Home » From The Readers, Letters to the Editor » Yavapai County Corruption Alleged

Yavapai County Corruption Alleged

scales of justice courtSedona AZ (June 8, 2015) The following is a letter to the SedonaEye.com editor as received with only the writer’s street address, telephone numbers, and email address removed from the attached Department of Justice letter:

To whom it may concern:

I have recently become a resident of your beautiful community.  Yavapai county is a beautiful place to live.  However, the corruption and oppression that takes place behind close doors is horrific.  I believe that an outcry for the public’s awareness is necessary.

Arizona was found to be the most corrupt state in the United States according to a study by Harvard Law and published in the Wall Street Journal.

http://blogs.wsj.com/riskandcompliance/2014/12/04/study-names-arizona-as-most-corrupt-state/

Furthermore, Bill Williams of the Examiner did an excellent piece on the intrinsic relationships of the Yavapai Superior Court system in 2012.  Over the past three years I believe the corruption has gotten worse and not better. It will continue to worsen as it goes unaddressed.  The only people the system is truly hurting are the families and loved ones of those the Court system and legal system is taking advantage of.  The education level of those who are affected by those in power only amplifies the problem.

http://www.examiner.com/article/cronyism-nepotism-and-favoritism-a-small-town-courthouse

Yavapai county’s 98% conviction rate stems from the fact that all the rules are broken in order to secure that conviction.

Attached please find a letter to the U.S. Department of Justice which was also forwarded  to the Investigator General in Washington D.C.

You have to ask if those in power are trying to help or hurt.  I’ve come to the conclusion that those in power in Yavapai county are the worst kind of criminals there are.

Thank you for your time and investigation into the matter.

Sincerely,
Cheri Remmenga

(attachment)

Cheri Remmenga

(street address, telephone number, email address deleted by editor)

June 5, 2015

U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.
Office of the Assistant Attorney General, Main
Washington D.C. 20530

RE: YAVAPAI COUNTY CORRUPTION

Dear U.S. Department of Justice:

I’m writing to you concerning several Federal statute violations and state statute violations occurring in the county of Yavapai, Arizona. I am originally from Los Angeles, California and was arrested driving westbound on the I-40. I had never heard of the county prior to my incarceration on December 1, 2014. I was incarcerated at the Camp Verde Detention Center from December 1, 2015 to May 5, 2015. Lack of law resources may cause me to include practices wherein no actual violation of the law occurred. During the first 60 days, I witnessed or in some instances experienced the following:

  • Illegal search and seizure
  • Unreasonable seizure
  • Denial of preliminary hearing
  • Improper grand jury
  • Denial of legal research for inmates
  • Refusal of prescribed medicine for mentally ill
  • Mishandling of inmate trust funds
  • Improper use of Anti-Racketeering Fund
  • Improper use of Investigative Fund
  • Laws that are prejudicial on their face
  • Lack of check and balance system for law officials
  • Abuse of power and authority
  • Improper Handling of U.S. Legal Mail

Illegal practices that violate an individual’s constitutional rights are so commonly practiced that they are accepted as being normal and legal.

As with many of the cases here, my own case involves a search in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Chino Valley Police Department seized an estimated $11,000 worth of property on December 1, 2014. I have yet to receive a receipt or inventory of the property taken from me as required by ARS § 13-120 and ARS §§ 13-3919-21. Some property was taken to Chino Valley Police Department, some property was given to Prescott Valley PANT sub-station, and approximately $2000.00 of property was not accounted for. My attorney, Linda Moore, said the police can take everything whether it is relevant to the case or not. This would be an unreasonable seizure of property under the Fourth Amendment (also see US v. $12,248 U.S. Currency, the United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit 957 F.2d 1513, found, “It is impermissible for government to simply to hold property belonging to a United States citizen for extended period of time without reason while neither conducting investigation nor attempting to verify claimant’s story”). This is a common practice. They let a civilian take my vehicle according to Chino Valley Police report 14C-10240. In California a tow company is utilized to secure a vehicle. I will address the illegal search in court. Most people here seem to be ignorant of their rights, so the illegal searches go on unaddressed. (1)

Within 48 hours after being at the Camp Verde Detention Center, I was strip searched three times. On December 4, 2014, I was placed in a small room without a toilet, sink or running water for 7 hours. The detention officers claimed I couldn’t leave the room until I urinated in a cup. For failure to urinate for them, they put me in isolation for 34 days. I requested to speak with a sergeant but all I was told was that inmates have no procedural rights pursuant to Sandin v. Conner. You could not appeal their decisions. I was denied access or aloud to review the case they relied on. My request for access to legal books was denied several times.

Furthermore, an organization called PANT (Partners Against Narcotics Trafficking) is very influential, and they have a lot of power in Yavapai county. Their objective seems to be righteous in nature, but without any check and balance system for the agency, their practices can be considered corrupt. Arizona law allows them to seize property related to numerous crimes. When it is successfully forfeited, the seizing agency is the 100% beneficiary. They get to keep everything they take.

The more property they seize the fatter their pockets grow. There is no check & balance system to defend against a system set up for corruption. A claim is rarely submitted in time to save defendant’s property because they are denied access to legal research. Brand new E class Mercedes, businesses, and houses are commonly seized and forfeited before the person is ever found guilty. The money goes in the pocket of PANT usually the seizing agency or documents are falsified to say they are the seizing agency. The money is supposed to go into the county anti-racketeering fund and investigative fund and distributed pursuant to ARS §§13-4310 (g) and 13-4318. After speaking with several inmates and some PANT employees (also whom are inmates) I’ve learned how a large portion of that money is spent. They pay addicts to use drugs and bring them information. They place electronic surveillance devices on some of their informants. Their paid informants have most likely signed a contract with PANT. One rule for their informants is they can’t be on probation because they can’t use drugs. I don’t know if this is illegal or not. It seems unethical at the least and a misappropriation of the funds. While I was in isolation, a girl came to my door (she worked for PANT reporting directly to John Hannah (telephone number removed by editor) and offered $1,300.00 to me for information on the whereabouts of names to find informants that stopped reporting. The statute § 13-4318 was written so that the funds would be used for drug treatment and education or gang prevention. It was not written to direct the funds to support drug use by buying addicts their drugs. (2) I even have suspicion that crimes have been set up to gain $200,000.00 worth of property (see State v. Fritz matter).

I continued to observe major discrepancies in Yavapai County’s judicial procedure and California’s legal procedure. Most are due to each states individualized laws. However, due process is the bare minimum offered by the constitution which included a right to a preliminary hearing, but only two prelim hearings have ever occurred in the Prescott Justice Court. My preliminary hearing was January 14, 2015 at 4:00 pm. I never went and it never actually occurred. The prosecutor will take your case to a Grand Jury hours before the preliminary hearing. I’ve read several Grand Jury transcripts with the permission of the defendant’s. It appears that the Grand Jury consists of the Bailiff, the clerk of the court, and sometimes acquaintances of the officer testifying. This is far from impartial. The foremen changes every time within the same Grand Jury which violates the § 21-412. These are sealed proceedings, so no one would know the difference nor do any of the defendant’s actually read their Grand Jury transcript. Pursuant to Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 12.9, challenges to the transcript can be made 25 days after the proceeding, but the defendant doesn’t receive a copy of the transcript until 30 days after the proceedings. In addition, the jury always deliberates and returns a 12-0 or 16-0 true bill in less than three minutes even when there are ten felony counts to consider. (See Grand Jury No. 184-GJ-179662 also see State v. Remmenga’s 12.9 Motion to Challenge Grand Jury). (3)

After conversations with some of the inmates at Camp Verde Detention Center, I was informed that my inmate trust account was getting $2.00 a day deducted from it for rent. I don’t recall ever authorizing this deduction or acknowledging this charge. I was told that it’s not posted anywhere but its common knowledge. I have not been convicted of a crime yet but am being charged without my consent or authorization for meals. This in in violation of the Arizona Constitution, Article II § 30. The worst part is that upon release you’re given a debit card with your remaining balance on it, but you can’t pull all of the cash off of it. You are forced to make purchases with your card which I suspect PANT monitors. The punch line is that money continues to be deducted from your card.

Yet another illegal tracking of recently released arrestees is to install a GPS on impounded vehicles without the consent of the owner. By the time notice is given to the owner, the GPS tracker has been removed (see State. V Bushee).

My last concern I will address I this letter can only be described as “torture” or “cruel and unusual punishment” by the women who are documented as having some sort of recognized mental illness. Yavapai County prides itself with their zero tolerance for narcotics, even legally prescribed narcotics. The most common substitute for psych medication is a very large dose of benedryll. I witnessed a women start ramming her head against a wall until she was removed. Another women in lock down was allowed to scream “get them off me” for over 14 hours until the deputy officer removed her from her cell bloody from apparently hitting whatever she thought was on her. Two more women tried to explain to me the torture of paranoia, voices, and fear of a psychotic meltdown because they were being denied their narcotic prescribed medication. Even if their doctor sends their medication to the jail, it will be denied. They are told if they are at the jail for over 60 days they will consider to allow them their medication. For some women, it creates a mental torcher chamber within their head. This could be considered negligent of the medical practitioner.

As to the violations or staff misconduct that I personally experienced, I attempted to resolve the multiple issues. I have kept a record of such to the best of my ability.

I’d like to conclude by recapping on the various issues I believe are in violation of state (federal and state), unethical or labeled as misconduct. The statutes in violation are listed also:

  • ILLEGAL SEARCH AND SEIZURE –
    Fourth Amendment of U.S. Constitution; ARS §§ 13-120 13-4315
  • UNREASONABLE SEIZURE OF PROPERTY –
    ARS §§13-3919-21 13-4306 c 13-3919 13-4365 f 13-4306
  • DENIAL OF PRELIMINARY HEARING AND BIASED JURIES –
    Arizona Constitution, Article II § 30; ARS §§ 13-114; Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 5; Title 13 Chapter 21
  • DENIED LEGAL RESEARCH
  • DENIAL PROCEDURAL PROTECTIONS
  • REFUSAL OF PERSCRIBED MEDICATION FOR MENTAL ILL
  • MISHANDLING OF IINMATE TRUST FUNDS
    Arizona Constitution, Article II § 30
  • IMPROPER USE OF ANTIRACKETERRING FUND
    ARS §§ 13-4310 (g); 13-4318
  • PREJUDICIAL LAWS
    Anti-Meth laws and sentencing guidelines. Law prejudices as to a particular type of addict. Holding that type of addict to stricter rules and penalties
  • LACK OF CHECK AND BALANCE SYTEM FOR LAW OFFICALS-
    PANT is getting paid to take property. They are not held accountable for failing to perform their duties prescribed by statute
  • ABUSE OF POWER AND AUTHORITY
    Monitoring spending, GPS tracking, illegal searches, and lack of due process when seizing property, denial of procedural rights, and everything mentioned herein.
  • My legal mail was opened without my presence. The contents of my legal mail was removed from the package and slipped under my door seven days later. In other instances my legal mail was opened and a note was written on it saying that it wasn’t read and the opening of the legal mail was inadvertent. Complaints were made to Sergeant Bolt regarding the mail. Nothing was ever done about it. I had legal mail that disappeared completely send by P. Henning (telephone number removed by editor).

I hope that each allegation is diligently looked into.

Sincerely,
Cheri Remmenga

See Also :

“Croynyism, Nepotism and Favoritism in a Small Town Courthouse,” Bill Williams. Examiner. June 27, 2012.

Panzarella v. Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office; Yavapai County Attorney; Steve Waugh; Superior Court of Yavapai P1300CV201001948

Measuring Illegal and Legal Corruption in American States by Harvard, Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics Corruption in America Survey. Arizona was number one.

See WSJ study on Arizona Corruption

(1) See In the Matter of White 2010 Toyota Yaris; One Thousand Three Hundred Sixteen Dollars in U.S. Currency Cause No P1300CV201401195 – The State illegally seized and forfeited property. Motion to Vacate Judgment is pending.
(2) Paid Informant GS has accepted money for drugs from PANT (telephone numbers deleted by editor); TM accepted money and drugs from PANT
(3) CAUSE nO. p1300CR201500039 – Grand Jury deliberated for four seconds returning a true bill as to two counts. The reading of statutes and counting of votes cannot even occur in four seconds. See 12.9 Motion filed May 18, 2015
Read www.SedonaEye.com for daily news and interactive views!

Read www.SedonaEye.com for daily news and interactive views!

52 Comments

  1. Dylan j says:

    The following is my opinion: My name is dylan jacobs..I thoroughly agree with this article..I. upset on how some people cant agree…this county justice..is straight financial rape ..money is the root of all these issues..u cant Express how badly I was treated by the courts…my appointed lawyer..and especially came verde..I solemy swear I stand for this article’s truth..its all valid…anyone disagree..take a trip and visit our camp verse jail..talk to the inmates..research the statistics. About yavapia courts..there’s slot have blantly clear clear misuse of power ..its disgusting..for example.
    Yavapai..probation violation bond is 15,000 dollars..however Maricopa is 1500 dollars..they make it easy to keep you, hard to get out..and when your out .extremely hard to fight your case..public defenders prosecutors the judges and probation..all work together..to keep this cycle going..its really sad…I’d like to start a group of peopel that agree that there needs to be a change..and try and come together and do so..

  2. Hannibal says:

    I couldn’t agree more with the comments that have been left on here. For I would like to speak with Cheri Remmenga, for there are a lot of the same tones that she went threw that Im going threw.

    I hope that the publisher will pass my info along.

Leave a Reply

Copyright © 2008-2017 · Sedona Eye · All Rights Reserved · Posts · Comments · Facebook · Twitter ·