One of the most counterintuitive concepts in gun crime cases is something called the “staleness of evidence.” Essentially, this relates to the length of time that a piece of evidence (usually a firearm) can be linked to a gun crime in Boston. After a gun crime, how much time needs to pass before a suspect can carry a gun without suspicion? A few hours? A few days? This question was addressed by a recent case in Massachusetts.
Firearm Found in Backpack Three Months After Murder
In August 2024, the Commonwealth rejected an argument from a defendant accused of murder in the second degree. The defendant argued that a firearm seized from his backpack should have been suppressed due to a variety of alleged issues – including a Fourth Amendment violation.
The murder occurred in 2017. Caught on camera by surveillance cameras, the shooting occurred relatively quickly – with the suspect discharging several shots before fleeing. However, the surveillance video proved less important than the eyewitness who witnessed the murder while looking out of a nearby window. This witness conducted their own independent internet research and claimed to have discovered the identity of the defendant.
The authorities finally tracked down the suspect three months later, proceeding to arrest him without a warrant before searching his vehicle and backpack. It was this backpack that contained the firearm, which was subsequently matched to the scene of the murder.
Was This Evidence “Stale?”
In making its decision, the Commonwealth addressed the question of “staleness.” In particular, it notes that there would have been probable cause if the defendant had been arrested on the night of the murder. The fact that the defendant was likely to still have the firearm seems to have been sufficient in the eyes of the court. However, one has to question this logic – especially since one would “reasonably” expect a murderer to destroy or dispose of any evidence linking them to their alleged crime. This logic obviously applies to firearms.
How long is too long when it comes to information that might indicate the presence of incriminating evidence? The Commonwealth points to two important factors in this situation: The nature of the crime and the nature of the item. Perhaps most notably, investigators must consider whether the item is “durable” enough to remain intact over the course of several months.
While a firearm is obviously more durable than other evidence (including drugs), the three-month delay pushes previous boundaries. The Commonwealth could only point to one similar case, pointing out that a duration of six weeks indicated firearm evidence was “not stale.” There is obviously a notable difference between six weeks and three months. One might argue that both durations are unreasonable from the perspective of most people.
Find an Experienced Gun Crime Defense Lawyer in Boston
If you have been searching for an experienced gun crime lawyer in Boston, look no further than Edward R. Molari. We have considerable experience with gun crime defense in Massachusetts, and we can help you explore various defense strategies. Reach out today to continue this discussion in more detail.