Arpaio's contempt could mean payout for profiled victims

A federal lawsuit that has already cost Maricopa County Sheriff's Office millions in a court-imposed policy overhaul may soon lead to payouts for victims of racially motivated policing.

In the nearly two years since a federal judge found that Maricopa County Sheriff's deputies routinely discriminated against Latinos during immigration-enforcement efforts, the agency has been forced to spend $30 million in an attempt to end the unconstitutional practices.

The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow was the result of a successful class-action lawsuit leveled against Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The plaintiffs did not ask for monetary damages, but called for big-ticket remedies, including a court-appointed monitor and recording devices for deputies.

Snow has indicated there may be more expenses to come should the six-term sheriff be found in contempt of the court. Snow has repeatedly blasted the agency's brass for defying his orders and this month followed through on his threat to order a civil contempt hearing, currently slated for April 21-24.

During a hearing last week, Snow and attorneys discussed the possibility of establishing a compensation fund for people who were unlawfully detained by deputies after the judge explicitly barred them from doing so in an earlier 2011 ruling.

"We know there was a significant amount of them, that they were picked up after the preliminary injunction or held longer ... and that would be a violation of the order," said plaintiffs' attorney Dan Pochoda with the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona. "The problem we have is being able to identify any of those people."

Lawsuit fines are paid out by the county's insurance policy, which is funded by taxpayers.

Defying an order

On Dec. 23, 2011, months before the civil-rights trial began, Snow issued a preliminary injunction that precluded deputies from detaining any person "only on knowledge or reasonable belief, without more, that the person is unlawfully present within the United States."

But Snow said it's recently become apparent to him that his order did little to thwart the practice.

After a former deputy committed suicide last May, investigators unearthed a stash of stolen ID cards and license plates, as well as evidence that the deputy, Ramon "Charley" Armendariz, had been recording many of his traffic stops.

RELATED: 18 crime stories that shocked Arizona in 2014

The revelation prompted the discovery of thousands more recordings that revealed the immigration-enforcement agenda persisted months after the order.

Sheriff's officials have corroborated this evidence, as Snow points out in his recent contempt hearing directive.

"[T]he Armendariz videotapes resulted in administrative interviews with MCSO personnel that have apparently revealed that Defendants, as a matter of regular practice and operation, continued actively enforcing federal immigration law by conducting immigration interdiction operations, and detaining persons after officers concluded that there was not criminal law basis for such detention," he wrote.

Sheriff's officials do not deny this allegation, defense attorney Tom Liddy said.

"It was the MCSO that discovered it and reported it to the monitor and to the court immediately," he said in a phone interview Friday.

Snow has outlined the sheriff's defiance as one of the three broad topics for the contempt hearings.

Sheriff's officials will also have to answer why they did not disclose all relevant information during pre-trial proceedings, and why Arpaio's aides failed to properly follow Snow's May order to quietly collect audio and video-recording devices from deputies.

Payout for victims?

At a Thursday hearing, Snow asked attorneys whether compensation issues stemming from the preliminary injunction would warrant a separate class-action damage case against the county.

Plaintiff's attorney Cecillia Wang from the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project mentioned the possibility of a compensation fund for victims, to be paid out by the defendants. Wang said she believed it would be more efficient to keep the possibility within the confines of Snow's court.

There's a compensation aspect to any contempt finding, Pochoda explained Friday. What makes this case problematic is the unknown number of victims and the inherent difficulties in locating someone outside U.S. borders.

One of the popular mechanisms for dealing with those kinds of issues is a compensation fund — essentially a pot of money that can be tapped for years after a settlement, as victims come forward. Similar methods have been used after natural and human disasters like the 2010 BP oil spill and the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Pochoda said.

There is no exact formula for identifying victims.

Some may present documents that they were detained and had criminal charges dropped or never filed; some may report that they were brought by deputies to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Pochoda said plaintiffs' attorneys have issued a number of records and discovery requests to the Sheriff's Office to try to identify victims who were detained from the day after the preliminary injunction and on.

Liddy said locating the victims is a "high priority for the sheriff," as well.

"He has directed MCSO personnel to do that," he said.

On Thursday, as Snow mulled over the possibility of a settlement rather than contempt hearing, the judge indicated that victim compensation would be a key element to any final determination.

Snow said his ultimate goal was to ensure compliance from the defendants in the future, and has often wondered aloud whether civil-contempt remedies will be sufficient. A criminal-contempt hearing, he has often said, may be more appropriate.

However, he said Thursday, "I don't want to refer this matter to criminal-contempt hearing if I can have adequate remedies for the victims in this case."