The Rutland City Police Commission on Friday held a meeting regarding "Police Issues". They opened up the discussion to the room full mostly of Police Officers and a few residents. Then went into executive session for about two hours.
The details of what exactly were discussed in that executive session are unknown. There have been many situations over the past few months stemming from the lack of management within the Police Department. One specific issue they discussed was why the Police Chief didn't notify the Police Commission of an internal investigation. Chief Bossi explained "there was no internal investigation. I was not therefore required to inform the commission." Bossi also stated "We made the decision early on that a criminal investigation needed to take place." Chief Bossi was concerned enough initially that a criminal investigation should take place, but the commission should not be informed of a criminal investigation being conducted inside the Police Department? One would conclude that if the Chief has to inform them of an internal investigation, he should be required to inform them of an external criminal investigation. So does the policy state the Chief shall inform the commission of any criminal investigations within the department?
The Herald was accused of witch hunting last night as well by one of Rutland City's Police Officers. The warrant became unsealed due to the Rutland Herald's request for this information be made public. The Herald has many other documents that were requested via the Freedom of Information Act. Some have been released, others were denied and some are still pending.
The Board of Alderman are expected to discuss the outcome of this decision and may act in opposition to the commission's findings. The Board of Alderman has no direct oversight of the Chief, but they can create policy that the Police Commission must enforce. The Board of Alderman also have control of the purse strings of the city via the Board of Civil Authority, which is made up of the Board of Alderman.
The details of what exactly were discussed in that executive session are unknown. There have been many situations over the past few months stemming from the lack of management within the Police Department. One specific issue they discussed was why the Police Chief didn't notify the Police Commission of an internal investigation. Chief Bossi explained "there was no internal investigation. I was not therefore required to inform the commission." Bossi also stated "We made the decision early on that a criminal investigation needed to take place." Chief Bossi was concerned enough initially that a criminal investigation should take place, but the commission should not be informed of a criminal investigation being conducted inside the Police Department? One would conclude that if the Chief has to inform them of an internal investigation, he should be required to inform them of an external criminal investigation. So does the policy state the Chief shall inform the commission of any criminal investigations within the department?
The Herald was accused of witch hunting last night as well by one of Rutland City's Police Officers. The warrant became unsealed due to the Rutland Herald's request for this information be made public. The Herald has many other documents that were requested via the Freedom of Information Act. Some have been released, others were denied and some are still pending.
The Board of Alderman are expected to discuss the outcome of this decision and may act in opposition to the commission's findings. The Board of Alderman has no direct oversight of the Chief, but they can create policy that the Police Commission must enforce. The Board of Alderman also have control of the purse strings of the city via the Board of Civil Authority, which is made up of the Board of Alderman.
How lucky for Bossi that one of the pictures was labeled with a file name that would indicate an 11 year old was in the picture. If that was not the case, then there would not have been the criminal investigation, only an internal one....or would there have even been an internal one??
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that there should have been both types of investigations….run simultaneously.
Let’s see, there was no subpoena, only a search warrant, I guess when they wrote the rule book there was no thought of a search warrant ever being issued for the Police Station.
I’m sure there must be some language that states that Bossi must inform the Commission of important issues, right?? And if so, he failed to do so.
The BOA needs to get rid of Bossi, if they don’t, they better re-write the rule book to include every situation that could ever come up. With Bossi using semantics to side step going to the commission, mayor, and city attorney, they will need such a rule book as Bossi's will never communicate unless it is in black and white.
Imagine being on the board of Police Commissioners and having to read the newspaper to find out what is going on in the police department. Wouldn't you be outraged? Apparently Bossi has them all eating out of the palm of his hand. Obviously the commissioners' oversight is very much controlled by Bossi when in fact it should be the other way around. The Board of Police Commissioners have to take charge and let Bossi know who is in charge.
ReplyDelete