A judge has denied an appeal filed by an incarcerated New Bedford man that sought further information about a misconduct investigation into the prosecutor and judge who served on his trial.
The judge and prosecutor had been accused in a series of anonymous letters last fall of carrying on a secret romantic relationship while serving on the same criminal cases in the New Bedford District Court. The judge named in the letters, Douglas Darnbrough, was briefly reassigned to another courthouse before announcing his resignation a month later, citing health problems.
A pair of criminal appeals later claimed Darnbrough’s resignation sufficed to “corroborate” the unproven rumors.
The appeals, which sought new trials for two men convicted of sex crimes in Darnbrough’s courtroom last year, had the potential to open up public access to confidential investigations into whether the allegations in the anonymous letters were true.
A judge specially appointed to oversee the appeals, David Frank, initially ordered the release of any investigative records held by the Bristol County District Attorney’s Office, which employs the prosecutor accused of misconduct and is seeking to uphold her convictions.
But the response from the D.A.’s office offered few details beyond a denial of the allegations. An assistant district attorney clarified that the investigation had been handled by the Massachusetts Trial Court, the statewide administration that oversees the New Bedford District Court, and that the investigation found no evidence proving the alleged misconduct.
Judge Frank denied subsequent motions to open up access to the Trial Court’s investigation and the cellphone records of the accused prosecutor.
On Wednesday, Frank dismissed one of the appeals altogether, writing in an order that the man seeking to overturn his conviction, Gerson Pascual-Santana, had failed to present credible evidence of misconduct.
“The defendant’s motions, affidavits and exhibits contain averments that can best be summarized as speculative, uncorroborated, and conclusory in nature,” Frank wrote. “They include no information about the author’s reliability and are silent on the basis of knowledge or source of any of the author’s claims.”
Bristol County District Attorney Thomas Quinn III said in a prepared statement that he was “very satisfied” with the judge’s ruling.
“These anonymous letters are part of a longstanding harassment campaign and are likely being sent by someone with personal animosity towards the individuals involved in this matter,” Quinn said. “As stated in our previous court filing, our pre-existing criminal investigation into this harassment campaign continues.”
Quinn’s statement also lamented the amount of attention the anonymous letters generated.
“It is very sad and a sign of the state of our society that anonymous letters alone could result in the smearing and maligning of individuals,” Quinn said.
Still, Judge Frank’s dismissal of the appeal does not close the book entirely on the misconduct allegations raised in the anonymous letters. The defense attorney representing Pascual-Santana, James McKenna, could appeal Frank’s decision.
