Tuesday, October 02, 2012

When are Police Officers Obviously Scumbags?

Michael Nowacki of New Canaan, Connecticut, faces or does face, 5 years for allegedly accidentally sending his ex-wife an email. This email was allegedly not threatening and was to provide another party with information. Where is the harm in that?

After the below document, found in full pdf form [here] or [this webpage], New Canaan Connecticut Police allegedly showed up on Mr. Nowacki's property at a much later date armed with shotguns, where one officer allegedly hit another police officer accidentally with a car. Officers armed with shotguns are not out collecting for the Red Cross. Should citizens be terrorized, beaten, arrested, or even railroaded to prison for blowing the whistle?

[This interview of Michael Nowacki is telltale, click first youtube.com video]

 [A previous post on Michael Nowacki] [Another Link]


The below is cut and pasted out of Nowacki's pdf file, click above link. Click on below image to make bigger.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Read the following, only a small excerpt from his custody hearing decision. Seems like a stable individual, no? And don't give me any conspiracy theory bull$hit. He's to sick to admit, or see, how sick he is.

At the evidentiary hearing on May 19, 2011,17 Dr. Robson testified that, while he had no concerns with the plaintiff's parenting skills, as she had exhibited remarkable strength in the face of significant stressors, the defendant had severe impairments which interfered with his day-to-day functioning and judgment.   Dr. Robson testified to his belief that the defendant was bipolar, manic/psychotic with paranoid personality disorder with histrionic and narcissistic traits.   Dr. Robson characterized the defendant as having a serious and pervasive illness requiring treatment, therapy and possibly medication.18  Additionally, Dr. Robson testified the defendant has a high IQ but is vindictive,19 impulsive and susceptible to boundary violations.   He stated, as well, that the defendant's thinking is tangential, his speech overproductive, and that he exhibits a merging of ideas.   Dr. Robson indicated that he had the opportunity to observe the defendant's participation in the court proceedings on May 10 and 19, 2011.20  His observations at these proceedings only served to confirm his diagnosis.   Dr. Robson observed the defendant talking over the court and participants, with little apparent regard for others.   Dr. Robson noted that when the court muted the defendant's remarks, the defendant appeared to enjoy himself, smiled and relaxed, projecting a feeling of being in “charge” of a situation most people would have found uncomfortable.   Dr. Robson testified that the children, particularly Kerry, were vulnerable to their father's poor parenting skills and nonexistent co-parenting ability.   Dr. Robson opined that, unfortunately, the severity of the defendant's impairment prevents him from appreciating the impact of his behavior on the children.   Dr. Robson concluded the defendant was not emotionally safe as a parent and therefore it was not in the best interest of the children to be in his care and custody so long as his condition remained untreated and unabated.   Dr. Robson's findings were thorough and persuasive and are adopted by the court.

Saturday, October 06, 2012 8:28:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

View My Stats