4 Responses to “While I have my disagreement with Arpaio, I believe that Trump should pardon him. As a matter of fact, DOJ should have withdrawn charges against him”

1. Brian Reilly
   August 1st, 2017 @ 9:16 am

   Arpaio’s downfall was a series of Arpaio video clips introduced as Exhibit 37 by the US during closing arguments. Once I viewed them, it became clear that there was a guilty verdict in Arpaio’s future.

2. hapnHal
   August 1st, 2017 @ 7:43 pm

   This case was a purely political witch hunt, as Sheriff Joe was targeted for investigating Obama’s fake birth certificate. Sheriff Joe was enforcing existing immigration laws that Obama and his thugs were breaking. Sheriff Joe was also denied a jury trial for a misdemeanor contempt of court charge. It appears that the refusal to allow Sheriff Joe to have a trial by jury, was a revenge motive to guarantee that he would be found guilty.

   Sheriff Joe is a good man, and he fought the good fight trying to keep Arizona safe from criminal illegal aliens.

   He should not serve a single second in jail.

   President Trump needs to take this matter under review and issue a PARDON Sheriff Joe.

3. Brian Reilly
   August 2nd, 2017 @ 5:34 am

   As one who attended the Arpaio civil contempt hearings back in 2015 and the Arpaio criminal trial in 2017, I can assure you that this was not a “political witch hunt.” For nearly 18 months, Arpaio ignored a federal court order, not to detain or arrest people, without probable cause that a crime had been committed. Arpaio’s office was violating the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution and that is what led to all of this. There was sufficient evidence for finding Arpaio guilty.

   Arpaio’s former attorneys, in court, agreed to a bench trial to cap the penalty to 6 months as opposed to a an open ended penalty for a jury trial. Arpaio’s attorney’s agreed to the bench trial. It’s just more Arpaio spin that he was denied a trial by jury.

   If Arpaio were to accept a pardon from President Trump, it’s my understanding that it would be an admission of guilt on Arpaio’s part.

4. hapnHal
   August 2nd, 2017 @ 9:05 pm

   A few more comments on Sheriff Arpaio Court Case.
   Is Illegal is Illegal? There is a process if one wants to become a legal citizen of the US. Thousands, if not millions, have went through this process.
   ———————–
   Arpaio issued the apology in court in Phoenix during the second day of a hearing to determine if he and four others will be punished for their failures to carry out the orders.

   “I have deep respect for the courts,” he said, Thompson/Reuters reported. “It really hurts me after 55 years to be in this position. I want to apologize to the judge. I should have known more about these court orders that slipped through the cracks.”

   Arpaio’s defense is he left it to his subordinates to carry out the judge’s orders and did not double check to ensure all was being done completely and correctly.

   The case will continue into June.

   Also during Thursday’s hearing, Arpaio dropped a bombshell and admitted his office was part of a quiet investigation into Snow’s wife.

   “We were investigating some comments that came to our attention,” Arpaio said, saying his former lawyer, Tim Casey, had hired a private investigator to look into remarks she allegedly made about her husband not wanting Arpaio to win his reelection in 2012, the Associated Press reported.

   TRIAL COMMENTS
   Arpaio’s attorneys repeatedly sought and were repeatedly denied a jury trial. Justice Department prosecutors argued that the defense would attempt to politicize the case if granted a jury, and requested a bench trial. They stressed that there is no constitutional right to a jury trial if the potential sentence is six months or less.

   While Arpaio’s attorneys acknowledged this last point, they argued that the unique nature of the case called for a jury of his peers. They cited a law, 18 U.S.C.A. § 3691, that requires a jury trial for those accused of criminal contempt.

   Bolton addressed this argument when denying the motion for a jury trial, noting that the law only applied when the accused conduct “constitutes a separate criminal offense.”

   Bolton additionally rejected the defense’s argument that a jury trial would prevent the appearance of impropriety. “This Court does not believe there is any such appearance,” she wrote in her order.

   “The case law is clear,” she wrote. “If the court limits Defendant’s potential sentence to six months or less, there is no right to a jury trial.”

   Trial evidence revealed that Arpaio’s deputies illegally detained 171 individuals after a federal judge banned Arpaio’s signature immigration patrols.

   But despite their central role in Arpaio’s contempt charges, information on these victims remained scarce throughout the trial. All victims were held and turned over to federal immigration authorities but it’s unclear what became of them. None were called as witnesses.

   After Arpaio and three of his aides were found in civil contempt of court, U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow ordered the creation of a victims’ compensation fund, to be paid for by the county.

   No victims have seen a payout to date though, according to Maricopa County spokesman Fields Moseley.

Leave a Reply