More dishonesty, of the Esquivelian kind.

APS School Board President Marty Esquivel, by and through his lawyers, has told a federal court that he "... is entitled to summary judgement (sic) on Plaintiff's claims as they relate to ... the August 25, 2010 Audit Committee Meeting based on a lack of personal participation. (emphasis added)

In his sworn testimony, Esquivel says he said "(Get) Out. Please get out."  I don't believe he actually said "please" for whatever that's worth. He indicated he had to "reiterate" that I needed to leave.  That sounds like "participation" to me.

 "Get out.  Please get out."

In this photograph, Esquivel is pointing his finger at me in what I would describe at a threatening manner; far more threatening a gesture than I have ever made toward any of them.  Note; his personal space has not been invaded, and if the distance between us had closed, it was by his deliberate action and not mine.

Speaking of threatening, do any of these people look afraid for their safety?

I was necessarily where I was, to photograph a public servant within his public service; it's the only reason why this record exists; of Esquivel documenting the unlawful ejection.

According to his sworn testimony

"... I pulled out my video phone, and really wanted to capture what was going on.  And I didn't capture everything but I think I got enough, because I knew things were headed downhill pretty fast. And I really wanted to document the misconduct, document the disruption in case I needed to really do it someday.  And I'm really glad I did."

Esquivel claims a degree in Journalism.  Who taught him to turn his camera off as soon as "things started heading downhill pretty fast."?  Isn't that the moment most of all, when his camera should be turned on?

In his deposition, Defendant Esquivel testifies in great length and detail about our alleged misconduct before the Audit Committee began.  Nowhere in his deposition does he mention that he wasn't even there - it's all hearsay.  He didn't even get to the meeting until after they had already adjourned the regular meeting and then moved into executive session.

If Esquivel found out what supposedly happened before he got there, he found out about it in a discussion that took place outside of the open meeting; in violation of the Open Meeting Act.

He learned it during a discussion of whether to eject Mark Bralley and I from the meeting; a discussion and vote that took place in violation of the Open Meetings Act.

A violation they later denied under oath when they approved a claim that nothing other than the agenda had been discussed and acted upon during the closed session.

I'm sure they will argue this is all "legal".

I'm just as sure I will never understand how it possibly could be.




wide shot Mark Bralley
the other is mine