In a sheer act of intimidation, the Boston Police Department is planning on filing a complaint against me for witness intimidation because I posted the name, email and phone number to a police spokeswoman, encouraging readers to ask her to drop the accusation against Taylor Hardy, whom she claims recorded her without consent.
Detective Nick Moore also assured me he would do the same to any PINAC readers if they continue to contact departmental spokeswoman Angelene Richardson as they have been doing since yesterday.
“I can go and get warrants for every person who called her,” he said during a telephone conversation earlier this evening. “It’s an annoyance. It’s an act of intimidation.”
I pointed out that the real intimidation is being conducted by Boston police, which is not only evident in the above video that prompted this whole debacle in which a burly cop threatens to arrest a burping videographer (not me) on battery charges when he is the one pushing the videographer, but is evident in their response to PINAC for posting the video back in August, which helped the video go viral.
Moore had emailed me this evening asking me to contact him, so I called him. After he assured me he wasn’t recording, he asked if I was recording and I told him no.
But I was taking notes as I normally do when I plan to write a story.
Moore described Richardson as a “poor clerk who picked up the phone” when Hardy called, only to be surprised when she learned that Hardy had uploaded a short video of the conversation that never even referred to her by name and had less than 100 views when she filed a complaint with him.
And she is described as an “executive secretary” for the Boston Police Department who made more than $76,000 last year, according to city documents posted online.
Moore said he is technically not charging me, but that I will be expected to attend a hearing in Boston in front of a magistrate judge, who will then determine if they have enough probable cause for an arraignment.
Hardy’s situation is the same, so I asked that he schedule us on the same day and he said he will try to do that. And maybe we can get a Boston videographer to record the hearing under the Massachusetts court rules.
Below is a screen shot of my intimidating tactics.
UPDATE: Below is Detective Moore’s email that prompted the discussion. I wasn’t going to post it at first out of professional courtesy, but it wasn’t until several minutes into our conversation that he mentioned he was going to file a complaint against me for intimidation, which is something he should have mentioned jn the email or from the beginning of our conversation.
He’s not trustworthy at all because had I known he was going to file a criminal complaint against me, I would not have called considering anything I say could be used against me.
Also, if he really did have “numerous victims of serious crimes” who contact him on a daily basis, he wouldn’t be wasting his time with me or Hardy.
Mr. Miller,Can you please contact me at your convenience at my office, xxx-xxx-xxxx. I realize that you do not trust the police and that is fine but I assure you I am not trying to jam you up. I just wish to have a cordial conversation with you and clear the air about a few things. Please do not post my office number or email to your website as I have numerous victims of serious crimes who contact me on a daily basis and It would not be fair to them or me if my voicemail box is full and they cannot get ahold of me.My supervisors and the District Attorney’s office are aware of this request but I assure you that the conversation will just be me and you, not recorded, and again, Im not trying trap you into anything incriminating. As I relayed to Mr. Hardy I try to give everyone involved in my investigations the benefit of the doubt and speaking with you about this hopefully will accomplish that. Thank you.Detective MooreBoston Police Department
UPDATE II: Detective Moore also said that Richardson had filed the complaint with him more than a month ago where it sat on the bottom of his pile because he had more serious cases to investigate. He acknowledged that at the time, the video had less than 100 views and that it did not contain her name within the video or in the description (and it still doesn’t).
If his intention was not to intimidate, wouldn’t it just make sense to contact Hardy and ask him to remove the video considering there was no obvious malicious intent, instead of filing a felonious complaint that could imprison Hardy, a 25-year-old journalism student and former Police Explorer who once wanted to be a cop?
Richardson, who is frequently quoted in the media, is not the victim here. She is the bully, using her police connections to try to quash PINAC’s First Amendment rights to disseminate the news, question public officials and criticize them for making frivolous (and false) claims.
We will fight these accusations very aggressively. We will investigate them harder than they have investigated us. We will show them that we won’t be intimidated.
Feel free to help the fight by donating.