Saturday, September 4, 2010

Read Copy of Letter from Foote stating Investigation was Criminal. Why does the WPD, Deputy Kelvin Macie of the Sheriff’s Office and the BOS keep saying it was an Internal Investigation Reppucci failed to cooperate in and not a Criminal Investigation like it really was? Why do they continue to try to hide this fact even though the evidence proves otherwise?

We have received a copy of the following letter and we interviewed Dan Reppucci about some of the events and circumstances revolving around his termination from the WPD.

We have transcribed the letter, the letter itself can be read by double clicking on it. It will then open in a new window.

Office of the Sheriff
Cheshire County

May 17, 2010

Dear Mr. Reppucci,

I am in receipt of your request for documents relating to investigation report #09-03-OF. The investigation in question is a criminal investigation. It is not an internal investigation. In 2009 the Cheshire County Sheriff’s Office was not requested to nor did it conduct any internal investigation on you or any member of the Winchester Police Department. The request of the Winchester Police Chief was to investigate how confidential information got from his office into the hands of Stanley Plifka. Your email of May 17, 2010 makes it clear that you have access to Deputy Macie’s report so I will refer to specific paragraphs to clarify what Deputy Macie’s assignment were in the investigation.

Narrative Page 1: Paragraph 4 in its entirety.

“Sheriff Foote was very clear in his directive to me. He stated that the Sheriff’s Office was only interested in investigating the matter of the chain of custody of the so called grievance letter. We were not going to investigate any allegations made by Sergeant Reppucci or any other internal personnel matters. The Sheriff gave me the documents listed above with exception of the Request Letter (that was given to me on 6/29/09 by Captain Croteau and came to the Sheriff’s Office separate from the other documents). I retained the documents at my home in a safe until 7/1/09.”

The investigation was never about you but how your document(s) got from the Chief’s office into the hands of Stanley Plifka. The interview of Stanley Plifka indicated he had at least seen the document(s) before Chief Phillips. Please refer to:

Narrative Page 2 and 3: Paragraph 7 starting on Page 2.

“I asked Mr. Plifka to tell me about the letter in question, written by Sergeant Reppucci. He said about two weeks to ten days ago, he was unsure of the exact day or date, Sergeant Reppucci came to see him. Sergeant Reppucci had a letter he had written and was going to give the Chief. The content of the letter and the ensuing conversation between Plifka and Reppucci concerned the recent promotional process at the Winchester Police Department.”

Lacking any evidence to prove who, if anyone took the document(s) from the Chief’s office the investigation was suspended until more information is developed.

I will say that it is my opinion and the opinion of the investigator that if during your interview with Deputy Macie had you substantiated Mr. Plifka’s statement and you gave him a copy of your document(s), the criminal investigation the criminal investigation would be over as there was no crime. The document(s) were yours and for the purpose of our investigation you could share them as you saw fit.

Your claim to need the report to defend yourself in a criminal proceeding is premature. There has never been any indication you are or ever were considered a suspect in our investigation.

Whereas this criminal investigation is still open it is not subject to the release. Should the case be closed or criminal prosecution commence the report will be made available in response to proper requests or in the course of criminal prosecution to the defendant in response motions requesting same through court proceedings.

Other requests for access to governmental records will reviewed in the light of RSA 91-A:5 Exemptions and answered in a routine administrative process.


Richard A Foote

The excerpts from this letter need some clarification or they could be taken out of context.

2nd sentence: “The investigation in question is a criminal investigation.” 

3rd sentence: “It is not an internal investigation.”

It would appear by reading this letter it was a criminal investigation and not internal as Phillips and the BOS continue to maintain through the courts and other administrative hearings.

All citizens have rights during CRIMINAL investigations even police officers. Reppucci had an absolute Constitutional right to ask to speak to counsel prior to answering any questions in this or any other criminal investigation. Regardless if he was a suspect or not (Foote in his letter claimed that Reppucci was not a suspect but named a “Participant” which one would logically assume is another way of saying suspect). Especially since Reppucci maintains he had been reporting criminal and unethical activities within the WPD to Phillips, a member of the BOS, The County Attorney’s Office and the AG’s Office and it was apparent to Reppucci that he was being targeted for termination because of his reports. Reppucci maintains he is not the one who has done something wrong. Looking at the facts it appears the Sheriff’s Office, the BOS and the WPD are covering up the facts.

In the last paragraph 1st page see the following:

“Sergeant Reppucci had a letter he had written and was going to give to the Chief. The content of the letter and the ensuing conversation between Plifka and Reppucci concerned the recent promotional process at the Winchester Police Department.”

1. Butch Plifka was interviewed by Macie on July 1st, 15 days after Roberts was promoted to Lt.

2. Reppucci has never denied speaking with Plifka as he had done so 1,000’s of times during his career in Winchester.

3. Reppucci stated he went to see Plifka because he was invited down there to discuss issues Plifka was having with the police department.

4. Reppucci has never denied speaking with Plifka about the promotional process and who got promoted or how that happened. It was common knowledge Phillips decided to have an Oral Board which involved Three Chiefs of police, all from out of town.

5. At best, Macie’s report says Reppucci had a letter he wrote and was going to give it to Phillips. How come it doesn’t say in the report that Reppucci read it to Plifka or Plifka read it or that they both read a part of it? How come it doesn’t say Reppucci had the letter with him, in his hand, on his clipboard, in his car? In fact, it doesn’t state in any way that the letter is ever involved with the conversation or how it even fits into the questioning. It appears it’s nothing more than a statement that Macie already had knowledge of, that he inserted into the paragraph because it looks good. In fact nowhere in Macie’s seven page report does he state that anyone has any information about the contents of the letter or that anybody even read the letter. Yes, the report does state that some think they may have seen it, but come on, ask a question in a certain way and just about anyone can illicit a response they can manipulate into an agenda. On the other hand ask specific questions that require specific answers and that might not be so easy to accomplish. Anybody could have a letter they wrote that they were going to give to their boss and mention that to a million people but that doesn’t mean they carry it around with them or that they discuss the details or even if they do that they disclose anything they shouldn’t.

Macie’s report goes into the finest of details in many paragraphs depicting visions of hallways and offices and doors and desks and trophies and pictures all around and in Plifka’s office. Yet Macie can not get one sentence of definitive, absolute proof in his entire seven page report that shows that Reppucci did anything wrong. Imagine. Does this sound like a competent investigation by a competent investigator?

6. Maybe the reason for that is simple. Maybe this was all a rouse to target Reppucci. Phillips has a habit of doing things like this, didn't Phillips do this similar thing in Jaffrey. 

7. At best, all that Kelvin Macie’s report has established is that he questioned Plifka and that at least part of a conversation between Plifka and Reppucci had involved the recent promotional process.

8. A reported crime is being committed and the investigator can’t be a little more specific when questioning someone about a possible break in and theft at the police dept? 

9. Like so many other people around town who were talking about Phillips poor choice for a Lt. and the unfairness in how people in Winchester get promoted, it can be imagined that Reppucci’s letter to Phillips and half the conversations in town were about the recent promotional process.

10. Reppucci maintains and states he can prove no confidential information was released, no personnel records were released, no discipline records were released. In addition, he maintains the truth of the matter is that all information in the letter revolved around public information and information that involved the public or that the public participated in, anyway. Once the facts surrounding the letter come to light and are pointed out, it is very easy and clear to see. Lots of people have known about and complained about the problems in the WPD. Does Phillips think that the public’s perception of him is something that it’s not? We don’t hold him in high esteem. We suspect he is crooked and information like this confirms those suspicions.

11. The WPD has very specific policies on criminal investigations that involve the WPD personnel. Reppucci maintains that Phillips grossly violated his own written department policies when he manipulated this investigation and Reppucci states and maintains it was he who adhered to the written policies of the WPD that Phillips was violating.

It appears there is no evidence Reppucci did anything wrong. There is proof without doubt that the Sheriff’s Office and the WPD failed to disclose that Reppucci was being questioned in a criminal investigation.  It is documented in Macie's report that all Reppucci asked, was that he be allowed to speak with counsel during a criminal investigation, as any citizen would be entitled to do. Reppucci felt this was most impportant simply because he was being targeted as a Whistleblower. Is this a cover up?

Dan Reppucci has stated that the other allegations about him stealing internal investigations through email are absolute nonsense. He was assigned internal investigations to work on and that information was not confidential to him, but the only emails he has, and he can prove it, are work product. Years ago Reppucci was assigned by the WPD to use an email program that was not web based. To access and work on investigations, reports and conduct any other work related duties outside of work, when needed, he used another email account as a work around. He as well as other officers did this with the permission of Phillips. He had been doing his work outside of the office that way for many years, has proof at this at this moment and he has emails to and from officers as he helped them do their own work, reports, affidavits etc. for the benefit of the town and not himself.

Had Reppucci really been in possession of confidential information that he was not entitled to and in possession of internal investigations as alleged by Phillips and Roberts, why was Reppucci not arrested for theft? Is it because the real reason is that the work he was doing was legitimate and Phiilips knew that? Since Phillips was so concerned about officers and their criminal conduct why didn’t he follow through on his knowingly defamatory allegations?

Is it that a proper and unbiased criminal investigation would have resulted in the truth?

It appears a conflict between the WPD and the Sheriff’s Office. Is Sheriff Foote not telling the truth that it is a criminal investigation or is Chief Phillips who is not telling the truth when he says the Sheriff's Office was conducting an internal investigation?

Was Reppucci caught up in the middle of this? Or was he set up?

Another consideration into whether Phillips has been truthful or not is that Reppucci was doing the job of the Lieutenants position as well the Sergeants position as well as the Detective work for almost a year and half, without any assistance. This had gone on from the time Thersea Sepe left, in March 2008, until the end of June 2009 when Roberts was promoted. Reppucci stated he had two fantastic reviews during this time, one in March of 2008 and the other in March of 2009 as well as fantastic reviews in all prior years of service. Phillips assigned Reppucci the duties of the Lieutenant and told him he was going to officially make him the Lieutenant in a few months. This few months ended up being substantially longer, he did not get protmoted and at no time did Reppucci get any compensation or recognition for assuming these additional responsibilities Phillips bestowed on him.

Interestingly, Reppucci maintaind he never asked Phillips, either in writing or verbally to reconsider his decision to promote Roberts to Lt. as Phillips has alleged. In fact, both verbally and in writing Reppucci has stated he told Phillips that since he now officially had the Lt's position filled he wanted to be relieved of any of the Lt’s responsibilities, at which Phillips told him he would devalue himself in the department if he were to do that and that Roberts didn’t know how to do what he did and therefore, Phillips, needed him to do those jobs.

Again, it appears to be a conflict between Phillips and Reppucci and someone must not be telling the truth.

There is a lot of corruption and cover up in the WPD, many of us are aware of that. The original players are still employed. Don't be fooled into thinking just because Jette is gone the problems are solved. His supervisors appear to be the ones who have covered for him. Make no mistake about the fact if you cover up a crime it is illegal. You can't ignore when a crime has occurred.

Reppucci has filed his appeal with the NH Supreme Court of Superior Court Judge Arnold's ruling and he is confident that the truth will be learned about the WPD.


Name Withheld said...

1st paragraph in the letter from Foote says in 2009 the Sheriff's Office was NOT requested to nor did it ever conduct any internal investigations for the WPD on Reppucci or anyone else.

How come Phillips never made it public he reported a crime to the Sheriff’s Office? Don’t we have a right to know the truth about what is going on in the police dept?

How could Phillips order anyone to answer questions in an investigation of another department? It would be pretty dangerous to find out all of a sudden that Phillips could order me to answer questions in an investigation being conducted by Hinsdale and if I didn’t I’d lose my job. I thought we have laws about that?

I hope it gets reported and Phillips pays hard for what he did to Reppucci and the rest of the dept.

Disgusted with all of them said...

This is outrageous. Phillips doesn't deserve to be a cop let alone a Chief of Police. Roberts doesn't deserve to be in this town. How many times have they broken the law that we will never know about? How many times have they covered up for their crooked cops that we'll never know about? The selectmen do nothing but let it happen. They are just as crooked as the cops they protect. The let this happen and cover it up. I hope Repucci and anyone else who has information goes to the FBI or the AG's with all this. That will put these arrogant above the law crooked idiots on notice about the real law and how it works. We need someone in here to clean up this cesspool of a police department and town hall. Someone these power hungry people WILL have to answer to like it or not. The selectmen have been told over and over about this stuff and still let it go on. I hope they all get found guilty of this cover-up and go straight to jail where they belong. You all bring SHAME to our town.

Anonymous said...

About time. Looks like a case of what goes around comes around right Jette, Roberts and Phillips?

Looks like it's time to pay up for all those bad deeds.

Anonymous said...

Not so surprising after all that has been exposed.

More proof of why we need these blogs. We get nothing from town hall.

So far everything that has been said has been backed up by proof.

Lets not forget that a short 6 months ago the AG's office found that Roberts and Phillips gave a bank false documents (bank Fraud?)so they could take over a bank account that didn't belong to them.

It was the Police Association account and Dan Reppucci was the Treasurer and the bank account was in his name.

The AG's kicked them off the board, made them resign.

They got a slap though. Maybe the AG's need to reopen that investigatio and charge them with the bank fraud and crimes they really commited.

And Phillips really promoted Roberts! Imagine!!! Guess he needed someone who would help him to continue on his devious path and Dan Reppuci wouldn't cooperate.

It starts to make sense when the real truth comes out.

I and many others believe that what Reppucci says is true. There is no reason to believe that he wasn't targeted and that he has a lot of info.

Kick ass Reppucci! You deserve to see the day they tumble. What happened was not right.

Anonymous said...

So they targeted and forced Dan Reppucci out. They targeted and forced Warren Breau out and what happened? The dept went to hell in a heartbeat under Phillips and Roberts. The rumors about all of the problems weren't rumors after all. There had been plenty of stories circulating like Roberts and Jette going after Breau and even taking pictures of Breau's open locker with his gun in it to try to set him up. It's a shame that after taking pictures these 2 officers didn't feel the need to lock the locker and secure the firearm. Breau may have been wrong for leaving his locker open but when he realized it a few minutes later he did come back and lock it. But Roberts and Jette were egregious in their behavior when they left the locker open after taking the pictures. Phillips didn’t think they did anything wrong. This is documented on video where it can be seen 1st Jette looks at the open locker, then he calls in Roberts to look at the open locker and then instead of closing it, they get a camera and take of it. Maybe someday we’ll all see the video and pictures. How about that for a hostile working environment? It's too bad Reppucci didn't tell anyone when Phillips left his gun on the back of the toilet in the restroom of the emergency services building. Don't worry Chief Phillips, just like with Roberts and Jette it's documented. Jette got his just reward now it's time for Phillips and Roberts.

Anonymous said...

Factual chronology of events involving the gun incident:

Fact: Breau hung his duty weapon which was secured in a triple retention holster(three safety features)in his locker and did not shut the locker door all the way.

Fact: Breau left the PD with his wife and son.

Fact: 45 minutes later Breau was told by officer Hurley that he left his locker open.

Fact: Breau immediate returned to the PD with his wife in tow, went inside, apologised to Roberts, Jette and Mary Anne.

Fact: Jette said to Breau " we were wondering how long it would take you to come back and lock your locker".

Fact: Breau securred his locker, which took approximately forty seconds.

Fact: Breau viewed the video tape which showed Roberts opening his locker and accessing his duty belt and weapon. Roberts then left the patrol room leaving his locker unsecurred, returned a short while later and saw Breau's open locker. Roberts left the patrol room again passing his un securred locker and returned with Firearms Instructor Jette. Roberts points to Breau's locker. Jette looks in Breau's locker and immediately picks up the digital camera and takes pictures of Breau's duty weapon hanging in his locker and in a securred holster. Jette and Roberts then leave the patrol room without ever locking Breau's locker.

Fact: Breau secured/locked the video in his desk for safe keeping.

Fact: At the direction of Chief Phillips, Breau was written up by Dan Reppucci for leaving his locker open.

Fact: Dan Reppucci told Chief Phillips that the actions of Roberts and Jette's were far more serious than that of Breau's in that Roberts and Jette unecessarily and deliberately left Breau's locker open and left Breaus weapon in the locker for forty-five minutes until Breau returned and locked it. Reppucci told Phillips that Jette and Roberts should have been severely disciplined for their actions,but Phillips refuced dole out any discipline to either individual..

Fact: There are dated and time stamped photographs that cooberate this incident.

The BOS should look into this incident and discipline Phillips and Roberts for their actions.

Fact: When Breau went to retreive the video tape from his locked desk it was not there.

Fact: Breau was told by Reppucci that the video tape was removed from his locked desk drawer by Roberts who had an extra key.

This is one of many examples of the unethical, undermining and sick tactics Phillips condoned.

Does anyone have to wonder why a couple good officers left the PD?

Anonymous said...

Fact is: the AG’s office has already found Phillips, Roberts and Platz in violation of the laws and found based on allegations they “did not follow the law when changing the authorized names on the Associations bank account”.

If you aren’t following the law, then you Are breaking the law.

Fact is: Phillips and Roberts and Platz broke the law and the AG’s office let them get away with it with a slap.

Fact is: Phillips was very dishonest with the AG’s office about what was really going on in the police dept at the time and covered up some very important facts. Would the AG’s have found differently had Phillips told the truth?

Fact is: the AG’s office clearly wrote in their decision, “Gary A Phillips, Christopher Roberts and Maryan Platz will hereby agree to the following:”

“1. Chief Phillips will resign immediately as the Acting Treasurer”

“2. Christopher Roberts and Maryan Platz will immediately resign as officers of the Winchester Police Association”

Fact is: The AG’s office doesn’t reprimand or admonish people when they are not violating the law. It appears that the AG’s office has exposed more of the underhanded, devious, unethical and illegal behavior of Phillips and Roberts and this fact is very well documented through the right to laws and the entire investigation, letters and notes are available through the AG”s office.

Fact is: In July of 2009, when Phillips asked by Breau and Reppucci, President and Treasurer, to sign documents and checks related to the Police Association they both refused to do so without first reviewing the documents themselves. Phillips refused the request to allow either of them to review documents that Phillips and Roberts filled out. Breau and Reppucci were the only 2 Officials in the association who had the authority to sign the documents. Rather than let them review the documents Phillips and Roberts pretended to have a police association meeting and they voted themselves in as President and Treasure to take over the association.

Does that sound legal and ethical?

Phillips and Roberts have a track record of using their power as police officers to circumvent the laws and undermine the rules.

Just like Jette, they need to go. It’s time to clean house.

Anonymous said...

Something is not adding up to Phillips version of his pd. What's being done about the Sheriff's Dept? Seems like they are protecting Phillips. Foote, Croteau, Macie - no one has set the record stratight? And where did the judge get his information from? The Ag's office looks into civil rights violations. This is pretty very serious against Phillips. What is he thinking? What are the selectmen thinking? Do they really think it's OK for police officers to break the law? If so they need to go bye bye. This is Winchester Police Corruption in broad daylight for all the world to see and it's Phillips at the helm and Roberts right behind him or maybe it's Roberts in front of Phillips. Seems like thats when all the problems really started. Way back when Roberts started. Hope this gets sorted out fair and square.

Anonymous said...

It seems that what Phillips did was illegal and is the Sheriff's dept covering for him?

Anonymous said...

Major police corruption - should the FBI would want to hear about it.

Anonymous said...

Just wondering. Maybe this is at least part of the reason why the selectmen did nothing about Jette for so long. Maybe it's why they have done nothing about Phillips and Roberts. There seems to be a lot of behind closed doors illegal maneuverings.

Anonymous said...

There is so much corruption out of the WPD it’s no wonder about any of this. We are at the mercy of very corrupt individuals. Thankfully Jette is gone and now Phillips needs to explain his actions.

Reppucci was set up by Phillips. Phillips lied and Macie lied. Misinformation and lies were sent to Superior court by the town and the town’s attorneys in order to gain a favorable ruling from Superior Court regarding Reppucci’s termination.

From the judges ruling printed in the Keene Sentinel

“Arnold also ruled that Reppucci’s refusal to cooperate in the sheriff’s deputy’s investigation was insubordination, and appropriate grounds for dismissal.”

“Due process does not require that a police officer be provided the opportunity to consult with an attorney before answering questions regarding an internal investigation,” Arnold wrote.

Would the judges ruling have been different if Arnold knew it was a criminal investigation?

The ruling probably would have been something to this effect,

Due process does requires that a police officer (like any other citizen) be provided the opportunity to consult with an attorney before answering questions regarding a criminal investigation.

Reppucci did not refuse to cooperate in the sheriff’s deputies investigation but rather chose to exercise his Constitutional Right to speak with an attorney because he was being targeted for termination, therefore there was no insubordination and Reppucci’s due process rights were violated.

Anonymous said...

One small methodical step at a time and the truth will come out and we watch and wait for that to happen.

Anonymous said...

This letter from Sheriff Foote says that the Sheriff's office NEVER conducted ANY internal investigations but Dan Reppucci was fired for not cooperating in the Sheriff's internal investigation? It was in the newspaper the judge found he didn't cooperate in the internal investigation. I doubt the judge would be lying. Phillips and his attorney lied in court. That should land him in jail. I hope Dan is working with the FBI to expose the truth of these supposed law enforcement people.

Anonymous said...

Keep it coming so the word gets out and justice will hopefully be served.

Anonymous said...

You're doing the right thing keep getting the story out. The facts are speaking for themselves. Phillips and Roberts have been operating a corrupt regime. Their house is weakening and the pressure needs to stay on them.

It’s scary to think that if they could do this to one of their own what do they do to the rest of us? How many more violations are there out there?

Anonymous said...

From the FBI's Philadelphia website

CAMDEN, NJ—A former Camden, N.J. police sergeant pleaded guilty today to conspiring with other Camden police officers to deprive others of their civil rights, United States Attorney Paul J. Fishman announced.

U.S. Attorney Fishman stated: “As a supervisor, Morris had an obligation to hold other officers to the highest standards of behavior. He opted instead to condone and commit a series of crimes. Our Office remains focused on rooting out such corruption, which insidiously eats away at the public’s confidence in those sworn to protect the rights of our citizens.”

Food for thought: It looks like the FBI takes civil rights violations pretty seriously and they don't care if they take down and hold accountable ranking police officers in the process.

Anonymous said...

As usual these blogs provide the proof needed to back up what is being said. This makes what we read on the blogs more credible than ever with no reason to think that anything said isn't true and can't be backed up by hard evidence. It's time for us to have the facts the selectmen and dept heads won't give us. We have been duped for a long enough time.

Anonymous said...

A CRIMINAL investigation is just that – an investigation that begins after the reporting of a crime to a law enforcement agency for the purpose of investigation and solving a criminal act or crime. This is a criminal process that allows for any person involved to consult with an attorney. This right lies with and is protected by the US Constitution and the NH Constitution and is NOT subject to ANY discretionary interpretation by law enforcement OR law enforcement personnel such as Phillips or Macie or anyone in between.

An INTERNAL investigation is a just that – an investigation conducted by any company or organization for the purpose of fact finding, to determine if that company or organization should have cause to discipline an employee or employees, for some internal company or organization violations determined to be violated ONLY by that company or organizations personnel and NOT by any outside law enforcement agency. This is a civil matter and NOT criminal and therefore the right to consult with an attorney IS discretionary and the right or non-right lies solely with the company or organization and is generally addressed in a written policy within that company or organization.

The importance of being able to distinguish between the two types of investigation is critical to being able to determine what rights people do or do not have in circumstances of investigations in the workplace.

ANY, employee, in ANY company or organization has an ABSOLUTE CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECED RIGHT to seek the advice of counsel during ANY criminal investigation they are involved in, at anytime they feel the necessity to do so and NO employer of ANY company or organization has the legal right to FORCE someone to participate in ANY criminal investigation and NO employer of ANY company or organization has the LEGAL right to discipline an employee for insubordination or any other charge for ASKING to exercise their CONSTITUTIONAL right to seek advice of counsel.

It seems as though some may have exerted a show of force in an attempt to violate the Constitutional rights of Dan Reppucci while he was on duty at the WPD.

Was this done for the purpose of Phillips and Roberts own personal gain?

To discredit Dan Reppucci so they could continue to cover-up the crimes and unethical activities that were being reported?

Had this information been available to all of us more than a year ago, would the face of the WPD look like it does today?

Would we be dealing with lawsuits, citizens hurt by officers who think not following policies is OK and a police department that prefers to be in hiding rather than doing their jobs and keeping our neighborhoods and roads safe?

It will interesting to see how the rest of this unfolds.

Anonymous said...

Since Sheriff Foote, the head of a law enforcement and police agency, by his own account, Clearly Directed, Deputy Macie to conduct a CRIMINAL investigation any person being questioned by Macie, including witnesses, had a legal right to stop the questioning at any time and ask to consult with an attorney.

Why has Chief Phillips and everyone else involved, except Mr. Reppucci and Sheriff Foote, continued to maintain that the investigation that Chief Phillips ORDERED Mr. Reppucci to cooperate in was in fact an internal investigation?

Why was the court not presented with the truth? No judge would have ruled against Mr. Reppucci and ruled he was insubordinate if they were given the facts.

Is that why the facts are being withheld? To protect Chief Phillips? The Town? The Sheriff’s Office? Deputy Macie?

And was Chief Phillips interfering in a criminal investigation being conducted by another agency?

Tampering with a witness perhaps?

Maybe Mr. Reppucci needs to file charges against Chief Phillips if the law allows.

How can Chief Phillips order someone, ANYONE, to answer questions in an investigation that isn’t part of the WPD? This investigation wasn’t an investigation that belonged to the WPD. It came from the Sheriff’s Office and Sheriff Foote has said that.

And did Chief Phillips let his anger at Mr. Reppucci’s knowledge of the WPD policies, policies that Chief Phillips himself wrote, get the better of him?

Mr. Reppucci has maintained that Chief Phillips was targeting him. Was Mr. Reppucci merely obeying and following the policies of the WPD while it was Chief Phillips who plotted to connive and concoct a story that violated the policies of the WPD in order to discredit Mr. Reppucci?

A criminal investigation by the Sheriff’s Office took place after a crime was reported by Chief Phillips.

Perhaps, since Chief Phillips continues to maintain that this was an internal investigtion he really means there was no crime and he just made a false report to law enforcemnt for the purpose of his own personal gain.

It seem pretty clear it was either a criminal investigation based on a reported crime


an internal investigation that Chief Phillips had no legal right to include the Sheriff's Office in.

So which is it Chief Phillips? Did you violate Mr. Reppucci rights during your internal investigation or was it during the criminal investigation?

By all accounts, written and verbal, Mr. Reppucci was ORDERED by Chief Phillips, to answer questions during that investigation without the protection of counsel, even though he had asked to speak with a lawyer, thus violating his MIRANDA rights.

Mr. Reppucci lost his job when Chief Phillips immediately put him on Administrative leave for INSUBORDINATION, showing Mr. Reppucci was not free to leave on his own accord and was being held in a custodial manner.

Mr. Reppucci’s Constitutional rights were violated when Chief Phillips ordered him to comply with his order to cooperate in this CRIMINAL investigation.

There are still a lot of unanswered questions, all pointing to everyone other than Mr. Reppucci.

Anonymous said...

To anonymous, thanks for time for the break down.

DR said...

Thank you to this blog for getting the truth out there. I will be making some post in the near future. I want Gary Phillips and Chris Roberts to know that I will continue my fight until they are brought to justice for all of the illegal and unethical things that they have done. Don’t you two worry. You will someday have to answer to someone with far greater powers then me. God.

Anonymous said...

Has the Selectmen or anybody else thought about the ramifications and complications if there are any appeals of Nate Jette cases going forward and what that effect might be on the taxpayers?

Anonymous said...

For those who doubt the status of Nate Jette, there have been some rumors surfacing that people may think that Nate Jette is on some type of leave or vacation or suspension.

It is NONE of the above.

Nate Jette turned in his resignation and here is an email between Bob Gray, Winchester Town Administrator, and another citizen. Bob Gray confirmed that on August 30, 2010, Nate Jette turned in his resignation from the Winchester Police Department.

This email can be requested under the RTK from town hall.

from <>

dateThu, Sep 2, 2010 at 9:24 AM

hide details Sep 2 (9 days ago)

Hi Bob,

Can you confirm whether Nate Jette:

Has resigned from the police dept?
If so when?
If so when it becomes effective.
If so the reason given.

Bob Gray


dateThu, Sep 2, 2010 at 10:30 AM

hide details Sep 2 (9 days ago)


Nate Jette resigned from the Police Department effective Monday 8/30/10 (Letter received 10AM 8/30) for personal reasons by his own choice.


Casual Blog Reader said...

Part I

I don’t know if I am the only one who has picked up on this but I figured I’d throw it out there. According to the letter by Foote he wrote,

“The investigation in question is a criminal investigation. It is not an internal investigation.”

The meaning is very clear.

Foote then quotes the following paragraph in the same letter and he says it’s directly from the investigative report that Macie wrote,

“Sheriff Foote was very clear in his directive to me. He stated that the Sheriff’s Office was only interested in investigating the matter of the chain of custody of the so called grievance letter. We were not going to investigate …any other internal personnel matters.”

What Macie writes in his report shows he was clearly directed by Foote to conduct a criminal investigation AND that he clearly understood that “we – meaning the Sheriff’s Office” were not going to investigate any internal personnel matters.

That reference in his report shows his (Macie’s) understanding that he was not there to conduct any internal investigation.

Looking at the previous blog you can see that all the information being referred to is from the same report in that blog and the same investigation Foote is referring to in his letter – Note the Investigation #’s 09-63-OF.

If Macie knew he was “Directed” by Foote to conduct a Criminal Investigation and we know from Foote’s letter the investigation in question was started as a criminal investigation and ended as a criminal investigation, how is it that Macie is involved with Phillips and they are both saying the investigation was internal?

How did the Court get that information?

What about this “other” non-existent investigation? If Foote didn’t give a directive to Macie, who did?

So was Macie working on his own?
Was Macie working with any of the other members of the Sheriff’s Office?
Maybe Macie was working with Foote?
What about Croteau and Phillips?
Was Maice working with Croteau?
Was Macie working with Phillips?
Was Phillips working with the Sheriff’s Office?
Were Foote and Phillips working together?

You can see the tightly woven ball of a mess. Somebody has to know something. Or more likely quite a few know something. And more than likely quite a few are hiding what they know.

So what could really going on here? Something just doesn’t make sense with all of this, but it smells pretty bad.

How is it an investigation that supposedly never took place apparently made it’s way to Superior Court and was presented to the court as having taken place?

This internal investigation is so real a judge made a ruling based on it, yet it doesn't exist because the highest ranking Police Official in Cheshire County, Sheriff Foote said and this is a direct quote from his letter, “In 2009 the Cheshire County Sheriff’s Office was not requested to nor did it conduct any internal investigation on you or any member of the Winchester Police Department.”

He says with absolute specificity, there was NO Internal Investigation that came from his Agency that involved the Winchester Police Department in 2009.

Casual Blog Reader - Part II said...

Part II

Dan Reppucci was fired from the Winchester Police Department in August of 2009 for Insubordination when he Failed to answer questions in an Internal Investigation, conducted by Deputy Macie of the Sheriff’s Office, according to Phillips, Macie, the Town and others.

In his appeal of that Town decision to the Superior Court of Cheshire County, the Judge found and ruled the following based on the information presented to the court:

“First, Mr. Reppucci failed to follow Chief Phillips order to answer Deputy Macie’s questions during the internal investigation.”

Say What? – Yes that is correct and a direct quote from Judge Arnold’s ruling.

But Foote said that their was NO internal investigation the Sheriff’s Office or Deputy Macie were involved with in 2009, didn’t he?

The Judge goes on to say, “Although Mr. Reppucci contends that it was erroneous for the Board to terminate him for this reason, the Court disagrees. First, due process does not require that a police officer be provided the opportunity to consult with an attorney before answering questions regarding an internal investigation.”

Bingo. Precisely correct, Judge Arnold. However, when the investigation is criminal and the US and NH Constitutions protect any citizens right to counsel during any criminal investigation, conducted by any police agency, regardless of and notwithstanding of their profession, including a Police Officer.

A problem here? Who’s lying here?

Was Perjury – a criminal and prosecutable offense committed by some members of the Cheshire County Law Enforcement community while knowingly testifying to or presenting false written statements to a court or in the course of Official Proceedings, while under sworn oath to tell the truth and all the facts?

RSA 641:1 Perjury.

Is there a civil conspiracy going on here?

False imprisonment?
Intentional infliction of emotional distress?
Vicarious liability?
And more?

I can see these very words as part of a lawsuit down the road.

I’m sure there is a law firm out there who would take a case like this on, on a contingency basis.

None of this is speculation but facts based on information presented here that
when analyzed raise these legitimate questions about our area law enforcement.

Does anyone really believe that Cops have a right to break the law, just because they are cops?

Does anyone really believe that Cops have a right to break the law, any law?

Does anyone really believe that Cops shouldn’t be held to a higher standard and not a lower standard when it comes to following the law?

Does anyone really believe that if it is found that crimes have been committed they should go unpunished?

It’s been well documented that Reppucci has said he was targeted by Phillips and Roberts.

Is this what happened?

Was some sort of fake investigation used by Phillips to meet out the discipline that resulted in, an too real termination of an otherwise law abiding police officer?

Let’s not forget that the other blog, the Winchester Informer, has information that the AG’s office has already found that Phillips and Roberts and Platz ALL Conspired together to present false information to a bank so that, none other than Reppucci and Breau were removed from a bank account, Illegally and fraudulently, so we know they are capable of conspiring together to get what they want, even if it does break the law.

This Town and this County appear to have some real serious issues involving quite a few members of their respective police departments. It sure looks like there are enough people, with enough information and gumption and determination to make sure the truth gets to the public.