Disciplinary hearing begins for New Haven cop accused in gunplay cover-up

New Haven Police Department New Haven Police Department Photo: Journal Register Co. Photo: Journal Register Co. Image 1 of / 1 Caption Close Disciplinary hearing begins for New Haven cop accused in gunplay cover-up 1 / 1 Back to Gallery

NEW HAVEN >> Officer Krzysztof Ruszczyk has won a criminal battle pertaining to his alleged involvement in an off-duty police shots fired incident, but now faces possible termination before the Board of Police Commissioners.

The board began the disciplinary hearing for Ruszczyk Tuesday night and is projected to last at least another two sessions. The hearing became heated at times as lawyers for Ruszczyk and the city clashed.

Ruszczyk’s attorney Norm Pattis characterized the incident as something that captured the imagination of the city and has become a heavily-publicized political issue.

“We are urging this commission not to rush to judgment,” he said in his opening statement.

Pattis said it’s unclear what evidence there is that Ruszczyk knew that shots had been fired by other officers and his participation in the alleged departure and removal of evidence from the scene.

Ruszcyk was one of three city cops arrested in a gunplay incident that allegedly occurred in April 2012. He was put on unpaid leave.

Former Officers Lawrence Burns and Charles Kim both were charged with firing weapons right before closing time outside Christopher Martins Restaurant and Pub on State Street April 1.

Ruszczyk was charged with interfering with police. It was determined in the Internal Affairs investigation that he didn’t fire a weapon, but did participate in removing evidence from the scene. That criminal charge was nolled and then dismissed in January 2014.

The three officers had graduated from the police academy class in 2008.

Burns pleaded nolo contendere, which is when a person accepts there would likely be enough evidence to be found guilty if a trial occurred, but doesn’t admit guilt. The plea was accepted in November 2013.

He was sentenced to one year in jail, execution suspended, and a conditional discharge of 21 months.

Before that, Burns went before the Board of Police Commissioners in July 2012 and was fired.

Kim pleaded guilty to first-degree reckless endangerment and resigned from the force in September 2013. He was sentenced to one year in jail, execution suspended, with a conditional discharge period of 18 months.

Lt. Anthony Duff, then head of Internal Affairs, testified about the investigation. Police were dispatched after getting a report that shots were fired outside the restaurant. They arrived and found witnesses that said there was gunfire, Duff said.

The three off-duty officers were told by on-duty officers to stand-by until investigators arrived. A supervisor was also called, Duff said. Until a supervisor reached the scene, an on-duty officer effectively would be the superior to an off-duty officer.

When shots are fired by an officer, the department automatically conducts its own investigation to determine if the discharge was the correct action, Duff said.

The three officers left the scene, according to Duff. Ruszczyk and Kim allegedly left in a vehicle that Ruszczyk was driving.

That presented problems because there is a four-hour window to test for gunshot residue on an individual, Duff said. That time window came and passed without the officers being available.

The officers’ departure from the scene also presented another problem; it made it seem as if the “blue line” allowed them to leave the scene even though they may have committed a criminal act, Duff said.

“It was, as the saying goes, a black eye for the department,” he said.

Ruszczyk violated several department rules due to his actions, including removing potential evidence from a scene, Duff said.

Pattis grilled Duff during cross-examination and asked if previous drafts of the Internal Affairs report had been destroyed. Duff said he wouldn’t classify it as being destroyed, but that they were revised.

The Internal Affairs report was submitted into evidence by attorney Saranne Murray, who is counsel for the city, but was later taken out and sealed by the commission after it was realized that an individual’s medical history was within the report and could become public record if the report was submitted in full.

The commission decided that a third-party would have to go into the report, redact it and then submit it to the commission.

Pattis strongly objected to that action and said it was unfair that the report could be used by city lawyers then pulled when a question came along about a person’s mental health that wouldn’t prove favorable to the city’s case.

Call Rich Scinto at 203-789-5748.