163, 166 (1994). The problem here is with the veracity prong as it is evident that the information in the affidavit comes from a first-time informant with no track record in the past. See Commonwealth v. Rojas, 403 Mass. 483, 486 (1988); Commonwealth v. Parapar, 404 Mass. 319, 322 (1989). While conceding that the affidavit does not establish the general veracity of this initial informant, the government argues that the specific reliability of the informant’s tip is sufficiently enhanced by other factors to cure the veracity defect. See Commonwealth v. Parapar, supra at 322. Even though the initial informant did supply some detail in his description of the criminal activity alleged, that tip is not enough, by itself, to satisfy the veracity prong. See Commonwealth v. Rojas, supra at 487 (<HOLDING>). Independent police corroboration of a
recognizing that the right to be present can be waived in noncapital felony federal cases recognizing that specificity of detail can contribute to reliability but noting that other indicia of reliability are usually present recognizing that remedial statutes may be applied to pending cases because they usually do not affect vested right recognizing that a plaintiff could present evidence of futility recognizing thomas methodology but noting that it is not mandatory