BOSTON, Dec. 17, 2018—Suffolk County District Attorney John P. Pappas today delivered the following remarks on his decision to withdraw indictments charging SEAN ELLIS with first-degree murder and armed robbery after a court reversed his convictions in the 1993 shooting death of Boston Police Detective John J. Mulligan:

“Good afternoon. With me are Boston Police Commissioner William Gross, Superintendent Paul Donovan, First Assistant DA Patrick Haggan, and Assistant District Attorney Edmond Zabin, chief of the Homicide Unit, and Assistant District Attorney Mark Lee, deputy chief of the Homicide Unit here at the DA’s office.

“In 2016, the Supreme Judicial Court affirmed a judge’s order granting a motion for a new trial in the case against SEAN ELLIS. Mr. Ellis had been convicted of murdering Boston Police Detective John J. Mulligan during a 1993 armed robbery with his co-defendant, TERRY PATTERSON. His convictions for possessing the murder weapon and Det. Mulligan’s service weapon, which was stolen from his body, remain undisturbed.

“The trial evidence and testimony in 1995 proved Mr. Ellis’ guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Jurors at the time called the case against him overwhelming. But the passage of more than two and a half decades has seriously compromised our ability to prove it again. For this reason, my office will file paperwork today ending the prosecution of Mr. Ellis for first-degree murder and armed robbery.

“Two major factors contributed to this decision. The nature of the evidence has not changed in 25 years, but the strength of it has declined with time. Moreover, the involvement of three corrupt police detectives to varying degrees in the investigation has further compromised our ability to put the best possible case before a jury.

“As the SJC noted two years ago, Mr. Ellis was near the scene of the crime moments before it was committed, he fled the scene in its aftermath, and he possessed the murder weapon in the days that followed. The most likely critical issue at a new trial, then, would not be whether Mr. Ellis was involved in Det. Mulligan’s homicide, but rather the level of his involvement with his convicted co-defendant, Terry Patterson.

“As some of you may recall, Mr. Ellis’ defense at trial was that Mr. Patterson committed the murder and robbery alone, on his own initiative, while Mr. Ellis was buying diapers at 3:00 in the morning. He claimed to his family that Mr. Patterson gave him the murder weapon and Det. Mulligan’s service weapon after he left the store, and that they left the scene together.

“We would have to rebut those claims at a new trial, and establish the state of mind and degree of participation necessary for a murder conviction – either that he was the shooter or that he knowingly participated and shared the intent of the shooter.

“But that evidence could come only from eyewitnesses, including those who identified Mr. Ellis as the man they saw crouching by Det. Mulligan’s vehicle shortly before the murder. And those specific recollections have, understandably, faded over the decades. The circumstances under which they were made would be presented against a markedly different backdrop than back in 1995.

“Finally, and significantly, there is the involvement of three corrupt police detectives to varying degrees in the investigation. As we all know, Detectives Kenneth Acerra, Walter Robinson, and John Brazil disgraced themselves and tarnished their badges in a wide variety of criminal conduct unrelated to this case – the extent of which was unknown to prosecutors or defense counsel in 1995.

“Perhaps more than any other factor, their shameful conduct presents a major challenge to our ability to put a successful case to a new jury.
“As the SJC concluded 18 years ago, there is no reliable evidence that Acerra, Robinson, or Brazil procured or produced false evidence in this case. Based on the facts and circumstances known to us, we don’t believe Det. Mulligan was involved in their schemes. But a lawyer today would argue that he was involved, and that they had a motive to protect themselves and their criminal enterprise – even at the cost of fully investigating a fellow officer’s homicide. Unfortunately, no matter how irrelevant their corruption might be to John Mulligan’s murder, it is now inextricably intertwined with the investigation and critical witnesses in the case.

“For all of these overlapping reasons, I have determined that the evidence we could reasonably expect to introduce is no longer sufficient to achieve a conviction. This was not an easy decision. It may not be a popular decision. But it is the right decision. As prosecutors, we don’t wash our hands of a controversy by handing it off to a jury. We have an ethical obligation not to pursue a case we don’t believe we can prove.

“Part and parcel of those ethical obligations is following the evidence wherever it leads. Under Dan Conley and Ralph Martin before him, and to this very day, the Suffolk DA’s office has not shied away from exonerating innocent men. But let me be clear: that is not the case here. If at any point we had any reason to believe that Mr. Ellis was wrongfully charged or convicted, we would have acted on it immediately.

“I know from many years of experience that Commissioner Gross shares those values. So did the Boston Police homicide detectives who led the investigation in the 1990s – Paul Barnacle, Denny Harris, John McCarthy, Tommy O’Leary, and Richie Ross. They did their jobs carefully, diligently, ethically, and accurately.

“The trial prosecutors, Phyllis Broker and Jill Furman, were the model of professionalism at every stage of the proceedings. They hid nothing from the jury or the defense. Even by the very high standards we employ today, their work was exceptional.

“The modern re-investigation, led by Sgt. Det. Paul McLaughlin and Sgt. Det. John Brown with Assistant District Attorneys Ed Zabin, Paul Linn, and Amy Martin brought the very best of 21st century law enforcement to bear on this case. I want to commend them for the honesty and integrity they brought to their efforts, and for the candor they showed to the court and opposing counsel. Their goal was to find and prove the truth, whatever it might be.
“In the 25 years since Det. Mulligan was murdered in cold blood, not one piece of evidence developed by prosecutors, defense counsel, or anyone else has pointed to anyone but Sean Ellis and Terry Patterson. Of all the people in all the world who might have killed John Mulligan, only they were present at the time and place he was killed – by their own admissions, supported by eyewitnesses and physical evidence.

“They fled the scene in Mr. Patterson’s distinctive vehicle, and they stripped that vehicle of its identifying characteristics when a witness description was released. The murder weapon was recovered near Mr. Ellis’ house, with a fingerprint on its magazine that came back to Mr. Ellis’ girlfriend. With it was Det. Mulligan’s service weapon, stolen from his person. In fact, Mr. Ellis and Mr. Patterson were only tried separately because each of them blamed the other for committing the murder alone.

“Sean Ellis served 22 years for the murder of Detective John Mulligan. His friend and co-defendant, Terry Patterson, served 12. In a case of cold-blooded murder, the execution of a uniformed police officer, those sentences are, frankly, insufficient to most of us. But we as prosecutors must operate – always and unfailingly – through the evidence we can prove. And the state of the evidence today makes it very unlikely that we would prevail at a new trial.

“Not lost in the legal assessment of the case is perhaps the most important aspect, our discussions with Detective Mulligan’s family. I met with them at length last week to explain our decision what they could expect if the case went to trial. They were perhaps the most difficult and weighty conversations I have ever been a part of in my 24-plus years as a prosecutor. Over two decades later, the pain they feel over Detective’s Mulligan’s murder was still palpable. They were disappointed, as any family would be after enduring what they have. But they, too, with incredible dignity and grace, understood this outcome.

“For John Mulligan’s family, this case isn’t an abstract piece of history. It’s been with them all along. But as longtime prosecutors and police detectives, it’s stayed with us, too — and we appreciate its gravity. This was, as I said, an incredibly difficult decision, but this team is uniquely qualified to make it, based only on the facts, the circumstances, and the law.

“I’ll now invite Commissioner Gross to say a few words as well.”

READ MORE: Ellis Sean – Nolle prosequi

–30–

All defendants are presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.