time of the incident, therefore the administrative subpoena to Verizon landline would not have turned up Gabe’s home records; an additional subpoena would have been required to obtain this information. The conclusion of the Massachusetts State Police report states “A review of phone records does not support WILLOUGHBY’S claim that a phone call occurred between GABE and MARY GRASING on October 18, 2011 at approximately 4:00 P.M.” Without seeing the additional records, if any, Mason was in possession of, it is unclear how this conclusion could be drawn. What analysis of Mary Grasing’s home records does show is that Marshard’s landline and Gabe’s landline were in contact with the Mary Grasing between October 17, 2011 and October 19, 2011, this is consistent with Willoughby and BenDavid’s version of the facts. These records should have
…show more content…
The Grasing matter hinges on whether Comcast records still exist and if bar counsel can obtain them. A follow up request will be made to the DA’s Office for any additional phone records analyzed during the State Police investigation. It is concerning that this matter was not transferred to another county given the fact the CPAC Unit works out of the DA’s Office.
RESPONDENT’S HISTORY WITH OFFICE OF BAR COUNSEL Laura Marshard was admitted to the bar on May 20, 1991. Marshard has been the subject of two ACAP calls, one of which was from Patrece Petersen. The second call was an older call from 2003, the caller Eric Kelley was a defendant that Marshard proesceuted, he alleges that she lied to the grand jury. Petersen’s call was in reference to the David Sylvia matter, Marshard’s conduct in this case was the subject of one of the charges in her recent hearing. The hearing committee has recommended a public reprimand, but the matter is still open as the respondent will be filing an
The Grasing matter hinges on whether Comcast records still exist and if bar counsel can obtain them. A follow up request will be made to the DA’s Office for any additional phone records analyzed during the State Police investigation. It is concerning that this matter was not transferred to another county given the fact the CPAC Unit works out of the DA’s Office.
RESPONDENT’S HISTORY WITH OFFICE OF BAR COUNSEL Laura Marshard was admitted to the bar on May 20, 1991. Marshard has been the subject of two ACAP calls, one of which was from Patrece Petersen. The second call was an older call from 2003, the caller Eric Kelley was a defendant that Marshard proesceuted, he alleges that she lied to the grand jury. Petersen’s call was in reference to the David Sylvia matter, Marshard’s conduct in this case was the subject of one of the charges in her recent hearing. The hearing committee has recommended a public reprimand, but the matter is still open as the respondent will be filing an