Jared Remy got away with murder - until he was arrested for one

Using court and police records, along with interviews with prosecutors, police and victims, the Globe profiles the former turnpike toll taker, Red Sox security guard and violent man, who mostly managed to evade any punishment for a series of crimes dating back to his high-school years.



Free tagging: 


    they kept avoiding juries in favor of judges

    if a case is a true slam dunk, most juries do the right thing and take their duty seriously. It would seem that it would be more congenial for the defendant to be in front of a jury, any one of whom can hang the proceeding. Why would someone forego an 8 or 12 to one odds in favor of a judge unless you knew that
    1. you were toast in front of a legit jury and/or
    2. the judge could be gotten to.

    This extends far beyond the Remy's. This screams for federal involvement.

    juries do not sentence

    By on

    all of his cases were plea bargains or other resolutions that did not go to trial, so no jury anyways. It's how most cases are resolved.

    Crazy to me...

    By on

    That Remy's name carried that much weight. A light hitting 2b who had a few good years in boston and at the time of most of these arrests, was just the announcer for the Sox. Its only really in the last 10 years that NESN has created this "rem-dawg" persona.

    Despite being a violent jerk

    By on

    he certainly had a lot of attractive women. Or was it because he was a violent jerk?

    That first picture of him is worth the click. He must have been injecting loads of 'roids.

    Remys are bullies....

    By on

    Poor Arianna stuck in DCF's foster care system while the grandparents battle for custody. I don't understand why one set of grandparents can't have temporary custody while the court is settling the issue. As if losing your mother at the hands of your father isn't enough trauma for a young child.

    I'd think

    By on

    There are issues with the other set of grandparents prohibiting this. In the article, it said Ms. Martell was only close to her cousin and that she had been on her own since she was 17-18. Who knows what her parents are like.

    Very well research and written article.

    By on

    I'm hoping Jerry and Phoebe Remy (parents), Peter Bella (Attorney) and the Red Sox (employer of Jared) all get held responsible for enabling and supporting his known behavior. This should be a textbook case and required reading for all prosecutors and judges on what not to do with a rich spoiled kid.

    Jerry Remy should do the right thing and resign

    By on

    Jerry Remy may or may not be responsible for 3 very screwed up kids, and enabling his son Jared to continue to commit his violent crimes. But I cant listen to his stupid jokes and giggling on NESN without thinking of this murder and the events leading up to it. Jerry just go away.

    Did you read the Globe article anon 1:54pm?

    By on

    Jerry and his wife failed miserably as parents all the way. Jared was a violent a-hole when he was a TEENAGER as the article details quite well. His parents repeatedly bailed him out and hired the best lawyers for him, and worked to get victims to not take action against their son. And now Jerry and his wife still think they are qualified to be guardians of the child whose mother was murdered . They're fighting for that in court right now.

    So Jared commited his murder as an ADULT, but the parental failures go way back before he was an adult. And I too don't want to hear Jerry's giggling any more. He should quit.

    As the anon noted

    By on

    Sure, the Remy's might have been horrible parents, but that just means they shouldn't have custody of the kid. If being a crappy parent was grounds for never being allowed to work, we'd have a ton of jobs for the unemployed.

    The parents committed no crime.

    Have to agree.

    He's certainly been stained by this. Also, at the risk of engaging in slanderous speculation I have to wonder whether the family may have bought someone's silence at one time or another in all this (legally or illegally, you know those "out of court settlements" favored by corporations and governments). Also, was Jerry Remy always the good guy he seems to be now? What the hell happened to his kids?

    This is epic whoyaknow.

    By on


    To top this whoyaknow, you need to be like a Kennedy or something and every whoyaknow favor the system can possibly contrive was played like God's own Wurlitzer doing Take Me Out To The Ball Game to make sure that every toxic criminal thing this freak ever did was swept under the very finest of rugs until it was time for the coroner.

    What the article doesn't talk about......

    Are the thousands of poor people who are also free that have records far worse than Remy's record. How can you throw someone in jail for committing 20 crimes like Remy, when there are people who have committed 50 to 100 crimes that are free? Defense attorneys know this and force the judges hand in favor of their client when the record isn't too serious (in the grand scheme of things, Remy's criminal history isn't that uncommon, and most people with similar records don't end up murdering others). domestics are especially bad because the victim more often than not does not testify.

    What year do you live in?

    By on

    Somebody should send you a time machine - so you can go live in 1976, where you would be more comfortable.

    Pete, are you disputing that

    By on

    Pete, are you disputing that people who have more resources to hire the best lawyers get "better" outcomes in court than indigent people who are assigned public defenders?

    No, but....

    This article put more of the focus on his criminal record and how the CJ system failed in this instance as some sort of special circumstance. I think that if Remy had no financial backing, the same things would have probably happened.

    Hmmmm...my inference from

    By on

    Hmmmm...my inference from reading this blog is that you are a legal professional so I would tend to defer to your experience but from having grown up in a high crime area and having some brushes with the law myself I can tell you that 6 CWOF's is atypical. Clearly he had a "good" lawyer and lots of connections, I have to believe that these mattered and that "Joe Blow" would have had a different experience.

    Pete Nice

    By on

    I respectfully disagree. The article is pretty plain in its description of the special treatment this Weston boy got.

    Judges in MA may or may not be lenient than average

    but surely you're not making the case that being rich, famous (or fame-adjacent), and represented by expensive lawyers isn't a huge advantage when facing our legal system, are you? I believe this is obviously true whether you live in a red or a blue state. As the article notes, the typical MA defendant never sees more than two CWOFs: young Remy skated with six of them.

    Go sit in a Suffolk County Courthouse someday.

    at 9am and watch and listen to all the criminals that go in and out of the system with public defenders. Forget about the CWOFs, see all the cases that simply get dismissed for whatever reason.

    And I should say that when I say that this is common in Massachusetts, I only say that because this is where I see it. It could also happen in other places as well. Being "liberal" probably doesn't have much to do with anything. Judges have to follow the rule of law no matter what state you are in. Look what happened in Florida with Zimmerman. That was really a "liberal" decision if you had to label it.

    And I'm not sure Remy benefited from great lawyers in these cases. If a victim doesn't show up, the case is going to get dismissed no matter who your attorney is. These didn't seem like serious trials where victims were grilled on the stand at the mercy of some great lawyer work. He had 5 girlfriends accuse him of crimes, but how many filed emergency restraining orders (24 hours) or showed up in court the next day to file a permanent one? These are key issues for me in determing whether or not Remy got some sort of special treatment. The article does show how people lied for him (the girl from the Franklin party), and this is also a common theme among criminals who commit serious crimes. If a witness lies, the criminal will not go to jail.

    The article mentions Remy getting another CWOF within 2 weeks after one expired from probation from a previous assault, but not commentary as to what judge did or why he did so? Were there other circumstances? The globe claims that 2 CWOFs is uncommon, but is it uncommon for murders? There have been several hundred murders in Boston over the past 15 years (probably a few hundred caught and tried) It would be interesting to show everyone what kind of records these people had, and why they got off of all of their crimes, only to have one last chance to kill someone.

    I'm not going to sit here and tell everyone that Remy shouldn't have been locked up numerous times for numerous crimes, or that everyone else would have gotten the same treatment as Remy. But I am saying that there are plenty of people with much more serious criminal records that have been given many more chances than Remy has, and these criminals did not all have great lawyers backing them.

    I also think that as sad as this story is, there are many more sad stories that go on in Boston every month that won't get mention by Globe writers.

    Unless you're disputing the facts of the Globe article,

    you're still missing the point. The fact that young Remy got three times the number of CWOFs as the typical MA offender suggests that he was treated with special leniency by the standards of the MA courts, regardless of how lenient those courts are relative to other states.

    So it's not an example of how lenient our courts are, but an example of how someone who is connected, wealthy and expensively-represented gets treated with more leniency than those that aren't, and that is true of every state in the US, not something distinctive to our courts.

    I guess I am disputing some of the facts.

    The globe doesn't really explain where they got the "3X the number of CWOFs" as a "typical" offender. What is a typical offender? Were the crimes similar (violent vs. non violent)? Were there victims in each case that didn't come forward? Do they include dismissals, null processed cases, probation sentences, time served sentences, or not guilty findings? Did they mention all the times where ADA's were willing to settle on dispositions but not sentences?

    The globe states that Remy violated a restraining order, but is unclear about how the victim and Remy's lawyer actually wanted Remy to get off of the charge of violating a restraining order. This is not uncommon where a restraining order is in place, but the victim and defendant are in constant contact with each other for whatever reason and another family member reports the violation. When the police then arrest the defendant, what happens in court is exactly what happened in this case, sometimes without the judges reluctance not to do anything.

    I don't think the word "leniency" is really the best word to describe what happens here. When victims don't show up or refuse to testify, the judges have no choice. When there is an agreement between the DA and defendant as to some ownership of guilt (and possibly remorse which the article does not mention but usually does happen in cases like Remy's), the judges are forced a hand that they usually go by unless there is some egregious aberration in how the law is being applied.

    Did Remy get treated differently because he had great lawyers? Because he was "connected"? Because he was white? I don't think the globe did a great job selling these points in my opinion.

    I guess as someone who is more familiar with the court system and how offenders are tried, defended and sentenced, I didn't see anything groundbreaking from this article. It left me wanting more answers for questions they seemed to leave unanswered (why and how did the court allow someone with 2 weeks left on a suspended sentence/CWOF to get another CWOF?), etc, etc.


    Those guys go to jail, Pete. Maybe not forever, but they fucking do some time.

    Oh they will do time Dan,

    but like I said, I'm talking about the criminal that has 100 on the record, not 20 like Remy. I don't think it is uncommon for someone like Remy to not see jail time.

    Just because there are other criminals worse than Jared Remy

    By on

    Just because there are other criminals out there who're just as bad and/or worse than Jared Remy doesn't justify his parents' abetting the system that has repeatedly just chewed Jared up, swallowed him, and then let him go. It's disgusting that the parents encouraged lawyers/judges, etc., to let him off the hook constantly.

    The parents are another issue altogether.

    A lot of the article does focus on them, and although I can't sit here and say they were great parents who did all they could for their kids, It can be very tough to have family members suffer from mental illnesses that the Remy's clearly had. I don't think I have the right to judge their decisions as parents.

    Decision as Parents?

    By on

    A 35 year old, jobless, father of two and Jerry thought his son was ok because he didnt hurt anyone in a few years? Whatever happened to "tough love?" There is, however, the possibility that even Jerry and Phoebe continued to enable Jared becasue they were also in fear of the monster they created. As far as mental illness goes, Jared probably added to Jerry's depression issues over the years. When Jerry did get healthy he should have known that Jared was in a crisis stage. Jerry knew the mental health system by then and had the resources to have Jared put in treatment by court order (Section12/Pink Slip). A 35 year old man that has two children should be working. Even if he hit the lottery, a normal 35 year old man would volunteer his time or do something to better the world.

    How can Bella sleep at night?

    By on

    How can Bella sleep at night? Everyone is entitled to a vigorous defense, but to repeatedly serve as attorney for this goon, after years of hearing the details of his violence towards others for years, is beyond belief. You'd think at some point he'd say 'get yourself a new lawyer'.


    By on

    He can sleep because everyone is entitled to a vigorous defense...and he provided his client a vigorous defense.

    A very lawyerly response...

    By on

    A very lawyerly response....but how can you 'vigorously' defend a person who keeps on savagely beating people over the course of years? I'm sure the handsome retainers from the Remy's had nothing to do with his repeated attempts to keep this monster out of jail and back on his parent's couch. Doesn't cut much ice with thinking and feeling human beings though. Doing the 'correct' thing is very different from doing the right thing. And most would say the right thing would being saying after some point, 'You are entitled to a defense, but you are not entitled to my defending you anymore'.


    By on

    There are a lot of thinking and feeling human beings who are defense attorneys or who have needed a defense attorney, and I'm guessing they'd all disagree with you.


    By on

    The Globe printed a chilling account of a family where sociopathy runs rampant. In his statement, the Remy family claims to 'love' the child whose mother
    was (allegedly) killed by their son, while they had a top-notch attorney on retainer to keep the brute out of jail. Her blood is on their hands, as well as those
    of Jared Remy.
    Resign, Jerry Remy, you make Aaron Hernandez look like a choirboy; at least he does not pretend to be anything other than who he is. Family is creepy
    and I don't know how anyone can look at Remy;s face again.

    C'mon now...Hernandez

    By on

    C'mon now...Hernandez (allegedly) killed multiple people and has a long history of violence. Even if Remy did enable this thug he did not personally hurt anyone so declaring him worse than Hernandez is over the top. Jerry Remy will deal with the repercussions of his enablement by losing his job and his place in society but Jared Remy is the one who is on par with Hernandez...maybe they'll be cellmates someday...preferably on death row.

    Well, the OBF column on BDC today

    certainly twists the knife in Remy's back after yesterday's plunging. If John Henry had a pair, he'd just fire Remy, because at this point it's a little embarrassing using your own paper to destroy the man, then letting him dangle until either Henry or Remy make a decision.

    So should the Globe and

    By on

    So should the Globe and Boston.com not report on the story? Would you feel differently if the Herald or Sports Illustrated did the story?

    Also, I understand that you are using a metaphor but referencing twisting or plunging a knife is in poor taste with relation to this story, in my opinion.

    The question is not whether the Globe should report the

    story, but about the interesting conflicts arising out of the fact that Henry owns the newspaper, the team, and the TV station. My first thought on reading the story, after absorbing its fundamental horrors, was, "Interesting that Henry would publish a story that hurts his other interests. That's either a noble thing, or to a more cynical mind, a ploy that he thinks will improve the fortunes of all of these businesses."

    I was not using that metaphor in any way

    as a snarky aside to the tragic incident. In fact, the thought hadn't occurred to me until I read your post. Apologies if I unintentionally offended anyone. And while I thought the piece was excellent, Henry, in my opinion, could have had the balls to fire Remy first, that's the only point I'm trying to make.