Arpaio's lawyers object to judge's questioning

Megan Cassidy | The Arizona Republic

PHOENIX — Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio was apparently as shocked as the rest of the courtroom last week when U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow began examining him, under oath, about an investigation into Snow's wife.

Arpaio's defense attorneys are now objecting to the surprise trajectory of questioning, calling the process "unorthodox," and asking for time to review related documents Snow ordered to be turned over immediately.

Arpaio and his top aides took the stand last week during civil-contempt proceedings, in which they are accused of defying Snow's orders stemming from a racial-profiling suit.

On Thursday, Arpaio's testimony took a dramatic turn when Snow handed the sheriff an article from the Phoenix New Times, which alleged shadowy investigations into federal officials, including Snow.

Arpaio reluctantly admitted to two investigations: one involving allegations that the Department of Justice was tapping emails (including those of Arpaio and Snow), and another that centered on Snow's wife.

Arpaio said he received a message from a tipster who claimed to have seen Snow's wife at a restaurant, and that Snow's wife said the judge "wanted to do everything to make sure (Arpaio is) 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 then ordered that all records into these investigations, including electronic data, funding, phone records, emails and reports be immediately placed on hold and handed over to a court-appointed monitor.

On Tuesday, defense attorney Michele Iafrate filed an objection that challenged the court's line of questioning.

Iafrate's motion states that Arpaio was entitled notice regarding these allegations to be able to prepare his answers.

"Here, although Defendant Arpaio testified that he previously read the article … the Court nor any other party previously provided it to Defendants nor gave notice that Defendant Arpaio would be questioned about it," the objection reads. "It was not identified as an exhibit."

Iafrate is asking that the defense team have the opportunity to review more than 3,300 pages of related documents that were to be turned over to the monitor, to scan for potentially privileged information.

Contempt proceedings are scheduled to resume in June.