An unnamed gentleman was apparently going about his business in Dorchester Monday. Said business is known as “home invasion“.
The break-in was on Beaumont Street and took place on Monday morning while the occupants were out. One was at work and the other…coincidentally enough…was on jury duty
The burglar took an awful lot of stuff, including all the electronics that he could find. This would include a laptop computer, television set and Nintendo Wii game system as well as other goods. The rooms were found, according to police, . “in disarray, draws (sic) opened, closets opened, items ransacked.”
However, the mystery thief apparently left a gift behind.
His blackberry cell phone. It was found on the bathroom floor. Near the broken window.
As a result of the helpful device, a warrant has issued for the arrest of the mysterious gentleman.
A mailman also told investigators that he saw two suspects climb into a white vehicle with “a loud engine” and take off. Another witness told police she saw two men carry a large object down the driveway and put it into what looked like a white hatchback.
While the phone is aiding law enforcement in tracking down one of the alleged suspects, the police may have to rely on eye witness identification to charge the second man.
As an experienced Boston defense attorney, I have handled many cases wherein the government’s case involves either eyewitness testimony or circumstantial evidence. Each type of evidence brings about its own strengths and weaknesses.
The cell phone has apparently already helped the Commonwealth arrive at a chief suspect, namely, the owner of that phone. However, the fact that said phone was left at the scene of the crime and was not there when the occupants left earlier in the morning is not conclusive of the issue of whether the owner was either one of the burglars or even at the scene of the crime. Perhaps the owner had previously been robbed of his cell phone. Perhaps it had been taken by someone who wanted the police to believe that the owner was the culprit.
After all, the leaving of a cell phone is not necessarily the result of carelessness. It could be the result of an evil plan to shed suspicion onto someone else.
And then there are the eyewitnesses. Well, clearly, there will be all kinds of issues to bring about regarding their ability to observe. Further, if they had indeed seen what looked like a robbery, why didn’t they call the police?
In other words, while the leaving behind of the cell phone might bring about a chuckle, it does not spell “game over” for the future defendant(s). Neither do the eyewitnesses even if they identify suspects.
The only question is….with the defense attorney(s) have the experience or talent to make the best out of these, and other, issues?
Well, I guess that will be for whoever is arrested in this case to decide.
Might I suggest , if you someday find yourself in their position, that you opt for a lawyer with talent and expertise? It might be more expensive…in terms of money. However, it might be much cheaper in terms of years in obligatory Commonwealth housing.
If you would like to discuss a criminal case with me, please feel to call me to arrange a free initial consultation at 617-492-3000.
To view the original story, please go to : http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1314030