ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥

Supervisor Bronson requested an outside agency such as the ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ Attorney General’s Office or the ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ Department of Public Safety conduct an investigation after recent allegations by the Pima County Deputy’s Organization that Nanos delayed an internal investigation into how supervisors and command staff handled the alleged sexual assault.

After meeting behind closed doors with the Pima County Attorneys Office, Supervisors Sharon Bronson, Steve Christy and Matt Heinz voted in favor of seeking an independent investigation. Supervisors Adelita Grijalva and Rex Scott voted no.

Nanos was not at the meeting but he reacted to the vote and complaint later in the day.

"The Sheriff has extended support to the victim throughout this process and investigative staff is engaged in the pending prosecution" the Sheriff's Department said in a news release Tuesday afternoon.

"In all cases of a sensitive nature the Sheriff’s Department places a high priority on preserving the privacy and dignity of crime victims," the release goes on to say.

"These principles guide us in this case. Requests for outside reviews and demands for transparency are understandable and the department offers full cooperation," the release said.

"The sensational claims covered in the media do not reflect the facts of this case or the decisions of this office," the release said. "We shall proceed with our principles in mind."

“It’s essential, I think, that we make this request and see which entities respond to it,� Christy said. “The public is demanding this, the optics are terrible, they need to be clarified with some sort of explanation and transparency on the Sheriff’s Department and the Sheriff’s part.�

Scott and Grijalva cited legal advice in voting against the measure.

“Based on the legal advice we received I can’t support the item,� Scott said. “The employee in question who’s been charged with the assault has been fired form the Sheriff’s Department, there is a criminal investigation that is being conducted (and) also a civil case ... I respect the concerns of my colleagues ... but based on what we heard in executive session I think that we can have an impact on the criminal court or the civil case.�

An amendment to the initial motion says the search for an outside investigation will not be limited to the two state agencies Bronson first mentioned.

The alleged sexual assault occurred in December during a Christmas party hosted by a former sergeant and leader of a school resource officer team, Ricardo Garcia.

According to a $900,000 claim filed against Garcia, Pima County and other law enforcement officials, Garcia and his girlfriend allowed the deputy to stay the night in their spare room after she felt she was unable to drive home.

Garcia, who was the deputy’s supervisor at the time, then allegedly assaulted the deputy while she was unconscious. He was arrested in January on suspicion of sexual assault and was then fired.

A criminal investigation is being handled by the Santa Cruz County Attorney’s Office.

The Pima County Deputy’s organization, their union, claims the assaulted deputy filed a formal complaint against her lieutenant, captain and chief because they “were aware that she was being actively sexually assaulted by her sergeant, Ricky Garcia, and refused to intervene for 80 minutes,� the union alleged.

After Sheriff Nanos did not launch an internal investigation into the supervisors in question, the deputy filed a complaint through internal affairs, but the union says it was been held up by Nanos.

Tuesday’s vote comes as Nanos notified the board his department would no longer provide security for their meetings.

The department has assigned two deputies to the meetings.

“This board has not asked that sergeant-at-arms be removed from our board rooms, that is something that is in the purview of the Sheriff’s Department and Sheriff Nanos,� Grijalva said Tuesday. “We will ensure that we have ample security here ... we don’t have any authority over whether they’re placed here or not.�

The move by Nanos, Bronson said, was retaliation for her seeking the independent review.

Nanos, however, said removing the deputies is a cost saving move that has nothing to do with the board’s vote to seek an investigation of him.