Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: Pay close attention to the case of the Harford Firefighter recently arrested

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Pay close attention to the case of the Harford Firefighter recently arrested

    Firearm owners in CT should pay attention to and follow this case.

    As most of you know, I am currently a legal investigator for Attorney Rachel M. Baird in Torrington and have access to the facts!

    The media in Connecticut has NO knowledge of the law and recklessly misses the real story regarding the animus against owners of firearms.

    Hartford Police on October 1, 2013 charged a longtime Harford Firefighter with 29 counts of "RISK OF INJURY" based on the number of UNLOADED firearms legally stored and located in his residence.

    http://www.courant.com/community/har...,7848964.story
    http://www.wfsb.com/video?clipId=9369619&autostart=true
    http://www.wfsb.com/video?clipId=9369528&autostart=true
    http://www.wtnh.com/news/hartford-ct...injury-charges
    http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/l...226194911.html

    First:
    Why did Hartford Police excessively charge 28 counts of "RISK OF INJURY"?

    Second:
    Why was the Hartford Firefighter the only adult residing in the home arrested?

    Third:
    Why did Hartford Police incorrectly claim that the firearms were in the Childs bedroom when they were actually located in the parent's bedroom?

    Fourth:
    Why did Harford Police hold the accused on an excessive $300,000.00 bond which was lowered, (after review by a Bail Commissioner), to a Written Promise to Appear?

    A hearing scheduled for October 16th @ 10:00 am where shocking facts rather than fiction will be revealed.
    Last edited by Edward Peruta; 10-05-2013 at 07:15 AM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member KennyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Mountain Top
    Posts
    87
    Ed, thanks again for getting info like this out. Sadly, there seems to be an effort currently underway here in CT to villanize LEGAL gun owners for whatever reason. And the MSM just go along with whatever their fed by LE without doing some questioning or investigating. Most people I know thought the story as reported by the media just didn't sound right. Lets all hope all the FACTS come out at the hearing on the 16th!

  3. #3
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    2011 Connecticut Code, Title 53 Crimes, Chapter 939 Offenses Against the Person
    Sec. 53-21. Injury or risk of injury to, or impairing morals of, children. Sale of children.
    Sec. 53-21. Injury or risk of injury to, or impairing morals of, children. Sale of children. (a) Any person who (1) wilfully or unlawfully causes or permits any child under the age of sixteen years to be placed in such a situation that the life or limb of such child is endangered, the health of such child is likely to be injured or the morals of such child are likely to be impaired, or does any act likely to impair the health or morals of any such child, or (2) has contact with the intimate parts, as defined in section 53a-65, of a child under the age of sixteen years or subjects a child under sixteen years of age to contact with the intimate parts of such person, in a sexual and indecent manner likely to impair the health or morals of such child, or (3) permanently transfers the legal or physical custody of a child under the age of sixteen years to another person for money or other valuable consideration or acquires or receives the legal or physical custody of a child under the age of sixteen years from another person upon payment of money or other valuable consideration to such other person or a third person, except in connection with an adoption proceeding that complies with the provisions of chapter 803, shall be guilty of a class C felony for a violation of subdivision (1) or (3) of this subsection and a class B felony for a violation of subdivision (2) of this subsection, except that, if the violation is of subdivision (2) of this subsection and the victim of the offense is under thirteen years of age, such person shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of which five years of the sentence imposed may not be suspended or reduced by the court.

    (b) The act of a parent or agent leaving an infant thirty days or younger with a designated employee pursuant to section 17a-58 shall not constitute a violation of this section.


    If you read that with the proper attitude, allowing a child to ride in a car on the road could be considered a crime as there is a Possibility of the loss of the child's life or limb. You know, and I know that's not what the legislature intended, but it certainly seems that law enforcement is reading things as liberally as possible while courts are enjoined to rule as conservatively (in the favor of the accused) as possible.



    You may well wonder that purpose it serves law enforcement to interpret as many things as possible as either a crime or dangerous.
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 10-05-2013 at 09:57 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member DDoutel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    101

    Glad that Firefighter found Rachel and Ed

    Child's bedroom...Parent's bedroom; and you can bet any amount of money that every single cop involved sings the same song. ********** **** ** ***** Why should we expect any different, when we as lawful gun owners don't rise up en mass and put them in their place? Can't wait to hear the real facts in this case.



    --Moderator deleted insulting remarks--
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 10-07-2013 at 09:50 AM. Reason: Rule 6
    D. T. Doutel

    What is to the lawyer or cop a "material misrepresentation of the facts", and to the politician "misspeaking" is, in common parlance, a bald-faced lie. And don't let anyone tell you different!

    Visit Connecticut Carry and LiarCop.com for the latest news regarding Norwalk v. Doutel and Doutel v. Norwalk.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Interesing facts of what is going on in CT regarding firearm cases

    As you can imagine, I hear firearm related horror stories on a regular basis as Attorney Baird's legal investigator.

    I have begun to get a very clear picture of how members of law enforcement, prosecutors and judges act and react to individuals who owns firearms.

    The best part of being involved and knowing facts is the ability to discuss issues with the knowledge of real life situations.

    I am also surprised at the number of firearm owners/clients who are willing to have the facts of their cases discussed publicly, especially when they see how misleading facts are spun by law enforcement in press releases to exploit, embellish or conceal law enforcement action(s).

    In case after case I have, (after hearing sworn testimony), come to the following conclusion

    "I DON'T RECALL" is the law enforcement equivalent of the Fifth Amendment when they are asked questions under oath.

    Last edited by Edward Peruta; 10-07-2013 at 08:25 AM.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    A lesson for everyone: file notices of trespass to the state and local LEOs and towns.

    LEOs may be knocking on you door 1 JAN 14 to check your registered guns and mags under some retarded reason..children safety check, maybe?

    When they come a-knockin , tell them that they are trespassing and ignore what they are saying .. order them off your land.

    Mr. Patterson let them search the residence (a place that was not involved with the domestic dispute I gather).

    I'm assuming that the cops went over there with the expressed idea of getting his guns..he did register them yes? See how registration leads to confiscation?

    Can someone tape the proceedings? Its allowed in the state, with the court's permission.

    "I don't recall" is not a 5th amendment claim -- its testimony that they have no recollection as to why they arrested the guy ~ I don't think this would be an issue in this case. Hard to forget grabbing dozens of guns. And I love it when they say "I don't recall"...then my testimony is not controverted.

    And nothing would shock me ... gun owners are vile creatures that must be eliminated ... to state employees perspectives.

    Lucky we have the 2nd and 9th amendments, huh?

    And the guy let the cops into the dwelling...he did not watch "Star Trek II - the Wrath of Kahn" ... "we are all one big happy fleet...fire phasers" lol
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaVIIoRKBlk
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 10-07-2013 at 02:09 PM.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by KennyB View Post
    Ed, thanks again for getting info like this out. Sadly, there seems to be an effort currently underway here in CT to villanize LEGAL gun owners for whatever reason. And the MSM just go along with whatever their fed by LE without doing some questioning or investigating. Most people I know thought the story as reported by the media just didn't sound right. Lets all hope all the FACTS come out at the hearing on the 16th!
    Your evil, I'm evil ... eh lets bask in the evilness !

  8. #8
    Regular Member DDoutel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by DDoutel View Post
    Child's bedroom...Parent's bedroom; and you can bet any amount of money that every single cop involved sings the same song. ********** **** ** ***** Why should we expect any different, when we as lawful gun owners don't rise up en mass and put them in their place? Can't wait to hear the real facts in this case.



    --Moderator deleted insulting remarks--
    I've used those terms a few other times on these forums, and never had them deleted before. Something new, here? I take exception to being censored when I'm not using curse words, and I couldn't care less whether the cops here dislike what I say. You all know me, and you all know where I come from. I fully understand that the forum is privately owned, and that they have the right to do as they please, including deleting what the want, but let's be consistent, hmm?
    D. T. Doutel

    What is to the lawyer or cop a "material misrepresentation of the facts", and to the politician "misspeaking" is, in common parlance, a bald-faced lie. And don't let anyone tell you different!

    Visit Connecticut Carry and LiarCop.com for the latest news regarding Norwalk v. Doutel and Doutel v. Norwalk.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    The witness list for the hearing to be held on October 16th a 10:00am in GA14 Hartfor

    1. Chief James Rovella or His Designated Records Custodian, HPD
    2. Lt. Brian J. Foley, HPD
    3. Detective Frank Verrengia, HPD
    4. Officer Kevin O’Brien, HPD
    5. Officer Johnathon Rowe, HPD
    6. Sergeant Edward Yergeau, HPD
    7. Sergeant Glendaly Garcia, HPD
    8. Detective Jason Lee, HPD
    9. Lt. Ed Dailey, HPD
    10. Officer Steve Donnelly, HPD
    11. Officer Manuel Pacheco, HPD
    12. Detective William Diaz, HPD
    13. Sergeant Norman Nault, DESPP
    14. Col. Danny R. Stebbins, DESPP
    15. Major William R. Podgorski, DESPP
    16. Sergeant Timothy Madden, DESPP
    17. Sergeant Michael Collins, DESPP
    18. Sergeant Walter Melfi, DESPP
    19. Lt. Eric Cooke, Commanding Officer, Special Licensing and Firearms Unit, DESPP
    20. Camilla St. Andrew, Hartford DCF
    21. Cynthia Chevannes

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    http://www.jud.ct.gov/electronicdevices_superior.pdf

    Seems like testimony will be taken ... anyone sought out to tape record the proceedings?

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    The State is looking to delay the hearing scheduled for October 16th

    The hearing was scheduled for October 16th which is 14 days following the arrainment which occurred on October 2nd.

    The state is now attempting to delay the hearing.

  12. #12
    Regular Member DDoutel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Peruta View Post
    The hearing was scheduled for October 16th which is 14 days following the arrainment which occurred on October 2nd.

    The state is now attempting to delay the hearing.
    And there will be absolutely no adverse consequences for them if they do, the law notwithstanding. We've seen this from this State "gummint" before. They'll pay no price at all for it; it is a deliberate attempt to use the process as punishment, as Peter Kuck is wont to say.
    D. T. Doutel

    What is to the lawyer or cop a "material misrepresentation of the facts", and to the politician "misspeaking" is, in common parlance, a bald-faced lie. And don't let anyone tell you different!

    Visit Connecticut Carry and LiarCop.com for the latest news regarding Norwalk v. Doutel and Doutel v. Norwalk.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by DDoutel View Post
    And there will be absolutely no adverse consequences for them if they do, the law notwithstanding. We've seen this from this State "gummint" before. They'll pay no price at all for it; it is a deliberate attempt to use the process as punishment, as Peter Kuck is wont to say.
    Of course if they lie under oath there would be consequences (maybe why they say "I don't remember a lot" ~ but lets face it, many people do this, its not confined to police ... its not called testilying for nothing).

    Unfortunately its the system we have - I have tried to change the law to make people more accountable but without success. That does not mean I will discontinue trying

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    State is looking to delay hearing

    it becomes more and more interestingThe state is looking to delay the Fernando hearing scheduled for October 16 more as it becomes available.

    it becomes more interesting

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247
    In order to understand or quesiton how Hartford Police placed a $300,000.00 bond on Micheal Patterson the HPD Bond Guidelines and Policies were obtained and are posted.

    BOND GUIDELINES


    FELONIES STARTING BOND

    CLASS A MURDER - 1 MILLION OR MORE
    CLASS A (other than murder) $250,000
    CLASS B $50.000
    CLASS C $25000
    CLASS D $10 000
    MISDEMEANORS STARTING BOND

    CLASS A $ 2,500
    CLASS B $ 1,000
    CLASS C $ 500

    GUN CHARGES
    MINIMUM BOND = $250,000
    (Minimal History}
    CONVICTED FELONS = $350,000

    Depending upon the additional chafes and the severity of the accused criminal history the bond should be raised.

    CARRYING PISTOL W/O PERMIT 29-35
    POSS. OF FIREARM/ALTERED SERIAL # 29-36
    WEAPONS IN MIV (firearm only) 29-38
    CARRYING A DANGEROUS WEAPON (firearm only) 53a-206
    POSS. SAWED OFF SHOTGUN 53a-211
    CRIM. USE OF FIREARM 53a-216
    CRIM. POSS. OF FIREARM (CONVICTED FELON) 53a-217c
    IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM W/MINORS 29-37i
    NEGLIGENT STORAGE OF A FIREARM 53a-217a

    ADDITIONAL BOND GUIDELINES

    POSSESSION OF NARCOTICS (small amount) $ 20,000
    (large amount) $100,000 AND UP
    PWITS NARCOTICS $ 30,000
    DRUG FACTORY $100,000 AND UP
    POSSESSION OF CONT. SUB (under loz) $10,000 (community court)
    (over l oz) $100,000
    PWlTS CONT. SUB (under 4oz) $ 20,000
    (over Aoz) $100,000 and up
    PROSTITUTION (Minimum court allowed) $ 10,000 Community Court
    PROMOTING PROSTITUTION (Minimum) $ 10,000 Community Court
    PATRONIZING A PROSTITUTE (Minimum) $ 10,000 Community Court
    DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
    MINIMUM COURT ALLOWED BOND $ 2,500
    (Multiple offenses) $ 5,000 and up
    VOP $ 5000

    IF THE PRISONER HAS VIOLENCT HISTORY AND THREATENS FURTHER VIOLENCE; SET BOND AMOUNT TO PREVENT THEIR RELEASE.


    CITY OF HARTFORD
    INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM

    TO: DETENTION SUPERVIOSORS

    FROM: Lieutenant Christopher R. Arace
    Commander, Courts/Detention Divisions

    DATE: November 8, 2012

    SUBJECT: Domestic Violence arrestees I Bond Amount $50,000.00

    In accordance with a directive from the Hartford Police Command Staff and the Hartford Superior Court:

    All Domestic Violence arrests where there is a physical assault, and/or a history of assault, the minimum allowable bond will be FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($50,000. 00).

    The accused MUST be given the NEXT court date. There are no exceptions.
    DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BONDS
    NO ASSUALT REPORTED
    OR
    NO HISTORY OF ASSUALT
    MINIMUM COURT ALLOWED BOND
    First Offense.............$ 2,500
    Multiple Offenses......$ 5,000 and up

    ************************************************** **************
    PHYSICAL ASSAULT REPORTED
    OR
    HISTORY OF ASSUALT
    MINIMUM COURT ALLOWED BOND

    First Offense.............. $50,000 and up

    THE ACCUSED MUST ALWAYS BE GIVEN THE NEXT COURT DATE.

    Lt. Christopher Arace
    Revised
    11/08/2012


    The accused MUST be given the NEXT court date. There are no exceptions.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    29 Counts of Risk of Injury could amount to Double Jeopardy

    In part, the federal double jeopardy clause prohibits "`multiple punishments for the same offense.'" Warnick v. Booher, 425 F.3d 842, 847 (10th Cir. 2005) (citing Jones v. Thomas, 491 U.S. 376, 381, 109 S.Ct. 2522, 105 L.Ed.2d 322 (1989)). When the issue involves multiple punishments, the federal district court must determine whether the sentencing court imposed greater punishment than the legislature intended. See id. And the federal court is "`bound by a state court's...


    The state/prosecutor should immediatley address the possiblitiy of Double Jeopardy and DROP/DISMISS any improper charges against Michael Patterson.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20FDCO%2020090908526

    another link to case cited .... link above "timed out" .. ref double jep
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 10-14-2013 at 04:30 PM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Kopis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    727
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Peruta View Post
    1. Chief James Rovella or His Designated Records Custodian, HPD
    2. Lt. Brian J. Foley, HPD
    3. Detective Frank Verrengia, HPD
    4. Officer Kevin O’Brien, HPD
    5. Officer Johnathon Rowe, HPD
    6. Sergeant Edward Yergeau, HPD
    7. Sergeant Glendaly Garcia, HPD
    8. Detective Jason Lee, HPD
    9. Lt. Ed Dailey, HPD
    10. Officer Steve Donnelly, HPD
    11. Officer Manuel Pacheco, HPD
    12. Detective William Diaz, HPD
    13. Sergeant Norman Nault, DESPP
    14. Col. Danny R. Stebbins, DESPP
    15. Major William R. Podgorski, DESPP
    16. Sergeant Timothy Madden, DESPP
    17. Sergeant Michael Collins, DESPP
    18. Sergeant Walter Melfi, DESPP
    19. Lt. Eric Cooke, Commanding Officer, Special Licensing and Firearms Unit, DESPP
    20. Camilla St. Andrew, Hartford DCF
    21. Cynthia Chevannes

    wow, that is a lot of witnesses, all getting paid......... for nothing.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Channel 3 will be there taping the proceeding ... anyone know anybody from ch. 3 to get a copy?

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Kopis View Post
    wow, that is a lot of witnesses, all getting paid......... for nothing.
    Well, anyone who wants to take over DESPP HQ ... tomorrow would be a good day, eh?

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Looks like the case was continued until 10-17, tomorrow ...

    http://www.wfsb.com/story/23704197/f...m-due-in-court

    Patterson claiming a 2nd amendment issue .... good !

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    http://www.courant.com/community/har...,7139518.story

    update on case .. still cannot get his guns ... next hearing date 28 oct


    They asked if he owns firearms and he brought them to his bedroom where he kept 26 firearms, along with ammunition.

    His 7-year-old son's bed was in the parents' bedroom while the boy's room was being renovated, he said, but the boy didn't sleep there. He said his son slept in his sister's room, while his daughter slept on the living room couch.

    Who takes a bed apart, move it, re-assemble it, and not have the person sleep there? I can see the cops saying that PC is here and I can also see where he could be not guilty...(not that I agree with the stupid "keep guns out of kids' reach laws). Just because a bed is in a room, is it evidence that the boy slept there?
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 10-20-2013 at 12:46 AM.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Torrington, CT
    Posts
    11
    Does anyone have an update on this?

  24. #24
    Regular Member brk913's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Plainville, CT
    Posts
    370
    Quote Originally Posted by beardman View Post
    Does anyone have an update on this?
    Continued to 11/19.... http://www.jud2.ct.gov/crdockets/Cas...2-d873e4ad617e
    Member:, NRA Patron Life, NSSF, CCDL, CT Carry, MRPC and Bell City
    NRA Certified Instructor, Chief Range Safety Officer - Basic Pistol, Home Firearm Safety, Metallic Cartridge/Shotgun Shell Reloading - www.ctpistolpermit.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •