Conley Names Fourth Prosecutor to Lab Crisis Task Force
BOSTON, Oct. 22, 2012—A man currently under indictment for murder is among the defendants whose cases will be heard in Suffolk Superior Court this week for specialized post-conviction sessions related to a former Department of Health drug lab chemist accused of mishandling evidence.
ANTHONY THAMES (D.O.B. 2/22/83) is charged with first-degree murder and unlawful possession of a firearm for allegedly shooting Raymond Lamar to death in Boston’s South End on the morning of Aug. 6, 2011. Shortly after his arrest on that offense, Thames pleaded guilty to possession of a Class B substance as a second or subsequent offense and distribution of a Class B substance as a second or subsequent offense. He is currently serving a five-year state prison term for that conviction.
Also expected in the special sessions today is LUIGI EPIFANIA (D.O.B. 7/13/83) of East Boston, currently serving five years on a 2011 drug conviction. At the time of his arrest in an East Boston OxyContin transaction in which he had about 150 of the powerful painkillers in his car, Epifania had just completed a previous prison sentence for beating a man with a frying pan during a separate drug deal, as well as a sentence for killing a neighborhood cat, setting its remains on fire, and throwing them through a Princeton Street resident’s window.
Prosecutors answered on more than 100 such cases in a set of specialized sessions last week for defendants convicted of possessing, distributing, or trafficking in drugs tested by Annie Dookhan, a former DPH chemist now under investigation by the Massachusetts Attorney General and State Police. Most of the cases were for motions to stay the defendants’ sentences, and prosecutors assented to about 70 of them. More such cases are expected this week.
A review of the defendants who appeared in those sessions shows that not a single case involved a non-violent, low-level drug user, as some sources have characterized them.
“One defense attorney was quoted as saying 80% to 90% of these cases involve small-time defendants,” Conley said. “I had to wonder which courthouse he was in, because nothing could be further from the truth.”
In just one day last week, the defendants included:
1. A defendant convicted of mayhem, aggravated assault and battery on a child, three counts of assault and battery, three counts of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, robbery, and two prior drug offenses;
2. A defendant convicted of unlawful possession of a firearm, 10 counts of assault and battery, four counts of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, three counts of assault, five counts of assault and battery on a public employee, and 11 prior drug offenses;
3. A defendant with three aliases, five prior drug convictions, and sentences for unlawful possession of a firearm and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon;
4. A defendant convicted of unlawful possession of a firearm, larceny over $250, and eight counts each of counterfeiting and uttering;
5. A defendant convicted of 11 prior drug offenses, as well as assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, two counts of carrying a dangerous weapon, assault and battery, and breaking and entering at night;
6. A defendant convicted of 12 prior drug offenses and three counts of assault and battery, as well as assault, larceny from a person, larceny over $250, and threats;
7. A defendant convicted of nine prior drug offenses and currently charged with unlawfully carrying a firearm;
8. A defendant with seven separate restraining orders against him, six convictions for armed assault with intent to kill, two convictions each for assault and battery and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, three convictions for assault with a dangerous weapon, and single convictions for witness intimidation, breaking and entering at night, armed robbery, and larceny from a person;
9. A defendant with prior convictions for assault and battery, aggravated assault and battery, attempted murder, home invasion, and three counts of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon;
10. A defendant with prior convictions for two counts each of assault with a dangerous weapon and carrying a dangerous weapon and single convictions for larceny over $250, breaking and entering at night with intent to commit a felony, malicious destruction of property, assault and battery, and assault and battery on a public employee;
11. A defendant with two prior gun convictions, three prior drug convictions, three convictions for assault with a dangerous weapon, and additional convictions for armed assault with intent to kill, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, and a civil rights violation;
12. A defendant with prior convictions for assault and battery, assault with a dangerous weapon, armed assault with intent to rob, extortion, breaking and entering, and four prior drug offenses;
13. A defendant seeking to withdraw his guilty pleas to counts of possession with intent to distribute Class A, Class B, and Class D substances along with his pleas to possessing a firearm and stun gun, which came after seven separate prior drug convictions and an additional conviction for unlawful possession of ammunition; and
14. A defendant with prior gun and ammunition convictions in addition to nine prior drug convictions.
Some defendants did not have prior convictions for violent crime or firearms offenses. They included:
1. A defendant who pleaded guilty to trafficking in cocaine and possession of Class B and Class D substances with intent to distribute following his arrest with 800 grams of cocaine, five pounds of marijuana, 266 prescription pills of various types without a prescription, and $25,000 in cash;
2. A defendant arrested with 23 grams of cocaine, 23 grams of heroin, two police scanners, and $11,000 in cash after a previous cocaine distribution conviction;
3. A defendant with four prior drug convictions and additional convictions for larceny over $250 and malicious destruction of property; and
4. A defendant previously convicted in federal court of distributing cocaine whose subsequent Suffolk County conviction for trafficking in cocaine and possession of a Class A substance with intent to distribute was reversed under a Supreme Court decision and who subsequently pleaded guilty to the same charges, only to challenge them in light of the DPH crisis.
“So in light of these defendants and their records,” Conley said, “I have to ask: Where are all the low-level, non-violent drug users that so many people claim are languishing in prison? Because they aren’t anywhere that we’ve seen.”
In light of the rapidly-growing list of defendants seeking release, and because of rising attempts by some defense attorneys to exploit the DPH crisis by filing motions even when Dookhan had no contact with the drugs for which their clients were convicted, Conley named a fourth prosecutor, Assistant District Attorney Spencer Lord, to the team answering on DPH-related motions. Lord was previously assigned to the DA’s staff in Boston Municipal Court.
Thames, Epifania, and about 14 other defendants currently held at the North Central Correctional Institution at Gardner and MCI Souza-Baranowski are expected to appear before Judge Christine McEvoy in courtroom 808 throughout the day.
–30–
All defendants are presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
