It's time to come clean Rep. Perry. You need to explain what happened to 16 year old Heather Adams when you were supervising fellow Wareham Police Officer Scott Flanagan the night of December 31, 1992. When Flanagan received two years in prison, why were you forced to resign from the department? It's time to stop hiding the truth, and it's time to start repenting for what happened to this innocent child for the sake of your constituents…
According to a July 19, 1994 Boston Globe Article by Judy Rakosky who covered this story, Heather Adams was a carefree 16-year-old until Dec. 31, 1992, when a Wareham police officer took her behind a dumpster and conducted an unlawful strip search, according to a civil suit filed in US District Court.
Former Police Officer Scott Flanagan admitted to criminal charges and was sentenced to a two-year prison term over the incident, but Adams has forfeited other freedoms, she claims in a court documents.
Since the search, the suit says, Adams has been racked by nightmares and unable to sleep alone. She gave up cheerleading rather than wear the requisite short skirt. She wears layers of clothing to conceal her figure and refuses to undress in front of anyone, the suit says. Her grades have suffered, and she has become a loner.
The suit seeks damages from Flanagan, and from his former supervisors, Sgt. Jeffrey D. Perry and Thomas A. Joyce, who, by the time the incident with Adams had occurred, knew about or should have known about three prior similar events, court documents say.
Adams' distress, according to the suit, stems from that New Year's Eve when Flanagan approached Adams and two friends outside a convenience store. Flanagan accused the girls of possessing marijuana, a charge they denied, turning their pockets inside out to prove it.
Flanagan pleaded guilty in May 1993 in Plymouth County Superior Court to attempted extortion, sexual assault and battery stemming from a May 1991 incident involving Lisa Allen, and to attempted extortion, open and gross lewdness and civil rights violations stemming from the Adams incident.
The suit says that Perry accompanied Flanagan to Adams' house that night and told her parents that she had been “found to have an oregano-like substance on her shirt, and that when she was confronted by the police officer she dropped her pants.”
This user created a brand new account on Sat., May 8 and then wrote a post on May 9. No other comments or any other contribution. Out of the blue we get some dirt on Jeff Perry. Given that Mr. Perry is now completing his fourth term as state representative, it is surprising such a scandal would have escaped the notice of the electorate for so many rounds.
<
p>So mark me very suspicious.
<
p>I’m no friend of Mr. Perry’s: I think his weakness for the Reagan cult is buffoonish. His slogan, too, is painfully awkward: “A Fresh, Dynamic, and Effective New Voice in Washington”. (Four adjectives?) I just cannot believe that Globe articles from 1994 are just now turning up.
All the evidence is there. Also go check out the statements from the Civil Case in which Perry was sued in U.S. District Court.
<
p>Read Judy Rakowsky’s Boston Globe article from July 19, 1994.
<
p>It states specifically:
<
p>The suit seeks damages from Flanagan, and from his former supervisors, Sgt. Jeffrey D. Perry and Thomas A. Joyce, who, by the time the incident with Adams had occurred, knew about or should have known about three prior similar events, court documents say.
<
p>and
<
p>The suit says that Perry accompanied Flanagan to Adams’ house that night and told her parents that she had been “found to have an oregano-like substance on her shirt, and that when she was confronted by the police officer she dropped her pants.”
you are the one making the allegations. Therefore, the obligation to back them up is on you to go to the Brockton courthouse, pull the papers, and post them here.
Atrios has an ongoing joke wherein he accuses reckless accusers of being goatlovers or pedophiles. It’s up to them to refute it. The reckless accusation industry is very fond of making other people responsible for verifying or refuting their reckless claims. Hence, Atrios turning it around against them.
<
p>This has some of the same reckless tone. If you’re making a grave accusation, the responsible thing to do is to back it up yourself.
<
p>If you need help doing that, fine.
<
p>If you cannot do that, shame.
This is a true story that Perry has hid his entire career and no one has as of recently connected the dots with. So Kurt Busch if you think it was alright that Perry, while a Police Sergeant, did nothing about and then covered up the sexual molestation of a child and also did the same for three other occassions involving Scott Flanagan, then all I can say I’m sorry for you. But the truth needs to come out about Perry if he expects to be congressman. Perry needs to be honest with the public about what happened.
What was the end result?
There’s a lot of missing history here and what there is doesn’t add up. Almost every political campaign conducts opposition research. Am I to believe Mr. Perry has run four times unopposed?
was a $50,000 verdict for Ms. Adams. (She refused a settlement offer that reportedly was higher.) However, AFAIK Perry was not a party to that suit – it seems to have been just Flanagan and the town.
It didn’t convince anybody back then either, and Perry became the unusual Republican to unseat a sitting Democrat.
I always thought your first name was Kendrick!
I thought it was Kate.
Is it fair to ask why this post was not taken down given the “suspicious” nature of the post?
most of it is accurate – the Flanagan thing really happened, Ms. Adams did win a jury verdict against him and the town, and Perry had some involvement with the whole thing, though apparently tangential. The only thing that seems to be potentially inaccurate is the notion that Perry was “forced to resign” as a result, and I don’t see that as enough to take down the post.
<
p>If I’m missing other aspects, please feel free to correct me.
This is potentially significant even if it currently has a National Enquirer feel to it. I do not like reckless accusation at all, though. It’s something Republicans (see Liz Cheney, Michelle Bachmann) have been indulging in a lot lately and I don’t want to see our side sink to that level. Not even on blogs. đŸ™‚
<
p>I’d have felt warmer about this diary if it had more of a “Hey! There might be something here!” tone to it or if it substantiated its claims with more than a Boston Globe article that lies behind a pay wall.
Similar claims in the comment section. Perry responds in the comments.
thanks for finding the link
<
p>
This story is completely 100% factual.
<
p>According to the Court Documments from the U.S. District Court Civil Case, the original amount of the suit was $250,000 and the victim, Heather Adams, agreed to drop the amount to $50,000 on the understanding that Perry would “voluntarily” leave the Wareham Police Force.
<
p>Check out the court documents. If anyone else is interested to learn more about the case they can also go to Plymouth Superior Criminal Court in Brockton and take a look at the criminal case of the Commonwealth Vs. Flanagan. In Motion #19, Perry was required to produce a 2 page statement about his involvement and the particulars of the sexual assault of Adams by Flanagan and his own actions in going with Flanagan only hours after the assault to Adams’s home in effort to protect Flanagan.
<
p>This is all publically documented and up until now, no one made the link between Wareham Police Sergeant Perry when the incident occured and State Rep. Jeffrey Perry of today.
<
p>If these allegations aren’t true, then why do these court documents state otherwise.
<
p>
How do we know that Jeff Perry was forced to resign and didn’t just go off and do other stuff. It looks as if he’s had a fine career thus far.
<
p>How do we know that Jeff Perry was part of covering up for Officer Flanagan?
<
p>You reference court documents. I’m not sure I understand motion #19. Who’d that come from? Plaintiff? The judge? Who? How do we know that the visit to Adams’ house was to protect Flanagan?
<
p>Finally, as PP suggests, didn’t Representative Provost’s campaign already raise this material?
We do know that Jeff Perry is very, very fond of Reagan and Reaganism. Let me tell you. We should run against that. There are 2 major aspects to Reaganism:
Note that the first one got us into a totally extraneous and expensive war in Iraq where the only certain consequence is that the formerly isolated Iranian regime now has a shiny new ally.
<
p>Let’s look at the recent consequences of the second:
Jeff Perry wants to run on that?
Do you truly believe that running a campaign based on a desire to expand government will get anyone elected in November? Remember it’s a political question.
Yes.
<
p>It would not be framed as “expand” government, though. The debacle in the Gulf, the recent mine disasters, and the upcoming banking revelations shouldn’t make it a hard sell.
People want the government to step in to regulate the oil industry, mining, wall street, etc. Our government is totally failing in this respect and it’s p*ssing people off. The big government that people don’t want is bailouts to wall street bankers and and hand outs to the health insurance industry that is being paid for by middle class taxpayers who can’t even meet their household budgets.
<
p>People are sick of taxpayer dollars being handed over to huge multi-billion dollar corporations only to have our electeds then try to appease the voter with the “small government/hands off” approach to regulation. It’s so stunningly ridiculous that I can’t believe how many people don’t see it.
otherwise I will delete this portion of the post.
If you indeed ARE a ‘cape cod’ democrat, you would know that Ruth Provost used this incident as the major argument in her campaign. The voters rejected it back in 2002.
attacking Ruth Provost, maybe a link or two might be helpful. CCD was asked the same.
I tried to confirm this assertion but the Google didn’t help me.
Does seem like there’s some bark to this bite. Globe story confirms much of this, though doesn’t go so far as to confirm that Perry’s resignation is connected.
<
p>This is the part that gives me the heebie jeebies
<
p>
<
p>It would be up to a judge and jury whether that would be seen as intimidation. But I’m not sure how you can justify that statement under any circumstance, given the facts above.