COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
MIDDLESEX, SS.

____________COURT
DOCKET NO. ___________
COMMONWEALTH
v.

________________________________________________________________________
COMMONWEALTH’S NOTICE
REGARDING A POTENTIAL COMMONWEALTH WITNESS
________________________________________________________________________
Now comes the Commonwealth and, in light of Mass. R. Crim. P. 14 and case law,
hereby notifies the defendant that one of the potential witnesses in this case, Melrose Police
Officer Kevin Stanton, was subject to an internal affairs investigation by the Melrose Police
Department in 2005-2006.
The Commonwealth was informed by the Melrose Police Department that this internal
affairs investigation involved allegations that Officer Stanton, in his capacity as Evidence
Officer, improperly destroyed narcotics evidence held by the Melrose Police Department, that he
ingested narcotics evidence held by the Melrose Police Department, and that he was dishonest
during the course of the internal affairs investigation. In 2006, a criminal case referral was made
to the Middlesex District Attorney’s Office by the City of Melrose. Due to an insufficient
quantity of admissible evidence, no criminal charges issued. The Commonwealth was advised
by the Melrose Police Department that Office Stanton was put on paid administrative leave on
January 26, 2006, terminated from the police force on October 4, 2006, and then reinstated as a
police officer on November 16, 2009.
The Commonwealth is in possession of documents relating to the above-referenced
conduct of Officer Stanton. Given that Officer Stanton’s duties are limited to answering a

 recorded business-line at the Melrose Police Department, and it is in this capacity that he is a
potential witness in this matter, the Commonwealth objects to the disclosure of records relating
to the internal affairs investigation or Officer Stanton’s underlying conduct and objects to
impeachment of Officer Stanton by the above referenced conduct at the trial on this matter. As
grounds therefor, the Commonwealth asserts that the documents are not relevant or material and,
further notes, “[i]n general, specific instances of misconduct showing the witness to be untruthful
are not admissible for the purpose of attacking or supporting the witness’s credibility.” Mass.
Guide Evid. § 608(b).

Respectfully Submitted
For the Commonwealth
MARIAN T. RYAN
DISTRICT ATTORNEY

________________________________
Assistant District Attorney

Date: