Hey, there! Log in / Register
Chinatown restaurant records five-day suspension for not fixing its video surveillance system
By adamg on Thu, 07/30/2015 - 9:25am
The Boston Licensing Board recently ordered New Moon Villa on Edinboro Street to shut for five days for failing to fix its surveillance system even as violence kept erupting outside the restaurant and sometimes spilled into it.
At a hearing earlier this month, a Boston Police detective said he went into the restaurant several times to ask for a copy of video after violent incidents, only to be told the system was not working that night. The most notable of these was a gang shootout last August that injured six people, one of whom ran through the restaurant kitchen, gushing blood, as he tried to flee.
The formal citation was for "failure to cooperate with police."
At the most recent hearing, a restaurant co-owner apologized and said he kept trying to fix an aging video and computer system, rather than buying a new one. The restaurant's lawyer said the restaurant would buy a new video system.
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Seriously?
Now it's private businesses responsibility to record crime for the police? Are they legally required to have a video surveillance system? If this was such a hot spot for violence, why weren't the police regularly watching it? What a joke.
Video system legally required?
Was the restaurant legally required to have a video surveillance system and keep it operational?
I too
Would love to learn more about this
God no
its just Gov overstepping
Seriously?
Why should a business be held responsible for policing the streets? What if a fight starts on the street in front of my house and then spills through my front door? Here's a novel idea: If there's an area with consistent problems, maybe BPD should, oh, I don't know, step up patrols in that area.
Write your city councilors!
I've written to a city councilor to protest this. I urge others, especially those who live in the city, to do likewise. It's easy to do -- go to http://www.cityofboston.gov/citycouncil/councillors/ Click on a councilor, and then click on the contact link.
WOWWWWWWWW
This is some bullshit on a level I didn't even know existed. I hope these resteraunt owners have a good lawyer, cuz this case smells like cash payout to me....
Why doesn't the CITY put up CCTV cameras there if it is so important. Why is Mr. Business owner responsible for providing the cops with surveilence? Is there a mandate in place?
Not what the suspension means
First, the restaurant did have a lawyer. He's the one who convinced the owners to install a new surveillance system.
What the suspension means is that if you have a surveillance system, you better keep it in working order. Had they not had cameras in place (non-functioning cameras, as it turns out), this would not have been an issue. Fine line, I realize.
They're not the first to get in trouble with this sort of thing, although the other case I can think of was even more ridiculous: Roggie's in Cleveland Circle, where police say they found the owner screwing with the surveillance system to try to delete any record of the guy who allegedly fell down the stairs and then got carried outside and dumped in an alley (that incident was good enough for criminal charges).
Apples and bowling balls
The incident at Roggie's was clearly destruction of evidence. This is a business who didn't want to spend money to replace a broken system. The two are not even comparable. Is a business legally required to keep it's surveillance system up to date? There are TONS of places that have old, non-working cameras. You can also buy dummy cameras that are just for show.
What the suspension means is
So as usual, the law creates a perverse incentive: Better to not have surveillance cameras, than have them, and risk the government use them against you.
I have "dummy" cameras in my
I have "dummy" cameras in my back yard after I got tired of chasing junkies with needles in their arms away with my family watching. An actual security system is cost prohibitive. Does this mean because I bothered to put up dummy cameras, because they aren't real, if a crime occurs in my back yard I would be guilty of interfering w a police investigation, or something else ?
Maybe if you are running a
Maybe if you are running a public business, and you tell the police that the security system is broken, but that you are going to get it fixed, and then you don't, you might get in trouble, as the Moon Villa did.
The moral of that story should be obvious
The obvious lesson here is to not tell the police anything, ever, unless a court orders you to do so.
Sheesh, and they wonder why people are uncooperative. Answering police questions can only bite you (as it did here).
And let the shootings and
And let the shootings and homicides continue..
You officially lost the right to comment on any crime or police related posts then. Keep your head in the sand, sir.
its their own fault
if somebody that isnt committing a crime gets in trouble because of being unable to help solve it i wouldnt bother talking to them either
e: their = the police
Glad to see more and more
Glad to see more and more people realizing this...