Reply #71: Your ignorance of Massachusetts case law is showing, as is the [View All]

[merh]

Cambridge Police Dept.'s lack of proper training (and Crowley is a trainer :scared: ).

Commonwealth v. Mulvey
57 Mass. App. Ct. 579 (March 14, 2003)

Police presence in and of itself does not by itself turn an otherwise purely private outburst into disorderly conduct.

The defendant was charged with disorderly conduct for yelling and pacing on private property that was set back from the road in a secluded area. There was no one around at the time except police officers. While the statute requires that the disturbance be such that it had or was likely to have an impact upon people in an area accessible to the public, the presence of police officers alone will not suffice to prove the public element.

In reaching its decision, the Court noted that the rationale behind criminalizing disorderly conduct rests on the belief that a disorderly person can provoke violence in others. Given that an inherent part of police work involves being in the presence of distraught individuals, and given that police officers are trained to maintain order, the Court concluded that police should be the least likely to be provoked. Therefore, police presence alone does not satisfy the public element.

http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=dmdaterminal&L=5&L0=Home&L1=Court+Decisions&L2=Court+Decisions+by+Topic&L3=Crimes&L4=Disorderly+Conduct&sid=Dmdaa&b=terminalcontent&f=courts_mulvey&csid=Dmdaa