by Sharon Rondeau

U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow was appointed to the federal bench by President George W. Bush in 2008

(Jun. 2, 2015) — On Saturday, The Post & Email reported that former CIA contractor and confidential informant to the Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff’s Department (MCSO) Dennis Montgomery had not yet filed a motion in response to the request of the U.S. Department of Justice to take custody of two hard drives he provided to the MCSO in the course of an investigation.

MCSO Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio and his chief deputy, Gerard Sheridan, testified in April that Montgomery’s research was unrelated to a civil contempt charge brought in the case of Melendres, et al v. Arpaio, et al decided against Arpaio by U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow in 2013.

The case is ongoing as Snow decides whether or not Arpaio and members of his staff willfully violated his orders not to racially profile subjects of traffic stops.

Last month, Mongtomery, through his attorney, Larry Klayman, asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to insist that Snow recuse himself from hearing the case because of a conflict of interest involving his wife, who had reportedly remarked to acquaintances at a restaurant that her husband wished to see that Arpaio was not re-elected.  The Ninth Circuit denied the request and remanded the case back to Snow, who thus far has not recused himself.  Snow canceled two scheduled status hearings but asked all parties to maintain additional hearing dates on their calendars beginning on June 16.

On Monday, Klayman and Jonathan Moseley filed a motion on Montgomery’s behalf with the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona which states that “it is clear that the Court has engaged in unethical ex parte communication with the U.S. Department of Justice without providing notice to any party much less the putative intervenor, Mr. Montgomery.”

Snow had ordered that all of the materials Montgomery had provided to Arpaio’s office be given not only to him, but also to the monitor Snow had appointed to oversee compliance with his 2013 racial-profiling order.  The monitor, Robert Warshaw, is currently monitoring the Detroit, Niagara Falls and Oakland Police Departments and makes millions of dollars from his work. Last week, The Post & Email was told by Warshaw’s business partner, Chief Charles Reynolds, that Warshaw does not grant interviews to the press.

At the conclusion of their June 1 brief, Klayman and Moseley stated that “The copying of documents and things by the U.S. Department of Justice must be held in abeyance until this matter is fully litigated and the ethics complaint before the Ninth Circuit Judicial Council runs its course, given the Court’s defiant and illegal refusal to obey 28 U.S.C. § 144 and its independent ethical duties and responsibilities to remove itself from this case immediately.”

On May 29, “Freedom Friday” host Carl Gallups, in commenting about the Melendres case, said that recent developments “are not the earth-shattering” information promised by Maricopa County Cold Case Posse lead investigator Mike Zullo, whose team determined more than three years ago that the long-form birth certificate image posted on the White House website on April 27, 2011 as well is Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form are “computer-generated forgeries.”

In late 2013, Zullo had told Gallups on air that Arpaio had launched a second criminal investigation stemming from, but unrelated to, the investigation into Obama’s documentation.  During testimony on April 23, Snow inquired about Montgomery’s investigation, in response to which Arpaio tangentially referred to the “birth certificate” investigation conducted by his Cold Case Posse. Arpaio appeared to indicate that the information Montgomery provided had been found to be unreliable, but on the following day, Sheridan stated that codes Montgomery identified as having been used to breach bank accounts, email accounts, and telephone calls by a government entity were confirmed accurate by a FISA judge in Washington, DC.

Also on Monday, in apparent response to Montgomery’s filing and Arpaio’s May 22 motion for Snow to recuse himself, Snow stated that the U.S. Department of Justice’s request to take custody of Montgomery’s research would not involve Warshaw “voluntarily.” Additionally, Snow stipulated that upcoming hearings scheduled to begin on June 16 are removed from the court calendar until the Defendants’ motion for him to recuse himself is settled.

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. “We now live in a nation where
    doctors destroy health,
    lawyers destroy justice,
    universities destroy knowledge,
    governments destroy freedom,
    the press destroys information,
    religion destroys morals,
    and our banks destroy economy.” ~ Chris Hedges

    James 3:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin. KJV

  2. I may be mistaken but I believe that Zullo (through Gallups) had promised “Universe Shattering” revelations (which have now been diminished to “Earth Shattering” – Right now I would settle for “case shattering” but the way things are going, I am beginning to have my doubts (unfortunately).

    The deck seems to be stacked against the Republic of the United States of America and most people are not even aware of it (nor can one get anyone to even consider the evidence this is so unbelievable to most who have not immersed themselves in it from the beginning.

    I don’t particularly like Ann Coulter but I saw her on Fox last night promoting “Adios America” and It’s difficult to argue with her analysis. The Late Great USA – It is hard to even comprhend that this is happening.

  3. If the vast majority of folks who commit crimes are of a particular origin, doesn’t that make a good case in favor of “profiling” ??? If my community is being overrun by those disobeying the traffic laws, and those who get stopped are overwhelmingly of a particular group, does that mean if a speeder gets stopped for speeding, or a drunk driver gets stopped for driving drunk, and that person just happens to be of said particular group, should he get off without so much as a warning ??? If that’s the case, then I am being profiled AGAINST for being an Anglo-Saxon American.