Williamstown Police Department Investigating Unauthorized Use of RMV Database

By Stephen Dravis04:08PM / Friday, March 12, 2021Print Story | Email Story

WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. -- Acting Police Chief Michael Ziemba is investigating an unauthorized use of the commonwealth's Criminal Justice Information System by members of the Williamstown Police Department.

In a statement issued on Friday afternoon, Ziemba said that "a few officers of the Williamstown Police Department searched names of individuals in Registry of Motor Vehicle records accessed through the Criminal Justice Information System database without a criminal justice purpose as required by Massachusetts law and Department of Criminal Justice Information Services regulations."

Ziemba said that disciplinary actions have been taken and that all of the personnel involved are undergoing retraining in the rules for accessing the CJIS.

"In addition, security and logging controls to the CJIS system have been tightened, and logs of all searches are being regularly reviewed by myself," Ziemba said.

Ziemba said that no evidence has been discovered of improper access to the Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) system, and no dissemination of the CJIS information has been discovered.

In response to a request for clarification on Friday afternoon, Ziemba said that there are several internal policies that cover the use of the CJIS, which is accessible by officers and dispatchers who are certified users.

The investigation into the unauthorized searches is continuing.

When it is complete, Ziemba said he will notify by letter everyone whose name was searched. He called completing the investigation and notifying the public "a top priority."

Ziemba said he has been in contact with about half the people whose names were subject of the searches.

"I understand and share their frustration, and I have welcomed the opportunity to hear their fears and concerns," Ziemba said. "I thank them for speaking with me directly. I reiterate my commitment to transparency in sharing with the public what details can be shared while the investigation remains ongoing, and I also reiterate the commitment of the entire department to the safety and well-being of all people in Williamstown."

iBerkshires.com Text Ads

Save & Earn with Greylock

3.30% APY 6-month certificate. Click to learn more! Insured by NCUA.

www.greylock.org

rk MILES Blding Materials

Are You Ready to Update Your Home? Start With rk MILES. 4 Locations (800)670-7433

www.rkmiles.com

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Letter: Vote No on 'Jungle' Primaries

Letter to the Editor02:05PM / Wednesday, September 30, 2026

To the Editor:

They don't call them "jungle primaries" for nothing.

Question 3 on the November ballot would trash two-party primary elections and replace them with California-style, chaotic — and extraordinarily costly — "jungle" primaries that would destroy the very political parties that have kept America stable since Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison created them in the 1790s.

Jungle primaries put all candidates, regardless of party, on one ballot with the top two vote-getters facing off in the general election — even if they're from the same party. That would create chaos, but the real issue is money: Jungle primaries give a distinct advantage to candidates backed by corporate money and the super wealthy. In short, jungle primaries move our primaries from the ballot box to big donor meetings long before campaigning even begins.

When something this radical is proposed, you have to look at who's behind it, who's funding it, and ask "why" they are doing it.

Their philosophical guru is Danielle Allen, a Harvard professor who ran for governor in 2022 but couldn't get 15 percent of the Democratic Convention vote to win the party's endorsement.

The money behind this extreme attack on small "d" democratic politics tells us more. With over $5 million in the bank as of Aug. 28, this is a very well-funded campaign — the lion's share of which came from wealthy Boston-area private equity individuals.

Twenty-two private equity executives gave $3.99 million, or 77 percent of all the money from individuals. Current and former Bain Capital executives contributed $1.92 million, and Berkshire Partners executives put up $1.32 million. In short, 22 rich people put up nearly $4 million to change how five million of us vote. Yes, it seems the ultra-wealthy want to destroy the two-party system that has kept our politics stable for 200 years.

View Full Story