QUESTIONS REMAIN IN FAKE-DRUG CASE

Ex-Detective Cleared; Other Investigations Focus On Money Trail

A Dallas police detective's acquittal this week on federal civil
rights charges closes a chapter in the fake-drug scandal, but trial
testimony and newly released court documents raise more questions
about how a group of crooked confidential informants was able to
manipulate detectives and their supervisors for profit.

After former Senior Cpl. Mark Delapaz's not-guilty verdict, Latino
leaders have called for a congressional investigation into the arrests
of dozens of innocent people. They also have urged the Dallas County
district attorney to bring state charges against Mr. Delapaz.

Dallas City Attorney Madeleine Johnson has promised a thorough
internal investigation.. And the FBI inquiry continues.

Whoever jumps in to fill in the gaps will face diverging money trails,
incomplete paperwork and conflicting testimony from illegal immigrants
who dealt drugs and were employed by Dallas police.

Mr. Delapaz's trial attorney, Paul Coggins, agreed that a thorough
internal investigation is needed.

"I think the street cops have been run up and down and grilled and
scoured," he said. "There were some incredibly lax procedures. ...
These guys [the informants] by luck or design exploited the
weaknesses."

Some of the questions lingering for investigators revolve around the
following:

. The informants' fake-drug scheme began as a plot to steal money
given to them by police to set up drug deals, according to trial
testimony. FBI records show that the informants stole more than
$11,000 from the department. Police procedures at the time required
detectives to file theft or lost-property reports with their
supervisors when drug money was missing. Police officials have not
disclosed whether those reports were filed or whether supervisors took
note of the missing money.

. Police commanders were aware that at least one of the three
confidential informants who worked with Mr. Delapaz was an illegal
Mexican immigrant, yet they approved cash payments to him, records
show. Police operating procedures don't specifically address the
employment of illegal immigrants, but it's generally against the law
for anyone to employ workers without legal immigration status.

. Police procedures require that payments to any confidential
informant be documented with an informant's signature. For some of Mr.
Delapaz's informants, the payments were so large that the informants
were paid in installments. According to FBI reports based on an
agent's interview with Mr. Delapaz, the informants signed documents
only after the total amount was received.

. An attorney for some of the informants disputes that his clients'
signatures on payment records are authentic, and some of the
informants have denied receiving all the money listed in the reports.

. At least seven people took part in fabricating fake drugs out of
billiards chalk under the direction of Mr. Delapaz's main confidential
informant, Enrique Alonso, trial testimony showed. The powder was
molded into bricks and wrapped in plastic at Mr. Alonso's daughter's
East Dallas apartment, and his brother and son-in-law bought the chalk
by the case. Another man, Roberto Santos, admitted in testimony that
he took part in setting up people for arrest. After a two-year federal
investigation, only three of those people - Mr. Alonso, Jose Ruiz and
Roberto Gonzalez - have been charged with a crime.

. Field tests of the seized substances were performed by officers
other than Mr. Delapaz. Those tests indicated that the drugs were
real. In at least 24 cases, the seized drugs turned out to be bogus or
were less than 1 percent real.

Jurors in Mr. Delapaz's federal criminal trial agreed unanimously that
the former undercover drug detective did not intentionally lie in
reports about a series of bogus narcotics arrests, which the
indictment alleged. But one juror said the panel longed for someone
from the Police Department to explain other officers' roles in the
arrests and whether any police procedures were violated.

"No one said Mark did anything wrong," said the juror, speaking on
condition of anonymity. "There was no supervisor pointing their finger
at him, saying, 'If he had done this. ...' The prosecution did not
give us the sense that he had violated a procedure."

Adelfa Callejo, an attorney for the League of United Latin American
Citizens, said the lack of answers is frustrating.

"Nobody has been punished except a couple of informants. Nobody has
given us an explanation. No one has given us an apology. There's no
satisfaction," she said. "We're tired of waiting."