DATELINE – PHOENIX. In any Arizona city or county agency, a police officer who makes racial remarks, commits sexual harassment, lies during internal investigations, or refuses to cooperate with an EEO inquiry would be fired and decertified. Their career would be over. But at the Phoenix VA Police Department, the same conduct has led to promotions, not termination. This investigation examines the federal loophole that allows substantiated harassers to keep their badges, guns, and authority to arrest – and why the VA's oversight bodies have refused to act.

HOW A "LOCAL COP" LOSES THEIR BADGE (AND A "VA COP" KEEPS IT)

In Arizona, the Peace Officer Standards and Training Board (AZPOST) can deny, suspend, or revoke an officer’s certification for serious misconduct, and a permanent revocation or denial generally ends that person’s ability to work as a sworn peace officer in Arizona. AZPOST de-certifications may be reported to the National Decertification Index (NDI), a nationwide database of officers whose certifications have been revoked, which agencies can query in pre‑employment screening, but an NDI entry is not itself a universal, automatic bar to law enforcement employment in every other state. 

What Local Officers Lose Certification For  

AZPOST has decertified officers for: falsifying time sheets, domestic assault, making false statements during internal investigations, sexual harassment, and racial discrimination.  

What Happens At The Phoenix VA Police Department  

Now apply that standard to the Phoenix VA Police Department. Internal VA records and federal court filings show that multiple leadership officials have engaged in conduct that would have led to immediate decertification in any local agency. 

The Double Standard in Practice  

Yet they remain on the job. They still carry guns. They still supervise the people they harassed. And they still have the authority to arrest, restrain, and use deadly force.

THE FEDERAL LOOPHOLE: NO DECERTIFICATION, NO CONSEQUENCES

The VA does not answer to AZPOST. Instead, VA police go through a federal background investigation using the SF‑85P (Questionnaire for Public Trust Positions), adjudicated by VA’s personnel security and suitability offices under the Office of Operations, Security, and Preparedness (OSP).

OSP also oversees VA’s internal law‑enforcement certification, personnel vetting, and credentialing systems for VA employees, including VA police—systems that are supposed to keep unfit officers out of armed roles but that exist entirely inside VA and are not part of any national decertification registry. 

No Real Decertification System  

For a time, DOJ tried to build a federal‑wide police misconduct database (the National Law Enforcement Accountability Database, or NLEAD), but the Trump administration shut it down. There is still no federal decertification system comparable to the National Decertification Index that state POST boards use, and no active national registry that reliably stops a problem officer from moving between VA facilities.  

What The Phoenix VA Police Proves  

On paper, OSP’s vetting and suitability programs are supposed to ensure “trust in our VA workforce.” In practice, Phoenix VA Police shows how ineffective they are. Leaders with substantiated findings of racial harassment, sexual harassment, and false statements kept their badges, kept their guns, and kept supervising the people they harmed. A system that leaves those officials in armed positions is not a safeguard. It is proof that VA’s internal vetting and OSP’s systems are failing the veterans they are supposed to protect.

Bottom Line: VA Police have their own certification system on paper. Phoenix VA Police proves it is meaningless in practice.

WHAT HAS BEEN SUBSTANTIATED (AND STILL IGNORED)

Our investigative team has documented the following misconduct at the Phoenix VA Police Department. Every single item below would have led to decertification in a local agency.

Racial Harassment – Substantiated by the VA

• A supervisor texting a Black officer a photo of soap labeled "Apples & Brown Sugar" with the message, "Wife bought a new soap and I thought of you."
• A supervisor interrupting a group of Black employees with, "Didn't mean to mess up your Black Panther party."
• A supervisor referring to a Black officer "Mr. Tibbs" – a direct reference to a Black detective fighting a racist police department – simply because the officer wore a suit and tie.

These incidents were part of a racially hostile work environment that the VA’s OEDCA substantiated in Case No. 200P‑644‑2022‑147530, which in turn led to a successful settlement agreement in Bennett v. United States Department of Veterans Affairs, No. 2:24-cv-00084 (D. Ariz. filed Jan. 11, 2024).

• Local consequence: Decertification.
• VA consequence: A few hours of training. No demotion. No suspension. No loss of badge.

Sexual Harassment – Modeled from the Top

• A supervisor pretending to spit in his hands and simulating masturbation behind a young female employee's back as she walked out the door.
• Lewd comments, unwanted advances, and a culture so hostile that some female employees changed their stated sexual orientation just to avoid management's attention.

The VA's own Harassment Prevention Program (HPP) substantiated multiple allegations; however, the Phoenix VA HHP and Local EEO program became to friendly with individuals in the police department - until someone reported the local HPP/EEO Program and  Human Resources had become "COMPROMISED" by the Phoenix VA Police.

• Local consequence: Termination and decertification.
• VA consequence: The same supervisor remains in a leadership position, still managing employees.

False Statements and Lack of Candor

Sworn affidavits in Ramirez v. Phoenix Veterans Affairs Police Department , No. 2:25-cv-00959-CDB (D. Ariz. filed Mar. 24, 2025), contain, according to the plaintiff, false statements, omissions, and lack of candor – potential violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (false statements to the government) and 38 C.F.R. § 0.735-12 (which explicitly warns that concealment of material facts or willfully inaccurate testimony may be grounds for disciplinary action).

• Local consequence: Criminal referral, decertification.
• VA consequence: No documented action. Officials remain in place.

Refusal to Cooperate with EEO Investigations

Some officials refused to cooperate with federal EEO investigations – they ignored emails, refused to respond, refused to answer questions, or otherwise failed to participate as required.

• Local consequence: Suspension, termination, decertification.
• VA consequence: No documented discipline.

WHO IS PROTECTING THEM? OSP, OS&LE, AND SELF‑INVESTIGATION

The VA has the Office of Accountability and Whistleblower Protection (OAWP) . However, its purview is limited – OAWP is primarily focused on senior management retaliation and misconduct. Anything outside its statutory scope is referred elsewhere, including to the VA Office of Inspector General (OIG), the agency’s own internal law‑enforcement and security system (the Office of Operations, Security, and Preparedness (OSP) and the Office of Security and Law Enforcement (OS&LE)), and – sadly – the very same local chain of command that oversaw the misconduct in the first place.

This creates a closed loop. OAWP investigates, refers the findings back to OSP and OS&LE, and OSP and OS&LE then investigate themselves. In the cases we reviewed, time after time they found “no further action required.”

A Pattern of Failure

The Concerned Citizens AZ Investigative Team reviewed multiple complaints and found a recurring pattern:

• No independent fact‑finding – the same agency accused of misconduct investigates itself.
• Referral back to local leadership – the very people accused of wrongdoing.
• Closure without meaningful corrective action – even when findings were substantiated.

OSP says it investigates. But when the investigator is a friend of the accused, when the accused control the documents, and when the result is always the same – that is not an investigation. That is a rubber stamp.

THE QUESTION NOBODY AT OSP WILL ANSWER

Here is the question that the Concerned Citizens AZ Investigative Team has repeatedly asked – and that OSP, OS&LE, and the Phoenix VA Health Care System's "Executive Leadership" refuse to answer:

How many substantiated findings of racial harassment, sexual harassment, and false statements does it take before someone loses their badge?

Because right now, the answer appears to be: There is no number.

• One substantiated finding? Keep your badge.
• Two? Keep your badge.
• A decade of complaints? Keep your badge.
• Multiple federal court lawsuit? Keep your badge.

At what point does the VA say, "Enough"? At what point does OSP admit that training is not discipline? At what point does someone lose the authority to carry a gun, make an arrest, and....take a life?

OSP's silence is its answer.

FOR THE PROTECTED OFFICIALS READING THIS: YOU CANNOT HIDE ANYMORE

You know who you are. You have substantiated findings. You have been named in complaints. You have sat in meetings and smiled for pictures while the paperwork piled up.

You still have your badge. You still have your gun. You still have the power to ruin careers, retaliate against whistleblowers, and decide who gets promoted.

But here is what you cannot do anymore:

• Hide.

Your sworn statements are public. Your EEO testimony is on the record. Your pattern of misconduct has been documented – not by anonymous accusers, but in the VA’s own investigative records.

The Concerned Citizens AZ Investigative Team is not a court. We cannot fire you. We cannot decertify you.

But we can make sure the public is aware and knows exactly what is going on.

And the public is starting to pay attention.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Concerned Citizens AZ Investigative Team – Bringing “Public Awareness” to those that didn’t know.

This information is based on public records, federal court filings, EEO determinations, whistleblowers, and documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. Readers are encouraged to independently verify all information through official sources.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

READER NOTICE

Concerned Citizens Media encourages readers to independently verify the information contained in this publication, including through public records, official sources, or AI-assisted research tools. For additional information or clarification, readers are encouraged to contact appropriate Department of Veterans Affairs officials or their local VA facility directly.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DISCLAIMER

Any attempt to retaliate against current or former VA employees, officers, contractors, or witnesses for engaging in protected whistleblower or EEO activity related to the matters discussed herein may constitute a violation of federal law, including 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(8)–(9), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and applicable VA anti‑retaliation policies. Documentation, reporting, or public discussion of substantiated misconduct, harassment, discrimination, or policy violations is protected activity.