– News and commentary about Quincy from Quincy Quarry News.
Quincy Police Department Detail Double Dipper Trial: Do You Feel Lucky?
The trial of the alleged double and sometimes triple dipper hit its seven day of testimony.
From the perspective of the Quincy Quarry reporter covering the trial, about the only ones getting lucky on the seventh day of trial in Courtroom Thirteen of the Federal Courthouse in Boston were the prosecution team members as they continue to pound away on the alleged Double Dipper with all manner of heavy evidence.
Then again, as this trial also concluded on this its seventh day of hearings, there was thus some respite for the defense even if the mercy of a technical knockout is not possible in a federal court fight
In any event testimony for the seventh day of the trial commenced with concluding the second day of testimony by an officer as regards primarily events involving a stint of time involving motorcycle training school and which the prosecution alleges involved at least double dipping by the alleged Dipper.
Also testifying was a Quincy Police Department Sergeant who was for a time supposedly the second in command of the Quincy motorcycle unit as well as at the same time subordinate to the alleged double and sometimes triple-dipping Quincy Police Department lieutenant.
During the sergeant’s questioning by the prosecution, he detailed the alleged Dipper to be a control freak, erratic in his actions, secretive, often nowhere to be found as well as volatile.
In particular, the sergeant addressed how after one particularly volatile outburst by the alleged Dipper in front of the church while they were on out on a funeral detail, the sergeant shortly thereafter called his union rep to complain, asked to be transferred out of the unit and quickly was transferred out ASAP as well as took a few days off to chill.
Several other points addressed by this witness were also telling.
One was how the alleged Dipper reached out to bother the sergeant via a telecommunication contact on seemingly standard sorts of departmental paperwork matters while the sergeant was both off duty as well as on his honeymoon.
Another was that out of the blue the alleged Dipper imposed a unit policy that no more than two members of the motorcycle unit could be working out in the police department’s gym at a time during their regular shifts; after all, how many people are even allowed to work out while at work unless they are professional athletes, a professional dancers or other sort of physically demanding performer?
Most importantly to the prosecution, however, surely was how the sergeant detailed how the alleged Dipper made it clear to the sergeant that he was to never – ever – touch the duty roster database as regards the alleged Dipper’s time on or off the clock unless specifically told to do so.
The final defense witness was an analyst who had reviewed the records. She identified over 20 incidents of apparent double and triple dippings, documented the alleged overlaps, summarized her findings in a graphic presentation as well as then conservatively projected the total amount allegedly embezzled by the alleged Dipper for the incidents cited in the federal indictment against him.
Conversely, during cross examinations of the witnesses by the defense, it did not appear that it undercut any of the prosecution witnesses’ testimony offered on the final day of the trial.
In fact, it would not be of any great surprise to this reporter if the cross examination by the defense of much of the testimony offered by all of the prosecution’s witnesses during the course of the entire trial only bolstered the views of the jury in ways not favorable to the defendant.
Conversely, the defense called only one witness for the defense and she is a law school intern who works in one of the defense attorney’s office.
Her testimony was based on a review of just two of the at least three key sets of separate information that can usually discern if double or triple dipping probably occurred.
Per her findings, she identified a considerable number of possible dipping incidents by a number of other members of the Quincy Police Department.
However, as it is impossible to set a plane in place absent three points in space, neither is it possible to make a compelling argument with but two of the at least three necessary sets of records.
More importantly, the other possible dippers s were not on trial and thus their but possible misdeeds are of little consequence when it comes to presenting a viable defense argument for the defendant.
And as for closing arguments, the prosecution continued to land heavy body blows upon the defendant.
Conversely, the defense continued to argue a defense strategy that others were also dipping as well as that he was a victim of politics who had thrown under a bus to protect the Police Chief and his brother-in-law the Mayor of Quincy from a potential scandal in the weeks leading up to a local mayoral election.
While both of these points made by the defense counsel are fraught with arguable veracity, they do not offer up a viable rationale to find the defendant not guilty other than via a most implausible finding of jury nullification.
In closing as regards the trial coverage, while the Quincy Quarry has often noted throughout its coverage that it is a fool’s task to endeavor to read the sentiments of a jury, the ever growing legions of loyal Quincy Quarry readers should not be surprised if the jury’s deliberations are relatively quickly concluded when the jury members return to the jury room on Monday.
And finally, one should not be surprised if more indictments of others follow if the alleged Dipper is found guilty as charged.