cover-up and conspiracy in the phoenix police department - memo dated 2-19-10

::

City of PhoenixTo:

From:

Integrity CommitteeCity of Phoenix City Manager's Office

Phillip Roberts, SergeantSouth Mountain Precinct, 41 K Squad

Date: February 19, 2010

Subject: COVER-UP AND CONSPIRACY WITHIN THE PHOENIX POLICEDEPARTMENT

On October 19, 2009, I authored a memorandum to the City of Phoenix IntegrityCommittee entitled "Request for Whistleblower Protection - Retaliation." As thecommittee is all to aware, I have made very serious allegations against LieutenantsLaurel (Lauri) Burgett and Lisa Messina, who I accused of either EEO and/or EEOretaliatory actions against Detective Terry Yahweh and myself.

I appealed to the Integrity Committee for assistance in this matter, describing this as a"cry for help." This was due to efforts by upper management of the Phoenix PoliceDepartment protecting both lieutenants and propagating retaliation against DetectiveYahweh and myself in that endeavor.

I made several predictions in this memorandum of events that I felt might occur if theIntegrity Committee did not act. Some of these predictions were as follows:

1. Retaliation would continue against Detective Yahweh and myself.2. The release of this memorandum to the Phoenix Police Department would

"infuriate" the Command Staff of the Phoenix Police Department if it were to beleaked to them.

3. The Professional Standards Bureau of the Phoenix Police Department (InternalAffairs) would be unable to investigate my allegations in an unbiased and fairmanner.

4. A message would be sent to other potential EEO victims not to report EEOcomplaints against the City of Phoenix Police Department for fear of retaliation.

I think it is important to remind the committee of these predictions because they have allnow come to fruition. This memorandum will not be a "rehash" of past retaliation effortsthat have been committed against myself ... far from it. As with each memorandum Ihave written, this memorandum will contain what many would describe as absolutelynew astonishing and appalling behavior from government officials.

However, this does not surprise me. I find it "Standard Operating Procedure" in thesematters. Mr. Randy Spenla, an official representative of the Integrity Committee himselfstated. "I feel vour oain" when it came to EEO retaliation beina committed anainst mA. "I V - ~--.------ - ---0:.1------- .---

and suggested that the "only" way to stop the retaliation was to file a civil lawsuit againstthe City of Phoenix Police Department.

Integrity CommitteeCOVER-UP AND CONSPIRACY of 18

Since taking that advice, the retaliation has continued at an accelerated rate. Thismemorandum however will not be centered on retaliation occurring against me. As thetitle of this memorandum suggests, it will deal primarily with what I believe is acontinuing policy of "Cover-up and Conspiracy" within the Phoenix Police Department.

Is this a harsh statement to make? Absolutely. Can I prove it by past, historical fact?Absolutely. Was the Integrity Committee made aware of this and did nothing to correctthe behavior? Absolutely.

Before delving into this matter, I want to make it perfectly clear that some of informationprovided to me and articulated in this document came from what I would describe as"very reliable sources" within City Government. Since the Integrity Committee operatesunder an umbrella of confidentiality, I will not disclose the identity of these sources.

If the need arises at a later date, I will disclose their identities during civil proceedings toverify the veracity of my claims. The "sources" who have provide the information to mehave communicated with me are from a wide spectrum of City Government. Why wouldso many people contact me and provide me with potentially damaging informationagainst the City of Phoenix and specifically the Phoenix Police Department?

It's easy to understand, my "story" has made it to the main core of City Governmentalemployees. Television news captions, newspaper articles and the Internet have alldone stories on me. I would invite anyone from the Integrity Committee to simply"Google" the name "Sergeant Phil Roberts Retaliation" and read what appears.

Sources within City Government have said they are tired of the "shenanigans" and"cronyism" occurring within the Phoenix Police Department, along with favoritism aswell.

I will not identify the supervisors at this time, but it is a fact that I know a Phoenix PoliceLieutenant who "ordered" a sergeant working for the lieutenant to read a 41-pagememorandum of mine that was leaked to the Internet entitled "Retaliation." Thelieutenant ordered the sergeant to read this document because according to thelieutenant, the sergeant needed to know "this is how the Phoenix Police Departmenttreats its employees."

I avow to the Integrity Committee that this is true. I discussed this with both thesergeant and lieutenant separately and both acknowledged this occurred. Will Idisclose the names of these supervisors? Absolutely not, why would I want them toendure and be subjected to the same retaliation that I have gone through.


Does the Integrity Committee think this is bogus information? Perhaps the IntegrityCommittee believes that I can say anything I want to but unless I have names to goalong with my claims, they should be discredited? If so, then please read on.

I have received information that in December of 2009 or January of 2010, ameeting/training seminar took place involving Command Staff, Executive CommandStaff Officers, Middle Managers and Civilian Administrators in the Phoenix PoliceDepartment, to hear one of the lead Public Information Officers from the Federal Bureauof Investigation (FBI).

This meeting was put on by Commander Chuck Miiller, who leads the Phoenix PoliceDepartment's Public Affairs Bureau (PAB) and was attended by numerousCommanders, Assistant Chief's, Middle Managers and as I understand, Public SafetyManager Jack Harris.

During this meeting, the FBI representative began to make several "jokes" that wereoffensive in nature and were clearly EEO violations. At least one member of theCommand and/or Executive Command Staff was offended by these comments and feltthey were out of place.

Shortly after the meeting was held, the City of Phoenix received a letter from a law firmin the Phoenix metro area stating that they were representing an "unnamed client" whois a member of the Command Staff, Middle Manager and/or Executive Command Staffof the Phoenix Police Department. The letter stated that the undisclosed official wasrequesting an investigation into the matter by the City of Phoenix Equal OpportunityDepartment.

What is not a surprise to me, or anyone who has had to deal with EEO retaliationpropagated by the Phoenix Police Department, is that the law firm stated their client wasfearful of "retaliation" being committed against them if their name was revealed.

Here is a Command Staff, Middle Manager and/or Executive Command Staff Officer,employed with the City of Phoenix Police Department, fearful of retaliation by their ownemployer if they bring an EEO complaint forward. In fact, I have been told that the lettereven alludes to my current situation that has been occurring and the retaliation againstme.

I had predicted this exact scenario in my October 19, 2009, memorandum if the IntegrityCommittee did not intervene? This is clear evidence that the Phoenix PoliceDepartment is incapable of investigating EEO complaints without placing fear in theirown employees for reporting it, even if the employee is among the top managementlevels in the Phoenix Police Department itself.


This should be easy to verify since I understand that a copy of the letter was sent to Mr.Gary Verburg, the City Attorney who is one of three members of the IntegrityCommittee. I also understand that the letter was sent to the City of Phoenix EqualOpportunity Department and the City Manager's Office as well.

I do not know if an internal investigation has been started in this matter however, I amsure the FBI will launch one since I will be informing them of this incident and it wastheir official that made the inappropriate statements.

Some of the facts maybe slightly off in these matters including the other discoveries Ihave uncovered, but the essence of what occurred is true. It is true that thismeeting/training seminar with an FBI representative took place and "off colored jokes"were made. Furthermore, a letter was sent to the City of Phoenix describing the eventsand requested an investigation be completed at the request of an anonymous client.

If this does not convince the Integrity Committee that there are serious EEO problemswithin the City of Phoenix Police Department, perhaps this next piece of information will.

I have obtained information that the City of Phoenix Equal Opportunity Department(EOD) has a "sustained" allegation against Lieutenant Burgett for providing false anderroneous statements to EOD investigators concerning my EEO allegations. Inessence, she lied during an internal investigation.

As part of the standard protocol for EEO investigations, City EOD investigators sharedtheir findings with the City of Phoenix Police Department's Professional StandardsBureau (PSB). It is my understanding that PSB's function is not to "reinvestigate" thematter but facilitate its disposition including a possible Disciplinary Review Board (ORB)hearing.

I have heard from multiple sources that PSB is now REFUSING to facilitate and/oraddress this matter and will not cooperate with City EOD. In layman terms, City EODcaught Lieutenant Burgett "red handed" in a lie concerning my EEO allegations and nowthe Police Department will not acknowledge it or do their job.

This does not surprise me. In November of 2009, City EOD advised the PoliceDepartment not to transfer me out of my position as a Robbery Sergeant. BothMarquita Beene of City EOD and I believe Chief Legal Council for the City of PhoenixPersonnel Department, Ms Elaine Cardwell, advised the police department not totransfer me yet the police department did so anyway.

So does it really surprise anyone that when City EOD does an internal investigation anddiscovers that Lieutenant Burgett lied in her statements that the Phoenix PoliceDepartment is now "refusing" to address the issue?


Is this not exactly what I predicted in my October 19, 2009, memorandum? I warnedthe committee that the Command Staff and Executive Command Staff Officers of thePhoenix Police Department had so "entrenched" themselves in these investigations thata fair and impartial investigation was impossible.

As I understand it, there is now a "feud" brewing between two separate branches of CityGovernment, one trying to protect City Employees from EEO attacks and one trying toprotect a single protected employee who initiates the attack.

If we don't pay attention to the findings from the City Equal Opportunity Department,then why do we even have an Equal Opportunity Department?

Does anyone from the Integrity Committee think that my claims are unfounded? If so,perhaps this next illustration may hit "closer to home."

Several weeks ago a Phoenix Police Department Disciplinary Review Board (DRB)hearing was convened for Phoenix Police Lieutenant Steve Haynes. Lieutenant Hayneshad been sustained for his second EEO complaint since he was promoted to lieutenant.The complaint was surrounding sexual harassment against a female employee.

The DRB recommended a "40 hour" suspension for Lieutenant Haynes even though thiswas not his first sustained EEO complaint. .

I have obtained information that Public Safety Manager Jack Harris signed off on this40-hour suspension. However, when this came to the attention of City of Phoenix CityManager David Cavazos, he had to "intervene" in the matter and overrode the minimaldiscipline for Lieutenant Haynes and ordered a demotion.

I don't have direct knowledge of this but I feel my source is credible.

Would the committee like another example of how the Phoenix Police Department"minimizes" EEO investigations once you are a "protected" individual?

In January of 2009, a DRB was held for Sergeant Ron Snodgrass, after being sustainedof showing pornographic material to a female employee, on his city computer. PublicSafety Manager Jack Harris over road a DRB recommendation for a suspension andinstead sanctioned a "written reprimand." Why would Public Safety Manager Harris dothat?

Could it be that Sergeant Snodgrass sat on the "Pension Board" and voted favorably toallow Public Safety Manager Harris to remain employed with the City of Phoenix yet beallowed to receive both his Police Department Pension and his Deferred OptionRetirement Plan (DROP) money? I have been told this placed Public Safety ManagerHarris's gross annual income at nearly $198,000.


Apparently the City of Phoenix Integrity Committee thought so because former AssistantCity Manager Alton Washington and the Integrity Committee "intervened" (somethingMr. Spenla told me the Integrity Committee could not do) in the matter and ordered thePhoenix Police Departments Professional Standards Bureau to "properly" investigatethe matter again. Furthermore, Mr. Washington "rebuked" Public Safety ManagerHarris, saying that his actions gave "the appearance of favoritism."

Think this is not true? Google the name "Sergeant Ron Snodgrass" and read whatappears. The term "the appearance of favoritism" is an exact quote from an ArizonaRepublic Article, dated January 24, 2009.

At that time, Assistant City Manager Alton Washington ordered Phoenix PoliceProfessional Standards Bureau to reinvestigate the matter "properly" and to administerproper and just discipline to Sergeant Snodgrass.

Does anyone see a pattern here? If not then please continue to read on.

In July of 2009, a Personnel Employee Relations Board PERB) hearing was held onclaims by the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association (PLEA) that an unfair and biasedinternal investigation was done by the Phoenix Police Professional Standards Bureau(PSB). The initial complaint was that Lieutenant Steve Soha had retaliated againstofficers under his command who had filed a work related grievance against him.

PSB did an internal investigation in the matter and "unfounded" the case, saying that noretaliation occurred. However, a PERB Hearing Officer came to the exact oppositeconclusion. The PERB Hearing Officer found credible evidence that Lieutenant Soh adid retaliate against his own employees and furthermore the PERB Hearing Officerchastised PSB for "unfounding" the investigation to begin with.

If you think this is not true, then I would invite anyone from the Integrity Committee toread the transcripts of the July 2009 PERB Hearing and review what the PERB HearingOfficer said. Did the Integrity Committee intervene in this matter as well? I believe theydid. I know for a fact that former Assistant City Manager Alton Washington did and theAssistant City Manager Chairs the Integrity Committee.

Does anyone recall what Mr. Washington did in this case? Mr. Washington was soincensed with the Phoenix Police Department at the completely tainted and unfairinvestigation that PSB had done, that Mr. Washington ordered Lieutenant Soh a's caseto be re-investigated.

However, did the Phoenix Police Professional Standards Bureau re-investigate thismatter? No, Mr. Washington did not trust PSB to properly investigate the matter andmade plans for the City of Phoenix Personnel Department to re-investigate it.

Yet another example of the Integrity Committee (or at least Mr. Washington) protectingCity Employees from unjust behavior at the hands of the Phoenix Police Department.


Anyone still not see a pattern yet? Then perhaps this next factual story will convincethe Integrity Committee.

On September 21,2009, I authored a memorandum entitled "Serious Neglect of Duty-Request for PSB Investigation." In general, the memorandum detailed informationconcerning an Illegal Alien Arms Dealer who was allegedly in possession of 60 handgrenades that he wanted to sell for $200.00 a piece on the streets of Phoenix.

Initially the investigation went well. Numerous officers and detectives were involved andwe had successfully electronically tracked the suspect's cellular telephone to within 100feet of its location. Everything was in place to affect a safe arrest and recovery ofnumerous hand grenades.

A command post had been established, Special Assignment Unit Officers (SWAT) werestanding by and representatives from both the Immigration and Customs Enforcement(ICE) along with the Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (AT F) were present. LieutenantLisa Messina was kept up to date on the status of the investigation throughout theevening and Violent Crimes Bureau Commander Dave Faulkner was also kept abreastof the investigation saying investigations such as this were "good."

The following day, Lieutenant Messina and Lieutenant Burgett had lunch together. Amonth prior I had filed an EEO allegation against Lieutenant Burgett and LieutenantMessina is her close, personnel friend (a fact verified by Ms Marquita Beene of CityEOD).

Immediately after their lunch date the investigation was stopped. It was removed fromthe Robbery Unit under my leadership and was transferred to Lieutenant Burgett's Unit.I initially believed this was just another act of retaliation that had occurred against mesince filing the EEO complaint, so I elected to just "log it down" as I had done so oftenbefore in the past and report it at a later date.

Does the Integrity Committee know what happened with the investigation next, after theRobbery Unit was on the verge of making an arrest and recovering potentially 60 handgrenades? Nothing.

Oh, there was a minor, token investigation that amounted to nothing substantive, but forall intensive purposes, the case was "dead in the water." Does the committee know thata Departmental Report was not done, a Case Agent was never assigned, no arrest wasmade, no hand grenades were recovered, no follow-up information was collected on thesuspects phone number or contacts and the information was never passed on to otherlaw enforcement agencies. No "Hazard to Officer Bulletins" or any other intelligencebulletin was ever created or distributed to surrounding law enforcement agencies.


Why? ...Because in my opinion the case was forgotten by all those in charge. Theinvestigation was forgotten by Lieutenant Burgett, Lieutenant Messina, CommanderFaulkner and possibly Commander Parra (Lieutenant Burgett's supervisor) as well.However, Sergeant Phil Roberts did not forget the investigation ... and this wasunacceptable to the Phoenix Police Department.

The obvious question is how could a seasoned, experienced lieutenant forget about amajor investigation involving the attempted sale of hand grenades by an illegal alien inPhoenix, Simple, it was never Lieutenant Burgett's objective to arrest a suspect orrecover hand grenades. Her objective was to pull the investigation away from me, plainand simple. In that respect, Lieutenant Burgett was a totally successful.

Perhaps members of the Integrity Committee feel this is a far stretch? Then let me tellthe committee of a meeting I had with Ms Marquita Beene, the City of Phoenix EODInvestigator on this EEO complaint.

On November 2,2009, I met with Ms Beene and we discussed the hand grenade case.Ms Beene acknowledged that if Lieutenant Burgett did not do anything substantive withthe case, then it would indeed appear to be "retaliation."

I want to be totally honest with the committee (as I always have been) and tell you that aDepartmental Report was done, a Case Agent was assigned to the investigation, follow-up information was completed and intelligence collected along with other lawenforcement being advised. All of this did occur ... after I wrote my memorandum, 29days after the investigation was transferred to Lieutenant Burgett's control.

I authored my memorandum 27 days after the case was stopped and the response fromthe Police Department must have been "oh my God!" Two days later and 29 days afterthe case was stopped, a "secret" meeting was held on the matter where the threepeople with the most information on the case (Sergeant Bracke, Detective Richard andmyself) where purposely left out.

The committee should also know that just days after being assigned as the Case Agentfor the hand grenade incident (29 days later), the Case Agent called the Phoenix LawEnforcement Association (PLEA) and spoke to PLEA President Marl Spencer andasked for union protection. The Case Agent felt that the investigation may become"politically driven" and if he did not write the investigation as the command staff saw fit,he would be retaliated against.

Is this a neglect of duty on the part of Lieutenants Burgett or Messina?" That dependson which internal investigative unit is looking into the matter. To me, any fair andunbiased investigation would sustain at least some small infraction if not a more seriousneglect of duty charge.


However, if the Phoenix Police Department's Professional Standards Bureau looks intothe case; the same investigative unit that botched an investigation involving LieutenantSteve Soha and required a PERB Hearing Officer to correct it; or the same investigativeunit that did not correctly investigate allegations against Sergeant Ron Snodgrass, thenthey would probably show that neither Lieutenants Burgett or Messina did nothingwrong.

Does the Integrity Committee believe that this too maybe a stretch? How could anyinvestigative unit not find some violation of policy in this matter? If you think that PSBwould not "whitewash" this investigation you would be wrong.

Yesterday on February 18, 2010, an Incident Review Process (IRP) was held forLieutenant's Burgett and Messina inside PSB. An IRP in layman terms is a process inwhich the alleged policy violator and their union representative review an internalinvestigation. During an IRP, the investigation is complete but in draft form only and isdone to verify facts and evidence. In most cases the finding is usually "sustained orunresolved."

However, not in this case. Both Lieutenants Burgett and Messina were found to havedone absolutely nothing wrong in the investigation. Their allegations were "unfounded."Does any of this sound familiar?

How could this be? How could such a glaring case of neglect of duty not even rate a"supervisory coaching," the smallest form of discipline or a performance issue?

The answer lays within Lieutenant Burgett's own words.

During the first week of January 2010, I began to receive information from sources thatLieutenant Burgett was openly stating that City of Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon hadbecome involved in the hand grenade investigation. Initially Sergeant Alex Ortiz of theDrug Enforcement Bureau, then later Lieutenant Greg Carnicle from the TacticalOperations Bureau, had heard Lieutenant Burgett make the statements to them that shewould not receive discipline in the hand grenade investigation and this came fromMayor Gordon.

In fact, Sergeant Ortiz related that according to Lieutenant Burgett, Mayor Gordon hadpersonally apologized to her for all that she has had to endure during the hand grenadeinvestigation.

Since that time, I have verified through anonymous "sources" that Lieutenant Burgetthas made these same statements to other police personnel and have been heard in theGang Enforcement Unit, Drug Enforcement Bureau and the Violent Crimes Bureau.One supervisor even stated that Lieutenant Burgett was "bragging" that she had MayorGordon's cellular te!ephone number !n her persona! cellular telephone address book.


Does the Integrity Committee feel that I may have "crossed the line" in mymemorandums for bringing up Mayor Gordon's name? If so, then I would request thatyou review my memorandums where I have discussed this. Is it Sergeant Phil Robertswho has brought the name of Mayor Phil Gordon into this investigation or LieutenantLaurel Burgett?

Simply asking Sergeant Alex Ortix or Lieutenant Greg Carnicle what Lieutenant Burgetthad said to them should suffice. During sworn depositions, I will provide additionalnames as needed. The facts are what they are.

The next logical question to ask is; did Mayor Gordon in fact contact Lieutenant Burgettand make these statements and if so why? Why would the Mayor of Phoenix getinvolved in an on-going, confidential, internal investigation and make statements to anEEO perpetrator. Statements that she would not receive any discipline in a handgrenade investigation and may have even apologized for it.

To understand this, lets talk hypothetical's and assume for the moment that MayorGordon did get involved (again per Lieutenant Burgett he did). In order to do this and tofollow along with a "possible" explanation, one must go back in time a few months agoto early November 2009.

During this time the hand grenade memorandum had been "leaked" to the news mediaand the Internet. I do know who the source of the leak was but I have been accused ofby the Command Staff of the Phoenix Police Department of being the source of theleak, a complete falsehood.

Almost immediately, the Phoenix Police Public Information Bureau became inundatedwith news media requests for any and all information pertaining to the hand grenadeinvestigation. Even State Senator Russell Pierce asked for a copy of my memorandum.

All this is true.

So why would a Republican State Senator get involved in this matter? Could it bebecause Senator Pierce is a critic of the immigration policies of the City of Phoenixsupported a Democratic Mayor, Mayor Phil Gordon.

In my memorandum, the suspect is described as an "illegal alien arms dealer" andremember that the newly assigned Case Agent on the investigation requested "unionprotection" from PLEA because he felt the case may become "politically driven."

All this is true.


With that being said, does anyone think that perhaps the Mayor of Phoenix wanted tobe briefed on this matter? To me, it would only seem logical, a heavy news mediaresponse and now a Republican Senator's inquiry. I cannot attest this occurred butLieutenant Burgett herself stated that she and Mayor Gordon spoke on the subject sohe must have known something about the investigation, right?

If true, then who would have briefed the mayor? The obvious answer is someone fromthe Phoenix Police Department. To me, it only makes sense to have a representativefrom the Police Department do this. Again, assuming this is true and it was LieutenantBurgett who stated that she discussed the case with the mayor.

Assuming that all or even a portion of this is true, then where did the Phoenix PoliceDepartment get its information to brief the mayor? Lieutenant Burgett may not haveactually done the initial briefing to the mayor. It may have come from Public SafetyManager Harris or another high-ranking individual with the Police Department, but theinformation itself came from Lieutenant Burgett.

Is this true? If the mayor was briefed on an on-going, internal Police Departmentinvestigation, where did the information for this briefing come from?

I believe the answer that lays with Commander Chuck Miiller of the Public AffairsBureau. In mid-November 2009, the Department of Public Safety (DPS) recovered 23hand grenades in west Phoenix. Immediately after this, there again was a flurry of newsmedia requests asking for information on the Phoenix Police Department's now"missing" hand grenade case.

Commander Miiller said that the hand grenades were not related to the Phoenix PoliceDepartment's earlier investigation and that as it relates to my memorandum an"argument" occurred between supervisors followed up by a "misperception" of events.

Commander Miiller also said that this was the second complaint (the first being myAugust 3, 2009, EEO memorandum) that I had launched against Lieutenant Burett since"being passed over in 2009" to lead a kidnapping squad supervised by LieutenantBurgett.

There is only one flaw in Commander Miiller's statements ... none of it is true.

No "argument" ever took place. No "misperception" took place and several witnessesverified this. Furthermore, Lieutenant Burgett never passed me over for the kidnappingsquad ... because I never applied for the position.

So where did Commander Miiller obtain this erroneous information from? In my opinionthere is only one answer, Lieutenant Burgett. It may not have been supplied directlyfrom Lieutenant Burgett, it may have been relayed via PSB !nvestigators to CommanderMiiller based on PSB interviews with Lieutenant Burgett (again another policy violation)but I believe the substance of the statements came from her.


Clearly Commander Miiller obtained these "false" descriptive statements somewhere.

Why do I think these statements came from Lieutenant Burgett. Because LieutenantBurgett needs/must come up with some sort of plausible explanation to the EEOcomplaint and what better explanation than "Phil Roberts is just upset because he gotpassed over for the kidnapping squad."

The problem with this is that it is not true. I did submit three transfer requests in 2009,all to leave Lieutenant Burgett's span of control. Two transfer requests were for theMajor Offender Bureau and one was to a Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET)position but not one to the kidnapping squad.

So assuming that Mayor Gordon was briefed on the hand grenade investigation ...wheredid the information come from?

My guess is from Lieutenant Burgett. If Commander Miiller possibly obtained his falseinformation, either directly or in-directly from Lieutenant Burgett, then could MayorGordon have possibly obtained his hand grenade information the same way ... againassuming that he was briefed on the subject, alluded to by Lieutenant Burgett's ownstatements.

For Lieutenant Burgett and the Phoenix Police Department this made total sense.

Sergeant Roberts was out of control and moving too fast. He was not interestedin an EEO complaint but was only upset and "disgruntled" for being passed overfor the position as the sergeant of the kidnapping squad. The EEO complaint isbaseless and so is the hand grenade investigation. This way no one on thePhoenix Police Department is embarrassed ...except Sergeant Roberts.

Is this a far off scenario? It shouldn't be, since this is exactly what Lieutenant Burgett,Commander Miiller and now PSB have put out.

Does the Integrity Committee know how many times I have been interviewed as awitness or been invited to "secret" meetings by the Police Department to discuss whatled up to these events. Not one time. Not by PSB, my supervisors, Commander Miileror anyone on the Police Department.

How many times has Lieutenant Burgett discussed this as a witness by PSB, hersupervisors, Command Miiller or been to "secret" meetings? I know of at least one time,by Mayor Gordon, according to Lieutenant Burgett herself.

Sergeant Ortiz even stated that Mayor Gordon apologized to Lieutenant Burgett for allthe stress and hardship she has had to endure in these events.


Is this true? Does Mayor Gordon know that I am on FMLA Stress leave for theseretaliatory actions, and that Commander Miiler's false statements caused ArizonaRepublic Reporter Michael Ferrassi to describe me as a "disgruntled supervisor."

Did the Phoenix Police Department "purposely" put this false information out andrefused to correct it? To me, it makes sense and explains much about why the PhoenixPolice Department continues to retaliate against me.

Assigning" Sergeant Roberts to 3d shift patrol to keep him quiet and if he files alawsuit, we'll simply payout with taxpayer's money and in time this too will beforgotten. This way "our" records will remain clean, no one will be the wiser onthe "botched" hand grenade investigation because PSB will clear the offendersand our chances of becoming the Chief of Police in San Diego, San Antonio,Bolder Colorado or some other American City will still be intact.

A pretty good plan except for one problem that the Phoenix Police did not count on, CityEOD did their own investigation and caught Lieutenant Burgett in a lie.

Is this a far stretch ... then why is PSB REFUSING to acknowledge City EO D's findingsof Lieutenant Burgett making false statements? It's easy to understand, if LieutenantBurgett is lying to City EOD then perhaps she is lying about everything?

Perhaps Mayor Gordon was briefed by the Police Department based on erroneousinformation supplied by Lieutenant Burgett. Perhaps Mayor Gordon became angry atSergeant Roberts based on the erroneous information and "apologized" to LieutenantBurgett for "all that she had gone through."

Could even a small part of this be true? If this did occur and Mayor Gordon"apologized" to Lieutenant Burgett as she says he did, does anyone think that MayorGordon angry with me? If so did that carry over to my assignment to 3rd shift patrol withWednesday, Thursday and Friday off even though I was under the protection of FMLAlaws?

These are all very interesting questions. I'm sure that when questioned about this thePolice Department will state that I only went on FMLA to avoid being transferred to 3rd

shift in the first place.

Not true. In October of 2009, Sergeant Rich Consenza contacted me on behalf ofCommander Faulkner, who was concerned that I was under a tremendous amount ofstress. Commander Faulkner wanted Sergeant Cosenza, who was the supervisor incharge of the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) for the Police Department, to see if Iwas "ok?"

So in December of 2009, after multiple retaliatory internal investigations launchedagainst me and "kicked out" of my office, I do go on FMLA (Stress) Leave and now thepolice department says it is to avoid going to 3rd shift.


You cannot have it both ways. I either am or am not under stress? It is a fact that thePolice Department had had concerns about my stress this as far back as early October2009 and I am currently under a doctor's care and diagnosed with extreme stress.

All of this is a huge problem for the Police Department. They must "unfound" theallegations against Lieutenants Burgett and Messina to save face and limit civildamages. Think this could never happen ... then explain the July 2009 PERB Hearing?

Can anyone on the Integrity Committee visualize what the newspaper headlines wouldbe if either Lieutenants Buregtt or Messina were "sustained" in even a small part of a"botched" a hand grenade investigation and allowing an illegal alien selling handgrenades to get escape?

I can ... "Supervisors Disciplined for Letting Illegal Alien Hand Grenade Suspect GetAway."

How would State Senator Russell Pierce react to this? Could this even affect futurepolitical aspirations of public officials in up coming elections?

Worst of all, whom on the Police Department would tell Mayor Gordon that theinformation supplied to him about the hand grenade investigation was wrong ... becauseit was supplied by a "sustained" liar.

How can the mayor give his assurance that no discipline will come out of the handgrenade investigation if it turns out that Lieutenant Burgett is a liar?

Could any of this be true?

Would the Phoenix Police Department's Professional Standards Bureau purposelyfalsify an internal investigation to "cover" for the Phoenix Police Department? Just askformer Phoenix Police Officer Linnea Knowles, she is he victim of Sergeant Snodgrass'ssexual harassment complaint.

Perhaps the committee could ask current Phoenix Police Officer Cameron Scadden ifhe thinks this could occur. He is the officer that was "retaliated" against by LieutenantSteve Soh a where PSB did an internal investigation said "no retaliation occurred" and aPERB Hearing Officer came to the exact opposite finding.

Does upper management of the Phoenix Police Department use the power of the PoliceDepartment to meet their own agenda's and personal vendetta's? If you are in doubt, Iwould suggest that the committee ask former Phoenix City Manager Frank Fairbanks.

Does the Integrity Committee know that a directive is in place, established by Mr.Fairbanks, not to execute search warrants at the homes of Phoenix Police Officers,unless the City Manager's Office is notified first?


How did this come about? It was over the theft of a three-dollar nameplate from ahomicide detective's cubical. The nameplate later was shown on a website critical ofthe Phoenix Police Department and specifically Public Safety Manager Jack Harris.

Search warrants were executed at various locations including the home of a PhoenixPolice officer and thousands of dollars in manpower have been spent on the case,without the recovery of the nameplate or any arrest of anyone for the theft.

Does the Integrity Committee not think this is an abuse of power? If not then couldanyone on the committee explain to me the following:

In September of 2009, I brought forth both information and evidence of a felony cover-up inside PSB itself. Both Lieutenants Lauri Burgett and Stan Hoover were involved,and it pertained to the destruction and concealment of official city documents.

This is a class 6 felony under Arizona Revised Statues 13-2407.AA. In the past 6months does anyone know what progress has been done by the Phoenix PoliceDepartment to investigate this case? Nothing.

Apparently the theft of a three-dollar nameplate is a more heinous of a crime than anInternal Affairs Lieutenant inside an Internal Affairs Conference Room orchestrating thedestruction and concealment of "official" City Documents.

Why does the City of Phoenix Police Department not investigate this? Because it goesfurther up the "food chain" than Lieutenants Lauri Burgett or Stan Hoover and the PoliceDepartment "doesn't want to go there." It might interfere with someone wanting to bethe next Police Chief in San Diego.

Think any of this is a far stretch of the imagination? Then I would respectfully ask theIntegrity Committee to pick up the telephone and dial 602-262-4580, this is thetelephone number to the Phoenix Police Professional Standards Bureau.

Ask PSB "what is the status of the investigation involving Lieutenants Stan Hoover andLauri Burgett in destruction and concealing "official" city documents which is a class 6felony on ARS 13-2407.AA.

Ask PSB "what is the status of Lieutenant Burgett's investigation where it is alleged sheviolated the orders of two Police Commanders and "forced" an unsigned, unreviwed andunauthorized PMG all the way to City Personnel.

Ask PSB "what is the status of the investigation where Lieutenant Burgett violatedUnited States Civil Rights Laws and kept a suspect unlawfully detained for 28 hours,feeding him a diet of Twinkies and soft drinks without legal council."


Ask PSB "Is it true that on December 14, 2009, you ordered Sergeant Ortiz to authorizea retaliatory memorandum to have Sergeant Roberts investigated for test driving a car 8months ago, for 10 minutes, on his lunch hour, where he was not identifiable as a PoliceOfficer but when Sergeant Roberts brought forth similar allegations against LieutenantBuregtt including photographs, both investigations are now being handled as"Periormance Issues?"

Ask PSB "what is the status of the neglect of duty allegations on Commander ChuckMiiller for "refusing" to contact Arizona Republic Reporter Micheal Ferrassi andcorrecting the erroneous statements he put out about Sergeant Roberts?"

Ask PSB "Is it true that City EOD has been in contact with you (PSB) and advised youthat they have a sustained "false statement" investigation against Lieutenant Burgettand you are not acting upon it?"

I am sure that PSB will give the same standard answer of "it is on-going," but simply aska general question of "how many Notice of Investigations (NOI's) have been issued" inthese matters.

Ask City EOD if they have discovered Lieutenant Burgett has lied in these matters andwhat is the response from the Phoenix Police Professional Standards Bureau to this?

Ask PSB if they actually made a ruling that both Lieutenants Burgett or Messina werenot found not responsible of even a minor policy infraction of the hand grenadeinvestigation, even though no one was arrested and no hand grenades were recovered?

Cover-up and Conspiracy Within the Phoenix Police Department? Absolutely.

You can call this a fiasco, quagmire, debauchery of leadership or some otherdescriptive term but in essences "it's a mess." In my opinion it did not have to come tothis.

If the Integrity Committee would have simply followed there own policies set forth in theCity of Phoenix Employees Ethics Handbook back on October 19, 2009, we would notbe were we are now.

Instead of fixing the problem, the committee stood by on the sidelines to observe anddid not even contact me until Phoenix City Councilman Michael Johnson began askingquestions.

Finally after six weeks, Mr. Spenla, contacted me on December 1, 2009, and said myinvestigation "fell through the cracks" and it was not even reviewed by the committeeuntil Councilman Johnson inquired about the complaint on November 30, 2009.


That's interesting since City EOD Investigator Marquita Beene told me that she hadbeen in contact with the Integrity Committee in mid-November of 2009 and was told bythe Integrity Committee that my complaint was one of the most unusual complaints thecommittee had ever received and they did not know how to handle it.

I told this to Mr. Spenal along with the facts that not only had I made an earlier inquirybut so had PLEA President Mark Spencer, all in mid-November of 2009. Mr. Spenla'sresponse to this was "telling the truth and my hand on the good book" the committee didreview my complaint on November 5, 2009, and did not know how to deal with 'it. Thiswas followed up by "you're not recording this phone call are you?"

With all due respect ... ,EXCUSE ME???

At the beginning of this memorandum, I stated several predictions back on October 19,2009, that I felt would come true unless the Integrity Committee intervened (as Mr.Washington would have). All of my predictions have since come true.

In closing let me predict what is coming in the future:

1. Retaliation will continue against me.2. Lieutenant Burgett and perhaps others will launch a civil lawsuit against myself

and the City will not defend me nor will the City of Phoenix be named as adefendant.

3. I will be brought up on even more internal investigations by PSB.4. The City of Phoenix Police Department and/or the Integrity Committee will

order me to stop authoring memorandums.5. The Police Department will soon release the internal investigation and police

report for the hand grenade investigation and it will show that both LieutenantsBurgett and Messina did nothing wrong and that there was amiscommunication on my part. I n addition it will state that I was moving "toofast" in the investigation and both lieutenants were simply trying to slow itdown.

6. Lieutenant Burgett will be "sustained" of only small infractions of policies, suchas making disparaging comments about another supervisor, but this will onlybe due to numerous witnesses present. No major policy violation will besustained by the Police Department against Lieutenant Burgett

7. And finally ... the Integrity Committee will not act. The Committee will continueto express its frustrations with the Police Department behind closed doors butin the end, will not intervene. Why? Because interference from the IntegrityCommittee would show wrong doing on the part of the Police Department andthat will increase a civil judgment.

Integrity CommitteeCOVER-UP AND CONSPIRACY0f18

As I have said before, in the end someone will have to answer for all of this. Someonewill have to explain how in the worst budget crisis in the history of the City of Phoenix,tax payers money was "squandered" like this. Why was this allowed to continue?

In July of 2009, Employee Relations Administrator Lori Steward signed an "order" thatall retaliation and retaliation like offenses must "cease and desist" upon the employeesof the City of Phoenix. I wonder how Ms Steward would feel that the order shemandated is not worth the paper it was printed on?

I would like the committee to think about this as I close. It is a fact that a Phoenix PoliceLieutenant ordered a sergeant under the lieutenant's command to read a 41-page"Retaliation" memorandum that I authored that is now on the Internet. The lieutenantdid this because the lieutenant wanted the sergeant to understand how "the PhoenixPolice Department treats it's employees."

I am under FMLA Stress leave and do not want to talk to anyone in City Governmentunless it is as a witness or to give testimony. I can be reached via Phoenix PoliceSergeant Lieutenant's Association Representative, Lieutenant Larry Jacobs at602-495- 6859.

As always, thank you for your time.

~(k~Q(k:g~L\~. Phil Roberts #4520

Copy: Lt. Larry Jacobs, PPSLA RepresentativeOff. Dave Kothe, PLEA RepresentativeMarquita Beene, City of Phoenix EOD InvestigatorAndrew Thomas, Maricopa County AttorneyArizona Attorney Generals Office, EOD InvestigationsUnited States Department of LaborFederal Bureau of InvestigationGoldwater InstituteJudicial Watch