Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Deval Patrick’s role in the Ben LaGuer story hits the Herald

By

BMG denizen Speaking Out has periodically posted updates (including one yesterday) on the long-running saga of Ben LaGuer, who was convicted of rape in 1983 and is serving his sentence in MCI-Shirley, but who has consistently maintained his innocence.  The case remains an active one.  The Supreme Judicial Court has agreed to hear LaGuer’s latest round of appeals.  Briefing is scheduled to be completed by late October, and argument is tentatively scheduled for December.  LaGuer is represented (pro bono, I assume) by James Rehnquist, son of the late Chief Justice and a partner at the white-shoe Boston firm of Goodwin Procter.

LaGuer’s bid to clear his name has enlisted an unusual cadre of supporters, including John Silber, Henry Louis Gates, Jr. – and, most relevantly, Deval Patrick, who reportedly said “I therefore have serious misgivings about the integrity of the criminal justice system in this case, as I believe any citizen would.”  Patrick’s “misgivings” led to today’s Herald article, which is subtly entitled “Deval backs rapist’s parole try.”  Additional unbiased reporting comes in the last line, which notes that “LaGuer is not the first convicted violent felon Patrick has backed. When he was an attorney for the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund in the 1980s, Patrick fought to save two cop killers from death row, winning one of the appeals.”  Good job, reporter.  No context, no further information, nothing.  Just inflammatory lines about backing violent felons and saving cop killers.  *sigh*  The article does manage to note that Patrick hasn’t followed the case in recent years. 

Luckily for Patrick, this story ran on the same day that the DA in Colorado dropped murder charges against the guy who may or may not have killed Jon Benet Ramsey.  So rather than the front page of the Herald trumpeting the LaGuer case, we got this:

Small favors, I guess.

UPDATE: Speaking Out notes some interesting circumstantial evidence that Tom Reilly’s campaign may have encouraged the Herald to write the LaGuer story.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. Is the Herald trying to “Willie Horton” Deval?

    <

    p>
    Nothing like portraying a Democrat as being “soft” on crime, I guess. (Other than “tax-and-spend,” that is….)

  2. Patrick is being unfairly treated by the Herald in regard to the LaGuer story.  There are sufficient questions concerning this case to warrant his consternation.  However, Deval has no right to complain about the way the Herald is covering this issue.  It is just about equivalent to they way Deval bashed the public schools in his recent ad.  The fact is that if Gabs had supported LaGuer and Deval had not, Deval would be trumpeting Gabs’ support of LaGuer from the rooftops.

    <

    p>
    I look forward to Gabs or Reilly putting out the ad lambasting Deval for his support of a “convicted racist.”  After all, no ad is complete unless it states “its about the children” or “soft on crime” or “revolving doors of the prison system” or “our schools are falling behind” or “he supports a convicted rapist and ignores his victim.”

    • I think you meant “convicted rapist.”  A funny slip…

      <

      p>
      Anyway, AFAIK, Patrick hasn’t “complained” about the Herald article.

      • What if I am writing on several different levels at the same time.  Ever here of string theory?

    • There is no evidence that Deval himself (or his campaign) is complaining about the Herald article, is there? Just some questions being raised by a few of us here in the blogosphere….

      <

      p>
      And I seriously doubt that Deval would be “trumpeting Gabs’ support of LaGuer from the rooftops.” Again, there is no evidence to support this assertion. Deval has thus far remained above mudslinging, and he doesn’t seem inclined to change course any time soon — especially since he’d probably say that he’d agree with Gabs, if Gabs came out in support of LaGuer. (Has he, btw?)

      <

      p>
      You seem to be making Deval out to be some sort of political opportunist, ready to adopt whatever position is most advantageous. Obviously you do not know the man.

      <

      p>
      And what’s with the Deval-bashing over public schools? Are you satisfied with the public school system — pre-K through college — as it is, or do you think there are ways it could be improved?

      <

      p>

  3. Say what you want about the Herald coverage of the Ben LaGuer story.  The last sentence is the real killer – excuse the pun. 

    <

    p>
    “When he was an attorney for the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund in the 1980s, Patrick fought to save two cop killers from death row, winning one of the appeals.”

    <

    p>
    If Patrick wins the Primary Kerry Healey and her minions will put out t-shirts with that tag line.

    <

    p>

    • is that today’s Herald story, Deval Backs Rapist’s Parole Try, seems to be forshadowing more unflattering stories about Deval to come with the statement in the last paragraph of this story: LaGuer is not the first convicted violent felon Patrick has backed. When he was an attorney for the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund in the 1980s, Patrick fought to save two cop killers from death row, winning one of the appeals.  Patrick’s choices of causes to champion only play into the stereotype that Democrats are weak on crime.  Does anyone remember Willie Horton? Patrick’s decisions on whom to defend and whose cause to champion coupled with his out of the main stream position regarding illegal immigration you know free or subsidized state tuition for illegal’s children, giving illegals driver’s licenses and public housing, and showing absolutely no preference to American citizens or legal immigrants on public housing waiting lists make Patrick’s election to the governor’s office very doubtful, in my opinion. 

      • Deval has spent the last 16 months (at least) talking with regular people all over the state about what their real concerns are, and he’s taken those concerns and developed a platform that addresses them. I’m sure he certainly has developed a better sense of the shared priorities of Massachusetts voters than either you or I. (Unless you’ve run for statewide office recently.) I’d hardly call that being out-of-touch.

        <

        p>
        Now, I’m not saying that there isn’t a fringe segment of the population that fixates on one or two “hotblood” issues such as those to which you refer, but my guess is that most voters have more mundane concerns.

        • Tim Little

          <

          p>
          Let me give you a news flash to the average voter not residing in moonbatville, freeing rapist and cop killers from jail is not fringe. Deval will solve the prison overcrowding issue though, they will all be on the street.

        • 60% of the respondents do not agree with Patrick’s immigration stance.  As far as Patrick meeting with as you put it “regular people all over the state,” I’m not so sure.  Patrick, no doubt and acording to most if not all polls, has the majority of the far left-wing of the Massachusetts Democtratic party supporting him. Unfortunately, for Patrick, Unenrolled voters are also allowed to vote in the Democratic primary.  In recent polls, these unenrolled voters do not appear to find Deval’s candidacy attractive. Why?  Probably due to the “hotblood” issues  of illegal immigration and crime.  However, I think that you’re right that “most voters have more mundane concerns.”  I would contend that a “mundane concern” of most voters is taxes.  Deval wants to ignore the voters’ wishes and not reduce the tax rate from 5.3 to 5.0%.  Gabrieli, on the other hand, wants to honor the wishes of the electorate in a responsible manner.  See Scott Lehigh’s August 8, 2006 article: Gabrieli’s Balanced Blueprint for income Tax Cut. This popular and responsible position is just one among many that Gabrieli holds that will contribute to Gabrieli being elected the Democratic nominee and eventual Governor of Massachusetts. 

          • Here, is what the survey summary says about in-state tuition and taxes in particular:

            <

            p>

            There is modest opposition to providing in-state tuition at state colleges and universities to undocumented immigrants who have graduated from a high school in Massachusetts.  Only 35% of likely Democratic primary voters favor this proposal (18% strongly and 17% somewhat), 53% oppose the idea (38% strongly and 15% somewhat) 8% are neutral and 3% don’t know.
            · Liberals, Patrick voters, and voters with higher levels of education are most likely to support this proposal.
            · Independents, Conservatives, Gabrieli voters, young voters (under 35) and older voters (65+), those with lower levels of education, Catholics, and those earning between $75,000 and $100,000 are most likely to oppose this idea.

            <

            p>

            Voters support rolling back the state income tax to 5% — 57% support this idea (46% strongly and 11% somewhat), 35% support keeping it at 5.3% (22% strongly and 13% somewhat), 5% are neutral and 3% don’t know.
            · Conservatives, Gabrieli voters, older voters, voters with lower levels of income, those with lower levels of education and Catholics are most likely to support the roll-back.
            · Liberals, Patrick voters, voters with post-graduate educations, and upper income voters are most likely to support keeping the tax at 5.3%.

            <

            p>
            Now I’m certainly no expert at deciphering this stuff, but two things strike me:

            <

            p>
            1) The “modest opposition” to in-state tuition is really not effecting Deval’s overall favorability. Those who are seemingly most opposed are also those least likely to actually vote (with the exception, perhaps, of older voters) or those who might yet change their minds. This suggests to me is that the issue is not exactly a top priority for voters. I wonder how many people would have even come up with this as a Top 6 issue if not prompted by the interviewer?

            <

            p>
            2) I will agree with you that taxes are a much higher priority, but I disagree with your framing of the issue. In reality I think Gabrieli and Deval are not that far apart on what is “responsible” tax policy, only I feel that Deval is being more straightforward with voters and not setting up a bait-and-switch. I guess time will tell as to what will work with voters. (Oh, and the “voters’ wishes” thing is a well-beaten red herring, so let’s just leave that be, shall we?)

            <

            p>
            Interestingly, there doesn’t seem to be any data on issues of crime and public safety.

            <

            p>
            Finally, on a blog etiquette note, please refrain from shouting quite so much. I appreciate your passion, but it’s not really condusive to intelligent discourse.

            <

            p>
            Thanks!

Archives