P. 1
Phoenix PD Aaron Thomas-Failure to Report

Phoenix PD Aaron Thomas-Failure to Report

|Views: 388|Likes:
Published by BadPhoenixCops

All Police officers since the early 1960s, along with all doctors are required by law to report any notion of sexual molestation to authorities. Naturally this law does not apply to any members of the Tovar family who are Phoenix cops – namely commander Louie Tovar and his brother sergeant Mark Tovar. They don’t need to report anything since the perp Louie Adrian Tovar was Louie’s own son and Mark’s nephew. And of course at this time, commander Louie Tovar ran the sex crimes division and would have to launch an investigation into his own blood. But for all other cops and doctors, it is a Felony to not report crimes against children. So to lay blame, the Phoenix PD launched an internal and criminal investigation into Aaron Thomas.

Notice how the Phoenix PD didn’t redact anything in these reports related to Aaron Thomas. Contrarily, notice how the Phoenix PD took full liberties to redact commander Louie Tovar’s name, sergeant Mark Tovar’s name and the sexual predator who committed the crimes – Louie Adrian Tovar III.

Crazy. Don’t you think?

All Police officers since the early 1960s, along with all doctors are required by law to report any notion of sexual molestation to authorities. Naturally this law does not apply to any members of the Tovar family who are Phoenix cops – namely commander Louie Tovar and his brother sergeant Mark Tovar. They don’t need to report anything since the perp Louie Adrian Tovar was Louie’s own son and Mark’s nephew. And of course at this time, commander Louie Tovar ran the sex crimes division and would have to launch an investigation into his own blood. But for all other cops and doctors, it is a Felony to not report crimes against children. So to lay blame, the Phoenix PD launched an internal and criminal investigation into Aaron Thomas.

Notice how the Phoenix PD didn’t redact anything in these reports related to Aaron Thomas. Contrarily, notice how the Phoenix PD took full liberties to redact commander Louie Tovar’s name, sergeant Mark Tovar’s name and the sexual predator who committed the crimes – Louie Adrian Tovar III.

Crazy. Don’t you think?

More info:

Published by: BadPhoenixCops on Apr 06, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

03/05/2014

pdf

text

original

ORIGINAL REPORT TYPE DATE: 20090310

PAGE
TIME:

NUMBER:
0939

DR NUMBER:

20Q9

90322630

A

OF REPORT: VICTIM

FATUJRE NOTIFIED:

TO REPORT NO STREET 010106 0600
I

OFFENSE;

501

BOOKING

!JOCATION: DATE/TIME REPORTING PREMISES: OFFENSE

000620

W WASHINGTON SUN

BEAT:

0513

GRID:

BA27

OF OCCURRENCE: OFFICER[S]: STEVEN

,

WED 6844

030106

0600

BOECK BUILDIN BIAS)

(..'NIT:25 C OCCUP lED: YES

GOVERNMENT/PUBLIC INVOLVED:
TAKEN:

BIAS NO

- NONE(NO BY: NO

PHOTOGRAPHS SCENE

PROCESSED

FOR LATENTS: *U,..

BY;

VICTIM STATE

INFORI'fATION OF ARIZONA

* ... * *

VICTIM

-01:


THIS
CHII,D

NAME: TYPE:

INSTITUTION

GOVERNMENT - COMPLETED NARRATIVE

V1C'llM OF: ALL OTHER

OFFENSES

SERIAL

NlJ1JlBER! 6844

****

****

THE CRIME OF FAILURE TO REPORT, PER ARB 13-3620 WAS COMMITTED WHEN DURING THE APPLICATION PROCESS TO BECOME A PHOENIX POLICE AIDE, IT WAS DISCLOSED THAT A ••• HAD COMMITTED THE OFFENSE OF MOLESTATION, POSSESSION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND VIEWING IMAGES OF BESTIALITY. SEE DR# 2009-90322630 FOR FURTHER DETAILS REFERENCE THAT INVESTIGATION. INFORMATION
PROTECTIVE

IN JANUARY AND FEBRUARY OF 2006,

REPORT

GENERATED

WAS DISCLOSED DURING THE APPLICATION PROCESS, HOWEVER SERVICES WERE NEVER NOTIFIED ,l\.ND T~ERE WAS NO POLICE AS REQUTRED BY ARS 13-3620. AND IS ONGOING. SEE RELATED REPORTS FOR

THIS IlI.VESTIGATION CONTIN{JES FURTHER DETAILS. EOR 6844

2009

90322630

A

Continued.

_-_._-

-------"--------'-------

-

-_----

- - - - -----1

PHOENIX POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT

ORIGINAL

PAGE NUMBER:

2

DR NUMBER: 2009 90322630 A NO MAIL-IN SUPPLEMENT:

VICTIM RECEIVED RIGHTS INFORMATION: INVOICES: DR ENTERED BY
6844

DR FINALIZED BY : 6844 END OF REPORT DR NO: 2009 90322630 A

-_---------------------_-----

PHOENIX

POLICE

DEPARTMENT 1

REPORT 2009

SUPPLEMENT
REPORT TYPE DATE: 20090310
FAILURE

PAGE

NUMBER:

DR NUMBER:

90322630

A

1

TIME:

1007

OF REPORT: 000620

TO REPORT

OFFENSE:
BEAT; 0600 0513

501

LOCATION:

W WASHINGTON
SUN

STREET
010106

GRID: BA27
0600 C25

DATE/TIME
REPORTING

OF OCCURRENCE:
OFFICER[S]:

I

WED 6844

030106 UNIT:

STEVEN

BOECK

OFFENSE INVOLVED:

BIAS - NONE(NO

BIAS) INFORMATION JEROME

****
INVESTIGATIVE
SPEAKING: IJEAD-Ol:

SUSPECT

****

NAME:

THOMAS,

AARON

ENGLISH SEX, MAGE:

RACE: B
OW:

~~IR: BLD

~YES:BRO

42

DOB:

SSN:

H~:

509

WT; 190

WORK:


0001 0002

OCCUPATION:

BUS. NAME:

PHOENIX 2100

WORK

LEVEL

HOURS;

POLICE

POLICE

R&I: SCN# 9008310089 APT/SUITE: ZIP CODE:

OF FORCE: ADVISED:

VERBAL YES

- 0700

DEPARTMENT LIEUTENANT PERSUASION, TIME: 0633

PHONE:~ NEGOTIATION,
OFFICER: DAYS

EMPLOY~

OFF:

COMM~~

WED,THL~,FRI

RIGHTS

6844

PROPERTY/EVIDENCE 000000 LEOl SEARCH

***

RECOVERY LOCATION: DATE: 000000

WARRANT INVOLVED:

PKG 001 CODE:EI DESCRIPTION: APPLICATION,
ITEM: SIZE:

ITEM: YDOCUME BRAND; IfILE
QUANTITY:
0001 FILE

MODEL: APPLICATION SERIAL/ACCT/ID;
ADRIAN ..

COLOR:
INCLUDING

EMPLOYMENET FOR POLYGRAPH REPORT, AND DOL. LEOl DDISK BRAND: CD-R

PKG 001 CODE:EI
SIZE; DESCRIPTION:

COll.1TAININGINTERVIEW WITH SRI, CD-R WITH DETECTIVE LAZZELL, COMANDER KAVANAGH AND PHONE MESSAGE AND CONVERSATION WITH SRI, AND DVD-R CONTAINING INTERVIEW CONDUCTED WITH ADRIJI_N (INTERVIEW CONDCUTED BY DET, J BARKER #6311 IN REGARDS TO DR# 2009-90322630.)

CONTAINING

INTERVIEWS

CD-R

QUANTITY:

0003

SERIAL/ACCT!ID:

MODEL:

COLOR:

2009

90322630

A

1

Continued.

,..----------------------.~-----~--

__
2

,.

----------------.- --,_ .._--,

.._-,'----

PHOENIX POLICE DEPARTM,ENT REPORT SUPPLEMENT
PAGE NUMBER~

DR NUMBER! 2009 90322630 A
****

1

SERIAL NUMBER: 6844

****

NARRATIVE

ON 02-24-09, I ATTENDED A MEETING AT THE CHILD HELP CENTER LOCATED AT 2346 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE. THERE I WAS BRIEFED BY COMMANDER RENTERIA #5667 WHO INFORMED US THAT SHE REVIEWED THE FILE OF PHOENIX POLICE APPLICANT 2 22 ADRIA.~ (DOB ...... WHO GOES BY THE NAME ADRIAN AND WHO WILL BE REFERRED TO AS ADRI~EPORT)t WHO HAD APPLIED IN 2006 FOR A POLICE AIDE POSITION BU'I' HAD BEEN DENIED EMPLOYMENT DUE TO ADMISSIONS MADE BY HIM DURING THE INTERVIEW PROCESS.
THE

ALLEGATIONS WERE OF A SEXUAL NATURE, THAT HE HAD MOLESTED HIS YEAR OLD LOOKED AT CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND BESTIALITY PHOTOGRAPJ.IS THE ON COMP~rER( AND HAD ENGAGED IN SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WHILE HE WAS {ruL~S OLD WITH HIS GIRLFRIEND, AND HER YEAR OLD SISTER HAD TAKEN PHOTOGRAPHS OF THEM. ADRIAN J & It WAS DENIED EMPLOYMENT WITH THE CITY OF PHOENIX, AND WAS TOLD THAT HE CO{~D RE-APPLY FOR'A POLICE POSITION AFTER A 3 YEAR TIME PERIOD HAD EXPIRED (EVEN THOUGH THE ADMISSIONS MADE SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED LIFETIME DISQUAL!FIER.) FURTHER IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THESE ADMISSION HAD NEVER BEEN REPORT TO CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES {CPS) OR TO ANY LAN ENFORCEMENT AGENCY (NO DEPARTto1ENTALREPORT HAD BEEN GENERATED TO DOCUMENT THIS INCIDENT AND NO INVESTIGATION HAD EVER BEEN CONDUCTED,)
A'!' 'J.'RE CONCLUSION INVESTIGATE THE OF THE BRIEF!NG, DE'!'. J. BAAKl::;1{ #6.Hl WAS ASSIGNED TO

MOLESTATION ADl'-lISSIONS MADE BY ADRIAN _ AND I WAS ASSIGNED TO LOOK IN THE FAILURE TO REPORT ASPECT OF THIS INCIDENT. ALSO IT WAS DECIDED THAT THIS INVESTIGATION WOULD BE PUT ON HOLD UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT THE INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED BY DET. BARKER WAS FAR ENOUGH ALONG AS NOT TO INTERFERE. SEE DR~ 20Q9-90322630 INVESTIGATION,
FOR

FURTHER DETAILS REFERENCE DET. BARKER'S

I WAS PROVIDED WITH A COpy OF Ed 2 a • EMPLOYMENT PACKET ( INCLUDING THE OFFER OF EMPLOYMENT WITHDRAWN MEMO, WHICH IS ALSO KNOW AS THE DOL (DROP OFF LIST.) THE REASON STATED ON THE MEMO FOR ADRIAN NOT TO BE PROCESSED WAS GIVEN AS: IIAJ?PLICANT ADMITS TO IITOUCHING" HIS YEAR OLD PENIS 3 TIMES (APPLICANT AT TIME), AT AGE ENGAGING IN SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH HIS YR O~D GIRLFRIEND WHILE HER YR OLD SISTER TOOK PICTURES. HE ALSO ADMITS TO LOOKING AT CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ON THE INTERNET, ALSO VIEWING WOMEN ENGAGED IN SEX ACTS 'tTIrn }.\.;."\1IMALS INTERNET. ON THE
II

DET. BARKER INFORMED ME HE CONTACTED CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES INFORMED THAT THERE WAS NO RECORD.OF ADRIAN BEING REPORTED FOR MOIJESTATION OR ANY OTHER OFFENSE,
I

Pu~

WAS

2009

90322630

A

1

Continued.

PHOENIX

POLICE

DEPARTMENT
3

REPORT
2009 90322630 A
1

SUPPLEMENT
ON 02-26-09,

PAGE NUMBER:

DR NUMBER:

ADRIAN CAME INTO 620 WEST t1ASHINGTON STREET AJ.'JD WAS BY DET. BARKER IN REGARDS TO HIS ADMISSION MADE IN 2006. I r10NITORED THE INTERVIEl'i FROM THE NONITOR ROOM, AND THEN ASSISTED WITH THE SERVICE OF THE SEARCH WARRANT LATER THAT AFTERNOON.

INTERVIEWED

DET. BARKER INTERVIEWED MADE IN 2006, • TOWARDS ...... SEVERAL QUESTIONS
AND BY WHOM.

THE

END

.~OUT

AND ASKED HIM QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ADMISSIONS OF THE U1TERVIEW r HAD DET. BAH.KER ASK HIS DISQUALIFICATION, AND WHAT HE WAS TOLD

AS DOCUMENTED IN DR# 2009-90322630 SUPPLEMENT #2, ADRIAN STATED HE MET WITH DETECTIVE STEVE CHECKETTS, .AND THEY DISCUSSED THE SEXUAL ABUSE ISSUES. ADRIAN ALSO STATED TO DET. BARKER THAT HE TOLD THE POLYGRAPH EXAMINER AND SPOKE TO AN UNKNOWN SERGEANT ALSO. ADRIAN TOLD DET. BARKER THAT HE DID NOT REMEMBER THE NAME OF THE SERGEANT SPOKE TO, BUT STATED IT WAS A MALE SERGEANT. _ STATED HE WAS TOLD EOTH BY DE!. CHECKETTS AND THIS SERGEANT THAT HE ~ RE-APPLY TO THE PHOENIX POLICE DEPARTMENT IN 3 YEARS. HE ALSO MENTIONED THAT HE HAD SPOKEN WITH SOMEONE NAMED DEBSIE, BUT DID NOT KNOW HER LAST NAME.
WHOM HE

SEE DET. BARKERS

INTERVIEW

WITH

FOR FURTHER DETAILS,

p~KrAl.NS

ON 03-05-09, I SPOKE WITH SGT. MCCARTHY #6048 AND SGT. FRANCIS #4614, WHO HAVE BOTH BEEN ASSIGNED TO THE POLICE EMPLOYMENT SERV:CBS BUREAU (P8SB) IN THE PAST AS SERGEANTS. THE PURPOSE OF SPEAKING TO THEM WAS TO LEARN THE PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE IN PES8 FOR DETECTIVES AND SUPERVlSORS AS IT
TU THl:; HIRING AND DISQVALU'lCA.l:luN UF POLlet; .sWOUN ANLJ CIVILIAN

APPLICANTS.

WHEN AN APPLICANT APPLIES FOR EMPLOYMENT WITH THE PHOENIX POLICE DEPARTME~~ (EITHER SWO~~ OR CIVILIAN) THEY MUST COMPLETE A APPLICATION PACKET, AND THEN ARE ASSIGNED TO A BACKGROUND INVESTIGATOR. THE INVESTIGATORS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR PERFORMING ALL BACK GROUND INVESTIGATIONS ON APPLICANTS, INCLUDING CRIMINAL, TRAFFIC, WORK HISTORY, AND REFERENCE CHECKS.

I ASKED ABOUT DISQUALIFIER FOR EMPLOYMENT, AND WAS INFORMED THAT 'THERE ARE 2 CATEGORIES OF DISQUALIFICATIONS. A 3 YEAR DISQUALIFIC~TION, AND A LIFE TIME DISQUALIFlCATION. EXAMPLES OF A 3 YEAR DlSQUALLF'lCATION WOULD BE MINOR DRUG USAGE WITHIN 3 YEARS, POLYGRAPH FAILURE, DRIVING RECORD ISSUES, AND MISDEMEANOR CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. IT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME THAT ANYTHING FELONY,WHETHER REPORTED OR NOT, WAS CONSIDERED AN AUTOMATIC LIFE TIME DISQUA1"IFICATION.
! THEN ASKED ABOUT THE 1tDOL" (DROP OFF LIST) MEMO WHICH IS GENERATED FOR APPLICANTS WHO ARE DlSQUJI.LIFIED. THIS ME'fYJO IS AUTHORED BY THE BACKGROUND DETECTIVE WHO IS DISQUALIFYING THE APPLICf>...NT AND IS THEN SIGNED BY THE SUPERVISING SERG~IT. SGT. MCCARTHY At~ SGT. FRANCIS BOTH STATED THEY READ EVERY DOL, AND SIGNED EACH ONE, AS IS REQUIRED.

2009

90322630

]~

1.

Continued.

~---------

- ----- --_--------

PHOENIX POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT

SUPPLEMENT

PAGE NUMBER:

4

DR NUMBER: 2009 90322630 A

1

I THEN ASKED ABOUT NOTIFICATIONS OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY INVOLVING CHILDREN. GAVE THEM A SITUATION SIMILAR TO THIS INCIDENT, AND ASKED THEM HOW THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED. BOTH SGT. MCCARTHY AND SGT. FRANCIS STATED THAT THE CHILD CRIMES UNIT SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED, AND THAT MORE THAN LIKELY A DETECTIVE WOULD HAVE RESPONDED TO DETERMINE WHERE THE CRIME OCCURRED, WHO THE VICTIM'S WERE AND TO QUESTION THE APPLICANT FURTHER AS TO THE ADMISSIONS.
I

I ASKED WHO HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE THAT NOTIFICATION, MEANING IF THE DETECTIVE OR THE SERGEANT HAD TO MAKE THE NOTIFICATION{ AND THEY SAID IT COULD BE EITHER, AS LONG AS THE PROPER NOTIFICATIONS WERE MADE. ON 03-05-09, I SPOKE WITH DET. DEBBIE LAZZELL # 4550. SHE IS ASSIGNED AS A BACKGROUND INVESTIGATOR FOR PESB, HOWEVER IS CURRENTLY TEMPORARILY ASSIGNED TO THE FAMILY INVESTIGATIONS BUREAU DUE TO THE CURRENT HIRING FREEZE IN EFFECT. SHE WAS ASSIGNED TO PESB IN 2006, WHEN ADRIAN APPLIED FOR EMPLOYMENT. SHE STATED IN 2006 SHE WAS ASSIGNED AS A BACKGROUND DETECTIVE FOR POLICE (SWORN) APPLICANTS. SHE INFORMED ME SHE WAS AWARE WAS GOING THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS { AS SHE KNOWS IS .WHILE SHE WAS AWARE THAT HE WAS GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS, SHE WAS NOT AWARE OF HIS STATUS DURING THE PROCESS { AND NEVER LEARNED THE REASONS HE WAS DISQUALIFIED. I ASKED HER IF SHE HAD ANY CONTACT WITH ADRIAN, AND SHE STATED SHE DID, HOWEVER SHE SPOKE WITH HIM ONLY ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING TRUTHFUL AND HONEST THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS. AT NO TIME DID HE DIVULGE ANYTHING TO HER.

THAT_

I ASKED HER IF SHE HAD ANY CONTACT WITH HIS DURING HIS PROCESS, AND SHE STATED SHE DID, MOSTLY SOCIAL CONTACT WHEN HE WOULD COME INTO THE OFFICE. SHE DID STATE THAT AFTER WAS DISQUALIFIED, HIS • CALLED HER AND TOLD HER DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE REASONS HE WAS DISQUALIFIED. HE REQUESTED THAT SHE GET A SERGEANT TO REVIEW THE FILE AND CALL .1 b. DET LAZZELL STATED SHE PASSED ALONG THIS REQUEST TO SGT. AARON THOMAS (WHO WAS DET. CHECKETTS'S SUPERVISOR) AND BELIEVES THAT SGT, THOMAS DID CALL ADRIAN. RECORDED. SEE THAT RECORDING

MY INTERVIEW WITH DET. LAZZELL AS DIGITALLY FOR FURTHER DETAILS.

ON 03-05-09, I RECEIVED A COPY OF THE PESB MANUAL, AND UPON REVIEWING THAT DOCUMENT I NOTED THAT IT STATES THAT A SUPERVISOR WILL REVIEW THE REASON FOR UNACCEPTABILITY AND INITIAL THE DOL FORM INDICATING APPROVAL. IT ALSO STATES THE FILE WILL BE RETAINED. ON 03-09-09{ CALLED AARON THOMAS ON HIS HOME PHONE AND CELL PHONE NUMBERS AND WAS ABLE TO LEAVE A vorCE MAIL MESSAGE REQUESTING HE CONTACT ME REFERENCE THIS INCIDENT.

2009 90322630 A

1

Continued.

-- -------- .-~-

PHOENIX POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT

SUPPLEMENT

PAGE NUMBER:

5

DR NUMBER: 2009 90322630 A

1

LATER ON 03-09-09, I RECEIVED A CALL FROM AARON AND WAS ABLE TO SPEAK TO HIM. I EXPLAINED WHO I WAS, AND THAT I WISHED TO SET UP AN INTERVIEW WITH HIM. HE AGREED AND STATED HE WOULD COME TO THE FAMILY ADVOCACY CENTER ON 03-10-09 AT 0630 HOURS TO BE INTERVIEWED. ON 03-10-09, I MET WITH AARON AT THE FAMILY ADVOCACY CENTER AND INTERVIEWED HIM AS TO THIS INCIDENT. AT 0637 HOURS I READ AARON HIS MIRANDA RIGHTS FROM A STANDARD ISSUED MIRANDA RIGHTS CARD. WHEN ASKED IF HE UNDERSTOOD HIS RIGHTS, HE STATED "I DO"_ (NOTE: AARON IS CURRENT ASSIGNED AS A LIEUTENANT AT THE CENTRAL CITY PRECINCT, ASSIGNED TO 3RD SHIFT WITH WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY AND FRIDAY OFF. THIS INTERVIEW WAS CONDUCTED AFTER HE HAD COMPLETED HIS SHIFT.)

I ASKED HIM HIS ASSIGNMENT IN 2006, AND HE STATED HE WAS IN EMPLOYMENT SERVICES (PESB) FROM JANUARY 2005 TILL HE PROMOTED TO LIEUTENANT IN 2007. WHILE IN EMPLOYMENT SERVICES, HE WAS AN OPERATIONS SERGEANT, RESPONSIBLE FOR REVIEWING HIRING FILES FOR BOTH SWORN AND CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES. HE SUPERVISED SIX DETECTIVES DURING THIS TIME. I ASKED HIM TO EXPLAIN THE HIRING PROCESS TO ME FOR BOTH SWORN AND CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES, STARTING WITH SWORN.

AARON EXPLAINED THAT THE HIRING PROCESS BEGAN WITH THE WRITTEN EXAM. UPON PASSING THE WRITTEN EXAM THE NEXT STEP IS TEE PHYSICAL EXAM. AFTER SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF THE PHYSICAL EXAM, THE APPLICANT IS GIVEN A BACKGROUND PACKET, AND INSTRUCTED TO FILL IT OUT AND RETURN THE COMPLETED PACK.

IT IS AFTER THE PACKET IS RETURNED THAT THEY ARE ASSIGNED A DETECTIVE, AND AN INTERVIEW IS SCHEDULED WITH THE APPL.ICANT AND THAT DETECTIVE. NEXT A POLYGRAPH EXAMINATION IS GIVEN TO THE APPLICANT, AND WHILE THAT IS GOING ON THE BACKGROUND DETECTIVE IS CONDUCTING A CRIMINAL RECORDS CHECK ON THE APPLICANT, CONTACT THE APPLICANT'S PREVIOUS EMPLOYEES AND PERSONAL REFERENCES. IN THE PROCESS IS THE NELSON DENNY TEST AND AN ORAL BOARD UPON SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF ALL ASPECTS UP TO THIS POINT, IS GIVEN A OFFER OF CONDITIONAL HIRE. THE HIRING IS BASED COMPLETION OF THE FINAL TESTS, THE MEDICAL EXAM, EXAM AND A DRUG SCREEN.

THE NEXT STEP EXAMINATION_ THE APPLICANT ON SUCCESSFUL PSYCHOLOGICAL

AARON EXPLAINED THE PROCESS FOR CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES IS SIMILAR HOWEVER A LITTLE LESS STRICT. THE APPLICANT COMPLETES THE APPLICATION AND BACKGROUND PACKET. THEY ARE THEN PUT ON A LIST. WHEN A POSITION BECOMES AVAILABLE, THE APPLICANT CAN BE SELECTED TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS. THE BACKGROUND INVESTIGATOR IS THEN ASSIGNED AND SPEAKS WITH THE APPLICANT WITH REGARDS TO THE INFORMATION IN THE PACKET. A POLYGRAPH EXAMINATION IS THEN GIVEN TO THE APPLICANT AFTER THE BACKGROUND EXAMINATION IS COMPLETED. REFERENCES AND PERVIOUS EMPLOYERS ARE BEING CONTACTED AT THIS TIME.

2009 90322630 A

1

Continued,

PHOENIX

POLICE

DEPARTMENT 6

REPORT 2009 90322630 A 1

SUPPLEMENT

PAGE

NUMBER:

DR NUMBER:

I THEN ASKED AARON ABOUT DISQUALIFIERS FOR EMPLOYMENT. HE STATED FOR SWORN THERE ARE DRUG AND DRIVING STANDARDS (HOW MANY POINTS ON AN APPLICANTS LICENSE), CRIMINAL RECORDS CHECK (WHAT AND HOW MANY TIME THE APPLICANT HAD BEEN ARRESTED.) BAD REFERENCES CAN BE DISCRETIONARY, MEANING THEY ARENrT AN AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFIER.

HE STATED
LESS THAN
I ASKED

CIVILIAN REQUIRED

EMPLOYEES FOR SWORN

HAVE DIFFERENT STANDARDS (POLICE) POSITIONS.

FOR HIRE,

WHICH

ARE

HAD NEVER

HIM ABOUT CRIMES THAT WERE NOT ON RECORD, MEANING THE APPLICANT BEEN INVESTIGATED FOR A CRIME, BUT DISCLOSED IT TO THEM DURING THE APPLICATION PROCESS.

AARON STATED IT WOULD DEPEND ON WHAT THEY DISCLOSED. FOR INSTANCE, COMMITTING A HOMICIDE WOULD BE A DISQUALIFIER. IF THEY DIVULGED A THEFT FROM 'EMPLOYER, IT MIGHT NOT BE A DISQUALIFIER, BUT WOULD BE A MARK AGAINST THEM.

I THEN ASKED ABOUT A SEX CRIME. ARRON STATED, "YOU KNOW SEX CRIMES WERE, WERE STRANGE IN THAT PERIL. THERE WAS NO STANDARD FOR A SEX CRIME." HE GAVE AN EXAMPLE THAT APPLICANT HAD RECEIVED A BLOW JOB WHILE DRIVING, THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN .AN AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFIER PRIOR TO HIS ARRIVAL, HOWEVER THIS WAS A COMMON EVENT, SO THE STANDARD WAS LOOSENED A BIT FOR THIS ACTIVITY. HE STATED THERE WAS NOT ANY HARD AND FAST RULES, AND THAT THEY WOULD OFTEN STAFF SITUATIONS WITH OTHER DETECTIVES AND SERGEANTS.
I ASKED HIM ABOUT AN APPLICANT THAT DIVULGED THAT WHILE HE WAS A JUVENILE, HE MOLESTED A YOUNGER CHILD, IF THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A DISQUALIFIER. HE STATED IT HE WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE A DISQUALIFIER, BUT HE CAN SAY IT WOULD BE 100% FOR SURE. HE STATED THE DETERMINATION WOULD BE WHAT HAPPENED AND WHAT THE SITUATION WAS. HE STATED HE COULD NOT SAY 100% ABSOLUTELY, YES.

I THEN

Q

ASKED

..

HIM

(

IF HE WAS AWARE SIGH, AND THEN

OF THE STATED

AT.

LET
11

OUT

LONG

LOUD

INVESTIGATION GOING ON INVOLVING WHO WAS AN APPLICANT. AARON 111 THINK I KNOW WHAT YOUR GETTING

I THEN SHOWED AARON THE DOL WRITTEN BY DET. CHECKETTS, AND GAVE HIM THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ IT. AFTER HE FINISHED, I ASKED HIM IF IT WAS SIGNED BY HIM, AND HE STATED IT WAS. I THEN HAD HIM TELL ME WHAT THE DOL STATES, AND AARON READ THE DOL TO ME. I ASKED HIM IF WHAT WAS WRITTEN IN THE DOL IS CONSIDERED A DISQUALIFIER, AND HE STATED IT WAS, AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN A LIFE TIME DISQUALIFIER. AARON STATED HE THOUGHT THEY IILETTER BrD" HIM (WHICH AARON STATED MEANT COULD NEVER APPLY AGAIN.) I ASKED HIM IF HE REMEMBERS THIS FILE, BIT. If HE STATED HE DID NOT REMBER THE REASONS, BUT STATED HE REMEMBERS THERE AND HE ENTIRE WAS AN

HE

STATED HE DID, riA LITTLE DISQUALIFYING STATEMENT AND ISSUE WITH THE THE Continued .

2009 90322630 A

1

PHOENIX

POLICE

DEPARTMENT
7

REPORT 2009

SUPPLEHENT TOUCHING OF HIS BEEN AN AtiTOMATIC SO, 'fA. 11

PAGE

NUMBER;

DR NUMBER:

90322630 A

1

LIFE

I ASKED HIM IF THE ADMISSION MADE SHOULD HAVE TIME DISQUALIFTER, AND HE STATED, "I WOULD T:tINR WHY THAT WAS NOT THE CASE HERE, AND HE STATE~ HE

r ASKED HIM DID NOT.

IF HE KNEW

I THEN ASKED HIM IF HE REMEMBERED CALLING ADRIA.).J AFTER HE WAS DISQUALIFIED, AND EXPLAINING TO HIM THAT HE WAS NOT ELIGIBLE. HE STATED HE COULD NOT REMEMBER. HE STATED HE BELIEVES THAT STEVE (DET. CHECKETTS) MAY HAVE TALKED TO HIM FIRST AND THAT HE MAY HAVE TALKED TO HIM AFTERWARDS, BO'l' HE STATED HE DOES NOT REMEMBER. I THEN CLA..~IFIED THAT THESE CONVERSATIONS HAPPENED 3 YEA...R.S AGO. I THEN INFORMED HIM THAT ACCORDING TO ADRIAN, HE WAS SERGEANT AND TOLD HE COULD RE-APPLY IN THREE YEARS. SlffiPRISED HIM, AND HE STATED IT DID. I THEN INFORMED AARON THAT SHE ASKED HIM TO CALL HIS. DISQUALIFICATION. AARON STATED HE REMEMBERS
AARON

CONTACTED BY A I ASKED HIM IF

THIS

I SPOKE

v-lITHDET.

(THE APPIJfCAN'l')

LAZZELL, .A,.t..ID SHE TOLD ME THAT AND EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR

MORE OF A CONVERSATION WITH ADRrAN'S~, STATED HE REMEMBERS TELLING ............... THAT HE COULD NOT TALK ABOUT THE REASONS HIS SON WAS DISQUALIFIED, AND HE THEN EXPLAINED THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF THE INFORMATION TO ME .

I THEN ASKED HIM ABOOT WHO WOULD MAKE THE CALL FOR TUB DI[JQUAl~IFIcATrON, IF THIS INCIDENT SHOULD BE A 3 YEAR OR A LIFE TIME DISQUALIFICATION, AND WHOSE RESPONSIBIL!TY IT IS TO MAKE THAT CALL (THE DETECTIVES OR SERGEk~TS,} ~£ON STATED THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A LIFE TIME, THE SERGEANT WOU!...MAKE THE CAJ~L. HE ADDED THAT IN A SITUATION D LIKE THIS, WOULD BE STAFFED WITH THE LIEU'I'ENANT (NHO WAS ACTING AS THE BUREAU COMYlANDER AT THIS TIME.) TO HANDLE THIS CASE, MIGHT HAVE AND HE STATED IT

I ASKED HIM IF NAME RECOGNITION, ( PLAYED A ROLE IN THE DECISION ON HOW WOULD NOT.

r THEN ASKED HIM ABor]T HI S UNDERSTANDING OF THE DUTY TO REPORT LAW, I ASKED HIM IF HE KNEW WHAT A MANDATORY REPORTER WAS, AND HE STATED HE DID NOT. I THEN EXPLAINED THAT THERE ARE PROFESSIONS IN ARIZONA THAT If THEY ARE MADE AWARE OF A CRIME AGAINST A CHILD, THEY HAVE RESPONSIBILITY TO REPORT THAT CRIME TO THE POLICE OR TO CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES (CPS.) I INFORNED HIM THAT TEACHERS AND POLICE OFFICERS ARE l>lA.,,\,DATORY REPORTERS. I ASKED AARON IF HE EVER CONTACTED CHlLD HELP OR CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES ABOUT THE ADMISSIONS MADE BY ADRIAN, AND HE STATED, "I DON'T THINK! DID, UM, OR MAN I DON'T KNOW TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST WITH YOU I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WENT DOWN. II

2009 90322630 A

1

Continued.

PHOENIX POLICE DEPARTMENT

REPORT
1

SUPPLEMENT

PAGE NUMBER:

8

DR NUMBER: 200.9 90322630 A

I ASKED HIM IF STEVE (DET. CHECKETTS) TOLD HIM HE WOULD DO IT, OR IF YOU WERE GOING TO TAKE CARE OF IT. AARON STATED HE WOULD TYPICALLY HAVE THE DETECTIVE MAKE THE NOTIFICATIONS AS THEY HAVE THE INFORMATION. HE STATED HE HAS HAD HIS DETECTIVES DO THAT IN THE PAST. AARON STATED IN HIS GUT FEELING, HE WOULD HAVE TOLD STEVE (DET. CHECKETTS) TO TOUCH BASE WITH SEX CRIMES, AND JUST PASS THE INFORMATION ON. ESPECIALLY WITH THE CHILD PORN ADMISSION. HE STATED HE DOES NOT REMEMBER SPECIFICALLY GIVING DET. CHECKETTS THAT lNSTRUCTION.

HE THEN STATED HE DOES NOT REMEMBER ANY PROTOCOLS, OR STANDARDS THAT WERE IN PLACE FOR REPORTING CRIMES TO AN INVESTIGATIVE DETAIL IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS. HE STATED HE DOES NOT REMEMBER TELLING STEVE TO MAKE THE NOTIFICATIONS, AND ALSO STATED HE IS VERY COMMUNATIVE WITH HIS CHAIN OF COMMAND AS WELL, AND BELIEVES HE WOULD HAVE TOLD HIS SUPERVISOR. AARON INFORMED ME THAT, "STEVE WAS ONE OF THOSE GUYS THAT WOULD FOLLOW UP AND DO THINGS AND THEN COME BACK AND LET HIM KNOW WHAT HE DID." I ASKED AARON IF A SITUATION LIKE THIS MIGHT HAVE MADE IT INTO STEVE'S MONTHLY NOTES, AND HE STATED IT MAY HAVE. I THEN ASKED IF HE HAD A COpy OF THE NOTES SAVED ANYWHERE, AND HE STATED HE DID NOT. AARON STATED HE DID NOT WANT TO LIE TO ME ABOUT THIS, BUT HE DOES NOT REMEMBER.

I THEN ASKED AARON IF HE REMEMBERS ADVISING LT. KAVANAGH ABOUT THIS SITUATION, AND HE STATED, "I CAN'T REMEMBER MUCH OF THIS AT ALL TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST WITH YOU. " HE STATED THIS IS THE KIND OF THING THAT HE WOULD TYPICALLY PASS ON TO HIS LIEUTENANT, SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE IT HAS TO DO WITH A COMMANDER'S"" HE STATED THAT IF THERE WAS AN INQUIRY ABOUT WHY THE APPLICANT WAS HIRED, HE WANTED HIS SUPERVISOR TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE SITUATION. HE STATED HE DOES NOT KNOW IF HE WOULD HAVE GONE THOUGH THE ENTIRE FILE WITH HER, OR JUST GIVEN HER THE INFORMATION.

I ASKED AARON, IF STEVE MAY HAVE TRIED TO SNEAK THIS APPLICANT BY BECAUSE OF HIS AND AARON STATED HE DID NOT THINK SO. HE STATED IS NOT UNCOMMON TO DISQUALIFY SOMEONE WHO HAD A FAMILY MEMBER ON THE DEPARTMENT.

I11III

I ASKED AARON ABOUT HIS CONVERSATION WITH COMMANDER (REFERRING TO COMMANDER ) HE STATED HE BELIEVES IT WAS INITIATED BY COMMANDER AND COMMANDER TOLD HIM THAT ADRIAN DID NOT KNOW THE REASONS FOR THE DISQUALIFICATION, AND ASKED THAT AARON TALK TO HIM.

AARON STATED HE TOLD COMMANDER .... ~THAT HE WOULD TALK TO ADRIAN AND EXPLAIN THE SITUATION TO HIM. HE STATED HE KNOWS HE DID NOT TALK TO COMMANDER ABOUT THE REASONS FOR DISQUALIFICATION, BECAUSE OF THE CONFIDENTIALITY. I AGAIN THEN ASKED AARON ABOUT CALLING ADRIAN AND TELLING HIM HE COULD APPLY IN 3 YEARS, AND HE STATED HE DOES NO REMEMBER MAKING THAT CALL AND TELL HIM THAT. HE STATED HE DID SIGN IT (REFEREEING TO THE DOL) BUT DOES

2009 90322630 A

l

Continued.

PHOENIX POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT

SUPPLEMENT

PAGE NUMBER:

9

DR NUMBER;

2009

90322630

A

1

NOT KNOW HOW HE WOULD HAVE APPROVED

IT.

I ASKED AARON IF HE WAS AWARE OF THE MANDATORY REPORTER LAWS, PRIOR TO OUR CONVERSATION. HE STATED HE KNEW HE HAD A DUTY TO REPORT, OR TO REACT OR RESPOND TO ACT. IF HE SEES A CRIME TAKING PLACE, HE HAS A DUTY TO ACT. HE STATED HE DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE DUTY TO REPORT LAW, AND THE WAY IT WAS EXPLAINED TO HIM.

I ASKED HIM EVEN THOUGH HE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE LAW, IF HE WOULD HAVE TOLD A DETECTIVE WHO CAME TO HIM WITH A SIMILAR SITUATION TO REPORT THIS TO THE PROPER INVESTIGATIVE DETAILS, AND HE STATED, tlTHAT1S MY STANDARD OPERATIONS. UM, MAN I JUST CAN'T REMEMBER SPECIFICALLY DIRECTING STEVE TO DO THAT. BUT I WOULD THINK THAT BASED ON THIS INFORMATION, THAT I WOULD HAVE SAID HEY STEVE, JUST GIVE SEX CRIMES A CALL, GIVE THEM THE INFOr UM AND LET THEM KNOW AND THEY CAN DO WHAT THEY WANT TO WITH IT." I THEN ASKED HIMr IF WHEN SPEAKING WITH THE APPLICANTr IF HE WOULD HAVE NOTIFIED THE APPLICANT THAT HE WAS GOING TO BE NOTIFYING AN INVESTIGATIVE DETAIL ABOUT THE ADMISSIONS. HE STATED IT WAS RARE THAT HE WOULD SPEAK WITH THE APPLICANT, BUT HE WOULD NOT NOTIFY THEM OF A POSSIBLE INVESTIGATION BECAUSE THAT MIGHT SCREW UP THE INVESTIGATION.
MY

INTERVIEW WITH AARON WAS DIGITALLY VIDEO RECORDED. FOR FURTHER DETAILS.

SEE THAT RECORDING

I THEN ATTEMPTED TO CONTACT COMMANDER KAVANAGH #4300 BY CALLING HER OFFICE AND WAS ABLE TO LEAVE A VOICE MAIL MESSAGE FOR HER REQUESTING SHE CONTACT ME REFERENCE THIS INCIDENT. LATER ON 03-10-09, I RECEIVED A CALL FROM COMMANDER KAVANAGH, AND WAS ABLE TO SET UP A MEETING WITH HER LATER IN HER OFFICE.

ON 03-10-09, I INTERVIEWED COMMANDER KAVANAGH ABOUT THIS INCIDENT. I ASKED HER IF SHE WAS AWARE IF AN INVESTIGATION INVOLVING THE uF COMMANDER . SHE STATED SHE WAS AWARE THERE WAS AN INVESTIGATION ON THE ALEA (ARIZONA LAW ENFORCEMENT ACADEMY) BECAUSE (OF COMMANDER AND F IN DR# 2009-90322630) WORKS THERE.

I EXPLAINED APPLIED FOR A POSITION OF A POLICE AIDE BACK ALSO I EXPLAINED THAT DURING THE APPLICATION PROCESS ADRIAN DISCLOSED SEVERAL ITEMS THAT WERE SERIOUS, THAT WERE CRIMINAL IN NATURE. I EXPLAINED THAT HE WAS DISQUALIFIED FOR 3 YEARS, HOWEVER POSSIBLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN A LIFE TIME DISQUALIFICATIONr AND THAT NOTIFICATIONS WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE, WERE NOT (ADVISING CPS OR CHILD HELP.)
IN 2006.

COMMANDER KAVANAGH STATED SHE WAS AWARE THAT POLICE OFFICERS ARE CONSIDERED MANDATORY REPORTERS. I THEN ASKED HER IF SHE HAD ANY INDEPENDANT RECOLLECTION OF THIS CASE, AND SHE STATED SHE DID NOT. I THEN SHOWED HER THE APPLICATION PACKET FOR

2009

90322630

A

1

Continued .

PHOENIX POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT SUPPLEMENT PAGE NUMBER: 10 DR NUMBER:
2009

90322630 A

1

b~, INCLUDING THE DOL (DISQUALIFICATION OFF LIST.) I INFORMED -aER THAT THE BACKGROUND INVESTIGATOR WAS DET. STEVE CHECKETTS, AND SHE REPLIED, "WHO HAS SINCE PASSED AWAY."
COMMANDER KAVANAGH THEN READ THE DOL, AND IMMEDIATELY STATED, ItI'VENEVER HEARD THIS BEFORE." SHE STATED SHE DOES NOT REMEMBER EVER SEEING THIS OR READING IT, AND THAT THE ADMISSION ARE PRETTY EGRESSIONS. I CLARIFIED THAT SHE NEVER HEARD ABOUT THIS BEFORE, AND SHE STATED SHE DOES NOT RECALL BEING BRIEFED ON THIS BEFORE. SHE STATED THIS WOULD HAVE STUCK OUT IN HER MIND, BECAUSE IT'S AN SHE STATED SHE DOES NOT RECALL ANYTHING WITH COMMANDER KAVANAGH IN READING TEE DOL, STATED THAT SINCE THERE WAS AN ADMISSION OF VIEWING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY, THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN AN AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFIER. SHE STATED SHE DID NOT KNOW WHERE THE 3 YEAR DISQUALIFICATION HAD COME FROM. SHE THEN STATED THAT STEVE CHECKETTS WAS LIKE AN INDEPENDANT ENTITY. THAT HE DID NOT LIKE HIS DECISION MAKING QUESTIONED. SHE STATED IT WAS RARE SHE GOT THINGS FROM STEVE. SHE THEN STATED STEVE WAS EXTREMELY RESISTANT TO MAKING CHANGES TO THE APPLICATION PROCESS FOR CIVILIANS. SHE HAD TO ORDER HIM TO DO SO, AND EVEN THEN HE WAS RESISTANT. SHE STATED NORMALLY ON A DISQUALIFICATION, STEVE WOULD MAKE THE CALL AND THEN IT WOULD GO TO THE SERGEANT.

SHE STATED SHE DOES NOT RECALL HAVING A DISCUSSION WITH STEVE OR AARON ABOUT !l,ND STATED THE 3 YEAR THING IS BIZARRE,

I ASKED HER IF THERE WAS A POLICY WHILE IN PESB ABOUT MAKING NOTIFICATIONS TO CPS OR TO CHILD CRIME DETECTIVES, OR OTHER AGENCIES WHEN CRIMES WERE BROUGHT TO THEIR ATTENTION. SHE STATED THEY DID THAT ON A REGULAR BASIS WHEN ISSUES CAME TO THEM. SHE STATED THE BIG ISSUE THEY HAD TO NARROW DOWN WAS JURISDICTION, AND NOTIFYING THAT AGENCY, AND THEY WOULD THEN MAKE A NOTATION IN THE FILE.

I ASKED COMMANDER KAVANAGH WHO THE RESPONSIBILITY WOULD BE TO MAKE NOTIFICATIONS ON A CASE LIKE THIS, AND SHE STATED IT WOULD BE ON BOTH, THAT BETWEEN THE 2 OF THEM, THEY WOULD GET IT DONE. SHE STATED SHE HAS NEVER READ THIS BEFORE, AND THAT IT SETS OFF SOME ALARMS FOR HER. I ASKED HER IF IN HER OPINION THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN REPORTED AND SHE STATED IT SHOULD HAVE. I ASKED HER IF THERE WAS ANY TRAINING OR A POLICY FOR THE SERGEANTS AND DETECTIVES ON MANDATORY REPORTING STATUTES, AND SHE STATED SHE COULD NOT REMEMBER ANY. COMMANDER KAVANAGH THEN FOR HER INITIALS, WHICH POINTED OUT THAT ON THE TO A QUESTION (PAGE 11) LOOKED THROUGH THE APPLICATION AND DOL, LOOKING WOULD INDICATE SHE REVIEWED THE FILE. SHE THEN APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT'S INITIALS ARE NOT NEXT SHE STATED THEY HAVE THE APPLICANTS INITIAL THEIR Continued.

2009 90322630 A

1

PHOENIX

POLICE

DEPARTMENT 11

REPORT 2009 90322630 A 1

SUPPLEMENT ANSWERS, WITHHELD

PAGE

NUMBER:

DR NUMBER: THE APPLICANT

AND SINCE THERE WAS NO THAT INFORMATION.

INITIAL

INTENTIONALLY

IN THIS CASE, THE QUESTIONS IS, IIWHILE AS A JUVENILE OR ADULT, HAVE YOU EVER COMMITTED ANY CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN: (FONDLING, TOUCHING IN AN INAPPROPRIATE MANNER, MOLESTATION, FURNISHING OBSCENE MATERIAL TO MINORS, CHILD PORNOGRAPHY, ETC.) If ADRIAN INITIALT.v l:.n~n'T"1<! nnlifN IINO" CROSSED THE "NO n nUT AND WROTE, "YES, IVE TOUCHED MY r WHEN I WAS . SHE WAS '{ OLD. Y OLD TOUCHED YO MALE . I NOT MORE THAN 3 X I S TOUCHED HIS PENIS 2X'S IN POOLi I X IN SHOWER (NO CLOTHS) n THE APPLICANT INITIALED THIS PORT!0N.
I

SHE ALSO POINTED OUT ON PAGE 12 THERE IS A QUESTION WHICH READS, "HAVE YOU EVER ACCESSED, DOWNLOADED, MAINTAINED, MANAGED, OR REDISTRIBUTED ANY FILES, PHOTO'S, JPEGS, MPEGS, CLIPS, AVI'S, OR MOVIES, OF ILLEGAL SEXUAL ACTS SUCH AS CHILD PORNOGRAPHy?n THE APPLICANT ORIGINALLY WROTE, "Non HOWEVER CROSSED THAT OUT AND WROTE, "HAS SEEN CHILDREN. NUDE OR IN SEX ACTS BUT THEY SAY THEY ARE 18 OR 19. HAS SEEN WOMEN ENGAGED IN SEX WITH HORSE & DOG NOT MORE THAN 6 X'S." THE APPLICANT INITIALED THIS STATEMENT.

II1II

I ASKED

IN REGARDS

COMMANDER

KAVANAGH IF SHE REMEMBERS BEING CONTACTED BY COMMANDER TO THIS APPLICATION, AND SHE STATED SHE WAS NOT. WAS DIGITALLY RECORDED. SEE THAT

MY INTERVIEW WITH COMMANDER KAVANAGH RECORDING FOR FURTHER DETAILS.

ON 04-10-09, I INTERVIEWED JACK OGILVIE, WHO IS THE POLYGRAPH EXAMINER WHO INTERVIEWED ADRIAN IN 2006. I INFORMED HIM THAT I WAS INVESTIGATING A CASE INVOLVING ADRIAN AND THAT HE WAS THE POLYGRAPH EXAMINER. HE STATED HE DID NOT REMEMBER THE APPLICANT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. I THEN SHOWED HIM THE MEMO HE COMPLETED DETAILING THE POLYGRAPH EXAMINATlnhl OF ADRInN, AND HE STATED HE REMEMBERED A FEW DETAILS, SUCH AS THE AND THE YEAR OLD SISTER PHOTOGRAPHING HIM. HE ALSO STATED IT IS POSSIBLE THAT OTHER APPLICANTS DISCLOSED SIMILAR SITUATIONS, AND THAT HE CANtT REMEMBER EVERY DETAIL.

JACK STATED THAT IT IS HIS STANDARD PROCEDURE TO NOTIFY THE BACKGROUND INVESTIGATOR WHEN AN APPLICANT DISCLOSES SERIOUS OFFENSES. HE STATED EH COMPLETES THE MEMO ON EVER CASE, BUT IT'S NOT UNCOMMON FOR HIM TO SPEAK TO THE BACKGROUND INVESTIGATOR DIRECTLY. HE BELIEVES THAT IN THIS SITUATION, BE WOULD HAVE CONTACTED DET. CHECKETTS ABOUT THE ADMISSIONS, BUT HE DOES NOT REMEMBER FOR SURE. I ASKED JACK ABOUT HIS BACKGROUND, AND HE STATED HE HAS BEEN A POLYGRAPH EXAMINER FOR OVER 20 YEARS, AND WITH THE CITY OF PHOENIX FOR 13 YEARS. HE STATED ON AVERAGE, HE INTERVIEWS ABOUT 300 APPLICANTS A YEAR. MY INTERVIEW WITH FURTHER DETAILS. THERE WERE TWO JACK WAS DIGITALLY OF PHOENIX RECORDED. EMPLOYEES SEE WHO THAT WERE RECORDING AWARE FOR

SWORN A

CITY
1

OF THE Continued.

2009

90322630

PHOENIX POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT SUPPLEMENT • PAGE NUMBER: 12 DR NUMBER: 2009 90322630 A
1

CRIMINAL NATURE OF THE INFORMATION DIVULGED BY APPLICANT ADRIAN ..... DURING THE APPLICATION PROCESS, BEING DET. STEVE CHECKETTS AND LT AARON THOMAS (LT THOMAS WAS A SERGEANT AT THE TIME OF THIS INCIDENT.) STEVE CHECKETTS PASSED AWAY IN 2007. EOS 6844 VICTIM RECEIVED RIGHTS INFORMATION: INVOICES:
3795472

NO

MAIL-IN SOPPLEMENT:

DR ENTERED BY ; 6844

DR FINALIZED

BY : 6844
DR NO: 2009 90322630 A 001

END OF REPORT

PHOENIX

POLICE

DEPARTMENT
1

REPORT 2009 90322630 A
2

SUPPLEMENT DATE: 20090310 FAILURE

PAGE NUMBER: TIME: 1015

DR NUMBER:

REPORT

TYPE

OF REPORT: 000620

TO REPORT STREET 010106 0600 BEAT:

OFFENSE: 0513

501 BA27 0600 C25

LOCATION: DATE/TIME REPORTING OFFENSE SERIAL

W WASHINGTON SUN

GRID:

OF OCCURRENCE: OFFICER(S]: INVOLVED: NUMBER: JOHN

I

WED 4438

030106 UNIT:

BELL

BIAS 4438

- NONE (NO BIAS)

****

NARRATIVE

****

ON 03-10-09, AT 0626 CONDUCTED AT 2120 N.

HOURS, I MONITORED AN INTERVIEW OF AARON THOMAS, CENTRAL AVENUE, IN THE FAMILY INVESTIGATIONS BUREAU.

I RECORDED THE INTERVIEW ON DIGITAL EQUIPMENT, THE EQUIPMENT USED WAS A CLH INTERNATIONAL DESKTOP COMPUTER WITH THE SERIAL NUMBER #403257. THE INTERVIEW WAS SAVED IN ITS ENTIRETY ON THE HARD DRIVE. A COpy WAS CREATED ON A DIGITAL VIDEO DISC. THE COpy WAS GIVEN TO DETECTIVE BOECK #6844. THE INTERVIEW ENDED AT 0726 HOURS. AS NECESSARY: AND/OR RECORDING AND/OR OF THE

CHECK

ONE AND COMPLETE

_x__

THERE WERE NO INTERRUPTIONS IN THE MONITORING INTERVIEW FROM ITS BEGINNING TO ITS CONCLUSION. IN THE

THERE WAS/WERE INTERRUPTION(S) RECORDING OF THIS INTERVIEW AS FOLLOWS: STOPPED RECEIVED TIME RIGHTS RESUMED INFORMATION: NO

MONITORING

TIME

REASON MAIL-IN SUPPLEMENT:

VICTIM INVOICES:

DR ENTERED

BY

6844

DR FINALIZED

BY

:

6844

END OF REPORT

DR NO:

2009

90322630

A 002

PHOENIX

POLICE

DEPARTMENT
1

REPORT 2009
90322630

SUI?PLEMENT REPORT DATE: 20090420 FAILURE

PAGE NUMBER: TIME: 0842

DR NUMBER:

A

3

TYPE OF REPORT: LOCATION: DATE/TIME REPORTING OFFENSE
000620

TO REPORT STREET
010106

OFFENSE: BEAT: 0513 0600

501

W WASHINGTON
SUN

GRID: BA27 0600

OF OCCURRENCE:
OFFICER(S): INVOLVED:

I

WED 6844

030106

STEVEN

BOECK

UNIT: C25

BIAS - NONE (NO BIAS)

REPORT STATUS AT PRE$E:NT: PENDING

****
SUBMIT FOR REVIEW-Ol: NAME: ENGLISH

SUSPECT

INFORMATION JEROME

****

THOMAS,

AARON

SPEAKING: SUSPECTED

OF USING: NOT APPLICABLE
DOB:_

RACE: B SEX: M AGE: 42 HAIR: BLD EYES: BRO
OlIN:
P BUS. NAME:

SSN:

HT: 509

WT: 190

WORK:

a

PHOENIX POLICE DEPA.~Tl1ENT i?HO~"E: ( OCCUPATION: POLICE LIEUTENANT EMPLOYE : WORK HOURS: 2100 - 0700 DAYS OFF: WED,THUR,FRI LEVEL OF FO~CE = VERBAL PERSUASION, NEGOTIATION, COMMh~ SERIAL NUMBER: 6844

R&l: SCN# 9008310089 A.PT/SUITE: ZIP. CO"__' ,

****

NARRATIVE PROBABLE

~*** CAUSE TO CHARGE SRl AARON POLICE

AT THIS TIME, THOMAS;

THERE

IS SUFFICIENT

- IN JANUARY OF 2006, SRl AARON WAS WORKING AS A SWORN PHOENIX SERGEANT IN THE POLICE EMPLOYMENT AND SERVICES BUREAU;

- IN JANUARY OF 2006 ADRIAN WHO WAS APPLYING FOR A POSITION WITH THE PHOENIX POLICE DEPARTMENT, DISCLOSED TO HIS BACK GROUND INVESTIGATOQ DRT. STEVE CHECKETTS, THAT HE HAD MOLESTED HIS AND YEAR OLD, HAD VIEWED IMAGES OF BESTIALITY ON THE COMPUTER AND ALSO VIEWED IMAGES OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY; - DET. CHECKETTS NOTIFIED SRl AARON OF THIS, DOCUMENTING ADMISSION IN A MEMO WHICH WAS SIGNED BY SRl fJffiONi THE

2009 90322630 A

3

Continued,

~-----------------------------PHOENIX POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT

SUPPLEMENT

PAGE NUMBER:

2

DR NUMBER: 2009 90322630 A

3

- SRI AARON ADMITTED TO KNOWING ABOUT THE ADMISSION, HOWEVER CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES WAS NEVER NOTIFIED AND NO POLICE REPORT WAS COMPLETED/NO INVESTIGATIVE UNIT WAS NOTIFIED AS IS REQUIRED BY ARS 13-3620. EVIDENCE COLLECTED: - DIGITALLY RECORDED INTERVIEW CONDUCTED WITH SRI AARONi - DIGITALLY RECORDED INTERVIEW CONDUCTED WITH DET. LAZZELL, COMMANDER KAVANAGH, AND POLYGRAPH .EXAMINER JAC - COpy OF AP APPLICANT ADRIAN I11III

I THEREFORE REQUEST THAT THIS CASE BE REVIEWED AND THE CHARGE OF FAILURE TO REPORT, PER ARS 13-3620, A CLASS 6 FELONY, BE CONSIDERED AGAINST SRI AARON THOMAS.

6844 VICTIM RECEIVED RIGHTS INFORMATION: INVOICES: NO MAIL-IN SUPPLEMENT:

DR ENTERED BY

6844

DR FINALIZED
END

BY : DR NO: 2009 90322630 A 003

OF REPORT

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->