New Haven Independent

Posted by: Fedupwithliberals | July 23, 2008 1:11 PM

I am very curious. Is Sean Matteson in any way related to the former alderman Ed Matteson of East Rock?

Posted by: visitor | July 23, 2008 1:35 PM

yeah, green party, thanks for helping city point save the trees. booo!

Posted by: Cheri | July 23, 2008 1:46 PM

"Mayorga said it would not be possible to identify the lieutenant who threatened Ferrucci with arrest."

How the hell is it NOT POSSIBLE to identify the lieutenant? Doesn't the NHPD know who they have patroling the Green last Sat. night? Why don't they get the list of names? Or, why doesn't the cowardly cop admit to what he did, so that a hunt will not be needed? And, when they find him, or when he identifies himself, maybe the City and the NHPD can find a way to "get on the same page."
I can't believe what a bunch of yahoos run this town.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | July 23, 2008 2:05 PM

Fedupwithliberals
Last names not spelled the same.

Comon' copper's leave Ralph alone.

But seriously that was very wrong of the officers to do. They had every right to be their as long as the where not a bother or disturbance. It is a bit sad that the officers did not know the laws of freedom of speech.

Posted by: Ben | July 23, 2008 2:45 PM

Ralph and Ralph,
Give up. You're not helping anybody.

Posted by: Edward_H | July 23, 2008 2:53 PM

I am really not surprised to hear a cop say something so stupid. After all, this city has at least one alderman who does not know what the U.S. Constitution is. I do find it very hard to believe not one person recorded the name of the lieutenant. It is not that hard to glance at a badge and get a name or number.

Ralph if your story is true you need to lodge an official complaint and have internal affairs investigate it. Otherwise I am not the only one who will think you are just trying to get your name in the paper.

Mayorga said it would not be possible to identify the lieutenant who threatened Ferrucci with arrest.

Total and absolute B.S. . So if this cop had decided to crack Ralph over the head it would be impossible to identify him? Good Lord at least admit you think his story is nonsense and you are not going to waste time investigating it.

Posted by: robn | July 23, 2008 3:33 PM

Even though Ralph Nader is an old crank who's partly to blame for the last eight years and should be kicked hard in the cajones for spoiling election 2000, I won't dwell on this and will rather support Ralph Ferrucci's right to do what he was doing in a public space.

Posted by: Tim Matthews | July 23, 2008 3:53 PM

Is anyone else left with the impression that voices of dissent are being sacrificed ? I'm supporting Ralph Nader to keep the constitutional liberties granted by that document, and not submit to the corpocracy that is trying to control the destiny of this country.

Posted by: Ralph Ferrucci | July 23, 2008 4:41 PM

Thank you everyone for your comments. This is a true story. I am waiting for a ruling from the corporate council first.

If they find in my favor I will lodge a conplaint with the I.A. and if they do not find in my favor I will file a case with the federal court.
Ralph Ferrucci

Posted by: Bugupit | July 23, 2008 4:56 PM

I echo the thought of Cheri, how the HELL is it not possible for NHPD to know which Lt was on foot on the Green at that time? Total lack of accountability, or total refusal to transmit information through the Mayhor's office to the public?

Do not associate Ralph Nader with the Green Party this year. He was barely associated with them four years ago. The Green Party has nominated former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney of Georgia for President.

Posted by: THREEFIFTHS | July 23, 2008 5:11 PM

Robin
Wake up Ralph Nader did not cause Al Gore To lose
The Election,Al Gore lost because he did not win his home state and that some of the voters of Florida had be illegally take off the voting rolls.Also this crooked control two party system which is control by the corporate plutocracy is the real reason that mr.ferrucci is not allowed to bring his petitions on the green.

Posted by: Sins of New Haven | July 23, 2008 9:40 PM

First off - politics aside - Ralph Ferrucci is not a liar. Ralph is not out to hurt anyone, he's here to make a positive change. Anyone who knows him like I do knows this.

Second, and much more problematic is not Ralph and what he was doing, but how the Sinners handle it. THAT'S where the problem is.

Try not to focus on the cops but on 165 instead. That's where all the slight of hand happens!

My guess is that they will in essence "go get your signatures and have a nice life."

Then it's up to Ralph to seek justice.

SUPPORT RALPH!

Posted by: Bill Saunders | July 23, 2008 9:59 PM

What Ferrucci isn't telling you is that he gets a buck for each valid signature. Hardly a philanthropic effort, by any stretch.

Posted by: Walt | July 24, 2008 6:48 AM

"Proprietors of the Common Grounds" is the correct title of the group which controls the Green, or at least closer to correct than in the article above.

Mostly from old "brahmin", somewhat pompous, New Haven families they determine what is permitted on the Green.

Set up long ago to prevent the common slob from desecrating the elite's park.

The commoners are permitted to pay for its maintenance however, but the Proprietors retain the power , and when one dies, the remaining proprietors elect his successor.

Were tricked by Mike Todd, one of Elizabeth Taylor's many husbands who without approval landed his helicopter on the Green to avoid the need to cab from Tweed NH Airport.

During his reign as Mayor, Dick Lee was the first "commoner" elected to the crotchety group. Even have women now I think.

Posted by: 19th Sq. Dweller | July 24, 2008 9:31 AM

I happened to be on the Green Sat. evening for the Squirrel Nut Zippers Show and was approached by nut job Ferrucci and his gaggle. I declined to sign and proceeded to get a lecture as to why I should - sorry but I'm on the Green to enjoy a show -NOT to have personal political view thrown in my face - Ferrucci should give it up and go back to knocking on doors

Posted by: Edward_H | July 24, 2008 10:23 AM

Ralph Ferrucci

I am waiting for a ruling from the corporate council first.

If they find in my favor I will lodge a conplaint with the I.A. and if they do not find in my favor I will file a case with the federal court

No matter what the corporate council says if your rights were violated by a New Haven cop you need to go down to Union Station and fill out a complaint.

You say you "didn't mind taking the bust". So why did you not continue to solicit signatures once your volunteers were firmly on public space? if you were arrested then we would have some evidence of your story being true.

Paul Bass

Do you have even one witness to corroborate Ralph's story? Did any of the volunteers back up this story? None of them got the name of the cop either? Are we just supposed to take Ralph's word? How do we know he did not make up this story to get attention for his signature gathering efforts? Lots of people have perpetrated hoaxes on the public in order to get attention for their causes i.e Curtis Sliwa.

Did you ask Mayorga why is it not possible to identify the cop in question? If this is true this is a serious lapse of responsibility and oversight in the NHPD

Posted by: Walt | July 24, 2008 1:05 PM

I do know where the line is between legitimate work with voters or potential voters and just being a pest.

I do not want Nader folks harassing me on the Green or Obama-pushers Blumenthal or Bysiewisz pestering me , when I go to the Vets Hospital

Can't they set up a station somewhere where they are available to those who want them, and they cant harass or pester others?

Posted by: Nigel T. Gully | July 24, 2008 3:41 PM

This is, sadly, another case of public officials abusing their status to deny Americans their first Amendment rights for signing a petition. The Nader/Gonzalez Campaign has received a number of reports all across the country of petitioners being kicked off public space for arbitrary reasons.

God forbid people exercise their civic rights in a humble and democratic way--we want to continue our tradition of having the lowest voter turn-out of any industrialized Western country!

Nader/Gonzalez offers us the answers we need to the questions that plague us the most: a teetering economy, seemingly endless wars oversees, a polluted environment, and (which is very lucid thanks to this article) the need to restore our basic civil liberties as American citizens.

Learn more at: www.VoteNader.org

Best,
Nigel

Posted by: Walt | July 24, 2008 5:12 PM

Correction above

" I do NOT know etc." would make a bit more sense

Posted by: Bill Saunders | July 24, 2008 10:04 PM

Edward H.

I was on the green at that time and Ralph personally related the incident to me shortly after it supposedly happened. (I tend to believe his account -- Ferrucci doesn't have a hoaxing bone in his body, but does tend to make a constitutional mountain out of a political ant farm.)

About thirty minutes later, one of these petitioners did approach me to sign for 'the cause', which I politely declined.

To the best of my knowledge, ability, and belief, I was on the green at that time, as was the petitioner. I will further state that this 'supposed threat' had no discernable effect on deterring Nader's 'New' Raiders from their appointed task.

What the Ballyhoo??

Posted by: Name WIthheld | July 25, 2008 5:10 AM

Grassroots activity, or commercial enterprise?

In the past, Ralph Ferrucci hasn't gotten paid to collect signatures for Nader. (check out the 2004 filings).

My understanding is that once again RF is contracting with RN to get him on the 2008 ballot in Connecticut, and the "volunteers" who got booted off the Green are actually "paid volunteers"/contractors.

Yes, it's lame. As is Nader. As is Ferrucci's attempt to lash out at the NHPD.

That's not to say there's nothing to discuss here. But the real facts need to be known.

Gotta go Ralph now...

Posted by: cedarhillresident | July 25, 2008 8:32 AM

This issue here should not be weather we like Ralph or Ralph!!!

The issue should what is in the article under the subtitle "A Trend"!!!!!!

Our rights as citizens to express our views and options weather citizens or employees of this city have been and most likely will continue to be violated!!!!

This should be pissing everyone off!!

Posted by: KenCT | July 25, 2008 8:56 AM

What pisses me off is these guys annoying people who were out to enjoy an pleasant evening on the Green. If any one of them had approched me I would have told him exactly that. BTW, did Ralph participate in the conga line?

Posted by: cedarhillresident | July 25, 2008 8:59 AM

Ken your echoing!!!

Not sure if he did but I did :)

Posted by: James | July 25, 2008 9:31 AM

I agree that this is not about either Ralph. The problem, and one that I've seen all too frequently, is police or lesser agents of authority citing a misinterpreted or wholly incorrect version of the law. Whether it is intentional or malicious, it doesn't matter. It is also inconsequential if you are right or wrong at the time, because arguing the point with one of these folks is likely to get you tazed and cuffed for "acting in and aggressive manner" or some other baloney.

Several months back I decided to take a few photos of New Haven for my friends who have never been here, using the Temple Street garage as my vista. Some illiterate Barney Fife parking cop screamed at me that I would be arrested if I didn't put down my camera. When I asked him what they hell he was on about, he responded "because of terrorists." In that case I told him to go screw and to call the cops if he wanted.

But the point is that far too often over the last 7 years we've ceded our civil liberties to people like this unknown Lieutenant who simply don't know what the hell they are talking about. Do you think that Lt. Mysterioso knows that Ralph may or may not be a paid member of the Naderr campaign and,t herefore, not protected by the same free speech rights as he would be if he were acting alone? Or is it more likely that he decided to impose his own understanding and interpretation of the law knowing that most people would simply be intimidated into complying?

And for those of you who don't want to be bothered while enjoying a nice evening on the Green, I hear you. But are you really willing to trade the right to free speech and assembly for an evening with the Squirrel Nut Zippers? That's a little shallow and a lot shortsighted. More people need to stand up for our rapidly diminishing civil liberties. Just because you don't like what Ralph has to say or how he says it doesn't mean that your cause won't be the next to be silenced by the ignorance or arrogance of those in positions of authority.

Lastly, to Ralph, if this is a legitimate case you need to pursue it with all due haste. This is not something with which to screw around or wait for the City to let you know if they think that it's OK for you to file a complaint. Lawyer up if it's legit.

Posted by: Edward_H | July 25, 2008 12:21 PM

Bill Saunders

I have no doubt Ralph and his volunteers were on the Green as described and I am certainly not calling Ralph a liar. I simply would like to see some independent (pun intended) verification of Ralph's story. Even a quote from one of the volunteers who overheard the exchange would do. For all we know maybe Ralph was being overly aggressive when asking for signatures and the cop asked him to cool it. We really don't know what happened.

I have nothing against anyone who wants to take this story at face value. Personally I just prefer to read stories that rely on more one person for the facts.

Posted by: James | July 25, 2008 1:15 PM

I agree, Edward. But the question ultimately is whether the Independent is an editorial blog or a news outlet. Both have their value, but I've been unable to determine which it is. Is there more emphasis, Paul, on conveying the political and social ideals of the Independent or on providing editorial commentary on City happenings? No judgment intended. Just a question.

Posted by: Paul Bass | July 25, 2008 2:22 PM

James -- We see ourselves as a news organization, not a blog, a news organization covering the city of New Haven. Like any news organization, or any sentient human being, we have biases (though some reporters and editors pretend they don't). We try to be up front about them and be open to all points of view on the site. Our primary mission is news reporting -- and leaving the commentary to you folks. (And thanks for the commenting!)

Posted by: Bill Saunders | July 25, 2008 2:46 PM

If the police directed Ralph & Co. to a "Free Speech Zone" to collect his signatures I might be a little more concerned.

Posted by: Name WIthheld | July 25, 2008 3:06 PM

Big typo on my part.

I wrote, "In the past, Ralph Ferrucci hasn't gotten paid to collect signatures for Nader."

I mean to say that in 2004 Ralph Ferrucci definitely got paid by Nader. And word on the street is that he's again getting paid now in 2008.

So that leaves the question of whether Ralph on the Green is a civic enterprise, or a commercial enterprise. Ditto for his volunteers.

Posted by: Edward_H | July 25, 2008 3:19 PM

Well at least Ralph did not engage in any Mcgrath type arm wringing

http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/2007/11/machine_pulls_e.php

We really need to find that cop and have him patrol Vito's building next election.

Posted by: James | July 25, 2008 6:04 PM

Paul, thanks for the response. I think the point here is that there's a certain level of follow-up and due diligence required of a journalist that wasn't done here. Why no corroborating witnesses? Or at least a statement that there were no witnesses to corroborate? How about a comment for somebody on the Green who had interaction with Ralph and can account for his demeanor? My point is that once a story seems to have fulfilled its purpose in illustrating the poihnt that NHI wishes to make, the investiation stops. And wheter it's selectively reporting facts or simply calling it quits before a well-vetted stroy is completed, it falls short of responsible journalism.

Now, I am holding you to a higher standard. I think you're an heck of a bright guy who can do a lot of good. But I do see a lack of journalistic integrity and commitment to telling the whole story. So if it really is your intent to be an independent news outlet, why not set an example for the big boys? Why not show them how it's done?

Posted by: Ralph Ferrucci | July 25, 2008 6:44 PM

I need to make a few things clear.

All the money I have ever received from the Nader campaign was reimbursements for copies made and other expences.

I am not paid for any of my signatures. They offered to pay me but I turned it down like I did in 2004.

As for on the green, I was not petitioning, I was setting up petitioners with supplies.

My biggest rule for petitioners if someone says they are not interested in signing, do not want to be bothered or start yelling at you about throwing the election DO NOT under any circumstances try to talk them into it. The reason I do not have petitioners pushing people is the five minutes of arguing with someone you can lose a dozen signatures.

Our job is ballot access, not getting votes. We do not argue with people who do not want to talk to us. We say sorry for bothering you and move on.

I am sure Bill can back me up. I never asked him yo sign for many reasons. The biggest reason being that I consider him a friend and do not want to put him in that spot to have to figure out how to say no.

Also he said a petitioner did come up to him which he declined. He never said that they harrassed him to sign the petition.

The only time I will argue is when someone argues with me and does not let me leave when I say I am sorry for bothering you.

We only petition until the music starts. I have told all of them do not petition during the show only before and after if they chose to stay.

And Lastly, I felt my first amendment rights were violated. The right to Free Speech and the right to Petition. These rights I will fight and go to court for if the Corporate Council does not see in my favor.

On saturday I have 3 events to petition, one is the green which I will be at. This time I will not bring a petitioner with me and have not planned other events for sunday in case they threaten me with arrest again.

I will not give up my rights to anyone. Let them arrest me, I do not care.
Ralph Ferrucci
ralphferrucci@votenader.org

Posted by: Not Mrs. Potter | July 25, 2008 6:56 PM

Like 19th Sq, I was on the green to enjoy the show. In this case with my two children. It was pretty short concert. Is this election brouhauhau the reason why?

As for filing a complaint, you can download the form off the city's website for the Civilian Review Board and mail it in. You can also pick up the form at most of our public library branches. It's not necessary to go to One Union Avenue to lodge a complaint.

Posted by: Chris Gray | July 26, 2008 1:59 AM

I've never been happy about Ralph Nader's utilization of the Green party's organization without ever becoming a member, but I suppose he realizes that his association with it will outlive him and that, while he lives, he can continue to campaign effectively for a multiparty democracy with them and, perhaps, take part of the sting out of that association by ending appearing just a crank instead of one of the great social activists of all time.

Free speech should not be abused. If, indeed, as a commenter mentioned, this crew was pestering people at an unrelated public event, I really can't support that tactic. If that is the case, it was wise to take to the sidewalks. If Ferrucci could have managed to get arrested quietly, something I find hard to imagine from what I have gleaned about him so far, this would have been a much stronger case. I don't really buy his excuse for not "taking the bust." Otherwise, I don't doubt his story.

During the Gulf War, I think it was, a peace march I was part of was unwisely lead to the Green from Beineke Plaza right before a summer concert on the Green and I recall the marchers being forced by mounted officers pretty tightly against the fence on the Elm Street end of the lower Green until we were ordered to disband. Neither the Green nor the sidewalk accommodated our free speech that night.

On the other hand, it was really funny when police tried to muzzle May Day celebrations just after the Mayor moved into the remodeled City Hall and was forced to notice people quite generously indulging in their First Amendment rights, if sometimes injudiciously.

I really appreciate many, many of the comments. "Get up; stand up for your rights!" Including the right not to be harassed by zealots, whether DeStefano supporters, Obama supporters, McCain supporters, or Nader supporters. The Knights of St. Patrick were always very effective at it, but those were private bashes.

Posted by: KenCT | July 26, 2008 5:42 AM

If people are being paid to collect signatures, the issue becomes very simple. I've always understoon the the Green is not to be used for commercial enterprises. Collecting signatures for money in this situation is no different from giving away cigarettes or selling balloons.

Posted by: Edward_H | July 26, 2008 9:01 AM

KenCT

If Ralph's story is true, I say if because neither Paul or Ralph have yet provided any corroborating evidence of this incident occuring at all much less verifying Ralph's version of the alleged event, how would the cop know they were being paid?

Posted by: Bill Saunders | July 26, 2008 6:16 PM

Ralph,

Nice job skirting the "paid' volunteers issue.

Though you may be unpaid yourself, by your own admission you are overseeing a staff of paid volunteers, and you need to make that distinction clear. In my opinion, the concept of 'paid volunteers' fogs the lens of what is truly grassroots political activity, and was actually a mitigating factor last week in my decision to not sign your petition (which I have always done in the past).

As for this mystery Lieutenant-in-Question that 'violated' your rights, the solution is simple -- identify him in a police line-up.

Posted by: Bruce | July 28, 2008 10:56 AM

There is nothing wrong with being paid for campaign work. While it's nice to use volunteers that can work for free, it is not always a feasible option. Not everyone has the luxury of being able to take on what amounts to a part-time job (or even full-time) without pay.

Posted by: Bill Saunders | July 28, 2008 4:53 PM

Bruce, et al:

Here is an interesting link from the National Congress of State Legislatures regarding the history of paid vs. volunteer petitioning.

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legismgt/elect/PaidvsVol.htm