Arizona

Arizona Police Commander Remembers to Turn His Body Camera on For Office Romp

An officer's inappropriate use of work equipment shows the risk of hiring "second-chance officers"

|

|||Scott Keeler/ZUMA Press/Newscom
Scott Keeler/ZUMA Press/Newscom

An Arizona police commander has been fired after choosing to use department resources for very personal reasons.

Footage from a body camera belonging to Anthony Doran of the Superior Police Department showed him carrying out a very personal tryst in the middle of his office, reports the Arizona Republic. In one video, Doran is seen angling his body camera toward himself and a woman in his office as they proceed to have sex. The unidentified woman in the video was not a department employee. The video dates to April, 2017, and was stored on Doran's computer. The video file was discovered by a secretary conducting business on Doran's computer.

The video is not all that was found. Channel 12 News reports that the video was found in a folder labelled "Fun Time." The "Fun Time" folder contained an additional 36GB of pornographic videos and nude pictures of Doran taken by himself. The folder also contained pictures of Doran's young daughter without clothes on. She is believed to be around the age of 5. According to the report, a sergeant who looked at the folder during an investigation into Doran wrote that both the images of the girl and their proximity to the other contents in the folder caused him to "physically react with shaking hands and upset stomach."

The Pinal County Sheriff's Office, which conducted the investigation into Doran's behavior, will not pursue charges against Doran for the picture of his daughter. However, the report made note of "suspicion that some grooming behavior may be present." Authorities also found that Doran was previously investigated and subsequently fired in 2013 from the Pima County Sheriff's Department for having inappropriate contact with a woman in his patrol car while on duty.

When confronted about the body camera footage, Doran allegedly told investigators, "I'll admit to that (violation) and take my 40," referring to a week-long suspension. Doran did not believe his termination was appropriate. He later griped that the town manager did not accept his resignation and chose to fire him instead. The Superior Police Department said he was fired in April.

An opinion piece in the Arizona Republic criticized the department for hiring "second-chance officers" like Doran. These are officers who, as explained, were "fired by previous departments, sanctioned by the state or placed on the Brady List, meaning their past behavior could compromise future court testimony." Most of the officers in Superior's nine-person police team are "second-chance officers." It was explained that departments hire officers previously accused of unethical behavior to save money.

Bonus link: Reason's Anthony L. Fisher explores why it's difficult to prevent bad cops from getting new jobs on the force.

NEXT: Rand Paul: Trump Should Keep Revoking Ex-Obama Officials' Security Clearances

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. These police cameras should really out some of the chaff over the next few years.

  2. Over the long run I think these cameras will be as durable as HRC’s hard drives.

  3. The “Fun Time” folder contained an additional 36GB of pornographic videos and nude pictures of Doran taken by himself.

    This is exactly why you put your porn in a folder labelled “Arrest Reports March-August 2006”

    1. I was going to make a similar joke, but I decided to read the comments first to make sure nobody else had already done that.

      1. BUCS has three folders on his work computer: “Not Porn”, “Not Not Porn”, and “Porn”. All three contain porn.

        1. Honestly, my old porn folders were called “Porn” and “Weird Stuff” but I was just a young kid. Now that distinction is not needed.

    2. .trash. > Arrest Reports Mar-Aug 2006 > Recovered Files > Hard Drive – Hugh Akston

    3. I put my porn in a folder labelled porn on my computer so people who don’t want to see it can easily avoid it.

  4. Cameras are like apples, cars, and SWAT teams. If they are left idle for too long, they go bad. Good cop doing his best to keep cop equipment in working order and testing it often.

  5. Having sex in the office is lame but I’m struggling to find reasons why it should be illegal. Who is the victim?

    1. The taxpayer who paid him to fuck at work.

      1. If he gets his work done, does it matter what he does in remaining time?

        If he doesn’t get his work done, isn’t it a problem in itself?

        1. If he gets his work done, does it matter what he does in remaining time?

          So what you’re saying is that it’s not exactly an issue of homemade porn but the amount, “How many GB of homemade porn does an officer get to generate before he’s abusing company resources?”

          Considering it wasn’t the intended use, I’m gonna go with 0. If he wasn’t on the clock, why was the camera running? If he was, well, isn’t that a problem in and of itself?

          1. Well, we just don’t know.

            Misuse of resources might be an issue here, but that should be governed by his contract, not by law of the land.

            1. Well, we just don’t know.

              Except that we do know. Whether they said, “Don’t use your badge cam to shoot homemade porn.”, “Don’t have sex at the office.”, or just “Don’t abuse police resources.” It’s likely he went through workplace training that explained to him that sex at the office was never OK. In any event, they looked at what he did, decided it ran afoul of their employment agreement or standards and fired his ass.

              1. Um, yeah, If the guy needs to be explicitly told “Don’t use your official police body cam to DIY yourself some porn”, I have to seriously question his judgment. As in, should this dude be running around with a badge and a gun?

                Plus, cute, non-sexual nude shots of your kid might be perfectly innocent, but keeping them in your porn folder immediately ups the squick factor.

          2. You can control the “amount” of porn by changing the video resolution. Is a large amount of low-res porn worse than a small amount of high-res porn?

            1. Are you asking now-me or jr. high-me?

            2. Low res porn is always worse.

        2. His work includes patrolling, no? Deputy is not a piece-work job. What’s he gonna do when that 9-1-1 call comes in mid-thrust? Pump harder and yell Oh My God?

          1. Go on…

        3. An officer has an obligation to be on the ready for action when he’s on the job, because he’s a first responder in an emergency and he’s supposed to lookout for trouble. I think I might have gotten a security guard in trouble when I walked past his security booth and up to an Egyptian embassy while he was distracted. After a failed attempt to figure out how to get inside, I tapped on the class to get his attention and ask him.

        4. He’s a cop – not giving speeding tickets and arresting people for drug possession is a benefit in my book.

      2. It’s possible he was off the clock when the fucking happened. Misuse of police resources maybe? I’m pretty sure if I used a camera that my employer had provided me to record myself fucking I would have been fired too, regardless if it was after hours or not.

        1. I’ve heard that 36 GB is a decent amount of time performing homemade porn. Especially if the badge cam only shoots 480p.

    2. It’s likely a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, but even without choosing to pursue that, it’s definitely cause for termination.

    3. Is it illegal? He rightfully got fired but there’s nothing in here about jail time. Despite the worrisome pictures of his daughter, the linked article actually says they are not pursuing charges.

      You can’t use police resources to film a sex tape and then save it on your work computer though. Obvious the guy should be terminated for that.

      1. Despite the worrisome pictures of his daughter, the linked article actually says they are not pursuing charges.

        The real question is: if anyone of us had made homemade porn using a work provided camera, and stored it on our work computer along with naked pictures of our 5 year old daughters, would we only get fired, or would we be facing child pron charges, with a very different article about us appearing on H&R?

        1. (sings) thiiiis ^^^

    4. It’s not the ‘sex at work’ as much as the ‘wildly inappropriate personal content on a work computer’. A computer that other people obviously have access to, making it a hostile-workplace charge.

      And, oh by the way, police are almost always hourly, not salaried, so the “he got all his work done” argument doesn’t apply. Unless you think he took all 36 Gb of those videos while he was on his lunch break.

    5. At least at the federal level, there’s some *very* strict rules regarding porn on any government-issued equipment, regardless of whether someone was on or off the clock at the time. To the best of my knowledge, most states have similar provisions.

      So don’t record your sex take with a government body cam and don’t store your porn on a government computer. Do what the rest of us do, and use you’re smart phone.

      1. Alright, that explains it. My government probably has similar rules.

        (I believe not working for the government is the easiest solution)

        1. Well, it gets you away from the specific “no porn on government computers” rule, sure. But most private employers have similar rules and policies, so yeah, safest bet is just keep the porn on the devices you actually own.

    6. It’s not illegal. That’s why he was not prosecuted. It is not allowed while on duty, thus the firing.

    7. Having sex is like commentating on Hit and Run. You shouldn’t do it on the company’s dime.

      1. >>>on the company’s dime

        my time is entirely too valuable

    8. There was the small detail of the child porn on his work computer.

  6. He should rename the folder from “Fun Time” to “Fuck Me.”

  7. Bake him away, toys.

  8. I saw some of the videos. When minutes count, this cop was always just seconds away.

  9. Fuck off cop haters, there could be any number of reasons he has naked pictures of his five year old daughter in a folder called “Fun Time” which is filled with nothing else but pornography and sex tapes

    1. True. And that number is zero.

    2. Let me review the life cycle rules with you:

      A pic of your cum along with erotic pics of your body or body parts is OK, because your cum is haploid.

      A pic of your fetus along with erotic pics of your body or body parts is weird, but I suppose it should be legal, because the kid is still young enough to kill on a whim without going to jail. She’s still in the “I made you, and I can destroy you” phase of life.

      Pics of anyone age birth to adulthood in an erotic setting is just plain wrong.

  10. I think the really disturbing takeaway here is that these body cameras aren’t centrally managed by some sort of group responsible for their data integrity, and apparently individual officers can take footage off of them and then delete it.

    1. It would cost a fortune to give every cop a camera that fed real-time video to some central cloud.

      1. Not to mention that centrally managed bodycam footage pretty much ensures that what gets release publicly will be a production rather than evidence (not that individual cops are more honest).

        I’ve mentioned it here before. If you watch the Harith Augustus shooting video*s* released by first the police (the next day) and then by COPA (almost a month later). The former is a video of the police shooting an armed suspect (you know he’s armed because they slow the video down when his shirt comes up) and the latter is a black man walking down the street whom police stop and then shoot to death. The latter really looks more like something out of a mafia film, he was going with them in the back seat or a body bag, his choice.

      2. No, no. Not “real time” like that.

        But, cop shows up for his shift, checks out his bodycam for the day from the Video IT dept, they turn it on, he wears it until the end of his shift, he turns it back in to Video IT and they turn it off, then put it in a charging dock to recharge and download the footage into the central repository.

        The point being that the individual cop should never have the ability to turn off the camera or delete footage from it.

        1. Agreed. And the individuals who control the body cam footage should not be answerable to the police department or the prosecutor’s office. Essentially they provide a contracted service whereby they provide the body cameras and host the footage and make it available to the public at any time after a 24 hour “no-view” period only allowing officers of the courts to view during that time (prosecutors, defense counsel, and judges, for example).

          If, for whatever reason, the footage needs to be kept secret, the time frame would allow for review and a court order to be issued, but wouldn’t let the cops/DA office to keep it locked away for months/years for no good reason.

        2. Mostly agree, but there is, unfortunately, one big problem. Bathrooms.

          There are solutions, but none that’ll make everyone happy. So far privacy concerns have been winning, and I suspect that’ll be true for another few years before cops lose the ability to temporarily disable their cameras.

      3. http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/0…..index.html
        $80/camera/month. Save one false settlement a year, and it’s worth it for a large department.

      4. Yo John there’s a feller above using the name John I or John l which at a casual glance looks like you’re posting. Just a heads up if you get any shit from Tony or Art accusing you of being an advocate for pedophiles over the next few days.

  11. In other law and order news, CNN, Buzfeed, the Washington Post and a few other miscreants are asking that the names and addresses of the Manfort jurors be released to the public.

    http://wtop.com/national/2018/…..fort-docs/

    They are not the “enemy of the people”. They just want to dox some jurors so the SJW mob can destroy their lives if they don’t convict Manfort.

    My God these people are scum.

    1. Names of jurors are customarily adjudged to be public information in a free country.

      Perhaps a libertarian, or even someone who is “libertarianish,” or someone familiar with the law, or someone who can take an educated guess concerning the law, could explain this to the uninformed authoritarians in the audience.

      1. The judge turned the motion down saying since he has been the subject of numerous threats and has to have 24 hour US Marshal protection, it was not safe to release the names of the jurors.

        Too bad for you, you fascist fuck.

      2. Names of jurors ARE NOT released to the public until after a jury service is completed. This does depend on the state, but the federal government does not do that.

        1. Voire Dire is, unless ordered by the judge, open to the public. Sometimes names are used, sometimes numbers.

          Allowing the government to keep secrets is fascism. Requesting public documents is normal democracy.

          Government secrecy for FRREEEEDUM!!

    2. I had no idea that Lefties need Manafort to be convicted so bad.

      Their comment sections dont even mention that even if Manafort is convicted, Trump will pardon him.

      Lefties live in a constant state of delusion. I dont understand how they hold down jobs.

  12. The video is not all that was found. Channel 12 News reports that the video was found in a folder labelled “Fun Time.” The “Fun Time” folder contained an additional 36GB of pornographic videos and nude pictures of Doran taken by himself. The folder also contained pictures of Doran’s young daughter without clothes on. She is believed to be around the age of 5.

    Is firing really the appropriate action here? I believe he should be on a sex offender registry for the rest of his life. You know, like regular people.

    1. Sadly yes. And as skeptical as I am of charging people with possession of child porn when they have naked pictures of their own kids, having naked pictures of your daughter on the same camera and in the same folder as all of your homemade porn is seriously strange and raises a lot of red flags.

      1. That, on top of the grooming, should certainly put him on the list. One thing that occurred to me that’s not quite clear: when we say ‘his daughter’ do we mean *his* biological daughter or the daughter of the woman he’s auspiciously married to or an otherwise minor girl for whom he’s a legal guardian? What a shit show if it’s his kid with his ex or whatever and he got partial custody of the kid because he was an officer.

    2. The “fun time” with an adult woman is stupid and embarrassing but not that outrageous if it’s not your husband. Firing would be appropriate. But the 5 year old daughter? Uh…..if a 17 year old has a nude picture of his 16 year old girlfriend, it’s sex offender register for life. This guy is pretty sick.

  13. “It was explained that departments hire officers previously accused of unethical behavior to save money.”

    I wonder if that actually works out in practice, considering the liability issues – has anyone analyzed the alleged savings?

    That being said, getting fired for sex in a patrol car seems low on the list of things which should make a cop totally radioactive for life. The stuff that *ought* to make a cop radioactive is the stuff about abusing suspects, framing same, etc. Or even faking evidence against a guilty person. All of which should be enough not to entrust him with the power to use force and file criminal accusations against people.

    1. To be clear, when he was found with a picture of his daughter among his porn pictures, that sounds radioactive, too, but that was after the patrol car romp.

      1. I’d love to see what they’d do to a “civilian” with a picture of his (eww) 5 yo daughter in a porn file.

        1. Charges of production and possession of child pron and since a co-worker found it, they’d probably a tack on distribution of child pron for good measure.

  14. Also, the problem isn’t just about second-chance officers, but about third, fourth, fifth chances, etc.

  15. I think we’re missing the most important thing here. Namely, that Commander Doran got home safe (and satisfied, presumably).

    1. (and satisfied, presumably).

      Yeah, but Mrs. Doran wasn’t. So she’s at my house.

  16. “The unidentified woman in the video was not a department employee.”

    Could she possibly someone he arrested and who then “consented” in exchange for being let go? It seems to me that someone should at least look into that possibility. Maybe Officer overly-Friendly needs more than just a firing.

    1. While I wouldn’t approve of the coerced sex, I’m more disturbed by the fact the woman in the video is listed as ‘unidentified’ as opposed to ‘his wife’ or ‘the mother of his daughter’. Not necessarily that men have to be exclusive to the women they have children with but that the latter options decrease the likelihood that the girl’s photos showing up in the ‘fun time’ folder weren’t as incidental as everybody’s pretending and that everyone in that precinct knows they let a child molester/pornographer go free.

  17. The real story here is not the cop it is the prosecutor who refuses to prosecute anything.

    Pinal County Attorney Kent Volker must resign immediately. What did an investigator say about the case Volkmer refused to file felony charges for?

    “‘The images and the fact they were intersected with pictures of sexual situations caused me to physically react with shaking hands and upset stomach,’ a sergeant wrote in his investigative report of Doran.

    Eventually, the PCSO discovered the images are of Doran’s daughter, yet the Pinal County Attorney’s Office did not charge Doran with a crime. The PCSO’s report did however say, ‘There is suspicion that some grooming behavior may be present.'” bet

    Yet Volkmer claimed the investigator did not want charges filed either.
    Somebody’s lying and I can pretty much be assured it is KENT VOLKMER: a proven liar in federal court.

    “Pinal County Attorney Kent Volkmer confirmed the child was Doran’s daughter. He said investigators and prosecutors concluded no felony charges were warranted. ” azcentral

    Volkmer KNEW this is a long behavior problem yet he has allowed this CORRUPT AND SICK COP to once again slip past the law.

    KENT VOLKMER MUST RESIGN IMMEDIATELY!

  18. How lucky we are that cops who do terrible things are always caught on video.

    1. Straight sex?

    2. Ah, there’s your problem with state authority right there in a nutshell. You assume *all* the bad stuff is being caught on video and use that as justification. Oh, see, its only a tiny minority of state employees abusing their authority. Its all right.’

  19. I, uh . . . look, that secretary was a dick. Yeah, he shouldn’t have been banging some broad in his office but ‘oh, I found this on your computer and it was *so shocking* I couldn’t even . . ‘ bit is ridiculous. Copy that shit, tell the dude to knock it off, and hold the video for that rainy day raise or something. I mean, who hasn’t at least thought of a tryst with someone in the broom closet?

    1. Nevermind. I thought this was just about the sex in the office. Should read the whole article next time.

    2. I mean, who hasn’t at least thought of a tryst with someone in the broom closet?

      Usually when I think of this it’s Principal Skinner and Mrs. Krabappel and I’m Ralph and I saw the baby and the baby looked at me.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.