Every day I question police officers in courtrooms around the Commonwealth and I believe that most are honest and professional while on the road and on the witness stand.  However, there are always a few bad apples and one in particular is finally becoming exposed.  Trooper Kathleen Carney has long been a “player” in the business of Operating Under the Influence enforcement as she makes no bones about the fact that she works as many road shifts and sobriety checkpoints as possible resulting in substantial arrests and court time.

As an attorney specializing in Massachusetts drunk driving defense, many of Trooper Carney’s arrests end up on my desk and her pattern of conduct reported by my clients is clear and unequivocal.  Now it looks like others are noticing.  For reasons that are not yet clear, Trooper Carney has been taken off the road and stripped of her weapon. Just days before her “modified duty” was released, I questioned Trooper Carney under oath regarding any suspensions, disciplinary action or internal investigations to which she offered a denial on all suggestions.

Admittedly, I can not prove whether she commited perjury in her denials….yet. But as reported in the Patriot Ledger, it may be that the State Police and/or the Norfolk County District Attorney are looking into that possibility. It seems that the day after her testimony in my case, the Norfolk County District Attorney reported that she would not be permitted to testify in future cases and in fact a case in Quincy District Court in which she was present to testify was dismissed for reasons not discussed even with the defense attorney.

I have always been an advocate for the videotaping of OUI investigations on the road and in the booking rooms as the Commonwealth’s reliance on officers’ opinions as the sole basis for convicting a citizen of Operating Under the Influence is inherently problematic.  As we all know, opinions are subjective and vulnerable to influence and bias on many levels.  In addition, while most officers are as honest as possible while testifying about their observations, they view the world through a partial lense (at least while on duty).

Let’s not overlook the fact that OUI enforcement can be big business for law enforcement. While I do not know the details of Trooper Carney’s source of income as a state trooper, I do know that she claims to be in court as a witness nearly five days a week. Her court time, coupled with her road shifts, leaves her little time for details which tells me that when the Boston Herald reports her base salary of $70,000 exploded to $187,152 in 2007, she is making a killing by making arrests.

Remember this….her subjective opinion regarding a citizen’s ability to drive is clearly influenced by her ability to make money. She gets paid for appearing in court whether the citizen is convicted or acquitted. This fact is also ignored by MADD when they recognize her and other officers for their relentless pursuit of drunk drivers. We continue to read the statistics issued by MADD and the State Police regarding the increased number of OUI arrests every year, yet the statistics regarding conviction rates are no where to be found. Perhaps if the local and state police, along with MADD, took a look at the merits of the arrests, Troopers like Kathleen Carney would have been discovered long ago and our justice system would not have been infected by this virus.