EJ Montini

The Republic | azcentral.com

Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery says it would be "amateur analysis" and "extremely shortsighted" for anyone to question his decision to not file criminal charges against Maricopa County Sheriff's deputy Sean Pearce over the vehicular death of Glendale resident John Harding.

Pearce was speeding in an unmarked car and t-boned Harding's vehicle. Montgomery says that there may have been an obstructed view for both drivers and, also, Pearce was answering a call for assistance in an arrest of a possible homicide suspect.

So, no charges.

And if any of us even DARES to wonder if there might have been just a teeny, tiny bit of politics involved in Montgomery's decision, we are engaging in "amateur analysis" and being "extremely shortsighted."

After all, Montgomery is a champion of ethics.

It is Montgomery, after all, who lately has been demanding that Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne resign over what Montgomery calls the "disgrace" Horne has brought to the office and his "lack of competence in his ability to lead an organization of that size, let alone a law-enforcement agency." The county attorney believes that elected officials should do and say more to hold other elected officials to account.

Then again, Montgomery is backing Horne's opponent in the primary election. He also is close to gubernatorial candidate Doug Ducey, even answering Ducey's call to see if crimes were committed in the recent immigration crisis with border-crossing children. Was that concern or politics? Citizens are still allowed to ask questions of politicians, aren't they?

Why shouldn't amateurs wonder about Montgomery's decision not to charge Deputy Pearce?

They might point out, for example, that in running for country attorney Montgomery sought and received some heavy-duty endorsements.

For instance, he was endorsed by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

And he was endorsed by then-State Sen. Russell Pearce, the author of SB 1070 and the father of Deputy Pearce.

Montgomery supported enforcing 1070, telling The Arizona Republic, "I thought it would an abuse of someone's official position to enter into an agreement to refuse to enforce valid Arizona law."

And in the end it wasn't Montgomery but a Department of Justice lawsuit and an order from U.S. District Judge Murray Snow that finally stopped Arpaio's discriminatory immigration-enforcement efforts, which were built around Pearce's law.

Now, the son of one of Montgomery's most important political benefactors, Pearce, who also happens to be an employee of another of Montgomery's most important political benefactors, Arpaio, t-bone's an innocent man's car and kills him while speeding in an unmarked sheriff's vehicle that was not equipped with lights or a siren. And Montgomery announces there will be no charges filed.

And he says that anyone who questions that decision is engaging in "amateur analysis" and being "extremely shortsighted."

But if he really wanted to eliminate any questions why not hand off the investigation to another county attorney?

Appearances matter in politics.

Then again, what do I know?

If I were accused of being a short-sighted amateur I'd have to plead guilty. Angry readers (and politicians) have called me an amateur my entire professional career. And as a person who requires contact lenses and eyeglasses, I'd admit that I have considerable vision problems.

But I'm not blind.