Town of Le Roy supervisor arrested following alleged incident with neighbor
An ongoing dispute between property owners in Le Roy reportedly became physical this morning and one of the neighbors, Stephen R. Barbeau, the Town of Le Roy supervisor, was arrested by Le Roy PD.
Barbeau, 55, of 9 Filmore St., Le Roy, is charged with harassment, 2nd.
According Barbeau's neighbor, Pete McQuillen, Barbeau was upset because a tree on McQuillen's property fell and Barbeau believed a portion of the tree came down onto his property.
"He bull rushed me and blew me back into some stumps we'd already cut," McQuillen said.
McQuillen suffered a minor sprained shoulder and he said he will see an orthopedic specialist tomorrow about neck pain.
Barbeau said that this was the third time one of McQuillen's trees has fallen onto his property. One time, he said, the tree damaged his house. This morning when it happened again, he went onto McQuillen's property.
"It was quite heated," Barbeau said. "He got heated right back. I pushed him with my hands open on his chest and he fell to the ground."
It was Barbeau's wife who called the police, Barbeau said.
Harassment in the second degree is a violation (in other words, it's not as high as a misdemeanor).
McQuillen and Barbeau live nearby each other, but the ongoing dispute involves property McQuillen owns that is adjacent to Barbeau's.
McQuillen had plans to build 26 single-family homes for people 55 and over on the property.
After McQuillen believed he won the right to move forward with the development, Barbeau joined in a lawsuit with neighbor David S. Boyce against the town planning board claiming the development was not properly approved. The suit eventually lead to McQuillen's plans being scuttled.
McQuillen is now building other structures on the property and that's another point of contention. McQuillen said he's doing everything within code. Barbeau said he is not.
Barbeau also accused McQuillen of storing junk on the propety and clearing away brush and trees that destroy any privacy barrier.
"He's never met a tree he doesn't like to take down," Barbeau said.
Barbeau was arraigned in Town of Le Roy Court and released on his own recognizance. Town Justice Daryl Sehm also signed an order of protection.
So Barbeau is complaining about McQuillen's trees falling on his property and also about McQuillen cutting down trees....
What the hell Is going on, on my planet!!
Steve, are you actually claiming to own this piece of crap we call a planet?
Wouldn't that make you a 'slumlord'?
As my bumpersticker said, "There is NO gravity. The Earth just SUCKS!!"
I see where Barbeau is 55, and McQuillen was gonna build homes for people 55 and over. Maybe Barbeau's mad that he couldn't live in one of them.
"He's never met a tree he doesn't like to take down," Barbeau said.
No, but, I'm guessing he's met some neighbors he doesn't particularly care for.
Why wasn't he charged with assault?
Ed....I think the animals should be the leaders....like the dogs for example ....they seem to be the only ones civilized these days....lol
Alvin....silly question my friend....if that was me or you....yes sir....prolly be posting bail too.....this guy ????....nah....his title gave him walking papers!!!!!
The pathetic comment by jack is a bit of an understatement in this case....but, he's on the right track!
A "TOWN" supervisor in a "TOWN" court? Time for a change of venue, I would think.
Hmmm...didn't Steve play soccer in high school...?
These dudes should move to Corfu, they'd fit right in there!
Why wasn't he charged with assault? Probably because at the time of the arrest there was no evidence to support such a charge.
Here's the statute for harassment 2nd:
A person is guilty of harassment in the second degree when, with
intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person:
1. He or she strikes, shoves, kicks or otherwise subjects such other
person to physical contact, or attempts or threatens to do the same;
Here's assault 3rd:
A person is guilty of assault in the third degree when:
1. With intent to cause physical injury to another person, he causes
such injury to such person or to a third person; or
2. He recklessly causes physical injury to another person; or
3. With criminal negligence, he causes physical injury to another
person by means of a deadly weapon or a dangerous instrument.
Assault in the third degree is a class A misdemeanor.
An investigation would need to show that beyond a reasonable doubt, the suspect took action that shows a clear intent to cause physical injury.
Judging purely by Genesee County precedent, this is at least felony assault.
Whatever the final charge, the Supervisor seems to have admitted going on the other guys property and putting his hands on him.
Very true John. The man is going to pay a fine for that and move on with his life.
Just an aside: If you ever find yourself speaking to police, there are only two acceptable phrases to use.
Phrase 1: Am I under arrest?
Use this phrase no matter what caused the police to initiate a conversation.
No matter what the answer they give to Phrase One is, immediately initiate phrase two:
Phrase 2: I want to speak with a lawyer.
Repeat Phrase 2 until your lawyer appears.
It is also acceptable to ask for the officer's name and badge number, but I advise noting the badge number quietly while taking inventory of the officer's features including hair color, height, weight and other recognizable/distinguishing characteristics including tattoos and/or birthmarks.
That is especially true if you are asked if they can look in your car for a traffic stop.
Something else to point out too, Howard, is Harassment in the 2nd, is a violation no different than getting a traffic ticket.
The outcome would be no jail time, but either a 6 month contemplation of dismissal or a 6 month conditional discharge, and maybe a fine.
Grumpy Old Men. Glad I don't have close neighbors.
The story mentions that harassment 2nd is a violation.
Grandpa Always said "Fences Make Good Neighbors'
Too funny. Seems like he is really trying to bully everyone. Even the people who live in the town. What goes around comes around.
It seems to me that someone who is an elected official should be held to a higher standard and not stoop to criminal activity. Hopefully people will remember at election time that this guy is a live wire who is lacking in self control. Not seeing him take a whole lot of responsibility either. I agree with Mark, fences are wonderful things!
Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
What I was walling in or walling out,
And to whom I was like to give offence.
Something there is that doesn't love a wall,
That wants it down.' I could say 'Elves' to him,
But it's not elves exactly, and I'd rather
He said it for himself. I see him there
Bringing a stone grasped firmly by the top
In each hand, like an old-stone savage armed.
He moves in darkness as it seems to me~
Not of woods only and the shade of trees.
He will not go behind his father's saying,
And he likes having thought of it so well
He says again, "Good fences make good neighbors."
"Good fences make good neighbors." It's always the worst quote when it's used to make this point. Frost was being ironic...it's the other man who doesn't want to know or communicate with his neighbor, not the narrator.
While we're on the subject, no one should ever say: "I took the road less traveled." It's the same damned road. The point of the poem is that the road leads to the same damned place. THE POINT OF THE POEM IS THAT THE SAME DAMNED ROAD LED TO THE SAME DAMNED PLACE, AND THE POINT OF THE OTHER POEM IS THAT FENCES -DON'T- MAKE GOOD NEIGHBORS.
Howard, Assault 3rd, or Menacing 3rd would be reasonable charges for the stated crime. The difference between the two being whether or not Mr. McQuillen sustained an injury due to Mr. Barbeau's actions. The argument being, that if one person causes injury to another during a physical altercation, the initiator of the altercation must understand that injury is a reasonable and likely outcome.
Wasn't he involved in some sort of brouhaha over his signs in the last election?
Wrong Chris.....the road less traveled leads the person to the same destination, that much is true. But they get a different view than the rest that take the other road. THAT WAS THE POINT.
The point is that the two roads were indistinguishable, but led to the same place.
I'm totally ready and willing to rumble on this one Kyle, but friend me on Facebook for it. We can post the results for folks here to see when we're done, but I'd hate to detract from the intent of this particular thread.
and just to whet your appetite, nothing in the poem suggests the view from the other road would have been any less breathtaking. Matter of fact, it's stated more than once that the roads are equal and indistinguishable.
The most common mistake in interpretation here is that the narrator is somehow engaged in lament or self-justification. It's neither.
Where is the CONservative Outrage?
CONservatives in the Town and Village of Le Roy should be going crazy after a local "Taker", who has lived at the troth of government largess for his entire working life, named "barbeau the Bully", assaulted a local entrepreneur and real estate developer, a "Maker" as CONservatives would call him, named Mr. Peter McQuillen.
Where is the lockstep CONservative support for a "Maker" who has been responsible for the creation of jobs and wealth in and around our community and the outrage against the physical assault against him by a bullying bureaucratic "Taker"?
Why do we only hear "crickets" from our CONservative friends? Where is the demand for the resignation of this bully after he besmirched the office of Town Supervisor by physically assaulting and injuring a constituent? Are there any CONservatives demanding "barbeau the Bully" even apologize for his vigilante like actions and the embarrassment and disgrace he has heaped on the town?
There is one thing we can be absolutely knock down dead sure of, if some Kenyan socialist had accidentally knocked Mr. McQuillen down and injured him during a heated discussion, the CONservatives would have been calling for an immediate impeachment if not a hanging! . . . . Can you spell HYPOCRICY?
In closing, please remember that is absolutely impossible to spell CONservative with out the word "CON" leading the way!