ILNews

Judge rejects former prosecutor spokesman's plea

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Hamilton County judge has rejected the plea agreement of the former public information officer for Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi.

Mario Massillamany was arrested in March in Hamilton County for drunk driving after he was stopped by police for speeding and driving in the wrong lane. Shortly after his arrest, Massillamany resigned from his position in the prosecutor’s office.

He is charged with two Class A misdemeanors: operating a vehicle while intoxicated endangering a person, and operating a vehicle with an alcohol concentration equivalent to 0.15 or more.

David Riggins of the Shelby County Prosecutor’s Office is the special prosecutor in the case due to Massillamany’s previous employment with the Hamilton County Prosecutor’s Office.

A jury trial was scheduled for Oct. 19, but Massillamany entered a guilty plea and agreement Thursday. Riggins said the agreement called for Massillamany to plead guilty to OWI endangering a person, do 150 hours of community service, have a 1-year sentence suspended to 20 days in jail, and have his license suspended for a year. His license is currently suspended.

Hamilton Superior Judge Gail Z. Bardach rejected the plea agreement and restored Massillamany’s not guilty plea. Riggins said the judge said in court she didn’t feel the license suspension was long enough.

The jury trial has been continued to Dec 7 but Riggins said they would continue to work on a plea agreement.

An attorney since 2004, he resigned his prosecutor’s office post immediately following his arrest and the Indiana Roll of Attorneys shows he’s now an attorney with Starr Austen & Miller in Logansport.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Bob Leonard killed two people named Jennifer and Dion Longworth. There were no Smiths involved.

  2. Being on this journey from the beginning has convinced me the justice system really doesn't care about the welfare of the child. The trial court judge knew the child belonged with the mother. The father having total disregard for the rules of the court. Not only did this cost the mother and child valuable time together but thousands in legal fees. When the child was with the father the mother paid her child support. When the child was finally with the right parent somehow the father got away without having to pay one penny of child support. He had to be in control. Since he withheld all information regarding the child's welfare he put her in harms way. Mother took the child to the doctor when she got sick and was totally embarrassed she knew nothing regarding the medical information especially the allergies, The mother texted the father (from the doctors office) and he replied call his attorney. To me this doesn't seem like a concerned father. Seeing the child upset when she had to go back to the father. What upset me the most was finding out the child sleeps with him. Sometimes in the nude. Maybe I don't understand all the rules of the law but I thought this was also morally wrong. A concerned parent would allow the child to finish the school year. Say goodbye to her friends. It saddens me to know the child will not have contact with the sisters, aunts, uncles and the 87 year old grandfather. He didn't allow it before. Only the mother is allowed to talk to the child. I don't think now will be any different. I hope the decision the courts made would've been the same one if this was a member of their family. Someday this child will end up in therapy if allowed to remain with the father.

  3. Ok attorney Straw ... if that be a good idea ... And I am not saying it is ... but if it were ... would that be ripe prior to her suffering an embarrassing remand from the Seventh? Seems more than a tad premature here soldier. One putting on the armor should not boast liked one taking it off.

  4. The judge thinks that she is so cute to deny jurisdiction, but without jurisdiction, she loses her immunity. She did not give me any due process hearing or any discovery, like the Middlesex case provided for that lawyer. Because she has refused to protect me and she has no immunity because she rejected jurisdiction, I am now suing her in her district.

  5. Sam Bradbury was never a resident of Lafayette he lived in rural Tippecanoe County, Thats an error.

ADVERTISEMENT