RutlandHerald.com - We Are Vermont

Rutland man sues city over '07 Taser incident



Toolbox

By Brent Curtis Herald Staff - Published: September 4, 2008

A lawyer representing a Rutland man who is suing the city because police used a Taser on him last summer has posted a video of the incident on the Internet that he hopes will shock viewers.

Shortly after filing complaints of excessive force and battery against the Rutland Police Department and one of its officers, Rutland lawyer Matthew Branchaud loaded a two-minute video depicting a portion of his client's arrest onto the high-traffic video YouTube Web site.

"I did it more for the public aspect rather than the court proceedings," Branchaud said. "I wanted it brought to the public's attention that this is apparently valid practice for Rutland police."

In a short written statement included with the video and in his four-page lawsuit, Branchaud contends that police needn't have used a Taser to subdue his client, George Griffin, Jr.

But Rutland Police Lt. Kevin Geno said Wednesday that officer Ed Dumas' use of the Taser was warranted - an opinion shared by other officers and the city's attorney, who were all involved in an internal review of the incident.

"There were only seven times out of 31 times that Tasers were drawn in 2007 that they were actually used so the officers here certainly aren't Taser happy or anything else," Geno said. "You have to gain control of a person whether to seat belt them or get them into a vehicle. If an officer isn't gaining that compliance, what do you do? If you can't do it with physical force, you need to resort to pepper spray or a Taser."

The 20-year-old Griffin was arrested on July 6, 2007, and charged with misdemeanor counts of disorderly conduct and consumption of alcohol by a minor - charges he pleaded guilty to in October 2007.

In a police affidavit filed in Rutland District Court, Dumas wrote that he was called to Center Street to deal with a young man trying to start fights. He didn't find any fighting, but along the curb of the street, crowded with hundreds of people attending a Friday Night Live event, he found Griffin.

After handcuffing Griffin, who Dumas said he pulled to the ground, Griffin was led to a cruiser. But the officer wrote that Griffin "arched his back and hollered that he was not going to allow me to put a seat belt on him."

Dumas said when physical attempts failed, he pulled out his Taser, pressed it against Griffin's hip and "told him three times to sit down or I was going to Taser him."

When Griffin didn't comply, Dumas wrote that he used the Taser.

But in his lawsuit, which seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, Branchaud wrote that the version of events described by Dumas don't make sense.

"Rutland City Officer Dumas turns his Taser into a stun gun then tasers a 140 pound handcuffed teen in the front seat of a police cruiser."

Rutland City Police chief states that Dumas' actions were "lawful, justified and proper," Branchaud wrote on the Web site, which had recorded 219 visits by Tuesday evening.

"There is no reason to use a Taser on a handcuffed teen that weighs 140 pounds, especially when that teen is not resisting arrest, threatening harm or damaging property," Branchaud wrote in the lawsuit.

It's difficult to glean from the YouTube video whether Griffin was resisting arrest since the interaction between Griffin and Dumas is filtered through the cruiser's windshield from a distance for most of the video.

Branchaud wrote that the Taser's jolt caused his client to vomit and urinate himself, although he added that police blamed the vomiting on the alcohol Griffin had consumed that night. Griffin registered a blood alcohol count of 0.155 after his arrest - an amount almost twice the legal limit for operating a vehicle in Vermont.

Branchaud also wrote that city police taunted his client after his arrest.

"Days after the incident, Officer Dumas passed by (Griffin) smiling and waving as if the incident was funny and Officer (Joseph) Bartlett laughed at (Griffin) and asked him if the Taser smartened him up," Branchaud wrote.

But Dumas and Geno remembered the incident differently.

Dumas wrote that as he led Griffin through the throng of people on Center Street, Griffin was "throwing himself around and at one point almost fell onto a young boy."

"People were clapping when we took him and his crew away," Geno said, referring to four other people who were arrested as part of the same incident the night Griffin was arrested.

No clapping can be heard in the video, although a large group of people, including off-duty city firefighters who aided police, can be seen standing around the scene.

Someone, either Griffin or one of the other people being arrested, can be heard repeatedly shouting that an off-duty police officer had punched him. In his lawsuit, Branchaud writes that Dumas can be heard saying, "I'm going to give him a little bit of juice" before using the Taser, although multiple samplings of the video on Wednesday could only pick out the word "juice."

Dumas, who couldn't be reached for comment Tuesday, and Griffin had at least one run-in with each other before.

Dumas was involved in the investigation of a burglary in November 2005 that led to the arrest of several people - including Griffin, who later pleaded guilty to two felony counts of burglary.

He was sentenced to 18 months to seven years in jail but all the jail time was suspended and Griffin was placed on suspension. He ended up serving 30 days in jail after violating his probation.

City Attorney Andrew Costello said Wednesday that he hadn't seen the lawsuit.

"We'll review the lawsuit when we're served and respond," he said.

Costello, who reviewed the internal report of the Taser use, said he was satisfied that police acted appropriately.

Contact Brent Curtis at brent.curtis@rutlandherald.com.








READER COMMENTS


I recall living in the Rutland area back in the late 80's and early 90's. The RPD then had some turmoil, but I found many of the officers to be professional and easy to get along with. I don't think anyone here should be making decisons, based on the poorly shot video posted on the internet. Secondly, who here is familar with the use and deployment of the taser? I can speak from first hand knowledge the taser is a great tool, and has saved many civilian lives from what may had been otherwise a deadly encounter with law enforcement officers. I know there are rogue police officers out there, as well as poor training standards, standard operating procedures, and internal affair units. However, don't stereotype the department members.

It is unfair for any of you to judge a police officer negatively, until you have walked in his/her shoes. I will not cast any judgement on the officers, as I was not there to witness the incident. They are human, make split second decisions, and if mistakes were made, then they should be corrected. Police Departments are easy to Monday Morning quarterback. And most people seem willing to criticize a department's response, until they are in need of a service.

I have to laugh at those who think that a 140 pound person is not a threat. In a police officer's role, everyone is a threat, until it is proven otherwise. That 140 pound person, who may be under the influence of alchol/drugs/mental illness, can induce a life threatening event toward the officer very quickly.

Mr. "None None" has several great points, including being sick of the lawsuits. As a police officer, I have personally deployed the taser approximately 6 times in the past three years. One included a mental health patient, who was going for a gun grab, and the taser saved his life and possibly one of my officers and hospital staff.

If you people are tired of the RPD being "corrupt", or however you decribe them, then stand up and make your voices heard. It does not take any courage to write your opinions here, where you are not face to face with anyone.

Finally, Police Departments are required to evaluate their standard operating procedures, so I am guessing they have a detailed use of force policy. Those policies are not available to the public, as they contain sensitive and strategic information. Finally, most officers have been subjected to the taser application inthe certification process, so they know what the tool is capable of.
-- Posted by Former Vermonter on Mon, Sep 8, 2008, 2:55 am EST

report this comment



My General take is taser use shoukd be reserved for immient threats to life. Tasing subjects for this sort of thing is foolish. However that said I will not second guess Offcier Dumas. As I wrote a year ago in a an article
"Police Officers should have a secondary weapon to use other then a gun.
Lawyers and critics do not have to deal with these stand offs first hand therefore they should not second guess or downplay a taser as a secondary weapon.
Guns kill people the use of guns is tragic and frankly I would rather be sued as a city for taser use then that of a gun. At least then I know a person is alive."
-- Posted by Zachary Hughes on Sat, Sep 6, 2008, 9:29 pm EST

report this comment



My General take is taser use shoukd be reserved for immient threats to life. Tasing subjects for this sort of thing is foolish. However that said I will not second guess Offcier Dumas. As I wrote a year ago in a an article
"Police Officers should have a secondary weapon to use other then a gun.
Lawyers and critics do not have to deal with these stand offs first hand therefore they should not second guess or downplay a taser as a secondary weapon.
Guns kill people the use of guns is tragic and frankly I would rather be sued as a city for taser use then that of a gun. At least then I know a person is alive."
-- Posted by Zachary Hughes on Sat, Sep 6, 2008, 9:23 pm EST

report this comment



I love the closed minded Utopia people create for themselves in this city. As long as you live east of Main St you could care less on what people deal with daily in troubled areas. Our city police struggle daily with being understaffed, overworked, and a futile justice system. I have lived in this city my entire life and I know the people involved on both sides of this event. As for the Griffin's...maybe if you hadn't created a reputation for yourselves as trouble makers and criminals, let alone resisting arrest in this situation you wouldn't have found yourself tased. If being tased was so over the top, how would you suggest that he get you to stop fighting and get into the car? Would you prefer a baton? You were told to stop and get into the car and refused violently...risking personal injury to those involved including yourself...that is a choice YOU MADE Mr. Griffin. It's a sad day when the criminal has all of the rights. Maybe if people like Mr. Branchaud would leave their white picket Utopia east of Main St they would see that the people involved are downtown DAILY, and causing trouble dowtown DAILY. Maybe we should spend some money on our police department and not yet another football field? We spent $700k on a professional grade Astro Turf football field this year...yet there are days when we have 2 officers covering the city due to budget limits. I think it is time we stand up and support our officers and allow them to do their job and clean up the scum in this city. Thank you Mr. Branchaud for reminding me why lawyers have such a bad reputation. How does it feel to sell your soul and moral standing in the hopes to make a dollar?
-- Posted by Jason Hall on Sat, Sep 6, 2008, 12:59 pm EST

report this comment



first of all my thoughts about this whole situation is that i hope this young kid gets what he is asking for, my cousin got arressted a couple years ago and they got him in forest park inside one of the apartments and in the kitchen and he had no where to run and the police pepper sprayed him in the face several times and then put a bike frame over his neck just to keep him there after they had already thrown him to the ground and he also has a lawsuit against the city police, these officers think they can do what ever they want to people because they wear a badge and they do not think about hurting them or their families they just think that they are all that, the other night dumas was behind price chopper because someone had thrown a rock at someone's car window and i was telling him about my nephew getting punched at the fair by the same people who smashed the window and he screamed in my face and told me that he did not care what happened he had no victim and no witnesses to it and i feel that was not the point the point was that these kids are going round rutland beaten up whoever they want and they are getting away with it but thats dumas for you he just dont care unless it is his family you are hurting or taking things from then he will do something about it and the other thing dumas hates is to get out of his car to do his job he would rather sit in his car and ride around all day and let people break the laws and when he does get out to do something about it we have issues like this where he uses too much force and abuses the person
-- Posted by dum 2 dum dum dum .... on Fri, Sep 5, 2008, 1:20 am EST

report this comment



Casey, I would like to speak to you regarding your complaint against the RPD. I am very interested you did not receive any positive response from City Hall. The job of the Police Commission is to take up matters like this, being a third party, although they are appointed by the Mayor and approved by the Board of Alderman. My thoughts are the Board of Alderman / Mayor should be the main focal point for citizens to voice their concerns and demand action. We elect these officials to represent us in local government. We do not elect the Police Commisssion, therefore what responsibilty do they have to us citizens? Two BOA meetings ago a resident wanted action about all the burglary incidents that have spiked in recent months(18 in July), not one comment or question from any of the memebrs of the Board of Alderman. That really disgusts me. Have you met with any of the Police Commissioners? Here are the names and addresses of the Board of Commissioners:

Police Commission ADDRESS HOME #

Thomas Calcagni 33 Lafayette Street (business) 775-5478
Robert Ebbinghausen (Chair) 25 Hillcrest Road 773-4302
Scott Holmquist 3 Porter Street 775-7812
Joan Wing (Vice Chair) 20 North Street 773-8647
Mary Nemeth (1 year) 242 Lincoln Avenue 773-3776
-- Posted by (Anonymous) on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 10:03 pm EST

report this comment



Well who knows how this kid will do in the future, I hope he straightens out. In any case, it appeared to me that they could have easily pushed him into the car and closed the door. Easy as that. He was shouting, okay, stupid, but let him shout all he wants in the back seat of the car. Didn't really endanger anyone by his shouting. He was cuffed, no reason to taze him. If they'd waited a minute or two after he was cuffed he would have likely tired of it and settled down/cooled off. He wasn't going to get anywhere in the cuffs and he didn't appear to be trying to run away at that point anyways. He was just being loud and stupid.

I sent letters to the Board of Aldermen and Mayor Lauras. The only one who even responded was the mayor, who essentially said he had no responsibility in the matter and basically wanted nothing to do with it. I will be remembering this at the polls and lots of people I know will be also...

The big problem here is this: any normal citizen uses force for whatever reason on another, there's an external investigation (that is, by the police, prosecutors look at it to see if it justifies charges, etc.). The police use force, there's an internal investigation by other police. The politicians have a vested interest in not wanting their police force to appear untrustworthy, abusive, etc., and if the department admits its officer acted illegally it sets them up for a lawsuit and an easily won one at that. Is it any wonder most such investigations do little? It's just the perfect recipe for corruption. The officers support each other and the unions will back officers even when they shouldn't be and they know it. The thin blue line. We need some mechanism for investigating problems and controlling the police that is neutral and we don't really have that yet. Perhaps bring all such complaints before a jury as a matter of course.
-- Posted by Casey Jennings on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 9:05 pm EST

report this comment



hmmm, not a dirtbag? We'll let the future decide, place your bets everyone. I am Spartacus two option situation is correct, the police choose the right option. Let's say they didn't tase him, what should have been the next escalation of force? Pepper spray, nightstick or beanbag deployment? I'll let you folks pick. I am sorry here about your situation Casey, that is unfortunate, I carry my Glock often especially now a days. I would have reacted the same way you did if treated like that from Officer Fuller, I probably would have just walked away from him and let him arrest for disorderly conduct. Ok now, if all you people find the RPD so corrupt why not voice your opinion to the Board of Alderman, Mayor or the Police Commission? Let me guess there all in on it. Watch out for the men in black suits, spooks coming to get you?
-- Posted by (Anonymous) on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 7:45 pm EST

report this comment



There is NO CONCELEAD WEAPON LAWS in Vermont. It is NOT ILLEGAL to carry a side arm or carry a rifle in Vermont, even into a store. There are four cities who have city ordinances against this, but Deer Season m,akes it unenforceable.

It is also a well known fact that the BULLSEYE to crime in Rutland, is right across the street from the Police Dept. I remember several years back when 2 gang members were being jumped on by a couple of dozen locals and were basically runned out of town by the local populance. Within two days the Rutland P.D. announced that we had a GANG problem (at the time the gang had the problem for they were highly outnumbered). So the RPD got funding for a speical dept to fight gangs. Now we have gangs dealing out of Motels and walking the streets and commiting crimes within ear shot of the Police Station. I am begining to beleive that they want REPEAT BUSINESS to guarantee their jobs.

I haven't seen a Decent Police Force since Doug Williams had it and they ran him into the ground because they didn't want the change. They wanted to grow fat and ride around. Rutland has had its share of corruption from the past to the present.
As far as the lawsuit.. Cities are protected under law to max that they may be sued for. I will state that the Police depts all over the country have found some very questionable oppurtunities to use lasers against the civilians. There have been over 200 deaths by TASER use and I will have to question that there has been some very poor judgement calls when to use the tasers. A 140 pound man should be no problem for any police officer and if the man was not armed then the police needed to only wait him out. I don't know if a law suit is justified in this case but have known several where I would have encouraged a lawsuit.
-- Posted by Old Jarhead on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 6:16 pm EST

report this comment



The only disadvantage of a taser is the cost , I guess a blackjack across his mouth would have been cheaper. I don't think the officers have a responsibility to put their safety on the line for any idiot. If a little shock settles him down do it. If he doesn't like peeing his pants too damn bad.
-- Posted by Enoch on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 5:47 pm EST

report this comment



Tasers are not safer than using physical force. They've been proven to cause deaths through heart attacks/etc. Using one on someone this drunk doesn't strike me as particularly well thought out.
-- Posted by Casey Jennings on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 3:36 pm EST

report this comment



What a waste of life, this scumbag should be in jail for his crime. Instead he is trying to be more of a plague on society. Any money he gets will be ****** away on drugs, and maybe next time he will kill someone. I just have 3 words about this scum: Loser, Loser, Loser!
-- Posted by Enoch on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 3:34 pm EST

report this comment



HOOK YA BUHHHH
-- Posted by Peee Fam on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 2:42 pm EST

report this comment



No one is saying this young man cannot grow and change. For the safety and sake of the Rutland Community, I sincerely hope he does. However, history has a history of repeating itself, and he has done nothing to prove different. He screwed up, now let's sue. There is a mature person's thinking.
-- Posted by None None on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 2:24 pm EST

report this comment



Let's see now.
Option One: Officer uses physical force to strap belligerent drunken offender (real potential injuries resulting) into car to protect offender during transport, with officer risking injury and expensive workers compensation costs to City taxpayers, or
Option Two: "Tase" belligerent drunken offender (no injuries resulting) to preclude injury to both offender and officer, using sound protocols in accordance with "public safety industry" training standard and best management practices.
Public good requires Option Two, and anyone who declares otherwise is both ignorant of the specifics surrounding event and buys into the "offender as victim" mentality.
-- Posted by I am Spartacus on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 1:05 pm EST

report this comment



This guy wouldn't be in this situation if he wasn't a *two time* criminal; if he wasn't drunk and disorderly. There is a seat belt law and if he is refusing to wear one and causing trouble for the officer (I don't know how many of you think its easy to wrestle someone in a vehicle) then the police officer needed to use force. Another aspect of this incident, however not related to the actual kid, is the fact that this is a growing crowd. The police office wants to quite the kid, get him in the police car, and buckled before a situation arises. A situation that this kid created on his own.

For those of you feeling the department should lose the case and therefore lose funding: the funding that they lose will be for materials (other than tasers) and for paid manpower. This will thereby create a loss of manpower on the streets, creating a slower response time. Maybe this makes some of you happy but if you are getting raped, or beat, or mugged, you may want the police arriving on scene asap!
-- Posted by Brianna Tetrault on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 12:54 pm EST

report this comment



first, i would like to make a comment about the young man in question here. i am not going to tell you the kid is perfect, and i am not going to tell you he hasn't been in trouble before. i will tell you this young man now resides in my home is doing every thing he can to be a good person. he just got his diploma and is working. anything i need help with no matter how insignificate it is he goes out of his way to help. he is wonderful with children and pets and he is really trying. weather he has a case against the city or not i don't know and can't judge that because i wasn't there and don't have all the facts. i respect most of the members on our city police force and have grow up in this town and have had to recieve help for them and am very thankful for the help i recieved. Just think before you cast this kid off because of his past or his families. he is not responsible for anything that someone else in his family may or may not have done. before you call some one a dirtbag you should know your facts. people do change as the grow and mature. think back on your own pasts and tell me that isn't true. i am sure many of you have changed in some way or other. i have high hopes for this young mans future.
-- Posted by virginia neathawk on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 12:52 pm EST

report this comment



Hopefully this case will be argued and decided at public trial. It would be regrettable if a deal were struck "behind closed doors" and the details of the settlement sequestered from public scrutiny.

The use and misuse of tasers is a controversial topic. Hopefully, given the incidents in Brattleboro and this reported event, the Attorney General of the State of Vermont, the Rutland City Police Commission, Rutland City's Mayor and the Board of Aldermen will review protocols and training requirements for the use of tasers by the Rutland City Police Department. Who knows, maybe the ACLU will offer their opinion.

Whatever anyone may think of the youngster who was handcuffed and tasered, ask yourself is it appropriate for the Rutland City Police, or any police department, to allow the tasering of a handcuffed subject? If you believe it is appropriate, under what circumstances is it warranted?

It will be interesting to see if the Rutland Herald voices an opinion on it's editorial page.
-- Posted by Mountain Lover on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 11:30 am EST

report this comment



We all know he was drunk and disorderly. That much isn't disputed. The question is whether the use of the taser was an acceptable use of it or whether it was excessive and/or unnecessary force. It looks to me like it wasn't needed, but we'll see what the courts say. If the department loses the lawsuit, fine with me. Less new equipment, maybe no raises next year. When the police department loses lawsuits such as this it should simply come out of their budget, no additional city funds should be given to the department because they spent their money on lawsuits.
-- Posted by Casey Jennings on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 11:28 am EST

report this comment



and it's funny how you skip right over the fact that this idiot was drunk and disorderly in public. Oh, right.......this is all about YOU. How do you feel about your taxes and the fact that YOU are paying for the defense of this lawsuit??
-- Posted by None None on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 11:18 am EST

report this comment



No, I briefly mentioned what happened to me earlier as yet more evidence there are problems with the Rutland Police. You jumped on me about that, and some others had some questions relating to it. I'm curious if there are more examples of such problems with the Rutland Police we should be aware of.
-- Posted by Casey Jennings on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 11:17 am EST

report this comment



Ummmmmmmm is this not discussing the idiot that was tasered? Funny how you made this all about you.
-- Posted by None None on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 11:14 am EST

report this comment



And you stated correct when you called police public servants. That they are, and they at times need to be reminded of their proper place.
-- Posted by Casey Jennings on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 10:52 am EST

report this comment



State v. Rosenthal is still very much in effect as a precedent: http://www.guncite.com/court/state/55a610.html

As is the state law saying municipalities may not restrict/regulate/etc. the carrying or posession of firearms, they can only prohibit the firing of a firearm within town or city limits: http://www.leg.state.vt.us/statutes/fullsection.cfm?Title=24&Chapter=061&Section=02295

Florida, Petititoner, v. J.L., a U.S. Supreme Court decision, states quite clearly an anonymous tip that a man has a firearm is not enough to base a stop on: http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/98-1993.ZO.html

And as carrying a firearm is entirely legal in this state there was absolutely no basis for a stop.

Needless to say the Rutland Police had no right to do what they did, particularly Officer Fuller's actions. Several illegal actions by police took place when officer Fuller stopped me. Firstly, the stopping and detaining of me for no legitimate reason, taking my gun and performing a search without my consent or any reason to believe anything illegal was going on or that my gun was stolen, continuing to detain and hassle me for a half hour long after he knew nothing illegal was going on, in which he attempted to intimidate me into not exercising my rights, etc.

Now more than ever with crime rising people need to be exercising this right. And as for terrorists, one armed passenger on each of those flights on 9/11 could have stopped the hijackers. And oddly enough Rutland is in the minority when it comes to people carrying firearms being harassed. You won't have any problem doing so in most of this state, only the corrupt cities such as Rutland.

The police are not responsible whatsoever for anyone's protection, there is case law on this going back to the 1850's with recent cases affirming this also. http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html
-- Posted by Casey Jennings on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 10:49 am EST

report this comment



In today's society, with terriorists and crazies all over the place, I would be quite alarmed should I see a person walking down the street with a weapon/gun strapped to his hip. Long gone are the days where it's not frightening to see a person with a weapon/gun in public. Remember going to school with a hunting rifle in the truck, now in today's society, that is cause for expulsion.

If an officer receives a complaint, they have the duty to investigate. Maybe the laws need to be changed to prohibit malitia maniacs from wearing their guns in public. Why do you have that "antique" strapped to you in public?

This lawsuit is a joke, and everyone knows it. Police Officers are public servants that are always open to harassment and degrading remarks. As you sit there in front of your computer madly typing away, know that they are out there trying to keep jerks like you safe. AND.......if you think you are such a superior to these gentleman/ladies, they why don't you try and do their job?

FYI: I am not a police officer, fireman or a family member of any public servant. I'm just fed up with stupid lawsuits. People need to take ownership of their actions. Why haven't you mentioned that this guy was a drunk idiot, causing a huge distraction to those there trying to enjoy the evening? Does that not matter to you??? Does it not matter to you that the civil rights of the individuals there that evening were being violated because of this drunk "teenager" (when did being 20 years old still make you a teenager?).

Seriously, if you think it is better in Alaska, go for it. It's one less lunatic here in Rutland.
-- Posted by None None on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 10:32 am EST

report this comment



I've never heard a good word about Bartlett since he's been hired, not even from his scumbag coworkers... Most of these useless cops are too fat and old to handle a child of 140 lbs, so the Tazer is the weapon of choice...
Of course we have to remember they have the UNION to protect their indiscretion's and harassment the taxpayer validates... Keep voting the high wages to keep the scumbags hiding in the bushes to give you a ticket while the drug dealers and child molesters are hard at work...
Isn't it neat that you have to put on a badge to get a child to talk to you?????
What a bunch of losers.....
-- Posted by None None on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 10:20 am EST

report this comment



Deaniac, I can't tell. So far they haven't stopped me again since June. They sent a letter that was quite cleverly worded to mean nothing in reality. I'm just waiting for them to try anything more before I take my next step...
-- Posted by Casey Jennings on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 10:11 am EST

report this comment



I once had a fairly positive opinion of the police here. My experience with them just revealed to me what many of them really are: thugs with badges who think they're public masters and can do whatever they wish because of their jobs, with a city government full of corrupt politicians to back them up.
-- Posted by Casey Jennings on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 10:07 am EST

report this comment



Casey's blog report is worth reading. Did the police department take any action against these officers? Maybe you should contact the Vermont NRA to help. We can not allow the Rutland City Police to harass law abiding citizens just because they think the laws should be different. Laws are laws and it is the police's job to uphold them, not make them.
-- Posted by Deaniac on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 10:06 am EST

report this comment



Only the thugs who believe they have the right to trample on civil rights will be glad to see me gone. Do I happen to have the pleasure of talking to one of them? Officer Fuller?
-- Posted by Casey Jennings on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 10:00 am EST

report this comment



From watching the video......why did the other officer open the driver's door and reach in? Why did the other officers scramble around Dumas? It looks like Mr. 140 Pounder was out of control. Why was he resisting the seatbelt? He is jacked up and causing trouble. Get those sick, welfare risen bums off our streets. What will Mr. 140 Pounder, Drunk Off My A$$, Dumb as a Stump do with whatever $$ he gains from this STUPID lawsuit? Drink it, Snort it, Shoot it away??? Now more of our tax dollars have to go to the city to fight this stupid lawsuit. This just makes me sick!!
-- Posted by None None on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 9:59 am EST

report this comment



CJ: Alaska is waiting for you......Vermont won't miss you.
-- Posted by None None on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 9:54 am EST

report this comment



Title 42 USC, Section 1983 (part of the Civil Rights Act of 1871) wouldn't be a bad approach to take with any police who violate any civil right, no matter how small. A suit under it would hold the officer personally liable, including for the legal costs of the plaintiff.
-- Posted by Casey Jennings on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 9:26 am EST

report this comment



Does anyone see anything wrong with this statement -

He was sentenced to 18 months to seven years in jail but all the jail time was suspended and Griffin was placed on suspension. He ended up serving 30 days in jail after violating his probation. So let me get this right, he pleaded guilty to two counts of felony burglary and did not receive any jail time.

The only jail time received was for violation of probation? Prosecutors and Judges in this state have caused most of the crimes to persist. Where is the punishment? Griffin and his whole family have a laundry list of crimes and yet they are still out walking our streets. Does police harrassment happen? Yes. Does laughing and Tasing this person for not responding to police commands constitute excessive force? No Why would he not just get int he car by himself?

Yes, the crowd did clap when these dirtbags were removed from Center Street. Actually Griffin is the one that instigated this incident. I witnessed this first hand, when Griffin was harrassing Officer Dumas in the middle of Center St. Oh, we didn't hear that side of the story yet, have we? Scarborough, how ignorant are you - Fire dept. caanot assist the PD, last time I looked they are both paid to provide public safety. The Fire dept. was there for the Friday Night Live function and assisted the PD when they needed them. For instance when numerous punks were picking a fight with to officers in the middle of Center street with young kids and couple thousands of people present. They were out-numbered and the Fire Dept. officer helped out. But I guess in your mind, we shouldn't have a PD, since you want them bankrupt. Hey genius, to bankrupt the PD would be to bankrupt every person they is trying to just get by paying their high taxes in this state.

I agree, its about time we put the police in the same law abiding catergory as the rest of the tax payers. So when someone assaults you what would you do, fight back? This is exactly what the officers did. The off-duty police officer that supposedly punched Griffin was in self defense.
-- Posted by (Anonymous) on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 9:13 am EST

report this comment



The Rutland Police have little respect for the Constitution and laws of this state. They harrassed me back in June, details can be seen at my blog, the first few posts from June: http://arctichomesteader.blogspot.com/2008_06_01_archive.html

Needless to say I wouldn't mind seeing them sued into bankruptcy if that's what it takes to hammer into them that they aren't above the law.
-- Posted by Casey Jennings on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 8:29 am EST

report this comment



But not half as amazed at what the law-breaking citizens get away with.
-- Posted by Justice None on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 8:20 am EST

report this comment



off duty city firefighter assisted the officer? dont fireman fight fire ,not crime? i hope this person gets his $$$ from the city. its about time we put the police in the same law abiding catergory as the rest of the tax payers ,that pay their salary. the public would be amazed at what the police get away with.
-- Posted by John Scarborough on Thu, Sep 4, 2008, 7:55 am EST

report this comment


You must be logged in to leave a comment. Register | Log In

Logout

Related Contents