Displaying results 1 - 25 of 8359 for evidence. Subscribe to this search
PHOENIX -- A Maricopa County Superior Court judge rejected efforts by Attorney General Tom Horne to kill charges that he violated state campaign-finance laws in his 2010 election.
Environmental groups filed suit Wednesday to block efforts by a Canadian mining firm from looking for copper in the Patagonia Mountains.
PHOENIX (AP) — Siblings of the man murdered by Jodi Arias tearfully told a jury Thursday how they are still traumatized by his killing six years ago, recounting a litany of nightmares, ulcers and family troubles brought on by the loss of their beloved family member.
The family members spoke to the jury that is deciding whether the 34-year-old Arias should get the death penalty or a life sentence in the 2008 killing of Travis Alexander. He was shot and stabbed in his shower by Arias in what prosecutors described as a jealous rage after he wanted to break off their relationship and see other people. Arias says it was self-defense.
Steven Alexander described nightmares, ulcers and constant trauma from losing his brother, including locking the doors when he showers. Tanisha Sorenson called it a "living hell."
"When I lay down at night, all I can think about is my brother's murder," Steven Alexander said as other family members could be heard crying in the gallery.
A jury last year convicted Arias of murder but deadlocked on whether she should be sentenced to life in prison or death. A new jury was seated to decide the punishment again. The defense is expected to begin its case later Thursday.
The family statements came after several days of prosecution testimony, primarily by the Mesa detective who investigated the case and interrogated Arias. Jurors also saw gruesome crime-scene photos and heard an X-rated phone call between Arias and the victim in the weeks before the killing.
Much of the testimony and evidence was a repeat from the original trial, which attracted a global following as it was televised live. The retrial is not being broadcast live, however.
PHOENIX (AP) — An independent investigation of the nearly two-hour execution of an Arizona death row inmate is expected to be completed in the next two weeks, attorneys representing the state said Wednesday.
Assistant Attorney General Matthew Binford, who is representing the state in a lawsuit involving the execution of Joseph Wood, said during a court status conference that a report is expected by mid-November.
Binford said the findings will go to Gov. Jan Brewer and to Arizona Department of Corrections director Charles Ryan, who may change the drug protocol for executions based on the report's recommendations.
Attorneys representing several prisoners and the First Amendment Coalition of Arizona are seeking information about lethal injection methods used by the state.
U.S. District Court Judge Neil Wake asked both sides for input about the need for litigation before the report comes out.
Mark Haddad, a lawyer representing the coalition, said litigation would ensure that evidence such as key witness interviews and electronic and phone communications would be preserved. Haddad further argued that even if the execution drug protocol changes, the state could essentially experiment on inmates without having to be completely transparent or accountable.
"They are free to go back to them even 18 hours before the execution or the day of the execution — as we learned from Mr. Wood," Haddad said.
It took nearly two hours and 15 doses of injection drugs before Joseph Wood died on July 23.
The owners of a Gilbert kennel have pleaded not guilty to animal cruelty charges stemming from the June deaths of 21 dogs.
SEATTLE (AP) — She has delivered the same 64-word speech eight times already, but Gabby Giffords is struggling to get through the ninth.
"Together, we can win elections," the former Arizona congresswoman tells her Seattle audience before starting to stumble.
After a moment of confused silence, an aide whispers the next line, and Giffords continues the broken sentence: "... change our laws."
Four years after she was shot in the head and went on to inspire millions with her recovery, Giffords is as committed as ever to pushing for tighter gun-control laws. But in the final days of this year's midterm elections, few candidates are willing to rally to her cause. There's little to suggest those elected next week will pursue the changes she seeks in the nation's gun laws.
As Giffords visited nine states in the past two weeks, the National Rifle Association was working in at least 30, with advertising and get-out-the-vote manpower, to strengthen its position in Washington and state capitals. She will be widely outspent this year by the NRA and others who support the rights of gun owners.
Two days after Giffords' appearance in Seattle, a 15-year-old high school student shot and killed two people and killed himself in an attack north of the city that seriously wounded three others. The shooting has barely made a ripple in the final days of the campaign.
"Long, hard haul," Giffords told The Associated Press in a brief interview after her Seattle event, using one of the short phrases that now dominate her speech.
In part by design, but also in recognition of the country's political landscape, not a single candidate in this year's midterm elections for statewide or federal office appeared with Giffords as she made her way from Maine to Washington state over 10 days.
She drew visits from Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, both Democrats, neither running for re-election next month.
"If this happened in March or December or any other time, we'd have asked other politicians to join," said Marti Anderson, an Iowa state lawmaker who helped organize a Giffords event in Des Moines. "But it's risky 15 days before an election."
Instead, Giffords took part in a series of discussions about domestic violence in smaller venues such as a Des Moines public library and a high school classroom in Portland, Ore. With the Senate majority at stake, Giffords isn't running television ads in states where Democratic incumbents are seeking re-election, among them North Carolina, Arkansas, Louisiana and New Hampshire.
The exception is Iowa, where her group announced plans this week to run television ads against Republican Senate candidate Joni Ernst. "Joni Ernst won't vote to close the loophole that lets some dangerous people still get guns," Story County Sheriff Paul Fitzgerald says in the ad set to run through Election Day.
Said Pia Carusone, Giffords' longtime chief aide, "We went in knowing we had to be strategic and careful."
The NRA has no such concerns. The powerful gun-rights lobby has spent more than $27.3 million this year on elections in at least 27 states through Oct. 15, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Giffords' organization, by contrast, has spent just $6.6 million in seven states.
The financial advantage is just one piece of the NRA's strength.
"Anyone who tries to gauge the National Rifle Association by money alone is making a huge mistake," said NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam, citing 5 million dues-paying members and many more voters who look to his organization for guidance on how to vote on Election Day.
Arulanandam said he's grateful that Giffords is "on the mend and getting better every day," but he criticized her political goals. "People realize that regardless of what she says, her endgame is similar to Michael Bloomberg and President Obama, which is draconian gun control," he said.
Giffords and her husband, former astronaut Mark Kelly, have gone to great lengths to rebut such criticism. Recently, with little sign that an effort to adopt universal background checks will pass in Congress, Giffords has focused on promoting a measure that would prevent convicted stalkers and abusive "dating partners" from accessing guns.
In a letter opposing the measure, the NRA says it "manipulates emotionally compelling issues such as 'domestic violence' and 'stalking' simply to cast as wide a net as possible for federal firearm prohibitions."
Giffords' team was initially hopeful, but it now concedes that the bill is not likely to come up in Congress' lame-duck session. And while the mood was largely positive during Giffords' tour, the frustration they're not connecting with voters this election season was evident.
"It's hard not to be, as a person in this country, disappointed by the lack of response," Carusone said. "But we're not surprised. We knew this wouldn't be easy."
Mountain View’s appeal of their one-year probation was denied by the Arizona Interscholastic Association on Wednesday, meaning the Mountain Lions will not participate in the 2015 postseason.
Arizonans are painfully aware of the skyrocketing costs of health care. Both federal and state governments continue to ask for more tax dollars to pay for Medicaid expansion and the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Taxpayers are contributing more than ever for health care for the less fortunate. Those below 133 percent of the federal poverty level now qualify for Medicaid and those using an ACA exchange receive a heavy subsidy. These programs will be inordinately expensive. Proposition 480 fails to acknowledge these massive changes and the sacrifices taxpayers are already making by asking for a 27-year, $1.6 billion bond and tax increase for the old way of doing health care business. At this point, the county hospital is only a true safety net for illegal immigrants because they do not qualify for AHCCCS or ACA, which begs the question why only Maricopa County property taxpayers should pay for a federal responsibility.
PHOENIX (AP) — A judge presiding over a racial profiling case against Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's office leveled harsh criticism against the agency Tuesday for not thoroughly investigating allegations that some sheriff's deputies were involved in thefts.
U.S. District Judge Murray Snow also singled out Arpaio for publicly saying he had no regrets about launching the type of immigration patrols that the judge found to have been unconstitutional as part of the profiling case. The judge is concerned Arpaio's comments are weakening efforts to correct constitutional flaws in the agency's approach to traffic stops.
"I think he is completely undoing what the MCSO (Arpaio's office) is spending a great deal of time building," said Snow, who showed visible frustration with the agency at several points in a court hearing Tuesday. He ordered the sheriff himself to attend the training that his officers must complete as part of the profiling case.
The hearing was called to discuss the agency's investigations of a former officer suspected of shaking down immigrants and to address Arpaio's recent unapologetic comments about a 2008 immigration patrol.
Arpaio, who was in Idaho on Tuesday, didn't attend the hearing. His lawyers and one of Arpaio's top managers faced sharp questioning from the judge, particularly over the investigation into former Deputy Ramon Charley Armendariz.
Armendariz was arrested in May after investigators found items belonging to others and bags of evidence at his home. Armendariz implicated former colleagues on Arpaio's immigrant smuggling squad, quit his job and later committed suicide. Armendariz is relevant to the profiling case because he was a witness at the case's 2012 trial and videos of his traffic stops were discovered after his arrest.
The judge said he had concerns that the only criminal investigation by the sheriff's office of Armendariz has been closed.
"I think you need to continue to investigate where those items came from," Snow said.
Robert Warshaw, a court-appointed official who is monitoring the sheriff's office on behalf of the judge, said another former member of Arpaio's smuggling squad has alleged that squad members had pocketed items from raids at safe houses.
Warshaw, a former police chief, said his team of police professionals has never seen more unprofessional interviews than those conducted by Arpaio's employees who are conducting the investigation. Warshaw said the interviews were replete with apologetic treatment of those being interviewed.
More than a year ago, Snow ruled Arpaio's office had systematically racially profiled Latinos in its regular traffic and immigration patrols. Arpaio denies that his officers have racially profiled people and has appealed the decision. The judge is requiring Arpaio's office to video-record traffic stops, collect data on traffic stops and conduct additional training to ensure officers aren't making unconstitutional traffic stops.
Tuesday's hearing also centered on Arpaio's recent comments about a 2008 immigration patrol in the town of Guadalupe that were a significant piece of the profiling case.
Asked to comment about an upcoming community meeting in Guadalupe, Arpaio told The Associated Press he had no regrets about the patrol. "With the same circumstances, I'd do it all over again," Arpaio said.
Snow said the sheriff, as an elected official, is free to make whatever public statements he wishes, but added that Arpaio sets the overall tone for his agency — and questioned whether the sheriff's comments are undermining efforts to train his deputies.
Tim Casey, an attorney representing Arpaio, said the sheriff's office is making significant changes ordered by the judge and that the agency was acting in good faith. "Good faith exists in the deed, not the spoken word," Casey said, arguing there was no cause and effect as a result of Arpaio's comments.
Cecillia Wang, a lawyer who pressed the profiling case against the sheriff's office, said the sheriff wasn't merely expressing disagreement with the judge — he was saying he would do his immigration patrols all over again.
Snow said he was willing to take such comments by Arpaio into account when deciding whether the sheriff's office has complied with the judge's efforts to fix the constitutional problems.
LAVEEN, Ariz. - Authorities are investigating a possible dog- and cock-fighting ring in Laveen after 91 animals have been found living in poor conditions at the property.
Maricopa County Sheriff's deputies responded to a rural home near 79th Avenue and Baseline Road Tuesday afternoon to execute a search warrant.
Officials told ABC15 that investigators have found evidence of animal fighting, including an arena with beer cans nearby, leashes hanging from trees, multiple breeds of animals and rooster houses.
Investigators said 37 dogs were found at the property living in poor conditions. All the dogs appeared to be thin and mangy and there was no food or water in sight.
Deputies said they found one dog dead, and two horses collapsed when deputies tried to move them.
MCSO officials said they found several types of dogs at the scene including Rottweilers, Pit Bulls, and even small dogs.
"Little dogs, cocker spaniels, poodles, chained up with heavy chains. That makes you wonder what they're being used for. Are they a training tool for the bigger dogs that are here?" questioned MCSO Deputy Joaquin Enriquez
Deputies say the dogs' owner Luis Garcia is now under arrest.
Investigators said he admitted he feeds the dogs pizza scraps if he has them. He also claims he rescues the dogs from the river beds.
Authorities said they have been investigating this property for an undetermined amount of time after neighbors reported activity at the property.
A suspected rapist in Gilbert whose conviction was reversed four years ago now is facing child pornography charges.
PHOENIX -- Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery wants a federal appeals court to give him what legal foes call a "do-over'' of his bid to salvage a state law denying bail to many people not in this country legally.
Montgomery conceded in filings with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that a prior county attorney did not present evidence showing that undocumented individuals were less likely to show up for court dates than citizens or legal residents. The appellate judges, citing that lack of evidence, ruled last week that lack of facts, coupled with disparate treatment of those without documents, make the 2006 voter-approved Proposition 100 illegal and unenforceable anywhere in Arizona.
But Montgomery, in his latest plea, said that was because the challengers to the law effectively admitted that to be true. So he said there was no need to present any statistical evidence.
Cecillia Wang, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, said that's not true. She said Montgomery is now seeking a "do-over'' for flaws in the way his office handled the case in the first place.
"They had every opportunity to show that Proposition 100 was supported by some indication there was a flight risk issue here,'' she said. "And they didn't do it,'' Wang continued. "You know why? Because those numbers don't exist.''
Montgomery said he does have such data, even though former County Attorney Andrew Thomas, who was in office when the law was challenged, chose not to present it. And he said the appellate court should give him a chance to make the case now.
"The story is not, 'I want a do-over, Andy Thomas screwed up,' ''Montgomery said. He said it's a question of "simple fairness.''
He said if the appellate court is relying on a lack of evidence to support Proposition 100 they should direct there be a court hearing to explore that issue before voiding a voter-approved state constitutional amendment.
This is more than a question of what happens going forward.
Montgomery said there are "a couple of hundred'' people now in his own county jails awaiting trial who were denied bail because of Proposition 100. He said if the ruling is not overturned, that will allow each of those people to demand a hearing to determine if they should be released -- a process that would be repeated in each of the other 14 counties -- which will cause a backup in handling other cases.
He also told the appellate judges if do not want to give him another chance to make his case, they should at least delay implementing their ruling to let him seek review by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The measure makes bail unavailable to those charged with "serious felony offenses'' if they are in this country illegally and if "the proof is evident or the presumption great'' that the person is guilty of the offense charged.
Proponents said that anyone who has crossed the border illegally probably has few ties to this country, making them a greater flight risk.
Voters approved the measure on a 3-1 ratio.
But appellate Judge Raymond Fisher, writing for the majority of the 11-member court, said there is a constitutional presumptive right of those arrested to be released on bail.
Fisher acknowledged that Arizona has a "compelling interest'' in ensuring that those accused of crimes show up for trial. But he said a blanket rule that those in the country illegally accused of certain crimes must be held without bond is not justified.
"The record contains no findings, studies, statistics or other evidence ... showing that undocumented immigrants as a group pose either an unmanageable flight risk or a significantly greater flight risk than lawful residents,'' Fisher wrote.
It is that evidence that Montgomery now contends he can marshal. But it may not matter.
Fisher said he and his colleagues are not saying it is up to the Montgomery to produce such evidence. But he said the absence of such evidence is a key factor in showing that Proposition 100 was not narrowly crafted to address a specific problem.
Fisher suggested there is, in fact, evidence to the contrary.
He pointed out there were undocumented individuals who had been arrested before Proposition 100 was approved who had been released without bail or after posting bond. He said they still showed up in court -- only to then be "needlessly remanded into state custody'' after the ballot measure took effect.
Montgomery has another hurdle to overcome: the breadth of the measure.
Fisher pointed out that Proposition 100 applies not just to those accused of serious offenses but "also relatively minor ones,'' like altering a lottery ticket with intent to defraud, unlawful copying of a sound recording, or theft of property worth between $3,000 and $4,000.
What Thomas did or did not do plays into this case in another way.
Appellate Judge Richard Tallman, dissenting from the majority ruling, said there was evidence of a sort presented: statements made by Thomas in favor of the measure during the 2006 campaign. Thomas argued that "far too many illegal immigrants accused of serious crimes have jumped bail and slipped across the border in order to avoid justice in an Arizona courtroom.''
But Fisher said that statement is not substantiated with any real data.
And he said "is not a credible source,'' having been disbarred two years ago on charges he used his office to "destroy political enemies'' and for filing unfounded criminal charges.
Follow Howard Fischer on Twitter at @azcapmedia.
Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery wants a federal appeals court to give him what legal foes call a “do-over” of his bid to salvage a state law denying bail to many people not in this country legally.
PHOENIX (AP) — Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's office says a court-appointed official's critique of the agency's investigation into alleged wrongdoing by some of its officers contains mischaracterizations.
Arpaio's lawyers say in court papers Tuesday that the report alleges investigators failed to act on information provided to them while they examined shakedown allegations against a former deputy. It also says supervisors of the deputy, whose arrest led to the investigations, didn't take appropriate action against him.
The report has not been released to the public.
The lawyers say the document unfairly suggested the sheriff's department wasn't investigating allegations in good faith, and that the criticism centers on the fact that no criminal charges have been filed against officers.
"Such a conclusion, especially given the genesis of this particular investigation, presumes the guilt of MCSO deputies," the attorneys wrote.
The critique was made by Robert Warshaw, who was appointed to monitor the agency by a judge who ruled Arpaio's officers have racially profiled Latinos in its patrols.
The judge asked Warshaw to investigate allegations against a witness in the profiling case, now-deceased deputy Ramon Charley Armendariz. Eighteen months after the profiling trial, Armendariz was accused of shaking down immigrants who are in the country illegally.
Armendariz was arrested five months ago after investigators found driver's licenses, wallets belonging to other people, bags of evidence and more than 100 license plates at his Phoenix home.
Another discovery at Armendariz's home involved an estimated 900 hours of videos taken from cameras mounted on his eyeglasses and dashboard that were supposed to be turned over in the profiling case.
Armendariz told investigators he was innocent, and he implicated former colleagues on Arpaio's immigrant smuggling squad. After his arrest, Armendariz resigned and was later found dead in his home in a suicide by hanging, officials say.
Warshaw's report on the investigation into Armendariz's allegations hasn't been publicly released.
The sheriff's office has repeatedly denied requests by The Associated Press for updates on the investigations, and investigative reports and related documents sought through public records requests haven't been released.
The attorneys who pressed the racial profiling case against Arpaio's office filed a response to Warshaw's report, but that filing is under a court seal. The American Civil Liberties Union, the driving force behind the profiling case, declined to comment on the filing by Arpaio's lawyers.
The sheriff's office says in its latest filing that nearly 9,000 videos taken by officers during the course of their work have been collected in the investigation. It says the videos have generated 39 internal investigations.
Arpaio's lawyers said Warshaw's criticism underscores the monitor's misunderstanding about the distinction between investigations that examine criminal allegations and those that focus on policy violations.
The sheriff's office also said the monitor alleged that Armendariz's supervisors failed to take administrative action against him. Arpaio's lawyers said it already has an administrative investigation into the matter.
U.S. District Judge Murray Snow ordered that a copy of Warshaw's report be sent to county and federal prosecutors. He set a Tuesday hearing to discuss the critique.
Arpaio's attorneys have asked the judge to close discussions of the Armendariz investigations, while opposing lawyers said they should be open to the public.
A new brain health program from Mather LifeWays Institute on Aging is based on all of the lifestyle factors.
Those of us who serve Marana as police officers and staff pride ourselves on providing exemplary service and protection to town residents, business owners and visitors. Marana is one of the safest communities in the state and our department promises to do everything it can to keep it that way.
One thing I’ve noticed the Republicans and particularly the far right, scorched earth, take no prisoners Tea Party types are really good at is projection. Whatever dirty tricks they are up to, they accuse their opponents of doing. A perfect example of this is the Oct. 15 letter from Rick Cunnington wherin he accuses Jo Holt of being inflexible and beholden to some completely made up Democratic “prime directive”. Captain Kirk on Star Treck had a prime directive. No evidence exists that the Democrats do. The Republicans on the other hand have given us the most unproductive Congress in history, the most Senate filibusters in history and a lege in Phoenix that only seems capable of passing bills that are clearly unconstitutional so the tax payers can spend millions defending them in court.
PHOENIX -- A medical-marijuana card is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for motorists found with active components of the drug in their system, no matter how little, the state Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday.
The judges rejected arguments by the attorney for Travis Darrah that the positive drug test, by itself, cannot be used to convict him of driving under the influence of drugs. The judges said prosecutors need not prove actual impairment.
Tuesday's ruling is unlikely to be the last word. Attorney John Tatz said he is weighing seeking Supreme Court review, saying the decision is in direct contradiction to the 2010 voter-approved Arizona Medical Marijuana Act. That's also the assessment of Chris Lindsey, a legislative analyst with the Marijuana Policy Project which crafted the law.
Darrah, who has a state-issued card allowing him to obtain and use marijuana, was arrested by Mesa police in 2011. He was charged with two separate counts of driving under the influence of drugs.
One makes it illegal to drive while impaired. The other says a person cannot operate a motor vehicle while there is any illegal drug or its metabolite in his or her body. That was based on a blood test that showed evidence of an active component of marijuana
Tatz asked the second count to be dismissed.
He acknowledged that the 2010 law does not make it legal for a medical marijuana cardholder to operate a motor vehicle while under the influence of the drug. But Tatz pointed out the law also says medical marijuana users cannot be considered under the influence solely because of the presence of metabolites or components of the marijuana "that appear in insufficient concentration to cause impairment.'' And he said there was no evidence presented that Darrah was not impaired.
The judge refused to drop the charge and refused to let jurors hear that
Darrah is a medical marijuana users. Jurors then found Darrah innocent of the impairment charge but, based solely on the blood test, guilty of the second charge.
Appellate Judge Michael Brown, writing for the court, said he does not read the law -- and the exemption -- as broadly as Tatz.
"If Arizona voters had intended to completely bar the state form prosecuting authorized marijuana users under (this section of the law), they could have easily done so by using specific language to that effect,'' Brown wrote.
Lindsey said all that ignores the intent of the law: allow patients to use the drug and not be kept from driving simply because there was something left in their bodies that shows up in a blood test.
The key, he said, is impairment -- or the lack thereof.
"You could have a small amount of active metabolite in the system and not be impaired,'' he said, much as someone using a prescription painkiller would not be breaking the law if the concentration was too low to cause impairment. And Lindsey said the 2010 law was crafted to include the impairment requirement because of how long marijuana remains in the system.
Tatz said there is precedent for that argument.
He said the parallel charge for alcohol to the one his client was convicted is operating a motor vehicle with a blood-alcohol content of 0.08.
If the blood test returns a number below that, that charge is dismissed. But the motorist still can be charged with driving while impaired if there is other evidence.
In this case, Tatz said, there is no presumptive number in Arizona law for how much marijuana someone can have in the blood. So that, he said, leaves prosecutors only the option of charging Darrah with driving while impaired -- a charge for which his client was found innocent by a jury.
Brown also said this case is different than one where the Arizona Supreme Court earlier this year voided driving while intoxicated charges against another medical marijuana user.
In that case, though, the justices pointed out that what was found in that driver's blood was an inactive metabolite of the drug which can remain long after the effects had worn off.
A medical marijuana card is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for motorists found with active components of the drug in their system, no matter how little, the state Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday.
A Maricopa County grand jury decided to indict four people in the deaths of more than 20 dogs at a boarding facility in Gilbert in one of the largest animal cruelty cases the county has seen.
A large number of students from Kyrene de la Colina Elementary School were sent home Thursday after the school experienced several bouts of norovirus — a common stomach virus.
The two Republican candidates running for Arizona Corporation Commission escaped further inquiry into their campaign finances Thursday by each agreeing to pay $1,000 fines.
PHOENIX -- The two Republican candidates running for Arizona Corporation Commission escaped further inquiry into their campaign finances Thursday by each agreeing to pay $1,000 fines.
Tom Forese and Doug Little essentially admitted that they committed to spending money on their joint campaign before they actually had the cash. That is a violation of election laws.
They also acknowledged that they did not properly report money they spent on things like campaign signs and petition circulators.
The deal was approved by a 3-1 vote by the Citizens Clean Elections Commission after Tom Collins, the panel's executive director, recommended it to them. He called it an "appropriate resolution'' of the issue.
Not everyone was pleased.
The Rev. Jarett Maupin, who filed complaints, said there was a general "slickness'' to the way the pair campaigned in the Republican primary were they beat out Lucy Mason and Vernon Parker. And Maupin said the preliminary inquiry done by Collins and his staff did not explore every aspect of that race.
This deal, he said, avoids the commission conducting a full-blown probe.
"I would hate to think the commission, with all the unanswered questions, would sell its integrity for $2,000,'' Maupin said. He said that if the commission levied the maximum possible penalties against the pair it would come close to $60,000.
Collins, however, said he found no evidence that either candidate, running with public dollars, had accepted outside cash or spent more than their allocations.
Only Commissioner Steve Titla voted against the settlement, calling the penalty "too low.''
The pair face off in the general election against Democrats Sandra Kennedy and Jim Holway.