Former Hopkinton Deputy Police Chief John “Jay” Porter (far right) stands with defense attorneys Maura Tansley and Leonardo Angiulo in court Monday. PHOTO/MARY ELLEN GAMBON

Former Hopkinton Deputy Police Chief John “Jay” Porter was sentenced late Monday afternoon in Middlesex Superior Court in Woburn to a minimum of seven years in prison for the three charges of child rape of which he was found guilty in a three-day trial that concluded June 6.

The first two sentences were related to an incident that occurred on Sept. 13, 2004, when the accuser, then 15, said Porter was taking her home after she experienced a mental health crisis during the school day at Hopkinton High School. Instead of going directly home, Porter drove to a nearby church parking lot, where the accuser said she was digitally penetrated and that Porter attempted to insert his penis into her twice.

For each of these convictions, Judge Michael Pineault sentenced Porter to seven years minimum to seven years and one day as the maximum penalty. These seven-year sentences are to be served concurrently in a state prison.

Porter received a three-year probation sentence on the third charge of rape. He was accused of having oral sex with the accuser in his car while he was driving her home after she babysat his two children at his home.

Upon his release, he will not be allowed to work with or volunteer for positions where he would be in contact with anyone under the age of 18. He also will be prohibited from drinking alcohol for the first year of his release and will have to submit to random screening tests.

The accuser gave a detailed victim impact statement as to how these assaults have affected her and will continue to affect her for the rest of her life. She was accompanied by a victim witness advocate, family and former HPD Sgt. Tim Brennan. Brennan was fired from the HPD for not revealing what he knew about the accuser’s accusations when he learned of them years before she decided to come forward. He urged her to go to the Middlesex County District Attorney’s Office and has supported her throughout the hearing and trial process.

Porter did not speak on his own behalf. He stared straight ahead during the entire proceeding.

Porter’s 3:30 p.m. sentencing hearing got a late start at about 3:50 p.m. on a blistering hot Monday afternoon. Porter, dressed in a navy blue suit and a light blue shirt, was escorted into the courtroom through a side door. His head was slightly bowed as he approached the table where his defense team sat. Once he sat down, his gaze remained steadily forward.

When the hearing began, Pineault, who presided over the trial as well as several of the pretrial hearings, described his role in determining Porter’s sentences. His objective was to weigh the accuser’s age and mental state, the trauma inflicted upon her and its ongoing effects against Porter’s knowledge of the law, his position of authority, his age and the accuser’s age at the time of the incidents.

Pineault added that he had received a file under seal from the defense team before the sentence imposition hearing. He also received a copy of the victim impact statement in advance of her reading it in court.

Prosecutor pushes for stiffer sentence

Prosecutor Maren Schrader noted that because of the nature of the crimes, Porter would have been charged with aggravated rape, but that statute did not exist until 2008. Her sentence recommendation was for 12-15 years for each of the first two charges, to be served concurrently. This would be followed by three years for the third charge with a set of conditions that Porter would have to meet.

Schrader called the crimes “most egregious,” adding that he used his position of power to take advantage of the victim.

“This wasn’t somebody who was unfamiliar with the law,” she said.

Schrader noted that the accuser shared in her testimony the incidents in detail as well as her mental state as a 15-year-old at that time, stressing that she “was looking for constant validation.”

Added Schrader: “Unfortunately, it turned into a sexual relationship that she did not realize was wrong.”

Victim gives statement

“I just wanted to speak today,” said the woman as she read her victim impact statement. “I’m having a very hard time with this because I struggle with it every single day.”

She described how “Porter’s choices inflicted deep psychological wounds” that will impact her for the rest of her life. They included “emotional and financial hardships.”

The woman also said that modern society has a deeper comprehension now of the impact that sexual assault has on a survivor compared with the time when she was raped two decades ago, saying that sexual assault “steals potential peace and stability.”

She said the sentence “can and should align with the current sensibility” of how child rape is viewed today.

Her trust in police was shattered, she revealed, not only because of her relationship with Porter but also because of the release of the improperly redacted report that mentioned her first name. She claimed that through the release of this report, she was “being outed by [HPD] Chief [Joseph] Bennett.”

She added: “I am choosing not to let this define me as a person, as a mother and as a nurse.”

Defense responds

Defense attorney Leonardo Angiulo stressed the difficulty that this case presents in regard to sentencing. He suggested that the judge be “guided by the principles of accountability and objectivity that are the underpinnings of our justice system.”

He recommended sentencing guidelines of “five years to a decade with three years of probation with conditions.”

The documents that were filed under seal contained “14 or 15 letters of support” for Porter, added Angiulo.

Angiulo also noted Porter’s character and the help he gave to others during his 30-year tenure with the HPD. He stressed that Porter “selflessly committed himself to public service.”

“Is it possible to be a good person and face serious consequences?” he asked rhetorically.

When the judge gave Porter an opportunity to address the court, he declined.

At that point, court adjourned for about 10 minutes while the judge reflected on the new information presented.

Brennan sat next to the accuser and spoke with her during the break. There were a few rows of supporters sitting behind her.

On the opposite side of the courtroom, Porter’s family and friends waited anxiously for the judge’s decision.

Judge renders sentences

During the break, the judge said he read the letters in support of Porter and reviewed the accuser’s statement. Pineault said he wanted the sentences to be “proportionate to the harm and continuing harm” to the victim. He also considered whether Porter would be a “threat to the public” upon his release and his ability to be rehabilitated. His sentence, he said, would be “no more severe than necessary.”

Other factors Pineault weighed were the age of both parties, the age disparity between them, Porter’s “position of trust and authority,” and the state of mind of the accuser when she “was in an extremely vulnerable position” as a teen with mental health and emotional challenges.

In addition to the sentences described above, Porter was ordered to register with the state as a sex offender. If Porter fails to do this, he may be penalized with fines and the revocation of his parole. He will undergo sexual offender and mental health evaluations and must “comply with any recommended treatment,” according to the judge.

Additionally, upon his release from prison, Porter will be forbidden from using alcohol for one year and must submit to random testing. He also must have “no contact of any kind whatsoever with the victim, her children, the witnesses, or the victim’s home or place of work, wherever that may be.”

Porter must never again work or volunteer in a position where he would be involved with anyone under the age of 18. He must pay court-related fees for victim witness assistance and DNA testing.

Porter has the right to appeal his sentence within 30 days.

This may not be the end of this saga, which has deeply divided the town and shaken some people’s faith in its leaders. The victim has the right to pursue a civil suit against Porter. The sentences in that case, should it occur, may be stiffer if Porter is determined to be a “sexually dangerous person.”