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.
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
Well, chucking bottles at the cops was probably a bad idea.
I think the guy is taking the wrong approach. There isn't a constitutional right to get drunk on private property. Before and after Prohibition, states could and did ban the sale of alcohol and, I believe, consumption of alcohol in some places, especially on a county level.
So the 9th basically is a prohibition against federal action - but not state action. There is no Constitutional right here, just a Constitutional prohibition against the feds taking action (or there used to be, but that's another story entirely).
The guy would need to examine the Mass Constitution to see if there are state prohibitions against law enforcement holding someone for engaging in a legal activity on private property - or if there are certain provisions that make it a state right to be left alone on private property if no crime is being committed.
So I expect this guy to lose with this argument, even though I disagree with the legality of the action - he chose the wrong defense.