Pubdate: Sat, 01 Dec 2001
Source: Keene Sentinel (NH)
Copyright: 2001 Keene Publishing Corporation.
Contact:  http://www.keenesentinel.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/223
Author: Greg Coffey

POLICE LEARN LESSONS FROM CHESTERFIELD RACIAL-PROFILING CASE

Increased criticism of racial profiling and a local court case have made 
New Hampshire police departments more careful about following proper 
procedures when searching suspects.

Racial profiling is the practice of searching suspects based solely on 
their race, and most commonly involves police searching suspects who are black.

Concerns of how police stop and search suspects is an evolving area of the 
law, said Earl M. Sweeney, state police academy director for the N.H. 
Police Standards and Training Council.

More than ever, police departments are stressing that officers must be able 
to explain to a judge or jury why they searched a suspect.

"Something has to be unusual. Something has to be going on. One thing we 
don't allow is a fishing expedition," said Swanzey Police Chief Eric Sargent.

Though officers often rely on instinct when deciding to search a suspect, 
that's not going to cut it in front of a judge, said Capt. Edward F. 
Bourassa Jr., of the Keene Police Department.

"If you can't articulate your feeling, you're going to have a tough time in 
court," Bourassa said. "Just the fact that someone is on the road at a 
certain time does not rise to the level of giving us the right to search 
their car."

Racial profiling became an issue for New Hampshire police departments in 
1999 when a Marlboro (Vt.) College student, who is black, was stopped by 
Chesterfield police for speeding and a broken taillight.

The student, Dorian Hight, was returning from Boston; he was in the car 
with two white friends.

The officer, while holding Hight's driver license and car registration, 
asked if he could search Hight, and Hight agreed. The officer found a small 
amount of marijuana, and Hight was convicted of drug possession charges in 
Keene District Court.

Hight's two white friends were not searched, according to the Supreme 
Court's ruling, though that point was disputed by Chesterfield's Police 
Chief Earl D. Nelson.

Hight appealed the decision, saying he hadn't willingly consented to the 
search. He argued that since the officer was holding his license and 
registration, he didn't feel as though he could say no.

In September 2001, the state Supreme Court, relying on a prior U.S. Supreme 
Court ruling, agreed the search was tainted by "the illegality of the 
detention." The court further scolded the officer because he was Caucasian 
and "the defendant was African-American, and the officer's suspicion did 
not extend to the defendant's two Caucasian passengers."

The court said the marijuana was found illegally and could not be used as 
evidence against Hight. The case was sent back to Keene District Court for 
reconsideration. Chesterfield police asked that the charges be dismissed, 
and the case was dropped last week.

Nelson said he didn't think the court had all of the information about the 
search, and refused to criticize his officer.

"At the time Sgt. (Jason) Graves did the search, he was following proper 
procedures. I stand behind him completely," Nelson said.

Nelson said he's comfortable with the court's ruling and that his 
department will now give back suspects' paperwork before asking if a search 
can be conducted.

"The court ruled against us, and we'll adapt to that and move on," he said.

Even before the Supreme Court ruled in Hight's favor, the case caused state 
police academy officials to change how they taught recruits to conduct 
searches, Sweeney said.

Previously, recruits were trained that all searches were okay as long as a 
person gave consent, and that officers did not have to tell suspects they 
could say no to a search, Sweeney said.

Now, however, recruits are trained to give back all relevant paperwork and 
then inform the suspect that they can say no to a search. They do that "so 
that there would be no question" that the suspect consented the search, 
Sweeney said.

Most importantly, race alone should not be the sole reason for a search, 
Sweeney said.

Sweeney isn't worried that the new policies will inhibit police work.

"I don't see that it has any great sweeping effect on police officers to do 
their jobs," Sweeney said.

Officers should be able to use clues other than race to determine if a 
suspect should be searched, Sweeney said.

For example, if a car with dead bugs covering the front grill has a license 
plate that is free of bugs, that's an indication that the either the car or 
plates, or both, are stolen, Sweeney said.

Also, if officers get a report that a Hispanic male robbed a bank, the fact 
that a Hispanic male is driving a car that has been stopped should not be 
overlooked, Sweeney said.

"The subject now fits a description," he said.

The Keene Police Department has no written policy on searches. However, 
around the time Hight's case hit the spotlight, the department began 
stressing that a suspect's license and registration should be returned 
before executing a search, Bourassa said.

Searching suspects is by nature a controversial matter, Sargent said. But 
that just means police have to be more careful when they search someone.

"If you go out there on a fishing expedition, you're going to get hung," 
Sargent said.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Rebel