Melendres v. Arpaio #1467 Oct 13 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 13 Evidentiary Hearing

OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
2963
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
2
3
4
5
Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres,

et al.,
Plaintiffs,
6
7
8
vs.
Joseph M. Arpaio, et al.,

Defendants.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
(Evidentiary Hearing Day 13, Pages 2963-3219)
18
DS
19
Court Reporter:
IEN
22
23
24
FR
25
Phoenix, Arizona
October 13, 2015
9:03 a.m.
BEFORE THE HONORABLE G. MURRAY SNOW
17
21
No. CV 07-2513-PHX-GMS
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
16
20
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Gary Moll
401 W. Washington Street, SPC #38
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 322-7263
Proceedings taken by stenographic court reporter

Transcript prepared by computer-aided transcription
A P P E A R A N C E S
1
2
3
4
5
6
For the Plaintiffs:

American Civil Liberties Union Foundation
Immigrants' Rights Project
By: Cecillia D. Wang, Esq.
39 Drumm Street
San Francisco, California 94111
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation
Immigrants' Rights Project
By: Andre Segura, Esq.
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, New York 10004
7
8
9
American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona

By: Daniel J. Pochoda, Esq.
P.O. Box 17148
10
11
12
Covington & Burling, LLP

By: Stanley Young, Esq.
By: Michelle L. Morin, Esq.
333 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 700
Redwood Shores, California 94065
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
For the Defendant Joseph M. Arpaio and Maricopa County

Sheriff's Office:
Iafrate & Associates
By: Michele M. Iafrate, Esq.
649 N. 2nd Avenue
IEN
22
For the Defendant Maricopa County:

Walker & Peskind, PLLC
By: Richard K. Walker, Esq.
By: Charles W. Jirauch, Esq.
SGA Corporate Center
16100 N. 7th Street, Suite 140
DS
15
23
24
FR
25
2964
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Melendres v. Arpaio, 10/13/15 Evidentiary Hearing
Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, PLC

By: A. Melvin McDonald, Jr., Esq.
By: John T. Masterson, Esq.
By: Joseph T. Popolizio, Esq.
2901 N. Central Avenue, Suite 800
A P P E A R A N C E S
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
For the Movants Christine Stutz and Thomas P. Liddy:

Broening, Oberg, Woods & Wilson, PC
By: Marilyn D. Cage, Esq.
P.O. Box 20527
For the Intervenor United States of America:

U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division
By: Paul Killebrew, Esq.
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 5th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20530
For Executive Chief Brian Sands:
Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith, LLP
By: Greg S. Como, Esq.
2929 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1700
For Brian Mackiewicz:
Sitton Nash
By: Alexandra Mijares Nash, Esq.
301 W. Warner Road, Suite 133
Tempe, Arizona 85284
Also present:
Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio
Executive Chief Brian Sands
Chief Deputy Gerard Sheridan
Lieutenant Joseph Sousa
18
21
IEN
22
DS
19
20
23
24
FR
25
2965
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I N D E X
1
2
Witness:
DAVID TENNYSON
Direct Examination Continued by Mr. Segura

Cross-Examination by Mr. Masterson
Redirect Examination by Mr. Segura
Examination by the Court
5
6
7
8
13
No.
2001
15
2760
17
19
20
21
2893
2894
IEN
22
2843
23
24
FR
25
Description
Admitted
MCSO Memorandum from Commander Shaw to Captain

Skinner dated 8/5/2015 re July 21, 2015 Site
Visit Request and MCSO Policy GC-17 dated
9/5/2014 Employee Disciplinary Procedure
(MELC416241-MELC416261)
3169
Memorandum to Steve Bailey from Stephen Fax

Re: Timeline for Ramon Charley Armendariz
dated 8/1/2014 (MELC011630-MELC011647)
3194
E-mail from David Tennyson to Dave Zebro Re:

Report Request dated 4/27/2015 (MELC1397053)
2983
Interview of Mary Ann McKessey with David

Tennyson re Case # 2015-0034 dated 3/27/2015
(MELC186200-MELC186266)
2970
Audio of conversation between Brian Mackiewicz

and David Tennyson (MELC672936)
2977
DS
18
3141
E X H I B I T S
14
16
2969
2997
3104
3118
Direct Examination by Ms. Wang
10
12
Page
STEVE BAILY
11
2966
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
P R O C E E D I N G S
1
2
3
THE COURT:
4
5
MS. WANG:
MR. YOUNG:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Cecillia Wang
MR. POCHODA:
Stanley Young
Good morning.
Stan Pochoda of the ACLU
MR. KILLEBREW:
Good morning.
Paul Killebrew for the
United States.
THE COURT:
15
Good morning.
MR. MASTERSON:
Good morning, Judge.
John Masterson,
16
Joe Popolizio for Sheriff Arpaio and the individual contemnors,
17
and with us is Holly McGee.
18
THE COURT:
19
MR. WALKER:
21
THE COURT:
DS
on behalf of Maricopa County.
IEN
Richard Walker
09:04:30
Good morning.
MR. McDONALD:
Mel McDonald
making a special appearance for Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
24
THE COURT:
25
MR. COMO:
FR
09:04:16
Good morning.
20
23
09:04:07
of Arizona for plaintiffs.
14
22
09:03:54
and Michelle Morin of Covington & Burling for plaintiffs.
12
13
I'm sorry.
and Andre Segura of the ACLU for plaintiffs.
10
11
Please be seated.
ought to let the parties announce first.
8
9
Thank you.
I did note that the parties have filed -- I guess we
6
7
2967
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Good morning.
Greg Como of
09:04:37
2968
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith representing Chief Sands.

THE COURT:
MS. CAGE:
Good morning.
Marilyn Cage of
Broening, Oberg, Woods & Wilson for nonparties Christina Stutz
and Tom Liddy.
09:04:49
THE COURT:
Good morning.
MS. IAFRATE:
Michele
Iafrate on behalf of Sheriff Arpaio and the unnamed alleged
contemnors.
THE COURT:
10
Good morning.
MS. MIJARES NASH:
11
09:05:00
12
Alexandra Mijares Nash making a special appearance for
13
Detective Brian Mackiewicz.
14
15
THE COURT:
Good morning.
All right.
I did notice that I finally got the
16
final -- or the sort of joint pretrial statement put together
17
this morning.
18
it, so I figured I'll try and read through it during break and
19
then maybe address it right after lunch.
20
anything else to take up, we can resume, I believe, with the
21
testimony of Sergeant Tennyson.
23
I didn't really have a chance to read through
DS
All right.
09:05:35
Sergeant Tennyson, then I'll remind you
24
you're still under oath.
25
you're still under oath.
FR
Unless there's
Is there anything any party needs to raise?
IEN
22
09:05:18
Even though we've had a long weekend,

09:05:54
THE WITNESS:
Thank you.
DAVID TENNYSON,
2
3
recalled as a witness herein, having been previously duly
sworn, was examined and testified further as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED
5
6
BY MR. SEGURA:
Q.
Good morning, Sergeant.
A.
Good morning.
Q.
So on Friday we were discussing an interview that you
10
conducted of Ms. McKessy with Dave Zebro, correct?
11
A.
That's correct.
12
Q.
And that interview -- do you recall the date of that
13
interview?
14
A.
15
the end of July, August, I'm not sure.
16
Q.
Of 2014?
17
A.
'14, yes.
18
Q.
Could you take a look at Exhibit 2893, which is not in
19
evidence.
I do not recall the exact date.
And is this the transcription of the interview that
21
you and Dave Zebro conducted with Ms. McKessy?
22
A.
24
FR
25
09:06:25
09:07:12
Yes, it is.
IEN
23
09:06:06
I'm thinking it was toward
DS
20
2969
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Tennyson - DX Segura, 10/13/15 Evidentiary Hearing
MR. SEGURA:
Your Honor, I move for the admission of
Exhibit 2893.
MR. MASTERSON:
Objection, hearsay.
09:07:27
2970
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
THE COURT:
Overruled.
The exhibit is admitted.
(Exhibit No. 2893 is admitted into evidence.)
2
3
BY MR. SEGURA:
Q.
this exhibit.
A.
I do.
Q.
That's not correct, right?
A.
That's not the correct date of the interview.
Q.
Okay.
And there's a date at the top of -- on the top margin of

Do you see where it says March 27th, 2015?
And there's also a case number, 15-34.
10
case number assigned to this case?
11
A.
12
criminal IA case, so that was the number given.
13
must have been assigned to the case, yes.
14
Q.
15
The page numbers are at the top.
Is that the
09:07:54
I'm not certain if it's assigned to the -- this was a
Okay.
THE COURT:
17
I assume it
Could you turn to page number 14 of the transcript.
MR. SEGURA:
16
09:08:19
Your Honor, may we publish this?
You may.
18
BY MR. SEGURA:
19
Q.
20
discussing how she was demoted because she did not divulge her
21
relationship with Mr. Mackiewicz?
22
A.
DS
Do you see at the bottom of page 14 where Ms. McKessy is
09:08:43
IEN
I do.
23
Q.
24
she was demoted, and that Bill Montgomery, referring to the
25
county attorney, referred it over to MCSO?
FR
09:07:40
Okay.
And at the very bottom, do you see where she says
09:09:00
2971
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Do you see that?
1
2
A.
I do.
Q.
And she was -- if you flip to the next page, she was
asking -- she was referring to a conversation she had with
Mr. Mackiewicz about what would happen to him for failing to
disclose this relationship, is that correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Okay.
do you see where Ms. McKessy states that Mr. Mackiewicz's
And if you go to the next page, page 15, line 639,
10
reaction was:
11
about.
"He's, like, '(Jerry) told me not to worry
09:09:36
They're gonna take care of it"?

Do you see that?
12
13
A.
I do.
14
Q.
Did you look into this issue as to whether Mr. Mackiewicz
15
should have revealed his relationship with Ms. McKessy?
16
A.
No, I didn't.
17
Q.
Do you know if there's a policy of having a relationship
18
with a county attorney, with an MCSO employee having a
19
relationship with a county attorney?
20
A.
21
administrative issue, so those people would have looked into
22
that.
IEN
DS
I'm a criminal investigator.
That would be an
09:09:53
09:10:07
The administrative side would have looked into something
23
that referred to policy.
24
Q.
Okay.
25
A.
There was a report written, and these transcripts all go to
FR
09:09:14
Did you refer it to the administrative side?

09:10:23
2972
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
the administrative side.
Q.
to this issue, correct?
A.
I'm not.
Q.
Turn to page 36 of the transcript.
And you're not aware if any investigation was conducted as
Do you recall that during Ms. McKessy's interview she
6
7
referenced a Cathy Woods Enriquez?
A.
I do.
Q.
And who is she?
10
A.
Cathy, from what I recall, I think she works for Phoenix
11
PD.
But she's assigned to ACTIC, which is a -- I think it's
12
like a joint division that does background investigations and
13
things like that, criminal investigation.
14
Q.
15
next page, is discussing some concerns she had about whether
16
Mackiewicz had obtained her text messages, is that correct?
17
A.
18
messages.
19
at one point a list of texts or e-mails, something to that
20
effect, yes.
21
Q.
Text messages that Ms. McKessy had sent?
22
A.
I'm not sure.
Okay.
09:11:16
And Ms. McKessy on this page, and I believe on the
09:11:40
I'm not sure exactly if she was talking about text
IEN
DS
I recall her talking about receiving a -- or seeing
23
text messages were.
24
Q.
25
says:
FR
09:10:39
09:12:10
I'm not sure exactly what the nature of the
So if you go to line 1586, do you see where Ms. McKessy

"Um, it was an email from (Cathy Woods-Enriquez), who's
09:12:32
2973
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
a detective over in Phoenix and the way -- it's hard to
describe, but basically -- you know, I told you, I think
between August 10th and August 11th was my final F' you text to
(Brian)."
And then she continues:
"(Cathy Woods) sent him like
a transcript of those texts by email.
(Cathy Woods) to (Cathy Woods) -- like she sent it to herself,
a copy of it."
So it was like from
Do you see that?
9
10
A.
I do.
11
Q.
Is that referencing text messages that Ms. McKessy believes
12
were from her?
09:12:59
MR. MASTERSON:
13
THE COURT:
14
Objection, foundation.
Sustained.
15
BY MR. SEGURA:
16
Q.
17
text messages that she had sent?
18
A.
19
and Detective Zebro that she had -- she had purchased a -- I
20
call them a throwaway phone.
21
pay-per-minute phones, and that he was -- she was sending texts
22
to who she believed was his girlfriends or his lady friends, I
09:13:10
Is it your understanding that Ms. McKessy was referencing
IEN
DS
You know, I'm not certain.
That Ms. Woods had?
I do recall her telling myself
Basically, it's a -- one of those
23
guess you could say.
24
want him to know it was him -- or her, rather.
FR
25
09:12:46
09:13:33
And she was doing so because she didn't
Cathy, I know -- I don't know her personally, but I
09:13:59
2974
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
don't recall how Cathy got the -- according to Mary Ann, how
Cathy actually got the texts.
bring up at one point, and it was a good point, that if -- and
I think McKessy even agreed -- that if Mackiewicz was
receiving, or Mackiewicz' girlfriends were receiving texts
regarding information that would only be known to him, we
suggested that maybe he was concerned about that, not knowing
who it was coming from.
Q.
I do know that Dave Zebro did
I do recall that.
And were you -- were you not concerned that
10
Detective Mackiewicz may have utilized Ms. Woods to access text
11
messages from Ms. McKessy's phone?

MR. MASTERSON:
12
THE COURT:
13
Objection, relevance.
Your Honor, this goes to the sufficiency
15
of the criminal investigation as to the allegations against
16
Mr. Montgomery.
17
she describes --
21
MR. SEGURA:
THE WITNESS:
I'll allow this question, but
Okay.
The way I recall it was those text
23
been known by Brian to be from her, if you understand what I'm
24
trying to say.
FR
25
09:15:27
messages from McKessy, according to McKessy, would not have
IEN
22
All right.
I'm not going to allow you to go very far with it.
DS
20
09:15:07
In this transcript, Ms. McKessy describes --
THE COURT:
18
09:14:46
What's the relevance?
MR. SEGURA:
14
19
09:14:26
My understanding was, and I think she even talked
09:15:45
2975
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
about it, was that could have been a reason why he was looking
into those text messages.
BY MR. SEGURA:
Q.
whether they had been improperly accessed?
A.
No, I did not.
Q.
So after this interview with Ms. McKessy you called
Mr. Mackiewicz on Monday and he came into the office, and last
Friday we discussed how he met with you, Captain Bailey, and
That's my recollection.
Did you ever look into this issue of text messages, and
09:15:59
10
Dave Zebro, is that correct?
11
A.
Yes, that's correct.
12
Q.
And after that you had a follow-up conversation with
13
Mr. Mackiewicz, correct, over the phone, that you recorded?
14
A.
15
day later, maybe two days later, that I did record.
Yes.
There was a phone call that I'm thinking it came in a
MR. SEGURA:
16
09:16:21
Okay.
Your Honor, I'd like to play
17
portions of that audio file and move for its admission.
18
we play the first 10 seconds?
19
of a transcript that was produced.
21
THE COURT:
23
24
FR
25
Could
I don't have a -- I'm not aware
Any objection?
MR. MASTERSON:
IEN
22
THE COURT:
DS
20
09:16:34
09:16:54
Object, foundation and hearsay.
Well, I don't know how we lay foundation
unless we play the file.

MR. MASTERSON:
basis of relevance.
Judge, I'm also going to object on the
I mean, it seems that what they're trying
09:17:06
2976
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
to do is impeach a witness who hasn't even testified yet by
using a criminal investigation for which he has not been found
guilty of anything.
THE COURT:
And it's highly --
Well, again, I'm not going to ask for
speaking objections.
09:17:25
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
Okay.
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
403.
As to the admission -- as to the playing
of this exhibit?
11
the playing of this exhibit.
12
foundation.
14
THE COURT:
It seems to me necessary to lay a
Well, I have not heard it, so I don't
You can play it, and then you can give me
MR. SEGURA:
Thank you, Your Honor.
Mr. Klein, will you play the first 10 seconds of
Exhibit 2894.
DS
(Audio clip played.)
21
BY MR. SEGURA:
22
Q.
09:18:20
IEN
Is this the audio recording of -- the beginning of the
23
audio recording of your conversation with Mr. Mackiewicz --
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
-- following your meeting with Captain Bailey?
FR
09:17:49
any objections you have.
18
20
09:17:34
even know what it is.
17
19
I'm just asking if you're going to object to
MR. MASTERSON:
15
16
I don't know --
And hearsay.
10
13
Relevance.
09:18:27
A.
Yes, it is.
MR. SEGURA:
2
3
Exhibit 2894.
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
5
6
2977
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Objection, hearsay, relevance, 403.
Are you offering this for the truth of the
matters asserted, or what are you offering it for?

MR. SEGURA:
I'm offering it for the adequacy of this
investigation of the MCSO employee who was primarily involved
in the Montgomery investigation.

THE COURT:
10
What's it going to tell me that goes to
11
the adequacy that doesn't rely on the truth of the matter
12
asserted, or how does it otherwise overcome the hearsay
13
objection?
MR. SEGURA:
14
conversation with the principal in the investigation and
16
having -- disclosing information or not properly investigating
17
the principal.
THE COURT:
18
21
MR. MASTERSON:
Excuse me, Judge.
there a number for this one?
23
MR. SEGURA:
24
THE COURT:
2894?
25
MR. SEGURA:
Yes.
FR
Well, I'll allow it.
The
IEN
22
All right.
09:19:11
objection is overruled.
DS
20
09:18:59
This goes to the propriety of having a
15
19
09:18:45
09:19:37
I didn't catch, is
I did not hear that.
Exhibit 2894.
09:19:46
2978
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
MR. MASTERSON:
Thank you.
BY MR. SEGURA:
Q.
meeting with Captain Bailey and Mr. Mackiewicz in the office?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
Okay.
A.
That's correct.
Q.
Okay.
this case, were you?
So you said that you had this conversation after the
09:19:58
And Mr. Mackiewicz called you, is that correct?
And you weren't calling him to actually investigate
10
A.
He called me.
11
Q.
You were having -- were you having this discussion as part
12
of your investigation?
13
A.
Yes and no.
14
Q.
What do you mean by no?
15
A.
I recorded it for a reason.
16
probable cause in my mind to think that a crime had been
17
committed.
18
or I called him, it would probably be wise just to audiotape
19
it.
20
Q.
You were calling him more as a friend, weren't you?
21
A.
He called me.
22
Q.
And when you were discussing this with him, it was from
09:20:18
At that point, there was no
IEN
DS
My thinking was is that any time that he called me
friend to friend?
24
A.
25
mine, but he's also a colleague, and he called me, and as -- if
FR
23
Yeah.
09:20:31
09:20:48
I'm not going to deny he's a -- he's a friend of

09:21:01
2979
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
you listen to the rest of that tape, you'll see that he did the
majority of the speaking, talking.
Q.
Okay.
MR. SEGURA:
Could we play the clip, 2894E.
(Audio clip played.)
5
6
BY MR. SEGURA:
Q.
allegations, did you?
A.
09:22:53
You didn't believe there was any merit to Ms. McKessy's
I could not identify a crime based on the interview that I
10
had with Ms. McKessy two or three days prior, no.
11
Q.
12
evidence.
Could you turn to Exhibit 2016, which is admitted into
And this is a -- Exhibit 2016 is a memo that a
13
14
Jennifer Johnson wrote to you on March 17th, 2015, is that
15
correct?
16
A.
That's correct.
17
Q.
And who is Ms. Johnson?
18
A.
She is an analyst with MCSO.
19
with PSB.
20
Q.
And you asked her to draft this memorandum, correct?
21
A.
I did.
22
Q.
You provided her with the information to draft this
09:24:19
At the time she was working
DS
IEN
23
memorandum?
24
A.
25
well as transcripts.
FR
09:23:02
09:24:28
Yes, she had audio/video of the interview with McKessy, as

09:24:41
2980
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
And this memorandum was produced about seven months after
you interviewed Ms. McKessy, is that correct?
A.
Yes, it was.
Q.
Okay.
A.
So to speak.
Q.
You wanted to close it out?
A.
I think I said Friday I don't think any case is ever
closed, but we follow the evidence, and if the evidence runs
dry there's not much more we can do.
This case had been shelved, right?
09:24:54
10
Q.
Prior to drafting this memo you hadn't actually
11
investigated this case, had you?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
You had followed up with Ms. McKessy to get the documents?
14
A.
No.
15
would try to rekindle her relationship with Christine,
16
Mackiewicz's girlfriend, who she claimed had all the
17
information, this third party from Christine.
18
an attorney and a former bureau chief, so professional
19
courtesy, we gave her the time and the opportunity to do that.
20
Q.
But you didn't follow up with her, correct?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
So on the second page, the last paragraph, do you see where
Ms. McKessy agreed during our first meeting that she
DS
IEN
it says:
24
described by Ms. McKessy, do not rise to a criminal level"?
FR
09:25:37
Ms. McKessy is
23
25
09:25:12
09:26:00
"Based on the information provided, the actions
Do you see that?
09:26:20
2981
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
I do.
Q.
And that was your opinion, correct, not that of
Ms. Johnson?
A.
Yes, that's my opinion.
Q.
Okay.
A.
Well, I'm not sure what you mean.
Q.
Ms. McKessy had made allegations that could rise to a
criminal level, correct?
A.
But that's not accurate, correct?
Based on the information that she provided us at that
10
particular time, I did not see that a crime had been committed,
11
no.
There was no evidence at that time.
12
Q.
And how about the misuse of overtime?
13
that could be a crime?
14
A.
15
prove that, we would need more in the way of evidence.
16
Q.
17
interviewed Ms. McKessy and Ms. Johnson drafted this memo, you
18
don't recall any of your supervisors asking for an update on
19
this investigation, do you?
20
A.
21
Lieutenant Seagraves.
22
Q.
Misuse of overtime can be a crime.
09:26:45
You didn't believe
However, in order to
09:27:01
During the seven months between the time that you
DS
The only one I can recall asking for a memorandum was
09:27:20
IEN
And was that around the time of this memo?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
So prior to that, you don't recall anyone asking you,
25
What's going on with this case?
FR
09:26:27
09:27:35
2982
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
I don't recall.
Q.
Okay.
sheriff about the allegations of overtime misuse, is that
correct?
A.
further the investigation, I would need to speak with the
sheriff, thought it was pertinent.
Q.
memorandum, correct?
You at some point had attempted to speak to the
I did at one point.
I suggested that the -- in order to
And Ms. Johnson did not include those efforts in her
A.
Pardon me?
11
Q.
Ms. Johnson did not include your efforts to reach out to
12
the sheriff in this memorandum?
13
A.
I don't believe so.
14
Q.
Is that because it happened after this memorandum?
15
A.
I don't recall when that happened.
16
Q.
Do you know why she did not include it?
17
A.
I recall being busy with other cases, obviously, and
18
Jennifer Johnson offered her assistance.
19
had regarding this case, and it was the audio/video CD of the
20
McKessy interview and the transcript.
21
her that specific information, no.
22
Q.
DS
10
IEN
Okay.
09:28:15
09:28:26
And I gave her what I
So I don't recall giving
09:28:51
Would you turn to Exhibit 2843, which is not in
23
evidence.
24
Zebro regarding your attempts to obtain information from the
25
sheriff regarding the parameters of Mr. Mackiewicz's
FR
09:27:57
This is a -- this is an e-mail that you sent to Dave
09:29:29
employment, is that correct?
A.
Yes, that's correct.

MR. SEGURA:
3
4
2983
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Exhibit 2843.
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
Objection, relevance, 403.
Overruled.
09:29:46
Exhibit 2843 is admitted.
7
8
BY MR. SEGURA:
Q.
There is a date handwritten.
10
A.
I do.
11
Q.
That's April 27th, 2015?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
Does that suggest that that's the date on which this e-mail
14
was sent?
15
A.
16
speak with the sheriff, and I noticed the same thing.
17
was no date; I don't know why.
18
stamp, on 4-27-15 it was sent.
19
Q.
20
the sheriff regarding this issue happened after the Johnson
21
memo that we were just discussing, after March of 2015?
22
A.
Yes.
I notice there's no date at the top.
I looked for -- for e-mails regarding my request to
09:30:09
There
But based on the computer time
So would that suggest that your efforts to contact
09:30:30
IEN
I'm not certain.
23
Q.
24
correct?
25
A.
FR
09:30:01
DS
Okay.
Do you see that?
Okay.
So you made requests to speak to the sheriff,
I discussed.
09:30:45
2984
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
And those requests were denied?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Who denied those requests?
A.
I recall discussing it with Kim Seagraves briefly, and she
said that that was not going to happen.
Q.
Did she say why?
A.
She didn't.
Q.
Did you ask why?
A.
No.
10
Q.
And a request was also denied to speak to the sheriff by
11
Chief Deputy Sheridan, is that correct?
12
A.
I'm sorry.
13
Q.
Chief Deputy Sheridan also didn't -- Chief Deputy Sheridan
14
also denied your request to speak to the sheriff about this
15
issue, correct?
16
A.
I don't recall that.
17
Q.
You had a meeting in which you discussed whether you could
18
contact the sheriff regarding this issue, is that correct?
19
With Captain Bailey, Lieutenant Seagraves, and Chief Deputy
20
Sheridan?
21
A.
22
I don't recall discussing that with anyone at the meeting, that
DS
I recall being in a meeting.
IEN
09:31:09
Can you say that again?
09:31:29
09:32:21
I don't recall discussing --
23
meeting, speaking with the sheriff.
24
Q.
25
be asked questions regarding the parameters of Mr. Mackiewicz's
FR
09:31:02
Do you recall if anyone discussed whether the sheriff could

09:32:48
2985
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
employment?
A.
I don't recall it being specifically discussed.
Q.
Was that issue discussed generally?
A.
I can't say.
Generally -- I don't know.
Q.
speak to the sheriff in which counsel was present?
A.
I did not, no.
Q.
Do you know if anyone did?
10
A.
I recall it being discussed.
11
can't tell -- I don't know who discussed it.
12
Q.
13
indicating to you that you could not speak to the sheriff
14
regarding the overtime allegations?
15
A.
16
recall that.
17
Q.
18
documenting your attempts to contact the sheriff regarding this
19
issue, correct?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Could you turn to to Exhibit 2842, which is in evidence.
22
A.
2842?
I don't want to -- I can't say accurately.
Did you have a conversation regarding whether you could
Okay.
I recall Seagraves, but I can't accurately, no, I don't
IEN
09:33:47
09:34:09
In this e-mail that you sent to Dave Zebro, you were
09:34:37
DS
Okay.
Q.
Yes.
24
A.
I don't see it.
FR
I didn't discuss it, and I
Do you recall anyone other than Lieutenant Seagraves
23
25
09:33:19
MR. SEGURA:
We're going to hand you a copy.
09:36:10
THE CLERK:
(Handing).
THE WITNESS:
2986
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Thank you.
BY MR. SEGURA:
Q.
had with Mr. Mackiewicz in August of this year, is that
correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Okay.
criminal investigation as to Mr. Mackiewicz, is that correct?
So this is a transcript of a telephone interview that you
09:36:18
And you were aware that there was still an open
10
A.
I knew the investigation had -- had been taken from me and
11
given to two other criminal detectives.
12
goes, I can't be certain whether it was active or not.
13
Q.
Did you check the status prior to calling Mr. Mackiewicz?
14
A.
No.
15
Q.
You didn't have any concerns with the possibility that
16
there was an open criminal investigation?
17
A.
No.
18
Q.
Okay.
19
correct?
20
A.
21
recall discussing with him the fact that I had been interviewed
22
earlier by the Monitor Team.
24
FR
25
As far as the status
But you discussed the case with Mr. Mackiewicz,
The status of it?
DS
Q.
09:36:50
I was just returning a telephone call, a text.
I don't recall if I discussed the status of the case.
IEN
23
09:36:30
Okay.
I do
09:37:13
Could you turn to page 5 of 12 of the transcript.

See at the top paragraph that starts, "This whole
Seattle case"?
09:37:44
2987
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
I do.
Q.
Okay.
was.
know, obviously, I'm gonna speak frank with you 'cause I can
trust you."
So it says:
"This whole Seattle case it was what it
You know, um, I believe that and, and I'm just gonna you
09:37:55
And then Mr. Mackiewicz says:
"But you know when,
when I got back and I sat in your when I sat in Bailey's office
and you, you, Bailey and Zebro were there, I was under the
impression because of not, not because of how it was handled
10
but, um, it was what it was.
You, you were, obviously, the
11
Sheriff wanted to find out who the snitch was."

Do you see that?
12
A.
I do.
14
Q.
So he's referencing a conversation -- the conversation that
15
you had with Captain Bailey and Dave Zebro the Monday after you
16
interviewed Ms. McKessy?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
And you discussed -- he was referencing that during that
19
meeting, it was discussed that the sheriff wanted to know who
20
the snitch was?
21
A.
22
I'm not exactly sure what he means by that.
DS
13
IEN
That's what he said.
09:38:18
09:38:33
I don't recall that, and to this day
23
Q.
Do you know who he was referring to by "the snitch"?
24
A.
You know, he -- he may have mentioned a name, but I can't
25
recall right now.
FR
09:38:07
09:38:50
2988
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Okay.
The next line says:
"We didn't know if it was
McKessy or not, blah, blah, blah."
During that meeting with Captain Bailey, was it
3
4
discussed whether Ms. McKessy was a snitch?
A.
I don't recall that that was discussed.
Q.
Do you recall during that meeting if there was any
discussion as to who may have leaked the Seattle or Dennis
Montgomery investigation?
A.
09:39:04
I don't recall that being discussed, not much about the
10
Seattle case at all, if any.
11
Q.
12
referring to in terms of a snitch, did you?
13
A.
14
had been accused by the Monitor Team of interviewing Mary Ann
15
McKessy and then directly going to Brian Mackiewicz and
16
providing him with all the information within the interview.
17
And as I spoke with the monitors for approximately nine hours,
18
I could not, in my mind, think of why I would have done that,
19
especially why I would have done it and audiotaped it.
You didn't follow up with Mr. Mackiewicz about what he was
No.
Honestly, I was relieved after returning his call.
So when I got the opportunity to return a phone call
DS
20
09:39:23
with Brian Mackiewicz, my sole purpose was to -- to figure out,
22
I'm getting old now, so I forget things maybe, but I was -- my
IEN
21
sole purpose was to figure out why I would have audiotaped that
24
conversation.
25
for a reason, and the monitors were quite angry with me because
FR
23
09:39:42
09:40:00
And in the back of my head, knowing that it was

09:40:17
2989
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
they truly believed that I had somehow circumvented this thing
some way and gave Brian information.
So honestly, I didn't hear -- I heard every third word
3
4
of this conversation, but when he started to tell me about a
meeting that we had had, about an airplane that he had been on
and I called him, it brought back my memory.
knew -- which I knew in my heart of hearts I would have never
interviewed McKessy and called Brian.
he was able to provide me with enough information so I could
And then I
I was just thrilled that
10
make that recollection.
11
Q.
12
obviously, the Sheriff wanted to find out who the snitch was,"
13
correct?
14
A.
In this transcript he does.
15
Q.
And he's -- it's your understanding that he's referencing
16
what was discussed during this meeting with Captain Bailey,
17
correct?
18
A.
19
discussed.
20
don't -- I don't recall that.
21
Q.
22
exonerate yourself, would you say that?
09:40:56
So he says in this transcript that "You, you were,
09:41:17
You know, he is, and I don't recall those specifics being
DS
I'm not saying they didn't -- he didn't, but I
09:41:30
IEN
Your purpose in this -- in making this call was to just
23
A.
24
interviewed Mary Ann McKessy and immediately confided in Brian
25
Mackiewicz and gave him all the information regarding that
FR
09:40:38
Absolutely.
The monitors suggested I had purposely
09:41:46
2990
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
interview.
I knew I did not, but I could not, for the life of
me, remember why that second phone call was placed, the one
which I had audiotaped.
was excited to finally figure out what that was about.
Q.
those discussions with Mr. Mackiewicz about McKessy's
allegations had already been discussed with Captain Bailey
during that meeting?
A.
I couldn't figure it out.
So yes, I
And you were excited because you were able to confirm that
Yes.
Brian came to Captain Bailey's office and he -- he
10
spoke at length.
11
basically McKessy had already provided us with based on the
12
conversation he had with his girlfriend, Christine.
13
Q.
14
discussed in the meeting with Captain Bailey, correct?
15
A.
16
sat back and listened to him.
17
he had already been aware of all this, so...
18
Q.
19
that you investigated the case, and that you had closed it out?
20
A.
Yes, he did.
21
Q.
Okay.
22
and next thing you know, I'm gettin' a call from Jerry."
I mean, he -- he knew everything that
09:42:24
And you discussed -- those allegations had already been
The specific allegations, I don't know.
To me, we kind of
09:42:41
It appeared as though he had --
IEN
DS
And he continues in this paragraph that -- he mentioned
23
And then he says:
09:43:27
"You go ahead and close it out
Do you see that?
24
A.
I do.
25
Q.
It's your understanding he's referring to Chief Deputy
FR
09:42:06
09:43:37
2991
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Sheridan?
A.
Yes.
Q.
He says, "You go ahead and close it out and next thing you
know, I'm gettin' a call from Jerry saying hey, you know what?
Don't worry about it but we gotta open it back up again.
we're giving it to Sparman because you know we just wanna make
sure that everything looks transparent."
And
Do you see that?
8
9
A.
I do.
10
Q.
Is it your understanding that he was suggesting that the
11
investigation was reopened after you had closed it it out just
12
so that it could look like something was done?
13
A.
14
had three -- two monitors from the federal courts suggesting I
15
had interfered with a criminal investigation.
16
what he told Jerry Sheridan, you could ask him, but I -- I
17
didn't really pay much attention.
18
statement to my lieutenant when I -- after finishing our
19
conversation on the phone.
20
Q.
21
they were making it out to look like a real investigation?
I do not know.
DS
MR. MASTERSON:
23
THE COURT:
BY MR. SEGURA:
25
Q.
FR
24
09:44:13
I'll say again, I may sound selfish, but I
I don't know
09:44:33
And I think I even made that
It wasn't your understanding that he was suggesting that
IEN
22
09:44:01
09:44:54
Objection, argumentative.
I'm going to sustain the objection.
You don't recall having any reaction to what Mr. Mackiewicz
09:45:08
said here?
A.
No.
I'm not sure what -- no.

MR. SEGURA:
THE COURT:
2992
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Your Honor, may I have a moment?
You may.
(Pause in proceedings.)
09:45:31
BY MR. SEGURA:
Q.
Captain Bailey that occurred at the office, you mentioned that
Mr. Mackiewicz appeared to know a lot of the allegations, is
During your conversation with Mr. Mackiewicz and
10
that correct?
11
A.
He did.
12
Q.
And you confirmed that Ms. McKessy had made those
13
allegations, correct?
14
A.
I'm sorry.
15
Q.
Sure.
16
Ms. McKessy had, in fact, made the allegations that
17
Mr. Mackiewicz appeared to know about?
18
A.
09:45:59
Can you say that one more time?
During that conversation you confirmed that
Word for word, no.
09:46:13
I do recall him -- let me back up.
Because the information that McKessy had relayed to
19
20
myself and Dave Zebro was a third party, it came from,
21
according to McKessy, Christine, who was allegedly Brian's
22
current girlfriend, it just -- I don't know, it made sense.
IEN
DS
09:46:34
23
was able to -- he knew.
24
about the investigation.
25
was aware of everything that I could -- not "everything," but
FR
He knew what was going on.
He
He knew
He had confronted Christine.
So he
09:47:03
2993
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
it was quite obvious that he knew what was going down.
He --
he knew.
Q.
Zebro informed him that Ms. McKessy had, in fact, come in for
an interview and had made those allegations?
A.
recall that.
something Captain Bailey said that, but -- I can't be specific
as to why her name came up or why that was divulged, but he did
And so you in this meeting, you and Captain Bailey and Dave
Yes.
I mean, McKessy's name did come up, and I -- I do
I'm not sure under what circumstance we -- I or
10
know; he knew everything.
11
Q.
12
correct?
13
A.
Yes, I believe so, yes, it was.
14
Q.
And the overall allegations that Ms. McKessy had made?
15
A.
I'm sure some of the allegations were discussed although
16
I'm not exactly sure what specifics were.
17
Q.
Okay.
If you look at the bottom, do you see where
20
had with Stacy Sheridan?
DS
Mr. Mackiewicz is discussing a meeting that Christine Webster
09:48:28
Do you see that?
I do.
IEN
A.
23
Q.
24
Chief Deputy Sheridan, is that correct?
25
A.
FR
09:47:48
Can you turn to page 7 of 12 of the transcript.
19
22
09:47:40
But it was divulged that Ms. McKessy had been interviewed,
18
21
09:47:19
He's also referring to a meeting that Miss Webster had with
Yes.
09:48:39
2994
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Okay.
And Christine Webster, that is -- that was
Mr. Mackiewicz's girlfriend at the time?
A.
I believe so, yes.
Q.
And if you go to the bottom of that page, do you see where
Mackiewicz recounts Chief Deputy Sheridan telling Christine,
"you know we believe Brian," continuing on to the next page,
"You know what whatever if Brian was cheating on you then, you
know that's your business.
as far as work goes, this is a nonissue"?
That's your personal business.
09:49:00
But
10
A.
Yes, I do.
11
Q.
You believe that Mr. Mackiewicz was saying this because
12
he's friends with Chief Deputy Sheridan, correct?
13
A.
14
wasn't relevant.
15
Q.
16
Chief Deputy Sheridan simply believed him, and that the
17
allegations Ms. McKessy made was a nonissue, were a nonissue?
18
A.
About cheating, again, to me it was not relevant.
19
Q.
Turn to page 409 of your deposition, second deposition
20
transcript.
It was -- to me it
The cheating wasn't a violation of state law.
It wasn't relevant that Mr. Mackiewicz was suggesting that
Should be the smaller one.
Okay.
On line, page 409, do you see where I ask:
23
you know what Mackiewicz was referring to when he says, 'you
24
know we believe Brian'?"
FR
25
09:49:39
09:50:12
It should be towards the end.
IEN
22
I don't know why he was saying it.
DS
21
09:49:21
Do you see that?
"Do
09:50:57
2995
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
I do.
Q.
And your answer was:
this.
I don't know.
"I mean, it is what it is.
They're friends.
It says
I don't know."
Do you see that?
4
5
A.
I do.
Q.
Was that testimony accurate when you gave it during your
deposition?
A.
they are.
09:51:09
Oh, yes.
I'm not denying that they were friends.
10
Q.
11
Mr. Mackiewicz this because they're friends?
12
A.
I'm sure
You believe that Chief Deputy Sheridan was telling
I don't know.
MR. MASTERSON:
13
THE COURT:
14
He asked for his belief.
THE WITNESS:
15
Overruled.
I don't know.
16
BY MR. SEGURA:
17
Q.
18
with someone you've investigated criminally as to these
19
allegations?
20
A.
No, I don't think so.
21
Q.
How about to someone who's still being investigated
22
criminally?
09:51:34
IEN
DS
Does this strike you as too familiar a conversation to have
23
A.
No, I don't.
24
Q.
Looking back now, you wouldn't have done anything
25
differently with respect to the -- with respect to your
FR
09:51:21
09:51:44
09:52:06
2996
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
investigation of Miss McKessy's allegations, correct?
A.
probably would have done something different with every single
case I've investigated.
As an investigator, I can look back the last 15 years and I
That's the benefit of hindsight.
As far as the McKessy case, I don't believe there was
5
6
enough evidence to support a crime had been committed at the
time, so no, I wouldn't have.
Q.
would have done more to investigate them?
Okay.
If you were serious about these allegations, you
10
A.
11
evidence, yes, more would have been done.
12
Q.
13
2009, you didn't receive any training on how to conduct
14
criminal internal investigations, is that correct?
15
A.
16
that were named criminal internal investigations?
17
Q.
18
criminal investigations?
19
A.
By name, no.
20
Q.
How about otherwise?
21
A.
I've received several -- I've gone through several training
22
courses, investigative courses, interrogation courses,
If I had been provided with viable evidence, usable
09:52:49
When you first were assigned to the criminal IA back in
Specific to criminal internal investigations, any courses
09:53:18
No.
IEN
DS
Or how to con -- courses about how to conduct internal
23
detective certification courses --
24
Q.
25
investigations?
FR
09:52:26
09:53:33
And are those general training courses on criminal

09:53:47
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Tennyson - CX Masterson, 10/13/15 Evidentiary Hearing 2997
A.
They are.
Q.
And none of those relate specifically to internal
investigations, correct?
A.
Not to criminal internal, that's correct.
Q.
Okay.
didn't receive any training on criminal internal
investigations, correct?
A.
And when you returned to PSB in 2014, you also
Criminal internal?
MR. SEGURA:
THE COURT:
10
Correct.
No further questions.
Cross-examination.
09:54:13
CROSS-EXAMINATION
11
BY MR. MASTERSON:
13
Q.
Good morning, Sergeant Tennyson.
14
A.
Good morning.
15
Q.
Where are you currently assigned at the Maricopa County
16
Sheriff's Office?
17
A.
The Bureau of Internal Oversight.
18
Q.
What is that?
19
A.
Basically, my position, it's a new position, is to review
20
the county attorney turndowns, the reports that are turned
21
down, specifically looking for probable cause and elements of
22
the crime, be certain that if an arrest was made, those exist.
IEN
DS
12
23
Q.
24
Internal Oversight?
25
A.
FR
09:53:55
09:54:46
09:54:59
What else do you do with the Bureau of -- what is it?
Yes, sir.
09:55:19
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I also review a sampling of the departmental reports
1
2
on a monthly basis for the same purpose: to make sure that
we're in compliance with not only Melendres, but to be certain
that the elements of the crime and the probable cause, should
an arrest have been made, is present.
Q.
little bit more about that.
currently do with MCSO that has something -- that is something
related to the Melendres case?
Okay, you just mentioned Melendres.
09:55:38
I want to ask you a
What is it about the job you
This case we're in today.
10
A.
Well, certainly the arrest procedures that are documented
11
in the reports.
12
only with the law, but with Melendres, obviously, and to make
13
sure that there's -- traffic stops are in compliance with the
14
new policies and procedures that are set forth.
15
of checks and balances to make sure everything's on -- on a
16
good level, I guess.
17
Q.
18
Melendres court orders?
19
A.
Yes, sir.
20
Q.
How do you go about doing that?
21
A.
We are -- and again, I'm new to the BIO unit, but we are
22
given certain instructions.
Making sure that they're in compliance not
Just a bunch
09:56:17
IEN
DS
Is part of your job to see that MCSO is complying with
09:56:28
Again, one of those would be to
23
review a sampling of departmental reports that is provided to
24
us by the monitors, ensure that they have the correct dates,
25
the numbers are correct as far as the matching IR numbers,
FR
09:55:54
09:56:53
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
signatures are in place.
The memorialization of the IR by the
sergeant is done in a timely manner within the guidelines set
forth.
that we're in compliance.
Q.
with training of other deputies?
auditing training?
A.
training.
Again, just a bunch of checks and balances to make sure
You mentioned training.
Does the BIO have something to do

Or were you talking about
We do receive auditing training, yes, and that's an ongoing

It's part of the BIO unit, I guess, standards.
We
10
all go through a certain audit training or audit school, I
11
guess you would say.
12
Q.
13
sheriffs in MCSO as a whole are in compliance with Melendres
14
court orders or in compliance with general training that
15
they're -- that's mandatory at MCSO?
16
A.
17
that as well, ensure that all the deputies are up to date with
18
their training and within the guidelines set forth by the
19
Court, yes.
20
Q.
Just not something you do personally.
21
A.
No, sir.
22
Q.
Okay.
09:57:40
Do you have anything to do with ensuring that the deputy
09:58:00
IEN
DS
I do not specifically, but BIO does.
Let's back up a little.
They keep track of
09:58:15
I just want to go through,
23
how did you first become employed with Maricopa County
24
Sheriff's Office?
25
A.
FR
09:57:18
I became employed in 2000, I believe.
I went through the
09:58:26
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
detention academy.
years, and when the hiring freeze was lifted I went to the
deputy academy and became sworn.
think it was 2002 or 2003.
Q.
Okay.
THE COURT:
8
9
10
Sorry.
I know you're trying to make sure
back off that microphone just a little bit.

THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
12
2003?
THE COURT:
15
Sorry, Judge.
Yes, sir.
And then what did you say after that?
16
then I'll let Mr. Masterson ask his next question, because I
17
didn't catch the end of what your last answer was.

THE WITNESS:
18
THE COURT:
21
BY MR. MASTERSON:
22
Q.
09:59:07
I think I just said I believe I went
IEN
Okay.
Okay.
Thank you.
09:59:20
And did you become a sworn law enforcement officer
23
after the academy?
24
A.
Yes, sir.
25
Q.
And what was your first assignment after that?
FR
And
through the deputy academy in 2002 or 2003, I'm not sure.
DS
20
09:58:57
You said you went to the deputy academy in
THE WITNESS:
14
19
09:58:48
everybody hears you, and I appreciate that, but you need to
11
13
I'd have to check.
I'm going to interrupt.
THE WITNESS:
I believe that was 2000- -- I
Tell me a little bit about --
THE COURT:
I worked at the Towers jail for roughly two
09:59:28
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
My first assignment was District 2 patrol.
Q.
Where's District 2?
A.
Be on the west side.
on cross streets of Van Buren and Dysart.
Q.
sheriff, tell me what happens.
out on the street and start enforcing the law?
around by yourself?
A.
The substation's located, I believe,
Do you have a -- well, when you first start as a deputy
I mean, do you just go right

Do you drive
How does that work?
When you graduate the academy you are assigned a certain
10
spot within the -- within the Maricopa County, within the
11
sheriff's patrol districts.
12
training, in District 4, which would have been up near Cave
13
Creek/Carefree.
14
several weeks of training where you sit with another -- you
15
ride with another deputy, and then eventually you drive and
16
he's your passenger, and you do basic patrol functions.
17
Q.
Is the other deputy that you ride with, is that the FTO?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
And that stands for?
20
A.
Field training officer.
21
Q.
You don't recall how many weeks that was?
22
A.
I want to say it's like 16 weeks, I'm -- it's several
10:00:03
I actually did my training, field
It's
IEN
DS
I don't recall how many weeks that is.
23
weeks, but I'm not certain.
24
Q.
25
requirements for mandatory training you have to undergo to
FR
09:59:41
Okay.
10:00:21
10:00:35
When you became a deputy sheriff, do you have

10:00:48
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
every year?
A.
Yes.
Q.
How is it you get that training?
A.
Both classroom training as well as firearms.
recall us having the computer training when I first started,
but now we have like what's called E-Learning, where the
classes are actually found on the Internet, and you have to
maintain those classes and do them on a regular basis to
maintain compliance.
I don't
10
Q.
When you first started did they have Briefing Boards?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
Well, did you have computers when you first started?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
Okay.
15
that what you're telling me?
16
A.
I don't believe they did, no.
17
Q.
All right.
18
deputy?
19
A.
Almost five years.
20
Q.
Were you in the same district the whole time?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
And then what happened?
They just didn't have the E-Learning back then.
DS
IEN
10:01:17
Is
10:01:31
After you -- well, how long were you a patrol
23
A.
24
District 2 detectives.
25
Q.
FR
10:01:03
10:01:37
What was your next job assignment?
I was assigned to District 2, same -- same district,
Okay.
Tell me about that.
What is that -- what's entailed
10:01:52
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
in being a District 2 detective?
A.
assaults, ag assaults.
patrol deputies that initially respond to a call, take the
initial report, and then it will be given to my sergeant, which
would be the detective-sergeant, and if there's follow-up that
needs to be done, then district detectives will do it.
Q.
different division?
We just do general investigations? burglaries, shoplifts,

Did a lot of follow-up work for the
Would you investigate homicides, or is that an entirely
10
A.
11
that would be the homicide division would take care of that.
12
Q.
13
District 2 would you investigate burglaries?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
Robberies?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
Sexual assault?
18
A.
Yes.
19
be turned over to the Sex Crimes Unit.
20
Q.
21
District 2?
22
A.
We do respond to a dead body, or something similar, but
10:02:24
Would you investigate -- back when you were a detective in
After -- well, how long were you a detective with
DS
Okay.
10:02:37
But depending on the complexity, it would eventually
10:02:49
IEN
A little over a year.
23
Q.
What happened after that?
24
A.
I was asked to take a position with the Organized Crime
25
Division.
FR
10:02:12
10:03:00
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
What does that mean?
What's the Organized Crime Division?
A.
The Organized Crime Division was -- let's see.
located on the 18th floor of the Wells Fargo building at the
time, and we did some of the investigations to include some of
the -- the county supervisors.
six people, seven people, and we got direction from former
Chief David Hendershott.
Q.
guess I'll call it?
We were
It was a unit of maybe five or
And how long were you in the Organized Crime Division, I
10
A.
One year.
11
Q.
And then where'd you go after that?
12
A.
I was moved to the criminal Internal Affairs division.
13
Q.
So are we -- I don't know if I added it up right.
14
somewhere around 2008?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
Okay.
17
A.
I was a criminal detective investigator.
18
Q.
Was it called Internal Affairs at that point?
19
A.
At that time it was.
20
Q.
Is that now called PSB, or Professional Standards Bureau?
21
A.
It is.
22
Q.
Okay.
10:03:46
Are we
2008-2009, possibly.
DS
IEN
10:03:59
And what did you do with criminal Internal Affairs?
10:04:16
How long were you with criminal Internal Affairs?
23
A.
24
promoted, I believe it was January of '14.
25
Q.
FR
10:03:23
As a detective, I remained with criminal IA until I was
Now, I think you discussed this a little bit with
10:04:31
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Mr. Segura, but tell me how this works.
Is there a separate -- I might not use the right
2
3
terminology, but there's a separate division within IA at the
time for criminal investigations as opposed to administrative
investigations?
A.
one division.
policy violations, things of that nature.
investigates criminal matters involving employees of the
10:04:48
Yes, there are two separate -- well, two divisions within

The administrative investigators investigate
The criminal side
10
county, to include detention staff, sworn deputies, and may in
11
some cases even county employees.
12
Q.
13
just you don't know, somewhere in there?
14
A.
It was around 2009, yes.
15
Q.
All right.
16
the next question:
17
first go-round?
18
A.
19
think.
20
Q.
21
2008 it went all the way to 2014?
22
A.
Let's talk about back in 2008.
Did you say 2008-2009, or
Let me establish this and then I'll ask you
10:05:30
How long were you with criminal IA this
I want to say almost six years, a little over six years, I
Now I'm really confused.
DS
So -- okay.
So if you started in
10:05:47
IEN
Yeah, I -- it was -- I want to say it was between '8 and '9
23
that I started with criminal IA, and I remained there until
24
'14, January '14.
25
Q.
FR
10:05:10
All right.
So, anyway, let's get back to when you were in
10:06:08
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
criminal Internal Affairs, and there's also an administrative
side, do you -- are there detectives on the administrative
side, or who's on the administrative side?
A.
well.
well.
Q.
For other detention officers?
A.
Actually, no.
detention.
There are detectives, but there are also detention staff as

Detention staff will do administrative investigations as
They do both.
They'll do sworn and
10
Q.
11
there?
12
detention officers there, too?
13
A.
14
and a sergeant.
15
captain, who is in charge of both criminal and administrative.
16
We did have a few detention officers that were employed by us,
17
the criminal side, but they did intel work within the jails, so
18
they assisted us within the jails.
19
Q.
20
you would have detention officers working with you in the jails
21
when you're in criminal investigations, Internal Affairs.
22
A.
What about on the criminal side?
What's the staffing
10:06:37
Is it all detectives, or how is that -- or are there
When I was there first, it was myself, another detective,

The sergeant would report directly to the
10:06:53
DS
Well, just so I understand, tell me a little bit about how
10:07:21
IEN
Many of the allegations against our officers --
23
specifically, detention staff -- come from the jails.
24
guys would do follow-up, they would pull video, they would
25
identify folks by face, by name, and just basically assist us
FR
10:06:26
These
10:07:42
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
within the jails.
Because as sworn, we don't spend nearly as
much time as detention staff does, so they have more of a
familiarity with the procedures, processes, paperwork, that
sort of thing.
Q.
in criminal IA, did you say it was you, another detective, and
then a supervisor?
A.
A sergeant, yes.
Q.
A sergeant.
10
A.
No.
11
Q.
Prior to becoming a detective, did you receive any training
12
in criminal investigations?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
Tell me, I know it was a long time ago, but tell me as much
15
as you can remember.
16
A.
17
There was interrogation classes, search warrant writing
18
classes, interview classes.
19
courses that I'd gone through over the course of time that I've
20
been there leading up to.
21
Q.
22
Are they on your computer?
Now, with respect to the law enforcement officers that were
So you're not a sergeant at this point.
10:08:11
10:08:34
DS
I know I had received general investigative training.
There were several -- several
10:08:54
IEN
When you take these classes, do you -- do you go somewhere?

How does that work?
23
A.
24
held within the office, one of the locations within the office
25
training division, or on some occasions that would be provided
FR
10:08:00
When I was taking the classes, they actually were either
10:09:08
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
or put on by outside entities where I would travel to those
places.
Q.
travel for a training class?
A.
Phoenix, several locations; I'm not exactly sure how many.
Q.
to call them seminars -- training seminars or training classes
you went to?
Okay.
Do you recall how many times you would have had to
I've been to Las Vegas a few times, few times in Mesa,
Do you recall the particulars of any of those -- I'm going
10
A.
11
that we traveled for.
12
was one of the courses that was put on in Vegas.
13
certainly exactly what they were, though.
14
Q.
Did you receive training in officer-involved shootings?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
Was that something Internal Affairs would investigate back
17
when you were in Internal Affairs?
18
back to 2008, 2009, somewhere in there.
19
A.
20
you know, if it were an internal issue where I hadn't
21
experienced it yet but maybe a deputy was engaged in gunfire
22
with another deputy, I guess it could come up.
I do.
There were some interrogation classes, I believe,

Officer-involved shooting.
I'm not
I do recall attending a class.
10:10:01
And I'm going all the way
DS
Well, it would depend on the set of circumstances.
IEN
10:09:40
I think that
I mean,
10:10:19
Yeah, it's part
23
of our -- part of our general curriculum as far as training
24
goes, sure.
25
Q.
FR
10:09:20
Did you continue to receive that sort of training the
10:10:35
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
entire time you were at IA back from 2008 or 2009 on up for the
whatever period of time, five or six years that you described?
A.
specific as to the dates and time or the nature of the
training, but, you know, time willing, and manpower being
available, yes, we would -- we would regularly, you know,
attend training courses, sure, whenever we could.
Q.
Do you still do that?
A.
I do.
10
Q.
Now, I think I understand that at some point you went to
11
general investigations, is that accurate?
12
A.
That is accurate.
13
Q.
First off, when?
14
A.
I believe we -- I got -- I got promoted in January, and I
15
believe it was then I went to general investigations and I was
16
assigned to -- as a sergeant to the jail crimes division.
17
Q.
You said January.
18
A.
No, I think it was '14, 2014.
19
so --
20
Q.
21
2014.
22
A.
Yes, that I re -- that I recall, yes.
10:11:14
10:11:32
I'm coming up on two years,
So you were promoted in January of -- January of
10:11:52
IEN
Yes.
23
Q.
24
didn't hear what you were assigned to then.
25
A.
FR
10:10:57
2015?
DS
Okay.
I mean, I can't be
And you went to general investigations.
I was assigned to the jail crimes.
And I'm sorry, I
10:12:03
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Jail crimes?
A.
Jail Crimes Division, yes.
Q.
What exactly is that?
A.
The Jail Crimes Division is made up of four or five
detectives and myself included, and we would investigate crimes
that occurred within the jail, inmate on inmate, that sort of
thing.
Q.
How about crimes allegedly committed by detention officers?
A.
If we would discover that, then generally that would be
10
provided to the criminal IA.
11
Q.
12
where you previously were.
13
A.
14
was said to have committed a crime against another employee or
15
a detention officer, yes, it would go to criminal IA.
16
Q.
17
jail crimes, I mean, is part of your typical duties to
18
interview people?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
Am I taking to understand that it would be inmates mostly
21
you'd interview, or would you also interview detention officers
22
in an investigation in jail crimes?
Okay.
10:12:33
So that went from general investigations back to
If it were an officer involved in an allegation where he
10:12:51
IEN
DS
When you were in general investigations and assigned to
23
A.
24
but we would -- we would interview both, other detention
25
officers as witnesses or leads, and also inmates, obviously,
FR
10:12:13
10:13:04
Well, as a sergeant I didn't do as many of the interviews,
10:13:23
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
'cause they were involved in the altercation or whatever --
whatever the allegation was.
Q.
involved in as many interviews?
me?
A.
many of the -- many of the investigations.
Q.
Affairs your first go-round with Internal Affairs, correct?
So since you were a sergeant, you wouldn't be personally

Is that what you're telling
10:13:41
Not as many as a detective, but I did involve myself in
Okay.
Which reminds me, you were a detective with Internal
10
A.
Yes, I was a detective first go-round, yes.
11
Q.
Did you conduct interviews as a detective?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
And did you tell me you went to training or classes or
14
seminars on conducting interviews?
15
A.
16
classes; investigative classes; classes that referred to
17
evidence, and all sorts of classes.
18
Q.
19
do you -- I mean, we all watch TV and we see Columbo and those
20
guys doing their interrogations, and I've seen the -- what is
21
she, a deputy chief on TV, and she always gets these guys to
22
confess.
Yes.
IEN
23
10:14:31
Do you guys all have your own kind of, This is my
24
style.
25
I know a lot of it's fiction, but is there some truth to it?
FR
10:14:11
I mean, this is kind of a dumb question, but do --
DS
Okay.
There were classes, I mean, there were interrogation
10:13:57
This is how I do it.
Or is what we're seeing on TV -10:14:50
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Do people do things differently?
Do you do things differently
than other detectives?
A.
differently, they have their own styles.
Q.
I've seen the guys kind of cozy up to the suspect.
that works.
suspect, or maybe just a witness?
A.
Yes, I think everybody does interviews a little
I mean, I've seen the guys banging the tables, and then
Tell me how
I mean, what do you do when you're interviewing a
Well, me personally, I think the more information you gain
10
from either a witness, a lead, or a suspect is beneficial to
11
the -- any good investigation, so I personally don't bang the
12
table or scream or yell.
13
speaking with comfortable, and -- and in doing so many times it
14
works.
15
info or bad info, my theory is to keep people talking, not to
16
shut them down.
17
Q.
How do you try to gain their confidence?
18
A.
There's a ton of ways.
19
to.
20
interest.
21
regardless of what position they're in.
22
gain their trust to ultimately seek the truth, that's basically
They provide me with information.
Whether it's good
10:15:47
It depends on who you're talking
Every person is different.
You try to find a common
You try to, you know, empathize with their position,
DS
IEN
10:15:21
I try to make the individual I'm
10:16:04
Anything you can to
23
what we do.
24
Q.
25
were you a detective, whether you were in Internal Affairs or
FR
10:15:05
We just want the truth.
Now, just give me in years that you can remember:
How long
10:16:34
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
in general investigations?
A.
of 2007 in District 2, and remained a detective until I was
promoted in January '14.
Q.
were still a detective in District 2 for a year or two and then
you went to IA, is that accurate?
A.
detectives, and then from organized crime, which lasted about a
I believe I began as a detective, I believe it was the end
So you began as a detective in 2007, and then -- so you
I went to the Organized Crime Division after the District 2
10
year, I think a year exactly, and I was then moved to criminal
11
IA, where I remained until I was promoted to sergeant in
12
January of '14.
13
Q.
And you're still a detective?
14
A.
I'm sergeant detective at this point.
15
Q.
No, I'm sorry.
16
were still a detective when you made the move from District 2
17
to IA to organized crime and then back to IA?
18
general investigations and then --
19
A.
20
IA detective, and then promoted to sergeant in '14, and then
21
sergeant at GID, or general investigations, jail crimes.
22
Q.
Before you got promoted to sergeant, you
10:17:30
Or did you go to
DS
Okay.
10:17:49
I think I got the time line now.
Do you use the same investigative techniques as a
24
detective whether you're a District 2 detective, whether you're
25
in general investigations, or whether you're in
FR
10:17:19
District 2 detective, organized crime detective, criminal
IEN
23
10:16:57
10:18:10
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Internal Affairs?
Or does it change, depending on where you're
assigned?
A.
allegation that an individual committed a crime, and we
approach each -- each investigation the same way.
crime, allegation of a crime, so very much the same.
Q.
investigation and you found probable cause that a fellow deputy
sheriff had committed a criminal offense, what would you do?
It's typically the same.
It's the same.
It's an
It's a
If you were conducting a criminal Internal Affairs
10
A.
11
an allegation that a deputy had committed a crime, and there
12
was probable cause to suggest it was done so, we would, again,
13
depending on the exigency -- is it a violent crime?
14
paper crime? -- we would gather as much evidence as we could,
15
and if there was enough probable cause, we would bring that
16
person in, we would interview him, and if there was still
17
enough probable cause, we would effect an arrest, just like any
18
other criminal investigation.
19
Q.
Have you ever done that?
20
A.
Absolutely.
21
Q.
Do you have any idea how many times?
22
A.
I can tell you that I have -- I've handcuffed guys who have
Well, without the rest, remaining information, if there's
10:19:22
10:19:36
DS
IEN
10:19:00
Is it a
23
been to my house and I've taken them to jail.
24
hasn't been dozens of times, but I can recall three or four
25
times that I've literally handcuffed guys who have held my
FR
10:18:24
Fortunately, it
10:19:57
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
child and I've taken them to jail.
Q.
How's that make you feel?
A.
It's horrible.
Q.
But you still did it.
A.
Yeah, it's my job.
Q.
Do you also make a recommendation -- I've seen some of the
documents, and I guess my question is:
recommendation to the county attorney that someone be
prosecuted, or you just turn over what you have to the county
I'd be lying if I said otherwise.
10:20:11
Do you make a
10
attorney and then the county attorney does whatever with it?
11
A.
12
can, and ultimately they make a determination whether there's
13
enough to prosecute.
14
continue on, and eventually it goes back to the county attorney
15
and they -- they do what they do.
16
Q.
17
well, let's assume this.
18
probable cause that a criminal offense was committed.
19
A.
Okay.
20
Q.
And you're going to turn it over to the county attorney.
21
All right?
I provide the county attorney with as much information as I
And if that's the case, then obviously we
10:21:00
Now, at the time you turn it over to the county attorney -Let's assume you've decided there's
DS
Okay?
23
point, or does that depend on circumstances?
24
A.
25
obviously the report, the information is going to follow and
FR
10:21:14
Will you have made an arrest of the suspect at that
IEN
22
10:20:34
That depends -- I mean, any time an arrest is made,

10:21:27
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
end up with the county attorney.
so forth.
There are time restraints and
Several times that we've sent reports over to the
3
4
county attorney for review without necessarily making an
arrest.
wasn't enough evidence, and there's times when they suggested
there probably is evidence, and we would continue as the, like
I said, we follow that evidence, and if there's enough of it,
we would effect an arrest.
Several times they've -- they've suggested that there
10
Q.
Now, tell me more about that process.
You said sometimes
11
you send it over there and they tell you not enough?
12
tell you to go back and do more?
13
A.
14
the County Attorney's Office, and we generally would not do
15
that unless we were really at a crossroads and just completely
16
stumped.
Do they
How does that work?
10:22:20
A lot of the cases, whether we like it or not, in
18
criminal IA are high-profile cases that are considered high
19
profile.
20
HSU case that we spoke of on Friday, I was of the opinion, as
21
well as my other colleagues, that all 50 of those deputy
22
sheriffs could not have been involved in the allegations made
IEN
DS
For example, this particular last -- this case, the
23
by Cisco Perez because they simply weren't there.
24
work there.
FR
10:22:03
It used to be we were able to get a verbal turndown from
17
25
10:21:47
10:22:33
They didn't
So there are two processes that we -- that we follow.
10:22:50
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
One process could be to list all 50 of those men and women as
suspects on an official report that would go to the County
Attorney's Office, and that would be public record.
think that was fair.
I didn't
We do at times, say, for instance, officer-involved
5
6
shootings, we won't send an official report to the county
attorney.
and they can make the determination whether to turn the case
down or tell us there wasn't enough evidence, so forth.
However, we will send the details of the incident,
This particular case I felt it was fair to those
10
11
individuals that weren't said to be involved, that I knew I
12
didn't have any evidence to suggest they were, to send that
13
type of detailed summary of information to the county attorney.
14
Simple as that.
15
happened.
16
evidence we had to follow, and he turned down -- turned down
17
the report.
18
Q.
19
investigation in a little bit, but I'm -- I'm still having a
20
little trouble in figuring out what you're telling me with
21
respect to what you turn over to the county attorney.
22
a -- and I think you just told me it could be different.
IEN
23
He read the information.
Based on the interviews we had, based on the
10:23:46
Or turned down the case for prosecution.
And I'm -- I'm going to get to that specific
My question is:
10:24:06
Is it
Do you turn over a completed
24
investigation report, or -- with recommendations, or you just
25
turn over the facts of your investigation and let the county
FR
10:23:29
That's what
DS
Okay.
10:23:10
10:24:24
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
attorney decide charges, or something like that?
I'm not understanding exactly how the processes works.
2
3
A.
We generally will turn over the specifics or the facts of
the case, the facts that we uncovered.
form, they can be in written form and on audio/video CD that
goes to the county attorney.
matter of the process, paperwork that actually makes it to the
county attorney.
It's all the same.
They look at it the same way.
Those are in written
It's just a
They look at the facts
10
and the details of the case, just like they would any other
11
case, and they make a determination whether or not it's a
12
chargeable offense or it can be identified as a chargeable
13
offense, and then they provide us with that information.
14
don't make recommendations to them.
15
have, based on what they're reading.
16
Q.
17
you made the decision or a determination that there is probable
18
cause that a criminal offense has been committed?
19
A.
No, not necessarily.
20
Q.
Well, then when -- when would be the situation when
21
you've -- when you've arrested someone and put them in
22
handcuffs?
10:24:58
We
They let us know what they
10:25:17
IEN
DS
If you turn it over to the County Attorney's Office, have
10:25:31
When would that happen?
23
A.
When probable cause exists and there's evidence of a crime.
24
Q.
Okay.
25
attorney, or could it be either one?
FR
10:24:44
Is that before or after it goes to the county

10:25:45
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Oh, it could be either one.
Q.
Okay.
the determination as to whether there's probable cause, or does
the county attorney make that determination?
A.
I can make that determination.
Q.
All right.
people in handcuffs that have been in your house and held your
kid?
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
You made the determination there was probable cause?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
Not the county attorney?
13
A.
County attorney did it in addition, but yes, it was my
14
decision to place the person in the handcuffs.
15
Q.
16
were with criminal Internal Affairs if -- well, again, we're
17
probably going to get into some terminology questions here.
Okay.
Well, let me ask you this, then:
10:25:58
Is that when you're telling me you've placed
Do you recall during the period of time when you
I'm going to give you these facts.
18
So can you make
20
that an arrest should be made for criminal charges of an
21
employee of MCSO.
22
A.
DS
determination that there's probable cause and you've decided
10:27:00
You with me so far?
IEN
Yes.
23
Q.
24
someone in the supervisory chain above you?
25
A.
FR
10:26:23
You've made a
19
Okay?
10:26:11
Do you remember that decision by you ever being reversed by
I can never recall an arrest being reversed, no.
10:27:18
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Do you recall investigating a situation that involved a
relative of the chief deputy?
A.
Chief Sheridan.
Q.
I'm talking about.
Internal Affairs investigation, a deputy who was a relative of
the chief deputy?
A.
I recall investigating a deputy that was related, yes, to
Okay.
I might have messed up the question.
That's what
Do you recall investigating, in a criminal
To my recollection, it wasn't a criminal investigation; it
10
was an investigation that took place after I had been promoted
11
and was assigned to the GID, or jail crimes, yes.
12
Q.
Okay.
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
So you were a sergeant then.
15
A.
Yes, sir.
16
Q.
And you investigated a deputy who -- do you know what the
17
relationship was with the chief deputy?
18
A.
19
or related somehow to one of the chiefs.
20
Q.
21
Deputy Sheridan, or was it another deputy chief?
22
A.
10:28:12
So it would have been after January of 2014.
I think he is a -- I want to say son-in-law.
DS
And this chief -- well, let me ask you this:
10:28:30
He's married
Is it Chief
10:28:51
IEN
Chief Deputy Sheridan.
23
Q.
Okay.
24
A.
Jerry Sheridan, yes.
25
Q.
And tell me what happened in that investigation.
FR
10:27:52
10:29:02
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
I was sergeant at jail crimes, and obviously responsible
for six or seven other detectives, to include reviewing
reports, making sure they're addressed properly, everything,
training is kept up to date.
This one particular detective, his name is Christopher
5
6
Butts.
maybe a Monday or a Tuesday, I don't know.
permission to another detective because of some -- some family
issues, I'd given him permission to come in on the weekend, on
10
He was assigned to jail crimes.
I recall it being a -I had given
a Sunday, to catch up on his typing in his reports.
12
same process.
13
make some extra money, he asked if he could just forego the day
14
of work during the week and then come in on the weekend and do
15
his typing.
16
a Sunday.
17
fine.
He was working an off-duty job, and in order to
I didn't know if it was going to be a Saturday or
10:30:12
I found out it was going to be a Sunday, and it was
Just by chance, I had struck up a conversation with
18
the first detective that I said, Okay, come on in on Sunday and
20
do your reports.
21
up, but I just asked him if he had had a chance to talk to
22
Chris.
IEN
DS
19
And I don't know how the conversation came
10:30:27
And he didn't appear to know what I was talking about.
23
I asked him if, well, Chris was here, he was in doing his
24
reports, too, and he said:
FR
10:29:47
I recall getting a request from Deputy Chris Butts,
11
25
10:29:22
I don't know.
I didn't see him.
So obviously, it's my responsibility when the -- when
10:30:44
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
that's the case.
He was supposed to be there and he was going
to be paid to be there to do his work, I -- eventually, I
checked his time sheet and he had logged in for, I want to say,
four or five hours' worth of work.
to make sure the guys are doing what they should be doing.
Again, my responsibility is
Long story short, he logged in and just didn't come to
6
7
work.
talking to me and -- to assure that those hours that he had
logged in on that Sunday, which he didn't come and work, were
10
In addition, he reached out to the admin person without
accurate in his payroll accounting system.
10:31:30
After an internal investigation within GID it was
11
12
found that he was overextended with his time off, with his sick
13
time, with his vacation time, and he simply just called from
14
home to make up those hours so he wouldn't be negative and
15
said, Hey, put me in for four hours.
16
him.
17
Q.
Did anybody above you try to reverse that decision?
18
A.
No.
19
Q.
Did Chief Sheridan try to convince you to reverse that
20
decision?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
All right.
So as a result, I fired
10:31:53
IEN
DS
He was fired.
10:32:12
Now, we've been to the point you were a
23
detective in District 2, then you went to Internal Affairs, is
24
that right?
25
A.
FR
10:31:06
Detective in District 2, then the Organized Crime Division.
10:32:41
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Ah, then -- then Internal Affairs.
A.
Yes.
Q.
And then you went outside to general investigations and
then back to what is now PSB, is that correct?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
Okay.
Why did you -- well, tell me --
THE COURT:
10:32:56
You know, Mr. Masterson, I don't know if
this is a good breaking point, but it's about that time.

MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
10
This is a great point, Judge.
All right.
Let's take 15 minutes.
(Recess taken.)
11
THE COURT:
12
Thank you.
Please be seated.
13
BY MR. MASTERSON:
14
Q.
Okay.
15
A.
Thanks.
16
Q.
I think I left you in general investigations.
Sergeant, welcome back.
10:53:41
Did you have opportunity to come back to what is now
17
PSB?
19
A.
Yes, I did.
20
Q.
Tell me how that happened.
21
A.
I was in general investigations for approximately six
22
months, and I believe in June of '14 I had received a message
IEN
DS
18
23
from Captain Bailey asking if I would like to come back to PSB,
24
the criminal side, as a sergeant, to which I accepted, I said
25
yes.
FR
10:33:07
10:53:54
10:54:16
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
You'd been in IA before, and this is the same -- this is
the same place, new name, right?
A.
Yes.
Q.
What did you think about going back to PSB?
A.
I was happy to go back.
the captain would ask me to go back after only having six
months on as a sergeant.
Q.
Why were you excited about it?
A.
Well, I felt that certainly I would be in on the ground
I was excited and flattered that
10
floor of this transition.
Open-minded.
I felt that I'd have a
11
leg up on many of the guys who had just been promoted, newly
12
promoted, and certainly would have a head start in kind of
13
getting my head -- wrapping my head around the whole Melendres
14
thing, the new procedures, the new policies, and things that
15
would take effect, so that would obviously help me in the
16
future as far as promotions.
17
Q.
18
in the transition and then you mentioned Melendres.
10:54:46
10:55:07
Well, you told me you were excited about getting involved
How does Melendres work into your excitement to go
19
20
back to PSB?
21
A.
22
thought so, that there would be some certain -- certainly some
DS
10:55:22
IEN
Well, I knew that because of the Melendres, at least I
23
changes were going to take place.
24
pigeon holed in, say, for instance, a patrol position, then
25
you're kind of last to get acclimated to the new changes, and I
FR
10:54:28
And like anything, if you're
10:55:39
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
just felt that it was going to be a time of change and I'd
be -- I'd be right there when it was happening, so, yeah, I
was -- I was excited about it.
Q.
And you were once again assigned to criminal IAs, right?
A.
Yes, criminal IA.
Q.
Do you feel criminal internal investigations are important
to law enforcement?
A.
Oh, yes, absolutely.
Q.
Why?
10:55:57
Well, we're -- law enforcement officers are held to a
10
higher standard than -- than civilians.
That's just the way it
11
is.
12
can't imagine a law enforcement office without criminal IA or
13
Internal Affairs.
14
Q.
15
important than -- well, when you were a detective and you were
16
investigating burglaries and robberies and -- I forget what all
17
you told me, sex crimes to some extent, do you feel Internal
18
Affairs investigations are less important than those
19
investigations?
20
A.
No, not at all.
21
Q.
Why not?
22
A.
Well, every investigation is important, especially a
And you have got to have those checks and balances.
And I
It would just -- just wouldn't make sense.
IEN
DS
Do you feel that Internal Affairs investigations are less
23
criminal investigation, and we handle those, at least I do, in
24
the same manner.
25
more so with the -- with the internal investigations.
FR
10:56:14
10:56:39
10:56:57
They're all extremely important, I think even

10:57:11
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
When you first came -- oh, let's see.
we're talking about now when you went back, or did I get my
dates goofed --
A.
June.
Q.
-- up again?
A.
June.
Q.
You went -- oh, January's your promotion.
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
And you went back to PSB in June of 2014.
10
A.
That's correct.
11
Q.
When you got back to PSB, was the Armendariz investigation
12
going on?
13
A.
Yes, it was.
14
Q.
Did you get involved in that?
15
A.
I didn't think I was going to be involved, but when I got
16
there, yes, I was quickly involved in that.
17
Q.
18
get involved in when you went back?
19
A.
20
unemployment hearing that involved a former employee that had
21
been fired.
22
a criminal investigation involving another former deputy named
Okay.
Is this January 2014
10:57:25
June 2014.
10:57:34
Tell me what aspect was your -- was aspect did you
IEN
DS
I was informed of an unemployment hearing, telephonic
His name was Cisco Perez.
10:58:02
And he was involved in
23
Alfredo Navarrette, who was -- who was being investigated by
24
our Special Investigations Division.
25
arrested.
FR
10:57:42
Ultimately, he was
10:58:22
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
During that particular telephonic hearing with
1
2
judge -- and I believe her name was Goodwin -- she asked some
questions regarding some information that she'd read from a
wiretap that involved that Navarrette investigation, Cisco
Perez speaking or conversing with Navarrette.
conversations was overheard and Cisco was overheard saying --
they were talking about a potential criminal's home, basically,
and he said, Well, maybe when I get in I can pocket some shit
for myself.
One of the
Excuse my language.
So obviously, that drew a flag with the judge and she
10
11
questioned him about that, and he explained to the judge that
12
that was the terminology that he used, and that all HSU
13
detectives pocket shit, like flags, T-shirts, drug
14
paraphernalia, and there may have been one other item.
15
Statues.
16
flat-screen television as well, which again raised more red
17
flags to the judge.
18
Q.
19
you find out about this -- is it -- I don't know if it's
20
testimony, but these statements made by Cisco Perez?
21
A.
I believe it was the day I got there.
22
Q.
Okay.
And he added that he would -- they pocketed a 62-inch
IEN
10:59:26
10:59:46
And how did it come to your attention?
23
A.
24
additional detectives from the Special Investigations Unit to
25
assist with this soon-to-be criminal investigation on the HSU
FR
10:59:02
And you -- well, when you went back to PSB, how did
DS
Okay.
10:58:41
When I got there, Captain Bailey had already recruited two
11:00:04
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
guys.
I met them as soon as I got there.
We briefed with the
captain.
hearing, meeting that Cisco Perez had.
it as well as transcripts.
was Shetler and Brady Anthony sat for several hours and
listened to the audio and looked over the transcripts trying
to, you know, develop a game plan, or see how we would approach
this particular investigation.
Q.
And this is when you first got back.
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
Do you know how this statement by Cisco Perez, or the
12
transcripts, or the audiotape, came into the possession of PSB?
13
A.
14
was -- there was some participation on behalf of the office as
15
well, and I believe Chief Knight and lieutenant -- I forgot the
16
lieutenant's name, but he was once over at the administrative
17
side of IA.
18
for the County.
The captain informed me of the -- the unemployment
He gave me audiotape of
Myself and detectives I believe it
11:00:48
I believe that the hearing, although telephonically held,
11:01:11
He was there, as well as another representative
And when he heard this, and he heard the judge
19
interacting with Perez and he made the statements, my
21
understanding that it was Knight that brought that to the
22
attention of PSB, and then as a result there was an inquiry
IEN
DS
20
23
that was to take place.
24
Q.
25
attention of PSB?
FR
11:00:32
11:01:34
Your understanding was that Chief Knight brought it to the

11:01:46
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
That's my understanding.
least on the phone present when those statements were made to
the judge by Cisco Perez.
Q.
Navarrette, is that right?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
Navarrette is the guy who was arrested and now in prison?
A.
I'm not sure if he's in prison.
believe that was 2011.
Okay.
It was Chief Knight who was at
And the statements were made by Cisco Perez, not
11:02:01
He was arrested.
He had some involvement with the
10
cartels smuggling drugs, humans, that sort of thing.
11
Eventually, he was -- he was arrested and charged.
12
Q.
And what happened with Cisco Perez?
13
A.
Cisco Perez was interviewed as a result of that, and as a
14
result of the 2011 criminal investigation -- in fact, I
15
interviewed him -- he gave very little information, and as a
16
result, he was sent over to the administrative side so they
17
could do an administrative investigation.
18
Q.
Do you know what ultimately happened to him?
19
A.
He was fired eventually.
20
for I believe over two years.
21
Q.
Do you know why he was fired?
22
A.
For lying.
24
side?
25
A.
11:02:39
He was on administrative leave
DS
IEN
Q.
FR
23
11:02:19
11:03:02
You interviewed Cisco Perez on the criminal investigation
Initially in 2011.
11:03:09
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Okay.
information.
A.
information.
he's read Miranda.
involvement with -- with Freddy Navarrette.
limited in what information he would give us.
What happened there?
Well, as is his right, he didn't have to provide me
He's a -- involved in a criminal investigation,

And he was -- we talked to him about his
He was very
additional evidence.
There was a gun mentioned and some other
10
things, but the SI guys were unable to find it.
11
interviewed him as we -- we normally would.
12
dead-end regarding the criminal aspect as well as the -- the
13
outcome of the SI investigation.
14
arrest him.
So we
11:03:45
We came to a
They didn't have enough to
So after that the information, as usual, will go to
15
16
the administrative side and they will conduct their own
17
investigation administratively.
18
Q.
19
warnings or Miranda warnings?
20
A.
No, Miranda warnings.
21
Q.
Did he invoke his Miranda rights and not talk to you about
22
certain topics?
11:04:02
Now, when you interviewed him did you give him Garrity
IEN
DS
11:04:14
23
A.
24
but he's -- he wouldn't get into any particulars, and
25
eventually he said that he didn't want to talk to us.
FR
11:03:26
As a result, we could not move forward without
8
9
You just told me you didn't get very much
No, at first he didn't.
At first he -- we had some dialog,
11:04:28
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Did he have a lawyer, do you remember?
A.
No, I don't recall a lawyer being there.
Q.
He just told you he didn't want to talk to you any more?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Did you try to gain his confidence while you were talking
to him?
A.
Sure.
Q.
How'd that work for you that time?
A.
He was already suspicious.
I mean, I can understand why,
10
you know.
11
custody and was being arrested, so I can understand his
12
apprehension.
13
I -- I drove to his home just prior to the interview and asked
14
him -- invited him to come down and speak, which he did on his
15
own accord, so yes.
16
Q.
When you said "brother-in-law," is that Navarrette?
17
A.
Former brother-in-law's Navarrette, yes.
18
Q.
When you interviewed Cisco Perez, had MCSO already arrested
19
Navarrette?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Did you arrest Navarrette?
22
A.
No.
His former brother-in-law had just been placed into
IEN
Q.
24
the hearing where he mentioned pocketing?
25
A.
11:04:53
In fact, I think
DS
But yeah, actually, we did.
23
FR
11:04:41
11:05:11
11:05:23
You listened to the transcript of Cisco Perez talking at
Yes, I read the transcripts and I listened to the audio.
11:05:43
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Was he accusing MCSO deputies of stealing, or what was he
saying, do you remember?
A.
certainly didn't say "steal."
referred to that term as a terminology he used.
named off the items that are commonly pocketed by all HSU, he
followed that up by saying he would -- then they would take
them back and use the items pocketed as training aids, tools.
Q.
It depends on how you listen to it.
It could -- he
He said "pocketing," and then he

And after he
So he said that the things they would pocket they would
10
then use for the training; is that what he said?
11
A.
12
the judge, yeah.
13
Q.
14
property you can recall him talking about.
15
A.
16
flags, drug paraphernalia, and then I believe there was a pause
17
and he said that, "Hell, we even pocketed a 62-inch flat
18
screen."
19
Q.
20
investigation when you first came back to PSB in June of 2014,
21
correct?
22
A.
11:06:23
That's what he says on the audio and that's what he told
Tell me the property you recall him talking about, all the
I recall him saying that there were statues, T-shirts,
All right.
11:06:35
So you're charged with this
DS
Okay.
11:06:55
IEN
That's correct.
23
Q.
All right.
24
A.
Well, eventually we listened to the audio and read the
25
transcripts with Cisco.
FR
11:06:00
What did you do?
How did you start out?
We round-tabled for a brief period as
11:07:08
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
exactly what we were listening to.
I think there was some
disagreement that depending on how you listened to what he's
saying, does he really mean that he's suggesting that things
were stolen?
training aids.
He follows it up by saying they're used as

So that was -- that was an issue.
Certainly, it was disturbing for him to say that to
6
7
the judge, so we briefly discussed it.
the following day, I started to interview folks associated with
HSU.
Within a day, probably
Prior to that, there was some additional discussion as to
10
the guys who were supposed to assist me, and that they had --
11
they were assigned to SI, which is Special Investigations,
12
which happens to be the same building as HSU is now occupying,
13
so they felt it would be uncomfortable and maybe a conflict
14
that they didn't feel comfortable actually sitting in on the
15
HSU interviews themselves, because eventually they would have
16
to go back and work under the same roof and there may be an
17
issue.
11:07:50
11:08:18
So obviously, I didn't argue that, that that's how
18
they felt, so I continued on by myself doing the interviews of
20
the HSU detectives at the request of Captain Bailey.
21
Q.
22
about this -- these guys who told you that they thought --
DS
19
11:08:32
IEN
Well, let me -- I want to talk to you just for a minute
23
well, you used the word "conflict."
24
this point?
25
or how was that to work?
FR
11:07:29
What was their position at
Were they supposed to be detectives helping you,

11:08:54
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes, they were going to help me with the investigation, to
include interviewing guys, which would have been very
beneficial.
had 50 people that were -- eventually, we were told, to
interview.
Obviously, three people are better than one.
We
11:09:07
The issue with the conflict, how it was explained to
6
7
me, the two detectives that were -- that were tasked with
helping me are undercover detectives.
They had beards.
They're plainclothes.
They wore mustaches and -- you know.
The
10
fear that I got -- well, from what I gather, is that you just
11
never know.
So they would assist with the interviews, and then
12
13
they would have to go back into the special investigations
14
division under the undercover position.
15
anonymous in the other undercover situation when they do their
16
investigations.
17
that there may be a conflict, and maybe one of the guys would
18
be -- you know, slip up, and because he's pissed off at them,
19
so to speak, would reveal their -- their identity.
20
safety issue as well as a -- just an uncomfortable situation to
21
be put in.
22
Q.
Very important to stay
11:09:41
So they were fearful that there's a potential
DS
So it was a
11:09:58
IEN
Did you discuss that with your supervisors?
23
A.
Yeah, I think it was discussed.
24
Q.
This issue?
25
A.
Yeah, I think it was -- it wasn't a -- it wasn't like the
FR
11:09:21
I mean --
11:10:08
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
big focal point, but yeah, it was -- it was discussed, and I
think ultimately it made sense, and I just continued on with
the investigation by myself.
Brady Anthony did remain for almost the entire
4
5
investigation, more of a -- like a consultant, I guess.
would sit in and watch interviews from our interview rooms and
so forth, but I don't recall anyone else other than myself
participating in the -- in the interviews.
Q.
10
He
Now, you said just a few minutes ago that you started by
interviewing a few of the HSU folks.

Tell me what you did.
11
11:10:40
How'd you start this whole
12
thing rolling forward?
13
A.
14
on what Cisco Perez said, that's all I had.
15
physical evidence.
16
saying, Hey, I've been the victim of a crime.
17
stole my statue, as you usually do.
18
allegation, you at least have -- it's nice to have a victim, a
19
live victim.
I was told to start, and start immediately.
Again, based
I didn't have any
I didn't have anybody coming to me and
Look, this guy
When you have an
But I didn't have that.
So I just started
interviewing these guys.
22
that I had -- I had written down on a piece of paper and the
IEN
21
11:11:15
I had like three or four questions
23
following day started to interview these guys.
24
they were baseline questions.
25
conversation going, because at that point I'm still -- I'm
FR
11:10:59
It's very helpful.
DS
20
11:10:23
And I guess
They were just kind of to get a

11:11:37
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
still looking for some sort of an identifiable crime.
sure what direction to go in.
I wasn't
I know I was actually talking to people that didn't
3
4
even know Cisco Perez, which was another -- that was another
problem I had.
administrative side has been -- has been placed on standby.
stopped.
to interview all of them.
But it was -- my understanding was, Look, the
It
We need to get these guys in criminally, and we need

We need to do it now.
That was followed up, obviously, by several e-mails
9
10
from the monitors asking when these guys were scheduled.
11
you contacted them?
12
their interviews?
13
arrangements and we want to be there so they can sit in on the
14
interviews.
Have
Reason being is we're making travel
to get these things done, and they needed to be -- these guys
17
needed to be -- needed to be contacted, told what days they
18
could come, so forth and so on, which was foreign to me,
19
because we don't do that with criminal investigations.
20
fact, we talk to suspects last.
21
typically talk to, so it was weird that we were bringing in
22
folks and actually scheduling them like a doctor's appointment:
IEN
DS
16
24
FR
25
11:12:15
What time are they going to be in for
So there -- there's a -- there was a -- I was pressed
15
23
11:11:52
11:12:29
In
That's the last person we
11:12:47
Hey, can you come in on Thursday?

I especially felt more uncomfortable knowing that
these guys had already been made aware of their participation
11:13:02
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
in the allegations that were before them in an administrative
investigation.
content.
said:
content.
So they'd already been told:
We need to talk to you administratively.
Then they
Stop and let me do it, investigate criminally, same
11:13:23
So it just -- it was unusual.
Hey, this is the
It wasn't -- it wasn't
what I was typically used to, and it -- it quickly ended about
two or three days into the interviews.
five interviews, and I was called to Captain Bailey's office
I may have done four or
10
and we were asked to meet with monitors Rojas and Peters, and I
11
was told that -- just prior to the meeting I was told to cease.
12
No more interviews.
13
with those monitors, so we did so.
14
Q.
15
suspect last, is that right?
16
A.
Typically, yes.
17
Q.
Who is pushing this weird procedure on you?
18
A.
Well, at first I didn't -- I didn't think anybody was
19
pushing me.
20
maybe I assumed, but I couldn't really identify a -- well,
21
potentially there could be a crime, but there's no witness.
22
There's no victims yet.
IEN
23
No more criminal interviews until we meet
Now, you said that you typically like to interview a
11:14:17
So my thinking was, Okay, we'll start this more of an
24
inquiry and see where it goes, and I quickly learned that no,
25
we're going to -- we're going to interview 50 guys, and we're
FR
11:13:59
I thought it was -- I looked at this because of --
DS
Okay.
11:13:39
11:14:37
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
going to ask them these questions.
Q.
this done?
A.
Well, why isn't this guy scheduled for an interview?
these guys -- why haven't they been contacted yet?
Was somebody pushing you to move this really fast to get
Well, yes.
I mean, I -- I was getting e-mails asking,
Why are
So, no, did someone say, Hey, you have to do this and
7
8
you have to do it today?
common sense.
But, I mean, I can only -- I'm using
If I get an e-mail from one of the monitors, who
10
I know people think I don't respect them but I certainly do,
11
and it says to me, Look, I am coming to town.
12
so-and-so, so-and-so, so-and-so, and so-and-so scheduled for
13
their criminal interviews for next week because I have to make
14
travel arrangements, that's not illegal.
15
would do it but it's not illegal, so who am I to say:
16
no, that's not how I do investigations.
17
said that, but I didn't.
18
interviewed, and you see what the results were.
19
Q.
20
things in a different way?
21
A.
22
questions on the monitor's letterhead:
So I did.
11:15:10
Can you have
That's not how I
Well,
11:15:28
Maybe I should have
I scheduled and we
So did you feel pressure to start doing things -- these
DS
11:15:47
IEN
Oh, yes.
I was handed a -- I was handed a list of
Your name's on it.
These are the -- it's
23
your case.
24
be some civil outcome, my name's on it.
25
the questions that we strongly suggest that you answer, and you
FR
11:14:52
Should it go to court, or there

But by the way, here's
11:16:05
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
do so from a list, 1 through 32.
Q.
you're talking about, did those come from the monitors?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And telling you, Do you have so-and-so set for interviews?
Do you have these guys set for interviews?
to interview?
A.
difficulty in actually compiling every name of every deputy
Okay.
Well, let's talk about that.
So you -- the e-mails
When are you going
What were they telling you?
Yes, there was a -- initially, there was a -- some
10
that actually had somehow touched HSU.
11
it right that it was difficult?
12
keep good records.
That was difficult.
I don't know.
Is
11:16:34
Maybe we didn't
But it certainly was.
Eventually, we got those names, and it came in the
13
14
form of two or three lists, but we finally got the names of the
15
folks who were actually assigned to HSU, former, present, when
16
Cisco was there, the whole nine yards.
11:16:50
There was an issue with not getting those names, so,
17
you know, I was under the impression they were suggesting that
19
we were trying not to -- not to give those names, but we did.
20
We finally got then.
21
push via e-mail:
22
get this guy interviewed.
IEN
DS
18
And then there was a push.
Hey, we want to have this done.

This guy interviewed.
There was a
11:17:10
We want to
This guy
23
interviewed.
24
were -- they were making travel arrangements around this.
25
obviously, there's exigent circumstances on their behalf; they
FR
11:16:19
And I did -- and I say that only because they

So
11:17:25
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
wanted to have this interview.
So if I were to say to you, Hey, I want to have this
2
3
guy interviewed tomorrow because I'm flying in, then obviously,
you would -- you would try to accommodate me.
did.
Q.
did you say, three or four guys?
A.
wasn't obvious, but it was certainly collective, our thinking
I just tried to accommodate.

Okay.
And that's all I
That's it.
11:17:41
And prior to this you had actually talked to, what
Oh, I talked to the detectives.
I mean, it was -- it
10
was collective, how we gonna -- how do we do this?
11
going to start this.
12
Q.
Okay.
13
A.
I'm sorry.
14
Q.
I think -- I think you said before, and we'll get to this,
15
but at some point Captain Bailey told you to stop, that you
16
were going to meet with the monitors, correct?
17
A.
That's correct.
18
Q.
Okay.
19
three or four of the HSU guys prior to that order from
20
Captain Bailey?
21
A.
22
handful of HSU guys.
I'm talking just before that.
11:18:12
Had you talked to
DS
IEN
Yes.
11:18:00
I understand that, but that's not what I meant.
11:18:24
I met with, I don't know the exact number, it was a
23
Q.
24
conduct as your interviews of the HSU people?
25
A.
FR
How are we
And was this the beginning of what you were going to
Yes.
And I looked at it at this point as an inquiry, and
11:18:35
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
it was fluid.
This thing was -- it was moving.
Again, I had
no victims.
from a disgruntled former employee that got fired for lying.
These are the things -- things I'm going on.
I had no allegations from a victim.
I had words
Of course, as an investigator you're always thinking
5
6
ahead.
who was involved with another guy got arrested for smuggling
humans and smuggling dope.
information.
So you're thinking, Okay, well, I have a guy who lied
None of this is credible
I like to give everybody the benefit.
So I went into this thing I want to say blind.
10
11
mean, I was trying to -- I developed some baseline questions.
12
I didn't know where those would go.
11:19:13
Certainly -- there was certainly a feel that this
13
14
thing needed to get done, let me put it that way.
15
anybody saying, Hey, you know, you have to have this done by
16
the end of the day?
17
a feel that it needed to be done, and it needed to be done
18
expeditiously.
19
Q.
20
they were?
21
A.
22
focused on, I think, what Cisco actually said, because I had --
Tell me about your baseline questions.
Can I recall
11:19:32
But it was certainly
Do you recall what
DS
11:19:45
IEN
They were geared, and they were just questions that -- that
23
I had nothing else.
24
Cisco Perez said this during an investigation, and guess what?
25
John Smith came forward last week and said that somebody stole
FR
11:18:57
I had -- you know, I had, Hey, by the way,
11:20:03
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
four of his statues.
I didn't have that.
I just had what Cisco said, so I
was like I guess I was hoping that, I don't know, just by
bringing those things up that something would -- a discussion
would come up and it would lead me in a direction that I could
logically formulate some sort of a reasonable strategy.
what I thought.
Q.
Did you ask them about pocketing?
A.
Oh, yes.
10
Q.
What did you ask them about pocketing?
11
A.
I asked them -- the only thing I could think of was that --
12
I guess I would have liked to have established whether or not
13
"pocketing" was a term, common terminology used with HSU.
14
may explain things, it may benefit those being investigated, or
15
it may be to detriment to them, but that's -- I wanted to
16
establish that.
That's
But that --
Certainly, the television.
17
11:20:29
That
set may have been one of those questions, too, 'cause it's
19
obviously a -- I mean, someone's accused of pocketing those
20
items.
21
addressed.
DS
That's a -- certainly something that needs to be
11:21:01
IEN
But again, I don't have -- I have Cisco Perez's word.
23
There was no follow-up done by Judge Goodwin, and I don't
24
expect her to have done some.
25
had to go on.
FR
11:20:48
I believe the television
18
22
11:20:18
That's all I had.
That's all I
So those were the questions that were asked of
11:21:16
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
the guys.
And immediately they were, No, I don't know.
I don't
recall using "pocketing" as a term.
I don't recall, you know,
doing any of those things.
like that, but not in a way that -- it's hard to explain, but
not in a way it's, like, Oh, aha.
in line with what Cisco says.
that's how it went.
Q.
They did mention statues and things
That makes sense.
It goes
If you can understand that,
Did you feel that your questions were a starting point of
10
your investigation, or was this going to be your whole
11
investigation?
12
A.
11:21:44
No, that was --
MR. SEGURA:
13
Leading.
MR. KILLEBREW:
14
THE COURT:
15
Leading.
Sustained.
16
BY MR. MASTERSON:
17
Q.
18
investigation when you first started talking to these three or
19
four folks you mentioned?
20
A.
21
few others, that we should probably establish sort of a -- a
22
game plan that we would talk to folks that we believed if, "if"
11:21:54
How did you envision, in your mind, this part of your
IEN
DS
Well, early on it was -- it was my thought, and I think a
23
there was something that was -- that could have been criminal
24
in nature that they would have had enough of a closeness to
25
Cisco Perez that we could gain additional intelligence or
FR
11:21:29
11:22:05
11:22:29
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
additional information.
I want to tell you right now I don't know why that was
2
3
not done.
It should have been done.
throughout.
investigations with the -- with the monitors, who ultimately
agreed that's how the investigation should have gone.
And it was even talked about at the end of the
So I don't know.
It was talked about
I just got the sense that it was:
This is what was going to happen, you're going to speak with
these guys, and here are your questions.
You need to ask these
10
questions, there are 32 of them, and don't deviate.
11
strongly recommend that these questions are asked, and we
12
recommend that these questions be asked in the process of a
13
criminal investigation.
14
Q.
15
three or four and then were told to stop, is that right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
Who told you to stop?
18
A.
Captain Bailey told me to stop based on the monitors, I'm
19
not sure which one, insisting that all criminal interviews be
20
done at the offices, PSB offices on the fifth floor of the
21
headquarters.
22
Q.
We
11:23:05
DS
And I think you already told us that you conducted these
11:23:20
11:23:38
IEN
Where were you doing them before?
23
A.
24
property manned by the Sheriff's Office, and they have
25
facilities there that audiotape and videotape interviews, so I
FR
11:22:48
I did a few at General Investigations Division, which is a
11:23:57
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
did those in their interview rooms.
Q.
So they have interview rooms there?
A.
Yes, they do.
Q.
They have interview rooms at PSB?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Are they different?
A.
The only reason those interviews were done at that time is
because they were to be done and started immediately.
interview rooms and the investigative equipment that's located
10
at PSB, the offices that -- that equipment occupied, was being
11
occupied by other detectives that were assisting with the
12
Charley Armendariz investigation.
13
rooms were occupied.
14
nefarious going on.
15
just that there was no room.
16
Q.
17
interview rooms at different facilities?
18
A.
19
same.
20
listen to them and view them and they're all the same.
21
Q.
And are they more intimidating?
22
A.
I don't know.
11:24:08
And the
So it's simply because those
There was no -- nothing sinister or
I wasn't trying to hide anything, it was
11:24:49
But I mean, are PSB interview rooms better than other
They're newer, but no, they're the same.
They work the
IEN
DS
They audiotape, videotape, and you can hear them and
23
Q.
24
talk about before you worked at Internal Affairs, because you
25
haven't been at PSB very long here.
FR
11:24:26
11:25:03
In the time you worked with PSB and before -- well, let's
11:25:24
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Did you interview people -- employees of MCSO who were
1
2
under criminal investigation -- did you interview them other
places than Internal Affairs, the Internal Affairs offices?
A.
there were occasions where some were -- were suspects.
ideally, a suspect would be interviewed at PSB, a sus -- I'm
talking about a suspect that we feel we had evidence, enough
evidence to bring them in to PSB and interview them.
We interviewed several people outside the PSB offices, and

But
Now, there have been times when we've interviewed
folks at the onset of an investigation, maybe off-site, and
11
then based on the gatherings of evidence in the investigation,
12
determined they were a stronger suspect than we first thought,
13
and we bring them in.
14
suspects on property --
15
Q.
Okay.
16
A.
-- ideally.
17
Q.
And I think you told me earlier you're going to be
18
interviewing a lot of guys here.
19
A.
Yes, several.
20
Q.
40, 50, somewhere in there?
21
A.
I think the number was 47, but it could have been a few
22
more than that.
IEN
DS
10
11:26:06
Ultimately, we like to interview
11:26:24
Do you remember?
23
Q.
24
interviews and conduct this investigation?
25
A.
FR
11:25:46
11:26:32
Did you feel you had enough resources to do all these
You know, it seems like you never have enough resources.
11:26:48
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
knew that I could get them done eventually, but no, I would
have liked to have had more, more folks helping me, sure.
Q.
Without a whole bunch of other guys helping you?
A.
more difficult.
Certainly, a couple of extra bodies would have been great, but
sure.
Q.
Okay.
10
A.
That's correct.
11
Q.
And you're going to meet with the inter -- excuse me.
12
You're going to meet with the monitors, is that accurate?
13
A.
That is.
14
Q.
And how many days after you started did that happen?
15
A.
I'd be guessing, but it wasn't long.
16
days after I started.
17
Q.
18
recall?
19
A.
I did.
20
Q.
What happened there?
21
A.
It was later in the afternoon.
22
was.
Did you feel you could do the investigation anyway?
Yeah, I do.
Now, Captain Bailey told you to stop, right?
11:27:29
It was just a few
11:27:40
Did you ultimately meet with the monitors, do you
11:27:50
I'm not sure what day it
IEN
Captain Bailey called me and said that, Look, we're going
23
to stop the investigations.
24
we're going to go meet with the monitors.
25
of the conference rooms at the headquarters, and we met with
FR
11:27:12
You have 50 people that you're speaking with.
DS
Okay.
I mean, it would have been -- it's obviously
We need to meet -- come see me and

And we did so in one
11:28:06
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Monitor Rojas and Monitor Peters.
Q.
they do to help you with your investigation?
A.
the questions, a copy of the questions that I was asking, and
were extremely displeased at the questions; that they would
have to be -- I would have to be much -- much more detailed and
much more in depth.
Okay.
And what did they tell you, or what did -- what did
Well, they indicated they had gotten a copy, or had gotten
11:28:27
Encouraged me to keep an open mind.
And there were references made, I believe by Pete
9
10
Rojas, that he talked about his friends that he thought were
11
friends when he was in, I don't know if it was Miami or
12
wherever, being caught with bricks of cocaine and so forth in
13
his -- in this guy's basement or this guy's attic.
11:28:54
I wasn't really sure where he was going with that,
14
15
because I felt there's a huge contrast between a, you know, a
16
T-shirt and cocaine, but I got his -- I got his point.
17
the point he was trying to make is he felt that -- based on the
18
fact there was only a couple of questions, that I was being
19
sympathetic to these guys and I was giving them a pass.
20
what I thought.
21
Q.
Were you giving them a pass?
22
A.
Absolutely not.
I think
That's
IEN
DS
11:29:27
23
Q.
Why not?
24
A.
I can't give them a pass.
25
have a family.
FR
11:29:11
I have a -- I took the oath.
I would never do that.
If I didn't want to do
11:29:38
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
that -- if I wanted to give them a pass, I'd quit this job.
I'd do something else.
Q.
Were you given a list of questions to ask the interviewees?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And were these questions -- who gave you the list?
A.
I was asked to produce a list of questions, which I did.
Captain Bailey and I spoke about the questions.
they were a little -- some of them were administrative in
nature.
In my opinion,
And again, this is what the request was, so I
10
forwarded those questions to -- to Mr. Peters.
11
I forwarded those questions directly or through the -- the
12
captain, I'm not sure, but he got the questions and then
13
quickly returned those -- quickly returned an additional list
14
of questions on letterhead, Warshaw letterhead, which included
15
several of mine, the ones that I asked, but they added several
16
as well.
17
a -- an administrative investigation rather than a criminal
18
administration.
19
Q.
And Peters was one of the monitors?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
And Warshaw's one of the monitors.
22
A.
Yes.
I don't know if
DS
IEN
11:30:18
11:30:39
Many of them, in my opinion, were geared more toward
11:30:52
I've not met him.
23
Q.
24
by Monitor Peters of all 47 of the HSU personnel that you
25
interviewed?
FR
11:29:53
Did you ultimately ask all of those questions given to you
11:31:11
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
You know, I -- I did.
I started out doing that, and it's
one of those things when you're -- you kind of go by your gut.
And there were a few guys that I was interviewing, and I had
more of an intimate knowledge of these guys than Peters does.
I mean, I've been around this office 15 years and I know some
of these guys.
that, I don't know, I don't know why I didn't ask them, but
there are a few that I left out.
e-mails suggesting that that was probably not a good thing to
So I just felt that there's some questions
And I quickly received
10
do, that they strongly recommended that I reinsert some of
11
those questions.
12
probably word for word from a piece of paper.
13
Q.
14
you remember?
15
A.
16
want to say the end of July, maybe third week of July, I think.
17
Q.
18
left over from last week and maybe this morning.
So yes, after that, of course I read them
I know we started in June.
Okay.
I think it finished up in -- I
11:32:00
I think you have some exhibits with you up there
Can you see if you have Exhibit 2006 up there?
DS
Do you have 2006?
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
Okay.
IEN
21
11:32:59
Have you seen that before?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
Do you recall talking about that last week with Mr. Segura?
25
A.
Yes.
FR
11:31:41
How long did it take you to conduct the 47 interviews, if
19
20
11:31:26
11:33:08
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
Could we publish this, please, Judge.
Sure.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
Do you see a statement there from Deputy Gamboa?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Can you tell me what Deputy Gamboa stated, please.
A.
The --
Q.
It might be --
A.
Sure.
10
Q.
It might be if you look at -- do you have it on your
11
screen?
12
A.
I do.
13
Q.
Maybe we could highlight the portion for him starting on
14
June 17th.
15
investigation.
16
A.
17
the items that Cisco Perez referred to as being pocketed.
18
he explains to me that there have been times, oftentimes when
19
items were discarded, and he even mentions religious statues,
20
and he explains that they -- in his mind they were not of any
21
monetary value and they'd just be retrieved and displayed.
22
Q.
11:33:29
Tell me what Deputy Gamboa told you during your
DS
And
11:34:29
Where'd he tell you these items were found?

Look at the first sentence.
24
A.
Abandoned in the desert.
25
Q.
Now, I want you to look at the next paragraph,
FR
11:34:08
I can only assume that we were -- I was asking about the --
IEN
23
11:33:53
11:34:49
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Deputy Rangel.
A.
Rangel.
Q.
Okay, Rangel.
religious statues that he had?
A.
Yes.
Q.
What did he tell you about those statues?
A.
They were left behind.
drop houses.
Q.
What's a drop house?
10
A.
A drop house is where the coyote or the smuggler will
11
eventually place those who are being transported across the
12
border as like a temporary holding area until they're released,
13
or they make payments, or whatever.
14
Q.
Have you ever been to one?
15
A.
I've not.
16
Q.
So Deputy Rangel told you --
Did you talk with Deputy Rangel about some
11:35:02
Sometimes they were left behind in
11:35:32
Did I say it right that time?
17
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
Rangel?
20
A.
You did.
21
Q.
Did he tell you that -- he said traffickers would leave
22
these items behind in abandoned drop houses?
11:35:39
DS
IEN
23
MR. SEGURA:
24
BY MR. MASTERSON:
25
Q.
FR
11:35:13
Objection, leading.
Well, why don't you read what he said, the second sentence
11:35:50
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
of that highlighted paragraph.
I think he's waiting for you, Judge.
He's heard your admonishments, I think.
THE COURT:
4
5
Well, that's good.
mind if you read what's there.

MR. MASTERSON:
THE WITNESS:
7
8
some religious statues.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
That's good.
I don't
I've already read it.
Okay.
Says that the -- he's in possession of
10
Q.
11
reporter --
12
A.
13
obtained as a result of drop house operations.
14
traffickers would leave them behind in abandoned drop houses.
15
Rangel said he used items as training aids, and would at times
16
use them while interviewing suspects -- or subjects, rather,
17
involved in a drop house case, in drop house cases.
You use the microphone so we make sure the court
11:36:26
He's in possession of some religious statues that were

Said the
11:36:38
And then it refers to transcripts.
18
Q.
Okay.
Now, so I have this straight, you mentioned that
20
Peters talked to you and was telling you about bricks of
21
cocaine or something?
22
A.
DS
19
11:36:58
IEN
No, it was -- Roja -- Rojas made mention -- they were
23
upset -- they were concerned about -- concerned about the
24
questions that were being asked initially.
25
impression that they thought that I was naive in thinking that
FR
11:36:13
And I get the

11:37:17
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
there's no way in hell that a deputy sheriff could be a
criminal, which is not the truth.
But he -- he referred to, Well, you'd be surprised.
3
4
And he said something to the effect that his -- one of his
friends was on the force with him, and he was arrested because
he had kilos of cocaine in his attic.
know they wanted me to revise those questions and I wasn't sure
what the relevance was or how that connected, how the kilos of
cocaine in any way was referring to or, you know, being related
I don't know.
I just
10
to a statue or a T-shirt.
11
very respectful, and ultimately I changed the questions, and
12
ultimately they changed them again and told me which ones to
13
ask.
14
Q.
15
cocaine?
16
A.
17
to me.
18
Q.
19
here.
20
A.
21
T-shirts, the flags, the drug paraphernalia.
22
Q.
I was
11:38:04
Did this investigation have anything to do with kilos of
11:38:24
No, not that I know of.
No one mentioned kilos of cocaine
Tell me every item you remember that you were dealing with
DS
Every item.
Well, from the onset it was the statues, the
IEN
Let me stop you.
23
now?
24
A.
I don't know.
25
Q.
Okay.
FR
I didn't voice my opinion.
11:37:38
11:38:33
What's the drug paraphernalia, do you
11:38:44
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
I mean, it's just general Cisco said, Yeah, even drug
paraphernalia.
Q.
Okay.
A.
And then the flat screen TV that he threw out there, the
62-inch flat screen TV.
Q.
Did you find anything out about that flat-screen TV?
A.
Not specifically the 62-inch flat-screen TV, but I found
out that Cisco Perez, when he spoke with the judge in the
unemployment hearing, made it clear to her that he was
I'm fairly certain he said that.
Go ahead.
11:38:55
10
completely unaware of the forfeiture process or the diversion
11
process that we often use to obtain some of the tools that we
12
use every day at the office.
13
it.
14
actually seize an item, it doesn't have to be of evidence, but
15
even if it's found property, and eventually take it into our
16
possession and use it.
There's a procedure.
It's a legal thing.
It goes to the courts.
We can do
But we can
18
telling the judge that he was not aware of that process.
19
fact, he does not do it.
20
doing any diversion processes or any forfeitures.
In
DS
He's not aware of anybody at HSU
investigations that he was involved in, not only was he a case
23
agent on one of the investigations, and it was a drop house,
24
but a television set was taken, two television sets were taken
25
as safekeeping, because they were found in, what I gather from
FR
11:39:47
I followed that up by looking into some of the
IEN
22
11:39:31
What struck me was that he was -- he was insistent on
17
21
11:39:12
11:40:09
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
the report, in the drop house, and typically items of value are
not found in there.
gathered those items for safekeeping in case they were able to
locate the owner of the home to return his items.
So the deputies went an extra step and
So not only was he case agent on that, those specific
5
6
television sets were and did go through the diversion process
legally, and to my knowledge are now being used by the SO.
found that interesting that he had no idea what the process
was; however, he was case agent on a case that we did actually
10
divert that property to being ours.
11
flags that came up with that as well.
12
Q.
So did you find the TVs were lawfully taken by MCSO?
13
A.
Specifically, the 62-inch TV that Cisco Perez mentions, I
14
couldn't find that television.
15
investigated as a result of the HSU -- their operations,
16
anything that was taken was placed in the Property and
17
Evidence.
18
legally seized.
19
Q.
Properly documented?
20
A.
Yes, sir.
21
Q.
Placed in evidence?
22
A.
Yes.
24
FR
25
So there was a lot of
Q.
11:40:49
But yes, the televisions that I
11:41:06
As far as I can see, it was properly seized and
11:41:22
DS
IEN
23
11:40:28
And subsequently forfeited?

MR. SEGURA:
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Objection, leading.
11:41:30
Q.
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Do you know?
MR. SEGURA:
THE COURT:
3
4
Objection, leading.
I'm going to allow the last question, if
he knows.
THE WITNESS:
I know that the case I speak of involved
Perez as case agent, and a successful diversion, yes.
televisions were diverted legally, and done so within the
guidelines of the law.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Those
Q.
Were you also part of investigating some identifications,
11
or IDs that were found during the Armendariz investigation?
12
A.
Yes, I was.
13
Q.
Tell me -- tell me about that.
14
A.
My involvement with the IDs came as a result of a visit to
15
the Enforcement Support building.
16
were visiting the building on an unrelated matter.
17
approached by a sergeant, and his name escapes me, he handed
18
me -- he handed me sort of a packet, I don't remember what they
19
were in, but basically it was a -- an audio CD of songs, some
20
sort of songs, and I believe there were a couple of
21
identification cards, voters ID card, maybe a -- I can't -- I
22
want to be accurate, so I don't know.
IEN
DS
10
Myself and Detective Zebro
11:42:00
11:42:20
We were
11:42:47
Anyway, they were --
23
they were Mexican ID cards.
24
Q.
They were --
25
A.
They were either voters registration cards or
FR
11:41:39
11:43:05
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
identification cards.
Q.
Of people from Mexico?
A.
They were cards, they were foreign Mexican -- they were
cards, Mexican IDs.
Q.
cards.
A.
because I'm not positive, but they were some sort of
identification, Mexican identification.
Okay.
Well, let me ask you this.
They were voter ID
11:43:16
Is that what you're telling me?
I think they were.
Okay.
Again, I don't want to be specific,
10
Q.
But it was -- these were not United States
11
Government documents or Arizona government documents.
12
telling me they were the country of Mexico documents?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
Okay.
15
these IDs?
16
A.
17
we had just come into possession of some identification cards,
18
not knowing that we'd been looking at these.
19
a -- something that needed to be reported.
20
possession of them and took them back to our offices.
21
Q.
Okay.
22
A.
We attempted to identify these people and find them.
All right.
11:43:30
Are you
So what'd you do when you were handed
11:43:49
I immediately made my command staff aware of the fact that
Obviously, it was
IEN
DS
So I took
11:44:07
Then what'd you do next?

We
had no idea how long those identification cards had been where
24
they were.
We had no idea how they were seized.
25
the names.
I'm not certain if we were able to attach a name to
FR
23
We looked up
11:44:24
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
a specific report, but we couldn't find these people.
Q.
possession of the person who gave them to you?
A.
he came across some -- I'm not certain how he came across them,
but it was as a result of that they were -- they were found.
Q.
said?
A.
Did you get any information on how they came into
Yeah, they were cleaning out, I guess, that building, and
And he gave them to you with a music CD?
Yeah.
Is that what you
I recall there being a music CD, and I want to say
10
it was a -- it was a Hispanic CD, Hispanic music, but it had --
11
and if I saw the photo, it had the drug lord on the top of
12
the -- on the face of the actual CD cover.
13
so I don't know what they're called, but the cover itself had
14
the face of a well-known drug smuggler, I was told, so...
15
Q.
Oh, you didn't know the guy; somebody just told you that?
16
A.
Yeah, I didn't know who it was, but they -- El Chapo?
17
El Chapo.
18
Q.
Okay.
19
A.
That rings a bell, but that's what was on it.
20
Q.
I think there's a new Halloween mask out of him.
I'm not sure if --
11:45:49
documents to you and the CD?
23
A.
24
anything that was in the offices that were identification or --
25
or items that could have possibly not been taken to Property
FR
11:45:37
Did the person tell you why he was giving these
IEN
22
11:45:09
I'm not into music
DS
21
11:44:44
I can only assume that we had been trying to gather
11:46:06
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
and Evidence were being forfeited, and we're -- we're making
sure we got all those in order to analyze them, figure out why
they were found, first of all, and not put into Property and
Evidence or destroyed, and then secondly, to see if they had
any kind of relevance to Armendariz.
Q.
through.
who gave them to you give you any information about --
Okay.
11:46:24
Well, I understand that's the process you were going
What I guess I'm trying to get at is, did the person
First off, was it a male?
9
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
Someone who worked for MCSO.
12
A.
It was -- I remember now, it was Sergeant Scott.
13
Q.
Scott?
14
A.
Scott.
15
Q.
Okay.
16
to you?
17
suppose he could have thrown them away.
18
gave them to you?
19
A.
20
we were looking into items of evidence, which include those IDs
21
and so forth, not so much me, but the other folks were doing
22
that regarding Charley Armendariz.
11:46:40
Did Sergeant Scott tell you why he was giving them
I mean, I guess I'm trying to figure out, and I
Did he tell you why he
IEN
DS
Well, he knew -- he knew we were doing an investigation and
11:47:06
So he found those, he
23
didn't know who they belonged to.
24
they were where they were, so he just gave them to me, knowing
25
I'm with Internal Affairs or PSB.
FR
11:46:47
He couldn't figure out why
11:47:24
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
to track down, or try to track down who these people were?
Tell me what you did.
A.
databases, we plugged their names into our arrest records,
anything we could do to get, you know, personal information,
addresses, phone numbers, employers.
don't recall being able to find those folks, but I do recall
finding what we believed to be former addresses or current
10
Okay.
Now, I think you started to tell me you were going
What we did was we utilized all of our law enforcement
And I don't recall -- I
addresses.
11:48:12
And I believe Detective Zebro and I physically went
11
12
out to those addresses.
13
address, didn't exist, and another one was an apartment
14
building, I don't know which location, it was in Phoenix
15
somewhere, and there was no -- there was no record of that
16
particular person being -- living there or being on a lease, so
17
we kind of struck out.
18
Q.
19
remember?
20
A.
I want to say two or three, I'm not -- I'm not certain.
21
Q.
And you said you looked at -- I don't want to mess up your
22
words -- I think you said law enforcement databases, or
One, I believe, was a fictitious
11:48:25
IEN
DS
How many IDs were there that you were looking at, do you
23
something like that?
24
A.
25
you can -- we can access, anyway, that you can punch in names,
FR
11:47:39
11:48:37
Yeah, there's several law enforcement databases you can -11:48:55
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
dates of birth, Social Security numbers, employers, and we can
try to locate these folks, former addresses.
Q.
can you tell us what those databases are?
A.
database.
with -- I believe we got with some of the folks at ACTIC.
do some additional background.
If you can tell us without revealing anything top secret,
There's the jail Website interface, JWI.
JMS, which is part of the jail system.
There's several.
DPS has their own

We even got
They
I mean, there's sev- -- all these
10
things are Internet-based searches that we can do.
11
of times we will.
12
be able to find at least maybe a previous address.
13
them are listed as transients, so they don't list addresses or
14
relatives or phone numbers.
15
they do.
16
Q.
17
system?
18
A.
Yes, they would -- well, they would, yes.
19
Q.
Did you -- is there something called CJIS and AJIS?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Did you search those?
22
A.
Yes.
A lot of
Sometimes we get lucky and -- and
11:49:56
DS
Q.
11:49:39
If they were arrested at one point, we will
11:50:07
And were you successful in finding any of these people?
24
Well, first of all, let me stop you.
25
What's CJIS and AJIS?
FR
And a lot
So if they were arrested would they show on your JMS
IEN
23
11:49:11
11:50:16
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
version of some of the local databases that we have, so -- and
they do the same thing.
figure out former addresses, employers, and that sort of thing.
No, we were unsuccessful.
Q.
were trying to -- trying to locate?
A.
get former addresses, but we struck out.
10
They're just national databases.
Just sort of a beefed-up
They do background checks, and they
11:50:38
Did you find any information about any of these people you
These specific people, we -- like I said, I believe we did

One fictitious
address and one was a -- they didn't know who this person was.
I recall at a later date getting some additional IDs
11
12
that came from a few purses that were found left behind, same
13
location, the Enforcement Support building, which we did the
14
same thing.
15
so forth, but failed to do so.
16
Q.
17
of these IDs?
18
A.
19
physical addresses, which we -- we attempted if we had one.
We tried to identify the owners of the purses and
Yeah.
These particular IDs I recall trying to go to the
One other effort was made on behalf of -- and I know
it was one of the IDs.
22
in of the purses.
IEN
21
11:51:27
I believe it was one that was found one
We tried to find the lady who we thought was
23
the owner of the purse because her identification was in it, or
24
some form of identification, I don't know if it was a hard copy
25
card or a receipt of some kind, and we were able to get with --
FR
11:51:13
So you actually went out to the physical addresses on some
DS
20
11:50:51
11:51:47
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
we were able to identify a potential -- I remember it being a
potential -- I think it was a son.
And based on some of the receipts in the purse, the
3
4
son had been under the watch, I guess you would say, or under
the -- yeah, under the watch of the adult probation people in
Tennessee, so we talked to that person, who gave us the
criminal record, which stretched from Tennessee to Colorado and
back to Fort Worth, Texas.
so we could find the mom.
This was an attempt to find the son
We got with the Fort Worth PD.
10
I spoke with a
11:52:31
11
sergeant there with investigations -- and I believe that's in
12
some of these documents -- and he graciously assisted in trying
13
to locate this -- this man.
14
was within walking distance from their actual police station.
In fact, his last known location
It turned out that, and I may be off by a few numbers,
15
16
but it turned out he had, I believe, 50 warrants for his
17
arrest, so obviously it was a -- he failed to be found.
18
those are just some of the efforts that we -- that we did to
19
try to find these folks.
20
Q.
21
sound maybe --
22
A.
DS
In your deposition you said 20 to 30 warrants.
IEN
MR. SEGURA:
24
THE COURT:
FR
11:52:55
But
Does that
11:53:12
It was somewhere --
23
25
11:52:08
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Objection, leading.
I'm going to sustain the objection.
11:53:22
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
I don't want you to embellish or exaggerate your testimony,
so could you just give us your best recollection of the
number of warrants this -- this fellow had on him?
A.
had that many warrants, I wouldn't be found, either.
Q.
Okay.
A.
Yes.
Q.
I'm sorry?
A.
What page?
10
Q.
80.
I don't know exactly, so I'll say this.
11:53:49
THE COURT:
13
Which volume?
Excuse me.
I think there are two volumes --
MR. MASTERSON:
14
15
What page?
MR. MASTERSON:
12
Oh.
This would be in Volume 1, if
it's page 80, I believe.

THE COURT:
16
BY MR. MASTERSON:
18
Q.
19
your recollection as to your testimony on the number of
20
warrants this gentleman had outstanding.
DS
Take a look at lines 8 through 14 and see if it refreshes
MR. SEGURA:
THE COURT:
IEN
22
23
BY MR. MASTERSON:
24
Q.
Did it?
25
A.
Yes.
FR
11:54:02
Makes sense.
17
21
11:53:37
You got your deposition up there?
THE COURT:
11
If it were me that
11:54:21
Objection, leading.
Overruled.
11:54:47
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
How many do you say in your deposition there?
A.
Twenty to thirty.
Q.
Okay.
was this guy on one of the IDs, or is this guy you're looking
for because you might have his mom's purse?
A.
not sure if it was identification cards or receipts, laundry
receipts, insurance cards, whatever it was, it re -- it
contained the information regarding the -- well, who we thought
10
So you didn't -- now, refresh me.
Are you saying --
11:55:01
From what I recall, the purse contained information.
I'm
could be the owner of the purse, the -- the female.
11:55:23
In addition was some sort of a documentation, whether
11
12
it be a card, a receipt, or a piece of paper that indicated
13
that this particular alleged purse owner was at one time
14
involved in some way with the folks at the adult probation in
15
Tennessee.
11:55:42
So we called adult probation in Tennessee.
16
A lady
17
recognized the name.
She didn't have a forwarding address for
18
this person who we thought owned the purse, or once owned the
19
purse.
20
how we went from the son.
21
find the lady who owned the -- owned the purse.
22
Q.
DS
However, she did have information on a son, and that's
IEN
Okay, now, refresh me.
We tried to find him in order to
How did we get from the three or
23
four IDs that were turned over to you from Sergeant Scott where
24
you tried to run down who these folks were to this purse and
25
this guy with the warrants?
FR
11:55:59
How did -- does that come together
11:56:18
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
or not?
A.
It does.
Q.
How?
A.
Well, when Sergeant Scott presented myself and Detective
Zebro with those IDs and the CD, it was -- felt it necessary
that we should return to the Enforcement Support building and
do a detailed search of the entire building to make sure that
there's no additional CDs or licenses or anything of that sort
lying around, which we did.
10
Q.
Okay.
Who made that call?
11
A.
I don't know who made the call, but that call was made --
12
and let me -- let me back up.
11:56:50
At a late -- after the IDs were given to me, it was --
13
14
it was made known to us that they had found in the process of
15
cleaning everything out, they had found two purses that were in
16
the lockers.
17
Support building at the time.
18
Support building.
19
we did a -- a search of the property to see if we could
20
discover anything else that was -- that was there that
21
shouldn't be -- well, not shouldn't be, obviously that didn't
22
look right.
DS
IEN
11:57:09
As a result, we went to HSU, or the Enforcement

It's still the Enforcement
We took possession of the purses, and then
And that's how we got the purses.
11:57:30
That's how I
23
got them.
24
Q.
Okay.
25
A.
Yes, that -- that building at one time was searched, the
FR
11:56:26
So you decided to search that whole building.

11:57:46
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
entire building.
Q.
couple of purses.
remember?
A.
not -- I don't want to say it was the first search, I don't
know if there were two searches, but there was a very detailed
search involving a lot of guys, and there were some other
items.
And do you -- do you -- well, we know you came up with a
Did you come up with anything else, do you
Yeah, eventually there were some other items taken, I'm
11:57:56
I believe there were some license plates that were
10
found in one area of the -- the building that occupied the
11
Posse member, I think.
12
the other items were, maybe hard copy -- I think they were hard
13
copy reports, just copies of police -- police reports.
14
Q.
Okay.
And then I don't recall exactly what
Now, you told us some of the steps you went --
THE COURT:
15
Could I just ask what date this was?
MR. MASTERSON:
16
THE WITNESS:
17
I'm sorry.
I don't know the exact date.
19
somewhere mid-2014, I think.
20
sorry.
I -- I'm not certain, Judge.
11:58:59
Thank you.
23
Q.
Well, so you came back to PSB in June of 2014, correct?
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
So it's after that?
FR
I'm
BY MR. MASTERSON:
IEN
22
DS
It was -- it had to have been August -- it had to have been
THE COURT:
11:58:34
Oh, absolutely.
18
21
11:58:11
11:59:05
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes.
Q.
Do you recall how long after that?
A.
I -- I don't.
Q.
Okay.
trying to find folks whose IDs you found, and we talked about
the criminal databases, and you also mentioned you found some
receipts.
you do with that?
10
A.
11
were -- including the purses that were found, including the --
12
the contents of the purse, I put them into Property and
13
Evidence for safekeeping.
14
investigative tools to locate who we thought may be the owner
15
of the -- of the purse, simply by the name, the state, that
16
sort of thing.
I'm not sure what you mean.
What -- all those items that
But the receipts were used as
there was a card with a number on it that indicated that at one
19
point we think the owner of the purse was somehow involved with
20
the adult probation people in Tennessee, and that's -- that was
21
a lead.
22
Q.
DS
18
11:59:52
12:00:10
IEN
Okay.
23
MR. MASTERSON:
24
THE COURT:
FR
11:59:31
Like obviously we got -- we got lucky in the fact that
17
25
11:59:18
If you found a receipt, what would you -- what would
8
9
Now, you mentioned these different ways you were
and 15 minutes.
Judge, this is probably a nice place.
All right.
We will reconvene in an hour
I will hopefully have read by then the
12:00:20
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
pretrial statement, but we probably won't discuss it till the
end of the day.
But what I would like is to have some idea about case
3
4
scheduling, as I've talked that -- talked that over with you
both of you last time about when and who we're going to call
holding how many days we're going to take up, so if you haven't
discussed that, you might do that in the hour and fifteen
minutes over lunch.
Thank you.
(Lunch recess taken.)
THE COURT:
10
Please be seated.
13:18:21
Please.
11
12
BY MR. MASTERSON:
13
Q.
14
about investigations you conducted where you were trying to
15
find owners of IDs or track down information about IDs that
16
you'd come into possession of during your investigation.
Sergeant Tennyson, when we broke for lunch we were talking
13:19:02
Do you recall that?
17
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
Did you follow up with any other local agencies on how you
20
might better go about doing your investigation?
21
A.
I did.
22
Q.
What did you find out?
IEN
DS
18
23
A.
24
Valley, to include Tempe, Phoenix, DPS, the MVD, Mesa,
25
Chandler.
FR
12:00:37
13:19:21
I followed up with several different agencies in the
There were a few other ones.
13:19:40
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Basically, what my interest was is --
1
2
Q.
Let me stop you for one second.
You just listed off a
whole bunch of cities.
departments?
A.
Yes, their police agencies, yes.
Q.
Okay.
A.
My interest was finding out what their policies and
procedures were, what they do on a day-to-day basis when they
take possession of a -- either a license plate or an
Are you talking about their police
13:19:51
Go ahead.
10
identification card as a -- as a result of police action.
11
Q.
What'd you find out?
12
A.
I found that the agencies do very much similar to what we
13
do.
14
in the -- in the state, I would think, or close to it, actually
15
has boxes at their substations made of cardboard, and if they
16
seize a license, driver's license in the course of doing
17
business, they bring it back and they would put it into the
18
box, and then eventually it's destroyed.
19
with the license plates.
20
Q.
What about if it's evidence of some crime?
21
A.
If it is evidence, it's either photocopied, placed into the
22
packet, which would be the ID -- the DR, the report, or it's
Phoenix PD, which I believe is probably the largest agency
DS
IEN
physically taken and placed into evidence as part of the -- the
24
report or the investigation.
25
Q.
And if it's not evidence?
13:20:25
And the same goes
23
FR
13:20:04
13:20:43
13:21:03
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
It's destroyed.
Q.
What do you mean they had a cardboard box?
talking about?
A.
walked us in the back.
a little background to see what their policies and procedures
were with the -- with the licenses and drivers' licenses just
because it became such a big focal point of this investigation.
What are you
I believe we visited the Cactus precinct and the officer
We told him what we were doing, sort of
And we found that they do very much like we do.
There
10
was a closet of some sort.
11
of retooled to be sort of a storage unit.
12
the room you turned right and there was a cardboard box on the
13
floor.
14
it.
15
sheared -- yellow-handled shears, basically.
16
the purpose was, and at the officer's discretion, if he chose,
17
he could come in and grab the shears and cut the plate up or
18
cut the driver's license up, throw it into the box.
19
Q.
20
cut-up plates that went in the box?
21
A.
22
sort, did they log them in, and I don't believe the man was
It was -- excuse me -- it was kind
13:21:39
As you walked into
It had several drivers' licenses and license plates in
Hanging on the wall directly above the box was yellow
And we asked what
13:22:07
Do you have any idea what happened to those documents and
DS
13:22:22
IEN
I asked about -- I believe I asked about a log of some
23
able to give me any kind of a log.
24
periodically and he takes the plates and licenses and they're
25
destroyed.
FR
13:21:19
He said that a guy comes
13:22:42
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Okay.
Could you take a look at Exhibit 2007.
your pile up there.
It's on your screen, too.
3
4
one you're more comfortable with.
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
Should be in
But you can use whatever
Could we publish this, please, Judge?
Sure.
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
Have you seen Exhibit 2007 before?
A.
Yes, I have.
10
Q.
What is that?
11
A.
It's an e-mail response from Keith Manning of the Maricopa
12
County Attorney's Office, basically turning down the HSU
13
investigation for criminal prosecutorial consideration, based
14
on what was given to him.
15
Q.
16
Exhibit 2007.
17
mouth, so tell me, had you completed interviewing all 47 guys,
18
or however many there were?
19
A.
Yes, at this point we had.
20
Q.
And had you prepared a report about that?
21
A.
I had.
22
Q.
And had you done the -- tried to track down owners of
Now, tell me what it is we're dealing with here in
IEN
23
purses and licenses and that sort of thing, do you know?
24
A.
25
was completed or not.
FR
13:23:38
13:24:00
Is this -- I don't want to put words in your
DS
Okay.
13:23:29
13:24:20
I don't know -- that was ongoing, so I'm not sure if that

13:24:35
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Okay.
Tell me what parts had been completed.
What I want
to -- to make it easier, what I want to know is what you gave
to Mr. Manning.
A.
what I recall, of what we gained, what I gained, from the
interviews with the HSU detectives.
wrestling with putting a value to items: for instance, the
license plates and drivers' licenses which came in at a later
time, in addition to what Cisco said.
What I gave him was a summary, a detailed summary, from
13:24:46
Particularly, I was
Because without a value
10
and a victim, it would be near impossible to prosecute.
11
doing so, that's why I decided to go to the other agencies to
12
find out what they did.
13
Q.
14
"discussions," telephone calls or meetings -- with Mr. Manning
15
about this?
16
A.
17
he said that -- I gave him sort of a quick overall of what I
18
had, and he said, You know what?
19
that, send it to me and I'll take a look at it.
20
Q.
21
prosecution of -- or any attempt to criminally prosecute the 47
22
deputies you interviewed?
Okay.
13:25:10
Did you have any discussions -- when I say
13:25:32
I believe I had a telephone call conversation with him, and
Just go ahead and package
IEN
DS
So as a result of this, did you move forward with criminal
23
A.
No, I did not.
24
Q.
Why not?
25
A.
There was no value.
FR
And in
We couldn't establish value to the
13:25:49
13:26:01
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
items.
We couldn't establish a victim.
We couldn't establish
intent.
It just didn't come together.
We reached out to, like
I said, MVD.
drivers' licenses back.
consider them of any value.
at times.
Q.
about value of the items, and you just did right there again,
and you also talked about finding victims.
Even MVD wouldn't -- they don't even take their

They don't reissue them.
They don't
In fact, they -- they refuse them
Now, you talked a little bit previously in your testimony
But you just mentioned you couldn't find intent.
10
What
11
do you mean by that?
12
A.
13
don't mean to come off as being smart in any way, but if you --
14
Q.
Maybe you mean "smart aleck."
15
A.
Smart aleck, yeah, sorry.
13:27:03
If you were to believe that these items that are
mentioned in this investigation were actually stolen from
18
shaking down individuals, you would have to believe that 15 men
19
and women that work for this office wake up in the morning
20
earning an above-average wage for this state, with families and
21
responsibilities and bills, kiss their loved ones on the cheek
22
with the hopes of obtaining a T-shirt or getting a statue or
IEN
DS
17
24
FR
25
13:26:41
Well, let me -- I'll just -- I'll say it this way, and I
16
23
13:26:27
13:27:21
maybe bringing home a couple of Mexican voter ID cards.

So the intent is -- is nonexistent.
I don't -- like I
would argue with you that based on that, there is no value.
13:27:45
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
don't understand why -- why it's being looked at in the way
it's being looked at.
value.
there's no intent.
Q.
trying to ignore deputy sheriffs stealing property, even though
it might be --
I get it: technically, everything has
But when you look at it that way, in its totality,
Are you trying to downplay somehow, or -- I mean, are you
MR. KILLEBREW:
THE COURT:
Leading, objection.
Sustained.
10
BY MR. MASTERSON:
11
Q.
12
steals an object worth 50 cents from a citizen, is that a
13
crime?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
Would you ignore it?
16
A.
No.
17
Q.
You just mentioned T-shirts, statues, some Mexican voter ID
18
cards.
19
you consider that a crime?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Would you ignore it?
22
A.
No.
13:28:41
If a deputy sheriff -- well -- yeah, if a deputy sheriff
DS
IEN
13:28:57
If a deputy sheriff stole those from somebody, would
23
Q.
24
investigation that any of these items -- the T-shirts, the drug
25
paraphernalia, the statues -- any of that was unlawfully seized
FR
13:28:04
13:29:25
Was there any evidence that you learned about in your
13:29:38
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
or stolen by any deputy sheriff or employee of the Maricopa
County Sheriff's Office?
A.
Not that I know of, no.
Q.
What did Deputy Gamboa tell you about the property?
A.
I believe Gamboa said that there were items found in the
desert from time to time abandoned -- his words, I think -- and
they would take them back to their offices and display them.
Q.
How about Deputy Rangel?
A.
Rangel was similar, but I think he probably said the same
10
thing.
It was regarding drop houses and different operations.
11
Q.
12
about making sure you follow procedure when seizing items.
13:30:23
Now, Mr. Manning here, he does seem to express some concern
Is that a concern of yours here?
13
I understand you
14
didn't write this, but is that a concern of yours?
15
A.
16
only my concerns, but the command staff's concerns, including
17
my partner at the time, deputy -- or Detective Zebro.
I think that I actually wrote in my report to Manning not
13:30:49
Yeah, obviously looking back, there were some
18
procedural issues.
Those guys -- to me they didn't have the
20
intent to steal that property or those items, but they probably
21
could have handled it in a different manner, yes.
22
Q.
DS
19
13:31:12
IEN
Should they have documented what they did better than they
23
did?
24
A.
Oh, sure.
25
Q.
You were conducting a criminal IA, correct?
FR
13:30:02
13:31:28
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
That's correct.
Q.
Is failing to document a criminal violation of Arizona law?
A.
No.
procedural issue, so it would be a policy issue, would be
administrative in nature.
Q.
But they certainly may well have violated some policy.
A.
Sure.
Q.
But that's not what you were investigating?
A.
No, sir.
10
Q.
You talked earlier about Cisco Perez.
11
was testifying or making a statement or what he was doing, but
12
I think you told us he was the one that brought up this
13
pocketing business, is that accurate?
14
A.
That is.
15
Q.
Did anyone else, to your knowledge, or did you learn about
16
anyone else during your investigation that said HSU officers or
17
any other MCSO deputies or employees were pocketing property?
18
A.
19
and hard, but I can't -- I can't think of any.
20
my thinking, was the sole engine behind this investigation.
21
Q.
The sole accuser?
22
A.
Yes.
I saw what they were potentially doing would be a
13:31:47
I don't know if he
13:32:18
I've been asked that question before, and I've thought long
IEN
DS
Cisco Perez, in
23
Q.
24
unfortunate that 50 deputy sheriffs were subjected to a
25
criminal investigation without probable cause that a crime had
FR
13:32:06
13:32:44
Now, I think you testified Friday that you thought it
13:33:04
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
been committed.
A.
I do.
Q.
When you use the word "unfortunately," why are you -- why
are you saying it's unfortunate?
A.
through the doors of IA or PSB and you're being looked at for
something that some people think you did, and it's a -- they
think it's a crime, I think it's very stressful and it's
unnecessary if there is no probable cause, evidence, or
10
Do you remember that?
I think until you're in that seat, until you actually walk
reasonable suspicion.
13:33:40
It would be similar to somebody from Phoenix PD who
11
12
just got fired today who said:
13
is on the take.
14
would be fair, without evidence, to subject those men and women
15
to, quite frankly, a very stressful -- it's a stressful event,
16
regardless of whether you did nothing or not.
17
I don't think that's fair.
18
Q.
19
Phoenix PD and then turns around and accuses everyone in which
20
department, you say?
21
A.
22
says:
Phoenix PD's entire arson unit
Everybody's on the take.
I don't know if it
13:33:58
So it's just --
I don't.
DS
So you just drew an analogy of some guy who gets fired from
13:34:20
IEN
I'll just pick a department.
Arson.
Let's say he just
Oh, everybody in arson is on the take.
23
statement, you know.
24
Perez said.
25
for training.
FR
13:33:22
That's his
I mean, that's even more than what Cisco
Cisco Perez suggested items were pocketed and used

I'm just saying if everybody's on the take, I
13:34:35
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
just don't think -- again, until you're in that spot, we
have -- as police officers, we have -- our main thing, at least
in my thinking, is our reputation.
through the PSB offices and paraded in front of chiefs and
high-ranking members of the office, not to mention friends, to
be sat down and -- and subjected to a criminal investigation
when there's absolutely no evidence to support that, I'm sorry,
I just -- to me, that -- it doesn't feel right to me.
Q.
And to be -- to be walked
And that's happening because a fired employee said they
10
were pocketing stuff?
11
A.
12
began when Cisco Perez suggested that all HSU members pocketed
13
items, took them back, and used them for training aids.
14
Q.
15
few minutes ago that you submitted everything to Mr. Manning
16
and then you got this exhibit which is up in front of you.
17
What was that, 2007, you got that back from Mr. Manning, is
18
that correct?
Now, after this was all over, I think you just told us a
MR. SEGURA:
Well, why don't you tell me --
Overruled.
We can move along.
23
Q.
24
any interaction with the monitors about this investigation?
25
A.
FR
13:35:54
BY MR. MASTERSON:
IEN
22
THE COURT:
13:35:32
Objection, mischaracterizes testimony.
MR. MASTERSON:
DS
21
13:35:15
To my knowledge, that's -- that criminal investigation
19
20
13:34:55
After you got Exhibit 2007 from Mr. Manning, did you have
Yes, I got -- I was called to a meeting with the monitors
13:36:08
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
after completing, I believe it was the last interview with the
HSU folks.
in attendance were -- well, there's Kiyler, Peters, and Rojas,
myself, Detective Zebro, and Detective Brady Anthony.
That meeting, I believe, happened in mid-July.
THE COURT:
5
6
I'm tracking.
right?
THE COURT:
Yeah, and it seems that maybe this is
That would -- okay.
I just want -- as
MR. MASTERSON:
Well, I think we are, but we have to
go back and see where the witness is.

THE COURT:
14
Sure.
15
BY MR. MASTERSON:
16
Q.
17
place?
18
I'm asking you this question is because the letter from -- or,
19
excuse me, the e-mail from Manning says October 7, 2014.
13:37:05
Do you have an approximate date when this meeting took

Well, let me put it in perspective here.
The reason
Is the meeting you're talking about before October 7,
DS
20
21
2014?
22
A.
IEN
Yes, that I can recall.
occurred almost immediately after I stopped -- after we ended
24
our interviews with the HSU.
25
Q.
Okay.
13:37:18
The meeting with the monitors
23
FR
13:36:53
long as we're both working on the same understanding.
12
13
13:36:45
not when that meeting happened.
10
11
I just want to make sure
You said after he received this from Manning,
MR. MASTERSON:
8
9
Wait a minute.
And
13:37:33
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
And based on the date of this memoranda, it was sent after
the fact.
Q.
with the monitors.
your investigation was completed.
A.
Okay.
MR. SEGURA:
THE COURT:
order --
This goes beyond
Well, I am going to allow some leeway in
13:37:56
witnesses?
MR. MASTERSON:
13
14
Objection, Your Honor.
Did you list Sergeant Tennyson as one of your
11
12
13:37:45
the scope of my direct.
9
10
Your interaction with the monitors after
The meeting lasted --
7
8
What I want you to tell us now is about that meeting
I'm trying to get Sergeant Tennyson
done, out of here, and not come back.

THE COURT:
15
Did you list him as one of your witnesses?
MR. MASTERSON:
16
I don't think I did.
Can --
Did not.
17
THE COURT:
18
Okay.
Then I'm going to sustain the
objection, unless you can tell me how it ties in to the direct
20
of Mr. Segura.
MR. MASTERSON:
13:38:18
Well, this goes to his -- his state of
mind and his actions in investigating this -- well, this whole
IEN
22
DS
19
21
23
chain of events, and his interactions with the monitor
24
afterwards concerning his investigation of this chain of
25
events.
FR
13:38:06
13:38:41
THE COURT:
Well, how is that relevant?
MR. MASTERSON:
2
3
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
It goes to his investigation and what
the monitors had to say about his investigation.

THE COURT:
4
5
BY MR. MASTERSON:
Q.
monitors.
A.
was mid-July.
I'll allow it.
13:38:53
Could you please tell me about your interaction with the
Yes.
We had -- a meeting was called by the monitors.
I want to say it was the 14th, 15th, or 16th of
10
July.
11
Zebro, Monitors Kiyler, Peters, and Rojas.
Again, in attendance were myself, Brady Anthony, Dave
It was a cordial meeting.
12
It
The idea was to discuss
13
the -- the results of the HSU investigation.
14
were -- "we" meaning myself and Detectives Zebro and Anthony --
15
were asked to speak freely.
16
thought of the investigation.
17
about alternative strategies to include, you know, focusing on
18
a closer circle to Cisco Perez to gain intelligence or further
19
information.
At one point we
We were asked about what we
There were some
names thrown out there that would have been part of maybe some
22
of the discussions that they were -- seemed like they weren't
IEN
21
23
aware of.
24
were suggesting that there was maybe a lack of communication,
25
and that we should probably get together in a different way and
FR
13:39:37
We did speak freely and we spoke
The monitors were very interested.
DS
20
13:39:06
13:39:57
And at the end, toward the end of the meeting they
13:40:18
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
round-table things.
They were happy to do that with us.
And then they said that they weren't even
2
3
understanding why we even did a criminal investigation.
laughed and they said, Yeah, we talked about it amongst
ourselves and we don't know why you did a criminal
investigation.
It was sort of shocking to me.
They
13:40:37
I was disappointed, to
say -- to say the least, 'cause I had these feelings all along
that it should have been done a little differently.
And the
10
meeting ended with Sherry Kylers and Peters inviting me to a
11
meeting that would take place later on in the afternoon with
12
Mr. Warshaw, which I attempted to attend.
13
door, and I was asked to leave, not to come in.
14
Q.
15
enforcement officers in a criminal investigation, that's when
16
you were told by the monitors that they didn't feel you should
17
have done a criminal investigation to begin with?
18
A.
19
investigation, and they spoke amongst themselves about it.
20
Q.
21
few questions and provide you additional questions to ask all
22
these 47 guys?
I knocked on the
So after you interviewed all 47 of the HSU deputies or law
13:41:26
They said that they weren't sure why we did a criminal
IEN
DS
But didn't one of the monitors criticize you for asking too
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
Did you get any explanation about that?
25
A.
I did not.
FR
13:40:52
13:41:45
13:41:59
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Can you look at Exhibit 206, please.
evidence.
And this is not in
Do you recall Mr. Segura showing this to you?
And I
want you to look particularly at I believe -- actually, let
me -- yeah.
Receipt"?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Do you see a list of items there?
a look at the items there.
Is there a page on there entitled "Transfer
Why don't you just take
I don't want you to read out loud.
10
I just want you to take a look at that list of items and see if
11
you can recall Mr. Segura asking you questions about any of the
12
items listed there.
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
Did he ask you about some TVs?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
Does this have anything to do with your investigation?
17
A.
No, it doesn't.
18
according to this paperwork, they were seized at one point and
19
placed into our Property and Evidence system.
20
Q.
21
have anything to do with the investigation you conducted?
22
A.
13:43:22
I think he did show me this Friday.
13:43:38
I mean, I -- these televisions were,
DS
But was this document and these items listed here, did that
13:44:00
IEN
Well, the investigation I -- I conducted at least from the
23
onset was a pocketed television, which would not have been
24
placed -- my thinking, if it's pocketed, it wouldn't have been
25
placed properly into evidence.
FR
13:42:52
13:44:23
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Do you know whether MCSO, in carrying out their law
enforcement activities, seizes TVs from time to time?
A.
Yes, they do.
Q.
Is there anything on this exhibit that shows that any of
those items were seized unlawfully?
A.
Not that I can see, no.
Q.
Is there a DR number listed for each one of those
documents?
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
Is there a barcode listed for each one of those documents?
11
A.
The barcode isn't on here, but there is a barcode.
12
order to place a piece of evidence into our system now you have
13
to have a barcode --
14
Q.
15
somewhere else.
16
A.
I do.
17
Q.
What's that barcode mean, do you know?
18
A.
I assume it's just an accounting process to keep the items
19
in numerical order as they are related to the particular case
20
they're working.
21
Q.
22
And if you don't, that's fine.
Look on your screen for a second.
Maybe you're looking
13:45:31
13:45:42
DS
IEN
Okay.
13:45:05
In
Do you see a barcode listed?
Do you know whether that's a barcode for property?
23
A.
24
there are barcodes on the items.
25
Q.
FR
13:44:44
You know, I don't.
I don't know for sure.
But I know
To your knowledge, did this exhibit that Mr. Segura asked
13:45:52
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
you some questions about, and the TVs in there, have anything
at all to do with Cisco Perez claiming that MCSO officers
pocketed property?
A.
are flat-screen television sets.
I'd have to say no, I don't know, I don't know why.
Q.
Not that I can think of.
All right.
THE COURT:
10
BY MR. MASTERSON:
13
Q.
Do you have 2887, sir?
14
A.
I do.
15
Q.
Tell me what this document's about.
16
A.
This is a memorandum that was authored by myself and
17
forwarded to Lieutenant Seagraves, who was my commander, my
18
boss at the time.
19
into a -- what was believed to be potentially missing $260 as
20
it related to one of the HSU cases.
21
Q.
22
start this investigation?
13:47:06
DS
I was asked to look into a -- to inquire
When did you undertake this investigation?
IEN
13:46:55
I did not.
12
23
A.
24
think, 2015, maybe a little before.
25
Q.
FR
13:46:18
No.
And you didn't move it in, right?
MR. MASTERSON:
11
So
Exhibit 206 was not in evidence, right?
MR. MASTERSON:
I don't see any 62-inch.
They
Can you please look at Exhibit 2887.
THE COURT:
I don't see how it relates.
13:47:33
When did you
It had to have been right around the first of the year, I
Well, take a look -- take a look on your screen there at
13:47:57
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
the first paragraph and see if that helps you.
in front of you?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Or at the document; I don't care which.
A.
December 7th.
Q.
Okay.
this information to begin with?
A.
guys were matching the reports that Armendariz was associated
Yes.
On the screen
13:48:10
Do you recall what you were advised of when you got
There were -- it was a big undertaking.
Some of the
10
with, and then they were matching the evidence that was placed
11
into Property and Evidence with the actual documentation in the
12
reports.
It was a tedious thing.
One of the detectives reviewing that noticed that
13
14
there was a photocopy of a -- of a money envelope.
15
take money or seize money, there's a regular money envelope
16
that the money's put into.
17
Then you add it up and it's signed, sealed.
18
and Evidence, they open it back up.
19
It's signed and sealed again.
When we
envelope that said $260.
22
money envelope itself.
IEN
21
Taken to Property
They do the same thing.
13:49:03
It was a photocopy of it, not the

When they did research into Property
23
and Evidence based on the report, report number, there was no
24
money deposited or placed into -- into evidence.
25
where the concern came in as where the flag arose.
FR
13:48:49
Then you list the denominations.
What they found was a partially completed money
DS
20
13:48:28
And that's
And it was
13:49:27
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
given to me to further look into.
Q.
just talked to about -- talked to us about it.
departmental report that dealt with this particular envelope,
is that correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
What was the date or, if you remember, around the date of
when that departmental report was completed?
A.
It was a 2010 report, I believe.
10
Q.
So four -- what, four and a half, five years before?
11
A.
Yeah, five years old.
12
Q.
Look at the second paragraph in front of you.
Okay.
Did you find a departmental report -- I think you

You found a
13:49:42
Do you see a date there?
13
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
So June 22, 2010.
16
the departmental report we see down below in the next
17
paragraph?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
Okay.
20
investigation.
21
A.
22
A lot of moving parts to that particular operation.
Is that the guy who was associated with
Now, tell me what you did as far as conducting that
DS
13:50:40
Well, obviously you read the report.
IEN
13:50:20
He was associated with the report.
We obviously see Cosme.
It's quite lengthy.

A lot of
23
people involved.
24
I believe he was case agent, and he spoke of the -- the arrest
25
with the man listed above with a June 22nd date.
FR
13:49:53
Deputy Cosme was --
And I brought
13:50:59
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Cosme in and I talked to him, interviewed him.
I was quite -- I was kind of handicapped because the
2
3
case was already five years old, and they've processed probably
tens of thousands of people, I don't know.
one of the HSU guys, but they -- they were busy.
I interviewed him.
and about the photocopy.
Q.
What'd you find out?
A.
He told me he didn't -- he didn't remember.
You'd have to ask
But I did it.
I asked him about the -- about the envelope
He -- I
10
believe he made comments about he was very busy, there were a
11
lot of people doing different things, but he denied stealing
12
the money.
13
Q.
14
stole $260 from someone he arrested?
15
A.
Yes, very much so.
16
Q.
What else did you do while -- while trying to get to the
17
bottom of this money envelope?
18
A.
19
I were going to be a bad guy and steal something, I certainly
20
wouldn't make a -- fill out a money form, make a photocopy of
21
it, attach it to a report, and then send the report into the
22
records department where it would be public record and not
13:51:49
IEN
DS
Well, again I -- logic told me that if, say, for instance,
deposit the money and just keep it.
24
thing to do.
FR
13:51:33
Would you consider it a serious offense if a deputy sheriff
23
25
13:51:20
13:52:08
That would not be a smart
So I inquired into some other possibilities, maybe the
13:52:25
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
truth; maybe there's a reason why this happened.
five-year-old case, so it's very difficult to get any kind of
accurate information, but we did come across a detention
officer, and his name escapes me right now, but he spoke of --
and he was -- he was assigned to the Enforcement Support
building, and he often helped out with processing and doing
whatever they do to -- to finalize their operations.
13:52:41
And he's the one that told me that there's time to
8
9
It's a
time been a lot of cases everybody -- no -- several people
10
don't go to jail, they actually are turned over to ICE.
And in
11
doing so, they would give whatever cash that was on one person,
12
if another person asked to take it, or if it was a relative,
13
they would give the cash to that person because they were going
14
to be deported back to Mexico and they would have to live, so
15
they would take that person's cash.
13:53:22
Now, whether this happened in this case, I don't -- I
16
don't know.
We didn't find that out.
18
me, that made sense rather than stealing the money, filling out
19
an envelope partially, photocopying it, and then adding it to a
20
very high profile report which many people have access to.
21
didn't make sense to me.
22
happened, but at the time it just didn't make sense to me.
IEN
DS
17
But that kind of -- to
It
13:53:34
I'm not saying it couldn't have
23
Q.
24
definitely given to someone else who was being deported?
25
A.
FR
13:53:00
But still you're not trying to tell Judge Snow that it was
Oh, absolutely not, no.
13:53:51
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Do you know how -- how it was five years after the fact
that this was even investigated?
A.
Armendariz had some sort of foothold in, they looked at the
reports to see who else was involved.
documentation was in order, it was proper.
if there were items seized as evidence.
with the Property and Evidence forms.
procedure was in 2010.
My understanding is is that every case that Charley
They checked to see if
They checked to see
They cross-checked it
I'm not sure what the
It looks like a lot what we do now.
10
And in doing so, they did catch things like this where it does
11
indicate there was a photocopy, at least, made of a
12
partially-filled-out money envelope, but they can't find the
13
money.
14
Q.
15
someone in your supervisory chain that's ordering this to
16
occur?
17
investigation was commenced, do you know?
18
A.
Well --
19
Q.
And if you have no idea, just let me know.
20
A.
No.
21
tasked with looking through all these reports and verifying
22
what was placed into property it was seized, it was done so in
13:54:39
Did you receive any information about -- I mean, was this
I mean, the agreement was is the -- the guys who were
DS
IEN
13:55:01
How is it that on December 7, 2014, this particular
23
a legal way and procedurally sound way.
24
to be potentially criminal in nature, then it would be -- it
25
would be given to myself and detectives working with me.
FR
13:54:19
13:55:17
If anything appeared
13:55:35
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Okay.
What was your conclusion when you got to the end of
this -- this investigation, which we're looking at the report
here in Exhibit 2887?
A.
followed the evidence and it ended.
case.
couldn't prove that it was stolen.
suggest it was stolen.
Q.
Oh, my recollection to this investigation was it, again,
People's memories fade.
It was a five-year-old
I don't know that -- we just
And there's no evidence to
Had you come to the conclusion that Deputy Cosme or any
10
other MCSO employee stole $260, what would you have done?
11
A.
I'm sorry.
12
Q.
If you came to the conclusion that Deputy Cosme, or any
13
other MCSO employee, stole $260 from someone who had been
14
arrested, what would you have done?
15
A.
16
evidence suggested that he had done that, he'd have been
17
arrested, or charge him.
18
Q.
13:56:13
Can you say again?
He would have been vigorously investigated, and if the
13:56:29
Can you look at Exhibit 2025, please.
Do you recall this particular -- well, it's a
19
supplemental report.
21
investigation?
22
A.
DS
20
Do you recall the report or the
13:57:12
IEN
This supplement came from Detective Jones, who was briefly
23
under my unit as a detective.
24
an attempt to locate what looks like four individuals.
25
Q.
FR
13:55:56
It appears to be his results of
Did you play a part in this investigation at all?
13:57:33
No.
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
information that was provided to him, and his job was to see if
he could locate any of these people.
Q.
investigation?
A.
I believe he was unable to locate.
Q.
Does this report indicate that these folks were turned over
to ICE?
A.
Yes, at the very end it does, yes.
10
Q.
Go back up.
11
listed, the four people are listed, their names?
12
A.
Yes, I do.
13
Q.
What was the date of the arrest there?
14
A.
April 18th, 2011.
15
Q.
Do you have any specific knowledge about what was done to
16
try to locate these four people who were turned over to ICE
17
back in April of 2011?
18
A.
19
we go through, again, law enforcement databases and jail
20
records, arrest records, that sort of thing.
21
Q.
Do you know if that was done in this particular instance?
22
A.
You know, I can only assume it was done.
Do you know what -- what occurred as a result of the
FR
Do you see the paragraph where they're all
A.
13:58:19
13:58:37
13:59:00
DS
Q.
Okay.
24
25
13:57:50
Specific, no, but we were -- we had sort of a process where
IEN
23
I mean, Jones was given the names and he was given the
Yes.
Fair enough.
Now, can you please look at Exhibit 2026.
Can you -13:59:39
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
-- tell me what this document is, please, if you know?
A.
This is another supplemental report, and I believe it was
done -- well, looks like it was done by Detective Cluff.
Q.
either?
A.
charge of -- or tasked with identifying some of those
identification cards linked to the HSU operations involving
Charley Armendariz.
Okay.
So you weren't personally involved in this one,
13:59:52
No, this was -- Cluff, he was part of the guys who were in
10
Q.
Do you remember Mr. Segura asking you some questions about
11
this document, and he talked about the -- part of this report
12
that said there was no local information found?
13
A.
I do recall that, yes.
14
Q.
The report lists people from Mexico, Florida, and
15
El Salvador.
You've told us about the criminal databases you
16
would check.
Are those just for the United States, or can you
17
get information from Mexico and El Salvador off those?

MR. SEGURA:
18
20
Q.
Do you know?
21
A.
I don't know.
22
mean, I don't know of any database where we can look up folks
IEN
DS
BY MR. MASTERSON:
14:01:01
The databases we used, typically, no.
23
in El Salvador or Mexico, no.
24
Q.
FR
25
14:00:38
Objection, leading.
19
Okay.
14:00:11
All right.
Let's talk about Ms. McKessy.
How is it you came to be involved -- I'm going to call
14:01:30
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
it the McKessy investigation.
Is that okay?
A.
Yes, that's fine.
Q.
How is it you became involved in that?
A.
I was made aware of McKessy, I'm not sure who made me aware
of it, but I knew that McKessy had met with Chief Lopez
regarding some sort of complaint, and that he was to meet with
her.
speak with us.
Zebro.
And afterwards we got information that she was going to

When I say "us," I mean myself and Detective
10
Q.
Did you know who Ms. McKessy was?
11
A.
Yes, I do.
12
Q.
Who was she?
13
A.
She was a former bureau chief.
14
her years and years ago.
15
but I knew her name.
16
Q.
Bureau chief where?
17
A.
The County Attorney's Office.
18
Q.
And you were charged with what, speaking to her?
19
Interviewing her?
20
A.
21
making some allegations, there was potentially some threats
22
made, and it was involving Detective Mackiewicz.
14:02:09
I have submitted work to
I knew who she was.
I never saw her,
14:02:24
How do we characterize this?
IEN
DS
Well, I was -- from what I recall, I was told that she was
23
Q.
24
threats?
25
A.
FR
14:01:49
Okay.
14:02:36
Who told you that she was making allegations of
I'm not sure exactly who told me.
It was either Dave Zebro
14:02:52
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
after speaking with -- I think Dave Zebro spoke with somebody
in command staff and said that we'd be interviewing McKessy.
Q.
Did you then interview Ms. McKessy?
A.
We did.
detective -- or Chief Lopez.
Q.
Detective Mackiewicz?
A.
Yes, she said she did have a relationship.
Q.
What did she tell you about that?
10
A.
She said that they had been, in her words, I think she said
11
exclusive for two and a half -- at least she felt they were
12
exclusive for two and a half years, up until I believe she said
13
April or May of 2014 when she found out that he had another
14
girlfriend.
15
Q.
16
about the other girlfriend?
17
A.
18
girlfriend through Facebook, I think it was.
19
her and she reached out to her, befriended her, and began to
20
discuss Mackiewicz's shortcomings when it comes to being with
21
other women.
22
Q.
It was about a week or so after she spoke with
Did she tell you whether she had a relationship with
Okay.
And then do you know what she did when she found out
14:03:32
14:03:49
She said that she had reached out, she identified the
DS
She identified
14:04:11
IEN
Did she tell you she ended the relationship with
23
Detective Mackiewicz?
24
A.
25
it.
FR
14:03:17
You know, I don't know, I don't recall her saying she ended
I mean, she said -- yeah, she did.
She said she ended it,
14:04:27
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
because she said she was -- she sent his -- the final text, or
something like that.
ended it.
talk to us.
Q.
other woman?
A.
She said she did.
Q.
Do you know whether she was in regular contact with the
other woman?
Okay.
So I do recall, but I don't know when she
It was, I'm thinking just shortly before she came to
And you just mentioned you think she contacted this
10
A.
She said that they had become friends.
11
Q.
You mentioned that when you started this investigation you
12
were looking into threats, is that accurate?
13
A.
14
guess, description of what she had -- was about to tell us.
15
believe there were some threats, or there was said to have been
16
some threats.
And that was obviously third- or fourth-hand
17
information.
It was prior to when I was talking to her that
18
was said.
19
Q.
Did you ask her about threats?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
What did she tell you?
22
A.
She told me that she was not physically threatened by
14:05:01
The way I recall it was it was just a general, I
IEN
DS
Yeah.
23
Mackiewicz, she was not fearful of him that he would physically
24
hurt her, but -- I forget the exact word she used, maybe -- I
25
don't know what it was, but she wasn't fearful physically, she
FR
14:04:44
14:05:33
14:05:46
14:06:01
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
was certainly not.
Q.
some reason?
A.
don't recall giving her advice to call Phoenix Police.
Q.
protection if she felt threatened?
A.
brought up.
Did you mention to her maybe calling Phoenix Police for
I may have.
I don't recall her -- I
14:06:15
Do you recall giving her any advice about an order of
I don't, but that probably was brought up, may have been
10
Q.
11
unimportant.
12
A.
13
unimportant.
14
Q.
Did you feel this particular case was unimportant?
15
A.
No, I did not.
16
Q.
Now, you listened to those recordings a little bit ago,
17
correct --
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
-- before lunch?
Mr. Segura asked you if you felt this case was
I don't think it's un -- I don't think any case is
14:06:48
Did you use the phrase "woman scorned "?
A.
I did.
22
Q.
Why?
IEN
21
23
A.
24
words.
25
Mackiewicz.
FR
14:06:27
Do you recall that?
14:06:59
DS
20
Okay.
Mary Ann McKessy used the same phrase, only not in those
She was very, very concerned, and very upset with Brian
Brian was cheating on her, lying to her.
In fact,
14:07:11
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I believe you'll find in a -- another interview that she had
with Lieutenant Seagraves that she even says we weren't -- we
were just looking into these girls.
She's upset that Brian was cheating on her.
Q.
prosecuted?
A.
chief.
Mackiewicz arrested or criminally prosecuted.
So she's certainly upset.
Did she tell you she wanted Brian Mackiewicz criminally
No.
In fact, she's an attorney, and she was once a bureau
She gave me no indication that she wanted Brian
In fact, I think
10
she said that she would -- that would make her physically ill
11
if that happened, and I believe at the end of the interview she
12
even was kind of confused as to whether or not we were the
13
administrative side of the house or the criminal side of the
14
house.
So she gave me -- and she's an attorney, so she gave
15
16
me no indication that he -- she wanted him to be criminally
17
investigated.
18
that's the impression she gave me.
19
Q.
20
prosecutor, is that correct?
21
A.
I don't know, I just know she's an attorney.
22
Q.
Okay.
14:07:59
14:08:13
Not that that would make our minds up, but
IEN
DS
Yeah, I mean, she was -- well, she is a criminal
14:08:32
At the Maricopa County Attorney's Office.
23
A.
Yes, sir.
24
Q.
Would it make a difference if she were to say, I don't want
25
you to criminally prosecute him?
FR
14:07:35
14:08:44
A.
we would certainly follow through with the investigation,
especially if -- if there were evidence to support that,
certainly.
Q.
prosecuted because I love him even though he was cheating on
me, if you found probable cause that a crime had been
committed, what would you do?
A.
10
No.
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I mean, it -- it wouldn't make a difference.
I mean,
And even if she told you, I don't want him criminally
14:08:55
I would have investigated vigorously and followed through
like all of our criminal investigations.
14:09:11
Mary Ann McKessy came to us and spoke to us for two
11
hours about being cheated on.
13
provided, none of it in my mind was of any evidentiary value,
14
it was third party.
15
particular meeting that she asked us -- asked us,
16
professionally asked us not to speak with the third party,
17
which would have been Brian's new girlfriend, Christine.
18
said that she would -- she lost contact with her, meaning
19
Christine, that she would befriend her again and try to gather
20
more pertinent information.
21
that she had evidence.
22
professional courtesy to do so, and just never got that
IEN
DS
12
And all the information that she
She said on several occasions during that
She
She didn't even think it important
And she's an attorney.
23
evidence.
24
Q.
25
said she was going to bring evidence to you?
FR
14:09:28
14:09:46
We gave her the
You -- what, you asked her to bring evidence to you, or she

14:10:03
Yes.
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
know what she was referring to as far as evidence.
about a lot of e-mails back and forth, flying women in to
Seattle, going out to dinners.
unless you're -- these aren't criminal acts.
or drinking wine, or flying a woman in from one side of the
country to another is not a criminal matter.
I don't
She talked
And again, these are things,
Going to dinner,
that, and she had -- she didn't even call it fraud.
She called
10
it -- I forget what she called it, but she certainly didn't
11
provide any kind of evidence to support that.
12
Q.
13
done quickly or rush through this investigation?
14
A.
No, not that I can recall, no.
15
Q.
Did anyone from MCSO tell you to cover up or hide this
16
investigation?
17
A.
No.
18
Q.
Did you contact Detective Mackiewicz to tip him off about
19
this investigation?
20
A.
No, I did not.
21
Q.
By the way, if you're having a phone conversation with one
22
of your friends, one of your buddies, do you typically record
14:10:40
IEN
DS
Did anyone at MCSO ever tell you to get this investigation
23
that?
24
A.
No.
25
Q.
Mr. Segura I think used a phrase -- it might have been you,
FR
14:10:20
However, the ADP thing, that's -- we asked her about
8
9
She said that she could get more evidence.
14:10:55
14:11:16
14:11:41
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
I don't remember, you can tell me -- I thought he used the
phrase "you shelved this," or I think you said "closed it out."
Just tell me, I don't care whose words you use, but what did
you do when you got to the point where you had finished your
investigation?
A.
talked a lot about Brian Mackiewicz being a cheat.
upset about that.
reason why she was demoted from bureau chief to whatever
14:12:07
Well, again, we -- we heard her out, Mary Ann McKessy.
She
She was
She talked about Brian Mackiewicz being the
10
position she's in now.
She talked about Brian Mackiewicz being
11
responsible for her losing $15,000 worth of income per year as
12
a result of their relationship.
So again, logic comes into play.
13
She's obviously
14
upset with Brian Mackiewicz.
15
opinion, no evidence to suggest Brian Mackiewicz is stealing
16
any sort of payroll or doing anything of that sort.
17
saying it didn't happen, but she gave us no evidence to suggest
18
that.
She provided us with, in my
The case was shelved.
19
21
No.
22
former bureau chief.
DS
We're looking for additional information.
IEN
I'm not
Did I follow up?
She's an attorney.
14:12:58
And she's a
If she had information, she knows what we
23
need.
24
have brought that forward, and she didn't.
25
Q.
FR
14:12:40
Was not closed, it was shelved.
20
She's a grown woman.
14:12:22
She knows we need evidence to prove anything.
She would
Not to me.
Do you know if the investigation's ongoing again?
14:13:17
3104
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Tennyson - RDX Segura, 10/13/15 Evidentiary Hearing
A.
I don't know for certain.
I'm told it's still an open
ongoing criminal investigation.
Q.
now involved in the investigation?
A.
Do you know that the Arizona Attorney General's Office is
I heard that they were.

MR. MASTERSON:
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
MR. WALKER:
THE COURT:
10
MR. COMO:
11
THE COURT:
12
To what extent, I don't know.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you.
Mr. Walker.
No questions, Your Honor.
Mr. Como.
14:13:39
I have no questions, Your Honor.

Mr. Segura.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
13
14
BY MR. SEGURA:
15
Q.
Sergeant, just a few follow-up questions.
16
A.
Sure.
17
Q.
Mr. Masterson asked you about some purses that you had --
18
that had been found in the Enforcement Support --
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
-- building?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
Did you ever ascertain how those persons -- how those
14:13:50
IEN
DS
14:13:57
23
purses came to be -- came into the possession of MCSO?
24
A.
25
were part of one of the investigations, though.
FR
14:13:28
I believe those purses -- not -- no.
I don't know.
They
14:14:17
3105
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
But you're not aware of anyone having determined how those
purses ended up at Enforcement Support, correct?
A.
No.
Q.
Mr. Masterson also asked you about your -- you contacted
other agencies to ask about their policies on maintaining IDs
and license plates?
A.
Yes, I did.
Q.
You didn't ask any of the agencies what they -- how they
handle valid identifications or non-fraudulent identifications,
10
did you?
11
A.
No, I did not.
12
Q.
And IDs, valid identifications, should not be destroyed,
13
correct?
14
A.
15
how they were gained -- how they were gathered.
16
how they were acquired, so I can't say yes or no.
17
Q.
18
destroyed?
19
A.
20
photocopied.
21
they're destroyed.
22
also, but there are other ways to handle them.
14:14:52
I guess it would depend on the circumstance.
I don't know
I don't know
14:15:17
Should fraudulent or suspended identifications be
Suspended IDs are typically destroyed.
They're placed into the body of a report and
DS
IEN
They're
14:15:30
I would assume the fraudulent ones are

They could be
23
put into evidence; they could be destroyed; they could be
24
documented.
25
Q.
FR
14:14:34
But you're not aware of what should happen to valid
14:15:44
3106
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
identifications?
A.
I'm sorry?
Q.
You're not aware of what should happen to valid
identifications that are held by MCSO?
A.
circumstances.
as well, but I don't know what the circumstances would be
around it.
Q.
Valid IDs should not be seized in the first place, correct?
10
A.
I would think so but, I mean, it depends on the set of
11
circumstances.
12
Q.
13
I had shown you, Exhibit 206.
I can't answer that accurately without knowing the set of
Okay.
I couldn't imagine that valid IDs are acquired
14:16:10
Mr. Masterson also asked you about the exhibit that
Could we bring that up?
14
Can probably put it up there for you.
15
14:16:28
And you testified on Friday that you -- you hadn't
16
found this particular departmental record, correct?
18
A.
I'm sorry, I didn't hear you.
19
Q.
You testified on Friday that you hadn't found this
20
particular departmental record, is that correct?
21
A.
22
particular report.
DS
17
14:16:46
IEN
You know, I don't remember reading this record, or this
23
Q.
24
time frame, correct?
25
A.
FR
14:15:54
You didn't look for departmental records in this
I don't think we did, and I think the reason was because
14:16:56
3107
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
it's a -- kind of outlasted the Cisco Perez and his
involvement, involvement with HSU.
Q.
members pocketed items, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Did you assume that if pocketing -- the practice of
pocketing, or taking items, was occurring while -- while Cisco
Perez was at HSU, that it stopped after he left HSU?
A.
Cisco Perez made statements that while he was at HSU, HSU
14:17:16
Well, no, I didn't assume that.
I took it upon myself
10
to understand that the -- if a crime could be identified, the
11
only way I will be successful in doing my job was to have
12
witnesses, and it would have to be -- I would have to be able
13
to prove it.
14
document suggests that somebody took a television set and
15
actually placed it into evidence, which would not be a
16
violation of state law.
17
that time.
18
Q.
19
that you were interviewing had worked with Cisco Perez, worked
20
at the same time as Cisco Perez at HSU?
21
A.
Sure, I think that would have been certainly --
22
Q.
Is that because if you assume that if they worked there
So I could never prove it.
I mean, this -- this
14:17:54
I think that's where my mindset was at
But it was important to you to know whether an HSU deputy
IEN
DS
14:18:11
23
after Cisco Perez left HSU that they could not be involved in
24
pocketing?
25
A.
FR
14:17:34
No.
Again, it all comes down to solvability.
I mean,
14:18:24
3108
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
if -- this evidence suggests somebody took a -- several
televisions.
and they properly placed them into Property and Evidence.
I guess at the time we were looking for that 62-inch TV, which
we never found.
They acquired them as a result of police action,

And
14:18:46
I don't think we -- this doesn't contain a 62-inch,
6
7
either.
I'd have to think back and I'd have to check with
my -- the guys who were helping out.
for a 62-inch TV, which is probably why this wasn't brought
We may have been looking
10
forth.
11
Q.
12
barcodes that were on the subsequent pages of this document?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
15
A.
Um-hum.
16
Q.
You didn't check to see if HSU had withdrawn any of
17
these -- any of the items under some sort of diversion
18
protocol, did you?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
These items?
21
A.
These particular items?
22
Q.
Yes.
IEN
DS
Mr. Masterson asked -- also asked you about some of the
23
A.
No.
24
Q.
You didn't look systematically for departmental records
25
involving HSU showing the seizure of high-value items, correct?
FR
14:19:02
14:19:12
14:19:26
14:19:38
3109
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Other than the television, no.
Q.
What would be the evidentiary value of a large television
taken during an operation?

MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
MR. SEGURA:
6
7
BY MR. SEGURA:
Q.
operations?
Do you want to lay some foundation?
14:20:01
Sure.
Do you know why items such as televisions are seized during
A.
Based on the diversion that I verified with Cisco Perez
11
being the case agent, it was determined, after speaking with
12
the supervisor, that it is unusual to find items of high value,
13
or any value, in a drop house.
14
there, from what I'm told, half naked, no means, no money.
15
according to this particular television or this -- this report
16
or this investigation involving a TV, a deputy sergeant took it
17
upon himself to remove it because his thinking, or his point --
18
the point he tells me, sometimes it's even difficult to find
19
the owners of these homes.
20
evidence as for safekeeping in case they were able to identify
21
the owner of the home, salvaging at least the television set.
22
That's how it was explained to me.
IEN
DS
10
People are literally thrown in
And
14:20:59
So he took it and put it into
14:21:18
So that to me makes sense,
23
yes.
24
Q.
25
Palmer had seized a television and then placed it into the
FR
14:20:25
Earlier you had referenced a departmental report in which

14:21:34
3110
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
diversion process, is that correct?
A.
Yes, I believe so.
Q.
Did you ask Sergeant Palmer why he had seized that
particular television as evidence?
A.
I believe I did, and I believe that was his explanation.
Q.
What was his explanation?
A.
That it's unusual to come across items of value at that
particular time.
not real -- I never worked with them, but they told me that a
And you could probably ask the HSU guys, I'm
10
lot of times they were unable to verify even the owner of a
11
drop house, for obvious reasons.
12
in their minds, items of value, this TV, from what Palmer said,
13
was taken and placed into evidence for safekeeping in case the
14
owner did come forward and is a victim of some sort.
15
Q.
16
the owner of that particular TV, correct?
17
A.
No, I don't.
18
Q.
Going back to the interviews that you did of HSU members,
19
you wouldn't necessarily expect a person involved in a crime to
20
just admit that they committed a crime, correct?
21
A.
No, I wouldn't.
22
Q.
Or that they had, in fact, pocketed items.
DS
And you don't know of any efforts that were made to locate
IEN
14:22:07
And items of value, at least
14:22:26
14:22:43
You wouldn't
23
expect them to just admit that, right?
24
A.
No, I wouldn't.
25
Q.
It wouldn't be, then, a surprise to you that they would say
FR
14:21:49
14:22:54
3111
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
that they simply found these items?
A.
No, it would not.
Q.
You didn't attempt to follow up with Deputy Gamboa as to
where he found these items?
A.
No, I did not.
Q.
Or during what, if any, specific operation?
A.
I did not.
Q.
Mr. Masterson also -- I believe you stated to Mr. Masterson
that the monitors believe that there should not have been a
10
criminal investigation, is that right?
11
A.
12
didn't know why a criminal investigation was done in the first
13
place.
14
even being done, and laughed.
15
Q.
16
monitors indicated that a criminal investigation should not
17
have been conducted?
18
A.
That's what I gathered, yes.
19
Q.
Would you turn to Exhibit 2849.
21
23
They even spoke amongst themselves as to why it was
And you mentioned that it's your understanding that the
And turn to page 1397099.
14:24:19
page.
Okay.
This is part of the transcript of the meeting
24
that you had with the monitors that you recorded in July of
25
2014, is that right?
FR
14:23:59
Mr. Klein, if you could zoom in to the bottom of the
IEN
22
14:23:43
The monitors said in my presence that they were -- they
DS
20
14:23:16
14:25:00
3112
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
It is.
Q.
And do you see five up from the bottom, where Chief Kiyler
says:
whether that's stealing or not.
not my problem"?
"And, and I'm not, I'm not going to make a statement on

You all figure that out.
It's
14:25:13
Do you see that?
6
7
A.
Yes.
Q.
Is it your understanding that she was not giving an opinion
as to whether it was criminal or not?

MR. MASTERSON:
10
THE COURT:
11
I don't know.
13
BY MR. SEGURA:
14
Q.
You don't know what that statement means?
15
A.
Well, yeah, but it's -- it's one of many statements that
16
are made.
17
Q.
Okay.
Your Honor, before we leave that,
could we, under Rule 106, go on to what Chief Kiyler says down
20
below there?
THE COURT:
14:25:44
Yes.
MR. MASTERSON:
IEN
22
DS
19
21
Last paragraph, we're looking at now.
23
THE COURT:
Yeah.
24
All right.
I've read it.
FR
25
14:25:29
Could you turn to page 1397 --
MR. MASTERSON:
18
14:25:22
If he knows.
THE WITNESS:
12
BY MR. SEGURA:
Thank you.
14:26:05
Q.
3113
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Could you move to page -- last three digits are 101.
Do you see at the bottom there where Chief Kiyler
2
3
says:
"I and you know and I'm not judging whether it's the
right decision or wrong decision."
Do you see that?
14:26:26
A.
I do.
Q.
She was again taking no position on whether it should have
been criminal, correct, if you know?

MR. MASTERSON:
9
10
Competence of
this witness.
14:26:37
THE COURT:
11
I think he asked "if you know," so I'm
12
going to allow him to answer if he knows.
13
BY MR. SEGURA:
14
Q.
15
should have been investigated criminally or not, correct?
16
A.
17
totality -- I was there for the meeting, and you -- meetings
18
are more than words.
19
there's ticks and things you -- I know that she was very clear,
20
as well as the other two that were there, that in their
21
opinion, they weren't -- they couldn't figure out why a
22
criminal investigation was even taking place, and they
If you know.
She was not taking a position on whether this
I don't know what position she was taking.
I know that the
There's --
IEN
DS
They're body language.
23
chuckled.
24
Q.
25
about the way it was being conducted as opposed to whether it
FR
14:26:54
14:27:12
Isn't it your understanding that the monitor was concerned

14:27:28
3114
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
was being conducted criminally?
A.
monitor provided me with the questions to ask, so it was the
monitor's interviews; it was the monitor's investigation.
Q.
or direct you on how to conduct this criminal investigation,
correct?
A.
indicate --
It's not my understanding that happened, because the
The monitors told you several times that they cannot order
I don't know if they used those exact words, but they did
10
Q.
11
135.
12
Kiyler says:
13
anything because we can't do that"?
14
And Peters says:
15
Turn to page 135 of the transcript.
Last three digits,
so."
"We've never ordered or directed you to do
"We don't have the authority to do
14:28:25
Kiyler says:
"We, we have said..." and continues:
17
"... if you're going to do a criminal anyway, we wish you'd ask
18
these questions.
19
see you do this."
If you're asking for an opinion, we'd like to
DS
Do you see that?
A.
I do.
22
Q.
You didn't disagree with any of those statements at the
IEN
21
23
time, did you?
24
A.
25
statements were made, but I disagree with the meaning behind
FR
14:27:58
Do you see at the top of the page, five down, where Chief
16
20
14:27:44
14:28:39
I do disagree with -- I don't disagree that those

14:28:47
3115
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
them.
Q.
monitor, that they were still ordering you to investigate it
criminally?
A.
Yes, I do.
Q.
You actually don't know who made the decision to conduct a
criminal investigation, do you?
A.
I do not.
Q.
You mentioned to Mr. -- Mr. Masterson about the McKessy
So you feel that even with these statements from the
14:28:55
10
investigation, that Ms. McKessy did not come back in with
11
documents that she said she was going to come in with, is that
12
right?
13
A.
That I -- that I know of, yes.
14
Q.
One of the main allegations was overtime fraud, correct?
15
A.
I don't think she ever used the term "fraud."
16
Q.
Or misuse of overtime?
17
A.
I'm not even sure if she used the term "misuse."
18
Q.
How would you characterize her allegation as to the
19
payroll?
20
A.
21
used, but I believe -- I don't believe she used the word
22
"fraud."
IEN
DS
Padding his overtime.
I don't know what exact words she
Q.
Couldn't you look at his entries on the ADP system?
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
And couldn't you have interviewed him about his time sheet?
FR
23
14:29:27
14:29:44
14:29:55
14:30:08
3116
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
I don't think I could have at that time, no.
Q.
You couldn't have interviewed Detective Mackiewicz?
A.
Well, I could have, but it would have been pointless.
didn't know what his parameters were.
hours.
They don't necessarily have to be behind a desk or at a certain
facility to get paid.
entertaining, you know, investigative leads, witnesses.
mean, there's several different parameters that -- that
Detectives work odd
They're allowed to drink on the job, in some cases.
They can be route to calls.
They can be
I
10
encompasses the how you get paid.
11
Q.
12
doing during those entries?
13
A.
No, I did not.
14
Q.
You mentioned -- Mr. Masterson went through with you all of
15
the training that you've received on general investigations and
16
criminal -- how to conduct general criminal investigations.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
Do you recall that?
19
A.
Yes, I do.
20
Q.
And he went through the length of time that you've been
21
with MCSO, and that you've continued to receive similar
22
training on general criminal investigations.
DS
14:31:03
14:31:14
24
A.
He did, yes.
25
Q.
You drew upon that training for your investigation of the
FR
14:30:43
Did you go through his overtime and ask him what he was
IEN
23
14:30:23
14:31:25
3117
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Cisco Perez allegations, correct?
A.
I'm not sure exactly what you mean.
Q.
Sure.
through your experience in the investigation of the Cisco Perez
allegations, correct?
A.
experience from the guys around me.
help me in my investigations, yes.
Q.
Sure.
Okay.
I'm sorry.
You've used what you've learned in training and
14:31:44
I mean, I use the results of training, the
I use a lot of things that
You also stated that Internal Affairs, and in
10
particular, criminal Internal Affairs, is an important element
11
to a law enforcement agency because police have to be held to a
12
higher standard, is that correct?
13
A.
I believe that's correct.
14
Q.
Do you believe you held Mr. Mackiewicz to a higher
15
standard?
16
A.
17
say it one more time, please.
18
Q.
19
higher standard?
20
A.
21
to a higher standard.
22
investigator does.
14:32:11
I'm not sure how to answer that.
Sure.
I'm not -- can you just
Do you believe that you held Mr. Mackiewicz to a
IEN
DS
Yes, I think I -- I hold all involved in my investigations
23
MR. SEGURA:
24
THE COURT:
25
MR. SEGURA:
FR
14:32:01
14:32:29
I follow the evidence like any other
Your Honor, may I have a moment?

You may.
Thank you.
14:32:50
3118
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Tennyson - X The Court, 10/13/15 Evidentiary Hearing
MR. SEGURA:
THE COURT:
I have no further questions.
All right.
Sergeant, occasionally I take
the privilege of asking a couple questions, and I think I'm
going to ask you a few questions.

THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
Sure.
After which I'll let all the attorneys ask
questions if they wish to.
afternoon break.
THE COURT:
11
THE COURT:
13
Yes, sir.
Thank you.
14:33:20
So why don't we come back in 15 minutes.
THE WITNESS:
12
But before I do that, I want an
Can you use one?
THE WITNESS:
10
14:33:11
Thank you.
Thank you.
(Recess taken.)
14
THE COURT:
15
Please be seated.
14:52:14
EXAMINATION
16
17
BY THE COURT:
18
Q.
19
don't -- I don't think I have too many, but I do have a few.
20
And as is frequently the case with questions I ask, I just want
21
to get your best idea of a time line straight.
22
A.
Q.
Now, I think you testified --
24
And again, I'm just asking kind of directed questions,
25
I'm not preventing you from objecting or anyone from objecting,
FR
14:52:34
Sure.
IEN
23
I hope I
DS
Sergeant, I promised you I'd ask a few questions.
14:52:48
3119
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
but I'm asking directed questions to try and get to the heart
of the matter.
I believe you testified that the Armendariz
investigation, the administrative investigation, had begun, and
during the course of that investigation, information was turned
up that related to the Cisco Perez matter --
A.
That's correct.
Q.
-- is that correct?
A.
That's correct.
10
Q.
And then a determination was made that the Cisco Perez
11
matter had to be investigated criminally.
12
A.
That's correct.
13
Q.
And you were put in charge of that criminal investigation.
14
A.
Yes, sir, that's correct.
15
Q.
And it was Captain Bailey that put you in charge of that
16
criminal investigation.
17
A.
Yes, sir.
18
Q.
And shortly thereafter, the administrative investigation
19
involving the items found at Deputy Armendariz's house was put
20
on hold.
21
A.
22
to items found at Charley Armendariz's house was put on hold
DS
14:53:13
14:53:25
14:53:43
IEN
To my knowledge, the administrative investigation related
23
either at the same time or immediately after Cisco Perez made
24
the statements.
25
Q.
FR
14:53:04
All right.
14:54:01
3120
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
With the unemployment hearing judge.
Q.
And then you pursued the criminal Cisco Perez
investigation.
A.
That's correct.
Q.
Now, I think you testified that at some point early on, the
monitor provided you a list of suggested questions.
A.
That's correct, sir.
Q.
And then you indicated that you had this meeting -- you had
already -- well, let me just make sure I've got the chronology
correct.
You had already asked some folks interviews that you
11
had prepared that involved three or four questions, I think is
12
what you said.
13
A.
That's correct.
14
Q.
And the monitor gave you about 30 other suggested questions
15
that you should ask.
16
A.
Yes, sir.
17
Q.
And then the next time you recall having a meeting with the
18
monitor was in this meeting that we looked at a transcript of
19
that you said occurred in late July?
20
A.
I believe it was July the 15th or 16th, middle of July.
21
Q.
Somebody recorded that meeting?
22
A.
Yes, sir.
IEN
DS
10
Q.
Do you know who recorded it?
24
A.
Detective Zebro.
25
Q.
Did he inform the monitors that it was being recorded?
FR
23
14:54:08
14:54:27
14:54:41
14:54:52
14:55:01
3121
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
I don't believe so, no.
Q.
Did you record all the meetings with the monitors?
A.
No, sir.
Q.
You recorded some of the meetings with the monitors.
A.
Just this one.
Q.
That's the only one you know of that you recorded.
A.
That's the only --
Q.
Okay.
A.
-- meeting with the monitors I recorded.
10
Q.
And in that meeting the monitors expressed surprise, from
11
your perspective, that there even was a criminal investigation.
12
A.
Yes, sir.
13
Q.
And I think you said that in that July meeting there was a
14
discussion about you maybe doing a more targeted investigation
15
as to Cisco Perez's associates?
16
A.
Yes, sir.
17
Q.
And I think you testified that that never happened.
18
A.
It did not.
19
in an order which in my mind wasn't strategically sound.
20
yes, there would have been a different approach.
21
discussed that with the monitors and they agreed it would have
22
been a good idea.
DS
IEN
14:55:16
14:55:35
We spoke with those associates, but we did so
23
Q.
In a later meeting or in this meeting?
24
A.
In this meeting.
25
Q.
All right.
FR
14:55:10
So
And we
Now in the end, do you recall doing up a
14:55:59
14:56:06
3122
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
memorandum to Captain Bailey, and you gave a copy to Chief
Kiyler a few days before you wrote 2008?
A.
No, Judge --
Q.
I'm sorry, Exhibit 2006, I think it is, yes.
A.
Judge, I've been asked that question and I don't -- I know
that I gave Captain Bailey a memorandum, and I recall getting a
response from Captain Bailey as to the concerns the monitors
had as to which -- what type of format it was on, 'cause it
was -- it was on a Word document.
I'm not a real good computer
10
guy, but I put everything down on a piece of paper and I gave
11
it to Captain Bailey from time to time.
12
Inquiry, I believe.
13
and paste that and put it on a sheriff memorandum format.
And then I was instructed to basically cut
But I honestly don't
15
recall giving that to Kiyler.
16
don't recall it, handing it to her.
17
Q.
18
one way or another and resubmitting it to Captain Bailey?
19
A.
20
a memo form and gave it back to Captain Bailey.
21
Q.
22
Exhibit 2006?
All right.
Doesn't mean I didn't; I just
14:57:06
Do you remember then revising that memorandum
DS
My recollection is I switched it from the Word document to
14:57:23
IEN
And is that memo that you gave to Captain Bailey
23
A.
Can I check?
24
Q.
You certainly may.
25
A.
I believe this is the memo that was transferred from the
FR
14:56:48
It was titled HSU
That's what I recall about that.
14
14:56:27
14:58:07
3123
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Word to the memo format.
Q.
sure I do, the Cisco Perez investigation -- pardon me -- the
Cisco Perez criminal investigation that you were in charge of
received an IA number, right?
A.
Yes, I believe it did.
Q.
And that was, I think, IA 14-295?
A.
That sounds correct.
Q.
And this was the memo that closed out IA 14-295.
10
A.
I don't know if it -- if it closed it out.
11
had a different numbering system up until recently, and I think
12
there was -- we were toying around with different numbering
13
systems.
14
IA number.
15
was closed out.
16
Q.
17
the Cisco Perez investigation?
18
A.
To my knowledge, no.
19
Q.
Any more memorandums been written on the Cisco Perez
20
investigation?
21
A.
To my knowledge, no.
22
Q.
Do you have any idea if such had happened, who would have
Okay.
And if I understand correctly, and I want to make
14:58:28
We had -- we
This was given a number, a CIA number, I think, or an

I don't know that this was -- I'm not sure if it
14:59:13
IEN
DS
Has any more investigation, to your knowledge, been done on
23
such knowledge?
24
A.
25
additional memorandums written, then it would be recent, and it
FR
14:58:50
14:59:28
The only thing that I can think of is if there were

14:59:39
3124
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
would stem from some additional information that came forward.
But to my knowledge, this is -- this was the investigation.
Q.
closed out the investigation?
A.
As far as I know, yes.
Q.
Are you aware of any additional information that has
recently come forward with respect to the Cisco Perez
investigation?
A.
No, sir, I'm not.
10
Q.
Now, you do recall that both the predecessor memorandum
11
that you -- the Word document that you revised and then this
12
memorandum caused some concern with the monitor?
13
A.
Yes, I do.
14
Q.
And you do recall -- well, I don't want to put words in
15
your mouth.
Okay.
So as far as you know, this is the memorandum that
15:00:03
15:00:21
Do you recall that the monitor in the end prepared a
16
17
report the following month, September, and submitted it to me
18
about what he viewed to be the deficiencies in the
19
investigations of the Armendariz matter to date?
20
A.
21
don't recall the particulars off the top of my head right now.
22
Q.
DS
I do recall that document, I do recall reading that, but I
15:00:32
IEN
You did actually read that report?
23
A.
24
about.
25
Q.
FR
14:59:55
I did read the report, if it's the one you're talking
Did you read all of it?
15:00:45
3125
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
I think I may have just read the information that was
pertinent to me, but I'm -- I'm not certain.
back.
Q.
report be filed with both sides, and I allowed both sides to
respond?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And do you recall that the MCSO's attorneys did respond to
the report?
It was a while
Do you recall as well that I allowed -- I required that the
10
A.
I believe they did, yes.
11
Q.
Did you read that response?
12
you ever read it?
13
A.
14
I've read it, but I don't recall the particulars right now.
15
Q.
16
testimony, would you -- would you say your testimony's right or
17
that the document filed by MCSO at the time was right?
I've seen it.
Okay.
Have
You know, it's hard to -- I would say
that my -- my recollection is -- is clear now, only because
22
this has been polarized and I've had some time to think.
IEN
21
23
15:01:43
Obviously, I've never been under the monitors before,
24
and quite frankly, it was just a new -- a new experience for
25
me.
FR
15:01:24
You may answer the question.
THE WITNESS:
DS
20
It's a public document.
And if it took a position that's contrary to your
THE COURT:
19
15:01:11
I'm sure I've read -- I mean, yes, I'm sure
MR. MASTERSON:
18
15:01:03
I would never intentionally give false information.
15:02:07
3126
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
BY THE COURT:
Q.
I'm not suggesting you would.
A.
Okay.
far --
Q.
All right.
A.
-- from the same.
Q.
Well, I may ask you about some of that later specifically,
and I may not, and that may take care more specifically of
Mr. Masterson's objections.
But I would be -- I'd be surprised if it was very
15:02:15
Let me ask you this:
10
Do you remember that after all
11
sides had had an opportunity to comment, or to file a written
12
briefing on the monitor's report, I held a hearing on the
13
monitor's report?
14
A.
15
be that involved.
16
there were hearings, but I -- I didn't -- I wasn't here for
17
those.
18
Q.
19
those, would you dispute the actual court record?
20
A.
No, not at all.
21
Q.
All right.
22
that hearing.
Judge, honestly, I wasn't that -- I wasn't at that level to

I know there were -- there were filings and
15:02:41
IEN
DS
Well, if the record reflects that in fact you were here for
I recall being here in October of 2014.
15:02:57
So October 28th was the date on which I held
23
A.
Okay.
24
Q.
All right.
25
report during that hearing?
FR
15:02:24
I was here.
I sat over there.
And do you remember going through the monitor's

15:03:10
3127
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
I -- I was sitting there.
honestly, I don't.
Q.
I listened to everything.
I --
I can't answer that.
That's all right.
Let me, if I can -- you indicated that you have read
4
5
the monitor's report, and it is filed as part of the court
record in this matter.
the defendants, some parts of it have been redacted, and we
haven't removed that redaction, so for the time being, I'm
going to give you a redacted copy.
10
A.
All right?
15:03:49
(Off-the-record discussion between the Court and the
clerk.)
MR. SEGURA:
13
THE COURT:
14
MR. SEGURA:
15
16
But I will tell you at the request of
Okay.
11
12
Your Honor --
Yes.
-- there's an unredacted version that we
15:04:04
have as an exhibit, if that would be helpful.

THE COURT:
17
Well, it might be, but I'm just going to
18
make sure you all have copies, so I'm going to give three
19
copies out.
20
version's available, but I'm not sure I've ever authorized an
21
unredacted version to be put in evidence so I'm just going to
22
play with this one for the time being.
IEN
DS
And it -- and I will say that maybe an unredacted
there's anything that still needs to be redacted.
24
BY THE COURT:
25
Q.
Could you turn to page 31.
15:04:27
I'm not sure that
23
FR
15:03:28
That starts "The Monitor's
15:04:40
3128
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
summary of the Cisco Perez-HSU criminal investigation," at
least as I read it, and I'm just going to point out a couple of
things, and -- actually, if you go back to 30 is where it
starts "The HSU criminal investigation," and then it has
"initial observations."
15:05:33
Do you see that?
6
7
A.
Yes, I do.
Q.
And then if you go to the next page where it says,
"Preliminary Findings."
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
Do you see that on the first sentence it talks about a site
12
visit that the Monitoring Team has?
15:05:41
Do you say the heading "Preliminary Findings?"
13
A.
I do, sir.
15
Q.
Can you read the first sentence after that.
16
A.
"During the June 16th to 20th, 2014 site visit, the
17
monitor --"
18
Q.
You don't have to read it out loud.
19
A.
Okay.
20
Q.
I'm just asking you:
21
as to whether or not Captain Bailey was the one who decided
22
that the best approach to the investigation would be to do
IEN
DS
14
Does that refresh your recollection
criminal interviews?
24
A.
Yes, it does say that.
25
Q.
Well, does it refresh your recollection as to whether or
FR
23
15:05:56
15:06:09
15:06:26
3129
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
not that occurred in that meeting?
A.
I don't know that I recall being at that meeting.
Q.
Where do you see the start of the very next paragraph where
it says:
he was not in agreement with the decision made by
Captain Bailey regarding the need to conduct criminal
interviews"?
A.
I do read that.
Q.
Does that recall your recollection as to whether or not you
"Sergeant Tennyson advised the Monitoring Team that
10
were at the meeting?
11
A.
12
the conversation that was had in July, middle of July, with the
13
monitors at the meeting they requested.
14
Q.
15
as to whether or not you were at this meeting with the monitor
16
team?
17
A.
18
Captain Bailey was talking about hand-picking me as the
19
investigator.
20
Team, and there was some questioning about -- regarding why we
21
did a criminal investigation.
22
they mentioned it:
15:07:07
That, when I read that, I believe that was in response to
Well, I'm just asking:
Does it refresh your recollection
15:07:27
I don't recall being at a meeting where I was present and
IEN
DS
I do recall being at a meeting with the Monitor
15:07:44
And I did mention -- I think
Were you -- were you not in agreement with
23
Captain Bailey?
24
Q.
25
you'll see that they identify an initial line of inquiry that
FR
15:06:57
So I believe those are two separate things.
Well, if you look at that during that same paragraph,

15:08:10
3130
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
you were pursuing that was composed of four questions?
A.
Yes, I see that, sir.
Q.
Were those the four questions that you had -- are those an
accurate portrayal of the four questions that you had outlined?
A.
Yes, it looks like it.
Q.
Okay.
you'll see that upon learning the -- what they viewed as the
limited scope of the questioning, and that it indicates that on
June 23rd, the Monitoring Team provided the following questions
15:08:23
And then below -- right below the four questions
10
and advised Captain Bailey and his team of investigators.
11
then if you turn the page, the next page and a half is some
12
initial paragraphs, and then 33 questions.
13
A.
Yes, I see that.
14
Q.
Have you seen those questions before?
15
A.
Yes, I have.
16
Q.
And have you read -- I mean, is everything that's on the
17
next page and a half, was that a memorandum that you reviewed
18
with Captain Bailey?
19
A.
20
receive a -- a memorandum with the Warshaw Associates
21
letterhead, and these questions were on it, yes, sir.
22
Q.
15:08:40
15:08:53
I don't know that I reviewed it with Captain Bailey.
I did
DS
15:09:09
IEN
Well, why don't you take a minute, 'cause I don't want to
23
rush you, take a minute and see if you believe that this
24
accurately portrays the memorandum you received.
25
A.
FR
And
Yes, that's -- I believe those are the questions.
Those
15:09:54
3131
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
are.
Q.
that he was expecting to hear back from Captain Bailey, but in
fact he heard back from you.
bottom of the page on page 33, and going over to page 34 on the
top of the page, he said he received, instead, an e-mail from
you, or a response, he doesn't specify that it was an e-mail, a
response on June 24th, 2014.
And then after that, they indicate -- the monitor indicates
And then starting at the very
Can you review that and see if you in fact -- if that
9
10
is a communication you would have sent to the Monitor Team on
11
June 24th?
12
A.
Are you talking about June 25th or June 24th?
13
Q.
Well, I don't know.
14
on the page -- on the bottom of page 33.
15
A.
Right.
16
Q.
You see where it says, "Captain Bailey never responded to
17
the Monitoring Team.
18
A.
Oh.
19
Q.
-- following response was received by Major Peters directly
20
from Sergeant Tennyson."
I'm talking --
15:10:43
Instead, on June 24th, 2014, the --
15:10:51
A.
Yes, I do, I see.
23
Q.
24
but may not be, an e-mail communication that appears to have
25
your name attached on the signature bar.
FR
15:10:29
Do you see that?
IEN
22
Let me check the date.
DS
21
15:10:09
And then after that it has in italics what appears to be,
And I just want to
15:11:01
3132
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
have you review it and see if in fact you recollect that you
sent that e-mail, whether or not you recollect that you sent
that e-mail to the monitor team.
A.
Yes, I did send that.
Q.
Okay.
A.
I believe so, based on the date, yes, the 25th date.
Q.
Now, you indicated that you received communications -- I
think you said e-mails, but maybe not -- that you received
communications from the Monitor Team that made you feel
And did you send it on June 24th?
15:11:15
Yes.
10
internally some pressure?
11
A.
Yes, sir.
12
Q.
Did you save those e-mails?
13
A.
Yes, sir.
14
Q.
And have you given them to anybody?
15
A.
I believe they're in the -- they're in the possession of
16
the attorneys.
17
Q.
All right.
18
A.
Fairly certain.
19
Q.
So you've turned them over to the attorneys.
20
A.
Yes.
21
It's not completed, but I believe some of them are in there.
22
Q.
DS
In fact they're in my report, I think, or in my memo.
15:12:06
15:12:15
IEN
Now, I think -- and again, I don't want to put words in
23
your mouth -- you said it wasn't like they were demanding
24
anything; it just caused you to feel internal pressure?
25
A.
FR
15:11:58
Yes.
Judge, if I was sitting out there chewing gum and you
15:12:31
3133
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
said you strongly recommend that I remove the gum, I would
remove the gum from my mouth.
are an arm of the Court, and if they're strongly suggesting I
ask questions, highly recommending that I do so, I will oblige.
Q.
thereafter, you asked all of these questions?
A.
from that line of questioning a few times, and I was -- I was
certainly contacted and told to reinsert those questions, yes,
So I respect that the monitors
And is it your testimony that in all the interviews
To the best of my ability, I did.
I do recall straying
10
sir.
11
Q.
12
suggestion to you, you would follow it.
13
that October 28th meeting my indication that I was very
14
dissatisfied with the way you had proceeded with the
15
interviews?
16
A.
Yes, sir, I was here.
17
Q.
And do you remember that we discussed concerns about the
18
way that you had closed out the Cisco Perez investigation?
19
A.
20
you discussed it, yes.
21
Q.
22
did anybody ever report to you that I expressed again my
15:13:05
Um-hum.
Do you remember -- you indicated that if I made a

Do you remember in
I'm sure
DS
Yes, I'm sure -- I'm sure we -- I'm sure you did.
15:13:20
15:13:38
IEN
I don't think you were at the November 20th meeting, but
23
dissatisfaction on the November 20th status conference?
24
A.
I don't recall that, sir.
25
Q.
It was on that day, though, that you sent -- and I think
FR
15:12:49
15:13:52
3134
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
you have it in front of you -- Exhibit 1001 directly to
Chief Deputy Sheridan.
A.
I have it.
Q.
Do you want to review that for me, please, so we know we're
both talking about the same document?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Just tell me when you've had a chance to completely review
it.
A.
Yes, I'm familiar with this.
10
Q.
All right.
11
Chief Deputy Sheridan, correct?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
And it closes out the criminal investigation into the
14
Armendariz materials, correct?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
Did the Armendariz criminal investigation ever get its own
17
IA case number?
18
A.
19
but -- but I don't know if it was a -- it was part of the death
20
investigation, it was that number, or it was a separate
21
number pulled for the Armendariz case.
22
know.
Now, this is a memorandum you sent to
DS
I don't -- I'm not certain.
IEN
15:14:38
15:15:27
I would -- I would say it did,
15:15:51
I don't -- I don't
I'm not sure.
23
Q.
24
any criminal investigation that you're aware of with respect to
25
the Armendariz matter.
FR
15:15:15
Well, in any case, it closes -- this memorandum closes down
15:16:09
3135
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes, regarding the IDs that were given to me, I believe
that's what it was, to look into to see if I could find --
Q.
Sure.
A.
-- the owners, yes.
Q.
Go ahead.
A.
Yes.
Q.
All right.
investigation with respect to the Armendariz matter?
A.
I am not.
10
Q.
Now, the Armendariz matter has different facts than the
11
Cisco Perez matter, correct?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
We might quibble about 62-inch televisions with respect to
14
Cisco Perez, and I appreciate your testimony.
15
carefully and tried to take good notes.
16
question that in the Armendariz residence there were other
17
items found other than just identifications, correct?
18
A.
Yes, there were.
19
Q.
And you never looked, I take it -- you've talked at some
20
length at efforts you took to reconstruct at least some of the
21
inves -- some of the identifications that you found in the
22
Cisco Perez investigation.
15:16:29
Are you aware of any subsequent criminal
I've listened
IEN
DS
But there is no
23
A.
That's correct.
24
Q.
Did you make any effort to reconstruct any of the
25
identifications found in the Armendariz matter that you wrote
FR
15:17:04
15:17:19
15:17:40
15:17:52
3136
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
to Chief Deputy Sheridan about here?
A.
deputies who were sifting through the documents and the items
found in Charley's garage, anything that they found to be
potentially criminal in nature that they could connect someone
else to a criminal act, then I would be investigating.
Q.
didn't look at any -- you didn't try to find anybody who -- who
had identifications in Armendariz's garage?
No, sir.
I was instructed to investigate anything that the
All right.
Well, you're aware, then, in addition -- so you
10
A.
11
were in Charley's garage, no.
12
Q.
13
that you later found, like these Mexican drivers' licenses and
14
the Mexican identifications, you're not -- you don't -- you're
15
not making any allegation that those were fraudulent?
16
A.
I'm -- I'm sorry, I'm not --
17
Q.
You're right.
18
A.
Okay.
19
Q.
I sort of broke the string.
20
A.
I'm sorry.
21
Q.
No, it's my fault.
And to the extent that there may be identifications
15:18:46
We'll go there later.
15:19:01
DS
I'm off on it.
23
drugs found in MCSO evidence bags, aren't you?
24
A.
25
some initial photographs from the search warrant early on.
FR
15:18:28
You are aware that in Armendariz's garage there were
IEN
22
I -- no, not that I'm aware of, specifically the ones that
Okay.
15:18:10
Personally, I didn't see the drugs.
I do recall seeing
I
15:19:16
3137
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
don't know what the drugs were specifically, I couldn't tell
you.
items found in property and evidence bags, yes.
Q.
And you were aware that there were firearms found?
A.
Yes, I'm not sure -- certain what firearms.
sawed-off shotgun.
me.
Q.
that's the one I most focus on as well.
But yes, I was told there was some drugs found and -- or
Yeah.
I recall a
That's the only thing that sticks out to
I think there may have been one or two others, but
And there were -- there was currency?
10
15:19:45
11
A.
I'm not aware of the currency.
12
Q.
No one ever made you aware that currency was found in
13
Armendariz's garage?
14
A.
15
the currency.
16
Q.
How about credit cards?
17
A.
I do recall some credit cards.
18
specifically what cards there were.
19
Q.
Bank cards?
20
A.
I don't know.
21
were some credit cards found, yes.
22
Q.
DS
They may have.
I just don't recall that.
I don't recall
15:19:57
I don't recall the --
I know there was identification and there
15:20:11
IEN
And cell phones and some other things.
23
A.
Yes, sir.
24
Q.
And those things have value, don't they?
25
A.
Yes, I think so.
FR
15:19:33
15:20:25
3138
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
But they weren't -- you never investigated them.
A.
No, not -- no, personally, no.
Q.
As far as you know, there's never been a criminal
investigation of those matters?
A.
where deputies attempted to locate the owners of those items,
but I -- it wasn't part of my criminal investigation.
Q.
looked into -- I'm aware of at least a few administrative
As far as I know, the only investigation that I'm aware of
Are you aware of any administrative investigation that
10
investigations that looked into the identifications, so I'm not
11
asking about those.
12
administrative investigations that might have looked into the
13
other items that we've just discussed.
15:21:07
But I am now asking about any
Are you aware of any administrative investigations
14
15
that have done that?
16
A.
17
administrative investigations, the information.
18
Q.
19
this criminal investigation may have received a different case
20
number?
21
A.
22
just got into a new system of numbering items, so
15:21:18
No, I'm -- typically, I'm not privileged to the
I think you indicated that you're not sure whether
15:21:36
DS
Okay.
IEN
I don't -- honestly, I don't keep -- I'm not really -- we
23
Lieutenant Seagraves, which was my boss, she developed a
24
numbering system.
25
number for the HSU investigation.
FR
15:20:35
I recall the 14-295 being a reference

15:21:53
3139
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Which was Cisco Perez.
A.
Which had been linked to Cisco Perez, correct.
Q.
And that was closed with 2006, I think is what you just
said; I'm not trying to put words in your mouth.
A.
Yes, I -- yes, essentially, yes.
Q.
I think you may have answered this, but I'm just going to
ask it:
deputy would take a valid Mexican driver's license from
somebody that they were deporting to ICE, or referring to ICE?
15:22:08
Do you know any reason why someone would take, an MCSO
10
A.
I could speculate, but you would have to -- to get a better
11
answer, you would have to talk to somebody that was actually
12
involved.
13
Q.
All right.
14
A.
I was never assigned to HSU, so I don't know.
15
Q.
But absent -- absent unusual circumstances, even if
16
someone's here illegally, they have a right to keep their
17
identification that's legitimate, don't they?
18
A.
19
had with the guys, there were instances where people would
20
discard their licenses in an attempt not to be identified and
21
that sort of thing.
22
case, but no, I couldn't accurately answer that.
IEN
DS
I would think so.
15:22:45
But based on some of the discussions I
15:23:01
I'm not saying that happened in every

I was never
23
assigned to that unit.
24
operating procedures were at that time, I don't...
25
Q.
FR
15:22:34
I don't know what their standard
Now, I believe that in one of the interviews, I can't
15:23:21
3140
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
remember, but one of the detectives told you that he took
certain items as a trophy.
3
4
A.
The only interview I recall anyone saying the word "trophy"
was with the sergeant, I believe it was Sergeant Trowbridge; it
had to do with license plates.
Q.
trophy taking problem be might be more widespread in MCSO than
you originally believed?
Have you ever formed an opinion as to whether or not the
10
A.
11
them about the trinkets and the -- the IDs and the license
12
plates and T-shirts and the flags and so forth, and we actually
13
searched the Enforcement Support building, to include the
14
entire Enforcement Support building.
15
facilities were searched as well, to determine if we could
16
locate items such as the so-called trophies that Trowbridge
17
referred to.
18
think we found any.
19
certainly not items like that hanging on the walls.
20
Q.
21
investigate whether Detective Mackiewicz was involved in
22
unauthorized overtime submissions?
Well, yes.
FR
you.
15:23:53
I believe a few other
15:24:24
And we found, I don't know if we found -- I don't

We may have found a few items, but not --
DS
A.
24
25
We interviewed the guys at HSU and we asked
Did you ever have anyone tell you that you didn't need to
IEN
23
15:23:38
15:24:43
No, sir, I haven't.

THE COURT:
I think those are all my questions.
Thank
15:25:09
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
THE COURT:
MR. WALKER:
THE COURT:
MR. COMO:
THE COURT:
Mr. Masterson.
No questions.
Mr. Walker.
MS. WANG:
10
Mr. Como.

Thank you.
You can step down.
Your Honor, plaintiffs call Steven Bailey.
15:25:36
Your Honor, may I hand up Captain Bailey's deposition
11
transcripts to the witness stand?
13
14
THE COURT:
You may.
MS. WANG:
Thank you.
THE CLERK:
15
Please raise your right hand.
15:26:53
(Steve Bailey is duly sworn as a witness.)
16
17
18
THE CLERK:
Thank you.
THE COURT:
Ms. Wang.
MS. WANG:
DS
19
Please have a seat.

STEVE BAILEY,
called as a witness herein, having been duly sworn, was
22
examined and testified as follows:
IEN
21
23
24
BY MS. WANG:
25
Q.
FR
15:25:18
Next witness, please.
20
Thank you.
MR. MASTERSON:
12
3141
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Bailey - DX Wang, 10/13/15 Evidentiary Hearing
15:27:18
DIRECT EXAMINATION
Good afternoon, Captain Bailey.
15:27:21
3142
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Hi, how are you?
Q.
Good.
A.
Good.
Q.
Sir, I want to start just by briefly going over your
background at MCSO, concentrating on since you've been a
commander.
A.
Okay.
Q.
You've been at MCSO since 1996, correct?
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
And you promoted to sergeant while you were assigned to the
11
Threats Management Unit, correct?
12
A.
I believe so, yes.
13
Q.
You were under Chief Hendershott's command there?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
And you thereafter transferred to the Special
16
Investigations Division, is that right?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
And you made lieutenant while you were at SID, correct?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
That was in 2006 or '7?
21
A.
I believe 2007.
22
Q.
All right.
IEN
DS
How are you?
15:27:36
15:27:48
15:27:56
And upon your promotion to lieutenant, you
23
became the commander of the HIDTA, is that right?
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
And that was still under SID.
FR
15:27:28
15:28:08
A.
Correct.
Q.
While you were the commander of HIDTA, did you become
familiar with administering grants?
A.
I managed the grant money, yes.
Q.
The HIDTA grant funds from the federal government?
A.
Right.
Q.
All right.
commanding HIDTA with managing grant funds to -- for the
operations of your unit, correct?
15:28:22
And you generally became familiar while
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
All right.
12
the Human Smuggling Unit, was reorganized into SID?
13
A.
That's correct.
14
Q.
From Enforcement Support, correct?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
And you were a captain at SID at the time, correct?
17
A.
No, I was not.
18
Q.
You were still a lieutenant in SID at the time?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
Okay.
21
of 2013, is that right?
22
A.
15:28:34
Now, is it correct that in June of 2013, HSU,
15:28:47
DS
You were promoted to captain in -- on September 2nd
15:28:59
IEN
Yes.
23
Q.
24
whole, correct?
25
A.
FR
3143
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
And at that time you took over the command of SID as a
Yes.
15:29:10
3144
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
And that included the HSU, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
So between September 2nd of 2013 and your departure from
SID on -- in June of 2014, HSU was under your command, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
About a period of eight months or so?
A.
Yes.
Q.
All right.
transferred from command of SID to command of the Professional
15:29:30
And just to close the loop here, you
10
Standards Bureau, or what was then known as the IA division, in
11
early June of 2014, correct?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
All right.
14
you to command the PSB, correct?
15
A.
Yes, it was.
16
Q.
I'm just going to use PSB generically even to cover periods
17
when it was the Internal Affairs Division.
18
Can we agree to do that?
Now, it was Chief Deputy Sheridan who assigned
19
A.
I understand, yes.
20
Q.
Okay.
21
because he wanted PSB to move faster and to clear cases in
22
bigger chunks, is that right?
IEN
DS
And Chief Sheridan assigned you to command PSB
23
A.
24
start the Armendariz investigation, to move along more
25
efficiently.
FR
15:29:45
15:29:58
15:30:08
I believe what he wanted was parts of the Armendariz -- to
15:30:26
Q.
Okay.
Do you mind speaking into the mike?
All right.
Thank you.
And I don't want to put words in your
mouth, so I'm going to refer to your testimony in your
deposition on September 8th of 2015.
A.
Okay.
Q.
You have a copy in front of you in the binders to your
right, if you'd like to look.
15:30:44
I believe your testimony on September 8th of 2015, on
8
9
3145
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
page 18, lines 13 to 18, was, and here it is:

"Question:
10
You told the monitor, Mr. Anders, that one
11
of the reasons Sheridan told you he was appointing you to the
12
command of PSB is that he wanted PSB to move faster and in
13
bigger chunks.
"Was that accurate?
14
"Answer:
15
Yeah, I remember saying that."
15:31:14
Is that correct, sir?
16
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
And you stand by that testimony?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
Now, you've known Chief Deputy Sheridan throughout your
21
career at MCSO, is that right?
22
A.
DS
17
15:31:28
IEN
Yes.
23
Q.
Since 1996?
24
A.
I didn't know him well in 1996.
25
class, and that's the first time I met him.
FR
15:31:01
He addressed my academy
15:31:40
Q.
Okay.
THE COURT:
2
3
Chief, I'm sorry.
I'm having a hard time
hearing you.
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
THE COURT:
Sure.
You bet.
BY MS. WANG:
Q.
And you now consider Chief Deputy Sheridan to be a friend,
11
correct?
12
A.
I do.
13
Q.
You socialize with him occasionally outside of work?
14
A.
I do.
15
Q.
And while you were the commander of PSB, you saw him on a
16
daily basis, correct?
17
A.
I don't know if I could say daily, but very often.
18
Q.
At least every other day --
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
-- on average?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
Okay.
IEN
DS
10
15:31:53
15:32:01
15:32:10
And your offices were both on the fifth floor of the
23
headquarters building, is that right?
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
To your knowledge, is the current PSB commander's office
FR
15:31:47
Thank you.
THE WITNESS:
I'm sorry.
Can you pull that just a little closer?
THE WITNESS:
3146
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
15:32:15
3147
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
also still on the fifth floor, along with the chief deputy's
office?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And that's the same floor as the sheriff's office, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Now, while you were the commander of PSB, you regularly
discussed this Melendres litigation with him, correct?
A.
time.
I don't know "regularly," but it would come up from time to
Q.
He would sometimes report back to you on what had happened
11
in court afterwards, is that right?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
And that was even on subjects that were not directly
14
pertinent to your work as the commander of PSB, correct?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
Now, sir, is it true that while you were in command of PSB,
17
you had a very challenging job?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
It was a very high workload, right?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
And as a result of this Melendres litigation, many new IA
22
cases were opened, correct?
IEN
DS
10
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
And I think you told me during your deposition that at the
25
time that you left the command of PSB on August 28th of 2015,
FR
15:32:27
15:32:40
15:32:54
15:33:05
15:33:18
3148
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
there were 633 open IA numbers across MCSO.

Is that about right?
2
3
A.
That's correct.
Q.
And do you think it's fair to say that while you were in
command of PSB, PSB did not have adequate resources to cover
all of those cases?
A.
That's fair to say.
Q.
And is it true that your caseload was so heavy within PSB
that you were not able to discuss matters like interview
10
techniques with your sergeants as regularly as you would have
11
liked?
12
A.
13
often, but I didn't get to spend a great deal of one on one
14
time with everyone in the division, I guess is the best way to
15
characterize that.
16
Q.
17
techniques?
18
A.
It could have.
19
Q.
And it's true that in general, PSB was greatly taxed by the
20
caseload while you were commander, correct?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
Sir, when you took command of PSB, you had not had any
15:33:51
I don't know that it came -- it would have come up that
15:34:08
IEN
DS
And that would have included discussions like interview
23
training in Internal Affairs investigations, correct?
24
A.
No, I had not.
25
Q.
And you had hoped to do some training on IA investigations,
FR
15:33:34
15:34:21
15:34:34
3149
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
but your workload was too heavy to permit that from -- to
permit that to happen, correct?
A.
That's accurate.
Q.
It would have been helpful to get that training, correct?
A.
Training is always good, yes.
Q.
And in particular, it would have been good for the
commander of PSB to have training in IA investigations,
correct?
A.
Sure, it wouldn't have hurt.
10
Q.
When you got to PSB as the commander, you made a couple of
11
changes in how things were done, is that correct?
12
A.
I probably did.
13
Q.
Was one of them to generally try to have detention officers
14
do detention IA cases and to have sworn side investigators
15
investigate sworn side cases?
16
A.
To the degree we could, yes.
17
Q.
And why did you think that was a good idea?
18
A.
On the detention side of the house, they understand certain
19
things, mechanisms that go on in the jail that maybe the sworn
20
staff wouldn't understand as clearly.
21
security walks.
22
side.
IEN
DS
15:34:59
15:35:18
Shift changes and
15:35:31
And conversely, the same thing on the sworn
Sworn people are more familiar with the operations of
23
sworn personnel.
24
Q.
25
let me start with this.
FR
15:34:45
Okay.
And there's another change that you made -- well,

At the time you became the commander
15:35:46
3150
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
of PSB, your custom was to brief Chief Deputy Sheridan on IA
cases on a regular basis, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And did you make the change that you would invite the PSB
investigators to join that meeting so that they could give him
information directly?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Now, the chief deputy plays a direct role in IA cases,
correct?
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
He is the one who has the ultimate authority to make the
12
findings in IA cases, is that right?
13
A.
On some cases, yes.
14
Q.
Okay.
15
all cases under policy, correct?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
And he's delegated that authority in some cases to other
18
chiefs, is that what --
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
-- you're saying?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
All right.
24
FR
25
15:36:12
Well, he has the authority to make the findings in
DS
IEN
23
15:36:02
15:36:26
15:36:32
And by "findings" I'm talking about those four
options: sustained, not sustained, exonerated, and unfounded.

Do we share that understanding?
15:36:40
3151
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes.
Q.
And currently, is it your understanding that Chief Deputy
Sheridan has delegated that responsibility for making the
findings in some cases to Chief Lopez?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
All right.
deputy is not subject to discipline?
A.
That's what I understand.
Q.
And is it your understanding that under MCSO policy, the
Under MCSO policy, is it true that the chief
10
sheriff is not subject to discipline?
11
A.
That's my understanding.
12
Q.
Now, you have an understanding as the former PSB commander
13
of how IA investigations are initiated, correct?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
All right.
16
command of PSB, if a civilian called a complaint in to someone
17
within Patrol Division, for example, how would an
18
Internal Affairs investigation be initiated?
19
A.
20
would contact PSB if it was a case that they thought PSB should
21
handle.
22
enough, they would contact us and we would assume the
Can you tell me, at the time you were in
15:37:06
15:37:23
IEN
DS
The employee or supervisor taking the initial complaint
15:37:42
If it was severe enough, alleged infraction was severe
23
responsibility of the investigation.
24
Q.
25
civilian complaint to decide whether or not to send it to PSB?
FR
15:36:52
So it was the responsibility of the supervisor who took the

15:38:01
3152
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yeah.
They may call us and just ask us what -- what our
opinion was:
the division or district in which it originated?
Q.
call on their own, whether to -- to forward that on to PSB?
A.
dismissal, termination, suspension, would normally come to PSB.
If it was something less of a violation, it could have stayed
in the district or division in which it originated.
Should we take it, or should they maintain it in
But they do not have to do so.
They could just make that
Typically, in cases that could have resulted in demotion,
10
Q.
11
have the initial discretion whether to forward it on to PSB?
12
A.
Not in all cases.
13
Q.
So you're saying that if it is clear at the outset of the
14
complaint -- withdrawn.
But the person, the supervisor who took the complaint would
So is it your testimony that if it is clear at the
15
time the civilian complaint is made that major discipline may
17
be a result, that should go to PSB?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
But you would rely upon the supervisor within the division
20
to make that assessment, correct?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
All right.
IEN
DS
16
you said that the -- under MCSO policy, the chief deputy and
24
sheriff both are not subject to discipline.
FR
15:38:32
15:38:50
15:39:05
Can you tell me, just going back for a second,
23
25
15:38:15
Do you know what policy that is?
15:39:18
3153
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
I don't.
Q.
Okay.
A.
I'm not sure if it's in GH-2, or it's something that's
written on behalf of the County.
Q.
policy?
A.
Could be, yes.
Q.
All right.
Affairs investigations are initiated, if the -- at some point
Okay.
Is it in the GH-2 policy?
So it may be a county policy rather than an MCSO
So going back to the process for how Internal
10
is an IA number, a case number assigned?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
How does that happen?
13
A.
The incoming -- the person taking the initial complaint
14
should immediately pull an IA case number.
15
determined that it's a legitimate case that needs to be
16
investigated as a result of the changes, every complaint that
17
comes in now gets a number.
18
dispositioned that way.
19
Q.
20
supervisor is determining -- making an initial assessment, the
21
supervisor could decide to talk to the complainant first, is
22
that right?
15:39:51
When they have
And is it true that that process, where the division
IEN
23
A.
Sure.
24
Q.
And could decide that it doesn't rise to the level that an
25
IA number should be pulled, correct?
FR
15:40:05
Then it's resolved and -- and
DS
Okay.
15:39:34
15:40:20
15:40:36
3154
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Not any more.
Policy says that if you get an external
complaint, you're to pull a number and it's to be investigated.
Q.
Every single complaint that comes in from a civilian?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Okay.
IA cases being initiated?
A.
Yes.
Q.
All right.
supervisors -- well, let me start with this.
And that -- has that greatly increased the number of
How does MCSO check to make sure that
When we're talking about supervisors on the division
10
11
side, that could be a sergeant, correct?
12
A.
I'm sorry?
13
Q.
When we talk about -- we've been talking about supervisors
14
on the division side, that can mean a sergeant, correct?
15
A.
16
a division it's a sergeant.
17
Q.
18
deputies in the field, correct?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
All right.
21
current policy's being followed; that every time a sergeant
22
gets a civilian complaint, that he or she is pulling an IA
Typically, when you refer to a supervisor in a district or
IEN
How does MCSO check to make sure that the
23
number?
24
A.
25
check against what complaints have come in to his division and
FR
15:41:06
15:41:15
And those are the first line supervisors of
DS
Right.
15:40:46
15:41:23
Typically, it's the division commander that will go and

15:41:42
3155
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
what numbers have been pulled, and do an audit that way to make
sure the complaint is being handled appropriately.
Q.
manner that does not have a written record?
check to make sure that the civilian complaint resulted in the
initiation of an IA case?
A.
I'm not sure I understand the question.
Q.
Well, is it possible that a sergeant could field a
complaint from a civilian in person?
Okay.
And what if the complaint came in through a -- in a

How would MCSO
A.
Sure.
11
Q.
There's no written record of that necessarily, correct?
12
A.
That's correct.
13
Q.
So you said that one of the ways that MCSO tries to make
14
sure that every civilian complaint results in the pulling of an
15
IA number is that the division commander would check to make
16
sure that records of civilian complaints result in an IA
17
numbers, right?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
If there's no written record of a civilian complaint, how
20
does MCSO ensure that an IA number was pulled?
21
A.
22
complaint would make a written record and then pull the IA
DS
10
15:42:16
15:42:28
15:42:42
IEN
By policy, the supervisor that would take that initial
23
number.
24
Q.
25
happening?
FR
15:41:59
And is there a way that MCSO can test to make sure that is
15:42:53
3156
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Other than audits by the division commander, I'm not aware
of one.
Q.
Okay.
A.
Not that I'm aware of.
Q.
You know what I mean by a tester?
A.
I do.
Q.
Putting in a call and posing, basically, as a civilian
complaint to see what happens?
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
And MCSO does not do that, correct?
11
A.
Not that I'm aware of.
12
Q.
Now, there are -- within the PSB there are two
13
subdivisions, the criminal subdivision and the administrative
14
subdivision, correct?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
And each of those investigates a corresponding type of
17
case, correct?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
How do decisions -- how does MCSO or PSB make decisions
20
about whether a case should be criminal or administrative?
21
A.
22
would stay on the criminal side; if it was a violation of
DS
Does MCSO use testers?
15:43:12
15:43:34
15:43:46
IEN
If it's a criminal allegation, a violation of state law, it
23
policy, it would stay on the administrative side.
24
Q.
25
that there's a violation of criminal law?
FR
15:43:04
Is it always clear at the point that an allegation is made

15:44:02
3157
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Not always.
Q.
So if a complaint comes in and it's not clear whether
there's criminal activity by an MCSO employee involved, how is
that call made?
A.
err on the side of caution and have it go through criminal
first to see if there was anything, any relative -- relevant
allegation.
to the administrative side for a follow-up investigation.
10
Q.
When I was there, I can only speak for what I did.
Okay.
I would
And then once it cleared criminal, it would come
Let me break that down.
15:44:36
So is it your testimony that the commander of PSB
11
12
makes the decision whether a case should be a criminal IA case
13
or an administrative IA case?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
And did you do that sometimes in consultation with the
16
chief deputy?
17
A.
Sometimes.
18
Q.
Is it true that when major discipline might be at stake,
19
you would consult with Chief Deputy Sheridan on that question?
20
A.
21
yes.
22
Q.
DS
Not on every case, but it wouldn't be -- I could for sure,
IEN
Okay.
decision whether an IA case should go criminal or
24
administrative?
25
A.
Yes.
15:44:49
15:45:00
So Chief Deputy Sheridan could have input into the
23
FR
15:44:22
15:45:18
3158
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
But in general, that's the responsibility of the commander
of PSB?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Now, going back to this -- the distinction between IA cases
done on the division side as opposed to the PSB side.
When the division keeps an Internal Affairs case, how
6
7
is PSB involved?
A.
the computer.
They call us to get the number.
It would be logged into
And then every month I believe we would send out
10
a list to those divisions showing their remaining open PSB
11
investigations.
12
Q.
13
let them know when they were still open?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
Did you keep them informed of any time lines associated
16
with administrative IA cases?
17
A.
18
their time lines, especially on an administrative case.
19
Q.
20
investigation on the division side?
21
A.
22
had a question about procedurally how to do it.
15:45:52
So you basically would keep track of their open cases and
15:46:05
Part of the purpose of that report is so they maintain
DS
And substantively would PSB have any involvement in the
15:46:23
IEN
Mostly it was to guide them in the right direction if they

They might
23
call down or a commander might call down with some questions.
24
But once they took the case, we generally did not interfere
25
with their part of the investigation.
FR
15:45:36
15:46:40
3159
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Under current procedure, as far as you know, can PSB access
information about ongoing IA cases conducted by division staff
through IAPro?
A.
Yes.
Q.
But you testified in your deposition that that does not
happen in practice, is that correct?
A.
It doesn't happen a lot.
Q.
Because you're busy enough doing your own cases, correct?
A.
Well, that, and the cases they generally keep aren't grave
10
enough for us to continually get involved, so we rely on that
11
command staff to do their job.
12
Q.
13
in the event that PSB staff have a conflict of interest in an
14
ongoing IA case?
15
A.
16
something that was kept in our mind.
17
Q.
It was kept in what?
18
A.
In our minds --
19
Q.
All right.
20
A.
-- when we accept a case.
21
Q.
As far as you know, there's no written policy on it?
22
A.
I don't know one off the top of my head.
Okay.
DS
IEN
Q.
24
policies, correct?
25
A.
FR
23
I am.
15:47:13
Now, is there any policy at MCSO covering what to do
I don't know if there's policy regarding it, but it was
Okay.
15:46:54
15:47:34
15:47:40
How did you -- well, you're familiar with PSB
15:47:50
3160
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
There's GH-2, correct?
A.
17, yes.
Q.
And there's GC-17, correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
There's also, I guess, at least a draft IA operations
manual, is that right?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
Okay.
a written policy on conflicts of interest in IA cases?
And do you know whether any of those documents have
10
A.
I don't.
11
Q.
Okay.
12
A.
I'm familiar with them; I don't have them all memorized.
13
Q.
All right.
15:48:09
You're familiar with them, right?
Fair enough.
You said that you did try to keep in mind conflicts of
14
15
interest.
16
A.
17
lieutenants.
18
conflict within the division.
19
call and ask, based on the circumstances of a particular case,
20
if we thought there was a conflict with them doing it.
21
Q.
22
there was a conflict of interest?
How did you do that?
15:48:22
When the case came in, and I briefed it with the
We would try and make sure that there was no
Sometimes the divisions would
DS
IEN
Okay.
A.
I'm sure there were.
24
but I'm sure there were.
25
Q.
Okay.
15:48:36
And were there instances where -- that you did find
23
FR
15:47:58
I don't remember them specifically,
And I asked you before about whether there were any
15:48:49
3161
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
written policies at MCSO covering conflicts of interest at PSB
on IA cases.
MCSO covering what to do in the event of a conflict of interest
in an IA case done on the division side?
A.
No, I don't.
Q.
Let me ask you this.
policies or ops manuals covering PSB.
15:49:14
We've talked about three written
Do those cover IA investigations done on the division
8
9
Do you know whether there are written policies at
side?
10
A.
They govern both.
11
Q.
Okay.
12
to make sure that a commander on the division side does not
13
conduct an investigation, an internal investigation, in which
14
he might try to hide evidence of his own policy violations?
15
A.
Ask me that again, please.
16
Q.
Sure.
17
hypothetical.
18
A.
Okay.
19
Q.
Let's say there is an ongoing internal investigation on the
20
division side.
21
A.
Um-hum.
22
Q.
And it's not apparent at the outset when the civilian makes
Under MCSO's policies and practices, what can PSB do
DS
IEN
a complaint, but there's a commander in that division who has
24
violated MCSO policy.
FR
15:49:53
Maybe I'll flip it around, give you the
23
25
15:49:26
What can PSB do, under policy, to prevent the
15:50:03
15:50:16
3162
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
situation where that commander on the division side can
essentially interfere with the internal investigation, to hide
his wrongdoing?
A.
over at that point, if that's what you're asking.
Q.
What if PSB is not made aware of it?
A.
Well, if we don't know, there's probably limited things we
could do about it.
Q.
Well, once PSB was made aware of it, we would take the case
Okay.
I think you said in your -- during your deposition
10
on September 8th, 2015, that if you didn't know about it,
11
you're not sure what you would do about it.
15:50:48
Is that fair to say?
12
13
A.
14
about it.
15
Q.
16
MCSO, lieutenants are chosen to oversee internal
17
investigations, is that right?
18
A.
In many instances, yes.
19
Q.
In what instances?
20
A.
Many instances, yes.
21
Q.
All right.
22
division?
If I wasn't made aware of it, I don't know what I could do
Now, is it true that within the various divisions at
IEN
DS
Okay.
23
A.
24
generally, yes.
25
Q.
FR
15:50:35
15:51:00
I'm sorry.
15:51:20
And is it generally one lieutenant per
I'm not sure how each division did it exactly, but
Okay.
You said just now you used the past tense, you're
15:51:28
3163
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
not sure how each division did it.
believe that things have changed since you left command of PSB?
A.
I don't know how each division does it.
Q.
Okay.
clear --
A.
I understand.
Q.
-- on your testimony.
I'm not trying to trick you; I just wanted to get
15:51:48
Do you have Exhibit 2770 in front of you?
THE CLERK:
(Handing).
THE WITNESS:
10
11
BY MS. WANG:
12
Q.
Thank you.
2770 is not in evidence.

MS. WANG:
13
14
Do you have any reason to
I do.
Why don't we just put it on --
Your Honor, can we put it on the screens
just for counsel and the witness?

THE COURT:
15
Yes.
15:52:34
16
BY MS. WANG:
17
Q.
18
and others dated March 19th, 2014.
19
recipients include Cesar Brockman, Walter Duncanson, and Jeremy
20
Blain.
21
A.
That's not what I have here.
22
Q.
2770?
Exhibit 2770 is an e-mail from Peter Metzler to James Alger
IEN
DS
Do you see that?
23
A.
I have 2070.
24
Q.
Oh, sorry.
FR
25
15:52:20
THE CLERK:
(Handing.)
A couple of the other
15:52:58
15:53:05
THE WITNESS:
Thanks.
BY MS. WANG:
Q.
Okay.
A.
Yes.
Q.
All right.
IA's and NOI's/Garrity."
Do you have it now.
And the subject line appears to be "Internal
A.
I don't see that verbiage.
Q.
It's up at the top, for some reason, instead of --
10
A.
Oh, yeah.
11
Q.
Okay.
12
commander as of March 19, 2014?
13
A.
No.
14
Q.
Do you recognize what his position was then?
15
A.
I don't.
16
Q.
Okay.
17
A.
Where it starts "Sgt.'s"?
18
Q.
Yes.
19
A.
"Some of you have come to me and expressed --"
20
Q.
You don't need to read it out loud; just --
21
A.
Oh.
22
Q.
-- read it to yourself.
FR
Yes.
Q.
15:53:47
Now, do you know, was Peter Metzler a division
15:54:01
Read the first paragraph of this e-mail.
DS
IEN
A.
15:54:13
I'm sorry.
24
25
15:53:27
Do you see that?
23
3164
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Okay.
Okay.
Does it appear to you that this was an e-mail giving
15:54:37
3165
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
instruction to -- instruction on internal investigations on the
division side, at least for some segment of a division, from
Lieutenant Metzler?
A.
division this was, but yes, that's what it appears.
Q.
It appears to be a patrol district, is that right?
A.
I believe so.
Q.
Okay.
read that paragraph to yourself.
Or Peter Metzler?
Yes, that's what it appears to be.
And take a look at the next page, paragraph 2.
All right.
10
I don't know what
instruction on when interviews are not needed during an
12
internal investigation?
13
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
Just
Does it appear that he's giving
11
14
15:54:58
Sustained.
15
BY MS. WANG:
16
Q.
17
were you aware that different segments of the Patrol Division
18
were -- had their own rules for how to do internal
19
investigations?
20
A.
I wouldn't characterize it like that, no.
21
Q.
Okay.
22
Were there any rules in effect at the time you were a commander
When you took command of PSB,
IEN
DS
So, sir, my question is:
15:55:46
15:56:01
What rules did apply -- well, let me ask you this:
23
of PSB to ensure uniformity of internal investigations
24
throughout the division side?
25
A.
FR
15:55:32
Policy as it stood was -- was a guideline to how cases
15:56:19
3166
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
should have been done in the districts and divisions.
there were so many things rapidly changing that those
instructions were also changing.
Q.
commander, there could have been different policies and
procedures being followed for internal investigations from
patrol district to patrol district, for example?
A.
lieutenants and commanders trying to ensure they did the right
All right.
But
And is it fair to say that while you were a PSB
There was certainly different interpretations of different
10
thing.
11
Q.
12
when PSB -- or the division, for that matter -- wraps up its
13
investigation, findings are made, correct?
14
finding is made, correct?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
And again, that would be by Chief Sheridan or Chief Lopez
17
on the enforcement side, correct?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
And there is a subsequent process -- well, two subsequent
20
processes that could affect the final outcome in terms of
21
discipline, correct?
22
A.
Let me switch gears now.
You're aware that
Or a preliminary
DS
All right.
15:56:54
15:57:14
15:57:23
IEN
Yes.
23
Q.
There's the predetermination hearing, is that right?
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
And there's also a grievance process, is that right?
FR
15:56:36
15:57:31
3167
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes.
Q.
All right.
in either of those processes?
A.
That's true.
Q.
And is it true that PSB investigators are not permitted to
make any submissions during a predetermination hearing?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
Or during the grievance process?
A.
Correct.
10
Q.
And the same -- and, sir, are you aware -- let me put it
11
this way:
12
you were not aware that a principal in an IA investigation can
13
present new evidence at a predetermination hearing, is that
14
right?
15
A.
16
predetermination hearing is to give additional information to
17
Chief Lopez or Chief Sheridan.
18
Q.
19
deposition transcript, line 14.
That's correct.
I don't remember saying that.
Okay.
I mean, the purpose of the
The question was:
"Are employees who are targets of
22
allowed to put on evidence at a predetermination hearing?
IEN
an investigation, being called in as a principal, are they
23
"Answer:
24
Do you see that?
FR
A.
15:58:00
15:58:17
Take a look at page 392 of your September 8th, 2015
21
25
15:57:44
At the time I deposed you on September 8th, 2015,
DS
20
And is it fair to say that PSB is not involved
I see that.
15:58:55
I don't believe so."
15:59:16
3168
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Okay.
A.
When I say "I don't believe so," I don't know that process
all that well.
What I think I meant was it's not typical of them to introduce
new evidence outside of the initial case.
Q.
testimony now?
A.
I believe so.
Q.
Okay.
Okay.
So you just want to clarify that testimony now?
I mean, I don't do predetermination hearings.
But they are allowed to do that, that's your
And I think you said just now that the purpose of
10
the predetermination hearing is to allow the principal to
11
present evidence or facts to Chief Sheridan or Chief Lopez, is
12
that right?
13
A.
14
adequately explained by the investigator, information the
15
investigator didn't know.
16
Q.
17
information, is that right?
18
A.
That's right.
19
Q.
All right.
20
required to submit an investigative plan at the outset of each
21
investigation?
22
A.
15:59:50
A lot of it is for them to explain, maybe it wasn't
16:00:06
And the PSB investigator is not permitted to rebut that
DS
Sir, is it true that PSB investigators are not
16:00:23
IEN
That's true.
23
Q.
24
that it is always a good practice to draw up an investigative
25
plan at the outset of an investigation?
FR
15:59:41
And you yourself, as a commander of PSB, do not believe
16:00:38
3169
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
I don't -- I don't think it's necessary in each
investigation.
Q.
a copy of GC-17, I believe.
about that.
All right.
I'd like you to turn to Exhibit 2001.
That is
I have some questions for you
16:01:01
So first take a look at it and let me know whether
6
7
2001 appears to you to be a correct cop -- true and correct
copy of policy GC-17 on employee disciplinary procedure.
A.
It appears to be, yes.

MS. WANG:
10
11
Okay.
Your Honor, I'd move to admit
Exhibit 2001.
MR. MASTERSON:
12
MR. WALKER:
13
MR. COMO:
14
No objection.
No objection.
No objection.
THE COURT:
15
2001 is admitted.
BY MS. WANG:
18
Q.
Turn to Exhibit 2881, which is already in evidence.
19
A.
What number?
20
Q.
2881.
DS
17
I'm sorry.
16:02:17
Do you see that?
A.
Give me a second.
IEN
22
There's quite a few.
23
Q.
You have a lot of exhibits there.
24
A.
I do.
Okay.
25
Q.
Okay.
I'm going to ask you a few questions about this.
FR
16:02:02
16
21
16:01:48
16:03:14
It's already in evidence.

MS. WANG:
2
3
along?
4
5
3170
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Let's go to --
And Your Honor, may I publish as I go
THE COURT:
You may.
MS. WANG:
All right.
16:03:29
Let's start, Mr. Klein, on page MELC1306916, down at
6
7
the bottom of the page, External Complaint.
BY MS. WANG:
Q.
Okay, Captain.
Do you see the last couple lines -- we'll
10
start there -- in policy GH-2 read:
"Procedural complaints:
11
Complaints of a minor nature, usually a misunderstanding or
12
lack of knowledge, which can oftentimes be resolved to the
13
complainant's satisfaction through discussions with a
14
supervisor.
15
investigation and are usually completed by a personal visit or
16
a phone call by a supervisor."
These complaints do not require an in-depth
16:04:09
Do you see that?
17
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
Okay.
20
complaint or a complaint of a minor nature is under policy?
21
A.
It's referencing specifically a procedural complaint.
22
Q.
Okay.
IEN
DS
And is that basically defining what a procedural
16:04:20
And it's giving instruction on how those should be
23
handled, correct?
24
A.
How they could be handled, yes.
25
Q.
Okay.
FR
16:03:48
Here's my question to you:
Is there anything in the
16:04:33
3171
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
GH-2 policy defining, or providing guidance to staff on what a
complaint of a minor nature is?
A.
I don't believe so.
Q.
Okay.
complaint of a minor nature, policy number GH-2 instructs that
these complaints do not require an in-depth investigation,
correct?
A.
necessarily minor violations of policy.
And again, these are -- once categorized as a
What it's identifying is procedural complaints, not
10
Q.
11
procedural complaint is defined as a complaint of a minor
12
nature, usually a misunderstanding or lack of knowledge, which
13
can oftentimes be resolved to the complainant's satisfaction
14
through discussion with a supervisor?
15
A.
That's what it says, yes.
16
Q.
Okay.
17
a procedural complaint?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
So my question is -- well, I think you've answered the
20
question I had.
21
labeled Internal Complaints on page 2.
22
A.
Well, it's -- do you read this as saying that a
16:05:17
16:05:37
And you understand that that is how GH-2 is defining
DS
Okay.
Turning next to the next -- the section
16:05:55
IEN
Yes.
23
Q.
24
here.
25
A.
FR
16:05:01
There are six categories of internal complaints indicated

Do you see that?
I do.
16:06:15
3172
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
That does not include bias complaints, correct?
Or
complaints of bias to policing?
A.
Not specifically, no.
Q.
All right.
complaints defined under policy, correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
Do you know why bias complaints are not listed here?
A.
I don't.
Q.
Do you know why external complaints are not similarly
And it gives the six categories of internal
10
broken down into categories as defined in GH-2?
11
A.
I don't.
12
Q.
Turn to page 3 next, and let's highlight paragraph 1 with
13
the heading Complaint Intake Procedures.
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
Okay.
16
paragraph is talking about what happens when a third party
17
registers a complaint on behalf of another individual, correct?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
Okay.
20
conducted when the first party agrees with the complaint or the
21
first party cannot be contacted"?
22
A.
Do you see where it instructs an inves -- well, this
16:07:09
16:07:26
IEN
Yes, I see that.
23
Q.
24
complainant, refuses to participate or hesitates to participate
25
because they indicate that they're afraid or they're -- of
FR
16:06:49
"An investigation will be
DS
Do you see where it says:
16:06:28
What happens under GH-2 if the first party, the actual
16:07:47
3173
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
retaliation, or they're afraid that they might end up in
deportation proceedings?
Does that mean no investigation will happen?
3
4
A.
No.
Q.
Okay.
do you read in GH-2 what the instruction would be in a
situation where the first-party complainant indicates fear in
coming forward?
A.
In a -- and a third party makes the complaint?
10
Q.
Right.
11
A.
It would still be investigated.
12
Q.
Okay.
13
A.
It says that when the first party agrees, but it doesn't
14
say it wouldn't be investigated if they didn't.
15
Q.
16
read that into GH-2, that they should still investigate, even
17
though GH-2 reads:
18
the first party agrees with the complaint or the first party
19
cannot be contacted"?
20
A.
I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand your question.
21
Q.
Well, it appears to me that the language -- well, it says
22
what it says.
So you think that a PSB staff member would have to
IEN
16:08:29
"An investigation will be conducted when
16:08:50
And I'm asking about the situation when the
first party can be contact, is contacted, and says:
24
want to talk to you.
25
A.
FR
16:08:00
That's not what it says here, right?
23
Okay.
Where
16:08:13
DS
Okay.
Well, that's what this appears to say to me.
I don't
I'm afraid.
16:09:08
3174
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
As you read GH-2, that situation is not covered, correct?
A.
That hypothetical situation is not covered, but it's not --
doesn't mean that we wouldn't investigate it.
Q.
correct?
A.
But GH-2 does not specify that it should be investigated,
16:09:30
Not the way you're explaining it, no.

MR. MASTERSON:
Judge, under Rule 106, could we have
the last sentence of this paragraph read, please?
BY MS. WANG:
10
Q.
Do you want to read that last sentence, sir?
11
A.
Out loud?
12
Q.
Your lawyer, Mr. Masterson, is requesting that you read the
13
last sentence of that paragraph.
14
A.
You want me to read it out loud?

THE COURT:
15
MS. WANG:
16
THE COURT:
17
18
16:09:40
I've read it.
16:09:52
Okay.
If that makes any difference.
I mean, you
can read it out loud if you'd like, Captain.

THE WITNESS:
19
"All complaints will be documented,
investigated as appropriate, and a written record will be made
21
of the findings and the resolution."
22
BY MS. WANG:
IEN
DS
20
Q.
24
paragraph 1 on page 3 of GH-2 is clear to PSB staff on what to
25
do when the first party complaint is contacted but indicates
FR
23
All right.
16:10:01
Is it your view, Captain Bailey, that this
16:10:17
3175
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
they do not wish to participate because of fear of retaliation?
A.
was a complaint that we could take, we would investigate it.
Q.
clear on what to do in that situation?
A.
I don't think it's unclear.
Q.
Okay.
begins:
It was clear with my staff when I was there that if there
Okay.
My question is:
Do you think that this paragraph is
Take a look at paragraph A.2. below here which
"A supervisor or commander/manager."

Do you see that?
9
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
Says, "A supervisor or commander/manager shall contact the
12
PSB when it is determined that an investigation based on an
13
Internal Complaint is warranted."
16:11:04
Do you see that?
14
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
And that is addressing the situation where a supervisor or
17
a commander on the division side fields a complaint.
16:11:16
Do you agree with that reading?
18
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
What's to prevent the supervisor from simply not taking
21
action?
22
A.
DS
19
16:11:27
IEN
Being in violation of policy.
23
Q.
24
separately?
25
A.
FR
16:10:36
Okay.
So that would have to be discovered and investigated
Correct.
16:11:41
3176
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
And take a look at paragraph B that begins at the bottom of
page 3 about the complaint log.
A.
Yes.
Q.
Is the complaint log something that is maintained in the
IAPro system, or is that separate?
A.
In the IAPro system now, and maintained in PSB.
Q.
Okay.
far as MCSO practice is concerned?
A.
I want to say early 2014.
10
Q.
Okay.
11
A.
I believe just after I did, 'cause it wasn't fully up and
12
running when I took over.
13
Q.
14
a table there that breaks out types of complaints, and then
15
lists who has investigative responsibility.
And when did that become part of the IAPro system as
Before you took command?
All right.
Take a look at the next page, page 4.
So my question is this:
16
16:12:05
16:12:21
There's
We've already gone over
17
procedural complaints, that second category listed here, right?
18
A.
Um-hum.
19
Q.
Okay.
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
And then the third line in that table indicates external or
22
internal complaints, racial, and other biased-based policing.
You have to speak audibly.
DS
IEN
23
16:13:13
Do you see that?
24
A.
I do.
25
Q.
Policy requires that PSB investigate such complaints,
FR
16:12:51
16:13:26
3177
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
What mechanisms does MCSO have in place to ensure that a
complaint coming in to the division side is not miscategorized?
A.
those divisions to understand what a racial profiling or a
biased-based complaint would be.
Q.
Internal Affairs practice across the profession with claims of
I think we're relying on the commanders and the staff at
Do you know whether there is generally a concern within
10
bias-based policing being categorized or miscategorized as
11
rudeness complaints?
12
A.
I have not heard that.
13
Q.
Okay.
14
division records to make sure that complaints about racial or
15
biased-based policing are properly characterized as such?
16
A.
17
We audit their caseload, the numbers assigned to them, and
18
ultimately the cases they finish.
19
Q.
20
civilian complainants, in order to check to see if the nature
21
of the complaint matched up with how the division supervisor
22
categorized it?
16:14:18
Does MCSO have any mechanism of doing audits of
16:14:36
We all took classes that we're clear about what that was.
IEN
DS
Does PSB do any random audits and contact complainants,
23
A.
Not when I was there.
24
Q.
Okay.
25
sets out a requirement that complaints on the division side
FR
16:13:53
Take a look at paragraph 3 here on page 4.
16:14:56
This
16:15:25
3178
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
shall be investigated by personnel of higher grade or rank than
the involved employee, with some limitation.

Do you see that?
3
4
A.
I do.
Q.
Does GH-2 cover the situation when there may be a conflict
of interest in the chain of command on the division side?
A.
I don't know whether it does or not.
Q.
You don't see it here, do you?
A.
I don't.
10
Q.
In paragraph 3 on page 4?
11
A.
No.
12
Q.
Okay.
13
continuing on to page 5 of GH-2, talks about how complaints
14
should be handled when they are received at the division by
15
phone or in person.
16:15:57
Now, paragraph D.1.a, at the very end of page 4 and
16:16:23
Do you see that?
16
A.
I do.
18
Q.
Does GH-2 cover the situation when a patrol deputy gets a
19
complaint herself while on patrol, in person?
20
A.
Say that again?
21
Q.
Does GH-2 cover the situation where the deputy who's being
22
complained against is the one who fields the complaint?
IEN
DS
17
23
A.
24
somebody wants to make a complaint, and the supervisor would
25
then take the complaint from the complainant.
FR
16:15:39
No.
16:16:46
They would have to advise their supervisor that
16:17:04
3179
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Okay.
Take a look at the bottom of page 5 of GH-2.
The
very last sentence indicates that the complainant's signature
should be on the complaint form.

Do you see that?
4
5
A.
Where is it?
Yes.
Q.
Okay.
form?
A.
In PSB we still investigate it.
Q.
Do you know on the division side whether it would still
16:17:24
What happens if the complainant does not sign the
What's the consequence?
10
investigate it?
11
A.
I don't know what they did independent of PSB.
12
Q.
Okay.
13
paragraph E.1. governing internal complaints.
Now let's skip to page 8 of GH-2.
16:17:49
Take a look at
And do you understand that that refers to complaints
14
15
made by one MCSO employee against another?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
Okay.
18
"When the unacceptable conduct involves a supervisor, the
19
employee shall contact the next level in the chain of command."
The second-to-last sentence in that paragraph reads:
Do you see that?
DS
20
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
Does GH-2 cover what to do when there are indications of
IEN
21
23
retaliation against internal complainants?
24
A.
Not specifically here that I see.
25
Q.
Okay.
FR
16:18:24
Do you see that anywhere else -- do you know whether
16:18:40
16:18:56
3180
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
that's anywhere else in GH-2?
A.
I don't off the top of my head.
Q.
Turn to page 9.
discusses the procedure for investigation of complaints,
correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And directs what may be obvious, that the investigation
consists of gathering and reporting facts related to the
allegation.
Paragraph 2, down towards the bottom,
16:19:25
Is that what investigators in PSB should do?
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
Do you see that the last, or second-to-last sentence reads
12
that:
13
behalf at any time prior to the conclusion of a complaint
14
investigation"?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
Now, we talked earlier about predetermination hearings, and
17
the fact that the principal can present new evidence at that
18
stage.
19
A.
I do.
20
Q.
Is there any MCSO policy that would prevent a principal
21
from coming forward with such evidence during the internal
22
investigation and prior to the predetermination hearing?
16:19:39
"Employees may present documentary evidence on their
16:19:52
IEN
DS
Do you recall that?
A.
We don't discourage it.
24
Q.
Okay.
25
principal doesn't take advantage of the fact that new
FR
23
16:20:05
But is there anything to ensure that, for example, a

16:20:28
3181
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
information can be presented at the predetermination hearing
when the IA investigator does not have a chance to rebut it?
A.
I'm not sure I understand the question.
Q.
Okay.
Let me break -- try to break it down.
Do you think it's true that in some instances, an
5
6
employee might present a new document, for example, at the
predetermination hearing, that wasn't presented during -- to
the IA investigator?
Do you have that situation in mind?
9
10
A.
I can see where that could happen, yes.
11
Q.
And could you see a situation where if that information had
12
been presented to the IA investigator, the investigator could
13
have followed up on that, and basically continued to make the
14
case that the employee had violated policy, notwithstanding
15
that evidence?
16
A.
17
investigation.
18
Q.
Because the investigator can follow up, correct?
19
A.
If they know about the information, yes.
20
Q.
Right.
21
to rebut what the employee is putting forward, correct?
22
A.
16:21:06
16:21:29
It's always better if you have it during the initial
DS
And the investigator might develop other evidence
16:21:40
IEN
You know, it could go either way, yes.
23
Q.
24
policy that would try to prevent the employee from putting on
25
new evidence for the first time during a predetermination
FR
16:20:48
Right.
And so my question is:
Is there anything in MCSO
16:21:59
3182
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
hearing, when they could have done so earlier on?
A.
Is there anything to prevent it?
Q.
Correct.
A.
No.
Q.
Is PSB involved in the selection of staff on the division
side who are engaged in internal investigations?
A.
No.
Q.
Are there selection criteria in place?
A.
For the divisions?
10
Q.
Right.
11
A.
At the discretion of the division commander.
12
Q.
So it's always at the discretion of the division commander
13
whom to appoint to that task within the division?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
And there are no criteria promulgated by PSB for that
16
purpose?
17
A.
No.
18
Q.
When you were PSB commander, did you begin the task of
19
trying to provide training to lieutenants on the division side
20
who were engaged in internal investigations?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
That process was not complete at the time -- as of the time
IEN
DS
that you departed, correct?
24
A.
It was not.
25
Q.
Did that training, as you put it together, reach the
FR
23
16:22:10
16:22:33
16:22:45
16:22:59
16:23:08
3183
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
sergeants or other staff below the lieutenant rank in the
division side who would be carrying out the investigations?
A.
Yes, it would have included them.
Q.
It would have included them?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Okay.
in place?
A.
process is.
16:23:27
And do you know whether that training is currently
I don't know.
Since I've left, I don't know where that
10
Q.
It was not in place at the time that you left, correct?
11
A.
No.
12
Q.
Are there any systems in place to ensure that findings on
13
the division side -- in other words, the not sustained,
14
sustained, exonerated, or unfounded findings -- are consistent?
15
A.
16
Chief Lopez, when he would read those cases, would check for
17
that.
18
Q.
19
done on the division side?
20
A.
In the cases that he would render findings on, yes.
21
Q.
And the PSB commander also signs off -- has to sign off on
22
those findings?
We would review a number of those cases, and certainly,
16:24:01
IEN
DS
So it's Chief Lopez's job to review all of the findings
23
A.
On some of those cases I would, yes.
24
Q.
Okay.
25
division cases?
FR
16:23:33
16:24:17
What determines whether you sign off or not on

16:24:29
3184
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
If they approached major discipline, I would review those
and -- and either sign off on it or not.
Q.
is not involved?
A.
Typically, no.
Q.
So there's no way for PSB to check whether cases resulting
in minor discipline are appropriately resulting in minor
discipline?
A.
At the time I left, no.
10
Q.
Who at PSB has responsibility for reviewing division IA
11
cases?
12
A.
13
administrative side.
14
Q.
15
right?
16
A.
On the administrative side there were two.
17
Q.
And so there would be three people within PSB responsible
18
for reviewing all of the IA cases done on the division side?
19
A.
20
in.
21
Q.
22
basis, are done on the division side?
All right.
And if only minor discipline is implicated, PSB
16:25:02
The division commander and the lieutenants on the
So at the time you left there were two lieutenants, is that
16:25:19
DS
Some of the sergeants would review some of them that came
IEN
Okay.
16:25:39
And about how many cases, let's say on an annual
23
A.
I don't -- I don't know off the top of my head.
24
Q.
It's hundreds of cases?
25
A.
I'm sure.
FR
16:24:45
16:25:55
3185
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Typically, in your experience would the PSB reviewer of a
division IA file read every page of a file?
A.
I can't speak to what they did individually.
Q.
Did you listen to recordings of interviews done?
A.
Most of the time, yes.
Q.
Every single one in every case?
A.
No.
Q.
Turn to page 13, please, of GH-2, which is Exhibit 2881.
I'm going to call your attention to paragraph F.3.
I read them.
16:26:07
That
10
paragraph requires that investigative leads be given a Garrity
11
warning and a notice of investigation prior to their
12
interviews.
13
A.
I do.
14
Q.
Is that practice followed consistently?
15
A.
In my time at PSB it was, yes.
16
Q.
In an internal -- a case triggered by an internal
17
complaint, the investigative leads would include the
18
complainant, correct?
19
A.
It could.
20
Q.
An investigative lead is simply someone who's interviewed
21
who is not a principal in the case, correct?
22
A.
24
FR
25
DS
Do you see that?
Q.
16:26:50
16:27:06
Witness, correct.
IEN
23
16:26:33
Do you think that -- well, withdrawn.

Part of the Garrity warning and notice of
investigation tells the person who's being issued those
16:27:24
3186
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
documents that they must be truthful, correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
And that they're subject to termination if they are found
not to be truthful, correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
Sir, do you think that it might be intimidating to an
internal complainant to be issued a Garrity warning prior to
their interview?
16:27:36
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
10
Overruled.
THE WITNESS:
11
Objection, foundation, relevance.
16:27:53
I think any PSB investigation can be
12
intimidating for anybody involved.
13
BY MS. WANG:
14
Q.
15
policy could provide that an internal complainant be given a
16
Garrity warning, or they don't necessarily have to be given a
17
Garrity warning.
18
the Garrity warning to be given to an internal complainant, do
19
you think that could cause intimidation?
20
A.
Yes, it could.
21
Q.
Let's turn to Exhibit 2790.
22
operational manual.
IEN
DS
All right.
But I'm specifically asking, I mean, MCSO
I'm asking you, under MCSO policy requiring
16:28:24
That is the PSB division
Do you have it in front of you now?
23
A.
I do.
24
Q.
Okay.
25
document, do you know?
FR
16:28:05
And was this a final document or is it a draft

16:29:28
A.
When I left it was still in draft form.
Q.
Okay.
left -- as it existed when you left PSB?
A.
And take a look at it now.
Is this the draft as you
It appears to be.
MS. WANG:
5
6
3187
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Okay.
Your Honor, I'd like to move the
admission of Exhibit 2790.

MR. MASTERSON:
If the testimony, which I think was
that the witness does not know if this is a final draft,
objection, foundation, relevance.

THE COURT:
10
Well, the witness didn't say that.
The
11
witness said this was a draft, and this was the form in which
12
the draft was when he left PSB.

MR. MASTERSON:
13
THE COURT:
14
MS. WANG:
15
16
16:30:02
Relevance.
Do you want to establish some relevance?
Sure.
I can do it first and then move its
16:30:17
admission.
THE COURT:
17
Um-hum.
18
BY MS. WANG:
19
Q.
20
commander of PSB?
21
A.
Very little of it.
22
Q.
All right.
IEN
DS
Well, Captain, was this draft developed while you were the
16:30:29
Was it a modification of an earlier document?
23
A.
24
other cases.
25
on redoing this manual at about the time I left.
FR
16:29:40
We were starting to modify it at the conclusion of some

We were finally getting some time to concentrate
16:30:44
3188
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Okay.
And as far as you know, is that process continuing
now?
A.
I don't know.
Q.
Okay.
felt were important to make in the IA division operational
manual?
A.
on that assisted divisions and districts do the cases
consistently with overview from PSB.
What were the modifications or revisions that you
Certainly, the educational component that we were working
Off the top of my head,
10
there was a number of other policy -- not necessarily policy
11
changes, but procedural things that we wanted to make sure were
12
included, including the integrity unit.
13
Q.
14
as you hoped to implement it?
15
A.
No.
16
Q.
What were the missing pieces?
17
done?
18
A.
19
we were working with counsel to get some things finalized and
20
approved to put in it.
21
the educational component was part of it.
22
some disciplinary discussions about some things.
16:31:34
What still remained to be
IEN
DS
I'm not sure what was left out of it.
At the time I left,
But the integrity unit stuff, certainly
Q.
24
to paragraph 102, the Mission Statement.
FR
16:31:14
And does this draft in 2790 reflect the operations manual
23
25
16:30:58
Can you turn to page MELC1396798.
16:31:47
I believe there was
I'm going to refer you
Does that reflect what you believe to be the Mission
16:32:17
3189
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Statement of MCSO's PSB?
A.
At the time this document was done, I believe it was.
Q.
Okay.
that is appropriate as an expression of PSB's mission?
A.
Are you asking my opinion?
Q.
Yeah.
A.
I think it's a little vague.
Q.
Yeah.
PSB should reflect that the purpose of PSB is to conduct fair,
And do you -- well, sitting here now, do you think
Do you think that the Mission Statement for MCSO's
10
impartial, complete, and accurate internal investigations?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
All right.
13
heading Internal Administrative Investigations.
16:32:54
Take a look at section 302, which is -- has the
I do not see any guidance in section 302 on interview
14
15
techniques.
16
A.
I do not.
17
Q.
Is it the intent to add such information to any operations
18
manual that is finalized?
19
A.
20
core set of classes that the investigators could have all gone
21
through before going into opening cases, investigating cases in
22
PSB.
Do you see that here anywhere?
16:33:20
IEN
DS
Part of what I would like to have completed is establish a
23
Q.
24
correct?
25
A.
FR
16:32:37
16:33:35
And that did not happen while you were commander of PSB,
It did not.
16:33:53
3190
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
It would have been very helpful, in your view, is that
right, for investigators to have had such training?
A.
investigations, appropriate training is necessary.
Q.
investigative leads may be offered the opportunity to have an
office employee present as a representative.
I think anywhere investigators are conducting
Right.
Take a look at section 302.6.
It indicates that
Do you see that?
8
9
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
Is it typical that a principal in an IA case gets an
11
employee representative in an IA investigation?
12
A.
13
people did; some people declined.
14
Q.
15
correct?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
Is it appropriate for an employee representative to try to
18
influence the statement of an investigative lead?
19
A.
No.
20
Q.
I'm going to ask you to turn to Exhibit 2819.
Some
16:34:49
This is not in evidence.
of you.
16:35:20
I hope you have it in front
I don't know if it's there.
23
Do you have it in front of you?
24
A.
2820.
25
Q.
You know what?
FR
16:34:33
It is something that is offered as an option to principals,
IEN
22
I don't know if I would characterize it as typical.
DS
21
16:34:13
Let's skip it.
16:36:20
3191
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Okay.
Q.
Sir, I'm going to change gears now and ask you about an
investigation that occurred while you were commander of PSB.
You are aware that there was an investigation into the
supervision of Charley Armendariz, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And eventually Detective Vogel, an outside investigator,
took over the investigation, correct?
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
But for a time, PSB investigated that in-house, correct?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
Now, that happened, the outsourcing to Detective Vogel
13
happened because there was a potential conflict of interest,
14
correct?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
And that was partly because you, as commander of PSB
17
previously, had been in the chain of command at HSU, is that
18
right?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
Now, you knew Detective Vogel before he took over the
21
investigation of the Armendariz supervision case, correct?
22
A.
DS
16:37:11
16:37:30
16:37:41
IEN
I did.
23
Q.
24
time; is that how you knew him?
25
A.
FR
16:37:00
You both served on federal task forces at around the same
Yes.
16:37:59
3192
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
And based on your experience with Detective Vogel, you
believed that -- or you believe that he is an outstanding
investigator, correct?
A.
investigator.
Q.
that year and more, did you develop a view that there were
failures of supervision in Armendariz's chain of command?
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
And that view was based not only on the one case regarding
11
Armendariz's supervision, but also on other IA cases that
12
happened on your watch as PSB commander, correct?
13
A.
I'm not sure I understand.
14
Q.
Were there other cases, other IA cases that PSB conducted
15
while you were commander into HSU personnel?
16
A.
Oh, yes.
17
Q.
And your view that there were -- is your view that there
18
were problems in the chain of command at HSU as a whole?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
And in fact, you believe that Charley Armendariz was not an
21
aberration, correct?
22
A.
My experience with Mr. Vogel is he was a very good
Now, based on what you saw as PSB commander over
DS
Okay.
16:38:13
16:38:57
16:39:07
IEN
I think Deputy Armendariz's behavior was specific to him.
23
Q.
24
conclusion, based on your experience as PSB commander, that
25
there were -- Charley Armendariz was a problem employee?
FR
16:38:31
Well, I guess my question is:
Did you reach the
16:40:03
3193
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes.
Q.
And did you reach the conclusion that there were problems
in his chain of command that permitted that to happen?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And did you reach the conclusion that Charley Armendariz
was not an aberration in that respect?
A.
all the members of HSU acted like Charley Armendariz.
Q.
I wouldn't characterize it that way.
Right.
I would not say that
I guess I'm not -- that wasn't quite my question.
The question is:
10
Were there problems in his chain of
command that permitted that problem to arise?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
All right.
14
not the only deputy who was problematic and who was permitted
15
by his chain of command to commit policy violations?
16
A.
In HSU?
17
Q.
Correct.
18
A.
I only remember specifically Charley having significant
19
issues --
20
Q.
Okay.
21
A.
-- that were specific to Charley.
22
Q.
I guess the question is:
IEN
DS
11
16:41:11
16:41:21
Do you believe that there were
systematic failures in supervision and discipline in his chain
24
of command?
25
A.
FR
16:40:40
And do you believe that Charley Armendariz was
23
Yes.
16:40:18
16:41:32
3194
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
And Charley Armendariz, it was re -- was it revealed during
the time that you were PSB commander, that Charley Armendariz
committed policy violations not only while he was assigned to
HSU, but also while he was assigned to other divisions?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
And are you aware that Charley Armendariz had multiple IA
investigations in which he was a principal over many years?
A.
were several instances where he was investigated.
16:41:50
I don't remember specifically how many, but I believe there
10
Q.
Okay.
11
A.
I do.
12
Q.
Okay.
13
to you on August 1st, 2014, setting out a time line of
14
Internal Affairs investigations of Charley Armendariz?
15
A.
Yes.
MR. WALKER:
DS
MR. COMO:
THE COURT:
23
BY MS. WANG:
24
Q.
25
gave it to you?
FR
No objection.
No objection.
No objection.
16:43:35
Exhibit 2760 is admitted.
IEN
22
Your Honor, I'd move the admission of
MR. MASTERSON:
19
21
16:43:25
Exhibit 2760.
18
20
16:42:17
Is Exhibit 2760 a memorandum that Sergeant Fax wrote
MS. WANG:
16
17
Do you have Exhibit 2760 in front of you?
Sir, you reviewed the memo at the time that Sergeant Fax
16:43:45
3195
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes.
Q.
And it compiles a pretty serious record of problems with
Charley Armendariz, correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Sir, did that signal to you that there were failures in
MCSO systems for dealing with civilian complaints?
A.
Yes.
Q.
What systems are in place now to make sure that this
doesn't happen again?
10
A.
Certainly, the BlueTeam early origination system -THE COURT:
11
Chief, I'm sorry.
THE WITNESS:
12
THE COURT:
13
I need to hear this.
Okay.
Sure.
The early identification system,
15
the policy changes where every complaint is given a number and
16
investigated.
17
educational components we've gone through, I would like to
18
think would prevent something like this from happening again.
19
BY MS. WANG:
20
Q.
21
systems: the early identification system, BlueTeam, and IAPro,
22
correct?
And those are all -- you mentioned a few software
IEN
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q.
Would you agree with me that those are all tools that MCSO
25
can use to try to prevent this kind of employee from continuing
FR
16:44:31
The changes in supervision, and certainly the
DS
Okay.
16:44:19
So would you please repeat that answer?
THE WITNESS:
14
16:43:57
16:44:45
16:45:06
3196
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
without discipline, correct?
A.
True.
Q.
But would you also agree with me that the value or the
utility of those tools depends on having human beings within
MCSO who will actually do their job?
A.
the employees is of paramount importance, yes.
Q.
the Armendariz supervision case, took the position that at the
16:45:19
It's fair to say I think the quality of the supervisor and
Are you aware that some of the principals in the 542 case,
10
time they were in Armendariz's chain of command, they were
11
aware of a great volume of civilian complaints, but that they
12
did not believe any of those complaints rose to the level of a
13
policy violation?
Are you aware of that?
14
15
A.
16
the people I interviewed said Charley got a number of
17
complaints.
18
Q.
19
they didn't believe that those complaints rose to the level of
20
a policy violation?
21
A.
I don't remember that language specifically.
22
Q.
Okay.
I don't specifically recall that.
I recall that some of
16:46:02
IEN
DS
And you don't recall that any of them made statements that
16:46:20
Then hypothetically, if one of the people in his
23
chain of command said that during an IA case, do you think that
24
they were exercising good judgment, in light of what you saw in
25
Exhibit 2760?
FR
16:45:45
16:46:41
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
Overruled.
THE WITNESS:
3197
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Can you ask me the question again?
sorry.
BY MS. WANG:
Q.
Armendariz's chain of command took the position that his
civilian complaints did not rise to the level of a policy
violation, do you think that statement would reflect good
Sure.
I'm
16:46:53
Do you believe that if a -- someone in Charley
10
judgment, in light of what you learned in Exhibit 2760?
11
A.
12
engaged in a number of different behaviors that some rose to
13
just plain simply policy violations, and some were just his
14
demeanor towards people wasn't acceptable, but may not have
15
risen to a policy violation.
When you overlay it specifically to 2760, yes.
Charley
16:47:43
Does that make sense?
16
17
Q.
18
guess he started getting IA cases pulled against him in 2006,
19
and looks like they continue through -- well, there are a
20
number -- let me withdraw that.
During the time period covered by Exhibit 2760, so I
16:48:14
During the time period covered by Exhibit 2760, could
PSB have done something if a supervisor had contacted PSB and
IEN
22
Sure.
DS
21
23
said:
24
number of civilian complaints.
25
any policy violations, but I am concerned about this high
FR
16:47:13
I have an employee, a deputy, who has a very large

I haven't been able to identify
16:48:42
3198
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
number of civilian complaints.
Could PSB have done anything in that situation?
2
3
A.
Sure.
Q.
What could PSB have done?
A.
Could certainly have consulted the division commander.
one point, I know a fitness-for-duty evaluation was done based
on what some of the supervisors in HSU were observing with
Charley.
different avenues to take.

Okay.
At
But PSB could have at least provided consultation on
10
Q.
11
highlight the bottom of the page where it says -- well, there
12
are a few here that say citizen complaint, no Internal Affairs
13
number issued.
Look at Exhibit 2760 at page MELC011641.
And let's
16:49:13
And these are from 2013.
Do you see that?
14
15
A.
I do.
16
Q.
All right.
17
that an internal affairs number should have been issued, based
18
on this reported conduct?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
But it appears that no Internal Affairs case was initiated?
21
A.
It does appear.
22
Q.
All right.
16:49:41
Taking a look at some of these, do you believe
DS
IEN
23
MS. WANG:
24
Exhibit 2790.
25
manual.
FR
16:48:53
16:49:56
Your Honor, I want to go back to
That was the draft Internal Affairs operations

16:50:20
3199
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
Yes.
I would still ask that that be admitted.
The witness has indicated that it was a draft, but for the
limited purpose of showing what his testimony was, and with the
understanding that it was a draft, I would ask that it be
admitted into evidence.
MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
8
9
Well, I'm going to sustain, I think, the
objection, not because I think it's irrelevant, but I think
10
it's marked as an exhibit.
11
that you thought were relevant.
12
he gave without objection.
13
exhibit admitted into evidence to illustrate what his testimony
14
was, so I'm going to sustain the objection.

MS. WANG:
15
16
BY MS. WANG:
17
Q.
You went through all of the areas
16:50:49
We received the testimony that
And so I don't think I need the
All right.
16:51:03
Captain Bailey, I'm going to move on to another subject.

You are aware that there was a criminal IA case
18
initiated based upon statements that Deputy Cisco Perez made
20
during an unemployment hearing, correct?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q.
And ultimately there was a decision not to refer that
IEN
DS
19
23
matter for criminal prosecution, correct?
24
A.
That's correct.
25
Q.
And then subsequently was there an administrative IA case
FR
16:50:32
16:51:20
16:51:35
3200
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
on that matter?
A.
Yes.
Q.
All right.
allegation that HSU personnel engaged in theft, is that right?
A.
I only remember Mr. Perez's statement.
Q.
Okay.
interviewed shortly before his death in an administrative IA
interview by Sergeant Rick Morris?
A.
Yes, I remember he was interviewed.
10
Q.
Okay.
11
there were a number of items found in Charley Armendariz's
12
home, correct?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
And some of those items included illegal drugs, correct?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
In MCSO evidence envelopes, correct?
17
A.
I believe so.
18
Q.
And there was a firearm, at least one firearm that Sergeant
19
Morris mentioned, is that right?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
And do you -- well, let me ask you this:
22
recording of that interview by Sergeant Morris of Charley
And Sergeant Morris indicated in his interview that
DS
IEN
16:52:01
Well, are you aware that Charley Armendariz was
23
Armendariz?
24
A.
25
the transcript.
FR
Cisco Perez's statement was not the only
16:52:31
16:52:49
16:52:58
Did you watch the
It was conducted before my arrival at PSB.
I read most of
16:53:12
3201
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Q.
Okay.
Do you recall that at one point in the interview,
Deputy Armendariz stated that he had been covering for people
in this office for -- I believe he said 10 years?
A.
I don't remember that specifically.
Q.
Okay.
you arrived at PSB?
A.
specifically.
Q.
That was not called to your attention later on when
It could have; I'm just saying I don't remember it
All right.
Well, do you know whether in any subsequent
10
internal investigation by PSB Armendariz's statement was
11
investigated?
12
A.
I don't.
13
Q.
You're not aware of that?
14
A.
I'm not saying it didn't happen; I'm just not aware of it.
15
Q.
Okay.
16
found in HSU's offices while you were commander of PSB?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
To you, is that an indication that a theft may have
19
occurred?
20
A.
Potentially.
21
Q.
All right.
22
cards and bank cards found in Armendariz's house when the
IEN
DS
Are you also aware that there were women's purses
16:53:43
16:54:01
16:54:24
And are you aware that there were also credit
23
search warrant was executed there?
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
And some of the evidence, or some of the property found in
FR
16:53:28
16:54:42
3202
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Armendariz's house could be traced back to operations in which
Armendariz was not involved; were you aware of that?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Were those matters investigated by PSB while you were
commander?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Those also are potentially indications that thefts occurred
by HSU, correct?
A.
Potentially, yes.
10
Q.
All right.
11
the Armendariz supervision case, 542, that Armendariz stole
12
$300 from a woman during a traffic stop?
13
A.
I remember that allegation.
14
Q.
That's an allegation of theft, correct?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
By someone in HSU.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
And were you aware of an IA case conducted while you were
19
commander of PSB where there was a property envelope indicating
20
that $260 cash was seized, but that there was no cash in that
21
envelope?
22
A.
16:54:58
Were you aware that there was an allegation in
DS
16:55:28
16:55:43
IEN
Yes.
23
Q.
You're aware of that case?
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
Okay.
FR
16:55:07
That is an indication of a potential theft by HSU,
16:55:52
3203
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
correct?
A.
Potentially, yes.
Q.
And are you also aware that there was at least one IA case,
based on a review of a video recording of a traffic stop, where
there appeared to be a discrepancy between the amount of cash
that a driver declared he had on him and the amount that was --
that a deputy claimed to seize from him?
A.
Yes.
Q.
That would be an indication of theft, correct?
10
A.
Could be.
11
Q.
All right.
16:56:30
I'm going to have you turn to Exhibit 69.
MS. WANG:
12
Sorry, Your Honor.
I was checking to see
if it's in evidence.
14
BY MS. WANG:
15
Q.
Turn to page MELC006122.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
And you see, is that a memorandum from Sergeant Fax to you
18
dated July 31st, 2014, on the subject "Determining if any HSU
19
Members Removed Property/Evidence for Training Purposes"?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Okay.
22
A.
I believe so.
IEN
DS
13
This is not in evidence.
16:57:15
16:57:44
Do you recognize that?

It's been some time.
23
Q.
24
attachments, it appears, to the memorandum relating to
25
something called the diversion program or the diversion list?
FR
Okay.
16:56:11
Well, take your time and look at it.
There are some
16:58:10
3204
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes.
Q.
So take your time and review it, and let me know if this
appears to you to be a copy of the memorandum that Sergeant Fax
gave you, with attachments.
Does it appear to be that memorandum?
5
6
A.
Yes.
least initial it, but it could have been a document that was
placed inside of a larger case file and I reviewed or signed
the entire case.
My signature's not on it, which normally I would at
10
Q.
11
here.
12
MELC006122.
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
And take a look at the last paragraph before the list of
15
deputies.
Okay.
Well, I'm just going to ask you about one thing
16:59:36
Turn to the first page of Sergeant Fax's memo,
16:59:49
Did Sergeant Fax indicate to you that he went in to
16
Property and Evidence and attempted to get information or
18
documentation of property items that HSU deputies had taken out
19
of Property and Evidence for training purposes, allegedly?
20
A.
Yeah, using the diversion process --
21
Q.
Okay.
22
A.
-- yes.
IEN
DS
17
23
Q.
24
by John Shamley of the Property and Evidence unit, is that
25
right?
FR
16:59:22
17:00:17
And that he found about 1,000 pages of information provided
17:00:33
3205
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
A.
Yes.
Q.
And if you look at some of the pages that Sergeant Fax
attached, each page is a -- kind of a log of many different
items that were taken out through the diversion program, is
that right?
A.
paper here.
Q.
Oh, okay.
A.
Just the memo and this yellow cover sheet.
10
Q.
All right.
11
information were logs of property that were taken out through
12
the diversion program by HSU deputies?
13
A.
I believe that's what they were.
14
Q.
So each of the thousand pages might have referenced a
15
number of different items of property, correct?
16
A.
I would think.
17
Q.
Okay.
I don't have any attachments; I just have three pieces of
23
17:01:22
DS
Ms. Wang?
Yes.
I'm just going to point out it's
17:01:32
5 o'clock.
MS. WANG:
Oh, then I had better stop talking.
I will
resume tomorrow.
24
THE COURT:
25
MS. WANG:
FR
17:01:02
Do you know whether --
THE COURT:
IEN
22
Do you know whether the thousand pages of
MS. WANG:
19
21
So you just have the --
THE COURT:
18
20
17:00:50
Is this as good a place as any to break?

Sure.
17:01:45
THE COURT:
1
2
THE WITNESS:
MS. WANG:
4
5
pretrial statement?
THE COURT:
We will resume tomorrow.
Your Honor, did you want us to address the
17:01:54
Yes, if you're ready and able to do that.
But I need to go get it.

MS. WANG:
THE COURT:
9
10
All right.
We'll see you tomorrow, Captain Bailey.
3206
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Okay.
People need not rise when I go back to the
courtroom to get my thing.
I'm just going to come right back.
11
THE COURT:
12
Let me just observe by way of observation
13
that isn't particularly important, I don't see, on defendants'
14
issues, unless defendants want to bring into this matter
15
contemnors that I have not noticed on various things, I don't
16
see why 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 21, 22, 25, 26, and 30
17
have anything to do with this proceeding, in light of the fact
18
that I have not noticed every nonparty contemnor for every act
19
of contempt.
20
specific counts, and it seems to me that those counts I've just
21
read suggest that I have noticed persons up for contempt on
22
topics that I have not noticed them up for contempt on.
DS
IEN
Any comment on that, Mr. Masterson?
24
MR. MASTERSON:
FR
17:04:36
I've only noticed specific nonparty contemnors on
23
25
17:02:09
17:05:09
My only comment is that if you have
not noticed them up for contempt on paragraphs we inserted in
17:05:27
3207
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
this pretrial, we're going to remove those paragraphs.

THE COURT:
All right.
Thank you.
Any objection to that?
3
4
5
MS. WANG:
Not at all.
THE COURT:
All right.
Plaintiffs have done pretty
good on holding their -- holding to their estimates, which I
said I thought were reasonable.
same comments I made to you, Mr. Masterson, which is my hope
that we could combine and my lack of understanding as to why
10
And I do -- I still have the
certain witnesses were necessary.
17:06:04
I think I indicated I'm not inclined to allow you to
11
12
get into the 287(g) program, to the extent you've listed that
13
under Chief Deputy Sheridan, unless you can tell me why it's
14
relevant for some reason.
It does seem to me that a lot of what you've said for
15
16
Chief Deputy Sheridan we've already tracked through.
17
wouldn't really be too excited about repeating all of that if
18
it's just going to be repetition.
19
seem to me that you're certainly entitled to call him in the
20
three hours -- I'll let you have three hours that you've asked
21
for if, in fact, you are going to call him, not inviting you to
22
use it.
24
FR
25
17:06:18
But as I also said, it does
DS
IEN
23
17:05:38
Liddy, you've asked for, what?
One hour?
17:06:36
That seems
to me to be reasonable.
Are we going to recall Bailey?
I think you've
17:06:55
3208
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
indicated we weren't going to do that, right?

MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
I hope not to do that.
Okay.
Well, if you do it, I'm going to --
I mean, I took good notes so far, and I intend to continue to
do that.
give you more leeway on cross, and then we can go back and
forth and let you have the time word.
that unless you represent to me that you're doing your very
best to call him one time.

MR. MASTERSON:
10
11
THE COURT:
But I'm not going to do
I will do my best to call him one
All right.
Any objection to proceeding
MS. WANG:
Well, Your Honor, I guess our only position
15
would be that defendants shouldn't have it both ways.
16
are not going to object to cross-examination beyond the scope
17
of direct, we would not expect to see the witness again.

THE COURT:
18
And I won't, either.
If we
20
the only way Mr. Masterson can recall Captain Bailey is if he
21
gives me a really good reason.
IEN
DS
presumption will be, if I allow that, which I'm inclined to do,
MS. WANG:
23
THE COURT:
24
MR. COMO:
25
MR. WALKER:
17:07:37
And so my
19
FR
17:07:27
that way?
14
22
17:07:13
time, Judge.
12
13
And I would like to -- what I would prefer to do is
17:07:53
All right.
Any objection to that by anybody else?
No, Your Honor.
No objection, Your Honor.
17:08:07
THE COURT:
1
2
3209
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Olson, can we try to call him only one
time under the same understanding?

MR. MASTERSON:
THE COURT:
Yes, Judge.
Fax.
I don't know how much you're going
to want to go over individual investigations, but Fax was a
player, and, you know, adequacy of investigations is clearly an
issue here.
you to hold it to less than that, but if you use your time and
it's fairly used, I'll give you up to four on Fax.
And so you've asked for four hours.
I'd ask for
Zullo, can we call Zullo just once?
10
MR. MASTERSON:
11
THE COURT:
12
Skinner.
13
17:08:41
Yes.
All right.
Oh, no, Stephanie Molina.
She's been the
14
director of Internal Affairs for three weeks and you want three
15
hours of testimony?
17:09:17
MR. MASTERSON:
16
Judge, you made some comments on --
what day is this now?
18
Friday about some of these witnesses, including Ms. Molina.
19
And I'll tell you what we're going to do is we're going to sit
20
down -- we have a few days off after this week, and we're going
21
to take a hard look at some of these witnesses and may withdraw
22
one or two, and if we do, we'll report that to plaintiffs and
IEN
24
FR
25
Tuesday.
You made some comments on
DS
17
23
17:08:22
17:09:31
let you know as soon as we can as well.

THE COURT:
Well, I appreciate that, but plaintiffs
are going to have to depose the ones that you don't withdraw,
17:09:47
3210
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
so maybe you'll want to do that earlier rather than later,
right?
MR. MASTERSON:
Exactly.
And that's what I meant when
I said I would notify plaintiffs, so we don't take depositions
we don't need to take.

THE COURT:
17:09:59
All right.
So Molina, I talked about
Skinner and I -- you know, one of the comments I made, and I
don't mind making it, as far as I recall, my monitors always
told me that Skinner's been responsive, and if you want to call
10
him to talk about, you know, your issues and your
11
responsiveness, I think that that's appropriate testimony.
12
don't really know that you need three hours for that.
that?
I think I suggested maybe an hour and a half.
15
MR. MASTERSON:
16
17
Do you think you're going to need three hours for
13
14
17:10:17
17:10:36
I'm not trying to be flippant, Judge,
but I don't know if he's a talker or not.

THE COURT:
18
Well, you know, I mean, with all due
respect, one of the reasons why I apply a little pressure is if
20
people are talkers, I want to get their counsel to say:
21
gab.
17:10:49
So why don't you assess that.
23
MR. MASTERSON:
24
THE COURT:
25
MR. MASTERSON:
FR
Don't
Just give us the information.
IEN
22
DS
19
I will.
And what about Farnsworth?

Well, that's one of the ones we're
17:10:58
3211
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
going to be considering as to whether we let plaintiffs, and
you know that we're not going to call him at all.

THE COURT:
3
4
once?
MR. MASTERSON:
5
6
THE COURT:
I would certainly hope to only have to
And how about Sheriff Arpaio, are you
MR. MASTERSON:
At this point we intend to, but again,
I don't know for sure.

THE COURT:
11
17:11:19
Well, if you're going to recall him, what
12
really is he going to talk about?
13
MR. MASTERSON:
Well, I think my decision, Judge, is
14
going to be made after I hear the remainder of the witnesses
15
from plaintiffs.
16
covered, but that we need to get into because of testimony we
17
heard between the time the sheriff testified and the close of
18
plaintiffs' case, we would call him on those issues.
Should there be anything I feel we have not
THE COURT:
19
All right.
21
to call in defense, you've got three hours on Sheridan.
22
hour on Liddy.
DS
of everything you've asked for on the witnesses you're likely
IEN
17:11:35
So if I give you the maximum
20
17:11:51
One
And I realize, you know, there is going to be
23
some cross.
24
you up to four hours, hoping you won't take it, but
25
acknowledging the legitimacy of your request.
FR
17:11:11
going to recall Sheriff Arpaio?
9
10
Mackiewicz, can we do him only
do him once.
7
8
Okay.
Olson, we're going to combine.
Fax, I've given
17:12:14
3212
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
Skinner, I'm inclined to give you an hour and a half.
1
2
If you need more, you can tell me, if you really need more and
explain why.
And Sheriff Arpaio you're sort of holding in the
4
5
bullpen.
after the plaintiffs have finished their case.
plaintiffs?
MS. WANG:
I haven't added up the remainder, but I can
10
do that very quickly.
11
six hours total for Bailey, so we've got a little over four
12
left, I think.
THE COURT:
13
MS. WANG:
16
90.
hours.
18
earlier.
19
we would want to put on.
20
one hour, maximum.
Vogel was 90.
Zullo is two
Mackiewicz we had to revise upward, as I stated
DS
That's two hours.
THE COURT:
MS. WANG:
IEN
17:13:02
90 minutes.
17
22
We have one plaintiff class member
I think that should probably be just
And Deputy Garcia I estimated 45 minutes.
17:13:26
What about Jakowinicz for documents?

Right.
We might need to call Jakowinicz
23
for documents, and I advised Mr. Masterson this morning that we
24
would like to put in the CAD data, the raw CAD data I was
25
unsuccessful in admitting with Lieutenant Sousa, so that would
FR
17:12:50
Olson we estimated one hour, is that right?
MR. SEGURA:
15
I estimated four hours total -- sorry,
Yes.
MS. WANG:
14
21
17:12:32
How much longer are we going to go on your case,
7
8
The way I look at that, that gives you about 10 hours
17:13:47
3213
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
be another custodian of records.
Your Honor, just to get those documents admitted.

THE COURT:
All right.
Those would be very brief,
So if we're going to do a
little bit more than four hours with Bailey tomorrow, we should
at least start on Olson, if not finish him tomorrow, correct?

MS. WANG:
Your Honor, there's one scheduling issue
with tomorrow.
Mr. Vogel.
schedule is in flux, and we've been told by his counsel the
The complication is that our next witness up is
He is working security for the Chicago Cubs, so his
10
only way we can be assured he will be here is tomorrow.
11
have proposed to take him out of order in the middle of
12
Captain Bailey's testimony tomorrow.

THE COURT:
13
So we
It doesn't matter to me.
I think
15
Captain Bailey and his counsel may have some issues with it,
16
but, I mean, we're going to -- we're going to try to
17
accommodate as best we can so we don't have down time.

THE COURT:
18
20
Well, I appreciate that.
MR. MASTERSON:
counsel as well.
22
opposed to me.
IEN
21
THE COURT:
24
MR. MASTERSON:
FR
Captain Bailey's
Well, he has -- he has independent
17:14:58
I should have said the special counsel as
23
25
17:14:42
counsel is who, if not you?
DS
19
17:14:21
Any objection?
MR. MASTERSON:
14
17:14:02
Okay.
Well, you know --
I don't know if there's scheduling
problems here, I guess is in short what I'm trying to tell you,
17:15:07
Judge.
THE COURT:
Well, I note Mr. Mitchell is here.
Mr. Mitchell.
MR. MITCHELL:
THE COURT:
5
6
3214
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
You know, you need to get to a microphone
so that we can get you.

MR. MITCHELL:
Thank you, Judge.
Thank you.
We've asked that Captain Bailey's
testimony not be interrupted, because it's difficult for his
schedule and what he's trying to do with his law enforcement
10
duties.
11
accommodate what's going on here.
12
to consider is scheduling him for another day.
13
how long Mr. Vogel's going to go, but I presume it's --
15
What we've asked plaintiffs

I don't know
90 minutes is what I've been told.
It's
17:15:48
MR. MITCHELL:
And then there's just four hours left
for Captain Bailey, so -MS. WANG:
18
Of my direct examination.
MR. MITCHELL:
19
THE COURT:
DS
20
17:15:32
not very long.
16
17
That doesn't mean we're not going to try to
THE COURT:
14
Yeah.
We'll be here tomorrow, Judge.
Well, thank you.
I do think I'm going to
allow Vogel to go in, just so that we can get him in, with all
22
due apologies to Captain Bailey, and I don't want to limit your
IEN
21
23
responsibilities, but maybe we can take -- sandwich Vogel, I
24
don't know, around lunch or sometime that makes it easier for
25
Captain Bailey, or may make it easier for Captain Bailey.
FR
17:15:17
So
17:16:02
17:16:20
3215
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
start him about 11:00, and then if we need to take him a half
hour after lunch or so we can do that, and then
Captain Bailey's back on the stand so we are efficiently using
his time, and if he wants to go take care of matters over lunch
he can do that.
That would be my suggestion.
17:16:37
But it looks to me then, and maybe we can take this
6
7
up, I'll let you go tonight, I don't want to take forever, but
it looks to me like we would do tomorrow, and then maybe two
and a half days after that at most, and probably not even that.
10
One and a half days on plaintiffs' case.
11
quite two days on defense.
And then maybe not
Now, I realize that I haven't built in any time for
12
13
cross-examination, but we're looking at four, maybe five more
14
hearing days at most.
15
give you that many, really.
16
well, but I will.
Is that correct?
I don't even want to
I mean, I think I've given --
important to the public, and the parties want to -- want to
19
have the information accessible to the public to the extent
20
it's possible while we're trying the case, and I want to
21
accommodate you in that respect.
DS
18
17:17:35
IEN
But I have read all the -- I've read the exhibits as
23
they've come up.
24
you know, what I would like to do is have you consider and plan
25
out the days in light of what I've just done, and maybe we can
FR
17:17:17
I realize that it is important, that this case is
17
22
17:16:57
I've tried to keep on top of this.
And as
17:17:55
3216
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
talk about about it early tomorrow, tell me what days you think
you're going to actually use.
One of the reasons I want to do that is to see not
3
4
only what days I have, but to contemplate with the parties how
we're going to handle this case when the factual presentations
of the evidence are through.
be my -- my preference, I think, to allow the party -- well,
here's what my preference would be.
And as I've indicated, it would
I think I'd like to take about two days and look over
the record and issue an order to the parties indicating what
11
factual issues I want them to address.
12
parties the opportunity to come here and argue whatever they
13
want to argue, as well as the factual issues that I've
14
identified, and then I'll make findings of fact, conclusions of
15
law, I'll try to be pretty expeditious about it, and then we
16
can come back and see if, in light of my findings, what, if
17
any, expert testimony we'll need, and if we do agree that we
18
want or desire expert testimony, I think we'll be able to
19
refine pretty clearly what testimony I want and what testimony
20
I don't want.
21
be awarded, some of those remedies are not dependent upon the
22
expert testimony, so that we can proceed in examining that.
IEN
DS
10
23
17:18:23
And then give the
And whether or not, if any remedies are going to
17:18:41
17:19:03
And that's what I'd like to do, just to sort of give
24
you the lay of the land.
25
think I've already laid that out before.
FR
17:18:09
If you have objections to that, I

I think everybody's
17:19:18
3217
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
sort of generally bought off on that.
But I'd like the parties
to actually start now scheduling, since we know what we've got,
witnesses and days, so that I can tell you I want this many
days, and then we'll have you appear to sort of do your oral
arguments before I make my findings of fact.
17:19:33
So do you want to discuss that tomorrow, or do you
6
7
want to discuss that -- tomorrow might be a good time.
So why
don't you please look at your schedules, what you're likely to
do and what you're likely to need, if there's any stipulations
10
that can be arrived at on documents, and if not, how much time
11
that's going to take and get it all in so that we can plan it
12
out, rough it out, and have a good idea.
Do you want to discuss that first thing tomorrow, or
13
14
do you want to discuss it at the end of the day, if you think
15
you're going to need more time to kind of work it out maybe
16
among yourselves?
MS. WANG:
17
19
sure each side will want to look at what we have remaining in
20
our own case, and then get together and try to suss out
21
cross-examination time.
DS
of the day, just so we have a chance to confer, because I'm
IEN
THE COURT:
23
24
FR
25
17:20:15
I would suggest after lunch or at the end
18
22
17:19:55
17:20:25
That would be my preference.
Mr. Masterson.
MR. MASTERSON:
I agree that the end of the day would
probably be a better time to discuss all this.

THE COURT:
All right.
That's fine by me.
But I
17:20:38
3218
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
would like to have a pretty clear idea of where we're going by
then.
That good for you?
MR. COMO:
THE COURT:
MR. WALKER:
THE COURT:
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
IEN
22
DS
19
21
23
24
FR
25
Mr. Walker?
17:20:47
That's fine, Your Honor.
All right.
See you tomorrow.
(Proceedings recessed at 5:20 p.m.)
20
Yes, Your Honor, thanks.
3219
OF
TH
EF
OG
BO
W
.CO
M
C E R T I F I C A T E
2
3
4
5
6
I, GARY MOLL, do hereby certify that I am duly
7
8
appointed and qualified to act as Official Court Reporter for
the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.
I FURTHER CERTIFY that the foregoing pages constitute
10
11
a full, true, and accurate transcript of all of that portion of
12
the proceedings contained herein, had in the above-entitled
13
cause on the date specified therein, and that said transcript
14
was prepared under my direction and control.
15
16
DATED at Phoenix, Arizona, this 14th day of October,
17
18
2015.
20
21
IEN
22
DS
19
23
24
FR
25
s/Gary Moll

Melendres v. Arpaio #1467 Oct 13 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 13 Evidentiary Hearing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Melendres v. Arpaio #1467 Oct 13 2015 TRANSCRIPT - DAY 13 Evidentiary Hearing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

OF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres,

Joseph M. Arpaio, et al.,

(Evidentiary Hearing Day 13, Pages 2963-3219)

BEFORE THE HONORABLE G. MURRAY SNOW

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

Proceedings taken by stenographic court reporter

For the Plaintiffs:

American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona

Covington & Burling, LLP

For the Defendant Joseph M. Arpaio and Maricopa County

For the Defendant Maricopa County:

Melendres v. Arpaio, 10/13/15 Evidentiary Hearing

Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, PLC

For the Movants Christine Stutz and Thomas P. Liddy:

For the Intervenor United States of America:

Melendres v. Arpaio, 10/13/15 Evidentiary Hearing

Direct Examination Continued by Mr. Segura

MCSO Memorandum from Commander Shaw to Captain

Memorandum to Steve Bailey from Stephen Fax

E-mail from David Tennyson to Dave Zebro Re:

Interview of Mary Ann McKessey with David

Audio of conversation between Brian Mackiewicz

Direct Examination by Ms. Wang

Melendres v. Arpaio, 10/13/15 Evidentiary Hearing

Good morning, Your Honor.

Good morning, Your Honor.

Stan Pochoda of the ACLU

Paul Killebrew for the

Good morning, Judge.

Joe Popolizio for Sheriff Arpaio and the individual contemnors,

and with us is Holly McGee.

Good morning, Your Honor.

on behalf of Maricopa County.

Good morning, Your Honor.

making a special appearance for Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

of Arizona for plaintiffs.

and Michelle Morin of Covington & Burling for plaintiffs.

and Andre Segura of the ACLU for plaintiffs.

ought to let the parties announce first.

I did note that the parties have filed -- I guess we

Melendres v. Arpaio, 10/13/15 Evidentiary Hearing

Melendres v. Arpaio, 10/13/15 Evidentiary Hearing

Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith representing Chief Sands.

Good morning, Your Honor.

Broening, Oberg, Woods & Wilson for nonparties Christina Stutz

and Tom Liddy.

Good morning, Your Honor.

Iafrate on behalf of Sheriff Arpaio and the unnamed alleged

MS. MIJARES NASH:

Good morning, Your Honor.

Alexandra Mijares Nash making a special appearance for

Detective Brian Mackiewicz.

I did notice that I finally got the

final -- or the sort of joint pretrial statement put together

then maybe address it right after lunch.

anything else to take up, we can resume, I believe, with the

testimony of Sergeant Tennyson.

I didn't really have a chance to read through

Sergeant Tennyson, then I'll remind you

you're still under oath.

you're still under oath.