Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Defense says prosecutor’s opening and closing were inflammatory in Bolter sexual-assault trial
Summary
In Commonwealth v. Bolter, defense counsel told the Appeals Court that a prosecutor’s opening statement and closing argument used inflammatory language and impermissible vouching that prejudiced the defendant’s trial, while the Commonwealth said its argument was grounded in video and recorded evidence.
Commonwealth v. Bolter: Counsel for the defendant asked the Massachusetts Appeals Court to reverse convictions on the ground that the prosecutor’s opening statement and closing argument were unduly inflammatory and included improper vouching for the victim’s credibility.
Why it matters: Prosecutorial remarks in opening statements and closings are routine, but courts draw a line where argument moves from permissible inference to expression of prosecutor opinion or impermissible appeals to emotion or sympathy. Attorneys and the panel debated whether the phraseology here exceeded acceptable bounds and whether any error was harmless given the recorded evidence.
What the…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
