Kenneth Vercammen, Esq is Chair of the ABA Estate Planning & Probate Committee and presents seminars to attorneys and the public on Wills, Probate and other legal topics related to Estate Planning and Elder law.
To schedule a confidential consultation, call

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.

2053 Woodbridge Avenue - Edison, NJ 08817

(732) 572-0500 www.njlaws.com

Monday, December 25, 2017

New 2017 Expungement Law

New 2017 Expungement Law
By Kenneth Vercammen 
     The Senate Judiciary Committee reports favorably and with committee amendments Senate Law No. 3307.
     This law, as amended, would revise procedures for expunging criminal and other records and information, including the shortening of certain waiting periods before a person may seek an expungement and increasing the number of convictions, which may be expunged.
     Concerning the expungement of one or more criminal convictions, the law sets forth the following categories of eligible persons:
      - a person who has been convicted of one crime, and does not otherwise have any prior or subsequent conviction for another crime;
      - a person who has been convicted of one crime and less than four disorderly persons or petty disorderly persons offenses, and does not otherwise have any prior or subsequent conviction for another crime or for another disorderly persons or petty disorderly persons offense such that the total number of convictions for offenses exceeds three;
      - a person who has been convicted of multiple crimes, or a combination of multiple crimes and disorderly persons or petty disorderly persons offenses, all of which are listed in a single judgment of conviction, and the person does not otherwise have any prior or subsequent conviction for another crime or offense in addition to those convictions included in the person’s expungement application; or
     - a person who has been convicted of multiple crimes or a combination of multiple crimes and disorderly persons or petty disorderly persons offenses, which crimes or combination of crimes and offenses were interdependent or closely related in circumstances and were committed as part of a sequence of events that took place within a comparatively short period of time (a so-called “crime spree”), regardless of the date of conviction or sentencing for each individual crime or offense, and the person does not otherwise have any prior or subsequent conviction for another crime or offense in addition to those convictions included in the person’s expungement application.
     If a person with one or more criminal convictions is eligible as described above for expungement relief, the expungement application may generally proceed so long as one of the following time period requirements is met:
      - six years have passed with respect to all aspects of satisfying the most recent conviction (six years from the date of conviction, payment of fine, satisfactory completion of probation or parole, and release from incarceration);
      - the payment of a fine, which is currently subject to collection under the State’s comprehensive enforcement program established pursuant to P.L.1995, c.9 (C.2B:19-1 et seq.), is not yet satisfied due to reasons other than willful misconduct, but the six-year time requirement is otherwise met.   
      - the fine is satisfied, but six years have not passed since doing so, and the six-year time requirement is otherwise met; or
     - at least five but less than six years have passed with respect to all aspects of satisfying the conviction (this expedited expungement would also require, as it does under current law, the person to show that it is in the public interest to permit such expungement).
     As expressed in the law, the term “fine,” in reference to measuring any applicable time period requirement for determining the satisfaction thereof, means and includes any fine, restitution, and other court-ordered financial assessment imposed by the court as part of the sentence for the conviction, for which payment of restitution takes precedence in accordance with applicable law.  
     Whenever the court granted expungement relief to a person with an outstanding fine, the court would, utilizing the comprehensive enforcement program, provide for the continued collection of any amount owed that is necessary to satisfy the fine or for the entry of civil judgment for the outstanding amount.  Once the person’s records and information was expunged, information regarding the nature of such financial assessments or their derivation from expunged criminal convictions would not be disclosed to the public.  Any record of a civil judgment would be entered in the name of the State Treasurer, and administered by the State Treasurer in cooperation with the comprehensive enforcement program without disclosure of any information related to the underlying criminal nature of the assessments.
     The court, after providing appropriate due process, could nullify an expungement granted to a person with an outstanding fine if the person willfully fails to comply with an established payment plan or otherwise cooperate with the comprehensive enforcement program to facilitate the collection of any amounts that remain due.  In the event of nullification, the court could restore the previous expungement granted after the person complies with the payment plan or otherwise cooperates with the comprehensive enforcement program to facilitate the collection of any outstanding amounts owed.
     With respect to criminal convictions for the sale, distribution, or possession with intent to sell marijuana or hashish, the law amends the expungement law to establish general expungement eligibility for a low-level offender consistent with how such an offender’s crime is graded under the State’s Criminal Code.  This consistency would also apply to a young low-level offender (21 years of age or less at the time of the offense) who is granted special eligibility to make an expungement application after one year from the date of the conviction, termination of probation or parole, or discharge from custody, whichever date is later in time.  Eligibility would be extended to all such convicted offenders when the crime is graded as a crime of the fourth degree, based on the amount of the drug being:
     - less than one ounce of marijuana (the current law provides eligibility for a smaller amount, 25 grams (0.89 ounce) or less); or
     - less than five grams (less than 0.17 ounce) of hashish (the current law provides eligibility for a slightly higher amount of five grams (0.17 ounce) or less).
     The new amounts set forth in the law are derived from the amounts used to grade the crime as a crime of the fourth degree under the State’s Criminal Code.  See N.J.S.2C:35-5, subsection b., paragraph (12).  As such, this would create a legal consistency between expungement law eligibility and grading under the Criminal Code, such that any fourth degree crime involving the sale, distribution, or possession with intent to sell marijuana or hashish would be generally eligible for expungement, and in the case of a young offender, the special eligibility for expungement after a one-year time period would consistently apply.  This is not currently the case, because the amounts set forth in the expungement law are different than the amounts used to grade the crime.
     Concerning a person with one or more convictions for disorderly persons or petty disorderly persons offenses (but no criminal convictions), the law sets forth eligibility as follows:       
      - a person who has been convicted on the same or separate occasions of no more than four disorderly persons offenses, no more than four petty disorderly persons offenses, or a combination of no more than four disorderly persons and petty disorderly persons offenses, and the person does not otherwise have any prior or subsequent conviction for a disorderly persons or petty disorderly persons offense such that the total number of convictions for such offenses exceeds four;
      - a person who has been convicted of multiple disorderly persons offenses or multiple petty disorderly persons offenses, or a combination of multiple disorderly persons and petty disorderly persons offenses, which convictions were entered the same day, and the person does not otherwise have any prior or subsequent conviction for another offense in addition to those convictions included in the person’s expungement application; or
      - a person who has been convicted of multiple disorderly persons offenses or multiple petty disorderly persons offenses, or a combination of multiple disorderly persons and petty disorderly persons offenses, all of which were part of a “crime spree” (described in the same manner as above with respect to a spree which resulted in multiple criminal convictions).
      If a person with one or more convictions for disorderly persons or petty disorderly persons offenses is eligible as described above for expungement relief, the expungement application may proceed so long as one of the following time period requirements is met:
      - five years have passed with respect to all aspects of satisfying the conviction;
      - the fine is satisfied, but five years have not passed since doing so, and the five-year time requirement is otherwise met; or
      - at least three but less than five years have passed with respect to all aspects of satisfying the conviction (this expedited expungement would also require, as it does under current law, the person to show that it is in the public interest to permit such expungement, similar to the expedited “public interest” expungement process for criminal convictions).
     As is the case with an expungement involving one or more criminal convictions, the amendments provide that the term “fine,” in reference to measuring any applicable time period requirement for determining the satisfaction thereof, means and includes any fine, restitution, and other court-ordered financial assessment imposed by the court as part of the sentence for the conviction, for which payment of restitution takes precedence in accordance with applicable law.
     The law provides a one-time limit on a person receiving an expungement involving any criminal conviction (continuing the current law’s one-time limit), as well as a one-time limit for receiving an expungement of multiple convictions pertaining to multiple disorderly persons or petty disorderly persons offenses, which convictions were entered the same day or which convictions constituted a “crime spree.”  
     Finally, the law would remove a bar on expungement eligibility for any person with one or more convictions for crimes, disorderly persons offenses, or petty disorderly persons offenses, who, prior or subsequent to the conviction or convictions for which expungement is sought had criminal charges dismissed following the completion of a supervisory treatment or other diversion program.  The dismissal of criminal charges in such manner would no longer be an automatic bar to the person seeking and obtaining the relief of expungement.  However, even if the person is successful in expunging any convictions, the expunged records would remain available for subsequent review for purposes of determining whether to grant or deny the person another entry into a supervisory treatment or diversion program for new charges.  See N.J.S.2C:52-20 and 2C:52-27, subsection b.

      The committee amendments to the law:
      - update the categories of persons with one or more criminal convictions who would be eligible for expungement relief, as described above;
      - update the categories of persons with one or more convictions for disorderly persons offenses or petty disorderly persons offenses (and no criminal convictions) that would be eligible for expungement relief, as described above;
      - update the time period requirements that need to be met in order for a person to proceed with an application to expunge one or more convictions for a crime of offense, as described above;
      - provide that the term “fine,” in reference to measuring any applicable time period requirements for determining the satisfaction thereof for proceeding with an expungement application, means and includes any fine, restitution, and other court-ordered financial assessment imposed by the court as part of the sentence for the conviction, for which payment of restitution takes precedence in accordance with applicable law;
      - add provisions which would permit the court to nullify an expungement granted to a person with an outstanding fine if the person willfully fails to comply with an established payment plan or otherwise cooperate with the comprehensive enforcement program to facilitate the amounts that remain due, and only restore the expungement once the person complies with the payment plan or otherwise cooperates with the comprehensive enforcement program; 
     - revise the provisions in the underlying law to maintain the one-time limit on a person receiving an expungement for multiple convictions pertaining to multiple disorderly persons or petty disorderly persons offenses, which convictions were entered the same day or which convictions constituted a “crime spree” – the revision is an update to the descriptions of the various categories of persons who are eligible for expungement relief, making these descriptions consistent throughout the law;
     - remove a provision which would have permitted the sharing of expunged records with the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) concerning any on-going obligations to pay restitution - this provision is unnecessary, as the AOC is not directly involved in the collection or enforcement of any such obligations; and
      - provide for a delayed effective date, updated to be the first day of the tenth month next following enactment (instead of the third month), in order to provide additional time for the AOC to take necessary administrative action in advance of the law becoming law so that it can more effectively implement the reforms presented in the law.

         The Governor’s office said:
Three new expungement reform bills developed by Governor Christie and Senator Sandra Cunningham (D-Hudson) as part of their continuing bipartisan endeavor would prohibit employment discrimination based upon an expunged criminal record; accelerate expungements and increase the number of convictions that can be expunged; and reduce the waiting period to expunge an entire juvenile record.
“I commend Senator Cunningham for working with me on this legislation that will return many more recovering addicts to their families, as productive members of society and help break the costly cycle of recidivism,” Governor Christie said. “It prevents a childhood or adolescent mistake from ruining someone’s future, while still ensuring there are appropriate consequences for unlawful behavior and lessons are learned. These reforms represent a second chance at life for our family members, friends, neighbors and coworkers, and they provide the same opportunities we would desperately want for ourselves.”
“A minor criminal offense should not lead to a lifetime of punishment. These bills are about removing barriers for residents and helping them to overcome the obstacles that exist to finding employment, taking care of their families and setting their lives on the right path,” said Senator Cunningham. “I want to thank the Governor for being a partner in this important work. These bills are a great step to providing offenders with the second chance they deserve.”
Senate bill 3306 would strengthen New Jersey’s Opportunity to Compete Act, also known as “Ban the Box,” sponsored by Senator Cunningham and signed into law by Governor Christie in August 2014. S-3306 would prevent those with current and expunged criminal records from being discriminated against at the early stages of employment pursuits.

Senate bill 3307 would reform procedures for expunging criminal records by:

·       Allowing a petitioner to expunge up to four, instead of three, offenses or multiple offenses that occurred within a short timeframe, if the petitioner has not been convicted of any prior or subsequent offense;
·       Reducing the expungement eligibility waiting period from 10 years to six years, following the latest of any conviction, payment of fine and completion of probation, parole or prison sentence;
·       Further reducing the expungement eligibility waiting period if satisfaction of a fine or restitution is the petitioner’s only remaining barrier and the court finds that the expungement is in the public’s interest; and
·       Aligning expungement and sentencing statutes, allowing expungement for possession of marijuana with the intent to sell up to one ounce, which is the threshold for a fourth-degree crime.

Senate bill 3308 would decrease from five to three years the waiting period to expunge an entire juvenile record, maintaining all other requirements and provisions.

“These necessary, life-saving reforms for people who deserve a second chance should be immediately passed by the New Jersey legislature and replicated across the country, as I have heard loud and clear from the victims of this disease and their families, grassroots leaders, medical professionals, law enforcement officers and those in the criminal justice system, during my travels around this great state and nation,” Governor Christie said.

Sunday, October 29, 2017

Codicil to a Will

Codicil to a Will


Codicil to a Will
A written revision to a Will is called a Codicil. An individual can have a Codicil to his or her Will as long as the 
Codicil meets certain requirements. The codicil must be signed 
and witnessed just as the original Will was signed and witnessed. The
 Codicil should refer to original Will by date and should be
 attached to the original Will. It is not recommended that an individual
 attempt to draft a codicil. A Codicil should only be drafted 
by an attorney to insure that it will have its intended effect. 

Decades ago when Wills and documents were drafted on typewriters. Now with modern computers, it is usually better just to prepare a new Will drawn up and executed.

Saturday, September 30, 2017

Woodbridge Library Wills, Estate Planning & Probate Seminar November 20

Woodbridge Library
Wills, Estate Planning & Probate Seminar
November 20 at 7pm
  Woodbridge Public Library
1 George Frederick Plaza
Woodbridge NJ 07095 
       WILLS & ESTATE ADMINISTRATION-PROTECT YOUR FAMILY AND MAKE PLANNING EASY
     SPEAKER: Kenneth Vercammen, Esq. Edison, NJ (Author- Wills and Estate Administration by the ABA)
     Main Topics:
 1. 2017 changes to NJ Estate Tax & changes to taxes on pensions
2. Updates in Federal Estate and Gift Tax 
3. The New Probate Law and preparation of Wills   
4. Why a new Power of Attorney is important 
5.  Living Wills             
6.  Administering the Estate/ Probate/Surrogate   
COMPLIMENTARY MATERIAL: Brochures on Wills, "Answers to Questions about Probate" and Administration of an Estate, Power of
Attorney, Living Wills, Real Estate Sales for Seniors, and Trusts.
     Woodbridge Public Library 732-634-4450
1 George Frederick Plaza
Woodbridge NJ 07095 

    Free Will Seminars and Speakers Bureau for Groups
       
        10 years ago the AARP Network Attorneys of the Edison/Metuchen/Woodbridge area several years ago established a community Speakers Bureau to provide educational programs to AARP and senior clubs, Unions and Middlesex County companies. Now, Ken Vercammen, Esq. and volunteer attorneys of the Middlesex County Estate Planning Council have provided Legal Rights Seminars to hundreds of seniors, business owners and their employees, unions, clubs and non-profit groups. For additional information on the Legal Seminars, contact our Coordinator, Kenneth Vercammen's law office at (732) 572-0500, email VercammenLaw@njlaws.com 
Details on free programs available

These quality daytime educational programs will educate and even entertain. Clubs and companies are invited to schedule a free seminar. The following Seminars are now available:
1. WILLS & ESTATE ADMINISTRATION-PROTECT YOUR FAMILY AND
MAKE PLANNING EASY
2. POWER OF ATTORNEY to permit family to pay your bills if you are temporarily disabled and permit doctors to talk with family
       All instructors are licensed attorneys who have been in practice at least 25 years. All instructors are members of the American Bar Association, New Jersey
State Bar Association, and Middlesex County Bar Association. All programs include free written materials.

       You don't have to be wealthy or near death to do some thinking about a Will. Here is your opportunity to listen to an experienced attorney who will discuss how to distribute your property as you wish and avoid many rigid provisions of state law.

      Topics discussed include: Who needs a Will?; What if you die without a Will (intestacy)?; Mechanics of a Will; "Living Will"; Powers of Attorney; Selecting an executor, trustee, and guardian; Proper Will execution; Inheritance Taxes, Estate Taxes  14,000 annual gift tax exclusion,  Bequests to charity, Why you need a "Self-Proving" Will and  Estate Administration/ Probate.

       Sample materials: Hand-outs on Wills, Living Wills/Medical Advance Directive, Power of Attorney, Probate and Administration of an Estate, Real Estate, Working with your Attorney, Consumers Guide to New Jersey Laws, and Senior Citizen Rights.

SPEAKERS BUREAU

        At the request of senior citizen groups, unions, and Middlesex County companies and organizations, the " Speakers Bureau " is a service designed to educate citizens about how laws affect their lives and how the judicial system operates. We have attorneys available to speak to businesspersons, educational, civic and social organizations on a wide range of topics during business hours.

In today's complex world, few people can function successfully and safely without competent legal advice. In order to insure your estate plans are legally set up, you need to know exactly where you stand so that you can avoid possibly catastrophic mistakes impacting both you and your family.

About the speaker: Kenneth A. Vercammen is a trial attorney in Edison, NJ. We is the author of the American Bar Association’s book “Wills and Estate Administration”
He is co-chair of the ABA Probate & Estate Planning Law Committee of the American Bar Association Solo Small Firm Division.  He is a speaker for the NJ State Bar Association at the annual Nuts & Bolts of Elder Law & Estate Administration program.
He was Editor of the ABA Estate Planning Probate Committee Newsletter. Mr. Vercammen has published over 150 legal articles in national and New Jersey publications on litigation, elder law, probate and trial topics. He is a highly regarded lecturer on litigation and probate law for the American Bar Association, NJ ICLE, New Jersey State Bar Association and Middlesex County Bar Association. His articles have been published in noted publications included New Jersey Law Journal, ABA Law Practice Management Magazine, and New Jersey Lawyer. He established the NJlaws website www.njlaws.com which includes many articles on Estate Planning, Probate and Wills. He is a member of the AARP and often lectures to groups on the importance of an up to date Will, Power of Attorney and Living Will.
 KENNETH  VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC
ATTORNEY AT LAW
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
(Phone) 732-572-0500
 (Fax)    732-572-0030
www.njlaws.com


Friday, September 15, 2017

NJ BIAS INCIDENT SUMMARY 2009


page1image1544
BIAS INCIDENT SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION
Crimes motivated by hate and bias tend to erode the basic fabric of society. Bias incidents having a racial, religious, ethnic, sexual or gender component as well as crimes against individuals with a handicap, manifest themselves in a wide spectrum of criminal activities. These bias incidents jeopardize the active and open pursuit of freedom and opportunity. They attack our citizens based on their race, religion, ethnic heritage, sexual orientation, handicap, or gender. Closely linked to such heritage are individual values, beliefs, and identities.
Realizing that no agency within the state was collecting complete data on bias incidents, a broad-based Ad Hoc committee was created to develop a comprehensive statewide reporting system. As a result of the committee’s recommendation, Attorney General Executive Directive No. 1987-3 was issued mandating all New Jersey law enforcement agencies begin reporting bias incident offenses to the Division of State Police, Uniform Crime Reporting Unit on a monthly basis effective January 1, 1988. On August 15, 1996, legislation was enacted which enhanced the state’s definition of a bias incident to include crimes that are gender or handicap-motivated.
The directive was instituted to capture vital data in an effort to identify the problem. This information permits proper evaluation of progress in preventing bias crime and assist with necessary planning for the future.
This twenty-second annual publication concerning bias crimes contains comparisons to the previous year’s statistics. The published statistics and graphs are the result of data submitted by the police community of New Jersey.
Hopefully, the information contained in this publication will be of value to various segments of society and serve its intended purpose.
source http://www.state.nj.us/njsp/info/ucr2009/pdf/2009_sect_12.pdf
— Bias Incident Summary — 211
BIAS INCIDENT STATISTICAL SUMMARY
Highlights of the 2009 bias incident offense statistics are listed below:
  • New Jersey law enforcement agencies reported 632 bias incident investigations, resulting in 683 target-type based bias
    incident offenses in 2009, a 22% decrease compared to 2008.
  • Harassment accounted for 41% (280) of all bias incident offenses.
  • Criminal mischief and damage to property accounted for 39% (264) of all bias incident offenses.
  • Racial bias accounted for 39% (268) of all bias incident crimes in 2009.
  • The target category of person accounted for 60% (408) of all bias offenses.
  • The Black race represented the most frequent racial group victimized by bias crime, accounting for 34% (233) of all bias offenses.
  • The Jewish religion represented the most frequent religious group victimized by bias crime, accounting for 33% (224) of all bias offenses.
  • The Hispanic ethnicity represented the most frequent ethnic group victimized by bias crime, accounting for 5% (33) of all bias offenses.
  • The most frequent day of occurrence was Tuesday (123 offenses).
  • The most frequent month of occurrence was October (72 offenses).
  • The most frequent place of occurrence was a residence, where 25% (177 offenses) of all bias incidents occurred.
  • Forty-seven percent (320) of all bias incident offenses were cleared, with 40% (129) being cleared by arrest, and 60% (191) being exceptionally cleared.
  • A total of 122 arrests (78 adults and 44 juveniles) were made resulting from bias incidents. Compared to 2008, arrests decreased 28 percent.
212
— Bias Incident Summary —
BIAS INCIDENT OFFENSES 2005 through 2009
BIAS INCIDENT OFFENSES
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Murder
Manslaughter
Rape
Robbery
Aggravated Assault
Burglary
Larceny-Theft
Simple Assault
Fear of Bodily Violence
Arson
Criminal Mischief
Damage to Property; Threat of Violence Weapons Offense
Sex Offense (Except Rape)
Terroristic Threats
Trespass
Disorderly Conduct
Harassment
Desecration of Venerated Objects
All Other Bias Incidents

- - -
3 15 5 1 54 12 3 346 9 1 - 33 1 4 292 - 13
- - -
7 25 4 3 52 17 1 290 16 - 1 28 1 15 339 2 24
1 - - 2 12 5 1 46 11 1 268 23 1 3 26 - 19 353 2 35
- - -
1 19 3 2 47 9 1 358 14 - - 37 - 12 340 3 30
- - -
3 10 2 1 38 21 3 263 1 1 1 22 - 16 280 - 21
TOTAL
792
825
809
876
683
— Bias Incident Summary — 213
BIAS INCIDENT OFFENSES/CLEARANCES/ARRESTS 2008/2009
BIAS INCIDENT OFFENSES
Number of Offenses
Offenses Cleared
Percent Cleared
Number of Arrests
Total Arrests
Adult Arrests
Juvenile Arrests
Murder
Manslaughter
2009
2008
2009
2008 2008
Rape 2009
2008
Robbery 2009
2008
Aggravated Assault 2009
2008
Burglary 2009
2008
Larceny-Theft 2009
2008
Simple Assault 2009
2008
Fear of Bodily Violence 2009
2008
Arson 2009
2008
Criminal Mischief 2009 Damage to Property; Threat of 2008
Violence
2009
2008
Weapons Offense 2009
2008
Sex Offenses (Except Rape) 2009
2008
Terroristic Threats 2009
2008
Trespass 2009
2008
Disorderly Conduct 2009
2008
Harassment 2009
2008
Desecration of Venerated Objects 2009
2008
All Other Bias Incidents 2009
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
3
19
10
3
2
2
1
47
38
9
21
1
3
358
263
14
1
-
1
-
1
37
22
-
-
12
16
340
280
3
-
30
21
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
3
14
7
-
-
-
1
36
33
6
11
-
1
22
12
1
-
-
1
-
-
25
13
-
-
11
15
249
213
-
-
15
10
-
-
-
-
-
-
100
100
74
70
0
0
0
100
77
87
67
52
0
33
6
5
7
0
-
100
-
0
68
59
-
-
92
94
73
76
0
-
50
48
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
6
12
8
0
0
0
1
23
20
2
6
0
1
37
13
0
0
0
1
0
0
18
9
0
0
6
6
65
47
0
0
5
4
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
6
8
6
-
-
-
-
11
15
1
3
-
1
7
2
-
-
-
1
-
-
12
6
-
-
4
5
47
31
-
-
5
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4
2
-
-
-
1
12
5
1
3
-
-
30
11
-
-
-
-
-
-
6
3
-
-
2
1
18
16
-
-
-
2
2008
876
380
43
169
96
73
TOTAL 2009
683
320
47
122
78
44
214 — Bias Incident Summary —
BIAS INCIDENT SUMMARY TARGET/TYPE – 2009
PERSON 408
RACIAL 193
RELIGIOUS 86
ETHNIC 60
SEXUAL 62
OTHER 7
American Indian - Asian 7 Black 166 White 16 Other 4
Catholic 1 Hindu 2 Islamic 8 Jewish 72 Protestant 2 Other 1
Arab 12 Asian Indian 9 Hispanic 30 Asian 2 Nat. Origin 3 Other 4
Bisexual 5 Heterosexual(F) 1 Heterosexual(M) 1 Homosexual(F) 10 Homosexual(M) 40 Homosexual(M&F) 5
Gender 2
Handicap: 4
(1) Physical - (2) Mental 4
Gender ID: 1
PRIVATE PROPERTY 169
RACIAL 46
RELIGIOUS 102
ETHNIC 9
SEXUAL 12
OTHER 0
American Indian - Asian 2 Black 39 White 4 Other 1
Catholic 2 Hindu 5 Islamic 1 Jewish 87 Protestant 1 Other 6
Arab 2 Asian Indian 2 Hispanic 3 Asian 1 Nat. Origin - Other 1
Bisexual - Heterosexual(F) - Heterosexual(M) - Homosexual(F) 3 Homosexual(M) 9 Homosexual(M&F) -
Gender -
Handicap: 0
(1) Physical - (2) Mental -
Gender ID: 0
PUBLIC PROPERTY 106
RACIAL 29
RELIGIOUS 67
ETHNIC 2
SEXUAL 8
OTHER 0
American Indian 1 Asian - Black 28 White - Other -
Catholic - Hindu - Islamic - Jewish 65 Protestant - Other 2
Arab - Asian Indian - Hispanic - Asian 1 Nat. Origin - Other 1
Bisexual 1 Heterosexual(F) - Heterosexual(M) - Homosexual(F) - Homosexual(M) 2 Homosexual(M&F) 5
Gender -
Handicap: 0
(1) Physical - (2) Mental -
Gender ID: 0
— Bias Incident Summary — 215
BIAS INCIDENT OFFENSES BY COUNTY 2008/2009
Man- Aggravated Larceny- Simple Fear of
Murder slaughter Rape Robbery Assault Burglary Theft Assault Bodily Arson
Violence
2008 - - - - - - - 2 - -
Atlantic 2009 - - - - - 1 - 2 - -
2008 - - - - 1 - - 5 - -
Bergen 2009 - - - - - - - 3 - -
2008 - - - - - - - 2 - -
Burlington 2009 - - - - - - - 2 2 -
2008 - - - - 1 - - 1 - -
Camden 2009 - - - - - - - 1 1 -
2008 - - - - - - - - - -
CapeMay 2009 - - - - - - - - - 1
2008 - - - - - - - 1 - -
Cumberland 2009 - - - 1 - - - 1 - -
2008 - - - - 1 - - 3 1 -
Essex 2009 - - - 1 1 - - 1 - -
2008 - - - - - - - 1 1 -
Gloucester 2009 - - - - - - - - 1 -
2008 - - - - 4 - - 6 - 1
Hudson 2009 - - - 1 1 - - - - 1
2008 - - - - - - - - - -
Hunterdon 2009 - - - - - - - - - -
2008 - - - - 1 - - - - -
Mercer 2009 - - - - 3 - - 2 5 -
2008 - - - - 4 - 1 5 1 -
Middlesex 2009 - - - - 2 - - 8 2 -
2008 - - - - 5 - - 13 5 -
Monmouth 2009 - - - - - - 1 12 3 1
2008 - - - - 1 - - 2 - -
Morris 2009 - - - - 1 - - 1 1 -
2008 - - - - 1 2 1 3 - -
Ocean 2009 - - - - 2 1 - 1 2 -
2008 - - - - - 1 - - - -
Passaic 2009 - - - - - - - - 4 -
2008 - - - - - - - - - -
Salem 2009 - - - - - - - 1 - -
2008 - - - 1 - - - 1 1 -
Somerset 2009 - - - - - - - 3 - -
2008 - - - - - - - - - -
Sussex 2009 - - - - - - - - - -
2008 - - - - - - - 2 - -
Union 2009 - - - - - - - - - -
2008 - - - - - - - - - -
Warren 2009 - - - - - - - - - -
page8image30848 page8image31008 page8image31168 page8image31328 page8image31488 page8image31648 page8image31808 page8image31968 page8image32128 page8image32288 page8image32448 page8image32608 page8image32768
2008 0 0 0 1 19 3 2 47 9 1
TOTAL 2009 0 0 0 3 10 2 1 38 21 3
216 — Bias Incident Summary —
Criminal Damage to
Weapons Offenses
Sex Offenses
Terroristic Threats
Disorderly Conduct
Desecration All Other
of Bias TOTAL

Venerated Incidents
Mischief Property Threat of
Trespass
Harassment
BIAS INCIDENT OFFENSES BY COUNTY 2008/2009
page9image6096 page9image6256 page9image6416 page9image6576 page9image6736 page9image6896 page9image7056 page9image7216 page9image7376 page9image7536 page9image7696
8 1 - - 1 - - 11 - - 23
9 - - - - - - 5 - - 17
34 1 - - 3 - 1 17 - - 62
24 - - - 4 - - 20 - - 51
22 - - - 1 - - 19 - 1 45
14 - - 1 3 - - 11 - 2 35
18 2 - - 1 - - 16 - 2 41
9 - - - - - 1 6 - - 18
3-----1--15
3------4--8
1---------2
2--------15
18 4 - - 7 - - 12 - 1 47
4 - - - 3 - 1 2 - 1 14
29 - - - - - 2 16 - 1 50
8 - 1 - - - 2 15 - - 27
7 1 - - 9 - - 11 - 2 41
11 - - - 2 - - 7 - - 23
2------3--5
-------2--2
21 - - - - - - 11 - 1 34
9 - - - - - - 11 - - 30
39 2 - - 4 - - 48 2 4 110
38 - - - 3 - - 42 - 3 98
64 1 - - 4 - 8 108 - 7 215
37 - - - 4 - 12 94 - 9 173
26 - - - 1 - - 13 - 6 49
25 - - - 1 - - 18 - 1 48
29 1 - - 4 - - 29 - 1 71
29 1 - - 1 - - 17 - 3 57
6 - - - 1 - - 4 1 3 16
14 - - - - - - 5 - 1 24
-------1--1
3---------4
9 - - - - - - 11 - - 23
12 - - - - - - 9 - - 24
2------3--5
3------1--4
14 1 - - 1 - - 2 - - 20
7 - - - 1 - - 4 - - 12
6 - - - - - - 5 - - 11
2------7--9
page9image31200
358 14 0 0 37 0 12 340 3 30 876
263 1 1 1 22 0 16 280 0 21 683
— Bias Incident Summary — 217
page10image992 page10image1152 page10image1312 page10image1904
VICTIM
page10image2512 page10image2672 page10image2832
AGE
10 and under 11to17
18 to 20
21 to 25

26 to 30
31to35 36to40 41to45 46to50 51to60
61 and over

SEX
Male Female
RACE
American Indian Asian
Black
White
Other

VICTIM/OFFENDER CHARACTERISTICS 2009
OFFENDER
                                                               2
                                                             128
                                                              32
                                                              26
                                                              15
                                                              18
                                                              13
                                                              24
                                                              17
                                                              21
                                                              18
226 88
4
3 40 264 3
page10image11264 page10image11424 page10image11584 page10image11744 page10image11904 page10image12064
TOTAL AGE
409
314
page10image13608 page10image13768 page10image13928 page10image14088 page10image14248 page10image14408
240 169
page10image15160 page10image15320 page10image15480 page10image15640 page10image15800
TOTAL SEX
409
314
page10image17344 page10image17504 page10image17664 page10image17824 page10image17984 page10image18144
10
24 166 206 3
page10image19440 page10image19600 page10image19760 page10image19920 page10image20080 page10image20240 page10image20400 page10image20560 page10image20720 page10image20880 page10image21304
TOTAL RACE
218
— Bias Incident Summary —
  6
127
 41
 36
 20
 38
 32
 31
 27
 31
 20
page10image24800 page10image24960 page10image25120 page10image25280 page10image25440 page10image25600 page10image25760 page10image25920 page10image26080 page10image26240 page10image26400 page10image26560 page10image26720 page10image26880 page10image27040 page10image27200 page10image27360 page10image27520 page10image27680
409
314
page10image28736 page10image28896 page10image29056 page10image29216
Description of Incident
BIAS INCIDENT SUMMARY 2009
Relationship of Victim to Offender
page11image2824 page11image2984 page11image3144
Swastika 128 Acquaintance 103 Cross Burning - Neighbor 54 Graffiti 114 Employee 5 In Person 304 Stranger 115 Letters 56 Unknown 331 Telephone 33 Other 75 Other 48
Place of Occurrence
page11image8960
Residence 177 Religious Building 20 Government Building 11 School Building 171 Business Establishment 92 Cemetery 1 Motor Vehicle 54 Highway 86 Parking Lot 32 Other 39
page11image14496
TOTAL 683
TOTAL 683
TOTAL 683
page11image17512
TYPE OF BIAS
RACIAL
RELIGIOUS
ETHNIC
SEXUAL
OTHER
American Indian 1 Asian 9 Black 233 White 20 Other 5
Catholic 3 Hindu 7 Islamic 9 Jewish 224 Protestant 3 Other 9
Arab 14 Asian Indian 11 Hispanic 33 Asian 4 Nat. Origin 3 Other 6
Bisexual 6 Heterosexual(F) 1 Heterosexual(M) 1 Homosexual(F) 13 Homosexual(M) 51 Homosexual(M&F) 10
Gender 2
Handicap: 4
(1) Physical - (2) Mental 4
Gender ID: 1
TOTAL 268
TOTAL 255
TOTAL 71
TOTAL 82
TOTAL 7
— Bias Incident Summary —
219
page12image272
BIAS INCIDENTS BY DAY OF WEEK 2008/2009
220 — Bias Incident Summary —

BIAS INCIDENT BY MONTH 2008/2009
— Bias Incident Summary — 221

222 — Bias Incident Summary —