Are unfit for public office? And if there is also something wrong with the crime fighting bone fides of senior prosecutors at the U.S. Department of Justice, does that mean that Healey is arguing that anyone involved with criminal justice in general — except one assumes cubicle criminologists who work at think tanks — should not be in politics? How do you feel about that? What conclusions should we draw about Healey’s use of logic, her ability to reason, her real familiarity with the criminal justice system, and her overall ability to fight crime should she be elected?
cadmiumsays
How to avoid saying things you wish you could take back.
<
p>
How long should a post be.
<
p>
Good places to get facts.
<
p>
Coordinating blogging and talk radio
<
p>
Just general things.
showtimesays
I hate to get ahead of everyone, but have you been hearing any rumors about the make up of the new adminstration?
He’s not elected yet, and won’t be unless he gets the most votes.
speaking-outsays
I’m listening.
<
p>
If the subject gets to LaGuer’s case in the Supreme Judicial Court and the lingering doubts about his actual guilt I’d be glad to chime in. It would be based on my column in the MetroWest Daily News last week. Here it is:
<
p> Reasonable Doubt About Benjamin Laguer’s Guilt
By Eric Goldscheider/ Guest Columnist
Thursday, October 26, 2006
<
p>
The fascinating thing about Benjamin LaGuer becoming a political football in the governor’s race is that the man convicted of raping his 59-year-old neighbor in 1983 might actually be innocent. Largely missing from the debate is that the original case against LaGuer was very weak and revelations made years after the verdict show that vital information was kept from the defense. That issue is currently before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. In 2002 a DNA test LaGuer fought for showed a trace amount of his genetic material in the evidence. This is cited as ironclad proof that LaGuer is guilty, but the media has ignored statements from four reputable DNA experts that the results are unreliable due to the way evidence was handled. LaGuer was indicted in August 1983 after the lead detective made blatantly false statements to the grand jury, including that the victim identified LaGuer by name. Private investigators identified a “likelier suspect” who was five years older than LaGuer with a similar build, complexion and ethnicity. His mother had lived in the building where the crime occurred and, most significantly, he had a history of sexual misconduct. Even though police were made aware of this man, they never interviewed him. In 1998, he was charged with another rape. The list of things pointing to LaGuer’s innocence is long. His attorney, who counted on LaGuer taking a plea bargain under which he could have walked free after two years, was ill prepared for a trial marred by jurors uttering racist slurs about LaGuer during deliberations and, as it turns out, suppressed evidence. The all-white male jury convicted LaGuer based only on the victim, who unbeknownst to the panel had a history of mental illness, pointing to him in the courtroom. By the 1990s LaGuer’s claims of innocence and the gaping holes in the case against him were widely reported in the press. The long list of prominent people speaking and writing in his support included Elie Wiesel, William Styron, Henry Louis Gates Jr., the Boston Globe editorial page, and John Silber. While fighting his conviction, LaGuer explored the world of ideas Boston University’s prison education program was exposing him to. He was a model prisoner, teaching AIDS awareness to other inmates, winning writing awards, and earning a bachelor’s degree with honors. That the parole board, in 1998, refused to acknowledge either the weakness of the original case or LaGuer’s achievements as an inmate incensed his many supporters. With Silber’s encouragement, a team of lawyers set out to find and then test evidence from the case for DNA. Midway through that process, Tamara Fisher, then a young lawyer with a high powered firm, used the Freedom of Information Act to get LaGuer’s police file and eventually the fingerprint report at the heart of the current challenge to the conviction. The file showed that socks and underwear from LaGuer’s apartment were mixed in with the rest of the evidence. Seen together with the miniscule amount of genetic material that yielded the DNA results, it is clear to the experts looking at the case that the way evidence was handled could and probably did lead to contamination. Theodore Kessis concluded, “…many instances of DNA testing errors have led to the false conviction of innocent individuals… It is my opinion that we have encountered such a case here.” Harvard geneticist Daniel Hartl seconded that finding, writing, “There is, in my opinion, ample reason for a full inquiry into this case, and I hope that the Supreme Judicial Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts will agree.” The issue before the SJC is whether LaGuer was denied a fair trial due to the fact that prosecutors withheld a report showing that four fingerprints lifted from a key piece of evidence — the base of the trim line telephone, the cord of which was used to bind the victim’s wrists — were left by someone other than LaGuer. The detective testified at trial that he only recovered one partial print. That testimony was obviously untrue. If the verdict is overturned then it will be up to a new jury to decide if LaGuer is in fact guilty as charged.
cadmiumsays
Wish it could have been longer. Radio really runs on a tight time schedule.
at how fast time passes when I’m on radio or TV. That half hour felt like about 8 minutes.
rpluciussays
you should try being the guy pushing the buttons… really goes fast then… too fast sometimes..
cadmiumsays
Very few people (liberal or not) that I know are aware of Jeff’s show. All the stations with right-wing bents do a lot of local talk and that gets people’s interest. National shows don’t give anyone the opportunity to discuss local politics. Eagan and Braude on WTTK are middle of the road pretty much.
<
p>
Jeff Santos is the name. 1430 ane 1200 AM are the game!
And maybe mention the BMG Air Force?
Are unfit for public office? And if there is also something wrong with the crime fighting bone fides of senior prosecutors at the U.S. Department of Justice, does that mean that Healey is arguing that anyone involved with criminal justice in general — except one assumes cubicle criminologists who work at think tanks — should not be in politics? How do you feel about that? What conclusions should we draw about Healey’s use of logic, her ability to reason, her real familiarity with the criminal justice system, and her overall ability to fight crime should she be elected?
How to avoid saying things you wish you could take back.
<
p>
How long should a post be.
<
p>
Good places to get facts.
<
p>
Coordinating blogging and talk radio
<
p>
Just general things.
I hate to get ahead of everyone, but have you been hearing any rumors about the make up of the new adminstration?
He’s not elected yet, and won’t be unless he gets the most votes.
I’m listening.
<
p>
If the subject gets to LaGuer’s case in the Supreme Judicial Court and the lingering doubts about his actual guilt I’d be glad to chime in. It would be based on my column in the MetroWest Daily News last week. Here it is:
<
p>
Reasonable Doubt About Benjamin Laguer’s Guilt
By Eric Goldscheider/ Guest Columnist
Thursday, October 26, 2006
<
p>
The fascinating thing about Benjamin LaGuer becoming a political football in the governor’s race is that the man convicted of raping his 59-year-old neighbor in 1983 might actually be innocent. Largely missing from the debate is that the original case against LaGuer was very weak and revelations made years after the verdict show that vital information was kept from the defense. That issue is currently before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. In 2002 a DNA test LaGuer fought for showed a trace amount of his genetic material in the evidence. This is cited as ironclad proof that LaGuer is guilty, but the media has ignored statements from four reputable DNA experts that the results are unreliable due to the way evidence was handled. LaGuer was indicted in August 1983 after the lead detective made blatantly false statements to the grand jury, including that the victim identified LaGuer by name. Private investigators identified a “likelier suspect” who was five years older than LaGuer with a similar build, complexion and ethnicity. His mother had lived in the building where the crime occurred and, most significantly, he had a history of sexual misconduct. Even though police were made aware of this man, they never interviewed him. In 1998, he was charged with another rape. The list of things pointing to LaGuer’s innocence is long. His attorney, who counted on LaGuer taking a plea bargain under which he could have walked free after two years, was ill prepared for a trial marred by jurors uttering racist slurs about LaGuer during deliberations and, as it turns out, suppressed evidence. The all-white male jury convicted LaGuer based only on the victim, who unbeknownst to the panel had a history of mental illness, pointing to him in the courtroom. By the 1990s LaGuer’s claims of innocence and the gaping holes in the case against him were widely reported in the press. The long list of prominent people speaking and writing in his support included Elie Wiesel, William Styron, Henry Louis Gates Jr., the Boston Globe editorial page, and John Silber. While fighting his conviction, LaGuer explored the world of ideas Boston University’s prison education program was exposing him to. He was a model prisoner, teaching AIDS awareness to other inmates, winning writing awards, and earning a bachelor’s degree with honors. That the parole board, in 1998, refused to acknowledge either the weakness of the original case or LaGuer’s achievements as an inmate incensed his many supporters. With Silber’s encouragement, a team of lawyers set out to find and then test evidence from the case for DNA. Midway through that process, Tamara Fisher, then a young lawyer with a high powered firm, used the Freedom of Information Act to get LaGuer’s police file and eventually the fingerprint report at the heart of the current challenge to the conviction. The file showed that socks and underwear from LaGuer’s apartment were mixed in with the rest of the evidence. Seen together with the miniscule amount of genetic material that yielded the DNA results, it is clear to the experts looking at the case that the way evidence was handled could and probably did lead to contamination. Theodore Kessis concluded, “…many instances of DNA testing errors have led to the false conviction of innocent individuals… It is my opinion that we have encountered such a case here.” Harvard geneticist Daniel Hartl seconded that finding, writing, “There is, in my opinion, ample reason for a full inquiry into this case, and I hope that the Supreme Judicial Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts will agree.” The issue before the SJC is whether LaGuer was denied a fair trial due to the fact that prosecutors withheld a report showing that four fingerprints lifted from a key piece of evidence — the base of the trim line telephone, the cord of which was used to bind the victim’s wrists — were left by someone other than LaGuer. The detective testified at trial that he only recovered one partial print. That testimony was obviously untrue. If the verdict is overturned then it will be up to a new jury to decide if LaGuer is in fact guilty as charged.
Wish it could have been longer. Radio really runs on a tight time schedule.
at how fast time passes when I’m on radio or TV. That half hour felt like about 8 minutes.
you should try being the guy pushing the buttons… really goes fast then… too fast sometimes..
Very few people (liberal or not) that I know are aware of Jeff’s show. All the stations with right-wing bents do a lot of local talk and that gets people’s interest. National shows don’t give anyone the opportunity to discuss local politics. Eagan and Braude on WTTK are middle of the road pretty much.
<
p>
Jeff Santos is the name. 1430 ane 1200 AM are the game!