SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK -againstABEL JOSEPH, Defendant.

THE GRAND JURY OF THE COUNTY OF NEW YORK, by this indictment, accuse the defendant of the crime of PERJURY IN THE FIRST DEGREE, in violation of Penal Law 210.15, committed as follows: The defendant, in the County of New York, did swear falsely by intentionally making a false statement which he did not believe to be true, while giving testimony which was material to the action, proceeding and matter in which it was made. Specifically, on August 2, 2010, and August, 10, 2010, the defendant appeared before the grand jury of the County of New York, a body authorized to administer an oath, and the defendant swore under oath that he would testify truthfully regarding the case of The People of the State of New York versus . On

September 14, 2010, and September 16, 2010, the defendant appeared before the Supreme Court of New York State, Part 85, a court authorized to administer an oath, and the defendant swore under oath that he would testify truthfully regarding the case of The People of the State of New York versus .

At the time the defendant testified before the grand jury, the grand jury was considering whether to charge with Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the

Fifth and Seventh Degrees. For that reason, it became material and necessary for the defendant, who was the arresting officer in charge of the arrest of , to testify about the

circumstances surrounding

s arrest and why the defendant believed that

was the individual he had seen sell a controlled substance. At the time the defendant testified before the Supreme Court, the judge was conducting a hearing to determine the legality of the arrest and subsequent search and seizure of contraband in the case of The People of the State of New York against was charged by Indictment Number , in which

with multiple crimes, including Criminal

Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Fifth and Seventh Degrees. For that reason, it again became material and necessary for the defendant to testify about the circumstances surrounding s arrest and why the defendant believed that had seen sell a controlled substance. During his testimony in the action, proceeding and matter, the defendant intentionally made a false statement that he did not believe to be true in that he made sworn statements before the grand jury that were inconsistent with his sworn statements in the Supreme Court to the degree that one of them is necessarily false, to wit: the following inconsistent statements about whether he observed the arrest of August 2, 2010 (before the grand jury) Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. again? Did there come a time when you saw Yes. And where and when - - was this? In the custody of Detective Viruet, I think it was at the corner of Lexington Avenue and 115th. How much later was that? Maybe two minutes, two, three minutes later. You said he was in the custody of Detective Viruet? Yes. And are you sure its the same individual you saw? Yes, I never lost sight of him. I was actually watching him radioing to Detective Viruet. was the individual he

August 10, 2010 (before the grand jury) Q. A. Did you observe Yes. apprehension?

Q. A. Q. A.

And who is it that apprehend him? Detective Tyrone Viruet. Were - - was it important for you to observe his apprehension as oppose to the other two? He was actually the person I seen make - - accept the currency. I seen him accept currency. I put them both over, I stood with him, stood with .

September 14, 2011 (before the Supreme Court) Q. So when youre saying, when you said that he is - - that he was walking northbound on Park Avenue towards Lexington, you were assuming at some point he was going to turn eastbound to go to Lexington? A. I seen him turn eastbound, thats why I told Detective Viruet, heading towards Lexington. ********** Q. Did you actually see get stopped by Detective Viruet? A. I saw them after. ********** Q. Did you see Detective Viruet stop A. No. September 16, 2011 (before the Supreme Court) You didnt actually see get detained or arrested on 115th and Lexington Avenue; did you? A. No, I seen him when he reached the corner. Q. Yes or no? A. No. Q. You did not see him get detained on 115th and Lexington Avenue; correct? A. No. *********** Q. And at what point did you lose sight of ? A. I lost sight of him, I stopped losing sight of him when Detective Viruet radioed to me that he indeed sees , and hes behind him and he followed him, then I actually took my eyes off of and went southbound. Q.

SECOND COUNT: AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, accuse the defendant of the crime of PERJURY IN THE FIRST DEGREE, in violation of Penal Law 210.15, committed as follows: The defendant, in the County of New York, did swear falsely by intentionally making a false statement which he did not believe to be true, while giving testimony which was material to

the action, proceeding and matter in which it was made. Specifically, on August 2, 2010, and August, 10, 2010, the defendant appeared before the grand jury of the County of New York, a body authorized to administer an oath, and the defendant swore under oath that he would testify truthfully regarding the case of The People of the State of New York versus . On

September 14, 2010, the defendant appeared before the Supreme Court of New York State, Part 85, a court authorized to administer an oath, and the defendant swore under oath that he would testify truthfully regarding the case of The People of the State of New York versus . At the time the defendant testified, the grand jury was considering whether to charge with Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Fifth and Seventh Degrees. For that reason, it became material and necessary for the defendant, who was the arresting officer in charge of the arrest of surrounding , to testify about the circumstances

s arrest and whether the defendant had found and stopped the two

men the defendant said he had observed purchase drugs from At the time the defendant testified before the Supreme Court, the judge was conducting a hearing to determine the legality of the arrest and subsequent search and seizure of contraband in the case of The People of the State of New York against was charged by Indictment Number , in which

with multiple crimes, including Criminal

Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Fifth and Seventh Degrees. For that reason, it again became material and necessary for the defendant to testify about the circumstances surrounding s arrest and whether the defendant had found and stopped the two men the defendant said he had observed purchase drugs from .

During his testimony in the action, proceeding and matter, the defendant intentionally made a false statement that he did not believe to be true in that he made sworn statements before the grand jury that were inconsistent with his sworn statements in the Supreme Court to the

degree that one of them is necessarily false, to wit: the following inconsistent statements about whether he found and stopped the two men the defendant said he had observed purchase drugs from . August 2, 2010 (before the grand jury) Q. A. Did you - - were you able to stop the individual who handed him the money? No, we - - he went unapprehended.

August 10, 2010 (before the grand jury) Q. And were you observing anyone else? A. Yes, two other individuals that were un-apprehended ********** Q. Are you ever able to stop these other two individuals? A. No, we couldnt find them. My field team couldnt find them. ********** Q. But they were not apprehended? A. No. ********** Q. Did other officers attempt to arrest other two people? A. Yes. Q. But they were never found? A. No. ********** Q. How long after the stop did you remain in the area? A. I stood in I actually went in the vicinity looking for the other two buyers with members of my field team. September 14th, 2011 (before the Supreme Court) Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Did you - I actually stopped the two male Hispanics. You what? I was the one who actually apprehended the two male Hispanics, when I stopped them after the transaction. You did stop them? Yes, I did. Well, what - - do you have some paperwork indicating who you stopped? No. THE COURT: Im sorry, the two male Hispanics involved in this transaction, you stopped them? THE WITNESS: Yes. They were not arrested. Yes, me and my other members of my field team. I actually stopped them. We actually didnt find any product on them, thats why we released them.

Where did you stop them at? Park Avenue. Park Avenue and what? About 113th, 114th to 113th. When did you do that? I did that simultaneously. When went north; they went south. I was in the middle of the block. I actually stood out (Witness indicating). I watched , they were walking slower, the two of them were talking to each other. They had no clue who I was, because I was in plain clothes. I stood in the middle of the block, made sure my field people, Detective Viruet, had eyes - - he confirmed that he sees , after I gave the direction of flight, then when he told me, I see , then I actually proceeded to follow the two male Hispanics down the street and stopped them at 113th and Park Avenue. ********** Q. Now, you said that you stopped the two male Hispanics who you saw or believe was engaged in a drug transaction with my client on 113th Street and Park Avenue; is that correct? A. Yes. ********** Q. Now, when you saw those two male Hispanics go southbound, you radioed their description; correct? A. No, I didnt radio their descriptions because I was actually stopping them. I radioed description, and I radioed their description when they were on the set when I first seen them; I told my team their description. *********** Q. When you stopped them and did what you - - you stopped them and did you search them? A. Yes. At the time, at the time we stopped them, I actually asked them, did they have anything on them that they werent supposed to have; they indicated to me, No, they were waiting for a friend. I asked them what the friend looked like, they couldnt recall. They said that they, they actually told me that he didnt come out. Q. So you remember the very specific conversation - A. The small conversation, yes. Q. - - you had with these two male Hispanics, after you just described these other hundreds of other things that you have been involved in over the last few years, but you remember the very specific conversation you had with these people? *********** A. Yes. Q. You do? A. Yes. *********** Q. And you didnt search them? A. We gave them a light pat down, a light pat down for any objects, anything like that. But we couldnt search them. We didnt do a thorough search at all, because I had seen nothing in his hand at the time; because the transaction I watched take place, it was to his hand, and thats what I was more concerned with his hand, and he didnt have the objects in his hand at that time.

Q. A. Q. A. Q. A.

*********** Q. A block and a half down the road you approached them; correct? A. Yes. Q. You kept your eye on them all the time? A. Yes, I kept my eye on them, I stood in my same location and watched them while I was in conversation with Detective Viruet. Q. You never lost sight of them? A. No.

CYRUS R. VANCE JR. District Attorney

Filed: No.

NA

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK -againstABEL JOSEPH, Defendant.

INDICTMENT PERJURY IN THE FIRST DEGREE, P.L. 210.15; 2 Counts

CYRUS R. VANCE, JR., District Attorney A True Bill ADA RYAN CONNORS OFFICIAL CORRUPTION UNIT

Foreman