The Telegram reports today that Larry Cirignano is being charged with misdemeanor assault, and a judge magistrate will hear testimony to determine if this goes to trial.
Bluemassgroup reports that Richard Nangle witnessed the whole incident, and calls it an assault and battery in an email.
I don't know Mr. Nangle, and have not disagreed or had issue with his reporting prior to this story, and I will add that even Laurie Latorneau has said he's stand-up, a fair guy. But from where I was standing, Larry Cirignano was guilty of rushing towards Sarah Loy, but I did not even see him touch her [though in the Globe Larry says his hand was on her back], and he could not have pushed her because she was out of his reach when she went down, and she went down at an angle inconsistent with Cirignano's direction and momentum. When Ms. Loy immediately assumed the fetal position, it reminded me of protester training. I did not see a push, and what I saw does not fit a push.
One other note, the telegram article uses the words 'anti-gay' or 'anti-gay marriage' five times to describe a protest of Legislators failing to uphold their oath of office.
23 comments :
tell it to the judge. you actually have a civic duty, as an eyewitness, to appearin court and file testimony.
clearly you believe in the democratic process. now, do you believe in due process?
file testimony and let it stand in a court of law.
Jay, I noticed you have been ignoring the fact that the Worcester police have already given a statement from the spokesperson that Larry Cirignano ADMITS he pushed her down. Are you just going to keep going like you aren't seeing that? Here it is again for you:
"Officers did not witness the incident, Worcester police spokesperson Sgt. Kerry Hazelhurst told EDGE Dec. 19. If they had, they would have placed Cirignano under arrest on a misdemeanor charge, he said. "He’s already admitted that he touched her," Hazelhurst reported. Under Massachusetts law, a person can be charged with assault and battery by merely touching another person if the touch is unwanted, Hazelhurst explained. "He pushed her down and he admits that as well."
In Today's Telegram story, Richard Nangle reports that Larry Cirignano denies pushing Sarah Loy, so I don't think I'm ignoring anything.
http://www.telegram.com/apps/pbcs.dll
/article?AID=/20061220/NEWS/612200705
/1101
I think that the police are going to have the facts right. Maybe Cirignano wants the press off his back, but the police are not going to have their spokesperson giving out false information.
So you are saying that the Police "know" that Cirignano admitted pushing Loy down, but the Telegram's Nangle is somehow in the dark and still thinks Cirignano is denying it...I doublechecked the EDGE quote, it's online today, and Sgt. Hazelhurst did say "He pushed her down and he admits that as well." The problem I have is that there are two possibilities here, the first I stated above, that the Police know something that Nangle does not and that none of us can find attributed to Cirignano in a direct quote - we find only the opposite. The second is that Sgt. Hazelhurst 'misspoke', which I would call very unprofessional for a spokeman.
I think there is an obvious conclusion; Mr. Cirignano wants the media of his back, and is trying to do damage control. He would, however, be afriad to give an edited version of the truth to the police. That is how both sources can still be accurate and arrive at different quotes. I was there, this was not a staged event, and even if it was for argument's sake, how do you get the head of the Catholic Citizenship group to act in this aggresive manner? Mrs. Loy was in with the VoteonMarriage group exercising her right to protest and was not up on the steps where the permit for VoteonMarriage to assemble covers. Mr. Cirignano could have easily asked a policemen to move her back into the main group of demonstraitors, but he got angry and decided to take matters into his own hands. Mr. Cirignano proves assault and battery by other accounts he has given media when he says he put his hand on her back to escort her. As the quote from the police says, anyone unwanted touching is assault and battery.
People wouldn't be making a big deal of this were it not for two things; he did not just "escort" her, and he is the head of his group. He should have known better. I get angry too sometimes, but I keep my hands to myself.
I think the problem with your obvious conclusion is that telling two different stories won't work, because the truth will eventually out. If we suppose for the sake of argument that your premise it true, then Sgt. Hazelhurst has leaked confidential information. If your conclusion is wrong, which is my premise, then Sgt. Hazelhurst 'misspoke'. Either way, this appears at minimum as unprofessional for a Police Dept. spokesman.
The only other possibility is that Sgt. Hazelhurst was misquoted. In that case, EDGE would appear unprofessional.
I quoted Sgt. Hazelhurst correctly, word for word, during our telephone interview.
Happy holidays to you, too!
Peter Cassels
National News Editor
Edge Publications
www.edgenewengland.com
www.edgeboston.com
www.edgeprovidence.com
www.edgenewyork.com
www.edgeptown.com
www.edgephiladelphia.com
If the quote is accurate then Sgt. Hazelhurst has leaked confidential information or has 'misspoken'; those appear to be the only conclusions to draw from the apparent contradiction between what Cirignano has said and Sgt. Hazelhurst has said.
What makes you think the information is confidential, or is that your assumption? What would be confidential about a confession?
You want people to believe that a designated spokeperson for the Worcester police who is a sergeant would have mispoken. More likely it is Larry Cirignano that told two stories in my opinion. One to police, and one to everyone else in order to keep the press off his back, and foster support.
What are you going to say when you find out he did push her? Will you still try to defend him, or will you finally start saying that violence is wrong, no matter who perpetrates it? WWJD?
If a confession is not confidential, then what makes you think Mr. Cirignano confessed to the Police that he, as Sgt. Hazelhurst was quoted as saying, 'pushed her to the ground'? Aren't you asking us to believe Mr. Cirignano is foolish enough to tell the Police one story and the press another when he knows that any confession will be reported to the media?
Nangle's article in Monday's Telegram tends to portray the Worcester Police as saying that Cirignano has admitted to facts sufficient for an Assault charge because he admitting that he put a hand on Ms. Loy. But that is different than your contention, and Sgt. Hazelhurst's words, that Mr. Cirignano admitted that he pushed Ms. Loy to the ground. That's why I think Sgt. Hazelhurst misspoke, because Cirignano only admitted to putting a hand on Ms. Loy, and explicitly denied pushing her or pushing her to the ground.
One fact that I maintained from the begining was confirmed in today's Telegram story; Sarah Loy was not 'in the crowd' but in front of the rally crowd. I think this shows that she was blocking the view of the speakers by our people with her sign. Nangle's article reflects this, he initially reported that Cirignano 'ran into the crowd' (T&G 12/17/06 page A1) to get to Ms. Loy. Today Mr. Nangle wrote 'Mr. Cirignano pursued her from the front of the crowd...to the back.' (T&G 12/25/06 page A3).
I think John, that you are not only trying Cirignano in a public forum, you are also convicting him. I've read a little about Assault and Battery, that they are from Common law, not statute law, and that battery can result from something as simple as a touch, but most of the legal advice sites, as opposed to the opinion sites, admit that "the courts have recognized that everyday life involves many incidents of contact between persons which should not be treated as criminal"
http://www.freebeagles.org/articles/
Legal_Booklet_4/lb4-14.html
I also hope that we do see some video - of how Ms. Loy actually got on the ground, as opposed to the after-the-fact images that we've seen so far.
Tell you what; I'll place a call to Sgt. Hazelhurst myself and get a direct answer to this. That will settle this, right?
Sarah Loy did not "take a dive" she was pushed down by Cirignano, and behavior like that should be condemned, not defended. I think the emails Cirignano has sent out to people tell a lot about his character, and on BlueMassGroup there is a person that reports he once pulled an old woman's hair at a silimar event. Is everybody out to get him, or just maybe could the stories be true?
Be sure to have Sgt. Hazelhurst clarify if he's quoting Cirignano directly, that Cirignano admits pushing Ms. Loy down (which he denies in Nangle's article in the Telegram. If Sgt. Hazelhurst is paraphrasing, and intended to convey that the admission of a touch is sufficient to prove battery, ask the Sargent to clarify that.
The reason I push for absolute clarification on these details is the go to the heart of Battery. If Cirignano pushed Ms. Loy, then from what I read he would be guilty of battery, but if he only touched her, and did not push her, then he's not automatically guilty of Battery, "because courts have recognized that everyday life involves many incidents of contact between persons which should not be treated as criminal."
I will make sure I have the clarification you asked for. Mr. Cirignano did forcefully cause Mrs. Loy to depart from where she wished to be, and that is battery for sure. What we are now trying to establish is how far the battery went. You do realize that the possiblity of charges of civil rights violations are still being discussed by the police, right?
I read that the Police may be investigating this as a hate crime. I guess we will have to see if placing one's hand on the back of an ACLU board member is both Battery and a civil rights violation.
Has any of the video that you promised will show exactly what happened surfaced yet, and if so, what's the URL?
I have spoken to a Worcester police detective about the video, and I have been asked to give no further public statements on the matter. You'll have to wait for the court proceedings.
Placing one's hand on someone's back in my opinion will not constitute a hate crime. Pushing someone to the ground out of anger because they have a different opinion on the issue of gay rights would be, and it seems that Mr. Cirignano did just that.
You said, "I did not see Larry touch her." but we know that he did by his own admission. You have also said, "I saw the whole thing." Which version of the truth are you promoting today?
I did not see Larry touch her, because his hand was on her back, not on her shoulder. Since I was up the steps from Ms. Loy and Mr. Cirignano, I could see the entire incident unfold from right to left, though I would not have had a clear view of their feet because of the crowd. But I could clearly see their heads and shoulders. My view would have been unlike someone who perhaps at the back of the crowd would have seen Ms. Loy coming towards them, but their view of Cirignano would have been blocked.
Which way was Ms. Loy facing when you saw her go down?
What about Sgt. Hazelhurst's quote in EDGE?
You said:
"I was about 15 feet to Ms. Loy's right, up a couple of steps with a clear view, and Larry had to move right in front of my field of vision as I was looking at the Speaker. So I saw the whole thing."
Now you are saying you would not have been able to see him put his hands on her because his back obstructed your view, am I right? I hope for your own sake you don't try to play this game on the witness stand. Perjury is a serious offense as well as being against one of the Ten Commandments.
I have a call in to Sgt. Hazelhurst for a clarification. I may get one, or I may not, but I have made the effort. One things is for sure, Mr. Cirignano is guilty of battery by definition if not intent. No one has the right to "escort" anyone, even if he feels she was in the wrong place. This is a hard lesson for him, and something he should have already known. His other antics speak volumes about his character.
I had a view of Sarah Loy and Cirignano from the side, their left sides, as the moved from the front of the "Let the People Vote" crowd towards the back, from my right to my left since I had turned to follow the action.
Who was the Worcester Police Detective who told you not to speak in public about the video? Does this mean you have a video? Now if I asked you which way you saw Sarah Loy facing when she was allegedly pushed, can you answer that question since you saw it, or does it fall under the video confidentiality clause?
I imagine that since the threshold for battery under Common law in Massachusetts is so low, the fact that Sarah Loy claims she was pushed and the fact that Cirignano admits to touching her, the Magistrate at the Show Cause hearing on Feb. 20 will most likely refer the case to trial, where the evidence and testimony can be sorted out.
"I was about 15 feet to Ms. Loy's right..."
"I had a view of Sarah Loy and Cirignano from the side, their left sides..."
Which is it? Look, you need to get your story straight, I'm no lawyer and I am catching your inconsistencies.
I do. When Sarah Loy was in front of the crowd, facing the speaker, her right was towards me. When she turned and ran into the crowd ahead of Cirignano, that put her left side towards me.
It'll be on your video.
The detective's name was Dan Sullivan, but that is as far as your fishing expedition is going. You are going to be testifying right?
Post a Comment