Lisa Aubuchon Asks Court to Block Her Responses to State Bar From Distribution to County Enemies

thomas and aubuchon illus.jpg
Photo illustration: Ray Stern

Lisa Aubuchon gave up confidential information to a State Bar investigator regarding Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas, and she doesn't want that info leaked out.

The deputy county attorney, once the attack-wolf for Arpaio and Thomas and now the subject of a State Bar investigation, filed a special action in court recently to block  distribution of her answers to questions by a Colorado lawyer assigned to the investigation.

The 39-page motion to the state Supreme Court states that Aubuchon felt compelled to answer Gleason's questions, because of State Bar rules compelling cooperation in investigations. The answers divulged attorney-client privileged information about her dealings with Thomas and Arpaio in the high-profile cases against county supervisors and judges -- the cases that got her and Thomas in trouble with the State Bar.

Sorry, folks -- none of her answers were revealed in the court filing, since that would clearly make her filing moot. But after the bombshell grand-jury transcripts that were revealed publicly thanks to Interim County Attorney Rick Romley, it's not unreasonable to think Aubuchon's answers provide more evidence of unethical behavior by her, Thomas, or Arpaio.

Back in April, Aubuchon requested a protective order that would stop Gleason from sharing her info. The court denied her request, saying it was premature because she hadn't shared the material yet. So, Aubuchon "dutifully" complied with Gleason's request and answered his questions.

Despite the direct wishes of Arpaio and Thomas that Aubuchon keep some things secret, Aubuchon told Gleason things she believed were covered under attorney-client privilege.

Records state that Aubuchon was worried Gleason might review her answers with the person who filed one of two complaints against her with the State Bar, County Manager David Smith. She also feared her answers would find their way to the people she tried to prosecute, like Supervisors Don Stapley and Mary Rose Wilcox, and Judge Gary Donahoe. Stapley, Wilcox and Donahoe have each filed claims against the county -- which name Aubuchon, among others -- for wrongful prosecution.

Aubuchon (who, by the way, has put in her own $10 million claim against the county), simultaneously filed another request to protect the information she gave Gleason -- but that request was also denied.

In an August 16 letter to Aubuchon's lawyers, Gleason makes it clear he intends to give Aubuchon's complete responses to David Smith. He'll also discuss her responses with unspecified "others" in order to "determine whether there is an agreement on facts, interpretations or other issues, he writes.

Sounds like Stapley, et al, will know exactly what Aubuchon told Gleason -- unless the state Supreme Court agree with Aubuchon's latest request, made on August 31.

Aubuchon wants the court to rule that Smith can't see the responses at all -- or, at the least, that he given only a redacted copy of her responses, with the privileged information removed.

One thing is clear about this filing: Aubuchon's getting a lot of work out of the stable of lawyers she's hired over at Wilenchik and Bartness. Four lawyers from the firm signed the August 31 special action request. But they're not getting paid out of Aubuchon's bank account: Taxpayers fund her defense, for the time being. We hear the total bill now exceeds $200,000.

Below, we've included the 55-page document that includes the exhibits from Aubuchon's latest filing. It's more interesting reading than the filing itself, and contains most -- if not all -- of her lawyers' arguments for the filing.


Aubuchon Case Update 3

My Voice Nation Help
9 comments
wherewasi
wherewasi

Well, you're right - it's a lot of reading and not too much to be gleaned from it except to note that Aubochon was one of the recipients of Arpaio's threatening letter in which he indicated that to speak to the investigator about any of the "on-going investigations" would subject her to criminal charges for violating the (non-existant) attorney-client privledge.

This tells me that Aubochon knows a lot of information that Arpaio does not want disclosed.

Better talk, Lisa. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't, but at least do the right thing NOW, even if you didn't in the past.

Ms Info
Ms Info

Law enforcement officers are not the clients of prosecutors. Cops are supposed to be neutral witnesses and investigators of criminal offenses. Prosecutors do not represent officers in court. There is no attorney-client privilege between a prosecutor and an investigating officer, period.

FormerRepublican
FormerRepublican

SCUMBAG Aubuchon. How DARE she continue to fight the investigation into her law license at the expense of the citizens of Maricopa County? If she was so strongly convinced of her own innocence, why doesn't she stand up and PAY FOR HER OWN lawyers? So far, she has cost the taxpayers over $200,000 and there hasn't yet been ONE SINGLE CHARGE LEVELED AGAINST HER. She's just paying to do "background stuff" on our dime.Cheap, corrupt con - that's how I'd describe this unethical, seriously mentally ill ex-employee of the county.Get OUT of Maricopa County you fat hog. NOBODY wants you here.

Gerry_c
Gerry_c

I don't think she has Attorney-Client Privilege in this case. It is a waste of money that her lawyers even argued that.

personal experience
personal experience

All the abuse Aubuchon committed under the color of the law is coming back to bite her. She is in for a round of her own medicine. Lets hope she is going get to bit hard for all of her relentless attacks on innocent people.

Anon
Anon

What goes around, come around. Those who abuse power and destroy innocent lives should NOT be immune but sent to prison for decades, as these prosecutors want for others.

botanybay
botanybay

What was the name of that bastard who became temporary DA after Thomas stepped-down and before Romley was appointed? He's the guy who changed her job classification so that she'd be fully covered for her legal expenses. And that is a damn shame.

Ms Info
Ms Info

Phil MacDonnell. He was Andy's chief deputy.

WhoKnows
WhoKnows

Seems what this dingbat seems to understand, is that when she works for the County, it's not Joke or Candy, it's that she is working FOR US. WE are her clients. And WE want to see her answers!

Whatever she said, it must be bad for Candy and Joke. Two more people that are, or were supposed to be WORKING FOR US.

Sorry Lisa. Start filling out applications for jobs that don't require a license from the Bar, as you're is going away!

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

Loading...