An upcoming evidentiary hearing in Suffolk Superior Court could decide whether prosecutors are allowed to use the DNA that led to the 2023 arrest of New Jersey attorney Matthew Nilo in a series of Boston rapes from 2007 and 2008. Defense lawyers are trying to knock out the samples that investigators say they obtained after quietly collecting utensils and drinking glasses at a corporate event, and the judge’s ruling will likely determine whether the case heads toward trial or quietly stalls out.
Federal agents say they picked up several items Nilo used at a corporate gathering in Manhattan in April 2023 and that DNA pulled from those objects matched material recovered from attacks in Charlestown and the North End, according to ABC News. Prosecutors say familial leads from investigative genetic genealogy pointed them to Nilo, after which they surveilled him and tested discarded items to confirm the match.
Defense attorney Rosemary Scapicchio has filed a motion asking a judge to suppress that warrantless seizure and testing, arguing that investigators went too far and that Nilo had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the setting where agents were collecting his used items. "If we win the motion to suppress then there is no evidence," Scapicchio told MassLive. Court records show that a suppression motion was filed earlier this year, and DocketAlarm reflects a series of pretrial motions and discovery disputes tied to that challenge.
How Investigators Say They Linked Nilo
Prosecutors say investigators relied on investigative genetic genealogy, a technique that involves uploading crime-scene DNA profiles to commercial genealogy databases to look for possible relatives, then building out family trees to pinpoint likely suspects. According to The Boston Globe, investigators followed that genealogical lead and then obtained discarded items from Nilo to conduct traditional forensic testing.
That combination of genealogical searching and follow-up DNA testing is at the heart of the prosecution’s theory of the case. It is also exactly what Nilo’s defense team is trying to keep away from the jury.
What’s At Stake
According to court records, Nilo faces charges including rape, aggravated rape causing serious bodily injury and kidnapping in connection with assaults that took place in 2007 and 2008. DocketAlarm lists the counts currently pending in Suffolk Superior Court. Prosecutors have said the DNA evidence from the seized items is central to tying him to those older attacks.
Legal Context And Precedents
Courts around the country are still sorting out when and how law enforcement can use investigative genetic genealogy, as well as whether quietly collecting and testing discarded items violates the Fourth Amendment. The Boston Globe points to recent Massachusetts rulings, including a Middlesex County decision that denied a similar suppression request, as signs that judges are still drawing the boundaries for these searches in real time.
Because those decisions are not uniform, a suppression victory for Nilo’s defense could do more than gut the prosecution’s evidence in this case. It could also send a message to other courts wrestling with how far investigators can go when turning genealogy leads into admissible forensic proof.
Judge Debra Squires-Lee is scheduled to preside over the evidentiary hearing that will test both the legal limits of investigative genetic genealogy and the admissibility of the disputed DNA evidence, MassLive reports. With motions and discovery still active on the court docket, the hearing is expected to become the central battleground over whether the DNA at the core of the case survives constitutional scrutiny.
