As a moral matter as well as a legal matter, to quote David Vicinanzo from an article at InDepthNH, the State’s decision to keep the Grand Jury Criminal Investigation report private without a public hearing or notice is a betrayal of all those kids abused at St Paul’s School.
David Vicinanzo represented “most, if not all”, administrators (per an email exchange between him and Associate AG Jane Young obtained through Right To Know) and David Vicinanzo is the one who petitioned the State not to release the list (emails and letters to Merrimack County DA and the AG’s office). He is also the one who argued with the State for his clients not to have to go before the Grand Jury or to be interviewed by the AG’s office for a criminal investigation the State was undertaking. And he is the one who then commended Judge Richard McNamara for keeping the Grand Jury Criminal Investigation report private.
The AG’s office informed David Vicinanzo that he had a conflict of interests in representing all of these administrators while also representing “E”. “E” is, I believe, “EW” whose name came up in the ineffective counsel motion by Owen Labrie’s defense attorneys and whose name came up during the retrial hearing in February 2017. “EW’s mother made a complaint to administrators at St Paul’s and to Concord Police about the unlawful sexual relations of State Witness Andrew Thomson with her daughter. Prosecutor Catherine Ruffle admitted to Judge Larry Smukler that a deal had been made with Andrew Thomson and that conversation was sealed so the jurors never got to see it. Jim Rosenberg of Shaheen & Gordon represented Andrew Thomson.
Eight months later, the New Hampshire Supreme Court ordered the conversation between Prosecutor Ruffle and Judge Smukler to be unsealed, revealing the admission by EW’s mother regarding her knowledge of the complaint and the deal with Andrew Thomson. Catherine Ruffle then retracted her comment, saying she’d made it in error. Michael Delaney (former AG), representing St Paul’s School, then stated that no such deal had been made.
He withdrew from consideration for the First Circuit after State Witness Chessy Prout (Owen Labrie’s accuser) informed the US Senate Judiciary Committee of his witness tampering with State Witnesses, including Andrew Thomson, and that Amanda Grady Sexton, David Vicinanzo’s client via NHCADSV, informed Prosecutor Ruffle of the tampering. But Ruffle allowed the witnesses to testify anyway, blocking a line of questioning about his sexual relations with 15-year-old girls – E.W. being one 15-year-old girl and Chessy Prout being another with whom he had online sexual invitations and admissions.
Andrew Thomson’s mother, Lucy Hodder Esq, was on the board of trustees for St Paul’s School and, per Chessy Prout’s memoir, managed to avoid deposition. She was also Governor Maggie Hassan’s legal counsel and on the board of NH Charitable Foundation which provides grants to the Central Crisis Center of New Hampshire (a client of David Vicinanzo’s due to his pro bono counsel for the NHCADSV who got a contract with St Paul’s School out of the grand jury investigation which they lobbied David Vicinanzo’s former partner, AG Gordon MacDonald for in 2017).
Right to Know emails contradict the public statements by Gordon MacDonald regarding St Paul’s School and his order for a Grand Jury Investigation.
Why is David Vicinanzo allowed to get away with such huge conflicts of interest with the AG’s office is the question that needs answering. Jane Young stated that the position of the AG’s office was that he had conflicts of interest in the St Paul’s investigation, but then went on to ignore it and had plenty of off-the-record phone calls with him as well (also revealed in RTK emails). His son, Matthew Vicinanzo, went on to work for Jane Young when she became US Attorney. His ex-partner is Gordon MacDonald, who is still listed with Nixon Peabody for one account, suggesting that he gets a financial benefit from settlements achieved by David Vicinanzo in the YDC cases.
Lastly, David Vicinanzo’s original client in the YDC cases is David Meehan. David Vicinanzo solicited other clients off his case but failed to provide effective counsel to his primary client by not discussing ahead of time the most basic thing in a civil case: the damages and how they are calculated. Thus the State had a loop hole to claim a cap of $475K and David Vicinanzo used juror post trial comments to leverage his position with Judge Andrew Schulman who inappropriately expressed solidarity with David Vicinanzo instead of admonishing the jurors and Vicinanzo and Rilee for direct communications after the trial. Jury instructions are posted online, and it’s explicitly stated that jurors shall not talk to attorneys or parties who have a direct interest in the case after the verdict.
Does anyone actually adhere to the laws in the NH Justice system or the NH bar? Or are they just put there for those with law degrees to break?
Authors’ opinions are their own and may not represent those of Grok Media, LLC, GraniteGrok.com, its sponsors, readers, authors, or advertisers.
Got Something to Say, We Want to Hear It. Comment or submit Op-Eds to steve@granitegrok.com
