Courts and Armed Officers . . .

[6hold]

Court off-limits for armed officers​

Environmental police check guns

By Scott J. Croteau TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF
[email protected]

State environmental police are at odds with a courthouse policy that requires them to disarm when entering any court building.

The issue came to a head Oct. 26 in the new Worcester court complex on Main Street when an environmental police officer refused to heed court officers’ request that he turn over his firearm shortly after entering the building. The environmental police officer said he was within his rights to carry the gun; court officers disagreed, according to an environmental police report on the case.

State policy allows state and municipal police who are in uniform and on duty to carry their department-issued weapon into the courthouses as long as they provide a police badge and photograph identification. Non-state or non-municipal police, such deputy sheriffs, constables and campus police, must check in their weapons which are then placed in secure gun lockers, according to the courthouse policy.

Courthouse officials list environmental in the latter category, meaning they must disarm upon entering a courthouse.

With the power to enforce state laws across the commonwealth, environmental police have continually shown frustration with the court policy. For years, environmental police and some lawmakers have lobbied the state Trial Court to change its policy to no avail.

“There is no logic behind it. There is a real simple solution and that is to allow these officers to carry their firearms into court for the safety of everybody,” said Lisa L. Fusco, an environmental police officer and president of the Massachusetts Environmental Police Officers Association. “Anyone that has the ability to change this should be ashamed they are allowing this to continue.”

On Oct. 26, Environmental Police Officer Anthony Abdal-Khabir entered the courthouse to attend the Worcester Central District Court arraignment of two men charged with injuring a young girl in a personal watercraft accident earlier this year on Indian Lake in Worcester.

In uniform, the officer was told by an associate court officer that he had to check his gun because he was a member of the environmental police. Officer Abdal-Khabir said that contradicted the posted policy and he could not hand over his weapon. The associate court officer said she was going to call her supervisor, according to an incident report written by Officer Abdal-Khabir that was obtained by the Telegram & Gazette.

At 9:05 a.m., the officer said he was late for his court proceeding, showed his credentials to another security member and proceeded to the courtroom. He reported that moments later, after walking up stairs toward the courtroom, he was stopped by three court officers and told he was not allowed in court unless he handed over his firearm to security.

Officer Abdal-Khabir stated that as an environmental police officer he had statewide powers and was late for the arraignment and proceeded to the third floor of the courthouse, where he was met by four more court officers, he said in his report.

The officer was not allowed in the courtroom and had a discussion with Chief Court Officer Francis A. Cicio. Court Officer Cicio restated the policy. Another environmental police officer, who relinquished her handgun to security, was in the courtroom for the arraignment.

Officer Abdal-Khabir then left the building and was told his supervisor would be called about the issue.

“He didn’t violate anything. I fully support his actions and he is one of the finest officers in our division,” Officer Fusco said.

She also said the Worcester courthouse does not have the correct equipment to effectively take out the ammunition clip and fully remove all the ammunition from the gun.

For safety purposes a piece of equipment called a clearing barrel is used to fully empty a firearm including the round inside the chamber. The clearing barrel is used in case the round in the chamber accidentally goes off. Officer Fusco does not believe that any courthouse in the state owns this piece of equipment.

She also questioned whether the courthouse personnel have a firearms identification card and the ability to take possession of a gun.

“In my opinion under no circumstance should any of our officers relinquish their loaded firearms to a person who is not qualified to take possession of them,” she said.

State Sen. Stephen M. Brewer, D-Barre, is one of the local lawmakers who wrote to the state Trial Court, namely Chief Justice Robert A. Mulligan, to express opposition to the policy of not allowing environmental police to carry their firearms in courthouses.

He wrote to the chief justice in 2006 and said he had to call them for a response. They told him they were concerned about setting a precedent, he said.

A spokeswoman for the Trial Court would only say the policy was for environmental police to disarm. A call to Thomas J. Connolly, acting director of security, was not returned.

“They don’t want to budge in this,” Mr. Brewer said in a recent interview. “I stand behind them (environmental police) on this one.”

The court policy brings the environmental police to the level of second-class officers, the senator said.

“This issue is with the procedures of the Trial Court,” he said.

Several courthouses don’t enforce the policy and according to Officer Fusco the only courthouses that stay stringent on the policy are those under the control of Regional Assistant Director of Security Robin R. Yancey. She is responsible for Worcester County, Hampshire County and the courthouses in Marlboro, Framingham, Natick and Palmer.

Court security personnel have quietly questioned the policy, but have to enforce it. Environmental police have sometimes mailed in citations to court to avoid going to the courthouses under Ms. Yancey’s control.

Officer Fusco recalled an incident in Framingham in which an environmental police officer had to go to the courthouse there relating to the trial of two men. The two men were members of a loose-knit group of criminals in Greater Boston and authorities were worried about the environmental police officer’s safety. Court security did not allow the environmental police officers to carry their weapons inside.

“God forbid one of our officers or another individual fall victim due to the shortsightedness of this procedure,” Officer Fusco said. In a letter to Mr. Connolly in 2005, Environmental Police Capt. George Agganis noted his officers make arrests, issue citations and are highly trained. The environmental police also undergo extensive firearms training.

Repeated letters from lawmakers and environmental police to Trial Court authorities have not changed the policy.

“Ninety percent of people we encounter are armed with guns, rifles, bows or filet knives,” Officer Fusco said. “The enforcement of this procedure is ludicrous. It shows an extreme lack of proper court security management.”

 

[dwarven1]

Forgive me for not being sympathetic, but perhaps they now understand how it feels to be a CITIZEN who's not a LEO in this fascist commiewealth.

 

[Jaxon]

Forgive me for not being sympathetic, but perhaps they now understand how it feels to be a CITIZEN who's not a LEO in this fascist commiewealth.

 

[FITH]

 

[dwarven1]

Hey, looks good, and I'm hungry, too. Mind if I join you?

 

[doobie]

She also said the Worcester courthouse does not have the correct equipment to effectively take out the ammunition clip and fully remove all the ammunition from the gun.

Huh??? What type of equipment does one need to effectively take out the ammunition clip and fully remove all the ammunition?

 

[Admin]

Huh??? What type of equipment does one need to effectively take out the ammunition clip and fully remove all the ammunition?

It might be SOP to dry fire once the gun is unloaded in to a barrel of sand which they probably didn't have.

 

[Chris]

Huh??? What type of equipment does one need to effectively take out the ammunition clip and fully remove all the ammunition?

Perhaps there is no safe direction to point the gun as you manipulate it. Occasionally you hear about some officer or lawyer who has a ND while checking a gun. There should be at a minimum a ballistic plate to which a firearm can be directed.

 

[snowjoker]

Why do the courthouses get to dictate that one type of PO can be armed and one can't? Why isn't a PO a PO no matter the designation?

 

[JonJ]

We have a Savage Check-It (Snail Trap) outside the back door at work.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Huh??? What type of equipment does one need to effectively take out the ammunition clip and fully remove all the ammunition?

A brain?

 

[Chris]

Why do the courthouses get to dictate that one type of PO can be armed and one can't? Why isn't a PO a PO no matter the designation?

As in most professions, there is a pecking order. The sad human trait of "My Kung-Fu is more powerful than yours" leads to some real issues when it comes to departments.

Why do you think it's been so freaking hard to get different agencies to work together for 'crisis' situations? Too many toes get stepped on.

 

[Len-2A Training]

When I've had to check my gun on entering a courthouse, they tell me to just place it in the gun lockbox AS-IS (loaded). LESS manipulating of the gun means less chance for NDs!

Typically courthouses ONLY recognize municipal and state police as "real police" (maybe the deputy sheriffs too, not sure) and allow them to go armed into the buildings. No one else, even if bringing in a prisoner, is usually allowed to be armed. The courthouse security isn't armed either.

It's a very dumb system, and each chief justice (one per courthouse) gets to make ALL those rules as he/she wishes.

 

[Arioch]

There should be at a minimum a ballistic plate to which a firearm can be directed.

Or a least a liberal democrat form the commonwealth.

 

[Coyote33]

Anyone see the comments on that page? Look at it this way, 351 cities and towns all do it differently to civilians, why not a handful of court officials doing it different depending on what agency you belong to? Just more of the same ol', same ol'.

 

[GSG]

There's nothing more reassuring for me to see when I walk into a courthouse than unarmed officers working a metal detector. How many courthouse shootings have their been in the U.S.?

 

[Firetarr]

Sounds like the guy in charge of security for those courthouses is a real cop wanna-be and couldn't measure up! So he probably used some of daddy's connections and became a court security guard(and stuck around long enough to become a boss). Now every time he can, he sticks it to LEO's.

 

[Skald]

When I've had to check my gun on entering a courthouse, they tell me to just place it in the gun lockbox AS-IS (loaded). LESS manipulating of the gun means less chance for NDs!

Typically courthouses ONLY recognize municipal and state police as "real police" (maybe the deputy sheriffs too, not sure) and allow them to go armed into the buildings. No one else, even if bringing in a prisoner, is usually allowed to be armed. The courthouse security isn't armed either.

It's a very dumb system, and each chief justice (one per courthouse) gets to make ALL those rules as he/she wishes.

Also, I believe Armored Car Drivers are allowed in armed if they are there on official business on duty and some other rules. Friends dad worked in Boston for Loomis and went into court a few times armed. This was years ago and may have changed.

 

[StuckInMA]

Two weeks ago I saw people wearing "public safety" jacket and packing in the court on New Chardon Street in Boston

My friend wears the same jacket, and he's just a security guard for a housing management company in Boston.

 

[WayneWong]

I work for a private ambulance service, and we provide 911 EMS services to several cities and towns. So do several other services. There is big incentive for the contractors and the municipalities to do it this way, especially in urban and heavily populated suburban areas.

I'm constantly hearing that some local fire chiefs put us down as "transfer medics." Some days I do more calls in 8 hours than these entire podunk departments do in a week.

Fire chiefs want EMS to come under their umbrella, because there is a lot more medical action than fires now a days. They put us down because it makes them feel better.

It's all jealousy, fear, and protection of their fifedoms. They don't want their communities to contract with the indie services.

 

[Firetarr]

 

[brass spitter]

The legal squabble is one thing.

Another is the fact that the environmental officer would put procedural issues ahead of the true mission--testifying at the arraignment--suggests that the officer isn't doing the job in the first place.

 

[WayneWong]

It is on topic. "I'm a cop, you're not a cop." "I'm a paramedic, you're not." To a sheriff or correction officer: You're not law enforcement. Some places won't sell blue line license plates to COs - I've seen the inside of Cedar Junction and Souza-Baranowska. Talk about 1*.


Full Time firefighter doesn't think a call firefighter is the real thing, even as they breath in the same smoke.

Tell me that an Amtrack Cop, or a Northeastern University Cop is less a PO than a cop in some podunk in Western Mass. An environmental cop is every bit as much a cop as any state or town cop. Remember the conflict between Boston PD and Boston Municipal?

Petty bullshit jealousy and politics. People protecting their fifedoms.Typical mAss bullshit.

 

[clinotus]

Arent Env. Police pretty much the same at State Police? They have statewide authority.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Arent Env. Police pretty much the same at State Police? They have statewide authority.

Don't ever ask a Statie that question! They'll bite your head off!

"I'm the only real dog in town" is played out between almost every two LE orgs in existence. The reality of petty BS and jealousy is far and wide . . . and not exclusive to MA by any means.

 

[Cross-X]

Forgive me for not being sympathetic, but perhaps they now understand how it feels to be a CITIZEN who's not a LEO in this fascist commiewealth.

Keyboard commando?

 

[Cross-X]

Perhaps there is no safe direction to point the gun as you manipulate it. Occasionally you hear about some officer or lawyer who has a ND while checking a gun.

Ouch!

What about gun-toting negligent computer geeks?

 

[Scrivener]

Ouch!

What about gun-toting negligent computer geeks?

Most of them don't do anything interesting enough to warrant their presence in court.....

 

[dwarven1]

Keyboard commando?

Nope, just someone tired of the dichotomy between the stated motto of "to protect and serve" and the reality of "some animals are more equal than others".

Ever looked at the statute in NJ that requires ALL handguns to be so-called "smart" handguns three years after such guns come on the market? The rationale behind this was so that guns couldn't be used against their owners. Well, guess what - LEOs are EXEMPT from this law, even though they're the ones most likely to have a gun taken away from them and used against them. Nope, this law is only for the peons.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

The officers on the list will no doubt disagree, but the more situations in which an officer is treated the same as a civilian, the better for civilian rights. If off duty officers in VA or AZ had to rely on their carry permit rather than badge, it's doubtful you'd have a restaurant ban in these states. Ditto for sales of guns other than the ones carried when on duty (in this case, defining "on duty" as "paid hours" - not the generic "never off duty").

When I lived in FL, the state police disarmed when entering the courthouse and only those responsible for security in the building remained armed. Although only symbolic, the private citizen, and the officer, had the same rights when appearing before a judge to resolve a dispute.

One cornerstone of freedom is that police are hired to provide a particular service to the public, not exist as a warrior class with special privileges beyond those actually required to do their job.