Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Defense urges reversal after prosecutor’s closing asked jurors to speculate on motive; Commonwealth counters
Summary
In Commonwealth v. Monsanto (23p1234), defense counsel argued prosecutors improperly shifted the burden in closing by posing rhetorical questions about the complainant’s motive to lie and misstating trial evidence about a bag’s color; the Commonwealth said its closing was grounded in the record and responded to defense attacks on credibility.
Jennifer Peterson, counsel for the defendant in the life‑felony case captioned Commonwealth v. Monsanto, told the appellate panel that the prosecutor’s closing argument went beyond permissible bounds and improperly shifted the burden of proof.
Peterson said the prosecutor asked jurors to speculate about why the alleged victim would lie (“Why would she make this up? What is she hoping to gain?”) and repeatedly posed rhetorical questions about motive, which she argued amounted…
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
