Haarde: Don't Point Fingers at Sudbury PD Regarding Lavender

He called on Town Manager Maureen Valente to ask Richard Glavin to take part in a meeting he wanted schedule for this week.

Instead, Haarde met with Glavin on Friday to ask questions related to the Lavender incident from May 8-9 and left convinced the officers who worked that night did everything by the book.

"The Chief gave all details, and I've been confident all along they did the right thing," Haarde said. "I've always had the utmost confidence in the  and I never questioned their actions or decisions. My frustration is that the people of Sudbury don’t know all the facts and that is causing many to question what happened."

"Over a month went by, and I was never consulted about this, being the only selectman who wasn’t there and being the vice chair," Haarde said. "We had a meeting on May 22, no one brought it up. I found out details from Sudbury Patch. Then I went to see the Chief, and I've spoken with him several times since hearing about it from Patch. We spoke again on Friday after hearing the chief was distraught over the situation."

At a recent Sudbury Public Schools Committee meeting, resident Bob Stein questioned the Committee as to their whereabouts that night. After Committee member Bob Armour admitted to being at Lavender for a short time, Chair Rich Robison ordered the remainder of the Committee to not answer.

"The names of the people inside Lavender (at the time of the violation) are not relevant to the police department’s investigation because they were not in violation of anything under the law, nor did the officers present know any of the patrons other than Selectman O’Brien," Lt. Scott Nix explained. 

Selectmen John Drobinski, who also admitted to being at Lavender prior to when the violation happened, tried to squash Haarde's motion to invite the chief, saying he was worried it would split the town further.

But Haarde said the town is asking for answers and deserves to get them.

"The police are in a very, very difficult position because town officials were there violating the law the police enforce," Haarde said. "The police did the right thing by the book, followed every procedure to the letter, but they are not the LAPD, who are going to come forward with some type of press conference. There’s not more to it from the police perspective."

Glavin said his officers acted responsibly that night and he supports their actions.

"I back the (officers) who were there that night," he said. "I stand by what they did. I commend them for taking appropriate action. We've cooperated (in sharing information) and stand by our position. We understand residents have concerns but we make decisions 365 days a year irrelevant of who is involved.  I am comfortable and confident that each decision was made free of any bias as some people are suggesting. If that requires a further investigation by a third party so be it, we will cooperate fully.”

Glavin said he's been especially upset over comments made about one of his officers from that night.

"Erin Corey went to Iraq to serve our country, and to read people call her 'Barney Fife' ... I'm irate over that," Glavin said. "That young lady served in Iraq ... don't call her 'Barney Fife.'"

Residents have also called for an explanation as to how officers that night allowed an alleged drunk driver who crashed her car that night, and claimed to be at Lavender, be cited for an OUI yet not be arrested.

After being transported to Emerson Hospital that night to receive treatment for injuries sustained in the accident, she was cited for her third OUI.

In documentation shared by Sudbury police, it's been learned it's not unprecedented for the department to cite someone for an OUI and not arrest that person immediately.

In the past two years, there have been six incidents, total, involving a motor vehicle accident with the operator transported to a hospital for sustained injuries where it was suspected they had been operating under the influence.  Five out of the six, to include the current incident, resulted in the charging of the operator versus arrest.

"In one out of the six incidents the operator was arrested due other circumstances to include uncooperative, then combative, behavior where two Sudbury officers and several Concord officers were necessary to quell his combative behavior while he was being treated at Emerson Hospital," Nix said.

Sudbury has several officers who have been employed in other police departments where similar circumstances have resulted in the same consistent actions.

"We have and will continue to cooperate fully with those individuals in providing clarity," Nix said. “It is imperative we remain neutral in forming our decisions.  If not, that would be to our detriment in promoting a successful prosecution. 

"From the onset of the circumstances the morning of May 9, we have handled the application of our policies and philosophies consistent with past practice.  Where we have deviated from past practice is in the amount of time spent justifying our actions.”