Imagine. A little corruption to cover up a crime. Wait…I remember a county attorney that was in an accident and it was covered up too…right in Cloquet.

Trooper Arrests Judge’s Daughter Then Command Staff Alters Report To Remove Evidence

SnarkyCopby

edited


After a judge’s daughter was arrested for crashing her vehicle while impaired and in possession of heroin, senior command staff altered the report.

Worcester, MA – After a trooper arrested a judge’s daughter for crashing her car while allegedly high on drugs, and in possession of heroin, it was discovered that evidence, in the form of a quote, was removed from the police report by senior command staff.

Turtleboy Sports broke the story, which details some of the allegations about the behavior of the command staff.

The arrest occurred on October 16 at around 7:40 pm, after Trooper Ryan Sceviour arrived at a collision scene.

The Trooper determined that he had probable cause to arrest Alli Bibaud for driving under the influence of drugs, and being in possession of heroin.

When she was arrested, Bibaud said, “Do you know how many people I had to blow to get that?” according to Turtleboy.

Drug Recognition Expert Trooper Ally Rei conducted an evaluation, according to Turtleboy, and submitted a report with the quote about how Bibaud acquired her drugs.

The reason that the quote was included is obvious to anybody with any law enforcement training: it’s evidence.

Vulgar statements are evidence of impairment, and her statement also acknowledges ownership of the heroin, and heads off the infamous “these aren’t my pants” excuse.

Turtleboy cites anonymous sources in making allegations involving Bibaud’s father, Judge Tim Bibaud, as well as District Attorney Joe Early, saying that they were involved in the quote being removed from the report.

Blue Lives Matter has only been able to confirm that the quote was removed by senior command staff, according to Massachusetts State Police spokesman Dave Procopio.

“It is not uncommon for report narratives to be revised. Usually it is handled at the level of a trooper’s immediate supervisor, i.e. usually a sergeant or a lieutenant. The trooper’s supervisor did not do so with this one so when it came to the attention of the colonel and senior command staff they did so themselves,” Procopio said in a statement.

Procopio’s statement continued, “In the report in question, the revision consisted only of removal of a sensationalistic and inflammatory directly-quoted statement by the defendant, which made no contribution to proving the elements of the crimes with which she was charged. Inclusion of an unnecessary sensationalistic statement does not meet the report-writing standards required by the department.”

This statement claims that the quote should never have been included, because it didn’t contribute to proving elements of the crimes. However, the quote not only contributes to proving impairment, but it wards off a possible defense.

When Blue Lives Matter asked Procopio to explain why a quote, which is, in fact, evidence, was removed from the report, he said that the quote was not necessary because enough evidence existed without it.

Indeed, the quote will likely have no impact on the prosecution. But excluding evidence is not how police reports are written.

It’s also exceptionally abnormal for senior command staff to alter a report.

While the alteration should have little impact on the prosecution, that leaves us to ask why senior command staff would take the extraordinary step to remove a criminal suspect’s embarrassing statement from a report.

Both Turtleboy and FOX 25 reported that two troopers were actually disciplined for including the quote in their report.

Procopio said that the troopers didn’t actually face any discipline, they just had a note added in their files noting that the quote was changed.

While that sounds suspiciously like a form of discipline, the union refused to respond to our request to confirm if the troopers actually faced any discipline.

Alli Bibaud is being charged with operating under the influence of drugs, operating under the influence of liquor, negligent operation of a motor vehicle, and two other motor vehicle offenses, according to Procopio.

Do you think that the alteration of the report was an ethical issue? Do you think that the agency’s leadership is complicit, if not involved directly? We’d like to hear from you. Please let us know your thought in the comments.

Leave a Reply