Recently, several Police Officers from various Departments who were victims of domestic violence, contacted a non profit organization and consulting firm, known as the National/New Jersey Police Solidarity Coalition Inc. for help. The firm specialize in assisting active and retired Law Enforcement personnel, including the public sector, charged with acts of domestic violence under false pretenses. They assist Pro-Se litigants with Court document preparation, investigate civil rights violations, official misconduct, and corruption complaints in which Government entities are named violators.
All Officers complaints cited, they were assaulted by an acquaintance within a domestic situation and as victims, obtained restraining orders to protect themselves and their employment as Police Officers. However, the offenders upon being served with the orders, counter signed complaints against the officers for DV in which some were summarily reassigned, suspended, denied promotions or denied permission for off duty work, stripped of their personal and Department weapons, predicated upon the complaint and directive by the Attorney General Guidelines. The firm noted, when Law Enforcement Officers as victims, secure an order of protection (restraining order)for themselves against a contentious or combative acquaintance, spouse or cohabitant.
The offender is advised of their rights to file an order of protection also against the officer. The firm noted, this is a flagrant practice utilized by most Prosecutor Domestic Violence Units and vindictive offenders. The firm further cited: “Prosecutors frequently utilize this bogus practice as a basis for probable cause to unlawfully seize the officer’s weapons, and offenders utilize it for retribution and leverage.” The Firm further cited: “ Over one million false allegations of domestic violence are filed each year. Everyone is aware that restraining orders issued against law enforcement officers are granted to virtually all who apply.” The majority of these cases, Judges, Prosecutors, Lawyers and offenders all know such allegations of abuse are utilized as a tactical advantage in matrimonial, and child custody matters.
The firm’s legal team noted, the mechanisms to halt such practice are never addressed or utilized by the issuing authority. The firm’s legal team also noted, a second order is unnecessary and a waste of the Courts time, as the first restraining order is a binding protection for both victim and offender, as neither party may violate the order or have contact with each other until the projected hearing date.
The Attorney Generals directive, instruct Prosecutors to seize all Department issued weapons and personal firearms, when an act of domestic violence has been alleged by a law enforcement officer. What the firm found disturbing and perplexing is, no where within the AG directive does it instruct nor advise the prosecutor to conduct an exploratory investigation prior to implementing said action to protect the accused officer’s constitutional rights.
The Officer’s complained they were outraged in the way they are being treated as victims of DV. by Prosecutors. They further cited, they feel, they are being summarily punished for filing the order to protect themselves. Some complained they have been placed on modified duty, suspended, disarmed between 6mos -3yrs or longer, restricted from working off duty to help meet their financial obligations, forced under duress to enroll in anger management, or long term psychological counseling programs at their own expense, contingent upon being returned to active duty and rearmed based upon the recommendations by the Prosecutor. The officers further complained, upon inquiry to their respective Professional Standards Units, of when they may be returned to active duty, they receive the same response “ It’s out of our hands, we’re waiting on clearance from the Prosecutors Office.”
As purveyors of law, Prosecutors should be aware of the Legislative intent within the Domestic Violence Act of 1991 and N.J criminal codes, which cite: “ No victim shall be denied relief or arrested or charged under this act with an offense because the victim used reasonable force in self defense against domestic violence by an attacker.” The law is absolute, it does not delineate, or specify who and who may not be identified as a victim, or who may be disqualified from receiving this protection, due to race, creed, color, gender, national origin, religion, sexual preference, or profession.
Here, the Officers as victims, pursuant to the relevant statute are covered by the shield of immunity. The reasonable force they utilized, was applying for a restraining order first. They followed the law to the strict letter, in which they are authorized and trained in domestic situations. In doing such, they are now being summarily penalized and punished as offenders for following the rules.
The firm cited: Most Prosecutors as a rule regarding these matters intentionally neglect to follow rules of law in which they are bound. The basic role of the prosecutor is to seek justice and not convictions. His or her office is charged with the duty to see that the laws of his/her jurisdiction are faithfully executed. Examining all the complaints and totality of the evidence presented, our investigators and legal team find the Officers have done nothing wrong and they are being unlawfully punished and their civil rights are being violated. Coalition President Eric Washington cited: “Sometimes the worst offenders of civil rights violation are people who work for public entities, perhaps they feel they are beyond retribution or above the law.”
“We find this practice of penalizing and disarming innocent law enforcement officers for obtaining DV orders as a means of protection very disturbing. First and foremost, it’s unlawful, unconstitutional, highly outrageous and repugnant. These officers place their lives on the line each and every day they put on a uniform, or pick up that badge and gun. They make enemies out here enforcing the laws they swore to uphold and protect. What’s paradoxical is, these officers wouldn’t have these enemies if for not doing their jobs to make the streets safer for you and I. They protect everyone else, but this practice of penalization without violation, deprives them of their right to protect themselves. The action’s the prosecutors are taking against these innocent officers are wrong. Their application of the law is synonymous with the actions they are directed to take against a convicted offender.”
The irony of it all is, one former member of my Police Department was charged with a bogus complaint of domestic violence, denied permission to carry firearms and placed on modified duty. While he was off duty with some friends at a club in neighboring Orange, N.J. they left the club to enter his vehicle and were subsequently robbed at gun point in the parking lot of the club.
The robbers found his police badge and identification on his person, but fortunately did not harm him, as he co-operated. However the next unarmed officer may not be so fortunate . We hope this doesn’t happen, but with this practice of disarming innocent law enforcement officers on the strength of false counter claims, who knows? We are prepared and ready to move forward with these matters, if our members and clients do not get resolution very soon.
National/New Jersey Police Solidarity Coalition Inc.
P.O. Box 72
S. Orange, N.J. 07079
google www.npscinc.blogger
12/04/09
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment