Cadden: Details "Vague and Insufficient"

By Walter F. Roche Jr.

One of the defendants facing 11 counts of second degree murder says prosecutors have only provided "vague and insufficent" details of the charges against him and he wants a Michigan judge to order them to provide details in a "bill of particulars."
The 12-page motion filed for Barry J. Cadden has been countered by a Michigan prosecutor's contention that Cadden already has extensive details on the murder charges and the motion should be denied.
The filings come in advance of a Thursday hearing before Livingston Circuit Court Judge Michael P. Hatty on Cadden's motion and a similar one filed in behalf of Glenn A. Chin, a co-defendant in the case stemming from the 2012 fungal meningitis outbreak.
Cadden and Chin were charged on Dec. 21, 2018 by the Michigan Attorney General's office after a lengthy investigation into the deaths of 11 Livingston County residents. They were all injected with a spinal steroid laced with fungus and produced at the company where Cadden and Chin were employed.
Calling the charges against him unprecedented, Cadden's motion states that despite state and federal investigations, no one has been able to determine how the methylprednisolone acetate produced at the long defunct New England Compounding Center became contaminated with a deadly fungus.
Stating that without a bill of particulars, the motion states Cadden is left to speculate on just what he is specificaly accused of doing that caused the deaths. The motion concedes that if he is convicted of the charges, Cadden is likely to spend his life in jail.
"The state has failed to elucidate the factual basis for it charges," the brief authored by Gregory Gleesom and Thomas Cranmer states.
"The least the state could do is provide Mr. Cadden with fair notice of what he allegedly did wrong," the motion states adding that the state has failed to prove malice or causation, two essential elements for a second degree murder charge.
In its response Michigan prosecutors said Cadden's claims are disingenuous and the details he seeks have already been made public in a series of appeals filed in state courts. All appeals were denied.
The filing asserts that under state law Cadden is not entitled to a bill of particulars and the court should not use its powers of discretion to order one.
Assistant Attorney General Erika L. Hamilton wrote that the since charges were not in so-called short form, a bill of particulars is not mandated. Instead, the brief states, the charges already detail who was injected with the contaminated steroids and when and where that occurred.
Citing testimony in a preliminary examination and subsequent testimony in appeals courts, the motion states Cadden is being disingenuous in claiming he does not know the nature of the charges against him.
Hamilton cites testimony from former NECC employees about the insanitary conditions at NECC and the roles played by both Cadden and Chin.
"A bill of particulars would be superfluous," the filing concludes.
Contact: wfrochejr999@gmail.com