From the breaking news department. The Boston Herald is reporting this morning that newly elected State Senator James Marzilli (D-Arlington) has been accused of sexual assault.
An Arlington woman has accused a state senator of sexual assault following an early-morning encounter in her home yesterday, the Herald has learned.
According to the town police log, cops were called to an undisclosed home at 1:15 a.m. to investigate a report of indecent assault and battery.
According to two law enforcement sources, the woman alleged that state Sen. James Marzilli (D-Arlington) made unwanted advances and groped her during an incident in her house. Marzilli, 49, was not arrested and has not been charged.
One wonders if charges are forthcoming?
Please share widely!
I mean, I guess it was, if she did call. Heck Broaddrick, Jones, and Willey never called the police, and they were (according to them) a lot more than over-advanced on unwantedly.
I used to live in Albany in college, you want to see bad things, move there. If you were a girl, you couldn’t go into a bar without some politician, aide, or lobbyist sexually harassing you. When I was in town in grad school at RPI, there was a huge thing with the chief of staff of the speaker raping a girl (he got off though he was accused three times in a span of a few years, he is NYs Gary Zerola). This guy just doesn’t fit the profile of one of these creeps. I wonder if its politically motivated. Think about it, people will remember he was accused. If the claim is false, people will still equate his name with the act. Looks like someone is taking a page from the Roger Stone handbook.
I don’t know how well you know Mr. Marzilli or the depth of your investigative powers. But “just doesn’t fit the profile of one fo these creeps?” And concluding that he’s being set up?
<
p>I worry that your suggested defense for him should the matter ever go anywhere would be “she was asking for it.”
<
p>Anytime the police are called at 1am, there’s reason to pause. And though not necessarily fodder for the public, the fact that a married man was in another woman’s home at that hour is also, well, let’s just say I’m not sure how well that would fly in my house.
<
p>Again, I’m not advocating binding his legs in the town square. I’m just saying it would make me think twice if I ever got a campaign mailing that included a picture of he and his lovely family.
<
p>But to say the guy doesn’t fit the profile makes you sound like you slept through l’affaire de Spitzer.
on my screen i see [hidden comment] and then they’s comment. hidden in plain sight, i guess!
I see it as well — I think we both have enough mojo to see it, and thus
could raise its average rating if we wanted.
you must be right, because when i viewed the diary after logging out, the comment thread was gone. and here i sat for who know how long, not knowing i had the power to see the invisible!
It happened with my infamous comment that made it to the Globe as well.
Just in case you were wondering.
I’m not worried if you don’t know how this thing works. I can see the hidden comment, so apparently I have mojo!
<
p>I bet that piker Doug Rubin can’t see the hidden comment!
I can see this hidden comment is it really hidden? Am I missing some joke?
Let’s not convict the guy before he has his day in court. I’ve seen too many stories where charges were made up, etc. for me to do anything else (including one that happened at my high school: a teacher was accused of attempting to rape a student… and she later admitted it didn’t actually happen, but not until after his reputation was destroyed, he had been suspended for nearly the year, etc. Mrs. D, my favorite history teacher perhaps ever, right up front told my Government class not to convict the guy before he had his day in court… and it’s a lecture I’ve been repeating to others, for different cases, ever since).
….i agree let’s not actually “convict” anyone without the process of the court.
<
p>and i’m not that interested in this particular case
<
p>but more broadly
<
p>is our standard that we shouldn’t discuss the situation of any public officlal who hasn’t been convicted?
<
p>all that spitzer talk before his admission? larry craig — before he plead guilty (which was before his recanting), we shouldn’t discuss? rick renzi of arizona, indicted on 35 counts? william jefferson of money-in-the-freezer fame who is pleading innocent?
we shouldn’t acknowledge the news and even discuss it. more like just don’t jump to unwarranted conclusions with it.
” I did not have sexual relations with that woman,
Ms. Lewinsky.” Then he denied it under oath–(no less) then they trotted out the blue dress. Uh, perhaps I misspoke. (translated: I am a bold faced liar.) Of course all the other women and their allegations of sexual assault are liars as well.
if you put down the moonshine jug few a secund, paw, you’ll notice there aint no talk neither of denial ner admissions here. and leeew-in-ski never accused anyone of sexual assault. i read in one on them paper newsie thing that she seemed to kinda really enjoy her brush with “power”! but damn them stinkin deem-o-crats any old how!
What Clinton got called on the carpet for was not illegal. What was illegal was the perjury. Which incidentally is a felony. But who’s counting. No different than that idiot Republican Congressman from Ohio that is a thief, or the idiot Republican congressman from California who is a thief, or the idiot senator trolling for sex in airports.
They are all cut out of the same bolt of cloth.
that sexual assault in the workplace happens when someone with power uses that power to have sexual relations with an underling, wanted or unwanted. That the mere fact of having those sexual relations with an underling can cause others at the organization to be passed over for promotion or other positive benefits. That sexual relations must not be non-consensual for sexual harrasment to occur. That of course is unless the one doing the harrasing is the President of the United States and is liked by the modern feminist establishment. It was never about the blow job for me but the double standard.
<
p>He was a 50 something year old, most powerful man in the world and she was a young 20 something intern. It is a classic case of sexual harrasment, classic. Of course unless you are a wildly popular Democratic President, with the backing of the modern feminist movement.
<
p>
…been taught incorrectly. There is no legal doctrine that says that consensual sexual realtions between people at different levels in a institutional or corporate entity per se constitute sexual harassment. It is possible, depending on the circumstance for such a relationship to cause what is considered hostile workplace harassment. Quid pro quo harassment, as you point out first, is easy to define and easy to see, “have sex with me or I’ll fire you.” Age difference and difference in status can be evidence of opportunity to harass, but it does not prove it.
<
p>Hostile workplace harassment involves creating an environment where employees are made to feel unwelcome, unsafe or very uncomfortable because of the conduct of one or more colleague. While it is possible for a consensual sexual relationship to be exploited in a way that creates a hostile environment, it does not, by its mere existence do so. Many companies proscribe such relationships to avoid the prospect of lawsuits, but corporate policy is not the law. There is nothing improper, legally, with having a consensual sexual relationship with a subordinate.
<
p>President Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinski hardly constituted hostile workplace harassment since, by all accounts, it was a secret, that is, until Linda Tripp got involved. As far as quid pro quo goes, the difference in their age and status would be evidence of harassment, if it was alleged, but there is the rub, it never was. Miss Lewinski never claimed that the affair was anything but voluntary and consensual. So, legally, there was no harassment. Whether there was some moral standard that was violated is another thing, and that is for people to decide on their own, but you are talking legal standards and you are misstating them.
<
p>
…and it went all the way to court, where the student’s case was thrown out. But not before the teacher had been out of work for the better part of two years, and suffered a major heart attack in the process.
<
p>I’m with Ryan on this one.
The cops did not lock him up. When have you ever heard of an alleged sexual assault, where the victim, an alleged woman. very likely dialed 911, the cops show up, she says, I am the victim of indecent A&B, the alleged perp is standing there—-and they didn’t lock him up. Are you kidding?
<
p>The cops did not lock this mope up for two reasons and only two reasons: one is that the womans allegations and the evidence or lack thereof are so out of whack with her statement, that they had to give him the benefit of the doubt (for a while/pending investigation OR it’s a bag job. That’s it. There is no other reason.
<
p>I have no idea who this guy is, but he does in fact have a wife, somewhere. What is he doing with this woman in her home? At that hour? Was he invited in? Was there alcohol involved. Was the woman’s clothing dissheveled/torn? Was furniture out of place or broken? Were their abrasions/contusions on the woman’s hands/forearms/neck? Why did she dial 911?
<
p>If it is a bag job—the case is going to go away. If the DA, whoever it may be, is in the satchel, then that is the ball game. I don’t care if the alleged victim is Mother Theresa’s partner is sainthood. On the other hand, if the DA is in a corner, or the alleged assailant has urinated down someone’s leg and it is time for payback—then he is going down the drain.
<
p>Still—it is highly suspect that the cops did not lock him up. My money is on the DA making it go away. It appears the alleged assailant is one of the annointed.. So despite what the facts of the case are or the veracity of the complainant’s allegations—no complaint to issue. After all—-this is Massachusetts.
you know this “fact” how?
but I sure do hope you are consistent.
<
p>
That was supposed to be off of Ryan’s post
<
p>
. . . what is one to think?
<
p>There is no rush to judgement here! I’m sure this will all come out in the wash.
<
p>Lecture item: Politicians need to be true to their ideals. It is no to much to expect!
<
p>What happened here should come out in court. If this ever makes itinto a courtroom.
My friends in Arlington tell me that the media (and the local email list) was getting calls and anonymous “tips” claiming Marzilli was arrested before the police department was aware there was even a complaint. This smells fishy.
<
p>Marzilli’s opponents tried to smear him in the past with a “Marzilli’s gay” whisper campaign – but all that did was to bring out the gay and lesbian vote.
… that certainly does smell fishy.
It’s hard to smear a pol who is home in his own bed with his own wife at 1:15 AM.
he was at a political fundraiser. sometimes they go late. that’s part of being a pol. so i guess you’re saying that it’s hard to smear a pol who isn’t a pol…or something.
<
p>i think if you want to smear a pol, you don’t need an after hours time frame. all you need is 2 minutes out of eyeshot of any witness.
in the morning. Maybe you progressives party harder than us conservatives. But being alone with a woman other than your wife at 1:15 am on Sunday Morning is not exactly putting yourself in a good situation.
the paper said it was a “function”, and didn’t specify which sort. and it was the boston globe article, not the one linked to above. sorry for the confusion.
<
p>as for the appropriateness of being out to whatever time, leave it to a gooper to get all nanny tisk tisk on another man’s ass.
The police were CALLED at 1:15, so obviously Senator Marzilli wasn’t there when the cops were called.
<
p>Saturday was town election day in Arlington, so there weren’t many people home and in bed at an early hour Saturday night. The local candidates endorsed by Marzilli all won the town election.
<
p>Full disclosure: Jim is a friend. I think he is an honorable guy. Personally, I find the charge to be incredible, but then again I wasn’t there.
“Political Wisdom 232: (4.50 / 2)
It’s hard to smear a pol who is home in his own bed with his own wife at 1:15 AM.”
<
p>What part of that statement don’t you agree with?
that anything that happens late at night should be viewed with suspicion. I think it’s silly to think that immoral or criminal behavior is more prevalent at night than during the day.
the anonymous postings began yesterday, claiming to have heard about news reports before there was anything in the press–but that was after the police received the complaint on Sunday morning.
<
p>It felt plenty fishy to me but your buddies here in A-Town have overstated the case.
<
p>BTW the justly famous Arlington list has largely discounted these posts, so far.
Are you saying she is part of a vast right wing conspiracy to “get” the alleged assailant? Her motive is what?
<
p>Perpetrators of a criminal or conspiratorial act must satisfy a few requirements to be truly scrutinized. Means, motive , and opportunity. For the sake of arguement, let’s just accept that the alleged assailant is the actual victim here. What would be this woman’s motive? A woman scorned? Payback? Money? She’s crazy? What?
<
p>Very rarely is anyone victimized by a total stranger. It is always friends/family/ co-worker/classmate/ or the person that someone has had casual contact with.
<
p>I don’t think that alleging that this is a conspiracy to torpedo “your guy” is going to stick. You have to get a bigger broom to obfuscate and blur the case, where it becomes unable to be presented to a judge at a probable cause hearing or a clerk of court for issuance of a complaint. This gives the case the flavor of “unprosecutability” (is there such a word?) No one knows how the case slipped through the cracks. God forbid that it goes before a grand jury. In this state a grand jury will issue a true bill for anything.
…or so I thought. I note the article talks about a 1:00 AM phone call to police, or something, as well. I have known J. James Marzilli since 1984 and never seen anything inappropriate – nor experienced anything I would even consider remotely off color. No sexualized “jokes” by Jim – ever. Also – no touching – none of that EVER from Jim Marzilli. So I plan to put the story aside and let it play out with no further time, or attention from me. And I am collecting signatures for Senator Marzilli’s re-election campaign. I do not believe “where there is smoke, there must be fire”.
would you act the same way?
I’m reading Amber’s comment as relaying personal experience with a person, not a random politician. I understand the point that you are trying to make, but it doesn’t jibe with this comment.
but shut the door on those we dislike before the jury is even convened. This is a human failing, I guess, and I think we’re all guilty of it. Of course, this blurry vision can be very dangerous, which is why our emotions should never carry the day.
<
p>2. And Howie Carr needs remedial civics and civility instruction.
<
p>As it happens, I am not a close friend of Jim Marzilli, but have lived in Arlington since DCecember of 1983. In all that time, often at the same events, I have never heard Jim Marzilli, even once, tell an “off color story” or make a sexual innuendo.
<
p>I have never seen Jim Marzilli touching females casually [so many men seem to think they can pat, hug, or put their arm around a woman in a way they never would do with a man – I have never seen or experienced Jim Marzilli do this].
<
p>I have been in the same room, or working on the same project with Jim Marzilli enough times over the last 24 or so years that I have lost count.
<
p>I have only been in the same room with Scott Brown two times – the data sets are not equivalent [I don’t count the times I was in the senate gallery staring like a hawk and taking notes during budget debates].
<
p>But, again, one of the bulwarks against tyranny in the American legal system is “innocent until proven guilty” – I would have thought any conservative worth more then a nickle would support that principle.
<
p>Oh – and Arlingtonians work for a living. We are not moonbats – we are teachers, firefighters, secretaries, union carpenters, business owners, and smearing all of us like Howie Carr [is Howie one of your heroes, not sure as to this, Eabo] is an act of malicious lazyness.
<
p>Why bother with facts when there is a juicy smear to popularize and spread? Who needs a legal system, anyway. Dunk ’em all in a pond and see if they sink.
unless you got picked up in Afghanistan or Iraq during a post-IED sweep-then you can get tortured until you confess to something, so you’re presumed guilty until proven guilty. The USA ain’t what it used to be-perhaps it never was.
Isn’t it unusual for a woman to tell police that X sexually assaulted her, and for the police then to investigate first with an eye toward bringing charges against X later? It could be the ambiguous nature of the charges, of course. But the specter of “do you know who I am?” hovers over this.
Regardless of the facts and the findings of any investigation. A situation of she said he said will only haunt this politician for a time to come. What disturbs me the most is the lack of good judgment on the Senators part. He is not a kid and claiming he could not imagine such a circumstances occurring is well just not an excuse for an experienced politician to make He made a fatal error in bringing a women (not his wife or an immediate family member) to his home late at night when no one else was at home.
<
p>I think regardless of the outcome of the investigation it will take much more then a lack of evidence finding for the Senator to escape this flaw in judgment.
<
p>This is most unfortunate because he held such promise of being able to truly advance the cause of Global Warming and protecting the environment as a Senator now we will just have to wait and see how effective he can be going forward from this.
<
p>As usual just my opinions I do hope I am wrong in this one
<
p>Edward Quinn
Just wanted to clarify the alleged facts. The story does not say he brought her to his house. It sounded like he may have given her a ride home.
I think regardless of the circumstances that come out or do not. The Point I am making is that the situation the Senator placed himself in has compromised him regardless of the actual details. There will be commentors on both sides saying it was a cover up or blah blah blah!!!!!
<
p>The senator can not escape the fact that he placed himself into a situation that if something happened it could not be explained away by a third party and this is where the lack of judgement comes in.
<
p>It is a sad commentary on society that your behavior is subject to wild speculation but he is certainly not the first Politician to fall victim nor sad to say will he be the last I am sure.
<
p>I would give one hypothetical
<
p>Where would the criticism be of Senator Edward Kennedy if he had not gone off the bridge but instead made it to the young womans home and dropped her off and went home himself. Certainly not much of a story their. Yet with the results you should have a shinning example of what can happen vs what did happen.
<
p>Again the potential of a great career may and I repeat may be forever damaged by what is alleged to be the facts not what maybe the facts and the rest of us are left up to our own imaginations. I hope all other elected officials take note and not forget.
<
p>As usual just my opinions
<
p>Ed Quinn
What about all of Uncles Ted’s subsequent problems? Certainly there must be someone else that had good intentions and was at the wrong place at the wrong time
ie that boob by the name of Craig from Idaho.
This was widely reported by community news in most communities in the district.
<
p>”The matter remains under investigation,” said Arlington Chief of Police
Fred Ryan, “and to date, Senator Marzilli has declined, through his
attorney, to speak with our investigators.”
<
p>Now I am no attorney and a client who does not listen to his attorney is a fool but this attorney is killing Senator Marzilli slowly. This kind of public response to this allegation is IMHO a fatal mistake on the part of a politician. If your innocent say it publicly or at the very least if you’re innocent give the investigators your statement. Either will rally your support but with this kind of stand where will we be when the indictment comes down because you refused to speak. You’ve made it impossible to stand with you maybe it’s the times maybe it’s the fact that to many in the past have lied to us that we now must step away and wait and see. Politically speaking your bad judgment compounded by your attorneys lack of understanding of Political reality makes me have to ask is it time for you to step aside and let the district move on.
<
p>With elections coming in November how can we stand tall with someone we’re afraid to even get close to? I think it’s time for the Senator to take a step back and decide if he wants to remain in Politics or move on with his life and try to put this episode behind him. Right now I can’t see his political career moving forward if the status quo remains intact. The risk to losing in November and turning over the seat to someone who does not truly represent the interests of the majority should not be an option to you yet you may infact be putting us at that risk.
<
p>Bad Judgment does not make you a criminal in any way nor should an accusation.
Bad Judgment will end a political career where the bar is much higher with regards to public standards. Just a fact of life today.
<
p>As Usual just my opinions
<
p>Ed Quinn
Senator Marzilli and his wife were incredibly gracious to us when they let us use their home the summer of 05 as a HQ for Deval Patrick volunteers. They fed us great food, gave me a nice cold Coke which was awesome after a long day walking hilly Arlington in the sweltering heat. And you could just tell the chemistry and love and dotting affection between the two.
<
p>I just cannot believe such a nice man, with such a nice wife, could possibly have done something this stupid. Especially someone with his public stature.
<
p>So I would wait and see what happens before we convict the man on hearsay evidence.
Eleanor Roosevelt and her “friend”. Won’t even bother with the former president and his beautiful and gracious wife.
Eliot Spitzer—your remember Eliot Spitzer?
<
p>What was Marzilli doing in this woman’s house? Why did she call police?
<
p>Because he gave you a Coke—-he is unable of indecent A&B?
OK.