LYNN — Prosecution from the Essex County District Attorney’s Office dismissed two assault-and-battery cases involving an elderly Donald Trump supporter from Swampscott and an African-American activist from Boston on Tuesday.
First, after hours in Lynn District Court, Essex County Assistant District Attorney Danielle Doherty-Wirwicz announced that the Commonwealth will be dismissing the charges against Ernst “Shimmy” Jean Jacques, who was accused of punching Linda Greenberg, the 80-year-old resident of Swampscott, after she had sprayed water at him at a pro-Trump rally in December 2020.
The protest, which included both supporters of the former president and the Black Lives Matter movement, was held in Swampscott.
“(It is) the decision that was too long in the coming, but the decision that was so right, so fair and so just,” said Jacques’ attorney, Murat Erkan.
The case was dismissed not by the court or on defense motion, but because the government’s ill-conceived prosecution fell apart and the prosecution decided to no longer go forward with the case, Erkan said.
Erkan said Greenberg refused to testify in court in front of the public upon learning that Jacques has filed a criminal complaint against her. He said that their complaint was alleging assault and battery, civil-rights violations and misleading investigators. It was authorized by the clerk’s magistrate and charges against Greenberg have been issued.
“This is the reason why the charges against this man were dismissed, because the guilty party refused to speak. This man was ready to speak and describe exactly what happened to him, the nightmare of this ordeal in front of a jury,” said Erkan on the steps of the Lynn District Court, wrapping his arm around Jacques.
However, Erkan’s statement was refuted by the DA’s office, which said that the complaint had not been filed until Tuesday, and Greenberg had not refused to take the stand.
“Today was the first time a civil-sought complaint was issued and we promptly filed the nolle prosequi,” said Katie Katzman, a spokesperson for the DA’s office. “At no time did Greenberg refuse to testify or indicate she was not willing to testify.”
Hours after Jacques’ case was dismissed, the District Attorney’s Office filed a nolle prosequi (“not to wish to prosecute” from latin) motion for Greenberg’s case, citing that, by law, the Commonwealth has an exclusive discretion to decide whether to prosecute a particular defendant.
Jacques looked emotional following the outcome of his case. He was slightly shaking and teary-eyed. He said he felt relieved because the truth had finally come out.
“But it should have come out 50 weeks ago. I shouldn’t have to lose my job and face, for six-seven months, daily harassment on social media,” said Jacques.
His father’s phone number got released because they share the same first and last name, said Jacques, and he was harassed with calls as well.
“My life was really put on hold,” Jacques said, adding that his life, his personal development and his mental health were negatively affected in so many ways.
He said it will take him some time to reset and regroup and that he looks forward to seeing where things will go with Greenberg’s prosecution.
“I just need to process it and figure out: how do I keep moving forward?” said Jacques. “I don’t know if I will ever feel comfortable going back to that town (Swampscott) because of their police officers who lied and continue to lie even to present day about this. So what does that say about anybody else that may frequent that town or what does it say about how they actually protect and serve or maybe they don’t protect and serve?”
At the court hearing, after prolonged recess, Doherty-Wirwicz said that the Commonwealth wanted to dismiss the case against Jacques because it has been severely hindered by the court’s rulings, issued on the first day of trial.
“My rulings are based on law so if they have hindered your case, don’t put that on me. I’ve applied the law as you presented these motions,” said Judge Matthew Nestor, suggesting that prosecution should have filed emergency appeals if they were not in agreement with the rulings.
Doherty-Wirwicz mentioned among others the rulings about jury voir; their affiliation with the groups in question; allowing the jurors to have opinions about the Black Lives Matter movement but not about Trump supporters and their affiliation. She also said that the victim and the prosecution have just found out about the violation filed against her.
“I have no role in that,” said Nestor. “I am, too, deeply troubled why it took a year for this process to be issued in that case.”
The nolle prosequi also for Jacques’ case mentions rulings admitting certain prior act evidence of the alleged victim and excluding similar evidence concerning acts of the defendants.
About a dozen people came to support Jacques in court.
“It’s been nerve-racking,” said Dyani Tisdol, of East Boston. “I am happy for him that he doesn’t have to worry about it anymore but there is really no justice.”
She said that Jacques lost a year of his life and the prosecution basically did not have a case against him.
“It shouldn’t be OK,” said Tisdol.
One woman waited outside since 9 a.m. Catherine Vitale of Dorchester, who described herself as a very active activist, said that she was a Trump supporter and was against wearing masks indoors. However, in this case she came out to support Jacques.
“Trump supporters are lying. You can clearly see in the video that he didn’t hit the woman,” said Vitale. “My entire career in activism is based on exposing the truth. This is a serious situation where somebody is being blamed for something they didn’t do and he is actually a really good person if you look into his background.”
