|
|
« Alert: Fatal crash stops traffic on 95 north, Attleboro | Today | Ocean State Job Lot warns of scam » October 31, 2007Carcieri's lawyers argue for executive privilegePROVIDENCE -- The state’s high court heard arguments today about whether Governor Carcieri should be called to take the stand at the trial of the seven Narragansett Indians facing criminal charges stemming from the state police raid on a tribal smoke shop in July 2003. Defense lawyer William P. Devereaux and Marc DeSisto, representing the governor, presented their cases under occasionally heated questioning by the Supreme Court justices. DeSisto urged the judges to overturn a ruling by the Superior Court judge that Carcieri could be called to testify about the orders he gave then State Police Col. Steven M. Pare leading up to the raid. DeSisto argued executive privilege should shield the governor -- and high ranking governmental officials -- from testifying unless he has direct and highly relevant personal information about the case that cannot be gotten from other sources. The issue of executive privilege has not been tested in Rhode Island. “Hailing the high executive into court unnecessarily disrupts administrative functions,” DeSisto said. Justice Francis X. Flaherty asked why the governor’s appearances on talk radio and before a commission reviewing the raid in the days and weeks that followed were not equally as disruptive. DeSisto responded that the governor has the obligation to “reach out" to the public on certain issues. “Doesn’t he have the obligation to tell the same story under oath?,” said Chief Justice Frank Williams. The governor should only be called to testify in “rare cases,” otherwise the system will lead to abuse, DeSisto said. Devereaux argued the governor’s testimony could be vital to defense arguments that troopers used excessive force by disregarding Carcieri’s order that they back off if they met resistance. “The jury deserves to consider the orders,” he said. The information being sought, he said, was not confidential. -- Journal staff writer Katie Mulvaney The justices questioned Devereaux with equal intensity. Goldberg asked why TV crews had been at the scene the day of the raid and whether the defense was inviting a “circus-like atmosphere” into the courts. Flaherty wondered whether the same evidence could be gotten by other means, which Devereaux likened to providing testimony by “boom box.” The cases grew out of the state police raid of a Narragansett smoke shop in Charlestown on July 14, 2003. Governor Carcieri ordered the police to execute the search warrant on the roadside store after the tribe began selling cigarettes without charging Rhode Island taxes, in violation of state law. The raid disintegrated into a violent confrontation. Seven tribal members, including Chief Sachem Matthew Thomas, face misdemeanor charges of obstruction, disorderly conduct, assault and resisting arrest. The court will issue a decision in six weeks, Williams said. In the meantime, the Supreme Court has urged the parties, including the attorney general’s office, which is prosecuting, to mediate the cases. “We weren’t kidding when we put that in the order,” Williams said. Posted by Mike McKinney CommentsTom L | October 31, 2007 2:47 PM link Officers with weapons and the ability to use deadly force at any moment can not be analyzed just like average citizens when they are raiding a store. The only restraint I appreciate is that they didn't use more abusive tactics. Raelc E. | October 31, 2007 4:36 PM link It seems to me that the governor could have avoided this whole ugly incident by going to court and getting an injunction to stop the Narragansetts from selling cigarettes. Instead he takes on the racist trappings of a '60s Southern governor and has the state police enter the reservation like goons. Let's have the governor testify under oath, something he is obviously too afraid and ashamed to do. kadar | October 31, 2007 8:31 PM link Post a commentPlease be civil. Vicious comments, personal attacks and profanity won't be published. Name and email are required; email address will not publish. |
|
ADVERTISING |
|
|
|
|
| Su | Mo | Tu | We | Th | Fr | Sa |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
ProJo 9 to 5 News Blog
Oct 2005 - March 2006
This is amazing. The officers were blatently attacked and only used force to protect themselves. I believe they showed great restraint under the circumstances.
If the governor told the police to back off if they met resistance, he shouldn't have even sent them in in the first place. Why should they (the Narragansetts) get treated with kid gloves? Regardless of whether the selling of tax free cigaretts is illeagal or not, they did attack the officers and resisted arrest, as is obvious in the news coverage.