Articles Posted in Sex Crimes

| by

The manager of a rooming house in Lawrence, Massachusetts found a laptop in the laundry room that she believed belonged to one of the tenants. Rather than return it the woman opened it and found images of Child Pornography. She then called the police. It was determined that the computer belonged to Gerard Anthony Burbine, a registered sex offender. Lawrence police then secured the laptop. They obtained a Search Warrant and a search of its contents confirmed the presence of Child Pornography. Burbine was previously charged with and convicted of Possession of Child Pornography for which he received a jail sentence. Right now, according to the Lawrence Eagle Tribune Burbine is being held on thirty thousand dollars bail for Enticing a Minor to be Exhibited in a State of Nudity. The case is being prosecuted in the Lawrence District Court but will probably be moved to the Essex County Superior Court in Salem, Massachusetts.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Child Pornography Defense Lawyer

Lawrence Massachusetts Sex Crimes Lawyer

I imagine that Burbine is being charged under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 272 Section 29A. That statute prohibits anyone from enticing someone whom he knows or should know is under eighteen years old from enticing that person to be exhibited in a state of nudity. A conviction for that offense is a felony for which there is a ten year minimum sentence. The article here makes no mention of facts that support this charge. Thus, I can only assume that during the forensic examination of the computer there were some emails or chat line communications located that suggested some sort of enticement.

Any Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer will tell you that there are always defenses to cases like this one. It is likely that the rooming house has one IP address that the tenants share thereby making internet access easy for everyone. The fact that the laptop was found in the laundry room suggests that someone other than Burbine was using it. Think about it. Why would he need the laptop in the laundry room? And, if he was using it there why would he leave it there? People living in rooming houses have limited means and are inclined to protect their personal belongings, not leave them in open areas. Aside from the device, what links Burbine to the illicit activity? Did anyone see him perusing the unlawful material? Are there any personal identifiers showing that he was the person who accessed the Child Pornography? Perhaps there is nothing more than stated in this article thereby making a prosecution of this case more difficult that it initially appears.

Continue Reading

| by

On June 22, 2004 a woman in Boston, Massachusetts boarded a Green Line Trolley. The train was crowded that day as the Red Sox had a home game. The defendant, Timothy Day got on the same train at the Copley Station. While on the train Day allegedly touched the woman and himself in an inappropriate manner. The woman exited the train and detected a stain on her clothing and something on her purse. She washed her clothes and threw the pocketbook away. The latter item was retrieved and tested. A DNA profile was created with the substance. It was later learned that two years earlier a similar incident occurred in Virginia. There too a sample was obtained and tested. The two samples matched. Last year it was determined that Day was the source of the DNA sample. Day is not being prosecuted in Virginia due to a statute of limitations problem. Day has been charged with Indecent Assault and Battery and is being prosecuted in the Suffolk County Superior Court in Boston.

Read Article:

Boston Sex Crimes Defense Lawyer

Indecent Assault and Battery Attorney in Massachusetts

Statute of Limitations defenses are very rare in Massachusetts. Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 277 Section 63 limits the time for filing an indictment or complaint to six years in Indecent Assault and Battery cases. This would be great for Day except for the fact that Massachusetts exempts as time any period in which the defendant is not living openly in Massachusetts. Had he been living in Massachusetts for the established period after the alleged act occurred he might succeed in moving to dismiss this case. Other Sex Crimes in Massachusetts such as Rape of a Child or Rape have much more generous time frames in which to file a complaint and prosecute the accused. Child Rape Cases in Massachusetts have a twenty-seven year statute of limitations. Rape cases have a fifteen year statute of limitations.

As a Massachusetts Sex Crimes Defense Lawyer I would like to know what substance was specifically identified on the woman’s pocketbook. DNA can be left at a crime scene through blood, head hair, body hair, skin flakes and more. Everyone leaves DNA traces behind through daily life activities. It can be left behind on cups, cigarettes, phones and other items. It can also be found in other bodily fluids, such as saliva, tear drops and semen. Thus, it would be helpful to know from what substance the DNA profile was obtained. Keep in mind that if Day ejaculated on the woman and her purse you would expect other people to have witnessed the act. This supposedly occurred on a crowded trolley. So what did other people see? Is anyone able to identify Day as the person committing the sexual assault? Can the woman make an identification? The answers to these questions will be helpful in the defense to this case.

Continue Reading

| by

A thirty seven year old Somerville, Massachusetts man who was riding the Green Line MBTA last week is accused of exposing himself to a Brighton woman. Boston.com reports that a woman boarded a trolley in the Allston, Brighton area. She observed the defendant approaching her. She looked down and saw his penis exposed and being stroked. Once he realized that she was looking he pulled down his sweatshirt to cover the exposed area. The woman screamed. The man apologized and got off the trolley. The victim followed him, grabbed him and waited for the police to arrive. The man told the police that his shorts must have fallen down due to the fact that the trolley was crowded and moving erratically. The case will be prosecuted in the Brighton District Court.

Read Article:

Brighton, Massachusetts Sex Crimes Defense Law Firm

Strange as it may sound this is not an unusual incident. Since becoming a Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer I have defended scores of cases just like this one. The MBTA seems to be a popular place for people to engage in this sort of behavior. However, our clients have been accused of doing this on buses, in airport terminals, on planes, in cars and out in the open while walking down busy city streets. If the person does not have a criminal record a typical result for resolving these matters would be a continuance without a finding with an evaluation and treatment as recommended by the probation department. On several occasions we have engaged psychologists to examine the accused and prepare an “aid in sentencing”. The psychologist will run our client through a battery of tests, interview him, interview family members, review the police reports, the accused’s criminal history and more. From this a report will be generated that will identify the problem, its triggers, cures or management tools to address the problem and the likelihood of reoffending or engaging in more egregious criminal conduct. These aids in sentencing comfort prosecutors and judges in recommending or imposing sentences that give the accused another chance.

Indecent Exposure in Massachusetts is a misdemeanor. It is proscribed by Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 272 Section 53. There is a maximum penalty is six months in the house of correction. The defendant in this case might face a charge of Open and Gross Lewdness. This charge is a felony and punishable by up to three years in prison. Open and Gross Lewdness is more difficult to prove than Indecent Exposure. A continuance without a finding is typically an option for resolving this crime as well however an aid in sentencing will become more necessary in this situation.

Continue Reading

| by

Jonathan Ngarambe of Salem, Massachusetts was summonsed as an Essex County juror. During the impanelment process on a Massachusetts Rape Case, Ngarambe lied to the judge. On two occasions the judge asked the prospective jurors if anyone knew any of the defendants. Ngarambe never made clear that he did in fact know three of the four defendants and that he went to school with these men. The district attorney prosecuting the case saw Ngarambe making eye contact with one of the rape trial defendants. He found out that Ngarambe had contact with another defendant in the courthouse the morning the trial was scheduled to start. Ngarambe was questioned by the trial judge and denied knowing the defendants. A 2008 Salem Massachusetts High School yearbook confirmed that the suspect was classmates with some of the defendants. One of the defendants is Facebook friends with him. Ngarambe has been charged with Witness Intimidation, Obstruction of Justice and Perjury. He will be prosecuted in the Essex County Superior Court in Salem. Authorities contend that Ngarambe wanted to get seated on the jury to help his friends get acquitted.

Read Article:
Salem Criminal Defense Lawyer

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 268 Section 13B sets out the law for Intimidation of a Witness or Obstruction of Justice in Massachusetts. As relevant to this case, the law states that anyone who “misleads, intimidates or harasses another person” i.e. a police officer faces up to ten years in prison after a conviction. This law also provides for the same punishment for anyone who tries to improperly manipulate a jury. There is also a house of correction sentence available for someone charged with this crime and both the district court and superior court have jurisdiction over this crime. In this case, recognizing the severity of the attempted obstruction the district attorney opted to indict this case. I would imagine that the prosecutor in this case is looking for state prison time if he gets a conviction.

This case aside, one of the things that concerns me most about this law is its subjectivity. If a police office questions a witness and is not satisfied with his or her answer the possibility of an obstruction charge looms. This is another reason why I always advise my clients not to talk to the police. Nothing good can come from it. Talking to the police without the presence of counsel puts you at risk for some sort of criminal charge, even if you have not committed a crime. Make sure you consult with a lawyer before you ever talk to the police. My office has defended people charged with this crime who never would have been had they simply not spoken to the police. If the police want to talk to you, call a lawyer.

Continue Reading

| by

Yesterday a Marblehead, Massachusetts man was arraigned on Child Pornography Charges in the Lynn District Court. The thirty three year old defendant was charged with Distribution of Child Pornography and Possession of Child Pornography. Authorities stated that an Essex County Internet Crimes Task Force identified the defendant in the course of one of its investigations. A Search Warrant was obtained and executed at his home. A computer was seized and searched. On it the police found about one hundred lime wire files depicting children engaged in pornographic acts. The basis of the distribution allegation centers on the use of a file sharing service. Bail was set in the amount of ten thousand dollars. The defendant’s lawyer asked that the case file be sealed pending a resolution of the case. He stated that a release of this information prior to trial would create irreparable harm regardless of the outcome of the case. The judge temporarily allowed the request citing non-compliance with the Massachusetts Uniform Impoundment laws.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Child Pornography Defense Lawyer

So what are the Massachusetts Uniform Impoundment Rules? In Massachusetts a party is allowed to file a motion for the impoundment of certain materials provided the motion states sufficient grounds and is supported by an affidavit. The motion must state with particularity the material the party seeks to impound. A time period for impoundment must be stated. The request for impoundment can be made prior to the filing of the objectionable material. In some instances third parties have the right to be heard in opposition to a motion to impound. Impoundment may be allowed only after a showing of “good cause”. Good cause contemplates the nature of this matter, the type of information that his being requested to be impounded, the reasons for the request and the interests of the community in general. Orders of impoundment may be modified. Appeals of these orders are brought before a single justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.

An Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer would want to use this rule in a case like this one. The allegations against the defendant are heinous. Anytime a search of this defendant’s name is entered these charges and the article will appear regardless of the outcome of the case. Concealing the details of this case and the data identifying the defendant to these allegations is a great strategy particularly in cases where lawyers are confident that a favorable result will follow for their client. The problem however is that the public oftentimes has access to this material prior to the case being brought forward in court. This can make the application of the impoundment rules improbable.

Continue Reading

| by

According to a recent article in www.wickedlocal.com just a few days ago two women were arrested and charged with Prostitution or Sexual Conduct for a Fee. The arrest took place at a “spa” in Needham, Massachusetts located on Dedham Street. Members of a Norfolk County Anti-Crime Task Force effectuated the arrests after a relative lengthy investigation. Later that day the officers made a similar arrest at a facility in Quincy. The article reports that the officers were able to access the businesses in an undercover capacity. The facilities at which the women were arrested are not properly licensed massage parlors. The cases will be prosecuted in the Dedham District Court.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Sexual Conduct for a Fee Lawyer

Needham Prostitution Defense Attorney

Our office is retained on cases like this one regularly. This type of criminal activity in Massachusetts is becoming much more common in large part due to the internet. Once a “word of mouth industry” the business of Prostitution in Massachusetts now “advertised”. It is a booming business. Media outlets such as backpage.com and others permit people to offer their services. Customer responses are voluminous. Many of the women offering sex for a fee fly into Boston for a weekend, oftentimes during a convention or large event. They stay in top notch hotels where they perform the solicited acts. They often service several customers per day and leave Massachusetts with large profits. Massage parlors are notorious for providing the same services. The difference is that the illicit activity is masked by the appearance of a lawful business.

Just recently a large Prostitution sting in Boston resulted in scores of arrests. The operation involved undercover officers posing as prostitutes, soliciting and/or receiving solicitations and agreeing to a price and meeting place. When the customers arrived they were identified and arrested. All were charged with Sexual Conduct for a Fee. Our office represented several of these individuals. None of them were convicted and none of them have a criminal record. More importantly, there are no CORI entries that can be accessed by the public or perspective employers for these people. Hiring an experienced criminal lawyer is the best decision these defendants made.

Most of the time these cases are resolved prior to trial. Provided the accused has an Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer a typical disposition involves pretrial probation for six months to a year. This usually means no criminal record at least as to these charges. Recently these cases have gotten lots of attention and the “customers” have found themselves identified in local newspapers or on police logs. Law enforcement does this deliberately to deter others from engaging in this type of conduct. This is not only embarrassing it often has a negative effect on job searches, promotions or social activities. Sometimes media outlets agree to removing the name of the accused with the urging of the defendant’s Criminal Lawyer.

Continue Reading

| by

Webcam.jpgAccording to a report in the Barnstable Hyannis Patch, Kevin McNicol of Hyannis, Massachusetts has been charged in the Massachusetts Federal Court for Sexual Exploitation of a Child. Authorities allege that McNicol had a minor engage in sexually explicit acts for the purpose of transmitting a video of that act. The crime occurred in April of 2004. McNicol’s home was searched on May of last year at which time his computer was seized. An analysis of the computer hard drive disclosed the presence of Child Pornography created through a web cam.

Massachusetts Child Pornography Defense Lawyer

The article does not disclose under which statute McNicol was charged. I would imagine however that 18 U.S.C. Section 2251 applies here. That statute makes it a crime for anyone to entice, persuade or coerce a minor to engage in explicit sexual conduct for the purpose of transmitting a live depiction of such conduct. The sentence for a conviction under this statute mandates fifteen years in federal custody and has a maximum sentence of thirty years in prison.

There is an unusual defense to this crime. Federal case law has held that if a defendant shows by clear and convincing evidence that he was not aware that the actor was under the age of eighteen he can avoid a conviction. Unlike Statutory Rape laws in Massachusetts, this statute permits someone to defend the case on the basis that he made a good faith mistake as to age. There is a caveat to this however. The First Circuit Court of Appeals has not addressed this issue and the supporting authority comes from the 8th, 9th and 11th Circuits.

The challenges to sentences under this law have not been very successful making it all the more important that anyone charged with this crime hire an experienced Massachusetts Federal Crimes Lawyer.

So how is the defendant going to fight these charges? For one thing, anytime there is a Search Warrant issued lawyers look to see if the warrant violated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights of the accused. Was there probable cause to issue the Search Warrant? Does the supporting affidavit provide sufficient evidence that the crime was committed and that the items searched would likely contain evidence of the commission of the crime? Sometimes in cases like this there is a live issue as to who actually orchestrated the criminal act. The mere presence of the illicit material does not necessarily mean that the person viewing it is responsible for the creation of the act. Nor for that matter is it always clear that child pornography on a one person’s computer means that he or she is responsible for downloading or viewing it. The age of the victim and his or her role in the act is important for reasons stated above. Differences in age between the defendant and victim can also have an effect on the sentence imposed in the case. It is important to remember that no matter how severe the accusation there is always a defense to criminal charges and the ability to mitigate any sentence that might be imposed.

Continue Reading

| by

Last Thursday, Keith Millan was charged with five counts of Possession of Child Pornography in the West Roxbury District Court. According to a report on Boston.com, Millan was an employee at a local property management company. It is alleged that co-workers found Child Pornography on his laptop. Images were also found on some compact discs and an external hard drive. Millan is a resident of Needham, Massachusetts. The images were characterized as disturbing and violent. Bail was set in the amount of twenty five thousand dollars cash.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Child Pornography Defense Lawyer

As a Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer I am seeing Child Pornography cases in being charged at an exponential rate. Online child pornography is one of the fastest growing internet based businesses worldwide. Just over three years ago there were over one thousand five hundred child abuse domains, more than one half of which were housed in this country. The demand for this material is growing at an alarming rate. One source estimated that back in 2005 the child pornography industry was grossing three billion dollars per year. There are studies that show that about forty percent of child pornography possessors had also had unlawful sexual contact with children. It is this fact that has prompted many Massachusetts prosecutors to advocate for more stringent penalties for people charge with Possession of Child Pornography even though Distribution of Child Pornography is considered the more serious offense in this state. These laws are getting tougher each time they are reviewed. There is a recent movement by federal prosecutors to have Congress increase the sentences for people convicted of child pornography possession cases. This is being watched closely by criminal lawyers in Massachusetts and throughout the country.

There are however problems inherent in most prosecutions for Possession of Child Pornography. Cases are charged when illicit images are found on someone’s personal computer, laptop, smart phone or other device. The first and most natural tendency is to accuse the owner of the property of possessing the material. This is not always fair. Most people, even today, are relaxed about these devices. People share cell phones and computers. They leave these items out in the open for hours or days at a time not worrying about who might be using them. People receive certain emails or texts that they immediately open or download without first checking to see if they know the sender. Spammers send links to illicit websites under the guise of a friend, employer, marketer and even at times a government agency. There is an inclination to open these messages, read them and to sometimes innocently download the content. The owner of the device can at times be oblivious to the presence of these materials. If caught up in this type of situation there is a great need to hire an experienced criminal defense lawyer, one who has defending child pornography case in Massachusetts with success.

Continue Reading

| by

Two days ago Raymond McAllister of Woburn, Massachusetts was charged with several Massachusetts Sex Crimes. The crimes alleged include Enticement of a Child, Posing or Exhibiting a Child in a State of Nudity and Dissemination of Matter Harmful to a Child. It is alleged that had a Skype video connection with a thirteen year old boy from Arizona. The defendant asked the boy to engage in sexual acts that could be viewed while the two were Skyping. The victim told law enforcement officials in Arizona. The investigation led them to McAllister who was just arraigned on these cases. A headline to an article in the Lawrence Eagle Tribune identified this crime as Child Pornography related. Bail was set in the amount of ten thousand dollars with house arrest and an order that the defendant not use the internet.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Child Enticement Defense Lawyer

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 272 Section 28 makes it a crime for anyone to Disseminate Matter Harmful to Minors. The conduct must be done knowingly meaning that the defendant must know that the matter is harmful to minors and he must believe or know that the person is a minor. For the purpose of this statute the work “knowing” requires a general awareness of the character of the matter. Matter is deemed harmful to minors where it is obscene, contains sexual content or nudity, lacks artistic value and contravenes “prevailing standards of adults in the county where the offense was committed as to suitable material for such minors”. A conviction for this offense carries a potential five year state prison sentence, making it a felony. The Massachusetts District Courts do have jurisdiction over this crime. The statute sets out certain Affirmative Defenses to this crime as well.

Child Enticement in Massachusetts is a crime under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 265 Section 26(c). The word “entice” maintains its usual meaning for the purpose of this law. Anyone entices when he lures, persuades, invites, coaxes, etc. The statute makes unlawful anyone who entices someone under the age of sixteen to “enter, exit or remain within” a particular place with intent that he is going to commit an enumerated Massachusetts Sex Crime. The penalty for a conviction under this law is also up to five years in state prison. This law also establishes jurisdiction within the district courts.

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 272 Section 29A sets out the crime of Exhibiting a Child in a State of Nudity. As applicable to this case, the district attorney will have to prove that the defendant knew or should have known that the boy was under the age of eighteen and that he enticed him to pose in state of nudity, doing so with lascivious intent and for the purpose of representation or reproduction. This crime has a minimum mandatory ten year state prison sentence. The Massachusetts Superior Court has jurisdiction over this charge.

Sometimes cases like this one are defended by attacking the validity of the Search Warrant. If the Search Warrant Affidavit lacks sufficient probable cause the search could be deemed unconstitutional and the items seized during the search will be suppressed. This might ultimately affect the sustainability of the prosecution. However, in this case, since Skype was used there is a possibility that the victim can make an independent identification of the person who committed the act.

Continue Reading

| by

Indecent Exposure.jpgThis past weekend Lowell, Massachusetts police were running a “downtown disorder detail”. Between the hours of midnight and 2:00 a.m. they arrested five local men, four of whom are accused of urinating in public. The fifth is alleged to have been walking on a downtown street with his genitals exposed. Here is what has been reported. The first man was seen urinating in a doorway on Merrimack Street just before 1:00 a.m. The second man was caught peeing near Merrimack and John Streets. This was at about 1:20 a.m. The third man was seen urinating on the door of a local shrine less than one half hour later. The last man, a Dracut resident was found relieving himself in a downtown parking lot. All five men have been charged with Indecent Exposure. The cases are being prosecuted in the Lowell District Court.

Read Article:

Lawyer Who Defend Sex Offenses and Crimes in Massachusetts

Indecent Exposure in Massachusetts is a misdemeanor. The law provides a maximum sentence of six months in the jail or a two hundred dollar fine. The statute, Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 272 Section 53 states verbatim that “[c]ommon night walkers, common street walkers, both male and female, persons who with offensive and disorderly acts or language accost or annoy persons of the opposite sex, lewd, wanton and lascivious persons in speech or behavior, keepers of noisy and disorderly houses, and persons guilty of indecent exposure shall be punished by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than 6 months, or by a fine of not more than $200, or by both such fine and imprisonment.”. Massachusetts case law has held that to be convicted of Indecent Exposure the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed an intentional act of lewd exposure and that the act was offensive to one or more persons. An essential element of Indecent Exposure in Massachusetts is the exposure of genitalia. Exposure of pubic hair ironically does not satisfy the statute. Exposure of one’s buttocks does fit within the definition of Indecent Exposure in Massachusetts.

Usually cases like this one get resolved by way of dismissal with court costs. In some cases pre-trial probation will be ordered. That means that the accused will be on some sort of probation, usually something informal that included community service or fees. Once the probationary term ends the case will be dismissed in its entirety provided that the defendant has complied with the conditions of probation. If he or she fails to honor the imposed obligations then the district attorney has the right to prosecute the case. If the defendants in this case do not have criminal records I imagine that one of these two forms of disposition will result. This is a situation where it is important that your Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer have the experience necessary to get you the best result possible.

Continue Reading