You are on page 1of 30

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

3
4

Manuel de Jesus Ortega
Melendres, et al.,

5

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiffs,

6

vs.

7

Joseph M. Arpaio, et al.,

8

Defendants.

SEALED PROCEEDINGS

CV 07-2513-PHX-GMS
Phoenix, Arizona
August 7, 2014
10:04 a.m.

EF
OG

9
10
11
12
13

TH

14

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

16

BEFORE THE HONORABLE G. MURRAY SNOW

17

(Telephonic Conference)

OF

15

18

20
21

Court Reporter:

IEN

22

DS

19

23
24

FR

25

1

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 1 of 30

Gary Moll
401 W. Washington Street, SPC #38
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 322-7263

Proceedings taken by stenographic court reporter
Transcript prepared by computer-aided transcription

1

A P P E A R A N C E S

2
3

For the Plaintiffs:

Cecillia D. Wang, Esq.
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
FOUNDATION
Immigrants' Rights Project
39 Drumm Street
San Francisco, California 94111
(415) 343-0775

4
5
6
7

Andre Segura, Esq.
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, New York 10004
(212) 549-2676

8

EF
OG

9
10

Jorge M. Castillo, Esq.
MEXICAN AMERICAN LEGAL DEFENSE
AND EDUCATIONAL FUND
Regional Counsel
634 S. Spring Street
11th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90014
(213) 629-2512, Ext. 121

11
12
13

TH

14
15

For the Defendants:

16

OF

17
18

20
21

IEN

22

DS

19

23
24

FR

25

2

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 2 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14

Timothy J. Casey, Esq.
James L. Williams, Esq.
SCHMITT, SCHNECK, SMYTH,
CASEY & EVEN, P.C.
1221 E. Osborn Road
Suite 105
Phoenix, Arizona 85014-5540
(602) 277-7000

Thomas P. Liddy, Esq.
Senior Litigation Counsel
MARICOPA COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Civil Services Division
222 N. Central Avenue
Suite 1100
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
(602) 506-8066

1

P R O C E E D I N G S

2
3

THE CLERK:

4

This is civil case number 07-2513,

Melendres v. Arpaio, on for telephonic conference.

5

Counsel, please announce your appearances.

6

MS. WANG:

Good morning, Judge Snow.

10:04:26

This is Cecillia

7

Wang from the ACLU for the plaintiffs.

8

phone with me my co-counsel, Andre Segura, also with the ACLU,

9

and Jorge Castillo of MALDEF, but I'll be addressing the Court
today.

I also have on the

EF
OG

10
11

THE COURT:

12

MR. WILLIAMS:

10:04:48

All right.

Good morning, Your Honor.

Williams on behalf of the defendants.

14

Casey and Tom Liddy.

James

Also with me is Tim

TH

13

15

And we also have client representative Steve Bailey,
who was not here when we first gave the Court our appearances,

17

with MCSO's Internal Affairs division, and then also Christine

18

Stutz and Vanessa Losicco from the Maricopa County Attorney's

19

Office, who are appearing -- or not making appearances.

20

They're here as client representatives, not as counsel.

DS

MONITOR WARSHAW:

23

Good morning, Judge.

Bob Warshaw.

Monitor Raul Martinez.

24

THE COURT:

25

Let me address an initial matter.

FR

10:05:09

I also have with me Deputy Monitor John Girvin and Deputy

IEN

22

10:04:54

OF

16

21

3

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 3 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14

Good morning.

Good morning to you all.
As in this hearing

10:05:26

4

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 4 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14

1

I may inquire into matters that I'm not going to require

2

disclosure for, I suggest that we hold this hearing initially

3

under seal, as it may involve particulars of ongoing police

4

investigations.

5

If I hold it under seal, then I want every participant

6

who is on the line to realize that they are not free to discuss

7

it, regardless of the fact that they are present, outside of

8

this hearing, except for among themselves.

9

EF
OG

I do and would authorize each party to obtain a

10

transcript of this hearing without further authorization of the

11

Court, but that doesn't mean that you can discuss the hearing

12

publicly unless and until I take off the seal.

13

Does anybody object to us going under seal?

14

MR. WILLIAMS:

15

MS. WANG:

16

THE COURT:

TH

No objection from plaintiffs, Your Honor.
All right.

I appreciate that.

OF

18
19

I take it, Mr. Williams, you're arguing on behalf of

DS

the defendants, or you're going to be speaking on behalf of the

23

MR. WILLIAMS:
THE COURT:

That's correct, Your Honor.

I've looked at your letter and the basis

24

for which you have asserted privilege, on which you've asserted

25

privilege, and it seems to me, essentially, that E and F

FR

10:06:40

defendants today?

IEN

22

10:06:27

Then I have looked at the -- I

have reviewed the letters that I have been sent by the parties.

21

10:06:04

Defendants do not object, Your Honor.

17

20

10:05:42

10:06:54

1

provide no basis for privilege, unless you're going to tell me

2

that you have pending appeals or disciplinary actions against

3

any particular MCSO employee or officer.

4

5

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 5 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14

Are there any such ongoing appeals or disciplinary

5

actions?

6

10:07:19

MR. WILLIAMS:

Your Honor, I think that the challenge

7

with that is that the disciplinary action begins with the

8

investigation.

9

with regard to this issue, but we would certainly contend that

EF
OG

There are no ongoing appeals that I'm aware of

10

the ongoing investigation, that there is a very large one of

11

those going on to which that would apply.

12

THE COURT:

Well, let me just tell you, Mr. Williams,

have you identified any particular officers that are subject to

14

disciplinary action as a result of any of the investigations?

TH

13

15

MR. WILLIAMS:

And Your Honor, if I may, on some of

these questions I may allow Steve Bailey, who's here next to

17

me, because he can provide a greater level of detail on those,

18

since we're under seal, so --

19

THE COURT:

CAPTAIN BAILEY:
THE COURT:

IEN

22

Well, I guess I don't have any objection

to Mr. Bailey -- or is it Captain Bailey?

DS

21

10:07:52

OF

16

20

10:07:36

Yes, Your Honor.

All right.

I don't have any objection to

23

his participation, except for I guess I want to direct the

24

dance.

25

been any officers that are designated as being subjected to

FR

10:08:07

And so I'm asking you first, Mr. Williams, have there
10:08:19

1

disciplinary action as a result of any of the material sought

2

by the plaintiff in this action?

3

MR. WILLIAMS:

Your Honor, let me just -- we have sent

4

out a number of notices to that respect, and we certainly have

5

targets in that respect, so there are -- and again, I probably

6

have to left Captain Bailey put a little bit finer point on

7

that, but I think the answer is that we are -- we are on that

8

road, Your Honor.
THE COURT:

10

want to be very specific:

11

disciplinary actions against any MCSO officer as a result of

12

the investigations?

13

CAPTAIN BAILEY:

14

THE COURT:

Have you identified any ongoing

TH

You know, Captain Bailey, again, I welcome

16

extent you provide clarification, I am going to allow Ms. Wang

17

to seek clarification of what you say, just so you're aware,

18

okay?

Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

10:09:24

Okay.

CAPTAIN BAILEY:

Go ahead, Captain Bailey.

Nobody has been noticed as a

23

principal as a result of the ongoing investigation.

24

there have been several employees observed during what would

25

have been discipline for Deputy Armendariz.

FR

10:09:05

I'm sorry, we had the

phone on mute.

IEN

22

MR. WILLIAMS:

DS

21

OF

your participation, but I do want you to know that to the

20

10:08:47

Your Honor, this is Captain Bailey.

15

19

10:08:35

Well, you may be on the road, but again, I

EF
OG

9

6

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 6 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14

However,

10:09:37

1

As a result of the interviews, I have a clearer idea

2

of their participation and their knowledge, which certainly

3

could result in discipline in the future.

4

THE COURT:

Well, but you are not in a position, as I

5

understand it, Captain Bailey, to determine that with respect

6

to any particular officer at this point?

7

CAPTAIN BAILEY:

are in the investigation now.

9

THE COURT:

In that sense, then --

EF
OG

All right.

10

Well, Ms. Wang, do you have any follow-up?

11

MS. WANG:

No, Your Honor.

10:10:08

I think it's -- well, I

would ask Captain Bailey just to confirm that they currently

13

don't have any ongoing disciplinary action against any

14

particular MCSO deputy.

TH

12

15

With that clarification, I think that the Court has
already understood plaintiffs' position, which is that A.R.S.

17

38-1101E and F don't apply at all, because there is no pending

18

proceeding, much less an appeal, against any MCSO deputy.

19

fact that MCSO has said that there may be some action taken in

20

the future certainly doesn't extend the privilege under the

DS

OF

16

The

THE COURT:

All right.

10:10:48

And Mr. Williams, that is my

23

ruling.

24

been identified and is being pursued, A.R.S. 38-1101E and F are

25

not applicable.

FR

10:10:26

statute to documents that we've been seeking now.

IEN

22

10:09:54

No, Your Honor, not at the point we

8

21

7

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 7 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14

Unless and until a specific disciplinary action has

That does not mean that L -- well, I want to

10:11:09

8

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 8 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14

1

take a look at L, and I also want to look at A.R.S. 39-121,

2

which says, "Public records and other matters in the custody of

3

any officer shall be open to inspection by any person at all

4

times during office hours."

5

So keep that in mind.

L, it seems to me, "An employer shall not include in

that portion of the personnel file of a law enforcement officer

7

or probation officer that is available for public inspection

8

and copying any information about an investigation until the

9

investigation is complete or the employer has discontinued the

10

investigation."

11

EF
OG

6

plaintiff has asked for personnel files of law enforcement

13

officers, that particular section of the statute may remain

14

applicable.

15

confidentiality obligations that pertain to the plaintiffs as a

16

method of overcoming that, but I do want to ask some

17

more questions so I can identify on a matter-by-matter basis

18

and appropriately protect the defendant's interests while

19

allowing the plaintiffs appropriate access.

TH

10:12:12

OF

Evidence, records, and videos seized from the

custody of any officer.

It doesn't seem to be precluded by

23

A.R.S. 38-1101E or F, and because it does not relate to the

24

portion of a personnel file of a law enforcement officer, it

25

doesn't seem to me, Mr. Williams, that you asserted a basis for

FR

10:12:32

Armendariz home seem to me to be material that is in the

IEN

22

And it also strikes me that we could discuss

DS

21

10:11:51

Well, it seems to me that to the extent that the

12

20

10:11:33

10:12:52

1

privilege.

2

Do you have --

MR. WILLIAMS:

Your Honor, I believe the definition of

3

the investigative file under 38-1101 is much broader than that

4

and includes anything attached to that investigation, and

5

that's the problem that we have, Your Honor.

6

THE COURT:

No, no, no, no.

10:13:11

Let's go back and focus

7

on the language of the statute, please, Mr. Williams.

8

looking only at 38-1101L and it talks about a personnel file;

9

it doesn't talk about an investigative file.
the statute?

11

MR. WILLIAMS:

12

We're

Or do I misread

EF
OG

10

9

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 9 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14

10:13:28

It does also mention, Your Honor, any

information about an investigation.

13

THE COURT:

That's fine.

But we're talking about a

14

personnel file.

15

evidence, records, and videos seized from the Armendariz home.

16

That's not a personnel file.

TH

And the request I'm talking about right now is

17

OF

MR. WILLIAMS:

That's the --

And Your Honor, I'm sorry.

L also

mentions copying any information about an investigation, and

19

that -- that would be our position is that for the same reason,

20

that evidence is now information -THE COURT:

23
24

FR

25

Well, I've got L in front of me.

10:13:58

You tell

me where it says copying any information about an

IEN

22

DS

18

21

10:13:43

investigation.
MR. WILLIAMS:

"... probation officer that is

available for public inspection and copying any information

10:14:08

1

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 10 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 10

about an investigation until the investigation is complete..."

2

THE COURT:

Yeah, that's from the personnel file,

3

though.

4

It doesn't -- it does not, as I read the statute, apply to --

5

generically to investigations, and so I don't think that you

6

have satisfied me that you have demonstrated any privilege in

7

the evidence, records, and videos seized from the Armendariz's

8

home.

9

That's information contained in the personnel file.

Your Honor, as a practical matter, that

EF
OG

MR. WILLIAMS:

10

information would be in the investigative file; it would not be

11

in the personnel file.

12

THE COURT:

I understand that.

14

investigative file?

TH

you've got any privilege that it would apply to that

MR. WILLIAMS:

I believe, Your Honor, we're having a

16

different reading of L.

17

essentially two parts and Your Honor is reading it,

18

understandably, different to have the second part subsumed into

19

the first part of the personnel file.

21

OF

But the way that -- that I read L:

An employer shall

enforcement officer that is available for public inspection and

23

copying any information about his investigation.

24

intended to cover both topics.

FR

25

10:15:11

not include in that portion of the personnel file of a law

IEN

22

10:14:58

I believe I'm reading L as having

DS

20

10:14:48

Can you show me where

13

15

10:14:33

THE COURT:

I think it's

I understand your reading and I don't

10:15:27

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 11 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 11

1

agree with it.

2

course -- I guess my understanding counts, is the one that

3

counts for immediate purposes.

4

I don't think it's correctly read.

Of

However, I do believe that it does make sense to have

5

some confidentiality obligation on plaintiffs.

6

that you believe that you can -- or that any information that

7

they might disclose would damage your investigation, I don't

8

want to do that, and maybe we can ask an assessment from Chief

9

Warshaw about where the investigation actually stands.

To the extent

EF
OG

But he

10

does keep me pretty well posted, and it was my impression that

11

the investigation in this respect, and I realize there are many

12

things to investigate, has not moved very far.

13

15

undertake all aspects of the investigation which may be of some

16

interest to them.

TH

the plaintiffs to wait until you determine that you're going to

17

10:16:27

OF

As I understand it from your letter, Ms. Wang,

plaintiffs are interested in discovering the material actually

19

revealed so that they can use it in the defense of this Court's

20

order to the extent that I have placed certain things in my

DS

18

things that are relevant to the applicability of such an order.

23

Do you desire it for any other purpose at this point?

24

MS. WANG:

FR

25

10:16:47

injunction and you believe that the investigation reveals

IEN

22

10:16:10

And so it is not my intention to just simply require

14

21

10:15:45

No, Your Honor.

Of course, plaintiffs are

seeking all these categories of documents in order to represent

10:17:09

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 12 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 12

1

the plaintiff class in making sure that the defendants are

2

complying with this Court's previous orders.

3

And I would also point out that defendants are

4

currently contesting provisions of this Court's orders, and

5

particularly the trial rulings and the Court's supplemental

6

injunction from October of last year on appeal in the Ninth

7

Circuit.

8

documents that defendants have produced to us demonstrates that

9

there is certainly evidence to support this Court's prior

EF
OG

And the little that we have seen so far from the

10

orders, and that would refute the position that the defendants

11

have taken on appeal, for example.

12

14

to protecting the interests of the plaintiff class and

15

protecting the plaintiff class from further violations of their

16

constitutional rights.

TH

directly relevant to the subject matter of this litigation and

17

10:18:03

OF

One other note I just wanted to make, Your Honor, and

I understand you've ruled already, on the privilege asserted by

19

the defendants based on 38-1101, with regard to subsection L,

20

plaintiffs are not relying on any rights under Arizona's public

DS

18

records law.

Primarily, we're relying on the ongoing

23

And so I think that I agree with the Court's reading

24

of subsection L as not conferring any privilege in any event,

25

but I'd also point out that we don't stand in the position of

FR

10:18:23

litigation and the Court's prior orders and injunctions.

IEN

22

10:17:46

So that's our position, that the documents are

13

21

10:17:27

10:18:46

1

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 13 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 13

the public trying to gain access to any of these records.

2

THE COURT:

3

It would be my proposal that if, for present purposes,

Let me float this for proposal.

4

Ms. Wang wants it for purposes of defending the order and

5

appeal and purposes of this action, that the plaintiffs be

6

restricted from any other use, but they be entitled to complete

7

access to the records and videos seized from the Armendariz

8

home.

9

have to seek authorization from the MCSO or from this Court.

EF
OG

And before they can use it for any other purpose, they

10

Any problem with that order?

11

MS. WANG:

12

MR. WILLIAMS:

10:19:27

No, Your Honor, not from plaintiffs.
Your Honor, from defendants'

standpoint, we do have an issue with them using it as a basis

14

for the appeal, as the record for the appeal would seem to be

15

closed.

16

TH

13

THE COURT:

10:19:39

Well, let me ask you, Mr. Williams, it

seems to me that plaintiffs have suggested, and it seems to me,

18

by my recollection, which isn't always fault free, that among

19

other things, plaintiffs requested prior to trial copies of any

20

videos or recordings made of any traffic stops.

DS

23

10:19:59

uncovered a great number of recordings, both video and audio,

that existed that were not disclosed.

24

MR. WILLIAMS:

25

THE COURT:

FR

And it

certainly seems to me that the Armendariz investigation has

IEN

22

OF

17

21

10:19:05

Am I correct --

And, Your Honor that's -- I apologize.

Am I correct about that?

10:20:23

1

MR. WILLIAMS:

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 14 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 14

Well, Your Honor, that's an important

2

point of clarity.

3

being disputed here.

4

under the protective order that -- that Your Honor issued.

5

Those HSU videos are not part of what is

THE COURT:

6

Those have been disclosed to Ms. Wang

I'm not talking about HSU videos; I'm

talking about Armendariz videos.

7

Have you matched them up to know that they weren't

8

videos made during the pendency of this lawsuit?

9

I believe they are after, Your Honor,

EF
OG

MR. WILLIAMS:

10

but I would be uncomfortable making that representation

11

affirmatively to the Court, I'm not certain.

12

THE COURT:

13

videos?

15

THE COURT:

Have I personally, or --

TH

MR. WILLIAMS:

16

meant the MCSO.

17

No, no, I don't mean you personally; I

OF

MR. WILLIAMS:

They have completed, as I understand,

19

are potentially problematic, and then those videos that have

20

been identified as potentially problematic are being reviewed

DS

the initial review of all the videos to determine which videos

IEN

THE COURT:

Have they dated the videos?

Have they

matched the videos up to victims, and have they done the

24

Hispanic surname search that we had discussed earlier?

FR

10:21:19

by a group of lieutenants.

23

25

10:21:06

Thank you for the clarification.

18

22

10:20:56

Well, have you even looked at all the

14

21

10:20:37

CAPTAIN BAILEY:

No, Your Honor.

We are still merging

10:21:42

1

all the spreadsheets.

2

THE COURT:

3

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 15 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 15

We need all the data that we could -Is that Captain Bailey?

Captain Bailey?

4

CAPTAIN BAILEY:

5

THE COURT:

Is this

Yes, Your Honor, I'm sorry.

That's all right.

If you'd just identify

6

yourself prior to speaking, because since you're not here, the

7

court reporter can't know unless you identify yourself.

8

CAPTAIN BAILEY:

9

Yes, sir.

Currently, we are merging

EF
OG

a number of spreadsheets together that is a collection of data

10

from every aspect that we could identify.

11

that we deemed potentially problematic, and there is 10 to 12

12

lieutenants currently looking at those 394 videos so we can

13

identify serious issues if they in fact exist.

14

16

you're operating in anything other than good faith,

17

Captain Bailey, but if you identified -- when you say 394

18

videos, do you mean 394 actual stops that have been videotaped,

19

or do you mean 394 of the 500 some-odd videos that have on them

20

one or more stops that are problematic?

10:22:31

DS

OF

understand things, and I appreciate and I'm not suggesting that

CAPTAIN BAILEY:

10:22:51

They are 394 clips that show both

traffic stops and potentially enforcement actions, depending on

IEN

22

10:22:07

Well, let me just tell you how I

TH

THE COURT:

There was 394 videos

15

21

10:21:49

how the camera was operated at the time.

24

from the reviews of hundreds of other videos that we have

25

separated out for further investigation by the Professional

FR

23

But those 394 come

10:23:11

1

Standards Bureau.

2

THE COURT:

All right.

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 16 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 16

And again, without calling

3

into question your good faith, I do believe that Ms. Wang might

4

not necessarily share the assessment of the Maricopa County

5

Sheriff's about the number of those videos that demonstrate

6

problematic behavior.

7

may well.

8

wants to spend the time reviewing them.

9

I'm not saying that she wouldn't; she

But I believe that she's entitled to look if she

EF
OG

Can you tell me why she wouldn't be?

10

CAPTAIN BAILEY:

11

is Captain Bailey.

12

THE COURT:

Your Honor, are you asking me?

No, I'm asking Mr. Williams.

you for the clarification, Captain Bailey.

14

was a fair question to be asking you.

15

MR. WILLIAMS:

I don't think it

Your Honor, I think we've stated our

17

allowed to look at them.

18

interference with the ongoing investigation --

OF

basis and you disagreed with it as to why she shouldn't be

19

That's correct, and I understand that.

DS

10:24:10

Ms. Wang can use whatever she finds for purposes only of this
lawsuit and/or the arguments on appeal, and that if she

23

discloses any information, publicly or otherwise, she'll be in

24

violation of my order.

25

MR. WILLIAMS:

FR

10:23:56

I think our concern is an

And let me ask you, Mr. Williams, my proposal is, again, that

IEN

22

THE COURT:

10:23:43

But thank

16

21

This

TH

13

20

10:23:28

And one concern, Your Honor, with

10:24:30

1

respect to the filing on the --

2

THE COURT:

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 17 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 17

I guess before I let you go, and I will

3

let you speak, Mr. Williams, but do you have any concern about

4

an order entered to that effect in terms of doing what I can do

5

to preserve the integrity of your investigation?

6

MR. WILLIAMS:

I do have concerns, Your Honor, if

7

she's able to file any of those records as a matter of public

8

record either with this Court or with the Ninth Circuit.
THE COURT:

10

I understand that concern.

EF
OG

9

Ms. Wang, before you file any other records as an

11

MS. WANG:

13

MR. CASEY:

Understood, Your Honor.

And will that be -- Your Honor, this is

14

Tim Casey.

15

particular provision?

16

it's one thing for plaintiff to be able to look at the

17

documents or look at the videos and make their own assessment;

18

it's another thing for it to go on the public record, because

19

we need to preserve the integrity of what investigations are

20

ongoing.

TH

Will that be included in your order, that
10:25:13

OF

Because that is a significant concern is

DS

And we also want to make sure if there are

23

before we can address them and meet with them.
THE COURT:

Well, how about I revise it this way,

24

Mr. Casey?

25

tons of things that you both agree on can go in the public

FR

10:25:31

quote-unquote victims, that they're not in the public record

IEN

22

10:24:56

exhibit, you'll need to seek authorization of the Court.

12

21

10:24:42

It may well be -- I don't want to have to decide
10:25:46

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 18 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 18

1

record.

2

Ms. Wang wants to put any of the exhibit -- actual exhibits or

3

evidence in the -- copies of them in the public record, that to

4

the extent she cannot obtain your approval, she get an order of

5

the Court authorizing it first.

So I will be glad to enter in my order that if

10:26:05

6

MR. CASEY:

That is agreeable, Your Honor.

7

THE COURT:

All right.

Request number 4, records of

8

interviews of MCSO personnel relating to the Armendariz

9

investigation.

EF
OG

Well, I take it that the Armendariz

10

investigation itself is ongoing.

11

MR. WILLIAMS:

12

THE COURT:

That is correct, Your Honor.

Is there any investigations that have been

opened, and I think you've already answered this, with respect

14

to any other officers that have been identified, other than

15

Deputy Armendariz?

TH

13

16

MR. WILLIAMS:

10:26:44

Not at this time, Your Honor, although,

again, we express our disagreement with how the line's being

18

drawn, but we understand your ruling so far.

OF

17

19

21

My ruling will be the same

with respect to records of interviews with the MCSO personnel
relating to the Armendariz investigation.

That is, Ms. Wang

23

otherwise use them, absent the authorization of MCSO, in a

24

public filing without order of the Court.

FR

25

10:27:03

may review those records, but she may not attach them or

IEN

22

All right.

DS

20

THE COURT:

10:26:27

Now, documents relating to one division level

10:27:25

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 19 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 19

1

investigation of Deputy Armendariz, IA2014-0142.

2

investigation complete?

3

MR. WILLIAMS:

Is this

Your Honor, this is an interesting one.

4

That particular investigation is complete.

5

that investigation is that the nature of the investigation, and

6

I can only disclose this because we're under seal, raises

7

concerns about how that investigation was conducted with

8

respect to the deputies involved in that.

9

The problem with

EF
OG

And so actually that is -- and that issue was raised
with the monitor earlier this week because it is of series

11

concern to the IA division as to how that investigation was

12

completed, which raises concerns about, frankly, whether there

13

was any involvement between those who conducted that

14

investigation and Deputy Armendariz' conduct.

TH

10

15

We had a very difficult time getting that division

16

investigation file back from the division.

17

we were concerned, to say the least, about how it was

18

conducted.

19

investigation.

21

10:28:17

When we got it back

OF
THE COURT:

All right.

And let me just say, I

if they're -- if they have concerns about any of my rulings, I

23

just invite them to speak up and identify themselves, or if

24

they have information that they think would be helpful to the

25

Court in making its rulings, I similarly invite them to speak

FR

10:28:30

appreciate the presence of the monitor staff on this call, and

IEN

22

10:27:59

And so that is the nature of that particular

DS

20

10:27:46

10:28:49

1

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 20 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 20

up.

2

But it seems to me, Mr. Williams, and I appreciate

3

your candor and the willingness of the Sheriff's Office to

4

investigate the adequacy of their own Internal Affairs

5

investigations, but it seems to me that that might go to the

6

very heart of matters in which Ms. Wang would be interested.

7

So to the extent that she wants the investigation

8

itself, I don't think there's any privilege that would withhold

9

it.

So the investigation

EF
OG

It's not an ongoing investigation.

10

itself, there is no privilege that attaches.

11

to the extent there is a new investigation about the adequacy

12

of that investigation, there may be other issues, but I don't

13

see any issue with her receiving the actual concluded

14

investigation of Deputy Armendariz, and so I'm going to let her

15

have that.

16

there is no longer any ongoing investigation, and so I'm not

17

going to make that subject to the protective order.

TH

MR. WILLIAMS:

DS

23

Yes, Your Honor.

10:29:50

We have the same

concerns that we've expressed before, but we understand your

THE COURT:

All right.

MR. WILLIAMS:

Thank you.

We think it runs substantial risk of

24

interfering with the very investigation that we're trying to

25

conduct, but we will, of course, abide by the Court's order.

FR

10:30:05

Court's -- the Court's decision on it.

IEN

22

10:29:25

Any concerns about that?

19

21

There may be --

And it seems that is a public document because

OF

18

20

10:29:07

10:30:18

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 21 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 21

1

THE COURT:

2

Does the monitor have -- does the monitor share any of

3

I appreciate it, Mr. Williams.

those concerns?

4

MONITOR WARSHAW:

No, Your Honor.

5

Court's views on that issue.

6

THE COURT:

I concur with the

10:30:31

All right.

Personnel records and

performance evaluations of any other MCSO personnel under

8

investigation as a result of the Armendariz matter and records

9

of complaints against such MCSO personnel.

10

EF
OG

7

Well, it seems to me that to the extent no such

11

persons have presently been identified, there is no response to

12

that request.

13

request, Ms. Wang?

14

MS. WANG:

15

And I would also note that this subject was addressed

16

by one of plaintiffs' requests for production during discovery

17

in the case as well, we did ask for records of citizen

18

complaints, so I think that would cover some of these

19

materials.

21

TH

No, you have not misread it, Your Honor.
10:31:06

OF
THE COURT:

All right.

Well, I'm going to say that to

underlying litigation before trial that were not disclosed but

23

you have subsequently discovered material that is responsive,

24

it just has to be disclosed, totally -- totally regardless of

25

any privilege asserted now.

FR

10:31:21

the extent any materials were requested by the plaintiff in the

IEN

22

Is that a fair summation, or have I misread your

DS

20

10:30:49

So --

10:31:42

1

MS. WANG:

2

THE COURT:

3

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 22 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 22

Thank you, Your Honor.

-- what's left of request number 8, other

than records of complaints against MCSO personnel?

4

The problem we have here, Ms. Wang, as I've said, is

5

there are no MCSO personnel under investigation as yet as a

6

result of the Armendariz matter, or have I misstated that,

7

Mr. Williams?

8

MR. WILLIAMS:

9

It's correct within the way the Court

EF
OG

has drawn the line, that's correct.

10

Again, we will contend that they were under

11

investigation and that the statute covers that status as well.

12

THE COURT:

All right.

14

may want to disclose that to Ms. Wang.

TH

may become subject to such an investigation, I believe that you

15

But Ms. Wang, when he does do that, it does seem to me
that 38-1101L then kicks in and you're entitled to their

17

personnel file, but you're not entitled to their personnel file

18

including any materials that pertain to the investigation.

19

Is that clear?

DS

MS. WANG:

I think so, Your Honor.

I take it that if

subject of an administrative disciplinary proceeding, we'll

23

expect defendants to inform us and inform the Court and the

24

monitor, and then we could take the necessary steps to, you

25

know, make sure that any privilege that then does get triggered

FR

10:32:50

circumstances change at any point and a deputy is actually the

IEN

22

10:32:30

OF

16

21

10:32:14

Now, at such point that any

13

20

10:31:57

10:33:14

1

will apply to documents.

2

THE COURT:

3

MS. WANG:

4

THE COURT:

5

All right.

But that's understood.

Any concern about that request and that

ruling on that request?

6

MR. WILLIAMS:

7

10:33:29

Other than our previous objections,

Your Honor, no.

8

THE COURT:

9

MR. WILLIAMS:
Your Honor.

Well, you've won that one, Mr. Williams.
I mean in the interim is my problem,

EF
OG

10

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 23 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 23

10:33:43

11

THE COURT:

12

MCSO Internal Affairs spreadsheet summarizing

13

video recordings seized from Deputy Armendariz's home.

14

All right.

Your Honor, if I may, those constitute

TH

MR. WILLIAMS:

Fair enough.

the very heart of the MCSO's investigation into this matter.

16

And more importantly, perhaps, they are works in process, and

17

they change as evidence is obtained, is analyzed.

18

investigatory conclusions that would be completely unfair not

19

only for the MCSO to be held to in the meantime, but even

20

worse, if they were somehow disseminated.

23

They include

But in any event,

10:34:18

about with regard to the investigatory file.
I should also say those, along with numerous other

24

documents, are provided to the monitor on a regular basis.

25

monitor is intimately involved in the investigation and sets

FR

10:34:02

that is at the very heart of what we -- what we are concerned

IEN

22

DS

21

OF

15

The
10:34:34

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 24 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 24

1

tasks and time lines and has almost daily contact with IA in

2

that respect.

3

dark.

4

So it's not as if that is being conducted in the

In addition, potential witnesses and victims are

5

identified in those spreadsheets who have not yet been

6

interviewed or contacted.

7

of our concern.

8

THE COURT:

9

That is certainly at the very heart

Mr. Warshaw, do you have any comment to

EF
OG

make with respect to those spreadsheets?

10

MONITOR WARSHAW:

Yes, Your Honor.

Mr. Williams is

11

correct, we do get those on a regularized basis, and those are

12

the subject of a consultative process.

13

restrictions that the Court has placed on the plaintiffs

14

relevant to the other matters that have already been discussed,

15

I personally do not see how it would be an investigative

16

compromise if that material was shown to the plaintiffs with

17

the same provisions that the Court has determined relevant to

18

the other matters.

TH

But based on the

10:35:24

I believe that is going to be my ruling.

I do appreciate the good faith of the MCSO.

impair their good faith investigation.

I don't want to

But certainly to the

23

think Ms. Wang's entitled to look at why and what and the

24

specification of why they are problematic, and certainly to

25

explore whether or not the stops involved members of the

FR

10:35:42

extent they've identified 394 stops that may be problematic, I

IEN

22

THE COURT:

DS

21

10:35:02

OF

19
20

10:34:49

10:36:02

1

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 25 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 25

plaintiff class.

2

And so subject to the same restrictions, I'm going to

3

make the same order.

4

to the last area that wasn't included in Ms. Wang's letter but

5

subsequently raised by e-mail, which is the monitor's reports.

6

And it seems to me that that would apply

Any other matters to be raised in this conference

7

call?

8

MS. WANG:

9

Your Honor, just one, which I subsequently

EF
OG

e-mailed to the Court, and I apologize for not including it in

10

my letter.

11

whether defendants have made a full disclosure under requests 5

12

and 6 from my May 21st letter, and these are -- both categories

13

relate to documents that MCSO has provided to the monitor.

14

There's some lack of clarity on my part about

TH

16

at the last minute yesterday just to get some clarity about

17

whether anything was still withheld.

10:36:57

OF

responsive, and Mr. Williams and I were meeting and conferring

18

To the extent that there are documents that are

withheld in that last category we just addressed about the

20

weekly -- or the regular spreadsheet that's given to the

DS

19

we are seeking those other documents as well.

23

THE COURT:

24

MR. WILLIAMS:

FR

25

10:37:16

monitor as one of those categories, I just want to clarify that

IEN

22

10:36:36

MCSO has produced a number of the documents that are

15

21

10:36:20

Mr. Williams.
Your Honor, I believe we have disclosed

in the privilege log or in our correspondence any of those

10:37:30

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 26 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 26

1

documents that weren't produced, and I think all of them fall

2

in the category of what we've been discussing today.

3

want to clarify that if you -- that by ordering the production

4

of all those, it is pursuant to the terms of your order today,

5

if they fall in that category with respect to an investigation.

6

THE COURT:

7

So I just

I'm not sure that I've understood this

interchange exactly, but are you satisfied, Ms. Wang?

8

MS. WANG:

9

I think so.

Maybe we should just clarify

EF
OG

with Mr. Williams that documents that MCSO is producing to the

10

monitor will be produced to plaintiffs with the limitation that

11

the Court has imposed on the other categories.

12

THE COURT:

Yes.

14

I'm not sure that the order itself would disclose any

15

privileged material, and it seems to me that we need to -- as

16

I've said before, and I think all parties are in agreement, we

17

need to be as open as we can be without interfering with

18

legitimate police operations.

19

Is there any reason why the order cannot be publicly

DS

filed?

MR. WILLIAMS:

10:38:51

Your Honor, from defendants I guess it

depends on the level of detail that the order gets into, but

IEN

22

10:38:33

OF

TH

why my order on this matter should be kept from the public?

21

10:38:09

Now, let me ask, is there any reason

13

20

10:37:48

presuming the order does not get into the details of any of

24

what was discussed today with respect to the status of the

25

investigation, the nature of the spreadsheets, the process,

FR

23

10:39:04

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 27 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 27

1

et cetera, to the extent it simply grants plaintiffs access and

2

restates the restriction, I think Your Honor is correct.

3

would just be nervous without any recital leading up to that.

4

THE COURT:

5

MS. WANG:

Ms. Wang.

I

Plaintiffs' view is that Your Honor's order

6

should be public, and we agree that, obviously, anything that's

7

sensitive or confidential should not be in that order.

8

THE COURT:

9

Is there anything else that needs to be raised?

Thanks to all parties.

EF
OG

All right.

10

MS. WANG:

11

MCSO has identified these 394 video files, but I take

Your Honor, just a clarification.

it that the Court is ordering the larger scope of documents

13

that were seized from Armendariz's home to be disclosed to

14

plaintiffs, is that right?

TH

12

15

THE COURT:

16

MS. WANG:

17

MR. WILLIAMS:

That's correct.

OF

mentioned, which obviously is part of the investigative

20

spreadsheet, I wonder if the Court would allow us to complete

DS

19

10:40:12

that lieutenant review, which would then be put into the

IEN

investigative spreadsheet before disclosing the spreadsheet, so

23

that at least the final version of the MCSO's review of those

24

videos is there, rather than the intermediate production of

25

that review.

FR

10:40:00

Your Honor, the only other issue with

respect to the lieutenant review of the videos that I

22

10:39:41

Okay.

18

21

10:39:27

10:40:31

1

THE COURT:

2

MR. WILLIAMS:

3

THE COURT:

4

MONITOR WARSHAW:

5

acceptable, Judge.

6

MS. WANG:

7

THE COURT:

8

said, Bob.

9

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 28 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 28

How long do you anticipate that taking?
Two weeks, Your Honor.

Mr. Warshaw?

From our perspective, I think that's

10:40:45

Your Honor, for plaintiffs -- sorry.
I am sorry.

I just couldn't hear what you

Can you repeat that, please?

EF
OG

And then, Ms. Wang, I'll hear from you.

10

MONITOR WARSHAW:

Right.

If I understand

11

Mr. Williams, is he -- is Mr. Williams, may I ask, are you

12

saying it will take you two weeks, or --

13

MR. WILLIAMS:

14

Yes, we think the review can be

TH

complete within two weeks.

15

THE COURT:

16

MS. WANG:

Ms. Wang.

10:41:09

Your Honor, my understanding is that MCSO

has been providing a version of this spreadsheet, which, as

18

Mr. Williams described it, is a work in progress, to the

19

monitor team on a regular basis.

20

copies of all such spreadsheets as they've been produced to the

DS

Our request is that we get

23

So our request is to get copies of all of those, and

including future versions, as Mr. Williams is describing.

24

THE COURT:

25

MONITOR WARSHAW:

FR

10:41:28

monitor, and that includes, you know, what's happened so far.

IEN

22

OF

17

21

10:40:56

Yeah.

I think that's a fair -Your Honor -- I'm sorry.

10:41:43

1

THE COURT:

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 29 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 29

I think that's a fair request.

It's the

2

import, I think, already of my order.

But to the extent that

3

Mr. Williams wants to designate one of those as final so that

4

you can have the final assessment of the MCSO, I think that

5

works, too.

10:41:59

6

MS. WANG:

7

THE COURT:

8

MONITOR WARSHAW:

9

(Proceedings concluded at 10:41 a.m.)

11
12
13

15
16

OF

17
18

IEN

DS

19

22

Okay.

TH

14

21

All right.

Thank you all.

Thank you, Judge.

EF
OG

10

20

That's right, for us, too.

23
24

FR

25

BO
W
. CO
M

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 735 Filed 08/11/14 Page 30 of 30
SEALED PROCEEDINGS, CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 8/7/14 30

1
2

C E R T I F I C A T E

3
4
5
6
7

I, GARY MOLL, do hereby certify that I am duly

appointed and qualified to act as Official Court Reporter for

9

the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.

EF
OG

8

10

I FURTHER CERTIFY that the foregoing pages constitute
a full, true, and accurate transcript of all of that portion of

12

the proceedings contained herein, had in the above-entitled

13

cause on the date specified therein, and that said transcript

14

was prepared under my direction and control.

TH

11

15
16
17
18

2014.

20
21

IEN

22

DS

19

OF

DATED at Phoenix, Arizona, this 11th day of August,

23
24

FR

25

s/Gary Moll