No DA pursuit of group home abuse claim

A Lynn mother who accused a Salem residential group home of abusing her adult autistic son has learned that the case will not be pursued by the Essex County District Attorney?s office.Teresa Carrington of Lynn said that she was called into a meeting with members of the Massachusetts Department of Mental Health?s state investigation team, representatives of the Essex County District attorney?s office and members of the Salem Police Department.Carrington said that during the meeting Monday she was told that the Essex County District Attorney?s office would not pursue charges related to allegations made by Carrington that a staff member at the May Institute?s Salem location beat her 37-year-old autistic son so severely that traces of blood were found in his urine days after the incident. The incident allegedly took place in early March.Carrie Kimball-Monahan, a spokeswoman for Essex County District Attorney Jonathan Blodgett, confirmed that Carrington was involved in a meeting with the DA?s office and that the purpose of the meeting was to “explain our decision not to pursue a criminal charge in the matter.”?That decision was arrived at after a diligent investigation conducted by a specialized unit of people with expertise in the area,” Kimball-Monahan said.Carrington, however, denies a thorough investigation was completed and said that her son was never interviewed by a forensic psychologist.Carrington claims that she was told by investigators that her son was not considered “competent enough” to prove beyond a reasonable doubt who the aggressor was and that there was no other clear evidence or witnesses to support the abuse claims.Carrington also said that during the meeting she was strongly advised by those present to pursue the matter herself in civil court. Kimball-Monahan refused to confirm whether that suggestion had been made.Carrington said that she has been in contact with several law offices.Julia A. Burgess, the senior director of strategic and corporate communications at the May Institute, previously declined to comment on the allegations, saying in a statement, “The May Institute is committed to providing the highest quality care to the individuals we serve. We consider their health and safety our primary responsibility. Privacy policies prevent us from commenting on the matter.”