Melendres v. Arpaio #1467 Oct 13 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 13 Evidentiary Hearing
Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
Transcript of Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
1/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2007
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres,et al.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Joseph M. Arpaio, et al.,
Defendants.
)))
)))
)
)
)))
No. CV 07-2513-PHX-GMS
Phoenix, Arizona
October 1, 2015
9:01 a.m.
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
BEFORE THE HONORABLE G. MURRAY SNOW
(Evidentiary Hearing Day 9, Pages 2007-2247)
Court Reporter: Gary Moll
401 W. Washington Street, SPC #38
Phoenix, Arizona 85003(602) 322-7263
Proceedings taken by stenographic court reporterTranscript prepared by computer-aided transcription
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
2/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Melendres v. Arpaio, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2008
A P P E A R A N C E S
For the Plaintiffs:American Civil Liberties Union Foundation
Immigrants' Rights ProjectBy: Cecillia D. Wang, Esq.39 Drumm Street
San Francisco, California 94111
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation
Immigrants' Rights Project
By: Andre Segura, Esq.
125 Broad Street, 18th FloorNew York, New York 10004
American Civil Liberties Union of ArizonaBy: Daniel J. Pochoda, Esq.P.O. Box 17148
Phoenix, Arizona 85011
Covington & Burling, LLPBy: Tammy Albarran, Esq.
1 Front Street, 35th Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
Covington & Burling, LLP
By: Stanley Young, Esq.
By: Michelle L. Morin, Esq.333 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 700
Redwood Shores, California 94065
For the Defendant Maricopa County:
Walker & Peskind, PLLCBy: Richard K. Walker, Esq.
By: Charles W. Jirauch, Esq.SGA Corporate Center
16100 N. 7th Street, Suite 140
Phoenix, Arizona 85254
For the Movants Maricopa County Attorney's Office and MaricopaCounty Attorney William Montgomery:
Ridenour Hienton, PLLC
By: April M. Hamilton, Esq.Chase Tower201 N. Central Avenue, Suite 3300
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
3/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Melendres v. Arpaio, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2009
A P P E A R A N C E S
For the Defendant Joseph M. Arpaio and Maricopa CountySheriff's Office:
Iafrate & AssociatesBy: Michele M. Iafrate, Esq.649 N. 2nd Avenue
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, PLC
By: A. Melvin McDonald, Jr., Esq.
By: John T. Masterson, Esq.
By: Joseph T. Popolizio, Esq.2901 N. Central Avenue, Suite 800Phoenix, Arizona 85012
For the Movants Christine Stutz and Thomas P. Liddy:Broening, Oberg, Woods & Wilson, PC
By: Terrence P. Woods, Esq.P.O. Box 20527
Phoenix, Arizona 85036
For the Intervenor United States of America:
U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights DivisionBy: Paul Killebrew, Esq.950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 5th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20530
U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division
By: Cynthia Coe, Esq.601 D. Street NW, #5011
Washington, D.C. 20004
For Executive Chief Brian Sands:
Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith, LLPBy: Greg S. Como, Esq.
2929 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1700
Phoenix, Arizona 85012
Also present:Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio
Executive Chief Brian Sands
Chief Deputy Gerard SheridanLieutenant Joseph SousaAlexandra Mijares Nash, Esq.
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
4/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Melendres v. Arpaio, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2010
I N D E X
Witness: Page
JOSEPH M. ARPAIO
Direct Examination Continued by Mr. Young 2015
SUZANNE KIMBERLY SEAGRAVES
Direct Examination by Mr. Segura 2076Cross-Examination by Mr. Popolizio 2215
Redirect Examination by Mr. Segura 2220
Recross-Examination by Mr. Popolizio 2232
Further Redirect Examination by Mr. Segura 2244
E X H I B I T S
No. Description Admitted
92 Letter to Charlie Armendariz from Joseph 2065
Arpaio dated 4/23/2011 (MELC004666)
2004 MCSO Memorandum from Lt Seagraves to Captain 2097
Bailey re Suspension of Administrative
Interviews of HSU personnel dated 7/2/2014(MELC005314)
2012 MCSO Memorandum from Sergeant Anglin to 2151
Lt Seagraves re Investigative lodging, signed
off by Chief Sheridan dated 1/28/2014(MELC233669)
2013 MCSO Memorandum from Sergeant Anglin to 2151
Lt Seagraves re Investigative lodging, signed
off by Chief Sheridan dated 2/2/2014(MELC234036)
2014 E-mail chain re Melendres Court Order dated 2162
5/5/2015 (MELC417670-MELC417672)
2015 MCSO Memorandum from Deputy Chief Lopez to 2183Chief Deputy Sheridan re Complaint against
Brian Mackiewicz dated 8/14/2014(MELC186196-MELC186197)
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
5/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Melendres v. Arpaio, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2011
E X H I B I T S
No. Description Admitted
2016 MCSO Memorandum from Jennifer Johnson to 2189Sergeant Tennyson re Complaint against Deputy
B. Mackiewicz dated 3/17/2015 (MELC186198)
2255 NY Times Article "Hiding Details of Dubious 2061
Deal, U.S. Invokes National Security" by EricLichtblau and James Rissen dated 2/9/2011(MELC184881-85)
2730 Case CV 07-02513-PHX-GMS - Defendant Arpaio's 2041
Response to Plaintiffs' Second Set ofInterrogatories and First Set of Requests forAdmission to Defendant Arpaio RE Contempt dated
9/15/20152828E Video Clip 5 DOJ Disc 1 of 2, April, 2012 2047to July 2012
2830C Video Clip 3 Fox News, DOJ dated 4/4/2012 2045
2832C Video Clip 3 Newsmaker with John Hook - Fox, 2018
Sheriff comments on Obama Investigation,
Immigration, Reaching out Hispanics, andPosse dated 1/27/13
2834A Video Clip 1 Fox News, Your World with Neil 2020
Cavuto, ICE Releasing Immigrants, DOJ Perezdated 3/18/13
2842 Transcript of Telephone Interview of Deputy 2205
Brian Mackiewicz by Dave Tennyson dated
8/5/2015 (MELC1397031-MELC1397042)
2858 Response to 7/22/2015 Monitor Document Request 2055Related to ITR 25 (MELC662424-MELC662437)
2887 February 2015 Memorandum from Tennyson to 2119Seagraves re closing out Cosme 15-21
Investigation
2890 Cosme Interview by Tennyson 2133
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
6/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:0
09:0
09:0
09:0
09:0
Melendres v. Arpaio, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2012
P R O C E E D I N G S
THE COURT: Please be seated.
THE CLERK: This is civil case number 07-2513,
Melendres, et al., v. Arpaio, et al., on for continued
evidentiary hearing.
Counsel, please announce your appearance.
MR. YOUNG: Good morning, Your Honor. For plaintiffs
from Covington & Burling, Stanley Young, Tammy Albarran, and
Michelle Morin.
THE COURT: Good morning.
MS. WANG: Good morning, Your Honor. Cecillia Wang
and Andre Segura of the ACLU for plaintiffs.
MR. POCHODA: Good morning. Dan Pochoda from the ACLU
of Arizona for plaintiffs.
MR. KILLEBREW: Good morning, Your Honor. Paul
Killebrew and Cynthia Coe for the United States.
THE COURT: Good morning.
MR. MASTERSON: Good morning, Judge. John Masterson,
Joe Popolizio, and Michele Iafrate for Sheriff Arpaio and the
individual contemnors, and with us is Holly McGee.
THE COURT: Good morning.
MR. WALKER: Good morning, Your Honor. Richard Walker
and Charles Jirauch appearing on behalf of Maricopa County.
THE COURT: Good morning.
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
7/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:0
09:0
09:0
09:0
09:0
Melendres v. Arpaio, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2013
MR. McDONALD: Good morning, Your Honor. Mel McDonald
making a special appearance for Sheriff Arpaio.
THE COURT: Good morning.
MR. COMO: Good morning, Judge. Greg Como
representing Chief Brian Sands.
THE COURT: Good morning.
MR. WOODS: Good morning, Your Honor. Terry Woods on
behalf of nonparties Stutz and Liddy.
THE COURT: Good morning.
MS. HAMILTON: Good morning, Your Honor. April
Hamilton on behalf of the Maricopa County Attorney's Office and
Maricopa County Attorney William Montgomery.
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, a bit of housekeeping.
We have had some discussions about Ms. Seagraves'
appearance --
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. YOUNG: -- given her schedule, and I believe she
will be here at the morning break, so with your permission, we
would ask that we take a break in Sheriff Arpaio's testimony at
that time and proceed with Ms. Seagraves' examination after the
morning break.
THE COURT: That's acceptable to everyone?
MR. MASTERSON: That's acceptable to me, Judge. I
just wanted to point out that Mr. Eisenberg is not here this
morning but Lieutenant Sousa is present.
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
8/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:0
09:0
09:0
09:0
Melendres v. Arpaio, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2014
THE COURT: Good morning.
We can proceed that way. I did note that I think
pursuant to my request, defendants last night filed a
reconciliation under seal of investigative documents.
I was trying to reconcile that with some of the
exhibits that have been admitted into evidence and I was not
able to do it, and so I may have some questions that I'd just
like to resolve with the parties, unless they otherwise get
ironed out for me, which they may do.
MS. WANG: Your Honor, plaintiffs do not have a copy
of what was lodged under seal by defendants.
THE COURT: Do you know what we're talking about,
Mr. Masterson? I think maybe Ms. Iafrate did it.
MR. MASTERSON: She did. And I saw the e-mail, but
I've not seen the document.
THE COURT: All right. Well --
MR. MASTERSON: She's going to be here in just a few
minutes, Judge.
THE COURT: All right. Work it out.
You may resume, Mr. Young.
MR. YOUNG: Thank you.
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
9/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:0
09:0
09:0
09:0
09:0
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2015
JOSEPH M. ARPAIO,
recalled as a witness herein, having been previously duly
sworn, was examined and testified further as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Good morning, Sheriff.
A. Good morning.
Q. So I'm going to show you a video. This time, I do promise,
it is John Hook, and we'll ask you some questions about it. It
is Exhibit 2832C. And I'll represent to you, at least based on
what your office as given us, it's a January 27, 2013 interview
on Newsmaker with John Hook.
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, may we play the video and then
I'll ask the sheriff about it?
THE COURT: You may do so.
(Video clip played as follows:)
JOHN HOOK: 30 percent of Maricopa County, roughly, is
Hispanic. You are the sheriff of all the people. So do you
owe that community some extension of an olive branch, and I
think you started to give it on election night.
What concretely have you done to try to reach out to
that community since the election?
SHERIFF ARPAIO: Well, I've put the hand out to a
couple elected officials.
JOHN HOOK: Were they receptive?
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
10/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:0
09:0
09:0
09:0
09:0
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2016
SHERIFF ARPAIO: No. Because there are a certain
group here that don't want me to enforce the illegal
immigration laws. I'm like the poster boy. They want to
aggravate the situation constantly, especially now with the new
philosophy with the Republican Party and everybody else to get
back the Latino vote.
I've always worked closely with the Latinos, and they
know it, and I do have support from that group. But there's
certain agitators, whatever you want to call it, that don't
like what I'm doing.
JOHN HOOK: So you think that the majority of
Hispanics support you?
SHERIFF ARPAIO: Well, you know one reason I want to
reach out, very simple, I want to get to them, given it's the
truth.
JOHN HOOK: What is the truth as you see it?
SHERIFF ARPAIO: Well, the truth is that I served four
years as a head of the federal drug enforcement in Mexico City,
South America, I covered the Texas border, I covered the
Arizona -- Arizona border as a head of the federal drug
enforcement. I know Mexico. I know the Latinos. I've always
got great cooperation from the President of Mexico down.
So I like to at least let them know, the community,
why we enforce the immigration laws, why I'm doing what I am
doing, and try to get the message out that way.
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
11/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:0
09:0
09:0
09:0
09:0
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2017
(Video clip concludes.)
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Sheriff, is that you talking to John Hook not too long
after your 2012 reelection?
A. What year was the segment?
Q. I'll represent to you that the date information we have on
the disk that was given to us by your attorneys was January 27,
2013. Does that sound right to you?
A. Yes.
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, I move the admission of
Exhibit 2832C.
MR. MASTERSON: Objection, relevance; cumulative; 403.
THE COURT: I'm going to overrule the relevance
objection.
I didn't understand initially what Mr. Masterson was
talking about yesterday when he said "cumulative." But I did
go back and review Sheriff Arpaio's testimony from the first
iteration of the contempt hearing, and I did note that you
placed in a number of similar video recordings that were
admitted into evidence.
I'm not going to prevent you, I suppose, if
Mr. Masterson wants to stipulate putting them in, to putting
them in, but at some point it does become cumulative. And I
don't think we need to play them all here in court; I get the
message, I think.
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
12/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:0
09:0
09:0
09:0
09:0
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2018
MR. YOUNG: Understood, Your Honor. I just have one
more in that vein.
THE COURT: All right.
2832C is admitted.
(Exhibit No. 2832C is admitted into evidence.)
MR. YOUNG: Thank you, Your Honor.
May we play now 2834A.
(Video clip played as follows:)
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: You know, you mentioned this Labor
Secretary designate, Perez, of course, who comes really from
the Justice Department, going after your methods in Arizona and
elsewhere, but what do you think of him running Labor? That
just seems like an odd choice.
SHERIFF ARPAIO: Well, he ought to be thanking me,
because we raided 74 businesses, my office, and arrested 500
people in those businesses here illegally with fake IDs. So he
ought to say, Thank you, sheriff. You're making up openings
for those here legally that they need a job, and as you say, we
do have an unemployment problem. So why would you want to give
these jobs to people that violated the law coming here
illegally? Let's save the jobs for U.S. citizens.
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: Amazing. Sheriff, feel better. Get
that shoulder back up to speed. You've got a lot of weight on
it there. Always good seeing you. Joe Arpaio, thank you.
All right. In the meantime --
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
13/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:0
09:1
09:1
09:1
09:0
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2019
(Video clip concludes.)
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Sheriff, is that you?
A. Said I had a lot of weight. What year was that?
Q. Well, you remember you having your shoulder injured in
March 2013, and then talking to --
A. That's why I was in that shirt.
Q. That's right. And that was in about March 2013, correct?
A. Probably.
Q. And that is you on the video?
A. Yes.
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, I move the admission of 2834A.
MR. MASTERSON: The same objection, but I'm going to
also add all I heard was reference to arrests for state --
Arizona state crimes, so that's an additional relevance factor.
THE COURT: I wasn't sure I heard anything about
federal immigration laws, either, on that one.
Do you want to replay it for me?
MR. YOUNG: Sure, Your Honor.
(Video clip played.)
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: You know, you mentioned this Labor
Secretary designate, Perez, of course, who comes really from
the Justice Department, going after your methods in Arizona and
elsewhere, but what do you think of him running Labor? That
just seems like an odd choice.
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
14/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:0
09:0
09:1
09:1
09:1
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2020
SHERIFF ARPAIO: Well, he ought to be thanking me,
because we raided 74 businesses, my office, and arrested 500
people in those businesses here illegally with fake IDs. So he
ought to say, Thank you, sheriff. You're making up openings
for those here legally that they need a job, and as you say, we
do have an unemployment problem. So why would you want to give
these jobs to people that violated the law coming here
illegally? Let's save the jobs for U.S. citizens.
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: Amazing. Sheriff, feel better. Get
that shoulder back up to speed. You've got a lot of weight on
it there. Always good seeing you. Joe Arpaio, thank you.
All right. In the meantime --
(Video clip concludes.)
THE COURT: I'll admit the exhibit. You can argue its
relevance.
(Exhibit No. 2834A is admitted into evidence.)
MR. YOUNG: Thank you, Your Honor.
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Sheriff, what you said about saving jobs for American
citizens, that was a political statement on your part, correct?
A. I don't know if you call it political. It makes common
sense. It was just my opinion speaking out on national TV.
Q. Well, didn't you say that your statements on political --
on unemployment issues, as they might be affected by your
immigration related enforcement efforts, were political
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
15/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:1
09:1
09:1
09:1
09:1
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2021
statements?
A. Yes. That's a side issue. The main issue was to enforce
that program and arrest people with fake identification. That
was what our mission was.
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, I may address this next
question to Mr. Masterson. I had an e-mail exchange about a
number of exhibits which I would like to have admitted, which I
can examine the sheriff on, but we could save time if we could
achieve a stipulation. And they are Exhibits 79, 80, 81, 83,
86, and 89.
MR. MASTERSON: I think we had another e-mail on my
way down here, but -- I don't know what you want me to do,
Judge. I can, I guess, try to look through all of them.
THE COURT: You haven't looked at them yet?
MR. MASTERSON: No, sir.
THE COURT: All right. Then proceed, Mr. Young.
MR. YOUNG: Perhaps I'll defer that question until
Mr. Masterson has more of a chance. Would that -- let's do
that.
THE COURT: All right.
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Sheriff, as a result of this Court's December 23, 2011
preliminary injunction, you did not tell anyone in your office
to change anything about how your office was doing its work, is
that correct?
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
16/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:1
09:1
09:1
09:1
09:1
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2022
A. No, I -- after this preliminary injunction came out, we did
delegate that to Brian Sands, and the lawyer was keeping track
of it, so there were, I'm sure, many discussions between those
people regarding this order.
Q. But you yourself did not tell anyone to change anything as
a result of the injunction, is that correct?
A. Well, I didn't go out to every employee, but that, once
again, was delegated to my subordinates to carry that message
out.
Q. Sheriff, do you remember having your deposition taken
earlier this month on April 15 -- actually, no. September 18.
Actually, last month at this point.
Actually, sorry, it is September 17. You remember
having a deposition, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. I'm going to direct your attention -- and we can
play it on the screen -- to page 358, line 16, to 359, line 1.
And I'm going to have Mr. Klein play that video. It's
clip number 6.
(Deposition video clip played as follows:)
"Question: Did you, yourself, ask anyone to change
anything in what your office was doing as a result of the
injunction?
"Answer: What do you mean by change?
"Question: Do anything different from what your
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
17/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:1
09:1
09:1
09:1
09:1
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2023
office was doing before the injunction was issued?
"Answer: No. I didn't tell them to change anything
differently."
(Deposition video clip concluded.)
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Sheriff, do you recall -- is that the testimony you gave on
September 17 of this year?
A. I think I mentioned I delegated that responsibility to my
subordinates.
MR. MASTERSON: Your Honor, excuse me. Under Rule
106, could we have the next question and answer on page 359,
lines 3 through 6.
(Cell phone heard in courtroom.)
THE COURT: Mr. Jirauch?
MR. JIRAUCH: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Why don't you leave the courtroom and take
your call?
MR. JIRAUCH: I won't take the call, Your Honor. I
don't need it. I thought it was off.
MR. YOUNG: Well, I'm happy to read it, Your Honor,
if --
THE COURT: Will reading it be adequate if we don't
have it on the video clip?
MR. MASTERSON: If he has it on video, that would be
wonderful; if not, reading would be adequate.
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
18/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:1
09:1
09:1
09:1
09:1
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2024
THE COURT: Okay.
I do think in fairness, if you have it on video, you
ought to show it on video.
MR. YOUNG: Mr. Klein, are you able to do that as to
page 359, lines 3 through 6?
THE COURT: And this is before or after the clip we
just saw?
MR. MASTERSON: Immediately after.
THE COURT: Thank you.
MR. YOUNG: Actually, Your Honor, if I can add on to
that, so I'm going to ask Mr. Klein to play page 359, lines 3
through 20.
(Deposition video clip played as follows:)
"Answer: No. I didn't tell them to change anything
differently.
"Question: Well, why didn't you tell anyone to change
anything?
"Answer: Because they were following the Judge's
orders, court orders.
"Question: Well, actually, Sheriff, your office was
not following the Judge's order, and you've admitted that it
was not and that's why you've previously said that you were
willing to have civil contempt found against you for violating
that order.
"Do you remember that?
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
19/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:1
09:1
09:1
09:1
09:1
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2025
"MR. MASTERSON: Form, foundation.
"THE WITNESS: No. I said as the leader, I take
responsibility but not the nuts and bolts. So in the
actual --"
(Deposition video clip concluded.)
THE COURT: It cut off the last line, but I got it.
"In the actual compliance, that was delegated," is what it
said.
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Sheriff, was that testimony accurate?
A. Yes.
Q. Your office had some internal investigations relating to --
well, actually, one internal investigation relating to
violation of the preliminary injunction.
Do you recall that?
A. No.
Q. Well, you gave an interview to Don Vogel in connection with
the 453 investigation, which was about the violation of the
injunction. Do you recall that?
A. Is that the one you're referring to?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And you recall the purpose of that investigation was
to determine whether there were any violations of your
department's policies in connection with the failure to comply
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
20/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:1
09:2
09:2
09:2
09:2
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2026
with the Court's injunction, correct?
A. I believe that was the stimulus behind that.
Q. Now, you never considered subjecting yourself to become a
principal of that investigation, correct?
A. I did appear before the private investigator.
Q. I understand you were interviewed by Mr. Vogel, but you
yourself were never, and you never subjected yourself to, a
potential finding of violation or potential discipline in that
investigation, is that correct?
A. Well, I don't know if I could make that decision on myself,
but when you say "principal," I'm not sure what you're talking
about.
Q. Well, you'd agree with me that you yourself were never
potentially subject to discipline in that investigation, is
that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Chief Olson was the person who was in charge of making the
final decisions about violation and discipline in that
investigation, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. You and Chief Sheridan made the decision to appoint
Chief Olson to that role, correct?
A. I made the final decision.
Q. You chose not to do that yourself, is that right?
A. Yes.
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
21/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:2
09:2
09:2
09:2
09:2
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2027
Q. Why not?
A. Because I never get involved in those type of situations.
I always delegate.
Q. Did you ever think about having somebody outside the agency
make those final determinations?
A. No.
Q. You recognize that there was also an investigation, also
done by Mr. Vogel, with respect to the issue of supervision of
Deputy Armendariz, correct?
A. I vaguely remember that.
Q. Did you ever think about having anybody outside the MCSO
play the role of final decision maker on that investigation?
A. No.
Q. That was also a final investigation where Chief Olson was
the final decision maker, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, with respect to the 543 investigation, which is the
one about the violation of the injunction, you knew when you
decided to make Chief Olson the final decision maker that he
would be making a decision with respect to Chief Sheridan,
correct?
A. Yes.
Q. You knew that Chief Sheridan was Chief Olson's superior,
and that Chief Olson reported to Chief Sheridan, correct?
A. Yes.
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
22/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:2
09:2
09:2
09:2
09:2
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2028
Q. So you knew that when you appointed Chief Olson, that he
would have to pass judgment on someone who was his superior, is
that right?
A. Yes.
Q. You realize that as to Chief Sheridan -- or actually I
should ask you: Did you hear, do you know, that as to Chief
Sheridan there were some initial findings of violation that
Chief Olson then later reversed?
A. I heard about it, but I never did get involved.
Q. You did not think that there would be any conflict in
having Chief Olson make those final decisions as to Chief
Sheridan, his superior, is that right?
A. No. Can I elaborate?
Q. Well, let me just make sure I understand your answer.
Is it correct that you did not think there was a
conflict?
A. No, because of the character of the person making that
decision --
Q. Okay.
A. -- and his experience.
Q. Well, let me make sure I've clarified here. Did you think
there was a conflict as a result of their reporting
relationship?
A. No.
Q. Now, you yourself have not imposed any penalty or any
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
23/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:2
09:2
09:2
09:2
09:2
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2029
discipline on Chief Sheridan relating to violation of the
injunction --
A. No.
Q. -- is that correct?
A. No.
Q. Have you imposed any penalty or discipline on Chief
Sheridan?
A. No.
Q. Have you imposed any penalty or discipline on anybody in
your department as a result of the violation of the injunction?
A. That's my -- not my decision. As I say, I delegated that
to appropriate officials.
Q. Well, Chief Sheridan serves at your pleasure, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And you could also -- well, as to Chief Sheridan, it's
possible that you -- you could make a decision to do something
with respect to him, even dismiss him, for violating the
Court's orders, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. But you've chosen not to do that --
A. Yes.
Q. -- is that right?
A. Chief Sheridan is a very professional, dedicated employee
of this office with a tremendous background. And I stand by
him, unless something else comes up in the future, and that's
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
24/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:2
09:2
09:2
09:2
09:2
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2030
the way it is.
Q. Can you imagine anything that would cause you to dismiss
Chief Sheridan?
A. Well, if he sticks up a --
MR. MASTERSON: Objection, relevance to "anything."
THE COURT: I'm going to sustain the objection.
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Sheriff, do you stand by Chief Olson's final findings that
no one in your department violated any policy of your
department with respect to failure to comply with the
injunction?
A. Once again, I did not get into the details, but I do have
confidence in Chief Olson. He's been through this before.
He's a voting member of POST, which is a state agency that
decides on discipline. I have confidence in him. And I told
him, when I agreed to ask him to do that assignment, that you
call it like you see it. And I'm convinced, with his ethics,
that he did that.
Q. So you stand by Chief Olson's final findings, correct?
A. I don't have all the details, but I stand by his decisions.
Q. Sheriff, it's at least possible that it would be better to
have someone outside the agency, such as the monitor, perform
the function that Chief Olson performed in that investigation.
Would you agree with that?
A. I don't know if the monitor had any authority to
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
25/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:2
09:2
09:2
09:2
09:2
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2031
investigate our people.
Q. Well, you could agree to have the monitor make final
decisions on discipline and violation with respect to, say,
issues arising out of violation of this Court's orders,
correct?
A. I think that is the function of the elected sheriff who
runs the third-largest sheriff's office in the country with
tremendous work, and as I say again, I support Olson. I don't
know all the facts doing his evaluation, but I support the
person. The person. I have faith in him for doing the right
thing.
Q. You're the elected sheriff, right?
A. Yes.
Q. So you could, as the elected sheriff, make the decision to
have the monitor, to appoint the monitor be the final
decision maker in an internal investigation relating to
violations of this Court's orders, is that right?
A. Well, you know, our employees do have merit protection;
some people will call it Civil Service. So there are mechanics
in order to decide on these type of decisions, discipline and
so on, so I don't know where the monitor would fit in.
On the other hand -- and once again, I don't get
involved in internal securities; I delegate that. But on the
other hand, I have confidence in my organization. We've gone
through many, many hundreds of investigations, Internal
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
26/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:2
09:2
09:2
09:3
09:3
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2032
Affairs.
Q. So you have confidence in a final finding made by
Chief Olson that even though your office violated this Court's
preliminary injunction, there was no violation of your
policies. Is that what you're saying?
A. I don't have all the facts where he came to his conclusion.
Maybe that would --
Q. But you agree with that conclusion, though, that there was
no violation of your office's policies as a result of the
violation of this Court's orders, is that right?
MR. MASTERSON: Objection, foundation.
THE WITNESS: As of now, I don't --
THE COURT: Sheriff -- Sheriff, please.
I'm going to overrule the objection.
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Do you have the question in mind, Sheriff?
A. Could you repeat it?
Q. You agree that there was no violation of your office's
policies resulting from the violation of this Court's
injunction.
A. Once again, I am going on what Chief Olson's examination
slash investigation was. I don't have all the details on what
his decision was --
Q. Okay.
A. -- as far as the facts during the course of his
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
27/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2033
investigation.
THE COURT: Can I interrupt?
MR. YOUNG: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: This will just save me having to ask a
question later on and maybe bring something to a conclusion.
You understand, Sheriff, that one of the things I'm
doing here is evaluating whether changes need to be made in
light of the failures that led to my order not being
implemented.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: You understand that.
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: All right. And you understand that one of
the things I'm doing is looking at how your office investigates
itself, correct?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: And I think you've indicated that you are
willing to be bound by Chief Olson's determination as your
office's final determination about what the appropriate
determination was with respect to any of your policies being
violated, is that correct?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, I would ask that we play the
video from the sheriff's March 25, 2015 deposition, page 258,
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
28/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2034
line 15, to 259, line 29.
THE COURT: That was the March 15 dep --
MR. YOUNG: March 25, 2015, page 258, line 15, to 259,
line 29.
And for Mr. Klein's benefit, that's clip number 76.
(Deposition video clip played as follows:)
"Question: Well, wouldn't it be better if the monitor
were to take over the authority for dispositions on discipline
actions for violations of the Court's orders?
"Answer: That would be a possibility.
"Question: As a matter of principle, that -- that's a
better possibility or better solution than leaving the
disposition authority in the hands of the people who were
responsible for violating the Court's orders in the first
place; correct?"
MR. MASTERSON: Objection.
"THE WITNESS: Without getting into the --"
(Deposition video clip concluded.)
MR. MASTERSON: Judge, I'm going to assert the
objection. I made an objection in the transcript at this
point.
THE COURT: I don't -- oh, is there an objection
that's been deleted from the transcript?
MR. YOUNG: It's possible the video has an objection
deleted, Your Honor, but --
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
29/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2035
THE COURT: Well, let's go back and see that. I --
Mr. Masterson?
MR. YOUNG: Mr. Klein, do you think you can do the --
MR. MASTERSON: Are we on -- I'm sorry. May I ask --
may I ask counsel a question?
THE COURT: Sure. But I don't even think you were in
this case yet.
MR. MASTERSON: No, but there's an objection by
defense counsel.
THE COURT: That's fine.
MR. MASTERSON: Are we at line 21 on page 258? Is
that your question?
MR. YOUNG: Well, I'm going to flip to 258 at line 15,
and I think Ms. Iafrate made a form objection at line 10.
THE COURT: At line 10?
MR. MASTERSON: Line 25's the one I'm looking at,
Judge, because I think that's the question Mr. Young just read.
MR. YOUNG: And there is another one at line 25.
THE COURT: And what is -- it's a form objection? Is
it a form objection?
MR. YOUNG: Yes.
THE COURT: All right. So what's your objection now,
Mr. Masterson?
MR. MASTERSON: My objection is to the use of the
phrase, leaving disposition authority in the hands of people
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
30/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2036
who were responsible for violating the Court's order in the
first place. Foundation.
THE COURT: I'll sustain that objection.
MR. YOUNG: All right. Well, then let's go to line 6
on page 259.
Actually, maybe I should -- before we play the video,
perhaps I should give Mr. Masterson a chance, going all the way
down to line 29 at page 259, whether there are any other
objections that he wants to assert at this point.
MR. MASTERSON: And you're going to read the question
at line 6 through 10?
MR. YOUNG: Yes. No. Well -- yes.
And actually, it will go from line 6 down to line 25
at page 259.
MR. MASTERSON: Objection, foundation, legal
conclusions, and relevance.
Do you have the -- well, would you like my copy for --
THE COURT: I would like somebody's copy.
MR. MASTERSON: As long as you give it back, I'll give
you this one.
THE COURT: Thank you.
MR. MASTERSON: (Handing).
(Pause in proceedings.)
THE COURT: All right. So what are your objections,
again, Mr. Masterson?
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
31/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2037
MR. MASTERSON: Foundation as to the -- foundation, in
that the question calls for a legal conclusion; and also its
relevance, since the Court will be making these ultimate
rulings on effective relief.
THE COURT: I'm going to overrule the objections.
Well, I'm going to overrule the objections to the
extent that the sheriff is the final decision maker in Maricopa
County. And so I think he does have the foundation to offer
opinions about appropriate ways to handle discipline within his
office.
Did you have other objections?
MR. MASTERSON: No, sir.
THE COURT: Okay. You can play the tape.
MR. YOUNG: Thank you, Your Honor.
So Mr. Klein, could you start at line 6 of page 259,
and go to line 25.
(Deposition video clip played as follows:)
"Answer: ... study, the protection of our employees.
Merit rules. I can go on and on.
"Question: Well, assuming that all of the state law
protections are abided by by the monitor, it would be a good
solution for the monitor to assume responsibility for deciding
how to discipline people within your office for violations of
the Court's orders; correct?
"MS. IAFRATE: Form.
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
32/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2038
"THE WITNESS: I have no objection for the monitor
conducting investigations. As far as who -- the disciplinary
action following that information or evidence, I still haven't
decided which way to go on that.
"BY MR. YOUNG:
"Question: Okay. So, in your view, it's possible
that it would be better if the monitor took over those
disposition decisions; correct?
"MS. IAFRATE: Form.
"THE WITNESS: I don't know if it's better or not,
but, once again, I haven't decided.
"BY MR. YOUNG:
'Question: Is that something you're actively
considering now?
Answer: It's a possibility."
(Deposition video clip concluded.)
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Sheriff, was that testimony accurate when you gave it on
March 25, 2015?
A. Yes. I said it's a possibility. Everything changes when
you run a large organization, so nothing is impossible.
Q. Is it possible now, in your view?
A. Pardon?
Q. Is it possible now, in your view, that it would be better
to have the monitor take over that decision-making?
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
33/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
09:3
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2039
A. No.
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, there's some dep- -- well,
some interrogatory responses. I'm wondering whether we could
get -- well, I can show them to the sheriff. It's
Exhibit 2730. I believe he verified them. Although if counsel
are willing to stipulate to the admission of those
interrogatory responses, I'd be happy to spare the sheriff the
time.
THE COURT: Have you designated them to Mr. Masterson?
Does he know which interrogatory responses you're talking
about?
MR. YOUNG: Well, he verified the whole thing, so I'm
going to ask --
THE COURT: Mr. Masterson verified it or the sheriff
verified it?
MR. YOUNG: The sheriff verified the whole thing --
THE COURT: Well --
MR. YOUNG: -- Exhibit 2730.
THE COURT: 2730.
Can you take a look at that, Mr. Masterson?
(Pause in proceedings.)
MR. MASTERSON: Well, I'm going to object to the
introduction of the entire document. If counsel wants to ask
specific questions concerning them then I'll address any
appropriate objections at that time.
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
34/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2040
THE COURT: Please proceed, Mr. Young.
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Sheriff, do you have Exhibit 2730 in front of you?
A. Where is -- oh, here?
Q. I think it might be one of those folders.
A. What number?
Q. 2730.
A. Yes.
Q. Exhibit 2730 has the title "Defendant Arpaio's Response to
Plaintiffs' Second Set of Interrogatories and First Set of
Requests For Admission to Defendant Arpaio Re Contempt."
If you go to the last page, you'll see something that
says that you "verify that the matters and things contained
therein are true to the best of your knowledge and belief,
except such matters as are stated upon information and belief,
and as to such matters, you believe them to be true."
Do you see that language there?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Is that your signature under that language?
A. Yes.
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, I'd move to admit
Exhibit 2730.
MR. MASTERSON: No objection.
MR. WALKER: No objection, Your Honor.
MR. COMO: No objection.
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
35/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2041
THE COURT: Exhibit 2730 is admitted.
(Exhibit No. 2730 is admitted into evidence.)
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Now, going back to the discussion we just had about whether
the monitor would be --
Sheriff, we're done with that exhibit, so --
A. We're done?
Q. We're finished with that exhibit.
A. Did you say we're done?
Q. We're finished with that Exhibit --
A. Oh.
Q. -- 2730; we're not done with the questioning.
A. Okay.
Q. Going back to our discussion about the monitor, at least in
March, it appears from your deposition, that you thought it
would be at least possible that it would be better for monitor
to make the decisions about discipline for violation of this
Court's orders, but you now think that that's not a
possibility?
Did I capture your testimony correctly?
A. No. Oh, I said anything is possible. When you run a large
organization, some changes can be made. I think that's what my
thrust of my comment was.
Q. Now do you think the change could be made, that the monitor
could assume responsibility for final dispositions on
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
36/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2042
disciplinary matters involving violations of this Court's
orders?
MR. MASTERSON: Objection, asked and answered.
THE COURT: Overruled.
THE WITNESS: Right now, as I said, we have not made a
decision.
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Are you still in the process of making a decision about
whether it would be acceptable from your standpoint to have the
monitor take over that responsibility?
A. We're still looking at all the aspects of that situation.
Q. Would you object if the monitor were to take over that
responsibility?
A. I've not made the decision.
Q. You thought about the issue of having a monitor oversee
your office's operations in 2012 after the Department of
Justice filed its lawsuit, is that right?
Do you recall that?
And in particular, do you recall thinking that you did
not want a monitor overseeing your office?
A. You are speaking on the Department of Justice?
Q. Well, right now I'm actually asking about your -- your
views about having a monitor oversee your office.
During the course of 2012, do you recall that you
thought that that would be a bad idea, to have a monitor
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
37/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2043
overseeing your office?
A. Yes. And the DOJ ruled in our favor --
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor --
THE WITNESS: -- not having a monitor.
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, I would ask that we look at
Exhibit 2830C.
(Video clip played.)
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: But I want to ask you, because they
seem to be suggesting the thing that is making the negotiations
break down is your -- this is their characterization -- your
sudden objection to having this independent monitor, something
that you hadn't objected to before, so they --
SHERIFF ARPAIO: And that --
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: -- think it's you who's making the
conflict come to a head right now.
SHERIFF ARPAIO: That is garbage. That is garbage. I
publicly in the past said I will never give in to a control by
the federal government. That is false -- which many other
statements they make are false -- that's not true.
(Video clip concluded.)
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Sheriff, is that you?
A. I don't even know what the beginning of that conversation
was about; you just showed parts of it. So it's hard to answer
just a little sound bite that you show without the whole
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
38/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2044
context of that interview.
Q. Well, your office gave us the whole interview and your
lawyers have it now, and if you want, you can have them play it
for you, or we could play the whole thing for you if you
wanted, but my question is: Was that you?
A. It was me and it was Kelly of Fox.
Q. And that was in approximately April 2012 when you were
talking about the dispute you were having with the Department
of Justice at that time, correct?
A. I believe so.
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, I move for the admission of
2830C.
MR. MASTERSON: Objection, relevance.
THE COURT: I guess, Mr. Young, I don't understand
what the relevance is. I mean, if I determine that the monitor
needs to appropriate control over matters that relate to this
lawsuit or the plaintiff class, and that if I have the
jurisdiction to do it, I'll do it. I don't care whether the
sheriff --
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, this relates --
THE COURT: I don't care whether the sheriff objects
or not.
MR. YOUNG: I understand that, Your Honor.
This issue goes to the state of mind issue as to the
contempt, and it relates to the sheriff's views about having a
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
39/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2045
monitor, which relates to, for example, how he interacted with
a monitor on May 14, 2014, and how he's reacted to having a
monitor generally. I think it's quite relevant to the contempt
issue.
THE COURT: All right. I'll admit the exhibit on that
basis.
(Exhibit No. 2830C is admitted into evidence.)
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Did that video accurately reflect how you felt about the
idea of having a monitor, Sheriff?
A. I believe -- I'm not sure of the confines of that monitor
on the Department of Justice issue, whether it was to monitor
my whole organization, every aspect. I do have a
constitutional right, as the elected sheriff that reports to 4
million people in this county, to serve them as the elected
sheriff. So when you say that someone can take over my
organization, I think that may be a legal problem, too, when
you're dealing with an elected constitutional sheriff.
So I think that's what I may have had in my mind at
that time, and I don't recall everything in that segment to
draw to that question. But basically that's how I felt at that
time.
MR. YOUNG: Could we play Exhibit 2828E.
(Video clip played.)
SHERIFF ARPAIO: But don't go around taking over my
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
40/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
09:4
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2046
office, and every time I want to do something we have to talk
to them and see if it's okay to go lock up some illegals, or
the tents, and everything else.
(Video clip concludes.)
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Sheriff, is that you also objecting to having a monitor in
connection with your dispute with the DOJ?
A. Once again, that was, what, two seconds? Three seconds?
What about the whole context of that interview? Very difficult
to answer that when I don't remember the whole interview.
Q. Sheriff, you can't tell whether that's you or not?
A. I know it's me.
MR. YOUNG: I move to admit 2828E.
MR. MASTERSON: I'm going to make the same objection
as to relevance and cumulative, but in addition, as the sheriff
pointed out, in the DOJ case -- and I can tell you this, I was
counsel for the sheriff in the DOJ case -- DOJ wanted to take
over the entire department. They wanted a monitor. They
wanted an inspector general. That's what the sheriff's talking
about here, not a monitor over disciplinary matters and IA
matters.
THE COURT: Well, I do think that after the admission
of the first, the second starts to get a little cumulative.
I'll allow it, but I'm not going to allow any more. So I will
admit this for a limited purpose. And, you know, we've already
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
41/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:5
09:5
09:5
09:5
09:5
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2047
heard argument from Mr. Masterson as to why its relevance is
limited, but you can make argument on the other side.
(Exhibit No. 2828E is admitted into evidence.)
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. So Sheriff, you said something about not wanting to have to
go talk to a monitor before locking up some illegals.
Do you recall that? We just saw it on the video.
A. Well, once again, I don't know what led into that comment,
but -- whether it had to do with illegal immigration or not, or
the Department of Justice zeroing in on taking over my
organization.
MR. YOUNG: Actually, Your Honor, I may have
overstepped -- or stepped on your -- did we admit -- did you
admit 2828E?
THE COURT: What was that?
MR. YOUNG: The video we just saw, Exhibit 2828E?
THE COURT: Yes, I admitted --
MR. YOUNG: Thank you.
THE COURT: -- 2828E.
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Well, Sheriff, when you refer to illegals in statements to
the press, you're referring to people who are in the country
without permission, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. We can play it again, if you'd like, but I think you
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
42/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:5
09:5
09:5
09:5
09:5
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2048
objected to having to ask someone any time you want to go lock
up some illegals, and my question is: Is that something that
you were unhappy about as to the prospect of having a monitor
oversee your activities with respect to your immigration
enforcement?
A. No. I don't know if that, illegal immigration, was part of
this segment that I use. I was concerned about the federal
government taking over the office of the sheriff. And I may
have used that as one -- many different crimes. Wasn't just
illegal immigration. The management -- I can go on and on.
Q. Do you have anything further to add to your answer?
A. No. I haven't seen the whole segment, but I will respond
to that portion, and I have.
Q. You said that you would fight to the bitter end before
having a monitor oversee your office, is that right?
A. I was speaking on the Department of Justice wanting to take
over my whole organization, the federal government running my
office in total. That's what I was talking about.
Q. So you settled your dispute with the DOJ, correct?
A. Can you repeat?
Q. Recently, just recently you reached an agreement with the
Department of Justice, correct?
A. Very proud of that agreement.
Q. And that agreement came about in part because there is a
monitor currently overseeing your office under the orders of
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
43/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:5
09:5
09:5
09:5
09:5
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2049
this Court, is that right?
MR. MASTERSON: Objection, foundation. Relevance.
THE COURT: You may answer if you know.
THE WITNESS: I'll agree the monitor is monitoring the
three positions that we agreed to.
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Well, the Department of Justice lawsuit involved racial
profiling issues that are similar to the issues, or identical
to the issues in this case, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. So at least as to that portion of what the DOJ was
concerned with, there is currently a monitor overseeing your
office, is that right?
MR. MASTERSON: Objection, foundation, relevance.
THE COURT: Overruled.
THE WITNESS: I don't know the legal aspects of a
transfer of that concept to our office regarding monitors.
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Well, let me ask you again, Sheriff. It was your view,
when you were talking about monitors with the DOJ in 2012, that
you would fight to the bitter end, is that right?
A. To take over the office of the sheriff completely, the
federal government taking over the office of the sheriff.
That's what I was responding to.
Q. And you said you would fight that to the bitter end, is
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
44/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:5
09:5
09:5
09:5
09:5
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2050
that right?
A. Taking over the office, the constitutional office of the
sheriff, yes. And I don't even think it would be legal for
that to ever happen.
Q. Sheriff, I'm going to show you an exhibit, which is an
Arizona Republic article dated June 28, 2012. It has a
quotation from you in it, and I'm going to ask you to take a
look at it. It should be in a folder on your table or we can
put it up on the screen.
Actually, let's put it up on the screen, if Your Honor
will permit.
THE COURT: What's the exhibit number?
MR. YOUNG: 2283.
Now, if we can blow that up a little bit on the
screen. And feel free to scroll down. Actually, let the
sheriff read the whole thing.
THE WITNESS: Do you want me to read the whole thing?
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Yes, you can go ahead and read the whole thing if you'd
like. I'm going to ask you some questions, and it might be
better if you read the whole thing.
A. Yes.
Q. Sheriff, before the trial in this action in 2012 -- and in
particular around June 28, 2012, the date of that article --
you knew that Judge Snow's brother-in-law worked at the
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
45/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:5
09:5
09:5
09:5
09:5
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2051
Covington & Burling law firm, correct?
MR. MASTERSON: Objection, relevance.
THE COURT: What is the relevance? We've already
dealt with this in context -- in the context of the motion to
recuse. I've denied that motion.
MR. YOUNG: Understood, Your Honor. This relates to
the sheriff's state of mind later on with respect to the
Montgomery investigation.
THE COURT: Well, how does it relate to the
Montgom- -- oh, the Montgomery investigation?
MR. YOUNG: Correct.
THE COURT: Are you going to be able to tie this up?
MR. YOUNG: I believe so, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. I'm going to give you a
limited leeway, but it's very limited. We're not reopening the
motion to recuse that I've already ruled on.
MR. YOUNG: Understood.
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Did you know that fact, in June 2012, Sheriff, that Judge
Snow's brother-in-law worked at Covington & Burling?
A. It may have -- I didn't pay much attention to it, but let
me just say this. My advice of my lawyer that we would not
oppose this.
Q. The Arizona Republic story quotes you as saying, quote, I'm
confident in this judge and the judicial system, and I'm not
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
46/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
09:5
09:5
09:5
09:5
09:5
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2052
asking for the judge to be removed from this case.
Was that an accurate quotation?
A. On advice of my lawyer, yes.
Q. Now, you testified in the trial that happened in this case
following that story. The trial was in July and early August
2012, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. There was evidence presented on both sides, right?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Then the judge made a decision in May 2013 that your
office violated the Constitution, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Then in October -- specifically October 2, 2013 -- Judge
Snow issued a supplemental injunction where he decided he was
going to require certain changes in your office, and that would
include appointment of a monitor to oversee those changes.
Do you recall that?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, that same month you, for the first time, heard about
Dennis Montgomery, correct?
A. I believe so.
Q. You had a meeting with Timothy Blixseth, Mike Zullo,
Detective Mackiewicz, where you talked about Mr. Montgomery,
who was someone who used to work for a federal intelligence
agency, correct?
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
47/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10:0
10:0
10:0
10:0
10:0
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2053
A. I'm not sure as to the date, but I believe we did meet.
Q. Okay. Let's take a look at Exhibit 2858.
THE COURT: Was that 2858?
MR. YOUNG: Yes.
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. And I'll tell you, Sheriff, this is a -- has a cover sheet
that indicates it's your office's response to July 22, 2015
monitor document request related to ITR 25.
Do you have Exhibit 2858 in front of you, Sheriff?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And if you look at the third page, MELC662425, do
you see a document with your signature on it?
A. Do I have the right -- is it 2858?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes.
Q. That is your signature on that page?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Is this your office's response to the monitor's
requests for documents, identifying dates, times, et cetera --
and I'm paraphrasing the first page -- relating to the Seattle
investigation?
A. Yes.
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, I'd move for the admission of
2858.
MR. MASTERSON: Well, if he's moving in that one page
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
48/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10:0
10:0
10:0
10:0
10:0
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2054
that the sheriff signed, I have no objection; if it's the rest
of the document, foundation.
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, the -- would you like argument
on that?
THE COURT: Well, I guess I'd like argument, but I
don't have the exhibit in front of me, so I don't know how many
other pages there are, and I don't see that exhibit here in my
box.
MR. YOUNG: Let me try to get that for Your Honor.
(Pause in proceedings.)
MR. YOUNG: (Handing).
Your Honor, the sheriff has identified this document,
Exhibit 2858, as his office's response to the monitor's request
for information relating to dates, times, et cetera, of
meetings relating to the Seattle investigation, and I think
there's foundation for that in that testimony.
THE COURT: Let me go back and see what his -- what
your question and his actual testimony was.
MR. MASTERSON: Judge, I want to point out that you'll
note once you get down to I believe page 8 or 9, that we're
seeing different signature lines from different people that are
not this witness.
MR. YOUNG: That's true, but the sheriff is able to
specify that his office responded --
THE COURT: Do you know what, gentlemen? From now on,
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
49/195
F R I E N D
O F T
H E F O G
B O W . C
M12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10:0
10:0
10:0
10:0
10:0
Arpaio - DX Young, 10/1/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2055
I'm going to strictly enforce my rule about one- or two-word
objections. If you really feel like you need to expound, then
we'll do it at sidebar, which I hate to do. And the
congregation over there is as big as the rest of the crowd so
we might as well do it in open -- but I'm not going to do it in
open court.
So I'm going to look and see what the sheriff's
testimony was. Please give me a minute.
(Pause in proceedings.)
THE COURT: The exhibit is admitted.
(Exhibit No. 2858 is admitted into evidence.)
THE CLERK: That's 2858?
THE COURT: 2858 is admitted.
BY MR. YOUNG:
Q. Sheriff, if you look at the page with the last three digits
on the bottom right, 430 --
A. Yes.
Q. -- you'll see something that has a date of October 18,
2013, at 8:30 a.m. Do you see that?
A. Yes.
Q. And actually, up at the top, Amy Lake, does she maintain
your calendar in Outlook?
A. Yes.
Q. The note says that you had an interview with Brian
Mackiewicz here in your office. Do you see that?
-
8/20/2019 Melendres v. Arpaio #1455 Oct 1 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 9 Evidentiary Hearing
50/195
F R I E N D
O F T