STATUTES EXPIRED IN DRUG SCANDAL

Delay In Dallas Police Inquiry Means Some Officers Can't Be Charged

The Dallas police decision to defer an investigation into the fake-drug
scandal until after the FBI finished its inquiry means that some officers
can't be prosecuted for potential crimes because the statutes of limitations
have passed.

Two lawyers who released a scathing account on Wednesday - that said
sloppy police work and lax supervision contributed to the false drug
arrests in 2001 - also said the decision to defer unnecessarily
delayed discipline for several possible rules violations.

"Simultaneous investigations of federal and state law criminal
violations were necessary for effective and adequate resolution of the
issues in the fake drug cases," wrote Terence Hart and Lena Levario,
both of whom spent 10 months looking at the cases. "Discipline of
officers has been delayed for years." The two report authors, both now
defense attorneys, made 59 referrals in recent months to the
department's public integrity division, which investigates possible
criminal acts by police.

They sent an additional 51 potential rules violations involving about
20 officers to the internal affairs division, which is responsible for
looking into potential administrative violations.

For many of the potential criminal referrals - including questions
about inconsistent statements or records tampering - too much time has
passed to prosecute, the report said. A few officers still could face
charges of theft by a public servant or forgery of a government
record. Dallas Police Chief David Kunkle said he hopes the
administrative referrals, which could lead to rebukes, demotions or
perhaps firings, will be finished by March. All the officers and
supervisors who had roles in the scandal aren't working now in
narcotics, department officials have said. The FBI and the U.S.
attorney's office urged former Police Chief Terrell Bolton to end an
internal inquiry into the cases in January 2002 because "problems
could arise" from dual investigations involving the same witnesses. He
agreed.

Federal cases' results U.S. Justice Department prosecutors lost a
civil rights case against one officer, Mark Delapaz, but the federal
investigation got other results. Several informants went to prison
after pleading guilty to duping officers by planting billiards chalk
packed like real drugs on innocent people.

They also face related felony charges in state court brought by the
district attorney's special prosecutor Dan Hagood.

The FBI's work also provided some of the framework and documentation
for the lawyers' report, which noted numerous allegations of
rule-breaking by several former narcotics officers that allowed the
informants to pull off the scheme.

Former narcotics officers already face new state charges in which the
three-year statute of limitations hadn't lapsed from the scandal,
which occurred from spring through fall in 2001. Mr. Delapaz, Eddie
Herrera and Jeffrey Haywood were indicted earlier this year on felony
evidence-tampering charges related to their roles in the fake-drug
arrests. Mr. Delapaz's attorney, Paul Coggins, has denied any
wrongdoing by his client, saying he's "confident that any jury who
hears this fairly will come to the conclusion that Mark was an honest
cop."

Mr. Haywood's attorney, Peter Barrett, said his client performed the
drug field tests he's accused of lying about.

Mr. Herrera's attorney, Bob Baskett, said the referrals address things
that "on the surface, appear that they might be irregular," but "until
they are fully investigated, we won't know." Many of the referrals are
related and involve a small group of narcotics officers, though some
patrol officers and former narcotics division supervisors appear on
the list of potential rules violations. Mr. Delapaz and Mr. Herrera,
partners who supervised the corrupt informants, dominate the list of
public integrity referrals.

Still, there are potential violations involving others in the report
that can never be prosecuted. Though it's too late in some cases for
criminal charges, some instances might warrant administrative
penalties for those officers still on the force, said Janice Houston,
a department spokeswoman. Reaction Michael Gonzales, a deputy district
director for the League of United Latin American Citizens, said he was
disappointed to learn that decisions about many of the referrals would
be delayed for months.

"Quite frankly, nothing has been done," he said. "It's an insult to
the Hispanic community and the families of the victims." The
rules-related referrals by the lawyers involve whether officers lacked
supervision or gave conflicting statements. They also relate to
whether they didn't follow procedure in filling out forms, disbursing
money or handling informants.

Some criminal violations have lengthier statutes of limitations, the
report said. Mr. Delapaz, Mr. Herrera and Senior Cpl. David Larsen
were involved in cases in which informant pay receipts appear forged,
the report says. Another referral said Mr. Delapaz should be
investigated for possible theft by a public servant.

Federal authorities never alleged that Mr. Delapaz took money.

Mr. Baskett, who also represents Cpl. Larsen, said there's no evidence
the corporal did anything wrong.

The referrals mostly inquire about potential problems.

The department's new inquiries should show whether any further action
is warranted, Ms. Houston said. "They have to begin the process of
investigating each one of these individuals to determine what
involvement they might have had," she said, noting that some officers'
names appear because they witnessed something.

Lawyers who investigated the fake-drug scandal cite numerous
examples of possible criminal and administrative violations by Dallas
police officers in 2001. The department is investigating the referrals
to determine whether to send the information to a special prosecutor
or whether administrative punishment is warranted.

Here are some of those involved:

Mark Delapaz
Status: Fired former narcotics detective central to the scandal; supervised
corrupt informants who admitted framing innocent people
Referrals: Dozens of potentially criminal acts and departmental violations
related to the arrests
Pending charges: Faces numerous state felony evidence tampering indictments;
trial scheduled for November, but a postponement until at least January is
likely

Eddie Herrera
Status: Fired former narcotics officer central to the scandal; Mr. Delapaz's
former partner
Referrals: Dozens of potentially criminal acts and departmental violations
Pending charges: Faces one state felony evidence-tampering charge
Senior Cpl. David Larsen

Status: Former narcotics officer; transferred to the department's northeast
patrol division
Referrals: Tampering with governmental records (statute of limitations
expired) and forgery of informant payment receipts (statute of limitations
expires in 2011)

Officer Larry Moses
Status: Former narcotics officer; transferred to the department's southeast
patrol division
Referrals: Aggravated perjury (statute of limitations expired)

Senior Cpl. Mark Woody
Status: Former narcotics officer; transferred to the department's southeast
patrol division
Referrals: Tampering with a government record (statute of limitations
expired)

Officer Tanya Jackson
Status: Officer, southeast patrol division
Referrals: Tampering with a government record (statute of limitations
expired)

Sgt. Jack Gouge
Status: Former narcotics supervisor; formerly in charge of a street squad
that included Mr. Delapaz and Mr. Herrera; transferred to central patrol
division
Referrals: Not named in any criminal referrals, but the report cites a few
potential departmental violations involving procedure and his supervision