The Philadelphia Inquirer from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania • Page B11

Thursday, September 11, 2003 THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER www.philly.com East Bll New Jersey MICHAEL PLUNKETT Inquirer Suburban Staff Miguel Reyes Jr. (left) and his father leave Camden County's Victims of Terrorism Memorial in Cooper River Park in Pennsauken. The Camden men visited the memorial dedicated last Sept. 1 1 in honor of all Americans killed by acts of terrorism and read its plaques while spending yesterday together for Miguel Reyes 67th birthday. Dog's shelter faces criminal probe by deception," he said.

"If they took money never intending to kill the dog and you can prove that there's a theft charge." Harry Jay Levin, a lawyer for the Associated Humane Societies, said the shelter simply had made a mistake by not destroying the 3-year-old Doberman. He said Tuesday that three shelter employees had told deSwart in person that the dog had bitten its previous owner. The woman's son disputed that, saying his mother "would have never brought it home" had she known. DeSwart's boyfriend discovered her dead in her bedroom when he came home from work. The dog, which deSwart had named Luger, was covered in blood and lying on a comforter in the room.

Investigators treated the case as a homicide until an autopsy determined Monday that deSwart had died from a dog bite. The shelter is examining Luger's adoption "from beginning to end" and "speaking to every employee who had a hand in the process," Levin said. The shelter has instituted more layers of safeguards, but it had not determined why the Doberman was allowed to be adopted. Levin also said he did not know why shelter employees, who knew the dog had a history of biting, did not realize that it was supposed to have been euthanized. "That's the issue we're trying to determine," Levin said.

"What mistake was made by a human being that allowed this to happen?" Muslim prisoners lose ruling A court said N.J. did not have to offer a ritually pure diet. Vegetarian should suffice, it said. By David B. Caruso ASSOCIATED PRESS Vegetarian prison food may not be the best, but state prisons in New Jersey are not breaking the law by serving it to Muslim inmates who have asked for meals that conform to their religious standards, a federal appeals court says.

Ruling in a case similar to dozens filed by prisoners from around the country, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Philadelphia upheld a lower court's finding that the state is not obligated to serve two Muslim inmates meals with meat that is halal, slaughtered according to Islamic law. Writing for a three-judge panel, Judge Dolores K. Sloviter sided with New Jersey officials, who said it would be too expensive to add halal meals to the prison menu. Prison authorities also said allowing prisoners to get meals prepared outside the prison would require each meal to be passed through an X-ray machine for security reasons.

"Based on the record evidence, we agree with the district court that providing vegetarian meals, rather than halal meals with meat, is rationally related to the legitimate penological interests in simplified food service, security, and staying within the prison's budget," Sloviter wrote. It is too early to know whether the ruling will be a blow to other Muslim inmates, who have argued with varying success in prisons around the country that dietary restrictions are protected by the constitution. For prisoners, whether they can get halal meals depends largely on where they serve their time. Federal prisons offer kosher, halal and vegetarian meals, but some states have resisted prisoner requests for special diets. License offices plan on adding police presence By Jennifer Moroz INQUIRER STAFF WRITER Each branch office of New Jersey's Motor Vehicle Commission could eventually have its own police officer as part of a plan to beef up security at an agency that has been known for lax oversight.

John Huertas, the commission's director of security, said yesterday that officials hoped to start placing local officers at the state's 45 motor-vehicle offices and four regional centers by December. The state would pay for the officers' time in an effort to deter customers from trying to get a driver's license with fraudulent records and employees from helping them do it. The state held a special training session in Trenton yesterday to acquaint more than 40 officers with how to detect fake documents, with statutes on document fraud, and with basic motor-vehicle operations. Huertas said he hoped to have a permanent police presence in some stations by December, starting with those that have the most transactions and highest incidence of problems. Since the spring of 2002, when New Jersey began overhauling its motor-vehicle bureau, 14 employees and more than 300 customers have been arrested on allegations of document fraud.

Since Sept. 2, when the state began requiring several forms of identification to obtain or renew a license, about a half-dozen people have been arrested, Huertas said. "We can make a greater concerted effort to thwart some of these crimes and arrest these criminals," Huertas said of the addition of on-site officers. "We intend to prosecute to the fullest anyone who comes in here with bad documents." Huertas said the state could spend between $2 million and $3 million on the program. Lawyers from out of state get access A requirement that they have an in-state office to practice in N.J.

was lifted. Phila. lawyers are happy. By Emilie Lounsberry INQUIRER STAFF WRITER For years, Philadelphia lawyers have looked longingly across the Delaware River and envisioned a new frontier of clients and courthouses. But such prospects for more business have long been limited by the requirement, in New Jersey court rules, that any lawyer who wants to practice in that state must have a "bona fide" law office there.

Yesterday, after years of efforts by the Philadelphia Bar Association to win elimination of that rule, the New Jersey Supreme Court lifted the requirement for three years so state court officials can "monitor the experience." The court will then decide whether to make the change permanent. The decision left Pennsylvania lawyers especially those in Philadelphia jubilant. "It's been a long, long case," said Center City lawyer Allan H. Gordon, who said the battle against the rule had been going on for at least seven years. The New Jersey State Bar Association, which opposed eliminating the rule, expressed disappointment.

N.J. lawyers worried "We remain concerned that the new rule will have an adverse impact on the ability of the New Jersey public to obtain quality legal representation from lawyers who are familiar with the customs of New Jersey practice, who are available to meet with clients at a convenient location, and who are accountable not just to clients but to their community and the courts," the association's president, Karol Corbin Walker, said in a statement. Rayman Solomon, dean of the Rutgers University School of Law in Camden, said the court's decision reflected the diminution of geographic barriers in the practice of law. "In society in general, localism is not on the ascendancy in many aspects of delivery of services," said Solomon, who said technological advances in the business of law had made it harder to justify such a strict local-office requirement for lawyers. But Solomon said there were systemic advantages to maintaining a "nexus between the law and the local community." "Lawyers are officers of the court.

They also have a role in the improvement of justice and the justice system. Therefore, being part of the community makes it more likely they fulfill that role," he said. 'Bona fide' offices The New Jersey rule stated that a "bona fide" office is a place where clients are met, files are kept, the phone is answered, mail is received, and the attorney or a "responsible person" can be reached to answer questions from clients, courts and opposing counsel. New Jersey has long been regarded as one of the tougher states in regulating the practice of law. Pennsylvania, for example, has no such requirement.

A New York lawyer challenged the rule, but in 1997 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld it, saying it promoted a legitimate interest in making sure that lawyers were accessible to clients and the courts. Audrey C. Talley, chancellor of the Philadelphia Bar Association, hailed the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision to accept a recommendation from one of its own committees. "We commend New Jersey's high court on eliminating a rule which needlessly restricted interstate practice," she said in a statement.

Gordon said the ruling would likely have more impact on sole practitioners and small law firms because most large and midsize city law firms already have offices in New Jersey. Levin said he did not know of a similar mistake ever taking place at the shelter. "Never. Absolutely never," he said. "They've been in business for 30 years, they handle about 15,000 animals a year, and this is the first time." He also said deSwart, before adopting the dog, had signed a disclaimer that provides no warranties "with regards to the health or demeanor" of the animal.

While the disclaimer provides the shelter with some protection from lawsuits, Levin would not address the liability in this case. "Everyone's so upset about what happened," he said. "I don't think anyone's focusing on liability." Martha Armstrong, senior vice president at the Humane Societies of the United States, said her group urged all shelters not to put up for adoption animals with a history of biting. "Everybody who attends one of our training programs knows that if you get a call about an animal that has bitten, you do not tell them: 'Bring them in, and we'll find them a new she said. In New Jersey, there are no regulations regarding how shelters handle an animal surrendered by an owner.

"It's really a management decision as to whether the dog is fit for adoption," said Jennifer Sciortino, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Health and Senior Services. The dog that killed deSwart was at the Newark shelter for 87 days and did not show any aggressiveness, which might explain why it was allowed to be adopted, Levin said. But Armstrong said the Newark shelter had "a moral responsibility, if not a legal responsibility," to euthanize the dog. "That's a bit disconcerting, that the data on the animal that said he was supposed to be euthanized was not accompanying the data that said he had bitten," she said. The adopted Doberman killed its Medford owner.

The police chief vowed an aggressive investigation. By Troy Graham INQUIRER STAFF WRITER Burlington County authorities have launched a criminal investigation into an animal shelter that allowed a Medford woman to adopt a Doberman pinscher that was supposed to have been euthanized for biting its previous owner. The dog mauled and killed its new owner, 67-year-old Valerie deSwart, in her Stokes Road home Sunday, just 10 days after she adopted him from a Newark, N.J., shelter run by the Associated Humane Societies. The Doberman's previous owner, a North Jersey woman, paid the shelter $55 to put down and cremate the 95-pound dog after it bit her this year. Instead, the shelter placed the dog in a pool for adoption.

"We are aggressively pursuing the investigation for a criminal nature," Medford Police Chief Edwin E. Wood said. "We need to do an aggressive, complete investigation. That's owed to the victim and her family." He said his investigators had interviewed the dog's previous owner and confirmed that the dog had attacked her. He declined to identify her.

Wood said he intended to have the dog destroyed. The dog's legal owner deSwart's daughter can appeal the decision, he said, but she has agreed that the Doberman should be euthanized. Wood could not say who might face criminal charges in the case or provide a timetable for completing the investigation. "That would be fact-specific. It could be individuals," he said.

"It depends on involvement, acts." Robert D. Bernardi, the Burlington County prosecutor, said that "at a minimum there's a breach of contract" by the shelter for not euthanizing the dog although, he said, that is a matter for the civil courts. "There may be an issue of theft MICHAEL PLUNKETT Inquirer Suburban Staff Luger, who killed Valerie deSwart in Medford, was adopted after a Newark, N.J., shelter failed to destroy the dog for biting its earlier owner. The shelter's lawyer said it had simply made a mistake. DEP withdraws support of cleanup plan Contact staff writer Troy Graham at 856-779-3893 or tgrahamphillynews.com.

said Campbell's position would have to be reconciled with what the DEP had said in court. The cleanup plan has long worried community activists and elected county officials, who contend that trace amounts of radium and uranium in the water could pose a health risk. Buoyed by the DEP's letter, about 60 people representing both groups spoke out yesterday at the hearing. Sharon Finlayson of the New Jersey Environmental Federation said of the DEP's letter: "It helped solidify the base of our opposition. It stops the permit in its tracks and puts us all on the same page." Contact staff writer Kaitlin Gurney at 856-779-3910 or kgumeyphillynews.com.

Like other foes, it now objects to flushing a site's tainted water through Camden County sewers. By Kaitlin Gurney INQUIRER STAFF WRITER In an about-face on a politically charged issue, New Jersey's Department of Environmental Protection yesterday announced its objections to a plan to flush water tainted with low levels of radioactivity from a Gloucester Township Superfund site through Camden County sewer lines. The announcement came with the cleanup plan for the GEMS Landfill, a 20-year-old Superfund site, nearly complete. The Camden County Municipal Utilities Authority held a six-hour public hearing in Camden yesterday on a discharge permit authorized in July, and the first release of 200,000 gallons of water a day for as many as 30 years to the county treatment plant in Camden was set for later this year. The landfill was a 60-acre private dump operated by Gloucester Environmental Management Services.

The GEMS Trust, a group of about 300 firms that dumped pollutants there from the 1950s to the 1980s, agreed in 1996 to pay $30 million for the cleanup. The public comment period on the plan was to expire soon, but a letter from DEP Commissioner Bradley Campbell introduced at the hearing announced his plans to appeal the municipal authority's discharge permit. Campbell stated that he would ask Attorney General Peter Harvey to reverse the state's position in years of cleanup hearings before U.S. District Judge Jerome B. Simandle.

After attorneys for the DEP and the federal Environmental Protection Agency assured Simandle in May that the site's groundwater was safe enough to drink, he ruled it could be flushed through county sewers. The DEP based its new objection on the GEMS Trust's failure to file groundwater monitoring data for the last six months. That lapse sheds light on "the ability and willingness of the GEMS Trust to comply with any permit the utilities authority might issue." Campbell also cited the "environmental and public health concerns expressed by citizens of the city of Camden and neighboring communities." Utilities authority officials Contact staff writer Jennifer Moroz at 856-779-3810 or jmorozphillynews.com. Contact staff writer Emilie Lounsberry at 856-779-3863 or elounsberryphillynews.com..