She
can't leave her house to buy groceries;
she's heard that the sheriff stations
deputies at Food City.
Daniela
lives down the street from a drug
dealer, not a safe environment for a
young family. She knows the guy's name,
his address and she's seen him do
business. But she can't call the police
they might take her away.
She's
learned how to walk quietly, to stay in
the shadows. The only place Daniela
allows herself to go is her children's
elementary school. She volunteers there
six hours a day. She says it's her
responsibility to be active in her
children's education. But when she walks
to school (she won't drive, ever) she
makes sure to go with one of her few
friend or her kids.
"You
can't walk alone because if you are
walking alone and you get taken, who is
going to tell your family you are gone?"
she says. "When you walk, you walk fast
and you walk quiet. You don't talk to
nobody. If someone is speaking to you,
you don't say anything."
Daniela's children can't sleep through
the night. They have nightmares about
their parents getting caught and
deported.
"We are
the only support for my children. If we
get arrested, we don't have another
person to take care of my children," say
says, starting to cry. "When they ask,
'What's going to happen to us, Mom, if
you get arrested?' I lie to them. I say,
'We have a plan my love, my sweetie.
Someone will take care of you and your
brothers. Nothing is going to happen to
you.' But it's a lie."
Daniela
also wakes up at night, crying. In her
dreams, she relives her border crossing.
She came to America to meet up with her
husband when she was 17, their
8-month-old baby in tow. In the border
town of Agua Prieta, she was assaulted
by a "coyote," slang for a person who
smuggles immigrants across the border.
The coyote stole her money, her
identification, and tried to steal her
baby.
"They
tell me they will take my baby," she
says in her slow, practiced English,
from inside a classroom at her
children's elementary school. That was
13 years ago, but from the look on her
face, it could have been yesterday.
"They say, 'You will never see your baby
again.'"
To save
her young son, Carlos, she made a
decision that haunts her to this day:
She paid a strange woman $600 to drive
him safely to Phoenix. It was a painful
gamble, but one that paid off. Carlos
survived.
If
Daniela were caught trying to save his
life this way in Maricopa County, she'd
be charged with human smuggling, the
same as the coyote who haunts her
nightmares. Today, victims of smuggling
are treated the same as the
perpetrators, thanks to an
interpretation of the law that assigns
the same level of responsibility to the
criminals who smuggle and the people
they sneak across the border.
There's
good reason to be afraid. The situation
for undocumented immigrants in Maricopa
County is arguably the worst in the
country, thanks to two men: County
Attorney Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Joe
Arpaio.
Roberto
Reveles, the former president of
immigrant rights group Somos America (We
Are America), says there is no place in
the country worse than Maricopa County.
"It's
worse because here there is a statewide
effort. The state Legislature is
involved, the executive branch the
governor is complicit, and at the
local level, the worst in the country
has to be the Maricopa County sheriff
and county attorney, who are abusing
their power to harass, intimidate, and
create fear in the hearts of
dark-skinned people," he says.
In
October, when the owners of this
newspaper were arrested for releasing
information about a grand jury subpoena,
no group in Maricopa County watched more
closely than the undocumented immigrant
community, says Antonio Bustamante, a
Phoenix defense lawyer litigating a
class-action suit against Arpaio and
Thomas.
"It was
a despicable, cowardly, gutless lack of
character thing to do to any human
being," he says. "And if they would do
that to prominent members of the
community if you're a 'wetback'
you've got no chance."
Undocumented immigrants know better than
anyone what it's like to be arrested in
the middle of the night, to walk around
as moving targets, to sit in jail.
In the
past year, the fight against immigrants
has gotten particularly nasty as
violence against immigrants has
escalated.
But
this is a fight that began back in
November 2004, when a conservative
lawyer named Andrew Thomas ran for
office on a get-tough immigration
platform. The pundits scoffed, noting
that the county attorney technically has
very little to do with illegal
immigration, a federal issue. But Thomas
has delivered on his campaign promises.
In doing so, he's become a national
spokesman for the anti-immigration
movement.
From
his attack on the judiciary, to his
promise to aggressively enforce a new
employer-sanctions law aimed at
businesses who hire undocumented
workers, to his intense lobbying for a
ballot measure that denies bail to
illegal immigrants accused of committing
felonies, to his campaign against
identity theft, almost every political
move Thomas makes has anti-immigrant
rhetoric at its root.
And
these days, Arpaio is right by his side.
Together, they've succeeded in
terrorizing the undocumented residents
of Maricopa County. Consider:
Thomas' controversial interpretation of
Arizona's anti-smuggling statute. The
county attorney accuses all people who
are smuggled into the state of
conspiring to smuggle themselves, a
class 4 felony.
Maricopa County is the only place in the
country where victims of human smuggling
are treated as criminals.
The
law has drawn the attention of national
human rights groups like the Center for
Human Rights and Constitutional Law on
the grounds that the statute is
preempted by the federal government's
constitutional right to regulate
immigration.
A
crackdown by Arpaio's deputies on
law-abiding immigrants including food
vendors, college students, and day
laborers has left the community so
frightened that many immigrants will not
even leave their homes to visit the
grocery store or go to church. Even
American citizens of Hispanic descent
say they are nervous. One citizen New
Times spoke with carries his United
States passport around to prove he's a
citizen.
A
push toward making local law enforcement
into immigration officers has had a
chilling effect on the undocumented
population. In February, 160 county
deputies were granted immigration
authority. Recently, Phoenix and Mesa
have considered allowing police officers
to question immigration status
(previously, they had to call ICE to
verify status). Though Arpaio has
arrested only about 1,300 illegal
immigrants a drop in the bucket
compared to the estimated 300,000 living
in Maricopa County the effort has been
felt throughout the undocumented
population.
An
increase in immigrant-on-immigrant
violence has come, experts say, as a
result of the population's inability to
call the police in time of need. The
fear within the immigrant community of
all police has given violent criminals
the upper hand they know their victims
can't, or won't, call for help.
Because
of the sheriff's reputation for
retaliation, all undocumented immigrants
New Times interviewed for this story
chose to use only their real first names
in order to avoid capture and possible
deportation. Some even refused to meet
with a reporter in person out of fear of
being turned over to the police.
Both
Arpaio and Thomas' offices declined
interview requests for this story.
Phoenix lawyer Daniel Ortega, legal
counsel to Somos America, says county
policies have dangerous ramifications.
"It is
our position that Joe Arpaio and Andrew
Thomas are doing exactly what the
Constitution of the United States
prohibits, and that is the enforcement
of immigration laws at a local level,"
Ortega says. "Why? Because they want to
get re-elected. They don't even have to
tell the truth. It doesn't matter as
long as it gets a headline."
The
issue is not unique to Maricopa County.
Nationally, the topic has become such a
political onus that in October Mexican
President Philipe Calderσn issued a
statement begging American politicians
to stop using migrants as the "thematic
hostages of their speeches and
strategies."
This
past summer, a national attempt at
comprehensive immigration reform, which
included a guest-worker program and
amnesty provisions for illegal
immigrants already here, along with
provisions for beefed up border security
and sanctions for employers who hire
illegal immigrants, failed to pass
Congress.
Without
a national solution, states have been
left to cope with the problem
themselves. At least 18 states have
punitive laws that deal with illegal
immigration. Following Thomas' lead in
Arizona, states including Colorado,
Nebraska, and Idaho are considering
legislation that would deny bail to
undocumented immigrants, and Oklahoma
already has such a law in place. In
January, Virginia's House of Delegates
passed a law that denies state funding
to charitable organizations if the money
is used to help illegal immigrants.
Under
Thomas' direction, Arizona is leading
the way. Tamar Jacoby, a senior fellow
at the Manhattan Institute and
internationally recognized expert on
immigration, says Arizona is a leader on
the issue. But that doesn't mean she
agrees with what the state is doing.
"I
would say, for better or worse, Arizona
has led the way on state immigration
measures," she says. "I would call them
Draconian state measures."
By the
way, Jacoby is no fuzzy liberal. She's
long been known as a rational
conservative voice on the issue, working
behind the scenes with policymakers in
Washington, D.C. She did not want to
comment directly on Thomas' policies,
but she did say the trend toward
state-sponsored immigration legislation
is dangerous. Jacoby says the problem
needs to be handled by the one entity
constitutionally equipped to handle the
problem: the federal government. She
blames federal immigration quotas that
don't correspond to actual national
labor needs.
It's
not that people would rather be illegal.
They don't have a legal way to come.
States can't do anything about that,"
she says. "All they can do is pass these
laws, which are so far from what we
need. It's like a zero-calorie diet."
Linda
Chavez, executive director of the Center
for Equal Opportunity, a conservative
think tank based in Virginia, agrees
that the political hysteria surrounding
immigration is out of control.
"I
think Arizona was sort of ground zero in
the fight against illegal immigration.
The reason you're seeing these state
initiatives is because the federal
government hasn't dealt with it," she
says. "We have a real hysteria sweeping
the nation. The hysteria has stopped
Congress from acting and provoked states
to act and, frankly, it's a mess. For
states to come in and usurp the job of
the federal government is misplaced and
dangerous."
Chavez
worries that many state jurisdictions,
like Maricopa County, ignore the facts
surrounding immigration and act under
political pressure. She points out that
nationally, the number of immigrants
coming to America has declined since
2000. This holds true in Maricopa
County. Between 2090 and 2000, the
foreign born population here increased
about 144 percent. But between 2000 and
2005, it increased only 29 percent.
"A lot
of these jurisdictions are acting on
their gut reactions rather than
empirical evidence," says Chavez.
"They're not considering the
constitutional ramifications."
That's
true. Like it or not, immigrants both
legal and illegal are protected by the
Constitution. In a landmark 2081 case,
the U.S. Supreme Court verified that all
people within the borders of the United
States are protected by its laws.
In
Plyler v. Doe, the court ruled that
illegal immigrants still have the right
to public education, the undocumented
are legally established as recognizable
"persons" and are guaranteed equal
protection under the law by the 14th
Amendment.
Other
decisions have declared that immigrants
are entitled to due process and can not
be arrested or subject to unreasonable
search and seizure without probable
cause.
Even
Deputy Troy Henley, special agent in
charge of investigations at Arizona's
office of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, agrees the undocumented
have constitutional rights that need to
be protected.
"Generally speaking, if you are in the
United States, you have constitutional
rights," he says. "Certain rights
attach, certain rights don't. Law
enforcement rights attach."
The
political hysteria surrounding
undocumented immigrants paved the way
for a right-leaning attorney with a
Latina wife and a hard anti-illegal
immigration stance to win the position
of Maricopa County's highest-ranked
elected law enforcement official.
In
2004, when Andrew Thomas ran his
campaign on an illegal immigration
platform, it was hard to take him
seriously. His "stop illegal
immigration" signs that covered the
county seemed almost like a joke. It
seemed preposterous that a county
attorney could tackle a federal issue
that even national law enforcement and
Congress can't get under control. But
his plan worked. Thomas won the
election. And immigration was more than
just a campaign talking point almost
immediately, Thomas made good on his
promises.
At that
point, the new county attorney and the
old sheriff had not yet forged a bond.
In
April 2005, only a few months after
Thomas took office, Patrick Haab, an
ex-Army reservist, made national
headlines by holding seven Mexican
migrants hostage at gunpoint at a rest
stop on Interstate 8, on county land
southwest of Phoenix, because he thought
they were illegal. Maricopa sheriff's
deputies who arrived at the scene
charged Haab with seven felony counts of
aggravated assault.
"I've
said it before and I'll say it again:
You don't pull guns on people because of
the color of their skin," Arpaio told
the Arizona Republic. "I will continue
to defend my deputies. They made the
right decision."
But
Thomas had other ideas. Twelve days
after Haab was arrested, Thomas
announced he wouldn't prosecute the case
because of a state law that permits a
citizen arrest when a felony is
committed.
(Never
mind the fact that crossing the border
without inspection is not a felony in
and of itself. The first time an
undocumented immigrant crosses the
border, it's a misdemeanor. Illegal
entry doesn't become a felony until the
person is caught, deported, and tries to
come back.)
Paul
Charlton, then the U.S. attorney for
Arizona, thought Thomas' decision was
dangerous.
"Any
time anyone takes the law into their own
hands, they risk a number of things," he
says of what Haab did. "Their own lives,
the lives of the people they are
detaining, and the lives of law
enforcement who come upon the scene.
It's a risky proposition, at best, and
it should only occur when there's not
another alternative. In my mind, there
were a number of other alternatives,
short of holding these individuals
hostage."
But
what Thomas did resonated with voters,
and the incident generated headlines for
months. Haab even appeared on Fox News'
Hannity & Colmes to discuss the
incident. Thomas drew applause from such
anti-immigration groups as the fledgling
Minuteman Civil Defense Corps.
Arpaio,
famous for generating headlines, saw an
opportunity.
Local
activist, lobbyist, radio host, and
former state legislator Alfredo
Gutierrez says it was a dangerous union.
"Arpaio
is a clown. A clown that's good for the
times, but a clown. Thomas is smart.
He's fiercely intelligent and civilized,
but he's also vile and hateful," he
says. "Arpaio has an obsessive need for
public approval and media attention, and
that's been true since the beginning.
The green bologna, Tent City it's all
designed to keep him in the spotlight.
Right around the Haab incident, it
became clear to him that this was the
next logical escalation. His primary
motivation is seeing his face on
television. Thomas is a different case.
Thomas truly understands his actions and
his manipulation of the sheriff is very
purposeful."
Around
the same time, the Arizona Legislature
passed a law aimed at stopping human
smuggling. Jonathan Paton, a Republican
from Tucson, says he sponsored the bill
with the thought that it would be aimed
at the organized crime rings that
traffic humans on the border, not at
their cargo.
The
bill makes it illegal for a person to
intentionally smuggle human beings for
profit or commercial purposes and
defines smuggling as the transportation
of people who are known, or could
reasonably be suspected, to be
unlawfully in the state.
Paton
remembers the committee sessions leading
up to the bill's vote as intense.
"There
was a lot of debate. They were grilling
me to see if this could be used to go
after someone driving a gardener around
and all these different things. I have a
district that goes up to the border. I'm
not soft on border issues," he says.
"But this [going after those being
smuggled] was not part of my plan."
Thomas
didn't care. In September 2005, he
issued an official opinion on the law.
Under Thomas' interpretation, anyone who
pays a "coyote" to guide them to America
is guilty of conspiracy to commit
smuggling, a felony offense that puts
the smuggled on the same level as the
violent criminals who bring them here.
Of the
18 or so anti-trafficking state laws
nationwide, none has this scope.
Florida, a state with a large
trafficking problem, even ensures that
victims are provided with state-funded
services.
Still,
Thomas' political moves have resonated
in other states. Earlier this year,
Oklahoma passed a comprehensive
immigration package filled with laws
modeled after those in Arizona. State
Representative Randy Terrill, who
authored the bill and brags that his is
one of only three states truly cracking
down on illegal immigration the other
two, according to Terrill are Georgia
and Arizona says he's looking at
Arizona's law for guidance.
Two
months after Thomas issued his opinion
on smuggling, he hosted a conference on
illegal immigration. The Southwest
Conference on Illegal Immigration,
Border Security and Crime was created
under the guise of exploring the issue
of illegal immigration, but its true
purpose was to grab national attention.
The
list of panelists included John Leo, a
former New York Times columnist, and
Kris Kobach, former counsel to John
Ashcroft. Tamar Jacoby of the Manhattan
Institute was also one of Thomas'
invited panelists.
In a
speech at the conference, Thomas made
his feelings toward immigrants clear.
"We do,
as a society, risk being turned into a
different society that is less appealing
by tolerating what is occurring," he
said. Later in the speech, he went on,
"I think we're dealing with something
that fundamentally changes our
democracy, not only in terms of our
sense of human rights, [but in] the fact
we are tolerating a sub-class of
people."
Next,
Thomas lobbied hard to pass Proposition
100, the statewide measure that denies
bail to illegal immigrants accused, not
convicted, of felonies. Since the
measure passed, other states have
followed suit. In Colorado, a bill to
deny bail to illegal immigrants is part
of a package of legislation for 2008 and
in May of this year, Oklahoma's governor
signed the Oklahoma Taxpayer and Citizen
Protection Act, which denies bail to
illegal immigrants and also fines
employers who knowingly hire them.
Similar measures are under consideration
in Nebraska and Idaho.
Oklahoma representative Terrill says
Arizona's Prop 100 was a model for the
bail provision of his state's act.
"I
snatched the no bail provision from you
guys," he says.
Thomas
fought the judiciary tooth and nail to
see it enforced as harshly as possible,
going so far as to have attorney Dennis
Wilenchik attempt to publicly humiliate
judges who refused to fall in line.
Tamar
Jacoby says these kinds of state actions
are only making the problem worse.
"Arizona is the place where emotions are
running highest in the whole country,"
she says. "Arizona is like an infected
tooth. It's inflamed and everything
makes it worse."
By the
spring of 2006, Thomas had successfully
added an important weapon to his arsenal
a guy with his own arsenal, Sheriff
Joe Arpaio. Local police departments
weren't willing to enforce immigration
or state smuggling laws, but Arpaio was.
But
despite his posturing on the topic,
Arpaio has yet to truly dismantle any
organized smuggling rings.
In
fact, he stumbled upon his biggest bust
to date by accident, when his deputies
picked up several barefoot, shirtless
immigrants running through the streets
of El Mirage.
It
turned out the men had escaped from a
nearby drop house, where they led the
deputies. The discovery was the result
of pure luck, not investigative
excellence.
Nonetheless, what the sheriff's deputies
discovered shined a shocking light on
the inside of a drop house, and the
serious ramifications Arizona's
anti-smuggling law could have for
victims of smuggling.
In
mid-October, sheriff's deputies
responded to reports that a number of "illegals"
were running shirtless and barefoot
through the streets of El Mirage. When
rounded up, deputies learned the
immigrants had escaped from a drop house
where they'd been held hostage.
The
inside of the house was disgusting. The
bedroom doors were locked from the
outside, and in each room, deputies
discovered jugs of human waste. Torn,
bloody underwear was discovered in one
room. The kitchen was filthy with grease
and old food, and there was no
furniture, only makeshift beds.
One of
the victims, the owner of the bloody
clothes, was a pregnant teenager.
Her
husband, identified only as "Angel" in
the report, re-created the scene for
police officers:
As soon
as they arrived at the drop house, he
and his wife were stripped of their
possessions and locked in a room. The
smugglers made phone calls to his family
in Chiapas, Mexico, demanding $3,200
on top of a set smuggling fee. Angel was
"advised that if he didn't pay, he was
going to die."
He
witnessed many beatings inside the
house, but the worst was the beating of
his wife. When her family could not
immediately pay her ransom, she was
dragged by her wrist from the room.
For the
next half hour, he could hear his wife
screaming and crying from the next room.
When she returned, badly beaten, she
said she'd been punched in the stomach.
She miscarried inside the house.
Another
man told sheriff's deputies what
happened to him when he arrived at the
house on October 2. As soon as he
entered the house, the coyotes took his
identification, his wallet, and all of
his personal belongings and locked him
in a room with about 14 other people. He
called the coyotes "kidnappers" because
they would not release him until his
fees were paid.
This
transport fee for this particular victim
was bumped $200, from $2,500 to $2,700,
upon his arrival in Phoenix. He told
police that the coyotes would call his
wife demanding more money and beat him
because she didn't have it. This
happened to a number of people trapped
in the home who were told that if their
relatives did not pay up, they would be
killed and dumped in the desert.
When he
was caught trying to escape, the man was
taken to a bathroom, where he was
tortured and almost suffocated with a
plastic bag.
Another
man in the same room was beaten and
threatened by guards for making too much
noise.
According to the police report, one of
the coyote guards, "placed the nose of
the gun on [his] neck and told [him]
that he has killed lots of people, and
that his hands were itching to kill
another."
The
man's offense? He was praying.
These
are the apparent effects of the
smuggling law. According to activists
and members of the legal community, the
worst thing about the law is that it
views victims as criminals. All the
people discovered in the El Mirage drop
house are subject to felony charges
under Arizona law. In an
uncharacteristic move, of the 54 people
discovered, only five were booked on
conspiracy to commit human-smuggling
charges. The rest were released to ICE
custody for voluntary return to their
home country. Because the sheriff will
not talk to New Times about the case,
it's unclear why his deputies made this
decision.
Even if
victims are deported without charges,
the threat of arrest and time in the
county jail still looms.
"They
are defenseless," says Phoenix lawyer
Daniel Ortega. "These are the people the
sheriff and the county attorney are
going after. The people who are the most
vulnerable."
It's
telling that none of the men picked up
in El Mirage phoned the police for help.
Thomas and Arpaio spread fear of the
police by feverishly trumpeting the
number of arrests and convictions under
the law. Other states, like Oklahoma,
are considering passing similar laws
because of it. But the numbers aren't
exactly what they seem.
Since
March 2006, Arpaio's deputies have
charged at least 800 people with
conspiracy to commit smuggling, and
Thomas' office recently boasted of its
500th conviction.
Most of
the pollitos, the slang word for people
who pay for transport to the U.S., are
offered the chance to plead guilty to
the reduced charge of solicitation
(rather than conspiracy) to commit human
smuggling. After they take the plea,
they are sentenced to unsupervised
probation and turned over to ICE for
voluntary removal from the country.
Antonio
Colσn, a lawyer in the Maricopa County
public defender's office who has
defended many of these cases, says most
people don't want to stay and fight the
charge.
"They
have the option to get probation and get
released to ICE. Clients just say, 'I
want to get out.' They don't know why
they are incarcerated. They don't
understand what's going on. And telling
them, 'You conspired to smuggle yourself
into the country,' doesn't make any
sense," he says. "As soon as they get a
hearing, they're told, 'We'll give you
the ticket home [if you plead guilty]'
and they all want the ticket home
because they've been incarcerated for no
reason. It's kind of sad."
Once an
immigrant is deported, it becomes a
felony to enter the United States
without inspection. Capture can lead to
time in federal prison. If an immigrant
is deported with a felony charge as
the people in the smuggling cases are
there is no way he or she can ever apply
for and get lawful entry to the United
States ever again.
The law
quickly drew national attention from
civil rights groups including the Center
for Human Rights and Constitutional Law
in Los Angeles. Peter Schey, executive
director of the center, has been
involved in fighting the law since the
first arrests were made.
"We
became involved because of the extreme
nature of the policy adopted by Andrew
Thomas and Sheriff Joe Arpaio," he says.
"They're the only federal or state
officials in the country who have
adopted the position that migrants may
be charged under criminal anti-smuggling
laws with the conspiracy to smuggle
themselves. We believe that Thomas and
Arpaio's position is entirely without
legal justification."
In
November 2006, Schey helped a group of
local activists, professors, and
immigrants charged under the law file a
class-action suit to fight it.
Schey
has a multi-pronged argument. First, he
says, the county attorney is violating
the intent of the law a claim that
representative Paton, the man who
authored it, has repeatedly backed up.
"If you
look at my statements in the hearing
committee itself, they were pretty
clear," he says. "Under questioning, I
stated the purpose was to go after
smugglers."
Schey
argues the law is unconstitutional.
"We
believe they are intruding into an area
in which the federal government
maintains exclusive jurisdiction," he
says. "The federal government has
enacted comprehensive laws dealing with
immigrant smuggling and has clearly
preempted local officials from
implementing the type of policy being
pursued by Arpaio and Thomas."
He also
worries that sheriff's deputies aren't
equipped to effectively enforce
immigration law. He knows of at least
one case in which a minor was indicted
on smuggling charges along with the rest
of the group she was arrested with. She
sat in the county jail for three months.
The
girl, Rosa Diaz-Godines, could not be
contacted for this story, but her
lawyer, Geoff Fish, confirms that she
was obviously underage.
"She
looked really young. She insisted she
was 18, but I didn't believe her, and
she finally admitted she was not," he
says.
On her
way across the desert, someone had told
her that if she said she was 18, she
would be allowed to stay in America. So,
she refused to admit her real age. Once
Fish was able to obtain her birth
certificate from Mexico and prove she
was underage, she was released. About a
month after her release, she became
eligible for a green card.
"They're not sufficiently familiar with
immigration law to determine who can be
here and who can not," says Schey. "They
assume everyone who is transported by a
smuggler is here illegally without
considering whether that person might be
eligible for a visa as a trafficking
victim, as a crime victim, as an
unaccompanied minor, or as a person who
can seek asylum. They don't have the
capacity to determine those questions
and they don't seem to care about them."
The
civil class-action suit Schey helped
file is now before Judge Robert C.
Broomfield in federal district court.
On a
local level, very few individual cases
have made it to trial. The County
Attorney's Office would not confirm how
many cases have gone before a jury, but
a press release from the office names
only one jury conviction. Juan
Barragan-Cierra was arrested in June
2006 along with three other men and
indicted on charges of human smuggling,
for smuggling himself into the state. A
jury found him guilty, and in December
2006, he was sentenced to two years
unsupervised probation and ordered not
to remain in the United States
illegally. His lawyer, public defender
Carissa Jakobe, is appealing the case.
At
least one judge has ruled the
convictions don't hold up.
In the
case of Adolfo Guzman-Garcia, who was
convicted by a jury, Judge Timothy
O'Toole dismissed the charges after the
trial.
Guzman-Garcia was arrested in May 2006
along with 10 others and charged with
attempting to smuggle himself into the
state. Those with whom he was arrested
pleaded guilty and were deported, but
Guzman-Garcia posted bond (this was
before Proposition 100 was passed) and
stayed to fight the case. Though a jury
found him guilty of the charges, O'Toole
chose to acquit him.
"Evidence showed that the defendant was
nothing more than a paying passenger . .
. the conspiracy statute does not impose
criminal liability on a person who is
merely being transported by an alien
smuggler for profit or commercial
purpose . . . there must be substantial
evidence that the person being smuggled
also agreed . . . to engage in the
offense of human smuggling," he wrote in
his ruling.
Antonio
Bustamante, a Phoenix lawyer who is
working with Schey on the class action
lawsuit, says the county attorney knows
the best way to ensure a high conviction
rate is to push the plea bargains.
"They
can't win their cases, so they're taking
convictions on the cheap by keeping
people incarcerated. You're going to sit
there until you cry uncle," he says.
"Thomas has no integrity and, to me, is
not even a man because of what he's
doing. Anyone would rather get out of
jail than wait months. That's cowardly,
that's not justice and that's not the
American way."
Immigrants in drop houses are not the
only people in danger. Once they enter
the community, they deal with the
constant fear of discovery. Getting
undocumented immigrants to talk about
life in Maricopa County is difficult.
They are instinctively distrustful of
strangers. When you can be arrested at
any moment, you have to be careful whom
you invite into your life.
That
doesn't mean the undocumented don't have
anything to say for themselves. After
Alfredo Gutierrez mentioned on his radio
program that this story was being
written, he received calls during the
rest of the day from people who wanted
to talk about life without a green card.
Most people did not want to say their
names or meet in person. Even when a
respected Hispanic leader tells
immigrants whom they can trust, they
don't want to take the chance.
Daniela, the mother of five whose oldest
child was almost stolen by a coyote, is
one of the few immigrants contacted by
New Times brave enough to speak candidly
about her fears.
She
lives down the street from a known drug
dealer, which puts her children in a
potentially dangerous situation every
day.
"I know
where they are selling and I know their
name, but I am not going to say nothing.
First, when the police come they could
have the right to ask me about my
situation. I don't know what's going to
happen after," she says. "Second, I am
afraid about the drug dealers. He
[Arpaio] is supposed to fight with those
persons, not with me."
But
undocumented immigrants like Daniela are
exactly whom he wants to fight. One
hundred sixty of his deputies and jail
officers have been cross-trained as
immigration officers, a program known as
287-g after the section of the national
Illegal Immigration Reform and
Responsibility Act of 2096 that makes
this legal.
The
program is intended for local law
enforcement to go after known violent,
criminals human smugglers for example
and, if they are undocumented,
initiate removal proceedings without
waiting on ICE.
In
theory, the 287-g training that the
Sheriff's Office signed up for is
designed to catch people like the drug
dealer down the street from Daniela and
the coyotes who brutalized the people in
the drop house in El Mirage people who
are known criminals. Arizona is not the
only state with this funding and
training available, nor was it the first
to get it. Twelve states have officers
cross-trained under the program. But
Maricopa County has the more 287-g
officers than any other county or state.
Linda
Chavez, of the conservative think tank
Center for Equal Opportunity, says it's
a good program when used sensibly.
"You
need to have police departments checking
people who have been arrested for other
offenses to see if the person is in the
country illegally. You don't want to let
someone go who is a flight risk," she
says. "But you don't want them pulling
people over and harassing them over a
broken turn signal. Do you really want
them doing an immigration check? You're
hassling someone for something extremely
minor when someone else could be doing
something serious."
But
Arpaio announced from the beginning that
he had no problem arresting illegal
immigrants for crimes like jaywalking or
spitting on the sidewalk.
"Ours
is an operation where we want to go
after illegals, not the crime, first,"
Arpaio told the Republic in March. "It's
a pure program. You go after them and
you lock them up."
He
didn't waste any time. His office is now
notorious for traffic stops that turn
into deportations as well as arrests of
food vendors and day laborers around the
Valley.
Father
Glen Jenks of Good Shepherd of the Hills
Episcopalian Church in Cave Creek found
his parish at the center of the fight
after Arpaio made it a point to station
deputies outside a day-labor center the
church operates in its parking lot.
Jenks says the church started the center
as a way to keep day laborers from
wandering the streets, a major complaint
in the northeast Valley community.
"That
created a chilling effect. They've
created terror in the Hispanic
community. The consequence of that is
whatever the percentage of the
population that's Hispanic can't report
a crime," he says. "They can't even let
themselves witness a crime."
Activist Alfredo Gutierrez says that's
the point.
"The
intent is to Satanize a group of people.
He's made them morally equivalent to
real criminals," he says. "The guy
walking down 34th street looking for a
job has got to be as dangerous a
criminal as a child molester."
Jenks
says that in his parish (which he points
out is about 80 percent Anglo
conservative Republicans) the sheriff is
losing respect.
"These
are not people who have a stake in the
issues we're talking about," he says.
"They just have a sense that the sheriff
and his deputies are gunslingers and do
not really respect them or trust them at
all. They've told me this point blank.
The
Department of Public Safety, which has
10 cross-trained officers, has adopted a
different approach. It is using the
training to go after people who involved
in known criminal activity.
Sergeant Fred Zumbo, a DPS officer who
has had the 287-g training, says DPS is
more focused on bringing down organized
crime rings.
"Our
goal is to get into the organizations
and cripple them," he says. "But the
corn vendor on the street is not a law
enforcement problem. We are small and
focused on the human smuggling aspect of
the law because those are the ones
causing the most problems in the
community."
Until
recently, local police chiefs, most
notably in Phoenix and Mesa, have shared
this sentiment and resisted the pressure
to become immigration enforcers. But
earlier this month, Phoenix Mayor Phil
Gordon announced he'd appointed a
four-man committee to consider repealing
a public order that prohibits the
Phoenix police from questioning
immigration status.
So far,
Mesa police Chief George Gascon has
stayed strong in his stance against the
sheriff's policies, though not without
consequences Arpaio has recently made
it a point to step on the chief's toes.
Gascon
declined an interview for this story.
His public information officer, Chris
Arvaio, says he's decided to stick to
addressing the issue at press
conferences rather than grant individual
interviews anymore. Every time he does,
the sheriff retaliates.
"After
the first couple interviews we found out
real quick that we don't want to play
political games," says Arvaio. "I think
he [Gascon] is tired of every time he
makes a comment it turns into a game."
And, in
spite of Gascon's stance on the matter,
the Mesa City Council decided in early
December to send a letter to Michael
Chertoff, secretary of Homeland
Security, asking for immigration
training for Mesa police officers in
their jails. So far, there is no push to
train officers on patrol.
The
situation with the police has become so
bad that even legal immigrants and
citizens are afraid. Miguel
Gomez-Acosta, pastor at the Lutheran
Mission of San Pedro and member of the
Valley Interfaith Project, moved to
Phoenix from Seattle last year and still
isn't accustomed to living in Maricopa
County.
"I
carry my passport and I carry my
daughter's birth certificate," he says.
"I grew up in this country. I served in
the military and became a citizen, and
despite that, I still have to carry my
passport and my daughter's birth
certificate because she looks brown.
Like me."
There
has been at least one case in which his
deputies detained a man, Manuel de Jesus
Ortega Melendres, who had legal
paperwork. He was pulled over outside
Good Shepherd of the Hills in Cave Creek
and detained for nine hours, even though
he had a legal visa. The man's lawyers
have filed a lawsuit against Arpaio in
federal court.
Antonio
Bustamante, the Phoenix lawyer fighting
the smuggling law, says probable cause
and due process rights are being
violated but says that's hard to prove
in court. All the witnesses get
deported.
"Arpaio
is doing racial profiling, though he
says he's not. Who's going to prove
otherwise especially people who get
thrown out of the country. You got rid
of the witnesses. You can do whatever
you want," he says. "'The public loves
me,' he always touts. 'I'm doing what
they people want.' Well, so did [Jim
Clark] in Selma."
Arpaio
insists that his deputies do not engage
in racial profiling. Barnarrdino, a
27-year-old immigrant from Guatemala,
disagrees. Barnarrdino came to Arizona
six years ago with a coyote, by way of
Mexico, after life in Guatemala became
too violent for him. When his apartment
was robbed by two men carrying a grenade
and semiautomatic rifles, he decided it
was time to get out of the country,
regardless of the consequences in the
United States. He says he doesn't regret
coming to Arizona to live, but his
run-ins with the police have not been
pleasant.
About
three months ago, he says he was leaving
a movie theater with his wife when he
caught the eye of two sheriff's
deputies.
"I said
to my wife, 'Watch, they're going to
follow us," he says through a translator
on the steps of his central Phoenix
church.
They
did and one of the deputies pulled him
over.
"He
came to the car and asked me, 'How many
drinks did you have tonight, wetback?' I
told him I don't drink," he says. "He
asked me, 'Are you a wetback?' I didn't
answer, so he made me get out of the
car."
The
officer forced him to take a
Breathalyzer test and conducted field
sobriety tests on Barnarrdino. He passed
each one. He hadn't been drinking; he'd
been at the movies. He says the officer
also asked his wife, who is Mexican but
has a pale complexion, "What are you
doing with a wetback?" The officer also
harassed him because his identification
was from the Guatemalan consulate.
"I gave
him my ID and he asked how much I paid
for it. I told him $80 at the consulate
office. He asked where I got it and I
gave him the address of the consulate,"
he says. "After a while he let me go,
but he told me if he ever sees me again,
I will sit in jail for a very long
time."
Barnarrdino was very lucky. But the
experience stayed with him.
"I'm
honestly very afraid. Every morning, I
make the sign of the cross and say,
'God, it's up to you,'" he says. When
asked if he would report a crime to the
police if he witnessed or was the victim
of one, he says no: "For what? To be
asked for my papers? I don't think so."
The
Guatemalan consulate confirms that
Barnarrdino is registered with the
office and has valid identification.
Undocumented immigrants may not
understand their due process rights, but
they do understand that Arpaio is a man
to be feared. Many have even stopped
going to church for fear of getting
stopped on the way.
Reverend Sau'l Montiel of Epworth United
Methodist Church and his colleagues at
the Valley Interfaith Project say
they've seen a decline in attendance.
Connie Andersen of Most Holy Trinity
Catholic Church says her congregation
feels it in the collection plate.
Montiel sees it in the pews as well.
"I
would say about one-third have stopped
coming," he says.
Those
that do show up have fearful prayers.
"The
prayer requests on Sunday all say, 'Let
us pray not to be arrested this week,'"
says Montiel. "That hurts me so much as
a pastor."
Andersen knows of people who won't even
send their children, who are legal
citizens, to youth group anymore, and
she worried that her church's annual
Virgin de Guadalupe celebration would
not happen this year because people are
too afraid to leave the house.
"This
is a faith tradition," she says. "This
is affecting our ability to practice our
faith and do it openly."
Andersen was right. Attendance at the
Virgin de Guadalupe celebration on
December 12 was noticeably down.
"We
weren't as packed as usual," she says.
"Normally people are hanging from the
choir loft to get a place."
Immigrant-related violence is on the
rise, according to DPS, Phoenix Police
and ICE officials, and it isn't all
related to smuggling. Kidnappers know
the undocumented family members of their
prey would rather figure out a way to
pay the ransom than involve the police.
Vincente is the owner of a seafood
restaurant in central Phoenix. About a
month ago, he was the victim of an
attempted kidnapping.
As he
was leaving work one night, a group of
men in ski masks followed him to his
car. When he tried to drive home, they
opened fire, shooting at him 18 times,
hitting him once in the shoulder. He
managed to escape he says "only God
knows why," though his nine years in the
Mexican army might have something to do
with it to the safety of his home,
where he decided to call the police only
because he knew he would die if he did
not.
According to the police report, bullet
fragments were found all over the road
at the scene. No one has been arrested.
"There is not enough suspect information
to help determine any identity," the
report states.
After
the attack, Vincente's brother bought a
gun because he also owned a restaurant
and was afraid of the kidnappers. He was
recently caught with the gun and
deported for owning it. Ironically,
Vincente says, his brother always hated
weapons. Undeterred, Vincente says he is
armed all the time now. He's afraid the
men could come back.
"If
they try to kidnap me again, they will
kill me. So I will kill them instead,"
he says. "I'm not going to let them get
me. I have a family."
This is
not an isolated incident. He knows three
other undocumented business owners who
have been attacked in the same way. None
of the others involved the police;
instead, their families paid the ransom.
"They
know we can't go to the police, and the
police think it's only the coyotes, and
it's not," he says. "I know a guy whose
brother was kidnapped and he pay the
money. He pay $100,000 dollars and they
give him back. He don't call the police.
He just stay quiet and pay and he is
alive."
Though
the police haven't found a suspect, Sgt.
Joe Tranter, a Phoenix Police Department
spokesman, says an attempted kidnapping
is likely.
"At
face value, if he says he was kidnapped
he probably was," he says. "We've got a
situation that is out of control."
Troy
Henley of ICE says his office has
noticed an increase in these kinds of
violent crimes by and against
immigrants.
"We
don't have numbers, but it seems to me
the violence associated with human
smuggling seems to be up," he says. "We
get a lot of referrals from police
departments in other places where the
relatives will get a call and the person
will say, 'I'm in Phoenix. I'm being
held in a house and they told me if you
don't pay $100,000 they will cut my ears
off or cut my fingers off."
Kidnappers know their victims have
nowhere to turn. And, according to Fred
Zumbo from DPS, the kidnappers are
organized criminals who don't care much
about possible deportation. They know
the way back.
"It's
illegal immigrants causing violence
against their own people. It's a group
of young males between 15 and 30, and
it's a very violent breed," he says.
"They have had military training. They
are brutal. They have no fear of being
arrested and they have no fear of
assaulting police officers. They'll just
as soon shoot you as look at you. And
they know they will get away with it."
The
sheriff's scare tactics are working,
but, perhaps, with unintended
consequences. A 37-year-old man who has
lived in Phoenix since 2090 calls New
Times late one evening in early
December. His voice comes cracking
through the phone. He's heard about a
reporter who wants to talk to immigrants
and he's calling to tell his story. His
English is shaky and so is his voice.
"I . .
. I know who killed somebody, but I am
afraid to call the police. The guy who
got killed was my coworker," he says.
"Everybody knows who killed him, but
nobody wants to talk to the police.
Nobody wants to be a witness because
they will deport you."
He
begins to sob. Even though he's pressed
for details, he doesn't want to give
them. He knows the man's name and the
names of the perpetrators but he will
not say who they are. Though the victim
was his coworker, he cannot reveal where
he works.
"I'm
sorry, I can't tell you that much."
He's
worried that if he talks, the police
will come after him and his family.
"If
they put in jail the owners of the New
Times, what would assure me?" he asks a
translator.
According to the little information he's
willing to share, the victim was walking
home one night when he was shot near his
south Phoenix neighborhood.
The
knowledge is destroying him, but what is
he supposed to do, he wonders. He has
two young daughters, and if he gets
deported, they will starve. As he talks
about the murder, there is the sense
that he is weeping not just for his dead
coworker, but also for himself, his
wife, and his daughters.
His
voice cracks.
"I
can't talk anymore," he says. "It's too
hard, I can't talk right now."
A few
days later, he is still uncomfortable
talking about what he knows.
"I
don't want to talk about that bad
thing," he says when contacted a second
time. "I don't want to talk about it.
I'm afraid."
Even
when assured that his identity and phone
number will be kept private, he is too
terrified to say anything.
"I
don't trust nobody," he says. "That's
the point."
He will
not meet anyone in person whom he
doesn't already know.
After
another 10 minutes on the phone, he is
too frightened to go on.
"I
think it's time to stop," he says. "I
can't tell you any more."
The line
goes dead.
Throughout history
there have been tyrants and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the
end they always fall. Think of it always. Mahatma Gandhi