Antero Pietila
2007-07-04 07:00:00.0
Current rank: Not ranked

BALTIMORE -

This being election time, a chorus of politicians is suggesting that hiring more police officers and increasing their salaries is key to stemming Baltimore’s homicide crisis. Maybe. But two equally important problems require aggressive action from Mayor Sheila Dixon and Police Commissioner Leonard Hamm.

One is officers who hold a second and, in several cases, a third job. Is police duty their main job, or a sideline?

Years ago I discussed this issue with Thomas C. Frazier, former Mayor Kurt L. Schmoke’s police commissioner. He acknowledged excessive moonlighting was an issue. Particularly during the overnight shifts, “a tired officer just parks the car and takes a nap,” Frazier said. Yet he and the Schmoke administration did nothing to repair the situation.

Considering Baltimore’s out-of-control killings, an impartial audit should be conducted into officers’ moonlighting and its effects on the department’s ability to fight crime. The audit is particularly necessary because unacceptably high numbers of prosecutions are dropped due to officers’ unexplained, chronic absences from courts — often because of outside jobs, no doubt.

In May alone, 203 officers failed to show up to testify in District Court misdemeanor cases, allowing suspects to escape a trial. The situation is somewhat better in the Circuit Court, which handles felony cases. Nevertheless 415 police officers failed to appear last year. As a result, the prosecutors had no alternative but to drop many cases.

In the interest of full disclosure, I admit that I contest every traffic citation I receive. “

Always go to court. There is a chance that the officer doesn’t show up,” an officer advised me years ago after handing me a ticket.

She was as good as her word, and my case was dropped.

The State’s Attorney’s Office’s list of officers’ failures to appear in May is an extremely troubling document. It suggests officers systematically failed to testify against a small group of defendants, who were in courts in various parts of the city on multiple charges.

May’s record belongs to a woman who visited court in various districts in 24 cases. Twenty-one different officers failed to show up to testify against her.

What’s with that, Commissioner Hamm?

That defendant’s court experience was the most remarkable, but it was far from unique.

Several juvenile defendants also got a firsthand look at how the criminal justice system works. One young man repeatedly avoided his day court after 15 officers from various districts failed to testify against him.

What’s with that, Mayor Dixon?

The state’s attorney’s list does not describe the seriousness of those cases. But that really doesn’t matter. It is the consistent pattern that troubles. Is it a coincidence or worse?

Margin notes in the state’s attorney’s list refer to repeated reminder calls to the officers involved, but mention practically no returned calls. The officers just don’t show up, mostly without explanations.

So how do these misdemeanor cases relate to Baltimore’s bloodshed? Here is how:

On May 4, a defendant in a felony drug case walked free because a police officer failed to testify against him. An assistant state’s attorney “attempted to call the P/O several times, left messages on his voicemail several times. P/O never returned the calls,” according to the document.

He simply didn’t show up.

At the time of the trial the defendant was on probation for four prior felony drug convictions and two handgun convictions.

Maybe you’ll read about this fellow in the papers. Have a good day, Mayor Dixon. Have a good day, Commissioner Hamm.

Antero Pietila is writing a book about how bigotry shaped the Baltimore metropolitan area. He can be reached at hap5905@hotmail.com.