1,424,857@3:50 pm
1,424,783 @ 1:15 pm
1,424,783 @ 1:15 pm
1,424,761 @ 1:04 pm
19,000 in the past 30 days (see below)
22 views in 11 minutes, 2 hits per minute 1:04 pm
_________________________________October 26, 2019 12:54 pm
Supervisor of Records
Secretary of State's Office
1 Ashburton Pl # 1719,
Boston, MA 02108
RE: Important Information on Medford Solicitor Rumley's Third Page of Reconsideration Letter
Dear Supervisor of Records
If you look at Mark Rumley's third page in his "Reconsideration" letter he states:
"Without exception, by September 11, 2019 each one of the officers on whom findings were made accepted their specific discipline
and made full payment of the overpayment that they had received."
If that aspect of the case is closed, it doesn't matter if a hundred new investigations are opened, the public has a right to know now that the offenders have paid the money back.
Who are these offenders and why should the public vote for Mr. Rumley's boss, which would ensure - ostensibly - that Mr. Rumley stays employed.
I submit that Rumley's reconsideration letter is self-serving and, if granted, harms the public.
In the October 24, 2019 Determination by your office - Page 3 - is this key quote:
"Nevertheless, there is a strong public interest in monitoring public expenditures and public employees have a diminished expectation of privacy with respect to public employment matters."
The Determination goes on to state:
"Further, the public has an interest in knowing whether public employees are "carrying out their duties in an efficient and law-abiding manner."
MR RUMLEY'S PAST EFFORTS ALSO SERVED THE CITY SOLICITOR WELL, BUT NOT THE PUBLIC:
That Mr. Rumley himself sat on a board of a 501c3 to thwart an election (January 2009,) allow his fellow board members to litigate against membership to stifle free speech (at a cost to cable TV ratepayers of over $100,000, which went into the pocket of Rumley's older brother's best friend,) fail to give the public the proper accounting in 2014 (five years later) of Medford Community Cablevision, Inc., - which your office certainly is aware of as I've been investigating the missing monies for six additional years now, my investigation starting in 2002, my meeting Mr. Rumley for the first time in early 2003, I think it's safe to say that this published author knows Mr. Rumley's schemes and tactics better than most people on the planet.
This is yet another Rumley scheme that we are all so aware of.
In my opinion, Mr. Rumley has on many occasions attempted to thwart the public records law.
This is just another example of his deceptions and it hurts the public during a critical election cycle where Rumley's job is possibly on the line.
In my opinion, Mr. Rumley has on many occasions attempted to thwart the public records law.
This is just another example of his deceptions and it hurts the public during a critical election cycle where Rumley's job is possibly on the line.
Mr. Rumley has something to gain by these names not being released. The names being released gives the voters information that can, quite possibly, remove Rumley's boss, Mayor Stephanie Muccini-Burke, from office.
Which is why I was threatened the night of October 24th that the police have a "bounty" on my head. I have retained the voice mail. They are using threats of physical violence AS WELL AS this "reconsideration" filing after the deadline expired in an attempt to stop this journalist, a true "public servant," from obtaining the information that is of great public interest.
I apologize for the multiple e mails. They are sent specifically because Solicitor Rumley has a unique history of holding back information
with a variety of tactics.
In 2008 Mr. Rumley was not honest to the citizens and retired judge Marie O. Jackson-Thompson in regards to the city limiting speech. Mr. Rumley has allowed over one hundred thousand dollars of P/E/G access monies to go to - not computer education for children, seniors and others - but for lawsuits designed to inhibit speech.
Indeed, when I had Judge Timothy Gailey remove Mayor McGlynn's cousin-by-marriage, Attorney David Skerry, from two cases, my witness, under subpoena, Mark E. Rumley gave legal advice to Mr. Skerry to put him back on the case in an attempt to hurt me. What kind of scoundrel hurts the public and public access TV (and by extension, the First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment which Rumley took an oath to uphold) in a court of law? Just because Skerry was the best friend of Mark Rumley's older brother is no reason for a city solicitor to inject himself into matters that did not concern Mr. Rumley, A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE 501C3 HARASSING MYSELF AND OTHERS.
Mr Rumley even admitted to me over a decade ago, and we'll paraphrase him "You're working for the benefit of the public. No one would invest this much time just to help himself."
So Mr. Rumley - who has harassed me, thwarted me, threatened to sue me, Mr. Free Speech himself, Mark Rumley, has spent too much time and too many taxpayer dollars working to STOP the public from getting essential information to properly evaluate who to vote for on election day.
The highly conflicted city lawyer is terrified that Mayor Burke's opponent will win and that he could be out of a job.
It's a huge conflict of interest which flies in the face of Mr. Rumley's oath of office. To uphold free speech and freedom of the press.
That's why Mr. Rumley's failure to put all the information on the table within the time offered by Fredson Sossavi on October 10th is so egregious.
Mr. Rumley failed to abide by the timeline so that he could create a new timeline for himself, a "reconsideration" after the time offered had elapsed.
Mr. Rumley admits in the document (attached) that the determinations were made and the monies paid back.
So how can Marian Ryan's "investigation" be needed to shield the names of the already disciplined police officers? It's a smoke screen because the election is a little
more than a week away. Marian Ryan - purportedly - is a huge supporter of Stephanie Muccini-Burke. D.A. Ryan and the mayor's office worked together to attempt to
shut down my publication in 2016 and 2017. I prevailed in that case, the judge seeming to be furious at the tactics of the Medford police and Ms. Ryan's office.
Marian Ryan's energy would be better served filing charges against the board of directors of the 501c3, which included Solicitor Rumley, rather than attacking the investigator.
And that speaks volumes about the District Attorney of Middlesex County and how careless she is with public monies.
The Public's Right To Know prior to an election is paramount here. And the clock is ticking to election day.
The public has a right to know.
Respectfully
Joe Viglione
___________________________________________________________________________________
EXHIBIT A: Mr. Rumley's free speech declaration that he refuses to abide by.
City Solicitor Mark E. Rumley / Medford Daily Mercury on or about Nov. 16, 2008 (quoted from the 2nd Judge Jackson-Thompson hearing) saying:
“The one sentiment that I have heard that I take great exception to is that the city is trying to limit speech,” said Rumley. “The notion the city would censor or squelch free speech is baseless and as city solicitor I would find any such effort repugnant.”
EXHIBIT A: Mr. Rumley's free speech declaration that he refuses to abide by.
City Solicitor Mark E. Rumley / Medford Daily Mercury on or about Nov. 16, 2008 (quoted from the 2nd Judge Jackson-Thompson hearing) saying:
“The one sentiment that I have heard that I take great exception to is that the city is trying to limit speech,” said Rumley. “The notion the city would censor or squelch free speech is baseless and as city solicitor I would find any such effort repugnant.”
EXHIBIT B
On Thursday, October 10, 2019, 1:28:32 PM EDT, Sossavi, Fredson (SEC) wrote:
Good Afternoon,
Please be aware, this office has received an appeal relating to your entity’s response to a request for public records. Attached are further details concerning this appeal. If you have any questions or wish to provide further information relating to this matter, please contact xxxxxx
Given that the Supervisor of Records must issue a determination within 10 business days of receipt of the appeal petition, please provide any additional information to this office as soon as possible.
Thank you,
Fredson Sossavi
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
Public Records Division
One Ashburton Place, Room 1719
Boston, MA 02108
Joe Viglione
YOU BE THE JUDGE
OCTOBER 10
2)RUMLEY WAITED UNTIL HE LOST YET ANOTHER APPEAL BECAUSE CONFLICTED RUMLEY DOESN'T WANT STEPHANIE MUCCINI-BURKE TO LOSE BY ANSWERING A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST
3)DIRTY RUMLEY MOVES THE GOAL POSTS BACK, HURTING THE PUBLIC THAT PAYS HIM SO WELL, BEING A TRAITOR TO THE CITIZENS OF MEDFORD THAT HE IS REQUIRED TO SERVE
4)IT'S IN THIS DOCUMENT. READ IT CLOSELY, SEE HOW CREEPY THE MIND OF MARK RUMLEY WORKS THIS HALLOWEEN SEASON
5)HUMPTY RUMLEY SAT ON A WALL
HUMPTY RUMLEY HAD A BIG FALL
ALL BUCKLEY'S HORSES
AND ALL BURKE'S MEN
COULD NOT PUT THE BASTARD BACK
TOGETHER AGAIN
IMPEACH RUMLEY....NOW - HUMPTY DUMPTY RUNNING LAW OFFICE
1:05 pm data
Pageviews today
|
305
|
Pageviews yesterday
|
764
|
Pageviews last month
|
19,000
|
Pageviews all time history
|
1,424,761
|
