Trump Pardon Does Nothing To Make Sheriff Arpaio Less Guilty, Says Judge

Judge Refuses To Toss Out Joe Arpaio's Guilty Contempt Verdict After Trump's Pardon

Despite the former sheriff's best efforts, a USA district judge denied his motion to vacate a guilty verdict from earlier this year, which found Arpaio in criminal contempt of court.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton found Arpaio was not entitled to have all her rulings in the case vacated after he was pardoned by President Donald Trump.

Former Sheriff Joe Arpaio's pardon doesn't... "The pardon undoubtedly spared (the) defendant from any punishment that might otherwise have been imposed". And even the distinctive aspects of Trump's pardon-including his apparent overruling of the federal judiciary's view of the constitutional rights at issue in the case, as evidenced by Trump's characterization of Arpaio as having been "doing his job" all along-are not what motivates Judge Bolton's conclusions, at least as they are presented. Bolton confirmed the pardon was valid, but left the door open as to whether she would vacate all of the orders in the Melendres case, which would wipe away Arpaio's guilty verdict from a July 31 decision.

Jack Wilenchik, one of Arpaio's attorneys, believed the relief he was seeking was important according to the Tucson.

Bolton ruled on October 4 that the pardon was valid.

The lawsuit, filed in 2007, accused Arpaio and his deputies of racially profiling Latinos during traffic stops and neighborhood sweeps.

Arpaio served 24 years as Maricopa County's top lawman, but lost his bid for a seventh term in 2016 to Paul Penzone, a Democrat.

The President's pardon drew an outcry from civil rights groups, which accused the former sheriff of violating the constitution in his crackdown on illegal immigration.

The case has cost county taxpayers more than $70 million. Before the pardon, Arpaio was planning to appeal the conviction, which his attorney said he thinks he would have won.

Related News: