Can you say "Structured?"

Staffers of Arizona Representatives and Senators: You can click here to skip directly to the preamble and complaint.

Some of you have been asking, through your anonymous comments to me, how I'm so sure that Judge Hinson falsified his affidavits, falsely certifying he had no matters pending beyond the Arizona Constitution's 60-day requirement. "Couldn't he," some of you ask, "simply been ignorant or made a mistake?"

No.

Aside from the fact he made ten "mistakes," it's all about "structuring." Since it's Tax Day, let me explain with an example from the IRS.

I assume you know your bank reports you to the IRS any time you deposit $10,000 or more. The IRS defines structuring as "any effort to avoid reporting cash or other monetary transactions over $10,000 by breaking them down into smaller 'related' transactions over any 12-month period."

We can argue the merits of the IRS' policy another day, but for now, if you were depositing $9999 dollars once a month for a year, the IRS concludes you are trying to avoid being seen, since it seems too coincidental that you would consistently make deposits that are one dollar under the $10,000 reporting trigger. And they might investigate you for money laundering.

You can see their logic, right?

In the same way, Judge Hinson structured his overdue rulings so not to be seen. This is clear from Exhibit 1, a graphic of Judge Hinson's 60-day Rule violations at a glance, below.

Now, if Judge Hinson was simply ignorant of the Constitution's 60-day ruling requirement—hard to believe, since the Cert form quotes the law. Nor is ignorance of the law an excuse—or if he truly didn't know when his cases had gone beyond 60-days—sadly, he can always blame his staff for not telling him. But can't a Superior court judge keep a calendar?—then we wouldn't expect a pattern in his falsified certifications. If he didn't know what was going on, he would be making false certifications consistently (or perhaps randomly) over the past two and a half years.



But that's not what we have here. There IS a pattern to Judge Hinson's affidavits. The pattern is, whenever it was time for the clerk's quarterly audit, Judge Hinson always closed out his overdue matters in the nick of time! In other words, when he knew someone would be watching, his affidavits were true. When he thought no one would be watching, that's when his affidavits were false.

See for yourself in Exhibit 1. You'll not find any X's (Violations) on the dates of the Clerk's Quarterly Report. Violations occur when Judge Hinson thought no one was looking.

And don't forget, Judge Hinson had Motive. The motive was money. Judge Hinson falsified his affidavits so he could get paid, per Arizona law. A prosecutor would use motive, along with pattern, to show willfulness.

This is how I know Judge Hinson falsified his affidavits. This is how you can know it too.

Now that you see it, the next question is, WILL a prosecutor use motive, along with pattern, to show willfulness in a prosecution of Judge Hinson? When he lied to collect his salary, didn't he defraud you and the State?

Or will there be two types of justice in Yavapai county and Arizona?

"Asked and answered," as lawyers say.

---