Defense urges SJC to grant new trial in Bateman case, citing audio edits and uncalled witness; Commonwealth stresses DNA evidence

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court heard oral argument on April 18, 2024, in Commonwealth v. Dennis Bateman, where defense counsel asked the court to reverse Bateman’s conviction and grant a new trial based on newly developed audio-forensic evidence and testimony from a witness the defense says trial counsel should have called.

Amy Cotagnon, attorney for Dennis Bateman, told the court: "I'm asking that this court reverse Mr. Bateman's conviction and grant him a new trial." Cotagnon argued that newly available analysis of police interview recordings and a witness the motion judge found there was "no reasonable strategic reason for not calling" could, if believed, support Bateman’s claim of actual innocence.

Cotagnon said the defense’s audio experts — whose testimony appears in the record appendix — found anomalies they described as consistent with edits. She told the court the file history and metadata show nine different iterations of the interview file with differing hash values and inconsistent file names, which she said is inconsistent with the officer’s explanation that the recording was uploaded once from an Olympus digital device on April 20, 2005. Cotagnon said the result is both missing minutes from the recorded interview and audio breaks the experts described as "look[ing] like an edit." She told the court there are roughly 11–12 minutes the defense says are not present in the version provided to counsel and that the experts could not explain the anomalies other than by post‑recording modification.

Cotagnon also pressed that a witness, Allison Hamilton, who she said would have placed the victim alive…