Pubdate: Wed, 20 Aug 2014
Source: Philadelphia Inquirer, The (PA)
Copyright: 2014 Philadelphia Newspapers Inc
Contact:  http://www.philly.com/inquirer/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/340
Author: Joseph A. Slobodzian

NARCOTICS OFFICER WHO LIED INSISTS HE'S BEING TRUTHFUL

Two years ago, a veteran police narcotics officer was labeled a liar
by a Philadelphia judge who tossed evidence seized from an alleged
drug dealer, destroying the prosecution's case.

The Philadelphia Police Department has removed Christopher Hulmes from
street duty pending the outcome of an Internal Affairs investigation;
the city has paid $150,000 to settle a civil-rights lawsuit against
him, and another is pending in federal court.

But Hulmes told another Philadelphia judge on Tuesday that he was
telling the truth about the June 14 arrest of alleged Kensington drug
buyer Richard Hill.

Hulmes testified before Municipal Court Judge T. Francis Shields on a
defense motion to bar prosecutors from using evidence in the Hill case.

Prosecutors say police seized six packets of "Good Luck" heroin when
they stopped Hill's green Dodge Intrepid on Lehigh Avenue near A
Street. Defense attorneys Eric Zuckerman and Elizabeth-Ann Tierney
insist that the evidence against Hill, 55, is tainted because Hulmes
admitted lying during the earlier case. Shields said he would rule
Friday.

Hulmes, 42, admitted that he lied in the 2010 drug case against Arthur
Rowland, 33, but said he wanted to protect a confidential source.
Hulmes said he feared that his source, who worked for Rowland's drug
business, would be harmed if identified.

"I didn't want him killed," Hulmes testified. "Would I do it the same
way again? No."

In addition to lying to obtain an arrest warrant for Rowland, Hulmes
also admitting lying during Rowland's parole hearing.

Zuckerman argued that there was no way to know if Hulmes was telling
the truth about Hill's arrest.

"He chose where and when not to tell the truth in taking the oath,"
Zuckerman said. "It doesn't mean he always lies in every case, it
means we don't know when he chooses to lie."

The District Attorney's Office has not barred Hulmes from testifying,
as it has other officers, such as Thomas Liciardello and five
narcotics officers under federal indictment for preying on drug dealers.

Assistant District Attorney Lauren Murray argued that Hulmes'
testimony in the Hill case was distinguishable from that in Rowland's.

Murray said no confidential source was involved in Hill's arrest and
that Hulmes was in a stakeout vehicle radioing information to patrol
officers about drug buys.

Murray cited corroborating testimony of narcotics officer Daniel
Wright, who said he arrested Hill - heroin packets in his hand - 11/2
minutes after Hulmes' radio call.

"Two times giving false testimony doesn't make Officer Hulmes a liar
in every other situation in which he testifies," Murray argued.

The stakes involve far more than the criminal case against
Hill.

One of the oldest legal instructions jurors get is that if they
believe a witness lies about one thing, they may disregard all the
witness' testimony.

Criminal defense lawyers have already begun circulating transcripts of
Hulmes' sworn deposition in the federal civil-rights lawsuit filed by
Rowland, which the city settled last year for $150,000.

"This is just the beginning," said Guy Sciolla, attorney for Rowland,
earlier this week.

Zuckerman and Tierney cited the deposition Tuesday and others are sure
to raise it in more cases in which Hulmes, an 18-year veteran officer,
13 of them on the Narcotics Strike Force, gave sworn statements.

In how many drug investigations have you been involved? asked Murray,
trying to establish Hulmes' bona fides.

"Thousands," replied Hulmes.  
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D