Former Flagstaff Police support services supervisor Hartman sentenced to year in prison | Local News

Hartman, a former support services supervisor with the Flagstaff Police Department who retired in 2012, was originally charged with three counts of molestation of a child in August 2023. A plea agreement on Feb. 8 left the lone amended count of aggravated assault with sexual motivation, with Coconino County Senior Commissioner Ted Campagnolo electing for the prison sentence for the 69-year-old Hartman despite the defense’s appeal for probation based on evaluations conducted during the court’s proceedings.

Campagnolo’s sentence concluded a legal process that spanned roughly 18 months after the Flagstaff Police Department began its investigation into Hartman in September 2022.

The victim, whose name is being withheld by the Arizona Daily Sun, initially reached out to Big Brothers Big Sisters of Flagstaff early in September 2022 to report the inappropriate nature of their relationship with Hartman and sexual contact when they were matched sometime between late 1991 and September 1995.

At the time of the assault, the victim was between 12 and 16 years old, and court documents for the original three counts specifically reference the assault occurring during 1993.

After the victim met with current members of Big Brothers Big Sisters of Flagstaff over Zoom to describe the acts Hartman committed against them, those details were quickly disclosed to FPD, which then set up a meeting with the victim directly. Detailing the relationship between the two, the victim explained they had matched as part of Big Brothers Big Sisters late in 1991. Though no illegal contact was initiated by Hartman during the first year, the frequency of their time together steadily increased; originally the two spent time together every couple weeks, then at least once a week and eventually multiple times in a week.

Describing how the contact began, the victim told the police initially it was through shoulder and neck rubs, which didn’t seem out of the ordinary as their mother had worked as a massage therapist and this was common contact within their family. Those massages progressed over time, with less clothing on the victim, at Hartman’s home in his bedroom. Eventually the contact included Hartman touching the victim’s genitals, according to the victim, though they never touched Hartman during the alleged multiple assaults.

After providing FPD with numerous details about their time with Hartman, the victim agreed to conduct a one-party consent call with the defendant in order to continue the investigation. Taking place in November 2022, the call lasted more than an hour and a half, according to the police report. Details from the call span 10 of the 26 pages in the report, with the victim and Hartman discussing the development of the Big Brother relationship that transitioned from attending athletic events or camping trips into the abusive conduct.

Hartman initially explained he could not remember many things, including any details on the crime committed. After the victim confronted the assault specifically more than a half hour into the conversation, Hartman responded by saying “I, I think that’s what you’ve been trying to talk about this whole time and I just can’t help you. And, I, it was, it’s nothing you did. How’s that, is that what you want?”

As the call continued, Hartman made a reference to a call the victim made to the defendant’s wife in 2005 to inform her of what happened between the two in the mid-’90s. Hartman admitted he was terrified ever since the call and had denied any illegal conduct to her.

When the victim then inquired if they were the only one to endure this behavior from Hartman, he said, “Let’s call you Victim A. There’s no victim after Victim A or nothing. Okay.”

During the conversation, Hartman denied any sexual contact occurred during the massages; that later shifted, with Hartman saying there were gaps in the occurrences as “I had to make sure you were willing.” After the victim said that a child can not consent, Hartman responded by saying, “I didn’t take it as consent, I just took it as no rejection.”

The victim immediately confronted that answer by saying, “Or that I wasn’t gonna report it,” which Hartman agreed with and added “Yeah. And that just took time.” The call concluded soon after, with FPD following up nearly four weeks later by arriving at Hartman’s home in late November 2022.

Despite admitting the massages happened with clothing removed during the call with the victim, Hartman told the police directly that they only happened fully clothed. Additionally, he claimed he did not discuss the massages directly with the victim on the recent call or apologize for anything that may have happened. After the police directly asked if the victim had confronted Hartman about them being molested for years, he denied again and said the victim was just telling the police what they remember.

After being informed the conversation had been recorded, Hartman declined to continue speaking at the time, with attorney Bruce Griffen contacting law enforcement to inform them he was now representing the defendant a day later.

On the same day of the in-person interview with Hartman, FPD contacted his wife by phone to verify the call the victim described from 2005. After saying she was unable to remember the details of the phone call back then, FPD explained there were allegations of an inappropriate relationship between Hartman and the victim. Asking if any of those details may have been part of the conversation, she continued to say she did not recall specifics and also did not remember speaking to Hartman about the 2005 conversation with the victim.

To conclude the investigation, FPD contacted three individuals the victim said they had disclosed the abuse to in the past. To varying degrees, the three confirmed they were aware of the victim’s recollection of the abuse, with one citing a conversation from many years ago that included the specific details that were brought to the police.

Roughly eight months after the latest date referenced in the police report, which closed by saying the case would be sent to the County Attorney’s Office for charging consideration, Hartman was indicted in August 2023.

Initially the case was assigned to Judge Ted Reed, but was reassigned to Senior Commissioner Campagnolo on Sept. 12, 2023 due to Reed’s recusal based on a conflict. Additionally, the Mohave County Attorney’s Office tried the case in place of Coconino County, first by Meaghan Gallagher and later by James Schoppmann.

“Cases may be referred to an outside agency for any number of reasons, including fairness or to avoid any appearance of impropriety,” said Deputy County Attorney Eric Ruchensky, speaking on behalf of the Coconino County Attorney’s Office. “Generally, we do not comment on these reasons in specific cases.”

Ruchensky also addressed the time between FPD’s investigation and the indictment.

“The timeline of the review of this matter was not a factor in our decision to refer it to an outside agency,” he said.

A possible plea agreement was initially mentioned this past November before officially being signed on Feb. 8.

Schoppmann opened the sentencing hearing on March 8 by reiterating the prosecution’s request for prison time in the case as any mitigation brought forward by the defense was in reference to how Hartman had behaved in the present day as opposed to his behavior 30 years ago when the crime was committed.

Explaining that if Hartman were to be sentenced to only probation and avoid having to register as a sex offender, Schoppmann declared the defendant would have essentially gotten away with the crime. Schoppmann referenced the significant impact the assault had on the victim’s life, who then spoke during the hearing.

The victim broke down the timeline of meeting Hartman and when the abuse began to the best of their memory. Citing that it took 30 years to realize they were a victim, and not responsible for the crime that was committed, the victim expressed how Hartman had leveraged his authority and position at the FPD during the entire ordeal.

Expressing they look back now and wonder how no one stepped up to ask how they were doing in the Big Brothers program or question why a match would spend such a significant amount of time with their “little brother,” the victim said they now realize as an adult that nothing but an intimate relationship would require that much attention. The length of time of the victim’s match to Hartman was also questioned, as the victim said most matches lasted less than a year as opposed to the multiple years they experienced.

Detailing the struggles of their personal life at the time they entered the Big Brother program, as well as the numerous struggles in the years after, the victim conveyed how the reporting process has been retraumatizing and asked aloud how many years of their life they have sacrificed due to stress.

The victim also questioned the Coconino County Attorney’s Office, citing the eight months they understood that it took to decide a possible conflict of interest, and expressed how challenging that was for them to wait through. Additionally, the victim questioned Hartman’s freedom to travel on Thanksgiving while out of custody amidst the court proceedings and the defense’s explanation of the abuse being an anomaly from Hartman’s otherwise regular life.

Closing their statement by describing the plea bargain as “watered down,” the victim expressed how they felt hurt and invalidated by the process, but expressed their pride in finally stopping Hartman during their final interaction.

While the defense elected not to have any additional witnesses or statements during the sentencing, Griffen shared Hartman’s apology for the circumstances the victim has found themself in and hopes they are able to improve.

Regarding the defense’s case for no prison time, Griffen explained how Hartman had lived a good life in the years since the time with the victim and the three decades of time that passed make the case more difficult to adjudicate. Citing his stable employment with FPD, his stable family life, no criminal history and a favorable assessment from the state assigned evaluator, Griffen expressed the belief that Hartman being required to register as a sex offender was unnecessary due to his unlikelihood to reoffend.

Beginning his statement by explaining how the sex offender registration was at the discretion of the court given the plea agreement, Campagnolo cited the Supreme Court of Arizona’s position that registration is not punitive and instead is regulatory to protect people in the community.

While the original charges would have made the registration mandatory — and had the case reached the court system years prior it would have been well served — Campagnolo said registration would not be appropriate as it is unlikely that Hartman would reoffend.

However, Campagnolo disagreed with Griffen’s assertion that Hartman had accepted responsibility for the crime as admitting to a one-time occurrence did not line up with evidence that says the pattern continued. Campagnolo went as far as saying that Hartman had minimized his involvement and his lack of accountability was in fact an aggravating factor rather than mitigating.

Describing how the victim had suffered in silence, Campagnolo said Hartman had ruined someone’s life with his actions and could have “served many, many years” if not for the plea deal. Campagnolo added that probation for Hartman would be “nearly meaningless” and community service may just make Hartman look like a good citizen. After declaring that the mitigating and aggravating circumstances were essentially equal, Campagnolo landed on the presumptive sentence of one year in prison.

Hartman was given until Monday, March 11 at 9 a.m. to report for the beginning of his sentence with no credit for time served. According to the Coconino County Jail booking report for Tuesday, Hartman was taken into custody on Monday morning.