THE cross motion for contempt filed by attorney Brien Sers Nicholas against Chief Prosecutor John Bradley and Assistant Attorney General Samantha Vickery will be heard by Superior Court Associate Judge Joseph N. Camacho on June 9 at 10 a.m.
John Bradley
In an order issued on May 28, Judge Camacho directed the parties to brief the court on the following issues:
1) What department/office has the authority to file criminal contempt charges?
2) If the allegation of criminal contempt is brought against attorneys of the Office of the Attorney General, is a special prosecutor needed to evaluate and investigate the criminal allegations?
3) Who has the authority to appoint a special prosecutor?
4) [What] other information and/or legal authority [is there] to assist the court in addressing the criminal allegations raised by the defendant?
Judge Camacho recently found probable cause to charge 17-year-old Kenneth Thomas Blas Kaipat with three counts of sexual assault in the first degree, two counts of sexual assault in the second degree, aggravated assault and battery, assault with a dangerous weapon, strangulation, and burglary.
Kaipat, who is being tried as an adult, is currently out of custody after posting bail and is under the custody of his parents as third-party custodians.
Kaipat is represented by Nicholas who has accused Bradley of “talking” to the media “not once but twice” about the case while it was still a juvenile matter.
Nicholas also accused Bradley of condoning and permitting Vickery in making arguments about Judge Camacho’s supposed bias against sexual assault victims.
Nicholas said the prosecution is “accusing the court of this Commonwealth of being unfair and corrupt.”
“The government cannot be made to escape from the foregoing scandalous accusations,” he added.
At a hearing on May 21, the judge informed Vickery that she would be given an opportunity to file a written response to Nicholas’ allegations.
But in his written order on May 28, the judge said: “Upon further consideration, and [out of] an abundance of caution, and considering possible or potential criminal charges, the court is concerned that ordering a written response from the Chief Prosecutor and/or AAG Vickery may result in self-incriminating statements.”
To be clear, the judge added, “the Office of the Attorney General’s Criminal Division may file a written response, [but] the court’s concern is that Mr. Bradley and Ms. Vickery are not put in a position that they are compelled to file a written response that goes against their constitutional rights against self-incrimination.”
Judge Camacho earlier denied the Office of the AG’s motion to recuse himself from hearing the case.
According to the prosecution, “The defendant’s mother has a close personal relationship to Judge Camacho’s brother.”
But the judge said it “does not fall within the third degree of familial relationship that requires a judge to recuse from a case.”
He added, “I do not know the defendant’s mother.”
