News (Media Awareness Project) - US CT: LTE: Chief Calls Criticism 'Without Merit' |
Title: | US CT: LTE: Chief Calls Criticism 'Without Merit' |
Published On: | 1999-03-24 |
Source: | New Haven Register (CT) |
Fetched On: | 2008-09-06 09:57:06 |
CHIEF CALLS CRITICISM 'WITHOUT MERIT'
Recently, the secretary to the assistant chief of police of this department
was arrested and arraigned for possession of a narcotic substance. There
have been insinuations that the New Haven Department of Police Service
tried to sweep the matter under the rug or hold its own employees to a
lesser standard of conduct. These accusations are wholly without merit.
In cases of suspected drug possession, both state law and department
protocol clearly provide the option of sending the substance to the state
laboratory for analysis and then applying for a warrant if the results are
positive. This commonly used procedure was here followed, and appropriately
so, as the matter involved simple possession (as opposed to intent to sell)
and less than one gram of a suspected illegal substance.
In addition, the accused individual was a nonviolent offender and posed no
risk of flight. In fact, precisely because she was a department employee,
we had knowledge of her whereabouts and the ability to observe and monitor
her activity.
Criticism has been lodged against this department for not taking immediate
action, which, again, is inaccurate. In truth, the department took
immediate action following the police officer's preliminary observations
and findings. That very evening in December, Assistant Chief MacDonald
contacted Capt. Richard Randall, head of the department's Internal Values &
Ethics Division, who sent the substance for analysis and initiated an
internal investigation. Later, when the test results were obtained, the
department immediately applied for an arrest warrant.
Proceeding as an internal investigation had several benefits, which a
knee-jerk arrest might have frustrated. First, the department was able to
refer the employee to a program, so that she could receive whatever
assistance was warranted. She took advantage of the services offered and
was willing and able to cooperate fully with the internal investigation.
Second, the short delay occasioned by an internal investigation afforded
the department additional time to ascertain that its employee was not
involved either with the sale of narcotics or usage in the workplace.
Obviously, the arrest of one of its employees on drug charges is both
painful and embarrassing to the department, the employee, and her family.
All of us make mistakes, particularly when we are young, and it is most
unfortunate that this indiscretion, though serious, has had to be played
out in such a public forum. I sincerely hope that the justice system,
treatment program, and support of her friends and colleagues will help this
excellent employee put this experience behind her and look ahead to the
bright future she deserves.
Recently, the secretary to the assistant chief of police of this department
was arrested and arraigned for possession of a narcotic substance. There
have been insinuations that the New Haven Department of Police Service
tried to sweep the matter under the rug or hold its own employees to a
lesser standard of conduct. These accusations are wholly without merit.
In cases of suspected drug possession, both state law and department
protocol clearly provide the option of sending the substance to the state
laboratory for analysis and then applying for a warrant if the results are
positive. This commonly used procedure was here followed, and appropriately
so, as the matter involved simple possession (as opposed to intent to sell)
and less than one gram of a suspected illegal substance.
In addition, the accused individual was a nonviolent offender and posed no
risk of flight. In fact, precisely because she was a department employee,
we had knowledge of her whereabouts and the ability to observe and monitor
her activity.
Criticism has been lodged against this department for not taking immediate
action, which, again, is inaccurate. In truth, the department took
immediate action following the police officer's preliminary observations
and findings. That very evening in December, Assistant Chief MacDonald
contacted Capt. Richard Randall, head of the department's Internal Values &
Ethics Division, who sent the substance for analysis and initiated an
internal investigation. Later, when the test results were obtained, the
department immediately applied for an arrest warrant.
Proceeding as an internal investigation had several benefits, which a
knee-jerk arrest might have frustrated. First, the department was able to
refer the employee to a program, so that she could receive whatever
assistance was warranted. She took advantage of the services offered and
was willing and able to cooperate fully with the internal investigation.
Second, the short delay occasioned by an internal investigation afforded
the department additional time to ascertain that its employee was not
involved either with the sale of narcotics or usage in the workplace.
Obviously, the arrest of one of its employees on drug charges is both
painful and embarrassing to the department, the employee, and her family.
All of us make mistakes, particularly when we are young, and it is most
unfortunate that this indiscretion, though serious, has had to be played
out in such a public forum. I sincerely hope that the justice system,
treatment program, and support of her friends and colleagues will help this
excellent employee put this experience behind her and look ahead to the
bright future she deserves.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...