Articles Posted in Sexual Crimes

Yesterday, we began discussing the case of Somerville High School student Galileo Mondol (hereinafter, the “Defendant”). He, along with two juvenile co-defendants, is facing charges in Pittsfield for an alleged attack upon a freshman during a team-building camp. The charges are serious and are likely to be indicted. They include, but are not limited, to rape, intimidation of a witness and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.

As the blog was posted, the smoke was clearing after a Dangerousness Hearing took place for the Defendant. As you may recall, such a hearing is conducted at the request of the Commonwealth, who believes the particular defendant is a threat to society and so must be held without any right to bail. Usually, when the Commonwealth makes such a suggestion, courts oblige and the defendant can look forward to being held without bail for (at least) the next few months.

Not this time, though.

We began this week warning folks about young people, drug laws and law enforcement. The violation of the drug laws, however, is not the only area in which kids are finding themselves in trouble.

What may have not been acceptable, but seldom prosecuted, in the past does get prosecuted now. There are, however, some cases in which the question of prosecution is a “no brainer”.

We know there are problems between students which include bullying, fighting and hazing in academic institutions. However, a recent case from Western Massachusetts brings such issues to a new level.

You knew there were cases out there like this.

This Boston criminal lawyer spends a good deal of time online. Among my various cyber-travels, it has been impossible to ignore that the sex industry is alive and well and may well occupy the capital of cyber-space.

Of course, not all such behavior is considered “normal”. Further, not all of it is for profit. Sometimes, it is simply for what the Supreme Court once called “prurient interests”.

And so the coffin lid slammed shut on the Zumba fitness instructor, 30-year-old Alexis Wright (hereinafter, the “Defendant”). She pleaded guilty in March and was sentenced today for the now infamous prostitution conspiracy in Kennebunk, Maine.

The defendant originally had a codefendant who was alleged to have been part of the conspiracy. That gentlemen, 57-year-old insurance agent Mark Strong with two kids, was allegedly her business partner in the prostitution ring. He did not plead guilty. In March, he went to trial. He lost.

He was convicted of 12 counts of promotion to commit prostitution and one count of conspiracy to commit prostitution on March 6. According to prosecutors, strong help to the defendant manage the prostitution.

Yesterday both Salem and Boston were buzzing with high profile matters. First, let’s discuss Salem and then, later today, Boston.

Salem’s figure of interest was John Burbine, 49, of Wakefield (hereinafter, the “Defendant”). The Defendant stands charged with Massachusetts sexual assault.

Prior to yesterday’s court date, the Defendant was facing criminal charges in Middlesex County for allegedly sexually abusing children at his wife’s day care is facing new allegations in Essex County. Said children, approximately 13 of them, ranged in ages from 8 days to 3 years of age. These assaults are alleged to have happened over a two-year period, beginning in August of 2010.

They are said to have occurred at the Defendant’s wife’s day-care business which was allegedly not duly licensed.

The Defendant’s criminal justice woes did not begin with the Middlesex case, however. In 1989, he was apparently convicted of assaulting a child.

In fact, his wife is currently charged with recklessly endangering children, and the Commonwealth contents that she knew about his prior conviction and allegations that he sexually assaulted young boys in 2005 and 2009. The latter two allegations, by the way, were never prosecuted.

Meanwhile, the Defendant was before the court in Salem yesterday on similar charges, although this time with only one complainant.
Continue reading

As we left off, Attorney Sam’s Take was discussing the matter of Nathan P. Williams, a 19-year-old Framingham man (hereinafter, the “Defendant”), who is poised to have a Massachusetts Dangerousness Hearing tomorrow. He faces charges of Massachusetts rape and kidnapping of the 15-year-old girl, hereinafter, the “Girl”.

While there may be many ways to attack the Commonwealth’s case in this matter, I would not be overly hopeful if I were the Defendant’s family for tomorrow’s hearing. Particularly if defense counsel plans to simply argue that his client is innocent and so not a danger.

Of course, based on how we are told the system operates, one would think that the argument is viable. After all, the Defendant has not only been convicted of no previous crimes, but, thus far, he remains presumed innocent of the new charges.

Well, remember what I have told you for a number of years now. In reality, the Defendant may be presumed innocent, but he is assumed guilty.

No, that is not a rule of law. It is a finding of reality.

The argument that the Defendant has been convicted of no crimes, including the one at bar will not carry him very far to freedom.

Of course, the Commonwealth’s case on its surface appears strong. Alleged DNA and eyewitness testimony, as well as the alleged finding of the clothing at the Defendant’s “last known” home. As you know, however, things are not always as they seem.
Continue reading

Nathan P. Williams, a 19-year-old Framingham man (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) is in a great deal of trouble. Tomorrow, he is scheduled to return to court for a Massachusetts Dangerousness Hearing. Earlier this week, he was arraigned in district court on charges that he kidnapped and raped a 15-year-old girl at knifepoint in the woods near her home on April third.

According to prosecutors, the Defendant waited around Gorman Road in Framingham until a certain school bus pulled up. The girl (hereinafter, the “Girl”) got off the bus. Then, the Defendant is said to have threatened her with the knife and forced her into a wooded, swampy area. There, according to prosecutors, he raped her.

According to the prosecution, the Girl did not know the Defendant.

“He indicated to her to come here, he wanted her to come with him,” the prosecutor argued at the bail hearing. “He walked into what was considered to be a thickly dense area. He directed her to a secluded spot … [He] proceeded to sexually assault the child in a number of different ways.” The prosecutor also alleged that investigators found “biological matter” on evidence they collected. This material is said to have matched the Defendant’s DNA.

Incidentally, it is a marvelous occurrence that the Commonwealth has such striking evidence so soon. Normally, they claim it takes months to get such conclusive data. Perhaps it was the magic of a high-profile case. Or, perhaps even, as the song goes, “It Ain’t Necessarily So”.

But I digress.

Further search, this time of the Defendant’s last known address, is said to have revealed clothing that matched the description given both by the girl and other witnesses of what the Defendant was allegedly wearing at the time of the attack.

The Defendant’s present lawyer has announced that his client is innocent and that there may be a misidentification in the case. Perhaps heralding this disclosure is the fact that the Defendant covered his face with a gray T-shirt and ducked out of sight below the rail of the prisoner’s dock during the bail hearing.

The Defendant’s not-guilty plea was entered on his behalf to charges of aggravated rape and aggravated kidnapping and he was ordered held without bail until Friday’s hearing.
Continue reading

Yesterday, Attorney Sam’s Take began discussing the plight of a certain Mr. Galant (hereinafter the “Defendant”) in connection with certain federal criminal allegations which allegedly took place in the Dominican republic. They involved various sex crimes involving children.

Over the last years, we have discussed many federal cases and how they usually built. If you take the international aspect of this matter out of it, this case seems to be a typical federal prosecution. Not that the Commonwealth never uses such tactics, but the federal prosecutors have built it to an art form.

Just tell me you haven’t heard this one before…

Suspect A comes into contact with law-enforcement. Suspect A is in possession of stolen materials. Suspect A is in trouble. However, suspect A says that she knows about suspect D, and suspect D has committed even greater crimes. And, by the way, suspect A is a critical witness against suspect D.

Isn’t that what happened in this case? The 14-year-old young lady (Hereinafter the “Girl”) Was found in possession of the Defendant’s credit card and withdrawing money from his account. She then explained how he had apparently broken their agreements and had illicit sexual relations with her and a couple of friends.

“But Sam, are you saying that the only evidence against the defendant is what the complainant said happened?”

No. Apparently, photographs were seized which reflected the Girll in positions which made the photographs child pornography. Further, I would imagine that federal investigators were able to find other evidence which supported the Girl’s claims. An example of this would be airline tickets that the Defendant used on his trips to the Dominican Republic. .

However, the start of this information leads back to the Girl. Further, without her testimony, these prosecutions cannot be made successfully.

“I was under the impression that the case is only prosecuted in the jurisdiction in which it happens. In other words, Massachusetts would not prosecute a case where the fax took place in California. Here, it seems like the United States is prosecuting a case where the facts occurred, or allegedly occurred, in the Dominican Republic. What gives?”

Continue reading

Shrewsbury’s unfortunate-named Conrad Gallant (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) had an interesting take on “What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas. “.

The alleged result?

Federal criminal charges for various sex crimes.

Last Friday, the Defendant pleaded not guilty to charges that he traveled to the Dominican Republic to have sex with underage girls. The 62-year-old Defendant was now in federal court in Worcester. He faces charges including sexual exploitation of children and engaging in illicit sexual conduct in foreign places. He allegedly traveled to the county to have sex with minors at least four times between February 2011 and March, 2012, When he was arrested.

He is being held without bail.

The Defendant is accused of carrying on an affair with a 14-year-old Dominican girl(hereinafter, the “Girl”) for approximately one year.

Not that this one girl was enough, mind you. Apparently, he needed two more.

According to authorities, the matter came to light when National Tourist Police in the Dominican Republic encountered the Girl at a bus stop in Bavaro-Higuey. She explained to the police that she had stolen the Defendant’s credit card and withdrew 26,000 Dominican pesos, the equivalent of $671, after they had sex. He had, after all, promised to give her 20,000 Dominican pesos to take her mother to the doctor, but that did not quite work out as arranged. He did not give her the money.

The Girl continued to tell the authorities about the year-long relationship which purportedly began in February, 2011. She explained that she had even lived with the Defendant for two days at an apartment and engaged in sexual acts with him before he returned home to Massachusetts.

Which is where he is said to live in his ex-wife’s home.
Continue reading

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.
Continue reading