Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos is defending his choice to suspend political opponents and union leaders for violating various internal department policies.
His suspensions of Heather Lappin, a Republican rival in the sheriff’s race, and Aaron Cross, president of the sheriff’s union who has been outspoken against Nanos, have put a spotlight on the ethics of local news organizations. The story unfolded last week as a taiga drama, raising questions about Nanos’ history of retaliation.
Nanos told AZPM that despite the timing, suspending either employee was not an option.
“Well, I don’t want to do this right before an election either, but I have a job to do, and that’s to enforce the rules, policies, procedures and guidelines and make sure others follow them. That’s not the case, so they need to be held accountable. It’s not retaliation to hold you accountable,” Nanos said.
A PCSD statement said Cross was placed on leave for engaging in political activity that appeared to be while in uniform. After the initial discovery, he picketed two intersections in Tucson and held up a sign that read, “Congressmen don’t want nanos,” even though his boss called him “unlike a Congressman.” I have doubts.
Nanos alleged that Lapin’s leave of absence was due to suspicions that she knew Cross was engaged in political activities on her behalf but did not stop it, and that she helped arrange media interviews with inmates. It said two separate policy violations were to blame.
Nanos said he learned of Lapin’s alleged activities when he asked Lapin if he knew about Cross’ political activities.
“(Lapin’s) leave status is due to several issues with her cell phone and computer that are of concern to us, completely separate from her on-duty campaign activities,” Nanos said.
AZPM repeatedly requested documentation showing policy violations. Nanos said he could not provide any evidence on her cell phone or computer because the matter is currently under investigation.
In a news release earlier in the week, Nanos did not name any reporters or news organizations involved in what it called a “collusion” in the release to pay for prisoner interviews, but several news organizations did not name the reporters or media outlets involved in what they called a “conspiracy” in the release to pay for prisoner interviews, but several news organizations reported that Arizona Luminaria criticized. Their reporter, John Washington, is known for reporting on deaths at the Pima County Adult Detention Center, a county jail under Nanos’ leadership.
PCSD did not name the media outlets or reporters in its statement, but AZ Luminaria later said they were “targeted” in a headline on an article featuring the sheriff’s accusations.
Nanos said inmates can be interviewed by the media, but the inmate must initiate the contact.
AZLuminaria reported that the Washington government reimbursed inmates $20 for phone calls from prison.
“We paid $20 for a phone call with an inmate, otherwise the inmate would not have been able to afford to speak to journalists due to the cost of the prison phone system,” AZ Luminaria Chief Executive Officer Eileen Fischler McKisson said.
According to PCSD policy, “The department does not permit interviews with inmates at any stage of their custody without the inmate’s prior permission and the approval of the sheriff or corrections officer.”
AZPM asked Lappin’s attorney, Steve Cervarik, to explain whether his client followed the policy, but said he could not answer the question without putting his client at risk.
Mr. Cross and Mr. Lappin are unable to speak because Nanos has issued a warning to them, said Mr. Cervarik, the lawyer representing them. A warning is also called a gag order.
The sheriff denied placing them under reprimand.
“We didn’t tell her not to talk, but we asked her not to tell anyone about it because this is an investigation.” said Nanos.
Selvarik said gag orders are issued or lifted at the discretion of the sheriff.
“If Sheriff Nanos is willing to lift Heather Lappin’s admonition, he will be able to answer your questions. Unfortunately, because of this recommendation, (the fact that Lappin denies any wrongdoing) “I cannot comment on the merits of this allegation without potentially putting Lapin at risk,” he wrote in an email.
On the day he was suspended, Lappin received a memo from Corrections Director Scott Lawing questioning his knowledge of political activity by members of the department and saying he should not discuss the matter until it was concluded. It was written.
Critics of Nanos say the suspension of two political opponents looks like retaliation. This is not the first time Nanos has made headlines for apparent retaliation against those who spoke out against his leadership.
Earlier this year, the Vice President’s Organization announced a motion of no confidence against Nanos. As of January, the number of members exceeded 200.
In a social media post at the time, the deputy organization said Nanos’ “retaliation to enforce silence” management style prompted the vote.
Last September, Nanos also removed department officials from a Pima County Board of Supervisors meeting, the same week they were scheduled to discuss a possible investigation into his conduct in a 2022 alleged sexual assault case.
A few weeks later, he brought lawmakers back to those meetings.
