Montgomery presents himself as a law-and-order stalwart, who in his career as a prosecutor has pursued tough sentences.

Transcription

1 On October 25, 2012, the Arizona Republic published an article that compared the two candidates in the upcoming election for Maricopa County Attorney. The incumbent, Bill Montgomery, a conservative Republican had no Democratic opposition. His only opposition in the election was Libertarian Candidate Michael Kielsky who lost the election by a wide margin. The article said, in part Montgomery presents himself as a law-and-order stalwart, who in his career as a prosecutor has pursued tough sentences....libertarian Michael Kielsky whose main campaign promise is that he will not prosecute victimless crimes...using the slogan "No victim, no crime, no time, no fine!" Kielsky's focus would be on not wasting resources by prosecuting victimless crimes, saying this would save money, lower the prison population and provide greater freedom and justice. "The job of the county attorney is to help protect individual rights by prosecuting those who would harm other people," he said. "Bill Montgomery, like his predecessor, is spending a lot of resources on prosecuting people who aren't hurting anyone." Since the news of the raid on the Phoenix Goddess Temple appeared, I have been to all the hearings and publish a Phoenix Temple Private List so that Temple supporters and the defendants can be apprised of what is going on in the courts and elsewhere. The information has served as a life line for the defendants who must live under a Court Order that prohibits them from having any communication with other defendants the result of which has limited information available to and from their assigned attorney's. Through this privately distributed mailing list, I have served as a source of unbiased information for interested parties who requested copies of my observations and viewpoints. I have not sought any media exposure nor do I have any direct connection with any of the defendants. I have clearly communicated that I am not a lawyer and that the views and observations made are mine or those of other individuals who have written me. I have insisted that anyone involved seek competent legal counsel and that they not rely on any statement found in my updates as legal advice. My personal belief is that this entire case is a tragedy of enormous proportions and an example of a gross misuse of the judicial system to address moral issues. I have only been to the Temple once where I met with its founder to learn something about its practices. As a Christian, I respect all religious and spiritual beliefs and an individual s right to practice their beliefs, a cornerstone of this nation s constitution. I am a supporter of private, consenting adult sexworkers. I believe that if anything at all, this should be a simple misdemeanor case of alleged prostitution against perhaps 4 of the 39 women accused. Instead, we are witnessing the deliberate and premeditated destruction of the lives of women and an attack on their religious beliefs that will have far reaching consequences. My archive is over 400 pages of pdf files that am willing to share. I encourage anyone interested to circulate this review as you deem appropriate and to contact me if you wish. The summary that follows on the attached pages presents background information and raises important questions that deserve your attention if you truly believe in the standard of Liberty and Justice for All. Namaste 1

2 FEBRUARY 2013 Sometime in the summer of 2011, the office of Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery presented information to a Grand Jury that operates in total secrecy obtained by the Phoenix Police Department during an undercover investigation of the Phoenix Goddess Temple. The Grand Jury has since then issued indictments against a group of 39 who were practicing their religious beliefs at the Temple. Arrest warrants for each woman were obtained based on allegations by the County Attorney of a series of significant criminal activities wrapped around accusations that the women and their religious beliefs and practices were merely a front for prostitution. On September 8, 2011, a pre-planned raid by heavily armed City of Phoenix Police SWAT teams took place at the Goddess Temple. The County Attorney and the Phoenix Policy clearly knew that this place was considered a temple for the practice of religious beliefs and as gathering place for those people of similar beliefs. The Phoenix Goddess Temple had been under surveillance and investigated by undercover police for months yet, the building was invaded by a deadly force of heavily armed police worthy of a raid on a terrorist operation. According to the published police report, the Phoenix Special Assignment Unit officers in tactical gear included 16 squad officers at the North Entry, 9 at the east Entry and 9 South Entry. A total of 34 officers directly involved in staging an attack against a temple where those arrested inside were unarmed women. One can only imagine the manpower assigned to this raid when you consider the support staff and logistical efforts involved. The raid was conducted under the watchful eye of select members of the press who had been given advance notice of the pending raid. Elsewhere in the City, Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery and a small army of lawyers joined the upper ranks of the Police department and monitored the events unfolding in anticipation of conducting a press conference immediately after the raid. In a well-rehearsed presentation, the County Attorney and Phoenix Police Department pronounced to the public that the women of the Phoenix Goddess Temple were taken into custody. They were declared to be acting as prostitutes and their religious views ridiculed. 2

3 On September 9, 2011, the Arizona Republic reported on the press conference. The article stated, in part, that Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery on Thursday said the Phoenix Goddess Temple, raided by police the day before, "was no more a church than Cuba is Fantasy Island. "Accepting money for sex is against the law," he said. Acting Phoenix Police Chief Joe Yahner called it "particularly disheartening that some would attempt to disguise their crimes as religious freedom." Read more: Thus began what has become known as The Phoenix Goddess Temple Case which has drawn international interest throughout the world. Since that date, the County Attorney s office has conducted a systematic effort to prosecute 39 people based on the dismissal of the validity of the women involved views of their religion and its practice. With the public statements made by both men resonating throughout the world, the County Attorney s office then implemented what can best be described as a legal tsunami strategy under the guise of protecting the citizens from criminal activity. The cost of County Attorney s efforts to prosecute the Temple case to the taxpayers has not been disclosed publically but one can only imagine those costs would exceed a million dollars. It s hard to imagine spending valuable resources when it has recently been made public that the Country Sherriff s office grossly mismanaged the Special Victims Unit and its activities which resulted in real sexual predators and crimes of a sexual nature against women and children to go unprosecuted while the County Attorney prosecuted the Temple case. There will be a tragic end to this saga of the Goddess Temple. In the end, who will question the ongoing saga of a legal system run amok by The Maricopa County Attorney who will have wasted tax payer funds and other precious resources in his zeal to shut down the Phoenix Goddess Temple? Who will ask the question: for what purpose? Here are some thoughts to consider: 1. Who committed what crime? The Maricopa County Attorney declared publically that these women were criminals calling them prostitutes. Was his purpose to uphold the laws against prostitution? 3

4 IF SO, WHY HAS NOT ONE MAN WHO VISITED THE TEMPLE GODDESS BEEN CHARGED WITH A SINGLE CRIME OF SOLICITING THE SERVICES OF A PROSTITUTE? Think about this comparison. If the Phoenix Police conducted the type of investigation of the Temple required to obtain the Grand Jury indictments and arrest warrants, then an argument can be made that they know the name of many if not all of the men who visited the Temple. If according to the County Attorney, a Priestess is to be considered a prostitute and a man solicits the services of a prostitute, that man has broken the law and committed a crime. YET, NOT A SINGLE MAN WHO VISTED A TEMPLE GODDESS WAS INDICTED, ARRESTED AND PROSECUTED. ARE ONLY THE WOMEN ARE CONSIDERED CRIMINALS? Is it reasonable to ask if a double standard was applied and a decision made to selectively prosecute only the women? Has anyone asked why? 2. Who were the Victims of this alleged criminal activity Was the County Attorneys purpose to assist the victims of this alleged crime? If so, who were the victims of this alleged crime of prostitution? At the beginning of each hearing, the judge reads the victim rights statement to the citizens of "The State of Arizona". By selectively not prosecuting any men who requested the Priestess assistance, has the County Attorney therefore declared that each man involved with the women of the Goddess Temple is therefore a victim? Why are they not criminals as well? By the nature of their action, did they not associate a criminal enterprise as a knowledgeable customer? Were they not participants in the alleged crimes of conspiracy? Wasn t it those male customers who provided the money allegedly laundered? 3. Was the purpose to legally challenge the religious practices Temple and or the Goddess? It s clear that the County Attorney s purpose was not to legally challenge the Temples existence as a place of worship and practicing of religious beliefs in the courts. The County Attorney fought vigorously against the introduction of a religious element into the case. The Court agreed and advised the defendants not to pursue a defense based on their religious beliefs. The County Attorney instead ridiculed publically any claim of religious practice at his initial press conference. 4. Was the purpose an effort to protect the citizens of Maricopa County against crime? Consider this: Every single person who went into the Temple did so at their own free will. No one was coerced. No one was forced. No one was kidnapped. Each of the Priestess of the Temple was practicing 4

5 their religious beliefs and shared those beliefs and practices with all those who sought therapy for the root chakra as part of their religious beliefs. 5. Was the purpose to implement a legal strategy that would assure there would never be a trial? The County Attorney believes that the practicing of those religious beliefs constituted prostitution and filed a list of charges against these women that some might argue represents prosecutorial abuse at its highest level. Under the guise of publically stated purpose of upholding the laws against prostitution, the County Attorney grossly over charged 39 defendants with multiple felonies. Knowing full well the nature of the press and the public s lack of attention to the legal process once the headlines disappear, the County Attorney filed a list of charges that attempt to declare the Temple a Criminal Enterprise and then implemented a prosecution strategy that would result in women being forced to accept a plea offered in lieu of going to trial and facing literally years of their lives in prison. The charges read like a laundry list Conspiracy Illegal control of enterprise Employee of house prostitution Keep/reside house prostitution Receive earnings of prostitute Money laundering Assist criminal syndicate/lead gang The County Attorney used Arizona's equivalent of "racketeering laws usually used for the mafia or drug organizations as his methodology for prosecution. They confiscated personal property and collected every computer belonging to these women in order to collect evidence. The County Criminal Forensic Lab initially reported as that they had collected 8 Terabytes of data. Consider, if you will, that 8TB is roughly the equivalent of 400 MILLION pages of documents. The estimates of the amount of data collected was later reduced to somewhere in the range of 2TB. Now consider this: the vast majority of the data was declared inadmissible by the court due to a sanction for delay in discovery release issued against the County Attorney s office stating that "only" the initial release of somewhere from 25,000 to 100,000 pages is admissible. In other words, the County Attorney was slapped on the wrist by the Court for delaying the processing of data. Might that data exonerate the defendants? To the best of my knowledge, none of that unprocessed data collected from confiscated computers has been given to the Defense Attorneys. 5

6 The only result of that sanction was to limit the evidence available. Why the delay in the processing of data? Was a defendant s right to a fair trial compromised while the County Attorney, encouraged by the Judge, conducted plea negotiations with each defendant that effectively said Take this deal or we will go to the Grand Jury to get more indictments and you are going to be found guilty of lots of other charges. Oh, and by the way, we haven t gotten around to processing the data on your computer yet? And in the end...what purpose has been served? The legal process continues and for those involved the last 18 months has been living hell with the trials pending the worst phase of all. Comments have been made that somewhere in the area of approximately 100 witnesses maybe involved in a trial which each trial expected to take 6-8 weeks. Trials are now scheduled for March Over half of the Temple women have given in to the threats of long prison terms. Most have agreed to felony pleas in desperation to get a sentence of probation. Some have been offered undesignated felonies if they agree to testify against each other. But a felony is still a felony...and felony convictions ruin lives. Even though only 4 of the women have any alleged prostitution charges, all of the Temple women are being threatened with long prison terms as the layering on of money laundering charges for each time they accepted donations to the Temple is threatened...again resulting in lives ruined with felony records. Many of the women have lost their homes, children and friends. One woman died (Tamara) as a medical result stemming from the stress she endured. With pending felony charges some cannot even get a minimum wage job. The County Attorney s office knows full well that future employment will be denied because of a felony conviction yet they use the threat of prison as a tool to obtain a plea. Some of the Temple women have professional licenses which could be lost due to felony conviction. Some are in the USA on visas for education and are at risk of deportation. A few are also citizens of foreign countries and may not be able to reenter the U.S if they wish to leave to visit family. Many of these women have received limited information from their attorney's. Why? Is it because their attorney s do not have anything to provide them? If so, is that because of the nature of the legal process or is it a deliberate delay strategy designed to force into plea agreements by two zealous County Prosecutors whose track records stand on their ability to obtain pleas? Amazingly, one of the lead prosecutors readily admits there is no real evidence against most of the Temple women and they are part of the "criminal enterprise" only by "association." The entirety of the women charged have limited or little financial resources and all but a few are represented by court assigned attorneys. None of the women has the kind of substantial resources to take 6

7 this case to trial and through the appeals process if convicted. The Maricopa County Attorney s Office knows this well and has used this to its advantage. All of this begs this question: Is this case an example of one of the purest cases of prosecutorial abuse ever witnessed? In the end, the true victims in this sordid legal affair conducted are women... women who cannot defend themselves in the dark alley of the legal system against their abusers hiding behind the law who accuse these women of illegal acts and call them prostitutes and ridicule the practice of their religious beliefs. The same people who consciously decided not to prosecute any men for soliciting prostitute services from these women...the entirety of whom claim that they were practicing the ancient religious beliefs of Tantra. The statement of the Libertarian candidate for the office of County Attorney, Michael Kielsky, best addresses this summary review of what I and many other consider an unnecessary attack on the individual rights of consenting adults "The job of the county attorney is to help protect individual rights by prosecuting those who would harm other people," he said. "Bill Montgomery, like his predecessor, is spending a lot of resources on prosecuting people who aren't hurting anyone." Dave in Phoenix dave@davephx.com February