New Haven Independent

Posted by: marge | September 26, 2007 1:48 PM

Register has a follow story today - 9/26
In it, state's attorney Dearington describes the admission about fake overtime an alleged crime by police that can't be "ignored."

When I read that quote, I thought, Isn't that right. I don't think anyone has described with such brevity and accuracy in the last 100 years in new haven what official policy here is for dealing with criminal corruption -- 'if it can't be ignored, go after it.'

Posted by: dana b | September 26, 2007 1:59 PM

If true, Detective Raymond's allegations are an indictment of the New Haven Police Department and Chief Ortiz. The chief does not appear in control of his own department.

Posted by: marge | September 27, 2007 12:03 PM

Another disturbing quote in the register's follow story from yesterday (9/26) is city spokeswoman Mayorga's response to why the city sought to withhold its receipt of this CHRO complaint, a public document, from the public.

out of "fairness" to CHRO she said, according to the Register story.

Again, another coded confession of incompetence and moral failure.

The city's job is to be accountable and 'fair' to us - new haveners - not to state agencies and that aren't even interested in the dubious favor.

CHRO has no expectation or desire to see cities withholding CHRO complaints from the public that are served on those cities. One call to CHRO would confirm that.

Accessing these at city halls is routine and CHRO has no jurisdiction or duty over that.

Mayorga's quote was a coded message to new haveners. Read this in its place: 'We didn't want it to get out even though we had no right to stop it. We have no respect for you or the law and even though our first obligation is supposed to be to you, frankly, your rights matter so little to us it is not even funny.'

Posted by: dana b | September 27, 2007 5:20 PM

Right on, Marge.

Posted by: WEBbloger 1 | September 27, 2007 9:15 PM

In spite of Det. Raymond's hysteria to the contrary, the bottom line is that she cashed the checks knowing that she did not earn the money, nor did she complain to the personnel department that she wanted to return the checks. Also, Raymond could have gone to her union and filed a grievance concerning sexual harassment, however, no such grievance is apparently on file. If White was so insistent on harassing her for well over a year, as a under cover officer, why did she not tape the harassing conversations?
Sounds like a stretch to me!

Posted by: cedarhillresident | September 28, 2007 9:12 AM

I was thinking right along with WEBbloger 1. I feel for her and I believe that she was harassed. I even believe that she may of been a bit afraid to say anything because she needs the job and feared losing it...but she cashed the checks.
When my rights where violated by a NHPD (recently retired HMMM yep makes me wonder) I was afraid to say anything to but what I did do is I told a city rep I trusted and my alderman (who was only on the cops side, I think they were looking for a video of cops hurting a kid on my street cam) Long story but I trusted cops until that day! But I at the least told someone at the time so that there was some kind of a record. And that is what this officer should of did if she was afaid.

Posted by: curious | September 28, 2007 9:50 AM

cedar hill - would you be comfortable telling us a little more?

Questions:

Did PD view the tape you refer to?
Do they have a copy of it?
About how long ago was this?
Do you have a copy of it or know who does?
Can you give any more information? This stuff is important. Thanks.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | September 29, 2007 12:49 AM

curious
I just typed 100 pages and deleted them.
But to clarify the hurt was not a major hurting it was roughing up. A few small bruises. The officers felt they were do the kid justice because he was an on the edge kid.

Sorry that is really all I can give you.

Posted by: Edward_H | September 29, 2007 11:42 AM

CEDARHILLRESIDENT

I was very disheartened to read about the NHPD officer who violated your rights. I have been reading your comments in the New haven Independent for quite some time and you have alwys been very fair and supportive to the police department. I hope you take every option available to you to see justice done. Over time there have been many posters on this site who have made all types of allegations against the NHPD but you are one poster on this site whose comments I take seriously. From what you posted it appears the cops seized your street cam looking for evidence of a police beating or roughing up? I hope you find yourself a good lawyer and sue the city for as much as possible for this traumatic experience.

I admit I don't know anything about the situation you have gone through but why not go into more detail? If the police did nothing wrong they have nothing to fear by an accurate desription of what transpired.

On a different note. It is strange that the police felt they were doing right by the kid by roughing him up a bit. If the parents of said kid had given him the same type of roughing up would the police have arrested the parents?

Posted by: WESTVILLER | September 29, 2007 10:24 PM

Det. Raymond's situation sounds like just another day in the lives of city workers. As a long time taxpayer, my friends in the BoE and public works say that sexual harassment is alive and well in City Hall and rarely gets to be the topic of discussion during morning coffee in the CC office. I hope you get your time in court and proper restitution for your suffering.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | September 30, 2007 6:52 PM

Edward
First Thank you I love your posts to.
I do have my problems with the police dept. as do many people in the city, but I also know alot of great officers that have been effected by all the bad in the dept. So I try my best not to bash them in hope that the good cops will see the day they can do there jobs the way they know they can.
A bit of me is still afraid of retribution. The one main cop is gone now. He was a cop that did his time and worked hard for the city in his day. I did make the kids write an account of what happened that day (ya know how story's change over time) just to have on record. I know the 2 officers that entered my house but not all that where roughing the kid up. I am not the type to sue over this kind of a thing.
I look at life as a learning thing and every thing happens for a reason. This made me open my eyes about the police and some politicians. Which before this whole thing they had my total respect and I would of went to the mat for them.
I am sure my calls made to the dept are still somewhere. Someday when I am old and gray (not grey yet thanx to Clairol) I will tell the story.
But not in this kind of forum. Most involved in my community do know about it. They were the ones I went to when it happened. My father told me to let it go. But as most know I am a little bit of an activist (just a wee bit) and that part of me is eaten up by the fact that I did not pursue this on some kind of a level. But in the end I do feel like letting it go was the right thing to do.

Posted by: marge | October 1, 2007 8:10 PM

Cedar Hill, I would say OK to most of it, because I know how traumatizing a he said, she said situation can be, but the tape should be released, if you have it.

Everywehre- reform panel, FBI etc is saying come forward, and morally I think, you should think hard about whether you have a duty to release the tape. Better to keep a copy - don't submit the original with no backup to the FBI - but reflect on this hard, for all of us. And possibly relase a copy to press too. Sometimes only publicity causes the authorities to do the right thing. It is all about accountability. They have to be accountable.