Pubdate: 6 Nov 1998 Source: San Jose Mercury News (CA) Contact: http://www.sjmercury.com/ Copyright: 1998 Mercury Center Author: Bill Romano, Staff Writer ACCUSED EX-COP GETS DISABILITY Gambling habit leads to pension; may have led to on-duty thefts A city retirement board Thursday granted a disability pension of about $27,000 a year to former San Jose police officer Johnny Venzon Jr., charged with stealing from people on his beat. His disability: the uncontrollable gambling authorities believe led to his alleged string of on-duty burglaries. The 3-2 vote by the San Jose Police and Fire Retirement Board means the 48-year-old Venzon soon can begin receiving monthly checks for his non-service-related disability. That money will come in even as Venzon sits in Santa Clara County Jail, charged with 14 counts of burglary and one count each of grand theft and receiving stolen property. His bail is set at $300,000. ``I'm sure we'll get a lot of flak,'' said board member Bill Brill of the city's Civil Service Commission. ``Johnny's no shining star. Obviously, our concern was with his family, much less with Johnny.'' The board's decision is the latest twist in a bizarre case that for 18 months has enraged authorities, outraged the public and followed a winding legal course. Venzon is accused of embezzling money from the police department, possessing uniforms stolen from fellow officers, burglarizing homes of citizens and stealing from the relatives of the recently deceased. He has blamed his alleged crimes on an overwhelming drive to gamble, a practice that plunged him heavily into debt over the years. Venzon pleaded guilty in June to three of four burglary counts but the bargain was revoked after angry police officials voiced their displeasure with the deal. The case has led to a variety of pending civil action. Compassion for family Brill said the board's decision was a difficult one, but he could live with it. He added that in denying Venzon's disability retirement, the board would have automatically deprived Venzon's wife, Deborah Venzon, and six children of the medical benefits to which an ex-officer and his family are entitled. Venzon had earlier told the board that if he received the disability pension, he would fill out direct-deposit slips to his wife's account. But the board was not in a position to legally force him to do so, Brill added. San Jose police officer David Bacigalupi, chairman of the retirement board, and City Councilwoman Charlotte Powers, both opposed Venzon's latest application. Firefighter Richard Santos, Councilwoman Alice Woody and Brill all supported Thursday's motion. The five-member panel, however, unanimously rejected an earlier bid by Venzon for a service-connected disability due to cumulative stress. According to the opinion of medical experts, Venzon suffers from obsessive-compulsive disorder they compared in their reports to alcoholism. Dr. Robert McIntyre, a clinical psychologist who interviewed Venzon in jail, issued an evaluation to the board, saying: ``I believe his psychiatric condition, specifically the pathological gambling, has progressed to the point that it would preclude his operating as a police officer in an efficient, responsible and competent fashion.'' Although he had no sympathy for the former officer, Santos said his ``heart goes out'' to Venzon's family as well as the victims of his alleged thefts. Medical evidence and opinion presented in the case, said Santos, tipped the scales in favor of a non-service-connected disability. Had the city's own doctor disagreed with those views he would have been more inclined to reject Venzon's application, he added. Bacigalupi asserted that Venzon could still have had a place in law enforcement had he accepted counseling from the department for the addiction that may have led to his current predicament. ``Barring where he is today -- he could be working as a police officer,'' Bacigalupi declared. ``But, Mr. Venzon chose the path of criminality. And that does not meet the requirements for disability.'' Decision had been delayed The final decision on Venzon's request had been delayed a number of times, with the board divided on whether to award him a ``non-service'' disability - -- unrelated to his work. But the panel could never muster the three-vote majority needed to approve the pension until after the position vacated by a retiring member could be filled. Brill, who was appointed recently, cast the swing vote. In a prepared statement, Brill informed the board that he had since read all the reports and listened to tapes of earlier hearings and was ready to make a decision on the matter. After Thursday's hearing, Brill said that Venzon seemed to have suffered from a gambling problem of ``pathological'' proportions. Woody said the question simply was whether Venzon was disabled. ``It was that clear for me,'' she said. ``Do we consider a gambling addiction a disability? The medical evidence was there to support that he was disabled.'' Outside the meeting, Angelo Venzon said he thought the board acted fairly toward his brother. Although the motion could have been denied, Johnny Venzon would have begun receiving vested retirement benefits in seven more years. City Attorney Joan Gallo said Venzon's case was ``very unique.'' The city, she said, permits retirements for reasons of psychiatric disability. Such conditions may sometimes involve an element of alcohol or other drugs. Faced with expert medical opinion, the board's action was based on by a legitimate rationale, she said. ``The board,'' Gallo said, ``granted his retirement because of his psychiatric disability not because he was a gambler.'' - --- Checked-by: Pat Dolan