One examiner predicted as late as yesterday that Martha Coakley would win the senate race in Massachusetts, but she didn't. Now that we can no longer predict, all of us who love politics can do is pontificate about Martha Coakley's loss to Scott Brown yesterday.
Some Democrats are blaming Martha Coakley for running a poor campaign. Way over on the right, Rush Limbaugh is claiming that voters turned out to vote for Scott Brown in order to save our nation.
Frankly, I think many factors played a role in Martha Coakley's defeat, but I just want to mention one, that I wrote about on September 4, 2009, and that is Martha Coakley's involvement in the Fells Acres Day Care case, involving false charges of sexual abuse against the Amirault family that ran the day care.
While the article received some attention when I first wrote it, it received a great deal more attention during the past week, with approximately 8000 hits. It was also picked up by many other websites and blogs, which reposted part or all of the article.
I wasn't the only one, however, who felt that Coakley's involvement in the Amirault case disqualified her from being a United States senator.
Here are just a few of the many articles which expressed concern about Coakley's involvement in the case.
One day before I wrote my article, a person left a comment to an article by Dan Kennedy on Media Nation, bringing up the Fells Acre Day Care case. (Kennedy's article predicted that Coakley would win the race. I wonder what he is eating this morning?).
Daily Kos writer jhannon wrote on the subject on September 13, 2009.
Eddie Coyle wrote on October 11, 2009 for the Blue Mass. Group that Democrats could not ignore Coakley's involvement in the Amirault case.
Francis Wilkinson wrote a piece for The Week about Coakley and the Amiraults on October 21, 2009
Ann Coulter writing in Human Events on December 9, 2009 said the Amirault case made Martha Coakley too immoral to be a senator.
Radio station WEEI interviewed Gerald Amirault about Martha Coakley's role in his case on January 14, 2010.
Psychology Today published an article on Jan 18, 2010 about Coakley and Fells Acres, although it was mostly a reprint of the article in The Week.
The list goes on and on. Just google Coakley Fells Acres if you want to read more.
Did Coakley's role in keeping Gerald Amirault in prison play a role in her defeat. I think it did, although what role it played is difficult to say. Certainly, the articles listed above show that it was of concern to many people. I know that If I had lived in Massachusetts I too would have voted against Coakley, although not necessarily for Scott Brown.
Putting and keeping innocent people in prison is as evil as not prosecuting guilty people. When the issue of convicting and imprisoning innocent people is involved in a political race, I am a one issue voter.
Which explains why I will be voting against Montgomery County DA, Jed Conboy, the next time he is up for re-election.
Comments
Just recently a Harvard academic published a book about child sexual abuse which posited that the endless *therapy* the children undergo is more harmful to them than the supposed violation of the child.
"The trauma myth" examines the industry which caters to providing help to supposedly damaged children.
Ms. Coakley ran a really pathetic campaign. And the deluge of wrongful convictions based on spurious testimony prompted by constant questioning really seems to have declined in the new millenium.
So go figure. Seems as if child sexual abuse may be just another crime du jour.
Letters to the Editor: The Real Darkness Is Child Abuse WALL STREET JOURNAL 02/24/95 Hardoon
The three Amiraults — Gerald, Violet and Cheryl – were convicted after two trials before different judges and juries almost one year apart. They were represented by able and well-known defense counsel. The convictions were upheld after review by state and federal appellate courts....in Amirault, the majority of the female children who testified had some relevant physical findings, as did several female children involved in the investigation who did not participate in the trial....The victims and their families in these cases have been irrevocably harmed by what was done to them by the Amiraults....The juries, by their verdicts, rejected these arguments. Justice was done.
COMMONWEALTH vs. GERALD AMIRAULT. 404 Mass. 221 December 6, 1988 - March 6, 1989
The parents of the child witnesses testified about their children's behavior while, or shortly after, attending Fells Acres. The children complained and cried about the school; they complained of stomachaches, headaches, pain in their genital areas, and bowel problems. They began bedwetting, lost their appetites, had nightmares, used baby talk, became fearful of lights, of men, and of being left alone. The children also displayed sexually explicit behavior; some began masturbating. Two of the boys tried to stick their tongues into their mothers' mouths.
Witness praises Amirault decision By John Ellement, Globe Staff, 2/23/2002 ...wants Gerald Amirault to admit he sexually abused her when she attended the Fells Acres Day Care Center in Malden in the 1980s. Bennett was one of nine children who testified against Amirault during his three-month trial in 1986, which ended with his conviction on multiple rape and molestation charges. He was sentenced to 30 to 40 years in prison...As for Amirault, ”...He is where he is supposed to be. I will fight against you to the end. He destroyed my childhood.”....the quality of the investigation and the actions of prosecutors, police, and social workers working with the children were all scrutinized intensely during Gerald Amirault’s trial – and still the jury convicted.
Amirault supporters are focusing on 2 percent of the children’s claims that "seem inexplicable and they are conveniently ignoring the 98 percent of the case that was overwhelming” against Amirault.
Sex abuse hurts children. Period. To state it is not traumatic is ridiculous. Therapy helps children that need it.
Coakley lost because of the health care debate. She won every major city where poor people receive state health care benefits and all of the progressive towns that always vote for social programs. She lost all of the smaller towns where people no longer wanted to pay for additional health insurance taxes for poor people. The election was purely economic. People do not care about legal cases, they care about their wallets. And she ran a poor election.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!