# DoJ sues Sheriff Arpaio for civil-rights abuses; anyone care to take Arpaio's side here? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 12, 2012, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726 "2012-05-12T20:42:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Lust4Life](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecc23a/32.png) [@Lust4Life](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lust4Life)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2012, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/161 "2012-05-15T19:40:36Z")
No not a law, a police regulation/guideline, it doesn’t include people who are later successfully prosecuted I believe. When police stop someone they have to fill out paperwork everytime. Though maybe sometimes they don’t, I wouldn’t know on that score. ---
**Author:** ![Lust4Life](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecc23a/32.png) [@Lust4Life](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lust4Life)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2012, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/162 "2012-05-15T19:42:27Z")
But as I said I’ll try and get it from the horses mouth, rather then from the internet. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2012, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/163 "2012-05-15T19:45:54Z")
> [@E-Sabbath](#): > > Trust me. Read this whole thing. It’s not about Sheriff Joe. But it’s tied to him, he’s specifically mentioned repeatedly as having caused about half of it. And it’s all a legal judgment. No, it’s not. It’s bar counsel’s allegations. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2012, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/164 "2012-05-15T20:15:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, it’s not. It’s bar counsel’s allegations. Bricker, uhm. You’re pretty wrong here. This is the Opinion and Order Imposing Sanctions. It was written by a panel of three judges, headed by William O’Neill, the presiding disciplinary judge of the Supreme Court of the State of Arizona. Now, I’m not sure how you managed to misread the first inch of the document, but that’s fine. These are findings of a judge. Actually three judges. I _believe_ this makes them matters of settled fact. Yes? Seriously. My question here is, given this finding, by judges, in this case, what does this give to the FBI? I’m assuming that the findings of one case is admissible as evidence in another? (From the Pit thread, as it’s more suitable to be answered here.) > [@DoJ sues Sheriff Arpaio for civil-rights abuses](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses/621586/62): > > OK, I looked at the citations in the GD thread. > > So this is not a finding of the disciplinary board, but rather a statement of charges, against which the respondents will presumably have the chance to offer rebuttal evidence? Wrong. This is the finding of the disciplinary board. The rebuttal evidence has been offered. This is the result. > [@](#): > > And those respondants don’t include Arpaio himself, as he’s not a lawyer and not subject to the disciplinary process? Correct. However, there are multiple statements in this finding that he directed or otherwise caused the actions to happen. > [@](#): > > There are numerous problems with treating these as evidence of criminal violations. For example, you say he caused a judge to be arrested on completely baseless charges of bribery. > > But was there a warrant for the arrest? Yes. Was the arrest legal? Yes. > > There seems to be unanimity that the charges could not be proved in court. > > However, this does not create a crime. As long as there was probable cause to arrest, the arrest is legal. > > What specific crime are you alleging here, and where is the evidence for it? Ahem. If you bothered to read even the quoted part, there was no probable cause for arrest. And further, the finding is that it was directly ordered by Sheriff Joe. I am not sure what specific crime I am alleging here. I am asking you, Friend Bricker, lawyer extraordinaire, to examine this finding, and tell us what, assuming a reasonably fit and capable prosecutor, could result from it. To requote: > [@](#): > > Sheriff Arpaio, through Chief Deputy Hendershott, closing their eyes to his Constitutional rights, > ordered Mr. Stapley arrested. They never filed any documents or charges but > instead surreptitiously videotaped his arrest, and held him in jail for hours. It was > testified that no one ever filed anything against Mr. Stapley regarding this event, > but took the time to call the press to inform them that he had been arrested. > [@](#): > > Chief Hendershott said that he had met with Mr. Thomas, Ms. Aubuchon, and Sheriff Arpaio, and that Sheriff Arpaio came up with the idea of charging the judge. > 484 > Chief Hendershott told Sgt. Luth to use as the material for the Form 4, or probable cause (“PC”) statement, a complaint that the Chief Deputy had submitted to the Commission on Judicial Conduct against Judge Donahoe. > 485 > Chief Hendershott printed off his complaint and wrote the charges on it. > 486 > At the hearing in this case, Mr. Hendershott was unable to describe any criminal conduct by Judge Donahoe. Extra bonus quote! > [@](#): > > 1. Were this a criminal case, we are confident that the evidence would > establish this conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt. Nevertheless, while Mr. > Thomas and Ms. Aubuchon did violate ER 8.4(b) by violating 18 U.S.C. § 241, > sanctions will not issue from this particular violation, nor will it be considered in > aggravation. While a criminal charge or conviction is not necessary to a finding > that Respondents violated ER 8.4(b), this Court is fully aware that it is not a > criminal court. In criminal court, a finding that Respondents violated 18 U.S.C. > § 241 would involve additional pre-trial and trial criminal procedures and > standards not applicable to this Court. As such, no sanctions will issue from this > finding, nor will Respondents’ violation of 8.4(b) in this Claim be considered in > aggravation. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2012, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/165 "2012-05-15T20:34:44Z")
> [@E-Sabbath](#): > > Bricker, uhm. You’re pretty wrong here. > This is the Opinion and Order Imposing Sanctions. It was written by a panel of three judges, headed by William O’Neill, the presiding disciplinary judge of the Supreme Court of the State of Arizona. Now, I’m not sure how you managed to misread the first inch of the document, but that’s fine. These are findings of a judge. Actually three judges. I _believe_ this makes them matters of settled fact. Yes? OK, my mistake. The language here was more… prosecutorial than I’m used to seeing in a judicial opinion. My bad. It’s true that these are now findings of fact – but only as to the respondants. In other words, these findings of fact are the result of a hearing of allegations from the independent bar counsel against Mssrs. Thomas, Alexander, and Aubuchon. And – it’s not a criminal trial. It’s a civil proceeding, in which facts must be proved only by preponderance of the evidence. > [@](#): > > Seriously. My question here is, given this finding, by judges, in this case, what does this give to the FBI? I’m assuming that the findings of one case is admissible as evidence in another? So, no – for two reasons: one is that Sheriff Arpaio was not a party to the proceeding, had no opportunity to deny the charges or cross-examine the witnesses. And even if he had that opportunity, the standard of proof was violation of attorney ethical standards, to be shown by preponderance of the evidence, not criminal charges that must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. > [@](#): > > I am not sure what specific crime I am alleging here. I am asking you, Friend Bricker, lawyer extraordinaire, to examine this finding, and tell us what, assuming a reasonably fit and capable prosecutor, could result from it. I don’t know. Give me a day to read a bit more of this thing. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2012, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/166 "2012-05-15T20:44:43Z")
That’s more like what I was hoping for. I think we can assume that various statements were testified to under oath. Eg, the bit where Hendershott said Sheriff Joe came up with the idea to charge the judge. What value do those have in a future trial? I’m gonna assume that at the very least they can be introduced into evidence, Hendershott can be called on to re-testify, and face contempt charges if he changes his testimony? On the prosecutorial tone: Yeah, I got the feeling the judges got _really pissed_ at Thomas et al in this. Face it, dummying up charges against a judge on really no cause at all? I can’t think of anything more likely to piss a judge off. I should point out that there are criminal charges likely to come out of the Thomas thing, and I believe that Sheriff Joe is _currently_ facing civil charges, with a second shot of criminal charges down the pipeline. So you may want to look at this both ways. In my non-lawyer, but reasonably-good-at-law-talking experience, I believe that most of the counts in this case can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. The iffy bits are where ‘Sheriff Joe ordered’, and for that, you simply have one or multiple people testifying that he did so. It’s meaty as hell, is what it is. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2012, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/167 "2012-05-15T20:53:47Z")
Here, this is also relevant. [http://www.scribd.com/doc/93122473/Complaint](http://www.scribd.com/doc/93122473/Complaint) This is the complaint about Sheriff Joe. I believe this section here is directly linked to the Thomas hearings. Though I think that it’s only relevant up to and not including 146. Remember, this is a Civil Complaint. > [@](#): > > III. > 138. Since at least 2006 and continuing to the present, in violation of the First > Amendment, MCSO and Arpaio have retaliated against critics of MCSO practices, > and particularly MCSO’s immigration practices, in an effort to punish these persons > for their criticism and to prevent future criticism. > MCSO H as Retaliated against Perceived Critics of Its Practices in Violation > of the First Amendment > 139. As recounted below, the filing of unsubstantiated complaints and lawsuits > demonstrates the pattern or practice of retaliation for protected speech activity. > 140. The former Chief Deputy, acting on behalf of MCSO and Arpaio, filed five > separate complaints with the Arizona State Bar targeting attorneys who spoke out > publicly against MCSO and Arpaio. Each of these complaints was dismissed for lack > of facts or evidence sufficient to support even the initiation of an investigation. > 141. The former Chief Deputy, acting on behalf of MCSO and Arpaio, filed four > complaints with the Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct targeting judg es who > had either made public statements critical of MCSO or had issued decisions that > Arpaio or MCSO command staff disliked. Each of these complaints was dismissed > for lack of facts or evidence to support opening an investigation. > 142. Acting in concert with the former Chief Deputy, Arpaio, and MCSO, a > former Maricopa County Attorney filed a lawsuit accusing people who had publicly > criticized MCSO of conspiracy in a criminal enterprise. Arpaio participated as a > named plaintiff in the lawsuit and substantially contributed to its filing. This case was > soon abandoned as unjustified and the responsible attorneys, including former > Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and two of his assistant attorneys, were > subsequently charged by the Arizona State Bar for havin g violated the Arizona Rules > of Professional Conduct by bringing the lawsuit. > 143. On April 10, 2012, former Maricopa County Attorney Thomas and his two > assistant attorneys were found guilty of the ethics charges. Thomas announced that he > was not appealing h is disbarment. > 144. MCSO and Arpaio also have used arrests as a means to intimidate and > retaliate against persons who have spoken out against their immigration practices. > The Opinion and Order in the Thomas ethics matter found, for example: “Sheriff > Arpaio, through Chief Deputy Hendershott, closing their eyes to his Constitutional > rights, ordered Mr. Stapley [an Arpaio critic] arrested. They never filed any > documents or charges but instead surreptitiously videotaped his arrest, and held him > in jail for hour s. Testimony at the disbarment hearing revealed that no one ever filed > anything against Mr. Stapley regarding this event, but the press was called and > informed that Mr. Stapley had been arrested.” > 145. The Thomas ethics Opinion and Order also described the treatment of > Arpaio critics by Arpaio, Thomas and others as “a concerted effort … to wrestle > power from [Maricopa County Board of Supervisors], County officials, and Superior > Court judges, and to instill fear in the hearts of those who would resist.” The Opi nion > and Order concluded that this effort culminated in a “ conspiracy” to indict a judge > without cause: “Thomas and [assistant county attorney] Aubuchon quietly met with > Arpaio and [former Chief Deputy] Hendershott behind closed doors. This shameful > gathering had but one motive. The foursome met to conspire about how to muzzle > their next most-feared nemesis. After much late-night intrigue by Thomas and > Aubuchon, the conclave’s results were revealed the following morning. On > December 9th, Thomas and Aubuchon filed criminal charges against Presiding > Criminal Judge Gary Donahoe without a shred of evidence that Donahoe had > committed any crime.” Judge Donahoe had done nothing more than issue a ruling > adverse to MCSO and was perceived to be a critic of Arpaio. > 146. Retaliation was not reserved for officials and judges in Maricopa County, > but also extended to individuals perceived as critical of Arpaio and MCSO . > 147. MCSO arrested a peaceful protestor for obstructing a thoroughfare during > an act of civ il disobedience. The protestor – who has a long history of publicly > criticiz ing MCSO immigration operations – was released. > 148. The protestor then went to observe the continuing protests. Although this > critic of MCSO policies was observing the protest without participating , MCSO > unlawfully arrested him when Arpaio , who is very familiar with this protestor, > publicly suggested that he be arrested a second time . At the arraignment, the > prosecuting attorney admitted that there had been no probable cause for the second > arrest. The interim County Attorney later dismissed the charges stemming from the > second arrest for lack of probable cause . > 149. On repeated occasions, MCSO officers arrested persons who had expressed > their disagreement with MCSO immigration policies during the course of County > Board meetings by applauding. These arrests were unjustified, as the arrestees did not > disrupt the meeting in any meaningful way. Indeed, the judge presiding over the trial > of the arrestees found that the arresting MCSO deputy “believes it is his role to make > uncomfortable anyone who express[es] views that disagree with the Sheriff” and that > Arpaio’s officers had “trampl[ed] on the First Amendment.” The court acquitted the > arrestees on its own motion at the close of the State’s case. > 150. Another critic of Arpaio was arrested for engaging in protected speech, and > was subsequently acquitted. Despite the acquittal, Arpaio explicitly stated that “\*n > the same circumstance, he would be arrested again,” making clear that retaliation, > rather than legit imate law enforcement, motivates Arpaio’s treatment of his critics. > 151. These actions, taken by MCSO and Arpaio, have deterred and are likely to > deter persons from engaging in protected speech. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2012, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/168 "2012-05-15T23:39:43Z")
> [@dngnb8](#): > > So you know the ratio of legal to illegal here? > > Cite please. I’m not talking about **immigrants** at all, and I’ve already posted my cite. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2012, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/169 "2012-05-15T23:43:21Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > (And that is not even including the 286,000 Indians who are not recorded as Hispanic in the census, but are probably treated as Hispanic by the typical white guy witha badge.) Do Arizonan Indians physically resemble Mexican Indians/Mestizos (who have shorter legs than most Indian nations north of the Rio Grande – it is not because of malnutrition that Mexicans are so short)? Serious question. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2012, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/170 "2012-05-15T23:55:31Z")
> [@dngnb8](#): > > Many of our illegals dont pay income taxes. Well, of course not, if the laws are such that the only work they can find is in the underground cash economy. > [@dngnb8](#): > > They do pay into SS, but many of those SS are through Identity Theft. Give you a guess who is among the leaders the nation in ID Theft. I daresay they only do that so they can work. It doesn’t mean they’ll ever **draw** Social Security. So, they’re paying in to the system for nothing, just for the chance to pick your beans at minimum wage or less. And you begrudge them even that?! > [@dngnb8](#): > > Frankly, the lazy American wont work in the fields because the work is far too difficult physically. Then, we need more Mexicans, don’t we? ---
**Author:** ![florez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b9e5f3/32.png) [@florez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/florez)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/171 "2012-05-16T02:10:16Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Do Arizonan Indians physically resemble Mexican Indians/Mestizos (who have shorter legs than most Indian nations north of the Rio Grande – it is not because of malnutrition that Mexicans are so short)? Serious question. In my experience white people generally have a problem distinguishing native American people from typical Mexican people, until we open our mouths to speak. Arizona tribes have very diverse looks, but so do many Mexican people, and IMO not every region in Mexico produces short body types. I have met Mexicans I thought were white people, until they opened their mouths to speak. Some of my Native Alaskan friends get a kick out of passing as Mexicans in Mexico, but also some very American Indian looking Mexicans I know, resent being called Indians, even though they generally could not be distinguished from many indigenous people. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/172 "2012-05-16T02:32:57Z")
> [@florez](#): > > I have met Mexicans I thought were white people, until they opened their mouths to speak. [Here’s a person](http://www.brooklynvegan.com/img/music2/louisck1.jpg) most people are familiar with who is Mexican. For those not aware they probably wouldn’t believe it. I certainly wouldn’t have guessed it. Well, he is: > [@](#): > > C.K., whose stage name is derived from an approximate English pronunciation of his Hungarian surname “Szekely”, was born in Washington D.C.[2][8] to Mary Louise and Luis Szekely. His mother is of Irish-American ancestry and his father, an economist and native of Mexico, is of Mexican Catholic and Hungarian-Jewish descent.[9] Though born in Washington, he lived in Mexico City until the age of seven. Because of this, his first language is Spanish, and he still retains his Mexican citizenship. > > SOURCE: [Louis C.K. - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_C.K.#Early_life_and_career) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/173 "2012-05-16T03:45:36Z")
> [@florez](#): > > Arizona tribes have very diverse looks, but so do many Mexican people, and IMO not every region in Mexico produces short body types. I suppose not. Anectdotal impression; I once spent a year living in southern Miami-Dade County, and it was the first time in my life I ever felt tall (at 5’8"). ---
**Author:** ![florez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b9e5f3/32.png) [@florez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/florez)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/174 "2012-05-16T04:26:31Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I suppose not. Anectdotal impression; I once spent a year living in southern Miami-Dade County, and it was the first time in my life I ever felt tall (at 5’8"). 5’8", Hell yeah you are tall, but we are typical short Mexicans; my brother 5’5" and Dad is 5’6", Mom was not quite 5 feet, and I am 5" 1". More wiry and proportional perhaps, but typical and brown enough to be fearful in Sheriff Joe’s neck of the woods. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/175 "2012-05-16T05:16:12Z")
> [@florez](#): > > 5’8", Hell yeah you are tall, but we are typical short Mexicans; my brother 5’5" and Dad is 5’6", Mom was not quite 5 feet, and I am 5" 1". More wiry and proportional perhaps, but typical and brown enough to be fearful in Sheriff Joe’s neck of the woods. Just out of curiosity, in Mexico, is there any clear social/cultural distinction between Indians and Mestizos? Does either group despise the other? ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/176 "2012-05-16T06:04:58Z")
> [@Lust4Life](#): > > Sigh… > > I’ll nip in and ask a copper next opportunity I get in the next few days, don’t know if I can find it trawling through the internet while still young enough to have my own mobility. > > Its well known over here, this really is a silly request for a cite. No, it really isn’t silly. You claimed things as facts, and I don’t believe that your statements accurately describe reality. If you want anyone to take what you said seriously, you should be able to back them up with cites. That’s how it’s done in GD. ---
**Author:** ![florez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b9e5f3/32.png) [@florez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/florez)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/177 "2012-05-16T07:02:10Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Just out of curiosity, in Mexico, is there any clear social/cultural distinction between Indians and Mestizos? Does either group despise the other? I do not have sociological overview enough to answer these questions very well, except to be honest, in Southern Mexico I noticed racist comments made toward people in traditional clothing, who were speaking their own language. However the Mestizos who were using negative terms to describe the indigenous people appeared to be indigenous themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 8:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/178 "2012-05-16T08:08:03Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Just out of curiosity, in Mexico, is there any clear social/cultural distinction between Indians and Mestizos? Does either group despise the other? I always laugh when people are flabbergasted out how “silly” the race is defined in the United States. Mexico, and the rest of Latin America, has put us to shame over the years with their classification system. In the state of Chiapas, a native group has declared war against the Mexican government and there’s been conflict there since the 1990s at least. > **[Racial Classifications in Latin America](http://www.zonalatina.com/Zldata55.htm)** ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/179 "2012-05-16T12:08:47Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > It is certainly acceptable for a Doper to so **argue** here. Do so if you can. > > But it would have to be more of an “argument” and more relevant than that. Certainly the law against murder is more important than that against border-crossing, which the actual law reflects in classifying the former as a felony and the latter as a misdemeanor. What’s to argue? ---
**Author:** ![Lust4Life](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecc23a/32.png) [@Lust4Life](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lust4Life)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726/180 "2012-05-16T13:28:50Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > No, it really isn’t silly. You claimed things as facts, and I don’t believe that your statements accurately describe reality. If you want anyone to take what you said seriously, you should be able to back them up with cites. That’s how it’s done in GD. Yes it is a silly cite request, its what we call a spoiler ie. you don’t really want an answer, but you do wish to harrass the poster against whom you don’t have any valid argument to counter them with. In fact I wouldn’t be stunned with amazement if that was the purpose of your post this time. The race card is always a simple and easy, not to mention cowardly tactic to use aswell. Disagree with me and you’re a racist, defend that poster or agree with him and you’re a racist. The ironic thing about the cowards who actually use this tactic from the safety of cyberspace, are the same people who IRL are too scared to put their heads above the parapet. The same people who apparently walk around with a chip on their shoulder everday looking for reasons to feel discriminated against, or for reasons that they are lifes failures, not because of their own shortcomings, but because of institutionalised racism. Except they never open their mouths about it at the time, and only complain about it after the event and when they’re safely anonymus on a m.b. Personally I don’t cave in to bullying, or attempts to gag me, even if its a pile on. I believe in free speech and democracy, which many on these boards pay lip service to but only if the speech agrees with what they said, and the democratic vote is for what they pretend to believe in. I find it particulary cowardly and offensive when dyed in the wool racists of an ethnicity other then White, hypocritically throw out accusations of racism themselves working on the theory that of course they’re not racists (At least in public) because not being White they CAN’T be racist. Well I’m sorry matey , you can be and you are. And are no less obnoxious then any member of the K.K.K. with whom they seem to share many characteristics, and the same ethos. Keep your bully boy tactics to yourself, and that goes for your terrorist admiring friend, (He knows who he is and has admitted several times on these boards to his admiration of them ), they won’t work on me, not now not ever. Sorry if I’ve spoiled your day, perhaps you can find someone else who’s a bit more amenable to your attempted bullying. Thats how real life works. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-sues-sheriff-arpaio-for-civil-rights-abuses-anyone-care-to-take-arpaios-side-here/621726.md?page=10)