David Hendershott, Sheriff Arpaio's Disgraced Former Chief Deputy, to Testify in Next Week in Andrew Thomas Case

hshott honduras copy 1.jpg
Sheriff Arpaio's former Chief Deputy, Dave Hendershott, is scheduled to testify next week at the Andrew Thomas disciplinary hearings.

Just looked at an e-mail from Jennifer Liewer, the on-the-spot public information officer for the Arizona Supreme Court:

David Hendershott, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's disgraced former chief deputy, is set to testify next week in the disciplinary hearings for former County Attorney Andrew Thomas.

That ought to be good. After an internal investigation showed that Hendershott used outrageous tactics in the investigations of top county officials, Arpaio fired him (though later let him resign).

Thomas and former deputy county attorney Lisa Aubuchon are now fighting for their bar licenses because of those same now-discredited corruption cases (Mostly discredited: Can't forget what Daisy Flores said about Don Stapley...).



Hendershott will be asked about the frustrations of the deputies below him, who fretted over what they perceived as unethical behavior. But we'll also be looking to see if Hendershott throws his old boss, Arpaio, under the bus.

As we mentioned in our May 26 article about how Arpaio knew what was going on, the Bar complaint against Thomas quotes one deputy as saying it was Arpaio's idea to charge retired Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe with bribery, a charge that wasn't supported by evidence and was later dismissed.

If you're on a trip to Honduras or visiting defense contractors in China next week, you can always check out the video later on the state Supreme Court's Web site.



Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
19 comments
Gerry_C
Gerry_C

One final thought before I drink a beer this afternoon.  Many of you that may be wanting to watch Henderbulk testify next week may want to consider investing in a wide-screen monitor if you don't already have one.   :-)

Gerry_C
Gerry_C

Isn't it nice to be able to use the adjective "disgraced" in these articles?

Is there a public link or index that will allow one to target a video in order to see a specific person's testimony?

Jason
Jason

I got front row seats to this spectacle.

Now, if only I could bring in my cold beer and my fresh bag of Orville Redenbacher's popcorn...

Dumoudan
Dumoudan

Is this law Racist? Does it specify brown people?Are the people who agree with this law racist?Are those who want this law enforced racist?The law says nothing of little "brown" people but it explains what is illegal entry. It's not very hard to understand. Why is this law "broken"? Why can it be selectively ignored?Illegal alien includes all people who entered illegally, could be Croation, Russian, Chinese, Irish, Canadians and yes even Mexicans. No one single race or people is referenced in the law. Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, "Improper Entry by Alien," any citizen of any country other than the United States who:Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers; or Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact; has committed a federal crime.Violations are punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment for up to six months. Repeat offenses can bring up to two years in prison. Additional civil fines may be imposed at the discretion of immigration judges, but civil fines do not negate the criminal sanctions or nature of the offense.These people cost Pheonix and surrounding cities hundreds of millions to support the education, health and welfare of these illegal immigrants. A landscape worker paid by cash (no taxes) and his wife (a stay at home mom), have been here for 16 years and had 7 children born in the US. Who do you think paid for her medical bills???

BostankyKanky
BostankyKanky

Why attack these good people? It would be better to spend your time attacking that douche Obama and his lot of crud.

Not surprised
Not surprised

I wonder how much memory loss Hendershott is going to claim!

Tommy Collins
Tommy Collins

What does Obama have to do with a Bar Discipline hearing in Arizona?

Guest23
Guest23

For what exactly? Statements like this are a waste of everyones time because you don't say why or provide any supporting evidence. When will you morons realize this?

And considering the illegal and questionably ethical actions of these people hardly paints a picture of them approaching anything close to the concept of good.

You would be much better off going back to school and at least getting your ged rather than spend time posting here.

Rob
Rob

I'm thinking something along the lines of..."on the advice of counsel.....I invoke my rights afforded under the 5th Amendment..."

Gerry_C
Gerry_C

Easy question Tommy.  The top agenda items on Obama's schedule each day, even before the PDB, is to see what he can do to prevent Arpaio from doing his job, to punish Thomas and Aubuchon for doing their sworn jobs, to punish Rachel Alexander for conservative blogging, to defy Jan Brewer's Federalism, and to protect RINO's in Arizona such as Stapley, Irvine, Romley, etc.

As such, the Obama administration required the leftist Arizona Bar to stream the disciplinary hearing videos not only for public consumption and humiliation of the accused, but more importantly straight to the White House situation room.  This way Obama can guide the hearing process minute by minute while his hand picked Colorado attorney, who is not even licensed to practice in AZ, does his bidding and takes Presidential phone calls for the next strategic move at every break.

Yes indeed.  As Andrew Peyton Thomas said, the corruption he faced and was trying to get to the bottom of involved some very powerful people. 

  

Gerry_C
Gerry_C

Guest23 is right.  Get that GED.  You could be Governor someday.

Tommy Collins
Tommy Collins

I don't think he can invoke the Fifth at a civil disciplinary hearing. but not sure... he is just a witness, not the accused.

Yourproductsucks
Yourproductsucks

So, witnesses aren't afforded the right against self incrimination simply because they are testifying in a civil hearing? Are you also suggesting that because someone is designated a "witness" they are compelled to give testimony regardless of the consequence it brings upon their own heads? Perhaps you should rethink your position and come back with a product a bit more intelligible.

Rob
Rob

Tommy,

I'd give you more knowledge than I on this matter, but I don't think it matters whether civil or criminal?  I think you always have the right to not say anything that may incriminate you.He's no longer given any protections he might have had as an LEO obviously, but given that he'll be testifying under oath I don't see why anything he says cannot be used to support or refute another issue.

Of course I'm not a lawyer...and I rarely watch TV.

Now Trending

Phoenix Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...