Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Dan Conley – Clueless in Revere

By

A young Revere police officer on their gang unit ends a night out with his fiancée by joining other off duty gang unit members behind the high school. There is alcohol present. Then a 17 year old arrives. Words are exchanged between the off-duty, out of uniform, most likely intoxicated, police officers and this kid.  Maybe the kid got smacked around. Maybe not. But he was pissed-off after dealing with these guys so he called some friends. The friends arrive.

The events that occurred immediately after ended with the young officer dead. Shot in the head. By a gun not issued to any Revere police officer.

D.A. Dan Conley charges the 17 year old with accessory to murder. The kid called his friends, remember? He is not the suspected shooter. His friends have not yet been identified or arrested.

Right away Dan Conley wrapped himself around the Revere police. He made gratuitous statements and vowed to get the killers. Any layperson can see that this case maybe a little fishy. Perhaps one of the off-duty officers pulled a gun on one of the kids to scare them. Perhaps one friend pulled a gun and shot in self-defense of himself or another.

Perhaps he was shot with a throw-away used by another officer.

Dan being Dan jumped in head first and tells us it is all about the cops being good guys.

Remember, this is the guy who wouldn’t prosecute any police officer after the Snelgrove homicide during the Red Sox celebration. The official report details others assaults committed by Boston police officers upon civilians. The report identifies many witnesses. Lay up to prosecute. Dan Conley did nothing.

Remember the detective caught on video stealing expensive sun glasses from a Newbury St. boutique. Dan Conley did nothing. On film and Dan Conley did nothing.

Did Conley’s misfeasance is fuel for bad and near bad police officers.

Now he runs as quickly as he can to protect the Revere Police. I can’t wait for the trial of the 17 year old.

Not guilty I am wagering.

BTW  Word is Michael Flaherty is seriously considering sacking the mayoral run and going after Conley.  To me it is a no-brainer.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. It wouldn’t be until 2010. That’s an awful lot of time for Conley to continue to bollix things up. And Flaherty is a peevish little jerk anyways- I’m not sure he’d be that much of an improvement. 

  2. D.A. Dan Conley charges the 17 year old with accessory to murder. The kid called his friends, remember? He is not the suspected shooter. His friends have not yet been identified or arrested.

    <

    p>
    …Conley overcharged the 17 year old (if it was overcharging) to try to scare him into identify the friends that he (the 17 year old) had called.

    <

    p>
    I don’t know whether MA has a felony murder doctrine, but it may be that the 17 year old could be charged with felony murder if the DA could figure out a felony that might have occurred during the incident.

    • Isn’t MURDER the felony?  If I’m missing something, could you explain how that works?

      • Consider the following hypothetical.  Perpetrators (perps) A and B rob a convenience store.  Let’s presume that the robbery would be a felony.  During the course of the robbery, perp B shoots (murders) the store clerk.  Perp B would be properly charged and convicted of murder, since he was the one who actually pulled the trigger. 

        <

        p>
        In this hypothetical, presume that perp A did not pull any trigger (he might not have even had a gun).  In that case he would not have directly committed murder.  But because perp A was in cahoots with perp B during the course of the robbery, and perp B committed a murder during the course of the robbery, perp A can also be charged with murder.  That is the felony murder doctrine.  And that’s true whether or not perp A even knew that perp B had a gun during the course of the robbery.

        <

        p>
        The same would be true regardless of the number of perps engaged in the robbery, whether or not any of others pulled any trigger.

          • …the more examples, the better.

            <

            p>
            BTW, JoeTS, there is no problem with asking honest questions.  I’ve done it many times here myself.  That’s how one learns.

            <

            p>
            It’s the “gotcha” questions that are annoying.

      • Raj- we do use the felony murder doctrine here. (At least as far as the first half of my example.)
        JoeTS- Felony-murder: (I’ll be lazy and use the text from Wikipedia)

        First, when a victim dies accidentally or without specific intent in the course of an applicable felony, it increases what might have been manslaughter (or even a simple tort) to murder.

        If I hold up a bank, and say, knock over a customer in the bank, and she splits her head open and bleeds to death, under the felony murder rule, I can be charged with murder, even though I didn’t specifically have the intent of killing her.

        Second, it makes any participant in such a felony criminally responsible for any deaths that occur during or in furtherance of that felony.

        Using the bank robbing hypothetical, the guy driving the getaway car is also on the hook for murder, too. (I’m not sure if that part applies here in Massachusetts, but it is a common-law doctrine used in other states.)

Archives