08-0080 seagraves 1st ia

7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

1/71

MARICOPA COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICEInternal Affairs Division

IA # 08-0080

Interview with Lieutenant Seagraves, S1018

June 23, 2008

TUCKER: My name is Bruce Tucker. Im a Lieutenant with the Maricopa

County Sheriffs Office. Today is Monday, June 23rd, 2008. The time is

approximately 1340, 1:40 hours. Uh, this is an audio recorded interview

with Lieutenant Kim Seagraves, number 1018 in regard to MCSO IA 08-

080. Um, Im gonna go ahead and set this on the table. Kim, you had a

chance to, uh, review both of the memorandums before we get, we got

started. Did you have any questions about either the Garrity or the Notice

of Investigation?

SEAGRAVES: No.

TUCKER: Okay. And youve signed both of them?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: (Pause) Im gonna go ahead and sign as the witness, um, and the

investigator on the one. Um, were here at your office, uh, the Cave Creek

District, Cave Creek/Carefree, 37622 North Cave Creek Road, Cave

Creek, Arizona. Um, what I wanted to do I, I spoke to you just briefly

before I initiated the recording was to identify for you, um, the gist of this

investigation. It involves your time as a supervisor over the Sex Crimes

unit, uh, with the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office assigned to General

Investigations Division. And cases that were turned over to the El Mirage

Police Department when El Mirage Police Department took the care,

custody and control of those cases that originated out of their area.

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: And you met with, uh, Sergeant Pokeno at one point in time and he

is a Sergeant that works for the Sheriffs Office that was assigned to work

Investigator: Lt. B. Tucker, #S0975 Reviewer: Capt. J. Miller #685Typed by: A9998Date/Time: July 1, 2008/1500 hours 1 of 71

7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

2/71


IA # 08-0080

in a contract at El Mirage, correct?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: And you had a discussion with him about, uh, cases that were

assigned to Sex Crimes?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: And there was a decision made to turn over certain cases to El

Mirage Police Department. What I wanna do with you, if I can, is identify

what cases were turned over to El Mirage, um, if those cases were workedby the Sheriffs Office prior to being turned over an dif they werent

worked by the Sheriffs Office, a basis for why if you can identify that.

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: Does that make sense?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: Um, I received a, uh, three-ring binder with various documents. I

brought it with me. Um, weve decided that, uh, you would look at it as we

go as opposed to reviewing it in advance. But does this look like the same

document or binder that you gave me or that you had delivered down to

Internal Affairs?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: It has, uh, hand-written notes on it. It has tabs from Table of

Contents and one through twenty-five (25). And on the outside, I believe,

its marked El Mirage Audit.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

3/71


IA # 08-0080

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: Okay. Um, let me know if you want to refer to this for anything.

Um, the goal here, like I said, is to identify what cases were turned over,

what cases were worked, what cases were- were not worked and if they

were not worked, why?

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: So.

SEAGRAVES: Can I look at that?

TUCKER: Certainly.

SEAGRAVES: Right.

TUCKER: Let me just move the recorder. (Pause)

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: If theres a, a table or chart to identify as a group of reports or

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: however is best to do this.

SEAGRAVES: What I started doing when, um, we took over El Mirage and there were I

mean I dont remember the exact date that we, we took it over. I mean I

got there in, um, July and I was there almost two years. And during that

time, El Mirage came on board shortly after I got there but I dont

remember the exact date.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

4/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: Well, lets go back and just get a little foundation first.

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: Um, how long well, its pretty simplistic, but how long have you

worked for the Sheriffs Office?

SEAGRAVES: Since 93.

TUCKER: Okay, and you were promoted as Sergeant the same time I was,

which was, uh, 04?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: And, um, we worked together in 04 and then, uh, you were

transferred to Sex Crimes if I recall correctly, it was mid 06?

SEAGRAVES: Yes. And I, I wanna say either May or June of 06.

TUCKER: Okay. And you remained there through your promotion to

Lieutenant?

SEAGRAVES: Um, till I got promoted which was February 15th of this year 2008.

TUCKER: And upon your promotion, you were transferred up here to Cave

Creek?

SEAGRAVES: Correct.

TUCKER: Okay. So the entire time you were at GID from June of 06 to your

promotion to Lieutenant. You were assigned to Sex Crimes?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

5/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: Okay. And when you first got there, we did not have the El Mirage

contract?

SEAGRAVES: Thats correct. It was coming on board and we knew we were getting it

but, um, it, it happened shortly after. Um.

TUCKER: Was it clear to you that El Mirage, uh, is like any other contract,

the contracts are priority issues?

SEAGRAVES: Yes. Well, it wasnt said that to me but Ive been working for the Sheriffs

Office

TUCKER: We know that.

SEAGRAVES: and I know the standard procedure of you know when you have a

contract city, the importance of that and just service that first.

TUCKER: Right.

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: Right. Okay, thats what I meant. Uh, so while youre the

supervisor, we are assigned cases or we being the Sheriffs Office are

assigned cases to be investigated from El Mirage. Those included the Sex

Crimes. How, tell me, if El Mirage had a Sex Crime case come through,

how would you be notified of it?

SEAGRAVES: Okay. Can I give you some background about when I got there

TUCKER: Sounds good.

SEAGRAVES: so that you know what I had or didnt have available to me?


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

6/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: Sounds good.

SEAGRAVES: Um, when I first came to Sex Crimes, I knew nothing about Sex Crimes. I

mean, obviously, you know I spent a majority of time in GID but, um,

never have I worked in Sex Crimes. So when I got to the unit, um, I had

been advised that there was a well, whats his name, Darrell Newton was

before me and that he was never around when he was there. So just like

when I started to take over you know the office, Id go through, Id clean.

Id look and see what was there. And I was looking for anything, um, this

was my first time that I actually had a squad you know since I worked in

Internal Affairs, I pretty much youre like an investigator on your own.Youre not accountable to supervising other people unless its directly

related like case manage like we did in Homicide.

So I didnt know what the procedure was in place prior to me getting

there, so I contacted Darrell Newton. At that time he had taken my spot in

IA, so I asked Darrell how, when these case come because when I got

there, they were stuffed in my mail box. Cases from different divisions all

over and I wasnt sure what rhyme or reason they were assigned and how

they were assigned. So if I had some sort of, um, you know packet of

information or if he had a book goin, I certainly wanted to keep the

continuity up. He told me he didnt have a book. Um, he told me that he

just assigns them from his head. He remembers who he assigned them to

and well, obviously, some cases are more complex than others. They

require you know the use of the protocol which you know were on time

frames you know getting interviews done, time management of the

evidence that needs to be collected within 72 hours. So how does he

remember who? There were, there were seven detectives. How do you

remember who you gave the last one to? Um, he had no rhyme or reason.

And as a matter of fact, the majority of the cases that were assigned to, uh,

each detective went through Cheryl the, um, the gal that o- answers the


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

7/71


IA # 08-0080

phone, Cheryl Johnson. Shes the one who was receiving, reviewing and

assigning cases. So I, I, basically, had nothing to go on. Um, I asked the

detectives you know who assigned them and they pretty much said the

same thing. You know Darrell was here. He was always available by phone

but when it came to assigning the cases, they came from Cheryl.

So that is what I had and so I had to create something that I felt I could at

least manage. So what I did was I had a little b- notebook binder and I had

each detectives name. And I still have the form I used and, and when I left

it with Fred Lugo that is what I gave him. I didnt take it. I didnt make

copies of it. I didnt think it would be relevant as, as I sit here now. But,

um, basically it just had detective, um, you know, um, John Filbab, MaryWard, um, Rhoda Rojas and every detective that assigned to the unit. So

when I would get the cases, um, I had to tell Cheryl dont review them any

more. Give them to me and I would go through them and I would read

them. And I would determine based on prioritization, which what we do

and I mean no matter what you do, its like youre gonna pick the things

that are just are, um, more hot, hot and workable. So those are the things

that I used.

Um, at the time Bill, Bill Knight was my, um, Captain and, uh, he gave us

all, which Ive included in this, um, packet what he uses and wanted us to

con- continue to use as far as prioritizing, which is basically Policy. You

know things that are happening now, the age of the child. Um, the fact that

if there is evidence, um, that needs to be collected within, uh, you know 72

hours. If youve got a crime scene, um, as opposed to you know a report

that happened five years ago. Five years ago something happened to me

and the suspect is this person, so those, those, we prior- prioritize based on

Policy, based on common sense, based on how soon we need to respond.

So those cases, those are the ones in, in Sex Crimes that were more

comprehensive that required immediate assistance, uh, some case, uh,

callouts. So the ones that I actually got physically in my hand, and Im not


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

8/71


IA # 08-0080

talking about callouts. Thats somethin totally different. But I would

review it and I would see, um, within the last week or so okay, thats that

brings it up there. Um, it happened where a suspect is known to the victim

or the victim and the suspect are still in contact. If, if thats the case and

parents arent willing or unable to you know provide a safe environment

for the kid so those are the things that we jump on. Things that meet that

level of the needs of the child and physical evidence and recovery of the

scene. Um, so those things came to my top of my list. Based on those, Id

actually go into my book manually, I didnt do it on the computer, I

manually wrote in which detective it came, um, their name, the suspect if

known, the victim. There was just like columns and I, I hand wrote those

things in and, um, a little synopsis of it could be something like, um, um,where it occurred like vagina, butt, um, touching only, um, licking,

whatever it was you know relevant to that case I wrote that. And I did that

for me just to mem- what I, I could remember so I could go back teacher,

uh, father, uncle that sort of thing. And that is how I gave those to detec-

detectives.

So if one of them was more comprehensive, I may give two old disclosures

for one hot and heavy one. Does that make sense? Do you know what Im

saying?

TUCKER: Yeah, I think.

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: I understand. The work level and

SEAGRAVES: Right.

TUCKER: trying to keep it even and distributed

SEAGRAVES: Right.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

9/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: amongst your staff.

SEAGRAVES: So thats how I managed, how I did you know the, the case balancing. Um,

and then I, I did not know how to use RMS because that wasnt something

that I had ever used before. So I enrolled in a class to learn how to do

RMS so that way, um, I would have the ability to, um, to look to see, um,

if the case had been cleared or if Id get a call I can you know query it up

through RMS. And the majority of the time, the clearance sheets before I

got there, instead of the Sergeant reviewing them, he may have signed

them, I cant speak for that. But they were given directly to Margie or they

were given to Cheryl or in some cases detectives would clear them on theirown. So there was no one single clearing house for the way that they were

cleared, okay? So I kinda had to recreate I, I had, and in one way it was

good because I got to do it and learn exactly how it went, but there was

no, um, base operation in place when I got there. So that was one thing I, I

did.

Um, also there was nothing on the U drive that singled anything out, as far

as all the 261s, 262s, um, that were related. So I couldnt just pull them

up because there was nothing. Id have to, I would have to get a daily

CAD report and basically go wheres this one, this one, which is eventually

what I did when I realized that some of the cases were not coming to me.

So that is the basic what I walked into.

TUCKER:

SEAGRAVES: And, um, I didnt have anything available to me. I contacted Don Harvey,

asked him if he had a book. He did not keep a book. Um, the detectives

you know sometimes they kept a book, sometimes they didnt. But that

didnt do any good for me. I personally needed to see so I would know

how many I had, how many came in. So when, um, I started receiving El

Mirage, there was a time period where Id be getting phone calls from


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

10/71


IA # 08-0080

victims, uh, CPS, uh, teachers, anybody that would possibly wanting to

know the status of a case and more so, it was the, the parents and the

victims, um, themselves calling saying, um, hey, what happened to my

case? So I would say okay, where did it occur? And if it was El Mirage, Id

take down that information. What report were you given? What number

were you given? Where did this occur? And then I would have to, um, use

that information that I had written down, go through my notebook. If I

didnt have it, well then I, I didnt have it and so I knew something was

missing. So the only way I knew that there was a, like a big hole that things

were being dumped into that never came to me was unless I, I got

contacted by phone saying you know CPS calling me hey, we dont wanna

interfere in your, uh, interview. When are you doing this? Have youcontacted Child Help to you know set up an interview? And I dont have

anything in my manual file, so I realized its something. So then Ill call El

Mirage and, um, Mike Pokeno wasnt my contact then. I, I dont really

remember who it was. I dont know if it was Chad Brackman. But I, I

believe it was Chad Brackman.

TUCKER: So before you go much further,

SEAGRAVES: Um hum.

TUCKER: you had occasions where you would get a phone call and

questions about status of a case and progress of a case and youd look at

your hand-written notes that are kept based upon cases that are turned in

to you that were in your mailbox or handed to you by

SEAGRAVES: Faxed.

TUCKER: Cheryl or by fax or however.

SEAGRAVES: Right.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

11/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: Long story short, you would look at your hand-written notes in

your log and that case would never be reflected on the log, is that correct?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: You would get those types of calls?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: Did you ever identify the source of the problem?

SEAGRAVES: Yes, I did.

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: Um, what I found out was that early on, and there was a, a big block of

time, but I dont remember I mean it was like months that this situation

would be a common occurrence. That Id have to try to track down their

report. And then I would call Records but Records wouldnt have anything

for it, because it was an El Mirage DR number. So there was no

corresponding MCSO DR to link the two together. So I would have to call

El Mirage and see, do you have this Police Report? Um, yes, no, not

written, um, I dont have it. I have to track down whoever took it and wait

until they faxed it over to me. So that is why I, um, made, may I refer?

TUCKER: Yes, please.

SEAGRAVES: Okay. I, um, since I had identified that I went and I wrote a memorandum

to my Lieutenant, which at the time was, um, Fred, Fred McCann. And I

asked him if he would forward my email up the chain of command because

I had identified that we were losing track of, um, time. We were you know


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

12/71


IA # 08-0080

time is the essence in, in any case but you know when youve got a little

kid that their injuries could, um, they heal very quickly, things like that

became very, very relevant to me in that unit. So, um, I wrote a

memorandum and I sent it and it was agreed upon that it would go up the

chain of command by, I believe, oh shoot, wheres? I know its in here.

Give me a second. (Pause) (Sounds like looking through papers or book)

Okay, here it is. Um, this will kinda give you an idea of the time frame, too,

perhaps. What I have is a memorandum and Ill show you. Its dated 7-17

of 06 and it was addressed to Fred McCann via the chain of command

and, basically, introduction is there are numerous, uh, sexual (unintel

17:14) reports that have been submitted to the MCSO Sheriff SVU from

the El Mirage Police Department. And Im paraphrasing, so Im not beingspecific.

Okay, Lieutenant or Sergeant Brackman, um, these reports were

assigned to El Mirage. Police Report number, however, do not have a

corresponding MCSO DR face sheet or a reporting number assigned to

them. So they even had a different format that that came to me. So I

received at least three ca- three phone calls from victims and the parents of

minor victims inquiring about their cases. Since there was no way to refer

to the report, I had to wait until the report is physically comes to our office

and if the report is not received by the MCSO Sheriffs Office, there is no

way to reference that report was ever received to our Office. The only way

I would know a report was not received if the victim and or the family

members would call me about the status.

So this is why I felt a need to do that. And so my recommendation would

be at the very time that their pulling an El Mirage DR, just take two

seconds more and pull an MCSO one. Um, now I know they had to go

through a different radio, I mean different communication people because

at that time we hadnt been merged together, um, and using one

Dispatcher. So it would just be one problem but I felt that it would solve


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

13/71


IA # 08-0080

the problem and this way that the point of contact would be El Mirage. We

would also have cross- cross reference. It could be immediately assigned. I

would know it right away. Um, it would be more accurate as far as the

location, occurrence of the victim. The report can be faxed over to the unit

to ensure immediate response, and the El Mirage Police Report, Report

number would be cross referenced to the El Mir- El Mirage point of

contact and for the MCSO Sheriffs Office. So and then it could be entered

into RMS for further tracking. So, um, McCann ap- approved that. He said

he received it. And also, uh, Captain Bill Knight at that time concurred

with that on 7-19 of 06.

This is what came to me as a sticky note from, uh, Chief Freeman. This willresolve itself in a month; meantime, Kim will have to make efforts to deal

with this in-house. So, um, this did not resolve itself in a month. It was

many, many more months after that; however, I still you know, um, was

trying to work with Brackman and work with the patrol people when they

would call me, um, for questions. Make sure that you send a report to me,

fax it to me. And that did alleviate it; however, there were still a big pool

that didnt come back to me until later, okay? So I did try to fix something

to make it and make my supervisor aware. And Fred McCann certainly he

acknowledged that and he knew that that was an issue but thats, um, kinda

how it was in the beginning.

So eventually, and not a month later, eventually there was a merging where

we were getting, um, the reports mixed, um, with our reports. But in some

cases, it still came on the El Mirage face sheet their face sheet, which had

to you know be transferred over. So it wasnt just a simple, simple thing.

So once I received the El Mirage, um, they were, uh, I didnt specifically

give El Mirage only one detective. I kinda married them all together and

the priority level, although, um, El Mirage always seemed to rise to the

top, whether it was a contract or not because they were always the most


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

14/71


IA # 08-0080

severe cases that we had. They resulted and I dont have numbers, but the

majority of our callouts, the majority of our really good arrests, the

majority of our you know really bad suspects came from El Mirage. So

although I did prioritize, they always seemed to rise to the top because they

were the most severe, okay?

TUCKER: Okay. Alright, lets go through, uh, besides your, your log that you

had for cases that you were assigning, um, did you based upon what you

told me, I take it that there wasnt a callout log so if there was a callout for

a detective, you didnt make a note of that some place, (unintel 21:10)?


TUCKER: Oh, you did?


TUCKER: Okay, can you tell me how you did that?

SEAGRAVES: Um, (unintel 21:16) binder, um, I think and I dont remember if I broke it

out to a second binder at some point because it got you know bigger than

my binder did. But, um, I did maintain a callout log. That was a callout log,

again, there was nothing prior to my getting there. I, I set that up on my

own. And, I just, um, I used to write in there that, um, right next to the

detective that if I was assign a case, I would say this was a callout, but then

we got so many calls I just decided to do a callout log. Basically the same

procedure. It was hand-written. It was a callout, um, suspect and who

called, who was called out and you know, um, just maintain a callout log.

TUCKER: Basic callout log?

SEAGRAVES: Very basic, not anything major.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

15/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: Okay. And, um, can you identify for me if, if you have in the, in the

book that you gave me the, uh, DRs that were turned over to El Mirage?

SEAGRAVES: Um, yeah. Do you want to know, I think, well, I think its important and I

dont know if Im jumping ahead of you.

TUCKER: You probably are much more familiar with this than I am.

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: So Im, Im more less at this point, gotta do an inquiry.

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: So please help me if you think theres something thats important.

SEAGRAVES: Alright. I just dont want you to you know if Im going too far and you

dont want me to go in that direction. But, um, we knew with rumors that

that El Mirage was eventually going to, um, you know, um, take over their

own and they were gonna be responsible for their own cases. But that did

not mean that we held those cases and didnt work them. There were, like I

said, with all of our cases we, we, we put them together. Um, unlike

common sense where it takes you know four or five days to work them,

some scenes and some investigations can be, um, on a roll for like maybe

two to three days and then it will stop and then you know we still have to

do some additional follow up. Its not where the unit goes out. There are

times that I did send the whole unit out on search warrants, but they were,

um, more the detective could really do it one person. If he needed two

people, then he, we would call somebody. But very few times was it you

know the whole squad. It would be one or two investigators. So, um, when

we had cases that were more, like I said, more complex we worked those.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

16/71


IA # 08-0080

So the El Mirage cases that were low priority as just the same as the

County cases, such as, um, you know problems with the credibility of the

witness. That she had said she lied, she didnt lie, she was at a party. Yes,

she was at party. No, she wasnt drinking; yes, she was drinking. Um, it

happened a month ago; it happened a year ago. Um, disclosures where now

theyre adults and now theyre claiming something else. That dont meet

the level but yet they still are inquire, we still need to do investigations.

Those cases were blended with the Sheriffs Office cases. So the priority

level on those were they were the same you know they were the same and

we worked them just the same.

So when it came time for, um, the El Mirage to go back to El Mirage, um,

the decision was not mine. We wanted to keep them. There were some

cases that were really down and dirty and we really wanted to keep them

because we knew who the suspects were. We thought they were gonna be

really basically good arrests and that was good for us. It was good for the

unit, and its good for morale when you get a bad guy and you put him in

jail. So all those things were really good.

Um, we were told by Hank Brandimarte the first of October the turn over

date was October 12th or October 13th. And, um, and so around the

beginning of October, we were told, I was told to tell my folks so I wanna

when I clarify that Im gonna say telling me I shared that with my troops.

But, um, that what we are doing is to wrap them up, to write up what we

have. Dont, um, bo- and this, I wanna make this really clear, this did not

mean the callout cases or the ones that you know 72 hours crime scene.

These are different. These were ones that we were currently working on

and we had gone like give you an example, we still need to go back and

follow up, ask additional questions or you know try to find a witness that

can cooberate this story, those kinda things.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

17/71


IA # 08-0080

He said write up what you have because were gonna turn those over in

October, October 13th, 12th or 13th. So there was one case and it was Mary

Wards case where her suspect in the El Mirage case was a suspect she had

who, um, I may be wrong about the location but I thought lived in

Whitman. So Mary had an old, an old case that belonged to the Sheriffs

Office case and, lo and behold, this was a reoccurring, um, you know I

dont know if its the same victim but it was the same suspect. So she said

she wanted to put those two together because then wed have a stronger

case because her case was turned down when she was M- with MCSO

when she filed it. So I wanted to keep that you know. Why would I wanna

give that away? So flat out, no. Hank said absolutely no. Uh, Captain, per

the Captain, wrap up what you have. So, um, what I did was, um, I savedsome of my emails to, to document the thing. Um, I wanna talk to you

about that later. Um.

TUCKER: And just so you know, Im not questioning your priority.

SEAGRAVES: Um hum.

TUCKER: Im just questioning if there were cases that were turned over that

werent worked. And if they werent worked,...

SEAGRAVES: Why?

TUCKER: why?

SEAGRAVES: Okay. Um, alright.

TUCKER: I mean I understand you were following protocols and priority.

SEAGRAVES: Yeah, okay.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

18/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: I just dont want you to feel as though Im questioning your

priorities.

SEAGRAVES: No, no, and I dont, I dont. I just you know a lot of this is coming back to

me as were talking about this, so.

TUCKER: Certainly. (Pause)

SEAGRAVES: Alright, so I do have emails where when I was asking Hank about, lets

see, I know at some point and Im looking at emails. This is August 1st and

the Captain had asked me about my open cases that are currently in our

unit. He was asking me just to give me a rough total. He wasnt saying youknow tell me what they were, just give me a rough total that Ken Holmes

was asking about that. So I, um, I dont know if I assumed this or he said

this to me but, obviously, so Ken could relay that information to the new

Commander that was taking over. So what I told him during this, um,

email and the phone call was that there was about 20 cases that Im gonna

send over to El Mirage that had been assigned to an investigator and but

not yet worked.

Now Ill go over case by case with you and Ill say what that means

not yet worked. Um, in some cases and its been a while since Ive looked

at these, there may be some that, um, were partially worked or something

was done on it but I dont wanna speak until I look at each one of those

TUCKER: I understand.

SEAGRAVES: to give you, um.

TUCKER: And thats, thats exactly what Im lookin to do.

SEAGRAVES: Okay.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

19/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: Thats.

SEAGRAVES: Okay, so back then I said this is not to say this is a grand total of all the El

Mirage cases that we work. Its strictly open, non worked cases. Now, um,

(pause) this was before, obviously, that we gave them over and, and the

total had changed. Talked in that email, I also refer to the prioritization

portion of it as well. So at some point, um, I get with Mike Pokeno and I

know that I talked to him numerous times on the phone. But I believe we

only met one time and it wasnt like, um, well, he did come down to GID; I

didnt go over there. He came down to GID and Margie sat with me

because Margie, um, I was goin tryin to manually go through some ofthese. And what Im showing you is three, um, pages of cases that he

provided me, Sergeant Pokeno provided me of cases that were open or, or

what you know there some showed x cleared, some showed clear. So we

were tryin to sit together so his list was different than my list. And I dont

know why you know I dont know why. Even the list that I gave to the

Captain and to the Lieutenant was different than the list gave that Hank

gave me that said please explain the status of these cases. So I had three

and I, I dont know why. I mean I have three pages here and some of these

are cases that what I, what I show is the date back in June. The unit, some

of them say on hold. Um, Sergeant Pokeno has this information. So these

were things that we tried to work together. And I would go through and

ma- Margie and I, um, Margie did majority of this. She went manually and

checked all the lists that Sergeant Pokeno had to see whether or not they

were some of them were showed open but they were really unfounded.

Some of them were inactivated. And there were some of them I had that

Pokeno did not have on his list.

TUCKER: Okay, lets go back for just a second. Were looking at three pages

that are you have hand-written 10-3 of 07. Sergeant Pokeno has

completed list. And, uh, the documents have like a brown highlight of


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

20/71


IA # 08-0080

various reports that are assigned to SVU, it appears, which is the Sex or,

uh, Special Victims Unit. And these, this highlighted document is created

by Pokeno, correct?

SEAGRAVES: Yeah.

TUCKER: By his records?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: And what you had done was you gave it to Margie Chavez, one of

the administrative folks over at GID,

SEAGRAVES: Um hum.

TUCKER: and asked her to go through the list from Pokeno to identify their

status?

SEAGRAVES: Yes, because some of them he, some of them he doesnt even have marked

as to status. Some of them are marked open; some are unfounded. And

some of the clearances that he has that say, for example, Im pointing to

two of them that say open when they were actually x cleared. And one of

them was inactivated, open, x cleared. Um, you know open, unfounded. So

what we did was we all three worked together. We were all in the same

room. We were in my office. And then, um, I would check these off with

things that I had and some of them I had and majority of them I didnt

have.

TUCKER: So when you say what you had, youre going from your hand-

written kept list of cases that you received for distribution and assignment?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

21/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: And then what is the third list? Where does that come from, do you

know?

SEAGRAVES: Okay, so this is, this is the list that it was kinda like a work in progress.

And, um, I found this to be, uh, it just seemed so confusing to see this list

and to compare it to my list. So then I went, oh, thats that list. Lets me

look here. (Long pause) This is a Policy I use, uh, GJ-6 for. (Pause)

Alright, back in October 11th, um, we were trying to figure out all the cases

that were that each detective had physically assigned to them that I had,

that I was aware of, that I knew to exist, okay? So I couldnt speak to ones

that you knew that they had that that had I hadnt physically receivedbecause that was my issue you know.

TUCKER: The AWOL reports, so to speak.

SEAGRAVES: AWOL reports wherever they were, obviously, they werent you know

sent. Same goes for now I mean if, if theres a, um, Sex Crimes report that

the guy you know does and he doesnt send, um, a copy of it to SVU you

know unless youre aware of it that it exists you know and you could

certainly use you know CAD to check that, daily CAD which I had Jeffries

work up and put something in the U: drive when we realized that some

things were falling through the hole. That was one way I, when I realized

the deficit of what was happening, trying to think of ways to get as much

as many reports to me that I could that were, should have been for some

reason not sent to me, faxed to me, hard copied to me. So that was one

way.

TUCKER: Lets stop real quick.

SEAGRAVES: Um hum.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

22/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: You said Jeffries. I assume that means you got ahold of Scott

Jeffries with CAD?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: And aid, please make sure I get some access of calls for service at

El Mirage and if theres a sex related call for service report taken, you

would have something you could refer to on a daily basis to identify saying,

oh, look, there was a 262 taken in El Mirage. So at least you were aware

of it and you could start looking for it to come across your desk?

SEAGRAVES: Not specifically El Mirage, for the whole County, okay?

TUCKER: Oh, okay.

SEAGRAVES: Because you know I felt like well, you know that its, its happened for

other divisions. Hey, did you get a copy of that report? And some of them

were just so, um, we should have been notified you know in the middle of

the night and we didnt get it.

TUCKER: Did you implement as far as when you talked to, uh, and is it Scott

Jeffries? I think its Scott Jeffries.

SEAGRAVES: Yes, Scott Jeffries.

TUCKER: Did you specify to him a particular category of types of crimes and

lets say, 261s and 62s

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: that he would send you a CAD printout every day or how did

that work?


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

23/71


IA # 08-0080

SEAGRAVES: No.

TUCKER: Tell me about that real quick.

SEAGRAVES: Um, well, what I learned is that in, in the process of doing this, I thought

theres gotta be a way that I can do this on the computer. Now RMS isnt

always accurate you know. Its only as good as the information. So if I

dont have reports that are coming to me, why arent they coming to me?

Is it because theyre not being sent to my District? Are they being, being

coded wrong? Um, so what could I do? So I talked to Scott Jeffries and I

said, what can I do to make sure Im getting these reports because theyre,theyre, Im not getting them. So he said, well, um, what you could do is I

could make you a special fol- folder in the U: drive that you can actually

just go to and you can see all the reports that are taken. So I, well, perfect

you know! That would be, assuming its being assigned right. If its a, say

if its a 261 or 262, its not a 962 so I mean

TUCKER: Right, I understand.

SEAGRAVES: assuming its coded correctly, then I, then I should be getting it.

TUCKER: So was that list all DRs or was it simply the DRs relating to

crimes that would come to your unit?

SEAGRAVES: They were crimes that any time you pulled a 261 or 262.

TUCKER: Crimes that should generally come to the SVU unit?

SEAGRAVES: Should come to the unit, should. Now some of them dont meet the level.

They could just you know be whatever, but we really should get a copy of

it regardless if it you know what it is. Its like you know somebody


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

24/71


IA # 08-0080

touched or accidentally touched a breast you know. They may not send

that but they may code it as a 262 but I should at least have knowledge of

that because maybe that suspect is a teacher and you know and, and this

way we can, I can have it. Whether or not I assign it, I still need to see it.

TUCKER: Do you know when he implemented that?

SEAGRAVES: Um, it was after I realized that there were a lotta cases that werent coming

to the unit and no, I dont. And Im sure Scott would.

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: Because I just know. I was trying to do it differently.

TUCKER: But at some point when you recognized a deficiency, you took

some steps to try to rectify it?

SEAGRAVES: Uh, thered, theres be no reason not to. I mean I, I dont care if I get one

report or if I get twenty. I, I dont care. I just wanna make sure I get them

because its very disturbing when you know a victims family is calling me

and rightfully so where what are you doin with my daughters report? You

know where, where do we stand on this? And I was amazed that some

parents wouldnt call sooner and then Id find out it was a week later or

two weeks later, a month later and I wouldnt even know that the report

even exists. And, um, no, those are just examples. Im not certain about the

time frame. But long enough for me, me as a parent to say well, if I hadnt

have gotten a a call within 24 hours, Id be callin somebody. So I dont

know why they were you know very patient about what they did.

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: So I, um, that had never been set up before but you know in speaking to


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

25/71


IA # 08-0080

Scott, he tells me that you know, um, that hes done that for a lot of people

you know. I could have broke it down by division. I could have broke but

that would have been more time consuming. I wanted it to be at a glance.

Um, although you know certain cases, uh, will meet the level in contract

cities but Id be able to see that once I pulled them up. At that point I, I

just wanted to make sure I can tick them off to know that I got them all.

So okay, um, back in October 11th the Captain was, um, this ccd

this to, um, Hank Brandimarte. He wanted to know if we finished our El,

El Mirage DR what we were turning over and the majority of them. Ill

give you a full count in the morning. This is whats really left on those

cases that have been on hold the past two weeks. Now.

TUCKER: Okay, where you readin that from? Im sorry.

SEAGRAVES: Um, this is an email that I sent to Henry Brank, Henry Brandimarte on

October 11th and in the evening. We stayed late and I was trying to go

through my lists to make sure that, um, if we could close them, we wed

close them. But, basically, everybody was writing. We were writing

supplements and, and I was there with them.

TUCKER: This is regarding the turn over to El Mirage?

SEAGRAVES: The turn over to El Mirage so about the open cases.

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: And, um, the, the whats really important here was that around this time

frame, the Captain was meeting with the counterpart, his counterpart with

El Mirage. And he had asked Hank, um, and Im br- Im telling you this,

although it kind of meshes into the other investigation, but Im only telling

you this because I really think it plays a part in what comes later. So the


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

26/71


IA # 08-0080

Captain had asked for each case to be summarized and all the steps are

done. And this part about being on hold for the past two weeks, I wanted

you to know that I wasnt holding cases that met the level of callouts or the

priority, like I mentioned about the evidence. He told me to stop assigning

cases. Hank Brandimarte told me to stop assigning cases and to work on

and close what we already had, okay? So when you see that and thats the

reason I say, say this in there.

TUCKER: Okay, lets go over that real quick. That instruction from

Lieutenant Brandimarte to you, Lieutenant Brandimartes your direct

supervisor at the time. Hes telling you to hold cases from what date? Do

you have any idea at what point?

SEAGRAVES: Around October 1st.

TUCKER: Okay, from October 1st when he first tells you were preparing to

transition back to El Mirage as control, he tells you to stop assigning

investigations?

SEAGRAVES: Stop, stop assigning cases. This doesnt mean callout cases. Now I wanna

make sure it doesnt mean like if Ive got physical evidence or a little girl

thats got an injury or an adult thats got an injury. Those cases were still

done. As a matter of fact, we still had them like two days before we turned

over El Mirage.

TUCKER: Okay, lets, lets go over that instruction a little bit

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: so there is so thats clear. Um, was that instruction to you in

writing or verbally?


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

27/71


IA # 08-0080

SEAGRAVES: It was verbally. It was to me. And, and I know that he also said the same

thing to other people that were in the squad.

TUCKER: Was that that portion about callouts, active cases that could be

worked promptly with a, a suspect in the same home or what have you,

how was delineated to you what cases you would hold and what cases you

would allow a detective to work during that time frame?

SEAGRAVES: Um.

TUCKER: Was that your decision or was that specified by Lieutenant

Brandimarte?

SEAGRAVES: Kn- I know that there was a discussion and I dont know if I brought it up

or you know or he brought it up. It wasnt like it, it seems like to me a

logical thing. At some point were gonna have to cut somethin off, okay?

TUCKER: So your minds met on an agreement that

SEAGRAVES: Well.

TUCKER: lets say an old stale case of, of recollection of something 15

years ago through counsel or what have you disclosure that type a case

would be, would not be assigned to a detective?

SEAGRAVES: Well, it wasnt.

TUCKER: Or?

SEAGRAVES: You know I, I dont.

TUCKER: Was it a case by case by your own determination?


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

28/71


IA # 08-0080

SEAGRAVES: No, well, you know I dont know how to answer that because it wasnt

like, it was almost a common sense thing tome. I mean it wasnt like I

thought he was doing something wrong by saying dont hold these. Um, I

knew in my mind if it was a little girl, whether its the tenth hour before we

turned over the keys, if theres somebody thats you know were, there

would be, we wouldnt do that you know we just wouldnt do that.

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: It wasnt like he said Kim, this is my criteria. It wasnt like that. It was like,

um, I dont know if he said or if I said it but I walked away with anunderstanding. Who said it or I said, this is what I think or he said, this is

what I think, my understanding of is lets wrap it up. The cases that you

dont have to assign, dont assign them. The cases that meet the level of all

those things that we talk about the priority level, regardless if its El

Mirage or MCSO where we can collect evidence and, and if we dont do it

that the case would be in the toilet, those are the cases that we still

continue to work.

TUCKER: Even I, I want you to know that I, I dont think that thats

necessarily the issue which were looking at.

SEAGRAVES: Um hum.

TUCKER: It may be part of it but its not the big part of it. I think the more

larger concern are case that are much older that are, are alleged to have

had minimal work or no work done, so.

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: But I appreciate pointing that fact out.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

29/71


IA # 08-0080

SEAGRAVES: Yeah, so thats thats how that went. So, um, this is initially what Im

showing you is part of that same. Now this will change but this is what

initially I gave to, uh, Brandimarte on October 11 th. And its the emails

dated October 11th of 2007 at 8:38 p.m. And then attached to it is the all El

Mirage cases assigned by detective. Theres a notation. All cases that are

listed as open have either been worked and or partially worked. See

notation for those specific cases. So, um, Ive got Rojas, Ward, Philbab,

um, Philbab continued, Brooks, Weege, Seagraves and Herrera. This list

changed cause, cause we continued to work them and, and close them.

So, for example, Ward, I think she well, I cant say. Ill have to count

them. But this list does change at some point.

Then October 12th, um, I give, um, Hank Brandimarte another

email. Steve Whitney, El Mirage, here is my final count for El Mirage. All

cases are summarized are in folders on the conference table. Each case has

a summary of the allegation and what remains to do in order to complete

the investigation. All property in each case has been turned into Property

and Evidence. There may be new cases that cross in the interoffice mail;

therefore, I do not have those actual reports. This may be because its not

yet written or its being held in El Mirage because its transfer of power

from MCSO back to El Mirage. In those cases, I still did a case file for the

report and may note that the DR is not listed in RMS therefore not

assigned and or worked, okay?

So, um, I have detective Weegeseven; Wardone, Brooks

one, Philbabeight, uh, Rojasthree. Recently unassigned cases not in

RJSthirteen; sex offender cases41. Now the 41, Im, Im bringing this

to your attention because before I went in this unit, I didnt really know

what that means. This could be 41 to 141. All it means is those 41 sex

offenders reside within the jurisdiction of El Mirage. So that has nothing to

do with whether the investigators do or dont do. Thats strictly on where


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

30/71


IA # 08-0080

the folks live, okay? So that really was insignificant.

Um, and then, um, this, these and you could read these later if you

dont feel that its important. November 1st is when El Mirage actually

picked up the cases. So I had them in my, sitting on my desk for a period

of time. October 17th, um, I write an email and I send it to Hank

Brandimarte and I cc Whitney. I said I still have the El Mirage case files in

my office. Ill be happy to take these files over to El Mirage in light of the

negative publicity, cause there was a lot of publicity goin on at that point,

and I could see the writing on the wall that theyre gonna come back and

say that they were unable to do their job as a result of MCSO not turning

over these cases.

So after they sat there from October 12th to the 17th, I thought you know

what? I know I was verbally told hang on to them. Hank came in my office

numerous times, as did the Captain, just you know Im workin with it, Im

workin with it. But I wanted to make sure I documented this. And that is

my sole purpose of doing that. So I have these, these cases. In light of the

negative publy, publicity in reference to this transition, I dont want El

Mirage to say that they couldnt do their job because we refused and or

never gave them the case files. In reality, they dont have any manpower

and that was the reason that was told that there was only one investigator,

Jerry Laird, and he was swamped working with Pokeno and couldnt make

it over. However, by not turning over these cases, it might become an

issue. Please advise. And I did that on 9-29 and then, um, then that

afternoon, same day, hold on to them for now. They are supposed to meet

with sometime this week according to the Captain. That came from

Brandimarte.

And so when that didnt happen, I say did, did the meeting, did you go

have your meeting? So then the Captain says, um, October 18th the next

day. I spoke with. This comes from Steve Whitney. I spoke with the Chief


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

31/71


IA # 08-0080

today regarding El Mirage and theyre turning over the cases back to them.

Hes not in today. He will take it up with Chief Freeman when he comes in

tomorrow or Monday. Hes aware that were ready to brief the new El

Mirage Detective Commander on these cases. Hell let me know and when

and were going to, when were gonna do this. Just for now be patient.

Well make something happen hopefully sometime in the next week.

And then this is my notation. On November 1st is when they actually picked

them up. So (pause). Um, now Im, Im gonna ask you if you want me to

even go into this, Bruce, but there was, there was an issue that, um, once

we turned them over the cases that why do we have open cases? Okay,

why do we have open cases? So I received this as did other members of thesquad. Please be prepared to discuss each case assigned to you on the

attached list. I understand that you dont have the files, but you need to be

ready to discuss, discuss each case that was assigned to you. Please do not

be unprepared.

TUCKER: Well, let me, let me kinda preface your question with what Im

aware of.

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: That was sent out by Lieutenant Brandimarte because questions

had been imposed or at least an email had been sent over from El Mirage

saying a lotta cases potentially werent worked. Uh, I havent seen the

email so I dont know exactly what it is, Im paraphrasing.

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: But, uh, there was a statement about hey, theres a concern that a

lotta cases werent worked and, uh, just wanna let you know (unintel

49:16) emphasize there with other issues that were included in the email.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

32/71


IA # 08-0080

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: (Unintel 49:24) came contact came down to Lieutenant

Brandimarte to explain why certain case were turned over or why there

were any cases turned over that appear as though they were not worked.

Now I think that he sent out that email with a request to each individual to

say, uh, regardless of what he wrote, I think his intent was each of you tell

me about your cases that were sent over to El Mirage and if there were any

cases that werent worked, please give me an explanation as to why. Um,

would that help you, guide you in what? Thats what I understand that to

be about and I dont know if we need to go into that or not. You tell me.

SEAGRAVES: Okay. Well.

TUCKER: I know there was a universal singular response that was.

SEAGRAVES: In addition to my own response, I did one as well. And then I was workin

an off duty job and then he contacted my folks directly and Philbab

contacted me and said, I thought you already took care of this. Do I need

to do something? And I said, well, you need to respond to the Lieutenant.

Hes asking a question. And he goes, well, can we respond collectively?

And my, my thought was you know I didnt see a problem with it but you

know regardless of what you know came of that as a result of that but that

is what happened. So.

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: Alright.

TUCKER: And then you made, you drafted a response with the assistance of

Margie over the phone, is that correct? Something along those lines?


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

33/71


IA # 08-0080

SEAGRAVES: Um.

TUCKER: Regardless, you drafted a response to, uh, Lieutenant Brandimarte

of some type and, and I dont know if that necessarily addresses the issue.

It was more of an explanation of your, we had a lot of work to do. Theres

a lot of people, etcetera.

SEAGRAVES: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

TUCKER: It wasnt a line by line, okay, regarding DR 06- dah, dah, dah, dah,

dah the reason why this case is the way it is is because of such and such.

SEAGRAVES: That is correct.

TUCKER: It was more of a general overview.

SEAGRAVES: It was.

TUCKER: We were called on other duties. We had 90 cases. We had you

know Queen Creek to deal with. Ive seen, I think, the response that you

provided,...

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: edited, uh, to some extent.

SEAGRAVES: Okay.

TUCKER: I think the numbers were edited by Hank or something.

SEAGRAVES: Okay.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

34/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: Does that sound familiar?

SEAGRAVES: Yeah, it does. I, you know I, I you know I would say, I remember, I

remember, I remember I was workin an off duty job for somebody. It was

last minute and, um, and I remember talking to Margie about something.

And then Hank going, are you sure its 90 percent? Im like well, I dont

know if its 90 percent but Im saying the major-. Well, dont say numbers

unless you know that theyre numbers. I said well, my point was Im just

sayin 90 percent I would just saying 90 percent. It wasnt like I had

calculations its actually 90 percent, 99 percent of the work, 90 percent,

whatever you wanna say. Majority of the work came from El Mirage andso

TUCKER: Okay, so that is the same thing?

SEAGRAVES: he, he tweaked it and then, yeah, so thats what youre referring to?

TUCKER: Yeah, that sounds like it.

SEAGRAVES: Alright, so what Im showing you here is if you wanna, lets do this. Um,

this is what Hank Brandimarte gave me. Um.

TUCKER: Now its my understanding that if this is the same document, it

looks like it is, what he did was had Margie go back through and, and

identify all the sex crime cases that they could find between RMS and I

think out of your book, perhaps?

SEAGRAVES: Im not sure. Im not sure where Hank got those.

TUCKER: Okay. So he gives you a document thats a, a spreadsheet, table.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

35/71


IA # 08-0080

SEAGRAVES: He gave it to everybody.

TUCKER: Okay, he gave everyone at least you had a copy of it. And youve

got certain highlights on here. And up in the left hand corner of the first

page it says, 261 slash 262. It begins with 2006 then theres the 2007 time

frame. And on the next page, it says 27 open cases. One case assigned to

District IV, which is a questionable, uh, case. I remember hearing

something about that. Thirteen (13) cases not entered into RMS at the

Detective Supervisor, etcetera. Okay, lets go over this diagram, what it is

that you wanted to discuss with that.

SEAGRAVES: Okay. (Pause) Okay, what I just wanna bring this to your attention soyoure aware. Um, the list that I told you about initially, which I have dated

on the email October 11th of 2007 I had many more cases on the list. Um,

(pause) well, no, I may not. They may have come out I take it then. Um,

the numbers look about the same. What Im looking at is comparing my

October 12th, 2007 with this document that Hank gave me. So detective

Weege, seven cases; detective Weege on this one has nine cases. Uh,

detective Ward had one; one. Uh, Brooks had one; one, so were good on

that. Philbab had eight on the previous one; and this one Philbab has seven.

Detective Rojas has three; and that one says detective Rojas has six. And

this one includes Herrera two and, uh, Cockerham, one.

Okay, so what I did was I took this document that was provided to

me because, um, this was what in my mind it didnt matter what I thought I

had. Its what I was told that I should have. So if this is what the Captain

was working on and you know the chain of command was working on as

the document that I needed to explain myself to that is what I focused on,

okay?

So what I did was I identified the one that was assigned to

Cockerham and I just highlighted what I was doing. So I broke it down, I


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

36/71


IA # 08-0080

and I sat with each detective and I said, okay, lets go over each of those

cases that we have that they want us to explain. And if they had a case file,

I wanted them to bring it in and lets go over it. And, um, and thats why I

called it the El Mirage Audit, okay? So it was before, it was before

anything happened I started documenting you know this stuff.

Um, honestly, I, I, I saw the writing on the wall when the negative publicity

and I thought this is gonna be an issue at some point. Um, I was aware of

it. I was trying to do everything I possibly could but, um, there was no

question in my mind that at the end of the day, um, as in any unit theres,

theres more work than there are people. And the only way that youre

gonna make that happen is if you have more people or have more hoursand sometimes that works and sometimes it doesnt. So I wanted to sit

down with the detectives and have them explain to me in their own words

what it is that they saw about that case, not what I saw, but what they saw.

So this is based on what they told me and the documentation to either, um,

well, youll see as we go into it, to support or, or whatever, whatever the

case (unintel 56:32). So this case was assigned, um, to, to detective

Cockerham.

TUCKER: And were lookin at 2006-114984.

SEAGRAVES: Okay. So this came from the sheet that was given to me by Lieutenant

Brandimarte in reference to El Mirage. Okay, this case RMS shows it was

to Cockerham. This case is a case that was a second report in reference

same suspect. The initial ca- when initial case went to Ro- Rojas and we

made an arrest on a suspect. The suspect was Chris Schaeffer and hes

already taken a plea agreement, so its listed on the list as Cockerham. So it

was reassigned from Cockerham to Herrera and then to Brooks this, this

one case. So, basically, you have a duplicate case, okay? Same exact case,

same exact. Um, this case is closed in RMS and the arrest was already

made. This was a callout.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

37/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: Okay, when you say duplicate case, explain what you mean by that?

SEAGRAVES: Um.

TUCKER: Because is it, is it charged under the Roy, Roy Rojas case?

SEAGRAVES: Yes, it is.

TUCKER: So this case is, is 11-4-984 is a, is a second DR on the same

incident?

SEAGRAVES: Um, I dont know if its the same incident. Um, I, I, I believe, well, I dont,

Im not gonna say for certain because I dont know.

TUCKER: Okay, but at least its been (unintel 57:48) to your understanding

under the same

SEAGRAVES: It has been, this was a callout.

TUCKER: (unintel 57:51).

SEAGRAVES: That it was Chris Schaefer, um, on Valentines Day cause I remember very

clearly this was a case that was a callout in El Mirage. And it was an

allegation of, I mean I remember it, it was a little girl who, um, was being

baby sat by Chris Schaeffers wife and, um, mom walks in and the little girl

is laying on the bed with her butt towards the very, um, you know edge of

the bed and hes, theyre both fully clothed and hes got the little girls legs

like up near his shoulder blades and hes just rubbing against her and he has

an erection. And so this case it was a callout you know. Mom tells the

mother of the child and the mother reports it. Um, we cant do a

confrontation call but we have enough, there was also a witness, a little boy


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

38/71


IA # 08-0080

walks in. So, we made an arrest on this. We made an arrest like right as

soon as we got it. It was you know a good case, um, and it was done. And

the guy ended up taking a plea and he, I dont know what he got, but it

was like a lotta time he got.

TUCKER: Okay, and what, whats the issue with this case as far as it was

reassigned to Cockerham to Herrera to Brooks? Where, where seems to be

the fault in that it wasnt closed or tied with the other case or?

SEAGRAVES: Um.

TUCKER: Do you understand what Im sayin?

SEAGRAVES: Yes, I do. Uh, the Cockerham was because when I very first got in the

unit, Cockerham was in the process of transferring out. I dont know if it

was, um, I dont remember if it was already set or he wanted to go and he

was gonna go to Jail Crimes. But it was like a, an equal switch because,

um, Herrera, Herrera came over. And, um, so it went from Cockerham no,

I take that back, Herrera hadnt left yet so it was Cockerham so it had to

be reassigned. So when he was leaving, I took the cases that were assigned

to Cockerham and reassigned them to other detectives. I just disbursed

them you know. I didnt just give them all to the same detective. I

disbursed them.

So it went to Herrera. Shortly after, um, I had issues with Herrera.

He just, he couldnt keep up. Uh, his mind set was he was way too

religious. He made judgment calls based on whether somebody went to

church, uh, whether they had clean houses. He was just really not a good

fit for there and, um, he just, he just couldnt keep up and he couldnt view

pornography. Uh, he wouldnt allow anything and a search warrant to

come in his, in his, um, cubicle because it had a mojo on it. He was just

very superstitious and he, he had no business being in Sex Crimes.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

39/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: So he got moved. At my request, he got moved. So, um, then Brooks came

in and he was, he came in, I think he was the, the swap from Cockerham,

Brooks. We did a transfer.

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: And then eventually, um, it was assigned to Brooks and it wasnt cleared.

And I dont have an explanation of why it wasnt cleared. Somebody didnt

do a clearance sheet. Somebody didnt associate the two cases.

TUCKER: But for some reason it just didnt?

SEAGRAVES: It didnt.

TUCKER: But you identified that when you were asked to look at it on this

list?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: And thus, thats why your last bullet point says arrest made, case

closed?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: I dont have the corresponding DR, but Im very clear on this because I do

remember this case.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

40/71


IA # 08-0080

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: Okay? So the next one is 07, uh, 101850.

TUCKER: I apologize. Can I ask you to go back to the chart for just a

moment?

SEAGRAVES: Sure.

TUCKER: Now when we look at it, you have it highlighted in yellow, right?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: So this is the case we just discussed?

SEAGRAVES: Right.

TUCKER: The next case were gonna discuss is this one thats highlighted in

yellow, correct?

SEAGRAVES: Right.

TUCKER: Um, whats the scoop with all these others in between?

SEAGRAVES: Um, well, how its given to me, these are all given by dates. And theyre all

by different detectives. So in order for me to try to keep the continuity of

when Im talking to the detectives, I just figured I would do all

Cockerhams, all Philbabs, all Rojass, regardless of the time. I you know

if it says that you know, um, the sheet that.

TUCKER: Okay, I understand.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

41/71


IA # 08-0080

SEAGRAVES: Yeah, Cocker-.

TUCKER: I understand now.

SEAGRAVES: According to what this is what was given to me, Cockerham had one so

thats one checked off. So then I just did each detective and I went over

each case,...

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: case specific. And if you wanna look at that while Im doin that if that

helps you out.

TUCKER: Might. Who, who has this case then?

SEAGRAVES: Um, well, Ill tell you.

TUCKER: Is 101 (unintel 1:02:11)?

SEAGRAVES: Its a mis- its a miscellaneous and Ive got it noted in the back.

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: Okay?

TUCKER: Alright.

SEAGRAVES: So the next one, um, let me look at these so I can make sure Im giving

you the right detective. (Pause) Okay, I guess, uh, in this book its different

in the copy I made. In this book, um, its not assigned to anybody.

TUCKER: Right, its open.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

42/71


IA # 08-0080

SEAGRAVES: 101850, its not assigned. Its not a report, not listed in RMS, okay?

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: So now I dont know that this is even mine.

TUCKER: And again, were goin o- over 2007, uh, its 07-101850.

SEAGRAVES: Um hum.

TUCKER: And this report is not listed in RMS so, therefore, you may noteven have received it?

SEAGRAVES: I dont even know it existed.

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: So what I did was first of all, I check RMS. Thats the first thing we do. So

when I went to go research the report, I checked in CAD and per CAD,

um, it doesnt say why it was initially coded. It was 647 Adam which is not

a Sex Crime. And then the disposition was changed to a 262, okay?

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: So thats what CAD says. Alright, so then Im thinkin alright, so do you

know about RMS when you, how, how a case comes in?

TUCKER: Like you my, my experience with RMS is minimal.

SEAGRAVES: Okay, okay. Well, you know, um, something can be and this was

something I learned as a result of you know finding out the deficiencies


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

43/71


IA # 08-0080

when reports not coming to me. Um, a case can be, you can pull a case a

262, you can pull it but if you dont make it into a case to be worked, its

just, it hasnt gone to that final process. Its like a two step process. You

could pull it and its a 262 but then its lacking certain information, so

theres no, nothing comes to me. Its just there. I dont know where it is

but its just.

TUCKER: So an entry, an i- an initial is made but there, lets say a second

phase where

SEAGRAVES: You have to.

TUCKER: someone needs to enter data and it actually has to get kicked out

to a unit?

SEAGRAVES: Yes.

TUCKER: Does that make sense?

SEAGRAVES: Okay, yes.

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: So, um, its a two step process. So thats similar to this case. So when I,

when I say never made it into a case thats the second field that you have

to make it into, add certain information that youre required to do,

including (unintel 1:04:30) information which is victim, suspect.

Someones manually gotta put all that stuff in there. Now before I got to

the unit, um, sometimes it would be done, sometimes Margie would do it,

sometimes Cheryl would do it. A majority of the time, Cheryl did, um,

shed get the report but she wouldnt make it into a case, um, so uh, thats,

thats not true. That, what Im trying to say is that she would assign those,


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

44/71


IA # 08-0080

but if its not, if it doesnt, isnt made into a case, we would not have any

knowledge of it, okay?

So lets see, I requested a copy of the report from Records. The

last page of the report indicates that a copy of the report was faxed over to

me; however, the phone number where it was faxed is not a fax number,

um, its my office telephone number, okay? So I never received it but it did

say and the date on that was 12-4. Um, if this case was never sent over to

me, I would have never known it existed or worked or assign it or to enter

it into RMS. I was unaware of this report until it appeared on the list

provided to me by Lieutenant Brandimarte. And so heres what I have. It

shows, I pulled the CAD printout which shows it initially came out as a647 Adam. It.

TUCKER: And (unintel 1:05:40) type is 262.

SEAGRAVES: Its changed to the 262. Um, and it talks about little bit you know, um,

about the incident.

TUCKER: Lets take this, for example, uh, with this particular case with you

not having known anything about it until Lieutenant Brandimarte gave you

that list, do you know when Lieutenant Brandimarte gave you that list?

SEAGRAVES: Oh, yes. He gave it to me,...

TUCKER: The date?

SEAGRAVES: um, (pause) right before all this hit the fan.

TUCKER: So, um, November?

SEAGRAVES: I dont know exact date. I know I do have something, I do have an email


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

45/71


IA # 08-0080

from him somewhere in reference to be prepared to explain it with a list

that he gave me. So that was where Im referring to that list.

TUCKER: Okay. Alright.

SEAGRAVES: So somewhere in my documents. (Pause)

TUCKER: Im just trying to find a correlation between you know this is a

2007 DR, uh, taken May of 2007 and you never or werent able to learn

about this until you were provided with some form of cross reference

material. I dont know if this chart has the date on it, no, it doesnt. But it

does go through October of 2007, so Im assuming October 2nd

. It has tobe post October 2nd of 2007.

SEAGRAVES: Well, you know here, heres the list on 10-5-07. Its the same list that

were talking about the, the you know shaded copy that were referring to

that Mike Pokeno had. It was after that date, okay?

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: Because this is the final, this is after what El Mirage turned o- we had

turned over to El Mirage and as a result of you know their complaint

against us, a result of you know the Captain, um, doing whatever.

TUCKER: Right, I understand.

SEAGRAVES: Okay, so specifically, it might be in one of those emails.

TUCKER: Okay, so each of these without having to waste all of your time

going through each of these, um, you have a preface statement and, and

this is the research that you did based upon the chart or the spreadsheet

that was given to you by Lieutenant Brandimarte. And the next one in here


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

46/71


IA # 08-0080

is 07-122917 and, and a brief statement about what you learned as a result

of your investigation again, report not listed in RMS. It is listed in CAD.

And you pulled the CAD history for it and its actually coded as 902 and

then final disposition is 262. So it goes from follow up to some form of

assault. But, uh, you have multiples of these in here, right?

SEAGRAVES: I have each one of them in here.

TUCKER: Okay. So when you say each one, again, Im just trying to identify

on this, on this chart that you have that you were given by the Lieutenant,

Lieutenant Brandimarte. You have some that are highlighted and then

some that arent and then some that are highlighted. The ones, explain tome why some are highlighted and some arent, so Im clear.

SEAGRAVES: Well, um, I was just going through, through my list here. Um, the ones that

are highlighted are Cockerham and the ones that are not listed in RMS.

TUCKER: Okay.

SEAGRAVES: So, um, I think Cockerham only had one, so he wasnt in the unit for a long

time so I just took that one. But as far as the other ones that are

highlighted, theyre the ones that are not assigned to anybody and theyre

not, theres some notation on the side of it either not, not report, not listed

in RMS, and a digit may be off, missing or

TUCKER: Um hum.

SEAGRAVES: something that I could not, um, they werent assigned to any specific

investigator. Then as, then as you go down further in the stack, I go

through these are all Jims.

TUCKER: Okay.


7/29/2019 08-0080 Seagraves 1st IA

47/71


IA # 08-0080

SEAGRAVES: These are all Marys. These are

TUCKER: Right, right.

SEAGRAVES: you know these are all Johns, so.

TUCKER: I under- I understand that part of it. But did you look up each one

of these cases that are on this list?

SEAGRAVES: I did, each one.

TUCKER: And are there some that that are immaterial or?

SEAGRAVES: Yeah, there are. You know let me just give you an explanation on this one.

Im just gonna tell you like these are some that like we turned over and

(unintel 1:10:01).

TUCKER: Okay, this is 2007-101850.

SEAGRAVES: Um hum. This report is, is not in RMS and when I went to research it, I

checked in CAD. It says it doesnt say why the report was initially coded as

647 Adam, wait a minute, um, were talking about the wrong one, I

apologize.

The 07-122917, listed in CAD, not in RMS, coded in CAD as a 902. Final

disposition is 262. There is nothing in the CAD information to indicate why

the disposition changed. I requested a copy of the reports from Records.

The report indicates the alleged victim said she had been drinking. Doesnt,

doesnt know if she was sexually assaulted. Okay, these are those, this is a

prime example of some of the cases that meet a lower level according to

our Policy and, um, where it fits in why, why its a lower priority.

Investigator: Lt. B. Tucker, #S0975 Revie

08-0080 seagraves 1st ia

Documents