Thomas must face ethics probes, high court says

The state's high court on Friday decided that Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas must still face multiple ethics investigations ongoing against him, despite his claim that the agency that launched them is politically motivated.

Thomas asks high court for help in Bar dispute

Thomas: Bar complaints politically motivated

The decision is a blow to the Valley's top prosecutor, who has been engaged in an intense legal battle for months trying to get the investigations tossed.

Thomas and his allies were the focus of as many as 13 such inquiries by the State Bar of Arizona back in May when he first asked the Arizona Supreme Court to step in.

He wanted the justices to either halt the inquiries or appoint outside investigators to finish them.

Thomas said at the time he felt the investigations were meant to muzzle him from taking conservative stances on things like illegal immigration and judicial power.

Thomas has since launched a broader public campaign to "reform" the State Bar.

His office created its own Web site to advocate dismantling the powerful organization that oversees every lawyer in Arizona.

He even went as far as to ask the court to issue a restraining order against the State Bar to keep its leaders from retaliating against his supporters.

But while the Supreme Court declined to step into the middle of the brouhaha, Thomas' office still claimed a small victory this week.

On Thursday, the State Bar named a pair of outside attorneys it would appoint to review the investigations if the Supreme Court chose not to get involved.

Former Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Rebecca Albrecht was named the independent investigator, and Valley attorney Gary Stuart was named as the probable cause panelist - a position that is essentially an ethics judge.

Barnett Lotstein, a spokesman with the county attorney's office, said the appointments were an unspoken admission that the organization was unable to conduct a fair investigation.

"It's the first time ever that the Bar has gone outside its own apparatus," Lotstein said on Saturday. "We're happy with it."

However, Bar spokeswoman Pat Giallanza said appointments were a way to head off criticism - not an admission of guilt.

The leaders of the State Bar, she said, "wanted people with impeccable credentials" to finish the investigations.

"They didn't want them to come under attack in any way," she said.

In its decision Friday, the Supreme Court mentioned the appointments as the primary reason it had declined to take a look at the issue.

In the months that the legal battle has been waged, most of the investigations against Thomas and his associates have been dismissed by the regular Bar investigators because the evidence didn't show any violations.

This week, the State Bar announced just two investigations remain.

One of the investigations is into comments Thomas made in a news release about a murder conviction. Before the defendant could be sentenced, Thomas issued a statement that said he hoped the man would be "properly punished so that he doesn't kill again."

The man's defense attorney told the State Bar he believed the jury, which would have to decide the man's fate, was tainted by the statement.

The other investigation involves Thomas' accusations that Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Timothy Ryan was biased against his office. Thomas said the judge should be banned from hearing any cases involving him or his agency.

Giallanza said she did not know how long the next steps of the investigation would take.