DISTRICT ATTORNEY
OF THE
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
155 LEONARD STREET
NEW YORK. N. Y. 10013
(212) 732-7300
ROBERT M. MORGENTHAU
DISTRICT ATTORNEY
NEIGHBORHOOD COMPLAINT OFFICES:
HARLEM BRANCH
55 WEST 125 STREET
NEW YORK, N.Y. 10027
(212) 831-8661
WEST SIDE BRANCH
2112 BROADWAY
NEW YORK. N.Y, 10023
(212) 595-0760
May 3, 1978
Honorable Robert J. McGuire
Police Commissioner
1 Police Plaza
New York, New York 10038
Dear Commissioner McGuire:
It is my pleasure to bring to your attention the exemplary efforts of retired Detective Randy Jurgensen in the investigation of the murder of Police Officer Phillip Cardillo at the Harlem Mosque on April 14, 1972.
The involvement of Detective Jurgensen in the case began on the day that Officer Cardillo was shot. On that day, although assigned to a stakeout with the Major Case Squad, Detective Jurgensen, under the most difficult circumstances, secured positive identifications of defendants from officers who had been assaulted. Thereafter, while assisting a fellow officer during a riotous street encounter, Detective Jurgensen sustained head injuries resulting in his hospitalization. The initiative which he displayed at the crime scene preserved critical evidence for a later, more thorough analysis.
Later in May of 1973, Detective Jurgensen was assigned to the investigation of the case on a full time basis. The confused circumstances surrounding the shooting required detailed analysis. In order to reconstruct the events leading to the death of Officer Cardillo, Detective Jurgensen interviewed approximately 100 police officers many of whom had never been interviewed and whose involvement in the incident, therefore, was not known. His analysis of the incident included construction of life size and small scale replicas of the hallway in which Officer Cardillo was murdered. Police officers assaulted in the incident used the life size model to demonstrate their participation, thus enabling them and Detective Jurgensen to see more clearly the events of that day. The all scale model was used to reconstruct the trajectory of bullets fired at the scene and was invaluable at trial to establish that no police officer shot Officer Cardillo by accident. In addition to these efforts, Detective Jurgensen procured movie films-of the scene and used them to identify persons observed entering and leaving the building after the shooting. He individually gathered a wealth of intelligence concerning members of the Black Muslim sect connected with the mosque in which Officer Cardillo was killed. This intelligence was of great value when, in March of 1974, Detective Jurgensen located an eyewitness to the murder. As a result of this eyewitness, other participants in the crime were identified, located murder. For the next two years, Detective Jurgensen was part of a bodyguard detail for the eyewitness until the beginning of the first of two trials which lasted approximately eight months. During each of these trials, Detective Jurgensen spent long hours providing support for the assistant district attorney in charge of the case.
The actions of Detective Jurgensen reflect great credit upon himself and the Police Department of the City of New York. Now that he is retired, we shall miss the perseverance and dedication which he brought to each case assigned to him.
Sincerely,
Robert M. Morgenthau
Honorable Robert McGuire
Police Commissioner
Police Department
City of New York
One Police Plaza
New York, New York
Dear Commissioner McGuire:
My name is Randy Jurgensen and I am a detective retired from the New York City Police Department.
On February 15, 1979, Personnel Order No. 54 awarded me, and others, departmental recognition at the level of “Commendation” in connection with an incident which occurred on April 14, 1972.
My purpose in writing this letter is to most urgently and respectfully request that my name be removed from Personnel Order No. 54. While I have no problem accepting the sad fact that police officers will be murdered in the performance of duty, I, in good conscience, must disassociate myself from actions which denied Philip Cardillo cution of the persons responsible for his death, caused his family untold misery, and forever blotted the record of our Police Department. Specifically, sir, my reasons are:
1) The violation, on April 14, 1972, of well-established principles of investigation because of political and other pressures. The failure to establish a crime scene and the release of unidentified prisoners because of an order from an unknown source are only two of many improper actions which occurred on April 14, 1972. To demonstrate this I submit that years later I, under the authority of a search warrant, and in the presence of an Assistant District Attorney, New York County, returned to the scene and removed from the ceiling of the premises a bullet fired on April 14, 1972 and other evidence which was required in court as evidence.
2) The order, by high-ranking officers, that white police officers leave the scene and only black police officers remain. I believe this to be unique. Such move may well come back to haunt our department in the future if cited by divisive elements in the community as a panacea for imagined wrongs. If done once, why not again?
3) The refusal of the Police Department to issue a statement that the officer was property performing duty when set upon and assaulted even though over-whelming evidence supporting this was at hand. This silence, combined with the incessant, vicious and totally false verbal attacks on the police by the group in question during the week the officer lay dying in the hospital placed an unbearable burden on the officer's family. Not until he was buried and his commanding officer, because of the Department's silence, issued a statement vindicating the officer and resigned in protest, did the Department support him.
4) The almost unheard of absence of the Mayor and Police Commissioner from the officer's funeral. This, coupled with an “apology” by a Deputy Police Commissioner to the group in question for police action on April 14, 1972 and the later endorsement of this apology by the then Police Commissioner. I find it ironic and totally sad to be commended now for actions which then, in the judgment of a Police Commissioner and Deputy Police Commissioner, required an apology to those responsible for the officer's murder. I can tell you, from personal knowledge, that these actions placed an impossible burden on the prosecution at the trial of the person accused of the killing.
5) The virtual abandonment of the investigation from the occurrence of the homicide until one year later. Until 1973 when, because of the impending publication of former Deputy Commissioner Robert Daley's book, “Target Blue,” a coordinated investigation was begun, literally nothing except the accumulation of news clippings had been accomplished. This is obviously so at variance with past practice in any homicide, not to mention the killing of a police officer, that it needs no further comment.
6) When the investigation resulted in an arrest and indictment, and the trial was in progress, the refusal on the part of the Police Department to respond to repeated requests by the District Attorney's office for Police Department records and files necessary to successfully prosecute the case. Only when the Department learned subpoenas were being prepared for the records did they deliver some of them and state the others had been lost. This absence of cooperation on the part of the Department with the District Attorney's Office continued and intensified until communication between the two offices had broken down completely and a special liaison officer had to be appointed. It seems strange to think that the driving force behind the prosecution of an accused cop-killer had to come from the District Attorney's office and even stranger that actions of the Police Department impeded that prosecution.
7) The convening of a special Grand Jury by the New York State Special Prosecutor's Office to inquire into the overall handling of the case. The apparent necessity of setting up such a Grand Jury in itself speaks volumes.
8) And, finally, with the approaching of the seventh anniversary of the officer's death, “commendations” are awarded for actions which took place on April 14, 1972. I think it best for my own peace of mind to not forget the injustices done Philip Cardillo and his family on April 14th and the days immediately following. This is why I again, urgently and respectfully, request the deletion of my name from Personnel Order No. 54.
I hope Commissioner McGuire that this letter will be accepted in the spirit in which it is offered. What was generated by the events of April 14, 1972 must never happen again. Perhaps this small effort on my part will help see that it never does.
Sincerely yours,
RANDY JURGENSEN
RJvc