Chin Seeks Separate Trial

By Walter F. Roche Jr.

Citing the reluctant ruling by a federal judge on the same issue, the attorney for a former pharmacist charged with 13 counts of second degree murder, is strongly opposing a motion by prosecutors to merge the case with a co-defendant facing the same charges.
In a filing in Livingston County Circuit Court, James Buttrey, the attorney for Glenn Chin, wrote that the two cases must be tried separately because the conduct of the two defendants was not comparable.
The filing comes at the head of a busy week in the case triggered by a 2012 nationwide fungal meningitis outbreak that ultimately killed more than 100 patients.
Judge Michael Hatty will hear arguments on Thursday on the state Attorney General's motion to merge the two cases. A day later Hatty is set to hold a scheduling conference on the two murder cases.
In his motion Buttrey stated that the only common element in the two cases was the fact that they were both employed at the now defunct New England Compounding Center, the company blamed for the deadly outbreak.
While co-defendant Barry Cadden was president and part owner of NECC, Chin was a salaried employee supervising clean rooms where sterile drugs were prepared.
Buttrey cited the ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Richard G. Stearns who ruled with reluctance that the two cases had to be separated.
Chin and Cadden were acquitted in federal court on similar second degree murder charges. They were convicted, however, on racketeering and mail fraud charges.
In his motion Buttrey said it was inevitable that Cadden would put the blame on Chin, while Chin would blame Cadden.
Though some of the fillings in Cadden's case were filed under seal, his lawyers are also opposing the motion to try the two cases at once. Stearns concluded that it was "one of those rare cases in which antagonistic defenses, coupled with an imbalance of evidence require the severance of trials." "The acts of Mr. Cadden and Mr. Chin are not the same conduct, nor can they be," today's filing states, noting that evidence against Cadden would be inadmissable against Chin.
"Much of the evidence in this case, which is complex and voluminous, is admissable against only one defendant," the filing continues.
The state Attorney General's office, which is prosecuting the case, filed the motion to merge the two cases, citing "judicial economy" and arguing that much of the evidence and witnesses in the two cases are the same.
Buttrey also noted that the case against his client could be ready for trial in eight to 12 weeks, while Cadden's appears to be a year away.
Contact: wfrochejr999@gmail.com