Posted on: Thursday, June 26, 2003

EDITORIAL
HPD learns it's not exempt from scandal

Sentencing of two ranking police officers puts to rest a major scandal that has shaken the Honolulu Police Department for the past two years.

Although its "food theft" focus may at times have sounded more like tailgating or car-port partying among friends, it was a serious matter that in the end was resolved in satisfactory fashion. The bottom line is that corruption has been identified and rooted out at HPD.

The case involved the diversion of money earmarked for the purchase of food for prisoners to pay for upscale workplace meals for police officers. Clearly, the idea was to boost morale and offer local-style relief to hardworking officers.

Beyond the immediate crime of felony theft, the scheme suggested a culture of entitlement within the department — a feeling among some that it was all right to divert a few bucks as part of an us-vs.-them culture that tends to separate uniformed police men and women from the citizens they serve and protect.

The two ranking defendants, Jeffrey Owens, a former police major, and Rafael Fajardo, a former assistant police chief, have avoided jail and probation by pleading no contest to their felony theft charges.

Some may argue that officers in such elevated positions of trust must face a higher standard and should have done time. We're satisfied that Circuit Judge Karl Sakamoto did a reasonable job of balancing the gravity of their crimes with long records of public service by these first-time offenders.

It's enough that Owens and Fajardo are disgraced. The case is an embarrassment to Chief Lee Donohue, whose department was slow to take it seriously, and ultimately Mayor Jeremy Harris.

Critics argued two years ago that the scandal was only an example of longstanding favoritism and corruption in the department and would lead to other more serious allegations. But as months passed, various officers implicated in the case resigned or retired, and no further evidence of such misconduct emerged.

Can the public now quit worrying about corruption at HPD? We wish we could make such assurances, but the fact is that HPD remains a closed culture that almost never airs its dirty linen.

The only thing that brought this case to prosecutors was the fact that ranking officers were upset enough to go public with their concerns. That suggests terrific behind-the-scenes pressures that may be ongoing. Perhaps we're only seeing the tip of an iceberg.

The finger-pointing and cross-accusations that accompanied this case appear to have subsided. But they show that in-house investigations can't be the last word in HPD accountability. Only a willingness to submit, when necessary, to independent investigation will assure the public trust, without which HPD is lost.