Greater Boston SPECIAL: : The 150th Anniversary of the Mass. Superior Court : Oct. 6, 2009

;
;
; 10/06/09 7:36 PM
;
;;;;GREATER BOSTON
Closed Captioning brought to you by AFLAC: Ask about it at work.
>> GOOD EVENING.
WELCOME TO A "GREATER BOSTON"
SPECIAL ON THE MASSACHUSETTS SUPERIOR COURT AS IT RECOGNIZES ITS 150th YEAR OF EXISTENCE.
WE'LL SPEND A DAY IN THE LIFE OF ONE JUSTICE AND LOOK BACK AT SOME OF THE STATE'S MOST FAMOUS CASES FROM LIZZIE BORDEN TO LUIS WOODWARD.
AND WE'LL BE JOINED BY SIX JUSTICES WHO SERVED THE SUPERIOR COURT.
FIRST A SCENE SETTER.
IT IS THE TERRAIN OF JUSTICE.
AT ONCE CEREMONIAL AND SORDID.
>> KIDNAPPING FOR EXTORTION.
>> WHERE PUBLIC DISPUTES SURFACE FOR METHODICAL MULLING.
AND WHERE CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS ARE BATTLED WITH A FIERCE EDGE.
>> THIS IS SO EGREGIOUS.
>> THE MASSACHUSETTS SUPERIOR COURT IS THE FINAL STOP BEFORE THE STATE'S SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT.
IT'S WHERE ALL FIRST DEGREE MURDER CASES, MOST FELONIES AND ALL CIVIL SUITS ABOVE $25,000 ARE HEARD.
SOME 6,000 CRIMINAL AND 30,000 CIVIL CASES APPEAR HERE ANNUALLY.
ALL HEARD BY THE COURT'S 82 JUSTICES IN COURTHOUSES ACROSS THE COMMONWEALTH.
IN THE TIME OF LINCOLN, THE COURT WAS CREATED PARTLY FROM OUTRAGE OVER ONE JUDGE'S DECISION TO SEND A FUGITIVE SLAVE BACK TO THE SOUTH.
AND IT'S WHERE DEFENDANTS FROM LIZZIE BORDEN TO LOUISE WOODWARD MET JUSTICE.
THIS IS THE 150th ANNIVERSARY OF THE MASSACHUSETTS SUPERIOR COURT.
THEY SIT IN THREE-MONROTATIONS GOING FROM COURTHOUSE TO COURTHOUSE, CIVIL TO CRIMINAL CASES.
JARED BOWEN RECENTLY SPENT A DAY IN THE LIFE OF JUSTICE LINDA GILES.
>> THIS EARLY AUGUST MORNING JUDGE LINDA GILES' DAY BEGINS WITH A CHARGE UP SOMERSET STREET INTO SUFFOLK SUPERIOR COURT, HE HAS AN ESCORTS.
SECURITY US A PARAMOUNT CONCERN.
>> WE'VE HAD SOME VERY SERIOUS INCIDENTS WHERE OTHER GANG MEMBERS ARE STABBED, WITNESSS ARE INTIMIDATED.
THERE'S A WHOLE PROTOCOL THAT HAS BEEN PUT INTO PLACE BECAUSE PEOPLE CAN SMUGGLE THINGS.
THEY'LL SMUGGLE A KNIFE OR A GUN IN.
WE HAVE TO BE ON GUARD ALL THE TIME.
>> Reporter: ENSCONCED UPSTAIRS, WORK ARRIVES IMMEDIATELY.
THE JUDGES AL TERN A BETWEEN CIVIL AND CRIMINAL SESSIONS.
GILES IS NOW IN A CRIMINAL ROTATION WITH A TRIAL STARTING TODAY.
EVEN SO, CIVIL CASES LINGER.
>> HER THEORY OF LIABILITY IS THAT HE ESSENTIALLY FORCED HER OFF THE PATH.
>> WE ARE SO OVERWHELMED IN THE SUPERIOR COURT IN THE -- WITH THE NUMBER OF CASES.
THE LAST CIVIL SESSION I WAS IN HAD AROUND 800 CASES.
THAT'S A LOT OF CASES.
WOULD YOU SEND ROBIN IN, PLEASE?
>> Reporter: GILES' CRIMINAL CLERK LOOMS WITH A PILE OF MATTERS REQUIRING ATTENTION FROM THE SUBSTANTIVE...
>> WE'VE GOT TWO MURDER CASES.
>> TO THE CZAR FORIAL.
-- THE SARTORIAL.
>> AND WHERE IS THE CAR?
>> IN THE COURTROOM, ATTORNEYS LINE UP.
COGNIZANT AS JURORS WAITING UPSTAIRS, GILES ATTEMPTS TO SWIFTLY MOVE THROUGH SEVERAL MOTIONS AND A HEARING.
MOSTLY REGARDING UPCOMING CRIMINAL TRIALS.
>> WE NEED THE PHONE RECORDS.
>> WE NID TO GET OUR EXPERT.
>> HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN HERE AT 9:00.
>> BOTH THE TRIAL AND JURORS ARE ON HOLD.
>> I AM NOT DELAYING THIS TRIAL FOR TWO DAYS WHILE YOU GO OVER THESE MATERIALS.
IT IS ESSENTIALLY A BALANCING ACT, MAKING SURE THAT THESE CASES MOVE AND DON'T LANGUISH.
THERE ARE SOMETIMES CRIMINAL CASE WHERE IS THE DEFENDANT IS OUT ON BAIL AND HE OR SHE IS NO HURRY TO GET TO TRIAL.
>> FINALLY, NOR LIE TWO HOURS LATER THE JURY IS SEATED FOR THE START OF TRIAL.
>> GOD SAVE THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS.
>> TWO DEFENDANTS APPEAR WITH A MULTITUDE OF INDICTMENTS, MOST SERIOUS AMONG THEM INTENT TO MURDER AS PROSECUTOR LAYS OUT.
>> WALKS UP TO MR. TAYLOR WHO WAS LAYING ON THE GROUND AND FIRED.
>> HOW IMPORTANT IS THE OPENING STATEMENT TO THE JURY, DO YOU THINK?
>> I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
NO MATTER HOW MUCH WE ADMONISH THEM TO KEEP AN OPEN MIND, UNFORTUNATELY STUDIES HAVE SHOWN, I'M AFRAID, THAT A LOT OF JURIES MAKE UP THEIR MIND AFTER OPENING STATEMENTS.
>> BUT IT'S NOT THE ONLY MAJOR INFLUENCE.
ALL COURTROOMS NOW CONTEND WITH WHAT THE JUDICIAL COMMUNITY CALLS THE CSI EFFECT.
>> WE FEAR THAT PEOPLE REALLY DO BELIEVE EVERYTHING THEY WATCH ON TELEVISION.
AND THEY REALLY DO WATCH THESE SHOWS AND THEY GET A SENSE, I THINK A VERY DISTORTED SENSE, OF HOW REAL LIFE OPERATES.
JURORS ARE EXPECTING FORENSIC EVIDENCE IN EVERY CASE.
>> SO OFTEN, GILES SAYS, MANY JURORS ALSO EXPECT A SWIFTNESS AND ENERGY OF A TAUGHT ONE-HOUR DRAMA.
BUT AHAS, TRIALS ONLY PLOD ALONG, WITH WITNESSS MAKING OR BREAKING CASES WITH GILES AS THE SELF DESCRIBED REFEREE.
>> ASSUMING I ALLOW HIM TO GO FORWARD, AND I DON'T DISALLOW HIS TESTIMONY -- IT'S EVERY JUDGE'S NIGHTMARE THAT I COULD BE ADMITTING OR EXCLUDING EVIDENCE THAT COULD HAVE A HUGE BEARING ON THE OUTCOME OF THE CASE.
THAT'S THE STUFF THAT CAN MAKE US OLD BEFORE OUR TIME.
>> ANY QUESTION ABOUT OBJECTIONS LAND IN SIDE BAR.
WHICH WE WERE PERMITTED TO SHOOT.
IT'S A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD.
>> WHAT'S THE RELEVANCE OF THIS?
>> WELL, THERE WAS A KNIFE ON THE GROUND RIGHT NEAR WHERE THE VICTIM WAS FOUND.
AND THERE WAS A MALL GLASS VIAL THAT CONSISTED OF COCAINE, CRACK COCAINE.
>> IT'S SO EASY TO TAINT A JURY, SAYING SOMETHING IN OPEN COURT.
SO WITH AN ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION I CALL THEM OVER TO THE SIDE BAR.
>> YOU'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR 18 YEARS AND YOU'RE STILL VERY VIGOROUS ABOUT IT.
WHAT COMPELS YOU?
>> I STARTED MY CAREER AS A TRIAL ATTORNEY AND I'M ON THE TRIAL ATTORNEY THROUGH AND THROUGH.
SO THIS IS HIGH DRAMA TO ME.
ON BOTH SIDE OF THE COURT.
I LOVE TRIAL WORK.
ANY OTHER LOOSE ENDS?
HAVE A GREAT AFTERNOON.
WE'LL SEE YOU TOMORROW MORNING AT 9:00.
THANK YOU, FB.
>> AT 4:00 THE JURY IS RELEASED AND MORE MOTIONS FOLLOW BEFORE THE JUDGE FINALLY RETREATS TO HER CHAMBERS.
>> THIS WAS A BUSY DAY.
WE HAD OUR HANDS FULL.
I WAS JUST TELLING LIZ THAT I COUNTED 13 DIFFERENT DEFENDANTS TODAY, SEVEN SEPARATE CASES, INCLUDING THE CASE ON TRIAL.
IT WLS A TERRIFIC TUESDAY.
>> THAT CASE ENDED IN A MISTRIAL.
WITH ME NOW ARE SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE RAYMOND BRASSARD, SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE GERALDINE HYNES, AND APPEALS COURT JUDGE JAMES McHUGH.
WELCOME TO ALL OF YOU.
JUDGE McHUGH, ONE OF THE REASON WHY IS THE SUPERIOR COURT WAS STARTED BACK IN THE 18 60s HAD TO DO WITH SPEED OF THE PROCESS.
THERE WAS A SNAIL'S PACE OF JUSTICE.
IT SEEMS LIKE THE WHEELS OF JUSTICE ARE EQUALLY SLOW NOW.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO SPEED UP THE PROCESS?
>> WELL, EMILY, I THINK WE DO HAVE CONTINUING STRUGGLES WITH SPEED BECAUSE OF THE VOLUME OF THE WORK.
THERE ARE INCREASING NUMBERS OF CASES, BOTH CIVIL AND CRIMINAL.
LIMITED RESOURCES WITH WHICH TO DEAL WITH THEM.
THE PROSECUTOR COURT THOUGH HAS INSTITUTED TIME STANDARDS, BOTH ON THE CRIMINAL SIDE AND THE CIVIL SIDE.
AND OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS WE'VE CUT THE TIME TO TRIAL AND THE TIME FOR MOTIONS AND THE TIME FOR VARIOUS DISPOSITIONS DRAMATICALLY.
AND WE HAVE TO DO MORE AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO MORE.
TECHNOLOGY WILL HELP US IN THAT REGARD.
AND, BUT THE VOLUME AND THE BASIS A CONTINUING CHALLENGE TO MEET.
>> JUDGE HYNES, MOST PEOPLE COME INTO CONTACT WITH THE COURT NOT AS A DEFENDANT, BUT AS A JURIST.
THEY COME IN, THEY'VE BEEN CALLED IN AND THEY ARE SUDDENLY THROWN INTO A PROCESS THAT'S VERY UNFRIENDLY AND ODD TO THEM.
WE SAW JUDGE GILES, IT WAS NICE TO KNOW THAT THEY WERE CONCERNED, BECAUSE THEY SIT IN THESE ROOMS, THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO READ NEWSPAPERS OR BRING IN THEIR PHONES, THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
THERE'S THAT PART OF IT AND THEN THERE'S THE CONCERN THAT ONCE THEY GET INTO THE JURY POOL THAT IT'S BEING MANIPULATED, THAT PEOPLE ARE BEING PULLED OUT OR PUT ON JURYS TO HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE OUTCOME OF THE TRIAL.
IS THAT A REASONABLE --
>> OF COURSE, IT'S THE WAY THE SYSTEM WORKS.
LAWYERS FOR BOTH SIDES ARE ALLOWED TO CHOOSE WHO THEY WANT TO EXCUSE FROM THE JURY FOR WHAT MAY BE A GOOD REASON, OR NO REASON AT ALL.
IT WORKS VERY WELL.
IN MOST SITUATIONS, EXCEPT WHEN PEOPLE TRY TO EXCLUDE PEOPLE BECAUSE OF RACE OR SEX OR RELIGION OR SOME OTHER --
>> DOESN'T THAT HAPPEN, TOO?
>> WELL, IT HAPPENS.
BUT JUDGES ARE VERY CAREFUL TO MONITOR THAT SITUATION.
WHEN WE THINK IT'S GOING ON, WE CALL THE LAWYERS ON IT AND WE HAVE A VERY ELABORATE SYSTEM FOR THEM TO JUSTIFY WHAT IT IS THAT THEY'RE DOING WHEN THEY CHOOSE TO EXCLUDE PERSON A FROM THE JURY.
SO WE DOMOND FOR THAT.
>> JUDGE BRASSARD, YOU'VE COME UP WITH A COUPLE WAYS TO MAKE THE JURIST MORE INCLUSIVE IN THE COURT PROCESS, BUT ALSO MAKE THEM MORE PROFESSIONAL.
YOU WANT THE MEN TO WEAR TIES, TO BE PRESENTABLE.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE A DRESS CODE FOR THE WOMEN.
BUT YOU'VE ALSO SAID THAT USERS SHOULD BE ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS, THEY SHOULD BE MORE INCLUDED IN THE PROCESS.
HOW DOES THAT WORK AND IS IT LEGAL?
>> EMILY, IT IS LEGAL, AND I THINK IT WORKS EXTREMELY WELL.
I DON'T HAVE A DRESS CODE AS SUCH.
BUT I ASK THE GENTLEMEN IF THEY'RE WILLING, IF THEY'RE ABLE, TO WEAR A TIE TO COURT.
I WOULD SAY 99% ARE PLEASED TO DO THAT.
I NEVER MAKE ANY CONCRETE SUGGESTIONS TO THE LADIES, BUT ASK THAT THEY DRESS APPROPRIATELY, AND THEY DO.
AND MY SENSE IS AND JUROR FEEDBACK THAT I RECEIVED IS THAT JURORS LIKE THAT.
THEY COME UP TO THAT LEVEL OF ATMOSPHERE, SO TO PEEK.
I'VE ALWAYS BELIEVED THAT WE HAVE TO BE SERIOUS ABOUT TREATING OUR JURORS LIKE ADULTS.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS YOU'VE DONE IS ALLOWED THEM TO ASK QUESTIONS, WHICH COME THROUGH YOU, BUT THEY CAN BE THEN RELAYED TO ATTORNEYS IN THE CASE.
AND YOU ACTUALLY HAD A CASE WHERE SOMEBODY ASKED A QUESTION THAT HAD 20 DO WITH A TWIN, I THINK, A DNA QUESTION, AND ACTUALLY HAD AN EFFECT ON THE CASE.
>> IT MAY WELL HAVE.
THE JURORS ASK MANY QUESTIONS.
MANY OF THEM ARE SIMPLY CLARIFYING SOME TESTIMONY.
BUT CERTAINLY ON OCCASION THE QUESTIONS ARE EXCELLENT.
NOT WEIGHING IN ON ONE SIDE OF THE CASE OR THE OTHER.
BUT GETTING TO A POINT THAT NEITHER OF THE ATTORNEYS, HOWEVER WELL PREPARED, JUST HAD NOT OCCURRED TO THEM.
>> YOU ALSO TAPED YOUR INSTRUCTIONS SO THEY CAN LISTEN MORE CAREFULLY OR PLAY THEM BACK IN THE COURTROOM.
I'M CURIOUS TO GET YOUR RESPONSE TO THIS CSI EFFECT, WHICH WE HAVE TALKED TO A NUMBER OF JUDGES ABOUT IN THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS.
BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE AN EXPECTATION, JURIES DO, MAYBE EVEN ATTORNEYS AT THIS POINT THAT THINGS ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE PUT INTO EVIDENCE IN A WAY BECAUSE OF THE SOPHISTICATION OF TECHNOLOGY.
TO THE POINT WHERE WE'RE HEARING TERMS LIKE NEGATIVE EVIDENCE, PEOPLE COME IN AND SAY WE CANNOT SHOW YOU THIS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE RESULT OF THAT.
IS THERE A DISCUSSION IN THE COURTROOMS ABOUT THIS SO-CALLED CSI EFFECT?
>> THERE IS A DISCUSSION IN THE COURTROOMS, AND IT'S A CONTINUING ISSUE, IT'S A CONTINUING PROBLEM TO COMBAT THAT AND TO DEAL WITH IT AND TO HELP JURORS UNDER THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT KIND OF TELEVISION PROGRAMMING AND REALITY.
BUT IT ALSO TIES IN TO A PROBLEM ON ISSUE.
IT'S AN ISSUE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CONFRONT AS WE MOVE FORWARD AND THAT IS THE BASIC CHANGES IN SOCIETY THAT TECHNOLOGY IS GOING TO BRING THAT WILL ENABLE PEOPLE AND ENCOURAGE PEOPLE AND EMPOWER PEOPLE TO BE THINKING ON THEIR OWN.
AND ACQUIRING INFORMATION ON THEIR OWN.
WE'VE ALREADY SEEN IN ADDITION TO THE CSI EFFECT, WE'VE ALREADY SEEN THE BEGININGS OF PEOPLE USING THEIR PDA'S TO GET INFORMATION ABOUT THE CASE WHILE THE CASES ARE IN PROGRESS.
AND AS WE MOVE FORWARD, THAT KIND OF SELF EMPOWERED LEARNING, WHICH THE NEW GENERATIONS ARE MUCH MORE ACCUSTOMED TO, I THINK WILL BE A CONTINUING ISSUE.
>> I'M WONDERING IF YOU THINK MAYBE THIS WHOLE JURY TRIAL IS GOING TO BE OUTDATED, IT'S GOING TO BECOME OBSOLETE.
DO YOU THINK?
>> NO.
THAT'S NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN.
THAT'S THE FOUNDATION, AND YOU DON'T HAVE A --
>> YOU CAN'T DO IT ELECTRONICALLY?
>> WELL, NO, NO, YOU CAN'T.
BUT WE'RE DOING THINGS ALL THE TIME TO BUILD UP THE INSTITUTION OF THE JURY.
WE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN YOU WERE TALKING TO JIM McHUGH ABOUT THE CSI EFFECT, IT CAN BE A REAL PROBLEM BECAUSE IT HAS AN EFFECT ON THE PROSECUTOR'S BURDEN.
AND THAT IS A BENEFIT THAT THE DEFENDANT GETS IN MOST CASES, WHEN THIS KIND OF TECH. ISN'T BROUGHT INTO THE COURTROOM.
AND I DO THINK WE'LL HAVE TO ADJUST TO JURORS WHO WANT TO TWILTSER, JURORS WHO WANT TO RESEARCH, USE GOOGLE WHEN THEY GO HOME, AND WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING WHETHER THEY'RE DOING THAT.
>> THE DARK SIDE OF TECHNOLOGY WOULD BE THE ELIMINATION OF JURY TRIALS AS WE KNOW IT.
IT'S BEEN THE HEART AND SOUL OF OUR LEGAL SYSTEM SINCE THE FOUNDATION OF THE COUNTRY, BECAUSE JUSTICES BETTER ACCOMPLISHED WITH JURORS AND IMPORTANTLY IT'S BETTER RECEIVED BY THE PEOPLE IF IT COMES THROUGH JURIES.
EVERY POLL INDICATES THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE ENORMOUS CONFIDENCE IN OUR JURY SYSTEM.
>> ALL RIGHT.
WE'VE GOT MORE JUDGES AND MORE SHOW TO COME.
THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING.
WHEN WE CONTINUE, CASES OF THE FAMOUS AND INFAMOUS.
AS WE SAID EARLIER THE COURT HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE SINCE PRESIDENT LINCOLN WAS FIRST ELECTED.
AND IT DIDN'T TAKE LONG BEFORE INFAMOUS CASES MADE THEIR WAY TO THE SUPERIOR COURT.
FROM CIVIL TO CRIMINAL, THE COURTS STORIED PAST IS A HISTORY LESSON FOR MODERN TIMES.
MOST CHILDREN CAN RECITE THE LIZZIE BORDEN RHYME.
BUT DOES ANYONE REALLY KNOW WHAT HAPPENED BACK IN NEW BEDFORD IN 1892?
>> WHAT HAPPENED WAS THAT THIS YOUNG WOMAN, 32 YEARS OF AGE, WAS ACCUSED OF HACKING HER FATHER AND STEPMOTHER TO DEATH WITH A HATCHET.
>> IT WAS THE FIRST CASE AT LEAST IN MASSACHUSETTS THAT ATTRACTED NATIONAL, EVEN INTERNATIONAL ATTENTION ALL BECAUSE THE ACCUSED WAS A WOMAN.
>> JURORS WERE ALL MEN THEN.
SO THE JURORS COULD NOT BELIEVE THAT A WOMAN COULD COMMIT SUCH A DASTARDLY CRIME.
>> 29 YEARS LATER, ANOTHER INFAMOUS MURDER PUT THE COURT AND MASSACHUSETTS IN THE SPOTLIGHT.
SACCO AND VEN SETITY.
>> THEY WERE ACCUSED OF OF MURDERING TWO PEOPLE IN THE COURSE OF A ROBBERY.
THERE WERE 500 PEOPLE LINKED TO THE JURY SELECTION PROCESS, AND THEY RAN OUT OF JURORS SO THE JUDGE PICKED UP ANYONE WHO WAS AROUND, AGAIN ALL MEN, AND BROUGHT THEM IN AND THEY WERE IMPANELED.
>> AFTER SIX YEARS OF POST TRIAL APPEALS THE MEN WERE EX COMPUTE -- EXECUTED.
BUT THE CONVICTION WAS TABLED BY CONCERN THAT THE JURY WAS BIASED.
ONE NAME IS SIN ON US IN WITH PYRAMID SCHEMES.
CHARLES PONZI.
IN 1920 HE MANAGED TO CONVINCE MORE THAN 40,000 PEOPLE, MOSTLY ITALIAN IMMIGRANTS, TO PURCHASE INTERNATIONAL POSTAL COUPONS, AND THEN USED ONE INVESTOR'S MONEY TO PAY ANOTHER.
>> HE WAS SO BROKE AT THE TIME OF HIS TRIAL THAT HE REPRESENTED HIMSELF.
THE JURY ACQUITTED HIM.
FINALLY HE DID GET CONVICTED IN OUR COURT.
AND SENTENCED TO SEVEN TO NINE YEARS OF A COMMON AND NOTORIOUS THIEF.
>> SOME CORE CASES LIKE THE 1942 COCONUT GROVE NIGHT CLUB FIRE IN BOSTON, ARE REMEMBERED NOT ONLY FOR THEIR PAIN AL DETAILS BUT BECAUSE THEY SET A LEGAL PRECEDENT.
SOMEONE WHO WAS NOT AT THE CLUB WAS HELD ACCOUNTSABLE.
>> THERE WAS ONE REVOLVING DOOR IN THE MAIN ENTRANCE, PEOPLE GOT STUCK IN THE DOOR, IT JAMMED.
>> THE FIRE STARTED AFTER A COUPLE REMOVED A LIGHT BULB TO CREATE A MORE ROMANTIC ATMOSPHERE.
A BUS BOY LUT A MATCH WHILE TRYING TO VIEW THE BULB BACK IN.
SOME DECORATIONS CAUGHT FIRE AND WITHIN FIVE MINUTES THE BUYER NIGHT CLUB WAS A RAGING INFERNO.
THE MANAGER WOUND UP SERVING 12 TO 15 YEARS FOR INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER.
>> I WENT TO OVER THREE INSTITUTIONS AND TOLD THEM THEY WAS SUICIDAL, AND AND PROBABLY HOMICIDAL.
>> A DOMESTIC MURDER IN 1979, HOWEVER, FOREVER CHANGED HOW THE PUBLIC WOULD SEE THE COURT IN ACTION.
HABITUAL CRIMINAL BRAD PRESENTEDER GAS STABBED HIS EX-GIRLFRIEND PATTY GILMORE TO DEATH.
THE TRIAL WOULD HAVE RECEIVED LITTLE ATTENTION SAVE FOR ONE THING.
IT WAS THE FIRST TRIAL TELEVISED IN MASSACHUSETTS.
>> THE COURT ORDERS THAT YOU WOULD BE IMPRISONED FOR THE TERM OF YOUR NATURAL LIFE, HARD LABOR IN THE MASSACHUSETTS CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION AT WALPOLE.
>> CENTLY WE ADOPTED RULES TO GOVERN CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM.
>> A FEW YEARS LATER CAME A CASE THAT WOULD GET NATIONAL TELEVISION COVERAGE.
AND BECAME THE SUBJECT OF A MAJOR MOTION PICTURE.
ON MARCH 6, 1983, A YOUNG WOMAN RAN SCREAMING AND HALF NAKED FROM BIG DAN'S TAVERN IN NEW BEDFORD, TELLING POLICE SHE HAD BEEN RAPED ON A POOL TABLE BY A GROUP OF MEN WHILE OTHER PATRONS CHEERED OR STOOD BY.
>> IT WAS A CASE OF NOTE BECAUSE JUDGE WILLIAM YOUNG WHO PRESIDED HAD TWO TRIALS GOING.
THERE WAS SIX DEFENDANTS, THEY WERE SEVERED, FOUR WERE TRIED AS A GROUP, TWO WERE TRIED IN THE OTHER GROUP.
SO HE IMPANELED TWO JURIES.
>> GUILTY.
>> AGGRAVATED RAPE.
>> OF THE SIX DEFENDANTS, FOUR WERE FOUND GILLY, TWO WERE ACQUITTED.
CONSTERNATION FOLLOWED THE CONVINCES OF VIOLET, GERALD AND CHERYL AMIRAULT, ACCUSED OF MOLESTING CHILDREN AT THEIR FAMILYS -- FELLS ACRE DAY CARE CENTER.
>> THE CHILDREN WERE SEATED IN THE WELL OF THE COURTROOM WITH THEIR BACKS TO THE DEFENDANTS BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T CONFRONTING THE DEFENDANTS, THE DEFENDANTS HADN'T GOTTEN THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO CONFRONT SO, TO PEEK.
>> IT'S NOT TRUE.
WHY ME, GOD.
I'M AN INNOCENT MAN.
>> THE SUGGESTIVE USE OF ANATOMICALLY CORRECT DOLLS AND A RASH OF DAY CARE ABUSE CHARGES AROUND THE COUNTRY COMBINED TO THROW DOUBT ON THEIR GUILT.
>> THIS IS HARDLY THE -- THE LONGEST JURY DLIBS, THE JURY WAS OUT OVER 64 HOURS.
>> YOU JUST SLAM MATTHEW EP EN.
>> CONTROVERSY TOO DOGED THE TRIAL OF LOUISE WOODWARD WHO WAS FOUND GUILTY OF MURDER IN THE SHAKING DEATH OF 10-MONTH-OLD THAT KNEW EACH EN IN 1997.
IN A CONTROVERSIAL MOVE, JUDGE HILLER ZOBEL REDUCED THE VERDICT TO INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER.
>> JUDGES DO HAVE THE POWER, WHICH SHOULD BE USED AND IS USED SPARINGLY TO REDUCE A VERDICT CONSONANT WITH JUSTICE.
>> WOODWARD SERVED A TOTAL OF 279 DAYS IN JAIL.
WITH ME NOW ARE RETIRED PROSECUTOR COURT JUDGE HILLER ZOBEL, WHO PRESIDED OVER THE WOODWARD TRIAL.
FEDERAL COURT JUDGE WILLIAM YOUNG WHO PRESIDED OVER THE BIG DAN'S TRIAL.
AND SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE BARBARA DORTCH-OKARA WHO PRESIDED OVER THE JOHN SALVI MURDER TRIAL.
WELCOME TO ALL OF YOU.
SO THERE MUST BE MANY CASES WHERE I HAPPENS THAT YOU LOOK AT A VERDICT OF A JURY, AND YOU SAY WHAT WERE THEY THINKING AND THIS IS ALL WRONG, HOW CAN WE CHANGE THIS, WHAT ARE THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH YOU CAN JUST CHANGE A VERDICT?
>> WELL, YOU DON'T CHANGE A VERDICT LIGHTLY.
YOU CHANGE A VERDICT RARELY, AND IN CRIMINAL CASES HOMICIDE CASES YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION THAT'S SET BY STATUTE AND RULE TO DECIDE WHETHER JUSTICE HAS BEEN DONE.
YOU CAN AWARD A NEW TRIAL, YOU CAN REVERSE THE VERDICT, OR YOU CAN AWARD A LESSER PENALTY.
>> DO YOU HAVE TO CONSULT WITH ANYBODY OR CAN YOU DO IT ON YOUR OWN?
>> YOU HAVE TO CONSULTS YOUR CON HENCE AND THE FACTS.
AND I THINK IT'S ANY JUDGE WHO HAS DONE IT WILL TELL YOU IT'S PROBABLY THE HARDEST THING A JUDGE CAN DO.
>> JUDGE YOUNG, A LOT OF THINGS THAT SUPERIOR COURT JUSTICES TOLD US THAT ONE OF THE BIG CONCERNS GOING FOR HAS TO DO WITH CULTURAL DIVERSITY AND JUST ALL THE DIFFERENT LANGUAGE ISSUES.
YOU OF COURSE PRESIDED OVER BIG DAN'S AND THE PORTUGUESE COMMUNITY, THERE WAS A LANGUAGE ISSUE THERE, YOU COULD SEE THE HEAD SETS ON THE DEFENDANTS.
IS THERE A CONCERN, WAS THERE A CONCERN THEN AND IS THERE A CONCERN NOW THAT WE DO HAVE A PROBLEM IN OUR SYSTEM WITH SO MANY PEOPLE NOT SPEAKING THE LANGUAGE OR NOT UNDERSTANDING THE JUDICIAL PROCESS?
>> EMPHATICLY YES.
AND THE PROSECUTOR COURT ESPECIALLY HAS A WONDERFUL GROUP OF INTERPRETERS OR A SYSTEM TO GET INTERPRETERS FOR SO MANY DIFFERENT LANGUAGES, DIFFERENT DIE LENGTHS OF CHINESE, CAMBODIAN.
ON THE COURT WHICH I NOW SERVE WE FREQUENTLY GO TO THE SUPERIOR COURT TO LINE UP AN INTERPRETER IN ORDER TO HAVE A FAIR TRIAL IT'S ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL THAT THE PERSON ACCUSED TRULY UNDERSTANDS THE PROCEEDINGS.
SO TO TAKE THAT CASE WHEN A PORTUGUESE SPEAKING PERSON WAS ON THE WITNESS STAND, THE INTERPRETER, PORTUGUESE AMERICAN AND NOW A COURT CLERK, STOOD RIGHT NEXT TO THE PERSON.
FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE TRIAL, THE PORTUGUESE INTERPRETER WAS RIGHT THERE WITH THE DEFENDANT, PEEKING QUIETLY TO THEM SO THAT THEY WOULD UNDERSTAND EVERY STEP OF THE PROCEEDING.
>> JUDGE DOCH OH CAR -- DORTCH-OKARA, YOU DID NOT ALLOW CAMS FROM THE SALVI CASE.
A YOUNG MAN ACCUSED OF GUNNING DOWN TWO WOMEN AT TWO DIFFERENT ABORTION CLINICS IN THE 90s.
YOU THOUGHT IT WAS TOO VOLATILE A SITUATION.
STILL AGREE WITH THAT LOOKING BACK?
>> WELL, I DO FOR THAT CASE.
TODAY I MAY LOOK AT IT DIFFERENTLY.
BUT IN ADDITION TO THE ISSUES INVOLVED THERE, THE ABORTION ISSUE AND THE LIKE, THERE WAS A SPECIFIC DEFENDANT, JOHN SALVI, WHO HAD MADE KNOWN AT VARIOUS PRETRIAL HEARINGS THAT HE WANTED TO MAKE A STAND, HE WANTED TO MAKE A STATEMENT.
HE INDICATED HE WANTED TO GIVE INTERVIEWS TO THE MEDIA.
AT ONE HEARING HE PASSED A NOTE TO A REPORTER.
AND THERE WERE CAMERAS AT SOME OF THE PREVIOUS HEARINGS, AND I GOT THE IMPRESSION THAT HE WANTED TO USE THE TRIAL AS A FORUM TO ASSERT HIS VIEWS.
AND I JUST DIDN'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN.
IT WAS A VERY VOLATILE SITUATION, PROTESTERS ON BOTH SIDE.
THE PRO-CHOICE, THE ANTI-ABORTION.
PROTESTERS WERE OUT IN FRONT OF THE COURT, WERE TAKING ENORMOUS SECURITY PRECAUTIONS AND I JUST DIDN'T FEEL IN A MURDER CASE WHERE TWO PEOPLE WERE KILLED, FIVE INJURED, THAT THE COURT OUGHT TO BE A FORUM FOR HIS VIEWS.
OR ANYBODY'S VIEWS.
>> THAT'S ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT'S BASICALLY BEEN RESOLVED, FORTUNATELY.
JUDGE ZOBEL, ANOTHER THING THAT JUDGE ROUSE BROUGHT UP WITH US IS THE ISSUE OF INDEPENDENCE AND HOW FORTUNATE WE ARE IN MASSACHUSETTS DOESN'T HAVE THE ELECTED JUDICIAL SYSTEM THAT SO MANY OTHER STATES HAVE, AND THE REASON BEING THAT THERE'S SO MUCH TEMPTATION TO BRIBE PEOPLE OR TO CUT DEALS WITH PEOPLE.
IS THIS SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT?
IS THIS SOMETHING YOU THINK MASSACHUSETTS WILL MAINTAIN?
>> WELL, A LOT OF THE STATES ELECT JUDGES, AND I'M NOT SURE THAT WE CAN BLANKET, SAY IN A BLANKET WAY THAT --
>> BUT THERE'S NO THROWING THE BUMS OUT IN THIS STATE.
>> BUT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN MASSACHUSETTS, WHERE YOU HAVE A COURT SYSTEM, A SUPERIOR COURT THAT'S STATEWIDE, WE SIT IN DIFFERENT COUNTIES, BUT IT'S ONE COURT, IT'S NOT THE MIDDLESEX COUNTY COURT OR THE SUFFOLK COUNTY COURT THE WAY IT IS IN OTHER STATES.
IT WOULD MEAN THAT IF WE HAD ELECTIONS OF SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES, EVERY SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE WOULD HAVE TO RUN STATEWIDE.
THE SAME AS THE GOVERNOR, THE SAME AS A U.S. SENATOR.
WITH THE EXPENSE INVOLVED -- THE BAD THING ABOUT, IN MY JUDGMENT, ABOUT ELECTED JUDGES IS THAT MONEY GETS INTO THE PICTURE.
AND WHAT HAPPENS, WHO CONTRIBUTES TO A JUDGE'S ELECTION CAMPAIGN?
WHY, IT'S THE RAURS -- THE LAWYERS, INCLUDING THE LAWYERS WHO ARE PRACTICING IN FRONT OF THE JUDGE.
WOULD YOU WANT TO HAVE YOUR OPPONENT'S LAWYER THE CAMPAIGN MANAGER FOR THE JUDGE?
I GUESS NOT.
>> WHAT ARE SOME OF THE OTHER CONCERNS GOING FORWARD?
>> TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE BASIC ROLE OF JUDGES IN OUR SOCIETY.
JUDGES PRIMARILY ARE TEACHERS OF THE LAW.
THE SKILL IS TO TEACH THE LAW, AND YOU SEE IN THIS PROGRAM IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE, TO WHOM DO THEY TEACH IT, THEY TEACH IT TO AVERAGE PEOPLE.
IN A GREAT TRIAL COURT LIKE THE SUPERIOR COURT.
THEY ARE TEACHING IT TO JURORS, THE PEOPLE WHO COME IN, SO THAT JUSTICE MAY BE DONE.
THE JURY SYSTEM IS DIRECT DEMOCRACY AT ITS FINEST, IT'S THE NEW ENGLAND TOWN MEETING AT LARGE.
THAT'S THE SKILL THAT YOU'RE SEEKING TO HAVE IN YOUR JUDICIARY.
YES, IN INDEPENDENT, YES PEOPLE OF INTEGRITY.
WHO CAN CONVEY ACCURATELY WITHOUT BIAS THE ENACTED LAWS OF OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS.
TEACH THOSE LAWS TO THE PEOPLE SO THEY MAY BE APPLIED IN SPECIFIC CASES.
>> YOU CONVINCED THAT'S GOING TO STAY THE CASE IN MASSACHUSETTS?
>> I AM.
I THINK WE HAVE TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE PERCEPTION OF JUSTICE AND EVERY YEAR I THINK THERE ARE BILLS FILED TO HAVE JUDGES ELECTED.
BUT I REALLY DON'T THINK THAT THE PUBLIC WANTS THAT.
THE PUBLIC WANTS TO HAVE CONFIDENCE IN --
>> THEY DON'T LIKE THEM ANY WAY.
>> WHAT CAN YOU OFFER AS YOUR CAMPAIGN SPEECH?
>> THIS HAS BEEN A PLEASURE HAVING YOU ALL HERE TONIGHT.
JUDGE BARBARA DORTCH-OKARA, JUDGE WILLIAM YOUNG, JUDGE HILLER ZOBEL.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR 150th.
THAT IS IT FOR OUR SPECIAL ON THE MASSACHUSETTS SUPERIOR COURT.
FOR MORE INFORMATION AND TO SEE MORE INTERVIEWS WITH JUSTICES, LOG ONTO OUR WEBSITE,.
I'M EMILY ROONEY.
GOOD NIGHT.+++ATH0