Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
In the Matter of the Peace OfficerCertification of:
Dustin R. Dionne,
Respondent.
No. 14A-055-POST
PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT ANDCONCLUSIONS OF LAW
HEARING: August 17, 2015, at 8:00 a.m.
APPEARANCES: Dustin R. Dionne (hereinafter “Respondent” or “Mr. Dionne”) was
represented by his attorney Eric Wilson, Esq., Napier, Coury & Baillie, PC. The Arizona Peace
Officer Standards and Training Board (hereinafter “POST” or “Board”) was represented by Seth
T. Hargraves, Esq., Assistant Attorney General.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Velva Moses-Thompson
______________________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS OF FACT
BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURE
1. POST is the state agency established by the Legislature to certify peace officers
and to suspend or revoke their certification if they fail to comply with POST rules. A.R.S. § 41-
1822.
2. Respondent has been certified by POST since 2006, and has been employed by
the Phoenix Police Department (“PPD”) as a certified officer since May 2006.
3. On or about April 23, 2014, POST received a Termination Report from PPD
informing POST that Respondent had been terminated from employment effective April 8, 2014,
and the agency was aware of conduct that may violate A.A.C. R13-4-109(A)(1)-(9).
3. POST assigned Compliance Specialist Steve Jacobs to investigate whether the
circumstances of Respondent’s termination from PPD provided cause to discipline his peace
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
officer certification under POST’s administrative regulations. On September 16, 2015, Mr.
Jacobs presented a case overview to POST.
4. After the case was presented to POST, it determined that cause existed to
discipline Respondent’s certification.
5. Respondent requested an administrative hearing on POST’s decision. POST
referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings (the OAH), an independent state
agency, for an evidentiary hearing.
6. On August 1, 2016, POST issued a Notice of Hearing. The Notice of Hearing
charged Respondent with violating A.A.C. R13-4-109(A)(7), (8), and (9)1 by committing the
following alleged misconduct:(1) On March 28,2013, Officer Dustin R. Dionne, while off-duty,recklessly displayed a firearm during a traffic altercation;
(2) On March 28,2013, Officer Dustin R. Dionne provided falseinformation when he informed a Phoenix Police Sergeant that he hadbeen followed off the freeway by an aggressive driver, Mr. MJ, when infact, it was Officer Dionne who followed Mr. MJ;
(3) On March 28,2013, Officer Dustin R. Dionne provided falseinformation when he informed a Phoenix Police Sergeant that he hadbeen followed into a business parking lot by an aggressive driver, Mr.MJ, when in fact, it was Officer Dionne who followed Mr. MJ;
(4) On March 28,2013, Officer Dustin R. Dionne provided falseinformation when he informed a Scottsdale Police Officer that he hadbeen followed off the freeway by an aggressive driver, Mr. MJ, when infact, it was Officer Dionne who followed Mr. MJ2; and,
(5) On March 28,2013, Officer Dustin R. Dionne provided falseinformation when he informed a Scottsdale Police Officer that he hadbeen followed into a business parking lot by an aggressive driver, Mr.MJ, when in fact, it was Officer Dionne who followed Mr. MJ.
AZPOST's complaint further alleged that the above conduct violates the following provisions of
1 Effective April 8, 2016, A.A.C. R13-4-109(A)(9) was renumbered R13-4-109(A)(12). POST cited therule that was in effect at the time of the conduct.2 POST withdrew Allegation 4 at the outset of this OAH proceeding.
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
A.A.C. R13-4-109 (7), (8), and (9):(7) The commission of a felony, an offense that would be a felony ifcommitted in this state, or an offense involving dishonesty, unlawfulsexual conduct, or physical violence to wit: A.R.S. § 13-2904.A.6.disorderly conduct, and A.R.S. § 13-2907.0I, false reporting to a lawenforcement agency;
(8) Malfeasance, misfeasance, or nonfeasance in office; and
(9) Any conduct or pattern of conduct that tends to disrupt, diminish,or otherwise jeopardize public trust in the law enforcement profession.
7. From December 7 – 9, 2016 and January 31, 2017, a hearing was held at the OAH
on the issue of whether cause existed for POST to discipline Respondent’s peace officer
certification. POST submitted 14 exhibits and presented the testimony of four witnesses: (1)
Officer Eric Schwartz of Scottsdale Police Department; (2) Officer Arthur Vernon of Scottsdale
Police Department; (3) Sergeant Tadd Cline of PPD; and (4) Steven Jacobs, Compliance
Specialist with POST. Respondent submitted 37 exhibits, testified on his own behalf, and
presented the testimony of six witnesses: (1) Officer Brian Walsh of PPD; (2) Sergeant Marco
Vasquez of PPD; (3) Sergeant Greg Westover of PPD; (4) Sergeant Lance Diedrick of PPD; (5)
Attorney Robert J. Kavanagh; and (6) Lon Bartel of Peoria Police Department.
HEARING EVIDENCE
8. On March 28, 2013, Respondent, who was off-duty at the time, was involved in a
traffic altercation with another motorist, Mahdi Jawad, as he traveled north on the 101 Freeway
in Scottsdale. PEX 5 at 2.
9. On March 28, 2013, at approximately 10:25:51 a.m., Mahdi Jawad called
Scottsdale 911 to report a road rage incident that culminated with the other motorist
(Respondent) pointing a gun at him. Jawad indicated that, the incident started on the freeway,
where the other motorist began to tailgate him; that he was followed to his place of work, the
Italian Spoon restaurant, located at 7950 East Redfield Road in Scottsdale; and that when he got
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
out of his car to ask the driver why he was following him, the subject pointed a black handgun at
him. PEX 13 (Scottsdale 911 audio).
10. Mr. Jawad told the 911 operator that the subject then drove away and left
westbound on East Redfield Road towards Phoenix (East Redfield Road turns into East
Thunderbird Road after crossing Scottsdale Road into Phoenix). Wanting to obtain a license
plate, Mr. Jawad followed the other motorist to North 64th Street and East Thunderbird Road in
Phoenix, but was told by the Scottsdale 911 operator to stop following and return to his
restaurant where a Scottsdale officer was waiting to talk to him. Mr. Jawad stated that he was
following the other car to get the license plate, but didn’t want to get too close because he didn’t
want to get shot. Id.
11. At almost the same time that Mr. Jawad called 911, Respondent also called
Scottsdale 911, to report a vehicle that was following him. Respondent told the 911 operator
“I’ve got a guy following me, I’m on Redfield just west of Hayden, he was in front of me on the
freeway and kept cutting me off. I get off the freeway and now he’s following me around, I don’t
know what his problem is”. Respondent then described Jawad’s vehicle and gave the license
plate. Respondent was asked if the other motorist pointed a gun at him; he said, "No," and added
he was a Phoenix police officer, who was armed. Since Respondent was leaving Scottsdale and
entering into the City of Phoenix, Scottsdale police transferred the 911 call to the Phoenix Police
Department. Id.
12. Respondent told the Phoenix 911 operator essentially the same story, “there was
an aggressive driver on the freeway kept cutting me off. I got off the freeway and now he’s just
following me, I don’t know what he’s doing he’s just following me”. After passing the
intersection of 56th Street and Thunderbird Road, Respondent told the 911 operator that the
vehicle was no longer behind him, and he didn’t see the other vehicle anymore. When asked if
he wanted police contact, Respondent stated, "No, I'm good now, I just didn't want him to do
something stupid." PEX 13 (Phoenix 911 audio).
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
13. When Mr. Jawad returned to the Italian Spoon, he was met by Scottsdale Police
Officer Eric Schwartz, who interviewed Mr. Jawad and later authored an aggravated assault
report that listed Respondent as the offender/suspect. PEX 8, 10 at 2; 12/7/16 Hearing Audio3
(hereinafter “HA1”) at 21:55-22:07.
14. Mr. Jawad stated that another vehicle had tailgated him and followed him to his
work. Mr. Jawad said he had come from Hayden and Cactus and then pulled into the east
entrance/exit to the business complex located at 7950 East Redfield Road. He said he drove to
the north side of the building and parked in a space directly in front of the Italian Spoon. Mr.
Jawad said the vehicle that was tailgating him on the freeway had followed him to his place of
work and had stopped behind him, just northeast of his vehicle. PEX 8 at 2-3.
15. Mr. Jawad told Officer Schwartz that he got out of his vehicle and asked the other
driver why he was following him (Jawad). Mr. Jawad said he was approximately four feet away
from Respondent’s vehicle when Respondent pulled out a black handgun (possibly a Glock),
pointed it at him (Jawad), with the muzzle of the gun stuck out of the driver's window and told
him to get back. Upon seeing the gun, Mr. Jawad jumped backwards toward the rocks. He said
he feared for his life and believed he was about to be shot. Id. at 3-7.
16. The subject (Respondent) drove out of the parking lot and Mr. Jawad got back
into his vehicle. Wanting to obtain Respondent's license plate, Mr. Jawad said he followed the
vehicle west on East Redfield Road. He followed the subject to North 64th Street and East
Thunderbird Road, but discontinued after being told by a Scottsdale police dispatcher to stop
following. Mr. Jawad did not obtain the license plate to Respondent's vehicle. Id. at 6.
17. While Officer Schwartz responded to Mr. Jawad's 911 call, Scottsdale Police
Officer Art Vernon called Respondent by phone at approximately 10:35 am, and requested that
he return to Scottsdale to provide a statement to officers. HA1 at 2:11:45-2:22:05; PEX 10 at 8.
3 OAH Portal Document # 533356 (14A-055-post-DS231126.DSS)
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
18. According to Officer Vernon, Respondent did not provide any specific
information regarding the traffic altercation and refused to return to Scottsdale to speak with
officers after being asked. Officer Vernon said Respondent told him Scottsdale police could
come out and contact him at East Greenway Road and North Tatum Boulevard in Phoenix.
Scottsdale officers did not drive into Phoenix to speak to Respondent. Approximately thirty
minutes after speaking to Respondent, Officer Vernon authored a supplemental report
documenting his contact with Respondent. Id.
19. On March 28, 2013, at approximately 10:27 a.m., Phoenix Sergeant Jeffrey
Nielsen monitored a radio call of a fight where Respondent had called 911 and reported he was
being chased by an aggressive driver westbound on East Thunderbird Road in the vicinity of
North 64th Street. The call ended when Respondent told the dispatcher he was no longer being
followed and did not wish to be contacted by the police. PEX 6 at 2-3.
20. Shortly after Respondent ended his 911 call, Sergeant Nielsen called Respondent
by phone to ascertain that Respondent was safe and to gather a basic story of what occurred. The
conversation was brief and lasted approximately five minutes. During their conversation,
Respondent told Sergeant Nielsen that the driving altercation started as he drove north on the 101
Freeway. Respondent was off-duty, not in uniform, and was on his way home. He was
positioned in the HOV lane when another motorist (Jawad) passed him, got in front of him and
then unexpectedly did a brake check (slammed on his brakes). Wanting to avoid an altercation,
Respondent decided to exit the freeway at the Cactus Road exit with the intentions of driving
west on East Cactus Road to the State Route 51 Highway. Respondent said somehow the
aggressive motorist changed positions and was now behind Respondent's vehicle as he exited the
freeway. Id. at 3, 6-7, 9.
21. Respondent told Sergeant Nielsen that after getting off the 101, he wanted to see
if the other driver was still following him and to see what the problem was. Respondent said
after he pulled into the parking lot of an unknown business complex, where he noticed the other
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
motorist had followed him. Respondent stated that the other motorist drove around the driver's
side of his vehicle and entered a parking space in front of him. According to Respondent, the
other motorist got out of his vehicle, and started approaching Respondent’s car. In response, to
make the other motorist get away from him and his car, Respondent said he displayed his gun,
but did not point it at the subject. After seeing the gun, the subject retreated and got back into his
vehicle. Respondent then drove out of the parking lot, but the subject again began to follow
him. As a result, Respondent said he called 911. Sergeant Nielsen stated that when Respondent
described Mr. Jawad’s approaching his vehicle, Respondent did not use any descriptive words
such as “aggressively approaching” or “raging”. Id. at 3-4, 7, 11.
22. Shortly after speaking to Respondent, Sergeant Nielsen said he received a phone
call from a Scottsdale patrol supervisor regarding the incident. Due to Respondent being listed
as a suspect in a criminal report, Sergeant Jeffrey Nielsen contacted investigators from the
Phoenix Police Department Professional Standards Bureau (PSB) who initiated an administrative
investigation into Respondent. PEX 6 at 4; PEX 5 at 3.
23. Several hours after the incident occurred, Scottsdale Police Officer Eric Schwartz
attempted to contact Respondent by phone, and with no response, he left a message for
Respondent to return his call. At approximately 2:30 p.m., Respondent returned Officer
Schwartz' phone call and both talked on the phone for a little less than ten minutes. After
introducing himself, Respondent first asked if the other motorist provided a statement to
Scottsdale police, to which Officer Schwartz replied in the affirmative. HA1 at 25:45-26:48;
PEX 10 at 5; PEX 7 at 2.
24. Respondent told Officer Schwartz that he was driving north on the 101 Freeway
headed home to Peoria after being in Gilbert. As he drove, he said another motorist began
"brake checking" him and did so to the extent that Respondent was forced to exit the freeway at
Cactus. Respondent stated that he was going to drive west on Cactus Road to the SR51, go north
and get back on the Loop 101 Freeway. Respondent indicated that as they were going west on
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Cactus, (Jawad) was behind him following him. Respondent indicated that he was checking the
GPS on his phone which directed him north on Hayden Road. HA1 at 27:00-28:30; PEX 7 at 2,
4; PEX 10 at 5.
25. Respondent told Officer Schwartz that as he was driving north on Hayden Road,
Respondent noticed that he was being followed, so Respondent turned into a business complex to
just see if (Jawad) was following him. Respondent indicated that (Jawad) followed him into the
business complex, zipped passed him on the left/driver’s side, pulled into a spot and jumped out
of his car and approached Respondent’s car with his hands in the air. Respondent said he pulled
out and displayed his duty weapon and told the subject to "Fucking back off” and to "Get the
fuck away from my car." Respondent stated that he did not point his gun at the subject and did
not identify himself as a police officer. HA1 at 27:40-28:15, 31:15-31:45; PEX 7 at 2-3, 5, 7-9;
PEX 10 at 5.
26. Respondent told Officer Schwartz that he called 911 because, as he exited the
parking lot, Mr. Jawad got back in his vehicle and began to follow him and he didn’t know if
Jawad had a gun. He told Schwartz that he’d rather call 911 and have PD take care of it. After
Officer Schwartz told Respondent that the lot he was describing was actually the other drivers’
workplace, and that Respondent was going to be listed as the offender in an aggravated assault
report, Respondent ended the call. PEX 7 at 8.
27. On March 31, 2013, Respondent sent a text message to a friend stating “Hey you
think after I get fired I can be a firefighter”. Two days later, on April 2, 2013, Respondent sent a
text message to another friend in which he stated “I talked to my attorney today about the
incident and everything is going to be fine”. PEX 12 at 26-27.
28. On April 5, 2013, eight days after the traffic altercation, Attorney Robert
Kavanagh prepared a written statement on behalf of his client, Respondent, that was sent to
Scottsdale Police Detective Mark Cristiani. Mr. Kavanagh requested the written statement be
included with the criminal investigation prior to it being submitted to the Maricopa County
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Attorney's Office for review. Mr. Kavanagh said the information contained in the written
statement was Respondent's perspective of the incident that occurred on March 28, 2013, and
would have been conveyed to Scottsdale police had they met with Respondent after the incident
occurred. PEX 12 at 18.
29. The written statement indicated that Respondent first encountered the silver
colored Infiniti SUV on the 101 Freeway, approximately one mile south of the Cactus Road exit,
where the other motorist, Mr. Jawad, started to apply his brakes and brake check Respondent for
"no apparent good reason". As Respondent changed lanes, the Infinity also changed lanes and
continued to brake check, forcing Respondent to alternate his travel route and exit at East Cactus
Road. When Respondent drove west on East Cactus Road approaching Hayden Road, the
Infinity continued with the previous behavior by pulling in front of Respondent and brake
checking him again. According to the letter, at this point Respondent “now believed more than
ever that he needed to call the police and report the Infinity’s conduct”. Then, as the vehicles
approached the intersection at Hayden Road, the Infinity abruptly swerved, cut across multiple
lanes of traffic, and drove northbound on Hayden Road. Id. at 19-20.
30. The written statement said Respondent followed the SUV into a parking lot (7950
East Redfield Road) where the Infinity abruptly pulled into a parking spot. Id. Respondent
stopped his vehicle approximately 25 to 30 feet away from the SUV with his seat belt fastened,
when the driver of the SUV (Jawad) quickly exited his vehicle and began to rapidly approach
Respondent “almost running” with his arms up, stretched apart and yelling expletives.
Additionally, the letter described Jawad as being “very angry”, “tense” with his “facial
expression and overall body language indicated that he was going to assault” Respondent. In
response, Respondent said he removed his firearm from its holster in the "go-bag" and pointed it
at a ·low ready position, and told Jawad to get away as Jawad came to within two to three feet of
his driver's window. After the subject saw the gun, he turned and walked back to his vehicle. Id.
at 19-21.
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
31. The description of the incident in the letter was different than what Respondent
had told Sergeant Nielsen and Officer Schwartz.
32. On April 9, 2013, PSB served Respondent a Notice of Investigation ("NOI"),
which alleged: "On March 28,2013, at approximately 10:26 a.m. it is alleged that Officer Dionne
#8554 was involved in a driving altercation with another motorist in Scottsdale, Arizona from
the northbound 101 freeway near the Cactus Road exit and ended at 7950 East Redfield Road,
where Officer Dionne produced a handgun and pointed it at the other motorist." PEX 4 at 2.
33. On April 9, 2013, investigators, including Sergeant Tadd Cline, from PSB
conducted an interview with Respondent. Respondent told PSB investigators that on the morning
of March 28, 2013, he was northbound on the 101 Freeway headed to the northwest valley from
Gilbert to meet his grandfather for a round of golf. He said he was positioned in the #1 inside
lane and was approximately one mile south of the Cactus Road exit when he came upon a slower
moving tan car that was driving in his lane. Before he could change lanes, Respondent said he
had to wait for a silver color Infiniti SUV to pass him in the HOV lane. After the SUV passed,
Respondent said he moved into the HOV lane and the SUV unexpectedly applied its brakes and
brake checked him, which caused Respondent to act accordingly to avoid a collision. The SUV
continued to "brake check" him as he switched lanes, mirroring everything that Respondent did,
and Respondent believed his safest course of action would be to exit the freeway. Respondent
said the SUV exited the freeway at Cactus Road and he followed. Respondent said he was upset
with the driver of the SUV, but did not honk nor use any hand gestures that would have
provoked the other driver. PEX 9 at 4-6, 16-18.
34. Respondent told PSB that after exiting the 101, both vehicles approached the
intersection at the end of the exit ramp and East Cactus Road, and waited for the light.
Respondent said he was behind the SUV and they were positioned in the #2 outside lane.
Respondent told PSB that he did not call 911 at this time because the aggressive, dangerous
driving exhibited on the freeway by the SUV had ended, he was no longer upset, and he had
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
somewhere he needed to be. Respondent stated his intention was to drive west on East Cactus
Road to the SR51, drive north, get back onto the 101 Freeway and meet his grandfather, who was
visiting from out of town, at a golf course in the area of North 101 Avenue and West Bell Road.
Id. at 7, 19, 20.
35. Respondent said he turned west onto East Cactus Road and eventually moved
over into the #1 inside lane. After moving over, Respondent stated the SUV mirrored his
movement, changed into his lane and again brake checked him. He said this occurred just east of
the intersection at North Hayden Road, which is one mile west of the freeway. Respondent said
this was the only time the SUV applied its brakes in between the off-ramp and North Hayden
Road. According to Respondent, at this point he was pretty much determined that he needed to
call the other driver in to police. Respondent “now believed more than ever that he needed to
call the police and report the Infinity’s conduct”. As the vehicles approached the intersection at
Hayden Road, the Infinity made a turn across multiple lanes of traffic, and drove northbound on
Hayden Road. Id. at 7, 18, 19, 20, 25, 39, 55.
36. After the SUV went north on North Hayden Road, Respondent said he decided to
follow it to obtain the license plate and call the police regarding the aggressive driving.
Respondent said the SUV was not only a danger to him, but its aggressive driving was now
endangering other motorists and he needed to report it. Id. at 27, 28, 56.
37. Respondent doesn’t tell either Scottsdale or Phoenix 911 about brake checking,
either on the freeway or on Cactus Road, nor does he tell either 911 dispatcher about Jawad’s
illegal lane change. PEX 13.
38. Respondent told PSB investigators that he followed the SUV into the business
complex, located at 7950 East Redfield Road. Respondent said he followed the SUV into the
business complex for the sole reason of obtaining the license plate to the SUV and to report it to
the police. Respondent told PSB that Jawad pulled into a parking space, and as he (Respondent)
was rolling past, Jawad threw his door open, got out and said something to the effect of “what
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
the fuck”, or “who the fuck”. According to Respondent, as Jawad was throwing the door open
his hands were in the air, he had a tense appearance on his face, and he started aggressively
approaching Respondent’s vehicle. Respondent described Jawad as not running, and not
jogging, but taking quick steps. PEX 9 at 8, 9, 46, 48, 55.
39. Respondent indicated that his first reaction was to go to his "go bag" where he
keeps his weapon. Respondent pulled his gun up to the steering wheel cluster or the front-end
cluster/steering wheel of the vehicle “holding it somewhat at low ready pointing towards the
steering wheel”. He put his left hand out and told Jawad to “get the fuck back, get away from
my car”. Jawad continued to approach Respondent’s vehicle, until he was about two to three feet
away, at which point he noticed that Respondent was holding a gun. Respondent did not
identify himself as a police officer. Id. at 9, 64.
40. In discussing Respondent’s decision to follow Jawad and obtain his license plate,
Sergeant Cline asked “So are you, you feel like you’re kind going through police mode now or,
just as a concerned citizen?” Respondent replied “At, this point my uh, I wanted to be someone
who is reporting an aggressive driver on the roadway, and no, not really police mode. No, I’m
not a cop on the road”. PEX 9 at 28 lines 4-8.
41. Later in the interview as Respondent is talking about when he pulled his weapon,
Respondent states:Comes up to my car, requires me to take action, the action I take isby grabbing my duty firearm, holding it at a low ready pointing itat the cluster and steering wheel area of my vehicle. And givinghim a command to back off because at this point, I'm a privatecitizen, I'm not working.
Id. at 55 lines 23-27.
42. When Sergeant Cline compared Respondent’s threatened use of force against
Jawad with a prior threatened use of force during the commission of his job duties, Respondent
told Sergeant Cline “In this circumstance I'm a private citizen I'm not a Police Officer. So it's
different.” When asked how it is different, Respondent stated “Or the laws are clearly different in
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Bob Kavanagh's report.” Respondent also stated “This is completely different than a situation
that happens at work when I'm acting as a Police Officer.” And “Because I displayed it so that
he would not. Because I'm, I'm not acting as a Police Officer, I'm acting as a private citizen.”
Finally, “Okay, well in this instance I wasn’t acting as an Officer. I was a private citizen. I gave
him a command to get back.” Id. at 61 lines 3-22, at 62 lines 5-6, 16-17, at 66 lines 14-15.
43. Respondent said he did not write down the license plate for the SUV, but
memorized it. Respondent dialed 911 as he travelled out the western side of the parking lot, and
started giving the information to the 911 Dispatch of the Scottsdale Police Department that he
was being followed by an SUV. As Respondent crossed the border into Phoenix, he was
switched over to the Phoenix Police Department, at which point he gave them his location where
he’s going, the direction of travel and the fact that he’s being followed by the suspect. Once
Respondent realized he was no longer being followed, he advised the Phoenix Dispatch that he
was no longer being followed and ended the contact. Id. at 10, 48.
44. Respondent then told PSB that, about five to seven minutes after ending the 911
call, while continuing to drive, Respondent was contacted by Sergeant Nielsen. Respondent
pulled over into a parking lot at Tatum & Greenway to take the call. Respondent told PSB that
while speaking to Sergeant Nielsen he wasn’t multitasking (talking and driving), and that while
speaking to Sergeant Nielsen, he switched over to a call waiting call from Scottsdale Officer
Vernon. Respondent declined Officer Vernon’s request to return to Scottsdale to discuss the
incident, and told Officer Vernon that he could come out to Tatum and Greenway where
Respondent was. Respondent stated that the only reason he could tell Officer Vernon where he
was to meet up was because he was stopped on the corner and could look up at the sign and say,
this is where I am. After ending the call with Officer Vernon, Respondent switched back to and
completed the call with Sergeant Nielsen. Id. at 10-11, 23, 33.
45. Respondent indicated that when he told Sergeant Nielsen that Jawad had followed
him off the freeway, that he was shaken by the incident. When questioned about having told
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Sergeant Nielsen and Officer Schwartz that Jawad had followed him into the parking lot,
Respondent acknowledged that he told Officer Schwartz that Jawad had followed him, and that
he had misspoken and confused the sequence of events when he made the statements to Nielsen
and Schwartz. Id. at 12, 22, 38-40, 42, 43, 44-45.
46. The PSB investigation sustained the allegations that:
- On March 28, 2013, at approximately 10:26 a.m., Officer Dustin Dionne #8554,
while off-duty, committed the elements of a felony when he recklessly displayed a
firearm during a traffic altercation while at 7950 East Redfield Road in Scottsdale,
Arizona.
- On March 28, 2013, Officer Dustin Dionne #8554 provided a false verbal report to
Sergeant Jeffrey Nielsen #5020 regarding his involvement in a traffic altercation that
incepted on the Loop 101 Freeway.
- On March 28, 2013, Officer Dustin Dionne #8554 provided false and misleading
statements to an officer from the Scottsdale Police Department regarding a criminal
investigation.
PEX 4 at 4; PEX 5 at 1.
47. The PSB investigation concluded that Respondent’s decision not to drive through
the parking lot demonstrated his intentions of making contact with Mr. Jawad. Respondent could
have avoided the confrontation at multiple points after exiting the freeway. Investigators found
no clear evidence that Mr. Jawad used or attempted to use unlawful physical force against
Respondent that would have required Respondent to display his firearm. Furthermore, if verbal
provocation occurred as Respondent alleged, the threat or use of physical force under the law
was not justified. The investigation also found multiple inconsistencies regarding Respondent’s
recollection of the incident. PEX 5 at 16.
48. PSB Sergeant Cline testified that his PSB investigation concluded that
Respondent’s conduct met the elements of disorderly conduct for the reckless display of a
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
weapon per A.R.S. § 13-2904(A)(6). Sergeant Cline testified that Respondent did not have
justification to display his weapon, because Jawad didn’t pose a threat; profanity doesn’t justify
physical force; there was no indication that Jawad was going to assault Respondent; Respondent
never relayed to PSB that he was fearful that Jawad was going to kill him, assault him, pull him
out of his vehicle and knock him around; and Respondent’s vehicle was running and he could
have easily driven off. Sergeant Cline also testified that Mr. Jawad’s actions in using profanities,
and walking back toward Respondent wasn’t unreasonable for someone who had just been
followed two plus miles off the freeway to his place of business. He further testified that, since
Jawad had nothing in his hands, wasn’t pointing or threatening, or using verbal provocation such
as threatening physical contact; coupled with the fact that Respondent had the ability to remove
himself from that situation, that Respondent was not justified in his action. HA1 at 3:46:30-
3:47:36, 3:47:50-3:49:18, 3:50:30-3:31:55.
49. As a result of the PSB investigation, Respondent was terminated from the
Phoenix Police Department on April 8, 2013. PEX 1, 2, 3.
50. On June 10, 2013, Attorney Robert Kavanagh authored another letter on behalf of
Respondent, this time addressed to the County Attorney’s Office. In this letter, Kavanaugh
addressed Respondent’s “misstatement” to Schwartz, and indicated that the only discrepancy that
Kavanaugh found regarding Respondent’s statement was that he told Schwartz that he didn’t
follow the other driver when he actually followed Jawad for a short distance. Dionne Exhibit
(“DEX”) 13.
51. On August 10 & 11, 2014, a civil service hearing was held on Respondent’s
appeal of his termination. During the hearing, Respondent testified that he decided to call 911
after Jawad had made the illegal turn from Cactus to Hayden Road. Respondent also testified that
at the termination of the call with Phoenix 911, he pulled into another business complex at
Tatum and Thunderbird to see if he was being followed. He further testified that several events
happened in this business complex, including the start of his conversation with Sergeant Nielsen.
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
While talking to Nielsen, Respondent reassessed his GPS and began travelling north on Tatum,
at which time he received a call waiting call from Officer Vernon. As he approached the
intersection of Tatum Road and Greenway Road, he pulled into a grocery store parking lot and
told Officer Vernon to meet him there. He then ended the call with Sergeant Nielsen and waited
about 5 to 10 minutes for a return call from Officer Vernon before proceeding on his way. DEX
15 at 36, 49-51.
52. Respondent’s testimony about the parking lot on Tatum and Thunderbird
contradicted what Respondent had told PSB. This information was not presented in the civil
service board hearing. PEX 9 at 10-11, 23, 33; DEX 14, 15.
53. On September 5, 2014, the hearing officer in Respondent’s civil service hearing
concluded that Respondent’s display of the firearm was reckless and not justified. She also found
that there was no evidence of any attempted use of physical force by Mr. Jawad. She further
found that Respondent exhibited bad judgment by not simply calling 911, and by not simply
driving away when he had the opportunity to do so prior to displaying his weapon. DEX 16 at
16-17.
54. On September 16, 2015, POST reviewed Respondent’s case and voted to initiate
proceedings on Respondent.
55. On October 9,2014, following his appeal before CSB, Officer Dionne was
reinstated as a Phoenix Police Officer, where he is currently employed. DEX 18 at
(Dionne000521).
AZ POST Hearing
56. In this hearing, Sergeant Marco Vasquez testified that if someone had followed
him off the freeway to his workplace, that he would feel threatened. He also testified that the
person doing the following is the aggressor. 12/8/16 Hearing Audio4 (hereinafter “HA2”) at
4:13:55-4:14:30, 4:16:00-4:16:22.
4 OAH Portal Document # 533367 (14A-055-POST-DS231127.DSS)
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
57. Sergeant Greg Westover testified that if someone had tailgated him on the
freeway and followed him home, he would feel threatened and would be justified in defending
himself. Sergeant Westover went on to state that “if anyone angrily followed him anywhere, I
would feel threatened and justified in defending myself”’ Id. at 4:49:35-4:50:45.
58. Officer Lance Diedrick testified and described an incident where he felt
threatened when an unknown vehicle approached him. Id. at 5:20:15-5:22:05.
59. The officers who were called as witnesses by Respondent testified that
Respondent responds well to high stress situations, including incidents where gunfire is
exchanged.
60. Attorney Robert Kavanaugh testified that if Respondent or anyone else provokes
someone to use unlawful physical force, then they don’t get the protection of the justification
statute. 12/9/16 Hearing Audio5 (hereinafter “HA3”) at 1:08:15-1:08:50.
61. Lon Bartel, testified that if Respondent intentionally followed someone off the
freeway, for no other reason than he wanted to, followed them to their work, where the person
felt in fear, and reacted by getting out of the car and asking Respondent what his problem was,
then Respondent would not be justified in threatening force. Id. at 2:45:55-2:46:30.
62. Respondent testified that after getting on the exit ramp, Respondent ends up
behind Jawad at the light, and feels the incident is over. Respondent then proceeds west on
Cactus Road in an effort to try and get back to SR 51 to make his way north back to the 101.
While attempting to do this, Jawad passes Respondent again, cuts in front of him and brake
checks him again on Cactus Rd before cutting across multiple lanes of traffic before heading
north on Hayden. Respondent then also made the turn across multiple lanes of Cactus Rd traffic
to follow Jawad north on Hayden, almost catching up as they approach Redfield Road. HA3 at
4:07:23-4:09:40.
5 OAH Portal Document # 533381 (14A-055-POST-DS231128.DSS)
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
63. Respondent indicated that the continued brake checking on Cactus Road and the
illegal lane change were the breaking point when he felt that he needed to obtain Jawad’s license
plate and call it in to police. Id. at 4:09:40-4:10:15.
64. Respondent follows Jawad west on Redfield then right into the Italian Spoon
parking lot where Jawad goes around back and quickly whips into a parking space while
Respondent is driving past him to get his license plate. Upon seeing Jawad get out of his
vehicle, just 15 feet away, while throwing up his hands yelling profanity and exhibiting a 1000
mile stare, and an intense look on his face, making a B-line or rapid approach to Respondent’s
vehicle, walking quickly, not running, but moving fast with intention of getting to Respondent’s
vehicle, Respondent retrieved his firearm and held it so that Jawad could see it while telling him
to get back. Id. at 4:12:35-4:14:38, 4:19:30-4:21:35, 4:25:00-4:27:14, 4:28:45-4:30:58.
65. Respondent testified that the parking lot was a typical lot, where two vehicles
could travel beside each other. Respondent described some vehicles parked under the covered
parking as well as other vehicles parked on the north side facing south, and the lot being not
empty but not overflowing. Other than Mr. Jawad, Respondent did not testify to seeing any
other individuals in the parking lot. Respondent testified that his vehicle was moving forward as
he was looking left toward Mr. Jawad’s vehicle in order to obtain the license plate, at which he
saw Mr. Jawad exit his vehicle, which surprised Respondent and caused him to stop his vehicle.
Id. at 4:14:45-4:15:35, 4:21:40-4:22:20.
66. As he’s leaving the parking lot and calling 911, Respondent sees that Jawad is
now following him. Respondent testified that initially he was trying to get the plate to call in the
information of a reckless driver, and attach at least the license plate as information, but that after
the incident in the parking lot, where Jawad aggressed on him in the parking lot, he had issued
Jawad a command in addition to a defensive display of his weapon from the low ready, and as
he’s exiting, Jawad is following him. Now Respondent states that he needs assistance because
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
he’s being followed by this person who has already aggressed on him and knows that he is
armed, and is now making a second attempt to aggress upon him. Id. at 4:39:50-4:40:58.
67. Respondent doesn’t tell either 911 dispatcher that he followed Jawad to the
Italian Spoon parking lot to get the license plate or the fact that Jawad aggressed on him in the
parking lot, that he had issued Jawad a command in addition to a defensive display of his weapon
from the low ready to defend himself. PEX 13.
68. Respondent testified that as he was going down Redfield Road (which becomes
Thunderbird Road), Respondent was talking to 911. Somewhere around 54th street, Respondent
stated that he didn’t see Jawad anymore. He stated that he saw a parking lot on the corner of
Tatum and Thunderbird, and that he pulled in to verify that he was no longer being followed.
Respondent then ended the call with 911, telling them that he does not desire any further contact.
HA3 at 4:40:58-4:42:41.
69. Respondent testified that several minutes after ending the 911 call, more than 3
but less than 8, he received a call from Phoenix Sergeant Nielsen, during which Scottsdale
Officer Vernon buzzed in on call waiting. Respondent stated that “this all happened right at the
same junction here as he is in that second parking lot”. While continuing his conversation,
Respondent begins travelling north on Tatum, as directed by his GPS, to what was ultimately
Greenway where he offered to meet Officer Vernon. HA3 at 4:43:40-4:44:30, 4:45:38-4:46:43.
70. Respondent’s testimony about the parking lot on Tatum and Thunderbird
contradicted what Respondent had told PSB. PEX 9 at 10-11, 23, 33.
71. Respondent made no effort to explain the discrepancies between the statement he
made to PSB regarding the second parking lot that he pulled into at Tatum and Greenway Roads,
and his testimony in this hearing and his civil service hearing about the second parking lot being
at Tatum and Thunderbird Roads.
72. Respondent doesn’t tell Sergeant Nielsen about the brake check on Cactus Road,
nor does he tell Nielsen about the illegal lane change. He also doesn’t mention that he followed
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Jawad to the Italian Spoon parking lot to get Jawad’s license plate. Respondent doesn’t tell
Nielsen about Jawad’s “1000 mile stare”, or the “intense look on his face”. Respondent does not
mention anything about Jawad quickly approaching or aggressively approaching him. PEX 6 at
11 lines 8-15.
73. Respondent testified that he did not give a thorough, accurate and descript version
of events as he understood them to be when he was speaking to Nielsen. Respondent indicated
that after realizing that there were inaccuracies or misspeaks, he needed to correct those actions
and he needed to do the right thing. Respondent further testified that he made the corrections in
his PSB interview and in the Kavanagh letter. HA3 at 4:49:30-4:53:40.
74. The Kavanagh letter does not state that Respondent had “misspoken” or that he
was correcting any “inaccuracies” that he had made to either Sergeant Nielsen and Officer
Schwartz. PEX 12 at 18-24.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. POST bears the burden of proof and must establish cause to penalize a peace
officer’s certification by a preponderance of the evidence.6 Respondent bears the burden of proof
to establish affirmative defenses by the same evidentiary standard.7
2. “A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that
the contention is more probably true than not.”8 A preponderance of the evidence is “[t]he
greater weight of the evidence, not necessarily established by the greater number of witnesses
testifying to a fact but by evidence that has the most convincing force; superior evidentiary
weight that, though not sufficient to free the mind wholly from all reasonable doubt, is still
sufficient to incline a fair and impartial mind to one side of the issue rather than the other.”9
6 See A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(G)(2); A.A.C. R2-19-119(1); see also Vazanno v. Superior Court, 74 Ariz.369, 372, 249 P.2d 837 (1952).7 A.A.C. R2-19-119(2).8 MORRIS K. UDALL, ARIZONA LAW OF EVIDENCE § 5 (1960).9 BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY at page 1373 (10th ed. 2014).
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
3. The Arizona Legislature has empowered POST to “[d]eny, suspend, revoke or
cancel the certification of an officer” who does not comply with rules prescribing reasonable
minimum qualifications for officers.10 Under A.A.C. R13-4-109(A), POST may “[d]eny,
suspend, revoke or cancel the certification of an officer” who does not comply with duly
promulgated rules prescribing reasonable minimum qualifications for officers.11 POST may
discipline an officer’s certification under A.A.C. R13-4-109(A)(7), (8), or (9) if it determines
that he has committed acts that constitute any of the following:
7. The commission of a felony, an offense that would be a felony ifcommitted in this state, or an offense involving dishonesty,unlawful sexual conduct, or physical violence;
8. Malfeasance, misfeasance, or nonfeasance in office; or
9. Any conduct or pattern of conduct that tends to disrupt,diminish, or otherwise jeopardize public trust in the lawenforcement profession.
Malfeasance is “[a] wrongful or unlawful act; esp. wrongdoing or misconduct by a public
official.”12 Misfeasance is “[a] lawful act performed in a wrongful manner.”13 Nonfeasance is
“[t]he failure to act when a duty to act existed.”14
Allegation 1
4. POST established by a preponderance of the evidence that n March 28, 2013,
Respondent, while off-duty, recklessly displayed a firearm during a traffic altercation.
5. POST established by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent committed
a felony or an offense involving dishonesty or physical violence.
6. Pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-2904(A)(6), a person commits disorderly conduct if, with
intent to disturb the peace or quiet of a neighborhood, family or person, or with knowledge of
10 See A.R.S. § 41-1822(C)(1).11 See A.R.S. § 41-1822(C)(1).12 BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY at 976 (8th ed. 1999).13 Id. at 1020.14 Id. at 1080.
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
doing so, such person: Recklessly handles, displays or discharges a deadly weapon or dangerous
instrument. Disorderly conduct under subsection A, paragraph 6 is a class 6 felony. A.R.S. § 13-
2904(B).
7. The evidence shows that Respondent’s display of the firearm was reckless and
not justified in this situation. The evidence further shows that Respondent knowingly disturbed
Jawad’s peace, or that he intended to do so. This was a situation of Respondent’s own making.
He did not need to be at that location. He intentionally followed Jawad off the freeway, through
the streets of Scottsdale, and to Mr. Jawad’s workplace, where Respondent pulled and displayed
his weapon to scare off Mr. Jawad.
8. Respondent’s conduct placed Mr. Jawad in reasonable apprehension of imminent
physical injury.
9. Respondent put himself in that situation and location. And once there, he did not
need to stay. If his goal was to obtain the plate, he had plenty of opportunity to do so long prior
to getting to the Italian Spoon restaurant. Respondent could have gotten the plate and called it in
while on the highway, while stopped at the light at the end of the off ramp from the 101 to
Cactus Road, while travelling down Cactus Road, or after he claimed to have been brake
checked on Cactus, but before the other vehicle made the illegal right turn. He didn’t.
10. When Respondent followed Jawad to Jawad’s place of business and pulled behind
Jawad’s vehicle, he could have easily gotten the plate and kept moving. The record shows that
Respondent’s vehicle was still in motion and moving past Jawad’s car when Jawad was getting
out of the vehicle. He didn’t. Instead of continuing to move, he stopped to engage Mr. Jawad
and pulled out his weapon.
11. Respondent’s claim of self-defense is not supported by the record.
12. While Arizona Revised Statutes 13-404, provides that "A person is justified in
threatening or using physical forces against another when and to the extent a reasonable person
would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
use or attempted use of unlawful physical force." A.R.S. § 13-404(A). The statute also provides
that the threat or use of physical force against another is not justified in response to verbal
provocation alone. A.R.S. § 13-404(B)(1). The threat or use of physical force is also not
justified if the person provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful physical force.
A.R.S. § 13-404(B)(3).
13. There is no evidence that Jawad was acting aggressive or that he threatened
Respondent, only that Jawad may have used profanity.
14. When Respondent was describing the encounter to Sergeant Nielsen, he stated
that Jawad exited his car and started approaching Respondent’s car. Sergeant Nielsen stated that
when Respondent described Mr. Jawad’s approaching his vehicle, Respondent did not use any
descriptive words such as “aggressively approaching” or “raging”. Similarly, when Respondent
was describing the encounter to Office Schwartz, Respondent stated that Jawad jumped out of
his car and approached Respondent’s car with his hands in the air. There was no mention of
profanities, other than the profanities used by Respondent, and there was no mention of the
aggressiveness or mannerism.
15. Respondent’s description of Mr. Jawad’s aggressiveness and mannerism were not
included in his initial reports of the incident, and were only added after Respondent began to
change his story about the incident in order to bolster his defense.
16. Respondent’s threatened use of force through the display of his weapon was
further unjustified, as Respondent had provoked Mr. Jawad’s actions by following him off the
freeway to his place of business.
17. Respondent’s own witnesses testified, they would consider the person doing the
pursuing as the aggressor. Sergeant Marco Vasquez testified that if someone had followed him
off the freeway to his workplace, that he would feel threatened. Sergeant Greg Westover testified
that if anyone angrily followed him anywhere, he would feel threatened and justified in
defending himself. Officer Lance Diedrick testified and described an incident where he felt
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
threatened when an unknown vehicle approached him. Attorney Robert Kavanagh testified, that
if Respondent or anyone else provokes someone to use unlawful physical force, then they don’t
get the protection of the justification statute.
18. Respondent was the one who was doing the pursuing of Mr. Jawad. Mr. Jawad
was acting in defense of the threat that was posed to him by Respondent. When Jawad exited his
vehicle in the Italian Spoon parking lot, he was responding to the threat posed to him by
Respondent following him off the freeway to his workplace. Respondent provoked Jawad’s
response by following him there. A.R.S. § 13-404 does not allow Respondent to claim
justification for reacting to a response that he provoked.
19. The evidence also does not support Respondent’s claim that he was acting in
response to his training and experience.
20. According to Respondent, his experience and training includes: “maximizing
distance between yourself and a danger point – ‘the greater the distance between the officer and
the threat, the more difficult it is for the suspect to hurt the officer’" and “do not challenge people
that actively trying to attack [officers]”. Respondent further stated that the training is
“intentionally designed to be an automatic response”.
21. The evidence showed that Respondent was not acting in accordance with this
training. Respondent did not maximize the distance between himself and the alleged danger
point, nor did he refrain from challenging the alleged threat. Respondent’s testimony was that
his automatic response to the “danger point” was to stop his vehicle and confront Mr. Jawad. He
made no attempt to maximize the distance as his training called for. Further, Respondent
repeatedly told PSB investigators that he was not acting in the capacity of a police officer on the
date in question.
22. Respondent’s explanation of acting in accordance with his training and experience
were not included in his initial reports of the incident, nor during his PSB interview, and were
only added after Respondent began to change his story about the incident.
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
23. Based on the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, Respondent
committed disorderly conduct when he recklessly displayed a firearm during a traffic altercation,
and doing so committed a violation of A.R.S. § 13-2904(A)(6). Therefore, POST established
cause to discipline Respondent’s peace officer certification under A.A.C. R13-4-109(A)(7).
Allegation 2
24. POST established by a preponderance of the evidence that, on March 28, 2013,
Respondent provided false information when he informed a Phoenix Police Sergeant that he had
been followed off the freeway by an aggressive driver, Mr. MJ, when in fact, it was Respondent
who followed Mr. MJ.
25. POST established by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent committed
a felony or an offense involving dishonesty or physical violence, specifically, A.R.S. § 13-
2907.01(A), false reporting to law enforcement.
26. A.R.S. § 13-2907.01(A) provides “[i]t is unlawful for a person to knowingly make
to a law enforcement agency of either this state or a political subdivision of this state a false,
fraudulent or unfounded report or statement or to knowingly misrepresent a fact for the purpose
of interfering with the orderly operation of a law enforcement agency or misleading a peace
officer.” False reporting is an offense involving dishonesty.
27. When Respondent told Sergeant Nielsen that he had been followed off the
freeway by Mr. Jawad, he knew that the statement was false and he knew it was being made to a
law enforcement agency.
28. Respondent did not dispute that he made the comments, nor did he dispute that
the statement was false. Respondent gave several explanations for the false statement including:
he was confused and shaken by the incident; he uses the term “following” interchangeably with
“mimic(ing)” and “mirror(ing)”, to convey that Mr. Jawad was following him from in front; and
that he misspoke. Respondent’s explanations are not supported by the record.
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
29. When Respondent was presented, in his PSB interview, with Sergeant Nielsen’s
recollection of what Respondent had told him about exiting the freeway, Respondent did not
dispute or correct the information, instead he stated that he misspoke because he was shaken by
the incident.
30. Respondent’s explanation that he misspoke because he was shaken by the fact that
Mr. Jawad exited his vehicle and threw his hands in the air, is not supported by the evidence and
is inconsistent with the testimony of Respondent’s coworkers, who that Respondent responds
well to high stress situations, including incidents where gunfire is exchanged.
31. Respondent’s explanations of why he told Sergeant Nielsen that Mr. Jawad had
followed him off the freeway were not included in his version of events until he began to change
his story about the incident.
32. Based on the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, Respondent
knowingly misrepresented and/or made a false statement to law enforcement to mislead, when he
informed a Phoenix Police Sergeant that he had been followed off the freeway by an aggressive
driver, Mr. MJ, when in fact, it was Respondent who followed Mr. MJ., and doing so committed
a violation of A.R.S. § 13-2907.01. Therefore, POST established cause to discipline
Respondent’s peace officer certification under A.A.C. R13-4-109(A)(7).
Allegations 3 and 5
33. POST established by a preponderance of the evidence that, on March 28, 2013,
Respondent provided false information when he informed a Phoenix Police Sergeant and a
Scottsdale Police Officer that he had been followed into a business parking lot by an aggressive
driver, Mr. MJ, when in fact, it was Officer Dionne who followed Mr. MJ.
34. Within ten minutes of the incident, Respondent told Sergeant Nielsen that he
pulled into a parking lot of an unknown business complex, where he noticed the other motorist
had followed him, drove around the driver's side of his vehicle and entered a parking space in
front of him.
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
35. Within four hours of the incident, Respondent told Officer Schwartz the same
story, that he pulled into a parking lot of an unknown business complex, where he noticed the
other motorist had followed him, drove around the driver's side of his vehicle and entered a
parking space in front of him.
36. There was no evidence presented that Mr. Jawad had ever followed Respondent
into any parking lot, nor that Mr. Jawad drove past Respondent and pulled into a parking space.
37. When Respondent told Sergeant Nielsen that he had been followed into a business
parking lot by Mr. Jawad, he knew that the statement was false and he knew it was being made
to a law enforcement agency.
38. And when Respondent told Officer Schwartz that he had been followed into a
business parking lot by Mr. Jawad, he knew that the statement was false and he knew it was
being made to a law enforcement agency.
39. Respondent’s claim that he did not intentionally mislead Sergeant Nielsen and
Officer Schwartz, but rather misspoke due to confusing the sequence of events is not credible
and not supported by the evidence.
40. Respondent’s explanation, of confusing the sequence of events, was not included
in his initial reports of the incident, nor during his PSB interview, and was only added after
Respondent began to change his story about the incident.
41. Respondent’s description of pulling into the second parking lot at Tatum and
Thunderbird Roads, was not included in his initial reports of the incident, nor during his PSB
interview, and was only added later in the present hearing and in his testimony before the civil
service board, after Respondent had started changing his story about the incident.
42. Based on the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, Respondent
knowingly misrepresented and/or made a false statement to law enforcement to mislead, when he
informed a Phoenix Police Sergeant that he had been followed into a business parking lot by an
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
aggressive driver, Mr. MJ, when in fact, it was Officer Dionne who followed Mr. MJ., and doing
so committed a violation of A.R.S. § 13-2907.01.
43. Based on the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, Respondent
knowingly misrepresented and/or made a false statement to law enforcement to mislead, when he
informed a Scottsdale Police Officer that he had been followed into a business parking lot by an
aggressive driver, Mr. MJ, when in fact, it was Officer Dionne who followed Mr. MJ., and doing
so committed a violation of A.R.S. § 13-2907.01.
44. Similarly, POST established that Respondent committed malfeasance, “[a]
wrongful or illegal act;” misfeasance, “[a] lawful act performed in a wrongful manner;” or
nonfeasance, “[t]he failure to act when a duty to act existed.” Therefore, POST established cause
to discipline Respondent’s peace officer certification under A.A.C. R13-4-109(A)(8).
45. POST established that Respondent engaged in a conduct or pattern of conduct that
tends to disrupt, diminish, or otherwise jeopardize public trust in the law enforcement profession.
Therefore, POST established cause to discipline Respondent’s peace officer certification under
A.A.C. R13-4-109(A)(9).
