by

This past weekend saw a bit of nice weather. What better time to protest Massachusetts sex crimes against women? What better time to march around scantily clad and chastise men who gawk?

In short….what better time for a “Boston Slutwalk”?

You think I am kidding, right? Ol’ Sam’s sarcastic humor has gotten the best of him and he is crossing the line, huh? Well, not at all.

This past weekend, there was a parade of men and women, the later primarily wearing only micro minis and bras. It was called by its participants the “Boston Slutwalk” and it wound its way from Government Center to the Common the marchers, chanting, “However we dress, wherever we go, yes means yes, and no means no,”

People stared, but no one dared to act in the animalistic way one might expect. As the Boston Herald put it, “you don’t mess with 200 “sluts” on a mission.”

Boston’s “Slutwalk” was one of an international series of such things that began earlier this year when a silver-tongued Toronto police officer allegedly told a group of York University law students that the best way to avoid getting raped was to not dress like a slut.

How delicately and tastefully put.
Continue reading

by

…And so the nationally known South Hadley bullying criminal case that began as a bombastic farce goes out with a face-saving and clearer headed whimper.

As you have probably heard, and as we discussed in previous blogs, all but one of the teens indicted last year by, to be undeservingly generous, overzealous ex-district attorney Scheibel, have had their cases resolved. While one remains awaiting trial for a typical Massachusetts statutory rape charge (hardly a bullying issue), the other kids have resolved their cases as misdemeanors.

The dispositions ranged from guilty pleas to misdemeanors to continuances without findings. The latter means that, so long as that particular defendant stays out of trouble after a probationary period, the matter will be dismissed. In the various cases, of course, the fact that they were initially charged as they were did the damage to each defendant’s criminal record. At best, it will be several years before these high school students can potentially seal their records and so moving on to college and/or employment will be even more of a challenge than it already is for the general public.

Although she spent much of her time in giving a victim-witness statement blaming her daughter’s ex-boyfriend, Phoebe Prince’s mother, Anne O’Brien, apparently agreed to these dispositions. In her statements, she included the following statement:

“Phoebe ended her pain brought about by harassment, harassment that could easily have been stopped if any of those involved had ever reached inside themselves to find their own compassion.”
Continue reading

by

Yesterday, we began our discussion about the Littleton coach (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) who had apparently lied before a Grand Jury when summoned to testify in connection with an ongoing Middlesex County rape investigation.

As we discussed, and it certainly deserves repeating, lying to authorities about an ongoing investigation, either under oath or not, is a crime. The only thing that changes is which crime it is going to be.

In this case, the apparent lies were spoken under oath. In the Grand Jury, witnesses are sworn in and questioned by a prosecutor about whatever is being investigated. To lie while under oath is the crime of perjury.

The Defendant was questioned about, among other things, whether he had committed certain crimes such as providing alcohol to minors. He denied having done so.
The government decided that the Defendant had committed perjury because his testimony, albeit self-serving, was contradicted by other witnesses.

To me, this brings about a couple of troubling questions.
Continue reading

by

We have discussed it many times before, but the message still is not really out. Take it to heart –tell your friends-put up flyers- there is absolutely a different standard between you and police officers when it comes to telling the truth! They can lie all they want…that is regarded as
“good police work”

You can refuse to talk to them, or, better yet, buy time to talk to an experienced MA criminal defense attorney, but you cannot lie to them. That is called a Massachusetts feloney.

Enter former gym owner Stephen DiTullio (hereinafter, the “Defendant”). This Littleton gentleman was summonsed to a Middlesex County Grand Jury during an ongoing Middlesex County criminal investigation.

The investigation was into allegations of Massachusetts rapes of underage gymnasts by their coach, Steven Infante (hereinafter, the “Sex Offender”). The Sex Offender was found guilty in his own trial on the sex crimes last May.
Continue reading

by

Massachusetts politics can be a dangerous business. We have talked many times how it can run, and ruin, the criminal justice system. Sometimes, however, it can provide the system with new business.

Take the case of Antonio Arevalo (hereinafter, the “Battered”) for example. He has been a critic of Lawrence Mayor William Lantigua. A very vocal cri.

This angered some folks…one man in particular. David Figueroa (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) works as a bouncer for La Guira, a nightclub which is popular with the mayor. Apparently, he did not care for the Battered’s attitude.

According to the Battered, he was confronted and beaten by the 6-foot-9 Defendant who called him “a snitch” and the “man who took the mayor to court.” .

Well, it is actually not only according to the Battered. The event was actually caught on videotape which has now hit the internet.

Anyway, The result was apparently a broken arm (in two places) for the Battered and a the need for a Massachusetts Assault and Battery Attorney for the Defendant Continue reading

by

Maine ‘s Krista Dittmeyer’s body has been found. The mother of the infant who was found in her car is dead. Meanwhile, a Lowell man needs a Massachusetts murder attorney as he is accused of killing his wife. Two Roxbury handguns were recovered by police after chasing and apprehending two individuals.

None of these stories are the subject matter of today’s blog. Instead, let’s deal with a real issue. Something that is really causing consternation to the Commonwealth’s law enforcement community. After all, they are our protection and the keepers of our liberty, aren’t they?

Well, some of those liberties perhaps.

They were a bit miffed last week. You see, Suffolk University Law School Students are asking some apparently embarrassing questions. One such student has taken on a project which Boston Police brass and union officials call in “cop-hate baiting at its worst.”

The police are so upset, in fact, that the university itself is seeking to distance itself from the project. The college ordered the fliers taken down, saying the collaboration between Suffolk Law students, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Boston Black Men’s Leadership Group should not have used the law school’s logo.

The hateful and offensive actions at issue is the posting of fliers for the “Police Misconduct Documentation Project” and the “Police Complaint Assistance Project”. These posters ask horrible questions like “Have you been abused, brutalized or mistreated by the Boston Police … ?”

Just imagine such a thing!

Apparently, according to the police and the university, such offensive questions should not be asked. One would imagine that such information therefore should not be compiled and should be silently swept under the rug.

After all, what is wrong with alittle police abuse? They have a hard job…aren’t the entitled to knock around a few folks?

Don’t call it a Boston assault…call it simply alittle attitude adjustment.
Continue reading

by

Rumor has it that the South Hadley bullying case which began with the roar of a despearate political prosecutor is going out with a wimper from her replacement who was left to clean up her messes.

You may recasll that the late Phoebe Prince was the tragic figure about whom the public was in an outcry. Ms. Prince committed suicide and it was determined that the reason was that several of her classmates were bullying her both in person and through the internet. Like a not-quite- as- sympathetic Ponchus Pilot, the area’s most senior law enforcement official, the District Attorney, abandoned her oath to “do justice” and, instead, catered to political opportunity. She took the unusual step of indicting a bunch of kids who were allegedly Ms. Prince’s bullies. This was done, of course, before the full investigation into Ms. Prince was conducted. Said inveastgation revealed a very troubled young lady who had attempted suicide long before she even got to South Hadley.

Of course, to give the indictments the proper stench, she included in the group boys with whom Ms. Prince is alleged to have had sex. They were now charged with MA statutory rape and grouped in with the bullies.

Thankfully for the cause of Justice, the political strategy backfired and that District Attorney found herself out of her job.

Now, while the defendants will still have MA felony charges on their criminal records as they attempt to continue in school or find jobs, the Commonwealth is said to be offering plea bargains which will allow five out of six of the defendants to plead guilty to misdemeanor charges and having the more serious charges dropped. It is believed that the defendants will be allowed to plead guilty to Massachusetts criminal harasssment.

Previously the defendants faced a variety of charges, including including civil rights violations causing bodily injury, criminal harassment, stalking and disruption of a school assembly.

Even the stutory rape charge will apparently be dropped against one defendant.
Continue reading

by

A Brockton assault and battery matter has just occurred under the type of circumstances that all parents fear. It resulted from a high school knife fight in which someone was injured.

The other was arrested for the Massachusetts dangerous weapon assault charge.

Of course the Brockton high school campus fight was not the first one between the participants in the story. It apparently took place after the same 18 year old students were escorted to the housemaster’s office because of an earlier physical altercation.

As of this writing, One of the students is resting in a local hospital and the other stands facing Massachusetts felony charges including assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.
Continue reading

by

Well, Bullying has hit the news again and, once again, this Boston criminal lawyer was asked to comment. On Friday, I was interviewed for Newsweek Magazine on the subject of the indictments handed down against Dharun Ravi (hereinafter, the “Defendant”). If you like, you can read the resulting article here.

As you may recall, Rutgers University freshman Tyler Clementi (hereinafter, the “Deceased”) committed suicide approximately seven months ago. Said suicide followed the Defendant, with the help of some friends, allegedly streaming live video footage of the Deceased, his roommate, engaging in romance with his lover, another man. The Defendant was allegedly aided in the broadcast by his lady-friend, Molly Wei (hereinafter, the “Accomplice”). During the broadcast, the Defendant allegedly described what was being broadcast on Twitter.

Criminal investigators have also apparently found that the Defendant had tweeted on earlier occasions his frustration and/or maliciousness about the Deceased’s homosexuality. As a result, New Jersey prosecutors say that the Defendant knowingly targeted the Deceased because he was gay.

Apparently, this was not bad enough. During the government’s investigation, it is alleged that the Defendant tried to mislead law enforcement, deleted messages and attempted to convince some of his friends not to cooperate with authorities.

These efforts did not work. They seldom do. They usually only result in more charges…which they did here.

Now, the Garden State has indicted the Defendant on 15 counts, including witness and evidence tampering and bias intimidation. The matter has been elevated to a hate crime.
Continue reading

by

This has been an upsetting week for Massachusetts law enforcement. Yesterday, we discussed how Boston’s prosecuting attorneys are upset with a particular judge. Now, law enforcement in general is upset with a ruling handed down by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.

The ruling primarily effects the Massachusetts search and seizure laws.

As we have discussed in the past, marijuana has been decriminalized. In other words, it is no longer a crime to possess a small amount of it. As also discussed, this meant that, in order to make an arrest regarding pot, the Commonwealth had to allege intent to sell the drug in order to make a “collar”. Massachusetts drug attorneys have gotten used to that.

Now, however, the Court has gone further.

In the past, if they stopped a vehicle on a MA criminal investigation, and they smelled marijuana, police treated it as probable cause to believe that a crime was being committed. They would then pull people out of the vehicle and, sometimes, search the vehicle. While the resulting charge might not be possession of the marijuana, the police would sometimes find something else to prosecute.

They can no longer do that on the basis of the marijuana odor alone. This is because while the smell might indicate smoking or possessing the marijuana, smoking or possessing it is no longer a crime. Thus, no probable cause.
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