Transcript of Rankin/PDI Meeting About Tucson 'Sanctuary City' Initiative

1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
2
3 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF PIMA
4
5
6
7
8 PEOPLE’S DEFENSE INITIATIVE, INC., )
9 ZAIRA LIVIER, TRAVONNE SMITH, ) No. C20195033
10 VIVIAN SMITH, BRIAN DUTZ, MARIA )
11 JOHNSON, PATRICK CALLAHAN, AND )
12 AMANDA ANYAEJI, ) Assigned to the Hon.
13 ) Brenden J. Griffin
14 Plaintiffs, )
15 )
16 vs. )
17 )
18 MIKE RANKIN, MICHAEL ORTEGA, )
19 CHRIS MAGNUS and STEVE KOZACHIK, )
20 all in their official capacities, )
21 and CITY OF TUCSON, et al., )
22 )
23 Defendants. )
24 ___________________________________)
25
26
27
28
29 CITY ATTORNEY MEETING
30
31 CONTINUATION TRANSCRIPT
32
33
34
35
36 _____________________________________________________
37
38
00623087.1
1
2 MR. PEARD: ….I WAS UP ALL NIGHT, YOU KNOW PREPPING.
3 SO, I GUESS THE THING WITH AGE OF TRUMP, IT’S LIKE WORKING FOR THE ACLU
4 IT’S LIKE YOU SPEND ALL THIS TIME PREPPING THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAPPEN.
5 BONES: OR YOU NEVER KNOW WHEN IT’S GONNA
6 HAPPEN…
7 MR. PEARD: THEN IF IT DOES HAPPEN YOU WANNA BE ABLE
8 TO FILE A LAWSUIT….
9 BONES: EXACTLY…IMMEDIATELY
10 MR. PEARD: …. WITHIN SIX HOURS OR SOMETHING.
11 BONES:: I THINK THAT’S TERRIFYING RIGHT NOW. YOU
12 KNOW HE SAID YESTERDAY HE WAS GONNA GO TO THE DETENTION CENTER SO
13 [UI]
14 MR. RANKIN: OH DID HE?
15 BONES: HE SAID IT YESTERDAY. I’M LIKE I WANT TO SEE
16 THIS HAPPEN.
17 MR. RANKIN: IS CASSIE JOINING US?
18 BONES: NO SHE HAD CAR PROBLEMS AND SO SHE HAD TO
19 LIKE DO IT PLUS THAT GUY….
20 MS. LIVIER: THANK YOU.
21 BONES: ….THAT WE WERE WORRIED ABOUT THE OTHER GUY
22 WITH THE MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEM – HE’S FILING MORE MOTIONS AGAINST
00623087.1 1
1 US SO THAT HAPPENS ON TUESDAY. REMEMBER THERE’S A GUY THAT KILLED
2 MARSHALL WHITE…
3 MR. RANKIN: YEAH
4 BONES: AND NEL SLESSENGER (SP) AT THE SAME TIME
5 WE WERE FIGHTING WITH ANOTHER GUY NAMED JACKSON …
6 MR. RANKIN: OH RIGHT RIGHT….
7 BONES: …NOW HE’S – HE’S ACTIVE AGAIN AND SO HE’S
8 FILING MOTIONS AGAINST OUR OFFICERS AGAIN.
9 MR. RANKIN: ORDERS OF PROTECTION, I GUESS …
10 BONES: YES
11 MR. RANKIN: AGAINST THE COPS.
12 BONES: SO HE AT LEASE HAS BEEN CONVICTED OF A
13 FELONY SO…
14 MR. RANKIN: WOW. WHAT IS TIM MEED (SP) BEFORE HE YOU
15 KNOW…
16 BONES: BEFORE THE STEP WAS HERE
17 MR. PEARD: IS HE THE ONE THAT ISSUED THE RESTRAINING
18 ORDER AGAINST THE COP…
19 BONES: [UI]
20 MR. PEARD: SIX MONTHS AGO?
21 BONES: YES
22 MR. RANKIN: I THINK IT WAS HIM.
00623087.1 2
1 BONES: WELL AT I FIRST THOUGHT IT WAS HIS SON. DID YOU
2 SEE THAT? LIKE HIS SON WASN’T A LAWYER AND [OVERLAPPING VOICES]
3 THEY HAD LIKE AN ARTICLE IN HERE….
4 MR. RANKIN: I WAS GRATEFUL FOR THE VOTERS THAT THEY
5 WERE ABLE TO DISTINGUISH ….[OVERLAPPING VOICES]
6 BONES: RIGHT BEFORE HAND HE GOT INDICTED, DIDN’T
7 HE?
8 MR. RANKIN: I THINK IT WAS BEFORE THE ELECTIONS…I
9 THINK IS WAS RIGHT AFTER THE PRIMARY BUT AFTER ….[OVERLAPPING
10 VOICES]
11 MR. RANKIN: IT WAS AFTER THE PRIMARY.
12 BONES: SO ON THE CRIMINAL STUFF YEAH I DON’T KNOW
13 WHAT HAPPENED THERE. AND THEN SO WE’VE BEEN FIGHTING – REBECCA I
14 SHOULDN’T SAY WE – REBECCA’S BEEN FIGHTING THIS THING FOR MONTHS
15 NOW. BACK AND FORTH AND OBVIOUSLY IT’S SERIOUS AFTER WHAT
16 HAPPENED.
17 MR. RANKIN: YEAH
18 BONES: SO WE DON’T WANT TO LEAVE ANY KIND OF
19 STONE UNTURNED.
20 MR. RANKIN: YOU THINK THE PERSONALITY BASE ARE
21 SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS ….
22 BONES: NEARLY IDENTICAL. MR. RANKIN: THAT’S
23 SCARY –
00623087.1 3
1 MR. RANKIN: WHEN YOU ACCESS TO WEAPONS. THANKS FOR
2 MEETING….
3 MR. PEARD: THANK YOU FOR MEETING WITH ME.
4 MR. RANKIN: SO I’M IN A POSITION OF PROBABLY HAVING TO
5 PROVIDE A MEMO EARLY NEXT WEEK I’M THINKING TO THE MAYOR AND
6 COUNCIL JUST ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS WERE TO BECOME LAW.
7 WHAT WOULD THE IMPLICATIONS BE FOR THE CITY AND – WHAT I’M EXPECTING
8 IS THAT I WOULD DO THAT MEMO AS A PUBLIC MEMO BECAUSE THEY NEED TO
9 BE ABLE TO REFER TO IT.
10 MR. PEARD: OKAY
11 MR. RANKIN: AND….
12 MR. PEARD: SO WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING – DOES THE
13 COUNCIL HAVE TO VOTE TO MAKE IT PUBLIC….
14 MR. RANKIN: YEAH
15 [OVERLAPPING VOICES]
16 MR. PEARD: YOU CAN DESIGNATE PUBLIC YOUR SELF
17 MR. RANKIN: YEAH I MEAN I’M SORTING THROUGH THAT IN
18 MY HEAD BUT I THINK BECAUSE WHAT I’M DOING REALLY – I’M NOT GIVING
19 THEM LEGAL ADVICE ABOUT YOU SHOULD DO THIS OR YOU SHOULD NOT DO
20 THAT AND IN FACT YOU KNOW I’VE GOTTA BE CAREFUL UNDER THE STATE
21 LAWS ABOUT INFLUENCING THE OUTCOME OF ELECTIONS THAT I’M NOT
22 SAYING YOU SHOULD ADVOCATE FOR THIS OR NOT. I’LL BE USING IT AS A
23 REMINDER THAT…
00623087.1 4
1 MR. PEARD: OH THAT MAKES SENSE
2 MR. RANKIN: YOU CAN’T USE CITY RESOURCES TO INFLUENCE
3 THE OUTCOME…
4 MR. PEARD: SUPPORT OR OPPOSE
5 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. YOU KNOW
6 MR. PEARD: AND THIS MAKES IT MATERIAL THAT YOUR ROLE
7 MATERIALLY DIFFERENT FROM A TYPICAL ORDINANCE COMING THROUGH CITY
8 COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
9 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT
10 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
11 MR. RANKIN: SO IT’S INTERESTING. BUT I’LL NAVIGATE
12 THROUGH THAT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER….
13 MR. PEARD: I HADN’T THOUGHT OF THAT DISTINCTION
14 EITHER.
15 MR. RANKIN: YEAH. UM AND SO IT’S IMPORTANT TO ME THAT
16 YOU KNOW I HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK TO THE FOLKS THAT WHO ARE
17 INTIMATE WITH IT TO MAKE SURE WE’RE UNDERSTANDING EACH OF THE
18 SECTIONS
19 MR. PEARD: THEN WE CAN MEET MORE THAN ONCE IF YOU….
20 MR. RANKIN: SURE
21 MR. PEARD: …FIND THAT HELPFUL DOWN THE ROAD.
22 MR. RANKIN: I WILL TELL YOU THAT MY READ OF IT AND I’VE
23 HAD THE CHANCE TO, YOU KNOW, GO THROUGH IT PRETTY CAREFULLY AND
00623087.1 5
1 HAVE ANTONIO AND REBECCA GO THOUGHT IT TOO BECAUSE THEY ADVISE TPD
2 AND THIS IS MOSTLY ABOUT TPD ISSUES.
3 MR. PEARD: YEAH ABSOLUTELY
4 MR. RANKIN: I DO THINK IT – THERE ARE PROVISIONS THAT
5 CONFLICT WITH 1070 AND WITH STATE LAW.
6 MR. PEARD: MHMM
7 MR. RANKIN: I DO THINK THAT AS A RESULT IT EXPOSES – IF
8 THIS WERE THE LAW – IT’S APPROVED BY VOTERS THAT IT WOULD EXPOSE THE
9 CITY TO LIABILITY UNDER 1070 AND 1487
10 MR. PEARD: OKAY
11 MR. RANKIN: YOU KNOW RIGHT NOW WITH THE STATUS OF
12 THE LITIGATION RELATING TO THE GRANT CONDITIONS – FEDERAL GRANT
13 CONDITIONS – YOU KNOW THOSE CONDITIONS ARE UNDER A STAY.
14 MR. PEARD: THE BURN GRANT
15 MR. RANKIN: YEAH HOWEVER THE ADMINISTRATION MIGHT
16 TRY TO EXPAND.
17 MR. PEARD: AND YOU’RE FAMILIAR WITH THE CONFERENCE
18 OF MAYOR’S LAWSUIT?
19 MR. RANKIN: YEAH
20 MR. PEARD: OF WHICH TUCSON IS A MEMBER – IS A PARTY TO
21 THAT?
22 MR. RANKIN: YEAH. AND WE’VE JOINED – SIGNED ON AS
23 AMICUS AND A LOT OF THE CASES INVOLVING THE EXECUTIVE ORDERS
00623087.1 6
1 INCLUDING ON THE GRANT CONDITIONS WHICH ARE UNDER STAY UNDER THE
2 9TH CIRCUIT DISTRICT ORDER NATIONWIDE STAY. BUT WE’LL SEE
3 MR. PEARD: WE DON’T KNOW….
4 MR. RANKIN: WHAT THE SUPREME COURT WILL DO
5 MR. PEARD: AND BY JANUARY 2020 WHEN – IF THE
6 PROCESSING BECOMES ORDINANCE, WE DON’T KNOW WHAT THE STATE WILL
7 BE AT THAT POINT IN TIME.
8 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. AND YOU KNOW WHEN I – WHEN I
9 ANALYZE THINGS NOW WHETHER IT’S THIS OR SOME THING ELSE THAT THE
10 COUNCIL’S CONSIDERING DOING, I HAVE TO FACTOR IN WHAT DO I THINK THE
11 ARIZONA SUPREME COURT WILL DO WITH THIS IN LIGHT OF – YOU KNOW OUR
12 EXPERIENCES THERE. IF ANYTHING THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT AND
13 PELANDER’S LEAVING. AND SO DUCEY’S GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER
14 APPOINTMENT WHO MY GUESS WILL LOOK A LOT MORE LIKE BULLOCK THAN
15 ANYONE ELSE. AND YOU KNOW I STILL GIVE MY HONEST OPINION BASED ON
16 MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW BUT I DO HAVE TO FACTOR IN ….
17 MR. PEARD: PREDICTIONS OF ….
18 MR. RANKIN: THAT THE SUPREME COURT MIGHT NOT ALWAYS
19 AGREE WITH ME LIKE THEY DIDN’T ON GUNS.
20 [LAUGHING]
21 MR. RANKIN: IN A VERY PAINFUL WAY.
22 MR. PEARD: YEAH
23 MR. RANKIN: BUT NONETHELESS.
00623087.1 7
1 MR. PEARD: SO WHAT’S MY …[OVERLAPPING VOICES]
2 MR. RANKIN: SO RIGHT NOW THE GRANT CONDITIONS YOU
3 KNOW THAT HAVE BEEN – AND ACTUALLY I MEAN A PRODUCT OF THAT
4 LITIGATION MAY BE A DETERMINATION ON A U.S.C. 1373 BEING
5 CONSTITUTIONAL OR NOT WHICH THE COURTS HAVE NIBBLED AT OVER THE
6 YEARS…
7 MR. PEARD: WELL THE COURTS – YEAH HAVE YOU SEEN THE
8 MOST RECENT – THERE’S ABOUT EIGHT DIFFERENT LAWSUITS …
9 MR. RANKIN: MHMM
10 MR. PEARD: INVOLVING 1373 AT THE MOMENT.
11 MR. RANKIN: YEAH
12 MR. PEARD: YOU’RE PROBABLY FAMILIAR WITH THIS NCAA V.
13 MURPHY CASE.
14 MR. RANKIN: MHMM
15 MR. PEARD: OR MURPHY V NCAA THAT SEEMS TO HAVE
16 SHIFTED THE COMMANDEERING CASE LAW PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY ….
17 MR. RANKIN: YEAH AND I THOUGHT THE COMMANDEERING
18 LAW ARGUMENT WAS STRONG TO BEGIN WITH YOU KNOW AND THAT’S HOW I –
19 THAT’S WHAT I POINTED TO WITH THE COUNCIL WHEN THEY ASKED ME ABOUT
20 IT. SO I MEAN THAT COULD GO IN A VERY – COULD END UP IN A VERY STRONG
21 RESULT FROM – ON THE ISSUE DIRECTLY ON 1373 BUT AT THIS TIME WE DON’T
22 KNOW HOW IT’S GONNA LAND, BUT I – I DO THINK AND I KINDA PREVIEWED
23 THIS IN THE EMAILS WE EXCHANGED I DON’T THINK CITY COURT HAS
00623087.1 8
1 JURISDICTION TO HEAR PRIVATE CIVIL CAUSES OF ACTION AND I KNOW WE CAN
2 CERATE JURISDICTION IF IT DOESN’T EXIST THROUGH LEGISLATION. I GET THE
3 ARGUMENT THAT – THROUGH THE ARS. AND I’VE KICKED THAT AROUND WITH
4 SOME OF THE OTHER ATTORNEYS ABOUT – YOU KNOW WHAT DO YOU THINK
5 THE SCOPE OF CIVIL JURISDICTION IS IN MUNICIPAL COURTS AND IF I ADD CIVIL
6 INFRACTIONS AND CIVIL ---
7 MR. PEARD: AND WHAT ABOUT THAT LANGUAGE ARISING
8 UNDER – THAT ARISING UNDER LANGUAGE?
9 MR. RANKIN: YEAH I STILL THINK AND ESPECIALLY IF YOU
10 LOOK AT THINGS LIKE THE RULES OF PROCEDURE THAT HAVE BEEN
11 PROMULGATED FOR MUNICIPAL COURTS INCLUDING TUCSON CITY COURT, IT’S
12 ALL EXCLUSIVELY FOR PRIVATE [OVERLAPPING VOICES] THE CITY’S
13 ENFORCING A VIOLATION THAT HAPPENS TO BE DESIGNATED CIVIL RATHER
14 THAN CRIMINAL AS OPPOSED TO JOE DOE VERSUS JANE DOE…
15 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
16 MR. RANKIN: AND WHY THAT GIVES ME A PARTICULAR
17 CONCERN IS THAT BY OPERATION OF OUR CHARTER AND CODE IF THERE’S A
18 VIOLATION OF A PROVISION OF OUR CODE THAT [UI] WHERE THE CODE ITSELF
19 DOESN’T DESIGNATE WHAT CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENSE THAT IS, WHAT TYPE
20 OF OFFENSE IT IS, WHETHER IT’S A CIVIL OR MISDEMEANOR THEN IT IS BY
21 DEFAULT CLASS 1 MISDEMEANOR
22 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
00623087.1 9
1 MR. RANKIN: IF THIS REMEDY ENFORCEMENT PROVISION IS
2 CARVED OUT THERE’S NO OTHER DESIGNATION OF WHAT – YOU KNOW IF AN
3 OFFICER FAILS TO GIVE THE – WHAT I’LL CALL THE MIRANDA PLUS WARNING
4 OR WHATEVER – WHATEVER IT IS THEN IS THAT LIKE DO THEY FALL – A
5 CRIMINAL VIOLATION.
6 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
7 MR. RANKIN: WHICH WE CAN’T INDEMNIFY AN OFFICER
8 [VOICES OVERLAPPING] … SO IT – I DON’T WANT TO READ TOO MUCH
9 INTO IT…
10 MR. PEARD: YEAH AND I HOPE YOU KNOW THAT WASN’T –
11 CLEARLY WASN’T OUR INTENT ---
12 MR. RANKIN: OH I KNOW, I KNOW ABSOLUTELY
13 MR. PEARD: I UNDERSTAND THE AMBIGUITIES THERE,
14 MR. RANKIN: NO I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT WAS “HEY LET’S
15 CREATE AN ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM THE GOAL OF WHICH IS NOT TO PUNISH
16 BUT IT – WHICH IS TO ENFORCE THE LAW…
18 MR. RANKIN: .. SO I GET IT. SO THAT’S MY CONCERN ABOUT
19 THAT AND THEN ONE OF THE SECTIONS I’M JUST GONNA HAVE TO ASK YOU
20 “WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU THINKING?”
21 MR. PEARD: SURE
22 MR. RANKIN: I THINK ….
00623087.1 10
1 MR. PEARD: I THINK I KNOW WHICH ONE YOU’RE GONNA SAY
2 BUT GO AHEAD
3 MR. RANKIN: YES IT’S THE – I’LL CHARACTERIZE IT IN THE
4 MOST ATTACKING WAY POSSIBLE….
5 [FEMALE LAUGHING]
6 MR. RANKIN: ….BUT IT’S THE IMMIGRATION AMNESTY FOR
7 CHILD MOLESTERS OKAY?
8 MR. PEARD: OH THAT WASN’T THE ONE I WAS THINKING OF….
9 MR. RANKIN: OH OKAY GOOD.
10 MS. LIVIER OH [LAUGHING]
11 MR. RANKIN: IS THIS IS K
12 MR. PEARD: K YEAH RIGHT
13 MR. RANKIN: SO IT’S THE PARTICULAR PROTECTION
14 MR. PEARD: WHICH ARS IS THE ONE THAT YOU SAY IS THE
15 CHILD MOLESTERS
16 MR. RANKIN: THE FIRST ONE THERE IS SEXUAL EXPLOITATION
17 OF A MINOR [TWO VOICES],
18 MR. PEARD: 13-3551?
19 MR. RANKIN: YEAH. 3556 IS SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF A
20 MINOR
21 MR. PEARD: OKAY
22 MR. RANKIN: 3601 IS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, 3601.02 IS
23 AGGRAVATED DOMESTIC VIOLENCE – SO FELONY DV. THE NEXT ONE NUMBER
00623087.1 11
1 4 1404 TO 1406 IS SEXUAL ABUSE, SEX WITH A MINOR OR SEXUAL ASSAULT
2 INVOLVING A MINOR, 1410 UNDER 5 IS CHILD MOLESTATION AND NUMBER 6 IS
3 CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE, SEXUAL MISCONDUCT BY A HEALTH PROFESSIONAL.
4 MR. PEARD: OKAY. THAT’S A VERY GOOD QUESTIONS
5 [OVERLAPPING VOICES] I THINK THE IDEA BEHIND THIS…
6 MR. RANKIN: WE CAME UP WITH SOME THEORIES
7 BONES: I MEAN IN THE END WE – WE -- OUR OFFICERS
8 ARE BASICALLY INSTRUCTED TO NOT ASK THESE QUESTIONS. WE TRY AS
9 HARD….
10 MR. PEARD: UNDER 2300
11 BONES: AS WE CAN IN THE DEPARTMENT IS TO JUST TRY
12 NOT TO GET INTO THE IMMIGRATION STUFF TO NOT ASK QUESTIONS THAT WILL
13 LEAD TO THIS BUT YOU KNOW I HAVE A SPECIFIC CASE THAT I REPRESENTED A
14 WOMAN COMING BACK INTO THE UNITED STATES THAT SHE WAS MOLESTED BY
15 HER UNCLE AND SO EVERYONE IN HER FAMILY GOT DOCUMENTATION EXCEPT
16 FOR HER YOU KNOW – AND SO SHE THOUGHT SHE WAS ACTUALLY A US CITIZEN
17 WHEN SHE WAS PICKED UP BY IMMIGRATION AND THE REASON WHY THEY
18 NEVER TOOK HER IN FRONT OF AN IMMIGRATION COURT WAS BECAUSE THEY
19 WERE AFRAID THAT SHE WAS GOING TO SAME SOMETHING ABOUT THE UNCLE
20 AND SO IF YOU ARE AN INVESTIGATOR AND YOU’RE ASKING THESE QUESTIONS
21 – IF IT CAME UP AT SCHOOL OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE A VERY
22 IMPORTANT QUESTION TO ASK BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A REASON WHY
23 SOMEONE WOULD BE QUITE IN THAT SITUATION. SO, SHE ENDED UP GETTING
00623087.1 12
1 DEPORTED AND BECAUSE SHE WAS 18 SAID “SCREW THIS COUNTRY” SHE
2 SIGNED A VOLUNTARY RETURN….
3 MR. PEARD: SO THIS IS AN EXAMPLE WHERE IF AN – IF A TPD
4 OFFICER HAD – BY ASKING ABOUT IMMIGRATION IT ACTUALLY HAS THE
5 OPPOSITE POSITIVE EFFECT.
6 BONES: YEAH BECAUSE FRIST OF ALL – FIRST OF ALL I MEAN IT
7 MIGHT GET THE UNCLE DEPORTED BUT IN THE END IT WOULD GET HER FIRST OF
8 ALL A ?? STATUS YOU KNOW SHE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET A U-VISA AND GET
9 ALL THAT APPLICATION TO OCCUR AND THEN, I MEAN AND I’M NOT SAYING
10 THAT IT WOULD’VE HAPPENED IN THE SPECIFIC CASE ’CAUSE IT DIDN’T BUT I
11 COULD SEE THAT BEING A PROBLEM WHERE IT KINDA CHILLS SOME OF THE
12 INVESTIGATION. AGAIN, OUR GUYS AREN’T LOOKING FOR THAT – OUR GALS –
13 IN THAT SPECIFIC CASE WE HAVE TWO WOMEN DETECTIVES THAT ARE
14 EXCELLENT AND SO THEY’RE NOT TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT BUT IT MIGHT
15 BE THE ELEMENT THAT NEEDS TO BE ASKED TO FIGURE OUT TO PROTECT THE
16 VICTIM IN THE SITUATION.
17 MR. RANKIN: SO MY THEORY ON K WAS THAT THE INTENT
18 WAS TO SAY THAT COPS AREN’T GONNA ASK IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE
19 VICTIM OR WITNESS IN THE CONTEXT OF ANY OF THESE. BUT THAT’S ALREADY
20 COVERED GENERALLY ELSEWHERE.
21 MR. PEARD: QUITE TRUE
22 MR. RANKIN: BUT IT SAYS THAT THE DETAINEE SPECIFICALLY
00623087.1 13
1 MR. PEARD: SO I’LL CONCEDE MAYBE WE WENT A LITTLE BIT
2 TOO BROAD ON THE ARS SECTIONS – I THINK THE ORIG – THE PRIMARY INTENT
3 WAS MORE SPECIFICALLY SEX – SORRY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SCENARIOS.
4 WHERE YOU HAVE WHAT’S A HE SAID SHE SAID STORY -- THE COP ARRIVES TO
5 THE SCENE SO HE SAID SHE SAID THE COP IS ASKING BOTH PARTIES –
6 SOMETIMES – IN SOME INSTANCES – CORRECT ME IF I’M WRONG BOTH PARTIES
7 ARE ARRESTED…
8 BONES: YEAH
9 MR. RANKIN: ’CAUSE IT’S EFFECTIVELY A MANDATORY
10 ARREST.
11 BONES: YEAH USUALLY IT’S – USUALLY IT’S WHOEVER CALLED
12 FIRST IS NOT ARRESTED, THE OTHER PERSON IS. [OVERLAPPING VOICES] JUST A
13 PRACTICAL – THAT’S I’M NOT SPEAKING FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
14 MR. PEARD: SO WE MAY HAVE -- WE MADE
15 BONES: …CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYER FOR 15 YEARS …
16 MR. PEARD: WE HAVE GONE OVER BROAD ON THE RANGE OF
17 ARS SECTIONS IN THAT PROVISION…
18 BONES: YEAH ’CAUSE TO ME IT SEEMS LIKE – AND RANKIN
19 BROUGHT THAT UP IT’S LIKE IT DOESN’T GIVE THE PROTECTION TO A GUY IN A
20 DUI RIGHT BUT IT GIVES IT TO SOMEBODY WHO’S DOING
21 MR. PEARD: RIGHT WELL I THINK – AND I THINK THE
22 OTHER – I THINK THE BIGGER PICTURE TAKING A STEP BACK – US TAKING A
23 STEP BACK AWAY FROM THE WHICH ARS PROVISIONS WE CHOSE AND DIDN’T
00623087.1 14
1 CHOOSE I THINK K GENERALLY IS TRYING TO GET AT – YOU KNOW THIS
2 POTENTIAL VULNERABILITY THAT’S B 1070 WHICH IS THAT THERE’S A RELEASE
3 – A COUPLE RELEASE VALVES IN SECTION 2(B) AND ONE OF THOSE RELEASE
4 VALVES IS [VOICES OVERLAPPING] SO WE SAY WHY NOT HAVE A CITY POLICY
5 THAT JUST SPELLS IT OUT – JUST SPELLS OUT – YOU KNOW THE OFFICER CAN
6 FIND OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES TOO BUT IN AT LEAST THESE CIRCUMSTANCES
7 THEY MUST FIND….
8 MR. RANKIN: AND WE’VE DONE THAT IN THE GO’S IN TERMS
9 OF SAYING THAT DON’T ASK VICTIMS AND WITNESSES OF CRIME BECAUSE
10 THAT HINDERS OR OBSTRUCTS INVESTIGATIONS BECAUSE IT CHILLS
11 COOPERATION WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT
12 MR. PEARD: AND YOU’RE – YOU’RE RIGHT THE BEGINNING OF
13 2300 DOES HAVE A – SOME LANGUAGE TO THAT EFFECT.
14 MR. RANKIN: AND THEN – JUST A SORT OF GENERAL LAST
15 THOUGHT – AND WHAT I WANNA DO IS GO THROUGH EACH OF THE SECTIONS
16 AND MAKE SURE I’M UNDERSTANDING BUT AND THIS IS MORE OF A POLITICAL
17 THAN A LEGAL SO IT’S OUT OF MY DEPTH A LITTLE BIT. BUT THUS FAR WE’VE
18 DONE A LOT IN OUR GO’S TO ADDRESS THE SAME UNDERLINING CORE
19 CONCERNS RIGHT. AND I THINK THE EFFECT OF IT AND I WOULD PREFER THIS
20 NOT LEAVE THIS ROOM IS THAT THE NUMBER OF CALLS FROM OFFICERS – FOR
21 IMMIGRATION INQUIRIES IS MINUSCULE.
00623087.1 15
1 MR. PEARD: AND I DON’T DISAGREE AND MIKE SILVA HAS
2 SHARED WITH ME SOME – AND I DON’T HAVE THE FULL DATA – SHARED WITH
3 ME SOME OF THAT.
4 MR. RANKIN: MY FEAR IS THAT EVEN –REGARDLESS OF
5 WHETHER THIS PASSES OR NOT IF IT’S ON THE BALLOT AND IT’S THE SUBJECT
6 OF DISCUSSION AND DEBATE AND ONE CANDIDATE USING IT AS A – SAYING DO
7 YOU SUPPORT IT VERSUS THE OTHER AND IT GETS SCRUTINY AND FOLKS START
8 LOOKING AT IT AND SAY WHAT THE HELL IS TUCSON DOING THERE ONLY
9 CALLING ONE TIME A MONTH. THEN WE COULD GET A CHALLENGE TO OUR
10 EXISTING GO’S. WHICH RIGHT NOW WE’RE IN A GOOD POSITION ON NOT JUST
11 ‘CAUSE WE HAVEN’T BEEN CHALLENGED BUT BECAUSE THERE WAS A – THE
12 PHOENIX
14 MR. RANKIN: WHERE – YOU KNOW – THERE’S AREN’T QUITE AS
15 BROAD AS OURS BUT WE HELPED WRITE THE RESPONSE TO THAT COMPLAINT
16 FOR PHOENIX. AND THAT WAS A GOOD RESPONSE
17 BONES: OH OKAY.
18 MR. RANKIN: WE WROTE AN AMICUS
19 MR. PEARD: YEAH LETTER IF YOU WANNA CALL IT THAT.
20 MR. RANKIN: YEA I TALKED TO THE PHOENIX ATTORNEY AND
21 WE DECIDED WELL MAYBE IT’S BETTER THAT THE CITY DOESN’T FORMALLY –
22 TUCSON DOESN’T FORMALLY COME FORTH
23 MR. PEARD: WAS IT JAY CABOO (PS) WHO’S
00623087.1 16
1 MR. RANKIN: JAY I TALKED WITH JAY BUT I WORKED WITH
2 BRAD HOLMES IS THE ATTORNEY BUT I SENT THEM A – I SENT THEM LITERALLY
3 A DRAFT RESPONSE AND SAID USE WHATEVER YOU WANT. BUT NONETHELESS
4 -- SO I THINK OUR POLICIES ARE IN A GOOD SHAPE RIGHT NOW AND A GOOD
5 POSITION AND I JUST – YOU KNOW THERE’S THE FINCHUMS (PS) OF THE WORLD
6 WHO WOULD LOVE TO …
7 MR. PEARD: I DON’T DISAGREE WE ON THE POLITICAL FRONT,
8 I MEAN YOU CAN JUMP IN IF YOU WANT, I THINK WE RECOGNIZE THAT THE –
9 THE RISK OF STATE LEGISLATIVE PREEMPTION WE’RE ALSO NOT UNMINDFUL OF
10 THE SOMEWHAT MORE FAVORABLE CONDITION THE STATE LEGISLATURE AS
11 OPPOSED TO A YEAR AGO.
12 MR. RANKIN: YEAH TRUE
13 MR. PEARD: NOW I SAY THAT RECOGNIZING THAT THERE’S
14 STILL A TWO CHAMBER REPUBLICAN MAJORITY. I DO ALSO SAY THAT
15 RECOGNIZING THAT THE MOST – PROBABLY THE MOST ANALOGOUS EXAMPLE
16 OF STATE PREEMPTION IN THE GENERAL REALM IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS
17 WAS WITH PHOENIX’S EFFORT TO MAKE A CITY WIDE ID PROGRAM AND TWO OR
18 THREE YEARS RUNNING THE STATE LEGISLATURE FLOATED BILLS IN EITHER OR
19 BOTH CHAMBERS TO PREEMPT THAT EFFORT EVERY TIME FAILING AND IN THE
20 INSTANCE WHERE IT CAME THE CLOSEST ON THE SENATE SIDE WAS TWO
21 SESSIONS AGO TWO REPUBLICAN MEMBERS FLIPPED AND WENT WITH ALL
22 DEMOCRATS TO VOTE IT DOWN IN THE FULL CHAMBER. THE OTHER YEARS IT
23 DIDN’T GET OUT OF COMMITTEE NOW….
00623087.1 17
1 MR. RANKIN: YEAH THE NUMBERS ARE BETTER NOW…
2 MR. PEARD: THERE IS NO GUARANTEES OF COURSE ON THAT
3 MR. RANKIN: YEAH BUT – WHAT I ALWAYS TRY TO KEEP IN
4 MIND IS THAT BECAUSE OF 1487 THAT’S A DIFFERENT PIECE. YOU GOT THE
5 PIECE ABOUT OKAY IS THE LEGISLATURE DO THEY HAVE THE NUMBERS TO DO
6 A NEW BILL ABOUT – THAT’S NEW LEGISLATION 1487 THAT’S JUST 1 PERSON
8 MR. PEARD: ONE WACKO YEAH – AND I RECOGNIZE
9 THAT YOU ALL ARE MOST LIKELY SUFFERING FROM PTSD FROM THE GUN CASE
10 AND WITH ALL GOOD REASON AND I UNDERSTAND NOT ONLY DID YOU HAVE
11 TO LITIGATE IT TO THE SUPREME COURT AND GOT YOUR HATS HANDED TO YOU
12 BUT YOU ALSO HAD TO PAY ATTORNEYS’ FEES TO THE OTHER SIDE.
13 MR. RANKIN: YEAH
14 MR. PEARD: SO I RECOGNIZE ALL THAT. SO I’M
15 OKAY…SETTING ASIDE SECTION K MAY BE THERE WAS A FEW [UI] ERRORS BUT
16 ON THE ACTUAL STATE PREEMPTION I’M HAPPY TO GO THROUGH SOME OF THE
17 LINES THAT YOU MAY – HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT I DO – I AM – MAY BE YOU’LL
18 BRING UP POINTS THAT I HADN’T THOUGHT OF BUT I – AT THE MOMENT I FEEL
19 CONFIDENT THAT A CAREFUL READING OF SECTION 2B OF SB1070 A CAREFUL
20 READING OF THIS WILL BRING THEM INTO HARMONY WITH ONE ANOTHER JUST
21 BARELY BUT I THINK THERE’S – I THINK A CLEAR LANGUAGE READING OF BOTH
22 BODIES OF LAW I THINK WE’LL BRING THEN INTO HARMONY
23 MR. RANKIN: OKAY. WELL LET’S GO THROUGH
00623087.1 18
1 MR. PEARD: AND I DON’T THINK – AND I THINK THAT I
2 SHOULD KINDA 30,000 FOOT VIEW SAY THAT UNLIKE THE GUN MELTDOWN CASE
3 THE – THIS DOES NOT DEPEND ON THE CITY OF TUCSON BEING A CHARTER CITY
4 OR NOT BEING CHARTER CITY. MY CONTENTION IS THAT THIS ON ITS FACE
5 DOESN’T VIOLATE – AS OPPOSED TO THE …
6 MR. RANKIN: YEAH. THIS ISN’T AN ISSUE OF CHARTER
7 VERSUS – IS THIS A LOCAL ISSUE NOT A LOCAL ISSUE BY LAW THIS ISN’T
8 CHARTER VERSUS LEGISLATURE THIS IS JUST THE EXISTING LANGUAGE OF 1070
9 AND WHETHER THIS WOULD CONFLICT WITH IT. SO I’M JUST GONNA GO
10 THROUGH MY NOTES FROM THE BEGINNING – FIRST OF ALL – SO SINCE IT’S A –
11 INITIATIVE AND IT CREATES A NEW PROVISION OF THE CODE THE IMPACT OF
12 THAT IF THE VOTER APPROVE IT IS THAT THE COUNCIL CAN’T LATER AMEND IT.
14 MR. PEARD: SO THAT WAS THE QUESTION I HAD – CAN IT –
15 OKAY THAT WAS THE QUESTION I HAD. CAN IT DO A SURGICAL REPEAL?
16 MR. RANKIN: NO WE HAVE A CHARTER PROVISION THAT
17 PROVIDES FOR INITIATIVE AND THEN IT PROVIDES THAT THE ONLY WAY TO
18 REPEAL OR AMEND AN INITIATIVE APPROVED BY THE VOTERS IS FOR THE
19 COUNCIL TO REFER AMENDMENTS TO THE VOTERS FOR APPROVAL.
20 MR. PEARD: OKAY
21 MR. RANKIN: SO AND THAT’S THE THING – [OVERLAPPING
22 VOICES] IF YOU NEED TO ADJUST SOMETHING WE CAN’T –
00623087.1 19
1 MR. PEARD: AND WHAT ABOUT THE SEVERABILITY
2 CLAUSE?
3 MR. RANKIN: YEAH I MEAN THERE’S THIS….
4 MR. PEARD: …HOW’S THAT PLAY IN YOUR MIND.
5 MR. RANKIN: I THINK THE SEVERABILITY CLAUSE IS WELL
6 WRITTEN IN TERMS OF THAT IT ALLOWS FOR SEVERING OUT ANYTHING THAT A
7 COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION DETERMINES IS INVALID,
8 UNENFORCEABLE AND SO THE QUESTION THERE ALWAYS IS THEN DOES THE
9 REST SURVIVE OR NOT, RIGHT. AND I KNOW THAT IT’S AS WRITTEN IT SAYS THE
10 BALANCE SURVIVES. I HAVEN’T TAKEN THE TIME RECENTLY TO GO BACK AND
11 LOOK AT THE CASE LAW ON THE THAT BUT THE CASE LAW SAYS A COURT WILL
12 STILL LOOK AT WHETHER IF YOU CARVE IT OUT DOES IT CHANGE THE
13 FUNDAMENTAL INTENT OF THE BALANCE OF IT AND IF IT DOES THEN I THINK
14 THE REST OF ‘EM GO WITH IT. BUT I THINK IT DEPENDS ON WHICH SECTION
15 WOULD BE FOUND TO BE INVALID. YOU KNOW, I THINK FOR EXAMPLE IF THE
16 COURT ACTION IS DEEMED TO BE INVALID THEN YOU COULD JUST CARVE THAT
17 OUT AND IT DOESN’T CHANGE THE REST OF IT -- IT JUST LEAVES THE QUESTION
18 OKAY IF THERE IS A VIOLATION WHAT IS THAT? WHAT IS IT?
20 MR. RANKIN: SO, THAT – YEAH I CAN SEND YOU THE CHARTER
21 SECTION BUT THAT’S WHAT IT SAYS, IT SAYS COUNCIL CAN’T AMEND OR
22 REPEAL THEY HAVE TO REFER IT TO THE VOTERS.
23 MR. PEARD: THAT’S GOOD TO KNOW.
00623087.1 20
1 MR. RANKIN: YOU’VE GOT THE DECLARATION OF POLICY
2 WHICH USES SANCTUARY TWICE WHICH ISN’T A LEGAL ISSUE IT’S JUST ….
3 MR. PEARD: MESSAGING…
4 MR. RANKIN: …IT’S MESSAGING AND BUT IT’S ALSO – THAT’S
5 THE LIGHTING ROD FOR – FOR THE FINCHUMS (PS) OF THE WORLD. YOU KNOW.
6 I WON’T BE SAYING THAT IN A MEMO AND IT’S NOT A LEGAL ANALYSIS, IT’S
7 JUST YOU KNOW.
8 BONES: WE ALSO HAD – BETWEEN US WE HAD INTERNAL
9 – A LOT OF INTERNAL DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE USE OF ….
10 MS LIVIER: A LOT.
12 MS. LIVIER: YEAH
13 BONES: THE OTHER THING IS IT’S NOT DEFINED.
14 MR. PEARD: WELL THAT’S INTENTIONAL ‘CAUSE WE DIDN’T
15 WANT THE WORD SANCTUARY TO HAVE LEGAL MEANING ‘CAUSE IN THE – IT
16 CURRENTLY DOES NOT HAVE LEGAL MEANING IN EITHER FEDERAL OR STATE
17 LAW. IN FACT, THE WORD SANCTUARY APPEARS NO WHERE IN SB1070 EITHER.
18 MR. RANKIN: WE TRIED TO DEFINE IT IN THE EXECUTIVE
19 ORDER BUT…
20 BONES: OH THAT’S RIGHT.
21 MR. PEARD: BUT THEY DEFINED IT BY REFERRING TO
22 1373 WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT NOW BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
00623087.1 21
1 MR. RANKIN: ALRIGHT AND THEN I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT
2 ONE OTHER WORD IN THE DECLARATION POLICY THAT …IT’S IN THE LAST
3 SENTENCE “FURTHER THE CITY IS COMMITTED TO PROTECTING AND
4 DEFENDING ALL PEOPLE AND UPHOLDING … BLAH BLAH BLAH”
5 MR. PEARD: OKAY
6 MR. RANKIN: AND
7 MR. PEARD: WE’RE NOT REPORTING TO CREATE A PUBLIC
8 DEFENSE SERVICES
9 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, I KNOW THAT – I KNOW THAT – BUT I WAS
10 JUST YOU KNOW I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS A –
11 MR. PEARD: UHHUH -- AND I HADN’T THOUGHT OF
12 THAT –
13 MR. RANKIN: AND THE REASON I ASK THIS BECAUSE THERE
14 WAS A PROPOSAL OR REQUEST I CAN’T REMEMBER FROM WHO ABOUT A YEAR
15 AGO ABOUT WELL COULDN’T THE CITY AND/OR THE COUNTY PUBLIC OR LEGAL
16 DEFENDERS TAKE ON A NEW RESPONSIBILITY IN TERMS OF DEFENDING FOLKS
17 IN – YOU KNOW WHEN THEY HAVE IMMIGRATION ISSUES AND – SO I JUST
18 WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WASN’T THE…
19 MR. PEARD: NO WE ARE IN ANOTHER EFFORT OF MINE I AM
20 CONTINUING TO PUSH ON THE COUNTY FOR THAT BUT NOT YOU. AND ON THAT
21 ISSUE IS [UI] BUT YEAH, MY – ANDY FLAGG AND I HAVE DISAGREEMENT –
22 LEGAL DISAGREEMENT ABOUT THE STATUTORY POWERS UNDER ARS 11
23 CHAPTER 11, TITLE 11 ABOUT WHAT THE POWERS OF THE BOARD OF
00623087.1 22
1 SUPERVISORS ARE IN TERMS OF CREATING A NEW PUBLIC DEFENSE SERVICES
2 SUB OFFICE. I CONTEND THAT BASICALLY HE CONTENDS THAT IN 1965 OR WHAT
3 – AFTER GIDEON WHEN THE STATE LEGISLATURE CODIFIED THE PUBLIC
4 DEFENSE PROGRAM STATEWIDE THEY DID NOT – THEY VERY NARROWLY
5 ITEMIZED THE TYPES OF LEGAL SERVICES THAT COULD BE PROVIDED THROUGH
6 THOSE SERVICES AND SO THEREFORE THERE’S NO STATUTORY AUTHORITY.
7 ANDY AND I AGREE THAT THERE’S NO STATUTORY AUTHORITY UNDER THAT
8 1960’S STATUTE – STATUTORY REGIME THE – WE DISAGREE BECAUSE I SAY THE
9 STATUTORY AUTHORITY COMES UNDER TITLE 11 UNDER THE GENERAL POWERS
10 OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BECAUSE THERE LIKE 50-SOME ODD ITEMIZED
11 THING THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CAN DO AND I CLAIM THAT 4 OR 5 OF
12 THEM PROVIDE AUTHORITY AND HE SAYS NONE OF THEM DO.
13 BONES: I KNOW THIS IS OFF TOPIC BUT COULD YOU GUYS
14 ARGUE THAT IT’S A ELEMENT OF AGGRAVATION FOR CRIMINAL SENSES AND
15 TIED INTO THE CRIMINAL PUBLIC DEFENDERS
16 MR. PEARD: UMM
17 BONES: I’M JUST – I MEAN BECAUSE ...
18 MR. PEARD: BUT WE’RE TRYING TO SEND CIVIL
19 IMMIGRATION ATTORNEYS INTO ACROSS THE STREET HERE TO IMMIGRATION –
20 BONES: NO I KNOW BUT I MEAN WELL AT LEAST THAT IT
21 GETS YOU A START, GET YOU AN IN ON THAT END OF IT SO – ’CAUSE THOSE
22 GUYS ALL – I MEAN IT DOES, AND EVEN – EVEN [OVERLAPPING]
23 MR. RANKIN: I [UI] INTO MY MEMO
00623087.1 23
1 BONES: …EVEN FOR A CIVIL MATTER THOUGH IT’S
2 GONNA BE AN AGGRAVATION IN A FUTURE CRIMINAL OFFENSE. AND SO IN 1326
3 OR IT COULD BE USED FOR AGGRAVATING IN A – IN A STATE OFFENSE.
4 MR. PEARD: OH YOU MEAN IN OTHER WORDS
5 BONES: SO IT’S A START OF A CRIMINAL ACTION FOR THE
6 MOST PART. AT LEAST AN AGGRAVATED FACTOR.
7 MR. PEARD: RIGHT. BUT THAT’S ASSUMING THAT THEY
8 CHARG.. – THAT THERE’S NO –
9 BONES: I MEAN I’VE HAD JUDGES USE IT ALL THE TIME
10 TO SAY HE THIS GUY’S BEEN DEPORTED 15 TIMES.
11 MR. PEARD: ON 1326 CASES?
12 BONES: NO, NO ON LIKE UM
13 MR. PEARD: OH OH …
14 BONES: LIKE ON SHOPLIFTING OR CAR THEFT ONE I HAD
15 A JUDGE GIVE MY GUY A MAX SENTENCE BECAUSE HE HAD ….
16 MR. PEARD: BECAUSE HE HAD THREE PRIOR 1326
17 CONVICTIONS
18 BONES: NO, NO CONVICTIONS
19 MR. PEARD: OH JUST CIVIL REMOVALS?
20 BONES: YEAH.
21 MR. RANKIN: DID ANY OF YOUR CLIENTS DO OKAY?
22 [LAUGHTER]
23 BONES: THAT ONE WAS –
00623087.1 24
1 MR. RANKIN: THEY EITHER GOT DEPORTED OR A MAX
2 SENTENCE
3 [LAUGHING]
4 BONES: .. THE BROTHER – THE BROTHERS OF ALL MY
5 CLIENTS HAVE BEEN DEPORTED….[LAUGHING][UI] -- THERE WERE TWO
6 BROTHERS THAT WERE THE JUDGES AND THE ONE RAN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY
7 OVER THE ONE BROTHER AND HE WAS NOT HAPPY WITH MY GUY COMING BACK
8 I THINK HE HAD 15 DEPORTATIONS.
9 MS. LIVIER: WOW
10 BONES: IT’S JUST LIKE….
11 MR. RANKIN: OKAY MOVING ON
12 BONES: YEAH SORRY I JUST THOUGHT OF IT.
13 MR. PEARD: DO DEFENDING I DON’T HAVE A CLEAR ANSWER
14 FOR YOU I THINK THAT WAS … IT WAS RHETORICAL FLOURISH.
15 BONES: GOT IT.
16 MS. LIVIER RHETORICAL FLOURISH? I LIKE THAT.
17 MR. RANKIN: DEFINITIONS IN A1 ARRESTS WE CARVE OUT THE
18 CITE AND RELEASE FROM THE DEFINITION OF ARREST. AND I THINK I
19 UNDERSTAND WHY ALTHOUGH I THINK THE IMPACT OF THAT WITHIN THE
20 CONTEXT OF THIS PETITION IS THAT TO THE EXTENT THIS INITIATIVE GIVES
21 PROTECTIONS TO DETAINEES – WELL I GUESS THEY’D STILL BE COVERED BY AS
22 A DETAINEE EVEN IF IT’S NOT AN ARREST.
00623087.1 25
1 MR. PEARD: THE WAY I’VE – LET’S SEE HERE, THIS IS
2 INTERNALLY INCONSISTENT WITH EACH OTHER – SO, LOOK IN DEFINITION
3 NUMBER 4 OF DETENTION. “DETENTION MEANS THE TEMPORARY RESTRAINT
4 OF A PERSONS MOVEMENT BY AN OFFICER SHORT OF AN ARREST” AND THEN
5 WE’RE DEFINING ARREST TO NOT INCLUDE 3903 CITE AND RELEASE PEOPLE SO
6 THEREFORE ANYONE WHO’S A 3903 CITE AND RELEASE PERSON IS STILL BY
7 DEFAULT A DETAINEE THEREFORE THEIR PROTECTIONS AFFORDED IN THE REST
8 OF THIS DOCUMENT TO “DETAINEES” ARE STILL THERE.
9 MR. RANKIN: SO WHY ARE YOU CARVING IT OUT? BECAUSE I
10 THINK IT’S OPENING UP TO SAY WELL THAT’S A CONFLICT WITH SATE LAW
11 BECAUSE ARREST 1339.03 IS AN ARREST UNDER STATE LAW.
12 MR. PEARD: IT’S AN ARREST UNDER STATE LAW FOR MOST
13 PURPOSES BUT THERE’S NO AUTHORITY – THERE’S AN AMBIGUITY AT BEST
14 UNDER 1070 WHETHER – WHAT IS AND WHAT IS NOT AN ARREST. THE WORD
15 ARREST IS NOT DEFINED BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE AS IT PERTAINS TO 1070.
16 IT’S DEFINED IN 1-215 I THINK THE GENERAL DEFINITION SECTION OF ARS. I
17 THINK IN THE 1-215, IT DOESN’T -- DOESN’T REFER TO CITE AND RELEASE
18 EITHER WAY IN THE GENERAL DEFINITIONS OF THE STATUTE. IT DEFINE --
19 I AGREE WITH YOU THAT ARREST IS DEFINED ELSEWHERE IN TITLE 13 --
20 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT.
21 MR. PEARD: -- AS -- AS INCLUDING CITE AND RELEASE,
22 BUT IT’S DEFINED IN -- IN -- IN 1070, WHICH IS CODIFIED IN TITLE 11.
23 THE -- SO I WOULD ARGUE THAT THE -- THE LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES
00623087.1 26
1 OPEN TO DEFINE FOR THEMSELVES FOR PURPOSES OF 1070 -- WE’RE NOT --
2 THIS ORDINANCE DOES NOT PURPORT TO DEFINE TO CARVE CITE AND RELEASE
3 UNDER THE DEFINITION OF ARREST FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE ONLY FOR THE
4 -- FOR THE PURPOSE --
5 MR. RANKIN: BUT WHAT DOES THAT GAIN? BECAUSE --
6 MR. PEARD: WELL, THERE’S SOMETHING --
7 MR. RANKIN: -- THE REASONABLE INQUIRY --
8 MR. PEARD: -- TELLS ME THERE’S LIKE $50,000 --
9 MR. RANKIN: -- APPLIES -- WELL, I KNOW THAT --
10 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
11 MR. RANKIN: -- BECAUSE THAT’S WHERE WE WERE
12 STRUGGLING TO FIND A WAY TO NOT DO AN INQUIRY FOR CITE AND RELEASE
13 --
14 BONES: RELEASE, YEAH.
15 MR. RANKIN: SO, I ASSUME THAT THAT WAS THE POINT OF
16 IT, SO -- OKAY.
17 MR. PEARD: I THINK -- YEAH, I MEAN, I’LL GIVE YOU
18 ONE EXAMPLE OF THE $50,000 A YEAR. I WORKED ON A CASE A FEW MONTHS
19 AGO, STATE V. GREEN, WHICH JUST WAS DECIDED BY -- BY JUDGE ECKERSTROM
20 AGAINST US. BUT -- BUT ONE OF THE ISSUES IN THAT CASE, IT -- THEY
21 DIDN’T REACH THE QUESTION, BUT ONE OF THE ISSUES IN THAT CASE, A
22 GENTLEMAN WAS ARRESTED IN FORT LOWELL PARK BY TPD, AND THE TPD OFFICER
23 AT THE MOMENT INTENDED TO MERELY CITE-AND-RELEASE HIM UNDER 3903,
00623087.1 27
1 AND -- BUT THE OFFICER BELIEVED AT THE TIME -- THIS IS BEFORE THE
2 CURRENT VERSION OF 2300 CAME OUT, IT WAS LIKE EARLY 2016 --
3 BONES: YEAH.
4 MR. PEARD: -- THE OFFICER AT THE TIME BELIEVED THAT
5 HE WAS REQUIRED TO RUN AN SB1070 CHECK AND SO HE DELAYED THE -- THE
6 -- THE STOP BY 20 ADDITIONAL MINUTES. AND SO WE -- WE WERE ARGUING
7 THAT -- THAT THAT WAS, YOU KNOW -- THE PROSECUTION SAID, WELL, NO,
8 HE WAS -- THE OFFICER AT THE TIME INTENDED TO CITE AND RELEASE HIM;
9 THAT IS AN ARREST. SO THERE WAS A DEBATE ABOUT -- DEBATE ABOUT THAT.
10 THE POINT BEING THAT THE STATE COURTS HAVEN’T RESOLVED THE QUESTION
11 OF WHAT IS AN ARREST FOR PURPOSES OF --
12 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
13 MR. PEARD: -- YOU KNOW --
14 MR. RANKIN: WELL, THAT WAS A HUGE PART OF OUR
15 ARGUMENT IN THE INITIAL LITIGATION AGAINST 1070 IS THAT THE IMPACT
16 OF 1070 APPLIED TO ALL OF THESE CITE AND RELEASES; AND, AS A RESULT,
17 WAS LIKELY UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE OF THE DELAYS AND THE EXTENSION
18 OF THE DETENTION WHICH WAS ACTUALLY A BIG --
20 MR. RANKIN: -- PART OF -- WHAT’S THE DISTRICT COURT
21 JUDGE’S NAME WHO ISSUED THE INITIAL --
22 MR. PEARD: OH --
23 MR. RANKIN: -- INJUNCTION?
00623087.1 28
1 MR. PEARD: -- BOLTON.
2 MR. RANKIN: AND THEN THE SUPREME COURT -- I MEAN,
3 I GUESS WE CAN BE THANKFUL FOR THE SUPREME COURT’S DECISION AND,
4 ULTIMATELY -- BUT THEY DODGED THEY ISSUE. IT WOULD’VE BEEN BETTER
5 TO HAVE IT THE WAY THAT BOLTON FIGURED IT OUT, BUT NOT EVERYONE --
6 MR. PEARD: AGREED, YEAH. SO THEY’VE LEFT -- AND
7 THAT’S -- I THINK --
8 MR. RANKIN: THAT’S WHAT YOU’RE ADDRESSING.
9 MR. PEARD: -- AND I THINK THAT’S --
10 MR. RANKIN: I GET IT.
11 MR. PEARD: -- AND I THINK THAT’S THE POINT OF THE
12 SUPREME COURT -- THE 2012 SUPREME COURT DECISION WAS THAT IT BASICALLY
13 SAID, LOOK, THE STATE COURTS NEED TO DECIDE SOME OF THESE DETAILS.
14 THEY NEED TO INTERPRET THEIR OWN DAMN STATUTE. WE CAN’T -- WE, AS
15 FEDERAL COURTS SHOULDN’T BE INTERPRETING SOME OF THESE NUANCES WHICH
16 -- WHICH FORECLOSED US FROM -- FROM ATTACKING ANY MORE --
18 MR. PEARD: -- FACIALLY, SO THE -- AND THEN IN THE
19 -- IN THE -- IN THE -- WHAT WAS IT CALLED? VALLE DEL SOL LITIGATION,
20 WHICH IS ONE OF THE ACLU’S CASES, TWICE -- NOT ONCE, BUT TWICE, THE
21 LITIGATION -- THE PLAINTIFFS’ TEAM ASKED JUDGE BOLTON TO CERTIFY TO
22 THE STATE SUPREME COURT SOME OF THESE VERY QUESTIONS AND, TWICE, SHE
23 -- SHE DECLINED.
00623087.1 29
1 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
2 MR. PEARD: -- SO WE’VE NEVER HAD STATE COURT
3 TREATMENT.
4 BONES: YEAH.
5 MR. RANKIN: WELL, BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR.
6 ‘CAUSE THEN SHE’LL CONTACT -- I DON’T THINK I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS --
7 I THINK WE -- IN THE GOS WE ALREADY, YOU KNOW, WE DEFINE -- I THINK,
8 COMPARED THIS DEFINITION THE WAY WE DO, BUT I THINK FUNDAMENTALLY
9 IT’S --
10 MR. PEARD: WHEN I -- WHEN I --
11 MR. RANKIN: -- THE SAME PURPOSE ANYWAY.
12 MR. PEARD: YEAH, I’LL ONLY ADD THAT WHEN I DEFINED
13 THAT TERM I ADDED -- I THINK I DID REFER TO 2300 IN DRAFTING IT. I
14 ADDED THE 1 -- THE 1, 2, 3 JUST -- JUST FOR -- I GUESS JUST FOR
15 PRECISION.
16 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. DETAINEES ENOUGH; THEN
17 DETENTION. MY ONLY QUESTION THERE -- NOT REALLY A QUESTION. I KNOW
18 THE ANSWER IS AT THE END. YOU REFER TO AN OFFENSE OF THE CODE AND
19 I’M -- BY THAT -- INCLUDING THIS “WITHIN CODE,” WOULD MEAN THAT THAT
20 REFERENCE TO “CODE,” MEANS THE TUCSON CODE?
21 MR. PEARD: I REFER --
22 MR. RANKIN: SO AT THE END IT SAYS, YOU KNOW --
23 MR. PEARD: OH.
00623087.1 30
1 MR. RANKIN: -- DETENTION MEANS BLAH, BLAH, BLAH,
2 TRAFFIC OFFENSE PURSUANT TO TITLE 28 OF A.R.S., OR AN OFFENSE OF THE
3 CODE.
4 MR. PEARD: OF THE -- OF CITY OF TUCSON CODE.
5 MR. RANKIN: BY JUST -- BY THIS SECTION BEING WITHIN
6 THE TUCSON CITY CODE, THAT’S GOING TO MEAN OF THE TUCSON CODE, SO
7 WHICH I THINK --
8 MR. PEARD: OH, OH --
9 MR. RANKIN: WHICH I THINK IS PROBABLY YOUR
10 INTENTION. THAT’S PROBABLY THE CODE YOU WERE REFERRING TO, RIGHT?
11 MR. PEARD: CORRECT.
12 MR. RANKIN: OKAY.
13 MR. PEARD: SO MORE PRECISE DRAFTING WOULD’VE BEEN
14 “THIS CODE?”
15 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, OR CAPITALIZE THE “C” --
16 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
17 MR. RANKIN: -- BECAUSE THAT’S DEFINED ELSEWHERE AS
18 THE CITY CODE. BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS -- YOU
19 WEREN’T THINKING OF ANY OTHER CODES.
20 MR. PEARD: NO.
21 MR. RANKIN: SO THAT WILL WORK.
22 MR. PEARD: CORRECT. YEAH, JUST THE TUCSON -- SO I
23 WANTED TO -- I WANTED TO ALLOW -- YEAH, I WANTED TO MAKE IT CLEAR
00623087.1 31
1 THAT DETENTION’S INCLUDED WHEN -- WHEN TPD OFFICERS DETAIN SOMEONE
2 --
3 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT, RIGHT --
4 MR. PEARD: -- FOR A MISDEMEANOR OFFENSE.
5 MR. RANKIN: -- THAT’S CITY CODE, YEAH, FOR
6 PROSTITUTION OR WHATEVER.
7 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
8 MR. RANKIN: OKAY. I LIKE NO. 5, DETERMINE IS THE
9 MEANING GIVEN TO IT IN THE STATUTE WHICH DOESN’T GIVE IT ANY MEANING
10 AS FAR AS I KNOW. (LAUGHING.)
11 MR. PEARD: IT’S TRUE. BUT MIGHT, YOU KNOW, THE
12 STATE COURTS MIGHT GIVE IT MEANING --
13 MR. RANKIN: YEAH --
14 MR. PEARD: -- SOMETIME.
15 MR. RANKIN: -- ITS SUCCESSOR STATUTE; WHICH COULD
16 HAPPEN.
17 MR. PEARD: YEAH, I TRIED TO INCLUDE “OR ITS
18 SUCCESSOR STATUTE.” I DIDN’T -- I WASN’T 100-PERCENT CONSISTENT IN
19 THIS. BUT I WAS TRYING -- I DID TRY TO INCLUDE THE PHRASE --
21 MR. PEARD: -- “OR ITS SUCCESSOR STATUTE.”
22 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, ‘CAUSE IT’S JUST --
23 (UNINTELLIGIBLE; VOICES OVERLAP.)
00623087.1 32
1 MR. PEARD: -- CODIFIED, YEAH.
2 MR. RANKIN: OKAY. FEDERAL OFFICER, WE THINK THIS
3 MIGHT BE A PROBLEM BECAUSE --
4 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
5 MR. RANKIN: -- THIS -- THIS IS NOT LIMITED TO FEDERAL
6 IMMIGRATION OFFICERS --
7 MR. PEARD: TRUE.
8 MR. RANKIN: -- IT’S ALL SWORN FEDERAL LAW
9 ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS. AND, AS WE GO THROUGH THIS, WE’RE GOING TO
10 RUN INTO SECTIONS ABOUT TPD’S COOPERATION OR JOINT OPERATIONS WITH
11 OTHER FEDERAL OFFICERS.
12 MR. PEARD: TRUE.
13 MR. RANKIN: WE DO A LOT OF THOSE, YOU KNOW, U.S.
14 MARSHALS, DEA, ATF, OTHERS, TERRORISM TASK FORCE. AND SO WHEN YOU
15 GET TO THE SECTION SAYS WE’RE NOT GOING TO DEAL WHAT THOSE JOINT
16 OPERATIONS UNLESS THEY SIGN OFF ON AN AGREEMENT THAT SAYS THEIR ARREST
17 AUTHORITY IS LIMITED TO X, Y AND Z, THEY’RE NOT GOING TO SIGN AN
18 AGREEMENT THAT SAYS THAT. AND SO THAT’S GOING TO BE A PROBLEM WITH
19 THAT.
20 BONES: AND I THINK WHEN YOU GET INTO THAT SECTION
21 -- WHEN I READ THE FIRST PART OF IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU DON’T WANT
22 US CROSS-TRAINING LIKE THEY DID -- I DON’T REMEMBER, WAS IT TEXAS
23 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? WHERE THEY WERE CROSS-TRAINING OFFICERS TO
00623087.1 33
1 ACTUALLY -- SO THEY HAD STOP POWER -- LIKE IMMIGRATION DOESN’T HAVE
2 STOP POWER ON, LIKE, CIVIL TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS.
3 MR. PEARD: THEY DO UNDER -- UNDER -- THEY -- YOU’RE
4 CORRECT, THEY NORMALLY DON’T, BUT THEY DO --
5 BONES: YES.
6 MR. PEARD: -- UNDER THIS ONE PROVISION OF A.R.S. --
7 BONES: OKAY. AND SO --
8 MR. PEARD: -- WHICH WE’RE TRYING TO
9 (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
10 BONES: -- SO -- SO THEN WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING IS
11 WE DON’T DO THAT AT OUR -- AT OUR ACADEMY. WE DON’T --
12 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
13 BONES: -- WE DON’T DO THAT. BUT THE PROBLEM --
14 MR. PEARD: THAT’S NOT -- THAT’S NOT SAYING --
15 BONES: -- WHEN -- WHEN YOU LOOK AT A BIGGER PICTURE
16 OF IT, IT’S IN THE ELEMENT OF IT. SO THEN IF WE TRAIN SOMEONE TO
17 GO AND FIRE A FIREARM AND THEN THIS PERSON ENDS UP LATER ON QUITTING
18 OR -- OR GETTING HIS OWN CERTIFICATION SOME OTHER WAY OR THEY GO
19 THROUGH A DIFFERENT AGENCY --
20 MR. RANKIN: DID WE VIOLATE --
21 BONES: -- DID WE VIOLATE IT --
22 MR. RANKIN: -- THIS BY PROVIDING SOME OF THIS
23 TRAINING?
00623087.1 34
1 BONES: -- BECAUSE WE DID PROVIDE SOME OF THIS
2 TRAINING
3 MR. PEARD: ‘CAUSE I THINK THE WAY WE --
4 BONES: -- AND CROSS-TRAINING.
5 MR. PEARD: -- WE CAN GO TO THAT SECTION IN A MOMENT
6 --
7 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
8 MR. PEARD: -- BUT I THINK THE LANGUAGE SAYS
9 SOMETHING LIKE THE EFFECT -- “PROVIDE ANY TRAINING, THE EFFECT OF
10 WHICH IS TO CONFER --”
11 BONES: YEAH.
12 MR. PEARD: -- STATE PEACE OFFICER STATUS.”
13 BONES: YEAH, BUT THE EFFECT MIGHT BE LATER ON.
14 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
15 BONES: SEE WHAT I’M SAYING?
16 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
17 BONES: IF -- ESPECIALLY IF IT’S A GUN TRAINING OR
18 SOMETHING LIKE, WE DON’T DO THAT. WE DON’T -- WE DON’T HAVE -- AND
19 I HAD TO CHECK BECAUSE I THOUGHT -- AND I MAY BE WRONG, I -- I COULD’VE
20 SWORN WE HAD SOMEBODY THERE THAT WAS LIKE A -- LIKE A PARK RANGER,
21 YOU KNOW, LIKE A FEDERAL PARK RANGER WOULD BE ONE, BUT THEY TOLD ME
22 NO.
23 MR. PEARD: SO IT COULD --
00623087.1 35
1 BONES: SO --
2 MR. PEARD: -- SO I’LL GIVE YOU THE BACKGROUND IN
3 CANDOR. ONE -- AND, AGAIN, THIS PARTICULAR BORDER PATROL AGENT MAY
4 HAVE BEEN MISREMEMBERING -- BUT WE -- I DO HAVE IN A RULE 15 INTERVIEW
5 A BORDER PATROL AGENT RECENTLY TESTING UNDER OATH THAT -- THAT HE
6 RECEIVED TRAINING AT SALETC.
7 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, THEY MIGHT HAVE LIKE THEIR
8 FIREARMS LIKE THAT.
9 MR. PEARD: RIGHT. BUT HE --
10 MR. RANKIN: BUT IT’S NOT LIKE --
11 MR. PEARD: RIGHT. BUT HE BELIEVED --
12 MR. RANKIN: -- TITLE 38 OR TITLE -
13 MR. PEARD: -- HE THOUGHT THAT THAT TRAINING -- HE
14 MIGHT’S BEEN MISTAKEN BUT HE THOUGHT THAT THAT TRAINING CONFERRED
15 ON HIM STATE PEACE OFFICER STATUS.
16 BONES: NO, YOU HAVE TO GET THAT THROUGH AZ POST AND
17 THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH OUR WHOLE ACADEMY TO GET THAT DONE.
19 BONES: SO -- AND WE DON’T -- WE DON’T -- I MEAN, WE
20 HAVE IT --
21 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
22 BONES: -- WE HAVEN’T DONE THAT BEFORE AND --
23 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
00623087.1 36
1 BONES: -- I COULDN’T IMAGINE --
2 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
3 BONES: -- THAT WE --
4 MR. PEARD: WELL, I’M --
5 BONES: -- ESPECIALLY AN IMMIGRATION OFFICER, I
6 COULD NOT IMAGINE OUR CHIEF SIGNING OFF AND GIVING AN IMMIGRATION
7 OFFICER --
8 MR. RANKIN: UNLESS MAYBE HE WENT THROUGH FOR PEACE
9 OFFICER CERTIFICATION AND THEN LATER LEFT --
11 MR. RANKIN: -- AND WENT TO THE BORDER --
12 BONES: YEAH, AND HE WOULD STILL BE AZ POST CERTIFIED
13 AND WORKING WITH A FEDERAL AGENCY.
14 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. SO THERE’S THAT ISSUE. BUT THE
15 ONE I’M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE --
16 MR. PEARD: DEA --
17 MR. RANKIN: -- IMPACT --
18 MR. PEARD: -- ATF --
19 MR. RANKIN: -- ON --
20 MR. PEARD: -- YEAH.
21 MR. RANKIN: -- JOINT -- YOU KNOW, M.A.N.T.I.S. OR
22 U.S. MARSHAL OPERATION, WHATEVER, FOR THE PURPOSES OF IMMIGRATION
23 ENFORCEMENT. BUT WE SAY, HEY, BEFORE WE DO THIS COORDINATED DRUG
00623087.1 37
1 OPERATION, DRUG INTERDICTION, WE NEED YOU TO SIGN OFF ON THIS MOU
2 THAT SAYS YOUR ARREST POWERS ARE BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, AND THEY’RE GOING
3 TO BE LIKE --
4 BONES: AND -- AND SOME OF THEM ARE --
5 MR. RANKIN: -- “WE DON’T HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO DO
6 THAT.”
7 BONES: -- IMMIGRATION MEANS -- LIKE THE HUMAN
8 TRAFFICKING -- I KNOWS THERE’S A PROVISION THAT CUTS IT OUT OF THERE,
9 BUT I KNOW THAT LIKE WE DO, DO STUFF WITH HUMAN TRAFFICKING STUFF,
10 TRYING TO -- AND SEX TRAFFICKING.
11 MR. RANKIN: ABSOLUTELY.
12 BONES: AND SO I -- WE HAVE A WHOLE DIVISION AND, OF
13 COURSE, THAT’S KIND OF TIED INTO IMMIGRATION.
15 BONES: -- BECAUSE WE’RE GOING TO HAVE LOTS OF THESE
16 WOMEN THAT ARE -- THAT ARE BROUGHT IN FOR THAT PURPOSE; AND CHILDREN
17 --
19 BONES: -- THAT ARE BROUGHT INTO THAT PURPOSE. SO
20 --
21 MR. PEARD: WELL, WE’LL --
22 MR. RANKIN: AND THERE MAY BE -- YOU KNOW, THE AGENCY
23 MAY BE FINE WITH IT AND SAY, WELL, YEAH, WE DON’T HAVE THESE
00623087.1 38
1 AUTHORITIES ANYWAY, BUT THEY’RE GOING TO HAVE TO RUN IT PAST --
2 UNKNOWN MALE: TO WASHINGTON.
3 MR. RANKIN: -- THEIR ATTORNEYS AND THEY’RE GOING TO
4 RUN IT UP THE CHAIN AND IT’S GOING TO BE -- YEAH, THEY’RE NOT GOING
5 TO SIGN ANYTHING LIKE THAT. SO --
6 UNKNOWN MALE: YEAH.
7 MR. RANKIN: -- I THINK THAT’S AN ISSUE.
8 IMMIGRATION STATUS DEFINITION IS FINE. I WAS CURIOUS WHY
9 YOU’RE -- OH, YOU EXPLAINED IT TO ME.
10 BONES: SO -- SO -- YEAH, ‘CAUSE IT’S ONLY 1320. I
11 -- I DON’T FULLY UNDERSTAND. OKAY. SO, WHEN YOU SAY IT EXCLUDES
12 VIOLATIONS OF 1325 AND 1326 --
13 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
14 MR. RANKIN: -- YOU’RE JUST SAYING THAT THOSE AREN’T
15 CIVIL IMMIGRATION STATUS? I -- I DON’T --
16 MR. PEARD: WELL, I WANTED IT TO BE CLEAR -- I WANTED
17 TO MAKE IT CRYSTAL CLEAR IN THE --
18 BONES: OKAY.
19 MR. PEARD: -- DRAFTING THAT, BECAUSE THERE’S AN --
20 THERE’S AN UNFORTUNATE 1980S CASE THAT STILL IS, FROM WHAT I CAN TELL,
21 GOOD LAW CALLED CITY OF PEORIA -- GONZALES V. CITY OF PEORIA, AND
22 THAT CASE INTERPRETS WARRANTLESS ARREST AUTHORITY UNDER 13-383, AND
23 IT SAYS THE FEDERAL COURT IN THAT 1980S CASE SAID A LOCAL POLICE
00623087.1 39
1 OFFICER IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA DOES NOT HAVE WARRANTLESS ARREST
2 AUTHORITY FOR CIVIL IMMIGRATION VIOLATIONS, BUT IT COULD HAVE -- I
3 THINK IT’S KIND OF DICTA -- BUT IT COULD HAVE CIVIL ARREST AUTHORITY
4 UNDER 13-383 FOR FEDERAL IMMIGRATION CRIMINAL PROVISIONS, SUCH AS
5 1325, 1326.
6 SO I WANTED TO MAKE IT CLEAR IN THE DRAFTING THAT WHEN --
7 ANY TIME IN THIS DOCUMENT WHEN WE REFER TO IMMIGRATION STATUS, WE’RE
8 REFERRING EXCLUSIVELY TO CIVIL -- IT MIGHT’VE BEEN -- IT MIGHT’VE
9 BEEN OBVIOUS TO US WITHOUT THAT EXTRA LANGUAGE, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE
10 IT CRYSTAL CLEAR.
11 BONES: SO I -- I THINK IT -- IT’S ALMOST LIKE IT GIVES
12 THEM MORE AUTHORITY THAN I WAS THINKING. I THOUGHT IT WAS TRYING
13 TO LIMIT IT SOMEHOW. BUT --
14 MR. PEARD: WELL, IT SAYING THAT LIKE --
15 BONES: BECAUSE THERE’S CASE LAW ALREADY SAYING THAT
16 THEY CAN DO THAT.
17 MR. PEARD: YEAH, AND I WANT IT -- AND I KIND OF WANT
18 IT TO -- I MEAN, OTHER -- ELSEWHERE IN THIS DOCUMENT IT SAYS THAT
19 -- IT -- IT SPELLS OUT THAT TPD OFFICERS SHALL NOT ASK ABOUT HOW A
20 PERSON CAME INTO THE COUNTRY AND ACCEPTED IT IN CASES LIKE HUMAN
21 TRAFFICKING; AND THAT’S KIND OF DESIGNED TO GET AT -- TO TRY TO CABIN
22 IN -- AND, AGAIN, I KNOW THAT TPD OFFICERS ARE NOT DOING THIS ON A
23 DAILY BASIS AS IT CURRENTLY IS. BUT I WANTED TO CABIN IN THE
00623087.1 40
1 POSSIBILITY OF THEM ASKING -- OF TRYING TO ESTABLISH PROBABLE CAUSE
2 OF A FEDERAL CRIME -- OF A -- OF A -- OF THIS FEDERAL CRIME, OF --
3 MR. RANKIN: ILLEGAL ENTRY.
4 MR. PEARD: -- OF ILLEGAL ENTRY SO THAT THERE’S --
5 SO THAT THE ONLY INQUIRY -- AND THERE’S NOTHING IN SB1070 THAT --
6 YOU KNOW, THAT TALKS ABOUT OFFICERS HAVING TO HELP FEDERAL OFFICERS
7 --
8 BONES: OKAY.
9 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, AND I UNDERSTAND IT SO IT -- IT
10 GOES HAND-IN-HAND WITH THE LATER PROVISIONS ABOUT NOT ASKING ABOUT
11 HOW MANY TIMES --
13 MR. RANKIN: -- YOU’VE ENTERED AND --
14 MR. PEARD: AND -- AND, BONES, YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF
15 I’M WRONG, BUT I THINK IN -- I THINK MOST OF 1325 AND 1326, THERE’S
16 NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. SO, FOR --
17 BONES: THERE IS ON 1325, RIGHT? THE -- THE --
18 MR. PEARD: OH, THAT’S --
19 BONES: -- THAT’S ILLEGAL REENTRY; I THINK IT’S FIVE
20 YEARS WITHIN POINT OF ENTRY.
21 MR. PEARD: OKAY. BUT IN MANY CIRCUMSTANCES --
22 BONES: SO --
23 MR. PEARD: -- AM I RIGHT THAT A --
00623087.1 41
1 BONES: -- 1326 THERE ISN’T ONE.
2 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
3 BONES: SO, IF YOU’RE HERE YOU’RE STILL VIOLATING IT
4 --
5 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
6 BONES: -- IT’S A CONSTANT VIOLATION, YEAH --
7 MR. PEARD: SO, IF --
8 BONES: -- ‘CAUSE -- ‘CAUSE THAT’S -- THAT’S --
9 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
10 BONES: -- REMAINING --
12 BONES: -- 1326 AND 1325, WHICH I HAVEN’T PRACTICED
13 IT IN A YEAR, BUT 1325 IS JUST, YOU KNOW, COMING ACROSS.
14 MR. RANKIN: THE ACTUAL (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
15 MR. RANKIN: SO, LET’S SAY I GOT A TPD OFFICER WHO
16 PULLS SOMEBODY OVER WHO’S BEEN LIVING IN TUCSON FOR 20 YEARS,
17 UNDOCUMENTED, CROSSED ILLEGALLY 20 YEARS AGO, PULLED OVER FOR A
18 TRAFFIC OFFENSE AND THEN IT COMES OUT IN THE CONVERSATION THAT --
19 THAT THE GENTLEMAN CROSSED ILLEGALLY 20 YEARS AGO, THEN THE OFFICER
20 HAS PROBABLE CAUSE OF A CRIME, THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS OF WHICH
21 HAS NOT EXPIRED.
22 BONES: YEAH, I DON’T KNOW IF THEY EVEN DO THE -- I
23 MEAN, I -- I MEAN, MY ARGUMENT WOULD BE THAT THEY -- I -- I TEACH
00623087.1 42
1 MY GUYS THAT THEY DON’T. BECAUSE IN A SITUATION LIKE THAT -- BECAUSE
2 IT’S SO COMPLEX YOU DON’T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE PERSON’S STATUS IS
3 AT THAT POINT.
5 BONES: SO YOU -- YOU --
7 BONES: -- HAVE -- HAVE TO KNOW THAT A SPECIFIC CRIME
8 OCCURRED AND THAT THIS PERSON --
10 BONES: -- DID IT AND YOU DON’T KNOW THAT BECAUSE YOU
11 CAN’T --
13 BONES: -- ESTABLISH THEIR STATUS.
14 MR. RANKIN: MAYBE THEY GOT A VISA. SO --
15 BONES: YEAH, EXACTLY. AND SO EVEN THEN THEY MAY BE
16 A DERIVATIVE CITIZEN OR THAT -- THAT -- THAT, FOR SOME REASON, IT
17 WASN’T A VIOLATION WHEN THEY ENTERED AT THE TIME THAT THEY DID --
19 BONES: -- YOU KNOW, OR THEIR REMAINING --
20 MR. RANKIN: OR THEIR REMAINING --
21 BONES: -- IS NOT A CRIME. SO -- AND -- YOU KNOW --
22 AND PEOPLE DON’T -- AND I ALWAYS USED TO ARGUE THAT CLIENTS DON’T
23 UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR STATUS IS. SO THEY MAY TELL YOU SOMETHING BUT
00623087.1 43
1 YOU CAN’T ALWAYS RELY ON IT. YOU KIND OF HAVE TO HAVE PAPERWORK TO
2 BACK UP.
3 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
4 BONES: SO --
5 MR. PEARD: YEAH. OKAY.
6 BONES: -- YOU KNOW, I -- I -- THAT’S -- WE -- YOU
7 KNOW, OBVIOUSLY -- AS HARD AS WE CAN TO PUSH ‘EM AWAY FROM -- FROM
8 LOOKING IN THIS AREA. SO -- BETWEEN US AND PLEASE DON’T TELL
9 IMMIGRATION BECAUSE -- (LAUGHTER) -- THEY’LL START -- THEY’LL START
10 FILING PAPERWORK ON US AND PUBLIC RECORDS STUFF.
11 MR. PEARD: UH-HUH.
12 MR. RANKIN: THE REST OF THE DEFINITIONS I DON’T
13 THINK I HAVE ANY -- YOU KNOW, I NOTICE THAT YOU INCLUDED THE OFFICERS
14 BEING OFFICERS WHILE THEY’RE ON SPECIAL OFFICERS, WHICH THEY ARE.
15 MR. PEARD: MM-HMM. I THINK -- I THINK NO. 10, I DREW
16 SOME OF THAT 1, 2, 3 LANGUAGE FROM THE CITY -- FROM THE EXISTING CITY
17 CODE.
18 MR. RANKIN: YEP.
19 MR. PEARD: MM-HMM.
20 MR. RANKIN: AND YOU DEFINE SCHOOL.
21 SO, IN 1782, I THINK THAT’S VERY -- A IS COMPARABLE TO OUR
22 GO, ALTHOUGH IT ADDS IN THE -- SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS FROM --
23 MR. PEARD: A COUPLE EXTRA SENTENCES.
00623087.1 44
1 MR. RANKIN: -- CHAPTER 17 --
2 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
3 MR. RANKIN: -- THE OTHER STATUSES.
4 B, WE -- WE SAY THAT, TOO.
5 C IS ONE OF MY FAVORITE PROVISIONS IS THE WINDOW TINT.
6 MR. PEARD: I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE SECTION I THOUGHT
7 YOU WERE GOING TO ASK ME WHAT THE HELL I WAS THINKING.
8 MR. RANKIN: NO. YEAH, I GET IT. IF THERE’S
9 ANOTHER OFFICER OUT THERE WHO’S JUST USING THE WINDOW TINT AS A WAY
10 OF PULLING PEOPLE OVER TO SEE IF THEY’RE ILLEGAL OR NOT.
11 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
12 MR. RANKIN: SO --
13 FEMALE SPEAKER: WE’RE VERY PROUD OF THAT SECTION,
14 AREN’T WE?
15 MR. PEARD: YEAH. WELL --
16 MR. RANKIN: I WAS JUST WONDERING IS -- IF THAT WAS
17 A --
18 MR. PEARD: THAT MIGHT COME UP TO THE COURTS AT SOME
19 POINT.
20 MR. RANKIN: YEAH. RIGHT. I MEAN, I -- IT’S SORT
21 OF ADDING ANOTHER ELEMENT TO --
22 MR. PEARD: IT’S NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO SB1070; IT’S
23 -- BUT IT IS SORT OF ATMOSPHERICALLY RELATED I GUESS YOU COULD SAY.
00623087.1 45
1 MR. RANKIN: YEAH. WELL, I GUESS IT COULD RAISE AN
2 OBJECTION TO THE PETITION AS BEING -- VIOLATING THE SINGLE SUBJECT
3 RULE, UNRELATEDLY.
4 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
5 MR. RANKIN: I WOULDN’T WORRY ABOUT THAT.
6 MR. PEARD: YEAH. WE --
7 MR. RANKIN: I DON’T KNOW THAT THAT EVEN APPLIES,
8 ACTUALLY, TO A CITY --
9 MR. PEARD: JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, WE WERE GOING TO
10 -- WE WERE GOING TO CREATE UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL AS WELL THROUGH THIS
11 SAME DOCUMENT BUT WE DECIDED AGAINST IT.
12 MR. RANKIN: OKAY. D, D, I THINK IS -- D, I THINK
13 IS IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH 1070 BECAUSE OF THE BREADTH OF IT.
14 MR. PEARD: OKAY. LET ME SEE.
15 MR. RANKIN: “AN OFFICER SHALL NOT PARTICIPATE IN ANY
16 LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY, THE PURPOSE OF WHICH IS TO DETERMINE A
17 PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS.”
18 SO 1070 SAYS, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO DO AN INQUIRY OF --
19 TO DETERMINE A PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS, YOU KNOW, WITH THESE
20 FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, AND THAT’S PART OF THE LAW
21 ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY. SO I DON’T KNOW HOW -- THAT’S JUST SO BROAD
22 --
23 MR. PEARD: BUT I THINK -- BUT I THINK --
00623087.1 46
1 MR. RANKIN: -- THAT I THINK IT -- IT’S --
2 MR. PEARD: WELL, WHAT ABOUT THE CLAUSE, “THE PURPOSE
3 OF WHICH?” SO, FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU ARE CONDUCTING A TRAFFIC STOP
4 AND THAT THAT -- THAT ULTIMATELY RESULTS IN -- IN A PERSON BEING
5 DETERMINED TO BE UNDOCUMENTED? THE PURPOSE OF THAT TRAFFIC STOP WAS
6 NOT TO DETERMINE THEIR IMMIGRATION STATUS; THE PURPOSE WAS TO
7 INVESTIGATE A SPEEDING VIOLATION.
8 MR. RANKIN: SURE. BUT 1070 ITSELF, THAT REASONABLE
9 -- THAT MANDATE, THAT’S STILL PART OF THE LAW TO MAKE A REASONABLE
10 ATTEMPT TO DETERMINE IMMIGRATION STATUS. THE PURPOSE OF THAT IS TO
11 DETERMINE A PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS --
12 MR. PEARD: MM-HMM. OH --
13 MR. RANKIN: -- AND THIS IS SAYING --
14 MR. PEARD: -- MEANING -- MEANING THAT --
15 MR. RANKIN: -- ESSENTIALLY --
17 MR. RANKIN: -- THAT YOU CAN’T DO THAT AS PART OF ANY
18 LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY --
19 MR. PEARD: I SEE WHAT YOU’RE SAYING.
20 MR. RANKIN: -- AND THE OFFICER IS SAYING, “I HAVE
21 A LEGAL OBLIGATION TO DO THAT.”
00623087.1 47
1 MR. PEARD: IT WOULD’VE BEEN BETTER DRAFTING TO HAVE,
2 COMMA, EXCEPT WHERE STATE LAW EXPRESSLY --
3 MR. RANKIN: I THINK THAT WHAT -- WHAT YOU’RE TRYING
4 TO DO IS ALREADY COVERED IN OTHER PROVISIONS THAT SAY YOU CAN’T STOP,
5 YOU CAN’T DETAIN AND YOU CAN’T PROLONG A DETENTION --
7 MR. RANKIN: -- FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING A
8 PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS. BUT THIS SAYS YOU CAN’T DO IT AS PART
9 OF ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY --
10 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
11 MR. RANKIN: -- AND THEY HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO.
12 MR. PEARD: SO IT WOULD’VE BEEN BETTER IF I’D SAID,
13 “OFFICERS SHALL NOT INITIATE A TRAFFIC STOP” OR “SHALL NOT INITIATE
14 A LAW ENFORCEMENT CONTACT” --
15 MR. RANKIN: WHICH I THINK YOU’VE ALREADY GOT, YOU
16 CAN’T DETAIN FOR IT OR -- AND YOU CAN’T --
18 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. AND ACTUALLY -- AND THAT’S HOW
19 OUR POLICY READS. SO THAT’S MY ISSUE ON THAT ONE.
20 E I THINK IS RIGHT.
21 SO, THEN F, AFFIRMATIVELY NOTIFYING. SO I DON’T KNOW THAT
22 THAT’S A LEGAL PROBLEM OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, WHAT’S THE SANCTION IF
23 THE OFFICER FAILS TO DO THAT. THE WAY YOU’VE GOT IT STRUCTURE IS
00623087.1 48
1 THE CIVIL ACTION IN CITY COURT I THINK -- THAT DOESN’T WORK. SO,
2 YOU KNOW -- ‘CAUSE THERE ARE GOING TO BE -- THERE WOULD BE TIMES --
3 THIS IS SOMETHING THAT OFFICERS ARE -- YOU KNOW, THIS IS A NEW
4 AFFIRMATIVE OBLIGATION AND THEY’RE NOT ALWAYS GOING TO REMEMBER TO
5 DO IT, SO IT’LL HAPPEN --
6 MR. PEARD: YOU’RE CONCERNED ABOUT -- YOU’RE NOT
7 CONCERNED ABOUT THE -- THE SUBSTANCE NECESSARILY, BUT THE -- BUT THE
8 -- THIS -- GETTING THEM IN TROUBLE WHEN -- WHEN IT MIGHT’VE BEEN AN
9 INNOCENT OVERSIGHT?
10 MR. RANKIN: WELL, I -- I -- I DON’T KNOW THAT I’M
11 NOT TROUBLED BY THE SUBSTANCE OF IT JUST IN THAT -- I DON’T -- I DON’T
12 LIKE TO CREATE NEW AFFIRMATIVE DUTIES FOR OFFICERS IN THE FIELD AND,
13 YOU KNOW, THERE’S ALREADY -- IT’S ALREADY HARD ENOUGH TO KEEP TRACK
14 OF ALL THOSE BASED ON DEVELOPMENTS IN THE CASE LAW OR STATUTORY
15 WITHOUT ADDING ON OUR OWN LAYERS ABOUT -- YOU’VE GOT TO AFFIRMATIVELY
16 NOTIFY -- OKAY, “RIGHT NOW YOU’RE FREE TO GO. I HAVE TO STAY HERE
17 AND I HAVE TO DEAL WITH YOUR CAR AND I HAVE TO DEAL WITH WHATEVER
18 ELSE I’M DEALING WITH AND MY PAPERWORK. BUT YOU’RE FREE TO GO. DO
19 YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?” AND THEN LATER ON, YOU KNOW, THEY’VE GOT TO
20 GET THE -- THE WRITTEN --
21 MR. PEARD: THAT -- THAT -- AND THAT’S IN DIFFERENT
22 CIRCUMSTANCES?
23 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, IT’S A DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCE
00623087.1 49
1 ALTOGETHER. AND, YOU KNOW, I DON’T THINK IT CREATES A CAUSE OF ACTION
2 AGAINST THE OFFIC- -- I -- YOU KNOW, I ALWAYS WORRY ABOUT, LIKE, 1983
3 LIABILITY, ET CETERA. THIS WOULDN’T CREATE THAT --
4 MR. PEARD: THERE’S NO CONSTI- --
5 MR. RANKIN: -- LIKE --
6 MR. PEARD: -- THERE’S NO --
7 MR. RANKIN: -- RIGHT, NO --
8 MR. PEARD: -- STATUTORY VIOLATION.
9 MR. RANKIN: -- CONSTITUTION- -- IT DOESN’T MAKE --
10 MAKE IT AS A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT --
12 MR. RANKIN: -- BUT -- YEAH, I JUST -- I --
13 MR. PEARD: MM-HMM. I CAN SEE THAT. RIGHT.
14 MR. RANKIN: I UNDERSTAND THE POINT OF IT.
15 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
16 MR. RANKIN: -- YOU KNOW, YOU’RE TRYING TO -- PEOPLE
17 -- EVEN IF WE SAY IN OUR GOS, WHICH I THINK WE DO, YOU KNOW, FOLKS
18 ARE FREE TO LEAVE ONCE YOUR -- THE PURPOSE OF YOUR STOP IS DONE --
20 MR. RANKIN: -- AND YOU -- YOU DON’T --
22 MR. RANKIN: -- BUT THEY HAVE NO OBLIGATION TO LET
23 THE PERSON KNOW UNLESS AT THE TIME THEY -- THE PERSON PROBABLY
00623087.1 50
1 FIGURES, WELL, I HAVE TO STAY UNTIL --
2 MR. PEARD: IT’S AN -- IT’S AM AMBIGUOUS SITUATION.
3 MR. RANKIN: -- HE OR SHE TELLS ME I CAN GO --
4 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
5 MR. RANKIN: -- RIGHT?
6 MR. PEARD: AND THAT’S DESIGNED AS YOU CAN PROBABLY
7 IMAGINE --
8 MR. RANKIN: MM-HMM.
9 MR. PEARD: -- ESSENTIALLY TO ALLOW THE DETAINEE THE
10 OPTION TO LEAVE THE SCENE BEFORE BORDER PATROL ARRIVES.
12 BONES: RIGHT. OR EVEN BEFORE THE INQUIRY IS MADE.
13 MR. RANKIN: OKAY. THE CHECKPOINT AUTHORITY -- THE
14 CHECKPOINT PROVISION, I DON’T -- I DON’T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH IT OTHER
15 THAN I DON’T THINK IT’S A SITUATION THAT’S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW.
16 MR. PEARD: SO --
17 MR. RANKIN: I DON’T KNOW IF THIS WAS MEANT TO DEAL
18 WITH LIKE THE --
19 MR. PEARD: AGREED.
20 MR. RANKIN: -- PORTLAND BUS STOP ISSUE AND --
21 MR. PEARD: IT’S MORE DESIGNED TO -- IT’S -- AND I
22 SAY THIS RECOGNIZING THAT TPD -- FIRST OF ALL, THERE ARE NO --
23 CURRENTLY, ARE NOT --
00623087.1 51
1 BONES: WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS.
2 MR. PEARD: -- WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS --
3 BONES: -- YEAH.
4 MR. PEARD: -- BUT I ALSO REALIZE THAT, AS AN ARIZONA
5 POST-CERTIFIED OFFICER, THEY HAVE LAW ENFORCEMENT --
6 BONES: MM-HMM. STATEWIDE.
7 MR. PEARD: -- LAW -- LAW ENFORCEMENT
8 RESPONSIBILITIES STATEWIDE. THIS IS MORE A CONCERN AT THE SHERIFF
9 LEVEL. I REALIZE THAT THIS IS THE CITY CODE WE’RE TALKING ABOUT.
10 IT’S JUST A -- IT’S JUST A DRAFTING PREFERENCE TO SORT OF CLOSE THE
11 -- CLOSE THE LOOP. IT’S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE A CURRENT CONCERN
12 ABOUT. THE REASON -- THE REASON WHY I SPECIFICALLY SAID A
13 “CHECKPOINT AUTHORIZED BY UNITED STATES V. MARTINEZ-FUERTE IS TO --
14 IS TO NOT EFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO DO SOBRIETY CHECKPOINTS SO THIS
15 DOESN’T TOUCH SOBRIETY CHECKPOINT OPERATIONS.
16 BONES: RIGHT.
17 MR. PEARD: I WANTED TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT
18 BECAUSE --
19 BONES: YEAH.
20 MR. PEARD: -- THE SUPREME COURT DOES AUTHORIZE YOU
21 TO DO THAT.
22 BONES: RIGHT.
23 MR. PEARD: -- FOR SOBRIETY.
00623087.1 52
1 WHAT WE’RE SEEING WITH THE SHERIFF, AS YOU MAY HAVE BEEN
2 FOLLOWING THE NEWS --
3 MR. RANKIN: THESE ARE IMMIGRATION CHECKPOINTS.
4 MR. PEARD: EXACTLY, YEAH, MARTINEZ-FUERTE IS
5 SPECIFICALLY --
6 BONES: YEAH.
7 MR. PEARD: -- BORDER PATROL. SO WHAT IS HAPPENING
8 OUT AT -- OUT ON ROUTE 86 TOWARD THREE POINTS RIGHT NOW IS THAT THE
9 SHERIFF AND OTHER CHECKPOINTS -- THERE’S -- THERE’S FIVE -- LET’S
10 SEE, THERE’S -- THERE’S FIVE -- FIVE CHECKPOINTS NOT ON TRIBAL LAND
11 THAT ARE WITHIN PIMA COUNTY. SO THE SHERIFF IS -- HAS BEEN UNDER
12 THE PRACTICE THROUGH STONE GARDEN OF STATIONING HIS DEPUTIES --
13 PARKING THEM AT THE CHECKPOINT AND WATCHING PEOPLE DRIVE THROUGH AND
14 LOOKING FOR STATE AND --
15 BONES: YEAH.
16 MR. PEARD: -- TITLE 28 VIOLATIONS.
17 BONES: BRAKE LIGHTS AND VIOLATIONS, RUNNING PLATES.
18 MR. PEARD: LICENSE VIOLATIONS. I HAVE --
19 MR. RANKIN: WINDOW TINT?
20 MR. PEARD: WINDOW TINT, YES. I’VE ACTUALLY -- I
21 MEAN, I’VE ACTUALLY -- WE’VE ACTUALLY -- YOU KNOW, SOME OF THESE
22 POLICE REPORTS FROM THE SHERIFF AND HAVE SEEN EXAMPLES OF LIKE THE
23 DEPUTY -- BASICALLY, WHAT’LL HAPPEN IS THE BORDER PATROL AGENT WILL
00623087.1 53
1 SAY, YOU KNOW, “U.S. CITIZEN, MA’AM?”
2 THE PERSON WILL DRIVE FORWARD AND THE DEPUTY WILL STANDING
3 -- STANDING RIGHT THERE AND SAY, “HEY, AGENT SMITH, CAN YOU MOTION
4 THIS CAR OVER TO THE SECONDARY LANE BECAUSE I SEE THAT THERE’S A
5 CRACKED WINDSHIELD” --
6 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
7 MR. PEARD: -- YOU KNOW. SO --
8 MR. RANKIN: OKAY. GOT IT. LET’S SEE. 1783 A,
9 IT’S -- IT’S -- IT’S STATED MORE FORCEFULLY THAN IN OUR GO. OUR GO,
10 YOU KNOW, ALREADY SAYS DON’T ASK OF THE -- OF VICTIMS AND WITNESSES
11 OR DURING CONSENSUAL CONTACTS, WHICH I THINK PROBABLY CAPTURES THE
12 SAME THING SO I DON’T KNOW THAT I HAVE ANY PARTICULAR CONCERNS ABOUT
13 A.
14 B -- SO B AND C ARE DIFFERENT HERE. AND, IN B, YOU DO
15 CAPTURE IN THE LAST CLAUSE, “UNLESS INQUIRY IS NECESSARY TO ESTABLISH
16 PROBABLE CAUSE OF A CRIME.”
17 MR. PEARD: YES.
18 MR. RANKIN: SO DON’T INQUIRE ABOUT HOW THEY GOT INTO
19 THE U.S. UNLESS THAT’S PART OF, YOU KNOW, YOUR INVESTIGATION LIKE
20 WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER.
21 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
22 MR. RANKIN: C DOESN’T HAVE THAT EXCEPT IT JUST SAYS
23 --
00623087.1 54
1 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
2 MR. RANKIN: -- “SHALL NOT INQUIRE HOW MANY TIMES A
3 DETAINEE OR ARRESTEE --”
4 MR. PEARD: IT DOESN’T HAVEN’T THE RELEASE VALVE.
5 MR. RANKIN: DOESN’T HAVE THE RELEASE VALVE. AND I
6 THINK THAT’S A PROBLEM. THAT’S BECAUSE --
7 MR. PEARD: CAN YOU THINK OF ANY EXAMPLES WHERE THE
8 NUMBER OF TIMES THE PERSON HAS ENTERED WOULD BE RELEVANT TO
9 ESTABLISHING PROBABLE CAUSE?
10 MR. RANKIN: THEY WANT TO KNOW IF THE PERSON’S A DRUG
11 MULE GOING BACK AND FORTH ACROSS THE BORDER.
12 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
13 BONES: YEAH. OR -- WELL, I GUESS WE WOULDN’T DO
14 THAT -- I GUESS YOU COULD, BUT WE DON’T PROSECUTE THAT HERE, THE
15 COYOTES --
17 BONES: -- THE FENCES. WE DON’T --
18 MR. RANKIN: I -- I’VE NEVER SEEN ‘EM OUT OF -- OUT
19 OF PIMA COUNTY. I HAVE A FEW OUT OF MARICOPA, BUT -- BUT DRUG
20 TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATIONS. SO --
21 MR. PEARD: THERE IS A -- IN THE CONSTRUCTION, THERE
22 IS -- AT THE VERY END IT SAYS, “SHALL NOT BE INTERPRETED TO LIMIT
23 THE ESTABLISHING OF PROBABLE CAUSE OR REASONABLE SUSPICION OF A
00623087.1 55
1 CRIME.” BUT I SEE YOUR -- I SEE YOUR CONCERN WITH LETTER C OF NOT
2 HAVING THAT ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE.
3 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, SINCE B HAD IT AND C DOESN’T --
4 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
5 MR. RANKIN: -- IT APPEARS INTENTIONAL, RIGHT?
7 MR. RANKIN: SO IT’S -- IT’S -- IT’S -- IT’S FAR MORE
8 LIMITING THAN B.
9 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
10 MR. RANKIN: SO, D, CONSENSUAL CONTACT, THAT’S FINE.
11 I MEAN, THAT’S -- THAT’S -- WE ALREADY HAVE THAT.
12 E, SAME THING.
13 F, I THINK IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DIRECTION WE’VE GIVEN
14 AS WELL ABOUT --
16 MR. RANKIN: -- PASSENGERS.
18 MR. RANKIN: OKAY. FOR LOCATIONS IN G. SO DON’T
19 ASK ABOUT IMMIGRATION OR STATUS OF A PERSON, SO IT’S NOT JUST OF A
20 MINOR, BUT IT’S OF A PERSON --
22 MR. RANKIN: -- IF THEY’RE A DETAINEE OR ARRESTEE,
23 BECAUSE YOU’VE ALREADY COVERED NON-DETAINEES AND ARRESTEES AND
00623087.1 56
1 THAT’S IF WE -- SO SCHOOL --
3 MR. RANKIN: SO, SCHOOL, I--
4 MR. PEARD: SO THIS IS SIMILAR TO, BUT IT GOES A STEP
5 BEYOND --
6 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, IT DOES.
7 MR. PEARD: -- WHAT WAS -- WHAT WAS UPHELD UNDER 4.48,
8 PHOENIX --
9 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
11 MR. RANKIN: SO -- YEAH, AND IT’S NOT JUST THE STATUS
12 OF, YOU KNOW, MINORS OR STUDENTS, IT’S ANY PERSON AT THE SCHOOL;
13 ALTHOUGH WE, I THINK, ALREADY SAY IN 2300 THAT WE DON’T CAN’T -- WE
14 DON’T CALL FOR THEM TO RESPOND TO --
15 MR. PEARD: TO THE SCHOOL --
16 MR. RANKIN: -- THE SCHOOL.
17 MR. PEARD: -- RIGHT.
18 MR. RANKIN: -- UNTIL WE CHANGE -- AND I THINK THERE’S
19 THE BACKING OF THE SUPREME COURT CASE OUT OF TEXAS, TOO, IN TERMS
20 OF --
21 MR. PEARD: PLYLER V. DOE?
23 MR. PEARD: SO I THINK THE -- I THINK THE RELEASE
00623087.1 57
1 VALVE, WHICH IS NOT WRITTEN BUT -- WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, SHALL NOT
2 INQUIRE ABOUT THE IMMIGRATION IN THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS: IF -- IF
3 AN OFFICER ARRESTS A PERSON, AN ADULT, LET’S SAY, AT A SCHOOL -- LET’S
4 SAY -- LET’S TAKE A BAD EXAMPLE WHERE IT’S, YOU KNOW, ENDED UP AN
5 ADULT DID SOMETHING TOWARD A CHILD AT A SCHOOL AND THE -- AND THE
6 OFFICER WAS RESPONDING TO THE SCHOOL, ARRESTS THE ADULT, TAKES THE
7 ADULT OFFSITE, THEN THE INQUIRY CAN TAKE PLACE ABOUT IMMIGRATION
8 STATUS.
9 BONES: I -- I WOULD SEE A COURT SMACKING YOU DOWN
10 BECAUSE -- ‘CAUSE THEY PERFECTLY -- THEY PURPOSELY REMOVE THE PERSON
11 TO START ASKING THOSE QUESTIONS. I -- I -- BECAUSE --
12 MR. PEARD: WELL -- WELL, YOU WOULDN’T --
13 BONES: -- (UNINTELLIGIBLE; VOICES OVERLAP) -- MY
14 DEAL WAS THE SAME THING IS JUST HAD THE OFFICER ASK THEM TO --
15 MR. RANKIN: WAIT --
16 BONES: -- TO (UNINTELLIGIBLE; VOICES OVERLAP) --
17 MR. RANKIN: -- I’LL BE CLEAR IS THAT THE REALITY --
18 THE REALITY IS TO JUST -- WHAT THEY WOULD DO --
19 BONES: YEAH.
20 MR. RANKIN: -- AND THAT MIGHT WORK FOR SCHOOL, THAT
21 DOESN’T WORK FOR A HOSPITAL.
22 BONES: HOSPITAL.
23 MR. RANKIN: BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU GOT AN ARRESTEE
00623087.1 58
1 OR DETAINEE WHO IS INJURED IN THE ARREST AND HE’S IN THE HOSPITAL
2 AND --
3 MR. PEARD: OH, OKAY.
4 MR. RANKIN: -- SO NOW THEY ASK --
5 MR. PEARD: LIKE -- LIKE A DUI TYPE -- EXAMPLE OF A
6 DUI PERSON OR SOMETHING --
7 BONES: WE -- WE HAD --
8 MR. PEARD: -- OR A --
9 BONES: -- A GUY THAT WAS --
10 UNKNOWN MALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
11 BONES: -- YEAH, REMEMBER THAT ONE IN PHOENIX?
13 BONES: AND THEN HE -- HE WAS STUCK IN THAT HOSPITAL
14 FOR LIKE MONTHS AND SO WE HAD TROUBLE ‘CAUSE WE HAD TO ROTATE PEOPLE
15 OUT TO WATCH HIM FROM TUCSON UP TO PHOENIX TO GET HIM. HE WAS IN
16 THERE FOR MONTHS ON A -- HE MURDERED SOMEONE IN TUCSON. WE FOUND
17 HIM IN PHOENIX. HE JUMPED OUT THE WINDOW AND BROKE HIS NECK OR
18 SOMETHING.
19 MR. PEARD: BUT THERE -- BUT AT THAT POINT --
20 BONES: SO --
21 MR. PEARD: -- THEY’RE -- OH, I SEE WHAT YOU’RE SAYING
22 ‘CAUSE --
23 BONES: BUT HE’S STILL IN THE HOSPITAL. HE’S STILL
00623087.1 59
1 IN THE HOSPITAL.
3 BONES: SO THEN -- AND -- AND I --
4 MR. RANKIN: WE GET PEOPLE WHO ARE BITTEN BY OUR DOGS
5 WHO ARE -- WHO ARE TAKEN DOWN AND BUSTS THE SHOULDERS OR WHO ARE SHOT
6 --
7 BONES: WELL -- AND WHEN I DID MY RIDE-ALONG, THE ONE
8 THAT MADE ME FREAK OUT IN THE INTERVIEW WHEN I APPLIED HERE, THAT
9 GUY WAS IN THE HOSPITAL FOR MONTHS. THEY FINALLY WENT TO TRIAL ON
10 IT. AND HE TRIED TO COMMIT SUICIDE AFTER TRYING TO KILL HIS WIFE.
11 SO -- AND THAT’S --
12 UNKNOWN MALE: THAT’S A GOOD RESULT FOR YOU.
13 BONES: I WASN’T IN THAT ONE. I WAS -- I WAS A
14 WITNESS ON IT. I WAS A WITNESS.
15 MR. PEARD: WOULD YOU MIND -- WOULD YOU MIND IF WE
16 TAKE A QUICK PAUSE AND I CAN --
17 BONES: YEAH.
18 MR. PEARD: -- TAKE CARE OF THE COFFEE THAT I’VE BEEN
19 DRINKING?
20 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.
21 MR. PEARD: WHICH WAY IS THE RESTROOM?
22 BONES: I THINK IT’S DOWNSTAIRS.
23 MR. PEARD: DO YOU GUYS GET TO ACCOMPANY ME?
00623087.1 60
1 MR. RANKIN: WE’RE CLOSED. I -- I JUST LEARNED THIS
2 MORNING THAT -- YEAH, WE’RE LEAKING --
3 MR. PEARD: OH, REALLY?
4 MR. RANKIN: -- OUR 8TH -- 8TH FLOOR IS --
5 MR. PEARD: IS THAT -- IS THAT BATHROOM EMPLOYED
6 (SIC) BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT?
7 MR. RANKIN: IT JUST -- YEAH, THEY’RE ALL UNDER
8 FURLOUGH.
9 (RECESS.)
10 UNKNOWN FEMALE: THANKS FOR MEETING WITH US.
11 MR. RANKIN: OH, YEAH.
12 UNKNOWN FEMALE: I WASN’T GOING TO COME. BUT I
13 FIGURED I SHOULD -- HE SAID IT WAS GOING TO BE A BIG LEGAL NERD FEST.
14 BUT I THINK --
15 MR. RANKIN: OH, YEAH --
16 UNKNOWN FEMALE: -- IT’S REALLY GOOD FOR ME TO --
17 MR. RANKIN: -- IT ALWAYS IS WHEN BILLY AND I GET
18 TOGETHER.
19 UNKNOWN FEMALE: YEAH, I KNOW. I LOVE LISTENING TO
20 -- TO -- TO YOU GUYS. BUT IT’S VERY HELPFUL FOR ME TO HEAR ALL OF
21 THIS AND --
23 UNKNOWN FEMALE: -- TO GET MORE, YOU KNOW --
00623087.1 61
1 MR. RANKIN: AND I’M TRYING TO --
2 UNKNOWN FEMALE: -- FAMILIAR WITH THIS.
3 MR. RANKIN: -- STAY OUT OF THE POLITICAL --
4 UNKNOWN FEMALE: MM-HMM.
5 MR. RANKIN: -- BUT I -- YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT -- LIKE,
6 THE MAYORAL CANDIDATES ARE, YOU KNOW, ARE WORRIED ABOUT THIS --
7 UNKNOWN FEMALE: RIGHT.
8 MR. RANKIN: -- YOU KNOW. ON THE ONE HAND THEIR BASE
9 IS PROBABLY, “HEY, YOU SUPPORT THIS, RIGHT? YOU’RE FOR SANCTUARY
10 POLICIES?” BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT TO
11 UNDERSTAND THESE BECAUSE THEN THEY COULD BE EXPOSED TO THE CANDIDATE
12 ON THE OTHER SIDE SAYING, “SO YOU SUPPORT A MEASURE THAT GIVES AMNESTY
13 TO A CHILD MOLESTER?” GREAT --
15 MR. RANKIN: -- YOU KNOW?
17 MR. RANKIN: AND THEN THEY’RE -- THEY’RE IN A TOUGH
18 SPOT. SO --
20 MR. RANKIN: -- BUT THEY’RE POLITICIANS THEY CAN
21 FIGURE THAT OUT.
22 UNKNOWN FEMALE: I’M SURE THEY CAN. YEAH, I MEAN,
23 I STUDIED NEUROSCIENCE SO ALL OF THIS LAW IS BRAND NEW TO ME. YEAH,
00623087.1 62
1 THIS IS VERY HELPFUL.
2 BUT, YOU KNOW, SO FAR I’VE MET WITH A FEW AND THEIR CONCERNS
3 SEEM MORE POLITICAL THAN NOT, THUS FAR. YOUR MEMO MIGHT CHANGE A
4 FEW THINGS, BUT --
5 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, I KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF FOLKS
6 WAITING AND GOING TO SAY, “WELL, WHAT IS IT GOING TO SAY? WHAT’S
7 IT GOING TO SAY?”
9 MR. RANKIN: SO, LOOK, I’M GOING TO MEET WITH BILLY
10 BEFORE I SAY ANYTHING BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND IT.
12 MR. PEARD: IT WAS OPEN HERE.
13 MR. RANKIN: IT WAS, HUH?
15 MR. RANKIN: YOU JUST HAD TO USE AN UMBRELLA WHILE
16 YOU SIT DOWN OR --
17 MR. PEARD: THERE’S (UNINTELLIGIBLE) COMING UP RIGHT
18 NOW. AND I WAS LIKE THEY’RE PROBABLY GOING TO YELL AT US ‘CAUSE --
19 “WHY DID YOU GUYS GO IN THERE?” ‘CAUSE THE SIGN’S DOWN.
20 MR. RANKIN: WELL, THE PAINT’S BEEN PEELING OFF THE
21 CEILING IN THERE FOR TWO MONTHS BECAUSE OF THE MOISTURE, ‘CAUSE
22 WHATEVER’S LEAKING --
23 MR. PEARD: IT’S LIKE HOW OLD’S THE -- HOW OLD’S THE
00623087.1 63
1 BUILDING? IS IT THE LEAD PAINT ERA?
2 MR. RANKIN: OH, WELL, WE -- YOU KNOW, WE HAD MICHELLE
3 TRAPPED IN THE ELEVATOR FOR 25 MINUTES THE OTHER DAY.
4 MR. PEARD: NO?
5 UNKNOWN FEMALE: OH, MY GOSH!
6 MR. RANKIN: MICHELLE SAID (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
7 RETURNING SOMETHING.
8 MR. PEARD: WELL, THEY (UNINTELLIGIBLE) BECAUSE
9 THERE’S A BASEMENT AND THEY HAD PROBLEM, RIGHT? AND THEY HAD TO GET
10 --
12 MR. PEARD: -- THE PEOPLE DOWN THERE FOR --
14 MR. PEARD: -- HAZMAT LIKE --
15 MR. RANKIN: BUT THE THING WAS THE ELEVATOR WASN’T
16 JUST --
17 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
18 MR. RANKIN: -- STUCK ON ONE FLOOR --
20 MR. RANKIN: -- IT JUST THE DOOR WOULDN’T OPEN, BUT
21 IT WAS STILL GOING UP --
22 UNKNOWN MALE: OH --
23 MR. RANKIN: -- AND DOWN.
00623087.1 64
1 UNKNOWN MALE: -- MAN, THAT’S --
2 MR. RANKIN: SO SHE WAS GOING UP AND DOWN AND UP AND
3 DOWN FOR 25 --
4 UNKNOWN FEMALE: THAT SOUNDS LIKE --
5 MR. RANKIN: -- MINUTES.
6 UNKNOWN FEMALE: -- A NIGHTMARE.
7 UNKNOWN MALE: DID YOU HAVE TO CALL IN A --
8 MR. RANKIN: SO WE CALLED THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND
9 THEY SAID THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE 30 MINUTES TO GET HERE. SO WHAT
10 WE DID IS ME AND ROY AND CHRIS AND WE -- AND WE’RE -- I HAD HER ON
11 THE PHONE --
13 MR. RANKIN: -- AND THE ELEVATOR WOULD STOP AT THE
14 FLOOR BUT THE DOORS WOULDN’T OPEN. SO WE’RE ABLE TO GET IT TO STOP
15 AT THE FLOOR AND THEN WE WERE PULLING THE DOORS OPEN --
17 MR. RANKIN: -- WHILE SHE WAS PRESSING THE DOOR-OPEN
18 BUTTON AND IT’S -- YOU KNOW, IT WOULD GO OPEN A LITTLE BIT AND THEN
19 CLOSE, GO OPEN A LITTLE BIT AND THEN -- BUT, FINALLY, ONE TIME WE
20 GOT IT TO STOP AND WE GOT IT OPEN AND IT OPENED PRETTY MUCH ALL THE
21 WAY AND SHE’S LIKE -- SHE’S LIKE, YES, JUMP.
22 MR. PEARD: WOW!
23 UNKNOWN MALE: SHE JUMPED OUT.
00623087.1 65
1 MR. PEARD: HOW IS THIS BUILDING; IS IT LIKE 1950S?
2 MR. RANKIN: ‘SEVENTIES, EARLY -- I THINK 1971,
3 SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT WHATEVER. NO, ‘60S, ‘60S, 1960S BRUTALISM,
4 THAT’S THE -- THE STYLE, BUT --
5 UNKNOWN FEMALE: WELL, THEY DON’T --
6 MR. RANKIN: -- THEY DON’T MAKE THE PARTS FOR THESE
7 ELEVATORS ANYMORE SO THEY HAVE TO GET THEM CUSTOM ORDERED. OKAY.
9 MR. PEARD: SECTION G WE WERE ON, SO --
10 MR. RANKIN: YEP, WE DID THE HOSPITAL. SO WE DID THE
11 HOSPITAL, YOU KNOW, CHURCH AND -- AND -- WELL, STATE OR LOCAL COURT
12 BUILDING IS AN INTERESTING ONE, OBVIOUSLY, AND I DON’T KNOW CURRENTLY
13 WHAT’S HAPPENING IN TERMS OF LIKE AT CITY COURT OR AT JUSTICE COURT,
14 YOU KNOW. ONE OF THE -- I THINK ONE OF THE CONDITIONS THE FEDS WERE
15 TRYING TO ATTACH TO THE GRANTS WAS, YOU KNOW, THAT IMMIGRATION
16 ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS WOULD HAVE ACCESS.
17 BONES: YEAH, THEY DO BENEFIT.
19 MR. PEARD: RIGHT. AND THIS DOESN’T PURPORT TO
20 LIMIT THEIR ACCESS FOR FEDERAL --
21 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. THIS IS JUST ABOUT OUR OWN FOLKS
22 --
23 MR. PEARD: RIGHT. BUT --
00623087.1 66
1 MR. RANKIN: -- BUT -- SO MY FUNDAMENTAL CONCERN JUST
2 WOULD BE THAT THESE ARE EXCEPTIONS THAT ARE NOT INCLUDED IN 1070.
3 SO --
5 MR. RANKIN: -- THE ARGUMENT IS THAT THIS IS A LIMIT
6 --
7 MR. PEARD: IT PUSHES THE ENVELOPE --
8 MR. RANKIN: -- ON 1070 WHICH I THINK ISN’T JUST A
9 1487 ISSUE BUT I THINK IS A 1070 ISSUE; BECAUSE IF I REMEMBER RIGHT,
10 1070 HAS ITS OWN CAUSE -- PRIVATE CAUSE OF ACTION THAT CAN BE BROUGHT
11 AGAINST THE CITY (UNINTELLIGIBLE; VOICES OVERLAP) --
12 MR. PEARD: BY A PRIVATE --
13 MR. RANKIN: -- POLICIES --
14 MR. PEARD: -- TAXPAYER --
15 MR. RANKIN: -- RIGHT.
17 MR. RANKIN: SO -- SO, YEAH, THESE ARE LIMITS THAT
18 AREN’T IN 1070 AND I THINK, ULTIMATELY, WOULD BE SEEN AS CONFLICTING
19 WITH IT OR LIMITING IT AT LEAST.
20 MR. PEARD: RIGHT, UNLESS THE AG WERE TO --
21 BONES: I WONDER IF YOU READ IT REAL --
22 MR. RANKIN: -- UNLESS THE AG WERE TO SAY, OKAY,
23 CHURCH OR HOUSE OF WORSHIP, THEY ARE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS IMPLICATED
00623087.1 67
1 THERE, JUST LIKE THEY ARE AT A SCHOOL, RIGHT?
3 MR. RANKIN: HOSPITAL, MEDICAL CLINIC OR NURSING
4 HOME, YEAH, I DON’T KNOW.
5 COURT BUILDING, THERE’S SOME INTERESTING LAW AROUND COURT
6 BUILDINGS TOO, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE’S ACCESS TO COURT IT’S NOT A
7 CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT, BUT YOU --
8 MR. PEARD: IT’S A DUE PROCESS -- IT’S A --
9 MR. RANKIN: IT’S A DUE PROCESS RIGHT. AND YOU
10 CERTAINLY WANT TO --
11 MR. PEARD: YOU DON’T WANT TO CHILL --
12 MR. RANKIN: -- PEOPLE TO GO TO COURT AND TAKE CARE
13 OF THEIR CASE RATHER THAN GO INTO WARRANT --
15 MR. RANKIN: -- SO I GET IT.
16 MR. PEARD: I ALSO -- I ALSO REALIZE THAT -- YEAH.
17 MR. RANKIN: HOW ABOUT --
18 MR. PEARD: AND I -- AND I SHOULD CLARIFY THAT G AS
19 “AN OFFICER SHALL NOT SEEK TO DETERMINE” SO -- SO OTHER CITY EMPLOYEES
20 LIKE, LET’S SAY, HYPOTHETICALLY, THERE WERE -- I DON’T KNOW, LIKE
21 A CITY -- CITY PROSECUTOR OR A CITY PUBLIC DEFENDER OR --
22 BONES: TRYING TO DO --
23 MR. PEARD: -- A CITY COURT CLERK --
00623087.1 68
1 BONES: TRYING TO DO A U VISA OR SOMETHING?
2 MR. PEARD: YEAH, I CAN’T THINK OF A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE
3 BUT --
4 BONES: I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE ONE IF YOU’D --
5 MR. PEARD: -- BUT --
6 BONES: -- GO IN THERE AND --
7 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
8 MR. RANKIN: WELL -- BUT LATER ON THEY’RE --
9 BONES: -- (UNINTELLIGIBLE; VOICES OVERLAP) --
10 MR. RANKIN: -- THEY’RE PROHIBITED FROM ASKING ABOUT
11 IT UNLESS IT’S PART OF A WORK --
12 MR. PEARD: THAT’S TRUE.
13 MR. RANKIN: -- SO --
14 (UNINTELLIGIBLE; MULTIPLE SPEAKERS.)
15 MR. RANKIN: YOU’RE RIGHT. BUT, YEAH, IT COULD --
16 I THINK IT’S -- IT’S A LIMIT THAT DOESN’T EXIST IN THE STATE LAW SO
17 THAT COULD BE A PROBLEM.
18 MR. PEARD: IT’S TRUE.
19 MR. RANKIN: THE OTHER THINGS IS, IS I DON’T THINK
20 IT HAPPENS BECAUSE THERE -- THEY WOULD ONLY BE MAKING AN IMMIGRATION
21 STATUS IN THE CONTEXT OF A DETENTION OR ARREST ANYWAY AND THEY’RE
22 NOT MAKING A DETENTION OR ARREST TYPICALLY IN A CHURCH OR AT -- IN
23 A COURT BUILDING.
00623087.1 69
1 BONES: AND IS A COURT BUILDING DEFINED? BECAUSE I
2 -- THE ONLY IS -- IS --
3 MR. PEARD: NO, IT’S NOT.
4 BONES: -- THERE’S -- THERE’S COURTROOMS AT THE PIMA
5 COUNTY JAIL, SO YOU HAVE A COURT -- YOU HAVE TWO COURTROOMS THERE.
6 MR. PEARD: OH, OKAY.
7 BONES: AND SO YOU HAVE ONE OUT AT SILVERLAKE RIGHT
8 ON THE SIDE WHERE THEY DO IT OVER VIDEO AND THEN THEY ACTUALLY SET
9 UP A --
11 BONES: -- COURTROOM INSIDE THE --
12 MR. PEARD: UH-HUH. IT DOES SAY “BUILDING” --
13 BONES: -- INSIDE THE WHOLE --
14 MR. PEARD: -- “COURT BUILDING.”
15 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, I DON’T THINK IT WOULD BE --
16 BONES: I’M JUST SAYING --
17 MR. RANKIN: -- I DON’T THINK THAT WOULD BE --
18 BONES: -- I DON’T THINK IT WOULD BE EITHER, BUT --
19 MR. RANKIN: -- CONSIDERED A COURT BUILDING.
20 BONES: -- BUT IF YOU DEFINED IT, IT WOULD HELP LIMIT
21 IT --
22 MR. PEARD: THAT’S A GOOD -- YEAH, THAT’S WORTH --
23 YEAH.
00623087.1 70
1 BONES: OR JUST PUT AN EXCLUSION OF IT IN CASE SOMEONE
2 TRIED TO DO SOMETHING WITH IT. I WOULDN’T SEE IT THAT WAY. I JUST
3 -- YOU NEVER KNOW.
4 MR. RANKIN: SO THEN IN H AND I, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE
5 THE SECTIONS THAT MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO EVER DEVELOP REASONABLE
6 SUSPICION THAT SOMEONE IS HERE -- IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT --
7 MR. PEARD: YEP.
8 MR. RANKIN: -- I MEAN, BASICALLY --
9 MR. PEARD: THIS IS -- THIS IS -- I -- I IS -- IN MY
10 VIEW IS PROBABLY THE ONE -- THE SINGLE BIGGEST AREA WHERE THIS GOES
11 BEYOND 2300.
12 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, YEAH.
13 MR. PEARD: AND I CAN GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE IN
14 TERMS OF WHY I THINK WE’RE ON FAIRLY SOLID GROUND. I -- YOU KNOW,
15 SOME ARE STRONGER THAN OTHER ADMITTEDLY, BUT --
16 MR. RANKIN: YEAH. WELL, H AND I WORK TOGETHER,
17 RIGHT? BECAUSE H YOU HAVE TO HAVE AT LEAST TWO REASONS, RIGHT?
18 MR. PEARD: RIGHT, RIGHT.
19 MR. RANKIN: AND SO THEN IF YOU EXCLUDE ALL THE
20 REASONS IN I -- I DON’T KNOW HOW YOU COULD COME UP WITH TWO REASONS.
21 MR. PEARD: WELL LET’S SEE, YOU HAVE A DRIVER, A
22 MOTORIST, WHO PROVIDES A MEXICAN PASSPORT AND ADMITS THEY DON’T HAVE
23 A DRIVER’S LICENSE; THAT’D BE FACTORS ONE. FACTOR TWO WOULD BE THEY
00623087.1 71
1 ACKNOWLEDGE VERBALLY TO THE OFFICER THAT --
2 MR. RANKIN: THEY ADMIT.
3 MR. PEARD: -- THEY’RE UNDOCUMENTED OR THEY -- OR
4 THEY ACKNOWLEDGE -- MAYBE THEY DON’T ACKNOWLEDGE THEY’RE
5 UNDOCUMENTED, BUT THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY RECENTLY TRAVELED FROM
6 MEXICO TO THE UNITED STATES AND THE PASSPORT DOESN’T HAVE ANY PAGES
7 WITH ANY STAMPS IN IT. THERE’S TWO FACTORS.
8 MR. RANKIN: SO HOW WOULD THIS NOT BE A LIMIT ON THE
9 REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO DETERMINE IMMIGRATION STATUS THAT CONFLICTS
10 WITH --
11 MR. PEARD: SO MY POSITION IS --
12 MR. RANKIN: -- 1070?
13 MR. PEARD: -- SO MY POSITION IS THAT, ESSENTIALLY,
14 ALL OF THESE NINE FACTORS LISTED IN I OUGHT TO BE CONSIDERED OFF LIMITS
15 FOR -- UNDER DIFFERENT CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS, MOST NOTABLY EQUAL
16 PROTECTION AND FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION.
17 SO -- I’LL GO THROUGH THESE QUICKLY -- SO -- SO A DETAINEE’S
18 RACE -- I THINK WE AGREE ON THAT, RIGHT, A DETAINEE’S --
19 MR. RANKIN: MM-HM.
20 MR. PEARD: -- RACE IS OFF LIMITS? AND THAT’S --
21 THAT’S ALREADY OFF LIMITS IN 2300.
22 MR. RANKIN: MM-HMM.
23 MR. PEARD: AND I THINK EVEN -- EVEN OUR
00623087.1 72
1 (UNINTELLIGIBLE) YOU KNOW, WOULD PROBABLY GRUDGINGLY ADMIT TO THAT.
2 TWO, A DETAINEE’S MODE OF DRESS. WE -- I CONTEND THAT
3 THAT, IN MOST CIRCUMSTANCES IS A PROXY FOR RACE. I THINK THAT’S --
4 I THINK THAT’S A CODE WORD -- I THINK A DOG WHISTLE FOR A DAY LABORER
5 OR SOMEBODY WHO -- YOU KNOW, I’VE I-213S, THE -- THE FEDERAL BORDER
6 PATROL EQUIVALENT OF A POLICE REPORT THAT HAS SAID, “BASED ON MY LAW
7 ENFORCEMENT EXPERIENCE MODE OF DRESS INDICATED HE WAS UNDOCUMENTED,”
8 WHICH IS TO SAY HE WAS BROWN AND DRESSED --
9 BONES: DRESSED LIKE MY GRANDFATHER, LIKE A --
10 MR. PEARD: -- LIKE A VAGABOND --
11 BONES: -- COWBOY --
12 MR. PEARD: -- OR SOMETHING.
13 BONES: -- LIKE SAY SOMETHING --
14 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
15 BONES: -- ABOUT THE DRESS. I GET IT.
16 MR. PEARD: THERE’S NO STRICT CASE LAW.
17 MR. RANKIN: (UNINTELLIGIBLE; VOICES OVERLAP) --
18 BONES: -- WEARING LIKE A PREACHER, LIKE, YOU KNOW,
19 WHATEVER IT IS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT WHERE IT’S LIKE, OBVIOUSLY --
20 OBVIOUSLY, IT WOULDN’T BE SOMEBODY --
21 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
22 BONES: -- LIKELY -- THE ONE THAT --
23 MR. PEARD: SO --
00623087.1 73
1 BONES: -- THAT YOU’RE --
2 MR. PEARD: RIGHT. SO TWO -- TWO THINGS: I GUESS
3 ONE IS COULD BE (UNINTELLIGIBLE) FOR RACE.
4 NUMBER TWO, TO THE EXTENT THAT THE CLOTHING HAS AN
5 EXPRESSIVE -- IS AN EXPRESSIVE -- HAS SOME KIND OF EXPRESSIVE MESSAGE.
6 IT’S A FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTION. NOW, I DON’T -- I DON’T HAVE
7 SPECIFIC CASE LAW TO POINT TO YOU --
8 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, THAT’S -- THAT’S WHAT I THINK IS
9 MISSING, RIGHT?
10 MR. PEARD: A DETAINEE’S ABILITY TO SPEAK ENGLISH,
11 I DON’T HAVE SOME, IT’S NOT ROBUST, BUT I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF CASE
12 LAW, INCLUDING A KENNEDY CONCURRENCE AND A SUPREME COURT DECISION
13 FROM ABOUT 20 YEARS AGO.
15 MR. PEARD: -- INDICATING THAT -- YEAH, GO AHEAD.
16 BONES: NO, NO, I WAS JUST THINKING OF HIKING BOOTS
17 BECAUSE -- ‘CAUSE ONLY MEXICAN WOULD WEAR ‘EM, BUT THEY’RE NOT POPULAR
18 ANYMORE. BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT’S THE ONLY ONE I CAN THINK OF. IT’S
19 LIKE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAD HIKING BOOTS ON IT’S PRETTY -- THERE’S
20 NOT AMERICAN KIDS RUNNING AROUND THAT ARE -- OR AT LEAST PEOPLE THAT
21 -- THAT ARE HERE IN THE UNITED STATES -- IT’S COMPLETELY CULTURAL
22 LIMITED TO HERE.
00623087.1 74
1 BONES: SORRY.
2 MR. RANKIN: YEAH. NO, I’M FAMILIAR WITH THE ISSUE
3 ON ABILITY TO SPEAK ENGLISH.
4 MR. PEARD: NO. 4 IS A -- IS A -- IS A COROLLARY TO
5 --
6 MR. RANKIN: COROLLARY TO 3.
7 MR. PEARD: -- TO -- TO THAT, TO NO. 3. AGAIN, I
8 DON’T HAVE AS STRONG CASE LAW FOR NO. 4 AS I DO FOR NO. 3, BUT THAT
9 WOULD BE MY ARGUMENT.
10 NO. 5, A DETAINEE’S INABILITY TO PROVIDE A PERMANENT OR
11 LOCAL RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. THAT’S NOT NECESSARILY A CONSTITUTIONAL
12 CONCERN IF THEY’RE USING THAT AS A FACTOR, BUT IT IS LIKE A
13 MCKINNEY-VENTO CONCERN. I MEAN, I THINK -- I THINK INABILITY TO
14 PROVIDE A RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, THAT’S REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT THE
15 PERSON’S HOMELESS, NOT REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT THE PERSON IS
16 UNDOCUMENTED. I DON’T -- I DON’T THINK THE CITY SHOULD BE -- THIS
17 LIST COMES -- AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW FROM AZ POST TRAINING MATERIALS
18 AS -- AS --
19 BONES: YEAH, THE AZ -- WE HAVE THAT LIST THAT YOU
20 CAN CONSIDER.
21 MR. PEARD: THAT YOU CAN CONSIDER
22 BONES: RIGHT.
23 MR. PEARD: -- AND IT WAS IMPORTED INTO 2300 -- I
00623087.1 75
1 THINK -- I THINK IT GOT IMPORTED --
2 BONES: RIGHT.
3 MR. PEARD: -- INTO 2300, BUT THE PROVIDENCE OF THAT
4 -- OF THAT --
5 BONES: IT WAS --
6 MR. PEARD: -- LIST COMES FROM --
7 BONES: -- IT WAS FROM --
8 MR. PEARD: -- 2010 --
9 BONES: -- AZ POST.
10 MR. PEARD: -- YEAH. AND SO MY SUPPOSITION IS THAT
11 THAT LIST SHOULD NOT BE THAT LONG OF WHAT CAN BE CONSIDERED.
12 THE RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS -- AGAIN, I DON’T HAVE CASE LAW,
13 BUT I THINK IT COULD BE A MCKINNEY-VENTO CONCERN. MCKINNEY-VENTO
14 GENERALLY DEALS MOSTLY WITH EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, NOT WITH LAW
15 ENFORCEMENT SERVICES, BUT I THINK -- I THINK THE CITY WOULD BE IN
16 A MUCH BETTER POSITION TO ELIMINATE THAT FROM A LIST OF THINGS THAT
17 COULD BE CONSIDERED.
18 BONES: I KNOW -- I KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN BY SAYING A
19 DETAINEE’S NAME RIGHT. YOU DON’T WANT EVERY -- EVERY LOPEZ, ALL MY
20 COUSINS, PICKED UP IN THERE BUT THEN --
22 BONES: -- THE DETAINEE’S NAME WOULD BE THEIR NAME
23 BECAUSE ‘CAUSE WHO THEY ARE -- WHICH COMES UP -- AND WHEN -- WHEN
00623087.1 76
1 IT --
2 MR. PEARD: WE --
3 BONES: -- GETS CALLED IN IT MAY BE FLAGGED.
4 MR. PEARD: -- WE HAD INTERNAL DISCUSSIONS --
5 BONES: YEAH.
6 MR. PEARD: -- ABOUT THAT, TOO, AND I WOULD’VE
7 PREFERRED NOT TO SAY SURNAME OR -- OR SPANISH-SOUNDED SURNAME --
8 BONES: ALL RIGHT. LIKE THE -- I KNOW THAT’S WHAT
9 YOU MEAN, BUT THE --
10 MR. RANKIN: THE ETHNIC ORIGIN OF THE PERSON’S NAME.
11 MR. PEARD: YEAH, WE WENT AROUND IN CIRCLES IN
12 DRAFTING THIS AND IT -- IT ENDED UP GETTING BOILED DOWN TO THAT, WHICH
13 I RECOGNIZE COULD BE A CONCERN IN TERMS OF --
15 MR. PEARD: -- CAN YOU NOT USE -- CAN YOU NOT --
16 BONES: ‘CAUSE -- ‘CAUSE WHEN I READ IT I KNOW WHAT
17 YOU GUYS MEANT. BUT THEN WHEN I’M READING IT NOW --
18 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
19 BONES: -- LIKE, LOOKING AT IT --
20 MR. PEARD: THE ORIGINAL DRAFT HAD -- I THINK WAS READ
21 TO SAY, “A DETAINEE’S SPANISH-SOUNDING SURNAME,” AND -- AND PEOPLE
22 IN OUR GROUP WERE LIKE, WELL, HOW DO YOU DEFINE WHAT IS SPANISH-
23 SOUNDING AND NOT SPANISH-SOUNDING OR FOREIGN-SOUNDING AND NOT --
00623087.1 77
1 BONES: WELL, YOU COULD SAY --
2 MR. PEARD: -- FOREIGN-SOUNDING?
3 BONES: -- ORIGIN OR --
4 MR. PEARD: ORIGIN, YEAH.
5 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
6 BONES: RIGHT? LIKE CULTURAL ORIGIN OF A PERSON’S
7 NAME.
8 MR. RANKIN: AND -- AND THE -- SO THE WAY THESE READ
9 TOGETHER THE DETAINEE COULD MAKE A FLAT-OUT ADMISSION, “I’M HERE
10 UNLAWFULLY,” AND THAT WOULDN’T BE ENOUGH. SO, LIKE IN OUR GO, WE
11 YOU ALREADY SAY NONE OF THESE FACTORS --
12 MR. PEARD: EXCEPT.
13 MR. RANKIN: -- STANDING ALONE --
14 MR. PEARD: AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
15 MR. RANKIN: -- IS ENOUGH OTHER THAN A DIRECT
16 ADMISSION.
17 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
18 MR. RANKIN: AND HERE THAT WOULDN’T BE ENOUGH UNLESS
19 THERE’S SOMETHING ELSE; THAT DOESN’T INCLUDE ANY OF THESE.
20 MR. PEARD: TRUE.
21 MR. RANKIN: AND I THINK THAT MAKES THOSE A -- I DON’T
22 KNOW HOW TO DEFEND THAT AS A CONSTITUTIONALLY-BASED -- YOU KNOW, VALID
23 LIMITATION ON THE REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO DETERMINE --
00623087.1 78
1 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
2 MR. RANKIN: -- STATUS UNDER 1070. YEAH.
3 BONES: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) THE WAY IT’S WRITTEN.
4 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, I KNEW THAT’S WHAT IT MEANT --
5 BONES: YEAH, ME TOO. BUT THEN I BLEW PAST IT, BUT
6 THEN I SAT THERE --
7 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. IT DOESN’T MEAN --
8 BONES: -- AND RIGHT NOW --
9 MR. RANKIN: -- OH, HEY, LOOK THERE’S A TERRORIST
10 WATCH LIST FOR, YOU KNOW --
11 BONES: OR YOU --
12 MR. PEARD: RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT.
13 MR. RANKIN: -- FOR MIKE RANKIN. BUT YOU CAN’T USE
14 --
15 MR. PEARD: YOU CAN’T USE THAT AS A BASIS --
16 MR. RANKIN: -- THE FACT THAT HIS NAME IS MIKE RANKIN
17 TO DETAIN HIM. (LAUGHTER.)
18 UNKNOWN FEMALE: I REMEMBER THAT DISCUSSION; THAT
19 WAS A LONG DISCUSSION.
20 MR. RANKIN: I BET. OKAY. SO, J, POLICY. OKAY.
21 AND, AGAIN, THIS IS -- TOGETHER WITH K, THIS IS TRYING TO GIVE
22 DEFINITION -- AN OPEN DEFINITION TO THE EXTENSION PRACTICABLE OR
23 HINDERS OR OBSTRUCTS.
00623087.1 79
1 MR. PEARD: OH, I DIDN’T GET TO -- I DIDN’T GET TO
2 FINISH MY LIST OF THE --
3 MR. RANKIN: OH!
4 MR. PEARD: -- THE NUMBERS.
5 MR. RANKIN: OH, OKAY.
6 MR. PEARD: BUT YOU DIDN’T HAVE ANY CONCERNS
7 NECESSARILY --
8 MR. RANKIN: NO --
9 MR. PEARD: -- INDIVIDUALLY; IT’S THE COLLECTIVELY
10 --
11 MR. RANKIN: -- IT’S THE --
12 MR. PEARD: -- EFFECT --
13 MR. RANKIN: -- COLLECTIVE EFFECT.
15 BUT REAL QUICKLY, YEAH, NO. 6, LET’S SEE, NO. 6, 7 -- WELL,
16 7 IS A LITTLE -- 6, 8 -- 6 AND 8 ARE WHAT WE WOULD ARGUE ARE --
17 MR. RANKIN: THAT’S --
18 MR. PEARD: -- FREEDOM -- FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION,
19 LIKE IN THE OLD CASE -- THE OLD CASE OF NAACP --
21 MR. PEARD: -- V. ALABAMA AND THEIR PROGENY. OKAY.
22 ANYWAY --
23 MR. RANKIN: OR EVEN THE -- THE -- SOME OF THE DAY
00623087.1 80
1 LABORER CASES OR EVEN -- YEAH, EVEN THE TREATMENT UNDER 1070 --
2 BONES: I REMEMBER THERE IS A CRIMINAL CASE --
3 MR. RANKIN: -- OF THE --
4 BONES: THERE WAS A CRIMINAL CASE I WON --
5 MR. RANKIN: HEY!
6 BONES: -- WHERE YOU COULD’VE USED AS A MATTER OF
7 PROBABLE CAUSE -- I CAN’T REMEMBER THE CASE LAW --
8 MR. RANKIN: IT’S -- THE STATE’S KEY WITNESS DIE OR
9 SOMETHING?
10 BONES: NO, I ACTUALLY WON A MOTION.
11 (UNINTELLIGIBLE) WHAT HAPPENED, BUT THERE WAS -- THERE WAS A NEW YORK
12 CASE WHERE THE GUY GOT PART OF THE -- THE PROBABLE CAUSE DETERMINATION
13 WAS THAT HE WAS TALKING TO A DRUG DEALER AND IT CAN’T BE USED AS THAT.
15 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
16 BONES: SO --
17 MR. PEARD: YEAH, THERE’S A COUPLE NINTH CIRCUIT
18 CASES I’VE STUMBLED UPON. ANYWAY, OKAY, BUT YOUR -- YOUR POINT IS
19 WELL TAKEN IN TERMS OF THE COLLECTIVE EFFECT IN THE -- IN THE EXAMPLE
20 OF SOMEBODY WHO ADMITS TO IT.
22 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
23 MR. RANKIN: SO, MY ISSUE WITH J IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT
00623087.1 81
1 THAN THE K ISSUE -- IS THAT I DON’T KNOW THAT YOU CAN DEFINE WHAT
2 IS AND IS NOT PRACTICABLE BEYOND SAYING -- WHAT’S PRACTICABLE OR NOT
3 IS BASED ON THE TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES IN TERMS OF -- YOU KNOW,
4 WHAT YOU CALL-- WHAT’S YOUR RESOURCES, YOU KNOW? WHAT CAN YOU DO?
5 WHAT CAN’T YOU DO? AS OPPOSED TO SAYING IT’S JUST A POLICY TO SAY
6 IT’S NOT PRACTICABLE.
7 BONES: YEAH, ‘CAUSE IF YOU’RE IN A BAKER UNIT,
8 RIGHT, WITH TWO OFFICERS IN IT YOU --
9 MR. PEARD: NO (UNINTELLIGIBLE) UNIT?
10 BONES: A BAKER UNIT WOULD BE TWO OFFICERS IN A
11 VEHICLE --
12 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
13 BONES: -- AND THEN THEY WOULD BE PRACTICAL AT THAT
14 POINT WITHOUT ANY KIND OF DELAY.
15 MR. PEARD: TRUE. I THINK IT WAS -- I THINK WHAT J
16 IS TRYING TO GET AT IF YOU’RE AT -- ON THE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY YOU
17 SHOULD TRY TO CONDUCT THE STOP AS -- AS JUDICIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE FOR
18 --
19 BONES: YEAH, AND YOU COULD --
20 MR. PEARD: -- SAFETY REASONS.
21 BONES: -- IT WOULDN’T SLOW IT DOWN ANY IF YOU HAD
22 THE BAKER UNIT BECAUSE THE OTHER PERSON WOULD BE SITTING IN THERE.
23 MR. PEARD: TRUE. OKAY.
00623087.1 82
1 BONES: SO, LIKE, I MEAN, THAT’S A PERFECT EXAMPLE
2 OF WHERE THAT JUST DOESN’T APPLY.
3 MR. PEARD: TRUE. BUT 1070 DOESN’T -- I AGREE THAT
4 IT MIGHT BE --
5 BONES: IT DOESN’T --
6 MR. PEARD: -- IT MIGHT BE --
7 BONES: -- CONFINE IT.
8 MR. PEARD: -- IT MIGHT BE GRATUITOUS SLIGHTLY,
9 SOMEWHAT, BUT I THINK IT -- BUT I THINK IT, IN TERMS OF STRICT CONFLICT
10 WITH STATE LAW, YEAH, FROM THAT LENS, I DON’T THINK IT STRICTLY
11 CONFLICTS WITH STATE LAW BECAUSE STATE LAW DOESN’T TELL CITIES WHAT
12 THEY CAN AND CANNOT FIND PRACTICABLE. BUT I DO AGREE THAT IT -- IT
13 COULD RAISE THE HACKLES OF PEOPLE LIKE FINCHEM.
14 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, AND WHAT I WANT TO DO IS KEEP IN
15 MIND NOT JUST, OKAY, DOES THIS CONFLICT OR NOT IT -- IN THE CONTEXT
16 OF 1487, I WANT TO BE THINKING ABOUT THESE IN THE CONTEXT OF 1070
17 ITSELF AND THE CAUSE OF ACTION THAT IT CREATES --
18 MR. PEARD: AGREED.
19 MR. RANKIN: -- WHERE IT DOESN’T --
20 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
21 MR. RANKIN: -- IT’S NOT LIMITED TO POLICIES THAT
22 CONFLICT WITH IT, IT’S POLICIES THAT -- I THINK THAT LIMIT THE
23 ENFORCEMENT OF THESE PROVISIONS. BUT I’LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK
00623087.1 83
1 AT IT. I HAVEN’T LOOKED AT THAT IN A WHILE.
2 MR. PEARD: YEAH. NOW THERE’S -- THAT PROVISION OF
3 1070'S NEVER BEEN INVOKED YET, BUT IT’S STILL --
5 MR. PEARD: -- BUT IT’S STILL IN THE BOOK. I -- I
6 AGREE --
7 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
8 MR. PEARD: -- WITH YOU.
9 MR. RANKIN: YEAH. K, WE TALKED ABOUT.
10 MR. PEARD: ASIDE FROM MAYBE THE -- THE MESSAGING
11 DIFFICULTY WE MIGHT HAVE DOWN THE ROAD, DO YOU SEE ANY OTHER LEGAL
12 CONCERNS OF K?
13 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, I MEAN IT’S -- I MEAN, IT’S A LIMIT
14 -- WELL, IT SAYS “MAY.”
15 BONES: “MAY” AND THAT’S -- THAT’S UNDERLINED.
16 MR. RANKIN: YOU KNOW -- SEE, J SAYS THE POLICY IS
17 THAT IT IS NOT PRACTICABLE, RIGHT?
19 MR. RANKIN: K DOESN’T SAY -- IT’S THE POLICY THAT
20 IT DOES HINDER AN INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE A DETAINEE’S IMMIGRATION
21 STATUS IN THESE CONTACTS. IT SAYS “MAY.” SO I DON’T KNOW THAT IT
22 ACTUALLY HAS ANY REAL EFFECT BECAUSE AN OFFICER MAY SAY IT’S NOT
23 HINDERING THIS INVESTIGATION IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE. SO, YOU
00623087.1 84
1 KNOW, I DON’T KNOW IF THAT WAS INTENTIONAL TO MAY THIS A “MAY” VERSUS
2 A “DOES.”
3 MY THOUGHT WAS THAT THE IDEA WAS TO DEFINE SITUATIONS WHERE
4 IT -- IT’S DEEMED TO HINDER OR OBSTRUCT SO THAT YOU’RE USING THAT
5 EXCEPTION. AND I THINK IF IT DOES MEAN THAT, THEN IT IS A LIMIT ON
6 -- BECAUSE THESE ARE NOT EXCEPTIONS THAT ARE DEFINED IN THE STATUTE.
7 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
8 MR. RANKIN: WHETHER IT CONFLICTS, I DON’T KNOW, BUT
9 IT DOES LIMIT. AND THEN MY -- AND I DON’T -- I JUST HAVE TROUBLE
10 SEEING WHY WOULD YOU PICK THESE AS THE ONES TO GIVE THE MOST PROTECTION
11 TO (UNINTELLIGIBLE; VOICES OVERLAP).
12 MR. PEARD: THAT’S FAIR. THAT’S FAIR. MAYBE WE
13 SHOULD’VE JUST KEPT THE ONE -- THE ONE --
14 BONES: THE 13-3601 --
16 BONES: -- THE MISDEMEANOR ONE.
17 MR. PEARD: THE -- THAT’S DOMESTIC -- THE 3601 IS THE
18 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ONE?
19 BONES: YEAH, I BELIEVE --
20 MR. RANKIN: YEAH. YEAH, 3601 IS THE SORT OF GENERAL
21 DV THAT -- THE ONES THAT CAN BE CHARGED AS CLASS 1 MISDEMEANORS, AND
22 THEN 3601.02 IS THE AGGRAVATED --
23 BONES: WHICH USUALLY MEANS --
00623087.1 85
1 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
2 BONES: -- THEY HAVE TO HAVE LIKE CHOKING OR A BROKEN
3 ORBITAL BONES OR --
4 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
5 BONES: -- IT’S -- IT’S NOT MULTIPLE BRUISES, IT’S
6 --
7 MR. PEARD: THANK YOU FOR MAKING ME FEEL --
8 BONES: YEAH --
9 MR. PEARD: -- TERRIBLE.
10 BONES: -- I MEAN, WE HAVE ENOUGH TROUBLE GETTING THE
11 COUNTY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ‘EM AS FELONIES, I MEAN, THEY ALL GET WAIVED
12 DOWN --
13 UNKNOWN MALE: YEAH, THEY GET WAIVED DOWN.
14 BONES: -- RIGHT NOW. IT’S HORRIBLE.
15 MR. PEARD: WHAT DO -- WHAT -- OH, THEY GET -- IT’S
16 --
17 BONES: THEY GET WAIVED DOWN FROM A FELONY TO
18 MISDEMEANORS ALL THE TIME.
19 MR. PEARD: REALLY? HMM.
20 BONES: YEAH, YOU CAN TALK TO JENNY STASH. DO YOU
21 KNOW JENNY?
22 MR. PEARD: I DON’T, NO. IN THE (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
23 OFFICE?
00623087.1 86
1 BONES: AT THE -- AT THE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE.
2 MR. RANKIN: NO, IN THE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE.
3 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
4 MR. RANKIN: SHE’S THE MAYOR’S DAUGHTER-IN-LAW.
5 BONES: YEAH, JUST --
6 MR. PEARD: OH, ISAAC’S WIFE?
7 BONES: NATHAN’S WIFE, RIGHT?
8 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. SO, OKAY, I THINK -- WELL, WE’RE
9 GETTING CLOSE. SO, 84 A, SHALL NOT INITIATE BY PHONE. THAT I GET
10 A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT, WHETHER THAT’S A LIMITATION AND VIOLATION
11 OF AUSC 1373 IN TERMS OF SHARING INFORMATION OR --
12 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
13 MR. RANKIN: -- COMMUNICATING. NOW, 1373 IS UP FOR
14 DEBATE ITSELF RIGHT NOW.
15 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
16 MR. RANKIN: WE DON’T KNOW HOW THAT WILL TURN OUT.
17 I THINK THERE’S A CHANCE THAT IT’LL BE DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL --
18 MR. PEARD: I THINK THERE’S A GOOD CHANCE UNDER --
19 UNDER THE -- UNDER --
20 MR. RANKIN: -- EVEN UNDER THE U.S. SUPREME COURT.
21 MR. PEARD: -- UNDER THE MURPHY -- UNDER THE MURPHY
22 REGIME, YEAH.
23 MR. RANKIN: AND MURPHY IS THE -- THE BETTING? IS
00623087.1 87
1 THAT THE --
2 MR. PEARD: YEAH, EXACTLY --
3 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
4 MR. PEARD: -- IT’S COMMANDEERING ON --
5 MR. RANKIN: YEP.
6 MR. PEARD: -- STATE LAW BETTING, YEAH.
7 MR. RANKIN: SO I THINK THAT’S GOT -- YOU KNOW, 1373
8 MAY NOT, AT THE END OF THE DAY, BE A CONCERN ANYMORE.
9 MR. PEARD: YEAH, AND I AGREE THAT 1070'S THE BIGGER
10 ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM.
11 MR. RANKIN: I MEAN, I LIKE THE WAY WE’VE DONE THIS
12 IN OUR GO OR IN OUR PROCEDURES BETTER IN THAT WE DON’T SAY THOU SHALT
13 NOT, RIGHT, COMMUNICATE BY PHONE. WE SAY IN ANY INSTANCE WHERE YOU
14 ARE GOING TO MAKE AN INQUIRY, HERE’S THE WAY YOU’RE GOING TO DO IT
15 AND THEN WE TELL THEM WHICH WAY TO DO IT, WHICH --
16 BONES: NORMALLY IS THROUGH --
18 MR. RANKIN: IT’S NOT A PROHIBITION ON ACTING A
19 CERTAIN WAY, IT’S A DIRECTION ON THESE ARE OUR POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
20 AS TO HOW TO ACCOMPLISH THIS --
22 MR. RANKIN: -- WHICH WAS INTENTIONAL ON THE WAY WE
23 --
00623087.1 88
1 MR. PEARD: AND I DRAFTED IT AS A PROHIBITION SORT
2 OF ASSUMING THAT YOU ALL WOULD FILL IN THE -- AS YOU ALREADY HAVE
3 UNDER 2300 -- TO SAY THIS IS HOW YOU DO IT. YOU DON’T DO IT BY PHONE.
4 YOU DO IT BY CONTACTING THE CENTRAL RECORDS DEPARTMENT I THINK --
5 IS THAT WHAT IT IS? THE RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
6 BONES: USUALLY, YES.
7 MR. RANKIN: AND THEN THE RECORDS DEPARTMENT USES
8 TRACK (PH.) AND LETS (PH.) AND ALL THAT. AND THEN LETS GO TO LAW
9 ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT CENTER (UNINTELLIGIBLE; MULTIPLE SPEAKERS) --
10 MR. PEARD: YEAH, YEAH.
11 BONES: SEND US SMOKES SIGNALS OFF THE ROOF AND --
12 UNKNOWN MALE: WE HAD -- WE HAD ONE INCIDENT THAT
13 DOMINICK FLORES HAD HELPED ME WITH A YEAR AGO WHERE --
15 UNKNOWN MALE: -- WHERE AN OFFICER -- OR SERGEANT
16 ACTUALLY -- HAD USED HIS PERSONAL PHONE AND HE WAS -- AT LEAST I WAS
17 TOLD BY MIKE SILVA AND DOMINICK THAT THE SERGEANT WAS -- HAD A
18 DISCIPLINE ON HIS RECORD FOR IT -- NOT -- NOT BECAUSE THEY FOUND THAT
19 HE MADE THE DETERMINATION WRONG- -- WRONGFULLY, THAT HE -- HE DID
20 PROPERLY DETERMINE THE PERSON WAS LIKELY UNDOCUMENTED AND THAT HE
21 OUGHT TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THAT LEAD OR THAT BELIEF, BUT THAT --
22 BUT THE MANNER IN WHICH HE COMMUNICATED WAS --
00623087.1 89
1 UNKNOWN MALE: -- WAS AGAINST POLICY.
2 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, YEAH. SO, I MEAN, WE ARE HOLDING
3 FOLKS --
4 UNKNOWN MALE: I AGREE.
5 MR. RANKIN: -- TO THE PROCEDURES.
6 UNKNOWN MALE: I AGREE.
7 MR. RANKIN: SO B IS FINE THAT WE DOCUMENT THAT WE
8 NEED TO DOCUMENT.
9 C ALSO IS JUST TO, YOU KNOW, DOCUMENT.
10 AND D IS WHAT WE’RE DOCUMENTING. MY -- I THINK MY ONLY
11 THOUGHT HERE WAS THAT I DON’T KNOW IF ANY OF THESE REQUIREMENTS WOULD
12 ACTUALLY -- COULD ACTUALLY HAVE THE EFFECT OF EXTENDING A DETENTION.
13 MR. PEARD: LETTER D, YOU’RE SAYING?
14 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, I DON’T KNOW THAT THEY DO, IT WAS
15 JUST WHAT I WAS GOING TO BE -- WHAT I WAS THINKING ABOUT.
16 MR. PEARD: AND I THINK THE REASON WHY D SAYS, “THE
17 CITY SHALL DOCUMENT AND NOT AN OFFICER SHALL DOCUMENT,” IS TO ALLOW
18 THE -- THE POSSIBILITY THAT --
19 MR. RANKIN: YOU SUPPLEMENT THE DOCUMENTATION --
20 MR. PEARD: -- THAT IT’S -- IT’S --
21 MR. RANKIN: -- LATER?
22 MR. PEARD: -- IT’S A CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE WHO MIGHT BE
23 DOCUMENTING IT AT SOME FUTURE TIME.
00623087.1 90
1 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. IN TERMS OF WHEN THE --
2 MR. PEARD: OR IT COULD BE CONTEMPORANEOUS --
3 MR. RANKIN: -- WHEN (UNINTELLIGIBLE; VOICES
4 OVERLAP) HAS RESPONDED TO THE INQUIRY OR NOT.
5 MR. PEARD: RIGHT. OR, I MEAN, IT COULD BE
6 CONTEMPORANEOUS BUT IT COULD BE THE OFFICER QUICKLY RADIOING --
7 RADIOING IT IN AND THE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE BACK IN HOME BASE IS --
8 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT --
9 MR. PEARD: -- DOING THE --
10 MR. RANKIN: -- FROM RECORDS WHO’S THE ONE WHO’S
11 ACTUALLY MAKING THE --
12 UNKNOWN MALE: THE INQUIRY.
13 MR. RANKIN: OKAY. I HADN’T CAUGHT THAT IT WAS CITY
14 VERSUS THE OFFICER, SO I DON’T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY ABOUT
15 THAT. ALL RIGHT. SO THE NEW WARNING -- THIS IS THE SAME CONCERN
16 WITH THE OTHER ABOUT IMPOSING AN AFFIRMATIVE OBLIGATION ON OFFICERS
17 WHO, YOU KNOW, ALREADY HAVE A LOT TO TRY AND UNDERSTAND AND FIGURE
18 OUT WHAT THEY’RE SUPPOSED TO DO.
19 BONES: THE OTHER THING -- THE OTHER THING IS IT’S
20 ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE A WARNING IMMIGRATION-WISE; IT’S
21 ALL-ENCOMPASSING.
23 BONES: AND WHEN I READ THIS THING, I WAS ALSO -- THE
00623087.1 91
1 THING THAT MADE ME NERVOUS IS YOU’RE GOING TO GET SOMEONE -- MAKE
2 THEM QUIET -- WHEN THEY HAVE AN ABILITY TO MAKE A CLAIM FOR LIKE
3 AMNESTY. WHAT YOU NEED TO SAY IT -- ON AND OFF AND THEY KNOW I’M
4 HERE UNDOCUMENTED, I CAN’T GET DEPORTED, I’LL BE KILLED IF I GET
5 DEPORTED AND SO --
6 MR. PEARD: OH, YOU MEAN IN TERMS OF ASYLUM.
7 BONES: YEAH. AND SO IN THAT SITUATION.
8 MR. PEARD: WOULD YOU HAVE MANY -- DO YOU KNOW -- I
9 MEAN, DOES THAT HAPPEN WHERE --
10 BONES: I MEAN, WHEN I WAS -- WHEN I --
11 MR. PEARD: -- FOLKS TELL TPD OFFICERS
12 (UNINTELLIGIBLE; VOICES OVERLAP)?
13 BONES: -- AND THAT’S -- ALWAYS WAS A CLAIM, AT LEAST
14 IN DURESS, TOO, ON DEFENSE FOR A 1326 OFFENSE, IF DURESS WAS A DURESS,
15 THAT’S THE ELEMENT THEY’RE GOING TO USE, THAT THEY NEVER SAID IT AND
16 THEN THEY FORMED IT WHEN THEY GOT IN.
17 AND THEN SO -- SO SAY YOU HAVE -- SO THE REASON I GOT NERVOUS
18 WITH THIS -- LIKE -- AND THIS SAYS -- SO THE REASON I GOT NERVOUS
19 WITH THIS IS -- IS -- SO ON THAT 1326 IF YOU GOT DURESS CLAIM, YOU
20 DON’T SAY IT IMMEDIATELY, THAT’S AN ELEMENT THE FEDERAL COURT’S GOING
21 TO LOOK AT TO SEE WHETHER IT’S TRUTHFUL OR NOT. AND SO IF THEY SAY,
22 NO, THEY DIDN’T SAY IT RIGHT AWAY. SO THEN YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO
23 -- SAY IF THIS PERSON
00623087.1 92
1 MR. RANKIN: IF THIS PERSON IS REALLY --
2 BONES: -- LIKE DEATH --
3 MR. RANKIN: -- SAYING DEATH AT HOME
5 MR. RANKIN: -- THEY WOULD’VE SAID THAT RIGHT AWAY
6 --
7 BONES: -- RIGHT AWAY, SO -- SO YOU JUST KIND OF
8 QUIETED THEM UP FROM SAYING SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE A DEFENSE.
9 BUT THE BROADER ONE IS THE -- IS THE PERSON THAT’S HERE AND
10 THEY’RE CLAIMING ASYLUM AND YOU TELL ‘EM THIS AND THEN THEY GET HANDED
11 OVER TO IMMIGRATION AND THEN THEY’RE LIKE, “THAT OFFICER TOLD ME IF
12 I SAID ANYTHING IT’S GOING TO BE -- COULD BE USED AGAINST ME.” AND
13 THEN THEY KEEP THEIR MOUTH SHUT AND THEN THEY GET DEPORTED.
14 AND THEN THEY COME BACK IN AND NOW THEIR ASYLUM CLAIM’S
15 A LITTLE BIT MORE DIFFICULT BECAUSE THEY’VE -- WERE NOT MURDERED WHEN
16 THEY CAME BACK TO THEIR HOME. AND THEY ALWAYS SAY THAT TO US --
17 PROSECUTORS ALWAYS USED TO SAY TO US -- THEY LIKE -- “WELL, THEY WENT
18 HOME AND THEY DIDN’T GET MURDERED SO THEY’RE FINE GOING HOME.”
19 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
20 BONES: AND SO --
21 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
22 BONES: -- NOW YOU’VE KIND OF -- A LOT OF TIMES THE
23 FIRST SHOT AT ASYLUM SEEKERS IS USUALLY YOU DON’T HAVE THAT ELEMENT
00623087.1 93
1 OF -- OF THEY’VE GONE BACK AND THEY’RE --
3 BONES: SO I JUST --
4 MR. PEARD: NO, THAT’S FAIR.
5 BONES: -- I MEAN, IT JUST KIND OF -- IT MAKES ME
6 NERVOUS --
7 MR. PEARD: THAT’S FAIR.
8 BONES: -- AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY JOB, IT’S
9 JUST MY OWN PERSONAL FEARS OF WHAT THE DOWNSTREAM PROBLEM’S GOING
10 TO BE FOR IMMIGRATION PEOPLE. SO, I DON’T KNOW, SOMEONE LIKE MARGO
11 CAN -- CAN --
12 MR. PEARD: YEAH, THAT’S --
13 BONES: -- TELL YOU WHERE (UNINTELLIGIBLE) IN THAT,
14 BUT --
15 MR. PEARD: THAT’S A FAIR --
16 BONES: -- YOU KNOW --
17 MR. PEARD: -- CONCERN. I GUESS I WOULD SAY THAT’S
18 -- EVENTUALLY, THAT PERSON’S GOING TO HAVE AN ATTORNEY IF -- WELL,
19 IF IT’S A CRIMINAL -- IF IT’S A CRIMINAL CASE, THEY’LL HAVE AN
20 ATTORNEY.
21 BONES: YEAH. BUT EVEN IN A CRIMINAL CASE, IT
22 DOESN’T MATTER BECAUSE IT’S -- THE -- THE TIME HAS PASSED WHERE THEY
23 COULD HAVE WENT IN THERE AND SAID I HAVE ABSOLUTE FEAR OR --
00623087.1 94
1 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
2 BONES: -- I WAS FORCED INTO THIS OR WHATEVER ELSE
3 WAS GOING ON.
4 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
5 BONES: SO -- SO --
6 MR. PEARD: TRUE.
7 BONES: -- BECAUSE -- I -- I MEAN, I’VE HAD IT A
8 MILLION TIMES AND THE PEOPLE HAVE TOLD ME, THEY SAID, WELL, I WAS
9 SCARED TO TELL THE OFFICER AND THAT’S WHAT YOU RUN, BUT YOU MAY NOT
10 BE ABLE TO PRESENT YOUR AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE BECAUSE YOU’VE -- GIVE
11 -- YOU DIDN’T GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO -- TO TELL THE OFFICER THAT.
12 AND I UNDERSTAND LIKE IT’S GOING TO BE A SMALLER PORTION
13 -- I WAS MORE WORRIED ABOUT THE BIGGER PORTION OF NOW THEY GET HANDED
14 OVER TO IMMIGRATION, THEY WON’T HAVE AN ATTORNEY AND -- AND THEN THEY
15 -- THEY DON’T KNOW TO TELL ‘EM THAT I -- I WANT AMNESTY BECAUSE OF
16 THE FEAR --
17 MR. RANKIN: ASYLUM.
18 BONES: -- ASYLUM -- SORRY -- BECAUSE OF THE FACT OF
19 -- BECAUSE YOU TOLD THEM TO BE QUIET --
21 BONES: -- FOR THE MOST PART. SO, I MEAN -- I MEAN
22 --
23 MR. PEARD: THAT MIGHT CHILL --
00623087.1 95
1 BONES: -- (UNINTELLIGIBLE; VOICES OVERLAP).
2 MR. PEARD: -- YEAH, IT MIGHT CHILL THEM DOWNSTREAM
3 FROM TALKING TO --
4 BONES: SO --
5 MR. PEARD: YEAH. WELL --
6 BONES: YEAH, THAT’S NOT MY SHOP. I JUST KIND WAS
7 SITTING THERE AND IT MADE ME A LITTLE NERVOUS ‘CAUSE -- ‘CAUSE I ALWAYS
8 --
9 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
10 BONES: -- WOULD TELL THEM, I SAID --
11 MR. RANKIN: NO ONE’S GOING TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR ASYLUM
12 SOON ANYWAY, SO --
13 BONES: YEAH, I -- I -- I KNOW.
14 MR. PEARD: THE OTHER -- BROADLY SPEAKING, SECTION
15 E IS SORT OF LOOSELY MODELED AFTER -- SO THERE ARE A COUPLE OF OTHER
16 EXAMPLES IN OTHER STATES -- IN FACT, CALIFORNIA STATE LAW NOW IMPOSES
17 IT ON ALL LAW ENFORCEMENT -- ALL JAILS I SHOULD -- IN THE JAIL, NOT
18 IN THE STREET, BUT IN THE JAILS. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON IMPOSES
19 IT, WHICH IS SEATTLE; AND CERTAIN JURISDICTIONS IN NEW YORK STATE
20 IMPOSE IT; AGAIN, ALL -- ALL IN THE JAIL CONTEXT. I’VE TRIED TO HAVE
21 NAPIER IMPOSE A POLICY LIKE THIS IN -- IN THE JAIL BUT HE’S DECLINED
22 TO DATE TO DO ANYTHING LIKE THIS.
23 BUT THE -- THE OTHER LOOSE MODEL FOR SECTION E IS THE
00623087.1 96
1 ARNOLD SETTLEMENT, WHICH IS A SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE ACLU AND ARIZONA
2 DPS ABOUT A DECADE OR MORE AGO. AND THEY STILL -- ACCORDING TO DPS
3 OFFICERS I TALKED TO, THEY STILL DO IT PURSUANT TO THE SETTLEMENT
4 SO THEY -- IT’S NOT RELATED TO IMMIGRATION, BUT IT RELATED TO CONSENT
5 TO SEARCH THE CAR ON A TRAFFIC STOP. THEY HAVE -- THEY ACTUALLY HAVE
6 TO CARRY THESE -- THE OFFICERS ACTUALLY HAVE TO CARRY FORMS IN THEIR
7 SQUAD CARS. AND IF THEY -- IF THE OFFICER WANTS TO ASK FOR A VOLUNTARY
8 CONSENT TO SEARCH THE CAR, THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE PERSON SIGN
9 MR. RANKIN: IS THERE A REASON -- WAS THERE A REASON
10 IN CALIFORNIA AND SEATTLE, ET CETERA, WHERE THEY CAME UP WITH THIS
11 -- THIS LANGUAGE OR SIMILAR LANGUAGE THAT THEY CHOSE TO IMPOSE IT
12 AT THE JAIL AS OPPOSED TO IN THE FIELD?
13 MR. PEARD: WELL, THE JAIL CONTEXT IS FOR ICE
14 DETAINERS, SO --
16 MR. PEARD: -- TO BASICALLY HEAD OFF -- SO A LOT OF
17 TIMES -- I’M PROBABY GETTING THE PERCENTAGES WRONG, BUT LET’S SAY
18 50-PER- -- LET’S -- YOU GET BOOKED INTO JAIL, ABOUT 50-PERCENT WHO
19 GET SNARLED UP WITH ICE DETAINERS, ICE LEARNS ABOUT -- ICE WOULD’VE
20 LEARNED ABOUT THEIR EXISTENCE REGARDLESS BY -- BY THE FINGERPRINT,
21 DATABASE SHARING. NOTHING WE CAN DO, RIGHT?
22 THE OTHER 50-PERCENT -- AND, AGAIN, I’M -- I’M BEING
23 LIBERAL WITH PERCENTAGES -- BUT THE OTHER HALF OF THE TIME, IT’S THE
00623087.1 97
1 JAIL STAFF THAT WILL AFFIRMATIVELY COMMUNICATE TO ICE, 1373, THAT
2 THEY THINK THE PERSON THEY HAVE IN JAIL MIGHT BE UNDOCUMENTED AND
3 ICE WOULD -- BY VIRTUE OF THE FINGERPRINTS ALONE WOULD NEVER HAVE
4 HAD REASON TO -- THEY WOULDN’T HAVE -- NEVER WOULD’VE POPPED UP ON
5 THEIR SCENE.
6 SO THAT PROVISION IN THE COUNTY JAIL CONTEXT IS DESIGNED
7 IN THE OTHER JURISDICTIONS TO SORT OF TAMP DOWN THE NUMBER OF TIMES
8 THAT OCCURS; THAT -- THAT OTHER -- THAT OTHER HALF OF THE TIME.
9 BONES: OKAY. SO -- SO, LIKE, IN THE JAIL CONTEXT
10 IT MAKES SENSE FOR ME ‘CAUSE IT’S NOT A DELAY, RIGHT? ‘CAUSE THE
11 GUY’S NOT GOING ANYWHERE. BUT -- BUT IN THE OTHER ONE IT’S AN
12 EXTENSION OF AN DETENTION AT THAT POINT, IN THE FIELD RELEASE PORTION
13 OF IT. SO THAT MAKES ME A LITTLE NERVOUS IN THAT.
14 MR. PEARD: WELL --
15 BONES: IS IT LIKE TO TRY AND HELP THEM OUT OR DETAIN
16 ‘EM BECAUSE WE REQUIRE THEM TO SIGN IT, YOU KNOW.
17 MR. PEARD: IT’S NOT JUST READING IT.
18 BONES: SO INSTEAD OF JUST SAYING THAT THEY HANDED
19 IT TO ‘EM, OKAY, HERE YOU GO, HERE’S YOUR PAPERWORK. GO AHEAD AND
20 GO.
22 BONES: THERE’S NO DETENTION. BUT IF YOU HAVE ‘EM
23 SIGN IT, I MEAN, IT’S DE MINIMIS, BUT -- BUT --
00623087.1 98
1 MR. PEARD: WELL --
2 BONES: -- WELL, I THINK --
3 MR. PEARD: SURE.
4 MR. RANKIN: ANSWERING FOR BILLY --
5 BONES: YEAH.
6 MR. RANKIN: -- THAT THE NET EFFECT OF THIS -- THE
7 OFFICERS KNOW THEY HAVE TO DO THIS. THEY’RE JUST NOT GOING TO
8 QUESTION ABOUT IMMIGRATION STATUS AT ALL.
9 BONES: YEAH. NO, BUT THEY’LL STUMBLE INTO IT. I
10 MEAN --
12 BONES: -- THEY’RE ALREADY NOT ASKING -- FOR US, AT
13 LEAST, THEY’RE NOT ASKING. OTHER DEPARTMENTS MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT
14 PROBLEM, BUT OUR PEOPLE AREN’T ASKING. THEY’RE DOING ALL THIS STUFF.
15 WHEN I READ IT THE RIGHT, LIKE JUST A QUICK READ-THROUGH, I WAS LIKE
16 I DON’T HAVE A BIG PROBLEM WITH WHAT YOU’RE ASKING US TO DO, THE MAIN
17 PART ‘CAUSE WE’RE DOING MOST OF IT, SO IT’S NOT REALLY A CHANGE THAT
18 MUCH FOR US AS -- WHAT OUR PRACTICES IN THE -- IN THE DEPARTMENT.
19 BUT -- BUT, YOU KNOW, THERE IS A SLIGHT --
20 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, AND THEN THERE’S GOING TO BE
21 SITUATIONS WHERE WE’RE -- YOU’RE GOING TO HAVE SOME -- A DETAINEE
22 ADMITS -- MAKES AN ADMISSION, RIGHT?
23 BONES: MM-HMM.
00623087.1 99
1 MR. RANKIN: AND THAT’S THE BASIS FOR, YOU KNOW,
2 SUBSEQUENT ACTIONS BY THE OFFICER AND THAT -- BUT THEN THE DETAINEE’S
3 GOING TO SAY, WELL, THE OFFICER NEVER READ THIS TO ME, RIGHT, BEFORE
4 I ADMITTED. AND OFFICER’S GOING TO SAY, HE ADMITTED. I DIDN’T ASK
5 HIM THE QUESTION.
6 BONES: YEAH.
7 MR. RANKIN: AND, YOU KNOW, YOU’RE GOING TO HAVE --
8 AND SO WHAT -- DOES THAT MAKE IT FROM THAT POINT FORWARD AN UNLAWFUL
9 DETENTION THAT, YOU KNOW --
10 MR. PEARD: YEAH, BUT THIS DOESN’T CREATE ANY RIGHTS
11 --
12 MR. RANKIN: IT’S NOT A --
13 MR. PEARD: -- ANY --
14 MR. RANKIN: -- CONSTITUTIONAL --
15 MR. PEARD: -- CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
16 MR. RANKIN: -- RIGHT; I THINK IT FEELS LIKE IT.
17 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
18 BONES: IS THIS -- AND THEN IT’S AN ADMISSION BY THE
19 PERSON THAT THEY RECEIVED IT IF YOU HAVE ‘EM SIGN IT. I’M TRYING
20 TO FIGURE OUT --
21 MR. PEARD: WELL, IT’S ALWAYS NUMBER TWO --
22 BONES: -- HOW THAT -- I MEAN --
23 MR. PEARD: -- WHEN --
00623087.1 100
1 BONES: -- HOW THAT HURTS THE -- THE DETAINEE LATER
2 ON.
3 MR. PEARD: WELL, IN SOME WAYS E2 IS A PROTECTION FOR
4 BOTH PARTIES, RIGHT? THE OFFICER AND THE DETAINEE.
5 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
6 BONES: NO, I DON’T THINK IT AFFECTS US --
7 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
8 BONES: -- NEGATIVELY THAT BAD. I’M -- I -- I DON’T,
9 YOU KNOW, OTHER THAN SOMEONE MISSING IT AND NOT DOING IT AND THEN
10 --
12 BONES: -- GETTING SANCTIONED.
13 MR. RANKIN: WELL, THAT’S MY THOUGHT.
14 BONES: THAT -- I DON’T --
15 MR. RANKIN: WHAT DOES IT MEAN WHEN THAT HAPPENS?
16 BONES: -- BUT I’M JUST WONDERING -- AND THAT’S YOUR
17 GUYS’ CONCERN IS -- IS, OKAY, NOW YOU’VE ALREADY MADE AN ADMISSION
18 THAT YOU’VE BEEN NOTIFIED OF THIS. SO THEN YOU’RE TRYING TO SAY,
19 WELL, THEY COMPELLING AT IMMIGRATION TO MAKE THESE ADMISSION. WELL,
20 NOW, THEY COULD SAY, WELL --
21 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
22 BONES: -- NO, YOU WERE --
23 MR. PEARD: ALTHOUGH NONE OF THIS IS --
00623087.1 101
1 BONES: -- MIRANDIZED AHEAD OF TIME.
2 MR. PEARD: -- BUT NONE OF THIS IN SECTION E IS GOING
3 TO BE DEFENSE TO IT. I MEAN, IF A PERSON ENDS UP DEPORTATION
4 PROCEEDINGS, THEY’RE IN DEPORT- -- YOU CAN’T -- YOU CAN’T --
5 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, THEY’RE NOT GOING TO CARE ABOUT
6 OUR --
7 MR. PEARD: YOU CAN’T PUT THE GENIE BACK IN THAT
8 BOTTLE.
9 MR. RANKIN: -- OUR WARNING OR NOT.
10 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
11 MR. RANKIN: BUT MY ISSUE’S THE SAME ONE AS BEFORE
12 AS --
13 MR. PEARD: IMPOSING AN OBLIGATION?
14 MR. RANKIN: -- AFFIRMATIVE OBLIGATIONS ON OFFICERS.
15 MR. PEARD: YEAH, I SEE THAT.
16 MR. RANKIN: AND -- AND INCLUDING (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
17 OKAY. 1785, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS SORT OF OUT OF ORDER
18 HERE.
19 MR. PEARD: SURE.
21 MR. PEARD: YEAH, THIS IS --
22 MR. RANKIN: -- ABOUT THE TRAINING, YOU KNOW, WE
23 DON’T CURRENTLY TRAIN FOR THE PURPOSE OF THEM BECOMING --
00623087.1 102
1 BONES: BUT WE DO, DO --
2 MR. RANKIN: -- POST-CERTIFIED --
3 BONES: -- TRAINING WITH THEM LIKE, YOU KNOW,
4 OPERATIONAL-TYPE TRAINING.
6 MR. PEARD: RIGHT. AND -- AND, BONES, YOU DON’T
7 THINK THAT THE -- THAT -- IN SECTION A, THAT THE EFFECT OF WHICH IS
8 TO CONFER OR EXTEND ARIZONA PEACE OFFICER CERTIFICATION, THAT THAT
9 COULD BE CONSTRUED OVERLY -- OVERLY BROADLY?
10 BONES: I JUST COULD SEE IT LATER ON BEING USED TO
11 SAY THAT SOMEONE ELSE -- YOU KNOW, LIKE COMING DOWN THE LINE -- EVEN
12 THOUGH THAT’S NOT OUR INTENT THAT IT COULD BE -- SOME OF THE THINGS
13 WE DO COULD LATER ON BE CONSTRUED AS BEING SOMEONE -- GETTING SOMEONE
14 AZ-POST CERTIFIED.
15 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, I COULD EASILY READ THAT TO SAY,
16 YOU KNOW, WE’RE NOT GOING TO PROVIDE TRAINING, THE RESULT OF WHICH
17 IS THAT BASED ON THAT TRAINING YOU GET YOUR CERTIFICATION RIGHT THEN,
18 RIGHT? BUT I SEE YOUR POINT AS IN --
19 BONES: YEAH.
20 MR. RANKIN: -- IT COULD BE A COMPONENT THAT THEY USE
21 LATER ON TO GET -- IT’D BE KIND OF THE SAME THING.
22 BUT C WAS MY BIG ONE. IT’S ABOUT THE JOINT LAW ENFORCEMENT
23 TASK FORCE OPERATIONS, OTHERS WITH A FEDERAL OFFICERS BECAUSE THAT’S
00623087.1 103
1 ANY FEDERAL OFFICER, UNLESS WE HAVE AN MOU WITH THE U.S.
2 MR. PEARD: OKAY. SO LET’S GO THROUGH 1, 2, 3, 4.
3 OH, SO YOUR CONCERN IS THEY’RE NOT GOING TO SIGN ANYTHING EVEN IF
4 JUST SAYS --
5 BONES: RIGHT, THEY WON’T.
6 MR. PEARD: -- UNICORNS?
7 BONES: YES.
8 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. THEY’RE GOING SAY -- SAY, OH,
9 GREAT, WE WANT TO DO THIS JOINT OPERATION TO, YOU KNOW, DEAL WITH
10 WHATEVER, LEGITIMATE PROBLEM. AND WE SAY THAT’S GREAT. WE NEED AN
11 IGA OR AN MOU, YOU KNOW. AND THEY’RE GOING TO LOOK AT IT AND GO,
12 WAIT, WHAT IS THIS ABOUT WARRANTLESS ARRESTS AND A.R.S. STATUTES AND
13 BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. LET’S RUN IT BY THE DOJ == OR
15 MR. RANKIN: -- OR LET’S RUN IT BY, YOU KNOW, THE U.S.
16 ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, WHATEVER. AND THEY’RE GOING TO SAY WE’RE NOT --
17 WE’RE NOT GOING TO SIGN SOMETHING THAT PROHIBITS --
18 BONES: I KNOW BECAUSE WE WERE JUST TRYING TO GET A
19 TRESPASS LETTER FROM ‘EM BASICALLY SAYING, LIKE, HEY, IF SOMEONE --
20 ‘CAUSE WHEN WE HAD THAT -- THE PROTEST OUTSIDE IMMIGRATION, WE WERE
21 TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, OKAY, HOW DO WE KEEP THE PEACE? WHAT HAPPENS
22 IF SOMEONE GETS ON THE PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, WE NEED A TRESPASS LETTER
23 TO ARREST SOMEBODY THAT WAS UNRULY OR DANGEROUS THAT WENT ONTO THEIR
00623087.1 104
1 PROPERTY. AND WE HAD TO GO TO WASHINGTON, D.C., TO GET IT. AND I
2 DON’T KNOW IF WE EVER GOT IT OR IF IT CAME LATE. BUT WE HAD MONTHS
3 AND MONTHS WORKING ON IT AND THEY WERE GOING BACK AND FORTH AND TRYING
4 --
5 MR. PEARD: OH, MY GOSH!
6 BONES: -- TO SEE WHAT THEY COULD.
7 SO -- SO I’M SAYING THAT THEY WILL SIGN THIS BECAUSE OF
8 JUST -- JUST SOMETHING THAT SIMPLE DID NOT GO THROUGH BECAUSE IT HAS
9 TO GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO WASHINGTON, D.C. SO --
10 UNKNOWN MALE: AND YOU’D HAVE TO -- AND HOW MANY
11 FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY -- HOW MANY FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
12 AGENCIES DOES TPD REGULARLY -- THERE’S PROBABLY SEVEN OR EIGHT
13 DIFFERENT --
14 BONES: THERE’S ATF --
15 UNKNOWN MALE: U.S. MARSHALS.
16 BONES: -- DEA, U.S. MARSHALS, FBI. THE FBI WON --
17 THAT’S HOW WE CRACKED THE -- I DIDN’T EVEN -- I MENTIONED THAT ONE.
18 THAT’S HOW WE CRACKED THE CELIS CASE, THE ONE WITH THE GIRL THAT WAS
19 MURDERED, SHE WAS KIDNAPPED -- BECAUSE HE WOULDN’T -- THEY WOULDN’T
20 -- THEY WOULDN’T TALKED TO US.
21 UNKNOWN MALE: THE COLD -- THE COLD CASE THAT -- THAT
22 --
23 BONES: YEAH. AND SO THEY -- THEY WOULDN’T TALK TO
00623087.1 105
1 US SO WE WORKED WITH THE FBI TO DO OUR INVESTIGATION AND WE’RE FEEDING
2 THEM QUESTIONS AND TELLING ‘EM -- ‘CAUSE WE KNEW EVERYTHING --
3 MR. PEARD: YEAH, YEAH.
4 BONES: -- AND -- AND THEY DIDN’T AND THEY WERE KIND
5 OF COMING IN COLD, BUT THEY WERE BEING OUR (UNINTELLIGIBLE) UP THERE.
6 AND SO -- IN FACT, THEY PULLED A GUY OUT OF STATE CUSTODY AND WALKED
7 HIM THROUGH THE AREA AND SO -- YEAH. SO THAT WOULD -- THAT WOULD
8 BE LIKE ONE OF THE ONES THAT WE COULD DO.
9 MR. PEARD: BUT -- BUT -- LET’S GO BACK TO LETTER C,
10 THOUGH. NO -- SHALL PARTICIPATE IN JOINT LAW ENFORCEMENT TASK FORCE,
11 JOINT ENFORCEMENT OPERATION OR SIMILAR ENDEAVOR. WOULD -- WHAT YOU
12 DESCRIBED WITH THE CELIS CASE BE ANY OF THOSE -- EITHER OF THOSE
13 THINGS? I MEAN --
14 BONES: YEAH.
15 MR. PEARD: -- COMMUNICATING -- COMMUNICATING WITH
16 EACH OTHER IS NOT A FEDERAL AGENCY --
17 BONES: IT WOULD BE A JOINT ENFORCEMENT OPERATION ON
18 THAT ONE.
19 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
20 BONES: -- RIGHT? BECAUSE WE’RE WORKING -- WE’RE
21 TRYING TO DO IT TOGETHER TO GO AHEAD AND GET THIS GUY ARRESTED.
22 MR. RANKIN: AND A LOT OF THE DRUG STUFF IS --
23 BONES: YEAH.
00623087.1 106
1 MR. RANKIN: -- FORMALLY TASK FORCE --
2 MR. PEARD: THE DRUG STUFF FOR SURE --
3 MR. RANKIN: -- OR --
5 MR. RANKIN: -- GUN STUFF.
6 BONES: THE -- THE -- IT WOULD BE JOINT OPERATIONS
7 IN THE HUMAN TRAFFICKING --
8 MR. PEARD: THE CLASSIC -- YEAH, THE CLASSIC DRUGS,
9 GUNS --
10 BONES: -- SO --
11 MR. PEARD: -- AND MONEY.
12 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. YEAH.
13 BONES: SO IT’S JUST -- I MEAN, IT’S --
14 MR. RANKIN: LET ME UNDERSTAND 1, 2 AND 3. WHAT ARE
15 THOSE --
16 MR. PEARD: SURE.
17 MR. RANKIN: -- STATUTES AND WARRANTLESS ARREST
18 ISSUES?
19 MR. PEARD: SO 13- -- SORRY -- 3871 AND 3875,
20 ESSENTIALLY, ARE WAYS IN WHICH FEDERAL OFFICERS CAN EFFECTUATE TITLE
21 28 TRAFFIC STOPS. SO THE -- THE -- I HAVE SOME RESEARCH ON THIS,
22 BUT 13- -- LET’S GO WITH -- START WITH NO. 1, SO 13-584 IS THE CITIZEN’S
23 ARREST -- IS THE STATE LAW THAT --
00623087.1 107
2 MR. PEARD: -- REFERS TO A CITIZEN ARREST.
4 MR. PEARD: THE STATE COURTS HAVE -- HAVE WIDELY SAID
5 THAT FEDERAL PEACE OFFICERS, THEIR ARREST AUTHORITY IN THE STATE OF
6 ARIZONA FOR STATE OFFENSES IS -- IS INTERPRETED BY -- IS ANALYZED
7 UNDER 13-384, NOT UNDER 13-383.
8 MR. RANKIN: OKAY.
9 MR. PEARD: SO, BASICALLY, YOU -- THE THREE OF US --
10 THE FOUR OF US HAVE THE SAME ARREST AUTHORITY AS A BORDER PATROL AGENT
11 --
13 MR. PEARD: -- UNDER -- UNDER STATE LAW.
14 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. THAT’S THAT DUI CASE OFF THE
15 RESERVATION.
16 MR. PEARD: YEAH, YEAH, THAT’S ONE EXAMPLE. AND
17 THERE’S OTHER CASES WHERE THERE’S, YOU KNOW, BORDER PATROL AGENTS
18 PULLS SOMEONE OVER FOR SUSPECTED DUI -- NOW, 13-384 SAYS -- SAYS ANY
19 -- BASICALLY, RECKLESS DRIVING WHICH -- WHICH THE COURTS HAVE
20 INTERPRETED TO MEAN --
21 BONES: BREACH THE PEACE.
22 MR. PEARD: -- DRUNK DRIVING -- OR BREACH THE PEACE,
23 THANK YOU -- IS -- IS FAIR GAME FOR A CITIZEN’S ARREST.
00623087.1 108
1 SO, FOR EXAMPLE, FINE. THEY CAN DO THAT WITHOUT ANY JOINT
2 CERTIFICATION.
3 MR. RANKIN: SURE, SURE.
4 BONES: SO IT’S A FELONY (UNINTELLIGIBLE; VOICES
5 OVERLAP) VIOLENCE --
6 MR. PEARD: BUT -- BUT -- YEAH, BUT NOT -- YOU KNOW,
7 NON-CRIMINAL SPEEDING AND ALL HUNDREDS OF OTHER OFFENSES AND WINDOW
8 TINTING. YOU CAN’T UNDER 384 --
9 MR. RANKIN: OKAY.
10 MR. PEARD: -- ABSENT SOME OTHER PROVISION -- THAT
11 SOME OTHER PROVISION TURNS OUT TO BE 3871 AND 3875 -- 3875 IS A STATUTE
12 DATING BACK TO THE EARLY ‘90S. THE STATE LEGISLATURE CREATED A WAY
13 FOR ANY OF THE 15 COUNTY SHERIFFS TO WAVE THEIR MAGIC WAND AND CONFER
14 WITHOUT TRAINING, WITHOUT AZ POST TRAINING, TO CONFER PEACE OFFICERS
15 STATUS FOR UP TO ONE YEAR AT A TIME.
17 MR. PEARD: SO --
19 MR. PEARD: -- SO WE’RE TRYING TO -- AND THEN WE HAVE
20 RECENTLY EVIDENCE --
21 MR. RANKIN: SO -- SO THE NET EFFECT OF THIS MOU, IF
22 THEY EVER WERE TO SIGN IT, WOULD BE A LIMITATION ON THE FEDERAL
23 OFFICERS AUTHORITY THAT THEY OTHERWISE WOULD HAVE IN THE ABSENCE OF
00623087.1 109
1 THIS AGREEMENT?
2 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
3 MR. RANKIN: OKAY.
4 MR. PEARD: SO -- SO IT WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY -- SO
5 THE EFFECT OF AN MOU WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE AS IF -- AS IF THE STATE
6 LEGISLATURE TOMORROW WERE TO REPEAL 3871 AND 3875.
7 BONES: YEAH, I MEAN, AND THAT’S OKAY.
8 MR. PEARD: LEAVING THEM -- LEAVING FEDERAL OFFICERS
9 THE SAME ARREST AUTHORITY THAT THEY -- THAT THEY HAVE UNDER 38 --
11 MR. PEARD: -- AND 84. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?
12 BONES: YEAH.
13 MR. PEARD: SO -- SO IT’S BASICALLY SAYING IF THERE’S
14 A JOINT -- IF THEY SIGN THE MOU --
15 BONES: YEAH.
16 MR. PEARD: -- AND LET’S SAY THERE’S A JOINT HIDA
17 (PH.), LET’S GET OVER THE --
18 BONES: HIDA.
19 MR. PEARD: -- IF THERE’S A JOINT HIDA OPERATION, THE
20 FEDERAL OFFICER IS TRAILING SOMEONE ON THE ROAD THEY WOULD HAVE TO
21 JOINT THEIR TPD GUY AND SAY, “HEY, CAN YOU PULL THIS PERSON OVER FOR
22 SPEEDING, I DON’T HAVE ANY OTHER --”
23 BONES: AUTHORITY.
00623087.1 110
1 MR. PEARD: “-- PROBABLE CAUSE TO -- OR REASONABLE
2 SUSPICION TO PULL THIS PERSON OVER, BUT I CAN’T PULL HIM OVER FOR
3 SPEEDING, BUT I KNOW HE’S -- HERE HE IS SPEEDING IN FRONT OF ME. CAN
4 YOU GET OVER HERE QUICK AND PULL HIM OVER FOR SPEEDING?”
5 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
6 MR. PEARD: AND THEN FROM THERE WE CAN --
7 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
8 MR. PEARD: -- WORK TOGETHER.
9 MR. RANKIN: YEAH. ALL RIGHT. SO IT’S ACHIEVED BY
10 CONTRACT TO TAKE AWAY THE AUTHORITIES THAT ARE GIVEN UNDER 3871 AND
11 75?
12 MR. PEARD: PRECISELY.
13 BONES: YEAH, THEY WON’T -- ‘CAUSE THEY WON’T SIGN
14 THAT. THERE’S NO WAY WE’LL GETTING THE FBI, THE DEA, AND EVERYONE
15 ELSE TO GO AND SIGN OFF ON IT. I MEAN, THERE’S IMMIGRATION, I GIVE
16 A SHIT ABOUT THAT, IT JUST, YOU KNOW, IT’S -- IT’S --
17 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
18 BONES: -- FOR ME IT’S THOSE OTHER ONES.
19 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
20 BONES: AND, I GUESS, EVEN WITH IMMIGRATION OR EVEN
21 -- I MEAN (UNINTELLIGIBLE) EVEN WITH THEM, YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT --
22 WHEN YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT THE -- THE ALIEN SMUGGLING OF -- OF
23 VULNERABLE --
00623087.1 111
1 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
2 BONES: -- PEOPLE SO YOU’RE GOING AFTER -- NOT --
3 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
4 BONES: -- IMMIGRANTS, BUT COYOTES ARE GOING AFTER
5 PEOPLE THAT ARE SMUGGLING FOR SEX TRAFFICKING PURPOSES, I MEAN, IT’S
6 -- IT’S --
7 MR. RANKIN: SO -- YEAH, AND IF I’M FINCHEM OR
8 SOMETHING, I SAY, “LOOK AT THIS -- WHAT TUCSON’S TRYING TO DO IS SAY
9 WE DON’T LIKE THE AUTHORITY THAT THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS GIVEN TO
10 FEDERAL OFFICERS AND SO TUCSON’S TAKING IT AWAY; THAT IF YOU WANT
11 TO --”
12 MR. PEARD: THAT WOULD BE A FAIR ASSESSMENT IF YOU
13 WANT TO SAY THAT.
14 MR. RANKIN: GREAT. THAT’S WHAT -- ‘CAUSE THAT’S
15 WHAT YOU’RE TRYING TO DO.
16 MR. PEARD: I SHOULD ALSO -- I SHOULD ALSO SAY IN THE
17 HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND THE DRUG -- BIG DRUG ALSO, 13-384 ALSO SAYS
18 ANY FELONIES, RIGHT? SO ANY -- SO --
20 MR. PEARD: -- A CITIZEN’S ARREST INCLUDE PROBABLE
21 CAUSE OF A FELONY. SO FEDERAL OFFICERS CAN CURRENTLY ARREST PEOPLE
22 FOR PROBABLE CAUSE OF A STATE LAW FELONY.
23 BONES: IF -- IF THEY -- AND I DON’T KNOW IF THEY DO
00623087.1 112
1 OR NOT, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. IF WE GET PEOPLE CROSS-REFERENCED,
2 THEY’RE WORKING IT AND THEN THEY NEED TO STOP SOMEONE ON A -- ON IT
3 AND WE GET THEM AUTHORIZED TO DO IT. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? AND WE
4 DON’T HAVE ANOTHER OFFICER ON SCENE TO MAKE THE STOP. I MEAN, THAT’S
5 THE THING THAT MAKES ME NERVOUS IS THAT -- IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE’S
6 CASES THAT ARE IN THE HOPPER OR THAT ARE POTENTIALLY COMING DOWN THE
7 LINE THAT I CAN SEE WHERE IT COULD LIMIT WHAT WE’RE TRYING TO DO THAT
8 HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IMMIGRATION AND SO IT’S SO BROAD AND
9 ALL-ENCOMPASSING BECAUSE IT’S NOT LIMITED TO IMMIGRATION. IT CAUSES
10 A MAJOR PROBLEM AND SAFETY ISSUE, I MEAN, FOR ME.
11 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
12 BONES: IT’S -- I MEAN -- AND THE BIG OF THIS WHOLE
13 THINGS THAT MAKES ME NERVOUS, IT’S GOING TO UNWIND ALL THE THINGS
14 THAT WE’VE BEEN DOING. AND THE LAST THING WE WANT IS TO SHUT DOWN
15 A COMMUNITY THAT’S -- ‘CAUSE THEN THE STATE’S GOING TO COME DOWN TO
16 HAMMER US HARDER -- SHUT DOWN THE -- A WAY THAT -- THE MOST DANGEROUS
17 THING IN THE WORLD IS WHEN PEOPLE CAN’T COME TO THE POLICE TO ME AND
18 SO -- ESPECIALLY VULNERABLE PEOPLE LIKE -- LIKE IMMIGRANT. AND SO
19 I WORRY THAT WE DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT WITH ALL THE GOOD INTENTIONS
20 AND THEN WE END UP GETTING THE STATE LAW THAT, YOU KNOW, UNWINDS
21 EVERYTHING THAT OUR DEPARTMENT’S DONE TO TRY AND REBUILD THOSE
22 BRIDGES --
23 MR. PEARD: YOU MEAN BY -- BY POKING THE MONSTER IN
00623087.1 113
1 PHOENIX --
2 BONES: YES.
3 MR. PEARD: -- AND GETTING --
4 BONES: AND -- AND THEN UNWINDS EVERYTHING OUR
5 DEPARTMENT’S DONE AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THE PEOPLE THAT ARE MOST
6 VULNERABLE BECOME MOST VULNERABLE AGAIN BECAUSE THEY CAN’T GO
7 ANYWHERE. AND THEY CAN’T COME TO US AND THEY CAN’T GO IN THERE AND
8 DO IT BECAUSE THE STATE TIED THEIR HANDS. I MEAN, THAT’S THE THING
9 THAT -- WHEN I READ THIS IT TERRIFIES ME ABOUT IT. SO --
10 MR. RANKIN: SO, 1786, I DON’T THINK I HAD ANY ISSUES
11 HERE. A, THE -- YEAH, DON’T --
12 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
13 MR. RANKIN: -- THREATEN SOMEBODY.
14 MR. PEARD: -- YOU DON’T -- YOU DON’T THINK THEY
15 COERCE OR THREATEN ANYONE?
16 MR. RANKIN: I DON’T. I DON’T. HOPEFULLY, WE
17 DON’T.
18 THE -- B, YOU KNOW, I STARTED THINKING, WELL, OKAY, IS THAT
19 A LIMITATION ON 1372 IN TERMS OF SHARING INFORMATION, BLAH, BLAH,
20 BUT THEN I THOUGHT -- I THOUGHT --
21 MR. PEARD: I THOUGHT -- I THOUGHT ABOUT THAT, TOO.
22 MR. RANKIN: -- TO MYSELF I CAN’T IMAGINE THAT THIS
23 EVER HAPPENS ANYWAY, PEOPLE CALL --
00623087.1 114
1 MR. PEARD: AT THE -- WELL --
2 MR. RANKIN: -- TO REPORT THAT THEIR NEIGHBOR IS --
3 MR. PEARD: -- AT THE SHERIFF DISPATCH --
4 MR. RANKIN: -- AN UNLAWFUL RESIDENT.
5 MR. PEARD: -- THE SHERIFF’S DISPATCH DATA SHOWS THAT
6 IT ACTUALLY DID -- NO, I REALIZE THAT’S IN THE HINTERLANDS WHERE --
7 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
8 MR. PEARD: -- WHERE PEOPLE ARE -- LIVE OUT IN THREE
9 POINTS AND -- BUT --
11 MR. PEARD: -- IN THE SHERIFF’S DATA IT DOES -- IT
12 DOES HAPPEN. IN THE CITY LIMITS I --
13 MR. RANKIN: SO PEOPLE CALL 911 TO SAY, YEAH, YOU KNOW
14 --
15 MR. PEARD: YEAH. YEAH, THERE’S A BROWN PERSON
16 WALKING RIGHT --
18 MR. PEARD: -- THROUGH MY BACKYARD.
19 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, OR --
20 UNKNOWN FEMALE: YOU’D BE SURPRISED --
21 MR. RANKIN: -- MY NEIGHBOR’S GOT --
22 UNKNOWN FEMALE: -- HOW INSANE PEOPLE ARE.
23 MR. RANKIN: -- DAY WORKERS OVER AT HIS HOUSE DOING
00623087.1 115
1 -- HE’S GETTING HIS ROOF FIXED AND I KNOW THEY’RE ALL ILLEGAL OR --
2 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
3 MR. RANKIN: OKAY.
4 BONES: WHEN I BOUGHT MY HOUSE IT WAS ON THE -- ON
5 THE --
6 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
7 BONES: -- (UNINTELLIGIBLE) THERE’S A MEXICAN
8 DRIVING AROUND.
9 MR. PEARD: YEAH, I THINK A LOT OF THE CALLS ACTUALLY
10 COME -- WERE TRACED TO ALLIE MILLER’S PHONE NUMBER.
11 MR. RANKIN: NO, SHE’S SMARTER THAN THAT. SHE WOULD
12 HAVE, YOU KNOW (UNINTELLIGIBLE) USING A FAKE NAME.
13 MR. PEARD: OH, I THOUGHT ABOUT THAT TOO IN TERMS OF
14 LETTER B ABOUT THE 1373 CONCERNING --
15 MR. RANKIN: YEAH. AND ON C I THINK THAT’S RIGHT.
16 I WAS TRYING TO REMEMBER TO -- GOD, IT’D BE PRIOR TO 1070 WHEN WE
17 HAD THE OTHER LEGISLATION ABOUT ELIGIBILITY FOR YOU KNOW, CERTAIN
18 STATE-FUNDED --
19 UNKNOWN MALE: ISSUES.
20 MR. RANKIN: -- PROGRAMS.
22 MR. RANKIN: AND THERE WAS AN AG OPINION THAT
23 APPROPRIATELY LIMITED IT SO THAT IT WAS CONSTITUTIONAL.
00623087.1 116
1 MR. PEARD: PROP 300?
2 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
3 MR. PEARD: WAS IT PROP 300?
4 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
5 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
6 MR. RANKIN: WASN’T IT BABBITT ULTIMATELY THAT --
7 ANYWAY --
8 MR. PEARD: YEAH --
9 MR. RANKIN: -- I THINK --
10 MR. PEARD: -- I THINK PROP 300 --
11 MR. RANKIN: -- NOT BABBITT -- WHAT’S HIS NAME?
12 MR. PEARD: SYMINGTON?
13 MR. RANKIN: IT WAS -- OH, GEE, OH, WOW!
14 MR. PEARD: GODDARD.
15 MR. RANKIN: GODDARD. AND HE LIMITED THE IMPACT OF
16 --
17 MR. PEARD: I THINK THAT’S TRUE --
18 MR. RANKIN: -- 300 AND SAID THAT IT WAS
19 CONSTITUTIONAL.
20 MR. PEARD: YEAH, I THINK -- THINK THAT’S TRUE.
21 MR. RANKIN: I JUST DON’T REMEMBER THE ISSUES THERE.
22 BUT I THINK C IS FINE.
23 SO 1787 IS (UNINTELLIGIBLE), RIGHT?
00623087.1 117
1 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
2 MR. RANKIN: AND THE TIMING FOR IT --
3 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
4 MR. RANKIN: -- YOU KNOW. WE TRY TO BE RESPONSIVE.
5 MR. PEARD: WE’VE ACTUALLY HEARD -- TO ALL’S CREDIT
6 I HAVE HEARD FROM SERVICE PROVIDERS IN THE COMMUNITY WHO WORK WITH
7 YOU (UNINTELLIGIBLE) THAT TPD’S ALREADY ONE OF THE BEST PLAYERS IN
8 THE COMMUN- -- IN THE REGION --
9 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
10 MR. PEARD: -- ON THAT ISSUE COMPARED WITH THE --
11 BONES: I’D RATHER NOT --
12 MR. PEARD: --- THE SHERIFF --
13 BONES: -- HAVE THE SPECIFIC DATE ON IT, THOUGH,
14 BECAUSE, THEN AGAIN YOU’D FALL INTO THE VIOLATION --
15 (UNINTELLIGIBLE; MULTIPLES SPEAKERS.)
16 MR. PEARD: CAUSE OF ACTION.
17 BONES: -- OR WHAT IF IT’S 100 DAYS? I MEAN, IF YOU
18 PUT SOMETHING AS -- AS -- LIKE, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER PRACTICABLE,
19 WHATEVER ATTORNEY YOU WANT TO USE, EVEN -- EVEN IF SOMEONE’S JUST
20 SITTING ON FILE NOT DOING ANYTHING AND THEY VIOLATE THAT. THEN THEY
21 GETTING (UNINTELLIGIBLE; VOICES OVERLAP).
22 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
23 BONES: SO WHEN YOU HAVE THE SET DATE --
00623087.1 118
1 MR. PEARD: I --
2 BONES: -- YOU KNOW THERE’S CERTAIN THINGS THAT --
3 I MEAN -- AND I THINK THE 90 DAYS IS NOT REASONABLE, BUT YOU NEVER
4 KNOW WHEN YOU GET INTO IT.
5 UNKNOWN MALE: YEAH, SOMETIMES THERE’S A QUESTION
6 OF, OKAY, WELL, WHAT’S THE OFFENSE, THEN --
7 BONES: AND THEN WHAT’S THE --
8 UNKNOWN MALE: WHAT’S THE OFFENSE THAT THE PERSON THE
9 VICTIM OR THAT THEY’RE COOPERATING IN THE CONTEXT --
10 BONES: YEAH, ‘CAUSE THERE’S SOME -- THERE’S SOME
11 IMMIGRATION MILLS LIKE -- LIKE THEY JUST DO IMMIGRATION COURT AND
12 THEY BASE CASES -- THEY --
13 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
14 BONES: -- BASICALLY STEAL MONEY FROM IMMIGRANTS.
15 AND THEN THEY GO IN THERE AND THEY’RE LIKE, HEY, WE’LL DO THIS FOR
16 YOU AND WE’LL DO THIS APPLICATION AND THEY’LL SAY, LIKE, OH, WELL,
17 YOUR WINDOW WAS SMASHED IN SO WE THINK YOU’RE A VICTIM AND WE CAN
18 DO THIS REQUEST UNDER -- AND SO THEN -- SO THEN THEY FLOOD THOSE THING
19 IN AND THEY KIND OF CYCLE SOMETIMES.
20 MR. PEARD: DO YOU SEE THAT SOMETIMES --
21 BONES: SO, IN FLORIDA --
22 MR. PEARD: -- KIND OF TRENDS?
23 BONES: YEAH, THERE’S A SPECIFIC LAW FIRM IN FLORIDA
00623087.1 119
1 THAT DOES --
2 MR. PEARD: IN FLORIDA?
3 BONES: -- YEAH, THAT DOES IT ALL OVER THE COUNTRY
4 AND SO --
5 MR. PEARD: OH, REALLY?
6 BONES: -- THEY REQUEST ALL THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT
7 STUFF AND THEY JUST -- YOU KNOW, THEY’RE STEALING MONEY FROM --
8 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
9 BONES: -- IMMIGRANT AND THEY’RE LIKE --
11 BONES: -- HERE’S THIS IS WHAT WE’RE GOING TO DO AND
12 THEY SHOW THEY’VE DONE THIS WORK AND THEY CHARGE ‘EM $100 AN HOUR
13 AND SAY, OH, WELL, WE APPLIED FOR (UNINTELLIGIBLE). WE THOUGHT YOU
14 COULD GET IT BECAUSE YOU’VE BEEN A VICTIM. I’M LIKE, YEAH, YOUR
15 WINDOW GOT SMASHED WHEN THEY STOLE YOUR STEREO, THAT’S NOT --
16 MR. PEARD: THAT’S NOT A QUALIFYING CRIME --
17 BONES: YES.
19 BONES: SO -- WHICH IS SAD, I MEAN, BUT THAT -- THAT’S
20 -- THAT’S THE THING IF THOSE FIGHTS HAPPEN ALL OF A SUDDEN WE START
21 GETTING THESE REQUESTS AND WE’RE MANDATED TO DO THESE 90-DAY RETURNS
22 ON ‘EM --
00623087.1 120
1 BONES: -- THAT, YOU KNOW --
2 MR. PEARD: YEAH, I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT.
3 MR. RANKIN: SO (UNINTELLIGIBLE) WE TALKED ABOUT BUT
4 YOU’VE GOT THE SEVERABILITY PROVISION AS WELL. LET ME JUST TAKE
5 QUICK AT THAT LOOK ‘CAUSE I DIDN’T TAKE ANY NOTES. (UNINTELLIGIBLE),
6 RIGHT. YEAH. SO, OTHER THAN THAT . . .
7 MR. PEARD: NO, THIS WAS -- I MEAN, THESE ARE VALID
8 POINTS YOU ALL RAISE ON -- BOTH ON THE -- YOU KNOW, SORT OF THE
9 ATMOSPHERICS OF IMPOSING -- OBLIGATION -- AFFIRMATIVE OBLIGATIONS
10 AND IN TERMS OF -- YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE DRAFTING CONNECTIONS AND
11 IN TERMS OF THE 1487 CONCERNS.
12 MR. RANKIN: SO WHAT’S NEXT ON -- ON THE END OF THE,
13 I MEAN, IT’S -- YOU KNOW, WHAT’S NEXT FOR ME, I MEAN, I’VE GOT FOLKS
14 CHOMPING ON MY BUTT TO GET SOMETHING OUT AND JUST -- YOU KNOW, THEY’RE
15 GETTING ASKED ABOUT IT.
16 MR. PEARD: WHAT CAN --
17 MR. RANKIN: (UNINTELLIGIBLE; VOICES OVERLAP)
18 WORKING ON A STORY, THE STAR IS ON A STORY AND EVERYBODY RIGHT NOW
19 IS JUST SAYING --
20 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
21 MR. RANKIN: -- WE’RE WAITING FOR RANKIN TO TELL US
22 WHAT THE IMPACTS OF THIS ARE, SO --
23 MR. PEARD: OKAY.
00623087.1 121
1 MR. RANKIN: -- GREAT.
2 MR. PEARD: WELL, I MEAN, I -- IF I CAN MAKE IT EASIER
3 FOR -- I CAN WRITE IT FOR YOU.
4 MR. RANKIN: THAT (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
5 MR. PEARD: NO, THE -- I GUESS THE OTHER QUESTION IS
6 WHAT CAN WE DO -- WHAT CAN WE DO TO HELP TO -- I MEAN, SHOULD WE BE
7 HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS WITH OTHER -- YOU KNOW, I’VE REACHED OUT
8 TO SOME OF THE COUNSELORS AND I WANTED TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION WITH
9 YOU FIRST BEFORE HAVING DEEPER CONVERSATIONS WITH INDIVIDUAL
10 COUNSELORS. I OBVIOUSLY UNDERSTAND THAT THAT -- IF THIS IS HEADING
11 TOWARD -- TOWARD THE VOTERS, THE COUNSELORS AREN’T GOING TO BE
12 WEIGHING IN ON THIS IN A VERY PUBLIC WAY, NECESSARILY.
13 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. THEY’LL -- THEY WILL BE
14 INDIVIDUALLY AS -- WHICH THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO.
16 MR. RANKIN: THERE WON’T BE LIKE A MAYOR AND COUNCIL
17 AGENDA ITEM TO TAKE A POSITION ON IT BECAUSE LIKE IT’S NOT
18 APPROPRIATE.
19 MR. PEARD: CAN I -- CAN I ASK YOU IF THIS WERE TO
20 PASS, IS THERE A WAY THAT PRIVATE -- KIND OF STEPPING AWAY FROM THE
21 CONTENT OF THIS --
23 MR. PEARD: -- IS THERE A WAY THAT PRIVATE DONORS CAN
00623087.1 122
1 DONATE TO THE CITY COFFERS FOR A SPECIFIC LINE ITEM PURPOSE? FOR
2 EXAMPLE, HYPOTHETICALLY, COULD -- COULD PRIVATE DONORS DONATE TO THE
3 CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE -- OR DONATE TO THE CITY AND DESIGNATE THAT
4 DONATION TO THE CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF
5 DEFENDING A SPECIFIC LAWSUIT? WOULD THAT VIOLATE --
6 MR. RANKIN: OH, THEY PROBABLY COULD --
7 MR. PEARD: -- ANYTHING?
8 MR. RANKIN: -- THEY PROBABLY COULD. WE HAVE A --
9 SO THAT’S A NEW QUESTION FOR ME. I -- I’VE NEVER THOUGHT OF --
10 MR. PEARD: IT’S A NEW QUESTION FOR ME TOO.
11 MR. RANKIN: BUT --
12 MR. PEARD: SO, HYPOTHETICALLY --
13 MR. RANKIN: -- I’M JUST THINKING OF THE CONFLICTS
14 HERE, OKAY?
15 MR. PEARD: -- HYPO- -- HYPOTHET- --
16 MR. RANKIN: I MEAN, I HAVE A FINANCIAL INTEREST --
17 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
18 MR. RANKIN: -- IN -- NOW --
19 MR. PEARD: HYPOTHETICALLY, COULD WE TAKE AWAY --
20 MR. RANKIN: -- I KNOW THAT --
21 MR. PEARD: -- THE --
22 MR. RANKIN: -- LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, FOLKS CAN AND HAVE
23 DONATED TO -- WE MAINTAIN A CIVIC FUND OR A GENERAL FUND AND THEY
00623087.1 123
1 SAY, YOU KNOW -- AND THEY EVEN PUT ‘EM THEIR WILLS, RIGHT? DONATE
2 $10,000 SO LONG AS IT’S USED FOR THE ZEBRAS AT THE ZOO OR WHATEVER.
3 SO, YEAH, THAT -- THAT COULD BE DONE. IT’D BE AN INTERESTING THING
4 IN TERMS OF ULTIMATELY -- LIKE, WHEN -- WHEN WE CHOOSE OUTSIDE
5 COUNSELOR -- WELL, THAT WHOLE THING TOO ABOUT --
6 MR. PEARD: AND THIS’LL BE --
7 MR. RANKIN: -- WHO’S PAYING FOR OUTSIDE --
8 MR. PEARD: WELL, THIS WOULD -- THIS WOULD BE THE --
9 MR. RANKIN: -- COUNSEL --
10 MR. PEARD: -- UNDERSTANDING --
11 MR. RANKIN: -- AND WHO’S THE CLIENT --
12 MR. PEARD: -- YEAH --
13 MR. RANKIN: -- AND WHO’S --
14 MR. PEARD: -- SO THIS WOULD BE --
15 MR. RANKIN: -- AND WHO’S HE WORKING FOR.
16 MR. PEARD: -- THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IT WOULD BE --
17 THAT THE DONOR OR DONORS WOULD HAVE NO CONTROL OVER WHO YOU --
18 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, RIGHT.
19 MR. PEARD: -- CHOOSE TO HIRE.
21 MR. PEARD: IF YOU CHOOSE TO HIRE OUTSIDE COUNSEL,
22 WHO YOU HIRE. IT WOULD BE SIMILAR TO LIKE THE THIRD-PARTY PAYOR
23 SYSTEM OF LIKE AN INSURANCE POLICY.
00623087.1 124
1 BONES: BUT YOU’D PUT IN -- I MEAN, I USED TO HAVE
2 IT IN MY -- IN MY LAW CONTRACT FOR MY CASES ‘CAUSE GRANDMA WOULD PAY,
3 RIGHT? AND SO YOU --
4 MR. PEARD: RIGHT, RIGHT. THE CLIENT IS STILL -- THE
5 CLIENT IS STILL THE CLIENT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER GRANDMA’S PAYING
6 --
7 BONES: RIGHT.
8 MR. PEARD: RIGHT?
9 BONES: YOU WRITE IT IN THE CONTRACT.
11 MR. RANKIN: THERE’S A WAY FOR PEOPLE TO DONATE TO
12 THE CITY AND SPECIFY THE PURPOSES FOR WHAT IT’S USED. IT’S JUST THAT
13 THOSE OTHER ISSUES WOULD BE UNIQUE TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION.
14 THE OTHER THING IS JUST THE -- WHAT I STARTED OUT WITH.
15 SO IT’S AN INITIATIVE, IT’S APPROVED, MAYOR AND COUNCIL CAN’T JUST
16 MAKE CHANGES, RIGHT? SO IF SOMETHING COMES UP IN AN 87 COMPLAINT
17 OR A 1070, OR WHATEVER IT IS, AND SAYS, YEAH, THAT WHATEVER PROVISION
18 IS -- YOU KNOW, THE CHILD MOLEST IS -- LIMITATION ON STATE LAW AND
19 IT’S A VIOLATION, THEY CAN’T CHANGE IT OR REPEAT IT.
20 SO, THEN, 1487 SAYS THE AG MAKES A DETERMINATION, NOTIFIES
21 THE CITY AND GIVES IT AN OPPORTUNITY TO CURE IT, FIX -- FIX THE LAW.
22 WELL, THEY CAN’T. SO THEN DOES THE CITY ATTORNEY AT THAT POINT JUST
23 SAY, WELL, I AGREE AND IT’S UNENFORCEABLE SO IT’S VOID AND INSTRUCT
00623087.1 125
1 -- RIGHT? BUT THAT --
2 MR. PEARD: OH, RIGHT.
3 MR. RANKIN: -- THAT DOESN’T STOP 87 --
4 MR. PEARD: STRIKE IT FROM THE BOOKS.
5 MR. RANKIN: -- IT DOESN’T STRIKE IT FROM THE BOOKS.
6 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
7 MR. RANKIN: AND WE LEARNED FROM OUR LAST THING ON
8 THE -- WITH THE GUNS, ‘CAUSE I WAS TALKING WITH THE AG ABOUT, OKAY,
9 WHAT IF, YOU KNOW, WE AGREED NOT TO FORCE IT BUT IT STAYS --
10 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
11 MR. RANKIN: -- ON THE BOOKS AND BLAH, BLAH?
12 SO WE STILL END UP IN FROM THE SUPREMES AND, YOU KNOW, AND
13 IN SOME INSTANCES, DEPENDING ON -- WE -- WE MIGHT BE NOT OBJECTING
14 TO THE FINDING OF THE COURT THAT IT’S, YOU KNOW, PREEMPTED OR
15 WHATEVER. I -- I HAVEN’T THOUGHT THROUGH ALL THOSE YET. IT’S --
16 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
17 MR. RANKIN: -- JUST -- THERE’S A LOT OF WEIRD PAST
18 THAT IT COULD TRAVEL.
19 PLUS, ULTIMATELY, THE -- A POSITION IN LITIGATION IS UP
20 TO THE COUNCIL SO, YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL SAY -- PUTS THEM IN A --
21 MR. PEARD: MEANING THEY -- THEY --
22 MR. RANKIN: -- REALLY TOUGH SPOT.
23 MR. PEARD: -- MEANING THEY -- THEY CAN INSTRUCT YOU
00623087.1 126
1 OR THE PRIVATE FIRM YOU HIRE NOT TO VIGOROUSLY DEFEND A CERTAIN
2 PROVISION?
3 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT, OR TO, YOU KNOW, STIPULATE ABOUT
4 A CERTAIN THING BUT DEFEND ANOTHER PROVISION AND THEN THAT’S JUST
5 PUT -- THAT’S PUT THEM IN AN AWFUL POSITION IN TERMS OF THEIR
6 CONSTITUENCIES, YOU KNOW, WHICH I TYPICALLY DON’T CARE ABOUT, BUT
7 --
8 MR. PEARD: SURE. THAT’S --
9 MR. RANKIN: -- I MEAN, I CARE ABOUT IT, BUT --
10 MR. PEARD: -- A VALID DECISION.
11 MR. RANKIN: SO THERE -- YEAH, THERE’S JUST A LOT OF
12 -- A LOT OF MOVING PARTS.
13 MR. PEARD: WITH THE GUN DISPOSITION CASE, WAS THAT
14 DEFENDED IN-HOUSE OR YOU CONTRACTED OUTSIDE COUNSEL?
15 MR. RANKIN: WE HAD -- WE DID A LOT OF THE WORK
16 IN-HOUSE, BUT WE HAD RICK ROLLMAN AS OUTSIDE COUNSEL AND HE DID THE
17 ARGUMENT. AND WE HAD AMICUS THAT WE ARGUING WITH US --
18 MR. PEARD: YEAH --
19 MR. RANKIN: -- THE LEAGUE.
20 MR. PEARD: -- THAT -- THAT DECISION WAS AWFUL.
21 MR. RANKIN: YOU KNOW, THE THING IS IT WAS WRONG AND
22 I KNOW IT’S WRONG.
23 MR. PEARD: PLUS, THEY EXERCISE NO JUDICIAL
00623087.1 127
1 RESTRAINT OR THEY COULD’VE --
2 MR. RANKIN: OH, NONE.
3 MR. PEARD: -- THEY COULD’VE RESOLVED --
4 MR. RANKIN: THEY ONLY REASON --
5 MR. PEARD: -- THEY COULD’VE RESOLVED THE ISSUE
6 AGAINST YOU BY ONLY TOUCHING ON HALF THE THINGS THEY TOUCHED ON.
7 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, AND THE OTHER SCARY PART ABOUT IT
8 IS, IS THE MAJORITY OPINION AT LEAST EXERCISED SOME RESTRAINT IN
9 PREVENTED BULLOCK’S OPINION FROM BECOMING THE OPINION -- WHICH
10 WOULD’VE JUST --
11 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
12 MR. RANKIN: -- CHARTERS DON’T MEAN ANYTHING.
13 MR. PEARD: YEAH, AND THEY DIDN’T -- THEY DIDN’T
14 ADEQUATELY CONSIDER THE CONSTITUTIONALITY -- I DON’T KNOW IF IT WAS
15 HEAVILY --
16 MR. RANKIN: NO, THEY DIDN’T --
17 MR. PEARD: BUT, YOU KNOW, IT’S LIKE -- IN MY MIND,
18 IT’S LIKE THE -- IT’S LIKE THAT -- THAT OLD NOTION THAT A LEGISLATIVE
19 BODY CAN ONLY ACT LIKE A BODY --
21 MR. PEARD: -- NOT AS INDIVIDUAL --
23 MR. PEARD: -- PEOPLE.
00623087.1 128
1 MR. RANKIN: OH, YEAH. I MEAN, WE BRIEFED THE HELL
2 OUT OF THAT. AND THEN THE COURT GAVE US SPECIFIC QUESTIONS AS TO
3 THE ONLY QUESTIONS THAT THEY WANTED ANSWERED AND THEY NARROWED IT
4 DOWN TO THE STUFF --
5 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
6 MR. RANKIN: -- THAT WHEN WE SAW THOSE QUESTIONS,
7 WE’RE LIKE, ALL RIGHT --
8 MR. PEARD: IT WOULD’VE BEEN -- IT WOULD’VE BEEN
9 BETTER IF 1487 HAD ALLOWED CASES TO GO UP THROUGH THE APPELLATE --
11 MR. PEARD: -- PROCESS.
12 MR. RANKIN: YEAH, SO A RECORD COULD GET DEVELOPED
13 IN A -- YEAH, BUT -- BUT, ANYWAY --
14 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
15 MR. RANKIN: -- I -- IT DOESN’T HAVE THE EFFECT ON
16 ME OF JUST BEING ENTIRELY, YOU KNOW, GUN SHY ABOUT ANYTHING, BUT WE
17 DO CERTAINLY HAVE TO PICK OUR BATTLES.
18 MR. PEARD: I THINK THERE’S SOME COUNSELORS HERE --
19 MR. RANKIN: AND GUNS WAS THE WRONG SUBJECT TO FIGHT
20 1487 ON, BUT WE DIDN’T PICK THE FIGHT.
22 MR. RANKIN: AND I SUSPECT IMMIGRATION MIGHT.
23 MR. PEARD: AND THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT --
00623087.1 129
1 MR. RANKIN: -- BE NUMBER TWO ON THAT ONE.
2 MR. PEARD: -- AND THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT -- THAT CITY
3 ORDINANCE WAS ON THE BOOKS LONG --
4 MR. RANKIN: LONG BEFORE.
5 MR. PEARD: -- LONG BEFORE, YEAH. WELL --
6 MR. RANKIN: AND, QUITE FRANKLY, I CAN’T THINK OF
7 ISSUE, OTHER THAN ELECTIONS, THAT’S MORE OF A -- PURELY A LOCAL
8 DECISION THAN --
9 MR. PEARD: RIGHT.
10 MR. RANKIN: -- ANYTHING ELSE.
11 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
12 MR. RANKIN: THIS ISN’T WHAT THE CITY IS TELLING YOU,
13 YOU CAN DO WITH YOUR GUNS.
15 MR. RANKIN: IT’S WHAT WE’RE DOING WITH OUR OWN GUNS.
16 MR. PEARD: YEAH. I GUESS THE ARGUMENT IS THAT THE
17 GUNS ARE LIKE FUNGIBLE GOODS ARE SOMETHING. I DON’T KNOW.
18 MR. RANKIN: YEAH , THEY’RE -- THEY’RE SACRED.
19 EVERY GUN IS SACRED.
20 MR. PEARD: WELL, I’M REALLY GLAD WE GOT THE
21 OPPORTUNITY TO TALK. YEAH, YOU RAISED SOME VALID CONCERNS. I’M
22 NOT SURE WHAT WE CAN DO AT THIS POINT.
23 MR. RANKIN: ONE THING I’VE BEEN ASKED IS -- SO I
00623087.1 130
1 GUESS THERE’S SOMETHING COMING UP WHERE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS GOING
2 TO BE ASKED TO TAKE A POSITION ON IT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER -- OR IT’S
3 GOING TO BE REPRESENTED TO THE PARTY -- I DON’T -- AND -- AND THE
4 QUESTION WAS WHETHER OR NOT I WOULD BE ASKED TO GO AND TALK AND SAY
5 WHETHER THE ISSUES -- I’M NOT, “NAH, NO, NO, NO, NOT --”
6 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
7 MR. RANKIN: -- MY ROLE AT ALL.”
8 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
9 MR. RANKIN: BUT I SUSPECT THAT BY THEN, YOU KNOW,
10 MY MEMO WILL BE SOMETHING THAT SOMEONE WILL USE.
13 MR. PEARD: RIGHT. THAT’S FAIR.
14 MR. RANKIN: BUT THAT’S NOT WHY I’M WRITING IT.
15 MR. PEARD: RIGHT. YOU’RE WRITING IT AT THE
16 INSTRUCTION OF YOUR BOSS’ --
18 MR. PEARD: YOUR SEVEN BOSSES?
20 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
21 UNKNOWN FEMALE: OH, NO, I JUST THINK THAT’S QUITE
22 INTERESTING BECAUSE I KNOW FROM SPEAKING WITH LEADERSHIP AND THE
23 DEMOCRATIC PARTY THAT THEY WERE APPROACHED BY ELECTEDS (PH.) AND
00623087.1 131
1 THEIR CONCERN WASN’T THE NITTY-GRITTY OF IT, IT WAS THAT WE WERE GOING
2 TO GET REPUBLICANS ELECTED TO OFFICE.
3 MR. RANKIN: OH, THAT’S ALWAYS THEIR CONCERN.
4 UNKNOWN FEMALE: AND THAT’S WHY -- AND THAT -- THAT’S
5 WHY I THINK THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SHOULDN’T BE VOTING ON IT. THAT
6 WAS WHAT WAS TOLD TO THEM. DEFINITELY A LOT OF MOVING PIECES. BUT
7 THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH.
8 MR. PEARD: YEAH.
9 UNKNOWN FEMALE: THIS WAS REALLY HELPFUL.
10 MR. PEARD: WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS FOR -- ANY OTHER
11 TASKS YOU WANT TO PUT ON MY --
12 MR. RANKIN: A COUPLE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE
13 WAITING TO SCHEDULE SIT-DOWNS I THINK WITH YOU --
14 MR. PEARD: OKAY. I DID REACH OUT TO -- I HAVEN’T
15 REACHED OUT TO ALL SEVEN OF THEM YET --
17 MR. PEARD: -- BUT I -- WE -- THE ONLY ONE WE’VE TALKED
18 IN PERSON SO FAR IS REGINA AND I’VE EMAILED WITH KOZACHIK.
19 MR. RANKIN: EVEN THE MAYOR SAID THAT HE’S HAPPY TO
20 SIT AND MEET BUT HE WANTED US TO MEET FIRST AND --
21 MR. PEARD: OKAY. AND I’VE NEVER MET THE MAYOR, BUT
22 I GATHER FROM WHAT I KNOW OF HIM THAT HE’S VERY CEREBRAL AND WILL
23 -- IS LIKELY TO ASK THE HARD QUESTIONS AS MUCH AS YOU’VE DONE WITH
00623087.1 132
1 ME. SO --
2 MR. RANKIN: YEAH.
4 UNKNOWN FEMALE: YOU’VE NEVER MET THE MAYOR?
5 MR. PEARD: NO, I MEAN, I’VE SEEN HIM -- I’VE SEEN
6 HIM IN PUBLIC; NOT ONE-ON-ONE.
7 MR. RANKIN: OKAY.
8 UNKNOWN FEMALE: ALL RIGHT.
9 MR. RANKIN: HE LIKE IT IF YOU CALL HIM THE LAME DUCK
10 MAYOR.
11 MR. PEARD: HE LIKES THAT?
00623087.1 133

Transcript of Rankin/PDI Meeting About Tucson 'Sanctuary City' Initiative

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Transcript of Rankin/PDI Meeting About Tucson 'Sanctuary City' Initiative

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

5 BONES: OR YOU NEVER KNOW WHEN IT’S GONNA

7 MR. PEARD: THEN IF IT DOES HAPPEN YOU WANNA BE ABLE

10 MR. PEARD: …. WITHIN SIX HOURS OR SOMETHING.

11 BONES:: I THINK THAT’S TERRIFYING RIGHT NOW. YOU

12 KNOW HE SAID YESTERDAY HE WAS GONNA GO TO THE DETENTION CENTER SO

14 MR. RANKIN: OH DID HE?

15 BONES: HE SAID IT YESTERDAY. I’M LIKE I WANT TO SEE

17 MR. RANKIN: IS CASSIE JOINING US?

18 BONES: NO SHE HAD CAR PROBLEMS AND SO SHE HAD TO

19 LIKE DO IT PLUS THAT GUY….

20 MS. LIVIER: THANK YOU.

21 BONES: ….THAT WE WERE WORRIED ABOUT THE OTHER GUY

3 MR. RANKIN: YEAH

4 BONES: AND NEL SLESSENGER (SP) AT THE SAME TIME

5 WE WERE FIGHTING WITH ANOTHER GUY NAMED JACKSON …

6 MR. RANKIN: OH RIGHT RIGHT….

7 BONES: …NOW HE’S – HE’S ACTIVE AGAIN AND SO HE’S

8 FILING MOTIONS AGAINST OUR OFFICERS AGAIN.

9 MR. RANKIN: ORDERS OF PROTECTION, I GUESS …

11 MR. RANKIN: AGAINST THE COPS.

12 BONES: SO HE AT LEASE HAS BEEN CONVICTED OF A

14 MR. RANKIN: WOW. WHAT IS TIM MEED (SP) BEFORE HE YOU

16 BONES: BEFORE THE STEP WAS HERE

17 MR. PEARD: IS HE THE ONE THAT ISSUED THE RESTRAINING

18 ORDER AGAINST THE COP…

20 MR. PEARD: SIX MONTHS AGO?

22 MR. RANKIN: I THINK IT WAS HIM.

3 THEY HAD LIKE AN ARTICLE IN HERE….

4 MR. RANKIN: I WAS GRATEFUL FOR THE VOTERS THAT THEY

5 WERE ABLE TO DISTINGUISH ….[OVERLAPPING VOICES]

6 BONES: RIGHT BEFORE HAND HE GOT INDICTED, DIDN’T

8 MR. RANKIN: I THINK IT WAS BEFORE THE ELECTIONS…I

9 THINK IS WAS RIGHT AFTER THE PRIMARY BUT AFTER ….[OVERLAPPING

11 MR. RANKIN: IT WAS AFTER THE PRIMARY.

12 BONES: SO ON THE CRIMINAL STUFF YEAH I DON’T KNOW

13 WHAT HAPPENED THERE. AND THEN SO WE’VE BEEN FIGHTING – REBECCA I

14 SHOULDN’T SAY WE – REBECCA’S BEEN FIGHTING THIS THING FOR MONTHS

17 MR. RANKIN: YEAH

18 BONES: SO WE DON’T WANT TO LEAVE ANY KIND OF

20 MR. RANKIN: YOU THINK THE PERSONALITY BASE ARE

21 SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS ….

22 BONES: NEARLY IDENTICAL. MR. RANKIN: THAT’S

3 MR. PEARD: THANK YOU FOR MEETING WITH ME.

4 MR. RANKIN: SO I’M IN A POSITION OF PROBABLY HAVING TO

6 COUNCIL JUST ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS WERE TO BECOME LAW.

8 IS THAT I WOULD DO THAT MEMO AS A PUBLIC MEMO BECAUSE THEY NEED TO

9 BE ABLE TO REFER TO IT.

10 MR. PEARD: OKAY

11 MR. RANKIN: AND….

12 MR. PEARD: SO WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING – DOES THE

13 COUNCIL HAVE TO VOTE TO MAKE IT PUBLIC….

14 MR. RANKIN: YEAH

16 MR. PEARD: YOU CAN DESIGNATE PUBLIC YOUR SELF

17 MR. RANKIN: YEAH I MEAN I’M SORTING THROUGH THAT IN

21 LAWS ABOUT INFLUENCING THE OUTCOME OF ELECTIONS THAT I’M NOT

22 SAYING YOU SHOULD ADVOCATE FOR THIS OR NOT. I’LL BE USING IT AS A

2 MR. RANKIN: YOU CAN’T USE CITY RESOURCES TO INFLUENCE

4 MR. PEARD: SUPPORT OR OPPOSE

5 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT. YOU KNOW

6 MR. PEARD: AND THIS MAKES IT MATERIAL THAT YOUR ROLE

7 MATERIALLY DIFFERENT FROM A TYPICAL ORDINANCE COMING THROUGH CITY

9 MR. RANKIN: RIGHT