Sunday, January 29, 2012

Hero Catholic Priest James Manship Exposes Corruption and Abuses Committed by East Haven Connecticut Police Department, Leading to Federal Indictment Of Four East Haven Police Officers.

In 2009 Father James a Catholic Priest assigned to St. Rose of Lima Roman Catholic Church started to investigate abuses and harassment committed against his Hispanic parishioners by police officers of the East Haven Police Department.  To document the abuses Father James would videotape the actions of the East Haven Police Department.  In retaliation the East Haven Police Department arrested  Father James for disorderly conduct when Father James attempted to videotape the police caught engaging in harassment and other illegal conduct against his Hispanic residence. However, a courageous and honorable local prosecutor dropped all the charges against Father James.  However, not deterred, according to the federal indictment, (“Co-Conspirator No. 1”), which is believed to be Police Chief Leonard Gallo, attempted to have Father James transferred and removed from St. Lima’s to another parish outside of East Haven by calling Father James supervisors, and complaining about his actions.

The courageous actions of Father James led to a federal 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 law suit against the East Haven Police Department by the Yale Law School’s Worker and Immigrant Rights Advocacy Clinic.  

As the direct result of Father James and Yale Law School actions the matter got the attention of the FBI and the United States Department of Justice. As a result the Justice Department this week announced the indictments against police officers, Spaulding, Cari, Zullo and Miller.

Similar to standard operating procedures in most towns and cities in New Jersey, abuses committed against people by the police stems from the failure of police departments to investigate and remand errant police officers engaged in illegal conduct. Over and over again it has been shown and proven that police departments cannot police themselves, and that only through outside investigation, including civil review broads, will such flagrant abuses be decreased. 

Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr.
New Jersey and Criminal Defense and Civil Rights Attorney
Elizabeth, N.J. 07207
Tel. No. (908) 354-7006

Dated: January 29, 2012

“If you want Peace Work for Justice.” Pope John Paul, I

Elizabeth Criminal Defense Attorney, Elizabeth NJ Criminal Attorney

Thursday, January 19, 2012

Recent Miranda Developments in New Jersey: No When to Shut Your Mouth.

When Questioned by Police Request the Assistants of
an Attorney and Not Your Mother: Recent Cases
on Defendant’s Miranda Rights.

On January 12, 2012, the Supreme Court of New Jersey flatly rejected a suppression of a custodial interrogation which was granted by the Appellate Division.

In State v. Demetrius Diaz-Bridges, the issue was simply whether a defendant who requested to speak to his mother during a custodial interrogation was asserting his right to remain silent, thus requiring the police to cease all questioning.

The Supreme Court rejected this argument holding that asking to speak to your mom instead of a lawyer affords the defendant no protection from further questions and the admission of the confession as evidence of guilt at time of trial.

Appellate Division Throws-Out Confession Based
On Promises Made To Defendant For Leniency.

On January 10, 2012, the Appellate Division in State v. Carl Hreha threw-out a confession taken by State Police Detectives reversing the trial court’s denial of defendant’s Miranda Motion to suppress his confession. 

In this case Mr. Hreha a computer technician with the Office of the Attorney sent racist literature to all the OAG printers at the Hughes Justice Center.  As a result Mr. Hreha was charged with various second degree computer offenses.

In this case the State Police detectives whom testified at the Miranda Hearing did not remember whether they made any promises of leniency to the defendant, including that if the cooperated that he would not be taken out of his place of employment (Office of the Attorney General), in handcuffs, would go home later that day, and would probably be admitted into the Pretrial Intervention Program in which after one-year the charges would be dismissed.  The Appellate Division held that such promises made by the detectives as testified by the defendant were promises likely to strip the defendant of his capacity for self-determination, citing the seminal cases State v. Fletcher, 380 N.J. Super. 80, 89 (App. Div. 2005) and State v. Pillar, 359 N.J. Super. 249, 272-73 (App. Div. 2003).

Defendant’s charged with a crime must be aware that even when a confession is made it is sometimes possible to have the confession thrown-out in certain circumstances.

Because there was a dissenting Judge in this decision this case will automatically be heard by the New Jersey Supreme Court.  Let’s hope that the decision is not disturbed by the New Jersey Supreme Court.

Sanzone Firm
Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr.
P.O. Box 261
277 North Broad Street
Elizabeth, N.J. 07207
(908) 354-7006
Dated: January 19, 2012

A New Jersey Criminal Defense Attorney locating in Elizabeth, New Jersey who will provide competent legal defense for people accused of serious crimes and disorderly person’s offenses in Union, Essex, Bergen, Hudson, Somerset, Middlesex, Morris, Passaic, Monmouth, Ocean, Atlantic, Hunterdon, Warren, and Cape May Counties,