UPDATE: Deputy Stoddard Is Jailed In The "Mesa Hilton" For Refusing To Apologize

.
Well, Judge Donohue followed through and now Phoenix has a serious battle on their hands...not good. So where are we at there? Well, you will recall that we reported on the Deputy that rifled through defense counsel's personal papers, taking some of them and copying them, under the guise of court safety. (Video of hearing HERE). You will also recall that we reported the matter was set before Judge Donohue to determine whether the Deputy was in contempt of court...he was found in contempt. The Deputy was ordered quite simply to apologize or serve a jail term. The Order of the Judge indicates that the

The law that applies is well established. The first applicable principle is the security officers’ status in the court. In carrying out their security duties in the courtroom, the Sheriff’s employees are acting as officers of the court. See Arpaio v. Baca, 217 Ariz. 570, ¶ 27, 177 P.3d
312 (App. 2008).

The second principle pertains to the court’s authority to address in a contempt proceeding behavior that adversely impacts people in a courthouse. In Hirschfeld v. Superior Court In and For County of Maricopa, 184 Ariz. 208, 211 – 212, 908 P.2d 22, 25 – 26 (App. 1995)...

Then the Judge laid down the TRUTH of the law:

Unlike the events in Hirschfeld, the conduct in question occurred in front of a judge of this court. Like Hirschfeld, the conduct in question was done by an officer of the court. The conduct in question disrupted and delayed the sentencing proceeding. The principles discussed in Hirschfeld apply here and teach that control of the conduct of all those appearing in court, whether inside or outside the courtroom, must remain in the hands of the presiding judicial officer.

Then, the Judge showed how the Deputy was simpy wrong:

The Court finds that DO Stoddard’s conduct was unreasonable. This Court finds that there was no security threat justifying the seizure of the document from counsel’s file. Nor was there any evidence that a crime was being committed or about to be committed. There was no immediate or future security threat that would have justified a reasonable detention officer in DO Stoddard’s situation removing, seizing and coping a document from a defense attorney’s file. A reasonable detention officer would have recognized after spending approximately 37 seconds reading the paragraph in question, that the “key words” had nothing to do with an immediate or future security threat to the jail or anyone else. Even giving DO Stoddard the benefit of the doubt that he had a right to scan the entire paragraph which was in plain sight after seeing the “key words” to determine if Defendant presented an immediate security risk, nothing in that paragraph justified DO Stoddard’s continued conduct of removing the document from counsel’s file and having the document copied.

The penalty for DO Stoddard:

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED holding Detention Officer Adam Stoddard in indirect civil contempt of court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that unless timely purged as set forth below, DO Stoddard shall on December 1, 2009, report to the Maricopa County Jail and be incarcerated therein until such time as proof is presented to this Court that he has purged the finding of contempt. Failure to comply will result in the issuance of a warrant for the arrest and
incarceration of DO Stoddard.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Detention Officer Stoddard may purge the finding of
contempt and the jail sanction by arranging, on or before November 30, 2009, at a time
convenient for Ms. Cuccia, a news conference to take place in the plaza on the north side of the Central Court Building where he is to give Ms. Cuccia a sincere verbal and written apology for invading her defense file and for the damage that his conduct may have caused to her professional reputation. DO Stoddard shall assure that the press release announcing the news conference is sent by email and fax to all news media outlets (print and broadcast) serving Maricopa County at least 24 hours in advance of the news conference. If at the news conference, Ms. Cuccia does not state that the apology is sufficient, DO Stoddard shall report to the jail on December 1, 2009 and be detained until further order of this Court upon a finding that he has complied with the purge clause.

The Judge, later, realized the err of his ways and amended his decision so that the apology still was to occur, but that the attorney did not have to decide whether it was sincere. I appears Stoddard ONLY had to apologize and BOOM, no jail.

Though I have been vocal about beleiving Ms. Cuccia should have been the judge of sincerity, I realized my error, too. Since then, I got into a bit of a debate about it with "What It Means", who has proven his wisdom to me, unfortunately only in hindsight. (OK, so I'm hard-headed). I have now realized I was wrong, too. Why? Because to have put this burden on Ms. Cuccia (the decision to send him to jail) would have been simply...stupid, not to mention that it was a lose-lose for her. If she said he as sincere when he said "I cannot apologize" would have put her up to public ridicule & if she would have said "He was not sincere", it would have placed her in serious 'outs' with the sheriff's office and with others. We can't be right all of the time.

What happened next was, well stupid, on the part of DO Stoddard. I'm sure that Arpaio ordered him to "not apologize", but why?. The statement made that morning is:

I am Maricopa County Detention Officer Adam Stoddard. I work in the Court Security Division of the Sheriff’s Office and have been with the Sheriff’s Office for five years.

Recently, Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe ordered me to hold a press conference to publicly apologize for doing the job I have been trained to do.

Part of my job in providing security to the court is to inspect documents brought into the courtroom. On October 19th, I saw a document that I had not yet screened, and that raised security concerns. I retrieved that document in plain sight and had court personnel copy it to preserve it as evidence in case it was a security breach.

It was a split second decision and I do not regret my actions.

Judge Donahoe has ordered me to feel something I do not and say something I cannot. I cannot apologize for putting court safety first.

What a dummy!! Are you telling me he can't just say, "I'm truly sorry for making the mistake of going through your personal belongings. I had originally thought there might be a security threat, but I was wrong and I really regret it, especially given all the mess it has caused." Would that really have been that hard? Instead he opted for the overused "I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky" statement...again, stupid.

Of course, you'll also recall that we reported that the infamous Sheriff Joe Arpaio stated after the Order, "My officer was doing his job and I will not stand by and allow him to be thrown to the wolves by the courts because they feel pressure from the media on this situation,” Arpaio said in a press release. He further said, "I decide who holds press conferences and when they are held regarding this Sheriff’s Office." (Arizona Republic). Nice Job Joe!! You made good on your promise. You obviously ordered this STUPID "non-apology".

Forget justice, due process, search and seisure laws, & having respect for the Court of which your man is an officer. I'm told this is...typical Joe. While Stoddard has been incarcerated for his refusal to apologize, it is rumored that he is hold up in the "Mesa Hilton", where all the celebrities and donors to the Sheriff get to stay. The lucky 60 prisoners are rumored to be able to bring "luxury personal items into the jail, including cell phones, musical instruments, computers and takeout meals." So much for 'equality' under the law...but I've never believed that one anyway.

It was also reported yesterday that "more than 100 officers rallied in downtown Phoenix Wednesday to support a colleague currently being held in jail on a contempt charge." (ABC15). To boot, the Maricopa County Association of Detention Officers (MCADO) has decided that they "feel it is an injustice and [they] will not tolerate it," according to Luis Altamirano with the MCADO. Oh great, what are they gonna do now? It seems like they, or someone with their opinion, is going to disrupt the courts until they get what they want. Yesterday, the court not only had a walk out and picketing by the Officers, but a bomb threat, too. What next? Who will investigate this...noone.

Why is it so hard to understand that all that was required for committing a serious breach of ethics & control of the courtroom, is a simple apology? All he had to do is apologize. We teach this everyday to our kids. You may not like it, but sometimes you just gotta say "I'm sorry" and move on. Instead he opted to refuse. Who is doing the most damage to our view of the police...not the judge. These actions seem in line with all the negative stereotypes about cops, namely, that they never feel remorse and they never think they are wrong. Good one guys!! Gotta love it when people 'fulfill the stereotype'!

Oh yea, the kicker, Sheriff King Great Leader Arpaio is paying DO Stoddard for every hour he is incarcerated. So the only person getting "screwed in jail" is the taxpayer...again!

*All of the bold & italic was added and not part of the original quotes.
.