There's already a top-of-the-page recommended diary by AnnetteK about this story, which broke this Friday afternoon in Phoenix, Arizona. Of all the stupid, illegal crapola and utter assholelyness that Sheriff Arpaio has foisted on [mostly brown] people, the arrests of two longtime journalists in their homes at night was a tipping point of sorts. Unlike all the poor and voiceless people he's rounded up in their homes and at their jobs, this time his victims had money, connections, and a big megaphone—not to mention friends in the media, who until then had mostly kissed Arpaio's rump.
The Lacey-Larkin story has been buzzing around for more than six years now, and today, reports New Times, it came to a head:
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors this afternoon voted unanimously to approve a $3.75 million settlement for New Times' co-founders, whose false arrests in 2007 were orchestrated by Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin were taken from their homes in the middle of the night and jailed on misdemeanor charges alleging that they violated the secrecy of a grand jury — which turned out never to have been convened.
That brings the total that Sheriff Arpaio has cost taxpayers of Maricopa County to about eleventy billion dollars, but no matter, I am happy to shell out my share to the old fart's victims. It's a long list, longer than any other sheriff's in the country. By a long shot. This episode is especially Arpaio-y, given that it's
spitefulness at the story's center—a particularly recognizable Arpaio character trait.
Please read below the fold for the recap.
New Times publishes a story in 2004 by John Daugherty that questions the sources of Joe Arpaio's wealth; the story, "Sheriff Joe's Real Estate Game," includes the Sheriff's home address:
I'm very interested in old man Joe's extensive real estate holdings. Especially after I discovered he's got $690,000 in cold, hard cash invested in two small commercial properties in Scottsdale and Fountain Hills.
County Attorney Andrew Thomas and his tag-team partner Sheriff Joe Arpaio
file charges against
New Times.
After Andrew Thomas took office as Maricopa County Attorney, Arpaio requested request charges against New Times for revealing his home address, based on an arcane state statute that bars publishing such information on the Internet if there's a "timely threat" to an officer of the law.
Two counties consider the case bogus (Arpaio's address was available elsewhere online, including government websites) and refuse to prosecute. Thomas-Arpaio Inc. hire a special prosecutor to go after
New Times. In 2007, the prosecutor issues a subpoena that includes
this giant hunk of gonad:
He issued grand jury subpoenas for the notes, records, and sources of the paper's reporters and editors for all Arpaio-related stories over a broad period of time, as well as for the IP addresses of New Times' readers of such stories.
And it goes beyond that:
The grand jury subpoena also demands website profiles of anyone and everyone who visited New Times online over the past two and a half years, not merely readers who viewed articles on the sheriff.
Lacey and Larkin respond to the subpoena with this entertaining read:
"Breathtaking Abuse of the Constitution."
This is hardly the first time — even if the scope here is breathtaking — that law enforcement attempted to use a grand jury to get at the confidential records of reporters or editors. But the contemptuousness of this troika of ambitious politicos is reflected in their attempt to target the readers of New Times.
Arpaio's
goons arrest Lacey and Larkin the night after "A Breathtaking Abuse of the Constitution" appears in October 2007—supposedly for revealing the contents of a grand jury that had not occurred. Media coverage and public outcry lead to the prosecutor's dismissal and a bunch of backtracking and CYA. After the
courts give the go ahead in 2012, Lacey and Larkin sue those involved for false arrest, including Arpaio, who tries but fails to get his name removed from the lawsuit.
Can you believe this bullshit? This demented, flaccid creep wanted the email identification signatures of everyone who visited the New Times website, where there have been a lot of Arpaio stories. Lacey and Larkin were two of the founders of New Times in 1970, one of the original alternative voices in the Valley. Now part of Village Voice, a national mouthpiece, New Times has been a thorn in the Sheriff's backside since he was elected in 1992. So in 2004 when Daugherty's article appeared, Arpaio thought he had his Pearl Harbor. It didn't work out that way.
They had such high hopes. For a few years there, Thomas and Arpaio were the Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum of law enforcement in central Arizona—Thomas giving the gasbag lawman legal cover for his immigration raids and other discriminatory bullshit, which of course has been proven discriminatory ...
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio relied on racial profiling and illegal detentions to target Latinos, a federal district court said today. The ruling comes following a three-week trial in July and August over a pattern of unlawful practices by Arpaio and the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office on immigration sweeps and traffic stops.
... and Arpaio playing the bombastic showman for hate, whenever possible, in front of the TV cameras. He's Bull Connor with a website. And a fan base. Which won't change much after today's ruling. They already hate
New Times and love the sheriff, so in their alleged minds this is just another example of the liberal media's (and the courts') persecution of Joe Arpaio. And if these "fiscal conservatives" weren't persuaded to dump the sheriff after he cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars in lawsuits and
misspent funds, the $3.75 million won't make a difference.
Andrew Thomas ran for AG in 2010, was defeated in the GOP primary, and eventually was disbarred for his part in the Age of Arpaio. The 81-year-old sheriff, who's already said he'll run again at 84, has had his racist wings clipped somewhat, but not enough. Now he's doing community meetings, by court order; only his spokespeople are having a hard time explaining how his new "crime suppression operations" are different from the old immigration sweeps.
The cockroach of law enforcement—while everyone else around him is disbarred, recalled, defeated or convicted, he soldiers on.