The badge of the Pima County Sheriff's Department.
This article has been updated to reflect legal perspective.
Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos is defending his choice to suspend a political opponent and a union leader for various internal departmental policy violations.
His suspension of Heather Lappin, his Republican rival in the Sheriff’s race, and Aaron Cross, President of a deputy’s union outspoken against Nanos, has unfolded over the last week in a saga that has put a spotlight on the ethics of a local news outlet and raised questions about Nanos’ history of retaliation.
Nanos told AZPM that despite the timing, he had no choice in suspending either of his employees.
“My goodness, I don't want to do this right around an election either, but I have a job to do, and that's to enforce rules and policies and procedures and guidelines and to make sure that others are following those and if they're not, they need to be held accountable. Holding you accountable is not retaliation,” Nanos said.
According to a PCSD statement, Cross was placed on leave for engaging in political activities while appearing to be dressed in uniform. He allegedly picketed at two Tucson intersections and displayed a sign saying “Deputies Don’t Want Nanos,” despite being told by his supervisor after being spotted the first time to “not look like a deputy.”
Nanos said Lappin’s leave was due to two different policy violations, including allegedly knowing Cross was engaging in political activities on her behalf and failing to stop it, and for helping arrange media interviews of inmates.
Nanos said he learned of Lappin’s alleged activities when questioning her whether she knew about Cross’ political activities.
“[Lappin’s] leave status was because there were some issues that came up in her phone and computers that concerned us, completely aside from any of the campaigning on duty,” Nanos said.
AZPM asked multiple times for documentation showing the policy violations. Nanos said he could not provide the evidence on her phone and computers because the matter is currently under investigation.
In a news release earlier in the week, Nanos did not name the reporter or media outlet involved in what the release called "collusion" to pay for inmate interviews but several media outlets pointed the finger at Arizona Luminaria. Their reporter John Washington is known for his coverage of deaths in the Pima County Adult Detention Center, the county jail under Nanos’ leadership.
Although PCSD did not name an outlet or reporter in their statement, AZLuminaria later said they are being “targeted” in the headline of an article addressing the Sheriff’s accusations.
Nanos said inmates can be interviewed by the media, but the inmates must initiate the contact.
AZLuminaria said Washington reimbursed an inmate $20 dollars to cover the cost of a phone call from jail.
“We paid $20 for a phone call with an inmate, who otherwise wouldn't be able to afford to talk to a journalist because of the cost of the jail phone system,” said AZLuminaria’s Principal Executive Irene Fischler-McKisson.
According to PCSD policy, “The department does not permit news interviews of prisoners in any stage of detention without the prior permission of such prisoners and the approval of the Sheriff or Corrections Bureau Chief.”
AZPM reached out to her attorney Steve Serbalik for clarification on whether his client followed policy but he said he can’t answer questions without endangering his client. He said in general terms, he was not aware of any laws in Arizona that would specifically prohibit reporters from initiating contacts with inmates in jails and prisons.
Neither Cross nor Lappin are able to speak because Nanos has placed admonishments on both of them, according to Serbalik, the attorney representing both of them. Admonishments are also known as gag orders.
The Sheriff denied placing them under admonishments.
“We didn't tell her, you can't talk, but we told her, what we asked her was, don't talk to anybody about this, because it's an investigation,” Nanos said.
Serbalik said gag orders are placed or removed at the discretion of the sheriff.
“If Sheriff Nanos is willing to lift the admonishment of Heather Lappin, I would be able to answer your question. Unfortunately, due to the admonishment, I can’t comment on the merits of the allegations (besides the fact that Lappin denies any wrongdoing) without potentially putting Lappin in jeopardy,” he wrote in an email.
The day she was suspended, Lappin also received a memo from Corrections’ Bureau Chief Scott Lowing questioning her knowledge of political activities by members of the department, which read “You are not to discuss this matter until it is concluded.”
Critics of Nanos say the suspension of two political rivals looks like retaliation. This is not the first time Nanos has received attention for apparent retaliation on those who speak out against his leadership.
Early this year, the Deputy’s Organization released a vote of no confidence in Nanos. In January, they had over 200 members.
In a social media post at that time, the Deputy’s Organization said Nanos’ management style of “retaliation to force silence” prompted the vote.
In September of last year, Nanos also removed his department’s officers from the Pima County Board of Supervisors’s meetings the same week they were scheduled to discuss a potential investigation of his conduct in an alleged sexual assault case in 2022.
He did return the deputies to those meetings a few weeks later.
By submitting your comments, you hereby give AZPM the right to post your comments and potentially use them in any other form of media operated by this institution.