News & Events
Message from MACDL President Randy Chapman
As many of you are aware, Mitt Romney and others have made the independence of the Massachusetts judiciary a national campaign issue. Never unwilling to throw someone under the bus if it is politically expedient, our former Governor has called for the resignation of Superior Court Judge Kathe Tuttman. He has alleged she is soft on crime and is unfit to serve. As members of the bar, we must individually and collectively speak out against this unwarranted attack on Judge Tuttman and our judiciary.
MACDL member Ed Ryan, who also serves as essentially the MBA spokesperson on issues of judicial independence, has outlined the facts surrounding the case that has triggered these attacks. Click here for the text of that statement.
As criminal defense attorneys, it is critical we educate ourselves about the underlying particulars of this case so that we might respond in an informed and intelligent manner. Some of you might have access to the media and will be called upon to speak on this issue. Others of you might simply be asked by family or friends to educate them. Please support the independence of our judiciary. They cannot speak for themselves, and so we must do so whenever possible or suffer the consequences of judges who might capitulate to the whims of politicians for fear of public scorn.
As Governor, Mitt Romney demonstrated a complete contempt for the judiciary. He was more concerned with making political statements than ensuring a balanced and independent judiciary. He essentially gutted the JNC when it did not provide candidates that met his transparent litmus test. The entire process was engineered by a legal counsel who was not even a Massachusetts lawyer at the time of his appointment. The only “qualification” of the legal counsel was that he was a state representative from Connecticut who was against gay marriage.
Nevertheless, notwithstanding the distortion of the process, the appointment of Kathe Tuttman was a good choice. I do not say this because I think she is lenient or defense oriented. As a prosecutor she was tough. However, she was also fair and balanced. She was intellectually honest and scrupulously ethical. There is little doubt she has brought these same qualities to the bench.
The transcript of the bail hearing shows someone that understands that bail is not intended to serve as a substitute for preventative detention. If the DA felt this guy was such a danger, he should have filed a 58A. If the facts were so egregious they should not have waited 2 years to bring the complaints when he was about to wrap up the sentence.
Again, please educate yourself about the facts and respond whenever possible.