According to an article in the MetroWest Daily News, a Framingham woman is facing charges of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. The article states that the woman allegedly attacked her ex-boyfriend’s new girlfriend in July.
The alleged victim told police that she was walking to her car near Tedeschi’s on Hollis Street in Framingham when she saw the defendant. The defendant began “coming toward” her and, as the alleged victim got into her car, the defendant reportedly started throwing rocks through the open car window. The defendant eportedly hit the alleged victim with two rocks. The article does not indicate that the alleged victim was injured, or that she had any marks on her, nor does it indicate that her car was damaged in any way. After the purported assault, the alleged victim went to the police station and made a report. The defendant was subsequently summonsed to court and arraigned. In addition to the above referenced offense, the defendant was also charged with violation of a harassment order, as the alleged victim had a harassment order in place against the defendant. At the arraignment, the defendant’s attorney indicated that the defendant’s ex-boyfriend had told her that he would “make her life miserable,” potentially providing the defendant with an argument that the ex and his new girlfriend have a motive to fabricate the allegations against her.
For a jury to convict the defendant of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon under G. L. c. 265, § 15A, the Commonwealth would have to prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) that the defendant touched the alleged victim, however slightly, without having any right or excuse for doing so; (2) that the defendant intended to touch the alleged victim; and (3) that the touching was done with a dangerous weapon. For a jury to convict the defendant of violation of a harassment order under G. L. c. 258E, § 9, the Commonwealth would have to prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) that the court had issued a harassment order ordering the defendant to refrain from abusing or harassing, refrain from contacting, or stay away from the alleged victim, her home, and/or her workplace; (2) that the order was in effect on the date when the violation allegedly occurred; (3) that the defendant knew the pertinent terms of the order and that it was in effect; and (4) that the defendant violated the order by abusing or harassing, contacting, or failing to stay away from the alleged victim, her home, and/or her workplace. Continue reading →