DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIVISION

INVESTIGATION REPORT

CASE/FILE NO.: CPC0001-09DATE OF REPORT: JuneSPECIAL AGENT: Ron NelsonATTORNEY: Donna Maddux

I. OVERVIEW

On January 21, 2009, Multnomah County District Attorney Michael Schrunk andPortland Police Chief Rosanne Sizer jointly sent a letter to Attorney General Krogerasking for an investigation into whether Portland Mayor Sam broke any laws inconnection with his relationship with Beau Breedlove.In response, the Oregon Department of Justice conducted an exhaustiveinvestigation, which included interviews with more than 50 witnesses; an extensivereview of City Hall records including telephone and email accounts; a review of Breedlove’s cell-phone records; and a forensic examination of Breedlove’s phone,Adams’ phone and computers. Based on the results of our investigation, this reportaddresses three key allegations:1. Did Adams have sexual contact with Breedlove in 2005 while Breedlove was aminor, in violation of ORS 163.415

, 163.435 or 163.445?CONCLUSION: There is insufficient evidence to support the allegations thatAdams committed the crimes of sexual abuse in the third degree, contributing to thesexual delinquency of a minor or sexual misconduct. Inconsistencies in Breedlove’sstatements regarding the two alleged incidents of kissing before his 18

birthday andBreedlove’s role in bringing his characterization of his relationship with Adams to theattention of the media has compromised his credibility as a witness in this investigation.In the absence of any corroborating evidence, proof of the allegation that Sam Adams

ORS 163.415 Sexual abuse in the third degree.

(1) A person commits the crime of sexual abuse in thethird degree if the person subjects another person to sexual contact and: (a) The victim does not consent tothe sexual contact; or

(b) The victim is incapable of consent by reason of being under 18 years of age. (2)Sexual abuse in the third degree is a Class A misdemeanor.

engaged in criminal sexual conduct with Breedlove is solely dependant upon Breedlove’scredibility. We conclude that there is not sufficient credible evidence to justify criminalprosecution.2. Did Adams commit official misconduct in violation of ORS 162.415

by hiring a

Portland Mercury

reporter in 2008 in an effort to stop her from pursuing a story aboutAdams’s relationship with Breedlove during Adams’s campaign for mayor?CONCLUSION: No evidence exists to support the allegation that Adams hiredformer

Portland Mercury

reporter Amy Ruiz in an effort to stop her from pursuing thestory of Adams’ relationship with Breedlove. The evidence overwhelmingly shows thatAdams was not involved with the hiring of Ruiz.3. Did Adams commit official misconduct in violation of ORS 162.415 or theft bydeception in violation of ORS 164.085

by lying about his relationship with Breedlovewhen questions about that relationship first emerged or in Adams’s mayoral campaign?

ORS 162.415 Official misconduct in the first degree.(1) A public servant commits the crime of official misconduct in the first degree if with intent to obtain a benefit or to harm another:(a) The public servant knowingly fails to perform a duty imposed upon the public servant bylaw or one clearly inherent in the nature of office; or(b) The public servant knowingly performs an act constituting an unauthorized exercise inofficial duties.(2) Official misconduct in the first degree is a Class A misdemeanor.

ORS 164.085 Theft by deception.(1) A person, who obtains property of another thereby, commits theft by deception when,with intent to defraud, the person:(a) Creates or confirms another’s false impression of law, value, intention or other state of mind that the actor does not believe to be true;(b) Fails to correct a false impression that the person previously created or confirmed;(c) Prevents another from acquiring information pertinent to the disposition of the propertyinvolved;* * * * *(2) “Deception” does not include falsity as to matters having no pecuniary significance, orrepresentations unlikely to deceive ordinary persons in the group addressed. * * *(3) In a prosecution for theft by deception, the defendant’s intention or belief that a promisewould not be performed may not be established by or inferred from the fact alone that such promisewas not performed.* * * * *

CONCLUSION: The evidence does not support the allegation that Adamsengaged in criminal official misconduct or theft by deception. Adams did not mobilizecity resources to promote or further his claim that he did not engage in sexual contactwith Breedlove. Further, there is no evidence that Adams conveyed false statementsabout his relationship with Breedlove to potential campaign supporters in a direct effortto obtain contributions.

II. SYNOPSIS OF INVESTIGATION

A. FACTS RELATED TO THE ALLEGATION OF SEXUAL ABUSE

Undisputed Facts

In March of 2005, Breedlove worked as a volunteer intern for Oregon StateRepresentative Kim Thatcher in her Capitol office in Salem. Breedlove was 17 and hadgraduated from high school nine months prior. In March of 2005, Adams was serving asa Portland City Commissioner.On March 24, 2005, Adams traveled to Salem to meet with legislators and todiscuss transportation issues. Adams and Breedlove first crossed paths when Adamsbriefly passed Representative Thatcher’s office. Although details vary, Adams andBreedlove both acknowledge that, before Adams left the building Adams was providedwith a card that included Breedlove’s name, phone number and a brief note fromBreedlove.Adams said he lost the card containing Breedlove’s contact information. He calledRepresentative Thatcher’s office on March 31, 2005, and spoke with a woman whoprovided Breedlove’s number. Adams called Breedlove that day and the two begancommunicating by cell phone and text message.Available records show regular cell phone and text message communicationthrough April, May, June and July of 2005. Adams’ phone records show the followingcall history to Breedlove: 2 calls on March 31

; 19 calls in April; 8 calls in May; 5 callsin June; 12 calls in July; 1 call in August; and one call in November. Breedlove’s phonerecords are available for the time period including April 13, 2005 – May 11, 2005.According to Breedlove’s records, from April 13 – April 29, Breedlove called or textmessaged Adams 31 times. From May 1 – May 11, Breedlove called or text messagedAdams 11 times.Within a few weeks of their initial communication, Adams and Breedlove agreethat they arranged to meet for the first time over lunch at the Macaroni Grill in downtownPortland. Neither claims to be able to recall the exact date of this lunch meeting, but bothagree it was most likely in April of 2005. Breedlove’s age came up in conversationduring the meal. Adams says he was surprised to learn Breedlove was only 17. After