POLICE DEPARTMENT'S RELIANCE ON INFORMANTS HAS RISKS

The Philadelphia Police Department is heavily dependent upon
informants to build cases against drug dealers, a reliance whose
risks are painfully apparent as a probe expands into the conduct of
its undercover narcotics unit.

Officer Jeffrey Cujdik, whose soured relationship with a confidential
informant triggered a federal-local investigation into the Narcotics
Field Unit, employed informants to justify 95 percent of his drug
searches in the last three years, records show.

An Inquirer analysis of 186 search warrants that Cujdik was granted
since 2006 shows that the officer cited confidential informants in
nearly all his cases. None listed an undercover drug buy that he
personally made, and only one listed a buy by another officer.

Rather, confidential informants - often drug dealers themselves who
work for cash or leniency - did most of the transactions.

Philadelphia's practices are similar to those of other big-city
forces, according to several studies.

Deputy Police Commissioner William C. Blackburn, who oversees the
Narcotics Unit as the head of major operations, said there was a
reason for the Philadelphia antidrug force's "heavy reliance" on informants.

"Informants give us an opportunity to get into an area where an
undercover police officer wouldn't be able to go," he said in an
interview last month.

Cujdik's relationship with one informant has shown the weakness of the system.

Investigators began to pursue Cujdik (pronounced CHUH-dik) last year
after his most productive informant, Ventura Martinez, alleged that
the officer had repeatedly fabricated evidence to obtain warrants. In
January, Cujdik was put on desk duty and ordered to turn in his service weapon.

According to sources, FBI and Internal Affairs investigators are now
looking at Cujdik's work with at least four informants, and suspicion
has spread to other members of his squad. Philadelphia's public
defender has sought to overturn 53 convictions allegedly based on
tainted searches.

According to Cujdik's affidavits, the officer cited Martinez -
code-named "Confidential Informant 103" - in 43 percent of his 186
search warrants in the last three years. Martinez provided tips to
Cujdik and made controlled drug buys from the dealers he informed on.
But Cujdik also trusted Martinez sufficiently that he asked him to
make drug buys from dealers he had never met.

Often described as a "necessary evil" in narcotics trajectories,
informants provide investigators with access and security. They allow
undercover officers to avoid dangerous situations with suspected drug
dealers. And a productive informant can generate far more cases than
officers would if they had to infiltrate the drug world themselves.

For all the work they do, informants don't cost much.

Blackburn said the Philadelphia force maintained about 200 active
informants, who were paid a total of $125,000 last year - slightly
more than Cujdik's overtime-enhanced salary of $111,800.

Civil libertarians and defense attorneys say informants can encourage
police to take shortcuts. Even with safeguards, there is little
external oversight to detect misconduct. Judges rarely question
whether the informants actually did what the officers say they did.

Even if Martinez is lying - Cujdik's defenders say the informant is
making it all up - the doubt he has cast is likely to take a
substantial toll. About 500 cases were thrown out after a 1995
evidence-faking scandal engulfed the 39th District, and the city paid
more than $4 million to settle lawsuits.

A bigger casualty may be faith in the force at a time when Police
Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey has made public trust a cornerstone of
his crime-fighting effort.

"The investigation is probably going to grow in scope," Ramsey said.
"We will let the chips fall where they may."