Upload
joe-arpaio
View
312
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
A 2nd plaintiff has moved in federal court Arizona to join the lawsuit against Maricopa County and Sheriff Arpaio citing First Amendment retaliation.This new claim exceeds the standard of proof for a civil case, it per se supports a criminal prosecution under the federal civil rights statutes. 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242 (conspiracy against rights, deprivation of rights under color of law)Background info at: www.sheriff-arpaio.com
Citation preview
Scott Huminski2624 S. Bahama DriveGilbert,AZ 85295(480) 243-8184
QU:RI< U $I DISTRICT COURTCISiRIOr OF ARIZONA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COU 1W_. P O~PUTY
DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
MAY 1 0 2012
United States of America,Plaintiff,
-v-
)))))))
CIVIL ACTION
Maricopa County, et al.,Defendants.
MOTION TO INTERVENE as PLAINTIFF-INTERVENOR and
VERIFIED COMPLAINT-IN-INTERVENTION
NOW COMES, Scott Ruminski ("Ruminski"), and pursuant to
F.R.Civ.P. 24(a), 24(b) moves to intervene in the above-captioned case and
complains, swears and deposes, under oath, as follows:
1. The above-captioned case involves subject matter that the named Defendants
have engaged in a long pattern of Constitutional Rights violations against
various persons in Maricopa County, Arizona. Specifically relevant to this
intervention are the claims of First Amendment retaliation as set Forth in
the Complaint.
2. Ruminski has been a resident ofMaricopa County for over two years.
3. Ruminski has been subjected to Constitutional Rights violations foisted upon
him by the named Defendants, specifically First Amendment retaliation.
1
4. Ruminski has been declared a citizen-reporter and "legitimate gadfly" by the
United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Ruminski v. COl'sones,396
F.3d 53 (2d Cir. 2005).
5. Ruminski has received threats of retaliation by means of arrest and criminal
prosecution from the Defendants for his reporting crimes to the Defendants.
6. The reporting of crime to a law enforcement agency is speech protected by the
First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The speech (crime
reports) concerned a person who is self-described as having control and
supervision powers with the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office. The
complaints of criminal conduct were/are critical of a judicial and law
enforcement insider, Justin M. Nelson, heightening the speech to core First
Amendment status. Attached hereto as Exhibit "A"is a true and correct copy
of an email from Justin Nelson describing his relationship with Sheriff
Arpaio.
7. Attached hereto as Exhibits "B" and Exhibit "C" are true and correct copies of
emails sent to Ruminski by the Defendants threatening retaliatory arrest
and prosecution via the County Attorney in response to Ruminski's crime
reporting to law enforcement.
8. Subsequent to receipt of Exhibits "B" and "C", County Attorney personnel
assaulted Ruminski in retaliation for his delivery of court papers containing
speech critical of the government. Surprise, Arizona has threatened to arrest
Ruminski if he engages in litigation against the self-admitted top friend and
2
crony of Sheriff Arpaio, Justin Michael Nelson. Gilbert, Arizona has
threatened to arrest Huminski if he engages in litigation against Bruce
Hume of the Norwalk, Connecticut Police Department.
9. First Amendment retaliation has been adopted as a custom, practice, policy
and procedure under the color of law by the Defendants and at several other
law enforcement entities in Maricopa County including the Gilbert Police and
Surprise Police whereby these agencies and Defendants use the threat of
arrest and prosecution as a retaliation to First Amendment expression
proximately causing the chilling of expression. The retaliatory conduct is
county-wide and has been adopted by multiple police entities.
10.The Defendants have threatened retaliation through use of the Arizona
Harassment Statute 13 A.RB. § 2921. The statute is constitutionally infirm
as it criminalizes speech protected under the First Amendment. The statute
has been used as a law enforcement tool of oppression.
11.This action is brought under the First Amendment and pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983 (Bivens action) analogous to the 42 UB.C. § 14141 claim set
forth in the Complaint. Huminski asserts the Complaint with the same force
and effect as if more fully set forth herein.
COUNT ONE
INJUNCTIVE AND DECLARATORYRELIEF
12.Plaintiff asserts the preceding paragraphs with the same force and effect as if
more fully set forth herein.
3
I3.Plaintiff seeks a declaration that the aforementioned conduct constitutes
First Amendment retaliation under the color of law. 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
14.Plaintiff seeks a declaration that the Arizona harassment statute, 13 A.R.S.§
2921, is unconstitutionally vague, over broad and violates the First
Amendment.
15.Plaintiff seeks an injunction against Defendants prohibiting First
Amendment retaliation and enjoining the enforcement of the Arizona
harassment statute 13A.R.S. § 2921.
Dated at Gilbert, Arizona, May 10, 2012
SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED to before me this 10th day ofMay, 2012
OFFICIAL SEALMICHAEL WEST
NOTARY PUBLIC· State 01Arizona~"''''0' MARICOPA COUNTY
My Comm. Expires Aug. 14,2013
Notary expo
A copy of the foregoing was served upon all parties of record by hand-delivery orFirst Class Mail, prepaid.
4
5/10/12 Hotmail Print Message
Breakfast with Joe
J Michael Nelson [email protected])
Sat 4/16/11 2:47 PMscott huminski ([email protected])
I just wanted to let you know that my son and I drove out to Fountain Hills this morning and had a wonderfulbreakfast with Mr. and Mrs. Arpaio (he calls my boy his "little red-headed detective). Like I said, I've workedon the man's political campaign for a decade.
As you mayor may not know, despite his position, Mr. Arpaio is the most powerful politician of either partyin Arizona. We had a long conversation about you, what has transpired, and what I believe your next moveswill be. He then began to get on the phone.
In addition to living less than a mile from the Surprise Police Department, I also live within a mile of an MeSOsubstation.
I have put you square in the cross-hairs of the Sheriff, MeSO as a whole, and in particular, the Meso officethat is less than a mile from my home. If you know anything about Joe Arpaio, which I a sume you do, thelast thing anybody wants in this state is to be in his cross-hairs.
With that in mind, I would be very, very careful about your next "strategic" move here in the valley, andfurther, very, very careful about approaching my house which I know, and he knows, you have the address to.From the very top down, Meso is now aware of your existence and your activities. That in itself would scarethe shit out of me personally, but whatever.
Remember my forest buddy. Now you are standing square in the middle of it, all alone, and I wish you all theluck in the world trying to find your way out before the actual civil proceedings commence upon your bookpublication.
Justin
scott huminski
From:Sent:To:
Steven Spidell - SHERIFFX [[email protected], July 19, 2011 11:32 AMJ Michael Nelson; [email protected]; [email protected];[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];[email protected]; loren. [email protected];[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];roy. [email protected]; [email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected]; [email protected]; Sheriffs Media Requests;MCSO Complaints; MCSO Information; [email protected]; Steven Gibbs -SHERIFFX; [email protected]; MCSO Web Team; Ian Thompson- SHERIFFX; [email protected]; MCSO Surplus Operations; Paula Gray -SHERIFFX; [email protected]; [email protected]; JesseSpurgin - SHERIFFX; [email protected];[email protected]; pat. [email protected]; scott huminskiRE: Scott HuminskiSubject:
I have made this request now for the second time. I do not wish to receive any further information concerning thismatter. Any futher emails concerning this I will consider it to be harrassment and turn it over to the county attorney forfurther review.
From: J Michael Nelson [[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday/ July 19/ 201111:28 AMTo:
; Sheriff's Media Requests;MCSO Complaints; MCSO Information; ; Steven Gibbs - SHERIFFX;
; MCSO Web Team; Ian Thompson - SHERIFFX; Steven Spidell - SHERIFFX;; MCSO Surplus Operations; Paula Gray - SHERIff)(;
; Jesse Spurgin :-SHERIFFX;; scott huminski
Subject: Scott Huminski
For more information on Scott Huminski, I have more than 10/000 documents on a harddrive that span back 15 years.These encompass every aspect of his quest against the legal system, and include his rantings, his filings, his competencyevaluations, threat letters sent to Vermont offiCials that were investigated by the FBI, the documents from the courtabout his criminal collusion with his police officer brother Bruce Hume to intimidate witnesses and create fraudulentevidence against a witness in his Vermont cases. I have everything about this guy.
Anybody interested, please let me know and I will mail you a jumpdrive, otherwise, all of the documents will be postedand available for viewing at Scotthuminski.com within a week. Please call 623-217-3439 with questions or requests.
J. Michael Nelson
1
'5/10/12 HotmailPrintMessage r.X ~;01/ \ \C 1/FW: 9th circuit in CA to hear Case on Arpaio's corrupt breakfastmeetings and Surprise
Lisa Allen - SHERIFFX ([email protected])
Wed 7/20/11 6:31 [email protected] ([email protected])
iVlr Hurninski,
Here is an ernail from your arch nemesis. Mr. Nelson, indicating that he has never met Sheriff Joe
Arpaio nor has had any dealings with him or anyone from this office.
The entire ernail string regarding any breakfast between Nelson and Sheriff Arpaio was a total
fabrication. Mr Nelson is not involved in the Sheriff's campaign. All of the references regarding
Sheriffs Arpaio's connections to him are fabrications.
Hence we insist you stop harassing us with these emails immediately. Remove anyone with the email
address of @mcso.maricopa.gov from your email string. We do not have any interest in your battle with
Mr. Nelson. If you do not remove us from these harassing emails, we will pursue a legal remedy.
This is the e-mail that states that J. Michael Nelson was lying.
The information contained in this c-rnail and any (ilcs transmitted with it arc confidential
and/or privileged, and are intended solely for the use of the recipients listed above. Tfyou are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,distribution, or copying of the transmitted information is strictly prohibited. Ifyou havereceived this transmission in CITor, please innucdiatcly notifY the sender and delete anddestroy all copies and attachments.