Re: 11/7/01 - Hartford Courant: Van de Velde: `I Demand The Chief Apologize'
OPED
Van de Velde: `I Demand The Chief Apologize'
November 7, 2001
Since the outset of the Suzanne Jovin investigation, the New Haven police have asserted that there were no witnesses to the crime, nor was there any forensic evidence that might identify her assailant. Today we know both claims were untrue.
On Oct. 26, the state's attorney's office revealed that an unidentified male's DNA was found in Jovin's fingernail scrapings. It did not match mine, although I am the only suspect police have publicly named from their supposed "pool of suspects." Suzanne Jovin had been a student of mine when I taught at Yale University.
This follows the police admission this past March that witnesses saw a tan or brown van parked adjacent to the scene at the time of the crime. I drove a red Jeep, which I consented to have the police search when they asked the night of my interview on Dec. 8, 1998. It had, of course, no link to the crime whatsoever.
I had also volunteered to provide a DNA sample that evening. The detectives in charge ignored my offer and subsequently never asked for a DNA sample - never. New Haven police also never asked to see me again - never, although they identified me as a suspect soon after the slaying.
Why has it taken more than two years for this important evidence to surface?
It was Andy Rosenzweig, a private investigator hired by Yale, who forced the New Haven police to reveal the existence of the tan van. It was Rosenzweig, not the police, who finally requested that I give a DNA sample, with which I immediately complied, this past April. I called for a private investigator and state forensic and cold-case experts to assist within a year of the investigation, believing that the New Haven police were guilty of negligence, if not misconduct. Why did Yale and the city ignore my requests?
It is obvious to me that from the outset of this high-profile case, the New Haven Police Department and Yale University have been conspiring to scapegoat an innocent person, to feign progress in the case and deflect criticism of their incompetence. Is anyone still today fooled?
The following list doesn't begin to include all the ways in which my case was mishandled:
New Haven Police Chief Melvin Wearing has refused to communicate with my lawyer or me in any manner and has made no requests to see me, ever.
Eighteen months ago, when the new assistant state's attorney, James Clark, was named to take over the case, I immediately offered to meet with him. He declined my offer.
Sixteen months ago, I appealed to the state to take over the Jovin investigation, arguing that the case was clearly cold and could benefit from a fresh look and more expert examination. The state's attorney in charge of the investigation, Michael Dearington, refused to turn it over to the state or to hand it to other, expert investigators.
Fourteen months ago, my family wrote Richard Epstein, chairman of the New Haven Board of Police Commissioners, outlining police misconduct in the case and appealing to the commission to investigate. He ignored my family's letter.
Twelve months ago, my family wrote the judge who appointed the grand jury to investigate the 1994 slaying of a New Haven detective's son, Philip S. Cusick. The Cusick case led to the arrest of Capt. Brian Sullivan, the former head of detectives for the New Haven Police Department. Sullivan was charged last year with hindering prosecution and tampering with physical evidence; he has pleaded not guilty. Some of the same police involved in the Cusick case were involved in the Jovin investigation. The judge forwarded the appeal to State's Attorney Dearington. He ignored my family's letter.
Ten months ago, I wrote Dearington directly, appealing to him to meet with me to discuss what I believe to be New Haven Police misconduct, pledging my cooperation to do anything to clear my name. Dearington ignored my letter.
Last month, I asked Yale University President Richard Levin to write the mayor of New Haven to direct the corporation counsel and the Board of Police Commissioners to determine if the suspicion of me was the result of misconduct by any former or current officers of the NHPD. In addition, in view of the numerous errors that occurred during the investigation, including the public identification of me as a suspect, I asked Levin to request that the governor transfer the case immediately to the chief state's attorney's office. President Levin has not responded to me.
The obvious questions are: Why did it require the pressure of a private actor to force the state to conduct this DNA analysis? Why did the New Haven police mislead the public about the lack of witnesses and forensic evidence in the case? Why did the New Haven police and Yale University name me a suspect within days of the crime when nothing linked me to it in any manner and, in fact, the evidence overwhelmingly pointed away from me?
Was I purposefully scapegoated to deflect misconduct and negligence in the investigation? Why were neighboring municipalities never asked for their help identifying suspects? Why is State's Attorney Dearington now asking for friends of Suzanne Jovin to be DNA-tested if New Haven police have suspects in the crime other than me? Is the claim that the New Haven police have a pool of suspects another fabrication?
By refusing to admit publicly that the New Haven police were wrong to name me a suspect in the crime, given that no motive, testimony or evidence remotely links me to the crime, Chief Wearing disgraces himself and discredits justice in New Haven. Is his objective truth and justice, or to cover for what I believe are the irresponsible actions of subordinates?
I demand that the chief of New Haven police apologize for the actions of his department and admit that I am not a suspect in the crime. I demand that an investigation be conducted of New Haven police.
ctnow.com |
