No convictions result from arrests at house party 33 people at Marlboro home were charged with CDS possession in 2002 BY LARRY RAMER Staff Writer MARLBORO — None of the 33 people who were arrested at a house party and charged with drug possession on Aug. 18, 2002 will ever be punished for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Although 33 people were charged with possession of a controlled dangerous substance, prosecutors never proved a case against any of the individuals. The 12 adults (18-year-olds) who were arrested were found not guilty in municipal court and the 21 minors who were arrested had no charges pressed against them following a review of the case by the Monmouth County Prosecutor’s Office. According to a supplementary police report of the incident obtained by the News Transcript, police were initially called to the home on Stone Lane by an anonymous caller who reported there was a loud party taking place and several people urinating on his property. Patrolman Andrew Goldberg and Patrolman Kenneth McGeehan responded to the call. When the officers arrived at the home they went to the backyard patio and discovered what Goldberg described as "loose green and brownish vegetable matter with the distinct odor of marijuana on the table." They subsequently located a clear plastic bag containing "greenish vegetable matter with the distinct odor of raw marijuana." According to the police report, the officers also found "several silver metal canisters that usually contain CO2 [carbon dioxide]" ... "a silver metal device that is used to inhale CO2 on the floor by one of the tables" and "a clear plastic bag containing several smaller clear plastic bags containing greenish vegetable matter that had the distinct odor of raw marijuana." When asked Monday if it was nitrous oxide (laughing gas) that the police report should have referred to and not carbon dioxide, Marlboro police Capt. Brian Hall said the report should have referred to ni­trous oxide. At that point, Sgt. Fred Reck and Patrolman Joseph Tomazic arrived at the home. According to Goldberg, "they were advised of the situation and advised that only one person was allowed into and out of the residence ... Alison Wexler, the 18-year-old daughter of the homeowner. Alison stated that she knew who had brought the CDS to her residence and that she would tell us who they were." Wexler was not arrested or charged with any crime. For 35 minutes, according to the re­port, officers asked those responsible for bringing drugs to the party to come for­ward. After no one did so, police arrested 33 people and charged them all with pos­session of a controlled dangerous sub­stance. Defense attorney Steven Sanders, who represented one of the defendants, later claimed in a written brief that the police had violated the U.S. Constitution and New Jersey state law. Sanders claimed police had violated the suspects’ Fourth Amendment rights by arresting them. "When no one would claim ownership of those bags, the officers’ reaction was to arrest each and every individual at the party and charge them with possessing a controlled dangerous substance. In short, the penalty for one individual’s decision to invoke his or her Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination was the violation of every other individual’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable seizures," Sanders wrote. According to Sanders, the police offi­cers also violated New Jersey law by ar­resting individuals simply because they were at a party where drugs were found. "Mere presence has never been suffi­cient basis to arrest an individual. Something more, such as evidence giving rise to an inference of ‘dominion and con­trol’ is required," the attorney wrote. Sanders went on to cite a relevant New Jersey court decision. In the deci­sion, a judge wrote that someone who is with several other people in a place where drugs are found cannot be accused of possessing the drugs unless additional evidence is produced. Police also failed to test the bags which they believed contained marijuana for fingerprints, Sanders pointed out. Marlboro police officials declined to comment on this case. Barry Serebnick, director of the Monmouth County Prosecutor Office’s Division of Family Services, said, "Despite the good work of the Marlboro Police Department there was not enough evidence to prove the cases [against any of the juveniles] beyond a reasonable doubt." Serebnick said his office only dealt with the juvenile defendants in the case and never attempted to bring charges against them. Marlboro municipal prosecutor Allen Falk, discussing mass arrests in drug cases in general, said police occasionally arrest a group of people in a place where drugs are found in an attempt to convince one or more individuals to confess to the crime. After hearing some of the circum­stances of the August 2002 case on Stone Lane and referring to the arrest of 33 people at the party, Falk said, "This [case] doesn’t surprise, shock or concern me."