Most Popular

Most Viewed
Most Commented
News
"Most Popular" tools sponsored by:

National Features

  • Broward-Palm Beach New Times
    The Muscle Men

    Thanks to a string of Florida "anti-aging clinics," baseball's steroid scandal isn't limited to superstars.

    By Michael J. Mooney
  • Miami New Times
    Picked On

    Farm workers earn nada in America's green-bean capital.

    By Janine Zeitlin
  • Village Voice
    "Why I'm No Longer a Brain-Dead Liberal"

    An election-season essay from one of America's greatest playwrights.

    By David Mamet

People love to dislike Dennis Wilenchik, but the guy's not completely friendless. Former Arizona Attorney General Grant Woods actually describes his good friend as even-tempered. The two have known each other for a long time; Woods and Wilenchik's wife met in law school at Arizona State University.

Woods says he's surprised at Wilenchik's reputation as a hothead, and by some of his higher-profile recent actions. He won't defend Wilenchik's recent attacks on the judiciary and continued efforts to discredit Dan Saban, saying just that his friend was acting at the behest of his clients. And the New Times case?

"That's a little inexplicable," Woods says. "The case was ludicrous on its face so I don't understand why anyone spent five minutes on it. There's lots of crime out there. There's plenty to do."

But on a personal level, Woods defends Wilenchik completely.

"I know he's a very decent guy," Woods says. "He's very well-intentioned. He tries to do the right thing."

It's clear that Wilenchik had certain intentions when he put together his biography for the Wilenchik & Bartness Web site.

To wit, from the site:

• Wilenchik says he had "a judicial clerkship at the Supreme Court of Arizona in 1977."

But Cari Gerchik, public information officer for the Arizona Supreme Court (that's actually the court's correct title), says there is no evidence that Wilenchik has ever worked for the court.

She writes, "You asked me to ascertain for which Arizona Supreme Court Justice Mr. Wilenchik clerked in 1977 (as it is listed on his Web site) and the answer is that while we maintain records of who clerked for the Justices during 1977 (and even earlier) we can find no record of Mr. Wilenchik having served as a judicial law clerk in that or any other year."

By e-mail, Wilenchik responds that he worked for Sarah Grant, who at the time was the senior staff attorney for the Arizona Supreme Court.

"I performed a six month intern-clerkship for the ct working under sarah grant who was then chief staff atty, and not for any specific judge, which is why i noted it as i did," he writes.

It is true that Wilenchik does not specify a justice in his biography. But it's also true that when you say you had a judicial clerkship at the Arizona Supreme Court, it's understood that you clerked for a Supreme Court justice.

Gerchik called Grant, who now sits on the Arizona Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court's official response: "Sarah Grant told me that Mr. Wilenchik was never her judicial law clerk, but that he may have done a short internship for the Staff Attorneys Office.

"The Staff Attorneys Office does hire interns, but these interns are not, and never have been, considered judicial law clerks.

"Then and now, the only way to clerk for or have a judicial clerkship with the Arizona Supreme Court is to be formally hired by a specific Arizona Supreme Court Justice."

• Wilenchik says he was a "judicial assistant/commissioner for the Presiding Criminal Judge of Maricopa County."

That judge was Stanley Goodfarb, who confirms that Wilenchik worked for him — but as his bailiff.

"He was my bailiff," says Goodfarb, now retired. (Goodfarb served as the discovery master in Saban vs. Arpaio, thanks to Wilenchik.)

So Wilenchik definitely wasn't a commissioner, or a judicial assistant?

"No," Goodfarb says, patiently. "He was my bailiff."

J.W. Brown, public information officer for the Maricopa County Superior Court, says that at the time, there was no such title as "judicial assistant." (That is a title that was created much later in order to pay secretaries more money.)

Wilenchik writes that, to his recollection, "the clerk then to the presiding criminal judge who handled post conviction relief matters also had commissioner status when dealing with post conviction relief issues which i dealt with for the judge."

He continues, "I was of course not appointed officially as a court commissioner as i had not even passed the bar then, nor have i attempted to convey that i was. That is why i noted it as part of the bailiff job as a judicial assistant-commissioner because it was not a typical bailiff type responsibility."

But that is not how Wilenchik noted it. The term bailiff is not used in his biography.

"There's no hybrid position in the court," Brown says. "You're either a commissioner or you're a bailiff. And the qualifications are not interchangeable. They are very distinct and unique to the position."

According to the county's official job description, a bailiff coordinates courtroom proceedings and performs legal and clerical duties, including ordering and preparing files, reviewing motions and being responsible for jurors.

The minimum education requirement for a bailiff is a high school diploma or a GED.

A commissioner is actually a judge pro tem, with many of the responsibilities afforded to a Superior Court judge, including the power to rule on motions, assist with cases/hearings, including in juvenile court and justice court, and even preside over some matters in trial court.

The process to become a commissioner is rigorous, Brown says. A law degree is required.

Given that Wilenchik actually did serve four years as a judge pro tem (he was appointed in 1988; Gerchick's records confirm it), it's hard to understand why he would bother to stretch the truth, vis à vis the bailiff position.

• Wilenchik says he was a deputy county attorney. That is true. He also says he was "selected for the Special Operations Division specializing in white collar crime matters when he left the office in 1980 to enter private practice."

True, technically. But why mention the special operations division (it was actually called the Special Operations Bureau) at all, when you never worked a day there?

"Funny you ask that," says Rodger Golston, a Valley lawyer who was the chief deputy county attorney at the time. Of Wilenchik, he confirms: "He was picked for the special operations bureau. He was recommended by another lawyer . . . But he never worked in it. He never had a case there and never did anything with that unit."

Write Your Comment show comments (4)
  1. What tangled webs we weave.
    Keep on their asses and keep showing the true colors of Arpaio & Thomas to the public.
    Maricopa County needs to send them both packing in 2008.

  2. You guys did it again! keep digging for the truth in 2008 as always, and don't let Arpaio or Thomas go in 2008 until they're behind bars where they belong.

  3. Keep up the good work and stay on these dirtbags next year. If you do a really good job on them, we can run Dennis Willenupchuck out of town in addition to Candy and Joke! If any of the 3 happened to end up wearing stripes and pinks in Tent City, that would be a big bonus.

  4. I appreciated the article I thought it was well done. But, I am a bailiff. I did not and do not appreciate the term lowly in your article at all. I never thought of myself as lowly because I AM a bailiff. Lowly??? what the heck does that mean? I am right there with you with every word in the article. But please take care not to belittle those of us who hold the position of bailiff. Sure,he did at one point bailiff. But, the rest of us are needed and work hard.

    Please take care in the future to respect everyone's job.

Phoenix New Times Insiders

  • Local food, music and news blasts
  • Free Stuff