Monday, Sept 8, 2026
Reported by Arch Hive
Recently, Joshua Almeida, a Warren resident, spoke up during the 'public comment' portion of the town council meeting claiming that the Warren Police Department conducted traffic enforcement operations from "private and religious properties without written permission". Almeida also warned the Town Council that he has prepared a federal civil rights complaint against the town.
The rules of the council dictate that the they cannot discuss or vote on public comment so no reaction was offered from the dais.
At the center of Almeida’s complaint is what he described as a discrepancy between police reports and the locations where officers were allegedly stationed.
He claimed officers park on private properties to conduct traffic enforcement while official reports identify the locations of traffic stops as public intersections or nearby road corners. “Official reports state one location, while the vehicles were in fact stationed on private and religious property,” he said. Almeida then identified a list of commercial properties, a charter school and several churches where he alleged officers had staged traffic enforcement operations, and that the staging occurred without express written permission from the property owners of record. If true, the citations and evidence resulting from those operations could be legally compromised. He invoked the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine, a legal principle concerning evidence derived from an unlawful search or seizure, and cited Wong Sun v. United States.
Almeida also pointed to what he described as department records showing motorists being stopped within minutes of one another at the same locations. He characterized the pattern as evidence of revenue generation rather than public-safety enforcement challenging the town to produce its records, policies and directives so the allegations could be evaluated. He also connected the alleged enforcement practices to federal traffic-safety grant funding, arguing that enforcement was structured to satisfy funding requirements. He also said his notice was intended to put various town officials and employees on notice of the allegations, naming police officers, court clerks, the police chief, a magistrate and the town administrator.
Almeida also raised procedural concerns involving court filings and public records requests.
He said motions for discovery, motions to dismiss and an affidavit had been submitted but were improperly rejected by a clerk. He further alleged that public-records requests were not fulfilled within the applicable legal time frame and that the records he received were heavily redacted, including information concerning alleged staging locations. He called for the records to be produced without redactions.
Almeida also questioned court costs charged to motorists whose cases resulted in good-driving dismissals. He said the practice warranted scrutiny concerning coercion, due process and what he characterized as unlawful extraction.
Almeida asked the town to provide written responses to each of his allegations and requested a full investigation within 30 days. He said any response should identify the records reviewed, the responsible official, the legal authority relied upon and any corrective action taken. He also addressed the police chief directly, arguing that the circumstances presented a choice between failing to understand the applicable law and knowingly allowing violations to continue.
The council did not debate the allegations during the meeting. Town Council President Joseph A. DePasquale provided the only substantive response reflected in the recording.
“The gentleman says he’s going to file a complaint in federal court,” DePasquale said. “I think what happens now is that it has to be filed in the proper forum moving forward, and the town will answer that complaint when it’s filed.”
No motion was made to direct a separate response to Almeida's allegations, and the recording does not reflect a commitment by the council to the 30-day deadline he proposed.
The council's next regular meeting is scheduled for October 13.