Although Pomey “did acquiesce to Randy Gomes’ scheme to use money from the HPT, she did not initiate the plan,” her lawyer, Michael DeMarco, wrote in a Sept. 11 motion. “She did, however, agree to allow Randy Gomes to go forward with his plan, initially, at least, because she wanted to help Randy, then a friend, with his drug related problems.”

Both of the defendants said they were sorry for their actions.

Gomes sat in the back right corner of the courtroom with his lawyer, parents and two other relatives. Pomey sat three rows in front of him flanked on the right by her two lawyers and on the left by her father.

“Suzanne fully accepts the consequences of her actions and wholeheartedly regrets them. She is a good person,” DeMarco wrote in a Sept. 11 affidavit. “She has learned from her mistake.”

In his written decision Agnes referred to “their sincere expressions of remorse and regret” as part of the reason for his ruling.

But Agnes disagreed with the defendants’ explanations of their motives.

“The court does not find that the motive for the thefts was simply a combination of the defendant Gomes’ drug problem and defendant Pomey’s desire to assist a friend,” Agnes wrote in his decision. “The thefts involved in this case were substantial, repetitive, and not uncovered as a result of the initiative of either defendant.”

Pudding's Possessions?

During the 15 minute hearing yesterday, Bedrosian mentioned “one outstanding problem.”

The Harvard University Police Department (HUPD) has been storing a large screen TV, two CD players, a portable DVD player, DJ equipment and 91 assorted DVDs since it seized them from Gomes’ room last fall.

“Who is the rightful owner of this property?” Bedrosian asked. “I would suggest...it is not Mr. Gomes.”

He referred to the property as “ill-gotten gains” and suggested Agnes order it be given to HPT or to charity.

Gomes’ attorney, Henry R. Cashman, said that the property should be released to his client after he pays HPT back $68,440.74.

Agnes said the property should not be considered ill-gotten gains, but that “it would be unreasonable for the Harvard University Police to hold on to this property for a period of three or four years until restitution is paid.”

If the parties cannot agree on a resolution, Agnes said he will hear arguments on the matter next month.