In response to a special motion seeking to dismiss dozens of protest cases, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office denies that its prosecution of pro-Palestine demonstrators arrested is politically motivated.
MCAO prosecutors claim their charges against 68 protesters arrested on ASU’s campus in April 2024 were justified and fair.
“Defense counsel has filed a motion falsely alleging that the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office prosecution is ‘politically motivated,’” MCAO wrote in in a court-filed response. “Neither law enforcement or MCAO was ‘substantially motivated’ by a desire to deter speech by arresting individuals and prosecuting this case.”
RELATED: MCAO accused of once again politically prosecuting protester
Prosecutors are hoping to avoid an evidentiary hearing that would require MCAO officials to testify about the foundation of genesis of the criminal cases.
During a recent hearing, Justice of the Peace Tyler Kissel, who’s overseeing the protest cases, indicated that he’s likely to hold a hearing, which defense attorney argue is required under the state’s Anti-SLAPP Law.
Last month, defense attorneys for the protesters filed an Anti-SLAPP motion, which seeks to dismiss the cases.
The defense motion alleged the cases against the ASU protesters are intended to punish them for their political views and are designed to deter future protests.
ABC15 is committed to finding the answers you need and holding those accountable.
Submit your news tip to Investigators@abc15.com
One of the defense attorneys, Steve Benedetto, said last month the case feels similar to a past scandal involving MCAO prosecutors, who worked with police to invent a gang and falsely charge protesters as members.
“I will say, based on the body cams, based on my knowledge of what happened in 2020, it certainly is starting to look that way,” Benedetto said in an interview with ABC15. “We got the involvement of the top levels of the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office guiding and interacting with the ASU Police Department before any arrests have even happened, which shadows what we saw in 2020, and ultimately led to a very large settlement against the county.”
None of the 68 cases have been resolved yet.
Defense attorneys said that’s because MCAO is refusing to offer any plea deals to the class 3 misdemeanors, which are the lowest level in Arizona’s judicial system, just above a civil traffic ticket.
“MCAO loves to push through with plea bargains. They want to resolve every case quickly and efficiently through plea bargaining,” said Jared Keenan, an attorney with ACLU Arizona. “It just doesn’t really make sense unless you acknowledge the fact that MCAO is once again is targeting people for their First Amendment activity.”
Contact ABC15 Chief Investigator Dave Biscobing at Dave@ABC15.com.
