Free Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

A F F I D A V I T
STATE GF ARIZONA }
] ss.
Ccunty cf Mariccpa ]
Mark Hamptcn, lacing duly swcrn upcn his cath, dcpcscs and says:
l. I am thc Plaintiff in di: mattcr cf Mark E. Hrzmpttm v. Cfmrfss Ryan,
at af., Unitcd Statcs District Ccurt fcr thc District cf Arizcna Nc. CVU3-lTi]6
Pl-IX NVW- [ makc this dcciaraticn in suppcrt cf my rcspcnsc tc Dcfcndants’
mctiun fur sunimaryjudgrncnt.
2. The cvidcncc at my STG validaticn hcaring in 1998 includcd a
. z-»r.»·&’ _
phutugraph that was takcn whilc I was cn a wurk assignmcnt at—a· Jaycccs rcdcc,C£¤—‘$,
si-
thc Scuth Unit Snack Shack, frcm Gctcbcr 30, 1989 thrcugh July 29, 1991. Tha
phctugraph was uf cthcr cmplcyccs cf thc Snack Shack. If any cf thc pcrscns
phctcgraphcd wcrc mcmbcrs c1` a particular gang, that was, tc thc bcst cf my
kncwlcdgc, purcly ccincidcncc. This phcitcgraph was taitcn by an Arizcna
Dcpartmcnt cf Ccrrccticns staff mcmhcr.
3. Tha cyidcncc at my STG vaiidaticn alsc includcd claims that I spckc
with Arym Brcthcrhucd rncmhcrs in thc cpcn yard, at scimc timc pricr tc August
cf 1995. I havc had cciuntlcss ccnvcrsaticns with thc hundrcds cf irunatcs that
wart: in thc cpcn yard, a placc wc wcrc pcrrnittcd tc bc ham 15:00 a.m. tc ii]:30
a.1‘n., liilil} a.1‘n. tu 3:31] p.n1., and 4:i](l p.rn. tc 5}:31] p.n1. Thcrc wcrc typically
3[l{l—S£i[} intnatcs in thc yard, and 5i] DDC staff in thc vicinity. I dc nct rccall any
at 5·.t.¤./Kijf GH 2:260 fad-=£t:·» Cltré
.Si·¤o»tf.sa=.€_é4i 3% Etc. TC C.».r.Pf·".5
G =¢·¤·*?'"Gaee£2: 1Z¢’0'6¢N*\/\A¤F»¢€D0cumenf 73-7 Filed 11/20/2006 Page 1 of 1
.5su;¢“.·‘·~l up JT-

Case 2:03-cv-01706-NVW

Document 73-7

Filed 11/20/2006

Page 1 of 1