Arpaio: PI hired to investigate judge's wife

In a bombshell diversion from his contempt-of-court proceedings, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio testified under oath Thursday that his attorneys had hired a private agent to investigate the wife of the federal judge who ruled that the Sheriff's Office had engaged in racial profiling.

The revelation was the result of direct questioning by U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow himself, who issued a landmark ruling in 2013 that Arpaio's office had profiled Latinos while conducting illegal-immigration operations.

Thursday was Arpaio's second day on the stand for the civil-contempt proceedings, where he and top aides are facing three broad allegations of defying Snow's orders stemming from the discrimination suit.

But the hearing took a dramatic turn after defense and plaintiffs' attorneys finished their examinations, and Snow announced he had some questions of his own.

After questioning Arpaio on the contempt and immigration matters, Snow shifted his focus to some of the sheriff's more-unorthodox operations, namely involving the sheriff's investigations into public officials. Snow based his questions on allegations cited in a June Phoenix New Times article, and provided a copy for Arpaio to read on the stand.

Snow launched into his interrogation after noting concerns with Arpaio's decision to transfer a commander from a unit dedicated to clandestine operations into a unit that ensures deputies behave ethically.

The implications of Snow's questioning were not immediately clear, but testimony offered a murky glimpse into some of the Sheriff's Office's alleged secret pet projects, with Arpaio conceding that the agency employed unreliable informants, private investigators and an unknown amount of public funds to investigate Arpaio's political enemies.

Arpaio carefully skirted Snow's line of questioning at the beginning, and only under intense scrutiny provided details of the covert mission.

Arpaio said he had come into the possession of an e-mail from a tipster who claimed to have met Snow's wife at a restaurant, and that Snow's wife said the judge "wanted to do everything to make sure I'm not elected."

Arpaio said his counsel then hired a private investigator to look into the matter.

"Results confirmed that your wife was in that restaurant," Arpaio told Snow. "I guess (the investigator) talked to the witness, confirmed that that remark was made."

Snow additionally questioned Arpaio about a second investigation also related to Snow. Arpaio acknowledged that some time in 2013, county funds were used to conduct investigations into the Department of Justice, which is leading an ongoing racial-profiling lawsuit against the Sheriff's Office.

Arpaio said an informant had indicated that the DOJ had been penetrating Arpaio's e-mails as well as those of local attorneys and judges. Arpaio indicated that Snow was one of the judges but said he later conceded that his informant was unreliable.

But Mel McDonald, a former U.S. attorney who will represent Arpaio should the current civil-contempt case be referred for criminal proceedings, said the full story has not yet been told.

"There's been no evidence that the sheriff ordered the judge's wife to be investigated," he told reporters after Thursday's hearing. McDonald told reporters to show up today to hear testimony from Chief Deputy Jerry Sheridan.

History of political targets

It's not the first time Arpaio has apparently flexed his investigative muscle to target a political enemy.

During the 2004 race for sheriff, Arpaio's office opened a rape investigation into his opponent, Dan Saban, stemming from a 1970s-era allegation.

Perhaps the most notorious demonstration of this practice came between 2008 and 2009, when Arpaio and then-Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas launched a series of government "corruption" investigations, and filed indictments against former county Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe and others.

But the charges later crumbled when it became clear that there was no real basis for the allegations and no federal statutes specifically authorized Arpaio and Thomas' actions.

The investigative tactics that detectives used in probing allegations against county officials prompted a U.S. Department of Justice criminal abuse-of-power investigation into the Sheriff's Office.

Thomas was eventually disbarred, but no federal criminal charges were filed against him or Arpaio. The decision not to prosecute Arpaio was widely considered to be based more on the difficulty of securing a conviction rather than a testament of the agency's innocence.

It's also not the first time the Sheriff's Office has fixed its energies on a presiding judge's family.

The first judge on the initial racial-profiling case, U.S. District Judge Mary Murguia, recused herself in 2009 after the Sheriff's Office complained about statements that her twin sister, Janet, had made in her role as leader of a national Latino rights group. Snow took over the case soon after.

On Thursday, Arpaio did not explicitly name the "counsel" who he said hired the private investigator but indicated it may have been his former defense attorney on the racial-profiling case, Tim Casey.

When asked about the implication, Casey's attorney Karen Clark said that Casey has ongoing ethical obligations to his former clients in the Sheriff's Office that limit his ability to respond.

However, she said, "He is confident that when the evidence the (court ordered) monitor is gathering is reviewed, it will reveal that he was never involved in an investigation of Judge Snow or his family."

When asked whether the Maricopa County Attorney's Office had knowledge of investigations Arpaio mentioned Thursday, county attorney spokesman Jerry Cobb issued the following response:

"We do not comment on whether there is an investigation, particularly where nothing has been presented to our office to take any action."

Implications for the case

Legal experts agree that it's not immediately clear what the day's revelations mean for the contempt proceedings, the racial-profiling case as a whole or Snow's status as the presiding judge.

"It is contemptuous behavior on its face," said Paul Charlton, former U.S. Attorney now in private practice. "And it is information deserving of further investigation to determine if other criminal misconduct occurred here."

Charlton said Arpaio's investigation could prompt the DOJ to reopen the earlier criminal abuse-of-power probe.

Jean-Jacques Cabou, a Phoenix-based attorney who has worked with the American Civil Liberties Union on local civil-rights cases, said the public should be concerned about the agency's covert operations.

"The revelation that Sheriff Arpaio, based simply on comments allegedly made in a restaurant, directed an investigation into the family of the federal judge presiding over the racial profiling case involving MCSO is simply frightening," he said by e-mail.

Dan Pochoda, one of the lead plaintiffs' attorneys of ACLU of Arizona, said he believes that, for now, Arpaio's admissions will have little impact on the current contempt case.

The tie-in, Pochoda said, will likely become clearer today when Sheridan takes the stand. It was reportedly Sheridan who transferred the commander into the professional standards bureau.

Quotable:

"Are you aware of anybody who has investigated any of my family members," Snow asked Arpaio.

The federal judge did not flinch when Arpaio confirmed the probe.

What's next:

Snow appeared to be done with his line of questioning of Arpaio when the hearing broke for lunch. Arpaio's attorneys will likely have an opportunity to question the sheriff early Thursday afternoon.