This report is confidential and intended for the sole use by the client for whom it was prepared and to whom it is addressed. It is limited to the specific scope and activities that the client requested. This report may not be copied, reproduced, disseminated, distributed or otherwise made available to any third party, in whole or in part, without the express prior written consent of Marcum LLP. Marcum LLP’s consent may be withheld for any reason. In preparing this report, Marcum LLP has used its professional care and diligence and relied upon the information provided by the client and other sources for its analysis. No representation or warranty, express or implied, is made by Marcum LLP as to the accuracy or completeness of the information included and relied upon in this assessment.
A
N
NDEPENDENT
EVIEW 
:
C
ITY OF
H
ARTFORD
,
 
C
ONNECTICUT
 P
OLICE
D
EPARTMENT
I
NTERNAL
A
FFAIRS
D
IVISION
 
Prepared for: Saundra Kee Borges Corporation Counsel Privileged and Confidential Attorney Work Product September 21, 2011
 
2
|
Page
 
Table
 
of 
 
Contents
 
I
NTRODUCTION AND
S
COPE OF
W
ORK
 ................................................................................ 3
 
M
ETHODOLOGY
 ................................................................................................................ 3
 
S
UMMARY OF
F
ACTS AND
F
INDINGS
 .................................................................................... 4
 
E
XHIBITS
 ........................................................................................................................ 24
 
Exhibits
 
E
XHIBIT
1: I
NTRADEPARTMENTAL
M
EMO TO
C
HIEF
R
OBERTS FROM
A
SSISTANT
C
HIEF
N
EIL
D
RYFE
,
 
D
ATED
N
OVEMBER
5,
 
2009 E
XHIBIT
2: HPD
 
O
RDER
4-2,
 
D
ISCIPLINARY
P
ROCEDURES
,
 
E
FFECTIVE
M
AY
14,
 
2000
 
E
XHIBIT
3: HPD
 
S
TANDARD
O
PERATING
P
ROCEDURES
IAD
 
06-001,
 
C
ITIZEN
C
OMPLAINTS
,
 
D
ATED AS
D
RAFT
J
ULY
24,
 
2006 E
XHIBIT
4: R
ECOMMENDATIONS FROM
A
UDIT OF
IAD
 
C
OMMISSIONED IN
2008
 BY FORMER
M
AYOR
P
EREZ AND
C
HIEF
R
OBERTS
E
XHIBIT
5: I
NTRADEPARTMENTAL
M
EMO TO
A
SSISTANT
C
HIEF
H
ORVATH FROM
S
ERGEANT
L
AUREANO
,
 
D
ATED
A
PRIL
11,
 
2011 E
XHIBIT
6: I
NTRADEPARTMENTAL
M
EMO TO
C
HIEF
R
OBERTS FROM
D
EPUTY
C
HIEF
C
IESINSKI
,
 
D
ATED
A
PRIL
7,
 
2011 E
XHIBIT
7: I
NTRADEPARTMENTAL
M
EMO TO
C
HIEF
R
OBERTS FROM
A
SSISTANT
C
HIEF
H
ORVATH
,
 
D
ATED
A
PRIL
11,
 
2011 E
XHIBIT
8: I
NTRADEPARTMENTAL
M
EMO TO
D
EPUTY
C
HIEF
C
IESINSKI FROM
C
HIEF
R
OBERTS
,
 
D
ATED
A
PRIL
12,
 
2011 E
XHIBIT
9: I
NTRADEPARTMENTAL
M
EMO TO
D
EPUTY
C
HIEF
C
IESINSKI FROM
C
HIEF
R
OBERTS
,
 
D
ATED
A
PRIL
14,
 
2011
 
3
|
Page
 
I
NTRODUCTION AND
S
COPE OF
W
ORK
 
Marcum LLP (“Marcum”) was retained by Saundra Kee Borges, Corporation Counsel of the City of Hartford (“City”), to conduct an independent review of the operations of the Hartford Police Internal Affairs Division (“IAD”). Additionally, we were asked to conduct a fact finding as to whether or not:
 
 Lieutenant Neville Brooks, in his role as Commander of the Internal Affairs  Division of the Hartford Police Department, unfairly targeted Assistant or Deputy Chiefs for investigation.
 
Certain Assistant Chiefs or Deputy Chiefs of the Hartford Police Department retaliated against Lieutenant Brooks for what they perceived as unfair targeting by him.
The purpose of the engagement was for Marcum to perform certain services and consult with Corporation Counsel to assist with formulating her legal strategy and advising her client, the City, as to current pending litigation.
M
ETHODOLOGY
 
The investigation consisted primarily of interviewing individuals, both internal and external to the City of Hartford Police Department (“HPD”), and reviewing various records, documents and reports. During the course of the investigation, where possible, the investigators attempted to obtain corroboration of certain facts from multiple sources. The credibility of the information gathered was reviewed using several factors, including, but not limited to:
 
Source of the information;
 
Witness’ basis of knowledge;
 
Existence of corroborating information;
 
Period of time, if any, between certain events and the date of any reported complaint relating to those events;
 
Motivation of those providing information; and
 
Ordinary experience and common sense of the investigator. More specifically, in excess of 330 work hours have been completed to date. We have interviewed more than 45 individuals, some of whom have been interviewed on multiple occasions.
View on Scribd