Thread: Az-Saban denied new trial in suit vs. Arpaio

Saban denied new trial in suit vs. Arpaio
Sheriff's foe vows to appeal ruling in defamation case
JJ Hensley
The Arizona Republic
Jul. 9, 2008 12:00 AM

When word came down Tuesday that Dan Saban would continue his quest to have Maricopa County Sheriff's officials held responsible for what he said was defamation during the 2004 election, few were surprised.

Saban, again a candidate against Sheriff Joe Arpaio in this fall's election, has vowed to continue waging his battle through the courts until his name is cleared, despite a court ruling Tuesday denying him a new trial.

But Saban's legal quest to prove sheriff's officials defamed him when they tipped the media and opened an investigation into allegations that he raped his adoptive mother in the 1970s means the sordid story will continue to mar another election.In his defense, Saban testified that his adoptive mother, Ruby Norman, molested him as a teenager. advertisement




"That's an interesting question: When does ones pursuit for justice become too inconvenient to actually pursue?" said Saban's attorney, Joel Robbins. "Dan early on in the case recognized that this would be difficult."

Both Arpaio and Saban supporters have accused the other side of using the case for political gain, but as the case continues to move forward - Saban's attorney has vowed to appeal - Arpaio could benefit more from his opponent's tenacity than Saban ever could from proving sheriff's officials intentionally made defamatory statements, observers say.

"I think there's two completely different perspectives: From a standpoint of electoral politics, it's probably just as well to let it drop, 'cause, wow, that's heavy stuff," said Michael O'Neil, founder of O'Neil Associates, a Tempe public-opinion research firm. "I suspect this goes a lot deeper than politics.

"You can have a human being who is injured by what they feel are completely false accusations and they're angry. My guess is that it's not smart practical politics that's running this."

Saban filed suit after Channel 15 (KNXV) ran a story in April 2004 in which Norman alleged that Saban raped her 30 years earlier. The investigation was ultimately transferred to the Pima County Sheriff's Department in Tucson. That agency closed the case, saying it was too old to pursue.

Saban claimed that Arpaio's chief deputy, Dave Hendershott, leaked the story to a TV reporter to discredit him as he challenged the sheriff's re-election bid.

The crux of Saban's request for a new trial hinged on an assertion that the judge had given jurors improper instructions at the end of the first trial, which ended in September with a victory for Arpaio.

But Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Robert C. Houser, in a ruling released Tuesday, denied Saban's motion for a new trial.

That trial and associated proceedings have cost an estimated $500,000 in legal fees, according to the Sheriff's Office.

Saban is to pay costs associated with the case other than legal fees, according to Tuesday's ruling, which should total about $34,000.

Sheriff's officials, however, are vowing to pursue a legal remedy that would leave Saban, and not taxpayers, on the hook for the office's attorney fees.

"The claim of innocence is really incredible, especially from a guy who would file such a frivolous lawsuit," said Deputy Chief Jack MacIntyre. "We gave him a chance four years ago to walk away and wouldn't do it. I think it's about a half a million dollars in taxpayer money going down the toilet."

Robbins counters that sheriff's officials are the ones who have wasted taxpayer dollars to smear a political opponent.

"That's the trouble about defamation," Robbins said. "The rumors never go away, false or true."

And that might be Saban's biggest problem as he weighs the potential benefit of clearing his name against the cost of continuing with the high-profile case, said Kelly McDonald, an Arizona State University political-science professor.

"The question for Saban, fundamentally, is: Will there be traction that the Sheriff's Office is somehow culpable for political dirty tricks in leaking the details? . . . The negative stuff always tends to be remembered more," McDonald said.

"I don't think many people ruminate over the water cooler what Dan Saban's professional resume is. But they do have some knowledge that he was accused of improper relations of a sexual nature with a family member."
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepubli ... o0709.html

Awww Dang it Dan . Does this mean your good buddy Gordon can't help you pay the legal fee's ? Why ? Your his hit man