| October 5 2005
Corruption: Worcester
D.A Conte and his Trooper stooges
Conte uses his C-PAC Troopers to investigate web site
threat charge.
It appears that the first amendment right to
free speech does not apply in Worcester County.
A Northboro man who
allegedly asked for the “resignation or execution” of Westboro
District Court Judge Paul S. Waickowski on one of the Web sites, he
created was charged in court with threatening to commit a crime
(murder).
Placing the poster in a court house which is a public
building, were all citizens are endowed constitutional rights of
free speech, (1st amendment), and initiated criminal charges.
Westboro District Court Associate Court Officer Stephen Gervais
noticed the poster, allegedly placed at the courthouse, on Sept. 9,
according to court records.
When some average citizen post an
opinion that is not "contusive" to Conte County cronies, Massachusetts
State troopers
in Conte Worcester C-Pac unit ride to the rescue.
Worcester DA
John Conte expects us to believe a real danger of the murder of
judge Waickowski was present, which meet a criminality level, yet DA
Conte waited twenty one (21) days to attempt to remove this
individual from society.
Assistant District Attorney Johnson
wanted Mr. Pechonis held until Monday so a competency and
responsibility hearing could be held. Worcester Judge David P.
Despotopulos had at least enough common sense to refuse the
ADA.
The Worcester courts are already backed up which keeps over 800
prison detainees in an overcrowded Worcester House of correction
(where men actually do die) yet, the C-PAC State Police unit and DA
Conte have time for this.
Now give me a break if we arrested
everyone who ever uttered “I hope god strikes him dead", out of
anger and or frustration, we would no doubt have most red blooded
American's in jail.
Before Worcester DA Conte proclaims what a
dangerous job being a judge is, the real facts do not support that
reality. The top ten dangerous jobs do not include any Law
enforcement of judicial positions.
Another case of selective
prosecution by DA John Conte in Worcester County no
doubt.
Wednesday, February 22,
2006
"The Conte movement has been a
well-financed tightly run political machine intensely devoted to
enacting his rigid ideology in the political realm. Not since
Senator Joseph McCarthy's witch-hunts of the 1950's have I observed
such an umbrella of fear cast upon the public. The illegal search,
coupled with a threatening letter has the undertones of Marxism. IT
will be a proud day for law enforcement when he is
dethroned."
What About Paul Pechonis?
I got to see Paul Pechonis up
close for the first time yesterday thanks to Boston's Channel 5. My exposure to him previously was through
the babycam that captured him being handcuffed and led out of his
home by uniformed and plain clothed State Police
troopers.
Today's story in the Worcester Telegram &
Gazette (read it here or here) about the legal implications of Mary Jean's battle with
the State Police focuses on her rights as a web
site operator to
post the video. Yes, I think that's very important. But I think
there is a larger issue.
Police showing up on one's doorstep
to take a person away in handcuff's shouldn't be part of the
American experience except in extreme cases. The charge against
Pechonis was posting comments on one of his Web sites construed as being threatening to a police officer and a
judge. Don't get me wrong. I don't condone those kinds of comments,
and I wouldn't make them myself. But I am very uncomfortable about
the idea of law enforcement agents with an ax to grind getting to
decide when a threat posted to an Internet site rises to the level
of an arrestable offence.
It took me a while to get to this
point of view. And I thank Mary Jean for having the guts to post Mr.
Pechonis's videotape, in effect daring the State Police to try to
stop her. They took the bate and now the discussion is out in the
open.
It seems that Mr. Pechonis's relationship with the
local police had some history. That included him filing a complaint
against a Marlborough police officer for improperly threatening his
son. Mr. Pechonis was making headway with that complaint through
legitimate channels. Then all of a sudden the State Police show up
at his door and take him away.
To top it off, the
tape captures what
any reasonable person would see as a highly invasive sweep of
Pechonis's home WITHOUT A SEARCH WARRANT. I can understand the
police wanting to make sure that a person being placed under arrest
couldn't reach out and grab a weapon. But to go up the stairs and
all around the ground floor AFTER MR. PECHONIS WAS ALREADY IN
HANDCUFFS seems just plain wrong.
The deeper we get into
this, the more it seems like the reason the State Police tried to go
after Ms. Jean for posting the tape had less to do with their
concern about her having violated a wiretapping law crafted to
curtail organized crime and more to do with their wanting to cover
up the fact that THEY THEMSELVES BROKE THE LAW in how they handled
Mr. Pechonis's arrest.
The fact that Ms. Jean's Web site is
essentially political in nature and is highly critical of the
powerful district TO WHOM THAT STATE POLICE UNIT REPORTS makes the
threatening letter Ms. Jean received all the more
troubling.
Unwittingly, by going after Ms. Jean the police
only proved the point about an out of control prosecutor that her Web
site is trying to make.
The larger point is that bloggers and
Web site operators everywhere should be alarmed at seeing one of
their own - even though his postings may be at the fringes of civil
discourse - being led away in handcuffs for something he posted.
Allowing that to go unchallenged is to go down a slippery slope the
ultimate consequences of which I shudder to contemplate.
Tuesday,
February 21, 2006
The Boston Herald and the MetroWest Daily News both covered the story of Mary Jean and
the restraining order she obtained against the State Police after
they tried to intimidate her into removing a video from her
Web site.
According to the article by Laurel
J. Sweet, tensions between Paul Pechonis, the man in the video being
arrested in his home, and police went back a ways. It seems Pechonis
had sought action against a local cop for threatening to put a gun
to Pechonis's son's head. Sweet reports:
Last summer, Pechonis claims Marlborough Police
Officer James Gough threatened to put a gun to his son Jared’s head
during a traffic stop. After that, Pechonis claims Gough followed
his son around the city, harassing him, and the father and son
reported the alleged incident to Marlborough Police Chief Mark
Leonard and submitted written statements to back up their
claims.
Could it be that the heavy handed
tactics used by the State Police, which included doing a sweep of
Pechonis's home WITHOUT A SEARCH WARRANT, was payback for
complaining about alleged police misconduct?
Mary Jean's
suit, based on her contention that the State Police is trying to
deny her right to free speech by threatening to prosecute her for
posting the tape, will be back in
federal court again soon. Could it be that the State Police was
trying to cover up the warrantless search?
It will be
interesting to see what happens. Could this be a case of: If the
crime don't get you the cover up
will?
Sunday, February 19,
2006
Attorney Dan Shea Clarifies
Website Argument
In a letter to the Worcester
Telegram & Gazette Daniel J. Shea clarified the
argument he made in
Federal Court on behalf of www.conte2006.com. Assume (which he doesn't) that a videotape of police
arresting Paul Pechonis in his home was made illegally. And assume
(which he doesn't) that Leominster mom Mary T. Jean posted it to her
Web site
knowing that it was illegally made. She is still within her
constitutional rights to post the video.
Why? Because the
tape shows the State Police behaving improperly, and (citing US
Supreme Court precedent in Bartnicki v. Vopper) the public interest in publicizing their
behavior trumps the questionof how the tape was made or obtained.
The police came to Mr. Pechonis's door to arrest him. He did not
resist in any way. Once he was in handcuffs the police proceeded to
swarm his home without showing a search warrant. That kind of
intimidation tactic is outrageous and arguably
actionable.
Judge F. Dennis Saylor apparently agreed with Mr.
Shea's point enough to issue a restraining order against the State
Police from taking any action against Ms. Jean until that and other
arguments can be aired more fully.
Attorney Shea also commended a local Worcester TV station (Channel 3)
for broadcasting a portion of the tape thereby seconding Ms. Jean's
actions in posting the
tape to the Internet. There are reports that other Web
sites have now posted the tape as well, but we can't confirm that
with links yet.
Saturday,
February 18, 2006
The T&G Nails This One
The State Police may be about to
get a lesson in what happens when you tread on Mary T. Jean of
Leominster, Massachusetts. According to today's Worcester Telegram &
Gazette (also read
it here) the Commonwealth will be in Federal Court on February
28 to explain itself for trying to intimidate her out of exercising
her constitutional right to free speech. The suit she filed
yesterday reads in
part:
Plaintiff is a private citizen
engaged in political activity. Plaintiff operates two internet
websites, "
worcestervoice.com" and "Conte2OO6.com," the second of which is at issue in this case. The
"Conte2OO6" site has arguably been instrumental in encouraging the
District Attorney of Worcester County, MA, Hon. John Conte, not to seek re-election as he had previously announced.
In her legitimate political activities vis a vis Mr. Conte,
Plaintiff posted on her "Conte 2006" website, a videotaped recording
of what she believes to be a warrantless and unlawful entry upon the
premises of Mr. Paul Pechonis by the so-called "C-Pac" Unit of the
Massachusetts State Police, a unit assigned to the selfsame
Worcester County District Attorney.
In the mean time, Federal
Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV issued a restraining order protecting Ms.
Jean from any action based on her Web posting for at least ten
days.
When is Attorney General
Thomas Reilly going to weigh in on this important matter???
Friday, February
17, 2006
FLASH: Mary Jean Wins 10-day Temporary
Restraining Order
United States District Court Judge
F. Dennis Saylor has issued a 10-day temporary restraining
order against the Massachusetts State
Police allowing
Leominster mom Mary
Jean to continue
posting a video on her Web
site depicting the
State Police arresting a man in his own home. Ms. Jean said she will
post the judge's order to www.conte2006.com as soon as she receives it by email.
Fox25 News
was not able to attend the hearing, but apparently we'll be able to
read about it in the Worcester Telegram & Gazette tomorrow.
According to Ms. Jean,
Judge Saylor watched the video on her Web site in the courtroom as a
part of the hearing.
Where is the Attorney General on
this one? Is Thomas Reilly going to stand by while the State Police
attempt to trample free speech rights in the Commonwealth? It may be
uncomfortable for him because the SP Unit in the video reports to
Reilly's phone buddy DA John Conte.
But if the office of Attorney General means anything, Reilly
must take a stand on this one.
Thursday,
February 16, 2006
Mission Creep
The preamble of the
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 272,
Section 99
states:
... that because organized crime
carries on its activities through layers of insulation and behind a
wall of secrecy, government has been unsuccessful in curtailing and
eliminating it. Normal investigative procedures are not effective in
the investigation of illegal acts committed by organized
crime.
So why is this law being used to
go after Mary Jean, a Leominster mom whose disdain for investigative
and prosecutorial shenanigans in Worcester County is anything but
secret? She puts it out there on the World Wide Web for everyone to see.
Yesterday she received a
certified letter from State Police lawyer
Ann M. McCarthy
telling her that if she didn't remove a video from her site
(www.conte2006.c0m) she would be investigated and possibly charged with a
felony.
The video in question depicts Paul Pechonis of
Northboro being arrested IN HIS OWN HOME for allegedly using one of
his Web sites to threaten a police officer and a judge. He denies
the charge and the matter is now in court.
The letter to Ms.
Jean and its frightening implications is the subject of a posting to
the Blue Mass. Group blog-a-rama. It also caught the attention
of the Worcester Telegram & Gazette. Read that article
here or here.
When a law
crafted to fight the mob is turned on its head to intimidate
ordinary people standing up to police state tactics, that's scary
stuff indeed. Its the kind of mission creep we ignore at our
peril.
Paul Pechonis was arrested at his home for allegedly threatening the
life of a police officer on his website. This was a
police officer who allegedly threatened to hold a gun to the head of
his son. That arrest was videotaped with the consent of all parties
except the police, by a camera in Pechonis' home. The video was
placed online by Mary Jean, who has been threatened
with felony charges for posting
it. A federal judge issued an injunction supporting Jean,
which the Attorney General has appealed. Jean has the support of the
ACLU of Massachusetts and the lawfirm of Choate, Hall &
Stewart. Jean is the webmaster of conte2006.com, a website critical of
Worcester County district attorney John Conte, which is where the
video is hosted. You can also find the video on YouTube.
Although the video has been described by some as showing an
"invasive search" without a warrant, the officers say they are just
checking the home to see if anyone else is present. They are not
shown moving or opening anything on camera, and the search is very
brief (just a few minutes)--I don't see any evidence of an "invasive
search." Now prosecutors have threatened Pechonis, issuing a cease and desist order for merely linking to
the video of his arrest from his own website.
Good job, prosecutors--you've just
ensured that there will be much more attention to this video and Pechonis'
case |
