[Argus]

Janet Reno did the same thing to a guy in Florida when she was DA down there. Railroad the innocent into prison, get headlines, and make sure he stays in there to rot lest someone question your role. Refuse to knuckle under to liberal inquisitors, and you find out quickly how compassionate they really are.

[TroutStalker]

FYI.

[moderation_is_not_a_bad_thing]

I'm a little confused here.... is the guy innocent or guilty? Obviously a jury found him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, is he somehow different than every other criminal claiming innocence?

If he's innocent then he needs better lawyers, if he's guilty then let him rot in jail. I personally don't get the idea of letting someone out early for "good behaviour". Good behaviour while in prison? Bizarre.....

[okie01]

The piece was by Dorothy Rabinowitz, I presume.

It is truly appalling that Amirault is still imprisoned. But it is good to see that Dorothy is still on the state's case.

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts evidently still practices the Salem Witch Trial Alternative. Either:

a. Confess and be burned at the stake, or

b. Don't confess and be tested in the drowning chair -- survive and be found guilty, then burned as a witch, or be drowned and...acquitted.

[Rainbow Rising]

Meanwhile, real child molesters con their way through these so-called "treatment" programs, and are then set free to live among an unsuspecting public, despite the high recidivism rate of such criminals. The system is truly topsy-turvy. I can't imagine how Gerald Amirault stays sane in the midst of this nightmare. I'm glad the Wall Street Journal has kept up with his story, because few other media outlets seem inclined to do so.

[SamAdams76]

I truly believe this man is innocent. I remember the case vividly from back in 1985. There was no physical evidence whatsoever presented in court that this abuse ever took place. Only the testimony of children who were coached extensively by "social workers." A child is very impressionable. I remember when I was six, my father threatened to throw me out the second story window of our house if I didn't behave and that he had already done it to another "bad" boy who is now dead. Of course this never happened. But my father told me that's what happened and I believed him at the time (probably after he had one too many shots of whiskey). I believed this for years until my father told me when I was around 10 that he made the whole thing up. But for years, I pictured this boy being thrown out the window by my father and would have have breathlessly told the tale to anybody that would listen to me. It doesn't take much to get a little kid's imagination running wild.

This case occurred during a time when there was a "witch hunt" of child molesters. Anybody accused of child molestation was automatically convicted in the media. Anybody brought up on such charges in a courtroom would get convicted, even if the evidence was not convincing. After all, what juror could let an accused child molester walk free?

It is because of this witch hunt mentality that I never became a Scout leader or a Little League coach and never worked with kids in any way. Why risk some kid pointing a finger at me and making a false accusation? My life would be over as I know it. A false accusation can have such horrendous consequences. We now read how teenage girls (and boys) concoct charges to "get back" at a strict teacher or some other hated authority figure. Some of them recant the charges but the falsely accused will have a cloud hanging over their heads for the rest of their lives, nevertheless. As for those who never recant, the poor guy ends up sitting in a jail cell, scorned by his fellow inmates and abandoned by his friends and family.

All Gerald Amirault had to do to go free was admit his guilt. He could have been home with his family many years ago and seen his kids grow up. But if you are innocent, how can you ever admit guilt? I try to put myself in Amirault's position and I would probably do the same thing, painful as it may be. No way would I ever admit to something so horrendous if I never did it.

The DA, social workers and other politicians in Massachusetts are too gutless to do the right thing. They want to cover their own asses so they will never admit that maybe they railroaded an innocent guy.

Remember, there was absolutely no physical evidence at all in this case suggesting that any sexual abuse took place at that day care. It certainly is a stretch to presume that Gerald Amirault, as well as his mother and sister could sexually abuse all these children without leaving a shred of physical evidence. It is even more of a stretch that not one of them would strike a deal with prosecuters and rat out the other two (or one) and that all three would willingly sit in jail for years when they knew that an admission of guilt would set them free. That is not what true pedophiles would do. A true pedophile would do whatever it takes to get out of prison so that they can do it again.

[SalukiLawyer]

This is routine. Typical case: an allegation of sexual abuse by parent is extracted from child by police. Without any other evidence this is sufficient for criminal charges and removal of child by DCFS. Since case may be (often is) weak, parent may indeed be permitted by the prosecutor to plead guilty to a lesser (often MUCH lesser) charge rather than run the risk of an unpredictable jury convicting him (or, yes, her) and the mandatory prison term that would entail. (This is sometimes called a "plea of convenience." The less polite term is an extortion.)

The return of the child now depends on the parent satisfying the State that he or she has "taken responsibility" for abuse that never occurred. This means confessing to a particularly horrible crime that never happened. When the desparate parent finally decides to parrot the required words and try to sham his or her way through group therapy, the State will say that doesn't count because the parent "doesn't mean it." Of course the State operates the psycho-social evaluation apparatus, too, backed up by still more court-recognized child advocacy volunteers and attorneys whose sole goal is to "play it safe" so there is absolutely no chance that the child is not "at risk." (Meanwhile, sexual abuse DOES go on in foster care, and not always by foster parents but by troubled OTHER children they are keeping.)

That road paved with good intentions has many, many stones with the mark "For the Children."

[agitator]

16 years ago, I sat outside the courthouse (along with 6 other people in news trucks) where "Tookie" Amiralt's trial was held for 2 weeks. Every day, we did what is known in the business as "gratuitous live shots" for the noon nooz

("...Well Jack, we're outside the courthouse waiting for the jury to return a verdict. Nothing has happened since yesterday, we don't know when anything is going to happen, but if something DOES happen, we'll be here to cover it! Back to you in the studio, Jack! ")

The whole thing was a media circus because the media is too greedy, lazy, and stupid to do anything important and they smelled fresh, ratings meat. Beyond the witchhunt mentality that the propaganda ministry I worked in was all too happy to capitalize on, Scott Dirtburger, er Harshbarger, is one of the biggest parasites ever produced in Massachusetts - right up there with Teddy.

[The Irishman]

Thanks for the post. I've been following the columns on this case by Rabinowitz for years and am convinced that this is a festering sore of injustice.

To right the wrong government must admit it is wrong. There is no principled person, Democrat or Republican, in a position of authority to do this. So sad. Regards.

[uvular]

Belated thanks for the ping; been in the process of moving the past month!

If Mr. Amirault ever gets out, I hope he sues everyone in the state, and at the top of the list to sue should be Scott Harshbarger. He was the original AG, and such as Reno, he was trying to make a name for himself, by prosecuting the Amiraults.

Hard to believe there will ever be a happy ending to this saga....