Barnstable County House of Correction

Several of us were wondering what exactly happens when someone is taken to the Barnstable County House of Correction. A quick search of the internet found the following information and photos from the Barnstable County Sheriff's office website.....

The Barnstable County House of Corrections Facility (BCCF) is located at the Massachusetts Military Reservation in the Town of Bourne. A formal ground-breaking ceremony was held in September 2002 for the new BCCF, a forty million dollar facility located on the Massachusetts Military Reservation in Bourne. The new three hundred cell BCCF is a state of the art, direct supervision facility.

Booking Procedures

The Barnstable County Sheriff’s Office services a daily inmate population of approximately 300 individuals. All of these individuals must go through the booking intake process. Each individual received is processed in the same manner:

1. Searched
2. All property taken-logged and bagged
3. Processed through the identification-fingerprints, photos, etc.
4. Medically screened for obvious injuries-medical treatment given if needed at time of booking
5. Booked in and advised of their charges and means of release if any.

If unable to secure release they are placed in appropriate facility attire and given the following items:

• Starter Hygiene Kit
• 2 Sheets
• Blanket
• Pillow
• Pillow Case
• 2 Jumpsuits
• Towel
• Sneakers (1 pair)

After the initial booking process is completed, the individuals are then classified into one of several classifications. The initial classifications are as follows:

• High Risk
• Medium Risk
• Low Risk

From the above, individuals are placed into the appropriate section.

Telephone Calls

Every section within the facility has access to their own telephone. Phones are not turned on before 9:00 a.m. for security reasons. Shut off time may vary depending on the section individuals are housed in and could be as late as 10:00 p.m. All calls are collect calls only. An individual is only allowed to call seven (7) different phone numbers. The initial numbers entered determine whom that individual can call for the remainder of their stay.

If you do not wish to accept phone calls from an individual at the Barnstable County Correctional Facility, the phone system will prompt you through the process to eliminate any further unwanted calls.

Inmates in our Discipline Unit are only allowed one fifteen-minute phone call per ten days. The phone system will not allow call forwarding or three-way calling.

Inmate Mail

Inmates may write and receive unlimited correspondence. Postage paid envelopes and writing paper are available for inmates to purchase through the Canteen.

Inmates are authorized to receive books (paperback only, no hard covers) and magazines that meet our criteria, only if they are purchased and sent from a publisher. Examples that do not meet our criteria are:

• Any sexually explicit material; or any material that may cause sexual arousal or encourage sexual behavior.
• Any material that contains instructions for manufacturing explosives, drugs, weapons or other unlawful materials.
• Any material that advocates violence or disruption within a facility.
• Any material that advocates any racial, religious or national hatred in such a way to create violence in the facility.

Books and magazines or other types of periodicals that are received from any source other than directly from a publisher will be returned to sender.No correspondence will be accepted from any other correctional facility or secure treatment facility.All outgoing mail is stamped as coming from our institution.Outgoing and Incoming mail will be inspected for contraband or security breaches with the exception of legal mail. When necessary, legal mail will be opened in the presence of staff.

Acceptance of Inmate Funds

Inmates are not allowed to have any monies in their possession. Under NO circumstances will an inmate while in court accept any monies from family, friends or attorney.During the booking process, all monies will be deposited in the inmate’s canteen account.Inmate receipt of funds can only take place during regular business hours or through the U.S. Postal Service. The following are the only accepted forms of currency:Postal Money Order, Bank Check, or Cash at the BCCF, no cash through the mail.

Clothing Exchange/Court Clothing

Inmates will be allowed to exchange their clothing received at the time of booking for court clothes only. The exchange process takes place Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. only. All exchanges are made item for item.Court clothing should be clean and pressed. Jeans, sneakers, shorts, sweat suits, or flip-flops are not considered acceptable court clothing.

General Rules and Regulations Regarding Visits

A complete listing of rules and regulations can be found posted in the visiting waiting area in the Lobby area of the BCCF. All inmates are required to fill out a Visitor Pre-Approval form during the intake process. This form allows for all inmates to have a maximum of five (5) visitors pre-approved through our Special Operations department to visit within the facility. Any visitor not listed on this form at the time of a visit will not be allowed to visit. If you are visiting the facility for the first time you are required to fill out a Request to Visit Inmate card which can be obtained in the Visiting Lobby of the BCCF.

All visitors shall produce a current photographic I.D. (i.e. State Driver’s License). Exceptions may be made by the Sheriff, Special Sheriff, Superintendent Deputy Superintendent, Assistant Deputy Superintendents or the Director of Security.

Two (2) adults, with one (1) child or one (1) adult with two children may visit an inmate at the same time, provided they register together with the Visit Reception Officer. Persons under eighteen (18) years of age will not be allowed to visit unless they are accompanied by a parent or legal guardian and meet the following provisions:

• Proof of the minor’s relationship to the inmate. A birth certificate or adoption papers must be presented at each visit.
• In the absence of a parent or legal guardian, a visit for a minor child or sibling may be granted. Minors are allowed to visit their parent, step-parent, grandparent, legal guardian, or sibling. Prior to a visit being granted, an approved permission to visit form, available in the Visits Lobby area, from the parent or legal guardian must be submitted to the Superintendent or his/her designee. The form must specify the child’s name, the person authorized to bring the minor into the facility, the inmate’s name and the signature of the parent or legal guardian submitting the form. The form must be notarized by a Notary Public commissioned by the state of Massachusetts . This notarized letter must be presented by the visitor at each time of visit.

All inmates, male and female, shall be allowed 2 visiting periods, (one hour per visit) plus Thanksgiving and Christmas. A maximum of four visitors may visit per day per inmate, no more than two visits at any one time, in the one hour span.

Visitor Guidelines for the Visiting Room

• Disruptive Behavior – Loud or abusive language will not be tolerated
• Physical Contact – No physical contact is allowed
• Fighting or Disruptive Conduct – Actions which disrupt the visiting room will not be tolerated and will result in the termination of the visit.
• Contraband – Nothing shall be passed or given to the inmate by the visitor without permission of the Lobby Officer or his/her designee.
• Under the influence – Visitors who appear under the influence of alcohol or drugs will not be allowed to visit.
• Children– Visitors shall be responsible for their children at all times.
• Dress Code – Any persons wearing inappropriate clothing and/or outfits will not be allowed to visit. The following clothing items are not allowed:
  

  No halter tops
  No sleeveless shirts
  No spandex
  No bare midriff
  No suggestive clothing
  No bare feet
  Visitors must wear undergarments

Any visitor wearing questionable clothing not covered on the above list shall not be allowed into the facility. Also, no inmate shall be allowed to visit unless they are appropriately dressed in the clothing of their unit.

Parker Goes To Jail!

As I wrote previously Christopher Parker was taken to jail on Friday April 27, 2007 when judge Tobey Mooney revoked Parker's bail. A BIG "Thank You!" to Cape Cod Times reporter George Brennan for posting an article about Parker being sent to the House of Correction so quickly on the Cape Cod Times website. You will find that article in the post before this one (below).

The weather this morning was horrible with wind and torrential rains. The sky was dark grey and fog had settled along the coast as I drove over the Bourne Bridge on my way to the Falmouth District Courthouse. I had been waiting for this day, hoping and even praying that today would find a bit of justice for my mother by having Christopher G. Parker's bail revoked.

If you have been following along on this blog you may have seen that Parker had been arrested yet again on charges of driving under the influence of drugs in October of 2006 in Bourne, MA. The day, March 5, that he allegedly drove his car into the back of my mother's Chevrolet Tracker he was not only out on bail for the Oct offense but was also driving on a revoked and suspended license. His license having been revoked after the Oct. OUI when he was found to be a danger to other drivers by the Registry and then suspended due to an unpaid speeding ticket.

I arrived at the courthouse and met up with George Brennan. Neither of us had seen Parker and it was 9am, the time the court session was slated to start. We checked the trial list and saw Parker's name so we waited for the announcement that would call people to the appropraite courtroom. At about 9:05 we see Parker enter the courthouse alone. He is dressed in a dark suit and tie and wearing a long black trenchcoat. He has a black baseball hat on and is wearing glasses. In his hands he is holding an umbrella and a wooden cane. He looks around and then sits down on one of the benches to await the call. At 9:10am the announcement comes for all adults having business in the trial court to go to the 2nd Session Courtroom. George and I followed Parker up the few stairs and down the hall toward the courtroom, Geoge telling me that it was a small room. He wasn't kidding! I think this courtroom was about the size of my master bedroom. Because it was so small most people stood outside in the narrow hallway. I stood just outside the open door of the courtroom on one side and George stood with his reporter's notepad on the other side of the doorway. As the Judge would call a case the defendants would go into the courtroom and stand in front of the large Judge's desk.

Finally I hear the clerk announce "The Commonwealth vs. Christopher Parker" and I moved to stand in the doorway so that I could see clearly. The clerk swore Parker in (although he didn't say anything) and at that point the Assistant District Attorney Chris Shea stood and said "Your Honor we request that bail be revoked in this matter". He then explained to Judge Tobey Mooney that while Parker was out on bail for this case he drove on a revoked license and has been charged with vehicular homicide in the death of Diane Carhart. I was surprised that they asked for the bail revokation so quickly, but I certainly was pleased! The Judge read briefly through Parker's file, made a comment on the number of his past convictions and charges and then she asked if Parker's Attorney, Arnold Lett, had anything to say. Atty Lett stated that Diane's death had been a tragic accident and involuntary on the part of his client, Parker. He also stated to the Judge that Parker has always appeared in court so he certainly wasn't a flight risk.

I have a problem with both facts that Atty Lett spoke too. First, my mother's death was not an involuntary accident. Parker was driving on a revoked and suspended license. He voluntarily got behind the wheel of that car. If he had been following the law he wouldn't have gotten into that driver's seat on Monday March 5, 2007. Secondly Parker had failed to appear on the date of his last court appointment, April 4, 2007. On that day there was to have been a Magistrate's Hearing at the Barnstable District Courthouse on the charges Parker is facing in Diane's death. Parker had even requested this hearing, but he failed to show up.

I found it interesting that Parker's face turned white when they asked for his bail to be revoked. He actually looked surprised that he might go to jail. He started slowly shaking his head back and forth as if he was saying no. He looked at the floor and then at the judge, then back at the floor. When Atty Lett was finished the Judge stated that Parker was a "danger to the community" and asked one of the two baliffs in the room to take Parker into custody. The baliff took Parker by the arm and left the room walking right past me as I stood there in the doorway. I had to fight the urge not to stick my foot out and trip him as they walked by! I stayed in the doorway watching as A.D.A. Shea and Atty Lett worked out a date for the next pre-trial hearing that they will meet on the Oct. 2006 OUI. That date will be May 18, 2007.

When they were done I left the courtroom and spoke briefly to George Brennan on how we felt to finally have Parker behind bars. Then I jumped into the car to drive home so that I could let everyone in my family know that he was in jail. My brother has been sick with a stomach flu and I hope this news will make him feel a little bit better. As of today Chistopher Parker is going to spend at least the next 60 days at the Barnstable County House of Correction in Bourne, MA and I couldn't be happier.

Repeat OUI driver jailed to protect public

Repeat OUI driver jailed to protect public

By George Brennan Cape Cod Times
April 27, 2007 11:01 AM
FALMOUTH – Christopher Parker, 50, was taken into custody this morning at Falmouth District Court, the judge calling him a “danger to the community.”

Parker is charged with causing a March 5 accident on Route 130 in Sandwich that killed Forestdale grandmother Diane Carhart, 63.He will be arraigned in Barnstable District Court on vehicular homicide charges May 9.

This morning he appeared in Falmouth District Court for a pre-trial hearing on a charge of operating under the influence of drugs.

If convicted, it would be his fifth offense for driving impaired.

At the time of his arraignment on those charges, Parker was released after posting $1,000 bail. After that charge, his license was revoked by the Registry of Motor Vehicles because he was considered a danger to other drivers.

This morning his bail was revoked yesterday by Judge Tobey Mooney ruling on a prosecution motion.Based on his driving record, which includes four convictions for operating under the influence of alcohol, Mooney said he should be taken into custody for 60 days at the Barnstable County Correctional Facility.

“I would find that (Parker) would present a danger to the community,” Mooney said.

Parker, hobbled by a leg injury that requires use of cane, walked out of the courtroom behind a court officer. The officer asked him if he came to court alone and he nodded yes.

Outside the courtroom, Susan Linhares of Mattapoisett, the daughter of Carhart, expressed relief that Parker was going to jail. “The family feels justice has finally been served,” she said. “We’ve waited almost two months for this. He has proven to be a danger to society, which is why his bail was revoked.”

All defendants offered bail are warned by the judge that being charged with another crime while out on bail could lead to a 60-day sentence in jail.

Arnold Lett, Parker’s attorney, argued against revoking the bail. He said his client shows up for court, which is what bail is supposed to guarantee.“This was an unfortunate accident,” Lett said. “It was not an intentional thing.”

A pre-trial hearing was set for May 18 in this case.
George Brennan can be reached at gbrennan@capecodonline.com.

Christopher G. Parker's Bail Revoked!

I've been waiting almost 2 months to be able to post this message....

At 9:30am this morning I watched as the judge at the Falmouth District Court approved the A.D.A.'s request to revoke Christopher Parker's bail on his Oct. 2006 Bourne, MA OUI charge. He was then taken into custody by the bailiff and sent directly to jail :-)

I will post more later this afternoon when I have a bit more time.

Understanding the Court Process

I received a booklet from the Cape and Islands District Attorney's Office that has a guide to understanding the court process. Since a number of us had questions regarding this process I have decided to put the info from the booklet here.

Understanding the Court Process

Victim/Witness Assistants will help guide you through the criminal justice process as the case progresses through the court system. The District Attorney's Office asks for your cooperation and patience during the prosecution stages and will make every attempt to avoid any inconvenience to you.

The following describes various court procedures that may be pertinent to the case.

Complaint - A complaint is a document issued by the Court formally charging a person (the defendant) with having committed a crime. The Complaint is usually issued by the Clerk-Magistrate after a police officer or private citizen completes and swears to an "Application for Complaint," briefly describing the facts of the crime. If the accused person is not already under arrest, the Clerk-Magistrate usually holds a Clerk's Hearing before deciding whether to issue a complaint. At the hearing the person complaining and the person accused tell their versions of what took place, and the clerk decides whether to issue a Complaint. If the Clerk does not issue the Complaint, the complaining person may appeal to a judge to issue the Complaint.

If a Complaint is issued, it is issued on behalf of the Commonwealth; and the District Attorney's Office decides whether or not the case will be prosecuted.

Arraignment - The Arraignment is the first time the defendant appears in court. At that time he is advised by the judge of the charge(s) against him and of the right to have a lawyer. At the Arraignment, the judge determines the conditions under which the defendant will be released until the trail. Since people are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty, the primary purpose of bail is to insure that the defendant will appear in Court on the scheduled date.

Pre-Trial Hearing - At the arraignment, a pre-trial hearing date will be scheduled. At this time, the District Attorney, the Defense Attorney, and the defendant discuss the case to determine if the case will go to trial, or if the defendant will be pleading guilty to the charges. A defendant has the right to offer a guilty plea at any stage of the court proceedings; therefore it is very important that the victims contact the Victim/Witness Office to advise of any concerns they may have.

District Court Trial - For certain crimes, the District Court Judge has the authority to conduct a trail to determine the guilt of the defendant. The defendant has a right to a District Court Trial by a judge or by a jury of six persons/ In court, an Assistant District Attorney will represent the Commonwealth and be in charge of the prosecution of the case. The Assistant District Attorney may want to talk with you at a conference before the trial date or immediately before you testify. At the trial, the Commonwealth must prove (beyond a reasonable doubt) that the defendant is guilty. The defendant does not have to testify. As a witness, your testimony may be necessary to the court in determining if the defendant is guilty or not guilty.

Summons (Subpoena) - A summons is a court order directing you to appear in court at a stated time and place. If you receive a summons you must appear in court. Bring the summons with you when you appear on the required day, and report wither to the Victim/Witness Office or to the District Attorney's Office in the appropriate courthouse.

Probably Cause Hearing - Certain crimes cannot be tried in the District Court. For these crimes the judge may schedule a preliminary hearing in the District Court called a Probable Cause Hearing. At this hearing the judge listens to testimony from witnesses and determines whether the evidence presented is sufficient to send the case to the Superior Court. Again, it is necessary for all summonsed (subpoenaed) witnesses to appear at the Probable Cause Hearing.

Grand Jury - A case sent to Superior Court may be presented to a Grand Jury, a group of 23 citizens. The Grand Jury hears evidence presented by an Assistant District Attorney through the questioning of witnesses in a secret session. The defendant is not present at the Grand Jury Hearing. If 13 or more members of the Grand Jury believe a crime was committed by the accused, the accused will be formally charged. The formal charge by the Grand Jury is an Indictment.

Superior Court Trial - Before the Superior Court Trial, the defendant is brought before the judge for arraignment, as in the District Court procedure. In the Superior Court, the defendant has a right to be tried by a jury of 12 persons or by a judge. The judge or jury will then decide whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty. If your testimony is needed during the trial, you will be summonsed to appear.

Sentencing - If the defendant is found not guilty at the trial, he is free to go and may not be tried again for the same offense. If the defendant is found guilty, the judge may choose any of the following sentences:

• Imprisonment
• Probation
• Fine
• Restitution

The judge may also decide to continue a case without a finding for a specific period of time.

Continuances - Occasionally, court hearings cannot take place as scheduled and will be postponed. The Victim/Witness Assistance Office will attempt to notify you of a postponement in order that you might avoid an unnecessary trip to court. You can call the office the day before your court appearance to check on postponements.

As a victim or witness, it is very important to keep the Victim/Witness Assistance Office informed of your current address and telephone number (home and/or work) so that we can contact you about your case. If you change your address or telephone number, be sure to let us know.

In the case of the Commonwealth vs. Christopher G. Parker the family and friends of Diane Carhart have been assigned Kathleen Finnegan as Victim/Witness Assistant. You can contact Kathleen at the Barnstable County Victim/Witness Assistance Office, 508-362-8103 (main office).

Revoked and/or Suspended Licenses

Christopher G. Parker has been charged with driving on a revoked license as one of the offenses in connection to my mother, Diane Carhart's death. I've done a bit of research on the Massachusetts driving laws as they pertain to driving on a revoked or suspended license.

According to the Cape Cod Times (March 14, 2007) in regards to Parker's charges in Bourne, MA in October 2006: "After he was charged in October, state police wrote a letter to the Registry saying Parker posed an ''immediate threat” and his license was revoked. His license was also suspended in December because he failed to pay a speeding ticket issued in 2005, Registry records indicate."

The Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles clarifies the term "immediate threat" as follows:

Immediate threat - If the Registrar determines that allowing you to continue driving poses an immediate threat to public safety, he/she can suspend your learner’s permit or driver’s license immediately. - http://www.mass.gov/rmv/dmanual/chapter2.pdf

Here are a few questions and answers on revocation and suspension from the Findlaw.com website....

Q : What is the difference if the state suspends, cancels, or revokes my license?

A : Suspension involves the temporary withdrawal of your privilege to drive. The state may reinstate that privilege after a designated time period and payment of a fee. You may also restore the privilege by remedying the underlying cause of the suspension, such as buying automobile insurance.

Cancellation involves voluntarily giving up your driving privilege without penalty. Cancellation allows you to reapply for a license immediately.

Revocation aims both to discipline the driver and protect the public. Revocation involuntarily ends your driving privilege. Revocation generally is permanent until you are eligible after a minimum period set by law to apply for a new license. The state may conduct a reinstatement hearing. You may have to retake a driver's license examination.

Q : What are the grounds for license suspension?

A : They vary by state. A local lawyer will be able to give you details about your state laws. Generally, however, a state might provide that three moving violations within one year warrant a three-month suspension. Refusal to submit to a field sobriety or breath testing device test also will result in suspension.

Q : What are the grounds for license revocation?

A : They are based on violating specific laws, such as habitual reckless driving, drunken driving, nonpayment of your motor vehicle excise tax, using a motor vehicle to commit a felony, and fleeing from or eluding the police. Again, they vary by state.

Q : What must the state prove before a court can convict me of driving on a suspended or revoked license?

A : The law varies from one state to another. The state, however, usually has to show that:
the accused's license or privilege to drive was revoked or suspended on the occasion in question; and the accused was driving a motor vehicle on a public highway at the time of the offense.

http://public.findlaw.com/traffic-ticket-violation-law/traffic-ticket-overview/drivers-license-penalties-faq.html

Below is a portion of the Massachusetts General Law as it applies to operating a motor vehicle after suspension or revocation of license. For the full statute click HERE.

PART I. ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT
TITLE XIV. PUBLIC WAYS AND WORKS

CHAPTER 90. MOTOR VEHICLES AND AIRCRAFT

MOTOR VEHICLES

Chapter 90: Section 23. Operation of motor vehicle after suspension or revocation of license; concealment of identity of motor vehicle

Section 23. Any person convicted of operating a motor vehicle after his license to operate has been suspended or revoked, or after notice of the suspension or revocation of his right to operate a motor vehicle without a license has been issued by the registrar and received by such person or by his agent or employer, and prior to the restoration of such license or right to operate or to the issuance to him of a new license to operate,......shall, except as provided by section twenty-eight of chapter two hundred and sixty-six, be punished for a first offence by a fine of not less than five hundred nor more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than ten days, or both, and for any subsequent offence by imprisonment for not less than sixty days nor more than one year,.....

Any person convicted of operating a motor vehicle after his license to operate has been revoked by reason of his having been found to be an habitual traffic offender, as provided in section twenty-two F, or after notice of such revocation of his right to operate a motor vehicle without a license has been issued by the registrar and received by such person or by his agent or employer, and prior to the restoration of such license or right to operate or the issuance to him of a new license to operate shall be punished by a fine of not less than five hundred nor more than five thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than two years, or both.

Any person convicted of operating a motor vehicle after his license to operate has been suspended or revoked pursuant to a violation of paragraph (a) of subdivision (1) of section twenty-four, or pursuant to section twenty-four D, twenty-four E, twenty-four G, twenty-four L, or twenty-four N of this chapter, or pursuant to subsection (a) of section eight, or pursuant to a violation of section eight A or section eight B of chapter ninety B, or pursuant to a violation of section 8, 9 or 11 of chapter ninety F, or after notice of such suspension or revocation of his right to operate a motor vehicle without a license has been issued and received by such person or by his agent or employer, and prior to the restoration of such license or right to operate or the issuance to him of a new license to operate shall be punished by a fine of not less than one thousand nor more than ten thousand dollars and by imprisonment in a house of correction for not less than sixty days and not more than two and one-half years; provided, however, that the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon such person shall not be reduced to less than sixty days, nor suspended, nor shall any such person be eligible for probation, parole, or furlough or receive any deduction from his sentence for good conduct until he shall have served sixty days of such sentence; provided, further, that the commissioner of correction may, on the recommendation of the warden, superintendent or other person in charge of a correctional institution, or of the administrator of a county correctional institution, grant to an offender committed under this paragraph a temporary release in the custody of an officer of such institution for the following purposes only: to attend the funeral of a relative; to visit a critically ill relative; to obtain emergency medical or psychiatric services unavailable at said institution; or to engage in employment pursuant to a work release program. The provisions of section eighty-seven of chapter two hundred and seventy-six shall not apply to any person charged with a violation of this paragraph. Prosecutions commenced under this paragraph shall not be placed on file or continued without a finding.

Whoever operates a motor vehicle in violation of paragraph (a) of subdivision (1) of section 24, sections 24G or 24L, subsection (a) of section 8 of chapter 90B, sections 8A or 8B of chapter 90B or section 13 1/2 of chapter 265, while his license or right to operate has been suspended or revoked, or after notice of such suspension or revocation of his right to operate a motor vehicle has been issued and received by such person or by his agent or employer, and prior to the restoration of such license or right to operate or the issuance to him of a new license or right to operate, pursuant to paragraph (a) of subdivision (1) of section 24, sections 24G or 24L, subsection (a) of section 8 of chapter 90B, sections 8A or 8B of chapter 90B or section 13 1/2 of chapter 265 shall be punished by a fine of not less than $2,500 nor more than $10,000 and by imprisonment in a house of correction for a mandatory period of not less than 1 year and not more than 2 1/2 years, with said sentence to be served consecutively to and not concurrent with any other sentence or penalty. Such sentence shall not be suspended, nor shall any such person be eligible for probation, parole, or furlough or receive any deduction from his sentence for good conduct until he shall have served said 1 year of such sentence; provided, however, that the commissioner of correction may, on the recommendation of the warden, superintendent or other person in charge of a correctional institution, or of the administrator of a county correctional institution, grant to an offender committed under this paragraph a temporary release in the custody of an officer of such institution only to obtain emergency medical or psychiatric services unavailable at said institution or to engage in employment pursuant to a work release program. Section 87 of chapter 276 shall not apply to any person charged with a violation of this paragraph. Prosecutions commenced under this paragraph shall not be placed on file or continued without a finding.

A certificate of the registrar or his authorized agent that a license or right to operate motor vehicles or a certificate of registration of a motor vehicle has not been restored or that the registrar has not issued a new license so to operate to the defendant or a new certificate of registration for a motor vehicle the registration whereof has been revoked, shall be admissible as evidence in any court of the commonwealth to prove the facts certified to therein, in any prosecution hereunder wherein such facts are material. A certificate of a clerk of court that a person's license or right to operate a motor vehicle was suspended for a specified period shall be admissible as prima facie evidence in any court of the commonwealth to prove the facts certified to therein in any prosecution commenced under this section.

Upon a conviction of operating after suspension or revocation of license or right to operate under the first paragraph, the registrar shall extend said suspension or revocation for an additional sixty days. Upon a conviction of operating after suspension or revocation of license or right to operate under the second paragraph, the registrar shall extend said suspension or revocation for an additional year.

If a person operating a motor vehicle after suspension or revocation of a license to operate or the right to operate a motor vehicle under the first or second paragraphs of this section, is found by the registrar to have operated a vehicle registered to another in violation of said suspension or revocation, the registrar shall, after hearing, revoke the certificate of registration of said motor vehicle for up to thirty days. Pursuant to said hearing, the certificate of registration and the number plates shall be immediately surrendered to the registrar.

For more info on revocation or suspension please see the Massachusetts Motor Vehicle Laws.

Brief Cape Cod Times Article

The following apears in today's Cape Cod Times under the "Cape News in Brief" section.

CAPE COD TIMES - A criminal complaint has been issued against Christopher Parker, 50, the Forestdale man accused of setting off a three-car crash one month ago that killed Diane Carhart, 63, in Sandwich.

Parker will be summonsed for arraignment May 9. He is charged with vehicular homicide and driving with a revoked license.

Parker, who has four convictions for operating under the influence, had requested a clerk-magistrate's hearing, but failed to show up for it Wednesday. His license was revoked after he was arrested last October on a charge of driving under the influence of drugs. That case is still pending in Falmouth District Court. - GEORGE BRENNAN

Criminal Complaint Issued - Arraignment Date Set for Christopher G. Parker

I was just notified by the Barnstable DA's office that a criminal complaint has been issued in the death of my mother Diane Carhart and that the date of May 9, 2007 at 9:00am has been set for Christopher G. Parker to appear before the judge for arraignment on charges for vehicular homicide and driving on a revoked license.

While the Magistrate Hearing that Parker requested, and didn't show up at, is normally held privately in the Clerk Magistrate's office...on May 9th Parker will appear in the First Session Courtroom before the presiding Judge in a public setting.

If you would like to join us at the courthouse on May 9th please let me know. Directions and information regarding the Barnstable District Courthouse can be found HERE.

Man accused in fatal crash misses hearing

Man accused in fatal crash misses hearing

By George Brennan Staff Writer Cape Cod Times

BARNSTABLE - Christopher Parker, the man accused of vehicular homicide in a Sandwich crash that killed a Forestdale grandmother, failed to appear yesterday for a show-cause hearing he requested.

Barnstable District Court Clerk Magistrate Robert Powers will now decide whether to issue a criminal complaint against Parker. If he does, Parker will be scheduled for arraignment.
Powers did not return several messages left at his office yesterday.

Parker, 50, was cited in connection with a three-car crash on Route 130 last month that caused the death of Diane Carhart, 63.

''The family is frustrated that this process is taking so long,” said Susan Linhares, Carhart's daughter.

Linhares, who lives in Mattapoisett, waited with police and prosecutors for more than an hour for Parker to appear, even though she would have been forced to wait in the court's lobby during the hearing. Because Parker was cited instead of arrested, he had the right to request the magistrate's hearing within four days of the citation being issued. He exercised that right, but failed to appear.

The person who answered the phone at Parker's Forestdale home yesterday hung up when a reporter identified himself.

At the time of the crash, Parker was driving with a revoked license. His record is filled with driving infractions that include four convictions for operating under the influence of alcohol dating back to 1982.
George Brennan can be reached at gbrennan @capecodonline.com.
(Published: April 5, 2007)

Clerk magistrate's hearing normally closed to public

The article below appears in today's Cape Cod Times. As I have stated previously it should be noted that in spite of the public records laws afforded us by the first ammendment Magistrate Hearings are closed to the public in the State of Massachusetts, the only state in the U.S. where this happens. The results of these closed hearings are only known if the magistrate decides to file charges, and then only through court records.

Clerk magistrate's hearing normally closed to public

By Hilary Russ Cape Cod Times Staff Writer
BARNSTABLE - Despite a reporter's request to attend a hearing in a high-profile case, the proceeding went ahead behind closed doors yesterday in the criminal case against Christopher Parker, the man accused of causing a three-car accident that killed a Forestdale woman last month.

Several days after the crash that killed 63-year-old Diane Carhart, Parker was cited for vehicular homicide. Yesterday's hearing was supposed to lay out the facts of the case before Barnstable District Court Clerk Magistrate Robert Powers, who will decide whether the charge can go forward to trial proceedings.

The ''show-cause” or ''clerk-magistrate's” hearing, which is held in cases in which a defendant is summonsed or cited with a crime but not arrested, is normally not open to the public. So yesterday's decision to hold Parker's hearing behind closed doors hardly came as a shock to Cape Cod Times editor Paul Pronovost.

''We're disappointed that the clerk magistrate denied our access to these hearings, but we're not surprised,” he said.

State judicial guidelines suggest such proceedings should be ''presumptively” closed to the public, not restricted in all cases, according to District Court Standards of Judicial Practice, or so-called Complaint Standards, which were cited in a decision last week by the Supreme Judicial Court.

In the SJC case, The Eagle-Tribune sought access to a clerk magistrate's hearing after an underage woman was stabbed at a Lawrence nightclub. She had allegedly been served alcohol at the club, and the newspaper tried to get into the hearing about criminal charges against the nightclub's corporate owner.

Writing for the SJC, Associate Justice Judith Cowin said The Eagle-Tribune had no First Amendment right of public access to the proceeding. She likened such hearings to grand jury proceedings, which precede the filing of criminal charges, are more informal than other types of court proceedings, and have not traditionally been open to the public.

But Cowin did hint that there could be other grounds for admittance.

''There may be circumstances in which an open hearing is appropriate,” she wrote.

Citing case law, Cowin wrote ''transparency that open proceedings afford may be especially important if a well-publicized show cause hearing results in a decision not to bring criminal charges. ... In such cases, the public may question whether justice has been done behind the closed doors of the hearing room.”

By emphasizing language in the Complaint Standards, ''the SJC has given the media some ammunition going forward in trying to gain access to these hearings,” said Kimberley Keyes, an attorney at Prince, Lobel, Glovsky & Tye in Boston. The firm provides legal counsel for the New England Press Association.

Pronovost said the Times does not intend to appeal Powers' decision to a single justice of the SJC.

Susan Linhares, Carhart's daughter, said she finds the process of clerk magistrate hearings frustrating.

''It seems as though they're trying to be secretive by holding them behind closed doors,” she said. ''I'm sure that's not what they're intending, but that's the appearance.”

Staff writer George Brennan contributed to this report. Hilary Russ can be reached at hruss@capecodonline.com.

(Published: April 5, 2007)

Christopher G. Parker - A No-Show at Magistrate Hearing!

Today at 2pm Christopher G. Parker was supposed to appear at a Magistrate Hearing at the Barnstable District Courthouse. This Magistrate Hearing had been requested by Parker when he had been served with the criminal citation which charged him with homicide by motor vehicle due to negligence as well as driving under a revoked license. Had Parker not requested the Magistrate Hearing within four days a complaint would have been issued ordering him to appear in court. His requesting the hearing and then not showing up seems to me only to be a delay tactic.

It was nice to see Mom's neighbor Nancy and reporter George Brennan in the courthouse when I arrived. I was also greated by A.D.A. Bryan Shea and Kathleen Finnegan who has been assigned as "our" victim witness advisor. Waiting for Parker to appear were also two of the Sandwich Police Officers who were working the case as well as the Sandwich Police Chief.

So what happens now? I asked that question and was told a complaint would now be issued for Parker to appear in court. The complaint has to be served to Parker so that takes a few days. On the date that Parker is given to appear he will be arraigned and read the charges against him. I will be notified of the date for Parker's next appearence at the Barnstable District Courthouse and will post it here. I have been told the date could be two to four weeks from today, depending on the case load at the courthouse. Look for it listed in the Important Dates section at left.

When asked how I feel about Parker not appearing today one word came to mind...frustrated! Tommorrow will be one month since my Mom was killed and yet the man who is being charged has not yet appeared in court. It is frustrating that he has more rights than my Mom, Diane Carhart, who never had received even a speeding ticket.

Magistrate Hearing Today!

Well it has taken one day shy of a month to get Christopher G. Parker into court in regards to my mother's death, but today is the day!

Parker has requested a magistrate hearing and it will be held at 2pm in the Barnstable District Courthouse, 3231 Main St Barnstable, MA. Anyone who would like to join us at the courthouse today is welcome. Directions can be found HERE.

I am hoping that he will not have the charges dismissed, but that is a possiblility. Not that there isn't sufficient evidence, but that the magistrate can do whatever he/she wants. The Assistant District Attorney told me that they can never be 100% positive that a case will not be dismissed. I am also hoping that Parker will have his prior bail (from the Oct 2006 charges) revoked and be finally put behind bars...something that should have happened at the scene of the crash or at the hospital as far as I'm concerned.

Check back later today for an update.