Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Confidential Informant Files Motions To Intervene; Disqualify Judge From Arpaio Case

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Confidential Informant Files Motions To Intervene; Disqualify Judge From Arpaio Case

    Breaking: Confidential Informant Files Motions To Intervene; Disqualify Judge From Arpaio Case

    Birther Report

    5/7/2015

    Excerpts:

    Breaking: Confidential Informant Files Motions to Intervene, Disqualify Judge From Arpaio Case
    MAINSTREAM MEDIA FAILS TO REPORT FISA JUDGE’S CONFIRMATION OF CODES SUPPLIED BY FORMER CIA CONTRACTOR DENNIS MONTGOMERY
    by Sharon Rondeau


    (May 7, 2015) — A KPTV article dated April 25, 2015 describing the events of the fourth day of a civil contempt hearing against Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio and Maricopa County claimed that “none” of the information provided by a confirmed former CIA contractor, Dennis Montgomery, to Arpaio and his staff in regard to CIA surveillance “was found to be credible.”

    However, the official court transcripts present the facts differently as testifed to by Maricopa County Deputy Chief Gerard (Jerry) Sheridan.

    The trial opened on April 21 as a result of a contempt charge leveled by U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow claiming that Arpaio defied a December 23, 2011 preliminary injunction to cease stopping individuals solely on the suspicion that they might be illegal aliens.

    The underlying lawsuit, Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres, et. al., vs. Joseph M. Arpaio, et. al., resulted in the appointment of a federal “Community Liaison Officer” to ensure Arpaio’s cooperation with Snow’s order to uphold the “constitutional rights of the Plaintiff’s class.” Melendres and four other plaintiffs claimed that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office had discriminated against them and all Latinos in actions amounting to “racial profiling.”

    In March, Arpaio and Deputy Sheriff Jerry Sheridan accepted responsibility for having “violated the Court’s orders” in a brief submitted by counsel proposing that compensation be paid to anyone harmed by their actions and that the April 21 trial be canceled. Rather than going to trial, Arpaio’s attorneys suggested that an agreement could be reached among the community liaison officer, court-appointed monitor Robert Warshaw, and counsel for plaintiffs and defendants.

    In a footnote on page 4 of the brief, the defendants’ attorneys supported their position by quoting Snow’s February status conference statement of “I don’t want to refer this matter to a criminal contempt hearing if I can have adequate assurance—if I can have adequate remedies for the victims of this case; if I can have, if I believe it is necessary, a punitive element to the individuals who may have been culpable of criminal contemptuous behavior such that it will not happen again.”

    However, Snow did not cancel the contempt hearings, which, following four days of testimony from April 21-25, is now in recess until June 16.

    In official transcripts of the hearings which The Post & Email has seen, Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph Arpaio told the court during testimony on Thursday, April 23, that a “confidential informant,” Dennis Montgomery, had stated that “someone” had carried out wiretapping and email breaches against “judges,” Arpaio and his attorneys as well as breaching the bank accounts of more than 50,000 Maricopa County residents.

    During questioning of Arpaio, Snow suggested that the party breaching phones and email accounts was the Department of Justice, which Arpaio did not confirm.

    In 2009, NPR conducted an interview of Aram Roston, who wrote an article about Montgomery titled “The Man Who Conned the Pentagon.” On February 19, 2011, New York Times authors Eric Lichtblau and James Risen reported that “For eight years, government officials turned to Dennis Montgomery, a California computer programmer, for eye-popping technology that he said could catch terrorists. Now, federal officials want nothing to do with him and are going to extraordinary lengths to ensure that his dealings with Washington stay secret.”

    Risen is the author of a book entitled, “Pay Any Price: Greed, Power and Endless War” which describes Montgomery as “a failed gambler” who “managed to fool the C.I.A. into believing that he had devised a means for decoding Qaeda messages.”

    In February of this year, Montgomery filed suit against Risen; The New York Times; Risen’s publisher, Houghton Mifflin; and other defendants, claiming “defamation and other tortious conduct.”

    Snow asked Arpaio how Montgomery was compensated for his work. “…as a confidential informant, his fees would have to be paid, or approved, if in fact it was before the transfer of Captain Bailey, his fees would have had to have been approved by Captain Bailey, or any payments to him would have had to have been approved by Captain Bailey?” Snow asked.

    Arpaio responded, “I’m not sure at the time period, Your Honor.”

    Referring to an article in The Phoenix New Times, Snow then said, “Now, the article says that you were personally conducting these investigations and personally aware of them. Were you?” to which Arpaio replied, “Well, on a certain issue I was.”

    “And what issue was that?” Snow queried, to which Arpaio responded, “It was the president’s birth certificate.”

    Snow: Okay. So you were — Mr. Montgomery was doing research into the president’s birth certificate. Did Mr. Montgomery ever tell you — or, well, did you ever use Mr. Montgomery to investigate anything about the Department of Justice?

    Arpaio: I don’t believe that Montgomery was involved in the birth certificate. It was other violations that he was looking into.

    Snow then asked if he or any of his family had been investigated by Arpaio’s office, to which Arpaio replied that his counsel had hired an investigator to look into “some comments that came to our attention.”

    The comments, reportedly made by Snow’s wife, indicated that Snow wanted to see that Arpaio is not re-elected. In January, Arpaio announced that he would seek re-election to a seventh consecutive four-year term.

    In testimony on April 24, Sheridan testified that he had oversight for investigators who worked with Montgomery at his home in Seattle, WA over a period of time.

    Snow: How often did you report to Sheriff Arpaio about what they were doing?

    Sheridan: We got weekly updates, sometimes twice a week.

    Snow: Think he understood what they were doing?

    Sheridan: I would think so, yes.

    Snow: You heard him yesterday say that the DOJ was wiretapping me and other judges, and that that was part of that investigation. You heard that testimony, didn’t you?

    Sheridan: Yes, sir.

    Snow: I didn’t hear you say anything about that. Was that part of the investigation?

    Sheridan: I — it’s my recollection that I don’t believe you were.

    In mainstream news coverage of the testimony relating to Snow’s wife, a WSFA report stated that Arpaio’s assignment of a private investigator to ascertain the veracity of the tip submitted by a member of the community that Snow’s wife had been overheard stating that her husband wanted to see that Arpaio not be re-elected amounted to a “secret investigation” which could result in additional “consequences” because “Federal law prohibits trying to intimidate or inappropriately influence a federal judge.”

    In an article absent proper punctuation and grammar, station KSAZ erroneously contended that Arpaio “even admitted his attorney had the judge’s wife investigated over comments she allegedly made.”

    On April 28, 2012, KPHO erroneously reported the first Cold Case Posse press conference as having occurred on March 1, 2011 and stated that “Both the birth certificate and draft registration are hot-button topics which have been discussed and dissected for several years.”

    Arizona Central reported that “The admission provided the most explosive moment of the trial and Arpaio’s critics with the proof they’ve long sought that the sheriff engages in covert operations that favor his personal and political agendas. Snow did not appear surprised when Arpaio confirmed on Thursday afternoon that the Sheriff’s Office had hired a private detective to investigate comments Snow’s wife allegedly made about her husband’s intentions to ensure Arpaio was not re-elected.”

    In a counterpoint, the article presented Arpaio’s explanation in court as “A private investigator does not just ‘investigate’ but can also conduct research, and researching whether the judge in this case is biased against the Sheriff’s Office would be important because of the level of oversight Snow seeks with his monitor.”

    A separate Arizona Central article characterized the investigation of the veracity of Snow’s wife’s comments as Arpaio having “confirmed the probe” of the judge’s wife. The writer reported that Snow “did not flinch” after Arpaio provided his response. “It’s not the first time Arpaio has apparently flexed his investigative muscle to target a political enemy,” the outlet reported.

    KPTV described Snow’s wife’s reported comments as simply “critical” of the sheriff. The AP reported that it queried the U.S. Attorney and FBI as to whether or not they would “examine” Arpaio’s “investigation of Snow’s wife,” although during testimony, Arpaio stressed that those making the claim about her comments were questioned, not Snow’s wife.
    .................................................. .........

    Source link. © 2015, The Post & Email. All rights reserved. - http://www.thepostemail.com/2015/05/...m-arpaio-case/

    Klayman-Montgomery - Sheriff Arpaio Civil Contempt Case - 5/7/2015 by BirtherReport


    View the complete Birther Report presentation at:

    http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/05...ant-files.html
    Last edited by bsteadman; 05-08-2015, 02:52 PM.
    B. Steadman
Working...
X