Misconduct continued...
Chris Hechavarria- S1851
​
Involved in the following Internal Investigations:
IA2014-0541
IA2014-0546
IA2014-0568
IA2014-0570
IA2014-0571
IA2015-0022
IA2015-0785
IA2015-0863
IA2017-0017
IA2019-0323
​
-
Conducted the celllbrite on Sarah’s phone, to which he met Detective Brown outside of MCSO headquarters and handed it to him on a flash drive. The results of this cellbrite indicated that Sarah’s phone was tampered with, as it shows messages from 2005, which was before Sarah ever even had an iPhone or even that phone number.
-
Hechavarria is currently on the Brady List (see link below) for falsifying warrants and is the principal in multiple internal investigations with MCSO for keeping (as souvenirs), losing and not logging evidence.
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
-
Hechavarria was also part of another case in which he was responsible for authoring search warrants for (CR2014-103633). The Lee’s spoke with the defendant and restaurant (Uncle Sam’s) owner, Bret Frimmel, (who later sued and won his case against MCSO), and he said the warrant created by Hechavarria for Sarah’s phone, was a copy and paste statement of a warrant created by Hechavarria in his case for his employee’s phone.
​
-
Hechavarria was under internal investigation by Shawn Braaten during the time of the Lee incident. Shawn Braaten then later helped him get promoted, which is against MCSO’s own policy for an employee to get promoted while under internal investigation. The “Second Amended Second Supplemental Permanent Injunction/Judgment Order” pertaining to case CV-07-2513-PHX-GMS (Melendres and United States of America vs. Joseph M. Arpaio), section XV, rule 173:
“Any employee who is named principal in an ongoing investigation of serious misconduct shall be presumptively ineligible for hire or promotion during the pendency of the investigation. The Sheriff and/or the MCSO shall provide a written justification for hiring or promoting an employee or applicant who is a principal in an ongoing investigation of serious misconduct. This written justification shall be included in the employee’s employment file and, during the period that the MCSO is subject to Monitor oversight, provided to the Monitor.”
​
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/5914aca8add7b0493473e83e
​
*It is important to note that Shawn Braaten himself was promoted to Captain in 2020 while being under internal investigation (IA2019-0323, see section below).
​
Robert Hanson- S1321
Involved in the following Internal Investigation:
IA2019-0323
​
-
Was the on duty Sergeant for MCSO the day of the alleged incident on 8/2/17.
-
Was notified the date of the alleged incident (8/2/17) by Sarah, of the personal relationship between Detective Broadwater and Jacob. Sergeant Hanson initially sounded surprised to find out this information, but then he quickly back pedaled stating that “it [didn’t] matter.”
​
-
Sergeant Hanson violated procedure in that he did not include the information Sarah divulged about the relationship between Detective Broadwater and Jacob Rector in a supplemental report. When Sarah emailed him to find out why he had not documented this information, Sergeant Hanson became very defensive and told Sarah she was not allowed to question him outside of court.
​
-
Sergeant Hanson’s personnel file reveals that he has difficulty being authoritative.
-
Sergeant Hanson was the investigator on IA2018-0403 involving Detective Tyler Thompson as principal, which was reviewed and signed off by Shawn Braaten and concluded that the allegations against Detective Thompson were “unfounded.” (See cross reference in Detective Thompson’s section)
​
*The case that resulted from the incident referenced in this complaint about Detective Thompson (CR2018-122653) occurred on May 7, 2018 and was dismissed a few weeks later on May 18, 2018. Court documents show that there was no search warrant issued the day of the arrest (not until May 10, 2018), which is why the case was dismissed. SWAT was also called out for this incident, and the suspect was arrested on 4 counts of aggravated assault, 4 counts of disorderly conduct and 4 counts of threatening/intimidation/property damage, yet the prosecution dropped it down to one charge of disorderly conduct with a weapon. This case is further evidence that this is a corrupt pattern of behavior involving the same MCSO officers as were involved in the Lee case, and that even when citizen complaints are filed, no disciplinary action is taken, and thus, the vicious cycle continues.
​
Dustin Baker- S1988
​
Involved in the following Internal Investigations:
IA2017-0639
IA2017-0843
IA2018-0323
IA2020-0170
IA2021-0215
-
IA’s 2017-0639, 2017-0843, and 2018-0323 were all reviewed and signed off by Shawn Braaten with “Exonerated” findings meaning that Deputy Baker’s alleged conduct occurred, but it was found to be “within MCSO’s policy.” This shows that every time Shawn Braaten has had to review and sign off on one of Deputy Baker’s complaints, Deputy Baker is never held accountable for his actions.
-
Deputy Baker was the first officer to interview Jacob and can be heard on body worn camera footage stating that MCSO might “hit [the Lee residence] with SWAT” after only just hearing Jacob’s false narrative (see video on “The Only Aggressor” page).
-
Deputy Baker was the officer who transported Jacob to the MCSO Anthem substation for his interview with Detective Jerry Broadwater. Deputy Baker’s body worn camera footage reveals that when he is getting ready to transport Jacob, Jacob states that he is fine riding in the back seat of the patrol vehicle because he has “been in the back before” because his “uncle (Shawn Braaten) let [him] sit in the back.” Deputy Baker responds, “Shawn?”, and Jacob says, “Oh yeah, you know him?”, and Deputy Baker says, “I know who Shawn is.” Deputy Baker then goes on to say, “I love Shawn, he’s a great guy. I enjoyed working for him. I’d work for him any day.” Jacob then comments, “He’s one of the most stand up guys I’ve ever met. I know you’re partial to your family but…” and Deputy Baker responds, “Oh yeah, no absolutely.” Deputy Baker then talks about how his dad had just recently retired as a Sergeant from MCSO, therefore he also understands the loyalty to family on the job. (See video on “The Only Aggressor” page)
-
Jacob’s mother reveals on body worn camera footage to Deputy Michael Fifield (#S2016) that her brother in law is Shawn Braaten. At this point, Deputy Fifield walks out to talk to his Sgt. Christopher Contino (#S1645) telling him that he needs to talk to him about “something unrelated,” and cameras get shut off. While these cameras are shut off, Deputy Dustin Baker can be seen on his body worn camera footage, walking out to talk to Sgt. Contino while Deputy Fifield and him are talking. Deputy Baker then asks Sgt. Contino and Deputy Fifield if their cameras are on or off, to which Sgt. Contino states they are off, and then Deputy Baker’s camera gets shut off as well. Once all the camera footage resumes, all of the officers on scene are aware of the familial connection (see video on “The Only Aggressor” page).
​
-
Deputy Baker’s personnel file reveals that he is “careless with evidence” and “needs to take a breath and break down a call before he arrives.” (Pg. 30-31/152)
DPS Supervisor Todd Whittard
-
Was the supervisor that signed off on and conducted the safety check for the DNA evidence in the Lee case.
-
All of the DNA evidence in this case came back as being inconclusive, and there were no masking agents found. If what Jacob alleged happened was true, then there would be DNA evidence that matched his allegations, which there was NOT.
-
Correspondence between the Department of Public Safety (DPS) and MCSO shows that at one point the gun and magazine were lost from evidence.
​
-
In April 2019, Todd Whittard was arrested for stealing evidence (rifles, ammunition, and other items), and in September 2019 he was found guilty of taking evidence home with him and was charged with 3 counts of theft, to which he plead guilty to a reduced charge and was put on probation.
-
The judge that resided over Todd Whittard’s case was Judge Joseph Kreamer, who was also on the jury selection for DJ’s trial as a jury member. This is a HUGE conflict in that he was not only the judge for an individual that was directly involved in our case (which also meant he was a judge in the same criminal division, which is a conflict in and of itself), but he is also currently a member of the Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct, which "investigates and disciplines judges and operates under special rules that were created for Arizona’s court system that exempt it from state public record and open meeting laws.” (See articles below)
​
https://www.azcourts.gov/azcjc/Members-of-the-Commission
*It is also important to note that Judge Kreamer and the Commission dismissed Judge Erin Otis’s complaints (see abc15 article above), and prosecutor Joshua Clark, with the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, was also a part of this misconduct (see article below), in which legal experts stated that “Clark’s conduct clearly violates ethical rules and raises serious concerns about ex-parte communication.” During the Lee case, Joshua Clark was the Bureau Chief and prosecutor Catherine Ferguson-Gilbert’s (and later re-assigned prosecutor Frankie Grimsman’s) boss. (For more detailed information on Joshua Clark, see the “Maricopa County Attorney’s Office” page)
​
​
Tyler Thompson- S1681
Was involved in the following Internal Investigations:
IA2014-0171
IA2014-0228
IA2015-0693
IA2016-0741
IA2018-0403
IA2018-0528
IA2019-0297
IA2019-0323
​
-
Internal investigation 2018-0403 involved a complaint where Detective Thompson was the principal. The complaint was one in which SWAT was called out to a woman’s home for a supposed aggravated assault charge, wherein there were not any body worn cameras in operation. SWAT not only broke her window without notifying her of the damages, but they failed to issue her a search warrant for her home. The assault case was dismissed by the prosecutor less than 2 weeks later (CR2018-122653) due to there being no search warrant provided at the time of incident, yet the complaint against Detective Thompson was “unfounded” by MCSO. This was investigated by Sgt. Robert Hanson and reviewed and signed off by Shawn Braaten (see cross reference under Hanson’s section below).
​
-
Detective Thompson’s direct supervisor in 2011 was Shawn Braaten.
​
-
Conducted the photo lineup evaluation with Jacob, in which Jacob can be heard stating that he’s “almost positive [DJ’s] not in any of these.” Additionally, there were only 6 photos included in the photo lineup, and DJ’s was the only one that was blatantly formatted differently so that it stood out. (See audio of photo lineup)
​
​
​
​
-
Authored the search warrant for both the Lee’s home and to take both Sarah’s and DJ’s DNA for a 3rd time (see reference in the Detective Broadwater section above).
​
-
Purposely turned his siren on in his vehicle the day of the alleged incident just as Sarah was walking out with her children. There was absolutely no reason to turn it on other than to scare the kids, which he succeeded in doing.
​
Shawn Braaten- S0893
​
Involved in the following Internal Investigations:
​
IA1999-0088
IA2000-0096
IA2017-0313
IA2019-0323
​
-
Jacob Rector’s uncle, and the man “pulling all the strings” in the Lee case, as was disclosed to the Lee’s by a MCSO officer who wishes to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation from within the department.
-
Promoted to Captain February 24, 2020 while under internal investigation by MCSO, which was outsourced to Investigative Research, Inc. due to the conflict of interest since he was working in MCSO’s Professional Standards Bureau when the investigation started. This is a violation of MCSO’s own policy on promotions while under investigation, which states the following in the “Second Amended Second Supplemental Permanent Injunction/Judgment Order” pertaining to case CV-07-2513-PHX-GMS (Melendres and United States of America vs. Joseph M. Arpaio), section XV, rule 173:
“Any employee who is named principal in an ongoing investigation of serious misconduct shall be presumptively ineligible for hire or promotion during the pendency of the investigation. The Sheriff and/or the MCSO shall provide a written justification for hiring or promoting an employee or applicant who is a principal in an ongoing investigation of serious misconduct. This written justification shall be included in the employee’s employment file and, during the period that the MCSO is subject to Monitor oversight, provided to the Monitor.”
​
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/5914aca8add7b0493473e83e
-
Shawn Braaten’s employment file does not mention this required justification for his promotion, even though it shows that he is the principal of internal investigation IA2019-0323, which was still an open investigation at the time.
-
Was on scene at the Lee residence the day of DJ’s arrest (can be seen on body worn camera footage), although his presence is not officially documented anywhere.
​
-
Shawn Braaten’s personnel file explains how at one point he was the K-9 Supervisor and “managed a large workload which include[d] patrol and call outs for [the] SWAT division.” (Pg 127/329)
​
* It’s important to note that during the Lee incident, SWAT was called out and all 3 armored “Bearcat” vehicles for the entire Maricopa County were on scene that day. Even though reports show that all of the SWAT officers were wearing their body worn cameras, not a single camera was turned on. Additionally, officers strangled the Lee’s family dog in an attempt to detain him and did not report that one of the officers was bit by the dog in the process. Remember, that Detective Ratcliffe had been acting as “look out” all day, had seen Sarah outside by herself at one point, and DJ and the kids outside playing by themselves at one point, and there were no signs of distress or danger, yet SWAT was still utilized in a blatant and excessive show of force. SWAT not only drove through and broke the Lee’s unlocked gate, but they called the Lee’s out over their PA system, to which the Lee’s complied immediately. No one had previously even attempted to knock on the door to get the Lee’s side of the story, this was all their overreaction based off of Jacob’s lies. After the Lee’s immediately exited their home (Sarah was not even allowed to put shoes on, and it was the middle of the summer), they were met with SWAT pointing loaded assault rifles at not only DJ and Sarah, but also at their two small children who were only 3 and 4 years old at the time. During this terrifying experience, DJ was the ONLY one attempting to de-escalate the situation in that he was telling the SWAT officers to “calm down,” to “not overreact,” to “take a deep breath,” and to “point the guns at him, not at [his] family.” DJ was then arrested in front of his children who were crying for their daddy.
​
-
Shawn Braaten’s personnel file reveals that in 2019 he was placed in a position within the Professional Standards Bureau (PSB) where his job was to oversee the entire bureau (pg 38/329). Additionally, he was assigned as the Commander over all of the sworn personnel in PSB, and his job was to review ALL of the PSB investigations conducted by sworn sergeants (pg 35-36/329).
​
-
This is important to note because Sarah filed her own complaint against Shawn Braaten and multiple other MCSO officers for their misconduct in the Lee case in 2019, therefore, Shawn Braaten would have been the one overseeing and reviewing this investigation (IA2019-0323). Additionally, although Shawn Braaten is listed as one of the principals in this investigation, his personnel file (pg 12/329) lists this IA2019-0323 as open, yet also states that Shawn Braaten is not currently the subject of any civil or administrative claims or lawsuits, which is completely false and contradictory. This investigation was outsourced by MCSO to a company called Investigative Research, Inc., and was botched and biased from the beginning in that MCSO was the one writing this company's paychecks, and the lead investigator, Pamela Wallace, confessed that she knew Shawn Braaten from prior cases that she had worked on (listen to audio recording below). Also, during Pamela's interview with Shawn Braaten, Shawn reveals how Jacob would call him directly when being reprimanded by MCSO in the past for misconduct. Jacob did not respect the officers' authority and would intentionally throw his uncle's name around as leverage to get out of trouble (see audio recording below). If Jacob's normal practice was to call his uncle Shawn for run-ins with MCSO, then how could one believe that he would not call him for this incident as well?
​
​
​
-
Shawn Braaten’s personnel file further reveals that part of his job description is that he does 2nd reviews of internal investigations and finds justifications for employees’ behavior who are under internal investigation. He then changes the findings from “we can’t say what happened” to “they acted within the policy or did not do what was alleged.” (Pg 8/329)
​
-
Furthermore, Shawn Braaten’s personnel file states that he was “often asked to contribute to the revision and/or development process of policies.” (Pg 8/329). Therefore, Shawn Braaten is not only rewriting the findings of misconduct to state that the employee acted within policy, but he is also the one writing and revising the policies so that the employees’ behavior can be justified as acting within that policy.
-
In 2000 (IA2000-0096) Shawn Braaten was named the principal in an internal investigation in which a citizen complained about him because an individual (Charles Dixon) called MCSO to report a possible burglary in process and gave a description of a vehicle that matched the complainant’s. The complainant was pulled over during a traffic stop, was handcuffed, and placed in a separate vehicle. Shawn Braaten asked the deputy on scene (Deputy Danner) to go back to Mr. Dixon’s house and physically bring him to the scene to identify the vehicle, which is not proper procedure. It was later revealed that Mr. Dixon worked for MCSO at the time, which shows that Shawn Braaten is not only willing to violate procedure for fellow officers, but he also shows them preferential treatment. As it turns out, the complainant who was detained had not committed burglary, and she retained an attorney against MCSO stating that her rights were violated, and that she had been unlawfully detained with weapons pointed at her. Shawn Braaten received no disciplinary action for this complaint, and he was exonerated.
-
In 2017 (IA2017-0313) Shawn Braaten (who was a Lieutenant at the time), along with 4 other officers (Sergeant Smith, Deputy Quinn, Deputy Halliday, and Deputy McFarland) were sent out of town for training on October 11, 2016. While waiting at the airport to board the flight, all 5 officers went to a bar at the airport to get food and they also had alcoholic beverages. While Shawn Braaten says in his interview with PSB that he remembers exactly what he ate (an egg burrito), he cannot recall what he had to drink. The other deputies admit to having alcohol before the flight but state that since their superiors (Braaten and Smith) were present, and they did not say anything or correct them for having an alcoholic drink, they thought it was okay to do. When interviewed by PSB, Shawn Braaten gives the excuse that because the deputies were not in his chain of command, and because they were seasoned officers, it was their responsibility to know policy and it was not his job to know if they were on the clock or not. Shawn Braaten ultimately was not held accountable for his actions in a supervisory position and the complaint against him was ruled “not sustained.”
​
Although the department that the Lee family has had to deal with is the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, this entitlement amongst family extends to other departments as well. Also in Arizona, Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb has a son (Cooper Lamb) who has been in the local news several times for misconduct, including hitting a bicyclist with his vehicle while driving under the influence. Ultimately, no lasting discipline was imposed on his son, which allowed Cooper to continue to violate the law, and thus, for the vicious cycle to continue (see articles below). This is just further evidence that law enforcement will go to great lengths to ignore the laws they are sworn to uphold when it comes to protecting their own family.
​
​
