Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog

According to media reports, David Ettlinger—a second grade teacher at Newton public schools—was arrested this week on child pornography charges. Recent updates indicate that Ettlinger, 34, is now also facing charges of indecent assault of a child under the age of 14.

Several sexualized images of minors were allegedly found on the teacher’s home computer at his Commonwealth Avenue residence. Image(s) of a 12-year-old family friend, as well as a video of Ettlinger having sexual contact with a female minor, were also allegedly discovered on the laptop, which was seized by investigators. According to news reports, multiple pairs of young girls’ underwear were found in his residence as well

The Underwood Elementary School and the surrounding community are quite alarmed about the charges, but no evidence has been found that Ettlinger’s students have been victimized. Reports suggest that Ettlinger, who has taught with Newton public schools for 12 years, otherwise appears to have a clean criminal record. He was apparently a popular teacher at the school.

Child pornography crimes are aggressively prosecuted by state and federal authorities in an effort to protect susceptible minors. Knowing Purchase or Possession of Child Pornography is one of two major pornography crimes in Massachusetts. A first offense is punishable by up to 5 years in a state prison and up to $10,000.

If you are facing charges of child pornography or indecent assault on a child, you should contact an experienced MA criminal defense lawyer.

Newton, Mass. teacher faces child porn charges, NECN.com, January 18, 2012

Second-grade teacher at Newton school faces child pornography charges, Boston.com, January 17, 2012

Newton teacher faces 2 sets of child porn charges, Boston.com, January 17, 2012

Attorney Sam's Take On Martin Luther King And Credibility

In the courts of justice, whether they be criminal or civil, the issue of
credibility is always imperative. Technically, of course, I have already
mis-stated the law. This is because a person's credibility is not considered an
issue unless that person testifies as a witness.

At least, that is what the law says. However, I am referring to reality.

As you may know, this Boston criminal lawyer has years of experience
as a lecturer and trainer of law students and new lawyers alike. What I tell
my students is that anyone who is in front of the jury has their credibility
being considered by jurors throughout the trial. This is true whether the
person is a lawyer or a witness. Whether that person is testifying...or simply sitting down with counsel. The jury is always watching.

And, be assured, it is critical to the particular cause at issue.

However, credibility is a tricky thing. It is often effected by our various
prejudices and preconceived notions.

"Sam, weren’t' t you going to be writing to Dr. King today instead of just pontificating about how much you know about trials?"

Yes and no. There are many lessons we can learn from Dr. King and his
experiences. And some of them have to do with the criminal justice system.
After all, he took on the establishment. He broke laws...laws we now realize
were unjust. However, it took folks like Dr. King to challenge them in order
for us to begin our path of understanding equality.

A path that has not yet come to an end, I might add.

Dr. King served time in jail. No, he was not a violent felon, a drug dealer or
drunk driver. He did, however, commit crimes that were in existence at the
time. In fact, he wrote from jail, one of the his classic works now referred to
as the "Letter From A Birmingham Jail".

Continue reading "A BOSTON CRIMINAL LAWYER DISCUSSES DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING AND CREDIBILITY" »

2011 is now history in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. In preparation for the changing of the year, a group called “AboutBail” compiled a list of some of the highest bail amounts throughout the country in 2011.

Let’s take a look, changing the actual names of the defendants, at seven of the ten listed:

1.19-year-old Gary Gunplay from Elgin, Illinois. He was a “known” gang member facing nine counts of felony shootings. With cases pending, Gary was stopped during an alleged traffic violation. Outstanding warrants were discovered and, despite trying to flee, he was caught. With two loaded handguns. Bail $2,250,000

2.19-year-old Gary Grabby of Glendale, California was arrested for sexually assaulting two brothers, ages 8 and 3, while babysitting. Bail: $2,700,000

3.Dave Daddykiller was a Chicago, Illinois gentleman accused of helping another gentleman kill Dave’s father. Dave had met his pal while serving time and the two allegedly bound, gagged and killed his father. The alleged murder was also found to be a violation of parole. Bail: $3,000,000, until the parole violation hearing, when he was held without bail.

4.Sheldon Shopper of Chicago, Illinois, was accused of stabbing three people at a Walmart. Under the influence of narcotics, he is claimed to have entered the store with a nine-inch butcher’s knife and stabbing three people with it. He was charged with attempted murder and aggravated assault. Bail: $3,000,000.

5.Billy Bullets was a Knoxville, Tennessee man who was arrested for theft, aggravated assault, felony murder and first degree murder. Apparently, Mr. Bullets went to a pawn shop and asked to see an unloaded shotgun. “seeing it” ended up resulting in his loading it with ammunition he had brought with him and shooting the employee who was helping him. Bail: $4,000,000.

6.Ricky Robber was a Fayette County, Indiana gent who actually failed at his attempt at robbing a CVS store. According to the government, he wore a wig, glasses and mustache (and a gun) at the robbery scene. They also say that said items were found in the home in which he was staying...along with blood-spattered clothing and a gun that “may have” been used to murder five people. Believed to be a flight risk, bail was set at $5,000,000

7.Dilbert Diplomat was a well-known French national and former head of the International Monetary fund. He was grabbed on charges of attempted rape, sexual abuse, forcible touching, unlawful imprisonment and a criminal set act. The complainant used to be an unknown Manhattan housekeeper. His bail conditions amounted to $6,000,000

The government then dropped the charges against him because they decided the complainant was not believable..

Attorney Sam’s Take On The Rationale Of Bail

Looking at these rather high bail amounts might give you the idea that there is little, if any, consistency when it comes to the mandating of bail amounts. For example, one would expect the bail for murder to be higher than someone accused of attempted robbery or even sexual assault.

Continue reading "A BOSTON CRIMINAL LAWYER REVIEWS THE RATIONALE BEHIND MASSACHUSETTS BAIL HEARINGS" »

Hello and happy new year. Yes, the (attempted) daily Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog is back!

I hope you had a great holiday season. For some, however, it did not end so smoothly. Let's look to Norton, Massachusetts, for one such tale. It's results may surprise you.

At approximately 5pm on Saturday, New Year's Eve, a 66-year-old woman was walking her two dogs. In the same southeast MA location, an off-duty state trooper was hunting deer.

The trooper mistook the dogs for deer.

So he shot the woman. She was hit in the torso.

The trooper called 911 after realizing the error; he had mistaken the trails of the two dogs for that of one deer.

While we know the woman was brought to a Rhode Island hospital, no further information about her has been released. The state police apparently performed an investigation which lasted about one day, when they announced the shooting was an accident. The trooper's information has also been withheld because he faces no Criminal charges.

Attorney Sam's Take On Accidental Shooting Investigations

Do you think that you would receive such a swift benefit of the doubt if you were in the the trooper's predicament?

Last month, we discussed how what used to be considered accidents and civil matters are now being prosecuted as crimes. Not here though. It was already released that criminal charges are not expected.

“Why does that strike you as ‘interesting’, Sam? Surely you do not believe that the officer intentionally shot the woman.”

Continue reading "MASSACHUSETTS STATE TROOPER SHOOTS 66-YEAR-OLD NORTON MA WOMAN" »

When we last left off, Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog was discussing an apparent shift in the criminal justice system through which people are punished for not playing the part of a government witness. I was opining that we could see more of this trend in the future.

You may be wondering what the status of such involuntary testimony is right now.

" ‘Involuntary testimony’? Sam, it can't be that I can get arrested for not cooperating with the police about a crime that has nothing to do with me, can it?"

It certainly can. In fact, let's look at what you mean by what "nothing to do with me" means. As far as law enforcement is concerned, any matter in which you witnessed something involves you. Given the goals of law enforcement, any potential witnesses should have to cooperate with police.

This makes sense, of course. After all, their stated goal of any criminal investigation is to solve the mysteries and catch the "bad guys" as police define them. Given that this is their primary motive, it makes sense that they feel that any reluctance on the part of potential witnesses should not be tolerated. After all, it makes their job harder and sometimes, even, impossible.

"Hey...they may be right. It kind of makes sense. Wouldn't such a system make sense?"

Well, it might be, if not for the fact that it is contrary to certain fundamental ideals underpinning our judicial system.

Continue reading "ATTORNEY SAM'S TAKE ON MASSACHUSETTS INVOLUNTARY GOVERNMENT TESTIMONY (PART ONE)" »

On Monday, the Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog broke the news that Attorney General Martha Coakley was about to meet with the legislature with recommendations in connection with the legal abomination our representatives passed into law last year about Massachusetts bullying.

Ever the optimist, I actually hoped that perhaps she would arrive with recommendations that actually add some common sense to the situation after both prosecutorial and regular politicians have botched the job…for the bully and bullied alike.

Well, apparently, she thinks she did. In fact, she told the Legislature’s Education Committee yesterday that her suggested requirement would be a “common sense” follow up to the statute passed and the several subsequent high profile bullying incidents in the Commonwealth.

I agree with her. Her solution is the perfect“follow-up” to that embarrassingly worthless statute.

Her recommendation? That every case of confirmed bullying be reported to the authorities. That’s right, the police and prosecutors. Let the prosecutions begin!

Attorney Sam’ Take On AG Coakley’s Solution

My first professional response to this was something like, “no…wha…really? no really? She didn't actually say....really?” Then, I sat and thought about it. I mused that perhaps her approach was the right one. In fact, maybe the only problem is that her approach does not go far enough.

Continue reading "MA ATTORNEY GENERAL MARTHA COAKLEY’S BRILLIANT SOLUTION TO THE BULLYING PROBLEM" »

This has been a sad week for Massachusetts babies.

We began the week with the story about a 13-month old boy being found dead in the back of a van. Now, as the week comes to a close, news of a 3-year-old boy from Weymouth being found dead crosses our bow. This occurred yesterday after what is being called an accident occurring while he was napping according to the Commonwealth.

According to the local district attorney’s office, the death does not appear to be suspicious, although it is still under investigation. What the mysterious accident was has not yet been announced. All we are told is that there was an adult in the home and the child was taking a nap.

It is said that medical results in the case are expected to come in today. Apparently, said result will either close the investigation…or start it anew.

The question, of course, is what do these tragic stories have to do with you?

Attorney Sam’s Take On Massachusetts Criminal Investigations Into Tragic Accidents

A Child Is Found Dead. The very thought of it upsets all of us. It upsetsMassachusetts law enforcement too. After all, they see their job as protecting the innocent. What can be more innocent than a baby? So, I suppose it is not surprising that one of the first responses to such a tragedy is “who is to blame?”

Continue reading "MA Infant Tragedies And Homicide Investigations" »

Your Cambridge work day is over and you return home. You are minding your own buisenss as you pick up the mail and bring it into your home.

You have received something from the Clerk’s Office in Suffolk County where you used to live. You open the envelope and find that you are being commanded to appear in court for something called an Arraignment.

You read further to find that Lisa Liar, your old flame, has claimed that you assaulted her last month. Further she says it was a Boston domestic violence incident.

Now what? Is it time to stand yourself against the wall and assume the position?

Not quite yet.

Attorney Sam’s Take On Massachusetts Criminal Summonses

No, your life is not over.

The summons that you have received indicates that a criminal complaint for Massachusetts assault has been issued against you. Yes, you need to show up for the arraignment. Yes, you have a criminal case pending against you But, no, all is not lost.

Continue reading "I Have Received A MA Criminal Summons In The Mail…Am I Under Arrest?" »

Today is Labor Day. I am a Boston Criminal Lawyer. It is what I do in my days of labor. And so it seems appropriate to post this blog today, rather than this past Friday. Call it rationalization if you wish, but today we tackle the question to which I referred on Thursday. What if you are dissatisfied with your criminal defense attorney? Are you stuck?

Unlike most of the questions we pose in this daily blog, there is a simple one-word answer to this question. The answer is “no”.

There are, however, some things you should keep in mind.

Attorney Sam’s Take On What You Want In An Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney

There are a number if things to keep in mind if you are looking to switch counsel in an ongoing criminal case. One is the timing of the switch.

“I know… because if you change too deeply in, you will anger the prosecutor or the judge, right?”

Continue reading "“I unhappy With My Boston Criminal Lawyer. Can I Change Attorneys?”" »

This has been a pretty bad week for you as far as the Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog is concerned. Earlier in the week, you were facing two trials. Yesterday, you were arrested.

The news is good and bad today. The good news is that you have not been arrested after all. The bad news is that you have learned that there is a Massachusetts warrant out for your arrest.

Similar to the issues discussed yesterday, there are general factors when it comes to arrest warrants which are the same whether the underlying accusations are for a Tewksbury home invasion, a Mattapan gun possession or a Swampscott drug case.

However, with such a warrant, law enforcement can pick you up any place and any time and place you in custody. There will not be any issue of bail until you find yourself in front of a judge, who must then vacate the warrant. Then, there will likely be a Massachusetts bail hearing to decide where you will be staying for the next several months (at least).

There is a simple two-word answer to the question of what to do when you find out about the warrant. Namely, “Get Counsel”!

On the other hand, if you are a daily reader of this blog, you know that every few situations in criminal justice can be summed up in two words.

Attorney Sam’s Take On MA Arrest Warrants

Massachusetts arrest warrants are usually issued when one of two things have happened. One is that, whether you knew it or not, there was a criminal investigation taking place in your name. The Commonwealth has decided to charge you with one or more crimes. The purpose of the warrant is to have you picked up and brought in before the court. In custody. Once there, the lawyers can argue under what conditions you might be released.

Continue reading " “I Have Learned There Is A MA Arrest Warrant Out For Me. What Do I Do?”" »

The Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog has been warning you it could happen.

It has suddenly happened…and it was the last thing you expected. You (or a loved one) have been arrested.

You came home tonight after work and, just as you were sitting down to eat, you received company at your door. The company was dressed in blue. They had a colorful car with a pretty red light on top of it.

They told you that they were there to arrest you.

You first thought it was a joke. But then you noticed that they did not seem like the humorous type.

And then they produced the Commonwealth Bracelets of Shame.

And off you went downtown, trying to remember what you had heard about the realities of Massachusetts bail hearings.

Attorney Sam’s Take On Getting Arrested In Massachusetts

Whether you like it or not, it is not terribly difficult to get arrested these days in Massachusetts.

Yes, of course, you could take the easy road and actually commit a crime. However, you could also have angered the wrong person. You could have made a momentary error of judgment. There could be, simply put, simply a mistake being made.

The point is…what do you do when it happens?

Continue reading "What To Do After You Have Been Arrested In Massachusetts" »

Yesterday, the Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog began its discussion about the Massachusetts murder case of Lauren Astley (hereinafter, the “Deceased”). The gentleman accused of the crime(s) is 18-year-old Nathaniel Fujita (hereinafter, the “Defendant”)

We looked at the Woburn bail hearing which took place, including the prosecutor’s representations as to what she believed the evidence in the case would show. She read some text messages allegedly between the Decased and the Defendant. She interspersed them with what as going on behind the scenes, such as the Deceased’s arrival at the Defendant’s home, the Deceased’s desire to save their friendship (in light of their recent romantic breakup) and the like.

I mentioned that it was possible that all this material might actually not make it into the mix of evidence which might find itself before the jury during a trial.

Today, let’s discuss why.

Attorney Sam’s Take On Text Messages, Hearsay And Admissible Evidence

As we have discussed in the past, not all items that the world considers “facts” are admissible as evidence in a trial. Every jurisdiction has its own Rules of Evidence which controls what may and may not come into evidence…and when.

As any experienced trial attorney can tell you, the rules can be a bit confusing…unless one is used to dealing with them.

Hence the need for an experienced criminal defense attorney when you are facing criminal charges.

Continue reading "A Boston Criminal Lawyer Discusses Potential Evidence In Woburn Murder Case (Part Two)" »

This week in the Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog, we have touched upon various issues involving Massachusetts search and seizure. Since I started this daily blog, I have warned you that, when performing a criminal investigation, police officers are allowed to mislead and, indeed lie, to a suspect.

A short time ago, this was confirmed in a case entitled Commonwealth v. Tremblay.

In this case, Mark D. Tremblay (hereinafter the “Defendant”), owned a house next door to Mr. Harold Nelson , whose home was adjacent to a lake in Chelmsford. Mr. Nelson was the owner of a twenty-foot Bayliner boat. On April 27, 2002, the boat the boat erupted in flames. The fire caused extensive damage to the vessel, and investigators concluded that it had been intentionally set.

The Defendant became the prime suspect during the resulting arson investigation.
Naturally, the Defendant was questioned during the investigation. However, the Defendant made the typical mistake that would be fatal to his defense. He believed what the police wanted him to believe. They told him that the statements he was to give were “off the record”. Apparently mistaking the interrogation for a press interview, the Defendant made inculpatory statements.

The Defendant was indicted and brought to trial. His attorney brought a motion to suppress the statements, claiming that the statements were involuntary because they were made with the understanding that they were made “off the record”. The lower court disagreed. The Defendant was convicted.

The Defendant appealed his conviction and the Appeals Court agreed with the trial court. And, now, finally, the Supreme Judicial Court has agreed with both lower courts.

Seems to me the Defendant could have saved alot of time, money and trouble if he had simply read this daily blog.

Attorney Sam’s Take On Search And Seizure And Police Investigations

In the end, we turn to a jury or judge (usually a jury) to determine guilt or innocence. As an experienced Boston criminal lawyer, I can tell you that the system basically sees this as a “no harm, no foul” situation. In other words, if a defendant is found “not guilty”, then no harm has been done, right?

Continue reading "Boston’s SJC Upholds Misleading Police Interrogations In Massachusetts Criminal Investigations" »

Massachusett’s top judges, the Supreme Judicial court, among others, (hereinafter, the “Judges”) are based in Boston. And they are not happy. Angered at the budget cuts approved Monday, they have urged Governor Deval Patrick to stop appointing new judges as they now already have to close 11 courthouses and lay off many employees.

In a strongly worded statement, the Judges say that said budget jeopardizes the right of every person, guaranteed by the Massachusetts Constitution, to swift justice.

“We make this request . . . with great reluctance and deep regret,’’ the Judges wrote. “The people of Massachusetts deserve better. But the fiscal jeopardy into which the operation of the Trial Court has been placed demands extraordinary action.’’

The governor’s legal counsel, Mark Reilly, has issued a statement calling the Judges’ pronouncements “confusing at best.’’ He has rejected their request that the governor stop appointing judges.

“I do think we have a crisis,’’ Representative Eugene L. O’Flaherty, a Chelsea Democrat said. “I disagree with the solution that is proffered by the court.’’

Michael W. Morrissey, a former state senator who became a prosecutor this year, believes that closing courthouses is short-sighted. He said moving criminal trials out of the Brookline court, for example, would endanger community programs that work closely with the court and with the local police.

“It isn’t just a case of appearing in court,’’ Morrissey said. “It’s the layers of support you have around you.’’

Attorney Sam’s Take On Lack Of Justice...Swift Or Otherwise

As I prepared to write today’s blog, I happened upon some comments posted by readers of Boston.com. Naturally, this led to my adding my own two cents. Many of said commentators seemed to be of the opinion that the Judges are on the right track. In fact, they went a bit further. They suggested that all the courts get closed down because their perception is that these institutions of Justice accomplish nothing close to Justice.

Naturally, if you have no courts, you don’t have much need for judges.

You can scoff at the anger toward the criminal (and, I would imagine, civil) justice system. Of course, you can scoff at a lot of opinions and realities. One might argue, though, that simple blind criticism without any thought to realistic solutions is how we got in this mess in the first place.

Continue reading "Boston’s Top Judges Move To Close MA Courthouses And Limit Judges " »

South Bosotn’s Whitey Buldger’s new attorney, J.W. Carney, Jr., has been heard explaining to the media that the government has had 20 years to prepare his client’s case for trial and that he has had the matter for (at the time) 5 days. From Boston’s Federal District Court to school disciplinary hearings, we have discussed the existence of an unequal playing field facing you when the finger of accusation comes to call.

Let’s end the week with one more example, shall we?

The Boston Globe reports that it has obtained a police an Internal Affairs Division report about a police officer involved in what has been called one of the most notorious police brutality cases in the city’s history. The matter stems from a 2009 arrest in the North End. The officer, David C. Williams (hereinafter, the “Officer”) has been placed on paid administrative leave for lying during the department’s investigation into the incident.

In 1999, the Officer was fired from the force after being implicated in the racially charged 1995 beating of an undercover police officer. He was then reinstated with nearly $550,000 in back pay after a civil service arbitration in 2005.

In the instant matter, the Officer faces the possibility of losing his job under Police Commissioner Edward F. Davis’s nearly 19-month-old policy of dismissing officers who lie in the line of duty, to internal affairs investigators, or in court (aka what would be called "perjury" if a non-officer did it.

The Officer’s attorney insists his client told the truth about the 2009 North End arrest. “He’s absolutely testified honestly and truthfully about the incident that occurred,’’ his lawyer explains . “Any conflicts about the incident were the result of a fast and rapidly evolving incident.’’

Do you find it odd that such claims are supposed to be believed when made on behalf of a police officer by his officer, yet not for the rest of you?

Anything wrong with that?

At any rate, the Officer is appealing the finding. A hearing is scheduled for later this month.

Attorney Sam’s Take On The On-Again/Off-Again Relationship Between Law Enforcement And The Truth

The relationship between police officers, or federal agents, and objective factual truth tends to be a bit tumultuous. Whether it is a good day or a bad day in said relationship, be assured that it is a different relationship than the law provides for you.

This case demonstrates this fact brilliantly.

For example, you would be prosecuted for perjury.

Continue reading "Boston Police Officer Allegedly Lies To Police Investigators And Faces No Criminal Charges" »

Most Massachusetts schools are now closed for the summer. For some students, however, the ability to attend class ended long before the end of the school year. It is a problem that is not merely local, but national as well.

Take 15-year-old Nick S, for example. Nick was by all accounts a good kid. He was a Boy Scout and played on the football team at high school. Nick even did well in school and helped out at home by caring for his mother, Sandy, as she battled Lou Gehrig’s disease.

Then, one day Nick purchased one capsule of JWH-018, a then-legal compound that mimics the effects of marijuana at school. The school, having a strict policy against drugs, guns and campus crimes, found out about the purchase. Nick was questioned by authorities, admitted his wrongdoing and apologized.

You might think it would end there…or at least shortly thereafter. You would be wrong.

The school held a disciplinary hearing. Nick’s parents and his mother’s nurse accompanied Nick to it. Just them. That’s right, no attorney.

You see, a school administrator discouraged them from bringing an attorney. You know, much the same way police officers often do as they sit down to take your statement or invite you to a Massachusetts Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing. The administrator explained that bringing a lawyer would be unnecessarily adversarial.

Imagine their surprise when the hearing became an hour and a half of badgering and harassment. According to Nick’s dad, it was “adversarial to an extreme.”

“They were badgering him and impugning his integrity. It brought him to tears, had me in tears, my nurse in tears.” To say nothing of the effect on Nick’s seriously ill mother.

As a result of the hearing, Nick had to be transferred to another school.
He committed suicide six days after starting there.

Now, surrounded by pictures of his late young son, Nick’s dad is trying to make some sense of it all and why his son had to die. “I thought with Nick’s record, with this being a first-time infraction and with the fact he possessed something that they didn’t even know what it was, surely they couldn’t throw the book at him,” he says “I was warned that a lawyer would make the proceeding unnecessarily adversarial, so I didn’t pursue any legal advice at that time.”

Attorney Sam’s Take On Counsel And School Disciplinary Hearings

“Aw come on, Sam. I’m sorry about this tragedy and all, but that is a pretty extreme situation, isn’t it? I mean, how often does something like that happen?”

You would be surprised.

Continue reading "A Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Discusses Whether You Need A Lawyer At A School Disciplinary Hearing" »

Blasphomy! Yet, I heard it myself on WBZ radio this morning!

Yesterday, the Casey Anthony jury in Florida shocked the nation, if not the world, by delivering a verdict of “Not Guilty” after her widely watched trial. Not guilty of killer her two-year-old daughter, Caylee. Not guilty of all the homicide counts. Guilty only of lying to investigators.

This may have surprised people...but that was not the unspeakable things to which I refer above.

The public is roaring “foul!” How could a jury listen to all the evidence as well as the law the judge told them and find the defendant not guilty of killing her daughter? After all, everybody else, who, incidently, did not have the jury’s vantage point, were convinced of her guilt! And they should know better, after all. They were mostly convinced of her guilt long before the jury was even sworn! Who are these Johnny-come-lately jurors to contridict general concensus?

Nope. Still not the misbegotten statements about which I speak.

The forbidden sentiments I heard on the radio were spoken by the prosecutor involved as well as an alternate juror in the case.

The DA said that he believed that the jury followed the evidence and the law! The alternate juror said he agreed with the verdict!

How dare they? People are comparing the verdict to the O.J. Simpson fiasco. Once again, according to uninvolved and comparatively uninformed public, the jury got it wrong. How dare the alternate juror and prosecutor suggest anything different?

To make matters worse, as everyone will tell you, the defendant may be set free after serving a mere 3 years in custody awaiting trial! How can that be the result simply because a silly little jury found her not guilty of homicide?

To add insult to injury, the defense attorney lashed out at the media after the verdict, saying, “ I hope that this is a lesson to those of you having indulged in media assassination for three years, bias, prejudice and incompetent talking heads saying what would be and how to be".

Many believe that this criticism was aimed toward legal scholars like Nancy Grace in her television show.

Incidently, do you remember the last time there was a public outcry over a finding of “gulity”? How about the first time? Can you even think of more than one instance when that occurred?:

Attorney Sam’s Take On The Assumption Of Guilt

“Sam, weren’t you going to continue writing about Whitey Bulger and prosecutorial advantage in the courtroom today? Is there some connection between the cases, other than Whitey’s being arraigned in federal court today for alleged Massachusetts murders, about which we are unaware?”

There sure is. Those two cases and just about any other criminal matter.

Continue reading "South Boston’s Whitey Bulger, Casey Anthony And Innocence" »

You know, when addressing to things like the long-sought capture of alleged mob kingpin Whitey Bulger, one really has to laugh sometimes at what captures the media’s attention.

As you may recall, last week was a big one for Whitey (hereinafter, the “Defendant”), He had just been captured after evading various state and federal law enforcement agencies, and their outstanding warrants, for years. The Defendant was wanted for a host of crimes including various Massachusetts murders, federal white collar crimes and…well, you name it. He was apprehended out of state with his his wife, Catherine Elizabeth Greig, a great deal of money and, allegedly, a substantial collection of firearms. He was brought back to South Boston’s federal court, where two significant legal issues quickly presented themselves.

The first issue was that of counsel. We discussed it a couple of times in this blog last week, but, suffice to say, the Defendant took the position that, since the government had taken all his money upon his capture, he could not afford his own experienced criminal defense attorney. The government sought to break new legal ground by weighing into the issue, claiming that publically funded counsel should not be provided because law enforcement believed that the Defendant had other access to money…such as his family and friends.

Prosecutors also claimed that the Defendant must have money hidden elsewhere and so he should use that. What they did not mention of course, was that they were hoping the Defendant would disclose said alleged funds so that they could grab that money as well.

And so it was that the court scheduled hearings on that mind-bending legal conundrum and a temporary attorney (hereinafter, “Substitute Counsel” was appointed in the meantime. Said attorney would deal with the issue of counsel as well as the new motion brought forth by the government. The new motion was to dismiss the earlier charges against the Defendant (the ones that allegedly sent him fleeing the Commonwealth in the first place) and simply go forward on the later indictments which included several charges of murder.

Well, the week brought us two days of hearings for the Defendant. As for the dismissal, the government won. This was really no surprise, as we will get to tomorrow. The Defendant, however, did get his court appointed attorney. Frankly, he hit the legal jackpot in doing so, receiving the aid of Attorney J. W. Carney, Jr., an attorney with whom I am acquainted and respect greatly.

The funny part is that of the various issues which have been, and will be, involved in the Defendant’s prosecution, none seemed to be the issue which primarily concerned everyone as the week came to a close. Instead, it was the issue of transportation which seemed to be the main concern.

You see, at the request of the United States Marshals, the Defendant got a free helicopter ride.

To bring him to court from his holding cell, the Defendant was brought on board a US Coast Guard Jayhawk MH-60 helicopter and then driven in a convoy to US District Court in South Boston for his Wednesday hearings. He was then flown back to jail on the Coast Guard chopper.

Various people were enraged. Family members of those allegedly killed by the Defendant complained that they had never had such a helicopter ride. Of course, presumably, they had never spent such time in chains as the Defendant is, either.

Indeed, radio talk show hosts, closely monitoring these critical issues opined at the costs associated, and so charged to the public, were in the high thousands of dollars. The last word on the number is that the Coast Guard and US Marshals are claiming that the transport cost only $1,500.

Even politicians weighed in on this seemingly critical matter. United States Senator Scott Brown, for example, wrote a letter to the head of the US Marshals Service, pointing to the Defendant’s helicopter ride and the marshals’ use of a “private luxury jet’ to bring him back from California, where he was arrested last week. “I agreed with U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz when she said Whitey Bulger would be ‘treated like every other defendant.’ So far, that does not seem to be the case,” he wrote.

Maybe they should have just made him walk the many miles like in the good old days, pulled by horses should he slow down.

Attorney Sam’s Take On Courthouse Security, Surviving Court And Money

Before you imagine the Defendant sitting in his window seat, happily enjoying his helicopter ride as officials point out sites of interest as he licks his ice cream cone and holds a balloon in his other free hand, you may want to venture back to reality.

Continue reading "South Boston’s Whitey Bulger Faces Homicide Charges And FliesThe Unfriendly Skies" »

Today, Boston’s federal court has a jury that has begun deliberations. It is the jury which has been sitting through the Sal DiMasi corruption trial. They will review the evidence. They will review the law.

Many of the factual issues are in dispute between the various defense attorneys and the Assistant United States Attorney. They have all suggested points of view as to these disputes. Is what the attorneys have presented to the jury simply spin?

Maybe. Or maybe the arguments were the most important part of the deliberations, although they contained neither judicial instructions or evidence in and of themselves.

Attorney Sam’s Take On The Analysis Of Evidence Perception(Part 2 Of 2)

Way back when, when I was a Brooklyn prosecutor, I found myself frustrated by the courtroom setting. This was particularly true when trying felony drug cases.

Continue reading "A Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Analyzes Massachusetts Evidence And Juries" »

We have been talking about juries and their deliberations. Sal DiMasi will be sitting in the hot seat as a Boston federal jury determines his fate next week. As you may have heard, the judge has handed down to the attorneys a draft of the jury instructions he intends to give when he charges the jury. It is the last chance for the attorneys to influence what the jury hears during the trial. Once they deliver their closing arguments, the judge charges the jury and it is all in the juror’s hands.

It is an uncomfortable place for a trial lawyer to be. Believe me, I have been there countless times. There is nothing more you can do…but wait, relive how things went and, most of all, guess what is on the jury’s collective mind.

What images did they take into the jury room? How much did they understand the law as the judge gave it. How much do you want them to have understood that law? Most of all, what perception of reality did the jury take back to that jury room with them?

And the last chance for the white collar crime attorneys to influence that sense of reality is the next 24 hours. The presiding judge, the Honorable Judge Wolf, has handed down potential jury instructions and has indicated that he will wait until the attorneys give their closing arguments (tomorrow) to finalize the instructions.

And then…the choice is the jury’s. The court has indicated that, “I’m going to instruct the jury that they have to consider each defendant, and they can choose to convict one of them, two of them, none of them, or all three.”

That much is clear. However, other issues with regard to the instructions are not so clear. For example, the defense lawyers want the court to tell the jurors that in order to convict DiMasi, they must find that he hatched a kickback scheme and directed payments to be made to associates in exchange for his help — a threshold that they say prosecutors have failed to prove.

Prosecutors, however, say they need to prove only that DiMasi was a willing and knowing participant in what they allege was a conspiracy to help a Burlington software company win state contracts in exchange for hundreds of thousands of dollars in kickbacks.

And so, while finalizing closing arguments, the fight for instructions has been on. The court heard argument from all sides today. While potential instructions have been handed down, nobody will know what the court will actually tell the jurors until he actually gives the charge.

And so, as the trial nears its end, the pressure is on the lawyers to find the right words in this final attempt to give the jury the most important thing which will effect the outcome of the trial.

Continue reading "Sal DiMasi Corruption Trial In Boston Federal Court Is Close To Going To Jury" »