fact, and conclusions

of law in this
conclusio
12
lawsuit, his assessment of the

injunction order, and
he resulting
resu
resultin
13
his training regarding the

he specifics
specific about assessing ethnicity
14
that are required by that

tha order.
order
15
they're not required

re by
red
y that
tha order.
16
extent, but the

Department has, on its own authority,
he Sheriff's
Sher
Sheriff
17
required additional
d itional
tional assessments made by deputies, but I'm
18
concerned
that
ned
d to t
t -- to that training as it goes to the
09:11:09
I realize that to some extent

They are clearly, to some
09:11:35
ND
S
OF
TH
EF
OG
10
19
09:10:49
There were
ere
e a few
fe
implementation
plementatio of my order.
I also realize that in that order I have necessarily
20
characterized Chief Deputy Sheridan's training, but I indicated

charac
chara
22
in the order that I do have that training here on videotape,
FR
IE
21
09:11:50
2
23
and if the defendants feel that I have mischaracterized it,
24
then I'm glad to play the training so that we can refer to it.
25
Is that your wish, or do you just simply wish to go
09:12:09
into what I've asked you to do and assess and provide me with?
MR. CASEY:
Your Honor, we've seen the video.
the counsel have.
going to be prepared to address the questions that you have.

ve.
All right.
who's addressing the training?
MR. SEGURA:
THE COURT:
Mr. Young -- oh, I don't

know,
n't
t know
ow,
That was --
That's me, Your Honor.
Do you see any

ny need
nee to
o play that
BO
Um-hum.
training?
MR. SEGURA:
11
THE COURT:
We do not, we've
reviewed it, thank you.
ve reviewe
review
OG
10
All right.
13
with respect to those three

matters, if after viewing -- with
ree
e matters
14
respect of each of the

you
e three
thre yo
o wish to assert that it was
15
appropriate training,
whether or not you believed corrective
in
ing
or whe
wh
16
action was in order

and, if so, what corrective action you
order,
, and
17
intend to take.
t ke
e.
19
I asked
whether after -d you to
t indicate
in
OF
TH
EF
approach the podium.
MR.
MR
R. CASEY:
C E
Sure.
09:12:48
Let me give you the answer to your
question
esti
estion
and then perhaps some background.
The short answer to your question is that
T
20
09:13:03
Deputy Chief Sheridan made mistakes at that briefing.

Deput
22
discuss semantics about whether it constitutes training or

di
2
23
whether it's encouragement for the troops.
24
that perhaps is not necessarily key here, but what is true --
RI
21
25
09:12:33
Mr.
please
Then Mr
r. Casey,
C
12
18
09:12:24
THE COURT:
We're
.C
OM
There's no need for us to see it.
I think
THE COURT:
We can
That's something
It's kind of key to me, but I'll --
09:13:34
MR. CASEY:
Okay.
THE COURT:
-- I'll get to your point.
MR. CASEY:
Yeah.
THE COURT:
I mean, I'll let you say --
MR. CASEY:
Yeah.
THE COURT:
-- what you want to say.
MR. CASEY:
He made mistakes in summarizing

rizing his
Well --
.C
OM
10
09:13:34
interpretation of the Court's order.
capture, really, what is a detailed order

er from May
Ma of 2013 and
then October, basically, the remedial
al
l aspects of it.
OG
10
He did
d not accurately
accur
c
BO
The second thing that was

mistaken
was that he allowed
as mis
m
taken
ak
11
a very emotive frustration to

displayed in front of troops,
o be displa
di
13
in front of the support team

team.
am.
14
that with you is we believe

elieve that
tha corrective action is
15
appropriate.
16
although there
probably nuances to it that we could bring
e are proba
p
17
to bear.
EF
12
TH
What
hat I want to do by sharing
09:14:16
OF
We're
the Court's assessment,
re not
t challenging
cha
chal
one of the things that I think is important, and I

But
ut o
18
suspect
spec that everyone in this room understands it, one of the
spect
20
things that we as human beings experience in

most difficult
diffi
21
life is
i change.
22
do something for our health, so we set goals, we change
IE
ND
19
FR
09:13:50
09:14:31
Sometimes change is internal when we need to
2
23
something.
Sometimes change is imposed on us by any number
24
of other factors, including a court order.
25
no -- no issue that it is hard for any law enforcement officer,
I think there is
09:14:53
11
when a court has ruled against it and has determined a monitor
is to be in place, that's not met with pleasure; it is
respectfully disagreed with.
track, the MCSO is taking a number of issues it disagrees with

it
the Court up on appeal.
.C
OM
09:15:16
The other thing that I think is important is that

th
6
on --
THE COURT:
Yeah.
MR. CASEY:
Yes.
10
THE COURT:
All right.
11
MR. CASEY:
Yes.
24th.
13
came out.
I haven
read it, I'm sorry.
haven't rea
re
It was
s filed
fi
o the day -- on the
on
Excuse me, on the 17th,

the day that the order
h, I think
th
THE COURT:
All right.
right
15
MR. CASEY:
Y:
So
o ---
16
THE COURT
COURT:
:
understand all those things.

I u
MR.
R CASEY:
CA
CASEY
:
Yeah.
OF
TH
14
17
The reason I think it's important,
THE COURT:
Okay.
20
MR. CASEY:
M
-- just finish --
21
THE COURT:
I'll give a few minutes, and then I'm
IE
ND
19
FR
22
2
23
09:15:33
Your Honor,
onor
no , if I can --
18
09:15:24
EF
12
MCSO filed that appeal

yet?
appe
y
yet
OG
BO
And as you know, on a parallel
09:15:40
going to tell you why I think it's important, too.

go
MR. CASEY:
Yeah.
I think it's important is this, is
24
that there's an adjustment process, and that process has a
25
continuum on this.
And I think even the monitor has expressed
09:15:52
12
when he's met with us that he understands that there's -- it's
always a difficult situation to be in any law enforcement shoes
when a monitor comes in.
.C
OM
The issue at that time -- really, 16 days
4
5
afterwards -- was you have a level of frustration that the

he
Deputy Chief made a mistake in conveying.
will not happen again.
and as an institution, you still have an institution

was
stitution that
t
grieving because of an -- what they considered

sidered an assassination
Shouldn't
t happen;
happen it
BO
You also have as individual

idual deputies
deput
of a uniformed deputy in their front

t yard
yard, in his front
11
driveway.
OG
10
09:16:28
So I wanted just to put

ut that
th
i context.
in
EF
It doesn't justify, Your Honor

Honor, the concerns that you
H
12
have.
And quite frankly,

over here now can
, I think anyone
a
14
understand, and I think

they're
nk they
hey're
e upset internally because they
15
sent you the wrong

g message.
m sage
me
ge.
16
They have sent

wrong message.
t you t
the w
TH
13
09:16:48
OF
It's obvious from your order.
And
n I think
n you're probably less interested in
17
representations
entations
ntation of counsel than perhaps you are from hearing
ND
S
18
09:16:09
from
actual player himself, Chief Sheridan, who actually
om
m the
t
actu
20
wants to address your questions here today and asks you for
21
permission to do that, because one of the things that's very

permis
permi
22
important is that I want to assure you as counsel, and you can

imp
im
09:17:06
FR
IE
19
2
23
hear it directly from the Deputy Chief, they are not interested
24
in so-called paper compliance.
25
good faith actual compliance with both the letter and the
They are interested only in

09:17:26
spirit.
And they understand that the comments made in the
briefing by the deputy have sent you the wrong message.
And
that is not the message that they wanted to send to you, to
anyone else.
adjustment, and perhaps that provides explanation, but no

n
justification.
.C
OM
09:17:46
And they understand that there's a period

od of
o
What they want you to understand is

who's
s the man w
BO
8
9
13
heading this up who's in charge of it for

or the last
as 12 years
before he became the chief deputy in
n the new
w -- after the
11
previous deputy was removed was responsible

in Graves v. Arpaio
responsib
12
for real compliance.
09:17:57
EF
OG
10
THE COURT:
Let me
e --
14
MR. CASEY:
sir.
Yes sir
Yes,
s
.
15
THE COURT:
T:
Let
et me get more to the point.
16
MR. CASEY:
CASEY:
Sure.
Sur
THE
COURT:
H COURT
CO
:
I want to make a couple of things clear.
MR.
MR
R. CASEY:
C E
Yes, sir.
09:18:11
OF
TH
13
17
18
THE COURT:
ND
19
I understand that for much of the action
in which I found that the MCSO violated the constitutional
21
rights in several respects of the plaintiffs' class, that Chief

right
22
Deputy Sheridan was not -- I don't have any evidence that he

De
09:18:19
FR
IE
20
2
23
was involved in those decisions, or in the operational
24
decisions, or in anything else.
25
I understand that.
I also understand the need for Sheriff Arpaio and
09:18:35
14
Chief Deputy Sheridan to have authority.
And they have been
given authority by the people of Maricopa County to direct the
law enforcement in Maricopa County.
intend to respect that.
respected.
.C
OM
I understand that.
I intend also to have my orders
09:18:57
Let me tell you, you talk about a period of
adjustment.
In December of 2011 I entered a preliminary

reliminary
injunction.
That preliminary injunction was

with.
s not complied
compl
m
I found that.
BO
I found that in May 2013.

.
decide at
I did
di not
n
no
that time to require the sheriff to tell me why

he shouldn't be
w
wh
11
held in contempt for his violating

preliminary
injunction
ing
ng that
th
p
pre
12
order because I did not want to create

artificial and
cre
13
meaningless disputes about

ut authority.
authorit
14
frankly, and I want to

o say
y this
is to the sheriff, I did sense a
15
real effort on his

part,
your cooperation with the
s pa
p
t, through
th
thr
16
plaintiffs, in
n trying
tryin to reach agreement and, in fact, in many
17
areas you r
reached
substantial agreement about what kind of an
ached
ch
s
sub
18
order I should enter.
19
orders.
ders
ers.
OF
ND
findings of fact and conclusions of law that were entered in

findin
findi
22
May.
Ma
IE
21
FR
09:19:39
I respected that and I entered those
It isn't a new order that he had in October; it was a

I
20
2
23
09:19:18
And I did sense,
TH
EF
OG
10
09:19:57
His characterization of those findings completely
dismisses the responsibility of the MCSO.
24
And I'm not saying, I agree with him, I'm not saying
25
that any particular individual in the MCSO was racist, but --
09:20:15
15
and I'm not saying, I did find evidence, and I laid it out,
that MCSO received incorrect instruction from ICE.
not that was the motive for how and why they chose to operate,
,
I don't know.
that implemented those orders and followed through on them

em and
nd
made policies; policies, directions, and orders that

at did not
apply to three officers, that applied on a department-wide

artmentartment
-wid
id
basis and governed those operations.
.C
OM
Whether or
And it doesn't matter, because it was the MCSO

SO
BO
09:20:36
I also found, and I don't want to embarrass

you, I
embarr
embarra
don't want to go into huge detail, I've

already done this, but
v alread
alrea
11
I also found that the MCSO claimed

they had implemented
ed that t
the
12
policies that simply did -- were

in order to
wer not
no implemented
im
13
eliminate some of the problems

proposed by their operation as
oblems
lems prop
14
far as racial profiling

went.
ing
ng went
en .
15
by the boards.
16
racist.
09:20:54
TH
EF
OG
10
It's all behind the -- it's all

I
09:21:11
OF
I'm
that anybody was an individual
'm
m not
t finding
fin
find
But
finding, and I did find, and it's laid out in
u I am fin
f
a very long
in which I evaluated all the evidence, that
ong opinion
op i
opi
19
the
e MCSO used race as one factor among others in selecting many
20
locations for their operations; that they used race as

of their l
21
factor among others in determining who they were going to

one fa
on
f
22
pull over; that they used race as one factor among others in
pu
2
23
determining who they were going to question once they pulled
24
them over; and that they didn't implement appropriate policies
25
which they'd indicated they had implemented to prevent
09:21:25
IE
ND
18
FR
17
09:21:42
16
racial -- the use of race inappropriately in making those
determinations.
contest this, received inappropriate instruction from ICE, and

d
to the extent on which they base that, I don't know.
.C
OM
Again, I realize that they did, and I don't
But here's another thing that ICE said in the trial,

trial
r
,
and I didn't find the need to decide this.
In fact,
t, I found
foun it
in the sheriff's favor.
completely inappropriate for the sheriff to use pretextual

pret
pretex
stops to try and make immigration enforcements

with its 287(g)
cements wit
wi
BO
ICE said they thought it was
authority.
I read the agreement that

sheriff had with ICE,
at
t the
he sher
she
11
and while ICE may have thought it

inappropriate,
it never
t was
wa in
napp
a
12
put it in the agreement.
13
sheriff bears the responsibility

for it.
sibility
bilit fo
OG
10
EF
Nevertheless,
the sheriff did it; the
verthel
vertheless
TH
subject of my preliminary
injunction in May of 2011 that has
lim ary
limi
y in
i
16
nothing to do with ICE,

I , and that is whether or not the sheriff
ICE
17
likes it, t
there
ere
re is a -- distinctions in immigration law that
18
are not
understood by the population, and apparently, and
t well u
19
with
th
h all due respect to you, sir, they were not well understood
20
sheriff, and that is it is not a criminal violation to

by the she
21
be in this country without authorization.
22
create a crime.
cr
09:22:29
IE
ND
OF
15
FR
09:22:17
There's a whole
section, and this was the
ole separate
separa
separat
14
2
23
09:22:00
09:22:51
That isn't enough to
It may not be something that most people understand.
24
It is a violation of the law.
It makes people removable,
25
civilly removable, but it doesn't constitute a crime, and the
09:23:08
sheriff has no authority to detain anyone based merely, and I
say merely, on the presumption that they're in the country
without authorization.
December in 2011.
17
.C
OM
I laid that all out very clearly in
And here we have, after I've entered the findings

dings
gs of
f
fact and conclusions of law and the permanent injunctive

nctive order
orde
r
years later, we still have the sheriff mischaracterizing

acterizing that.
mischaracterize it?
BO
Now, does the sheriff have the right

ght to
8
9
Absolutely, he does.
s.
I saw
w
Chief Deputy Sheridan's article in the paper,

paper, which is the same
11
mischaracterization, or virtually
ly
y the same
am mischaracterization
12
about my findings of fact and

conclusions of law that he
d conclusio
concl
13
trained his deputies on.
14
the cooperation that the sheriff

sheriff's department entered into with
sherif
15
the plaintiffs and

detailed
specifications you agreed to.
d the
t
detai
eta
TH
also in light of the fact of

It was
wa al
09:24:01
I agree,
agree to everything and there were
ree,
ree
, you
yo didn't
di
OF
16
some important
differences.
rt nt
t differ
diff
18
the detailed
programs that you'd agreed to, and when he said
tailed
ailed pr
p
ND
S
17
But the detailed specifications,
that,
know, my order was outrageous and the other stuff, he
at
t, you
u kno
20
said that in public.
21
him.
him
hi
.
IE
19
FR
09:23:43
EF
OG
10
22
09:23:27
He can say that in public.
I can't stop
09:24:20
I was worried when I read it that he was sending the
2
23
deputies of the MCSO the wrong message.
But I -- you know, I
24
recognize that he has a right, and he's a politician, to
25
mischaracterize my order if he wants to, because I have to be
09:24:35
held accountable, too.
characterization of my order is after I've done it.
changes when, instead of addressing the general public, he's
training his deputies about what that means.
18
And I don't get to say what the fair
.C
OM
But it
And if you're going to tell me that you have agreed

re
to, in your initial proposal, that the deputies would

uld be fully
full
u
trained about the legal ramifications of Melendres

dres versus
Arpaio, if you're telling me that all that means is y

you have to
provide a formal training in which you do that

then you
that, and
a
an
BO
09:24:52
can have all sorts of other trainings

gs in
n which
hic you
11
mischaracterize that, I want to know it right

now.
r
rig
OG
10
Is that what you're saying?

saying
13
MR. CASEY:
Absolutely
not.
olutely
utely not
14
THE COURT:
All right.
right
TH
EF
12
09:25:09
And then why is it that when I
entered that order

of 2011 it's still being
r in
i December
Decemb
cem
16
mischaracterized
later and there's still a term of
zed two years
yea
17
emotional a
adjustment
justment
ustmen and anger two years later, and six months
18
after my
findings of fact and conclusions of law?
y findin
findi
09:25:19
OF
15
have an explanation for that?

Do you
y
ND
19
MR. CASEY:
M
20
Your Honor, I don't have an explanation.
All I can tell you as counsel is that my clients -- and let me

Al
22
be absolutely frank on this, because I appreciate very much
FR
IE
21
09:25:38
2
23
what the Court is saying, my clients know, understand, and
24
appreciate that your orders are the law.
25
hearing and your order from March 17th are important for not
And I think this

09:26:04
19
only the lawyers, but for our clients to have read, digested,
and considered, which they have.
It's important.
.C
OM
You asked me the question so here's my best estimate.

.
3
4
Everyone grieves and handles things differently.
How long
g does
do
it take to grieve and be upset?
differently, and I understand the Court's concerned

d about the
t
one year and the six months and that.
Everyone handles it
09:26:32
THE COURT:
That would be two years.

rs.
rs
.
MR. CASEY:
Two years.
BO
The only
that I can say
ly thing
thin th
t
as an attorney, Your Honor, is that it is a -- while my clients
11
are absolutely committed and, you

you're going to
ou
u know,
kno , and
know
a
12
have to hear from them, but are absolutely

committed to -- and
abs
absolut
13
recognize that your order

law, and they will comply with
r is the la
14
it in the intent and the spirit

spirit, at the same time they disagree
15
fundamentally with
h a number
umber
ber of conclusions that you reached.
TH
THE COURT:
COURT:
their ability
li y to
t disagree.
dis
i
I respect their ability to publicly
18
state their
disagreement.
heir dis
di
And I even don't even expect them to
19
be fair
fai about their public statements about their disagreement
20
reasons why.
and the r
21
haven't been, but that is their right.

haven
haven'
22
changes when we talk about how they instruct their officers.

ch
From my assessment, they certainly
FR
IE
ND
17
24
25
09:27:06
And let me say, right away, that I respect
OF
16
2
23
09:26:45
EF
OG
10
MR. CASEY:
Yes, absolutely.
I recognize that.
09:27:26
It
And I can tell you
without waiving -THE COURT:
And, let me --
09:27:41
20
MR. CASEY:
Yes, sir.
THE COURT:
-- just be clear, and I think I was clear
in my order, I don't even object if they instruct their
officers that they disagree, if they do it professionally.
I don't even object if they want to explain why they disagree.

isagree
agree.
.
But I'll tell you what.
of evidence that took me a long time to review after trial.

tria
And
A
You gave me to
tons
MR. CASEY:
Yes, sir.
THE COURT:
I've looked at it all very

thoroughly.
ve
t
th
BO
gave your clients and I gave the plaintiffs

aintiffs as
a fair a hearing
11
as I could.
12
matter of law whether or not the MCSO

has
violated the
MC
h
13
constitutional rights of the

class.
he plaintiff
plaint
14
that up with the Ninth

h Circuit,
Circuit you can take it up with the
15
Supreme Court, but

t as
a you've
you
u've
v said, that has been a legal
16
determination that is
i made.
ma
OG
10
EF
OF
TH
You can take
It's done.
09:28:26
And I will tell you from --
without
t waiving
waivin any privilege, other than the appeal, it's
19
done.
ne
e.
20
compliance with Mr. Warshaw and that team and your order.
21
what we
w have done is we've made mistakes.
22
absolutely right, they have a First Amendment right to disagree

ab
2
23
with you; they have a right to go up on appeal and take it to
24
whatever they want.
25
of the line troops, how appropriate it is to be in that
18
It's
It
t's over.
o
What matters now is their good faith

And
09:28:42
Because you're
RI
EN
D
09:28:06
We are not relitigating

this court or as a
ating
ting in thi
t
MR.
R CASEY:
CA
CASEY
:
17
09:27:53
We had a long trial.
.C
OM
But the issue is is when you're in front

09:29:00
adjustment process, that grieving process -THE COURT:
Let me tell you something else.
MR. CASEY:
-- that's where the mistake was.
THE COURT:
Let me tell you something else that
.C
OM
21
concerns me.
09:29:10
MR. CASEY:
Yes, sir.
THE COURT:
I sensed in the training, to be fair to
Chief Deputy Sheridan, to be fair to Sheriff

f Arpaio,
Arp
Arpaio
, I sensed
in the training a very sincere and real concern

the safety
concer for
f
fo
BO
of their officers, and they may believe

Court does
ieve
eve that this
t
11
not share that concern.
12
know, I share that concern.
OG
10
09:29:21
EF
But I want
ant them to know, I want you to
You may recall that

balance -- in the long sessions
at in bal
14
when we were hamming out your

with the order, the
you disagreements
d
di
15
plaintiffs wanted to,

and
t
to
d I believe they have a very firm
16
constitutional
l basis
basis, in light of my findings, to request that
17
during the period

eriod
ri
o the injunction the MCSO not be allowed to
of
18
make any
inquiries at all of passengers that they've pulled
ny
y inquir
inqui
19
over
er
r for stops.
stop
09:29:37
Do you recall that?

D
21
MR. CASEY:
I do.
22
THE COURT:
And do you recall that I let them do that?
2
23
MR. CASEY:
I do.
24
THE COURT:
No, I didn't let them do that.
25
You're not going to get that.
IE
20
FR
ND
OF
TH
13
09:29:53
I said:
What we're going to get in
09:30:01
22
place, because I want to protect the right to -- this law
enforcement tool and the protection of the deputies, I said
we're going to come up with a rather imperfect solution, but
I'm going to require the deputy, when he pulls over, to state

tate
te
the reason why he's pulling them over so we know whether

er it's
s
pretextual, and then after the stop is over he's gotta

otta give us
u
the best estimate of the ethnicity, not ask, because

ecause that would
be inappropriate, and I realize that that was

and
as a difficult
diffic
f
imperfect solution.
.C
OM
BO
But it was better than requir

requiring the
requi
deputies never to ask any occupants any questions

and for their
quest
questi
11
safety.
OG
10
You can ask Chief Warshaw.

arshaw.
arshaw
EF
12
14
ordered that they give

for the stop on the radio
ve
e the reason
reas
s
15
call before they pull

somebody
over.
pu
somebo
meb
16
deputies?
17
members of the
monitoring
team.
he
e monito
i
Said it's fairly common
18
practice
throughout the nation.
ce throug
throu
But I am concerned.
TH
appointed, I said, Chief,

I've ordered.
, this is
s what
w
I've
Is that endangering
I checked with the other
And so I'll tell you something else I'm concerned
ND
19
about.
about.
I'm
concerned about sending mixed messages to those
I
21
deputies about whose orders they have to comply with.

deputi
deput
22
order, or is it the characterization of my order in this sort

or
FR
IE
20
of wink and nod mentality that says:

And I -- you know what?
24
25
09:30:51
OF
He said
said,
, No, it isn't.
09:30:37
As soon as he was
13
2
23
09:30:18
word.
09:31:06
Is it my
This is a bunch of crap.
"Crap" is not a very decorous
But it's not my word, it's Deputy Chief Sheridan's word.
09:31:27
He called the order ludicrous.
He called it crap.
of message is he sending to his own deputies?
then, do they follow?
make for them?
23
What kind
Whose order,
.C
OM
And what kind of protection does that
And if in fact the chief deputy is concerned about

ou his
hi
officers' safety in drawing their attention away during

uring the
e
second that it takes to add the reason why he's

over
s pulled ov
v
police officers, then why is he worried about

making
an
ut them
th
m
mak
assessment of the ethnicity both before and after the stop?
BO
10
That seems to me to draw away the attention

ttention
tention of
o the deputy
11
before the stop is made in a way

y that may
ay create a danger.
12
However, I accept that the sheriff

heriff and the chief deputy have a
13
right to ask their deputies

in that information.
ies
s to engage
enga
nga
14
I do not doubt their sincere

believe that those deputies be
sincer bel
be
15
kept safe.
And
TH
EF
OG
09:32:02
09:32:22
So if
balance they find that's appropriate,
f in their
th
OF
16
they can im
implement
that.
lement
em
th
18
just want,
ant
nt,
, to the extent that there is some sort of implication
19
that
at
t I'm
I m not very concerned about allowing them to do their job
I'
20
as they don't violate the Constitution, I reject that

so long a
21
completely.
comple
compl
22
got concerns, you raise them.

go
ND
IE
FR
I'm not going to override it.
But I
17
And that's why I have a monitor team.
We're not trying to put you out
of business; we're just trying to keep you in line with the
24
Constitution.
All right.
09:32:36
If you've
2
23
25
09:31:44
I've said a lot of my peace.
Do you have
09:32:51
24
any more you want to say, or are you going to get down to what
your -- you propose to ameliorate, and we still have other
issues to talk about, are you going to propose what steps you
take to do corrective?
And I don't want -- by the way, if
.C
OM
09:33:05
Chief Deputy Sheridan has come and he's willing to talk to me
and address me, I don't want to deprive him of that privilege.

privi
But I do want to make very clear what I've made clear

a to you.
And I also don't want to deprive the plaintiffs

aintiff of
aintiffs
o their chance
MR. CASEY:
11
12
BO
OG
to address things.
Your Honor, let me consult

briefly with
c
con
Chief Sheridan.
THE COURT:
14
(Pause in proceedings.)
roceedings
oceedings.)
15
MR. CASEY:
Y:
Before
ore I get to the proposed correction,
OF
THE
H COURT:
CO
COURT
:
All right.
MR.
MR
R. CASEY:
C E
-- address you.
18
THE COURT:
ND
19
All right.
Chief, would you like to hear
before you address me?

from the plaintiffs
p
CHIEF DEPUTY SHERIDAN:
No, sir.
22
THE COURT:
Well, please come talk to me,
FR
IE
21
2
23
24
25
09:33:34
Chief Sheridan
n does want to talk to --
17
20
All right.
right
ight.
.
TH
13
16
09:33:18
EF
10
All right.
09:33:42
then.
First thing I'd like to say,
Your Honor, is I heard every word you said loud and clear.
09:33:55
THE COURT:
Okay.
25
Thank you.
But I also wanted to take a
few minutes to tell you who Jerry Sheridan really is, and so
I've prepared a few comments.
.C
OM
I've been with the Sheriff's Office for 35 years,

ears
s,
since I was 18 years old.
I hold a master's degree.

e.
I teach
a
ethics at the community college level.
the FBI national academy, and I was a member

r of the Arizona
Ar
POST peace officer standards and training,

an ethics
ng,
ng
, considered
consid
conside
BO
I've been
member of
een a membe
expert, and I can tell you that I am

ashamed
of some of the
m a
shamed
hamed o
11
things that I said during that briefing.

briefing
riefi .
12
be a briefing, Your Honor, and

with you that it was
nd I disagree
di
disagr
13
training.
OG
10
But
I consider it to
B
TH
Well,
Well
Wel
, let
t me ask you, sir, do you think
that once entering

the order
g t
rde -- and it may have been a
16
briefing; I don't
the technicalities are -- but once
on't
on
t kn
know what
w
17
your department
rt ent
nt has
s suggested to me and I've implemented that
18
there will
l be training that implements the appropriate holding
19
in Melendres versus Arpaio, do you think you can in good faith
20
compliance with my order provide that training and then in
21
briefings mischaracterize my order?

briefi
brief
09:34:45
EN
D
OF
15
RI
22
09:34:32
EF
THE COURT:
14
09:34:10
09:35:04
Let me just say, Your Honor,
2
23
that was the first time I discussed the issues in front of a
24
large group of deputy sheriffs.
25
I mischaracterized your order.
I know I made some mistakes.

There's no doubt about that.
09:35:25
26
My counsel briefed me on that after they saw the video.
I had
got some of the facts incorrect.
And
I'd like to address some of those issues.
.C
OM
THE COURT:
I was very emotional.
Well, I appreciate that, but I want to go

g
back to my point and get an answer.

Yes, sir.
And the
I
e reason
reas
09:35:43
would say yes, sir, you know I stood in this court

ourt and I
disagreed with you on the issue of calling out the

reason
for
t
r
re
the traffic stop prior to the traffic stop.

top.
top
BO
THE COURT:
11
14
We did some research

that -arch about
ab
THE COURT:
13
relitigate that.
You know
now what
what?
?
CHIEF DEPUTY
SHERIDAN:
PU
PUT
SHERID
ERI
15
09:35:58
And I even
signed an
ev
eve
EF
affidavit.
TH
12
I appreciate that.
hat.
hat
OG
10
We're not going to
I know, sir.
But the reason
I'm telling you

ou that is today, since your order, those deputy
17
sheriffs are
r calling
callin in the reason for the traffic stop.
18
would agree
yes, they are doing everything that you have
gree that,
th
19
ordered.
dered
ere .
So I
ND
OF
16
THE COURT:
T
21
If in the order I've ordered that you provide correct
IE
20
FR
22
09:36:07
All right.
Now back to my question.
09:36:23
training on the legal principles of Melendres versus Arpaio, do

tr
2
23
you believe that you are in good faith compliance with the
24
order if you provide that training, but in briefings or other
25
contacts with your deputies you mischaracterize that holding?
09:36:41
I'm not sure I completely
understand your question, but I would say no if I was to
continue to do what I did in that one 15-minute segment six
months ago.
THE COURT:
.C
OM
27
Do you also understand that because

se it was
wa
the first time you'd addressed the deputies after the
injunction order was released, that can send a very powerful

power
signal about how they're supposed to address

seriousness
of
s the serio
r
that order once it becomes fully implemented?

ented?
ented
?
BO
Yes,
s,
, sir.
sir
11
THE COURT:
So do you
yo understand my
OG
10
All right.
concern?
09:37:18
EF
12
09:36:58
13

ERIDAN
IDAN:
:
Completely.
Co
14
THE COURT:
Please go ahead.
15
CHIEF DEPUTY
SHERIDAN:
PU
PUT
SHERID
ERI
TH
All right.
right
Okay.
This all happened, this
all started in
of 2010 when the sheriff appointed me as
n October
Octob
o
17
the interim
deputy.
m chief
hi
d
dep
18
of Justice
lawyers in a separate case, and I sat across the
tice
c lawy
law
19
table
about six or seven of the lawyers from Washington,
ble
le from
om ab
20
and one of the lawyers who sat directly across from me, the
21
for the Department of Justice, said that we, the

lead attorney
a
22
Sheriff's Office, were ignorant, and we were racist, and I was

Sh
I began meeting with the Department
09:37:46
FR
IE
ND
OF
16
09:37:23
2
23
furious with that.
And I asked him, Where did you get that?
24
And he told me: Community leaders, your press releases, and
25
inmates.
This was not the Sheriff's Office that I knew; this
09:38:07
was not the Sheriff's Office that I grew up in.

Two people that trained me early on in my career --
one a Black man from Los Angeles and another a white man that
grew up in Queen Creek -- they taught me -- they had most
influence on my career.
kindness, compassion, and empathy for people.
the office that I knew.
They taught me the lessons of
This,
s, again,
aga , was
again
w
BO
in his patrol car to a day labor work camp

amp in the
he orange
09:38:39
OG
orchards of Queen Creek -THE COURT:
For what it's

's worth --
12

AN:
AN
Honor, this is very

Your H
Yo
EF
11
important for me to tell me

am.
e who I a
I'm going to let
15
TH
13
THE COURT:
you do that, but I'm

I'm going
ng to
t tell you we have a lot of things
16
to cover, so I'm
to
'm
m going
goi
t ask you to be brief.
And for what
17
it's worth,
to tell you a couple of things.
, I'm
I'
'm going
i
Well,
you know what?
Well
Wel
, do y
OF
14
in here
me the truth, even though I think they were
her and told
t
20
under real pressure not to.
21
to -- if not, I'm not saying from you, maybe there their
22
colleagues, other people.

co
IE
ND
19
FR
09:38:47
I have
hav a lot of respect for the MCSO officers who came
18
And so I'm not -- you're not going
They told me the truth.
09:39:00
It
2
23
performed -- it provided the basis for a lot of the factual
24
reasoning that I ended up with.
25
09:38:24
And I remember specifically one day

took
me down
ay Chuck
Chu
t
too
10
.C
OM
28
You don't have to convince me that -- that the MCSO is
09:39:15
not racist in orientation.
finding.
factor among others in making your decisions.
fine distinction, I realize.
29
I don't -- I never made such a
But what I did say, sir, is that you used race as one
.C
OM
I mean, that's a
That's what I found.
Do you understand what I'm saying?
THE COURT:
All right.
09:39:36
Yes, sir, very clearly.

early.
early
All right.
BO
Very clearly.
rly.
rly
So let me brief through

notes now that
rough my
m no
n
I don't have to explain to you who I am as

a an individual, but
11
what I did when I left that meeting

we had a
ting
ing is I realized
re
12
policy -- we had a perception

racist, and so what
n that we were
w
13
I did is I began thinking

ways to fix this.
g about way
14
the integrity-accountability
tability
ability bulletin.
bu
bul
15
things.
16
policies.
17
we strengthened
th ned
ed our
r code of conduct.
18
things.
.
19
my friends ov
over at Phoenix Police Department.
20
things way
wa before the Melendres case ever came to trial.
21
TH
EF
OG
10
OF
We developed
We started to do
We started
change
some policies.
ed to chang
han
We added brie
briefings.
09:39:44
We added some
09:40:14
We added code of conduct and

I began doing a lot of
I reached
out to the Hispanic community.
rea
I contacted
I did all these

09:40:30
And part of my frustration that day -- again, I'm
telling you, Your Honor, I apologize for my actions that day,

te
2
23
but I can tell you I am not a person to hide what I do or who I
24
am.
RI
22
25
It was -THE COURT:
Well, let me ask you, is that your frank
09:40:50
30
assessment?
training you gave, is that your frank assessment about what my
holding was?
4
that now.

know what else to say.
THE COURT:
OG
But the newspaper

article came
newspa

SHERIDAN:
really --
CHIEF
SHERIDAN:
H EF
F DEPUTY
U
17
the --
THE COURT:
ND
19
21
THE COURT:
IE

C
FR
09:41:22
-- didn't begin talking about
Can I ask a question?
20
22
After October, but we
Let me ask you, did you --
OF
THE COURT:
COURT:
16
18
09:41:09
significantly after October,

ber
r, didn't
didn'
didn
't it?
14
15
So the day that

I gave that
t
th
EF
THE COURT:
TH
13
I appreciate it.
briefing in October --
12
It was -- and I -- I don

don't
on
It was incorrect.
10
11
All right.
THE COURT:
I realize
lize
ze
09:40:59
It was incorrect.
BO
What you put in the newspaper article, the
.C
OM
Yes, sir.
09:41:25
Did you post that newspaper article or
otherwise distribute it to MCSO officers?

ot
2
23
No, sir.
24
THE COURT:
Go ahead.
25
Did anybody in the MCSO do that?
All right.
09:41:40
1
2
No, sir, not that I'm aware
of.
THE COURT:
Any of your attorneys do that?
THE COURT:
Do you have something to say, Mr. Liddy?

Liddy
id ?
MR. LIDDY:
Not to the Court, Your Honor.
THE COURT:
All right.
As a matter of,
, I --
Thank you.
BO
As a matter
fact,
r of fact
t, Your
Honor, it was Mr. Casey's advice that I not send that

out.
t
Your Honor, I want to
sure it's clear
t make
ma
mak
OG
MR. CASEY:
10
that any comments that we have up

p here
her are
ar not going to be
12
interpreted as waiving any privilege.

rivileg .
rivilege
THE COURT:
13
EF
11
Well,
appreciate that.
l, I apprec
15
in your training is that

attorney you talked to indicated
at every
ev
eve
16
that I had violated

olated the Constitution.
OF
TH
advise you, Chief Deputy

one of the things you said
puty
uty Sheridan,
Sherid
Sherida
I could now ask
ND
S
called waiving the

h attorney-client privilege.
19
you
u to tell
ell me
m the names of all the attorneys who gave you that
20
you waived the privilege.

advice because
bec
IE
09:42:31
I would, of course, hear from your attorney first, and
let him say you hadn't waived the privilege, but it gives you
le
FR
22
09:42:14
One
things that you risk when you do that is
n of the
e t
17
21
09:42:00
And let me
14
18
09:41:47
No, sir.
.C
OM
31
2
23
the -- I suspect, really, and I don't mean to be disrespecting
24
of you, I suspect they really hadn't told you that; they
25
perhaps had told you that there were some arguments they could
09:42:49
make that some of the steps that I had done violated your
constitutional rights in certain particulars.
much that any attorney would tell you that my whole order was
unconstitutional.
32
.C
OM
But I doubt very
I'm not going to make you tell me who those lawyers

ye
5
are.
But please be advised that when you tell me what lawyers

lawy
lawyer
have told you, you risk waiving your privilege.

Do you understand that?
BO
Yes, sir.
ir.
ir
.
THE COURT:
All right.
11
MR. CASEY:
Your Honor, I --
12
THE COURT:
You need
d to be at a microphone.
13
MR. CASEY:
Your
absolutely important you
r Honor,
Honor it's
it
can ask him that question,

that privilege only applies
stion
tio , because
becau
ca
15
if it comes from his

hi lawyers
awyers
yer in this case.
TH
14
THE COURT
COURT:
:
understand that.
I u
OF
17
But I'm not going to
MR.
MR
R. CASEY:
C E
It's important for this case, for the
credibility
edibility of
o defense counsel, I will ask him if you don't ask
20
I believe it's important for this team for this

him, because
him,
becau
21
Court to understand that that source, he can tell you whether
22
it's from us or it's not.

it
FR
IE
ND
19
09:43:38
We believe it's important, because
we are practicing before Your Honor.

THE COURT:
24
25
09:43:23
try to embarrass
lawyers, or -a rass
as those
thos
h
18
2
23
09:43:14
EF
OG
10
16
09:43:01
then.
All right.
Well, ask him the question,

09:43:54
DEPUTY CHIEF SHERIDAN:
Excuse me, Your Honor.
You
don't have to ask me the question because I have it already
written down here what I was going to say about that issue.
THE COURT:
.C
OM
All right.
Okay.
33
But before I get to
09:44:02
that, again, I was doing all these things, I was trying

rying to
correct the issues that we were dealing with, our 287(g)

287(g)
287(g
authority was taken away, all those issues, and shoring

up our
shorin
r
training, and bam, your order comes telling

that we're going
ling us
u tha
th
BO
to have a monitor and we're going to

things.
o do
d some other
o
11
was frustrated.
So that's -- again, I'm

excuses.
I' not
no making
ma
EF
12
OG
10
I take
full responsibility for every

ery word that I said.
14
the issue that just came

am up
ame
up,
, I used hyperbole.
15
exaggerating about
issue
t the
t
ssu of you violating the Tenth
16
Amendment of the Constit

Constitution.
Con
17
table or in
advised me that you had violated the
n this
hi courtroom
cour
o
18
Tenth Amendmen
Amendment
mendmen of the Constitution, so ...
IE
ND
S
OF
TH
13
19
And to address
I was
09:44:46
None of my counsel here at this
In no
n way did I ever intend to give my deputies the
20
impression that they should deny or ignore your order.
21
animated that evening because I know how hard they work; I know
animat
anima
22
how they feel about their jobs and how proud they are being a
ho
FR
09:44:25
I was
2
23
deputy sheriff.
24
has been trashed.
25
of the media, maybe just like what I did, misrepresented what
09:45:12
But I also know and I saw that their morale

Their morale has been trashed mainly because
09:45:39
the Court's ruling was, maybe in a different manner, and the
community activists out there reporting and calling my deputy
sheriffs racist.
disheartened.
34
.C
OM
I became very angry over that and very
So as a part of my attempt to raise their morale,

ale,
e I
became very animated, and subsequently I mis -- misunderstood,

sunderstood
misstated your rulings.
them to do anything other than comply, and I believe I did make
the statement that your order was the law

land -aw of the l
You did, sir.
11
OG
THE COURT:
BO
And in no way did I ever

ver intend for
10
09:46:18
-has been my
-- and that
t
tha
ruling.
And I've got six pages,

ges, I know your time is short, of
ges
13
things that we have accomplished

your ruling.
mplished
lishe since
si
THE COURT:
EF
12
Well,
Well
Wel
, for what it's worth, let me just say
TH
14
09:45:56
that one of the reasons

really disappointed in some of
ea
eas
s I was
w
wa
16
the things you

because I did recognize the extensive -u said is b
17
I mean, it is true that

the order that I entered is extensive
th
18
and it is
and most of that is because you agreed with
s detailed,
deta
19
plaintiffs
aintiffs to extensive, reasonable, specific detail about how
20
to comply.
comply
21
monitorship, and that you would have complied in

very short
s
22
every respect.
ev
09:46:31
I was very optimistic that this was going to be a
09:46:53
FR
IE
ND
OF
15
2
23
Then, in both the newspaper article and your training,
24
you tell people that the order is so ridiculous, it is so
25
specific and so exacting that it resembles a New Orleans order
09:47:09
where people were murdering people as opposed to merely
depriving them of significant constitutional rights for six
years.
Can you understand why I'm not really impressed by
4
5
.C
OM
35
that kind of what appears to me to be double-dealing?
09:47:23
Completely, Your Honor.

Honor
My actions and words, I understand have

ve gotten
gotte your
y
attention.
But I hope that they don't overshadow

shado any
shadow
n doubts
that the monitor -- as a matter of fact,

discussion
, I had this
th
thi
BO
with Chief Warshaw, and maybe even in

n front of
o his team, that
11
during that briefing I had said some things

that I shouldn't
in
12
have.
OG
10
EF
I realized that a while

le back.
back
And one final thing,

hing
ng,
, Your Honor, and then I'll close.
13
As the chief of custody

versus Arpaio, I worked
ody
dy in
n the Graves
G
15
for many years to de

deal with
d
ith and comply with Judge Neil Wake's
16
rules and ended

31-year process with that case.
ed the 31-y
17
learned from
was
that -- the value of documenting
o that
th
w
wa
18
activity;
that's one of the main things in your
ty
y; it
it's
's clear
l
IE
ND
S
OF
TH
14
19
order.
der
er.
20
internally, we're going to do that with the monitor.

internally
21
improve training.
improv
impro
FR
22
09:47:51
09:48:12
What I
Continual
internal inspections; we're going to do that
Conti
And
09:48:42
The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office now has the
2
23
best-run jail system, in my opinion and in many others',
24
because of this process that we went through.
25
reason for me to doubt that the sworn side of the Maricopa
And there's no
09:48:58
36
County Sheriff's Office is going to come out and have the same
results through this process, through complying with your
order, through the additional training, and all the other
things that your order brings.

THE COURT:
.C
OM
Let me just raise something, and I
appreciate that.
I hope
this is an early corrective that won't need to be repeated,

or
repeate
that I won't have to use the coercive authority

Court,
ority
rity of this
t
thi
because I'm not anxious to promote some sort of

o a confrontation
BO
I certainly hope it will be true.

.
09:49:18
between your authority and mine.
I really
reall am not.
11
doesn't mean I'm unwilling to do it

it.
.
OG
10
But that
Let me raise something

your consideration.
ing for you
EF
12
13
realize that you have the

e right to request whatever
14
documentation you want

t to
t request.
reque
reques
15
of your officers, I am still

til requiring that you give me an
16
assessment of the ethnic

ethnicities, their assessment of the
et
17
ethnicities
people that they stop during the term of the
s of
f the pe
18
monitorship.
rship
hip.
.
But in terms of the safety

09:49:50
OF
TH
09:49:34
I do not require that that be made both before they
ND
19
engage with
wit the -- with the people they've stopped and after.
21
You've
You
Yo
've
v created a form that requires that.
22
to do so.
I'm not contesting that.
09:50:06
You have every right
But I am saying if you're
FR
IE
20
2
23
concerned, as you indicated you were about the extra second
24
that it took to talk about the stop, if you're concerned about
25
drawing your officers' attention away to estimate ethnicity
09:50:23
before the stop, that's not something my order requires.
you want to do it, fine.
37
If
Do you understand what I'm saying?
.C
OM
I'm not requiring that.
Yes, sir, I knew that from

om the
t
beginning, that we wanted to do that.
But in the process

cess
s of a
traffic stop, Your Honor, the deputy sheriffs, any police

polic
officer's paying very close attention to the individual

ndividua in
ndividual
i that
car, their movements and those kinds of things,

can even
ings
ngs,
, if you
y
yo
see into the vehicle.
BO
Well, I understand
that's an issue.
tand that t
OG
THE COURT:
10
Do you understand how, having viewed

I perceive
iewed
ewed the
e training,
tr
12
that you were telling them that

should give less than
hat they
the sh
13
their best effort at making

ing
g that
tha estimation?
es
SHERIDAN:
15
THE COURT:
T:
TH
14
No, sir, I don't feel that.
You
want me to play it so you can
ou wan
wa
OF
CHIEF
SHERIDAN:
H EF
F DEPUTY
U
No, sir.
I've watched that
video several
veral times and it's very clear in my head.
19
that
at
t I said,
said
aid, what was ludicrous, what I was talking about, was
20
guessing of the ethnicity of the individual.

the guessi
ND
IE
FR
The part
18
22
THE COURT:
09:51:28
Would you rather that I impose the order
originally requested by plaintiffs and say that you can't

or
2
23
inquire of the occupant, make any inquiry of the occupants of a
24
vehicle during the term of the injunction?
25
09:51:13
understand how
w I -- how I have that concern?
17
21
09:50:57
EF
11
16
09:50:41
Your Honor, I -- my personal
09:51:44
opinion is I think that would be a better way to do it is to
inquire to an individual, because I -You misunderstood my question.
My
.C
OM
THE COURT:
38
question was plaintiffs suggested, as you may recall, that

t I
enjoin you from making any inquiries of occupants of vehicles

ehicles
icles
made at a stop.
THE COURT:
Would you prefer that I enjoin the

th MCSO
BO
10
That's correct.
t.
during the term of the injunction from making any

ny inquiries at
all of occupants of a vehicle during
g a stop?
stop
09:52:13
OG
(Pause in proceedings.)
12

AN:
AN
Honor, I guess I'm

Your H
Yo
EF
11
confused, and -- but my counsel

here says no, we don't want
unsel her
14
that.
THE COURT:
T:
15
OF
CHIEF
SHERIDAN:
H EF
F DEPUTY
U
COURT:
THE
HE C
R
ND
MR. SEGURA:
M
09:52:30
Thank you.
Plaintiffs, do you want to be heard on
Yes, Your Honor.
We were anticipating
09:52:41
hearing from defendants first on their corrective action.

hearin
heari
IE
FR
Appreciate your
this?
is
s?
20
22
Thank you.
18
21
right.
All rig
ri
addressing the
Chief Deputy.
e Court,
Court Ch
17
19
TH
13
16
09:52:01
THE COURT:
All right.
Well, I'll tell you what.
2
23
am going to hear from defendants first.
24
right to the point what corrective action they suggest.
25
I don't want to hear from you at great length.
I want them to get
I'm
09:52:50
39
going to ask you to summarize very briefly your comments after
we hear from Mr. Casey, because we have other ground to cover.
MR. SEGURA:
MR. CASEY:
Of course, Your Honor.
.C
OM
Your Honor, I need to make an objection

ion
n to
something you said earlier to Jerry Sheridan about you

u believe
elieve
that deputies told the truth but were under pressure

to.
re not to
o.
THE COURT:
Um-hum.
MR. CASEY:
I don't recall --
THE COURT:
Well, let me -- let

my comment,
t me clarify
clari
clarif
BO
and I tried to do that with Chief Deputy

eputy Sheridan.
Sheri
her
09:53:19
OG
10
I am not suggesting that

Arpaio,
at either Sheriff
Sh
11
Chief Deputy Sheridan, or any

in any way tried
y of the
th attorneys
at
13
to pressure any of the MCSO

witnesses to say anything other
CSO
O witness
14
than the truth.
EF
12
TH
I'm not suggest

suggesting that.
sugges
But I'm sugg

suggesting
su
esting
ing that in a very heated environment,
15
where those deputies

want to contribute to a finding that
eputies don't
don
17
they behaved
wouldn't feel some pressure
e unconstitutionally
uncons
unconsti
18
just by
in which they were in to otherwise
y the circumstances
ci
19
vary
ry their testimony.
te
20
I said that
tha in the context of praising those deputies for doing
21
their best for telling the truth in that environment.
22
what I meant.
wh
ND
And I believe that you will recall that
IE
FR
09:53:36
OF
16
2
23
09:53:04
MR. CASEY:
09:53:57
That's
I just wanted to assert my objection on
24
the record, because I thought it was inappropriate, with all
25
due respect to the Court.
09:54:07
THE COURT:
1
2
That's fine.
40
You've preserved -- you've
preserved your objection.

MR. CASEY:
Corrective action.
n.
Number 1, I recommend that we issue defense counsel

sel
l
.C
OM
working with our client to summarize the case and make specific
pecifi
point-by-point clarifications -- actually, corrections

ions about
abou
what this order requires.
It has to be realistic, but I am suggesting

that
g to the Court
Cou
C
what I do is I circulate with plaintiffs'

s' counsel something
BO
We have a total of 200-plus

00-plus
00
plus pages.
pa
a
that they think would be appropriate.

e.
.
They've
They v watched the
11
video.
12
have something where it goes to Mr

Warshaw or goes to the
Mr. War
13
Court for approval.
OG
10
In
I return, we can then
15
THE COURT:
T:
TH
Second thing
-g I'm
I m suggesting
I'
sugge
sugges
And to whom would you distribute that
OF
MR.
R CASEY:
CA
CASEY
:
I'm suggesting right now that it go

However, a more
ND
S
completely
the entire MCSO.
tely
ly throughout
thro
thr
logical,
arguably more logical group would be the only deputies
gica , argu
gical
20
that were in that room during the saturation patrol briefing on
21
October 18, but I guess I'm -- I'm open to an entire MCSO wide.
Octobe
Octob
IE
19
FR
22
09:54:52
corrective?
17
18
09:54:39
EF
We will try to summarize that.

that
14
16
09:54:19
09:55:05
In addition, because you have raised legitimate,
2
23
serious concerns in the judgment of counsel and my client,
24
we're going to have to rebuild some trust.
25
to the firm -- "firm wide"; from my old days at a large firm --
Briefing board goes

09:55:28
41
goes to the MCSO wide.

There's also a program that we can reinstitute called
Chat With the Chief.
we can do that.
mischaracterized, that the chief can do a video that can

an be
b put
pu
on the website for the MCSO that could be advertised

ed to the
e
MCSO deputies that will allow them to search it

t that look at
them and watch -- and they can watch it at their conve

convenience.
n
So we have four different areas that we think are corrective
We were also thinking that based on what was

as
09:55:48
BO
and meaningful.
OG
10
I'm not sure exactly how that works but
.C
OM
You know, that video hasn't

sn't
sn
t gone.
gone
ne.
11
09:56:11
We created that,
hopefully, that it would be a benefit

to us in this matter, but
benef
t
13
the only people that really

lly
y got that
tha briefing were those that
14
were on the October 18th

patrol, but we think that
8th saturation
satura
saturat
15
that isn't appropriate.

ri
riat
TH
EF
12
09:56:31
Now, the reason

-- just so it's clear, the reason I'm
re
OF
16
suggesting
the plaintiffs get involved is because
g that
hat
at I have
h
hav
18
we have
able to solve some problems together.
e been a
17
THE COURT:
I recognize that.
MR. CASEY:
M
And I don't know what you -- what you
ND
19
20
would like, but I would like the Court's involvement, because
22
here's the reality.

he
You have 159 pages-plus in your May order,
FR
IE
21
09:56:41
2
23
you've got 59 in the agreed-upon order, plus some additional
24
things.
25
going to be a good enough summary unless I have agreement by
I'm concerned that no matter what we do, it's never

09:57:00
42
these people and I've got agreement either from Mr. Warshaw or
the Court, because -THE COURT:
Fine.
MR. CASEY:
-- I don't want this to happen again,

, Your
Yo
Honor.
09:57:11
THE COURT:
I don't, either.
MR. CASEY:
Okay.
MR. SEGURA:
THE COURT:

nor.
nor
.
BO
Would you like me to approach

approach?
?
Yes.
OG
Again, I don't mean to be disrespectful,

but we have a
disrespectf
dis
respect
10
lot of ground to cover.

MR. SEGURA:
12
Definitely,
Honor.
tely,
tely
, Your
Y
EF
11
.C
OM
First of all,
13
we're pleased to hear that

are willing to take some
at defendants
defendan
14
form of corrective action.

tio .
tion
15
strong.
16
December in our
to
ur letter
lett
t counsel and were hoping to meet and
17
confer on t
this.
is
s.
18
Chief Deputy
Sheridan's op-ed actually came out a month after
puty S
19
our
letter expressing the very concerns we're talking
r first let
20
today.
about toda
21
impede constructive compliance with the Court's order.

imped
TH
We feel
that action needs to be
f
09:57:36
OF
We first ra
raised
these concerns with defendants in
r
ed the
th
Unfortunately, we weren't able to do that, and

Unfo
Un
ND
IE
FR
22
09:57:23
We believe these statements from the top really
09:57:52
We agree that there needs to be a statement from the
2
23
MCSO correcting the prior misrepresentations by Chief Sheridan
24
and Sheriff Arpaio.
25
Arpaio and Chief Deputy Sheridan.
We think that should be signed by Sheriff

09:58:10
THE COURT:
Any objection to that, Mr. Casey?
MR. CASEY:
Your Honor, we're going to have to
consider that, Your Honor.
consider it.
THE COURT:
MR. SEGURA:
All right.
09:58:20
And we agree that any summary

y of the
t
At first blush, no, but we have to

o
.C
OM
43
case, we'd be happy to work with defendants on that

that.
.
We've
We'
'
been able to do that in the past very well, so w

we're
we
're
e definitely
d
able to do that.
BO
But most importantly, we think

hink there needs to be a
OG
10
clear direction that the data collection

need to
llection requirements
re
12
be complied -- complied with as provide

provided by the Court.
pro
13
there was an instruction that

deputies -- that could be
hat deput
14
perceived as instructing
deputies to err on the side of
ting
ing the
th dep
de
15
"unknown."
16
they should use

judgment in determining the race of
se their
thei best
be
17
both the driver

the passengers that are encountered during
r ver
er and
d t
18
any stop.
op
p.
19
option
deputies to be -- for deputies to be choosing.
tion for
or dep
I think
TH
EF
11
And, you know, "unknown" should really not be an

And
21
THE COURT:
22
I guess I'm going to make an objection; I'm going to
RI
In addition -I
24
25
09:58:46
OF
The deputies
should -- it should be made clear that
ep
eput
es sho
sh
20
2
23
09:58:31
09:59:06
Let me just make an observation.
direct part of this to you, Mr. Casey.

MR. CASEY:
co-counsel.
I'm sorry, Your Honor.
I was talking to
09:59:17
THE COURT:
I understand.
44
I'm going to require -- I
think it's perfectly reasonable to have you negotiate with
plaintiffs a rather understandable brief summary of what is a
very detailed recitation of my evidence, but whatever it is is

i
going to have to be signable by Sheriff Arpaio and by
Deputy Chief Sheridan to get my approval.
Do you understand that?
MR. CASEY:
I understand what you've

ve said.
sa .
said
THE COURT:
Second thing, whether

her or not
ot
.C
OM
BO
09:59:31
Chief Deputy Sheridan believes that his state -- I will accept
11
his statement that he didn't intend

that his
end to
t suggest
su
sugg
12
deputies not use their best efforts in compliance with my
13
order.
14
rational person, that it could be

b interpreted that way.
15
going to require, as
suggest, that that make clear
a plaintiffs
lainti
int
16
that sheriff deputies,

should use their best efforts
deputie , personnel,
deputies
p
17
to comply w
with
order.
th
h my ord
o
10:00:04
EF
OF
TH
So I'm
Now,
Now
ow,
, I will tell you that to the extent that
19
Chief
ief
ef Deputy
puty Sheridan wants to collect other data, he's
20
certainly free to do that.
21
or to anybody else.
22
to -- I'm not going to require -- I'm not going to say his
FR
09:59:43
But it certainly appears

appears,
ppear , I believe to me and to the
IE
ND
S
18
OG
10
It may prove useful later on to him
10:00:24
But to the extent -- and I'm not going
2
23
officers can't put "unknown."
But to the extent that they're
24
going to try and convince me that I reconsider my order based
25
on such data, or to the extent they're going to try and
10:00:42
45
convince the public that they have reformed based on such
data -- and I'm not saying they haven't; I certainly hope they
have -- to the extent that he ever instructed them they should

d
put "unknown," I think that calls into question the validity

ity
y of
the data itself.
.C
OM
10:00:58
That's right, Your Honor, and

d we
w -- and
a
MR. SEGURA:
we -- we agree with that.
object to their -- to the additional data collection

ollection
requirement pre-stop; we were pointing out that that

was not
th
t
required by the Court's order.
THE COURT:
11
OG
10
Just to make clear, we did not
BO
That's fine,
, and
an it
t isn't.
is
But they still
have lar -- I mean, they're still -- Sheriff

Arpaio is still
Sh
13
the sheriff of Maricopa County.

County
unty.
.
14
do what they want to do.

do
EF
12
He can require his deputies to
TH
MR. SEGURA:
RA:
RA
16
THE COURT:
COURT:
understand, Your Honor -I unde

und
Constitution.
o
MR.
MR
R. SEGURA:
S U
But we think that there needs to be clear
direction
that the officers should use their best judgment.
rection
ection tha
20
"Unknown"
"
Unknown"
Unknown
" should really be the very last resort the officers
21
should be instructed to use.

shoul
22
THE COURT:
Have any problem with that, Mr. Casey?
MR. CASEY:
Yeah.
IE
ND
19
FR
18
2
23
24
25
10:01:21
As long as it's in compliance with the
OF
15
17
10:01:10
10:01:32
Your Honor, the most truthful
answer may in fact be "unknown."

THE COURT:
And I've said, he can put down "unknown";
10:01:40
I'm not telling him he can't.
to say they will use their best efforts.
they put down "unknown," I think it calls into question the
data.
the cameras.
And to the extent
Well, we also have part of your order

rder
e are
re
The problem --
THE COURT:
Absolutely.
MR. CASEY:
The problem is is we have

ave a credibility
credi
re
BO
gap based on what you've seen, and I think

Court is
ink the Cou
Co
accurate.
A reasonable, objective person can interpret certain
11
things the way that you've done, and what

at we're telling you is
12
we will do the best effort and

we're
telling it.
nd we
e're
r te
13
"unknown," if it's a truthful

is somehow wrong -thful
ful answer,
answe
EF
OG
10
15
talking about this.

s.
16
MR. CASEY:
CASEY:
Yes, sir.
Yes
THE
COURT:
H COURT
CO
:
I am not going to prohibit deputies from
MR SEGURA:
MR.
Lastly, our concern, which was also
20
expressed by you, Your Honor, is that we do have some concern
21
Deputy Sheridan continuing to provide trainings with

with Chief
C
22
respect to the requirements of the order after the message

re
FR
10:02:21
indicating
ting
ng "unknown."
"un
IE
ND
S
19
We're not going to spend time
OF
TH
THE COURT:
18
problem.
No problem
roblem
10:02:02
The idea that
14
17
10:01:52
But he is going to be required
.C
OM
MR. CASEY:
46
2
23
that -- that he has conveyed at least twice that -- that we
24
know about.
25
trainings with respect to the mandates of your order.
10:02:27
We think that he should not be involved in

10:02:42
THE COURT:
47
Well, let me tell you how I feel about
that.
video, but Chief Deputy Sheridan is still the chief deputy of
Maricopa County Sheriff's Office.
got a great team.
everything that happens.
again, this doesn't just serve as a corrective; this serves

as
serv
creating a record.
this Court, I don't want to do it, but I will have

hav laid a
I've got a monitor.
He's
e's
They get complete access to every training,

training
ining,
,
BO
And if I have to use the

e coercive
coerciv power of
record.
10:03:15
I'm not going to tell him

can't
im he
h can
an't be in training.
11
But I think he knows and he's

sincere desire to do it
s expressed
expre
13
right.
14
action.
17
TH
MR. SEGURA:
RA:
RA
Okay.
Okay
ay.
That's all
THE
COURT:
H COURT
CO
:
Okay
Okay.
All right.
Thank you.
Is
I that clear, what my order's going to be?
19
Here
re
e is
i my order:
or
20
defendants to confer on a correct but brief summary of the
21
Melendres versus Arpaio order to be placed in a corrective

Melend
Melen
22
letter that both Sheriff Arpaio and Chief Deputy Sheridan can
le
FR
10:03:30
that we have.
IE
ND
S
18
If he doesn't do it
t right,
right, I'll take appropriate
OF
16
EF
12
15
10:02:57
If Chief Deputy Sheridan does it
OG
10
I understand the basis for the request, in light of the
.C
OM
I'm going to allow the plaintiffs and the
2
23
sign that will be distributed to all MCSO personnel, indicating
24
both that his previous summary -- summaries were inaccurate;
25
that they do not wish to provide inaccurate summaries; nor do
10:03:45
10:04:09
they wish to provide any suggestion that best efforts should
not be used by the deputies in compiling the data required by
the order.
.C
OM
Is that clear?
MR. CASEY:
It is to the defense, Your Honor.
THE COURT:
Plaintiffs have any question about

t it?
i ?
it
MR. SEGURA:
THE COURT:
Let's move on,

, then
then,
, to the
community liaison officer, the notice of the

e community
communi
meetings, and I also want to raise, although

didn't put it in
hough I did
di
10
the order, what I think is a fairly related po

point, which is the
p
11
community advisory board.
OG
BO
EF
of Hector Martinez, and I will just say, it's -- it's another
14
situation where I admire

mire Deputy Martinez for being truthful
15
when he says things

perhaps, unflattering; when he
gs that
at are,
ar
are
16
indicates that
-- and by the way, I did receive and
t he was
wa -
17
understand your
that his deposition, even though he
ur corrective
corre
r
18
was involved
in t
the HSU, and even though it involved the
volved
lved i
19
circulation
of the cartoons that were at issue in this case,
rculation
culation o
20
deposition did not occur in this case; it actually occurred

his deposi
21
in the
th Department of Justice case.
So I do get that
22
clarification and I appreciate it.

cl
And I appreciate your
10:05:04
IE
ND
OF
TH
13
FR
10:04:39
Defendants did, at my request

request, send me the deposition
requ
12
2
23
10:04:25
No, Your Honor.

All right.
48
10:05:22
attaching the relevant pages from Deputy Martinez.
24
I must admit, although the order requires a deputy, I
25
had assumed that it might be something more along the lines of
10:05:39
49
a chief deputy, or somebody higher, some deputy higher in the
staff would be appointed, but I don't think the fact that he is
only -- is a basic deputy is not in compliance with my order.
.C
OM
But what concerns me is Deputy Martinez's
truthfulness.
And I don't mean to in any way suggest that

he's
at he
e's
not an appropriate deputy, or that he's not otherwise

ise faithful
faithfu
in his duties.
one -- the Mexican yoga cartoon? -- that he found

funny,
foun that
h
and that he found it funny because of what

hat happens
happen in the
10:05:58
BO
But he does say in there that he found at least
Hispanic culture: because in our culture,

of friends and
lture
ture,
, a lot
l
lo
11
family tend to get really drunk and do

like that.
d things
th
thin
OG
10
You know, if I were members

member of the plaintiff class, I
13
can understand why that truthfulnes

truthfulness
uthfulnes would cause me very grave
14
reservations about whether

the attitudes of this person
ether or not
n
no
15
who you'd selected

d to
t be the
th community liaison officer are the
16
attitudes, especially
peciall in light of his involvement with the
pecially
17
circulation
n of
f that
t cartoon, and I understand and don't mean to
18
suggest
he sent it on, but he received it as a member of
t that h
19
the
HSU,
e H
S , would
SU
woul be an appropriate community liaison officer.
10:06:44
ND
OF
TH
EF
12
10:06:22
I also, just to be brief about it, have had concerns
20
expressed to me that some of these community meetings took

expres
expre
22
place in parking lots early in the morning on the Saturday

pl
FR
IE
21
10:07:00
2
23
before Christmas.
I have read that you were trying to comply
24
before the time ran out.
25
require that it be in reasonable accommodations, reasonably
I appreciate that.
But the order did

10:07:21
50
noticed, so I have some concern about that.

And I just wondered if you want to address that
briefly, Mr. Casey, if you want to indicate whether or not you

u
believe the MCSO would see any corrective action as being
appropriate or not, and then I'll hear from plaintiffs.

.
have a few thoughts.
MR. CASEY:
Please.
ase.
ase
.
BO
questions for you when you're through.
Your Honor, briefly

Hector Martinez,
y as to Hec
He
Mr. Martinez is here today.
Also Lieutenant
Skinner is
ieutenant
eutenant Russ
R
11
here to have -- could answer any

y questions
question that you have.
OG
10
EF
also a member of the class,

it understandable why
ss, and I find
f
14
the plaintiffs might be concerne

concerned
because we have a
oncern
15
truth-teller that spe

speaks
sp
ks the
th truth that says something that
16
doesn't fit in
preconceived idea of a particular culture
n with a pr
17
or otherwise,
he's a member of that class and that culture.
s
b
but
h
he
10:08:14
OF
TH
13
to me that if -- you know, quite frankly,

It
t seems
se
18
instead
painting him with the scarlet letter because he
stead
tea of pa
20
something, as you say, truthful, let's see how he does in

found some
21
next 12 months.
the ne
th
n
22
If this is about sensitivity, then let's also be sensitive to
IE
ND
19
FR
10:07:52
You know, quite frankly,

know, Deputy Martinez is
nkly,
nkly
, you
y
k
12
his membership in the class and his trial effort, because quite
24
frankly, with all the -THE COURT:
10:08:33
Let's give him the benefit of the doubt.
2
23
25
10:07:36
Then I
In addition to that, though -- well, I'll

I ll have
I'
hav a few
7
8
.C
OM
Okay.
I got your point.
Move on now to
10:08:50
51
the others.
MR. CASEY:
Yeah, okay.
And the next one was the
community meetings.
holding hands as we're crossing a busy street and we're
learning.
Court's order in the time we did it.
Yes.
can address what we're going to try to do for

annual
or the
th next
e
meeting that will be at the end of 2014.

.
.C
OM
Your Honor, this is a process where we're

e
We tried in good faith to get everything done

ne in the
th
Can we do it better?
bette ?
better
BO
I think lieutenant -- excuse me, yeah, Captain

aptain Farnsworth
Farn
We're open to suggestions, but with all

due respect,
a
OG
10
Your Honor, what we get is a week

k ahead
ahe
o time criticisms, and
of
12
we've already spent the money

we've already
y to do advertising,
adv
13
got the locations, we are

e actually open to getting feedback
14
from the monitor and from

plaintiffs but it's gotta be
fro the
t
p
pl
15
timely.
16
like this and being in t

trouble not doing it timely.
TH
10:09:40
OF
Because wha
what we'
we're
wh
're worried about is coming in here
Now,
plaintiffs
were gracious, I think, perhaps
o
plain
plainti
17
Cecillia
ia
a Wang,
Wang, Ms. Wang, was saying that, Hey, we'll give you
19
more
re
e time.
time.
20
on January 6th, quite frankly, in that time period after
21
Thanksgiving, there is no good time.

Thanks
Thank
IE
ND
18
FR
10:09:21
EF
11
22
10:09:03
But whether you do it on December 21st or you do it

B
THE COURT:
10:09:57
Well, there may not be, but assuming she'd
2
23
given you an extra month, enough for you to be able to hold the
24
meeting inside as -- in the middle of winter as opposed to
25
outside might have been more convenient, don't you agree?
10:10:11
MR. CASEY:
You know, I can't agree with it, because I
don't know enough of the details of where it was at.
why I was going to say that the commander can address the
specifics.
THE COURT:
That's
.C
OM
I appreciate the commander wants to
address me.
time I'll hear from him.
I want to cover some ground, and then if we have

a
You made the point, and --
MR. CASEY:
Want me up here, Your Honor?

Honor
THE COURT:
Yeah, I do.
BO
I want
t you up there.
t
th
OG
I want to talk about the community

board.
ommunity advisory
a
ad
10
Has anything been done to implement

community
advisory
ment the
t
c
com
12
board?
MR. CASEY:
I communicated
ommunicated
mmunicated without waiving any
privilege with the Commander

Farnsworth, and my understanding
mmande Far
mmander
Fa
15
is we have, what, three

th e picks?
pic
pick
16
been two people,

that are looked at favorably and
le,
le
, perhaps,
per
perhaps
17
they're still
the third.
i l evaluating
evalu
evaluat
18
other than
that.
han tha
I understand that there have
ND
S
OF
TH
14
THE COURT:
19
10:10:33
EF
11
13
10:10:20
52
All right.
10:10:45
I don't know any specifics
I do recall when we were
our meeting back at the end of August last year ironing

having ou
21
the order that you objected to the creation of the

out t
th
22
community advisory board at all.

com
co
10:10:58
FR
IE
20
2
23
MR. CASEY:
Yes.
24
THE COURT:
And one of the things that I did in
25
entering the final order, I don't know if anybody noticed, the
10:11:08
community advisory board had a large scope of authority to
advise the sheriff about all aspects of policing.
that to giving advice to the sheriff only about the
implementation of this order.
.C
OM
I limited
Did you appreciate that I made that distinction?

on?
?
MR. CASEY:
THE COURT:
10
Why, thank you, Mr. Casey.

asey.
asey
.
Does
e it make
BO
Court's distinctions.
any difference to the sheriff, does he still objec

object to
obje
participating in the community advisory
sory board?
board
MR. CASEY:
Yes, Your Honor.

onor.
onor
12
THE COURT:
And does
object to the
s he still
st
requirement that he do annual

-that I find that
nnual
ual - assuming
as
14
these meetings were sufficient,

ufficient, does he still object to my
ufficient
15
requiring that he disseminate

the information that I've
d
di
eminat
ina
16
required in the
meetings, and to the appointment of a
he annual
annu
m
17
community l
liaison
officer at all?
aison
is
o
off
OF
TH
13
MR.
MR
R. CASEY:
C E
Yes, Your Honor.
10:11:53
In fact, one of the
18
10:11:36
EF
11
things
ings I was going to ask you is to -- for permission, I was
20
going to orally move for a stay of that aspect to your order
21
asking permission to brief that -with permission,

p
IE
ND
19
THE COURT:
10:12:07
Well, let me tell you what I'm thinking,
FR
22
10:11:26
Your Honor, I always appreciate

te the
OG
53
2
23
and this may be better, and I'm going to say it for the benefit
24
of plaintiffs.
25
caused me to do was to think, you know, if I have to invoke the
One of the things that viewing the videotape

10:12:25
54
compulsive power of this Court to get compliance, am I going to
be comfortable with the order?
.C
OM
I gotta say, with all due respect to Deputy Martinez,

,
3
4
I can understand why plaintiffs don't -- are hesitant about

ut his
h
appointment.
sheriff didn't really give them a fair shot when he

e holds
hold
meetings outside in the cold on a December morning.

ning.
ning
doesn't mean that I think that the sheriff didn

good
didn't make
ma
faith efforts to be in compliance.
BO
That
But the sheriff is doing something

I don't want
omething that
t
th
OG
10
him to do -- or, I'm sorry, that he doesn't

want to do under
doesn
12
the order, and he feels like it's

on his
it s an
a infringement
in
13
sovereignty that I'm compelling

pelling
lling him to speak.
14
appreciate that till I started f

focusing on the fact that I
15
would need to compel

with my order if I thought it
pe compliance
pel
omplia
pli
16
was in violation.
ion.
ion
.
10:13:01
I didn't really
10:13:23
OF
TH
EF
11
And
thought about the reason, ultimately, that
n then
th
I t
17
I limited
scope of that authority and entered it, and that
ted
d the s
ND
S
18
10:12:47
And I can understand why they feel like the

e
is because I b
believe that the sheriff's actions have violated
20
constitutional rights of particular and identifiable

basic cons
21
members of the community, a plaintiff class, and that they were

member
membe
22
entitled to have some assurance that the MCSO was responding to

en
10:13:37
FR
IE
19
2
23
their concerns and being -- considering their voices.
24
that's why I entered sort of the compromise order that I did.
25
And
I have to tell you that the monitor has and I have
10:14:00
55
received a number of complaints about the quality of the
meetings that have been conducted by the sheriff, both formally
and informally, in terms of them saying things about me
requiring to do things when in fact it was their suggestion

on
about the demeaning of this order; about Chief Trombi, for

or
example, rolling his eyes.
.C
OM
By the way, I understand that there was

as a March 15th
meeting that was taped by the MCSO; I'd like

e to get a copy of
that tape if it exists.
BO
MR. CASEY:
A March 15th what?

hat?
hat
11
THE COURT:
A March 15th
meeting that took
h community
communi
OG
10
10:14:31
place in -- I've got it written

here.
ten dow
down he
13
community meeting at which

was in attendance that
ch Chief
Chie Trombi
Tr
14
was filmed partly by community and partly by the MCSO.
15
like to get a copy

tape if it's in existence.
y of
o that
at MCSO
M
TH
EF
12
MR. CASEY:
CASEY:
Yes, Your Honor.

Yes
THE
H COURT:
CO
COURT
:
But here's the point.
OF
16
17
A March 15th
I'd
19
respect
Martinez, I understand that, they don't like,
spec to Deputy
spect
De
20
you know
know,
, where the meetings were held, and I understand that,
21
too.
too
to
.
22
very quick order.

ve
FR
IE
ND
they don't
like the
community liaison officer, and with all due
on
n't lik
t
24
25
10:14:45
You know, I thought
18
2
23
10:14:16
10:15:04
Not saying you're not trying to be in compliance with a

And maybe I don't like some of the things
that they say in the meeting.

But as I indicated to Chief Deputy Sheridan, I don't
like, and I think what he said in the paper was completely
10:15:20
56
inaccurate, he said he thinks so, too, now, but the truth is he
has a First Amendment right to say it.
the sheriff might well take these meetings and use them to
put -- to state their spin on things, and as long as it's
stating it to members of the community, I gotta tell the

he
plaintiffs, I'm not very comfortable enforcing any sort of an
order against Sheriff Arpaio saying whatever he

e wants to say to
the community in those community meetings.
of a different way to address my concern,

is, I think, a
n, which
whic is
i
.C
OM
BO
very legitimate concern on behalf of

f the plaintiffs.
plain
lai
When I entered that order
er I had
d not
no gone through the
12
process of selecting a court monitor,

because the parties
monito , and
monitor
a
13
couldn't agree, I had the

e benefit of
o taking a month and really
14
researching, doing a lot of interviews,

trying to find the best
inte
nt
15
court monitor I could.

ou
oul
TH
10:16:15
Now, I
I'm
you that I'm not going to
'm
m not
no telling
te
OF
16
disagree with
I may well during the course of
i h Chief Warshaw;
W
18
this monitorship.
onitorshi
nitorsh
ND
S
17
But I have had the privilege of working with
19
him
m over
ov
the last several months; I've had the privilege of
20
his team.
meeting hi
IE
FR
22
10:15:58
EF
11
21
10:15:38
thought
But I have
a
OG
10
And so they might --
I believe that I have selected very well.
10:16:28
And so I would propose to you this: that I modify the
order, and to the extent that community meetings need to be

or
2
23
given, Chief Warshaw give them.
That way, I can approve
24
whatever is said at those community meetings, and you will have
25
a chance to object, as will the plaintiffs.
It can be an
10:16:50
57
assurance that what is said is neutral and fair to all parties
and explains exactly the monitor's assessment of MCSO's
progress and takes concerns.
.C
OM
That way, Sheriff Arpaio, Chief Deputy Sheridan, can

an
say whatever they want to say in the community, and however

wever
ve
they want to say it.
does not want to be involved in the community advisory board,

I
bo
frankly had hoped that he would be involved,

would
, because this
t
be an occasion to repair relations.
BO
Further, to the extent that the sheriff
But, you know, the truth is

s that that
tha community
OG
10
advisory board was to advise the sheriff about

various
ab
12
complaints about the implementation

ntation of the order as I limited
13
it, the sheriff doesn't want

nt to be involved, and that's
14
perfectly fine, because

a monitor who I am
se now
ow we have
h
15
perfectly satisfied
ed will
ll be fair to the sheriff, but will
16
investigate every
complaint he receives that has any
very compla
co
17
credibility
ty to
o it.
it.
TH
OF
10:17:40
IE
ND
S
of being a community advisory board to the

So
o instead
in
19
sheriff
which the sheriff has the right to appoint
eriff
rif in wh
20
representatives and evaluate the complaints, I am perfectly

representa
21
happy to revise the community advisory board so that plaintiffs
22
still can appoint members to the community advisory board, and

st
FR
10:17:22
EF
11
18
10:17:08
2
23
those members will report directly to Chief Warshaw, and
24
Chief Warshaw will evaluate and investigate the complaints.
25
That actually might be a better process, because I
10:17:55
10:18:12
58
know that although Chief Warshaw will be fair to the sheriff, I
think he wants to promote any complaints that he might get from
the community to be sure that the sheriff is fairly
implementing the order.
involved in the process, that might inhibit people from

m being
willing to come forward.
.C
OM
And to the extent that the sheriff

ff was
w
This way, the sheriff is not involved in being

bein
compelled to speak in any way he doesn't want

not
nt to be;
; he's
h
being compelled to participate in a community

board
munity advisory
advi
dv
BO
that he doesn't want to participate in.

in
But
ut I am convinced
11
that plaintiffs' complaints have a way

wa to be
b heard and
12
investigated.
13
meetings that set this forth,

can pre -- you know,
orth
th,
, the monitor
m
14
can run by the parties

es
s and give them a chance to object to
15
anything that's being

said.
ei
eing
said
id.
OG
10
TH
EF
And, to the extent

needs to be community
xtent there
t
10:19:01
OF
sheriff wants
to
n
t do,
do
o, I think that the plaintiffs' concerns are
18
being adequatel
adequately
addressed, perhaps not perfectly addressed,
dequate
ND
S
17
but
t it isn't
isn
sn't
't a perfect world.
20
agreement on many things, but you haven't reached

reached ag
21
agreement on this.
agreem
agree
22
from being compelled to speak in a way -- he can speak however

fr
IE
19
FR
10:18:43
That way
sheriff is free to do whatever the
way, the
t
s
16
As you pointed out, you have

10:19:12
And this, I think, will prevent the sheriff
2
23
he wishes to about this order and the complaints, nevertheless,
24
of the plaintiffs will be fully investigated.
25
10:18:29
Would you check with your clients and see if they're
10:19:28
59
favorable to that sort of a proposal?
And I would be
interested -- I don't know who was addressing this on behalf of
plaintiffs.
MR. POCHODA:
THE COURT:
.C
OM
Mr. Pochoda, was that you?

Yes.
Why don't you let Mr. Pochoda speak

eak to me
about what he thinks about that, and you check with

h your
clients and see if they would approve that kind

d of --
10
frankly, it may require some more consideration

than simply a
deratio th
deration
t
couple minutes -THE COURT:
11
OG
Your Honor, I will do that

but,
that,
, but
t, quite
BO
MR. CASEY:
Oh, yeah, I completely

agree.
complete
10:19:50
But here's
what I propose to do.
I looked
ked at the order last night while I
13
was thinking about this.
14
the order that you'll implement what I've just told you.
15
rather like the idea

de myself.
dea
myself
elf
16
order that I will submit

to both parties and then you will have
su
17
the opportunity
tu ity
ty to object.
ob
EF
12
I've
in some amendments to
I've penciled
penc
enc
TH
OF
MR.
MR
R. CASEY:
C E
18
THE COURT:
ND
19
And I will propose a modified
Yes, Your Honor.
I would just like to know if it's worth --
I mean,
mean, I do think that it takes care of your concern that I'm
21
way compelling your client to speak, and I understand

in some
so
som
22
that.
th
IE
10:20:04
Your Honor --
20
FR
10:19:40
10:20:18
I think it also takes care of the concern that, you
2
23
know, if I -- if I feel like the sheriff or his chief deputy
24
are misinstructing their deputies, I'll come after them.
25
I'm not going to come after them for saying whatever they want
But
10:20:36
60
to say in the community unless they say it in the community as
a way of instructing their own deputies about this order.

One clarification before -- because I am
.C
OM
MR. CASEY:
3
4
going to need time to talk with my clients.
And so I
appreciate you being able to send out your proposed changes.

hanges
ge .
In the order currently, the Warshaw -- Chief

ief Warshaw
Warsh
and his team are not permitted to speak to the media.

media.
an agreed-upon term.
That
was
Th
BO
THE COURT:
That's an agreed-upon
pon term.
term.
ter
10
MR. CASEY:
And what I want

understand -t to unders
under
11
THE COURT:
Unless I authorize
it.
thor
thorize
i
it
12
MR. CASEY:
And that's
I'm asking you.
t's what
wha I'
13
THE COURT:
Yeah.
h.
14
MR. CASEY:
It is one thing
-t
15
THE COURT:
T:
I will
ill authorize -- I saw, for example, an
TH
Exhibit D that
submitted in which you gave me the script
t you submi
s
17
that was read

meetings.
e d at
a community
comm
o
18
authorize
ize
e the script before any community meeting.
OF
16
MR CASEY:
MR.
ND
19
I need to ask -- I'm sorry, Your Honor,
if I sound -- well, let me just ask the question.

and I --- i
Sure.
22
MR. CASEY:
If in fact part of your order will be
FR
IE
THE COURT:
2
23
authorizing Chief Warshaw to communicate to the media at any
24
time in addition to -THE COURT:
10:21:13
I will be glad to
21
25
10:21:05
EF
OG
20
10:20:52
Yeah.
10:21:27
10:21:45
MR. CASEY:
1
2
an absolute no-go.
-- speaking to the community, then it is

We will not agree.
Well, I appreciate that you wouldn't
MR. CASEY:
Yeah.
THE COURT:
-- but I decide what the order

r is.
is.
MR. CASEY:
You're absolutely right.
agree --
10:21:51
.C
OM
THE COURT:
I'm
No, but I
No,
'
just -- you asked whether we objected, and I would

just
say
wou
j
jus
that --
BO
THE COURT:
Yeah, well --
11
MR. CASEY:
-- it would be over
objection.
r that
th
12
THE COURT:
I understand,
stand,
stand
, but I'm not authorizing
Chief Warshaw to make any

statements to the media except for
y statement
14
those statements that I authorize

him to make.
authoriz
uthori
TH
13
MR. CASEY:
Y:
that -- thank you very much, because

And tha
th
that helps me be able

abl to go, obviously, to my client and talk
17
to them.
OF
16
Mr. Pochoda, how does my
All right.
proposal
strike you?
opos
oposal
stri
ND
19
You are, after all, the American Civil Liberties

Y
20
Union.
Union
IE
21
22
FR
10:22:06
Thank
T
ank
nk you.
you
COURT:
THE
HE C
R
18
10:21:58
EF
OG
10
15
61
MR. POCHODA:
THE COURT:
2
23
24
Skokie.
25
acknowledge that --
There you go.
You marched in favor of the Nazis in
Even if you don't like Sheriff Arpaio, I assume you
10:22:18
MR. POCHODA:
raise about the ACLU.
There's gotta be other things you can
-- that he has the right to say whatever
.C
OM
THE COURT:
he wants to say.
MR. POCHODA:
62
We agree.
We don't believe there

re was
w
a
shred of an attempt to impose any words on Sheriff Arpaio.

Arpai .
Arpaio
We
W
didn't impose that he even had to attend any one

ne of these
community meetings nor any particular script,

pt
t, so we don't
do
believe there are any First Amendment implications

mplication whatsoever
mplications
BO
on any of the community outreach programs,

as they are
ograms, limited
ograms
li
lim
11
in the order.
OG
10
So it was just setting

meeting.
ing up a me
EF
12
First Amendment implications

training sessions and so
ions
ns than the
t
14
forth.
15
department there to take

ke the
th information from the community and
16
to perhaps provide
but there was no script nor
ovide answers,
a
answe
17
compulsory
by anyone in the Sheriff's Department,
y attendance
ttendance
tendan
18
including
ing
ng the sheriff.
s
ND
S
THE COURT:
So you don't have any problem with my
proposed change, or at least the concept of my proposed
21
changes?
change
chang
IE
20
FR
10:23:05
OF
TH
They had to have

from the
ave some
som representatives
r
re
19
MR. POCHODA:
10:23:19
Well, I will have to take this back to
2
23
the plaintiff class, Your Honor.
24
to the members of the community.
25
10:22:50
It had no more
13
22
10:22:29
This one is of great concern
By the way, we'll not include Mr. Martinez as a member
10:23:33
of the class because, to my knowledge, he has not ever been
stopped in a vehicle by MCSO.
THE COURT:
narrowly.
MR. POCHODA:
THE COURT:
MR. POCHODA:
Latino.
THE COURT:
10
11
I'm sorry, they

y don't.
don
reread --
12
MR. POCHODA:
13
THE COURT:
14
MR. POCHODA:
16
THE COURT
COURT:
:
10:23:53
-- the
e class definition.
d
I will
wi
d that.
do
TH
I apologize.
You
need to
Y
You changed
hanged the class on us, Your Honor?
No problem.
OF
15
You have to be stopped

a
ped in a vehicle,
v
veh
BO
definitely a member of the class.
10:23:45
I believe that Deputy Martinez

z is most
OG
It has to be someone --
.C
OM
I'm sorry, I didn't define the class that

t
EF
63
I did not realize that,

10:24:03
Let me ask, do you have any
problem, in
n light
ig
o my proposal, if I stay those aspects of
of
18
the order,
since they haven't -- I mean, to the extent they've
der
r, sin
IE
ND
S
17
19
been
they've been implemented, but nothing
en
n implemented,
implemen
20
currently is going on with respect to those orders.
21
FR
22
MR. POCHODA:
No, just the opposite, Your Honor.
We
believe there's been a conscious attempt to sabotage the

be
2
23
community provisions in the order.
24
are opposed to it.
25
10:24:16
THE COURT:
We know that the defendants
They've taken every action -Well, again, I appreciate that, but what
10:24:32
64
would you propose -- here's my -- as I was mulling this over,
what would you propose I really do?
the sheriff?
sheriff, to the extent he says he has a First Amendment right

ight
ht
to say whatever he wants to say as a politically responsible

onsible
ib
and elected representative of Maricopa County, if I'm

'm going to
t
make him hold meetings, he can say whatever he wants to

say in
t s
those meetings.
.C
OM
I think the
BO
Correct.
And we've
that,
ve never disputed
d
don't dispute it today, Your Honor.
When I said
they were
s
sa
11
sabotaging, it was because of who

selected to be their
o they
the sele
se
12
community liaison, and the -- and t

terms of the community
the t
13
meetings, which were geared

red
d to get
et the lowest possible turnout,
14
because they didn't give

and so forth.
ive us notice,
noti
ot
TH
THE COURT:
T:
15
I will
ill tell you that if we have
Chief Warshaw doing it, we'll do it very fairly.
17
fact we do it
we give all kinds of notice, we have
t very fairly,
fa
18
it in a nice location,
and then we get very little turnout, I
l
19
will
ll
l tell you that I may consider canceling the requirement to
20
meetings.
have the m
10:25:16
And if in
ND
OF
16
IE
21
FR
10:25:02
EF
OG
10
22
10:24:48
I'm not inclined to do that.
MR. POCHODA:
Would you propose I muzzle
10:25:31
But it will be something that I can coordinate with
Chief Warshaw on, and we can do it in a way that there just

Ch
2
23
won't be any question about whether we're providing such a fair
24
opportunity, and at the same time, Sheriff Arpaio won't feel
25
muzzled.
10:25:40
MR. POCHODA:
Yeah, I -- I'm not sure where the
muzzling comes in, since we never were -THE COURT:
I don't think there was muzzling, either,

,
.C
OM
65
but I can understand his viewpoint.
going to be required to enforce this order -- and I want

nt to
t
have an order that I'm going to enforce because, believe

elieve you
yo
me, I intend to enforce it -- I want to be comfortable

fortable
enforcing it.
BO
MR. POCHODA:
And to the extent that

at I'm
I m
I'
Your Honor, we think

hink it is
i a very
reasonable suggestion and we'll take

e it back.
back.
11
to the issue of the community liaison

officer,
which we still
aison offic
ff
12
feel is an important -- to have

within the Sheriff's
ave someone
som
13
Department, not this particular

choice, for various reasons.
ticular
cular cho
THE COURT:
It does not get
TH
Well,
tell you the community
Well
Wel
, I will
wi
wil
liaison officer has

functions, basically: one is to hold
as two
o func
fun
16
community meetings;
tings;
tings
; the other is to be assistant to the
17
community a
advisory
board.
visory
isory bo
18
in the monitor
monitor, I will require Maricopa County to pay a little
ND
S
OF
15
extra
necessary to fund that, but it's not a -- I checked
tra
ra money
ney n
20
briefly.
with him b
21
extraordinary.
extrao
extra
22
that I'm comfortable enforcing and allow the sheriff to say

th
IE
10:26:19
If I eliminate those and vest them
19
FR
10:26:05
EF
OG
10
14
10:25:51
It is some extra money, but it isn't
10:26:37
And to allow the sheriff to give me an order
2
23
whatever he wants to say, and especially since he does not want
24
to have any role in the community advisory board or community
25
meetings, I think it's a great suggestion.
I don't want to
10:26:54
66
love my own suggestions too much -MR. POCHODA:
And who am I to argue?
But we never
expected, to be honest, that the sheriff would show up a lot of
the -- at a lot of those community meetings, but -THE COURT:
cover.
That's good.
Yeah.
Yeah, we do think
it's
k it
it'
's important
impo
to have, then, an identified person at a minimum.

nimum.
nimum
And
I hate
A
to say this today, but we have to take it back to discuss
BO
amongst ourselves within the monitor

r team who is the liaison to
11
the community.
OG
10
That will
fine.
ll be fine
f
13
All right.
Other
er issues?
issues?
14
MR. POCHODA:
EF
THE COURT:
TH
I should come up with something I can
ask you for now quick.

ui
uick
THE COURT:
COURT:
MR.
R POCHODA:
POCHOD
POCHODA
17
COURT:
THE
HE C
R
-- other issues.
I wanted to discuss --
18
10:27:26
Now --
OF
16
10:27:16
We think it's very

-ery
ry -
12
15
10:27:06
You have anything else to say, Mr. Pochoda?

?
MR. POCHODA:
We've got a lot of ground

to
ou
t
.C
OM
the
e members of
o the monitor team have received word, feedback,
20
tentative and initial discussions with MCSO

that in their
th
21
personnel, that they've been ordered or instructed that they're

person
perso
22
not to talk to members of the monitor team until an attorney

no
10:27:37
FR
IE
ND
19
2
23
comes and is present.
24
if that's actually instruction that you've given.
25
At least I've heard that; I don't know
Let me tell you that again, in terms of rights that
10:28:00
67
the Sheriff's Office has, I think that the sheriff has the
right to require, if he's going to -- I mean, I think he has a
right to instruct his employees that they shouldn't talk to the

he
monitors unless they have counsel.
violate -- I mean, it doesn't -- you can't really say it
violates the order, but it violates the spirit of the order in

i
which the monitor team has full and complete access

ccess to the
th
Sheriff's Department and operations and ability

ility
lity to ask
a
questions to determine what's going on.
.C
OM
But I think that does
BO
10:28:20
OG
I'm not going to tell you you can't

your
ca 't
can
t instruct
i
10
employees that.
But if you are going to

instruct your
o in
12
employees that, I've counseled

Chief Warshaw about it, and
ed with Chi
13
it will be -- it will require,

for him to make the
quire
ire,
, in
n order
o
14
fair assessments that I'

I'm going to require him to make, it will
15
require that I appoint,

po
poin
and authorize him to appoint, very many
16
more monitors,
they
can go and watch the operations of
, so that
th
t
17
MCSO and determine

for
e ermine
rm
fo themselves information that they could
18
otherwise
determine
by simply asking a question, without
ise
e dete
i
10:28:51
ND
S
OF
TH
EF
11
10:28:33
creating
some sort of environment that I'm concerned, frankly,
eati
eating
20
Deputy, that your instruction started to create, which is

Chief Depu
21
a dual
ua enforcement track.
22
So if that is going to be your position, my concern is
FR
IE
19
2
23
that it's going to significantly impair Chief Warshaw's ability
24
to monitor the actual compliance by the MCSO, and to the extent
25
that it costs more money, I'm going to authorize that he
10:29:13
10:29:32
68
increase his monitor staff.

Now, I do realize that that indication made to members
of the monitor staff may have been a misinstruction, but I
thought since we're all gathered together I'd inquire into

o it
it.
MR. CASEY:
.C
OM
Your Honor, I think there's been a
10:29:49
misunderstanding, a miscommunication on this, but let me tell

e
you what I do understand to be the case.
has any intention or desire to sit in on

n anything the monitors
do.
10:30:09
OG
10
BO
There will be instance -- no one on

team
n the defense
defen
def
8
9
THE COURT:
You mean defense

attorneys.
fens attor
fense
tt
12
MR. CASEY:
Yeah, the
attorney.
he defense
defe
13
THE COURT:
Okay.
y.
14
MR. CASEY:
But what
wh
I want you to understand -- you
TH
EF
11
know, I say that sounds

I apologize.
so ds -- yes,
sou
y
16
with my wife, "I

you to understand, Sheila."
I want
wan yo
17
THE
COURT:
H COURT
CO
:
You talk to your wife that way?
MR.
MR
R. CASEY:
C E
No, that's -- that's why I stopped myself,
ND
because
cause
aus I work
wor for her.
Your Honor, I apologize.
Y
20
I get carried away.
My
Irish blood gets up.
22
is, you know, there's a lot of regulation in the MCSO, and, for
is
FR
IE
21
example, there's a whole lot that deals with what I call HR,
24
issues I don't have any concept about.

THE COURT:
10:30:29
But here's really what we're looking at
2
23
25
10:30:15
18
19
It's like talking
OF
15
What we want --
Can you get to the point --
10:30:47
MR. CASEY:
Yes.
69
The point is if someone from the
MCAO wants to attend to help make sure, if they're culling over
policies and procedures, to add value to it, they ought to be
able to attend.
It's not --
THE COURT:
Sure.
MR. CASEY:
-- an adversarial process.
THE COURT:
Sure.
.C
OM
10:30:58
And we don't want to make it

t that.
I'm just telling you that if it gets in the way of the

t
monitor's function, it may increase the monitor

monitor's
monito
's costs.
MR. CASEY:
Well, and let me also

als put
pu in there here
OG
10
BO
also, if in fact -- I don't have any intent

intention,
but if in fact
te
12
defense counsel wanted to attend

tend and
an be a fly on the wall --
EF
11
THE COURT:
Plaintiffs'
counsel, you mean.
intiffs
tiffs' co
14
MR. CASEY:
Plaintiffs' counsel.
Plaintiffs
16
17
THE COURT
COURT:
:
Sure.
Sur
MR.
R CASEY:
CA
CASEY
:
-- give my client --
COURT:
THE
HE C
R
Sure.
IE
ND
S
18
to go and --
19
MR CASEY:
MR.
attendance?
attendance
10:31:24
21
THE COURT:
Nothing.
22
MR. CASEY:
Absolutely.
THE COURT:
Except if there arises a perception that
2
23
24
25
10:31:20
-- advice, what is the problem with me in
FR
20
But I have the right
OF
15
TH
13
10:31:06
there is any sort of wink and nod understanding in the MCSO.

Do you understand what --
10:31:38
MR. CASEY:
Yes --
THE COURT:
-- I'm saying?
MR. CASEY:
-- I think absolutely.
That's what -- and

nd
.C
OM
70
that's, unfortunately, why we're here, because the perception

tion
on
is there's going to be an adversarial process if counsel

el is
present.
occasions we'll be there.
That's not what the purpose would be on those
The other thing that's important, and

know, we've
and,
, you kn
BO
talked to -- well, we may not have talked

ed to,
to, but
ut one of the
10
things that we have been advised from

is
om
m other
ther jurisdictions
j
ju
11
that the lawyers need to be at least

east aware
ar of what's going on
12
because of monitor creep --
10:31:57
EF
OG
THE COURT:
Nothing
hing
ng --
14
MR. CASEY:
--- so
o --
15
THE COURT:
T:
Nothing
hin in my -- what I just said
TH
13
10:32:05
indicates that
t you can't
can't do whatever you want to do.
c
OF
16
10:31:44
MR.
R CASEY:
CA
CASEY
:
17
Yeah, but there's the implication that
there's
for obstruction, an adversarial process.
s a potential
pote i
poten
19
just
st wanted to
t convey to the Court that's not our intent.
ND
18
THE COURT:
T
All right.
21
MR. CASEY:
Thank you.
22
THE COURT:
Anything that I -- I had a sentencing two
FR
IE
20
Thank you.
2
23
minutes ago.
24
there anything plaintiffs want to be heard on that point?
25
There's still some grounds I have to cover.
MS. WANG:
10:32:19
Is
Your Honor, we were prepared to address the
10:32:29
71
possible resetting of various deadlines in the Court's October
order.
to the parties for comment and review, we can take care of that
at
then, but we are prepared to address that today -THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
Well --
10:32:43
-- if you like.
.C
OM
If Your Honor is going to do a modified order to submit
-- let me tell you that I talked wit

with
it
Chief Warshaw about this, too.
And his suggestion

to
ggestion
gesti
t both
parties, see what you think, the parties

s have been
bee diligent,
BO
really.
Both parties have been diligent

to comply
igent in trying
t
tr
11
with preparing the policies and get -- get

ge everything in order.
OG
10
The reason there has

delay is because you
s been a de
EF
12
couldn't agree on the monitor;

had to take the time necessary
nitor
tor;
; I ha
14
to be sure I was appointing

good monitor; he then had to work
ointing
inting a go
g
15
out his logistics wi

with the
County.
w
he C
16
that is the fault

party, and I think both parties
ault of neither
nei
17
have tried very

to meet the requirements they've
ry diligently
dilig
l
18
tried.
So there's been a delay
10:33:08
OF
TH
13
What Chief Warshaw suggests and what seems reasonable
ND
19
now geared up and he's starting to be able to

to me is he's
h
21
assess these things.

asses
22
of things to be submitted by March 31st.
IE
20
FR
10:32:53
10:33:21
There was, apparently, the first deadline

He suspects -- and I
2
23
suspect, too, given the parties' previous diligence -- that the
24
parties have still been working on these things.
25
unable to take all at once everything on March 31st.
He's just
10:33:41
72
So what he suggests that you do is be ready on March
1
2
31st.
He will issue interrogatories saying:
items.
those items that are designated on March 31st, that triggers

ers
the deadline in the order for you to respond as to those

se items
only.
to get automatic acceptance, because he's going

g to evaluate
evalua
them, plaintiffs are going to evaluate them.

.
he's ready to move on to the next he'll say

say,
, Give me the
When the sheriff submits
.C
OM
You give him those items.
Give me these
It doesn't mean that you give compliance, you're

ou're
ou
e going
ing
BO
when
And then
An
h
next -- he'll specify which other sets

information, and we
ets
ts of info
inf
11
can proceed in that orderly fashion.

hion
ion.
.
OG
10
Does that make sense

you,
Mr. Casey?
e to you
yo
, M
13
MR. CASEY:
It does
does,
es,
, Your Honor.
14
THE COURT:
make sense to you, Ms. Wang?

Does that m
15
MS. WANG:
:
TH
EF
12
Yes,
Honor.
s, Your
Yo
You
The one caveat we have is
17
proposed tr
trainings
and
inings
ni
an policy revisions, there were a few
18
concrete
deadlines
for certain trainings to be completed, I
te deadl
eadl
19
believe
lieve
iev there are three.
20
a hard stop
sto that would be a no-later-than date for those
21
trainings actually to be completed.

traini
train
10:34:24
IE
ND
OF
that in addition
ion to the submission of certain documents and
FR
10:34:13
Thank you.
16
22
10:33:57
And the plaintiffs would like to see

10:34:42
We understand that that will take some time to have
2
23
the monitor team review and approve the curriculum and the
24
trainers and all that, but we would like to see those
25
trainings, particularly given the misstatements that have gone
10:35:00
73
out so far.
THE COURT:
I understand that, and let me suggest I
doubt that defendants will disagree, why don't you just submit
t
such a date to them for their approval; put it to me; I'll

l
revise the order in that respect?

MS. WANG:
Thank you.
THE COURT:
All right.
10:35:13
That's fine.
.C
OM
I think the only

nly other
othe
question that I wanted to address was the publication

ublicatio request
that I'd received from Ms. Young -- Mr. Young,

Young and
an Ms. Dennis
BO
opposed that request.
I'm glad to hear from y

you, I hate to
11
have you travel all this way and not hear

from you, but I've
ar f
12
got -- I think I've decided what I

I'm
going to do.
' go
'm
13
But go ahead, Mr.

r. Young.
Youn .
Young
14
MR. YOUNG:
16
17
TH
what?
10:35:33
THE COURT
COURT:
:
I've
I
'v decided what I'm going to do.
MR.
R YOUNG:
YO
YOUNG
:
Okay.
Well, I would note that, Your
Honor, it's
a very important issue.
it
t's
s obviously
ob
obv
Your ruling in
IE
ND
S
18
I'm
sorry,
I'm sorry
sor
, Your Honor, you've decided
OF
15
19
this
is
s respect is going to be the final outcome at least as to
20
saturation patrols, since the defendants are not appealing your
21
findings as to saturation patrols.

findin
findi
FR
22
10:35:23
EF
OG
10
10:35:45
I would note that while in federal court it is
2
23
permissible to cite unpublished opinions, in various state
24
courts it is not.
25
Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure 28(c), it's not permissible
For example, in Arizona, under the Arizona

10:36:03
74
to cite, and it's not precedent -- unpublished opinions are not
precedent.
So your ruling, for example, in May of 2013, which
.C
OM
talks about the Arizona employer sanctions law and the Arizona
izona
on
human smuggling law actually are not citable in the courts

urts
t of
f
Arizona, notwithstanding the fact that Your Honor's

s rulings
have dealt with matters relating to Arizona law.

w.
possible that there would be state court lawsuits

would
wsuit that
wsuits
h
benefit from --
BO
It's
It'
It
's quite
qu
10
THE COURT:
Well --
11
MR. YOUNG:
-- the citation
tion --
12
THE COURT:
-- it is
possible, but my ruling isn't
s possible
possi
EF
OG
10:36:38
precedent in state court,

even if it's published, is
, anyway,
anywa , e
anyway
14
it?
TH
13
MR. YOUNG:
G:
15
Well,
Well
l, it
i wouldn't be binding precedent,
that's correct,
the Arizona courts would need to -- to
t, because
beca
17
come up with
own
t their
th
ow judgments as to Arizona law.
18
would certainly
rtainl be
b informative and beneficial, and just
generally
speaking, having your rulings be searchable more
nerally spe
20
easily on Westlaw and more easily found by people who are
21
researching on these issues would be a great public benefit.

resear
resea
IE
19
FR
22
All right.
10:37:03
Thank you.
I think I called you Ms. Dennis.
2
23
25
THE COURT:
10:36:46
But it
ND
S
OF
16
24
10:36:25
I'm sorry, Ms.
GilBride.
MR. CASEY:
I only stood up because we've decided if
10:37:15
the Court wishes to publish, the Court may publish --
THE COURT:
Well, thank you.
MR. CASEY:
-- not over objection.
THE COURT:
Well, thank you.
Here's my inclination.
.C
OM
75
I do think that, without

out
t going
in
into it, I think to the extent that there's questions

are
ons that
th
ar
raised by the Sheriff's Office or -- which I'm certainly going
to allow him to raise, about what actually I held,

hel , to
held
t the
extent that publishing my order makes it

to the
t more accessible
acce
cc
BO
public, it's going to be published.
OG
10
10:37:26
10:37:42
However, to the extent that my inj

injunction, you've
i
11
requested me to publish my injunction,

njuncti , as you've -- as I've
njunction
13
just indicated, I feel perfectly

clear -- or perfectly able to
erfectly
fectl cl
14
adjust my injunction to really

meet the practical needs -- I'm
eally m
15
not going to do it
t lightly,
lightly
ly,
, but I think we've talked about one
16
area today where

the injunctive order makes more
ere adjusting
adj
adjust
i
17
sense for t
the
and it makes more sense to the
e sheriff
sheri
18
plaintiffs.
iffs
ffs.
.
10:38:02
OF
TH
EF
12
injunction is not necessarily set in stone, and

So the
t
19
it's not set in stone, and because, as Ms. GilBride

because it
21
pointed out in her letter, in this day of Westlaw, everybody

pointe
point
22
can access everything, if you've got a computer, I'm not

ca
2
23
inclined to publish my injunction at this point.
10:38:16
RI
20
24
25
Do you want to be heard one final shot on that,

Mr. Young?
10:38:33
MR. YOUNG:
1
2
76
If you mean by "injunction" your October
2nd, 2013 order -THE COURT:
That's exactly what I mean, yeah.
MR. YOUNG:
We still believe that whatever its final

inal
al
.C
OM
form is, and I understand that there may be some modification

ication
ation
to it, that ultimately having that available on -- on Westlaw

Westl
in a published form, in F.Supp., would be helpful,

because it
ful,
ful
, becaus
would add to the ability to search it and find

from
ind it
i years
ye
yea
now, it would be of benefit to --
BO
10
THE COURT:
All right.
11
MR. YOUNG:
-- be published.
ished.
ished
12
THE COURT:
Well, I note that

the sheriff doesn't
t
EF
OG
10:38:56
object to it, and if I decide

publish it when -- when we
ecide
ide to
t pub
pu
14
next arrive at the final

version, I'll just do that.
nal version
versio
15
not going to do -not

going to make any decision on that
- I'm
I
ot g
16
until we revise
se it t
to be what I consider to be final form.
OF
TH
13
17
MR.
R YOUNG:
YO
YOUNG
:
COURT:
THE
HE C
R
All right.
But I'm
10:39:09
Last chance, is there any -- I
18
do want
express -- well, I appreciate the sheriff coming
wan to ex
20
today.
today.
21
today will prove to be, even if somewhat painful for all of us,
22
a valuable corrective that helps me enforce this order.
ND
19
I appreciate what Chief Deputy Sheridan said.
IE
FR
10:38:41
I hope
10:39:26
I hope
2
23
to do so in a way that does not impinge upon the sheriff's
24
authority as the sheriff of Maricopa County to enforce law
25
enforcement.
10:39:51
77
But I hope in addition to making that corrective this
hearing served one other purpose, and that is, with all due
respect, and I hope you don't misunderstand me, it is to create

te
a record.
of what is acceptable and not acceptable.
record so that even though I would be very reluctant

nt to enforce
enfor
f
any sort of coercive action against the Maricopa

pa County
Sheriff's Office or the individuals within it,

it, I am perfectly
pe
willing to do it if I need to.
.C
OM
To create a record that you've been clearly advised

vised
e
BO
And this
makes clear, I
s record
recor ma
m
believe, that I have done my very best

est to give
giv fair notice of
11
what is required under my order.
OG
10
EF
So I appreciate all parties

being here.
partie be
12
proceed as we've indicated.

ed.
14
(Proceedings concluded at 10:40 a.m.)
18
ND
19
17
OF
15
16
20
IE
21
FR
22
2
23
24
25
Thank you very much.
TH
13
10:40:09
And it creates
tes
s a
We will
10:40:31
78
1
C E R T I F I C A T E
.C
OM
3
4
5
I, GARY MOLL, do hereby certify that I am duly

dul
appointed and qualified to act as Official Court Reporter

for
Repor
p
the United States District Court for the

e District of Arizona.
BO
I FURTHER CERTIFY that the foregoing pages constitute
OG
10
a full, true, and accurate transcript

all of that portion of
script
cript of
f al
12
the proceedings contained herein,

in the above-entitled
rein, had
rein
h
i
13
cause on the date specified

ied
d therein,
therein and that said transcript
14
was prepared under my

y direction and control.
TH
EF
11
16
DATED
Arizona, this 26th day of March,
A ED
D at Phoenix,
P
Pho
17
2014.
ND
19
18
OF
15
20
IE
21
FR
22
2
23
24
25
s/Gary Moll

Melendres # 662 140304 Transcript - D.ariz. - 2-07-Cv-02513 - 662 - Transcript - Mar 24 2014 Hearing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Melendres # 662 140304 Transcript - D.ariz. - 2-07-Cv-02513 - 662 - Transcript - Mar 24 2014 Hearing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 662 Filed 03/26/14 Page 1 of 78

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Manuel de Jesus Ortega

BEFORE THE HONORABLE G. MURRAY SNOW

Proceedings taken by stenographic court reporter

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 662 Filed 03/26/14 Page 2 of 78

Lesli Rawles Gallagher,

Stanley Young, Esq.

Cecillia D. Wang, Esq.

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 662 Filed 03/26/14 Page 3 of 78

Timothy J. Casey, Esq.

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 662 Filed 03/26/14 Page 4 of 78

This is Civil 07-2513, Melendres v.

Arpaio, on for status conference.

Counsel, please announce your appearances.

Stanley Young, Covington

Dan Pochoda for plaintiffs.

Good morning, Your Honor.

Andre Segura for the plaintiffs.

Tim Casey and

Can I ask, is there

somebody who principally plans to speak on behalf of plaintiffs

matter that you indicated you'd like to discuss this morning.

Judge Snow, we've divided up the subject

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 662 Filed 03/26/14 Page 5 of 78

publication of the Court's orders, and Mr. Pochoda will handle

matters relating to the community outreach and the community

Well, I'll ask you

Thank you, Your Honor.

Mr. Casey, is there

to principally speak on behalf of the

Mr. Williams in my office

prefatory comments, however

number of people here,

ordered, that I would

accomplish what we need to accomplish, but I have a day of

sentencings, so I don't mean to be rude to anybody but I may be

a little bit directive.

I hope we have enough time to

Let me just say, for purposes of those who are in

attendance, that there is a rule in the District of Arizona

that court hearings are not to be recorded, and so I'm going to

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 662 Filed 03/26/14 Page 6 of 78

ask you to abide by and comply with that rule.

publicly available transcript that can be obtained but I'm

asking you not to record the hearing.

That does not mean that you cannot tweet or otherwise

record it -- or not record it, but type on your laptop,

as you do so in an unobtrusive manner.

marshals that if they detect anyone recording the hearing,

because that is in violation of the rules of

will be removed from the hearing, so I do request that you

But I have directed the

please honor that rule.

Let me introduce, and I believe th

all of the parties here, Chief

the Court appointed as the

Chief Warshaw as an officer

this year to assume

team, but a representative

be the appropriate time.

Not all of his monitor