United States District Court, D. Massachusetts
For R. Paul Dube, Claimant: James J. O'Malley, LEAD ATTORNEY, Attorney James J. O'Malley III, Salem, MA.
For USA, Plaintiff: Christopher R. Donato, Fred M. Wyshak, Jr., LEAD ATTORNEYS, John A. Wortmann, Jr., Natashia Tidwell, United States Attorney's Office, Boston, MA; Michael L. Tabak, LEAD ATTORNEY, United States Attorney's Office MA, Boston, MA; Joseph Wheatley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC; Kristina E. Barclay, U.S. Attorney's Office, Boston, MA.
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Nathaniel M. Gorton, United States District Judge.
The motion pending before this Court arises out of a statement proffered by the presiding judge at the conclusion of the trial of defendant Frank Iacaboni (" Iacaboni" ) in April, 2009.
In September, 2006, defendant was charged with nine counts of racketeering, operating an illegal gambling business, conspiracy to commit arson, arson, using fire and explosives to commit a felony, conspiracy to commit extortion and attempted extortion.
Iacaboni, along with three of his co-defendants, was tried before this Court beginning in March, 2009. The trial lasted for seven weeks. Iacaboni was ultimately convicted on eight of the counts in which he was charged and was acquitted on one of the racketeering charges.
On the 29th day of trial, after the jury began deliberations and outside of the jurors' presence, this Judicial Officer addressed the eight attorneys representing the government and the four co-defendants as follows:
I'm going to do something that I don't normally do, but I thought it would be helpful to end on an up note rather than a down note today. I actually drafted this before the most recent scurrying around of questions that the jury posed.
But, nevertheless, before a verdict is rendered and this case becomes history,
I wanted to do something that is rather unprecedented but is warranted, I believe, in this case and, I hope, will become more commonplace in future cases.
And I hesitate only as a client hesitates to compliment his lawyer before the bill for fees has been rendered. But I proceed, nevertheless, to commend counsel in this case for a job well-done. This was a well-tried case. We have been at work here on very serious business for seven weeks, on matters of the utmost importance to the litigants and to society as a whole.
Yet, throughout this trial, you have conducted yourselves with professionalism; civilized discourse, for the most part; and even collegiality. Indeed, this trial could stand, in this Court's opinion, as an exemplar of how criminal trials are supposed to be tried, with vigorous and zealous representation of clients, conducted within the boundaries of the rules and of common decency. You are examples of the very best that the legal profession has to offer and a credit to the bar.
And with that, I will stop before this degenerates into another contentious exchange and we all go home ...