Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Defendant's Response to Commonwealth's Supplemental Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss

Defendant's Response to Commonwealth's Supplemental Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,309|Likes:
Published by masslive

More info:

Published by: masslive on Mar 02, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

11/23/2013

pdf

text

original

 
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT
HAMPSHIRE, SS.                                                                                 DOCKET NO.:10-48  COMMONWEALTH   V.    AUSTIN RENAUD
 
DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO COMMONWEALTH’SSUPPLEMENTAL OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’SMOTION TO DISMISS
 In response to the government’s supplemental opposition the defendant, through hiscounsel, responds that the government has made a mistake and is unwilling to admit the error.It is now clear, the government failed to provide to the Grand Jury accurate and conciseinformation as to the age of Ms. Prince at the time of the crime charged.  The government nowargues that the members of the Grand Jury were allowed to speculate and guess from theevidence provided that Ms. Prince was under the age of sixteen at the time of the alleged acts.Ms. Prince’s age is an element of the crime and needed to be presented, clearly and correctly,to the members of the Grand Jury.  A review of the Grand Jury minutes and the exhibits has leftthis Honorable Court and the counsel for the defendant without any basis or reasonableinferences on which to determine the age of Ms. Prince at the time of the charged crime asrequired.The government is really stretching the envelope of common sense and understandingto make the arguments encompassed in their opposition.  It is not to be left to the Grand Jury toguess at the age of Ms. Prince at the time of the crime charged.   The information was readilyavailable to the government and not presented despite the extensive volume of the Grand JuryMinutes in this lengthy investigation.  The government could have, and should have, presentedthe information as to her date of birth to the Grand Jury and failed to do so.The missing element is fatal to the current indictment.  This is simple and basicinformation that must be presented to Grand Juries throughout the Commonwealth in cases likethis on a daily basis.  This missing evidence is information which is critical to sustaining theindictment which has been returned by the Grand Jury.  This is not a time for the Grand Jury to

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->