|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASE #2 (Issue #62: September 1996)Printed with permission of Chief David Dial, Naperville (Illinois) Police Department
The Naperville, (IL) Police Department and its Police Chief, David Dial, were taken to court on a defense motion for contempt of court arising from a convict's appeal of a murder conviction. The thrust of the motion was that the Naperville Police Department had failed to reveal all of its policies and procedures at several preconviction court hearings. Subsequent to the murder, Naperville became accredited. Part of Chief Dial's August 1996 letter to CALEA's Executive Director Richard Kitterman follows:When he (defense attorney) found nothing to support his theory that I had misrepresented the dates these policies became effective, he advised that he was going to subpoena records from CALEA. I told him that wouldn't be necessary and that I would be willing to request that the Commission (CALEA) provide him whatever information he required without the subpoena. As you know, in their initial phone call to you, the defense attorneys had several questions about the requirements for accreditation and the accreditation process. They then told me that they desired to have a copy of the report that had been completed on our department by the assessment team upon which our accreditation was based. I knew that it was a very positive report, and one that our department was proud of. The day after they received the report from the Commission, they contacted the attorney who had been appointed to represent me in this matter and advised him that they realized there was no evidence to support their mistaken belief that these policies existed at the time of the murder and that they would be formally withdrawing their petition before the court. The good news about all of this is that the defendant remains imprisoned, and the department's reputation in this matter remains unscathed. As I have previously mentioned to you, I was fortunate to have accurately documented policies which could absolutely prove the allegations being made by the defense counsel were unfounded. I am thankful for the assistance of the Commission in this matter and look forward to getting my department reaccredited in November of next year.
|
|
|
