SJC Affirms Murder Conviction of Steven M. Webster

D.A. O'Keefe: "A complex, cell phone technology intensive case"

Cape & Islands District Attorney Michael D. O’Keefe announced today that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the first degree murder conviction of Steven M. Webster for the 2012 killing of 28 year old Andrew Stanley.

On July 11, 2012 Barnstable Police responded to the report of shots being fired at 30 Otis Road in Hyannis. Officers observed and pursued three individuals fleeing the house and one of those individuals, Eddie Mack, Jr., was apprehended a short distance away in the possession of guns and money. Upon entry into the house at 30 Otis Road, Stanley was found bound, beaten and shot in the back. After an exhaustive investigation, law enforcement officers and crime lab personnel developed evidence that linked Steven M. Webster to the murder. Two other men plead guilty to charges related to this case.

In September of 2016 a Barnstable Superior Court jury found Steven M. Webster guilty of first degree murder, armed robbery and home invasion. Webster was sentenced to life without parole at MCI Cedar Junction by the trial Judge Gary M. Nickerson.

On appeal, Webster challenged the sufficiency of the evidence, the relevance of the tire impression evidence that was introduced, the admissibility of certain cell phone evidence and that the trial judge should have instructed on consciousness of guilt.

In a nineteen page decision the Supreme Court rejected all of Webster’s challenges finding that all the evidence was relevant and properly admitted thereby providing sufficient evidence to find the defendant guilty. The court also found that the trial judge’s instructions were appropriate.

The case was tried by First Assistant District Attorney Michael Trudeau and Assistant District Attorney Nicole Manoog.

The appeal was briefed and argued by Assistant District Attorney Elizabeth Sweeney.

District Attorney Michael O’Keefe said “I commend First Assistant District Attorney Michael Trudeau in presenting a complex cell phone technology intensive case”. welcomes thoughtful comments and the varied opinions of our readers. We are in no way obligated to post or allow comments that our moderators deem inappropriate. We reserve the right to delete comments we perceive as profane, vulgar, threatening, offensive, racially-biased, homophobic, slanderous, hateful or just plain rude. Commenters may not attack or insult other commenters, readers or writers. Commenters who persist in posting inappropriate comments will be banned from commenting on