ÃÛÌÒÓ°ÏñAV

At issue is a Department of Public Safety report about former DES Director Tim Jeffries and security chief Charles Loftus describing a cache of weapons and ammunition DES had accumulated, under the pair’s supervision, for its own security force.

In a new legal filing, attorney for the state Daniel Dowd told a Maricopa County judge the report simply contained statements of facts and the state did nothing to defame or libel either man.

Dowd also said a separate claim that the plaintiffs were held in “false light� by publication of the DPS report also cannot stand. He said Arizona does not recognize such a claim when it is based on a publication relating to a public official’s performance of public duties.

Gov. Doug Ducey fired Jeffries a year ago from the $215,250-a-year post following a series of controversies, the last being reports that he flew to Nogales on a state plane to take several staffers out drinking at a restaurant during business hours. Jeffries was celebrating the fact these workers had agreed to become “at will� employees who could be fired for no reason.

Loftus was fired at the same time along with several other top DES officials in a shakeup at the agency.

The governor then directed DPS to perform an inventory of all weapons and ammunition at the agency not assigned to employees there. That resulted in the seizure of 55 handguns and nearly 89,000 rounds of ammunition stored in the basement.

The DPS report said the amount of ammunition was three or four times what a large police department might need in a year and “may reasonably be described as excessive.� Investigators also said they could not find about 4,000 rounds.

Jeffries and Loftus filed suit last month claiming the report defamed them. While the lawsuit does not seek a specific amount — that is precluded under Arizona court practices — a prior demand letter from Jeffries said he wanted $5.1 million for damage to his reputation.

Dowd said anyone filing claim for libel under Arizona law must allege facts showing a false and defamatory statement concerning the plaintiff was published and that the statement resulted in injury.

“The allegations within the complaint, even taken as true, do not meet these required elements,� Dowd wrote.

He said the DPS report presented individual interview accounts along with hundreds of pages of supporting documents on which its conclusions were based. The report made note when DPS received conflicting evidence, when it could not independently substantiate allegations, and when allegations were disputed, he said.

An email from Loftus about his position on the issues was included in the report, Dowd added.

“DES outlined the facts available to it, thus making it clear that the challenged statements represent its own interpretation of those facts and leaving the reader free to draw his own conclusions,� the attorney told Superior Court Judge Aimee Anderson, adding: “DPS conclusions in the audit report are protected by the First Amendment and are not actionable as a matter of law.�

The attorney acknowledged that the report says there were statements from those interviewed that Jeffries and Loftus used DES ammunition for personal use at a private shooting range.

But it also says in the report that “no evidence was discovered to substantiate this allegation.�

Dowd also said Jeffries and Loftus have no legal basis to sue the state because many of the statements in the report were “generic,� with no specific reference to either.

These include statements that 4,050 rounds of ammunition were missing, ammunition was not secured, records about the use of ammunition were nonexistent and that ammunition was purchased in violation of state procurement rules.

“These statements do not refer to Loftus (or Jeffries) and, at most, concern DES, the (agency’s) Office of Inspector General and DES personnel more generally,� Dowd wrote.