Thanks to the TAB’s Jonathan Dame for continuing to ask about this.
Middlesex DA's office on #NewtonMA Sweet Tomatoes crash: "There are no updates at this time. This is an open and ongoing investigation."
— Jonathan Dame (@JDameTAB) June 10, 2016
Crazy Divers: Men be like...
drivers man be like
I believe the Citizens of Newton are owed a progress report on the investigation at the very least.
It’s now 3 and a half months later, the Investigation should be coming to a close and the appropriate charges brought.
I agree with Doug. Some update is needed at this point, even if it’s just to say the investigation will wrap up in X weeks. This was a terrible incident and no one wants anything less than a thorough investigation. But three and a half months does seem like a long time.
I contacted the DA’s office a couple weeks ago and got a similar response to Jonathan’s. Just called again and was told that they won’t comment on an open investigation to someone not directly involved (I’m not). The executive admin did say someone would call back (she said that when I called a few weeks ago, so I’m not waiting for my phone to ring).
I asked what recourse, if any, I have as a regular citizen to ask for a status update. Not specific info on the investigation, just some update on timing. I didn’t really get an answer. I’m not familiar with DA investigations, so I don’t know whether we can expect any info before the report is done. Fortunately, as a regular citizen, I’m also a voter and will certainly bear this in mind.
I’m sure someone will urge patience. Please do not use that word, as it implies we’re being impatient. We were impatient two weeks, maybe even four or five weeks, after the incident. Three and a half months (March 1) is no longer a question of patience/impatience.
This is Beyond Ridiculous. This should have never taken this long. What are they hiding?? And one can only assume that the Police Station on Chestnut street has cameras outside – why has this not been made public? Is the DA concerned that one of the deceased was an attorney and the other person worked for a Newton Law firm? Maybe the lawyers friends of the deceased need to put some pressure on the DA office for information to be released.
@Joanne,
I can understand the feeling that this investigation is taking a long time. However, it serves no purpose to speculate on what is taking so long. I also think it does no good to assume anything. I walk by the building on Chestnut Street all the time and I don’t believe I have ever seen any cameras on the building.
The one thing I will say is that I suspect that the families of those directly involved in this tragedy have been updated as the investigation has gone along. Otherwise, I am fairly sure there would have been family members seeking out the media to express their concerns about the delays.
We all want to know but are we all entitled to know? I’m not so sure.
But I certainly want the investigators to do a complete and thorough job so that if there are any charges here, they will stick and not be lost due to a rush to judgement.
While I understand that everyone is anxious to bring some closure to this tragic event, as an officer of the court (i.e., an attorney) I want to point out that due process sometimes overrides the desires of the public for swift and sure justice. A law enforcement investigation and a grand jury proceeding can take some time to conclude and it is only fair to everyone that the legal process be allowed to unfold as fairly as possible. I urge everyone to be patient while this process play itself out.
TWT — I agree with much of what you wrote. I’m particularly unsure of what we, as regular citizens, are entitled to. It may be nothing. Then again, I’m just looking for an update of some kind. Maybe a timeframe of completion would be good, not necessarily the completed report.
However, I do disagree with your use of “rush to judgment” and Ted’s reference to “swift” justice. We’re three and a half months deep here. “Rush” and “swift” have long since gone past.
And I realize where Ted’s overall comment is coming from, but enough with the “be patient” line. It’s sounding more and more patronizing each time I hear it. As I said above when I nicely asked that no one use the word “patience,” it implies we’re being impatient. I don’t believe we are after this amount of time. It’s like when I went out to dinner the other night. If I expected the bill within 10 seconds of asking for it, I’d be impatient, I’d be in the wrong. But after 10 minutes of it not coming, the waitress was now in the wrong (don’t worry, it was not a restaurant in Newton).
The woman at the DA’s office reminded me twice during our brief conversation that the office oversees 50+ cities and towns. There’s a lot going on, with a lot of difference cases and investigations. And that makes sense. But we’re not being impatient simply by asking a question.
Dan Foley, there is nothing wrong with asking questions, but the public is not necessarily entitled to an answer at this point. In any case like this, due process and the integrity of the investigation and the grand jury indictment process, if applicable, necessarily involves some secrecy. Indeed, the rules of criminal procedure mandate that officials involved in the grand jury indictment process may not disclose information until an arrest has been made.
Defendants in serious criminal cases have a constitutional right to a grand jury. The grand jury performs the dual function of determining whether there is probable cause and protecting citizens against unfounded criminal charges. If this case has been brought before a grand jury, it would not be unusual for the proceedings to take at least three months, which is the ordinary period of time that a grand juror must serve, but in many cases it takes longer to conclude an investigation, bring it before the grand jury, and obtain an indictment. In Middlesex County, which is the largest in the state and has many cities and towns, there are often many cases going through the grand jury process at any one time. Having consulted with several criminal defense attorneys, I am informed that the process of indictment can often take six months or more.
If you are interested, here is a primer on the grand jury process in Massachusetts that I hope you find helpful.
The above discussion implies that there is a grand jury process occurring. What if there is no such process going on? Can the public be notified as to whether a grand jury has or will be convened to bring a case forward? If the D.A. were just dragging his/her feet (with no grand jury proceeding happening), how would the public know?
Sallee, not even a defendant has the right to know about the existence of grand jury proceedings unless and until they are concluded, and even then there are some legal limits on disclosure.
The case for secrecy was unanimously upheld by the Supreme Court in Douglas Oil Co. of California v. Petrol Stops Northwest. The Court’s rationale for strict secrecy was that “if preindictment proceedings were made public, many prospective witnesses would be hesitant to come forward voluntarily” and that “witnesses who appeared before the grand jury would be less likely to testify fully and frankly.” In addition, the Court found that “there also would be the risk that those about to be indicted would flee, or would try to influence individual grand jurors.” The Court also cited the protection of privacy of the accused, noting that “persons who are accused but exonerated by the grand jury [should] not be held up to public ridicule”. Interestingly, while officials involved in the grand jury process are prohibited from disclosing such proceedings, witnesses who testify before the grand jury are not.
As a practical matter, however, because they are elected officials, I would expect that if the District Attorney decides not to pursue an indictment or fails to obtain one, some sort of announcement would be forthcoming. By the same token, I assume she will announce when and if there is an indictment. I know that the media has been diligent in their duty to investigate, and I assume the District Attorney has also been diligent in fulfilling her duty to the public. Once again, I would–politely–urge everyone to be patient while the investigation is still going on, which the District Attorney has confirmed to be the case.
Ted — Thanks for forwarding the primer. That’s good to have. That’s been part of my issue, simply not being familiar with the process. I hope you understand that in no way do I think my wanting to have an update is of equal importance as the process itself.
I’ll echo Sallee’s questions about the grand jury. When the DA’s office says that the “investigation” is ongoing, would that include the grand jury? From a layman’s perspective, it would seem like the grand jury was separate and would occur after some amount of investigating was done. In that case, an announcement along the lines of “it’s moved to the grand jury” would seem appropriate. However, if the grand jury is considered part of the broader investigation, then I would understand why we’ve not had any details.
Thanks again for answering these questions.
THM — our posts went through simultaneously. That answers my question. Odd that witnesses aren’t required to secrecy. And your being polite about patience is appreciated!
Dan Foley, it costs me nothing to be polite, but being rude can be very costly. I assume that an investigation is not officially closed unless and until an indictment is issued. Indeed, an investigation could and often does continue right up until the jury or the judge reaches a verdict at trial.
I would not be surprised if the results of neurological testing of the driver (or still pending results, perhaps of multiple tests) are behind the delay. Combine that with, as Ted alluded to, a grand jury process…
I think we will be waiting a while longer.