Melendres v. Arpaio #1465 Sept 25 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 6 Evidentiary Hearing (Amended)

OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
1279
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
2
3
4
5
Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres,

et al.,
Plaintiffs,
6
7
8
vs.
Joseph M. Arpaio, et al.,

Defendants.
9
10
11
12
13
14
(Evidentiary Hearing Day 6, Pages 1279-1487)
17
18
19
DS
AMENDED TRANSCRIPT
Court Reporter:
IEN
22
23
24
FR
25
Phoenix, Arizona
September 25, 2015
9:03 a.m.
BEFORE THE HONORABLE G. MURRAY SNOW
16
21
No. CV 07-2513-PHX-GMS
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
15
20
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Gary Moll
401 W. Washington Street, SPC #38
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 322-7263
Proceedings taken by stenographic court reporter

Transcript prepared by computer-aided transcription
A P P E A R A N C E S
1
2
3
4
5
6
For the Plaintiffs:

American Civil Liberties Union Foundation
Immigrants' Rights Project
By: Cecillia D. Wang, Esq.
39 Drumm Street
San Francisco, California 94111
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation
Immigrants' Rights Project
By: Andre Segura, Esq.
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, New York 10004
7
8
9
American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona

By: Daniel J. Pochoda, Esq.
P.O. Box 17148
10
11
12
Covington & Burling, LLP

By: Lauren E. Pedley, Esq.
1 Front Street, 35th Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
13
14
Covington & Burling, LLP

By: Stanley Young, Esq.
By: Michelle L. Morin, Esq.
333 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 700
Redwood Shores, California 94065
15
16
18
19
20
21
For the Movants Christine Stutz and Thomas P. Liddy:

Broening, Oberg, Woods & Wilson, PC
By: Terrence P. Woods, Esq.
P.O. Box 20527
IEN
22
For the Defendant Maricopa County:

Walker & Peskind, PLLC
By: Richard K. Walker, Esq.
By: Charles W. Jirauch, Esq.
SGA Corporate Center
16100 N. 7th Street, Suite 140
DS
17
23
24
FR
25
1280
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/25/15 Evidentiary Hearing
1
2
3
4
5
6
For the Defendant Joseph M. Arpaio and Maricopa County

Sheriff's Office:
Iafrate & Associates
By: Michele M. Iafrate, Esq.
649 N. 2nd Avenue
Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, PLC
By: A. Melvin McDonald, Jr., Esq.
By: John T. Masterson, Esq.
By: Joseph T. Popolizio, Esq.
2901 N. Central Avenue, Suite 800
7
8
9
10
11
12
For the Intervenor United States of America:

U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division
By: Paul Killebrew, Esq.
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 5th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20530
13
U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division

By: Cynthia Coe, Esq.
601 D. Street NW, #5011
Washington, D.C. 20004
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
For Chief Deputy Gerard Sheridan:

Mitchell Stein Carey, PC
By: Lee D. Stein, Esq.
1 Renaissance Square
2 North Central Avenue, Suite 1900
For Executive Chief Brian Sands:

Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith, LLP
By: Greg S. Como, Esq.
2929 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1700
IEN
22
For Deputy Chief Jack MacIntyre:

Dickinson Wright, PLLC
By: David J. Ouimette, Esq.
1850 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
DS
15
23
24
FR
25
1281
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
1
2
3
4
5
6
Also present:
Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio
Executive Chief Brian Sands
Chief Deputy Gerard Sheridan
Deputy Chief Jack MacIntyre
Lieutenant Joseph Sousa
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
21
IEN
22
DS
19
20
23
24
FR
25
1282
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I N D E X
1
2
Witness:
GERARD SHERIDAN
Direct Examination Continued by Ms. Wang

Cross-Examination by Mr. Masterson
Cross-Examination by Mr. Walker
5
6
7
8
9
No.
2003
11
2065
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2074A
2525
2528
2529
2530
IEN
22
2067
23
24
FR
25
Description
1289
1382
1477
2531
Admitted
Dkt No. 881, Order re discovery dated 2/12/2015 1362
The Briefing Board, Number 15-04 dated

4/17/2015 (MELC225056-MELC225058)
1466
Dkt No. 795, Court Order dated 11/20/2014
1378
DOJ/ARPAIO, 2007-2013 (MELC199549)
1292
E-mail from Beverly Owens-Prindle to Travis

1327
Anglin, Joel Floyd, Brian Stutsman re Refund
of CI Funds dated 3/10/2014 (MELC198446-198447)
Maricopa County Sheriff's Office memo from

1319
Travis Anglin to Kim Seagraves re Investigative
lodging dated 2/2/2014 (MELC187093)
E-mail from Brian Mackiewicz to Sara Bagley re
Investigative trips to Seattle dated 7/22/2014
(MELC198277-198279)
DS
13
Page
E X H I B I T S
10
12
1283
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Maricopa County Sheriff's Office memo from

Travis Anglin to Brian Stutsman re
Investigative purchases dated 1/21/2014
(MELC187111)
1322
1323
Forwarded E-mail from Brian Mackiewicz to Jerry 1333

Sheridan of E-mail from Thomas Drake to Brian
Mackiewicz re a summary of data and information
analysis of information from Dennis Montgomery
dated 11/14/2014 (MELC198093-198095)
P R O C E E D I N G S
1
2
3
4
THE CLERK:
Counsel, please announce your appearance.
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
Good morning.
MR. YOUNG:
Good morning, Your Honor.
10
Covington & Burling.
11
and Lauren Pedley.
12
Cecillia Wang of
Stanley Young,
With me are my colleagues, Michelle Morin
MR. SEGURA:
13
Dan Pochoda, ACLU of Arizona, for
plaintiffs.
MR. KILLEBREW:
Paul Killebrew and Cynthia Coe for the
MR. MASTERSON:
Good Morning, Judge Snow.
John
18
Masterson and Joe Popolizio for Sheriff Arpaio, and with us is
19
Holly McGee.
MR. WALKER:
23
FR
09:04:26
Richard Walker
Mr. Jirauch will be joining us
also momentarily.
24
25
Thank you.
on behalf of Maricopa County.
IEN
22
THE COURT:
DS
21
09:04:12
United States, plaintiff intervenors.
17
20
09:04:01
Andre Segura for the plaintiff.
MR. POCHODA:
15
16
Good morning Your Honor.
09:03:53
the ACLU for plaintiffs.
14
This is CV 07-2513, Melendres, et al.,
v. Arpaio, et al., on for continued evidentiary hearing.
1284
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Liddy.
MR. WOODS:
Terry Woods for nonparties Stutz and

09:04:42
MR. McDONALD:
1
2
THE COURT:
Good morning.
MR. STEIN:
THE COURT:
MR. COMO:
Lee Stein
09:04:49
Good morning.
Greg Como on
behalf of Chief Sands.

THE COURT:
Good morning.
MS. IAFRATE:
10
11
Mel McDonald
specially appearing for Chief Deputy Sheridan.
making a special appearance for Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
1285
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Michele
Iafrate on behalf of Sheriff Arpaio and the unnamed contemnors.

THE COURT:
12
Good morning.
MR. OUIMETTE:
13
David
14
Ouimette, specially appearing for Deputy Chief MacIntyre, who
15
is here.
09:05:07
THE COURT:
16
Good morning.
Mr. Walker, yesterday you said that I hadn't yet
17
18
authorized payment of July invoices for the monitor.
19
done that.
21
MR. WALKER:
Oh, sorry we overlooked that, Your Honor.
THE COURT:
All right, thank you.
I am still
23
reviewing August invoices; I'll probably file that order
24
shortly as well.
FR
25
09:05:19
We'll get it taken care of right away.
IEN
22
I have
It's document 1253.
DS
20
09:04:56
MR. WALKER:
Thank you, Your Honor.
09:05:29
THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
2
3
1286
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I'm informed the parties wanted a sidebar.
Yes, Your Honor.
Plaintiffs request a
sidebar before we resume the testimony of Chief Sheridan.

(Bench conference on the record.)
THE COURT:
All right.
It is, although humorous,
Mr. Stein makes a good point, because this microphone isn't
super good, and so if you're going to speak, I need to have you
come up and talk into this microphone.

MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
10
Sure.
And if you want to gather in so you can
11
hear and whoever's speaking doesn't have to shout, thus
12
defeating the purpose, it would be a good idea.

MS. WANG:
13
because this morning with Chief Sheridan I plan to mention the
15
fact that there is an open Internal Affairs investigation
16
against Brian Mackiewicz.
17
subject matter of that investigation is.
18
questions about it.
19
relating to the investigation.
I have maybe two
I don't intend to refer to any documents
DS
My understanding from the Court's statements on August
11th during a status conference is that the fact that there is
22
that open criminal IA investigation is not under seal.
IEN
09:06:31
I do not plan to specify what the
21
in an abundance of caution I wanted to raise it before I
24
proceed with those questions.
25
THE COURT:
All right.
Any objections?
09:06:48
So just
23
FR
09:06:17
So Your Honor, we're requesting the sidebar
14
20
09:06:02
09:07:07
1287
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
MR. MASTERSON:
No objection, Judge.
And I think we
went over this before, that some of that information's out in
the public, and it doesn't seem like she's going to go further.
May I go talk to the witness briefly so he doesn't say
something?
THE COURT:
09:07:19
Any objection?
MR. MASTERSON:
MS. WANG:
That's fine.
MR. MASTERSON:
MS. WANG:
10
THE COURT:
11
I don't want him to blurt out --
-- any information.
Sure.
That's fine.
All right.
Let me just state on the
12
record I think that the fact that there is an investigation is
13
on the record, and the fact that it is a criminal investigation
14
is also on the record.
MR. MASTERSON:
15
THE COURT:
16
17
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
19
THE COURT:
Yes, sir.
All right.
Before we begin, resume the examination,
23
been talking to you about in terms of admissible exhibits, in
24
terms of witnesses, and descriptions of testimony by all
25
parties?
FR
09:07:43
did we make any progress in terms of the statements that I've
IEN
22
09:07:37
And if you're not going to go any further
(Bench conference concluded.)
DS
21
Right.
than that, I think that's all on the record.
18
20
09:07:25
09:08:46
MS. WANG:
1288
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
No, Your Honor, unfortunately not.
We
understood that the defendants were still looking at our
exhibits and might give us more stipulations on admissibility,
but we have not yet heard back.

MR. MASTERSON:
Maybe we were talking past each other
a little bit.
witnesses to this point to plaintiffs' counsel this morning.
With respect to exhibits, my understanding was that
We did send a list of our at least proposed
sometime before the end of the day we were going to get a list
10
of exhibits that plaintiffs were going to utilize with each
11
witness, and then over the weekend, hopefully, we can get
12
through exhibits for upcoming witnesses and stipulate a lot of
13
those into evidence.
14
list.
THE COURT:
But so far we don't have a narrowed-down
All right.
As long as we know we're still
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
18
Thanks.
I apologize.
I do take notes by typing,
and I understand that when I use this mobile mike you all get
20
to hear my typing, and occasionally my breathing.
21
for that.
22
me know.
IEN
DS
19
I apologize
If it becomes too distracting to anybody, just let
23
Ms. Wang.
24
MS. WANG:
FR
09:09:38
working on it.
17
25
09:09:20
We still got the thousand exhibits.
15
16
09:09:00
09:09:56
1289
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Sheridan - Direct, 9/25/15 Evidentiary Hearing
GERARD SHERIDAN,
1
2
recalled as a witness herein, having been previously sworn, was
examined and testified further as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED
4
5
BY MS. WANG:
Q.
So Chief Sheridan, good morning.
A.
Good morning.
Q.
When we left off yesterday, we were about to split apart an
exhibit into two pieces because you had seen one of them.
09:10:12
Do you have in front of you now Exhibit 2074A?
10
11
A.
I do.
12
Q.
All right.
13
one-page document before, is that correct?
14
A.
That's correct.
15
Q.
All right.
16
it as a representation of information that Dennis Montgomery
17
had provided to the MCSO, is that correct?
18
A.
Yes, ma'am.
19
Q.
All right.
21
23
And you saw it in connection -- well, you saw
MS. WANG:
Your Honor, I'd move the admission of
MR. MASTERSON:
09:11:00
Judge, could I just take a quick look
at what the new version looks like?
24
THE COURT:
25
(Pause in proceedings.)
FR
09:10:48
Exhibit 2074A.
IEN
22
I believe you testified that you have seen this
DS
20
09:10:22
Sure.
09:11:16
MR. MASTERSON:
Judge, I just -- I guess I have a
question for counsel.
of the matter asserted in the document?

MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
It is not.
Then my only objection is foundation.
You want to lay a little foundation,
MS. WANG:
Sure.
BY MS. WANG:
10
Q.
11
document, Exhibit 2074A, during a meeting concerning the
12
so-called Seattle investigation, correct?
13
A.
Okay.
14
Q.
Sure.
15
A.
I have 2074 that has two sheets to it.
16
talking about the top sheet --
17
Q.
18
front of you, we'll get that to you.
19
Exhibit 2074.
20
A.
I do not have 2074A.
21
Q.
I apologize.
Chief Sheridan, you've testified that you were shown this
Can we back up one second?
I assume we're just
09:12:00
DS
It is the first page of
09:12:20
23
THE CLERK:
24
MS. WANG:
25
THE CLERK:
FR
09:11:47
Yes, 2074A, which you should -- if you don't have it in
IEN
22
09:11:37
Ms. Wang?
8
9
Is this being introduced for the truth
MR. MASTERSON:
1290
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I have it.
Okay.
(Handing).
09:12:48
1291
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
BY MS. WANG:
Q.
Do you have it now, sir?
A.
Yes, I do.
Q.
All right.
document in the course of a meeting concerning the so-called
Seattle investigation?
A.
No, ma'am.
Q.
When did you see this before?
A.
I believe Sheriff Arpaio showed me a copy of this in his
So the question was:
Were you shown this
10
office.
11
Q.
Okay.
12
A.
No.
13
Q.
Was it in connection with the so-called Seattle
14
investigation?
15
me withdraw that.
09:13:24
And when was that, do you recall?
Did he mention it was in connection with -- let
09:13:36
Did Sheriff Arpaio inform you that this represented
16
17
information Dennis Montgomery had given him?
18
A.
19
had obtained from Dennis Montgomery.
20
Q.
21
yesterday?
22
A.
This was in reference to information that we, the office,
DS
In connection with the investigation we were discussing
09:13:53
IEN
Yes, ma'am.
23
Q.
24
showed you this document?
25
A.
FR
09:12:59
All right.
And was anyone else present when Sheriff Arpaio
I don't believe so.
09:14:03
1292
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
What did Sheriff Arpaio tell you about the document when he
showed it to you?
A.
I recall, because they were very important to me, and this is
why I recall them, was the wiretaps, the DOJ wiretaps on my
personal cell phone and his cell phone dated September 28,
2009.
little bit excited about it, actually.
Q.
He just showed it to me and pointed out the two items that
MS. WANG:
MR. MASTERSON:
MR. WALKER:
13
MR. COMO:
14
THE COURT:
15
MS. WANG:
17
No objection.
No objection, Your Honor.
No objection.
2074A is admitted.
09:15:11
All right.
Could I ask that it be
published, Your Honor?

THE COURT:
19
BY MS. WANG:
21
Q.
DS
20
Okay, sir.
Yes, it may be published.
09:15:21
Let's highlight the bottom third of the page.
IEN
Do you see where there are mentions of the Melendres
23
case here?
24
A.
Yes, ma'am.
25
Q.
And the judge referenced in the entries for July 17th --
FR
09:14:58
(Exhibit No. 2074A is admitted into evidence.)
16
22
Your Honor, I'd again move that
Exhibit 2074A be admitted.
12
18
That's why I recall seeing this document and being a
All right.
10
11
09:14:30
09:15:32
1293
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
sorry, July 19th, 2012, and October 2nd, 2013, that would refer
to Judge Snow, correct?
Was that your understanding?
MR. MASTERSON:
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
The question is whether --
09:16:02
Overruled.
I'm sorry.
THE WITNESS:
Objection, foundation.
Well, at least the -- the one dated July
19th, 2012, I would assume that that was Judge Snow.
The other
10
October, I -- I don't know.
11
BY MS. WANG:
12
Q.
13
Arpaio other than this one?
14
range.
15
A.
16
don't know if this would have been classified as a class action
17
lawsuit, but when we saw this document, everything on here,
18
this is what led me to start to question Mr. Montgomery,
19
because everything on here's public record.
20
those two wiretap references to the sheriff and my phone,
21
everything could have been found online, in the newspaper, that
22
kind of thing, so...
09:16:21
Do you know of any other class action lawsuits against
I mean in the October 2013 time
Well, we were dealing with the Department of Justice, and I
I mean, other than
DS
IEN
Q.
24
of public record, is that correct?
25
A.
FR
23
09:16:39
09:17:08
Well, the wiretap information would not have been a matter
Right.
I assumed it was made up, to be honest with you.
09:17:27
1294
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Okay.
Montgomery represented that he was obtaining this information
from data he had obtained while a contractor or employee for
the CIA?
A.
No.
Q.
You never heard that from anybody?
A.
No.
Q.
Did anyone ever tell you anything about the source, the
purported source, of Dennis Montgomery's information?

No.
Well, did anyone ever inform you that Dennis
09:17:51
10
A.
I had always assumed, and I think others did, that he
11
just pulled this off the Internet or the news media sources,
12
and he put it together to entice us to pay him some more money.
13
Q.
14
correct?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
Over a hundred thousand dollars?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
And you continued to pay him after you saw this document,
19
isn't that right?
20
A.
Correct.
21
Q.
But you believed that he was just giving you public-source
22
documents?
IEN
DS
Well, you had paid him a significant amount of money,
23
A.
We did.
24
Q.
Even though you kept paying him?
25
A.
We did, because on occasion he would come up with some real
FR
09:18:04
09:18:29
09:18:38
09:18:47
1295
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
information.
Q.
getting that supposed real information?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Where was that?
A.
From the material that he obtained when he was a contractor
with the NSA and CIA.
Q.
have data from the CIA and the NSA?
And did you have an understanding about where he was
09:19:02
So you did have an understanding that he was purporting to
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
And those are federal agencies, right?
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q.
Did you have any concerns that that might be an improper or
14
illegal use of that data from the CIA and the NSA?
15
A.
That's -- that's what we were looking into.
16
Q.
How did you look into that?
17
A.
We're a law enforcement agency.
18
to determine, what information he had.
19
about what he had, and he wouldn't show us, and we were trying
20
to validate what he was telling us and showing us.
21
Q.
22
Dennis Montgomery over the potential illegal use of data from
09:19:26
That's what we were trying
DS
He was very nebulous
09:20:06
IEN
Is it your contention, sir, that you were investigating
23
the CIA and the NSA?
24
A.
25
was a credible source with the information for the 150,000
FR
09:19:40
No.
We were investigating Dennis Montgomery to see if he

09:20:27
1296
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Maricopa County residents' bank accounts that he gave us, that
he sourced us, to see if that was credible; to see if the
federal government was guilty of computer tampering for 150,000
Maricopa County residents.
Q.
Montgomery's representation that he was using data he obtained
from the CIA and the NSA while a contractor for them, did that
representation give rise to a concern on your part that that
was an illegal use of federal agency records?
So let me ask you my question again:
MR. MASTERSON:
10
THE COURT:
11
Foundation, relevance.
BY MS. WANG:
14
Q.
15
illegally using data he obtained from the CIA and the NSA?
16
A.
17
working with their advice -- blessing, I guess, if you call
18
that -- as a law enforcement agency, to figure out what
19
information we had, what crimes we had, and what crimes we were
20
eventually going to deal with.
21
talked many times about if this crosses over into a federal
22
crime -- and I believe I've already told you this -- that we
Did you have a concern that Dennis Montgomery might be
09:21:24
IEN
DS
We were working with the Arizona Attorney General, and
And the sheriff and I had
23
were prepared to turn it over to the FBI.
24
Q.
FR
09:21:16
We didn't know.
13
25
09:20:51
Overruled.
THE WITNESS:
12
Objection.
Did Dennis
Okay.
09:22:03
I think you're still not answering my question.

My question is:
Did you have any reason to be
09:22:23
1297
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
concerned that Dennis Montgomery had committed a crime in using
the CIA data for this purpose?
A.
this information.
Q.
believe your testimony was that you were investigating whether
the federal government had illegally accessed bank records and
other information of Maricopa County residents, is that
correct?
We were concerned that Dennis Montgomery illegally obtained
When you testified here in court on April 24th, 2015, I
10
A.
That's correct.
11
Q.
So your testimony today is adding some new information,
12
that you were looking into the legality of what Dennis
13
Montgomery was doing?
14
A.
No.
we began doing business with Dennis Montgomery and no other
17
reason -- was he came to us with 150,000 Maricopa County
18
residents' bank information and bank account numbers and dates
19
and account amounts, very specific information on 150 residents
20
that he said he obtained while he was working as a contractor
21
with the NSA and the CIA, and that they were making -- they
22
asked him, make him, whatever word you want to use, they
IEN
DS
16
23
contracted with him to do this, and he knew what they were
24
doing was illegal.
FR
25
09:23:06
Don't -- don't confuse the two issues.
It was our belief that -- and this is the reason why
15
09:22:48
And what he did was he made a copy every night before
09:23:19
09:23:58
09:24:23
1298
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
he went home of this data, so some day he could become a
whistle-blower and let the United States, people of the United
States know what they were doing.
came to us with.
This is the story that he
We didn't really care about what Dennis Montgomery,
5
6
whistle-blower, he said he went to even the ACLU for
whistle-blower status, and he tried to get whistle-blower
status and nobody would listen to him.
Sheriff Arpaio with 150,000 Maricopa County residents that
But when he came to
10
their rights had been violated, the sheriff was the one that
11
had finally had the guts to take a chance and take a time --
12
take the time and spend some money to investigate this issue.
13
That's how Dennis Montgomery started.
Montgomery is a questionable character.
16
google him and see, I think it's the Playboy or Penthouse
17
article, the story, the video.
18
were very well aware of all those things.
19
oftentimes not the most savory characteristics on the planet.
20
So we knew that.
21
outcome, if we were able to prove the credibility of Dennis
22
Montgomery, would far outweigh the $250,000 or so money that we
IEN
DS
15
24
FR
25
09:25:12
And as you know the rest of the story, Dennis
14
23
09:24:48
All you have to do is
It's very enlightening.
09:25:34
We
Informants are
We knew that going into this.
But the
09:25:59
were spending on this investigation.

And don't forget the time period, too, that we were
looking into this.
Edward Snowden, I believe is his name, was
09:26:21
1299
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
a huge story across the country.
I think he fled to Russia and
he was making the same type allegations.
doing with Dennis Montgomery.
That's what we were
Now, Dennis Montgomery then, because we start and
4
5
began questioning him, starts coming up with this information
like Exhibit 2074A, because we start telling him, Hey, you need
to come up with something credible here or we're not going to
pay you any more.
He has no source of income.
source of income.
So he is frantic about keeping us on the
10
We're his only
hook, so to speak.
09:27:20
And so he comes up periodically with these things like
11
12
this exhibit that we have before us.
13
information.
14
out to verify some of those bank account records, and we were
15
able to verify that some of that information was accurate; some
16
of it was not.
And he has some credible
As a matter of fact, we sent a team of detectives
reason why we're talking about it here in Judge Snow's court.
19
He comes up with this thing about the DOJ phone call to
20
Judge Snow's chambers or something like that.
21
thinking that, Oh, you know, we're in Judge Snow's court, maybe
22
this would be very sexy for us to know this, and thinking that
IEN
DS
18
24
FR
25
09:27:45
And then he comes along -- and this is probably the
17
23
09:26:43
And again,
09:28:08
we'll bite on it, and we don't.

And you have those documents.
You have the e-mails.
You have my direct order in writing in those e-mails to my --
09:28:34
1300
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
members of my staff, and testimony from the sergeant, Anglin,
that I gave him a direct order they will not and do not
participate in anything concerning this Court.
And so Montgomery, in my opinion, was doing these
4
5
things to string us along to pay him a little bit longer,
because he knew that he didn't have the goods in order to make
a case that we needed to make a case, and we would not pay him
any longer.
Q.
Well, you did continue to pay him after he initially came
10
forward with allegations that Judge -- that involved
11
Judge Snow, correct?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
And I don't think you ever did answer my original question,
14
which is:
15
committed a crime in copying the data from the CIA and the NSA
16
and giving it to you at the MCSO?
17
that that constituted a federal crime?
asked and answered.
20
THE COURT:
DS
19
Objection, relevance, foundation,
09:30:00
That's why we sought the counsel from
the Arizona Attorney General, because of that very concern.
23
BY MS. WANG:
24
Q.
So the answer is yes, you did have that concern?
25
A.
Yes, ma'am.
FR
09:29:43
Did you have any concern
Overruled.
THE WITNESS:
IEN
22
09:29:28
Did you have any concern that Dennis Montgomery had
MR. MASTERSON:
18
21
09:29:04
09:30:12
Q.
1301
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Now, you mentioned the Arizona Attorney General.
Are you aware that MCSO arranged for Dennis Montgomery
2
3
to have a so-called free talk with the AG's office?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And Dennis Montgomery -- well, let's go through to make
sure we know what a free talk is.
Is that basically a proffer to a prosecutor in which
7
8
the person who's coming forward with information seeks and
obtains immunity from prosecution for any crimes, is that
10
right?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q.
And in fact, in this instance, Dennis Montgomery had asked
13
that MCSO facilitate the arrangement that he would be immunized
14
against prosecution for any crimes that he may have committed
15
in going into that free talk with the AG's office, is that
16
right?
17
A.
Yes, ma'am.
18
Q.
So you did have an indication that Dennis Montgomery may
19
have been involved in federal criminal activity in relation to
20
his obtaining and use of that data, correct?
21
A.
It's possible.
22
Q.
I want to go back to the exhibit, 2074A.
24
FR
25
09:30:44
DS
IEN
23
09:30:25
09:31:00
09:31:13
Did you understand that Dennis Montgomery had faxed
this document to Sheriff Arpaio?

Do you see at the top there's an indication this
09:31:38
1302
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
document was sent through a fax machine?
A.
No.
Q.
You don't see that?
A.
Well, I see the number on top.
faxed to the sheriff.
Q.
of the page, 602, that number?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Do you recognize that as a fax machine, Sheriff Arpaio's
I was not aware that it was
09:31:54
Do you see the handwritten telephone number at the bottom
10
fax machine number?
11
A.
No.
12
Q.
I'm going to have you take a look at a couple documents.

Do you have Exhibit 2880 in front of you?
13
THE COURT:
14
MS. WANG:
15
2880.
THE WITNESS:
17
18
BY MS. WANG:
19
Q.
20
from it.
09:32:30
Thank you.
I do.
This document is not in evidence.
I'm not going to read
DS
It's a reverse telephone number lookup printout.
where it says Dennis Montgomery.
23
A.
Okay.
24
Q.
Okay.
25
there, and then compare that to the number at the top of
FR
09:32:35
Can you turn to page 2 of the document and look at
IEN
22
What was that exhibit number, again?
THE COURT:
16
21
09:32:09
Look at the -- the telephone number that's listed

09:32:56
1303
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Exhibit 2074A.
A.
Okay.
Q.
Okay.
refresh your recollection about where this document,
number 2074A, came from?
A.
refresh my recollection.
Q.
did you tell you about it?
So does this document, Exhibit 2880, in any way
09:33:26
I was never aware of where it came from, so it wouldn't
All right.
When the sheriff showed you this document, what
10
A.
I'm sorry, what was that?
11
Q.
I'm referring back to Exhibit 2074A, the DOJ/Arpaio
12
timeline document.
13
what did he tell you about it?
14
A.
15
part.
When Sheriff Arpaio showed this to you,
Oh, what did he tell me about it?
I'm sorry, I missed that
09:34:09
Not much.
16
09:33:49
We just really keyed on the wiretap and
17
talked about that the DOJ really wiretap our personal
18
cell phones.
19
first glance I looked at it and I said, Sheriff, I said, other
20
than those wiretap things, this looks like something that
21
anybody could put together just doing a little Internet
22
research.
IEN
DS
And then I looked at it, and I think even at
Q.
24
did you have an understanding that Dennis Montgomery was
25
alleging that there was a conspiracy between the Department of
FR
23
09:34:44
Chief, looking at this document, the DOJ/Arpaio timeline,
09:35:05
1304
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Justice, Judge Snow, and the Covington & Burling law firm?
A.
No.
Q.
You did not have that understanding?
A.
No.
Q.
Did you ever hear anyone mention that Dennis Montgomery was
alleging that there was a conspiracy involving Judge Snow,
the U.S. Department of Justice, and the Covington & Burling law
firm?
A.
No.
10
Q.
You never heard anything about such a purported conspiracy?
11
A.
What -- what I heard was that Dennis Montgomery came up
12
with a phone record that the DOJ had called the judge's
13
chambers.
14
Q.
15
significance of that fact?
16
A.
DOJ was talking with Judge Snow.
17
Q.
Did Sheriff Arpaio mention that allegation to you?
18
A.
No.
19
Q.
Was that during a conversation in which you told
20
Detective Mackiewicz that he should not investigate Judge Snow?
21
A.
Yes, ma'am.
22
Q.
So you did understand that purported fact to be implicating
09:35:30
That was the fact that I had heard.
And what was this -- what were you told about the
DS
IEN
some kind of wrongdoing on the part of the Court?
24
A.
25
Sheriff's Office concerning members of the court, our
No.
09:35:55
It was -- I believe it was Detective Mackiewicz.
23
FR
09:35:18
09:36:18
I was concerned with the prior activities of the

09:36:46
1305
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
reputation concerning investigations of members of the court in
years past.
I was the chief deputy.
I did not want to be
associated with anything in that way, shape, or form, and
that's why I told Detective Mackiewicz, We are not going to
entertain any further information from Montgomery, and you're
to tell him not to investigate anything about Judge Snow, and
if he is -- if he does, we will walk away.
Q.
09:37:13
By the way, Chief, Detective Mackiewicz was assigned to the
10
Threats Unit at MCSO, correct?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
And isn't it true that in years past, the MCSO Threats Unit
13
was actually involved in some of those investigations you just
14
mentioned into judges and other public officials?
15
A.
It was many years ago, yes.
16
Q.
Sir, turning again to Exhibit 2074A, you mentioned that
17
there were indications here that your telephone had been tapped
18
by the DOJ, is that right?
19
A.
That's correct.
20
Q.
Were there -- does your telephone number appear on this
21
document?
22
A.
09:37:44
09:38:09
DS
IEN
It does.
23
Q.
And which number is that?
24
A.
It's -- it's on the line dated 9-28-2009.
25
no longer have that number, but that was the number I had at
FR
09:38:28
602-920-4000.
I
09:38:53
1306
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
that time.
Q.
cell phone?
A.
number 4001 is the sheriff's number.
Q.
All right.
A.
That is a cell phone number.
Q.
And what about the numbers appearing in the next -- the
third number that appears in the next line?
And was that a landline at your MCSO office or a
That was my personal cell phone number.
And the
09:39:05
Is that a cell phone or a landline?
10
A.
920-4400 was at that time the chief deputy, Dave
11
Hendershott, that was his cell phone number.
12
Q.
13
Exhibit 2074A, with Sheriff Arpaio, did he say that he was not
14
going to pursue any of this information?
15
A.
16
even though we're curious, would like to know if the DOJ
17
actually did tap our cell phones.
18
we believe that if they were credible wiretap numbers, we as
19
American citizens have a right to be notified that they did tap
20
our cell phones.
21
that they tapped our phones.
22
of Justice is a stand-up company and we never were notified, we
All right.
IEN
When you discussed this timeline document,
As a matter of fact, to this day, the sheriff and I,
DS
Yes.
We never got an answer.
09:39:43
And
The Department of Justice never did notify us
09:40:15
And assuming that the Department
23
assume that these numbers were bogus also.
24
Q.
25
2074A that there appears the date November 5th, 2013?
FR
09:39:17
Sir, do you see that in the fax stamp up at the top of

09:40:42
1307
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Do you see that?
1
2
A.
Yes.
Q.
All right.
this document around that date or shortly thereafter?
A.
It was probably shortly thereafter.
Q.
And you continued to pay Dennis Montgomery, and you
continued his investigation after November of 2013, correct?
A.
We did.
Q.
You continued it into 2014, correct?
10
A.
Yes, ma'am.
11
Q.
And even into 2015 you were still seeking information from
12
Dennis Montgomery, correct?
13
A.
On a very limited basis, yes.
14
Q.
In fact, up through the beginning of this contempt hearing
15
on April 21st you were still seeking information from Dennis
16
Montgomery, correct?
17
A.
Posseman Zullo kept in contact with Dennis Montgomery, yes.
18
Q.
So your answer is yes, as of April 21st, 2015, MCSO was
19
still seeking information from Dennis Montgomery, right?
20
A.
I -- I don't think that's quite accurate.
21
Q.
Well, you just testified that Posseman Zullo was still
22
seeking information from Dennis Montgomery as of April 20th of
IEN
DS
Do you recall whether Sheriff Arpaio showed you
2015, correct?
24
A.
25
in contact with him.
FR
23
09:41:01
09:41:17
09:41:31
09:41:57
I didn't use the word "seeking information"; I said he kept

09:42:18
1308
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
All right.
Sir, do you still have Exhibit 2524 in front of
you?
opposition to the sheriff's motion to disqualify the Court.
A.
Yes, ma'am.
Q.
All right.
you to turn to Exhibit E.
question is MELC202142.
A.
time finding this thing, so could you --
That was my declaration in support of the -- or
Okay.
This is not in evidence, but I'm going to ask
I'm sorry.
Sure.
The Bates stamp on the page in
I know during my deposition I had a hard
10
Q.
11
Klayman to Michael Zullo with a cc to David Webb and Dennis;
12
subject line, Second Request, date Monday, April 20th, 2015.
13
And it's under a cover page Exhibit.
14
A.
Okay.
Here it is.
15
Q.
Okay.
Are you there?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
Will you read that e-mail and let me know if that refreshes
18
your recollection that Posseman Mike Zullo was seeking the
19
completion of work from Dennis Montgomery as of April 20th,
20
2015.
21
A.
Okay.
I'm sorry.
22
Q.
Sure.
The question was:
I'll describe it for you.
09:43:38
09:44:05
Thank you.
DS
IEN
It's an e-mail from Larry
09:44:26
Can you repeat your question?

Does this document refresh your
23
recollection that as of April 20th of 2015, MCSO Posseman Mike
24
Zullo was still seeking the completion of work from Dennis
25
Montgomery?
FR
09:42:57
09:45:47
1309
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes.
Q.
And was he still seeking information from Dennis Montgomery
on that date?
A.
It's obvious from this e-mail he was.
Q.
Thank you.
09:45:58
Sir, you mentioned a moment ago that you directed
6
7
Sergeant Anglin and Detective Mackiewicz not to investigate
Judge Snow because you were concerned about getting, I don't
want to put words in your mouth, but I think you mentioned a
10
concern that you didn't want to be involved in any
11
investigations like those that had happened in the past of
12
judges and other public officials, is that right?
13
A.
14
sheriff sat me down and he counseled me on what he expected
15
from me.
16
allowed the former chief deputy too much leeway in doing
17
things, and that he was not going to do that with me.
18
was not going to investigate any corruption charges on public
19
officials or go into any corruption issues with members of the
20
bench, and he made that quite clear to me.
21
honoring that order from the sheriff from a few years before.
When I took over as the chief deputy, the
DS
And that was one of the things that he said: that he
And he
And so I was
23
about what Dennis Montgomery was giving us was baseless, and
24
really, even if there was some communication between the
25
Department of Justice and the Court, I'm sure the Court does
FR
09:46:50
09:47:27
And also, it's common sense, from everything I knew
IEN
22
That's correct.
09:46:27
09:47:58
1310
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
have communications with the Department of Justice in the
normal course of business.
courts work.
I don't know.
I don't know how
So I wasn't concerned with it.
But for the sense of propriety, the sense of honoring
4
5
the sheriff's orders to me, I told them, Do not, do not get
involved with Montgomery, and you tell him that we will not
entertain this and we'll walk away.
Q.
Office investigations of Maricopa County judges, members of the
Well, you're aware that the Maricopa County Sheriff's
Board of Supervisors, and other public figures in the county,
11
had been part of the United States Department of Justice
12
lawsuit against the sheriff, correct?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q.
And the sheriff was in office when those investigations
15
occurred, correct?
16
A.
That's correct.
17
Q.
And fair to say the sheriff had made public statements in
18
connection with those investigations himself, correct?
19
A.
Correct.
20
Q.
But you're saying that he was trying to put all that on
21
David Hendershott?
22
A.
DS
10
09:48:52
09:49:06
09:49:19
IEN
I didn't say that.
23
Q.
24
responsibility for having done those investigations of state
25
judges and members of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors?
FR
09:48:23
So your understanding was that Sheriff Arpaio took
09:49:40
MR. MASTERSON:
1
2
403.
THE COURT:
3
4
1311
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Objection, foundation, relevance.
You want to lay a little foundation,
Ms. Wang?
MS. WANG:
Sure.
09:49:58
BY MS. WANG:
Q.
a concern that you did not want the Seattle investigation to
proceed against -- along the lines of a conspiracy involving a
Chief Deputy, you just testified a moment ago that you had
10
federal judge, is that right?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q.
And you said one of the reasons that you had that concern
13
is that MCSO previously had been engaged in investigations of
14
public figures, including judges and government officials,
15
correct?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q.
And you also testified that Sheriff Arpaio mentioned those
18
previous investigations to you in connection with -- well, when
19
you became chief deputy, is that right?
20
A.
Way before Dennis Montgomery ever appeared, that's correct.
21
Q.
And you mentioned that the sheriff explained that the
22
reason those investigations came about is because he had given
IEN
DS
09:50:36
23
Chief Hendershott too much leeway?
24
A.
Yes, ma'am.
25
Q.
All right.
FR
09:50:16
09:50:49
Was that your testimony?
So my question is, since you offered up those
09:51:08
1312
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
statements, whether it was your understanding, based on that
conversation, that Sheriff Arpaio was trying to blame Chief
Hendershott for the fact that those investigations happened.
A.
anybody for anything.
Q.
conducted those investigations of judges and other government
officials?
A.
You'll have to ask him that question.
10
Q.
We will.
I've known Sheriff Arpaio for 22 years.
He doesn't blame
09:51:31
So Sheriff Arpaio accepted the responsibility for having
09:51:42
MS. WANG:
11
May I have one moment, Your Honor?
THE COURT:
12
You may.
13
14
BY MS. WANG:
15
Q.
16
past investigations of judges and other public officials in
17
Maricopa County?
18
A.
I don't know.
19
Q.
Okay.
MS. WANG:
DS
20
Chief, did you ever make any public statements about those
I don't recall.
Your Honor, I'd like to play a video clip
of a press statement that Chief Deputy Sheridan made in
22
connection with those investigations.
IEN
21
23
24
FR
25
09:52:12
MR. MASTERSON:
Your Honor, objection.
09:52:28
First off, I
haven't seen it; secondly, relevance.

MS. WANG:
Well, the witness has opened the door to
09:52:47
1313
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
discussion about how the Dennis Montgomery investigation fit
into or didn't fit into a pattern of conduct, and that pattern
of conduct was the subject of other litigation that the chief
has been involved in.
The video was provided to the defendants when we
5
6
provided our exhibits.

THE COURT:
7
8
It's marked Exhibit 2827.
And it is, you allege, a statement made by
Chief Deputy Sheridan?

MS. WANG:
Yes, sir.
THE COURT:
10
11
All right.
You can play enough of it to
MS. WANG:
Sure.
MR. MASTERSON:
13
Your Honor, I'm still going to object
14
to relevance, because it appears to be about matters in
15
unrelated cases that happened years ago.

THE COURT:
16
09:53:33
Well, I understand that, but I do think
17
that the door has been opened at least a little bit.
18
go to credibility.
19
MS. WANG:
It does
Your Honor, I should say that Chief Deputy
Sheridan appears on it making a statement, but he's at the end
21
of about a four-minute clip.
22
THE COURT:
IEN
DS
20
four-minute clip.
09:53:45
Well, I'm not sure I want to play a whole
Do you want to ask him about it first?
24
MS. WANG:
25
MR. MASTERSON:
FR
09:53:24
see if he can recognize himself.
12
23
09:53:06
Sure.
Excuse me.
Counsel, could we have a
09:53:56
1314
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
date when this supposedly happened, please?

MS. WANG:
Your Honor, this video clip was actually
produced to the plaintiffs by the defendants.
It's among a
collection of press statements involving the sheriff or other
MCSO officials that we requested in a document request.
believe the date -- the file name for the audio clip, as
produced by the defendants to us, indicates that it was on
October 11 of 2012.
10
THE COURT:
And I
October 11, 2012, apparently.
09:54:58
All right.
11
MS. WANG:
12
Let's play Exhibit 2827.
(Video clip played as follows:)
13
Known as America's toughest sheriff...
14
Known as
15
America's toughest sheriff.
16
law investigating Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
17
you later on tonight.
18
Arizona sheriff, popular for being tough on crime, Sheriff Joe
19
Arpaio.
20
investigation for allegedly abusing his own power.
21
you hear who he's accused of targeting (indiscernible).
Could also be in trouble with the
Go ahead.
Well, he's now under
23
reputation for being tough on crime.
24
lot over the last few years.
25
immigrants and DUIs.
FR
A little bit more for
Keep in mind I said the
DS
You all know who he is.
09:55:30
Wait till
09:55:46
Well, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio certainly has a
IEN
22
09:54:28
We've reported on him a
He's equally hard on illegal
Beyond throwing the book at them he likes
09:56:03
1315
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
to send a public message.
Maricopa County to wear pink underwear, black and pink uniforms
while working on chain gangs.
highway" --
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
appears?
Your Honor, I'm going to object to all
Can we move to the part where Sheridan
MS. WANG:
10
I will try, Your Honor.
(Video clip played as follows:)
12
ANNOUNCER:
13
.. who tried to answer for a sheriff who
was a no-show.
ANNOUNCER:
15
I just don't understand why suddenly, Joe
16
Arpaio has sent out you three people basically just -- I mean,
17
this is nervous, to face this kind of media scrutiny and these
18
kind of questions.
19
America, right?
He is the toughest sheriff and he's a
good sheriff, and I know that if he could be here, he would be
22
here.
IEN
21
speak because you're a potential witness in a number of these
24
investigations, he's got to default to what his attorneys say.
FR
09:57:17
But when you've got legal counsel advising you not to
23
25
09:57:00
I mean, this is the toughest sheriff in
LISA ALLEN:
DS
20
09:56:21
11
14
09:56:16
this extraneous --
8
9
Arpaio's "my way or the
(Video clip paused.)
Arpaio has forced jail inmates in
ANNOUNCER:
The problem is none of these people the
09:57:31
1316
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
sheriff sent to talk to us say they had anything to do with the
political investigations the sheriff is accused of conducting.
Jerry Sheridan is the interim chief deputy.

INTERVIEWER:
Well, Jerry, did he abuse his power?
Did he send out underlings to investigate political opponents
to destroy their careers?
CHIEF DEPUTY SHERIDAN:
INTERVIEWER:
INTERVIEWER:
10
INTERVIEWER:
12
No, I was not.
I've been here for 32 years
14
and I know the inner workings of the office.
15
not involved in any of those mischievous things that he's been
16
accused of.
ANNOUNCER:
17
The sheriff was
19
against Stapley were thrown out.
20
(Video clipped paused.)
23
MS. WANG:
24
THE COURT:
FR
25
All right.
09:58:19
Is there any more with Chief
Deputy Sheridan?
IEN
22
DS
Stapley the sheriff is not done, even though all 118 counts
THE COURT:
09:58:04
But in the case of County Supervisor Don
18
21
09:57:53
So do you know what kind of --
13
Absolutely not.
-- involved in those decisions?
11
Absolutely not.
You were --
09:57:45
BY MS. WANG:
No, I don't believe so.

All right.
09:58:23
1317
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
So Chief, that was you appearing on the video, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And you stated -- and that was Lisa Allen from the public
information office who appeared alongside you, is that right?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
In that video clip you stated that the sheriff was not
responsible for those investigations of public officials,
right?
A.
I don't believe I used the word "responsible."
10
Q.
Well, we just heard the audio.
11
A.
I think the word was "involved."
12
Q.
So as you parsed it out, Sheriff Arpaio -- you stated that
13
Sheriff Arpaio was not involved in those investigations of
14
public officials?
15
A.
I believe that's the word I used in the video.
16
Q.
He was the head of the agency, was he not?
17
A.
He was.
18
Q.
And you said just a moment ago here on the stand that the
19
sheriff does accept responsibility for those investigations of
20
public officials, judges, and other officials?
21
23
24
FR
25
09:58:34
MR. MASTERSON:
Objection.
Were you denying on --
09:58:47
09:59:06
09:59:23
That's not even close to
what the witness said, Judge.
IEN
22
DS
THE COURT:
I'll just rely on the recollection and the
transcript.
MS. WANG:
All right.
I'll move on.
09:59:37
1318
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
BY MS. WANG:
Q.
than $250,000 on the Dennis Montgomery investigation, is that
right?
Sir, I think you testified earlier that MCSO spent more
MR. MASTERSON:
5
6
THE COURT:
Yes, and then the witness talked about it,
THE WITNESS:
10
BY MS. WANG:
11
Q.
12
investigation, correct?
13
A.
I did.
14
Q.
All right.
Yes, approximately $250,000.
10:00:01
And you personally approved expenses that related to the
Take a look at Exhibit 2526, please.
Do you see that, sir?
15
10:00:11
A.
I do.
17
Q.
And did you approve a trip to Seattle, Washington in
18
connection with the Seattle investigation taken by
19
Detective Mackiewicz?
20
A.
I assume so.
21
Q.
Take a look at Exhibit 2527.
DS
16
Says I did.
IEN
Let me go back to the previous one, 2526.
10:00:57
That was in
23
October of 2013, is that correct, that you approved that trip
24
by Detective Mackiewicz?
25
A.
FR
09:59:49
and I'm going to allow the question.
22
We
talked about this before the start of trial.
7
8
Objection, Your Honor, relevance.
Yes, ma'am.
10:01:23
1319
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
All right.
And then on 2527, it indicates that all the
paperwork for another trip -- actually, two more trips:
Seattle and one to San Diego -- were on your desk.
e-mail dated February 3rd, 2014, is that correct?
A.
Yes, ma'am.
Q.
And that indicates you were the one who were -- was
responsible for approving those expenses, correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
One to
That was an
10:01:42
2528 is a memorandum from
10
Sergeant Travis Anglin to Lieutenant Kim Seagraves dated
11
February 2nd, 2014, correct?
12
A.
Yes, ma'am.
13
Q.
And your signature appears at the bottom indicating the
14
request is approved, right?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
All right.
18
MR. MASTERSON:
MR. COMO:
THE COURT:
IEN
22
MR. WALKER:
DS
21
Your Honor, I would then move the admission
of Exhibit 2528 into evidence.
19
20
10:02:18
MS. WANG:
17
Objection, relevance.
I join the objection, Your Honor.
The exhibit is admitted.
(Exhibit No. 2528 is admitted into evidence.)
24
MS. WANG:
FR
Your Honor?
10:02:30
No objection.
23
25
10:02:05
Can we show the -- publish the exhibit,

10:02:42
1
2
1320
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
THE COURT:
You may.
MS. WANG:
Thank you.
Let's highlight the first paragraph under narrative.
3
4
BY MS. WANG:
Q.
permission to rent a house instead of using a hotel for this
trip, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And that was because they were going to be staying in
So, Chief, in this memorandum Sergeant Anglin was asking
10
Seattle for 44 nights, is that correct?
11
A.
Yes, ma'am.
12
Q.
And if you look at the next paragraph, they were suggesting
13
a four-bedroom house.
10:03:10
Do you see that?
A four-bedroom house is now available?
14
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
And he indicates that, in the next paragraph, that they
17
were planning to use the fourth bedroom for storage and use of
18
materials being processed in the investigation.
10:03:27
Do you see that?
19
A.
I do.
21
Q.
Are you aware, sir, that at one point in time the MCAO
22
personnel stored hard drives that Dennis Montgomery purportedly
IEN
DS
20
23
obtained from the CIA in that bedroom in the house?
24
A.
No.
25
Q.
You're not aware of that?
FR
10:02:53
10:03:45
10:03:59
A.
No.
Q.
Okay.
You can take that down.
1321
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
This is an e-mail from
Brian Mackiewicz to Sarah Bagley dated July 22nd, 2014.
does this e-mail indicate that you gave a verbal approval of a
trip by Michael Zullo and Brian Mackiewicz in connection with
this investigation?
A.
Correct.
Q.
All right.
Do you see the sentence that reads:
And
"Since
10
this trip is most likely going to turn up in an audit request
11
we would like to have all approvals in writing"?

MR. MASTERSON:
12
13
Objection, Your Honor.
10:04:41
Counsel's
reading from an exhibit not in evidence.

MS. WANG:
14
I beg your pardon.
15
BY MS. WANG:
16
Q.
Have you seen this document before, Chief?
17
A.
Yes, ma'am.
18
Q.
All right.
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
You were involved in the subject matter of the e-mail and
21
discussions with Detective Mackiewicz, correct?
22
A.
10:04:52
DS
And were you familiar with is contents?
10:04:59
IEN
I was.
23
Q.
24
Finance Bureau?
25
A.
FR
10:04:19
And with the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office Budget and
Yes, ma'am.
10:05:08
MS. WANG:
1
2
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
10
Objection, relevance, hearsay.
Are you offering it for the truth of the
10:05:20
No.
I'm offering it because I'd like to
get the chief's reactions to some of the content.

THE COURT:
8
9
Your Honor, I'd move the
matter asserted?
6
7
All right.
admission of Exhibit 2529.
1322
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Well, I'm going to conditionally admit it,
but I may reject it if I determine that what you're really

asking is for the truth of the matter asserted.
MS. WANG:
11
Yes, Your Honor.
12
13
BY MS. WANG:
14
Q.
15
is most likely going to turn up in an audit request we would
16
like to have all approvals in writing"?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
Sir, was it your understanding from MCSO's Budget and
19
Finance Bureau that some of the expenses involved in the
20
Seattle investigation were likely to be the subject of an
21
audit?
DS
Chief, do you see the sentence that reads "Since this trip
MR. MASTERSON:
IEN
22
23
24
FR
25
10:05:40
Objection, hearsay.
10:05:52
10:06:11
Now we're talking
about the truth.

THE COURT:
BY MS. WANG:
Sustained.
10:06:28
1323
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
All right.
learn that -- or did you have the understanding that expenses
related to the Seattle investigation were likely to be audited?
A.
investigation would come to light to the public, and that we
would be accountable and responsible and have to answer to the
expenditures and our actions.
Q.
understood it, was likely to be audited in the future?
Oh, yes.
Setting aside the document, Chief, did you ever
We always knew that one day the Seattle
And why is it that this particular investigation, as you
10
A.
Because it was controversial.
11
Q.
And because they were large expenditures as well?
12
A.
They were large expenditures, and it involved allegations
13
against the United States Government.
14
Q.
15
Exhibit 2530.
All right.
10:07:12
Why don't you set that aside and turn to
10:07:29
2530 is a memorandum from Sergeant Anglin to
16
17
Lieutenant Stutsman dated January 21st, 2014.
18
your signature and the notation "approved" appear on that
19
document?
20
A.
MS. WANG:
10:07:51
Exhibit 2530 into evidence.
IEN
22
23
THE COURT:
24
MR. MASTERSON:
25
THE COURT:
FR
And sir, does
It does.
DS
21
10:06:49
Do you have an objection?

Objection, relevance, hearsay.
Overruled.
The exhibit is admitted.
10:08:11
1324
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
May I publish it, Your Honor?

You may.
Let's highlight -- thank you.
Let's go to the next paragraph as well.
5
6
BY MS. WANG:
Q.
approval of the purchase of several potentially high-value
pieces of computer hardware as well as online software, is that
Sir, in this memorandum Sergeant Anglin was requesting the
10
right?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
And if you go down to the next paragraph, he indicated that
13
this computer equipment could cost more than $50,000.
10:08:43
Do you see that?
14
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
And this is a request that you approved, correct?
17
A.
That's correct.
18
Q.
Was it your understanding that this computer hardware was
19
for the purpose of permitting Dennis Montgomery to provide MCSO
20
with large volumes of data he had obtained from the CIA or the
21
NSA?
22
A.
DS
15
10:08:59
10:09:13
IEN
That's correct.
23
Q.
24
you about the source of funds for payments to the confidential
25
informant, Dennis Montgomery.
FR
10:08:23
Now, during your testimony on April 24th, Ms. Iafrate asked
10:09:31
Do you recall that?
1
2
A.
No, sorry.
Q.
All right.
state RICO funds were used to pay Dennis Montgomery.
A.
Yes.
MR. MASTERSON:
7
8
10:09:46
Objection, relevance; asked and
answered in the previous hearing.

THE COURT:
9
10
Well, the transcript indicates that you stated
Is that true?
5
6
1325
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I'll sustain the objection.
The answer's
on the record.
MS. WANG:
11
10:09:59
All right.
It was just for background.
12
apologize, Your Honor.
13
BY MS. WANG:
14
Q.
15
Seattle investigation federal HIDTA grant funds were used for
16
the investigation?
17
A.
18
my deposition on the 15th of September.
19
Q.
20
document, Exhibit 2525.
Okay.
And have you since -- well, let me show you a
10:10:30
Sir, Exhibit 2525 is an e-mail from Beverly
Owens-Prindle dated March 10, 2014, to Travis Anglin and
23
others.
24
correct?
25
A.
FR
10:10:07
I was not aware of that until you disclosed that to me in
IEN
22
Sir, isn't it true that in fact, at some point in this
DS
21
And you are one of the people copied on this e-mail,
Correct.
10:11:08
Q.
1326
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
All right.
And the subject line is "REfund CI funds."
Do you see that?
2
3
A.
Yes.
Q.
Okay.
indicated on the face of the document?
A.
I was.
Q.
And do you see the content of the document here?
over this in your deposition, correct?
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
All right.
11
in fact, sent among these MCSO personnel?
12
A.
I have not.
13
Q.
All right.
14
HIDTA grant funds were used to pay the confidential informant,
15
Dennis Montgomery?
16
A.
I have not.
17
Q.
All right.
18
had to be refunded because that was not a proper use of that
19
money?
20
A.
I'm aware from the e-mail that was the case.
21
Q.
Do you have any reason to believe that Exhibit 2525 is not
22
an accurate and correct printout of e-mails that were
You were a recipient of this e-mail, correct, as
10:11:52
Are you aware that federal HIDTA grant funds
DS
IEN
10:11:27
Have you since confirmed that in fact, federal
maintained on MCSO's e-mail servers?
24
A.
FR
We went
Have you since confirmed that this e-mail was,
23
25
10:11:20
10:12:09
No.
MS. WANG:
Your Honor, I would move the admission of
10:12:32
1327
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Exhibit 2525.
MR. MASTERSON:
Your Honor, my objection is foundation
as to the information in the document, as opposed to whether it
was kept on a Maricopa County server.

THE COURT:
Well, I'll admit the document only for the
purpose that it was received by Chief Deputy Sheridan, and not
for the truth of any matter contained -- or asserted in the
document.
9
10
BY MS. WANG:
11
Q.
12
points with Captain Steve Bailey, correct?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
All right.
15
about the reliability of Dennis Montgomery to you, is that
16
correct?
17
A.
At times.
18
Q.
Did Captain Bailey ever tell you that he could not, in good
19
conscience, sign any more expense approvals for the Seattle
20
investigation?
21
A.
I believe so.
22
Q.
And when he refused to sign any more of the approvals for
10:13:12
Now, you discussed, sir, the Seattle investigation at some
IEN
DS
And Captain Bailey expressed serious concerns
23
expenses, did you instruct him to send the approval forms
24
downtown, or to headquarters?
25
A.
FR
10:12:54
I don't recall how I handled that.
10:13:26
10:13:44
10:14:04
1328
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
But you do recall that Captain Bailey refused to sign any
more expense approvals?
A.
Yes, I do.
Q.
Did you ever hear Captain Bailey express concern that the
payments to Dennis Montgomery were an improper use of MCSO
funds?
A.
were an appropriate way to pay Mr. Montgomery.
were exhausting the RICO funds, and that's why he didn't like
10
the use of the RICO funds to pay Mr. Montgomery, because they
11
could be used for other investigations.
12
Q.
13
an improper use of RICO funds?
14
A.
15
recall him protesting that it was exhausting the RICO account,
16
and that it could have the potential, if they had another
17
investigation, to slow down an investigation.
18
I remember, his major complaint with paying Montgomery.
19
Q.
20
presence?
21
A.
Oh, yes.
22
Q.
And, sir, I'm going to ask everyone in the room to forgive
What I recall Captain Bailey discussing was the RICO funds

However, they
I don't think I ever heard him say it was improper.
I do
10:15:14
That was his, as
IEN
DS
And he expressed that view to Sheriff Arpaio in your
10:15:45
We -- we talked about that a lot.
the language, because I'm just going to quote something that
24
was testified to by another witness.
FR
10:14:53
You did not hear Captain Bailey saying that he felt it was
23
25
10:14:24
Do you recall Sheriff Arpaio telling Captain Bailey in
10:15:57
1329
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
response, quote, I don't care.
You need to get the fucking
money, end quote?
A.
the sheriff for 22 years.
two times.
could be wrong.
Q.
If you don't recall those exact words, do you recall the
sheriff basically telling Captain Bailey:
I don't recall the sheriff using that language.
I've known
I've heard him say the F word maybe
I don't think that was one of the occasions, but I
Did you hear the sheriff express that sentiment, in effect?
Yes.
Get the money?
10
A.
11
my opinion, Captain Bailey was whining about the Montgomery
12
investigation, and this was something that the sheriff and I
13
wanted to continue.
14
Q.
15
and the sheriff about Dennis Montgomery, correct?
16
A.
At times.
17
Q.
And -- well, you had added Sergeant Anglin to the
18
investigation in the first place, right?
19
to assign him to the investigation, correct?
20
A.
That's correct.
21
Q.
All right.
22
that he felt MCSO should not be paying Dennis Montgomery as a
And I had the same sentiment to Captain Bailey.
In
10:16:43
IEN
DS
Now, Sergeant Travis Anglin also expressed concerns to you
10:17:09
It was your decision
10:17:22
And did Sergeant Anglin tell you at one point
23
confidential informant?
24
MR. MASTERSON:
25
MS. WANG:
FR
10:16:21
Objection, hearsay.
It's not offered for the truth.
10:17:49
THE COURT:
Overruled.
THE WITNESS:
1330
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I'm having a hard time remember --
remembering what Anglin's position was, because it vacillated
from time to time.
genius and had all this great information.
sheriff to go and do an interview with Carl Cameron from
Channel 10 in Washington, D.C., about how credible he was.
then he would go back and say, No, he's not credible.
to get away from him.
10
Sometimes he thought that Montgomery was a

He wanted the
10:18:19
And
We need
And then he would flip-flop back when
Montgomery gave him something that was credible.
10:18:48
So, you know, at times he didn't want us to pay him,
11
12
at times he did want us to pay him, so I don't know how to
13
answer your question.
14
Q.
15
in an argument with Posseman Mike Zullo about whether to pay
16
Dennis Montgomery?
17
A.
18
Posseman Zullo, Detective Mackiewicz, Sergeant Anglin, I'll
19
include Captain Bailey, all very strong personalities, so is
20
Dennis Montgomery, and at any one time they were fighting with
21
each other.
Well, did there come a time when Sergeant Anglin got
DS
You could tell.
You've seen all the e-mails.
23
week they hate, you know -- Zullo hates Montgomery.
24
week he loves Montgomery.
25
Montgomery.
FR
10:19:06
Well, I can tell you all three of those individuals,
IEN
22
Okay.
Well, maybe I did; I don't know.
10:19:29
One
The next
And the next week Mackiewicz hates
And the next week Mackiewicz is fighting with
10:19:50
1331
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Zullo.
That's one of the reasons I sent Sergeant Anglin up
there, to -- to help manage this very difficult situation.
Q.
investigation?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Was that after he had tried to take Posseman Zullo off the
investigation?
A.
sergeant up there, so yes.
Did there come a time when you took Sergeant Anglin off the
10:20:05
I saw that it wasn't working and it was a waste of having a
10
Q.
Okay.
11
Sergeant Anglin from the investigation after he tried to remove
12
Mike Zullo from the investigation?
13
A.
14
from the investigation; only I or the sheriff did.
15
they were not getting along.
Mike had been involved in this
16
investigation from the onset.
Sergeant Anglin came in late
17
into the investigation.
18
sergeant involved in it was not working.
19
him.
20
Q.
21
Anglin try to remove Mike Zullo from the investigation?
22
A.
10:20:19
Well, he didn't have the authority to remove Mike Zullo
DS
All right.
I saw that
10:20:43
My desired effect of having the
And my question is:
That's why I removed
At one point did Sergeant
10:21:06
IEN
Yes.
23
Q.
24
correct?
25
A.
FR
Is your answer yes to my question, that you removed
And you said that he did not have the authority to do that,
Correct.
10:21:18
1332
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
And in fact, did the sheriff not intervene and tell
Sergeant Anglin, quote, Who the fuck do you think you are, end
quote?
A.
I have no knowledge of that.
Q.
You did not hear that?
A.
No, ma'am.
Q.
All right.
really nothing -- no evidence put forward to believe that there
was a conspiracy involving the Court?
10:21:30
Sir, did you ultimately conclude that there was
10
A.
We never looked into whether there was a conspiracy with
11
the Court.
12
Q.
13
there was a conspiracy involving the Court, correct?
14
A.
15
about conspiracy to the Court in writing.
16
time, and that was about the time I told both Detective
17
Mackiewicz and Sergeant Anglin we were not going to get
18
involved in anything involving this Court.
19
written documents of anything until I think it was April 23rd,
20
April 24th, in Chief Knight's office, when we turned over those
21
documents to the Court.
22
Q.
Well, Dennis Montgomery provided you information suggesting
I never saw any information Dennis Montgomery provided
DS
I heard verbally the
10:22:26
I didn't see any
10:22:56
IEN
Did you ultimately conclude that Dennis Montgomery had not
23
provided you with any reliable information?
24
A.
No.
25
Q.
Okay.
FR
10:21:58
Can you turn to Exhibit 2531.
10:23:13
1333
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Sir, Exhibit 2531 is an e-mail from Brian Mackiewicz
1
2
dated November 14, 2014, to you, is that correct?
A.
Yes, ma'am.
Q.
Okay.
e-mail from a Thomas Drake, is that right?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And there's an attached two-page letter signed by J. Kirk
Wieby and Thomas Drake.
And this is an e-mail that he sent, forwarding an
Do you see that?
9
10
A.
I do.
11
Q.
And the date on the letter is November 13th, 2014, correct?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
All right.
14
A.
I am.
THE COURT:
Objection, foundation; hearsay.
Overruled.
Exhibit 2531 is admitted.
DS
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
Your Honor, may I publish the document?
10:24:44
You may.
IEN
BY MS. WANG:
23
Q.
24
And this is the two-page letter from Mr. Wiebe and Mr. Drake.
25
They write:
FR
10:24:25
19
22
MR. MASTERSON:
18
21
You're familiar with this document, sir?
Exhibit 2531 into evidence.
17
20
10:24:17
MS. WANG:
15
16
10:23:58
All right.
Let's start with page 2, the first paragraph.
On November -- on the 6th of November 2014 -- and
10:24:59
1334
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
there's an address -- "J. Kirk Wiebe and Thomas A. Drake, both
former employees of the National Security Agency, and each
having many years of experience in the matter of data analysis
for intelligence production purposes, met with Investigator
Mike Zullo and detective Brian Mackiewicz of the Maricopa
County Sheriff's Office to examine certain data alleged to
reflect partial results of the clandestine collection of a
large volume of email and telephone communications."

Do you see that?
9
10
A.
I do.
11
Q.
Okay.
12
starts with the word "finally."
13
Mr. Drake wrote:
14
printed materials allegedly written by officials of the
15
U.S. Government, in particular the CIA and other organizations.
16
Again, there is was no evidence suggestion or revealing that
17
the documents examined came from any sensitive source or were
18
obtained through sensitive access methods involving specific
19
software and relevant metadata that would enable the collection
20
and processing of network-based or stored data."
Let's skip to the second page, the paragraph that
Do you see that Mr. Wiebe and
"Finally, Mr. Wiebe and Mr. Drake examined
A.
10:26:09
I do.
23
Q.
24
actually, let's got to the first page of the document, 2531,
25
and highlight the e-mail from Thomas Drake to Brian Mackiewicz.
FR
10:25:50
Do you see that?
IEN
22
10:25:33
DS
21
10:25:18
And did you understand from this document -- well,
10:26:20
Do you see the sentence that reads:
1335
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
"We have found
that he is a complete and total FRAUD"?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And you understood that to refer to Dennis Montgomery,
correct?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
And Brian Mackiewicz forwarded this to you, correct?
A.
He did.
Q.
And this was in November of 2014, correct?
10
A.
Correct.
11
Q.
And as we've already seen, Posseman Mike Zullo continued to
12
seek information from Dennis Montgomery till at least April
13
20th of 2015, correct?
14
A.
He's -- continues to communicate with him, yes.
15
Q.
Well, I think you testified finally after looking at the
16
document that he was seeking the production of work from Dennis
17
Montgomery on that date, correct?
18
A.
Yes.
MS. WANG:
19
THE COURT:
DS
20
10:26:39
the morning break?
22
MS. WANG:
IEN
21
10:26:50
May I have a moment, Your Honor.

You know what?
THE COURT:
24
We'll be back in 15 minutes.
FR
Is this a good time for
10:27:31
Actually, yes, it is.
23
25
10:27:13
All right.
(Recess taken.)
Why don't we take 15 minutes.
Thank you.
10:27:43
1336
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
2
3
4
Please be seated.
May I proceed, Your Honor?
THE COURT:
You may.
MS. WANG:
Thank you.
BY MS. WANG:
Q.
Chief Sheridan, take a look again at Exhibit 2525, please.
A.
Did you say 2525?
Q.
2525.
A.
Okay.
10
Q.
Okay?
11
A.
She was a forensic accountant assigned to the internal
12
audit function of the Sheriff's Office.
13
Q.
14
financial matters, expenses of the MCSO?
15
A.
16
more of an auditor, not a records-keeper.
17
Q.
18
that were audited?
19
A.
20
audited.
21
Q.
22
within her scope of responsibility as an internal auditor for
Sir, who is Dr. Beverly Owens-Prindle?
10:49:21
And is Dr. Prindle responsible for keeping records of
I don't believe that was her function.
Her function was
10:50:01
Did she keep records of expenses that might be audited or
DS
I'm sure that she kept records of the items that she
10:50:14
IEN
And was she responsible for documenting matters that came
23
MCSO?
24
A.
Yes, ma'am.
25
Q.
And who is Lee Ann Bohn?
FR
10:48:44
10:50:27
1337
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Lee Ann Bohn is -- well, at the time of this e-mail, she
was our chief financial officer.
Q.
And did she -- was she Dr. Owen's supervisor?
A.
Yes, ma'am.
Q.
I'd like to turn now to Exhibit 2526, please.
10:50:48
Do you have it in front of you, sir?
6
7
A.
I do.
Q.
Who's Cindy Allen?
A.
Cindy Allen is an administrative assistant.
10
Q.
And with respect to Exhibit 2526, was she documenting
11
travel expenses that Detective Mackiewicz incurred?
12
A.
13
assigned to the Custody Bureau, which is outside of the
14
organization.
15
Q.
16
travel expenses?
17
A.
18
know why.
19
Q.
20
for work have to document their travel expenses?
21
A.
Yes, ma'am.
22
Q.
And there are regular records kept of that by MCSO,
I don't know why she did this, because she's actually
Do you know Brian Mackiewicz was writing to her about
I don't, unless she was filling in for someone.
Do MCSO personnel who are required to travel
IEN
DS
All right.
10:51:37
I don't
23
correct?
24
A.
That's correct.
25
Q.
Approvals need to be documented for such expenses, correct?
FR
10:51:08
10:51:53
10:52:02
A.
Yes.
Q.
Can you turn to Exhibit 2527 now.

All right, sir.
1338
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Carmen Hernandez, at this time,
February 3rd of 2013, was the travel coordinator for MCSO,
correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And was it one of her responsibilities to document travel
requests made by MCSO personnel?
A.
That's correct.
10
Q.
All right.
10:52:37
Now please turn to Exhibit 2529.
Sir, is Sara Bagley a finance business analyst with
11
12
the MCSO's Budget and Finance Bureau?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
And is one of her responsibilities to document issues
15
relating to expenses incurred by MCSO personnel in the course
16
of their work?
17
A.
I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with her job function.
18
Q.
Okay.
19
determine whether she was writing, corresponding with Brian
20
Mackiewicz concerning approvals for travel expenses?
21
A.
Please give me a second.
22
Q.
All right.
DS
IEN
10:53:25
With respect to Exhibit 2529, are you able to
23
A.
Okay.
I'm sorry.
24
Q.
Sure.
Why don't I just ask you another question because I,
25
frankly, don't remember the other one.
FR
10:52:46
10:53:47
Can you repeat that question?
10:54:19
1339
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Was Sara Bagley, in connection with Exhibit 2529,
1
2
documenting a written approval for travel expenses?
A.
Yes.
Q.
In connection with Detective Mackiewicz's work for MCSO,
correct?
A.
10:54:35
Yes, ma'am.
MS. WANG:
Your Honor, at this time we would move to
admit Exhibits 2525 and 2529 for all purposes.
I believe that
they're substantive evidence that should come in under both
10
Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2) as non-hearsay statements of
11
a party opponent, and under the Rule 803(6) exception, the
12
hearsay rule, as records of a regularly conducted activity.
13
Your Honor had admitted both 2525 and 2529 for limited
14
purposes, and we request that they be admitted without
15
limitation.
10:55:21
And let me add, since I believe Mr. Masterson is about
16
17
to speak, I would also move to admit Exhibits 2526 and 2527 on
18
the same grounds.
MR. MASTERSON:
19
I'm just looking at one right now,
Judge, and this is 2529 -- 2529, and I don't see that the party
21
admission applies to this particular document.
DS
20
THE COURT:
IEN
22
these documents in front of me.
24
from Maricopa County?
FR
10:55:40
Is it prepared -- I'm sorry, I don't have
23
25
10:54:51
MR. MASTERSON:
Is it prepared by somebody
It is, but -- it's from
10:55:54
1340
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Detective Mackiewicz, but Detective Mackiewicz is not a party.
I'm not sure he has authority to speak for MCSO on -THE COURT:
Well, 2529, you may be able to establish
foundation later on, but if it is written by Mackiewicz, then
I'm not going to admit it at this point for lack of foundation.

MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
Well, I've got to see what the other
Counsel, could you please run those numbers by me
again?
MS. WANG:
12
Sure.
MR. MASTERSON:
13
14
Do you have any other objection?
ones are.
10
11
All right.
MR. MASTERSON:
MS. WANG:
2525, 2526, 2527, and 2529.
And I take it it's the same basis for
Correct.
MR. MASTERSON:
16
MS. WANG:
17
10:56:38
Thank you.
Yes.
MR. MASTERSON:
18
This particular e-mail is -- 2527 is
from Ms. Carmen Hernandez?
20
objection with respect to that one.
DS
19
THE COURT:
Hernandez.
Oh, I'm sorry.
23
looking at the wrong heading.
24
Detective Mackiewicz again.
25
MS. WANG:
FR
So I have the same
10:57:00
Well, who is --
MR. MASTERSON:
IEN
22
10:56:25
each one?
15
21
10:56:17
I'm sorry.
I was
This is from
Your Honor, all these documents were
10:57:13
1341
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
produced by the defendants, and I believe -- well, I can ask
the chief deputy another -- I'm sorry.

THE COURT:
Yeah.
I think you need -- if you want me
to admit them based on the hearsay exception, which is what I
assume you're going to now, you're going to have to lay more
foundation through the chief.

MS. WANG:
7
8
THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
10
Honor.
THE COURT:
12
MS. WANG:
13
I understand, but --
Yes.
I'll ask a few more questions, Your
Okay.
Your Honor, I have objected to all
these on the basis of relevance and 403 as well.

THE COURT:
16
I understand.
10:57:45
And again, I think it's a
matter that was opened up by your own client's testimony that
18
makes it relevant, so I'm going to overrule your objection and
19
I don't invite any response.
20
BY MS. WANG:
21
Q.
22
reason to believe that they are not e-mails that were kept as
DS
17
10:58:03
IEN
Chief, looking at those four exhibits, do you have any
23
part of MCSO's regular e-mail system?
24
A.
No.
25
Q.
And do you see anything in those exhibits -- 2525, 2526,
FR
10:57:40
All right.
MR. MASTERSON:
14
15
Both as non-hearsay under Rule 801, and as
an exception to the hearsay rule under 803.
11
10:57:28
10:58:45
1342
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
2527, or 2529 -- that would indicate that these were not e-mail
communications in the regular course of MCSO business
documenting travel expenses associated with MCSO business --
with MCSO business?
A.
No.
10:59:13
MS. WANG:
Your Honor, I move again for them all to be
admitted under the two rules, 801(d)(2), as non-hearsay, and
under, alternatively, that the exception to the hearsay rule
applies under Rule 803(6).

THE COURT:
10
I don't think you've yet met the
11
requirements of the rule, so I'm going to sustain the
12
objection.
MS. WANG:
13
14
BY MS. WANG:
15
Q.
16
the subject -- a suspect in a criminal IA investigation?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
Have you ever told Detective Mackiewicz, in connection with
19
that case, that he need not be concerned about the
20
investigation because it concerns a personal matter?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
I'm going to move on now to another subject, sir.
DS
Sir, are you aware that Detective Mackiewicz is currently
IEN
23
11:00:17
11:00:45
You testified yesterday -- excuse me -- that there
24
have been many IA cases opened regarding the improper handling
25
of ID documents by MCSO personnel, correct?
FR
11:00:04
11:01:12
1343
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes, ma'am.
Q.
You're familiar with the fact that a Sergeant Powe in the
Special Investigations Division found 44 IDs around the office,
correct?
A.
I am.
Q.
And that in connection with that case, Captain Bailey had a
policy violation sustained in connection with an IA case,
correct?
A.
I am.
10
Q.
And he's the commander of the PSB, correct?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q.
And I'm going to have you turn to Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2065,
13
please.
by --
11:02:26
MS. WANG:
16
Oh, I beg your pardon, Your Honor.
17
an attorneys' eyes only designation on this document.
18
believe there's any reason for that.
19
agree to remove that.
21
THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
IEN
22
MR. MASTERSON:
DS
20
There's
I don't
Would ask defendants to
That can be removed, Judge.
11:02:35
All right.
Thank you.
23
BY MS. WANG:
24
Q.
25
MCSO on April 17th, 2015?
FR
11:01:38
Sir, is Exhibit 2065 a Briefing Board that was put out
14
15
11:01:28
Chief, is Exhibit 2065 a Briefing Board document put out by

11:02:43
1344
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
It is.
Q.
And this document essentially promulgates new policies
relating to the handling of IDs, correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
And was this document promulgated because of all of the
issues that have arisen in the last two years about improper
handling of IDs?
A.
Yes, ma'am.
Q.
And those things all came to light in what you refer to as
10
the Armendariz spin-off investigations, correct?
11
A.
That and others, yes.
12
Q.
All right.
13
April 17th, 2015, more recently, correct?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
And was that because in July it came to light that a
16
Sergeant Jon Knapp had tried to turn over a thousand IDs to the
17
Property and Evidence Unit?
18
A.
That's correct.
19
Q.
And isn't it true that if Sergeant Knapp had followed
20
Briefing Board 1504 when it issued in April of 2015, he should
21
have turned those in earlier, correct?
22
A.
11:03:15
DS
Now, you had to reissue this Briefing Board of
11:03:33
11:03:54
IEN
Yes, ma'am.
23
Q.
Now, and he did not do so until July, correct?
24
A.
Correct.
25
Q.
Now, Captain Bailey informed you of the fact that Sergeant
FR
11:02:56
11:04:07
1345
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Knapp had come forward with over a thousand IDs, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And you've subsequently learned that in fact it was 1,459
IDs?
A.
I believe that's the number.
Q.
Captain Bailey informed you of this around July 8th, is
that correct?
A.
I'm not sure of the date, but that's about the time.
Q.
All right.
And Captain Bailey came over to your office in
person to inform you of this, correct?
11
A.
He did.
12
Q.
And when Captain Bailey -- well, what was your reaction
13
when Captain Bailey told you of the thousand-plus IDs turned in
14
by Sergeant Knapp in July?
15
A.
I was dumbfounded --
16
Q.
That --
17
A.
-- and angry.
18
Q.
Because they should have been turned in earlier, correct?
19
A.
That's correct.
20
Q.
Now, when Captain Bailey told you about these IDs, you knew
21
that this had the potential to be a very serious matter,
22
correct?
IEN
DS
10
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q.
And you recognized this was a major deal, I think you've
25
said before?
FR
11:04:23
11:04:40
11:04:54
11:05:07
11:05:27
1346
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes.
Q.
You understood that the plaintiffs in this case would take
these IDs very seriously?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And you understood that this is something that the
court-appointed monitor would take seriously, correct?

MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
8
9
11:05:32
You may answer if you have -- if you have
an opinion.
THE WITNESS:
10
I believe they would, yes.
11:05:46
11
BY MS. WANG:
12
Q.
13
what did you do?
14
A.
15
told me about them he had already pulled an IA number.
16
told him that I wanted to find out what the heck he was doing
17
with all those IDs, why he hadn't turned them in, why the chain
18
of command didn't make sure he was briefed on this
19
Briefing Board, and I wanted an accounting of how he obtained
20
those IDs, and why.
21
Q.
22
Sergeant Knapp interviewed by PSB, correct?
Now, when Captain Bailey informed you about these 1459 IDs,
What did you tell Captain Bailey?
Well, I'm not sure -- I'm fairly sure when Captain Bailey
DS
And I
11:06:44
IEN
And Sergeant Knapp told you that he intended to have
23
A.
Captain Bailey told me that, yes.
24
Q.
Correct.
25
maybe the next day or within a day or two, about the interview
FR
11:06:10
And Captain Bailey came back and reported to you,

11:07:06
1347
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
of Sergeant Knapp, correct?
A.
It was -- yeah, it was a day or two later.
Q.
Okay.
had pulled those ID cards out of the Property and Evidence
room, correct?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
They had been in the destruction bin there, correct?
A.
Yes, ma'am.
Q.
And you also found out that Sergeant Knapp had pulled those
And you learned that Sergeant Knapp reported that he
IDs from the destruction bin at the Property and Evidence room
11
over a period of years, correct?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
Ending in about 2010?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
When you heard that report from Captain Bailey on the
16
Sergeant Knapp interview, you told Bailey to suspend the IA
17
case, correct?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
Now, at that point, after Captain Bailey had told you about
20
the Knapp IDs, and then told you later the results of the
21
interview of Sergeant Knapp, you did not report the 1459 IDs to
22
the court-appointed monitor, did you?
IEN
DS
10
A.
No.
24
Q.
You were aware at that point in July, after hearing about
25
the Sergeant Knapp interview, that the Court had ordered the
FR
23
11:07:21
11:07:31
11:07:40
11:08:06
11:08:25
1348
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
production of IDs belonging to the members of plaintiff class,
correct?
A.
Yes, ma'am.
Q.
You were aware the Court had ordered that back in February,
correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Now, is it fair to say that when you heard Captain Bailey's
report on the interview of Sergeant Knapp, you thought that
there was some question about whether the Court's order would
11:08:40
10
apply or not, is that correct?
11
A.
That was one of the issues.
12
Q.
Okay.
13
had obtained these documents from the destruction bin might
14
affect whether disclosure was required under the Court's order,
15
correct?
16
A.
Yes, ma'am.
17
Q.
You also thought that the fact that he had collected them
18
over a period of years might affect whether disclosure was
19
required under the court order, is that right?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Now, sir, you're familiar with the Property and Evidence
22
room's procedures for putting things in the destruction bin,
IEN
DS
And you thought that the fact that Sergeant Knapp
23
right?
24
A.
I am.
25
Q.
And at one point you were actually assigned to the Property
FR
11:09:00
11:09:17
11:09:28
11:09:40
1349
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
and Evidence department, correct?
A.
I was.
Q.
All right.
bin, for example, when a deputy confiscates them from someone
and then determines they are no longer needed for evidence, is
that right?
A.
Correct.
Q.
And the deputy would fill out documentation and submit
those IDs to be destroyed, correct?
And is it true that IDs go into the destruction
10
A.
Yes, ma'am.
11
Q.
All right.
12
about whether disclosure was required under the court orders,
13
was there any other reason you did not immediately inform the
14
monitor of the IDs?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
Was that because you were concerned about notifying the
17
monitor only after you had the right story?
18
A.
That's correct.
19
Q.
So I'm a little confused, because I think you said that you
20
told Captain Bailey to suspend the IA case, correct?
21
A.
That's correct.
22
Q.
Wouldn't that have been the way to get more information to
11:10:07
IEN
DS
Besides those two questions you had that --
23
provide the monitors about the IDs?
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
Now, did you seek advice from counsel about whether or not
FR
11:09:55
11:10:28
11:10:48
11:11:08
1350
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
the court orders required disclosure of the IDs?
A.
I did.
Q.
And did you seek that advice from Ms. Iafrate?
A.
Yes, ma'am.
Q.
All right.
Michele Iafrate after hearing the report on the Sergeant Knapp
interview, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And you presented her with the two questions you had that
You met one-on-one or spoke one-on-one with
10
might implicate whether or not disclosure was required under
11
the court orders, correct?
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q.
That was that, number one, Knapp had collected the IDs over
14
a period of years, correct?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
And number two, that they had come from the destruction
17
bin, correct?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
And you believed that those two facts might possibly take
20
the IDs out of the court-ordered disclosure requirement,
21
correct?
22
A.
24
FR
25
11:11:58
DS
Q.
11:11:45
11:12:06
Yes.
IEN
23
11:11:29
How did Michele Iafrate react to the news of the Knapp IDs?
MR. MASTERSON:
BY MS. WANG:
11:12:26
Q.
you a reaction to the news about the Sergeant Knapp IDs?
Did she tell you during the conversation -- or did she show
MR. MASTERSON:
3
4
1351
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Objection to statements as hearsay,
and foundation as to reaction.

THE COURT:
Overruled.
THE WITNESS:
I recall her saying something to the
effect that she wasn't sure; that she would have to do some
research.
BY MS. WANG:
Q.
Did she indicate to you that she was upset like you were
11
about the fact that these thousand-plus IDs had surfaced?
12
A.
Oh, yes.
13
Q.
She thought it was a matter for concern, correct?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
Are aware that the court-appointed monitor team began one
16
of their quarterly site visits with MCSO on July 20th of 2015?
17
A.
Yes, I believe that's the date.
18
Q.
And are you also aware that on Friday, July 17th, the
19
Friday before the monitor site visit, members of PSB gathered
20
to have what Captain Bailey calls a rehearsal meeting in
21
anticipation of the monitor site visit?
22
A.
DS
10
11:12:58
11:13:13
11:13:35
IEN
Yes.
23
Q.
Did you attend part of that meeting on July 17th?
24
A.
I think I did for a few minutes, yes.
25
Q.
And did you inspect the actual IDs when you arrived there?
FR
11:12:44
11:13:52
1352
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes.
Q.
Is it fair to say that the 1459 IDs are very voluminous?
A.
Yes, it's a very impressive sight.
Q.
They fill a large clear plastic bag, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And if you packed them up tightly, it would probably fill
up an entire Bankers Box?
A.
Probably several.
Q.
Okay.
11:14:11
Michele Iafrate was present at that meeting,
correct?
11
A.
I'm not sure.
12
Q.
You don't recall?
13
A.
I don't -- I don't recall if she was there or not.
14
Q.
Captain Bailey was present, correct?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
Lieutenant Seagraves?
17
A.
I believe so.
18
Q.
Who else do you recall being there?
19
A.
I believe Laurie Sanchez, the administrative assistant, and
20
several others assigned to PSB.
21
Q.
Lieutenant Sparman, or Sergeant Sparman, is it?
22
A.
I don't recall who else was there.
IEN
DS
10
11:14:26
11:14:36
11:14:50
There was many other
people in the room.
24
Q.
Right.
25
A.
I was pretty -- I was focused on the IDs.
FR
23
11:15:06
1353
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Is it fair to say it was meant to be a gathering of PSB
staff?
A.
Yes, ma'am.
Q.
All right.
A.
I don't recall.
Q.
Okay.
A.
Correct.
Q.
They were under discussion during that meeting, obviously?
A.
They were, because that's when -- it may have been Sergeant
Was Lieutenant Swingle there?
11:15:20
So you saw the 15 -- 1459 IDs during that meeting?
10
Sparman, but again, I don't want to guess, especially sitting
11
up here.
12
were Hispanic drivers' licenses, or Hispanic IDs.
13
Q.
14
be required under the Court's order, correct?
15
A.
Correct.
16
Q.
While you were present at the July 17th meeting, did you
17
hear any PSB staff ask for guidance about what to do about the
18
pending IA case?
19
A.
20
about -- a lot of them appeared to be fraudulent.
21
30 percent were Hispanic surnames.
22
dumbfounded about this whole issue, and the sight of them
But someone told me that about 30 percent of those
And that gave rise to further concern that disclosure might
11:16:07
IEN
DS
I don't recall much of a discussion other than hearing that

About
11:16:31
And, you know, again, I was
23
reconfirmed that.
24
minutes, so I don't remember much of a conversation.
25
Q.
FR
11:15:44
And I was only in the room for a few
You said two things just now: that there was discussion
11:17:05
1354
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
that 30 percent of the IDs appeared to belong to people who
were Hispanic, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And you also said that some of them appeared -- some of the
IDs appeared to be fraudulent, correct?
A.
fraudulent.
Q.
the Hispanic IDs, 30 percent -- or many appeared to be
11:17:18
I believe I was told many of them appeared to be
Okay.
But I just want to clarify.
You didn't hear that of
10
fraudulent.
11
A.
They were two separate statements, correct.
12
Q.
Okay.
13
happened, the IDs had not been disclosed to the monitor yet,
14
correct?
15
A.
That's correct.
16
Q.
Did you speak to Michele Iafrate at some point on July 17th
17
separately?
18
A.
19
could have been.
20
Q.
21
three of you?
22
A.
11:17:33
As of July 17th, 2015, when this rehearsal meeting
I know I talked to her.
11:17:53
I don't know if it was the 17th;
I don't remember exact --
DS
Did you meet with Michele Iafrate and Captain Bailey, the
11:18:19
IEN
I believe so.
23
Q.
24
correct?
25
A.
FR
Those two were separate statements, correct?
That would have been after this PSB meeting on the 17th,
I'm not sure.
11:18:28
1355
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Did you report to Michele Iafrate the fact that about
30 percent of the IDs appeared to be -- belong to people who
were Hispanic?
A.
I don't recall our conversation exactly, so I'm not sure.
Q.
Okay.
in your deposition on the 22nd.

All right.
Let me take a look at that.
I'll move on.
I can't find it right now.
Michele Iafrate and Captain Bailey, correct?

A.
Yes, ma'am.
11
Q.
And that was before the July 20th meeting with the monitor,
12
correct?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
All right.
15
the view that it would be premature to disclose the IDs at the
16
July 20th meeting?
17
A.
I don't -- I don't recall her words.
18
Q.
Did she express to you, in effect, that she believed it
19
would be premature to disclose the IDs to the monitors at the
20
upcoming meeting on the 20th?
21
A.
It was something to that effect.
22
Q.
Okay.
IEN
DS
10
23
24
FR
25
11:18:54
During -- so you do recall that you had a meeting with
8
9
Let me see if -- I believe you testified about this
11:19:37
Did Michele Iafrate tell you that she was of
Let me just make sure.
11:19:48
11:20:17
On September 22nd, 2015,
during your deposition I asked you at page 720, line 15:

"During the meeting on July 17th, did you discuss with
Ms. Iafrate and Captain Bailey, did you discuss whether to
11:20:38
bring up the Knapp IDs during the monitor's site visit the
following week?
"Answer:
And what was the substance of that
discussion?
11:20:50
"Answer:
6
7
Yes.
"Question:
1356
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
She said it would be premature to bring up
the issue with the IDs at this point."

Is that testimony correct?
8
9
A.
Yeah.
10
Q.
At that point, July 17th of 2015, you had known about the
11
1450- -- 59 IDs for almost two weeks, right?
12
A.
I'd have to count on my fingers.
13
Q.
Okay.
14
A.
I'm not sure when I found out about them.
15
10th; I'm not sure.
16
Q.
17
week.
18
A.
I would agree to that.
19
Q.
Okay.
20
A.
I would agree to a week without actually remembering --
21
Q.
Counting on your fingers?
22
A.
-- when I saw them and getting a calendar out.
24
FR
25
I -- maybe.
You found out about them on July 8th, correct?
Maybe the 9th,
Is that fair to say?
And probably more than a week, correct?
DS
Q.
11:21:38
Well, in any event, you had known about them for over a
IEN
23
11:21:03
Okay.
11:21:47
Fair enough.
During the meeting with Michele Iafrate and
Captain Bailey, Captain Bailey asked, "What do I do if the
11:22:03
1357
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
monitor asks about IDs?" didn't he?
A.
I believe so.
Q.
All right.
A.
Something to the effect of, If he asks specifically about
the 1500 IDs, go ahead, tell him.
Q.
deposition on September 22nd.
sure that we have that you did tell Michele Iafrate that about
30 percent of the IDs among the 1459 were -- appeared to belong
10
And what was Michele Iafrate's response?
11:22:37
And my colleague has helped me to find the citation to your

I want to go back and just make
to people who were Hispanic.
At page 704, line 1:
11
11:23:13
"Question:
Between the first
12
time you spoke to Michele Iafrate and the second time, did you
13
learn any other information about the Knapp IDs that you
14
conveyed to her during the second meeting?

"Answer:
15
16
IDs.
"Question:
"Answer:
FR
25
And why was that -- why was that relevant
to report to her?
23
24
11:23:40
"Question:
IEN
22
About 30 percent of those were Hispanic
surnames.
DS
21
Anything else that you reported to her
that was new?
19
20
11:23:30
There was almost 1500 IDs.
17
18
Just that the -- there weren't a thousand
"Answer
-- because the plaintiffs' class is Hispanic
drivers."
Was that testimony accurate?
11:23:52
1358
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes, ma'am.
Q.
So you did report to Michele Iafrate that 30 percent of the
1459 IDs appeared to belong to Hispanics, correct?
A.
I believe so.
Q.
All right.
Now, on Wednesday -- withdrawn.
The following week during the monitor site visit did
6
7
you learn that Captain Bailey had answered a question from the
Monitor Team regarding identification documents?
A.
Yes, ma'am.
10
Q.
All right.
11
Captain Bailey himself?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
Did he come to you on Wednesday of that week, which would
14
have been July 22nd, to report what happened during the July
15
20th meeting between PSB and the Monitor Team?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
And did he advise you that Lieutenant Swingle of PSB --
18
well, withdrawn.
And did you learn about that from
11:24:29
11:24:44
Did he advise you that during the July 20th meeting,
19
he had been asked by Chief Kiyler of the Monitor Team a
21
question relating to identification documents?
22
A.
DS
20
11:25:04
IEN
He did.
23
Q.
24
asked?
25
A.
FR
11:24:02
What was the question that he reported to you he had been
I don't recall the language from the question, other than
11:25:16
1359
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
she inquired about IDs.
She was asking questions about IDs,
that kind of thing.
question.
Q.
response to her question?
A.
He said no.
Q.
And is it fair to say that when he came to you on July
22nd, that Wednesday, that he was concerned about whether his
answer might have been problematic?
Did we have any cases on IDs, that kind of
I don't remember exactly the words.
And what did Captain Bailey report to you had been his
11:25:40
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
And he reported to you that Lieutenant Swingle of PSB had
12
been asked the same question by Chief Kiyler later, and that he
13
reported the discovery of the 1459 IDs?
14
A.
That's correct.
15
Q.
And Captain Bailey was concerned because he thought that
16
his answer, his negative answer to Chief Kiyler, might make it
17
look like he was trying to hide the fact of the 1459 IDs?
11:25:54
MR. MASTERSON:
18
19
BY MS. WANG:
20
Q.
Is that what he told you?
21
A.
That's what he told me.
22
Q.
And what did you tell him in response?
IEN
DS
11:26:29
23
A.
24
following Michele's guidance, she's still doing the research on
25
it.
FR
I told him:
11:26:10
Don't worry about it.
As long as you were
I don't know if we're ready to -- if we were ready to
11:26:57
1360
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
disclose the IDs to the Monitor Team yet, or if we even needed
to at that point.
Q.
Captain Bailey about -- to prepare for the July 20th meeting?
A.
I knew that she normally helps them prepare, yes.
Q.
Okay.
had told Captain Bailey, If they ask you this question, you can
answer this way; if she asks you -- if the Monitor Team asks
you this question, you can answer another way.
And did you understand that Michele Iafrate had talked to
And was it your understanding that Michele Iafrate
That they
10
basically ran through various possible questions and answers
11
together in advance of the July 20th meeting?
12
A.
I was aware of that.
13
Q.
Do you believe that Captain Bailey's answer to the Monitor
14
Team during the July 20th meeting was accurate?

MR. MASTERSON:
15
16
The witness
11:27:48
11:28:07
said he doesn't remember the question.

MS. WANG:
17
Well, Chief, I'll withdraw that question.
18
BY MS. WANG:
19
Q.
20
happened during the July 20th meeting?
21
A.
He went over it rather quickly, yeah.
22
Q.
Well, he was very concerned about whether he might be in
IEN
DS
Chief, did Captain Bailey describe for you what had
23
trouble with the monitor, correct?
24
A.
Correct.
25
Q.
And you got enough of the sense of the question and answer
FR
11:27:25
11:28:29
11:28:45
1361
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
that had been -- question and answer during the July 20th
meeting that you were able to give him a reassurance that he
shouldn't worry about it, correct?
A.
the question.
different answer than his lieutenant did --
Q.
Well --
A.
-- to me was what he was concerned with.
Q.
Well, Captain Bailey had said, in response to a question
Right.
I don't think he was concerned with his answer to

It was more of his concern that he had a
10
whether there were some IDs, some question about whether there
11
were IDs, No, correct?
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q.
And Lieutenant Swingle, when asked the same question, had
14
said, Yeah, we found 1459 IDs, correct?
15
A.
16
did respond affirmatively.
17
Q.
18
Captain Bailey came to you and said he was concerned that it
19
would look like he was trying to hide the IDs, correct?
20
A.
Right.
21
Q.
All right.
22
about the events during the Monitor Team visit on July 20th,
Well, I don't know if it's the same question, but yes, he
11:29:22
11:29:35
IEN
DS
And I thought you testified a moment ago that
11:29:52
So based on your discussion with Captain Bailey
23
did you have any concern that he had given an inaccurate
24
answer?
25
A.
FR
11:29:04
No.
11:30:06
1362
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Sir, I'm going to have you take a look at the Court's order
of February 12th, 2015.

MS. WANG:
It is in evidence as Exhibit 2003.
Well, I should say the parties have
stipulated to its admission, and I would move for its admission
at this time.
THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
7
8
11:30:29
Exhibit what?
2003, Your Honor.
It's the Court's
February 12th, 2015 order.

THE COURT:
Exhibit 2003 is admitted.
10
MS. WANG:
11
12
BY MS. WANG:
13
Q.
14
12th, 2015.
All right, sir.
MS. WANG:
15
THE COURT:
16
MS. WANG:
17
Thank you.
This is the Court's order of February
Can we publish it, Your Honor?
If you could put that up and highlight
paragraph 1 at the bottom of the first page.
19
BY MS. WANG:
20
Q.
21
ordered to produce the following documents and any associated
22
privilege logs by February 27th, 2015?
IEN
DS
Do you see where it says:
A.
I do.
25
Q.
Okay.
FR
24
11:31:12
You may.
18
23
11:30:41
Number 1.
Defendants are
11:31:20
Do you see that?
Let's turn to the next page and highlight
11:31:32
1363
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
paragraph A.
The requirement is that copies of identification
2
3
documents seized by MCSO personnel from apparent members of the
plaintiff class, that's the requirement, correct?
A.
Yes, ma'am.
Q.
And you understood this order in July of 2015, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
There's no limitation that says "unless the documents came
out of the destruction bin at the Property and Evidence room,"
11:31:48
10
right?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q.
There's no time limitation on that, is there?
13
A.
There's also no time period that we have to do it
14
immediately upon discovering them, either.
15
had pulled an Internal Affairs investigation number.
16
in IAPro.
17
investigation numbers.
18
The monitor was -- we were going to notify the monitor.
19
a matter of when and what -- what we were going to be able to
20
tell them over and above what the Court's order was -- the
21
issues with the Court's order also.
My opinion was we
That was
DS
There's no secret what we were doing.
It was
11:32:51
Let's get
23
our -- let's find out.
24
Let's find out what these IDs are about before we ring the
25
alarm.
FR
11:32:22
The monitor has access to IAPro and our internal
So in my mind, it was just a matter of:
IEN
22
11:32:01
Let's get our story straight here.
Because my reaction to it, Ms. Iafrate's reaction to
11:33:18
1364
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
the 1500 IDs, and just about everybody else's, was pretty
alarming.
And knowing how the monitor would respond to it was a
3
4
grave concern to me, so I wanted to make sure before we advised
the monitor about the IDs that we knew what we were talking
about: where they came from, what was going on, was this even a
concern of the Court, those kinds of issues, and they hadn't
been sorted out yet.
Q.
But sir, you had told Captain Bailey to suspend the IA
10
case, correct?
11
A.
12
documents.
13
my mind -- you have to understand my frame of reference.
14
have just completed the Charley Armendariz investigation of
15
63,000 personnel hours with over 50 detectives at any one time,
16
and what a huge undertaking something like this could be.
17
discovery of 1500 IDs could lead to something of similar
18
nature.
11:34:05
No, I told him to suspend looking into the individual

That's what I was talking about.
Don't forget, on
We
11:34:30
This
So before I -- and I try not to be an alarmist.
19
Before I got all excited about it, I wanted to make sure there
21
was an ongoing investigation on why this happened, why they
22
didn't comply with it, but in my mind, what I was talking about
IEN
DS
20
23
the suspending anything was let's not start taking individual
24
IDs, doing the individual investigation, tracking them back
25
through CAD, through our Records Management System to see what
FR
11:33:41
11:34:51
11:35:27
1365
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
deputy was responsible for it to go back to.
some more interviews that needed to be done with property room
and that kind of thing.
magnitude of what you're talking about.
Q.
Did you tell Captain Bailey to suspend the IA case on the 1459
IDs?
to suspend only part of that investigation?
A.
That has always been my -- yes, always been my order.
10
Q.
You didn't say that a few minutes ago.
11
A.
Well, I'm sorry if I left that part out.
12
Q.
Okay.
13
deposition, at page 514, line 17, I asked you:
14
Captain Bailey told you about the Knapp interview, his
15
interview of Sergeant Knapp, did you tell him --'
16
A.
Can you give me an opportunity to --
17
Q.
Sure.
18
A.
-- look at this?
19
Q.
September 15th, 2015, page 514.
20
A.
Okay.
21
Q.
Line 17:
22
interview, his interview of Sergeant Knapp, did you tell him to
It wasn't the suspension of the
Sir, just a few minutes ago you testified -- I asked you:
And you answered:
Yes.
11:36:11
And on September 15th, 2015, when I took your

"After
11:36:29
Please.
What page is that?
11:36:50
"After Captain Bailey told you about the Knapp
suspend the IA case on the Knapp IDs?
24
"Answer:
25
You did not testify to any qualification or limitation
FR
11:35:47
Now you're saying you told him
DS
IEN
23
There was still
I think I did."
11:37:16
1366
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
on the suspension order, did you?
A.
No.
Q.
And earlier the today you did not testify that you told him
to suspend only part of the investigation, correct?
A.
IA case involving the IDs means exactly what I said a minute
ago: taking those individual IDs, backtracking through our
Records Management System and CAD, find out who impounded them,
where they came from, bringing the deputies in, just like we
No, because like I testified a minute ago, in my mind, the
10
did with the Charley Armendariz case.
That is my frame of
11
reference when I think about investigating this.
There's really two parts in this case to me.
12
issue even came up with my interrogation from Chief Anders from
14
the Monitor Team.
15
because I think even Captain Bailey was unclear about what I
16
was talking about with the IDs and how I wanted this
17
investigated, because there is the personnel side of it.
18
was Sergeant Knapp allowed to obtain these IDs?
19
reason?
20
Briefing Board, was his chain of command culpable?
21
that investigation, and then there was what -- when I think
22
about when we talk about the investigation of the IDs
We went round and round about this also,
Why didn't he turn them in?
DS
IEN
11:37:55
And this
13
11:38:17
Why
For what
In response to the 1504

There was
23
themselves.
24
Q.
25
order to tell the Monitor Team any time between July 8th and
FR
11:37:29
11:38:48
Sir, why would you need to have all that information in

11:39:16
1367
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
July 20th:
We found 1459 IDs.
We haven't gotten to the bottom
of it, but we will look into it?
What stopped you from doing that any time between July
3
4
8th and July 20th of 2015?
A.
alarmist, and how the Monitor Team would respond to it, and I
believe they are alarmist, I was scared that they would
overreact and create a huge problem and I would have another
Charley Armendariz situation on my hands.
Because knowing how I responded to it, and I'm not an
And again, we spent
10
63,000 personnel hours on that investigation.
11
any one time.
50 detectives at
13
Monitor Team.
14
was trying to hide it from them.
Ms. Iafrate, Captain Bailey,
15
none of us ever talked about it.
It's just let's find out what
16
we have here before we tell the Monitor Team.
17
as that.
18
Q.
19
information, but you had suspended the investigation, correct?
20
Or at least part of it?
21
MR. MASTERSON:
It was not a fact -- it was not anything that I
11:40:37
It's as simple
DS
Well, you're saying it's simple as trying to find out more
IEN
THE COURT:
23
BY MS. WANG:
25
Q.
11:40:55
Objection, asked and answered.
Overruled.
THE WITNESS:
24
FR
11:40:09
I wanted to make sure what we had before I told the
12
22
11:39:37
That's correct.
And you say that you knew it was a matter of time before
11:41:02
1368
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
you were going to disclose the IDs, but you asked Michele
Iafrate to research two reasons why you thought disclosure
might not be required at all, correct?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
Sir, did there come a time when you told Captain Bailey to
go ahead and reactivate the IA investigation into the 1459 IDs?
A.
No.
Q.
No?
A.
It is now.
10
Q.
Oh, you only reactivated it after lieutenant --
11
Captain Molina took over PSB?
12
A.
That's correct.
13
Q.
In late August.
14
A.
That's correct.
15
counsel, who was coordinating with, I believe, you, to get some
16
direction about how to approach investigating these IDs.
17
never received that direction, but Captain Molina began to
18
investigate the IDs on her own without direction from
19
plaintiffs' counsel or our counsel.
20
Q.
21
in late August, correct?
22
A.
So it never was reactivated?
Captain Bailey's no longer in charge of PSB.
11:41:45
I was waiting for some direction from my
DS
When was Captain Molina appointed to command PSB?
11:41:58
We
It was
11:42:34
IEN
It was about three or four weeks ago.
23
Q.
24
connection with this case on August 6th, 2015, correct?
25
A.
FR
11:41:20
You were interviewed by Chief Anders of the Monitor Team in
I don't remember.
11:42:51
Q.
of your interview with Chief Anders of the Monitor Team.
Sir, take a look at Exhibit 2532.
This is the transcript
Do you have that in front of you?
It might be in one of the binders.
4
5
that's voluminous.
A.
Yes, it's here.
Q.
Please turn to page 63.
It's a document
11:43:59
Well, first turn the first page and let me know
8
9
1369
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
whether you were interviewed by Chief Anders of the Monitor
10
Team on August 6th, 2015.
11
A.
I was.
12
Q.
Okay.
Turn to page 63.
MR. MASTERSON:
13
11:44:24
Your Honor, I'm going to object to the
14
use of the interview transcript from the monitor.
15
discussed this in a status conference.

THE COURT:
16
I believe we
11:44:36
I indicated that I'd let it be used to
17
show prior statements if that came up.
18
the use is, but I'm not going to sustain your objection at this
19
point.
MR. MASTERSON:
DS
20
I mean, first off, I think that you
said it can be used for impeachment.
22
yet to impeach the witness.
IEN
21
23
THE COURT:
11:44:50
We haven't had a question
Well, I'm going to allow its use unless
24
you've got a specific objection.
25
MR. MASTERSON:
FR
So I don't know what
My objection is that this was a
11:45:01
compelled interview without due process protections for my
client.
THE COURT:
With all due respect, I'm going to
overrule that objection.
interview --
MS. WANG:
7
8
present?
10
11
He had counsel present.
The
11:45:15
I believe Mr. Mitchell was present, was he not?
1370
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
He was, Your Honor.
THE COURT:
Somebody from Ms. Iafrate's office was
MS. WANG:
Actually, Your Honor, Mr. Popolizio was
present, and Lee Stein was present as well.

THE COURT:
12
All right.
MR. MASTERSON:
13
The objection is overruled.
Your Honor, I just want to note for
14
the record that -- and I'm obviously not going to read it into
15
the record at this point, but the prefatory remarks made by the
16
monitor at the beginning of each interview.

THE COURT:
17
18
Well, do they provide a basis for your
MR. MASTERSON:
Well, it does, because the monitor
basically tells counsel that they are not permitted to
21
participate in the interview.
DS
20
IEN
MS. WANG:
11:45:46
Your Honor, just for the record, there's a
23
clear statement from the monitor at the beginning of the
24
interview that the interview is not compelled, that the witness
25
is not compelled to answer.
FR
11:45:37
objection?
19
22
11:45:26
11:46:00
1371
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Secondly, Garrity is a case based on the Fifth
1
2
Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
Garrity itself and the Chavez versus Martinez case, there is no
Fifth Amendment problem until the statement is introduced in a
criminal trial.
civil hearing, and I'm going to be using this for impeachment
purposes.
We are not in a criminal trial, we're in a
THE COURT:
Judge, I just want to note that
10
there's a possibility of criminal referral here, so we do have
11
criminal issues.
THE COURT:
12
13
THE COURT:
11:46:39
Are you going to direct the witness not to
answer the question?

MR. STEIN:
I am not going to direct him not to answer
the question, but I do think there are Fifth Amendment issues.

THE COURT:
DS
20
Well, I don't represent the witness in
that particular aspect.
18
19
Well, are you going to direct the witness
MR. MASTERSON:
16
17
Well, you've raised them.
Are there any
that I need to consider now?
22
MR. STEIN:
I believe so.
23
THE COURT:
All right.
24
MR. STEIN:
The use of a compelled statement.
IEN
21
FR
25
11:46:30
not to answer the question?
14
15
11:46:17
Overruled.
MR. MASTERSON:
And under
11:46:52
What are they?

And I
actually am not, frankly, positive that this is a compelled
11:47:01
1372
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
statement.
2
3
THE COURT:
All right.
MR. STEIN:
But the use of a compelled statement
that's used by the Court to evaluate whether or not to make a
criminal referral I think is improper and infringes on his
Fifth Amendment rights.

THE COURT:
I understand that.
11:47:11
I do believe that I
gave instructions about the nature of these interviews before
they ever began.
I haven't read the statements.
I think I've
10
indicated I haven't read any of the statements.
11
what statement the monitor made.
12
that everybody could obtain all their rights, and that's why I
13
was letting counsel be there because there were criminal
14
ramifications.
At this point,
16
I'm only going to consider it for purposes of the civil
17
contempt hearing.
18
allow the --
I understand that, Your Honor, and I think
this is actually a much more significant issue if we get to the
21
point of --
IEN
DS
20
22
23
THE COURT:
Criminal referral?
MR. STEIN:
No -- well, yes, of course, but with
24
respect to the Internal Affairs investigation interviews.
25
those were clearly covered by Garrity and those are clearly
FR
11:47:34
I'm going to overrule the objection and
MR. STEIN:
19
11:47:21
But I think I made it clear
I understand your concern, Mr. Stein.
15
I don't know
11:47:45
And
11:47:58
compelled statements.
2
3
to what?
4
5
6
7
8
given?
9
10
11
12
THE COURT:
The Internal Affairs interviews relating
MR. STEIN:
Relating to the various --
THE COURT:
You mean the criminal PSB investigations?
MR. STEIN:
The civil PS -- the administrative --
THE COURT:
Oh, the PSB where Garrity statements were
MR. STEIN:
Yes.
THE COURT:
Okay.
MR. STEIN:
Sorry I was unclear.
THE COURT:
Well, I may just have misunderstood.
I'm following you now.
MS. WANG:
14
BY MS. WANG:
16
Q.
17
with Chief Anders of the Monitor Team?
18
A.
I am.
19
Q.
Starting at line 12, Chief Anders asked you:
23
24
FR
25
11:48:26
Sir, you're on page 63 of your August 8th, 2015 interview
DS
"Does this investigation involving Sergeant Knapp, is
11:48:34
this still an open investigation?

"Chief Sheridan:
IEN
22
11:48:18
15
21
11:48:08
Go ahead, Ms. Wang.
13
20
1373
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
"Chief Anders:
Yes, sir.
Okay.
Has it always been an open
investigation?
"Chief Sheridan:
As far as I'm concerned it has,
11:48:45
yes."
1374
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Was that your statement to Chief Anders on August 8th,
2
3
2015, sir?
A.
Yes.
Q.
So which is it, Chief Sheridan?
to be suspended and then reopen it?
You've given various different statements, so I'd like to hear
from you --
A.
No.
11
A.
12
BY MS. WANG:
13
Q.
What are you saying?

THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
15
THE COURT:
16
THE COURT:
18
That's what I'm trying to find out.
I didn't even get --
I'm sorry.
11:49:16
-- to hear the objection, Mr. Masterson.

The objection was argumentative.
All right.
Do you want to read back the
Well, I've got it here.
THE WITNESS:
Just a second.
11:49:30
Okay.
You just don't understand what
I'm trying to communicate to you.
23
Okay?
To me, there is two parts to this issue of the 1500
24
IDs.
25
minute ago.
FR
11:49:10
Overruled.
IEN
22
question?
DS
21
Objection, argumentative.
Well, wait a minute.
MR. MASTERSON:
17
20
Was it always open?
-- don't understand what I'm saying.
14
19
11:48:56
You just --
MR. MASTERSON:
10
Did you direct the IA case
Number one, Is the person outside? as I explained a

How Knapp got them.
Where he got them from.
The
11:49:54
1375
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
chain of command.
1504.
Why he didn't respond to Briefing Board
There's that piece.
Then there's the piece of:
Where'd they come from?
Is this part of the documentation that the Court is seeking in
its February order?
what I'm talking about.
That part of the investigation.
I told Captain Bailey to hold off on it.
So that's
miscommunicated -- and it's obvious.
continue to read this, what you're trying to impeach me with,
Even if you read, if you
10
but if you continue to read the deposition here, or the --
11
actually, I call it the interrogation the way Anders treated
12
me.
13
between Captain Bailey and myself about this issue that I had
14
to clarify with Captain Bailey, because he was in the
15
understanding that I wanted the whole thing stopped, and that
16
was never my intention when I told him that.
17
BY MS. WANG:
18
Q.
19
Knapp IDs, matching up to the two different investigations
20
you're now trying to describe?
21
A.
22
me, IA number or not.
11:50:44
If you read this, there was a miscommunication even
11:51:07
DS
Sir, did you pull two IA numbers in connection with the
11:51:22
IEN
I don't know if Captain Molina pulled another ID -- excuse
23
Q.
24
was only one IA number pulled, correct?
25
A.
FR
11:50:20
But as of the time Captain Bailey was still at PSB there
Correct.
11:51:37
1376
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
And in your previous testimony in your deposition you only
testified that you asked Captain Bailey to suspend the IA case,
correct?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
You did not refer to two IA cases, correct?
A.
I'm still not.
halves.
it properly, my desire when I told him to stop the case.
went back, I clarified it with him, and we are investigating
11:51:48
I'm saying this could be one case, two
Again, I probably miscommunicate -- didn't communicate

But I
10
the IDs individually now like we did with the Armendariz case.
11
I mean, I don't understand why this is such a big deal.
12
Q.
13
Team on August 6th, 2015, correct?
14
A.
For the third time, yes.
15
Q.
I deposed you on September 15th of 2015, correct?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
And I deposed you again on September 22nd of 2015, correct?
18
A.
That's correct.
19
Q.
And on all three occasions you said:
20
Captain Bailey -- well, you gave various statements about
21
whether there was an open IA investigation or a suspended IA
22
investigation, correct?
Sir, you were interviewed by Chief Anders of the Monitor
A.
I don't know.
24
know.
25
Q.
11:52:40
I told
DS
IEN
23
FR
11:52:15
You -- you're confusing me now.
11:52:52
I don't
Well, sir, before today have you ever mentioned before that
11:53:08
1377
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
you told Captain Bailey to suspend only part of an IA case?
A.
I don't think it's ever come up in this light before.
Q.
Well, you've been asked several times whether you asked
Captain Bailey to suspend the IA case, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And you said that you did give him that direction, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And you did not qualify that during your deposition saying
that there was a limitation on the scope of your suspension
11:53:28
10
order, is that right?
11
A.
12
today.
13
Q.
14
clearly understand what you were saying, is that right?
15
A.
That's correct.
16
Q.
As the chief deputy, when you are directing Internal
17
Affairs matters, is it not important for you to speak clearly
18
and make sure that your orders are understood?
19
A.
Of course it is.
20
Q.
On July 30th of 2015 do you recall that the Court ordered
21
the U.S. Marshals to take custody of the 1459 IDs?
22
A.
I didn't think I ever needed to qualify my answer until
Well, you just said that Captain Bailey didn't
DS
All right.
11:53:59
11:54:14
IEN
I do.
23
Q.
24
correct?
25
A.
FR
11:53:49
And the U.S. Marshals went over to MCSO to pick up the IDs,
Correct.
11:54:38
1378
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
And did you and Mr. Popolizio speak to reporters outside of
headquarters on that occasion?
A.
We did.
Q.
And you said on television that no one had ever asked for
those IDs, is that right?
A.
Correct.
Q.
Do you stand by that?
A.
I do.
Q.
I'm going to ask you to turn to Exhibit 2067.

MS. WANG:
10
11:54:50
Your Honor, this is the Court's order of
11
November 20th, 2014, concerning the monitor's authority on
12
Internal Affairs investigations.
13
to the admission of this document and I'd move for its
14
admission at this time.

THE COURT:
15
MS. WANG:
16
THE COURT:
17
THE COURT:
19
MS. WANG:
23
THE COURT:
24
MS. WANG:
25
THE COURT:
FR
11:55:22
Correct.
2067 is admitted.
I'll just point out, Ms. Wang, we are

We've got five minutes --
11:55:31
Oh, I'm almost -- I'll be done with him in
five minutes?
IEN
22
That's Exhibit 2067?
approaching the noon hour.
DS
21
The parties have stipulated
18
20
11:55:06
Sure.
Okay.
I'm not trying to hurt -- you know, rush
11:55:39
1379
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
anything.
I just say look for a break --
MS. WANG:
Sure.
If you would prefer to take a lunch
break now, I can resume after lunch, but I don't -- I only have
about five more minutes with the chief.

THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
6
7
BY MS. WANG:
Q.
November 20th, 2014.
All right.
Go ahead.
I'm sorry, Your Honor.
11:55:51
Just a moment.
Sir, will you turn to page 20 of the Court's order of
MS. WANG:
10
THE COURT:
11
MS. WANG:
12
And Your Honor, may I publish that?

You may.
Let's highlight paragraph 1 there.
13
BY MS. WANG:
14
Q.
15
cooperation with such investigations by the monitor is
16
required.
17
resources to facilitate such investigations?
18
A.
Yes, ma'am.
19
Q.
You understood that to refer to Internal Affairs
20
investigations, correct?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
The Armendariz spin-offs.
Chief, do you see that the order requires that MCSO's
11:56:55
And let's now turn to the next page, paragraph 6.
24
"To the extent that the MCSO claims that it is privileged or
25
otherwise protected from providing information to the Monitor
FR
11:56:40
MCSO shall also provide any necessary facilities or
DS
IEN
23
11:56:26
11:57:13
1380
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
in an independent investigation or otherwise, and the Monitor
contests the existence of the privilege or the protection, the
matter shall be decided by the Court."

Do you see that?
4
5
A.
I do.
Q.
Okay.
required that if MCSO wanted to withhold anything, it should
take that matter up with the Court, not just decide to withhold
it on its own, correct?
10
MR. MASTERSON:
11
And, sir, you understood that the Court's order
with privileges here.

THE COURT:
12
13
11:57:29
We're talking
This --
I am going to require that you limit your
objections, as I've indicated before.

MR. MASTERSON:
14
THE COURT:
15
Foundation.
Thank you.
11:57:52
Do you have an understanding of the Court's order?
16
17
Did you have an understanding at the time of the Court's
18
order -- of the Court's order?
19
THE WITNESS:
21
Yes, sir.
All right.
THE WITNESS:
You may answer.
That's why I was seeking counsel's
23
BY MS. WANG:
24
Q.
25
monitor about whether you needed to disclose something, you
FR
11:57:58
advice on what actions we needed to take.
IEN
22
THE COURT:
DS
20
11:57:41
But you understood that if you had a dispute with the

11:58:13
1381
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
should take that dispute to the Court, correct?
A.
Correct, and I would do that through my counsel.
Q.
Eventually, the 1459 IDs came to the Court's attention not
through your counsel, but through the Monitor Team, is that
correct?
11:58:38
Do you have that understanding?
6
7
A.
I'm not sure.
Q.
Do you recall that on July 23rd of 2015, Chief Robert
Warshaw, the court-appointed monitor, sent an e-mail out
10
requesting a status conference?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
And that concerned the 1459 IDs, correct?
13
A.
I believe so.
14
Q.
Sir, I just have one more question for you.
15
turn back to the issue of the Dennis Montgomery investigation.
16
I just want to make sure I understand your testimony.
11:58:54
I'm going to
Sir, do you have any reason to think that Dennis
17
Montgomery ever gave MCSO reliable information about a
19
purported conspiracy between the Court, the United States
20
Department of Justice, and the law firm of Covington & Burling?
21
A.
DS
18
MS. WANG:
Thank you.
I have nothing further for you.
23
Oh.
24
I have nothing further.
25
THE COURT:
Take a lunch break and be back
FR
11:59:34
No.
IEN
22
11:59:09
All right.
11:59:57
1382
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Sheridan - Cross, 9/25/15 Evidentiary Hearing
about 1:15.
(Lunch recess taken.)
THE COURT:
Please be seated.
Mr. Masterson, I was just wondering, do you want to go
4
5
next?
They're the other plaintiff intervenor.
check and see if they had any questions, unless you want to go
next.
9
10
I don't know if the United States has any questions.
I was told they didn't.
MR. KILLEBREW:
That's correct, Your Honor.
All right, thanks.
MR. MASTERSON:
12
like to go that way, though.
14
THE COURT:
Go ahead.
Well, if you would rather have him start,
that's fine.
MR. MASTERSON:
16
13:24:08
I'll go ahead, Judge, thank you.

CROSS-EXAMINATION
17
18
BY MR. MASTERSON:
19
Q.
Good afternoon, Chief Sheridan.
20
A.
Good afternoon.
21
Q.
I'm going to try to go in order somewhat how Ms. Wang did,
22
but I might jump around a little, so I apologize for that.
13:24:13
DS
IEN
23
But I want to start with your testimony about some
24
e-mails regarding the preliminary injunction that Judge Snow
25
ordered on December 23, 2011.
FR
13:23:57
Mr. Como's welcome to come up if you'd
13
15
I just thought I would
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
11
13:23:45
Do you remember speaking with
13:24:34
1383
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Ms. Wang about some of those e-mails?
A.
I do.
Q.
And your testimony was -- I think what you told us was you
might not have opened them or read them, or at least you don't
remember opening them or reading them.

Do you remember that?
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
8
9
13:24:54
Objection, compound; leading.
You know, I will allow that one, but I'm
not going to allow a lot of leading questions.

THE WITNESS:
10
Yes, sir, I do.
13:25:07
11
BY MR. MASTERSON:
12
Q.
13
realize that at the time, back in December 2011?
14
A.
I did not.
15
Q.
Why not?
16
A.
It's a little bit of a long story, so I'll make it as quick
17
as possible.
18
was the chief of custody and I ran the jail system, which is
19
approximately 75 percent of the Sheriff's Office.
20
involved in my own business, so to speak.
13:25:23
When this case started back in 2007, I believe, I
So I was
and the way I understood it was a traffic stop in Cave Creek,
23
287(g) deputies talked to Mr. Melendres, who was here on a visa
24
to visit.
FR
25
13:25:47
I had heard some talk around the shop about this case,
IEN
22
Did you
DS
21
Did you realize -- this is an important case.
However, he admitted that he was seeking work.

They contacted ICE officials.
ICE said detain him,
13:26:19
1384
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
bring him to Phoenix.
And when they brought him to Phoenix,
ICE officials interviewed him and let him go.
understanding that was the genesis of this case.
really pay much attention to it.
That was my
And I didn't
In 2010, I think it was September of 2010, there was a
5
6
lot of turmoil in the Sheriff's Office.
put on leave by the sheriff.
were all put on leave.
chief deputy.
The chief deputy was
An executive chief and a captain
The sheriff asked me to be the interim
And I remember that day because he said
10
something to me that was very important.
11
got a problem.
12
that was my focus.
He said:
I need you to help me fix this.
Jerry, I've
So that's --
14
up, is because my mind was on some of these other issues.
15
won't repeat some of the issues, but we talked about them this
16
morning, about judges and prior elected officials; those things
17
were very much in the media.
As time went on, things didn't get much better.
18
Board of Supervisors issued a resolution that pretty much
20
micromanaged the Sheriff's Office.
21
close scrutiny.
22
excuse me, in 2012.
IEN
DS
19
13:27:43
The
We were placed under very
13:28:04
We had at least a dozen audits in 2011-2012 -But let me back up a little bit.
In December, just to take December of 2011 alone, I
24
was dealing with the acquisition of a contract town for law
25
enforcement services with Youngtown.
FR
13:27:21
What I'm talking about, and the reason I bring this
13
23
13:26:47
I was dealing with you
13:28:41
1385
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
and Mr. Popolizio on the Department of Justice case.
Mr. Perez
from the DOJ came out and said that they were going to file
suit against us.
I was very involved in that.
About the same time we had an inmate death, a very
4
5
controversial inmate death that's still in litigation, Marty
Atencio.
and killed in a violent gun battle.
a very traumatic thing.
of the December 23rd, 2011 order coming out.
A week after that, we had Deputy Bill Coleman shot
Burying one of your own is
This all happened within three weeks

And not only
10
that, I --
11
Q.
12
regarding overtime for officers?
13
A.
14
by our employees against us because we didn't give them
15
briefing time.
13:29:32
I'm sorry to interrupt.
Do you recall another lawsuit
There -- that was only a $14 million lawsuit that was filed
I was dealing with all those personnel issues.
issues -- and I could probably spend the next hour and a half,
18
if I could remember all of them, explaining to the Court all
19
the things that I was doing.
20
mind, this case was delegated by the former chief deputy to
21
Executive Chief Brian Sands.
22
the interim chief deputy or the permanent chief deputy.
IEN
DS
17
But the bottom line was, in my
13:30:17
That never changed when I became

It was
23
understood that the lawyers in this case dealt directly with
24
Chief Sands and not me.
FR
13:29:48
So my normal process was in dealing with those
16
25
13:29:03
So, with the heavy workload that I had and all the
13:30:45
1386
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
reforms that we were going through, I triaged my e-mails, and
anything that dealt with Melendres, because I thought it was a
simple case, I either didn't open or I don't recall reading
them if I did open them, because an executive chief, Brian
Sands, had that responsibility.
responsibility, and I trusted him to do his job.
Q.
through some other matters that were going on at the time, but
I'm going to touch on a couple just so you can explain to me
10
He was delegated that
Now, I don't intend to spend an hour and a half going
what exactly they were.
12
Coleman, correct?
13
A.
Yes, sir.
14
Q.
Was there an officer-involved shooting back during this
15
period of time?
13:31:58
Let give you a date, maybe it will help you:
16
17
12-15-2011, involving Mr. Dansby?
18
A.
Sorry, I don't recall.
19
Q.
Remember that one?
DS
All right.
Was -- you mentioned, I think, some IAs
that occurred involving some command staff personnel back
22
during this period of time, is that correct?
IEN
21
23
A.
Yes, sir.
24
Q.
Was that, at the time, Chief Deputy Hendershott, and there
25
were two others involved, correct?
FR
13:31:45
I think you already touched on the murder of Deputy
11
20
13:31:23
13:32:13
13:32:32
1387
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
There was Executive Chief Larry Black and captain --
Q.
Was it deputy --
A.
Joe Fox, I'm sorry.
Q.
And was -- well, tell me what happened in those IAs.
A.
Well, as a -- as a result of those investigations, Chief
Hendershott and Larry Black resigned in lieu of termination,
and we actually did have to go through the termination process
for Captain Black.
Joe Fox.
You know, there was another major case, too, and I
9
10
meant to mention it when I brought up the fact that we were
11
acquiring a new contract town of Youngtown in December of 2011.
12
That's the time that the media kicked off the turmoil
13
surrounding the sex crimes cases, which you still hear in the
14
media about those cases, so we were dealing with that.
15
was a remnant of an investigation that was not completed under
16
Chief Hendershott.
17
completed about that time, and it became a celebrated case that
18
we spent a lot of time with, and the media was -- was quite
19
intense on that case.
20
Q.
21
you had in that particular case.
22
A.
I ordered it to be completed.
13:33:17
That
13:33:48
It was
DS
Tell me a little more about that, please, what involvement
13:34:17
IEN
After I took over as chief deputy, probably two weeks later
23
the IA commander, Ken Holmes, came to me and he said that we
24
had a problem, in that there was an unresolved internal
25
investigation, and it was the sex crimes cases.
FR
13:32:51
13:34:46
1388
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
The sex crimes cases was a result of some -- when we
1
2
changed over from helping out El Mirage, they took their --
possession of their cases.
some unfinished sex crimes cases, child sex crimes cases, that
were under the purview of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office.
There was a lot that were under El Mirage also, but there were
some under MCSO.
Q.
Now, were these all child sex abuse cases?
A.
Most of them were.
They discovered that there were
Not -- not all of them, but most of
10
them were child sex crimes cases, and --
11
Q.
I would guess those would be important to you?
12
A.
Yes, this is extremely important to me.
13
ordered Captain Holmes to reinstate this investigation in
14
earnest.
15
prior to Charley Armendariz one of the largest internal
16
investigations that was ever undertaken by the Maricopa County
17
Sheriff's Office.
18
Q.
19
Armendariz investigation took 63,000 personnel hours and you
20
had 50 detectives assigned.
Tell me what -- you said that was
21
bigger than the sex crimes.
Tell me what was entailed in the
22
sex crimes investigation, and tell me why it was an IA to begin
13:35:32
So I immediately
And this was a case, it was probably to the date
13:35:59
IEN
DS
Now, you told us, I think a couple of times, that the
23
with.
24
A.
25
problems in the organization.
FR
13:35:16
13:36:12
Well, there were allegations that there was systemic

There were cases that were not
13:36:32
1389
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
investigated.
There were cases that -- well, let me tell you
how we approached it.
It's probably easier to do that.
Every case was evaluated and there were -- I'm
3
4
guessing now, and I hate to guess on the stand here, but there
were around 400 some-odd cases that were reviewed and found to
have some issues with them.
a supplement, that they didn't comport to our policy.
that end of being relatively minor issue, to an uninvestigated
case where there was an allegation of abuse, sexual abuse, that
10
Some issues could be there was not

From
there was no follow-up done.
13:37:40
And so those cases, again, we took a team of
11
12
detectives and we went through all those cases.
13
took almost a year to get through that.
14
complicated this investigation was.
15
Q.
16
lap?
17
A.
About two weeks.
18
Q.
Okay.
19
A.
And obviously, those kinds of cases are very emotional for
20
law enforcement officers, for anyone, anyone in this courtroom,
21
that they weren't properly handled.
And it took --
That's how large and
How long were you chief deputy before that one fell in your
DS
Go ahead.
23
few -- and I'm not making light of it, okay, because one case
24
is one too many that wasn't followed up on.
25
just a handful of cases that were not followed up on properly.
FR
13:38:01
13:38:18
But what we did finally find is that there were very
IEN
22
13:37:00
But there were

13:38:42
1390
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
The rest of those 400 cases were more or less administrative
issues, but it took us a long time to -- to find that out, to
follow up and make all those cases whole and make them right
again and reinvestigate the cases that needed to be.
oversaw that also during this time period.
Q.
today and also a few minutes ago -- that the death of inmate
Atencio, that lawsuit was ongoing, is that correct?
A.
And so I
13:39:07
Now, I think you told us earlier -- well, actually, earlier
Yes.
MS. WANG:
10
THE COURT:
11
Objection, leading.
13:39:24
Sustained.
12
BY MR. MASTERSON:
13
Q.
14
time?
15
A.
16
week of the issuance of the December 23rd, 2011 order.
17
remember the exact date, but it was in a week to 10 days of the
18
order being issued.
Was the lawsuit involving Mr. Atencio going on at that
Well, the inmate death of Marty Atencio occurred within a
I don't
And again, as chief deputy, my responsibility is with
19
the entire organization, and so I was involved in that, the
21
meetings that pursued the inmate death.
22
Q.
DS
20
13:39:59
And you already told us about Deputy Coleman.
IEN
23
And you also mentioned a $14 million lawsuit
24
involving -- was it overtime, or what was that, again?
25
A.
FR
13:39:39
The $14 million lawsuit that was filed against us by the
13:40:28
1391
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
detention officers was for lack of overtime for briefing.
So
we were found to be out of compliance with FLSA regulations and
paying officers for the 15 minutes for their show-up time.
so I had to deal with the county over that.
And
Also, speaking about the county, there was -- because
5
6
of the county's resolution in early 2012, it required myself,
Chief Freeman, who was basically my right-hand person at the
time, to help us through this getting reacquainted with the
county.
We attended meetings two, three, four times a week,
10
11
every week, throughout the year.
12
things that I was confronted with when I took over as chief
13
deputy was we had no relationship with the Board of Supervisors
14
for approximately three years because of the -- the former
15
chief deputy's attitude towards the -- the Board of
16
Supervisors.
17
help me fix this.
18
county with the board focused on repairing those relationships.
19
We need each other to do our job.
20
Q.
21
a little problem with a $100 million as well?
22
A.
13:41:47
That's what the sheriff meant when he said please

And so I spent a lot of time over at the
DS
Now, you told us about the $14 million lawsuit.
Was there
Well, it was more of a media problem than anything.
IEN
13:41:22
Because one of the main
13:42:11
It was
23
an accounting issue.
24
$104 million cross funding where, because of a lack of a system
25
for accountability, we used detention funds that were earmarked
FR
13:41:00
What you're talking about is the
13:42:40
1392
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
solely for detention on the enforcement side to pay for deputy
sheriffs, and vice versa.
the detention side.
And we paid general fund money in
So when this came to light because of these audits
4
5
that we were going through at this time in 2012, it was a huge
media frenzy, because -- and to this day some people still
accuse the sheriff of stealing $104 million.
The case, to me, is very simply boiled down to the
8
9
county rectified the situation by reconciling the books, and
10
the money that we used in detention funds was -- was very
11
similar to the money that we used to pay detention officers out
12
of general fund money.
13
books in their journal voucher entries, or however the
14
accountants do that.
Office every year.
17
sheriff didn't take $104 million home in his pocket.
18
were used for the operation of the Maricopa County Sheriff's
19
Office one way or other.
20
restrictions on it.
21
books, so to speak, for the $104 million.
22
months and months in 2012 and 2013.
DS
16
IEN
13:43:43
So they just moved the money on the
But it costs X amount of dollars to run the Sheriff's
15
It didn't cost $104 million more.
13:44:12
The
The funds
The general fund money has less
That's how they were able to rectify the
13:44:38
But that went on for
23
Q.
Do you remember when it started?
24
A.
I'm sorry, I don't.
25
Q.
And who at MCSO -- excuse me -- was most responsible, or
FR
13:43:09
13:44:59
1393
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
more responsible for dealing with that issue?
A.
speak, responsible for our budget.
Q.
hundred-million-dollar episode?
A.
the chief deputy, and that it was realized during an internal
audit by -- I think it was a state auditor general found the
discrepancy, and then it was -- I believe it was deputy county
We have a chief financial officer who does the books, so to
And what was your role, then, in the whole
13:45:28
Well, again, this was one of the things that I inherited as
10
manager Sandi Wilson who actually worked out a solution with
11
the state to rectify the accounting error.
12
Q.
13
Bohn?
14
A.
No.
15
Q.
Okay.
16
supervisor, but are you in her supervisory chain?
17
A.
18
chief deputy I would have been, yes.
19
Q.
20
the sheriff, but were you charged with getting to the bottom of
21
the hundred million dollars, or was that pretty much the
22
financial folks?
Now, you mentioned the CFO a minute ago.
Is that Lee Ann
No, that would be -- that was Loretta Barkell.

Are you her -- I know you're not her direct
13:46:21
Loretta Barkell has since retired, but at that point as the
Did someone charge you -- I guess it could only be
IEN
DS
Okay.
23
A.
24
issue with the Board of Supervisors and their chiefs and those
25
discussions.
FR
13:45:58
No.
13:46:38
I was very involved in that because it became a big
13:46:59
1394
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
relationship with the Board of Supervisors?
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
What did you do to do that?
A.
Well, the day after the sheriff, which was a Wednesday
afternoon, the sheriff asked me to help him fix this, as I went
over to -- I made a phone call on Thursday morning and I called
Sandi Wilson, because she was the only one I really had a
relationship with from the years past, and I asked her if I
10
Was this during the time you were trying to rebuild the
could come over and talk to her.
13:47:34
And I tell you this story because you have to
11
12
understand the context of how bad the relationship was.
13
she said, Jerry, are you wearing your gun?
14
And she said, Can you leave it in your office?
15
been in law enforcement for a long time, and leaving my gun
16
like downstairs in the locker or in my desk, you know, I feel
17
it's unusual to me.
And
And I said yes.
You know, I've
13:47:57
So I said yes.
And I walked over there and I got off the elevator on
18
the 10th floor and I was confronted by one of the Board of
20
Supervisors' chiefs.
21
got right in my face and she says, What in the F are you doing
22
here?
IEN
DS
19
And she saw me and she ran over to me and
You don't belong here.
We don't want you here.
23
started dressing me down.
24
stood there, I was -- I was in shock.
25
were.
FR
13:47:08
I got spittle in my face.
13:48:24
And she
I mean, I
That's how bad things

13:48:47
1395
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
And so after I got done being accosted, I went over, I
1
2
sat down with Sandi.
We had a two-hour meeting, it was great.
Sandi said that she was going to help us make this the best
Sheriff's Office in the country, and we've got a lot of -- a
lot of things that we can accomplish together and we'll work
together with the board.
members, and we started working together in repairing the
previous damage.
I had a lot of support from the board
But it didn't happen overnight.
13:49:09
I was very naive.
10
thought that morning, Thursday morning driving in, oh, we could
11
do this in six months, you know, we could get this done.
12
it took years.
13
hit to where we feel very comfortable going over there.
14
about a year.
Well,
It took probably four years for it to really
Took
Sandi Wilson invited me to be the guest speaker at her
15
16
annual meeting of her staff.
17
looked at me and she said:
18
deputy of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office be my guest
19
speaker, ever.
I never thought I'd have the chief
So we put a lot of effort, a lot of people put a lot
of effort, especially myself, into repairing that damage, and
22
that was 2010, 2011, 2012.
IEN
21
23
Q.
24
bit about the Melendres lawsuit, is that right?
25
A.
FR
13:50:00
And she told me that morning, she
DS
20
13:49:31
13:50:21
Now, sitting -- sitting up there today, you know quite a
Yes, sir, I do now.
13:50:42
Q.
Do you feel it's an important lawsuit?
A.
Absolutely.
Q.
And I'm asking these questions because of some of the
questions Ms. Wang asked you.
that the case involved allegations of racial profiling?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Yet you told us you didn't read e-mails about the case.
What my question is:
8
9
1396
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Do you realize and understand
Are you telling this Court that
you don't think racial profiling's a serious issue, or you need
10
to be concerned about that?
11
A.
12
December 23rd, 2011, and in 2012, I didn't understand what this
13
case was about.
14
traffic stop made by 287(g) deputies.
15
understanding of the case.
No.
13:51:21
I -- I thought I would have made it clear that in --
What I understood this case was about was a

That was my
13:51:48
I never really paid much attention to it because of
16
all the other things that I was doing, and it was delegated to
18
an executive chief, which is somebody that is next to the chief
19
deputy, the highest ranking officer in the office.
20
be able to rely on my staff to help with the burden of the
21
leadership of the Sheriff's Office.
22
was a simple delegation and my misunderstanding of what this
IEN
DS
17
I have to
13:52:11
And that's all it was, it
23
case was all about.
24
Q.
25
understanding of what you do as a chief deputy.
FR
13:50:57
Now, sir, I'd like to get a little bit better of an

You just told
13:52:36
1397
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
us about some pretty large events and matters that were taking
place back in 2010, 2011, and 2012, but I want to get down to,
I guess, more what you do on, I don't know if I want to go so
far as to say a daily basis, because maybe that will take a bit
more time than I want to take, but on a weekly or monthly
basis -- I've never been in law enforcement.
the chief deputy of -- how big did you say this organization is
if you compare it to the -- around the country?

MS. WANG:
What do you do as
Objection, compound.
MR. MASTERSON:
10
I'll ask it again.
11
BY MR. MASTERSON:
12
Q.
How big is the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office?
13
A.
We have 35 -- approximately 3500 employees, 750 which are
14
sworn officers.
15
nation.
16
1,000 volunteers.
17
agency, plus we run a very complicated jail system.
13:53:20
We have the second-largest jail system in the
We cover 9,226 square miles.
We have approximately
13:53:42
We are a full-service law enforcement
And to answer your question what do I do every day?
18
13:53:02
don't know.
I can tell you I could sit in my office and not
20
even turn on my computer and look at an e-mail, which happens,
21
and be busy until 8 o'clock at night with people coming through
22
my door with problems.
IEN
DS
19
Maybe the easiest way to answer your question is I
24
took a week off and I had one of the other executive chiefs
25
fill in for me.
FR
23
And when I came back to work a few weeks ago,
13:54:14
13:54:36
1398
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
he told me, Oh, my God.
I can't believe this.
every day is solve everybody else's problems in the
organization.
I guess that's what I do.
What you do
In a nutshell, I'm a
problem solver.
But the issue with me is I have to know
there's a problem.
don't believe in mysticism, okay?
I have a crystal ball on my desk, and I have a little sticky on
it, and it says "out of order."
On my desk I have a crystal ball.
13:54:59
And I
It's just a symbolic thing.
And I put that there because I
10
have a philosophy.
If people don't tell me that something's
11
broke or something is wrong, I can't see into the future.
12
can't -- I'm not clairvoyant.
I don't know.
And so that's what I do is I try and solve problems, I
13
14
try and prevent problems from happening, I review policy.
15
we spent a lot of time this morning and yesterday talking about
16
Internal Affairs cases.
17
cases, I make decisions, I go over the budget, I hold several
18
meetings a week with the staff, I train employees at the
19
academy, I'll go out and give a speech if I'm asked to, I'll do
20
whatever people want me to do, and I go home usually 7 o'clock
21
at night.
22
Q.
And
13:55:41
DS
I go over and review Internal Affairs
13:56:09
IEN
A lot of meetings?
23
A.
A fair amount of meetings.
24
Q.
Do you have -- tell me a little bit -- we've heard some
25
testimony, I think, about staff meetings.
FR
13:55:20
And I don't remember
13:56:26
1399
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
exactly the details.
Tuesday meetings, someone was talking about Wednesday or
Thursday meetings.
A.
meeting with the sheriff and his executive command staff on
Monday morning.
afternoon with all the chiefs in the office.
captain of CID, Court Implementation Division, and the captain
over PSB, because they're an important part of the op -- of our
10
It seems someone was talking about
What are those about, if you know?
Our normal course of meetings is we have an informal
I have an operations meeting on Monday
Also includes the
daily operations.
13:57:15
And then on Thursday we have a staff meeting that
11
12
includes all the chiefs with the sheriff.
13
generally set in stone meetings.
14
Q.
How about e-mails, you get a couple a day or what?
15
A.
I probably get 50 e-mails a day.
16
Q.
You were asked a number of questions about a meeting in
17
December of 2011, or perhaps January of 2012, about the
18
preliminary injunction.
19
A.
Yes, sir.
20
Q.
Do you remember having a meeting about the preliminary
21
injunction in 2011 -- late 2011 or early 2012?
22
A.
13:57:34
Do you recall those questions?
DS
IEN
Q.
24
2070, please.
FR
And those are the
13:58:00
No, sir.
23
25
13:56:46
Jump around a little bit here.
Can you look at Exhibit
I think you have it up there, Chief.
Here we go.
13:58:45
2070 is admitted in evidence.
1400
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Do you recall looking
at this document earlier, sir?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And I'm looking down toward the bottom where it says,
"Please see the HSU portion of the SID op manual."
13:59:06
Do you see that?
6
7
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
And it's talking about this is a first draft.
A.
Yes, sir.
10
Q.
Can you tell me a little bit about -- what is this manual?
11
A.
Each division has, especially a division that is not a
12
normal pro -- procedure like Special Investigations.
13
their own operations manual, because they do certain things
14
that nowhere else in the office does.
15
that should bring a smile to Ms. Wang's face is they deal with
16
informants.
17
anyone able to pay and deal with and manage informants.
18
they would have that section in their manual.
They have
And one of the issues
13:59:53
And so nowhere else in the office are there -- is

So
And so when HSU was transferred, that function was
19
transferred to Special Investigations -- by me, by the way.
21
required that they write their -- or revise their policy and
22
protocols and incorporate that into the SID operations manual.
IEN
DS
20
23
Q.
24
draft of the SID policy during this period of time?
25
A.
FR
13:59:18
We
14:00:25
Do you know why they were looking at an e-mail concerning a
This was about the same time that the Court's final order
14:01:00
1401
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
and decision was issued, if I remember correctly, so it would
be in conjunction with that.
Q.
next page, 1032203, please.
You see that, sir?
Can you take a look -- well, actually, I think I want the
And I'm looking at -- well,
there's a big Roman numeral IV, and then it looks like there's
kind of a -- I don't know if that's a little Roman numeral V or
a V.
A.
Yes, sir.
10
Q.
Do you know -- do you know what that's all about there?
11
A.
No, sir.
12
Q.
Did you have anything to do with the revision of the --
13
well, MCSO policies dealing with the, I'm going to use the
14
phrase ICE/LEAR, Immigration Customs Enforcement and Law
15
Enforcement Area Response protocol.
16
A.
17
with it.
18
Q.
19
want you to take a look at the -- again, I don't know if it's a
20
V or a Roman numeral V.
14:02:33
Well, this is in evidence, obviously, so I just want -- I
Do you see the first bullet point?
14:02:49
Can you read that
for me, please?
23
A.
24
that the ICE/LEAR, Immigration and Customs Enforcement/Law
25
Enforcement Area Responsible protocol is no longer allowed."
FR
14:02:05
I don't know what you mean by did I have anything to do
IEN
22
But do you see those?
DS
21
14:01:51
Yes.
"Comprehensive division operations manuals mention
14:03:07
1402
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
And could you read the next bullet point, please.
A.
"Mention that we do not detain anybody for any amount of
time based purely on immigration status.
related charges - Snow ruling."
Q.
bullet point, please.
A.
Snow ruling."
Q.
Detain only for state
And then I want you just to read the second to the last
"Traffic stops cannot be elongated because of ethnicity -
All right.
Now, can you go back to probably the front page
10
there and tell me what the date is on -- on that document,
11
please.
12
A.
13
November 4th.
14
Q.
Of what year?
15
A.
Of 2013.
16
Q.
Okay.
17
why this document was being circulated back during that period
18
of time?
19
A.
20
Court had issued its final order and decision.
21
that's the proper name for it, but it came out in early October
22
of 2013, and that they were probably making sure those changes
14:03:41
This would be the original -- well, this was sent on
14:03:55
Now, it's okay if you don't know, but do you know
IEN
DS
Again, my thought was that we were revising it because the
23
were incorporating into their manual.
24
Q.
25
trying to comply with Judge Snow's order?
FR
14:03:26
I don't know if
14:04:23
Does it appear to you that at least someone at MCSO is

14:04:45
1403
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
At some point did you become engaged in the Melendres case?
And, well, let me -- yeah, let's use the word "engaged." I
don't want to -- I guess I don't want to know when you first
knew about it or heard about it, because you already told me
that.
A.
to contemplate what needed to be done in May of 2013 when the
Court issued its findings of facts, conclusions of law.
But when did you get involved with it to any extent?
I became involved in it and active in the case and started
I remember very specifically -- as a matter of fact, I
10
11
have the picture on my phone as one of the screens -- standing
12
out in front of the courthouse and making the statement to the
13
media and understanding that this was not just a case about a
14
traffic stop in Cave Creek, Arizona, with Mr. Melendres.
15
was much bigger than that.
16
Court's decision, hearing the Court -- being in courtroom the
17
day that he issued that ruling, I understood that there was
18
something much more to this than I had in the past.
19
Q.
20
think you're talking May of 2013, you just said you realized it
21
was more than a traffic stop in Cave Creek.
22
elaborate a little bit on that, please.
IEN
DS
Tell me a little bit more about that.
A.
24
Mr. Melendres involved in the case.
25
other than our use of 287(g).
14:06:07
It
Seeing the Court's and reading the
23
FR
14:05:24
14:06:40
At this point, I
14:07:07
I'd like you to
Well, I believe that there was -- that there was more than
There were other issues
The judge found that we had
14:07:33
1404
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
violated the Fourth Amendment by unnecessarily detaining
people, and that we had violated people's Fourteenth Amendment
rights by inappropriately using authority that we did not have.
Q.
as a factor in your conducting of traffic stops and dealing
with illegal immigrants during the time you had 287(g) status?
To your recollection, did the judge rule that you used race
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
Objection, compound.
I'll allow it.
THE WITNESS:
Yes.
10
BY MR. MASTERSON:
11
Q.
12
as a factor in making traffic stops for immigration purposes
13
while they were 287(g) certified?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
Do you know who provided that training?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
Who?
18
A.
ICE.
19
Q.
And Judge Snow found that to be a violation of the Fourth
20
Amendment, correct?
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
IEN
22
14:08:45
Do you know whether MCSO deputies were trained to use race
DS
21
Objection, relevance, Your Honor, 403.

I'm going to allow a little bit of
background, but I'm not going to allow a whole ton of
24
background on this, Mr. Masterson.
FR
14:08:56
14:09:09
23
25
14:08:14
MR. MASTERSON:
Thank you, Judge.
14:09:19
1405
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
THE WITNESS:
That's correct.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
that it was okay to use race as a factor in making traffic
stops, rather enforcing immigration law while they had 287(g)
status, it was the federal government?
So it was not MCSO who provided training to its deputies
MS. WANG:
I do think you're leading, Mr. Masterson.
I'm going to sustain the objection.
10
BY MR. MASTERSON:
11
Q.
14:09:54
Who gave your deputies that training?

MS. WANG:
12
THE COURT:
13
14
Objection, leading, 403, relevance.
THE COURT:
Objection, relevance, 403.
I'm going to allow it for a few more
questions, and then we're going to move on.

MR. MASTERSON:
15
THE WITNESS:
16
I'll move on after this one, Judge.
deputy sheriffs that attended their 287(g) school.
18
BY MR. MASTERSON:
19
Q.
MR. MASTERSON:
Excuse me just a minute, sir.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
23
Q.
Do you recognize that, Chief Sheridan?
24
A.
Yes, sir.
25
Q.
I'm sorry, I didn't hear you.
FR
14:10:50
IEN
22
Could you please take a look at Exhibit 103.
DS
21
14:10:02
ICE gave that training to a hundred
17
20
14:09:35
What --
14:11:07
1406
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
Oh, thank you.
What is it?
3
4
A.
This is a Briefing Board which has the same effect as
policy dated May 28th, 2013.

MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
7
8
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
14:11:17
Could we publish this, please, Judge?
Sure.
Before we get into the specifics of this Briefing Board,
10
could you tell me a little bit about what exactly a
11
Briefing Board is, how that works?
12
A.
13
has to go through legal review, research, best practices
14
comparison, those kinds of things, so promulgating policy can
15
take months and months.
16
of those months, so we have this mechanism we call the
17
Briefing Board to immediately get out policy to all members of
18
the Sheriff's Office.
19
through e-mails, and supervisors are required to brief their
20
subordinates on their contents.
21
Q.
22
number 13-40?
It can take some time to promulgate an official policy.
It
And sometimes we don't have the luxury
14:11:57
DS
And it's something that is sent out
14:12:30
IEN
Do you have any personal knowledge of this Briefing Board
23
A.
Yes, sir.
24
Q.
Tell me about -- well, tell me what you know about this.
25
How did it come to be?
FR
14:11:32
14:12:45
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
2
3
1407
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Objection, Your Honor, relevance, 403.
I'll allow a few questions on this, too,
but not a ton.
THE WITNESS:
I believe this was done at the request
of our counsel that we put something out immediately to address
the court ruling.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
Were you engaged in the Melendres case at this point?
A.
I was.
10
Q.
Did you approve this Briefing Board?
11
A.
I did.
12
Q.
Was it provided to every single deputy sheriff in the MCSO?

MR. KILLEBREW:
13
THE COURT:
14
Sustained.
16
Q.
Who did this Briefing Board go to?
17
A.
This Briefing Board -- actually, Briefing Boards go out to
18
every employee in the Sheriff's Office.
19
Q.
And the date on this, please?
20
A.
Is May 28th, 2013.
21
Q.
Let's talk about Internal Affairs, or PSB, whichever you're
22
more comfortable with.
DS
BY MR. MASTERSON:
IEN
14:13:20
Objection, leading.
15
14:13:37
14:13:47
Can you please tell me what your role
23
is in Internal Affairs or PSB investigations?
24
A.
25
the responsibility, the oversight of internal investigations to
FR
14:13:07
As the chief deputy, the sheriff, by policy, has delegated

14:14:47
1408
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
the chief deputy.
So, therefore, the commander of the
Professional Standards Bureau reports directly to me.
My primary role is the oversight of the cases that are
3
4
being conducted, assign cases, and the oversight and final
sign-off on cases that are investigated by PSB.
14:15:27
There are approximately 550 cases, I would guess, that
6
7
are going to be completed this year, 2015, by PSB.
that have IA numbers.
actually be investigated by PSB.
Excuse me,
Probably 200 of those cases will
And again, I'm estimating the
10
numbers.
So approximately 200 of those cases will come to my
11
desk for review and signature.
12
Q.
13
pulled, but then 200 actually investigated?
14
A.
15
not just by PSB; they'll be investigated at division level for
16
less serious policy violations.
17
Q.
18
going to try it again.
Is what you're telling me that there's 550 total IA numbers
No, sir.
Okay.
All 500 and some will be investigated by -- but
14:16:24
Well, I'm still not sure I have it straight, but I'm
So there's -- when you tell me there's 550 cases, does
19
that mean there's 550 IA numbers?
21
A.
22
in 2015.
14:16:47
DS
20
IEN
There's 550 IA numbers pulled and issued by PSB, probably
23
Q.
24
investigated about 200, but then the other 350 would be
25
investigated at the district or division level?
FR
14:15:57
And so are you telling me, then, that PSB actually
Is that what
14:17:11
1409
16
where's our boundary?
17
boundary?
18
A.
19
border.
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
20
border.
If you go east, we're to Apache Junction.
21
go south on the east side, you're to the SanTan mountains.
22
Four Peaks mountains that you see out in the distance?
we're doing?
MS. WANG:
Objection, leading, compound.
THE COURT:
Sustained.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
Well, tell me.
A.
Okay.
the division level.
specifically by PSB to conduct investigations.
I still don't get it.
14:17:19
The other 350 cases or so will be investigated by

We have lieutenants that are trained
You know, one of the problems in dealing with a
9
10
Sheriff's Office, as opposed to a police department, even, is
11
the continuity of how business is done, because we're spread
12
out so far.
13
several states --
14
Q.
Again, it's 9,226 square miles, bigger than
Let me stop you just for a second.
Can you just give us an idea on if we went that way,
15
14:18:10
If we went that way, where's our
That way and that way?
Well, if you go west, we're 60 miles from the California
IEN
DS
If you go south, we're 30 miles from the Mexican
23
are in Maricopa County.
24
Q.
Okay.
25
A.
It's huge.
FR
14:17:46
And if you
14:18:28
The
Those
And we go north to Lake Pleasant.
14:18:50
1410
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Okay.
A.
And so one of the problems that we have that police
agencies, police officers can't understand, especially when
they come and they take a look at us, is this issue of
isolation of areas, districts isolated from each other, and how
we try to maintain a continuity of doing business.
So what we had to do with internal investigations is
7
8
bring people, competent people, the most competent people we
had in those areas, bring them in, train them on how we do
10
internal investigations and protocol, so those divisions in
11
those districts could do the investigations.
12
obviously, having a burden of over 500 IA cases for PSB, I'd
13
have to quadruple the size of the staff, and we just don't have
14
those resources.
So that's what happens.
16
There is a lieutenant that's assigned to PSB that reviews all
17
those outlying cases, those 350 or so cases, to make sure that
18
they comply with our standards and our check-off and our
19
checklist.
20
Q.
21
building?
22
A.
DS
Is that lieutenant, then, at the main MCSO headquarters
IEN
Yes, sir.
14:19:58
14:20:23
His office is on the fifth floor of headquarters
23
building in PSB.
24
Q.
25
said divisions and districts, are those the same thing?
Okay.
14:19:35
Because
But there's one other thing and then I'll shut up.
15
FR
14:19:06
And, well, first off, a basic question:
When you
14:20:39
1411
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
all -- they all mean the same thing to me.
a commander at captain level.
Q.
question was:
in each district or division?
A.
Yes.
Q.
One or more than one?
A.
Oh, I'm sorry.
10
Q.
Well, tell me how that works.
11
or how?
12
A.
13
Some divisions -- we have one division right now that's -- and
14
only one right now that's being run by a lieutenant.
15
a very complex division.
16
that investigates homicides, sex crimes, those things.
17
have three or four lieutenants assigned to that division, plus
18
a captain.
19
Q.
20
lieutenant was trained, I believe, in the districts to
21
investigate PSB or Internal Affairs claims.
Divisions, districts, jail facilities, they're
14:21:03
There's usually more than one.
Does it depend on the size,
14:21:14
Depends on the size, complexity of the operation itself.
It's not
But we have a Major Crimes Division
14:21:36
They
DS
The reason I'm asking you is because you said that a
14:22:05
Is that what you just said?

MS. WANG:
24
THE COURT:
FR
My next
Is there a lieutenant, more than one lieutenant
23
25
They're all run by
That was almost going to be my next question.
IEN
22
Yes, sir.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Objection, leading.
Sustained.
14:22:28
1412
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Is there a lieutenant in each district who can -- who was
trained to investigate PSB or IA claims?
A.
that -- as a matter of fact, each jail, because some jails have
hundreds of officers assigned to them, we have more than one
lieutenant that would be trained to do that.
Q.
process, if you know?
A.
The training process for?
10
Q.
The lieutenant in the division who handles the PSB or IA
11
claims.
12
A.
13
I don't -- I was not present at that.
14
trained them on.
15
Q.
16
is?
17
A.
I don't.
18
Q.
Do you know when a lieutenant might go to this session?
Yes, and that includes the jails also.
14:22:59
Well, they went to PSB and PSB put on a training session.
Okay.
I don't know what they
Do you have any idea how long the training session
14:23:14
That's -- that's a weird question.
DS
Do you get -- does the lieutenant who's going to
handle PSB or IA claims at the division level get training
22
before the lieutenant is assigned to that position?
IEN
21
23
know.
24
A.
All right.
25
Q.
I'll try.
FR
14:22:44
Tell me how the training process -- or what is the training
19
20
We have lieutenants
14:23:29
If you
Could you state that again, please?

14:23:47
1413
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
If a lieutenant is going to handle PSB or I claim --
1
2
IA claims at the division level or district level, does the
lieutenant go to PSB to get that training first?
A.
attempt to make sure that all the investigators in the office
have the credentials.
I'm not exactly sure a hundred percent.
Q.
changes to either the IA or PSB procedure over the last couple
10
In the past, no.
Okay.
Have there been other -- any other technological
14:24:31
To make it easier on you I'm asking you about IAPro.
A.
I'm glad, because I wouldn't have thought of that.
Yes, we have -- and I know, because I've mentioned it
13
14
over the last two days, that we have IAPro, which is a software
15
program that allows us to track and manage the Internal Affairs
16
investigations.
17
investigations to supervisors of the people under
18
investigation.
19
Q.
20
give me a little bit more information on how that works?
21
A.
22
there's a -- another component of IAPro, and it's called --
24
FR
25
DS
14:24:54
It also allows access to some of those
Now, and you say "some of those investigations."
The investigations that have been completed.
IEN
23
14:24:08
And I think we've accomplished it, but
of years?
11
12
What we've been doing is making an
Can you
14:25:26
For example,
been a long day.

Well, there's another component of it, and I'll think
of the name in a minute, that -- it's an early-warning system
14:25:52
1414
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
that is in conjunction with IAPro that allows staff,
supervisors -- this is one of the things we worked very closely
with the Monitor Team on -- to ensure that supervisors in the
field knew who those deputies were that worked for them, in the
event they just got transferred to their squad, they would have
access to their IA records.
records at 2 o'clock in the morning.
They would have access to their IA
That was important to the Monitor Team.
We were able
to get the -- the company that provided the software to -- to
10
do that.
11
with the individuals throughout the office.
12
Q.
13
that's the early-warning system.
14
little better, please?
15
A.
I thought I just did.
16
Q.
Well, I think you did, but I guess I'd like to know why --
And so we've enhanced the communication of the system
Can you just explain that a
Or in more detail, I guess.
You said the monitor liked that idea.
Yes, sure.
14:27:11
Do you?
18
A.
19
all.
20
many good things that have come out of this litigation is the
21
availability of that software and the acquisition of that
22
software.
I don't -- I don't have a problem with it at
IEN
DS
As a matter of fact, it was something that was one of the
14:27:31
And the tailoring the IAPro to -- and I wish I could
23
remember the name of that other component, because they go hand
24
in hand with each other.
FR
14:26:42
You mentioned what I was going to ask you about next, and
17
25
14:26:22
And it would allow a sergeant who gets a new deputy to
14:28:04
1415
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
know what kind of past he has.
If the deputy has been -- has
had allegations of any racial profiling or inappropriate
behavior, or misuse of e-mails and those kinds of things, it
would allow the supervisor to keep better track of them.

There's also a component of that, too, as an
5
6
early-warning system.
there's a BlueTeam component to this also, which --
Q.
it, or are you going to tell us what BlueTeam is?
Because every incident in there -- and
Tell us what "BlueTeam" is before you start talking about
10
A.
I was going to tell you what BlueTeam was.
11
Q.
Okay.
12
A.
BlueTeam is a component that is interlinked with IAPro, and
13
that is really the early-warning system in incidents that -- a
14
deputy might be accused or might have a citizen's complaint on
15
them for something, or they come in late, or call in sick, many
16
different issues.
Go ahead.
concert with the Monitor Team, have agreed that -- in fact, we
19
added a lot more than the Monitor Team required to keep track
20
of for behavior of employees.
21
throughout the office, not just for the deputy sheriffs.
DS
18
And we've also instituted it
14:29:21
14:29:44
IEN
If you are late, like, three times in six months, it
23
will send the sergeant a little yellow alert, and it will send
24
that alert to Internal Affairs, that this individual's been
25
late three times, or there's been three citizens' complaints on
FR
14:28:50
There's a couple dozen identifiers that we, again, in
17
22
14:28:31
14:30:14
1416
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
this individual in the last month or whatever the -- whatever
the threshold was that was set and agreed to by us, the
Monitor Team, and I'm not sure if the plaintiffs had any input
on that or not.
want to say that for sure.
I don't recall.
I think they did, but I don't
14:30:35
And so those little red lights, green lights, yellow
6
7
lights would go off and help us prevent a Charley Armendariz in
the future, is really the way I look at it.
early-warning system.
So it's an
And the employees were afraid of it in the beginning
10
11
because they thought, Oh, we're going to get in trouble for
12
everything.
13
out of -- it was originally housed in Internal Affairs.
14
took it out of Internal Affairs, just because of the stigma
15
that, oh, Internal Affairs is there to get you in trouble, to
16
fire you, that kind of thing.
17
in BIO, Bureau of Internal Oversight, and we use it as a
18
training tool to prevent bad behavior like we discovered with
19
Charley Armendariz.
20
Q.
21
questions so you'll have to forgive me.
We
14:31:23
And we put it under Chief Knight
DS
14:31:55
You just used the phrase red, yellow, and green
23
lights.
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
Really.
FR
But now they see it as a device where we took it
Now, this is a dumb question, but sometimes I ask dumb
IEN
22
14:30:59
Are there really lights that go off on this thing?
Can you tell me -- tell me about that.
14:32:10
1417
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Well, a green light means that there's been no complaints.
A yellow light means that there's caution, there's been a few
complaints that are getting close to the threshold where action
needs to be taken.
threshold of behavior has been met and action needs to be
taken.
Q.
Where do these lights go off?
A.
They'll be sent to -- it's on the computer.
on the computer, right?
10
supervisor and the PSB.
11
Q.
12
investigations that might take place at the division or
13
district level as opposed to on the fifth floor at PSB in the
14
main building downtown.
Everything's
14:32:59
We talked a little bit ago about
Does any investigation or any complaint or claim get
14:33:16
an IA number?
Let me ask you this way.
17
If I make a claim that I was
out in Gila Bend on 85 and a deputy stopped me for going past
19
Lewis Prison at 90 miles an hour, and I make a claim saying the
20
deputy told me I was a jackass, or something like that, after
21
he wrote me the citation, and I make a complaint, I use my
22
computer and I e-mail MCSO, is that going to get an IA number,
IEN
DS
18
23
or what's going to happen there?
24
A.
That will get an IA number and be entered into IAPro.
25
Q.
And what happens then?
FR
14:32:40
It's sent to the individual's
Now, let me ask you this.
15
16
And a red light is a indication that the
14:33:44
14:34:04
1418
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
It will be investigated by most likely at the division
level, because it's a fairly common complaint.
for sheriffs.
employees, but police officers in general.
to get stopped and get a ticket, so they complain about it
quite often.
Q.
violation" so it's going to be at the district level.
I saw Dan look at me.
And not just
Not just for sheriff's
People don't like
You said that it's a, I think you used the phrase "minor
Can you give us a definition of -- I don't know if you
9
10
have minor, moderate, high.
11
A.
12
minor discipline, which is either verbal counseling or a
13
written reprimand, something that rises to that level, or major
14
discipline, which would rise to the level of time off without
15
pay, all the way to termination.
16
Q.
17
division or PSB downtown, depend on the possible discipline?
18
A.
19
handy.
20
SR 85, if the sergeant doesn't -- isn't familiar with this
21
deputy, they might not know that he's got a history of treating
22
motorists poorly.
How does that work?
14:34:51
Well, we have two levels to discipline, basically.
We have
14:35:13
So does where it's going to be investigated, whether it's
Yes.
And this is where IAPro comes in very useful and
IEN
DS
For example, to use your example of the traffic stop on
This is not his first complaint.
14:35:45
This is
23
his fourth or fifth complaint, and that he's been disciplined
24
for this before.
25
counseling or whatever.
FR
14:34:29
So he may just write it up, give him a verbal

14:36:15
1419
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
But with IAPro, now that sergeant will know, Oh, this
1
2
deputy's already received the first line of discipline for
this.
Internal Affairs for investigation because of the disciplinary
matrix that we have as how we mete out discipline.
Q.
matrix.
A.
of that if you do this, this is how you're going to be
The next one is major discipline.
So it may get sent to
14:36:37
I think you told us you had a fairly strict disciplinary

What did you mean by that?
We have a matrix that all the employees are very well aware
10
punished; if you do this again, it ups the level of punishment;
11
and if you do it a third time, you're going to be terminated,
12
that kind of thing.
13
everything from coming in to work late to assaulting an
14
individual using excessive force, that kind of thing, and
15
everything in between.
And it goes into categories of behavior,
14:37:36
And it's all categorized, it's actually put in the
16
matrix.
It took us approximately two years to work through
18
this with the Civil Division of the County Attorney's Office,
19
with the lawyers that represent us in personnel matters, and it
20
is very -- when I say strict, what it does is people know
21
there's not much leeway in the system.
22
if you're the chief deputy's son-in-law, that -- and I don't
IEN
DS
17
14:37:56
That it doesn't matter
23
have one that works at the Sheriff's Office, by the way.
24
you're the chief deputy's son-in-law, that doesn't matter.
25
This is how it's going to happen.
FR
14:37:04
If
14:38:23
Q.
were talking about IAPro at the time.
identifiers?
A.
things that we pay attention to.
identifier.
You used the word "identifiers" earlier, and I think you

What did you mean by
Those are the -- and I believe there's about 15 or so -That's what I meant by
When you say "pay attention to," you
talking about on the matrix?

THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
10
No, sir, in IAPro.
Okay.
THE WITNESS:
11
14:39:01
Where we would -- somebody's being rude
12
on traffic stops, using foul language, you know, any of those
13
things that we've determined, excessive force complaints,
14
racial profiling complaints, those kinds of things are all part
15
of those identifiers that we have determined are important to
16
keep track of.
17
BY MR. MASTERSON:
18
Q.
Who came up with those identifiers?
19
A.
We did, in concert with the Monitor Team and I believe
20
counsel.
21
we did.
22
Q.
DS
I'm not a hundred percent sure.
I'm fairly sure that
14:39:22
14:39:39
IEN
Racial profiling's one of the identifiers?
23
A.
Oh, yes, sir.
24
Q.
You talked with Ms. Wang a little bit about the
25
reassignment of Ken Holmes from PSB.
FR
14:38:44
Coming in to work late; use of force complaints.
THE COURT:
7
8
1420
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
14:40:02
1421
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I don't care if you remember talking to Ms. Wang about
1
2
it.
Do you remember doing that?
A.
Yes, I do.
Q.
Tell me a little bit more about why you thought it
necessary to reassign Captain Holmes out of PSB.
A.
June, maybe July of 2014.
the monitor over the Armendariz investigation, things weren't
moving fast enough.
I was feeling a lot of pressure.
This was probably in
I was feeling a lot of pressure from
I had worked with Captain Holmes for a long time.
10
11
Captain Holmes is a thorough, methodical individual, but he is
12
slow.
13
able to keep up with the pace of the Armendariz investigation,
14
and that was not Captain Holmes.
15
Q.
16
transferred Captain Holmes out and Captain Bailey in?
17
A.
Yes, it was just starting.
18
Q.
When you say just started, I mean, are we talking a week?
19
Two weeks?
20
A.
I'm guessing a couple months, maybe, six weeks.
21
Q.
Okay.
22
A.
Yes, sir.
He's not high speed.
DS
IEN
14:41:46
Do you remember?
14:42:03
You said that you felt pressure, is that correct?
23
Q.
From whom or what?
24
A.
From the Monitor Team: document requests, criticisms, just
25
the general demeanor.
FR
14:41:05
So I needed somebody that would be
Was the Armendariz investigation going on at the time you
A couple days?
14:40:18
I could tell that they were not happy
14:42:25
1422
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
with our progress, and even a few comments about
Captain Holmes.
Q.
Tell me a little more about that, please.
A.
I can't remember specifically who made the comments, or
what they were, even, but it was my general impression that
they weren't happy because he's -- he does things at his own
pace.
Q.
slowly on the Armendariz investigation?
Did the Monitor Team tell you that PSB was moving too
10
A.
I don't -- I don't remember that.
11
Q.
You moved Captain Bailey in in an attempt to get the
12
investigation to move along quicker, is that correct?

MR. KILLEBREW:
13
THE COURT:
14
Sustained.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
16
Q.
Did you move -- why did you move Captain Bailey in there?
17
A.
There's several reasons I moved Captain Bailey in there.
18
Q.
Okay.
19
A.
First one was I knew he had the skill to do a complex
20
investigation.
21
investigation I alluded to earlier where Captain Bailey -- he
22
was Lieutenant Bailey at the time -- noticed that one of his
14:43:30
Let's have them, please.
DS
IEN
14:43:08
Objection, leading.
15
This was on -- right on the heels of the
23
detectives, Detective Navarrette, was possibly dealing drugs
24
and guns to the cartel.
25
to do a federal wiretap investigation to look into the
FR
14:42:47
14:43:49
And he came to me and asked permission

14:44:23
1423
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
allegations, which I gave him permission to do that.
Subsequently, Navarrette was arrested, put in jail.
2
3
Cisco Perez was terminated along with two other employees, and
about five or six other civilians were also arrested as a
result of that.
involving thousands of hours and hundreds -- and thousands of
telephone calls, and probably managing 30 detectives at one
time.
because he had.
It was a very thorough, complex investigation
So I knew Lieutenant Bailey was capable of doing that,
Lieutenant Bailey was promoted to captain, and so I
10
11
knew he had the integrity to run the Professional Standards
12
Bureau.
13
like that.
14
was one of the few people in the office that had all those
15
ingredients and able to run the Professional Standards Bureau.
16
Q.
Navarrette was a deputy sheriff with MCSO?
17
A.
He was.
18
Q.
He was arrested?
19
A.
He was arrested and put in jail, yes, sir.
20
Q.
Who arrested him?
21
A.
We did.
22
Q.
Cisco Perez was a deputy sheriff?
He'd been a detective most of his career.
DS
IEN
14:45:26
He had the experience of running a major investigation
23
A.
Yes, sir.
24
Q.
He did not get arrested?
25
A.
No, sir.
FR
14:44:56
And he
14:45:51
14:46:04
14:46:15
1424
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Why not?
A.
The County Attorney's Office felt that we didn't have
enough to have -- have a conviction.
Q.
Would you have liked to arrest him?
A.
Oh, yes.
Q.
Did you fire him?
A.
Yes, we did.
Q.
And there were did you say two more employees of MCSO who
were involved?
10
A.
11
were also involved in it.
12
Q.
Were they arrested?
13
A.
No, sir.
14
Q.
Were they fired?
15
A.
Yes, sir.
16
Q.
Captain Bailey ran that whole -- well, let me ask you this.
17
When -- tell me if I'm wrong.
18
investigation, not an IA, correct?
19
A.
That's correct.
20
Q.
Okay.
21
A.
Yes.
DS
23
THE COURT:
24
BY MR. MASTERSON:
25
Q.
FR
There were two detention officers that
14:46:39
14:46:46
This was a criminal
You ran that whole criminal investigation.
MS. WANG:
IEN
22
That's correct.
14:46:29
14:47:02
Objection to leading, Your Honor.

The answer's out.
So you then moved Captain Bailey into PSB a few months into
14:47:20
1425
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
the Armendariz investigation, is that right?

MS. WANG:
Objection to leading again.
THE COURT:
Sustained.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
Armendariz investigation?
A.
It was early on in the investigation.
Q.
You've told us about personnel hours.
more -- I would like in pretty much detail what that
When did you put Captain Bailey in PSB in relation to the
Can you describe
10
investigation entailed.
11
A.
12
understand what 63,000 personnel hours means.
Can you tell us more about that?
A full -- if we worked every day five days a week
14
every day of the year, that's 2,080 hours.
15
an awful lot of time.
16
a half for a person.
So 63,000 hours is
That's well over -- that's a career and
14:48:29
That's a lot of time.
We had at any one time 50 detectives and supervisors
17
18
working on this case because of how we did this, how we broke
19
down the Armendariz case.
20
I believe the Monitor Team had some input on this also, came up
21
with an investigative plan.
DS
Captain Bailey and his PSB team, and
14:48:55
IEN
And basically what we did, because of all the videos,
23
really, that were involved, there were approximately 4,300
24
videos that had to be reviewed that were found that were
25
related to Charley Armendariz.
FR
14:47:58
I'm glad you asked, because sometimes people don't
13
22
14:47:35
Every one of them needed to be
14:49:19
1426
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
reviewed realtime; can't fast-forward through those things.
Some of them were corrupted and they were difficult to see.
And so we had detectives on computers in PSB -- we
didn't farm it out and give somebody 10 CDs to go back to the
their office in another district someplace.
computers, we brought in staff at PSB, so we could keep control
over it, and what we did is we had detectives go through those
DVDs.
another deputy sheriff, or by another police agency, which
We brought in
If they saw a policy violation by Charley Armendariz, by
10
there were a bunch of those also, they were to make note of
11
that.
14:50:21
And then those, I think there were about -- about
12
13
10 percent of Charley's DVDs had policy violations on them.
14
There was 400 something that went to a second level
15
investigation where we took lieutenants from throughout the
16
office and we made them do the same thing.
17
and reviewed, but we made them do a written assessment of those
18
incidents.
14:50:43
We sat them down
And then if they -- if they had policy violations that
19
were sustained or they thought would be sustained, they were
21
sent to the next level, where we actually investigated not
22
Charley Armendariz, because Charley was dead by this time,
IEN
DS
20
23
there was no use investigating Charley, but there were other
24
deputy sheriffs that we noticed on some of those DVDs that we
25
initiated internal investigations on each and every one of
FR
14:49:47
14:51:04
14:51:30
1427
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
those deputy sheriffs.
And this is what took so long, because
it had to be done realtime, there were so many videos, and it
was so complex.
Q.
took?
periods.
A.
until, I don't know, just a few months ago.
Q.
Okay.
10
A.
It's not something that we could have done overnight.
11
Certainly not something that another police agency would have
12
gladly accepted the responsibility of doing; certainly not
13
something that we could have afforded to pay an outside agency,
14
and I don't think anybody would even be big enough to do it.
15
Q.
16
that investigation?
17
A.
18
the -- another agency should -- should do this investigation
19
for us.
20
didn't really know what we had; you know, was it viable -- it
21
might have been a viable option.
22
and pretty quickly it progressed, it was -- we would have got
That's what took 63,000 personnel hours.
Do you have any idea how long overall that investigation

I suppose we could divide 63,000 up into 24-hour
Well, from a time period from when we started it in May
Was it suggested by someone that you get someone else to do
14:52:18
14:52:37
Well, those were some of the ideas that maybe, you know,
IEN
DS
And, you know, I thought -- well, in the beginning we
14:53:01
But as this thing progressed,
23
that back within a few weeks and said say, Hey, no thanks,
24
Jerry, you guys gotta do this yourself.
25
organization to investigating the Charley Armendariz matter.
FR
14:51:54
We can't devote entire

14:53:26
1428
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
How many detectives were assigned to this investigation?
A.
At one time there was probably 50 working on it at one
time.
Q.
I don't know if there -- is there a homicide division or --
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
Do you know how many detectives are assigned to that?
A.
I don't.
Q.
More than 50?
10
A.
To homicide --
11
Q.
Yeah.
12
A.
-- which is a section, it's not a division.
13
Q.
How about sex crimes?
14
or -- I'm sorry, what was the word you used?
15
A.
The sex crimes, special victims unit.
16
Q.
It's a unit, okay.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
Okay.
19
A.
I'd really be guessing on that one.
20
Q.
More than 50?
21
A.
About 50 is what I was going to say.
22
Q.
Okay.
Do you know how many detectives you have assigned -- well,
14:53:49
No.
Maybe 15.
Is there a sex crimes division,
14:54:11
There are approximately 25 assigned to that.

What about narcotics?
I'm not sure.
IEN
DS
14:54:35
Now, you just told me that there were 4300-plus
23
videos that were related to Armendariz.
24
how long each one of those videos was?
25
A.
FR
14:53:38
Do you have any idea
It varied from a minute or two to hours.
14:54:55
1429
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Somebody looked at each one?
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
And I think I lost you for a second.
400 secondary reviews.
did -- well, let's go one at a time.
A.
detectives, actually, that were assigned to initially review
the DVD's for potential policy violations.
policy violations, they filled out a form and submitted that
You said there were
What -- what, again, was that, and who

What was that?
14:55:16
The secondary review came from the deputies, the
If they noticed
10
for a secondary review, which was done by the lieutenant.
The
11
lieutenant would then do a more lengthy review of what they saw
12
on the video, and possibly do a correlation with what policy
13
violations would have been occurring on the video.
14
Q.
15
review?
16
A.
The detective that did the original review.
17
Q.
Do you know what criteria were utilized by the detectives
18
to determine whether it went from the 4300 down to the 400?
19
A.
20
but I don't know what criteria they were given.
21
Q.
Okay.
22
A.
Lieutenant level.
Who made the decision of whether it got to the secondary
14:56:18
IEN
DS
I know they received training by PSB in what to look for,
14:56:39
And the 400 was done by?
23
Q.
How were those lieutenants assigned to that?
24
A.
The lieutenants were given the DVDs, lieutenants from
25
throughout the organization -- again, there was 400 of them
FR
14:55:48
14:57:04
1430
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
that had to be reviewed realtime -- and they needed a critical
analysis.
few checkmarks on a box like the initial analysis was; this
took a much longer time period to do.
Q.
the 400 videos that needed further review?
A.
I'm sorry, I don't.
Q.
How many lieutenants do you have overall?
number?
So it just wasn't watching the video and making a
Do you know how many lieutenants were assigned to review
Do you know that
10
A.
I believe we have about 40.
11
Q.
Do you -- maybe you don't know this, but did you use all of
12
them or just some of them, do you know, for the 400-video
13
review?
14
A.
I don't think we used all of them, no.
15
Q.
All right.
THE COURT:
18
20
21
IEN
22
afternoon break.
I'm just looking for a good time for an
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
Oh, this would be great, Judge.
14:58:18
Good time?
MR. MASTERSON:
23
THE COURT:
24
(Recess taken.)
25
THE COURT:
FR
Yes, sir.
We're hitting about 3 o'clock.
DS
19
14:58:01
Mr. Masterson?
MR. MASTERSON:
17
14:57:40
Now --
THE COURT:
16
14:57:25
Yes, sir.
See you in about 15 minutes.
Please be seated.
Thank you for the
15:19:26
1431
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
courtesy.
You may resume, Mr. Masterson.
Please.
MR. MASTERSON:
Thank you, Judge.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
calling them spin-offs, but I'm not sure.
think you testified 40 or so.
15:19:44
I want to move into the Armendariz -- I think we've been

The IA cases, I
9
10
A.
Yes, sir.
11
Q.
Ms. Wang told us -- told you yesterday there were four
12
major -- do you recall four, or how many do you recall that you
13
characterize as major?
14
A.
I think that that was correct, it was about four.
15
Q.
Do you remember what those four were?
16
A.
There was the Armendariz case itself; there was the
17
leadership case about Charley Armendariz.
18
we spent some time on was not a spin-off Armendariz case; it
19
was in reference to the violation of the preliminary
20
injunction.
21
failing me on the fourth issue.
22
Q.
15:20:00
The other case that
DS
That was the third one, and I'm -- my memory's
15:21:09
IEN
I want to talk about the leadership case first, so tell me
23
what you mean by the leadership case.
24
A.
25
Armendariz happen?
FR
15:20:23
There was an investigation into how could Charley

How could we have a deputy sheriff out
15:21:41
1432
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
there doing what he's doing and go unnoticed, unaddressed, for
so long?
Q.
Did somebody get discipline for that?
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
Who?
A.
That would be Chief Trombi received major discipline.
Lieutenant Sousa and sergeant -- and a sergeant received minor
discipline.
Q.
That case.
15:22:03
Sorry, I can't remember his name.
Why did Chief Trombi get major discipline?

Well, first let me ask you this:
10
What was the major
11
discipline?
12
A.
He received a 40-hour suspension.
13
Q.
Why?
14
A.
Failure to supervise, incompetency, those kinds of things.
15
I don't remember the exact policy violations.
16
Q.
17
was he at that time with respect to Deputy Armendariz?
18
A.
He was a deputy chief in the chain of command.
19
Q.
The reason I asked the question is I'm wondering how -- why
20
was he the one that got the major discipline and the lower
21
ranks got the minor discipline.
22
A.
15:22:50
DS
Where is Chief Trombi in the supervisory chain, or where
IEN
I'm sorry, I don't recall.
23
discipline of that.
24
believe.
25
Q.
FR
15:22:35
Okay.
15:23:16
I wasn't involved in the
That would have been Chief Olson, I
You know, what we probably need to learn a little
15:23:46
1433
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
bit about is the hierarchy.
lieutenant, captain figured out, but can you tell me where you
go up the chain after that.
A.
an executive chief, then you have the chief deputy, and then
the sheriff.
Q.
the major discipline?
A.
Yes.
And I think I've got sergeant,
After captain you have a deputy chief, then you have
And where was Chief Trombi in the chain when he received
Well, when he -- when he received the discipline he was an
10
executive chief.
11
occurred that he was -- that was under review and under
12
investigation, he would -- he was a deputy chief.
13
Q.
14
some point during this process?
15
A.
He was.
16
Q.
Are you familiar with that promotion process?
17
A.
I am.
18
Q.
Why did that happen?
19
A.
When Executive Chief Sands retired, I believe it was in the
20
summer of 2013, Deputy Chief Trombi acted in his position for a
21
long time.
22
outstanding job filling that role and that he deserved to be
But most of the incident he was -- that
15:24:30
And you were asked some questions about he was promoted at
IEN
DS
15:24:52
promoted.
24
Q.
25
and more yesterday.
Okay.
15:25:09
And the sheriff and I thought that he did an
23
FR
15:24:15
You've mentioned Cisco Perez a couple times today

And he was the deputy we just talked about
15:25:58
1434
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
a little bit ago who was fired, correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
All right.
we've talked about it already, and we talked about it quite a
bit, so I'm not going to stay on this too long, but tell me
about the pocketing allegations he made.
A.
was, and made an offhand allegation about, you know, he got in
all this trouble, and, you know, we're firing him, or we fired
Tell me about the allegations.
And I know
He was at a hearing of some sort, I don't recall what it
10
him.
11
taking people's ID cards and statuettes and a flat-screen TV
12
and nothing's happened to them.
13
to that effect.
14
Q.
15
TV?
16
A.
Yes, sir.
17
Q.
Did he -- was it one TV?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
Were there any allegations by Cisco Perez or anybody else
20
about a whole bunch of TVs, or anything like that?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
The reason I'm asking you is Ms. Wang kept referring to
Meanwhile, the deputies on the Human Smuggling Unit were
15:26:52
Something like that, something
One of the -- one of his claims was that somebody stole a
15:27:22
IEN
DS
As far as I know, yes.
23
TVs, TVs, TVs.
24
whole bunch.
25
A.
FR
15:26:19
15:27:36
I wanted to know if there's one or there's a
There's one TV that I'm aware of.
15:27:50
1435
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
All right.
Tell me about that TV.
A.
That TV was investigated.
awarded to us by the court in a forfeiture process, and it was
used in the training room at the Human Smuggling Unit.
Q.
One TV.
A.
One TV.
Q.
And you went to court on that TV, a state court here in
Arizona --
15:28:21
MR. KILLEBREW:
It was seized legally and
Objection, leading.
10
BY MR. MASTERSON:
11
Q.
Did you go to a state court here in Arizona?
12
A.
Yes, sir.
13
process like we do with many other items that are seized.
14
Q.
15
TV?
And we went through the normal forfeiture
Did the court here in Arizona tell you you could use that
15:28:51
MR. KILLEBREW:
16
17
BY MR. MASTERSON:
18
Q.
THE COURT:
I'm going to allow it.
DS
THE WITNESS:
21
BY MR. MASTERSON:
22
Q.
Yes, sir.
15:28:58
IEN
You also talked a bit with Ms. Wang about some drug issues,
23
I guess drug IAs.
24
methamphetamine.
25
A.
FR
Objection, leading.
What'd the court tell you?
19
20
15:28:34
Yes, sir.
She kept mentioning heroin and

15:29:34
1436
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Tell me, what part of Armendariz had anything to do with
heroin or methamphetamine?
A.
Charley Armendariz's house, those items were found in his
garage and in his house.
Q.
Did you investigate that?
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
Was it a separate IA?
When sheriff's detectives executed a search warrant in
15:29:59
Let's talk about this.
And I think I might have this a little bit confused.
9
10
There was an IA concerning Armendariz himself, is that correct?
11
A.
Yes, sir.
12
Q.
Was there another IA, then, or was -- I'm a little bit
13
confused about 40 IAs, an IA in Armendariz, and what seems to
14
be another IA we're talking about now about drugs,
15
methamphetamine, and heroin.
15:30:46
Can you just kind of straighten that out for me?
16
17
A.
18
was over a thousand items that were confiscated, seized during
19
the search warrant of Charley Armendariz's home.
20
items could be attributed back to other deputies.
It
Some of those
15:31:18
For example, a driver's license, let's say, that we
were able to backtrack through our CAD system through our
IEN
22
There were many items -- trying to remember the number.
DS
21
23
Records Management System to another deputy sheriff.
24
deputy sheriff had contact with that individual.
25
an internal investigation of that deputy sheriff over that ID.
FR
15:30:23
The
We initiated
15:31:50
1437
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
That would be one of the 40-plus spin-off Armendariz
investigations, as an example.
were able to attribute to somebody other than Charley
Armendariz we could follow up on a separate investigation.
So any item that we had that we
Now, your question about the drugs specifically, I
5
6
don't recall if we were ever able to match up, because some of
those drugs were in evidence bags with a seal with no numbers
on them, with some with some information on them.
ever able to connect them with another deputy, I -- I don't
10
If we were
believe so; I don't believe we were.
15:32:43
So that's how the Charley Armendariz investigation was
11
12
very big, very volu -- as a matter of fact, the executive
13
summary was 542 pages.
14
week.
15
grammar.
16
there are 17 volumes or so of support documents, tens of
17
thousands of pages, support documents for that investigation.
18
So we have that.
I just reviewed that within the last
I sent it back for some editing, not of content, but of

And there are -- I understand, I haven't seen it,
15:33:14
And then there's the 40 spin-off investigations where
19
we were able to identify sheriff's personnel that had violated
21
policies, and we were also able to identify some outside law
22
enforcement agencies, their officers, that had violated some
IEN
DS
20
23
policies, and we notified those agencies about their officers'
24
behavior.
25
Q.
FR
15:32:13
So you investigated these drug-heroin-methamphetamine
15:33:43
15:34:03
1438
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
issues, is that correct?
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
You didn't blow them off?
A.
No, sir.
Q.
Were they a part of the 40 -- well, let me ask you this:

The 40-plus, were those the guys with what you
6
7
described as trinkets?
A.
That's something else.
Q.
Okay.
10
A.
Really, the 40 spin-offs would be more related to the
11
videos --
12
Q.
Ah.
13
A.
-- the Armendariz videos.
14
Q.
All right.
15
using your word.
16
that?
17
A.
18
Those were done individually.
19
Q.
20
empathy with some of your folks, some of your deputies.
Now, let's talk about the trinkets deal.
15:34:32
I'm
What part of the Armendariz IA overall was
15:34:50
Which -- you were talking yesterday about having some
15:35:13
Can we -THE COURT:
Can I interrupt?
23
MR. MASTERSON:
24
THE COURT:
25
make sure that I --
FR
What did that involve?
That was a separate investigation done by -- individually.
IEN
22
Or is that something else.
What are the 40?
DS
21
15:34:14
Yes.
Can I interrupt, because I just want to

15:35:23
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
And was that the investigation that was
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
10
Yes, sir.
That you signed off on and completed in
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
13
Yes, sir.
And that encompassed all -- I think you
14
said it was just identifications yesterday, but from your
15
perspective, that encompassed identifications and trinkets?

THE WITNESS:
16
THE COURT:
17
Just so that I can be clear about this as
well, seems to me that I remember that in Armendariz's house,
19
in addition to drugs, in addition to guns, there were credit
20
cards and bank cards.
IEN
DS
15:36:18
Is that part of the trinket investigation?

THE WITNESS:
23
THE COURT:
24
THE WITNESS:
25
THE COURT:
FR
15:36:03
Yes, sir.
18
22
15:35:47
Exhibit 1001?
12
21
15:35:36
the criminal investigation?
11
The trinket investigation, Your Honor,
was done by Sergeant Tennyson.
7
8
-- understand something here.
individually and it's not part of the 40 IAs, who did it?
5
6
Absolutely.
When you say the trinkets investigation was done
3
4
1439
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
No, sir.
Were they ever investigated?

Yes, sir.
And were they investigated by
15:36:25
Internal Affairs?
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
3
4
Yes, sir.
Do you know the number of that
investigation?
MR. MASTERSON:
5
6
1440
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Excuse me, Judge.
Was your question
an IA number, or how many?

THE COURT:
It was an IA number.
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you.
THE WITNESS:
10
It could be -- it could be one of
11
several.
12
I don't recall the -- the number, but if --
It would have been -- whatever it was, it
14
would have been disclosed to the monitor and disclosed to the
15
Court?
15:37:02
THE WITNESS:
16
Yes, sir.
And then we also had the -- if in Charley's garage we
17
had a credit card or something -- I know there was a purse,
19
there was all kinds of items -- that we were able to attribute
20
to another deputy sheriff having possession of those, we would
21
have a separate IA pulled for that.
DS
18
IEN
THE COURT:
Could you identify any cell phones?
24
THE WITNESS:
FR
15:37:21
There were cell phones, as I recall.
23
25
15:36:41
Again, overall, the Charley Armendariz investigation,
THE COURT:
13
22
15:36:33
I don't recall the -- the cell phones,
whether we pulled numbers on those individually.
15:37:37
THE COURT:
How would you tie a purse up to somebody?
THE WITNESS:
Well, if there was an ID in it.
know if we did with the purse; I'm just using that as an
example.
THE COURT:
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
I don't
Thank you, Mr. Masterson.
MR. MASTERSON:
1441
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
15:37:51
Saved me about eight questions.

You got it there, Chief?
9
10
A.
Yes, sir.
11
Q.
What is that?
12
A.
This is what the Court just asked me about.
13
found identification investigation conducted by Sergeant
14
Tennyson, the criminal investigation results.
15
Q.
16
entire investigation?
17
A.
No.
18
Q.
Let me ask you this.
19
report has a 542-page executive summary and tens of thousands
20
of pages of documents.
21
larger investigation or is this entirely separate?
22
A.
15:38:16
DS
Is this the entire investigation?
This is the
Does this represent the
You said that the -- the Armendariz
Is Exhibit 1001 a small part of that
15:39:06
IEN
Entirely separate.
23
Q.
24
if we wanted to look at what all went -- what all went on
25
during this particular investigation?
FR
15:38:43
Okay.
What else goes with this or would -- would help us
15:39:22
1442
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
I guess you would have to talk to Sergeant Tennyson.
Q.
Okay.
other than this -- can we call this a summary, or is that not
fair?
A.
I would call it a summary.
Q.
Okay.
this; we should talk to Sergeant Tennyson?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
Thank you.
Do you know whether there are any other documents
But you can't tell us any more information about
Now, I'm trying to figure out how to characterize this
10
11
question, but yesterday you had a discussion with Ms. Wang, and
12
I don't -- I don't want to use a characterization that's not
13
fair, but it appeared to me you were a little upset, and you
14
were talking about the ACLU would be all over you if you did
15
not do an investigation.
15:40:04
15:40:42
16
A.
Yes, sir.
18
Q.
Was that when you were being asked about -- asked questions
19
about empathizing with certain deputies during a criminal
20
investigation of those deputies?
21
A.
Yes, in conjunction with Exhibit 1001.
22
Q.
Well, I don't know how to ask you other than what riled you
IEN
DS
17
23
up?
24
A.
25
initially for conducting a criminal investigation into the IDs,
FR
15:39:39
15:40:57
Well, I felt I was being criticized by the Monitor Team

15:41:31
1443
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
and then shortly after that when we started the investigation
we were criticized for not charging anybody with a crime.
it was like I was damned if I did, dammed if I didn't.
And
So when the allegation was made by, to me, a very
4
5
uncredible source -- however, an allegation -- of my deputy
sheriffs stealing items, I initiated that criminal
investigation.
Ms. Wang insinuated, at least I read into it she was
insinuating I did it to forestall the length of the
And what riled me up yesterday was when
10
investigation to go over the 120 days so I couldn't discipline
11
my deputies, and that I used that as a tactic.
12
the furthest thing from the truth.
And that was
14
I had at the time in some very strenuous circumstances being
15
pulled from both ends.
16
us for, "Well, I wouldn't do that.
17
criminal investigation?" on one hand, and then a month or two
18
later or however long later it was -- then they're angry, the
19
Court's angry, everybody's angry because we didn't criminally
20
prosecute anybody.
The Monitor Team initially criticizing
DS
Why are you doing a
15:43:35
hauled in again for another interview, being read their Miranda
23
warnings, and when we really didn't have probable cause to pull
24
them in, to detain them on this stuff and ask them questions
25
about identification cards or things that were, according to
FR
15:43:17
And in the meantime, my deputy sheriffs are being
IEN
22
15:42:52
What I was trying to do is the best I could with what
13
21
15:42:20
15:43:56
1444
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
the County Attorney's Office, of no value.
And that upset me that I had to put my deputy sheriffs
2
3
through that process so I wouldn't be criticized by either the
Monitor Team or the plaintiffs' counsel, but yet here I was
sitting here getting criticized, anyway.
frustrated about that.
Q.
that -- and I don't want to put words in your mouth, so -- and
I can't quote you, but you said something about the monitor
So I was very
I want to ask you something you just mentioned, and that is
10
telling you you didn't even need to do those, and then the
11
monitor being mad at you after you did them.
15:44:42
What were you talking about?
12
A.
That's a conversation between Sherry Kiyler and
14
Captain Bailey.
15
Q.
What's that all about?
16
A.
I wasn't present at that conversation.
17
me that she asked, Why are we doing that?
18
to do that, something to that effect.
19
was her, something like that.
20
Q.
And then later were you criticized for how you did it?
21
A.
That's correct.
22
Q.
Can you look at Exhibit 2520, please.
IEN
DS
13
23
one, Chief?
24
A.
Yes, sir.
25
Q.
Tell us about it, please.
FR
15:44:24
15:44:56
Captain Bailey told
It's not necessary
She wouldn't do it if it
15:45:15
Do you recall this
15:46:09
1445
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
You know what?
1
2
cut it -- cut it shorter.
sustained?
A.
You've been up there a while.
Let's
Can you tell us why this was not
You're right, I've been up here a long time.

I don't remember.
IA 20140541, I don't remember which
IA this pertains to.
Q.
try one more, though, just for the heck of it.
Can you please look at 2062.
You know what?
That's fine.
I'm going to -- I'm going to
And this one we talked
10
about yesterday, or you talked about yesterday.
11
A.
2062?
12
Q.
Yes, sir.
14
A.
Yes, sir.
15
Q.
And you used, I think, the phrase somewhere in here about
16
Hechavarria was not the only deputy involved?
17
A.
That's correct.
18
Q.
And is that why -- well, you talked about why he wasn't
19
disciplined.
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
There was a lot of discussion on whether it was because he
22
was not the only deputy involved, or whether it had to do with
FR
25
15:47:44
DS
IEN
24
15:47:00
Do you remember talking about this one yesterday?
13
23
15:46:40
15:48:03
his contact with the suspect in booking a suspect.

I just want to know specifically why it is Deputy
Hechavarria was not disciplined in this particular instance.
15:48:22
1446
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes, sir.
He -- Deputy Hechavarria was not the only deputy
sheriff that dealt with the individual.
have his name here, whoever he was whose driver's license
showed up a year or two, few years later, in a closet or
locker, I don't remember where it was.
deputies that dealt with this individual.
And I don't -- I don't
He was one of three
Deputy Hechavarria, however, took him to jail, put him
7
8
in custody, and all the items he had on him into evidence --
not into evidence, but into property in the jail.
None of the
10
three deputies recalls how that ID got in the drawer.
11
just say drawer, because I don't remember exactly where it was.
Let's
13
don't know who did it.
14
thought it was Hechavarria, but he explained it better and
15
further in his response to his discipline.
16
was the appropriate thing to do, is to not give him discipline
17
for this incident that occurred years before.
And it was obvious to me that we -- we
And I thought that
we are trying to discipline a deputy sheriff who recalls the
20
incident, who recalls arresting him, who recalls placing all
21
his property into the property locker at the jail, but does not
22
recall or does not know why or how his driver's license got in
IEN
DS
19
FR
25
15:49:53
This was September of 2011, so four years later here
18
24
15:49:25
And, you know, you can't discipline somebody if you
12
23
15:48:55
the drawer.
15:50:40
I couldn't see disciplining him for that.
And the reason this was -- this discipline was issued
in the first place is probably my fault, because we were on a
15:51:11
1447
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
feeding frenzy, for lack of better terms, in going over these
cases, and blanketing disciplining people because they were,
quote-unquote, the case agent and a piece of property showed up
somewhere, and four and five years later we could trace it back
to that individual and we disciplined them.
15:51:41
Deputy Hechavarria took the time, he remembered the
6
7
case well enough to write a response to his discipline.
looked at it, I evaluated it, and I rescinded his discipline.
Q.
Did Deputy Hechavarria actually book, properly book
10
property into the MCSO property facility when he took the
11
suspect in custody?
12
A.
THE COURT:
license?
Do you know if that included his driver's
THE WITNESS:
15
16
I don't know the answer to that
THE COURT:
And it wouldn't be appropriate, for
example, just for background, it wouldn't be appropriate for
19
anybody just to take his driver's license without booking it
20
into property or otherwise accounting for it.
DS
18
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
IEN
22
15:52:38
That's correct.
And just so we can get this out of the
23
way -- and I think you've already testified on this, so forgive
24
me for asking again -- it's apparent that that was a
25
large-scale problem at the MCSO, is it not?
FR
15:52:21
question, Your Honor.
17
21
15:52:08
Yes, sir.
13
14
15:52:54
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
1448
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Yes, sir, it was.
And what you call -- referred to as
trinkets like small religious statuettes and license plates and
drivers' licenses, none of that's appropriate to take from
people without accounting for it.

THE WITNESS:
I agree with you.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
here today, can you tell us whether they were taken from a
10
Now, with respect to some of those trinkets, as you sit
person?
15:53:22
And I'm asking you the question because -- let me ask
11
12
another question:
13
in an abandoned drop house?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
Could any of those trinkets have been found out in Gila
16
Bend in the middle of the desert?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
So as you sit here today, you can't tell us whether any of
19
those trinkets was actually physically taken from a person.
21
THE COURT:
Objection, leading.
15:53:46
Sustained.
23
Q.
24
trinkets came into possession of anyone at MCSO?
25
A.
FR
15:53:34
BY MR. MASTERSON:
IEN
22
Could any of those trinkets have been found
MS. WANG:
DS
20
15:53:10
Do you have any specific information as to how any of those
None.
And as I explained yesterday, most of the
15:54:06
1449
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
statuettes, candles, those types of things that I referred to
as trinkets, were actually purchased by one of the HSU deputies
when he visited his family or went down to Nogales.
ones that were not purchased by him, we were not able, to the
best of my recollection, to make a determination where they
came from, how they got there.
time, for years, that kind of thing.

THE COURT:
They'd been there for a long
Chief --
MR. MASTERSON:
10
THE COURT:
11
Certainly.
And again, if you want to object to my
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
14
I'm ready for you, Judge.
All right.
Thanks.
Yesterday in your testimony you talked about at your
15
16
deposition you said there was one major incident and two minor
17
incidents, and then you said you thought there may actually be
18
as many as six to eight minor reprimands that arose from the
19
spin-off matters.
THE COURT:
Yes, sir.
How many if any of those related to
23
category, how many, if any of those, related to identifications
24
taken from members of the public?
FR
25
15:55:35
identifications that were taken, or trinkets, but in the same
IEN
22
15:55:11
Shall we call them that?
THE WITNESS:
DS
21
15:55:03
questions, I'm not offended.
13
20
15:54:46
And if I may, Mr. Masterson.
12
And the
THE WITNESS:
It's hard for me to answer in a number,
15:56:00
1450
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
but let me -- let me try this.

THE COURT:
Sure.
THE WITNESS:
We disciplined supervisors that were
responsible over the area --
THE COURT:
In response to these IAs?
THE WITNESS:
15:56:26
In response to these IAs, the fact that
they knew there were trinkets, license plates on the wall,
drivers' licenses on the wall, those kinds of things.
disciplined supervisors because of that -THE COURT:
10
What was -- who were the supervisors?
THE WITNESS:
11
We
Captain Letourneau; I believe
12
Lieutenant Sousa; some of the sergeants; there might have been
13
another captain or two.

THE COURT:
14
15
17
Honor.
THE COURT:
21
THE COURT:
FR
25
That's correct.
15:57:22
And you can identify Captain Letourneau,
Lieutenant Sousa, you think maybe a few sergeants.
23
24
And they would be in response to IAs that
THE WITNESS:
IEN
22
No, they were written reprimands, Your
were filed with the monitor?
DS
20
15:57:13
THE WITNESS:
18
19
Were those oral counselings or were they
written reprimands.
16
15:56:44
or two.
THE WITNESS:
Yes, sir.
There may be another captain
I -THE COURT:
You're not sure.
15:57:34
1451
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
My mind is, yeah --
We've already seen you did discipline
Deputy Hechavarria, and then on your grievance you reversed
that discipline.
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
6
7
15:57:47
Can you think of any deputies that may
have been disciplined for taking identifications or trinkets -THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
THE COURT:
11
Yes, sir.
15:58:01
Who was that?
THE WITNESS:
12
Yes, sir.
-- that discipline was upheld?
THE WITNESS:
10
13
Yes, sir.
I don't remember their names.
There
were numerous deputies.

THE COURT:
14
Well, forgive me, but you said you don't
15
think there were more than eight in your testimony yesterday,
16
and so we've got Sousa; we've got Letourneau; we've got
17
sergeant, a couple of sergeants.

THE WITNESS:
18
THE COURT:
19
That would be --
And when you say "numerous," are you
talking in response to -- I'm sorry, because I don't mean to
21
interrupt you.
22
Internal Affairs investigations?
IEN
DS
20
23
15:58:22
You're talking in response to these
THE WITNESS:
They all would be covered under one IA
24
number; those, that group would be under one IA number.
25
there were cases, and that's why I said the feeding frenzy,
FR
15:58:11
But
15:58:36
1452
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
that day PSB brought me a stack of cases involving
identifications and those kinds of things.
Identifications were something that we were able to
3
4
positively show that Jerry Sheridan had this individual, booked
this individual on this day, and that ID showed up in a drawer
four years later at a district somewhere.
agent.
IA pulled on that, investigation done, and I was disciplined.
We did that with -- and I could have numbers for you on
10
I arrested that individual.
I was the case
I was then -- there was an
Tuesday, Your Honor, if you want, but we disciplined many.

THE COURT:
11
when that was your tes -- up to eight yesterday, I'm kind of
13
having a hard time reconciling those two.

THE WITNESS:
15
BY MR. MASTERSON
16
Q.
Well --
15:59:51
Are we talking about two different investigations here?

THE WITNESS:
17
Maybe we are.
I don't know.
I'm a
little bit confused right now.
19
people that we found that we could -- that were case agents and
20
so -- and had possession sometime of that ID, and there were --
21
there was a group of them.
22
not recall.
IEN
DS
18
23
THE COURT:
But I know that we disciplined
16:00:09
How many that is, right now I do
But that would have been a discipline that
24
occurred in an IA that you've identified and provided to the
25
monitor and to the parties here.
FR
15:59:34
Well, when you say you disciplined eight,
12
14
15:59:05
16:00:31
THE WITNESS:
1
2
THE COURT:
foundation, Judge.
THE COURT:
I'll object to that question with
I don't know, if you're asking me.

Okay.
THE WITNESS:
But you believe that they would
Yes, sir.
I believe I signed off on
these sometime around May or June, May.

THE COURT:
10
MS. WANG:
11
Ms. Wang.
16:01:03
Your Honor, I've heard testimony, both just
12
now and earlier, a few minutes ago, that Chief Sheridan has
13
testified to the existence of IA investigations where other
14
people were disciplined over the so-called trinkets.
15
testified that there were IA investigations into the drugs
16
found in Deputy Armendariz's house, and other items such as
17
credit cards, bank cards.
18
in the production from the defendants.

THE COURT:
19
MS. WANG:
DS
20
He also
Have you requested it?
I believe, Your Honor -- well, I was going

Maybe I
22
should wait until I have a chance to do redirect.
But I do
IEN
to ask the chief deputy more questions about that.
23
believe that those investigations would be encompassed in the
24
requests we've made.
FR
THE COURT:
16:01:23
We have seen no such documentation
21
25
16:00:45
have at least been turned over to the monitor?
8
9
As far as I know, all of
And to the plaintiffs.
MR. MASTERSON:
Yes, sir.
those cases have been turned over to the monitor, and these --
1453
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
All right.
16:01:41
16:01:55
1454
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
You may proceed, Mr. Masterson.
1
2
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
you mean by that?
A.
involving the IDs and the discipline.
the IA commander was Captain Bailey and his staff.
when they came in with a stack of internal investigations I
said, Look, we're going to make this quick.
You used the phrase twice now "feeding frenzy."
What did
Means I didn't take a lot of time to review those IA cases

My determination was to
That day
If they were the
10
case agent, I'm going to discipline them.
11
did, and we did it rather quickly.
12
Q.
Did you have occasion to revisit some of those decisions?
13
A.
Well, Deputy Hechavarria did.
14
sergeants, lieutenants that I disciplined also, and I told them
15
all at the same time why they were getting disciplined for the
16
trinkets and drivers' licenses on the walls and all that so
17
they understood, so they just didn't get a piece of paper in
18
the inter-office mail, so they understood how important this
19
was.
20
Q.
21
over this, you took another step and called these folks into
22
your office?
IEN
DS
So let me get this straight.
And that's what we
16:02:51
I called in captains,
If someone got discipline
23
A.
Not all of them, but some of them.
24
Q.
Some of the supervisors.
25
A.
Yes, sir.
FR
16:02:16
16:03:27
16:03:46
16:03:59
1455
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Okay.
You talked a bit with Ms. Wang yesterday.
give you a little context.
deputy's prior record of discipline while you were making your
decisions on discipline.
You know what?
Let me
You were talking about looking at a
Do you recall that?
We don't even have to have you recall
it.
sergeant or lieutenant -- but do you look at a deputy's prior
disciplinary record when you're making a decision as to whether
to impose discipline or the level of discipline on that deputy?
Do you look at a deputy -- say deputy as opposed to a
10
A.
11
impose discipline.
That is done and delegated to Chief Lopez
12
or Chief Marchand.
My involvement is I will review an Internal
13
Affairs investigation, and if I sustain it and feel that it is
14
a major violation that deserves major discipline, I forward it
15
to them.
16
Q.
I'm going to answer that question no, because I do not
Okay.
They take into account those types of things.
16:04:48
16:05:22
And thank you for the distinction.
So I'm going to use a -- law enforcement side, so I'm
17
going to talk about Chief Lopez.
Do you know whether Chief
19
Lopez -- well, I think you might have just told me, but do you
20
know whether Chief Lopez looks at a deputy's prior disciplinary
21
record before he decides what discipline to impose?
22
A.
DS
18
16:05:41
IEN
Yes, he does.
23
Q.
Okay.
24
A.
Absolutely.
25
use for discipline calls for that to be done.
FR
16:04:28
And that's okay with you?

It's part of the matrix.
The matrix that we

16:06:04
1456
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Now, there was an IA against you, right?
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
Kind of surprised you?
A.
Yes.
Q.
We listened to a recording yesterday and you told
Chief Olson you took responsibility.
if you think it's best for MCSO to discipline you, you need to
do that.
with him at the PDH -- well, it wasn't a PDH for you; they
And you told Chief Olson,
Did you tell Chief Olson that while you were talking
10
don't call it that.
11
A.
Yes, sir.
12
Q.
And I think you also told him -- at least I heard in the
13
recording, and you might not have said this, these are my
14
words -- did you say, I'm going to put that on you, or put it
15
on your shoulders, or something to that effect?
16
A.
17
shoulders."
18
Q.
19
he felt he should do so?
20
A.
21
right thing to do to discipline me, that he had my blessing.
22
Q.
It's a name clearing hearing?
16:07:22
Were you trying to coerce him into not disciplining you if
DS
I was trying to tell him that if he thought it was the
16:07:42

Do you remember this one from yesterday?
24
A.
Yes, sir.
25
Q.
There are two allegations Ms. Wang talked about yesterday.
FR
16:07:05
I think I did say something to the effect of "it's on your
IEN
23
16:06:30
16:08:24
1457
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Do you recall that?
And more importantly, do you see it in the exhibit in
2
3
front of you?
A.
I do.
Q.
What's the first allegation?
A.
There's unbecoming conduct and incompetence.
Q.
Do you remember what the facts are?
you see in the document what the facts are that purport to, I
guess, establish allegation number 1?
16:08:39
And if you don't, can
10
A.
The allegation number 1 made by Deputy Garcia was that on a
11
number of occasions in the summer of 2010 that Deputy Walters
12
refused to take law enforcement action with Hispanic victim.
13
And when the status in the country was in question, he would
14
threaten to contact Immigration and have them deported.
15
Q.
And which deputy did you say did that?
16
A.
Deputy Walters.
17
Q.
Did Deputy Walters take a polygraph examination?
18
A.
Yes, sir.
19
Q.
Do you see in the exhibit in front of you questions asked
20
of Deputy Walters during the polygraph examination?
21
A.
22
exactly where it is.
16:10:14
DS
IEN
Q.
24
find it.
FR
16:09:59
I know it's in here because I've seen it, but I don't know
23
25
16:09:15
Well, neither do I or I'd help you, but let me see if I can
You know what, Chief?
I can't find it, either.
But
16:11:05
1458
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
we don't have a jury here, and the judge can certainly take a
look at it.
THE COURT:
Yeah, I will take a look at it.
I will
tell you this.
the pages, if you just indicate them to me, I'll take a look at
it.
MR. MASTERSON:
7
8
Mr. Popolizio, Mr. Masterson, if you just find
Judge.
THE COURT:
We will certainly do that.
Thank you,
All right.
10
BY MR. MASTERSON:
11
Q.
12
guess the factual circumstances of allegation 2.
13
A.
14
that's okay.
15
Q.
That would be faster and better.
16
A.
Otherwise, I'd have to file through it.
16:11:26
Can you tell me from looking at the document what the -- I
Without finding that, I can -- I can do that by memory, if
16:11:50
Allegation 2 was it was early in the morning or late
17
at night, depending on your point of view.
19
stopped alongside the road and a vehicle passed by them at what
20
they said was a high rate of speed.
21
Deputy Coogan decided to stop that vehicle, pulled them over,
22
and found out that it was Deputy Ruben Garcia driving the car.
IEN
DS
18
23
Q.
24
road at the time this occurred?
25
A.
FR
16:11:19
Two deputies were
Deputy -- or Reserve
16:12:08
Do you know what the deputies were doing at the side of the
I don't recall.
16:12:44
1459
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Do you know what time it was when this occurred?
A.
I think it was about 3 o'clock in the morning, some time
like that.
Q.
typically dark at 3 o'clock in the morning?
A.
It's usually pretty dark out on Dysart Road.
Q.
And the record, or the document in front of you said the
car passed them at a high rate of speed?
I'm not sure it matters what time of year it was.
MS. WANG:
I'm going to allow that one.
THE WITNESS:
11
BY MR. MASTERSON:
13
Q.
14
of stopping him for being Hispanic, is that right?
15
A.
Correct.
16
Q.
Okay.
And then Deputy Garcia accused the deputy who stopped him
16:13:37
If you could look at page MELC821042.
Do you see the polygraph test questions there?
17
A.
I do.
19
Q.
Could you read the questions and answer, please.
20
A.
Yes, the polygraph test question's:
DS
18
"Question:
23
Did you ever threaten to illegally deport
initiating a department report?
24
"Answer:
25
"Question:
FR
16:14:15
anyone in Gila Bend in lieu of conducting an investigation or
IEN
22
16:13:12
Yes.
12
21
16:12:57
Objection, leading.
THE COURT:
10
Is it
No.
Did you intentionally lie to IA during
16:14:32
your interview with them regarding this issue?

"Answer:
No."
MR. MASTERSON:
3
4
1460
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Judge?
THE COURT:
May we publish this document, please,
Yes.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
Could you please read the polygraph test results.
A.
"Upon careful review of the polygraph examination charts
taken from Deputy Walters, it was determined that there were no
10
criteria to indicate deception in the reactions he presented.
11
A final determination of 'No deception indicated' was
12
rendered."
13
Q.
14
for just a little bit.
Let's jump topics.
you told them not to investigate Judge Snow?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
To whom did you give that order?
19
A.
Detective Mackiewicz and Sergeant Anglin.
20
Q.
Did you give it to Mr. Zullo?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
Did you tell someone to tell Mr. Zullo?
IEN
DS
16
23
A.
24
Zullo understood my direction.
25
Q.
FR
16:15:05
Let's go to the Seattle investigation
Did you give a direct order to anyone at MCSO where
15
16:14:50
16:15:43
16:16:07
I told Detective Mackiewicz to make sure that Posseman
What was the first contact you had with Mr. Montgomery, and
16:16:37
1461
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
what did he claim to be bringing to you at that time?
A.
I've never met Mr. Montgomery.
Q.
That was -- I knew that.
When you first heard about Mr. Montgomery, what did
4
5
you learn he was supposedly bringing to MCSO at that time?
A.
amounts that he obtained while he was a contractor with the
NSA.
Arizona residents that were part of that also, but I really
16:16:58
150,000 Maricopa County residents' bank account numbers and
And I believe there was another 400,000 or so state of
10
didn't pay attention to that.
I was more concerned with the
11
Maricopa County residents.
12
Q.
13
supplied to try to verify some of information in the 151,000 or
14
however many there were?
15
A.
Yes, sir.
16
Q.
And I'm going to use the word "you" but I don't mean you
17
personally, but what did you do to follow up?
18
A.
19
it was this morning, we consulted with the Arizona Attorney
20
General.
21
could identify that were still here in Maricopa County.
22
Because his information was old.
Did MCSO follow up on any of the information Mr. Montgomery
Well, we did a few things.
Like I said yesterday, or maybe
We formulated a plan to look into the people that we
DS
IEN
16:18:04
was from 2010, because that's when he contracted with them.
24
believe it was from 2008 to 2010, sometime in that period.
FR
16:18:32
The latest information he had
23
25
16:17:42
So he had old information.
He had three-,
16:19:08
1462
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
four-year-old information by the time he gave it to us, so a
lot of the information was stale.
we were able to contact people.
knock on doors to see if they had that number, that account
number and all that, and some of it was verified.
But some of the information
We did send detectives out to
16:19:34
In fact, my wife had a business, a private business
6
7
and an account number, and that name and number was part of
this documentation, and that account number was her account
number.
The dollar amount in the account number was inaccurate
10
but the account number was accurate.
11
Q.
12
discover that Mr. Montgomery was maybe not being truthful?
13
A.
14
somewhat of a handful as an informant because of his past,
15
which is very public, and we don't need to go over it here, we
16
talked about it yesterday.
17
Q.
18
you know?
19
A.
20
Dennis Montgomery, and there's a nice video there about him and
21
articles.
22
Q.
Now, at some point did you come to decide or learn or
Well, we always -- we always knew that Mr. Montgomery was
Well, how did you know?
16:20:36
You say it's public, but how did
So I googled
DS
Somebody said, You need to google that guy.
16:20:54
IEN
Did you read any of the articles?
23
A.
I did.
24
Q.
Any one in particular?
25
A.
Yes.
FR
16:20:02
And I don't remember if it was a Playboy or Penthouse
16:21:05
1463
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
article, and I read it online, and I only read the article.
Q.
that.
A.
how he scammed the President of the United States, the Homeland
Security, and he was actually re -- the guy responsible for
the -- I think it was the red alert that shut down the airports
and things when George Bush was the President.
pretty successful in what he did in scamming the federal
Oh, so it is all about the articles.
I've always wondered
All right.
Yes.
And -- and it went into very good detail about he --
And so he was
10
government.
11
Q.
12
you worked with confidential informants before?
13
A.
I have not, no.
14
Q.
As a law enforcement officer for 32 years?
15
A.
Thirty-seven.
16
Q.
Thirty-seven.
16:22:01
Let me ask you this, and maybe it's been a while, but have
16:22:12
Okay.
Well, let me ask you this question:
17
Are confidential
18
informants typically upstanding citizens who come to a law
19
enforcement agency to do good and save mankind?
21
THE COURT:
Objection, leading.
16:22:32
I'll allow it.
THE WITNESS:
IEN
22
MS. WANG:
DS
20
Well, let me clarify.
I've worked with
23
many informants, but none that were officially paid informants.
24
Okay?
FR
25
16:21:24
But that's correct:
Informants come to us -- and I
16:22:42
1464
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
think I mentioned this yesterday -- for their very own reasons
why they would cooperate with law enforcement.
want something from us in return, whether it's money, whether
it's to turn in or to reduce their competition drug dealers,
whatever, they have -- many of them, most of them have a
criminal background past, and some may even still be active
criminals that we might not be aware of.
Q.
charges by becoming an informant?
They usually
How about do they ever try to reduce or evade criminal
10
A.
11
common.
12
Q.
13
you never met him.
14
information supplied by Mr. Montgomery to Mr. Montgomery?
15
A.
At every step and turn.
16
Q.
What did he start coming up with then?
Yes.
Work off their charges, those kinds of things, very
But were MCSO investigators questioning the
16:23:54
When you threatened to cut off the money, what did he
18
do?
19
A.
20
money he came up with that -- that timeline that I was shown
21
that showed the two -- the wiretap information on my cell phone
22
and the sheriff's cell phone.
DS
Well, I think the first time we threatened to cut off the
IEN
24
FR
25
16:23:31
At some point -- and if you didn't do this -- well, I know
17
23
16:23:11
16:24:12
I think that was the first thing
that he came up with.

THE COURT:
Do you remember when the first payment was
you made to Mr. Montgomery?
16:24:33
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
No, sir.
County records will reflect that?
THE WITNESS:
1465
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Yes, I'm -- I'm sure we have that
information.
THE COURT:
Thank you.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
there were HIDTA funds that apparently were utilized --
A.
Yes, sir.
10
Q.
-- as payments?
Do you recall looking at an exhibit earlier today where
16:25:04
Were all of those funds reimbursed?
11
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
Could we please take a look at Exhibit 2065.

Do you have 2065, sir?
14
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
Do you recognize that document?
17
A.
I do.
18
Q.
Without -- without reading from it, can you tell me what it
19
is, please.
20
A.
21
of how to handle the seizure of drivers' licenses and license
22
plates.
16:25:57
IEN
DS
It is the Briefing Board, which has the effect of policy,
23
Q.
And what's the date on the policy, please?
24
A.
April 17th, 2015.
FR
25
16:24:46
MR. MASTERSON:
Your Honor, move for the admission of
16:26:11
16:26:33
1466
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Exhibit 2065.
2
3
THE COURT:
Any objection?
MS. WANG:
No, Your Honor.
MR. KILLEBREW:
THE COURT:
2065 -- oh, I'm sorry.
MR. WALKER:
MR. COMO:
No objection.
2065 is admitted.
9
10
BY MR. MASTERSON:
11
Q.
12
I think you said that it was reissued.
16:26:49
Ms. Wang asked you some questions about this yesterday and
13
14
A.
Yes, sir.
15
Q.
Do you know when?
16
A.
July, mid-July.
17
Q.
Do you know why?
18
A.
Because we had Sergeant Knapp turn in approximately 1500
19
IDs.
20
Q.
21
that Briefing Boards are read?
22
A.
Generally.
DS
When a Briefing Board goes out, is there a method to ensure
16:26:58
16:27:32
IEN
Yes, sir.
23
Q.
How do you do that?
24
A.
If the Briefing Board rises to that level, there is an
25
attachment -- everyone will get an e-mail with a Briefing Board
FR
16:26:41
None.
THE COURT:
No objection.
16:27:59
1467
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
on it.
And it will have a little icon in it, E-Learning icon,
that you get into the E-Learning system, and it asks you the
question:
two questions.
telling us the truth?
Q.
Did you read this in its entirety?

Basically, did you read this?
I think it asks
And are you
16:28:40
Did one of those go out with Exhibit 2065, do you know?

Well, I guess I should ask you:
It went out twice.
Do you know whether that second document went out either or
both times?
10
A.
I don't.
16:28:55
THE COURT:
11
Is that -- did you ask either time?
MR. MASTERSON:
12
THE COURT:
13
Yes, sir.
Thanks.
14
BY MR. MASTERSON:
15
Q.
16
turned in.
17
A.
I think the number was 1495, something like that.
18
Q.
Well, I think you flipped the last two numbers.
19
dealing with 1459 --
20
A.
1459, okay.
21
Q.
-- but we just recently got something from the monitor that
22
shows a few, like 20 or so less.
All right.
24
A.
No.
25
Q.
Okay.
16:29:15
Do you know how many there were?
We've been
DS
IEN
23
FR
Let's talk about these IDs that Sergeant Knapp
16:29:40
Have you ever seen that document?
Tell me how you first found out about those IDs.
16:29:48
1468
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Captain Bailey came into my office and he told me:
a problem.
And everybody that comes into my office says that.
So I said:
What's the problem?
And he said:
We have
Well, we have a sergeant that just tried
to turn in a thousand IDs to the property room.
I sent -- and the property room refused to take them because
the property custodian wanted them inventoried, and Knapp
refused to do that, so he refused to take them.
individual down to the property room and we now have a thousand
10
And he said:
So I sent an
IDs from Sergeant Knapp.

He says:
11
16:30:57
I've already pulled an IA number -- if I
12
remember correctly, I didn't have to tell him to do it -- and
13
that his plan was to talk to Sergeant Knapp, find out where the
14
heck he got these IDs.
So a day or two later he came back and he said that
15
16
the story was that Sergeant Knapp had permission of his
17
captain, and he wanted to obtain a group of IDs because he was
18
going to teach a fraudulent ID class.
19
But as a side note, he never taught that class.
And that from -- I think it was from 2007 to 2009,
sometime in that time period, he would go to the property room
22
and get the IDs out of the box, and even Property might -- the
IEN
21
23
property custodian might even call him and say, Hey, we got a
24
bunch of IDs.
Do you still want them?
25
and get them.
And that's how that happened.
FR
16:31:30
That was his intent.
DS
20
16:30:22
16:32:01
Yeah, and he'd go down

16:32:36
1469
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Do you know -- when did you run proper -- is that correct?
You ran the property room or whatever you call it?
A.
and yes, one of my functions was oversight of the Property and
Evidence section.
Q.
testimony about stuff getting slated for destruction or put in
a destruction bin, or whatever the phrases have been.
I was the lieutenant over property management in the '80s,
16:32:53
Well, I don't know if anything's changed, but we've heard
How does that work?
9
10
A.
Well, not much has really changed, other than now we have a
11
nice barcoding tracking system, so it's a lot easier to track
12
things than using carbon paper like we did when I had the
13
property room.
But the property that comes into Property and Evidence
14
15
is -- comes in with an invoice.
16
invoice.
17
incident, and it's got the items individually delineated on
18
that form.
19
guns in one area, drugs in another area, blah, blah, blah,
20
blah, blah.
It's got a summary of an
It gets put on shelves, depending on the items:
It gets stored.
16:34:02
as evidence.
It's pulled off the shelf, signed out to the
23
deputy/detective.
24
it's brought back, it's put -- put back away.
FR
25
16:33:28
Case may go to trial; may go to court; may be needed
IEN
22
It has a DR number.
Everything comes in on an
DS
21
16:33:06
It's used in court.
When it's finished,
When the case is completely adjudicated, or in the
16:34:21
1470
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
case of found property when it's finished, or the time period's
up in found property, it's ready for destruction, a deputy will
sign off the property sheet that it's okay to destroy these
items.
separated, put in individual boxes and bins, and the items are
then adjudicated according to law.
Q.
while, correct?
A.
Yes, for a long time.
10
Q.
How many years?
11
A.
I was a deputy sheriff for 30 years.
12
Q.
Were there occasions when you would seize or take
13
somebody's driver's license?
14
A.
Yes, sir.
15
Q.
How would -- how could that happen?
16
can recall.
17
that could happen.
18
A.
19
presented a driver's license that was not theirs; somebody
20
altered their driver's license.
21
you know, they'll try and make it look like they're 21 so they
22
can drink.
The items, again, are brought down off the shelves,
You were a -- you were a deputy sheriff at MCSO for a
16:35:09
Give me the ways you
16:35:25
I don't care if you name them all, but tell me how
IEN
DS
Somebody had a suspended driver's license; somebody
A good example is a juvenile,
Those kinds of things.
16:35:45
Those would be some ways
23
that you could obtain a driver's license.
24
Q.
25
guess I'm referring to maybe like a bouncer at a bar or a bar
FR
16:34:49
Did you ever have anyone, a citizen, give you IDs -- and I
16:36:06
1471
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
owner, manager, someone like that, or a Circle K owner.
ever happen?
A.
No, not to me, no.
Q.
You ever find IDs?
A.
No.
Q.
You haven't ever find property in an abandoned vehicle?
A.
Oh, yeah.
Q.
Ever find IDs in an abandoned vehicle?
A.
I don't think --
11
16:36:18
MS. WANG:
10
it slide -- sorry.
THE COURT:
12
That
Your Honor, objection.
I've been letting
403, relevance.
On that basis, I'll overrule the
13
objection.
14
BY MR. MASTERSON:
15
Q.
16
has, please tell us.
17
somebody had an altered driver's license, maybe some kid trying
18
to be 21, and so you're the deputy that took it.
19
then?
20
A.
21
with a crime, we'd destroy it, throw it away.
22
Q.
And again, maybe this has changed over the years, and if it
DS
Well, we would confiscate it.
Would you -- okay.
IEN
16:36:46
But let's say, I'll use your example,
What happens
If we're not charging him
16:37:10
That's -- would you just "wing" it in
23
the desert?
24
A.
Well, cut it in half and throw it in the garbage.
25
Q.
Okay.
FR
16:36:30
I mean, what would you do?
Would there be any occasion when a seized document,
16:37:28
1472
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
license like that, would make it into MCSO property?
A.
So -- but, you know, back when I was a deputy, no.
Q.
"unicorn bin" at some point.
A.
enforcement agency in Maricopa County, except the Maricopa
County Sheriff's Office, still has those bins and boxes in
their substations.
Well, now they all are, just for the record, Your Honor.
Have you ever heard of these -- I think we heard the phrase

You ever heard of that?
Well, I would -- I would say just about every other law
If we were to go reconvene at the nearest Phoenix
10
11
Police Department substation across the street, I betcha they
12
have a box, because I know, my Internal Affairs detectives took
13
the effort and went and did a little research.
14
Department has a box in their squad room that has a pair of tin
15
snips screwed to the wall so they can cut the license plates
16
and drivers' licenses in half.
17
same process, protocol.
Phoenix Police
16:38:53
Chandler Police Department has
problem and we're still dealing with it -- Maricopa County
20
Sheriff's Office is still dealing with it -- is that the state
21
does not want those items back.
22
to them, anyway.
IEN
DS
19
16:39:09
So we are bringing them back
Our property room, when the monitor gives us the
24
authority to destroy these items, how we're going to destroy
25
these drivers' licenses and IDs is we're going to bring them to
FR
16:38:22
Just about all of them do, because we run into a
18
23
16:38:02
16:39:33
1473
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
the Arizona Department of Transportation and let them deal with
it, because we certainly don't want to get involved in this
issue any longer.
Q.
Could we have Exhibit 2003, please.
Could I look at the next page, please.
Do you have it there, sir?
6
7
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
Now, you became aware of the -- let's go with 1459 IDs --
at some point, correct?
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
And your emotion at the time you find out?
12
A.
Disbelief and anger.
13
Q.
Had the Briefing Board gone out instructing employees to
14
turn in IDs?
15
A.
Yes, sir.
16
Q.
But these weren't turned in by Sergeant Knapp.
17
A.
They were not.
18
Q.
Can you look -- well, you talked with Ms. Wang about you
19
had some questions when you saw these IDs, I guess, about
20
whether the court order applied to these IDs.

Is that accurate?
16:41:12
16:41:32
Is that an accurate rendition of
what you told us earlier?
IEN
22
16:40:55
DS
21
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
And the two -- you mentioned two things:
25
set for destruction, and apparently gathered up to nine years
FR
16:40:18
You said already

16:41:52
1474
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
ago.
Is that an accurate repetition of -- recollection of what
you said?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Can you look at -- we're looking at page 206.
what's up on your screen there?
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
Can you look at A.
A.
Yes.
Q.
Can you tell us for a fact whether any one of those 1459
Is that
16:42:12
10
IDs was seized by MCSO personnel?
11
A.
Could you say that again?
12
Q.
Well, do you know for a fact -- you looked at the bagful of
13
IDs, right?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
Do you know whether any one of them, as you sit here
16
today -- well, you know what?
16:42:44
Let's back up.
When you first saw them, because I don't really care
17
what you know today.
When you first saw the bag of 1459 IDs,
19
did you know whether any one of them was seized by somebody
20
from MCSO?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
Did you -- did you look at any of them close, like read the
IEN
DS
18
16:43:04
I wanted to know where they came from.
23
names on there?
24
A.
No, sir.
25
Q.
Okay.
FR
16:42:24
And I know -- I know these questions are kind of
16:43:14
1475
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
nitpicky whether you know for a fact that anything was seized
by MCSO, but did you know, at the time you first saw these IDs,
whether any of them were from apparent members of the plaintiff
class?
A.
I wouldn't know that.
Q.
What you did, sir, because you had questions, is you talked
to a lawyer about it, right?
MS. WANG:
16:43:34
Objection, leading.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
10
Q.
Did you talk to your lawyer about your questions?
11
A.
I did.
12
Q.
Ms. Wang asked you a question about you wanting -- I guess
13
you used the phrase, and I don't know if it was in your
14
deposition or -- well, I should put it this way, I don't know
15
which deposition it was in, that you wanted to get the right
16
story before you went to the monitors.
16:44:12
Do you recall that statement or testimony?
17
18
A.
Yes, sir.
19
Q.
Were you trying to make up a story?
20
A.
No.
21
by that.
22
Q.
DS
In fact, I wanted to be accurate.
That's what I meant
16:44:24
IEN
She also asked you a couple of questions, and I know it's
23
getting late, and I'm having trouble remembering, but there was
24
a question about 30 percent being Hispanic surnames, is that
25
accurate?
FR
16:43:47
16:44:46
1476
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
And then what did you say about how many were fraudulent?
Or --
A.
Many.
Q.
Okay.
A.
I used the word "many."
Q.
And to your knowledge, those were two different statements
made to you?
16:44:56
MS. WANG:
Objection to --
THE WITNESS:
10
MS. WANG:
11
Correct.
-- the leading again.
12
BY MR. MASTERSON:
13
Q.
Were those two different statements made to you?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
Do you know, as you sit here today, whether any of the IDs
16
that have Hispanic surnames are also fraudulent?
17
A.
I don't -- I don't know.
18
Q.
Okay.
19
saw those IDs were you going to tell the monitor about them?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Did you ever intend to destroy them?
22
A.
No.
DS
IEN
16:45:12
Were you going to tell -- from the first time you
23
Q.
Did you ever intend to hide them?
24
A.
No.
25
Q.
Did you want to find out whether the court order applied?
FR
16:45:04
16:45:33
16:45:44
1477
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes.
That's why we sought the advice of Ms. Iafrate.
Q.
And now Captain Molina is investigating each of those IDs,
is that correct?
A.
That's correct.
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
MR. COMO:
MR. WALKER:
10
Mr. Jirauch.
Mr. Walker.
I have a few, Your Honor.
16:46:30
CROSS-EXAMINATION
11
12
BY MR. WALKER:
13
Q.
14
County, right?
15
A.
I've heard that.
16
Q.
In your testimony in response to questions from
17
Mr. Masterson, you mentioned something about an issue about
18
$104 million in funds that were not properly accounted for, is
19
that right?
20
A.
That's correct.
21
Q.
And you also mentioned a board resolution which I think you
22
characterized as micromanaging the sheriff's department,
IEN
DS
Chief Deputy Sheridan, you know I'm counsel for Maricopa
23
correct?
24
A.
Yes, sir.
25
Q.
Were those two connected in any way?
FR
16:46:11
I don't have any questions, Your Honor.
Oh, I'm sorry.
That's all I have.
Mr. Como.
THE COURT:
Thank you, sir.
16:46:41
16:47:03
16:47:15
1478
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
No.
Q.
Okay.
micromanaged the sheriff's department, did it micromanage the
department on fiscal matters?
everything?
A.
nature, but it did not manage us in any way as to our law
enforcement activities.
Q.
Now, when you said that the board resolution
On law enforcement matters?
On
16:47:36
It set out a series of audits that were mostly fiscal in
Now, you've testified in response, I think, mostly to
10
questions from Ms. Wang, about the circumstances under which
11
you came to be initially interim chief deputy and then
12
ultimately chief deputy, and you made some mention of
13
conditions that existed at the time that you came into the job.
14
A.
Yes, sir.
16
Q.
And your predecessor was David Hendershott?
17
A.
He was.
18
Q.
Did you have dealings with Chief Deputy Hendershott prior
19
to succeeding him?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Okay.
22
A.
Sometimes he was a pleasure; sometimes he was very
IEN
DS
15
16:48:33
16:48:46
How did you find him to deal with?
23
difficult.
24
Q.
25
prior to your becoming chief deputy, and you mentioned that
FR
16:48:12
Now, you mentioned some investigations that had taken place

16:49:08
1479
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
some of those investigations had to do with members of the
bench.
3
4
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
And you also mentioned that there were investigations of
other public figures, I think was the phrase you used.

7
8
A.
That's correct.
Q.
Who were those other figures?
10
A.
It would be the public figures were Mary Rose Wilcox and
11
Don Stapley, members of the Board of Supervisors.
12
Q.
13
of the Board of Supervisors?
14
A.
Yes, sir.
15
Q.
You mentioned that for a period of about three years prior
16
to your becoming initially interim chief deputy and then chief
17
deputy, there was essentially no relationship between the
18
Sheriff's Department and the Maricopa County Board of
19
Supervisors.
20
A.
21
communicate with the county government was Loretta Barkell, our
22
chief financial officer, or Chief Hendershott.
16:49:32
DS
IEN
24
deputy --
16:49:47
Did I understand that correctly?
That's correct.
Q.
FR
Yes, I do.
And at the time they were investigated, were they members
23
25
16:49:18
The only person that was allowed to
16:50:14
So when you arrived in the position of interim chief
THE COURT:
You know, I'm sorry.
What does this have
16:50:44
1480
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
to do with the current action?
MR. WALKER:
It has to do, Your Honor, with the issue
of the extent to which, if any, Maricopa County could be held
responsible for these actions.

THE COURT:
Well, let me just be clear.
The Ninth
Circuit has already ruled as a matter of law that you are the
jural entity that has to be sued here.
repeated now at least five times, the only basis on which you
are a party to this lawsuit, so it is not a question that is
10
open.
11
inquiry that follows along this line.
13
to go into briefly.
14
THE COURT:
MR. WALKER:
15
16
That is, as I have
So I'm going to direct that there is no further helpful
MR. WALKER:
12
THE COURT:
MR. WALKER:
18
I have just one more matter that I wanted
Which has to do with what?
It has to do with this issue, and I'd
The proffer, Your Honor, is the question
20
Court has found unconstitutional, whose laws the Maricopa
21
County Sheriff's Office was enforcing or attempting to enforce.
22
And I would expect the response to be either federal or state
IEN
DS
I would like to ask is with respect to the conduct that this
FR
25
16:51:44
You can make a proffer.
19
24
16:51:21
like to make a proffer.
17
23
16:51:02
16:51:58
laws, not Maricopa County ordinances.

THE COURT:
Well, accepting that to be the proffer,
I'm very concerned, Mr. Walker, that you not prejudice the
16:52:23
1481
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
defendants in this action by taking the position, which you
have previously sought to take, that there is some sort of a
difference between Maricopa County and the Maricopa County
Sheriff's Office.
Again, I realize that there may be political
5
6
difficulties and fissures, but you are here and you have been
entered in as a party to this action because you are the jural
entity that must be sued when Maricopa County Sheriff's Office
is sued.
So I'm not going to allow you to prejudice the
10
defendants by asking questions that may prejudice them that are
11
not relevant to this action.

MR. WALKER:
12
13
Your Honor, I understand.
16:52:57
I think we
have a difference of perspective on this.

THE COURT:
14
Well, we do.
And because I understand the
existing law to be what the Ninth Circuit has told me, you have
16
now preserved your right to appeal this matter.
17
going to allow you -- and I will allow you to ask questions
18
that I don't view as being prejudicial potentially to the
19
defendants, and to participate in this matter otherwise, but
20
because the Ninth Circuit has ruled, I don't believe there's
21
relevance to those questions.
22
MR. WALKER:
IEN
DS
15
Okay.
16:53:17
But I'm not
16:53:35
I'm prepared to sit down, Your
23
Honor, but I just mention that in our reply I tried my best to
24
outline in great detail what the structural issues are that
25
I've been trying to --
FR
16:52:37
16:53:57
THE COURT:
1482
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I understand what the structural issues
are.
They're not relevant here.
the jural entity that must be sued when the Maricopa County
Sheriff's Office is being sued.
that is the only reason you are here.
position that is potentially adverse to the Maricopa County
Sheriff's Office in this action.

MR. WALKER:
THE COURT:
Ms. Wang?
10
11
You are here because you are
That's why you're here.
And
And so you cannot take a
Understood, Your Honor.
All right.
Well, I don't know.
We got five minutes.
MS. WANG:
I can do something in five minutes, but my
13
estimate is that I probably have 30 to 45 minutes of redirect.
14
I'm happy to start if you like.

THE COURT:
15
Well, it's the weekend.
Why don't we
16
enjoy the weekend and we'll give you 30 minutes.
17
remember that Monday I have other business, so we will we
18
convene on Tuesday.
resolution of this matter.
21
be glad to start at 8:30.
DS
20
IEN
MS. WANG:
Please do
If it helps to start at 8:30, I'll
16:55:03
How do the parties feel?
We're all shaking our heads, Your Honor, at
both tables.
24
THE COURT:
25
MS. WANG:
FR
16:54:44
Do the parties -- I mean, I'm all into the expeditious
19
23
16:54:31
Can you do anything in five minutes?
12
22
16:54:13
Shaking your heads meaning?

"No."
Thank you.
16:55:17
1483
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
THE COURT:
All right.
No, you win.
Let me suggest that I'm going to do this.
I'm going
to direct the monitor to provide the plaintiffs -- and,
Mr. Como, if you wish, provide you -- with a complete
accounting -- with a complete copy of all of the IA
investigations and results that it has been provided by the
Maricopa County Sheriff's Office.
to do it if they can over the weekend, and that way, you'll see
if you've been given a complete copy of the records, Ms. Wang.
MR. COMO:
11
12
And I'm going to direct them
Mr. Como, do you want them?
10
It's not necessary to provide them to me,
THE COURT:
All right.
And I am going to say just as
14
a matter of judicial privilege that I learned today at noon
15
that Mr. Como has been appointed to the Maricopa County
16
Superior Court bench.
17
Mr. Como.
18
until this part of the action is completed.
16:56:00
So I offer you my congratulations,
I'm not going to let you take the bench, however,
Did you have matters you wish to raise?
19
DS
MS. WANG:
Your Honor, just relating to the point
about the IA files and outcomes, I do -- I did locate the
22
document.
IEN
21
16:56:15
We -- plaintiffs did request all documents related
23
to investigations stemming from former Deputy Charley
24
Armendariz, including but not limited to the investigations
25
referenced in defendant's reports on the status of current IA
FR
16:55:51
thank you.
13
20
16:55:31
16:56:37
1484
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
investigations.
I do not believe we have received any IA files
relating to an investigation of drugs or other -- some of the
other property that was discussed by Chief Sheridan on the
stand.
that testimony --
If that bears out to be true, we will move to strike
THE COURT:
16:56:57
I will entertain that.
I will say that
the monitor did provide me a quick bit of information that they
do not have Chief Deputy Sheridan's grievance grant on the
Hechavarria matter.
So I know Mr. Masterson was going to give
10
me a complete accounting of that and update that if it was
11
necessary.
12
things -- nothing specific.
13
of that that they haven't been updated on action taken here.
And their concern may be that they don't have other

They just are concerned in light
My inclination, of course, will be, if the information
14
15
hasn't been provided, my inclination will be to strike the
16
testimony.
17
Mr. Masterson, before I do that.
THE COURT:
19
DS
MS. WANG:
One other scheduling matter, Your Honor.

Yes.
Defendants produced documents that relate
to Sergeant Tennyson after his deposition.
22
reopen his deposition for the purpose of questioning him about
IEN
21
23
24
FR
25
16:57:35
But I, of course, will hear from you first,
MS. WANG:
18
20
16:57:14
16:57:50
We have asked to
those documents and are meeting and conferring.

Our hope and request is that he be deposed Monday so
that it would not require a change in our schedule and proposed
16:58:08
1485
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
witness order, which would have him coming up among the next
set of witnesses.
potential scheduling issue.
defendants will make him available for deposition on Monday.

THE COURT:
5
6
We do not know yet whether
All right.
Well, you can work that out,
MR. YOUNG:
One other scheduling issue, Your Honor.
Based on where we are, and based on actually the
convenience of Mr. Don Vogel and his attorney, it seems that it
10
would be better to have him testify on October 8 or 9, and
11
those were days that Your Honor had set aside.
12
back to Mr. Vogel's attorney, I want to make sure that those
13
days are planned for testimony.

THE COURT:
14
Every day I told you to hold, I myself
have held.
16
on those days, we will have testimony on those days.
And I anticipate that if we need to have testimony
16:59:01
But one of the nice things that -- one of the very
17
nice things that would occur if you could get together, and you
19
now have several days to do it, is to come up with the
20
joint-pretrial-like statement, we can actually plan the order
21
of witnesses, see how we're going, estimate, and free up days
22
maybe that we could all use for other purposes.
IEN
DS
18
have kept open the 8th -- or I have held -- I've reserved all
24
of the days that I expect you have all reserved, too.

MR. YOUNG:
Yes, Your Honor.
16:59:17
But I still
23
FR
16:58:41
Before I get
15
25
16:58:25
hopefully will be able to.
So I just wanted to flag that there is that
Thank you.
And we do
16:59:36
1486
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
hope that we will have some more fruitful conversations about
that order.
THE COURT:
Mr. Masterson, anything?
MR. MASTERSON:
MR. WALKER:
6
7
Honor.
MR. COMO:
THE COURT:
9
10
Tuesday.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
IEN
22
23
24
FR
25
16:59:45
I don't have anything further, Your
Nothing further, Your Honor.

All have a nice weekend.
I'll see you on
16:59:58
DS
19
21
I have nothing further, Judge.
(Proceedings recessed at 4:59 p.m.)
11
20
All right.
1487
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
C E R T I F I C A T E
2
3
4
5
6
I, GARY MOLL, do hereby certify that I am duly
7
8
appointed and qualified to act as Official Court Reporter for
the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.
I FURTHER CERTIFY that the foregoing pages constitute
10
11
a full, true, and accurate transcript of all of that portion of
12
the proceedings contained herein, had in the above-entitled
13
cause on the date specified therein, and that said transcript
14
was prepared under my direction and control.
15
16
DATED at Phoenix, Arizona, this 7th day of October,
17
18
2015.
20
21
IEN
22
DS
19
23
24
FR
25
s/Gary Moll

Melendres v. Arpaio #1465 Sept 25 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 6 Evidentiary Hearing (Amended)

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Melendres v. Arpaio #1465 Sept 25 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 6 Evidentiary Hearing (Amended)

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

OF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres,

Joseph M. Arpaio, et al.,

(Evidentiary Hearing Day 6, Pages 1279-1487)

BEFORE THE HONORABLE G. MURRAY SNOW

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

Proceedings taken by stenographic court reporter

For the Plaintiffs:

American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona

Covington & Burling, LLP

Covington & Burling, LLP

For the Movants Christine Stutz and Thomas P. Liddy:

For the Defendant Maricopa County:

Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/25/15 Evidentiary Hearing

For the Defendant Joseph M. Arpaio and Maricopa County

For the Intervenor United States of America:

U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division

For Chief Deputy Gerard Sheridan:

For Executive Chief Brian Sands:

For Deputy Chief Jack MacIntyre:

Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/25/15 Evidentiary Hearing

Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/25/15 Evidentiary Hearing

Direct Examination Continued by Ms. Wang

Dkt No. 881, Order re discovery dated 2/12/2015 1362

The Briefing Board, Number 15-04 dated

Dkt No. 795, Court Order dated 11/20/2014

DOJ/ARPAIO, 2007-2013 (MELC199549)

E-mail from Beverly Owens-Prindle to Travis

Maricopa County Sheriff's Office memo from

Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/25/15 Evidentiary Hearing

Maricopa County Sheriff's Office memo from

Forwarded E-mail from Brian Mackiewicz to Jerry 1333

Counsel, please announce your appearance.

Good morning, Your Honor.

Covington & Burling.

and Lauren Pedley.

With me are my colleagues, Michelle Morin

Dan Pochoda, ACLU of Arizona, for

Paul Killebrew and Cynthia Coe for the

Good Morning, Judge Snow.

Masterson and Joe Popolizio for Sheriff Arpaio, and with us is

Good morning, Your Honor.

Mr. Jirauch will be joining us

on behalf of Maricopa County.

United States, plaintiff intervenors.

Andre Segura for the plaintiff.

Good morning Your Honor.

the ACLU for plaintiffs.

This is CV 07-2513, Melendres, et al.,

v. Arpaio, et al., on for continued evidentiary hearing.

Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/25/15 Evidentiary Hearing

Terry Woods for nonparties Stutz and

Good morning, Your Honor.

Good morning, Your Honor.

behalf of Chief Sands.

specially appearing for Chief Deputy Sheridan.

Good morning, Your Honor.

making a special appearance for Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/25/15 Evidentiary Hearing

Good morning, Your Honor.

Iafrate on behalf of Sheriff Arpaio and the unnamed contemnors.