Daniel Kloberdanz Claims Maricopa Deputy Joseph Pellino Beat Him Severely During Arrest Because He's a Lawyer; Seeks $12M in Lawsuit

kloberdanz-mug.jpg
Image: www.arrestfiles.org
Daniel Kloberdanz's mug shot from his June 15, 2012, arrest on suspicion of hindering an investigation. He claims in a lawsuit that he was beaten severely by a deputy during the arrest.
Real estate lawyer Daniel Kloberdanz isn't a criminal defense expert, but figured he could help an employee who'd called him as she was being investigated for a DUI.

Not long after arriving at the accident scene at Lone Mountain Road and 60th Street in Cave Creek last year, Kloberdanz claims, the lawyer found himself being pummeled by a deputy and accused of a crime that could cost him his career.

Kloberdanz lays out his story in a lawsuit filed on June 12 in Maricopa County Superior Court, which was preceded by a December 2012 claim letter against the county offering to settle the matter for a cool $12,125,000.

See also: Deputy Steve Carpenter Resigns in Fallout Over Tim Abrahamson North Dakota Assault Case; UPDATED w/MCSO Response

The lawyer's tale of being beaten by a merciless deputy who then conveniently left out details of the attack in court paperwork, unfortunately, isn't terribly hard to believe in the 20th year of Sheriff Joe Arpaio's reign.

One point that runs in Kloberdanz's favor, as far as we're concerned, is that Kloberdanz claims Deputy Steven Carpenter helped hold him down as Pellino beat him. As we've previously reported, Carpenter, in September 2012 -- about three months after the Kloberdanz incident -- went on a road trip to North Dakota to help another deputy ambush and attack a man.

Kloberdanz's lawsuit describes how Deputy Pellino seemed to have no reason for the alleged beating -- other than the fact that Kloberdanz is a lawyer.

However, Pellino saw the event differently than Kloberdanz: He arrested Kloberdanz for hindering an investigation, and Kloberdanz faces a bench trial at 3 p.m. tomorrow on the charge before Desert Ridge Justice Court Judge Clancy Jayne.

The State Bar is also probing the lawyer's actions stemming from the incident, Kloberdanz admits, meaning the debacle could result in sanctions against his law license.

According to Kloberdanz, though, "every word" of his lawsuit is true. We talked to the lawyer and read his lawsuit today after being told of a write-up about it in Courthouse News. You don't need to be pay $35 for CN's copy of the lawsuit -- you can read it for free at the end of this post.

It all began on the night of June 15, 2012, when an employee at Kloberdanz's law firm, Valarie Lingenfelder, hit a motorcyclist with her vehicle. She called police and her boss, and her boss arrived on scene first. He spoke briefly with Robert Briggs, the motorcyclist, then turned his attention to Lingenfelder.

kloberdanz-mug-profile.jpg
Image: www.arrestfiles.org
Kloberdanz's profile shows a cut he says he received while being attacked by Deputy Joseph Pellino.
A sheriff's posse member, Robert Burghart, showed up, followed by Deputy Pellino. "Within seconds," according to the lawsuit, Pellino determined Lingenfelder was impaired and threw a pair of cuffs on her. He looked at Kloberdanz, without knowing who he was, and told him that "she should not have been driving."

Kloberdanz says he asked the deputy if he could try to calm down Lingenfelder, who was standing alone and "upset."

Pellino asked the woman whether she knew Kloberdanz. She said he was a friend -- and also her lawyer. With that, Kloberdanz says, Pellino strode over to him and shoved him so hard in the chest that he fell to the ground.

When Kloberdanz rose to his feet, Pellino said, "I don't need you guys telling me how to do my job," and tackled him, court records state.

Pellino cuffed the lawyer's hands behind his back while he was face down on the street and screamed "anti-lawyer sentiments," Kloberdanz claims.

My Voice Nation Help
88 comments
k.kaprow
k.kaprow

This story has been picked up by the anti-Arpaio, anti-cop libertarian site, Reason.com. Check out the hack piece Reason's chief propagandist,  J.D. Tuccille, posted on the 21st. It's a revealing and instructive case study in advocacy journalism, i.e. propaganda. Tuccille's one-sided "reporting" quotes extensively from this article while, oddly, leaving out pertinent details. No matter. With little or no dissent from the peanut gallery, Reason's anarchist readership laps it up.


http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/21/sheriffs-deputies-beat-and-jail-attorney


scottsdaleazmikey
scottsdaleazmikey

I know Kloberdenz too.  I know him very well because his horribal client sued me few years ago.  During my trial he strangled a little puppy in court to scare my key witness.  It worked and I lost the case.  The judge was so surprised to see a lawyer kill a puppy he did nothing. Its all caught on video but the Marcopa County Court conspired to keep it secret.

aurelielafemme
aurelielafemme

Sounds like total BS.  What kind of "reporting" is this, NT?  Weird.

sggrange
sggrange

I know Kloberdanz and he is a major SLEEZE of a man...


He traded sex for legal services during a divorce that he completely screwed up (He is a real estate atty and knew NOTHING about divorce law abut wanted the booty) , he screws anything that walks (and I bet he is putting it to the drunk driver) and he has a mouth that you WANT to shut up...I despise the MCSO but I am inclined based on my personal knowledge to believe them over the shithound Danny!

therazorsedge555
therazorsedge555

This whole story has problems, and not from the MCSO side.

Cozz
Cozz

As we all know, I'm sure not pro Arpaio or MCSO, but even I have to question why it took this guy a year to come forward if this did in fact happen.

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

If only this would have happened before the 2012 election for Sheriff, or the 2013 attempt at getting recall signatures.  Can you imagine the traction Penzone would have received with this information? 

Oh wait...it did happen before the 2012 election...weird.

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

It's also curious the attorney's allegation is that without any provocation, the deputy walked over to a person whom the drunk driving aggravated assault suspect identified as her attorney and immediately shoved him to the ground.  That kind of behaviour certainly wouldn't play well for the true victim who was clobbered by a drunk driver. 

The allegations this attorney is making match the amount he's requesting as compensation.  Absolutely ludicrous and unbelievable.

allanbartlett
allanbartlett

kaprow, do you tickle wop-pie-o's balls first or just suck the two inches into your mouth. fuck you.

ndmike12
ndmike12

@scottsdaleazmikey Thanks for the laugh, officer (deputy?). I just hope you didn't post that comment on the Maricopa taxpayers' dime.

Mouthoftruth
Mouthoftruth

@aurelielafemme I am curious as to what degree and training you have that qualifies you to call this article "BS". Is it your incredible use of the scientifically respected term "BS"? 

WhoKnows
WhoKnows topcommenter

@Cozz Seems he did file a notice of claim last year though.  That's required months before a lawsuit is filed.

ConcernedCitizenAZ
ConcernedCitizenAZ topcommenter

@yourproductsucks  Now you know how obscenely rich Arizona's lawyers are. Just shows what lawyers make working in Arizona's broken criminal justice system. Poorly written laws, that no one wants to reform or it would stop the gravy train. 

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@yourproductsucks  

People with anger management deficiencies, which is 90+% of MCSO, don't need provocation to assault people.

Cozz
Cozz

@WhoKnows @Cozz

Ok, that does explain it, it just didn't mentioned that in the story.....

In that case, bend over Maricopa County tax payers, here we go again if this proves to be true.

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@WhoKnows @yourproductsucks This statement of yours is a perfect example of your failed reading comprehension skills.

bob_lablaw96
bob_lablaw96

@Flyer9753 @yourproductsucks You may well be right, but then again, maybe not.

He claims to have had his shoulder dislocated, but when he went to the hospital the next day, no mention was made of an injury to the shoulder.

From the picture shown in this story, he had an "injury" to the side of his face that was of the size of a nick while shaving.  I am not saying that it did not come from the Deputy, but it is less than what Zimmerman had, and the forensic doctor in that issue said that it was "insignificant.'

Oftentimes, people will exaggerate a smidgeon when they file a lawsuit. Lawyers do it all the time, and I wonder if this guy is just following protocol and blaming everything on a stupid deputy so that he can get a few bucks from the taxpayers.

I am no fan of corrupt or abusive cops, but this story, and the pictures shown, make the "victim" look worse than the deputy

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@Flyer9753 @yourproductsucks If the allegations are true, why are we just hearing heard about it a whole year later? 

If true, the story should have been carried on every major netowrk in the Nation.  The idea that a police officer would, without ANY provocation, commit aggravated assault on the attorney of a suspect as the scene of the crime is outragous and unheard of.  This SHOULD be HUGE!  If true, this deputy has no business being free, let alone, continuing to act as a law enforcement officer...

Why didn't this attorney file a formal complaint against the deputy?  Why didn't he go public?  According to his story, he did absolutely nothing wrong.  

The booking photos don't show a person who was "severely beaten."  Instead, tho photos show a guy who's actions placed his career as a practicing attorney in jeapordy.  Those drowning will take anyone they can grab down with them.

bob_lablaw96
bob_lablaw96

@yourproductsucks @Flyer9753 Did it ever occur to you that no force was used on Rodney when he complied with commands? That neither of his passengers were beaten at all?

Rodney brought a lot of his pain on himself. If not for the Black "leaders" he probably would have not filed a grievance or lawsuit.

In any case, this is so much different than Rodney. This attorney is claiming stuff that he cannot show even happened. He wants us all to pay for him showing up and being a butthead at the arrest of his friend.  

No one but an attorney would try this stuff in court


bob_lablaw96
bob_lablaw96

@Flyer9753 @yourproductsucks I am not sure that you are correct on this.  You should at least give some benefit of the doubt to the deputies, based on the scant evidence that was shown.

Cops bust folks up all the time, no doubt.  But, this case seems to be an attorney who filed his case after waiting until memories have faded, and there is no evidence maintained to dispute his claim.  If there was no reason to video this arrest, then there is only a "he said/she said" story to take to the courts.

I am not going to defend MCSO, or any other agency, against legitimate claims of abuse.  There is no excuse for it at all.  But, this seems to be an ambulance chaser that found a willing partner( the New Times) that is willing to bash MCSO and hope for a payoff to make him go away.

If only there was a method of making people filing false claims against a government agency (cops) pay a huge penalty, equal to the possible payout had the claim been legit, I think a lot of these lawsuits would dry up.

But, that is just my opinion, and others have laughed at that a lot of times.

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@Flyer9753 @yourproductsucks and making a vague referencing unidentified "research reports" is not a reference citation.  But you should know this already as you are an educated individual.

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@Flyer9753 Your experience with MCSO was enough to conclude that 90%+ had anger control deficiencies?  hmmmm

Again, I call bullshit.

Your experience in and with LEO's have no bearing on the percentage of MCSO you disparage.

...and if you had already cited your references, why were you so adament that you weren't going to cite your references because I made fun of your butt boy?

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@yourproductsucks@Flyer9753 

As stated in an earlier comment....

"That stat is from my experience with MCSO as well as my experience in and with LEO's for 30+ years, coupled with the research reports that state that people with anger management issues do not need provocation to attack someone - research which depending on the specific paper ranks the percentages anywhere from 60-95% of those who have anger management issues also not needing provocation to attack someone.  So in the end, to address your point, that is my opinion based on experience and research."

I had already shared my source with you, I guess you are just to stupid to realize it. 

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@Flyer9753 @yourproductsucks "People with anger management deficiencies, which is 90+% of MCSO, don't need provocation to assault people."

"I never said 90+% of MCSO officers have anger management issues, except in my opinion part of my first comment,..."

So, the first part of your statement was based on "fact" and the second part was "opinion" yet it all seems to be made as a statement of fact. 

Your opinion is your source..no wonder you were reluctant to share your source...

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@WhoKnows reading comprehension is not your strong suit.  You are wrong.  I know it's hard to hear it from me...

WhoKnows
WhoKnows topcommenter

@yourproductsucks THe IRS does NOT make laws.  No more than the Clown Sheriff does!


SHOW ME THE LAW, passed by CONGRESS!

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@yourproductsucks @Flyer9753  

'you got owned.  see you next time. '

If you want to continue to be delusional and think that, that's your right, doesn't make it a fact.

WhoKnows
WhoKnows topcommenter

@Flyer9753 @yourproductsucks 


YPS seems to like to attack people for their opinions.  I made a comment yesterday that started with "I bet..." and he came back and demanded proof than then called me a liar!


He LOVES to claim someone that posts an opinion needs to "cite proof".  But, as he works for MCSO, and in my OPINION, that makes him dumb as a rock!

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@yourproductsucks  

anyways, have a nice night troll, be sure to do your homework

Next time if you don't jump to asshole attack mode, I will be happy to cite my sources for anything I quote.

I'm going to dinner

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@WhoKnows @yourproductsucks IRS is an enforcement agency. You are correct that they do not make the laws...they enforce them...and the manner in which they enforce 501(c)4 applicants is defined in the link I provided. 

The enforcement is based on case law that is cited throughout the link.

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@yourproductsucks @Flyer9753  

I never said 90+% of MCSO officers have anger management issues, except in my opinion part of my first comment, as explained to you in later comments.

Stop trying to put words in my mouth.

As to that opinion part of my first comment - it's my opinion and I am welcome to it, just as you are to yours. 

There are plenty of research studies that have shown up to 95% of all people with anger management issues do not need to be provoked to attack someone. Go look them up.

There are also a number of research studies that say a significant number of LEO's have anger management issues. Again, go look them up.

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@Flyer9753 liar.  You don't have a source.  There is no such source that will corroborate your statement that 90%+ MCSO employees have anger management deficiencies.  Its a ridiculious statement that EVERYONE including your butt buddy, see right through...

Now you are stating you have a source but won't show it.  IT DOES NOT EXIST you are a liar and can't admit it when it's painfully obvious to everyone else.

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@yourproductsucks@Flyer9753@WhoKnows 

"cite your source...stop changing the subject and cite it"

Not be an asshole with the personal attacks in what was until that point a civil conversation and I would have.

Now you can kiss my ass and go do the research yourself, maybe you will actually learn something that way.

WhoKnows
WhoKnows topcommenter

@yourproductsucks @WhoKnows Please point to anything after page I3 in a LAW.  Not an IRS interpretation of the law.  The IRS doesn't MAKE laws.  Show me where CONGRESS defined a 501(c).4.  You do know how LAWS are made, right?

WhoKnows
WhoKnows topcommenter

@yourproductsucks @WhoKnows

I guess you didn't actually READ the document you posted a link to.  Do you need help with the big words?


Top of page 3:

"[A]n organization is operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare"

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

"This is your fallback when you have nothing else...this and the juvenile name calling.  When you have something of import to add then hop back in."

Pot calling the kettle black = YPS

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@WhoKnows @Flyer9753 @yourproductsucks  

Pretty much - he/she/it? posted a message starting the personal attacks and then deleted it in favor on one of the last ones above, which was even more of a personal attack.

I guess he/she/it is not smart enough to know about email notifications with message content.

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@yourproductsucks @WhoKnows  

BTW - I got your message before you deleted it and the only one looking stupid is you.

I tried to talk reasonably with you tonight and you resort to personal attacks and homophobic slurs when you realize you are wrong and have lost the argument.

But go ahead, I am sure you will try to spin this as I won't continue the conversation or site your source or you don't have one bullshit... 

whatever... I'm done dealing with a butt kissing idiot who refuses to learn and even in a civil conversation resorts to personal attacks like a 2 yr old.

WhoKnows
WhoKnows topcommenter

@yourproductsucks @WhoKnows 

But it seems you have no facts, and claim others lie just because YOU have never heard it or looked into things.  Like on the 501(C).4 LAW in another thread.  You lose YPS.

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@WhoKnows This is your fallback when you have nothing else...this and the juvenile name calling.  When you have something of import to add then hop back in.

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@yourproductsucks @Flyer9753  

my butt buddy? ROFL!!!!! As usual, when you know you are losing and know you are wrong, you resort to personal attacks.

So typical of you YPS, it's what cements your long time standing as a troll.

Google is your friend, I suggest you use it since in times past I have posted you links, that you then ignore or try to spin out of context and I am tired of doing your research for you since you clearly never learn anything.

Have a nice night Lisa, aka Troll aka YPS, enjoy your butt buddy Joe Arpaio.

WhoKnows
WhoKnows topcommenter

@yourproductsucks @Flyer9753 

Dang, you are so anal I bet you can't deal with yourself, YPS!

When is your next AZ Post psych exam?

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@Flyer9753 cite the source that corroborates your statement that 90%+ of MCSO have anger management deficiencies. 

your butt buddy attempted to bail you out on oyur statement saying you  were joking...you are instead, doubling down on it.  So cite your source...I'm betting you don't/ can't (which is a better example of what synonymous means).

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@yourproductsucks@Flyer9753 

" You must have meant excessive rather than unprovoked in this sentence, which makes your Rodney King reference incorrect/ moot in the argument you are attempting to frame."

No, I meant exactly what I said, since in this context, unprovoked and excessive are in relation to each other, not separate.

In this context, if something is excessive it is also unprovoked. If you do not understand that, then I can't teach it to you in a blog, you will need an english language text book for that. 

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@yourproductsucks

'Anyone who makes up stats like that and in the same breath attacks another persons comments as lacking objectivity, are obviously ignoring their own subjectivity.'

That stat is from my experience with MCSO as well as my experience in and with LEO's for 30+ years, coupled with the research reports that state that people with anger management issues do not need provocation to attack someone - research which depending on the specific paper ranks the percentages anywhere from 60-95% of those who have anger management issues also not needing provocation to attack someone.  So in the end, to address your point, that is my opinion based on experience and research.

As to my bias towards MCSO - so what? You insinuate in your initial comment that the officer was provoked and that no officer would attack someone without provocation. My comment was pointing out the error of that assumption, as has been proven by history in general and in respect to MCSO as the long list of lawsuits and settlements show.

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@Flyer9753 @yourproductsucks " Rodney King WAS an unprovoked attack in the aspect that what King did, did not warrant the physical abuse/attack he received"

You must have meant excessive rather than unprovoked in this sentence, which makes your Rodney King reference incorrect/ moot in the argument you are attempting to frame.

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@Flyer9753 @yourproductsucks Is the statement you made "People with anger management deficiencies, which is 90+% of MCSO, don't need provocation to assault people " based on fact or your own personal experience? 

Anyone who makes up stats like that and in the same breath attacks another persons comments as lacking objectivity, are obviously ignoring their own subjectivity.

WhoKnows
WhoKnows topcommenter

@yourproductsucks @Flyer9753 

What a good little MCSO employee you are!  You know that there are more lawsuits against MCSO than Chicago, LA and Houston PD's combined, right?  Or there were a few years back - by a factor of 10!

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@Flyer9753 @yourproductsucks They are not synonymous when referencing the Rodney King incident as you have done.  Force was necessary to arrest the fleeing/ fighting King due to King's actions that night.  The force used was excessive.

your circular reasoning, however, is "unprovoked"and "excessive" making your last statement factual.

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@Flyer9753 You obvoiusly have "unprovoked" confused with "excessive."  They aren't synonymous.

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@yourproductsucks @Flyer9753 

That is not an opinion on this case, that's a well known fact and my opinion as to how that applies to MCSO in general based on documented history and my own personal experiences with MCSO

It is not a judgement or opinion on the specifics and particulars of this case, since we don't have enough information IMO to make any kind of judgement.

If you choose to take it as a judgement of MCSO in this particular incident, that's your mistake, not mine since that was not my intent.

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@Flyer9753 " yet notice how I have not ventured an opinion as to who was right or wrong? I am willing to wait for the facts to make that determination"

"People with anger management deficiencies, which is 90+% of MCSO, don't need provocation to assault people"

Sounds like objectivity to me.

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@yourproductsucks @Flyer9753  

Rodney King WAS an unprovoked attack in the aspect that what King did, did not warrant the physical abuse/attack he received.

I'll give you a "nice try at splitting hairs" but that's all it is and it's bullshit as you know.

You are not bringing up valid points, you are trying to defend MCSO no matter what, without even waiting for the facts of the matter to be available. 

You state I have an agenda, yet notice how I have not ventured an opinion as to who was right or wrong?  I am willing to wait for the facts to make that determination, however you clearly are not, since in your FIRST comment you are defending MCSO and making excuses for them.

yourproductsucks
yourproductsucks

@Flyer9753 @yourproductsucks 

Rodney King was never argued as an unprovoked attack. ever.

I am bringing up valid points in order to spawn some objectivity amongst some of the readership here on PNT.  I recognize there are a group like you who don't care to hear such things because it doesn't meet your agenda.  It is your perogative to do so.  Have a great day.

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@yourproductsucks 

The entire Vietnam war started over a lie told to the American people by their legislators and media, that is a fact that we now know thanks to histories 20/20 vision - so why did we only hear about it 15 years later? Why didn't the journalists and news networks at the time carry it???

My point being that your argument that since networks didn't carry it, it must not be true is so false it's laughable and in the overall scheme of things it's nothing more than an attempt at deflection without any basis in fact.

We have PROOF of police officers acting without provocation all over the place, Rodney King ring a bell? Or how about the officers here in AZ and elsewhere that have been fired and charged for EXACTLY that, acting without provocation - you are doing nothing more than trying to make excuses without any basis in fact. Go on youtube and search for police brutality and you will see example after example of cops acting without provocation.

I am not saying this happened or didn't. I am not saying who was right and who was wrong, since I don't know and not enough FACTS are available to make a determination.

However you are trying to defend MCSO, without complete information, which means you don't care about what really happened, you only care about protecting MCSO.

Which means you are part of the problem since you don't care about facts, you only care about protecting MCSO no matter the cost and both of your comments make that abundantly clear.


Now Trending

Phoenix Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...