The Arizona State Bar has been ordered to further investigate after attorneys for murder convict Jodi Arias made new allegations as they appealed the State Bar’s dismissal of an ethics complaint against Arias prosecutor Juan Martinez.
In January, the Bar rejected allegations that Martinez violated the code of ethical conduct by having a sexual relationship with two female bloggers covering the Arias trial and contacting a dismissed female juror while the trial was going on.
The complaint was dismissed despite Martinez’s admission that he contacted the juror and his statement that he could neither confirm nor deny whether he had a sexual relationship with two trial bloggers.
In a more than 400-page filing this week with an Arizona Supreme Court committee reviewing the dismissal, ethics attorney Karen Clark argues that the Bar misapplied ethical rules, disregarded key evidence, and failed to contact key witnesses.
The Attorney Discipline Probable Cause Committee, a nine-member panel of citizens and attorneys, meets monthly behind closed doors to review State Bar disciplinary actions.
The State Bar announced Friday that the committee would vacate the previous order of dismissal and order the Bar to conduct further investigation into the matter. Once further investigation is conducted, the case will be resubmitted to the committee for a decision.
Martinez’s ethics attorney, Scott Rhodes, did not respond to a request for comment.
In a letter to the State Bar and the review committee, he urges the committee to ignore the letter as an “improper attempt to influence your judgment through the presentation of opinions and new allegations that were not part of the original Bar charge.”
“There can be no doubt that the (Clark letter) was intended to exert improper influence and sway your decision.”
Arias is serving a life sentence in the brutal 2008 murder of ex-boyfriend Travis Alexander at his suburban Phoenix home
Clark’s letter includes expert opinions on Martinez’s conduct from death-penalty attorneys, as well as new information that appears to corroborate allegations about Martinez’s sexual relationships with two trial bloggers and improper contacts with a juror.
In both instances, Clark argues, Martinez was both sharing and seeking information that could give him an edge in persuading jurors to impose a death sentence on Arias. Martinez ultimately failed to obtain a death sentence.
“His actions as described in the Bar complaint, if true, are unprecedented,” wrote
Phoenix attorney Larry Hammond, who has almost 40 years of experience in death penalty cases.
“The judge presiding over the trial had clearly expressed concern about the extensive publicity surrounding this very high profile trial. Indeed, she had taken steps to prevent members of the press and media from sending out electronic messages during courtroom proceedings - a restriction which itself engendered opposition from the press.”
“Yet, at the same time, Martinez was providing, in private, the same types of information that the court was trying to moderate.”
“It may be overstating the obvious to observe that had there been nothing improper about his communications there would have been no reason to proceed in a clandestine way.”
Amy Armstrong, an attorney with the Arizona Capital Representation Project, wrote that Martinez’s alleged misconduct may have violated Arias’ constitutional rights.
“Martinez's pursuit of the death sentence against Ms. Arias at almost any cost … violates the public faith in the prosecution's duty to ‘seek justice, not merely convict,” Armstrong writes.
“Any competent post-conviction attorney would aggressively investigate whether Martinez's behavior violated Ms. Arias's constitutional rights."
Ethics attorney Karen Clark provided new information from the dismissed juror, who alleges she sent a nude selfie to Martinez and they engaged in sexual banter while the trial was going on. The dismissed juror also alleges Martinez sought information on how the remaining jurors viewed the case, according to Clark’s letter.
In dismissing the initial Arias complaint, filed one year ago, the State Bar concluded that there was no evidence Martinez shared confidential information with the two bloggers, and that it didn't know what was said between Martinez and the dismissed juror.
The new allegations in Clark’s filing go beyond ethical issues raised in the initial complaint against Martinez:
-Clark alleges that Martinez is a “serial sexual harasser of women.” Clark writes that she was contacted by a female member of the court staff who alleged she was sexually harassed at work by Martinez. The woman can provide the names of several other current or former Maricopa County employees who were sexually harassed, according to Clark.
-Clark’s filing includes a statement from a woman who worked for adult probation services in the courts. She described an episode in 2005 when Martinez invited her into a courtroom after a trial had adjourned for the day, opened a box containing clothing worn by a murder victim, and forced her to smell the clothing by pushing her face into it.
Martinez’s attorney dismissed the new Arias filing as criminal defense lawyers “calling for mob justice” against Martinez.
“A convicted murderer has succeeded in co-opting lawyers, almost none of whom had anything to do with her case, into joining into a chant that her prosecutor is unethical,” Rhodes wrote.
The Arias filing includes supporting letters from six private attorneys. One of them is Richard L. Lougee, a criminal defense attorney in Tucson who is also the brother of Dave Lougee, president and chief executive officer of TEGNA Inc., which owns KPNX-TV.