Dear Friends of the National Police Defense Foundation,

This may be the most difficult thing I’ve ever had to write.  I find myself in a position to have to plead for your compassion and empathy on behalf of my family.  The kind words and wishes of friends, family and caring citizens have brought us a great deal of emotional support during the most challenging crisis of our lives; but I’m afraid, without the generous monetary support of fair and decent people like yourself, my family will undoubtedly lose our home to pay for legal fees associated with a most unjust abuse of power threatening my husband’s freedom and our family’s home life.

Although the details of the case are lengthy, I’ll try to share an overview of the nightmare my family has been living for the past nearly 2 1 years.  I feel that giving you some background information will provide you with a better understanding of the vendetta against my husband brought on by an overzealous prosecutor. My husband, Kenneth Henderson was a dedicated member of the Bound Book Police Dept (BBPD) for over 24 years.  He was appointed Chief of Police 7 years ago.  He not only had a spotless disciplinary record throughout his career in law enforcement, he was also a decorated, respected officer in the community he loves, the community in which he grew up. 

Ken had enjoyed a cordial and professional relationship with the County Prosecutor for the first few years in his position as chief.  But, a few issues of disagreement in more recent years resulted in the Prosecutor’s displeasure. 

Ken was the liaison for Somerset County on the Narcotics Task Force. And in 2003 Ken had formed a subcommittee among the municipal police chiefs in the County to try to obtain authority to investigate narcotic-related crimes independent of the Prosecutor’s Task Force, as is done in every other county in the state.  The Prosecutor opposed his efforts and insisted they continue to subordinate all such investigations to his Narcotics Task Force.  

Ken was subsequently invited to lunch by the Chief of Detectives and was told by him that the Prosecutor was furious with him for forming the subcommittee and advised him it would be in his ‘best interest’ to drop it.  The subtle threat was but a small glimpse of what was to come.  It seems that the Somerset County Prosecutor ranked first in the state for narcotics statistics (even though Somerset is not among the counties with the greatest drug problems or arrests). Allowing municipal police departments to have investigative authority would jeopardize the top ranking the Prosecutor enjoyed.

Another member of the Prosecutor’s office had told Ken that the Prosecutor was irate about the fact that he had responded to a media inquiry after participating at a press conference as the Chairman of the Narcotics Task Force.  The prosecutor’s displeasure had nothing to do with any comments Ken provided to the media but rather with the fact that the press sought Ken out to interview rather than seeking out the prosecutor.  He was never invited to another press conference involving his task force.  More similar run-ins occurred that we only later realized were perceived by the Prosecutor as a threat to his omnipotence.

In 2004, the prosecutor had a plan to merge the police forces of four towns; one of which was Bound Brook.  Ken disagreed with his plan to merge police forces and he questioned the Prosecutor as to whether the other three police forces were in favor of the action. The prosecutor insisted they were in full support, however, that was not the case.   When the PBA and the town also disagreed with the plan publicly; Ken was told by the Prosecutor to take disciplinary actions against the PBA members who were mentioned in the news as opposing the plan.  Ken refused.

Bound Brook Officials had appointed Ken Chief in 1997.  Out of all of the elected council, there were two people who had opposed Ken’s appointment.  One of them became the Mayor in 2000 and the other, was appointed by the new mayor as the new police commissioner in order to undermine Ken’s position as Chief.  He now was to report to a man that opposed his promotion.  Ken did his best to work with them.  In short time, however the Officials began to complain to Ken about the increasing presence in town of African Americans and Hispanics, pressuring him to take action against minorities.  Ken refused to take such horrific discriminating actions.  The police department began to receive many complaints from minorities in town that municipal inspectors were harassing them. 

Ken reported these actions to the Prosecutor and requested an investigation.  The Prosecutor declined but instead forwarded complaints to the Civil Rights Division of Justice who subsequently conducted an investigation and issued a Consent Decree for violations of civil rights against minorities. 

Even after the action brought against the town for discrimination, the prosecutor’s office ironically still picked the day of the very first Hispanic Celebration in town to conduct a sting operation to set up Ken and one of the local Hispanic businessmen who owned a restaurant and popular club in town.  An ordinance issued by the town called for police officers to work at this establishment on weekends to provide traffic control and community policing.   Ken often worked there on Sunday nights. The Prosecutor investigated him in February of 2004 claiming it was a ‘no show’ job for which he was being paid, but the investigation found Ken was indeed at the location working as appropriate.  To date, we have yet to find out who made the allegations of the “no show” jobs and the prosecutors office has refused to provide that information.

They dropped the investigation until October, and then, still finding no wrongdoing, pursued a sting operation leading to Ken’s arrest.  We found out that prior to this sting operation taking place, the prosecutors office was cautioned by their own Assistant Prosecutor who recommended against it, stating that there was no proof of misconduct to justify such an operation. The Assistant Prosecutor was subsequently left out of  additional meetings so that they could go forward with their plans.   He had no idea that the sting operation had been conducted until after the fact.

 The prosecutor’s office arranged to have the Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) conduct an inspection at the site.  The ABC agent called Ken to advise him of the inspection and told him (as is clearly documented by their own taped phone call!) to tell the owner to be present for the inspection.  At their advice, Ken called the owner to come down so that he could be there to speak with the ABC.  Consequently Ken was accused of ‘tipping off’ the owner, and was arrested 2 days later.  The prosecutor’s office ensured that all of the news media including newspapers and television stations in the New York/New Jersey area were aware of the action taken and were present as they escorted my husband to jail in handcuffs.  This of course, was to further humiliate and embarrass him.   

The outrageous contradictions and reporting of falsehoods and misleading propaganda fed to the media that day and since then have also been an incredible source of frustration and anguish.  The ‘powers’ that be took over the Police Department and have pursued an extensive investigation that would pale those conducted of criminals. They have piled on ridiculous charges. The intent, of course, is to force Ken to give up and surrender to their power.  I must admit it is tempting to find an easier way for my family to be at peace, but if they win this case, who will be next?  The corruption of those in power is becoming so rampant, we cannot afford to give in and leave them unexposed for the abuse they have perpetrated upon us.   

During a recent motion hearing to dismiss some of the charges against Ken, a Superior Court judge agreed with Ken’s defense lawyer and dropped four of the charges against him.  This was great news but we still have other charges to deal with.  With regard to the incident involving the ABC agent, the judge was close to dismissing this charge as well.  Ken’s attorney stated no rational jury could deem that the inspection was confidential by reading the transcript of the taped conversation.  The judge responded by saying “I agree, not beyond a reasonable doubt”.

What is incredibly disturbing also is that the information the prosecutor’s office presented to the grand jury is full of lies, omissions and misrepresentation of the facts.  Exculpatory evidence was also not presented to the grand jury.  Before all of this happened to my husband, I was unaware that grand jury testimony can be completely presented by the prosecution. Ken was never asked about any of the charges against him, with the exception of the initial question regarding the night of the sting operation in which he told them exactly what happened. They did not present this to the grand jury nor did they advise the grand jury that Ken had never been questioned about any other charges. Ken’s attorneys were not there to present their side of the issues.  The unfairness of this system is unfathomable to me.   To further highlight the unfairness of the grand jury presentation, the judge advised that in a grand jury testimony, “the bar is set at ground level” which means the prosecution has no obligation to present the truth.  How this can be acceptable and fair is beyond my comprehension. 

This case has gone on now for 2 1 years but we have to continue to fight for my husband.  He did nothing wrong.  Financially we are in a position that we never would have dreamed of being in.  In a short time, we will most likely have to sell our home, a home on which we have already had to take out a second mortgage to pay for legal fees.   The only home that our two young boys who are 13 and 11 have ever known.   It will devastate them to know that we have leave.   We can’t afford to fight this case on our own any longer and we pray for your support and generosity.  Please help us to obtain the resources we need to fight for what’s right. With your help, we will continue to stand up for what we believe in.  We will have a fair system of justice that does not allow political egos to pursue their personal interests by indicting those who dare to disagree.

The Chief’s legal defense fund is administered by:

National Police Defense Foundation
21 Kilmer Drive
Building 2, Suite F
Morganville, NJ 07751
www.npdf.org

Please send all donations to the NPDF above or through the web site: www.npdf.org. You can also visit Chief Henderson’s web site at www.chiefldf.net.

Thanks sincerely for your consideration and support.

Yours truly,

Theresa Henderson