You are here: Home / 2012 / October / Archives for 23rd

Judge O’Neil in Andrew Thomas disbarment LIED about prior involvement

October 23, 2012 by 9 Comments

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N  S E N S E , in Arizona

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

More evidence coming out that Judge O’Neil was on a mission to disbar Andrew Thomas  

The ethical violations Judge O’Neil violated continue to mount

We’ve been following this case for awhile, and the apparent ethical violations committed by the judge who disbarred Andrew Thomas have become too many to list. By the time this has all played out, we’re going to make the bold prediction that Judge O’Neil is disbarred, and Thomas has his license restored. O’Neil was appointed as disciplinary judge at the exact same time the State Bar began prosecuting Thomas and his deputies, in 2010. He was put there for a reason, in order to ensure that Thomas was disbarred. He resisted every effort to recuse himself when clear conflicts of the judicial canons were found. He had ruled against Thomas previously on the EXACT ISSUES he disbarred him for!

Now we’re finding out yet another issue he had ruled against Thomas and Thomas’s other deputy he disbarred, Lisa Aubuchon. O’Neil disbarred Aubuchon in part for allegedly bringing charges against corrupt County Supervisor Don Stapley after the Statute of Limitations had ended. The truth is, Aubuchon brought felony charges against Stapley WITHIN the state of limitations, and the Bar tried to claim that a couple of the misdemeanor charges she brought against Stapley were brought after the Statute of Limitations because a non-prosecutor in the office discovered Stapley’s actions before Aubuchon did. Only by twisting the definition of the Statute of Limitations, to say that it starts running when someone who is not a prosecutor who does not understand criminal law discovers the actions, could you make the argument that the charges were brought after the Statute of Limitations had run. The results of the Grand Jury investigation into Aubuchon were turned over to the US Attorney’s Office. They threw out everything, exonerating Aubuchon a few weeks ago. This undermined O’Neil’s disbarment of Aubuchon.

In 2010, O’Neil was assigned to preside over a Grand Jury investigation by the Attorney General’s Office to determine whether the Statute of Limitations had run on the charges against Stapley. Aubuchon filed a motion to disqualify the Attorney General. At the same time, Aubuchon filed a motion to disqualify O’Neil from hearing her disciplinary case, for an obvious conflict of interest. O’Neil issued an order, which has only been unsealed recently, declining to recuse himself from Aubuchon’s disciplinary case. In it, he LIED and said he was not involved with the Grand Jury proceeding against Aubuchon! He wrote,

“This judge was and remains unaware of ever being assigned to rule on any “emergency motions to disqualify the AG’s Office” filed by or on behalf of Respondent nor does this judge recall any such motion filed by Respondent.” “Even if a grand jury was specifically investigating Respondent (and this judge is unaware of that) it would not warrant recusal.” He goes on to state among other things that “this judge has no recollection of ever being told by anyone that Respondent was or might be under investigation.”
Perhaps a competency hearing is in order? This liar and monster is on a power trip and must be removed as disciplinary judge. He is a willing tool of the biased liberal State Bar. Questions must be answered. Why was O’Neil’s order refusing to recuse himself sealed until now? The Judicial Ethics Commission needs to add this growing list of ethical violations to the investigation it is already doing of O’Neil. He is being investigated for things like ghostwriting legal pleadings for people, which is prohibited by the judicial canons. Read the affidavit here. We have also been told that a complaint has been filed with the Real Estate Commission for an unethical short sale O’Neil arranged for his mother, and it is being investigated.
Join Our Mailing List
Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Crime and Punishment, Ethics, Judicial

Robert Robb: Prop. 204 tax initiative a well-intended wreck

October 23, 2012 by Leave a Comment

Arizona Republic columnist Robert Robb provides this assessment on Arizona ballot measure Proposition 204:

The debate about the sales-tax increase, Proposition 204, is taking place primarily at the high policy level.

Proponents say that education needs more money and that the Legislature can’t be counted on to provide it. Opponents say Prop. 204 just pours more money into the system without accountability reforms to ensure better outcomes and leaves Arizona with the second-highest sales tax in the country.

It’s difficult to get voters to peer into the weeds on these complicated ballot propositions. But with Prop. 204, it’s important that they at least take a peek. That’s because, technically, Prop. 204 is a wreck.

And part of its technical incompetence gets to the heart of its promise to provide new funding for education.

Prop. 204 provides funding to pay for inflation increases in existing K-12 funding. But the proposition is unclear as to whether that’s just the current year’s inflation or cumulative from the effective date of the proposition.

Continue reading…

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Ballot Measures, Campaigns & Elections, Constitutional Law, Guest Opinion, Initiative(s), State Budget, State Economy, State Government, Taxation Tagged With: , ,

Gilbert Mayor John Lewis Supports Local Override; Opposes Prop 204

October 23, 2012 by Leave a Comment

No on 204

PHOENIX — Today Gilbert Mayor John Lewis joined a growing number of local leaders from across the state opposing the permanent $1 billion annual tax increase created by Prop 204.

“As Mayor of Gilbert and an advocate for Gilbert Education, I am voting ‘YES’ on our local override, which supports our families and businesses,” said Mayor Lewis. “The override continues the same funding level that our School District has been operating for ten years without an increase. However, Proposition 204 permanently raises taxes and is structured poorly, which does not help our families and businesses. I am voting ‘NO’ on 204.”

The Arizona Republic, The Arizona League of Cities and Towns, 11 Chambers of Commerce, 14 professional business associations, and 44 Mayors and local City Councilmembers have all come out in opposition to Prop 204. To see a complete list, click here.

“I greatly appreciate the leadership Mayor Lewis has brought to the East Valley,” added Doug Ducey, the Chairman for No New Taxes, No on 204. “Prop 204 includes hundreds of millions of dollars in special interest earmarks and cuts out tax revenue sharing with local municipalities. Arizona deserves real education reforms that Prop 204 just won’t deliver.”

To learn more about Proposition 204, please visit www.VoteNoOn204.com.

###

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Ballot Measures, Campaigns & Elections, City Government, Elected Officials, Initiative(s), Press Release, State Budget, State Economy, State Government, Taxation Tagged With: , ,

How to vote on Arizona Judges

October 23, 2012 by 18 Comments

We have received many requests on who to vote for on the many judges seeking retention. The typical rule of thumb is to vote AGAINST all judges. For those of you who would prefer to reward good judges, one of our friends researched and scanned the following image. You should be able to click on this and print it out.

Please feel free to comment on any information you may have about these judges.

Please share this with others by posting on Facebook or Tweeting.

Arizona Judges

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Campaigns & Elections, Judicial, Voters Guide Tagged With:

Why Virginia Ross best recorder candidate

October 23, 2012 by Leave a Comment

by Gerald Stevenson (reprinted with permission)

 

I know Virginia and her business acumen — she has the technology background and organizational experience to lead the recorder’s office out of the operational and financial missteps of the past.

She has clearly outlined her objectives to revitalize this key county department to be more customer oriented; technology current; and fiscally sound.

After years of ingrown management, the Pinal County recorder’s position needs Virginia’s drive and leadership to ensure the critical data of our county is protected and accurate.

She has quickly grasped the pivotal needs to lead for the future and make it more accessible to you and me.

Virginia is a seasoned and disciplined manger whom we can trust with our county’s critical records. She will make the right business decisions to upgrade, strengthen and refresh the office as appropriate.

Once elected, Virginia will conduct an operational audit and a budget review to determine the weaknesses and refine the development needs for the recorder’s office. She will then publish the short-term and long-term objectives of the department and provide a realistic roadmap to accomplish these goals.

I think you’ll agree with me. This office has an embarrassing record and is a laggard. Let’s straighten this out and get it right this election. Virginia Ross is the best candidate for the Pinal County Recorder’s position.

- Gerald Stevenson is retired IBM executive who lives in Mountainbrook.

Filed Under: County Government, Government, Uncategorized Tagged With: