Yes, I have taken Susan Moran to task for voting for the bad so-called “Police Reform Bill”, and for misleading by implying that our local police chiefs were in support of that Bill, when they are not. They hate that Bill, and so does every police officer, firefighter, and first responder in the Commonwealth. Your readers should know that this Bill takes police officers out of our schools and also prohibits them from investigating gang activities in our schools. How does that reform Public Safety? It doesn’t! I want our schools safe for our children, teachers, administrators and staff. This Bill does just the opposite!
This Bill also ends “Qualified Immunity” for police officers, fire fighters, first responders, and even school nurses. What does this mean? “Qualified Immunity” is akin to the “Good Samaritan Law” for Public Safety people under emergency circumstances, when there are only seconds to react and take action. If this so-called “Police Reform Bill” passes, good first responders can be sued for actions they take when rescuing people. For example, if a police officer pulls someone out of burning car to save their life, but their spine gets injured in the process, that officer could be sued. Ending “Qualified Immunity” doesn’t increase the accountability factor for bad cops. It only hurts every police officer, firefighter, and first responder in the Commonwealth. Why should we do that?
This newspaper thinks that they found a “gotcha moment” to take me out; but they are wrong. As your paper knows, and as your readers know, I cannot talk about my legal cases due to Client Confidentiality. However, I would like to point out the obvious. When a case is dismissed in Court, many times it is due to an out of court agreement. I am not sure if the newspaper was trying to mislead readers, is just uniformed of the process, or just plain doesn’t care because it distracts from their intended political purpose of this editorial. Furthermore, your editorial states that I could have turned down cases against bad cops. So, is this newspaper suggesting that I should have turned a blind eye to bad police, and a blind eye to justice? Where is the social justice in any of that?
I have a Law Enforcement background, which includes a U.S. Army Commission as a Lieutenant in the MPs. I know bad cops when I see them. They are far and few between, less than 1%. And so, are we to conclude that holding bad police accountable under the current law is not right; while Moran’s vote to allow good cops, (which are over 99%), to be sued over everything and anything is correct? This is the real hypocrisy!
For this newspaper to write such an obviously slanted piece reeks of desperation to bailout Susan Moran. Her vote for that so-called “Police Reform Bill” was atrocious, and that coming from someone who was a town official in Falmouth where just two years ago two police officers were shot in the line of duty. Thank God they survived. Her misleading statements about the police chiefs supporting this Bill made matters even worse. My support for the police is unwavering, and they know it. That is why police and firefighters are endorsing my candidacy. I am sure an apology from this newspaper will not be forthcoming, but I am still owed one nonetheless.
James R. McMahon, III
Candidate for State Senate
Plymouth and Barnstable District