Villamaino denied removal of tracking device, considered flight risk
Date: 2/28/2013
By Chris Maza
chrism@thereminder.comSPRINGFIELD — Former East Longmeadow Selectman Enrico "Jack" Villamaino's request to have his electronic monitoring device removed was denied in Hampden County Superior Court on Feb. 28.
Attorney Jeffrey Meehan, representing Villamaino, filed the motion citing familial circumstances and discomfort as the primary reasons for the request, which was heard by Judge Bertha Josephson. Villamaino is awaiting trial for 38 charges stemming from his alleged plot to steal votes for himself via illegally obtained absentee ballots during his GOP primary race for state representative of the Second Hampden District.
Meehan told the court that Villamaino, whose wife and alleged co-conspirator Courtney Llewellyn as well as his father, Enrico Villamaino Sr., were also in the courtroom, planned to move in with his elderly grandparents after they had recently been released from an assisted care facility where his grandmother was treated after sustaining injuries during a fall.
He also argued that Villamaino has ties to the community as a lifelong resident of East Longmeadow with no prior criminal record and has been working in the family business, EJ Villamaino Paving, since he lost his job at the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority after being arrested there.
"In addition to working in the family business ... he has been caring for his grandparents and is planning to move in with them with his present wife so he can tend to their needs," Meehan said, adding that Villamaino's grandparents also live in East Longmeadow.
Meehan also said the device has created "issues with hygiene and discomfort" and given the length of time remaining before the trial, it seemed appropriate that the device be removed.
Villamaino was arrested on Oct. 16, 2012 and arraigned the following day. He was ordered to wear the tracking device, to remain in his home except when going to work or medical appointments and to surrender his passport. At a Feb. 19 pretrial hearing, a final pretrial conference date was set for Aug. 5 and the trial was scheduled to begin on Oct. 15.
"Wearing this bracelet for nearly a year is troublesome for him," Meehan said.
He suggested that Villamaino could check in weekly with his probation officer as an alternative to electronic monitoring.
Meehan also filed a motion to allow Villamaino to assign the $10,000 cash bail posted after his initial arraignment, meaning he would forfeit the right to retrieve that money following the trial, in order to apply it to financial obligations to the court.
That motion was not contested by Hampden County District Attorney Mark Mastroianni, however, he argued against releasing Villamaino from the ordered monitoring, stating that without the promise of money to be returned to him and no way for the government to trace his movements, the defendant would have little incentive to return to court.
"When I see an assignment of bail and then a request for monitoring to be taken off as well, it's almost a procedure put in place to take off all incentive to appear in court," Mastroianni said. "I think there's an obvious need for bail. If he is allowed to take off the cash part of his bail by assigning that, as is totally appropriate, [and] if the bracelet is removed, the court and the Commonwealth would have no assurances which we can rely upon that the defendant would be compelled to return."
Mastroianni added that it was the position of his office that Villamaino poses some level of flight risk, given that his passport was found on his person upon his arrest.
"When the indictments came out, I did not inform Mr. Meehan of the exact day that they came out and the Commonwealth had the State Police serve a warrant on Mr. Villamaino at his job in Boston. We made a decision that we were not going to ask him to voluntarily come in," he said. "When the State Police got there, the Commonwealth found it particularly unusual that on that day in Boston, Mr. Villamaino, knowing this investigation was underway, knowing that it was only a matter of time until we filed charges, had some type of personal backpack-type bag with him and in that bag was his passport. That passport has been surrendered, but the fact that he had it was a concern."
The seriousness of the charges against Villamaino should also be taken into consideration, Mastroianni argued.
"The allegations in this case involve a scheme that required a significant amount of thought, of planning and of preparation," he said. "The amount of sophistication and planning and forethought that went into this crime leads me to have the concern that an amount of bail is necessary.
"The charges are serious enough — some are felony charges and there's state prison exposure," he continued.
Josephson ultimately agreed with Mastroianni, stating that the reasons presented by Meehan were not substantial enough to allow Villamaino to go unsupervised.
"The circumstances that have been argued do not in my view constitute reason to amend or modify the conditions of bail," she said. "I am denying without prejudice so that if circumstances do present themselves, you can bring them back."
