Faxed 617-727-5761 

January 11, 2008

RE: Complaint regarding the Office of Joseph Early Jr. Worcester District Attorney and his attached C-Pac State Troopers.

Dear Lt. Brooks,

Per our conversation on or about 12:30 pm of January 10, 2008 I contacted you in regards to the treatment received by Trooper Robert Cerra to whom I was directed to when I contacted the Attorney General’s office regarding the misrepresentation in a Worcester District criminal case (Commonwealth v John Szantry). At issue was that material witness’s that had sought to provide factual information through the Worcester District Attorney Office had given statements to Massachusetts State Trooper (s) who are assigned to the Auburn C-Pac unit. I explained the case involved four counts of indecent assault and battery on a person under 14 involving two separate complainants.

When I read to trooper David Cerra, Judge David Riccaradone’s ruling of January 8, 2008 as an example for simplicity I used the statement of Coby. I read the statement very careful and explained that in fact the sentence of one day after the competency hearing was incorrect. That in fact the photos were not taken on that day after the competency hearing. Trooper Cerra asked me to repeat myself on several occasions which I did.  I further explained that I provide the actual photos to ADA Joseph Reilly on April 27, 2007 in the Worcester district attorney’s office. Based on the fact that he was unable to clearly understand the misrepresentation of what I was telling him I asked him if he wanted me to fax to him the ruling in order for him to be better informed.  Trooper Cerra declined to accept the ruling. I went on further to explain that in total five witness statement  were misrepresented and I read to him the judge’s foot  note located on page four which clearly states he adapted the defense ‘s summary of the anticipated testimony of each prospective witness as a correct version that each individual gave to the state police.   I explained I spoke to each one of these individuals the evening of January 9, 2008 and they stated that in fact this was not reflective true accuracy of their statement.

I further explained that my own statement which was taken by trooper David Cravidi which was provided to me in fact was missing portions and ended in the middle of a conversation concerning an amicus brief.  I provided to him the date and location of the statement as well as the date and location when I was given a CD version of my statement by both trooper David Cravidi and trooper Daniel Richard. I explained that currently I have a Federal restraining order against the state police and that their questioning of me regarding this and the material facts that lead to the issuing of the restraining order were missing.

Trooper Cerra requested additional personal information from me which I provided to him. At this point he stated he could not take my word that the other statements were in fact false and that the individual needed to contact him.  I stated that was fine and that I would have them contact him directly.

I called Mike Hodgkins and informed him in order to seek assistance from the Office of the Massachusetts Attorney General he needed to call Trooper Cerra and I provided the phone number to him.

At 11:43 am Trooper Cerra called me and began to berate me for giving him false information concerning the photos and told me that infact if I was going to accuse a state trooper of changing a statement I had better have my story correct. He was cross, agitated and verbally unpleasant. I explained to him that in fact I had done no such thing and if he misunderstood what I had said to him I apologize for the confusion but at no time was this intention.  I further stated yes in fact after Coby emailed the photos but again the time was incorrect.  I again stated I had given them to ADA Reilly.

I had also contacted Mr. Vic Valois who also felt his statement was misreported in the Judge’s ruling  Mr. Valois  phone me immediately  after speaking to Trooper Cerra disturbed by the treatment he receive by trooper Cerra  when he attempted to explain the issues regarding his statement . Please see statement of Vic Valois attached.

I went to the Office of the Attorney General over a very serious issue which I believed consist of the altering of statement given to the state police in a criminal investigation and or the presentation of  false documentation to a judge regarding this matter. At no time did I state I had direct knowledge of how the statements became altered and who changed them but I suggested it was either the state police to ADA Joseph Reilly III as they were the only parties to have the statements previous to the defense being provided copies.  In fact the very reason I contacted the Office of the Attorney General was to determine who altered the statements and to report this crime had occurred. I also believe providing false documentation to a court of law to escape prosecution is a crime.

It is my perception that ADA Joseph Reilly had the opportunity to read the motion of Limine filed by defense attorney Edward Ryan and had to know that in fact statements were incorrect but failed to bring to the attention of the Judge Riccicardone in the hearing of December 14, 2007 or file a motion with the court to state such. 

I was a witness on two occasion when Mike Hodgkins told ADA Reilly that in fact he was in the rest area previous to the arrival of John Szantyr yet it clearly states that he “followed him into the rest area” In fact Mr. Hodgkins’s called ADA Reilly within one hour of this witnessing of John Szantyr and ADA Reilly failed to return his call. He again called a week later and ADA Reilly did not return his call regarding the ability of John Szantyr to function.  (See Amicus Brief)

Several witness have come forward to state in fact John Szantyr was able to climb three flights of steep stairs unassisted, perform a Eucharist service, give confession and count individuals in a group June of 2006. Lisa Licwar also contacted ADA Reilly in November of 2006 stating she witnessed John Szantyr walk, give confession, perform the last rights in his home and carry on a normal conversation in which time he understood every aspect of their discussion. ADA Reilly never attempted to reestablish contact even after he stated he would seek her statement.  Ms Lickwar went on to state in fact for three weeks on or about October and or November 2006 John Szantry functioned in a prayer group in the home of Anthony Russo in which he deciphered Locutions (during prayer when a person hears a voice of a spiritual entity audibly), walked, talked with no stutter to his speech and functioned like every other individual in the room.  Please see attached statements.

Coby Lewis is currently out of state on business and I will see he provides to you also a statement of correction.   

After I received my statement on CD when it was actually recorded on a small digital recorder and determined it was in fact missing material I contacted those who had come forward and requested they also seek their statements in order to make sure they were in fact accurate.  I have enclosed the letter received by Mr. Vic Valois which is written by the prosecuting attorney Joseph Reilly III which is highly unusual as he is not the keeper of the records for the DA’s Office.  Mike Hodgkins who mailed his request to the DA’s office did not receive a reply.  

In fact when you look at all the statements in whole they reflect the Worcester district Attorney’s office provided assistance to defend the defendant which has been an ongoing theme during the duration of four years involving this case.  To be honest I expected those types of incidents to occur during the Conte regime, I am however highly disappointed to see the actions continued under the direction of Joseph Early Jr.   I have no firsthand knowledge that DA Early himself has taken inappropriate actions however he has failed to address the issues when brought to his attention.

In summary, we respectfully request an immediate investigation of facts provided due to the fact it is strongly probable this case will be dismissed against the defendant John J Szantyr due to this misrepresentation of material fact on February 28, 2008. It is my opinion that this has been an organized effort including the Worcester District Attorney’s Office primarily orchestrated by ADA Joseph Reilly III.

As the Attorney General’s office is by statue the chief law enforcement agency for State of Massachusetts to allow this to occur would be counterproductive to the protection of children and all residence of the State of to Massachusetts to which she took an oath to protect.

I have also enclosed a copy of an amicus brief we filed with the court to provide a clearer understanding of the path this case has taken.  

Please feel free to contact me should any questions arise.

Sincerely

Mary T .Jean 

Enclosed:

Statements:       Vic Valois

                        Bill Fortin

                        Michael Hodgkins    

                        Lisa Lickwar  (2 pages)

                        Mary T. Jean (2 pages)                    

                       Amicus Brief August 17, 2007 (18 pages) 

                       Judge David Ricciardone ruling January 8, 2008 (10 pages) 

                       Reply public record request dated November 27, 2007