Connect with us

New York

Over 100 Connecticut State Troopers Accused of Faking Traffic Stops

Published

on

Over 100 Connecticut State Troopers Accused of Faking Traffic Stops

On an unseasonably warm morning in February 2017, a 75-year-old white motorist was making his way north on Interstate 95 in Westbrook, Conn., when he was pulled over by a state trooper and charged with a traffic violation.

That is, at least, according to a traffic stop report filed by the officer. But no ticket appears to have been issued.

In fact, there may not have been any stop. The driver may not even exist.

State officials believe that the trooper was among more than 100 Connecticut state police officers who may have filed false reports of traffic stops in recent years, possibly to boost the internal statistics used to measure their performance.

A recent audit described “a pattern of record manipulation” and said there was a “high likelihood” that at least 25,966 recorded stops between 2014 and 2021 were false and that as many as 58,553 may have been, at minimum, inaccurate.

Advertisement

“What was the motivation here, really?” asked Ken Barone, a co-author of the audit. Most likely, he said, “the motivation here was to appear productive.”

The idea that Connecticut’s state police officers may have conducted a yearslong scheme of systematic deceit has shocked the public, embarrassed the state’s law enforcement community and enraged its political leadership at a time of national conversations about police accountability.

The U.S. Department of Justice is investigating, state officials said. Gov. Ned Lamont, a Democrat, has launched a separate inquiry.

“The trust and the confidence in Connecticut state police is clearly shaken by this,” said State Representative Steve Stafstrom, a Democrat and the co-chairman of the state legislature’s judiciary committee.

The ticket reports under scrutiny may have also irrevocably tainted the racial data that the state collects on traffic stops. That is because the motorists who were purportedly stopped were disproportionately white, said Mr. Barone, who is the manager of the Connecticut Racial Profiling Prohibition Project, which seeks to identify and address racial and ethnic disparities in traffic enforcement.

Advertisement

The auditors compiled their research by comparing two sets of data: court records of real tickets issued to real people and internal data from the state police.

“Every time Trooper A said they stopped a car and issued a ticket, I should be able to find said ticket in the court system,” Mr. Barone said.

But the numbers did not add up. Mr. Barone and his team kept finding reported tickets that had no match in the court system — no matter how they tried to account for typos or other mistakes. He said they had used an “extremely conservative” approach.

“The philosophy that we had was: ‘When in doubt, give them credit,’” he said.

But Mr. Barone said he saw almost no way that troopers could have made some of the stops they reported.

Advertisement

In one case, a trooper logged five registration violations over a 30-minute period. Another trooper reported issuing five speeding tickets in 22 minutes. Another reported three speeding tickets in 14 minutes. Still another claimed to have issued three wrong-lane tickets, in a work zone, in nine minutes.

Mr. Barone said that members of the Connecticut Racial Profiling Prohibition Project were inspired to begin the audit last summer after Hearst Connecticut Media reported that four troopers were found to have falsified records in 2018. They strongly suspected a much broader pattern, he said.

Now the auditors, who included researchers from the University of Connecticut and Northeastern University, say they believe the problem is widespread.

Their report, released earlier this summer, found 130 former and current officers who had filed suspicious reports. James C. Rovella, the head of the state’s Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, told lawmakers in July that 68 of those officers were still active. He did not respond to a request for comment.

Some troopers have been cleared of wrongdoing in the weeks since the audit was released.

Advertisement

Andrew Matthews, the general counsel and executive director of the state police union, put that number at 27; Mr. Barone said the auditors had cleared only 20, because of duplicate badge numbers. The state police declined to comment, citing an ongoing investigation.

Experts in criminal justice say the ticket scandal has revealed a lack of accountability within the state police.

“If we can’t trust them for traffic tickets, how are we going to trust them for cases like sexual assault, or murder?” said Nicole Gonzalez Van Cleve, a sociologist at Brown University who studies policing and prosecutors.

“The state troopers sort of view themselves as better than local police officers,” said Mike Lawlor, a criminal justice professor at the University of New Haven, who is also a member of the state’s Police Officer Standards and Training Council, which certifies officers. “But also, over time, they’ve had a culture where there was essentially no real oversight of them.”

The state police union has sued to block the release of the names of the troopers under suspicion until the investigations conclude. Mr. Matthews said they are entitled to due process — and that revealing their identities could put them in danger.

Advertisement

He also cast doubt on the audit’s methodology: He said auditors had not done enough research to understand how the ticket reporting system works.

Although some state troopers had cruisers equipped with electronic ticket recording systems during the period of the audit, others had to write out tickets by hand. Mr. Matthews said that auditors had not appropriately checked electronic court records against the carbon copies of handwritten tickets on file with the state police.

“Why is everyone in such a rush to tarnish the good names of people that did nothing wrong?” he asked.

Mr. Matthews, a former state trooper, was among those whose reports were flagged. He denied any wrongdoing and said one of his cruisers did not have an electronic recording system.

“I did my job with the utmost integrity,” he said.

Advertisement

Instead of widespread dishonesty, Mr. Matthews suggested that there could have been data entry issues.

Maybe, he said, some of the stops resulted in infractions more serious than a ticket, and an officer misreported them as tickets. Perhaps a trooper issued a warning, instead of a ticket, but a dispatcher entered it incorrectly.

Advocates and lawyers said that they need accurate traffic stop data in part to assess whether officers are unfairly targeting Black and Hispanic drivers.

Connecticut outlawed racial profiling of drivers in 1999. The Racial Profiling Prohibition Project has been collecting and analyzing statewide data since 2013.

But the state troopers’ data is now “obsolete,” said Claudine Constant, the public policy and advocacy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut.

Advertisement

In fact, the audit found that the reports under suspicion were almost 10 percentage points more likely than verified reports to involve white drivers, and about 4.5 percentage points less likely to involve Black or Hispanic drivers.

“This audit reveals a pretty breathtaking disrespect for the states’ racial prohibition law,” Ms. Constant said. “And even worse, the goal of attempting to reduce traffic stops that might be grounded in racism.”

Now, officials are trying to determine whether there was systematic fraud — and, if so, how high up it went.

“If they misused the system intentionally, the question that stems from that is: ‘Why was nobody arrested?’” said State Representative Craig Fishbein, a Republican who is the ranking House member of the legislature’s judiciary committee.

The scandal may also have repercussions across the justice system.

Advertisement

Already, the lawyer for a man accused of murder is arguing that he should be told whether the state police officers involved in the case were flagged in the audit — which would undermine their credibility. Mr. Lawlor, the criminal justice professor, said he expected other defense attorneys across the state to make similar arguments — until the names of troopers under investigation are released.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

New York

Transcript of Trump Manhattan Trial, May 30, 2024

Published

on

Transcript of Trump Manhattan Trial, May 30, 2024

-
Jury Deliberation Re-charge
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK CRIMINAL TERM
-
-
PART: 59
Χ
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
-against-
DONALD J. TRUMP,
DEFENDANT.
BEFORE:
Indict. No.
71543-2023
CHARGE
4909
FALSIFYING BUSINESS
RECORDS 1ST DEGREE
JURY TRIAL
100 Centre Street
New York, New York 10013
May 30, 2024
HONORABLE JUAN M. MERCHAN
JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT
APPEARANCES:
FOR THE PEOPLE:
ALVIN BRAGG, JR., ESQ.
DISTRICT ATTORNEY, NEW YORK COUNTY
One Hogan Place
New York, New York 10013
BY:
JOSHUA STEINGLASS, ESQ.
MATTHEW COLANGELO,
ESQ.
SUSAN HOFFINGER, ESQ.
CHRISTOPHER CONROY, ESQ.
BECKY MANGOLD, ESQ.
KATHERINE ELLIS, ESQ.
Assistant District Attorneys
BLANCHE LAW
BY:
TODD BLANCHE, ESQ.
EMIL BOVE, ESQ.
KENDRA WHARTON, ESQ.
NECHELES LAW, LLP
BY: SUSAN NECHELES, ESQ.
GEDALIA STERN, ESQ.
Attorneys for the Defendant
SUSAN PEARCE-BATES, RPR, CSR, RSA
Principal Court Reporter
LAURIE EISENBERG, RPR, CSR
LISA KRAMSKY
THERESA MAGNICCARI
Senior Court Reporters
Susan Pearce-Bates, RPR, CCR, RSA
Principal Court Reporter

Continue Reading

New York

Transcript of Trump Manhattan Trial, May 29, 2024

Published

on

Transcript of Trump Manhattan Trial, May 29, 2024

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK CRIMINAL TERM
-
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
PART: 59
Indict. No.
71543-2023
CHARGE
-against-
DONALD J. TRUMP,
DEFENDANT.
BEFORE:
4815
FALSIFYING BUSINESS
RECORDS 1ST DEGREE
JURY TRIAL
X
100 Centre Street
New York, New York 10013
May 29, 2024
HONORABLE JUAN M. MERCHAN
JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT
APPEARANCES:
FOR THE
PEOPLE:
ALVIN BRAGG, JR.,
ESQ.
DISTRICT ATTORNEY, NEW YORK COUNTY
One Hogan Place
New York, New York 10013
BY:
JOSHUA STEINGLASS, ESQ.
MATTHEW COLANGELO,
ESQ.
SUSAN HOFFINGER, ESQ.
CHRISTOPHER CONROY, ESQ.
BECKY MANGOLD, ESQ.
KATHERINE ELLIS, ESQ.
Assistant District Attorneys
BLANCHE LAW
BY:
TODD BLANCHE, ESQ.
EMIL BOVE, ESQ.
KENDRA WHARTON, ESQ.
NECHELES LAW, LLP
BY: SUSAN NECHELES, ESQ.
Attorneys for the Defendant
SUSAN PEARCE-BATES, RPR, CSR, RSA
Principal Court Reporter
LAURIE EISENBERG, RPR, CSR
LISA KRAMSKY
THERESA MAGNICCARI
Senior Court Reporters
Susan Pearce-Bates,
RPR, CCR, RSA
Principal Court Reporter

Continue Reading

New York

Critics Fault ‘Aggressive’ N.Y.P.D. Response to Pro-Palestinian Rally

Published

on

Critics Fault ‘Aggressive’ N.Y.P.D. Response to Pro-Palestinian Rally

Violent confrontations at a pro-Palestinian rally in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, on Saturday reflected what some local officials and protest organizers called an unexpectedly aggressive Police Department response, with officers flooding the neighborhood and using force against protesters.

At the rally, which drew hundreds of demonstrators, at least two officers wearing the white shirts of commanders were filmed punching three protesters who were prone in the middle of a crosswalk. One officer had pinned a man to the ground and repeatedly punched him in the ribs, a 50-second video clip shows. Another officer punched the left side of a man’s face as he held his head to the asphalt.

The police arrested around 40 people who were “unlawfully blocking roadways,” Kaz Daughtry, the department’s deputy commissioner of operations, said on social media on Sunday.

Mr. Daughtry shared drone footage of one person who climbed on a city bus, “putting himself and others in danger.” The Police Department, he wrote, “proudly protects everyone’s right to protest, but lawlessness will never be tolerated.”

Neither Mr. Daughtry nor the police commented on the use of force by officers. A spokeswoman for Mayor Eric Adams did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the police response. The Police Department’s patrol guide states that officers must use “only the reasonable force necessary to gain control or custody of a subject.”

Advertisement

Bay Ridge has a significant Arab American population and hosts demonstrations in mid-May every year to commemorate what Palestinians call the Nakba, or “catastrophe” — when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were forced from their homes during the war that led to Israel’s founding in 1948.

Andrew Gounardes, a state senator and a Democrat who represents the area, said local politicians had been in touch with the commanding officer of the 68th police precinct before the preplanned protest and said there had been no indication that there would be such a heavy police response. He called the videos he saw of the events “deeply concerning.”

“It certainly seems like the police came ready for a much more aggressive and a much more confrontational demonstration than perhaps they had gotten,” he added.

Justin Brannan, a Democrat who is the city councilman for the area, said the protest was smaller than last year’s but that officers had come from all over the city to police it. He said their approach appeared to be directed by 1 Police Plaza, the department headquarters in Manhattan.

“These were not our local cops. Clearly, there was a zero-tolerance edict sent down from 1PP, which escalated everything and made it worse,” Mr. Brannan said.

Advertisement

“I’m still waiting on information and details about the arrests that were made,” he added, “but from my vantage point, the response appeared pre-emptive, retaliatory and cumulatively aggressive.”

The Republican state assemblyman whose district includes parts of Bay Ridge, Alec Brook-Krasny, had a different perspective. He said an investigation would determine whether the officers’ actions were warranted, but he said some protesters were “breaking the law” by refusing to clear the street.

“I think that those bad apples are really hurting the ability of the other people to express their opinions,” Mr. Brook-Krasny said.

Some local residents supported the police and said they were tired of the protests’ disruptive impact. “Enough is enough,” said Peter Cheris, 52, a 40-year resident of Bay Ridge, who said he had viewed the videos of the protest. “If you’re going to break the law, you deserve it,” he said.

Donna Lieberman, the executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, singled out the presence of the Police Department’s Strategic Response Group, a unit that is sometimes deployed to protests and has been the subject of several lawsuits brought by the civil liberties union and other groups.

Advertisement

The police unit’s handling of the demonstration “was a violation of New Yorkers’ right to speak out and risks chilling political expression,” Ms. Lieberman said in a statement. “N.Y.C.L.U. protest monitors witnessed violent arrests, protester injuries, and even arrests of credentialed members of the press.”

She added: “The continual pattern of N.Y.P.D. aggression against pro-Palestine demonstrators raises important questions about the city’s disparate treatment of speakers based on their message.”

Abdullah Akl, an organizer with Within Our Lifetime, the pro-Palestinian group that organized the protests, said the response took organizers aback, particularly for a demonstration that occurs every year in Bay Ridge and is known to be frequented by families with children.

“It was really an unusual and unprecedented response,” Mr. Akl said.

He said he witnessed two men being pushed to the ground. One of them can be seen in a video with blood streaming down the side of his face. Nerdeen Kiswani, chair of Within Our Lifetime, said three protesters — including the two who can be seen being punched — were treated for their injuries at hospitals.

Advertisement

The Police Department has arrested hundreds of demonstrators since street protests began shortly after the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7 and Israel’s subsequent invasion of Gaza. The protests have been largely peaceful, with few injuries or violent clashes.

In a turning point, on April 30 officers cleared Hamilton Hall at Columbia University, which had been occupied by protesters for 17 hours. Many officers showed restraint during the arrests, though a handful were filmed pushing and dragging students as they removed them from the building.

On Sunday, Ms. Lieberman said police response to the protests in Bay Ridge underscored the importance of implementing the terms of a $512,000 settlement the civil liberties union and the Legal Aid Society reached with the city this month. The settlement set new terms for how the Police Department manages protests, creating a tiered system that dictates how many officers can be sent to demonstrations and limits the use of the Strategic Response Group. It will take years to put into practice.

The settlement is one of several that stemmed from the George Floyd racial justice protests in 2020. Last year, the city agreed to pay $13.7 million to settle a class-action lawsuit that claimed unlawful police tactics had violated the rights of demonstrators in Manhattan and Brooklyn. In March, the city agreed to pay $21,500 to each of roughly 300 people who attended another Black Lives Matter protest in 2020 in the Bronx. Those people were penned in by the police, then charged at or beaten with batons, according to a legal settlement.

Andy Newman and Camille Baker contributed reporting.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Trending