Chuck contacted our office because his former girlfriend took out a 209A Domestic Restraining Order against him.  The court had issued a temporary order and scheduled the case for a full hearing.  I met with Chuck, a juvenile, and his parents at my office and we discussed strategies to fight the restraining order.  We met for a couple of hours. They left to go home at 2:35p.m.  A couple of hours later, I got a call from Chuck’s father.  He told me that Chuck had been arrested.  The police came to their house and said that he violated the restraining order by walking past his former girlfriend’s house at 3:00 p.m.  Chuck lived approximately 15 miles from my office and at the time they left my office, traffic would have made it impossible for him to have driven home and then walked the 2 miles from his house to hers, so I knew the accusation was false.  His family uses an app called Life360.  This app tracks the phones of all family members.  The data from the app clearly showed that Chuck was nowhere near her home at the time she claimed he was there.  He was riding in his dad’s car, which was confirmed by his dad. As a result of this accusation, I was now also hired to represent Chuck on the criminal matter.  Chuck had no past record of any kind, and we had a strong alibi in his defense.

We appeared before a judge in Waltham Juvenile Court for the criminal charge. Normally in these circumstances, the judge would not set a bail or impose any conditions of release. Chuck would simply be let go on his own recognizance and promise to return to court as needed. However, due to the circumstances of the case, I was uncomfortable allowing him to leave without some protection.  If this girl lied about his walking past her house once, she could certainly do it again.  I took the unusual step of requesting that the Judge place an electronic monitoring ankle bracelet on Chuck while he was out on release.  This type of bracelet, also referred to as an “ELMO,” is monitored by a state agency.  The judge initially balked, but after some strong urging by me, the judge understood our concerns and agreed to the ankle monitor.

While the case was pending, it was mostly quiet until two weeks prior to the scheduled trial date.  Chuck’s dad was contacted by the police who claimed that he left a note on the doorstep of the former girlfriend.  His dad quickly called me, and I spoke with the police.  They were able to confirm with the court and ELMO that Chuck never visited her home.  We were able to keep these new charges from ever issuing.  Taking the unusual step of placing Chuck on the ELMO bracelet paid off in a major way. It was certainly an unusual strategy to protect my client from false accusations, but my instinct paid off and provided proof that Chuck had not violated the restraining order. Thereafter, we were also successful in resolving the original charges for violating the restraining order.

Although in this case Chuck was a juvenile, I would use this strategy for any client in a similar situation as a means to protect them from false accusations.

Contant Law defends juvenile cases in Middlesex, Essex and Suffolk counties including the following courts: Brookline Juvenile Court | Cambridge Juvenile Court | Chelsea Juvenile Court | Dorchester Juvenile Court | Essex County Juvenile Court  | Lawrence Juvenile Court | Lowell Juvenile Court | Lynn Juvenile Court | Middlesex County Juvenile Court | Newburyport Juvenile Court | Salem Juvenile Court | Suffolk Juvenile Court | Waltham Juvenile Court | West Roxbury Juvenile Court

Prove accusations are false - chuck's story

We’re here to answer your questions and help you throughout the process

Contact Us

10 Cedar Street, Suite 23
Woburn, MA 01801
(617) 227-8383 Call OR Text
(617) 944-9867 Fax
Office: M-F 8am-5pm
Phone: 24/7
Get Contant in Your Contacts

Get Contant Law in your court.

Call, text or email and we will get right back to you. Fill out this form to schedule an initial complimentary consultation.