Saturday, February 18, 2012

Southwest Border Sheriffs Statement On Sheriff Paul Babeu

As the Director of Southwest Border Sheriffs I am here to tell the American People that we fully support Sheriff Paul Babeu!

Sheriff Paul Babeu has served his country and his community with expertise,and his passion for not only our country and all that is wrong with Washington DC but also his love for our country and its citizens.!

What Sheriff Babeu does in his personal life is his business and his alone! Not the communities.!

For those who choose to make a big deal out of this I say get a life and he who is without sin cast the first stone.!

Sheriff Paul Babeu Press Conference from Paul Babeu on Vimeo.

Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Arpaio seeks reversal of smuggling law limits


PHOENIX - Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's lawyers urged an appeals court to reverse a ruling that barred his deputies who are enforcing Arizona's immigrant smuggling law from detaining people based solely on the suspicion that they're in the country illegally.

Attorneys for the sheriff told the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that a lower-court's Dec. 23 ruling that limited the sheriff's immigration powers was deeply flawed. The sheriff's lawyers appealed the ruling in mid-January and filed their first brief on Friday.

U.S. District Judge Murray Snow had made the decision in a lawsuit by a handful of Latinos who alleged that Arpaio's officers based some traffic stops on the race of Hispanics in vehicles, had no probable cause to pull them over and made the stops so they could inquire about their immigration status.

Arpaio has denied the racial profiling allegations, saying people pulled over in the patrols were approached because deputies had probable cause to believe they had committed crimes and that it was only afterward that deputies found many of them were illegal immigrants.

During his immigration patrols known as ``sweeps,'' deputies flood an area of a city- in some cases, heavily Latino areas _ over several days to seek out traffic violators and arrest other offenders. Illegal immigrants accounted for 57 percent of the 1,500 people arrested in the 20 sweeps conducted by his office since January 2008.

Separate from the lawsuit, the U.S. Justice Department has accused Arpaio's office of racially profiling Latinos, basing immigration enforcement on racially charged citizen complaints and punishing Hispanic jail inmates for speaking Spanish.

The sheriff's office said it doesn't discriminate against Latinos and is negotiating to resolve the allegations, but is prepared to go to court if the Justice Department files a lawsuit.

In the lawsuit alleging racial profiling, Arpaio's lawyers said the judge erred in ruling that reasonable suspicion is required on all elements of the state's smuggling law to justify a brief detention and by failing to look at the totality of circumstances to determine whether an officer had suspicion to make the stop.

``Finally, the appealed order improperly concludes, in its practical effect, that MCSO cannot enforce certain Arizona laws, even though no court of competent jurisdiction has held such laws unconstitutional,'' Arpaio's lawyers wrote.

Dan Pochoda, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, one of the group's representing people who filed the lawsuit, said the judge never ruled that deputies must have reasonable suspicion of all elements of the immigrant smuggling law.

Pochoda also said the judge's ruling didn't effectively prevent Arpaio's deputies from enforcing the smuggling law. Since the ruling, Arpaio's office has made arrests under the smuggling law.

``The key arguments, apparently, from the people who wrote the briefs are based on things that didn't happen, based on mischaracterizations of what the judge did,'' Pochoda said.

The lawyers pushing the lawsuit face a March 9 deadline for filing their first brief responding to Arpaio's appeal.

(Copyright 2012 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

The State of Arizona authorizing opposition to the use of an international force on american soil

State Of Arizona


Authorizing opposition to the use of an international force on american soil that seeks to enforce any united states treaty that has not been ratified by the united states senate.


State of Arizona
House of Representatives
Fiftieth Legislature
Second Regular Session
2012


HJR 2001

Introduced by
Representative Harper: Senator Gould



A Joint RESOLUTION

Authorizing opposition to the use of an international force on american soil that seeks to enforce any united states treaty that has not been ratified by the united states senate.


Whereas, the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution firmly states, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"; and
Whereas, Article II, section 26, Arizona Constitution, states, "The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself or the state shall not be impaired"; and
Whereas, member nations of the United Nations have formed committees with the intent to regulate private firearm ownership; and
Whereas, the United Nations committees have held hearings on the Arms Trade Treaty, which includes regulation of private firearms ownership; and
Whereas, the Constitution of the United States prevents the President from enacting a treaty without ratification from the United States Senate; and
Whereas, the National Rifle Association has secured the commitment from 51 current United States senators that they would not ratify the United Nations' Arms Trade Treaty as long as it includes regulation of private firearms ownership; and
Whereas, the United Nations Security Council regularly shows its disregard for sovereign nations and their constitutions and laws; and
Whereas, the United Nations has used force to disarm citizens of a sovereign nation in the past, which led to mass killings by bladed weapons; and
Whereas, the United Nations often uses international forces to impose its will on sovereign nations.

Therefore
Be it resolved by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:

1.  That the State of Arizona opposes any use of an international force on American soil that seeks to enforce any United Nations treaty that has not been properly ratified by the United States Senate.

2.  That the State of Arizona authorizes using organized resistance to thwart any international force that infringes on the United States Constitution or any of its amendments.
http://www.azleg.gov//FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=%2Flegtext%2F50leg%2F2r%2Fbills%2Fhjr2001p.htm&Session_ID=107

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Sheriff Paul Babeu speaks at CPAC 2012





Please Donate To Sheriff Paul Babeu For Congress

Proud Pinal: County hardly a stepchild, but a force that helped shape Arizona




Photo courtesy of the Pinal County Historical Society, In 1891 citizens hoped the Pinal County Courthouse would impress upon Washington, D.C., that Pinal County was part of a territory ready for statehood.



By LYNN SMITH and PAT FAUX
Pinal County Historical Society

 

Editor’s Note: This story is re-printed from the Winter 2012 edition of Pinal Ways magazine.

Florence was the earliest town organized in the Gadsden Purchase in what became Pinal County, Arizona Territory. The town was named the county seat in the 1870s.
 
Pinal County and Florence might be considered stepchildren of Central Arizona. The county and the town are left out of the exciting activities of the neighboring counties north and south of them. Important sports events, even the Super Bowl, occur away from Pinal County. Major universities are part of these nearby counties, not Pinal. Politics and its accompanying intrigue are part of the largest state capital in the United States — Phoenix — in Maricopa County! Even the mainline railroad and the interstate highway bypass the town of Florence.

Pinal County and Florence are expected to take care of many unpleasant tasks of the state. Although there are now branches of the state prison, for many years Florence was the only location of first, the Arizona Territorial Prison, then the Arizona State Prison. So Pinal County was required to keep under lock and key the miscreants arrested, tried, and found guilty in other counties besides Pinal. To this day one prison in Florence, Eyman Complex, is the one that contains death row. The first prison, Florence Complex, does execute those convicted of capital murder. These unpleasant tasks are those with which other counties may be happy not to have to concern themselves, but Florence has offered so much more.

During territorial days and Arizona’s hundred years of statehood, Pinal County has contributed much to the state of Arizona. Four men who were prominent in Pinal County history became territorial or state governors. One became majority leader of the U.S. Senate. These men contributed much and then moved on. Others lived an active life before coming to the county but set down roots and became important citizens of Florence. This article focuses on some of the people who came and stayed, some who moved on and on some of our enduring institutions.

Pinal County is proud of its courthouses. The first was an adobe building that was outgrown quickly. By 1891 the county had built the brick Victorian courthouse with its imposing clock tower that still dominates the town. Town and county citizens hoped the building would impress Washington, D.C., with the fact that Florence was not a dusty old adobe town anymore but part of a territory ready for statehood.

It was decided to include a jail in the building, but that left no money for a clock. The painted-on clock faces show the time in Florence as always 11:44.

Why precisely 11:44 remains a murky matter. Some claim that is the hour the clock hands happened to be painted, while others claim shameless boosterism, with town fathers hoping tourists might glance at the clock and decide to stay in Florence for lunch.

Former court reporter John Swearingen loved to tell courthouse stories, some involving the basement jail. One had Judge W.C. Truman holding court when additions were being made to the building. He asked the bailiff to tell the carpenters to stop making so much noise. The bailiff returned to report that the prisoners were breaking through the brick wall directly under the judge’s bench. The hole wasn’t yet quite large enough for someone to escape.

That Florence was chosen as the county seat and has been so for 130 years has been a boon to the town. In 1908 the re-location of the territorial prison from Yuma to Florence added to the town and county’s economy. Under the supervision of Warden Thomas H. Rynning, a group of prisoners from the Yuma prison came to Florence by train and were ferried across the now-dry Gila River to help build the prison.

Rynning was a military man, a member of the 8th U.S. Regular Cavalry in the late 1880s. He participated in 17 battles against the Indians. He re-enlisted as one of Col. Theodore Roosevelt’s Rough Riders during the Spanish-American War and, according to Burt Goodman in an Arizona Republic column, participated in the charge up San Juan Hill.

In 1902, the Arizona governor and then-President Theodore Roosevelt appointed Rynning as second captain of the recently formed Arizona Rangers. The Rangers were established to go wherever such a group of lawmen was needed, regardless of jurisdiction. Capturing outlaws and keeping the peace during such times of unrest as labor strikes in mining towns were part of what they did. Rynning served five years as captain and set standards for their success in bringing law and order to the territory before statehood.

In 1907, the governor asked Rynning to become warden of the Yuma Territorial Prison. Ironically, many of the inmates in the prison he had put in there during his Ranger years. The Legislature wanted a new prison. Florence wanted the prison, too, and had the land for one.

Gov. Joseph H. Kibbey was concerned about the lack of funds to construct the prison. Rynning wrote in his memoir, “Gun Notches”: “I said I could build it with the convicts and pay them with time.” Under a plan set up for the prison’s construction, two days’ work by an inmate meant that one day would be taken off his prison sentence.

It was Rynning’s plan to make the new prison self-sustaining. The prisoners grew crops, raised pigs and chickens, and maintained a dairy herd that saved money for the territory and, after 1912, the state of Arizona. Eventually private enterprises complained that the prison’s production of milk, eggs, chickens and pork was unfair competition. (Extra milk, for instance, was supplied to public institutions such as schools.) The prison is no longer self-supporting.

In the 1930s murderer Eva Dugan was unexpectedly decapitated when she was hanged for her crime. This caused quite a sensation, and the state legislature turned to lethal gas instead of hanging. The double chair on exhibit in the museum was used for the first lethal gas execution of two brothers who had murdered a prospector in Casa Grande. They were scheduled for execution in the gas chamber on the same day.

Statehood came to Arizona in February of 1912. Arizona’s star was the 48th on the flag. The state was often called the “Baby State.” After Alaska and Hawaii entered the Union, “Baby State” no longer applied. Sometimes, because of gaining statehood on Feb. 14, Arizona was called the “Valentine State.” Arizona also was called the “Copper State,” and ultimately “Grand Canyon State” became the state’s official nickname.

Florence and Pinal County have proudly supplied local and county attorneys for the office of territorial or state governor. Territorial governors who at one time resided in Florence were Joseph H. Kibbey and Richard E. Sloan.

Kibbey was a lawyer who came to Arizona in 1888 to become an attorney for the promotion of the Florence Canal Company. In 1890 he was appointed an associate justice of Arizona Territorial Supreme Court. In 1892 Judge Kibbey rendered the decision determining the right of appropriation of water for irrigation known as the Kibbey Decision. He was appointed territorial attorney general in 1909 and the next year, territorial governor. Kibbey immediately faced problems regarding a bill in the U.S. Congress that would have created statehood for the Arizona and New Mexico territories, combining them into one state! He threatened to resign his office rather than allow the joint statehood bill to pass. It failed.

Kibbey’s brother, Frank, made headlines in Arizona Territory in 1892. On Florence’s Main Street he shot Wood Porter in the back, believing his wife was having an affair with him. Wood Porter was prominently connected. He was the nephew of a former associate justice of the Territorial Supreme Court, William Wood Porter. Defense attorneys asked for a change of venue because sentiment ran heavily against Frank Kibbey. Judge Richard E. Sloan presided over the jury trial, which was held in Pima County rather than the new Victorian-style Pinal County Courthouse.

Rather than as an adult woman, the defense represented Mrs. Kibbey as a “victim, a vulnerable child” of the Victorian culture, protected by her husband, the defendant. She didn’t testify against her husband, perhaps realizing that since her lover was dead, her only provider would go to prison and leave her destitute.

Gov. Kibbey desired reform in the territory. He wanted to outlaw gambling, restrict tobacco and liquor, and prohibit prostitution. He also wanted to tax the mines. This hurt his re-nomination as governor. President Taft nominated Richard E. Sloan to be the next territorial governor.

Like so many others, Sloan had moved to Arizona from Ohio in 1884 for health reasons. A lawyer by profession, he settled in Florence in 1886 and quickly became active in his new hometown. The same year that he arrived in the Pinal County seat he was elected district attorney. Sloan’s career flourished. After judicial appointments by Presidents Benjamin Harrison, William McKinley and Theodore Roosevelt, President William Howard Taft in 1909 appointed Sloan as territorial governor, the office he held until Arizona became a state in 1912.

In his 1932 book, “Memories of an Arizona Judge,” Sloan wrote of how he married and brought his bride to his desert home. According to his book, she thoroughly enjoyed the strangeness of her new surroundings and, in a “spirit of playfulness,” wrote to her mother of housekeeping in a “mud house.”

While he was governor, Sloan’s family lived in the Adams Hotel in Phoenix. As reported in an April 12, 1990, Arizona Republic interview with his younger daughter, Mary, a fire broke out in the hotel at 6 a.m. on May 17, 1910. His wife and daughter were sleeping on the building’s wooden porches at the time while he slept indoors. He did not like the sun waking him up early. The family got separated but did re-unite safely. The governor carried his daughter’s teddy bear under his arm. Mary said, “I don’t think he knew he had it.”

Not one who resided in Florence but who frequently visited the town and the prison was Arizona’s first governor after statehood, George Wylie Paul Hunt. He served more terms (although they were short at the time) than any other governor of the state. A strong advocate of prison reform, he would often come down from Phoenix to Florence to visit the prison on weekend trips, spending Saturday nights in the spare room at the warden’s house. His interest in prisons came from reading Victor Hugo’s “Les Miserables.” He became president of the Anti-Capital Punishment Society in America in 1914, and Arizona did away with capital punishment during that time. He believed in having inmates build highways and bridges and did away with the inmates’ regular black-and-white-striped uniforms.

Another governor was Robert T. “Bob” Jones, a self-educated engineer with a varied resume. He worked in Mexico, on the Panama Canal and in Nevada. He moved to Arizona in 1909. The Southern Pacific Railroad put him in charge of building the railroad line between Kelvin and Hayden Junction. In 1912 Jones left engineering and went into pharmaceuticals. He opened his first pharmacy in Superior and later opened two more, one in Florence.

After eight years in the state Senate, the “friendly pharmacist” known as Bob Jones easily won the office of governor and was sworn in on Jan. 2, 1939. After his two-year term he chose not to seek re-election and retired from politics in 1941.

Florence’s favorite son, future Arizona Gov. Ernest W. McFarland, was born into a homesteading family in Oklahoma and always cared about the farmer. He completed his B.A. degree at the University of Oklahoma in 1917. After service in the Navy during World War I, he completed a master’s degree in political science and obtained his law degree from Stanford University in 1922.

McFarland began his practice of law in Casa Grande. In 1924 he was elected Pinal County attorney and held that office for six years. He was elected Superior Court judge in 1934.

Of great importance to Arizona is water. As Gov. Kibbey had been before him and as many officials have been after, McFarland was concerned with irrigation and water law. He made an extensive study of the problems concerning such laws, and as Superior Court judge heard many important cases concerning water rights.

Perhaps it was issues such as these that led McFarland to run for Senate. His 1940 election was a stunning defeat of a fellow Democrat, incumbent Henry F. Ashurst, the “Arizona Legend since 1912.” McFarland became a member of the Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, where water legislation was initially considered. He worked for passage of the Central Arizona Project that became a reality years after he left the Senate.

Americans of both major parties praised legislation passed in Congress that benefited returning World War II veterans. McFarland was co-sponsor of this bill known as the “G.I. Bill of Rights,” a benefit program that provided housing, insurance and college tuition to veterans of World War II. The citation for McFarland’s Veterans’ Hall of Fame Award states that McFarland’s “most notable achievement” was being co-author of this bill.

Republican Barry Goldwater defeated Democrat McFarland in the election of 1952. The former senator returned to Arizona and became involved in the new industry of television by being a co-founder of Phoenix’s Channel 3. McFarland returned to politics by running for and being elected governor of Arizona in 1954 and re-elected in 1956. He was elected to the state Supreme Court in 1964 and became chief justice of the Arizona Supreme Court in 1968.

Ranching and produce farming had been part of Florence’s history since its days as a supplier of food and forage to the military in the 19th Century. In the 1920s President Calvin Coolidge signed a bill into law authorizing the construction of Coolidge Dam on the Gila River. It would provide water for the irrigation of acres and acres of Pinal County cotton farms.

Photographs of the dam’s dedication on March 4, 1930, show former President Coolidge and his wife, Grace, as well as spectacular views of the dam’s unique dome construction. Missing at first was the invited celebrity, Will Rogers, nationally known humorist, who enjoyed poking fun at politicians. He was found outside with the general public, eating a hot dog from a vendor. When finally brought to the head table, he looked at the slowly filling reservoir behind the dam and announced, “If they’d named that lake after me, I’d mow it.”

In 1932, Florence rancher Charles A. Whitlow Sr. became aware that there was a shortage of money for milk for the school children. He suggested a junior rodeo where children competed for prizes. It was so successful it became Florence’s signature event and includes a parade, known as the Junior Parada.

Thanksgiving weekend in Florence is Junior Parada time. The events have drawn celebrities, including parade marshals such as singing cowboy Gene Autrey and Ken Curtis, who played Festus on the television show “Gunsmoke.” Another parade marshal was the popular warden at the prison, Frank A. Eyman. He rode in the parade more than once, often with an inmate band, “Stars behind Bars,” and mounted guards.

Eyman was a Tucson policeman for 20 years. He participated in the only non­violent capture of notorious gangster John Dillinger in 1934. He later served as sheriff of Pima County. He was appointed warden of the state prison in Florence in 1955 and served until 1972. In 1958 he ended a threatened prison breakout with two guards held hostage by firing a gun four times and shouting to inmates, “If you SOBs even so much as scratch my men, I’ll kill all of you.” The guards were released unharmed. His tenure as warden came at a time when there was prison unrest nationwide and much prison overcrowding. The community admired Eyman for his law-and-order stance.

Lynn Smith and Pat Faux are sisters. Since 2000 both have been members, Lynn as chair, of the Collection Management Committee of the Pinal County Historical Society.

 

Monday, January 2, 2012

Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik's Death Squad

By William N. Grigg






A home invasion in Tucson, Arizona; below, right, its equivalent in Mosul, Iraq.
 




















Why did they use a SWAT team

If  Tucson resident Jose Guerena was plausibly suspected of narcotics trafficking, why wasn't he arrested on his way to or from his job at the nearby Asarco Mission copper mine? What justified a military assault on his home, when investigators knew that they could have executed a conventional search warrant?

 Jose was never charged with a crime. In a previous encounter with police he consented to a search of his vehicle. In an separate traffic stop, Jose was a passenger in a car in which police found a handgun and a trivial amount of marijuana; he was arrested and subsequently released without being charged with a crime. He was an honorably discharged Marine combat veteran and -- of infinitely greater importance -- a gainfully employed, married father of two children. 

There's no reason to believe that anything other than a conventional search warrant -- served by officers who aren't kitted out in paramilitary drag, who knock on the door, identify themselves, and display the document in question before gaining entry -- was either necessary or appropriate. This could have been done with minimal risk to everyone involved. 

If a routine search warrant had been executed on the morning of May 5, the substantive result would have been the same: The police would have found no evidence of criminal activity. The most important difference, of course, would be that Vanessa would still have a husband, and her children -- grade school student Jose, Jr. , and toddler Joel -- would still have their father. Instead, Jose was a victim of criminal homicide at the hands of a Pima County Sheriff's Office (PCSO) SWAT team. 

At the time of the raid, Jose had just finished a twelve-hour shift at the local Asarco copper mine; he was startled awake by terrified cries from his wife, Vanessa, who told him that there were armed men laying siege to their home. Jose told her to hide in a closet with their four-year-old son, Joel. 

When the intruders burst into the home, Jose was in his boxer shorts and reportedly was holding an AR15 rifle, which he never discharged -- contrary to the SWAT team's initial report, which was that Jose had fired on them. His wife, who claims that she had never seen the gun before, initially told investigating detectives that it had been "thrown" next to Jose's body. Whether or not Jose actually pointed the gun, the invaders flung a total of 71 rounds in his direction, twenty-two of which hit him. 

Significantly, none of the wounds, as described in the official Medical Examiner's report, appears to have been a killshot. Jose was grazed in the head, and wounded in the extremities. One round penetrated a lung and his spleen, causing a hemorrhage. The same report notes that there was "no evidence of medical intervention," despite the fact that one member of the SWAT team -- deputy Jay Korza -- is a medic, and paramedics summoned by Vanessa's panicked 911 call arrived at the home mere minutes after the shooting. 



Rather than rendering or permitting medical aid to their victim, the SWAT team barricaded the crime scene while Jose bled to death. They didn't even confirm Jose's death directly. Instead, they deployed a camera-equipped remote-controlled robot to investigate, and then obtained an official pronouncement by telephone from a SWAT team physician who was miles from the scene. 


The likelihood that Jose could have survived if the SWAT team had provided timely medical care elevates this crime from simple homicide to second degree murder through depraved indifference. But the guilty parties here aren't limited to the trigger-pullers who spilled Jose's blood: Given that there was no legal justification for a military raid in the first place, the policy-makers responsible for signing off on it are just as guilty as the people who carried out those orders.

In a petulant and self-serving television interview with local ABC affiliate KGUN, Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik insisted that the SWAT raid was entirely "appropriate," and that since Jose was "part of a very violent organization, we considered it high risk." 

As helmet camera video of the raid documents, the comportment of the  SWAT team was not what one would expect from police carrying out a "high risk" mission against a potentially violent criminal. Music can be heard playing in the background; the mood of the SWAT operators seems more like what would be expected of a sports team preparing for a pickup basketball game, rather than combat-ready tactical specialists steeling themselves to confront a dangerous offender. 


Furthermore, Dupnik's rationale for the "high risk" operation is contradicted by Michael Storie, the attorney representing Jose's killers. Asked if Jose's previous arrest played a role in the SWAT team's strategy in carrying out the raid, Storie replied: "No. They didn't know anything about it and they didn't even know Guerena would be in the house at the time they approached."


What this means, apparently, is that a SWAT team was sent to carry out a combat-style raid against a home the team believed was  occupied only by a young mother and her four-year-old child. The task force investigating Jose knew his work schedule and his family's daily routine; did it neglect to share that information with the SWAT team? Was that intelligence deliberately withheld?


Nothing was "mishandled" here, maintains Sheriff Dupnik, ignorant of the fact that once incompetence is eliminated as an explanation, we're left with something can only be regarded as sinister -- and criminal.



 The public shouldn't be alarmed over the raid that killed Jose Guerena, the Sheriff assured KGUN, since "We average about 50 of these searches" every year. Wouldn't this mean that there is a SWAT raid of this kind taking place practically every week in Pima County? In light of what happened on May 5, should Pima County residents receive these tidings with relief, or apprehension?


"This was an unfortunate situation that was provoked by the person himself," Dupnik maintained, asserting that this is the inevitable outcome when someone points an "assault rifle" at cops. A more honest person would acknowledge that the SWAT operators first pointed their weapons at Jose when they had no cause or justification to do so, and that it's always a bad idea to invade a home occupied by a young mother with a toddler. 

Dupnik, however, was too busy wallowing in self-pity to spare any sympathy for the young father who was slaughtered on the floor of his own home: "Unfortunately, in this particular case, the printed media ... for whatever reason, decided to beat Dupnik up, over the head, with a sledge hammer...."


Sending a paramilitary death squad to bust down a door and hurl lead in every direction is conscientious police work; criticizing the synapse-challenged apparatchik responsible for such atrocities is something akin to criminal assault. Is everybody clear on this? 




Dupnik's casually defamatory statement that Jose Guerena was part of a "very violent organization" isn't supported by evidence, and will never be proven in court. Since Jose was killed before being charged with a crime, his innocence will forever remain an unimpeachable legal fact. However, it is a moral certainty that Clarence Dupnik is the chieftain of a "very violent organization" that can kill innocent people with impunity.

The search warrant affidavit that lead to the May 5 raids in Tucson -- a tapestry of supposition held together by begged questions -- purports to describe a large, well-organized narcotics smuggling operation involving Jose's older brother and other relatives. 

The PCSO's Special Investigative Unit (SIU) investigated Jose and the others for about two years, including six months of relentless, highly intrusive surveillance. This included wiretaps, stakeouts, and detailed scrutiny of household finances. The central figure in the investigation appears to have been Jose's older brother, Alejandro, who did have a criminal history (albeit one not involving mala en se). 

Suspicions were piqued by the fact that this group of Mexican-Americans, most of whom received welfare, appeared to be living beyond their means -- which, while exceedingly unwise, is neither a crime nor uncommon, even in post-Bubble America. Jose, according to his wife, was the kind of frugal provider who made birthday pinatas for their son, rather than buying them. The affidavit insists that none of the subjects appeared to be gainfully employed. That statement is offered despite the fact that the same affidavit acknowledges that Jose, who retired from the Marine Corps several years ago, worked long hours at the copper mine.


Despite the depth of their suspicions and the extent of their investigation, the affidavit admits: "During the SIU surveillance concerning the aforementioned subjects [that is, Jose and the others], they were not observed handling or even in the proximity of narcotics."

The functionary who filed the affidavit, identified only as "Detective Tisch,"offers a litany of excuses for the absence of tangible evidence of the drug trafficking ring he and his comrades had purportedly identified. 

Some "drug traffickers are aware that electronic communications are subject to law enforcement interception ... [and therefore] prefer most transactions to be in person," he writes in lines 123-124 of the affidavit. Where and when did those transactions occur? Ahem -- well, you see, "it is your Affiant's belief ... that suspects who are involved in drug trafficking are aware that law enforcement officers conduct surveillance of their residences, their businesses, and their activities" -- so none of the deals would go down in any of those places, y'see. 

Well, why not stalk those insidious people to the secret lairs wherein they ply their insidious trade? Ah, gee, well, as much as I'd love to, Tisch stammers in print, drug dealers "are conscious of being followed by law enforcement officers and are therefore difficult to follow." All right  -- what about the fact that the SIU had terrifyingly detailed access to the financial records of those whom they were investigating? "Narcotic traffickers often use financial habits designed to minimize and hide a paper trail," Tisch wrote by way of prefacing information about the earnings, finances, employment histories, properties, and clothing purchases of Jose and Alejandro Guerena and the others. 

The most significant "evidence" of Jose's supposed involvement in the alleged drug ring was the fact that he was found in the possession of a large quantity of plastic wrap during a 2009 traffic stop. In a fashion reminiscent of Don Quixote seeing malevolent giants where windmills placidly plied the Iberian skies, Detective Tisch wrote that "it is your Affiant's belief that saran-type wrap is commonly used to wrap and rewrap marijuana for ease of transportation...." It was subsequently discovered that this illicit "masking material" had actually been used to wrap furniture at the home of Jose Guerena's mother. 


After paring away all of the officious persiflage that litters this document, here is the "evidence" is presented to the judge: 

This small group of Mexican-Americans in Tucson, who include some people with criminal records, has money and assets we believe, but cannot prove, are the proceeds of drug trafficking. The only way we can prove this is by deploying a military strike force to kick in doors and collect the evidence that we cannot find through legitimate police methods. A judge quite generously responded to that request by issuing a hunting license to the local SWAT team and calling it a "search warrant." 


The affidavit demanded permission to seize all "fruits, instrumentalities and evidence of the [drug-related] crimes" allegedly carried out by the purported marijuana trafficking ring. 
Although the PCSO "rip crew" found no evidence of any kind in Jose's home, they were nothing if not thorough: Among the supposedly "drug-related" items they plundered from the home were Vanessa's wedding ring and Jose's combat medals from his service in Iraq. 


Once again, this detail offers critical insights into the mindset and priorities behind the May 5 atrocity. This wasn't the behavior of people sworn to protect individual rights and private property; it was the opportunistic avarice of officially sanctioned thieves who consider themselves legally entitled to a cut of anything of value they can find. 

This is why Detective Tisch's affidavit (like any other document of its kind) should be seen as a report filed by a thief casing coveted properties on behalf of a home invasion ring: These people have a bunch of nice stuff; all we have to do is find a plausible excuse to steal it from them


 That's how the "War on Drugs" operates at the local level. For law enforcement agencies, the objective isn't to abolish drug trafficking, or even to impede it significantly; rather, it is to maximize the institutional profits they derive from prohibition

One properly notorious example is on display on Interstate 40 in Tennessee, where officers from two drug task forces prowl the highway in search of  cash they can seize through civil asset forfeiture.


Dutifully reciting the prescribed catechism, Kim Helper, District Attorney for Tennessee's 21st Judicial District, insists that the highway robbery scheme is "a way for us to continue to fund our operations so that we can put an end to drug trafficking and the drug trade within this district." Of course, those two objectives -- "continued funding" and "an end to drug trafficking" -- are mutually incompatible. 

Officers assigned to the task force often ignore actual narcotics shipments, choosing instead to focus almost exclusively on seizing money. This means concentrating on the westbound side of the highway, where the cash is believed to be found, rather than the eastbound lane, which is supposedly used to shuttle drugs in from Mexico. 

As Nashville's CBS affiliate reports, the salaries paid to the officers involved in this highway robbery ring are paid directly out of the cash and other assets seized by them; this means that police often find themselves competing to stop and shake down the same cars, sometimes nearly coming to blows in the process. 



The Patron Saint of narcotics task forces is 19th Century NYPD Officer Alexander "Clubber" Williams, who created an immensely lucrative fiefdom in a precinct ripe with vice and graft of every conceivable variety. 

Clubber's exuberant corruption made for good press copy, which was made even livelier by his compulsive quotability. "There is more law in the end of a policeman's nightstick than in a decision of the Supreme Court," he explained when he was criticized about his penchant for brutality. It was his proprietary brand of glib shamelessness that gave New York's vice district its name: "All my life I have never had anything but chuck steak. Now I'm gonna get me some tenderloin." 

Like the contemporary drug warriors who are his institutional progeny, Williams knew that vice cannot be eradicated through state coercion -- but that the "war" against it can be immensely profitable. As Professor Alfred W. McCoy of the University of Wisconsin-Madison points out, through drug prohibition, police act as "an informal regulator, controlling the volume of vice trading and setting the level of syndication"; this results in the creation of "powerful syndicates and a high volume of illicit activity." 

To see a splendid example of the process Dr. McCoy describes, all that is necessary is to cast our eyes to the south. Since 2006, the Mexican front of Washington's drug war has claimed more than 40,000 lives. It has militarized that country's law enforcement culture, thereby generating substantial profits for the corporate affiliates of Washington's National Security State. The inflated profits resulting from prohibitionist policies have likewise been a boon to the banking sector, both in Mexico and globally. The cartels themselves are thriving, diversifying, and expanding their institutional reach both into the U.S. and Central America.

This symbiosis police agencies and the vice cartels they help create enriches criminal kingpins on both sides. The consequences of this cynical charade are often lethal for innocent people needlessly targeted by  State-licensed thugs armed with combat-grade weaponry and imbued with the scruples of Clubber Williams.


The second hour of last week's installment of Pro Libertate Radio was devoted to the murder of Jose Guerena. Go here to listen.










Pro Libertate