NO. SJC-10824 PURSUANT TO GLC 211, 5 3 FROM ... - Mass Cases

which, remarkably, contained a list of 21 witnesses
(R.A. "49-50").
The Pro Se defendant strenguously objected and
argued that the Commonwealth had manipulated the
process for disclosure and access to its witnesses
-
for nearly two years, while at the same time with-
holding the names and addresses of its witnesses
until the day of trial, in violation of mandatory
discovery. The Pro Se defendant further argued that
where the court was forcing him to trial the next
day (12/08/09), after having just received a list
of 21 witnesses from the Commonwealth that day
(12/07/09), would result in a "trial by ambush."
The trial judge (Muse, J.) stated that the dcfen-
dant's objection was "duly noted,"and he then
threatened the defendant that if he appeared late
for trial the next day, the court would revoke
defendantls bail, and have him taken back into
custody (R.A. "48").
All the while, the government maintained a
constant surveillance of the Pro 5e defendant's
movements and activities through GPS electronic
moitoring and tracking.
On December 8, 2009, the defendant filed
II
Defendant's Motion For Continuance Of Trial And
II
Waiver of Rule 36 Speedy Trial Right, citing
15