Maricopa Police Officer Dismissed – When it rains, it pours. I guess women just aren’t interested in guys who keep their dogs locked up in hot patrol vehicles. Who knew?

Maricopa Police Officer Craig Curry was fired from the Department for allegedly being “untruthful” and failing to follow protocol in regard to a case not related to his much-publicized K-9 incident, records show. Apparently he was also trying to flirt with a witness. Who does that?

Public hearings were held on July 11 and 25 to hear the appeal of Curry. According to a summary of the public hearings provided by the city of Maricopa, after hearing witness testimonies, reading and considering exhibit evidence, hearing arguments from the parties and “fully advised in the premise,” the findings of fact, conclusions of law and decisions were provided.

Curry is a 14-year veteran of the department.

According to the hearings, his dismissal wasn’t considered “unreasonably disproportionate” to the offense in question as to be “arbitrary, capricious or taken without reasonable cause,” the summary stated, adding that Curry showed a “lack of candor” and “untruthfulness designed to mislead the investigator.”

“I’m sure the intention of every internal investigation is to be fair and balanced,” Curry stated of the dismissal. “I believe this particular investigation missed the mark.”

Curry stated that “it may not be obvious,” but when examining the case facts, there are “definitely biases and ethical concerns” by those “responsible for interviewing witnesses and making decisions.”

“I am still looking to exhaust all possible appeals and judicial actions afforded to me to ensure that this doesn’t happen to another officer and that I have the opportunity to tell my story in front of an impartial listener,” Curry stated.

Maricopa Police Officer Dismissed

The incident that is in question took place back on Dec. 6. Curry was conducting a welfare check at Circle K, and afterwards Curry reportedly turned off his body camera and approached the female 911 caller and chatted for about an hour. Later on, the caller complained to officials that she thought the conversation was in appropriate, calling it “weird” and “of a sexual nature.” He was trying to ‘get those digits’ I suppose.

Sgt. Chance Jordan was assigned to conduct a preliminary investigation of the allegations against Curry. After interviewing the caller, Jordan gave Curry a notice of inquiry.

The notice informed Curry of an allegation of violating the code of conduct, which is conduct “unbecoming” for a “citizen reported you were unprofessional toward her during a police contact.”

This admonishment also instructed him not to discuss the investigation, including the interview, with any unauthorized persons. Curry wasn’t allowed to access any internal files or department records.

Hours after receiving the notice and admonishment, Curry allegedly accessed internal department records related to his call for service at Circle K to “review the details of that welfare check and his notes about the call for service.”

On Dec. 14, Curry was told to meet with Lt. Kathleen Elliot, who reassigned him to an administrative position while the investigation was underway.  Curry did NOT flirt with the Lieutenant.

When Elliot gave Curry his reassignment notification, he told her he didn’t know what the investigation was about and the names on the notice “meant nothing to him.” Elliot knew at the time Curry made this statement he’d spoken with others about the incident and knew the date, time and location of the incident resulting in the allegations against him and who made the complaint against him.

The report states that Curry made a false and misleading statement, violating the admonition given to him by Jordan.

Two days later, Curry allegedly accessed the body cam video from Dec. 6. He hadn’t docked it at the end of his shift on Dec. 6-7 until about a week later and the video hadn’t been labeled by Curry.

Curry reportedly buffered the video and streamed it to see the entire Circle K incident. Since his body cam was off during his interaction with the caller, there wasn’t footage of the interaction. 

Curry didn’t label the video after reportedly viewing it.

He tried viewing it on Dec. 17 but couldn’t and believed it was either removed or restricted. On Dec. 18, he accessed the video but didn’t watch it.

On Dec. 27, Curry received a superseding notice of investigation/inquiry. It contained the same information as the one on Dec. 13 but also included additional allegations of misconduct, citing his “unprofessional interaction” with the caller on Dec. 6 when he made “inappropriate statements to her” making “her feel uncomfortable” and him “inappropriately” touching her.

There were several allegations later not sustained, including misuse of the Arizona Criminal Justice Information System, his conduct unbecoming during his Dec. 6 interaction with the caller, his off-duty work as a policy violation and talking to others after being ordered not to talk with anyone about the investigation.

Before the Dec. 28 interview with Jordan, Curry was “given the opportunity” to watch all the body cam footage worn by the officers.

During the interview, Curry relayed the interaction between himself and the caller and admitted to touching her arm and hand. He also told Jordan he accessed the internal department records since he didn’t have the details about the case.

When asked about the details Curry had, he said he’d spoken with the caller’s friend about the call for service welfare check on Dec. 6, was given the caller’s name and told the caller said he’d “hit on her.”

Curry admitted to speaking with another officer about the Dec. 6 allegations and told Jordan he didn’t have his body cam on while talking with the caller since the call for service was “officially over.”   

He was reminded he’d told Elliot he didn’t know what the investigation was about when on administrative reassignment. Curry said he’d “misstated the statement” since he knew what it was, but didn’t have the details.