On Oct. 30, 2025, Councilmember Allen Skillicorn sat slumped and alone in the waiting room adjacent to the three tiny courtrooms housed in the Tempe Municipal Courthouse. After more than nine months of unexplained and unwarranted continuances, the day had finally come for Skillicorn to face the consequences for his unlawful act of fleeing the scene of an accident.
Although Skillicorn was visibly diminished and clearly chagrined by the presence of an interested observer, as it turned out he had nothing to worry about. The fix was in and Skillicorn skated.
After a barely audible sidebar exchange with the City Prosecutor, Esteban Gomez, recently appointed Municipal Judge Kerry Rait approved a plea deal that included the following provisions:
• Skillicorn would plead guilty to a new charge, added by the prosecutor that day, to facilitate a deal: the civil offense of traveling at a “speed greater than reasonable and prudent for conditions” in violation of A.R.S. § 28-701(A).
• The prosecutor would dismiss the more serious charges of fleeing the scene of an accident in violation of A.R.S. § 28-663(A)(1) and failure to provide information in violation of A.R.S. § 28-663 (A)(2); and
• Skillicorn would pay a $250 fine and $246 in court costs for a total outlay of $496.
There is no legitimate explanation for the prosecutor’s recommendations or Judge Rait’s leniency.
According to data collected and maintained by the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office and the Arizona Judicial Branch’s case disposition reports, in Arizona, approximately 3,000 to 3,500 criminal actions involving “leaving the scene” of an accident are filed annually. Approximately 95 percent of these cases are resolved through plea agreements. It is not uncommon for the agreements to include guilty plea to a lesser criminal offense, but it is extremely rare for the prosecutor to negotiate a plea deal where the defendant avoids all criminal liability by pleading guilty to a civil traffic violation.
Dismissal of all criminal charges following the prosecution’s addition of a civil traffic citation occurs in less than five percent of the cases statewide, and less than two percent of the cases filed in the Maricopa County Municipal Court. This deviation may be justified where there are shortcomings in the evidence and no ongoing public safety concerns.
Here, the charges were fully supported by an investigation that included the other driver’s statement, a photograph of Skillicorn driving away from the scene, and video footage of him abandoning his damaged vehicle in a nearby parking lot and walking rapidly away from the scene.
There is no evidence to rebut the investigator’s belief expressed in the police report:
“Based on the difficulty it took for Skillicorn to start the vehicle, the short distance he drove away, and the fact that he fled the vehicle on foot after he parked, it is believed that he did not intend at any point to have police contact.”
In addition, there can be no question that Skillicorn’s reckless driving remains a public safety concern. On April 25, 2025, just six weeks after he was involved in the Tempe hit and run, the Scottsdale Police Department charged Skillicorn with reckless driving and operating an unregistered vehicle. These charges resulted in a criminal prosecution, assessment of a hefty fine, and mandatory attendance at “driver’s school.” In comparison, the plea agreement negotiated by the Tempe prosecutor and rubber stamped by Judge Rait, for far more serious offenses, resulted in little more than a tap on the wrist.
It does not appear that before accepting the plea agreement Judge Rait considered a Presentence Investigation Report, that should have been prepared, that would have included Skillicorn’s reckless driving history. It also does not appear that Judge Rait considered any victim impact statements that the prosector was obligated to request.
Whether attributable to dereliction of duty, deliberate indifference, or nefarious motives, the plea deal transformed a crime long regarded as one involving moral turpitude into nothing more than a minor traffic infraction.
The Skillicorn plea raises serious concerns about the equal application of justice. When the punishment imposed on elected officials dramatically diverges from prosecutorial and judicial norms, public trust is eroded.
Public opinion should not be affected by Skillicorn’s sweetheart deal. A dismissal of criminal charges is not equivalent to a determination that Skillicorn was innocent. Through the eyes of voters Skillicorn can and should be viewed not only as a self-proclaimed “chaos agent,” who has repeatedly embarrassed and disgraced our town, but as a criminal.
