Shut It Down.
By Jim Conley • Mar 6th, 2008 • Email This Post to a Friend •
Print This Post
• Email this author
It’s not clear to me when the selectmen’s Chief Daniel O’Leary’s police review panel is scheduled to meet again, but it really doesn’t matter. With word that O’Leary was actively involved in recruiting its members [see previous post], this committee has no moral authority (not that it had much to begin with).
The tragedy is that a few accomplished people got sucked into this sideshow, people like Ruth Ellen Fitch and former Superior Court Justice Peter King. And, out of respect to their reputations, we should rescue them from this circus tent.
Folks, it couldn’t be any clearer that we need to wrest supervision of the Brookline Police from the sixth floor of town hall. When you give hacks a job, you get a hack job. The police department and residents deserve better than Chief O’Leary, Richard Kelliher and the Brookline Selectmen.
And I’ll bet there are more than few officers who agree with that sentiment.
An aside: In the e-mail I reference in the Martha Coakley post, it’s interesting to note that Selectman Betsy DeWitt is copied on the correspondence. Oh, do you mean the Betsy BeWitt that ran from the room when her board was hearing the Conquest appeal? That Betsy DeWitt?
She’s involved in assembling the panel formed to correct the “frustrations” selectmen had with the process involving Conquest, though she recused herself from hearing the appeal Conquest filed out of frustration with the process?
Only in Brookline.
Jim Conley is publisher of On Brookline.
Email this author | All posts by Jim Conley
Is it possible that because of Selectman DeWitt’s long-time friendship with both Arthur Conquest and his wife it would have been “difficult” for her to vote against Conquest’s appeal? If she had voted in favor of the appeal, then her and Hoy’s votes would have granted the appeal, which might have proved embarrassing to our Town officials. So perhaps her recusal on the vote was not very courageous on her part. Is her current role regarding citizen complaints a sort of mea culpa? It would seem that Betsy had less reason to recuse herself than Bobby Allen who did not.
DON’T SHUT IT DOWN!
Let’s make this a test of open government, transparency. Let’s insist that justice be done. Let’s put on the table exactly how the panel members were selected and by whom. Two Selectmen are up for reelection this May. Let’s put their feet to the fire to fix this mess.
I have just started to read a 51 page, singled-spaced article by Mark Fenster titled: “Designing Transparency: The 9/11 Commission and Institutional Form” available at:
http://ssrn.com/abstract/=1099600
If the “abstract” is interesting, perhaps panel members (and others) with the time might read this article as it may pertain to the tasks of the panel.
Of course the citizen complaint process as it relates to the May Town Hall incident that the panel is to address is quite distant from the dreadful events of 9/11 and its aftermath. But to our Town, which has a history of civil rights and justice, the events of the Town Hall incident are important and should be addressed in a fair and timely fashion.
Our Town has had a history of committees, advisory and otherwise, that have made studies and prepared reports that have gathered dust on shelves. Hopefully this will not be the case with the assignment of this panel. It is up to the members to make their efforts meaningful in as unbiased a manner as practicable. We all have our biases but they can be significantly overcome by discourse similar to the hermeneutical circle process.
I hope to complete my read of the article over the weekend to determine how, in my view, it might be of aid to panel members and share my thoughts with visitors to this Blog.
UNSOLICITED COMMENT TO REVIEW COMMITTEE
I finished reading Prof. Fenster’s article (referenced in my earlier comment) more quickly by ignoring, for the most part, its extensive footnotes. I heartily recommend this article to members of the Review Committee and others in our community in considering the Review Committee’s response to the Selectmen’s “Charge.” A 4th revision draft of the “Charge” invites the Committee “to solicit other comments, as appropriate” in addition to holding a public hearing at which the public may comment. (I hope that the Committee will hold several public hearings and not limit itself to just one.) Although unsolicited, I submit this comment in the spirit of the “Charge.”
Prof. Fenster’s article stresses the importance of impartiality, accountability, transparency and deliberations of an advisory committee in arriving at its conclusion or report. While the article points out concerns addressed by the 9/11 Commission involving “National Security,” the local issues to be addressed by the Review Committee do not seem to be similarly restricted. In comparison to the 9/11 Commission, the task of the Review Committee should be relatively simple.
First of all, there was the Citizen Complaint filed by Arthur Conquest on June 7, 2007 regarding the Town Hall incident of May 24, 2007. This was followed by BPD Lt. Burke’s investigation pursuant to the procedure to be reviewed by the Committee, which culminated in his report of October 10, 2007.
The Review Committee should seek and review all of the materials involved with Lt. Burke’s investigation in order to determine whether his report fairly reflected his investigation. Obtaining a chronology of the investigation by Lt. Burke also seems appropriate, including the order of the witnesses, the process of preparing the report and its distribution in draft forms to various Town officials and personnel (as well as their comments) before its preparation in final form and its public release. To the extent there may be security issues involving the BPD, or privacy issues, the Committee could utilize Executive Sessions under the Open Meeting Law.
It would seem that the Review Committee could not do justice to its “Charge” without the full cooperation of the BPD to produce a report satisfying the impartiality, accountability, transparency and deliberations of the Committee. Hopefully, such a report would result in the improvement of both a very good BPD and the Town’s policy concerning citizen complaints. A public that perceives its police force as providing “procedural justice” will strongly support the police in its law enforcement efforts.
Respectfully submitted.