NYC man arrested for 403 phony 9-1-1 calls

May 24, 2004
3,231
503
608
Queens, NY
#1
The first 402 must not have been too eggregious...
BC-NY--Phony-911-Calls
Jan 4, 5:54 PM EST
NYC man accused of making 403 phony 911 calls
By COLLEEN LONG
Associated Press

NEW YORK (AP) -- A 51-year-old landlord who lived on one of Brooklyn's trendiest corners was so annoyed by street noise that he placed hundreds of fake 911 calls of dire tales, such a subway explosion and shots fired, to bring police to the scene, authorities said Friday.

Louis Segna was arrested after police discovered that 403 calls were made from his cellphone during the past two years, said New York Police Department Deputy Inspector Terence Hurson.

Many of the calls were about unruly crowds, but some were more serious, such as one placed on Sept. 1 by a caller who said there was an explosion inside the L-train subway, a busy line that connects Brooklyn with Manhattan, Hurson said. Police raced to the scene and discovered no problems.

Segna was charged Friday with false reporting and reckless endangerment. He was being held on $5,000 bail. It wasn't clear if he had an attorney. According to a criminal complaint, Segna said he was having a great deal of trouble with his tenants and needed help the day he called in the phony explosion.

Hurson said Segna was a fixture at community board meetings and had been in the precinct dozens of times, complaining about the noise outside his building on the corner of Bedford Avenue and North 7th Street in the heart of Williamsburg. The area is bursting with bars, cafes and boutiques and is usually crowded day and night.

Two emergency calls were placed on Dec. 30: One of an unruly crowd and the second, about 20 minutes later, was of shots fired, police said.

"Of course we race back," Hurson said, but no trace of gunfire was found.

Another call was made on New Year's Eve. The man on the phone said that someone had pulled a knife him. But police found nothing.

Hurson said he started to wonder, and listened to the two from Dec. 30. He said he immediately knew it was Segna because they had spoken about a dozen times and the man has a distinctive voice. Hurson said Segna speaks slowly and has a bit of a speech impediment.

Investigators ran through the other calls and discovered hundreds made from Segna's phone, and he had given his name at least once before, according to the criminal complaint.

"He said: `It's the only way I can get you guys to come and listen to me,'" Segna said, according to Hurson.
 

Ballbuster1

In The Danger Zone...
Wackbag Staff
Aug 26, 2002
102,736
16,578
839
Your house, behind the couch
#2
Louis Segna was arrested after police discovered that 403 calls were made from his cellphone during the past two years
It took them 403 calls from the same number to see a problem?
 
Dec 8, 2004
48,595
20,930
693
Maine
#5
Dunno if this is the same guy...and I don't know how common that name is...

PEOPLE v. SEGNA 158 Misc.2d 35 (1993) 600 N.Y.S.2d 615
The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Louis Segna, Defendant.
Supreme Court, Kings County.

January 26, 1993

Legal Aid Society, Brooklyn (Robert Baum and Vincent J. Romano of counsel), for defendant. Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney of Kings County (Steven D. Kramer of counsel), for plaintiff.


[ 158 Misc.2d 36 ]

JOSEPH KEVIN McKAY, J.

Introduction
Defendant is the subject of a nine-count indictment charging various violations of article 265 of the Penal Law for unlawful possession of homemade explosive devices and a rifle in his home at 167 North 7th Street, Brooklyn. He has moved to suppress all the contraband to be offered against him at trial on the grounds that it was acquired as a result of a warrantless and unlawful entry, search and seizure at his home.
The prosecution originally opposed the motion by affirming that the search occurred during the execution of a lawful order of eviction against defendant, described as a "squatter" at the premises. This persuaded a previous Justice of this court to deny defendant's motion summarily, with leave to renew upon "new facts." After reargument, I ordered an evidentiary hearing, which was conducted over the course of four sessions in November 1992, and consisted of the testimony of a police sergeant, a City Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) manager, an ASPCA agent and the defendant. Based on that record and the posthearing briefs of counsel, the court now renders a decision, embodying findings of fact and conclusions of law which follow.
The Facts
First, it is now undisputed that there never was any court order or warrant of eviction affecting these premises at the time in question, nor did the ASPCA ever obtain any type of warrant or other lawful court order to investigate or prevent
[ 158 Misc.2d 37 ]

cruelty to animals at the premises.1 What really happened was that the ASPCA received a complaint about mistreatment of a dog at the premises on or about January 28, 1991. During their routine investigation of this complaint, ASPCA agents went to the premises the next day and heard a barking dog. Because no one answered, they interviewed the next door neighbor, the source of the complaint. She identified the occupant, told them that HPD was the owner and that animals roamed in the backyard under foul conditions.

ASPCA's next move was to contact HPD, request written proof that HPD was the owner of 167 North 7th Street, and insist that HPD grant them access to those premises. The assigned HPD property manager had no keys to the premises and did not believe any HPD official had ever been inside the house. She agreed to cooperate with the ASPCA, however, by providing a letter of City ownership and by meeting the agents at the address on February 4, 1991 to help them gain access. No one took any steps to obtain the occupant's consent to enter (except by knocking on the door on two occasions), or to seek lawful Criminal or Civil Court authorization to take action.

Link