TheAgitator.com
Martha Coakley’s Troubling Career as a Prosecutor
Wednesday, January 13th, 2010I have an article up at Politico today looking at the unsettling criminal justice record of the Democratic nominee to replace Ted Kennedy.
23 Responses to “Martha Coakley’s Troubling Career as a Prosecutor”
Leave a Reply
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial NoDerivs 2.5 License.
Speaking of the Supreme Court, they apparently will be revisiting their decision to requiring prosecutors to make crime lab specialists available for cross examination. Since David Souter has been replaced by Sotomayor, the decision could be undone. Sotomayor isn’t exactly known for her hostility to the prosecutors….
Any prosecutor who doesn’t publicly acknowledge the wanton destruction caused by reckless crusading prosecutions during the day care sex abuse hysteria of the 80s and 90s doesn’t deserve to hold public office for roughly the same reason a holocaust denier probably wouldn’t make a very good Israeli Prime Minister.
To hold public office one should have the basic ability to act on the basis of what’s right and wrong rather than purely on the basis of what is self-promoting and what isn’t.
Well written article, Mr. Balko.
I read Dorothy Rabinowitz’s Pulitzer-prize winning Commentary pieces in the Wall Street Journal for years. She wrote many compelling editorials about the Fells Acres/Amirault family child-abuse trials, hearings, and appeals, as well as about other outlandlish child-abuse investigations and convictions such as in Wenatchee, Washington, and the Grant Snowden case in Miami, Florida (convicted and served 12 years in prison courtesy of Dade County D.A. Janet Reno until freed on Federal appeal).
These Commentaries were later compiled into a book Rabinowitz authored called: “No Crueler Tyrannies”.
Her Journal editorials framed then Middlesex County D.A. Coakley as a partisan prosecutorial zealot, who ignored the mountain of evidence that the alleged child-abuse ringleader was in all likelihood innocent, convicted on the coerced and coached testimony of 3-5 year old children.
Coakley did her prosecutorial best to see that the 5-0 Pardon Recommendation of the Massachusetts State Pardon and Parole Board was ignored by then Republican Gov. Jane “Not-Too” Swift.
As a result, Mr. Amirault served an additional 4 years in prison, until subsequently paroled after 18 years in prison. In what must qualify her for the Medal of Courage Award, Mr. Amirault’s wife stayed married to him all those long 18 years while he was imprisoned…..
Wonder if Mr. Amirault is making any personal appearances at Coakley campaign rallies, holding up a Scott Brown for U.S. Senate campaign sign??
I find it stunning how many people associated with the child sex abuse and recovered memory prosecutions of the 80s and 90s suffered practically no impact for the destruction they wrought on hundreds of parents, children, and preschool owners and teachers.
The Supreme Court yesterday heard arguments in the civil commitment case of Graydon Comstock who plead guilty and got 3 years in prison for receiving child porn, but just before he was released, he was civilly committed to an indefinite term (commonly for life) of incarceration under a federal civil commitment order.
So, on one hand, we have a guy whose 3-year sentence was converted to a life term for a crime the government thinks he might commit and on the other, a public official who conspired to torture and utterly ruin the lives of dozens of adults and children, yet suffers hardly a hiccup on their career path.
What we need is an Adam Walsh Act for government officials who victimize children and their families in the name of justice.
“Wonder if Mr. Amirault is making any personal appearances at Coakley campaign rallies, holding up a Scott Brown for U.S. Senate campaign sign??”
If they’re smart, the Brown campaign would feature him in a ad attacking Coakley on the issue.
Collin:
Maybe yes, maybe no. Gerald Amirault, his mother Violet who owned the Fells Acres Day Care center, and his sister who worked there, were convicted of multiple child abuse charges by Middlesex County D.A. Scott Harshbarger, a predecessor of A.G. Martha Coakley, back during the nationwide day car center child-abuse hysteria of the 1980’s.
Many people presume that if a jury is guided to the conclusion that a person is then found guilty, then they must in fact be guilty.
Partisan prosecutorial zealot Martha Coakley will presumably go to her grave still asserting that Amirault is guilty.
Hurry the day……
#5
The reason they won’t is because it’s easy to draft Coakley’s response attacking Brown: “Brown likes child molestors”. Which will the voters listen to? Those four words or Brown’s long, complex explanation of all the details? Facts don’t matter; perception is everything in campaigns.
I’m a hardcore Mike-Dukakis liberal in Massachusetts, and I could never label myself a “Libertarian” insofar as it requires drinking the supply-side/Objectivist Koolaid. However, I’m going to have to pull the lever for the Libertarian candidate, Kennedy, in this election. Some one as deeply pathological as Coakley cannot be trusted with power, however close her stated positions might be to my own.
Also, no sense pining for Scott Brown to use the Gerald-Amirault angle against Coakley. He is trying to get to the Right of her on every law enforcement issue he can dig up. Indeed, if the GOP Right had it all its own way in this country in the 1980s and 1990s, the victims of the recovered-memory persecutions would have been put to death after child rape was made a capital offense. (Even Obama has endorsed the death penalty for child rape. Imagine how that would have turned out during the recovered-memory hysteria.)
I don’t subscribe to the “supply side/objectivist” koolaide either. What I do like is liberty and being able to keep my own property. How is this “drinking koolaid”?
I think this is true of anyone in our government these days. Recall the quote Radley has posted before?
Or if that is too much, how about Lord Acton?
It isn’t the people we elect that are the problem, it is the system itself. You give power to those whom you elect and then are shocked when they abuse such power. From my perspective, it is to be expected.
In a decent world, attracting nominees for prosecutor or attourney general would be a sting operation with the goal of removing them from society.
The mixing of politics and the administration of justice attracts pathological individuals and then rewards their pathology when in office. Judicial power of any kind should result in a minimum 20 year ban on the holding of elective office.
Regards, Don
That person should be Radley Balko — he has “the look”.
Good article, Radley. I don’t know much about Scott Brown (and I suspect that I wouldn’t be able to vote for him), but I enjoyed his recent remark that he wasn’t seeking to fill Ted Kennedy’s shoes, but to represent his constituents. I think it’s worthwhile that he isn’t falling for the nonsense that only someone who would vote like Kennedy is worthy of the job, as though the position was part of some sort of ideological inheritance. And, as Radley’s Politico piece points out, Coakley doesn’t pass any sort of purity test as Kennedy’s ideological heir, either.
BTW, it strikes me that we’ve been treated to another good illustration that the default media stereotypes of Democrats and Republicans (encouraged by their own spinmeisters) are totally unreliable. Your link yesterday to the Reason piece on how legislators kowtowing to state and local government employee unions is bankrupting them made mention of the fact that plenty of Republicans have been part of the scam, even though one might expect them to resist union money grabs, expansions of government payrolls, and generally grossly irresponsible spending. And here today we have evidence that the Democrat candidate in a pretty liberal state is actually a pro-prosecution hard liner, even though I would guess many traditional Democrats would expect otherwise and would see her work on cases like Amirault’s as appalling.
Coakley’s staffer assaults member of the press
http://politics.theatlantic.com/2010/01/reporter_gets_shoved_after_coakley_event.php
Excellent article, Mr., Balko. However, I must take issue with your venue – The Politico? They who never spike a hysterical overreaction, or refuse to pass on self-serving “anonymous” government sources?
Drudge and Politico – fact-free right wing dweebness at its worst.
Dweebosity? Dweebology? Dweebocrats!
Coakley mocks Fenway Fans, call them idiots.
Scott Brown, however, honors the heroes of Fenway Park and the proud traditions of Boston Sports.
“Wonder if Mr. Amirault is making any personal appearances at Coakley campaign rallies, holding up a Scott Brown for U.S. Senate campaign sign??”
Not a bright idea, as she has thugs that beat people up in public for that shit.
If Brown’s campaign were smart, they would draft it as “while real child molesters were stalking our children, Coakley was pursuing innocent people based on quackery. When the truth came out, she cared more about protecting her conviction than protecting our children.”
Alright guys, if you have a Digg account, digg it!
http://digg.com/political_opinion/Is_Martha_Coakley_committed_to_justice_Radley_Balko
I see you drink different Kool-Aid instead.
I still think it is funny how the peasants think they have choices during elections.
I am voting for Brown, and sending letters to both Coakley and Brown to tell them why. Coakley, to encourage her to seek a new career in private practice, and Brown, to remind him some of his voters do not support his conservatism 100% and that he should tone it down.
//If Brown’s campaign were smart, they would draft it as “while real child molesters were stalking our children, Coakley was pursuing innocent people based on quackery. When the truth came out, she cared more about protecting her conviction than protecting our children.”//
Why don’t I ever see “law and order” types pursuing such a line? Even if cares only about catching the guilty, without regard for the costs to the innocent, any resources the state spends persecuting innocent people are resources which are not used to go after guilty ones.
Supercat:
Reason why Scott Brown won’t challenge Coakley on the Amirault conviction:
Child Molestation accusations are the neutron bomb of criminal accusations. Just the mere accusation of such a heinous, unnatural act totally destroys the individual accused unless they are an exceptionally strong individual. Friends flee to the hinterland to avoid association with the accused.
In the curious timing department, Gerald Amirault was the guest of the Dennis & Callahan morning talk show on WEEI radio in Boston TODAY. He gave a lengthy interview about his case, his trial, his lengthy imprisonment, and the role then Middlesex County D.A. Martha Coakley played in keeping him imprisoned an extra 3 years.
He mentioned that he isn’t voting for the lady that helped keep him in prison for a full 18 years until he was finally paroled in 2004. Nor are his family or friends. He seemed an enthusiastic, authentic Scott Brown for Senate supporter for some reason…….
Amirault really didn’t sound bitter. Really.
Here’s the link to his interview:
http://castroller.com/podcasts/WeeiDennis/1411531
Child Molestation accusations are the neutron bomb of criminal accusations. Just the mere accusation of such a heinous, unnatural act totally destroys the individual accused unless they are an exceptionally strong individual.
Right, so how should the public react if they find out that Ms. Coakley went easy on (at least one) real child molesters and threw the book at innocents so people wouldn’t realize she was soft?