Possible link between Expressway shootings and Dorchester murder

Holloman

NBC Boston reports police are investigating links between the Sunday double shooting on I-93, the murder of a woman later that night on Santuit Street and a screaming man found on the side of Rte. 140 in Franklin early this morning.

NBC Boston identified the screaming man as Lance Holloman and said he lived at 11 Santuit St., which is owned by Daphne Holloman. Police have not identified the Santuit Street murder victim.

The Suffolk County District Attorney's office, meanwhile, reports Holloman was returned to Dorchester for arraignment today on a gun charge for a May 31 incident, in which he allegedly directed another person to throw a loaded handgun from a vehicle while fleeing a traffic stop Judge James Coffey imposed $150,000 bail and revoked his open bail on a separate Dorchester case charging assault and battery and animal cruelty.

Hollomon also faces charges in New Hampshire for a February incident in which he and a woman allegedly used pepper spray and hot coffee as weapons against security guards who had caught them shoplifting at the Lord & Taylor at the Rockingham Mall at Rockingham Park.

Photo by Salem, NH Police.

Innocent, etc.

Neighborhoods: 

Topics: 

Free tagging: 

Comments

Sounds like a model human

By on

Sounds like a model human being. So glad he was free despite all the previous charges, almost missed an opportunity to perform a double murder.

Fleeing traffic stops,

By on

Fleeing traffic stops, attacking people, harming animals why are people like this always walking free?

Priorities

We have to make sure the ditches being dug around town are properly guarded so BPD is overworked and under-focused on their main jobs.

"Always"?

By on

I'm pretty sure our prison system is full of people who attacked others, fleed police, and/or harmed animals.

Then again, we don't put anyone away for life for any of the things you mentioned either so at some point they'll all be "walking free" again at some point down the road with the hope that their behavior was a one-off or has been corrected.

But when they do these things, you'll hear about it and since you don't personally care who this guy is...or any of the ones before that have committed similar acts, you'll keep hearing about new ones and just think it's someone that shouldn't have been "walking around free". But when he's away for the next, say, 10 years, you'll just complain about some other guy being allowed to "walk around free". You'll have a revolving door of concern just because you can't differentiate between different cases very easily but want to generalize that our system is screwed up in some way.

And maybe it is. You may have a point that our correction system does a bad job of helping people correct those past behaviors though....except, I doubt that was your point at all.

Poor guy

By on

Clearly the education system and social services failed him during his childhood. It's a shame we let him down and now he's turned to a life of crime. This is NOT OK.

As adults we make choices and

By on

As adults we make choices and he seems to want to make bad ones. That's on him. Plenty of people have shitty childhoods and choose to be good people.

So many calls for CJ reform,

By on

So many calls for CJ reform, this guy is the face of the reform that is needed. Stop releasing violent persons from prison with a freakin slap on the wrist.

Learn what bail is for

By on

Timeline:

February - Salem, NH - 2 counts of robbery
May - Dorchester - fleeing a traffic stop, throwing a loaded gun from the car
Some other time - Dorchester - A&B, animal cruelty

Those are the only charges against him. He was picked up for arraignment on the May incident and lost his bail on the A&B/animal cruelty. He's only a person of interest for the highway shootings and the murder currently.

It doesn't appear that any of the 3 of the above incidents has even been to trial yet. That means he's innocent until proven guilty and gets bail for those incidents. Now, you could say that by the 3rd time he's in court, the judge may not want to grant him bail (but did). But you'd be wrong, because he wasn't ever arraigned for the May incident (just was) and as a result of that arraignment, he lost his bail for the A&B incident which will keep him in jail until trial now. Which means he got bail in NH and then bail in MA...and then lost bail in MA.

So, he hasn't gotten any "slap on the wrist" OR the "book thrown at him" yet. All of his cases are in the early-going. What exactly did you want them to do differently (again, remembering that he's innocent until trial and bail is a thing we do)?