Attorney’s comments are inaccurate

Steve Shulman

The Daily Pilot recently reported on a “gang-rape” case involving

three juveniles now charged as adults.

As a member of the Newport Beach Police Department and press

information officer for the department, it is my responsibility to

report factual information timely and accurately to the media.

In most ongoing investigations, the information provided publicly

must be limited because releasing certain information could

compromise the integrity of the investigation. In a sexual assault

case, laws prohibit the release of some information in order that the

victim be protected.

At the end of the day, it is the court system that will evaluate

the investigation, the evidence, police conduct, and the innocence or

guilt of any defendant charged with a crime. We respect and

understand this constitutional process.

In the Daily Pilot’s story, (“All three suspects in gang-rape case

plead not guilty,” Thursday), Joseph Cavallo, an attorney

representing Gregory Haidl stated: “He [Gregory Haidl] is the one

that has been pillaged by the Newport Beach Police Department. Only

his house was searched twice.”

While the Police Department was not previously given the

opportunity to respond to this comment, I’d like to comment now.

I have found Newport Beach Police Department detectives to be the

most dedicated, hard working and honest police officers with whom I

have ever had the pleasure of working. Detectives handling sexual

assault cases are charged with investigating the most disturbing and

sensitive of police investigations. This case is no different.

So, when I hear Cavallo talking about the Police Department

“pillaging,” it is my responsibility to once again present some

facts:

When the Police Department is provided evidence of a sexual

assault, it must conduct an investigation. When detectives believe it

necessary to gather evidence at a residence,

it can be obtained with consent of

the owner, by obtaining a search warrant (an order from a judge

to seize evidence), or by both. In

this case the Police Department received both consent and a search

warrant.

Cavallo’s statement is inaccurate, reckless, if not slanderous

wherein he states the department “pillaged his client” when

detectives, by order of a search warrant and consent, seized evidence

from a crime scene.

An order from a judge should not be construed as “pillaging” and

the court will decide whether or not police conduct was legal and

warranted.

Let us not lose focus on the seriousness of this crime ... and the

real victim.

* SGT. STEVE SHULMAN is the press information officer for the

Newport Beach Police Department.