Search This Blog

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

A JUROR CALLS AND ANOTHER ONE WRITES

It seems like the hornet's nest at the Hartford Police Department continues to be poked, and plenty of people are willing to talk about it.

Last night a comment was posted by someone who claimed to be a juror in the Rashim Campbell case. I asked them to get in touch with me and tonight they did. Another juror has apparently also posted a comment here on the blog.

It continues to amaze me the following this blog has developed and who is actually reading.

The juror who called had some very interesting information to relay. The two biggest factors in Rashim Campbell's acquittal were that, according to the juror, the Prosecution didn't do their job and that the IAD investigator was not credible.

The juror was very candid and didn't avoid any of the questions I asked. Apparently the feeling was unanimous when they entered the jurors room, but Lieutenant Ford started off on the wrong foot right from the start. Now keep in mind that these jurors really didn't know the facts of the case other than what was presented in the court room. They didn't know the police officers, they didn't know the alleged victim Michael Stewart and they definitely had never heard of IAD Sergeant Rob Ford.

I guess the recently promoted Lieutenant Ford had tried to impress the jurors with his introduction, but that apparently backfired big time. In his introduction, Lt. Ford informed the jurors that he was the newly promoted Lieutenant for the Blue Hills area of the City and proudly told the jurors "If you have any problems in Blue Hills, call me ".

Apparently that was the wrong thing to say. The juror who called me said that almost all of the jurors felt as though they were being offered a bribe by Lt. Ford. They also said that he seemed to need his notes to be able to testify and that raised questions. For whatever reason, they also felt that Ford's promotion might have been a reward for the Campbell investigation.

That one took me by surprise, because keep in mind, the jury had no knowledge of the politics or the players that seem to be coming to the surface recently.

The other part that surprised me, was that the jurors thought the prosecution didn't do their job. Apparently the general consensus was that the facts hadn't been laid out and even the video didn't support the assault allegations and looked more like reasonable force to get the situation under control.

During the conversation I was asked why they would put a new prosecutor in charge of this case. The juror was very surprised to find out that the prosecutor was actually Hartford County States Attorney Gail Hardy and was not a brand new prosecutor.

In the end, it seemed like a pretty clear decision for the jurors and apparently the perceived credibility of Lt. Ford played a large role.A unanimous not guilty verdict was reached in less than an hour.

Another juror posted their thoughts on the trial under the posting "Officer Rashim Campbell...not guilty on all counts"

In the meantime, several police sources are telling me that the calls for an outside investigation into the Hartford Police Department are mounting. Requests are being prepared for investigations into the removal of Lt. Brooks as well as potentially false information fabricated for the Rashim Campbell arrest warrant application as well as potential complaints against Lieutenant Ford.

This can prove to be an interesting situation for Mayor Pedro Segarra and how he approaches these problems in an election year. This one has the potential to blow up into a major problem and seems to be getting worse by the day.

Keep those calls coming.

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?



Sometimes it seems like we have become immune to things that affect young people and how decisions can change their lives.

I usually focus on Hartford issues, but luckily this is one idiotic decision that we don't have to take blame for.

It seems that a student at Shelton High School, James Tate, came up with a creative way to ask for a prom date. He had the audacity to cut out large paper letters and tape them to the front of Shelton High School asking "SONALI RODRIGUES, WILL YOU GO TO PROM WITH ME? HMU, TATE" . For those not familiar with the texting lingo, "HMU" is nothing improper, it means "hit me up".

For being creative, the headmaster of the school has suspended Tate and revoked his right to go to the Prom. It wasn't graffiti done with spray paint and there was no damage done to the building. And I would even imagine that Sonali felt pretty special when she arrived at school Friday morning and saw the invitation.

Sonali promptly said yes.

This is absurd that Tate was punished to this extreme and the Headmaster should be ashamed for her actions.The headmaster, Dr. Beth Smith, can be reached at 203-922-3004 ext. 512 or by e-mail by clicking here

Something as important as the prom could also be disastrous when yanked away like this. In a city like Hartford plagued with youth violence and under performing students, I would hope that any Hartford educator would have handled a creative move like this in a much more positive manner.

Call or e-mail Doctor Smith and let her know what you think. I guess it goes to show that some people like Dr. Smith can be educated, but common sense can't be taught.

Good job Tate, and Somali should be fortunate to have a date with a young man that can be creative and respectful.

A facebook page has also been created "Let James Tate Go to the Prom"

Monday, May 9, 2011

OFFICER RASHIM CAMPBELL...NOT GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS

Hartford Police Officer Rashim Campbell, who was arrested and terminated last year after being accused of assaulting a prisoner, was found not guilty today by a Superior Court Jury.

Closing arguments took place this morning and the jury was given the case after lunch. It took a little over two hurs for the jury to return with their not guilty verdict.

Saturday, May 7, 2011

HPD, THE WONDER OF IT ALL

I'm not quite sure who is paying attention to what is going on at the Hartford Police Department, but it seems to be bordering on the absurd lately when it comes to Labor issues.

First we had the whole Lt. Neville Brooks situation. Chief Roberts made it a point last week to tell all of the officers in HPD roll calls on Saturday not to believe everything on "We the People" because they were only reading one side of a story. Fair enough, but so far there doesn't seem to be much on "the other side" of the story.

The we had the Lt Ed Dailey story. This is going to prove to be another interesting personnel matter. I haven't posted anything about it yet because the City and Chief Roberts are stonewalling me on releasing the IAD report into Dailey. To make a long story short, the IAD report as defined by Connecticut law is a public document once it is completed.

The report was completed several weeks ago and a disciplinary hearing was scheduled to be held for Dailey this past Thursday on May 5, 2011. The Chief and Assistant Corporation Counsel Nathalie Feola-Guerrieri are claiming that the report, even though it is complete, is exempt from disclosure. The claim that it is exempt as an "ongoing investigation" is close, but neither the Chief or Feola-Guerrieri seem to notice that one extra word in the exemption "ongoing CRIMINAL investigation".

There are no criminal allegations against Dailey nor has anyone been advised that there may potentially be any criminal allegations. It is purely administrative. Is this one more example of the "transparency" we keep hearing the Mayor and the Chief speak of?

But just when the hearing was supposed to be held, it was abruptly cancelled. According to sources, an IAD complaint has been lodged by Dailey against his accuser, Captain James Bernier. Then, as if that wasn't enough, the Hartford Police Union has now taken up the claims of another Officer who apparently was ordered by Captain Bernier to disclose information from a private, off-duty conversation

The Union memo to Bernier is below, and if you can follow all of this, it details the allegations better than I can here. Sources are also telling me that in the end, this may be an attempt to disqualify the department advocate, Lt. Marco Tedeschi from any involvement in Dailey's hearing. The Department advocate acts as kind of a prosecutor at disciplinary hearings. A panel of three police Captains act as the "judges" and eventually make a recommendation to the Chief as to their findings.

HPD UNION MEMO TO CAPT. BERNIER

Lt.Tedeschi apparently submitted an interdepartmental memo to Chief Roberts last week advising against proceeding with Dailey's hearing. It seems that Lt. Tedeschi did not feel that the accusations rose to the level of discipline being taken. I hope to obtain that memo in the upcoming week and it will be posted here.

And to end the week of the absurd, apparently another police Lieutenant had his unmarked City vehicle towed from the rear of the police department after he refused to move it from the entryway he was blocking.

Only in Hartford.

My FOI Complaint against the City in regards to the Dailey report is below. It's a little long , but you can see how the City works hard to deny release of documents:

TO: Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission

Please accept this e-mail as an official complaint against the City of Hartford and the following City of Hartford officials: Mayor Pedro Segarra, Corporation Counsel Saundra Kee-Borges, Attorney Nathalie Feola-Guerrieri, Police Chief Daryl Roberts and Detective Ursula Wiebusch. All parties involved have potential care and control over the requested documents and/or are in a position to facilitate their disclosure.

All of the above individuals were responsible or participated in the decision making that resulted in the denial of the attached request for records under the Freedom of Information Act.

On or about April 1, 2005 the following request for public documents was made to Hartford Police Chief Daryl K. Roberts via e-mail:

Chief,
>>
>>In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act I am requesting the following for review:
>>
>>Any and all documentation as well as the completed investigative report regarding Lt. Ed Dailey and the incident that occurred at or about 17 Rockville Street on or about February 24, 2011. I believe that the original investigation was started by Captain Bernier. If you need any clarification as to what I am requesting, please feel free to contact me.
>>
>>It is also my understanding that the report has been completed and distributed and is no longer a pending investigation
>>
>>Thank you

That request was promptly acknowledged by Chief Roberts, also by an e-mail back to me.

On April 26, 2011, since I had not heard anymore back on the request, I once again e-mailed a follow up request to Chief Roberts . That e-mail was promptly answered by Chief Roberts as follows:

Mr. Brookman,

Thank you for the reminder. If you're entitled to this information I will provide it according the rules and regulations of FOI. I will follow up and contact you by the end of business on Wednesday, April 27, 2011.

Detective Wiebusch,

Please look into this and advise me as soon as possible. Thank you once again.

Daryl K. Roberts
Chief of Police
Hartford Police Department

In the above e-mail, Chief Roberts directed Detective Wiebusch to handle the matter.

On April 27, 2011 I received an e-mail from Detective Wiebusch with a "PDF" file attached of a letter
signed by Chief Roberts denying my request claiming that the report was part of an ongoing investigation. The report has been completed and through a third party, I have seen the
completed report. The report has been distributed to various individuals, and my contention is that the report is a public document.

In addition, there is apparently no criminal behavior being alleged in the investigation or report which would be the only basis for any exemption as claimed by the City. Under 1-210, the only exemption I can see that might apply. Since the City and the Corporation Counsel have refused to cite the specific exemption they are claiming, I can only assume that they are relying on 1-210-b-3 which states as follows "(3) Records of law enforcement agencies not otherwise available to the public which records were compiled in connection with the detection or investigation of crime, if the disclosure of said records would not be in the public interest because it would result in the disclosure of (A) the identity of informants not otherwise known or the identity of witnesses not otherwise known whose safety would be endangered or who would be subject to threat or intimidation if their identity was made known, (B) signed statements of witnesses, (C) information to be used in a prospective law enforcement action if prejudicial to such action, (D) investigatory techniques not otherwise known to the general public, (E) arrest records of a juvenile, which shall also include any investigatory files, concerning the arrest of such juvenile, compiled for law enforcement purposes, (F) the name and address of the victim of a sexual assault under section 53a-70, 53a-70a, 53a-71, 53a-72a, 53a-72b or 53a-73a, or injury or risk of injury, or impairing of morals under section 53-21, or of an attempt thereof, or (G) uncorroborated allegations subject to destruction pursuant to section 1-216;".

As anyone reading the statute can clearly see, 1-210-b-3 clearly applies to investigations in which "records were compiled in connection with the detection or investigation of crime,". I attempted to make this point in an e-mail to all parties involved, including Mayor Segarra, Corporation Counsel Saundra Kee-Borges and Attorney Hathalie Feola-Guerrieri that was sent on April 27, 2011 . In that e-mail I even cited FOI decisions that would seem to apply to this request. Yet the City, specifically Attorney Feola-Guerrieri seem to ignore the facts as presented

This would appear to be a clear violation of the Connecticut Freedom of Information Act. All parties involved, with possibly the exception of Detective Wiebusch, have it within their power to comply with this request but have failed to do so even after I attempted to outline my points. Therefore I am also requesting that the maximum civil penalty of $1,000 per occurrence be assessed against all parties involved as the Commission deems appropriate if a violation is found to have occurred. As the Commission is aware, this is not an isolated incident, but rather what appears to be a pattern of practice to deny the public's right to inspect public documents for exemptions that are not based in state statute.

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

HOMICIDE 13 BEING INVESTIGATED

Hartford's 13th homicide of the year took place last night when a 21 year old man was shot and killed near Enfield and Greenfield Street.

The vehicle he was in stopped at the Kentucky Fried Chicken on Albany Avenue, he was transported to St. Francis Hospital and he was pronounced dead.

Monday, May 2, 2011

IS IT TIME FOR THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AT HPD?

Is there enough going on inside the Hartford Police Department to warrant a visit from the Justice Department investigators?

A couple weeks ago I would have probably said no, but now my blinders are off and I think I would have to answer with an emphatic YES. I think many people, including Chief Roberts, underestimated the fallout from the transfer of Lt. Neville Brooks as the IAD commander.

For the past week I have been receiving phone calls from individuals familiar with incidents that are very disturbing. Allegations of improprieties of everything from missing cash during search warrants, to an alleged drug dealer repeatedly being charged with crimes because the detective making the arrests had a sexual relationship with the drug dealers girlfriend. By arresting the dealer, it freed up the girlfriend to spend uninterrupted time with the detective.

There are many more allegations of a serious nature, but I think you get the point that something is not right here.

Aside from the issues with the HPD Chiefs feeling that they are above scrutiny, it erodes the public's confidence in the process. According to a CHRO complaint filed by LT. Brooks with the State of Connecticut, he claims that Chief Roberts had instructed him that the Chief's had an "exalted status so that the usual protocols did not apply". Are you kidding me? If anything the rules should apply to the Command staff even more, I think it is called "leadership by example".

It is also interesting to me that Chief Roberts would take the time to attend roll calls all weekend long attempting to discredit the blog and call the entries "lies" and "one sided". The information coming out will most likely prove the opposite.

This is the time that Mayor Segarra, who constantly speaks of "transparency", needs to step up and demand a complete and full examination of HPD.

Anyone wishing to document additional information, please feel free to contact me.

To read Lt. Neville Brooks CHRO complaint, click below:
CHRO Complaint Lt Brooks