NEWS > 04 November 2006

Article sourced from

Boston Globe - United States
04 November 2006

This article appeared in the above title/site.
To view it in its entirity click this link.

Accuracy of warrants questione

HARTFORD, Conn. --A former Hartford detective's claim that city police frequently signed warrants swearing to have witnessed illegal activity they really didn't see is sparking concern among defense lawyers of possible perjury and corner-cutting.

Some lawyers are calling for a federal investigation and others say past criminal cases need to be reviewed to see if convictions should be overturned.

"It undermines the credibility of the criminal justice system," said John Wesley Hall Jr., a defense lawyer in Little Rock, Ark., and author of books and a Web journal about the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches.

"It's like a bomb going off," Hall said. "Defense lawyers are obligated to go through their files. They should get somebody independent to investigate."

Former Detective Stanley Wasilewski testified last month in a hearing in Hartford Superior Court involving another retired officer, Sgt. Franco Sanzo, charged with tampering with evidence in connection with a faulty search warrant affidavit. He said that officers often signed sworn affidavits for warrants claiming they had witnessed something that they had not seen, but their partner had viewed.

Wasilewski said the warrants are still accurate because they trust their partners enough to sign the warrants. "It's acceptable because it's not like you're making anything up," he said.

Judge Thomas P. Miano, who presided over the hearing, expressed concern. "It's our job to uphold the law. The thing is, you've suggested to me, well, 'Maybe we're fudging,'" he said during the hearing, according to a report in the Journal Inquirer of Manchester.

Miano has declined further comment and the case against Sanzo was continued until later this month.

Hartford police spokeswoman Nancy Mulroy said the department stands by its officers and the integrity of its investigations.

"He's been retired for six years," she said. "In today's police department, that's not the practice. We've taken great steps to insure proper supervision and the quality of our investigations."

The Connecticut Criminal Defense Lawyers Association plans to investigate the issue and Chief State's Attorney Kevin Kane said his office would review the claims if asked.

Norman Pattis, a defense lawyer based in Bethany, said Wasilewski's comments are "a huge story," and he expected many lawyers to review cases involving Hartford police.

"I think the problem of police lying is an enormous one," Pattis said. "When the public at large believes that the cops are on a crusade against the bad guys, the end justifies the means. But what the public doesn't realize is that an officer who lies under oath puts us all at risk."

Jack King, a spokesman for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said warrants should be thrown out if officers swear under oath to have seen something when they did not.

But Hartford defense lawyer Gerald Klein said he did not expect the testimony to affect many criminal cases because Wasilewski has been off the force for six years. The statue of limitations in Connecticut for perjury and making false statements is five years.

(FOR FULL STORY PLEASE VISIT WEB SITE BY FOLLOWING LINK ABOVE)

EiP Comments:

* We have no wish to infringe the copyright of any newspaper or periodical. If you feel that we have done so then please contact us with the details and we will remove the article. The articles republished on this site are provided for the purposes of research , private study, criticism , review, and the reporting of current events' We have no wish to infringe the copyright of any newspaper , periodical or other works. If you feel that we have done so then please contact us with the details and where necessary we will remove the work concerned.

Other related articles:

Article sourced from

Boston Globe - United States04 November 2006

Accuracy of warrants questione

EiP Comments:

Boston Globe - United States
04 November 2006