Thursday, October 21, 2010

New Documents: Kelvin Macie Criminal Investigation and Court Ruling

If this all sounds confusing, it's because it is. If this doesn't sound logical, it's because it's not.

See NEW documents on right, CC Sheriff investigation 09-63-OF and CC Superior Court Judge decision in Reppucci lawsuit with Town. The continued lies have now forced him to APPEAL that Decision in the Supreme Court.

What's been presented by the Chief, Town, Deputy, Sheriff's Office and Court is absolute nonsense and if this involved anybody other than a police officer - It Would Not Be Going On.

                                     Click on New Links : >>>>>>>>>>> 

Don't be fooled into thinking - he was Cop so he had to cooperate. That's not true by any stretch. Dan Reppucci was not a cop in this investigation - he was an ordinary citizen, like you or me and he was entitled to HIS Constitutional Rights and he was entitled to an Attorney.

No truth could ever be this distorted and maligned.

Who provided the judge with the information he based his decision on?

Judge Arnold states Reppucci didn't provide evidence or even dispute the facts? So who provided this undisputed evidence? Where did it come from? Or were the facts provided by Reppucci simply overlooked because the Town's story was more believable?

How did the judge come to the conclusion that it was Mr. Reppucci's refusal to answer Deputy Kelvin Macie's questions that led to sufficient grounds for his termination? See 2nd paragraph, 2nd page. It was a criminal investigation and in fact that criminal investigation was provided as evidence to the Court.

The Judge states Reppucci refused to answer Deputy Kelvin Macie's questions. He had a right to refuse - he was being questioned in a criminal investigation - not the internal investigation the judge refers to in his ruling. See 1st page, paragraph 2.

The Judge states that Reppucci provides no factual support to his allegation that neither the WPD or Sheriff's Office followed proper rules and regulations during their investigation.

Well, is it normal and customary for the Sheriff's Department to show up at someones house for criminal investigations with an Administrative Warning for the people to sign?

Is that the protocol for police departments across our land?

If they showed up knocking on Judge Arnold's door with one, would he have willingly answered questions about anything they were asking?

How about a Chief of Police who reported a crime to that agency? Do the criminal investigations magically become internal investigations?

Hasn't the judge ever heard of due process? Or maybe he was persuaded to believe that there were so many who were against Reppucci that it must have been true he did something wrong?

See NEW documents on right, CC investigation 09-63-OF and Superior Court decision or use links below: