Dedicated to Corrections Officers, Policemen, & Firemen throughout the Garden State
As reported by nj.com, the New Jersey Supreme Court prohibited law enforcement officers from destroying the notes they take while interviewing witnesses, victims and suspects, saying defense attorneys should be allowed to view them so they can challenge official police reports.
The decision, by a divided court, addresses the decades-old struggle in New …
As reported by nj.com, New Jersey’s price tag for public-worker retirement health benefits is higher than any state in the nation, according to a study to be released by the Pew Center on the States. New Jersey has promised $66.7 billion in medical benefits to future and current retirees, but has not set …
As reported by nj.com, on a Monday morning in late March, counselors filed into the Piscataway police department on an urgent mission. The day before, a veteran officer distraught over the breakup of his second marriage had been killed during a shootout with colleagues in what some authorities called a clear case of “suicide by cop.” The counselors were there to give grieving officers a chance to talk through their emotions. They also wanted them to know that in times of crisis, there are alternatives to suicide, a growing problem one psychologist calls an “epidemic” among law enforcement officers in New Jersey and across the nation.
The March 27 death of Sergeant David Powell, 46, marked at least the fifth time this year an active or retired officer had taken his life in New Jersey, putting the state on pace to eclipse last year’s grim tally of 13 suicides, according to records kept by Cherie Castellano, the founder and director of a state-sponsored counseling service known as Cop2Cop.
New Jersey had just two known law enforcement suicides in 2002, the first year Castellano began keeping records. While the number has fluctuated since then, it’s been steadily climbing for the past seven years despite growing awareness and a flurry of programs to combat the problem.
Nationally, more than 400 active and retired officers commit suicide each year, said Robert Douglas, executive director of the National Police Suicide Foundation. No single force can be linked to the increase, according to those who study the issue. Rather, it’s a combination of factors that includes the ready availability of firearms, the stresses inherent in police work, difficulty explaining those stresses to loved ones and an inability to “transition from the street to the home,” said Douglas, a retired Baltimore police officer.
Eugene Stefanelli, the psychologist who refers to police suicides as an epidemic, has been working with the New Jersey State Policemen’s Benevolent Association to address the issue. Substance abuse, he agrees, plays a role in the increased risk of suicide. But Stefanelli also cited morale problems fostered by what he said was a lenient judicial system that returns criminals to the streets, a reduced respect for officers in general and “administrative pressures” within departments.
To Castellano, the founder of Cops2Cops, a helpline staffed by former officers and managed by the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, even the economy cannot be discounted as a contributing factor. Police departments across New Jersey have slashed jobs and benefits in recent years. State officials have taken some steps to address the growing number of suicides, making suicide-prevention programs available for officers and, beginning last year, mandating the training for cadets at New Jersey’s academies.Continue Reading In Rising Numbers Across NJ, Troubled Officers Are Turning to Suicide
As reported by nj.com on February 4, 2011, the effort to reform the State of New Jersey’s civil service system stalled as Governor Chris Christie conditionally vetoed a bill to overhaul the system and Democratic legislative leaders declared they will not agree to his proposed changes.
Christie called the Democrats’ bill “tepid, ineffective …
As reported in the Star Ledger on November 10, 2010, hundreds of Newark city police officers, firefighters, and civilian employees, barring a last-minute reprieve, will be laid off on Friday, November 12, 2010 after a judge dismissed a lawsuit aimed at blocking the city’s cost-cutting measures.
Superior Court Judge Patricia Costello told lawyers for …
As reported in the Trentonian on October 15, 2010, a battle is brewing at the Statehouse over whether to cap salary increases for public employees who cannot strike. Various mayors want arbitration-awarded salary and benefits increases for police and firefighters capped at 2 percent to help them control property taxes, but union officials say …
As reported in the Trentonian on October 13, 2010, the Ewing Township Police Department has slashed the number of tickets for motor vehicle violations in the past three months in response to the Township’s decision to lay off six patrol officers due to budget constraints.
According to Police Chief Robert Coulton, summons issued …
On July 30, 2010, the Appellate Division decided James Henderson v. Board of Trustees, Public Employees’ Retirement System, Docket No.: A-6176-08T2. In the case, James Henderson appealed the Board of Trustees of the Public Employees’ Retirement System’s (“Board”) denial of his application for accidental disability benefits. Frank M. Crivelli, Esq. and Donald C. Barbati, Esq. of the Pellettieri, Rabstein & Altman law firm, and the authors of this blog, successfully argued to reverse the denial, thereby obtaining accidental disability benefits for Henderson.
The case addressed whether Henderson was entitled to accidental disability retirement benefits based upon two (2) separate work-related incidents. Notably, it was undisputed that the first incident causing Henderson injury constituted a “traumatic event.” After initially becoming injured, Henderson was unable to work for some period of time, returned to light duty for a while, and then, ultimately, returned to full duty. The injury was then aggravated and accelerated by a second incident in which Henderson attempted to perform an ordinary task within the scope of his duties and responsibilities of employment.
The Board initially denied Henderson’s application for accidental disability retirement benefits. To support the denial, the Board determined that the second accident did not constitute a “traumatic event” within the meaning of the applicable case law. The Board also found that the injury originally suffered by Henderson in the first incident constituted a “pre-existing disease or condition,” thereby precluding him from receiving said benefits. This appeal ensued.
On appeal, Henderson argued that: (1) the second incident constituted a “traumatic event” within the meaning of the applicable case law; and (2) the term “pre-existing disease or condition” was never intended to include injuries suffered in prior traumatic events for purposes of whether an individual qualifies for accidental benefits.
In its decision, the Appellate Division agreed with the Board’s initial determination that the second incident did not constitute a traumatic event within the meaning of the applicable law. Significantly, however, the Court agreed with our contention that the term “pre-existing disease or condition” does not include injuries suffered in prior traumatic events. Rather, the Court found that term has been uniformly applied to bodily diseases or conditions that were not caused by a traumatic event. The Court cited a litany of case law to support this contention and articulated that the Board’s suggestion that the injuries resulting from the original traumatic event and their sequelae should be treated as pre-existing diseases or conditions is utterly inconsistent with the applicable law.
On July 20, 2010, the Appellate Division decided In the Matter of Latief Dickerson, Hudson County, Docket No.: A-1323-08T2. In the case, Latief Dickerson appealed from a final decision of the Civil Service Commission (“Commission”) terminating his employment as a corrections officer with the Hudson County Department of Corrections (“Department”).
On May…
On June 1, 2010, the Appellate Division decided In the Matter of Michael Sottilare, Department of Corrections Hudson County, Docket No.: A-4761-08T3. In the case, Michael Sottilare appealed from a Civil Service Commission (“Commission”) decision affirming the Hudson County Division of Personnel’s termination of his employment with the county’s Department of Corrections.
Sottilare, after more than ten years as a corrections officer, received four preliminary notices of disciplinary action arising from events commencing on November 30, 2005 and continuing through December 23, 2005. The final incident resulted in his termination.
While on leave due to an on-the-job injury, Sottilare was videotaped working at a construction site in contravention of Hudson County’s policy requiring persons on leave to remain at home unless they are receiving medical care or purchasing medication. A disciplinary charge of malingering issued as a result. Shortly thereafter, on December 23, 2005, Sottilare made a telephone call to the New Jersey Policemen’s Benevolent Association Local 109 office in order to obtain legal representation for the hearing scheduled on the malingering charge and to request a postponement. Officer Shaara Marie Green, then the Vice President of PBA Local 109, answered the phone call.
When Green testified before the Office of Administrative Law, she said she told Sottilare that the union could not provide him with legal representation because the Internal Affairs Unit (“IAU”) officers were no longer members. Sottilare had been assigned to IAU since 1995 or 1996. Green also told Sottialre to obtain his own attorney, and gave him the name of the person that his attorney should contact in order to request the postponement.
Green also testified that after she told Sottialre that PBA Local 109 could not provide him with counsel, Sottilare informed her that she was under investigation by IAU. Sottialre explained to Green that surveillance was being initiated because she was reportedly living with an ex-inmate in violation of departmental policy.
Green immediately telephoned Ricardo Alves, Sottilare’s supervisor at IAU, to report the conversation. When Alves testified, he confirmed that he received a call from Green about the complaint that had been filed against her and that Sottilare had told her that she was the subject of an IAU investigation. Deputy Warden David Krusznis confirmed that Green was being investigated and said that disclosure of the existence of a pending IAU investigation is a violation of departmental policies and procedures, as well as of guidelines promulgated by the Office of the Attorney General.Continue Reading Termination of Internal Affairs Officer Who Disclosed Pending Investigation Affirmed
