409,899
409,859 @ 11:17 PM
1,817 page views in the past 28 1/2 hours
______________________________________________________________________
LeBert's misconduct sending our numbers through the roof!
Courtesy photo from YouTube video
Look at the Top 10, All LeBert all the time!
McGlynn and Rumley have allowed the bad conduct to fester, and now it is reflecting badly on Stephanie Muccini-Burke.
Question: If Clerk Ed Finn chest-bumped Stephanie Muccini-Burke and screamed in her face as he did to me, do you think untrustworthy Finn would still have a job?
Question: What if Edward P. Finn committed felonious assault and battery on Lena Muccini? Do you think dishonest Rumley would circle the wagons to protect reprobate Finn and his ugly conduct?
SO WHY DOES CHIEF SACCO MAKE UP EXCUSES FOR OFFICER JIMMY LEE,
DETECTIVE STEPHEN LEBERT AND HIS AWFUL HISTORY, AND THE OTHER MISCONDUCT IN MEDFORD?
THE ANSWER IS SIMPLE: MIKE MCGLYNN
______________________________________
It's Big News in Medford
pinac
photography is not a crime.com
http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015/07/plainclothes-massachusetts-cop-threatens-to-kill-man-during-traffic-stop/
“You’re lucky I’m a cop ’cause I’d be beating the fucking piss out of you right now,” Lebert threatens.
Mike mentions that he was recording the traffic stop with a dashcam and Lebert responds by threatening to take the camera, which is generally illegal for police to do without a warrant, although he didn’t end up following through with the threat.
Mike told Lebert he was recording because he was under the impression he was required to do so by Massachusetts state law. Boston.com further explains that “Massachusetts is a ‘two-party consent’ state, which means it’s illegal to record audio without the knowledge and permission of the person being recorded.”
However, this information is false.
According to the 2001 Hyde ruling, it’s only necessary to keep an audio recording device in “plain sight” to avoid violating the wiretapping law and no consent is required. Furthermore, the 2011 Glik ruling, which found that records police and other public officials is protected by the First Amendment, has left it ambiguous as to whether the Massachusetts law is Constitutional.
409,859 @ 11:17 PM
1,817 page views in the past 28 1/2 hours
______________________________________________________________________
LeBert's misconduct sending our numbers through the roof!
Courtesy photo from YouTube video
Look at the Top 10, All LeBert all the time!
Jul 27, 2015
| ||||||||||
Jul 27, 2015
| ||||||||||
Jul 23, 2015
| ||||||||||
Jul 27, 2015
| ||||||||||
McGlynn and Rumley have allowed the bad conduct to fester, and now it is reflecting badly on Stephanie Muccini-Burke.
Question: If Clerk Ed Finn chest-bumped Stephanie Muccini-Burke and screamed in her face as he did to me, do you think untrustworthy Finn would still have a job?
Question: What if Edward P. Finn committed felonious assault and battery on Lena Muccini? Do you think dishonest Rumley would circle the wagons to protect reprobate Finn and his ugly conduct?
SO WHY DOES CHIEF SACCO MAKE UP EXCUSES FOR OFFICER JIMMY LEE,
DETECTIVE STEPHEN LEBERT AND HIS AWFUL HISTORY, AND THE OTHER MISCONDUCT IN MEDFORD?
THE ANSWER IS SIMPLE: MIKE MCGLYNN
______________________________________
It's Big News in Medford
photography is not a crime.com
http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015/07/plainclothes-massachusetts-cop-threatens-to-kill-man-during-traffic-stop/
“You’re lucky I’m a cop ’cause I’d be beating the fucking piss out of you right now,” Lebert threatens.
Mike mentions that he was recording the traffic stop with a dashcam and Lebert responds by threatening to take the camera, which is generally illegal for police to do without a warrant, although he didn’t end up following through with the threat.
Mike told Lebert he was recording because he was under the impression he was required to do so by Massachusetts state law. Boston.com further explains that “Massachusetts is a ‘two-party consent’ state, which means it’s illegal to record audio without the knowledge and permission of the person being recorded.”
However, this information is false.
According to the 2001 Hyde ruling, it’s only necessary to keep an audio recording device in “plain sight” to avoid violating the wiretapping law and no consent is required. Furthermore, the 2011 Glik ruling, which found that records police and other public officials is protected by the First Amendment, has left it ambiguous as to whether the Massachusetts law is Constitutional.
