A 2022 case involving a Paterson police officer and a fleeing suspect during an investigation was dismissed about a month ago. Details of the case were concealed from the 2023 grand jury who moved to indict the officer in question. The evidence suppression caused for the case’s dismissal without prejudice after a request from the attorney general’s office.
It was alleged that officer Jerry Moravek shot an unarmed fleeing man, Khalif Cooper. Moravek, who was with the Paterson Police Department at the time, stated that Cooper was armed, and during the pursuit, ordered Cooper to “drop the gun.” A several block chase ended with Moravek firing two non-fatal shots, with one striking Cooper. Due to injuries caused by the bullet wound, Cooper’s spinal cord was severed, leaving him subsequently paralyzed from the waist down.
Some important information about the officer involved shooting and what coincided with the aftermath was included in a judge’s opinion in Civil Action No. 23-03566. Civil Action No. 23-03566 was filed as Khalif Cooper v. City of Paterson et.al., with Cooper seeking $50,000,000 in damages.
Some of the factual background from Judge Jamel K. Semper’s District Court Opinion:
On February 6, 2023, the State brought criminal charges against Moravek alleging “second-degree aggravated assault” causing serious bodily injury in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1B(1) and “second degree official misconduct” in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:30-2A. Following an investigation of the incident by the New Jersey Attorney General Public Integrity and Accountability office, on or around March 27, 2023, the New Jersey Attorney General assumed control over the Paterson Police Department.[emphasis added]
Attorney General Matthew Platkin was a member of Governor Phil Murphy’s cabinet during the pre-pandemic years, into the pandemic. From 2018 towards the end of 2020, Platkin was Murphy’s Chief Counsel. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Platkin was responsible for many of the executive orders and draconian policies Murphy implemented.
“Platkin played a critical role in guiding New Jersey through the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, overseeing the drafting of pandemic-related executive orders and workforce policy reforms for state government employees to maintain government services,” is noted in Platkin’s bio at the National Association of Attorneys General. “He also contributed to the State’s successful defense of pandemic-related actions in dozens of litigations in state and federal court.”
Some of those COVID-19 policies Platkin enacted were illustrated in a September 2020 piece I put out at AmmoLand News:
From documents obtained through an AmmoLand News’ OPRA request, W160618 Moms Demand Action Phil Murphy 6-25-2020 (embedded below), we get to see another side of the story, perhaps the hidden motivation and or source of inspiration to close down gun stores in New Jersey.
The email is dated Thursday, March 19, 2020, at 10:14 am. Reacting to a NICS screengrab apparently leaked from the West Long Branch NJ Police department. The writer of the email was Theresa Turner, the New Jersey State Chapter Co-Lead from Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America ([email protected]) and the recipient Matthew Platkin ([email protected]), the Chief Counsel to Governor Murphy and the acknowledged “architect of candidate Murphy’s gun ‘safety’ platform.”
The email reads in part:
“I’m writing because as you probably know, there has been a surge in gun sales and ammunition in New Jersey…I’m just wondering if anyone in your office or the AG’s office is concerned about this. Aside from the obvious problems of more guns in our state and the backlog at NICS, it seems that the stores are nonessential and yet are staying open with lines of people inside and out, which could potentially spread the virus.”
Two days later Governor Phil Murphy had all the gun stores in New Jersey closed. The anti-Civil Liberties organizations of Moms Demand Action, Everytown, and Murphy’s administration were not happy about this new surge in people exercising their Constitutional right to self-protection.
If you like our articles… please subscribe to our 2nd Amendment update list. We generally send one email per week containing 2A news you might’ve missed.
After his two-year run with the Murphy administration it was said that, “Platkin left the post briefly for three weeks in early 2021 [to] join U.S. Senator Cory Booker’s staff on a short-term basis during the Senate trial of President Donald Trump.” By February 2022, Murphy announced Platkin’s appointment to his current post as Attorney General.
Platkin was the Attorney General at the time of the officer involved shooting. By February of 2023, Platkin communicated his intent to file charges against Moravek. And subsequent to that, Platkin’s office seized control of the Paterson Police Department.
The March 27, 2023 announcement stated, “Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin today announced that his Office is superseding the Paterson Police Department, and assuming control of all police functions, including internal affairs investigations, effective immediately.”
Platkin was in charge of both the Paterson Police Department and the Office of Attorney General, and by extension the Office of Public Integrity and Accountability, during the time the grand jury was convened. By December of 2023, the Grand Jury voted to indict Moravek.
On March 27, 2024, the civil case Khalif Cooper v. City of Paterson et.al., was dismissed in part. The court found in the civil complaint against Paterson, et.al., that the “Plaintiff fails to allege any facts attributing to the supposed negligent conduct, and as such, merely offers ‘labels and conclusions’ counter to what is required.”
So what happened since?
In July, a judge dismissed Platkin’s criminal case against Moravek after Platkin requested the case be withdrawn, without prejudice. The July 22, 2024 letter and filing said in part:
While the failure to present the materials to the grand jury on December 6, 2023 would not require the dismissal without prejudice is just to ensure that any grand jury that returns an indictment against the defendant is aware of the additional information. In fairness to the defendant, this Motion now ensues.
Was Platkin’s letter a move to head them off at the pass, so to say? He admitted that there was evidence “inadvertently never been transferred from PCPO to OPIA.” Platkin clearly saw the writing on the wall in his multiple failures in this case.
“Superior Court Judge Marilyn Clark on Monday called cellphone photos of a police shooting victim holding a gun “significant new evidence” as she formally dismissed the misconduct indictment against Paterson Officer Jerry Moravek,” a NorthJersey.com article said. “Clark noted that the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office’s grand jury presentation against Moravek repeatedly asserted that Khalif Cooper was unarmed when he was shot by the Paterson officer. The judge said authorities had “a legal responsibility” to turn over the photos showing Cooper with a weapon to the cop’s defense attorneys.”
This move on behalf of all the parties involved was suspect. Platkin’s fingerprints were all over every facet of this case. To what benefit was there for the evidence to be suppressed?
To indict again would be beyond wanton. If the Attorney General’s own use of force guidance is followed, how could he push for another grand jury? Platkin’s 2022 document on the topic seems to exonerate Moravek – especially in light of the evidence surfacing that Platkin et.al. did not provide to the grand jury. The guidelines read in part:
Requirements to use deadly force. Strict requirements must be met before an officer may use deadly force. There are, however, occasions when deadly force is necessary to protect officers and the public. An officer may use deadly force only when the officer reasonably believes that such action is immediately necessary to protect the officer or another person from Imminent danger[emphasis added] of death or serious bodily injury. Officers must adhere to the following:
- as discussed in Core Principle Three, when feasible, officers shall attempt [emphasis added] to deescalate situations, issue verbal warnings, or use non-lethal force with the goal of resolving encounters without using deadly force;
- officers shall not use deadly force if a reasonably available alternative will avert or eliminate an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury and achieve the law enforcement purpose safely;
- when feasible[emphasis added], prior to using deadly force the officer shall identify themselves as a law enforcement officer and give a clear verbal warning to the suspect that the officer will use deadly force; and
- officers shall not use deadly force when the use of deadly force creates a substantial risk of injury to innocent persons.
Looking at the same document, the definition of “Imminent danger” is as follows:
Imminent Danger. Threatened actions or outcomes that are immediately likely to occur during an encounter absent action by the officer. The period of time involved is dependent on the circumstances and facts evident in each situation and is not the same in all situations. The threatened harm does not have to be instantaneous, for example, imminent danger may be present even if a subject is not at that instant pointing a weapon at the officer, but is carrying a weapon and running[emphasis added] for cover to gain a tactical advantage.
Platkin’s letter to the court when seeking to have the case dismissed for the time being, he did express something that’s worth exploring and appears contrary to his own 2022 use of force guidelines.
K.C.’s mere possession of a gun (even at the time the defendant shot, which no party asserts), running away from an area where gunshots were heard, would not make it lawful for the defendant to have shot him in the back while K.C. was running away and not pointing the weapon at anyone.
The very office that Platkin has under his leadership, the Office of Public Integrity and Accountability, went under fire from this event and others. Sen. Joe Cryan, in July, rang the alarm that something’s not right.
“We have an Attorney General searching for headlines instead of facts,” said Cryan (D-Union). “It’s about the work. I think that New Jersey deserves better than this embarrassment.”
“I think our citizens deserve better than the actions of this office,” Cryan said. “When you allow the rights to be destroyed for some, you allow it to be destroyed for all.”
The case is not exactly crystal clear, but to be honest, Platkin would be daft to try and run another grand jury. Platkin has until November 1st to inform Moravek if another case is being launched against him.
What’s not evident is if this was a scenario of malice or incompetence. There’s been plenty of both from Governor Murphy’s administration and Platkin’s office. We’ll just have to wait until the day after Halloween if Platkin is going to give a trick or a treat.
