“reasonable cause to believe” that Elder Abuse is Happening Settlement In the Matter of Harold MacGilvray- Disposition Agreement
“reasonable cause to believe”
The job of a Housing Supervisor is to provide rent-paying tenants with
QUIET ENJOYMENT. However in Everett, MA "screaming Mimi, the Wicked Witch of Whittier Drive," is a reprobate known as Nicole R. DiPierro, the fruit of the poisonous tree of dishonest and disgraced ex mayor, Carlo DeMaria, forced out by the voters in November of 2025.
Since cousin Carlo was spit out by the voters, his narcissistic cousin, elder abuser Nicole DiPierro, must resign or be fired for cause.
This writer is serious as a judge. I have the dates where Ms. DiPierro abused me, and now her weapon against me is vile and criminal perjury.
Not an honest bone in her body, and the Courts must stop her lies, defamations and abuse of a minority, handicapped elder who helps his community, like fixing the broken steps at Housing.
Nicole DiPierro is calling the photographs of the broken steps "stalking," in response ...actually retaliation - a complaint she is already facing in Boston at the MCAD, she is calling the photos of the broken steps "stalking" because it shows her negligence and inability to do the job she is paid $75,200.00 - crooked Carlo money that she does not deserve. She sits in a courtroom while her lackey, Fran LaRovere, whores himself out to abuse elders. Mr. LaRovere does not deserve a legal license, Nicole DiPierro should be remanded to Framingham Women's Prison, and Jean Daniel needs to be exposed for the liar that he is.
So if "Crazy Charlie" gets coddled by Shelby Perrault (of MVES) and - by extension - Ms. Perrault's partner-in-crime, Nicole DiPierro, one must as why a madman is treated with dignity, while the piano player faces hostility?
Because Ms. DiPierro uses the sexual harasser, the crazy man, the vicious woman at the community room, these are DiPierro's tools of harassment bothering a good, honest, rent-paying tenant.
We have Reasonable Cause to Believe that Ms. DiPierro and her thugs, Francis La Rovere, Brian Arrington, Shelby Perrault and Jean Daniel, are all involved in conspiring against seniors. They hurt seniors.
Knowing how I cleaned up the Medford Police Department (exposing the Brady listed cops of the L'Italien Report, 9 months of effort until I succeeded,) exposing disgraced ex police chief Leo A. Sacco, Jr to the city council (the Chief then threatened me for going after his "family," his alleged drunk driving son - an MBTA cop, to which I said to Sacco "On Channel 5 news, fair game!" (these bastards think like Nicole DiPierro, that they are omnipotent in their malfeasance, the monsters) well, Leo got fined by the State Ethics Commission, Cousin Carlo, as did Harry MacGilgray, who I was friendly with once upon a time, until I published repeatedly his $15,000.00 fine. MacGilvray, McGlynn, Sacco, all the products of nepotism, as is Cousin Carlo, Cousin Nicole and Cousin Anthony.
Nicole DiPierro causes Irreparable Harm to seniors, which is why I am taking her to court and requesting an Harassment Prevention Order.
KEEP IN MIND, I REPORTED LOONY LEO TO THE CITY COUNCIL BEFORE THE ETHICS COMMISSION FINED HIM
I REPORTED TED TOMASONE BEFORE HIS MALFEASANCE WAS DISCOVERED AS MAGISTRATE OF SOMERVILLE DISTRICT COURT. WHEN I MOVED THE TRIAL FROM SOMERVILLE TO CAMBRIDGE DISTRICT COURT AN ATTORNEY SAID TO ME "YOU ARE AMAZING." HE DID NOT THINK I COULD DO IT, AND IN CAMBRIDGE DIST. COURT I WAS ABLE TO EXPOSE MEDFORD'S TV3 AND EVENTUALLY SHUT THEM DOWN DUE TO RACISM.
MY SKILLS HAVE ONLY GOTTEN SHARPER.
Press Release Former Medford Police Chief Leo Sacco pays $9,000 Civil Penalty for Violating Conflict of Interest Law
Feb 6, 2022 · The State Ethics Commission is an independent state agency that administers and enforces the provisions of the conflict of interest law and financial disclosure law.
- David A. Wilson, Executive Director
Boston, MA — Former Medford Police Chief Leo Sacco has paid a $9,000 civil penalty for violating the conflict of interest law by failing to appropriately discipline Medford police officers who made false claims for detail pay, not requiring the them to return more than $17,000 in falsely claimed detail pay, and concealing the matter from the mayor. Sacco signed a Disposition Agreement in which he admitted the violations and waived his right to a hearing.
In spring 2018, Sacco learned that some Medford police officers had submitted requests to be paid for detail hours they had not worked and personally investigated. Eleven patrol officers Sacco interviewed admitted they had accepted detail pay for hours they had not worked. Sacco did not record his interviews, did not interview any superior officers alleged to be involved, and did not prepare a written report of his investigation or findings.
Instead of imposing meaningful discipline, on November 28, 2018, two days before he retired, Sacco gave the 30 patrol officers he interviewed a verbal reprimand that was not recorded in the officers’ personnel files. Sacco did not reprimand the superior officers involved and did not require the culpable officers to pay back the unearned detail pay. Sacco did not inform the mayor of the allegations, his investigation, or the officers’ admissions.
In 2019, the newly hired Medford police chief learned of the false claims for detail pay and launched an independent investigation. Twenty-five patrol officers and five superior officers were found to have submitted requests for detail pay, totaling $17,000, for hours or shifts not worked. Based on these findings, each culpable officer was disciplined, ranging from letters of reprimand to suspension. All culpable officers were removed from the police detail list and required to return the falsely claimed detail pay. Seventeen officers received suspensions.
The conflict of interest law prohibits public employees from using their official positions to provide anyone with a valuable privilege or exemption to which they are not entitled. Sacco violated this prohibition by failing to appropriately discipline the officers who falsely claimed detail pay, by failing to require them to pay back the unearned pay, and by failing to report the matter to the mayor.
The law also prohibits a public employee from acting in a manner that would cause a reasonable person aware of the relevant facts to believe the employee would be improperly influenced or show undue favoritism in their official acts. Sacco’s mishandling of the investigation and discipline of the officers who falsely claimed detail pay would have caused a reasonable person to believe that those officers could unduly enjoy his favor in the performance of his duties as police chief. Had Sacco followed established Medford Police protocol, the culpable officers would have been officially and substantially disciplined, as they were after his retirement.
The Commission encourages public employees to contact the Commission’s Legal Division at 617-371-9500 for free advice if they have any questions regarding how the conflict of interest law may apply to them.
Settlement In the Matter of Harold MacGilvray- Disposition Agreement
| Date: | 10/24/2018 |
|---|---|
| Organization: | State Ethics Commission |
| Docket Number: | 18-0001 |
Oct 24, 2018 · Medford police officer Harold MacGilvray paid a $1,500 civil penalty after admitting to violating the conflict of interest law by engaging in political activity on duty 10 days before the
the woman posing as Hillary Clinton in the matter of Harry MacGilvray, head of the police officer's union or something in Medford, too tired to look it up, the woman told me that she slept with the cop that threw her ex husband out (Jimmy Lee, brother of the late Richard Lee, former Medford Town Manager, who she put a restraining order on for breaking her lip, we have the exclusive photos; she alleged she had sex with another officer who I am friendly with so we will leave his name out of this, Nicole, and the ex chief himself, Leo Loony!!! ---allegedly) How creepy does this nepotism get?
https://www.mass.gov/settlement/in-the-matter-of-harold-macgilvray-disposition-agreement
Disposition Agreement
The State Ethics Commission (“Commission”) and Harold MacGilvray (“MacGilvray”) enter into this Disposition Agreement pursuant to Section 3 of the Commission’s Enforcement Procedures. This Agreement constitutes a consented-to final order enforceable in the Superior Court, pursuant to G.L. c. 268B, § 4(j).
On February 16, 2017, the Commission initiated, pursuant to G.L. c. 268B, § 4(a), a preliminary inquiry into possible violations of the conflict of interest law, G.L. c. 268A, by MacGilvray. On September 21, 2017, the Commission concluded its inquiry and found reasonable cause to believe that MacGilvray violated G.L. c. 268A, § 23.
The Commission and MacGilvray now agree to the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact
1. MacGilvray is a paid patrol officer for the Medford Police Department (“MPD”).
2. MacGilvray was a MPD patrol officer on October 29, 2016.
3. In 2016, MacGilvray was president of the Medford Police Patrolmen’s Association (“MPPA”).
4. On October 29, 2016, MacGilvray was on paid duty and patrolled in uniform as a MPD Patrol Officer at two community events in Medford.
5. While on duty and in uniform at the first community event, MacGilvray posed for a photograph with an individual costumed as Hillary Clinton and another MPD officer, also in uniform (“Photograph 1”). The costumed individual wore a Hillary Clinton mask, a prison style orange jumpsuit with the word “inmate” printed on its front, and wrist shackles. MacGilvray and the other MPD officer posed on either side of the costumed individual holding her arms as though they were restraining a prisoner.
6. While on duty, MacGilvray personally posted Photograph 1 to the MPPA Facebook page with the caption, “Look who MPD grabbed at the Fall Festival in Haines Square Today….” (“Caption 1”).
7. While on duty and in uniform at a second community event the same day, MacGilvray posed for a photograph with an individual costumed as Donald Trump and two other MPD officers, also in uniform (Photograph 2). The costumed individual wore a Donald Trump mask and a business suit. MacGilvray posed side- by-side with the costumed individual who had one arm over MacGilvray’s shoulder and his other arm over the shoulder of another MPD officer who stood on his opposite side. MacGilvray and the other MPD officer each had an arm around the costumed individual’s back. The third MPD officer stood next to MacGilvray.
8. While on duty, MacGilvray asked another MPD officer to post Photograph 2 to the MPPA Facebook page.
9. MacGilvray authored the caption that accompanied the second posted photograph, “Making America GREAT again in West Medford Square!!” (“Caption 2”).
10. MacGilvray caused Caption 2 to be posted to Photograph 2 on the MPPA Facebook page.
11. On October 29, 2016, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were candidates for President of the United States. The U.S. presidential election was to be held on November 8, 2016.
12. In October 2016, “Make America Great Again” was a Trump campaign slogan. In 2016, “Lock her up!”, referring to Hillary Clinton, was often chanted at Trump campaign rallies.
13. Soon after MacGilvray posted or caused them to be posted to the MPPA Facebook page, Photograph 1, Photograph 2, Caption 1 and Caption 2 gained attention from local and national news media outlets, including The Boston Globe, The Boston Herald and Fox25, and were widely circulated via social media.
14. MacGilvray removed the photographs from the MPPA Facebook page the same day they were posted in response to the controversy they created as shown by comments posted on the MPPA Facebook page.
15. MPD Rules and Regulations prohibit MPD officers from participating in political activity other than voting in elections.
Conclusions of Law
16. Section 23(b)(2)(ii) of G.L. c. 268A prohibits a municipal employee from, knowingly, or with reason to know, using or attempting to use his official position to secure for himself or others unwarranted privileges or exemptions which are of substantial value and which are not properly available to similarly situated individuals.
17. As a Patrol Officer for the Medford Police Department, MacGilvray is and was in October 2016 a municipal employee as defined in G.L. c. 268A, § 1.
18. The official uniform and on-duty work time of a municipal police officer are substantially valuable public resources and their use for private political purposes is not authorized by law and is unwarranted.
19. The MPD uniform is a public resource of the City of Medford. The use of this public resource to engage in private political activity, including but not limited to activity relating to a campaign for election to public office, is an unwarranted privilege that is not properly available to police officers or political candidates or any similarly situated individuals.
20. The unwarranted privilege of using a police uniform to engage in private political activity is of substantial value because, given the authority that the police command as armed enforcers of the law, the use of a uniform in political activity gives the impression of official and public support, which would carry significant weight with voters, possibly intimidate supporters of an opposing candidate, and erode the public trust in its police force. The use of paid on-duty work time is also a privilege of substantial value and its use for private political purposes is unwarranted.
21. Causing the publication of photographic images demonstrating support for one political candidate over another, even if such publication is done in an attempt to amuse others, is private political activity. Taking such actions while on duty and in uniform as a police officer is the use of official position to engage in private political activity and an unwarranted privilege of substantial value that is not properly available to similarly situated individuals.
22. Thus, by causing the public posting and dissemination of two photographs of himself and other MPD officers in uniform with images and captions implying MPD disapproval of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and approval of presidential candidate Donald Trump, MacGilvray knowingly or with reason to know used his Medford Police Officer position to secure for himself and others an unwarranted privilege of substantial value not properly available to other similarly situated individuals, in violation of § 23(b)(2)(ii).
Additional Circumstances Considered in the Resolution of this Matter
23. MacGilvray, testified that he had no prior knowledge that either costumed individual would attend the events he patrolled and was not involved in arranging their appearance at the community events. The investigation by the Commission revealed no evidence to the contrary.
24. MacGilvray testified that he did not request that the costumed individuals pose for pictures with him and other officers and did not request that he be given copies of those photographs. The investigation by the Commission revealed no evidence to the contrary.
25. MacGilvray testified that the amount of time he took to post or cause the posting of the photos was limited to one half hour or less. The investigation by the Commission revealed no evidence to the contrary.
26. MacGilvray received an official letter of reprimand for violating the MPD’s prohibitions against political activity, among other violations. He was required to post a formal letter of apology to the public on the website of the MPPA, which was posted for three days.
27. MacGilvray cooperated fully with the Commission’s investigation.
28. The Police Chief for the City of Medford has advised the Commission that MacGilvray has served the City of Medford with distinction over the course of his career.
In view of the foregoing violations of G.L. c. 268A by MacGilvray, the Commission has determined that the public interest would be served by the disposition of this matter without further enforcement proceedings, on the following terms and conditions agreed to by MacGilvray:
- that MacGilvray pay to the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, with such payment to be delivered to the Commission, the
sum of $1,500 as a civil penalty for violating G.L. c. 268A, § 23(b)(2);
and
- that MacGilvray waive all rights to contest, in this or any other administrative or judicial proceeding to which the Commission is or may be a party, the findings of fact, conclusions of law and terms and conditions contained in this Agreement.
By signing below, MacGilvray acknowledges that he has personally read this Disposition Agreement, that it is a public document, and that he agrees to the terms and conditions therein.
Comments
Post a Comment