Capitan officer's misconduct hearing Friday - Ruidoso News

[Right on]

RN or RNot wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, thank you, and while we are making requests, can you please put an article in the RN about the upcoming Sedarwall trial on the 20th in Sandoval County. There is a lot of speculation, and a newspaper is supposed to bring us THE NEWS, right?

Yeah. Inquiring minds want to know.

[Not JFK]

Thank you Mr.Morris, we apprecitate the info, but we are way ahead of you. And my understanding is the resolution of this case is not until at least December. Is the information we have wrong? And before miss pinky tells me I am always wrong, tell her I am not playing her game. I will deal with facts and articles, not her nonsense.

[Herme Lenotre]

Michael Morris wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually you should have a problem with this if you have any respect for the law.
The Code of Judicial Conduct is clear on the matter. At NMRA 21-200(b) the following is found:
"A judge shall not testify voluntarily as a character witness."
21-200 is titled "Impartiality". In fact the mere fact that the judge did this shows him to be biased on the record. In legal parlance this judge has been recused since he first held this bias. Certainly any actions he takes in his court from this point forward that include this officer are without jurisdiction.
Those of you who wish to see the judge disciplined for his actions need merely inform the Judicial Standards Commission that this judge did indeed testify as a character witness.

I have infinite respect for the law, but I am not an attorney. This wasn't a criminal hearing, if that makes any difference.

[Michael Morris]

Herme Lenotre wrote:

<quoted text>I have infinite respect for the law, but I am not an attorney. This wasn't a criminal hearing, if that makes any difference.

Makes no difference. The upshot of the prohibition is so that a judge not lend the credibility of the judiciary to an individual.

In this case, if the basic facts are correct in the story, it appears the high and mighties of Capitan have joined together to support a cop who lied after being convicted. Perhaps that is the real story to come of this.

[Herme Lenotre]

Lied after being convicted?
What?

[Michael Morris]

Herme Lenotre wrote:

Lied after being convicted?
What?

From the story:

"According to the Department of Public Safety Misconduct Report, the NMLEA received information that Officer Sean V. McGarry, 40, had been arrested and convicted by a special court martial on Oct. 5, 2007, while serving in the U.S. Coast Guard."

That would be the convicted part.

"The report alleges that McGarry failed to disclose the information about his arrest when he applied to the Certification Waiver Program. He did so by marking the box "no" in response to the question, "Have you ever been arrested?" and "Have you ever been convicted of a crime?""

That would be the lying part.

[New York Minute]

This is all too vague. Most people don't have a true grasp on military policing principals. What is it he was said to be convicted of? Being gone a day sans permission? That's the story I heard and while it will get you court martialed, it is not a real time offense.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Not JFK]

Not vague at all. Read the report, NY Minute. He was not "gone for a day". It is specific. You are wrong. And yes, Mr. Morris, the "mighties" of Capitan did appear to band together to the dismay of Capitan. It is a shame that one bad apple caused such heartache for their town. Let's hope that Santa Fe gets it right and isn't blinded by all the foolishness.

[New York Minute]

If it is specific, then you too, be specific. Isn't that part of a debate? You must stop alluding too mystical panthers and whimsical bands of people and be specific. Assuming that you of course, have the specifics.

[Buck]

The only way to have a factual discussion on this topic is to obtain reports of the events from another source than the RN. Carter's reports are clearly biased against McGarry and the Village of Capitan elected officials. Considering the known fact that the Review Board in Santa Fe let McGarry stay on the job for the last 6 months, there must be some evidence he presented that is exculpatory.

[Not JFK]

Read the report. It is specific. Santa Fe is not the one to pull him off the job while under investigation. That is up to the Village of Capitan, who failed to follow their own policy, which btw, also shows their bias in favor of this officer. They should have removed him until the case is resolved. If he was free of the charge for the past six months, why did Santa FE pursue it?

[Not JFK]

By report , I meant the Coast Guard Report. Not the RN report.

[New York Minute]

So are you suggesting that in a town such as Capitan, the police offers are not protected under NAPO or unions? If there was any reason for him to be off the job, he would have been off the job; suspended with pay; and then you'd be kvetching about that too!

[Not JFK]

Read the policy, it is there. At least off the street, with pay or not, would have shown good faith on the part of the Capitan officals. Not abiding the Village policies, and being witnesses for him at his hearing,shows bias and improprieties in so many ways. I hope the good citizens of Capitan take them to task for it, regardless of the outcome of the hearing.

bw: What NAPO or union is there in Capitan?I would like to contact them.

[Michael Morris]

Did it say in the questions anything about the severity of the offense or just as stated in the paper?

[New York Minute]

Sweet Jesus, and just what would you say, not JFK? That you are still steaming about a speeding ticket you received 4 years ago and you feel that Sean gives you dirty looks when you pass him on the highway?

[Not JFK]

Sorry no ticket here. BTW, was Sean in Capitan 4 years ago? And sweet!,thanks for the info on Sean giving me dirty looks, that is info I can definetly use.

Mr. M , I guess you would have to see an app to answer your question.

(and still waiting for an answer to my question.)

[Herme Lenotre]

Not JFK wrote:

Sorry no ticket here. BTW, was Sean in Capitan 4 years ago? And sweet!,thanks for the info on Sean giving me dirty looks, that is info I can definetly use.
Mr. M , I guess you would have to see an app to answer your question.
(and still waiting for an answer to my question.)

Oh seriously, did anyone ever tell you, you sound a whole lot like Sunny? So paranoid. Helter Skelter. Booooo!

[Not JFK]

Herme Lenotre wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh seriously, did anyone ever tell you, you sound a whole lot like Sunny? So paranoid. Helter Skelter. Booooo!

Your multiple personalities are the only ones who keep telling me I am or am like someone else...lol. NOT!!!!! And not paranoid. Now, back to the subject, where is the article exonerating Sean? This is his thread and I am curious. Anybody?

[Lexi D Krepps]

Sorry NotJFK, so sorrrryyy..
You are going to be soooooo disappointed.
And then angry. And in denial. And then back to being angry. I'm so sorry to think of your extreme disappointment (and no doubt the accompanying feelings of betrayal combined with a lil' bit of shock & awe)