A Maine judge has ruled that it was valid for police to charge a Hancock County man with rape 20 years before they knew what his name was.
From 2002 to 2022, police only knew the suspect — now identified as Jason Follette of Gouldsboro — by his DNA profile. Eventually, advances in DNA testing and identification led to Follette being identified and then charged in 2022, even though the crimes had been committed in 1996.
Prosecutors originally filed the charges in 2002 with the anonymous DNA profile given the six-year statute of limitations for filing rape charges.
Follette’s defense attorney, Don Brown of Brewer, has filed numerous motions in the case challenging the validity of evidence. Last year, he successfully argued that police did not have the authority to search a metal trash bin in Gouldsboro where they obtained samples of Follette’s DNA.
Police later were granted court approval to compel Follette to provide a new DNA sample, which has enabled them to continue with their case.
Brown also contested the validity of the 2002 arrest warrant and, given the time that has elapsed since then, asserted that his client’s right to a speedy trial has been violated.
Justice Harold Stewart, the presiding judge in the case, has ruled that charges were properly filed within the statute of limitations, even if it took police another 20 years to match the specified DNA profile with Follette.
He also ruled that delays in trying the case since Follette was publicly identified and charged in November 2022 have not been caused by the prosecution or by the court, and that Follette’s right to a speedy trial therefore has not been violated.
“The delay occurring since November 2022 has been almost entirely due to the need to litigate the several motions filed by Follette,” Stewart wrote.
Bob Granger is the third Hancock County District Attorney to have overseen prosecution of the case. Michael Povich was the DA when the anonymous DNA profile was identified in the original charges in 2002, and Matt Foster held the role when Follette was specifically charged in 2022.
Granger said Stewart’s ruling to allow the use of only a specific DNA profile to file criminal charges within a statute of limitations is unprecedented in Maine.
“A number of courts in other states have considered the issue but this is the first test in Maine,” Granger said.
Brown did not immediately respond to a message left at his office on Wednesday.
In court documents, Brown also argued that there have been discovery violations by prosecutors and that the primary investigator in the case, Detective Dana Austin of Maine State Police, has not been truthful, but Stewart rejected those arguments in his 39-page order.
Stewart wrote in the order that he may have erred in earlier rulings in the case, opening the door for Brown to file further challenges.
The judge said he “may have been wrong” in finding last summer that there was probable cause in ordering Follette to provide a new DNA sample to police, but he added that issue would have to be addressed in a separate appeal if Brown chose to pursue it.
Stewart also said he may have been incorrect when he determined previously that a PowerPoint presentation that Austin showed to prosecutors and investigators in 2022 was a “work product” of the prosecution — which would make it exempt from evidentiary discovery rules — rather than a document generated by police, which would be subject to discovery requirements.
But he said that prior determination did not harm the defense because the PowerPoint presentation did not contain exculpatory evidence for Follette or demonstrate that Austin has been untruthful.
