Attention now turns to possible DA failures over alleged affair with judge

In a case that has now reached the state's highest court, two defendants claim the Bristol County District Attorney's Office failed in its duty to investigate allegations of judicial misconduct by the former premier Justice Douglas Darnbrough, which potentially resulted in unfair trials.

The case involves two men convicted of sex crimes in New Bedford District Court. In February 2023, each appealed their conviction, requesting new trials based on allegations that Darnbrough was having an affair with the assistant district attorney who prosecuted them, which they said jeopardized the integrity of their trials. Defense attorney James McKenna filed an appeal for new trials with the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) in April after his first appeal was denied in February 2024 in New Bedford District Court.

District Attorney Thomas M. Quinn III's office now has until next Friday, June 14, to file its response to the appeal. The SJC will schedule oral arguments after the filing of the prosecutor's brief.

Gregg Miliote, a spokesman for District Attorney Quinn's office, declined to comment on the SJC's appeal.

In a letter dated May 8, an SJC clerk wrote that the court was seeking amicus briefs from third parties on the question of “whether the district court erred in denying defendant's motion for new trial “. It also considers “whether the prosecutor satisfied his duty to investigate misconduct” and “whether the district court abused its discretion in denying defendant's discovery request.” The court solicits amicus briefs as expert testimony, often on cases involving ethics issues or complex issues involving the justice system.

While the district court's appeal in February focused on the allegations and records related to the case, the appeal now before the SJC focuses on what McKenna describes as the failure of the court and office of the prosecutor to investigate the allegations of the case and judicial misconduct.

The DA's office failed to “conduct a thorough investigation” into the allegations of misconduct, McKenna argued, citing precedent set in similar cases in Massachusetts. “The Commonwealth’s failure to fulfill its duty to investigate means that justice has not been served,” McKenna wrote in the SJC’s appeal.

The prosecutor's office initially claimed during a Jan. 5 court hearing that it had conducted an internal investigation and found “no evidence” of a sexual relationship between Darnbrough and the prosecutor. However, after the judge ordered the prosecutor's office to release a summary of that investigation, the prosecutor's office walked back that assertion, revealing that it had not conducted an investigation into the alleged affair at all. Instead, the prosecutor's office relied on an investigation by the state trial court, which was never released beyond the prosecutor's summary.

Allegations regarding this matter first surfaced in September 2023, in a series of anonymous letters sent to top court officials and lawyers. Although unsubstantiated, the letters claimed that Darnbrough covered up the alleged affair while continuing to preside over cases pursued by his alleged romantic partner.

In February, the district judge hearing the case denied the request for a new trial because, as he wrote in his ruling, the “claims rely almost exclusively on anonymous, unsigned, and unsworn notes “. The judge also denied McKenna's request for full records from the state trial court and district attorney's investigations into the alleged affair.

McKenna said the judge's decision in February blocking his access to the records amounted to a “catch-22”: a new trial was denied due to lack of evidence because the judge denied his motion that could have produced such evidence.

McKenna appealed the decision to the SJC, which oversees the state's district courts. “The district court’s failure to order production of the investigative reports in the Commonwealth’s possession constituted both an abuse of discretion and a violation of (defendant’s) constitutional right,” McKenna wrote.

The two men McKenna represents are currently serving two and a half year sentences. One is Gerson Pascual-Santana, convicted of sexual assault of a child under 14 years old. The other is Jonathan Rascao, convicted of sexual assault of a mentally disabled person.

Pascual-Santana's case is the first to be brought before the SJC. The appeals court stayed Rascao's trial pending a decision in the Pascual-Santana case, which will serve as precedent for Rascao's case. If the court rules in favor of Pascual-Santana, it will likely open the door for dozens of other cases involving Judge Darnbrough and the ADA to be retried, the people involved said.

Many questions still remain unanswered after the district court judge's ruling in February. Shortly after the anonymous letters were released, Darnbrough stopped appearing in court. A spokesperson for the trial court then said he was on “vacation”. Upon his return, he was transferred from New Bedford to the Plymouth District Court, where he served for less than a month before submitting his resignation to the state.

McKenna argued that there is still no clear explanation for Darnbrough's resignation. Darnbrough's lawyer at the time cited health reasons. But McKenna questioned the judge's timeline during a Jan. 5 court hearing.

“When someone resigns for health reasons, they don’t transfer to Plymouth,” McKenna said.

McKenna has won support from the state's public defense agency and the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts (ACLUM), which are each pushing for transparency in a case that the trial court in the state and the prosecutor's office played closely.

The ACLUM also made clear that some elements of the case and allegations of misconduct remain unclear. He expressed concern about what he described as “evolving and inconsistent assertions” made by the prosecutor’s office.

The prosecutor's office said in its summary of the trial court's investigation that the anonymous letters were part of a smear campaign aimed at harassing its prosecutor. The prosecutor's office released a statement in February supporting the judge's decision. “The judge clearly credited our representations and concluded that the documents filed by the defendant in this case were 'speculative, uncorroborated and conclusive in nature,'” Quinn wrote.

The Light is not publishing the prosecutor's name because the only reference to her is in the anonymous letters. His name is not used in the appeal or the prosecutor's report.

McKenna described the DA's office as “playing hide and seek” with its cases rather than fulfilling its duties. He argued that the prosecutor's office has a “constitutional obligation to investigate.” . . and this was not respected,” he wrote. In his appeal, requesting a new trial, he wrote: “Any other solution would jeopardize the integrity of our justice system. »

Email reporter Will Sennott at [email protected].