Pubdate: Wed, 29 Jan 2003
Source: Kansas City Star (MO)
Copyright: 2003 The Kansas City Star
Contact:  http://www.kcstar.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/221
Author: Richard Espinoza
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/corrupt.htm (Corruption)

DOUBTS ABOUT LAWRENCE POLICE OFFICER ENDANGER CASES

A Douglas County judge threw out crucial evidence in a drug case after 
accusing an officer of lying on a search-warrant application.

Now, "more than a dozen" cases that cannot be won without the testimony of 
Lawrence police Officer Stuart Peck could be dismissed, said the Douglas 
County district attorney, Christine Kenney.

"As far as we're concerned, this officer is not available to testify on 
criminal cases at this time," Kenney said. "It's unfortunate. I'm afraid 
this is going to cause a lot of hardship."

Lawrence police officials put Peck on paid leave after the accusation. They 
expect a city attorney to decide this week whether he will stay on the 
force. Peck, who joined the department in 2000, is on his third week of 
paid leave.

"We've started investigating information that had to do with improper 
testimony," said Police Lt. Dave Cobb.

Attempts to reach Peck were unsuccessful Tuesday.

Peck was an Overland Park officer from September 1988 until he resigned on 
Jan. 1, 1999, according to that department's records. He worked for a 
private investigation agency before starting work in Lawrence.

In 2001, he signed an affidavit requesting a warrant to search a house for 
evidence of drug dealing, including cocaine, small plastic bags and scales.

In a ruling last week, Douglas County District Judge Michael Malone said 
Peck misled him in the affidavit by referring to a confidential informant 
in the plural "they."

The judge said Peck also lied about the informant's criminal past and 
failed to mention that Peck had arranged for dismissal of a charge against 
the informant of driving while suspended.

Malone also said a member of the Lawrence drug-enforcement unit had warned 
Peck about worries that the informant did not give "the whole information 
at times." But Peck wrote that his informant's credibility was 
"unquestioned," the judge wrote.

"The magistrate reviewing the affidavit for search warrant could not have 
been more misled about the confidential informant's veracity," Malone wrote.

Malone said Peck had known the informant for about four months before he 
asked for the search warrant.

Once, the judge wrote, Peck showed up when another officer allegedly found 
marijuana after stopping the informant's car. Peck said he did not 
intervene in the case, but Malone wrote that prosecutors never received 
reports about the matter, and evidence custodians never received the 
suspected marijuana for testing.

Without the confidential informant in the drug case, Malone wrote, there 
would not have been probable cause to issue a search warrant. The judge 
would have been able to consider only that Peck watched a car leave the 
house, stopped it for rolling through a stop sign and found suspicious 
items inside.

Peck told the judge that inside the car was the smell of burnt marijuana, 
scales with white-powder residue and $800 cash.

"There is no probable cause connection that defendant resided at the place 
searched, and there is no probable cause connection that the defendant was 
committing any drug dealing from the residence searched," Malone wrote.

~~~
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Alex