From: postpischil@alien.enet.dec.com (Always mount a scratch monkey.) Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.drugs Subject: The Killing of Bruce Lavoie (was "The costs of the drug war.") Date: 26 Feb 90 22:17:38 GMT Followup-To: misc.legal Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation By the way, Nashua Police officers showed up at the first public town meeting wearing Batman shirts, the victim's wife said in her report that one of the police officers who arrived after the shooting looked like Michael Keaton in Batman, and the victim's full name was Bruce Watson Lavoie. -- edp (Eric Postpischil) "Always mount a scratch monkey." Memorandum of Investigation I. Scope of Investigation The Office of the Attorney General and the New Hampshire State Police conducted an investigation into the death of Bruce Lavoie, who was fatally shot on August 3, 1989 by Hudson Police Sergeant Stephen Burke while police were executing a search warrant at Lavoie's Hudson residence. Our investigation consisted of an inspection of the apartment where the shooting occurred; an examination of physical evidence seized (1) from the apartment, (2) from the officers involved in the search and (3) from the autopsy; interviews of all witnesses; review of all police reports generated concerning the shooting; and review of the autopsy findings. The scope of the investigation was limited to determining whether Sergeant Burke committed any criminal offense with respect to the shooting of Mr. Lavoie. Events occurring prior to and after the shooting were considered only as they related to this issue. A police officer is justified in using deadly force under the circumstances outlined in RSA 627:5, II. In addition, a shooting which occurs accidentally and which is not the result of a negligent, reckless, knowing or purposeful criminal mental state is not a crime. Under New Hampshire law, an unintentional shooting constitutes negligent homicide where the person fails to become aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that death will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that his failure to become aware of it constitutes a gross deviation from the conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation. RSA 630:3; 626:2, II(d). A fatal shooting which is the result of criminal negligence is a class B felony. II. Facts On August 2, 1989, Hudson Police Detective Barry Golner presented the Nashua District Court with a search warrant application and affidavit for 24 Roosevelt Avenue, Apartment #2, Hudson, New Hampshire, the residence of Bruce Lavoie. The warrant sought controlled drugs and narcotics, as well as firearms and paraphernalia associated with drug use and sale. Judge Roger I. Gauthier of the Nashua District Court issued the search warrant. Execution of the warrant resulted in the seizure of a small amount of marijuana, cocaine residue, and rolling papers. On August 3, 1989, at approximately 4:30 a.m., Hudson police officers met at the police station to be brief by Chief Albert Brackett on the execution of the Lavoie warrant, and two other warrants to be executed at the same time. The team assigned to search the Lavoie apartment consisted of Chief Brackett, Sergeant Stephen Burke, a five-and-one-half year veteran of the Hudson Police Department, and Officer Ronald Mello, a member of the Department for two-and-one-half years. At the briefing, the officers received information regarding the layout of the Lavoie apartment and learned that the occupants of the apartment included two adults and some children. Although police had no specific information that Bruce Lavoie would be armed, they were aware that individuals involved in drug dealing frequently carry firearms, a fact recognized by the Nashua District Court Judge who authorized the search for firearms at the Lavoie residence. Chief Bracket directed Sergeant Burke to enter the apartment first and to proceed directly to the bedroom area. Officer Mello was to follow Burke into the apartment with a shotgun. Both of these officers are members of the Hudson Police Special Response Team, the equivalent of a SWAT Unit, and have received special training relative to that assignment. Chief Brackett was to use a door "ram" to gain entrance to the apartment and was then to follow his two officers inside. At approximately 5:00 a.m., the three officers entered building #24 by means of a pass key the Chief had obtained from the apartment manager. The officers did not have a key to the Lavoie apartment. Chief Brackett was wearing a T-shirt with the words "Hudson Police" on the front and back, as well as a cap with a Hudson Police insignia. Sergeant Burke and Officer Mello were dressed in black tactical suits. Sergeant Burke was carrying a Ruger 9 millimeter semi-automatic pistol in his left hand and a black shield reading "Police" in his right hand. The shield was 36" x 19" and weighed approximately 23 pounds. A flashlight was taped to Burke's left forearm. Officer Mello was carrying a shotgun with a flashlight taped to its barrel. Both flashlights were on. Chief Brackett struck the apartment door three or four times with the door "ram" in an effort to gain entrance. The other officers were standing on either side of the door. The door was forced open with the last blow. There is conflicting evidence as to when the officers announced their identity as police officers. Chief Brackett recalls yelling "police" as he struck the door. Sergeant Burke and Officer Mello recall yelling "police" while entering the apartment but do not recall whether any officer announced their identity prior to that. Members of the Lavoie family do not recall the officers announcing themselves as police until after Mr. Lavoie had been shot. The officers did not knock and announce their identity and purpose prior to commencing the forcible entry. Inside the apartment, Bruce Lavoie, age 34, was in the master bedroom with his eight-year-old son Jonathan beside him on a mattress on the floor. His six-year-old son Steven was sleeping nearby on the floor. Eleven-year-old Robert Lavoie was in a second bedroom. Lavoie's wife Susan was sleeping on a couch in the living room just to the left of the entryway. (See attached Diagram A and Legend). [Don't see them; I haven't entered them. -- edp] The apartment was dimly lit. Sergeant Burke was the first officer to enter the apartment. Both he and Officer Mello entered while crouched behind Burke's shield. As he entered, Burke had his finger within the trigger guard of his pistol. As Burke stepped into the apartment, his pistol discharged a single round. The bullet entered and exited a hallway wall approximately one foot off the floor, struck a vacuum cleaner just inside the right bedroom in which Robert Lavoie was sleeping, and was recovered in the hallway just outside that bedroom. An empty cartridge casing was recovered just inside the entrance to the apartment. (See Diagram A and Legend). After Burke's weapon discharged he continued straight ahead in the direction of the master bedroom, whose doorway was approximately fifteen feet from the entrance to the apartment. Chief Brackett entered the apartment and approached Mrs. Lavoie who was on a couch immediately to his left. According to all the officers, they were each yelling, "Police. Get down." Mrs. Lavoie complied with the instructions and laid on the floor. Sergeant Burke gives the following account of the events which occurred as he approached the master bedroom: He observed a man in undershorts (Bruce Lavoie) approach the doorway of the bedroom and attempt to close the door. Sergeant Burke forced the door open with the shield in his right hand, pushing Lavoie back into the bedroom. Lavoie lunged at Burke and grabbed his left arm. Burke and Lavoie struggled back into the room a few steps, with Lavoie pulling Burke by his left arm. The struggle lasted only a few seconds. Burke who was still holding his shield in his right hand, felt pressure on his left hand and heard the pistol discharge. Lavoie then fell to the mattress on the floor. Burke immediately dropped his shield and bent over Lavoie to check his condition. Burke did not recall pulling the trigger. He believed Lavoie was attempting to get his gun. Officer Mello gives the following account of the events which led up to the shooting: He followed Sergeant Burke to the bedroom area. He observed Burke struggling with a male (Lavoie) in the entranceway to the master bedroom. he saw Burke holding Lavoie back with his shield. They wrestled into the bedroom and out of sight. As Mello approached the bedroom doorway, he saw Burke and Lavoie struggling by the bed. He heard a shot fired and observed both Burke and Lavoie fall to the floor. He then heard Burke yell, "He grabbed my gun." Chief Brackett, who was with Susan Lavoie in the living room, stated that he saw Sergeant Burke and Officer Mello disappear out of sight toward the bedroom area. He then heard a shot fired and Sergeant Burke yell, "Let go of my gun." When Chief Brackett entered the bedroom, he saw both Sergeant Burke and Bruce Lavoie lying on the mattress. Lavoie was bleeding from under his left arm pit. Susan Lavoie, who was in the living room, states that she heard the two gunshots but did not see the shooting. Bruce Lavoie's eleven-year-old son Robert, who was in the right bedroom, gives the following account: He was awakened by banging on the door, saw men enter the apartment and observed one shot fired at that time. He then saw men run into the bedroom and heard shots fired. he did not see what occurred inside the bedroom. Eight-year-old Jonathan Lavoie, who was in the bedroom with his father, states that he was awakened by the sound of gunshots and saw his father lying on the mattress, already shot. Six-year-old Steven Lavoie, who was also in the bedroom with his father, states that he was awakened by the sound of gunshots. He further states that his father was lying in bed asleep when an officer, carrying only a gun, came into the room and fired two shots, one striking the wall and one striking his father. Immediately following the shooting, Officer Mello asked Sergeant Burke for his weapon and, upon receiving it, de-cocked it and placed it in his pants pocket. he later turned it over to State Police investigators. He also removed the shells from his own shotgun. The officers brought the Lavoie children to their mother in the living room and secured the bedroom in which the shooting had occurred. The officers, by portable radio, immediately requested the Hudson Police dispatcher to send an ambulance, which was dispatched at 5:06 a.m. After another officer arrived with a first aid kit, Sergeant Burke applied a compress to Lavoie's wound. The ambulance arrived at the apartment at 5:11 a.m. and Mr. Lavoie was removed from the apartment at 5:23 a.m. While at the apartment, Fire Lieutenant Robert Bianchi, an Emergency Medical Technician (EMT), controlled the bleeding and gave Mr. Lavoie oxygen. Mr. Lavoie was conscious and lifted himself up while on the stretcher during its removal from the apartment. After being rushed by ambulance to St. Joseph's Hospital in Nashua, Mr. Lavoie was pronounced dead following surgery. Although he remained conscious for a period of time, Mr. Lavoie gave no information concerning the shooting prior to his death. Witnesses recall him asking, "Why did you shoot me?" and "What happened?" An autopsy performed later that day by State's Chief Medical Examiner Roger M. Fossum revealed that Mr. Lavoie died from a single gunshot wound to the left side of his chest which penetrated his abdominal cavity. The path of the bullet was sharply downward and slightly left to right. The nature of the wound, the presence of gunpowder particles around the wound and the laboratory examination of the shirt worn by Mr. Lavoie all indicate a contact or near contact discharge. Mr. Lavoie did not exhibit any evidence of injury to his hands or arms. An examination of the apartment by State Police investigators revealed an indentation and black scuff mark on the bedroom wall in the area where Officer Mello reports having observed Sergeant Burke and Bruce Lavoie struggle. (See attached Diagram B). [Also not entered. -- edp] Susan Lavoie stated that these marks were not present prior to that morning. State police detectives recovered Sergeant Burke's police shield from on top of the mattress. Laboratory analysis of that shield revealed white marks consistent with paint and plaster or gypsum, which investigators recognized as components of the wall in the Lavoie apartment. Following the shooting, Sergeant Burke's left hand and wrist showed abrasions that were not present prior to his entry into the apartment. Laboratory analysis of Sergeant Burke's weapon determined that the weapon functioned properly and did not exhibit any mechanical defects. Sergeant Burke's weapon, a Ruger 9 millimeter semi-automatic pistol, operates in the following manner: When firing the first shot, the weapon operates in the "double-action" mode meaning that the trigger must be pulled the full distance which both cocks the hammer and releases it in the same trigger motion; when firing subsequent shots, the weapon operates in the "single-action" mode meaning that the hammer is already cocked and that the trigger need only be pulled a short distance with significantly less pressure to release the hammer and fire the shot. When a shot is fired, the empty cartridge casing is automatically ejected from the weapon by a slide mechanism. Further testing revealed that the weapon required eleven and one-half (11 1/2) pounds of pressure to discharge in the double-action mode and five and one-half (5 1/2) pounds of pressure to discharge in the single-action mode. The projectile recovered from the autopsy, the projectile recovered from the apartment and the empty cartridge casing recovered from the apartment were positively identified as having been fired from Sergeant Burke's weapon. In addition, a second empty casing was found in the weapon, indicating that full retraction of the ejection slide had been physically impeded when the pistol was discharged the second time. Laboratory examination of the weapon for fingerprints resulted in the discovered of no latent fingerprints. An analysis of hand swabs taken from Bruce Lavoie following the shooting for the presence of antimony, a constituent of gunshot residue, resulted in negative findings. A negative finding is inconclusive as to whether any gunshot residue was in fact deposited on Lavoie's hands. III. Conclusions This Office has determined that Sergeant Burke discharged his weapon unintentionally while struggling with Bruce Lavoie and that he is not criminally responsible for Lavoie's death. Both Sergeant Burke and Officer Mello describe the shooting has having occurred while Sergeant Burke and Bruce Lavoie were struggling inside the bedroom. Their accounts are consistent with each other and consistent with the available physical evidence. Specifically, the presence of an indentation and black scuff mark on the bedroom wall where Officer Mello reports having observed the struggle, as well as the presence of paint and wall board material on Sergeant Burke's shield, are consistent with the shield having struck the wall during the course of a struggle. The fact that the shield was recovered from the mattress where Bruce Lavoie and Sergeant Burke fell after the shooting is also consistent with this scenario. As previously noted, the presence of an empty cartridge casing within the chamber of Sergeant Burke's weapon after the shooting indicates that full retraction of the ejection slide was impeded when the pistol discharged the second time. While it is unknown what impeded the slide, this finding indicates that the weapon was in contact with some person or object at the time of the discharge, and thus is consistent with a struggle. However, the absence of fingerprints on the weapon, the absence of injuries to Mr. Lavoie's hands and the negative results of the antimony test on swabs of Mr. Lavoie's hands indicate that his hands were most likely not in direct contact with the weapon at the time of discharge. The nature of the wound and the angle of the bullet's path -- a contact or near contact wound with a sharply downward path -- are consistent with discharge having occurred during a struggle. These findings are also inconsistent with Lavoie having been shot while lying in bed, since such a scenario would put the shooter in an improbable position. (See Diagram B). Finally, the presence of abrasions on Sergeant Burke's left hand and wrist following the shooting, which were not present prior to his entry into the apartment, are also consistent with a struggle. The only evidence inconsistent with an accidental discharge is the account of six-year-old Steven Lavoie, who states that an officer, carrying only a gun, fired two shots in the master bedroom. However, Steven Lavoie's account is inconsistent with (1) the physical evidence establishing that only one shot was fired in the bedroom, (2) the fact that Sergeant Burke was carrying a large shield which was recovered from the mattress after the shooting, and (3) Steven's statement that he was first awakened by the sound of gunshots. It is also inconsistent with the other aforementioned physical evidence. For the aforementioned reasons, this Office concludes that the discharge of Sergeant Burke's weapon and the killing of Bruce Lavoie were unintentional. The determination whether Sergeant Burke is criminally liable must include a consideration of the effects of the first discharge of Sergeant Burke's weapon upon the subsequent death of Bruce Lavoie. Accordingly, this report will address the following issues: 1) whether the risks created by the initial discharge and Sergeant Burke's subsequent conduct were substantial and unjustifiable; and 2) whether Sergeant Burke's failure to become aware of those risks constituted a gross deviation from the conduct that a reasonable police officer would have observed in the situation. The propriety of the time at which the warrant was executed and the manner in which entry was obtained are not relevant to Sergeant Burke's mental state and are beyond the scope of this investigation. Sergeant Burke was instructed on the manner in which the warrant would be executed and his role in its execution, but did not participate in the decisions concerning these matters. Sergeant Burke's weapon discharged almost immediately upon entering the apartment. An empty cartridge casing recovered just inside the entrance to the apartment is consistent with this conclusion. The bullet entered and exited a hallway wall approximately one foot off the floor, struck a vacuum cleaner just inside the right bedroom and was recovered in the hallway between the bedrooms. The weapon was not fired in the direction of any target visible to Sergeant Burke at the time. Burke states that he did not intend to fire the weapon, nor does he recall applying any pressure to the trigger. He also states that he did not stumble as he entered the apartment nor was he startled by Susan Lavoie, who was on a couch immediately to his left and who began screaming upon the officers' entry. There is no evidence to suggest that the weapon discharged as the result of any mechanical defect. As previously noted, the amount of trigger pressure required to discharge the weapon in this double-action position is significant. Absent any explanation by Sergeant Burke as to why his weapon would discharge under the circumstances, his initial discharge of the weapon constituted a serious breach of police protocol and training. Although the initial discharge of the weapon did not directly cause injury or death, it may have heightened the risk of subsequent injury or death in two ways. First, it may have increased the likelihood that the occupants of the apartment would take actions to defend themselves. Second, the initial discharge placed the hammer in a cocked position, requiring considerably less pressure to fire a second shot and thus created a greater risk of a subsequent unintentional discharge. Appropriate police procedure required the officer 1) to announce quickly that he had discharged his weapon accidentally and 2) to de-cock the weapon by pulling the trigger and manually letting the hammer down with his thumb. Sergeant Burke's failure to take these actions before continuing towards Mr. Lavoie's bedroom may have created a substantial and unjustifiable risk that death would result from a subsequent confrontation with Mr. Lavoie. Nevertheless, we cannot say that Sergeant Burke's failure to announce that he had accidentally fired his gun and to de-cock the weapon before proceeding to the bedroom constituted a gross deviation from what a reasonable officer would have done under the circumstances. The execution of a search warrant for drugs is a tense and potentially dangerous activity. Drug dealers are frequently armed and evidence sought under such a warrant is easily destroyed. When executing a search warrant for drugs in a residence known to be occupied by a suspected trafficker, police have a responsibility to secure the residence as swiftly as possible. A reasonable police officer operating under the circumstances could have proceeded in an effort to secure the residence without considering the risks created by the accidental discharge of his weapon or the proper steps which should be taken to minimize those risks. Accordingly, this Office concludes that there is insufficient evidence of a gross deviation from an objective standard of reasonable conduct upon which to base a charge of negligent homicide. (signed) Andrew W. Serell Senior Assistant Attorney General August 25, 1989 ================================================================================ Note 844.211 Hudson police kill unarmed man during drug raid 211 of 527 BEING::POSTPISCHIL "Always mount a scratch monkey." 35 lines 12-SEP-1989 20:18 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Some of you might know that what appeared in the papers was not the entire Attorney General's report. Even before the publication, I wrote to the Hudson Police and the Attorney General's Office to ask for a copy of the report, statements of the participants and witnesses, and descriptions of the evidence. The Hudson Police refused to provide any information on the grounds that they could not release a report of another agency. They gave no reason for failing to provide copies of the statements or information about the evidence. Senior Assistant AG Andrew W. Serell (three steps below AG) sent me the following letter: Your letter to this office has been referred to me. Our office is not sending by mail to the general public its report concerning the Bruce Lavoie shooting or the State Police investigative file. If you stop by our office we will be happy to provide you with a copy of our report and allow you to view the investigative file. If you choose to do so, please call in advance to make arrangements. Great, now I've got to give up a day of work to go get a copy of the report and spend who knows how many hours examining the file. What purpose can they have for this? It's not money; they could have asked for postage. People establish governments for the common welfare. How is the common welfare served by refusing to disclose public information except under arbitrary conditions? To those who approved of the government's actions, tell me what good is served by making me come to Concord instead of mailing the copy of the report. -- edp ================================================================================ Note 844.218 Hudson police kill unarmed man during drug raid 218 of 527 BEING::POSTPISCHIL "Always mount a scratch monkey." 101 lines 14-SEP-1989 08:33 -< Public Hearing of 13 September >- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There were 550 to 600 people at the hearing last night. At first, about 150 people were waiting outside or in the entrance of the Library Street School. To find out why they weren't being admitted, I went to the front of the line. There were some tables mostly blocking the hallway to the meeting room, on which about half a dozen persons with Batman shirts were sitting. I found out later they were off-duty Nashua police. Nobody representing Hudson was preventing entrance. Since I don't know enough not to make my way past imposing people, I went inside and challenged the council, stating that the RSA said any person who desired to attend a public meeting shall be permitted to attend. They questioned whether it applied to just residents (I knew it was any person) or to meetings of towns as opposed to cities (I wasn't sure; they looked it up). Eventually, the meeting was moved to Memorial School, which had a bigger room -- and was air-conditioned to boot. 25 people spoke (or tried to speak) in disapproval of the shooting and/or subsequent events, 8 people spoke in approval of the police, plus two persons spoke for the Lavoie family, one person made a neutral statement advising thorough investigation, and one person I couldn't figure out due to distractions and the difficulty of hearing. A statement from Susan Lavoie was read. She asked the town council to investigate the justification for the 5 a.m. raid, the justification for not knocking or announcing themselves, the justification for the amount of weaponry present, the refusal to allow her to console her fatally wounded husband, the decision to allow only "certain EMTs" to treat Bruce Lavoie, and the failure to notify the fire department that there was a gunshot wound. One person who had been a Hudson resident for 11 years but moved recently wanted to speak (and is counted in the 25 above) but was denied permission by the town council. Another person raised concerns about details of the AG's report, such as ballistics information and reports of a shot fired before entrance to the apartment. Other comments made in disapproval: This incident was an accident waiting to happen; the police's failure to announce and use of plainclothes raids is a pattern; people have been beaten by Hudson police for no crimes; a retraction of the allegations that Lavoie dealt drugs was requested, since there has been no evidence of that; resignations of Burke and Brackett were requested; Hudson has good police officers but they need a good leader; one person objected to entering an apartment with children with guns drawn; several people supported the "war" on drugs but oppose this incident; one person complained that if substantial amounts of drugs had been found or Lavoie had used a weapon, the story would have been detailed on the front pages the next day, but the reports of the police took too much time to be revealed in this case; another resident report a Nashua lawyer predicted before Brackett was chief that he would bring catastrophe and had a Gestapo mentality; another person said police should never fire unless absolutely necessary; another supports the police department but questions their integrity and justice; another says a gun does not go off accidentally, the trigger must be pulled; and another person said their right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure is threatened and the safety of their home is threatened. One person had shown his driver's license to the moderator to prove he was a Hudson resident but refused to state his address for the record, and the town council denied him permission to speak. In support of the police: One person said people are tired of hearing about this incident, who's Hudson going to have if Brackett is fired, keep the chief; a resident who is a Tyngsboro officer and has worked with Brackett praised Brackett; another said let the authorities investigate, not the media; another supports the AG report; one person had a petition of 307 signatures to accept the AG report and leave the matter to the town's attorneys; another object to the town council investigating the matter, saying they did not have the knowledge to do so; and a brother of a state trooper who worked with Brackett supported the police. Several residents spoke a second time: One requested state police task force involvement in future raids, as Manchester and Epping have, said the ammunition used is stronger than that used for bear and is outlawed by the Articles of War and (of?) the Geneva Convention; a person who had spoken for the Lavoie's (a member of the family or just a representative?) responded to the 307-signature petition with 118 signatures she had collected just by herself, and she said some of the signatories of the petition had been scared away from the meeting. In spite of denying the Nashua resident and the address-withholder the right to speak (both times with loud disapproval from the audience), the town council several times made comments about permitting free speech. The people who were permitted to speak finished with 20 minutes left in the two hours allotted for the meeting. The person (attorney?) who had read the statement from Susan Lavoie wanted to read a section of the RSA, but the town council would not let them speak again. A Hudson resident got the RSA from that person and read it for them. It was 630:2, definition of manslaughter. Finally, the town Moderator, speaking for himself, announced that there were efforts to assist Susan Lavoie and her children and asked that people remember that Saturday as they drive through Hudson. Somebody else mentioned that several stores were selling flowers to benefit the Lavoie's, including a 7-11 (on Derry Road?), Charlene's, and Market Basket. -- edp ================================================================================ Note 844.219 Hudson police kill unarmed man during drug raid 219 of 527 BEING::POSTPISCHIL "Always mount a scratch monkey." 9 lines 14-SEP-1989 08:41 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- P.S.: One person said the police told Susan Lavoie not to worry; they only shot Bruce Lavoie in the arm -- so it came as a shock to Susan Lavoie when she reached the hospital (on her own; nobody gave her a ride) and was told her husband had been shot in the chest and was dead. The speaker objected to the police not being able to tell an arm wound from a chest wound. -- edp ================================================================================ Note 844.307 Hudson police kill unarmed man during drug raid 307 of 527 ALIEN::POSTPISCHIL "Always mount a scratch monkey." 12 lines 22-SEP-1989 11:03 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, I finally got a statement from the Attorney General's office on why they not only will not provide copies of the investigative file but won't even allow copies to be made with a hand-held copier: "It's a policy of the office." No law, no regulation, no purpose served. It's just simply that the people we paid to prepare this information for us have decided we shouldn't have permanent copies of it. -- edp ================================================================================ Note 844.350 Hudson police kill unarmed man during drug raid 350 of 527 ALIEN::POSTPISCHIL "Always mount a scratch monkey." 25 lines 29-SEP-1989 16:50 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I spent this morning at the Attorney General's office. I'll enter more information later, but here's the most interesting item. Remember the guys in Batman shirts at the public hearing? There were eight to ten of them, somewhat intimidating, dressed in black Batman shirts. Cheryl Dulak of the Telegraph told me they were off-duty Nashua Police. I didn't know it then, but the back of their shirts said "Goon Squad". A goon is a thug hired to intimidate or harm opponents. At the time, I just thought they were being ordinary jerks. While going through the investigative file, I learned that in Susan Lavoie's report to police after the shooting, she described the fourth officer to enter the apartment (just after the shooting, in response to the team's call for help) as looking "like Michael Keaton in Batman". Were the shirts purchased before the shooting and this is a coincidence or were they purchased later? I'm going to look into that a bit, but if it is the latter, it would seem the Nashua police were deliberately calculating to offend and intimidate the Lavoies -- simply disgusting behavior. Also, according to the criminal records I saw, Bruce Lavoie's full name is Bruce Wayne Lavoie. -- edp ================================================================================ Note 844.353 Hudson police kill unarmed man during drug raid 353 of 527 BEING::POSTPISCHIL "Always mount a scratch monkey." 141 lines 3-OCT-1989 08:42 -< You want facts? I got facts. >- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- . . . . Here's a tiny bit of the information contained in _Hudson Police Shooting, August 3, 1989, I-89-220, Victim: Bruce Lavoie_. Officer Mello (one of the three officers on the team to break into Lavoie's apartment) reported hearing a gunshot before the door opened. He identified the gunshot as coming from where Officer Burke was. That facet of Officer Mello's statement was not resolved by the Attorney General's report. The statements of all the people involved were too voluminous for me to copy, but I read much of them. Sunrise on August 3 was 4:38. Evidence seized under the warrant was: L-1 one hand rolled cigarette containing .33 grams of vegetative matter identified as marijuana three partially burned hand rolled cigarettes each containing vegetative matter identified as marijuana, total weight .06 g L-2 plastic bag containing residue of vegetative matter identified as marijuana L-3 one section of a bag containing residue of vegetative matter identified as marijuana L-4 two plastic bags and a bag fragment containing residue of vegetative matter identified as marijuana one partially folded paper packet containing a white residue the analysis of which documented the presence of the narcotic drug, cocaine B-1 one partially burned hand rolled cigarette containing .03 grams of vegetative matter identified as marijuana K-1 one empty pack cigarette paper, test for presence of controlled drugs negative (Another part of the file identified the papers as Zig Zags.) Detective Barry Golner swore to Judge Roger L. Gauthier there was probable cause for believing that the following items were in the apartment: illicit controlled drugs and narcotics, weight scales, records and ledgers of the drug sale transactions, monies associated with the illicit drug sales transactions, firearms, safe deposit keys, drug distribution paraphernalia such as scales, bags, aluminum foil, cocaine screens, inositol or manatol, and items identifying the occupants of the structure, such as checkbooks, legal papers and identification, bills, mail addressed to the occupier of the premises, clothing and personal articles with the names on them, telephone toll records, telephones, telephone answering machines and their tapes, and devices used to monitor Police Communications. Here are the reasons listed for probable cause: o Hudson Police Chief Al Brackett met with a "confidential reliable informant" (CI-1 of 88) who has provided information on two separate occasions that led to arrests and convictions on major narcotics trafficking offenses. CI-1 of 88 stated Bruce Lavoie was involved in the sale of drugs from his apartment, at 7B Bockes Road. (Note that the apartment raided was #2 at 24 Roosevelt Gardens.) CI-1 of 88 stated he drove Kevin Hughes to 7B Bockes Road, where Bruce Lavoie sold about a pound of marijuana to Kevin Hughes. o The detective saw a car with plate 721537 parked at 7B Bockes Road on 12 November 1987 and 2 March 1988. That plate is listed to Lester Langille of 98 Linwood Street in Nashua. Langille was arrested on 21 November 1975 for Possession of Marijuana and Operating a Vehicle in Possession of Marijuana and was convicted on the Possession charge. Langille was also arrested on 7 April 1979 for Possession of Marijuana Second Offense and Possession of a Controlled Drug Marijuana [sic] First Offense and was convicted of Possession of a Controlled Drug First Offense. o On 5 September 1974 Lavoie was arrested by Goffstown Police for Possession of a Controlled Drug. The detective's statement makes no mention of a conviction. o Lavoie moved into 24 Roosevelt Gardens, #2, on 8 April 1989. o The detective detected the odor of marijuana emitting from apartment 2 on 26 June 1989. Detective Golner checked other apartments and could not detect the odor coming from them. o Lieutenant James Brackett of Nashua told Golner he had received information from a confidential reliable informant that Kevin Hughes and Bruce Lavoie were involved in the distribution of marijuana from their apartments in Hudson. Brackett advised that Lavoie was supplying Hughes with marijuana. Hughes was living at 24 Roosevelt Gardens, #19. Lavoie's rental application with Dube and Cabral shows two previous residences covering the past seven years: 33 Orange Street and 183 Flagstone Drive, both in Nashua. Standard Operating Procedure for the Hudson Police calls for using Deadly Force in compliance with RSA 627:5 II. SOP explicitly states "The use of Deadly Force as defined by 627:9 shall NOT be used in the process of arresting any person charged SOLELY with a misdemeanor". From the autopsy: There is a contact gunshot wound of entrance in the left anterior lateral chest, seventeen inches below the top of the head and seven and one-quarter inches to the left of the midline. This wound is two and three-quarters inches slightly above and lateral to the left nipple. The wound is one-half inch in diameter with a one and seven-eights inch diameter area of abrasion due partly to powder and partly to a round barrel abrasion. Soot is noted on the upper margin of the wound extended for one-half to three-quarters of an inch somewhat laterally. Subsequent internal examination reveals that there is a blast cavity three inches in diameter in the left pectoralis muscle. The bullet tracks acutely downward external to the thorax until the area of the fifth rib where it then enters into the fifth rib creating a one and one-half inch long by one-half inch wide rectangular . . . The autopsy described the bullet as a "large caliber mushroomed semi-jacketed bullet". Chemical analysis of body fluids revealed a level of marijuana in the blood consistent with intake within a several hour period prior to death and no other drugs or alcohol were found. Delta-9 THC was detected at 7.6 nanograms per milliliter of blood, Delta-9 carboxy THC was detected at 68 nanograms per milliliter of blood. -- edp ================================================================================ Note 844.386 Hudson police kill unarmed man during drug raid 386 of 527 BEING::POSTPISCHIL "Always mount a scratch monkey." 19 lines 10-OCT-1989 06:14 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I spoke with Mike Keenan yesterday. He's experienced in police work and investigations and has a copy of the State Police investigative file on the Lavoie shooting. (Keenan is also Hudson's Town Moderator.) He points out some discrepancies in the information in the file: There is no report of damage to the bedroom door, which was allegedly hit with a 23-pound shield with Officer Burke behind it. After Bruce Lavoie was shot, Susan Lavoie saw his feet centered on the bed, even with the bottom. But she was kept out of the bedroom, only seeing that glimpse. When the paramedics arrived, Bruce Lavoie's feet were off to the side of the bed. Also, when Bruce Lavoie was being taken to the ambulance, he asked Susan Lavoie what happened. Keenan says that's not characteristic of a person who has had a fight with police. Individually, some of these and other items aren't much, but cumulatively they show too many problems about the police's version of what happened. -- edp ================================================================================ Note 844.450 Hudson police kill unarmed man during drug raid 450 of 527 BEING::POSTPISCHIL "Always mount a scratch monkey." 34 lines 18-OCT-1989 11:14 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- At the 12 October hearing, 10 people spoke for accepting the Attorney General's report as is, and 6 spoke for more investigation/action. Statements of people speaking for acceptance included: The town council is not qualified to investigate (repeated many times); this matter is not suitable for the form of open government they were having there that night, leave the matter to state and federal officials; three investigations is enough, the real issue is how are we going to fight drugs; this is no place for amateur detectives, to say the AG is covering up for a local police department is absurd, leave the matter to professionals; one person said they were sick of criticism, "If I hear one more, I'm going to take action", leave the police alone; feel police have done job, if town does not accept reports, you're saying it's okay to sell drugs; if have problems with investigations, contact people who conducted them; one person knew kids who were on drugs while at school, they never graduated, the town is fortunate to have Al Brackett, if the council investigates, it is sending a message that it's okay to do drugs. Statements for more investigation included: I don't stop thinking when the AG tells me to, quite a few details about the state police investigative file; too many questions are unanswered, in the United States we have the right to question, the right not to like what happened, and the right to answers; one person questioned whether supervisorial personnel working overtime violated proper procedures, whether the raid was conducted properly; Brackett is to be given credit for making drug-fighting a large part of his program, but that doesn't mean Brackett is infallible, he made a large error in judgement; the Attorney General has made statements in conflict with the medical examiner's office; there is no explanation in the AG's report of why some conflicting statements were chosen over others. -- edp