WEBBER WILL DISPUTE
Police brass caught in cop's disputed inheritance case
Estate lawyer noted information sharing
2 
Zoom
A photograph shows some notes taken by Hampton Attorney Gary Holmes on April 20, 2012 regarding the contested estate of the late Geraldine Webber. Photo by Rich Beauchesne/Seacoastonline
By Elizabeth Dinan
edinan@seacoastonline.com
Posted Oct. 28, 2014 @ 5:40 pm
Updated Oct 28, 2014 at 6:28 PM
edinan@seacoastonline.com
Posted Oct. 28, 2014 @ 5:40 pm
Updated Oct 28, 2014 at 6:28 PM
PORTSMOUTH — A lawyer who helped an elderly resident leave most of her $2.7 million estate to police Sgt. Aaron Goodwin, kept notes that say the deputy police chief shared information about the case with Goodwin’s defense attorney and that the police commissioners were told how to respond to media questions about the case.
The notes were written by attorney Gary Holmes and made public after his Oct. 16 deposition. Holmes wrote a last will and trust for the late Geraldine Webber, which is now disputed by multiple parties alleging Goodwin exerted undue influence over Webber, while she had dementia, to inherit most of her wealth.
More than 100 pages of Holmes’ handwritten notes about the case were obtained by the Herald and one of them, dated April 12, 2012, states Holmes learned from Goodwin’s attorney, Chuck Doleac, that a Herald reporter called Webber and that Deputy Police Chief Corey MacDonald “had off record conversations” with the reporter. The Herald did on that date have a 25-minute conversation with Webber, as well as an off-record discussion with MacDonald about the situation, in general terms, for background information.
Holmes’ notes dated Sept. 21, 2012, document a conversation he had with the Herald. He wrote he told the Herald there were “many sides” to the story and he was “sure” the Herald had heard “of other facts” that involved Portsmouth attorney James Ritzo, who wrote Webber’s 2009 will that did not name Goodwin as a beneficiary.
Holmes, who authored Webber’s last will and trust, made notes saying the Herald responded it had not heard the “other facts” about Ritzo, “in spite of (Holmes) being told by Chuck (Doleac) yesterday that Corey MacDonald had off-record conversation about Ritzo.” In other words, MacDonald told Goodwin’s lawyer he had an off-record discussion with the Herald about the controversy and somehow that was communicated to the lawyer who drafted Webber’s contested will the next day.
Attorney Paul McEachern, who is representing four of Webber’s former friends contesting her last will and trust, said Holmes’ notes, showing communications among MacDonald and lawyers for Goodwin and Webber’s estate, “support my original instinct that this is official corruption and they support it.”
MacDonald explained one of his jobs as deputy chief is to monitor ongoing litigation that could affect the Police Department. He said he contacted Doleac at that time “to gauge the status of” Goodwin’s case, “its impact on the department, and (Doleac’s) observations as to its impact on Aaron Goodwin, as he was under extreme stress by all accounts, and was serving as a police officer for the department.”
“During my conversation with attorney Doleac, I may have also included a statement that I provided the Herald an “off the record” perspective on the department’s take on the Goodwin-Webber matter at that time,” said the deputy chief. “My goal in providing the Herald that information was so that our newspaper would have a better understanding of what the department was doing and why, though I could not officially comment at that time. Though I have no recollection of it, I equally have no reason to believe I would not have mentioned to attorney Doleac that I had expressed the department’s position to the Herald as ‘background.’”
Chief Stephen DuBois said MacDonald has “above average” communication skills and for that reason, he interacted with Doleac, which “is exactly what this administration and prior administrations have expected of him.”
By letters dated Sept. 18, 2012, and sent by certified mail to the Police Commission and DuBois, the Herald first inquired about the allegations against Goodwin. According to his handwritten notes dated the following day, Holmes wrote that the Herald had written to the Police Commission for comment and that “police will respond — Aaron will not.” Holmes’ notes for that date also say, “the police commissioners have been told they support Aaron but no comment.”
Police Commission Chairman John Golumb denied the commissioners were told how to respond to the inquiry. “Nobody told us how to respond,” he said.
If someone had suggested how the Police Commission should answer a media inquiry, Golumb said, the commission would acknowledge the suggestion politely, but then act on its own. “But I can make it clear that did not happen,” he said.
Commissioner Jerry Howe concurred that the commission was never instructed about how to respond to the Herald’s questions about the case. “The commission reached its response on its own,” he said.
Howe added that Holmes had no way of knowing how the commission decided to respond because he wasn’t there.
By letter dated Sept. 19, 2012, the commission answered the Herald’s inquiry stating that Chief DuBois was keeping the commission informed and that the commission “supports the manner in which Chief DuBois is handling this matter.”
DuBois responded to the Herald by letter, also dated Sept. 19, 2012, stating that the allegations against Goodwin “concern off-duty personal issues which do not involve the Portsmouth Police Department.” He said the department conducted a “thorough investigation” of Goodwin’s contacts with Webber and “is convinced that there was no violation of law or departmental regulations committed by” Goodwin. DuBois also noted that outside agencies were looking into the situation and “resolutions of those issues will be the responsibility of those agencies.”
Howe said the Police Commission supported Goodwin in 2012 because it received reports from the state Bureau of Elder Services in response to allegations that Goodwin unduly influenced Webber that concluded with no findings based on available information.
MacDonald reminded that the Police Department and he “are not now, nor have we ever been involved in determining who gets what out of Ms. Webber’s will.”
“We have not coordinated a response for attorney Holmes, attorney Doleac, or any of the others engaged in the litigation,” he said. “Our priority, area of responsibility and sole concern is the honest and effective operation of the department, in spite of the pressures that this matter has brought to bear on our community.”
He added he expects he’ll “get the chance, under oath, to answer any other questions that exist on what the department did and for what reasons in this matter.”
MacDonald said the Police Department often can’t make a public comment, due to various restrictions, but “when possible, we try to provide the newspaper an answer as to why we are taking policy or issue positions.”
“Taking a strict “’no comment’ policy position lends itself to conspiracy theories and speculation,” he said. “I do not believe in a no-comment approach and I think when possible the more light you can shed, even if at times it is in the form of “background off-record” comments, is worthwhile in providing the press with our perspective or position.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for commenting.
Your comment will be held for approval by the blog owner.