#1 2009-07-17 14:16:05

Just got word from a very reliable source the George Coleman is being booked at the Wareham Police Station for allegedly intentionally hitting a woman with the Crime Watch vehicle.  Crime Watch vehicle was towed.

2009-09-08: Wall Street Journal on Wareham's Crime Watch

Last edited by billw (2009-09-09 01:40:16)

Offline

 

#2 2009-07-17 14:22:43

Someone needs to get over there ASAP and get a picture.

And of course get a copy of the report.

Offline

 

#3 2009-07-17 14:30:00

Someone should contact Steve Urbon too.

Offline

 

#4 2009-07-17 14:32:57

Is the woman ok?

Offline

 

#5 2009-07-17 14:36:45

I feel awful... if true there's a victim.... I never even thought of that!

Offline

 

#6 2009-07-17 14:47:43

BREAKING NEWS:

Word has it that the woman has alleged that Crimewatchman gave her a ticket, the woman felt the ticket was unfair so she called the real police, and then Crimewatchman hit her in the Crimewatchmobile and she believes this was intentional.  This all happened in front of the woman's very young kids.  Word also has it that the Crimewatchmobile has been towed and Crimewatchman was taken to the police station.

No word on the woman's condition.

Offline

 

#7 2009-07-17 14:51:31

Is the word that he hit her or hit her car?

Again, please someone call Steve Urbon. If true this needs to be in tomorrows Standard Times.

Offline

 

#8 2009-07-17 14:54:28

I'd say this woman has one HELL OF A LAWSUIT!

Just last week, three citizens, including two former and well-respected former Wareham police officers, went before the BOS to complain that Crimewatch was a problem the BOS had to look into, and the Chairman blew off their complaints.  They took and have steadfastly taken an approach of "Don't complain about Crimewatch, Crimewatch can do no wrong!"

Something tells me that Sweet Brucey's "the town has no liability for Crimewatch" theory is going to be PUT TO THE TEST!

Offline

 

#9 2009-07-17 14:54:47

HER!

Offline

 

#10 2009-07-17 14:58:06

i heard about the same thing that george coleman gave the young women a ticked which she thought was un fair , she called the real police , george got in the crime watch  car and ran her down in front of her 2 young kids , word has it that they were crying uncontrolably , dont know but she must have been taken to toby hospital , george is being booked rite now, i hope she gets  a good laywer and sews the crap out of the town and to think when a man complained about george a week ago  at selectman meeting , and bruce mutered , jesus .

Offline

 

#11 2009-07-17 15:02:06

BREAKING NEWS:

Word has it that there are as many as 6 or more witnesses and some took pictures, including a picture of the Crimewatchmobile being towed.

Offline

 

#12 2009-07-17 15:02:33

there wre several witnesses and pictures were taken.

Offline

 

#13 2009-07-17 15:05:30

The begining of the end!!

Offline

 

#14 2009-07-17 15:05:47

Oh my - my first thought was he couldn't be that unbalanced to hit anyone on foot, and must have hit her car.

Civil lawsuit certainly, against the town big time, unfortunately the police department may be included, and possibly Coleman personally enough to bankrupt him. But that would be for later.

Right now we need to know what he has been charged with.

This would be a criminal offense, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon (or something like that), depending how bad add with intent to do great bodily harm. Whatever, the charge will be reduced and there will be a plea bargain, so hopefully the initial charge would be as serious as the evidence justifies.

If all this is true I wonder if we will be seeing any other crime watch vehicle around town for the foreseeable future.

Offline

 

#15 2009-07-17 15:07:12

TBL

Once again the arrogance of the selectmen bite them in the ass. They demand an anal probe of the entire police department when criminals complain about being arrested but when countless good citizens complain about Coleman they are brushed off and Coleman is further encouraged to continue his behavior.

Offline

 

#16 2009-07-17 15:36:11

Maybe sweet brucie can be sued personally.  He is deliberately making decisions that are harmful.  It was brought to his attention that coleman has a temper and is abusing his power to give out tickets.  Sweet brucie basicly said , 'tough' that's the way we want it.

Offline

 

#17 2009-07-17 15:57:28

BREAKING NEWS: BAGEL BITING RAGBOY CAUGHT WITH EGG ON HIS FACE!!!

Keep an eye on Ragman's site, it has been changing as we all continue to blog details about the incident.

As of 3:30, Ragman had down that this was really over some kind of altercation Crimewatchman had with a man over his kids, and Ragman discredited claims about a woman being hit, saying that there were no reports about it with the EMS or Tobey Hospital.

Well Ragboy, let me help you write your paper!

BREAKING NEWS: 

Word has it that the woman and as many as 6 or more witnesses have been at the police station all afternoon giving statements.  The woman was apparently not injured to the point that she had to be taken to the hospital and was taken to the station.

The woman alleges that she attempted to pull into a space, that Crimewatch man yelled at her and acted rude and abusively, the woman alleges that she attempted to call the real police because she did not like Crimewatchman's behavior, she alleges Crimewatchman, while in his car, revved his engine a few times in an intimidating manner and then hit her.

MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT - THERE WILL BE A FULL SCALE EFFORT BY THE HYPOCRITE ELITE TO TRY AND SWEEP THIS UNDER THE RUG!

OK Ragman, go run along now and change your site again.

Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2009-07-17 15:59:16)

Offline

 

#18 2009-07-17 15:58:13

BREAKING NEWS SLAGER THE WORST JOURNALIST EVER TO WALK THE FACE OF THE EARTH.

TAKE A LOOK AT SLAGERS ARTICLE ON THE INCIDENT. FREE OR COURSE! THOSE WHO PAY SUCKERS!

HIS ARTICLE IS 100% WRONG ON ALL OF THE FACTS. HE TRIES TO DEBUNK THIS THREAD BY CALLING TOBEY. YES DUMBASS SHE WAS HIT WITH THE CRIME WATCH CAR AND WAS UNHURT. YOU CAN GET HIT WITH A CAR AND NOT BE HURT DUMBSHIT! DONT TRY TO SAY YOU NEVER WROTE ABOUT IT, I ALREADY HAVE A COPY OF YOUR TOTALLY FALSE ARTICLE!

Offline

 

#19 2009-07-17 16:01:49

The selectmen allowed this to go on. So the woman will probably sue the town .  Nice the selectmen again cost the taxpayers money with their  arrogance and poor decisions.

   Chief Joyce started an auxiliary force that would have been very closely monitored.  The selectmen shot it down because they couldn't have control over it. Yet they let this Yahoo   ( My opinion only )  do whatever he wants.  And for what some parking revenue? Short  Georgie's  temper seems to be up there with Brucie boy. 

   I need to move.....

  Hope the woman is OK.

Offline

 

#20 2009-07-17 16:03:28

Ragman, just remember, YOU were the one who said this guy is great and we're all evil power elitists for questioning his record.

Offline

 

#21 2009-07-17 16:13:24

First I hope the women and children are OK.

According to the BOS and ITA when I asked those questions.

Their answers were: the town does not own or pay for any portion of the vehicles.

The town has no liability for injury to crime watch volunteers or anyone they injure.

Their answers are on tape now I guess we will find out the truth. The BOS Chairman probably figured this would end up in court anyway so why deal with the issue.

BRuce will blame the ITA and the Police Chief when it hits the fan.

Offline

 

#22 2009-07-17 16:18:25

Where did this take place?

Offline

 

#23 2009-07-17 16:30:04

When concerns were raised about Crimewatch at the last(televised) BOS meeting. As many pointed out, Brucie brushed them off. To paraphrase, he tried to justify parking ticket revenue as the main advantage. He also stated something to the effect of .."I don't know what the big problem is with Crimewatch, they're not going anywhere," then rudely rushed the gentleman away while uttering "Jesus". I live in a part of town that doesn't see Crimewatch much. But after reading about this in the last few weeks, I noticed one of their "cruisers" driving down my street with it's lights on, for no apparent reason. Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't these guys, basically supposed to act as any concerned citizen would and report criminal activity they witness and inform the authorities? They are NOT an "authority" themselves, and to portray themselves as such, is criminal in itself.

Offline

 

#24 2009-07-17 16:30:27

While the facts come filtering through - and we find out all the detail, plus what if anything Coleman will be charged with...

a few side issues to consider

if the town doesn't own the vehicles, who are they registered to?

Was the town paid market value for them and by whom? If not who approved gifting them?

Are these crime watchers individually approved by the BOS and sworn in by the town clerk like auxiliary police and (I think) call fire fighters would be in other towns?

Do the crime watchers sign a document absolving the town of any responsibility, and accept personal responsibility, should they get injured or injure someone else? If so would this document always have legal standing?

How can the town think it's credible that they have no liability for civil action taken by the victim of a crime watcher who was exercising authority granted by the town?

If I was a lawyer I'd love to represent the woman who was hit by Coleman.

Offline

 

#25 2009-07-17 16:34:30

Savage Joes a Dbag wrote:

When concerns were raised about Crimewatch at the last(televised) BOS meeting. As many pointed out, Brucie brushed them off. To paraphrase, he tried to justify parking ticket revenue as the main advantage. He also stated something to the effect of .."I don't know what the big problem is with Crimewatch, they're not going anywhere," then rudely rushed the gentleman away while uttering "Jesus". I live in a part of town that doesn't see Crimewatch much. But after reading about this in the last few weeks, I noticed one of their "cruisers" driving down my street with it's lights on, for no apparent reason. Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't these guys, basically supposed to act as any concerned citizen would and report criminal activity they witness and inform the authorities? They are NOT an "authority" themselves, and to portray themselves as such, is criminal in itself.

I wrote elsewhere that if you are talking about the rooftop strobe lights they are probably breaking the law when they turn them on.

I don't see any legal reason they can use the lights which make them look very much like a police cruiser especially from the rear and front. It seems to me that while in those vehicles they are always impersonating police officers.

Offline

 

#26 2009-07-17 16:45:16

[\deleted

Last edited by urneighbor (2009-09-04 14:42:12)

Offline

 

#27 2009-07-17 16:46:49

I'm sorry I didn't clarify,neighbor, it was the lights on top I was referring to. Also, at the meeting Brucie basically stated that there was no liability to the town and/or waivers had been signed. I took it as a brush off answer that basically said "it's not your problem to worry about or decide if it's going to happen". Par for the course. There's a pattern everyone..

Offline

 

#28 2009-07-17 16:56:10

Maybe I should go back next Tuesday and ask tghe same questions....he probably would not recognize me to speak.

Offline

 

#29 2009-07-17 16:58:33

I just wanted to be sure. Regular (i.e. REAL) police, ambulance, fire all have rules about when to use lights and siren (and when not to). In Massachusetts the colors of the lights are set by law. Yellow is pretty standard for all kinds of vehicles which may represent a traffic hazard but never need them to get anywhere quickly.

Red and blue are for real emergency vehicles, the police here use the red and blue sometimes with white because not only do they often need to get somewhere quickly but they also need to be able to pull someone over.

The green is sometimes used for private security vehicles, such as mall police, but when flashing it can easily be mistaken for blue.

I saw the strobe lights being used at Little Harbor, absolutely no reason.

With their real looking but fake cruisers I have little doubt some or all of the crime watchers are getting a cheap thrill pretending to be police. I hope they don't speed or go through stop signs or red lights.

Offline

 

#30 2009-07-17 17:11:05

deleted by urn

Last edited by urneighbor (2009-09-04 14:42:37)

Offline

 

#31 2009-07-17 17:11:08

Searay240,
That was you? Well hello, and nice job! Sounds like Brucie could just refuse to allow you to speak, and citizens voices are heard at his behest. He must have let you speak out of the kindness of his heart last time.

Offline

 

#32 2009-07-17 17:40:58

When Mr. Coleman was at the courthouse, they were having difficulty finding a judge to come in. Not sure whether or not they were  successful.   If not, Mr. Coleman would be spending his weekend at Wareham PD. I'm sure the ST will have the latest info soon.

Offline

 

#33 2009-07-17 17:45:51

GWB

I saw the crime watch car on a flatbed heading down Onset Ave. towards Depot street this afternoon. Did not know why but did chuckle to myself. I got home and logged on and here it is. Thank you. I am not sure but It may have been a flatbed from Vaughn's Towing or Mark's towing. Would it not be cool to get a pic of that car on the impound lot. Glad to hear that no one was hurt. KARMA IS A BITCH!!!!!!! Have a nice night Mr. Colman :)

Offline

 

#34 2009-07-17 17:48:48

TBL

Because of the information control/distortion that is practiced by the selectmen the police department will not be able to issue a news release without approval by the selectmen puppet town administrator. So you can bet any official word from the PD will be very vague. News outlets contact police and fire departments all the time for information. The Wareham Police must be the only police department in the state that can't comment on incidents they deal with.  The last chief was suspended because the selectmen/ITA didn't like what he said. So now the current top cop cannot make an unauthorized statement unless he wants to pay the price.

Offline

 

#35 2009-07-17 17:49:22

Mark today down in your calendar.  It's the day the Hypocrite Elite became finished.

The BOS should resign immediately.  They ignored all the warnings.  They ignored multiple complaints.  They knew of Crimewatchman's background and stood by him anyway.  Sweet Brucey was dismissive and rude to complaints by three citizens, including two former police officers.  Sweet Brucey said just last week that the town has no liability for what Crimewatch does.  Sorry, you were repeatedly warned that is not true and you're undoubtedly going to find that out because it would surprise me greatly if this woman does not sue.

When the BOS gave Crimewatch the ability to write tickets, they allowed Crimewatchman to drive a makeshift police cruiser, then they gave them police authority on behalf of the town and they are incompetent morons if they think any different.  They, as our town leaders, made the town vouch for Crimewatchman, and their jugment was way off.  They put the town on the hook for a major lawsuit, and the hook is now being reeled in.

The Ragman should also resign immediately.  Citzens have been wondering aloud for a long time now if the BOS was wise to give authority to a man who was caught in a prostitution solicitation.  The Ragman has repeatedly deflected that criticism and demonized the critics as being evil people trying to bring down a noble volunteer. 

Earlier this year, Ragman said the bloggers were evil for bringing up "a misdemeanor charge of a Crimewatch volunteer, as if what happens in 1986 has any bearing on today."  He of course, neglected to say the charge was prostitution.  Then, just recently, he said the bloggers had accused Crimewatchman of a felony and that was not true.  Well, again, another Ragman "technical denial."  The bloggers have alleged prostitution solicitation, and the Ragman played a word game.

Sorry Ragman, but had you listened to this criticism, you could have broken the story about the prostitution incident and gotten this man removed as Crimewatch head, and perhaps today's incident would never have happened. 

Imagine, if you are this woman's lawyer - the BOS gave authority to a man that they knew had been caught soliciting a prostitute and they expected him to excerise the authority they gave him with sound judgment?

Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2009-07-17 17:53:28)

Offline

 

#36 2009-07-17 17:56:10

Yes that was me, I guess I hould change my name to Jesus.did not hear the comment only saw it on tape.

Our crime watch has issues, and they appear to be with the head guy.

I don't like the headquarters on Onset Ave in the middle of our main st.

However done right with good leadership that organization could be an asset to the town.

I do support the concept just not our model

Offline

 

#37 2009-07-17 18:03:10

BREAKING NEWS: Crimewatchman charged with assault and battery with a deadly weapon (to wit, a Crimewatchmobile).

Offline

 

#38 2009-07-17 18:12:20

BREAKING NEWS: Crimewatchman charged with assault and battery with a deadly weapon during townwide computer audit.

Offline

 

#39 2009-07-17 18:15:39

The computer audit comment was a nice touch to the story.

Offline

 

#40 2009-07-17 18:26:39

While I absolutely refuse to read the rag anymore, I'm sure ragboy will blame this whole incident on the hate bloggers. What else is new? The fact that people have been warning the bos that this program is not working including police officers, will be totally ignored.

I'm glad the woman is ok.

If the bos authorized crime watch to act as agents of the town by giving parking tickets, I believe that the town will be on the hook for the legal bills incurred by Coleman.  The town has indemnity insurance for such things. Of course, when she sues the town, we will get to pay twice. This is all speculation, of course. We'll have to see how it plays out.

This is an event that could have been avoided---jesus, as the grand poobah would say.

Watch for the ST story--fact not fiction and baseless speculation should be coming our way.

Offline

 

#41 2009-07-17 18:42:27

Wickedlocal has a small blurb so information about his dangerousness is getting out.

Offline

 

#42 2009-07-17 18:44:40

breaking news george coleman of crimewatch struck a woman with a crime watch vehicle during a town wide computer audit

Offline

 

#43 2009-07-17 19:44:49

QUOTH RAGMAN: "Coleman and the Crime Watch program have been a frequent target of attack by anonymous hate bloggers."

Yeah, because silly us, we thought maybe it was a bad idea for the town to give police authority to a man that was caught soliciting a prostitute, that, oh I don't know, maybe such an individual would not excerise good judgment while wielding such power and, oh what do you know?  WE WERE RIGHT!!!

Ragman, you should be ashamed of yourself.  This man was unfit for the job and you stood by him all the way anyway and look what happened.

Offline

 

#44 2009-07-17 19:54:14

I smell a ragman exclusive interview with coleman once he's out of the clink

Offline

 

#45 2009-07-17 19:56:34

commonsense wrote:

I smell a ragman exclusive interview with coleman once he's out of the clink

And I bet it will start out with the usual, "Coleman sat behind his desk at Crimewatch..."

Offline

 

#46 2009-07-17 20:06:41

FROM A COLUMN CURRENTLY ON THE RAG WEBSITE THAT'S BEEN UP FOR ABOUT A WEEK OR SO:

QUOTH RAGMAN: "For instance, there can be a legitimate debate over whether the Crime Watch volunteers should have the authority to write parking tickets. But the vicious personal attacks against Crime Watch director George Coleman are enough to make you sick. This man is a volunteer. He’s giving his free time to help support the town. But that hasn’t stopped some people from perpetuating vicious rumors that he was once convicted of a felony. That’s another outright lie. But these people don’t care. They’re just trying to send a message of fear and intimidation toward anyone who stands against them."

No Ragman, the bloggers said that he was convicted of soliciting a prostitute.  You've never confronted that, just done your best to spin it away.  It was a serious issue.  The BOS made a major error by thinking that someone with such a conviction would display good judgment while acting as a parking agent for the town.  That mistake will now undoubtedly lead to a lawsuit that will bankrupt the town.

What is an outright lie, Ragboy?  Either say he was not convicted of soliciting a prostitute (you won't because he was) , or take a stand and declare you don't think solicitation is a big deal, but stop ignoring the name of the crime - confront it and stop playing word games.  Nobody ever said the word "felony."  The bloggers said solicitation.

Thank God this woman was not badly injured, but it just as easily could have been a major tragedy.  And there are reports this happened in front of minor kids, which is a tragedy by itself.

The BOS are putting politics over public safety and they need to go.

Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2009-07-17 20:11:15)

Offline

 

#47 2009-07-17 20:12:36

Hamatron5000 wrote:

commonsense wrote:

I smell a ragman exclusive interview with coleman once he's out of the clink

And I bet it will start out with the usual, "Coleman sat behind his desk at Crimewatch..."

...unable to look up or crack a smile...

Offline

 

#48 2009-07-17 20:14:06

And you know what else?  BOS, instead of throwing away $51,000 or more of taxpayer money on a bogus computer witch hunt to silence criticism, try listening to it next time, and maybe things like what happened today won't happen again.

Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2009-07-17 20:14:45)

Offline

 

#49 2009-07-17 20:22:25

Interesting letter from Crime Watcher Christopher Gay in Wicked Local last month.

Here's another one from last year.

Gay was present at the incident today with Coleman and is quoted in the Slager article.

Offline

 

#50 2009-07-17 20:28:54

Been away, back,  exhausted and can hardly believe the news.  Just wondering ?? Did EMS go there?  Does anybody here know ?   This is strange even for Wareham Onset. ...

Offline

 

#51 2009-07-17 21:10:11

Hopefully one of the local news stations got wind of this for tonight's broadcasts..breaking news at 11: cop-wannabe  who got caught in prostitution sting now arrested for assault!!!..4,5,6,7,10, 12, Fox and NECN should be contacted...

Offline

 

#52 2009-07-17 22:09:34

Wow, let's all be grateful no one was injured.

Offline

 

#53 2009-07-17 22:36:28

NOW BRUCIE SAID LAST WEEK THAT THE CRIMEWATCH MEMBERS SIGN A WAIVER AND WILL HOLD UP IN A COURT OF LAW. I HOPE THIS IS TRUE BECAUSE IF SHE DECIDES TO SUE IM SURE ITS NOT THE CRIMEWATCH SHE GOES AFTER, ITS THE TOWN OF WAREHAM.

Offline

 

#54 2009-07-17 23:23:16

IHATESLAGER wrote:

NOW BRUCIE SAID LAST WEEK THAT THE CRIMEWATCH MEMBERS SIGN A WAIVER AND WILL HOLD UP IN A COURT OF LAW. I HOPE THIS IS TRUE BECAUSE IF SHE DECIDES TO SUE IM SURE ITS NOT THE CRIMEWATCH SHE GOES AFTER, ITS THE TOWN OF WAREHAM.

All a waiver like that could possibly do is prevent a Crimewatcher from dragging the town in as a third-party defendant if the Crimewatcher gets sued.

It is not binding in the least upon a plaintiff who wishes to sue the town for negligently authorizing a moron to perform  police functions.

Once again, Bruce proves why the sixth-rate law school he attends is in fact sixth-rate.

Offline

 

#55 2009-07-18 02:08:16

from the rag,
"I was in the area with my kids to take my kids for the free lunch they offer at the band shell," she said. "(Coleman) was parked and drove straight out. The woman put her hands and arms on the hood of the car to brace herself from falling."
   Jacobsen said Coleman then got out and began verbally berating the woman.
   "He was a very nasty man. I had never encountered him before. He accused her of being stupid," Jacobsen said. "He refused to call the police for her. He wouldn't give her his name. She said she didn't have a cell phone and he wouldn't give her his."
    A police source said Coleman did, in fact, make a call to the police, reporting that the alleged victim was acting "out of control." Coleman also requested police assistance. That call was taken by officer George Dionne and was recorded, as are all calls to police dispatch.
    Jacobson's friend Kimberly Lake, a Wareham resident who was with her son for the free lunch, said Coleman hit the woman as he was attempting to drive away. When asked if she knew Coleman previously, Lake said her husband used to be on the Board of Directors at Crime Watch and resigned after a disagreement with Coleman. Lake's husband now serves as a maintanance worker at the police station.
    According to members of Crime Watch, Donald Lake did not resign. He was voted off the board for failing to attend meetings."

---Sorry for the long quote, but it sounds like he's spinning it like there's a conspiracy of the bad men coming to get the good guys. I guess 'cause he knows Coleman and can get a quote from him(which says nothing).
He describes a witness(Jacobsen) and her friend, another witness(Lake) whose husband used to be on the board, but was bad so he got booted off. But he "serves" as a maintenance worker for the police now. So, Lake is discredited because of her husband and Jacobsen must be in on it because they're friends.What??? They are witnesses, this isn't a conspiracy, this wasn't staged. The guy "WORKS" at the police station, and formerly "served" on the board. And what does it have to do with it anyway. HELLO, maybe people were right and Coleman et al. are DOUCHE BAGS. OK, I'm better, a little.

Offline

 

#56 2009-07-18 02:20:50

I guess good things do happen to assholes like coleman!!

Offline

 

#57 2009-07-18 02:20:54

and another thing..Don't hate on the "anonymous hate bloggers", truth can come out when someone's not as worried they're identity will be revealed. You should know this. I think anonymous sources have revealed some pretty big NEWS stories over time. And not revealing your sources is soo moral of the journalist. As far as "hate", I guess that depends on your perspective.

Offline

 

#59 2009-07-18 06:53:44

Now, that's reporting!

Last edited by urneighbor (2009-09-04 14:42:58)

Offline

 

#60 2009-07-18 07:22:17

Hey Savage Joes,  It is exactly that suggestive spin that the "mouth piece" has been putting on stories for several years, which has created most of the turmoil in Wareham for far too long; like he's always got some keen insight and always insinuating some underlying conspiracy.  As more and more of us are finding out its all just manufactured BULLSHIT.  The sooner we all ignore him, the sooner he's gone and that day can't come soon enough.

Offline

 

#61 2009-07-18 08:07:43

It is starting to look like Ragman is working on a "Crimewatchman was targeted by the cops and the lady just tripped and fell on the Crimewatchmobile" defense.

Ragman, you're hysterical.  You were a cartoon character long before Bobo the Clown.

Offline

 

#62 2009-07-18 08:12:57

IT SEEMS RAGBOY IS TRYING TO DISCREDIT THE WITNESSESS THAT WERE ON SCENE. NOW RAGBOY DID YOU INTERVIEW THE FOUR OTHER WITNESSESS TO THE INCIDENT? ARE THEY ALL LYING? WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO DISCREDIT A WITNESS (WHO WAS OBVIOUSLY UPFRONT TO YOU TALKING ABOUT HER HUSBAND). THE HUSBAND WASNT THE WITNESS HIS WIFE WAS ALONG WITH NUMEROUS WITNESSESS WHO SAY THE INCIDENT. WHY DONT YOU DISCREDIT YOUR OWN WITNESS THAT HAD THIS VERSION OF THE INCIDENT

  According to Crime Watch volunteer Christopher Gay, Coleman had exchanged words with another man regarding the behavior of a group of elementary school-age children.
    “A gentleman who appeared to be with the kids came up to me and said ‘one of your men is harassing young children and ruining their day,’” Gay said. “There were two police officers parked in the vicinity and they came over.”
    Gay said he saw police lead Coleman toward one of the cruisers, where he was then placed under arrest.


WHERE DID THIS HAPPEN? WAS HE TALKING ABOUT AN INCIDENT THAT HAPPENED LAST WEEK OR SOMETHING. HOW CAN YOU CONFUSE THIS WITH SEEING SOMEONE STRUCK BY A CRIMEWATCHMOBILE?

Offline

 

#63 2009-07-18 08:35:46

So the ITA looks like he will be the fall guy. My question is has he halted current operations pending an investigation?

Offline

 

#64 2009-07-18 08:39:16

bbrady wrote:

It is exactly that suggestive spin that the "mouth piece" has been putting on stories for several years, which has created most of the turmoil in Wareham for far too long; like he's always got some keen insight and always insinuating some underlying conspiracy.  As more and more of us are finding out its all just manufactured BULLSHIT.  The sooner we all ignore him, the sooner he's gone and that day can't come soon enough.

I totally agree with bbrady. The obsession on this blog with ragboy is what is keeping him alive. Let it go folks.

With the July 30 meeting coming up (see "invitation" thread) something positive is coming from this blog. Let's also be credited with the ruination of the rag by NO ONE reading or responding to it. He thrives on us. Let it go--let him go--as much fun and amusement that he gives us, he is destroying the town, and if you engage him, he will have his much needed audience.

We have serious business to attend to---getting rid of the bos, the ITA, and the pain and suffering they have caused this town. We can do that through legal means. The ONLY way to get rid of ragboy is to ignore him. Please.

Offline

 

#65 2009-07-18 09:09:46

IF BOBO ATTENDS WILL WE HAVE TO HEAR ABOUT HOW HE KISSED HIS KIDS GOODBYE NOT KNOWING IF HE WOULD COME HOME THAT NIGHT. OH WAIT HE DOESNT GO HOME HE SLEEPS AT HIS OFFICE. FORGET IT

Offline

 

Board footer

warehamwater.com