Montgomery County police add peer review after judge limits gang‑validation testimony; staffing gaps remain

The Montgomery County Public Safety Committee on Oct. 6 heard a detailed update from police and prosecutors on how the county identifies and validates alleged gang members for use in criminal trials and how court rulings have changed that work.

County police and the State’s Attorney’s Office said a February ruling by Judge Chernofsky limited the admissibility of portions of gang‑expert testimony because the court found the validation process lacked sufficient review. In response, Montgomery County Police Department leaders said they added a multi‑tiered review: an initial validation by a detective, a peer review by a second detective and an additional supervisor review to resolve disagreements.

Assistant State’s Attorney Gabriel Carrera told the committee that the prosecutor’s gang team relies heavily on gang‑validation packets for complex prosecutions and that preparing for trial can require hundreds of hours of detective work and repeated motions in limine. He summarized a recent MS‑13 homicide matter in which one defendant was convicted, another produced a hung jury and other co‑defendants remain pending; parts of the gang‑related expert testimony in that case were judged inadmissible without peer review.

Police said the department currently lists 19 validated gangs in Montgomery County, though they expect the true number is higher. The gang investigative teams focus on intelligence gathering, proactive enforcement and coordination with federal and local partners. Detectives and captains emphasized that the teams’ work is time‑intensive: an individual validation summary can take several weeks and detectives frequently are in court for multiple weeks while maintaining on‑call duties.

Council staff framed the update in the context of budget planning: six vacant gang‑unit positions were identified earlier as potential reductions (non‑recommended), and officials said filling or shifting those positions requires balancing patrol needs — the department is roughly 190 officers below authorized strength countywide. Police leaders said recent internal transfers and upcoming academy classes will help fill some vacancies but cautioned it will take months to realize full operational relief.

Several council members pressed whether adding internal peer review fully addresses the judge’s concerns under the Daubert‑style standard cited in the opinion — testability, error rates, controls and general acceptance in the relevant community. Members cited other jurisdictions and cases (including an Ingersoll opinion referenced in the packet) that use weighted point systems and suggested Montgomery County consider whether an 8‑point checklist with low thresholds creates undue subjectivity. MCPD and ASA representatives said they are studying other jurisdictions and legal precedent but warned that wholesale methodological change requires time and testing; the immediate corrective step was to add layered review.

Council members also asked about grant funding. MCPD said the department’s gang‑team positions are paid from Montgomery County funds; grants such as those from the Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and the Maryland Crime Intel Network support intelligence infrastructure and partner work but do not cover personnel costs.

The committee did not take formal action on staffing or policy changes; staff and police said additional analyses and a fuller staffing update are expected at the committee’s November staffing briefing.