Arrest Made in MA for Stabbing Tragedy in STT

How tragic.

glad he was arrested

I'm trying to understand something about this arrest compared with other cases. It seems like there are many times where a suspect in a murder case here disappears off island and is never arrested, unless he comes back (e.g., the Malfetti case).

So why was this guy arrested off island when others are not? Was it just that much easier to find him? Was it because the evidence in this case was clearer than others? Was it because he's not a local with family connections on island? Or am I again trying to make sense out of an island thing I will never understand?

Was it just that much easier to find him? Was it because the evidence in this case was clearer than others?

Yes. All the evidence pointed to him as the only suspect.

The murder weapon was left at the scene, the Massachusetts authorities were notified, and they responded immediately. I think they found him at "home." The suspect also had an arrest record in MA, so they knew something about him.

He was in court on a probation violation when he was arrested for the STT murders.

He was in court on a probation violation when he was arrested for the STT murders.

LOL!I hadn't heard that part yet. Now that is a dumbass Masshole! What an idiot!

he is bi polar. i am just concerned that he is being tried here and not stateside

He committed the crime here. He will be extradited and tried here.

obviously, but the track record for criminals being put away for any length of time here is not very good

obviously, but the track record for criminals being put away for any length of time here is not very good

In 2014 a research study was published in the International Journal of Criminology and Sociology on the subject of US Territories Exclusion in Federal Sentencing Research (University of Tennessee-Chattanooga). You can certainly read the whole paper online but the findings don't support your assumption, viz:

" ... For instance, our OLS regression showed that in both territories and states, defendants who opted for trials received harsher sentences than defendants who pled guilty. However, the coefficients in the territories were considerably higher than the
coefficients in the states. This indicates that the effect of a “trial tax” (harsher punishment levied on defendants who chose to exercise their right to a trial) is stronger in the territories than in the states.

… our fourth discussion point, which addresses the finding that territorial defendants receive longer sentences than stateside defendants ..."

do you have a link? i can not seem to find what you found.

Enter, "US Territories Exclusion in Federal Sentencing Research" into your search engine (I use google) and it comes up, full PDF and abstract.

ok