Fired Fayetteville Officer Gets 5 Years Probation For Sexual Assault

jamisonstilesmug

FAYETTEVILLE (KFSM) – The fired Fayetteville police officer accused of raping a woman while on duty received five years probation Friday in a plea deal with prosecutors, according to the Washington County Prosecutor’s Office.

Jamison Stiles pleaded guilty to one count of second-degree sexual assault, along with one count of release or disclosure of official documents to unauthorized persons. He will be required to register as a sex offender, as part of the plea deal, according to prosecutors.

The deal comes after the former officer was set to stand trial Monday and Aug. 25 in two sexual assault cases, each involving one victim. Charges were dropped in a case concerning a third victim last week, prosecutors said.

Stiles was arrested and fired last year after a woman said he handcuffed and sexually assaulted her while he was on duty. She said he took her home from a bar that night, after which he sexually assaulted her.

When the rape allegation surfaced, the Fayetteville Police Department launched an internal investigation into Stiles, after which a former police dispatcher accused him of sexually assaulting her at her home, records show.

The first report came on Nov. 10, when a woman told Fayetteville police an officer sexually assaulted her, according to court documents. She told police that in late October she woke up naked in her apartment at The Cliffs II after a night of drinking to a uniformed officer standing over her. The officer then pulled the blanket covering her down and grab her breast, according to a preliminary report from the Washington County prosecuting attorney.

Police said an internal investigation was then launched.

According to the preliminary report, Stiles and another officer had stopped an intoxicated woman on Block Avenue just minutes after midnight on Oct. 26. The woman was placed in Stiles’ patrol car. That’s when the other officer left the scene, according to Fayetteville Police Sgt. Craig Stout.

The preliminary report states Stiles told the woman he was “trying his best not to arrest her.” He then asked the woman if someone was at her house so he could just take her home. She told Stiles that she lived alone. That’s when Stiles turned off his police vehicle video recorder, according to the preliminary report.

Stout said that it is against policy for a police officer to ever turn off his recorder.

Investigators found that Stiles’ recorder was turned off again around the time the woman reported the officer to be in her apartment. Authorities used GPS data to place Stiles’ patrol car near The Cliffs II Apartments during the time his recorder was turned off, according to Stout.

Stiles, who lived at The Cliffs II, was given a master key to the apartment complex in his role as courtesy officer there, Stout said.

On behalf of The Cliffs II Apartments, Lindsey Management Co. issued a statement on Dec. 23, saying Stiles’ services as a courtesy officer ended there on Nov. 30. He worked there on an independent contractor basis, the statement says.

Investigators interviewed Stiles Dec. 3 concerning the allegations against him. The next day, he was placed on administrative leave and relieved of his badge and gun pending the outcome of the internal investigation, according to a police department news release.

On Dec. 16, Stiles was fired from the police department for eight policy violations, police said.

Stiles had been employed by the Fayetteville Police Department for almost three years before being fired, Stout said.

After his termination, a former Fayetteville Police Department dispatcher reported she had also been sexually assaulted at her home by Stiles this past July. She said Stiles was on-duty and in uniform at the time of the alleged assault, according to investigators.

A second police officer, David Nguyen, was fired in connection with the Stiles case for failing to report to supervisor that the dispatcher told him Stiles had sexually assaulted her, according to a police department internal investigation released on in February.

Police documents show at least three women complained about Stiles’ conduct in the six months leading up to the officer’s firing and arrest.

An internal investigation by the police department states Stiles made it a habit to switch off his mandatory video recorder, which is against department policy. In one such instance in June 2013, Stiles turned off his video recorder after stopping a woman’s vehicle on suspicion of failure to dim lights. The woman told the internal investigator stiles “spoke very inappropriately” before shining a light on her shirt and asking her if she knew her shirt was see-through. The woman was let off with a warning.

In another instance in July, the officer turned off his video recording after stopping a woman on suspicion of using improper safety equipment. Stiles made the woman pull behind the church before conversing with her and looking at her in a “sexual manner,” the woman told investigators. Stiles let the woman off with a warning, the documents state.

In another instance, a woman’s boyfriend made a complaint to police after Stiles helped the woman home from Dickson Street while he was on-duty, according to the internal investigation. Stiles found the woman on Dickson Street and instead of arresting her on suspicion of public intoxication, the officer drove her home, but turned off his video recording device. The woman and boyfriend made no specific allegations against Stiles, but said his conduct made the woman feel “uncomfortable.”

16 comments

  • Bob Gnarly

    If the recording devices are mandatory then why does the officer have the option to switch them off?
    Are there ANY repercussions for switching off this “mandatory” device?
    If not, then how is it called “mandatory”?

    By the way, 5News, these are questions you should be asking if you truly would like to be viewed as anything other than a mouthpiece for whatever “official” position is given. Ya’ll might wanna look the term “investigative journalism”.

  • Sarah 300

    This is not horrible. The punishment is more like a slap on the wrist. The women should seek attorney advice since the officer was on duty and gainfully employed. There is that remedy via the courts.

    If the woman calls the police after an interior assault, she sees that when the police arrive at the scene and learn that the alleged perpetrator is a police officer, a shift takes place. The responding officers are now responding not to the victim of a crime, but to an officer in need.

    Because most police departments do not have a policy addressing police-perpetrated domestic violence, the responding officers, who are the abuser’s colleagues, use their discretion in handling the call. The responding officers are likely to discourage the victim from signing a complaint. They urge her to consider his career, to think about all the good things they share, to think about their kids. They assure her that he’s a good man and a good police officer, that he’s just under a lot of stress. They promise to talk to him off the record and invoke the code of silence. The responding officers do not inform their superiors and life goes on, for the abuser, as if nothing ever happened.

    With the Lautenberg Amendment, if domestic violence is charged, then the so-called officer is never allowed to carry or possess a weapon, essentially ending his career.

  • John

    How nice of the Washington County Prosecutor’s Office to make life easy for this convicted r4pist. I wonder what their wives, sisters, and mothers think of this disgrace.

  • Karen Robbins

    This is a travesty of justice. There IS no justice for “law enforcement”. If that had been the guy that works digging a ditch etc. there would be prison time involved. Shame, shame, shame on all of you who had a hand in letting this pervert off!!!!!!

  • ly

    Who the hell was the judge in this case? I am outraged! Can’t imagine sending my daughter to the University here knowing this is how sexual assault is dealt with here and even worse the police are the people I’m counting on to protect her against assault! Crazy decision.

  • ly

    Every upstanding Fayetteville police officer and their families should be outraged too because the public will definitely look on them in an unfair way now since “one of their own” got a slap on the wrist. Now the good guys will have to deal with the backlash of this very poor decision for a long time. Okay…..I’m done…for now.

  • barbed_wire83

    That guy only get 5 years PROBATION!?!? For RAPING someone?!?! WHILE IN UNIFORM?!?! You just can’t trust this system anymore. :(

  • Nathan Griffee

    A. I think it’s sad to see this plea down to such a small penalty so that this poor woman can avoid being further abused by this scumbag’s attorney in a trial.

    B. Police departments are likely to cover things up and ” protect their own” until the officer commits a crime that they can’t cover up. How can an officer with a history of turning off the video camera continue to be employed? This crime could have been prevented if he had been terminated the first time he turned off the video camera. The higher ups in the Fayetteville police department are responsible for this crime.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 519 other followers