MASS--Coakley--Dem. has to be forced to charge in curling iron assault on 2 yr. old

[oreo]

Well--the dirty details of this horrific crime against a child comes into light. A police officer in Mass. while babysitting his 2-1/2 year old neice violates her with a hot curling iron. The toddler was in the hospital for a month--& Coakley while being the District attorney actually has to have her hand "forced" by an attorney for the family--& 6 months after the incident & after the family attorney--goes to district court to bring charges against this police officer--finally Coakley does something one day before the district court steps in. The successor to Coakley--after assuming the DA's office puts this child preditor on trial & the offender--police officer-- is now serving 2 life terms for this attack on a helpless--innocent child.

It is believed that Coakley stalled on this incident-because the offenders father was a labor union big shot.

Here is the story:

Some saw Coakley as lax on ’05 rape case

In October 2005, a Somerville police officer living in Melrose raped his 23-month-old niece with a hot object, most likely a curling iron.

Keith Winfield, then 31, told police he was alone with the toddler that day and made additional statements that would ultimately be used to convict him.

But in the aftermath of the crime, a Middlesex County grand jury overseen by Martha Coakley, then the district attorney, investigated without taking action.

It was only after the toddler’s mother filed applications for criminal complaints that Coakley won grand jury indictments charging rape and assault and battery.

Even then, nearly 10 months after the crime, Coakley’s office recommended that Winfield be released on personal recognizance, with no cash bail. He remained free until December 2007, when Coakley’s successor as district attorney won a conviction and two life terms.

Coakley, now the Democratic candidate for US Senate, has made much of her record prosecuting crimes against children, and says her office handled this investigation appropriately. But the case stands out as one in which she drew criticism for not being aggressive enough. Indeed, the case gave rise to Coakley’s last competitive election.

http://bigjournalism.com/ghewson/20...-to-forget-about-candidate-coakley/#more-5970

 

[Vel]

But... but.. Brown cussed in front of TEENAGERS !!!!!

 

[Maple]

Well--the dirty details of this horrific crime against a child comes into light. A police officer in Mass. while babysitting his 2-1/2 year old neice violates her with a hot curling iron. The toddler was in the hospital for a month--& Coakley while being the District attorney actually has to have her hand "forced" by an attorney for the family--& 6 months after the incident & after the family attorney--goes to district court to bring charges against this police officer--finally Coakley does something one day before the district court steps in. The successor to Coakley--after assuming the DA's office puts this child preditor on trial & the offender--police officer-- is now serving 2 life terms for this attack on a helpless--innocent child.

It is believed that Coakley stalled on this incident-because the offenders father was a labor union big shot.

Here is the story:

» Martha’s Greatest Hits: The Things the Democrats Would Like You to Forget About Candidate Coakley - Big Journalism

She has an awful history of protecting the children in her state, she also failed to prosecute a priest who was molesting little boys.

 

[SwingVoter]

I hope the little girl is ok, Martha should offer to pay for the psych counseling this poor victim will need

 

[oreo]

I hope the little girl is ok, Martha should offer to pay for the psych counseling this poor victim will need

Doesn't the citizens of MASS know this? What in the heck is she doing even as the democrat candidate for senator? Has the DNC in MASS buried this & does not want their supporters to know about this-- WELL THE CAT'S OUT OF THE BAG NOW.

It's obvious to me that Coakley had no intention of prosecuting this former offender police officer for this horrific crime against a toddler. She had to be forced into it.

Coakely shouldn't be running for senator--she should be prosecuted for deriliction of her duties as a District attorney.

 

[Zander]

She's weak on crime, at least when the crime is committed by people connected to Union Big Shots.

 

[oreo]

She's weak on crime, at least when the crime is committed by people connected to Union Big Shots.

Again, what is incomprehensible to me---is do the citizens of MASS know her horrible record on going after child preditors? I can't imagine they could possibly vote to promote a person to senator--who took 10 months & only after being forced to prosecute this monster.

If MASS. elects this woman as their senator--simply because they want to play pin the tail on the donkey--I will lose all respect for this state.

I understand the difference between conservative & liberal--but there is no difference between both wanting to protect innocent--helpless children from monsters.

 

[JD_2B]

?? I'm already lost.. I don't watch a lot of news, and don't live in New England.. Someone please catch me up? Apparently Martha Coakley, the DA that failed to protect the public, is running for public office.. Got that much.
How does the union come into play?

 

[Walt]

From what I have heard JD. Winfield's dad was high up in the union that helped get her elected.

 

[Gem]

This sounds horrific....but does anyone know the "other side" to the story? Why did Coakley stall? I'm looking for it now, but does anyone know? I don't want to get so sickened by the facts of the case that I miss something that makes Coakley's decisions understandable and/or correct.

 

[Gem]

Here's some explanation from Coakley herself...but I only find it more troubling:

In a recent interview, Coakley said her office acted appropriately at every turn, adding that her office fielded 900 complaints of sexual and physical child abuse each year. She asserted that it was not unusual for prosecutors to require more than one grand jury before obtaining indictments, especially in cases such as Winfield’s, in which there is only circumstantial evidence and the victim is deemed too young to testify.

“I think the jury’s conviction is sound and will be upheld on appeal,’’ Coakley said.

Coakley pointed out that Winfield had no prior convictions, had deep roots in his community, and had appeared voluntarily at his arraignment after a 10-month investigation, leaving her office with scant reason to ask for cash bail and little reason to believe that a judge would order it.

She insisted that Winfield’s status as a law enforcement officer had no bearing on her decisions. “The fact that he was a Somerville police officer was irrelevant,’’ she said.

Is she saying what I think she's saying? That they didn't go after this guy because she thought it would be too tough a case to obtain a conviction?!?! And what sort of shoddy work was Coakley and her team doing if the next guy in after her was able to get the rapist sent away on two life sentences?

Here's the article:
Some saw Coakley as lax on ’05 rape case - The Boston Globe

 

[Zander]

?? I'm already lost.. I don't watch a lot of news, and don't live in New England.. Someone please catch me up? Apparently Martha Coakley, the DA that failed to protect the public, is running for public office.. Got that much.
How does the union come into play?

Here is what happened - the full story with all the details is --- Some saw Coakley as lax on ’05 rape case - The Boston Globe

The Winfield case began Oct. 13, 2005, after a day when Winfield and his wife were baby sitting their niece, along with their own two children.

That afternoon, when the toddler’s grandmother stopped by to pick her up, she found the toddler crying, and the child refused to walk. After taking the toddler home, the grandmother changed her diaper and noticed what she could only conclude was a severe diaper rash, according to a narrative of the case detailed in court documents.

When the toddler’s mother returned from work, the girl was still crying and in obvious pain. And when the mother changed her diaper, she, too, noted that the area was very red.

By 11 p.m., when the toddler’s mother once again changed her diaper, the redness had become alarming. “Her genital and anal area was bleeding, and her skin was peeling off,’’ according to prosecutors.

The next morning, after her condition had worsened, the toddler’s mother took her to a Somerville pediatrician who referred her to Children’s Hospital and notified the Department of Social Services (now the Department of Families and Children), along with Melrose police. The toddler ultimately spent a month at Shriners Hospital for Children in Boston recovering from burns.

Coakley refused to press charges until she was literally forced to. Factor in that Winfield's father was a heavy with the Union, and her husband was an ex-police officer and it looks like the "fix" was in.

 

[JD_2B]

Hmmm.. Well apparently her opponent could have used this as some kind of motive to push his own political campaign, as well, though.

Bail is generally based on a person's merits, not solely based on the charges or potential sentencing. The only real issue being risen here is the fact that he was released on his own recognizance, instead of on a cash bail.

I agree that it is unusual, but the case is unusual, as well. The way it started out, it was based on a lot of circumstantial evidence, so requiring a cash bail at that time could have been seen as a bit excessive, even, considering that he is a policeman, was completely cooperative, and did show up to the arraignment voluntarily.
On the other hand, considering the nature of the charges, the evidence that they had, and the sentence for a conviction, it does look unusual that he did not have to come up with some kind of bond.

I just don't see this as anything that could be chalked up to the previous DA doing something overtly wrong, or having an agenda behind it, and especially not putting the case together adequately with her in charge of it. That stuff is just hype to make her look bad and him look good. Just because HE got the conviction, doesn't mean that conviction had any merit towards the new DA's efforts, or any less pertaining to her own efforts.

I mean, if ten guys start building a house under the supervision of a foreman, and get a new construction foreman, who finishes the house soon thereafter- does that mean that the new foreman put all the footwork into the house? No of course not. Somebody had to lay the foundation. =)

I just don't see what the big deal is with these two, or why this is the best they can do to build themselves up. Poor little girl was only two years old.. Why should her misery be the basis of someone getting elected to public office???

 

[manifold]

I heard about another story where she fought tooth and nail to keep an innocent man in jail, after his innocence was proven.

She's some piece of work alright.

 

[Zander]

Hmmm.. Well apparently her opponent could have used this as some kind of motive to push his own political campaign, as well, though.

Bail is generally based on a person's merits, not solely based on the charges or potential sentencing. The only real issue being risen here is the fact that he was released on his own recognizance, instead of on a cash bail.

I agree that it is unusual, but the case is unusual, as well. The way it started out, it was based on a lot of circumstantial evidence, so requiring a cash bail at that time could have been seen as a bit excessive, even, considering that he is a policeman, was completely cooperative, and did show up to the arraignment voluntarily.
On the other hand, considering the nature of the charges, the evidence that they had, and the sentence for a conviction, it does look unusual that he did not have to come up with some kind of bond.

I just don't see this as anything that could be chalked up to the previous DA doing something overtly wrong, or having an agenda behind it, and especially not putting the case together adequately with her in charge of it. That stuff is just hype to make her look bad and him look good. Just because HE got the conviction, doesn't mean that conviction had any merit towards the new DA's efforts, or any less pertaining to her own efforts.

I mean, if ten guys start building a house under the supervision of a foreman, and get a new construction foreman, who finishes the house soon thereafter- does that mean that the new foreman put all the footwork into the house? No of course not. Somebody had to lay the foundation. =)

I just don't see what the big deal is with these two, or why this is the best they can do to build themselves up. Poor little girl was only two years old.. Why should her misery be the basis of someone getting elected to public office???

I agree, it is sordid and sad.

But that is what politics have become in our nation, especially under Obama. He is a deeply polarizing, tin-eared ideologue that will stop at nothing to forward his leftist agenda. He simply doesn't care that most Americans do not want this health care bill shoved down our throats. He doesn't care if he bankrupts the country and spends us to oblivion. He believes he knows what is good for you and too bad if you disagree. He is disconnected, totally. This lack of "connection" is creating a lot of anger, and that anger is turning into a Backlash.

 

[JD_2B]

Hmmm.. Well apparently her opponent could have used this as some kind of motive to push his own political campaign, as well, though.

Bail is generally based on a person's merits, not solely based on the charges or potential sentencing. The only real issue being risen here is the fact that he was released on his own recognizance, instead of on a cash bail.

I agree that it is unusual, but the case is unusual, as well. The way it started out, it was based on a lot of circumstantial evidence, so requiring a cash bail at that time could have been seen as a bit excessive, even, considering that he is a policeman, was completely cooperative, and did show up to the arraignment voluntarily.
On the other hand, considering the nature of the charges, the evidence that they had, and the sentence for a conviction, it does look unusual that he did not have to come up with some kind of bond.

I just don't see this as anything that could be chalked up to the previous DA doing something overtly wrong, or having an agenda behind it, and especially not putting the case together adequately with her in charge of it. That stuff is just hype to make her look bad and him look good. Just because HE got the conviction, doesn't mean that conviction had any merit towards the new DA's efforts, or any less pertaining to her own efforts.

I mean, if ten guys start building a house under the supervision of a foreman, and get a new construction foreman, who finishes the house soon thereafter- does that mean that the new foreman put all the footwork into the house? No of course not. Somebody had to lay the foundation. =)

I just don't see what the big deal is with these two, or why this is the best they can do to build themselves up. Poor little girl was only two years old.. Why should her misery be the basis of someone getting elected to public office???

I agree, it is sordid and sad.

But that is what politics have become in our nation, especially under Obama. He is a deeply polarizing, tin-eared ideologue that will stop at nothing to forward his leftist agenda. He simply doesn't care that most Americans do not want this health care bill shoved down our throats. He doesn't care if he bankrupts the country and spends us to oblivion. He believes he knows what is good for you and too bad if you disagree. He is disconnected, totally. This lack of "connection" is creating a lot of anger, and that anger is turning into a Backlash.

You do realize that your comment is polarizing, right? "his leftist agenda"??

 

[Zander]

Hmmm.. Well apparently her opponent could have used this as some kind of motive to push his own political campaign, as well, though.

Bail is generally based on a person's merits, not solely based on the charges or potential sentencing. The only real issue being risen here is the fact that he was released on his own recognizance, instead of on a cash bail.

I agree that it is unusual, but the case is unusual, as well. The way it started out, it was based on a lot of circumstantial evidence, so requiring a cash bail at that time could have been seen as a bit excessive, even, considering that he is a policeman, was completely cooperative, and did show up to the arraignment voluntarily.
On the other hand, considering the nature of the charges, the evidence that they had, and the sentence for a conviction, it does look unusual that he did not have to come up with some kind of bond.

I just don't see this as anything that could be chalked up to the previous DA doing something overtly wrong, or having an agenda behind it, and especially not putting the case together adequately with her in charge of it. That stuff is just hype to make her look bad and him look good. Just because HE got the conviction, doesn't mean that conviction had any merit towards the new DA's efforts, or any less pertaining to her own efforts.

I mean, if ten guys start building a house under the supervision of a foreman, and get a new construction foreman, who finishes the house soon thereafter- does that mean that the new foreman put all the footwork into the house? No of course not. Somebody had to lay the foundation. =)

I just don't see what the big deal is with these two, or why this is the best they can do to build themselves up. Poor little girl was only two years old.. Why should her misery be the basis of someone getting elected to public office???

I agree, it is sordid and sad.

But that is what politics have become in our nation, especially under Obama. He is a deeply polarizing, tin-eared ideologue that will stop at nothing to forward his leftist agenda. He simply doesn't care that most Americans do not want this health care bill shoved down our throats. He doesn't care if he bankrupts the country and spends us to oblivion. He believes he knows what is good for you and too bad if you disagree. He is disconnected, totally. This lack of "connection" is creating a lot of anger, and that anger is turning into a Backlash.

You do realize that your comment is polarizing, right? "his leftist agenda"??

So what? I don't feel the need to sugar coat the facts. Do you deny he has a leftist agenda?

 

[JD_2B]

The point is, what does the president's political affiliation have anything to do with any of this???

Obama haters.. I tell ya!!

 

[midcan5]

It is believed that Coakley stalled on this incident-because the offenders father was a labor union big shot.

So it could be believed otherwise? Would that be fair you think?

 

[del]

It is believed that Coakley stalled on this incident-because the offenders father was a labor union big shot.

So it could be believed otherwise? Would that be fair you think?

fairly naive.