FLORENCE — An Arizona sheriff's office says independent testing of a bloodied shirt backs up the story of a deputy who contends he was shot by drug smugglers in the remote desert amid speculation by some that it was a hoax.
The Pinal County Sheriff's Office said Thursday that the Arizona Department of Public Safety concluded that a bullet passed through the shirt, but that no gun powder was found on it.
And that, the sheriff's office says, confirms that the bullet was fired from far away as Pinal County Deputy Louie Puroll said it was.
Puroll told investigators he was following a group of smugglers carrying bales of marijuana when he was ambushed by men firing AK-47 rifles in the remote desert south of Phoenix on April 30.
In what Puroll described as a running gunbattle, he was grazed by a bullet in the back.
Rich posted at 5:50 pm on Thu, Oct 7, 2010.
That's a tee shirt, where's his shirt? If you're going to fake evidence, don't be so transparent. It's sort of insulting for the sheriff's office to consider us all mentally deficient.
lolobo posted at 6:40 pm on Thu, Oct 7, 2010.
(yes) you are right where ?? the other shirt???? on top of that there is not a lot of blood ?? if ever have a cut it's just bleed and bleed like it's not going to stop ,just mabe that he was trying to make a deal and was ask to much money . with the other friends and his drug deal went bad what a bunch of lier .......
exit526 posted at 7:08 pm on Thu, Oct 7, 2010.
Yawn. Nothin' to see here, folks. Team Babeu thrills us again.
Real investigators would have seized all of his clothes. Little late for that now. "We are reopening the case" is a crock! Submitting 5 month old evidence is not reopening a case. Who is going to investigate it? A local Boy Scout troop? The VFW? Babeu, himself?
Now Louie has declared he didn't shoot himself, everything is all better. If he didn't do it, who did? Babeu and and his booboos closed the case months ago - with an aggravated assault or attempted murder of a police officer and the case was closed by them?
Again, nothin' to see here. Puroll told us tonight there still might be shell casings out there in the rocks unless they just loaded their magazines with just 7 cartridges. Gaffney, earlier, told us the bad guys might have used "brass collectors" on their guns.
As to the endless PCSO internal affairs investigation, I mean, it's been over 5 months and is this really that complicated? After all, Louie said he didn't shoot himself, Babeu believes him and that's that. It only took 5 weeks and a good photo opportunity with McCain for a purple heard medal to be awarded. And we are still working on the I.A?
I am still interested in what he did that Friday from 8 AM when he checked on until early afternoon (besides breakfast) when he finally went to play. He was on the clock. Let's look into Babeu and his boys and their misuse of federal overtime on Operation Stonegarden details (of which Louie was bilking at the time).
Our taxpaying dollars go for this comedy?
abimopectore posted at 7:14 pm on Thu, Oct 7, 2010.
The investigation should have initially been lead and done by another independent agency that isn't pulling any political theatrics like MCSO. Because it was never done like this, we'll never know the truth.
skinchini posted at 7:31 pm on Thu, Oct 7, 2010.
So I have a few questions for the first four to make comments. Have any of you worked in this area before? To the one trying to talk like a medical professional (exit 526), what is your medical training especially as it pertains to gunshots? We can start there? And your answers please.
abimopectore posted at 8:19 pm on Thu, Oct 7, 2010.
skinchini,
Yes. It's not just the medical/forensic analysis that is being questioned. It's the WHOLE investigation from the moment of arrival on the crime scene, the gathering of evidence, statements, interviews, follow ups, etc... You just don't close an investigation especially if they've assaulted or injured a police officer. It remains open since the hope is that you'll catch the perpetrator(s) hopefully one day or link them to the crime some moment down the road. Secondly, although not necessarily required unless mandated by law but highly recommended, it would have behooved Sheriff Babeau to designate another investigating agency to handle this scenario, for the sake of the investigation, justice, and for his own deputy's benefit, and especially his department. This way he could clearly make the case that the facts spoke for the truth he's claiming at the moment. The only thing one can surmise at this point is that this "truth" is long gone and lost in the desert and most likely will never come to light for obvious political reasons.
wgauthority posted at 9:24 pm on Thu, Oct 7, 2010.
Holy road apples, the entire team of crack investigative reporters for the Useless Times is online trying tomake like they are the final authorities, and don't have EGG all over their ugly faces! Maybe they can hire more self-proclaimed experts that are more believable than the last batch they hired. QUE BOZOS
exit526 posted at 12:47 am on Fri, Oct 8, 2010.
Skinchini,
I am very familiar with the area of the indicent. Concerning gunshots, I made no comments relating to the gunshots and forensics. I questioned opening and closing the case, the statements by Puroll and Gaffney about missing brass, challenged the I.A. being done and jested about the immediacy of the purple heart award and Louie's workday that Friday. No one claimed or implied medical training except you. I didn't trash competent law enforcement personnel or procedures.
Hang on to your Babeu loyalty. Keep mocking the New Times writer. You might go back to the (officer) Franklin Brown case in 2002 at Phoenix PD and watch for similarities.
Hope to have eased your mind about my medical background and area knowledge.
Since I mentioned comedy, make sure you go to KPHO.com and read the Tammy Leitner (formerly of the Trib) recent piece about finding the second cave spotter in Pinal County. Make sure you see the two slideshows she includes (with captions). That was intense reporting by an embedded reporter. Be sure to note nature of the "spotter" they spotted. Thant's #2. And we keep slamming the Times and their experts that don't agree.
Read the Rubin article from a week ago and catch the qoutes from Babeu's chosen investigator, Sgt. Haussman. Read HIS words, not Rubin's. I am pointing out problems with an investigation (from start to non-finish) that were allowed or caused by the sheriff and his staff and the choices they made (and continue to make).
Stand by Babeu and his administration. Then as this figurative parade goes by, remember back years ago to reading "The Emperor's New Clothes." We are right in the middle of it and few people are speaking out.
forkedlift1 posted at 4:36 am on Fri, Oct 8, 2010.
A July 8, 2010 Arizona Republic article by Dennis Wagner reports on Puroll's initial interview by PCSO, Puroll's detailed account of how it all came down.
It states, "At that moment, Puroll said, two unseen subjects began firing from 25 or 30 yards off to his left, one with a rifle and the other a pistol. Puroll dropped down."
If the subjects were "unseen," how was Puroll able to identify the weapons (a rifle and a pistol) they were using?
I too question Babeu, (1) not sending Puroll's long sleeve shirt and other of his apparel, which had been kept as evidence, to the DPS lab for testing (2) calling off a DPS investigation of Puroll two hours after Babeu put the matter in their hands to investigate, and STILL not allowing them to query Puroll and (3) now publicly declaring that the case is "closed" despite the fact that a law enforcement was shot and wounded with intent to kill by an unknown assailant.
Previous reports said that Puroll's arms were clean, free of any scratch marks or dirt from the desert brush, dropping to the ground in the ordeal, etc., indicating he must have been wearing his long sleeve uniform shirt, not just a T-shirt, which also should have been sent to DPS.
Masterrogue666 posted at 4:38 am on Fri, Oct 8, 2010.
Supporters of ILLEGAL ALIENS with grasp at anything! Rich, power burns would NOT stop at the first shirt.
As a matter of FACT, the deputy that WAS SHOT by drug runners DOESN'T agree/support SB 1070!!!!!
He was in "your corner" and you call him a liar?
ROTFL
forkedlift1 posted at 6:21 am on Fri, Oct 8, 2010.
Masterrogue666, Where did you get that from, that Puroll doesn't agree/support SB 1070? In coverage of his press conference with Babeu, there's no indication that he said that. Although it's possible that he could have dropped his gun and it discharged, he WAS adamant that he didn't and wouldn't shoot himself.
“Until this shooting happened, and I got home that night and was watching the news, I never heard of 1070. I do not watch the local news. I don't read the newspapers and I don't care about politics,” said Puroll. (Channel 5 news)
"Puroll was grazed by a bullet in April after calling police dispatchers to report he was in a gunfight with drug smugglers in a remote area of Pinal County. Puroll later told investigators he had been shot by a man armed with an AK-47 about 25 yards away." (Channel 12, Ariz. Republic)
Again, what is your source of information that this deputy -- who claims no interest in politics, doesn't watch TV news or read the papers -- has taken a position on SB 1070?
He also told a TV news reporter that to this day he has never read the New Times story (about his shootout in the desert and forensic opinions.)
wherehaveallthejobsgone posted at 7:22 am on Fri, Oct 8, 2010.
Lets pull all remaining troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan immediately. Redeploy them on the thousands of miles of border north, south, east and west; including all of their advanced equip to efficiently and effectively secure our borders. We have waged 40 years of drug war at a cost in the trillions of dollars and are worse off than when we started. Legalize and nationalize recreational pot use by adults with acceptable proof of age; sub out production and distribution of pot to private sector to employ Agri Business Techniques, and Home Depot like logistics, thereby driving down costs, enhancing profits and tax revenues, while undercutting Black Market pricing. This will eliminate the Black Markets incentive and stop the bleeding of resources toward ineffective effort and scant results. Place some of the redeployed troops and put boots-on-the-ground in our school campuses while ramping up anti drug use education in those same schools, all funded by the new revenue source.
wherehaveallthejobsgone posted at 7:23 am on Fri, Oct 8, 2010.
Just Say "Yes!" Legalizing Drugs Is Good
for Society ... and the Economy, Harvard
Prof. Says
Posted Oct 06, 2010 10:06am EDT by Henry Blodget in Recession, Politics
Related: SAM, BUD, PPH, XPH, MRK, JNJ
Share 84 retweet 2 Email Print
California residents will vote in November on whether or not to legalize
marijuana. If they do vote "yes," says Harvard economics professor
Jeffrey Miron, that should only be the beginning.
All drugs should be legalized nationwide, Miron says. Pot, cocaine, LSD,
crystal-meth --- you name it.
"Legalizing drugs would save roughly $41.3 billion per year in
government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition. Of these savings,
$25.7 billion would accrue to state and local governments, while $15.6
billion would accrue to the federal government," Miron claims in a recent
Cato Institute report he co-authored.
According to their website, "The report also estimates that drug
legalization would yield tax revenue of $46.7 billion annually, assuming
legal drugs were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and
tobacco. Approximately $8.7 billion of this revenue would result from
legalization of marijuana and $38.0 billion from legalization of other
drugs."
But won't we become a nation of drug addicts?
No, says Miron. Walk down any city street and you can already buy legal
drugs in multiple establishments: Caffeine at Starbucks, nicotine at the
supermarket, alcohol at bars and restaurants. And we're not ALL
addicted to all of these drugs.
Our current drug policy doesn't work, Miron observes. Despite ~$40
billion spent on enforcement and prosecution, drug use is still
widespread. Meanwhile, because the products are illegal, they're
dangerous, low-quality, and unregulated, and they generate zero tax
revenue.
Legalizing drugs would solve those problems, Miron says. It would help
close the budget deficit. And it would eliminate a bizarre double
standard, in which Americans are encouraged to drink and smoke
themselves to death -- while guzzling addictive coffee and tea -- but become criminals if they dare to get stoned.
http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/just-say-yes-legalizing-drugs-is-good-for-society-and-the-economy-harvard-prof-says-yftt_535480.html
Masterrogue666 posted at 9:13 am on Fri, Oct 8, 2010.
It was on the TV in SEVERAL news reports this morning.
The deputy also stated that the news media blew things way out of proportion.
smarter1 posted at 10:10 am on Fri, Oct 8, 2010.
Deputy Puroll was a member of Search and Rescue task force. I don't believe they dress like Smoky the Bandit in spanking uniforms, but wear tee shirts and camouflage for their unique line of work. Per the New Times' biased articles: "Puroll was wearing khakis, a dark green T-shirt (he either was wearing a heavy long-sleeved shirt or carrying it around his backpack), a floppy hat, and combat boots. He said later his Camelbak backpack held a blanket, water, a first-aid kit, and other survival items." But then it appears that some responders here are not interested in the facts, but more in using this incident to further their gripes about SB1070 and the sheriff without consideration of the impact of their vendettas on innocent people's lives. Maybe they'd better hope they never get in trouble out in the desert and have no need for Search and Rescue operations to save them.
Masterrogue666 posted at 11:44 am on Fri, Oct 8, 2010.
smarter1: Well put! If they had ANY CLASS, they'd apologize for previous statements. However, leave it to them to delve even deeper into illogical conclusions and OPINIONS....
forkedlift1 posted at 2:57 pm on Fri, Oct 8, 2010.
Good point, smarter1, about the apparel for Search & Rescue people. In a follow-up New Times story, a PCS0 lieutenant said
S&R people are supposed to wear long-sleeve shirts to protect from the elements. Puroll's was a long-sleeve flannel shirt that he apparently had wrapped around his back pack, which showed faint signs of blood, but not of being hit.
Disregarding for a moment the T-shirt that was tested for residue, there are still a few matters that can't yet be explained.
(And NO, Masterrogue, they have nothing to do with 1070, or "open borders" or liberals.)
(1) The shortage of shell cartridges at and near the desert crime scene.
(2) The horizontal angle of Puroll's gunshot wound although it was an uphill shot.
(3) The inability of 200 law enforcement officers and search helicopters to ever locate the half dozen smugglers or their supposed drug filled back packs.
(4) The bloodied T-shirt. Puroll wasn't rescued for approx. 80 minutes after his call. Shirt apparently removed from Puroll's torso enroute to medical facility and given to evidence room later the same night, April 30, or next day and placed in sealed bag. Photo of bloodied T-shirt not taken until May 5, five days later. Photo shows red, moist blood. In the 80 minutes Puroll waited for rescue, blood would have coagulated (takes 3 to 15 minutes for such) and not still be moist when submitted to evidence person for storage.
(3)
Masterrogue666 posted at 6:13 pm on Fri, Oct 8, 2010.
Interesting how much "information" forkedlift1 has, yet didn't see ONE TV news report were they stated that the deputy doesn't support sb1070.....
AzAce posted at 8:52 pm on Fri, Oct 8, 2010.
I don"t know where you people are looking if you haven't heard or read that the Deputy does not support SB1070, so obviously you're well informed, it was even in the paper today!
as for these so called "experts" that gave opinions by looking at photographs, it should make anyone doubt their opinion in the future, I wonder how many people are sitting in jail based on their "expert" opinion??? sorry but in my opinion, an "expert" would never put themselves out there like that based on a photo, and would only give an opinion after examining ... 1st hand what they would need to, to give an informed opinion.
forkedlift1 posted at 2:18 am on Sat, Oct 9, 2010.
After I asked, RM, I did see a small one-liner at the end of an article in this morning's (Friday) Republic. Didn't have the TV on all day today, or the radio, and must have missed it late yesterday.
It's kind of funny for him to have any opinion at all about SB 1070 since he very assertively said he doesn't care about, doesn't follow politics, doesn't watch the local news, doesn't read the newspaper.
See my earlier post for his direct quote from the Ch.5 news broadcast. Humorous, though, that in the same sentence he said he was watching the TV news the night of the incident.
It may be a while, but I think we'll ultimately be learning more about that blood stained T-shirt.
smarter1 posted at 10:22 am on Sat, Oct 9, 2010.
When we watch too much CSI and Rambo versions of Hollywoodized cops, we tend to get a lot of false impressions about the reality of life and the job, making fantasy mountains out of ordinary molehills. What appears out of place in this whole matter is the insertion of SB1070 comments and swipes at Sheriff Babeu, which had nothing to do with the incident when it happened while the deputy was on duty doing his usual job. I think the sheriff described it well when he said the deputy was the victim in this matter, period.
And as far as the two "experts" quoted so often, if they were so expert beyond textbook teaching they would know how unethical and unprofessional it is to make a conclusive judgment off of a photograph without considering ALL of the evidence in the matter firsthand. Surely their "expert" testimony would get thrown out of a courtroom. Guess we'll all human, huh?
Though no one else will say it, I wish to extend my gratitude to Deputy Puroll for his service to protect us citizens from the vicious drug smuggling that has invaded this state. And I'd like to say, "Keep up the good work. Thank you. You're my kind of guy!"
RollerCam posted at 11:08 am on Mon, Oct 11, 2010.
BOTTOM LINE:
Anyone that libels Paul Babeu is on the wrong side of the USA-Mexico border.
forkedlift1 posted at 2:48 pm on Mon, Oct 11, 2010.
How is Paul Babeu's expert investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office coming along?
hillstreet posted at 10:50 am on Tue, Oct 12, 2010.
The story is not over by a long shot, until Purroll submit to a polygraph and a DPS interview. I listened to the 45 minute camp fire story he gave PCSO detectives and it's got more holes than swiss cheese. oO course, the detectives just sat there in awe and did not cross examine him on the discrepancies.
babeu will not allow any closure to this incident, too importantt to his national rep as a tough "border sheriff."
Masterrogue666 posted at 7:08 pm on Tue, Oct 12, 2010.
I read "New Times" article about Mary Rose "Willtakebribes" Wilcox's felony Indictments. The go into great detail how many won't stand due to one reason or another.
Funny thing, they NEVER mentioned if taking "loans" from Chicanos Por La Causa, then voting to provide County funds to that same group is considered by MOST people as MORALLY and/or ethically questionable.
But then, I'm speaking of the "New Times", so of course I'm not surprised. And those persons that don't have a problem with what she HAS DONE seem to come from one specific "camp". You get one "Brownie point" if you can give the answer.....
forkedlift1 posted at 12:04 am on Wed, Oct 13, 2010.
MR666, you're beating a dead horse (no surprise there) regarding Arpaio's failed retaliation attempt against MRW because she dared to question the propriety of his "sweeps" and get her convicted of bogus criminal charges -- all dismissed by the court. You must have missed Anderson Cooper's extensive coverage of Arpaio's retaliation history, his many abuse-of-power misdeeds, last night (Monday) on CNN, his victims speaking openly and candidly, the ongoing federal grand jury investigation addressing his wrongful actions, Arpaio's refusal to be interviewed by CNN, the weak attempts by three of his staff members lined up and trying in vain to make excuses for the "toughest sheriff's" actions. Yes, the rest of the country got to see and understand what the real Joe Arpaio, that sheriff in Arizona, is all about and what motivates him.
Hillstreet, I agree that the Louis Puroll matter is not over by a long shot. About a week ago I listened to the May 3 interview of Puroll by PCSO detectives for the first time -- a monologue by Puroll, who is quite a captivating storyteller, for about 35 minutes, with the remaining 10 minutes being a couple of
"clarifying" questions asked by the detectives. An average person listening to the account, unfamiliar with all the artillery related by Puroll and moreso the specific terrain particulars (what exactly happened where and at what distance), is disadvantaged. But by that time, 3 days later, the detectives certainly had some advance knowledge, and the "interview" supposedly occurred on site.
Most curious is the fact that the photo of THAT particular red-blood-stained T-shirt with the bullet hole was not taken until May 5, two days later.
Reporter Paul Rubin, who has a history of being pro-law enforcement, didn't begin looking into this incident until he got a number of calls from law enforcement people, who, as yourself, were likewise seeing all the holes in Puroll's story.
So even at this late date, a polygraph of Puroll should be able to either close some of those holes or further expose them. With all the unanswered questions and inconsistencies, Babeu's insistence and actions to shove everything under the rug makes the whole matter all the more suspect.
forkedlift1 posted at 11:49 am on Wed, Oct 13, 2010.
BTW, Roguemaster, since you brought up the irrelevant topic about the abuse of power actions against Mary Rose Wilcox by your hero Arpaio and his partner-in-crime Andrew Thomas, here are two of the applicable federal statutes: 18 USC 242 (depriving someone of his or her rights under the "color of law") and 18 USC 241 (conspiring to deprive someone of his or her rights).
rrjenn posted at 2:31 pm on Thu, Oct 14, 2010.
All the open border, pro illegal alien scum seem to be out in force here. No amount of evidence would ever matter to you scum. You scum will always take the illegal alien perspective and always denigrate the hard working lawmen who put their lives on the line every day for you. You people make real Americans sick.
Masterrogue666 posted at 8:58 pm on Thu, Oct 14, 2010.
forkedlift1: AS ALWAYS, you "missed" my point, or outright IGNORED IT!. Personally, I believe it's the latter.
Let me state it another way: Do you or do you not think that it's wrong for ANY government official to receive "loans" from an organization, and then vote to provide funds to said organization.
AT NO TIME did I mention ANYTHING about Sheriff Joe or MCSO in my statement posted at 7:08 pm on Tue, Oct 12, 2010. In FACT, AZ Republic did an article about Wilcox's actions. I know you are aware of that fact, however, I also know you'd NEVER admit it.
I know, your hatred of Sheriff Joe runs deep, and you wish to protect the "image" of a public official that supports your cause. However, that does not change the FACT that what she HAS DONE IS MORALLY and/or ETHICALLY questionable.
So, you still can't answer a DIRECT QUESTION? As always, you try to employ a smokescreen to obscure the truth. Some things NEVER change.
forkedlift1 posted at 3:23 am on Fri, Oct 15, 2010.
Rogue of course you're entitled to your opinion...which happens to conflict in TOTAL with the strongly worded ruling against former Maricopa County Attorney Thomas and Arpaio by the out-of-county judge in M.R.W's case.
Let's first look at the circumstances which brought it all about....i.e., Arpaio's motivation to hunt, hunt, hunt, dig, dig, dig up anything on M.R.W. because she had uttered her dissatisfaction with his "sweeps."
If you saw CNN Monday night, they exposed Arpaio's pattern in that respect, plus the ongoing federal grand jury investigation, and they also interviewed M.R.W., Stapley, the County's budget director or asst. manager, and a lawyer of one of Arpaio's victims, stemming from his failed, though costly, retaliation efforts.
As I mentioned, Arpaio refused to be interviewed (I wonder why), but it was gratifying to see that CNN's extensive report exposed to the rest of the country what Arizona's notorious sheriff is really all about, much more and much worse than an eccentric, opinionated, self-serving camera hog.
As I recall the M.R.W. matter consisted of a routine annual public vote taken at one of their meetings by the BOS, no discussion, unanimous 5-0 vote, granting Chicanos por la Causa (a non-profit organization that's been around for decades and does a lot of good things for the community, particularly children) some kind of public assistance from the county for serving the needs of the community.
Mary Rose and her husband had taken out a business loan from a subsidiary of CPLC, which really wasn't all that much, for their restaurant....a remote (not substantial) conflict of interest. "AH HAH! She voted for that subsidy to CPLC" (which really wouldn't have mattered one way or the other since it was a rubber-stamp sort of vote anyway by all the supervisors) "So we will demolish her."
What followed was the typical Arpaio press conference for the sole purpose of smearing her and painting her as a reincarnation of John Dillinger...just as he and Thomas tried to do with Judge Donahoe, Supervisors Stapley and Kunasek, the New Times editor and publisher, Terry Goddard, Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, three other judges, and lord only knows how many others....because they dared question something Arpaio did or did not do.
When she told CNN she was indicted on 44 felony counts, I about fell off my chair. Andrew Thomas, on behalf of his partner in crime, must have told some real whoppers to that Maricopa County grand jury -- just as he recently lied through his teeth to the media about the March 3 decision "to end this inquiry" of THAT grand jury -- and did not initially recognize his own blatant conflict of interest in pursuing the absurd matter against M.R.W. Go to the judge's ruling and learn something instead of fabricating an issue that wasn't there in the first place.
Deeply imbedded corruption and the ongoing abuse of power by a law enforcement agency (MCSO) has been keeping the FBI, U.S. Attorney, and Dept. of Justice busy for almost two years now. And in addition to the Frank Munnell 63-page memo, we read just yesterday of another memo from another sheriff's deputy itemizing wrongdoing within MCSO, which the FBI and U.S. Attorney are currently reviewing.
Strange, isn't it, that expert investigator of MCSO, Paul Babeu, didn't receive a copy.
forkedlift1 posted at 10:08 am on Fri, Oct 15, 2010.
The CNN video of last Mon night's broadcast on Arpaio is posted on Phoenix New Times website to see for yourself.
smarter1 posted at 2:25 pm on Fri, Oct 15, 2010.
From Homeland Security's office Oct. 14: "...a meeting was held in Puerto Penasco in which every smuggling organization who utilized the Vekol Valley was told to attend. This included rival groups within the Guzman cartel. It was decided that the cartel would send a group of 15 very well equipped and armed sicarios complete with bullet proof vests into the Vekol Valley. The group will walk into the valley taking 4 days to get into LPOP positions and communicate back to Penasco. Penasco will then send groups of simulated backpakers carrying empty boxes covered with burlap into the Vekol Valley to draw out the bandits. Once the bandits have been identified, the sicarios will take out the bandits. Incidentally, the night of the Vekol Valley shooting [April 30-Deputy Puroll] we received information from a source who reported that the scouts in the valley (the cartel has 23 scout locations with rolling encryption) were reporting that bandits had shot 2 sheriff's deputies and the area was covered with cops." There is your factual proof that the drug cartel is fighting its wars in Pinal County, not all south of the border. Still think the deputy's ambush was a hoax?
forkedlift1 posted at 8:40 pm on Fri, Oct 15, 2010.
smarter1,
Your post (above) is from a May 13 (not Oct 14) email, two weeks after Puroll's alleged "shootout in the desert" and sent to Arizona law enforcement agencies back then from Homeland Security, which law enforcement kept under wraps.
Apparently Channel 5 also had a copy of it, and broke it to their viewers early this morning. After that, Babeu issued a news release containing that May 13 email to newspapers and media outlets. (I assume you got a semblance of the info from PCSO also.)
Anyway, Homeland Security got wind of what Babeu had done, maybe from Babeu himself, and Matthew Chandler, Homeland Security's spokesman in D.C., fired off an email to Babeu, which said,
"This particular information proved to be inaccurate," Chandler wrote.
"At this time, DHS does not have any specific, credible information on intra-cartel violence taking place in Arizona. Over the past 20 months, this administration has dedicated unprecedented manpower, technology and infrastructure to the Southwest border.
"In addition to remaining in close contact with law enforcement on the ground, over the past several months we have added personnel and assets to Arizona to assist other federal, state and local partners to keep our communities safe."
Then late this morning or early afternoon Tim Gaffney, Babeu's PI person, fired an inquiring email back to Chandler, which said,
"Can you please explain to me how the Department of Homeland Security can say that the information was 'proved to be inaccurate?'
"The intelligence information disseminated by your office was correct regarding the Deputy Puroll shooting, and four weeks later we had two illegal immigrants murdered in this same area described in the e-mail where they said it would take place. One of the illegal immigrants was armed with an assault rifle. Now during the past several weeks `spotters' have been located [in] several different caves which is also referenced in the e-mail. How with three confirming facts can you say that it was `proved to be inaccurate?'"
So it looks like the ball is in Homeland Security's court to reply to Gaffney/Babeu. We await to read a response from Homeland Security.
That May Homeland Security letter was reported on the Channel 5 and Channel 12 evening news tonight, along with Babeu, and New Times had already written a story about it around 2:30 today, same time you posted your comment here.
http://www.kpho.com/news/25397850/detail.html
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2010/10/homeland_security_spokesperson.php
Rich posted at 9:29 pm on Fri, Oct 15, 2010.
"Still think the deputy's ambush was a hoax?"
Yeh. In fact I really don't buy that Homeland Security knows its (inappropriate term synonym for donkey) from its elbow. This is James Bond (inappropriate term synonym for dice game) appropriate for a bad novel.
forkedlift1 posted at 12:33 pm on Sat, Oct 16, 2010.
A commenter on another article recommended a polygraph test administered by the FBI for all involved in this matter. It's hard for the average citizen to separate serious law enforcement needs from political posturing or aspirations.
Masterrogue666 posted at 2:53 am on Sun, Oct 17, 2010.
See what I mean? You ask a SIMPLE, DIRECT question from forkedlift1, and you get a convoluted smokescreen. What's the matter fork, can you answer a simple, direct question?
No matter how hard you try to obscure the truth, you will always fail. Did Wilcox take "loans" from an organization that later she voted to give county funds to? The answer is YES. That makes her actions morally and ethically questionable.
When you bring up Sheriff Joe's actions, it changes NOTHING. It only helps prove that you are incapable of answering a simple, direct question.
As I stated earlier, you either missed the point, or chose to ignore it. Well, now it's clear that you have chose not to answer my question. What's the matter, afraid of the truth? Too late, it's already out there. The fact that you refuse to answer actually helps prove my point.
Or are you saying that Wilcox took the loans due to MCSO's actions?
rrjenn posted at 8:51 pm on Sun, Oct 17, 2010.
Masterrogue666, this guy will never see any point that doesn't benefit his mestizo buddy's. You can pummel him with facts, but you just cannot fix stupid libertards. I went to the trouble of showing him that the two items in sb1070 that the judge blocked were in fact no different than what the feds are required to do (if obama executed the immigration laws congress enacted like he is supposed to) but he did the same thing. He dropped the ball and ran away crying like a little girl. Mary Buttock needs to have what's left of her behind shot off. lol. Forkedcr*p needs to move to Mexifornia where he can be with the rest of the libertards.
soricobob posted at 6:59 am on Mon, Oct 18, 2010.
Can't imagine what the illegals would do if all the energy which has gone in to the investigation of this deputy went into stopping them.
forkedlift1 posted at 10:43 am on Mon, Oct 18, 2010.
Investigation? What investigation? By whom? Except for a 47 minute tape recorded "interview" of Louis Puroll on May 3 by one or two Pinal County detectives with no substantive questions asked at the end of Puroll's 35+ minute uninterrupted monologue, there's been no investigation. Paul Babeu put the kibosh on an outside (DPS) investigation, those best equipped to conduct one, remember?
Interestingly, however, Babeu (with only a couple years of any law enforcement experience under his belt) agreed to conduct an outside "investigation" of Arpaio's MCSO at Arpaio's behest after MCSO deputy chief Frank Munnell's 63-page memo was made public.
Maybe Babeu could seek a quid pro quo from Arpaio and ask Arpaio to investigate the April 30 "shootout in the desert" incident described by PCSO deputy Puroll.
After all, what are friends for?
rrjenn posted at 4:50 pm on Mon, Oct 18, 2010.
soricobob,
You got that right. That's their strategy. Waste our time and resources defending border agents and cops that care enough to fight for us till we just give up and allow all the mestizos to just flood the country. The movement is growing, and the 11 to 20 million criminals who stole into our country will never be citizens unless they go home and apply legally like any other immigrant that believes in the rule of law and respects American laws and values.
rrjenn posted at 4:54 pm on Mon, Oct 18, 2010.
The rantings of a illegal mestizo loving bozo that cares more about illegals than he does about the brave American law enforcement that risks their lives daily to protect him. He knows a lot about being dense and dumb but very little about law.
"You are as dense and dumb as a box of rocks.
Tell it to the judge. Your convoluted, accusatory, petulant, and dishonest posts are so idiotic that you probably never noticed most commenters just skip over them, don't even read them."
rrjenn posted at 6:00 pm on Mon, Oct 18, 2010.
Hey forkedsh*t1, looks like our good friend is busy writing the next step in ridding our state of the illegal criminals you love so much. I don't think your girlfriend Mary Rose Buttock will be able to help you bozo.
Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, is gathering his team together for his next state immigration-law effort.
Kansas attorney and Secretary of State candidate Kris Kobach this week confirmed that he is working with Pearce to write a bill that would develop a state law to change the way children born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants are granted citizenship.
Kobach helped Pearce write Senate Bill 1070. Pearce has said he will propose the bill when the legislative session starts in January.
Kobach would not say what that bill might look like. "We aren't announcing anything yet, as the drafting is not complete," Kobach said via e-mail.
Ya see bozo, it's snowballing and wont stop till we get what we want.
Rich posted at 8:47 pm on Mon, Oct 18, 2010.
I have a newspaper dated 1779 in which the editorial was about what a big deal it was to be born here. It's really silly. I have a great grandfather who was a Cherokee, should I go back to Oklahoma or Carolina? We're a big deal because we achieve, and when we don't want competition we're only cowardly palookas living on yesterday and a failed reputation.We are the wretched waste of a foreign shore, and when we stop being that, we stop being anything at all.
forkedlift1 posted at 9:28 pm on Mon, Oct 18, 2010.
Don't let propriety get in your way or anything, but since you copied the entire Az Republic article from yesterday's paper it's customary to cite to your source.
rrjenn posted at 1:29 am on Tue, Oct 19, 2010.
Rich, I understand your point and to some degree I agree with you, but this competition is helping to not only lower overall wages here but is also fueling the high unemployment here. This wretched waste of a foreign shore has a limit in the amount of ignorant, unskilled labor that it can assimilate from Mexico. I'm told Mexico's unemployment rate is around 3.5 percent. One can easily see why. Their unemployed are flooding into America helping to keep our unemployment high by taking many jobs that Americans will do for a fair wage. Is it fair to Americans and to the many legal immigrants to have to carry this burden? It's high time Mexico starts dealing with their own problems. When only 50 families own 95% of the countrie's wealth, and everyone else is dirt poor, it's time for another revolution.
Over the last five years, the official unemployment rate in Mexican cities has grown by 0.72% to reach 3.8%. Although that figure is far below the unemployment indexes in the rest of Latin America, the European Union, the United States and much of Asia, Mexico faces a serious problem generating jobs.
http://www.wharton.universia.net/index.cfm?fa=viewfeature&id=1026&language=english
Masterrogue666 posted at 6:48 am on Tue, Oct 19, 2010.
Rich: As is common, attempt insults instead of argue points. All that really does is show YOUR character. I am aware that the board voted unanimously. That doesn't change the FACT that Mary Rose voted. The proper course of action would be for her to abstain.
Rawk.....
Masterrogue666 posted at 6:57 am on Tue, Oct 19, 2010.
Rich: By the way, forkedlift's "inability" to answer a direct questions stems from a long time ago. I once asked if he thought that ILLEGAL ALIENS have the same rights as US citizens. He never answered that question, which in its own way is an answer.