Thomas Di Nunzio, the commander who oversees the High Tech Crimes Unit of the Camden County Prosecutor’s Office, is watching you! Sgt. Di Nunzio is one of several officers identified as concealing knowledge of “tampering with” and the “destruction of” digital evidence incriminating a number of public and private persons in Camden County, New Jersey.
In 2013, Detective Christopher Auletto and Sgt. Thomas Di Nunzio of the Camden County Prosecutor’s Office, embarked on a sting operation (a.k.a., retaliatory prosecution) requiring the assistance of: four judges from Camden County (Nicolas F. Trabosh, Nan S. Famular, Lee A. Solomon, Irvin J. Snyder), Camden County Prosecutor (Warren Faulk), Assistant Prosecutors (Mark Chase, Laurie A. Corson, Tracy A. Cogan), high ranking officers from Voorhees Police Depart. (Chief Louis Bordi, Lieutenant April Herrington), and patrol officers from Evesham Township.
THE STING OF THOMAS DI NUNZIO
The “sting” operation was meant to intimidate and suppress the speech of Whistleblower Bruce Aristeo from exposing incriminating evidence implicating Camden County public and private figures in a fraud.
Part of the intimidation plan was to incarcerate Bruce Aristeo until he pled out to a “gag order,” which afforded him an immediate release from jail. Regardless of Camden County jail conditions Bruce Aristeo declined to bargain.
Bruce Aristeo realized people were being terribly wronged by officers from within the Camden County Prosecutor’s Office, and therefore he refused their offer.
When Camden County Prosecutors and Judge Solomon’s intimidation plan failed, a second Assistant Prosecutor, David E. Deitz, of the Special Investigations Unit, was assigned to help Assistant Prosecutor Tracy A. Cogan further pressure Aristeo; that attempt failed as well.
DID DI NUNZIO ACT ALONE?
After several discovery hearings, David Deitz inadvertently provided the defense with documents incriminating investigating officers. Unbeknownst to Detective Christopher Auletto and Sgt. Thomas Di Nunzio, the documents demonstrated Chris Auletto could very well have engaged in a crime. It wasn’t clear from the documents that Auletto acted alone or in cahoots with Thomas Di Nunzio of the High Tech Crimes Unit, or Voorhees officers.
In one hearing, Whistleblower Bruce Aristeo presented evidence demonstrating digital files missing from discovery proved the prosecution was retaliatory in nature. Although Tracy Cogan attempted to divert attentions from the High Tech Crimes Unit, and how they destroyed certain seized computer and storage devices, the issues were made part of the Court’s public record.
RHETORICALLY FOOLING THE PUBLIC
There are two ways to perceive this: 1) either the High Tech Crime Unit officers’ were in on it and employed to protect their own, or 2) the High Tech Crime Unit officers are incompetent and untrained.
Articles and news broadcasts have not reported the extent of misconducts by this Unit. Sadly they are suppressed from the public, only to be praised on the Camden County Prosecutor’s Office High Tech Crimes Unit own webpage; it states:
The investigators perform comprehensive forensic examinations of electronic devices and preserve and analyze digital data seized from computer systems and mobile devices that will be needed for criminal prosecutions of defendants.
Unsurprisingly, the praise is false too. It misrepresents what the Unit is authorized to do. When digital evidence is seized, a comprehensive search requires search warrant signed by a judge before executing a search. The device (computer, thumb drive, cell phone, etc.) storing the evidence is then sealed and a detective personally transports the device(s) 38 miles north of Camden to the Regional Computer Forensics Laboratory (”RCFL”).
Only the RCFL can preserve and analyze digital evidence, there offers are trained by the FBI. This process secures the data from “tampering with” or the “destruction of” evidence from within the agency that seized the devices. This is exemplified in the case against Bruce Aristeo where:
The High Tech Crimes Unit seized and accessed his computer and storage devices prior to getting a search warrant. (see docs).
The Fourteenth Amendment commands the signing judge affirm with “particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
In layman’s terms, the particular items (files) seized must be known to be directly related to the case.
Question: How could a judge list a particular file on a computer drive, that may or may not be related to a case, unless the examiner accessed the files prior to the search warrant and informed the judge of what to list?
HIRING INTERIOR DECORATORS TO DECIPHER
With all this fumbling around with digital files, one must question at this point, “Are criminal cases, reliant upon digital evidence, being examined and deciphered by untrained officers?”
Answering that question is an online article posted on NJ PEN by Matt Skoufalos, titled Hard Drives and Harder Work for Camden County’s Child Porn Investigators, Matt Skoufalos reports:
The High Tech Crimes unit … assists with major crimes investigations, … domestic violence cases, … surveillance videos, and cell phone extractions.
And… Detective Kate Scully, a trained interior designer stated, “I pretty much got trained in the office …”
According to this article, officers of the Camden County Prosecutor’s Office High Tech Crimes Unit may have been trained in-house, but the officers of the RCFL are trained and supported by the FBI.
If that is so, then can we assume Sgt. Thomas Di Nunzio, the man who engaged in fraud, is training new officers?
WANT TO BE REALLY SCARED?
Repeatedly, history has shown that law enforcement and justice officers are “willing and do” cover-up corruption and misconduct at every stage, so what should we think about: The Regional Computer Forensics Laboratory, the lab that secures data for criminal investigations for prosecution, is staffed and operated by fellow officers from other prosecutor offices:
- The New Jersey Attorney General’s Office
- New Jersey State Police
- New Jersey Division of Criminal Justice
- Essex County Prosecutor’s Office
- Somerset County Prosecutor’s Office
- Monmouth County Prosecutor’s Office
- Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office
- Middlesex County Prosecutor’s Office
Post your comments and concerns below.