PITTSFIELD — The last time James “Jamie” Tarjick Jr. was in Berkshire Superior Court, he was led away in shackles to begin a 12-year sentence after pleading guilty to 127 counts related to a statewide burglary spree. That was in September.
On Thursday, he was a prosecution witness in the trial of John L. Smith, an alleged co-conspirator in one of those burglaries.
In his testimony, Tarjick recounted in exhausting detail how he and his younger brother, Aaron, methodically stole items from homes and vehicles throughout western Massachusetts and on Cape Cod.
And in particular, he laid out how the trio planned and executed the 2012 burglary at the home of Smith’s former employer.
Tarjick said Smith recruited him and brother to rob the Pittsfield house because he had been denied unemployment benefits. Smith, 52, of Hinsdale, has pleaded not guilty to eight charges for his role in the incident.
Tarjick said he was initially recruited in 2010 by his brother, who had begun supplementing his income with profits from thefts and burglaries, to help steal a refrigerator.
That led to a two-year crime spree, which ultimately would land both of them in prison for a combined 29 years. Jamie Tarjick got a reduction in his sentence in exchange for his cooperation in the investigation.
He testified Thursday that he and his brother would sometimes get requests from people who wanted particular items, which the brothers would steal and then sell to them.
He said they would drive into a neighborhood, park their car and sometimes walk for miles to either do “smash-and-grab” robberies from parked cars that had valuables inside or look for vulnerable homes.
Tarjick said he and his brother would go “everywhere and anywhere” on their mission, as long as it was within the confines of Massachusetts to avoid setting off Aaron’s electronic monitoring device, which he wore as part of his pretrial release conditions on a child sexual assault case.
Typically, the pair would look for valuables like electronics, tools, tablet computers, phones, jewelry, purses, wallets and cash, he said.
They would look for homes that showed signs of being unoccupied including driveways that weren’t shoveled or had no fresh prints in the snow, days’ worth of delivered newspapers piled up outside or no lights on. They would then check around the property to see if there were notices of alarm systems or signs of dogs living in the house.
Sometimes, they would break into a house and quickly take what they could carry and sell, Tarjick said. Other times, more planning, time and a bit of luck would be required, as in the case of the refrigerator.
Since a large vehicle would be needed to transport such a large item, they would need to park close to the targeted house to avoid being seen wheeling a refrigerator down the middle of the street in a residential neighborhood.
Tarjick said the robberies could last anywhere from 10 minutes to a couple of hours, depending on the size of the house, the amount of valuables inside and how much time the brothers thought they could spend without being detected.
Tarjick testified he and his brother sometimes would offer to cut people in for a portion of the profits of their thefts if they provided good information about a particular target.
Enter John Smith, who Tarjick said he has known for about eight years; first as an acquaintance and then ultimately, as someone he felt he could trust enough to openly discuss his robberies and sale of stolen items in front of.
Tarjick said Smith approached him in February 2012 and said there may be a great deal of cash in the home of his former employer.
Assistant Berkshire District Attorney Joseph Yorlano asked Tarjick if he was worried whether Smith would alert police about his crime spree; He said he wasn’t because he “didn’t think [Smith] was that kind of guy.”
According to court testimony, Smith walked off his job as a foreman for an electrical contracting company during a late-October snowstorm in 2011. He was denied unemployment benefits, because he was not laid off and also lost an appeal of the original decision.
Tarjick said before attempting a break-in, he wanted to know details like the layout of the house, whether there was an alarm system or dogs inside, the number of people who lived there, when they might be away from home and if there was a safe in the home.
Smith, who helped with the construction of his former employer’s house, knew the location of a large safe, which was installed inside a walk-in closet, out of normal view.
Tarjick testified he didn’t know anything about the people who lived in the house.
“Nor did I care at that point,” he said.
Tarjick said he told Smith it would be helpful to know when the house would be unoccupied. That opportunity arose on May 28, 2012, while the family was away for Memorial Day weekend.
The home did have an alarm system, but, according to testimony, it was deactivated that weekend because remodeling work inside was causing it to go off unintentionally.
Electronics, cash, coins, jewelry and guns were among the items reported stolen.
Smith was among those named as a potential suspect by the victims, due in part to the dispute over his benefits and a series of harassing voicemails he’d allegedly left on the family’s phone.
Police spoke with Smith in late June 2012, but did not have enough evidence to press any charges. Smith said he was at home on the evening of the robbery.
Investigators did get Smith’s cellphone records, which showed activity involving two particular numbers that were traced back to phones belonging to Jamie and Aaron Tarjick.
During the interview, Smith denied knowing who was attached to those phone numbers.
About a dozen calls between the three phones were logged between 11 a.m. and 11 p.m. May 27.
Smith’s cellphone also received a call from his home landline about 9:57 p.m., according to testimony, raising doubts about his alibi.
The home was broken into about 3 a.m. May 28, according to testimony.
As part of the larger burglary investigation, data from Aaron Tarjick’s monitor was collected and showed he was in the area of the home at the time of the break-in.
Smith was implicated later after a September 2013 traffic stop recovered one of the handguns stolen from the house.
The driver of the car told police he’d received the gun from Jamie Tarjick. That was among the pieces that helped police ultimately connect the Tarjick brothers to the crime spree.
Tarjick’s testimony is expected to continue Friday after which the state will likely rest its case. The jury may get the case as early as Monday.
Aaron Tarjick pleaded guilty to nearly 60 charges connected to the robberies and was sentenced to up to 17 years in prison. That sentence is in addition to the 19-to-25-year sentence he was already serving on a sexual assault conviction.