Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer Blog

On January 8, 2013 PD, an 18 year old male, met CC on line. CC identified herself as a 17 year old female. The chatted online, they exchanged photos, they talked on the phone. One week later they agreed to meet and on January 15 PD drove to Lynn and picked her up and they drove around for a short time. They talked and both had a genuinely good time. PD brought her back home; there was no sex of any kind. They continued chatting and talking. CC told PD that she loved him. They agreed to get together again and on January 19, 2013 CC drove to Lynn again, picked up CC, and they went for a drive. She directed PD to a secluded parking lot. They kissed and talked; there was some fondling but then CC jumped out of the car. Eventually she got back in the car and PD drove her home. It turns out that CC was 14 years old and had sneaked out of the house unbeknownst to her mother. Several days later the police showed up at PD's door and arrested him for Aggravated Rape, Rape of Child with Force, Indecent Assault and Battery on a Person 14 or older, Assault with a deadly weapon, and Threat to Commit a Crime. On January 22, 2013 PD was brought to Lynn District Court and arraigned and bail was set at $5,000.00. It took his family several days to raise the bail and PD was released. PD was bewildered as he had done nothing wrong. PD and his family contacted and retained Attorney Robert Lewin. Attorney Lewin took a very detailed statement of the facts from PD. His story had a ring of truth to it. The details were consistent with innocence. Attorney Lewin got the police reports and the girl's statements and reviewed them in detail with PD. Again the details all pointed towards PD's innocence. Attorney Lewin went up the chain of command in the DA's Office and ultimately spoke with the head of the sexual abuse unit. Attorney Lewin sent a letter to the District Attorney asking the District Attorney to critically investigate the young girl's statements. On February 28, 2013 (37 days after his arraignment) PD and Attorney Lewin appeared in Lynn District Court and the District Attorney filed a Nolle Prosequi to all the charges against PD. A Nolle Prosequi is a termination of the prosecution of a criminal case by the District Attorney. On February 28, 2013 PD walked out of Lynn District Court a free man. This happened in part because Attorney Lewin got on the case immediately, promptly prepared the case, and advocated zealously for the charges to be dropped.

In 1983, WC - then age 28 - went out on a date with a woman and ended up being accused of Rape. He did not deny the charge and was able to negotiate a plea where he was given a 7-10 year suspended state prison sentence and he was placed on Probation for five years. For four years he was a perfect probationer. At the beginning of his fifth year of probation he simply walked away from the probation and moved to Louisiana. From 1988 to 2011he lived in Louisiana. He started a business and became successful. The business was a custom motorcycle engine shop. On a February day he was in his shop when the US Marshalls showed up with a warrant for his arrest for being a fugitive from justice from the state of Massachusetts. They cuffed him and brought him to a local court in Louisiana where he was held for rendition back to Massachusetts. His friends contacted Attorney Robert Lewin in Massachusetts. WC ultimately waived a hearing in Louisiana and was transported back to Massachusetts. He was brought to Middlesex Superior Court (now in Woburn, MA) and brought before a Magistrate where he was ordered held without bail. He was served with a Notice of Surrender for Alleged Violation of Probation. There was no question that he had violated his probation: he left the state without permisssion; he failed to keep in contact with probation; he failed to report to probation; etc. The Probation Department was asking that his probation be revoked and the 7-10 year state prison sentence be put into effect. Attorney Lewin put together a memorandum for the Judge that included letters from associates in Louisiana, business records, and medical records. The case required some thinking outside the box. Extending his probation did not make sense as that would require that he not leave Massachusetts and that he wear a GPS bracelet. Sending him to prison to serve 7-10 years for a crime that occurred 28 years earlier did not make much sense either. WC's friends in Louisiana were willing to put together a free WC fund and raised $15,000. Attorney Lewin suggested to the Judge that she find WC in violation of his probation and that she assess $5,000.00 as a court cost penalty and terminate his probation. The Judge liked the idea but thought the money way too short. The horse trading began and when the dust settled on March 22, 2011 the Judge ordered $15,000. WC's friends wired the $15,000 up to Attorney Lewin who paid it to the Court. WC was brought back before the Judge who ordered his probation TERMINATED and ordered him RELEASED FROM CUSTODY. He was then discharged from the case and the case was closed. WC is back in Louisiana building engines and catching shrimp.

A convicted rapist is on probation and is required to wear a GPS tracking device. As part of the GPS law he is prohibited from going to certain places; these places are called exclusion zones. On January 3, 2011 he was at home when his probation officer called him and told him that he had violated an exclsuion zone and the police were coming to arrest him. He exlaimed to his probation officer that he had not left the house and had not been anywhere near the exclusion zone (the home of the victim who lives across and down the street). Attorney Lewin called the Probation Officer and insisted that they check the accuracy of the GPS device. It turned out that the GPS device was giving off what are called "floating points"; these are points on the tracking maps that are not accurate. They are false tracking points. In this case the tracking points showed the offender literally walking across a pond. In addition the tracking points showed the offender moving a distance of 100 yards in 2 seconds. On Friday, January 7, 2011 after a full court hearing, the Probation Department admitted that the offender had not violated his GPS restrictions and the probation violation was dropped. The accuracy of the GPS tracking system can and must be called into question in these cases.