First, Healey is supporting New Bedford’s plan to begin drug-testing at its public schools, starting at age 11. Healey is backing the New Bedford program and said the city’s decision to start drug testing could be a model for other communities.
Let’s see where Democratic frontrunner Reilly stands on another clear privacy issue, this time a battle over the release of private medical records, which could reveal whether an underage girl was intoxiacted when she died:
These are private medical records, and they were not public records and should not be released,” Reilly said last night on ”Greater Boston” on WGBH-TV.
Asked about his involvement, Reilly added: ”I’ve had many conversations with district attorneys on cases, but, first and foremost, it was the family and the suffering they’d gone [through]. This shouldn’t have even gotten this far; this family suffered enough.”
Reilly, as AG, is the state’s top prosecutor. And yet, here he is, standing up for the privacy of a victim and standing in the way of a possible convinction. Often, an AG seeking higher office would jump on this the other way, demanding justice at every turn, laws and principles be damned.
You’ll find no such principled argument from Healey. Drug-testing in public schools, acceded to by parents or not, is a lame attempt to pander to every parent’s fears when they send their children off to school. For Healey to stand behind this program demonstrates exactly where she’ll stand on privacy issues amd education in Massachusetts should she be elected. Right alongside the Republican Congress, which is pushing this program on schools across the country.
A parent summarizes just how indicative this program is of the larger Republican effort to sacrifice civil liberties in favor of a potentialallayance of fear:
Kim Silva’s 16-year-old son has straight As, plays sports, and is a diabetic; she said she does not think he’s a drug user. Her daughter, who is 10, will not be eligible for the program until next year, but Silva said she is leaning toward signing them up.
What is it going to hurt?she said.I’d rather know. It would make them think twice.
Sounds precisely like the defense we’re hearing about illegal wiretaps, no?
I’ve not made a decision on whether to support Reilly or Deval Patrick in the Democratic primary. I’ve been satisfied with both of them, though not impressed by either. This morning’s news, however, makes it all the more clear that returning the Governor’s office to a Democrat is important not just for the big battles like gay marraige and social programs, but for these seemingly small ones. As we’ve seen on a national scale, if you give an inch on privacy … you know the rest.
what concerned me was the fact that the father of the victims is apparently an old friend of Reilly’s (and a campaign contributor), so it has the whiff of a powerful state official intervening at the behest of his friends to spare the family embarrassment rather than someone crusading for privacy rights. And withholding the records did interfere with an investigation:
<
p>
Northborough Police Chief Mark Leahy told the Associated Press yesterday that his investigation was stymied by the district attorney’s refusal to share the autopsy reports with his department. Leahy’s department was investigating whether the teenagers had been illegally served liquor. Under Massachusetts’ so-called social-host law, anyone who serves alcohol to a minor may be criminally charged.
“I was certainly surprised by the involvement of the AG’s office,” Leahy told the AP. “They don’t ordinarily get involved in these matters.”
On WGBH, Reilly basically filibustered Emily Rooney on this — repeating himself, going on and on without saying anything. He may be right on principle, but it was a pretty lousy speaking performance.
As I read it over again, I’m actually more suspect than I am impressed, especially given the $300 contribution. I may have been too willing to damn Healey by praising Reilly. Thank you for pointing that out.
I mean, that’s nice, but I wouldn’t expect to get preferential treatment b/c of a small-ish contribution. The dad of the two girls is a friend of Reilly.
<
p>
In any event, I actually agree with Reilly that I don’t think it’s necessary for the press to know, but it seems a little strange that he’d be involved, and he was clearly uncomfortable talking about it.
right on with you Charley. Trying to guess how this played out, I be the Northborough police chief was pissed (because he wants to look tough) and Reilly did the right thing. Sure, it might have been awkward for him, considering the connection, but he did whats right, and in the end, thats what matters.
…or the “host” of the Baseball Playoff Party that the girls attended. IF they were drinking at this gathering, then someone committed the crime of supply booze to minors and two young girls are dead becuase of it. Of course the facts are not known to the Police Chief because he has been denied records from the DA’s Office.
<
p>
I’m not a Patrick troll here. It just blows my mind that this happened and now there appears to be another news cycle on this story and it could become a real fire for the Rielly camp. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/01/05/police_drop_investigation_after_ag_intervenes/
<
p>
I must say, I’m surprised about the lack of interest this story seems to have on this site. I expected wall-to-wall coverage on the front page.
Write up your own post — that’s what they’re for!
on the article and everything I read it was the Murphy family. It said nothing about the host of the party. The father of the family had given to the campaign, not anyone who allegedly supplied the minors.
Ask and you shall recieve.