by

In Massachusetts, a personal care aid pleaded not guilty to over 24 charges related to the theft and use of a debit card meant for a legally blind and deaf teenaged girl. Kerri A. Ryan is accused of using the card between January and April of this year to get cash to buy food, gas, and alcohol. Ryan, however, says that part of her job in assisting the 15-year-old girl was to shop and prepare meals for her.

The girl’s mother, Risa Costello-Falvo, is accusing Ryan of stealing the card, getting access to the PIN number, and using the card to take out almost $2,000. The Department of Revenue provided her daughter with the debit card, which automatically deducts a $100 from the girl’s father for child support.

Ryan allegedly used the card to make 41 transactions. Costello-Falvo says she didn’t realize the transactions were being made because she had put away the card for future use. Ryan had worked for Costella-Falvo on and off for the last four to five years, but she has not worked for her since February.

Ryan, who was not arrested, was released on personal recognizance and will appear in court for a pretrial hearing in August. Effective May 3, the state of Massachusetts has revoked her license to practice nursing for at least five years.

Charges that Ryan faces includes seven counts of larceny under $250 and trying to commit a crime, eight counts of improper use of a credit card under $250, one count of receiving a stolen credit card, a count of larceny over $250 with one scheme, and larceny by check greater than $250.

Just because you have been arrested for a Massachusetts theft crime does not mean you will be found guilty. There are effective defense strategies an experienced Boston theft crimes lawyer can employ to maximize your chances for the best outcome possible. A good criminal defense lawyer will conduct his or her own investigation of the charges against you and file all motions that can benefit your case to achieve the best outcome possible.

Health aide accused of theft from disabled teen, Telegram.com, July 17, 2008

Related Web Resource:

Crimes Against Property, The General Laws of Massachusetts
Massachusetts Crime Rates 1960 – 2006, Disastercenter.com Continue reading

by

A spokesperson for the Sheriff’s Department in Los Angeles County says actor Shia LaBeouf may not have caused the drunk driving-related injury accident on July 27 in West Hollywood, California. The accident occurred around 2:30 am.

LaBeouf, who was arrested for DUI, has had to undergo surgery to repair an injury he sustained in his left hand. The woman riding with him and the woman driving the other vehicle were also injured. Both women sustained minor injuries.

LaBeouf has yet to be arraigned on the DUI charge. Now, however, there is evidence to indicate that the accident may have happened because the other driver ran a red light before striking LaBeuof’s truck, which rolled over during the accident.

If you have been arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs in Massachusetts, it is important that you speak with a Boston, Massachusetts DUI lawyer right away. An experienced DUI attorney will know how to handle the charges against you and can investigate your case to determine whether there is evidence showing that the criminal charges against you should be dropped or reduced.

For example, the charge and penalties will be different depending on whether this is your first or a subsequent DUI offense. The penalties are more severe if someone other than the alleged drunk driver suffered serious injuries in a DUI crash. In Massachusetts, an arrest for DUI that causes serious physical injuries can lead to up to 10 years in prison.

Shia LaBeouf might not have caused collision, Sheriff’s Department says, Los Angeles Times, July 29, 2008
Actor Shia LaBeouf arrested, injured in drunk driving crash, AFP, July 28, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Shia LaBeouf

Massachusetts Law About Drunk Driving, Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries Continue reading

by

Actor Christian Bale was released on bail on Tuesday, after he was arrested earlier in the day following allegations that he assaulted his sister and mother. Bale has issued a statement denying the allegations.

The 34-year-old movie star was detained at the London police station in England following his arrest. Bale’s mother and sister are accusing him of assaulting them at the Dorchester Hotel, the day before the latest Batman movie, “The Dark Knight,” had its European premier in London. Police reportedly waited to question him until after the movie opened.

In Massachusetts, a threat of violence is considered an assault. No one actually has to have been physically hurt for an assault charge to be filed-the same goes for an assault and battery charge, which includes the physical contact of another person without his or her permission.

If you have been arrested for assault and/or battery in Massachusetts, you are entitled to proper legal protection and representation against all charges. Some incidents are not always what they seem, and our Boston, Massachusetts assault lawyers can determine whether the charges against you can be dropped or reduced. Even if you have not been charge with a crime, but you are under investigation or have been arrested, it is never too soon to hire an experienced criminal defense team that is on your side.

Domestic Violence
The physical or emotional assault of family members, domestic partners, and ex-spouses is considered domestic violence, which is punishable by criminal law. The best way to combat any Massachusetts assault charges or other allegations related to domestic violence is to speak with an experienced domestic violence lawyer.

State law considers domestic violence a misdemeanor crime unless someone is seriously injured. If a domestic violence report is filed against you with police in Massachusetts, law enforcement officers are legally mandated to arrest anyone accused of this crime.

Christian Bale denies assault allegations, USA Today, July 22, 2008
Batman Star Christian Bale Arrested in London, National Post, July 22, 2008

Related Web Resources:
Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, Mass.gov
Domestic Violence
Continue reading

by

In Middlesex Superior Court, the attorney for three plaintiffs that are accusing Massachusetts State Senator James Marzilli of sexual harassment has filed an action requesting a civil rights injunction. The injunction would operate like a restraining order and carry a penalty of up to 10 years in state prison if he is ever convicted of assaulting a woman once the injunction were issued.

Marzilli has been indicted of accosting a person of the opposite sex. He was arrested after he allegedly went up to several women on June 3 in Lowell and asked them for sex or tried to grab them. Police apprehended him following a pursuit on foot. The incidents occurred when he was in Lowell on official business.

Shortly after his arrest, Marzilli was hospitalized at McLean Hospital and diagnosed with bipolar disorder. He was indicted earlier this month on charges of annoying and accosting people of the opposite sex, indecent assault and battery, resisting arrest, and disorderly conduct.

In an unrelated incident in May, Middlesex County prosecutors said they would not file criminal charges against him following an investigation into charges filed by a woman accusing Marzilli of touching her inappropriately without her permission. Just this week, two other women came forward to file a sex abuse lawsuit against Marzilli. One woman is accusing him of lewd sexual conduct while another woman claims that she woke up in his guestroom to discover the senator on top of her.

Massachusetts Civil Rights Injunctions
The Massachusetts Civil Rights Act allows for an injunction to be issued for individuals that are the victims of intimidation, threats, or coercion because of their gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, country of origin, or disability. A person that violates a civil rights injunction can end up in jail. The penalty may require time in state prison if someone gets hurt.

Two more allegations, WickedLocal.com, July 15, 2008
Related Web Resources:
2 more woman allege harassment by Sen. James Marzilli, BostonHerald.com, July 16, 2008
Your Rights Under the Massachusetts Civil RIghts Act
Continue reading

by

New York Giants running back Ahmad Bradshaw is completing a 30-day sentence in jail for violating the conditions of his probation related to an undisclosed offense from when he was a juvenile. Last month, Bradshaw voluntarily turned himself in at a Virginia jail, and his release is slated to take place before football training camp begins later this month.

The probation violation was charged out of the Tazewell County Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court. The sentence is not related to other run-ins with the law that Bradshaw experienced when he was a student at the University of Virginia and Marshall University.

In 2006, Bradshaw pleaded guilty to stealing a video game console from a college dorm room. The criminal charges against him were eventually dropped, and Bradshaw was ordered to serve probation for two years. Prior to this incident, Bradshaw was arrested for resisting arrest and possession of alcohol as a minor in 2004.

There are many reasons for why a probate may be found in violation of your probation, such as:

• Failing a drug test.
• Being charged with another criminal offense.
• Failure to give notice of an address change.
• Missing a scheduled meeting with your probation officer.
• Illegal drug or weapons possession.
• Violating other conditions of your probation.

A probation violation may not only lead to additional penalties, including jail time, but it could damage the terms of your plea agreement or other conditions related to your probation.

Giants running back Ahmad Bradshaw jailed in southwest Virginia, NYDailynews.com, June 19, 2008
Bradshaw serving 30-day sentence for probation violation, AP, June 19, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Ahmad Bradshaw, ESPN.com
Sentences – Fines, Jail and Probation, Expertlaw.com Continue reading

by

Nearly 12 years after the murder of JonBenet Ramsey, her family has finally been cleared of any involvement in her death. The body of the six-year-old beauty queen was found in the basement of her home in Boulder, Colorado, on December 26, 1996 and for years, her father John, her mother Patsy (now deceased), and her brother Burke were considered among the leading possible suspects in her slaying. They were never, however, formally declared suspects.

JonBenet’s family has always maintained their innocence, but the media reports alluding to their possible involvement damaged their reputations. Today, the Boulder District Attorney’s Office released a letter officially clearing John, Patsy, Burke, and all immediate relatives of having any part in her murder. DA Mary Lacy formally apologized for being unable to clear their names before, and, moving forward, her office promised to treat the family as victims in the JonBenet murder. The announcement came after a new testing method using “touch samples” proved that none of the Ramsey family members’ DNA is a match for the new evidence discovered in her case.

Tests in March indicate that a pair of long johns found on JonBenet’s body contained DNA belonging to an “unknown male” that matched a DNA sample taken from JonBenet’s underwear. Tests were also conducted to make sure that the DNA did not come from medical examiner or law enforcement employees. This latest DNA was also used to exonerate John Mark Karr, who in 2006 confessed to killing JonBenet, of her murder.

In a televised interview, John Ramsey expressed gratitude at the formal acknowledgement that he, Patsy, and Burke did not play any part in JonBenet’s murder. He also expressed his continued wish that the real killer be found.

Family cleared in JonBenet Ramsey’s death, MSNBC.com, July 9, 2008
DNA clears JonBenet’s family, points to mystery killer, CNN.com, July 9, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Read the DA’s Letter to John Ramsey

JonBenet Timeline, CBS News.com Continue reading

by

Middlesex District Attorney Gerard T. Leone Jr. announced this week that two former Tufts University workers have been indicted for stealing almost $1 million from the school.

The indictments accuse Josephine Nealley, the former director of the student activities office, and Raymond Rodriguez, the office budget and fiscal coordinator, of stealing university funds in two separate incidents. An anonymous tip led to the discovery that Nealley was controlling bank accounts from the student activities office.

Nealley was indicted on three counts of larceny. She is accused of stealing $372,526. Rodriguez was indicted on two counts of larceny. He is accused of stealing $604,873.

An internal probe determined that Nealley transferred school funds to her personal accounts before making purchases at Whole Foods, Disney Store, Omaha Steak, Foxwoods Resort and Casino, and IKEA. Rodriguez is accused of writing a check to himself from Tufts for $100,000 and using the money to pay personal bills. He also allegedly used Tufts funds to pay for concert tickets, vacations, and designer gear, reportedly shopping at Gucci, Bloomingdale’s, and Prada.

Larceny is the illegal taking and carrying off of personal property without the owner’s permission and with felonious intent to take away the property permanently.

2 accused of stealing nearly $1m from Tufts, Boston.com, July 2, 2008
Two Former Tufts Employees Indicted For Stealing Nearly $1 Million From University, MiddlesexDA.com, July 1, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Tufts University

Sentencing Guidelines, The Massachusetts Court System Continue reading

by

In Massachusetts, two Wrentham selectmen have filed criminal charges against one another for assault. John Zizza and Robert Cohen got into a bathroom argument at a June 3 board meeting. According to Zizza, Cohen suddenly approached him and started uttering swear words, telling Zizza not to touch him and telling him he would be sorry. Zizza says he feared for his safety. Cohen, however, says it was Zizza that acted in an intimidating and hostile fashion and purposely tried to provoke him.

The argument began after Zizza told Cohen that he had checked nominating papers-Cohen’s included-for forged signatures. Both men dispute the other’s account of the confrontation, although they aren’t accusing each other of inflicting physical harm.
The selectmen are scheduled to make an appearance in Wrentham District Court to find out if there is enough evidence to charge either one of them.

Massachusetts law considers verbal abuse to be a crime if someone uses words to threaten another person in a manner that causes the recipient of the threat to fear physical harm. An assault charge may even be filed if someone threatens another person with bodily harm and that person fears for his or her safety.

Under the General Laws of Massachusetts:

Chapter 275: Section 2. Complaint of threat to commit crime
Section 2. If complaint is made to any such court or justice that a person has threatened to commit a crime against the person or property of another, such court or justice shall examine the complainant and any witnesses who may be produced, on oath, reduce the complaint to writing and cause it to be subscribed by the complainant.

Wrentham selectmen file assault charges against each other, Boston.com, June 24, 2008

Related Web Resource:

Massachusetts General Laws

Wrentham selectmen’s feud hits public, Web, The Sun Chronicle, June 25, 2008 Continue reading

by

The Suffolk District Attorney’s Office has dropped the child porn possession charge that was filed against Michael Fiola, a former Department of Industrial Accidents investigator in Massachusetts. Fiola was fired from his job after child pornography was discovered on his state-issued laptop. The computer was a replacement laptop, issued in November 2006, after the one he had been using was stolen.

Several months later, IT officials at the DIA noticed that his data usage was four times higher than that of his colleagues. He was fired on March 14, 2007. Fiola had spent several years as a DIA employee investigating workers’ compensation fraud.

Massachusetts state police convinced the Boston Municipal Court to charge him with possession of child pornography in August 2007. After conducting a lengthy investigation, however, Tami Loehrs, a nationally renowned computer forensic analyst retained by Fiola’s defense team, discovered that the former investigator was the victim of spam.

Loehrs’s 30-page report discusses how Fiola’s laptop had been running corrupt virus protection software and that crackers and spammers had barraged the computer’s memory with images of pre-teen porn and incest. The images could not be seen by the naked eye.

Loehrs says she is 100% convinced that viruses and trojans had compromised the laptop, which may have been hacked, and that her findings show no “user interaction preceding the porn activity,” some of which had been rapidly downloaded.

Fiola’s wife, Robin says her husband has always been computer illiterate, and that he plans to sue the DIA for “destroying our lives.” Fiola says that their friends abandoned them and he wants to get his reputation back.

Child pornography possession is considered a serious criminal and social offense in Massachusetts. A criminal charge of child porn possession can lead to the ruin of your reputation, the loss of your job, and the loss of relationships.

Probe shows kiddie porn rap was bog, Bostonherald.com, June 16, 2008
Victim of malicious software tells how it cost him his job, his friends, his livelihood and his peace of mind, Computerworld.com, June 18, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Department of Industrial Accidents

Tami Loehrs
Continue reading

by

R & B Performer R Kelly has been found not guilty of all 14 child pornography charges. The verdict ends a six-year saga for the singer, who was accused of having sex with a minor and recording the incident on video. He could have faced 15 years in prison if he had been convicted of all the charges and would have had to register as a sex offender in Illinois.

The video had been mailed to the Chicago Sun-Times in 2002. Kelly was initially indicted on 21 counts of child pornography. Prosecutors claimed that Kelly was the man seen engaging in the graphic sex acts with an allegedly 13-year-old girl. The video was recorded sometime between November 1997 and February 1998. Copies of the tape were sold on streets across the United States.

Kelly, and the girl, who is now 23-years-old, have always denied that they are the people seen having sex in the 27-minute video. A defense expert has even suggested that Kelly’s likeness had been inserted in the video.

Some 22 witnesses testified during the criminal trial. Several of the witnesses, four of them relatives of the alleged victim, identified the now 23-year-old woman as the girl in the video. Three other relatives of the alleged victim, however, testified for the defense and said they did not recognize the girl in the video. Kelly and the woman did not testify during the trial.

One key witness, Lisa Van Allen, said she had engaged in threesomes with Kelly, who had videotaped the encounters, and that one of the incidents involved the alleged victim. Under cross-examination, however, she admitted to stealing a $20,000 diamond studded watch from Kelly. The defense said that Van Allen just wanted to extort money from Kelly.

R. Kelly found not guilty, Boston Herald, June 14, 2008
R. Kelly arrested in child porn case, CNN.com, June 5, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Child Pornography, USdoj.gov
What is Child Pornography, Missingkids.com Continue reading

Contact Information
Cambridge, MA
Main Office
675 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139
Phone: 617.206.1920Fax: 617.491.3299Toll Free: 800.481.6199
Boston, MA
1 State St
Suite 2
Boston, MA 02109
Phone: 617.547.1205Toll Free: 800.481.6199
Needham, MA
250 First Avenue 2nd Floo
Needham, MA 02494
Phone: 781.675.2329Toll Free: 800.481.6199

Some Select Cases are referred to other attorneys for principal responsibility

By publishing this information on this Website, the Boston, Massachusetts law firm of Altman & Altman LLP is not claiming to represent any clients or cases mentioned here. The content provided is designed to inform readers and is not intended as legal advice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2024, Altman & Altman LLP
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design