Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMathews Executive Summary 3.12.2018CityofSanLuisObispo, PoliceDepartment, 1042WalnutStreet, SanLuisObispo, CA, 93401-2729, 805.781.7317, slocity.org Memorandum Date: April 30, 2018 To: Chief Cantrell Via: Captain Staley From: Lieutenant Bledsoe Subject: Investigative File # 2018-0005 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On Thursday March 1st, and Friday March 2nd, 2018 Officer Cory Mathews contacted sworn members of the Hanford Police Department in an attempt to obtain personal information through law enforcement data bases. Officer Mathews is a former Police Officer with the Hanford Police Department and used these relationships to gain this information. He led the Detectives and Police Officer to believe he was currently employed by the San Luis Obispo Police Department and was conducting narcotics investigations. Officer Mathews is currently on administrative leave for unrelated allegations of misconduct because of several off-duty policy violations. That case On Thursday March 1st, 2018 Hanford PD Detective contacted SLO PD Detective Anthony Pellouso to inquire about Officer Mathews status. Pellouso told Detective that Mathews was currently on administrative leave and he should not be providing him with any information. Detective notified his department’s administration about this situation on Tuesday March 6th, 2018 regarding Officer Mathews. Hanford PD learned that Officer Mathews had contacted additional Hanford personnel in an attempt to gather information through their data bases for what they believed to be narcotics investigations being conducted by Mathews. ATTACHMENTS; Recorded phone conversation with Digital audio recordings of interviews Copies of emails/text messages Memorandum from Kings County Sheriff’s Office SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS: Officer Mathews attempted to illegally obtain confidential information from law enforcement officials and data bases while on Administrative Leave from this agency. Policy, Rule, or Regulation Violation If sustained it would constitute a violation of the City of San Luis Obispo Police Department Policies, personnel rules and State Law. INVESTIGATION; On Tuesday March 6th, 2018 at approximately 3:52 pm, I received a phone call from with the Hanford Police Department. informed me three Hanford PD Police Officers had recently been contacted via text messages from Officer Cory Mathews. He told me Officer Mathews had asked these three officers if they could provide him personal information for some subjects he was investigating for narcotics cases he was involved with. Officer Mathews is a former police officer with the Hanford Police Department and was co -workers with these three Hanford officers. identified his employees as Detectives and Officer He told me on Thursday March 1st, 2018 Detective learned Officer Mathews was on administrative leave with the SLO PD after he spoke with SLO PD Detective Anthony Pellouso. Detective Pellouso is also a former police officer with the Hanford PD and is friends with Detective When Detective learned that Officer Mathews was on administrative leave he later contacted his supervisor and management with Hanford PD. said he believed Officer Mathews had asked his employees to conduct records checks using Accurint and TLO law enforcement data bases. He said his employees believed Officer Mathews was acting in an official capacity as a law enforcement officer and was using this information for legitimate means during the course of his investigations. After learning this information from Detective he immediately notified me. then put out a department wide email on Thursday March 6th, to the Hanford PD advising their employees not to provide Officer Mathews with any law enforcement sensitive information. Shortly after putting out this email, he was contacted by Hanford PD Officer told he had also been contacted by Officer Mathews who asked him to help identify a subject for a narcotics case. provided me with contact numbers for Detectives and Officer Interview with Hanford PD Detective On Thursday March 8th, 2018 at approximately 9:53 am I met with Detective in his office at the Hanford Police Department. The following is his statement in summary. Detective said he has known Officer Mathews since 2011 when they worked together at the Hanford Police Department. He said he worked closer with Officer Mathews when they were partners on the regional SWAT team beginning in 2012 when Mathews was his team leader. He said he has known Officer Mathews for approximately five years. Detective told me he received a text message from Officer Mathews on Thursday March 1st, 2018 at about 11:30 am. I asked Detective if Mathews told him or led him to believe he was currently working as a San Luis Obispo Police Officer. said Mathews didn’t mention “one way or the other whether he was currently a police officer in the text messages.” He said in his text messages he asked if he was still a detective. told him he was still a detective, and Mathews then asked him if he could look up some names and phone numbers for him. Detective said this request from Officer Mathews didn’t really concern him because when he first started at SLO PD he was on patrol working the evening hours. He said Mathews had asked on a prior occasion to look up a “missing person critical” for him as well as a phone number. Detective said he believed Mathews was asking for assistance and it was, “a call for service, that was my understanding at that time.” He told me Mathews did not explain to him why he needed this information. Detective told me he believed Mathews was acting in the capacity as a SLO PD Officer when he was asking for this information. I asked Detective to tell me what Officer Mathews specifically asked him for. told me Mathews asked him to look up some names and phone numbers, and provided him with the name, “and an “805” phone number. Detective said he did look up the name in his department’s TLO search data base and received a “hit” on that name. said he took a picture of the information on his cellular phone and sent it to Officer Mathews. I asked Detective if Mathews asked him to look up any other subjects and he said yes. He told me Mathews asked him to look up a, “said he found a and sent him a screen shot of the results on as well. Detective told me a few minutes later, Officer Mathews responded saying “Thanks.” He then texted him one more time and said, “one more number and that’s it.” Mathews then sent Gustin the number, “He told me all of these requests to this point were all on the same date, March 1st. Detective said he came up with a land line for that number and provided it to Mathews via screen shot. Detective said the following day, Friday March 2nd, Officer Mathews texted him again and told him he accidentally erased the photos he sent him. Mathews then asked him if he was at work. responded by telling Mathews he was not at work, but his partner was. He said those text messages were exchanged at around 11:50 am. Detective confirmed that he had sent screen shots of the information he received on TLO to Mathews regarding and the phone number he asked for. I asked Detective if Officer Mathews told him he was currently on administrative leave and he said, “no.” I then asked him how he discovered Mathews was on administrative leave. He told me after he had sent Mathews the screen shots, he, “remembered hearing through the grape vine Cory had taken some time off, this was several months ago.” He believed this time off was for personal reasons, and of his own choice. said he knew it was a while back and he didn’t know the details. Detective began thinking about Officer Mathew’s requests and knew he had resources here with Detective Pellouso. He began thinking, “Why’s he asking me,” when he’s got Pellouso. said Mathew’s requests began raising concerns with him the more he thought about it. Detective said on Thursday afternoon March 1st, he reached out to Pellouso and asked him if he should be concerned about Mathews texting him asking for information on names. He said after he sent Pellouso the text message, Pellouso called him back and told him Mathews was on administrative leave. Upon learning this information, he notified his partner then told me On Friday March 2nd, texted him letting him know Mathews was now reaching out to him for information. He said advised him Mathews had told him he was working on a dope case. I asked Detective if he has had any contact with Officer Mathews since his text message on Friday March 2nd and he said no. Detective said he regretted not getting the information back to us sooner. He said he gave Officer Mathews the benefit of the doubt and tended to trust him too much. He said he wanted to help him out as a fellow officer thinking he was, “on the up and up.” I asked Detective when he reported this to his administration . He told me he discovered this information on Thursday March 1st after speaking with Detective Pellouso and reported it to his sergeant and lieutenant on Tuesday March 6th in the morning. He said they immediately notified of the situation. He said later that afternoon sent out a department wide email regarding Cory Mathews. Detective provided me with a compact disc containing the text message exchanges between him and Officer Mathews. The disc and text messages are attached to this report. My interview with Detective ended at approximately 10:04 am. Interview with Hanford Detective On Thursday March 8th, 2018 at approximately 10:11 am, I interviewed Hanford Police Detective in his office at the Hanford Police Department. The following is his statement in summary. Detective said he has been an officer with the Hanford PD for seventeen years and has known Officer Mathews for approximately twelve years. He said he was a FTO at the time Officer Mathews was hired with their agency and had him as a trainee for a short period of time. said he worked in the Detective Bureau with Officer Mathews for about a year, before Mathews was transferred to the Narcotics Task Force. said he did not have a very close working relationship with Mathews. I asked Detective if he recently had communications with Officer Mathews and he said he did. told me on Friday March 2nd, at approximately 11:50 am, he received a text message from Officer Mathews, “regarding needing some help.” said the text message said something to the effect, “He’s working a little dope case, and wanted to know if I still had access to Accurint, which we don’t use that here.” Detective told me he, “was kind of aware there was something going on over there. It didn’t seem right that it was mid-afternoon and needing information that he could probably get from dispatch from SLO.” I asked Detective to describe to me the content of the text messages sent to him by Officer Mathews. He looked up the messages on his phone and read them aloud to me. Officer Mathews asked if he was working today. Mathews wanted to know if he still had access to Accurint and Detective told him he did not. Mathews text message stated, “I’m working a little dope case and need some help.” When explained to Mathews he would be unable to help him, Mathews stated, “Ill try someone at the DA’s office. Thanks anyway.” Detective provided me a copy of this text message exchange with Officer Mathews which is attached to this report. Detective was aware Detective had a conversation with SLO PD Detective Pellouso the previous day. He knew Officer Mathews was on administrative leave and was not going to provide him with any information. I asked Detective if Officer Mathews told him or led him to believe he was currently working as an officer or an investigator with SLO PD. said he was aware Mathews had been hired by SLO PD. He said based on Mathews text messages, he believed Mathews may be working as a narcotics investigator at that time. Detective said Mathews did not tell him exactly what he needed the information for other than stating he was working a dope case. did not ask Mathews any questions regarding Mathew’s request, but only told him he needed to re-certify with TLO. Officer Mathews did not provide Detective with any names or phone number requests, and did not give Mathews any information. I asked Detective if Officer Mathews told him he was on administrative leave and he said, “no.” I asked him how he discovered he was on administrative leave and he told me, “rumors around here,” information provided by Detective Detective told me he has not communicated with Officer Mathews since the text messages on Friday March 2nd. I concluded my interview with Detective at approximately 10:17 am. Interview with Hanford Police Officer On Thursday March 8th, 2018 at approximately 12:41 pm I interviewed Hanford Police Officer in an interview room in the front lobby of the Hanford Police Department. The following is s statement in summary. Officer said he has known Officer Mathews since 1998. He said they were in the military (Marine Corps) together and have worked at the Hanford PD for several years. said he considered him and Officer Mathews to be close friends. Officer said he received a text message from Officer Mathews on Sunday March 4th. I asked Officer about the text messages and he said Mathews asked if he was working. told Mathews he was working at which time Mathew said he, “needed an address for a guy named said he ran the name through their local “RIMS” data base, as well as through CLETS. Officer said he found nothing in their local system and about seven matches in CLETS. Officer Mathews told Officer should have an address and he found none. Mathews said the subject would be in his 30’s. I asked Officer if Officer Mathews asked him to run through any specific data base systems and he said, “No, he just asked if I could get an address for him.” I asked if Officer Mathews told him, or led him to believe he was a police officer or an investigator with SLO PD. was aware that Mathews had lateraled to the SLO PD from the Hanford PD and stated, “As far as I know he’s a police officer there.” I asked Officer if Mathews told him the reason why he was asking for his assistance and he told me, “He said was just and needed locked up and then he made a comment about was a drug dealer.” I asked him if Officer Mathews told him he was investigating a crime, and he said, “I just assumed so.” Officer told me that him and Mathews were, “Probably the best friends of this department even though he’s a pretty quiet guy.” He told me, “I assumed that’s what he was doing, he’s looking for an address because he’s investigating someone.” I asked Officer if Officer Mathews told him what he needed this information for and he said, “no.” He also told me he did not know the subject He told me that was the only person Mathew asked him to help with. Officer told me he did not send Officer Mathews any information. He told Mathews he was unable to identify and the address he requested. said Mathews told him the subject may also live I asked Officer if Mathews told him he was on administrative leave and he said, “no.” I asked Officer how he discovered Mathews was on administrative leave. He told me a department wide email came out from informing their employees Mathews was on administrative leave and not to provide him with any information. said he had heard rumors that Mathews had gotten into trouble back in November 2017, but he didn’t know for sure. I asked Officer if he had spoken with Officer Mathews after learning he was on administrative leave and he said, “yes.” told me he sent Mathews a text message the day email came out. He said, “I woke up and saw the email, I texted him right away. I said hey we just got a department wide email saying that you’re on admin leave and soliciting information.” He stated to Mathews, don’t tell me that you asked me about that guy because of that.” He said Mathews stated, “Hey I’m sorry bro.” responded by saying, “Sorry? I better not get hemmed up for some bullshit.” He said Mathews then said, “Na, a drug dealer, he told me was a drug dealer.” said he stopped texting Mathews after this exchange and notified I asked Officer if he saved the text messages from Officer Mathews. He told me he saved the messages from Tuesday March 6th but erased the messages from Sunday March 4th. showed me the text messages from the March 6th exchange. I took a photograph of these messages and attached them to this report. I concluded this interview at approximately 12:46 pm. On Wednesday March 7th, 2018 at approximately 4:30 pm, I received an email from with the Kings County District Attorney’s Office. This email was regarding Officer Cory Mathews, and his availability to testify in a King’s County homicide case. Upon receiving this email, I immediately called He informed me that Officer Mathews was the lead investigator in a homicide case which occurred while Mathews was employed with the Hanford Police Department. He told me the first trial resulted in a hung jury and they were re-trying the case. He asked me about Officer Mathew’s status and I told him he was currently on administrative leave with SLO PD. asked me if Officer Mathews was a Brady concern due to him being on administrative leave. I told there were no Brady issues involved with his current administrative leave status, however, there could be some issues with some new allegations against Officer Mathews. I did not provide with any details regarding Officer Mathews prior case or the new allegations. told me he recently spoke with Hanford PD who informed him of the issues with Officer Mathews and his department. I told I would be investigating these new allegations and they are a personnel matter which I could not discuss with him. was understanding and thanked me for the information I was able to provide. On Thursday March 8th, at approximately 12:08 pm, I called to ask him if Officer Mathews had contacted anyone from his office soliciting information. In reviewing the text messages from Officer Mathews to Hanford PD Detective on Friday March 2nd, Officer Mathews indicated he would try to contact someone from the DA’s office after Detective said he was unable to help him. I informed that Officer Mathews may try to contact someone from his office to obtain personal information. was unaware if Mathews had contacted anyone from his office at this time. He told me he would notify his employees of this situation involving Officer Mathews. told me if he discovers any relevant information regarding this matter he would notify me immediately. Interview with Detective Anthony Pellouso On Thursday March 15th, 2018 at approximately 2:57 pm I interviewed Detective Anthony Pellouso in my office at the San Luis Obispo Police Department. Also present was Detective Chris Chitty acting as Pellouso’s POA representative. Prior to beginning my questioning of Detective Pellouso I advised him this was a personnel investigation and ordered him to answer all questions under the compulsion of the threat of disciplinary action. I have attached the Interview record to this case file. The following is Detective Pellouso’s statement in summary. I asked Detective Pellouso if he understood why he was being interviewed and he told me he did. I advised Pellouso he was being questioned as a witness to IF# 2018 - 0005 against Officer Cory Mathews, as well as for the allegations against him for failing to report promptly. Detective Pellouso told me on March 1st, 2018 sometime during the early afternoon, he received a text message from Hanford Police Detective I asked Pellouso what the nature of that text message was. He said, He was asking if I knew anything about Cory Mathews status here at the PD, and said that he was, and Cory asked him to run two names for him.” Pellouso told me after receiving this text message he called Detective Detective Pellouso told Detective that Officer Mathews was on administrative leave but didn’t know the reason why. He told Detective he shouldn’t run anyone for Officer Mathew because of his status. Detective Pellouso told me he was aware Officer Mathews was on administrative leave at the time he was trying to obtain information from Detective I asked Pellouso if he knew the subjects Officer Mathews wanted to identify and he told me he did not. He also told me he did not know the reason why Officer Mathews was trying to obtain these subjects information. I asked Detective Pellouso if he believed Officer Mathew’s actions in this matter may have been a violation of any department policies. He said, “I figured it was probably not okay, but I didn’t think it was criminal in any nature.” He added, “But I told him that because of him being on admin leave it was not something he should be looking up and have access to.” I asked Pellouso why he didn’t think Mathew’s requests were criminal in nature. He told me, “Because I didn’t know if he was, so my partner from Hanford asked if he was okay to look him up in Accurint, so I didn’t think he was asking to be searched in CLETS.” Detective Pellouso told he shouldn’t look up anyone for Officer Mathews in any data base at this time. I asked Detective Pellouso if he believed Officer Mathew’s actions could have led to disciplinary actions in this matter if he was in violation of department policies and he said, “yes.” I reminded Detective Pellouso that I called him into my office on Tuesday March 6th and asked him if he had spoken with anyone from the Hanford Police Department regarding Officer Mathews. I then asked Pellouso if he reported this information to any other SLO PD supervisors prior to speaking with me and he said he did not. I asked Detective Pellouso why he didn’t report this information and he stated, “I didn’t think it was criminal, I didn’t think I was, I wasn’t trying to hide any information from anybody. I just didn’t think that it was gonna be something that could get him in trouble.” Pellouso said he was looking out for Detective and didn’t want him to get in trouble for running people for Officer Mathews. I asked Detective Pellouso now that he has had a chance to look at our policy and the allegation against him, if he now believes he should have reported this incident to his supervisor. He stated, “Yes I should have.” I asked him if he was aware of that policy prior to March 1st, and he stated, “not the specifics.” It was Pellouso’s understanding this policy was related to having law enforcement contact off duty and having to report it to supervision. He told me he now understands this policy and he will, “in the future report anything like this.” I concluded this interview at 3:06 pm. Interview with Officer Cory Mathews: On Wednesday April 18th, 2018 at approximately 9:08 am, I interviewed Cory Mathews in the Council Conference room at the San Luis Obispo City Hall. Mathews was represented by his Attorney John Kristofferson who was present along with Sergeant Aaron Schafer as witness to this inquiry. I began the interview by first notifying Mathews this was a personnel investigation and read to him verbatim the information listed on attached Interview Record form. I then read Mathews his Constitutional Rights per Miranda. Mathews said he understood his rights but invoked his right to speak with me regarding this investigation. At this time, I advised Mathews he was now being ordered to answer my questions and give a full, detailed, and complete statement of his involvement in this matter. Mathews acknowledged he understood his rights and signed the attached admonishment form. I also signed the form which is attached to this file. I recorded this interview with my department issued digital recorder. The interview was transcribed at attached to this file. The following is Mathews statement in summary. I asked Mathews if he was on Administrative Leave with SLO PD on Thursday March 1st, and Friday March 2nd, 2018 and he said he was. He remembered signing his notice of Administrative Leave on November 2nd, 2017. I asked Mathews if he is currently employed by anyone or any other business outside of the San Luis Obispo Police Department and he said, “no sir.” I then asked him if he was employed by anyone other than SLO PD on March 1st and 2nd, 2018 and he again stated, “no sir.” 0540) Mathews said he knows Hanford Police Detective because he worked with him for several years at Hanford PD. Mathews said he considers to be a friend of his. I asked Mathews if he sent Detective any text messages on Thursday and Friday March 1st and 2nd, 2018. Mathews said he sent him text messages, but he wasn’t certain what the exact dates were. I asked him what the purpose of those text messages and he told me, “I was inquiring information in regards to subjects that I had heard were possibly selling narcotics in the San Luis Obispo area.” (06:40) Mathews explained he knew his reputation was “dwindling” while he was on Administrative Leave. He told me he was attempting to start a “target package on possible drug dealers” in the event he is able to return back to work with SLO PD. He said this would give him something to start working on when he returned back to work and “start to develop my reputation back.” (07:15) I asked Mathews if he asked Detective to check on any people using law enforcement data base systems. Mathews told me he knew Detective had access to Lexis Nexis and Accurint, and he asked him to “run searches on both of those.” (07:40) He told me he asked Detective to run a check on I asked Mathews how he knew and he said, “that was one of the names that I was given.” I asked who gave him name and he told me he with different subjects. He told me a conversation struck up and people found out he was a police officer. He said an individual then began giving him names of people he believed were selling drugs in the San Luis Obispo area. I asked Mathews what he was going to do with this information and he stated, “Hold it until I went back to work.” (08:15) I asked Mathews who is, and he said was another name this individual had given him. I then asked Mathews if he knew the name of this person who was providing him with these names and he told me he did not know. He said he had no idea who this person was, and it was the first time he had met the person Mathews said this has happened to him in the past when people found out he was a police officer. They would then begin telling him names of individuals they believed were selling drugs. He did tell me he was going to use this information for his personal use if and when he returned back to work with SLO PD. He would use this information and develop his own probable cause to work a case on the names provided to him. I asked Mathews if he believed this was okay activity to be involved with while on Administrative Leave. He said, “At the time I wasn’t planning on doing anything with the information until I went back to work.” (09:30) Mathews said he has not contacted or Mathews told me he knows Hanford PD Detective and said he was a friend. Mathews said they worked together as Detectives for seven years at Hanford PD. I asked Mathews if he sent Detective any text messages on Friday March 2nd, 2018. He said, “It had to have been around there.” (10:00) Mathews told me he had lost the information that he had received from Detective so he contacted Detective to see if he could provide him with the same information. He said he did not get any information from Detective because he wasn’t at work that day. I asked Mathews if he knew Hanford Police Officer and he said he did. Mathews told me Officer is a friend of his. I asked Mathews if he knew what assignment Officer was working and he said he thought he was the He now knows if working patrol. I asked Mathews if he sent Officer any text messages on Sunday March 4th, 2018 and he said, “I’m not sure of the date but yes I did send him text messages.” (10:55) I asked Mathews if he asked Officer to run anyone for him. He stated, “I did not specifically ask him to, are you talking about CLETS, like run through CLETS?” I asked Mathews if he asked Officer to check a name for him. He said, “I asked him to check a name for me.” (11:10) I asked him how he asked Officer to run a subject. Mathews stated, “I was assuming he had access to, as a he would have access to the same data bases that our detectives had.” (11:20) I asked him if CLETS was one of those data bases and he said yes. Mathews said he didn’t specifically ask him run CLETS. He also said he didn’t have any information that would qualify a CLETS run. I asked Mathews who was and if he knew him. Mathews said he was another name who was provided to him by the unknown subject in the I asked Mathews if he had followed up by contacting and he said he did not. He told me, “No, I just had the addresses.” (13:50) He said the addresses were not in San Luis Obispo so he “dropped it.” He said none of the subjects he had the Hanford PD employees run for him had San Luis Obispo addresses. Mathews said he did receive information on the subjects from Detective and Officer He said they sent him screen shots of some of the information as well as text messages. Mathews confirmed all his communications with the Hanford PD employees were through text messaging. He never spoke with any of them on the phone. I asked Mathews if he told or he was working narcotics and needed this information for cases he was working. Mathews said, “I did not specifically tell them I was working narcotics. I said that these people were involved, supposedly involved in drugs, and I was trying to set up a case.” (15:00) Mathews said he did not tell any of them he was on Administrative Leave when soliciting this information. I asked Mathews if he lead them to believe he was a SLO PD Investigator and he said, “That never came up. I just asked for a favor.” (15:15) I asked Mathews if they (Hanford PD employees) could have reasonably perceived he was attempting to get this information as a SLO PD employee. He said, “Yes, it was, I mean they are friends of mine, it was a friendly request, I’m assuming that they thought it was for what I was asking for. These guys are possibly dealing drugs in the San Luis Obispo area. Can you run these guys through these data bases and if you have any information can you provide it to me. I had no intentions of doing anything until the event that I went back, if and when I went back to work. That was when I was going to start doing my work ups on them.” (16:00) I confronted Mathews about a text message he sent to Detective on Friday March 2nd, 2018 where he stated, “I’m working a little dope case and need some help.” I asked him if he believed that could have been mis-leading in that he was currently working as an officer with SLO PD. Mathews stated, “Yes, it could have been mis-leading.” (16:50) He said that was not his intention though. I asked Mathews about the text he had sent to Officer responding to his prior text message on Tuesday March 6th, 2018. I asked him what he meant by telling he was “off work,” and he said that he was on Administrative Leave. He did acknowledge he had not told Officer he was on Administrative Leave however. In Mathews text message to Detective on Friday March 2nd, he stated he would try to contact someone from the DA’s office. Mathews told me he was referring to the Kings County DA’s Office in that text. I asked him if he did contact someone from that office and he said he did. He told me he contacted I asked Mathews if provided him with any information and he said he didn’t remember if he received any information from him. I asked Mathews who he asked to provide information on and he said it would have been the same three subjects, referring to I asked Mathews if he believed his actions in trying to obtain this information while on Administrative Leave was a violation of any department policies. He said, “At the time I did not believe that what I was doing was against policy. All I was trying to do was get some information so that I could, when I hit the ground, when I go back to work, I could just hit the ground running.” (19:00) He said he didn’t contact anyone from SLO PD because he did not know of anyone who had the access to the same data bases. He said he didn’t know who was in the Detective Bureau right now. Mathews said none of the people he was checking on had SLO addresses so he did not follow up any further. I asked Mathews if he had any contact information from the person in the pool hall who provided him these names. He said he didn’t even know the person and did not have any way of contacting him. He told me the person who gave him these names told him they were drug dealers in San Luis Obispo. His intention was to use this information when he returned back to work to start working narcotics cases. The subject who provided him with these names did not ask for anything in return. He again said he knew his reputation was poor and he was going to use this information to work cases and try to build back his reputation. I asked Mathews if he shared with anyone the screen shots Detective had sent him and he said he did not. He told me he did not still have them on his phone. Mathews said as soon as he realized they were not living in San Luis Obispo he deleted all of them. It should be noted, in Mathews statement he said he was only looking for people who reside in San Luis Obispo, so he could work cases on them if and when he returned back to work. In reviewing the text messages after this interview, my attention was brought to the text message Mathews sent to Detective on Thursday March 1st, 2018. In that text Mathews stated, “ I’m looking for an address This text message contradicts his statement about only looking for people living in San Luis Obispo. I ended this interview at approximately 9:32 am. Follow-up Investigation: During my interview with Mathews, he told me he contacted his who he said worked with the Kings County District Attorney’s Office. He said he asked if he could provide him information on the same three subjects he had previously asked Detective and Officer for. Mathews said he did not remember if provided him with any additional information on these three subjects. Based on this information, I called with the Kings County DA’s office on April 23, 2018 at approximately 1:20 pm . I informed him that one of his investigators, may have provided information to Officer Mathews through law enforcement data bases. told me no longer works for his office and believes he is currently working as a Deputy Sheriff for the Kings County Sheriff’s Department. He told me lateraled to the Kings County Sheriff’s Department over a year ago. provided me with Kings County Sheriff’s phone number. On April 23, 2018 at approximately 3:10 pm I called and spoke with him on the phone. told me he is the with the Kings County Sheriff’s Department and confirmed Deputy works for his agency. I told may have provided personal information from law enforcement data bases to Officer Cory Mathews who is currently on Administrative Leave with our department. I provided the names of the three subjects Officer Mathews was researching. He told me he would look to see if any of those names were run through their data bases by Deputy and respond back to me. said he would contact me as soon as he received further information. On Friday April 27, 2018 at approximately 11:09 am, called me from told me he checked their department’s Spillman RMS system as well as CLETS and found no record of any of the names I provided him. He said they conducted an inquiry between the dates of January 1st through April 23rd, 2018 to see the names Deputy had run through their systems. The search resulted with negative results for the names I provided to emailed me a memorandum regarding their findings which is attached to this file. Interview with Deputy On Tuesday May 22nd, 2018 at approximately 8:55 am I called Deputy from my office to his cellular phone. (I spoke with Deputy on a recorded line and attached our conversation to this report. The following is statement in summary. I confirmed with that he is I then asked if he knew Mathews was on administrative leave and he said “yes.” (00:53) I informed that during an earlier interview with Mathews, he told us he had contacted to have him run some names for him to try and get them identified. I then asked if this was true and he said, “yes.” (01:11) I asked if he tried to identify anyone for Mathews and he said, “no , no, not running CLETS or nothing like that.” I asked if he had run anyone through TLO or Accurint for Mathews and he said, “Let me see which one I have, I want to say it was TLO at the time.” I asked if he remembered the names of subjects Mathews asked him to run, and he said he did not remember. He said Mathews told him he had “some stuff along the lines of a, a build up for a narcotics related case or something like that. It was trying to get something, he was getting something going or something is what he had told me. He was getting something going because he was getting ready to go back to patrol or something along those lines.” (02:25) He said Mathews was trying to “get a running start.” (02:30) I asked if he remembered what date Mathews contacted him on and he said he would have to guess about three or four months ago. He said it could have been a little more than that though. I asked if Mathews knew he was employed with the Kings County Sheriff’s Office and he said, “Oh yeah.” (03:08) said Mathews may not have been aware that he had left I asked if I provided him with some names if he thought it could refresh his memory as to the names Mathews asked him to run. He then stated, “A male and a female.” (03:40) I asked him if sounded familiar to him and he said no. also did not remember the name as being a name Mathews asked him to run. I again asked him if he remembered any names and he said he did not. I asked him if he could recover any of that information and he told me he might be able to, but it has been several months since he has used that system , referring to TLO. He told me he would check as soon as he got back to the station. I then asked if he remembered the name and he stated, “Yes, that one does.” (04:47) I asked if he remembered how many names he checked in TLO for Mathews and he told me, “That’s the only one.” I asked him if he provided any information about to Mathews and he said he did not. He said he believed the name came back with, “No history.” I asked if he could do some research to see what other names Mathews asked him to run and he said he would. He told me he only communicated with Mathews via text messaging and said he didn’t believe he had kept messages that long. I provided with my contact number and asked him to call me back when he completed his research. told me if he didn’t have the names in his text messages he would not be able to remember them. He said is the only name he had run through their TLO system. I asked if Mathews asked him to run any of the names through CLETS and he said, “No.” (06:40) On Tuesday May 22nd, 2018 at approximately 9:41 am, Deputy called me from his cellular phone (to my office. told me he had no additional information. He said because it was so far back in time, the system automatically deletes everything every thirty days. After I thanked him for getting back to me he told me he didn’t actually find out Mathews was on administrative leave until after his request to run names. He told me their communication was all via text messaging and Mathews never told him he was on administrative leave. I asked if Mathews told him he was working cases and he said no. He said, “If I remember right, it was something about the system for that particular, like the TLO type thing, not being available.” (01:10) said he didn’t ask or second guess Mathews reasons. confirmed he believed Mathews was currently working for SLO PD at the time he made these requests. He said he found out Mathews was on administrative leave when an email came out form Hanford PD. He said when he found out Mathews status he called him. I asked what Mathews told him, and he said, “Yes,” referring to being on administrative leave. He said Mathews did not provide him with any details as to why. said Mathews did tell him he was due to return back to work soon. asked me if I would be able to provide him with any additional details regarding my findings in this matter. I told him this is a personnel matter and I would not be able to provide him with any additional information. I told him I have spoken with and he was aware of the situation told me he would speak with This ended my interview with Deputy I recommend this case be forwarded to Chief Cantrell for final disposition.