• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Public Hearing before SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE “Review of racial profiling” LOCATION: Seton Hall Law School DATE: April 18, 2001 Newark, New Jersey 10:00 a.m. MEMBERS OF COMMITTEE PRESENT: Senator William L. Gormley, Chairman Senator Louis F. Kosco Senator Robert J. Martin Senator John J. Matheussen Senator Norman M. Robertson Senator Raymond J. Zane Senator Garry J. Furnari ALSO PRESENT: John J. Tumulty Christine Shipley, Esq. Jo Astrid Glading, Esq. Office of Legislative Services Senate Majority Douglas Wheeler, Esq. Committee Aide Staff Counsel Senate Democratic Michael Chertoff, Esq. Staff Counsel Special Counsel to the Committee Scott L. Weber, Esq. Assistant Special Counsel to the Committee Hearing Recorded and Transcribed by The Office of Legislative Services, Public Information Office, Hearing Unit, State House Annex, PO 068, Trenton, New Jersey TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Martin Cronin, Esq. Assistant Attorney General, and Director of State Police Affairs Office of the Attorney General New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety 1 Captain David S. Leonardis Commandant Training Bureau - Sea Girt Division of State Police New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety 28 James J. Fyfe, Ph.D. Professor Temple University 99 Sergeant James Fennessy Office of State Police Affairs Office of the Attorney General New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety 147 George D. Pugh Retired Chief of Police, City of Camden, New Jersey; and, Retired Director of Public Safety City of Atlantic City, New Jersey 153 Detective Andres Lopez Division of State Police New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety 153 Lieutenant Carmelo V. Huertas Jr. Division of State Police New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety 158 Trooper Edward H. Lennon President State Troopers Fraternal Association of New Jersey 173 APPENDIX: TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page Consent Decree submitted by Martin Cronin, Esq. 1x Statement submitted by James J. Fyfe, Ph.D. 52x lmb: 1- 68 rs: 69-144 hw: 145-193 SENATOR WILLIAM L. GORMLEY (Chairman): The first witness for today will be Martin Cronin. Mr. Cronin, will you please stand and raise your right hand? (Oath administered) Okay. Now, we’re going to turn off all the cell phones. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Cronin, we would appreciate your opening statement. A S S T. A T T O R N E Y G E N E R A L M A R T I N C R O N I N: Thank you, Sir. In their testimony before this Committee, both Attorney General Farmer and Colonel Dunbar referred to the Office of State Police Affairs. They referred to its role in facilitating the change which is currently occurring within the Division of State Police and the Office of the Attorney General. I would like to take this opportunity to outline the purpose and structure of the Office of State Police Affairs; to define the relationship among this office, the Division of State Police, and the independent monitoring team appointed under the consent decree; to describe key provisions of the consent decree, a copy of which has been provided to each member of the Committee; and to describe the role which the Office of State Police Affairs has played in facilitating State compliance efforts with various consent decree provisions. The creation of the Office of State Police Affairs was first recommended in the final report of the State Police Review Team issued in July of 1999. The staffing of this office did not begin until September of 1999, when I was appointed director. Shortly after my appointment, it became apparent to me that many viewed the interim and final reports as a sellout of the State Police and the failure to defend its members and its tradition. It also became equally 1 apparent that others viewed the observation made in these reports that the great majority of troopers are honest, dedicated professionals who are committed to enforcing the law fairly and impartially, as a sidestep of the issue and a failure to recognize the affront to human rights and dignity that accompanies an unwarranted racially biased traffic stop. A challenge posed to this office was to not allow either of these extreme views to improperly infect the substance of any solution. To address this challenge, the office has sought to facilitate change and to ensure that our laws are equally applied to all of our citizens whom we serve. This office has sought to facilitate the implementation of these changes in a manner that does not adversely affect trooper safety or the ability of troopers to effectively function as law enforcement officers. These considerations guided our negotiations of the consent decree and continue to guide our approach in its implementation. In our efforts to promote equal, effective, and safe law enforcement, this office has consciously solicited and received State Police participation in working groups, which formed the recommendations on key issues affecting State Police operations and consent decree compliance. This joint approach continues today. As Colonel Dunbar alluded to, while disagreements have arisen concerning consent decree implementation, they are ultimately resolved, due in large part to the desire and the ability of our offices to work side by side to achieve the common goal of equal, effective, and safe law enforcement. At this time, I would like to describe the responsibilities of the Office of State Police Affairs, which is set forth in Paragraph 110 of the consent decree, which you have. The consent decree provides that the Office of the Attorney 2 General shall create an Office of State Police Affairs, which will have the responsibilities to ensure implementation of the terms of the consent decree; to provide coordination with the independent monitoring team and the United States concerning State Police matters related to implementation of the consent decree; to audit the manner in which the State receives, investigates, and adjudicates misconduct investigations; to audit State Police use of the MAPS, or Management Awareness Program; to audit State Trooper performance in motor vehicle stop requirements; to provide technical assistance and training regarding these matters; and to conduct certain misconduct investigations. In addition to these consent decree mandated compliance functions, the Office of State Police Affairs also provides certain legal advice to the superintendent and other State Police members. The structure of the office: In structuring the office, we sought to draw upon the expert-- SENATOR GORMLEY: Excuse me. Could we close the door? (noise in hallway) Thank you. Go ahead. ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL CRONIN: Thank you, sir. In structuring the office, we sought to draw upon the expertise of already existing State agencies and focus the efforts of the Office of State Police Affairs towards consent decree compliance and coordination that the other State entities further the purposes of the decree. For example, the Division of Law continues the defense of civil lawsuits against the State Police or its members. Also, the Division of Criminal Justice and the county prosecutors continue to conduct criminal prosecutions of State Police members when warranted. 3 Presently, the Office of State Police Affairs is broken down into two functions or divisions. One is a compliance function. It’s staffed by three DAGs; two members of the Division of State Police, which are detailed to the office; and four State investigators, who are not State Police members. As the consent decree -- as viewed in -- by the independent monitors, is broken down into several tasks that relate to motor vehicle stop documentation, misconduct investigations, etc., what this part of the office does is, individual members are assigned certain tasks required by the decree, and they are responsible for facilitating compliance with that. More specifically, this would require them to look at the requirements of the decree, assist State Police members in drafting protocols which satisfy the minimum requirements of the decree, and then solicit response from the State Police, which would not only satisfy the requirements of the decree, but further management objectives to make it a more effective organization. Members of the office also teach Division members regarding issues such as the consent decree requirements and constitutional law as part of the training requirements of the consent decree. We also identify and retain consultants who have facilitated the creation of the MAPS program, have helped us with the ethics training, cultural diversity training, and surveys conducted on the New Jersey Turnpike. The compliance arm, if you will, of the office also plays a central role in the processing of misconduct investigations. I’d like to take a few moments to speak about that, sir. SENATOR GORMLEY: Yes. ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL CRONIN: Under the consent decree, there are three major players in the processing of misconduct 4 investigations. One is the Office of Professional Standards of the Division of State Police. Under the consent decree, the Office of Professional Standards is obligated to receive all misconduct complaints against State Police members. They are also required to conduct all misconduct investigations subject to -- some cases can be done by my office, where there is a conflict or otherwise an agreement amongst the Attorney General and the Colonel. Also regarding misconduct investigations, the Office of State Police Affairs has an obligation under the consent decree, Paragraph 110, to audit the manner in which the State receives, investigates, and adjudicates the misconduct investigations. So my office, as a separate auditing function of investigations done by the Division-- Yes, sir. SENATOR GORMLEY: Just for background-- ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL CRONIN: Yes. SENATOR GORMLEY: --before your office existed-- ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL CRONIN: Yes. SENATOR GORMLEY: --who performed that function, or was it performed? ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL CRONIN: Yeah, sir, it was performed. Within the Division of Law-- SENATOR GORMLEY: Okay.

Load more

  185

Copy Link