Yavapai County Attorney Sheila Polk: No "Reasonable Belief" of Convicting Mark Mitchell

Categories: Law and Order
Mark Mitchell, free man.
We got a copy of the letter from Yavapai County Attorney Sheila Polk, explaining to Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery why no charges will be filed against Tempe Mayor-elect Mark Mitchell.

Aside from the "absence of a reasonable belief of probable conviction," Polk also notes Mitchell's age at the time and the probability that he would've been tried as a juvenile.

The sexual-abuse allegations against Mitchell -- initially reported to Phoenix police -- was forwarded to the Yavapai County Attorney's Office since Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery had publicly supported Michael Monti, Mitchell's opponent in the mayoral race.

Mitchell's accuser claimed the incidents occurred in 1983 -- when she was 10, and Mitchell was 13 or 14 -- and she just brought it up to the cops a couple months ago.

The only evidence, Polk notes, would be statements from the individuals involved, and neither the woman's mother nor brother could corroborate her stories, even though she recalled her accounts pretty specifically.

Polk also says that the "motive" of the woman coming forward would be challenged.

According to the police report, the woman "expressed that this has been eating at her for years and it has gotten worse lately due to the public exposure of Mitchell at this time as he is a current Tempe City Councilman who is a mayoral candidate for the City of Tempe."

According to Polk, "The victim states she was prompted to report to authorities the events occurring in 1983 during an unrelated investigation involving sexual abuse of the victim's minor child."

Polk says that although the woman was involved with authorities from the beginning of the investigation of the alleged abuse of her child, she still waited almost another year to bring up the allegations against Mitchell.

The investigation into her kid started in May 2011, while she told police her claims about Mitchell in February 2012.

As for the law aspect, the criminal code in 1983 said kids under the age of 14 weren't "criminally responsible" unless they knew what they were doing was wrong, so prosecutors would have to prove Mitchell knew what he was doing was wrong almost 30 years ago.

If this had been brought up in 1983, Polk writes, it's likely the case would've been heard in juvenile court, and if convicted, Mitchell probably would've been on probation until he was 18 -- which is kind of out of the question now.

"While there may be situations wherein an adult should -- and can -- be prosecuted for criminal conduct committed thirty years ago while under the age of eighteen, this is not such a case," Polk says.

You can read the letter in its entirety below:

Mitchell Decline Letter

Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help

Whose going after the criminals in over 400 sex crimes cases that got tossed or "cleared" in Maricopa County? Focus on that, not what a couple of children did 30 years ago. These families are living in fear and the criminals are running loose.


Read the County Attorney's report. Mark Mitchell is a lair! He tells the woman, he was sorry for hurting her, just experimenting, exploring, had not had sex before, they were just kids, he "acknowledged SOME INVOLVEMENT", etc. Then he lies to the Police Detective say he never touched her in any sexual manner. Even if they can't go ahead with prosecution because of 30 year time laps, how about the ethical dilemma for Mitchell as Mayor elect, flat ass lying to the police during  their investigation? Will Tempe City Council members hold him to answer for his ethical laps and lying? Or, will they sit back, turn the other cheek and hope that another Ben Arredondo does come out of this. Bottom line, Mark Mitchell got caught lying to the police and Tempe City Council has a responsibility to hold Mitchell's feet to the fire, not for sex assault "6 times", but cus he flat ass lied to the POLICE! Screw all you JASON ROSE haters. Mitchell is a lier and need to answer to Tempe Citizens for his behaviour. And, Mayor Hallman and each City Councilman need to grow some balls and make Mitchell answer publicly for his lies. It was all recorded folks, won't take a genious to figure out this one! Lastly, JASON ROSE is a great man so bite me!


I distinctly remember this man being in the Hitler youth...


His father was the Mayor of Tempe when he was 13.


Of course not, Mitchell is a politician and we all know when politicians break the law, the law looks the other way.


"The victim states she was prompted to report to authorities the events occurring in 1983 during an unrelated investigation involving sexual abuse of the victim's minor child."

Finally, Matthew Hendley, on his fifth article or so on the subject, reports that the woman reported the matter during an unrelated investigation into something else. Moreover, we find out that rather than it being an unrelated investigation into something insignificant like Andrei Cherney's stubbed toe as Hendley callously suggested in the comments of his last article, it was an unrelated investigation into alleged sexual abuse of the woman's daughter. But that didn't fit into Hendley's narrative of the woman possibly being part of a supposed "dirty trick"  campaign by the Monti campaign so he deliberately omitted it until now.

LD19 Resident
LD19 Resident

You can bet that if Candy Andy and the Miscreants were handling this case, it would be prosecuted, statute of limitations or evidence be damned.

Then again, MontyPug is nearly as bad as Candy Andy and the Miscreants...

Good for Ms. Polk for refusing to prosecute this case.


Pedfile4Mayor, You are the sick one.


If Mitchel had lied, the police would have arrested him, or at least referred the question prosecuting Mitchell for obstruction to the County Attorney.

They didn't do either.

The police will tell you: when you lie to us, you go to jail.  Period.

I've seen people charged with obstruction for the most remote of inconsistencies, and I am confident that given how the Phoenix Police Dept. caved to pressure from (R) to first write the report, then refer it to the prosecution and then release it to the media that they would have charged Mitchell if they could.

Yours is a selective read, and just the latest evolution in the Jason Rose/ Shane Wikfors slime machine's continued mendacity.  First you claimed he lied about not knowing the woman.  That died away when it was revealed the police used her married name, which Mitchell did not know, but when they used her maiden name, he immediately confirmed knowing her.

Now you and the slime you lie with are floating a new bit of false outrage.  It won't fly.

We can all read the report, we fully understand that Mitchell means and none of us, save the birther, truther radicals in your intellectual circle jerk are fooled one bit by the like of you, Rose or Shit-for-Brains Shane.


have you heard of spellcheck?? 


So the mayor convinced the mom and brother to tell different stories than the victim right McCheese?


au contraire - the allegation of dirty tricks actually becomes more substantial.

A whole year passed between when this woman talked about it with the police and when she decided to ask for a prosecution - you have to ask WHY?

Who encouraged her?

Why were so clearly un-prosecutable claims taken seriously?

Why was Monti's campaign manager calling reporters weeks before a police report had even been written, much less made public?

Why were Republican operatives, employed by the City of Phoenix, calling the top brass at the PPD demanding that a report be issued immediately? Was it just coincident that "immediately" also meant "before next weeks election?"

How did Shane Wikfors, the AZGOP Communications Director, know what would be in the police report weeks before it was written? Why was he so active teasing the story on his radical right-wing blog?

What did Shane know and when did he know it?

That's the next step in this investigation.

Now Trending

Phoenix Concert Tickets

Around The Web

From the Vault