| Originally Posted by SOT Hey could you delete the bad parts of the other thread, merge this with that...and delete the silly part of this thread...and get it back on track...then stick the big thread? |
| Originally Posted by quality617 I'm guessing "bobbing for crotch apples" MAY have been the coup de grasse. Just a hunch. |
| Originally Posted by dcs2244 When I read that post in the original thread it was truly a "LOL" moment for me... |
| Originally Posted by LawWoman Can somebody explain to me the rational of not letting EPOs, State certified Police Officers carry guns in courts?????????????? |
| Originally Posted by LawWoman I can just smell a girl fight between me and Foxy |
| Originally Posted by Tuna It's not a matter of trust, it's a matter of power play. Some one high up in court security, (and I say security because they are not police) has there undies all in a bunch over an incident that happened away from the court many years ago. Now they are exercising their "power" for payback. |
| Originally Posted by Tuna It's not a matter of trust, it's a matter of power play. Some one high up in court security, (and I say security because they are not police) has there undies all in a bunch over an incident that happened away from the court many years ago. Now they are exercising their "power" for payback. |
| Originally Posted by Foxy85 Lawwoman = douche bag |
| Originally Posted by testtaker How does an unarmed court blue shirt security gaurd take a weapon away from an armed police officer??? |
| Originally Posted by Edmizer1 The court security at my local court (withheld) told me that they were told that only officers that fall under the courts definition of police officer are allowed in with guns. He said that DEA, FBI, UMASS, and EPOs aren't police officers under their definition. The guys I talked to said that they waive in the plain clothes guys such as the FBI but can't get away with it for uniformed cops. |
| Originally Posted by testtaker How does an unarmed court blue shirt security gaurd take a weapon away from an armed police officer??? |
| Originally Posted by kttref In my GA we are to wear civilian clothes and we must check our weapons at the door. Which sucks, but we don't really have a choice. . |
better then nothing... | Originally Posted by JMB1977 I might be wrong ...but don't EPO'S have state wide jursdiction? |
| Originally Posted by Delta784 They do. |
| Originally Posted by mpd61 Yes and annadad will tell you they have MORE jurisdiction than Staties, |
| Originally Posted by Tuna To my knowledge these are the NO GUN COURTS for the EPO's: NoHo Hadley Dudley Milford Worcester Westboro Natick Framingham If I missed one post it. This is getting serious |
| Environmental Police bring issue to a head By Kim Ring TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF PALMER— Morale is slipping among Environmental Police, who say they are issuing more warnings and arresting fewer people because they don’t want to hand over their guns when they show up at court. For the second time in recent weeks, an Environmental Police officer’s refusal to lock his gun in a metal box near the door forced court officers to bar him from entering the building. Court officers told David A. Loos that he could not come into the Palmer District Court yesterday if he did not secure his gun in accordance with policy. “I asked them for a copy of the policy and they did not provide it to me,” Officer Loos said. “They said it was an internal memo.” The policy, though, does exist, Trial Court spokesman Joan Kenney said. “It attempts to limit the number of firearms in the court,” she said. While some law enforcement personnel, such as state and local police, are allowed to bring guns into the building, Environmental Police, officers from the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and some other agencies are not. Lawyers who carry guns are also asked to check them at the door, Ms. Kenney said. But Officer Loos said that Environmental Police are different from the other targeted agencies because “we have full police powers across the state, and territorial jurisdiction and powers of arrest in every courthouse in the commonwealth.” He and fellow Officer Andrew P. Beaulieu said they are better trained to handle guns than many part-time officers, including one seen in the court yesterday with a holster they said might allow someone easy access to the officer’s weapon. “Why is that allowed to happen?” Officer Loos asked. After Officer Loos refused to lock up his gun, he stood outside waiting to sign a complaint against a local man, charging him with hunting illegally. About an hour later, District Court Clerk Magistrate Benjamin D. Barnes brought the complaint to the foyer for the officer to sign. Now, though, Officer Loos wonders what will happen when it is time for him to testify against Michael A. Passey, 46, who allegedly is not licensed to carry a gun and allegedly hid a weapon in the woods while hunting on posted property over the weekend. He fears the case will be dropped if he again refuses to give up his gun and is not allowed inside. He said he believes Mr. Passey, who also has a marijuana and drunken-driving case pending at the court, is dangerous and should be prosecuted, but whether he’ll have to surrender his weapon so he can testify remains to be seen. While current regulations allow Environmental Police to turn over their weapons in certain facilities, they are not obligated to do so, Environmental Police Lt. John S. Pajak said. Lt. Pajak said he is confident that the case against Mr. Palley will move forward. Yesterday’s incident is the most recent in which an officer refused to lock up his gun. On Oct. 26, Environmental Police Officer Anthony Abdal-Khabir entered the Worcester Central District Court with his gun holster and was told he could not come inside. He entered and tried to go to a courtroom but was stopped by four court officers. The officers said part of the reason for holding on to their guns is so they are not targeted by defendants, many of whom were armed when they were arrested. “It makes us a target,” Office Beaulieu said. “We’re walking a round the court in a uniform with an empty holster.” The empty holster might offer the impression that Environmental Police have fewer powers, the men said. And they considered who would be responsible for the loaded gun while it is locked in a small safe, though court personnel explained that the key to the locker would be given to the officer. It was unclear whether there is more than one key for each locker. Officer Loos wondered whether the court officers who sit near the lockers are licensed to carry firearms, and what training they’ve had in handling loaded guns. He said he was not comfortable leaving his weapon in a locker. News of Officer Loos’ experience had state Sen. Stephen M. Brewer, D-Barre, frustrated last night. For some time, he has been trying to correct what he sees as a major problem with the court’s policy. He recently contacted Chief Justice Robert A. Mulligan. “He’s going to meet with his chiefs and report back to me,” Mr. Brewer said. “But I’m running out of patience and we’re going to file legislation.” That legislation would create a policy that would not preclude Environmental Police from bringing their guns to court. “I think it’s a real affront to state officers,” he said, adding that Environmental Police likely deal with more weapons cases than other agencies, because they police waterways and woodlands where sportsmen are found. State Rep. Todd M. Smola, R-Palmer, said he will support the senator’s efforts because he finds the current policy “ridiculous.” “I’m hoping Chief Justice Mulligan will intervene and set a reasonable policy,” he said. “The Environmental Police Officers are just like local officers and state police.” Mr. Smola questioned whether forbidding Environmental Police Officers from carrying guns in court would help achieve the goal of fewer guns in court. “It sounds a little hypocritical, because there are only about 100 Environmental Police officers in the entire commonwealth,” he said. “They’re such a small group.” Environmental Police say they are also concerned because the weapons policy does not seem to be equally enforced in all courts. They said only courts under the control of Regional Assistant Director of Security Robin R. Yancey are affected. Ms. Yancy oversees facilities in Worcester County, Hampshire County and the courthouses in Marlboro, Framingham, Natick and Palmer. While the Environmental Police are grateful for the support of legislators, Officer Loos’ case against Mr. Palley is slated for a pretrial hearing on Jan. 16 and it’s not likely any legislation would find its way to the governor’s desk before then. |
| Originally Posted by quality617 Even more ridiculous, seeing as there are only 9 of us. How is that helping the balance of power in the court? |
Courts, officers at odds| Originally Posted by SOT Yeah but you guys are super bad! 9 SPCA cops is like 200 MSP....yo! |
Yo! 
that the Trial Court security policy, dated December 2000, states that state and municipal police officers on duty are allowed to carry their police-issued weapons into courthouses provided they present a badge and identification. | old cop- Yes mulligans pull does gravitate toward him, ask any court employee. Fox- you guys deserve more than what you get, you folks should make up 50% of the the next C.o's regime. As EPO's you can fight, you work out of the system and can make change. I beleive in fighting for what I beleive in until it is counterproductive. I think Mulligan is managing folks as he sees it, which I beleive is the military way. I have no issue with any military personel. In fact I beleive that to manage folks you have to show them some kind of discipline to achieve the goal. Am I wrong here?? |
| Originally Posted by JMB1977 Thats nonsense that all you EPO's can't carry inside a courthouse. Just like campus police...(yes we are police officers in uniform) are all in the same boat...(Set apart from State and Municipal officers) |
| Originally Posted by SOT Well I think the one difference here is that the EPO's can enforce laws across the state, campus police can not. |
| Originally Posted by Q5-TPR Since when do the EPO's or any PO's for that matter, have to turn their weapons in when they go to court?? I know I have been away for a while, but this is the first I have ever heard of it. If a Court Officer told me to turn my weapon(s) in, I would laugh at him and eaither a. keep walking in or b. turn around and walk out, go home, and call my union rep. No bash on the Court Officers, just what would happen. The only people I will hand my weapons over to is my chain of command. All others get my weapon muzzle first, and one bullet at a time! |
| Originally Posted by robodope This is absolutely disgusting...The court system has put the EPO's lower on the pecking order and the Chief comes out and just confirms it instead of taking the rare oppurtunity to support his officers..That is why this state sucks!! |
| Originally Posted by Q5-TPR Since when do the EPO's or any PO's for that matter, have to turn their weapons in when they go to court?? I know I have been away for a while, but this is the first I have ever heard of it. |
| Originally Posted by KozmoKramer Hi Q5 - take a look at the following threads. It should provide some insight and history. http://www.masscops.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41253 http://www.masscops.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41519 |
| Originally Posted by bbelichick EPO management is legendarily b-a-d. This doesn't shock me. |
To those administrators that won't back up the EPOs | Originally Posted by OldCop As a result of the recent media attention to the attempts to disarm Massachusetts Environmental Police Officers entering the Commonwealths' courthouses, certain officers have been ordered in writing to comply with the courts mandate. This order through the chain of command comes from the Chief of Inland Enforcement, with the blessing of the Director of Law Enforcement. Additionally, as per the Chief of Inland Enforcement, should an altercation erupt in the courts, officers are directed to retreat to a "safe location" and allow the Court Officers to deal with the situation. It is anticipated that the Environmental Police Officer Association (EPOA) will be requesting immediate training for all officers in techniques that include: Running and hiding; Cowering; and, Shirking Duties and Responsibility. It has been suggested that certain managers act as instructors due to their demonstrated, long-term proficiency in the aforementioned subject matter. Attornies for the EPOA will also be composing legislation requiring that each courthouse provides an "EPO Safe-Haven" clearly marked to facilitate retreating officers. Some officers have already suggested the installation of "man-sized safes" ala Dick Cheney, as reported in the Daily Show with John Stewart. Also, unknown at this time is whether any officer will be required to "Shreik Like a Little Girl" when retreating, or if a silent retreat is acceptable. Many of the officers opposed to this order have been directed to employer-mandated medical examinations to determine if their testosterone levels exceed the management threshold of 1 part per quadrillion. Any officer exhibiting evidence of testosterone who is also found to engage in any conversation with the media, will be required to undergo a medical process which includes neutering and the severing of the vocal cords, before being allowed to return to work. While deemed harsh by some employment standards, the process is the norm for most employees within the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, (aka don't even THINK that we like cops). Previously, EPO's, particularly Lieutenants, were required to be muzzelled, a somewhat less severe process, and allowed to speak only with the approval of management, and then, only on non-controversial matters that enhanced the public perception of the Sekretariat. The side benefit of the mandated medical arrangement is that the pool of eligible candidates for management positions (read non-civil service appointees) in the heirarchy of the Mass Environmental Police should increase significantly. |
| Originally Posted by rg1283 To those administrators that won't back up the EPOs |
It's become a terrible burden to be strapped with this type if injustice caused by management. This thing could have been straightened out many years ago (in fact it was ) but NO, management has allowed it to fester again. If the officer refuses to go into court it's dereliction of duty. If the officer surrenders their firearm and there is a problem it's "duck and cover" with no defense. If the court officer, who receives the weapon has no LTC who gets jambed up? The EPO? A uniformed officer with an empty holster is just asking for an altercation with the nitwits. | Originally Posted by Foxy85 I must stress yet again, the C.O. is not to take any possesion over the weapon....you retain the key, so in essence, if we're not handling the weapon....there is no need for an L.T.C. |
| Originally Posted by PaulKersey When you see them in court, you have to lower your head in shame, and avoid confrontation because your holster is empty? You kidding me?. |
| Originally Posted by Foxy85 Anway, I don't want to argue posession, but there is really no exchange of the weapon....EPO puts it in a locker....takes the key, or in todays case, he came in today and said he wasn't armed....good enough for me..... |
| Originally Posted by Deuce God I hope not Paul. That's when the real fun starts and you get to beat the bag out of some mope w/ your hands.. |
| Originally Posted by Deuce God I hope not Paul. That's when the real fun starts and you get to beat the bag out of some mope w/ your hands.. |
. | Originally Posted by Foxy85 I must stress yet again, the C.O. is not to take any possesion over the weapon....you retain the key, so in essence, if we're not handling the weapon....there is no need for an L.T.C.... |
| Originally Posted by Foxy85 FYI I do have my LTC and have qualified witha few weapons so I would have no problem handling it even IF we did take possesion of it, which we shouldn't so, I really have no point.....just stressing no CO should be even coming close to touching your weapon.... |
| Originally Posted by Foxy85 Any EPO's have any updates concerning the process of "getting approval" from Boston? I've heard about the duck and cover update....is that to say things aren't going well? Please keep us all informed of any positive updates, either with your union or management.... |
| Originally Posted by Tuna Foxy, look up constructive possession, you don't need to have it in your hand to have possession of it. How many other keys are there, never knew a lock that didn't have 2 or more keys Ya got an LTC, yea!! What weapons do you own? What weapons have you qualified with? How and who did you qualify with, (which PD, military unit, militia, cub scout troop)? Look up MGL 268s13B read it and you may find a problem with what you are doing. Look up Chapter 268s32C, it's in committee right now but if it passes look out. Also the word on the street is that the Sheriff's dept may take over security at ALL courts in Ma. Makes sense to me. There are already there bringing the customers in and they are armed |
| Originally Posted by Tuna Foxy, look up constructive possession, you don't need to have it in your hand to have possession of it. How many other keys are there, never knew a lock that didn't have 2 or more keys |
| Originally Posted by SOT I don't think it is really an issue of "constructive possession" as much as it would be a "prohibited person" having unauthorized access. |
| Originally Posted by 94c I Would have to go with constructive possession. |
</img>| Originally Posted by Foxy85 LoL, didn't even know the Trial Court had an honor guard...hilarious.... |
| Originally Posted by rg1283 I mean WTF is the court officer going to do wand an EPO? |
| Originally Posted by rg1283 This would be "illegal" against the rules, while in court one time, I realized that the metal detectors detect metal. Now everything on the EPO's belt is going to set off that detector. Extra magazines, handcuffs of course. One could easily carry a .38 lightweight somewhere if their a police officer with all that gear on. I mean WTF is the court officer going to do wand an EPO? |
| Originally Posted by C73 The plain clothes would work except for the fact that we have take home cruisers. I'm not driving in to court unarmed in a marked cruiser. C73 |
| Originally Posted by dh18 Considering that the cruisers are take homes and that many officers live halfway across the state from their patrol area; I don't see many EPOs taking their personal vehicle to court. |
| Originally Posted by Motorcop On 12/21/ Senator Steven Brewer filed SD 2576 Relative to allowing environmental Police Officers to carry a firearm in any court facility in the Commonwealth. It is now in the joint committee on rules. |
| Originally Posted by Delta784 That's the whole point....waste as much patrol time as possible, to send a message to the blockheads at the trial court. |
| Originally Posted by dh18 Stop thinking logically, the managers don't care and believe that the weapon should be turned over and that an officer should "duck and cover". So if an EPO leaves their weapon at home with their cruiser he would not be on patrol while traveling to court and the officer would still owe the state time on the road. |
| Originally Posted by Tuna Also the word on the street is that the Sheriff's dept may take over security at ALL courts in Ma. Makes sense to me. There are already there bringing the customers in and they are armed |
| Originally Posted by dh18 The rumor mill says the Sheriffs are mulling the idea, esp since the MGLs (ch 221 s 69) allows either deputy sheriffs or court security officers to provide courthouse security. |
| Originally Posted by Delta784 Never happen....court officers are even more politically connected than deputies, if that's possible. Do you really think the judges of this state will allow the chance that their hacks will be exposed to working a cellblock, or working something other than banker's hours?? |
| Originally Posted by Foxy85 Absolutely correct.... Instead of holding signs for the sheriff, they are in with senators and state reps. It won't happen.... |
| Originally Posted by Foxy85 I scored well on the Court Officer entry exam.... |
| Originally Posted by Foxy85 I scored well on the Court Officer entry exam.... |
| Originally Posted by Foxy85 I scored well on the Court Officer entry exam.... |
test where you studied all night?| Originally Posted by Tuna You have got to be kidding me. You guys have an exam. |
| Originally Posted by Bulldog64 So back to the issue.....LAW vs Policy....State law dictates that EPOS Carry....Hack policy says give it up at the door. Good luck with that. Badge goes with firearm.....end of story. |
| Originally Posted by dh18 The law (MGL ch 21a s 10c) says the director of MEP may allow an EPO to carry a weapon, it does not allow anyone else to make that decision. |
| Originally Posted by dh18 I don't know of any law that prohibits a police officer on duty from carrying a weapon into a state owned public building. |
| The court officers on Friday completed a week of training, which included courtroom and restraint procedures, defensive tactics, and a review of the Trial Court’s diversity and sexual harassment policies. |
| Originally Posted by RPD931  Wow!! A Full week?!?! |
| Originally Posted by Delta784 No offense to court officers, but the job isn't exactly rocket science........ |
| Originally Posted by Mongo Second thankfully it is policy not to and I should hope it would be for every agency. |
In over 20 years I have not needed one at either place. Granted we all know the potential for a gunman exists, but I'll continue to play the odds while off-duty - In most of the extremely rare cases where a gun was pulled by an offender in court, he took it off someone who was allowed to carry one inside... | Originally Posted by JoninNH Loyal, I'd really reconsider carrying off duty if I were you. |
| Originally Posted by Tuna . Pay attention: When you are asked into the Judges chambers for that special favor. Pay attention: When you are asked to look the other way for that political friend. That's not too much to ask, is it?? You'd be surprised.... No we wouldn't! Some of what I mentioned can be taught and then there's some people who are just never going to get it... |
| Originally Posted by Foxy85 You really need to calm down Tuna, I know your love for the Court Officer's is strong, but sersiously, take a step back and stop mauling us...We have plenty of love to go around for you....C'mon please stop being so nice to us, its really starting to make me blush... |
| Originally Posted by kttref anyone else feel this thread has run it's course? |
| Originally Posted by Foxy85 You're right, theres talks in the courts that they will need to check their baton and O.C. as well now.... |
| Originally Posted by Loyal few of the police prosecutors carry inside the court and they are there more than any of us. See the new thread on having a life outside of law enforcement, about how some guys always feel a need to carry and be a cop 24/7/365.. I leave mine in the locker rather than bring it to court. Couldn't be bothered. Bring it with you if you want and the EPO's should not be excluded, but it's not worth sweating about. Clearly the courts think there are enough safeguards and feel that having a gun forcibly taken from someone and used against others is more of a risk than a defendant getting one past security. I bring no badge, gun or cuffs - just my PD ID when I go to court. We can't bring a gun into the HOC when we are on duty and bringing a safekeep there, what's the difference ? |
| Originally Posted by Foxy85 The problem isn't that they are not allowing guns in the court, the problem is that they are singling out EPO's and a couple of other agencies and not allowing THEM to carry in courts.... |
| Originally Posted by Foxy85 MSPCA cannont carry in courts, nor any out-of-state law enforcement agency, nor any federal agency.....I believe the exception is if they are transporting prisoners in some capacity, but then they don't really come into the "courts" per se, they just exchange paperwork/prisoner and leave.....Its fishy, but then again it is Massachusetts |
| Originally Posted by Foxy85 MSPCA cannont carry in courts, nor any out-of-state law enforcement agency, nor any federal agency.....I believe the exception is if they are transporting prisoners in some capacity, but then they don't really come into the "courts" per se, they just exchange paperwork/prisoner and leave.....Its fishy, but then again it is Massachusetts |
| Originally Posted by quality617 So far, Framingham and Salem are the only places that have enforced this. Everywhere else, they could care less. |
| Originally Posted |