But didn’t Chesa refuse to file charges against the abuser of Dr. Michelle, as the recall mailer and ads say?


That story is wildly inaccurate. As this 48 Hills article explains, “In this case, court records show, Michelle (I am withholding her last name) and her husband were going through a contentious breakup. According to law-enforcement sources, the husband was arrested after an incident at their home, but never charged; the charges weren’t “dismissed.” A senior prosecutor, with 23 years of experience handling DV cases, determined that there wasn’t enough evidence to pursue the case.

Then Dr. Michell asked for a restraining order against her husband, banning him from coming to their apartment. But it was complex, because his 98-year-old mother owned the building where they lived, and occupied the unit below the one occupied by his soon-to-be ex-wife. He opposed the order, and after considerable legal wrangling, both sides stipulated to an order; she agreed to move out soon, and he agreed not to come to the apartment while she was there. But the order, which I got from Superior Court, clearly states that he had the right to come and visit his mother on certain days and times, when it was likely Michelle would be at work.

At one point, his mother was ill and in a hospital, and he came to the house on a date and time that the order allowed, to get her a blanket and pick up her mail. He also dropped off an envelope with money he owed Michelle in the mailbox of the unit where she was living. Michelle was home, and alleged that he had violated the order.

The case went to a senior prosecutor, a woman who is known statewide as an expert on prosecuting DV cases. She didn’t see how she could take this to a jury. When Michelle complained, Boudin called in an outside expert, another career DV prosecutor from another jurisdiction, to review the case. That outside review concluded that the evidence failed to suggest that the husband willfully violated the order.”