Tweet
Arpaio felt that testifying in GA was too much of a “burden”. Refused to appear
Defend Our Freedoms Foundation
Orly Taitz, Esq.
1/27/2012
Excerpt:
"There was a lot of talk about sheriff Arpaio. WND was promoting him and his investigation and seeking donations for him and his posse. Keep in mind: even if a sheriff comes up with a report, suggesting a need for prosecution, it is up to a District Attorney, whether to file charges and further it is up to the judge, whether to hear the case on the merits or throw it out of court on technicality.
GA was a golden opportunity for Arpaio to testify, to provide his report. It gave him an opportunity to skip the step of DA or AG, who may or may not cooperate and be in front of the judge, who is willing to listen and hear the case on the merits. Arpaio blew this opportunity. I did not want to say anything before the trial, I did not want to upset people, but bottom line Arpaio simply blew it. Keep in mind, an attorney does not have to issue subpoenas. You issue subpoenas only when you are not sure the witness will appear and testify. I sent Arpaio a subpoena. I called WND and related to their political editor Bob Unruh, that I finally have one judge willing to listen. I related, that Corsi or Farah want to testify -here is an opportunity. I also sent an e-mail to this extent. I also explained that I sent a subpoena to Arpaio just as a cover for him, it would give him an opportunity to state, that he is not going after Obama because he wants to, but because he is complying with the subpoena. Below is a letter from Arpaio’s attorney, saying that Arpaio will not cooperate. He gave 2 reasons: it is too much of a “burden” on him and the hearing is in GA and he is in AZ. I could go to a circuit judge in AZ and extend the jurisdiction to AZ and seek reciprocal enforcement, however I concluded, that it will be a waste of my time and money.
Arpaio’s unwillingness to testify tells me that:
a. he does not have any new evidence aside from what I provided him
b. I question how serious he is about removing Obama from office. If he really was serious about it, he would have appeared and testified and he would have taken a full advantage of this rare opportunity to be in front of a judge immediately and present his story.
I believe, that at some point Arpaio will come up with a report, but I question whether it would lead to anything.
Similarly, I contacted a talk show host Mark Gillar. He had several investigators on his show: Mara DeBest, Tom Harrigan. I contacted all of them. I was telling Mark Gillar, that all of these investigators are totally worthless, in that, if they are not willing to appear in court and testify and put their money where their mouth is, their opinion is of no value.
It is easy to be a couch warrior or a keyboard warrior. It is hard to be on the front line, take bullets, roll with the punches, take enormous abuse from right and left, risk one’s license, risk sanctions from corrupt judges, risk one’s life.
Lastly, here is an explanation, why I did not need to get a subpoena enforcement in DC against Obama, but was seeking reciprocal enforcement against Fuddy. The difference is because Obama is a defendant, he availed himself to the jurisdiction of GA by placing his name on the ballot in GA and he consented to be served through his attorney, who is located in GA. So, by serving Obama through his attorney in GA, I made the subpoena against him instantaneously valid, I did not need to seek any reciprocal subpoena enforcement in DC. The judge agreemed with me on that point.
At any rate, the public is entitled to know, that Arpaio refused to cooperate, even though I did not even need a subpoena for a cooperating witness, and Arpaio could be in front of a judge immediately and he could present all his evidence immediately."
Farrar v. Obama – Subpoena of Sheriff Joe Arpaio
Reply |Vigil Joseph vigilj@mcao.maricopa.gov to me
Jan 23
"Ms. Taitz, Attached hereto is a letter regarding the subpoena you sent to Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Should you care to discuss this matter further, please feel free to give me a call. Sincerely, Joseph I. VigilMARICOPA COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICECIVIL SERVICES DIVISION222 North Central Ave., Suite 1100Phoenix, Arizona 85004(602) 506-8541 ...........................
View the complete post at:
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=30858
Defend Our Freedoms Foundation
Orly Taitz, Esq.
1/27/2012
Excerpt:
"There was a lot of talk about sheriff Arpaio. WND was promoting him and his investigation and seeking donations for him and his posse. Keep in mind: even if a sheriff comes up with a report, suggesting a need for prosecution, it is up to a District Attorney, whether to file charges and further it is up to the judge, whether to hear the case on the merits or throw it out of court on technicality.
GA was a golden opportunity for Arpaio to testify, to provide his report. It gave him an opportunity to skip the step of DA or AG, who may or may not cooperate and be in front of the judge, who is willing to listen and hear the case on the merits. Arpaio blew this opportunity. I did not want to say anything before the trial, I did not want to upset people, but bottom line Arpaio simply blew it. Keep in mind, an attorney does not have to issue subpoenas. You issue subpoenas only when you are not sure the witness will appear and testify. I sent Arpaio a subpoena. I called WND and related to their political editor Bob Unruh, that I finally have one judge willing to listen. I related, that Corsi or Farah want to testify -here is an opportunity. I also sent an e-mail to this extent. I also explained that I sent a subpoena to Arpaio just as a cover for him, it would give him an opportunity to state, that he is not going after Obama because he wants to, but because he is complying with the subpoena. Below is a letter from Arpaio’s attorney, saying that Arpaio will not cooperate. He gave 2 reasons: it is too much of a “burden” on him and the hearing is in GA and he is in AZ. I could go to a circuit judge in AZ and extend the jurisdiction to AZ and seek reciprocal enforcement, however I concluded, that it will be a waste of my time and money.
Arpaio’s unwillingness to testify tells me that:
a. he does not have any new evidence aside from what I provided him
b. I question how serious he is about removing Obama from office. If he really was serious about it, he would have appeared and testified and he would have taken a full advantage of this rare opportunity to be in front of a judge immediately and present his story.
I believe, that at some point Arpaio will come up with a report, but I question whether it would lead to anything.
Similarly, I contacted a talk show host Mark Gillar. He had several investigators on his show: Mara DeBest, Tom Harrigan. I contacted all of them. I was telling Mark Gillar, that all of these investigators are totally worthless, in that, if they are not willing to appear in court and testify and put their money where their mouth is, their opinion is of no value.
It is easy to be a couch warrior or a keyboard warrior. It is hard to be on the front line, take bullets, roll with the punches, take enormous abuse from right and left, risk one’s license, risk sanctions from corrupt judges, risk one’s life.
Lastly, here is an explanation, why I did not need to get a subpoena enforcement in DC against Obama, but was seeking reciprocal enforcement against Fuddy. The difference is because Obama is a defendant, he availed himself to the jurisdiction of GA by placing his name on the ballot in GA and he consented to be served through his attorney, who is located in GA. So, by serving Obama through his attorney in GA, I made the subpoena against him instantaneously valid, I did not need to seek any reciprocal subpoena enforcement in DC. The judge agreemed with me on that point.
At any rate, the public is entitled to know, that Arpaio refused to cooperate, even though I did not even need a subpoena for a cooperating witness, and Arpaio could be in front of a judge immediately and he could present all his evidence immediately."
Farrar v. Obama – Subpoena of Sheriff Joe Arpaio
Reply |Vigil Joseph vigilj@mcao.maricopa.gov to me
Jan 23
"Ms. Taitz, Attached hereto is a letter regarding the subpoena you sent to Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Should you care to discuss this matter further, please feel free to give me a call. Sincerely, Joseph I. VigilMARICOPA COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICECIVIL SERVICES DIVISION222 North Central Ave., Suite 1100Phoenix, Arizona 85004(602) 506-8541 ...........................
View the complete post at:
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=30858