Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Sceviour Lawsuit

    Uploaded by

    Don Landgren
    4K views23 pages
    Trooper Ryan N. Sceviour files civil lawsuit in Suffolk Superior Court

    Original Title

    Sceviour lawsuit

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Trooper Ryan N. Sceviour files civil lawsuit in Suffolk Superior Court

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    4K views23 pages

    Sceviour Lawsuit

    Uploaded by

    Don Landgren
    Trooper Ryan N. Sceviour files civil lawsuit in Suffolk Superior Court

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 23
    COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS: SUFFOLK, $8 ‘SUPERIOR COURT DEPT. CA.No, RYANN.SCEVIOUR Plain, LIEUTENANT COLONEL FRANCIS HUGHES, LIEUTENANT COLONEL DANIEL RISTEEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY JOSEPH EARLY ,JR., MASSACHUSETTS D3PARTMENT OF STATE POLICE, Defendants PLAINT Introduction ‘This case arises out ofa civil conspiracy initiated and directed by District Atomey Joseph Eay J (hereinafter “DA Barly", the highest law enforcement official of Worcester County, tounlawfully tamper with Court documents, to violate Stat ‘Trooper Ryan Sceviou's igs, and to defeme him. In October of 2017, DA Early conesived of and entered into a conspiracy with high-ranking members ofthe Massachusetts State Police and others o eerce Trooper Sceviour to unlawfully ltr his official poice report so hat DA Karly could surreptitiously inser it into a cour file and remove the orginal report. Further, DA Early and his co-conspirators agreed to Aiscipline the plaintiff in onder to force him to participate in their illegal plot. In response to Trooper Sceviour objecting to having to pantcipate inthe defendants’ unethical aud illegal scheme to obstruct justice, and opposing the conduct of his supervisors, DA Ealy and high-ranking members of the State Police retaliated against »y making publi satements claiming that he had writen an improper report inorder to harm a viet ofthe opioid epidemic. Infact, it was Trooper Sceviour who had performed his duties in an exemplary manner and it was the defendants who acted illegally. Uimately investigations conducted by both the Attorney General and an independent investigator tetuined by the State Police established that DA Early bad instigated the conspiracy and that he and high-ranking State Police officials had ated impropery, while Trooper Sceviour had conducted himself in accordance with his teining and the law (Once these findings were released, rather than accept responsibilty, DA Early publicly denied that he had initiated the plot and agsin indicated thet Trooper Sceviour had acted improperly when he prepared his epor. ‘The plaintiff hereby alleges a follows: The Parties 1, ‘The plaintiff, Ryan N. Scevioue (“Trooper Sceviour"), a all times relevant hereto, has been employed by the Massachusetts State Police as a Trooper: 2. The defendant, the Massachusetts Department of State Police (*MSP"), is law enforcement agency ofthe Commonwealth of Massachusetts established pursuant M.G.L.¢, 22C, 5,2 “The defendant, Joseph Early Jr. (“DA Early"), ata ies relevant hereto, was andis the elected District Atorey of Worcester County, Massachuses. ‘The defendant, Lievtenant Colonel Francis Hughes (“Lt Col. Hughes"), at all imeselevant hereto was employed as the Deputy Superintendent of the Masschusets State Police. Lt, Col. Hughes is being sued i his individu capaci ‘The defendant, Lieutenant Daniel Ristcn (“Lt Col. Risten"), at allies relevant serto was employed as the Commander of Feld Services forthe MSP. Lt Col. Risen is being sued in his individual capacity. Facts Ryan Seeviour is 29 years old and is curently employed a8 a trooper for the MSP. Prior ojining the MSP, Trooper Sceviour was employed by the Towns of Brewster and Canton a a Police Officer: “Trooper Seeviou entered the State Police Training Academy in October of 2015 and graduated in Api of 2016 Massachasets State Troopers receive training regarding th writing of police reports “Troopers are trained to include al extraordinary statements made by criminal defendants when writing a report after an arrest for “Operating a Motor Vehicle While Under the Influence.” 2. 13 16 18, “Massactusetts Rule of Criminal Procedure 14 mandates that the Commonwealth provide the criminal defense with “the substance of any oral statements made by the defendant.” “Trooper Sceviour has prepared hundreds of eports regarding various incidents and arrests dus ig hs law enforcement career, He was never Aiseiplined in any manner relating to his reports untit October 19,2017 “Trooper Sceviour was assigned tothe Holden State Police barracks in July of 2016. ‘On Monday, October 16,2017, he was working the 3PM to L1PM shift _iring his shift, he arrested a young woman named Alli Bibaud and inst her For prepared an application fora eritinal complaint ose Operating Under the Influence of Naroties, Operating Under the Influence of Liquor, Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle, Marked Lanes Violation; and Failure to Inspec. ‘Aer theres, he transported Ms. Bibaud tothe Holden Barracks where she was given a Breathalyzer test for Alcohol and was evaluated forthe use of drugs by Troopor Ali Rei, a Drug Recognition Exper. After processing, Ms. Bibaud was released on personal recognizance to tho custo of her father, Judge Timothy Bibaua. During tte early morning of October 17,2017, Trooper Sceviou prepared an arrest eport on an MSP computer which included certain incriminatin statements made by Ms, Bibaud. 20, 2 2. 23, 25, Pursuant to MSP procedure, Trooper Sceviour sought to have the report reviewed bya supervisor. He contacted Sergeant Jason Conant (“Sergeant Conant’ who was working at the Leominster Barracks. Sergeant Conant recommended some additions tothe report, Trooper Sceviour made the changes then Sgt. Conant determined thatthe contents ofthe report were appropriate and approved it Sergeant Cona 1s approval was noted on the document in the State Police ‘computer system. “Trooper Seeviour prepared an application for criminal complaint, rated cutthe police report, signed it, and made copies so thatthe State Police Court Officer could deiverit othe Worcester Distict Court in the morning ‘The Cont Otficer delivered the report, along with the other relevant documents tothe Worcester District Court on the morning of October 17, 2017 A Clerk Magistrate in the Worcester District Court reviewed the report and associated documents and issued a criminal complaint against Ms Bau. The police report was placed inthe Cour fie ‘Trooper Seeviour heard nothing further about Ms. Bibaud'sarest on either October 17th or October 18h The Conspiracy A Early learned ofthe ares of Alli Bibaud and reviewed the orginal Police report on Tuesday, October 17,2017. 26. 21, 28. 29. 30, 31 32, 33, DA Bary was aware that Ms. Bibaud had been an employee of his ofice in the past, a was her father, who presently serves a a judge in Worcester County, sere whom DA Early and members of his office appear. DA Early determined that hs office would have a conflict of interest fit prosecuted the Bibaud matter. On Tuesiay, October 17th, DA Early determined that his office would not prosecus the Bibaud case “That same day, Judge David P. Despotopulos, the Chief Judge ofthe ‘Worcester District Cout, became aware ofthe arrest of Alli Bibaud Judge Despotopulos determined that the Worcester District Cour could ‘not hear the Bibaud case beeause of conflict of interest caused by the relationship that Ms. Bibaud and her father, Judge Timothy Bibaud, had wath the prosecutors an judges in Worcester County. The Bibaud case was Scheduled for araignment onthe morning of October 7, 2017. Alli Bibau’s father, Judge Timothy Bibaud informed the Cour that his daughter would not appea for her cout date and he asked that the Worcester District Court entra default, He sought no special treatment for his daughter ether fom the Court nor from the District Atorney Rather than defaulting the criminal defendant as her father had asked, at the requet ofa diferent Worcester County judge lawyer named Kara Colby appeared for Ms. Bibaud and asked the Court to continue the arraignment until October 30,2017, 34, 35 36. 31, 38, Attomey Colby als filed a motion asking the court to impound Trooper Sceviow’s police report unt arraignment. On information and belief, someone suggested to Ms. Colby that se file the Motion to Impound and it was not her idea, At this time, the plait doesnot know Who that person is, Both motions were allowed by the Court without opposition by the prosecutor, (On October 17, 2017, Judge Despotoputos contacted the Chief Justice of dicated the Distct Courts ofthe Commonsécalth Judge Pal Davey, that the ease could not be heard in Worcester County, and asked thatthe ‘Baud ease be assigned to another county fr prosecution and adjudication “That same day, the office of Chief Judge Dawley informed Judge Despotopls thatthe ease would be transferred to Middlesex County and ‘hati would be specially assigned to Judge James Sullivan who normally sits in Plymouth County. DA Early learned on Octobor 17,2017 thatthe Bibaud ease would be transferred to Middlesex County for proseeuti 1d adjudication {As ofthe end of business on Tuesday, October 17,2017, DA Early was, aware ofthe following facts regarding the Bibaud cas: 4 thatthe aregnment ofthe Biband case was rescheduled to Oetober 30,2017; 39, 4 2, 'b, thatthe ase would be prosecuted by the Middlesex County District Atomey athe Framingham District Cour before Judge James Sallivan; that te police report writen by Ryan Seeviour was inthe Court file and vas impounded until the aralgnment and any decisions regarding any continuing impoundment or redaction would be made by Judge Sullivan, As the end of business on October 17,2017, DA Barly was aware that he should nt take any further aetion regarding the Bibaud case because is office was no longer prosecuting the case and had a confit of interest in handling the matter. Despite this knowledge, DA Early formulated a plan o obtain an altered Police report and to surreptitiously replace the orignal report withthe altered sport inthe cour file before the case file was physically teansered _DA Bary began to implement hs illegal plan by contacting» member of the State Police assigned tothe District Attorney's office and asking him to faclitae the creation ofan altered repor. The member of the State Police recognized tha this action would be improperand declined to puticipae inthe plan Late in the aftemoon of October 17,2017, DA Early telephoned former MSP Col Richard MeKeon (“Col. MeKeon”) and began discussing “Trooper Sceviout's report with him, 4s, 46. 47. 48, 49. 50. 3 52, (Col, Mekeon and DA Eauly were former co-workers specifically, Cal MeK on used to work under the supervision of DA Early (On October 18,2017, DA Easly again called Col. MeKeon and asked him ‘what he was gong to do about Trooper Sceviou's report Col. MeKeon told DA Bary that he could not do anything about the report. ‘because it was already in the Court file and indicated tat the “ship had sailed" with regard to amending the repor. DA arly persisted and demanded that Col. MeKeon obtain an altered report sothat the Court file could be tampered with and the original report eliminate. Beginning on October 17,2017, and for & number of days thereafter, DA Early and Secretary of Public Safety Daniel Bennett had « number of telephone conversations regarding the arrest of Ms. Bibaud. The exact content ofthe conversations is unknown to the plaintiff at this me. ‘Thereafter, DA Barly, Col. MeKeon, Lt. Col. Francis Hughes, Lt. Col Daniel R ston, and Major Susan Anderson entered into an agreement to coerce Trooper Sceviour to produce an altered report regarding the arest ‘of Ms. Bibaud, which would appear to be the original por. Trooper Sceviour was home asleep onthe morning of October 19,2017 when he was woken up bya loud banging on the door of his house ‘When he answered, a fellow State Trooper greeted him ‘The Trooper tld him that he was to report tothe Holden barracks immediatly. 33, 54, 55, a7 os, 59, 6 ‘Thereafter, Trooper Sceviour retrieved two voicemail that had been let on is plone by Lieutenant James Fogarty (“Lt. Fogarty”), his supervisor atthe Helden barracks, ‘The frst voicemail indicated that Trooper Sceviour was to immediately report tothe Holden barracks in response toa direct order from “the Colonel” regarding the arrest of “a judge's daughter.” In the second voicemsl, Lt, Fogarty told Trooper Sceviour to call him as soon as ke received the voicemail because i was “extremely important.” "Trooper Sceviour drove over 90 miles from his home tothe Holden buarackson his scheduled day oft Upon activa, Trooper Sceviour was met by Sergeant Conant and his union represenatve, Trooper Jeffrey Gilbert (“Trooper Gilbert”, trooper Seeviour, Sergeant Conant, and trooper Gilbert met with Li Fogaty. Lt. Fogaty informed them that he had been ordered by is supervisor, Major Aaderson, to issue Sergeant Conant and Trooper Sceviour negative “Supervisory Observation Reports” inorder to reprimand them for including certain statements made by Ms. Bibaud inthe ares repor. “Trooper Sceviour indicated that he believed his report tobe proper and protested the proposed discipline and the conduct of hs supervisors. “The writen reprimand indicated that Trooper Sceviour was being discipline for “the negative and derogatory statements included within the gist oF your report.” 10 a, 6, 66, 68 Sergeant Conan was reprimanded fr “approving this report and allowing ‘inappropriate commentary tobe included in the report” Lt, Fogaty told Trooper Seeviour that he had done nothing wrong and that he (Fogany) wold have included the statomentsif he had prepared the report bu: despite Trooper Seviows insistence that his conduct was proper andthe removal of any ofthe statements would be unethical and unlawful, Fogarty issued the discipline in accordance with the orders of the co-conspirators, Lt. Fogany also stated that Sergeant Conant had done nothing wrong, but since Maor Anderson had ordered Lt. Fogarty to issue the negative Observation Reports, "he was forced 1 do 80." Lt, Fogary indicated that he didnot agree thatthe negative Observation Reports were warranted. Lt. Fogary and Sergeant Conant then ff the barracks and Troopers Sceviourand Gilbert met with Major Anderson. During this meeting, Trooper Soeviour asked Major Anderson why she had ordered that he receive @ negative Observation Report. She replied that she was also ofthe opinion that Trooper Sceviour had done nothing vweong but tha “it was ordered by the Colonel.” Major Anderson also stated that she di not know why “they were doing this” to Trooper Sceviou. Trooper Seeviour protested and objected tothe discipline uw 69, 70, a 2. 2. 14 15, During te meeting, Major Anderson told Trooper Sceviou that she had ranged to change the status of his report on the computer systems to return ito draft frm and that he was o edit the report. She produced a copy of Trooper Sceviour’s report, on which handwritten notes were Visible ino different ink coors. Major Anderson indicated that eits proposed by her supervisor, Lieutenant Colonel Danie Risteen (Lt, Colonel Risteen”), wer in red ink and edits proposed by her were in back ink ‘Trooper Silber asked! Major Anderson it he could have a copy af the marked tp report, but she refused to give itt him and stated that he could take notes bt could not have a copy ofthe actual document withthe handweitng om it looper Seeviour told Major Anderson that he opposed making any edits and that he believed doing so was “morally vacant.” “Trooper Gilbert told Major Anderson that he believed that the order 0 alter the report was wrong and that he did aot agree with it “Trooper Gilbert indicated to Major Anderson that Trooper Sceviour would conly make the revisions if he were directly ordered todo so Major Anderson responded, “tis is an order Jeff, we all have bosses.” She indicated thatthe order had come from “Bennet (referring to Secretary of Pubic Safety Daniel Bennet) to Colonel MeKeon to Lt. Colonel Ristoen to her. 2 76. 78 9. I 2, 8 “Trooper Seeviour opposed making the eis and deletions, and asked what "would happen fhe refused 0 do so. “TrooperGilbert informed him that, pr protocol, he would be charged with insubordination and, consequently, would be subject to discharge if he refused obey Major Anderson's direct onder, “Trooper Seeviour again protested, tating, “If this was some random person and no a judges kid, none ofthis would be happening.” Trooper ‘Sceviour communicated that he opposed the order an tha he belived it to be illegal “Major Anderson agreed with Trooper Seviou’s concerns but gave him a direct order to make the revisions anyway in an efor to eliminate erain relevant and incriminating statements made by Ms. Blbaud from the repor. As real ofthe illegal coercion by his supervisors, Trooper Se ‘was fored to create an altered report “Trooper Sceviour told Major Anderson that he wanted to note in his report that he had revised it because of an order by his supervisors Major Anderson responded that he was not permitted to do so ‘Trooper Seeviour refused to produce a new report unles he could at the ‘ery leas: note on it that it had been “revised” ventualy, Major Anderson agreed to allow Trooper Sceviour to add a ‘notation on the report indicating that i was revised, but she didnot allow him to inficate why it was revised ofthat he was ordered to revise it 13 85, 88 89, 91 Major Anderson then ordered Trooper Seeviou to deliver the altered report to ADA Jeff Travers of the Worcester County Distt Court, who ‘was waiting for it at the direction of DA Early Upon information and belief a the direction of DA erly, ADA Travers sttempte to arrange to place the altered, “revised” eport inthe cour file by asking Clerk Magistrate Brondan Keenan to surreptitiously replace the ‘original report with the altered repor. (Clerk Magistrate Keenan refused to participate in the illegal scheme to alter the Cou fie At this point, DA Barly realized that his original plan would not be success ‘As a esl of Trooper Seeviour's actions, the conspirators were notable to ‘execute el plan andthe altered report was never put inthe Cour file DA Early instead ordered ADA Travers to improperly bring the ease forward on Friday, October 20, the day before it was st tobe physically transferred to Middlesex County, without notice to Ms. Bibaud or her lawyer, and to bring an oral Motion to Redact the report DA Early believed that it was highly unlikely th a neutral judge would ‘continue 10 impound the report or permit it to be redacted, ‘The actions taken by DA Early to redact the report were improper and ‘unethical, u 98, DA Early was no longer prosecuting the Bibaud matter; thus, his ations with regard to that case subsequent to October 17,2017 are not protected by pros torial immunity 94. On Octover 26,2017, a website, Turtleboy Sports, published a report indicating that Distiet Auorney Joseph Early had contacted Colonel ‘MeKeon and illegally arranged to have the report altered.” 95, The repart was picked up by a number of other news outlets from all over the world. As a result of Trooper Seeviout's opposition to the illegal scheme, and his refusal to alter the report without marking it revised, which resulted in the failure ofthe conspiracy, Col, MeKeon ordered the State Poice media spokesperson to make false and derogatory slatements tthe media regarding Trooper Sceviour, particularly that his report {included improper statements that violated the standards for repor-writing and that required removal ? * See htps:turteboysports.comida-joe-ealy-major-susan-anderson-force-troopers-t0 alter-report-for-judges-caughter-ho-said-do-you-know-how-many-peoplei-had-to- blow-to-get-that-after-heroin-oui-arrest/ *See, ¢g., Mtp//boston.cbslocalcom/2017/1 /08/massachusetts-state-police.report- laysut-trooper-ryan-seeviour! (“State Police spokesman Dave Procopio told WBZ. ‘Seeviour was wrong to include comments that weren't relevant to the woman's arrest. “Supervisory members ofthe State Police, up to and including the Colonel, may review ‘any report and have the responsibilty to order any appropriate revisions In the report in {question, the revision ccnsisted only of removal ofa sensatonalistic, directly-quoted statement by the defendant, which made no conteibution to proving the elements of the crimes with which she was charged, Procopio said. ‘Inclusion of an unnecessary sensationalist statement does not meet the repor-writing standards required by the

    You might also like