COMPLAINT TO THE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT
Complainant:
John F. Sendelbach
Shelburne Falls, MA 01370
Date: March 17, 2026
Submitted to:
Commission on Judicial Conduct
John Adams Courthouse
1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500
Boston, MA 02108
Subject: Complaint of Judicial Misconduct Against Hon. Gregory Teran, Hon. Laurie MacLeod, and Hon. William Powers, Franklin County District Court — Pattern of Failure to Consider Prior Adjudicated Evidence, Enabling Escalation to Physical Assault
I. Executive Summary
This complaint alleges a pattern of judicial misconduct by Hon. Gregory Teran, Hon. Laurie MacLeod, and Hon. William Powers in four separate harassment prevention order (HPO) proceedings under M.G.L. c. 258E involving respondent Katherine Hennessey. The first two judges (Teran and MacLeod) denied protection on March 17 and March 20, 2025 on substantially similar facts, without reference to or consideration of prior judicial findings denying the HPO (March 2023, Judge William F. Mazanec, III). This repeated denial enabled Hennessey's ongoing conduct, culminating in a physical assault on November 30, 2025 for which probable cause has been found (Shelburne Police Report 25SHL-114-OF, December 11, 2025).
Judge Powers, presiding over the March 11–12, 2026 hearing, ratified and authenticated Hennessey's entire pattern by failing to read the revised affidavit submitted on March 11. This filing explicitly listed the April 7, 2026 criminal arraignment of the Respondent (Dockets 2641CR000158 and 2641CR000159). Despite this notice, the Court instructed the petitioner not to rehash prior proceedings, suppressed disclosure of an active cardiac emergency, editorialized testimony from the bench (“that doesn’t help your case”), and denied the petition despite the documented pattern and pending criminal charges for assault.
The conduct constitutes apparent partiality, abuse of discretion, failure to review submitted materials, and conduct that gives the appearance of bias under the Massachusetts Code of Judicial Conduct (Canon 2, Rule 2.5: competence and diligence; Rule 2.2: impartiality and fairness; Canon 1, Rule 1.2: integrity and independence).
II. Factual Chronology
March 2023 — Initial Judicial Finding of No Probable Cause
Presiding Judge: Hon. William F. Mazanec, III
Matter: Hennessey v. Sendelbach (HPO Petition)
Outcome: denied. The Court found no probable cause to support Hennessey’s allegations. This established the first "Not Credible" marker in the judicial record regarding the Respondent’s use of the court to manufacture harassment claims.
March 17, 2025 — Denial by Judge Gregory Teran
Dockets: 2541RO0000075 (vs. Hennessey), 2541RO0000076 (vs. Alouette Batteau), 2541RO0000077 (vs. Henry Batteau)
Three simultaneous HPO petitions filed based on ongoing pattern.
Ex parte hearings held; petitioner only participated.
Outcome: All three denied. Docket reason: “Plaintiff only participated in hearing.” No reference to March 2023 finding.
March 20, 2025 — Denial by Judge Laurie MacLeod
Docket: Separate from March 17 batch.
Petition filed based on pattern, referencing prior perjury finding.
Ex parte hearing held; petitioner only participated.
Outcome: Denied. Transcript reflects no discussion of the March 2023 finding.
December 15, 2025 — Prior Adjudication of Credibility (Judge William F. Mazanec, III)
Docket: 2541RO0000370 (Hennessey v. Sendelbach)
Hearing: Both parties participated.
The court reviewed video evidence cited in Hennessey's affidavit. The video contradicted her sworn statements. Judge Mazanec stated on the record that he did not believe her account.
Outcome: Petition denied. Temporary order vacated.
This established that Hennessey had made false statements under oath in at least one proceeding.
March 11–12, 2026 — Denial by Judge William Powers
March 11, 2026 (preliminary/continuance session):
Petitioner submitted revised narrative memorandum dated March 11, 2026, with appendix listing April 7, 2026 arraignment (dockets 2641CR000158 and 2641CR000159).
Attorney Marissa Elkins requested continuance.
Petitioner disclosed active atrial fibrillation emergency. No acknowledgment by court. Bailiff yells in Planitiff's ear and grabs him from behind.
Continuance granted to March 12, 2026.
March 12, 2026 (main hearing):
Court instructed petitioner not to rehash prior hearings or matters already in the record.
Petitioner attempted to disclose active cardiac emergency but was interrupted.
Court editorialized during testimony (“that doesn’t help your case”).
Court questioned petitioner multiple times about December 1–15, 2025 period; petitioner stated “nothing happened.”
Court asked petitioner whether Hennessey was “getting in trouble” or “getting arraigned” on April 7 (despite the date being listed in the submitted appendix). Clerk verbally confirmed to the judge.
Outcome: Petition denied. No restraining order issued.
III. Analysis of Misconduct
The repeated denials on substantially similar facts, without reference to the March 2023 finding, enabled the continuation of the Respondent's conduct, culminating in the November 30, 2025 assault. Judge Powers’ conduct constitutes a specific and dangerous departure from the Massachusetts Code of Judicial Conduct:
1. Failure of Judicial Diligence (Rule 2.5): The April 7th arraignment for Assault & Battery and Malicious Destruction (Dockets 2641CR000158 and 2641CR000159) was explicitly detailed in the Petitioner’s March 11 filing. Judge Powers’ inquiry on March 12 regarding whether the Respondent was "getting in trouble" or "getting arraigned" confirms a gross failure to review the submitted materials. This lack of diligence resulted in a ruling made in total ignorance of critical, documented criminal proceedings against the Respondent.
2. The "Double Bind" Trap (Rule 2.6: Right to be Heard): The Court’s instruction "not to rehash" prior proceedings—while simultaneously demanding testimony regarding the history of the parties—created an impossible procedural gag order. This "Double Bind" effectively suppressed the Petitioner's ability to introduce the December 15, 2025 adjudication of the Respondent’s perjury, stripping the Petitioner of his fundamental right to be heard.
3. Violation of Decorum and Accommodation (Rule 2.8): The Court failed to maintain a safe and dignified environment. By permitting a Court Officer to shout into the Petitioner’s deaf ear and physically seize him from behind, while the Judge editorialized from the bench (“that doesn’t help your case”), the Court weaponized the Petitioner’s disclosed hearing impairment and cardiac distress against him.
4. Biological Impact and Resolution of Induced Medical Crisis: The physical harm caused by this conduct is documented by a sustained, six-day medical crisis. The Atrial Fibrillation event, explicitly disclosed to the Court on March 11 and 12, was exacerbated by the hostile "Double Bind" environment. This crisis reached a definitive biological resolution only on the morning of March 17, 2026—the first morning without palpitations. This six-day window of physical injury serves as forensic proof of the harm induced by the Court’s reckless disregard for a disclosed life-threatening emergency.
IV. Request for Relief
The complainant requests that the Commission on Judicial Conduct investigate the conduct of Judges Teran, MacLeod, and Powers for apparent partiality, abuse of discretion, failure to review submitted materials. Recommended relief includes referral for disciplinary action and any other measures the Commission deems appropriate to restore confidence in the judicial process.
Respectfully submitted,
John F. Sendelbach
[Your Address]
Shelburne Falls, MA 01370
[Your Phone]
[Your Email]
Signed under the pains and penalties of perjury this 14th day of March, 2026.
John F. Sendelbach
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Notice of Pending Judicial Conduct Complaint
TO: Office of the District Attorney, Northwestern District ATTN: Assistant District Attorney / Prosecution Team for Dockets 2641CR000158 & 2641CR000159
FROM: John F. Sendelbach, Complainant/Victim
DATE: March 14, 2026
RE: Notice of Formal Complaint filed with the Commission on Judicial Conduct (CJC)
Please be advised that on this day, March 17, 2026, I have formally submitted a Complaint of Judicial Misconduct to the Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct in Boston regarding the handling of Harassment Prevention Order (HPO) proceedings related to the above-referenced criminal matters.
The complaint names Hon. Gregory Teran, Hon. Laurie MacLeod, and Hon. William Powers of the Franklin County District Court. The grounds for the complaint include:
Failure of Judicial Diligence (Canon 2, Rule 2.5): Specifically regarding the failure to review submitted evidence and documentation of the November 30, 2025 assault and the April 7, 2026 arraignment (Dockets 2641CR000158 & 2641CR000159).
Impartiality and Fairness (Canon 2, Rule 2.2): Concerns regarding the court's failure to consider prior judicial findings of "not credible" regarding respondent Katherine Hennessey (per Hon. William F. Mazanec III, Dec 15, 2025).
Integrity of the Judiciary (Canon 1, Rule 1.2): Including the suppression of a disclosed active medical emergency (atrial fibrillation) during the March 12, 2026 hearing, which directly triggered and prolonged a six-day cardiac crisis for the petitioner. This medical event reached resolution only on the morning of March 17, 2026 (the first morning without palpitations), providing a forensic record of the physical harm induced by the courtroom environment.
Relevance to Criminal Prosecution: The CJC complaint details how the repeated denials of protection—despite police findings of probable cause for assault—may have emboldened the defendant and contributed to a pattern of escalated conduct.
I am providing this notice to ensure that the District Attorney’s office is aware that the prior HPO proceedings, which were referenced during the March 12, 2026 hearing, are now under formal state-level investigation for procedural and ethical irregularities.
Respectfully,
John F. Sendelbach
