Is Sheriff Joe Setting Up A Mental Incompetency Defense???

Sheriff Joe Placed A Lean Against The World Net Daily Building For His Share Of The Profits

Part of being a Girl Reporter is considering alternative theories for people’s behavior. With that in mind, I have to wonder if Sheriff Joe has some ulterior motive for Going Birfer. Could it have something to do with all those investigations against him, but not in the way everybody suspects??? Well, here I go. Rule 11 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure applies when a person is mentally incompetent to stand trial:

Rule 11.1. Definition and Effect of Incompetency

A person shall not be tried, convicted, sentenced or punished for a public offense, except for proceedings pursuant to A.R.S. § 36-3707(D), while, as a result of a mental illness, defect, or disability, the person is unable to understand the proceedings against him or her or to assist in his or her own defense. Mental illness, defect or disability means a psychiatric or neurological disorder that is evidenced by behavioral or emotional symptoms, including congenital mental conditions, conditions resulting from injury or disease and developmental disabilities as defined in A.R.S. § 36-551. The presence of a mental illness, defect or disability alone is not grounds for finding a defendant incompetent to stand trial.

As an Arizona lawyer explains it on his website;

A person may be incompetent for a number of reasons including mental illness, mental retardation, head injury, and substance abuse. A person is not legally competent if cannot understand the legal matters or is not able to assist in his own defense.

The different between an insanity defense and Rule 11 is that a Rule 11 evaluation does not have anything to do with the defendant’s mental state at the time of the offense. In other words, an insanity defense is a defense to the criminal charge itself, not that the defendant is not competent to stand trial. In truth, Arizona does not have a true insanity defense. Rather, it is a “guilty except insane” defense. That means if the jury or judge agrees the defendant is guilty except insane, the court will sentence the defendant to the presumptive term at the Arizona State Hospital. The court can find the defendant guilty except insane even if the defendant is competent to stand trial.

The above rule only applies to criminal prosecutions. At present there are several ongoing investigations into The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office.  Several of these appear to have possible criminal ramifications. From Wiki:

In June 2008, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) began an investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office.  In March 2009, the United States Department of Justice notified Arpaio that they were investigating the department for civil rights violations, in unfairly targeting Hispanics and Spanish-speaking people. The DOJ found “reasonable cause to believe that MCSO engages in a pattern or practice of violating the Constitution and laws of the United States” and that “MCSO is broken”.

In October 2009, it was reported that the FBI was investigating Arpaio for using his position to settle political vendettas.

In January 2010, it was reported that the Department of Justice has impaneled a grand jury to investigate allegations of abuse of power by Arpaio.

In March 2010, it was reported that an investigation into Arpaio is “serious and ongoing“, according to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

And, from December 2011:

Richard Martinez is a civil rights attorney, he says, it appears the U.S. Justice Department did a thorough investigation.

“They have a very strong case against the Sheriff and unless he immediately agrees to comply and remedy all these problems, which I doubt he will, they’re going to take him into federal court,” he said.

Martinez says what’s documented could have Sheriff Arpaio facing criminal charges, even jail time.

“There appears to be substantial evidence that a lot of money has been misspent in that department,” said Martinez.” There seems to be a lot of other issues that are here.  Certainly, this letter addresses behavior that could be prosecuted criminally.”

Perhaps Old Sheriff Joe has been crazy . . . like a fox. If found mentally incompetent, any civil proceedings would take place with a guardian of some sort being appointed. But civil financial damages would most likely come out of Maricopa County’s deep pockets. But, any criminal trial does not go forward at all. It would be postponed until such time as Arpaio was mentally able to proceed. Arpaio was born in 1932 so he will be turning 80 years old this year. The simple facts of life are, that he doesn’t have to delay any criminal action very long until he will be able to appeal directly to the Highest Court in the Universe.

Could Arpaio’s venture into Birtherism constitute evidence of legal mental incompetence – where a person is unable to understand the proceedings against him or her or to assist in his or her own defense??? From my experience with Birthers, they lack the ability to comprehend the simplest legal concept.  Natural born citizenship knocks even the lawyers among them for a loop. Mention that word to them, and off they go to France, Switzerland, Ancient Rome, lion prides, and Indian tribes. Everywhere but to Wong Kim Ark and Ankeny v. Governor.

This legal incapacity extends even to simplest of sentences. Nearly every Birther I have encountered is not able to understand these six words:  not necessary to resolve these doubts, from Minor v. Happersett. The Birthers get that one wrong every time. Can you imagine being their defense attorney and trying to explain why Brady v. Maryland does NOT mean that Obama’s birth certificate is exculpatory evidence???

As far as effectiveness, I submit the quickest and surest way to get the crazy tag in 2012 America is to Go Birfer. Further, and this is also from personal experience, Birthers are mentally unable to learn. They are simply not trainable. If Arpaio has Gone Birfer, then his cognitive functioning is dead and gone. His Guardians, if such should be appointed, should be thankful if he is able to go to the bathroom by himself. I can’t go deeper into this without writing a book, but from what I can tell, much of the psychological assessment deals with patient history and subjective descriptions. For anybody who is interested, here is a pdf from Massachusetts used to make forensic competency assessments:

Massachusetts Competency To Stand Trial Worksheet

It would appear to me that if Arpaio starts muttering about phony presidential birth certificates and conspiracies involving Hawaiian DOH officials, the entirety of the American Judiciary, and random Hawaiian newspapers from 50 years ago, that he will attract the shrink’s attention.  If he follows up with accusations that an electronic image is a “forgery”, and that it is appropriate to conduct police investigations with investigators who have a pecuniary interest in the outcome, then he will begin hammering nails into the Coffin Of Competency. All Arpaio needs to seal the deal is to start muttering Minor v. Happersett in answer to the shrink’s questions. And maybe demand his Vattel Rights to Trial by Combat according to the Ancien Regime of France.

Now, at this point is important for me to state that I haven’t accused anyone out of the Maricopa County’s Sheriff’s Office, Sheriff Joe, I haven’t accused anyone of anything. I’m not accusing the Sheriff. Let’s wait and see how we can develop this information on mental incompetency. Which I think is very – very important right now. I want to get to the bottom of this.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image. This is from the film, Cat Ballou (1965). That is Lee Marvin playing Kid Shelleen, a drunken stumblebum. I am not sure who plays the horse.

The memorable scene where Lee Marvin’s horse is seen leaning against the wall, looking drunk with his legs crossed, almost didn’t make it into the movie. Because horses don’t “naturally” cross their legs, the animal’s trainer told director Silverstein that scene couldn’t be filmed. Afterward he thought that, with a few days’ work, it might be possible. When Silverstein reminded the man that time was of the essence and offered him one hour to do it, the trainer went to work and produced one of filmdom’s greatest visuals. The scene was finally realized when the horse was fed cubes of sugar while his legs were gently plied into just the right position.

When Marvin accepted his Best Actor Oscar for his performance, he started by saying, “Half of this probably belongs to a horse out in the Valley somewhere.”


About Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

Hi!!! I am a Girl Reporter on the Internet. I am 31. Plus I am a INTP. I have a Major in Human Kinetics, and a Minor in English. I have 2 cats, and a new kitten! I write poetry, and plus I am trying to learn how to play guitar. I think that is all??? Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter View all posts by Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

12 responses to “Is Sheriff Joe Setting Up A Mental Incompetency Defense???

  • David Farrar

    Why are the no Democratic presidential challengers in any of these state primaries?

    Could it be Obama is such a wonderful president nobody wants to run against him from within the Democratic Party, or could it be, like a good communist, he has subverted the democratic process and the Democratic Party by using state executive committees to block any and ALL other party rivals from primary ballot access?

    ex animo

  • Reality Check

    Hi David! Well, it is is just a fact that popular incumbents usually face no primary challenge. Have you looked at every state to verify that no names are on the ballot other than the President anywhere? One could certainly run a write-in campaign. It usually takes an significant effort to get on a state primary presidential ballot. Why would someone waste the money this year if they were a Democrat? The Democrats are choosing Obama for good reason. He is most likely to win reelection.

    Can you cite any proof at all for your allegations of “communist tactics”? Yeah, I thought not.

  • Thomas Brown

    Barack Obama is no more a communist than David Farrar is a pedophile.


    • Monkey Boy

      Is David Farrar a pedophile? Can he prove that he isn’t? If he can’t, then my suspicions concerning him are justified.

  • Reality Check

    Hi David!

    i read your and Cody Judy’s latest filing down in Georgia. It sure sounds like Orly is throwing you two under the bus. How is the view from down there?

  • bob

    Why are the no Democratic presidential challengers in any of these state primaries?

    There have been several challengers. In New Hampshire, for example, President Obama won 81% of the vote; other candidates split the remainder.

    • Reality Check

      I figured that was the case but I am damn tired of doing research for the Birfer’s. If they want to make stupid claims then they can do their own research. Then I would probably check because odd are they either goofed or lied or both.

      Primary ballot access varies from sate to state. I suspect no two states are exactly alike.

    • Reality Check

      BTW, there was a primary in Georgia yesterday. Newt won on the Republican side. On the Democratic side one candidate was on the ballot and he seems to have won with 100% of the vote.

      David who?

  • Don

    Rather than providing a reasonable explanation for the document discrepancies you attempt to attack the messinger.

    If DOJ believes they have a case, they should file a lawsuit.

    If Martinez believes he has a case, he should file a lawsuit.

    Allegations are one thing, but facts are another. Since we have heard Holder and Martinez make these accusations for months without any action, it is obvious that they don’t have any facts.

    • Thomas Brown

      Oh, they will. Because Arpaio is the complete opposite of everything this country stands for: fairness, equality under the law, innocent until proven guilty… He is the poster boy for everything repugnant in the black bowels of human nature: abuse of power, false witness, self-aggrandizement, and corruption. His crimes will catch up to him, just as surely as his phony bull-guano “evidence” against our President will be exposed for the shameless, treasonous scam that it is.

      Believe me, they will take their time to make sure they can convict Arpaio before issuing an indictment. As much as I’d like them to hurry up about it, the result will be worth the wait to see this racist bag of puke bite the dust.

      Almost makes me wish Sedition were still a hanging offense. Almost. It would be worth the price of admission if we could, above all, see him hung with one of his many favorite pair of pink floral panties peeking out below his wrinkled paunch.

      Sadly, those days are long gone.

      Ah, nostalgia. Ah, Bartleby.

    • Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

      Hi Don!!!

      Well, it is kind of hard to attack the discrepancies in the documents, when they don’t matter much. Like I pointed out in a earlier Internet Article, the only way you prove forgery by looking at an IMAGE of something is if there something incongruous in the information.

      For example, if instead of Alvin Onaka, the registrar was listed as Peter Rabbit. Or if it was signed by John Doe, MD in 1961 and John Doe died in 1959. Or, if like with the swift boat stuff, the font type did not exist at that time.

      The Cold case Posse did not find any of those types of incongruities in the long form. There may be one in the selective service document, but frankly, forgery is only one possibility out of many. And not the most likely, IMHO. (Which means In My Human Opinion)

      What does seem really out of place is have investigators who have a pecuniary interest in the outcome of the investigation.

      As far as what the DOJ does, or Martinez, all I can do is report what is out there.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

  • Monkey Boy

    … the only way you prove forgery by looking at an IMAGE of something is if there something incongruous in the information.

    Wrong! There is no foolproof way the judge the legitimacy of an image without examining the source document. Why? Because, there is no guarantee that the image is an accurate reproduction.

    For instance, I could copy the President’s BC and photoshop in a “Peter Rabbit” signature or a “smiley face.” The birfer loonies are correct when they say that images of the BC don’t prove anything. However, the State agency in Hawaii that issues certifications of birth has, on multiple occasions, avowed that it issued a valid birth document to the President and he was born in Honolulu. So, why would he need to forge something?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: