Sheriff Joe is sueing for slander : AZ IMC

Arpaio wants to sue because newspaper just won't play nice

Although the U.S. Constitution clearly states that Congress shall make no law abridging press freedom, it is silent on whether a sheriff can intimidate a newspaper in the name of decency.

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio wants to find out. His government-paid attorney drafted a letter to the West Valley View newspaper threatening legal action over an undignified headline.

The harsh headline read: "Sheriff as dangerous as a child predator."

"It was meant to be harsh," said Jim Painter, the managing editor, "but it was not libelous."

The headline ran with an opinion column that said Arpaio was endangering the Avondale community by not telling the paper about a pair of attempted kidnappings.

For more than a year, Arpaio has feuded with the paper, complaining about unflattering or incomplete coverage.

Arpaio restricted the West Valley View's access to press releases, making reporters schedule times to view them in his downtown Phoenix office rather than simply sending them by e-mail as he does with just about every other media outlet in Arizona. Nearly constantly.

The newspaper took the case to court, and a Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled that Arpaio needed to send press releases to the newspaper. The judge couldn't make Arpaio e-mail the releases but said Arpaio's refusal to do so was unprofessional and "petty."

A Maricopa County Sheriff's Office spokesman said the news releases on the attempted abductions were at headquarters for all to look at. But the West Valley View's news editor wrote a column criticizing the sheriff for not alerting the newspaper to the incidents. The paper slapped the provocative headline on it and ran it on the Oct. 3 Opinions page

Arpaio then put his county-appointed attorney, Dennis Wilenchik, to work. Wilenchik, according to his contract, charges taxpayers $185 an hour.

The trouble is that there isn't anything legally wrong with the column or headline. Under the case law that defines libel, an elected official can be criticized. Opinions are protected speech. What a country.

Wilenchik's stern Oct. 24 letter asked the paper to retract the child-predator comparison and "publish the truth" about Arpaio's efforts to protect children.

But sprinkled in amidst the legal language was a new tactic. Wilenchik appealed to the newspaper's manners.

"Have you no decency at all?" the letter asked the newspaper's editors.

Wilenchik, in a phone interview, said it troubles him that political disagreements these days devolve quickly into personal attacks. "I was writing them the letter trying to bring (the newspaper) into some folds of decency," he said.

Asked to elaborate, Wilenchik said he misspoke.

"I didn't file it to make them more decent," he said. "I filed to let them know that there are bounds of decency."

Wilenchik called the headline "dangerous" because it attacked Arpaio personally.

"That's why you have to stop that malicious, dangerous behavior," he said.

Wilenchik, who said he hasn't decided whether to bill the county for his time, said Arpaio has not yet decided whether to sue the West Valley View.

But should the sheriff sue, he would be standing up for the rights of elected officials to demand civil and polite discourse through force and intimidation.

Just as the Founding Fathers envisioned.