Laserfiche WebLink
As of this ,time, criminal prosecution is continuing on the case. Regularly, <br /> l <br /> since the nve s tigation commenced, we have been involved in ongoing contact <br /> with the Special Prosecutor, Town Counsel, other agencies and the victim's <br /> family. While we would all like to see the case handled more quickly, that <br /> matter is not under our control . <br /> In the othermatter related to the Raw Bar, ,the department received certain <br /> i <br /> information n October of 1995 that other violations might be present at <br /> the Raw Bar. I must note that, other than the investigation into the fatal <br /> accident in July, the only other matter to come to my attention concerning <br /> the Raw Bar was a complaint of overcrowding that was observed by a police <br /> officer on May 28, 1995 . That matter was referred to other departments for <br /> followup. In regard to the information in October, at my request, two State <br /> Troopers were assigned to work with two Mashpee Detectives to look into the <br /> passibility that liquor violations were taking place at the Raw Bar. They <br /> did not observe any violations in the establishment. However, the troopers <br /> were able to leave the establishment with their drinks in hand, which is a <br /> minor violation. After receiving their report on the matter, I advised the <br /> Board of Selectmen on November 14 , 1995 and recommended that they consider <br /> conducting a hearing on that matter also. <br /> In an initial decision outlined in a November 17, 1995 letter, Town counsel <br /> recommended to you that the selectmen hold a hearing on the alleged Liquor <br /> violations from the July accident, using testimony from a detective instead <br /> of testimony from the out-of-state witness . When the selectmen subsequently <br /> approved their decision to hold the hearing, both the violations alleged <br /> from the accident and the alleged October violations were to be considered <br /> together. I was advised verbally of that decision and the proposed hearing <br /> date ❑f January 8th, Sometime later, I was advised that Town counsel had <br /> reconsidered the hearing before the Board of Selectmen and had recommended <br /> that it be postponed until conclusion of the criminal case. <br /> In my opinion, the police department has handled all of the matters I have <br /> addressed in this memorandum in a fair and impartial manner. A reference <br /> is made in Selectman caf fyn' s letter comparing the Raw Bar cases with cases <br /> at Davy' s Locker that I advised the Selectmen of in about June of 1995 . She <br /> advised that a notification was made "almost immediately" in those cases, <br /> followed by a public hearing. I must advise you that in that matter, there <br /> were eight incidents between July 3rd and November 6th of 1994 , followed by <br /> seveninc idents ( six of significance) over a six-week period. At the time <br /> I advised the Selectmen about Davy' s Locker, I spoke of f if teen incidents <br /> Of concern which had occurred over a period of about eleven months . Most <br /> importantly, however, is that none of the incidents at Davy' s Locker were <br /> also the subject of a pending criminal case where certain evidentiary items <br /> might not be available for a liquor violation hearing. In the case of the <br /> alleged liquor violations at the Raw Bar related to the fatal. accident, it <br /> should be apparent from my actions in the October case that I would have <br /> notif "ed the Selectmen ❑f those violations much faster if there were not a <br /> consideration for theP otential of criminal prosecution* <br /> Please advise of any further questions on this matter. . <br /> CC: Board of Selectmen Liaison <br />