DELANCO TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT

Your Police….Our Community

Bi-Weekly Crime Report

June 8, 2009 To June 21, 2009
This Report Reflects Only Those Calls Which Result In The Generation Of A Criminal Case
It Does Not Reflect The Myriad Types Of Other Calls Which Demand A Police Response.
06-08	An officer met with John Fenimore, the Delanco Township Public Works Supervisor, at the West Avenue recreation field to investigate a “Criminal Mischief” complaint.  Upon arrival, Mr. Fenimore directed the officer to an area on the field where a vehicle had driven in circles, damaging the grass.  Mr. Fenimore also pointed out damage to a picnic table near the concession stand.             In speaking with a resident living near the field, the officer was told that this individual had observed a SUV spinning in circles in the grass the previous evening.  This resident stated that this had occurred between 8:30 PM and 9:30 PM.  This activity was not reported at the time.
06-08	An officer was dispatched to a residence on Heron Court to investigate a reported burglary of a vehicle.  Upon arrival, the officer met with the victim who stated that sometime between 12:00 AM and 5:00 PM on June 6th, unknown person(s) had entered his locked vehicle and removed his wallet from its location in the closed center console.  He stated that he discovered the wallet missing when he entered his still-locked vehicle and began to travel to a local convenience store.  The investigating officer saw no signs of forced entry to the vehicle.
06-10	An officer responded to a residence on Burlington Avenue to investigate a reported theft of jewelry.  In speaking with the victim, the officer was advised that at 7:30 AM, the victim’s ex-husband came to the residence to visit his children, prior to them leaving for school. During this visit, her ex-husband requested to use the bathroom, after which he left the residence.  The victim then took the children to school and returned home.  Upon returning home, she discovered that two (2) rings were missing, which were kept in a box in the bathroom.  The victim was of the belief that her ex-husband had taken the jewelry.             After receiving the case, the detective contacted the accused and advised him of the allegations set forth by his ex-wife.  This individual was aware of the allegations and denied having committed the theft.  He further stated that another female was present that morning that had used the bathroom before him.  After supplying the name of this individual, the officer informed the accused that the investigation was on-going and that he would re-contact him should it be necessary.
06-11	While operating an unmarked vehicle, the detective observed an individual, for whom he knew a warrant had been issued, enter a vehicle as a passenger and begin to leave the area.  As the detective followed the vehicle, he summoned an officer who was operating a marked vehicle and requested that he stop the suspect vehicle.  After crossing the Riverside-Delanco Bridge, the marked unit stopped the vehicle.             After stopping the vehicle, the detective had the suspect exit the vehicle after which he observed the suspect acting in such a way as to cause the detective to suspect that he was attempting to conceal something.  A cursory search of the subject failed to confirm the detective’s suspicions.  The detective then turned the subject over to a uniformed officer and requested that the prisoner be transported to Hdqtrs.             At Hdqtrs, a detailed search of the prisoner revealed that he had secreted a plastic sandwich bag containing suspected marijuana in his shoe.  After charging the subject with “Possession of A Controlled Dangerous Substance,” the subject was processed and transported to the Burlington County Jail in default of $2500.00 bail, as set by Judge McCloskey.
06-12	This Department was contacted by a Camden County Jail officer and informed that an individual, for whom an arrest warrant had been issued by this Court, was incarcerated in that jail.  Subsequently, an officer proceeded to the Camden County Jail and took possession of the prisoner.  The female prisoner was then transported to Burlington County Minimum Security Facility and lodged there in default of the requisite $931.00 bail.
06-13	An officer was dispatched to a residence on Oakford Avenue to investigate a report of “Criminal Mischief.”  Upon arrival, the officer met with the homeowners who reported that sometime between 10:00 PM on June 12th and 8:10 AM on June 13th, unknown person(s) had poured what appeared to be motor oil into their pool.  Upon entering the rear yard, the officer smelled a strong odor of an “oil-based” product.  Upon inspection of the pool, the officer agreed with the homeowners that the substance was motor oil.             Later on this same date, the officer was again dispatched to the victim’s residence in response to a “Neighbor Dispute.”  Upon arrival, the officer was advised that due to various actions and words of neighboring household, it was their belief that a member of that household had committed this act.  This belief was predicated upon events the previous evening involving the victim and the neighbor in another municipality.             In speaking with the accused neighbors, they alleged that the male victim had followed them to three different businesses in Edgewater Park.  It was also alleged that words were exchanged during this time period.  These individuals denied any complicity in the act perpetrated against the victims.
06-13	A resident came to Hdqtrs to return a completed “Affidavit of Probable Cause,” seeking to sign a criminal complaint against her ex-boyfriend for “Harassment.”  The victim explained the accused had called her numerous times after their breakup, in spite of her demands to desist.  She further stated that he had driven past her residence three (3) times on June 12th, sounding his horn and had parked further down the block.  She stated that the accused had left the area when officers responded.  It was these officers who provided her with the affidavit.             Since the Burlington County Superior Courts were open, the victim was directed there to apply for a T.R.O. in accordance with the Court’s directives.  She was advised to return to this PD upon completing her business with the Court.  Prior to leaving, the officer swore the victim to her statement, after which he contacted Judge McCloskey and read the statement to him.  The Judge found “Probable Cause” for issuance of a “Complaint Summons” for “Harassment,” which the officer completed and the victim signed.             The defendant, who was contacted by the Mansfield Township PD at the behest of this Department, came to Hdqtrs to surrender himself on the charges.  After processing, the subject was released R.O.R. pending court.
06-13	An officer responded to a residence on Edgewood Avenue to investigate a reported theft.  In speaking with the homeowners, the officer was informed that they had several friends over for a “get together,” and after all of the guests had left, the female resident discovered a ring missing from its location on the kitchen windowsill.  The officer was also advised that the only “stranger” at this get together was a juvenile female who came with a friend of the hosts who was involved with this JV through the “Big Sisters” program.  The hostess contacted her friend and informed her of this loss and requested that she contact her “Little Sister” and inquire about the ring.  After contacting the JV, this friend contacted the victim and advised her that the JV denied any knowledge of the ring.             The officer contacted the “Big Sister” and requested the JV’s telephone number, in order that he could speak to her about this incident.  After being supplied with the telephone number, the officer contacted the JV’s mother and requested permission to speak with her daughter with regard to this case.  After receiving this authorization, the officer spoke with the JV, who denied any knowledge of the missing ring.             On June 16th, after being assigned to the case, the detective spoke with victim’s husband who reaffirmed his and his wife’s belief that the JV had taken the ring.  At that time, he stated that neither he nor his wife wished to sign a formal complaint but wished only to have the ring returned.  The detective advised him that he would attempt to contact the JV a second time.             On June 18th, the detective contacted the suspect’s mother, via telephone, and was advised that she had spoken with her daughter and the initial investigating officer with regard to this incident.  She stated that she had searched her daughter’s belongings and was unable to locate the missing ring.  She further stated that her daughter has never been in trouble and does well in school and supports her daughter’s contention that she did not take the ring.             Upon reporting his conversation with the suspect’s mother, the victim’s husband stated that neither he nor his wife wished to sign a “Criminal Complaint” against the suspect, nor did they wish to have the other guests questioned with regard to this case.  Based upon these wishes, the case was closed
06-14	A resident of Hickory Street telephoned Hdqtrs to report that unknown person (s) had thrown mud and dirt on her car while it was parked in front of her home.  Officers responded to her home where they observed that the vehicle had dirt and mud smeared on the engine hood, windshield, roof, rear window, and trunk deck.  Dirt was also observed on the sidewalk next to the vehicle.  It appears that the victim‘s vehicle was targeted, since no other vehicles in the area had been subject to this tampering,   The victim neither heard nor saw any suspicious activity prior to discovering this “Criminal Mischief.”
06-14	A resident came to Hdqtrs expressing a desire to sign a complaint against a neighbor due to an on-going noise problem emanating from the inhabitants home.  The complainant stated that between June 12th and June 14th the shouting, including vulgarities, along with loud music had offended her and her family.  She stated that she had reported the noise to police on this date, but when officers arrived, the noise had already stopped.  She stated that she wished to sign a complaint for this latest transgression (officers had responded to this location on previous occasions).  The victim was provided an “Affidavit of Probable Cause” and advised to complete it and return it in order that it could be forwarded to the Court for a finding
06-14	While on patrol on Creek Road, an officer observed a vehicle traveling to his front, which twice crossed over the center lane markings into the oncoming lane of traffic.  Based upon these observations, the officer conducted a “Motor Vehicle Stop” on the vehicle.  When the officer advised the operator that he stopped him for crossing the center lines, the operator indicated that was due to him talking to his rear passengers.  In speaking with the operator, the officer smelled a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage on the operator’s breath.  He also observed other indicators that led him to believe that the operator was driving under the influence of an alcoholic beverage.  With this, the officer had the operator exit the vehicle for the purpose conducting a “Field Sobriety Test” on the individual.  While attempting to perform these tests, the operator stated that he was an “immigrant.”  When the officer inquired if he had a passport, the suspect stated that it was at home.  After failing to properly perform these tests, the operator was taken into custody and transported to Hdqtrs for processing.             After failing the “Alcotest,” the subject was issued a summons for “Driving While Intoxicated.”  In accordance with Attorney General’s Directive as it pertains to “undocumented aliens,” who have been arrested for “D.W.I.,” Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was contacted and informed of this arrest.  At the direction of the ICE agent and after receiving a “Detainer” from him, the subject was transported to the Burlington County Jail.
06-15	An officer was dispatched to a residence on Oakford Avenue in reference to a dog “Running At Large.”  Upon arrival, the officer met with the caller, who advised him that the large dog in the rear yard belonged to a neighbor.  The caller expressed the desire to sign a complaint against the neighbor for “Allowing a Dog to Run At Large.”  The caller was provided with an “Affidavit of Probable Cause,” which he completed and returned to the officer.  The affidavit was subsequently forwarded to the Court for a determination.
06-17	A resident came to Hdqtrs to surrender himself on a warrant issued by this Court for “Failure to Appear” at a previously assigned Court Date. In that Court was in session at the time of his surrender, the subject was taken before Judge McCloskey.  The judge fined the defendant $100.00 for “Contempt of Court” and vacated the warrant.
06-18	At approximately 8:00 PM, an officer was “flagged down” by a resident who wished to report that her husband had been missing since 7:00 AM, this same date.  The woman reported that her husband had been sentenced to jail by Judge McCloskey the previous day (June 17th) and that he was released from the Burlington County Jail at 7:00 AM (June 18th).  She further stated that her husband never called her to pick him up from jail upon release, which was unusual for him.  The woman stated that the only place she could think of, that he might have gone to, was a bar near the jail in Mount Holly.             The investigating officer returned to Hdqtrs to “follow-up” on the investigation.  The officer contacted the Burlington County Jail and confirmed that the individual had been released at approximately 8:00 AM.  The officer then contacted Mount Holly PD and requested that an officer go the named bar to ascertain if the individual was there.  This check proved fruitless.  The officer then contacted the missing man’s wife and informed her of the results of his investigation, after which he entered the man’s information into N.C.I.C.  The officer also contacted area hospitals in the event that the subject had been treated there.  This proved negative.             On June 19th, at approximately 4:00 PM, an officer was dispatched to the missing man’s residence in response to a report of verbal dispute between brother and sister.  Upon arrival, the officer observed the “missing person” sitting on the front steps.  He stated that he arrived home at approximately 11:00 AM, this date, after having spending the night at a motel in Cinnaminson.  The verbal dispute did not rise to the level necessitating police action. The “Missing Person” was removed from N.C.I.C
06-19	At approximately 8:00 PM, the detective met with a resident, who came to Hdqtrs to report her ten-year-old son missing.  The mother stated that she had last seen her son at approximately 12:00 PM.  She stated that he was riding his bicycle and usually frequents the Walnut Street School area.  She stated that she had attempted to contact her son on his cell phone but her calls went directly to his “voice mail.”             The officer immediately entered the boy’s information into N.C.I.C. and requested the mother provide a photograph of the child, in order that patrols would recognize him if seen.             At approximately 9:00 PM, Central Communication advised patrols that the child had returned home.  The detective proceeded to the residence and verified that the child had returned.  The boy was subsequently removed from N.C.I.C.
06-19	An officer responded to a residence on Walnut Street to investigate a report of “Criminal Mischief.”  The caller told the officer that unknown person(s) had broken the left-rear taillight on his vehicle.  The officer surveyed the damage and concluded that the damage was not the result of a MVA.  The victim could not provide a “time frame” when this might have occurred.  A further search of the area failed to locate any other damaged vehicles.
06-21	An officer responded to a residence on Laurel Street investigate a report of “Criminal Mischief.”  The caller told the officer that sometime between 9:30 PM on June 20th and 10:00 AM on June 21st, unknown person(s) “scratched” two (2) deep scratches along the tailgate of the victim’s pickup truck.  The victim stated that he neither heard nor saw any suspicious activity during this time period.