WRITTEN BY: CAPTAIN JOINT
Treating Yourself printed the story of the illegal raid on my Holland, Massachusetts home in TY#12. titled “Where is Captain Joint?” Here is what’s happened since: When the police arrest you, it costs you your money to defend yourself.
When you catch the police dirty, you have to bear the cost of proving your case, while the police have the local town lawyers and all of the town’s resources behind them for defence. No matter what, it’s your money draining into the system. My case against the Holland, Mass. police was dismissed by a lower court judge during an oral argument for summary judgement November of 2008. Without money for an appeal and more
legal fees that I was told would mount up to $15,000 or more, I was unable to continue with the case, even though lawyers told me I could have a chance to win on appeal, due to the judge ignoring the 1st amendment rights violation claims. This would only mean that another judge would look at the appeal on the case. I could still be denied a trial — a very costly gamble I could not afford. At this point, our time for appeal has passed (we could no longer afford the cost of legal help.), but there may still be justice found in this case. I think the two main officers, Agent Scott Haley and
Chief Kevin P. Gleason can be charged with perjury (It may be too late on the affidavit, dated 2003, but they again lied under oath in depositions dated 2008), but to do this, I need to force out the name of the “C.I. #62”,
whom they claim was sent into my home to buy pot with photocopied money from me as they claim they watched from their car. I believe “C.I. #62” To be Michael Zelonis, who, as a matter of public record, was arrested on my property Oct. 30 2002, and had been only allowed there to get wood to warm his home. He was arrested on gun charges, and for possession of heroin and needles. I had no idea this man had guns, and I don’t condone or allow hard drugs around me or my family. He never would have been allowed around my family. He was never allowed back at my home and was in jail when the police claim they made these fictional “buys”. The police refuse
to release the name of the “C.I. 62” because they know that to do so would place them in jail themselves. The fact that this dangerous felon was arrested on my property was not mentioned in the police affidavit. I think an arrest of this nature would be included as “reasonable cause” to believe there is crime going on at the property. They make no mention of this arrest, yet they run my pro-marijuana politics throughout the affidavit. I think the gun-toting felon is more of a threat to the neighbourhood, but that’s just my opinion…
If I can force “C.I.# 62’s” name out and confirm who he is with the help of some other law enforcement agency, and prove the “buys” were lies, I think these officers will also be subject to charges of producing false evidence in the case of simple possession that was brought against my wife and daughter (I was never charged with any crimes). The police produced photocopied money that they claim was sent into my home, yet never recovered. This evidence produced during the discovery phase of the trial was rejected from the courts as not admissible, no sales charges were brought against anyone, only simple possession, and all charges dismissed. So why even produce the photocopied money? There was no trail of evidence to follow the “evidence”? The question remains: how to bring these cops up on charges by going through the proper channels? They have committed crimes, and I would like to see them charged. The two recent sworn depositions from Haley & Gleason also differ as to if one or both officers were present at one of the “buys”; the reason these officers can’t remember the details of this “drug deal” is because it never happened!
These depositions are now posted at captainjoint.com so the public can read them and judge for themselves. Some of the citizens of Holland, Mass. have put up a web page with more information on Chief Kevin P. Gleason. See 01521.com This will give you an idea of the type of officer he is. He has been brought up on charges before, yet the system continues to protect him. Considering he said he investigated me on a “rumor,” I have heard “rumors” about him, and maybe it’s time for him to be investigated as well…
Also in Agent Scott Haley’s deposition, he states that the “C.I. 62” informant was in and out of my home and kept them informed as to my medical condition, that I had “tubes and stuff sticking out of my arms.” I had no tubes or anything else sticking out of my arms until after March 25, 2003
(the day the warrant was signed, the day I was operated on,) and was still inpatient on March 27, 2003, the day of the raid. I was never in my home prior to the raid with any tubes in my arms, the other “sales” were on emergency room admissions unrelated to the illness I was operated on for. The police were unaware of that prior to their depositions and lied using information on my illness developed after the fact; my medical records bear this fact out. It should be easy to prove perjury. If the police made three “buys” with a “C.I. #62”, wouldn’t there be a trail of evidence? Trail of money used in the “buys”? Evidence of three bags of marijuana logged in to be produced at the time of discovery? Why was I, the target of the raid, never charged for the “sales” I made? Did they smoke the evidence?
Finally, though the police did return my family’s $850 taken in the raid, all our other property was destroyed, even though no order was given to do so. In fact, the District Attorney ordered our money and property returned years ago when all the charges against our family were dismissed. I don’t see any good police work here. Am I missing something? How do charges get brought against police officers that the system seems to want to protect?
These guys broke the law and put my whole family, grandchildren included, at great risk. They did much damage to our home and property as they broke the law. They chased us out of our home at a great cost to our family.
And all because one judge has the ability to say that a jury can’t hear my case, and because the police won’t reveal the name of the C.I., I can’t face my accuser.