Skip to comments.Inside Martha Coakley
Posted on 01/16/2010 11:01:28 AM PST by richardtavor
April 19, 2001. Anniversary of the filing of Gerald Amirault's petition for commutation. The Parole Board -- required by law to make a recommendation within six months -- has still done nothing.
July 6, 2001. The Parole Board votes 5-0, recommending that the Governor commute Gerald Amirault's sentence to time served.
August 2, 2001. Martha Coakley and the Middlesex DA's office orchestrate a hysteria-filled press conference by the alleged "victims" of the Amirault family. Ironically, the true abusers of these people are in fact Coakley herself and her colleagues -- Harshbarger, Reilly, Bernstein, Hardoon, etc. Dorothy Rabinowitz writes an excellent refutation of the "victims" newly minted charges for the Wall Street Journal. One of the most vocal participants in this Coakley-engineered fiasco was "victim" Jennifer Bennett. Read what Judge Borenstein has to say about the mistreatment of this poor little girl by the Middlesex DA's office. Also participating in the press circus were Phaedra Hopkins, Brian Martinello, and Martinello's mother, Barbara Standke. To check the record for these "victims," and for the other seven children who were used against the Amiraults, see this Appendix written by attorney Dan Finneran for the first Fells Acres new-trial motion.
August 17, 2001. In a Boston Globe op-ed piece, Democratic former Congressman and state Attorney General James Shannon calls upon Governor Swift to free Gerald Amirault.
August 22, 2001. Middlesex DA Martha Coakley talks Christopher Lydon into having Barbara Standke, one of the "victim" mothers, on Lydon's radio show with Coakley. Standke makes a lot of brand-new charges against the Amiraults, and claims that these charges were disclosed to her by her son before September 2, 1984. There is of course nothing in the record to support this. Coakley knows or should know this, but says nothing to dispute Standke's false accusations.
(Excerpt) Read more at mysite.verizon.net ...
She’s a POS alright, but your title conjures up an Unwanted Visual ;-)
Yes, my first thought was "No Thanks."
My second thought was, "Up to the elbow."
No sexual innuendo’s intended....yuck!
She be dreck to the core but would fit right in with the slime of current rotten crop in DC. Thats why we really need ‘Change’.
Dennis Prager brought this up in his AM show broadcast from California and rebroadcast on Chicago’s WIND AM 560 at 11 pm. Very likely it will be followed up locally in WI on WTMJ’s am 620 weekdays Charlie Sykes (who sometimes subs for Prager) in his 8:30-12 noon show on the 18th if he doesn’t take off for the MLK holiday.
I just got up to Martha Coakley's campaign HQ to help her win Tuesday's crucial special election. I have to tell you -- this isn't like anything Massachusetts has ever seen.
It's happening right after the holidays, so a lot of people haven't even heard about it. Meanwhile, the same guys behind the Swift Boat ads are taking over the airwaves to distort Martha's record, and the same far-right tea-party crowd that's attacking President Obama is funding her opponent.
The stakes in this race are incredibly high. If we don't hold this seat, a right-wing Republican will hold Sen. Ted Kennedy's old seat until at least 2012 -- and we'll lose a crucial vote in the Senate for health reform and the agenda we fought so hard for last year.
That's why we're going all out in Massachusetts with a massive effort to lock up a Democratic victory. But we can only afford to keep this battle up against the far right through Election Day if folks like you chip in.
Please donate $5 or more to help us make Martha Coakley the next senator from Massachusetts.
Democratic ads are highlighting the key differences between Martha, a long-time public servant and one of the nation's best attorneys general, and her extreme Republican opponent who would walk in lockstep with Mitch McConnell and national GOP power brokers.
And our organizers are engaging volunteers by the thousands to make sure Obama voters make it back to the polls.
But we need your help to keep it going. Please donate $5 or more to the Democratic Party to support our work, including our efforts to elect Martha Coakley:
Let's win this,
Democratic National Committee
Follow the money ... Looks like the
vics cashed in. Here's a 1997 piece in the Herald by Tom Mashberg:
Although 10 children testified against Violet, Cheryl, and Gerald "Tooky" Amirault during their two criminal trials in the 1980s, a total of 16 families received financial settlements related to the Fells Acres Day School abuse case, documents obtained by the "Herald" show.
Those 16 settlements, totaling $20 million, were negotiated by independent civil litigators representing the plaintiffs and their parents. The awards were all approved by the Amiraults' insurers, Worcester Insurance Co., in a series of out-of-court agreements completed in 1991.
Violet Amirault, 74, and her daughter, Cheryl Amirault LeFave, 41, are likely to be sent back to prison soon. Four weeks ago yesterday, the Supreme Judicial Court reinstated their convictions in the much-disputed 1984 Fells Acres abuse case.
Although the SJC's ruling was to have taken effect yesterday, it has been delayed until the seven justices can consider a motion for a rehearing submitted by the family's lawyers two weeks ago. In the event that the justices dismiss that motion -- perhaps as early as Monday -- Middlesex County prosecutors will be free to ask a judge to order the women back to jail.
The cash settlements with the families vary greatly, and in some cases children who did not testify in court received bigger awards than those who did so. Some of the children, who were 4 and 5 years old when the school closed, will be turning 18 this year and receiving lump sums of about $50,000.
For some, there will be lump sums again at 21 and 25, and then monthly payments for life. Eight of the 10 children who testified at the Amiraults' 1985 and 1986 trials received financial settlements, the documents show. The other eight who were awarded cash did not testify but attended the Malden day school.
None of the lawyers for the children or for the Amiraults would comment on the awards, which were kept confidential as a condition of the settlements.
But Patricia Amirault, Gerald's wife, said: "For some of the people, I think the money was a clear-cut motive. And for others, I absolutely think they believe in the State's insistence that these kids were sexually abused, and money came later."
The mother of one child who did testify told the "Herald" in 1995: "I've said it before. I'd give up all the money if it meant this never happened."
In one settlement, a young girl who attended the school for less than two months and did not testify received $70,000 up front, and will receive lump sums of $35,000 at ages 18, 21, and 25. At 25, she will recieve $378 per month for life, starting in 2011. Her parents were also granted $70,000. Another girl who did not testify received $85,000 up front and will receive $2,385 per month for life, starting in 2011.
The young boy whose allegations prompted the initial investigations of the school received $75,000 up front and $35,000 at age 18. He will receive $45,000 at age 21, $65,000 at age 25, and $110,000 at age 30.
Monetary awards have been granted by insurers representing other day-care providers convicted of sex abuse in the 1980s, including cases in New Jersey and North Carolina that were subsequently overturned.
In those two cases, insurers continue to make payments and have declined to sue the authorities despite the fact the defendants were later vindicated.
To the extent there are victims in this case, they are Worcester Insurance and the children in whom the Commonwealth planted painful false memories, in order to advance the careers of ambitious prosecutors. And the perp is Massachusetts, and a significant accomplice is Martha Coakley!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.