Law&Crime Sidebar - Crying Cop, Husband Accused in Twisted Sex Crimes Case

Episode Date: March 27, 2026

A Massachusetts police officer and her husband faced a judge on shocking charges of child rape and sexual abuse allegedly involving their adopted son. Plymouth officer Samantha Pelrine and her husband, Daniel Forand, were arrested after their now-adult adopted son reported the abuse, which allegedly started when he was just 14 or 15. Law&Crime’s Jesse Weber takes you inside the courtroom, where their defense attorneys pushed back hard against the allegations.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code SIDEBAR at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: https://incogni.com/sidebarHOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger, Christina O'Shea, Alex Ciccarone, & Jay CruzScript Writing & Producing - Savannah Williamson & Juliana BattagliaGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrimeTwitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

An absolutely wild day in court in Plymouth, Massachusetts as a police officer and her husband face a judge accused of shocking sexual abuse related to their adopted son. Samantha says, I don't want to take his virginity. Daniel replies he's already lost his virginity. But a big twist came when the pair's defense attorneys had a chance to speak and turned everything upside down. He sends a text to Samantha with a picture of food he had cooked up. And she said, did you make that? Yeah, I did. I'm a fucking chef. That's the type of conversation he's engaging in with her five days before coming in here and making these salacious allegations. We're going to take inside the tense courtroom, break down both the prosecution's case as well as what the couple's attorneys had to say about the alleged victim.

Welcome to Sidebar, presented by law and crime. I'm Jesse Weber. Look, when I'm covering a story, one of the things I think about the dangers in the world, I was thinking about this. Do you ever really contemplate how a stranger can find and use anything about your privacy? your name, your phone number, your address, it's all out there, which is why I want everybody who follow sidebar to keep your data safe online. Our sponsor, Incogni can do that. They track down all these old posts and search sites that are exposing your information and then they demand it to removal. Look, I was shocked. Turns out databases had all my information and within days,

Incogni was taking them down. The setup is simple. You just create an account and Cogni's going to do the rest. Plus, their new Unlimited Plans custom removals feature lets you submit specific links that their privacy experts will personally investigate and remove. So if you care about staying safe, take your privacy back with Incogny. Go to incogny.com slash sidebar, use code sidebar for 60% off an annual plan. When a Massachusetts police officer and her husband were arrested this week, needless to say, this added an element of shock. But it's when you hear the details about what allegedly happened in the couple's home involving their adopted son, that I would just say maybe you throw in anger and disgust. The officer was put on leave,

members of multiple law enforcement agencies showed up at their home at 6 a.m. to arrest them both. And they were brought before a judge to hear the allegations against them. We're talking about 31-year-old Samantha Pelrine. I've also heard it, Samantha Pelrine, but we'll go with Pelrine and her husband, 37-year-old Daniel Furrand. And they are both facing charges of child rape. Now, before we dive into the couple's arraignment and they're pushed for bail, I just want to give you a little bit of background here. So according to the media outlet, WCVB,

On March 15th, a 21-year-old man went to the Massachusetts State Police barracks to report that both Palrine and Furrand had sexually assaulted him for years, starting when he was just 14 or 15 years old. So state police, they quickly launched an investigation. Pelrene had been a Plymouth police officer since April of 2022, and she said in a department Facebook post honoring female officers that she had always wanted to be a police officer. But now she's on unpaid leave. And to be clear, yes, these are allegations she hasn't been proven guilty. But the department did release a statement on Thursday after her arrest saying, quote, we are appalled and deeply disturbed by the allegations. We hold our officers to the highest of standards and expect them to uphold their sworn duty,

both on duty and off. Our primary mission is to safeguard the public's trust and uphold the law. We value human life, fairness, integrity, accountability, and professionalism. The conduct alleged is in violation of our values and of our basic principles, as police officers to serve and protect. While we respect the judicial process, we remain committed to a timely and thorough internal investigation to find the facts, review available evidence,

and take appropriate administrative action. Officer Pelrene's duty status is currently under review, right? So basically, they're going to be looking at everything she did while she served as a member of law enforcement. Also, you know, how she was hired. And let's also go to Ferrand. So he apparently runs a pest control business. It's called Pilgrim Pest Professionals.

He and Pelrene, they were apparently raised in the Plymouth area. This is according to their attorneys. They reportedly live on a hobby farm together. And Furran also has a young daughter from his previous marriage. You see, while Pelrene's attorney said his client, quote, didn't have so much as a speeding ticket, when you go to Furand and his alleged past behavior, that is what's drawn a lot of scrutiny right now. Why do I say that? So now I want to go to this direct reporting from the Boston Globe.

It says in 2019, police in Plymouth asked a judge to issue an order denying Furand a gun license, citing a laundry list of problems and conflicts, including numerous allegations of harassment and trespassing. Police described, quote, one incident wherein Mr. Furran texted his estranged wife 436 times in a 13-hour period, and another wherein he telephoned another person 700 times in a short period of time. His neighbors repeatedly complained about Furan mistreating his animals, which included horses, goats, chickens, and pigs. They complained about him shooting guns on his property, chasing a neighbor's dog with a machete, and using binoculars to watch them. He yells at people, it appears mostly women, and has put all of them in fear of him. His personality is that of a controlling, erratic, and angry person.

He is manipulative and sinister. So now it seems that his wife has been pulled into the claims against him, and they both face just a full list of very serious felony charges. According to the district attorney, Ferrand, is charged with six counts of a decent assault and battery, 12 counts of aggravated rape of a child, one count of assault and battery, and one count of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. Pelrene is charged with three counts of aggravated rape of a child and one count of statutory rape. Very, very serious. And as the attorneys, the court personnel and the defendants themselves gathered in Plymouth District Court for arraignment on Thursday, I got to say, I don't think many of them were prepared for exactly what they heard.

The hearings started off like any other with the court being called to order, the judge asking about their pleas, motions in bail. Let's take a look. Commonwealth, I do not see any motion for pretrial detention. Do you want to be heard on bail? Correct, John. The Commonwealth's not moving for dangerousness. I would like to be heard on cash bail along with conditions of release. Okay. And are you aware of the requests of the Commonwealth? Okay. I'm not specifically aware of the conditions, but I could probably gain what's the request is going to be. Okay. All right. So not guilty, please, or entered on behalf of both defendants at this time. and I will hear you Commonwealth in your request for bail.

Yes, Your Honor. So the Commonwealth's request is the same for both defendants. The Commonwealth is requesting $250,000 cash bail, along with the following conditions. That the defendants be ordered to stay away and have no contact with the alleged victim in this case. That they be ordered to stay away from children under the age of 18, that they surrender all firearms in their possession,

that they remain in Massachusetts for the pendency of this case, and that they surrender passports to the court if they do have them. But then what happened? The Commonwealth Attorney, Plymouth Assistant DA, James Duffy, then launched into a disturbing litany of allegations that have been leveled against both Pelrene and Furand by their adopted son, who's an adult now. And I'm going to warn you right now. It is really tough to listen to. The allegations before the court essentially date back to 2018. The alleged victim in this case in 2018 became a foster child of the two defendants before you. And just for clarity's sake, so there's no confusion. I intend to refer to the defendants by their first. first name so the court's aware who I'm talking about when I discuss which conduct. The allegations

are that the alleged victim in this case moved in with the defendants back in 2018. At the time, the alleged victim was 14 years old. Fast forward to May, between May and June of 2019, when the alleged victim is still 14 years old, that's where the first allegation of sexual assault comes. This is against Daniel. The alleged victim in this case alleges that on that occasion, Daniel brought the alleged victim into the master bedroom at his home, that he then forced his bitch into the alleged victim's mouth, that he forced the alleged victim to put his into Daniel's mouth, that he touched the alleged victim's and he forced the alleged victim to touch his his. The alleged victim then discloses that this continues almost weekly for the next

couple of years. Fast forward now to the fall of 2019, so at this point the alleged victim would be 15 years old. It's alleged that on one occasion in the fall of 2019, specifically September after the defendants had been married, that Daniel was again sexually abusing the alleged victim in the bedroom when Samantha walked into the bedroom. It's disclosed that at this point Samantha leaves the room and doesn't come back for the rest of the day. In October of 2019, Daniel summons the alleged victim to the bedroom. When the alleged victim walks into the bedroom, he sees Daniel having with Samantha.

Daniel then removes the alleged victim's pants and instructs Samantha to perform on the alleged victim, which Samantha denies at that time. Fast forward to a week after that, so we're still in the fall of 2019, and the alleged victim is still 15 years old. There's another incident where Daniel,

again, is sexually assaulting the alleged victim by forcing his into the alleged victim's mouth and forcing alleged victim's into his mouth. Samantha walks into the room. At first, it's alleged that she goes into the bathroom and Daniel follows. They then come out of the bathroom and Samantha says, I don't want to take his virginity. Daniel replies, he's already lost his virginity. Samantha then is only wearing a bra. She lays down on the bed. Daniel then instructs the alleged victim to insert

his to her into her. He does while this is happening when the alleged victim slows down. Daniel comes up behind the alleged victim and pushes him to force him to keep going on the intercourse. This happens numerous times through 2019 and carrying. over into 2020. Most of the allegations take place in the home. There is an allegation that happened outside the home. This was an indecent assault and battery where it's alleged that Daniel touched the alleged victim's while in a work truck in the county. This continues on with the three of them, with the alleged victim being forced to partake in these sexual encounters with Samantha and Daniel. And then it changes a little bit in about

February of 2020. In February of 2020, there's an occasion where the alleged victim is laying on the couch with Samantha. Samantha gets up off the couch. She removes her clothes. She instructs the alleged victim remove his clothes and then forces him to have with her at that point in time. Up until that point in time, the disclosure is that Daniel and Samantha and the alleged victim would only interact as a group of three, but from this point in February 2020, it now changed to where Samantha was performing these assaults on her own without Daniel being present. The allegations, Your Honor, that these sexual assaults and essentially these same details proceed until 2025.

Those essentially the allegations, Your Honor, that are before the court. Wow. So according to an affidavit, the alleged victim wrote when applying for a restraining order against the couple, which was reviewed by the Boston Globe, the man had apparently said that his grandmother and his aunt raised him from the age of three to 12. They then apparently introduced him to some, quote, church friends, so Pelreen and Furran. He started living with them and says they were granted legal guardianship about a year later, and that is when the alleged abuse started. So the prosecutor explained to the court why they

were requesting such a large bail amount here. The Commonwealth's request is due to the serious nature of these allegations and the potential flight risks that these defendants pose specifically. with the charges that the defendants are facing, obviously there are superior court only charges on here. They've now been charged, so their standing in the community has changed. They've formally been charged, and if they are eventually convicted of these charges, they're facing a significant mandatory minimum of 15 years, specifically on the aggravated rape through a joint venture theory. That's a significant mandatory minimum that they're facing the Commonwealth would argue that that changes their situation where they do become a flight risk, given the allegations before the court.

I will note for the court, they do not have criminal records. This is the first entry onto their criminal records. So the Commonwealth's request for bail along with conditions is based largely, in fact, is based on the allegations before the court to ensure that they continue to answer on these charges and to also protect the safety of the alleged victim in this case. So for those reasons, I would request $250,000 cash bail, stay away no contact of the alleged victim, stay away from children under the age of 18, surrender all firearms,

remain in Massachusetts and surrender a passport. Also, Your Honor, the Commonwealth did file a motion to impound in regards to both defendants, and I do have motions for protective orders if I may just approach and file this with the court. Now, the judge asked for a little bit more clarification of one of the charges that Ferran faces. It's assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.

Take a look. Can you just give me a sentence or two about the assault and battery with a dangerous weapon with respect to... Yes, Your Honor. So there were occasions where Daniel would request that the alleged victim performed sexual acts on him, and the alleged victim would refuse.

Specifically, there's an occasion in the summer of 2019 when they're in the kitchen of the home. Daniel requests a sex act. The alleged victim says no. Daniel then strikes, punches the alleged victim in the face. The victim falls to the ground, hits his head on the ground. That would be the basis of the assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.

He then reaches into the alleged victim's pants and squeezes his . There were other occasions where he would demand that the alleged victim performed sex acts on him when he would say no, and he would either throw glasses at him or he would hit him physically. So after those gross, shocking claims were entered into the record, Palreen's attorney, Joseph Krausky Jr. turned the accusations on their head, and he revealed some very concerning apparent holes in this man's story.

On behalf of Samantha Pelreen, I am requesting that the court release her on her personal reconnaissance, with the assented to condition that she have no contact, directly or indirectly, accepting through counsel, with any of the named witnesses or the named alleged victim. The Commonwealth has just told you that their standing in the community has now changed. Well, that is legally incorrect. Pursuant to our Declaration of Rights in Section 76, there is a presumption of personal recognizance. As you know, the bail statute has 28 criteria laid out for you to assess and determine what is the amount sufficient but not greater than necessary that will ensure these two individuals, specifically my client, comes to the court. Certainly

the allegations, the mayor allegations are serious. Certainly the potential penalty is significant. But most of the criteria is designed answering the question and given the court information about ties to the community in good evidence that the person will not flee the prosecution. With that in mind, Ms. Pelreen is 31 years old. She lives at the property right here in Plymouth, Massachusetts. She was born in South Shore Hospital in Weymouth, Massachusetts, but she was raised and spent her entire life here in Plymouth. She was educated, went to Plymouth South High School, where she graduated, then went on and earned a bachelor degree from Salem State with a degree in criminal justice. After that, she worked at the

Greater Plymouth Health and Families Service Center there under the umbrella of the Kennedy Dunovan Center. She was a family support advocate. She was gainfully employed. She was a revered employee, helped many families along the way. After that, she pursued her lifelong dream, and she was sworn into the Plymouth Police Department in 2022. She has worked there with distinction since 2022. My client doesn't have any entries on her carry. She doesn't have so much as a speeding ticket. I think the timeline is a little bit important for you to make your determination. First of all, this adult was never a foster child. He's now 21 years old. In June of 2028, he had basically there was no place else for him to go. Sorry, counsel, I think you said 2028.

Excuse me, 2018. There was no place else for him to go. There was allegations made against his biological parents. There was an aunt that was doing the best, but didn't have the faculties or facilities to take care of him. He certainly came to the home with some documented problems. He was on medication, and he had several diagnoses. They right away, after being asked to take him in, entered into a guardianship about a month later. The timeline in what's alleged against him takes place over the course of 2019, 2020, 2021. I will tell you, at his urging, when he was an adult at 18 years old, he urged them to legally and formally adopt him.

At first, it was rebuffed because his biological father would not sign off on it, but he persisted, and when he was 18, they adopted him, and we have documentation, we have pictures of the celebration. This is after they allegedly had been physically assaulting. him three to four times a week. I will tell you what's also important as it relates to the timeline. The government's assertion that they are of flight risk is belied by the actual history of the case. On March 17, 26, now these are allegations that are six, seven years old. The allegations don't come to light until March 17, 26. That's when he applies for

a restraining order. When he applied for a restraining order, my client, Samantha Pellreen, was notified by her department and through other sources that she was now under investigation. I reached out, talked to Trooper Dunn. I knew the nature of the allegations against her. She has had 10 days to assemble resources and funds and whatever other means she has to flee. She has not done that. She has remained at the family home, where they live. She has at all times been available and her whereabouts have been known to the Commonwealth and to the state police. She has strong ties to the community. In that home, they have a significant property. They have a hobby farm. They have animals. The co-defendant has a 10-year-old daughter. They have a successful business with

employees, all of their ties are right here to Plymouth County. They don't have the desire or the intent to go anyplace else, and the best evidence of that is them remaining here and facing these allegations. They were taken into custody this morning without any prior notice to counsel. We were in the middle of preparing for a restraining order hearing that's on for tomorrow. It's a little bit interesting on the restraining order hearing because the alleged victim went under oath and swore to certain things in front of Judge McDonough. And one of the things he swore to was that he felt that his life, excuse me, that my client posed a threat to his safety, posed a threat of imminent harm to his well-being. And he had told the judge that he

moved out in either early February or late January of 2026. I think the timeline is really a distinction without the difference. But again, what he told her is that he was afraid for his safety, and he left the court with the implication that he had not had any contact with them, because he said specifically that he moved out early February, and I've heard that they are looking for me. That's what he said under oath to get the restraining order. Well, it just so happens that on February 4th, after he moved out, he went to their home. He apologized for his conduct. He had engaged in a physical assault of Mr. Ferrand. Told him he was going to the Coast Guard. He asked to continue working at the company until April of 2026 during the same time

where he's allegedly purportedly afraid for his safety. He asked if he could go on a family trip with them to Jamaica. He asked them about a skiing trip to Sunday River. He asked if he could still come over for Sunday dinners. February 18th, He broke into the house with a ladder through a window. We have a witness verifying that he pulled up at the house to check on it because they were away and they saw his vehicle, the alleged victim's vehicle in the driveway. February 27th, he's telling the court he's afraid for his safety. We have verification.

He asked for his job back and actually went back to work. March 2026, we have video of him showing up at the house. in a pickup truck, a work truck that his father had given to him to sell. In the video shows him engaged in a cordial conversation talking about the fact that they got the truck running and are going to be able to resell it. This is only 18 or 19 days prior to when he applied for the restraining order, the same operative period of time when he said he was terrified of these two.

March 7th, 2026, there's an encounter at a gas station with him and his father. He's with another female, a female named B. They all engage in a cordial conversation. March 9th, eight days before he goes under oath and is talking about Samantha Pellrine, there's a text exchange where he calls him and she texts back, I missed you call, you all right? this so-called alleged victim said, yeah, just tired, need someone to talk to, to stay awake, driving, need someone to text. It's eight days. Under oath, he said he was terrified then.

March 11th, he actually sold the truck that had been gifted to him from his father for $3,100. March 12th, five days before he comes in under oath, he sends a text to Samantha with a picture of food he had cooked up. And she said, did you make that? I did. I'm a chef. That's the type of conversation he's engaging in with her five days before coming in here

and making these salacious allegations about when he was 14 or 15. March 13th. Again, verification. He asked to remain on at pest control. March 13th, four days before that. What else do we have? Well, because of

allegations made against this guy, not them, DCF had to come to the house on prior occasions. There was an allegation that he had engaged in inappropriate behavior with his step-sister. DCF came, and it's not that they were able to substantiate the allegations against him, but fully engaged in a vetting of the home, the suitability of the home, and you know from your experience, the fundamental questions are asked, do you feel safe in the home? Has anyone abused you, either physically or sexually? And we can only assume that those were all checked next. And we can only assume

that those were all checked negative because DCF unsubstantiated the complaints against him, but filed no further action against these two. So with DCF investigating this house on at least two prior occasions, there was no evidence of wrongdoing. We also know that there was a history with this young man. He was a problem, and we can document it. He had accused someone falsely of sexually inappropriate behavior when he was in high school, when he laid came clean and admitted it was a sexual encounter he had with a teammate on his basketball team. Fast forward to December 2025 and to January 2026. He's dating this young woman that's mentioned in the police report, and that's really the genesis of where this started. He wanted to do things his own way.

He continued against the parents' wishes to have her stay over. They were concerned about a young child being in the house, him having her stay overnight. continue to break the rules. We have him on 445 in the morning in late November where he has told Judge McDonner that Mr. Foren assaulted him and he described the incident. We have him jumping on Mr. Forran, putting him in a headlock, trying to choke him out where he's clearly the first aggressor. The real issue came to a head. We have a letter, and this is the person that's scared, we have a letter from his girlfriend where she accuses this so-called victim of raping her. And we have that letter.

So this is a case that has viable defenses, but your fundamental question, and it's not a question of public safety. They didn't move pursuant to 58A. Branden doesn't allow you to consider public safety. The fundamental question is, are they going to do the right thing and appear? And the presumption is yes. and the evidence you have before you should point towards yes. Now Krowski also addressed Palreen's career as a police officer, a position that requires the trust of the public.

Let me comment about this, about the fact that my client's a police officer. I don't come to you and say that a police officer should be treated any more favorably than any other civilian counterpart, but they certainly shouldn't be treated disproportionately unfavorably. I have clients all over the state charged with rape, and not one of them is held on anything close to this amount of bail. And there is something to be said that she's a police officer because you know her ties to the community is strong, and she's been vetted, her background's been vetted, her personal history has been vetted, her life in high school and in college, and any issues of discipline in high school and college have been successfully vetted. I'm asking you for

5,000 because I have no doubt, nor should you, that she will appear to face these charges, Judge. Ferran's attorney Tamari Kovac also spoke, reiterating what Krowski had said and providing a little more context. Their son has been employed for my client for Dan for a few years. He wanted to go out on his own and see if he can, you know, sort of start something, a business or be successful, not tied to his father's business. So he applied for a job.

It was with a ferry. And then for some reason, there was some misunderstanding, and the alleged victim missed the meeting. So he texts Dan and asks for his job back. And like any supportive father, it's like, would you, sure, would you like to meet at, you want to meet at Dunkin' Donuts, Starbucks, you pick. Now, if somebody who has been physically and sexually abusing somebody for years, is that the language you would use?

You pick? He offers his son his job back. And there is a very, not only is it just a cordial conversation, it is a conversation coming from love, from a father, saying, I support you and I understand why you're looking for employment outside of the family business. but of course you're welcome back. You know, I support you in your endeavors and, you know, I want you to be successful. That is the true fault. That is the true relationship.

I also want to talk about some of these dates leading up to when he appears here on 317, saying how terrified he is. And I will get to obviously some of where my client, you know, where he's from and his ties to the community. However, on the day, that he came here to apply for the restraining order on 317, he had just called his mother, called Sam. She didn't pick up, but he had reached out to her. There are, I mean, I was baffled when I read the affidavit for the restraining order, and I got a copy of it, and I listened to it, and then I'm looking at the information that my client is providing me.

These are, he, there we have videos of him at the house. They are working. They are having cordial. What we might consider just mundane conversations about work. My client has for many years had a lot of security cameras. He has very expensive equipment that is kept up the home. You can see them. Your Honor, if you would like, I'm happy to approach.

I have videos of their son dry. into the property with Dan following his truck. It's very mundane conversations. I have video of my client being attacked by him. So interestingly, when he's 21 years old, he has a girlfriend who doesn't live close by. And the parents are like, you can, we support you in this relationship,

but we don't know her and she cannot sleep here. So what does he do? He sneaks, he keeps trying to sneak her into the house, when that's not working, he's with other people. They're waking up. There are people they don't know in the home. So this couple are sleeping in the trucks. They're putting tents up.

And they have told them, of course, you can date her. She's welcoming her. She cannot sleep here. So at one night, when they discover that they are there, he tells him, like, these are the rule. Like, you know the rules. You broke the rules. I want you out.

If you don't leave, I'm going to. going to call the police. And what does he do? You can see it on the camera. He brutally attacks my client. And as a caring, loving father should do, he just puts them to the test, trying to stop him, telling him, stop, stop, stop. Is somebody who is abusing their son the way that he is alleging,

do you say I'm going to call the police? This troubled young man had not been following the house rules. And then it finally was enough. You need to find somewhere else to live. So this is what he does. And then he fabricates these allegations for attention with the biological family. Only he knows the motivation. However, when he came to court, he was disingenuous.

He was manipulative. He does not tell the judge, hey, also, like, I just called Sam today. I've been talking to them. I've been employed by him this entire time. I am at the house regularly. They are texting, like, hey, we set aside, you know, we have a text ring, we set aside some shelves so that you can store some of your boxes because there was some water, water damage that are going to be renovating that part of the house.

So like here's where you can keep some of your things. These are just conversations that you would expect of any, you know, between an adult child and loving parents. He didn't have to live there, Your Honor. In 2025, I believe he was making about $80,000. $2,024 making over $50,000. So this is not a vulnerable person who has no place to go and is forced to live at this house. This is where he chose to live every day.

Now, the judge herself seemed a bit shaken by everything that had just come out in the courtroom. So she announced her decision on bail. She extended the protective order on behalf of the alleged victim that had been set to expire today. according to the Boston Globe. Take a look. After hearing, the court sets, with respect to Samantha Pellarine, the court sets bail on the amount of $10,000. As conditions, if she should meet that bail, she is to have no contact and stay away with the complaining witness in this matter, surrender the passport, remain in Massachusetts, and surrender any firearms. If you violate any of those conditions that the court is setting, your bail may be revoked,

and you could be held in custody in a house of correction without bail, for up to 90 days or until your trial. That includes any new offenses that you may commit in that period of time as well. With respect to Daniel Ferrand, bail set in the amount of $25,000 cash. The conditions, if he should make that bail, are that he's to have no contact and stay away with the complaining witness. Surrender his passport, remain in Massachusetts, surrender any firearms. Sir, you as well, if you commit a new offense,

or you violate any of those conditions? of your release. Your release could be revoked and you could be held in custody in a house of correction without bail for up to 90 days or until the time of your trial. So Pelrene, Furran, both posted their bonds. They left the courthouse together. Local reporters, as you can imagine, just swarm them, asked for the reactions to the allegations, but their attorneys basically said no comment. The judge also impounded all documents related to the case until at least April 30th, so they're going to remain sealed for now. Not surprising when you're dealing with accusations regarding a then minor. and the two are back in court on June 8th.

But that's all we have for you right now here on Sidebar, everybody. Thank you so much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you should get your podcast. You can also check us out on NBC's Peacock as well. We've got episodes up there. If you want to follow me, X Instagram, my News Nation show, Jesse Weber Live, Monday through Friday, 11 p.m. Eastern.

See you next time, everybody.