Samuel Goldberg has been a Massachusetts criminal defense attorney for 20 years. Prior to that, he was a New York state prosecutor. He has published various articles regarding the practice of criminal law and frequently provides legal analysis on radio and television, appearing on outlets such as the Fox News Channel, Court TV, MSNBC and The BBC Network. To speak to Sam about a criminal matter call (617) 492 3000.

MASSACHUSETTS MAN PRETENDING TO BE A PHYSICIAN FACES MULTIPLE SEX CRIMES PROSECUTIONS

My last Attorney Sam’s Take discussed two new cases. One involved a physician who has been indicted for receiving and possessing child pornography. While the charges in his case no doubt bring shock and horror to those who know him, it seems to be nothing out of the ordinary as far as these types of cases tend to go.

At the very least, it pales when compared to the discoveries about Mr. David Anderson (hereinafter, the “Defendant”). The Defendant’s situation has a number of unusual twists that will, no doubt, end up as elements for various criminal charges.

Of course, one of the questions will be where the charges are prosecuted.

Attorney Sam’s Take On Potential Criminal Charges And Jurisdictions In Sex Crimes Cases

The Defendant could well find himself prosecuted in both Massachusetts and Connecticut. This is why both cases are likely to remain pending for awhile. Massachusetts does not have the jurisdiction to prosecute for the crimes in Connecticut, and visa versa.

Both states’ charges, and more, however, can be brought in federal court. First of all, since the crimes seem to cross state lines, that is enough to give federal prosecutors jurisdiction. Further, it is likely that some of these crimes involve the internet. If so, then federal prosecutors could get jurisdiction over that..

“But he could not be facing charges in both federal and state courts, right?”

As long as the crimes prosecuted are not exactly the same, yes he could. In short, the Defendant could find himself facing criminal charges from all three courts. Likely, however, a decision will be made amongst the justice departments to do one or the other. In other words, both state courts or one federal court.

Clearly, the Defendant will continue facing charges in connection with child pornography. This would include the creation of child pornography if some of his “patients” were children.

At least in the Commonwealth, the Defendant is not simply looking at criminal charges in connection to the items seized from his computer. The Defendant was “examining” these folks under false pretenses. As a result, he could be looking at battery charges in connection to ALL the examinations. Further, the examinations which included…certain parts…he could be looking at indecent assault and battery charges. Finally, with his younger “patients”, he could be looking at statutory indecent assault and battery charges. Of course, the same goes for potential charges of rape if the Defendant inserted anything into any of the “patients” orifices as “part” of the examinations.

I do not know whether the video-tapes he created had sound. If so, then he has also violated what is known as “wire-tapping” statutes. That would be another felony charge.

“Sam, it seems like the Defendant’s own handiwork (the videos) ruin him. Is it unusual for those charged in such crimes to videotape themselves committing the crime?”

In my experience….no. It may seem hard to believe, but it seems that many such defendants turn out to have taken rather graphic video tapes of their crimes and keep them…until they are discovered and turned over to the police.

“It seems that the Defendant’s wife is a crucial witness in this case for the prosecution. Can’t she decide not to testify?”

Normally, a wife can refuse to testify against her husband, and visa versa. There are exceptions to this rule however. One of them is if the victims of the crime are children. So, she likely could not refuse to cooperate in this case. However, while she might be important to issues of search and seizure, she is probably not a necessary witness in the actual prosecutions. More important will be those depicted in the videos.

“Search and seizure?”

Yes…the question of whether the items seized by law enforcement were seized in violation of the Defendant’s Constitutional rights. It is likely to be his best shot at avoiding serious prison time in this case.

For the original article upon which this blog is based, please go to http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1061181216&srvc=rss

Contact Information