Southern Maryland's Only 24-hour Newsroom    

Where is the Loot? New Federal Court Filing Lays Blame for Stolen Loot at Feet of Doolan, Clears Voorhaar By Kenneth C. Rossignol ST. MARY’S TODAY LEONARDTOWN --- Who has the loot? That question, involving a missing tractor trailer load of property which had been in the custody of the St. Mary’s Sheriff’s Department, was raised one year ago in news reports in ST. MARY’S TODAY, is one step closer to being answered. Attorneys for a local man seeking the return of his property from police custody, which was seized from him during a police raid of his home in which criminal charges against him were later dropped, recently completed preliminary steps of the lawsuit which revealed who may have been responsible for stealing the property from police custody. Court filings in a federal suit brought by a Hermanville man against former St. Mary’s Sheriff Richard Voorhaar and ten unnamed deputies have been amended in Federal Court with the suit now alleging that the property of the plaintiff which disappeared in police custody was actually stolen in a scheme involving the Assistant Sheriff Steven Doolan. The amended complaint filed in United States District Court not only alleges that Deputy Steven Doolan, who had been the second in command at the department with the rank of captain when the first news of nearly $80,000 worth of building supplies was missing from police custody was part of a conspiracy to steal the property but also clears former Sheriff Richard Voorhaar of any wrongdoing in connection with the theft. Voorhaar had defrocked Doolan of his position as Captain and demoted him to the rank of Lieutenant which he now holds. Voorhaar also had suspended Doolan for about two months before bringing him back to work handling clerical duties. When St. Mary’s Sheriff David Zylak (D.) was sworn into office, his first action was to assign Doolan and Lt. Michael Merican to sit on the duty officers desk answering the phone, a far cry from the role the two deputies played for much of the time Voorhaar was in office when they ran the department and made most all of the major decisions as the former sheriff spent increasing amounts of time out of state in his mountain cabin. Voorhaar has since the election, when his anointed candidate to replace him as sheriff lost the Republican primary, sold his home in St. James and moved from St. Mary’s County to West Virginia. Doolan, his friend Steven Paul Cooper, an employee of a local defense contractor, Eagan McAlister Associates and George Michael Bowes, Jr., Doolan’s stepson, are alleged to have conspired together to steal the building materials. The building materials have been valued at figures ranging from $40,000 in a Sheriff’s Department press release to as much as $80,000 in published reports. Doolan’s wife is a security official with Eagan McAlister and in the last campaign cycle was the election campaign treasurer for St. Mary’s State’s Attorney Richard Fritz (R.) Building materials had been stolen from a job site of an office building owned by EMA prior to the investigation into the stolen property being initated by Sheriff’s detective Cara Safford. Dep. Safford used information obtained from an informant to obtain a search warrant for the property of Wendell Ford. Ford has long been the target of the Sheriff’s Department which has played him up as a local drug kingpin. Despite their many years of spending all available resources on trying to pin drug dealing charges on Ford, the Sheriff’s Department has been failed to make a case against him and once again created a major embarassement for themselves with this latest case. The property taken from Ford’s home was poorly catalouged and inventoried and a video tape of the seizure was first reported missing as well but after attorneys for Ford filed a federal suit, the tape mysteriously turned up in the custody of the Sheriff’s Department. The Maryland State Proscecutor has been conducting a criminal probe of the missing loot since first learning of purloined property in news reports in ST. MARY’S TODAY. A month after the first news was printed, Voohaar assigned a deputy with close ties to Doolan to investigate the matter but that effort quickly ceased and Voorhaar wrote to Prosecutor Montanrelli asking him to conduct a probe. Voorhaar claimed that his effort had been "stonewalled" by Doolan. Despite a court order issued on March 28, 2002 by District Court Judge John Slade instructing the immediate release of the property to Ford, Doolan, in his official capacity as Assistant Sheriff, wrote to Ford’s attorney promising that an investigation into the matter was underway. But the newly filed court papers allege that Doolan had a key role in the disappearance of the missing loot. Doolan converted Ford’s property to his own and directed that the property be released to Cooper and Bowes and some of the property was sold for cash. Doolan, in an unusual departure from official policy for disposing of property held in police custody, gave a cell phone number to a subordinate in the police property section to use to contact someone he said worked for EMA. Instead, the cell phone number was for his stepson who, according to court filings, "was not then and never has been an employee of EMA". "Pursuant to the order from Defendant Doolan, his subordinate released to Defendant Bowes and Defendant (Cooper) a close friend of Doolan and an employee of EMA, the majority of the property that had been seized from the Plaintiffs. The property that was released included 5 bags of insulation, aluminum siding starter strips, nineteen pieces of 14 foot baseboard; 2 pre-hung interior vinyl doors; additional interior and exterior doors; 39 pieces of vinyl siding; one roll of tar paper; 5 rolls of poly painted aluminum coil; 5 sets of vinyl shutters; one case of roofing nails (50lbs.); one case of 8d coated sinker nails (50lbs.); 90 sheets of sheetrock; vinyl windows; 52 8’ cinderblocks; and numerous other items," said the court filing. "On information and belief, Defendants Bowes and Cooper took possession of the property described above knowing that they had no legal right to the property," stated the filing which next said that Doolan’s stepson "…sold a portion of the property for cash" while "Defendant Cooper retained at his residence another portion of the property." But, as has been the case for years, not all of the loot is accounted for, according to the filings. In five counts of violation of the law and rights of Ford, the plaintiff’s attorneys, Michael B. Suessmann and A. Shane Mattingly, detail the criminal wrongdoing led by then Captain Doolan and ask for compensatory and actual damages as well as punitive damages in papers they filed with the Federal Court on May 12th. Count One of the suit claims that Doolan, Bowes and Cooper’s scheme to steal Ford’s property was "intentional, without justification and together with Defendant Bowes and Cooper’s removal of the property from the custody of the Office of the Sheriff, constiuted a conversion of the Plaintiff’s property." Count Two charges that "The wrongful acts of the individual defendants, as set forth in this complaint, were committed pursuant to an agreement between and among these defendants to accomplish an unlawful and improper violation of the Plaintiffs’ constitutional and common law rights." Count Three alleges that Doolan "…acted with actual malice and under color and pretense of law, statutes, customs and usage’s of the State of Maryland" and deprived Ford of the rights, privleges and immunities guaranteed to him under Article 24 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights. Count Four states that Doolan also deprived Ford of his federal constitutional rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. Count Five reasserts the illegal conduct of Doolan and is filed against the Board of Commissioners due to Doolan’s job status as the Assistant Sheriff when the entire affair took place. Suessmann and Mattingly were contacted last week by ST. MARY’S TODAY for comment on the suit and were asked if they knew how the loot was transported by the conspirators. Suessmann declined to elaborate beyond the scope of the recent filings. "We will find out the answer to this question when we have the opportunity to interview the defendants," said Suessmann. State Prosecutor Montanarelli has repeatedly stated to ST. MARY’S TODAY that his office will be completing their probe soon, noting that earlier projections on ending the probe were hampered by a lack of staff and the task of completing other probes around the state. Montanarelli said that his probe may recommend the prosecution of civilians involved with theft of the missing loot and also that he would submit a recommendation to States Attorney Richard Fritz that he recuse himself from any dealings with such a prosecution. Customarily, Montanarelli indicts only elected officials and with Voorhaar now out of office and Sheriff Zylak having nothing to do with the alleged theft scheme organized by Doolan, Doolan could be prosecuted by the United States Attorney or by a special prosecutor who, upon appointment by the Circuit Court, may decide to bring charges. Should Montanarelli issue a report to Sheriff Zylak on the investigation but determine that prosecution of Doolan is not up to him, Doolan could still be pursued by the FBI which had conducted an extensive probe previously into the activities of the department. Zylak would likely fire Doolan even if no criminal charges are placed as his alleged actions violate many major parts of policy and procedures, especially those dealing with forbidding the theft of property from the police property storage. If Doolan is charged and convicted of criminal theft charges he would be subject to prison time as well as losing his job and his retirement. Under the current civil lawsuit, the taxpayers will pick up the tab of paying Ford for his property which was stolen from the Sheriff’s Department, allegedly by the chief deputy, his stepson and Cooper. This latest revelation in the story of the missing loot goes a long way to clear Voorhaar from any involvement in the theft of the property but also shows how he provided little supervision for the department he was elected to lead. Voorhaar had handpicked Doolan as his Assistant Sheriff, promoted him to Captain from the position of being a desk seargeant and had given him carte blanche to run the agency.         Fritz Was Forced Into Court To Pay Child Support While In Charge of Locking Up Dead-Beat Dads By Kenneth C. Rossignol ST. MARY'S TODAY LEONARDTOWN --- According to St. Mary's Circuit Court records, St. Mary's State's Attorney Richard D. Fritz was forced into a Circuit Court by his first ex-wife in 1982 to provide child support for the couple's child who was 16 years of age. Court records show that on January 25, 1982, that Sheila Hare Presley, whom Fritz married in 1966 and divorced in 1969, filed proceedings with the St. Mary's Circuit Court to require that her ex-husband provide child support for their daughter. Fritz had worked as an assistant state's attorney, under State's Attorney C. Clarke Raley, and in that capacity, had locked up men in St. Mary's County for failing to pay their child support. His present job is responsible for enforcement of child support. Due to Fritz's employment in the state's attorneys office, a special prosecutor was appointed to prosecute Fritz. James A. Kenney III, now a Maryland Appeals Court Judge, represented the State of Maryland in the proceedings against Fritz who was the defendant, which were filed under the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, as Presley lived in Virginia. On June 8, 1982, an agreement stipulating Fritz's financial support for his child was agreed to and filed in the record and the Order was signed by a Judge later that month. Besides ordering that Fritz pay for the support of his child, an act that Presley contends he failed to do for most of the girl's life until the agreement was signed, Fritz was ordered to pay for one-half of her college education. In an interview last week, Presley told ST. MARY'S TODAY that he had not lived up to that part of the agreement and that she never pursued him in court for the money as she was tired of the hassle of doing so. A message left for Fritz, at his office, requesting comment prior to deadline was not returned. The Virginia Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Deputy Clerk then filed an action in 1983, once again while Fritz was still an assistant state's attorney, informing the St. Mary's Circuit Court that Fritz was still not complying with the order of the court, to which he had agreed the previous year. "Respondent in the above styled cause is not complying with the order of support," wrote Deputy Clerk Margaret Pike, who noted in the filing that Fritz was a prosecutor at the St. Mary's courthouse. "Please take whatever action you consider proper to obtain enforcement of the Court Order." Presley said that Fritz was a struggling college student and was unable to provide much in the way of support with only a few payments ever made while he was in college. But after he graduated and became employed as a public defender, was in private practice and became a prosecutor, he still failed to pay child support and she said that she decided to force him to do so. "He never stayed in touch with our daughter," said Presley, who contacted ST. MARY'S TODAY last week, "but after the court proceedings he paid after that." Presley said that she had heard about the allegations made by Carla Henning Bailey that the incident which took place on St. Georges Island in 1964 which Bailey contends was a case of gang rape in which Fritz and two others held her down and forcibly raped her, while Fritz contends was a case of consensual sex. Fritz later pled guilty to having sexual relations with a minor child, as Bailey was 15 at the time, and was sentenced to a 18 months in prison. Presley said that while she was not there when the alleged rape took place, she doubted that Fritz had forced himself on Bailey as there were many girls who were lining up to have sex with him at the time. "I was going with him at time and he told me what he had done," said Presley, "that she got worried and changed her story, he said she let them do that." Bailey contends that she screamed for help the entire time the three young men were raping her. Presley said that every time the child support case was ready to go to court something happened to delay it, noting that Fritz would claim that he didn't know her whereabouts. "I told him years ago that he should have been a car salesman," said Presley. "He had a rough life growing up and he's done well compared to the way he grew up, he had to care for his younger brother and sister while others his age were out having fun, he grew up fast. There is still a lot of pity in me for him." Presley said that following the court's order she finally got money from Fritz, only after their child was 16, but that she never collected on the costs of their daughter attending college. She claims that Fritz told her to pay the costs and then he would pay her half. "We never pursued it," said Presley, "he never paid it." Attorney General’s Office To Appeal Dismissal Of Charges In Internet Solicitation Case Curran says ruling may affect police ability to apprehend sexual predators BALTIMORE --- Attorney General J. Joseph Curran, Jr. announced that his office will pursue an appeal in the Court of Special Appeals of the dismissal of charges against a New Jersey man accused of using the Internet to solicit sex with a minor. On August 14, Frederick County Circuit Court Judge Mary Ann Stepler dismissed charges against Donald Taylor, Jr, 44, of Camden, New Jersey, on the grounds that no actual minor was involved in his actions, but rather a Maryland state trooper posing as a 15-year-old girl. In October 1999, the police received a complaint about Taylor. Thereafter, a police officer, posing as "Stephanie", a 15-year-old girl living in Frederick, began having Internet chat conversations with Taylor. The charges alleged that these conversations involved Taylor’s solicitation of unlawful sexual conduct with "Stephanie." During these conversations, Taylor said that he would bring Stephanie a teddy bear and condoms and pay for a motel room. Taylor arranged to meet "Stephanie" at a Pizza Hut parking lot in Frederick on October 29, 1999. On that date, Taylor checked into a hotel, and he had the condoms and teddy bear as agreed. At 5 p.m., he saw the same officer, dressed as a 15-year-old girl, at the designated spot. Taylor made a gesture for the officer to come to his car, and then police arrested him. Taylor was charged with three counts of solicitation of a minor on the computer, one count for each day of communication on the Internet. Maryland law prohibits the transmission of information by computer for the purpose of soliciting unlawful sexual contact with a minor. Taylor was also charged with an attempted third degree sex offense, which involves intercourse with a person 14 or 15 years of age, where the perpetrator is at least 21 years of age, and with attempting to assault a minor in the second degree. Judge Stepler granted Taylor’s motion to dismiss the charges. She dismissed the charges of solicitation of a minor over the Internet because there was no minor involved. She dismissed the attempted third degree sex offense on two grounds: that Taylor had not taken a substantial step toward commission of the crime, and that it was impossible for Taylor to have committed a crime because there was no minor involved. "We strongly believe this case merits an appeal," Attorney General Curran said. "It’s an important case because the judge’s ruling may limit police ability to apprehend sexual predators. Other jurisdictions have held that a police officer can pose as a minor and the perpetrator can still be punished for the intended crime." Board guts new impact fee, puts off implementation until Sept. 1 LEONARDTOWN --- The St. Mary's Board of Commissioners have delayed the start of the new $4,500 impact fee until Sept. 1st., giving all those who flooded the permits office since they raised the fee, time to get all of their requirements fulfilled and avoid the more than double increase of the fee. The Board took the action at Tuesday's meeting. Already hostile due to their desire to have the fee raised to at least $6,000, the Grape Nut crowd of Potomac River Association and Sierra Club enviro-elitists are now hopping mad at the Board. A legal challenge to the draconian impact fee is coming up from one of several possible sources but not because of the new higher tax on new homes, but because of the exemption for family property which is parceled off for family members, allowing up to 3 such transfers without any impact fee at all. Commissioner Dan Raley told ST. MARY'S TODAY that 3 attorneys have told the Board that their action is legal and will hold up. "Anytime I can save people money by helping them with the family exemption information, I am going to do it," said Raley, "I must have had 15 calls today."

The following is the transcript of the ABC News program 20/20 which aired on Jan. 19th featuring the saga of State's Attorney Richard Fritz and the election day story that appeared on our front page revealing that he and 3 others pled guilty to the rape of Carla Henning Bailey in 1964 when he was 18 and she was only 15. 20/20 Wednesday, Jan. 19, 2000 (This is an unedited, uncorrected transcript.) Prepared by Burrelle’s Information Services, which takes sole responsibility for accuracy of transcription. CHARLES GIBSON, ABCNEWS And now a story that is going to force you to choose sides. A respected prosecutor, a pillar of his community who says as a teen-ager he was caught in a youthful indiscretion. His accuser? A woman who describes a shocking episode that she says happened when they were both in high school. Only one of them is telling the whole truth. But which one? And why are they reliving it today, 35 years later? Here’s chief correspondent Chris Wallace. CHRIS WALLACE, ABCNEWS (VO) The kids at Great Mills High School look like most teen-agers in 1964. But behind the all-American scenes, the football games and dances, students here shared a dark secret. One of them may have been gang-raped. CARLA BAILEY I just remember screaming for help. And that’s all. CHRIS WALLACE Did help ever come? CARLA BAILEY No. CHRIS WALLACE Did Carla consent to having sex with you? RICK FRITZ Yes. CHRIS WALLACE Nothing forced about it. RICK FRITZ Nothing whatsoever. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Rick Fritz and Carla Bailey, who were schoolmates back then, now give very different accounts of that explosive incident. Whatever happened between them as teen-agers 35 years ago, it’s suddenly front-page news in this corner of southern Maryland. Do you think you’re objective. Do you think you’re even-handed? KEN ROSSIGNOL Probably not. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Publisher Ken Rossignol ran the rape headline on election day, just as Fritz was running to be the top prosecutor in the county. This is the story of how far an aggressive reporter went to dig into a candidate’s past. And the extraordinary step the candidate took to fight back. RICK FRITZ It was cold. It was calculated. It was intended to make me lose an election. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) How did it come to this a prominent 53-year-old lawyer having to answer for what he may have done when he was 18? To understand how it all happened, first you need to understand where it took place. Some 50 miles outside Washington, St. Mary’s County may seem a world apart from the nation’s capital, but it’s small-town southern flavor can mislead you, because we found this community is rife with blood feuds and political power struggles that rival anything you’ll find in the big city. (VO) Here, among the tobacco farms and cotton alongside the pristine stretches of waterfront, they’d been playing an especially rough brand of hardball politics for generations. KEN ROSSIGNOL But if you do have any more information in Trooper O’Reilly’s arrest... CHRIS WALLACE (VO) One of the key players is Ken Rossignol, who puts out a weekly tabloid called St. Mary’s Today. KEN ROSSIGNOL There were six witnesses. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) He is the reporter, and photographer, and editor-in-chief at the paper. ELLEN St. Mary’s Today. CHRIS WALLACE Sometimes his 80-year-old mother Ellen helps out with the phones. But Rossignol is essentially a one-man band. KEN ROSSIGNOL Any evidence of alcohol? CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Long before he targeted Rick Fritz, Rossignol was drawing blood in St. Mary’s County. KEN ROSSIGNOL How long before you all are through with this? CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Each week he prints the names of local residents arrested for drunk driving. A county commissioner who falls asleep during a meeting earns a mention on the front page. KEN ROSSIGNOL Some might call me a crusader. I don’t think so. I think I’m doing my job. CHRIS WALLACE You know what some people call your paper, don’t you? KEN ROSSIGNOL Oh, sure, they call it “the rag.” It probably means they don’t like it. But what you know? Them that don’t like it shouldn’t. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) In the fall of ’98, Rick Fritz was running to become state’s attorney and from the start of the campaign, Fritz says, the paper had a fatal attraction obsession with him. One story alleged when he was a deputy prosecutor, Fritz was soft on drug dealers. Another accused him of delaying a trial so he could go bear hunting. RICK FRITZ He’s made me look like a liar to the court. He’s made me look like a thief. He’s made me appear as though I’m giving inside information to drug dealers. Obviously, what they were endeavoring to do was to blow me up, dynamite me. CHRIS WALLACE You printed story after story about Rick Fritz. You really went after him, didn’t you? KEN ROSSIGNOL I think we went after his record. We’re going to look at the record, and we’re going to tell our readers what the record shows. And we’re going to tell them what we think about it, too. CHRIS WALLACE Were you trying to beat him, to make sure he didn’t win? KEN ROSSIGNOL Absolutely. RICK FRITZ (From tape) The important issue for the citizens of this county... CHRIS WALLACE (VO) In the final days of the campaign, it became an issue that both candidates for state’s attorney had been in trouble with the law when they were much younger. And this was Ken Rossignol’s silver bullet. Looking through court records, he found that back in high school, Rick Fritz was charged with carnal knowledge of a female child, that he and two other young men had sex with a 15-year-old. Fritz pled guilty to the misdemeanor and got off with probation. On election eve, the most explosive story of the campaign rolled off the presses. The headline was a bombshell, “Fritz Guilty Of Rape.” Do you think it’s fair to print an article like that on election day when the candidate is going to have no opportunity to respond? KEN ROSSIGNOL Sure it’s fair. He’s a big boy. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) But timing wasn’t the only issue. Was that front-page headline an accurate description of the crime? Wouldn’t it have been more accurate to say he pled guilty to sex with an under-age girl? A lot more accurate then saying he pled guilty to rape. KEN ROSSIGNOL Oh, that’s a good headline, I wish you were here at the time. CHRIS WALLACE You make it sound like, well, it wouldn’t sell as many papers. KEN ROSSIGNOL No, you said that. I didn’t say that. CHRIS WALLACE You don’t have any qualms about putting pled guilty to rape on the front page of your paper? KEN ROSSIGNOL No. None whatsoever. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Before the sun came up election morning, Fritz and some of his supporters decided to strike back, to make sure that voters never got a chance to see that front page. RICK FRITZ You have people at this point in time that, in essence, said, ‘Damnit. Enough is enough.’ CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Campaign workers, including several off-duty sheriff’s deputies, fanned out across the county to buy every St. Mary’s Today they could find. At 5:00 AM they purchased all 70 papers at this grocery. An hour later, the 50 copies at this gas station were gone. And all night, they cleaned out every vending machine. By election morning, anyone who wanted to read Rossignol’s paper, was out of luck. KEN ROSSIGNOL You know, it’s not my First Amendment right. They violated my reader’s First Amendment right. CHRIS WALLACE Rossignol was outraged, calling it a direct violation of freedom of the press. KEN ROSSIGNOL When law enforcement officers are going to step across the line and violate people’s constitutional rights, because they feel that’s the only way they can win an election, the closest thing that you can find to that is what happened in Nazi Germany and other Third World totalitarian countries. RICK FRITZ He put them on the market for purchase. And they were purchased. CHRIS WALLACE Mr. Fritz, wait a minute, wait a minute. Do you think that when a publisher puts out several thousand copies of his paper, don’t you think he expects them to actually get to the readers, not just to be bought out by a politician and thrown away? RICK FRITZ I’m sure he did, but most publishers are not attempting to subvert democracy as he was. CHRIS WALLACE He has a right to choose his method of distribution, and you have a right to interfere? RICK FRITZ Not to interfere, to purchase. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Some people called what the Fritz campaign did on election day the “newspaper caper.” But, it’s turned out to be no joke. Rossignol complained to authorities that the deputies intimidated store clerks into selling them the papers. Now the FBI is reportedly investigating whether the off-duty officers committed civil rights violations. Do you think that you or the off-duty sheriff’s deputies did anything wrong? RICK FRITZ No, absolutely not. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) On election night with the details of the rape allegations still a secret to most voters, Fritz won with 54 percent of the vote. It was a victory not only over his opponent in the campaign but also over Rossignol’s newspaper. But it didn’t last long. Because one more key player was about to be heard from. After 35 years, this woman was finally ready to break her silence. Richard Fritz, the man who is now the state’s attorney. He was the second man who raped you. DIANE SAWYER, ABCNEWS When we come back, Carla Bailey comes forward after 35 years to tell her story. And wait until you hear what she says happened that day. Stay with us. ANNOUNCER She calls it gang rape. He says it was consensual. CHRIS WALLACE Why would a woman 34 years after the fact make up a story like that? ANNOUNCER Who is telling the truth? When 20/20 continues. (Commercial Break) ANNOUNCER Will this man’s career be ruined by something he and two friends did in high school? CHRIS WALLACE What makes you think that a 15-year-old girl would willingly have sex with three young men one after another? RICK FRITZ Happens all the time. ANNOUNCER Hear the victim’s story before you decide. (Commercial Break) DIANE SAWYER Rick Fritz has been elected state’s attorney but is still fighting for his reputation after a newspaper story that accused him of rape when he was a teen-ager. Fritz says it was consensual when he and his two friends had sex with a schoolmate. But 35 years later that girl from his past reappeared, and, as Chris Wallace reports, she calls what happened that day gang rape. CARLA BAILEY I didn’t want to do it. They forced me to do it. That’s wrong. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Carla Bailey, who is now 50, had moved away from St. Mary’s County to a small town in Pennsylvania. She was stunned to learn that a painful secret from her past had become front-page news in her hometown. KATHY HEWITT I knew it was gonna upset her. I knew it was going to enrage her. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Kathy Hewitt, a former classmate and life-long friend, sent Bailey the rape story and let her know what Fritz was saying, that she consented to everything that happened that day. CARLA BAILEY Makes me look like I’m a piece of trash or something. Like I’m the one who’s, ‘oh, yeah, come on guys,’ and it wasn’t that way. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Bailey tracked down publisher Ken Rossignol and last April he printed the follow-up to his election-day bombshell. The woman who says Fritz raped her, coming forward after 35 years. About the only thing that Richard Fritz and Carla Bailey agree on is one day in November 1964, they ended up here on St. George’s Island on the Potomac River along with some friends. They went to a small house on the island. What happened next is where the story is split. (VO) Fritz was a senior, Bailey a sophomore. She says she can’t remember many details that day, but she can’t forget what it turned into it. CARLA BAILEY I somehow ended up in a room. I remember a window. One single bed, and that’s where it happened. These three guys all took turns with me. And raped me. One would hold my feet. One would hold my arms. And then one would do their thing and they took turns. RICK FRITZ Totally untrue. CHRIS WALLACE All three acts were consensual? RICK FRITZ Yes, it was a consensual situation. CHRIS WALLACE And she wasn’t saying that? RICK FRITZ No, no. CHRIS WALLACE No chance that they could have thought you were consenting? That you wanted this to happen? CARLA BAILEY No, not in my book. CHRIS WALLACE Did you struggle? CARLA BAILEY Yes, I struggled and screamed. CHRIS WALLACE What makes you think a 15-year-old girl would willingly have sex with three young men one after another? RICK FRITZ Happens all the time. CHRIS WALLACE Maybe I’m innocent, Mr. Fritz. I don’t know a lot of girls who have sex with three guys, one right after another, when they’re 15-years-old. RICK FRITZ Well, I can say that it occurred. It was voluntary. I mean, I don’t want to speak poorly about the girl. But three of us had sex with her. And that should speak for itself. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Bailey says she didn’t report the attack to her parents or the police. But by the next morning, Great Mills High School was buzzing. Rumors that Carla had been raped swept through the halls, and so did whispers that she had sex voluntarily with three boys. KATHY HEWITT When I heard rape, I absolutely believed it. All of us girls were just—we just figured that was the end of her life. Her life had just been ruined. Who would marry her? CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Bailey’s parents finally heard and went to the authorities. But the case never got to trial. As we’ve said, Fritz and another of the young men pled guilty to a misdemeanor, having sex with an underage girl, and got off with probation. The third boy was a juvenile, and his record is sealed. CARLA BAILEY Just like it was a waste of my time, my parents’ time to take me over to the courthouse and even press charges. CHRIS WALLACE Did you feel that he got away with it? CARLA BAILEY Yeah. I just know that he should have been punished for what he did. CHRIS WALLACE Bailey believes the boys only got a slap on the wrist because one of Fritz’s friends was from a prominent St. Mary’s family. But Fritz says it just shows there was no case. RICK FRITZ I know that, as a prosecutor myself, if a 15-year-old girl came in and told me that she was held down, raped by three different people, I’d immediately have them arrested and charged with first-degree rape. CHRIS WALLACE And so the fact that the prosecutor didn’t do that in your case indicates what? RICK FRITZ Either she did not say that, OK, or else her story was so totally incredible that he just out and out did not believe her. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) We contacted the prosecutor in the case. All he would say is that he handled the matter appropriately. Whatever the reason for the light sentence, when Bailey returned to school, friends say the outgoing 15-year-old was never the same. KATHY HEWITT She was ashamed. She was scared. She was all of a sudden afraid. She had to walk down the halls and see these guys coming down the halls smiling. And what did that do to her self-worth? And I watched my friend change. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) While Rick Fritz went on to become a successful lawyer and now county prosecutor, Carla Bailey married at 17 and eventually left town. Thirty-five years after the incident, she finds it difficult to describe what she’s been through. CHRIS WALLACE Do you think about this often? CARLA BAILEY Sometimes I’ll just go in my room and cry. CHRIS WALLACE Fifteen-year-old girl, it’s a lot to go through, isn’t it? CARLA BAILEY Well, yeah, I guess. CHRIS WALLACE Here’s the question I keep wondering about. Why would a woman, 34 years after the fact, make up a story like that? RICK FRITZ Well, my guesses are that obviously someone from Mr. Rossignol’s newspaper got a hold of her, I would assume paid her. And I have no evidence of this, but I’m thinking about what would have made her say that. CHRIS WALLACE Fritz has suggested that Ken Rossignol paid you for your story. CARLA BAILEY He didn’t pay me. CHRIS WALLACE Never got a dime? CARLA BAILEY No. KEN ROSSIGNOL It’s outrageous, I think that is delusional. It’s a lie that they’ve made up. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Ken Rossignol also denies paying for the story, and then delivers this counter punch. He has challenged Fritz, the man who prosecutes criminals, to submit to a polygraph test himself. KEN ROSSIGNOL I think he should take a lie detector test to determine his truthfulness, or he should step down. RICK FRITZ If Ken Rossignol wants to put up $500,000 in escrow so I can sue his butt for the libelous activity that he has engaged in over the last year and a half, I’d be more than happy to take the polygraph examination. More than happy to. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) Chances are we’ll never know what really happened that day on St. George’s Island, but Ken Rossignol’s election-day headline reopened all the old wounds. Carla Bailey says she still hopes for justice. CARLA BAILEY I would like to see him pay. Instead of going to jail, he’s going to just lose what he has. CHRIS WALLACE (VO) As for Fritz, he says he’s already lost plenty, that people now ask his wife whether he raped that woman. But once the story hit the front page, he says he did what they always do in St. Mary’s County—he fought back. RICK FRITZ Never was my intention to make her out to be trash. But if the facts of the case are the facts of the case, then so be it. CHARLES GIBSON Newspaper publisher Ken Rossignol is suing Richard Fritz, the sheriff in St. Mary’s County, for allegedly violating his civil rights by confiscating the newspaper.

Fritz Story Spotlighted On 20/20

ABC News presented their network show 20/20 on Wednesday evening featuring St. Mary's State's' Attorney Richard Fritz defending his participation in an alleged gang rape as being consensual sex despite the charge by his victim, Carla Bailey that Fritz and two others held her down and forcibly raped her. 

20/20 Anchor Chris Wallace inteviewed Bailey, Fritz and ST. MARY'S TODAY Publisher Kenneth Rossignol as the show displayed many scenes from around St. Marys County.  Fritz pled guilty to carnal knowledge of a minor child, aged 15, when he was 18 and was sentenced to 18 months in prison, the term was suspended to probation. 

The FBI is currently conducting a criminal investigation into the actions taken by deputies to sweep news stands of the newspaper on election day eve  in 1998 in order to prevent voters from learning about the incident. 

Lawmakers, Prosecutors Prepare to Battle Over Gun Prosecution Program

By KIMBERLY MARSELAS

Capital News Service

WASHINGTON, D.C. --- A group of Maryland legislators and law enforcement officials are headed for Virginia Friday for a closer look at an aggressive anti-gun program that they hope to bring to Maryland.

The Richmond program, known as Project Exile, requires that all convicted felons who are caught with a firearm be prosecuted under federal law and sentenced to a minimum of five yearsin an out-of-state federal prison if convicted.

"We're going to try our best and sell it here in Maryland," said state Sen. Philip C. Jimeno, D-Anne Arundel, one of three Maryland legislators who plans to introduce legislation in January modeled on the Richmond program.

But U.S. Attorney for Maryland Lynne A. Battaglia said no new Maryland laws are needed because the state already has a similar aggressive enforcement program in place.

"We already have Exile here: It's called Disarm," Battaglia said. "There's no state law we need to pass to enforce it."

Under Disarm, law enforcement officials review the record of anyone arrested with a handgun in Baltimore. If the person has any previous felony convictions, state and federal prosecutors decide where to prosecute the case, based on which court would likely result in more jail time.

Officials outside Baltimore can ask the U.S. Attorney's Office to review their gun-crime cases. If the suspect has two or more previous felony convictions, federal prosecutors will consider taking the case.

But in Richmond, prosecutors are not given a choice. Anyone subject to Exile guidelines is automatically charged with the federal offense, and judges are required to give a minimum sentence of five years on conviction.

The imposition of mandatory sentences is "highly suspect" to the Virginia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.

"The principle problem with Exile is the mandatory sentences," said Kent willis, executive director of the Virginia ACLU. "We take out of the hands of judges the right to make sure the punishment is commensurate with the crime.

Judges should be able to ... look at all the extenuating circumstances."

Willis also thinks officials are giving Project Exile too much credit for lowering crime rates.

"There really are too many variables to make that connection," he said.

"Overall crime rates are down all over the country."

But Jimeno is convinced by the Richmond numbers. He said taking the decision-making power away from local judges and prosecutors has been key to the success of the Virginia program.

"That's the difference: tightening down so there is no discretion," he said.

U.S. Rep. Robert Ehrlich, R-Timonium, agrees that Maryland laws are not enforced uniformly. He organized Friday's trip, so Maryland lawmakers could find out more about the Richmond program.

In addition to Jimeno's bill, a companion measure is expected to be introduced in the House of Delegates by Delegates Joan Cadden, D-Anne Arundel, and George Owings, D-Calvert. It was not clear Thursday which state lawmakers were accompanying Ehrlich to Richmond.

Battaglia maintains that Maryland's current program has been successful.

Her office said 250 cases have been federally prosecuted through Disarm since the program started in Baltimore in 1994, and the average sentence for those convicted has been eight years.

But Jimeno said Maryland can do more.

"The real difference [between Disarm and Exile] is the success that Project Exile has gotten," Jimeno said. "Everybody knows in Richmond that if you're carrying an illegal gun, you're going to go to federal prison. That's not happening here."

Sheriff's Lieutenant Charged By Grand Jury With Mishandling Criminal Records

LAPLATA --- The Charles County Grand Jury indicted Sheriff's Lieutenant Michael J. Allison Nov. 1 with one count of Misappropriation by a Fiduciary and two counts of Misconduct in Office, in an indictment unsealed Monday afternoon, Nov. 15, according to the Charles County Sheriff's spokesman Craig Renner.

---

State Police Re-examine Asset Seizure Policy in Wake of High Court Ruling

By SHANTEE WOODARDS

Capital News Service

WASHINGTON, D.C. --- Maryland State Police are reviewing their policies for seizing property in drug cases, after the Supreme Court's rejection of a Baltimore case on the subject last week.

A police spokesman said the department is reviewing the impact of the Supreme Court's decision in Mayor and City Council of Baltimore vs. One 1995 Corvette "to ensure we are following the appropriate procedures." That case involved city police officers, but could have an effect on all police agencies in the state.

Several Maryland defense attorneys said they expect the high court's ruling could affect the millions of dollars of property that police have seized from criminal defendants. State police said they seized $2.2 million in cash and $2.6 million in property from criminal suspects in 1997, the latest year for which figures were available.

"It'll protect people's rights," said lawyer Richard Finci, of the high court's recent decision. "It'll protect people's rights to be free from illegal searches and seizures."

Finci, of Houlon & Berman in New Carrollton, had argued the case in lower courts and filed papers with the Supreme Court, which rejected the state's appeal without comment last week.

The case stemmed from the May 1996 arrest of Weldon Holmes after what police said was a drug deal on Parkview Avenue in Baltimore. City police said they found more than a pound of cocaine in Holmes' 1995 Corvette after they arrested him.

But a circuit judge ruled that police had improperly obtained the cocaine from Holmes' car and could not use it as evidence in the trial against him. Criminal charges against Holmes were eventually dropped.

The cocaine was also barred as evidence in a separate civil trial to seize the car as a drug asset. The judge relied on a 1965 Supreme Court ruling that prohibited Pennsylvania prosecutors from using seized bootleg liquor as evidence in a forfeiture proceeding involving the car that contained the liquor.

The Maryland Court of Appeals agreed with the trial judge in February, ruling that police cannot seize property that is based on illegally obtained evidence.

City and state officials argued that more recent rulings by the high court have weakened the 1965 decision. But Appeals Court Judge Dale R. Cathell wrote that while the exclusionary rule has been weakened over time, "We do not believe it to be appropriate ... for this court to attempt to overrule," the 1965 decision.

The state appealed to the Supreme Court, whose refusal to hear the case means the Court of Appeals ruling stands.

"Given the current state of the law, it doesn't make sense to apply this to civil forfeiture cases," said Assistant Attorney General Andrew Baida, who argued the case before the Court of Appeals. "The (Supreme) court chose to rule with the status quo."

That sat well with defense attorneys in Maryland. Augustus Brown, a partner with Brown, Brown & Brown in Bel Air, said he is "hopeful" this will lead to other courts dismissing similar cases.

"(Forfeiture) is used sometimes where the automobile is used as leverage to get a defendant to plead guilty," said Brown. Stricter forfeiture procedures will make prosecutors do their job more effectively, he said.

State police said they are reviewing those procedures to see if they need to be stricter.

"The reason it's important to us to monitor is to ensure we are following the appropriate procedures," said Maj. Greg Shipley, a spokesman for state police. "Our commitment is to follow the law and the way the law is interpreted by the courts."

Finci said the case was successful in that it clarified points about a basic law. But seized property is still a problem in Maryland, he said.

"The state likes to take property and seize it," he said. "It's easier than taxes."

-

 

Green Not Guilty On 1st Degree Murder But Will Likely Get 30 Years On 2nd Degree Rap

By Kenneth C. Rossignol

ST. MARY'S TODAY

UPPER MARLBORO  (Aug. 19) On Wednesday a Prince George's County Circuit Court Jury, after less than 4 hours of deliberation, found Keith Allen Green guilty of murder in the second degree and not guilty of premeditated 1st degree murder.

In a case which was resurrected by the Maryland State Police Cold Case Squad which reopened the investigation which had been abandoned by the St. Mary's Sheriff's Department after only 9 months, then State's Attorney Walter B. Dorsey demanded that key evidence be in place before he sought an indictment which ultimately led to the conviction of Green this week.

It was Dorsey's insistence that investigators, assisted by Daniel Morris a former Prince George's detective who Dorsey hired to work in his office to coordinate such probes with both the Sheriff's Department and the State Police, accomplish each and every task he set before them in order to make sure that a successful conclusion would be obtained in the eventual trial of Green.

Last year, as the clock ticked down towards the election, Sheriff Richard Voorhaar, who even as long ago as November of 1997, was telling the press that an arrest in the Pickeral murder "was close" began to bitterly complain that Dorsey was holding up the investigation with an eye to delaying so Voorhaar could come under more fire during the election.

When Dorsey finally consented to go ahead to the Grand Jury for an indictment he did so with what he thought was enough evidence to win a conviction, not let Green get off and never be able to charge him again should more evidence be obtained.

Ultimately, Dorsey's decision was correct.

Courtroom observers say that Richard Fritz did a good job in presenting the case this week, although one person noted that Fritz did not stand each time he addressed the judge, a basic courtroom courtesy which surprised that person. But Fritz's skills as a prosecutor, when he actually gets into a courtroom, equal his skills as a strategist.

Fritz should be good. He learned at the knee of the very best. For 10 years he worked for Dorsey, picking up the advise, counsel and wisdom of the man who many say has the best legal mind in Maryland and had he been so inclined, could easily have been elected Governor of this state.

Those who heard all the evidence presented in the murder trial of Keith Allen Green also agreed on another issue which has been at the central part of the entire Pickeral Murder: that Sgt. Ernest Carter's testimony was what made the case for the state. His interactions with Green, his traps he laid for Green to trip himself up, were exactly the reason that Carter should have been retained on the case by political gloryhound Voorhaar.

Voorhaar removed Carter and replaced him with his prima donna detective who prances around in starched collars and sparking new suits, Lt. John Horne, but who's best contribution to this case was when he ended up as the star witness for the defense, introducing the possibility of another person being responsible for the slaying of the 13-year-old child.

Carter's ability as a detective not only showed that he should have been kept on the case longer than 36 hours, but that his retirement was a genuine loss to the county's citizens, who now suffer with inadequate investigators who's main skills appear to be their political loyalty to Voorhaar.

Green will likely get 30 years.

Had it not been for the hard work and determination of the Maryland State Police Cold Case Squad, Green would still be out on the loose, smoking crack cocaine and molesting little girls. The professionalism and dedication to duty of these intelligent sleuths made the day in this case and for once the public can say that justice prevailed.

The non-political probe put on by the State Police in this matter underscores why we need a state police force and why we need a professional county police department, devoid of politics, and committed to respecting the rights of citizens while they work to protect and serve the public.

This woman wore a tee shirt with a photo of Claudia Pickeral at this year's candlelight vigil which was the second year that citizens gathered to bring pressure to bear on officials to bring the child's killer to justice.


St. Mary's States Attorney Richard Fritz did a good job in presenting the case prepared by his predecessor, Walter B. Dorsey.
ST. MARY'S TODAY photo

This is the home of the man on trial for killing Claudia Pickeral after it was torched.  A trial for arson charging Minister Lindsey with the crime found him not guilty.
ST. MARY'S TODAY photo by Terrance Greenhow

---

Merchant Unhappy With Action
Taken By State's Attorney

LEXINGTON PARK --- A Lexington Park business owner said last Friday that in the last six months St. Mary's State's Attorney Richard D. Fritz has dropped criminal charges against two persons who have disrupted his business.

Chuck Vetter, general manager and partner of the Perkins Restaurants in Leonardtown and California, told ST. MARY'S TODAY that he is upset and concerned for the future of law enforcement while Fritz is in office.

Vetter has hired off-duty police officers to provide security for his restaurant 8 years, with the deputies working the late night shifts in duty that has been authorized by the Sheriff.

The off-duty police officers working security for Perkins join a brigade of off-duty state troopers and sheriff's deputies working most nights as guards in much of the Lexington Park and California area.

The businessman said that he and other business owners have to employ off-duty officers to guard their businesses because the alternative is waiting for an on-duty officer to respond to a call for help.

"I have to have the comfort level there, to know that security is in there," said Vetter. "Waiting 15 minutes for a patrolman to get to the establishment could be very costly."

While perturbed that taxes go for paying for law enforcement and then having to pay again for off-duty officers, Vetter said that he and other merchants have no choice and he is resigned to it being a cost of doing business.

Vetter is vexed over Fritz's decision last week to drop charges against a former employee who allegedly stole goods from the Perkins in Wildewood Shopping Center.

"I am annoyed that it was dropped, I feel very frustrated," said Vetter, who noted that this latest incident comes on the heels of having charges dropped a few months ago on a Mechanicsville man who was arrested and charged with assault after he struck a waitress and a customer as he raised cain in the California location late one night in 1997.

Fritz sent a letter to Vetter on July 23rd announcing to him that the criminal theft charges against Robert Lurvey Marshal Jr. "...has been resolved. On July 22, 1999, the case was placed on the stet docket."

Fritz informed Vetter that Marshal was to obey all laws and noted that he had already paid restitution and that should he have any questions, he was to contact Jeannie Copsey, the victim-witness coordinator in his office. Vetter said that on Friday that he had not been informed of the disposition of the case ahead of time nor had he heard from Copsey.

Assigning a case to the Stet docket is a type of plea bargain negotiated between defense attorneys and the prosecution to reduce case load in court and to avoid trying cases which may have marginal evidence. A case that is steted can be brought back to life within one year if the defendant once again commits an offence. The prosecution can exert some influence to obtain restitution in order to give light treatment to the defendant.

Vetter said the breakdown in law enforcement at the court level due to the prosecutor failing to try his cases could have serious consequences.

"I am concerned for the case where the unruly customer assaulted the deputy who was working in my restaurant could have grabbed the officer's gun," said Vetter. "We possibly could have had an incident which we couldn't recover from. It's unnerving when you have to worry about your staff like that. I went to Fritz and asked him why he wasn't prosecuting the case against the drunk in my family restaurant and he said he was going to put a deputy on the job who was lying."

The deputy Vetter referred to in the assault that was working in Perkins that night and placed the unruly man under arrest was Deputy Steven VanDevander. VanDevander attempted to gain control over the man and had to use pepper spray to subdue him, an action he was later criticized for by Sheriff Richard Voorhaar. Voorhaar has defended the use of pepper spray by another deputy in an incident at St. Mary's College last year as the proper use of force, while calling VanDevander's actions excessive force.

Pepper spray was first introduced several years ago as another tool in the officer's arsenal of weapons in order to allow an extra level of non-lethal force for law enforcement personnel who were unable to physically control a suspect and avoid the use of blackjacks or guns.

In the Perkins's incident, VanDevander attempted several times to control the man before being forced to spray him with pepper spray and then cuffed him and turned the man over to other officers.

Two weeks ago a Circuit Court hearing was held to determine if Voorhaar will be allowed to fire Dfc. VanDevander. Voorhaar tried to fire the officer after he filed a Federal complaint of sexual harassment, charging civilian supervisor Deborah Zylak of discriminating against him after he refused her sexual advances.

St. Mary's Circuit Court Judge John Hanson Briscoe ordered Voorhaar to put the deputy back on the job after an earlier court hearing. Instead of assigning Deputy VanDevander to regular patrol duties, Voorhaar instead assigned him to paid administrative leave, stripping him of his gun, badge and patrol vehicle, in what may be a violation of the court orders.

Vetter confronted Fritz about dropping the charges and he reports that Fritz justified doing so by claiming that the deputy had lied in a department action. Vetter points out that there were six other witnesses as to what took place. Deputy VanDevander contends that he did not lie in the incident in question, but declined to discuss the incident, instead deferring to his attorney for comment.

Now Circuit Court Judge Thomas H. Rymer will decide the issue of the deputy's employment while his lawsuit continues in federal courts. Attorney Ben Wolman, representing VanDevander, last week said he felt Judge Rymer would render a fair verdict and not be intimidated by the row of sheriff's department supervisors who were ordered to attend the court hearing and lined the front row in uniform. Lt. John Horne was on vacation but appeared in court in conformance with Voorhaar's orders.

After last year's election, Voorhaar, in a statement made to the broadsheet newspaper, The Enterprise, warned that with the election behind him, he was going to go after the troublemakers who had opposed his reelection. Since that time, Lt. Donald Purdy, who opposed Voorhaar in the general election, was forced to retire. Purdy was told that if he didn't retire, he would be fired and would have to fight in court to gain his retirement status.

---

Deputy's Attorney Hopeful of Outcome; Calls Voorhaar's Actions Improper

By Kenneth C. Rossignol

ST. MARY'S TODAY

LEONARDTOWN --- A hearing held last week in St. Mary's Circuit Court before Judge Thomas Rymer was to determine if the actions of St. Mary's Sheriff Richard Voorhaar were proper in attempting to dismiss a deputy.

The incident in which Voorhaar has tried to fire the officer took place on Dec. 6, 1997 when Deputy First Class Steven VanDevander subdued and arrested a Mechanicsville man who had attacked employees and patrons of a local restaurant.

Dfc. VanDevander had been employed in authorized secondary employment as a private security guard for the Perkins Restaurant located at the Wildewood Center in California when an unruly and intoxicated patron began to assault employees and customers of the establishment.

Deputy VanDevander attempted to quiet the man and place him under arrest when the drunk began to fight the officer. The officer used pepper spray and subdued the man, taking him outside and then turning him over to other police officers where he was then hustled away to jail.

St. Mary's State's Attorney Richard Fritz last winter dropped criminal charges against the man, angering the owner of the restaurant, Chuck Vetter.

Vetter told ST. MARY'S TODAY at the time that he was furious that Fritz would let the man get off scot free after attacking his employees and customers. Vetter said that business establishments were powerless to protect their employees and customers from assault as a result of Fritz's decision to drop the case.

There were six witnesses to the assault and they were prepared to testify for the State in the case, but Fritz, acting in concert with Voorhaar's command staff, determined that charges would be dropped even though there were more than sufficient witness testimony to bring about a successful prosecution.

Voorhaar's command staff had previously told prosecutors that they wanted the case dropped so they could use the incident against VanDevander, according to one source.

Attorney Ben Wolman told ST. MARY'S TODAY that he is hopeful that Judge Rymer will rule in VanDevander's favor once he completes his review of the case.

"My experience is that Judge Rymer carefully reviews the evidence and the brief," said Wolman, "and that upon doing so, he will rule in our favor."

Asked how VanDevander was treated by Sheriff Voorhaar, Wolman said, "I am pretty disappointed, it shows that this was very unusual as for the treatment of deputies in regards to the way the department reacted to the use of pepper spray in the incident last fall at the college and then the stand taken on this incident, the action is inconsistent."

Last September Deputy Eric Walker allegedly sprayed pepper spray on a college student at St. Mary's College of Maryland during an incident in which students were slow at clearing out of a outdoor party near college housing. Another student who was sprayed by Deputy Christopher Medved was already in the custody of a Maryland State Trooper.

A lawsuit alleging brutal treatment has been brought against the deputy and the county by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf one student, with the department responding that the deputy acted properly; but in VanDevander's case, the Sheriff has claimed that the deputy was off-base for spraying the disorderly customer in Perkins.

The command staff of the Sheriff's Department sat lined up in a row behind VanDevander and Wolman in court last Thursday leading some courtroom observers to suspect that the senior deputies were there in an attempt to intimidate.

During court proceedings Wolman pointed to the row of deputies and asked who was running the Sheriff's Department.

Asked if the line-up of the show of force would affect the outcome, Wolman said he didn't believe that it would.

"You would have to be pretty stupid to do that, to think that you are going to intimidate Judge Rymer or any other of our Judges here in St. Mary's County, if that was the Sheriff's reason for having them there, it was foolish and a mistake."

Asked to characterize the actions of Deputy VanDevander in the Perkin's incident, Wolman said that the deputy's behavior was "appropriate and proper under the law."

Voorhaar had fired VanDevander earlier this year after the deputy had filed a federal lawsuit alleging sexual harassment involving his treatment after he claimed he refused to have sex with civilian supervisor Deborah Zylak. VanDevander's suit also claims wrongful termination and retaliation.

St. Mary's Circuit Court Judge John Hanson Briscoe ordered Deputy VanDevander returned to work and his back pay restored pending the hearing last week.

Some courtroom observers viewed the attorney representing the Sheriff as being less than knowledgeable in presenting her case and having a voice which had tones like chalk running the wrong way across a blackboard while Wolman had presented a strong case in a professional manner to which the Judge paid rapt attention

VanDevander's federal lawsuit is reported to have important merit with Wolman calling the retaliatory actions of Sheriff Richard Voorhaar likely to end up costing the county large sums of money.

Lawsuits generated by the actions of the Sheriff's Department in the hiring and treatment of deputies, along with the operation of the agency in dealings with the public and operation of the detention center account for the vast majority of the legal exposure for the county.

Former County Attorney Douglas Durkin reached a point in his relations with Voorhaar where he refused to represent the Sheriff's Department, citing their refusal to follow his advise.

The taxpayers still have to pay for the attorneys who represent the Sheriff's Department, regardless of whether Voorhaar's actions are found to be proper and in accordance with the law, with no chance of personal responsibility on the part of the Sheriff for his actions.

In a case brought by Deputy Sharon Haynie accusing Sheriff Voorhaar of sexual discrimination against her in promotions, a court has ruled that the case can proceed against the county but let Voorhaar off the hook personally.

There are no female or black deputies on the St. Mary's Sheriff's Department above the rank of corporal while Voorhaar has said in the past that he has not been able to find qualified minorities to hire as deputies.

---

Sen. Walter B. Dorsey, who was St. Mary's State's Attorney at the time of prosecution of case upheld this week credits his office's tenacious prosecution of drug offenders to former Deputy State's Attorney Christy Chesser, right, and Assistant State's Attorney James Tanavage.  ST. MARY'S TODAY photo

Dorsey Says Supreme Court Ruling Vindicates Decision To Prosecute In Controversial Case

LEONARDTOWN --- Sen. Walter B. Dorsey, the former 5-term St. Mary’s State’s Attorney, said on Wednesday that he was pleased to hear that the United States Supreme Court had upheld a conviction obtained through a decision his office made to prosecute a local drug dealer arrested in July of 1996 during a narcotics investigation conducted by the Sheriff’s Department.

"I have always been proud of the tough stance taken by my team of prosecutors, Assistant States Attorney James Tanavage and my Deputy States Attorney Christy Chesser," said Dorsey. "It was a good decision to go ahead with prosecuting this case even though the deputy failed to get a search warrant and our position was first overruled by the Special Court of Appeals, but now we have been vindicated by the highest court of the land."

At issue in the decision was whether or not St. Mary’s Sheriff’s deputies should have obtained a court warrant before searching a vehicle operated by Kevin Darnell Dyson as he returned from a trip to New York which the detectives had been told by an informant was for the purpose of bringing back drugs to St. Mary’s County.

As rationale for their decision this week, the Supreme Court Justices cited two previous cases in which they allowed warrantless searches when police acted on good faith with information that the vehicles had concealed drugs inside.

"We have been on the forefront of activism in fighting drugs," said Dorsey, "all during my tenure we tried to do everything possible to put drug dealers behind bars, sometimes you don’t get the best cases but you must deal with the facts at hand. We felt we had the cause to go ahead and now the Supreme Court has agreed."

A reporter for the Washington Post tabloid section devoted to Southern Maryland, Jesse Mangaliman, who is new to the area and unfamiliar with St. Mary’s County, requested a comment from present States Attorney Richard Fritz, who told him that "The reaction was, ‘See we told you. Why didn’t anybody listen to us in the first instance?"

Fritz, who was in private practice since 1992, and established a reputation as the defense attorney of choice for local drug dealers, was elected last November and took office in January of this year, thus had nothing to do with the 1997 prosecution of the case or the decision to appeal the verdict of the Maryland appeals court to the Supreme Court.

Drug Dealers Can Get The Heave-Ho

Appeals Court Upholds Quick-Evict Policy for Criminals in Public Housing

By BETH PERRETTA

Capital News Service

BALTIMORE --- The Baltimore City Housing Authority can continue its speedy eviction proceedings against tenants charged with certain criminal activity, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.

The U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the housing authority's 1995 policy of hauling tenants straight to court for eviction hearings if they were charged with specific crimes, whether they were convicted of the crimes or not.

The policy was challenged by tenants who claimed that a 1984 consent   decree with the housing authority gave them the right to an informal hearing with management and a formal grievance hearing before eviction proceedings could begin.

But the U.S. District Court said last spring that the consent decree no longer applied, since Congress in 1990 rewrote the National Housing

Act to allow eviction without an administrative hearing for tenants accused of drug crimes or of threatening a housing authority worker or resident. The circuit court upheld that ruling Wednesday.

A housing authority attorney hailed the circuit court's decision, saying the speedier eviction proceedings have allowed the housing authority to "really clean this thing up." Melvin Jews estimated that the authority has been able to evict several hundred tenants -- mostly drug dealers and users.

"The change has been remarkable, especially in light of the new   developments in the area," he said.

But the tenants' attorney said the ruling does more than let the city's housing authority clean up. Legal Aid's Gregory Countess said it essentially provides for a clean sweep that can overlook inaccuracies in police reports and penalizes entire families for the behavior of just one family member.

Under the court's ruling, he said, a 70-year-old woman could be brought to court for violating her lease if a son or grandson used drugs.

He called it "part of a larger sledgehammer approach to the war on drugs."

The 1984 consent decree, he said, at least allowed tenants a chance to talk informally with housing management and to go before an independent panel for a grievance hearing "to save their homes."

But Jews said that tenants are trying to save their homes by demanding a public housing clean-up. They are the ones calling the police to report drug activity, he said.

"Ninety-nine percent of our tenants are good, hard-working, law-abiding families who just want to make sure their children are safe," Jews said.

Countess doubts that the housing authority's cleaning spree is helping 99 percent of tenants, as Jews claims. He said that there "seems to be no discretion exercised by the housing authority."

The tenants' last hope, he said, is a clause in the lease that was   negotiated in 1997, which gives them the chance to talk to management before their eviction cases are brought to court. Tenants can use those informal conversations to show how an entire family might be hurt by one child's mistake, to point to inaccuracies in police records or -- if guilty of drug possession -- to show that they have begun substance abuse treatment.

But Countess said housing management has not been granting those meetings. He said he was not surprised by the federal court decision, but was disappointed for the residents.

---