MassCops - Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network, A Mass Police Web Portal

Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network

Massachusetts Police News, Information and Discussions on MassCops



Pages: 1
Main Page

Hudson Officer acquitted of false report

(Click here to view the original thread on the MassCops Message Board)

Posted by: MiamiVice

1/29/06
Officer acquitted of false report
By Elaine Thompson TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF

CONCORD - A Hudson police officer yesterday was found not guilty of filing a
false police report against Police Chief Richard Braga's nephew and his
girlfriend.

Officer Michael S. Vroom, 28, of 315 Berlin St., Clinton, who has been on
paid administrative leave the past 15 months, smiled after hearing Concord
District Court Judge Robert J. McKenna Jr. announce the not guilty verdict
immediately after closing arguments from both sides. The officer, however,
declined comment because he is still facing an internal investigation,
which will determine the future of his career.

Officer Vroom was accused of filing a false police report and false assault
and battery charges against Kate Lugin, 19, of 5 Temi Road, and her live-in
boyfriend, Michael Moura, whose father is the brother of Chief Braga's
wife. The chief recused himself from the criminal and internal cases and
turned the matter over to Capt David Stephens.

The charges came after the officer responded to a call on March 3, 2004,
from Ms. Lugin's neighbor, John Sherman, that someone in the woman's house
had parked their car partially blocking his driveway. Mr. Sherman, the
couple and Ms. Lugin's mother said there were years of bad blood between
occupants of the two homes.

Officer Vroom testified yesterday that he banged on the door several times
before Ms. Lugin opened it. He said he asked to come in to speak to the
owner of the vehicle. Ms. Lugin refused, but the owner, Mr. Moura's cousin,
Jose Moura, came out another door and went over to talk to the officer. The
officer said Ms. Lugin closed the door and he asked Jose Moura to have her
come outside. When she opened the door, the officer said, he smelled
marijuana.

He said he told Ms. Lugin that he smelled marijuana and asked who else was
in the house and if he could come inside and look around.

The woman denied having smoked marijuana and slightly pushed the officer's
chest with an open hand as she tried to close the door, Officer Vroom said.

She got agitated and pushed me and said, No. Go away. I told her not to
do that, not to touch me,the officer testified. He said Ms. Lugin pushed
him a second time and tried to retreat back into the house, but he reached
around the door and held onto her arm.

“She tried to close the door and I put my foot in the door jam. I told her
she was not free to go … that I was placing her under arrest for assault
and battery, the officer said

Officer Vroom said he heard someone run inside the house and slam up
against the door, knocking Ms. Lugin to the ground. He said at that point
he saw that it was Michael Moura who had pushed the door. He said he went
to go arrest Mr. Moura, but that Mr. Moura opened an adjacent door leading
to another part of the house, ran through it and slammed it behind him. The
officer said he suspects that Mr. Moura ran out a back sliding glass door
that led to the backyard.

Mr. Sherman, the neighbor, called 911 and told police that an officer
needed assistance. He also testified that he saw Mr. Moura run out the back
of the house. But, Mr. Moura, as well as his father, brother, girlfriend
and her mother, Patricia Quinn, testified during the trial that Mr. Moura
was not at the house that night.

Mr. Moura told the court yesterday that he was with his brother and father,
doing a plumbing job at a Dunkin' Donuts on Cape Cod from March 3 to 5.
Assault and battery and resisting arrest charges against the pair were
never prosecuted because of Mr. Moura's Cape Cod alibi.

Officer Vroom's lawyer, Joseph W. Monahan, maintained that Mr. Moura was
indeed in the house, but couldn't chance getting into trouble because he
was already on probation for at least three convictions, including driving
to endanger, leaving the scene of an accident with property damage, and
driving after revocation of his license He has also been arrested for
possession of marijuana. In July 2003, he led police on a high-speed chase
that began in Hudson and ended in Stow when he lost control of his
motorcycle and slid under a car. After the accident, his license was
revoked for three years for being a habitual traffic offender. He also
broke his right wrist and had to have a metal pin inserted to hold the
bones together. Mr. Monahan maintained that the injured right hand
prevented Mr. Moura from being able to do the job on Cape Cod. But Mr.
Moura said he was able to use his left hand.

You try to make me look like a bad kid, Mr. Moura said to the defense
lawyer when he pointed out the young man's criminal record several times.

Sgt. Thomas W. Boudreau, the supervising officer and a backup officer to
the Temi Road incident, testified that a push on the chest from Ms. Lugin
was enough for Officer Vroom to file assault and battery charges. But, he
thinks the matter should have been handled differently.

A parking complaint that escalated to an arrest, that should not have
happened in my opinion, Sgt. Boudreau said. He said he does not recall
what Ms. Lugin said, but that she was œverbally venomous toward Officer
Vroom.

He also said an ashtray that the officer found inside the house contained
ashes that smelled like marijuana but he decided that charges would not be
filed.

Capt. David Stephens said even though the judge cleared Mr. Vroom of
criminal charges, he still has internal charges pending. He declined to
elaborate on those charges Mr. Stephens has handled the case because Chief
Braga recused himself because of the family ties. The captain said the
chief has never even read the internal report. He said the district
attorney's office reviewed the case and concluded there was sufficient
evidence to go forward with the case against Officer Vroom.

He said he is disappointed with the judge's decision and for the lack of
explanation from the judge.

It would have been nice to know what his reasons were. But, now we’ll move
forward with the internal noncriminal part. That will go to a hearing
officer who will decide on the other charges we have pending, he said.
There are different standards of proof for a criminal case and an internal
case. In a criminal case you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. In an
internal case, it's preponderance of the evidence.

The trial was the first of two this week involving a Hudson police officer.
Officer Kevin F. Andrade, 27, of Hudson, is to go on trial today in
Framingham District Court on a charge of assault and battery with a
dangerous weapon. He was arrested after a bar brawl in Hudson last June.


Posted by: laxball33

Originally Posted by MiamiVice 1/29/06
Officer acquitted of false report
By Elaine Thompson TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF
01/29/06? are you a psychic Miami?

On another note it's too bad to see that same old small town bullsh*t going on and ruining a young guy's career. It's easy enough to read into that article by the capt stating he's disappointed by the judge's decision to see that even though the chief has "reclused himself from being a part of that case" he is still pulling the capt's strings. Unfortunately I think we all know that no matter what happens that guy is done in that town. Just by the ending statements the capt should have made it easier for the readers and just said, "we're going to fire him anyways" rather than his little song and dance. Hopefully Vroom will end up finding another dept that will look past the BS and hire him.

If someone gets mouthy or smart with me and then pushes me, they're going to get the same treatment that guy gave.


Posted by: fscpd907

Hudson Police officer to testify before judge
By Kristen Bradley / Daily News Staff
Saturday, January 21, 2006

FRAMINGHAM -- A part-time Hudson Police officer is ready to take the stand in his own defense as he tries to convince a District Court judge that he was acting in self-defense when he hit another man in a barroom brawl in June.
The third day of testimony in the bench trial for Kevin F. Andrade will resume Monday morning at 9 in Framingham District Court.

Andradem 28, of 46 Broad St., Hudson, faces one count of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. Andrade has waived his right to a jury trial and will leave his fate to Judge Paul Healy Jr.
Yesterday, Andrade’s attorney, Charles MacLean, said his client was acting in self-defense when he punched another man, David Breen, in the face around 1 a.m. on June 5, at Armand’s Pub on South Street in Hudson.
MacLean said Breen threw the first blow. Andrade also allegedly threw a bar stool at Breen after he had fallen to the ground.

The prosecution rested its case yesterday, but not until Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Breen -- no relation to the victim -- put the Hudson Police sergeant who was in charge the night of the fight, on the stand.
Sgt. Christopher Shea testified that the initial call came in reporting a fight at the pub. Shea said when he arrived, he saw Breen with a group of his friends, as they held a cloth up to Breen’s bloody nose.
Shea said according to witness accounts, the fight started when Andrade and a group of his friends showed up at the pub following a friend’s wedding. Someone in Andrade’s group allegedly asked one of the men in Breen’s group where the bathroom was, and the response was that it was at the exit. According to the witness accounts, Shea said Andrade and his friends thought the other group said something about them being "idiots," with the two sides picking up the fight from there.
How it went from a shouting match to a physical confrontation is what both sides are trying to prove.

Shea testified that Breen -- who had not met Andrade prior to the incident -- identified Andrade as his attacker. Shea considered that probable cause to arrest Andrade. Shea said Breen appeared to have been drinking but was not intoxicated. Andrade was drunk when police arrived, Shea said.
Shea also testified that the three other officers on duty that night -- Officer Joe Kerrigan, Officer Ronald Mace and former Hudson officer Tony Rego, who is now a Maynard Police officer -- all failed to return to the station after the scene at the pub was cleared.

Shea said that normally multiple officers will be on hand to book someone who has been arrested and normally, after an incident, officers return to write up their reports. In this case, Kerrigan, Mace and Rego did neither, with Shea testifying that he "assumed they wanted nothing to do with it."
The three officers didn’t start writing their reports until after Shea called all three into the station and ordered them to produce their reports before their shifts ended at 7 a.m., Shea said.
Shea said once Andrade’s friends saw he was being arrested, they approached Shea and asked, "how do we help, what should we say?" Shea said he replied "tell the truth," and went back into the bar to talk to more witnesses.

Rego -- Andrade’s second cousin -- testified that Breen was very drunk when speaking to police officers. Rego said when he pointed to a group of three men -- all friends with Andrade -- and asked if one of them had hit him, Breen and others pointed to someone in that group. He said Andrade was nowhere near that group when he asked the victim the question. Kerrigan also testified Breen was "severely intoxicated," when police arrived.

Rego said officers don’t typically write reports for incidents that bring the response of several police officers. Usually, they arrive at a location, wait for instructions from a supervisor or lead investigator -- who in this case was Shea -- and help out with whatever they’re asked to do.
Usually in Hudson, one officer responds to a call, therefore usually that same officer is the one writing the report. In this case, Shea would be in charge of writing the report, Rego said. Rego also testified that Shea offered no instruction, and Rego said he had no idea how Shea decided Andrade should be arrested.
Mace testified that one of Andrade’s friends, Greg Wardwell, told police he was the one who punched Breen and threw a bar stool at him, suggesting that Shea arrested the wrong man.

This is the second Hudson Police officer to go on trial this week for alleged criminal behavior. On Wednesday, Hudson Police Patrolmen Michael Vroom was acquitted of charges that he filed a false police report.


Posted by: WorPD007

MetroWest Daily News

Letter: "Disappointed" in Hudson

Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - Updated: 12:11 AM EST


 E-mail article</FONT> View text version</FONT> View most popular</FONT>
Capt. Stevens of the Hudson Police Department stated that the department was "disappointed" that my brother, Officer Michael Vroom was found not guilty of filing a false police report. Also, recently Executive Assistant Paul Blazer was "disappointed" in a decision that upheld the clearing of a ludicrous suspension on Officer Kerrigan.


I too am "disappointed" that my brother puts his life in jeopardy protecting and serving this town and his supervisors are "disappointed" he was cleared of charges that were unfounded. I am "disappointed" that Sgt. Shea and Captain Stevens took the word of their boss’s nephew, Michael Moura, who was on probation, had a past history of fleeing from the police and obviously a record, over that of a creditable officer.


I am "disappointed" that the Hudson Police would publicly name a confidential informant for Hudson in court and put this citizen at risk. I have read articles about how hard it is to gain the trust of citizens to come forward in cases that the police need assistance with and this doesn’t seem like a way about gaining trust. I am "disappointed" that my brother is not the only officer on the force who has been wrongfully disciplined after an encounter with one of the chief’s nephews.


The actions of the police department and failure of the town to let this type of conduct continue is costing taxpayers thousands of dollars, as well as losing good officers who are choosing to work elsewhere.


MATTHEW VROOM,
Hudson


Posted by: commando

Judge clears police officer in bar brawl

Hudson chief 'stunned' by District Court verdict
By Elaine Thompson TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF
ethompson@telegram.com

FRAMINGHAM— A Hudson police officer was found not guilty yesterday of
assaulting a bar patron. He is the third Hudson police officer to prevail in a court battle within the past two weeks.

Kevin F. Andrade, 27, was charged with assault and battery on David Breen, 44, of Berlin, for allegedly punching him in the face, and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon for allegedly striking Mr. Breen with a bar stool while he was down. During the three-day trial, Mr. Andrade testified that he hit Mr. Breen in self-defense after he was struck first. He also maintained that he never struck him with a bar stool. District Court Judge Paul F. Healy Jr. found Mr. Andrade not guilty on both charges yesterday.

"I'm happy that the truth came out," an obviously elated Mr. Andrade said after pumping his fist in the air after the judge's decision.

Mr. Breen, meanwhile, called the verdict "a miscarriage of justice."

Hudson Police Chief Richard Braga, who was in the courtroom when the
verdict was announced, said he was stunned.

"This case is as solid as any I've seen in my 25 years on the job," he said later in a telephone interview. "Strong evidence was presented that showed that the victim was punched in the face and then struck with a bar chair by an off-duty police officer. The department brought this case forward on the basis of that evidence. We don't take pleasure in bringing charges against a police officer. But we felt it was the right thing to do in this case. We charged this individual in the same way we would have any other person who committed such an act.

"I am stunned by the verdict. But it is a decision of the court and we will move on."

After an internal investigation, Mr. Andrade, a part-time officer for two years, was notified earlier this month that he was terminated. He has appealed to the state Civil Service Commission.

The fight took place at Armand's Pub, 25 South St., in the early morning hours on June 5. He testified yesterday that he and about five friends had attended a wedding at St. Michael's Church, followed by a reception at the Portuguese Club, before going to the pub.

He testified that when the men arrived, Mr. Breen and two other patrons
were at the bar, along with a bartender and her boyfriend, who is also a friend of Mr. Andrade's. He said Mr. Breen was asked by one of his two companions where the bathroom was located.

According to Mr. Andrade, Mr. Breen replied the bathroom "is over there
behind those (expletive) idiots," referring to Mr. Andrade and his friends.

However, Mr. Breen testified last week that he said "over there by the
egress."

Mr. Andrade testified, "He said look at those guys. Look how they're
dressed. They look like they just came from the prom." He said his friend, Greg Wardwell, went over and started to argue with Mr. Breen's friend, Braulio Jara. Mr. Jara testified last week that he and Mr. Wardwell have been feuding for more than 10 years and have fought in the past.

Mr. Andrade testified that Keith Weagle, a friend of Mr. Andrade's and boyfriend of the bartender, tried to break up the argument when Mr. Wardwell turned on him. Mr. Andrade said at that point, he went over and split up his two friends.

He said Mr. Breen started calling them idiots again. Mr. Andrade said he went over to Mr. Breen and said, "You got a problem? Why are you calling us idiots? I'm a Hudson police officer. I don't need any problems here."

He said he went to shake Mr. Breen's hand, but that Mr. Breen put down his drink and turned around and punched him in the face. He said he instinctively punched back and the two fell over some bar stools to the floor. "We got up and Breen said, 'You want some more? Is that all you got for a police officer?' " Mr. Andrade said.

Mr. Breen and his friends said Mr. Andrade and his friends were looking for a fight. They said Mr. Breen wanted to leave and that Mr. Breen initiated the handshake to try to defuse the argument.

Mr. Breen's friend — Mr. Jara — and the bartender called police. When they arrived, Mr. Andrade and one of his friends, Nelson Andrade, no relation to the defendant, had driven around the corner to the police officer's home. Mr. Andrade said he immediately came back to the pub to make sure his other friends were all right. When he arrived, Sgt. Christopher Shea stopped him in the parking lot.

Sgt. Shea testified earlier that he arrested Mr. Andrade after Mr. Breen pointed him out when Mr. Andrade returned to the parking lot. Mr. Andrade said Sgt. Shea interviewed Mr. Breen and his two friends, but never spoke with Mr. Andrade's friends.

In Mr. Andrade's letter of termination, the department cited the alleged assault and battery as well as interference in a police investigation by talking to witnesses, particularly the bartender. Mr. Andrade said he has spoken with her, but never about the case.

Judge Healy said: "What right does the chief have to tell him not to talk to a witness in this case? He's a defendant."

On Jan. 18, a Concord District Court judge found Officer Michael S. Vroom, 28, not guilty of filing a false police report and assault and battery charges against Chief Braga's nephew and his girlfriend.

On Jan. 6, a Middlesex Superior Court judge upheld the state Civil Service Commission's ruling that Officer Joseph P. Kerrigan was unjustifiably bypassed for promotion to sergeant in 2000. The court decision means the patrolman's name will be the first on the list the next time the department has an opening for sergeant.

In 2000, he and Officers Christopher Shea and Thomas Boudreau were up for a sergeant's position. Officer Kerrigan, a former union president, scored highest on the Civil Service exam, but Officer Shea, who did the best during the interview process, received the promotion. In bypassing Officer Kerrigan, Chief Braga cited a poor performance at the promotion interviews and a 1999 case in which the patrolman allegedly committed perjury while testifying in juvenile court. He also cited an incident in July 2000 in which Officer Kerrigan allegedly swore at a 16-year-old while off duty. The boy was Chief Braga's nephew The officer was suspended without pay for two days for allegedly swearing at the teenager, but the Civil Service Commission overturned the suspension. The town filed and lost an appeal of that decision in Superior Court.

The state Department of Personnel Administration approved the promotion bypass. But Civil Service Commissioner Daniel M. Henderson said Chief Braga's reasons for not promoting Mr. Kerrigan were unsubstantiated. The commissioner also called the chief's promotion interview process "a sham."


Posted by: K9Vinny

It sounds like it is time for a "no confidence" vote for Chief Braga and Sgt. Shea. It sounds like the whole brass at Hudson P.D. are a buch of morons.


Posted by: 94c

no one in a bar fight is 100% right or 100% wrong. unless someone gets in my face no one goes to jail and the combatants can go file their own complaints.

never mind locking up a cop under those conditons. I'm glad the judge saw through all the bullshit.

It's obvious this Shea guy is nothing but a kiss ass to the Chief


Posted by: WorPD007

Saturday, March 4, 2006 Hudson police officer is reinstated

Elaine Thompson TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF
ethompson@telegram.com


HUDSON— A police officer who was found not guilty of filing a false police report against Police Chief Richard Braga’s nephew and his girlfriend has been reinstated to the department.

Capt. David A. Stephens said Officer Michael S. Vroom was notified yesterday that he will resume his job Monday. Officer Vroom, 28, of Clinton, had been on paid administrative leave since Sept. 28, 2004, as the result of an incident that happened March 3, 2004.

The officer was accused of filing a false police report and false assault and battery charges against Kate Lugin, 19, of 5 Temi Road, and her live-in boyfriend, Michael Moura, whose father is the brother of Chief Braga’s wife. The chief recused himself from the criminal and internal cases and turned the matter over to Capt. Stephens.

Last month, after a three-day trial, Concord District Court Judge Robert J. McKenna Jr. found the officer not guilty, but he was still facing a termination hearing.

After the verdict, Capt. Stephens said he was disappointed with the judge’s decision and for the lack of explanation from the judge. Yesterday, the captain said the department has decided to put the matter behind it.

“The department has decided not to move forward with his termination hearing. I just feel it’s in the best interest of the department and the members not to proceed further,” Capt. Stephens said yesterday.

He said an internal investigation concluded that Officer Vroom violated Hudson police rules and regulations, and the officer has received discipline. The captain said he was prohibited from disclosing the violation and the discipline. “He received information for his discipline this morning,” Capt. Stephens said.

Officer Vroom could not be reached for comment.

“We’re just very happy to have him back,” Officer Jack Donovan, union president, said in a telephone interview yesterday.

The charges came after the officer responded to a call from Ms. Lugin’s neighbor, John Sherman, that someone in the woman’s house had parked their car and it partially blocked his driveway. Witnesses for both sides testified that there were years of bad blood between occupants of the two homes.

Officer Vroom said when Ms. Lugin answered her door, he smelled marijuana. He asked to come in, but the woman refused. He said he heard someone run inside the house and slam up against the door, knocking Ms. Lugin to the ground. He said he saw that it was Michael Moura who had pushed the door. When he went to arrest Mr. Moura, the officer testified, Mr. Moura opened an adjacent door leading to another part of the house, ran through it, slammed it behind him, and went out a back sliding glass door that led to the backyard.

The officer arrested Ms. Lugin and filed charges against her and Mr. Moura of assault and battery on a police officer and resisting arrest. The charges were never prosecuted because the couple, as well as Mr. Moura’s father and brother, said that at the time of the incident, Mr. Moura was on Cape Cod doing a plumbing job with the family company.

The officer’s lawyer, Joseph W. Monahan, maintained that Mr. Moura was indeed in the house, but couldn’t chance getting into trouble because he already was on probation for at least three convictions, including driving to endanger, leaving the scene of an accident with property damage, and driving after revocation of his license. He also has been arrested for possession of marijuana. In July 2003, he led police on a high-speed chase that began in Hudson and ended in Stow when he lost control of his motorcycle and slid under a car. After the accident, his license was revoked for three years for being a habitual traffic offender. He also broke his right wrist and had to have a metal pin inserted to hold the bones together. Mr. Monahan maintained that the injured right hand prevented Mr. Moura from being able to do the job on Cape Cod.

Officer Vroom’s trial was one of two last month involving a Hudson police officer. Former Officer Kevin F. Andrade, 27, of Hudson, was arrested and charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon after a bar brawl in Hudson last June. A Framingham District Court judge found him not guilty. The officer was fired before his trial and has since appealed to the state Civil Service Commission.


Posted by: Buford T

Move forward my ass. I bet Vroom will get flowers and candy from the administration upon his return. Sue the towns balls off and lateral the hell out of that hell hole. Their's a special place in hell for administrators who do things like this..


Posted by: 7MPOC

At least its a civil service town, if it was non-civil service they would ruined this cop for doing his job. I have 2 words for this brother officer, Lateral Transfer. Go to a place where police work is commended not condemed. Also, if they disciplined for something ridiculous, another few words, Appeal to civil service! I know people complain about civil service, rather, how hard it is to get in but once you do its a great thing to have especially for politics like this.


Posted by: nightcopppa

WTF?????????????????????
Please remind me never to put in for a job in Hudson.
You have got to be shitting me.


Posted by: WorPD007

Any idea how these two Officers are doing? Also heard the Town ended up settling the law suit with another Officer from that town?!


Posted by: 4198

It makes me sick to read things like this. You guys are right on with the civil service-thank god that dept. was civil service. Problem is, many departments are not civil service and things like this can happen at any point in your career no matter how good you did your job for say....the past 10 years!! One complaint comes in, and WOW!! They seem to suddenly forget all your accomplishments and focus on this complaint, sit around and analyze the shit out of it, and come up with more stupid ideas, to question you such as: Why your not smiling enough anymore? Why it seems your down? and then they use that new BS as a reason to start an internal investigation as to why your not your "normal" self, and now getting complaints, pointing to maybe he is stressed out? having family problems bla bla bla, it's so typical of small bored "department heads" that dont have enough police work to focus on so they police their own department to hell. They micro manage everyone there watching waiting for you to fk' up so they can have a meeting on it, have coffee and hack the shit out of you. Dont forget, the "managers" got there by doing what they are told, not by thinking about it, and that's no matter what the truth is, all kiss ass -back stabbing spineless jelly fish in my eyes and if those are the "good guys" then call me a bad one!! I'd rather stand apart and alone from them, and right next to my union brother patrolman any day of the week!


Posted by: Simple

The only mistake I see is that the Officer stated that she was not free to go because she was under arrest for assault and battery. A@B on a PO is not arrestable. I am surprised the Lawyer did not pick up on this. I know a bunch of people are gonna freak out and say that A@B on a PO is arrestable. It is not, they are usually charged with assault and then some other charge like Disorderly or Disturbing the peace,both of which are the arrestable offenses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MiamiVice
1/29/06
Officer acquitted of false report
By Elaine Thompson TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF

CONCORD - A Hudson police officer yesterday was found not guilty of filing a
false police report against Police Chief Richard Braga's nephew and his
girlfriend.

Officer Michael S. Vroom, 28, of 315 Berlin St., Clinton, who has been on
paid administrative leave the past 15 months, smiled after hearing Concord
District Court Judge Robert J. McKenna Jr. announce the not guilty verdict
immediately after closing arguments from both sides. The officer, however,
declined comment because he is still facing an internal investigation,
which will determine the future of his career.

Officer Vroom was accused of filing a false police report and false assault
and battery charges against Kate Lugin, 19, of 5 Temi Road, and her live-in
boyfriend, Michael Moura, whose father is the brother of Chief Braga's
wife. The chief recused himself from the criminal and internal cases and
turned the matter over to Capt David Stephens.

The charges came after the officer responded to a call on March 3, 2004,
from Ms. Lugin's neighbor, John Sherman, that someone in the woman's house
had parked their car partially blocking his driveway. Mr. Sherman, the
couple and Ms. Lugin's mother said there were years of bad blood between
occupants of the two homes.

Officer Vroom testified yesterday that he banged on the door several times
before Ms. Lugin opened it. He said he asked to come in to speak to the
owner of the vehicle. Ms. Lugin refused, but the owner, Mr. Moura's cousin,
Jose Moura, came out another door and went over to talk to the officer. The
officer said Ms. Lugin closed the door and he asked Jose Moura to have her
come outside. When she opened the door, the officer said, he smelled
marijuana.

He said he told Ms. Lugin that he smelled marijuana and asked who else was
in the house and if he could come inside and look around.

The woman denied having smoked marijuana and slightly pushed the officer's
chest with an open hand as she tried to close the door, Officer Vroom said.

She got agitated and pushed me and said, No. Go away. I told her not to
do that, not to touch me,the officer testified. He said Ms. Lugin pushed
him a second time and tried to retreat back into the house, but he reached
around the door and held onto her arm.

“She tried to close the door and I put my foot in the door jam. I told her
she was not free to go … that I was placing her under arrest for assault
and battery, the officer said

Officer Vroom said he heard someone run inside the house and slam up
against the door, knocking Ms. Lugin to the ground. He said at that point
he saw that it was Michael Moura who had pushed the door. He said he went
to go arrest Mr. Moura, but that Mr. Moura opened an adjacent door leading
to another part of the house, ran through it and slammed it behind him. The
officer said he suspects that Mr. Moura ran out a back sliding glass door
that led to the backyard.

Mr. Sherman, the neighbor, called 911 and told police that an officer
needed assistance. He also testified that he saw Mr. Moura run out the back
of the house. But, Mr. Moura, as well as his father, brother, girlfriend
and her mother, Patricia Quinn, testified during the trial that Mr. Moura
was not at the house that night.

Mr. Moura told the court yesterday that he was with his brother and father,
doing a plumbing job at a Dunkin' Donuts on Cape Cod from March 3 to 5.
Assault and battery and resisting arrest charges against the pair were
never prosecuted because of Mr. Moura's Cape Cod alibi.

Officer Vroom's lawyer, Joseph W. Monahan, maintained that Mr. Moura was
indeed in the house, but couldn't chance getting into trouble because he
was already on probation for at least three convictions, including driving
to endanger, leaving the scene of an accident with property damage, and
driving after revocation of his license He has also been arrested for
possession of marijuana. In July 2003, he led police on a high-speed chase
that began in Hudson and ended in Stow when he lost control of his
motorcycle and slid under a car. After the accident, his license was
revoked for three years for being a habitual traffic offender. He also
broke his right wrist and had to have a metal pin inserted to hold the
bones together. Mr. Monahan maintained that the injured right hand
prevented Mr. Moura from being able to do the job on Cape Cod. But Mr.
Moura said he was able to use his left hand.

You try to make me look like a bad kid, Mr. Moura said to the defense
lawyer when he pointed out the young man's criminal record several times.

Sgt. Thomas W. Boudreau, the supervising officer and a backup officer to
the Temi Road incident, testified that a push on the chest from Ms. Lugin
was enough for Officer Vroom to file assault and battery charges. But, he
thinks the matter should have been handled differently.

A parking complaint that escalated to an arrest, that should not have
happened in my opinion, Sgt. Boudreau said. He said he does not recall
what Ms. Lugin said, but that she was œverbally venomous toward Officer
Vroom.

He also said an ashtray that the officer found inside the house contained
ashes that smelled like marijuana but he decided that charges would not be
filed.

Capt. David Stephens said even though the judge cleared Mr. Vroom of
criminal charges, he still has internal charges pending. He declined to
elaborate on those charges Mr. Stephens has handled the case because Chief
Braga recused himself because of the family ties. The captain said the
chief has never even read the internal report. He said the district
attorney's office reviewed the case and concluded there was sufficient
evidence to go forward with the case against Officer Vroom.

He said he is disappointed with the judge's decision and for the lack of
explanation from the judge.

It would have been nice to know what his reasons were. But, now we’ll move
forward with the internal noncriminal part. That will go to a hearing
officer who will decide on the other charges we have pending, he said.
There are different standards of proof for a criminal case and an internal
case. In a criminal case you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. In an
internal case, it's preponderance of the evidence.

The trial was the first of two this week involving a Hudson police officer.
Officer Kevin F. Andrade, 27, of Hudson, is to go on trial today in
Framingham District Court on a charge of assault and battery with a
dangerous weapon. He was arrested after a bar brawl in Hudson last June.



Posted by: irish937

Hey Simple, go back to school. A&B PO is arrestable all day long, dipshit. Misdemeanor ammounting to a breach of the peace in your presence. Go back to school, asswipe. Learn the laws, then post. You want to spar?? PM me, otherwise, shut the f#%k up!!!


Posted by: irish937

Sorry, I hate pussy, can't stand up for themselves.........Trolls!!!


Posted by: Simple

You cannot breach an Officer's peace. Again ab po has to be coupled with another charge. And take a chill pill!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by irish937
Hey Simple, go back to school. A&B PO is arrestable all day long, dipshit. Misdemeanor ammounting to a breach of the peace in your presence. Go back to school, asswipe. Learn the laws, then post. You want to spar?? PM me, otherwise, shut the f#%k up!!!



Posted by: Simple

By the way you are the dipshit. If you read my post it says that it has to be coupled with another charge like, What did you say "Breach of the peace"?, No shit but in this case it would have to be disorderly because you cannot breach the peace of a police officer, you go back to school learn to read and then you can post. Arresting for assault on a Police officer alone will get thrown out 10 outa 10 times, If the idiot has a half-way decent attorney. Look at any police log they are also charged with some other charge. CARE TO ANSWER THAT? If you want you can look up the charge
MGL 265, 13D see if it in itself is arrestable. Then we can talk........


Quote:
Originally Posted by irish937
Hey Simple, go back to school. A&B PO is arrestable all day long, dipshit. Misdemeanor ammounting to a breach of the peace in your presence. Go back to school, asswipe. Learn the laws, then post. You want to spar?? PM me, otherwise, shut the f#%k up!!!



Posted by: irish937

Really? ANY A&B amounts to a "breach of the peace". When a misdemeanor is committed in your presence AND amounts to a "breech of the peace", you can arrest for it whether the statue authorizes it or not. In Comm. v O'Hara, the appellate court stated that swerving over the lines amounted to driving to endanger, which was a breech of the peace and therefore arrestable. I believe it was 1991 case. You do not need any other charge to make an arrest. Scenario: You walk up to two nitwits slugging it out in back of a bar. You can make the arrest for A&B. You do not need a "tack" on offense such as disorderly. You can, but it is not necessary. By the way, the case law I think you are describing (about an officer's peace cannot be disturbed) is for the charge of "disturbing the peace".


Posted by: dcs2244

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simple
You cannot breach an Officer's peace. Again ab po has to be coupled with another charge. And take a chill pill!!!
Yes, you can breach an officer's peace in certain circumstances...there is case law (albeit recent...last 20 years) on this...I'll poke around and see if I can find it...

Remember, when writing your report: "...and the crowd began to gather..."


Posted by: Simple

Go look up MGL 265 13D which directly states the LAW and the ability to arrest for this charge.............
Quote:
Originally Posted by irish937
Really? ANY A&B amounts to a "breach of the peace". When a misdemeanor is committed in your presence AND amounts to a "breech of the peace", you can arrest for it whether the statue authorizes it or not. In Comm. v O'Hara, the appellate court stated that swerving over the lines amounted to driving to endanger, which was a breech of the peace and therefore arrestable. I believe it was 1991 case. You do not need any other charge to make an arrest. Scenario: You walk up to two nitwits slugging it out in back of a bar. You can make the arrest for A&B. You do not need a "tack" on offense such as disorderly. You can, but it is not necessary. By the way, the case law I think you are describing (about an officer's peace cannot be disturbed) is for the charge of "disturbing the peace".



Posted by: irish937

You keep doing things the way you want. I'm telling you what you are authorized to do. This is basic policing 101. Any A&B is arrestable in your presence PERIOD. What are the ways you, as an officer, can make arrests? Felony on P/C or in presence, warrant, Misd. on P/C where the statue allows, misd. committed in your presence where statutory right exists AND misd. amounting to a breach of the peace committed in your presence (read also 41/9. Did you read the case law I quoted? The appellate court stated clearly that the officer had a right to follow over town lines because he had an arrestable offense in his jurisdiction. That arrestable offense as quoted by the court was operating to endanger. Obviously OTE does not have a statue that clearly authorizes an arrest, but the court stated that it was arrestable because the offense (OTE) amounted to a breach of the peace. It was not disturbing or disorderly. If I remember correctly, that was a vehicle swerving in and out of lanes at 3 a.m.. Now if that fact pattern amounts to a breach of the peace type offense, how can an assault and battery, which by it's own nature is a violent offense, not be? Another question. What if your inside someone's house investigating a call and they punch you in the face? Can't really be disorderly because you lack a public venue. Let's say it doesn't amount to disturbing either. What do you do? Summons?


Posted by: Simple

That is correct you are SUPPOSED to summons, but it doesn't ever happn that way. In the case you refer to it is all correct, but in the case of assault on PO still not arrestable by itself.. Talk to an attorney or look in the little book that you probably carry around with you and look up 235 13d and see if it is arrestable. If you want I will look the law up in a criminal text book and then transpose all the info here for you to read and then annotate the books info for you, but alas you are still wrong about ab po.....Sorry!



Quote:
Originally Posted by irish937
You keep doing things the way you want. I'm telling you what you are authorized to do. This is basic policing 101. Any A&B is arrestable in your presence PERIOD. What are the ways you, as an officer, can make arrests? Felony on P/C or in presence, warrant, Misd. on P/C where the statue allows, misd. committed in your presence where statutory right exists AND misd. amounting to a breach of the peace committed in your presence (read also 41/9. Did you read the case law I quoted? The appellate court stated clearly that the officer had a right to follow over town lines because he had an arrestable offense in his jurisdiction. That arrestable offense as quoted by the court was operating to endanger. Obviously OTE does not have a statue that clearly authorizes an arrest, but the court stated that it was arrestable because the offense (OTE) amounted to a breach of the peace. It was not disturbing or disorderly. If I remember correctly, that was a vehicle swerving in and out of lanes at 3 a.m.. Now if that fact pattern amounts to a breach of the peace type offense, how can an assault and battery, which by it's own nature is a violent offense, not be? Another question. What if your inside someone's house investigating a call and they punch you in the face? Can't really be disorderly because you lack a public venue. Let's say it doesn't amount to disturbing either. What do you do? Summons?



Posted by: Simple

Make that 265 13 d. My typo.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Simple
That is correct you are SUPPOSED to summons, but it doesn't ever happn that way. In the case you refer to it is all correct, but in the case of assault on PO still not arrestable by itself.. Talk to an attorney or look in the little book that you probably carry around with you and look up 235 13d and see if it is arrestable. If you want I will look the law up in a criminal text book and then transpose all the info here for you to read and then annotate the books info for you, but alas you are still wrong about ab po.....Sorry!



Posted by: irish937

I've said my peace. Gook luck to you all all the people of your village.


Posted by: irish937

Meant AND all the people of your village. Sorry, my typo.


Posted by: Simple

Good Luck to you. I hope you have the Homestead act on your house and know a good attorney.
265 13d
Quote:
Originally Posted by irish937
I've said my peace. Gook luck to you all all the people of your village.





ma police, boston ma police, massachusetts police, massachusetts police, mass state police, mass police, ma, mass, massachusetts, massachusetts, massachutes, massachusetts law, massachusetts polece, police, officer, police officer, cops, police gear, law enforcement, police duty gear, state police, sheriff, law, police supply, police agency directory, police agency, police department, traffic officer, police dept, state trooper, dispatcher, massachusetts county sheriff, massachusetts sheriff, massachusetts department of corrections, ma doc, doc, dept of corrections, police information, civil service, ma civil service, massachusetts crime, police training, police academy, ma police academy, massachusetts officers, masscop, masscops, mpa, bpa, ibpoa, police association, massachusetts police news, massachusetts crime news, mass most wanted, police career information, police patrol, police administration, police books, crime scene training, police discussion, crime discussions, cops

About MassCops, the home for Massachusetts law enforcement.

The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network opened in 1998 and is now a part of the New England Police Network The site is a pro-police discussion forum intended for sworn police officers and civilian law enforcement officials as well as those interested in pursuing a career in law enforcement here in Massachusetts.

The goal of The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network is to provide an informal network of law enforcement officials here in Massachusetts for educational and informational purposes.

The forum covers many topics such as Police Related News Articles, Agency & Profession Discussions, Police Training as well as Law Enforcement Career Information.

The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network and The New England Police Network (NEPN) and it's network sites are privately owned websites/domains and are not affiliated with or endorsed by any government association or agency.

MassCops (masscops.com) and (masscop.com) are privately owned are not affiliated with or endorsed by the Massachusetts Coalition of Police (masscop.org)



vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vB Easy Archive Final ©2000 - 2008 - Created by Stefan "Xenon" Kaeser

3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 49 50 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108