Massachusetts Daily Collegian

Northampton judge postpones motion for dismissal in Vassell case

By Caitlin Soto

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






vassell3_2_10

Hannah Cohen / Collegian

A judge of the Superior Court of Hampshire County has postponed a motion on Tuesday March 2 to dismiss the case against former University of Massachusetts student Jason Vassell until March 26.  The motion was proposed in late 2008 by Vassell’s defense team, and seeks to dismiss the charges against Vassell based on claims of selective racial prosecution.

The pre-trial hearing for Vassell was to be presented at the court house in Northampton on Tuesday, but it was rescheduled at the request of the prosecutor for the case against Vassell, Assistant District Attorney Elizabeth Farris. The postponement was requested on the basis of the prosecution, stating its need to review files related to the case against Vassell.

Regarding the motion to dismiss, the pre-trial hearing was held in order to discuss the defendant’s plea to discharge the indictment against Vassell.

Vassell was arrested Feb. 3, 2008 on charges of aggravated assault for allegedly stabbing two white males in a contentious altercation at MacKimmie Hall. According to his defense team, Vassell acted in self defense, as his attorneys and supporters hold he was first taunted and then assaulted by the two men he ultimately stabbed. The males involved in the aggravated assault against Vassell were identified in police reports as Jonathan Bosse and John Bowes. Currently, Bosse has faced no charges. Bowes was charged with civil rights violation, but was later acquitted on March 13, 2009. He was sentenced with one year probation and a $200 fine. As for the now 24-year-old Vassell, he could be facing a maximum of thirty years in prison for two counts of aggravated assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.

This pre-trial hearing was the first in six months. It has been two years since the assault, and no verdict regarding Vassell has been decided upon by the courts.

“It’s terrible how they have railroaded him these past two years. Especially when the others involved received a slap on the wrist,” stated a Justice for Jason supporter, who chose to remain anonymous.

“What happened to the sixth amendment of the Constitution?” asked UMass student Joseph Muccio. “The constitution states that everyone deserves a speedy and just trial. I don’t see that happening here.”

In the brief, which supports the motion to dismiss the charges against Vassell, the defendant accuses the district attorney of engaging in selective prosecution on the basis of race. The trial has opened a series of debates regarding the question of civil rights in the Pioneer Valley. On Feb. 3, supporters gathered in Northampton with signs supporting Vassell, during a candlelight vigil to mark the two year anniversary of his arrest. One sign suggested that institutional racism was alive and well in the Pioneer Valley.

Caitlin Soto can be reached at [email protected]

5 Comments

5 Responses to “Northampton judge postpones motion for dismissal in Vassell case”

  1. Oscar E. Soto, Esq. on March 3rd, 2010 12:33 pm

    Caitlin- Well done. We are all proud of you.

    Dad

    [Reply]

  2. alex on March 3rd, 2010 4:17 pm

    Lock him up. the face is he stabbed two people. enough of this bs he acted in self-defense crap. The facts have come out, he came out of his room, escalated the fight, went back into his room to grab a knife, while wearing a ski mask, yeah sounds like self-defense. No disrespect but it is so annoying to hear all minorities on campus claim everything as a racial situation. He’s not about to go to jail cause he’s black, its because he STABBED two people.

    [Reply]

  3. Derek Khanna on March 4th, 2010 12:19 am

    Joseph Muccio, apparently you have absolutely no understanding of law. You do have a right to a speedy trial, however, Jason’s lawyer David House has placed motions to elongate his trial. Specifically the racial charged prosecution requires a number of years to work through. Whatever side of this issue we are, we should all acknowledge that legally Jason has essentially waived his right to a speedy trial by such motions. Imagine if you went to court and constantly filed subsidiary motions, would it be the courts obligation to make it a quick trial?

    [Reply]

  4. Caitlin on March 4th, 2010 12:41 am

    Alex-
    We’ll leave it to the courts to decide Jason’s fate. Thanks for your opinion.

    [Reply]

  5. Dan on March 9th, 2010 12:30 pm

    Caitlin, this is a great article!

    Alex – you powerfully delegitimize your argument when you complain about “all minorities.” That sort of blanket statement is in itself quite racist.

    [Reply]

If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a gravatar.