Confronted in Court with His Own Words, Sheriff Denies Profiling

NEW YORK TIMES

By Fernanda Santos

July 24, 2012

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/25/us/arizona-sheriff-testifies-in-racial-profiling-case.html?ref=todayspaper

The man who calls himself “America’s toughest sheriff” made his way into the federal district courtroom here on Tuesday wearing a black suit and a stern expression. He spelled out his name for the clerk — “Joseph M. Arpaio, A-R-P-A-I-O,” then raised his right hand, swearing to tell the truth before he took the stand.

“We do not arrest people because of the color of their skin,” Mr. Arpaio, the Maricopa County sheriff, said in court.

Mr. Arpaio, 80, has enjoyed unparalleled popularity during his 20 years as the elected sheriff. Known as Sheriff Joe, he is running for a sixth term while facing his biggest challenges yet: a lawsuit by the Justice Department, and the federal civil rights trial under way here. Both accuse the sheriff and his office of a pattern of discriminatory policing during large-scale operations known as suppression patrols that singled out Latinos — including citizens and legal immigrants — for stops, questioning and detention.

This federal trial resulted from a class-action lawsuit by plaintiffs representing every Latino pulled over by Mr. Arpaio’s deputies since 2007.

“You didn’t always look at illegal immigration as a serious crime, correct?” said Stanley Young, a lawyer for the six named plaintiffs in the lawsuit. “That’s correct,” Mr. Arpaio replied.

The Mr. Young sought to highlight inconsistencies between what Mr. Arpaio has said and written about immigrants, mostly Mexicans, and his explanations of those statements in court. The sheriff sounded meek and appeared uncomfortable at times as he was asked to explain his words and actions.

For example, Mr. Young played part of a television interview in which Mr. Arpaio said that being compared to the Ku Klux Klan was “an honor, it means you’re doing something.” When questioned about it, Mr. Arpaio testified on Tuesday that he had “no use for the K.K.K.”

He once called his office a “full-fledged federal immigration agency.” On Tuesday, he backed away from that description, testifying that illegal immigration was one of the crimes his office focused on, but not the only one.

At times Mr. Arpaio seemed his own adversary. Mr. Young read aloud several passages from Mr. Arpaio’s second book, co-written by Len Sherman. At one point, the book asserts that Mexicans crossing the border into Arizona, California and Texas were engaged in an effort of “reconquista” — retaking the land that was once theirs. Another passage expressed the opinion that second- and third-generation Mexicans living in the United States maintained “identities, from language to customs to beliefs, separate from American mainstream.”

“My co-author wrote that,” Mr. Arpaio testified on Tuesday, his voice raspy, symptoms of a recent battle with the flu.

Judge G. Murray Snow, who is presiding at the trial, allotted each side 20 hours to present evidence and testimony. He began the day reminding both sides of how much time they had used — plaintiffs: 2 hours, 47 minutes; defendants: 3 hours, 9 minutes — before engaging in an examination of his own.

He called back to the stand Deputy Sheriff Louis DiPietro, who had been the last witness to testify on Thursday, the first day of the trial. Mr. DiPietro, who joined the sheriff’s office in 1988, pulled over a driver carrying a group of day laborers the driver had just picked up at a church parking lot in suburban Cave Creek in 2007, among them Manuel de Jesús Ortega Melendres, a Mexican schoolteacher here on a tourist visa, and one of the named plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

The judge wanted to know about his training (most of it took place online, Mr. DiPietro said), the level of communication among officers assigned to the detail that carried out the traffic stop (there was a quick briefing before it got started, he said), and his understanding of the purpose of the action.

“Some type of investigation about illegal aliens,” Mr. DiPietro said.

Judge Snow wanted to know if he thought day laborers generally were in the country illegally. “I do,” Mr. DiPietro replied.

Mr. Arpaio’s lawyer, Tim Casey, projected onto a screen a written plan for a crime-suppression patrol much like the one Mr. DiPietro participated in. Mr. DiPietro said he recalled seeing a similar document on the day he stopped Mr. Melendres. It contained a paragraph that read, “At no time” will Maricopa County sheriff’s office personnel “stop a vehicle based on the race of the subjects in the vehicle.”

On the stand, Mr. Arpaio said, “I am against racial profiling today, as in my 50 years in law enforcement.”

Mr. Young worked to prove otherwise. He read from notes, news releases and transcripts of messages left on a hot line Mr. Arpaio set up to collect tips about suspected illegal-immigrant activity.

Mr. Arpaio testified that he “very seldom” suggested locations for the patrols; the task was left to his subordinates, he said.

A protest unfolded outside the courthouse, where four people who had entered the country illegally sat on a banner laid on the ground — “No papers, no fear,” it read — blocking traffic at the intersection of Washington Street and Fourth Avenue.

“I’m here. Come and arrest me,” one of them, Miguel Guerra, a father of three from Mexico who has lived in Phoenix for 13 years, said into a megaphone.

The police eventually arrested him and the others who had joined him.