F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9

F E A T U R E S 8 NOPD’S Innovative Approach to Saving Police Careers – Jonathan Aronie, Sheppard Mullin Richter and Hampton 12 The Rise of the Opioid Epidemic and Law Enforcement/Federal Responses – Todd Rossback 14 Narcotics Cases Produce Mountains of Mobile Data: What Next? – Louis Quijas 16 Civil Forfeiture – Albert L. Digiacomo 18 Community’s Response to Opioid Addiction – Tory L. Decaire 20 Candidate for Section I Representative


C O L U M N S 4 Association Perspective 7 National Office Update 22 Chapter Chat 24 Academy News 26 A Message from Our Chaplain 27 Staying On The Yellow Brick Road 28 Historian’s Spotlight 34 FBINAA Charitable Foundation


E A C H I S S U E 6 Strategic / Academic Alliances


A D I N D E X – San Diego University 25 CRI-TAC – JFCU


EXECUTIVE BOARD Association President, Section I / JOHNNIE ADAMS Chief, Santa Monica College (CA), jadams@fbinaa.org Past President / SCOTT DUMAS Chief, Rowley Police Department (MA), sdumas@fbinaa.org

Representative, Section III / GRADY SANFORD Chief Deputy, Forsyth County Sheriff's Office (GA), gsanford@fbinaa.org Representative, Section IV / BILL CARBONE Lieutenant, New York City Police Department (NY), bcarbone@fbinaa.org

Chaplain / JEFF KRUITHOFF Chief, City of Springboro (OH), jkruithoff@fbinaa.org

1st Vice President, Section II / KEVIN WINGERSON Assistant Chief of Police, Pasadena Police Dept. (TX), kwingerson@fbinaa.org

Historian / PATRICK DAVIS Chester County Department of Emergency Services (PA), pdavis@fbinaa.org

2nd Vice President, Section III / JOE HELLEBRAND Chief, Brevard County Sheriff’s Office (FL), jhellebrand@fbinaa.org

FBI Unit Chief / CORY MCGOOKIN Unit Chief, National Academy Unit (VA)

3rd Vice President, Section IV / KEN TRUVER Chief, Borough of Castle Shannon (PA), ktruver@fbinaa.org

Executive Director / HOWARD COOK FBINAA, Inc. National Office (VA), hcook@fbinaa.org

Representative, Section I / TIM BRANIFF Undersheriff, Thurston County Sheriff’s Office (WA), tbraniff@fbinaa.org Representative, Section II / SCOTT RHOAD Chief/Director of Public Safety, University of Central Missouri (MO), srhoad@fbinaa.org




2 F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9

Mar/Apr 2019 | Volume 21/Number 2 The National Academy Associate is a publication of the FBI National Academy Associates, Inc.

F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9


Howard Cook / Executive Director, Managing Editor Suzy Kelly / Editor

© Copyright 2019, the FBI National Academy Associates, Inc. Reproduction of any part of this magazine without express written permission is strictly prohibited.

The National Academy Associate is published bi-monthly by the FBI National Academy Associates, Inc., National Office, FBI Academy, Quantico, VA 22135.

Get your job posting in front of the strongest law enforcement leadership network in the world. FBI National Academy Associate members are active in our network, engaged in their careers, and open to new opportunities. Our network gives you the opportunity to reach senior law enforcement executives with an abundance of talent and experience. Our NEW Job Posting Board allows you to match your organization's position to the most qualified profession- als in the industry. REACH QUALIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT EXECUTIVES TO JOIN YOUR TEAM

The FBI National Academy Associates, Inc. is a private, non-profit organization and is not part of the Federal Bureau of Investigation or acting on the FBI’s behalf. Email editorial submissions to Suzy Kelly: skelly@fbinaa.org. Submissions may vary in length from 500-2000 words, and shall not be submitted simultaneously to other publications. Email Chapter Chat submissions to Susan Naragon: snaragon@fbinaa.org by the 1st of every even month. The FBI National Academy Associates, Inc., the Executive Board and the editors of the National Academy Associate neither endorse nor guarantee completeness or accuracy of material used that is obtained from sources considered reliable, nor accept liability resulting from the adoption or use of any methods, procedures, recommendations, or statements recommended or implied.

Photographs are obtained from stock for enhancement of editorial content, but do not necessarily represent the editorial content within.





























On the Cover: The Opioid Epidemic affects all – the families, healthcare system, communities and law enforcement. This issue focuses on a few of those impacted.

To learn more about the FBINAA Job Posting Board, visit www.fbinaa.org .



Johnnie Adams

Dear Fellow Graduates,

W e are months away from the Annual FBI National Acad- emy Associates’ National Conference in Phoenix, Arizona. This premier event starts on July 20, 2019 and concludes on July 23, 2019. The committee is working hard to make this the best conference ever and we know by our preliminary attendance records and vendor/sponsor participation that it will be one of our largest. If you have never been to a FBI National Academy Associ- ates National Training Conference, I encourage you to attend and take advantage of the excellent training, networking and fellow- ship that you will experience in Arizona. If you are adventurous and so inclined, I encourage you to take advantage of the opportunity of attending one of our inter- national re-trainers. The next scheduled international conference will be in San Salvador, El Salvador from May 5th to the 9th at the Sheraton Presidente in San Salvador. Click here for more infor- mation http://www.fbinaaelsalvador.org/. After that, the Asia- Pacific re-trainer will be in Taiwan from June 9-14, 2019. Go to our National website and click on international conferences for more information. May is a somber month, one of reflection, as law enforcement from throughout the country honor the heroes of our profession during National Police Week. Paying tribute to those that have given the ultimate sacrifice to protect the communities that they have sworn to defend. I encourage those that are in the DC area to come join your fellow graduates to honor those individuals at the 31st Annual Candlelight Vigil starting at 8pm on Monday, May 13, 2019 at the National Mall between 7th and 12th street. The National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial sponsors this event and no tickets are required. In the last 50 years, 9451 officers have died while in the line of duty. Gunfire is the leading form of death and 3824 of our comrades died through actions involving gunfire. Additionally, 163 officers passed away last year in the line of duty and coincidently in May we experienced our greatest loss of 22. We also tragically lost at least 158 police officers by suicide in 2018. I am always saddened by the loss of life of a fellow officer and please keep everyone of these heroes and their families in your prayers. The FBINAA is committed to providing the best training in the industry to protect our graduates and their fellow officers. This year we have pushed many programs out to include train the trainer courses in Officer Wellness and Resiliency and continue to push the below 100 initiative. This clearly is not enough and we will double our efforts in the coming year to reach our goals. My time as president is winding down and as many before me have stated the time goes by quick. This is my 8th year on the National Board and I am so thankful for everyone that has come into my life during this journey. I am here to continue to serve

the membership with a great staff and fellow executive board members. Please take time to download the new FBINAA Connect app . There is a wealth of information on the app and in the Forum section under “Ask the FBINAA Executive Board” ask a question or just say hello and tell us how we are doing. Communication is the hallmark of a great organization and we want to hear from you! I hope to see you soon.

Best Regards,

Johnnie Adams, President FBINAA Chief, Santa Monica College Police Department FBINA #222

4 F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9


R EGISTER TODAY for the inaugural FBI National Academy As- sociates Yellow Brick Run . This virtual run is designed to keep you on your fitness journey while supporting a great charity - the FBINAA Charitable Foundation! The Yellow Brick Run is a 6.1 mile run, walk, skip or hop (you decide) is reminiscent of the physical training final challenge graduates completed during their National Academy program. WHO CAN PARTICIPATE The Yellow Brick Run is open to all, not just FBI National Academy graduates - so grab a friend, Session mate, family or the entire Chap- ter to get involved and get moving! TIMEFRAME OF THE YELLOW BRICK RUN Once you are registered, you can complete your run from that point until July 8, 2019. We will be announcing the final results during the FBINAA Annual Conference the end of July. WHEN WILL MY RACE PACKET SHIP? Race packets will be mailed out to those who have registered the first week of June. Packets for those that register after that will be sent within 1-3 days after registration. SEND US YOUR PHOTO! We love seeing our members and friends of the Association staying active and doing good deeds. Send us your photos of you participat- ing in the Yellow Brick Run. Make it a photo op and wear your T-Shirt, Bib and Medal.

A LITTLE FRIENDLY COMPETITION We know how competitive this group is, so we will be recognizing the Session and the FBINAA Chapter that has the highest participation percentage. Get your colleagues motivated and moving! TO REGISTER The Yellow Brick Run registration fee is $50.00 and includes your race bib, race t-shirt, medal and shipping. Packets will begin to ship the first week of June. Remember you have until July 8, 2019 to complete your Yellow Brick Run. Remember your registration fee is tax deduct- ible. Support your FBINAA Charitable Foundation today! THE FBINAA CHARITABLE FOUNDATION The Foundation’s mission, now and into the future, is the care and support of members and their families who are in distress, or in harm’s way, and the continued educational development of our mem- bers and their families, as well as the members of other FBI affiliated nonprofit law enforcement associations.





Saint Leo University 813.310.4365 | saintleo.edu PLATINUM ACADEMIC ALLIANCES

5.11 TACTICAL SERIES 209.527.4511 | 511tactical.com JUSTICE FEDERAL CREDIT UNION 800.550.JFCU | jfcu.org VERIZON WIRELESS 800.295.1614 | verizonwireless.com

University of Oklahoma 800.522.4389 | pacs.ou.edu


University of San Diego 619.260.4573 | sandiego.edu/fbina


ecoATM 858.324.4111 | ecoatm.com AXON 800.978.2737 | axon.com

American Military University 703.396.6437 | PublicSafetyatAMU.com


Bethel University 855.202.6385 | BethelSuccess.net

Columbia College 803.786.3582 | columbiacollegesc.edu


University of New Hampshire 603.513.5144 | law.unh.edu

Waldorf University 877.267.2157 | waldorf.edu

3SI SECURITY SYSTEMS 610.280.2000 | 3sisecurity.com ACADIA HEALTHCARE 855.526.8228 | acadiahealthcare.com PANASONIC 610.326.7476 | us/panasonic.com/toughbook POINT BLANK 888.245.6344 | pointblankenterprises.com CELLEBRITE | cellebrite.com • UPS 404.828.6000 | ups.com FIRST TACTICAL 855.665.3410 | firsttactical.com LANCER SYSTEMS 610.973.2600 | lancer-systems.com LEXISNEXIS | solutions.lexisnexis.com/IDCFBINAA FIRSTNET 571.524.1853 | firstnet.gov NICE 551.256.5000 | nice.com FORUM DIRECT 855.88.FORUM | forum-direct.com GUIDEHOUSE | guidehouse.com


California University of Pennsylvania 724.938.4000 | calu.edu/golegalstudies

Columbia Southern University 800.977.8449 | columbiasouthern.edu

Faulkner University 800.879.9816 | faulkner.edu


Northcentral University 844.628.8943 | ncu.edu/fbinaa

Trident University 714.816.0366 x2019 | Trident.edu/FBINAA

GUARDIAN ALLIANCE TECHNOLOGIES 800.573.5950 guardianalliancetechnologies.com LEADSONLINE 800.311.2656 | leadsonline.com CENTRAL SQUARE 800.727.8088 | centralsquare.com CODY SYSTEMS 610.326.7476 | codysystems.com VIRTUAL ACADEMY 844.381.2134 | v-academy.com

Upper Iowa University (888) 877-3742 | uiu.edu/fbinaa

Wilmington University 302.356.6766 | wilmu.edu


NATIONWIDE 877.669.6877 | nationwide.com

6 F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9


F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9

Howard Cook

W e welcomed our Chapter leadership to Quantico in March for several days of planning and networking for the As- sociation. We were able to celebrate the Association’s past with the ribbon cutting ceremony of the FBINAA History Wall. In support of our mission, Training is at the core of all we do. We’ve added some new Leadership Forum classes to our portfolio. The School Shooting Prevention Leadership Forum training in South Carolina was a great success and attended by 130 people. A second program is scheduled for May in Kansas City, Kansas. We received approval from Motorola to apply for their grant over the next two years. This funding supports our Officer Resil- iency, Safety and Wellness initiatives and training. We also held a very successful Officer Resiliency, Safety and Wellness Leader- ship Forum in Chicago attended by 150 and plan to schedule future programs. There is much happening around our Association with Spring re-trainers underway. I had the opportunity to join the Maryland/Delaware and Hawaii re-trainers and was able to engage with our members in these Chapters and partake in some impactful training. I was also able to attend the LEEDA confer- ence and the Latin America/Caribbean Chapter re-trainer, both training events were successful with great turnouts. We are looking forward to hosting sixty young leaders this year during our Youth Leadership Program scheduled for June. The participants have been notified and we have sent them their welcome/informational packets. Finance has completed the 2018 audit. In addition, the 2018 Annual Report is now complete and is available for your review on our website. Stay connected to the FBINAA through our new FBINAA Connect App. The App is now available for download on your phone and will keep you up to date on events, training, news and forums. As reported previously, there was a data incident that af- fected three FBINAA Chapters, all which use a third-party server. At no time was any financial and/or other personal identifiable information compromised. The affected Chapters continue to work with their local FBI Field Office and the third-party server provider to investigate this matter. The national database is secure and we are finalizing a comprehensive manual, or action plan, to address potential future cyber attacks. The FBINAA had a very strong start for 2019. Here are a few highlights...

I have two notes about our personnel. Please join us in welcoming our newest teammember, Felicia Capote. Felicia will be working onsite in our store. On a sad note, we say goodbye to Angie Wier. Angie was a valued member of our team and we wish her all the best. Lastly, it’s not too late to join us in Phoenix, Arizona from July 20-23, 2019. The host Chapter has been hard at work putting together a very impressive training conference.


Howard M. Cook FBINAA Executive Director FBINA #224



8 F B I N A A . O R G | J A N / F E B 2 0 1 9

The New Orleans community’s satisfaction with their Police Department has been on a steady ascent over the past few years. Compared to a city-wide baseline survey conducted in 2014, by 2016 “community members had better perceptions of their most recent contact with the NOPD, were more satisfied with the department, had higher ratings of trust, and reported being more willing to cooperate with NOPD.” A different, but more recent, community survey found a continuation of this trend, with the NOPD’s satisfaction rating among community members bumping up four points between 2016 and 2018. During more or less this same time period (2013 through 2018), the NOPD also saw a 30% decrease in civilian complaints against police officers. W hile these trends are significant in their own right, they are truly remarkable considering, less than 10 years ago, the NOPD was described as a broken department by the U.S. Depart- ment of Justice. In a lengthy report following a comprehensive, multi-year investigation of alleged civil rights abuses, the DOJ con- cluded the NOPD had “long been a troubled agency,” with “[b]asic elements of effective policing... absent for years.” Today, NOPD is a changed, and in many ways model, law enforcement agency. There are many factors that have contributed to NOPD’s on- going transformation, among them scores of rewritten policies, a wholly revamped training program, better supervision, and a new leadership team sincerely committed to righting the wrongs of the past. But there is another contributor that has received somewhat less attention. In 2016, the men and women of the NOPD, working with a small group of psychologists, historians, and community stakeholders, developed and implemented the nation’s first department-wide police peer intervention program focused on preventing mistakes and misconduct before they occur. ETHICAL POLICING IS COURAGEOUS (EPIC) The program, called EPIC (for Ethical Policing Is Coura- geous) is highly innovative yet stunningly simple. The program teaches officers (from recruits to leadership) strategies and continued on page 10

F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9


continued from "NOPD" page 9

fighting crime. A culture of errors and misconduct lead to a loss of morale and diminished job satisfaction. And, of course, the impact on civilians — the police department’s actual customers — in terms of emotional stress, lack of trust, and, in some cases, actual physical harm, can be huge. Indeed, the collective cost of those consequences almost certainly dwarfs the cost of settle- ments and litigation. And none of this even touches on the social cost to the officers themselves. Individuals who witness mistakes and misconduct and do nothing to prevent them put themselves at great risk of emotional and psychological stress. Non-intervening observers of preventable sexual assaults, for example, can carry that burden with them for years. There is every reason to believe “passive bystandership” in the context of police mistakes and/or misconduct takes a similar emotional toll on the non-intervening police officer. and misconduct in law enforcement, the first thing that comes to most people’s minds are the notorious examples caught on film over the past quarter century of police officers failing to take action in the face of another officer’s use of excessive force. The officers standing passively by during the beating of Rodney King in Los Angeles in 1991 probably is the example that comes most readily to mind. While the men and women of the NOPD certainly had the King case in mind when they developed their EPIC program, they also had in mind the more common, albeit less sensational, scenarios in which officers more commonly find themselves. While a police officer may go through his or her entire career without witnessing an excessive use of force, very few officers will make it very far without witnessing some preventable nega- tive behavior by another officer, be it a mistake or misconduct. Maybe it’s a partner ready to “teach a suspect a lesson” following a foot pursuit. Or a colleague about to lose his/her cool in the face of a verbally abusive arrestee. Maybe a supervisor seems inclined to leave certain details out of a police report. Or maybe a colleague is intent on driving him/herself home after one too many post-shift drinks. These are just some of the scenarios real police officers face in the real world. And, as most of us know from experience, each of these scenarios has the potential of go- ing from bad to worse with an ill-thought-out intervention. For some, intervening in another’s conduct comes easy. But the truth is most of us do not fall within that category. For most of us, intervening in another’s conduct, at least in some cases , can be difficult, frightening, or even dangerous. Some of us go so far as to turn the other way or even walk out of the room to avoid having to intervene at all. As a result, we (all of us — includ- ing police officers) come up with all manner of excuses, either consciously or subconsciously, for not taking on the role of an ac- tive bystander. Experts call these excuses “inhibitors.” And they include these all-too-familiar mental rationales: THE PSYCHOLOGY OF PEER INTERVENTION Unfortunately, when we talk about preventing mistakes

tactics to intervene safely and effectively in another officer’s conduct, regardless of rank, if necessary to prevent a regrettable action. It helps officers: / Identify the warning signs of conduct for which an intervention may be necessary, / Understand the power a thoughtful intervention can play in preventing mistakes or misconduct, / Gain the confidence to intervene when necessary, / Gain the skills to intervene when necessary, / Take responsibility for acting, and / Actually take meaningful and safe action. The interpersonal tools EPIC provides in furtherance of these goals are based on years of academic research into what is called “active bystandership” and “passive bystandership,” and can be used by officers to help prevent misconduct, prevent a mistake, or even lead a colleague in need of health or wellness services to seek help. EPIC also fosters an environment where such an intervention not only is welcome, but is expected. The EPIC program grew out of a realization by the NOPD that pushing officers to report problems after they occur, while an essential and noble goal, often is difficult to achieve in prac- tice with any sort of consistency. Experience tells us that training programs that focus only on reporting and discipline often put officers in an untenable position (or at least the perceived posi- tion) of having to either (a) do the right thing and, perhaps, be labeled a rat, or (b) stay silent and put one’s career (if not free- dom) at risk. By focusing on prevention rather than reporting and discipline, EPIC seeks to keep officers from ending up between that rock and hard place. In many ways, of course, EPIC is not new. Good police of- ficers have been willing to speak up and keep bad things from happening for decades. And certainly, officers intervene every day to protect civilians from harm, often putting their lives on the line to do so. But an officer intervening effectively and early enough to prevent another officer’s conduct (or misconduct) is less common than one might think. Indeed, if it were otherwise, we wouldn’t see 1,100 police officers arrested each year, signifi- cantly more citizen complaints and disciplinary actions, and countless officers putting themselves, their colleagues, or the community at risk through preventable mistakes. THE COST OF NOT INTERVENING The cost of “passive bystandership” in policing is immense. Obviously, on one level, mistakes and misconduct cost law enforcement agencies and their cities untold millions of dol- lars in investigations, litigations, and settlements. Long Beach, California, for example, a city of only 470,000 people (at the time of a 2013 analysis), was paying more than $3 million annually in damages to resolve police mistakes and misconduct. New York City, at the other end of the population spectrum, has paid out about $384 million to resolve such cases in the last five years alone. Certainly these costs cannot all be laid at the feet of by- standers, but unquestionably some material component of these costs could have been avoided by more effective “active bystand- ership” among police officers themselves. The cost of misconduct and preventable mistakes goes well beyond the cost of litigation and settlements. A police depart- ment with a poor reputation of integrity and/or competence will have problems recruiting, retaining good officers, and even

/ I’m not sure what is happening. / It’s not my responsibility. / Someone else will do it. / Someone else will do it better than I. / I don’t know all the facts. / What if I get it wrong?

continued on page 11

10 F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9

continued from "NOPD" page 10

/ What if I get hurt? / What if they think I’m not a team player? / What if I piss him/her off? / No one else is doing anything. / It’s not my job.

Psychologists have studied these inhibitors for decades. They are powerful. They are commonplace. And, while some of us overcome them better than others, almost none of us is com- pletely immune from them. We also know from years of research, that inaction begets inaction. Witnesses to mistakes and misconduct consciously or subconsciously look around to assess the reactions of others. Where they see their peers — or worse, their superiors — not taking action, they naturally think no action needs to be taken. As one observer put it in the context of preventable sexual assault on college campuses, witnesses “may look around for cues to see if others define it as an emergency, and seeing none, do nothing.” TEACHING PEER INTERVENTION For years, police agencies — like other organizations, from hospitals to universities to the military — have dealt with these inhibitors to active bystandership by downplaying them, pre- tending they are not real, or deceiving themselves into thinking police officers are uniquely capable of overcoming them. At the same time, many “reform” programs too often treat officers as perpetrators, prompting a knee-jerk “I don’t do that so this doesn’t apply to me” reaction. As mistakes and misconduct in policing have not gone down dramatically over the past decade, it is clear that the traditional approach is not working. Human nature is what it is. Wishing it away won’t make it go away. Rather than trying to command people to put aside human nature, the NOPD took a different tack with its EPIC program. EPIC acknowledges the very real reasons people (including police) do not consistently intervene in a peer’s (let alone a su- perior’s) conduct, and arms its officers with practical strategies, tactics, and confidence to overcome them. NOPD’s EPIC training combines decades of social science research with commonplace law enforcement scenarios to give officers practical and effective tools to keep their colleagues and the public safe by preventing problems before they occur. THE SUCCESS OF EPIC While it’s hard to quantify the success of NOPD’s EPIC pro- gram— because, in most cases, an effective intervention means nothing happens — NOPD leaders, rank and file, and outside observers have seen its success with their own eyes. They also have seen the program embraced by all stakeholders, includ- ing the officers themselves, the City, and the public. NOPD also has seen significant national interest in its EPIC program. Over the last two years, EPIC has been featured in IACP’s Police Chief Magazine , PERF’s Subject to Debate , The Washington Post , The Times Picayune , and the New York Times . Clearly, word of EPIC is getting out. Last year, more than 75 professionals from across the U.S., including police chiefs, command staff, academy directors, and union officials, attended a two-day EPIC Executive Leadership Conference at Loyola University New Orleans School of Law. The conference, sponsored by the NOPD, the Fraternal Order of

continued on page 23




The opioid epidemic sweeping our nation did not happen overnight. Its origins reach back three decades to efforts to manage and relieve pain through pharmaceutical solu- tions. A large factor attributed as a root of today’s crisis is the rise of prescription drug addiction and abuse. Most notably, Purdue Pharma’s OxyContin was overprescribed to patients by doctors targeted by the com- pany’s extensive marketing campaign. Since 1996, when the drug was brought to market, Purdue Pharma downplayed the addictive nature of this ‘wonder drug’ with marketing statements such as, “less than 1% of patients become addictive” (Frontline, 2016). In 2007, the company admitted to charges of fraudu- lent marketing following a four-year federal investigation, paying $600 million in fines and settlements (Frontline, 2016). A ccording to the Centers for Disease Control (2018), fifty- three thousand Americans died from opioid overdoses in 2016, exceeding car crash and gun violence deaths. In 2017, opioids killed roughly 142 Americans each day (Office of National Drug Control Policy [ONDCP], 2017). Research suggests a variety of factors have contributed to the rise of opioid abuse, including: the philosophy of pain management and associated attempts to alleviate suffering through pharmaceutical drugs, the over- prescription of pain medications like OxyContin, shame felt by predominantly suburban whites whose addiction falls outside

traditional middle class social norms, and passing of addiction from parents to children, called neonatal abstinence syndrome (ONDCP, 2017; Frontline, 2016; House of Representatives, 2015). In 2012, the problem of prescription drug abuse had reached epidemic proportions, as evidenced by growing federal government attention and strategies devoted to address pre- scription drug abuse. On March 7, 2012, the House of Represen- tative subcommittee on crime, terrorism, and homeland security held hearings to review the prescription drug epidemic in America. These hearings reveal the extent to which this crisis had grown, with testimony and written statements asserting that: / 254 million prescriptions for opioids were filled in the U.S. in 2010, which is “enough painkillers to medicate every single American adult around the clock for a month” (House of Representatives, 2012). / The original purpose for OxyContin was to only be prescribed to help patients in the last stages of cancer or other severe illnesses, but OxyContin and other generic oxycodone drugs are being prescribed for less severe reasons, which has expanded the availability of the drugs and potential for their abuse (House of Representatives, 2012). Simultaneously, while prescription drug abuse was reaching epidemic proportions, the last two decades have also witnessed an expansion of the epidemic from prescription drugs to street opiates like heroin. The evolution of prescription drug and heroin epidemics has occurred for a multitude of reasons, including both push and pull factors. Among the pull factors is the demand for opioids from people who have become addicted to prescription drugs to manage pain. Efforts to address prescription drug abuse have focused on educating prescribers on the risks of prescribing opioids and expansion of programs for monitoring prescription drugs (ONDCP, 2015). While these efforts have been successful in slowing prescription opioid overdoses, the success in reducing prescription opioid overdoses has largely been offset by easy ac- cess to cheaper, more potent, and less controlled opioid sources, such as heroin and synthetic opiates like fentanyl. Among the many push factors, the influx of heroin from Mexican drug cartels in the last two decades has produced an illicit market flooded with cheap and available heroin. As Sam

continued on page 32

12 F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9

F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9


F B I N A A . O R G | J A N / F E B 2 0 1 9 14


F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9


This January, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection intercepted a tractor-trailer that appeared to be transporting Mexican produce into Arizona. But it turned out the truck was carrying much more—250-plus pounds of the addictive opioid fentanyl, a painkiller that has been linked to the deaths of Prince , Tom Petty and thousands of Americans.

I t was the largest fentanyl bust the agency had directed, amounting to a street value of around $3.5 million. The truck also contained a stash of nearly 395 pounds of methamphet- amine, adding over a million dollars more to the value of the drug bust. This was no isolated case. The nation’s opioid crisis has demanded law-enforcement attention in recent times more than ever. Deaths from drug overdoses have risen significantly in the past 10 years, with opioids gaining national attention as “hot spots” of the opioid epidemic continue to emerge across the country. Narcotics overdoses have killed nearly four times as many people in the U.S. than murder and non-negligent man- slaughter, according to the National Institutes of Health. The carnage is so severe that it is incumbent upon investiga- tors to do everything in their power to track down the sources to stop drug deals and prevent future overdose deaths. Often, the answers lie within a cell phone or other mobile device recov- ered at the scene—as was the case in Orlando, Fla., where law enforcement officials were able to track a 2017 fentanyl overdose case back to the drug dealer where the drug was obtained, lead- ing to a conviction for first-degree manslaughter. The drug dealer is now serving a life sentence. TOO MUCH DATA, TOO LITTLE TIME Seizing a cell phone from a scene like the one in Arizona sets in motion what ultimately must be a high-speed, tightly choreo- graphed investigation. The clock starts ticking immediately; if investigations don’t have solid leads, suspects or arrests within 48 hours, the chances of solving a case drop by half. With the advent of digital forensics, it is now possible to extract terabytes of data from a single cell phone, tablet or other device used by victims, witnesses and others involved. Buried

within that mountain of data are clues that could hold the key to solving the most complex narcotics cases, like a drug dealer’s lo- cation, text messages that may reveal future deals in the making, and images or videos that might help law-enforcement officials identify other people of interest. Extracting evidence from a device is just the first step in the investigative process. The real challenge is then to sort through and make use of a tremendous—and growing—amount of data frommultiple devices seized during a drug bust, without losing time. Mobile devices are getting more complex by the day, with people using not just text messaging but chat applications such as Kik and Snapchat to communicate. The inability to extract data from encrypted apps, as well as the sheer amount of data that must be extracted, have been identified as two of the top three digital forensics challenges for investigators. The problem is clear: more data is available now than ever before, but operationally, investigating teams often struggle with accessing and analyzing the daunting volumes of it. AUTOMATION SPEEDS UP INVESTIGATIONS Traditionally, sorting through data obtained frommobile devices at a crime scene has been a largely manual and time-in- tensive process. If information can’t be identified quickly, teams have to move on, leaving critical evidence undiscovered. The process hasn’t just been slow, but inefficient. The data extracted frommobile devices is usually processed in a siloed, static way, without being able to combine insights for a high-lev- el view. That’s important when, for example, investigators need to piece together clues from a drug dealer’s social media posts or external sources along with data stored on a phone.

continued on page 30


In the aftermath of the Ferguson unrest, the Obama Administration, through the Attorney General’s Office significantly diminished the availability of “equitable sharing” of federally forfeited assets. Some offered that the reason was an appearance that local law enforcement was “militariz- ing” their departments through federal asset sharing revenue, commonly called adoptions. Other opposition was rooted in the concept that law enforcement for- feiture actions had become a self- serving encroachment on an indivisible’s property without adequate due process. DRAMATIC CHANGES IN CIVIL FORFEITURE LAWS ALBERT L. DIGIACOMO

F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9 16

I n the Trump administration, his previous Attorney General had breathed new life into equitable sharing for local law enforce- ment. The Sessions’ changes in federal adoptions were timely since many states have now altered the asset sharing process with local and state law enforcement, substantially diminishing the civil asset forfeiture process and distribution. And a new case just granted certiorari by the Supreme Court may have broader implications for all remaining states in the area of civil asset forfeiture. legal ownership of seized assets from an individual charged with a crime to state or the federal government. This legal process is placed against property (in rem) , meaning “against the property,” not the individual (in personam) , “against the person.” “In perso- nam” forfeitures require a criminal indictment, “in rem” forfeiture action require no criminal charges and the proceedings are admin- istered at a civil hearing. Most of the controversy involving abuse in asset forfeiture is directed at the “in rem” method. This type of seizure describes the “property” as the offender of the criminal ac- tion. In these cases, the government must show in civil court that the property was used as the instrument of the crime but, up until recent reforms, no criminal conviction was required. LEGAL CHALLENGES TO CIVIL ASSET FORFEITURE: In the past five years, the legal and academic communities have presented the public with a multitude of problems that they saw with current civil forfeiture practices. They assert that the public has been harmed and offered some convincing cases of abuse to support their position. The legal battles include the traditional application of a lower standard of proof, innocent ownership, and disproportional seizures when compared to the underlying criminal offense. STANDARD OF PROOF: Defendants in a criminal action may be acquitted of the all underlying charges but lose their property to the government under the lower, civil court, standard of proof. i.e. preponderance of evidence. This was viewed by critics as a “lose-win” situation for law enforcement since the police were still able to effectively seize assets even after failed criminal prosecutions. To address this, two dozen states have made it harder for authorities to take property from individuals without first securing criminal convictions. Other states, (Utah, Kentucky, Michigan, and Nevada) have modified their standard of proof to “clear and convincing”, a higher burden than the preponderance level. Three states: North Carolina, New Mexico, and Nebraska, have abolished civil forfeiture entirely. In all, since 2014, 29 states and the District of Columbia have raised the stan- dard of proof in their civil forfeiture laws. INNOCENT OWNERSHIP: One case that certainly impressed the national public was a 2014 forfeiture case in Philadelphia involving the Sourovelis Family. Christos Sourovelis’s son was arrested for selling $40. of illegal drugs outside his home. His home was subsequently seized as an instrument of the drug transaction, and his family was displaced pending the civil forfeiture action. After Sourov- elis successfully filed a class action federal lawsuit, enjoined by the Institute of Justice, the DA’s Office not only dropped the forfeiture action against Sourovelis but in 2015 amended future civil forfeiture procedures. This case presented the obvious issue of innocent ownership and proportionality. In Pennsylvania as well as half the states, it is the burden of the property owner to BACKGROUND: Civil Judicial Forfeiture is a statutory process that converts

show the property owner was unaware that the property had been used for criminal purposes. In the case of the Sourovelis family, their appeal of innocent ownership was successful. A re- cent Pennsylvania law signed by Governor Wolf specifically adds protection in real property cases by prohibiting the pre-forfeiture seizure of real property without a hearing. This provision would have likely stopped the eviction of Christos Sourovelis from his home before the criminal case against his son was litigated. However, the innocent owner defense was successfully denied in another case on appeal where a property owner had clear knowl- edge that her grandson was selling illegal drugs from her home and failed to take corrective action to stop the criminal activity. In this case, the police made several buy-busts from the grand- son who was a resident in the property. The property owner was not criminally charged but the grandson was, and pled guilty to the drug offenses. The appellate court noted that the owner was present during the repeated police actions, indicating her full knowledge that the property was an instrument of the drug of- fenses, not merely a location. Law enforcement should note that this forfeiture was successfully upheld on appeal in part because police were able to correctly document the owner’s presence and awareness of continued criminal activity. Many states have now amended their forfeiture laws regard- ing innocent ownership by placing the burden of proof on the law enforcement agency, not the property owner, in proving the owner was aware of the nexus between the property and the criminal activity. disposition of the assets after forfeiture. Public opinion in many communities opine that police agencies seek asset forfeiture to en- hance their own budget, “padding police coffers”. In truth county prosecutors in many states have control of the forfeited asset and have enhanced their own offices with this funding. Between 2002 and 2013 forfeiture revenues were equivalent to nearly one-fifth of the entire Philadelphia district attorney’s budget. As we know, equitable sharing through federal adoptions afforded local law enforcement guaranteed sharing with little restriction on the use of the funds, a factor used by the Obama administration in limiting the type of equipment local agencies can purchased with federal forfeiture. Within the past few years many states and municipalities have amended their forfeiture policies to specifically prohibit the seizing police agency from benefitting from the asset. In addition to procedural reforms, some county prosecutors no longer control the forfeited assets but are now under the control of judges. And community-based drug rehab programs, not the police, will be the recipients of the forfeited funds. Scott Bull- ock, president of the Institute for Justice called Philadelphia’s consent decree “an unprecedented blow against civil forfeiture”. Other governments have passed similar amendments to their civil forfeiture laws. States that restrict police agencies from receiving any amount forfeited asset include, NM, MO, WI, IN, ME, NC, and District of Columbia. “POLICING FOR PROFIT”: Much of the criticism of civil forfeiture is centered on the

F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9

PROPORTIONALITY-EIGHTH AMENDMENT: The Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution

continued on page 31 17

COMMUNITY’S RESPONSE TO OPIOID ADDICTION Oswego, New York is like many communities across the nation that struggle to find a solution to our ever-increasing opioid epidemic. The reality is that opiate addiction strikes across age, ethnic and economic groups (Adams, 2018) and the community looks to the police for help in combating this issue even when the solution is not en- forcement related. Education, treatment, and intervention are roles that our police officers have had to take-on. Working together with our community partners, the Oswego City Police Department has been intricately involved in providing a variety of tools to help us in our fight.


A s an active participant in the Oswego County Drug Task Force the Oswego Police Department, in its more tradi- tional law enforcement role, has teamed-up with other members of area law enforcement agencies as well as State and Federal entities to help identify drug dealers, investigate their activities, and take effective and efficient enforcement action as needed. This is the type of involvement that has long since been our de- partment’s response to illegal drug activity, but the community needs and deserves more. The CDC recently reported that opiate addiction in now America’s fastest-growing drug problem with the total number of painkillers prescribed in a single year enough to medicate every adult living in the U.S. around the clock. While true that heroin is the most widely used illegal opiate, it’s a fact that prescrip- tion opiate painkillers are equally dangerous and an insidious problem. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that approximately two million people in the United States alone are addicted to prescription opiates (Adams, 2018). In response, in 2012, the Oswego City Police Department installed drop boxes in the department’s lobby to accept unused or unwanted prescrip- tion medication and a separate receptacle to accept needles and other sharps. These drop boxes are available to the public on a 24/7/365 basis with no questions asked with the goal of getting the unused or unwanted medication out of homes where it may end up being abused. The most recent data shows that opiate addiction and painkiller addiction has resulted in over 53,000 overdose deaths annually (Adams, 2018). The issue of equipping police with the naloxone is debatable among law enforcement leaders across the nation, however these are members of our community that are dying and we are frequently in a position where we can do something about it. In 2012, members of the Oswego City Police Department were trained in the use of, and were issued, nalox-

one, a medication designed to rapidly reverse opioid overdose (National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2017). There have been sev- eral cases since the medication has been issued, in which it was administered by Oswego Police Officers in successful life-saving efforts. Unfortunately, the opioid addiction problem does not just adversely impact adults, as the first use of opiates is starting at an earlier age. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) reports that an estimated 52 million people, 20% of those aged 12 and older, have used prescription drugs for nonmedical reasons at least once. One in twelve high school seniors reported nonmedical use of the prescription drug Vicodin during the past year and about one in twenty high school seniors reported abusing OxyContin (Adams, 2018). With this in mind, the Oswego Police Department has resurrected the DARE program in our area schools. DARE had been pushed to the side over the years as budgets and time constrains made it more difficult to continue the program, however with the increasing issues related to opioid and other illegal drug use coupled with a new and im- proved curriculum, the DARE program is once again, beginning in September of 2017, made available through our local schools. DARE’s new curriculum, “Keeping it Real” has been updated to teach students decision making for safe and healthy living (DARE America, 2017). The most recent addition to our community’s arsenal is the creation of the City of Oswego’s REAP Program. REAP stands for Rapid Evaluation for Appropriate Placement and consists of several key components. First, the REAP program offers a way for people to get help. Traditional methods of treatment usually meant waiting for an opening, finding the appropriate program and more waiting. The REAP program teamed-up Oswego Police with Farnham Family Services which is a New York State licensed, continued on page 34

18 F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9

F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9



attendee selection process. I have served as an evaluator on the FBINAA University of Phoenix Scholarship Committee and have re- cently been appointed to sit on the FBINAA Charitable Foundation Science and Innovation Award committee. Finally, for the past four years I have had the privilege to serve as the 2019 Annual Train- ing Conference Co-Chair, hosted by the Arizona Chapter and the Phoenix Police Department. In this role I have had the opportunity to attended chapter, section, and national events and have seen the best of our Association. This has strengthened my belief that the best of our Association represents the best of American law enforcement, the fundamental premise that brought me to and keeps me deeply committed to the FBINAA and to our members. As your Section I Representative, I offer my commitment to be your advocate and to be your voice lending my diverse career experiences, extensive leadership background and strong As- sociation relationships to represent the Members and Chapters of Section I with honor and in service with a focus on three key areas I feel are most important to serving the needs of the mem- bers of the FBINAA: First, I will bring a Member and Chapter Focus that embrac- es the awesome responsibility and honor of serving as Section I Representative. First and foremost, I will serve the member- ship and make every decision with the Member’s, Chapter’s and Association’s best interests in mind. I will maintain open lines of communication between the Executive Board, Chapters and our members to assure transparency for decisions and accountability for actions while recognizing service to each other is fundamental to our continued on page 24

Fellow FBI National Academy graduates and friends my name is Jim Gallagher , proud graduate of the 245th Session of the FBI National Academy and candidate run- ning to be your Section I Representative to the FBINAA Executive Board in 2019. I believe it is the responsibility of leaders to serve others. It is for this reason that I humbly offer my service to you and to the Executive Board of the FBI National Acad- emy Associates as candidate for Section I Representative. I am a Cop's kid from a Cop family. My Dad, Jim Sr. has a total of 48 years of dedicated law enforcement service with the NYPD, Drug Enforcement Administration and the US Army Military Police. My family has or continues to serve in the NYPD, New York State Court Officers, Suffolk County (NY) Police Department and the Federal Air Marshals Service. I am a 24-year veteran of Phoenix Police Department with assignments in Patrol, Gang In- vestigations, Undercover Vice and Narcotics, Tactical Support and Fugitive Apprehension and have held command assignments in Strategic Information, Patrol and Narcotics. I have a BA in Political Science from Arizona State University, an M.Admin – Leadership from Northern Arizona University and an Ed.D in Organizational Leadership Studies from Northeastern University (MA). Since graduating from the 245th Session of the National Academy in 2011, I have been an active member of the Arizona Chapter Executive Board as part of Chapter leadership, assisting with training across the state of Arizona, recruiting new members and acting as a chapter liaison with our Executive Board and Staff. I also serve in a leadership role within the Phoenix Police Department as coordinator for our competitive National Academy

20 F B I N A A . O R G | M A R / A P R 2 0 1 9

Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker