Four years before an NYPD detective became the focus of a wrongful arrest probe, the city paid $30,000 to settle a suit implicating her in another bad bust. Hit the jump to read the rest of the story.
@WiL
The city last year wrote checks to a father and son who claimed their arrest by Detective Perelene Kaalund and other cops in Queens’ 102nd Precinct was bogus.
The two Sikh men, Bhupinder Singh Boparai and his son, Sandeep, claimed Kaalund and the other cops busted them even though the only witness against them twice changed his story.
A few months after the criminal complaint was filed against both Boparais, the Queens district attorney moved to dismiss the case, their lawyer says.
Now Kaalund, who recently retired from the NYPD, is in the middle of an ongoing investigation into the arrest of another Sikh man, Tejpal Singh, in a 1996 drive-by shooting.
Singh was convicted on the word of two witnesses; one of whom has since recanted, while the second has said he’d change his testimony for money.
In that case, a former NYPD sergeant says Kaalund did not obey his order to prepare an NYPD summary of an interview with another suspect’s statements that Tejpal was not in the car.
The sergeant, James Carroll, said he wanted to arrest another man for the shooting, but Queens prosecutors ordered him not to. Tejpal was convicted in 2004 and sentenced to 25 years to life.
After the Daily News revealed serious questions about the case earlier this month, the district attorney reluctantly agreed to “fully investigate.”
Reached by The News, Kaalund said, “I’ll have my opportunity to talk in court. I’ll have the district attorney call you.”
The other case occurred on Nov. 15, 2005, when the Singhs told cops Bhupinder Boparai and two others attacked them in a temple. Sandeep Boparai’s name was not mentioned.
As Kaalund and other cops began investigating, the officers “expressed a desire to resolve the dispute . . . without making arrests,” the suit contended.
During the talks, the victims claimed Sandeep also attacked them. Kaalund called Sandeep “the troublemaker,” though witnesses told cops he wasn’t in the temple when the fight took place.
After a stationhouse meeting, victim Jagir Singh agreed to drop the charges and admitted Sandeep wasn’t in the temple during the alleged altercation.
The suit said Jagir told Sandeep and others he filed charges against the Boparais “because he felt disrespected.”
The Boparais say they told cops this. They say police responded by telling them they were lucky they weren’t arrested.
Nearly four months later, Jagir Singh filed a new complaint. On March 1, 2006, the Boparais were charged with assault in the temple fracas.
In the federal suit, the Boparais claimed the cops investigating the incident “knew that contradictory accounts of the alleged crimes were provided by witnesses.”
Their lawyer, Ezra Glasser, said all charges were dropped a few months later.
Kevin Ryan, a spokesman for Queens District Attorney Richard Brown, said two cases were adjourned in contemplation of dismissal and later dismissed.
In July 2008, the city agreed to settle.
