Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has not read the book he co-authored in 2008, which includes information on Arpaio's philosophy on America's immigration problem and how to cope with the nation's porous borders.

Arpaio's lack of familiarity with the book, "Joe's Law - America's Toughest Sheriff Takes on Illegal Immigration, Drugs and Everything Else That Threatens America," was among the revelations to emerge from a nine-hour deposition the sheriff gave as part of a racial-profiling lawsuit filed against the Sheriff's Office.

Arpaio's attorney, Tim Casey, said plaintiffs are losing the racial-profiling case so their attorneys are attacking the sheriff.

"I thought Arpaio did very well," Casey said. "He's basically a CEO of a several thousand person organization, and he certainly sets policy. There's not a single thing in there that helps their case."

Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres, Jessica Quitugua Rodriguez, David Rodriguez, Velia Meraz and Manuel Nieto, Jr., all allege in the suit filed in U.S. District Court that deputies searched them without cause or unreasonably detained them between September 2007 and March 2008.

The plaintiffs are represented by David Bodney, who also represents the Republic, among other Valley media organizations. Bodney made the deposition transcript available.

Casey pointed out that attorneys are given broad latitude in deposition to ask questions about anything that might lead to the discovery of more evidence that could be admissible to a case.

Among the other details that emerged during Arpaio's Dec. 16 deposition.

��Arpaio has not read the racial-profiling claim related to the deposition.

��Arpaio has not instituted any training for deputies on racial profiling, and he does not believe any training is necessary.

��Arpaio says he was not well versed on the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, or its counterpart in the Arizona Constitution, which prohibit unreasonable searches and seizures. He says he relies on his legal team to deal with those intricacies.

��Arpaio frequently claims ignorance about the details of Sheriff's Office operations and repeatedly states that reporters misquote him and take what he says out of context in stories for print and television media.Throughout the deposition, Arpaio comes across as a leader who prefers to delegate ample amounts of authority to high-ranking sheriff's officials and media-relations staff members. The bulk of Arpaio's testimony in the deposition involved his public-speaking engagements, appearances in television shows on FOXNews and CNN and quotes related to the sheriff's immigration-enforcement policy Arpaio gave members of the print media.

Bodney refers to statements Arpaio made in those forums in an effort to paint a picture of a sheriff who is often inclined to pursue law-enforcement policies - whether it's forcing inmates to wear pink underwear or making immigration a top priority - with an equal emphasis on how the practices will play out with the voting public as he has in the impact on crime.

"Is it possible that your reason for moving forward on this get-tough (immigration) policy is because it is popular or might become popular?" Bodney asks.

After an objection from Arpaio's attorney about whether the question already was asked, Arpaio responds:

"I could say 'no' with a straight 'no,' but - maybe I should not say this, but I have been sheriff for 17 years. I have been reelected 15 years without the illegal immigration problem, so I don't do this for politics."

Arpaio on Monday called the release of his deposition testimony a public-relations move from the plaintiffs. He said he responded to questions truthfully, but did not elaborate when it was not required.

"In depositions, they'll ask you questions 100 different ways and try to trick you," Arpaio said. "When you have 4,000 employees, and I have a philosophy to delegate, I do know what's going on in general terms. I don't micro-manage."