"Circuit Court of Appeals: Andover Police Had Probable Cause"
2004
By Regina M. Ryan of Louison, Costello, Condon & Pfaff, LLP
The First Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that in January 2000, the police in Andover, Massachusetts, had probable cause to arrest Barbara Valente for planting anonymous bomb threats in her place of work.
In August 1997, Valente began work as an on-site manager for ADECCO Employment Services at Hewlett Packard in Andover, Massachusetts. The HP plant comprised seven buildings and employing over 2,500 people. Between August 1997 and January 1999, seven anonymous bomb threats and fourteen anonymous notes expressing spite or workplace dissatisfaction appeared at the plant. Several of the notes were found by Valente--one purportedly signed with her first name--and twenty-one of the twenty-four notes were in the building in which she worked.
After the first bomb threat in November 1997, the Andover police began an investigation. The detective then heading the case identified a suspect (not Valente) by handwriting, and HP retained a handwriting analysis firm with adequate credentials: McCann and Associates. McCann deemed the samples inconclusive and the investigation lapsed. In September 1998, Valente began three months of maternity leave to care for her newly adopted child. During this time, two more notes were discovered and in January 1999, the investigation resumed under the charge of Detective William Wallace. More handwriting samples were obtained, this time from nine employees including Valente. McCann determined that only Valente could not be ruled out as a suspect; but McCann also said that she could not be "conclusively" identified based on the samples available.
More samples of Valente's handwriting were secured and in November 1999, McCann concluded that it was "more probable than not" that Valente was the author of three bomb notes, including two found when she was on leave, and eleven of the other notes. Wallace met with McCann representatives who, with slides or similar means, displayed the similarities on which they relied and repeated their conclusion. Wallace also determined that Valente could have visited the HP building in question during her leave, although he had no proof that she had done so.
On January 5, 2000, at Wallace's request Valente came to the police department. In the discussion that followed, Wallace deemed Valente's rather terse disclaimers not what he expected from an innocent person--she simply said she knew nothing about the notes; he also found her to be very nervous, her skin reddening and breaking out in hives. At the close of the interview, Wallace and his supervisor agreed that Valente should be arrested and a warrantless arrest was effected on three counts of creating a bomb scare, each of which carried a maximum punishment of 20 years' imprisonment under Massachusetts law.
The criminal charges against Valente were ultimately dismissed. In July 2001, Valente brought a civil rights action against Wallace, his supervisor and the town, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 (2000), charging that she had been arrested without probable cause in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The First Circuit affirmed the district court's granting of summary judgment on the merits in favor of the police, ruling that they had probable cause for the arrest, a ground that also disposed of any derivative claim against the town.
On the facts known to Wallace at the time, the Court held that a reasonable police officer would be warranted in the belief that Valente had sent some of the notes. The main reason for this conclusion is that a seemingly qualified expert handwriting examiner had said that the notes were more likely than not written by Valente. This is not conclusive as to probable cause but a powerful start. Further, Wallace did not just take the expert's summary conclusion; he met with the McCann representatives and watched them explain graphically why they were persuaded. This evidence coupled with the fact that Valente did not offer an alibi when interviewed by the police and her appearance at the interview being very nervous, her skin reddening and breaking out in hives. Supported the finding of probable cause.
Accordingly all counts and claims were dismissed against Wallace and the Town of Andover.
Barbara Valente v. Town of Andover, 332, F 3d 30, 1st Cir.
