Rep. Patterson pleads not guilty to domestic violence counts
by Mary Jo Pitzl and Alia Beard Rau - Mar. 9, 2012 12:00 AM
The Republic | azcentral.com
Rep. Daniel Patterson, D-Tucson, pleaded not guilty in Tucson City Court on Thursday to four misdemeanor counts of domestic violence.
His attorney is claiming legislative immunity in hopes of shielding Patterson from prosecution until the Legislature adjourns.
The charges -- domestic-violence assault, domestic-violence disorderly conduct, domestic-violence imprisonment and domestic-violence harrassment -- stem from complaints filed by his former girlfriend and campaign manager and involve incidents that occurred from Feb. 24 to March 5, according to Tucson prosecuting attorney MJ Raciti.
Patterson did not immediately return a call for comment.
His attorney, Joe St. Louis, said Patterson is not dodging prosecution but said the purpose of legislative immunity is to allow an elected official to do his or her job.
"You either have legislative immunity or you don't," he said. "The second you get sworn in as a legislator, you have legislative immunity."
Raciti would not comment on whether her office has determined whether legislative immunity would apply in this case.
St. Louis said he expects the case to collapse given that it turns on accusations made by a woman whom he described as having a life that has "spun out of control."
La Paz County jail officials confirmed that Patterson's accuser was booked into jail Tuesday on two felony drug counts, one involving possession of a dangerous drug and the other involving possession of drug paraphernalia.
St. Louis said her arrest on the drug allegations is evidence that she is not a credible witness in the domestic-violence charges against Patterson.
He predicted that the charges will eventually be dismissed and hinted that Patterson may sue the city for false prosecution once the case ends.
But that may not help Patterson keep his legislative seat.
Patterson faces a possible House ethics investigation. If the investigation moves forward, the House Ethics Committee could ask the full House to consider removing Patterson.
And it likely has the votes. House Democrats already are calling for Patterson's resignation.
Rep. Katie Hobbs, D-Phoenix, filed an ethics complaint on Feb. 27 alleging that Patterson has "engaged in a pattern of conduct that may be considered domestic violence."
Hobbs said the behavior is part of a pattern of inappropriate conduct.
The House Ethics Committee chairman, Rep. Ted Vogt, R-Tucson, said committee rules require lawmakers to give Patterson an opportunity to respond to the allegations in writing.
He said Patterson has not yet responded.
Holy Bundgaard, here we go again
SourceHoly Bundgaard, here we go again
Another legislator -- this time Democratic Rep. Daniel Patterson -- charged with domestic violence.
Naturally, he's claiming immunity and naturally, he's claiming it's all his wacko girlfriend's fault. (Why does this sound familiar?)
But I note that this is the second order of protection in two years against Patterson. First, his wife. Now, his girlfriend. (Why does this also found familiar?)
Virtually all of his Democratic colleagues have said Patterson needs to go. They says he's long been a hothead who picks fights (verbal, I presume) and that he's a huge distraction.
He is, of course, innocent until proven guilty of his four misdemeanor counts of domestic violence.
The quesiton is: should he remain in the Legislature -- making laws for the rest of us to follow?
Or is it too much, to expect our leaders to abide by a higher standard than not-yet-convicted?
Prosecutor: Tucson lawmaker cannot claim immunity
SourceProsecutor: Tucson lawmaker cannot claim immunity
Mar. 9, 2012 10:45 AM
Associated Press
The Tucson city prosecutor's office does not believe state Rep. Daniel Patterson can claim legislative immunity from prosecution on domestic violence charges, an attorney with that agency said Friday.
Prosecutor M.J. Raciti said her office will oppose a move by Patterson's attorney to invoke the immunity provision provided in the state constitution. It generally bars the arrest of lawmakers during legislative sessions.
Patterson, a Democrat from Tucson, was not arrested, but his attorney Joe St. Louis said the case should be put on hold during the session.
Patterson pleaded not guilty Thursday to four misdemeanors stemming from a domestic dispute with his former girlfriend. Patterson has denied wrongdoing against the woman who lived with him and helped with his re-election campaign.
St. Louis said the former girlfriend is not credible, citing her recent arrest on drug charges.
Patterson's fellow Democrats in the House have filed an ethics complaint against him and called for his resignation. A hearing is scheduled next week in the case.
Peoria Republican Scott Bundgaard resigned from the Arizona Senate in January, just before he was to testify in a Senate ethics hearing on whether he should be punished in connection with a fight involving a girlfriend last year.
Bundgaard previously pleaded no contest to a misdemeanor endangerment charge under a plea agreement that included dismissal of a misdemeanor assault charge. He denied invoking the immunity provision, but police officers testified that he did.
These are the creeps who think they know how to run our lives????
SourceEthics panel should make quick work of Patterson
Holy Bundgaard, here we go again.
Nine weeks into the legislative session and already one lawmaker (Scott Bundgaard) has resigned after fighting with his girlfriend on the freeway and another (Richard Miranda) has resigned to “spend time with his family”.
But first, Miranda will spend some time in federal court on Wednesday, answering criminal charges of wire fraud and attempted tax evasion.
Now comes the state Capitol’s latest poster child for high standards of decency and moral conduct: Rep. Daniel Patterson.
The Tucson Democrat is due in court Thursday on charges that he assaulted his now-ex girlfriend. (Does that sound familiar?)
He claims he didn’t do it, that he’s the victim. (Ditto on the familiarity thing.)
And even if he did, he says he’s got the ultimate trump card: legislative immunity. (Um, yeah.)
The House Ethics Committee,at the request of House Democrats, convenes Tuesday to figure out what to do with their colleague, who appears to have a habit of making women fear for their lives. So much so that every one of his fellow Democrats, other than the two who serve on the ethics committee, has called for his resignation. So has the executive director of the state Democratic Party.
Patterson isn’t budging and he isn’t talking – to me at least.
The self-described “family man from south downtown Tucson” has long been a hothead and bully, according to his colleagues. Before joining the Legislature in 2009, court records indicate he was hauled before a judge at least three times between 1995 and 2004, collecting misdemeanor convictions for criminal trespassing, disorderly conduct and false reporting to law enforcement. (I believe it’s known as lying.)
He also has a charming personal life, having taken up with his campaign manager, Georgette Escobar, in 2009, as his then-wife was undergoing a double mastectomy.
The wife, Jeneiene Schaffer, called Tucson police in 2006, telling them that Patterson had assaulted her in the past and now was threatening her in front of their then-four- year-old daughter.
She obtained an order of protection in August 2010, saying she was afraid to serve him with divorce papers given his temper and his arsenal of weapons. Schaffer, recovering from cancer at the time, wrote in her petition that he had yelled at her several times in front of their daughter, screaming that he hoped she would die. She said she feared for her and her daughter’s safety.
“He threatens to throw me out of the house every week,” she wrote. “I am very scared for my life.” Court records indicate he refused service of the protective order before the Democratic primary that year, when he was running for re-election as a “family man.” No charges were ever brought.
Fast forward to Feb. 24, when Escobar, his campaign-manager/girlfriend, sought her own order of protection, claiming that Patterson had threatened to kill her in the past. She told reporters that Patterson that day had yanked her and her dog out of a vehicle as they were trying to leave, then threw her to the ground, bending back her fingers.
Patterson immediately labeled her the attacker. He then hired a private investigator to dig up dirt on Escobar. Turns out she has a criminal history involving drugs, domestic violence and theft and was disbarred in California.
Last week, she was charged with misdemeanor drug possession in La Paz County.
He, meanwhile, is facing four domestic violence charges in Tucson and a political firestorm that will only grow if his colleagues don’t get rid of him.
“The biggest problem right now is this is not serving the public well,” said House Minority Leader Chad Campbell, who was the first to call for Patterson's resignation. “This is a distraction from everybody’s time and energy.”
A distraction?
How about an embarrassment, an outrage, a disgrace?
Either this guy’s the world’s most misunderstood man – with not one but two woman seeking protection and his entire caucus seeking his resignation – or he’s a total jerk.
Patterson will, of course, have his day in court. He is innocent until proven guilty of assault. Of disorderly conduct. Of false imprisonment. Of harassment.
But it’s galling to think of this character casting even one more vote in the Arizona Legislature, making laws for the rest of us to follow.
Or is it asking too much, to expect our leaders to abide by a higher standard than not-yet convicted?
Rep. Daniel Patterson's ex recants abuse claim but charges remain
Source
Rep. Daniel Patterson's ex recants abuse claim but charges remain
The Rep. Daniel Patterson sideshow reconvenes at the Capitol this week, as the Tucson Democrat put out word Monday that he’s been cleared of accusations that he assaulted his former girlfriend.
Georgette Escobar recanted in a Facebook post on Sunday – just one day before she was due in court to be arraigned on drug charges stemming from an arrest she has claimed was orchestrated by Patterson.
“I always said truth would prevail,” Patterson wrote on Facebook, in response to Escobar’s retraction. “This personal matter is tough on us & our families. Time to heal.”
Time, actually, to get to the bottom of what the heck is going on here.
The House Ethics Committee meets Wednesday to hear results of its investigation in Patterson. His ex wife has filed a new order of protection against him, telling me that she’s afraid for their 9-year-old daughter.
Meanwhile, Tucson City Attorney Baird Greene says he has no plans to drop the charges and Senate Minority Leader Chad Campbell is sticking by his call for Patterson to resign.
“The fact that we are talking about this six or seven weeks later just underscores the fact that this has been a distraction for six or seven weeks,” he said.
Patterson’s private life hit public view in February after Escobar, his girlfriend/campaign manager, filed an order of protection, claiming he assaulted her after locking her out of the house. A Tucson police report quotes witnesses as saying they saw Patterson “backhand” Escobar but no one was arrested.
Patterson, who now faces four misdemeanor domestic-violence charges, has said he did nothing wrong – that in fact he was the one who called police because she was the aggressor. Escobar, he says, has mental issues and a criminal history involving drugs, theft and domestic violence.
Two weeks after the Feb. 24 altercation, Escobar was arrested in Quartzsite and charged with possession of methamphetamine. Because she was in jail, she was unable to attend a Tucson hearing on her restraining order, which was quashed.
On Sunday night, she suddenly recanted. “Daniel Patterson never hit or committed domestic violence against me. I never needed an order of protection against him. I’m sorry,” she wrote. “I disagree with the ethics complaint, investigation and charges against him. He should be found innocent.”
Escobar didn’t return calls on Monday.
If you’re wondering what’s going on here, you’re not alone. While some women do lie about abuse, people who work with domestic violence victims tell me they often recant.
Rep. Katie Hobbs, D-Phoenix, who has long worked with Sojourner Center, says she has no plans to withdraw her ethics complaint against Patterson. The complaint, she says, was based upon a pattern of behavior, including verbal altercations at the Capitol that have fallen just short of blows.
“I believe she was abused. I’ve talked to her on the phone,” Hobbs said, of Escobar. “I’ve heard her stories and I’ve also interacted with Daniel on many occasions and witnessed his behavior. I don’t think that two women in a row would lie about him being abusive.”
Patterson’s ex-wife, Jeneiene Schaffer says she recently filed a new order of protection because she’s afraid for her daughter’s safety. Schaffer says Patterson begin abusing her when she was eight months pregnant.
“He hit me twice a week and 80 percent of that time it was in front of (our daughter),” she said. “Not only did he hit me, he did exactly the same thing he did to Georgette. Her would push me out the door, push me out the gate and I would have (our daughter) with me.”
Patterson is adamant that both women lied. He calls Schaffer’s allegations “old news” and says she’s now using the court system to keep his daughter from him. He questions those witness statements that he backhanded Escobar and suspects the criminal charges may be some sort of political payback from the city of Tucson.
In short, he believes that everybody has been unfair and everybody needs to back off now that Escobar has recanted -- letting the story play out in court and letting him get back to his job, making laws for the rest of us to follow.
“I am duly elected and lawfully seated so Laurie, it’s not up to you to decide whether it’s appropriate for me to sit in the Legislature or not,” he said. “No disrespect, it‘s not up to you, it’s not up to Katie Hobbs, it’s not up to anybody in the Legislature. It’s up to my voters.”
Expulsion vote possible for Rep. Patterson
Source
Expulsion vote possible for Rep. Patterson
Patterson denies claim in special counsel's report
by Alia Beard Rau and Mary Jo Pitzl - Apr. 2, 2012 10:49 PM
The Republic | azcentral.com
The state Legislature could consider removing Tucson Rep. Daniel Patterson from his seat as soon as today after an ethics-inquiry report alleged wide-ranging misconduct and recommended his expulsion.
A House Democratic leader said he would either call for a vote today to remove Patterson or seek to severely restrict the lawmaker's access to the Capitol pending a later vote.
Should the vote pass, Patterson, who was elected as a Democrat and changed his party affiliation to independent on Monday, would become the first sitting lawmaker to be expelled in more than 20 years.
A 33-page report released Monday by independent attorneys appointed to investigate Patterson included allegations that he offered to trade a lobbyist sex for a vote, used marijuana, verbally abused staff and other lawmakers, and physically abused his ex-girlfriend. Some of the allegations are unattributed and contain scant detail.
Patterson, who has repeatedly rejected calls to step down, denied the claims of domestic violence and called the sex-for-vote allegation an "outrageous lie." In other cases, he said, his actions had been misconstrued or the inquiry had simply become a political "fishing expedition."
The ethics complaint stemmed from allegations of abuse by an ex-girlfriend who was also his campaign manager. Aside from the ethics inquiry, those allegations also led to several misdemeanor domestic-violence charges, which are pending in a Tucson court.
Rep. Katie Hobbs, D-Phoenix, and 15 other House Democrats requested a House Ethics Committee investigation into Patterson's "behavior of conduct that may be considered domestic violence," as well actions that may be deemed as unbecoming of a state lawmaker or violating the public trust. The committee turned the task over to independent attorneys.
For weeks, Patterson's ex-girlfriend told media, law enforcement and attorneys that Patterson verbally and physically abused her and that she was afraid of him.
A day after making such a statement, a message was posted on a Facebook account in her name recanting her allegations. She has not returned calls from The Arizona Republic seeking confirmation that she wrote the message.
Patterson said the allegations have no merit, particularly after the Facebook post. He said there was no domestic violence against either the ex-girlfriend or his ex-wife. He called the report released by Stinson Morrison Hecker attorneys Michael Manning, Craig Morgan, Sharon Ng and Danelle Kelling "a fishing expedition."
"This is a political process ... a fishing expedition that goes way outside anything in the complaint," Patterson said. "The allegations in the complaint are moot. The complaint is not valid."
He said the attorneys went far beyond their permitted scope in the report. He has said they should have only been permitted to investigate the domestic-violence allegations.
But the attorneys in their report said they had the ability to investigate beyond the domestic-violence allegations.
"We have been asked to investigate and report whether Rep. Patterson has engaged in a pattern of inappropriate, indecorous, illegal or unethical conduct," the report states.
They said their investigation included reviewing public records and interviewing lawmakers, staff, lobbyists, members of the public and Patterson.
"Over 80percent of the (legislative) members, legislative staff, lobbyists and others we interviewed believe that Rep. Patterson is a serious discredit and threat to the House, its members, the legislative process, his party and his constituents," the report states.
Patterson said the allegation that he offered to trade a lobbyist sex for his vote, contained in a single, unattributed paragraph in the body of the report, is an "outrageous lie." When asked about allegations of marijuana use, he said that he hadn't read that part of the report and that allegation was not part of the original complaint.
The attorneys were critical of Patterson's behavior, saying he "routinely challenges but then ignores admonishment ... often retaliating through verbal abuse and, on one occasion, has either feigned or actually threatened to physically assault those that did not agree with him."
While it is not uncommon for a lawmaker to get emotional and opinionated about a bill or an issue, there are strict rules about treating lawmakers respectfully and not making an issue personal.
Some lawmakers interviewed by investigators are named in the report, describing confrontations with Patterson, and some events were documented during public hearings.
In 2010, Patterson impugned former Sen. Russell Pearce during a public committee hearing by criticizing Pearce personally.
During a closed-door House Democratic Caucus meeting that year, in which domestic-violence allegations surfaced, Patterson became angry and screamed at Rep. Lynne Pancrazi.
According to Pancrazi and Hobbs, Rep. Steve Farley attempted to interject, and Patterson pushed Farley away and continued his tirade, the report said.
Pancrazi told investigators that she avoids Patterson, fears for her safety since the ethics complaint has been filed and "has made a habit of keeping a weapon near when (she) sleeps."
The report described a House policy that no legislative staff members are allowed to meet with Patterson alone. House staffers confirmed that policy to The Republic on Monday.
Patterson said allegations that he is verbally abusive and harassing toward lawmakers and staff are misconstrued.
"I don't ever mean to offend anybody at the Capitol. But I think there's some people there that really have a hard time when somebody takes a strong independent stand," he said. "A lot of Democrats quietly sit there while constituents' interests are undermined."
Patterson said his job at the Legislature is not to appease fellow lawmakers, but to fight for his constituents.
The report covers allegations related to the domestic-violence claims, including a Tucson police report from February .
In it, a witness tells police that he saw Patterson "backhand" his ex-girlfriend hard enough to "knock the female to the ground."
House Minority Leader Chad Campbell, D-Phoenix, said that if leaders did not seek an immediate vote on Patterson's removal, they could ask to restrict his access, only allowing Patterson to enter the House with a security escort so he can vote.
"People are afraid for their lives down there," Campbell said.
If lawmakers balk at an expulsion vote, the House Ethics Committee will proceed.
Chairman Ted Vogt, R-Tucson, said he gave Patterson an April 16 deadline to respond to the investigative report.
"The sooner the better," Vogt said. "I want it in writing."
Rep. Patterson resigns after panel recommends expulsion
SourceRep. Daniel Patterson resigns from Arizona House
Hands resignation letter to House Speaker Andy Tobin
by Alia Beard Rau - Apr. 11, 2012 01:10 AM
The Republic | azcentral.com
State Rep. Daniel Patterson, a Tucson independent, has resigned his seat in the House.
Patterson gave his resignation letter to House Speaker Andy Tobin, R-Paulden, who accepted the resignation.
"Effective immediately I have accepted the resignation of Daniel Patterson," Tobin said.
The decision comes shortly after the House Ethics Committee recommended the full House remove Patterson from office. The full House was expected to vote on expulsion this afternoon.
Patterson had tweeted earlier in the day that the "fix was in."
The bipartisan committee had made the recommendation after they questioned Patterson for two hours. The ethics allegations included intimidating other lawmakers, angry outbursts and domestic violence.
Patterson has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing. He left the committee hearing before the unanimous vote was cast and without making any final comments.
During the questioning, Patterson admitted he has made mistakes that he regrets but said they did not merit removal from the House. It's not clear why he later made the decision to resign.
"Nothing I have done warrants my resignation or removal from the House," he said, adding that he already has suffered a loss of his office, legislative assistant and reputation. "Certainly there are some things that have happened at the House where if I could do it over, I would handle things differently."
Patterson criticized the investigative report an independent team of attorneys produced. The report included numerous allegations made by anonymous staff members and lobbyists. He said in addition to including unverified allegations, it went far beyond the scope of the original ethics complaint.
Patterson also repeatedly asked for a full hearing in which he could question those who made allegations against him.
"I should have a full opportunity to talk with these people directly," he said.
Committee members agreed that some of the allegations were unverified. But they said there was enough concern just based on the complaints from named lawmakers.
"Even if we strip away what is anonymous sourcing ... there is still a core of members, duly elected members that signed declarations that show a disturbing pattern of behavior," Rep. Ted Vogt, R-Tucson, the committee chairman, said. "There is a fundamental gap between how you perceive yourself and your actions and how others perceive you and your actions."
Rep. Debbie McCune Davis, D-Phoenix, said she also was concerned about the pattern of behavior. She mentioned a witness that reported to police seeing Patterson "backhand" his ex-girlfriend during an altercation in Tucson.
Patterson responded by saying that his ex-girlfriend has recanted her allegations of domestic violence. Patterson still faces four counts of misdemeanor domestic violence. He said the incident the witness describes never happened. He said he believes they will be dismissed.
He also said he believes the Tucson city attorney violated the state Constitution by charging Patterson during the legislative session. Patterson said he has never claimed legislative immunity, but he has never waived it either.
Patterson said the ethics committee should wait until the criminal allegations are resolved before pursuing the ethics complaint. The committee disagreed.
Rep. Eddie Farnsworth, R-Gilbert, said this was not a court of law, but a political body dealing with a political issue.
"I don't disagree with you that there is a significant part of this report that for me personally is not really persuasive. It's hearsay, innuendo and conjecture," he said. "The pieces I focused on primarily where the declarations of the members. There seems to be a tremendous amount of corroboration for the statements made by those members."
He also said he witnessed Patterson violating House rules on several occasions. Farnsworth mentioned instances where Patterson walked off the House floor during a House vote, continued speaking past his allotted time despite being told to stop and impugning individual members on the floor, all of which would violate rules.
Farnsworth asked Patterson to give him a yes or no answer as to whether Patterson agreed with complaints made by other lawmakers.
"This is a continued and repeated pattern over time, which is the very heart and crux of the problem," Farnsworth said.
Patterson hedged his answer.
"I have tried to admit my mistakes and say I'm sorry when I've made mistakes," he said. "Some of the things in the declarations raise legitimate issues. But some of the declarations I simply disagree with the way they are described."
Patterson said he's never been "convicted" of impugning anyone on the floor and has never intentionally violated House rules.
"I'm working hard at toning down my rhetoric," he said.
Patterson denied statements made by House Minority Leader Chad Campbell, D-Phoenix, that Democratic leadership had spoken to him about his behavior on some occasions. Patterson was a Democrat before changing to an independent earlier this month.
Patterson said the ethics complaint and the resulting proceedings are partly due to a political witch hunt. He said Democrats want a Latino in Patterson's seat.
"Politics clearly plays a role in what's going on," he said.
Vogt asked Patterson what percentage of what was happening was brought about by Patterson's behavior.
"Some of it," Patterson said.
Patterson said he may consider suing Arizona to keep his seat.
"All possibilities are on the table," he said. "To be expelled would put voters choices in jeopardy."
Wednesday afternoon, Campbell, a Democrat from Phoenix, had this to say about Patterson's resignation: "Now it's time to get back to the work of the people."
Patterson sets stage to sue the state
Source
Patterson sets stage to sue the state
Rep. Daniel Patterson resigned this afternoon, setting himself up to sue the state.
"Hostile work environment,” you know.
Folks, I don’t make this stuff up.
“I have been forced to resign due to the fact that the House has become a very hostile work environment for me," he wrote, in his letter of resignation. "Due to this I am no longer able to serve my constituents in the way they deserve.”
Actually, he wasn’t forced to resign. Had he just waited an hour or two, he would have been expelled by what I suspect would have been a near unanimous vote of his colleagues.
Predictably, Patterson repeated the same things in his resignation letter that he has said all along:
He’s the victim.
Of racist Democrats, of “plundering” Republicans, of Rep. Katie Hobbs and virtually all of his Democratic colleagues who signed the ethics complaint against him, of his ex-wife and ex-girlfriend, of police and prosecutors, of the state and, of course, of the media.
We are all to blame for the giant conspiracy that lost him his seat in the House.
If that wasn’t clear before, it became crystal clear this morning when the House Ethics Committee wisely gave Patterson the chance to present his defense. As expected the guy hung himself.
The Ethics Committee took about three seconds to recommend expulsion, noting a pattern of "distrubing" behavior outlined by 14 of his colleagues, along with an eyewitness report that he "backhanded" his girlfriend during a February fight, knocking her to the ground.
All five committee members asked thoughtful questions that exposed Patterson as someone who deflects blame and refuses to accept responsibility. And the fact that he seemed genuinely mystified by why his conduct merited expulsion? Really, that said it all.
If anybody can demonstrate hostile work environment, I would think it would have been his now-ex colleagues.