AZ POST

INTEGRITY BULLETIN

Volume No. 18

 

 

 

The Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board (AZ POST) is mandated by the legislature to establish and enforce the physical, mental, and moral fitness standards for all peace officers in the state.  The Board meets the charge to protect the public by overseeing the integrity of Arizona’s law enforcement officers by reviewing cases and taking action against the certification of individuals who violate the AZ POST Rules.  The following is a summary of some of the actions taken by the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board at its February and March 2004, public meetings.  These actions are not precedent setting, in the sense that similar cases will end with the same result, because each case is considered on its individual facts and circumstances.  Having said that, the Board publishes this bulletin to provide insight into the Board’s position on various types of officer misconduct.  As always, the Compliance Specialist for your agency is available to discuss any matter and to assist you with any questions you might have.

 

                                                                                           

CASE NO. 1

FALSE REPORTING

 

 

Officer A accidentally discharged his weapon in his residence when no one else was home.  The bullet traveled through an interior wall and through an adjoining bedroom, the bedroom of one of his roommates.  When his roommate asked what had happened, Officer A said the bullet had come from outside the residence through his bedroom window.  Because two of his uniforms had been damaged, the roommate reported this to his supervisor who requested a copy of the police report.  No report had been made.  However, Officer A was questioned and responded by filing a report that unknown persons had fired a weapon toward his residence, causing the bullet to enter his window, and ultimately his roommate’s closet.  The criminal investigators noted that the bullet trajectory made Officer A’s story highly improbable.  He stuck to the story through several interviews, but finally admitted the truth.  The Board revoked his certification for committing false reporting and lying during a criminal investigation. 

                                                                

 

CASE NO. 2

DRUG USE WHILE AN OFFICER

 

 

Officer B tested positive for anabolic steroids after the agency ordered a "for suspicion" test.  The Board revoked his certification for the illegal use of a dangerous drug.

 

                                                                                                             

CASE NO. 3 

ASSAULT

 

 

Officer C assaulted a female coworker by grabbing her around the neck with his hands and choking her.  The Board revoked his certification for the commission of an offense involving physical violence and malfeasance.

 

                                                                                                    

CASE NO. 4 

UNTRUTHFUL

 

 

Officer D was alone in a remote substation prior to the end of his shift.  He wrote a report concerning evidence he intended to transport the following day.  No one was scheduled to report to duty between the time he left and the time he checked back on duty the following day.  He inadvertently left the evidence sitting out on a desk at the locked substation when he went home.  When he arrived the next day, the evidence was in the same condition and location it had been when he left, so he carried on with it as he intended.  Some time later, during a heated discussion on a number of subjects with his supervisor, the supervisor asked him what he meant by having “secured” the evidence as he wrote in the report.  He replied it had been in the trunk of his patrol vehicle.  The agency fired him.  The Board adopted a consent agreement that suspended his certification for 100 days from the date he left the agency’s employ for misfeasance in office.

 

                                                                                                                

CASE NO. 5  

THEFT

 

 

The Board adopted a consent agreement calling for voluntary relinquishment of certification in one case where the theft of state monies was alleged, but not put to proof.

 

On February 18, 2004 and March 17, 2004, the Board voted to close out the following cases without initiating a complaint for disciplinary action.  In some of these cases, the Board directed staff to assure that any hiring agency would comply with the misconduct reporting statute by inquiring of the past agency whether violations of POST rules existed.

 

·       An officer failed to volunteer relevant information about another officer’s intent to lie to IA, and made a statement that, although true, was likely to mislead investigators.

 

·       An officer identified himself as a peace officer when working off duty in another jurisdiction.  He performed a civil standby while collecting monies owed to his off duty employer.

 

·       The Board dismissed a case without prejudice in which the officer is alleged to have lied to his supervisor about the reason he needed emergency time off.  The officer is presently serving in the armed forces and would be unavailable to attend a hearing for at least two years.