Recently Posted News
posted September 01, 2011
Fired SR chief hired by county
Brown lands job as deputy sheriff
By John Bojarski
Eagle Staff Writer
December 17, 2010
Despite being fired by Slippery Rock in a rough economy, former borough police Chief Terry Brown is not headed to the unemployment line right now.
He was hired Monday as a part-time Butler County deputy sheriff by Sheriff Mike Slupe.
“An offer was made to Terry Brown if he needed our assistance,” Slupe said. “We had one more part-time slot to fill, and he filled it.”
Brown was placed on paid leave Oct. 23 by the borough council following a firearms training incident. He was terminated Dec. 7 by council.
Brown on Thursday declined to comment about his case.
Slupe said he has known and worked with Brown for nearly 20 years.
“I know his reputation; I know his work ethic. I feel very comfortable in having him in this office,” Slupe said.
“I know for a fact that in the law enforcement community, Terry Brown is very highly respected and very highly regarded.”
Slupe said Brown was the most qualified candidate who applied for the position.
Since Brown is already a certified police officer, the only required training he will have to complete is a two-week deputy program, which can be done sometime during his first year of employment.
There are 18 part-time deputies in the department.
Slupe said he is looking forward to working with Brown.
“Terry is an outstanding police officer and will be an asset to our office for as long as he is here,” he said.
Al Lindsay, a Butler attorney retained by Brown, said Brown’s ultimate goal is to be rehired by Slippery Rock.
“There are a number of different avenues,” Lindsay said to achieve that.
He said Brown has three options. One is a federal civil rights lawsuit against the borough. Another is filing a grievance with the police union. The third is a request for a hearing by the state civil service commission.
Lindsay said he and Brown are evaluating which one to pick.
Following Brown’s termination, the borough had five days to present charges to him. Lindsay said Brown has seen those charges, but he has not.
Brown of Slippery Rock was hired by the borough in 1986, and he became chief in 2009.
Fired SR chief hired by county
John Bojarski, Butler Eagle. December 17, 2010Fired SR chief hired by county
Brown lands job as deputy sheriff
By John Bojarski
Eagle Staff Writer
December 17, 2010
Despite being fired by Slippery Rock in a rough economy, former borough police Chief Terry Brown is not headed to the unemployment line right now.
He was hired Monday as a part-time Butler County deputy sheriff by Sheriff Mike Slupe.
“An offer was made to Terry Brown if he needed our assistance,” Slupe said. “We had one more part-time slot to fill, and he filled it.”
Brown was placed on paid leave Oct. 23 by the borough council following a firearms training incident. He was terminated Dec. 7 by council.
Brown on Thursday declined to comment about his case.
Slupe said he has known and worked with Brown for nearly 20 years.
“I know his reputation; I know his work ethic. I feel very comfortable in having him in this office,” Slupe said.
“I know for a fact that in the law enforcement community, Terry Brown is very highly respected and very highly regarded.”
Slupe said Brown was the most qualified candidate who applied for the position.
Since Brown is already a certified police officer, the only required training he will have to complete is a two-week deputy program, which can be done sometime during his first year of employment.
There are 18 part-time deputies in the department.
Slupe said he is looking forward to working with Brown.
“Terry is an outstanding police officer and will be an asset to our office for as long as he is here,” he said.
Al Lindsay, a Butler attorney retained by Brown, said Brown’s ultimate goal is to be rehired by Slippery Rock.
“There are a number of different avenues,” Lindsay said to achieve that.
He said Brown has three options. One is a federal civil rights lawsuit against the borough. Another is filing a grievance with the police union. The third is a request for a hearing by the state civil service commission.
Lindsay said he and Brown are evaluating which one to pick.
Following Brown’s termination, the borough had five days to present charges to him. Lindsay said Brown has seen those charges, but he has not.
Brown of Slippery Rock was hired by the borough in 1986, and he became chief in 2009.
posted September 01, 2011
Hearing begins in SR
Ex-chief appeals firing by council
By John Bojarski
Eagle Staff Writer
May 11, 2011
SLIPPERY ROCK — The first four witnesses were heard Tuesday at the appeal hearing for fired Slippery Rock police chief Terry Brown in front of the borough’s civil service commission.
Brown was fired by the borough Dec. 7 following a firearms training incident.
In his opening statement, Christopher Gabriel, a Pittsburgh attorney representing the borough, said Brown’s actions could have had serious consequences and were highly inappropriate for firearms training.
“You’ll see that council did what it should have done,” Gabriel said.
Al Lindsay, a Butler attorney representing Brown, said in his opening statement that Brown did not meet the criteria for firing a police chief and that the maneuver that he used was an accepted, advanced tactical move.
“Nobody was in danger that day,” Lindsay said.
Gabriel called borough officers Brian Hoak and Jason Bennett, as well as state Boat and Fish Commission officer Joe Morris, who testified that on Oct. 7, they attended a firearms training session that was being instructed by Brown, a certified gun instructor.
During an exercise where live bullets were being used, Brown jumped in front of Bennett, grabbed Bennett’s gun, a .40 caliber Glock, and held it to his chest, tugging it back and forth.
Bennett testified that Brown said, “Good, now I can testify in court that I had a loaded weapon pointed at me,” after the incident.
Lindsay asked if it is possible that Brown said, “Don’t worry, not a big deal, I am controlling your weapon. I have been down range many times and I can testify to that in court.” Bennett said it is possible that Brown said that instead.
Morris said he recalled Brown saying that the gun would not fire during the struggle.
Morris, a certified gun instructor, said it violated basic firearm safety. When he runs classes, guns, loaded or unloaded, are not allowed to be pointed at other people. He said he would not be permitted to instruct again and would likely be fired by his agency if he did something similar.
Neva Stanger, borough solicitor, testified that, after hearing about the incident, she interviewed Hoak, Bennett and Morris, who all told similar stories.
In a meeting with Brown, his personal attorney Tom King and Mayor Ken Harris, she said Brown did not dispute the officers’ stories but he did feel he used an appropriate tactical maneuver.
She said Brown said the maneuver was called “center axis relock”, a technique taught by Paul Castle, a Nashville, Tenn., tactical specialist. The technique is supposed to prevent the gun from firing and help the officer fight suspects at close range.
Brown provided her with the instruction binder that he used for her review and showed her an online video featuring Castle. However, she discovered that the binder’s pages were out of order and was missing a chapter on safety that was in the table of contents.
When she contacted Castle, he responded that he did not support what Brown did.
Before the hearing started, both sides had disputes.
Gabriel had borough officer Terry Fedokovitz testify that civil service commission member Mark Beres implied that the commission would vote in favor of rehiring Brown several weeks ago.
Gabriel asked if Beres would recuse himself.
Commission solicitor Steve Yakopec, an Arnold attorney, asked if Beres felt he could fairly judge the case, and Beres said he felt he could. This is common procedure in civil service commissions, he said.
Lindsay wanted to issue a subpoena to Harris for access to the entire contents of a flash drive that he possessed, which contained information related to executive sessions that discussed Brown’s case.
Stanger said the borough was concerned that some portions of the flash drive contained privileged information and wanted to give a redacted version.
The commission cannot issue a subpoena, Yakopec said. It would have to go through the court of common pleas.
Yakopec said the hearing would resume at 6 p.m. today, but that the board would take no vote until after the court rules on the use of the flash drive.
Hearing begins in SR
John Bojarski, Butler Eagle. May 11, 2011Hearing begins in SR
Ex-chief appeals firing by council
By John Bojarski
Eagle Staff Writer
May 11, 2011
SLIPPERY ROCK — The first four witnesses were heard Tuesday at the appeal hearing for fired Slippery Rock police chief Terry Brown in front of the borough’s civil service commission.
Brown was fired by the borough Dec. 7 following a firearms training incident.
In his opening statement, Christopher Gabriel, a Pittsburgh attorney representing the borough, said Brown’s actions could have had serious consequences and were highly inappropriate for firearms training.
“You’ll see that council did what it should have done,” Gabriel said.
Al Lindsay, a Butler attorney representing Brown, said in his opening statement that Brown did not meet the criteria for firing a police chief and that the maneuver that he used was an accepted, advanced tactical move.
“Nobody was in danger that day,” Lindsay said.
Gabriel called borough officers Brian Hoak and Jason Bennett, as well as state Boat and Fish Commission officer Joe Morris, who testified that on Oct. 7, they attended a firearms training session that was being instructed by Brown, a certified gun instructor.
During an exercise where live bullets were being used, Brown jumped in front of Bennett, grabbed Bennett’s gun, a .40 caliber Glock, and held it to his chest, tugging it back and forth.
Bennett testified that Brown said, “Good, now I can testify in court that I had a loaded weapon pointed at me,” after the incident.
Lindsay asked if it is possible that Brown said, “Don’t worry, not a big deal, I am controlling your weapon. I have been down range many times and I can testify to that in court.” Bennett said it is possible that Brown said that instead.
Morris said he recalled Brown saying that the gun would not fire during the struggle.
Morris, a certified gun instructor, said it violated basic firearm safety. When he runs classes, guns, loaded or unloaded, are not allowed to be pointed at other people. He said he would not be permitted to instruct again and would likely be fired by his agency if he did something similar.
Neva Stanger, borough solicitor, testified that, after hearing about the incident, she interviewed Hoak, Bennett and Morris, who all told similar stories.
In a meeting with Brown, his personal attorney Tom King and Mayor Ken Harris, she said Brown did not dispute the officers’ stories but he did feel he used an appropriate tactical maneuver.
She said Brown said the maneuver was called “center axis relock”, a technique taught by Paul Castle, a Nashville, Tenn., tactical specialist. The technique is supposed to prevent the gun from firing and help the officer fight suspects at close range.
Brown provided her with the instruction binder that he used for her review and showed her an online video featuring Castle. However, she discovered that the binder’s pages were out of order and was missing a chapter on safety that was in the table of contents.
When she contacted Castle, he responded that he did not support what Brown did.
Before the hearing started, both sides had disputes.
Gabriel had borough officer Terry Fedokovitz testify that civil service commission member Mark Beres implied that the commission would vote in favor of rehiring Brown several weeks ago.
Gabriel asked if Beres would recuse himself.
Commission solicitor Steve Yakopec, an Arnold attorney, asked if Beres felt he could fairly judge the case, and Beres said he felt he could. This is common procedure in civil service commissions, he said.
Lindsay wanted to issue a subpoena to Harris for access to the entire contents of a flash drive that he possessed, which contained information related to executive sessions that discussed Brown’s case.
Stanger said the borough was concerned that some portions of the flash drive contained privileged information and wanted to give a redacted version.
The commission cannot issue a subpoena, Yakopec said. It would have to go through the court of common pleas.
Yakopec said the hearing would resume at 6 p.m. today, but that the board would take no vote until after the court rules on the use of the flash drive.
posted September 01, 2011
Police, gun experts share safety views
Panel hears appeal for fired SR chief
By John Bojarski
Eagle Staff Writer
May 12, 2011
SLIPPERY ROCK — Three expert witnesses testified Wednesday at the appeal hearing of fired Slippery Rock Police Chief Terry Brown in front of the borough’s civil service commission.
Brown was fired by the borough Dec. 7 following a firearms training incident.
Chris Gabriel, a Pittsburgh attorney representing the borough, called Robert McNeilly, the current chief of police at Elizabeth Township, Allegheny County. He is the former chief of police in Pittsburgh from 1996 to 2006 and a firearms trainer, who said that nobody on a firing range should be down range, or in front of a muzzle.
“You don’t point a weapon at anything you don’t intend to shoot,” McNeilly said.
Several witnesses testified Wednesday that Brown walked in front of borough officer Jason Bennett, grabbed Bennett’s gun and held it to his own chest during training on Oct. 7.
McNeilly said, during his time as police chief in Pittsburgh, no training officer allowed students on a range to stand down range.
Paul Castle, a Nashville, Tenn., tactical specialist testified that he did not agree with Brown’s method.
“Speaking politely, I would say that’s the most heinous, stupid thing anyone could say,” Castle said. “If he worked with me, he would be fired.”
Borough solicitor Neva Stanger testified Wednesday that Brown said he was using one of Castle’s techniques.
Castle said that when he does have students down range the gun is cleared to the point it is a shell and a plastic sleeve is placed in the barrel so it absolutely cannot fire.
He also said he would brief students about the operations that would take place during training. That did not happen Oct. 7, according to testimony.
“Every time you go to the range, there is a range briefing,” Castle said.
Al Lindsay, a Butler attorney representing Brown, called Robert Swartzwelder, a Pittsburgh police officer and firearms trainer, as his first witness.
Swartzwelder called his training method “gun fighting” rather than firearms training.
Firearms training takes place on a flat course and all instructions are given with an instructor standing near the students. Gun fighting, he said, encourages students to think on their feet, like in an actual police situation.
He said this is important because the most dangerous situations are the ones that officers are least trained for.
Although McNeilly said he did not allow, and was not aware of, anyone down range of guns in training, Swartzwelder said it was and is done often in Pittsburgh’s department.
“They’re doing it right now on the range in the city tonight,” Swartzwelder said.
Although he testified that he does not believe that Brown was out of line, he said he would have done it differently.
“Cold, if I had no idea what happened that day, no, I would not do that,” he said.
Swartzwelder said, if he was in Brown’s position, he would warn the officer what he was going to do, make sure his finger was securely away from the trigger area and would try to stay out of the way of the muzzle.
Lindsay, using a fake gun, demonstrated a technique with Swartzwelder where he securely held his finger on the barrel of the gun, similar to the way that Brown is alleged to have held the gun, which would prevent it from firing.
Swartzwelder said that accidental discharges do happen, but there is no way to make a gun range entirely safe.
“Things can happen. We just try to reduce them,” he said.
The hearings will continue June 10 and June 17, both starting at 5 p.m.
Police, gun experts share safety views
John Bojarski, Butler Eagle. May 12, 2011Police, gun experts share safety views
Panel hears appeal for fired SR chief
By John Bojarski
Eagle Staff Writer
May 12, 2011
SLIPPERY ROCK — Three expert witnesses testified Wednesday at the appeal hearing of fired Slippery Rock Police Chief Terry Brown in front of the borough’s civil service commission.
Brown was fired by the borough Dec. 7 following a firearms training incident.
Chris Gabriel, a Pittsburgh attorney representing the borough, called Robert McNeilly, the current chief of police at Elizabeth Township, Allegheny County. He is the former chief of police in Pittsburgh from 1996 to 2006 and a firearms trainer, who said that nobody on a firing range should be down range, or in front of a muzzle.
“You don’t point a weapon at anything you don’t intend to shoot,” McNeilly said.
Several witnesses testified Wednesday that Brown walked in front of borough officer Jason Bennett, grabbed Bennett’s gun and held it to his own chest during training on Oct. 7.
McNeilly said, during his time as police chief in Pittsburgh, no training officer allowed students on a range to stand down range.
Paul Castle, a Nashville, Tenn., tactical specialist testified that he did not agree with Brown’s method.
“Speaking politely, I would say that’s the most heinous, stupid thing anyone could say,” Castle said. “If he worked with me, he would be fired.”
Borough solicitor Neva Stanger testified Wednesday that Brown said he was using one of Castle’s techniques.
Castle said that when he does have students down range the gun is cleared to the point it is a shell and a plastic sleeve is placed in the barrel so it absolutely cannot fire.
He also said he would brief students about the operations that would take place during training. That did not happen Oct. 7, according to testimony.
“Every time you go to the range, there is a range briefing,” Castle said.
Al Lindsay, a Butler attorney representing Brown, called Robert Swartzwelder, a Pittsburgh police officer and firearms trainer, as his first witness.
Swartzwelder called his training method “gun fighting” rather than firearms training.
Firearms training takes place on a flat course and all instructions are given with an instructor standing near the students. Gun fighting, he said, encourages students to think on their feet, like in an actual police situation.
He said this is important because the most dangerous situations are the ones that officers are least trained for.
Although McNeilly said he did not allow, and was not aware of, anyone down range of guns in training, Swartzwelder said it was and is done often in Pittsburgh’s department.
“They’re doing it right now on the range in the city tonight,” Swartzwelder said.
Although he testified that he does not believe that Brown was out of line, he said he would have done it differently.
“Cold, if I had no idea what happened that day, no, I would not do that,” he said.
Swartzwelder said, if he was in Brown’s position, he would warn the officer what he was going to do, make sure his finger was securely away from the trigger area and would try to stay out of the way of the muzzle.
Lindsay, using a fake gun, demonstrated a technique with Swartzwelder where he securely held his finger on the barrel of the gun, similar to the way that Brown is alleged to have held the gun, which would prevent it from firing.
Swartzwelder said that accidental discharges do happen, but there is no way to make a gun range entirely safe.
“Things can happen. We just try to reduce them,” he said.
The hearings will continue June 10 and June 17, both starting at 5 p.m.
posted September 01, 2011
Fired chief testifies at hearing
Civil service panel weighs gun incident
By John Bojarski
Eagle Staff Writer
June 11,2011
SLIPPERY ROCK — Former borough police Chief Terry Brown testified Friday at his appeal hearing by the borough’s civil service commission.
Brown was fired by the borough Dec. 7 following a firearms training incident.
He testified that during the incident, which took place Oct. 7, he was running a firearms training course where borough officers Brian Hoak, Jason Bennett and Terry Fedokovitz, along with state Fish and Boat Commission officer Joe Morris, were students.
They were training for the Municipal Police Officers’ Education and Training Commission. Brown is a certified gun instructor.
At one point, Brown told the officers about a technique called “center axis relock.” He then went to Bennett and held his gun, turned it 90 degrees, making sure Bennett’s finger was away from the trigger and held the gun’s slide. Brown said this made sure the gun would not fire.
Previous testimony said that Brown provided no explanation or acknowledgment of his actions.
“The guys knew what was taking place. They knew. I demonstrated,” Brown said. “The gun could not fire.”
Brown then stepped in front of Bennett and demonstrated that Bennett could attempt an “elbow strike” or a “pistol punch” on a suspect. While doing this, the gun was aimed at the left side of Brown’s chest.
Commission solicitor Steve Yakopec of Arnold asked Brown whether he intentionally pointed the gun at himself. Brown said he did not.
When this happened, Bennett said an expletive, to which Brown responded, “Jason, it’s not a problem. I’m in control of the gun. I can testify I’ve been muzzled before, I’ve been down range many times,” which is slightly different from what the other officers testified.
Brown said his statement was meant to imply that he knew what he was doing.
After that exercise, Brown asked the three borough officers what they thought of the technique, and he said all of them said they liked it.
Chris Gabriel, a Pittsburgh attorney representing the borough, asked Brown if he was trained in center axis relock.
Brown said he learned that technique at the state police Northwest Training Center.
Center axis relock is not part of the municipal police officers’ training, but Brown said that, as the trainer, he is permitted to modify the course as long as the techniques are equal or more advanced than training standards.
Brown said when it comes to training, municipal police officers’ training only requires basic, static shooting. But he said this does not train officers properly.
“The MPOETC training does not teach police officers real-life things,” he said.
Brown said he would do the same thing again, provided that the student had good shooting skills and good trigger control. He would not do it with a beginning student.
Brown said he chose Bennett to demonstrate with because he is “very tactically minded.”
However, Brown said, if he did do it again, he probably would talk more.
Although two expert witnesses previously testified that they never have students down range of loaded weapons, Brown said he has had his officers down range many times in past training sessions.
It was not until two weeks after the incident that he heard that the borough might have an issue.
Brown, along with his personal attorney Tom King, were called into a meeting with Mayor Ken Harris and borough solicitor Neva Stanger.
King asked whether the meeting was a loudermill hearing, which is a meeting before a government employee is disciplined or fired. Brown testified that Stanger said it was “sort of, maybe.” He also said Stanger did not allow a court reporter at the meeting.
However, Stanger testified that she told both Brown and King that the meeting was a loudermill hearing. She said she did deny a court reporter be present.
After Brown’s testimony Friday, both sides rested.
In his summation, Al Lindsay, the Butler attorney representing Brown, said that the borough’s position is that students should never be down range of a loaded weapon, but Brown and an expert witness testified that it does happen. This is more realistic for officers, Lindsay said.
In his summation, Gabriel said it is not the commission’s job to say what proper training is or whether they would have fired Brown. It is the commission’s job, Gabriel said, to determine whether Brown did what council said he did and whether borough council acted outside its legal authority.
“It was a three-second incident. It was an incident where someone could have ended up dead,” Gabriel said.
The court reporter has 30 days to submit the hearing transcripts to Lindsay and Gabriel, and they then have 30 days to present their opinions to the hearing commission. The commission has 60 days to review the transcripts and meet with Yakopec before coming to a decision.
A previously scheduled hearing for June 17 is canceled.
Fire chief testifies at hearing
John Bojarski, Butler Eagle. June 11, 2011Fired chief testifies at hearing
Civil service panel weighs gun incident
By John Bojarski
Eagle Staff Writer
June 11,2011
SLIPPERY ROCK — Former borough police Chief Terry Brown testified Friday at his appeal hearing by the borough’s civil service commission.
Brown was fired by the borough Dec. 7 following a firearms training incident.
He testified that during the incident, which took place Oct. 7, he was running a firearms training course where borough officers Brian Hoak, Jason Bennett and Terry Fedokovitz, along with state Fish and Boat Commission officer Joe Morris, were students.
They were training for the Municipal Police Officers’ Education and Training Commission. Brown is a certified gun instructor.
At one point, Brown told the officers about a technique called “center axis relock.” He then went to Bennett and held his gun, turned it 90 degrees, making sure Bennett’s finger was away from the trigger and held the gun’s slide. Brown said this made sure the gun would not fire.
Previous testimony said that Brown provided no explanation or acknowledgment of his actions.
“The guys knew what was taking place. They knew. I demonstrated,” Brown said. “The gun could not fire.”
Brown then stepped in front of Bennett and demonstrated that Bennett could attempt an “elbow strike” or a “pistol punch” on a suspect. While doing this, the gun was aimed at the left side of Brown’s chest.
Commission solicitor Steve Yakopec of Arnold asked Brown whether he intentionally pointed the gun at himself. Brown said he did not.
When this happened, Bennett said an expletive, to which Brown responded, “Jason, it’s not a problem. I’m in control of the gun. I can testify I’ve been muzzled before, I’ve been down range many times,” which is slightly different from what the other officers testified.
Brown said his statement was meant to imply that he knew what he was doing.
After that exercise, Brown asked the three borough officers what they thought of the technique, and he said all of them said they liked it.
Chris Gabriel, a Pittsburgh attorney representing the borough, asked Brown if he was trained in center axis relock.
Brown said he learned that technique at the state police Northwest Training Center.
Center axis relock is not part of the municipal police officers’ training, but Brown said that, as the trainer, he is permitted to modify the course as long as the techniques are equal or more advanced than training standards.
Brown said when it comes to training, municipal police officers’ training only requires basic, static shooting. But he said this does not train officers properly.
“The MPOETC training does not teach police officers real-life things,” he said.
Brown said he would do the same thing again, provided that the student had good shooting skills and good trigger control. He would not do it with a beginning student.
Brown said he chose Bennett to demonstrate with because he is “very tactically minded.”
However, Brown said, if he did do it again, he probably would talk more.
Although two expert witnesses previously testified that they never have students down range of loaded weapons, Brown said he has had his officers down range many times in past training sessions.
It was not until two weeks after the incident that he heard that the borough might have an issue.
Brown, along with his personal attorney Tom King, were called into a meeting with Mayor Ken Harris and borough solicitor Neva Stanger.
King asked whether the meeting was a loudermill hearing, which is a meeting before a government employee is disciplined or fired. Brown testified that Stanger said it was “sort of, maybe.” He also said Stanger did not allow a court reporter at the meeting.
However, Stanger testified that she told both Brown and King that the meeting was a loudermill hearing. She said she did deny a court reporter be present.
After Brown’s testimony Friday, both sides rested.
In his summation, Al Lindsay, the Butler attorney representing Brown, said that the borough’s position is that students should never be down range of a loaded weapon, but Brown and an expert witness testified that it does happen. This is more realistic for officers, Lindsay said.
In his summation, Gabriel said it is not the commission’s job to say what proper training is or whether they would have fired Brown. It is the commission’s job, Gabriel said, to determine whether Brown did what council said he did and whether borough council acted outside its legal authority.
“It was a three-second incident. It was an incident where someone could have ended up dead,” Gabriel said.
The court reporter has 30 days to submit the hearing transcripts to Lindsay and Gabriel, and they then have 30 days to present their opinions to the hearing commission. The commission has 60 days to review the transcripts and meet with Yakopec before coming to a decision.
A previously scheduled hearing for June 17 is canceled.
posted September 01, 2011
Judges must decide when defendants or convicted criminals should be permitted to travel
Sunday, August 21, 2011
By Paula Reed Ward, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Gregory Podlucky pleaded guilty in June to diverting more than $25 million from his company to his own pocket, using the money to build himself a castle and an expansive model train collection and to purchase rare gems.
When he is sentenced in October, the 51-year-old is facing at least several years in federal prison, although he could get as many as 20 years.
On Friday, Mr. Podlucky was to leave with his family to fly to Los Angeles to spend the weekend at his son's college orientation.
The motion to travel -- filed by his defense attorney and approved by the judge in the case -- allowed Mr. Podlucky four days away.
Experts disagree on whether a man facing so much time in prison -- and who may still have substantial means with which to flee -- should be allowed to make such a trip.
But they agree that the decision is completely discretionary and one that judges make all the time.
"These judgments are idiosyncratic," said G. Robert Blakey, a federal criminal law professor at Notre Dame Law School. "There's no pattern to them."
The granting of bond -- both pretrial and after conviction -- is predicated on two things: risk of flight and danger to the community.
Under American law, pretrial defendants are presumed to be innocent. That means it is up to the prosecution to prove that the defendant would likely try to flee or commit new crimes while on bond.
The standard is the same for defendants who have already been found guilty, Mr. Blakey said. Though, he continued, the burden shifts to the defendant to prove that he is not a flight risk or a risk to re-offend.
For white-collar criminals, the possibility of committing a new crime is negligible.
"It's not special treatment. It's different treatment," Mr. Blakey said. "A white-collar offender is not a danger." Crime data shows that such offenders are very unlikely to commit new crimes.
Even still, because of the circumstances of Mr. Podlucky's case, Mr. Blakey called it "extraordinary" that the former CEO of Le-Nature's got bond.
"It's incredible he's permitted to go anywhere. He's run off with millions and millions of dollars," Mr. Blakey said. "The danger of flight for this guy -- which is a function of the length of time he could be in prison -- I'm surprised they'd give him bail at all, let alone [let him] get on a plane and fly across the country."
In Mr. Podlucky's case, he first sought permission from Senior U.S. District Judge Alan N. Bloch to spend 11 days in California.
That request -- which the U.S. attorney's office did not consent to -- was denied by the judge.
"Obviously, if they don't consent, it's very tenuous," said Mr. Podlucky's defense attorney, Alexander H. Lindsay Jr.
However, when the length of time for the trip was reduced, and the prosecution consented to the travel, Judge Bloch agreed
"Four days was much more reasonable than 11," Mr. Lindsay said.
The attorney was not surprised the second request was approved.
"Gregory Podlucky has always been where he's supposed to be and done what he's supposed to do," Mr. Lindsay said. "He's cooperating with the government and also cooperating with other people to ameliorate what happened here."
But Mr. Blakey found the reason for Mr. Podlucky's travel to be less than moving.
"This is his kid's matriculation in college --big deal," Mr. Blakey said. "I'm not a bleeding heart. The day you're convicted, you're guilty. You've lost that liberty. You've lost the liberty to go to your college [orientation]."
But Mr. Lindsay defended the request.
"This is a normal thing a parent wants to do with their child," he said. "Especially given the lengthy period of time he's facing."
Former U.S. District Judge Robert Cindrich said he, too, would likely have let Mr. Podlucky go.
"You'd be pretty hardhearted not to grant that one," he said.
An additional thing Mr. Cindrich would consider in making the decision, he said, was "Would I, in effect, be punishing the child? He didn't do anything wrong.
"In matters that pertain to the family, we try to look at -- who are we harming here?"
The former judge said there are ways to keep the person in constant contact with the probation department overseeing the case to make sure he is not going to flee. A defendant could be required to call in every so many hours or check in at a local probation office.
"The kind of [crime] [Mr. Podlucky] was in is not something he could accomplish in a weekend pass," he said.
While Mr. Blakey would not have gone for a request to attend college orientation, he did say he is in favor of honoring humanitarian requests -- for example, if a loved one dies.
In addition, he said that in cases where witnesses are cooperating, it is likely that the prosecution will consent to and the judge will approve all of their requests.
...
Paula Reed Ward: pward@post-gazette.com or 412-263-2620.
Your Honor, may I go to Cedar Point before prison?
Paula Reed Ward, Pittsburgh Post Gazette. August 21, 2011Judges must decide when defendants or convicted criminals should be permitted to travel
Sunday, August 21, 2011
By Paula Reed Ward, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Gregory Podlucky pleaded guilty in June to diverting more than $25 million from his company to his own pocket, using the money to build himself a castle and an expansive model train collection and to purchase rare gems.
When he is sentenced in October, the 51-year-old is facing at least several years in federal prison, although he could get as many as 20 years.
On Friday, Mr. Podlucky was to leave with his family to fly to Los Angeles to spend the weekend at his son's college orientation.
The motion to travel -- filed by his defense attorney and approved by the judge in the case -- allowed Mr. Podlucky four days away.
Experts disagree on whether a man facing so much time in prison -- and who may still have substantial means with which to flee -- should be allowed to make such a trip.
But they agree that the decision is completely discretionary and one that judges make all the time.
"These judgments are idiosyncratic," said G. Robert Blakey, a federal criminal law professor at Notre Dame Law School. "There's no pattern to them."
The granting of bond -- both pretrial and after conviction -- is predicated on two things: risk of flight and danger to the community.
Under American law, pretrial defendants are presumed to be innocent. That means it is up to the prosecution to prove that the defendant would likely try to flee or commit new crimes while on bond.
The standard is the same for defendants who have already been found guilty, Mr. Blakey said. Though, he continued, the burden shifts to the defendant to prove that he is not a flight risk or a risk to re-offend.
For white-collar criminals, the possibility of committing a new crime is negligible.
"It's not special treatment. It's different treatment," Mr. Blakey said. "A white-collar offender is not a danger." Crime data shows that such offenders are very unlikely to commit new crimes.
Even still, because of the circumstances of Mr. Podlucky's case, Mr. Blakey called it "extraordinary" that the former CEO of Le-Nature's got bond.
"It's incredible he's permitted to go anywhere. He's run off with millions and millions of dollars," Mr. Blakey said. "The danger of flight for this guy -- which is a function of the length of time he could be in prison -- I'm surprised they'd give him bail at all, let alone [let him] get on a plane and fly across the country."
In Mr. Podlucky's case, he first sought permission from Senior U.S. District Judge Alan N. Bloch to spend 11 days in California.
That request -- which the U.S. attorney's office did not consent to -- was denied by the judge.
"Obviously, if they don't consent, it's very tenuous," said Mr. Podlucky's defense attorney, Alexander H. Lindsay Jr.
However, when the length of time for the trip was reduced, and the prosecution consented to the travel, Judge Bloch agreed
"Four days was much more reasonable than 11," Mr. Lindsay said.
The attorney was not surprised the second request was approved.
"Gregory Podlucky has always been where he's supposed to be and done what he's supposed to do," Mr. Lindsay said. "He's cooperating with the government and also cooperating with other people to ameliorate what happened here."
But Mr. Blakey found the reason for Mr. Podlucky's travel to be less than moving.
"This is his kid's matriculation in college --big deal," Mr. Blakey said. "I'm not a bleeding heart. The day you're convicted, you're guilty. You've lost that liberty. You've lost the liberty to go to your college [orientation]."
But Mr. Lindsay defended the request.
"This is a normal thing a parent wants to do with their child," he said. "Especially given the lengthy period of time he's facing."
Former U.S. District Judge Robert Cindrich said he, too, would likely have let Mr. Podlucky go.
"You'd be pretty hardhearted not to grant that one," he said.
An additional thing Mr. Cindrich would consider in making the decision, he said, was "Would I, in effect, be punishing the child? He didn't do anything wrong.
"In matters that pertain to the family, we try to look at -- who are we harming here?"
The former judge said there are ways to keep the person in constant contact with the probation department overseeing the case to make sure he is not going to flee. A defendant could be required to call in every so many hours or check in at a local probation office.
"The kind of [crime] [Mr. Podlucky] was in is not something he could accomplish in a weekend pass," he said.
While Mr. Blakey would not have gone for a request to attend college orientation, he did say he is in favor of honoring humanitarian requests -- for example, if a loved one dies.
In addition, he said that in cases where witnesses are cooperating, it is likely that the prosecution will consent to and the judge will approve all of their requests.
...
Paula Reed Ward: pward@post-gazette.com or 412-263-2620.
