Forgot your password?
New user?
State prison plans: mental therapy or torture?
‘Progressive’ City Council abuses vulnerable persons—and free speech
East Cambridge Property
Ten Lessons from the Criminalization of Dissent
Document Actions
State stalls again; Lafayette 8 back to Square 1
On the morning of April 13, the six remaining Lafayette Eight defendants and their supporters gathered in Cambridge District Court for what was supposed to be their trial. Instead the litigation process is back in the pretrial stage. A new pretrial hearing is now scheduled for June 5.
The Lafayette Eight were removing rubbish and planting seeds when they were arrested on April 14, 2004 at a city-owned lot on the corner of Main and Mass Avenue in Cambridge. They were charged with multiple felonies. Charges against two who were juveniles were later dropped.
|
What occurred on April 13 was a violation of standard rules of criminal procedure, increasingly common in the "post-9/11 era."
Defense attorney Daniel Beck asked the court to rule on a motion to dismiss, based on violation of right to a speedy trial. The motion had been filed three weeks earlier.
District Attorney Coakley's office had done nothing to answer the motion. In addition, the DA asked for more time to comply with discovery—a full two years into the litigation process.
Under "discovery," the DA—representing "the Commonwealth"—is required to turn over to the defense any witness statements and any evidence that might tend to exonerate the defendant.
The defendants were startled to hear the judge use the words "Commonwealth" and "Court" interchangeably, as if they referred to the same entity.
Brushing aside Beck’s objections, Judge James Wexler awarded the prosecution an additional thirty days to answer the dismissal motion. He even suggested that defense counsel should assist the prosecution in the matter.
Two days prior to the court appearance, the Cambridge Police Department had refused to accept subpoena notification from Lafayette Eight legal counsel. They said that they did not accept court papers at the Central Square headquarters.
Unfortunately we live in a nation without equal application under the law. Special treatment and advantages are typically given to prosecutors over defendants. Prosecution witnesses are allowed to check notes prior to answering cross examination. Prosecution noncompliance with discovery is rewarded by extended grace periods. State agencies conduct pretrial investigations.
The trend is that our courts will inceasingly reflect pro-prosecution bias until the Commonwealth and the Court truly are the same entity. This can be seen in the misuse of grand juries, paramilitarization of local police agencies, and anti-defendant legislation such as that contained in the "anti-gang violence" bill authored by Senator Jarrett T. Barrios (D-Cambridge) and Representative Stephen Canessa (D-New Bedford).