COMCOR Date: October 10, 2019 To: Christine Burns, El Paso County Scot Smith, El Paso County JeffJorden, Division of Criminal Justice Wendy Bacchi, Division of Criminal Justice From: Hilary Johnson, Director of Quality Assurance RE: PREA Allegations Between Staff and a Client Clients Involved: Staff Involved: What Initiated Investigation: On Sunday September 22 at approximately 1pm, Executive Director Mark Wester was at the 3950 Facility. Client? approached him and stated that staff member? had been inappropriate in conversations with her. The client stated that_ raised his shirt and asked if she wanted to touch him. The client also stated she believed that he was having a sexual with another IRT client At that time, was placed on administrative leave pending the outcome ofthe investigation and other managers were briefed regarding the issue (Bobbi Vigil, Erin Davison, Antonette Jaramillo). The investigation was conducted in accordance with PREA Standards (?115.221, ?115.222, ?115.271, ?115.271). The staff member investigating the allegation was trained and certified in accordance with PREA Standard ?115.234. This intent of the PREA investigation was to determine whether or not, based on a preponderance of evidence, a violation of the ComCor PREA policies related to sexual abuse, sexual harassment, or sexual misconduct occurred. Investigation Team: Hilary Johnson, Director of Quality Assurance Antonette Jaramillo, Director of Human Resources Bobbi Vigil, Director of Operations Interviews Conducted: Interview with On Monday, September 23 at approximately 8:45am, Hilary Johnson and Antonette Jaramillo interviewed IRT client at 2723 Nevada. was explained the role of PREA investigations, and the goal was to ensure that all clients were safe. She was told this investigation had nothing to do with her program and wouldn?t result in disciplinary action or removal from the program. was told that staff had heard a rumor that she might be in a relationship with a staff member. denied any relationship or sexual contact. She stated she was safe at ComCor and listed multiple staff members that she could approach if she had concerns or felt unsafe. Interview with At approximately 1030am, Hilary Johnson and Antonette Jaramillo interviewed client? at 3950 Nevada. was explained the role of PREA investigations, and the goal was to ensure that all clients were safe. She was told this investigation had nothing to do with her program and wouldn?t result in disciplinary action or removal from the program. was explained that Mr. Wester had informed us of her concern, and we were there to speak about that. _stated: 0 She wanted more points to get a bottom bunk and she asked_ how to earn points 0 She stated_ offered to let her do chores for extra points 0 She stated they went downstairs for the client to mop - She stated_ explained he wanted to pursue modeling and was dieting to improve his body to which_ stated she replied that ?his body was fine" 0 She stated_ raised his shirt in order for her to see his abdomen 0 She stated that she was uncomfortable with this line discussion 0 She stated that after that she went into her room and changed her panties as they had his DNA on them. She stated she wanted to preserve evidence because she knew he shouldn?t have done that left out of her story recall specific details of sexual acts. Ms. Johnson commented on the about the absence of detail and stated that left her to presume it meant there was sexual contact. I. - stated Ms. Johnson ?wouldn?t be wrong? if that was presumed. At that point, Ms. Johnson explained the mandatory reporter status and this allegation may be a law violation so the Colorado Springs Police Department would be contacted. stated she understood. At that time, Ms. Johnson called CSPD and informed them of the allegation and made arrangements for_ to be transported to ComCor location on Mark Dabling Boulevard for confidentiality in making the report. At approximately 345pm, Colorado Springs Police reported to Mark Dabling and first spoke with Hilary Johnson and Antonette Jaramillo who briefed them on the allegation and what has happened up to that time. CSPD officers then interviewed_ without staff present for about an hour. At the conclusion of that interview, CSPD officers requested to review the 3950 location. Antonette Jaramillo and Hilary Johnson escorted CSPD to 3950 and showed them the area in question and - - was transported back to 3950. Antonette Jaramillo and Hilary Johnson explained that we would need to get camera footage the next day and would contact the officers once that was complete. Arrangements were made for contact on 9/24/19. CSPD provided case 19-35520. Colorado Springs Police Department Follow-Up: On 9/23/19 at 2119, on-call manager Antonette Jaramillo received a call from Security Specialist Mr. Lewis stating CSPD was on their way to talk to According to Mr. Lewis, CSPD Officer Pacheco and CSPD Officer Neuenfeldt arrived on grounds at 2117. Ms. Jaramillo arrived on grounds at 2131. CSPD officers were in the business manager office talking to_ exited the office at 2147. At 2148 in the business manager office, Ms. Jaramillo was briefed of the following- - CSPD officers located the car that allegedly belonged to_ via VIN and temporary tag information, which was found in impound lot, due to a car accident 0 CSPD could not search the car due to car not being registered to_ but submitted for a warrant and the warrant was granted byjudge 0 CSPD searched the area of car where_ explained they would find the item (item was identified as purple underwear in a zip loc bag) and found purple underwear in a zip loc bag in the trunk of the car 0 CSPD will be submitting the underwear for DNA evidence Second Interview with? On September 24, 2019 at approximately 10am, Clinical Director Carrie Gavitt stated to Hilary Johnson that Client had stated to her therapist Mark Hallahan a comment regarding sexual encounters with a staff member. At approximately 11am, Hilary Johnson and Antonette Jaramillo interviewed? for the second time at 2723 Nevada. stated that: 0 She didn?t disclose the sexual contact in the previous interview because she was caught off guard and didn?t know what to say. 0 She stated that she had sexual contact with staff member?on multiple occasions. 0 She stated this began with a conversation where they discussed that they had both been strippers for previous/other employment. stated in that conversation that if returned to stripping, he would ?come and check her out?. 0 At a later time, she was completing her center duty (which she thought might have been around 9pm and may have occurred in Ada Padilla?s office) and he was ?hovering around her? while she completed the chore. 0 At one point he walked behind her and grabbed her vagina from behind and they began kissing and he ?reached into her pants and touched her private parts? which was further clarified to mean vaginal area. 0 On another occasion, she was asked to clean the storage room by? asked why and stated that he responded, ?because there are no cameras.? While in the storage room she stated they began kissing and he spun her around pulled her pants down and vaginal intercourse occurred. 0 On another occasion, she was asked to clean the supply closet again ?because higher ups were coming.? When in the closet she stated that_ attempted to have vaginal intercourse, but she explained she was on her period. He responded by pushing her head down to his genitals and she stated she performed oral sex on? - On another occasion, which she guessed was Friday September 13th,_ was performing a room check and she was in the shower. He knocked and asked her to come to the door (which is appropriate per policy) but when she came to the door her towel slipped which exposed her breast. Later she was asked by_ to complete chore hours for an incident report. She stated he asked her to clean room 18. Once in the room he stated seeing her breast was a ?pleasant surprise?. He asked her to ?take her gloves off? which she had on to complete her chore. She did and at that time he grabbed her, and they began kissing and he was touching her vaginal area. She stated he performed oral sex on her and then they had vaginal intercourse. She stated she believed that incident was around 6pm. Additionally,_ was asked which other staff were on duty when this was occurring. She stated usually Kristi Smith and Garrett Hardcastle were generally the ones on shift. She shared that they only had sexual contact when Kirsten was not on shift ?only the newbies.? was asked for information regarding dates these events may have occurred and she stated, ?basically each time I did chore hours?. was told that was placed on administrative leave and would not be returning to work at this time. She stated that she felt safe at the facility. She stated she was concerned about other clients or staff gossiping and was told to report any concerns to Hilary or Antonette. On October 10 at approximately 2pm, Bobbi Vigil and Hilary Johnson interviewed? at 5464 Mark Dabling. It was explained to_ that this interview was separate from the CSPD investigation and was for employment purposes. Hilary Johnson started by stating there was a PREA allegation against_ to which he stated, ?nothing happened?. Ms. Johnson asked for_ to explain a response to the allegations. went on to state: 0 The allegation was from one female who was in serious trouble of getting terminated (he later identified this client as 0 That day_ had been in trouble for a phone and receiving calls from a male ComCor client. confiscated the phone and screened her incoming calls stating? ?wasn?t available?. 0 When at the time clock with John Charlesworth, Mr. Charles worth asked if_ could make calls to which_ said yes. and Mr. Charlesworth were walking up the stairs discussing the incidents of_stating she would probably be ?terminated this week". When they got to the top of the stairs, they could see that_ heard the conversation on the stairs. It was a wasn?t a ?coincidence" that_ overheard this and then made this PREA report. _gave a detailed description of the event regarding_ requesting a bottom bunk. He stated he understood the policy to be if you had a bottom and were moved back to the top, when another bottom was available you wouldn?t need more points to get back to a bottom. He said that was short points and he offered to let her ?deep clean? the offices and downstairs areas to earn them since case managers had complained that their offices needed cleaning. He said - - cleaned all the staff offices upstairs and downstairs and the supply closet which included organizing half empty boxes and getting rid of empty ones. said that he does stay with clients when they are cleaning to make sure they are doing what they are supposed to. explained had many incidences since she arrived at intakes and he has probably written her up a number of times to which he added that he writes many people up. - - talked of a time when? roommate accused her of stealing a bus pass. He said he confronted_ and she returned the bus pass to him. Other than these,_ explained his interactions were normal and didn?t stand out. said there was a second allegation and he had ?no clue? about that client. He went onto identify the second client as He stated: 0 _had talked to him about struggling in the program, missing her previous lavish lifestyle 0 There were not any interactions with_ that were out of the norm. 0 That he did clear chore hours with_ Including: 0 A time when she cleaned under room 12, stating she swept half and it ?took longer than expected? which was about an hour. 0 A time when she cleaned the floors of room 18 to prepare for a non-res client who was moving in. explained that as a shift supervisor and former military he generally took the lead to make sure that areas had a ?deep clean?. He said that clients with center duties were assigned the day hall and Security Office areas, so he used chore hours to get other areas deep cleaned. He said not all clients would do that work because they didn?t like to clean that much. He said when he was monitoring a client clean, he would always have a radio and keep in contact with the Security Office staff. He also said because of this cleaning he was frequently alone with clients. _said he was uncomfortable in taking the shift supervisor role at 3950 because he didn?t want to work with females. He said he did accept the position because he wanted the promotion. He said he had been in talking to an attorney who said ?you?ll always see violations and accusations? when staff and clients of different genders work together. He stated that he has frequently in meeting said that ComCor needs more cameras because there are ?a shit ton of blind spots downstairs? and there is a possibility of being falsely accused. At the end of the interview, it was repeated by Ms. Johnson that this was solely to make employment determinations and not apart of the criminal investigation. Ms. Johnson stated she would complete a report and turn that into Human Resources and the executive director to decide how to move forward. Supplemental Interviews: Interview with Danielle Kev: On September 23, 2019 at approximately 10am, Hilary Johnson and Antonette Jaramillo interviewed Danielle Key. Ms. Key was explained the role of PREA and that an investigation was being completed. She was told the goal was to ensure all clients were safe, anything she said would be confidential, and wouldn?t affect her program. Ms. Key was asked if she had heard any rumors about staff having relationships with clients to which she responded no. Ms. Key was asked about staff and she said that staff were professional and respectful. Ms. Key was informed of how to contact Hilary Johnson if there were other concerns or if she learned of new information. Interview with_ On September 25, 2019 Bobbi Vigil was contacted to by staff stating that wanted to speak with her directly. Hilary Johnson, Antonette Jaramillo, and Bobbi Vigil spoke with_ at 3950 Nevada at approximately 12pm. _explained that she and did not have a good relationship because she felt_ was too strict and mean. felt uncomfortable being a ?snitch? but could no longer remain quiet. She stated that ?bragged? about getting?to have sexual intercourse with her with the goal of ?getting paid? because she had DNA evidence. felt upset because she felt there was no force in the sexual act between_and_ felt that_ lured- - into that situation and while she knew it was wrong for_ to engage in sexual activity didn?t think he should be punished. was explained the rules of PREA and that all sexual contact was prohibited to which she stated she understood. At this point the interview was ended. Interview with Rachel Holloway and Isabelle Gregory: On September 25, 2019 Hilary Johnson and Antonette Jaramillo followed up with additional interviews of IRT clients Rachel Holloway and Isabelle Gregory. Clients were explained the role of PREA and the concerns that had been raised. Both clients denied knowledge of any inappropriate acts by staff towards clients. Both clients were advised how to contact Ms. Johnson if that changed. Interview with On September 25, 2019 Hilary Johnson received an email from Heidi Freeman stating that client? made comments to her regarding_ and On September 26, 2019 at approximately 2pm Hilary Johnson and Antonette Jaramillo interviewed The role and scope of the investigation was explained, and - was asked if she had if she had any information that we would be interested in. - said she did want to speak with us because she felt the information was not ?right." - stated that approximately 2 weeks ago_ had ?bragged? to? that she ?sucked - up and fucked him? and had evidence and would be using it to get a payday from ComCor or - stated that_ stated she ?lured? him by inappropriate conversation and motioning her body in a suggestive manner while in the supply closet at the time the sexual encounter occurred. was upset that she had been hearing that_ was stating this was a forced rape. was upset because she felt that this was consensual sex and had tricked into this act in order to get paid or get her sentence modified. was explained the rules of PREA and that all sexual contact was prohibited to which she stated she understood. At this point the interview was ended. Second Interview with? On September 25 2019 at approximately 230pm, Hilary Johnson and Antonette Jaramillo were leaving 3950 and ran across Bobbi Vigil and_ in the front of the building. Ms. Vigil requested that Hilary and Antonette join the conversation. - was expressing frustration in knowing the comments of_ included being forced into sex. - - admitted that she was aware of the allegation of sexual activity between and - - (even when first interviewed). - stated that_ admitted to the act and said, ?now she would get paid from - or ComCor?. - is the victim of a rape case and was distraught that_ would compare being a willing partner with forced sexual activity. The rules of PREA were explained to- so that she understood there is zero tolerance with sexual activity with staff and clients because clients are unable to give consent in this environment. - stated she understood but just didn?t want the impression to not be countered with her information from_ At this point the interview was ended. Other Evidence Reviewed: Cell Phone Review of_ Phone: phone had been confiscated for a rule violation that occurred on Saturday September 21. HilaryJohnson reviewed the cell phone for contact with staff member?and found no evidence on the phone. Cell Phone Review of_ Phone: is participating in the program and a program requirement is that all clients leave their cell phone in the Security Office while in treatment classes. Hilary Johnson retrieved? phone from the Security Office and reviewed the cell phone for contact with staff member? and found no evidence on the phone. A Review of Camera 24: Based on the description of the events by_ Hilary Johnson and Antonette Jaramillo reviewed camera footage from the 3950 Facility dated 8/31/2019. and_ could be viewed on camera 24 beginning at 15:40:48 with them leaving the basement office area at 16:00:53. The client and staff went in and out of camera review multiple times and when out of camera view they were in a supply closet not generally accessed by clients. The longest period they were out of camera view was over 8 minutes and 30 seconds. A Review of Camera 19: Based on the description of the events by_ Hilary Johnson and Antonette Jaramillo reviewed camera footage from the 3950 Facility dated 9/13/2019. and_ could be viewed on the camera beginning at 18:59:10 with them leaving the Security Office/Day Hall area and exiting the building either into client room 18 or the case manager office. The client and staff went in and out of camera review multiple times with the longest period of time being out of camera view at over 29 minutes. Chore Hours and Incentive Points: A review of_ chore hour completion demonstrated two occasions where completed chore hours for? On 8/24/2019_ credited her 2 hours for cleaning and organizing storage. On 9/11/2019 gave her credit for 4 hours stating, ?Client helped bring neg terms bag to the tech office?. A review of_ message center demonstrated that on 8/10_ awarded points for cleaning under room 12 even commenting ?cleaning took longer than expected but client cleaned without issue?. The documentation on 8/24 and 8/10 is concerning because those are times when the facilities are operating with the fewest staff and in are areas where clients generally are not allowed and there is no camera footage. These details also align with? statements that engaged in these acts when the fewest staff was on grounds and in areas without camera footage. Referrals for_a_nd_ for Aftercare: CSPD provided Victim?s Assistance Services through a Victims Advocate on September 25th to and On September 26, received medical attention for sexually transmitted infections and possible pregnancy. On September 30, received medical attention for sexually transmitted infections and possible pregnancy. On September 26th both clients were offered access to a licensed counselor who specializing in sexual assault response. On September 27th_ had an appointment with this counselor and declined any future visits. On October 1, had an appointment with this counselor and scheduled appointments for future sessions. Both clients have been given contact information for TESSA and ComCor management for any concerns going forward. Client Follow Up: On October 15, 2019, Hilary Johnson spoke with? to update her on the outcome of the PREA investigation. was informed that_ was terminated from ComCor?s employment on October 14. was asked if she needed any further support and she denied. She was informed how to contact Ms. Johnson and request additional counseling. Follow-Up: On October 15, 2019, Hilary Johnson spoke with to update her on the outcome of the PREA investigation. was informed that_ was terminated from ComCor?s employment on October 14. was asked if she needed any further support and she requested assistance accessing medical attention and filing a restraining order. stated that she was unable to get sexual transmitted disease testing when she went to Memorial Hospital. Ms. Johnson called the Colorado Springs Police Department Victim?s Advocate. The advocate stated that she would assist_ with both items. Status of Police Investigation: This allegation has been turned over to Colorado Springs Police and been assigned to Detective Ashton Gardner Badge 5166D. Det Gardner explained that he has sent the physical evidence retrieved from_ and a DNA sample to_ for evaluation. At this time, CSPD is awaiting the laboratory results from the physical samples to make a determination of criminal charges. Conclusion: It is the conclusion of this investigation team, based upon the preponderance of the evidence, that the claim of sexual abuse is substantiated between Clients- and- and? Both clients speak to having similar inappropriate conversations with which included topic of their physical appearance and bodies. Both clients allege similar claims of being intentionally taken to areas that are not in the view of cameras to complete chores hours. These are times when the fewest staff were on shift and can be substantiated on at least two occasions by camera footage. The review of camera footage demonstrates instances where_ was off camera view for extended periods of time. It is highly unusual to be with clients in these areas for this length of time. Due to the similarity in allegations, substantiation of the claims with video showing the clients and being off camera, and inappropriate nature of being in these areas off camera for these of time, it is the determination of the investigative team these allegations more likely than not to occurred and these allegations are substantiated. On October 15, 2019,? employment with ComCor was terminated.