Saturday, August 17, 2013

There's Blood On Your Hands Massachusetts

I am so angry about this and one of the nice things about blogging is I'm not subject to the political correctness that has infected this nation for far too long.

So, I'm going to speak my mind about this.

Jared Remy, 34 brutally and savagely murdered Jennifer Martel, 27 the mother of his 4 year old daughter in front of the little girl and several neighbors on Thursday, August 15.

This murder could have and should have been prevented.

Who is Jared Remy? He's the son of former Major League baseball player, Jerry Remy, who has been the play by play announcer for the Boston Red Sox on their NESN channel for many years.

Jerry Remy during his Red Sox playing days
Jerry Remy was an average player who played second base for the Red Sox and California Angels during the mid 70's and retired after the 1984 season. Remy is beloved in New England because he's a former Red Sox player and he was born and raised in Somerset, Massachusetts.

Remy, who is affectionately known as the RemDawg, is revered by Red Sox fans because he is a local guy, talks like a local guy, and has been associated with the Red Sox for over 40 years.

Remy also owns a restaurant, hosts a website called The Remy Report and has an online store.

His son Jared has a long criminal record of assaults dating back to 1998. This includes assault and battery charges against him with three different women, one of them being Jennifer Martel.

Jared Remy was employed by the Red Sox as a security staffer and was fired in 2009 in connection with an investigation by Major League Baseball involving steroids.

Take a look at what Jared Remy looked like back then:

As you can see, Remy was sampling his own wares and when you see what he looks like today, never stopped.

Here's what Remy looks like now at his arraignment:


Again, Remy is a large, powerful man more than capable of inflicting serious damage on just about anyone he wants. Remy is in fact so large, that when he was arrested was too big to be taken in a police cruiser. They had to call a wagon to take Remy to the Waltham Police station.

As you will see, Remy's had a history of having things swept under the rug. Here's a telling excerpt from the Boston Globe article when Remy was dismissed from the Red Sox for his involvement for selling steroids:

Remy, 30, said he believed the questioning, conducted in a Fenway Park conference room by MLB investigator Eduardo Dominguez, lasted about 15 minutes. It seemed to him a perfunctory exercise in damage control.

“They didn’t ask much at all; they wanted to make it disappear,’’ he said.

“Major League Baseball asked me, ‘Have you ever seen any players do steroids?’ ’’ Remy recalled. “I said, ‘No. no.’ . . . He said, ‘If you’re honest with me, nothing will happen to you.’ Next thing I know, I get fired.’’

Here's another excerpt from the same article:

A massively muscular man, Remy is unapologetic about having used steroids and proud of his knowledge of weightlifting. He can be seen striking bodybuilding poses in photos posted on his girlfriend’s Facebook page.

Remy has faced several assault charges, most recently in 2005, when he beat up a previous girlfriend. He acknowledges having made mistakes in his life, but said he would never take the legal risk of selling steroids.

Remy seems to be a poster boy for what is termed roid rage. His criminal record certainly reflects that and his reputation for being controlling and abusive paint a picture of a very dangerous man.

Of course, the Boston Red Sox and Major League Baseball wanted to distance themselves from this as far away as possible.

The Red Sox released this statement after Remy and another employee were dismissed:

“The Boston Red Sox worked with Major League Baseball’s department of investigations on matters involving the termination of two hourly employees, Alex Cyr and Jared Remy,’’ the statement read. “These activities, like all activities related to employee status or termination, are confidential.’’

Major League Baseball has had the stain of PEDs for decades and are still embroiled with many stars today who have either been suspended or face suspension. This is the dark side of not only MLB but all of pro and amatuer sports. MLB seems to be a target more than other sports because of its history and emphasis on numbers and records.

Which since the 90's have been a joke. You can go back to Jose Canseco, Mark McGuire, Rafael Palmiero, Sammy Sosa, Barry Bonds straight through to current players like Manny Ramirez, Ryan Braun and Alex Rodrigues.

MLB has been its own worst enemy as well:

The decision to promptly fire Cyr and Remy does underscore the league’s and team’s tougher attitude about performance-enhancing drug use, and stands in sharp relief to how baseball officials dealt with a similar incident in June 2000, when a Red Sox clubhouse worker was stopped by State Police on Blue Hill Avenue in Dorchester.

That employee was driving a car loaned to him by then-Sox utility infielder Manny Alexander. Police found steroids and syringes in the glove compartment of the Mercedes.

The punishment? Charges against Alexander were dismissed for lack of evidence. The clubhouse worker was reassigned to a maintenance job at Fenway.

Major League Baseball closed its investigation without determining who was responsible for the drugs and without interviewing Alexander.

Other sports, especially the NFL, do not face the scrutiny that MLB does which is laughable. But that's another subject for another time.

The point of all this is to show that Jared Remy has long been both a steroid user and an abuser, especially toward women:

Remy has a violent criminal history, including a total of 15 criminal charges since 1998, according to Waltham court records. He has been accused of assaulting five people – including four women – and was involved in at least three restraining orders, including one in which he was the plaintiff.

So how did Jared Remy with such a lengthy criminal record and an admitted steroid user avoid being in some sort of program or in jail?

My best guess is his father has many connections and used them to get his son out of the many jams he got himself into. This pattern of enabling Jared to walk away from his crimes has now come back to haunt Jerry Remy and his wife.

I've heard all the talk and read many articles that warn us not to implicate Jerry Remy and his wife because Jared is an adult and is responsible for his own actions.

Boston Herald  columnist  Joe Fitzgerald  wrote this gem today. Fitzgerald is a long time sports reporter who now writes pretty much irrelevant columns for the Herald.

Jerry Remy has certainly had it pretty rough for the past few years. A long time cigarette smoker, Remy has battled cancer and missed significant time from his broadcasting duties as a result. I certainly do not disparage Jerry Remy for this and I certainly can sympathize with his plight as I lost my dad to lung cancer back in 1999.

That said, Remy's medical issues do not let him off the hook with what his son has done. Fitzgerald ended his column with this:

Jerry Remy, the broadcaster, is fair game for scrutiny, just as Jerry Remy, the second baseman, was.
But Jerry Remy, the dad, deserves to be left alone right now.

What makes this murder so horrible is the fact that Jennifer Martel called police on Wednesday, August 14, because Jared Remy smashed her face into a bathroom mirror.

She took out an emergency restraining order against Jared Remy, but was asked by Remy's mother to remove the restraining order because it would "ruin his life".

Should we leave Jerry Remy and his wife alone after many sources have reported that Remy's mother begged Ms. Martel to remove the restraining order because it would "ruin his life"?

It gets worse.

Jared Remy was subsequently released on personal recognizance by authorities. The same guy who was sentenced to 81 days in Middelsex County Jail for assaulting another woman back in 2005.

Let that sink in. I would assume that when one is arrested, a background check would be run and I would assume that the Waltham Police saw that Jared Remy has a long criminal record of violence and abuse. But higher authorities intervened.

Remy was arrested for smashing Jennifer Martel's face into a bathroom mirror and is released on personal recognizance then returns the next night and brutally stabs her to death because she was "planning her escape".

So how did this monster get released on personal recognizance?

“On Wednesday, a [bail] request was made based on the information that we had on Wednesday,” said Middlesex District Attorney Marian T. Ryan. “Obviously and tragically, there is different information today, Friday morning.’’

Based on the information that they had on Wednesday they decided that Jared Remy was no threat to Jennifer Martel and released him.

15 years of criminal charges with a noted history of violence apparently wasn't enough to convince DA Ryan that Jared Remy was a ticking time bomb.

Let's see the press conference where DA Ryan explains her rationale for releasing Remy:

Start at 2:22 mark where District Attorney Ryan addresses releasing Remy:

"The bail recommendation on Wednesday was made based on the totality of the circumstances, the singular count in that case as well as conversations with investigating officers and Ms. Martel."

Jared Remy was released because his parents used their connections. I'm pretty sure that the DA's office wouldn't release most people with Remy's background.

To not look at Jerry and Phoebe Remy as part of why this happened is a huge mistake. If you look into the incidents with Jared it's hard not to question why he wasn't in jail after what happened Wednesday night when he first attacked Ms. Martel. Restraining order or not, the police have every right to detain a suspect if they feel he or she would be a threat. They certainly had more than enough evidence to do just that, but the DA's office overruled them.


Because they were asked to.

Let's look into the Remy family a little bit further:

In July of this year, daughter Jenna Remy, 28 was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, resisting arrest, wanton malicious defacement, and misdemeanor breaking and entering. She also kicked an officer twice, once in the buttocks and in the groin and had to be maced with pepper spray to be subdued.

August 2010 - Jordan Remy arrested for indecent assault and battery. This class act decided to follow a woman out of a bar and grab her crotch saying "You know you want it"

Jerry and Phoebe Remy have three children.
All three of them have been arrested for assault at one point in their lives.

I see all these comments saying it's not right or fair to implicate Jerry and Phoebe for the behavior of their adult children. Fair enough if it were one or two isolated incidents, but they have hit the trifecta, all three have engaged in criminal behavior which begs the question, why?

In Jared's case we can conclude that strings have been pulled especially on Wednesday of this week when the DA turned a blind eye the obvious.

Jennifer Martel should be alive today and her 4 year old daughter should be with her mother.

Because Jerry Remy used his influence and status to get his son off the hook and the DA gladly obliged, Jennifer Martel was brutally murdered and her daughter left without parents.

I don't care how you look at it, the State of Massachusetts, Jerry and Phoebe Remy have the blood of Jennifer Martel on their hands.

A case of "who you know" which is a way of life here in Massachusetts, cost someone theirs.

I hate that this happened and I do feel that both Jerry and Phoebe Remy would have never guessed that their son would go this far. But that's the problem. They were too blind to see what an animal Jared Remy really is when it was painfully obvious that he was more than capable of murdering a young woman.

RIP Jennifer Martel. You certainly did not have to die and that is the shame of it all.

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

The Curious Oprah Winfrey Handbag Situation

What are we to make of the recent allegations made by Oprah Winfrey about a brush with what she perceived to be racism in Switzerland?

Ms. Winfrey is a high profile person and certainly has enough wealth to buy pretty much anything she wants wherever she wants. Ms. Winfrey is also a high profile person politically and her words and actions (for better or worse) carry a lot of influence to many people.

The incident took place at a high end boutique named Trois Pommes in Zurich, Switzerland where Ms. Winfrey was attending the wedding of Tina Turner. The owner of the shop, Trudie Goetz, was also a guest at Ms. Turner's wedding.

From CNN:

She told Entertainment Tonight: "I was in Zurich the other day at a store whose name I will not mention. I didn't have my eyelashes on, but I was in full Oprah Winfrey gear. I had my little Donna Karan skirt and sandals, but obviously The Oprah Winfrey Show is not shown in Zurich."

"I go into a store and say to the woman, 'Excuse me, may I see that bag over your head?' and she says to me 'No, it's too expensive.'"

Winfrey says she asked again to see the bag -- a $38,000 crocodile skin number by Tom Ford -- and the woman again refused, saying, "No no no, you don't want to see that one, you want to see this one, because that one will cost too much and you will not be able to afford that."

Winfrey says she asked a final time to see the bag: "One more time I tried -- I said, 'But I really do just want to see that one,' and she said, 'I don't want to to hurt your feelings,' and I said, 'Ok thank you so much, you're probably right, I can't afford it and walked out of the store. Now why did she do that?"

Now I have my doubts that someone who is on commission would deny someone to look at a potential big ticket item unless they looked they crawled into the store from under a cardboard box. And I would certainly hope that Ms. Winfrey would be given to making up stories about being denied looking at an item. That said, it would appear as if Ms. Winfrey indeed might have tweaked the narrative to fit her agenda during the interview.

According to the CNN story, she didn't make a fuss:

"I could've had the big blow up thing and thrown down the black card and all that, but why do that?"

Because maybe nothing really happened?

Let's take a look at some more of Ms. Winfrey's comments as she described the incident in Zurich; The handbag incident came up during the interview when Ms. Winfrey was asked about being called the N word and told the interviewer:

"Racism for me doesn't show itself that way. Nobody in their right mind, unless they're a Twitter thug, is gonna call me the N word."

Ms. Winfrey also said that racism and sexism are exhibited in different ways for her:

"True racism is being able to have power over somebody else, so that doesn't happen to me that way. It shows up for me this way; It shows up that sometimes I'm in a boardroom or I'm in situations where I'm the only woman, I'm the only ah, African-American person within, you know a hundred mile radius. And I can see in the energy of the people there, they don't sense that I should be holding one of those seats. I can sense that. But I can never tell, is it racism or is it sexism. Often it's both. I mean the sexism thing is huge. the higher the ladder you climb, it gets huge. Because, just men are used to running things. So I don't have it in the same way other people have it.

Then she goes on to tell the story about the incident in Zurich.

Here is the interview with Entertainment Tonight:

The other side of the story comes from the clerk at Trois Pommes who is trying to maintain anonymity.

From an article in the Daily Mail, the clerk was quoted:

'I wasn't sure what I should present to her when she came in on the afternoon of Saturday, July 20, so I showed her some bags from the Jennifer Aniston collection. 'I explained to her the bags came in different sizes and materials, like I always do. 'She looked at a frame behind me. Far above there was the 35,000 Swiss franc crocodile leather bag.  'I simply told her that it was like the one I held in my hand, only much more expensive, and that I could show her similar bags. 'It is absolutely not true that I declined to show her the bag on racist grounds. I even asked her if she wanted to look at the bag.  

'She looked around the store again but didn't say anything else. Then she went with her companion to the lower floor. My colleague saw them to the door. They were not even in the store for five minutes.'

She emphatically denied ever saying to Winfrey: 'You don't want to see this bag. It is too expensive.  You cannot afford it.'

The saleslady went on: 'This is not true. This is absurd. I would never say something like that to a customer. Really never. Good manners and politeness are the Alpha and the Omega in this business. 'I don't know why she is making these accusations. She is so powerful and I am just a shop girl.  'I didn't hurt anyone. I don't know why someone as great as her must cannibalize me on TV.  'If it had all taken place as she claimed, why has she not complained the next day at the wedding of Tina Turner with Trudie Goetz, my boss? She was there also at the Turner wedding as a guest. I don't understand it.

'I spoke to Oprah Winfrey in English. My English is okay but not excellent, unfortunately. 'I didn't know who she was when she came into the store. That wouldn't have made any difference if I had. 'We work really hard to greet all the people who come into the store with the same level of respect and treat them all equally.
'If someone asks me whether he or she can see an article, I always present these. Because that person is a potential buyer. And my job is to sell it. 'I'm glad if I can sell an article. It is a reward for me, if I can sell a nice piece. This means that I'm good at my job.'

She has worked in the store for five years, says 50 per cent of the clientele come from abroad and that a bag costing nearly £25,000 is sold 'only a few times a year.' Asked what she would say to Oprah now she added: 'I would apologize and say it was all a  misunderstanding. I surely did not intentionally want to insult Ms. Winfrey. I hope this nightmare ends soon.'

In the ET interview, Ms. Winfrey said she was alone. The shop clerk said she was with a companion. Here is a link to an interview the clerk did with a German news source (page can be translated)

From the interview, the clerk seemed to think than Ms. Winfrey was accompanied by a bodyguard:

What exactly happened when Oprah Winfrey came in your business?

She came on Saturday 20 July in our boutique. It was in the afternoon, just a normal day. Oprah Winfrey had a friend there, maybe it was her bodyguard, I do not know. He has certainly held up the door for her.

So if Ms. Winfrey came into the shop with someone who the clerk assumed might be a bodyguard, would it make any sense for her to deny showing her an expensive item? 

Doesn't make sense to me.

So what we have here are two different accounts of the incident:
  • Ms. Winfrey claims she was alone in the store and the clerk flatly refused to show her the handbag.
  • The clerk claims Ms. Winfrey was accompanied and she was showing her similar bags to the one she asked about. Bear in mind also that the clerk admits that she does not speak English as well as she'd like.

Going back to the ET interview, Ms. Winfrey is talking about the perception of racism and sexism to the interviewer. This was all in response to a question about Paula Deen admitting to using the N word and the interviewer asking Ms. Winfrey if she had ever been called the N word. Ms.Winfrey tells of how nobody would ever dare be racist to her face but in her case, it is done more subtly.

It appears to me that Ms. Winfrey got her nose out of joint because the clerk did not recognize her. She even mentions this in the interview that "it's obvious The Oprah Winfrey Show is not shown in Zurich"

How dare they not air her show in Zurich?

She would also have us believe that this clerk who has worked in a high end boutique in Zurich and also worked in Italy in a major boutique has never encountered a wealthy black woman.

I think Oprah was on her high horse during the interview and embellished the story a little bit. She is now backtracking about the story:

"I think that incident in Switzerland was just an incident in Switzerland. I'm really sorry that it got blown up. I purposefully did not mention the name of the store. I'm sorry that I said it was Switzerland, I was just referencing it as an example of being in a place where people don't expect that you would be able to be there."

Again, she mentions that "people don't expect that you would be able to be there"

Ms. Winfrey got caught making the story out to be more than it really was because the clerk, who referred to being on commission and has enough experience with wealthy customers, seems as if she would be smart enough to qualify a customer such as Winfrey. 

It's also important to note that the store is located in a ritzy area and it would be safe to presume that the clerk would have noticed that Ms. Winfrey was an American and also that she was wealthy enough to shop in such a store.

Oprah talks about perception; perception of racism, perception of sexism. Every person can feel some sort of sizing up and scrutiny if they want in any situation. It's human nature. People are constantly analyzing each other during every encounter. Anyone can perceive that another person is looking down at you or feeling like you don't measure up if you really want to. It all comes down to how secure you are and how much you want to guess what someone else is thinking.

Good luck with that. It's silly to worry about what you think someone else thinks of you. And, there's a really good chance you might be dead wrong.

I really find it hard to believe that a salesperson with 5 years experience in a high end boutique in Zurich would tell any customer that they cannot afford an item. I would be shocked to hear a clerk in a JC Penny tell a customer that. It doesn't make sense.

And she still has her job.

This is not a handbag
Oprah Winfrey should be more careful about her anecdotes, she is very influential and her words can create big issues where there aren't.

I don't think that Oprah thought that this would become the story it eventually did. She got caught making a mountain out of a molehill.

Be careful what you say
Ok then


Apparently Oprah Winfrey really thinks way too much of herself. She is now, as they say doubling down on the racism claim. But again, her comments are more telling.

In an exclusive interview with Blick, Ms. Winfrey once again steps in it:

(Note: the website has been translated from German to English)

In the U.S., blacks have to deal daily with racism. Can it be that you have particularly sensitive in Zurich?

No! Although I do not know any black man who was not stopped or traced ever because of his skin color from the police, but in women it's different. What I experienced in Switzerland, is my only happened once before in my life. I did not accuse Switzerland it. It was a single incident. One incident, experience the everyday people with black or brown skin color. However, it was unusual that happened to me. Believe me, usually rejoice seller when I get them into the business. It is very unusual that I'm not literally dragged into a boutique. Outside of the window, dozens press the nose flat to watch me while shopping.

And this time?

I was the only person in the store. I had specially dressed me because I know that it can get very snobbish in this kind of stores. The first thing people pay attention on what clothes you are wearing. Therefore I have a Donna Karan outfit chosen and even washed my hair. So they do not think of me as some homeless people who got lost in her shop.

And then what happened?

The woman did not want to jerk the bag that I just wanted to look at me. The effort it was too big, because they did not come off so easy. Then she told me that the bag was simply too expensive. And I said: "But I want to see them anyway." Instead, it has presented me cheaper bags.

Your reaction?

I said: "Okay, thank you very much! But I really want to see the others."She still held back the cheaper me. To be honest, I've only just found out how much these damn pocket costs. You know what? The woman was right: I would not have bought the thing - too expensive!

$ 38,000!! I would have fainted when I saw the price tag.

Apparently, Ms. Winfrey was put off by the lack of dozens of people pressing their noses flat to watch her shop.

She admitted that the price tag was too high. Perhaps the clerk knowing the price was more interested in trying to sell her something with a more reasonable price?????

That's what commissioned sales people do, size you up and try to steer you toward what they think you will actually buy.

Of course Oprah Winfrey can afford the $38,000 handbag, but would she actually buy it? Her comments indicate the answer is a definitive NO. And the sales clerk likely knew that she wouldn't bite so she steered her toward what she thought would be more palatable.

It appears that Ms. Winfrey is using this incident to make her appeal to those who in her words "what people of black or brown color experience daily".  She's a billionaire who is recognized the world over and I'm sure treated better than 99% of the people in the world regardless of her gender and her skin color. Her story holds no water. Anyone who is serving on a board of directors like she mentioned certainly knows who she is and likely could care less about her gender or skin color. It's all about power and prestige at that level and Oprah Winfrey knows that. She is just trying to make herself out to be a victim where there's no crime. She's trying to make herself a sympathetic figure to those who actually do experience racism and prejudice.

The shop owner, Trudie Goetz sums it all up quite nicely:

"I don't know why she talked of racism.  I am sorry, but perhaps she is being a little over-sensitive here.  Maybe she was somewhat offended because she was not immediately recognized in the store."


Thursday, August 8, 2013

Finally Some Left Lane Common Sense!

Well, the State of New Jersey is getting it right.
We've written about left lane losers here and here
New Jersey is cracking down on motorists who stay in the left lane.
Gov. Chris Christie has signed into law a bill that raises the penalties for violating the state's keep-right law from $50 and $200 to between $100 and $300.
In addition, the bill requires that a person who commits the offense to be subject to an additional $50 surcharge.
Motorists in New Jersey are required to stay in the right lane unless they are passing slower traffic.
The bill's sponsors say staying in the left lane creates a dangerous situation for motorists.
The state estimates that it will raise more than $400,000 a year in fines. Some of that money will go toward signs warning drivers to stay right.
Under the bill trucks may be driven for up to one mile in the farthest left lane when preparing to turn left or when entering or leaving the road from the left lane. The amendments also specify that “emergency conditions” include poor visibility, snow, accidents, or the presence of emergency vehicles.
More on the story here

Bravo New Jersey!!

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

A Case for Immigration and Welfare Reform All Rolled Into One

Vivencia Bellegarde, 25, of Everett Massachusetts managed to make a case for both immigration and welfare reform in one fell swoop at 3:13 am Monday morning, August 5.

Bellegarde is accused of drunk driving and forcing a Boston Globe delivery truck off Route 93 and sending it crashing 40 feet off the highway to the road below. The driver, Paul J. Healy, Jr. suffered multiple injuries in the crash. Thankfully, Healy is listed in fair condition which is amazing considering the fall he took.

Here's a video taken from a traffic camera

Let's just take some excerpts from The Boston Herald and The Boston Globe and let them speak for themselves.

From The Boston Globe story:
A woman whose car allegedly struck a Boston Globe delivery truck and sent it plummeting off Interstate 93 on Monday swore at a trooper, threatened him with a voodoo curse, and said she didn’t care about the seriously injured driver, a State Police report on the crash said.
Vivencia Bellegarde, 25, of Everett told a trooper that she did not care about hitting Paul J. Healy Jr.’s truck because he wasn’t dead, saying all she cared about was smoking a cigarette, according to the report.
From The Boston Herald story:
A Cadillac-driving OUI suspect — charged with running a Boston Globe delivery truck off Interstate 93 and onto the Leverett Connector — was carrying three EBT cards, mocked a cop “for paying for food when she gets it for free” and threatened to put a voodoo curse on him, according to a police report.
“I questioned her as to why she had other peoples (sic) EBT cards and she 
began screaming that I was a ‘dumb (expletive)’ for paying for food when she gets it for free,” trooper William Koko­cinski wrote of Vivencia 
Bellegarde, 25, of Everett, noting she had her own electronic benefits transfer card and also the cards of two other people.

Both stories confirm that Bellegarde swore at the trooper who arrested her, called him a racist and had 3 EBT (Electronic Benefits Transfer) cards in her possession. Only one of the cards were issued to her. She was also driving a 2006 Cadillac DTS, which according to could be valued at about $10,0000-12,000.

(We've addressed EBT in a previous story here)

Now a $10,000 or $12,000 car is not outrageous by any stretch of the imagination for someone to drive who might be at a lower income level, BUT a Cadillac DTS for someone who is unemployed and on benefits who proudly proclaims that she gets her food for free, sends another message:

2006 Cadillac DTS Performance 4dr Sedan
Not a bad ride

 More from the Herald:
Bellegarde’s driving record
 includes 10 suspensions, many for failing to pay citations. Last year, her license was suspended for 30 days in connection with a first-offense drunken-driving charge in Lincoln from September 2011. Her license will be suspended for three years because she refused a Breathalyzer test in Monday’s crash, according to the Registry of Motor Vehicles.
A real class act, this one

Bellegard is quoted in the Herald story as telling Massachusetts State Trooper William Kokocinski to "Google her name and find out who I was (expletive) with".

Well, let's see what a Google search turns up. Of course, the actions from Monday have rocketed up the charts, but there is one interesting link:

The site is called GuiltByAssociation.

MENSA members need not apply looks like yet another in the growing line of vacuous social media sites where numbskulls post photos and make themselves look even more stupid than they are. Which is quite an accomplishment.

Bellegrade, according to the trooper's statement is a native of Haiti. I'm sure she went through all the proper channels of immigration to come here and not work and receive benefits.

 I'm sure that alcohol fueld Ms. Bellegard's bravado by her actions and words, but isn't it interesting that she gave us these parting words of wisdom:

She told Trooper Kokocinski that "she was coming for all you white [expletives].