A city priest crossed into East Haven to document what he called systematic and sometimes violent police harassment of Latinos — only to find himself arrested and his camera confiscated.
As the head of a parish with a growing population of newcomers from Latin America, Manship has been an outspoken advocate for Ecuadorians and other immigrants.
The priest is Father James Manship, pastor of the Saint Rose of Lima church in Fair Haven. He is scheduled to appear in New Haven’s State Superior Court Wednesday morning in connection with his arrest by East Haven police.
The priest’s advocacy work has recently extended across the nearby border into East Haven, where Latino business owners say that East Haven police have been targeting their customers for harassment. The business owners said that Latino customers are afraid to come to their shops, for fear of being threatened and ticketed by police officers.
[...]
On the evening of his arrest, at around 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, Feb. 19, Father Manship walked into My Country Store, a convenience store in East Haven run by Ecuadorians. Inside, the police were removing over 60 expired license plates that had been hung as decorations in the store. The license plates were government property, the officers had said, and they were confiscating them.
Manship entered the shop, took out a digital camera, and began videotaping the East Haven police officers who were removing license plates from a wall in the rear of the store.
The officers immediately ordered Manship to stop videotaping, seized his camera and put him under arrest, according to Manship. Within minutes of his arrival, everyone in the store fell silent as Father Manship was led out in handcuffs. He was charged with interfering with a police officer and creating a public disturbance.
[...]
After the police arrested the priest, they noticed that the store was equipped with security cameras. Elio Cruz, a leader in New Haven’s Virgen Del Cisne Ecuadorian community, was in the store that night. “When [the police officers] realized there was videotaping from My Country Store, they went crazy,” Cruz recalled later. “They said it was illegal and they tried to grab the computer.”
Now, here's the police's account of arrest from Hugh Keefe, criminal defense attorney who’s representing the East Haven Police Department (and Jimmy Dyer and James Galante's BFF)
According to the Officer David Cari, Keefe said, Officer Dennis Spaulding had approached Father Manship when he entered the store, advising him to keep his distance from the police. Spaulding had reportedly given Manship a similar warning earlier in the week.
Manship allegedly walked toward the police with an “unknown shiny object cupped in his hands.” Manship stopped and “fully extended his hands” towards the officers. Officer Cari reported that he felt unsafe. He asked Manship if he was holding a video camera, asked him to reveal what was in his hands. Manship reportedly didn’t answer.
[...]
“When you have something in your hand and the police ask you a simple question, common sense dictates that you answer that question,” attorney Keefe said.
Father James Manship released video footage Thursday that contradicts an East Haven police report justifying his arrest.
[...]
Manship and his supporters released the footage at a press event Thursday at the St. Rose of Lima Church in Fair Haven.
The video, taken by Father Manship (pictured), shows the seconds leading up to his arrest.
The footage appears to contradict a claim made by the East Haven police department in a police report that was withheld until 13 days after the incident. The police report, David Cari, one of two arresting officers, states that he didn’t know what the New Haven priest was holding. He wrote that he saw an “unknown shiny silver object” that Manship had “cupped” in his hands, and was afraid for his safety. Read the police report here.
The footage clearly shows that the arresting officers knew that Manship was holding a camera, not an “unknown shiny silver object.”
In the video, the Officer Cari twice refers to the object as a camera.
“Sir what are you doing? Is there a reason that you have a camera on me?” says Cari, in the video.
[...]
In direct contradiction of Cari’s claim, the video from Manship’s camera shows Officer Cari twice verbally identifying the “silver object” as a camera.
“Sir what are you doing? Is there a reason that you have a camera on me?” says Officer Cari, in the video.
“I’m taking a video of what’s going on here,” Manship replies.
“Well, I’ll tell you what, what I’m going to do with that camera,” Officer Cari says, as he walks around a shelving unit to approach the priest.
Who's telling the truth? I think you know that answer.
Morale of the story...the videotape will always tell the story. In this case, the East Haven police's account of the incident is basically a joke by the fact that the video DIRECTLY contridicts the arresting officer's account of the incident.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.