Judge upholds disciplinary charges against N.J. troopers in sex scandal
By Chris Megerian/Statehouse Bureau
November 17, 2009, 7:40PM
TRENTON -- A state administrative law judge has refused to throw out disciplinary charges against seven troopers involved in a sex scandal.
Lawyers for the troopers asked for the case to be dismissed earlier this month, saying the Attorney General’s Office withheld evidence damaging to the state’s case.
The Trenton TimesThe exterior KatManDu nightclub in Trenton, where the woman alleges she met the New Jersey State Police troopers in 2007.
The troopers were accused of sexually assaulting a Rider University student two years ago, although they maintain the sex was consensual. Although the troopers were never charged, they were suspended without pay last month after an internal investigation determined they acted improperly.
The troopers’ lawyers said a DNA test shows the student had sex with a different man after the troopers, then lied about it to investigators. They said this evidence should have been revealed earlier, but Administrative Law Judge Jeff Masin said that wasn’t sufficient reason to throw out the case.
"The respondents’ receipt of the FBI lab report was clearly delayed from when they should have received it," Masin wrote Monday. "But ... the existence of ‘bad faith’ or ‘connivance’ is missing."
Representatives for the troopers said they’re reviewing Masin’s ruling.
"I’m very disappointed," said Patricia Prezioso, a lawyer for one of the troopers. "We’re considering appealing it."
State Troopers Fraternal Association president David Jones said the Attorney General’s Office committed "egregious" violations in pursuing the case.
A separate federal case also is under way, with a hearing scheduled for Dec. 3. Lawyers for the troopers say their clients’ constitutional rights have been violated because they were disciplined for having consensual sex. State officials said conduct that disgraces the State Police should be punishable.
According to disciplinary charges, the seven troopers used their badges to avoid an $8 cover charge at KatManDu, a nightclub on the Trenton waterfront, on Dec. 6, 2007.
They met the student, who is now 27, at the bar and then went to the Ewing home of one of the troopers. The next day, the woman reported she had been sexually assaulted, state officials said.
After the criminal investigation was dropped without being brought before a grand jury, the State Police began an internal affairs investigation into the troopers’ conduct.
7 comments:
This is very sad to hear, especially as a female. Based on the evidence in the article I'm not sure who's right or wrong but I hope that it isn't the police officers. To know that there are prime figures of authority that would take advantage and more than likely get away with it is a scary thought. If IA has taken the kind of action it has by suspending the officers then the heat is probably leaning towards them. This makes me think that anyone can become a police officer - and it usually is the trigger-happy, power hungry, and slightly mentally deranged that end up with that occupation. LC1736
Darnell said all things considered it is quite evident that the victim did in fact engage in consensual sex with the accused state troopers. I strongly agree with the fact that all evidence should have been presented to the public during trial. As far as the conseqences on the officers they should have been punished until they were found guilty of the charges presented. Nonetheless, the consequences in a sense was necessary to send a message to those officers who engage in sexual encounters with women when the sex was not consensual.
I would assume that there was no consent whatsoever between 7 states troopers and a civilian . The student was probably terrified , and have sexual intercourse with them . Nevertheless , they should have been granted their constitutional rights . Having said that some states have a "Rape Shield Law" which protect victims from revealing their past sexual history , this probable the basis for the judge's decision.
in sum, When seven state troopers have sexual intercourse consecutively with a student , they should have known that if caught their could be reprecautions.
lj 6631
no body know who's right and wrong because, it is really hard for me to believe that a woman consent to have intercourse with seven man at once.even though if that was the case the state troopers should know better than that not to messed with her in the first place, getting some fun have certain limit.so i don't really care about what is coming to them because they should serve as example for other ,as for the women she was not suppose to go to any of those man house in the first place ,some one she met for the first time nop, so whatever the outcome of that case it's okay with me.JS7920
Okay, so with what I am going to say may make me sound like a hypocrite in some way, but why seven? In this situation both parties acted in negligence from the seven troopers having intercourse to the young women who decided to go off to their house. Now, let’s say I am at a local bar drinking, and there is a group of seven men (non officers) who want to sex with me, on a personal note I would be scared. Think about it there is seven of them and one of me, but whom would I call in my situation, the damn police! I can understand that an officer is a human being, in this case they are men, so they have their animal instincts, and want have to fun. I can also understand that what an officer does outside of his job is his business and he can do what he pleases, but these were SEVEN men, SEVEN officers at that, they acted as if they were in college running a “train” on a young woman. There is a possibility that she might have been frightened at the time, but in a situation like this, who are people more likely to believe her or the “law”, exactly my point. In most cases people do not confront the law because they will end up losing because in the end the “law” is “always” right! --K.C
Well from reading this article it seems like the troopers had sex with this women, which is not a crime! Obviously, what the troopers do in their own personal time is their business and should not be scrutinized by their employers. If a crime were committed then, yes, the Attorney's General Office should be involved. I think, in the end, it would be hard for the prosecution to prove that a sexual assualt occured.
i found funny how they point out the fact that "the seven troopers used their badges to avoid an $8 cover charge" really? Can't afford $8? and me, personally i wouldn't want anyone in that club knowing what i did for a living....mp9504
Post a Comment