A plea-bargain spared the innocent Cheryl Amirault LeFave a return to prison in the Fells Acres day-care ritual-abuse case. The poisonous 18 August 99 decision by the SJC continues to fester, however, threatening the rights of other innocent people. The MA State Legislature must correct the damage, to reassure courts and magistrates of other States and nations that ours can meet civilized standards.

I offer a first draft of a "Miscarriage of Justice Correction Act." Since I am not a lawyer, others presumably can make improvements.

"1. No doctrine of 'finality' shall be cited to deny an innocent person relief from a miscarriage of justice, especially when a request for relief is based on substantial new evidence. It is better that a guilty person escape than that an innocent person suffer."
"A. For the purpose of this statute, new "evidence" is not limited to theories (eg the testimony by a psychologist in the 1986 Fells Acres case that child witnesses' memories might have been tainted), but also includes research that would cause a jury to give substantially more weight to said theories."

[I understand the next 2 sentences in para B. are the current standard in much of the US]

"B. To set aside a lawfully established guilty verdict, a defendant must establish his innocence by a preponderance of the evidence. For this purpose, all scientifically valid evidence should be weighed, whether or not it can presented to a jury.

"(1) The burden of proof for maintaining a conviction shifts back to the prosecution, however, if
(a) enough evidence has been destroyed by the prosecution (eg the tainting of the memories of the Fells Acres children by suggestive questioning) to make proof of innocence impractical, AND

(b) the defendant has been cooperative in the determination of truth."

[end of draft]

--Hugo S. Cunningham

Editorial note: This proposal did not attract suggested amendments, though I have since heard of interest off-line. It did, however, provoke another short debate about the merits of the Fells Acres prosecution:

In ne.general TBK tbk@xoxo.com wrote:

: More Libertarian-naive-bullshit that doesn't amount to a hill of : beans. They were all found guilty which was ultimately held up on appeal. : Didn't Lefave get her sentenced reduced to time served, but ultimately : convicted of the crime? If there were so many things wrong with this case, : why is it that the brother is still in prison and nothing much has been made : of his plight?

Judicial stubbornness and insolence.

: Apparently there was some truth to the accusations and : ultimate convictions of these people.

Not truth, hysteria.

The same hysteria that drove the Witch Trials. Those "witches" were all convicted, too. I guess they must've been guilty, right?

-- Mike Zarlenga

========
Newsgroups: ne.politics,ne.general
Subject: Fells Acres: MA Legislature should fix SJC blunders
From: hcunn@removethis.tiac.net (Hugo S. Cunningham)
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 19:28:04 GMT
[Posted via Deja News. My ISP's newsreader is down.]

In article 81afjv$g7b$1@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net, "TBK" tbk@xoxo.com wrote:

> Hugo S. Cunningham wrote in message news:81a04o$sdf@news-central.tiac.net...

> > A plea-bargain spared the innocent Cheryl Amirault LeFave a return to > > prison in the Fells Acres day-care ritual-abuse case. The poisonous > > 18 August 99 decision by the SJC continues to fester, however, > > threatening the rights of other innocent people. The MA State > > Legislature must correct the damage, to reassure courts and > > magistrates of other States and nations that ours can meet civilized > > standards.

> More Libertarian-naive-bullshit that doesn't amount to a hill of > beans. They were all found guilty which was ultimately held up on appeal.

Similar cases have been thrown out across the country, by other courts that are not part of a incestuous political machine. Do a web search against "Kelly Michaels," "Little Rascals", "Grant Snowden," and "McMartin Preschool."

> Didn't Lefave get her sentenced reduced to time served, but ultimately > convicted of the crime? If there were so many things wrong with this case, > why is it that the brother is still in prison and nothing much has been made > of his plight?

It costs a *lot* of money (well into six figures) to pursue a criminal appeal, and, unlike the quack psychotherapists who brainwashed the Fells Acres children, the Amirault family cannot bill the taxpayers. Since the evidence is identical in both cases, a reversal for Cheryl LeFave would automatically have meant a reversal for Gerald Amirault as well, at a far lower cost to limited family finances.

> Apparently there was some truth to the accusations and > ultimate convictions of these people.

(1) Was it purely coincidence that the Amirault family ran Fells Acres without complaint for twenty years, and just happened to choose the year 1984 (when the whole country was swept with hysteria about Satanic cults in day-care centers) to go crazy and start their own factory of abuse?
In valid cases, once a serial abuser is arrested (eg Father James Porter) and publicized, other victims come forward to say, "Now that you remind me, I remember that he did this to me also." Why didn't any parents or children from previous years come forward to accuse the Amiraults?

(2) Why were the children in so much worse shape at the trials (1986-87), after 2-3 years of suggestive questioning and misnamed "therapy," than they were in early September 1984, when they were removed from Fells Acres? They had obviously been abused by 1986, but by whom? (Research by psychologists Stephen Ceci and Maggie Bruck since 1991 provides the answer.)

> I wonder what the parents of the > children that were molested think of your little crusade.

They are probably outraged, like the Christian parents in Medieval Europe who lynched Jews on "ritual murder" charges. But in a society supposedly founded on reason and justice, it is not enough for people to feel indignant. They need to be indignant at the actual culprit.

--Hugo S. Cunningham

[Editorial note: no answer was posted]