Indirect Prohibitioin Consequences

phr

Bluelighter
Joined
May 25, 2004
Messages
36,678
Location
St. Charles, IL
Ok, I came across a couple articles I enjoyed the other day. They're not directly about drugs, but rather are about topics influenced by the current drug laws.


So, I figured a thread where people can post these types of articles and discuss them would be a good idea. I guess we'll see if it works out...
 
In Witness Killing, Prosecutors Point to a Lawyer
DAVID KOCIENIEWSKI
NY Times
12/21/07



NEWARK — For prosecutors in New Jersey, much about the 2004 murder of Deshawn McCray was all too familiar: Yet another key witness in a major drug case had been shot dead before he could testify in court.

But there was one aspect of the killing that especially alarmed and infuriated prosecutors. They believed that a defense lawyer — a former prosecutor — had played a role in facilitating the murder.

The United States attorney has said that that lawyer, Paul Bergrin, relayed Mr. McCray’s identity to friends of one of his clients, a gang member who was facing life in prison on drug charges. The prosecutors said he had even met with members of his client’s gang in person to make clear what was at stake.

“No Kemo, no case,” Mr. Bergrin told the gang members, using Mr. McCray’s nickname, according to testimony in federal court this year.

Three months later, Mr. McCray was shot in the head by one of the gang members on a Newark street.

“Paul Bergrin was a pivotal part of the conspiracy to kill Kemo McCray,” an assistant United States attorney, Joseph Minish, said in court. “Without him, it would not have taken place.”

Prosecutors will not speak publicly now about Mr. Bergrin. They have never charged him in connection with the killing or in any other case in which witnesses might have been intimidated or harmed. They have indicated that problems with safeguarding key evidence — including a wiretapped conversation involving Mr. Bergrin — have left them unable to pursue a prosecution.

But for law enforcement officials in New Jersey who have struggled to combat the widespread problem of witness intimidation, the claims about Mr. Bergrin amount to a particularly disturbing twist on a growing threat.

Mr. Bergrin, in an interview, denied any involvement in knowingly endangering a witness. He said that he had never met with gang members, and that anyone who claimed that he conspired to harm a witness was lying.

“I had nothing to do with the homicide of any witnesses whatsoever,” said Mr. Bergrin, who continues to practice criminal defense law in New Jersey. “I would never partake in any kind of action related to that kind of conduct.”

Law enforcement officials in New Jersey, though, have long been concerned about cases involving Mr. Bergrin’s clients, many of them gang members.

In one case, murder charges against Mr. Bergrin’s client were dropped after a prosecution witnesses was killed. In another murder case and a shooting case, charges were reduced after witnesses were intimidated and recanted their previous statements. And in 2005, a witness against one of Mr. Bergrin’s clients in a murder case changed his story after the defendant’s relatives gave him $1,050 in Mr. Bergrin’s office — and later pleaded guilty to making the payment.

Mr. Bergrin was not present in the office at the time, and he said he had no knowledge of any such payment. “There was never any allegation that I was involved,” he said.

The only legal or professional scrutiny Mr. Bergrin is currently known to face, in fact, is in New York City, where prosecutors have charged him with running New York Confidential, a brothel that charged $1,000 an hour.

The office of the Manhattan district attorney, Robert M. Morgenthau, has accused Mr. Bergrin of taking over the business from a former client and using it to offer sexual favors to unnamed New Jersey law enforcement officers and jail guards — people who were in a position to keep him informed about what inmates might be planning to cooperate against his clients.

Mr. Bergrin has pleaded not guilty. His lawyer, Gerald Shargel, called the charges “nonsense.”

The possible role of defense lawyers in the intimidation of witnesses has angered prosecutors in New Jersey for years, and has recently attracted the interest of state legislators.

For their part, prosecutors say they have grown weary of a familiar sequence of events: Shortly after they provide defense lawyers with copies of a witness’s statement, as they are required by law to do, the threats, warnings and outright attacks begin.

In gang cases prosecuted in cities including Trenton, Newark and Camden, it is not unusual for a witness’s statement to be photocopied within days of being turned over to the defendant’s lawyer, and then be posted on telephone poles or circulated throughout the neighborhood.

State officials are hoping to offer witnesses greater protection, state officials are pushing for laws to restrict the information released to lawyers for certain criminal defendants.

A bill now being considered by the State Legislature and supported by the state attorney general would require that prosecutors handling gang cases turn over only a witness’s name, and make it a felony for defense lawyers to provide their clients with addresses or other identifying information.

“The defendants have a right to know the evidence against them,” said Assemblywoman Bonnie Watson Coleman, a sponsor of the bill. “But witnesses have a right not to be harassed.”

But even supporters of that measure concede that it will be of limited value because many gang crimes occur in neighborhoods or drug organizations so tightknit that all it takes to locate a witness is a name — or a nickname.

Mr. Bergrin, 52, built a reputation as something of a legal maverick as he moved from prosecutor to defense lawyer.

After a decorated career in the Army infantry, he was a prosecutor for the United States attorney’s office in New Jersey and the Essex County prosecutor’s office, preparing his cases with a ferocity that impressed his colleagues and intimidated his opponents. Mr. Bergrin — the son of a Brooklyn police officer and a graduate of law school at Nova Southeastern University in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. — bragged that as a prosecutor he won convictions on every homicide case he handled.

He entered private practice sometime before 1990, and since then, Mr. Bergrin’s client list has allowed him to move through divergent worlds. He has represented celebrities like Queen Latifah; soldiers accused of murdering Iraqi detainees; Angelo Prisco, a Genovese crime family boss; and a former Mrs. New Jersey, who was accused of passing $70,000 in bad checks.

And he has won acquittals in more than a dozen murder trials, a track record that has made his name familiar along Newark’s streets and cellblocks.

Mr. Bergrin’s dealings with those clients has provoked criticism from prosecutors and police officials who say he has become far too close to the accused drug dealers and gangsters he represents.

Mr. Bergrin defends his work.

“When you represent thousands of individuals, have had hundreds of homicides and violent crimes, you can’t be held responsible for every time a witness gets talked to or intimidated or threatened,” he said.

In Mr. McCray’s case, the events leading to his slaying began in November 2003, prosecutors have said, when Mr. Bergrin met with a client named William Baskerville, who had just been arrested on charges of selling more than 50 grams of cocaine.

The prosecutors’ charges about Mr. Bergrin emerged at Mr. Baskerville’s trial. Mr. Bergrin had been removed as his lawyer, but he was a central character in the story prosecutors told in court.

Court records and telephone logs show that shortly after visiting Mr. Baskerville in jail, Mr. Bergrin called Hakeem Curry — Mr. Baskerville’s cousin and Newark’s most powerful heroin distributor — and told him the identity of the prosecution’s star witness.

“I got a chance to speak to William, and he said the informant is a guy by the name of K-Mo,” Mr. Bergrin told Mr. Curry, according to a transcript of the conversation, which was taped.

Later that week, according to prosecutors, Mr. Bergrin met with Mr. Curry and two other relatives of Mr. Baskerville’s to discuss the case. One of the gang members who prosecutors said was present at the meeting was Anthony Young.

Mr. Young testified that Mr. Bergrin had warned everyone at the meeting that if Mr. McCray were to take the stand, Mr. Baskerville would almost certainly be convicted of charges that would bring a mandatory life sentence. Based on Mr. Bergrin’s statement, Mr. Young testified, Mr. Curry’s organization paid him $15,000 to kill Mr. McCray because “he has to be pushed, he has to be handled, we have to knock him off.”

In the weeks that followed, Mr. Baskerville bragged to fellow inmates that he had sent word to have his witness killed, they testified. On March 3, 2004, as Mr. McCray and his stepfather were walking back from a Newark convenience store, Mr. Young ambushed them.

Three bullets struck Mr. McCray in the head. Mr. Young, who confessed and cooperated in Mr. Baskerville’s prosecution, was sentenced to life and avoided a possible death sentence. At Mr. Baskerville’s trial, the prosecutor, in his summation, said of Mr. Bergrin, “Don’t think, ‘How could a lawyer do this?’ I hope you’re not thinking that. He was in on it, ladies and gentlemen. There is no doubt about it.”

Mr. Bergrin said that he was bewildered by the United States attorney’s assertion that he had sought to have Mr. McCray killed. He said he had spoken to Mr. Curry about the case only at the request of his client’s mother, who had informed him that Mr. Curry was her son’s cousin.

“I was just relaying the strengths and the weaknesses of the case with my client’s relative because of his close relationship,” Mr. Bergrin said.

But federal officials have described Mr. Bergrin in open court as the “house counsel” of Mr. Curry’s drug organization, which they said was responsible for more than 80 percent of the heroin distributed in Newark. Dealers who worked for Mr. Curry have testified that Mr. Bergrin was equal part lawyer and friend whose main duty was to monitor all the cases to be certain that no one cooperated with prosecutors.

The United States attorney for New Jersey, Christopher Christie Jr., has not brought charges against Mr. Bergrin, partly because an assistant prosecutor did not properly safeguard the tapes of wiretapped conversation involving him, meaning that they may not be admissible as evidence in court.

“Any suggestion that I tried to prevent people from cooperating or had other motives is absolutely false,” Mr. Bergrin said. “I work incredibly hard on all of my cases and am available at all hours of the night to represent my clients.”

Link!
 
So Many Crimes, and Reasons to Not Cooperate
DAVID KOCIENIEWSKI
NY Times
12/30/07



CAMDEN, N.J. — When her 16-year-old son was shot dead on a street corner here in June, Rosalynn Glasco became the latest mother left to search for justice in a world without witnesses — where the stigma of being seen as a snitch or the fear of retaliation prevents many from testifying about even the worst crimes.

But Ms. Glasco held out some hope, all the same. Determined not to let her son’s killer go unpunished, she urged her daughter and other relatives to work the grapevine in the neighborhood where he was killed, Whitman Park, searching for evidence, and maybe somebody willing to share it.

Discovering nothing, she pressed on.

Ms. Glasco’s extended family put together fliers and started assembling a Web site to publicize a reward. She gathered her life savings and set the figure for information at $5,000. She delayed posting it because Camden detectives asked her to wait, saying they had promising leads in the investigation.

The leads fizzled; a trip to see the mayor produced more promises of effort, but no arrests. The murder of Ms. Glasco’s son, Salahuddin Igwe — shot at 5 a.m. as he walked home from a party — remains unsolved.

Ms. Glasco is disappointed. She is also realistic. If the tables were turned, she admits, and if another mother were at her doorstep asking for information, she is not sure she would help, either.

“Snitching, telling on people, isn’t something that I personally would involve myself with,” she said in an interview last week. “People don’t want to talk to you if they think you’re a snitch. If they were your friends, they’re not your friends anymore. You’re left totally all alone.”

As the most violent neighborhood in one of the nation’s most dangerous cities, the Whitman Park section of Camden is on the front lines of the struggle with witness intimidation. An array of powerful forces converge here to discourage people from cooperating with the investigation of crimes — crimes committed against their own homes, their own neighbors, their own children.

Drugs are sold openly from street corners and abandoned row houses. Gunfire is a neighborhood soundtrack. And the competing gangs that control Whitman Park have made it clear that the price for defying them is death. Within blocks of the street where Ms. Glasco’s son was killed, six people were murdered in less than a year.

Yet many residents of Whitman Park say their reluctance to help investigators is based on more than just fear of gang retaliation. It is also a consequence of their deep distrust of the local police and prosecutors and politicians. Like residents of many other struggling, predominantly black and Hispanic neighborhoods across the country, people here complain that racial profiling, police corruption and the excesses of the war on drugs have made them suspicious of virtually any arm of government.

Atmosphere of Distrust

It was here in Whitman Park, after all, that a once-lauded community police officer was sentenced to prison last year for robbing drug dealers. And it was here that Gov. Christie Whitman was photographed frisking a young black man who had been falsely suspected of carrying drugs, an image that surfaced publicly in 2000 and came to symbolize New Jersey law enforcement’s longstanding practice of racial profiling.

And that is not all. The neighborhood’s grim economic and social realities, which have convinced any number of young people here that drug dealing is the best job available, leaves many law-abiding residents with conflicting loyalties.

There are so many people in the neighborhood with friends or relatives in the drug business that to help police arrest a dealer may jeopardize a family’s financial security.

It adds up, the police say, to an environment where they encounter people who, however much they despise the gangs, are more comfortable coexisting with the Bloods, Crips or Latin Kings than assisting the police.

“There’s a lot of history and a lot of reasons for people to stay quiet that are hard to understand unless you’re from there,” said Capt. Al Handy of the Camden police. “We’ve been trying to work with people and win back the trust. But it’s a long, long process.”

The social stigma against helping the police has become an exasperating obstacle confronting officials as they try to combat increased gang violence in urban communities. According to Deputy Attorney General Hester Agudosi, who supervises New Jersey’s 21 county prosecutor’s offices, the number of witnesses who remain silent because they fear for their safety is probably less than one-tenth the number who refuse to talk because they fear the social repercussions.

One small, glaring symptom of the dilemma is the “Stop Snitchin’” movement, an underground effort, popularized in rap videos and with T-shirts, urging criminals not to testify against other suspects in exchange for more lenient sentences. But the sense of estrangement is far broader, crossing generational lines and testing the consciences of people whose only involvement with crime is as a victim or potential witness.

“A lot of white Americans from suburban communities can’t understand why people wouldn’t talk to law enforcement,” said Charles Ogletree, a Harvard law professor who is studying witness intimidation for the National District Attorneys Association. “But in a lot of inner-city communities, there is so much hostility to the police that many people of color can’t fathom why someone would even seriously consider helping them.”

In Whitman Park, a neighborhood of less than half a square mile that is home to 6,000 people, young men in black hooded sweatshirts are a fixture on street corners and front stoops, openly flagging down drivers to offer cocaine. Of the 43 murders that the Camden police have reported this year, seven have occurred there.

The reasons for not talking about those murders — or other crimes — can be varied.

“Let’s say you make a police report and they run your name and find out you have a warrant from five or six years ago you forgot about,” said Verdell Peterson, 52. “In this neighborhood, $250 is a lot of money, and if you don’t have it to pay your bail, you’re going to sit in jail until someone else does.”

‘You Might Get Killed’

But many say that steering clear of the police is a matter of trust, and survival.

Neil Reynolds, 18, said that his upbringing in Whitman Park taught him that “the wrong friends will get you shot and cops will get you shot or locked up.”

“If you talk to the police, you might get killed,” said Mr. Reynolds, who has a record for narcotics sales but says he is now trying to leave the drug business. But even those who aren’t physically harmed, he said, face repercussions. “No one wants anything to do with you, because when they get in trouble, they think you’ll tell on them, too.”

At Community Baptist Church, where funeral services have been held for a half-dozen of Whitman Park’s murder victims in recent years, the Rev. David King said an entire generation of Whitman Park children were being raised to fear the police.

Working from a run-down building with oil poured on unused doorways to prevent narcotics dealers from congregating, Mr. King runs anti-gang and drug rehabilitation programs and urges church members to keep an open mind about the police. But last month, when a police officer who is well known and well liked at the church crashed his car out front, Mr. King said he was dismayed to see neighborhood children cheering.

“All they could see was his uniform,” he said.

Police and prosecutors have tried various strategies to regain the trust of Camden residents in recent years. The Shooting Response Team, which quickly floods the scene of any gun crime with a crew of city, county and state investigators, has been credited with an improved response to gun crimes. Statistics indicate that the department has tripled its success in solving shootings, to 42 percent in 2006 from 14 percent in 2003.

But efforts to strengthen the community policing efforts in the neighborhood and start a neighborhood watch program were set back late last year when the officer assigned to Whitman Park, Cpl. Michael Hearne, was arrested on charges that he and an accomplice had been robbing drug dealers at gunpoint.

Corporal Hearne pleaded guilty and is serving a seven-year prison term.

Even those residents who are willing to trust the police can be dissuaded from reporting drug activity to the authorities because narcotics have become such an integral part of Whitman Park’s economy. Steven Carmichael, a postal carrier who is acting president of the United Neighbors of Whitman Park, said that in many instances people are ambivalent because they want to drive off the drug dealers, but are friends with their parents.

“Do you say something to the parent? But maybe the parents already know and are afraid to put the kid out on the street where he might get shot or killed,” said Mr. Carmichael, whose cousin across town was killed by rival drug dealers last year. “Or maybe the parents are out of work and don’t ask where he gets that money so long as it helps them put food on the table. From the outside it seems black and white, but out here, things get complicated.”

Things certainly got complicated for Mr. Carmichael after his cousin’s death.

“I couldn’t go to the funeral because people know I try to help the police,” he said.

In November, when detectives were stymied in the case of 12-year-old boy killed in a Camden housing project, investigators brought the child’s mother up from Florida to canvass the neighborhood in hopes that a “mother to mother” conversation with people near the scene of the shooting might encourage witnesses to come forward.

The case remains unsolved.

Little Help From the Top

Ms. Glasco had hoped to help her son Salahuddin, known as Sal, avoid the temptations and perils of Camden, and so in 2005 she moved with him to Lindenwold, a suburb. Although his father is in prison and his sister has had brushes with the law, Sal was the child who everyone had hoped might at least escape the city.

One of Sal’s jobs was at the Boys and Girls Club of Cherry Hill, near Whitman Park. He frequently spent the night at his sister’s home, on Thurman Street, and socialized with friends down the block.

One June night he never made it back to his sister’s. Ms. Glasco eventually found herself on the telephone with a detective, who, she recalled, “told me that he was sorry to inform me that my son had been killed.”

From the outset of the investigation, detectives warned the family that witnesses would be difficult to come by. But Ms. Glasco was adamant that she was “not going to let this one go.”

So she went looking for witnesses.

“I wanted to let them know this was about a mother and her son,” she said. “And maybe that would make them do the right thing.”

She and her relatives would shake loose a nickname of a potential suspect, but turn up little else. The police did little better.

A meeting in September with Mayor Gwendolyn A. Faison offered one glimmer of hope when the mayor picked up the telephone a few minutes into the conversation and got the deputy police commissioner on the line. There was little follow-up, however, and Ms. Faison said she wasn’t surprised: Camden’s government has been under state supervision for nearly 20 years because of corruption, so the police do not report to her.

“I can call, and I did,” Mayor Faison said, “but I have no authority over them.”

The Camden police declined to discuss the case, but the Camden County prosecutors say they are satisfied with the detectives’ work and optimistic that they’re moving toward an arrest.

Since her son’s death, Ms. Glasco said, she is often not certain where to focus her anger. She is infuriated with the killer and frustrated with the police. She is anguished by the thought that someone knows who is responsible, but is too scared or cynical to come forward. And she is honest enough to understand why they might not.

Still, she pleads.

“People have to put themselves in my shoes,” she said. “I’m a mother with a dead kid. And the person who did it is out there, smiling, thinking that they got it made.”

Link!
 
Links to the other articles about witness intimidation in NJ can be found at the article source.
 
Top