Susan Powell's Father Hires Private Eye to Review File

by Associated Press Writers Paul Foy and Brady McCombs

Police say they've taken their best shot at finding missing Utah mother Susan Powell. Now, her dad is hoping a review of the newly released case file containing tens of thousands of pages of detective reports, maps, interview transcripts and more might turn up something the investigators missed.

Chuck Cox told reporters Tuesday at a news conference in Seattle that a private eye has offered to help comb through the records, perhaps yielding new or overlooked clues about the sensational case.

"That's one of the reasons we wanted it: to find out what (the police) really had, because that would point us in a different direction and give us a place to search for my daughter," Cox said.

Susan Powell disappeared in December 2009, and her husband, Josh Powell, was long a suspect in the case. But last year, he killed himself and the couple's two young sons in an explosive house fire in Washington state, and investigators turned their attention to Powell's brother, Michael, who, they now believe, helped Josh Powell dispose of Susan's body.

Michael committed suicide by jumping off a parking garage in Minneapolis three months ago. That left authorities with no direct suspects, and this week they announced they were closing the active part of the investigation and opening their books on the case. They insisted they never had enough evidence to charge either brother.

"We didn't have a body. We don't have a crime scene," West Valley City Deputy Chief Mike Powell said.

The documents show that police had always doubted Josh Powell's bizarre alibi. Powell claimed he wasn't home when his wife vanished because he had just left the house in the middle of the night to take their 2 and 4-year-old boys camping in the Utah desert in the middle of a snowstorm.

They describe how Powell gave muddled answers when asked where authorities should look for her, and how detectives painstakingly followed up on tips called in by hunters, campers, prisoners, other law enforcement agencies and even psychics. They checked mine shafts and shallow pet graves, tracked down a potential witness in Michigan, used wiretaps and put a tracking device on Josh Powell's van.

Detective reports also reveal that Josh Powell apparently had an affair with a woman he met through a dating service months before his wife vanished. The woman, whose full name is redacted, told them they had sex five to six times during daytime meetings, and he paid her about $800.

The revelations about the affair and about Michael Powell's potential involvement were surprising, Cox said, and he was eager to see what else was in the files.

Cox and Anne Bremner, a Seattle attorney for the family, said they continue to believe that prosecutors did, in fact, have enough evidence to arrest Josh Powell and convict him for murder. Not having a body can make it tougher to prove a murder charge, but prosecutors across the country have won convictions in such circumstances.

In this case, Bremner said, the circumstantial evidence was remarkably strong: Powell's alibi was nonsensical. He hemmed and hawed when questioned by police. He couldn't explain why he had her cellphone with the digital SIM card removed, and he couldn't explain why, in the days after she disappeared, he rented a car and drove it 800 miles.

There was also a potential motive: Josh Powell cleaned out Susan Powell's retirement accounts 10 days after her disappearance, and he had taken out $1.5 million in life insurance policies on her.

"In some ways, circumstantial evidence is the best evidence," said Bremner, a former prosecutor. "With direct evidence, you can have a witness lie. With forensic evidence, you can have problems with collection. But circumstantial evidence never lies and you can't change it.

"They could have arrested him, and they should have, based on that evidence."

Bremner told the news conference that even as Utah police close the active part of their investigation into her disappearance, federal authorities continue to review the case, a claim that was denied by the U.S. Attorney's Office in Salt Lake City.

Bremner said she and Cox were apprised earlier Tuesday of the federal investigation by an agent who has been directly involved in the case. She said she requested permission to announce the development at the news conference, and the agent granted it. Bremner said the scope involved looking into what Josh Powell's father, Steve, knew about his daughter-in-law's disappearance.

In response, Melodie Rydalch, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Utah, issued a statement saying that federal agencies in Utah had assisted in the investigation and would be happy to do so again should circumstances warrant.

"However, we do not have plans to conduct any further investigation," she said.

West Valley City Deputy Police Chief Mike Powell said he wasn't immediately aware of any ongoing federal investigation.

Steve Powell had a sexual obsession with Susan Powell and thoroughly documented it in journals seized by police. He is currently serving a prison sentence after being convicted of voyeurism charges for secretly recording young neighbor girls.

Utah police said Monday that they do not believe he was directly involved with Susan Powell's disappearance but may know more about it than he has let on.

Police said both Steve and Michael Powell were uncooperative in the investigation.

They interviewed Michael numerous times about why he left his car at an Oregon junk yard weeks after Susan's disappearance _ a fact police didn't learn until nearly two years later. Officials said he offered evasive answers about why he got rid of the car and how he had used it in late 2009.

Arizona Attorney Mark Hummels Known For Helping Others

By Catherine Reagor and Ryan Randazzo, AZCentral.com 

Rich Robertson received a phone call from Mark Hummels at 8:30 a.m. Wednesday.

Hummels wanted a favor. He was calling to ask Robertson, a private investigator, to assist one of Hummels’ former clients, for whom he had provided free legal aid. Hummels was concerned the person needed more help, Robertson said.

“Mark was always willing to help,” Robertson said.

Although Hummels had been an attorney for less than 10 years, he was already the president of a federal Bar group, had spent hundreds of hours providing free legal aid and had garnered the respect of many of Arizona’s most prominent lawyers.

An hour later, at 9:30 a.m., Hummels was representing the chief executive of a call-center company at an arbitration meeting at a north-central Phoenix law office. Steven D. Singer, CEO of Fusion Contact Centers, was the defendant in a lawsuit. After the meeting broke up an hour later, both men were shot in front of the building. Singer died Wednesday.

Hummels, 43, was hit by bullets in the neck and back. He died Thursday night.

“We are devastated at this news about our beloved friend,” according to a statement from Osborn Maledon on Thursday.

Hummels was low-key, with a sense of humor. The judge for whom Hummels served as a law clerk remembered him as a gentle, decent person with a ferocious intellect and a “goofy” side.

Hummels had worked with Singer for several months. The shooter, Arthur Douglas Harmon, 70, had been in a nearly year-long legal battle with Singer over a business deal. Harmon was found dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound Thursday morning.

Praise and respect for Hummels came from every corner, from those who knew him in Arizona legal circles to those who remembered him fondly from years before.

“He wasn’t full of bluster. He would go out of his way for people,” Robertson said.

Hummels worked as a journalist before becoming a lawyer. After receiving a bachelor’s degree from Colorado College, Hummels earned a master’s degree in journalism from the University of California-Berkeley in 1997. His first job was as a reporting — intern in Santa Fe for the New Mexican.

“The best thing about Mark was his attitude. He was a serious journalist but made what we do fun,” said Steve Terrell, a reporter with the paper. He and Hummels covered the New Mexico Capitol beat together. “When he became an attorney, we all teased Mark about how serious he looked in his work photo. We have a picture from his going-away party when he was wearing a Hawaiian shirt, smoking a fake cigar and crossing his eyes.”

Terrell checked his e-mails Wednesday night after hearing about the shooting to see when he last connected with Hummels.

“It was in 2005, after the birth of one of his sons,” he said. “He was so happy to be father. He and (his wife) Dana were a great couple.”

Geoff Grammer, a sports reporter with the Albuquerque Journal, worked as an intern at the New Mexican when Hummels was there.

“Mark treated people, his sources, with respect. He made me want to become a reporter,” Grammer said.

Hummels left the New Mexican in 2001 to attend law school at the University of Arizona. He graduated summa cum laude in 2004 and earned the highest score on the Arizona Bar exam that year.
Judge Andrew Hurwitz of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals gave Hummels a job as a clerk when Hurwitz served on the Arizona Supreme Court in 2004.

“Everyone I know in Arizona told me I must hire him immediately because he was the smartest guy they had ever met,” Hurwitz said outside the U.S. Courthouse in downtown Phoenix on Thursday. “They were all right, but they also forgot to tell me he was also the nicest guy.” He said that he and Hummels “became fast and dear friends.”

“This is a day of unspeakable sorrow,” he said. “We all feel so helpless.”

Hurwitz described Hummels as a gentle, intelligent, decent person who was an avid swimmer and had a “goofy” side that included riding a unicycle.

After working for Hurwitz, Hummels joined Osborn Maledon in 2005. His practice focused on business disputes, real-estate litigation and legal-malpractice defense. He was arbitrating a business dispute with real-estate ties before he was shot.

“It was a catch for our firm to get someone like Mark Hummels to come and join us,” Bill Maledon said. “We are devastated by this senseless, tragic loss of our friend and partner. It is a tragic loss, not just for our firm but for our community.”

Hummels volunteered with the Arizona Justice Project, a group that helps inmates try to overturn wrongful convictions.

“Mark spent hours and hours preparing an educational presentation on the Ray Krone case,” said Lindsay Herf, DNA project manager for the legal non-profit. “We have used his work to educate hundreds of attorneys and law students.”

Ray Krone was convicted of murder in 1991 and spent a decade in prison. He was exonerated based on DNA evidence.

Hummels also served as president of the Phoenix chapter of the Federal Bar Association.

He lived with his wife and elementary school-age sons in Phoenix’s Arcadia neighborhood.

Happy Holidays from Arizona Private Investigations and Arizona Legal Document Services!

Arizona Private Investigations: The Surveillance and Locate Specialists

Call us today at 480-318-9936 for a free consulation, or visit us on the web at www.azprivateeye.com for more information.

Arizona Private Investigations is Here To Help

For a free consultation, call us today at 480-318-9936 or for more information go to our website at www.azprivateeye.com.

Private Investigator Calls Colorado City Police Department the Most Crooked in the Country

by Gary Tuchman, CNN

The federal government is suing two towns that are dominated by the fundamentalist, polygamous, FLDS Church and its jailed leader Warren Jeffs.

According to the Justice Department sect members in Colorado City, Ariz., and Hill Dale, Utah have been forcing nonbelievers out. The feds call it discrimination and they want it to stop.

They say it's happening because FLDS members control everything that counts in these places from the town hall to the tap water.

CNN's Gary Tuchman recently visited Colorado City where the word of Warren Jeffs is akin to the word of God and where his cult-like religion is the law.

Colorado City, Arizona is a very unusual place. The desert town is the religious seat of the FLDS Church, which promotes and practices polygamy. And whose leader has been convicted of raping underage girls.

"The police force in Colorado City is, without a doubt, the most crooked police department in the country," said private investigator Sam Brower.

Brower is a private investigator who has dug into FLDS allegations for most of the last decade. He says the cops make the community increasingly unstable.

"I've never seen the tension so high," said Brower.

Tuchman wanted to ask the police about their support and allegiance to convicted pedophile and polygamist Warren Jeffs, but they didn't want to talk.

Mohave County is where Colorado City, Arizona is located. Tom Sheahan is the sheriff. He says his deputies can't trust the local police.

"They are doing only what the church wants to do and what their leaders tell them to do," said Sheahan.

When asked if their religion and their prophet is far more important than the laws of the state of Arizona Sheahan said, "That we know for sure."

With that in mind, the Arizona legislature took up a bill to dissolve the department known as the Colorado City Marshals Office and leave enforcement up to the sheriff.

Under the law, any Arizona police department in which more than half the officers were decertified by the state for corruption or crime in an eight year period would be dissolved.

Colorado City currently has six cops. Six other cops have been kicked off within the past eight years.

The state says each of those cops was decertified for different reasons, such as felony sexual conduct with a minor, bigamy, refusal to testify and answer questions at a grand jury and a deposition and seeking advice from a fugitive.

That fugitive being Warren Jeffs when he was on the FBI ten most wanted list. A letter recovered when Jeffs was arrested written by the former chief declared, "I am praying for you to be protected and yearn to be with you again."

The Arizona Senate passed the bill unanimously, but then something very surprising happened in the Arizona House. Representatives Nancy McClain, R-Bullhead City, and Doris Gooddale, R-Kingman, non-FLDS members who represent Colorado City in the legislature, took up the church's cause to keep the police department intact.

With their leadership, the bill died in a close vote. McClain and Gooddale say the bill is unconstitutional because they claim the city is being singled out. They also acknowledge they want to support their FLDS constituents who will cast ballots for them come election day.

Rep. McClain said, "things are changing up there and it just doesn't seem fair to go backwards in time when things are finally opening up."

That directly contradicts what Gary Engels sees. He's the primary investigator of the FLDS for the county prosecutor's office.

"Things are getting much worse up there. It's getting worse by the day. It's getting more fanatical," said Gary Engels, Mohave County investigator.

So where is Representative McClain getting her information?

"There's more commerce there. They are more willing to talk with people who are not members of the community so I see that as opening up, said Rep. McLain.
Tuchman reports that people come to him and say they're scared, there's no one to talk to. They want to get out. They're trapped. Their children are being taken away from them. The cops are doing nothing.

Tuchman asked Rep. Gooddale about that and she responded by saying, "No. No one has said that to me in any of the times I've been up there."

But it does happen, repeatedly.

This past February, Tuchman reported the story of David Bistline. Warren Jeffs had kicked him and many other men out of the church for not being faithful enough.

In the middle of the night Bistline's wife and seven children were told to leave him and they left the house with the local police standing by.

"Just about killed me. I just closed my eyes and I felt like my soul is out there just floating around somewhere," said Bistline.

When Warren Jeffs kicks people out of the church, their families are taken away from them. And the cops helped take their families away from them.

"That was five years ago," said Rep. Gooddale.

When Tuchman told Goodale that that was a few months ago because he had just covered a story about it Goodale said, "Well, we never heard about it."

Rep. Goodale testified to the other legislators that this is a very open community. One of her quotes was "when we come here. We go to the baseball games, the Little League games."

We can tell you from talking to people who were in the church that there has never been a Little League here in Colorado City. As a matter of fact, one woman in the church currently says she doesn't even know what the term Little League means.

After this story aired on CNN on June 26, 2012, 3TV's Mike Watkiss (who has covered Colorado City and Warren Jeffs extensively) joined Gary Tuchman for a discussion.

That segment can be seen here. This is the transcript:

O'BRIEN: Earlier tonight, I spoke with Gary Tuchman as well as Michael Watkiss, an investigative reporter for our Phoenix affiliate KTVK. He joined us by phone.

So, Gary, let's start with you. The way you describe it, it's almost as if a religious sect is actually running these towns. Describe what it's like when you talk to the residents.

TUCHMAN: Well, that's right, Soledad. Many of the people I talked to in these towns remind me of people I've talked to in Afghanistan and Iraq. Religion is more important to them than anything.

If their prophet, Warren Jeffs, who's now in jail tells them something, they do it. Including in the past when he's told 13-year- old or 14-year-old girls they have to marry men in their 60s, 70s or 80s. They do it.

Their families make everything move to make it happen. So it's the kind of situation we go there and try to talk to the people who are members of the FLDS. They run away from us.

They run away from us because they're scared to be seen with us. Because they could get in trouble if they talk to an outsider like myself.

O'BRIEN: Mike, I know you actually interviewed a couple who say that they were discriminated against. What story did they tell you?

MICHAEL WATKISS, KTVK TV INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER (via telephone): They got a home -- a young man was classic case. He worked as a young man working on work crews when he was about 8 years old. He left the community, was never compensated.

Finally, he was given a home when they started taking over the land trust. He was badly disabled on a work related site down in Phoenix. So he's disabled. He was never compensated for his work as a child.

He and his family were given a home. They're non-FLDS. The FLDS community didn't want them there and they refused to turn on their water and power. They've had this home for nearly four years and they still don't have water.

They have to haul water to their home. This while FLDS families can go in and get their water hooked up in a matter of hours. The community has started bottling water and selling it as a commodity while they tell this family they don't have water to give them to their homes.

It is the most egregious. You know, again, people who don't understand this or haven't followed this think this, you know, is this community run by a religion? It's absolutely run by a religion. People who are not of that religion are persecuted from sun up to sun down.

O'BRIEN: So Gary, we saw you trying to get the attention of the police chief who didn't seem to be coming to the door. What's your experience with the police departments in these towns?

TUCHMAN: Well, in years of going there, Soledad, I've tried to talk to the police and to government officials. They have never, ever consented to an interview except one time, the mayor of Hilldale, Utah, talked to me.

A few months later, he was kicked out of the church. I will tell you, it's very, very different as Mike says than any other place in the United States.

One encounter I had with one of the police officers there. I was trying to interview one of the residents near the post office in a public spot. The officer said, stop interviewing people.

I said, no, this is a public street. He said, stop interviewing people. I said, not this is public. He says, I will arrest you and take you in if you don't stop trying to do an interview.

I don't know where he would take me if he arrested me, but that put an end to that. That is not something a cop would normally say when you're doing interviews in a public street. But in the FLDS land, that's what they say.

O'BRIEN: Mike, I'm going to give you the last question if I can. Warren Jeffs, he's behind bars, but it seems like you're saying he is not out of commission.

WATKISS: Well, and Gary can attest to this. He's done some stories for your network. He has been kicking families, people, out just in the most brutal -- the disruption of families that he continues to orchestrate.

He's thrown hundreds of people out, just torn families apart and I think this shows you the power that he yields. He's behind bars and he continues to rip families apart.

They were screaming about the abuse of the Texas Rangers when they went and raided that compound in Texas. I would argue that Mr. Jeffs has done more damage to the family -- his own families in his own community than 30 raids on the compound could have done.

You know, this is a brutal man. It is a misogynistic culture. The core it abuses women and children and these guys have been policing the government forever. The cops are corrupt. Every layer of government is corrupt. The feds should have done this a long time ago.

O'BRIEN: Mike Watkiss and Gary Tuchman this evening. Thanks, gentlemen. Appreciate it.

Former County Attorney Andrew Thomas Disbarred

Written by John Rudolf, Huffington Post, April 11, 2012

A former top Arizona prosecutor and anti-illegal immigration crusader used his office to destroy political enemies, filed malicious and unfounded criminal charges and committed perjury and other crimes, a state legal ethics panel ruled on Tuesday in Phoenix.
The three-member panel voted unanimously to disbar Andrew Thomas, the former Maricopa County attorney, and his former top deputy, Lisa Aubuchon. Thomas was elected in 2004 and resigned in 2010 during his second term to pursue an unsuccessful run for Arizona attorney general.

"This is the story of the public trust dishonored, desecrated and defiled," the ethics panel said.

As chief prosecutor for Arizona's most populous county, which covers much of the Phoenix area, Thomas, a Republican, gained national prominence after joining forces with Joe Arpaio, Maricopa County's controversial sheriff, in aggressively pursuing, detaining and prosecuting undocumented immigrants.

A series of failed public corruption prosecutions, also closely plotted with Arpaio, proved Thomas's downfall. After the cases collapsed, a far-reaching independent investigation authorized by the Arizona Supreme Court revealed stunning ethical lapses, according to the scathing 247-page report by the review panel.

Thomas suffered from "profound arrogance" that led him into "ethical ruin," said the panel, headed by William O'Neill, the state's presiding disciplinary judge.

Thomas, aided by Aubuchon, "outrageously exploited power, flagrantly fostered fear, and disgracefully misused the law," the panel said.

In a decision read from the bench, O'Neill said the panel found "clear and convincing evidence" that Thomas and his deputy brought unfounded and malicious criminal and civil charges against political opponents, including four state judges and the state attorney general.

The charges were ultimately rejected by state grand juries or thrown out of court as meritless, but not before wrecking havoc on the lives of those targeted.

Thomas used his office to settle political scores and worked closely with Arpaio's office in the discredited prosecutions, said Bennett Gershman, a national expert on prosecutor misconduct who acted as a consultant for the ethics investigation.

"Anybody who disagreed with them, they indicted," Gershman said.

In one instance, Thomas brought criminal charges against a state judge with no evidence and no investigation, in order to stop the judge from filing an adverse ruling the following day in a corruption case. In another case, Thomas indicted a county official on more than 120 misdemeanor and felony counts, despite having clear knowledge that the statute of limitations for almost all of the alleged crimes had passed more than a year earlier.

Thomas and Arpaio are under investigation by a federal grand jury for possible civil rights and other charges, according to court documents obtained by the Arizona Republic in 2010. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's office in Phoenix declined to comment on the grand jury proceedings.

Despite the harsh sanctions, Thomas remained defiant on Tuesday, declaring in a statement that his disbarment was the result of a "political witch hunt."

"Today, corruption has won and justice has lost," Thomas said. "I brought corruption cases in good faith involving powerful people, and the political and legal establishment blatantly covered up and retaliated by targeting my law license."

Thomas' claims of persecution rang false to Rick Romley, a fellow Republican who served as Maricopa County attorney for 16 years prior to Thomas's election to the office in 2004.

"There is no credibility in that statement," Romley said in an interview with The Huffington Post. "It really begs the question of whether or not he is delusional."

Romley, who led several major corruption probes during his tenure, applauded the ethics panel's ruling.

"It's absolutely clear that this wasn't a search for justice," he said of Thomas's contested prosecutions. "This is an issue of vindictiveness and a clear abuse of power."

Arpaio issued a statement on the disciplinary panel's decision, but did not leap to his former ally's defense.

"Today's decision no doubt is a disappointment to Andrew Thomas, his family and his colleagues," said Arpaio, dubbed "America's Toughest Sheriff" by conservatives. "He was a hard-working professional who served the people of this county for many years."

"As there are several lawsuits involving some of the same parties and issues involved in today's decision, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further," Arpaio said.

How A Private Investigator Can Help You

The following was written by Jeff Kimble, P.I., owner of Arizona Legal Document Services, L.L.C. http://www.arizonalegaldocs.com/ and Arizona Private Investigations http://www.azprivateeye.com/.  It is intended to provide general information regarding the business of private investigations and should not be considered legal advice.

The public perception of the private investigator is varied, both from the frequently exaggerated and inaccurate portrayals of "private eyes" in film and television and also from the simple fact that, compared to other occupations, a relatively small percentage of citizens require the services of a private investigator in the first place.

A simple yet precise definition of a private investigator is one who is employed to collect evidence or information. Once the drama, the mystique, and the ridiculous (just watch one episode of Magnum P.I. to get the wrong idea of the investigation business) are stripped from the Hollywood versions of the job description, a private investigator is essentially a gatherer of information. He or she—if ethical, professional, and experienced—knows how to retrieve this information legally, whether through research, observation, or technical means and then provides this information to his or her client for a fee.

Private investigators are hired by individuals, families, small businesses, large corporations, and even by government entities. Cases range from industrial espionage to lost pets, from criminal investigations to pre-employment screenings and the types of P.I.'s and their specialties are as diverse as are the clients who hire them and the varied cases in which they are involved.

The first step toward determining whether a private investigator can help you is by clearly defining your reasons for hiring one in the first place. What do you want? Are you simply trying to discover the truth in a personal matter? Or are you planning to use evidence obtained from an investigation in court? Or both? These kinds of questions are important to ask yourself before you begin your search for a reputable investigator as they may affect the outcome of your case as well as its cost.

If you are considering litigation (going to court) you may want to hire an attorney before hiring a private investigator. The attorney should advise you as to whether your case requires the services of an investigator to be successful. There is no sense in making a financial investment in information that may ultimately not be useful or admissable in court.

If you are purely interested in "the truth" regarding a personal or business matter, then calling a P.I. directly may be your best option.  A private investigator can be your confidential resource for what you cannot (or do not want to) ascertain on your own.  He or she can be "your eyes" into matters the police may not be able to help you with and can effectively be your agent or representative in matters familial, civil, and/or private in nature.

Always keep in mind that different investigative agencies offer different services and those services can vary greatly in cost and scope. A large agency with hundreds of operatives may not be economically appropriate to help you find a long lost relative but may be perfect to handle a complicated case of corporate fraud. A small agency may be ideal to help you determine if your spouse is unfaithful but may be the completely wrong choice for the countersurveillance needs of a Fortune 500 Company.  Investigate your investigator first.  Research online, contact the Better Business Bureau, read client testimonials and thoroughly review the agency's licensing and qualifications.  (See: Things You Should Know before Hiring a Private Eye in the May 2010 archive of this blog.)

Once you feel satisfied with your choice, meet the investigator(s) in person. How do you feel about him, her, or them? Do they handle themselves professionally? Do they appear trustworthy? What is your "gut reaction?"  Do you feel comfortable with them in general? These are valid questions and often the best test when making the final determination. You could very well end up having a long and intimate business relationship with this person or persons and they may see your significant other, family, friends, business associates, and acquaintances at their best or worst. If you don't feel completely comfortable trusting him or her with your personal and/or business information, look elsewhere.

Once you have determined that you require the services of a private investigator and have made your choice from the many agencies available in your area, what are some of the specific services private investigators have to offer?

Our company, Arizona Private Investigations, a subdivision of Arizona Legal Document Services, L.L.C., offers the following:

Child Custody and Infidelity Investigations

Missing Persons /Skip Traces

Surveillance (physical, photographic, and GPS tracking)

Location and Recovery of Property (including replevins)

Threat Investigations

Criminal Investigations

Hiring a private investigator can be one of the most valuable and life changing choices you ever make.  To further appreciate what a private investigator can do for you, contact Jeff Kimble at 480-318-9936, or visit the Arizona Private Investigations website at:

http://www.azprivateeye.com/

"The Truth will set you free..."

Family Reunites After Woman's Disappearance Half a Century Ago

by Andrew Colgrove, WSAZ NEWS 3, September 15, 2011

If one of your family members disappeared, how long would you keep looking for them?

One family's persistence and unwillingness to give up hope finally paid off after their loved one vanished more than half a century ago.

Emma Dartey remembers the last day she ever saw her big sister Shelby.

"I remember her going up the street, taking the bicycle saying she was going to deliver the mail to somebody, and that's the last time I saw her," Emma said.

They say Shelby ran away on May 26, 1958 when she was 19 because she was in a bad marriage. She never came back.

"It was sad wondering if she was dead or if someone had hurt her," Emma said.

"It was hard,” Shelby’s other sister Linda Davis said. “I think she knew one day we'd find her. We never gave up."

The family, from Westwood, Kentucky, searched for decades with no success, but they recently hired a private investigator who was able to track Shelby down. She’s been working as a waitress in Phoenix, Arizona.

A few weeks ago, Linda flew out to see her at her restaurant.

"She didn't recognize me,” Linda said, “so she sat down at the table. She said, “Hun, I don't believe I know who you are,’ so I just got up and put my arms around her, told her I loved her, and I was her baby sister, and she broke down and cried."

Wednesday, for the first time in more than half a century, Shelby came home. She flew into the Tri-State Airport, where more than a dozen of her family members greeted her with kisses and hugs.

"I prayed every night that one of these days God would let me see them again,” Shelby said. "That empty feeling in my heart, it finally was filled."

Shelby says as the years passed, she wanted to return home, but was too afraid.

"When I left I was young,” she said. “I thought if I come back now, they have their own life, their own family, and they probably won't accept me, but I was wrong."

"I’m really happy to see her,” Emma said.

Now the family is adamant they won't let another half a century go by without being together again.

Shelby also had two children of her own here before she left. They were 3 and 2 years old at the time.

Her son is driving up from Alabama to reunite with her, and she'll be traveling to Georgia to see her daughter

Case May End Andrew Thomas' Career

by Yvonne Wingett Sanchez and Michael Kiefer - Sept. 13, 2011 12:00 AM - The Arizona Republic

Andrew Thomas wasn't there to hear it when the independent counsel for the State Bar of Arizona laid out a case against him that could end his legal career.

Thomas faces disbarment, but the former Maricopa County attorney did not attend Monday's opening statements in his disciplinary hearing at the Arizona Supreme Court.

His co-defendants and former deputies, Lisa Aubuchon and Rachel Alexander, sat silently in the front row of the gallery in a dark-paneled courtroom as other attorneys explained why they should or should not face sanctions for their investigations of or legal complaints against judges, county supervisors and others they believed engaged in "corruption."

"The evidence and testimony that we will present will establish a four-year period of prosecutorial abuse by Mr. Thomas and Ms. Aubuchon," said John Gleason, the attorney prosecuting the case. "Under the direction and supervision of Mr. Thomas, he and Ms. Aubuchon engaged in personal retribution against their enemies."

"If you crossed paths with the county attorney, Sheriff (Joe) Arpaio, or former (sheriff's) Chief Deputy David Hendershott, you should expect to be sued, criminally charged, or both, by the county attorney," Gleason said.

"The evidence will show that the primary purpose of the prosecutions was to punish those individuals with whom Mr. Thomas and Ms. Aubuchon disagreed."

A three-member panel will weigh evidence in the disciplinary hearing, which could stretch into November. The burden is on state Bar counsel to prove the allegations against the three attorneys. The panel must make a decision on their fate within 30 days of the last day of the hearing.

The three former prosecutors are charged with a total of 33 ethical violations stemming from actions against other county officials and judges between 2006 and 2010. Charges against them include conflicts of interest; filing criminal and civil cases to embarrass or burden rivals, or filing without probable cause or sufficient evidence; criminal conduct; and conduct involving dishonesty and fraud.

Among the allegations are that Thomas and Aubuchon filed bribery and obstruction charges against Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe without probable cause; that they pursued a grand-jury investigation of Donahoe, county supervisors and other officials despite conflicts of interest; and that they filed misdemeanor charges against Supervisor Don Stapley in 2008 despite the statute of limitations having lapsed.

Alexander's role is limited to joining Thomas and Aubuchon in what Gleason described as a "meritless and frivolous" federal-racketeering lawsuit against officials and judges.

The three also are accused of failing to cooperate with the Bar investigation, and instead attempting to delay and obstruct the extensive initial investigation conducted by Gleason and his team.

Gleason said he and his co-counsel, James Sudler, would prove their case with new testimony from judges, investigators with sheriff's and county attorney's offices, county supervisors, and others to show the depths of the unethical conduct. The disciplinary hearing will be the first time most of the witnesses will tell their stories under oath.

Gleason promised a glimpse into a "Bizarro World" of investigative techniques, where indictments were written before investigations began, and where tips came from newspaper articles, not shoe-leather detective work. Search warrants, he said, were drafted based on "creative writing . . . and a little fluff above, and a little fluff below."

But Thomas' lawyer, Don Wilson, said Thomas sincerely believed he was rooting out corruption at the highest levels of county government.

"He tried to investigate it, he tried to prosecute it," Wilson said, but, "he was stonewalled and stymied. He confronted bitter and powerful antagonists. He confronted a hostile judiciary."

The consequences, Wilson said, were that the county Board of Supervisors stripped Thomas of his civil litigation department and its budget, and interfered with his ability to hire special prosecutors to try the cases against them.

Thomas brought charges against Stapley in 2008, Wilson said, because of what he believed were improper dealings among Stapley, then-Presiding Superior Court Judge Barbara Mundell, and private attorney Tom Irvine, who represented both the county and the courts in planning a $340 million court-tower project in downtown Phoenix.

Aubuchon's attorney, Ed Moriarity, offered a summary of what he believes was a conspiracy among politicians and judges to bring his client to this point.

Presiding Disciplinary Judge William O'Neil has already ruled that the defendants cannot gather new evidence to try to prove that they were right in bringing cases against county officials. Still, Moriarity hinted that he would still try to prove that all of Aubuchon's actions were justified but were thwarted.

"Let's face it head-on: This is not a normal case . . . this is a political case. You will see the evidence and know what I mean by the time I am finished," he said.

Furthermore, Moriarity said, the press and even the Bar have distorted facts of the case for a "selective prosecution."

Alexander's lawyer, Scott Zwillinger, argued his client should not be part of the hearing. She was simply doing her job, he said, and was working at the direction of her boss.

She was drafted into the racketeering suit, he said, because Thomas told her it was a "crisis." Alexander's initial role in the racketeering suit was to research whether Aubuchon could sue the same people she was prosecuting criminally.

The answer was no, Zwillinger said, at which point Alexander was asked to take over the racketeering case, even against her better judgment.

Zwillinger questioned why Alexander was singled out for disciplinary proceedings when her supervisor and private attorneys from consulting law firms were not.

"Each of the charges brought against Rachel will fail," Zwillinger said. "Why is Rachel here? The answer is: she shouldn't be."

The hearing continues today with testimony scheduled from retired Superior Court Judge Kenneth Fields, former Deputy County Attorney Sally Wells and Irvine.

Private Investigator Warns of More FLDS Abuses

By Mary Garrigan,  Rapid City Journal, Posted Thursday, September 1, 2011

The recent convictions of polygamist church leader Warren Jeffs proves that South Dakota and Custer County law enforcement officials should do more to investigate a Jeffs-affiliated compound near Pringle, said an expert on the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Sam Brower is a private investigator from Cedar City, Utah, who spent seven years investigating the FLDS after being hired by a FLDS member who was engaged in a dispute with the group. Brower provided law enforcement with information that helped a Texas jury convict Jeffs of the sexual assault of two underage girls, a 12-year-old and a 15-year-old whom he had taken as "spiritual brides." He has also written a book about Jeffs titled "Prophet's Prey," which hit bookstores Tuesday.

Brower is convinced that underage marriages also occur at the FLDS site near Pringle, though he said he has no evidence to prove it.

Custer County Sheriff Rick Wheeler was on the compound Aug. 4, the same day that a jury convicted Jeffs. He was at the 140-acre compound to accompany staff from the state Department of Environment and Natural Resources. DENR was there to inspect a concrete batch plant and construction-related dirt runoff. The concrete is being used in the construction of two agricultural buildings.

Wheeler tries to visit the compound every week or so and usually accompanies government officials onto the property. He knows he doesn't see all of the compound's residents on his visits but said he has never seen any obviously pregnant underage girls. Wheeler didn't hear any conversation about Jeffs that day, nor find any evidence of child brides during any of his frequent visits.

"At this time, I don't," he said when asked if he has any evidence of child sexual abuse. "If we did, we'd act on it."

"The day that I was in there, there were women around, with kids, doing things. One thing I have noticed is that most of the women and guys that I see are fairly close to the same age," Wheeler said.

Brower was raised in the mainstream The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which has no ties to the FLDS. He has been to the Pringle area three times in the course of his FLDS investigations, once with Jon Krakauer, the author of "Under the Banner of Heaven," a best-selling book that examines the ideologies of both mainstream and fundamentalist Mormons. Brower's book, however, deals mainly with activities at FLDS communities in Utah, Arizona and Texas.

Brower is familiar with the leadership in Pringle, however, and said he didn't see anyone from that compound in the San Angelo courtroom during Jeffs' trial. Jurors and spectators, including Brower, heard a tape recording of "a panting, pervert prophet raping a little girl," he said. That tape was confiscated by authorities the day the fugitive Jeffs was apprehended in 2006, but this trial was the first time it was used as evidence against him. Previously, a Utah judge sealed it as prejudicial and a federal judge said it was protected as "religious material."

"I hope ... that attorney generals in other states, including South Dakota, model their performance more after the attorney general in Texas than the one in Utah ... and don't let these atrocities continue," Brower said.

Among the mounds of evidence removed from the FLDS ranch in El Dorado, Texas, were diaries indicating that Jeffs has been at Pringle and directed its activities. Brower believes some of his estimated 80 wives may be living there now.

"I don't know that for a fact, but I think that's a good possibility that they are," Brower said. "It's a place of refuge for people in the hierarchy of the church. Only the most righteous are allowed to go there."

Meanwhile, the Texas verdict sends a clear message to FLDS leadership in Pringle and elsewhere, Brower said. "In the United States, we're not going to tolerate people raping little girls."

He warns South Dakotans that other jurisdictions that have taken a "hands-off" approach toward the FLDS have regretted it. "Everybody that believes it's easier just to look the other way has paid a price for it," he said.

Brower contends the FLDS is a "large criminal organization" that uses unfair labor practices to underbid legitimate existing businesses, particularly in the construction trades. His book recounts the plight of women who have left the FLDS, as well as "lost boys" -- young males with little education and no money -- who have been banished from their families and communities at the whim of church leadership.

Brower said South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley to take a "proactive" approach to the FLDS, even if no victims speak out.

"If I was there, I would be knocking on Marty Jackley's door, asking for an investigation; the law should follow them around," he said.

A spokeswoman for Jackley said her office wouldn't confirm or deny the existence of any investigation of the Pringle-area community.

"As with any matter, if we receive information regarding potential criminal activity, our policy is to investigate that information and see criminal prosecution if justified," Jackley said by email.

Brower said breaking the secrecy of the compound requires proactive investigation.

"It's much easier for people to look the other way. They don't want the headache, the hassle. It's the easiest thing to do," he said. "I know it's not easy. More than anybody, I know how hard it is to crack this religious facade. But human suffering is caused because of it."

Brower doesn't expect Jeffs' prison term to have much economic impact on Pringle, which is largely financed by church followers elsewhere, he said.

"They're completely supported by people in Shortcreek," he said. That community on the Utah/Arizona border is hailing Jeffs as a martyr for his religious beliefs, complete with a 38-foot-tall statue of the prophet that it had shipped from Texas to Shortcreek recently.

In it, Jeffs holds a Bible with one hand and a little girl by the other.

Ahwatukee Private Eye Focuses on Elder-Abuse Cases

by Cathryn Creno, Jul. 27, 2011, The Arizona Republic

Jacob Mueller quickly tired of his early retirement from police work.

In 2004, he left the Oxnard Police Department in California with enough benefits to provide a nice life in Prescott. But a retiree's life was not enough to occupy someone who once thrived on participating in car chases and underwater rescues and arresting gang members.

"I found myself slipping," Mueller said. "I needed something more challenging to do."

He opened a private investigations firm, but Mueller didn't find adultery investigations and other divorce-related work interesting.

"I sat in cars taking pictures of cheating spouses and people collecting alimony who said they weren't working but really were," he said. "I felt like there was something missing."

Through networking online, Mueller was hired by relatives of an elderly, disabled Prescott Valley resident to determine whether an employee hired to care for the person was stealing.

It turned out the family's suspicions were correct, and Mueller had found his niche.

"Families should not trust a $20 Internet background check when it comes to checking the backgrounds of the people caring for their loved ones," he said. "There really is no national criminal background check" that can be conducted for a few dollars online.

Mueller has since moved to Ahwatukee and turned the focus of his company, Global Eye Investigations, to investigating abuse, neglect and financial exploitation of the elderly.

He pointed out that such crimes don't just happen to older people who are isolated and unknown.

Mueller said he was particularly troubled earlier this year when, at age 90, legendary actor Mickey Rooney testified before a Senate committee about being the victim of abuse and exploitation by a family member.

"Elder abuse is a lot more hidden than you would think," he said. "The percentage of cases that are ever reported are very low compared with what is going on out there."

Last year, Arizona's Adult Protective Services investigated 6,488 reports of "vulnerable adult" mistreatment, and most of the reports were made by health or social-service workers, according to a report by the state Department of Economic Security.

Dana Young, owner of the Discovery Detective Group in Scottsdale and vice president of the Arizona Association of Private Investigators, said many private investigators, including those in her own group, take on elder-abuse cases. Three to 5 percent of the cases her company investigates annually are elder-abuse cases, she said.

But Young said it's rare for a company to specialize in elder-abuse cases.

"A lot of people don't have the money to hire private investigators," Young said.

All the more reason for elder abuse to be his specialty, said Mueller, who also said he is available to conduct no-cost workshops on recognizing and reporting abuse of the elderly.
In one recent case in Mesa, he said, a care-home owner became suspicious of the behavior of a worker. Mueller ran a background check and told the owner that the employee had served a five-year prison term for selling cocaine - something that was not disclosed on the job application.

He also said he recently looked into allegations of toxic mold and neglect of patients in a West Valley care home.

"I can't guarantee what I am going to find, but I guarantee people will sleep a little better having the information they are seeking," he said.

How a Private Investigator Can Help You

The following was written by Jeff Kimble, P.I., owner of Arizona Legal Document Services, L.L.C. http://www.arizonalegaldocs.com/.  It is intended to provide general information regarding the business of private investigations and should not be considered legal advice.

The public perception of the private investigator is varied and nebulous, both from the frequently exaggerated and inaccurate portrayals of "private eyes" in film and television, and also from the simple fact that, compared to other occupations, a relatively small percentage of citizens run across or require the services of a private investigator in the first place.

A simple yet precise definition of a private investigator is one who is employed to collect information. Once the drama, the mystique, and the ridiculous (just watch one episode of Magnum P.I. to get the wrong idea of the investigation business) are stripped from the fictitious versions of the job description, a private investigator is essentially a collector of information. He or she—if ethical, professional, and experienced—knows how to retrieve this information legally, whether through research, observation, or technical means, and then provides this information to his or her client for a fee.

Private investigators are hired by individuals, families, small businesses, large corporations, and even by government entities. Cases range from industrial espionage to lost pets, from criminal investigations to pre-employment screenings, and the types of P.I.'s and their specialties are as diverse as are the clients who hire them and the varied cases they present.

The first step toward determining whether a private investigator can help you is by clearly defining your reasons for hiring one in the first place. What do you want? Are you simply trying to find out the truth in a personal matter? Or are you planning to use the information you obtain from the investigation in court? Or both? These kinds of questions are important to ask yourself before you begin your search for a reputable investigator, as they may affect the outcome of your case, as well as its cost.

If you are considering litigation (going to court) you may want to hire an attorney before hiring a private investigator. The attorney should advise you as to whether your case requires the services of an investigator to be successful. There is no sense in making a financial investment in information that may ultimately not be useful or admissable in court.

If you are purely interested in "the truth" regarding a matter, then calling a P.I. directly may be your best option.  A private investigator can be your confidential resource for what you cannot (or do not want to) ascertain on your own.  He or she can be "your eyes" into matters the police may not be able to help you with, and can effectively be your agent or representative in matters familial, civil, and/or personal in nature.

Always keep in mind that different investigative agencies offer different services, and those services can vary greatly in cost and scope. A large agency with hundreds of operatives may not be economically appropriate to help you find a long lost relative, but may be perfect to handle a complicated case of corporate fraud. A small agency may be ideal to help you determine if your spouse is unfaithful, but may be the completely wrong choice for the countersurveillance needs of a Fortune 500 Company.  Investigate your investigator first.  Research online, contact the Better Business Bureau, read client testimonials, and thoroughly review the agency's licensing and qualifications.  (See: Things You Should Know before Hiring a Private Eye in the May 2010 archive of this blog.)

Once you feel satisfied with your choice, meet the investigator(s) in person. How do you feel about him, her, or them? Do they handle themselves professionally? Do they appear trustworthy? What is your "gut reaction"? Do you feel comfortable with them in general? These are valid questions, and often the best test when making the final determination. You could very well end up having a long and intimate business relationship with this person or persons, and they may see your significant other, family, friends, business associates, and acquaintances at their best or worst. If you don't feel completely comfortable trusting him or her with your personal and/or business information—look elsewhere.

Once you have determined that you require the services of a private investigator and have made your choice from the many agencies available, what are some of the specific services private investigators have to offer?

My company, Arizona Private Investigations, a subdivision of Arizona Legal Document Services, L.L.C., offers the following:

Child Custody and Infidelity Investigations
Pre-Employment Screening
Criminal History Reports
Individual Background Profiles
Adult and Youth Caregiver Abuse/Neglect Investigations
Teen Whereabouts/Lifestyle Investigations
Premarital Screening
Tenant Screening
Missing Persons /Skip Traces
Witness Location
Witness Interviews (statements and affidavits)
Police Interviews
Expert Witness Research and Interviews
Evidence Collection
Surveillance (physical, photographic, and GPS tracking)
Testimony/Deposition
Location and Recovery of Property (including replevins)
Threat Investigations
Criminal Investigations

Hiring a private investigator can be one of the most valuable and life changing choices you ever make.  To further appreciate what a private investigator can do for you, contact Jeff Kimble at 480-318-9936, or visit the Arizona Legal Document Services, L.L.C. website at:

http://www.azprivateeye.com

"The Truth will set you free..."

Murderer Caught by Arizona Private Investigator

written by Megan Boehnke - Mar. 26, 2010, The Arizona Republic

Judge Bradley Soos asked twice Thursday if the feeble man before him in a Pinal County Superior Courtroom could hear him.

"I think so," said the man, leaning forward, his hands cuffed, his tattoos drooping beneath his red jumpsuit.

The court knows the man as Frank Dryman, a fugitive from parole, a murderer who shot a man seven times in the back in a small Montana oilfield town in 1951.



His neighbors in Arizona City know him as Victor Houston, the gruff yet charming deacon who ran a wedding chapel, painted signs and sold cactuses and desert knickknacks. He was a notary public. He was on the board of the local Moose Lodge. He graduated from the sheriff's citizens' academy.

In Arizona City, the man everyone saw but few knew well had suddenly become the man who had nearly been hanged in Montana.

In the sleepy community 60 miles south of downtown Phoenix, news spreads fast. One car after another drove by the compound surrounding his wedding chapel Thursday morning, boots hang from the skeleton of a cholla cactus. But beyond knowing him as the quirky man who ran the town's wedding chapel, few really knew much about their neighbor, and no one in town knew him as well as his close friend Patricia Lindholme did.

Not long after she met the man she knew as Vic, he told her he once killed somebody.  He told her that it was in a bar fight a long time ago and that he had served his time.  She didn't ask questions.

Decades earlier, a 19-year-old Frank Dryman caught a ride with Clarence Pellett, a rotund café owner and father of six, as Dryman hitchhiked from California to Canada in April 1951. When the two arrived in Shelby, Mont., Dryman pulled a .45 caliber pistol.  Pellett took off running.  Dryman missed with the first shot but felled his victim with the second.  Then Dryman walked up to the body and fired six more shots.

A 160-man posse fanned out across northwestern Montana in search of Pellett. They found his body with eight empty shells nearby, about 45 feet from muddy tire tracks in a field.

Authorities caught up to Dryman in Canada the next day, and he signed a confession. Within a week of the murder, he was convicted and sentenced to hang.  The state's "galloping gallows," the traveling execution squad, would be coming to Shelby.

The newspaper in town published a special section about the murder, but the hanging never happened.  The verdict was thrown out because of the local publicity.  After a second trial he was sentenced to a life of hard labor in the state penitentiary.  He served 14 years.  Two years later, he skipped out on his parole.

"Whatever happened to the infamous Frank Dryman, the cold-blooded murderer?" the Great Falls Tribune asked in an article written in 1977.

In the three decades that Frank Dryman lived as Victor Houston, his only brush with the law was a speeding ticket from the Pinal County Sheriff's Office.  He tended to his own business, spoke his mind occasionally and built a humble life as a sign-painter and a father.

He paid his yearly dues to the Chamber of Commerce.  Most businesses around town display signs painted by Dryman.  No one knew it was a trade he picked up in prison.

His daughter and stepdaughter attended local schools in the 1990s, when Houston participated in a parent-teacher organization and donated signs to carnivals.  Most in town saw Vic as a rough but active member of the community.  Lindholme saw him differently.

"There was something so sad coming off of him," she said. "I saw this deteriorating old man, and there was nobody to help him."
 
He was legally blind and could barely hear.  He had liver failure and had survived prostate cancer.  In recent weeks, he began asking Lindholme to take care of his affairs.  He wrote a will on March 16 and asked her to be its executor.  But looking back, Lindholme said, she still doesn't think her friend Vic knew what was coming.

Neither did Clem Pellett, who was born two years after his grandfather was shot to death. Clem's father never spoke about the murder but warned Clem to never pick up hitchhikers.  It wasn't until he cleaned out his mother's Chandler home that Pellett, an oral surgeon from Washington, discovered a box of mementoes and the newspaper clippings on his grandfather's death.

Pellett called local Montana newspapers and began requesting more clippings.  He looked through transcripts of the trial, where his wife found a description of Dryman's tattoos.  He requested records from the Montana Department of Corrections and the parole board.  Then he began searching for Dryman himself.  Before long, Pellett received a call from a family friend that a private investigator had found Dryman.

"I was just flabbergasted.  I thought he was dead," Pellett said.

Patrick Cote, a private investigator based in Casa Grande, Arizona, tracked Dryman's Social Security number to the wedding chapel.  Cote went looking for Frank Valentine, another alias.  He found Victor Houston.  His tattoos were similar and the stories seemed to match.

"Dryman and Houston were one and the same," Cote wrote in his report to the Pellett family.

It took Pinal County sheriff's deputies about 30 minutes to get a confession.

The tattoos were faded and his fingerprints weren't in the national database.  But after the detectives told Houston that they were getting an analyst to compare his prints to those of the missing Frank Dryman, he broke down and told the truth.

On Thursday, two days after his arrest, Dryman signed a waiver to forfeit his rights to extradition proceedings.  The state of Montana will come to Arizona to pick up the fragile old man. The state's parole board then has the option of re-paroling him, sending him to prison with the option to return before the board or requiring him to serve the full life sentence.

Lindholme said if he does return to prison, she isn't sure how long he'll last. With his recent money problems and the loss of his license, life in Arizona City has been hard.

Lindholme has been in touch with his daughter, who lives in New Mexico, and his siblings.  They all knew of his past, though how much his daughter knew is unclear.  Dryman even told a detention officer that he was relieved to not have to run anymore, said Tamatha Villar, a sheriff's department spokeswoman.

"Vic was chased by demons all his life," Lindholme said. "Let's face it, all he had to do was abide by the rules, and he couldn't do it."

Andrew Thomas and Lisa Aubuchon Should be Disbarred, State Investigator Finds

Originally printed in New Times Blogs by Ray Stern, December 6, 2010

Maybe tailing the investigator for the Arizona State Supreme Court was a bad idea.

A probable-cause panelist for the state high court, spurred by a report from investigator John Gleason, has ordered disciplinary procedures to begin against former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and his former deputy, Lisa Aubuchon.

In a 76-page report presented to the panelist, Gleason notes that if the allegations against Thomas and Aubuchon were proven, then they should be disbarred.

Such a disciplinary move would be a major blow to Thomas, who quit his office in what turned out to be an unsuccessful bid for state Attorney General this year. Disbarment would mean Thomas and Aubuchon couldn't work as lawyers in Arizona. Thomas could forget any notion of a political comeback.

The final word on punishment won't be known for several months.

The report by John Gleason is expected to be released by the state Supreme Court at a 2 p.m. news conference.

We don't have the report yet, but a state Supreme Court official confirmed the gist of it to New Times.

The order by Judge Charles Jones, who was appointed this year as a "probable cause panelist" to help sort out the county's legal mess, was filed with the Arizona State Bar this afternoon.

The order is more than a recommendation that Thomas and Aubuchon be disbarred, says the state high court's spokeswoman, Jennifer Liewer. She compared Jones' report to the findings of a grand jury.

​The next step will be for Gleason, (brought in from Colorado to avoid a perception of bias), to file formal charges with the bar's new disciplinary judge, William O'Neil. During his investigation, Gleason was tailed by private investigators working for lawyers hired by Aubuchon at public expense.

An Arizona Republic article today suggests that disciplinary action may also be coming for former deputy county attorney and blogger Rachel Alexander.

We can't help but wonder how one of Thomas' chief aides, Barnett Lotstein, would remain unscathed in these proceedings.

In any case, Thomas and crew will have plenty of opportunity to fight and/or appeal their case.

Rick DeBruhl, spokesman for the State Bar, says Gleason will file the charges "in the near future." Typically, this step would occur within 60 days, but in this case it'll likely to happen sooner, he says.

Within 150 days of the charges being filed Thomas and Aubuchon will be given the chance to defend themselves against the allegations in a public "trial" of sorts, DeBruhl says. He adds that the event won't be a "trial," per se, because Thomas and Aubuchon haven't been accused of any crime. Rather, they will fight allegations that they violated the ethical rules of attorneys, he says. Continuing the metaphor, Gleason will act as the "prosecutor," DeBruhl says, and will present the case to a small panel consisting of O'Neil, a lawyer, and a member of the public.

O'Neil could grant time extensions to the process, if he decides it's necessary, DeBruhl adds.

Theoretically, Thomas and Aubuchon could also receive punishment that falls short of disbarment.

DeBruhl says Jones' order could have contained a recommendation for the immediate suspension of the law licenses of Thomas and Aubuchon, but it didn't.

Aubuchon filed a $10 million claim against the county after being fired, and both she and Thomas have set up shop in the Valley as private-practice lawyers.

John Gleason will act as a "prosecutor" of sorts in the disciplinary hearing against Thomas and Aubuchon.

​As far as we're concerned, this should be a slam-dunk case for disbarment. Thomas, for example, filed a criminal complaint (with Aubuchon's help) against Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe that alleged bribery. No evidence of anything remotely resembling bribery ever surfaced, and the facts surrounding the case seem to show that Thomas used the charge to avoid a conflict-of-interest hearing against him by Donahoe.

Thomas, working as the legal arm to Sheriff Joe Arpaio's politically minded "anti-corruption" task force, also brought charges against County Supervisors Mary Rose Wilcox and Don Stapley.

All of those charges were dropped after a judge ruled that Thomas had serious conflicts in the cases.

Arizona Seniors Scammed by "Fake Grandchildren"

Originally posted by the Associated Press, October 23, 2010

Arizona authorities are warning seniors about a scam in which thieves pose as grandchildren over the phone and ask for bail money.

The Yavapai County Sheriff's Office reported Saturday that three such scams have occurred since September last year.

The most recent was on Oct. 18, when a 75-year-old Cottonwood man got a call from a woman who identified herself by name as his granddaughter, told him she had been arrested in Canada and that she needed bail money.

Shortly after, someone who said they were a police sergeant called and told the man to wire $5,600 in bail money to a contact in Florida. The man followed the instructions but later found out his granddaughter never had been arrested and was safe at her home in Utah, and he was out $5,600.

Sheriff's spokesman Dwight D'Evelyn said two similar incidents occurred in September last year.

He said such scams are difficult to investigate because suspects usually live outside the U.S. and throw out cell phones before they can be traced.

D'Evelyn said detectives believe whoever is responsible uses social networking sites, such as Facebook, to identify family members through profiles and photos. In some cases, people write about travel plans and specific family information, making schemes much easier.

He warned people to tell their parents and grandparents about the scheme, and that any requests for money to be wired should be seen as a red flag.

"Remember, these suspects specifically target seniors who may be more trusting and cooperate quickly out of concern for their jailed' loved one," D'Evelyn said.

Facebook Postings in Legal and Financial Arenas

Written by Phil Villarreal - September 8, 2010 - Arizona Daily Star
http://www.azstarnet.com/

Comments and pictures parents post on Facebook can come back to haunt them during custody battles, debt-collection efforts and job applications.

A compromising Facebook post "is like a smoking gun in that you can't destroy it," said attorney Shawn Kenney, the law department team leader at Thrush Law Group.

Kenney said he's seen custody cases hinge on arguments of parental incompetence stemming from Facebook posts. He recalled a case in which a father posted a picture of himself proudly displaying a 3-foot acrylic bong. In another case, Kenney said a mother wrote about how she'd been out with her girlfriends "getting trashed for the third time this week."

"When people put information on Facebook it may not be in their best interest and does come back to haunt them in ongoing litigation involving custody," Kenney said, adding he's also seen a mother call her young boy "my pimp" and a father post a picture of himself baring tattoos while posed with a butcher knife, joking that he was a killer.

Divorce attorney Robbie Lewis, who owns the Law Offices of Robert G. Lewis, P.C., has also seen Facebook rear its often-ugly head in custody battles.

"The whole face of discovery in divorce has really changed over the last few years," Lewis said. "I can't tell you how many times clients have found out about extramarital affairs through looking through their spouses' telephones in the middle of the night, or checking their spouses' e-mail or Facebook accounts."

Lewis said in the past, clients would hire private investigators to dig up dirt on spouses. Now the evidence can be found with a few mouse clicks.

"People put silly things on Facebook accounts - pictures of themselves or other people in bars doing inappropriate things" that end up presented at trial, Lewis said.

Attorney Grady Wade, who, along with his work in other legal fields, defends clients in debt-collection cases and sometimes collects debt for creditors, said while he doesn't personally use Facebook to investigate debtors, anything people post publicly on Facebook is fair game.

"If they put stuff up there, it's pretty much for public use," Wade said. "If they don't make the page private, then it's for public use and they don't have any expectation of privacy."

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which prohibits abusive behavior and restricts the methods collectors can use to locate debtors, doesn't prohibit using social networking sites.

Wade said third-party debt collectors aren't allowed to publicly shame debtors. For instance, a collector couldn't become a friend of a debtor under a false pretense and then post something on his wall about him owing money.

The restrictions don't apply to the creditors themselves, Wade said, adding that he'd advise clients to record any contact with a third-party collector.

Tucsonans applying for jobs at the University of Arizona, the region's second-largest employer, had best clean up their Facebook profiles.

UA human-resources manager Chris Wolf said managers dig up whatever information they can to vet job prospects, and Facebook is within limits.

"If a candidate regularly references violent behavior, then that may be a red flag," Wolf said. "It's more likely that a hiring manager will discover that someone references topics such as their political views - irrelevant when it comes to determining whether they can perform well, yet it may create an unintended bias."

No matter the context, Kenney said people should stop thinking of Facebook posts as semi-private announcements to close friends. He recalls a mentor's advice from decades ago, advising him to be careful about what he put in writing and says it applies to social networking sites:

"Never put anything on there you wouldn't want on a billboard on the highway," he said.

Things You Should Know Before Hiring a Private Eye

The following was adapted from information available on the Arizona Department of Public Safety website: http://www.azdps.gov/.

If you are considering hiring a private investigator and have never done so, you may be making decisions while highly emotional. Regardless, you should give such a decision careful thought and thoroughly consider the circumstances before hiring an investigator. Prior to contacting a PI, you should specifically identify what it is you want to know, what your expectations are, and how much money you can afford to spend. Additionally, you may want to first check on the PI (or agency) using a consumer assistance group such as the Better Business Bureau, researching reports on the internet, or examining other sources of business information. Please note: a company is not necessarily "bad" because it has complaints registered with such sources; sometimes the complaints are not justified. You may also want to check with the Arizona Department of Public Safety Licensing Unit to determine if the PI (or agency) is properly licensed. In Arizona, any advertisement for a PI agency (or PI) must also contain their license number.

Once a PI is selected, talk to the investigator and discuss the case with them, including what you want to know, what your expectations are, and how much you can afford. The PI should readily provide options and inform you if your goals and finances are realistic for the case. If the PI cannot provide this information, you may want to look elsewhere.

Once you are in agreement with a PI, a written contract may be drawn up that specifically states what will be done: deadlines, fees, frequency of reports, estimated costs, etc, so that no significant issues are left unknown. While a written contract is not required by law, the lack of such an instrument can prove detrimental for both the PI and the client if problems later arise.

Once the PI has completed the agreed upon work, the client is often required to pay the PI a retainer (or payment as otherwise agreed upon) before the PI is required to provide a case report to the client. The case report may be written or verbal.

The following are common issues between PI's and their clients and are provided for the benefit of both parties. This does not constitute legal advice nor does it interpret law or administrative rules:

1. While most private investigators are competent and manage their affairs in a professional manner, the Arizona Department of Public Safety (AZ DPS) Licensing Unit has received complaints related to misunderstandings about services provided and fees. Many times, consumers believe that their retainer will cover all of the costs for their case. This simply may not be true. You should be aware that a retainer is normally required before a PI will do any work on your case and that payment of a retainer in no way means there will not be further billing for services (unless it is specified in a contract). Initial billing is normally deducted from the retainer, and once that runs out, the client is normally notified. Anyone seeking the services of a PI should consider obtaining a written contract that details what the consumer wants, what the fees will be, time limits, and what the PI can actually perform. If you are hiring a PI to perform work for you and there is a deadline for that work to be completed, ensure that the date is written into a contract. If you are comfortable with the PI, verbal contracts are permitted and common, however, keep in mind that you may have difficulties if problems later occur and there is no written agreement. Either way, it should be your choice, and the PI you are hiring should accomodate you and honor your wishes in regard to a contract. If not, you may want to look elsewhere.

2. Oftentimes, PI's will bill consumers for phone calls, making copies, office consultations and in particular, "stand-by" time. Stand-by time usually occurs when you are directing a PI to wait on your behalf for an event to occur, such as the subject of an investigation to go somewhere. A PI at their office or home on "stand-by" may legally bill you for this time; make sure you and the PI understand what is expected.

3. Generally, every person performing PI services in Arizona must be licensed by the AZ DPS Licensing Unit. PI's are provided an ID card that shows who they are and when their license expires. You may reasonably ask to see their PI ID Card and record the license number and expiration date. Additionally, PI agencies are provided a Private Investigation Business License that must be clearly displayed at their place of business. Report anyone claiming to be a PI who cannot (or will not) produce such licenses or ID to the AZ DPS Licensing Unit at (602) 223-2361.

4. As stated previously, many PI's are competent professionals, however, some are simply inexperienced or unqualified to perform certain services such as lie detection, electronic debugging, and other highly technical and sophisticated specialties. You should speak candidly with the PI (or agency representative) who will be performing such services and establish what the PI's qualifications and experience are. Normally, persons trained in such specialties can provide specific knowledge or evidence from schools, seminars, prior law enforcement and/or military experience, etc. that will demonstrate what their qualifications and experience are. Bottom line: if you are not comfortable with the PI, you may want to find someone else.

5. PI's should provide you with a case report (written or verbal) at the completion of services and once final payment has been made (or some other option that has been agreed upon in a contract.) In some cases, you and the PI may have agreed that your case will be performed in sections and that each section will require payment at its completion. Other variations may be established as well. Regardless, it is in your best interest to know exactly what the terms are before you sign a contract or enter into a verbal agreement. The final report should normally provide a detailed picture of what was done, when it was done, how much time was expended on your case, the results of the investigation, and the cost of each component of the investigation, such as: time expended on surveillance, phone calls, stand-by time, extra investigators, special equipment, etc. If agreed upon by the client and the PI, a basic verbal report is also appropriate.

6. Persons hiring a PI must be aware that cases will not always turn out the way they expect or hope. Surveillance work, criminal background research, and divorce related searches are all classic examples of potentially expensive PI work that may prove fruitless for the client, however, PI's will still legally bill you for their time and efforts and you are obligated to pay them. Inability to obtain desirable or favorable results for a client does not legally justify not paying or disciplining a PI. For example, the Licensing Unit cannot discipline a PI for his/her inability to locate the person he/she was hired to find.

7. You may reasonably ask for evidence of work performed by a PI. This evidence could include photographs or videotape of a certain location or event, an audio recording, copies of documents, receipts, etc, to name a few. For example, let's assume you want to know if a certain car is parked at a hotel in a city 100 miles away. The PI travels to the hotel, locates the car and photographs or videotapes the car while parked at the hotel. This would constitute reasonable evidence that the PI performed the work. As another example, you may want a PI to watch a house to determine if any cars pull into the driveway and then videotape the cars and occupants. But what happens if the PI is watching the house and no cars arrive so the PI doesn't record any video? There is nothing wrong with this if the client is comfortable with it, however, many PI's will use a video or digital camera to record short (5-20 second) time and date stamped videos (or photos) of the location and offer them to the client as evidence they performed the work. You should be wary of PI's that refuse to show evidence of work performed or at least explain what they have done. Bottom line: Get this requirement in writing if it is important to you.

8. Generally, it is illegal under federal law (The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act [GLBA] also known as The Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999) for a person (or PI) to obtain account information from financial institutions (such as banks) unless the account owner gives their consent. Oftentimes in the past, the person (or PI) would perform an act called "pretexting" and fraudulently obtain personal information on the subject of an investigation by pretending to be the account holder. This tactic is now used for identity theft, and is illegal when performed in conjunction with obtaining confidential and protected personal information. Pretexting to obtain personal information used to be common in divorce cases and law suits, but since this tactic is now considered criminal and unethical, an honest PI should not engage in such procedures, nor should he/she be advertising to perform such services. However, keep in mind that some information about you or the subject of an investigation may be a matter of public record, such as whether you own a home, pay your real estate taxes, or have ever filed for bankruptcy. It is not illegal for a PI to collect this kind of information.

9. Generally, it is illegal under federal law (The Telephone Records and Privacy Protection Act [TRPPA] of 2006) for a person (or PI) to obtain personal phone records from a telephone company or internet phone provider service without the consent of the account holder. The means of obtaining such information are similar to those used in obtaining account information from financial institutions.

10. Generally, it is illegal under federal law (The Fair Credit Reporting Act [FCRA] as amended May 22, 2009) for a person (or PI) to obtain credit reports without the consent of the credit holder or some other legitimate purpose. As previously stated, the means of obtaining such information oftentimes are similar to those used in obtaining account information from financial institutions.

Complaints

If you have a complaint against a Private Investigator or Private Investigative Agency in Arizona, you should first try to resolve it directly by contacting a supervisor of the agency. If for some reason you are unable to resolve the problem, you may wish to contact senior management or the agencies consumer affairs representative for further assistance. Dealing directly with the agency is usually the fastest, simplest and most effective approach. Most agencies value their customers and will usually be responsive to their concerns. If you are unable to resolve your complaint directly with the PI agency, you may file a complaint with the Arizona Department of Public Safety Licensing Bureau, which is responsible for ensuring that the agencies we regulate comply with applicable state laws. (See address, phone and website information below.) If an investigation of your complaint finds a violation of law or rule, you will be informed of the violation and the corrective action to be taken. However, the AZ DPS does not have authority to resolve contractual disputes or undocumented factual disputes between a customer and an agency. They also do not have the authority to resolve disagreements pertaining to the agencies policies and procedures that are a matter of management discretion and not addressed by specific laws. In such cases, if the agency does not make a voluntary adjustment, AZ DPS will usually advise you to consider obtaining legal counsel regarding your rights to resolve the situation. While the AZ DPS Licensing Bureau endeavors to intercede on behalf of complainants, the transactions at issue are not always within their authority as regulators. The Department's regulatory authority is limited to the laws passed in the legislature that relate to security guards and private investigators.

AZDPS Licensing Unit

PO Box 6328 MD 1160

Phoenix, AZ 85005

Phone: (602) 223-2361

Fax: (602) 223-2938