|Assault and Battery of a public employee (MGL 265/13D)|
One of my first surprises in this arrest is how easily someone
can be charged with
assault and battery on a public employee
. The next thing that came to my mind is why there is a law
specific to assault and battery on a public employee. Are public employees
on a higher plane of existence than everyone else? Did I miss something
in human evolutionary progress? Isn't this rather discriminatory by it's
very nature. Actually, it is quite repugnant.
It would seem that the pigs in the Animal Farm have become more than equal under the law in Massachusetts.
I'd like to think that this law is a doubled edged sword that applies when police assault and batter us in the same manner that we assault and batter them.
The law, according to Framingham police officer Gregory Reardon implies that if you merely touch a police officer, you have assaulted and battered him and that could be a felony.
What Gregory Reardon did to me was a horrible abuse of this law and for that he should be fired.
If assault and battery on a police officer might be considered a felony and a very serious charge, why was I let out on my own recognizance and without bail?
Why did Gregory Reardon apologize to me before I was placed in a cell after being arrested? Why would a police officer who just charged me with assault and battery against him apologize to me? I normally accept apologies from those that have made a mistake, but his actions were taken with malice and intent. The apology merely lays the groundwork for his next offense.
Apparently, I do not pay sufficient protection money (Er! taxes) to be left alone from those doing the protecting. Heavy Sigh!
When you see someone get arrested for assault and battery against a public employee, you may safely assume that a police crime may have occurred with 50% probability. The police usually note it down in their log files as ABPO (Assault and Battery on a Police Officer).
|Send comments to: firstname.lastname@example.org|