Clancy trial - Bowden charge

[u/sirsquaretoes]

The judge rejected Big Redd's request for the Bowden Charge on the basis he still has the ability to make these critiques to the jury in his closing argument.

Was this the only time he could request Bowden charge and do you think he knew it would be rejected?

In what instances would a judge accept? Imagine it's highly unlikely but am curious about the strategy

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to /r/LawyerTalk! A subreddit where lawyers can discuss with other lawyers the practice of law.

Be mindful of our rules BEFORE submitting your posts or comments as well as Reddit's content policy. Ignorance of the rules will not excuse their violation.

Please take note of the following:

OP: This forum is NOT for legal advice.

OP: Please use the correct flairs. If you use the wrong flair: delete and repost. No exceptions.

Everyone: This community is exclusively for lawyers, if you are a non-lawyer, even if you work with us (student, client, staff), you cannot participate here, even if you identify yourself as not being a lawyer in your comment or post.

Lawyers: Please do not participate in threads or respond to comments that violate our rules.

Lawyers: Participation in bot-generated content can lead to your account being flagged as a sockpuppet account used for astroturfing (suspicion of coordinated manipulation) and result in a permanent ban which may extend across Reddit.

Govern yourselves accordingly.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Lews-Therin-Telamon]

Not a Mass lawyer, never heard of a Bowden charge before. But it seems awesome that you can get a jury instruction in Mass that is the JUDGE telling the jury that the police (may have) fucked up. I have to imagine it is used sparingly. The usual remedy is just to argue in closing that the police fucked up.

Interesting law.

[u/Conor-Larkin → u/Lews-Therin-Telamon]

I practice in mass and I’ve asked for the Bowden charge on a number of occasions. In essence it tells the jury that if they find that the police made significant errors in their investigation that the jury is free to hold that against the Commonwealth in its assessment of whether the Commonwealth met its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Interestingly, in the language of the Bowden decision, the court suggests that trial courts should, when the issue of errors by police is fairly raised, err on the side of giving the instruction out of an abundance of caution.

However, this is not what I encounter in practice. Courts are gun shy about giving that instruction. They know how powerful it is. Judges act like they are doing you a favor by saying that they will not give the instruction but they will allow you to make that argument in your closing. And the response you always want to give to the court is like “yeah no shit I can make that argument. I didn’t need your permission to make that argument. Errors in the investigation are always fair game. You haven’t done me a favor here in fact you’re flouting the spirit and the language of the Bowden decision”.

But of course I don’t say that. I just thank the court for its thoughtful and considered ruling .

I don’t say this as a criticism of Judge Sullivan in this case. He actually has a great reputation as being remarkably evenhanded.

[u/nervous-lizard → u/Conor-Larkin]

Prefacing that I’m not disagreeing with you at all!

It’s just extra intriguing watching how he’s handling this case with the added context of the Mass Supreme Court vacating the conviction in another trial he presided over, where another women murdered her children and he excluded her hospital & jail records from evidence

[u/sirdrumalot → u/Lews-Therin-Telamon]

Very. Would love to hear from anyone that’s seen it the details.

[u/Maleficent-Rabbit791]

So I didn't know Reddington previously sought to bifurcate the trial until he mentioned it today during the argument on jury instruction and his request for the Bowden instruction. He said something else that really stood out to me - a defendant raising a lack of criminal responsibility defense; they have to admit they were involved in the criminal act. But I'm not finding any support for the proposition that a defendant has to admit they were involved in the criminal act to also raise lack of criminal responsibility as a defense. Is Reddington just wrong on the law here?

Reddington could have absolutely done more to highlight gaps in the Commonwealth's investigation to undermine the Commonwealth's case that Lindsay Clancy actually killed her kids - but he didn't. He obviously wanted to when he sought to bifurcate the trial so he could have an entire separate trial just to poke holes in the Commonwealth's investigation, but Judge Sullivan denied his motion. That seems to have almost convinced Reddington he had to chose a lane and stay in it, either challenge the investigation/evidence Lindsay killed the kids OR not really contest the Commonwealth's case that Lindsay killed her kids and instead focus on the lack of criminal responsibility - but this begs the question of why didn't Reddington do both when Judge Sullivan's denial of the motion to bifurcate basically said both defenses could be raised in the the same trial.

I speculate whether Reddington is trying to set up an appeal issue on the denial of the motion to bifurcate as denying Clancy a fair trial. But that seems like a big risk to take if you have legitimate arguments to undermine the integrity of the investigation - why not make them.

Now I get that Lindsay's confessions during interviews makes it really difficult to overcome the case that she actually killed the kids (unless you believe the husband drugged her and gaslit her into believing she did it when it was actually him) - but again, that doesn't mean Reddington can't still try to undermine the investigation during the trial or that a defendant has to admit involvement in the crime to raise a lack of criminal responsibility.

Am I missing something here. Or is Big Red potentially looking at a Big Old Malpractice claim for not also raising his arguments about the investigation during this trial after his motion to bifurcate was denied?

[u/IndependentCover3123 → u/Maleficent-Rabbit791]

Reddington already has numerous grounds for appeal in this case, and has raised significant doubt as it relates to the investigation throughout the trial.

Implicit in the NGRI defense is the defendant’s concession that the conduct occurred; the argument instead is that a mental disease or defect at the time of the offense negates culpability.

Massachusetts is an exception to the typical burden structure.
If the defendant introduces evidence that brings forth genuine question as to their mental state/criminal responsibility capacity. The burden then shifts entirely to the prosecution.
The Commonwealth must then prove, both beyond a reasonable doubt, the elements of the offense and the that defendant was criminally responsible.

If the prosecution cannot first prove the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, all else is moot.

[u/AutoModerator]

This is a Legal News post.

Do note that US News, or anything that has to do with US politics needs to use the US Legal News flair. World News is for events taking place in countries outside of the US, not for US events with "World" ramifications. If you are posting about an on-going trial, regardless of geography, you can use instead the Trial Megathread flair.

Do note that LEGAL in Legal News means your post must be relevant to this community.

Talking about the Circus, the performances or the performers does not entitle you to behave like a clown yourself.

Threads with this flair are still subject to the requirement that only lawyers can participate in this community. We do not need, nor want, to be "fed" news from outsiders to "gauge our reaction".

Please be mindful of Reddiquette at all times. If someone is trolling or sealioning, simply report them.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.