Search This Blog

Loading...

Friday, September 9, 2011

YOU ASKED FOR IT, HERE IT IS.....THE NAPPIER INCIDENT REPORT

Here is the incident report you have been asking to see and the Hartford Police brass don't want you to see. Despite numerous requests from several media outlets and a formal FOI request from "We the People", the mind trust at HPD chose not to release the report. "We the People" was able to obtain the report through "alternative" means. But again, the truth always seems to win out, so here is the report for your reading pleasure.

A source at the Connecticut FOI Commission said on Thursday that the report was clearly a public document and should have been released.

So much for that transparency we keep hearing about from the Segarra Administration.

Nappier Incident Report

34 comments:

147 said...

Very standard basic report. I think the officer should have expanded on what profanities where used by Miss Nappier. I guess she (Nappier) had a sense of entitlement.
Where was this other person Nappier dropped off, why did she not intervene when they saw Nappier with the police.

Nappier was in 2007 Crown Victoria,not a 2011.. I see the lies building.
So Nappier was driving a unregistered motor vehicle, why did Gail Hardy drop the charges? Political cover up.

I know everyone is Monday morning quarter backing this situation but we were not there. So judge all you want, it was decision that made, wrong or right. I truly believe that the officer should have written a little bit more than two pages based on the circumstances but hey it was a decision..
good luck officer

Anonymous said...

Hey 147, Nappier was in a 2011 Crown Victoria. The registration in the car was for the 2007 Crown Victoria that was replaced by the 2011 car in March 2011. DAS manages the state's fleet and as reported is confident they placed the registration in the 2011 car. Well that appears to be partially right. They put the old (2007) registration in the 2011 car. In fact, the 2011 is registered so Nappier was not driving an unregistered vehicle.

By the way, why are you so worried about the other person. Do you really think that a sane person would come out of their house to intervene between police and a high-ranking official. To use your words what "sense of entitlement" would they have. It’s apparent that the police were not interested in the person. They allowed the person to leave the car go into the house and then blocked Nappier from leaving the parking lot.

You don't have to be a Monday morning quarterback to use common sense - a state official driving a state vehicle. No need to wait until Monday, call the state police. Where is homeland security when you need it? There goes your political cover-up conspiracy.

Anonymous said...

 Let this be a lesson to us all.... Our vehicles are equipped with an in-car video recording system for a reason, USE THEM!!! The public likes to videotape us while we perform our jobs so let's do it for them as we promote public transportation.  Seems to me that most people we stop claim to be  "special" from one degree to another and believe they deserve "special" treatment. Give them that "special" treatment they deserve while recording every step. If a complaint is ever filed, you will be cleared in the end. 

  

Anonymous said...

You FOI’d it, got rebuffed and got it anyway? Nice work. I wonder how much money and resources the department will exhaust trying to find out how this report got out. They will spend more money and resources looking into this then they would have fighting and losing your FOI request. Nice try DKR, you can try to hide your secrets (like this report), but in the end, the blog exposes you again, and again, and again... This must be getting tiring. A smarter move would have been to redact and release the report. But who am I to make such a crazy cost saving - less embarrassing suggestion, it’s not like I am the Department Advocate or anything…

Good point about the video's. But you can bet there is a reason why this officer does not want a video on her. Here is an idea, if an officer gets more than 2 discourteous attitude complaints in a year (sustained or not), don't let them leave the station without a video camera on them.

Both the officer and Nappier look like complete fools. I guess it is the perfect outcome.

Anonymous said...

Let me start by pointing out that I am an average citizen and not a member of HPD as many of the posters on the blog are.

That said, I can not believe that this incident has blown up to the point it is now. After reading most of the articles and news stories about this and now reading the incident report, the conclusion to me is pretty clear. The Officer involved did what I consider as a taxpayer "good police work". She responded to a call for service, ran the plate of a car in the parking lot and made contact with the operator of the vehicle that had no registration information according to DMV records available to her. Sounds like pretty standard stuff so far right?

But wait the operator of the vehicle is a high ranking state official. As a tax payer I can't believe that in the current state fiscal crisis, she is out in a gas guzzling crown vic at 830 on a Thursday night not engaged in any type of official state business. Add to the fact that she has "discreet" plates displayed rather than her "official #4" plate. Could this be because she doesn't want to draw attention to the fact that she is out and about in a state issued vehicle conducting her personal business? I'm sure if the official #4 plate was displayed, the officer would most likely not even give her a second glance, would just assume that she is on official business and let her pass.
If this was a regular state employee, their vehicle would have been retrieved from the tow yard the next day and reassigned to someone else. But the Treasurer is too high and mighty for that, now we have to make it a race issue and huff and puff about how she was unfairly treated. Give me a break!! How about you take some responsibility and have some integrity with your office. The Governor should ban all these elected officials from using their state vehicles for after hours personal business. I'm not sure why she needs a big gas guzzling crown vic for her long commute from Westerly Terrace to Elm Street. I would take an educated guess that 90% of the Treasurer's official business is conducted in Hartford, why does she need a take home car anyways, her exorbitant salary isn't enough? Business as usual....unlimited perks for the elite higher ups and constantly villifying the rank and file state employee.

This whole fiasco makes me sympathize with all you guys/girls in uniform more than ever. You make what you think is a legitimate motor vehicle stop, take the appropriate action and the next day the State Atty's Office puts out a press release saying there was no reason for the stop and the charges that were filed. Then DMV admits that they made an error and did not enter the registration info correctly. That would leave me to believe it was in fact a legitimate MV stop and the charges were appropriate. Where is the apology??? What a joke.

HPD should be backing their officers, but that is probably a whole other topic for discussions.

Keep up the good work guys, don't let the circus atmosphere take away from the great work the educated public know you are trying to do.

147... said...

To anonymous @205a.m., if you paid attention I was reading the report. If you paid attention the officer was running the plate affixed to the car. If DMV had the vehicle in the system it would have came back as follows.
State of Ct State Treasuer
55 Elm St. yadadad
I am retired and have ran plates before. Their no such thing as incognito plates. State plates must come back to a department. they do not have the persons name affixed to it.

C sqaud said...

What is the status of the occonor investigation??

Anonymous said...

The report is perfectly fine. Who really cares napier got a little slap. Big deal. The entire north end is black. The gravy train of racial profiling needs to end.

Spare 13 said...

I saw dennis occonor the other day and he stated he would stop kevin from posting comments. Fyi

Oxy Moron said...

The Hartford Courant article quoted Denice as saying she had taken a friend out for dinner @ a fish place. Is it SOP that an non-state employee be allowed to ride in a state car? What does the gov and/or DAS say about that?

forgetaboutitGizzie said...

I am really curious to see how this investigation turns out for all the Officers involved. It appears JK was just doing her job.

If the Department finds them at fault well then I'm resigning from HPD and going to Waterbury Police for a better Job.

Jarjura cares about his COPS.

Spartacus said...

Hey Nappier,
If I had been on scene, I would have taken your BAC. I know that you would have refused the breath a liar.
Sgt D. O'

Anonymous said...

Geez, people. How do you RACIALLY PROFILE in a neighborhood where everyone is the same race? YOU DON'T. If it was me, pasty white girl, on Barbour Street and I was stopped THAT would have been "racial profiling". Nappier was NOT stopped because of her race, the NAACP needs to back their war dogs down. She herself has stated that it had nothing to do with race, just "the impoverished neighborhood"...please...which is exactly why a shiny, 2011 car had its plates run by HPD. I would have done the same thing...that car doesn't belong there.

Kavanox said...

I bet she would want to go on oprah and tell her sad story. And then march on police headquarters with a bible. Now i bet morale goes in the negatives around.

peter brush said...

As a Hartford resident I want the pols and the chief to stand up for the cops. The police report indicates Nappier played the race card at the time. I'm sick of it. It may not have been her fault, but it was certainly not the cops' that she couldn't produce proper paper work. (Anecdote; I've gotten in trouble with the cops while I was driving white without registration.)
She shouldn't have been allowed to walk, but, to suggest this is to be politically incorrect; i.e., the problem with her walking is not that the route was too long but that it went through probably the worst black neighborhood in the state.
Nappier shouldn't have a car, but, as Lender points out in his piece, she should be paying taxes on personal use. Is she? Put me in the "doubt it" column.

Anonymous said...

The offficer says she was in the area due to another call and that Nappier pulled into the driveway in front of her. Can the paperwork from that other call be FOI'd to corroborate this report?


Also, how many other state vehicles are in the same situation as Nappier's? Were other state employees' or officials' vehicle info not transferred to the main database?

One report said that the state #4 plates were in the trunk. Any facts on who switched the plates, when and why? It seemed that Nappier was aware her official plates were not on the vehicle -- who else was aware and what did they do with that info? Where was this officer in the couple of hours before this report?

Anyone who recognized Nappier would probably realize she had #4 plates and would wonder where the plates were.

Just looking from another angle to see if an officer with a record of problems might have been more than "just in the neighborhood".

peter brush said...

"Good people can, and do, live in bad neighborhoods in our state."
-----------------------------------
Nappier says the cops are liars when they say she was offered a ride, but seems to suggest walking through Hartford's north end not a problem. I'd say her credibility on the first point damaged by her second claim.
That neighborhood is among the worst in New England. Sure good folks live there, but when one evaluates the risks the aggregate is considered. My insurance company charges me more because I live in the 06106 zip. It does me no good to tell them (the insurance guys) that many good people live here. It would certainly do me no good if I were to tell them that there are even a few white guys, too.
I've had an accident with an unregistered/uninsured car on Russ St. Cost me $500 and my insurance company $1500. I appreciate the cops taking the matter seriously. If the very important Treasurer can't produce her paper work it's not the cops' problem.

peter brush said...

I want the pols and the chief to stand up for the cops...
----------------------------------
What's up with the State's Atty. rushing to declare "no basis for the issuance of the summons or towing of the vehicle?" Surely an exaggeration to say there as no, none, zero basis. Why rush to meet with the chief? If there was an error, drop the charges and shut up.
-----------------------------------
The Honorable Richard N. Palmer, Chairman of the Criminal Justice Commission, announced today the Commission has appointed Gail Hardy as State’s Attorney for the Judicial District of Hartford.

Attorney Hardy, an 11-year veteran of the Division of Criminal Justice, is the first African American appointed to the position of State’s Attorney in Connecticut history.

Anonymous said...

Gotta love all the people defending the Hartford Police the corrupt force that it is no other way around it

Anonymous said...

I wonder why IAD has done nothing about this officers previous complaints. Oh wait. They are all working private jobs today. How many jobs does GL work a week? When does he find time to do his regular IAD work? 5pm -2am suuurrreee. They sure are setting the professional standard.

Today, Sgt. Laureano, Sgt. Zager, Sgt. Cunningham and Sgt. Watson all worked PJ's. I hope nothing important comes in. Where are Elliott and Davis? Those guys work a ton of PJ's too. The IAD investigators do this all the time.

It must be nice to "flex" your hours as much as you want. Here is a question: Is IAD flexing their hours to accommodate their IAD investigations? or: Is IAD flexing their hours to accommodate their private job schedule? Here is a clue- 4 of the 5 IAD investigators are working a job today. They must be way behind in the B-squad investigations because all of them will be working B-Squad today. lol what a joke. What is the deal with that IAD assignment? I guess you can work as many PJ's a week as you want, and find time to squeeze in the IAD stuff later.

If it is ok for IAD to flex their hours around private jobs, then it should be ok for everybody else to do the same. Must be nice. How many jobs a week does Sgt. Laureano work anyway? Any guesses. I bet it is FOI-able. I’ll bet that Rudiewicz report will have some issues with IAD, this should be one of them.

Hey everybody at HPD; Work whenever you want so you can do your Private Jobs first, then take care of your regular assignment whenever you can. If it’s ok for IAD, it’s ok for you. Call in sick as much as you want too even if you are not sick. Hey, the IAD investigators are lying by claiming they are flexing their hours to take care of B squad stuff, you can lie too. I bet if you land a cushy big money assignment like IAD, where you can make your own hours to do PJ’s, then you are probably going to do exactly what the chief wants you to do so you don’t get transferred. My god, the administrative end of this PD needs a complete overhaul.

Turd Ferguson said...

"alternative" means aka I'm a big scumbag and I know the right people in the hartford police department

Anonymous said...

Nappier being a CT citizen suffers from the same syndrome many CT residents do, entitlement. Same thing has many politicians ans residents 2nd guessing the power companies because the neighbors power got turned on first.

As state treasurer, I wonder is a credit check was even done on Nappier....

Fuzzy said...

It's Gizzie, trust. Oh Marone!

Anonymous said...

Turd got it right...scum bag with an agenda, the whole fiasco is much like William Shakespeares play "Much Ado About Nothing"

KEVIN BROOKMAN said...

ok, maybe you can enlighten us, what is the "agenda"?

BB said...

The two of you 'agenda' conspirists are obviously morons. Keep up the fantastic work guys, you raise the bar on how long people can keep their heads buried in the sand without suffocating.

Anonymous said...

I'm surprised that a white person would even want to be an officer in Hartford . An officer in Avon gets paid twice as much without working in the "wild west" North end of Hartford . My hat is off to a white woman working this area at night . You couldn't pay me being white to walk down Garden st. ,Barbour St.,Albany ave. ,etc.etc. during the DAY. My car broke down on the way to a Christmas party in Hartford (not far from Park st. area and I walked up to two Hartford cops in their car and told them my situation . They gave me a ride home to South Windsor . I don't recall the race of the officers . That's my point I guess . They were professional police officers . I did not have AAA . I told the police my friend would get my vehicle started and I would have the vehicle out of there the next day . 17% of Hartford residents have HIV. Some have the new strain of Aids that medications do nothing for . Who wants to chase a junkie with a needle in pocket with nothing to lose . Not me . Who's gonna do that for 38 k per year before taxes you . Like I said my hats off tho the Hartford Police .

Anonymous said...

Using state vehicle to transport friends on private time while out on the town . Wow that's where my tax dollars go . Now more tax dollars wasted on a report for this . A billion dollar deficit in Ct. Can I have a 2011 Crown Victoria too. The State treasurer allows state funds to go to state workers that get up to 300% or more than there salary (as stated in the Courant ).You wont get my vote .

Anonymous said...

A 2007 Crown Victoria too old? $27 k per car and only good for 4 years ?!. Maybe the car would last longer if there was no personal use .! My prius is a 2007 w/50 k mi. and just broken in . We should just give them a mercedes or bmws they might last longer . If the passenger gets hurt in this vehicle when the operator was drinking does the insurance cover the lawsuit or do the taxpayers foot the bill ? Out on the town in the state vehicle with the incognito plate . Hmmm . Yes I guess you would want to be incognito driving friends around on tax dollars .

Anonymous said...

If she was so innocent then why did she act in a defensive manner and start swearing at the officer? She could use a lesson in manners and also how to act like a lady. The police are just doing their job! She should not use her color as an excuse to get out of BAD behavior. That is getting very old; it's like getting out the violin over and over with these people. Grow up! One gets further with honey than with vinegar. She could have worked things out much calmer and in a professional manner than how she handled herself. Profanity towards the law is downright disrespectful.

Anonymous said...

The cop did the job that she was hired to do. Once the "ACCUSED" started using profanities, they should have just locked her up. I hate to see anyone play the "black" card, especially when they're wrong.

peter brush said...

Gotta love all the people defending the Hartford Police the corrupt force that it is no other way around it
-------------------------------------
To the extent the Dept. is "corrupt" or mismanaged it should be corrected, if by nobody else than by our pols. In the mean time, there is no evidence of "corruption" in the (initial) proceedings with Treasurer Nappier. Glad to hear Chief suggesting all a big mistake, and glad not to hear any suggestion that race was an issue (for the cops). I commend any and all trying to maintain order in the city, particularly on and around Barbour Street.
Glad to see the Chief acknowledge that the incident with Nappier was something of a SNAFU.

Anonymous said...

Gabe Laureano is a good dude!

Anonymous said...

Actually I was surprised that the original Courant article portrayed her so calmly. It's well known that she has a short fuse and profanity abounds in her speech when she is angry. I thought maybe she had mellowed from city days.