Broward grand jury hears first witnesses in criminal probe of Broward Health

By Dan Christensen and Buddy Nevins, FloridaBulldog.org 

Broward State Attorney Michael Satz Photo: Tom Tracy, Florida Catholic

A Broward grand jury began hearing testimony Wednesday about alleged criminal conduct at long-troubled Broward Health, the taxpayer-supported public medical system for the northern two-thirds of the county.

A panel of 18 grand jurors were on hand to examine potential criminal violations of Florida’s Government-in-the-Sunshine Law and state ethics laws by the seven-member commission appointed by Gov. Rick Scott that runs the health-care agency.

The grand jury may also take a broader look at Broward Health, which has been buffeted by allegations of mismanagement and insider dealing for years. Grand jurors have the power to recommend changes in the system’s governance and have done so with various governments in the past.

“I decided our office should focus on possible Sunshine Law violations and related matters that had come to our attention,” said Broward State Attorney Michael Satz.

Office spokesman Ron Ishoy indicated that grand jury testimony would reach into many areas of the public health-care system.

“We are in the midst of a wide-ranging investigation,” he said.

News of the county grand jury’s probe comes amid an ongoing federal grand jury’s look at suspicious purchasing practices at Broward Health. Florida Bulldog reported in February 2016 that the federal grand jury has subpoenaed Broward Health’s records about former procurement officer Brian Bravo and 16 companies, including MedAssets, a publicly traded, Georgia-based group purchasing organization.

‘No overlap’

Satz was reluctant to convene a grand jury on Broward Health last year because he felt that it might duplicate or get in the way of the federal investigation. On Tuesday, he indicated that was no longer an issue. “There continues to be good cooperation between the investigative agencies involved and no overlap,” Satz said.

Former Broward Health General Counsel Sam Goren entering the grand jury room on Wednesday. Photo: Florida Bulldog

Grand jury proceedings, both federal and state, are secret. Wednesday morning, however, subpoenaed witnesses began showing up outside the grand jury’s new home — Courtroom 10175 on the 10th floor of the new Broward County Courthouse Tower.

The kickoff witnesses were Broward Health’s former general counsel Sam Goren and ex-board chairman David Di Pietro. Goren, accompanied by his colleague attorney Jacob Horowitz, testified for an hour and 15 minutes. Di Pietro testified for nearly two and a half hours. Neither man would discuss his testimony nor disclose what matters he was asked about.

Appearing to testify in the afternoon were Pam Hatfield, senior executive secretary to Broward Health’s president/CEO, and former Broward Health Commissioner Maureen Canada.

Investigators led by Assistant State Attorney Tim Donnelly, chief of the office’s Public Corruption/Special Investigations unit, brought nine boxes of documents with them to the grand jury room. Accompanying Donnelly at yesterday’s proceedings were prosecutors Whitney MacKay and Chris Killoran.

Broward corruption prosecutor Tim Donnelly outside the grand jury room on Wednesday. Photo: Florida Bulldog

Broward Health is an independent special district whose legal name is the North Broward Hospital District. It operates four hospitals, including its flagship Broward Health Medical Center in Fort Lauderdale, and additional urgent care and outpatient centers.

The governor appoints a board of commissioners that runs the district and levies property taxes to help support its mission, which includes providing treatment for indigent patients. The board has seven seats, but two are currently unfilled. All five commissioners are Republicans appointed by Gov. Scott.

Di Pietro blows whistle

Di Pietro filed a federal whistleblower suit last year shortly after he quit the board. The lawsuit was unsealed late last week, and Florida Bulldog reported Monday that it contains a number of politically explosive allegations about insider influence, including kickbacks and “hush money” payments at Broward Health that reach up to the governor himself.

Former Broward Health chairman David Di Pietro exiting the grand jury room on Wednesday. Photo: Florida Bulldog

Prosecutors have fielded numerous complaints about the governance of the public-health system during the past 18 months. At least two of the complaints involve the controversy swirling around the hiring of Interim President/CEO Beverly Capasso.

One complaint alleges Capasso, who was a Broward Health commissioner at the time, violated Florida ethics laws when she voted to give herself her current job. Florida law on voting conflict states that “no county, municipal, or other local public officer shall vote in an official capacity upon any measure which would inure to his or her special private gain or loss.”

The CEO job pays Capasso $650,000 annually. A search for a permanent chief executive is underway.

Another allegation is that board members discussed hiring Capasso in private, thus breaking the Sunshine Law, which requires most public matters to be discussed in the open.

An abrupt hiring

She was hired suddenly as CEO during a May 8 Broward Health Commission meeting. Before the vote, fellow board members did little questioning of her background, her health care experience or how she would approach the job. Because of the lack of meaningful debate at the meeting when Capasso was hired, the move appeared preplanned.

After her hiring, information about Capasso’s background surfaced that was never publicly discussed before she was hired. The Sun-Sentinel reported that Capasso held a master’s degree from an unaccredited mail and online university that a federal investigator called a diploma mill during congressional testimony.

Broward Health Interim President/CEO Beverly Capasso talks with Commissioner Christopher Ure after Monday’s board meeting. Photo: Florida Bulldog

Gov. Scott appointed Capasso, a registered nurse whose experience included a stint as chief executive of Jackson Memorial Hospital, to Broward Health’s board in October 2016.

Another complaint filed with the State Attorney’s Office alleges that Broward Health Commissioner Christopher Ure used his position to get an investigator to threaten his mistress.

“I filed the complaint and went in to talk to Tim Donnelly about it. Donnelly told me they were going to hold a Grand Jury concerning Broward Health” but gave no timetable, community activist and blogger Dan Lewis said.

Lewis outlined his allegations in an Aug. 21 post on his Broward Health Blog.

WestonGuy954

“Christopher Ure and Jane Doe met online late in 2015.  He used ‘Guy Weston’ and ‘WestonGuy954@gmail.com’ as his online profile (clever, he lives in Weston and he’s a ‘guy’).  He also used an anonymous Google voice number 770-580-4009 to keep his communications secret,” Lewis wrote.

Lewis posted pictures that Ure allegedly texted the woman, including one he described as taken outside his daughter’s school play.

Dan Lewis

Late last year, Ure and the woman had a falling out.  She felt she was jilted and tried to contact Ure’s wife and Ure’s minister, Lewis wrote. Then one day she received a call from a private investigator trying to warn her off.

“As you know, um, our friend has a very important job and I, uh, look out after these guys so you can look it up,” the investigator said in a message that was recorded and given to Lewis.

The investigator worked for a law firm that in the past had sued Broward Health for malpractice.

Lewis complained to the State Attorney’s Office that Ure received “a favor” because he was a Broward Health commissioner involved in a lawsuit with the investigator’s employer. If proved, such a favor would constitute unlawful misuse of public office.

Ure did not return phone messages requesting comment.

Tools for change

Grand jury reports can be powerful tools for change, but their success has been mixed in Broward.

In 2009, grand jurors recommended tougher regulation of pain clinics that had proliferated in Broward, where 33 of the nation’s 50 leading dispensing physicians of Oxycodone were then located. The report helped bolster the argument that stricter laws were needed, and Tallahassee acted.

Repeated examinations of the Broward schools construction practices by local and state grand jurors failed to produce the same results.

In 1997, the grand jury blasted the Broward public schools for shoddy construction and overspending. But as a 2002 grand jury report noted, it changed nothing.

A 2015 report from the State Attorney’s Office again slammed the School Board for not following earlier grand jury recommendations, including those by a statewide grand jury.

Broward chief judge leads push to release from jail nonviolent poor who can’t make bail

By Dan Christensen, FloridaBulldog.org 

Broward Chief Judge Jack Tuter Photo: J.A.A.B Blog

Concerned that poor people charged with minor, nonviolent offenses who can’t post bond are clogging the jail at taxpayers’ expense, Broward Chief Judge Jack Tuter is spearheading a push to release more of them before trial.

“If you are in jail more than a couple of days on a low bond, you are probably there because you can’t afford to post the bond. People shouldn’t be waiting in jail simply because they are poor,” Tuter said in an interview last week. “It’s a multi-faceted problem, but my goal is to get out those with ties to the community and some degree of assurance they’ll show up in court.”

Tuter, who took over as chief judge on July 1, said recent Broward jail statistics showed that 321 people were being held on bonds of under $5,000. Low-risk individuals in that group with no other pending charges are the focus of Tuter’s concern.

Broward’s County Court judges serve on a rotating basis as first appearance, or Bond Court judges. Earlier this month, Tuter and representatives from the Broward Sheriff’s pretrial diversion program met with those judges for a refresher about the options for judges when dealing with incoming defendants, including less costly electronic monitoring and releasing defendants on their own recognizance.

“Most judges knew this, but I reemphasized it,” said Tuter. “Is there an alternative to jail?”

The chief judge’s action was warmly met by Broward Public Defender Howard Finkelstein, who has long accused local judges of fostering a “double standard” of justice by ignoring the disparate treatment of minorities and the indigent.

“Broward County is taking its first steps to end the institutionalized racist justice system that has existed in our county for the past 50 years,” Finkelstein said. “We have a chief judge who’s trying to figure out the right thing.”

Broward’s jails have a troubled history that led to decades of federal monitoring to protect the constitutional rights of inmates. In 1976, inmates sued alleging a variety of constitutional violations stemming from overcrowding, abuse and inadequate medical care. The case was largely settled last December – 40 years later.

Chronic overcrowding is not currently a problem, with the inmate population under 4,000 and about 77 percent of the system’s 5,144 bed capacity.

More reductions sought

Still, Tuter wants to see that number lower. “I’d like to see it under 70 percent,” he said.

The cost to house an inmate in Broward is about $150 a day. The cost to taxpayers to keep 30 inmates who can’t meet a small bond in jail for 30 days is about $135,000. In contrast, Tuter said it costs $5 a day to put an ankle monitor on a defendant.

The question of who should be released is complicated by several factors, not the least of which is how to deal with defendants who don’t have a permanent address. An address is required for pretrial release. It allows the court system to notify defendants when they must appear in court so judges don’t have to order deputies to go out and pick them up.

When low-bond defendants remain in custody for more than five days or a week judges typically take a “second look” to see if a reason exists to let them out. But if the courts are not successful in further reducing the jail population, Tuter will consider instituting a “third look docket” that will have judges go to the jail to make “a more refined approach” to finding pretrial release.

The court has a lengthy schedule of “convenience bonds” that offer defendants preset amounts they can post to get out of jail, depending on the charge, without even seeing a judge. The bond range is from $25 to $500,000.

Public Defender Finkelstein wants to end the use of convenience bonds, which he says are convenient to judges and the well-to-do, but not his typically indigent clients. Tuter, who was appointed to Broward’s circuit court bench by Gov. Jeb Bush in 2005, has no plans to scrap the schedule.

Still, change that promises to address old grievances has begun.

“Broward seems to be coming out of its constitutional slumber,” said Finkelstein. “It’s like the lights went on and everybody realizes we haven’t been doing things right.”

Strange case: BSO looking to buy rights to embarrassing lawsuit to quash it

By Dan Christensen, FloridaBulldog.org 

Broward Sheriff Scott Israel

The Broward Sheriff’s Office is making a bizarre bid to squelch a disturbing lawsuit brought against it by a former employee – it wants to buy all rights to the lawsuit from a bankruptcy court trustee.

The lawsuit, filed in 2015 by former BSO Human Resources Information Manager Jennifer Bakowski, includes a host of allegations against BSO including false imprisonment, defamation and malicious prosecution.

In federal bankruptcy court Thursday, a lawyer for BSO asked the court to deny the trustee’s plan to allow Bakowski to buy back her own lawsuit at a cost of about $86,000. Instead, he said, the sheriff should be allowed to buy it for $161,000 in public dollars.

“If we can acquire the case, we can dismiss the case,” said Fort Lauderdale attorney Thomas M. Messana.

“It was his client’s misdeeds that caused the bankruptcy,” countered the trustee’s lawyer, Jason S. Rigoli of Boca Raton. Rigoli argued BSO had no standing to object to the trustee’s proposal to sell the lawsuit back to Bakowski, noting her offer was sufficient to pay off all creditors and attorneys’ fees in full with interest.

“They’re trying to cover up and cap the amount of their liability,” Miami attorney Christian Olson told U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Raymond B. Ray on behalf of Bakowski.

Ray deferred a ruling, and asked both sides to submit final written arguments by March 31. It was unclear whether another hearing on the matter would be held.

Bankruptcy trustee Marc P. Barmat obtained opinions from independent trial attorneys that valued the case as being worth much as $1.2 million, according to attorneys for Bakowski.

Strange case

The strange case arose out of a reopened bankruptcy court case that Bakowski and her husband, Robert, originally filed in 2013 in the wake of her December 2012 firing by Sheriff Scott Israel.

Bakowski was a 13-year employee with an otherwise spotless record when two sheriffs – Al Lamberti and Israel, his successor – publicly accused her of embezzling approximately $1 million. A year later, however, BSO detectives and the State Attorney’s Office cleared Bakowski of wrongdoing after determining, among other things, that in fact no money was missing, court records say.

Jennifer Bakowski

While under investigation, Bakowski and her husband filed for bankruptcy in Fort Lauderdale as their debts piled up following the loss of what was said in court to be a “six-figure salary.” The court discharged the couple’s debts in August 2013.

More than a year later, on Jan. 31, 2015, Bakowski sued Sheriff Israel and several underlings in Broward Circuit Court alleging a variety of misconduct by BSO arising from her dismissal.

In June 2016, an attorney for BSO contacted the trustee to tell him about the lawsuit, alleging it should have been included in the bankruptcy estate because the claims arose well before the underlying damages case was filed in Broward Circuit Court. The trustee soon moved to reopen the Bakowskis’ bankruptcy case and, as required by law, gave notice to the couple’s debtors to refile any claims.

The trustee and the Bakowskis later agreed to avoid the costs of further litigating whether all the alleged causes of action in the state complaint against BSO are property of the estate. They agreed to give all rights and title to the suit to the trustee.

The trustee then proposed to sell to Jennifer Bakowski those bankruptcy rights. After Thursday’s hearing, Bakowski said she would fund the rights purchase with money she recently inherited from her late mother.

The sale would have gone through, but BSO objected. Specifically, BSO’s lawyers complained in court papers, “The sale ‘process’ was opaque, was not conducted at arms length, and favors the debtor over the estate and its creditors.”

“We’re not a disgruntled bidder,” BSO lawyer Messana told Judge Ray. “We’re saying the process was unfair.”

Broward grand jury to review death of black man tasered by Coconut Creek police

By Dan Christensen, FloridaBulldog.org 

Calvon "Andre" Reid

Calvon “Andre” Reid

Broward’s grand jury will convene next week to consider whether four Coconut Creek police officers should face criminal charges in the death of a black man who was shot multiple times by police firing Taser stun guns.

Calvon “Andre” Reid, a 39-year-old meat salesman, died on Feb. 4, 2015 – two days after being shot down in a parking lot of the large, and largely white, Wynmoor retirement community.

“At long last,” said West Palm Beach attorney Jack Scarola, who represents Reid’s family. “We are all very anxious to see what happens in the course of this proceeding and even more anxious to get past this so we can conduct our own investigation.”

Details about the death of Calvon Reid have been shrouded in secrecy from the moment the first Taser was fired about 1:30 a.m. outside 1701 Andros Isle, awakening residents to a sound like a firecracker going off. Coconut Creek police did not disclose the police-involved shooting, or announce that someone had died in police custody until after the Florida Bulldog published eyewitness accounts on Feb. 27, 2015.

The shooting, and the resulting heavy media scrutiny, cost city police chief Michael Mann his job. He was forced to resign in early March, days after publicly declaring at a press conference that there had been “no cover-up” by police.

In addition to questions about possible police use of excessive force, the grand jury must sort through several mysteries when it meets on Nov. 9.

Police have said Reid was wearing torn and bloodstained clothes, had cuts on his hands and body, and was in an “agitated, combative and incoherent state” when they encountered him inside the gated community. But why was Reid there? How did he get there? And was he visiting someone? Witnesses heard Reid repeatedly cry out, “Baby! Baby! They’re gonna kill me!”

Broward Assistant State Attorney Yael Gamm will present the case to the grand jury on behalf of longtime State Attorney Michael Satz. The proceedings are closed to the public by law.

State Attorney’s track record

Satz’s track record in such cases: since 1980, just one police officer in Broward – BSO Deputy Peter Peraza in 2015 – has been indicted for killing someone while on duty. A judge dismissed the manslaughter charge against Peraza in July. Satz’s office is appealing.

The four Coconut Creek officers being investigated by the grand jury are Sgts. David Freeman and Darren Karp and Officers Thomas Eisenring and Daniel Rush. Freeman, Karp and Eisenring are white. Rush is African-American.

In April, Rush was arrested by Broward Sheriff’s deputies and accused of molesting four young boys. He was later released on bond and is awaiting trial.

The walkway where the first Taser shots were fired. Small bloodstains remained in the tile grouting.

The walkway where the first Taser shots were fired. Small bloodstains remained in the tile grouting.

Broward Medical Examiner Dr. Craig Mallak declined to discuss his findings in the case, citing state law that exempts information about ongoing criminal investigations from public disclosure.

Last year, however, Florida Bulldog reported that Mallak’s office ruled Reid’s death a homicide and the cause electrocution. Attorney Scarola called that “consistent with having been over-Tased.”

Taser electroshock guns long have been promoted and sold to police departments as a non-lethal alternative to handguns. The company’s website says, “Taser products protect lives, prevent injuries, reduce litigation and save agencies money.”

In 2009, however, Taser International warned police agencies that use their stun guns to avoid chest shots, saying they posed a risk of injury. A 2012 study reported in the medical journal Circulation found that Taser shocks to the chest could cause cardiac arrest and sudden death.

Attorneys for the police officers, who by law are excluded from grand jury proceedings, have challenged the medical examiner’s findings in pre-grand jury discussions with prosecutors. They argued that toxicology reports prepared by a privately retained expert found something the medical examiner’s office missed: traces of flakka in Reid’s body. Flakka is the notorious and powerful synthetic stimulant that fueled a short-lived, yet frightening epidemic in Broward two years ago.

“He was on flakka”

“The issue here is more than just the Taser,” said attorney Michael Dutko, an ex-Fort Lauderdale policeman. “Why was he there? We don’t know. But he was on flakka and his somewhat out-of-control behavior was consistent with that.”

Dutko said the Coconut Creek officers committed no crime.

“Our position essentially is these officers were dispatched to a call for a citizen acting erratically and upon their arrival their observations as to his condition gave them cause for great concern and great alarm,” Dutko said. “They had reason to be alarmed for the safety of others, their safety, and his safety and had the absolute need for his compliance.”

Dutko declined to discuss the case in more detail. “Obviously this is an important story and one that will be reported about, but our office is really very concerned about maintaining a balance of responding appropriately, but not invading the province of the grand jury.”

Scarola, who represents Reid’s family, said he had not heard about the flakka finding, but said it wasn’t a revelation.

“It’s not a surprise because that would be a reasonable approach as a defense of these officers to try and break the causal connection between their excessive use of force and Andre’s death,” Scarola said. “But they are going to have a hard time defending based upon any contention that there was no excessive force. That’s pretty well established and corroborated by eyewitnesses.”

Two of those eyewitnesses are Wynmoor residents John Arendale and Bonnie Eshelman, who were jolted awake early that morning by a violent commotion outside the front door of their ground-floor apartment.

The couple observed the fatal encounter through their windows. In interviews, they said that as many as four officers fired four Taser shots in two volleys. They said Reid, a father of two sons, was struck at least twice in the chest by wires tethered to the high-voltage stun guns that can deliver a painful and immobilizing shock from as far as 35 feet away.

Among other things, they heard Reid cry out “I can’t breathe” while on the ground under several officers.

Nevertheless, city detectives didn’t interview Arendale and Eshelman until shortly after their accounts were published on Feb 27, 2015. A month later, they were re-interviewed by detectives Frank Fuentes and James Dingus, accompanied by a crime scene technician who took photographs of the view out their windows.

Former Miami Police Chief Ken Harms, a police policy expert and trial consultant, told Florida Bulldog last year that the detectives’ actions appear to have been an improper attempt to discredit their testimony.

“It gives the impression to me that the police were trying to protect the officers’ interest as opposed to getting down to the issues at hand, which ought to be was the use of force justified under the circumstances and if so what amount of force,” said Harms.

Arendale and Eshelman are among a number of witnesses expected to testify before the grand jury next week.

Miami U.S. Attorney’s Office accused again of spying; A ‘mole’ in the defense camp?

By Dan Christensen, FloridaBulldog.org 

Defense lawyers Marc Nurik, left, and J. David Bogenschutz

Defense lawyers Marc Nurik, left, and J. David Bogenschutz

For the second time this summer, Miami federal prosecutors stand accused of spying on the defense – this time in the case of an alleged $28-million, international sweepstakes fraud.

As described in court papers, the “invasion of the defense camp” appears to have begun in February when one of four defendants in the case cut a secret plea deal with the U.S. Attorney’s Office and began working undercover.

The informant, John Leon of Wilton Manors, participated in defense team strategy sessions for three months as a government “mole,” obtaining documents and listening to privileged discussions about witnesses and other sensitive defense matters and reporting back to the government, the documents say.

The fallout: defense accusations that the case has been irretrievably “tainted” due to constitutional violations of the attorney-client privilege.

“For a period exceeding two months, Leon, acting as a government informant with the government’s acquiescence, invaded the defense camp where he learned critical defense strategies by actively participating in numerous meetings, after already accepting a government plea and agreeing to cooperate,” say court papers filed by attorneys Marc Nurik of West Palm Beach, J. David Bogenschutz of Fort Lauderdale and Marshall Dore Louis of Miami.

Assistant U.S. Attorney H. Ron Davidson, while acknowledging that defendant Leon became a covert “government cooperator,” told U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles in a July 8 pleading that Leon “never shared privileged information with the United States, the United States never asked for privileged information and the defendant’s motion lacks any merit.”

The judge, however, has sided so far with the defense. On Aug. 3, after an initial hearing, he ordered the government to turn over to the defense all “rough notes” of interviews of Leon by Internal Revenue Service agents who helped build the government’s fraud case. The defense had sought the agents’ notes, contending the government had “carefully sanitized” memos of interviews with Leon produced to the defense.

‘The ends of justice’

The same day, Judge Gayles also granted a continuance in the case and reset the trial date for Nov. 28, saying “the ends of justice outweigh the interests” of a speedy trial.

What’s expected to follow this fall is a full-blown hearing on whether felony charges of mail fraud, money laundering and conspiracy should be dismissed against the remaining defendants – Matthew Pisoni, Marcus Pradel and Victor Ramirez – due to government misconduct.

“An evidentiary hearing is exactly what is required to determine how to resolve these blatant [constitutional] violations, and the appropriate sanction for these pervasive violations,” attorneys Nurik and Bogenschutz said in court papers.

U.S. Attorney Wifredo A. Ferrer’s office declined Florida Bulldog’s request for comment.

In June, prominent Miami defense lawyer Howard Srebnick accused both the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office of spying on the defense in a $55- million Medicare fraud case by illegally and obtaining copies of confidential defense documents. More specifically, it was alleged a government-approved copying service had surreptitiously provided agents with duplicates of documents culled by the defense team from 220 boxes of evidentiary records in preparation for trial.

The Florida Bulldog reported last month that those allegations of government misconduct dissipated weeks later when the U.S. Attorney’s Office abruptly gave all three defendants generous plea deals involving no prison time. The defendants had each faced lengthy jail terms if convicted.

The copying service, Imaging Universe, was fired. The U.S. Attorney’s Office conducted an internal inquiry, but declined to make public its findings. Srebnick withdrew his motion with the accusations after securing a deal for his client. Consequently, the judge never ruled on the merits.

The alleged scam

Pisoni was president of the now-defunct Mail Tree, Michael McKay, Spin Mail and other Florida companies that the government contends were used in the fraud. Pradel, Ramirez and Leon worked with him in the alleged scam.

The four were indicted together on May 7, 2015 for participating in a sweepstakes scheme that began in 2006. The indictment says victims were falsely notified by mail that they’d won a substantial prize, but needed to pay a fee of up to $50 to redeem their winnings.

Authorities have said the defendants collected more than $25 million from hundreds of thousands of victims in the U.S. and abroad, using shell companies and international bank accounts to lauder their loot.

Even before they were indicted, the four had learned they were under investigation “and circled the wagons in a Joint Defense Agreement,” the government said. A JDA is a contract in which defendants extend the attorney-client relationship among them to facilitate the sharing of privileged information.

But last winter, unknown to his fellow defendants, Leon and his Fort Lauderdale attorney, Omar F. Guerra Johansson, began plea negotiations that resulted in his Feb. 17 plea agreement with the government.

“His cooperation was kept covert because Leon was cooperating with the government against a non-charged defendant,” prosecutor Davidson wrote. “Moreover, the government specifically instructed Leon not to share privileged information.”

Leon’s plea deal became public on April 20 when the indictment against him was dropped and a single new conspiracy charge was filed. He’s now facing a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment. Before, like the others, he faced a maximum of 80 years in prison.

Accusations of spying by FBI, U.S. Attorney’s Office dissolve amid generous plea deals

By Dan Christensen, FloridaBulldog.org 

Defense attorney Howard Srebnick, left, and Assistant U.S. Attorney James V. Hayes

Defense attorney Howard Srebnick, left, and Assistant U.S. Attorney James V. Hayes

Weeks after being accused of spying on the defense in a $55-million Medicare fraud case, the Miami U.S. Attorney’s Office gave all three defendants generous plea deals that closed the case and made the misconduct accusations go away.

At the same time, the government quietly fired the Fort Lauderdale-based copying service at the center of the scandal. Imaging Universe had improperly supplied the government with duplicates of documents that defense lawyers cherry-picked out of 220 boxes of seized records while searching for evidence helpful to their clients.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office investigated the matter, but declined a request by FloridaBulldog.org to make public its findings.

Dr. Salo Schapiro, the 71-year-old former medical director of Biscayne Milieu Health Center, faced up to 100 years in prison and $55 million in liability when he was indicted for conspiracy and health care fraud in September 2014. But last June 20 – less than three weeks after the Florida Bulldog reported the story – prosecutors who once had trumpeted the case allowed psychiatrist Schapiro to plead guilty to a single count of making a false statement.

Schapiro’s punishment: a $10,000 fine. He continues his medical practice in Boca Raton, but no longer takes Medicare patients. His online biography does not mention his felony conviction.

Dr. Salo Schapiro

Dr. Salo Schapiro

Schapiro’s two co-defendants, indicted on similar charges, got similarly light treatment.

Nurse practitioner Marlene Cesar, 64, of Allentown, PA, pleaded guilty July 1 to stealing less than $1,000 in Medicare benefits and was fined $150. On July 28, 74-year-old mental health counselor Sonia Gallimore, who like Schapiro was from Broward, was placed on pretrial diversion for six months.

“The story is in the results,” said Schapiro’s Miami attorney, Howard Srebnick.

Srebnick and his associate, Rossana Arteaga-Gomez, raised the matter in court filings in late May. Their motion argued that the government had a practice of secretly obtaining copies of documents the defense had flagged as important and asserted it was not the action of “just one rogue [FBI] agent or prosecutor.” Rather, the motion said, it appeared to be “an office-wide policy” of both the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the FBI that has gone on for “at least 10 years.”

Several days of hearings, open and closed, were held before Miami U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke. They culminated with Schapiro’s combined guilty plea and sentencing hearing June 20 on the reduced felony charge.

Credibility in question

After negotiating the plea deal for his client, attorney Srebnick withdrew his motion at the hearing. He said its allegations “were based solely on the statements and emails of the owner of the copy service, whose credibility, at a minimum, has come into question during this litigation.”

U.S. Attorney Wifredo Ferrer issued this statement:

“When we learned of the copy service issue, our prosecutors immediately notified the defense lawyers.  Unintended circumstances can arise — the test is what you do when faced with such circumstances.  Here, rather than resolve the matter privately, we were completely open and transparent.  We urged the defense to air it in public.  Ultimately, the defense counsel acknowledged that they had no information the prosecutors had looked at any of the materials in question and that the prosecutors in the case acted appropriately and ethically.”

U.S. Attorney Wifredo Ferrer

U.S. Attorney Wifredo Ferrer

The owner of Imaging Universe is Ignacio E. Montero. He did not return several phone messages seeking comment.

The motion said Montero told attorney Arteaga-Gomez that he’d provided the U.S. Attorney’s Office “duplicate copies of the discovery documents selected by defense counsel in other cases” for the past 10 years.

Court papers alleged that Imaging Universe and Montero gave the government CDs containing duplicates of documents Schapiro’s defense team had culled from the 220 boxes of records agents had seized from Biscayne Milieu. The records were stored at an FBI warehouse in Miramar, where defense lawyers who wanted copies of such records were required to use Imaging Universe.

The government later acknowledged that Imaging Universe did supply the FBI with duplicate CDs of what it had copied for Schapiro’s defense team, but said the discs “were never requested by any agent, prosecutor or anyone else on the government’s behalf.”

No ‘pervasive’ spying

Assistant U.S. Attorney James V. Hayes was the lead prosecutor on the case. He has said in court papers that he was unaware of the duplicate CDs until an FBI agent disclosed their existence in April. He and co-counsel Lisa H. Miller, a Justice Department fraud attorney, said they immediately told “Montero to stop and began an internal inquiry.” They also said “no pervasive practice of receiving or recording defense discovery” was found.

Still, the government sent out notifications about what happened to lawyers for a number of unidentified defendants. Officials declined to say how many attorneys were notified.

Defense lawyers recently raised a similar issue “of government invasion of the defense camp” in at least one unrelated case involving an allegedly fraudulent sweepstakes scheme.

Prosecutor Hayes informed Srebnick on April 22 that FBI Agent Deanne Lindsey “had been surreptitiously receiving the CDs,” according to the defense motion. “Hayes proposed to immediately destroy the CDs,” but the lawyers instead asked that he give them to the defense, “which he did.”

“Covertly cloning defense counsel’s work-product to obtain a tactical advantage is nothing short of ‘shocking to the universal sense of justice,’ ” Srebnick and Arteaga-Gomez wrote.

Court records show that between June 8 and 16 U.S. District Judge Cooke held a series of open and closed hearings about the matter. Early on, the judge indicated she would make a ruling on the motion and even asked both sides what possible remedies were available should she find “pervasive” misconduct by the government.

But the judge never ruled on the merits of the defense motion. The matter became moot when Srebnick withdrew it after prosecutors offered Schapiro the plea deal and he accepted.

Secret U.S. Marshals’ report ID’d security weaknesses at Broward courthouse before escape

By Dan Christensen, FloridaBulldog.org 

Broward County Courthouse

Broward County Courthouse

A confidential U.S. Marshals’ security assessment for the Broward County Courthouse exposed numerous weaknesses in the building’s security system four years before last week’s scandalous escape of a 21-year-old murder suspect.

The assessment included several recommendations that, if implemented, may well have prevented Dayonte Resiles’ desperate dash out of Judge Raag Singhal’s courtroom, down four flights of stairs and out a fire emergency door to short-lived freedom.

Resiles, who escaped one week ago, was captured Wednesday without incident at a West Palm Beach motel and returned to Broward. Seven people have been charged with aiding in the escape of Resiles, who is accused of stabbing to death Jill Halliburton Su in her Davie home in 2014.

Resiles’ arrest, however, did little to ease anxiety about courthouse security.

“Here’s the bottom line, and it’s something we’ve been talking about for years and clearly predates Sheriff [Scott] Israel. We do not have sufficient staffing from the sheriff’s department in this courthouse,” Broward Chief Judge Peter Weinstein said Thursday.

“We constantly hear from the county, ‘We give the sheriff sufficient funding to run the department.’ The sheriff says, ‘I don’t have enough manpower.’ And we’re the people in the middle,” said Weinstein.

The first page of the U.S. Marshals Service security assessment for the Broward County Courthouse.

The first page of the U.S. Marshals Service security assessment for the Broward County Courthouse.

The U.S. Marshals’ assessment, a copy of which was obtained by the Florida Bulldog,  similarly noted the need for more law enforcement personnel in both the lobby screening station and courtrooms.

“There is not an armed security officer assigned to each courtroom, instead, there are civilian court deputies. Very few of the courtrooms have armed security officers,” says the assessment. “On an average day, the central courthouse has approximately 14 law enforcement officers working in the building. This building has 54 judges and 11 magistrates. In-custody defendants are ‘dropped-off’ in courtrooms with no law enforcement personnel present.”

The recommendation: “one court deputy for every judge. Court deputies should be armed and trained by BSO and should have access to a duress alarm. Two law enforcement officers for in-custody defendants,” with an additional officer for each additional defendant.

Israel tweaks courthouse security

On Monday, Sheriff Israel moved the Broward Sheriff’s Office part-way toward the Marshals’ recommendations. From now on, he said, maximum-security inmates appearing in court would have a sworn deputy with them at all times, not just a civilian bailiff. A detention deputy who escorts the prisoner to court “will only release custody once an armed deputy is present,” the sheriff said in a statement.

Israel did not address the report’s call for shielding judges with bulletproof glass or improving the knee wall and gate that now partially separates the courtroom gallery areas from public seating area and does not extend the width of the courtroom.

WPLG Local 10 reported Monday that Israel did not accept $2.6 million offered by the county last year to beef up courthouse security. The offer, said to be in writing, would have doubled the number of armed courthouse deputies from 29 to 58 and also allowed the sheriff to “guarantee that every high-risk inmate like Resiles could be accompanied by at least one armed deputy in addition to a bailiff,” the television station reported.

BSO spokeswoman Veda Coleman-Wright responded Thursday: “We support having an armed deputy (plus additional BSO personnel) in every critical courtroom in the courthouse, but the county has not approved additional staffing or funding to provide this level of coverage.”

Coleman-Wright also provided a Wednesday memo written to the County Commission by BSO General Counsel Ron Gunzburger. It accuses county administrators of holding the $2.6 million “hostage until the sheriff signs a global memo of understanding (MOU)” for the entire judicial complex that would build on existing staffing levels that are “woefully inadequate,” locking in future personnel shortfalls.

Broward Sheriff Scott Israel

Broward Sheriff Scott Israel

“If the sheriff would sign the proffered MOU, he would be agreeing to continue inadequate and unsafe staffing for the greatly expanded size of the entire complex…The sheriff is unwilling to sign this deeply flawed agreement,” the memo says.

Assistant County Administrator Alphonso Jefferson disputed that account. He said the MOU would ensure that dollars allocated by the county specifically for courthouse security would actually be spent by the sheriff on courthouse security, and not be diverted to the sheriff’s other priorities.

“Essentially, we want to make sure the money is earmarked for courthouse security,” said Jefferson. “You don’t want to be back with the same issue down the road.”

BSO and Broward’s judiciary asked the Marshals’ Office to evaluate security because of their expertise in arranging security for federal courthouses. The evaluation, completed in July 2012, was done after several fleeing defendants had highlighted courthouse security deficiencies.

“What report?”

According to Jefferson, however, the security assessment was done without the county’s knowledge. He said county officials didn’t learn about it until November 2013. “It was at a meeting with BSO and the judiciary when we heard about the report. We said, ‘What report?’”

The county soon put together a task force of all the players, including the court administrator’s office. He said that as a result, the county has been spending $1.8 million to address a number of recommendations – for example, installing security cameras and improving security at entry screening areas in the East Wing and the North Tower that houses felony courtrooms

The Marshal’s security review looked at a wide variety of areas from outside perimeter security to courtrooms and chambers, public area and access control and law enforcement staffing and technology.

“Security is of fundamental importance to every court because the impartial and independent application of the law may be threatened by intrusion, disruption, intimidation, force, theft, malicious and environmental disaster,” says the assessment. “If a court cannot operate with a high degree of security, its legitimacy has the potential to be undermined.”

Other recommendations included the installation of numerous closed circuit television cameras inside and outside the courthouse, door and window alarms, additional barriers to prevent vehicle intrusion, better external lighting and better monitoring of nighttime cleaning crews.

The marshals’ assessment team, while acknowledging that implementing its recommendations would be costly, emphasized “that an acceptable level of security will only be reached when all of the measures at the best practice level are incorporated… Care should be taken to prioritize and implement as many of the recommendations as quickly as possible.”

The review did not estimate costs, but some were simple and relatively inexpensive. For example, report notes that in many courtrooms the door leading to a judge’s chambers had the lock on the courtroom side of the door.

“This means that if someone was chasing the judge and the judge runs into chambers, the judge has no way of locking the door. This also means that prior to court commencing, anyone could turn the lock and have access to chambers,” says the report, which recommended reversing the locks, with the deadbolt on the chambers’ side.

Many of the reports’ recommendations have not been adopted. Chief Judge Weinstein said, however, that many would be incorporated into the new, $250-million high-rise courthouse building that remains unfinished. The new courthouse was supposed to open last year, but is now expected to open in October, said Weinstein.

After the new courthouse opens, the old 10-story courthouse will be demolished and a plaza and new parking facility will be installed. The more modern felony wing on the east side of the courthouse will remain, and be connected by walkways to the new 20-story courthouse.

Broward medical examiner’s evidence policy worries prosecutors, defense lawyers

 

By Eric Barton, FloridaBulldog.org 

Broward Medical Examiner Dr. Craig Mallak

Broward Medical Examiner Dr. Craig Mallak

The Broward County medical examiner has been destroying some tissue and blood samples after they are a year old, a policy defense attorneys and prosecutors say could affect untold numbers of criminal cases.

Dr. Craig Mallak told the Florida Bulldog he instituted the policy shortly after taking Broward’s chief medical examiner position in 2012. He says the rule helps ease his office’s overcrowded evidence storage and also conforms to the norms of his industry.

The change was never publicly announced. Instead, Fort Lauderdale defense attorney J. David Bogenschutz discovered it during depositions in a murder case. The Medical Examiner’s Office destroyed a year-old blood sample in that case, and now Bogenschutz believes charges against his client should be dropped.

Attorneys on both sides of criminal prosecutions say other cases could be affected by the destroyed-evidence policy. After learning of the change in 2013, Broward Assistant State Attorney Brian Cavanagh sent an email to fellow prosecutors warning that it “presents a significant destruction of evidence problem.”

So far, no cases have been thrown out or lost at trial because of the policy. But Public Defender Howard Finkelstein said the change will likely lead to requests for dismissals and mistrials in criminal cases where the evidence has been destroyed. In others, the destroyed evidence might simply be something that defense attorneys use to cast a reasonable doubt.

“There are plenty of ways you can increase storage capacity, but you can’t reclaim evidence once it’s destroyed,” Finkelstein said. “There will be a cloud over this kind of evidence for as long as this policy continues.”

The medical examiner’s practice of destroying year-old toxicology samples came to light as Bogenschutz developed his defense for Ronald Melnik on a second-degree murder charge.

According to prosecutors, Melnik shot Reza Payan shortly after midnight on Jan. 1, 2011. Bogenschutz said Melnik claims that Payan, a heavily trained Brazilian ju-jitsu fighter, attacked him for no reason and that he shot his longtime friend five times to defend himself.

Bogenschutz was going over the evidence with his client about a year after the shooting when Melnik honed in on a crime scene photo. On the ground near Payan’s body was a small vial, attached to Payan’s keychain.

The vial contained ecstasy, or MDMA, a psychoactive drug, Bogenschutz said. That night, Payan had also been drinking and smoking pot heavily. Mixed with ecstasy, that could lead to inexplicable aggression.

Police had taken a sample of Payan’s blood, so Bogenschutz sought to have it tested for ecstasy by an independent lab.

Blood sample destroyed

In April 2015, Bogenschutz learned from Dr. Gary Kunsman, the chief toxicologist at the Broward County Medical Examiner’s Office, that the sample had been destroyed under the new policy.

In response, Bogenschutz filed a 180-page motion to dismiss the charges against Melnik. At issue is a legal term called spoliation, which typically comes up when police or prosecutors have deliberately hidden evidence.

Fort Lauderdale defense lawyer J. David Bogenschutz

Fort Lauderdale defense lawyer J. David Bogenschutz

“The question for the judge is, can this destruction of evidence affect the outcome? And we believe that it clearly does,” Bogenschutz said.

The bigger issue, Bogenschutz said, is how this might affect other cases, especially those filed months after a crime. The defense in those cases may have no chance to conduct its own analysis of evidence that has been destroyed.

“I’ve had cases when eight, 10 or 12 months pass before charges are even filed. That would mean the defense has no chance to conduct its own examination of what might be key evidence,” said Bogenschutz, who has practiced in Florida since 1971.

During depositions in Melnik’s case, the medical examiner and his employees revealed that they had begun a new policy in late 2012 of destroying toxicology samples that were a year old.

Bogenschutz then filed a records request with the State Attorney’s Office and found a series of emails with Mallak, urging him to change the policy. The State Attorney’s Office offered compromises, including storing samples longer for ongoing criminal trials or notifying attorneys before samples are destroyed. In the end, Mallak agreed to one change: keeping blood samples in DUI cases for two years but destroying all others after a year.

Mallak said he was surprised that his policy caused “a shock to the system around here.” He said defense attorneys and prosecutors need to understand that the old policy was flawed, and that blood and tissue samples kept for months begin to deteriorate and cannot be accurately tested. Bacteria and mold can corrode the tissue, making samples meaningless.

‘I can’t change the laws of nature’

“I personally don’t keep things in my refrigerator for years, so you can’t expect me to keep evidence that way,” Mallak said. “I can’t change the laws of nature. I can’t stop these samples from breaking down.”

Mallak came to Broward after serving as the U.S. Armed Forces medical examiner. He oversaw 250 employees in a crime lab with a $50-million budget. He worked on high-profile cases that include the space shuttle Columbia explosion and identifying the body of Saddam Hussein after the Iraqis hanged him.

In Broward he inherited a 38-person department that had been under scrutiny for poor case management and slow turnaround rates. Shortly after he arrived, Mallak shut down his lab after discovering that employees had improperly validated drug samples, which forced a review of toxicology results in pending criminal cases. He said he has since reduced his office’s turnaround from 90 days to 10 and overhauled testing methodology to conform with industry standards.

Mallak said he also discovered there was no policy governing when evidence was destroyed. Some blood and tissue samples stored by his office dated back decades. Mold and bacteria covered a few vials.

“These samples are not like a bullet that can just sit on a shelf indefinitely,” Mallak said. “They have no evidentiary value after a long time passes.”

The rule he established covers only those toxicology samples like blood and human tissue that can erode over time. DNA and other samples that can be stored without refrigeration are kept indefinitely, Mallak said.

The policy Mallak instituted follows minimum requirements set by Florida administrative rules. It also conforms to minimum industry standards, said Dr. David Fowler, president of the National Association of Medical Examiners.

Blood and tissue samples can be kept for years if preserved in sodium fluoride. Medical examiners will often keep samples for years in ongoing cases, or when an attorney requests it, Fowler said. In Maryland, where Fowler is the state’s chief medical examiner, samples are typically kept for three years unless defense attorneys or prosecutors ask for them to be retained longer.

Broward Assistant State Attorney Brian Cavanagh

Broward Assistant State Attorney Brian Cavanagh

In Miami-Dade, the medical examiner’s office keeps such samples for five years, according to a memo on the department’s policy.

The destroyed evidence in Broward has become an issue in several criminal cases since the change, Cavanaugh said. But so far, no cases have been thrown out or lost at trial because of the policy.

When Cavanaugh learned of the change, he did an accounting of which cases might be affected. Among the destroyed evidence was blood taken from the 2012 crime scene where an 8-week-old baby died in the trunk of a car in Coral Springs. Luckily, Cavanaugh said, that evidence wasn’t pertinent. A jury in October returned a guilty verdict for the boy’s father, Janus Saintil, who is now serving a life sentence.

While the destroyed evidence wasn’t relevant in that case, Finkelstein worries that it could be in other cases. “This is not supposed to happen. People aren’t supposed to be acquitted because evidence has been destroyed,” Finkelstein said. “Even as a defense attorney, this is not what we want. We want the system to work correctly.”

In most cases, the destroyed evidence shouldn’t lead to charges being dropped or dismissed, explained Cavanaugh. But it’s an issue that could become a problem for prosecutors as defense attorneys use it to cast doubt. “It’s significant only in that it allows the defense to create an issue,” Cavanaugh said. “The question is, ultimately, is it going to be insurmountable?”

In the Melnik case, Circuit Judge Andrew Siegel has scheduled oral arguments for Aug. 5 to consider Bogenschutz’s motion to dismiss. The judge’s decision could be an indication of how the medical examiner’s policy can affect other cases.

Broward prosecutor: BSO’s probation plan jeopardizes safety, victim’s rights

By Dan Christensen, FloridaBulldog.org 

Broward County Courthouse

Broward County Courthouse

In a challenge to judicial authority, the Broward Sheriff’s Office is again pushing a scheme that would allow BSO, not judges or state law, to determine the reporting terms for county court defendants placed on probation.

BSO’s controversial idea, intended to cut probation costs, fizzled a year ago after it became known that defendants were being allowed to report less frequently than ordered by the court. In a Nov. 10 memo to all county court judges, however, BSO resurrected the idea, saying it “will become effective January 1” if they go along.

Once again, Broward County Court Judge Ginger Lerner-Wren is blowing the whistle. In an email to colleagues and others last month, she called BSO’s idea “legally unenforceable and contrary to the law.”

Lerner-Wren has a formidable ally this go-round.

In unusual pushback against the sheriff’s office, Broward Chief Assistant State Attorney Jeff Marcus wrote a two-page letter to Chief Judge Peter Weinstein last week objecting to BSO’s proposed new “Order Placing Defendant on Probation” and warning it would jeopardize both the legal rights of victims and the safety of the community.

“The State Attorney’s Office agrees with Judge Lerner-Wren’s position in his matter,” Marcus said.

Broward County Court Judge Ginger Lerner-Wren

Broward County Court Judge Ginger Lerner-Wren

Weinstein did not respond to a request for comment.

BSO’s Department of Community Programs oversees probation. It would save money by reducing how often defendants convicted of misdemeanor offenses like driving under the influence (DUI) must appear at a local probation office.

BSO released a Nov. 30 letter sent by David Scharf, the department’s executive director, to Weinstein thanking him for facilitating an earlier meeting with County Court Administrative Judge Sharon Zeller to discuss the court’s decision to “approve” the revised probation order. No administrative order approving the change was issued, however.

Zeller could not be reached for comment.

Probation Manager Pearlie Meisel’s memo says that under the new regiment the probation division would determine the number of times a probationer must report using “a comprehensive validated risk assessment.” The assessment would then be forwarded to a judge for their signature.

“If for any reason you decide the selected supervision level is not agreeable, please signify your preference of supervision on the probation order before signing,” Meisel’s memo instructs the judges.

‘EVIDENCE-BASED DECISION MAKING’

Scharf, Meisel’s boss, explained the practice known as “dosage probation” in an interview last year. He said it is rooted in “evidence-based decision making” involving the use of “objective risk assessment” criteria to determine whether an offender is high, medium or low risk.

In the past, BSO has used that formula to determine, without court input, how many doses, or times, someone on probation must physically report to a probation officer. When Lerner-Wren chanced to spot the unapproved practice in her court last year – BSO allowed a defendant ordered to appear before a probation officer once a month to show up every two months – she signed an order banning it in her courtroom.

The matter seemed to fade away when County Court Administrative Judge Sharon Zeller expressed concern about the legality of the practice in a memo to all criminal division judges last December.

But Meisel’s memo last month stirred the pot.

On Dec. 7, after hearing from Lerner-Wren, the State Attorney’s Office joined the fray.

Noting that probation is often imposed on defendants convicted of DUI, prosecutor Marcus told Judge Weinstein, “It is our position that Florida Statute 316.193(5) mandates that the defendant be placed on “monthly reporting probation … if a defendant is placed on a level of supervision which mandates that they report every other month as proposed in the new Order of Probation, his will be in violation of the statute.”

Marcus said that prosecutors are concerned about “inadequate” levels of supervision. He said offenders allowed to report every other month will not have “the same level of drug and alcohol testing that accompanies most of our probationary sentences” and that “the safety of the community could be jeopardized.”

“Of special concern are the recidivist DUI offenders who are sentenced routinely to the most intense levels of supervision,” Marcus wrote.

Marcus said, too, his office has other concerns about the delay caused by the “comprehensive risk assessment” because the level of supervision will not be announced in open court at the time of sentencing.

“As you are aware, all conditions of probation must be announced at the time of sentencing in order to be considered enforceable,” Marcus said.

“Finally, in many instances we have victims who are present in court at the time of sentencing. If the court sentences someone to a specific level of supervision based on a statement of the victim, and then a determination is made by a probation specialist after the fact, without the benefit of knowing about the victims’ wishes, we are concerned that the victim’s rights” under state law “may be jeopardized,” he said.

The FBI built a database that can catch rapists — almost nobody uses it

By T. Christian Miller, ProPublica  FBI-seal

This story was co-published with The Atlantic.

QUANTICO, Va. — More than 30 years ago, the Federal Bureau of Investigation launched a revolutionary computer system in a bomb shelter two floors beneath the cafeteria of its national academy. Dubbed the Violent Criminal Apprehension Program, or ViCAP, it was a database designed to help catch the nation’s most violent offenders by linking together unsolved crimes. A serial rapist wielding a favorite knife in one attack might be identified when he used the same knife elsewhere. The system was rooted in the belief that some criminals’ methods were unique enough to serve as a kind of behavioral DNA — allowing identification based on how a person acted, rather than their genetic make-up. (more…)

Page 1 of 212»

Newsletter

Notify me by email when new stories are published.