State v. Mr. P (DMC No. 14225) – Felony Sexual Assault – Not Charged – Chandler Police Department Investigated (DR No. CH20XX-XXXXXXX0).

Mr. P was going through an extremely difficult divorce with his soon to be ex-wife. She was irate because he had filed for divorce and was now dating a new woman. She had tried to get her daughter to claim that Mr. P tried to molest her when he attempted to give her a kiss on the cheek good night. The daughter was taken down to the police station for a forensic interview, and she made the following statements: “she said she did not independently remember the incident until she was with her mom over summer break. She recalls some details of the incident after her mom asked her about the incident and showed her websites related to domestic violence.” She then went on to tell Detectives this had been discussed numerous times with her mother, and her mother kept showing her websites related to psychopaths and other evidence to indicate that her father was an abuser. Ultimately, the ex-wife was charged with Custodial Interference, and was issued an Order of Protection.

After all this occurred, Mr. P’s ex-wife then claimed she had been raped by her husband two years prior. She then told the Detectives that she had suffered from depression and had suicidal thoughts in the past, and now she had PTSD due to the alleged “rape.”

We became involved in the investigation, and we turned over the Comprehensive Family Evaluation which was conducted in their divorce case. Of note was the final exam of the Psychiatrist when he puts in his report: “she went on to state that she is a witch she has ‘tools.’ She said her daughter is also a witch. She angrily left the office and stood in the hallway and shouted ‘please don’t hurt any more women and children.’ She then slams shut the examiner’s office door.”

Once the Detectives reviewed everything, they quickly decided to close the case and did not even route it to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office to be reviewed for charging. If Mr. P were to have been charged and convicted, he could have spent well over a decade in prison. In addition, he would have lost custody of his children.

State v. Mr. H (DMC No. 14357) – (2 Counts) Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor (2 Victims/DCAC) – Not Charged – Flagstaff Police Department Initially Investigated then Coconino County Sheriff’s Office Investigated (DR No. SXXX-XXXXXX9); Coconino County Attorney’s Office Declined to File Charges.

Mr. H was a Flagstaff Police Officer who had a stepbrother who was in the Coconino County Jail. His other stepbrother had recently committed suicide. The stepbrother who was in jail began making accusations that when he and his deceased brother were 8 or 9 years old, that Mr. H would babysit them when their parents were out, and that he would make them go into the shower and perform oral sex on each other. He also claimed that he had told his parents about these incidents. When the parents were interviewed, they denied any knowledge of what he was saying.

The incarcerated brother also turned over his cell phone and said he had texts in which Mr. H allegedly admitted to everything. During these texts, the incarcerated brother kept making accusations that they were bullied, and it was Mr. H’s fault that the other brother killed himself. Mr. H kept apologizing profusely and would say things such as “I’m so sorry to what I did to you guys when you were younger.” When the Coconino County Sheriff’s Office came to question him, Mr. H denied all sexual conduct accusations and asked to speak to a lawyer. We became involved in the case and we immediately contacted the Sheriff’s office. We indicated that our client would be making no statements, and that any admissions he made had been in relation to bullying his brothers when they were younger. Due to the ramifications which could follow from any misconstrued admissions in regards to Mr. H keeping his job, it was best that we did the talking for him from this point forward.

Ultimately, the case was routed to the Coconino County Attorney’s Office. It was thoroughly reviewed and written up (in order to put into Mr. H’s personnel file.) It was determined that his admissions could easily be relating to bullying, and not to any sexual conduct with his brothers. Therefore, charges were being declined as there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction. Initially, Mr. H could have spent the rest of his life in prison if he was convicted of these charges. Ultimately, no charges were ever brought and he still maintains his job as a police officer.

State v. Mr. Y. (DMC No. 14759) – (3 Counts) Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor (3 Victims/DCAC) and (3 Counts) Felony Child Molestation – Not Charged – Glendale Police Department Investigated (DR No. 20XX-XXXXXXX4); Maricopa County Attorney’s Office “Turned Down.”

Mr. Y had worked for years in a trailer park as a manager and a maintenance man. One of the mom’s claimed to have overheard her kids talking about Mr. Y being “nasty.” When she pressed them, about what they meant by “nasty”, they talked about playing cops & robbers and “being handcuffed,” and playing the “tasting game” where something was put in their mouth. They also claimed they had been touched or licked in their privates.

The Police became involved and interviewed all 3 of the alleged victims (who were under 12 years of age). Their stories continually changed, yet they all maintained they were touched by Mr. Y. When Mr. Y was contacted, he admitted they played cops & robbers before, and that he had given the kids candy in which they were to guess what flavors the jelly beans were. He adamantly denied he had ever touched any of the children. He did agree to give a DNA sample, and then when he was pressed about doing a “voice stress analysis test,” he stated he wanted to speak to a lawyer.

We became involved, and we contacted the Detectives. We asked them to have no further contact with Mr. Y, and to deal with us directly. Because all of the allegations were so old (some up to 6 years), it was highly unlikely there was going to be no DNA. Ultimately, the case was sent to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office where it was reviewed and “turned down.” Mr. Y was potentially facing at least 3 life sentences in prison if he were to be convicted on the Sexual Conduct with a Minor charges alone, due to the fact that the children were under 12 years of age. He was never charged with anything, and he has a clean record.