[ Music. Close up of the John Adams courthouse. Onscreen text that says, "Judicial Independence in Massachusetts: Bail"]
[Onscreen text that says, "Commonwealth v. Dequon Salim"]
[Interior of a courtroom.]
Court officer: All rise, please stand.
[Everyone in the courtroom stands as Judge Groce enters the courtroom and is seated. Onscreen text that says, "Hon. Charles W. Groce III, Justice, Springfield District Court"]
Court officer: Thank you. The Honorable Justice is present, you may be seated and remain quiet.
[Everyone in the courtroom is seated.]
Clerk: 18CR856, Commonwealth versus Dequon Salim.
Judge Groce: All right, Madam Clerk, thank you very much. Officer, thank you very much. Counsel, good morning. Mr. Salim, good morning, sir. And I understand in this particular matter the defendant has already been arraigned. Is that correct?
[District Attorney stands.]
District Attorney: Yes, your Honor.
Judge Groce: Commonwealth, you're moving for bail?
District Attorney: Commonwealth is moving for bail.
Judge Groce: All right, I'll hear you on the issue of bail.
District Attorney: Thank you. Your Honor, the Commonwealth is requesting a $10,000 cash bail in this case. This defendant faces a number of firearms charges that stem from December 21st of 2018 when the Springfield police officers responded to an area in Springfield for a ShotSpotter activation indicating that two shots had been fired, and when they arrived, they recovered two shell casings, also indicative that a firearm had been discharged in that area. Upon their arrival, they did not observe any individuals in the immediate area, so they then began to search for individuals who were either suffering from a gunshot wound or an individual who may have been involved in the shooting as a shooter.
While they were in the area, about three blocks away, they observed this defendant. And this defendant matched a description having been given by a 9-1-1 caller of an individual who was fleeing from the scene of the shooting. As officers approached and first observed the defendant, they noticed that he appeared to be concealing an item underneath his coat in the area of his waistband that through their training and experience they knew was a common location for individuals to carry firearms.
This defendant, however, upon the police officers approaching him, quickly darted down a driveway and went toward the rear of a building, and as police officers got closer to him, the defendant then began to run and flee from the police officers.
He ran toward the back of that building and attempted to avoid apprehension by the police by scaling, or trying to scale, a fence in the rear of that building. Ultimately, he was apprehended as he was trying to scale that fence, and just a little distance away from that fence that he was observed trying to climb was, in fact, a firearm that was loaded with ammunition.
Your Honor, this defendant is not new to firearms offenses. I would suggest that this defendant has a history of convictions with the court that would indicate that bail is necessary. Most importantly, this defendant has a previous conviction for carrying a firearm without a license, and also for assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon, to wit, a firearm for having shot someone in the past. And those offenses occurred in 2012, and he received a three year state prison sentence for that offense.
In addition to his history of convictions and the nature and circumstances of the offense, the Commonwealth would suggest that this defendant faces a substantial penalty for the crimes for which he's been charged should he be convicted. The defendant faces a minimum mandatory sentence of five years in state's prison for having previously been convicted of a firearm.
In addition, the defendant faces another three year minimum mandatory sentence for having previously been convicted of a prior drug offense and violent crime. Your Honor, in addition to those factors, the Commonwealth would ask that you consider the fact that the defendant is unemployed, and the Commonwealth would suggest that his unemployment gives him a lack of ties to this community. He would not be at risk for losing his employment should he have failed to appear in court to answer to these charges.
In addition to his lack of employment, the defendant also suffers from a mental illness. He, however, has not received treatment and is not currently receiving treatment for this mental illness, which gives the Commonwealth concern as to whether or not he will be able to abide by and follow court orders and appear for court. Most significantly, the Commonwealth would point to the defendant's flight from the police in order to avoid apprehension, as well as to avoid prosecution in this case.
The Commonwealth would suggest that considering the circumstances of the defendant indicating that he recently had surgery on his foot, but still, even in that condition, fled from the police and attempted to climb a fence in order to avoid apprehension, is indicative of his desire to avoid prosecution on these cases, and also is indicative of his, what I would suggest, his future behavior as to whether or not he would appear for court. Commonwealth feels that the $10,000 cash bail is necessary to ensure his appearance. So, based on all of those factors, the Commonwealth requests that you set bail in the amount of $10,000. Thank you.
[District Attorney sits down.]
Judge Groce: All right, very good. Probation, may I see Mr. Salim's record?
[Probation Officer hands Judge Groce a record.]
Judge Groce: Thank you. All right, counsel.
[Defense attorney stands up.]
Defense attorney: Thank you. Judge, on behalf of Mr. Salim, I would request that Mr. Salim be released on his own promise to appear with a condition that he have a mental health evaluation and any other condition that the court sees fit. Mr. Salim presents himself to the court 27 years of age. He's a lifelong resident of Springfield, where he resides with his mother and his two sisters. Those would be the people that would be responsible for the bail if, indeed, a cash bail is set, and I'm going to represent to the court on my conversations with them, they do not have any expendable income at this point.
Mr. Salim presents himself to the court with no history of defaults. As the Commonwealth stated earlier, he does have a history of convictions. However, again, no defaults. He has been placed on probation on one occurrence, and he successfully completed probation. I cite these because what that shows to the court is that when given conditions by the court, be it to appear, or to abide by conditions of probation, he has done so successfully on every occasion that it's been asked of him.
Getting to the case in itself, here, we have a 9-1-1 call. The police respond to a ShotSpotter. In the 9-1-1 call, the caller identifies the person that they see in the vicinity of the alleged shots as being 5 foot 10, African American, wearing a hoodie. What we know from the Commonwealth's own police report is that when this gentleman was encountered, he had on a coat.
I believe it would be preposterous to believe that between the police encountering him and this particular shooting, that he puts on a coat over a black hoodie. It just makes no sense. It also should be noted that the 9-1-1 caller never made any mention of him walking or running with any sort of limp or favoring one side or the other. What we do know is that the Commonwealth is acknowledging that this gentleman recently had surgery on his foot as a result of diabetes. They state that when they approach him, he attempts to, again, flee from them. Later on, he makes this statement that, "you killed my cousin." Well, I believe that explains it all. The court is well aware of the condition or mistrust or distrust between the black community and law enforcement. This is happening all around the country, it's made major news, and it really is coming more into light with the invent of cell phones and videos and so forth.
So, what the Commonwealth is going to have the court believe, or ask the court to believe, is that though their police officers through their own report, never lost sight of this gentleman, that he took a firearm, either out of his coat or his pants, and threw it without them ever seeing the item or hearing the item. That's preposterous. And, again, no history of defaults, has complied with probation, lifelong resident of the area. And his financial inability to pay, that you accept the defendant's recommendation of releasing him on his own promise to appear. Thank you.
[Defense attorney sits down.]
Judge Groce: All right. All right, well, counsel, I want to thank you both very much. I have considered your arguments, of course, I've considered your presentation of the facts, and I've considered the applicable law. The court will now indicate with respect to the appropriate bail to be set for Mr. Salim.
[Judge Groce turns to face the camera.]
Judge Groce: You be the judge.
[ Music. On screen text that says, "Produced by The Massachusetts Trial Court Public Outreach Committee & Suffolk University"]
[On screen text that says, "Executive Producers: Hon. Mark D. Mason & Brian J. McDermott. Director: Chris Dwyer. This production would not have been possible without the support of the Executive Office of the Trial Court. Paula M. Carey, Chief Justice, the Massachusetts Superior Court, the Massachusetts District Court, the Boston Municipal Court and the generous time of the Assistant District Attorneys, attorneys, probation officers, court officers, the Administrative Office of the District Court and the Administrative Office of the Housing Court staff members who appear. For general questions regarding bail in Massachusetts, please contact Catherine M. Coughlin, Esq., Massachusetts State Bail Administrator, (617) 788-7312. The characters and events depicted in this video are entirely fictitious. Any similarity to actual events or persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental."]