At least this time the suspect was wide awake when police say they found him with a loaded gun

A man who was arrested on gun charges in May when police allegedly found him asleep in a car with a gun on the center console was arrested on gun charges yesterday after police stopped his car for allegedly driving with an expired registration.

Alex Cherizard, 34, was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm, second offense, unlawful possession of ammunition, carrying a loaded firearm without a license, driving an unregistered motor vehcile, and being a Level II armed career criminal, which could mean longer sentences if he's convicted on the other charges.

Police say officers has pulled Cherizard over at Blue Hill Avenue and Dove Street around 9:55 p.m. yesterday on the motor-vehicle charge. During an inventory search before having his car towed away, police say, officers "discovered a 9MM semi-automatic handgun loaded with 10 rounds of ammunition inside the glove compartment."

Innocent, etc.



Free tagging: 


Why does it seem that for all

By on

Why does it seem that for all the harping by the legislature and AG about "MA's tough gun laws" the people breaking those laws don't seem be the slightest bit inconvenienced by them?

Not wow

By on

Unless you can explain to us how in the course of 4 months the case went to trial and he was found guilty.

I can wait on your answer. But not 4 months for it.


By on

Take a trip down to your local district court and get the timeline of the first case you come across. I'd bet that unless someone pleads out, the case takes a year to go to trial.

Now that's a different point

By on

But bail is not punishment, his alleged crimes are technically non-violent, and his history of showing up at court appearances shows that he is not a flight risk.

non-violent? hello?

By on

So twice carrying a loaded ILLEGAL firearm falls under a "non-violent" classification to you? pretty much the same this as jaywalking or a noise violation right? holy hell - what world do you live in? That mindset is exactly the problem - leniency in the face of repeat gun offenders.

From his May arrest - The officer shouted, “Don’t move!” as the male startled and reached for the (illegal) firearm."

You are completely missing the point. I could care less if he is a flight risk or shows up at court. I am looking for a way to keep him OFF THE STREETS of my city while toting ILLEGAL guns. The guy is 34 years old, and likes to ride around with guns, letting him walk away from an arraignment is evidently NOT getting the message across.

There are very bad people on our streets, and it should be the judge's responsibility to have OUR best interest in mind - not finding ways to make it easier for this guy to re-offend.


You do know the difference

By on

Between a violent act and the potential for a violent act, right? The illegal gun, in of itself, is not violent. It's the use of said weapon that is violent.

If you're looking for a way to get illegal weapons off the streets, work on getting long sentences for illegal possession of a firearm. Heck, we could make it a 10 year sentence for the first offense, 25 for a second offense, and life without parole for the third offense, but that doesn't change the fact that the guy has not been convicted of what he was charged with 4 months ago.

Or we could do away with trials and let the police send people to prison right after arrest. Is that what you want?

still missing the point....

By on

this guy should not be out on bail simply BECAUSE he has demonstrated an inability to distance himself from ILLEGAL firearms - whether you consider it "violent" or not is a non-issue. He has made it clear that, if left on the street, he will be carrying an illegal firearm.

I do agree with you on the stiff sentences, but that's the problem - they don't happen. This guy already has a career criminal moniker. Now with two illegal firearm cases in the same year, where do you think he is? in jail waiting for trial? my guess is that you'll be able to find Mr Charizard right back out on the streets this weekend - and probably carrying a gun.

Re: The Bail Act 1976, When assessing whether to grant bail, courts must – under the Bail Act 1976 (BA 1976) – start with the presumption that an accused should be granted bail, unless there is a justified reason to refuse it.The court will then consider:

the nature and seriousness of the crime (repeat ILLEGAL firearm possession), the character of the defendant, his/ her past criminal record, associations, and ties with the community (career criminal status), the defendant’s previous record of abiding by his/ her bail conditions (repeat ILLEGAL firearm possession), the strength of the evidence against the defendant (caught twice (once reaching for) ILLEGAL firearm)

I'm not saying he doesn't deserve a fair trial, I'm asking that a judge keep him off the streets of Boston in the meantime, and if found guilty - put him away for a LONG time.

Charizards on Blue Hill Ave!

By on

thought this was a Pokemon story, stayed for the firearm possession #FelonyIChooseYou

oh where to that headline supposed to be funny?

By on

Maybe I just have a hard time finding the humor in a repeat criminal carrying illegal firearms in my city,...multiple times in the same year. - I guess I'm old fashioned.

Second, second, SECOND UNLAWFUL possession of an ILLEGAL firearm and ammunition (along with driving an unregistered vehicle and being an armed career criminal) and this scumbag is STILL cruising around town. Mother-Of-Gawd. I feel for the BPD here. I mean, what DO you actually have to do to be taken off the streets of my city? This guy has clearly demonstrated that he gives ZERO fucks about pretty much every law. I would love to know where the judges live who continue to grant him bail. My guess is NOT Boston.

Please lock him up! And for all of you whiners about "assault weapons" and "nra gun nuts". Guess what - punks like Mr. Charizard are the majority of your shooters - guys like this who are able to walk freely after being arrested multiple times for ILLEGAL firearms. We NEED to focus on common sense gun control/laws AND punishment criminals under the laws we have. The vast majority of homicides by gun are happening with handguns and when you allow criminals to WALK after being arrested - it's only a matter of time before they have another gun. Healy and her ilk feel great about themselves for banning "AR-type" weapons - basically placing thousands of law-abiding rifle owners into a state of legal limbo. And she gets all of the atta-boys from the anti-gun crowd. But the reality is that it's not stopping criminals from shooting each other on the streets of Boston - because they aren't buying ARs for $1000s of dollars from a gun shop. We need to PUNISH the gangbangers who break the law and terrorize our city neighborhoods.

We need more guns off the street - and we also need more criminals who carry ILLEGAL GUNS off the streets as well.

Think I'm way off? Take a sad look at Chicago for 2016 - these are inner-city murders, not some NRA prepper guy in his bomb shelter with AR-15

2016 (ONE YEAR)
Shot & Killed: 720
Shot & Wounded: 3659
Total Shot: 4379

and nothing more than a blip in the media.

It's easier to kick lawful

By on

It's easier to kick lawful licensed gun owners in the teeth than keep violent criminals locked up. Criminals are hard to deal with and the SJC loves enforcing their due process. Gun owners on the other hand are a villified minority and easy target in this state. They have no political power, the courts bend over backwards against them, and every licensed person lives in fear of pissing off their police chief whom can void or deny licenses, for no reason other than a whim, or the AG 'reinterpretting' law to declare them felons in waiting.

So when a politican in MA wants to look tough on crime which person do you think they'll pick on the easy or hard one?


By on

Your posting stats for Chicago how about stick to where we're at and that's massachusetts! Chicago and Massachusetts aren't the same and don't have the same laws! How about we post something pertaining to this city the track record of solving homicides are the worst in the county and they wonder why so many more young men feel the need to carry guns to feel protected than to be the next victim!!!

From 2006

By on

' At approximately 1:40 P.M. on September 23, 2006, Detective

Page 580

Robert Pieroway, a plainclothes Boston police officer assigned to a drug control unit, was traveling in the passenger seat of an unmarked police vehicle when he observed the defendant standing with a group of men in Franklin Square Park in the South End section of Boston. Detective Pieroway noticed a woman, later identified as Jessica Rivera, enter the park, stand beside the defendant, and then walk with the defendant to 10 East Brookline Street, in the courtyard of the Cathedral housing development. Outside 10 East Brookline Street, the defendant and Rivera met a man, Alex Cherizard, [Note 1] on a bicycle, and the three individuals walked up the stairs to the front door of the building, where a fourth person opened the door from inside. As Alex Cherizard was walking up the stairs, he placed his right hand inside the rear of his pants, down to the groin area. The three individuals remained inside the building for approximately thirty seconds, out of view of Detective Pieroway.'

Here we are, September 2017.