A few months back I posted Friday’s With ‘Fired’ Frank after a number of my former colleague at Scottsdale and a couple of guys I knew at the Maricopa County’s Sheriff’s Office forwarded me the Pinal County Sheriff’s Office “Friday’s With Frank” YouTube page.  Along with the forwards, they were confused about how a former police officer they worked with, who had a checkered past and had left both agencies after Internal Affairs investigations would be made the social media face of a third organization in the state.  Moreso, they wondered how he could even be hired by a third agency.  I was a bit taken aback too, thus I posted my feeling about it in April 2023. 

For whatever reason, nobody cared about the post until the past 60 days when it blew up, having recorded nearly 10,000 unique page over the past two months with over 5,000 in the past 28.  Along with the views came several negative comments about what I wrote.  The main complaint was my use of my nickname for him, “Fired” Frank.  Several pointed out my “slander” by referring to him as having been fired from both Scottsdale PD and MSCO.  Here’s what I wrote, “Frank Sloup was “fired”, errrrrrr “separated”, errrrrrrrr “decided to resign”, from not one, but two different law enforcement agencies in Arizona for integrity issues before being hired and featured by Pinal County.”  The reason those terms are in quotes is because you can’t find information about exactly how, why or under what circumstances he was separated from those agencies without filing FIO Requests to both Scottsdale and the county, which I don’t care enough to do. 

But let’s discuss why that information is so hard to come by.  It’s by design.  You see, there is this dirty little secret in law enforcement, one which I saw time and time again, and have never agreed with.  When a cop gets caught violating policy, violating someone’s civil rights or having trouble with telling the truth, they are usually present with a carrot and stick option.  They are told that they can (a) resign in lieu of termination or (b) use their due process rights and fight the termination.  Option A comes with the articulated understanding that if they leave without fighting, the agency will not attempt to have their AZPOST Certification revoked or suspended, thus allowing them to seek employment at another police agency within the state.  With Option B, they are threatened with the agency attempting to have their certification revoked or suspended, thus not being able to work as a peace officer in the State of Arizona.  In my experience 95% of those given the choice leave without fighting.  Especially those hoping to continue their careers in LE.  It was such a ubiquitous practice in Scottsdale that a former Scottsdale LT coined a term for it.  It was then forever referred to as “Passing the Lemons”. 

I don’t know the ultimate type of separation Frank Sloup had with Scottsdale PD.  But here is what I can tell you based on an AZPOST Audit History that anyone can obtain.  He was hired by Scottsdale sometime between January 1, 2001 and March 23, 2001.  He obtained his AZPOST certification July 20, 2001 after graduating from the academy.  The records then show a “Separation Date” from Scottsdale of May 24, 2002 with “Misconduct – Yes”.  Scottsdale shortly submitted a Certification Review to AZPOST to have his certification Revoked, Case 02-54, which is also public record but it appears the actual report from 2002 is no longer available.  AZPOST chose to not revoke his certification, but the reason is not noted.  Scottsdale HR records only show Sloup as “Separated” from the city, not “Resigned”, “Terminated” or “Retired”.    

Logic dictates that if your employer separates your employment after an internal investigation for misconduct and then attempts to have your professional certification revoked or suspended, it was not a mutual parting of ways. 

He would then go on to be hired by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office in 2004.  In August of 2017 AZPOST records show he was again “Separated” from the agency with a Separation Type noted as “Misconduct – Yes (Level 2)”.  MCSO would also submit a review of his certification which was taken up by AZPOST in December 2017, Case #17-148, and again the Board voted not to suspend his certification due to “Agency Discretion”.  In other words his former agency had already taken action against Sloup that they found adequate; reminding everybody he was already “separated” from MSCO by this time. 

His case summary was still obtainable.  To summarize from the AZPOST case file, he pulled a DUI one night.  He failed to complete his report that night per MCSO policy regarding felony charging.  When it was brought to his attention that the date of the report was the following day, he altered the date on the report to the previous day using White Out after it was already submitted.  A clerk noted the alteration and he then gave conflicting stories when asked about it.  The matter was moved to IA for further investigation.  MSCO would find the allegation of giving misleading statements and altering a government record sustained.  The case notes do say that he resigned from MSCO prior to receiving his discipline. 

So again, he was alleged to be involved in misconduct that resulted in an integrity violation and altering a government document.  His agency attempted to revoke or suspend his certification and ultimately separated him from the organization.  It would be this incident that would also land him on the Brady List effective October 2017.  I’ll let the logical people reading this decide once again, who thinks this was a mutual parting of ways?

Still need more convincing that Sloup, if technically not terminated, was shown the door from two agencies?  The Brady Standard came into place around 1999, a year after I was hired.  There are currently 16 Scottsdale officers on the Brady List, I know all of them.  I know all of the stories that got them there.  All of them were terminated or resigned in lieu of termination.  None of them were allowed to keep their jobs. 

Since 1998, when I started, Scottsdale submitted 51 officers for reviews of their AZPOST certification.  Almost all were also on the Brady List.  37 of the 51 either had their certification suspended, revoked or voluntarily relinquished it.  Five did not have it revoked as a result of their agency’s action, which was termination or voluntary separation.  AZPOST only voted for 10 not to have their certifications removed based on the merits of the allegation, of which Sloup is one.  I only see four names that were allowed to continue to work for a few weeks until they could “retire” after accruing 20+ years. 

Based on all this, for the logical people out there, would you believe that Frank Sloup, being both on the Brady List and having had his certification sent for review by the two agencies that he was separated from, leave those agencies because he was looking for greener pastures?  Or is it more logical to believe that he was shown the door?

In my world, if you are told to quit or be fired, you are being fired, period.  It may makes people feel better if they can lie to others and say they quit, which I guess is technically correct, but a perversion of the truth. 

It’s actually much worse for law enforcement, when police officers can be separated from one or more agencies, be allowed to keep their certifications after sustained allegations of misconduct, and go on to work as a police officer elsewhere.  But these are the times we are living in.