Projo 7 to 7 News BlogTaking the news pulse of Rhode Island and Southeastern Massachusetts, by Providence Journal and projo.com staff, from 7 to 7, every business day |
|
Get the 7 to 7 on your mobile at www.projo.com. Twitter: projo | RSS | Email alerts
« Murder indictment follows standoff with police |
Main
| Twin River dog racing to continue through Aug. 8 »
PROVIDENCE, R.I. - The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that inconsistent statements from a domestic abuse victim will not guarantee an acquittal if there is other supporting evidence a crime was committed. "In this case, the Supreme Court is confronted with yet another victim of domestic violence who, after her abuser was arrested and charged with a felony, changed her story and gave markedly different testimony at trial to protect her abuser," Acting Chief Justice Maureen McKenna Goldberg wrote in the opinion for the court. "The jury was provided with two versions of the events leading to this prosecution - the first was the statement given to the police on the scene and the second was the testimony at trial. By its verdict of guilty, the jury chose to believe the statement the witness gave to the police immediately after the crime. We affirm." Gerardo Cardona was convicted by a Superior Court jury of two counts of domestic assault against his wife, Catherine Cardona and her son, Bernard Baton. In his appeal, Gerardo Cardona pointed to inconsistencies in the statement his wife gave to the police after the incident and at trial. He also argued that the judge failed to tell the jury that suspicion of a crime is not enough to warrant a guilty finding, and that the judge incorrectly instructed the jury on assault and battery charges, even though the defendant was only charged with assault. According to the opinion, South Kingstown police officers arrived at the Cardona home on Broad Rock Road on August 9, 2005. Catherine Cardona told the police that she saw her husband hit her son, who was 28 years old at the time and is developmentally disabled, in the face and kick him when he fell to the ground. She told the police when she went to call the police, Gerardo Cardona followed her, swearing and attempting to slap the telephone out of her hand. All of this was recorded in a police statement that Catherine Cardona signed. At trial, Catherine refused to look at the written statement, denying its authenticity and testified that she denied telling the police that her husband hit and kicked her son. At trial, two South Kingstown police officers testified that Bernard Cardona was visibly shaken and had a "red mark" on his face when police arrived that night. The jury returned a guilty verdict, and Gerardo Cardona was sentenced to five years in the Adult Correctional Institutions, one year to serve on each count to run concurrently, the balance suspended with probation. "The trial justice explained that he denied the motion for a new trial because there was substantive and credible evidence in addition to Catherine's prior witness statement to establish defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt," Goldberg wrote. "After a careful review of the record, we are of the opinion that the trial justice correctly found that the evidence presented to the jury was sufficient to support the verdict." The court also found that the judge was correct to instruct the jury on assault and battery charges because they are part of the same statute that Cardona was charged under. It also dismissed the argument regarding the judge's instructions because the law does not require a judge to use specific language, and the court also agreed that to mention any additional instruction relative to "surmise, suspicion, or hunch could serve to unfairly highlight that portion of the charge and result in the jury considering the instruction out of context." |
|
|
|
Leave a comment
Please be civil. Vicious comments, personal attacks and profanity won't be published. Name and email are required; email address will not publish.