Wow, How did I miss this? By Joe Viglione
I knew Leo A. Sacco, Jr. to be a dirty cop, and have evidence that Paul Covino and Kevin Faller, though not on the Brady list, are allegedly dirty, filty cops with unclean hands as well.
My friends just uncovered this 2022 article on Sacco Jr. and it is a mind blower. Whacko-Sacco the s.o.b. who threatened me at the Medford City Council, got caught with his hands in the cookie jar. Allegedly Leo orchestrated this mess and gave his own police force a major black eye with the L'Italien Report. Look at this malfeasance!
Press Release Former Medford Police Chief Leo Sacco pays $9,000 Civil Penalty for Violating Conflict of Interest Law
- David A. Wilson, Executive Director
Boston, MA — Former Medford Police Chief Leo Sacco has paid a $9,000 civil penalty for violating the conflict of interest law by failing to appropriately discipline Medford police officers who made false claims for detail pay, not requiring the them to return more than $17,000 in falsely claimed detail pay, and concealing the matter from the mayor. Sacco signed a Disposition Agreement in which he admitted the violations and waived his right to a hearing.
In spring 2018, Sacco learned that some Medford police officers had submitted requests to be paid for detail hours they had not worked and personally investigated. Eleven patrol officers Sacco interviewed admitted they had accepted detail pay for hours they had not worked. Sacco did not record his interviews, did not interview any superior officers alleged to be involved, and did not prepare a written report of his investigation or findings.
Instead of imposing meaningful discipline, on November 28, 2018, two days before he retired, Sacco gave the 30 patrol officers he interviewed a verbal reprimand that was not recorded in the officers’ personnel files. Sacco did not reprimand the superior officers involved and did not require the culpable officers to pay back the unearned detail pay. Sacco did not inform the mayor of the allegations, his investigation, or the officers’ admissions.
In 2019, the newly hired Medford police chief learned of the false claims for detail pay and launched an independent investigation. Twenty-five patrol officers and five superior officers were found to have submitted requests for detail pay, totaling $17,000, for hours or shifts not worked. Based on these findings, each culpable officer was disciplined, ranging from letters of reprimand to suspension. All culpable officers were removed from the police detail list and required to return the falsely claimed detail pay. Seventeen officers received suspensions.
The conflict of interest law prohibits public employees from using their official positions to provide anyone with a valuable privilege or exemption to which they are not entitled. Sacco violated this prohibition by failing to appropriately discipline the officers who falsely claimed detail pay, by failing to require them to pay back the unearned pay, and by failing to report the matter to the mayor.
The law also prohibits a public employee from acting in a manner that would cause a reasonable person aware of the relevant facts to believe the employee would be improperly influenced or show undue favoritism in their official acts. Sacco’s mishandling of the investigation and discipline of the officers who falsely claimed detail pay would have caused a reasonable person to believe that those officers could unduly enjoy his favor in the performance of his duties as police chief. Had Sacco followed established Medford Police protocol, the culpable officers would have been officially and substantially disciplined, as they were after his retirement.
The Commission encourages public employees to contact the Commission’s Legal Division at 617-371-9500 for free advice if they have any questions regarding how the conflict of interest law may apply to them.
Medford Police Officer Harold MacGilvray pays $1,500 Civil Penalty for Violating Conflict of Interest Law
- David A. Wilson, Executive Director
BOSTON, MA — Medford police officer Harold MacGilvray has paid a $1,500 civil penalty after admitting to violating the conflict of interest law by engaging in political activity while on duty and in uniform 10 days before the 2016 presidential election. The State Ethics Commission on October 23 issued a Final Order allowing a joint motion to dismiss the adjudicatory proceeding against MacGilvray after he paid the civil penalty and signed a disposition agreement in which he admitted the violation and waived his right to contest the Commission’s findings.
While working as a Medford Police Department (MPD) patrol officer at a community event on October 29, 2016, MacGilvray and another uniformed MPD officer posed for a photograph, acting as if they were restraining a person who was wearing a Hillary Clinton mask, shackles, and a prison jumpsuit. MacGilvray, who also serves as president of the Medford Police Patrolmen’s Association (MPPA), posted the photograph to the MPPA Facebook page with the caption “Look who the MPD grabbed at the Fall Festival in Haines Square Today….” Later that day, while still in uniform and on duty at another community event, MacGilvray and two other MPD officers posed for a photograph with a person dressed in a Donald Trump mask and business suit. MacGilvray authored the caption “Making America GREAT again in West Medford Square!!” and asked another MPD officer to post the photograph and caption to the MPPA Facebook page.
Soon after the photographs were posted, they were widely circulated on social media and gained attention from local and national news outlets. In response to the controversy, MacGilvray removed the photographs from the MPPA Facebook page the same day. He later received a letter of reprimand from the MPD for violating the department’s policy on political activity. He was also required to post a letter of apology, which appeared on the MPPA website for three days.
Section 23(b)(2)(ii) of the conflict of interest law prohibits public employees from using or attempting to use their official positions to secure for themselves or others unwarranted privileges of substantial value that are not properly available to similarly situated individuals. MacGilvray violated this section of the conflict of interest law when he used public resources – a MPD police uniform and worktime – to engage in private political activity. Posting or otherwise causing the publication of photographs and captions that demonstrate support for one candidate over another, even if done as an attempt to amuse others, is private political activity. Wearing an official police uniform when engaging in private political activity creates the impression of official and public support.
The State Ethics Commission is charged with enforcing the conflict of interest law, G.L. c. 268A. When the Commission’s five members vote to find reasonable cause to believe a public employee has violated the law, it can also authorize an adjudicatory proceeding against the employee. The Commission’s Enforcement Division initiated the adjudicatory proceeding against MacGilvray in February 2018. Once an adjudicatory proceeding has been initiated, the public employee then has an option of entering into a public disposition agreement rather than exercising his or her right to a hearing.
The Commission encourages public employees to contact the Commission’s Legal Division at 617-371-9500 for free advice if they have any questions regarding how the conflict of interest law may apply to them.
###
0 comments:
Post a Comment