Articles Posted in Murder

I could tell, this morning, as I noted the drop in temperature, not to mention the snow, that something was a bit different. Instantly, I figured out what it was…you woke up wondering what was happening these days in the proceedings leading up to the federal murder trial of James “Whitey” Bulger (hereinafter, the “Defendant”). Well, let me bring you up to date on the latest debate.

The Defendant’s lawyers are reacting to the prosecution’s latest argument regarding the alleged immunity which the defense claims was given to the Defendant during his days as a government informant. The prosecution has argued that a judge should force the Defendant to show proof of the deal he says he had with the late United States Attorney Jeremiah O’Sullivan, who the Defendant says gave him immunity in the 1970’s and 1980’s. It would seem that the prosecution would like to prevent any mention of the immunity issue during the actual trial.

Attorney J.W. Carney, Jr., lead attorney for the defense is arguing that a jury – not a judge – should decide whether the immunity defense in this matter is legitimate. Carney argues further that the immunity pass “did not have an expiration date”.

Attorney Carney argues that it is the Defendant’s choice alone whether to bring up the defense of the immunity prior to trial. Having the court decide that issue, he says would violate the separation of powers between the executive and judicial branches of the federal government. Further, Carney wrote in the opposition to the government’s motion, “…the prosecuting attorneys were not witnesses to the grant of immunity; they simply advocate in an attempt to disavow the (Department of Justice’s) agreement…Despite their inner conflict, the United States Attorney’s Office cannot employ the court to renounce their obligations.”
Continue reading

Over the last couple of days, we have been discussing the case of the first Boston area murder of 2013. Now, a whole four days have gone by and so naturally there have been more murders, or at least homicides, to follow that one. However, we found ourselves discussing the issue of self-defense.

In the New Year’s day homicide, the weapon of choice was apparently a knife. At least, that is what apparently took the life of the young man who died. Of course, it would also appear that before any knife was involved, fists and the rest of the accompanying body were the weapons used.

Many people still misunderstand the theory of self-defense and when to raise it. For example, I have spoken to some clients who believe that when the police are conducting their initial criminal investigation, one can simply explain that the killing happened out of self-defense and the police may well shrug , walk away and close the case.

It seldom works that way.

This is why the subject of the investigation often makes a critical mistake that will come back to hunt him or her later. The investigating officer cajoles the target, making promises like “we only want to hear your side of the story” and “we know you’re good person … it must have been justified”. The target then, rather than consulting an attorney, decides to go it alone and give their story to law-enforcement. The result? The target becomes the defendant.

“But Sam, what if it really was self-defense and the story given by the target lays that out pretty clearly?”

Continue reading

In yesterday’s blog, we began discussing this, the first homicide for The Boston area in 2013. Yesterday, the recipient of the stabbing remained unnamed and unknown. Yesterday, Brian T. MacDonald, 24, of Brighton (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) was arraigned.

The deceased’s name was Anthony “Tony” Spalding. He was a young music producer and art student. He is said to have died as a result of the brawl he had in Allston with the Defendant on New Year’s Day.

Mere hours after an indie rock album he had produced was released.

Spaulding became the city’s first murder victim of 2013 when he was killed just before 3 a.m. Tuesday? Friends and fans remembered Mr. Spalding, stating that he will live on in the songs he helped create.

“Tony knew what he was doing and definitely would have been a force to be reckoned with,” said Tyler Kinsherf of the indie folk band Anika Scribbling. “Anything music he was into. He’s left behind a legacy. These files, these tunes will exist forever.”

Spalding died as a result of being stabbed during the fight outside his home on Pratt Street in Austin.

The Defendant,, an assistant manager for Sears Automotive, pleaded not guilty to the murder charge yesterday in Brighton District Court. He was ordered held on $500,000 cash bail by Judge David T Donnelly.

Assistant Suffolk District Attorney Holly Broadbent described for the court the investigation which led to the Defendant’s arrest. Apparently, investigators tracked the Defendant down by following a 2 mile trail of blood that the police suggest dripped from cuts on three of the Defendant’s fingers. The cuts required emergency room attention.
Continue reading

Hello and Happy New Year, Massachusetts!

In case there be doubt, we are continuing on from where we left off, in terms of criminal justice, at the earliest possible time. In other words, as of January 1, 2013, the Boston area had its first homicide of the year.

The victim is said to be an, as of yet, unnamed 21-year-old man who was fatally stabbed. He was attending a house party when authorities say things spiraled out of control. Police did, of course, release the name of the suspect. He is 24-year-old Allston resident Brian MacDonald (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) . The Defendant’s arraignment is scheduled for today in Brighton District Court.

While the stabbing is said to have taken place at approximately 2:45am, Boston police Officer James Kenneally, a department spokesman, said that the Defendant was not arrested until later in the day. He indicated, however, that he had no information on what touched off the stabbing.

One neighbor, Alex Breski, 21, said he was at the house on Monday night for a New Year’s Eve party and left shortly before the stabbing. He also said that he returned when he heard screaming and saw the victim, a tenant of the house, lying in the snow and bleeding heavily from several wounds.

“His friends got their hands on the wounds,” he said. “There’s blood all over the snow … I was standing there the whole time, he wasn’t moving.”

He went on to say that about 30 people left the house and began running in different directions, and that a dispute over unwanted guests at the party may have preceded the stabbing.

He described the scene as “crazy”.
Continue reading

Massachusetts law enforcement, as well as school officials, Are trying to send the message out to old and young alike that threats about showing up at schools with weapons is not going to be tolerated. Part and parcel of the message is that jokes about school shootings and like murders are not funny in the least.

Attorney Sam’s Take mentioned yesterday that the arrest recently of a 15-year-old girl who supposedly requested somebody bring violence to her school was an overreaction. I stand by that observation. However, it is an overreaction that one must expect during these times immediately following the tragic shooting in Newtown Connecticut.

When I began this topic earlier this week, I mentioned the idea of “felony stupidity”. In these cases, where kids are posting comments about shooting up schools, whether in bad humor or truly meaning it, One has to question such kids mental abilities.

But, then, what comes to mind is some of Bill Cosby’s humor about kids. He contends that kids have “Brain damage”. He goes on to give funny examples. As there is nothing funny about this topic, I will leave you to look up those comments on your own. No, kids do not necessarily have brain damage. However, we do know that they are biologically not yet developed. If brains are not fully developed. They are kids. And part of Being a kid, often, is to make stupid mistakes.

So, here is the problem that now faces all of us and our kids. We are living at a time where, understandably, there is no tolerance for any suggestion of school violence. It doesn’t matter if it’s a joke, and over statement, or cry for help. They will be no tolerance fart. How do We react then two things for which we have no tolerance? These days, we bring in law enforcement. True, the result will impede our kids abilities to get further in life, but, the idea is to prevent the shootings. Clearly, a bunch of kids lying dead because of the shooting is worse than the roadblocks put up in the criminal records of these other kids.

So much so that today mere rumor of the possibility of such violence is enough to begin a criminal investigation.
Continue reading

Massachusetts schools and law enforcement, like many across the country, are dealing with concerns of another school shooting. In the aftermath of the Connecticut mass murder, such concern is reasonable. Are overreactions based upon rumors understandable? Is it necessary?

A couple of years ago, we had a very public tragedy happen. A young girl, a troubled young girl, committed suicide. The cause was laid at the feet of other kids. This was a great tragedy. As a result, we overreacted and ended up with new anti-bullying law that proved to do nothing other than ruin those other kids lives. This was, and is, usually our reaction. Over reaction. In these overreactions, our weapon of choice is the criminal justice system.

Attorneys Sam’s Take got involved. We discussed the matter in fairly unpopular terms because we held an unpopular opinion.

Well, Here we go again.

Yesterday, we discussed a recent matter involving threats against schools. Of course, these rumored threats are not what one would call a tragedy. The tragedies we are afraid of, many of which have happened, the actual violent acts of unspeakable proportion. One such tragedy, the worst yet at least around here, is the one which took place in Connecticut a couple of weeks ago.
Continue reading

Well, it had to end sometime.

Boston’s Dwayne Moore has been found guilty of various murder charges stemming back to the so-called “Mattapan Massacre” back in September, 2010. This was the case where Mr. Moore was accused of being a part of a drug-related robbery which ended up being a blood bath. Four murder charges to be exact. he was also convicted of some other charges, as well as acquitted of a few others, but when you are looking at four life sentences without parole, those tend to dim by comparison.

At least one of those acquittals, though, are interesting fodder for us to discuss. However, we will get to that in a moment.

Mr. Moore was found guilty on Monday and sentenced on Tuesday.

Victims said this does not heal their broken hearts.. “September 28, 2010. That was the day my life changed forever,” said Ebony Flonory, whose sister and nephew were murdered. “At least we’ll have a little peace and to know that the people who did this will pay for it,” said Patricia Washum, whose friend was murdered.

Meanwhile, not all of the human drama was on the Commonwealth’s side. For example, courthouse officers had to drag away Moore’s mother, outside the sentencing, who was apparently upset when a photographer took her picture.

Defense attorneys vowed to appeal and claimed that the prosecutors got the wrong man convicted. They further recharge that the state’s star witness, Kimani Washington, got away with murder. During trial, defense counsel described Washington as a “snake oil salesman” who himself committed the crimes. Washington admitted participating in the robbery, but said he left before the shootings.

Of course, Suffolk County District Attorney Dan Conley. Seems satisfied with his decision.
“Washington was a participant in this robbery and he is going to pay a very heavy price for that,” he said. In fact, Washington is to serve 16 to 18 years.

In an unfortunate comparison by the judge, which reminds us that timing is everything, His Honor drew a parallel between the victims in Newtown, Conneticuit and the youngest victim in Mattapan, saying the 2-year-old boy was just as innocent, his death just as tragic.

Attorney Sam’s Take On Problematic Criminal Cases And Appeals

In any criminal case, when the verdict is guilty, unusual occurrences that occur trial will likely lead to appeal issues. Certain issues come to mind automatically. On the other hand, some seem to have already taken care of themselves.
Continue reading

Sometimes the sequel is much more interesting than the original . Even in the land of criminal justice!

Take the ongoing Mattapan massacre multiple murder trial for example. Last week, we discussed the surprising direct examination of the sole eyewitness regarding his “surprise” alleged redemption of memory…and eyewitness ability. Now, as the jury deliberates, the court was treated to another surprise…the need to excuse one of the deliberating jurors.

All judges are very careful to give certain instruction to jurors throughout a jury trial. The judge presiding over the trial, Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Locke is a very well seasoned and deliberate jurist. You may be sure that he is not one likely to forget such admonitions. One of these admonitions is that jurors are not allowed to do their own research in a case. Rather, they are told that they must determine their verdict based solely on the evidence in the trial as applied to the law as the judge gives it. Of course, other obvious things may be used…such as the ability to reason and common sense.

The juror in this case did online ballistics research. That is a direct violation of the court’s Orders.

And so it was that Judge Locke had to announce, “A juror violated the rules I have given. One juror took it upon himself to do research and that is not evidence, only the testimony is evidence.”

To make matters worse, that juror may well have tainted the rest of the panel. Apparently the juror shared some of his research with other jurors. For this, of course, the judge chastised the juror. However, Judge Locke praised the other jurors who apparently indicated that they would disregard the information. In fact, the jury’s foreperson alerted the judge in writing this morning about the violation.

Judge Locke, finding that the research was not necessarily directly linked to the events on trial, determined that a mistrial did not need to be declared. He did, however dismiss the rogue juror and replaced him/her with an alternate juror.

“I cannot tell you how serious and upsetting a violation of a juror’s oath and obligation this was,” Locke said. He also explained that the deliberations would have to be started from the beginning.

Jury issues have complicated this matter which was not so clear-cut in the first place. First of all, the panel had to be bused in from Worcester throughout the five-week trial. Deliberations began for alittle under two days last week and cancelled on Friday due to a sick juror. Today, the court had to look into the matter of the juror violation. Deliberations were halted for a few hours as each member of the jury was questioned individually by the judge. After the jury was reconstituted and told they had to start from the beginning, the deliberations restarted at noon. Not surprisingly, no verdict was immediately forthcoming.
Continue reading

One of the Massacuhusetts murder cases we have been tracking for the past couple of years is in the middle of its second trial. This is the so-called “Mattapan Massacre” trial in which, at the first trial, the jury acquitted one defendant and could not reach a unanimous verdict as to the other, Dwayne Moore (hereinafter, the “Defendant”).

The Defendant is on trial again as this is being written.

The attorneys are expected to give final arguments to the jury today.

The last time we discussed this case was when it came to light that the one eyewitness of the shootings, Marcus Hurd, had decided to change his testimony since the last trial.

Mr. Hurd, the sole survivor of the 2010 attack in Mattapan that killed four people, including a two-year-old child, gave a detailed account at the first trial. At that trial, though, he indicated that he could not identify the shooters. After that trial, howerver, Mr. Hurd delivered the bombshell that his memory had improved, he was no longer afraid and he now recognized the Defendant as the man who had shot him.

A hearing was held during which the Commonwealth requested it be allowed to bring this new testimony forward at the re-trial. They won that hearing. Mr. Hurd was allowed to testify as to his improved abilities.

But…he did not do so.

Nobody asked him.

And so, the hard-won testimony, which I would imagine the Commonwealth touted as critical and the “truth” never came in.

During his testimony at the retrial, nobody asked him. And so, he did not identify the Defendant as the shooter.

The reason why the defense lawyer would not ask the witness to identify his client as the murderer are evident.

When asked why the Commonwealth did not elicit the testimony, the prosecutor explained that he does not discuss trial strategy with the press.

Yeah. It’s a big mystery.

Attorney Sam’s Take On The Game Of Criminal Justice

Last week, we discussed my assertion that the criminal justice battles, both on the streets and in the halls of Justice have become games.
Continue reading

Often, a trial is like a Broadway play; it is, after all, a real human drama. Especially in the case of criminal trials.

One of the tricks of the trade, in both disciplines, is to manage suspense. Call it window dressing or call it crucial supporting evidence, but prosecutors sure seem to be setting the stage for the new feature presentation of the re-trial of the Mattapan Massacre murder trial.

This time, only one man stands in the prosecution’s hot seat….Dwayne Moore (hereinafter, the “Defendant”). This time nothing can be left to chance. This time, the Commonwealth gets to shift the burden of proof onto two, not only one like last time, main witnesses.

You see, the Commonwealth’s star witness last time was a gent who admitted to being in on the planning of the drug robbery. However, despite independent evidence to the contrary, he claimed to have stayed around just long enough to inculpate the two defendants and then conveniently left before the shooting started.

Apparently, the jury did not buy that beyond a reasonable doubt.

Fortunately for the Commonwealth, though, one of those severely injured, yet not quite killed, in the shooting has changed his testimony from the first trial so that he may just be able to help the prosecution get a conviction in time. The witness, Marcus Hurd (hereinafter, the “Witness”) testified in the first trial that he could not identify the man who shot him.

Guess who has changed his testimony.

So, now there is new hope for the prosecution that the original star witness plus the Witness, with his new story, will be enough to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Continue reading