COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS HAMPDEN, SS. SUPERIOR COURT ‘CRIMINAL ACTION No. 2016-540 COMMONWEALTH “ ‘A Hampden County grand jury returned a two count indictment charging vey Johnson (Cohn, wid: Marder (Count), and Assault and Battery by Means ofa Dangerous Wespon Causing Seious Bil Injury (Count I). The defendant has moved to amiss, erauing hat the rand jury di not rveve sufficient evidence to establish probable cause that she commited the offenses charged. See Commonwealth v. McCarthy, 385 Mass, 160 (1982) EVIDENCE, PRESENTED TO THE GRAND JURY. Johnson, and co-defendant Richard Page (-Page) lived tgetber ina second floor bedroom in aouse located at 45 ¥4 Armory Sireet "the house"), Springficld." Other people resided at the house, including Erie Stephenson (“Stephenson”), Westley Bxaw ("Esaw"), and “Victor Valentin (“Valentin”), the only tenant named on the lease, The following individuals Visited or stayed a the house for short periods of time on June 15 wad 16,2016: Bsaw's woman fitens, Briva Thonnpson ¢“Thompeon”?,Rsaw's frend Maria Cubi *Cubi), Valentn’s woman ‘fiend, Sandy Mendoza (*Mendoza), Stepbenson's fiend Venus Sarauel ("Same"), and ‘Samuels’ four year old grandson 1 The evidence did nthe ceri the defends were mated; however se witnesses efit Page, sete sts‘Dring prosedings before the eran jury the Commonwealth induced several witess statements describing the atmosphere inthe Rouse befor and ding the weeks Ted upto sun 16, 20162 The nonpotce wines statements resented tthe grand jury were, ames, cottadicory, confusing ond even nonsensical, A summation of that evidence flows Aconting to wines slalemen’s,Ftnson an Page had erg for pst of the month ha she ved atthe bose, Johnson, Stephenson an Page all engage a umber af isptes Jeadng upto the day of Stephenson's death. One ofthe disptesberweon Stepenson and “Johnson and/oe Page concere five (rst olla loan betwen the partes, Two three days before june 16, Johnson accused Stephenson of assaulting her? Several witnesses reported hearing Johnson call Page a punk” for ailing to retaliate against Stephenson forte alleged assault and witnesses heard her telling Page to * {Stephenson's} ss." Samuels tated chat SJohason tld Page to “pt the lie” on Stephenson an sty he “jumped” he presumably o sere as an explanation for Page's retaliation. {nan unrelated incident, Stephenson and Samuels claimed that Johnson pushed Samuels, who fl into her randsoe, who then fll down stars* ‘On Jue 15, the day before Stephenson deth, Johnson repeatedly called the police a report domestic dstbances. Springfield police officers responded fo three or fur calls mae from the house, While speaking with “911” operator, Johnson reported that Stephenson struck hres owever, she was ncoaperative with police offices when they responded othe seene 2 ype Commonweal posted wires statment gh poke oss who ta or summarize i wise aaa ary playing recordings of tir nteviows athe Spigtil Plce Department 3 Noe fhe ther ecapats winesed he aged sr and Stephenson io it + atan “Aris” esting on th evening of fne 15, Stphoso ld peopl tha Johnson pase Ni padson dows thoes Noge ote other occupants reperted wimesting tise. 2tiers spoke wth Stephenson who reported thal Johnson and Page had on Sighting ht ey aed that Johnson attacked im for no reason ‘om be nigh of Yun 15, whe other oscupans a their guests wacked sevision, dank lshot and socialized on the fist for, Johnson an Page sire ery to their second floor pdtoom, The ls ofthe group sted a bows 2:0 oF 3:00 _Atappoximatly 600 am. on Jae 16, Stephenson emerged fiom is secon for ‘troom and entered the balroom. Sever witnesses reported hearing Johnson say: “There he pes” end “et hat otherickeror Go fick him op” Page and Stephenson be eng 8 Ate second floor and both walked down the tis. Coi, Thompson and Hsaw all of whom hd slept th livingroom ber and saw Page and Stephenson, Cub and Thompson herd hee ek of iphtingotsde and aang in the chen Cui sw Page pick upa table es before entering te ltehe, Thompson saw Page wih «wooden objec. Baw sae Page gab a able ee sefre etering the kitchen, Tho thee desrbod bearing three “humps” o “bom, boom, boom abi claimed she sa Page sie Stephenson the times on he hea. Cub Mhompson, and Eww reported sesing Page leave te then, Cubi sail Page cae the ble eg and mediately went up the sti. Thompson sid Page ef th house and id not ave the table we he rerured, The witnesses foand Stephenson on he ithe Noor. They desea hm coring and alternatively described him as unconscious of wi ise open, Thompson callod 911, These tee witnesses std that Jobosn remained on he second flow ring entre init. saw woke Veet, ho was asleep inthe only bedroom onthe fs oo and i not witnessed the incident. When Valentin entered te kitchen, he observed Stephenson onthe floorasa Pap entering fom outside, He st Fnson come down testa, When he insured Johaso and Page not eave ut the pie avd they walked wp the surf tbe second stor, Nove ofthe occupant sa tem agin and they al speulstd that Jenson and Pap et through a ssond floor winds Samuel, the only wines nthe second lor, sd that when Stephenson wen into the tpttroom that morning, she beard Johnson tel Page, “Tete you go. Ge that motbeske.” ‘Samuels claimed that she son athe op of th tease with Johnson, herd the two men guing, od Stephenson to watch iy” and saw Page hit Stepenson once over the ead with = abe leg asthe descended thesis, Acondng to Samuels, Stephenson sree’ “Oh my God. oh ny God and Page tld Jonson: I got this motericker, tld you baby, Capt his snotherfucke” As Stephenson continued walking down he tas, Samuels went tog het yandson? Assording wo Samuels, age the house apd yon retuing fold Sbason, Lets goon that heb ide coming in thy minutes, Samuel explained the the night Before about 430 am.~she ovetheard Page say he called someone to whom he sai: “in 30 minutes Ym gonna cal you back. You comeback withthe glk” She so claimed Ut Page sid “i 40 more mines Pm giving my Homeboy a al and he's supposed to ome though hee with lock” She aod shat Page was like ling Johnson) "We gonna set hi thing up, We gonn sey hath jumped on you nd everthing case..." he's ike don't wanna 2 10 jail. You ‘kaw? ben beating your Hohasons) ass ff nd on ince you've [Jobson] been sealing fom scan shit According to Samuels, afr te assat, when Valentin ld Page and Jonson not to leave, Johnson said“ didn't do it 1 dda’ do it, My nusband knocked his ass out Tot Ki 5 Samet si tates! er tht Page suck Stepensen he tines 4 | |that he's gonna got hin, My husband knocked his as out” ‘Page and Johnson were not presen when the police arived athe hoose, The ofiees tocate table leg in the bedroom that Page and Johnson shared. Emesgeney responders ceansported Stephenson to Bay State Medical fr treatment Stephenson didnot survive i injuries and the mesial exarines Uetexmincd thatthe enue of death was unt oee rsa the head. DISCUSSION [Standard of Review “he standard opplicable to the defendant's motion is whether dhe gran jury heart sulfciont evidence to establish het deny and probable caus to arest her Commonweat “MeCarthy, 995 Mass. 160, 163 (1982), which defined as reasonably tastworthy information sufficient to warrant prudent person in believing tht the accused had commie oF was commiting aeriminal offense, Commoneathv. Moran, 453 Mass. 680, 883 (2009 (a cases citedy-The Commonweal mst present the gran jury with evidence on es ofthe clement of the ofenses charged in ose for the indictments o stand, Commomvealth v. Hanright 46 ‘Mass. 303, 312 (2013), quoting Moran, supra at 884, Assault and Battery By Means of a Dangerous Weapon Ctusing Serious Bodily Injury (Count 11) “The grand ry ost have hear suficent evidence to eatish probable case or a saul und ater by mean ofa dangrons weapon casing sous bodily injury. “An asl nd her isthe intentional and unjustified we of force upon the person of anther” Conmenacalh v. Appleby, 580 Mess. 296, 506 1980}, A dngerous weapon san item thats dangerous pers or dngeou ape inte cicustanes lat 303-34, Sets bly 5injury is fie as body injury that resus ina pemansn isSigurement los or imsimnent of bodily funtion Tint or organ, ora substantial sf eh, G1 © 265, § 130) ‘Because the prosection proceeds aginst Johnson as a coventuc, it must have presented cvdenc tothe gra jury that Johnson both partici nan shared the requisite metal sate forthe erime charge See Commonwealth v,Zanot 454 Mass 449, 466468 (2009), Evidence ‘fhe aiding and abetting inthe offense inluded the foto + (0) Johnson urged Pas to ett against Stephenson on several occasions; 2) they discussed “pting te Fie" on Sephenson by asserting hath tasked Johnson nd 2 ohason weed and encouraged Paes, she night before and then mses before the st og” Stephenson an Kick his] asin seminin, Further, and most sigsifcnly,Samls reported ta Jobson wes preset on the stairway as age stuck Stephenson's head wth he table ep Plice found the able gin the edroom shared by fonson and Page arte allogely fom the house, The evidense established tht the abo og a allegedly sed in is case, was a dangerous weapon and shat > scl and batery caused Stephenson sulle serous bly ij: death ‘without question, te grand jury heard coniraditry evidence tout Jhon poo nd conduct during Page's atack on Stephenson Cui, Thompson and Few reported that hey id pot see Johnson ding the Page-Stehenson encoun on the sais andi the cen In cov, Samets described the assault and batery a coiting onthe stsrway while Jobson tool by, having urged on Page when Stenson left the bathroom, Notwithstanding the disjoint and sel contadictory ature of Samuels report, if eredited, er desertion of * Gran cs ited abi oasis the ceil oft witness config aoa the seston pee eS te wren wpe ud soda soements ade by Cab Thomprn, aw and Soren 6Jonson's conduct was sufficient oetablish probable cause to believe that Johnson tended side encourage ad ha kaowedge that Page would ary othe alleged assault and battery on Stephenson, and tht ome point while onthe stairway, she became vars and intended bathe vse a ble leg to accomplish hat purpose, As a conseiencs, dismissal ist warane IM, Murder (Count) cone spetkng t obtain an incon for murder the Commoners preset evidence othe following elements 1) the defendant cae the viem's ea; an 2) he kfevant ther intended te vet's dat, ated io caus the viet grievous bodily tat, tinted to do a act which, nthe cumstances known 1 the defendant, a easonable peson wou known ceed plan nd song iklbood tht death woul et Ses Commonweal. Earle, AS8 Mas. 341, 246-347 & 1.9, 350 2010 Commonmealh. Gre, 4369 Mase 469, 470.1, 4724 (1987. See sao Commonseathv. Lyons, 444 Mast, 289, 293+ 2o4 (205), Grievous bly harm s ein as serious or ever injury to antes person's boy. ‘See Commonweal. Reed, 427 Mass, 100, 104 (1998) (and ese cited. To support «murder snigmentona theory of joint ver, the prosecution must ave presented evince the yan jury that the defendant (1) aided, encouraged, panned pape no ood remy o seit another in lng the vitim, and (2) intended the victim's death, grievous bodily arm to the vita, or any ac that a easonblepeson would have known crated plain an rong iketinond of death, Commonwealth. Hanright, 466 Mas. 303, 314 2013). rire, Johason das ot dispute th he grand jury heard sulin evidenee ests probebl eset believe tnt the blows hat Page divert Stephenson's ead witha able I ‘caused his deat, As to her own liability, Johnson argues thatthe proseoution filed to presentcvidenee the she hd known of Page's intended conduct and tht she partipated inthe ene and shared the reuse intent to sean an ndetment for murder “his case psc vey close question ato wheter grand jurrsreeive sie | evidence to establish probable cause to believe that Johnson ha the requisite intent and nol ny i, Sc’ semen were te mot ciel evidence prseted on host | issues, According to Samuels, inthe very early moming hours (4:30 am.) she overheard conversations between Fhnson and Page suggestive of them ling that Pape tack Stephenson th explanation they would ff forthe atk, Samuels and the ote witesse reported that when Stephenson emerged from te blom at abut 65, Jhson wget Pageto get tht mthefecke” ort “yo fick im up.” Of he four eyewitness, only Sars lied shat Pag suck Stpbenton on testcase wile Johnson soa atthe top ofthe stirs and tat afer inlting te blow, Page sid“ goths motherfucker [old you baby” The evidenes 5 resented didnot indicate th obs supplied the table lego Page or hat edited or ncoureged im to use it Even if ran jurors coud reasonably infer hom Yhnsons alleged presence tht he knew of Pages teat tack wih the able eg, there was evidence tht ate knew and shared Pog’s intent that is tack would be daly, as required fr deiberstely premeditated mutdery joint venture See Commonveath x: Gonsale 475 Mass 396, 415 (2016). Dismiss is wanted on that heory of murder fn he Gest degree or ander commitd with extreme ars or crsy, Sars statements sud 10 atotish that Johnson knew of and share Page's intent to cause Stephenson grievous Dsity ‘hrm orto do an st which inthe cteunsances as known o Johnson, a reasonable person _yould have known erated a plain and song likelihood that death would result It would beseasonable to infer from the wines desertion of secing Stephenson on he tchen Noor syringe open-yed that he remand consuls fo patio ftime before he succumb to his injures. K would also be ressonableto infer rom Johnson's alleged satements fatowing the injures to Stephenson My husband knocked his as ou. Itoh that he's oan get it, My husband kavkot his et”) hat she wa nfiret o his suferng, Soe Commanveathv, Cancen, 389 Mass 216,227 (1983), Therefore, dismissals pot ware as to murderin the fist degre commited wit extreme atrocity oF ely? BV. Conelusion se ears noting hut [probable aot to ssn an nenent is diddy low stander." Honig, supra, a 31. This asin my view, only just mets i, Wher te prosecution cn svivea motion fo required nding of ot iy oF susan its been of proving beyond a reasonable dou tht Johnson sable a jun venture on the chargesis et fo ial + pecame th evidence psn was suficientes probable case beleve Hut Johnson ke ml shred erm M2 fcr cnn Siepeneor eon ly med act wich, inte cameos 2 korn na abc person woulhuv town ccaa plan nd stongitetbod tat dew woul es, Inari soon ges would uso suri dims 9‘ORDER | Forthe foregoing reasons, its hereby ordered that: (1) the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is allowed as to so much of Count I as charges murder in the first degree committed | “with deliberate premeditation andi in ll other respects denied; (2) the Defendant's Motion to ee v) | ey Loa A Susie of Cour, Dated: June 21, 2017 10