Posted on 07/08/2005 10:18:07 AM PDT by Dashing Dasher
Eric Laverriere was celebrating last New Year's Eve at a friend's house in Waltham when police broke up the party. They took him into protective custody and kept him locked in a cell for nine hours until the effects of a night of beer drinking wore off.
In what legal experts believe to be a first-of-its-kind legal challenge, Laverriere filed suit against the Waltham Police Department in US District Court in Boston, contending that he has a constitutional right to get drunk on private property ''so long as he causes no public disturbance."
Laverriere, a 25-year-old computer systems specialist from Portland, Maine, argues that the Massachusetts Protective Custody Law is intended to target public drunkenness and that Waltham police overstepped their bounds when they used it to seize him from a private residence.
''One thing people should be able to do is drink in their own house," Laverriere said in a phone interview yesterday. ''That's the beauty of the land of the free."
The state's Protective Custody Law, enacted in 1971, replaced a law dating back to Colonial times that made public drunkenness a crime, subject to arrest, conviction, and a criminal record. The law, which does not explicitly say whether it applies to those in public or in private, authorizes police to take incapacitated people to their homes, a treatment facility, or a police station, where they can be held against their will for up to 12 hours.
Under the law, people have to be drunk and deemed to be a danger to themselves or others. They are not charged with a crime.
Laverriere asserts in his lawsuit that he had ''a constitutional right to be drunk in private, a privacy and liberty right founded in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution."
{SNIP}
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Another case for SCOTUS!?
Interesting information - or just a Silly Friday Thread.
I think "why the police broke up the party" would be a fact I would want to include, were I a journalist. The disposition of the partygoers would depend on this fact very much.
SD
I think the guy is right - but how did the cops wind up in his house?
Mystery of the Church?
The fact that he's from Portland, ME explains a lot.
More info: (page 2) 230am - video camera - let's see how the story unfolds...
Waltham Deputy Police Chief Paul Juliano declined to comment on the suit on the advice of the city's legal department.
Several lawyers who represent some of the biggest police departments in the state said they believed the state's protective custody law clearly gives police the authority to take inebriated people into custody. But they said it was the first time they had seen someone challenge the law on the grounds that one has a constitutional right to get drunk on private property.
Boston attorney Leonard Kesten, who has defended many police departments in civil rights cases, said legal precedent has established that police cannot just show up at someone's home without cause and take suspected drunks into protective custody. But, he said, if officers are investigating a crime or responding to an incident and discover that someone is drunk, they are obligated by law to take that person into protective custody if he or she could hurt themselves or others.
''You can drink all you want as long as you're not a danger to yourself or others," he said, adding that police have been sued for failing to take people into protective custody who later died from alcohol poisoning or killed others in drunken-driving accidents.
Laverriere said that he drank several beers, but wasn't drunk, when officers arrived at his friend's duplex on Lyman Street about 2:30 a.m. and said someone had thrown bottles at a passing police cruiser. When everyone denied throwing bottles, Laverriere said, officers began screaming and ''becoming more threatening," prompting him to pick up a friend's digital camera and start videotaping.
Officer Jorge Orta ''came running to me, ripped the camera out of my hand and threw me down on the floor," Laverriere said in the interview, adding that he injured his shoulder and is scheduled to have surgery next month.
Laverriere said that although he told police he had been invited to spend the night at the house, the officers insisted on taking him into protective custody. While police arranged for local partygoers to take taxis home, other out-of-town guests were allowed to remain at the house, he said.
''Heaven forbid if we've reached the point where police can take you out of your home because you're drunk and not hurting anybody," said Harvey Schwartz, a Boston civil rights lawyer who filed the suit on behalf of Laverriere and believes that the protective custody law implicitly applies to public places.
One police report says that Laverriere appeared intoxicated and expressed ''displeasure" at being told he had to leave the party. Laverriere said he could not leave because he lived in Maine, the report says, and was then taken into custody. The report says he fell to the floor while resisting Orta's efforts to handcuff him. Schwartz accused the police of retaliating against Laverriere because he tried to videotape them, noting that other partygoers who had been drinking were allowed to remain at the house.
According to police reports, after two champagne bottles and a beer bottle were hurled at the cruiser, officers went into the home and found about 25 people inside, many of whom appeared intoxicated.
One Lyman Street neighbor, Joseph Saulnier, recalled the New Year's Eve party as a rowdy affair. ''It was very loud. There were cars parked everywhere on the street. People were everywhere," he said.
Laverriere contends that the party was winding down and he was sitting in a recliner, watching television, and drinking water when police showed up at the house.
''I can understand if you're abusive to a housemate or you do something that is damaging or life-threatening they can come and remove you," he said. ''But if you're just sitting there having a good time with friends and don't do anything wrong?"
Attorney Timothy Burke of Needham, who represents the Massachusetts State Police and about 30 other police departments, said police had a right to enter the home to investigate the bottle-tossing incident. In most cases, Burke said, police take people into protective custody whom they could arrest for disorderly conduct, trespassing, or some other charge.
''More often it's used to give a person a break and not arrest them," he said.
Globe correspondent Cristina Silva contributed to this report.
I reckon Sunday begins right after midnight on Sunday.
SD
}^)
The last one is for anyone that gets so trashed that they wonder on to another's farm....
Or perhaps milking another's cow is a euphemism . . .
Or
Maybe Both
:o)
I have to keep the tradition, you see.
LOL!!!!
(ps - I see we're still pinging thag.... )
shiver. Don't tell the police, I am a huge klutz and am always hurting myself.
So, cause a ruckus and...
police have been sued for failing to take people into protective custody who later died from alcohol poisoning or killed others in drunken-driving accidents.
attract the police and then...
One police report says that Laverriere appeared intoxicated and expressed ''displeasure" at being told he had to leave the party.
become beligerant and...
In most cases, Burke said, police take people into protective custody whom they could arrest for disorderly conduct, trespassing, or some other charge.
the cops throw you in the drunk tank for the night rather than arresting and charging you with a crime.
So what is the complaint?
SD
Hey, did I leave those at your house again?
Those look like shrimp covered cuffs.
Or cotton candy.
They kind of make me urppy.
urp
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.