Alejandro Done, 46, hereinafter, the “Defendant” was in Charlestown District Court this morning. He was arraigned on a rape charge stemming from a July 29, 2006, sexual assault on a woman near Moakley Park.
He remains in custody, held without bail, as the Commonwealth intends to have a dangerousness hearing to show that he should continue to be so held. Said hearing is currently scheduled for July 27th.
This Thursday, the Defendant will be arraigned on charges involving a July 29, 2007, attack along the Esplanade.
You might think that this is bad enough. However, in addition to the summer attacks of 2006 and 2007, law enforcement indicates that the Defendant will be charged with at least three other summertime attacks. These are alleged to have occurred on June 16, 2007, July 13-14, 2009 and June 13, 2010.
Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel Conley said the investigation is ongoing and the Defendant may be linked to more unsolved assaults.
The sexual assault charges coming the Defendant’s way are the results of matches, according to the Commonwealth, on DNA taken from the Defendant during the investigation in yet another rape case.
This is the case in which he is accused of raping a woman while working as an Uber driver in 2014. In that case, a DNA sample was taken from the Defendant and then run through a database of unsolved attacks.
The Commonwealth hit the jackpot.
According to Conley, the DNA was a match for the 2014 Cambridge rape case a well as the others.
In the Cambridge case, the Defendant is accused of picking up the complainant from a Boston residence on December, 2014. He is said to have presented himself as a driver for Uber and allegedly drove the victim to a secluded location where he beat and sexually assaulted her.
In the above-referenced cases now pending in court, as well as the ones still to come, the Defendant has indicated that he is not guilty. His charges in the Cambridge matter include charges of rape, assault to rape, kidnapping and assault and battery.
As of this morning’s arraignment, the Defendant was already being held without bail on that case.
-
Attorney Sam’s Take On The DNA Database And Repetitive Hearings
You can see a video of today’s events at thus WCVB site.
“Sam, does the state need a person’s permission to run their DNA against other unsolved cases?”
No. Once the Commonwealth legally has the evidence, it can check it against whatever it wants. The same is true with fingerprints.
“Why would he give a DNA sample if he knew he was guilty of other sex crimes?”
First of all, we do not know that he knows he is guilty of anything. He is presumed innocent of any and all charges (despite the detail that he is being held without bail…!). Second, he likely did not have much choice in the matter.
While it does take a court order, a criminal defendant can be forced to give up such a sample. It is not considered very intrusive (usually a swab from the inner cheek).
“If the Defendant is already being held without bail, why is the Commonwealth seeking another hearing to hold him without bail?”
There are a number potential reasons. Two of them particularly come to mind.
First of all, I have long explained that the prosecution, lead by a politician, the District Attorney, likes to look “tough” on crime. This is a great opportunity to not only do so but seem to be victorious at the same time.
A trained chimpanzee is likely to prevail should one be given a chance by the Commonwealth to handle the dangerousness hearing. No judge is likely to let this guy out.
Another potential reason is that the prosecution does not want to take any chances. What if the Cambridge case goes south? Should that happen, and the Defendant is released on that case, the prosecution wants to make sure that he does not hit the street…and the proverbial road.