NORTH ATTLEBORO - In the latest in a series of dueling statements regarding the criminal case against former North Attleboro Electric officials, a defense attorney is firing back at the Bristol County District Attorney's Office.

It is the third statement issued since last month when former Electric Commissioners Richard Shaw, Bruce Bliss and Bruce Gebhardt were acquitted of a criminal charge of misspending $4 million in bond money. Former General Manager David Sweetland was also found not guilty of the same charge this summer.

All of the statements address comments from Fall River District Court Judge Christopher Welch, who said the charges should never have been brought, and also found prosecutorial misconduct on behalf of North Attleboro police and the assistant district attorney who handled the case. Welch also accused Town Administrator Mark Fisher of withholding evidence.

Francis O'Boy, the attorney who handled the defence of the three commissioners said Thursday that District Attorney Sam Sutter's criticism of the judge's remarks in the verdict were flawed. He also referred to Fisher's recent statement, in which he said he did not withhold any evidence.

"The bottom line revolves around the town administrator now criticizing the district attorney's office for its performance at trial and the district attorney's office shifting blame to the judge," O'Boy said. "Knowing the players in this sorry state of affairs, I can only conclude that none of this foolishness would have occurred and no complaint would have been brought had Jack Coyle still been the chief of the North Attleboro Police Department." Sutter said in his statement Welch should have never have made his remarks and noted that in 2007, Welch determined there was enough evidence that he found there was probable cause for the case to be issued.

O'Boy said that Welch did not have access to key evidence that helped to prove the innocence of his clients - some of which included a videotape of North Attleboro Electric officials explaining to selectmen how the bond money was spent, which turned up midway through the trial.

"One of Sutter's key points revolves around the magistrate's decision to issue a complaint, but it is clear the magistrate had no knowledge that manager Sweetland and the commissioners actually appeared before the selectmen, explained their plans and answered questions from (then) Selectman Fisher," O'Boy said. "The meeting was taped, but the tape was never turned over to the defense. The district attorney's office has a continuing duty to produce any exculpatory evidence, but the tape of that appearance was never disclosed by the assistant district attorney then presenting the case to the magistrate hearing the application for the issuance of the complaints."