•

Bullhead City Police Department DISCIPLINARY ACTION REPORT

.." J'D-OOI)4 (7-1-96)

Nicolas Sessions

DOE

Sergeant

1/14/1999

165

1. Name

2. List infiactioo(s): Date(s) of Occurrence(s) BDd DeIaiIs.

On 9122/2006 Sgt Scott Gillman filed a complaint alleging improper conduct on duty. SGT. Gillman alleged that S gt, Sessions wasnot truthful ill representing facts pertaining to the placement of a tracking device

Based on the facts of the investigation I have sustained the complaint.

I spoke to Sgt. Sessions regarding the allegations and findings. He offered the following.

Sgt. Sessions stepped up and admitted that he misrepresented his information to Sgt.Gillman, and did so out of frustration. He was attempting to get his point across to Gillman with little success and embellished his stand by indicating that Randy Means was onboard with his position. He acknowledged thatin hindsight he was wrong and understands the ramifications .

•

Signature (lnitiatiDg Officer)

Date

3. I ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF nus REPORT

GAR001809

Sergeant Scott Gillman alleges that on 09·21"()6, in the vicinity of 2500 Tesota Way, Sergeant Nick Sessions committed Improper Conduct on Duty. Sergeant Gillman alleges that during a conversation concerning a departmental investigation Sergeant Sessions was untruthful by indicating he had a conversation with Randy Means "regarding the legality and placement" of a transponder. Sergeant Gillman stated that Sergeant Sessions had told him that ''Randy Means (had) told him that what I did (the placement of the transponder) was illegal."

• SYNOPSIS OF INVESTIGATION

•

•

" 1'0.0010 (l1-13-96)

3. Investigating Officer

Sgt. Jerry Duke, 81

1. Date of Report January 26, 2007

1.

Bullhead City Police Department

GENERAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

4. SUBJECT (NATURE OF INVESTIGATION OR NAME AND ADDRESS OF INDIVIDUAL)

ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION

5.INSTRUCi'IONS:

REPORT WILL BE PREPARED IN mE FOLLOWING ORDER: REASON FOR INVESTIGATION, SYNOPSIS OF JNVESTIGAl1ON. CONCLUSION. RECOMMENDA TIONSAND COMMEI'IlT (WHERE APPROPRIATE). LIST OF ATTACHMENTS (IF ANY) AND DETAILS WHICH SUPPORT mE SYNOPSIS.

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

Sergeant Sessions conceded that he had been "angry with Sergeant Gillman" prior to and during the argument in question "for other reasons" unrelated to the specific incident. Be said, "I was actively engaging him in an argument in order to perturb him." Sergeant Sessions advised that he did not recall "much of the conversation," but did recall that "I was talking to him about the placement (of the transponder) and the fact that uh, Randy Means agrees with me about how they, how they're put on, leading him (Sergeant Gillman) to believe that we spoke about the transponder •.• " Sergeant Sessions stated that he did not believe that Sergeant Gillman or Detective Anderson would lie in reference to their statements concerning his speaking to Randy Means about the placement

of the transponder. He then emphatically admitted, "I didn't discuss placing the transponders" with Randy Means. Sergeant Sessions took full responsibility for the disagreement saying, "I should not have engaged Scott in this manner ... and if 1 knew I was misleading him I should have said something." Sergeant Sessions also indicated that he had no animosity toward Sergeant Gillman nor intention of retaliating against him in any way.

Name of Subject Personnel:

Date of Employment:

Rank/Classification:

Department ID Number:

Nicholas Sessions 01-14-99 Sergeant

165

7. SUPV. INITIALS ID # 8. 6RIGINAL

SUPPLEMENTAL

6. SIGNATURE

::f. A R.U-.L. ID# 8f

1

GAR001810

2

GAR001811

ADDITIONAL SUBJECTS

•

1.

Lieutenant Steve Smith

1255 Marina Blvd.

763-9200

2.

Detective Richard Anderson

1255 Marina Blvd.

763-9200

3.

Mr. Randy Means

(702) 591-3701

5.

Letter of Correction from Lieutenant Steve Smith to Sergeant Nicholas Sessions in reference to the incident in question. (fhis letter was not delivered to Sergeant Sessions and all other copies destroyed. Discipline was deferred to the Department Disciplinary Officer as per Departmental Policy.)

LIST OF ATIACHMENTS

1. BHCPD Use of Force or Complaint Reception and Processing Worksheet submitted by Sergeant Scott Gilllman.

2. Memorandum from Sergeant Scott Gillman to Sergeant Jerry Duke oftbe Office of Professional Responsibility.

3. Letter of Notification to Sergeant Scott Gillman from the Office of Professional Responsibility •

4. Memorandum from Lieutenant Steve Smith to Captain Mark Moss dated 09-27-06, in reference to the Limited Investigation conducted into the incident.

•

6. Notice of Administrative Investigation issued to Sergeant Nick Sessions.

7. Memorandum (and attachments) from Lieutenant Steve Smith to Captain John Crary dated 11-01-06.

8. Memorandum from Sergeant Scott Gillman to Lieutenant Steve Smith dated 11-01- 06.

9. One audio-taped interview with Sergeant Scott Gillman.

10. One audio-taped interview with Sergeant Nick Sessions.

11. One audio-taped telephone conversation with Sergeant Scott Gillman.

12. One transcript of the interview with Sergeant Scott Gillman.

13. One transcript of the interview with Sergeant Nick Sessions .

•

INCIDENT OVERVIEW AND INVESTIGATION

•

On September 21, 2006, Sergeant Scott Gillman and Detective Richard Anderson were in the Narcotics Section Office at 2500 Tesota Way discussing the replacement of batteries which had gone dead in a transponder located on a suspects vehicle. During this discussion Sergeant Nick Sessions entered the office. At this time an argument ensued between Sergeant Sessions and Sergeant Gillman as to the legality of the placement of the transponder.

Sergeant Sessions indicated that he did not recall "much of the conversation." He advised that when he entered the office he had been ''very angry with Sergeant Gillman •.• for other reasons." He said that he began to "actively(ing) engage(ing) him in an argument in order to perturb him; there was not doubt about that."

Sergeant Gillman stated that Sergeant Sessions had came into the Narcotics Office while be and Detective Anderson had been discussing "strategies on how we were going to get this transponder for the targets (suspects) car so we can (could) recharge the battery again."

He advised that during this discussion Sergeant Sessions had interjected saying that he had "a conversation with Randy Means" in reference to how this transponder had been placed. He said that Mr. Means had informed him that the placement of this transponder had been "illegal. "

•

Sergeant Gillman stated that he and Sergeant Sessions had then entered into a heated discussion in reference to the placement of the transponder. He said that he had told Sergeant Sessions that he had screened the placement with Emmett Strugill, the MAGNET Sergeant, and William Carrol the County Attorney handling the ease, He advised that he had told Sergeant Sessions that both of these individuals had approved the placement of the transponder. Sergeant Gillman stated that Sergeant Sessions had repeatedly told him that Randy Means "is our legal consultant on this."

Sergeant Gillman stated that he had then asked Sergeant Sessions exactly "what is it. .. that you told Randy Means." He indicated that Sergeant Sessions had informed him that he had told Mr. Means that they had placed a transponder on a targets car in a fenced yard. He said that he had then told Sergeant Sessions that he had his facts wrong. He said, "well there you go again Nick, giving facts to people on this case that are not the facts." He said that after he had informed Sergeant Sessions of the correct circumstances of the placement of the transponder, Sergeant Sessions had said, "Oh, I'm sorry ... I misunderstood."

In reference to their conversation, Sergeant Gillman stated that "there was absolutely no confusion about what we were talking about. We were talking about one thing and one thing only, the placement of the transponder, and in his mind (Sergeant Sessions's) what I had done was illegaL"

•

Although he maintains that he did not recall "much of the conversation," Sergeant Sessions advised that ''the subject of the transponder came up." He indicated that this subject seemed to be the "crux of tbe conversation." He said, "I was under the impression that it was put on at the home of the suspect, it turns out that it was actually put on at a different residence which I was totally unaware of."

3

GAR001812

I

I I I I

i

!

I

J

It was clear from the interviews with both Sergeant Gillman and Sergeant Sessions that a lengthy and heated discussion had taken place concerning the placement of the transponder. It was also clear that the crux of the disagreement had became that Sergeant Sessions had spoken to Randy Means concerning the placement and had been told that this placement was illegal under the eireumstanees presented.

•

Sergeant Sessions indicated that he had told Sergeant Gillman that he had spoken to

Randy Means in reference to this specific incident as he understood it. He said,"1 don't know exactly what 1 said to him (Sergeant Gillman), but I know I was talking to him about how they, how they're put on. Leading him to believe that we (he and Randy Means) spoke about the transponder ••. " Sergeant Sessions then conceded tbat he had not actually ever discussed the placement of transponders with Randy Means. When asked this question directly, he said, "No, I didn't. .. I didn't discuss placing the transponders, no."

Sergeant Sessions also stated that he did not believe that Sergeant Gillman or Detective Anderson would lie about what they indicated they had heard or understood him to say. He said, "No, I can't believe that either Sergeant Gillman or Detective Anderson would lie about this, I, I, I know them both well enough to be able to say, you lmow, I don't think that this would be the case in this instance."

Investigator's Note:

•

That this discussion centered upon Sergeant Session's alleged conversation with Randy Means is apparent. According to Sergeant Sessions, he does not believe that either Sergeant Gillman nor Detective Anderson would lie concerning what they heard or understood him to have said. Sergeant Sessions himself conceded that he "was talking to him (Sergeant Gillman) about the placement, and the fact that uh Randy Means agrees with me ... "

Lieutenant Smith's interviews with Sergeant Gillman, Sergeant Sessions, and Detective Anderson eenflrm this also.

I

I

I

- !

i I

I

This investigator subsequently contacted Randy Means to confirm whether there had been a conversation between himself and Sergeant Sessions in reference to the placement of transponders. Mr. Means advised that the placement of transponders would be a unique subject that he thought he would recall. He advised that he had no such recollection of speaking with Sergeant Sessions or any other subject concerning the placement of transponders while at Bullhead City or even recently.

It should also be noted that Sergeant Sessions assumed full responsibility for argument and disagreement. He said, "I know I initiated it I also know that L .. as a supervisor should not have engaged uh Scott in that manner ... and if 1 knew I was misleading him 1 should have said something •.. I was very angry with him and I really didn't care how he took what I had to say ... I was basically looking to put him in his place."

GAR001813

•

Sergeant Sessions confirmed that he had made the statement that he was not finished with Sergeant Gillman to former Sergeant Michael Newman. He advised that he had made this statement in reference to the fact that the investigation was ongoing and that the issue between he and Sergeant Gillman had not been brought to a conclusion. He indicated that

4

•

he did not intend for this statement to be taken as that he was seeking revenge or retaliation. He said, "there was no nothing uh sinister in this statement," and once again indicated that he had no animosity or plan of retaliating against Sergeant Gillman.

L

I

•

•

5

GAR001814

•

•

•

SUBJECT:

TO:

FROM:

Imm

Office of the Commander Operations Division

MEMORANDUM 07-008

February 5,2007

ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION OPR 6-027

SERGEANT SCOTI GILLMAN CAPTAIN MARK MOSS~

1. Your complaint against Sergeant Sessions was investigated. On February 2, 2007 I reviewed OPR investigation 06-027. Based on the facts of the investigation I found that the complaint was sustained.

.~ .:

GAR001815

~ PD-OOII (3-11-97)

•

Bullhead City Police Department

•

•

I. OPR CONTROL NUMB
Use of Force or Complaint 6~ -02. {
Reception and Processing Worksheet
2. COMPLAINANT INFORMAnON
NAME FIRST I M!.j l&h_Lt-1M
seem-
SDliImP.O.1IOX
HOME ON 1=\1....E
ADDRESS arv I $TATE I ZIPCODE HOME PIiONE N
( )
EMPLOYER )lAME .. ADOItESS WORK PHONE I
EMc.. ('D· &8) ..,~ 3-9-u::x:::>
.i. .. NON-COMrLAiNi USE OF FORCE iiiroRT I 0 SHOOTING INCIDENT I 0 PHYSICAL FORCE- I U(.ECiAL INTEltVENTI()}\
4. SUBJECT OF ALLEGA nONIREPORT (Us( AlIcIi ...... Sulojeds .. Bad<)
NAME FIRST I MJ. u.sT
N\c\,,\ ~t.oNS
LOCATION DIVISION JOB ASSlGNMENT I
c...e..u.A~tJb,_ ~-n~Tlc:.NS s.~-\-
!
IDI r J>QB ON 1- TO BE FILLED IN IF lCNOWN ,
kPS t=·u ~ !
i
So DETAlLSOFlBEALI..EGA'IlON ,
I
- I
IWU11!IS'I1tEET I
see, A~~~ ~~~ ~
aTYlTCIWN IcotOOY 100TE Jilhm J DAY
lYPE 0 PHYSICAL ABUSE ~ IMPROPER CONDUCT ON DUlY
OF 0 VERBAL ABUSE IMPROPER CONDUCT OFF DUTY
ALLEGATION 0 CRIMINAL CONDUCT 0 DlSSATISFACflON WllH PERFORMANCE OF DUTY t
(afficKoNE) ·0 OTHER (please Explain)
!
I
SYNOPSIS .,D.,.~~ ~a~ I
~ j

_. j
"
i
I
I
(Attach as many additional pages as necessmy ..
s, I declare that tbe aUegi!tious contained in this eom~t are true and that Han investigation proves these allegations to be
kDowingly false, I may be liable to both criminal and civil prosecution.
Dale 01zz.a:.0 ~~ I
I
SignabJrc ofparcut/'guardian (lfyoa are uadcr 18 years of age)
7. RECEI'TION DATA
OA"lEltECI!IVl!D rtWE~ I LOCe\11CIN I oFflc£ -
091-1- 06 ~ f600 Im(:ElY!;D /S/JCPIJ
HANE I uu
RECEIVED BY LT. JmfTIJ 8]
a. OPRtISE
NANE .r_,-rIJ IlDM
INVESTIGATOR .rr€V€..J &'1 rA
COIoIUOL NUNllEll.ISSUl!D BY , DATE ASSJG)&) J~11ON -
091,1"0 € 0 GAROO1816
. I

I

r I

i

•

Bureau of Criminal Investigations Vice/ Narcotics Section

Sep~ber22,2006

CONVERSATION WITH SOT. NICK SESSIONS

SUB~cr~ TO:

SGT. JERRY DUKE

OFFICE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSmILITY

FROM:

SGT. SCOTT GILLMAN VICE! NARCOTICS SECTION

REFERENCE:

AN ONGOING NARCOTICS INVESTIGATION AND SUBSEQUENT CONVERSATION SGT. SESSIONS CLAIMS HE HAD WITH 1RA1NER RANDY MEANS

•

1. On August 25, 2006. I was conducting surveillance on drug suspect in the area of the Desert Foothills sub-division. The suspect parked the vehicle he was driving (not currently registered to him) in the driveway of a third party residence. The suspect parked the vehicle in close proximity to the public sidewalk and went into the home.

2. I had a GPS transponder in my possession which is designed to be places on a car with the intent of tracking the vehicle. I wanted to use this transponder to track the suspect when he drives this car as part of my ongoing investigation.

3. Before doing so, I contacted Sgt. Emmett Sturgill who supervises the MAGNET Task Force so that I could get his legal opinion of the placement of the transponder in this situation based on his training and experience. Sgt. Sturgill felt that the transponder was OK to place on the vehicle under these circumstances. Sgt. Sturgill also consulted with the prosecuting attorney in this case, County Attorney William Carroll. Sgt. Sturgill said William Carroll said it was OK for me to place the transponder on the vehicle under these circumstances without a court order. I also spoke to William Carroll by phone to confirm. this .

•

GAR001817

4. After getting legal advice. I placed the transponder on the suspect's vehicle at this location without incident and the unit members and I began tracking the suspect's vehicle through the use of the transponder and the internet.

•

5. I briefed Sgt. Sessions about this part of the investigation. At no time did he ever tell me that he had legal issues with the placement of the transponder nor did we ever have a disagreement over this issue at that time.

6. On September zo", 2006. Sgt. Sessions, Cpl. Williams and I, along with other department members, attended a mandatory training class at the Bullhead City Police Department. Randy Means was the instructor and discussed Federal Constitutional Law Review and Updates. The class basically outlines U.S. Supreme Court decisions and Case law.

•

7. On September Zl", 2006. sometime between 0900 and 1200 hrs, Detective Andersen and I were in the Vice/ Narcotics office. We were discussing the fact that the transponder battery of the suspect's vehicle has gone dead which prevents us from tracking the suspect During this conversation, Sgt. Sessions came into the office. The following is a summary of our conversation.

8. Sgt. Sessions said he spoke with Randy Means on our training day regarding the legality and placement of the transponder. Sgt. Sessions said Randy Means told him that what I did was illegal.

9. I was stunned by the fact that Sgt. Sessions would have a conversation with Randy Means about the case I'm working without including me in the conversation. This was also the first time I was aware that Sgt. Sessions had any issues with the way the transponder was placed. I wanted to believe that he was joking. but as we continued to talk it was clear to me and Det, Andersen that he was serious.

•

GAR001818

10. I told Sgt. Sessions that I screened this case with Sgt. Sturgill and County Attorney William Carroll and they told me the placement of the transponder was OK. I also told Sgt. Sessions that Randy Means was not the final word on legal decisions. Sgt. Sessions said he spoke to Randy Means about this because Randy is the department's consultant on liability issues. Sgt. Sessions kept mentioning this over and over.

•

11. I told Sgt. Sessions that I didn't feel lor the department had to worry about department liability in this case because I had taken the necessary steps in seeking legal advice before placing the transponder on the suspect's car. Sgt. Sessions continued that Randy Means felt that what I did was illegal.

12. At this time, 1 asked Sgt. Sessions to tell me what he told Randy Means regarding the circumstances and placement of the transponder. Sgt. Sessions said he told Randy that 1 entered a fenced yard during a government operation and placed the transponder on the suspect's car.

•

13. Det. Andersen and I both got upset and told Sgt. Sessions that he didn't even give Randy Means the correct facts regarding the case. I told Sgt. Sessions that I didn't place the transponder on the suspect's car at the suspect's house (which is fenced) and told him again that the transponder was placed on a car, the suspect's drives, at a third party residence.

14. At this time. Sgt. Sessions claimed that he wasn't aware of the location where I placed the transponder on the car and thought it was placed at the suspect's residence. I didn't believe this statement because. again, Sgt. Sessions was briefed on this on more that one occasion. I told Sgt. Sessions that I would have obtained a court order before I placed a transponder on a car at a suspect's home. This conversation was ended at this time and Sgt. Sessions never indicated that he was joking.

15. On September 21,2006,1 called Randy Means regarding the conversation Sgt. Sessions said he had with him. I called his cell phone number (702) 591-3701, but got his voice mail and left a message.

•

GAR001819

•

16. On September 22,2006 at about 0700 brs, I called Randy Means again and he answered the phone. The following is a summary of our conversation. I briefly explained my investigation regarding the transponder and asked him ifS gt. Sessions discussed the case with him. on our training day.

17. Randy Means said he didn't remember having a conversation with anyone regarding this case, but said he talks to a lot of people during the training.

18. I told Randy I was calling him because if Sgt. Sessions did discuss the case with him, he (Sgt. Sessions) did not give him

. the correct facts. I told Randy that I called him because I believe he and Sgt. Sessions never bad a conversation and Sgt. Sessions has been untruthful about other things I know about.

•

19. Randy Means said the transponder case I described to him is out of the ordinary especially because a transponder was involved. Randy said this conversation he allegedly had with Sgt. Sessions occurred less than a week ago. I told Randy that it allegedly occurred on Wednesday, the day he came to our department and trained us. Randy said he would have remembered this particular case and said he didn't remember having this conversation with anyone. I thanked Randy for his time and we ended our conversation.

20. I am writing this memorandum. with the intent to file a formal complaint against Sgt. Nick Sessions. I believe Sgt. Sessions was not being truthful when he told Detective Andersen and me that he spoke to Randy Means about my drug case and the placement of a transponder. I do not know Randy Means personally, although, I do believe that Randy Means is a very intelligent person with a keen memory for details. I base this finding on Randy Means' ability to recount detailed police incidents that he has been asked to consult on. I believe that Randy Means would have remembered a conversation of this magnitude with Sgt. Sessions if it actuaIIy occurred.

21. I believe that this is not an isolated incident, where Sgt.

Sessions' integrity is being called to question and I will discuss other incidents that I am aware of when I am asked to.

•

GAR001820

22. In my opinion, Sgt. Sessions' untruthfulness, specifically about this case, could have affected the case and the outcome of the investigation. If I had not looked into this conversation (Sgt. Sessions claims he bad with Randy Means) and took what he said as the truth then removed the transponder from the suspects car with no intention of using it again. this affects the surveillance aspect of the investigation aside from getting a court order .

•

•

•

GAR001821

•

You may be contacted by a representative of this office in the near future if there are any further questions that need to be clarified concerning your complaint. Any questions that you may have in reference to your complaint should be directed to the Office of Professional Responsibility at (928) 763-1045. Please use the assigned case number in any correspondence or inquiries concerning your complaint.

•

Bullhead City Police Department

1255 MARINA BOULEVARD· BULLHEAD CITY, ARIZONA 86442 (928) 763-9200 Fax (928) 763-5558

FILE (OPY

Sergeant Scott Gillman:

September 28, 2006

The Office of Professional Responsibility of the Bullhead City Police Department has received the complaint which you filed. Your complaint has been assigned a case number

of OPR 06-027.

Sincerely,

Sergeant Jerry Duke Supervisor,

Office of Professional Responsibility

GAR001822

•

•

MEMORANDUM September 27,2006

Office of the Commander Bureau of Criminal Investigations

SUBJECT: LIMITED INVESTIGATION

TO: MARK MOSS

CAPTAIN, OPERATION DIVISION

FROM: STEVEN SMITH

LIEUTENANT, BUREAU OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS

Reference:

General Orders AR 7-1.1.05

Enclosure:

(a) (1)

Memorandum from Sgt. Gillman dated 9/22/06

•

1.

On Friday. September 22nd• Sgt. Gillman came to my office. Gilhnan was upset about a conversation he had with Sgt. Sessions on Thursday. September 21 rd. Gillman said he was considering writing up his concerns in the form of a formal complaint. Gillman said he had several problems with Sessions but he agreed that the central issue was his concern that Sessions had lied to him about a conversation he had with Randy Means.

2. Gillman said that he had been in his office on Thursday with Det.

Andersen and Sgt. Sessions. He began discussing with Sessions and Andersen the problem with a transponder that he had affixed to a suspect's vehicle for the purpose of tracking that vehicle. The problem was that the battery to the transponder had died, and discussion ensued about how to retrieve the transponder and who would do the task.

•

GAR001823

•

•

•

3.

Gillman said that at some point during the discussion Sessions spoke up and questioned the legality of the placement of the transponder in the first place. Gillman told Sessions that he had received operational guidance from Del. Sgt. Emmett Sturgill and legal guidance from County Attorney William Carroll. Gillman said he was confident that he had done everything correctly. He said Sessions told him that Sessions had spoken with Randy Means on their training day and the Randy Means told him that what he (Gillman) bad done was illegal. Gillman said he then challenged Sessions and asked him what exactly he had told Means about the placement of the transponder. Sessions said he told Means that Gillman had entered a fenced residential yard during a governmental operation and placed the transponder under a car. Gillman said he and Andersen then jumped in and told Sessions that the problem was he (Sessions) did not have the facts and didn't know what he was talking about.

4. Gillman said he was disturbed that Sessions had presented incorrect information to Randy Means and that Means' conclusion that the placement of transponder was illegal tended to sully his (Gillman's) reputation. Gillman called Means .

5.

Gillman spoke with Means via telephone and presented the correct facts about the use and placement of the transponder. Gillman said that Means believed that the use and placement of the transponder was okay and that he did not think the case would not suffer any adverse legal ramifications. Gillman then asked Means ifhe had a discussion about this issue with Sessions. Means said he couldn't recall such a conversation. Means remarked that this issue was not a common one. Considering the conversation occurred only two days prior and that it concerned an unusual topic (placement of a transponder) then he was fairly certain he would have remembered such a conversation.

6. Later that afternoon I called Sgt. Sessions to my office. Minutes before he arrived Gillman dropped a written complaint form. We spoke briefly and then Gillman left. Sessions then entered my office .

GAR001824

•

•

•

7.

Sessions carne in to my office. He recalled the heated conversation in the Vice !Narcotics Office Thursday morning. He admitted telling Gillman that he had spoken to Randy Means and that Means told him it was illegal. Sessions said he questioned Means in general about warrant less entries on Wednesday (September 20~ during the training seminar conducted by Randy Means. Sessions denied telling Gillman that he specifically asked Means about issues specific to their narcotics case involving placement of a transponder or the placement of a transponder in general.

8. Sessions admitted that this problem was his fault. He said he had questioned Gillman about the placement of the transponder and admitted that he (Sessions) had the facts wrong. He thought the transponder had been placed on a car while the car was in a fenced yard. He admitted that Gillman had reason to be upset with him.

9.

I asked Sessions if he recalled, after telling Gillman he had briefed Means about the case, that Gillman asked him just what did he tell Means. Sessions said Gillman did ask him something along those lines. I asked him how he (Sessions) responded. He said he told Gillman he asked Means about his legal opinion about .. this", referring to questioning Means about warrant less entries. He denied using the language "transponder" with Means. Sessions further stated that he had only asked Means two questions in class.

10. I took the Randy Means class. I recall one question that Sessions asked of Means. It did not involve the use or placement of a transponder.

11. During my interview with Sessions, he remarked that he hoped that Gillman wasn't pursuing this complaint (along with several other minors complaints that I also addressed with Sessions) with a plan to wrest the Vice I Narcotics Section from him. Sessions told me that he knew that Gillman had recently met with the Chief and Deputy Chief. He said he knew Gillman and knew that Gillman met with them in order to convince them that he should remain in Vice / Narcotics and take over the unit. I confronted Sessions and asked him how he knew this. He said he just knew Gillman. I asked him if the D.C., Chief or Gillman had shared their conversation with him. He said no. I then asked him how he could tell me he "knew" this to be true when he had no facts to support it. Sessions admitted that he didn't and was just speaking figuratively.

GAR001825

• 12. A short while later I received a phone call from Gillman. Gillman
asked me if Sessions owned up to the lie or claimed he was joking.
I told Gillman that Sessions admitted telling him (Gillman) that he
spoke to Randy Means about warrant less entries and denied telling
Gillman that he specifically asked Means about the use and r
placement of a transponder. Gillman said he was disappointed and
wanted to proceed with the complaint
13. On Monday, September 25, I interviewed Richie Andersen in Sgt.
Wincentsen's office. Andersen recalled the conversation from
Thursday morning or early afternoon. He said it stems from a
discussion about the batteries goingdead in the transponder. He
said the conversation became heated and voices were high. He
recalled that Sessions had claimed to have spoken with Randy
Means who told him that the placement of the transponder had
been illegal. He recalled Gillman saying something to the effect,
"Just what did you tell Means?"
14. Andersen could not recall with much specificity what Sessions'
response had been to Gillman's question. I asked him if Sessions
could have told Gillman that he spoke to Means about warrant less
entries in general. Andersen said no. He said the talk. was all
• about the transponder.
15. I interviewed Kenny Williams. {Note Sessions had told me that
Williams might have been in the room and heard the
conversation.} Williams said he and Queen had just returned to
the office after conducting a drug buy. He said he only heard the
end of the discussion and did not hear any portion in which
Gilhnan confronted Sessions about what he had told Means or
what Session's response had been.
16. I re-interviewed Sessions. I told him that I had reached a
conclusion and that conclusion was that he did in fact tell Gillman
that he had spoken to Means about the use and placement of the
transponder and not just a general question about warrant less
entries . •

GAR001826

•

17. I admonished Sessions for lying to Gillman. I told him that he acted more like a supervisor and not an officer. I told him to pause and think about his response rather than speak in haste. I told him whenever possible to avoid speaking when angry or emotional. I told him to recognize that as a supervisor his words carry authority and that his subordinates are particularly influenced by what he says and does. 1 warned him not suggest that his opinions or assumptions are based on fact when they are not, and to preface his opinions or assumptions with, "Ithink" or "1 believe". Using a phrase from Randy Means' training, I reminded him that what he says means no more or less than what he says. I told him to practice these habits daily. I told him that this incident would be documented.

18. 1 then spoke with Sessions and Gillman together. Gillman confronted Sessions about his "bullshit", Gillman said he knew what he heard and after taking to Means he knew Sessions had lied to him. Gillman spoke at length. He confronted Sessions about other instances in which he believed that Sessions had embellished facts or events or simply bu1lshitted about them. Gillman spoke at length. I allowed him to continue.

•

19. During a pause in Gillman's tirade, Sessions apologized and characterized his comment about what he had told Gillman about his Randy Means conversation as "horseshit", He admitted he was wrong and admitted he had no business talking about it in the first place because he didn't have the facts straight. He admitted that had he been in Scott's place he would not have handled it as well as Scott had handled it. He told Scott that I had given him correction in this matter and that he would be working to try and win back credibility with Scott.

20. Sessions and Gillman came as close to holding hands and singing a happy ditty in two-part harmony as I cared to see.

21. I told Gillman that I wanted to handle this complaint at my level.

Gillman agreed and believed that would be appropriate as well. He agreed to voluntarily withdraw his complaint as long as it was docwnented. Gillman said he did not want Sessions to lose his job or been demoted or punished over this. He wanted me to know about the problems and correct it. He believed that Sessions was a good officer and supervisor but needed some correction .

•

GAR001827

Enclosure:

(a)

Limited investigation

MEMORANDUM September 25, 2006

•

Office of the Commander Bureau of Criminal Investigations

SUBJECT: LETTER OF CORRECTION

TO: NICHOLAS SESSIONS

SERGEANT, VICE I NARCOTICS SECTION

FROM: STEVEN SMTIH -4/$3

LIEUTENANT, BUREAU OF CRIMINAL INVESTIOA TrONS

1.

On September 22, 2006, Sgt. Gillman filed a complaint against you. The basis of his complaint is that you told him that you had a discussion with Randy Means regarding the legality of the placement of a transponder in a particular case. Gillman contends that Randy Means did not have such a conversation with you regarding legal issues involving the placement of a transponder.

•

2. I conducted a limited investigation. I concluded that you did tell Gillman that you had a conversation with Randy Means about the placement of a transponder when, in fact, you did not have such a conversation with Means.

3. I am giving you direction to be mindful of what you say. Pause and think about your response rather than speak. in haste. Whenever possible avoid speaking when angry or emotional. Appreciate that as a supervisor your words carry authority and that your subordinates are particularly influenced by what you say and do. Do not suggest that your opinions or assumptions are based on fact when they are not. Preface your opinions or assumptions with, "I think" or "I believe", Remember that what you say means no more or less than what you say. Practices these habits daily .

•

GAR001828

------------------------------------------------

•

•

•

CITY OF

BULLHEAD CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT NOTICE OFADMINISIRATIVE INVESTIGATION

Sergeant Nick Sessions

Will Notify

06-027

Employee Name

Appointment Dateffime

OPRNumber

/. An administrative investigation is being conducted into allegations of possible violations of City or Department work rules and/or regulations concerning the following incident(s):

Sergeant Scott Gillman alleges that OD 09-21-06, in the vicinity of 2500 Tesota Way, Sergeant Nick Sessions committed Improper Conduct. on Duty. Sergeant Gillman alleges that during a conversation concerning a departmental investigation Sergeant Sessions was untruthful by hlliicatinghe had a conversation willi Randy Means "rl!garding the legality and placement" ora transponder. Sergeant Gillman stated that Sergeant Sessions had told him tbat "Randy Means (had) told him that what I did (the placement of the transponder) was illegal."

A Notice of Administrative Investigation is a direct order requiring an appearance for interview/s in reference to the subject incident and/or allegations. Compliance with an Administrative Investigation is compulsory pursuant to Administrative Regulations 3-1.22 and 3-2.03.

Department Administrative Regulations 3-3 and 3-4 outUne your specific rigbts and responsibilities in this investigation. They include:

A. You are being compelled by a Bullhead City Police Department supervisor to truthfully answer questions relating to your duties/conduct. You can be disciplined up to and including dismissal for refusal to answer these questions .

B.

Questions, tests, or examinations will be specifically related to your performance or fitness for duty.

C. Any such statements, tests, or examination results can be used against you in a disciplinary/administrative/civil proceeding, but will not be used against you in a criminal proceeding.

D. Voluntary statements, confessions, or untruthful statements by you about conduct unrelated to this investigation may be admissible tn any subsequent criminal action.

E. Any false, deceptive, or misleading statements you make may lead to additional discipline up to and including dismissal, as well as possible suspension or revocation of your AZPOST Peace Officer Certification.

You have the rigbt to mechanically record this interview. The Department reserves tbe right to transcribe any mechanical recording of this interview for the purpose ofverifying the accuracy of the interview. If requested, you shall review the transcription and sign said transcription ffyou find it to be accurate.

h es __ No You are being given a direct order Dot to discuss this investigation, including your interview, with any unauthorized person. Other than the investigating supervlsor(s), the only authorized persons you may speak to concerning this investigation are your attorney, a clergy, selected representative, or spouse. If you intend to have a representative, notify the SOPR in writing prior to your scheduled interview.

hes ~_No Do you understand your specific rights and responsibilities in this investigation?

__ Yes 1NO Do you have any questions about your specific rights and responsibilities in this investigation?

"'Investigator's Initials ~. /1-08-0' ;:r,O,

GAR001829

r

I I

j

1.

On November 1.2006. at about 11 :00 arn., I met with Deputy Chief Williamson in Sgt. Wincentsen's office. Williamson had information regarding an on-going internal complaint filed by Sgt . Gillman and Sgt. Sessions.

•

Office of the Commander Bureau of Criminal Investigations

MEMORANDUM November 1, 2006

Enclosure: (1)

Memorandum dated October 30th from Gillman to Duke

SUBJECT:

TO:

FROM:

•

2. Williamson briefed me about several comments he heard from other officers about Sessions complaining about the Department conducting a formal investigation after the Department had already conducted a limited investigation forcing him to buy books and attend church. Williamson said these comments included a statement by Sessions that it was not over between him and Gillman. Williamson informed me that as far as he knew the persons who had first hand information about Sesssions' statements were Sgt. Tiffany. Ofc. Grasse, and retired sergeant Mike Newman.

3. I told Williamson that I intended to obtain written statement from Ofe. Grasse and Sgt. Tiffany. Williamson told me he would obtain a statement from Grasse (Grasse works for Sgt. Garzon who is subordinate to Deputy Chief Williamson). I told Williamson I would forward the information to Sgt. Duke and associate it with the current on-going case involving Gillman and Sessions .

•

GAR001830

•

•

•

4.

At about 11 :20 a.rn., I met with Gillman in Sgt. Wincentsen's Office. Gillman said that on the 30th Sgt. Tiffany approached him and quietly told him he needed to talk to him about statements he overheard Sessions making to Mike Newman during a recent F.O.P. party. Gillman cupped his mouth to suggest that Tiffany wanted this to be a "hush hush" kind of meeting and that the information he had to tell Gillman was not information he wanted made public.

5. Gillman said Tiffany told him that Sessions was complaining to Newman about him being the subject of a limited investigation. As a result of that investigation Sessions was forced to buy two books and go to church. Sessions continued to complain that the Department had turned this into a formal investigation. Sessions threatened that this he would go after the Department. He stated that this matter was not over between him and Gillman.

6. Gillman said he later had a conversation with Grasse. Grasse said Sessions recently approached him complaining that he was in trouble again. Grasse asked him why he was in trouble. Sessions said that Tiffany had overheard him making some comments about Gillman that were taken out of context.

7.

I told Gillman that Williamson had giving more information that suggested that Gillman might be concerned that Sessions obtained some information about what he had said to Newman by reading a memo on Gillman's computer. He said he had begun to compose the memo using another memo as a template. He noticed that when he logged on (possibly today) this document was listed as the second document recently viewed when it should have been listed further down. Gillman said whether or not Sessions had read his memo on his computer was the least of his concerns in this matter.

8. Gillman said that he had talked with his wife about this and she was very upset. He said he was concerned about Sessions and that he (Gillman) needed to be removed from the Narcotics unit or Session needed to be moved.

GAR001831

•

[Note that Gillman has made this concern about separating from the Narcotics unit during his original complaint. He currently has a maj or role in a significant operation. Command has encouraged him to wrap up this operation sooner than later. Gillman has made efforts to broaden the scope of the investigation extending the operation even further. Command has begun to pressure him for a resolution. About 30 minutes earlier I asked Gillman for a target date for the service of one or more search warrants because I and other commanders are eager to see the results and as well as to move Gillman his patrol squad that he had been assigned to supervise several months ago.]

9.

He said that when people in post offices start shooting, you later find that there were warning signs and that these signs get overlooked. He said there are warning signs here. He said he didn't know what Sessions might do. He said he was worried about what Sessions might do including ruining his career.

10.

I told Gillman that if these allegations were factual, that is, that Sessions was continuing to run his mouth about things that were not true, then correcting his nature or character was beyond my ability and authority. I told him that I had met with the Deputy Chief and that we agreed to collect statements and forward then to Sgt. Duke as part of Gillman's original complaint against Sessions and that Duke would investigate the matter.

GAR001832

•

11. I told Gillman that as far as his career and welfare were concerned I suggested that he limit his concerns to what the facts suggested. I pointed out that if the facts prove true then Sessions' nature or character has not changed; that is, he is still running his mouth and there may still be an integrity issue. I told him there were no facts suggesting threats or violence. I told him not to become paranoid that he might go postal.

12. Gillman raised his voice and said he wasn't paranoid about him going postal. I told him he brought it up. He began talking loudly and becoming demonstrative with his fingers (right hand). He threatened that if the Department was just going to sweep this under the carpet then he and his wife would pursue it.

•

•

13. I told Gillman that I had already said I would be collecting the statements and forwarding them for the investigation. Gillman continued saying that this better get looked into and not just swept away. I told him he was starting to piss me off'. I told him that I wanted his memo. He said, "Why don't we call the Captain." I told him I was through and told him I was giving him a direct order to turn over the memo. He handed me the memo. He and I walked out of the room at about the same time. He said he didn't mean to piss me off. He left angry. I left angry.

14.

I am forwarding Gillman's memo. I hope that this apparent ongoing problem between Sessions and Gillman can be resolved quickly.

•

I

I

I I

I

I

•

GAR001833

I t

•

Bureau of Criminal Investigations Vlce/Narconcs Section

October 30lh 2006

SUBJECT:

WARNING FROM SGT. TIFFANY ABOUT SGT. NICK SESSIONS

SGT. JERRY DUKE 4

OFFICE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSmILITY

SGT. SCOTT GILLMAN sift

VICEI NARCOTICS SECTION

TO:

FROM:

REFERENCE:

none

•

1. On October 30th 2006, at about 1645 hrs, I was in the break room at the 911 Center with Sgt. Tiffany .

5. Sgt. Tiffany said he overheard Sgt. Sessions discussing with "Mike Newman the fact that a limited investigation was done on him. Sgt. Sessions told Mike Newman that he was ordered to go to church and had to buy two books to read as part of his discipline regarding the limited I.A. Sgt. Sessions said the

2. Sgt. Tiffany told me that I need to make sure that I watch my back around Sgt. Sessions because he (Sgt. Sessions) is not done with me. I believed that Sgt. Tiffany was referring to the complaint that I filed on Sgt. Sessions for being untruthful with me.

3. I asked Sgt. Tiffany to tell me what was going on. Sgt. Tiffany said he attended an F.O.P. Meeting recently where (retired) Sgt. Mike Newman and Sgt. Sessions were also in attendance.

4. Sgt. Tiffany said he overheard Sgt. Sessions having a conversation with Mike Newman. The following is a summary of what Sgt. Tiffany told me he heard:

•

GAR001834

6. I want the department to be aware of the warning Sgt. Tiffany made to me involving Sgt. Sessions .

department is now doing a full investigation on him regarding the same I.A. Sgt. Sessions said if they were going to do a full LA. on him. after already being disciplined. he was going to go after them for doing this. Sgt. Tiffany reminded me again to watch out for Sgt. Sessions.

...

•

•

GAR001835

•

Office of the School Resource section

November 1,2006

SUBJECT: CONVERSATION WITH SGT. SESSIONS

TO: SGT. GARZON

FROM: OFFICER GRASSE 162 J:!I1 f

•

(1) On October 31, 2006 at approximately 1530 hours i began a coversation with sgt. Sessions in the report writing room of the Bullhead City Police Dept. During the conversation Sessions stated that sgt. gillman was upset with him. Sessions stated that he recently attended a f.o.p. function and saw retired sgt. Mike Newman .

(2) Sessions stated that he began talking with Newman and advised him that Gillman had filed a complaint against him. Sessions stated that he told Newman that be and Gillman were far from over. Sessions stated that while he spoke to Newman he also noticed tbat sgt Tiffany was in close proximity.

(3) Sessions stated that he later learned that sgt. Tiffany had advised Gillman to be careful because Sessions may be out to get him and Sessions told Newman that their situation was far from over. Sessions stated that Gillman is now concerned about retaliation and f:tled an additional memo about Sessions comment.

•

(4) Sessions stated that when he made the comment to Newman he was implying that the investigation was far from over and he was still involved with Gillmans

GAR001836

•

complaint. Sessions stated that he did not intend to imply that any harm would come to Gillman or suggest any kind of retaliation .

•

•

GAR001837

•

SUBJECT:

TO:

FROM:

REFERENCE:

ENCLOSURES:

•

•

BUREAU OF PATROL COPPS~PE~PROBLE~SECT10N

DATE: 110106

PHONE CONVERSATION

BRIAN WILUAMSON. DEPUTY CIllEF OF POLICE SERGEANT RAUL GARZON ~t\

(a) CONVERSATION WITH SERGEANT NICK SESSIONS

(1) NONE

1. On 110106, at approx. 1200 hrs, Sergeant Scott Gillman called me and told me that he spoke to Officer Brandon Grasses who told him that Sergeant Nick Sessions told him that I was out to get him along with Sergeant Gillman.

2 .

I have no idea what was meant by that comment. I called Officer Brandon Grasse and asked him what he said to Sergeant Gillman reference the comment that Sergeant Gillman and I were out to get Nick Sessions. Officer Grasse told me that Nick has thought that to be the case for quite some time and has told Officer Grasse that he thought this to be true.

3. I then called Sergeant Nick Sessions and told him that I am not out

to get him and that 1 don't want him to think that I'm out to get

. him. I also told Sergeant sessions that I will help him in any way if he needs my assistance here at work. Sergeant Sessions said that he's just been hearing rumors and then he thanked me for calling him.

GAR001838

•

Office of the Commander Bureau of Criminal Investigations

MEMORANDUM September 25> 2006

SUBJECT: LETTER OF CORRECI'lON

TO: NICHOLAS SESSIONS

SERGEANT, VICE I NARCOTICS SECTION

FROM: STEVEN SMITH

LIEUfENANT. BUREAU OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS

Enclosure:

(a)

Limited investigation

1.

On September 22, 2006, Sgt. Gillman filed a complaint against you. The basis of his complaint is that you told him that you had a discussion with Randy Means regarding the legality of the placement of a transponder in a particular case. Gillman contends that Randy Means did not have such a conversation with you regarding legal issues involving the placement of a transponder.

•

2. I conducted a limited investigation. I concluded that you did tell Gillman that you had a conversation with Randy Means about the placement of a transponder when, in fact, you did not have such a conversation with Means.

3. I am giving you direction to be mindful of what you say. Pause and think about your response rather than speak in haste. Whenever possible avoid speaking when angry or emotional. Appreciate that as a supervisor your words carry authority and that your subordinates are particularly influenced by what you say and do. Do not suggest that your opinions or assumptions are based on fact when they are not. Preface your opinions or assumptions with, "I think" or "I believe". Remember that what you say means no more or less than what you say. Practices these habits daily .

GAR001839

•

Bureau of Criminal Investigations Vice/ Narcotics Section

•

November 1st, 2006

SUBJECf:

INFORMATION ABOUT INDIRECT THREATS MADE BY SGT. SESSIONS

TO:

LT. STEVE SMTIH

FROM:

SGT. S'COTT GILLMAN 5V=::> VICE! NARCOTICS SECTION

REFERENCE:

none

•

1. On November 1 2006, at about 0915 hrs, I spoke to Sgt.

Garzon on the telephone. Sgt. Garzon told me that he had a conversation with Officer Grasse at the Bullhead City P.D. The following is a summary of what Sgt. Garzon told me in regards to his conversation with Officer Grasse:

2. Officer Grasse said he had a conversation with Sgt. Sessions in the report writing room. Officer Grasse said Sgt. Sessions told him that he was at an FOP Meeting and spoke to Sgt. Tiffany and (retired) Sgt. Newman and there was talk about the complaint that I filed against him. Officer Grasse said Sgt. Sessions admitted that he said, "thing's are not over between me and Scott" during a conversation he was having with Sgt. Newman and Sgt. Tiffany at an FOP Meeting.

3. At this point, I explained to Sgt. Garzon that I had already been warned by Sgt. Tiffany to watch my back around Sgt. Sessions and that I had written a memo about that warning. I told Sgt. Garzon that I needed to speak with Officer Grasse directly and asked that Officer Grasse call me.

GAR001840

4. At about 1100 hrs, I spoke with Officer Grasse over the telephone. I asked Officer Grasse to tell me what Sgt. Sessions had told him. The following is a summary of what Officer Grasse told me:

•

•

5. Officer Grasse said that he was at the BHCPD in the report writing room when Sgt. Sessions approached him and they began talking. Officer Grasse said Sgt. Sessions told him that he was in trouble again. Officer Grasse said he asked Sgt. Sessions what he was in trouble for now. Officer Grasse said Sgt. Sessions told him that he attended an FOP Meeting where Sgt. Tiffany and Sgt. Newman were present. Sgt. Sessions said he was talking to Mike Newman about the complaint I filed against him and he made the comment to Newman that ''things are not over between me and Scott". Sgt. Sessions said Sgt. Tiffany overheard this part of the conversation and later went to me about it. Officer Grasse said that Sgt. Sessions appeared to be defending the statement he made about me to Mike Newman. Officer Grasse said that Sgt. Sessions believes Sgt. Tiffany took this statement. "things are not over between me and Scott" out of context and Sgt. Sessions appeared to be justifying it to him.

•

6. I told Officer Grasse that I was going to write a memo regarding this conversation and he may be talked to' about it at a later date .

. 7. Based on the integrity complaint I filed on Sgt. Sessions, the warning I received from Sgt. Tiffany about Sgt. Sessions as well as the conversation I had with Officer Grasse, I believe Sgt. Sessions may try to retaliate against me for filing a complaint on him.

8. I discussed my concerns with Deputy Chief Williamson after a meeting in our office and told him of my intentions to document these incidents. I explained to him that I have talked to my wife about these issues occurring in my work place and she is upset to the point of tears for my safety. Deputy Chief Williamson said I needed to talk to Lt. Smith and made it clear he would talk to Lt. Smith immediately .

GAROQ1841

•

•

9. At about 1145 hrs, Lt. Smith and I spoke in Sgt. Wincensen's office. I explained the conversation I had with Sgt. Tiffany regarding his warning to me to watch my back around Sgt. Sessions as well as my subsequent conversations with Sgt. Garzon and Officer Grasse regarding the statement Sgt. Sessions is said to have made, "things are not over between me and Scott". I made it clear to Lt. Smith that based on these findings I was concerned that Sgt. Sessions may be trying to do something to jeopardize my career and I explained that I was also concerned for my safety. I told Lt. Smith that I was also concerned that Sgt. Sessions would be telling this to (retired) Sgt. Newman when Sgt. Sessions knows that I had to report possible misconduct on S gt, Newman while assigned to this section.

•

10. I used a POSTAL analogy to explain my concern regarding

Sgt. Sessions which I feel now was a bad analogy to use at the time, but I was frustrated with this whole situation and do take the statement, "things are not over between me and Scott" as an indirect threat based on the totality of this situation.

II. Lt, Smith said that he has done everything he can do as a manager about this situation and he can't prevent Sgt. Sessions from talking then told me I needed to write a memo to what I learned so it could be forwarded to Sgt. Duke for investigation. Lt. Smith said that no actual threats were made toward me by Sgt. Sessions and he didn't feel the need for paranoia regarding the matter.

GAR001842

12. This paranoia statement upset me because I do not believe I am being paranoid, but I am concerned to know exactly what Sgt. Sessions actual meant by making this statement to Sgt. Newman who is no longer a member of our department. I became defensive over, what I believe, was a poor choice of words made by Lt. Smith about being paranoid .

•

13. I told Lt. Smith, in essence, that iftbis situation wasn't handled properly and something happens to me as a result, my wife is aware of what is going on and the department will be held accountable. Looking back on this statement, it was a poor choice of words made on my part, but it was a choice of words made in frustration regarding my current working environment. In hindsight, I do believe the department is doing everything they can under the totality of the circumstances.

•

14. After I made this statement, Lt. Smith told me he was "pissed off" and ended the meeting. I told Lt. Smith that I was sorry he was pissed and ifhe wanted we could 'talk to the Captain about this issue further. Lt. Smith said no and directed me to get my memo written regarding these events.

•

15. I am writing the memo because, based on the totality of these circumstances, I do perceive this statement that Sgt. Sessions is said to be making as an indirect threat toward me because I am having him investigated for integrity reasons. I do not feel that I can work with Sgt. Sessions any longer until this situation is resolved.

Cel

Sergeant Jerry Duke

Office of Professional Responsibility

•

GAR001843

GAR001844

•

Sgt. Scott Gillman OPR 06-027

This is Sergeant Jerry Duke of the Bullhead City Police Department Office of Professional Responsibility. The date is October the 9th, the year 2006. The time is approximately 1045 hours. And I'm at the office of Professional Responsibility conducting an interview with Sergeant Scott Gillman in reference to OPR 06-027 .

Duke:

. And you are Sergeant Gillman correct?

Gillman:

Yes.

D:

And even though you're the complainant in this situation you understand the rules and regulations pertaining to Administrative Investigations apply to this interview also, is that correct?

D:

And statements? You understand that?

G:

Yes.

•

D:

You understand that you have an responsibility to be truthful and honest and forthright in all your answers?

G:

Yes.

G:

Yes.

D:

Okay, well my understanding is from a memorandum dated September 22, year 2006 and I'm going to show you this memorandum and ask if you recognize that memorandum.

G:

Yes I do, that was drafted by me.

•

I

•

D:

Okaytbat's amemorandurn addressed to me in this office from you, is that correct?

G:

Yes.

D:

And in that memorandum uh you set forth a circumstance situation that developed in between you and Sergeant Sessions, is that correct?

G:

Yes.

D:

Now let me get some positions straight here so people listening to the tape recorder will understand. You're a Sergeant, correct?

G:

Yes I am.

•

D:

But right now where are you assigned and what are you working?

D:

Okay that's the clarification that I want to make that uh your promotion came while you were assigned to Vice Narcotics correct?

G:

I'm currently assigned to the Vice Narcotics Section, urn, I was promoted uh during my assignment in the Narcotics Section and I'm trying to wrap up a, an investigation, an on going investigation and when that case is wrapped up urn, I'm going to be reassigned back to patrol so Sergeant Sessions is uh currently assigned as a Supervisor to the unit

G:

Yes.

D:

And so even though you're a Sergeant you're not the supervisor in that section, is that correct?

•

2

GAR001845

D:

And Sergeant Sessions is the Supervisor of the Vice Narcotics Section correct?

D:

And you're waiting to finish up a case to go back to patrol where you will assume supervisor responsibilities?

•

G:

That's correct

G:

That's correct.

G:

Yes he is.

D:

Okay, now just a little bit of detail, this case you were working on, is that the case that is outlined here in this uh part of this memorandum?

•

G:

Yes it is.

D:

Okay urn, just for the tapes sake uh, give me a little background of'uh, of this incident, I don't want all the case, just, just this particular incident which the complaint is involved.

G:

Okay. Uh, we've been investigating, we've had an on going investigation involving a a target, several targets in Bullhead City reference urn the sale of methamphetamine and cocaine. Urn, through this investigation we've been doing surveillance details urn, we decided, we were having a lot of trouble with with surveillance and we decided to uh get the help of the MAGNET Task Force and regarding equipment and the use of urn some GPS transponders. Urn, and Emmett Sturgill the Sergeant in uh of MAGNET urn, a pretty tough uh low less a transponder. The transponder assists us in our surveillance in in tracking urn our our target.

•

3

GAR001846

•

D:

And so he is in charge of the entire MAGNET Task Force?

D:

Okay, once again, who is Emmett Sturgill?

G:

Emmett Sturgill is a Sergeant assigned to uh, he's a (inaudible) employed by the Department of Public Safety but he, he's essentially in charge of the urn MAGNET Task Force and his office is in Kingman.

D:

And our Vice Narcotics Section is a part of the MAGNET Task Force?

G:

Yes it is.

D:

Okay go go on with your narrative.

G:

So to speak, there's a Lieutenant above him but he more or less oversees jhe the entire Task Force urn whenever we have a uh any issues that arise where we're not sure on how to deal with something, its not uncommon for us to speak with Emmett because he is experienced, very experienced in narcotics investigations and urn he knows the policy better than anybody. And its, the policy is currently going through some changes also.

•

D:

Okay.

G:

We do speak with him on a frequent basis.

G:

So we decided that we were gonna place a transponder on our targets vehicle, on several vehicles actually, we were only issued one transponder at the time so uh, the transponder uh its function is more or less to help us track urn our target in a manner so we don't have to be so close to him because our target has been running counter surveillance you know, he

•

4

GAR001847

•

runs bumper checks whatever you want to call them but he's, he's doing a lot of counter surveillance making our surveillance details difficult so we wanted to place transponders on the car and a transponder, DPS transponders are urn connected to the internet and there's a web site on the internet so we have the, we have the ability to actually track every where he goes with the help of that transponder. It's pretty accurate. So uh, on August,

G:

August 25th of 2006 I was conducting a surveillance detail up in the Desert Foothills subdivision. And uh, the target was driving a vehicle that isn't currently registered to him and he parked that vehicle at a third party residence. It's not a residence that we've been able to identify as uh a residence he owns or or pays the rent at or pays the utilities at this point. I felt that under these circumstances

D:

G:

It it was in the driveway.

•

D:

Where was this vehicle, on the street or in a parking lot?

D:

In the driveway?

G:

Yes and it was about three to five feet from the, there's a public access sidewalk area that runs right uh adjacent to the driveway. So I felt under the circumstances we could probably place the transponder on the, on the car urn. but before 1 did that I contacted uh, Emmett Sturgill and I explained to Emmett the circumstances regarding the placement of the transponder and he said "no you're legally fine to place it that way." I said, "So okay I'm going to try and place it then." He calls me back and says"l also spoke with William Carroll." William Carroll is the County

•

5

GAR001848

•

Attorney that is going to be prosecuting this case. He said "I talked to William as well and his legal opinion is the same urn, you're okay in placing the transponder under these circumstances because our target urn doesn't have an expectation of privacy under under the circumstances of the residence and the vehicle." So I said, "Okay." So I then also talked to William Carroll and I also told him, I gave him. the scenario, William said "yeah I talked to Emmett and you're, you're okay go ahead you know, you're going to go and place them." So on that date I placed the transponder on on the targets vehicle and uh after, after the placement of the transponder every, everybody within our unit was aware of how I placed it, when it was placed urn, we had, um, Detective Queen knew about it, Sergeant Sessions was was briefed on how it was placed.

r

I

1

!

GAR001849

D:

Okay, (both speaking inaudible) how did they become aware that you had done this?

•

G:

I told them.

D:

Okay and this is in your office area?

G:

Yeah it was, it was in our office but we've also had meetings about it urn, I had, I had a meeting with the Chief, the Deputy Chief uh, the Captain, the Lieutenant, Sergeant Sessions was present during that meeting, we discussed, I discussed in that meeting because the Chief had asked me to give him a case overview to fmd out where we were within the investigation and our approximate time frame on when I believe that we'd have the case wrapped up. And there's a lot oflogistics involved with wrapping it uP. you know we weren't sure if it was gonna Title Three, that's what the DA wants to take it and they want to take it to a wire. So I was trying to uh argue, trying to take it to the next level with the Chief, just giving him a general overview of the case and and the transponder

•

6

•

actually, that whole, the detail of that transponder and how it was placed was actually brought up in that meeting. It was also brought up in a, in a, we have weekly, sometimes hi-weekly meetings with the Deputy Chief and the uh Special Problem Unit.

D:

So, uh, somehow I think is that is pretty common knowledge within the section?

G:

Yeah, everybody knew.

D:

Okay.

G:

Everybody knew where I placed it um., and how it was place and so forth.

D:

Okay.

•

G:

So urn, we've been more or less on on the internet tracking tracking this vehicle and its and its movements and monitoring it that way. Um from the internet. And urn. and no time in any conversations I ever had with Sergeant Sessions did I ever get the feeling from him that this was ever a problem uh, the way it was placed or anything so. Uh, uh on, I'm reflecting back on my copy of the. of the memo I wrote for the dates. (pause) On September 20th urn Sergeant Sessions, Corporal Williams and I uh, we attended a training that was put on by Randy Means, it involved urn the U.S. Constitution and legal, legal updates and things like that and uh that that's pretty much a non significant day at the time urn, just training, I mean, 1, we all, a lot of department members attended it, it was really no big deal, it was on a Wednesday training day. The following day urn, September 21 st sometime between urn nine o' clock in the morning and twelve, Detective Andersen and I were in, were in the uh Narcotics Office and we were and Detective Andersen had told me that the uh

•

7

GAR001850

•

transponder battery had gone dead which basically meant that we couldn't track the the target anymore. So we were discussing you know, strategies on how we were going to get this transponder from the targets car so we can charge the battery again. And while we were discussing this Sergeant Sessions came into the office urn. he he was listening to our conversation and its, at that point he brings up the fact that he had a, he says "you know what, I had a conversation with Randy Means on the way you placed that transponder on the car and what he's saying you did was illegal." And I'm like ''WHAT!'' I was like, I was actually kind of like really surprised that he would have a conversation with Randy regarding a case that I'm doing without and and and he had mentioned that he had had this conversation during our training day and I was there and I was kind of like, ''why would you have this conversation and at least not let me be present during it so so if you felt it was an issue, the issue could have been clarified more easily if all parties that are involved with this thing could be there". And uh, me and, me and Detective Andersen were more or less, like well first of all Randy Means isn't the final say in all the legal matters that come up with our department so I I, I was like, so I'm not really worried about it you know and then he's like "well you know Randy Means is our legal consultant because he is the City's legal consultant." And I'm like, "I I don't really care Nick, I mean, I I screened this case with Emmett Sturgill, I screened this case with the Prosecutor William Carroll, they both said it was okay. He's the one prosecuting the case. I'm not really concerned about it urn, as far as liabilities are concerned I I've basically done all I need to do to cover myself, you mow with regards to placing the transponder." He's like well you know, he kept saying over and over again "he is our legal consultant on this. " You know stuff, I was, at this point Richie and I are kind oflike, what is this all about why would you even bring this up but urn at some point I said, "Well what is it exactly that you told Randy Means?" And he says "well," and this more or less a summary, he said uh, "well I told Randy that you placed a

•

GAR001851

•

8

•

transponder on a targets car in a fenced yard, the targets fenced yard

during a government operation." And at that point I said, 'Well there you go again Nick giving facts to people of this case that are not the facts." I said, "that's not what happened so I can understand where Randy would be coming from in thinking that what I did was illegal because based on what, the scenario you're giving him I clearly need a court order and I, if those were the circumstances I would have gotten a court order but those aren't." And he's like "well, now maybe I'm confusing, what, well how did you place them?" I'm like, "we've had several meetings about this, I mean, I placed a transponder on the targets dad's car in a third par, at a third party residence in the driveway near the sidewalk and those are the facts, there was no fenced yard involved," And he's like, "Oh that's I I I'm sorry I totally misunderstood the whole placement of it and I'm like "wen we discussed this over and over again." I was kind oflike, you you didn't, you didn't do anything wrong, you know, I mean, there's no possible he could have got that confused in my mind. Because its been, we've had conversations in briefing over this stuff, now, I don't know, I just don't find that Sergeant Sessions would not be paying attention on that many different cases, So after that whole conversation was said and we clarified how the placement was made on the transponder urn, at that point Sergeant Sessions was like "well how can I help you guys get it off of the car you know?" And I'm like, "well you know we need to figure out a way and find out where the car is at at the time and you know, I was more or less describing for him the area where I placed it, the area where I placed it on the vehicle was like near the where the exhaust pipe actually sticks out and the exhaust comes out, it was right above that so we were discussing that at that time. And he was like, "wen yeah if! see the car and then it's like somewhere where I can remove I'll pop it out," So I was like, cool you know and I was showing him exactly where it was so that when he he would have to be fiddling around under the car and he'd know exactly where he had to get it ifhe wanted to get it. And that's pretty

•

•

9

GAR001852

•

much where the conversation ended. That's when, I was, I kept thinking over and over in my head, it's like you know, what is going on here. why why would he not include me in a conversation with Randy.

D:

Now it is your impression that he had a conversation with Randy Means distinctly about the placement with the transponder?

D:

Okay, did he just mention this one time or this conversation I'm talking about, do you remember if it was one time, two times or?

G:

Yes.

G:

(Sigh) ou mean in the office there?

D:

Yeah in the office there.

•

G:

It was (sigh) put it this was Sergeant; there was absolutely no confusion about what it was we were talking about We were talking about one thing and one thing only, the placement of the transponder and in his mind what I had done was illegal.

D:

Okay, okay but then what happened after that?

D:

That's correct.

G:

He had that conversation with Randy Means he said uh during our training day.

G:

Db that evening I was thinking about you know one, its like you know you're the Sergeant. I understand that you want maybe check into some stuff, legalities and things which I didn't have a problem with but I was a

•

10

GAR001853

•

little upset that he wasn't including me in in determining whether what I did was wrong or right. So I started really questioning whether or not uh Nick had this conversation with Randy. Uh I tried to call Randy that evening and I got his voice mail urn, I tried to call Randy the following day about it, if! could remember it's like umm, (pause) seven o'clock in the morning on September 2200. I called Randy and I I used the phone number that was provided on the handout that Randy had and I called him and I was able to get a hold ofbim and he had told me that "yeah, I was flying back to the East coast and I wasn't able to get your call." First one I guess and he wanted to know what was going on so I basically asked him,

. I said, "do you remember having a conversation with with anyone regarding uh the placement of a transponder and we talked specifically about uh a conversation he may have had with Sergeant Sessions regarding some legal issues, regarding a placement of a transponder and Randy Means was like, you know) "1 don't remember having a conversation like that with anybody." And I'm like "Randy this was uh, I'm calling you to find out if this conversation happened but also to give you the correct facts because in talking with Sergeant Sessions he indicated a set of circumstances of the placement of a transponder that weren't actually the facts. So I'm kind of calling you to get your legal opinion but also to find out if you even had this conversation with Sergeant Sessions to begin with regarding the placement of a transponder." So I ran by the correct scenario with Randy Means and Randy Means opinion was basically, you know, you're probably okay but what you do need to understand is that somebody has an expectation of privacy at the house whether it's the target or not. somebody does. And I said, "yeah, I I definitely agree with you on that, on that point." And then he says "this conversation I supposed to have had was like less than a week ago?" And I'm like "Randy, this was on Wednesday when you were at our department." And keep in mind the conversation we were having at that particular time was Friday, two days after his training. I said, "Randy

I r

I

i I

I

!

•

•

11

GAR001854

•

this was on Wednesday, this was you know on the day you were at our department providing training to us." And Randy's like "you mow that's a pretty out of the ordinary scenario involving the placement of a transponder. That's not something that comes up in scenarios all the time. And I I think I would have remembered a conversation like that and I don't remember having that conversation with anybody." At that point, I was, in my mind. I was, I felt very confident that Sergeant Sessions was not truthful with me uhh, when he was-telling me that he had this conversation with Randy Means regarding the transponder.

f

D:

Okay, did you go and, my understanding is you responded and you brought this to the Lieutenants attention ultimately but did you actually before that, did you actually have a conversation or anything with Sergeant Sessions about it?

D:

Okay.

•

G:

No I didn't.

G:

Umm, I I didn't feel that I was, first of all I felt that he was being untruthful and there' s been other situations that have come up in this case that led me to believe more so that he was untruthful.

D:

And I'm going to address that in just a few minutes but I want to continue with this scenario first of all.

G:

Okay.

D:

To exhaust all of this and then, and after you had this conversation on September 22nd with Randy did you subsequently talk with Lieutenant Smith about it?

•

12

GAR001855

G:

Yes I did.

•

D:

Okay what was that and how did that conversation go? First of all my understanding is you, did you type up the memorandum and complaint first?

D:

Okay, okay and what was

G:

No I didn't, no I waited and saw Lieutenant Smith first.

G:

And I basically explained the the entire situation that we just discussed with with Lieutenant Smith and Lieutenant Smith was like, "you know could have been a misunderstanding?" Urn, I said "no, no this was not a misunderstanding, this you know." And he was like "well you know, let me, I'd like to handle this. I'd like to talk with Detective Andersen and I'd like to talk with with Sergeant Sessions and stuff." And I said, "Okay." I went ahead and I said "I just want to make you, I want to make it clear to you that I uh, you mow, I feel its pretty clear that Sergeant Sessions tends to do this kind of stuff, this isn't the first, I mean, more or less Sergeant Sessions, there's there's the story and then there's the story according to Sergeant Sessions. And in during our conversation I kind of told Lieutenant Smith that and Lieutenant Smith was more or less like, "you know, yeah. and he had actually discussed an incident where Detective Andersen, he's he's involved with the investigation on a (inaudible) level and we're replacing on lease vehicles and I told Detective Andersen "just drop off your old car, get in your new car and leave, don't stick around for a long period of time, I don't want you to be seen with us." So that's exactly what he did but in doing that he locked his gun in the car, in the old police vehicle and Lieutenant Smith found it so it was talked about urn that you know, Richie was pegged on this and when pegged, and actually

•

•

13

GAR001856

•

later on that Sessions said "you know the Lieutenant's pretty upset about this uh thing and he's going to be looking into why you left your gun and all," I mean it was I don't know if they did you know, I don't think that needs to be handled that way. I'd kind oflik.e, well I just uh kind of told him to hurry, hurry and he forgot it, that kind of thing. What it was later found out was that Sessions was actually joking about that, regarding Lieutenant Smith being upset and Lieutenant Smith was kind of part of the joke. But Lieutenant Smith discussed that incident and he said "yeah I heard later at the station you know, uh, Sergeant Sessions talking about it and I mean, he was making a lot more of the whole story that it was really. there was a lot more substance that he had created than there really was" and I said ''yeah he has a tendency to embellish, sometimes to make more out of things than what they really are. Like he adds little words and things like that to stories he tells. And uh I think it was discussed, you know «do you think he was doing that here, do you think he was kidding with you?" I said, "At no time did he ever tell me he was joking, at no time did he, did I or or Detective Andersen ever feel he was joking about this. He never brought any inclination that he was kidding about this particular placement and transponder he had in a conversation with Randy so I took it as serious. I mean, this is an investigation that I'm conducting and I at no time thought he was ever joking about it so Lieutenant Smith and I discussed that and more or less Lieutenant Smith gave me the indication that he was going to try to handle it and

r !

i 1

i

•

D:

Did you tell and I'm banking on I think you did, but I want to be sure,

G:

Okay.

D:

Did you indicate to Lieutenant Smith that uh, as you have in your memorandum that this, you didn't feel that this was an isolated incident,

•

14

GAR001857

•

that there are other situations and circumstances where you called Sergeant Sessions integrity into question?

G:

Yes.

D:

Okay what did he, what was his comment on that?

.G:

(Sigh) I don't recall him really commenting about it uh, he let me explain the incidents that I was aware about and I I explained a few urn, but I don't, I don't recall him actually giving me a response.

D:

Okay and this particular one he wanted to handle?

G:

Yes and I 1 made it clear to him at that time, "1 just want to let you know that L I'm intending to file a formal complaint, urn and when I leave here I'm going to go type it up." And he says "okay." And I urn, I left, went to the office and I started writing up this memorandum that you have a copy of and urn I took it back and down to him and actually asked him ''where I can find the face page to a complaint form because I've never filed a complaint on anybody before." And he led me to the uh front desk counter in the police lobby, pulled one out and I pulled one out and attached that to the uh memorandum and then I, I remember asking him if I needed to give the memorandum to you because I had told him I addressed the memorandum to you and he told me "no that he would handle it" And I said "okay." That's pretty much where where we left off.

•

D:

Okay.

G:

And uh I'd, I had plans Friday to actually take a vacation but because of the circumstances on Thursday and and that month, that morning I called

•

15

GAR001858

•

Randy and discovering that Randy doesn't recall having the conversation with Sergeant Sessions. I was like, you know he's not being truthful about this so I'm going to go into the station and I'm going to let the Lieutenant know about it before I go on vacation and I'm gonna write this memo before I go on vacation and uh, after I was done writing my memo and giving it to the Lieutenant I ended up leaving but I had called uh Lieutenant Smith while we were, my wife and my kids and I were driving up the bill out of Needles. I called Lieutenant Smith and said to him, I

said uh, "have you had the opportunity to to speak with Nick yet?" And

he said to me "yes I did" I said "well what is he saying?" And he saying "well, he saying he never had a conversation with you about Ran, him having a conversation with Randy Means in a placement of a transponder. He's saying he had a conversation with Randy Means but it was about search and seizure stuff. not about a transponder." And I said, "Lieutenant he's telling you that, he is covering up his lie with now another lie because he did have that conversation with Detective Andersen and I saying he had a conversation with Randy Means regarding the placement of my transponder. There was no confusion about what that conversation uh details were," I said "I was calling you more or less to see if you' d spoke to Nick and Nick had told you yeah I was just joking. I was gonna, I was gonna pull my memo, my complaint because you know, if it was just Nick's way of joking and not letting anybody know he was joking. I was just gonna let it slide but I have no intentions of letting it slide now. If

he' s telling you that, yeah I had a conversation, I talked to him about a conversation with Randy Means but it was about search and seizure stuff not a transponder, he's not being truthful with you Lieutenant." The Lieutenant said "we have a problem here," I said. "yes we do." (Laughter) It's pretty much in that, at that point my phone conversation was cutting in and out with the Lieutenant because we were going up that hill and phone wasn't working really good so it kept cutting off and breaking up and stuff,

•

•

16

GAR001859

G:

Over the phone?

•

D:

Do you remember what date that conversation was with Lieutenant Smith?

D:

Yes.

G:

The same day, Friday, the same day I turned in the complaint, the 22nd of September.

D:

(pause) okay, what happened after that?

G:

I went to California for the weekend and uh came back Monday urn and I was in the Narcotics Sergeant office or the Narcotics office and uh Lieutenant Smith urn asked to speak with me and I said "okay" and we went to Sergeant Wincentsen's office in the 911 Center and Nick Sessions was present during the uh meeting with Lieutenant Smith and I had and he told me that more or less "he was conducting a limited IA investigation on the incident, that he's already talked to Sergeant Sessions about uh what occurred and that uh Sergeant Sessions was being given some corrective" uh, I can't remember how he worded it, "corrective actions, corrective measures to what ever he did." He didn't elab, he said «he didn't want to elaborate with me on what those were because it really wasn't my concern; it was between him and Sergeant Sessions." And he said "I've already," and again this is all summary because I was more or less very, what is going on here, you know I'm., I make a formal complaint and now I sitting here in a Lieutenant, in in a meeting with the Lieutenant with the person I'm making the complaint against and being told it's a limited IA and and the Lieutenant said something to the effect of "I've already drawn my own conclusions as to what happened." So at that point I'm going okay, I'm going to ask him a question on what his conclusions were but

•

•

17

GAR001860

D:

Does Sergeant Sessions have anything to say during this time?

•

then he went on about how "he felt that it was very important for this unit to be together because we're doing this big case and he understands that I've lost trust in Sergeant Sessions and Sergeant Sessions is going to have to gain your trust back and that may take some time to do and urn" and at some point I said, "well Lieutenant I want to know what conclusion you've drawn from this?" And he said, "Well I've drawn the same conclusion basically of what you put in your memo." And I said, "That's good because that's exactly what happened in my memo and I don't want to have any confusion as to what conclusion you may have drawn."

G:

Yes.

D:

Do you recall what he had to say?

•

G:

He said that urn, during that urn conversation we had on Thursday, the one where Detective Andersen was present regarding the transponder and the Randy Means conversation:' he said "that more or less he felt like an officer that day and um, he felt like urn, he said he was upset, he was mad over the, over the whole, I don't know, the whole atmosphere and the conversation regarding the transponder" He, he doesn't, he never acknowledged to me that he was untruthful, he was more or less, and I think the Lieutenant said the same thing, he's not saying it didn't happen because he's saying you guys wouldn't lie about something like this but he saying he was so upset that he doesn't remember exactly what he said. And I all, thinking to myself, I'm going, wait a minute here, I'm not the greatest investigator in the world but I talked to Lieutenant Smith on Friday and Lieutenant Smith told me that "he did acknowledge having a conversation with us and saying he spoke to Randy Means but it was about search and seizure issues." Now on Monday I'm being told that

•

18

GAR001861

•

he's acknowledging that the conversation probably did happen "because you guys wouldn't lie about it but I don't remember, I don't remember because I was so upset" and he's like "I don't even know what I was upset about." This is what Nick Sessions was saying and I'm like, "1 don't know what you were upset about either." And Lieutenant Smith was referring to this whole conversation between Sergeant Sessions and Detective Andersen and I like it was an argument. It was not an argument! It was not heated to the point where people were yelling urn, it was more or less me being on the defensive of the, of the placing the transponder and Detective Andersen going "yeah, yeah Nick, yeah, that' s not what happened." That type of thing. And it was kind of being, in my mind, kind of being blown off of some argument that we had, and some ego's got involved and and its uh, you know, its going to have to be cleared up type of thing too .

•

D:

But your conclusion, your opinion at the conclusion of the meeting between yourself, Sergeant Sessions and Lieutenant Smith was that Lieutenant Smith had basically said that he agreed with you of what happened but that Sergeant Session had not aclmowledged any wrong doing?

G:

He had, he, in my mind he hadn't acknowledged that he was untruthful with me but I took that the Lieutenant agreed that there was some untruthfulness because Lieutenant Smith said, "Sergeant Sessions has a lot to do with you to earn your trust back." So in my mind Lieutenant Smith wouldn't have made that kind uh of statement unless he felt that Sergeant Sessions wasn't truthful with me.

D:

Okay but Sergeant Sessions in that meeting never made any acknowledgement to you that he had been untruthful?

•

19

GAR001862

•

G:

Not directly saying I lied to you, it was more or less you know, I have a lot to do to earn your trust back, I agree with that but not you know, directing, that day I lied to you, nothing like that. Urn, 1 got to be honest with you, that meeting was a (inaudible) into me because I was kind of, 1 don't mow, 1 was placed in a weird spot, an uncomfortable spot, umm, I work with this, I work with this person and I'm being, you know. of course, he mows I made a complaint and its more or less, it was more or less swirling that this was the way it was going to be handled and he's he's got, he's getting corrective action and needs to report back to the Lieutenant within thirty days regarding what things he's done to

•

D:

Okay. And we're going to leave that as it may. (Both speaking inaudible). I want to press on now to the uh, the last place, this, not an isolated incident, you indicated there were other incidents you had, can you run some of those by me here real quick.

D:

Was that the way you expected it to be handled?

G:

No it wasn't.

G:

I had a conversation with Sergeant Garzon after he was promoted to Sergeant and he had indicated to me that um when he and Sergeant Sessions were going through the promotional process, Sergeant Sessions had taken his oral interview before uh Sergeant Garzon had. Garzon indicated to me that when Nick comes out of the interview room urn Nick goes up to Garzon and says urn, "hey just to let you know they have all of our IA packets in the interview room." And Garzon was saying he was like "Huh, you know (laughter)" He was more like Garzon you know and Garzon said "1 went into the interview thinking this in my mind and they didn't have our IA packets and he was like I was furious because it more or less changed his whole mind set of the interview at that point," he was

•

20

GAR001863

•

•

you know, and he's like ''1 was furious, he straight out lied to me about it and he said I went and confronted Nick about it and at the time he was like I was really strongly concerned about filing a complaint against him for doing that And and he said I didn't because I told Nick, you mow you do this kind of stuff again and I'm going to." Urn during the meeting we had with uh the Chief, the Deputy Chief, the Lieutenant, the Captain, Nick and:

I we had an overview of the case meeting, in the Chiefs office. I can't recall the date of the meeting but when I was giving the overview of the case to the Chiefum Sergeant Sessions pipes in by saying what "a guy he has been working, a guy by the name something, it's a long Hispanic name uh he says that this guy lives at _

_ and he told, he tells everybody in the meeting that this guy too, he is, you know chief, he's connected to this this Scott's case too. I've been doing this investigation and he's connected and he's connected to the addresses um-.w. you have to get into detail, you know. two other address that are possibly related to the target." And I was like this is the first time I had ever heard of this and I'm the case officer, so I said, I said, "hey Nick this is the first time I ever heard about this guy being connected to our target" And he's like, "yeah I know, I hadn't had time to tell you about it, urn, you know, but I'll tell you about it" I'm like, "okay." Well after the meeting occurred I said "well how is this guy connected?" And he goes, "Ah he's not connected, it's a mistake on my part." And I took that as like he's trying to make himself look good in this meeting by having his investigative part in the case but he had he had plenty of different times to tell me they were connected before the meeting and didn't.

D:

Now who is this meeting with?

G:

With with uh, the Chief, the Chief, the Deputy Chief, Lieutenant Smith, Captain Moss, me and urn Sergeant Sessions. And uh

•

21

GAR001864

•

D:

Okay would you happen to have a date of that meeting some place?

G:

I had, I don't have, I'll have to look but I don't think I have the actual date of the meeting. There was only one case overview meeting with

D:

Okay was this before this incident happened?

D:

Okay.

G:

Yes it was.

G:

I believe, were the last names. And the guy

G:

And I spoke to Nick Sessions after; sometime after the meeting I'm like, "how are they connected?" you know, and and he said "it was a mistake they're not connected urn."

•

D:

Okay what was this guys name again?

D:

And he and a couple of other addresses were supposed to have been connected to that case?

G:

Yes according to uh urn Sergeant Sessions he said that "this guy was

connected to

are twa

addresses connected to the target. And I'm like "Whoa" you know, it was (meeting) like; no he's not. (Laughter)

D:

(Both speaking inaudible)

•

22

GAR001865

• G: You said this in the meeting with all the (coughing both speaking
inaudible)
D: How soon after that meeting did you confront him with that and ask him
about it?
G: Might have been later that day or or or, see at the time it wasn't hugely
significant to me to get upset it was more or less like oh maybe it was
Nick embellishing again (laughter) that's the way I took it I mean.
honestly. So I didn't, you know, the times, type conversation type thing
but it was, it was after the meeting. it could have been that day or a day or
two later urn (coughing)
D: Okay, (inaudible coughing both speaking) reason within the time of that
particular meeting?
•
G: (Inaudible coughing and both speaking) when we got our phone polls
back. Uh to uh Sergeant Sessions urn, luck, this guy was connected to
Tito, our target. And the phone poll showed the phone numbers matched
and I called Nick, I said, "Hey you lucked out Nick because uh (laughter)
he is he is connected" And Nick's like "oh really, I mow, like Hey you
know." Well after the meeting we hadn't had the phone polls back yet and
we're actually waiting, you mow I told the Cbiefyeah we're waiting on
the phone polls. I want to shut this thing down and see how frequent this
guy is making calls and who is he making calls to and see if we can
identify more people, I don't want to shut it down yet so we're waiting on
phone polls and we're waiting on financials and forfeiture paperwork and
things like that so. When got the phone polls back, that's when it was
basically. hey,
• D: Those phone polls, are they dated when you got them? 23

GAR001866

•
G: Ahh, I think they are, yes. They are dated.
D: Okay. Any other incidents that you can recall? r
I
G: Umm, a lot of this information that I'm getting is from just shop talk more
or less but urn Sergeant Sessions put himself in for Officer of the Year, he
had a agreement with Detective Chamo uh that Chamo was going to write
Nick up and Nick was gonna write Chamo up, well Chama ended up
leaving the department and now Nick had nobody to really sign off his
write, his write up for Office of the Year so he went to Brandon Grasse
and he had Brandon Grasse sign the write up and uh it looked as though
Brian had written the document when in fact Nick had written the
document and Nick got Officer of the Year based on that And I find that
that's uh
•
D: And where did this information come from?
G: This information came from Detective Andersen urn, I believe that uh
Brandon Grasse was already been interviewed um and has acknowledged
that D:

Interviewed by who?

G:

I because I told Lieutenant Smith about it, I told Lieutenant Smith about it as one of the incidents.

D:

Has he been interviewed recently?

G:

Yes I believe so.

•

24

GAR001867

i

/'

I

•

D:

Ohokay.

G:

Urn but he's acknowledged it "yeah I did that, it was early in my career and I did write, 1 did sign my name to a document that Nick had written." So I feel (sigh) that's the, this is an integrity issue to me I mean its, it doesn't say much for yourself when you're writing yourself up for things and then having to go to other people to sign stuff.

D:

Okay, alright, these incidents that you've recorded here, they're the ones that you have personal knowledge of?

G:

Yeah I have, now. there's another incident that I've been made aware of recently but I'm not sure if its true or not without you interviewing other people but uh JJ. this guy Detective Johnson who works for Lake Havasu PD who is assigned to MAGNET, he's the one who works on this particular case. He uh attended a Clandestine and Drug Laboratory School with Sergeant Sessions. Urn, he later went to the Arizona Narcotics Officers Association Seminar with member of our department uh (inaudible), uh uh Sergeant Garzon, Officer Hoag and and uh some officers who went to the training. Urn it was brought up by Detective Johnson that uh he "why did you all pull Scott Gillman from the Narcotics Unit you know, that's too bad" type of thing and and uh 1 think: it was brought up and I don't know the context of the conversation but it was brought up that uh you know, "Scott had a lot of experience up there, surprised you're pulling him" or whatever and then Detective Johnson said "1 went to a school with Sessions and he said that he was a Narcotics Detective with the previous department he worked for which was (inaudible)" and that's the first I'd ever heard of it and I think: that, uh, and 1 got this information from Sergeant Garzon and Garzon was like, "yeah that's the first 1 ever heard of it" and Officer Hoag was also present when Detective Johnson was telling them this so he was more or less telling

•

•

25

GAR001868

•

Detective, Sergeant Sessions sounds like he's telling Detective Johnson that he was a detective in narcotics for another agency and I and I never heard that and I don't really believe he ever was, its just, like all these things are just popping, you know, popping in my head now that this particular incident has come about.

i

I I I

r

I

0:

What's Detective Johnson's first name?

G:

Ahhh, they call him 11. I don't, I don't really know ummm, but he's assigned to MAGNET.

D:

MAGNET with, but he's with Lake Havasu PD?

G:

Yes he is. He's been untruthful with with Sergeant Garzon during promotional opportunities and and in mind and for no other reason than frying to give himself an advantage in the interview. I mean, the trip goes on up or something. that's the, what other reason would he have for doing that? I I do not have any idea why he would be untruthful with me about having a conversation with Randy Means, I mean. its not advantageous to the investigation that's for sure. Umm, its caused, its created uh, I mean Detective Andersen feels as strongly as I do that, or why would you, why would you say it when its not true and it just creates, what it does it creates uh uh block with the unit. Its, we're not cohesive because

•

0:

Now now based upon what you just said right there I want to ask you a question here, it is probably the Lieutenant's desire to handle it in the manner he did handle it was so that you know, you would not be divided and that he could bind the wounds and it would be cohes, cohesive. Do you feel that what he did to accomplish that goal?

•

26

GAR001869

GAR001870

•

27

•

G:

I mean, I wasn't, my focus wasn't all on to see who everybody was in the room because I just wasn't in that mind set at that time. I was more or less in a cave. What is going on here or why are we discussing this piddling thing about a transponder. it never was an issue before now I'm having to justify and explain my actions here to Sergeant Sessions. I wasn't in that mind set in trying to distinguish everybody and who they were.

D:

Okay, anything else you would like to add at this time?

G:

(Sigh) no, my, the only think I would like to add is you know. my reason for filing this complaint and is one, I want it to be documented the appropriate way on him being untruthful in regards to a conversation he had with me regarding a criminal investigation. I don't want it to be misconstrued because at some point um when after all this occurred I got I spoke with Lieutenant Smith and he had asked me to hold my complaint and I didn't have a big problem doing so as long as it was documented properly. And urn I learned later if I pulled it it wasn't going to be documented properly so that's why I left the complaint as it stands because the department needs to mow about these types of situations regarding integrity and I want it to be documented appropriately because its not only going to protect the department hut its going to protect other officers that maybe with Sergeant Sessions in an environment where his integrity may be caned in question again and I don't want that officer who has no issues on integrity in his file to be uh looked at as untruthful when Sergeant Sessions may be telling a whole different story on that particular incident. So I just, I I just strongly want this documented appropriately urn because in my mind urn Lieutenant Smith made me believe that if this complaint had been investigated :fully it would be found sustained and Sergeant Sessions urn, and this is what Lieutenant Smith told me, "If we investigate this fully the complaint will be found sustained and Sergeant Sessions uh, his certificate of certification will be sent to POST for

•

•

28

GAR001871

•

review," And so I'm like whoa you know, I don't wish that on anybody and I don't wish that to happen to Sergeant Sessions in this case but I didn't place him in this position, he placed himself in this position and it just needs to be looked at correctly, thoroughly so that if there's corrective action that he needs to be given so it don't happen again so be it, I'm okay with that.

D:

Okay, this concludes my interview with Sergeant Gillman and the time is approximately 1127 hours,

Transcribed by Diana P. Markez, Bu1lhead City Police Department.

•

•

29

GAR001872

•

Sergeant Nicholas Sessions OPR 06-027

This is Sergeant Jerry Duke of the Bullhead City Police Department The office of Professional Responsibility. The date is November the 9th t the year 2006. The time is approximately 1517 hours. And I'm at the office of Professional Responsibility conducting an interview with Sergeant Nick Sessions in reference to OPR 06-027.

Duke:

And you are Sergeant Nick Sessions, are you not?

Sessions:

lam.

D:

And did you receive my notice of Administrative Investigation?

S:

Yes I did.

D:

Did you read through the summary of the allegations that are set forth thereon?

•

S:

ldid

D:

And do you understand what this investigation has to do with?

S:

I do.

D:

Okay do you understand your specific rights and responsibilities in this investigation?

S:

I do.

D:

Do you have any questions about your specific rights and responsibilities in this investigation?

s:

I do not.

•

1

GAR001873

D:

(Long pause) okay if you want to sign that one for me. Okay, my understanding of what the allegations consist of is that they came forth out of a meeting, not a formal meeting but a meeting that you had with Sergeant Gilhnan on September 21st of this year in reference to an investigation that was being conducted, is that correct?

•

s:

Actually it was more of an argument

D:

Okay, but I mean by meeting I'm saying you two met?

s:

Yes.

D:

I'm not talking about a formal meeting.

•

s:

Yes.

D:

Can, can, just, just tell me a little bit about that that contact you had with him, what the conversation was about and how it went?

s:

Wel1 to be honest with you I don't remember much of the conversation and I stated that to Lieutenant Smith even afterwards because I was very angry with Sergeant Gillman uh for other reasons. Urn, I do know that uh I was actively engaging him in an argument in order to perturb him; there was no doubt about that. Urn, in which, I know we were talking about uh the transponders on the vehicles, we were talking about entering uh private property to install them lib, the first half of the conversation I believe we were referring to a different locations where it was originally installed urn, I mean, really I just got the you know the basics of what we were discussing but

•

2

GAR001874

• D: When you said you had engaged him in order to perturb him it means
(both -speaking inaudible)
S: (Both speaking inaudible) already aggravated about something?
D: Yes.
s: There) there were outside influences that I'm finding out now urn, much
after the fact that uh urn that have had me on edge about Sergeant
Gillman, very worried about him and I have come to find out that he has
some outside influences that are apparently making him feel the same
way.
D: Okay but at this point in time and we mayor may not delve into that a
little later but) shed a little light on this thing, but right now
•
s: I don't believe it really does to be honest with you.
D: Okay right now I want to just get the gist of the conversation. As you
recall it and what was going on, the subject of the transponder came up.
S: That's correct. D:

That seemed to be the crux of the conversation.

s:

That's correct.

D:

Uh and my understanding is at some point in time that uh there had been a disagreement as to the legality of the placement of this transponder, is that correct?

.'

3

GAR001875

•

s:

That's correct; I believe we were speaking about a separate location. I was under the impression that it was put on at the home of the suspect, it turns out that it was actually put on at a different residence which I was totally unaware of.

D:

Okay.

S:

And which I actually admitted after. as a matter of fact I believe Detective Andersen you know, brought it to my attention and the fact by saying. when I told him what I thought the address was making the statement that "I was an ass" and I agreed with him because I was arguing a point that uh I obviously was on a whole different page than he and Sergeant Gillman was.

D:

Okay but at some, at some time during that discussion or argument in order to support your position did you ever indicate that you had a conversation to Randy Means in reference to this specific incident as you un<ierstoodit?

•

s:

Yeah, I know what I, I don't know if I said to him and again this is where to be honest with you, I really don't know because at this, by this part of the conversation I was pretty angry with Scott. Urn, I don't know exactly what I said to him but I know that I was talking to him about the placement and the fact that uh Randy Means agrees with me about how they, how they're put on. Leading him to believe that we spoke about the transponder as opposed to generalized questions that I may have asked uh whether it being during the class or afterwards, he, and I, and I, even if! would have know that he believed me to be leading into an entire conversation I didn't do a thing to stop that.

•

4

GAR001876

• D: Okay, so there's no, there's no argument in your mind and no contention
with the fact that during the heat of the discussion, the heat of the
argument things that were said maybe even by YOUt there's no argument
on your part that that may have actually led them to believe
s: No, I can't believe that either Sergeant Gillman or Detective Andersen
would lie about this,!, I, I know them both well enough to be able to say,
you know, I don't think that that would be the case in this instance.
D: Okay, uh, so so to the fact, the fact of the matter is uh and in your
discussion with Randy Means did you actually discuss with him about the
transponder?
S: No I didn't.
• D: Okay.
S: I didn't discuss placing the transponders, no.
D: Okay uh, and and of course, the subsequence of this is something
(inaudible) real short and want to get clear on this. On, on these concerns,
or a statement made I believe, its alleged that you made a statement to
Sergeant Newman in fact you were not finished or you were not finished
with Sergeant Gillman or something to that effect.
s: That was brought to my attention already.
D: Okay do you recall exactly what that statement was because I may be
wrong?
• s: Well the statement probably was that I'm not done with Gillman. 5

GAR001877

D:

Okay and what did you mean by that?

•

S:

This isn't over. Mike, there were two people present, I, there was, a conversation waiting for an FOP meeting. When Mike first saw me he asked me about, how things were going with (both speaIdng inaudible).

D:

This is (both speaking inaudible) Sergeant Newman?

S:

Correct.

D:

Okay.

S:

Urn, Sergeant Reff pulled up, started kind of giving me gas about my corrective actions that I'm taking. Urn, and then we had our FOP meeting and then Sergeant Newman and I finished our conversation in the presence ofuh urn, Sergeant Tiffany. So I don't know which person went to uh, however it got to Sergeant Gillman, obviously neither of them were there for the entire conversation in which I can guarantee you if I speak to either of them they would tell you they weren't there for the whole thing because there was only one Sergeant at one point and one Sergeant at the other. And I mean I know that is a statement I make regularly, "I'm not done, I'm not done, this isn't done."

•

D:

By this isn't, by you being not done, you're talking about the Administrative Investigation?

S:

I, yeah, and at that point I was actually talking about I didn't think it would be done because Scott believes I was out to get him. Which means this, I, I'm not done with Scott .

•

6

GAR001878

•

D:

Okay does that mean

s:

My dealings with Scott I didn't feel at that point were going to be over even ifhe left Narcs or I left Narcs or anything along those lines. It's kind oflik.e saying, you know, I mean, it's like me saying, "I'm not done with Sergeant Duke, I'm, I'm not done with you know with my brother (inaudible) I just not done with him yet.

D:

Okay is this, but I guess, there was no

S:

There was no nothing uh sinister in this statement.

D:

Okay and and my understanding is from what you said before and I want to clarify it is that you seen, and I don't want to put words in your mouth, when you said that you didn't believe that Detective Andersen or Sergeant Gillman would lie about this. You seem to have no problem with, that was their understanding of what was said during that

D:

Okay meaning that you have no animosity, no plan on reciprocation or retaliation?

•

s:

No, none.

D:

Okay.

s:

And if anybody can bring forward one scrap of evidence that since the beginning of this issue I've done anything in any way shape or form that would even be misconstrued as detrimental uh, as I stated to the Deputy Chief, I, I'll leave this agency because I will not bring harm to Scott or his family.

•

7

GAR001879

•

s:

Absolutely!

D:

And so essentially, I mean, beside a lot of headache and heartache and stress and I understand that but essentially you understand the position of actually the complaint and the process, is that my understanding also?

s:

Yes.

D:

Oh okay, I just wanted to be clear on that, I mean, and I'm not saying that you're, I know it's a lot of stress and a lot of problem things but with, you understand the nature of a misunderstanding, is that what you're talking about?

S:

Absolutely, I also know that I initiated it I also know that I, I, I as a Supervisor should not have engaged uh Scott in that manner urn, and if I knew I was misleading him I should have said something. Um, I was angry with him, I was, I was very angry with him and I really didn't care how he took what I had to say. Urn, I was basically looking to put him in his place urn, in a way that I didn't have to do it to where it wasn't going to harm his career.

•

D:

Okay, urn, is there anything else you would like to add?

s:

Vb., not really I mean, you've pretty much explained to me where we're at with this. I was very confused with the procedure; nobody else really explained it to me. Urn, I mean I just don't know ifI'm supposed to continue on with uh any corrective action that I am taking now or not. Urn, I. I don't know where I stand with that I mean, uh, nobody; nobody's given me any any direction any way.

•

D:

Okay .

8

GAR001880

•

s:

I mean I don't know where I'm at or what I'm supposed to be doing.

D:

And that is secondary to the investigation. Well. we'll clarify that in just a moment here but other than, as far as the investigation, the facts in the investigation, anything you'd like to add as far as it goes?

s:

No.

D:

Okay.

s:

No, not at all.

D:

This will conclude my interview with Sergeant Sessions and the time is approximately 1527 hours .

•

Transcribed by Diana P. Markez of the Bullhead City Police Department

•

9

GAR001881