Over at tellhimfred.com, barryfreed gives his account of being arrested, handcuffed and put in jail for a $40 ticket that he paid.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Over at tellhimfred.com, barryfreed gives his account of being arrested, handcuffed and put in jail for a $40 ticket that he paid.
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad: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
I actually read that whole thing.
By Pete Nice
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 8:19am
Here is what probably happened.
On May 3rd, the guy is driving a car with an expired registration. Cop pulls him over and gives him a ticket (he says a $40 ticket but there is absotuly no fine in the entire MA general laws which is $40 so this part kind of confused me, maybe the registration renewal fee is $40, or a Revere Town by law is $40?). The guy now has to pay for two things, his registration renewal and the ticket. The ticket itself is not going to factor into the registry computer until a few days, so he can actually register his car before paying the ticket (since the registry doesn't even know he has a ticket at that point). So he says he goes online and registers his car and pays the ticket?
Either way the registry did not receive something and has his license suspended in their computer, the only computer the police can go by.
Now, the police may have been a-holes to the guy but:
-They don't have to read him his rights if he isn't being questioned for anything (or if they don't want to)
-They have the right to search his car without permission since it was an inventory search.
-His license was suspended and that is why he was arrested (since he says the cops did not tell him why but he goes on to explain that is what the cops actually told him.
What is the lesson here? Don't wait until the last day to register your car. (especially if you get a ticket after the fact for not registering the car).
That's the ONLY lesson?
By Marc
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 2:21pm
Pete, is that the ONLY lesson you take from this?
Normally, I try my utmost to sympathize with the needs of the police in these sorts of stories. I will say that your posts here on Universal Hub over the past couple of years have contributed to my overall respect for the Boston police force, and to my understanding of how hard it must be for uniformed cops to come off well in their interactions with non-criminals, when so much of their career is spent engaging with dangerous criminals who are pretending to be non-criminals.
BUT...This post of yours crosses the line, in my mind, and leads me to reconsider positions you've argued admirably in earlier posts.
This man did nothing wrong. There was either:
(a) a bureaucratic error which was not his fault, or
(b) a minor error in response to a ticket which he was not aware of
A system which defends this sort of treatment of the most law-abiding of situations, in situations where there was no crime, and at worst a clerical error, is a system that cannot be sustained in the long term. It will face, at best, a polite crisis of conference from the population, and at worse anti-police harassment or vigilanteism.
I would think the lesson to take from this, is that this man should organize a petition group including (a) his family and friends (b) his co-workers and entire work network (c) people who have read this blog and the original blog, and (d) any local media he can engage, and demand an apology from the Waltham police department, and a letter explaining what they are going to do to improve their treatment in the future of the non-criminal population that will inevitably pass through their system due to human error. Perhaps if that happened with some regularity, the pressure on the police force to avoid bullying non-criminals would get some changes made.
I mean, just imagine what could have happened if he had ever lost his cool during this ordeal? The mind boggles...
Ok Marc,
By Pete Nice
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 3:56pm
First off, none of this really seems to be a police issue (except for the alleged rudeness and the alleged losing of the keys).
Second, cops have only one thing to go by in these situations, the registry computer. The Waltham Police department did nothing wrong in terms of the actual arrest. Suspended license arrests are pretty much the lowest form of arrest you can have. But I should add that I am still confused by this, and it usually takes months before your license gets suspended unless you have 3 surchargable events within a certain time period. Plus the whole $40 fine thing boggles my mind as well. There simply are no state fines equal to $40 and any ordinance would take a long time to get to the registry (if they even can for licenses).
In addition to the fact that suspend license arrests are often times weak ones (in terms of taking ones liberty away for a few hours), police don't have much of a choice when it comes down to it as they are personably liable for anything that happens if they let the guy go and he actually drives again and hurts someone. No one would take that chance.
My point was that people should be aware about getting things done on time at the registry. Why chance an error like this?
Great points, Pete, but choices were in fact made
By Marc
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 4:50pm
Hi Pete,
I have to say, after reading your response, that I'm again impressed with your reasonable presentation of a defense of the role of the uniformed cops in this issue. Where we differ here is an issue of perspective, I think.
It seems to me that you see here a clear series of events; and that, while unfortunate events, they were not under police control, nor were even subjects of police choice. The only question here is if the error was on the part of the RMV or the motorist himself. Am I correct in my understanding of your position?
In other words, the chain of facts as you recognize them are:
a) Motorist did not renew registration in time (4/30/09)
b) Motorist received ticket in Revere for expired registration (5/3/09)
c) Revere uniformed police officer made conscious effort to be kind, informed of error, issued ticket
d) Motorist paid a ticket
e) Motorist renewed registration with RMV
f) Due to either motorist or RMV error, ticket was not recorded as paid at RMV
g) RMV suspended license, notification either not sent or not received by motorist
h) Waltham uniformed police officer had no choice but to arrest motorist for driving on suspended license
However, the chain of facts I see is this:
a) Motorist did not renew registration in time (4/30/09) - a minor everyday infraction
b) Motorist received ticket in Revere for expired registration (5/3/09)
c) Revere uniformed police officer made conscious effort to be kind, informed of error, issued ticket - correctly handled
d) Motorist paid a ticket
e) Motorist renewed registration with RMV
f) Due to either motorist or RMV error, ticket was not recorded as paid at RMV
g) RMV suspended license, notification either not sent or not received by motorist
h) Waltham uniformed police officer saw an opportunity to treat a non-threatening, law abiding guy badly, and took it
If the arresting office, booking officer, and others at the jail did not quickly recognize that this was a sober, non-threatening, polite, no-police-record type, they need retraining in community relations and a harsher penalty for the failure. The choice they made was to be as rude and unhelpful as possible, and to make sure that any chance to make this man feel confused and powerless was taken. That was a choice - we both know that police officers do not have to behave that way in this situation.
My gut instinct is that this is simply normal human behavior, and that training and cultural change would fix it. But only if it's acknowledged as a problem. All was not cast in stone here from the minute of RMV or motorist error.
Ok I see your side.
By Pete Nice
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 5:51pm
But I'll say this then.
Id bet in Waltham and other surburban towns, around 50% of the arrests are for motor vehicle infractions (driving without a license, driving with a suspended license, warrant for not showing up for court for these other arrests.)
The Waltham police and courts probably have about 1,000 or so arrests go through the system. I never defended the alleged rudeness, I'm just saying that in terms of the legalilty of the arrest everything was done ok on the Waltham Police side. (which this guy questioned with his Miranda rights not being read and the non consent search being done)
And of course there is the two sides to every story part. I've dealt with a lot of suspended license arrests. A lot of the drivers were in fact lazy with following up with payments and renewal stuff and think they can get out of the arrest by showing they are "good guys" with no criminal history. Once that registry computer shows a suspended license, the cop on the street has limited options.
And actually, the initial Revere cop let him drive with an expired registration. Would you have been happy if this guy hit you and it turned out his insurance didn't cover him for an unregistered motor vehicle? Is it or isn't it the police officers job to tow the vehicle off the street?
Fair enough
By Marc
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 10:14pm
Fair enough, and also good points.
You know, that may be true, but I think if so it would make the situation look worse rather than better. It would mean that their treatment was definitely intentional bullying.
I know Waltham fairly well, having grown up nearby, worked there, partied there on occasion, and nearly bought real estate there. I couldn't tell you if 50% was a reasonable percentage or not. But Waltham is an extremely diverse city in every sense, and Waltham cops are not strangers to violent crime. Like other suburbs and neighborhoods of Boston, Waltham marries together colleges, bedroom communities, and high tech in some parts, with housing projects, cramped illegal boarding houses, and a decaying heavy industry base in other parts, all around a core of regular tough-guy boston culture. I know police there see a wide mix of stuff. If they also see 50% people who have never done anything worse than a suspended license arrest caused by an RMV mixup, then they know very well that their treatment of him was inappropriate.
I hear you that the bare legality of the arrest was ok, no question.
Well, isn't it the police officer's job to use all his facilities, including professional discretion, to better serve and protect?
In my experience there are police who try to serve the law-abiding populace, which sometimes requires respectfully herding them to have their papers in order, but still with an understanding that they are the customer. And they protect the law-abiding populace from dangerous elements in society by aggressively pursuing bad actors, at great personal risk to their own persons. Then, there are many other police who, for whatever reasons, develop a culture of aggressively pursuing the law-abiding populace, and misreporting actual crimes to lower their crime statistics. I hope that eventually the omnipresence of video and audio recorders will stamp this second group out.
Well, isn't it the police
By Pete Nice
Tue, 06/29/2010 - 8:00am
Well, isn't it the police officer's job to use all his facilities, including professional discretion, to better serve and protect?
True. But the police don't decide on the fact that driving with a suspended license is arrestable and that there are no other options available to that officer on the street. By taking drivers with suspended licenses off the street, the officer is serving the rest of us that do play by the rules. Alleged rudeness aside, it was the registry that decided the guy had a suspended license, not the police.
And there is no discresion here. This isn't like a shoplifter that you could simply summons into court instead of arresting. If this person had a suspended license, was let go and continued to drive and hurt someone, the officer (and Waltham taxpayers) would be responsible for that injured party. The laws are set up to protect those people who may be hurt by those who drive with suspended licences.
Again, it seems that this may or may not have been a screw up at the registry. But my point is that police officers have less discresion than they would if they encountered a shoplifter, bar fighter, or someone drinkking in public.
And actually there might be an interesting story behind this whole thing. A few years ago someone decided (or intrepreted this law) into meaning that driving with a suspended license was not an arrestable offense. Then strangely enough police departments in MA got the memo from the Court system that they were in fact arrestable offense again after a few months. I'm willing to bet the courts lost a lot of money when people were just given warnings, not charged at all and/or given a chance by police officers to just fix the possible mixup at the registry with out criminal action.
Phone call
By bph
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 9:26am
Maybe he didn't make that phone call. Someone ought to warn
Dan Kennedy
Re: Phone Call
By anon
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 9:44am
If the poor guy was never even notified that his license was suspended or his ticket for driving with an expired registry was never processed by the RMV, how is he supposed to know? Is he psychic?
All in all, a bad sequence of events where a poor guy was pulled over and arrested before he could EVEN BE NOTIFIED by the RMV that his license was no longer valid. I hope he tells his story to every major media outlet in the Greater Boston Area and gets a sincere apology from the RMV and the Waltham police for this. I'd even consider taking legal action if I were him.
Given my experience
By CraigInDaVille
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 12:40pm
with the horrible record-keeping here in our lovely Commonwealth, I tend to err on the side of "this guy has a valid complaint" of the issue. My experience: Moved to Boston for the summer from out-of-state for a brief summer sublet in order to find a permanent apartment. Found one and moved on August 15th to Somerville. Apparently Boston sent me an Excise Tax bill on... August 14th! Never got to me. Never made it through the mail forwarding, etc. And being new to MA, I had no idea to expect a bill.
The following year, I received an excise bill from Boston (first time I actually received one). It just had a bill for the previous full year (not the year I moved to MA). I wrote back, saying I was in Somerville, showed when I listed it as "garaged" there. Got a note back that the NEXT year I would owe Somerville, but for now I owed Boston. Okay, whatever.
The year after that, when trying to renew my registration, I was told I owed about $180 to the City of Boston. Apparently, while they could find me to tell me that I owed for a full year (when the car was never garaged in the city) they never told me about a past-due amount owed for the previous year (really just a few weeks, but whatever). No notice, no "current balance and previous balance", nothing. So with days to go before my registration was up after thinking this would be a fast renewal, I was essentially forced to pay the back amount plus 4x the amount in late fees and whatever.
Who wins? The city. They get to increase what is owed with no obligation to make it right asap. They can claim that notices were sent a thousand times, but it is not in their interest to do so until it becomes a necessity for the driver (via renewal or perhaps arrest on the side of the road) and in the meantime the amount owed keeps going up.
Add into the mix a typical local MA cop with an attitude and a desire to show the bad boys of Waltham who is in charge, and you get this situation.
Cops
By anon
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 9:29am
and people want cops to be the ones in charge of verifying whether people in Arizona are legal or not!!
As one who has the dubious
By imjustmusing
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 9:58am
As one who has the dubious honor of towing cars for a meager living, I can only say there are always two sides of every story.
When I go to a Police call, where the driver is being arrested and his car is being towed to the impound lot, I find that usually, unless the driver has a criminal record the cops won't arrst the driver. They will have us tow the car and maybe write the briver a ticket, but won't cuff him and stuff him, unless...
If the driver is giving the cop a rations of you know what, that is the quickest way to be fitted for the chrome bracelets. Most people don't think they are giving the cop crap, but they usually are. How dio I know this? Because they continue with it when they get into the tow truck with me.
Now, I have never dealt with the Waltham PD, and I don't know this gentleman but I can guess there was probably some s*** given. Most cops really don't want to deal with arresting soeone for something this minor.
They can and do arrest people
By anon
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 1:20pm
I was arrested for a suspended license and I did not have a criminal record and I am smart enough not to mouth off to the police because I know I will never win. Of course the Sommerville police and court officers I dealt with were professionals and helpful.
For the record it is not against the law to speak back to the cops (1st amendment and all) and cops should not be doing anything other than their jobs regardless of how big an ahole the person is being. Selective enforcemment of the law by the police is a bad thing IMO.
Unless you are too polite in disagreement
By Marc
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 2:33pm
Now this is verifiably not true. There are many Boston-area cops who respond angrily to polite disagreement. To put it in your terms, they expect not "no s*** given", but the right amount of s*** given. They're not necessarily bad guys, but you sometimes have to address them with just the right level of hey-buddy-cmon-alright to get through to them as fellow humans, or they will try to break you. People who aren't from around here, or didn't grow up with people who became cops, can end up getting treated much worse just for speaking politely. Perhaps some cops see all polite disagreement as "talking down" to them, or the like. I think it's more likely just an instinctual opportunity to bully someone who is out of their element. Either way, from what I've seen, politely speaking back to a cop will definitely make some of them see red.
Your license status
By anon
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 10:53am
For everyone who reads this and is worried about this happening to them, I would strongly suggest that you check the status of your license at https://secure.rmv.state.ma.us/LicInquiry/intro.aspx
Whoa!
By eeka
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 8:46pm
Hey, it even knows I need corrective lenses!
Entitlement, disdain, disrespect
By fenwayguy
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 12:20pm
Very unprofessional, regardless of the subject's behavior.
imjustmusing: overqualified or underemployed?
There are always two sides
By pilgrimm
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 12:34pm
So, I’ll withhold my judgment here, but I have seen cops behave badly in the past. While it may be a few bad apples, any unprofessionalism or rudeness only serves to erode public trust. If there were a safe way, to make complaints without fear of retribution, maybe there would be less bad behavior on the part of officers.
Also the suspension laws in Mass. are ridiculous and this would have never happened if we didn’t have such ridiculous laws on the books.
They're ridiculous in both directions
By eeka
Mon, 06/28/2010 - 10:53pm
How often do we hear of people with licenses suspended for ACTUAL reasons (you know, like mowing down old people, evading the cops, etc.) who are then arrested for things like, oh, mowing down old people or evading the cops? Some of these people have done dozens of hellacious things, all without valid licenses, yet they're out walking around freely and apparently getting into cars and driving. Why even have driver's licenses if it's apparently not that big of a deal to drive without one?
Also, since this state does suspend licenses for all sorts of things like unpaid tickets, thinking you'd renewed correctly when you hadn't, etc., the law itself becomes meaningless. "Driving with a suspended license" means anything from not renewing on time up through someone who had theirs taken for mowing down old people. When I was an administrator and we'd run background checks on potential hires, that was an infraction we basically ignored, because it didn't give us any information as to which kind of suspended license situation it was. I'm guessing that if even an agency in a field that takes background checks really seriously is willing to overlook this infraction, it can't be keeping a lot of people out of work. Why bother getting a driver's license?
How do you know he was even telling the truth
By anon
Sat, 07/03/2010 - 8:28pm
First, most of you assume everything he wrote is even true. I know for fact that the Waltham Police do video tape everything inside their station and these accusations he made would easily be proven out. He aloso did not even use his real name as the police beat shows an entirely differant name for that arrest at that time(I wont post it). I always find it amazing when people will assume a person they know nothing about is always telling the truth about the police and yet are so willing to assume the worse in the police. Yet, most of the time, it turns out to be the exact opposite. Also the Waltham Police make an excess of 3000-4000 arrests per year (Not hard to confirm statistics)
I highly doubt they have that many arrests.
By Pete Nice
Sat, 07/03/2010 - 11:02pm
I just saw somewhere that Newton and Brookline have less than 1,000 a year. That would tell me Waltham couldn't be much more than that. I could be wrong though. 3-4 thousand a year would be 8-10 arrests a day. Maybe the Waltham Court processes that many prisoners from other towns?
I believe the guys story though. He misunderstood a few things about the law but all he really claimed was that the police officers were rude. That could have meant he was rude and they were just being rude back. Nothing he says tells me the police did anything illegal though.
Always carry $40.00
By anon
Wed, 07/07/2010 - 12:07pm
Read this story with great interest. Also read the following stories, again with great interest. What it seems like to me is that this gentleman is a complainer. Always looking for the negative in everything. Although he admits to some fault, a lot of his comments seemed made up or exaggerated. When you're looking for the negative in everyone and every situation, you will no doubt find it. So when you think someone is being inconvenienced or doesn't give you the answer you want to hear, you will think that person is either annoyed or unprofessional. Sorry, dude, but it all stemmed from your oversight. There is no one to blame but yourself. Very unfortunate about RMV messing up, but once again, it stemmed from your being delinquent with your registration. Renewals are sent out weeks in advance, possibly up to 2 months prior to the month it expires. You also had the whole month to renew. So, long story short, it all could have been prevented by you being a responsible person, but it ended up with your system-hating, fingerpointing blog. Point the finger at yourself and be a man.