# data[].attributes.headline
Letter to Mayor Passero of June 18, 2017 received by Mayor of New London: mpassero@ci.new-london.ct.us  - et al

# data[].attributes.subject
Letter to Mayor Passero of June 18, 2017 received by Mayor of New London: mpassero@ci.new-london.ct.us  - et al

# data[].attributes.body
from: Jonathan Brand <187947@gmail.com> | Dear Mr. Mayor:

Although you have wisely deleted all visible record of these matters by banning my personal account from the City's Facebook page and by allowing Mr. Reichard to do the same on the City's police page - It is important to leave record in this format where I can summarize one important problem of several, all of which require your immediate attention:

On or about April 17, 2017 I read Mr. Reichard's arrest report for a David Gun. While the nature of the case will not be repeated here as a simple matter of good taste, what I read explicitly shows that Mr. Gun was arrested without legal cause for arrest. Allow me to explain briefly: The original arrest report which remains on Facebook's server and can be subpoenaed by you, states that a plan of arrest is made after a local Pharmacy reports a specific activity by Mr. Gun. The plan for arrest oddly states that a search will take place for an illegal item it refers to only as "object." The following paragraph gives a basic overview of the plan as it occurred when executed: Mr. Gun's home is entered the search is performed, however the "object," is not found. Mr. Gun is arrested anyway. Combined with the media reports of this incident, it is disclosed and understood that police found cause for arrest after the arrest was made. This mistake is commonly referred to by defense attorney's as one in which the ends justify the means and requires the immediate release of Mr. Gun, so far as one can tell. It also requires that his charges be dropped until police can get it right.

As in all documented/published cases to date, Mr. Reichard responded to my post with a question on this topic by violating another law, this time Constitutional law. He banned my personal account from our community's public police page on FB, deleting all record of  his awareness of my comment. However, Facebook server logs will show you that he did not stop there. What I also witnessed at the time of my account's ban from the police page in April, was the immediate disappearance of Gun's arrest record. When I noticed it was back online at Facebook, I read it again. In its current form, that fact that no cause for arrest was obtained, has been deleted. It reads well now and fact remains that by law, Mr. Passero, it appears you would now be obligated to subpoena these records from Facebook or be named as an accomplice. I can virtually assure you the the records in his case can and will be obtained either way..

With regard to my, "Personal Grievance" about being falsely charged with a felony and cast as a medical helicopter-thwarting risk, heroically neutralized and intercepted by New London police, you already have the information needed to approach and resolve the matter at this live link. Notice that it is receiving some shares already as I finalize my civil claim for local filing. You may want to deal with this head-on, not in the Mr. Reichard deals with these problems however. Attached, you will find the latest article published to the web as my team rapidly dissembles the SEO/Google search presence constructed by Mr. Reichard's attempts create his own positive history which date back 10 years. The SEO disassembly process was initiated by Mr. Reichard's failure to comply with CT's Freedom of Information Act laws by refusing to answer a lawful FOIA request sent by certified mail, signed for by our police department on the morning of June 8. I appreciate your efforts in assuring for the record that you do not appear an accomplice to this violation of law as well.

Regarding the status of accomplice, I would very much appreciate your input into why public defender, Shawn Tiernan of the New London Superior Court informed me on record that in my case, regarding the felony charge from April 2016 which I am not permitted to see, "The law does not apply." In fact, if you can ensure that he changes course in protecting police from having to reveal 3-5 surveillance video's of the alleged helicopter incident at L&M hospital, you can avoid being an accomplice to the deliberate filing of false felony charges as well, which is beneficial to you.

You are quoted in the news as stating that the official who dismissed Mr. Reichard from the New Haven Police Department assured you that he was fit to serve in New London. Assuming this quote is not meant to refer to our former Mayor, and does refer to you, is that true that you were given this information?

You will find it impossible to delete this record of your knowledge and awareness of these legal matters delivered in this format, Mr. Mayor. Based on the fact that news media and Federal agencies are receiving copy of this message openly and by BCC, you can be assured that eyes from above are looking down. Because there is no God, these eyes refer to the auspices of our Federal government, which remains a formidable opponent for you nonetheless.

In God We Trust,
Jonathan Brand
c. 860-501-6070

# data[].attributes.headline
MS. HILL  -  Evidence of This 'Celebrated' Cop's Accolades Supported Only by 3rd Person Selfie Reviews at Free Resume Sites.

# data[].attributes.subject
MS. HILL  -  Evidence of This 'Celebrated' Cop's Accolades Supported Only by 3rd Person Selfie Reviews at Free Resume Sites.

# data[].attributes.body
NEW LONDON, Conn. Starting in about 2010, Google search shows the story of a lonely law enforcement worker so celebrated by his own account of public perception, that the public may have left that detail to Mr. Reichard altogether. In fact, results of many Google searches for this particular 'celebrated' individual only appear to lead back to about 8-10 "one page wonder" websites telling of such public accolades. - from a false 3rd person perspective in most cases. Regarding public praise, these selfies share a more telling consistency: As a whole they have a total of zero likes and zero shares.

IT GETS DARKER

You're reading an author and blogger who does not understand why Reichard's men were allowed to file a make believe felony charge along with a fake police report to the media in April 2016. The charge, which I am not allowed to see, has my name on it and the story in the media uses my name and face. It appears Reichard did this either to get even with me for coming forward about a former City of Groton Police Officer named, LeBeaux, or to gain public praise for protecting residents from a dangerous situation you can only read about online. No matter how one explains this after reading a public redaction from a journalist named Macy Corica, it is troubling to an even greater extent if you accept the next claim, and a good deal darker should you fact check this claim: The story police told is about a wild person trying to catch a medical helicopter or prevent it from taking off from L&M hospital! (But) It so happens that all 3 outdoor video surveillance tapes along with 2 indoor tapes are permanently missing or accidentally gone, just for that hour. It means not only is the public deprived of a great video, they were deprived in fact, of the truth by virtue of reading the articles or watching the story on their local television news. For me, if I may speak to things so small, I have a college degree but cannot find work anywhere in this region as a result. My first job after spending a month at Corrigan Correctional Facility was a trash pickup job working with a nice man in his 20's from "Just Dump It" in Old Lyme. He saw the  the article and fired me. That was how I learned of my true qualifications as a software developer with a Bachelor's in Eastern CT, the official title as I understand it now, "Not Qualified to Pick up Trash."  And I understand. The fake news story looks real and even if Tom were convinced otherwise, what would others think?

When mentioning a mistake on the New London Police Facebook page that appears to have falsely imprisoned a fellow resident named David Gun, Mr. Reichard broke Constitutional law and ban my Facebook account's voice from my community police page for life, also deleting record of his mistake. Let this serve as a reality check for Peter Reichard's fleet of flattering police selfies. The fact that they exist as described, helps indicate that I have some value or did, before Mr. Reichard abused his power and a community's trust to to manipulate the media in the same way. He claims special training from his Assistant Chief of Police role in New Haven, as being the "go to" person for all media matters. One can only imagine what that means or how it applies here.

And perhaps that's why a web history law enforcement by Peter Reichard is a hoax, a fake. Perhaps it explains why he appears only to consider himself when interacting with social media and the world wide web. I would suggest this indicates his effort to sway public opinion by use of deception. In fact, Peter appears to have indulged in a career-long habit of violating State and Federal law. An amateur SEO hack at best, Reichard appears to be of little or no value to any American community. Consider my research and my experience when making hiring decision for law enforcement. My name is Jonathan Brand. Because of this actor's behavior, meaning Reichard's behavior, I cannot realistically expect to be considered for employment in CT including roles where I can pick up your trash or serve your coffee. I have already been fired at the former and rejected from the latter based solely upon Reichard's fake media piece. Allow me to share a qualification for both roles: I aced college Physics, Anthropological Linguistics and Neuro-Psychology at Montclair State University. These three were highly challenging courses, the last of which cuts class sizes in half each semester and offers 2 to 3 As. At Dunkin Doughnuts, please recall that I would be grateful to serve your coffee, but that someone else will be with you in a moment.

I am not at all special. There are other New London residents I know of including "David Gun" who are in jail as a result of Mr. Reichard's apparent career-long crime spree. My future feels distinctly as though it has passed, His lies, at least two that I know of, and two ruined lives, my own and that of Mr. Gun are documented at a website I helped build called newlondontimes.com. I have asked for his reasons in writing that he might be fit to continue serving in New London. My comments are all deleted from the City of New London CT Facebook page and from our Police page at the extra-Constitutional discretion of acting Mayor, Mr. Paserro.

I will suggest that unconstitutional censorship is an odd way to serve the public. In keeping with Mr Reichard's theme of celebrating accolades however, I wish to submit two of my own. In my twenties, I received a "Best Tutor" award for tutoring English writing and science at my College. I was also called on once by a well known investor, billionaire Bill Ackman, on the topic of pyramid schemes where I defer to the expertise of Dr. John M. Taylor and the fearsome intellect of the top US expert, Robert Fitzpatrick., talented teachers. In fact at this point I don't know that there should be another place on the web where I report this accolade or the deep privilege of knowing Jon and Bob. Before I close out, fact check this article by sending a Freedom of Information Act request to the Police in New London, CT and ask for any of the witness reports that they cite in the media, then ask to see the tapes, all of which turn eyes back to New London CT police. See history's 'unmarked grave of liars,' for further reference. Take with you from here, these additional truths about Peter Reichard, and how he/she affects communities and individuals. I am one of those affected.
-Jonathan Brand

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
New London Police Department
5 Gov Winthrop Blvd, New London, CT

Rated 'Most helpful' by Google Users
Jonathan Brand

I asked a question on the police Facebook page - an unusual arrest record posted to the NLPD page on Facebook clearly described a search that did not find the illegal 'object' mentioned in the plan for arrest. Police made the arrest anyway and posted the suspect's face on the Police social media "Perp" wall. That was how I found this highly problematic arrest record. It was linked to the mugshot shown here. On Facebook, I posted to the police page to draw the attention of NL police to this specific problem about a minute after spotting it and double checking. 7 to 8 seconds after posting my question about this particular individual and the arrest record for his mug shot, I was gagged something was over my mouth - I couldn't post - all previous posts including my last post were gone, deleted. In fact with no end to this 'silenced' or censored status, I am banned for life. Since this post was made, this particular arrest record has blinked on and off the Facebook server. At last viewing it had undergone a complete edit and showed no trace of the original cause for concern. Facebook needs to be subpoenaed for the record of edits made by police. Here is a screenshot showing the suspect's face, it was recorded moments after police banned my account. Note that the conversation to the right may be missing on future re-posts of this case:

In a Google review of the New London Police department that appears atop the first results page for most searches, I joked about this serious issue of banning residents who find such errors, "I'm kind of like Demi Moore's boyfriend in Ghost, but after the wet pottery part. And.. Demi Moore can't see me.. that's messed up."

But another item in this story is 'messed up.' When I called the Mayor's office to ask that the City follow federal law that protects free speech, the receptionist agreed that my question, as I'd explained it, was protected free speech but she gave me a clear impression that this matter would be filed in accordance with some process and that like all public attempts to participate in local Government, nothing was going to be done and my request was already dead at the Mayor's Office. I hung up politely and used a social hack to connect to Mr. Reichard in person. This must have been him. Would you like to hear my social hack so that you can use it too? Send a FOIA request to obtain the May 17 [correction looking at the date in the above photo near top right, this call should be on or about April 18 instead] 2017 call I made from 860-501-6070 to the NLPD. Here's why I don't think the Police will provide the information as required by law: Chief Reichard was unable to say why the question would not be protected free speech, his voice cracked and for a moment was not possible to understand - he sounded furious and then responded to my question on un-banning me, arguably in the tone of a killer, "Why don't you come down here and say that to my face, say that right to my face so I can see your eyes." I think I was busy just then or that I disconnected the call. I remember a bit of both, it was both. I hung up because I was busy. I cleaned the kitchen and put my affairs in order and scrubbed got behind the faucet where tough stuff is, wrote a last will and testament Cced it to Shawn Tiernan. I was busy but I did send a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain this audio tape. The postal tracking number for the FOIA request is

7016 2710 0000 9087 7395 It was signed for by Police on the morning of June 8th I believe. I don't know if the extra 3 dollars for certified mail makes a difference. I know Mr. Tiernan refused to say he received anything. That's the Public Defender assigned to me by the New London Superior Court. He defends the cops fake charges by telling me I can't see them and that I can't see the video surveillance evidence - which I know doesn't exist. It implicates the police in a crime - for exactly what they did. That's why Mr. Tiernan is payed by all of us, he's a Public Defender. Do you understand?

Scroll down past the entering my home without a warrant questions , it's near the bottom of this FOIA PDF. I sent it certified mail, Police signed for it in June 2017.

When you turn off one person's voice you take it away from other people's ears, what if someone wanted to read this observation even if it's not likely, what if someone did want to know what I saw? -Or would wanted the information but did not get to read, hear about or know because it is deleted? That's a performance art with marionettes when you take a deeper look at it. Chief Reichard's unlawful censorship really treats New London residents like dolls on strings."

"...public scrutiny is no job for a man who carries a gun in public and threatens me to come ask for my voice back "face to face so I can see your eyes." Are you serious? Go look at a flag so it can see your eyes, Mr. Reichard - face to face, square of with Old Glory. Get a better idea what this is about."

The review draws to its conclusion,

"The cloth is a symbol we kind of need and Chief is a role we kind of need. Pick your descriptors but if someone you work for points out an error, understand that the observer would feel safer, personally knowing there's no mistake. Agree then say you will look into it. Do not censor anyone from Facebook. You should even give the same respect to someone who texts the police FB page about an alleged 'leprechaun epidemic' claiming small folk are 'after me lucky charms.' [Observe] "OK will do - Thank you. I will look into that" Because any discussion about deviating from that base approach or continuance of your censorship response, is not appropriate. Please un-ban me Chief Reichard."

Again, after I asked about the legal cause for that prisoner that particular file as the arrest record originally appeared, I'm pretty sure it did disappeared.. was pulled offline. A month or so later I saw it again, this time with nothing about a search process, (huh?) It was stated that the suspect was simply arrested for something illegal in his possesion this time - did history change? We need to subpeona the server logs on this from Facebook, it is easy to do.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Public Scrutiny of Police, vs. Chief Reichard's Censorship

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Rated 'Most helpful' by Google Users Jonathan Brand I asked a question on the police Facebook page - an unusual arrest record posted to the NLPD page on Facebook clearly described a search that did not find the illegal 'object' mentioned in the plan for arrest.