The Silent Minority.
By Jim Conley • Dec 13th, 2007 • Email This Post to a Friend •
Print This Post
• Email this author
In case readers have missed the fundamental point on the matter of Arthur Conquest and his travails with the Brookline Police, here it is - Conquest was about to be charged with assault (by an officer who is nephew to the complaining witness) through evidence gathering (i.e., statements) that the police admit did not consider Conquest’s version of events (with respect to an alleged altercation with former ZBA member Lawrence Kaplan).
This was not a matter of he said/he said, it was a one dimensional case rushed to the charging bar. It was more than sloppy; it was an abuse of power. And then the selectmen repeated the abuse when they took up Conquest’s request for a hearing on the department’s laughable internal investigation. Because, once again, Conquest was not allowed to speak.
Now, we can expect that dimwits like Selectman Jesse Mermell can’t see the abuses unfolding. But an attorney (no matter how dense) ought to be able to see the abuses, as Gil Hoy surely did. He said he was, “troubled by police actions and he wanted to hear more.”
But Selectman’s Chair (and attorney) Nancy Daly (Brookline’s Orrin Hatch) saw no issue with letting the police put on another one-dimensional case. And the pride of the New England School of Law, Selectman Robert Allen, sat mute (except to punk it up a bit on Hoy’s motives).
The police version of the “facts” were good enough for Allen, Daly and Mermell…there’ll be no hearing.
Would that have happened to a white resident from Chestnut Hill? Of course not. And it looks to me like we have a separate but unequal application of law enforcement in Brookline.
The fact is that Arthur Conquest, a black resident in a town that is white as the driven snow, has been denied the basic dignities of a free people - the right to present evidence, the right to an unbiased investigation into his treatment by the police, and the right to a fair and open hearing into his grievance when that doesn’t happen. Hell, he wasn’t even going to be notified of his appeal’s consideration by the selectmen.
The Brookline Police and Selectmen sent a powerful message - go screw - to those who may object to police treatment, no matter the cause. And that’s just fine with our so-called civil libertarians.
But as Martin Luther King said: “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”
Jim Conley is publisher of On Brookline.
Email this author | All posts by Jim Conley
Today’s Brookline TAB coverage of the Conquest matter reveals and leads to several interesting threads of thought concerning Selectmen Mermell and Allen:
Mermell: “I can’t cast a vote for political reasons on the back of an officer’s career.” Presumably, she meant Officer Ford. Was Officer Ford, in Jesse’s eyes, the victim here? Did Jesse consider that several BPD Officers (some African-American) witnessed the confrontation of Conquest by Officer Ford and failed to step in to calm the encounter and keep it from getting out of hand? In what manner was Conquest a threat in the lobby of Town Hall with all of the BPD officers present together with a number of residents? Does Jesse have any idea as to why, after the conclusion of the investigation on the sixth floor it was NOT Officer Ford but Sgt. Campbell (nephew of the former ZBA associate member Lawrence Kaplan) who notified Conquest of the “no trespass” order and that he would be charged with assault, even though Officer Ford was the primary on the BPD response? Does Jesse have any idea as to why Conquest and his supporting witnesses were not given the opportunity to present their versions of the incident (which none of the BPD force had witnessed)? If Jesse did read Lt. Burke’s report twice, or perhaps three times, surely she was aware that Officer Ford admitted in effect that out of fairness to Conquest he should have been permitted (as well as other witnesses present) to provide his version of what had happened on the sixth floor. So why was Jesse so concerned with Officer Ford’s career? Was Conquest the “Invisible Man” in her eyes?
Allen’s challenge of Selectman Hoy: “I just don’t see how it relates to the allegations against Ford…. I’ve sat on this board with you [Hoy] for eight years. Never [have I] heard you pull out the policies.” Isn’t this reminiscent of the treatment that was dumped on then Selectman Sher several years ago by Selectmen Allen, Hoy, Merrill and Daly at the hearing on DPW Commissioner DeMaio? By the way, did Allen hear from many persons as did Jesse on the action to be taken on Conquest’s appeal? Did Allen hear from his BPD Lieutenant brother (and “of Counsel” member of his law firm) in this regard? If so, might that have influenced Allen in his vote? If Allen had voted for a hearing on Conquest’s appeal, might such a vote have had an impact on Allen’s local law practice?
I should point out the irony of Hoy being subjected to Allen’s hostility on this occasion in light of his, as well as other Selectmen, ganging up on Sher several years ago. For Hoy, this may have been an “and then they came for me” moment. But principle and truth trump Brookline-style political loyalty. I trust Hoy has learned this lesson. Sadly, I don’t think Jesse has. And Selectman DeWitt took the uncourageous recusal route by not disclosing why. As for Chair Daly, what more needs to be said?
I wonder if the late Martin Luther King might have once thought that PAX members were his and his cause’s friends? If so, Martin might be heard saying from the grave “I can’t hear you!” Do they all have laryngitis or do they merely lack “sticks”? Are Marty, Stanley, Joe, Bob, John, Bob, Evelyn, et al, all out of town?
I don’t know where they are. The last time I saw Marty Rosenthal on the sixth floor he was trying to get some justice for DPW Commissioner Thomas DeMaio over the Carlton St. Footbridge grant.
Which reminds me, why was PAX so hot on a footbridge as a civil rights cause celebre, but when we learn that no civil police complaints have advanced in 12 years they’re on the other side of the river?