Radtke Sentenced To Probation, Community Service In Pima County RICO Case

Chris Radtke

On Friday, former Pima County Sheriff Chief Deputy Chris Radtke received a slap on the wrist after pleading guilty to three misdemeanors. Radtke was sentenced to one year of probation and 100 hours of community service after admitting to misusing Pima County Sheriff’s Department RICO funds.

Radtke must also pay a $3,000 fine.

Radtke was accused of misspending $500,000, but was allowed to plead down to three misdemeanor charges.

In February, Pima County Sheriff Napier said he was disappointed that Radtke’s “egregious criminal violation of public trust resulted in only a misdemeanor plea agreement with potentially an extremely light sanction.”

According to the original indictment:

Radtke conspired with others in the Pima County Sheriff’s Department to make it appear that the forfeiture funds were being used by the SAV by using SAV checks and the SAV credit card to pay for items that were actually purchased for the Sheriff’s Office and individuals affiliated with the defendant. The following are examples of the approximate $500,000 of financial transactions affecting interstate and foreign commerce that were designed in whole or in part to conceal and disguise the nature, location, source, ownership, and control of the proceeds of specified unlawful activity:

a. On May 12, 2011, an SAV check was issued to an employee of the Sheriff’s Office for $926.09. Supporting documentation shows that the check was to reimbursed the special awards fund, and that the defendant requested part of that reimbursement for a $250 restaurant bill and tip and that other Sheriff’s Office employees requested $109.09 in reimbursement for a new microwave oven for the break room at the Sheriff’s Office;

b. On September 21, 2011, an SAV check was issued to an employee of the Sheriff’ Office for $627.60. Supporting documentation shows the check was to reimburse the SAV food and refreshment fund and that the defendant requested part of that reimbursement for an $80.79 restaurant bill and tip for a lunch for the Sheriff’s Office custodians;

c. On October 31, 2011, an SAV check was issued to an employee of the Sheriff’s Office for $288.72. Supporting documentation shows that the check was to reimburse the Sheriff’s Office for materials to assemble a Santa sleigh to be used at the Sheriff’s Office annual awards banquet and that the defendant approved the use of the funds for that purpose;

d. On December 4, 2013, an SAV check for $600 was issued to a business called “on-dree-ah” to purchase a chalkboard. The invoice was addressed to an employee at the Sheriff’s Office;

e. On January 6, 2014, an SAV check was issued to an artist for $300. Supporting documentation shows that the check was to reimburse the Sheriff’s Office for artwork for a chalkboard at the cafe at the Sheriff’s Office, even though the cafe was owned and operated by the defendant’s niece, not by the Sheriff’s Office;

f. On July 23, 2014, the SAV Chase credit card was used to purchase a photograph for the Sheriff’s Office for $31.34. A handwritten note on an email reflecting the purchase states that the photograph was requested by the defendant;

g. On July 24, 2014, the SAV Chase credit card was used to purchase two model airplanes for the Sheriff’s Office for $599.90 and to pay $90 for shipping. The invoice lists the defendant’s last name next to one of the model airplanes and that the model airplanes were being shipped to the Sheriff’s Office;

h. On July 29, 2014, the SAY Chase credit card was used to pay $50 for a rush shipping charge for the model airplanes to be shipped to the Sheriff’s Office;

i. On March 31, 2015, the SAV Chase credit card was used to purchase a chalkboard for $366.29 and to pay $135 for shipping and handling charges.

Supporting documentation shows that the chalkboard was purchased for the cafe at the Sheriff’s Office, even though the cafe was owned and operated by the defendant’s niece, not by the Sheriff’s Office; and

j. On April 20, 2015, an SAV check was issued to an artist for $500. Supporting documentation shows that the check was to reimburse the Sheriff’s Office for artwork for a chalkboard at the cafe at the Sheriff’s Office, even though the cafe was owned and operated by the defendant’s niece, not by the Sheriff’s Office.

About Arizona Daily Independent News Service 1903 Articles
Under the leadership of Arizona Daily Independent Editor In Chief Huey Freeman, our team of staff reporters work tirelessly to bring the latest, most accurate news to our readers.