Melendres v. Arpaio #1354 Sept 10 2015A TRANSCRIPT - AM Status Conference

OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
2
3
4
5
Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres,

et al.,
Plaintiffs,
6
7
8
vs.
Joseph M. Arpaio, et al.,

Defendants.
9
10
11
12
13
14
(Status Conference)
17
18
DS
19
Court Reporter:
IEN
22
23
24
FR
25
Phoenix, Arizona
September 10, 2015
9:05 a.m.
BEFORE THE HONORABLE G. MURRAY SNOW
16
21
No. CV 07-2513-PHX-GMS
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
15
20
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
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
A P P E A R A N C E S
1
2
3
4
5
6
For the Plaintiffs:

American Civil Liberties Union Foundation
Immigrants' Rights Project
By: Cecillia D. Wang, Esq.
39 Drumm Street
San Francisco, California 94111
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation
Immigrants' Rights Project
By: Andre Segura, Esq. - Telephonically
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, New York 10004
7
8
9
Covington & Burling, LLP

By: Stanley Young, Esq. - Telephonically
By: Michelle L. Morin, Esq.
333 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 700
Redwood Shores, California 94065
10
11
12
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund

By: Jorge M. Castillo, Esq. - Telephonically
634 S. Spring Street, 11th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90014
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
For the Defendant Joseph M. Arpaio and Maricopa County

Sheriff's Office:
Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, PLC
By: A. Melvin McDonald, Jr., Esq. - Telephonically
By: John T. Masterson, Esq.
2901 N. Central Avenue, Suite 800
IEN
22
For the Defendant Maricopa County:

Walker & Peskind, PLLC
By: Richard K. Walker, Esq.
By: Charles W. Jirauch, Esq.
SGA Corporate Center
16100 N. 7th Street, Suite 140
DS
15
23
24
FR
25
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/10/15 Status Conference
For the Movants Christine Stutz and Thomas P. Liddy:

Broening, Oberg, Woods & Wilson, PC
By: Terrence P. Woods, Esq.
P.O. Box 20527
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
For the Movants Maricopa County Attorney's Office and Maricopa

County Attorney William Montgomery:
Ridenour Hienton, PLLC
By: Ernest Calderon, Esq.
Chase Tower
For the Intervenor United States of America:
U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division
By: Puneet Cheema, Esq. - Telephonically
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 5th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20530
10
U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division

By: Cynthia Coe, Esq. - Telephonically
601 D. Street NW, #5011
Washington, D.C. 20004
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
For Chief Deputy Gerard Sheridan:

Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, PLC
By: A. Melvin McDonald, Jr., Esq. - Telephonically
For Executive Chief Brian Sands:
Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith, LLP
By: Dane A. Dodd, Esq.
For Lieutenant Joseph Sousa:
David Eisenberg, PLC
By: David Eisenberg, Esq.
2702 N. 3rd Street, Suite 4003
IEN
22
For Deputy Chief Jack MacIntyre:

Dickinson Wright, PLLC
By: Gary L. Birnbaum, Esq.
1850 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
DS
12
23
24
FR
25
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
1
2
3
4
5
6
Also present:
Chief Robert Warshaw, Monitor - Telephonically
Commander John Girvin, Deputy Monitor- Telephonically
Chief Deputy Gerard Sheridan
Lieutenant Joseph Sousa
Raphael O. Gomez, Esq. - Telephonically
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
21
IEN
22
DS
19
20
23
24
FR
25
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
P R O C E E D I N G S
1
2
3
4
5
THE CLERK:
This is civil case number 07-2513,
MS. WANG:
09:05:52
Good morning, Your Honor.
Cecillia Wang of
the ACLU for plaintiffs.
9
10
THE COURT:
Good morning.
MS. MORIN:
Michelle Morin of Covington & Burling for
THE COURT:
13
Good morning.
MR. MASTERSON:
John
Masterson for Sheriff Arpaio and MCSO.
15
THE COURT:
16
Good morning.
MR. WALKER:
09:06:12
Richard Walker
17
on behalf of the County as defined in previous appearances and
18
filings with the Court.
19
21
MR. WOODS:
and Liddy.
THE COURT:
24
MR. BIRNBAUM:
FR
09:06:24
Terry Woods here, Your Honor, for Stutz
23
25
Dane Dodd, Lewis
Brisbois, on behalf of former Chief Sands.
IEN
22
MR. DODD:
DS
20
09:06:03
plaintiffs.
12
14
Please be seated.
Counsel, please announce your appearances.
11
THE COURT:
Melendres v. Arpaio, on for status conference.
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Good morning.
Gary
Birnbaum, special counsel for Deputy Chief John MacIntyre.
09:06:35
THE COURT:
Good morning.
MR. EISENBERG:
David
Eisenberg making a special appearance on behalf of Lieutenant
Joseph Sousa.
He is present in the courtroom.
THE COURT:
Good morning.
MR. EISENBERG:
MR. CALDERON:
09:06:46
Good morning.
Ernest
Calderon for nonparty William Montgomery, Maricopa County
Attorney, and his office.

THE COURT:
10
Good morning.
09:06:56
Who do we have on the telephone?
11
CHIEF WARSHAW:
12
13
Chief Warshaw and Deputy Monitor Commander John Girvin.

MR. YOUNG:
14
For plaintiffs,
15
Stanley Young, Covington & Burling, Andre Segura of the ACLU,
16
and Jorge Castillo of MALDEF.
17
MS. CHEEMA:
Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Puneet Cheema and
19
Cindy Coe.
For Civil
MR. McDONALD:
Special
23
appearance -- this is Mel McDonald on behalf of Sheriff Joe
24
Arpaio.
25
Barry Mitchell, making special appearances for Chief Jerry
FR
09:07:24
Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Raphael Gomez.
IEN
22
DS
21
MR. GOMEZ:
09:07:09
For the
18
20
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I am also covering this morning for Lee Stein and

09:07:39
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Sheridan.
2
3
THE COURT:
Anyone else on the phone?
All right.
Last time we discussed the parties'
request for mutual experts on MCSO's Internal Affairs
investigation processes.
stage in this proceeding, and I have decided to allow that, but
we need to talk about scheduling.
testimony that could bear on the topic, all testimony other
10
than the experts' testimony to be taken care of in this next
11
round of resumed hearings.
09:08:18
I assume that the Department of Justice has their
12
13
expert.
14
thoughts about who they might retain and will now, if they
15
haven't already retained one, engage one, and that those
16
experts can have access to all the materials in the file to
17
date.
18
will also be relevant to their undertaking.
I assume that defendants, if they have -- they've had
09:08:42
Of course, some of the testimony yet to come I imagine
But it does seem to me that I would like to discuss
19
some obstacles to proceeding and how we can best resolve those
21
obstacles so that the next hearing won't just take --
22
needlessly take days, but will provide everybody with all the
IEN
DS
20
23
the testimony other than the expert testimony that they're
24
going to -- that's going to be introduced in this contempt
25
matter.
FR
09:07:59
In short, if we're going to do that, I want all the
8
9
That would require an additional
09:09:02
09:09:22
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I did note early this morning, Ms. Wang, although I
1
2
haven't read it, that you have filed your motion to compel.
I've also noted that you've already scheduled depositions on
the 7th and 8th of October, or sometime in the break, in some
of the break dates in October.
09:09:35
It seems to me that we need to decide how I'm going
6
7
to -- we need to decide that motion to compel, so that if I am
indeed going to offer up other testimony, those witnesses
who -- or I'm going to require additional testimony, those
10
witnesses who have information that may be responsive to
11
questions can be deposed efficiently prior to the resumption,
12
or at least efficiently with respect to the resumption of the
13
resumed contempt hearings.

Ms. Wang.
14
MS. WANG:
15
Yes, Your Honor.
I would agree, we would
16
like to see a ruling before we depose witnesses who would touch
17
on the issues that are subject of the motion.
next Monday afternoon, and so plaintiffs' request is that we
20
have very expedited response briefing from defendants; and we
21
would respectfully request a ruling, if possible, by Monday
22
morning, so that we can go forward with that deposition, with
IEN
DS
19
09:10:26
the Court's ruling to guide us.
24
THE COURT:
25
MR. MASTERSON:
FR
09:10:07
I have to say, the next such witness is being deposed
18
23
09:09:51
Mr. Masterson.
Well, Judge, I haven't seen the motion
09:10:43
yet.
I'm pretty confident I know what it's about.
I see next Monday afternoon's deposition is Mr. Fax.
2
3
I'm not sure how much information Mr. Fax has on the issue
if --
THE COURT:
5
6
Was it the meeting on the 17th that's the
MS. WANG:
That's right, Your Honor.
But as you'll
see when you do have a chance to look at the motion, we do
think that the waiver goes to the subject of advice given on
10
whether to disclose the Knapp IDs, the 1459 IDs, and we would
11
expect to ask Sergeant Fax questions about whether he had such
12
knowledge or participated in conversations about that.

THE COURT:
13
handle this expeditiously but don't want to deprive you of the
15
fair opportunity to respond.
MR. MASTERSON:
17
THE COURT:
Okay.
Let's see.
DS
Wednesday?
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
IEN
23
I mean, I'd like at least five days to
respond, Judge.
19
22
09:11:49
How much time do you think you need?
16
21
So that would put it next --
Friday.
We'll say five working days.
09:12:03
Okay.
So you've got today; you've got tomorrow;
you've got Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday.
24
Can you get it to me Wednesday night or Thursday?
25
MR. MASTERSON:
FR
09:11:27
Mr. Masterson, obviously, I would like to
14
20
09:11:12
subject of the motion?
18
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
We can get it to you by Thursday,
09:12:17
Judge.
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/10/15 Status Conference 10
THE COURT:
Okay.
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
to me Thursday morning?
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
Correct.
So if I give you until -- can you get it
We have status next Friday, right?
09:12:28
Certainly.
Okay.
So if you'll do it Thursday morning
before 10 o'clock, Ms. Wang, can you get me any kind of reply,
if you want, on a very expedited basis, and I'll try to let you
10
know by Friday night how I'm going to rule.

MS. WANG:
11
We will do so, Your Honor.
09:12:41
And at this
12
point I don't want to waive a reply, but we'll certainly file
13
it immediately so that you can rule by Friday.

THE COURT:
14
MS. WANG:
15
All right.
I would point out that Chief Deputy
09:12:54
16
Sheridan, who I would expect to depose on the subject, is
17
scheduled to go forward on Tuesday with his deposition.
18
the briefing schedule with five days for a response even if we
19
do waive our reply, and I'm not saying we certainly will, we
20
may have an issue where we will need to reopen depositions for
21
this limited purpose, and may need to do that in the evenings
22
during --
DS
IEN
23
THE COURT:
24
MS. WANG:
25
THE COURT:
FR
Given
Well, here's my thought on that.
09:13:13
I had --
Okay.
-- an additional thought, see if it works.
09:13:24
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I've had you all hold dates, although we have not
1
2
firmly set any date.
It seems to me that if in fact I'm going
to reorder testimony, you're going to at least have to redepose
Captain Bailey.
depositions need to be reopened, how about we convene the first
day of the resumed hearing on the 23rd, the 22nd already being
scheduled as a resumption date, and I allow you to retake
everyone who you won't have already been able to take, in light
of my ruling, on the 22nd.
And so if in fact people need to be -- their
That will also, perhaps, give you more time to work
10
11
out the order of witnesses, who you're going to call, provide a
12
little bit of cross disclosure, because as I looked at this
13
last week, I do realize that you have been given very little
14
time.
15
helpful to have a joint pretrial order of some nature, that may
16
give you a little time to try and work out stipulations and/or
17
incorporate in documents and testimony that you need, if in
18
fact that proves necessary.
And while I do agree with Mr. Masterson that it would be
DS
MS. WANG:
I think that will work, Your Honor,
22
may need to double-track on the 22nd, even if they're brief,
IEN
depending on how many witnesses will need to be reopened.
We
but we'll try to work that out.
24
THE COURT:
25
MS. WANG:
FR
09:14:24
09:14:39
21
23
09:14:05
Is that workable for you?
19
20
09:13:44
All right.
And we appreciate the extra day.
That was
09:14:54
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
very helpful.
THE COURT:
Mr. Masterson, any comment?
MR. MASTERSON:
My only comment is these -- I've been
in three depositions, and we're taking an unbelievable amount
of time in these depositions, and a lot of the time is spent on
issues which are not relevant to this dispute: not relevant to
the OSC; not relevant to the underlying lawsuit.
spent an awful lot of time in a deposition yesterday on issues
which Mr. Young stated they weren't even going to raise.
In fact, we
So I understand that they may want to reopen
10
09:15:30
11
depositions and question witnesses, depending upon the Court's
12
ruling on the motion to compel.
13
short depositions specific to the issues ruled upon in the
14
motion to compel.
15
we're not going to take hours upon hours going into irrelevant
16
areas.
17
objections and instruct witnesses not to answer a little bit
18
beyond what Rule 30 allows me if we reach into irrelevant areas
19
during these follow-up depositions.
But these ought to be very
And we're not going to revisit old issues;
THE COURT:
Well, I'll tell you what I will do.
I'm
not going to allow you to instruct witnesses not to answer, but
22
I will be available on the 22nd, and if in fact you feel like
IEN
21
23
they're going -- retracking areas that have already been
24
covered, they're going beyond the motion to compel, call me up
25
and I'll make the ruling.
FR
09:15:49
And I would ask the Court to allow me to make
DS
20
09:15:15
09:16:05
09:16:22
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
MR. MASTERSON:
MS. WANG:
Thank you, Judge.
Your Honor, respectfully, I would just say
that I disagree with Mr. Masterson's characterization of the
depositions that have occurred and I would challenge him to
point to any irrelevant matters or matters where we're
replowing ground that was covered previously.

THE COURT:
You know what?
The deposition took place,
it's on the record, we're going to have the hearing, and so
we'll have the hearing.
10
hearing.
I will rule on relevancy during the
09:16:49
It does seem to me, though, that as we get ready -- if
11
in fact we're going to call the third phase for remediation
13
experts, and if those experts are going to want to refer to the
14
monitor's report on the adequacy of the investigations, which
15
is at least as we have currently discussed it, we need to
16
provide the monitor access to materials that he may or may not
17
need in preparing that report.
18
combined his -- at your request, Mr. Masterson, since we
19
combined his interviews with depositions, I know he mentioned
20
that he was going to need to interview Chief Olson.
And one of the things, since we
scheduled.
I don't remember when.
to giving the monitor a copy of that deposition to see if it
24
covers the questions that he was otherwise going to cover?
FR
09:17:36
But is there any objection
23
25
09:17:12
Now, I note that you do have Chief Olson's deposition
IEN
22
DS
12
21
09:16:33
MR. MASTERSON:
I have no objection to that, Judge.
09:17:55
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
MS. WANG:
No objection, Your Honor.
Plaintiffs would
not object to giving to the Monitor Team any of the deposition
transcripts.
THE COURT:
4
5
sense.
09:18:03
Any objection to that, Mr. Masterson?
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
8
9
Well, it seems to me that makes the most
No objection, Judge.
All right.
We also have, then, the
remaining issue, and I have not talked to the monitor and don't
10
know, but he's on the phone, the extent to which -- I mean,
11
we've identified 61 to 65 new identifications, I think,
12
recently.
13
seem to involve members of the plaintiff class, that are going
14
to require also internal investigations.
Prior to that we had the 1459, about half of which
I am not inclined to postpone this whole hearing while
15
16
you do the investigation that relates to those documents, but I
17
don't know whether the monitor feels like he needs such a
18
postponement, and it may abide his observation of what you're
19
doing now.
And so I guess those are issues, Chief Warshaw, that I
DS
20
wanted to raise with you today.
22
way or the other, do you know or are you going to have to wait
IEN
21
23
24
FR
25
09:18:12
09:18:35
09:18:53
Do you have any comment one
and see?
CHIEF WARSHAW:
Your Honor, I think the best answer at
this particular time is that we wait and see.
We have had
09:19:08
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
communication with the new commander of the Professional
Standards Bureau, and it is our understanding that the MCSO is
first commencing its own investigation relevant to those IDs.

So we know very little about the progress, as the
4
5
exercise has just begun, so I would like to hold in abeyance
for a little bit any views that we may have on that until we
can get a sense about the course and conduct and scope of that
investigation.
THE COURT:
All right.
Well, it would probably be
10
something I at least want to raise with you generally.
11
won't -- again next week.
12
have an answer, but if you do have an answer or you can give us
13
some thoughts, that would be helpful.

CHIEF WARSHAW:
14
THE COURT:
15
the motion to compel.
17
Thursday morning.
21
23
I've forgotten.
10:00 a.m., Judge.
Thursday morning at 10:00 a.m.
MS. WANG:
09:20:30
THE COURT:
That's fine, Your Honor.

If in fact -- and we can determine this
24
next status conference -- if in fact, in light of that, we need
25
to do resumed depositions, I will assume that the resumed
FR
09:20:00
going to file one, by Friday, shall we say noon?
IEN
22
We set a briefing schedule on
And then, Ms. Wang, you'll have any reply, if you're
DS
20
Yes, Your Honor.
What time did I say?
THE COURT:
19
09:19:48
You will have the response to me by
MR. MASTERSON:
18
I don't necessarily expect you to
All right.
16
09:19:31
09:20:48
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
depositions will relate to the topics set forth in the motion
to compel and we will set those for what has otherwise been
scheduled as the first day of the resumed hearing, which is
September 22nd, which time you might also use, if you have any,
to shore up the sort of semiformal joint final pretrial order
that we have discussed.
In addition to those matters, I had a few other
7
8
matters I wanted to raise.
documents been provided that had to do with the archived PST
10
files?
Have all the Maricopa County
09:21:25
MS. WANG:
11
Your Honor, we do not know.
We received
12
the last batch, let's say, which was voluminous, as they all
13
have been, on this past Tuesday, the 8th, due to some
14
logistical problems with the delivery.
15
for that, that's when we received the last batch, and I do not
16
know whether there are additional documents.
I'm not blaming anyone
Casey's files that Court ordered to be produced.
I wrote to
19
Ms. Iafrate and to Ms. Clark to point out that Ms. Clark copied
20
me on a letter to Ms. Iafrate still requesting item by item the
21
defendants' authorization to release the documents.
DS
18
09:22:01
IEN
However, Ms. Clark noted that she had handed over all
23
of the documents to Ms. Iafrate, and I believe under Your
24
Honor's order Ms. Iafrate should simply produce those
25
immediately, and I have had no response to my correspondence on
FR
09:21:44
We also have not received yet the documents from Tim
17
22
09:21:04
09:22:22
that.
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
And one more note.
Through some discussion between
plaintiffs' counsel and Mr. Calderon, counsel for the Maricopa
County Attorney's Office, I'm advised by him that we will
receive additional documents in response to our subpoena to the
MCAO next week midweek.
7
8
heard?
MS. WANG:
I do not know, Your Honor.
Your Honor, Ernest Calderon.
May I be
09:23:02
THE COURT:
11
12
What are those documents?
MR. CALDERON:
9
10
THE COURT:
Yes.
Would you please approach a
microphone, Mr. Calderon?

MR. CALDERON:
13
Your Honor, may it please the Court,
14
it's been the county attorney's position to do as expansive a
15
search as possible relative to Mr. Young's inquiries in the
16
case.
17
the privilege is owned by the sheriff.
18
documents with a privilege log, comparable to what Ms. Clark
19
has done, over to Ms. Iafrate.
What we do is we prepare a privilege log.
We turn over the
document which prompted us to think, our office to think:
22
we as expansive as possible in the search?
IEN
21
client to expand their search.
24
they produced, I think, about a hundred documents, I'm not
25
sure.
FR
09:23:29
Were
So we asked our
23
It was last night.
09:23:15
We believe
Last week Mr. Young raised a question or two about a
DS
20
09:22:44
I understand that last night
My associate was texting me when we
09:23:51
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
were outside.
So I don't know the volume of it, but I have a -- and
2
3
I don't know what the documents are.
plaintiffs' counsel that by no later than the middle of next
week, my goal would be the first part of next week, to have the
privilege log and the documents turned over to Ms. Iafrate, of
course with a copy of the letter to plaintiffs so they can
discuss delivery and receipt of those documents.

THE COURT:
THE COURT:
11
Thank you, Your Honor.
09:24:24
Thank you.
Do you have any insight for us, Mr. Masterson?
12
MR. MASTERSON:
13
I wish I did, Judge, but I don't.
As
14
you can see, this morning I'm all by my lonesome, and I don't
15
know the answers to some of these questions.
16
maybe provide help in one of the areas, and that's with respect
17
to Mr. Casey's file.
I think I can
09:24:42
My understanding is that a privilege review -- to the
18
extent there are remaining privileges in those documents, the
20
privilege review has to be conducted.
21
when we did the privilege review previously, we had four -- at
22
the Court's suggestion, we had four lawyers from our firm
IEN
DS
19
As you know or may know,
23
participate in going through those, I think, 80,000 documents.
24
So we're willing to offer up our associates again to take a
25
look at Mr. Casey's file.
FR
09:24:06
All right.
MR. CALDERON:
10
But I have assured
I think that may be the holdup, but
09:25:00
09:25:20
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I don't know for sure, because I have not discussed that with
Ms. Iafrate.
THE COURT:
3
4
Do you have any input on the last batch of
the archived files?
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
I have none on that.
All right.
09:25:33
Thank you, Mr. Masterson.
Ms. Wang, this is what I'm going to --
Well, I'm sorry.
MR. DODD:
THE COURT:
10
MR. DODD:
11
Yes?
Your Honor, may I be heard on that?

Certainly.
09:25:45
The archived recovered PST files that have
12
been produced to us, I think we received one yesterday and two
13
the day before, those are non-searchable PDF.
14
format in which they've been produced.
15
time or the capability to review 16,000 some-odd e-mails in a
16
non-searchable PDF format before the depositions next week and
17
the recommencing of the contempt proceedings the week after
18
that.
THE COURT:
19
21
We're not going to have
All right.
Your Honor, plaintiff would join in
09:26:17
I would point out that even though those files were in
23
a native PST format, and even though we requested that they be
24
produced in native format, it appears they are actually scanned
25
documents and therefore are not searchable, as Mr. Dodd said,
FR
09:26:01
Chief Sands's request through Mr. Dodd.
IEN
22
MS. WANG:
DS
20
That's the
09:26:37
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
and do not include the metadata.
in that form.
We had requested production
And I did bring this up with Mr. Walker outside of the
3
4
courtroom back on August 28th, and we would, in short, join in
Mr. Dodd's request.
THE COURT:
09:26:53
All right.
Well, here's what we're going
to do.
hearing, and I authorized that because Mr. Masterson was going
to be here.
10
Ms. Iafrate requested to be excused from today's
I don't necessarily expect Mr. Masterson to know
everything Ms. Iafrate's handled.
09:27:07
But I think I've been pretty clear, and we started a
11
12
week ago on my order, and so I'm going to authorize you,
13
Ms. Wang, that if you don't have satisfactory responses to this
14
by the end of the day, you should call my chambers, and we will
15
have a status hearing by the end of the day to know where we
16
stand on these and if further order of the Court is needed to
17
provide direction.
I will also point out that as anxious as I am to
18
resume the contempt hearing, if we need to take more than the
20
22nd to iron out and make sure that we have documents, that
21
they're searchable, and that appropriate depositions can take
22
place, then we will to that.
IEN
DS
19
23
09:27:36
But everybody's going to hold open all the dates I
24
gave you, and we will -- and only with the authorization of the
25
Court will the resumed hearing not begin on the 22nd.
FR
09:27:21
I've
09:27:57
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
already discussed postponing it a day, and if I have to end up
postponing it more than one day, I will.
those dates, and as soon as we can resume, we will resume; and
we will get the documents fully produced in searchable format;
and we will get Mr. Casey's files reviewed for privilege and
disclosed to the other parties so that they have time, adequate
time to review them and conduct effective depositions.
am going to hold everyone's feet to the fire quite literally to
make sure that happens.
But we will hold all
And I
And so today, Ms. Wang, if you don't have satisfactory
10
11
responses to this, we will resume -- we will reconvene; we will
12
reconvene when Ms. Iafrate can be here, whether that has to be
13
the noon hour or whether it has to be at 5 o'clock; and we will
14
get answers to these questions.

MS. WANG:
15
THE COURT:
16
How about the LEAR protocol?
Last time
you requested to have access to the LEAR protocol and
18
Ms. Iafrate said she'd provide that to you.

MS. WANG:
We do not have that yet, Your Honor.
wrote to Ms. Iafrate yesterday to point out that we do not have
21
the LEAR protocol.
22
documents that have come up during depositions that have not
IEN
DS
20
been produced previously, and I do not have a response to that
24
letter.
FR
THE COURT:
09:29:08
I also asked for a number of other
23
25
09:28:35
09:28:52
17
19
09:28:15
Would you please, in preparation for the
09:29:22
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
hearing this afternoon, provide the Court and the other parties
with copies of all of that correspondence to Ms. Iafrate; would
you please list out the documents and the requests that you
have made that remain unanswered or unresponded to; and would
you be prepared to address them, and would you advise
Mr. Masterson and Ms. Iafrate of those precise issues that you
are wanting to address that I can have very precise answers.

MS. WANG:
I will, Your Honor.
THE COURT:
09:29:43
All right.
Were there any other documents
10
that we should discuss other than what we have already
11
discussed?
MS. WANG:
12
I don't believe so, Your Honor.
I think it
13
will be covered by pointing to the correspondence that has gone
14
unanswered in the last few days.

THE COURT:
15
16
Mr. Masterson, did you have
MR. MASTERSON:
general?
THE COURT:
19
On this particular topic, or in
On this particular topic.
I'll let you
raise whatever issues you have, as I usually do, before we
21
convene, before we --
DS
20
MR. MASTERSON:
IEN
22
23
09:30:26
I have nothing further on this one,
Judge.
24
THE COURT:
Okay.
25
All right.
What other matters did you have?
FR
09:30:14
anything you wanted to say on this?
17
18
All right.
09:29:56
09:30:34
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
MR. MASTERSON:
Just a couple, Judge, and the first
one has to do with the 1459 IDs.
from plaintiffs of the ones they want us to take a look at.

THE COURT:
Why should they --
MR. MASTERSON:
We're still waiting on a list
Well, because they're the ones who
have to make the determination, I think, whether these people
are in the plaintiffs' class.
THE COURT:
determination.
No, they don't have to make that
You have 1459 documents that you found that
10
were retrieved from Property that were not, as I understand it,
11
registered in Property.
Is that correct?
12
MR. MASTERSON:
13
THE COURT:
14
15
report?
18
Well, isn't that something that an
Well, it could, Judge, but we also
have a number of fraudulent documents -THE COURT:
09:31:36
Let me just tell you I'm having my monitor
look at the adequacy of your Internal Affairs process.
IEN
22
That I do not know.
Okay.
MR. MASTERSON:
DS
21
They were in Property, yes.
Internal Affairs office looks into?
19
20
Is my understanding correct?
09:31:27
THE COURT:
17
Part of
23
that adequacy, from my mind, is you making a determination of
24
what is worthy of investigation and what is not worthy of
25
investigation, and then the monitors' and the experts'
FR
09:31:17
And were they registered as part of any
MR. MASTERSON:
16
09:30:59
09:31:51
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
assessment as to whether or not that is a competent and
adequate investigation.
MR. MASTERSON:
Well, when we discussed this issue
previously in status conferences, the discussion revolved
around paring down the number of IDs that we needed to look at,
because there are clearly fraudulent IDs in there; there are
clearly IDs in there that do not belong to members of the
plaintiff class.
THE COURT:
9
10
12
09:32:16
MR. MASTERSON:
Okay.
So everybody's going to happy
with my determination on what documents are relevant?

THE COURT:
13
14
Well, if there are, you can make that
determination.
11
No.
But the adequacy of your
determination will be subject to the monitors' review.

MR. MASTERSON:
15
THE COURT:
16
Okay.
That's what we'll do.
The last issue I think you have
18
addressed, and that is my concern on starting up the hearing
19
again on the 22nd of this month.
DS
As the Court knows, we have depositions set all the
way through the 21st.
22
two days all day, from 9:00 in the morning on Monday till
IEN
21
09:32:44
I've been in depositions for the last
23
8 o'clock at night; on Tuesday -- or yesterday, excuse me, from
24
9:30 in the morning until 6:30 at night.
25
have any time to prepare.
FR
09:32:28
All right.
MR. MASTERSON:
17
20
09:32:04
We're not going to

09:33:01
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
And I realize plaintiffs' got an army of lawyers at
1
2
their disposal; we don't.
We're not riding the money train.
We're kind of concerned with costs.
lawyers, but we need time to prepare.
So we've got a few
Now, perhaps the day or two off, although now I guess
5
6
we're filling up the 22nd with additional depositions, but we
cannot prepare a defense when we don't know what the issues
are, we don't know who the witnesses are, we don't know what
the exhibits will be, in one day; it's just impossible.

THE COURT:
10
MS. WANG:
11
Ms. Wang.
09:33:34
Your Honor, a couple of points in response.
First, Your Honor, the fact that depositions are
12
13
running right up till September 21st is largely due to
14
defendants' delay in scheduling them.
15
initially, I believe, on August 17th requesting dates for all
16
the witnesses, and I did not hear back from defendants, without
17
further prodding, for almost two weeks.
I wrote to them
been due to defendants' failure to produce documents in a
20
timely manner.
21
produced in February and we're still getting them now.
DS
19
Many of those documents were scheduled to be
09:34:15
IEN
And so I would say that it is plaintiffs who have been
23
prejudiced by depositions running right up to the hearing time.
24
We do not have an army of lawyers any more than defendants do,
25
and we are prejudiced by having to prepare for the hearing
FR
09:33:53
Furthermore, the delay in having the depositions has
18
22
09:33:16
09:34:33
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
itself as well as doing depositions.
we can, but I really do have to object to Mr. Masterson's
characterization of the situation.

THE COURT:
All right.
And we are doing the best
Let me just say,
Mr. Masterson, that I did spend a little bit of time yesterday
reviewing the course of my discovery orders and the responses,
and it seems to me that your client has been uniformly very,
very, very late, and in violation of this Court's orders, as it
pertains to the time that documents should be produced, so I am
10
extremely disinclined to give you the benefit of your own
11
self-engineered delay.
09:35:05
That being said, I am not averse, if we get there and
12
13
you really need more time, and you can convince me that you
14
have a justified reason for it, to give you a day, but I'm not
15
going to give it to you now.
16
week.
17
going to let you know what the witnesses are.
18
said that.
19
And if you can convince me that you need an extra day, you'll
20
get it.
We're going to look at what the witnesses are.
09:35:24
I'm
I've already
The topics are going to be -- they'll be orderly.
09:35:38
But I'm not going to give you that authorization now,
and it certainly doesn't seem to me that the very delayed and
IEN
22
We're going to get up to next
DS
21
23
disobedience of the Court's order in scheduling a deadline
24
merits me granting you a very large extension at this point.
FR
25
09:34:46
This matter has delayed and delayed and delayed.
09:35:52
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
believe that your client, as much as anybody else, is
interested in getting an expeditious -- but fair -- resolution
of this.
So if we get there, you need more time, I'll entertain
4
5
that.
inclined to ask, why it is that documents that I ordered to be
produced last February during February weren't produced, and
your clients weren't -- client representatives weren't even
asked about them until months later.
10
But you're going to have to explain to me, if I'm
And that's what the
testimony in this action has been.
12
intend to give you a fair opportunity to respond if that proves
13
necessary, because there still are things developing, I'm not
14
going to grant that at this point.

MR. MASTERSON:
15
Thank you, Judge, and that's all I'm
looking for.
17
just looking for a fair opportunity to represent my clients at
18
the contempt proceeding.
19
like to get this done, too, because we'd like to just move to a
20
compliance phase and be done with this.

THE COURT:
IEN
that time.
23
And as you just recognized, we'd sure
All right.
09:36:57
And I'll entertain that at
But I do intend to hold everybody's feet to the
fire and get this thing underway.
24
Mr. Walker, you wanted to say something?
25
MR. WALKER:
FR
09:36:40
I'm not looking for some huge postponement; I'm
DS
16
22
09:36:26
So while I understand what you're saying, while I
11
21
09:36:07
Yes.
09:37:08
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I'd just point out Your Honor has raised two, I think,
1
2
very salient points in prior status conferences.
should try to make this hearing as efficient as possible, and a
very good way to do that is to reach as many stipulations as we
can.
final decisions about stipulations until this wave of discovery
is completed.
None of the parties are in a very good position to make
Mr. Masterson's point a couple status conferences ago, that
10
there may well be benefit from the parties all participating in
11
a settlement conference with a magistrate judge.
12
extent that we can reach agreement on settling issues,
13
obviously that contributes to efficiency of the process.
And to the
15
the perspective of the citizens and the taxpayers of Maricopa
16
County, handling things in a way that makes this next phase as
17
efficient and as not time-consuming as possible is a very high
18
priority.
19
Court's resources that that's a high priority.
DS
So the concern that I wanted to express is while I
understand the plaintiffs' concerns about when they receive
22
documents and when they're being able to conduct depositions,
IEN
09:38:13
And it seems to me from the standpoint of the
21
23
and I certainly understand and appreciate the Court's concerns
24
about getting this next phase over, and I'm in full agreement
25
with that, it does seem to me that if we needed to take a few
FR
09:37:49
And we are where we are for whatever reasons, but from
14
20
09:37:30
The second point is, and this actually was
8
9
One is we
09:38:36
09:39:00
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
extra days to try to streamline this process as much as
possible, that's really in everybody's interest.

THE COURT:
All right.
I appreciate that.
I don't
think it requires any comment other than what I made to
Mr. Masterson.
do it and the parties are agreed, then I'll consider it later
with specific requests for specific reasons.
particularly more so than as a lawyer, I've learned that the
10
way to produce resolution is to require resolution by holding a
11
strict schedule, and so I intend to hold that strict schedule.
13
to put it off for a day or two, then I'll put it off for a day
14
or two in light of specific reasons of what you're going to
15
specifically do.
16
the parties aren't agreed, then let's just resolve this matter.
17
That's my view, just so you're aware of it.
But if you don't have those reasons, and if
09:40:06
Mr. Birnbaum, Mr. Ouimette last week indicated that
18
you wanted to re-raise an issue that we have already had some
20
discussion on.
21
at all, and I'm particularly not going to change it if you
22
don't have something new to tell me, but I will give you the
IEN
DS
19
I really doubt that I'm going to change my mind
09:40:24
opportunity to say something if you wish.
24
MR. BIRNBAUM:
25
THE COURT:
FR
09:39:45
If you can convince me that there's compelling reasons
12
23
09:39:27
I will say, Mr. Walker, though, in my time as a judge
8
9
If you can convince me that there's a reason to
Your Honor, I --
Could you approach a microphone, please.
09:40:39
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
MR. BIRNBAUM:
Sure.
Your Honor, I have nothing new
to tell you.
I do not need to re-raise the issue now.
Deputy
Chief MacIntyre's deposition has been scheduled for, I think,
the 21st, but prior to the 22nd.
But since you gave me the invitation, I will only say
5
6
this, Your Honor:
We're well into this case.
responding to the possibility of a criminal referral.
want to mischaracterize anything you've said, but I don't think
there's anyone in this room, the Court included, who thinks
I'm here
I don't
10
that there has been the slightest indication of any
11
contemptuous conduct, let alone criminal intentional conduct,
12
by Deputy Chief MacIntyre.
indemnified.
This case is continuing against him almost in a
15
"baby with the bathwater" sense.
16
of the allegations in this case; we understand the position
17
that the sheriff and the chief deputy have taken.
18
don't relate to Deputy Chief MacIntyre.
19
whole series of times in this case where you gave us an
20
opportunity to -- I'm sorry, Your Honor.
DS
14
THE COURT:
said.
IEN
22
We understand the seriousness
09:41:44
But those
There have been a
09:42:04
I'm just reviewing something you just
But I'm --
23
MR. BIRNBAUM:
24
THE COURT:
25
MR. BIRNBAUM:
FR
09:41:25
As you know, he, as I understand it, is not being
13
21
09:41:01
Sure.
-- still listening.
Sure.
Go ahead.
There have been a series of
09:42:12
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
times in this case where we did raise the issue, sort of the
kind of Celotex "show us the beef" issue.
claim here, tell us what it is.
provided to the Court; it hasn't been provided to us today.
If there's really a
We never saw it; it was never
And here's where I do differ with something you have
5
6
said in the past, Your Honor.
this contempt proceeding occurred, we were provided with a list
of the remaining witnesses that the plaintiffs intended to call
in the case.
When the first series of days of
Deputy Chief MacIntyre was not a witness.
You
10
have raised the question of, Well, I want to hear what Deputy
11
Chief MacIntyre says, just like you've heard from
12
Lieutenant Sousa.
14
Deputy Chief MacIntyre, at least I don't, certainly not on the
15
contempt issues, because the burden of proof obviously rests
16
with the plaintiff.
17
deputy chief.
18
call.
19
and absolute fishing expedition.
20
document or a new theory that they want to re-depose my client
21
about.
He wasn't even listed as someone they want to
The latest deposition, as far as we know, is a complete
DS
Nobody has shown us a
IEN
And thank you for the indulgence, Your Honor.
24
you to understand why we're so concerned about it.

THE COURT:
09:43:35
We'll
make the motion again at the appropriate time, but we do want
FR
09:43:16
There has been no presentation as to the
23
25
09:43:00
Your Honor, we don't have any intention of calling
13
22
09:42:32
Well, as I've said, and I have had this --
09:43:51
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I've indicated with Lieutenant Sousa, I don't have any interest
in keeping anyone in this suit longer than they need to be kept
in, and I've asked plaintiffs to refine that case.
I do believe that we're going to wait and abide your
4
5
motion at the appropriate time.
your client, I believe he's up on -- I named him on two
separate charges, did I not?

MR. BIRNBAUM:
8
9
THE COURT:
cause.
Well, it's not clear, Your Honor, based
Well, I'm talking about the order to show
MR. BIRNBAUM:
12
involved in Armendariz.
14
involvement with the preliminary injunction order.

THE COURT:
15
Then there was this question of his
That's correct.
MR. BIRNBAUM:
16
the Court acknowledged that other than him being shown as a
18
carbon copy on a letter, which you've said was not even within
19
the scope of privilege --
DS
It seems to me that the representations,
and I think you're not misstating, the representations by
22
defendants have been consistently that Chief MacIntyre had no
IEN
21
23
responsibility with respect to Melendres at all or the
24
preliminary injunction; that he was carbon-copied only in a
25
clerk function to see that other people -- other addressees of
FR
09:44:35
Not to misquote you, I hope, but even
17
THE COURT:
09:44:22
Well, everybody agrees he's not
13
20
09:44:07
on your prior comments --
10
11
If there's a reason to dismiss
09:44:49
09:45:02
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
the document saw it.
MR. BIRNBAUM:
Right, which brings us to your third
point, Your Honor, which is when we raised this issue before, I
believe what you said, and I'm very sorry if I mis -- I'm not
try to quote you at all, but you said:
third issue of Deputy Chief MacIntyre's role in discovery.

THE COURT:
And Deputy Chief MacIntyre had no role
in discovery.
THE COURT:
10
11
Well, it seems to me like his affidavit
MR. BIRNBAUM:
Well, Your Honor, you've said this
13
before.
14
and you know the whole history --
Years earlier, Deputy Chief MacIntyre did receive --
THE COURT:
15
say.
Right.
MR. BIRNBAUM:
17
And so we'll hear what he has to
It's not his burden to come up here
19
and say, I'm going to tell you everything I did during my time
20
at the Sheriff's Office, although we've done even that.
21
answered that by submitting his declaration.
DS
what he has to say where?
We've
09:46:06
IEN
Isn't it time, perhaps -- it's a rhetorical question,
23
of course -- but isn't it time, perhaps, for what in a
24
different setting would be the response to a Celotex motion,
25
kind of a bill of particulars?
FR
09:45:51
But we have -- well, Your Honor, hear
18
22
09:45:37
gives rise to a different inference, at least.
12
16
09:45:22
Yes.
MR. BIRNBAUM:
Well, then there's this
09:46:26
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
THE COURT:
Not yet.
MR. BIRNBAUM:
Can't the plaintiffs be asked:
Tell us
what your claim is about contemptuous conduct by Deputy Chief
MacIntyre?
THE COURT:
5
6
I think they're entitled to take his
deposition and they've noticed it.

MR. BIRNBAUM:
Your Honor, they took his deposition.
You're saying they're entitled to take it again, and we're
saying perhaps if you tell us that there's a new theory, or a
10
new piece of evidence, or a new document that they're going to
11
ask him about that they didn't ask him about before, but they
12
took his deposition for four-plus hours previously in this case
13
before the first four days of hearing and then elected not to
14
call him.
THE COURT:
15
All right.
MR. BIRNBAUM:
16
THE COURT:
17
MS. WANG:
18
Thank you, Mr. Birnbaum.
Very briefly, Your Honor.
There are new
relate to Chief MacIntyre, and we have noticed his deposition I
21
believe for the 11th, based on the availability that
22
Mr. Ouimette provided, and we'll see what we find out at the
IEN
DS
20
FR
25
09:47:07
Ms. Wang.
documents that have been produced since April 24th that do
24
09:46:51
Thank you very much, Your Honor.
19
23
09:46:38
09:47:18
deposition.
THE COURT:
All right.
And you'll let me know if you
are ready to release Chief Deputy MacIntyre?
09:47:33
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
We will do so -I'm sorry --
-- as soon as we know --
-- "Deputy Chief" MacIntyre.
Now, that's -- that's enough, Mr. Birnbaum.
MR. BIRNBAUM:
6
7
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
error.
Please approach the microphone.
MR. BIRNBAUM:
Your Honor, I just want to avoid an
I want Ms. Wang just to check -THE COURT:
09:47:41
I'm just asking the plaintiffs to
10
double-check.
I think the last agreement that was in fact
11
confirmed is that he would be deposed on the 20- -- I think the
12
morning of the 21st.
And Ms. Wang, I just checked with Mr. Masterson.
13
09:47:49
14
think that's what he has on his calendar as well.
15
double-check that, Your Honor, but I didn't want to leave it
16
misstated.
THE COURT:
17
All right.
So we can
Thank you.
Anybody else have anything else to raise?
18
MS. WANG:
19
Your Honor, as to depositions, we had
initially noticed Mr. Zullo and Mr. Mackiewicz for later in
21
October after the initial two weeks of the hearing.
22
write to defendants to request that we move them to prior to
IEN
DS
20
I have not heard back.
09:48:15
I did
23
September 22nd.
24
with Mr. Masterson as we were walking into court this morning,
25
and we'll work on that.
FR
09:48:04
I conferred briefly
09:48:40
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
There is a third witness, Rollie Seebert, who relates
1
2
to the preliminary injunction issues in the case.
repeatedly asked first that we be able to interview him, as he
is no longer with the MCSO.
would prefer to do this by deposition.
we do not have any response on that.

THE COURT:
Mr. Masterson indicated that they
We asked for dates, and
I'll start with Mr. Seebert.
Mr. Seebert lives in Long Beach now.
He's not
10
employed by us any more.
11
point where he is so we can talk to him and try to schedule a
12
deposition.
I'm trying to track down at this
09:49:24
But I will tell the Court, and I'm probably the worst
13
14
person in this room at word searches, but I've tried some and I
15
can't find that Mr. Seebert has anything to do with any issue
16
at all in this case.
17
I'd just like to know why we're taking this guy's deposition.
THE COURT:
18
MS. WANG:
19
Ms. Wang.
Your Honor, Mr. Seebert was the director of
21
Sergeant Palmer and Lieutenant Sousa to create training
22
scenarios after the Court's preliminary injunction order.
DS
the training division at the time that there were efforts by
IEN
09:49:37
So, before we all fly out to Long Beach,
20
09:49:51
He
23
was copied on some of those documents relating to that proposed
24
training, and therefore, we believe he may shed light on what
25
happened to that training and why it did not take place.
FR
09:49:02
Mr. Masterson.
MR. MASTERSON:
We have
09:50:14
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
MR. MASTERSON:
Well, Judge, I mean, I think we'll
probably learn a great deal about that through Lieutenant Sousa
and Sergeant Palmer, so I don't know that we need to schedule a
deposition in Long Beach for some guy who maybe was the
director --
09:50:33
THE COURT:
Well, it seems to me I do remember
Mr. Seebert from Lieutenant Sousa's testimony, and some of the
documents that showed that he was copied.
relevant.
10
I think it is
If you don't want to do the deposition then you can
authorize the interview.

MR. MASTERSON:
11
09:50:49
Okay.
The other issue, and
12
Mr. Birnbaum brought it to mind, is my intention, and I just
13
want to seek guidance from the Court so we can avoid bothering
14
you during depositions, is that if someone has been deposed
15
before, that that began the seven-hour time clock.
09:51:08
And if, for example -- and I haven't read how long a
16
previous deposition was, but if it was four hours, then I
18
would -- I would limit it to three if we were retaking that
19
same person's deposition, unless I can be convinced that so
20
much new material has come forward since the first deposition
21
that we need to take more than three hours going forward.

THE COURT:
IEN
22
DS
17
23
Well, I appreciate you raising this issue.
Let me just say that I did agree with you before:
24
don't intend to allow plaintiffs to retrack territory they've
25
already taken.
FR
09:51:27
They can only -- when they've redeposed
09:51:42
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
somebody, they can only deal with new material discovered.
If that new material discovered is extensive, I'm
going to allow them to exceed the seven-hour time limit; if
it's not, I'm not.
to give me a call.
So you can make your judgment.
You can try
09:51:58
I will tell you that I'm pretty scheduled for the next
6
7
two weeks.
Some of that time, of course, one day is, at least
for the moment, the deposition of Mr. Casey, but otherwise I
may be difficult to get ahold of.
I will try to give you my --
10
how you can get ahold of me wherever I am, but I will be in
11
proceedings, one in Tucson, one at -- one at the jail, or one
12
of the prison facilities for most of two days next week.
So I would appreciate, although I recognize your
13
14
ability to enforce some finality here, I would appreciate a
15
little bit of lenience, if there are sufficient documents that
16
are new or material that is new, that you give the plaintiffs a
17
little bit of leeway.
allow you to cover matters that have already been covered
20
unless there is some reason that these new documents shed new
21
light on them, so we should all try to be as expeditious as
22
possible.
IEN
DS
19
09:52:58
Long answer, trying to make it summarized, I'll give
24
you my phone number wherever I am, and if you need to get in
25
touch with me, try to get in touch with me.
FR
09:52:43
But Ms. Wang, as I've said before, I'm not going to
18
23
09:52:20
If you feel like
09:53:15
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
the depositions have gone on too long, I'll make a ruling.
if you do that, Ms. Wang, would you please have ready the new
material that you believe justifies an extension in the hours
and why that is necessary?
with Mr. Masterson before you call me so Mr. Masterson can
assess whether or not it really merits a call.

MS. WANG:
And I assume you will review that
Thank you, Judge.
And I will tell you
that I have never cut someone off at four hours in state court
10
or seven hours in federal court; I give leeway every single
11
time.
12
have been deposed three times.
I get the point.
MR. MASTERSON:
14
15
16
Thank you, Judge.
THE COURT:
Anything else?
All right.
I will see you on the 18th, unless,
Ms. Wang, we need to reconvene today, in which case my judicial
18
assistant is out today.
19
Kathleen -- this is Kathleen -- get Kathleen's number, and she
20
can set up the hearing.
IEN
DS
17
22
MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
Yes, Your Honor.

Thank you.
MS. WANG:
24
(Proceedings concluded at 9:54 a.m.)
FR
09:53:55
Can I ask you to call and get
23
25
09:53:42
But here I'm just concerned because some of these folks
THE COURT:
13
21
09:53:28
Yes, Your Honor.
MR. MASTERSON:
But
Thank you.
09:54:08
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
C E R T I F I C A T E
2
3
4
5
6
I, GARY MOLL, do hereby certify that I am duly
7
8
appointed and qualified to act as Official Court Reporter for
the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.
I FURTHER CERTIFY that the foregoing pages constitute
10
11
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.
15
16
DATED at Phoenix, Arizona, this 11th day of
17
18
September, 2015.
20
21
IEN
22
DS
19
23
24
FR
25
s/Gary Moll

Melendres v. Arpaio #1354 Sept 10 2015A TRANSCRIPT - AM Status Conference

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Melendres v. Arpaio #1354 Sept 10 2015A TRANSCRIPT - AM Status Conference

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

OF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres,

Joseph M. Arpaio, et al.,

BEFORE THE HONORABLE G. MURRAY SNOW

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

Proceedings taken by stenographic court reporter

For the Plaintiffs:

Covington & Burling, LLP

Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund

For the Defendant Joseph M. Arpaio and Maricopa County

For the Defendant Maricopa County:

CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/10/15 Status Conference

For the Movants Christine Stutz and Thomas P. Liddy:

For the Movants Maricopa County Attorney's Office and Maricopa

U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division

For Chief Deputy Gerard Sheridan:

For Deputy Chief Jack MacIntyre:

CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/10/15 Status Conference

CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/10/15 Status Conference

This is civil case number 07-2513,

Good morning, Your Honor.

the ACLU for plaintiffs.

Michelle Morin of Covington & Burling for

Good morning, Your Honor.

Masterson for Sheriff Arpaio and MCSO.

Good morning, Your Honor.

on behalf of the County as defined in previous appearances and

filings with the Court.

Good morning, Your Honor.

Terry Woods here, Your Honor, for Stutz

Dane Dodd, Lewis

Brisbois, on behalf of former Chief Sands.

Counsel, please announce your appearances.

Melendres v. Arpaio, on for status conference.

CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/10/15 Status Conference

Birnbaum, special counsel for Deputy Chief John MacIntyre.

Good morning, Your Honor.

Eisenberg making a special appearance on behalf of Lieutenant

He is present in the courtroom.

Good morning, Your Honor.

Calderon for nonparty William Montgomery, Maricopa County

Attorney, and his office.

Who do we have on the telephone?

Good morning, Your Honor.

Chief Warshaw and Deputy Monitor Commander John Girvin.

Good morning, Your Honor.

Stanley Young, Covington & Burling, Andre Segura of the ACLU,

and Jorge Castillo of MALDEF.

Good morning, Your Honor.

Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Puneet Cheema and

Good morning, Your Honor.

Good morning, Your Honor.

appearance -- this is Mel McDonald on behalf of Sheriff Joe

Barry Mitchell, making special appearances for Chief Jerry

Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Raphael Gomez.

CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/10/15 Status Conference

I am also covering this morning for Lee Stein and

CV07-2513, Melendres v. Arpaio, 9/10/15 Status Conference

Anyone else on the phone?

Last time we discussed the parties'

request for mutual experts on MCSO's Internal Affairs

stage in this proceeding, and I have decided to allow that, but