Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Murder Mystery: Who Killed Yale Student Suzanne Jovin? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (776)	5/26/2000 9:09:00 AM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1397

Re: 11/4/99 - Robinson's Cop-Out Robinson's Cop-Out Hit & Run By Paul Bass Published 11/04/99 Connecticut's top federal crime-fighter, U.S. Attorney Stephen Robinson, insisted last week that he takes police misconduct seriously. Now he has a chance to prove it. He can order his office to revisit a case it tragically fumbled before Robinson took over: the case of disgraced ex-New Haven police detective Vincent Raucci and two people he may have set up on murder charges, Scott Lewis and Stefon Morant. Robinson wasn't talking about that case last week. He hasn't been talking about it at all. He was talking about his just-completed 20-month investigation into the 1997 killing of unarmed motorist Malik Jones by East Haven cop Robert Flodquist. He concluded that he lacked evidence to bring criminal charges against Flodquist. (See related story, page 10.) Meanwhile, two blocks from Robinson's office, the Raucci/Lewis-Morant case, a drama of police misconduct, continued to unravel in Superior Court. It's a tale of mind-boggling injustice--with a prosecutor's dream of bountiful evidence. Robinson must tackle this case now. In doing so, he can prove his commitment to holding cops accountable. Vincent Raucci "solved" a 1990 double murder by arresting Lewis and Morant, two drug dealers. They're now spending, respectively, 120 and 70 years in jail for that murder. Both want new trials. Morant's plea was heard in court last week. The hearing produced a series of bombshells about police corruption--and, more than ever, made this case a challenge to the criminal justice system's ability to police itself. Robinson said last week it would be "inappropriate" to comment on the Raucci/Lewis-Morant case because of ongoing state litigation. Any suggestion he is or isn't investigating could unfairly prejudice the proceedings. Sounds good. But it's a cop-out. Robinson has known about potential federal crimes in connection with this case and done nothing about it, before the latest appeals hit the court. And as of more than a year ago, the public knew about Raucci's potential federal crimes, too. The Advocate revealed that a secret FBI report showed investigators concluding that Raucci set up Lewis and Morant for the murder to settle a drug-dealing debt. (See "The Cop & The 'Killer,'" Sept. 17, 1998, on the Web at www.newhavenadvocate.com/newarchive.phtml.) Internal police investigations showed Raucci involved in drug use and possibly the drug trade. True, the state's case against Lewis and Morant doesn't fall under Robinson's jurisdiction. The FBI investigation does. Robinson's predecessor decided not to act because he thought too much of the information (but not all!) came from an unreliable source, a criminal named Ovil Ruiz. Yet Ruiz is the same criminal whose Raucci-induced testimony the state used to make its case to send Lewis and Morant to jail! And he has changed his story often. In Superior Court last week, witnesses called by Morant provided incredible new evidence. The evidence adds to what Robinson's office already knew--and makes it incumbent upon Robinson to investigate possibly wide-ranging links between the local police and the drug trade and the possible framing of innocent people. Among the new testimony: * Former police detective Mike Sweeney testified he saw Raucci concoct a sworn statement and get Ruiz to sign it, implicating Lewis and Morant in the killings. * Another retireddetective testified Raucci offered to plant drugs on a suspect in a separate case. * Previously secret additional FBI documents showed that Ruiz at one point admitted that he--not Lewis or Morant--actually pulled the trigger in the double murder. * Hector Ortiz, a gang member serving 30 years to life in a Pennsylvania prison, testified that Raucci gave him a statement implicating Lewis and Morant to sign as his own. He also said he regularly did drugs with then-detective Raucci. * Several prison workers testified that Ruiz told them he told a lie that sent Morant and Lewis to jail. And an FBI agent took the stand to reaffirm his conclusion that Raucci set the pair up. In two past Advocate interviews, Raucci denied any illegal activities. He denied setting up Lewis and Morant. There's no evidence that Stephen Robinson has made any effort to revisit this case. Here's what Robinson would have to believe to justify not reopening it. He'd have to believe the FBI misjudged. He'd have to believe that Ruiz was lying to all the people in jail, and to the FBI, but telling the truth on the stand. He'd have to believe the inmate from Pennsylvania had some hidden reason to claim that Raucci did cocaine with him and had him file a false statement. He'd have to believe two separate ex-detectives have private motives for crossing the blue line andimpugningRaucci. He'd have to believe the people named in internal police reports lied about seeing Raucci break the law while a cop. Or maybe they told the truth, but somehow Raucci was capable of law-breaking in those cases but not in the Lewis-Morant case. He'd have to believe Ovil Ruiz lied about pulling the trigger in the murder. He'd have to disbelieve the testimony of all these people from different walks of life. He'd have to believe that only two people are telling the truth. One would be Raucci, a one-time fugitive ex-detective who could face a jail sentence if Robinson investigates him. The other would be Ovil Ruiz, a self-professed liar--and Robinson would have to believe Ruiz told the truth only in the murder trial, not since. Does Stephen Robinson believe all that? E-mail: pbass@newhavenadvocate.com newmassmedia.com