599,680 @ 11:52
599,670 @ 11;40 pm
599,600@9:49pm
174 from 7 - 11:52 pm
292 minutes, 174 page views
908 yesterday 1/26/16
29,532 past 3o days
908 yesterday 1/26/16
29,532 past 3o days
Allegation that a police officer threatened a witness
On his. "List"
Huge story to break
WIKIPEDIA:
Police misconduct refers to inappropriate or illegal actions taken by police officers in connection with their official duties. (Would this pertain to keeping secret the activities of ex-detective Stephen Lebert? Isn't that misconduct? The cover-up is worse than the crime, sometimes. See Watergate.
Police misconduct can lead to a miscarriage of justice and sometimes involves discrimination or obstruction of justice.
THE PATCH:
Man Claims False Imprisonment by Medford Police
By
A Medford man is suing the city for $500,000, claiming police held him on two occasions on a warrant that had been recalled.
James Twohig, 31, of Medford is suing the city for $500,000, claiming it violated his 14th amendment rights when Medford Police held him from June 25 to 28, 2010 and again on April 22 to 25 this year on a warrant out of Norfolk County that had been recalled, according to a lawsuit filed by his attorney, Laurence Cohen, last week.
On the first occasion, the police department was faxed a copy of a court docket on June 26 that showed the warrant was recalled, but continued to hold Twohig for another two days, according to the lawsuit.
http://patch.com/massachusetts/medford/x1
The lawsuit includes two claims that police violated Twohig's 14th amendment rights by holding him on an invalid warrant, two claims they arrested him falsely and two claims he was imprisoned falsely. It seeks compensatory damages totaling $50,000 and $450,000 in punitive damages.
Cohen said he had not decided whether he would seek a bench trial - held before a judge - or a jury trial.
_____________________________________________________
In an effort to control police misconduct, there is an accelerating trend for civilian agencies to go beyond review to engage directly in investigations and to have much greater input into disciplinary decisions.[1]
CASE - MEDFORD:
BRAUCHER, J. The plaintiff brought this tort action against the defendant police officers for assault, assault and battery, false imprisonment and "negligent denial of medical care."
A jury returned verdicts for the defendants, and the plaintiff appeals, challenging the admission in evidence of a police investigation report and the instructions to the jury on the use of deadly force by a police officer. We transferred
JAMES JULIAN vs. FRANCIS RANDAZZO & another.
380 Mass. 391
February 4, 1980 - April 15, 1980
Middlesex County
Present: HENNESSEY, C.J., QUIRICO, BRAUCHER, KAPLAN, & LIACOS, JJ.
380 Mass. 391
February 4, 1980 - April 15, 1980
Middlesex County
Present: HENNESSEY, C.J., QUIRICO, BRAUCHER, KAPLAN, & LIACOS, JJ.
In an action against two police officers for assault, assault and battery,
false imprisonment and negligent denial of medical care, the judge erred
in admitting in evidence, over the plaintiff's objection, a police
investigation report which included hearsay and the investigating
officer's opinion and recommendation. [392-394]
In a tort action by a plaintiff who was mistakenly shot by a police officer as the officer was pursuing an individual suspected of committing a felony, there was no error in the judge's instructions with respect to the question whether the officer was justified in using deadly force to effect an arrest. [394-397]
CIVIL ACTION commenced in the Superior Court on August 4, 1976.
The case was tried before Apkin, J., a District Court judge sitting under statutory authority.
After review was sought in the Appeals Court, the Supreme Judicial Court, on its own initiative, ordered direct appellate review.
Philip M. Weinberg for the plaintiff.
Robert J. Blumsack, Assistant City Solicitor, for the defendants.
http://masscases.com/cases/sjc/380/380mass391.htmlIn a tort action by a plaintiff who was mistakenly shot by a police officer as the officer was pursuing an individual suspected of committing a felony, there was no error in the judge's instructions with respect to the question whether the officer was justified in using deadly force to effect an arrest. [394-397]
CIVIL ACTION commenced in the Superior Court on August 4, 1976.
The case was tried before Apkin, J., a District Court judge sitting under statutory authority.
After review was sought in the Appeals Court, the Supreme Judicial Court, on its own initiative, ordered direct appellate review.
Philip M. Weinberg for the plaintiff.
Robert J. Blumsack, Assistant City Solicitor, for the defendants.
___________________________________________________________
WIKIPEDIA"
In addition, individuals and groups are now filming police in an effort to force police to become accountable for their actions and for their inactions. With the proliferation of mobile devices capable of recording alleged misconduct, police misconduct and abuse is now receiving publicity on social media and on websites including YouTube. In response, police often try to intimidate citizens to prevent them from using cameras. In other circumstances police will illegally seize or delete evidence recorded by citizens notwithstanding laws that make it a crime to destroy evidence of a crime being committed irrespective of whether the crime is committed by civilians or by the police.[2][3]
_____________________________________________________________________________
Medford, MA officer threatens to kill civilian over traffic ...
https://www.reddit.com/r/AmIFreeToGo/comments/3esxh5/medford_ma_officer_threatens_to_kill_civilian/
https://www.reddit.com/.../medford_ma_officer_threatens_to_kill_...
Reddit
[–]RhubarbCharb 17 points
[–] 1 point
