wrote:
>For an analysis of the Fells Acres verdicts that is sympathetic to the
>prosecution's case, see my Boston Phoenix story of April 28, 1995:
> http://www.bostonphoenix.com/alt1/archive/news/quote/FELLS_ACRES.html
>Four years down the road, I think it's held up remarkably well.
>Also, former prosecutor Wendy Murphy had an excellent letter to the editor
>in Thursday's Boston Globe, showing how advocates for the defense have
>made the evidence against the Amiraults appear more spectacular -- and
>thus less believable -- than it actually was.
The letter was in the range 200-250 words, and protested against what she considered undue skepticism in a 4 May "Metro/Region" article (I believe by reporter Sacha Pfeiffer) on the then-upcoming SJC hearing.
Let's have a look at her letter in the Thurs 12 May 99 "Boston Globe" (p. A20):
"The prosecutor has a legitimate argument that the
suggestibility issue is a red herring in the Fells Acres case, as all the children made detailed disclosures of abuse unsolicited by anyone."
Here again, like prosecutor Catherine Sullivan at the 6 May hearing, Ms. Murphy is arbitrarily excluding parents and other family members from her definition of "anyone." At a notorious public meeting at Malden Police station on 12 September 1984, panic-stricken parents were told to assume the worst, and to start questioning their children about sexual abuse.
Judge Borenstein's brief description of this meeting can be seen at URL
http://www.tiac.net/users/hcunn/witch/bd-3C.html#3C1a
Ms. Murphy warns readers not to swallow the canard about
"toddlers being 'molested with butcher knives.' The 'butcher knife' phrase came exclusively out of the mouth
of defense counsel during trial."
Ms. Murphy (and her co-conspirator Larry Hardoon who made the same statement earlier) remind me of a certain religious order (let us call them the "Jovians") who had a reputation for (1) shrewd scholarship, and (2) ethical gymnastics on behalf of temporal patrons. Supposedly,
if accused of murdering three men and a dog, the "Jovians" would "triumphantly produce the dog, alive!"
Similarly with the "butcher knife" -- maybe the prosecutors did not use the precise phrase "butcher knife." (Others more familiar with the trial record may amplify this.) But, as Chief Justice Paul J.
Liacos noted, they did put this inflammatory testimony in front of the jury:
"The Commonwealth offered as evidence of the defendants' motive [supposed expert witness] Dunn's detailed descriptions of pornographic photographs of children taken by persons not in any way connected to the defendants. Dunn also described objects, not mentioned by the children in this case, such as gun barrels, scissors, and dildoes, which were inserted into the genitalia of minors who were completely unrelated to this case."
In his article "Junk Science. Junk Justice. The Fells Acres Daycare Case," available at URL
http://www.ultranet.com/~kyp/harris/fells.html
Jonathan Harris noted the following:
Copyright © 1995 Jonathan G. Harris. Permission granted
to reproduce this work for nonprofit purposes.
[...]
"With the possible exception of one child, the 'physical signs' are commonly found in unabused children. The one exception is a girl with a small scar on the hymen. This scar was not seen in an examination of the child soon after the case started, likely because the child's pediatrician did not use a coloscope, a device for examining colons and vaginas under magnification. More recent studies suggest these sort of small scars are indistinguishable from normal hymenal irregularities.
"Gerald's family and attorneys maintain that likely this
girl had no contact with Gerald during the brief time
period she attended the school. Their claim is supported by the fact that the girl maintained that Gerald was a blond, even though he had dark brown hair. She further elaborated that she knew the clown was Gerald because some of the blond hair was exposed. She claimed that Gerald stuck a big knife into her bum (anus). Under cross examination she described how it got stuck inside of her and she screamed. Her teacher then took her back into the classroom and told Gerald not to do that again. The girl had initially had claimed to be assaulted by a robot, a blond man with glasses, and an unidentified 'Mr. Gatt'.
Ms. Murphy continues
"The defense can point to nothing -- not a single comment from any adult -- that bears any relation to the children's disclosures or to their testimony at trial."
The parents did not videotape their original interrogations of the children (Would any parent have thought to do so?). The children were already worn down by the time they were put in front of video cameras with the egregious Susan Kelley, yet even at that late stage, the improper and suggestive nature of her questioning was still obvious.
Ms. Murphy:
"What happened to the idea that the press should disclose all the facts because only the fullest plate of information leads to the truth? What happened to the principle that, in the marketplace of ideas, everyone gets a voice, however meek?"
"Meek" is about the last word I would apply to Ms. Murphy.
Ms. Murphy:
"What happened to the 'Globe's objectivity?"
Does Ms. Murphy mean the "objectivity" of 1997, when a
nationally-recognized "Day of Contrition" at Salem MA was blacked out, and when a supporter of the Amiraults was smeared as an advocate of child molesting?
Read about Wendy Murphy's advocacy of junk science in the "American Bar Association" journal.
Return to index of Fells Acres articles.
Return to Bob Chatelle's Fells Acres report (most up-to-date coverage)
Return to index of "Fells Acres and the Boston Press."