Prosecutors today rely heavily on surveillance footage, a form of evidence that did not even exist a lifetime ago. Prior to this development, the only way to look back on a past moment was by asking an eyewitness. Which is the more reliable form of evidence in the context of murder, armed robbery, or assault cases in Boston? This question was recently addressed in a Boston armed robbery case – and it provides some interesting insights.
Armed Robbery and Murder Defendants Appeal Based on Video Evidence
This case involved armed robbery and murder stemming from a 2015 incident. The defendants were accused of robbing or attempting to rob three different sex workers at gunpoint within a single night. The first woman denied them entry to her hotel room, while the second opened her door and had several hundred dollars stolen. They then visited a third woman’s hotel room, and this woman died shortly after the visit.
The defendants were filmed entering and exiting the hotel via surveillance cameras. The guests also reported hearing screaming and a single gunshot. During their investigation, police contacted the two women who interacted with the defendants. One identified a defendant when presented with a photograph of him. Investigators also obtained security footage from not only the hotel but also the surrounding buildings.
Investigators then used this footage to identify the defendant’s vehicle, later tracking it to a residence in Burlington. They then seized the car, searched it, and accessed his cell phone – finding more incriminating evidence. They also found evidence that showed the defendant was an employee of one of the targeted hotels. Through additional searches of vehicles and residences, investigators found compelling evidence against the defendant – including the apparent murder weapon and clothing worn during the offenses.
All of this led to numerous convictions during a jury trial in 2017. These convictions included murder in the first degree and attempted armed robbery.
The defendant then appealed, arguing that the police officer who identified the defendant in the surveillance videos did so erroneously. The defendant argued that the video footage was of poor quality, making it difficult to determine the identities of recorded individuals. In addition, the court admitted that instead of allowing the officer to describe the footage to the jury, they should have simply shown the footage directly to the jury.
Despite this admission, the court decided that the error did not result in prejudice. Aside from the video footage, the court argued, there was simply too much incriminating evidence. In other words, it would not have mattered anyway – and the defendant would have still been convicted.
Contact a Boston Armed Robbery Defense Lawyer
If you have been accused of armed robbery in Boston, you might want to get in touch with an experienced defense attorney at your earliest convenience. Even if there seems to be a significant amount of evidence laid against you, a lawyer could help you fight for your rights with confidence. To get started with a defense strategy, contact Edward R. Molari today.