It was probably ten years ago when my wife and I and some friends were returning from a night out in Sandwich when we ended up behind an erratic driver on Route 130. We called 911 and were connected to Sandwich, Mashpee, Barnstable, and back to Mashpee as each police department asked us to follow the car if we could do so safely.
"Safely" was the operative word here. It was nighttime, so we couldn't see if the driver was male or female, old or young. What we could see was that they were crossing the line, nearly hitting several cars head-on. We kept our distance, but stayed close enough to give the police a description of the car and an eye on its direction.
Mashpee arranged a road block near the rotary. We were on the phone with them when we passed the police cars. We flashed the cars even as we were shouting, "That's us with the lights! He's right in front of us!" The police pulled onto the road, threw on their lights as they passed us, and pulled the driver off the road.
And so, when George Morse was taken to task for doing the exact same thing - following an erratic driver while on the phone with the police - I found myself scratching my head.
Another issue that was raised was Mr. Morse's red light permit. Again, things didn't add up. The permit was issued by the fire chief. Clearly, Chief Brodeur thought that Mr. Morse would use the light responsibly. Indeed, when Mr. Morse's term as constable ended, he immediately returned the permit without being asked. Is that not a demonstration of good character?
After the Monday vote, someone took me to task for allowing Mr. Morse to explain these. But why wouldn't we allow that? If we are going to accuse someone of doing something inappropriate, do they not have the right to rebuttal?
Some have taken issue with Mr. Mustafa's statements about the Constitution, but I agree with him. We cannot accuse someone of doing something inappropriate, nefarious, or illegal without giving them the opportunity to defend themselves. Not only is it common courtesy, it's the law.
Think about it...What if you were the one being accused?
A few years back, my wife had her license suspended.
If that was all you knew, what would you think?
In fact, she forgot to pay her excise tax, so the registry suspended her license. However, because she was never stopped by the police - it's fair to say that she's a good driver - we didn't learn about this until she went to renew her license.
Now what do you think?
As I noted during the meeting, Mr. Morse was required to provide only five references, one of which must be a lawyer. All told, he provided nearly four dozen. Most were in writing, some were in person, and a few were over the phone - calls that came directly to me and other members of the Board. Instead of just one lawyer, four stood for him, including two retired judges. Businessmen, retired women and even the father of a woman he arrested provided glowing references.
Only at funerals have I seen more people speak so highly of a man.
Now you know what I was thinking, and why I voted for Mr. Morse.
3 comments:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-20/california-official-s-800-000-salary-in-city-of-38-000-triggers-protests.html
You're driving alone at night when you realize you might be being followed. You pull into your driveway and that unmarked car blocks your driveway.
Do you try to run into your dark, empty house? Do you just sit there, lock your doors and "hope" he goes away? Do you run for the neighbor's house?
You may not think she'd be terrified, but i expect she was. No unauthorized, non-uniformed individual should be allowed to do that to the citizenry.
Anonymous, That is another way of looking at this situation, and it illustrates the problem here: We have two individuals, each with their own version of the events. We can analyze this to death, but in the end, the police found no crime committed. I base my decisions on verifiable facts, not speculation and rumor.
Post a Comment