Police Log - 06/06/19

Posted

SHOPLIFTING

On Feb. 22 at approximately 4 p.m., Officer James B. Vible responded to the area of West Natick Avenue for a report of a shoplifting incident that occurred at the Macy’s location at the Warwick Mall.

Dispatch advised that a male suspect had stolen two North Face jackets from the store. Loss prevention personnel were said to have lost sight of the suspect as he crossed West Natick Avenue.

A search of the surrounding area proved unsuccessful. Macy’s valued the jackets at $338. The store provided police with surveillance video.

On March 5 at 1 p.m., Detective Christian W. Vargas responded to Macy’s to present a photo lineup of possible suspects to a witness in the case. The witness provided a positive identification based on one of the photos.

On May 21 at 6:10 a.m., Officer Kevin P. Warren responded to Kent Hospital to take Fernando A. Carter, 32, 30 Prospect St., Apt. 1, Providence, into custody on a charge of shoplifting. Carter was transported to Warwick Police headquarters for processing.

***

At 10:43 p.m. on May 25, Officer Kyle J. Fitzsimmons responded to the Macy’s location at Warwick Mall for a report of shoplifting. Dispatch advised that asset protection personnel at the store had a woman in custody.

At the scene, an asset protection agent for the store indicated that the woman had been observed entering the women’s department while “carrying a large handbag that appeared virtually empty.” The woman is said to have selected items from various departments – periodically placing them in the same empty fitting room stall – before entering the stall for approximately 15 minutes.

When the woman emerged from the stall, the handbag “appeared to be full,” according to the asset protection agent. A check of the stall found some clothing items and several empty hangers. The woman then proceeded past all points of purchase and exited the store, at which point she was met by asset protection personnel and escorted to the store’s office.

Eight items with a total value of $641 were recovered, while seven other items with a total value of $562 were damaged due to security sensors being torn off.

Amanda L. Kachadurian, 32, 59 Puritan Ave., Cranston, was arrested on a charge of shoplifting and transported to Warwick Police headquarters for processing. She was later released with a summons to appear in Third Division District Court.

LARCENY

On May 27 at 6:45 p.m., Officer Brian W. Fontaine responded to a Camp Street residence for a report of a larceny.

At the scene, the reporting party told Fontaine that her purse had been taken from her vehicle as she unloaded groceries shortly before 6 p.m. that evening. The purse contained a driver’s license, assorted credit and bank cards, a Social Security card, a paycheck, several jewelry items and $657 in cash.

No surveillance footage was available, and no suspects were immediately identified.

SUSPENDED LICENSE

At approximately 4:30 p.m. on May 28, Officer Gavin E. McVeigh responded to the area of Holliman Elementary School on Deborah Road for a report of suspicious activity.

At the scene, McVeigh observed a gray GMC sport utility vehicle backed into a wooded area near the school. No one was inside the vehicle. Parked in front of the GMC was a black 2011 Ford F-150.

McVeigh made contact with the operator of the Ford, who indicated he was at the scene as a third-party contractor to assist with unlocking the GMC vehicle. The operator is said to have been unable to provide identification documents. He also “appeared nervous” and quickly left the scene, according to the officer.

A subsequent records check for the name the operator provided indicated his driver’s license was suspended and that he was wanted on a bench warrant issued from Third Division District Court. At that point, McVeigh followed the Ford and initiated a motor vehicle stop on Post Road.

Travis L. Purvis, 49, 133 Aborn Ave., Warwick, was arrested on a charge of driving with a suspended license, third or subsequent offense, and additionally taken into custody on the bench warrant. He was transported to Warwick Police headquarters for processing and later transported to the Adult Correctional Institutions.

Comments

16 comments on this story | Please log in to comment by clicking here
Please log in or register to add your comment
scot63

Remember being suspicious is NOT A CRIME no need to show your ID stick up for your rights as the police like to violate your rights!!!!

Thursday, June 6
Happy

Scot63, If it looks like a dog, smells like a dog and acts like a dog, it is a dog!

Police are not stupid, they know when there is something not right.

You may want to allow crime on a technicality, myself, I want criminals off the street any way they can do it!

Friday, June 7
Happy

Scot63, If it looks like a dog, smells like a dog and acts like a dog, it is a dog!

Police are not stupid, they know when there is something not right.

You may want to allow crime on a technicality, myself, I want criminals off the street any way they can do it!

Friday, June 7
RISchadenfreude

With the rise of online shopping, it looks like the only people who go to the malls anymore are thieves, the vast majority of whom do not reside in Warwick. So, what value do they bring to our fair city, exactly?

I look forward to the rise of Online Shoplifting.

Monday, June 10
RISchadenfreude

scot63,

Perhaps you should have read the article before posting your rant.

1. A vehicle backed into the woods on the grounds of an elementary school, after hours, with a second vehicle- possibly with the intent to break into the GMC, since there was no second operator on-site.

2. Individual is on City property (public school).

3. Individual was a scofflaw who thinks that license suspensions and bench warrants don't apply to him.

4. It's been my experience that a large number of arrests are made because the individual draws the attention of a diligent officer to themselves through their actions and suspicious behavior, not alleged "abuse of authority".

5. Scofflaw was not a Warwick resident.

5. I hope you don't live in Warwick.

Monday, June 10
scot63

RISchadenfreude i do live in warwick, Again suspicion is NOT A CRIME!!!! i beleive in peoples rights & warwick police always try to violate your rights!!! No need to show ID if you are a passenger in a car!!! And remember to always FILM THE POLICE!!!!!

Monday, June 10
justanidiot

eyes dont like happy comment, seems suspicious to me. time to send the gestapoo to do a deep background check

Monday, June 10
justanidiot

eyes dont like happy comment, seems suspicious to me. time to send the gestapoo to do a deep background check

Monday, June 10
RISchadenfreude

scot63,

"Suspicion" in itself is not a crime, but suspicious behavior does provide probable cause for a police officer to investigate. It's also known as Proactive Policing and is far more constructive than having officers sitting around in their vehicles, not paying attention to what's going around them, "eating donuts", as the old cliché goes, waiting to be assigned to a call by Dispatch. Many good arrests, like the one described, result from making contact with suspicious individuals and behavior while actively patrolling their assigned beat, being involved with what's going on around them.

You can't have it both ways- do you have a problem with officers "sitting around", or actively doing their jobs? Seems foolish to complain about both.

What part of my explanation below do you not understand?

It's a shame that I had to explain that to you.

"People, places, the things they do and the time they do them"- most important knowledge to an officer on the beat...everything out of the ordinary is "suspicious", like these two clowns.

You aren't one of those comical "sovereign citizens, are you? LOL!

And yes, you do have to show ID if you're a passenger in a vehicle.

Tuesday, June 11
scot63

RISchadenfreude, See you get it SUSPICION IS NOT A CRIME!!!! i believe in our constitution and every citizen should know their rights!!!! If you want to be ID every corner then move to Iran where there are checkpoints..

Again passengers DO NOT HAVE TO SHOW ID!!! LAST I KNEW THIS WAS THE LAND OF THE FREE.. NOT SUPPOSED TO GET EXTORTED BY THE PEOPLE I PAY!!!!

Tuesday, June 11
davebarry

Scot63...I would bet a lot of money that you have broken the law and blame the police for taking you into custody. Your advice to folks about showing ID will likely get a lot of them in trouble since there are times when even passengers have to show ID or risk arrest. In this case, a vehicle on school grounds when the school is closed is more than enough reason. You should really get a law degree prior to dispensing advice.

As far as the WPD abusing constitutional rights, you are way off base. WPD is one of the most professional departments in the country.

I've not observed one critic of the police who was not a criminal or related to a criminal. What say you Scot63?

Tuesday, June 11
Cat

scot63,

In the case of SUSPENDED LICENSE, Purvis was not the passenger but the operator that was unable to provide ID. If he is the operator without the proper ID then the police are well within their right to stop him and check on his identity. In all states you are required to have a drivers license to operate a vehicle.

In most cases I have seen, ID is not provided because it will lead to charges. If someone is not doing anything criminal, why would they have a problem with providing ID? Now in the instance of someone just walking down the road, they don't need to provide ID unless they are being suspected of committing a crime. If I am taking a walk and I almost never carry my ID when I walk, if asked for an ID I can honestly state I do not have one and I am not required to provide it. The police officer would have to detain me on suspicion of a crime or let me go.In most cases, I would be let go because it is too much paperwork for them unless there is something more serious involved.

I think that the Warwick Police Dept. does a great job. They have far too much to do to waste time on a non-starter If you want to exhaust yourself with getting out of providing an ID then I guess you are entitled to do so. Most citizens will simply work with the police and the entire thing will be over much quicker if you simply provide the information. Unless you have something to hide.....

Tuesday, June 11
scot63

NOPE NEVER COMMITTED A CRIME!!!! JUST BELIEVE IN MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!!!!! AS A PASSENGER IN A CAR I WILL NEVER SHOW MY ID!!!! AND NO I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO HIDE!!! WARWICK COPS A SO PHONY LIKE WHEN THEY WERE FILMING LIVE PD ONLY PUT ON A SHOW FOR THE CAMERAS!!!! DO YOU THINK OFFICER MORETTI WOULD HAVE LET YOU GO FOR DRUNK DRIVING LIKE HE DID FOR DAVID CICILLINE SISTER??? I THINK NOT!!!!!

Tuesday, June 11
RISchadenfreude

Uh-oh, Cat and davebarry- scotty's gone "All Caps"...

scot63, I can tell you that it is WPD procedure to ID everyone in a vehicle or anyone who they come in contact with during the course of an investigation, including car stops, suspicious vehicles and accidents. Individuals can be detained until identified, at the primary officer's discretion; this is true of many departments, particularly accredited ones, and leads to many arrests for outstanding warrants. Your lack of knowledge will land you or some other poor fool who takes your advice in unneeded and unnecessary trouble.

It also works as a great "Shut-up" / de-escalation tool for those people who inject themselves into situations that they should keep their nose out of; nothing closes a fool's mouth like, "Are you part of this? I need your ID."

It's my experience that far too many people like yourself who cry about their "rights" don't know a thing about them and even less about their obligations and responsibilities.

Wednesday, June 12
scot63

RISchadenfreude, Believe me i know my rights , i think you need to look up the laws unless you are law enforcement then for sue you don't no the law!!! I bet you are a violator of peoples rights!!!! ALWAYS FILM THE POLICE!!!!

Wednesday, June 12
RISchadenfreude

scot63,

Depending on the circumstances, you could elevate the charge from failure to present ID on demand to a 2-hour detention and ultimately end up with an obstruction charge for no other reason than to "make a point" and have something to complain about, but you just go on with your bad self; I just hope people with nothing to hide aren't foolish enough to take your uninformed advice.

I don't know why you're concerned, though- odds are a busy police officer has more important things to worry about than you. You must have a lot of time on your hands; if you do, please look up the word "Consequences".

Thanks for the entertainment, though, and good luck...

Thursday, June 13