Pubdate: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 Source: Dallas Morning News (TX) Copyright: 2004 The Dallas Morning News Contact: http://www.dallasnews.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/117 Author: Matt Stiles, and Robert Tharp, Dallas Morning News Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/corrupt.htm (Corruption - United States) 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 - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin