Arroyo says released BPD, DA documents vindicate him, BPD documents call sexual-assault allegation 'unfounded'
Ricardo Arroyo this afternoon got his redacted BPD file, from which he released some documents including e-mails from both BPD and an assistant Suffolk County prosecutor declaring there was no case.
Arroyo, who has said he didn't assault anyone, posted copies of the documents, which include e-mails from a sexual-assault detective and the assistant DA who investigated allegations against him on Twitter at 3:27 p.m., related to 2005 allegations by a woman who has told the Globe she stands by her story that Arroyo pressured her several times for oral sex and threatened her over e-mail when they were students at the O'Bryant School.
Around 1 p.m., an hour before Arroyo was set to have the documents released to him, the Suffolk County District Attorney's office, rather than acting DA Kevin Hayden's campaign, released an official statement pre-emptively calling Arroyo a shameful liar:
We have thoroughly reviewed our entire unredacted file regarding the sexual assault allegations against Ricardo Arroyo. Nothing in the file suggests or indicates that the allegations were unfounded. Also, nothing in the file questions the validity of the victim’s statements. The campaign to sabotage this victim’s credibility is shameful.
In fact, according to an e-mail in the file from Tara Burdman, then an assistant Suffolk County DA assigned to the case, "there was no crime committed." BPD records called the allegations "unfounded."
Arroyo responded by calling Hayden the liar, and now possibly a law breaker, for having the file re-opened on his own and making the comment he did. He also blasted whoever leaked the story to the Globe for trying to throw the election.
The Globe, which reports it got a copy of the file on its own, however, said one document shows that when an assistant DA told her what happened did not rise to the definition of rape, the teen insisted what happened was "not consensual."
The filed Arroyo released were about this case, rather than a second BPD investigation in 2007, also never prosecuted, involving a second woman whose lawyer has said Arroyo never did anything to her.
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
if you ask me
all this mudslinging is far more shameful than some people getting heated during city council meetings
Not even close
The behavior of a few councilors the other day was beyond immature.
Hopefully they’re challenged next election cycle.
They're both unqualified
Hayden's behavior today is a gross abuse of office, and as for Mr. Arroyo, where there's smoke there's fire and I don't think his denials are worth the breath they're shouted with.
Where's my write-in candidate at
Is there a viable write-in candidate? Anyone willing to name names? Because I’m leaving this one blank or giving Mickey Mouse a write-in vote unless there are other suggestions.
Maybe Martha Coakley should announce.
She could actually win this one.
I’m just gonna write in Elle Woods or Saul Goodman.
For the primary I guess it
For the primary I guess it doesn't matter. I'll save my Mickey Mouse for the general, unless a credible write-in candidate emerges.
PS @adam emoji crash the comment entry process.
There's no write in
There's no write in
Candidates have to live in Suffolk County
There's no race after Tuesday for DA. Instead of two choices, you will have no choice.
I hope people start to take the time to learn civics
Comment I've seen elsewhere
"We need to impeach whoever wins."
There's no write in
Really unsure why you think that we can't write in a candidate. Maybe/maybe not in a Primary, but in the general election, you'd have to show me proof to convince me.
That you double down on this by insulting my/our collective understanding of election machanics is :chefs-kiss:.
Definitely wrote in a choice.
Definitely wrote in a choice. Somebody needs to take the time to learn civics, but it's not me
Seems like a missed
Seems like a missed opportunity for the GOP. Unless they are running someone in the general election.
It's a special election, not a primary.
This is the real thing.
Pull a republican ballot (see the secretary of state's website)
There are no options for Suffolk DA on that ballot. I believe you are misinformed.
It is definitely a primary
It is definitely a primary and not a special election.
Beyond just being disqualified from the office he's running for, Hayden should be subject to discipline before the bar.
Is not only a proven lie, but a politically motivated lie for personal gain. And he used his public office to propagate this lie.
Per SJC 3.07, Rule 8.4, this misconduct is a violation of the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct, and should be reported to the MA Bar.
Beyond disqualifying himself for the position of Suffolk DA, Kevin Hayden should have his license to practice law reviewed.
The document that says unfounded is an internal BPD report
And it is the opinion of a BPD detective, not the SCDAO. The email from the ADA indicates she does not believe a crime was committed, which is far different than “unfounded”, which typically means an incident never happened. So the SCDAO never made an “unfounded” determination.
Badgering and pressuring a classmate into giving you oral sex is probably not a crime, but I don’t see how any of this exonerates Arroyo. He still lied on his bar application and to the Globe, which was always the clearest issue anyway.
This is a gross display. Sad to have seen it play out in the news.
the allegations were true
What the report said is that the allegations did not describe a crime. Sexual harassment itself is not against the law. Manipulating someone into sex is not crime. Bullying itself is not a crime. Everything evil is not a crime.
He left the school voluntarily. BPS convinces people that it would look "better for your record" to leave. The victim felt safe enough after he was gone. This is a common conundrum for police and DA's.
Did Arroyo lie on his bar application? His lawyer would have known that the allegations weren't enough to charge him and should have told him so. Did he lie to the press that he never heard of this investigation; I think yes.
Is Hayden admitting that he is behind the leak?
I believe the woman…
…and I agree that just because Arrroyo’s actions were not criminal it doesn’t mean the actions were ok. BUT…
An hour before the release of the documents Hayden claimed “Nothing in the file suggests or indicates that the allegations were unfounded.” And then when the documents were released, the case close out form explicitly states “Final disposition: unfounded.”
I mean, it’s just a stunning lie from Hayden and an insult to everyone’s intelligence. I’m not here to excuse Arroyo’s high school behavior, but Hayden’s actions up to his statement were corrupt enough, he didn’t have to release a flimsy attempt at gaslighting when the word “unfounded” is super conspicuous in these docs. It is stunningly poor judgement for any literate person, let alone an allegedly skilled, experienced prosecutor.
Is it a lie or vocabulary
Is it a lie or vocabulary games? that isn't corruption.
…comes from the fact that the detective who closed the Arroyo case in 2005 is now Kevin Hayden’s driver. And Kevein Hayden not only leaked those sealed docs to the Globe, he showed those sealed docs to a private investigator that he hired to dig up further dirt on Arroyo and the investigator violated the privacy of two women, and re-traumatized a woman solely for Hayden’s own political gain. That is super corrupt. Why is a sitting DA illegally violating the privacy rights of people who were minors at the time and re-traumatizing a woman who faced sexual harassment and abuse?
And the claim “Nothing in the file suggests or indicates that the allegations were unfounded” is an astoundingly transparent lie when the actual document says “Final disposition: unfounded.” That isn’t vocabulary games, it’s plain English. Kevin Hayden thinks we’re dumb and can’t read what the document plainly says.
having no foundation or basis in fact.
is the definition of unfounded. That isn't what the investigation showed. The victim told the truth but did not describe a crime.
Who is this private investigator? Why would you need to hire an investigator if your driver knew the whole story, the only dirt slung.
"That isn't what the investigation showed."
It's exactly what it showed. They used the word "unfounded" in the closeout document. It's right there. We can see it with our own eyes.
Furthermore, former BPD detective Tom Nolan states, "The term 'Unfounded' as used in law enforcement is an unambiguous term—from Boston Police Rules and Procedures: 'investigation revealed that conduct did not occur'."
I believe the woman experienced what she experienced. Arroyo's behavior was gross and abusive. But the investigation explicitly states that the specific charges being investigated were unfounded.
And the private investigator was a former BPD cop hired by Hayden.
The one real claim by the
The one real claim by the woman was that she received threatening emails, and she is convinced that Arroyo sent them. When you say you believe the woman, does that mean you believe her judgement that Arroyo wrote those emails?
The redacted police report suggests the police looked into it (page 39 states "threat made over the internet" while page 24 refers to BPS computers) but there's no further mention of the emails, at all.
It seems credible to me.
But I was specifically thinking about this statement from last week.
The woman from the 2005 case said she stands by what she told police: that Arroyo, who was a good friend of hers at the time, pressured her to perform oral sex, mentally manipulated her, and sent her threats.
Perhaps Arroyo wasn’t behind that specific theating email, but it seems plausible (even likely) that Arroyo would have used an email with a anonymous handle and didn’t use his real name.
If it wasn't unfounded, why didn't SCDAO prosecute? The press release was outrageous. Either say nothing, or "the documents speak for themselves."
I have no idea what really happened, doubt there's any way to prove anything now.
Usually unpublicized facts in SA cases not prosecuted. They're still hidden.
Can't discount political influence, either
Dante Williams, who was the BPD detective who closed out the 2005 case, is currently Kevin Hayden's driver, according to Arroyo.
Arroyo says he never knew of the allegations until the Globe contacted him last month and his lawyer said he dealt with "school matters only". The released documents show Arroyo spoke to the police at the time as did his lawyer.
Sex assault cases are hard
I’ve had many friends who are sexual assault victims. These cases are really hard because something that can be very damaging to a victim may be hard to convey to a police officer or prosecutor, and even harder to bring to trial.
This is a space where it’s often one voice against another. There’s often no evidence or witnesses. The line between inappropriate and illegal can be very blurry.
That may easily mean that an accusation may get classified as ‘unfounded’, especially if investigated by a male investigator.
However, just because there’s not enough evidence to bring a legal case, doesn’t mean the accused is not an asshole or bad person.
How people comport themselves in the most intimate of human interactions is often a good measure of their underlying character.
Even if the allegations were true,
which is definitely not something I'm taking for granted, I would still vote for Arroyo. Hayden has *already* shown incompetence and corruption in his role; Arroyo stands a good chance of doing better than him.