Nashua’s cover-up: Police keep evidence against them
Wednesday, Aug. 9, 2006
TO THE NASHUA police, Michael Gannon is clearly and unmistakably guilty of violating the state’s wiretapping law. The police cannot prove that. The department dropped the case against Gannon because Chief Timothy Hefferan admits the charge cannot be proven in court. But Gannon is still guilty, Hefferan says. The police just “know” it.
In June, two Nashua police officers came to Gannon’s house to investigate his 15-year-old son, suspected of being involved in an alleged mugging. With his home security cameras, Gannon recorded the officers conversing on his porch and speaking to him. He brought the tapes to the department to prove that the officers had made fun of him and were “extremely rude,” he said.
That’s when he was arrested for audiotaping a person without his consent. He should have obtained the officers’ consent before taping them, the police said. Never mind that the cameras were visible and his property is posted with a sign stating that the property is monitored with recording equipment.
Chief Hefferan admitted last week that Detective Andrew Karlis was “discourteous” to Gannon. He said he would take action against Karlis, though he avoided the word “discipline.” And last week Hefferan decided to drop all charges against Gannon. But the tapes showing the “discourteous” behavior? The police department is keeping them.
“It’s what’s on that tape that makes the whole tape illegal,” Hefferan told us in an interview yesterday. “We know it’s illegal. We just gave him a break before going forward. We didn’t think we could prove it in court.”
Isn’t Gannon innocent until proven guilty? Isn’t what’s on the tape legal unless proven otherwise?
“That’s not the position we’re taking,” Hefferan said. “We know it’s illegal. We just made a decision not to run him through the process. We made the decision that the tape is contraband. It’s illegal because of what is on it.”
Hefferan compared the tape to cocaine. But cocaine is illegal to possess. The tapes might or might not be. Hefferan said the department contacted several attorneys and all advised that the tapes could be confiscated.
And so the only evidence showing how Gannon actually was treated by the two officers will remain in the hands of the police. Because they maintain that Gannon is guilty of a crime they know they cannot prove he committed. Isn’t that comforting?
What's your opinion? E-mail us at letters@unionleader.com.
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Nashua%E2%80%99s+cover-up%3A+Police+keep+evidence+against+them&articleId=6e8c717b-cd00-485c-94bd-2a8f7a861293
Wednesday, Aug. 9, 2006
TO THE NASHUA police, Michael Gannon is clearly and unmistakably guilty of violating the state’s wiretapping law. The police cannot prove that. The department dropped the case against Gannon because Chief Timothy Hefferan admits the charge cannot be proven in court. But Gannon is still guilty, Hefferan says. The police just “know” it.
In June, two Nashua police officers came to Gannon’s house to investigate his 15-year-old son, suspected of being involved in an alleged mugging. With his home security cameras, Gannon recorded the officers conversing on his porch and speaking to him. He brought the tapes to the department to prove that the officers had made fun of him and were “extremely rude,” he said.
That’s when he was arrested for audiotaping a person without his consent. He should have obtained the officers’ consent before taping them, the police said. Never mind that the cameras were visible and his property is posted with a sign stating that the property is monitored with recording equipment.
Chief Hefferan admitted last week that Detective Andrew Karlis was “discourteous” to Gannon. He said he would take action against Karlis, though he avoided the word “discipline.” And last week Hefferan decided to drop all charges against Gannon. But the tapes showing the “discourteous” behavior? The police department is keeping them.
“It’s what’s on that tape that makes the whole tape illegal,” Hefferan told us in an interview yesterday. “We know it’s illegal. We just gave him a break before going forward. We didn’t think we could prove it in court.”
Isn’t Gannon innocent until proven guilty? Isn’t what’s on the tape legal unless proven otherwise?
“That’s not the position we’re taking,” Hefferan said. “We know it’s illegal. We just made a decision not to run him through the process. We made the decision that the tape is contraband. It’s illegal because of what is on it.”
Hefferan compared the tape to cocaine. But cocaine is illegal to possess. The tapes might or might not be. Hefferan said the department contacted several attorneys and all advised that the tapes could be confiscated.
And so the only evidence showing how Gannon actually was treated by the two officers will remain in the hands of the police. Because they maintain that Gannon is guilty of a crime they know they cannot prove he committed. Isn’t that comforting?
What's your opinion? E-mail us at letters@unionleader.com.
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Nashua%E2%80%99s+cover-up%3A+Police+keep+evidence+against+them&articleId=6e8c717b-cd00-485c-94bd-2a8f7a861293
What if the video is recorded and not just monitored? Does that make any difference?
