BEVERLY — For most people, their last image of James Carver is from a black-and-white photo from 1989, the year he was convicted of setting a fire that killed 15 people at the Elliott Chambers rooming house in Beverly.
For four days last week, a different version of Carver appeared in a courthouse in Lawrence — in a wheelchair, in handcuffs, wearing court-provided headphones so he could hear the legal arguments over his latest effort to gain freedom.
Carver, now 60, is asking for a new trial, the fifth time he has done so since he was sentenced to life in prison for the notorious Elliott Chambers fire on July 4, 1984. His attorneys say there is new evidence in the case due to advances in fire science and eyewitness identification, and that a new jury should hear that evidence.
“It is overwhelmingly clear that justice was not done and that Mr. Carver is entitled to a new trial,” attorney Lisa Kavanaugh told Judge Jeffrey Karp on Friday in Lawrence Superior Court.
The fire at Elliott Chambers, now the location of a CVS on Rantoul Street, was one of the deadliest in the state’s history. A jury found that Carver, who lived in Danvers at the time, set the fire in a fit of jealousy over his former fiancée dating a man who lived there. Fifteen people died, including a 9-year-old boy who was visiting his grandmother, the rooming house manager.
Carver’s previous requests for a new trial have been denied four times. But the legal team representing him now, which includes attorneys from the state public defender’s Innocence Program and the Boston College Innocence Program, says that advances in fire science and eyewitness identification principles provides new evidence that merits a new trial.
Craig Beyler, a fire science expert for the defense, said investigators at the time of the 1984 fire relied on “myths and misconceptions” about fire science that were common at the time. The investigators concluded the fire was started by someone using an accelerant, such as gasoline, to ignite a stack of newspapers on the floor of an alcove in the building.
Investigators relied on the “myth” that fire does not burn down, and that the fire actually started in the overhead area of the alcove and could have been caused by an electrical problem, Beyler said.
Carver’s attorneys also question the reliability of eyewitness accounts that either placed Carver at the scene of the fire or said he later confessed to setting it. They said a “vast body of scientific research” has emerged since Carver’s trial that bears on the reliability of a witness’ identification of Carver.
Nancy Franklin, a psychologist who specializes in cognition and memory, including eyewitness identification, testified that the witness who identified Carver at the scene had limited time to observe him, in unreliable lighting conditions at night. The witness was a taxi driver who made his observations while stopped at a traffic light at the corner of Rantoul and Elliott streets.
There are also questions about how “police feedback” influenced the witness, saying his descriptions of Carver became more detailed as the police continued to develop more evidence against Carver, Franklin said.
Carver’s lawyers have also submitted evidence suggesting that Carver did not get proper representation from his original defense lawyer due to the lawyer’s “personal and criminal misconduct,” including substance abuse.
In a court filing opposing Carver’s request for a new trial, prosecutors in the Essex County District Attorney’s office said the new evidence is not strong enough to “cast real doubt” on the justice of Carver’s convictions. They said the original investigators did consider whether the fire could have started overhead and “dropped down” to the floor of the alcove, but dismissed that possibility.
As for the new science that might be used to challenge a witness’ identification of Carver being at the scene of the fire, prosecutors said that same science could also be used to revisit testimony from other witnesses who did not identify Carver as the suspect they saw that night.
The new science “constitutes a double-edged sword, and would be as likely to harm the defendant’s case as to help it,” prosecutors said.
They also said there was plenty of evidence beyond the fire investigation and eyewitness accounts that led to Carver’s conviction — including threats and confessions made by Carver himself.
“We had a lot of evidence from the defendant’s own mouth,” Assistant District Attorney Catherine Semel told Karp at Friday’s hearing.
Another hearing in the motion for a new trial is scheduled for May 29. Karp’s ruling is not expected for months and will be subject to appeal.
Karp called the matter a “significant case,” saying, “The defense is asking me to vacate a 40-year-old conviction in a 40-year-old case where 15 people died.”
Carver, who is serving time at Old Colony Correctional Center in Bridgewater, was transported to the courthouse in Lawrence each day for the hearing. His daughter attended the hearing on Thursday, sitting in the front row. She declined to comment for this story.
Staff Writer Paul Leighton can be reached at 978-338-2535, by email at [email protected], or on Twitter at @heardinbeverly.
By Paul Leighton | Staff Writer
Source link
