FARMINGTON — Five corrections deputies with the Davis County Sheriff's Office sexually harassed female co-workers or didn't do enough to prevent it from happening, a two-month investigation has concluded.

At least six to seven women were victims of harassment, and possibly more, but some left their jobs before the investigation began, Debra Alexander, the Davis County human resources director who headed up the investigation, said Wednesday.

The investigation began Jan 25 after "multiple" corrections employees had contacted the county's human resources department with complaints about "harassment, sexual harassment and supervisory failure to address those issues," Alexander said.

Thirty-eight employees were interviewed as part of the investigation and 220 pages of notes and documentation collected, she said. The investigation was completed March 27. It concluded that the harassment had been going on for just under three years, with a complaint made as recently as last fall, she said.

The report comes on the heels of Tuesday's firing of Sandy Police Chief Kevin Thacker, who had been with the department for more than 30 years, for alleged inappropriate touching at work.

Last month, a lawsuit was filed against former Provo Police Chief John King. Five women are seeking an unspecified amount in excess of $600,000 in compensation, as well as new measures to prevent sexual misconduct from occurring in Provo government, for alleged behavior by King that ranged from leering to inappropriate comments to unsolicited touching, groping and one allegation of rape. King resigned in March of 2017.

The alleged victims in the Davis County case are all women and include both certified law enforcers and civilian employees within the corrections department.

"What the investigation did show was there very much was a culture problem," Alexander said. "There was a level of tolerance for that sort of thing."

Related story:

Davis County Sheriff's office reviewing handling of sexual harassment complaint

Five employees in the Davis County Sheriff's Office and jail were placed on paid leave amid a review of how the office handled a sexual harassment complaint.

She noted that some of the men even believed part of the problem was the women who complained about the men's behavior. The men had the attitude that "if you can't get along with it, you should get out," Alexander said.

"There was an attitude toward the females who were on the receiving end of this type of conduct, that they were the problem as opposed to the males who were doing it. So not only were they subjected to inappropriate behavior, they were also chastised internally because they were perceived to be part of the problem," she said.

Five men — the former chief deputy for corrections, a captain and three deputies — were placed on paid administrative leave on April 16 "to minimize disruption" in the workplace while the disciplinary process unfolded, Alexander said. Each employee had a hearing on April 18. They were then given a letter on Friday informing them of what discipline they would receive.

Four of the five men returned to work on Monday. One deputy resigned from the department since being placed on leave, she said.

Among those guilty of violating county policy was Chief Deputy Kevin Fielding who on April 21 was demoted to the rank of captain, according to Alexander. Fielding, who was transferred out of corrections to the main sheriff's office just before the investigation began, was supervisor during the time of the alleged harassment. He was not accused of harassing women, but of failing to address the problem, she said.

Davis County declined to release the names of the four other deputies Wednesday, saying it's because the officers still have until Friday to appeal their penalties, though they were allowed to return to work on Monday. Their penalties were also not disclosed Wednesday because of the appeal deadline.

Because Fielding was an appointed employee and not a merit employee, he does not have the option of appealing, Alexander said.

While the actions of the five are a violation of Davis County policy, Alexander did not know Wednesday whether the conduct rose to the level of potential criminal charges. The Davis County Attorney Office will decide if any charges should be filed, she said.

According to county policy, harassment is prohibited in the workplace. But county policy can also be violated if there is behavior that happens outside of work that has the effect of creating a harassing environment in the workplace, Alexander said. The investigation found evidence of both kinds of harassment.

Related topics