The truth about the Allen-Flanagan incident

So now its the Allen -Flanagan Incident is it? (0.00 / 0)

And Allen was there in the cranberry bog with "three males" when the cruisers arrived?

So Rob approaches the gutter.

One must wonder if the supervising Sargent would have noticed if Officer Flanagan had asked the boys to pull down their pants.

---

by: StartedoutRepublican @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 12:32:13 PM UTC

Did Jeff Perry go to jail (5.00 / 1)

Was he charged?  The case was the Commonwealth vs. Flanagan wasn't it?  Do the facts that don't fit your narrative upset you.  The facts are this was  a fluid and chaotic scene.  You and others have portrayed this as Jeff Perry standing watching the molestation of a 14 year old girl and giving the Arsenio Hall woop woop woop.  It's disingenuous. I'm not the one in the gutter. You are.  

Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 12:35:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What makes you think they didn't? All were searched. (0.00 / 0)

Yr. Obedient Servant, Peter Porcupine, Republican

---

by: Peter Porcupine @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 15:05:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Peter surely you jest! (0.00 / 1)

Another cover up? Boys with their pants around their ankles?  

---

by: StartedoutRepublican @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 17:39:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What happens when Perry spends time in Washington??? (0.00 / 0)

But believing someone who you spend a significant amount of time with is not a crime

Great!  What happens after Perry starts hanging around politicians and lobbyists in DC?

The wing-nuts got their man, but they should've back Malone.

---

by: yankeegop @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 12:35:38 PM UTC

The independents and moderate got their man too (0.00 / 0)

Jeff Perry beat Malone among independents and moderates too.  He also leads Keating among these same groups.

Bob Hedlund for Minority Leader.

---

by: Mike "DD4RP" Rossettie @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 18:45:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rob your lies are nothing but an attempt to re-victimization of this woman... (0.00 / 1)

You lie when you write, "As to the screams of a 14 year old being arrested...".  This girl was not arrested PERIOD.  Just like Jeff Perry lied on his bar application and stated the 2nd victim of Scott Flanagan was "arrested" when she was not, you are trying to change the facts to present the victim of sexual assault in a torrid and unsavory manner--that is how you are re-victimizing this woman.  

And to equate "copping a feel" to reaching down the underpants of a 14 year old girl to rub her vagina, speaks volumes to your character.  

Rob, go slither back under your rock.

---

by: Simple J. Malarkey @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 12:48:26 PM UTC

I actually think (0.00 / 0)

the words Copping a Feel are crude and people who do that are dispicable.  I'm sorry you don't feel the same way. I tried to use as crude a word as I could to describe what the disgusting Scott Flanagan did to this victim. Really I did.

I never said she was arrested.  Sorry I should have said being detained, but when the cops detain a 14 year old I would imagine there are screams.  

I agree with you Simple.  Scott Flanagan is a dirt bag.  But what you fail to see is there is reasonable doubt that Perry saw or witnessed anything untoward.  Perry's only "crime" in all of this is believing the dirt bag Flanagan.  

I have a hard time believing that Jeff Perry stared at what happened and didn't report it.  And I think you do too.  

Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 12:57:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And Festus (0.00 / 0)

Copping a feel means non-consensual sexual contact.  So I used it in the right way, sorry for your ignorance.

http://www.urbandictionary.com...


Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 13:01:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

and let me tell you.... (0.00 / 1)

Eno knows A LOT about "non consensual sexual contact"

.....too soon?

Grease Fire

---

by: PitBullGOP @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 13:11:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why don't you come out (0.00 / 0)

from behind that screen name tough guy.  


Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 13:16:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Amen (0.00 / 0)

Rob is entitled to his opinion about this case, without having personal slurs sent his way, in my opinion. Good on him for leaving the comment online.

---

by: bobneer @ Mon Oct 25, 2010 at 02:43:16 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

You "never said she was arrested"?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? (0.00 / 0)

Then why did you just mark out the word "arrested" and insert "detained"...BECAUSE YOU WROTE ARRESTED.  You and Jeff Perry have a lot in common: A complete lack of comprehension of sexual assault, as you both display a callous approach in minimizing this serious issue.

Sexual predators do not "detain" as you and Perry use this word to cover-up a crime.  Sexual predators isolate their victims and humiliate their victims like the two victims were in these cases--then they assault them, they rape them and they intimidate them...they do not "detain" them.  

And to use any other phrase other than "sexual assault", such as "cop a feel" is another example of your ignorance about the deep trauma these tragedies have on victims.  

Rob, you ignore so many facts was you present this feeble defense of Jeff Perry.  But let me share just one with you.  Originally, in SWORN testimony, Jeff Perry said he had a clear view to see and hear everything that happened that night and he said nothing occurred...ONLY WHEN FLANAGAN PLED GUILTY DID PERRY CHANGE HIS STORY and claim he say nothing, he heard nothing and that he knew nothing.  

Also, you make this sound like a crazy, wide open scene at the cranberry bog.  It involved two cars with 4 teenagers and a "adult" who was arrested for having a roach (something you think should be legalized) and three cop cars with four cops.  So the scene involved 8 people with three cop cars surrounding 2 other cars...maybe an area of 50 sq feet....a situation where anything done or said would be observed by the "supervising officer" Jeff Perry.

Rob, you miss the real point...it is not what Jeff Perry did 19 years ago...it is his current coverups and lies that are killing him.  That is basically what the Cape Cod Times and the Barnstable Patriot said when they did not endorse Perry (the Cape Cod Times endorsed Keating--which I'll post on later)

---

by: Simple J. Malarkey @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 13:53:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I was (0.00 / 0)

using arrested in the general sense of a 14 year old, not necessarily the victim.  I noticed that the way I wrote it made it seem like she was arrested.  

As to the Perry saying he could see everything.  That might have been his first thought.  Do you watch "Lie to Me"?  Just this past week they had an episode that dealt with what they called distracted blindness in which you think you see or don't see something because you saw what immediately preceeded and immediately followed it.  But not what happened in between.  You actually think you saw the whole thing but really didn't.  Your description of the scene would fit in with this no?


Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 13:59:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rob I have no idea what you're saying... (5.00 / 1)

"using arrested in the general sense of a 14 year old, not necessarily the victim"?  Like the saying goes, when you're in a hole, stop digging.

No I don't watch "lie to me" (never heard of it...but I understand your point and let me give Perry the benefit of the doubt (which is hard to do when Lisa Allen says her mom reported the incident the next day, only to run into a Blue Wall of Silence).

But let's say Perry thought he saw everything and nothing happened and then learned later this assault happened and he was wrong.  Why did he not then, or in 2002 when running for State Rep or now when running for Congress say he made a mistake, that he should have been a better supervisor that night?  No, instead he says it was "good police work" and stumbles into a long list of lies and contradictions and reasonable people (like the two biggest newspapers on the cape) conclude that is is a liar.

Rob, all Jeff Perry had to say early on is that he made mistakes and should have been more vigilant and, in this electoral atmosphere, he would be the next Congressman.  But Perry's true personality has surfaced in this race, one that can not accept the realities of that night, or his behavior with regards to the second assault, or  his character flaw in buying a fake college degree, or his glossing over of his involvement with Flanagan on his Bar Application and other lies and contradictions.  Yes, there are many blurred "facts" that lead reasonable people to disagree about whether Jeff Perry enabled and covered up for a sexual predator...but there is no doubt that Jeff Perry's long history of not being truthful demonstrates he lacks the character to be a Congressman.

---

by: Simple J. Malarkey @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 14:28:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rob, you are either clarifying or correcting (0.00 / 0)

your own words lately. You do a great job on this site until you get waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out there trying to explain away a Republican candidate's misstatement or action. Not your job. Theirs.  

Your loyal attempts to explain away Jeff Perry's struggle to explain away his sloppy police work and misguided loyalty to a colleague 19 years ago is over the top. (At least you are not crude like our friend strawberry.)  

And I do not accept the notion that he can be excused because "all cops" value loyalty to each other over "betraying" a colleagues corruption, and he will serve us well in Congress.  

---

by: StartedoutRepublican @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 14:30:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He's Not (5.00 / 2)

He's not explaining away sloppy police work and misguided loyalty. No one is. That's not the issue. Do you think  a 20 year old charge of sloppy at work is relevant or having misguided loyalty towards friends is relevant? Then every single person running for office is probably guilty.

The issue is repeatedly claiming someone was complicit in a heinous  crime  without evidence to support the assertion, even after the matter has already been investigated, and that is a big deal. In fact, those pulling this card are the one's coming close to defamation.

---

by: swamp_yankee @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 15:16:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You may wany to rethink that (0.00 / 0)

...because "all cops" value loyalty to each other over...

You may not want to believe that, but you're ignoring reality of every police on the face of the planet.

There is a reason they call it a brotherhood.  In any situation where you were required to give your brother (your literal sibling, not a cop) the benefit of the doubt you likely would initially (someone you've known for years).  However upon realizing your bother may have actually committed a crime, you'd then be forced to explain your loyalty to him when "You should have known" he was committing a crime.

EXTREMELY similar thing...when your day to day survivability depends on that other guy you back them up by default (until you find you can not).  It doesn't matter if you like/dislike or think he/she is a complete ass...you depend on him, and he depends on you.  Like firefighters and military.

Is it right, is it wrong....not the point.  That is the way it is (and has to be).  No different than if your brother stopped at your house after robbing a bank.  Are you likely to believe that of your brother until someone actually makes you question your own judgment?  Does it cause problems in investigations when there has been actual wrong doing...you bet.  But it has to be the default stance under SOP because no other system would work.  You have to believe your brother, until you've been shown he can't be trusted.

Like conspiracy theories exist because the simple answer is just not acceptable, we want to believe someone could have/should have stopped something horrible from happening.  The simple answer is cops protect each other because they have to ALWAYS....until they find out they can't because someone screwed up or abused their authority.  One who cannot extend that implicit trust to his brother officer is in for a short career under the best of circumstances, or life in the worst.

Follow me on twitter @garyrlake

---

by: garyrlake @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 15:58:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ten honest police officers think you don't know what you're talking about. (4.00 / 1)

After a short (10) sample.

Free coffee and "tips" from night club owners maybe, not an illegal procedure that would reflect badly on the whole force.  

---

by: StartedoutRepublican @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 17:37:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Way too simplistic (0.00 / 0)

not an illegal procedure that would reflect badly on the whole force

Assumes initial direct knowledge of the seriousness of the offense...what I (and others) is/are saying is that that direct knowledge did not exist initially and the default 'protect the brother behavior' was in place.

Just as the example I gave with your brother arriving at your house.  Unless he walks in and says "I just robbed a bank" you have no reason...even though he was acting maybe a bit strangely in your living room...to say yes  when someone asks you  "Did your brother rob a bank?".  Your response is likely something like "Oh hell no....he was just in my living room last night...He was right there, 15 feet away from me".  He's your brother...he's never committed a crime as far as you know.

If the next morning you find out there's a film of your brother robbing a bank you then have to say "Yes he was here....but I had no knowledge of what just happened....I didn't see a thing, and I had no way of knowing"...even though it makes you look a bit foolish and "reflect badly" on you and perhaps your family (i.e. the police force)?  How could you not know?...you're his older brother?....there's no way you could have NOT known....he was sitting 15 feet away from you?  Didn't you know based on his strange behavior? You didn't hear all the sirens coming down the street?  Didn't you see the news bulletin about a bank being robbed?

It wouldn't be long before the court of public opinion would have you driving the get-a-way car.

We can call it bad police work...for which Perry paid for with his job.  But it would have been the same whether it was Sgt Perry or Sgt Smith on duty on the night.  But that's what happens when someone in a line of work that requires implicit trust commits a crime or abuses authority.  An investigation ensued...Flanagan plead guilty and went away.  Perry resigned because he's the guy in charge who "Should have known".

You're trying to get in the badness of the offense rather than the level of direct knowledge and when that knowledge was attained...because of the heinousness of the crime and wanting to hold someone accountable...and I get that.  But it comes down to who do you believe....and obviously you don't believe Perry, so don't vote for him.   You have Keating...and others to choose from.

But stop claiming you can prove anything with any degree of certainty.  And don't delude yourself into believing a police officer wouldn't back a fellow officer initially even in a heinous crime (until he gets the full picture and has to back off his support)....

Why shouldn't you back your brother....he's never given you any reason to believe he'd rob a bank?...until he actually did.

Follow me on twitter @garyrlake

---

by: garyrlake @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 18:29:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What's that Bruce Springsteen song about blood? (0.00 / 0)

He'd agree with you.  

---

by: StartedoutRepublican @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 20:35:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Was the adult arrested? (0.00 / 0)

What was he doing bringing a 14 year old girl to a cranberry bog to smoke pot with him and two other older teens?  I think we should be glad that the police broke up this party, a 14 year old girl was in danger there.  And if they wanted to arrest him, they'd need to find the weed, which they knew was around somewhere because they found the roach.  So, one of them took the girl aside and searched her person, just like they also probably also searched the other guys.

And before being arrested, a person is detained, so "being arrested" is a process that doesn't always end with an arrest, but always starts with being detained.  I think people can be arrested on suspicion of having drugs on them and searched after the arrest, and then be let go if there are no drugs, right?  But would anyone prefer that to just being patted down or even strip searched at the scene and let go right away, and not arrested?

---

by: John Howard @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 18:24:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks John... (0.00 / 0)

...it's comforting to know your on the other side of this discussion.

---

by: Simple J. Malarkey @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 21:27:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree, Rob. (5.00 / 2)

It defies logic and good sense that 3 cops (Perry and the two others I referenced later in this thread) would stand there and do nothing while a girl screamed.
To believe so is to believe that all 4 cops at that scene were dirtbags.
Only one went to jail, the one who should have gone to jail.

---

by: swami7774 @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 18:04:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

[hidden comment] Disgraceful that GOP still supports Perry (0.00 / 2)

I can't believe that Rob Eno wrote this article, and I can't believe that he is attacking one victim by repeatedly naming her.   Like Jeff Perry, Rob Eno conveniently leaves out facts.   For example:

*Flanagan and Perry visited the girls parents at 11:30 at night, which, by itself, is highly unusual.    During the visit, Perry told the parents that they had asked their daughter to remove her clothes, so Perry clearly knew what happened.  

*Perry refuses to answer some questions about the incident.   In particular: Did Perry hire Flanagan (or give him money) after he was released from jail?   The answer to that question is really interesting.

---

by: BlueWatch @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 13:28:55 PM UTC

If the victim didn't publicly release her name (5.00 / 1)

I never would have.  


Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 13:36:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Blue - I'm prety sure that has nothing to do with Allen. (0.00 / 0)

Yr. Obedient Servant, Peter Porcupine, Republican

---

by: Peter Porcupine @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 15:03:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What A Pathetic Sideshow .. (5.00 / 1)

Anyone who beleives the narrative being put out by the left has never lived. Perhaps due process is another right that they would like to see done away with. Anything else?

---

by: nomad943 @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 13:38:57 PM UTC

My focus has been on what he did AFTER the scene (5.00 / 2)

1.  Made an unauthorized visit to the girls house at 11:30 at night, with Flanagan.  (Detectives are the ones who conduct follow up interviews and the accused is NEVER there.  Even if Perry took on that role, if he were acting in good faith, he would have called the parents and asked them to come to the station so the interview could be recorded with their permission.)

The only reason for the time and manner of that visit was to intimidate.

2.  Visited Flanagan in prison AFTER his conviction and sentencing.  Perry says he wanted to confront him.  He had months to do that.

3.  "Resigned" as a 28 yr old Sgt just 17 days after Flanagan's indictment.

4.  Refused to answer Howie Carr when he asked him if he hired Flanagan after he got out of prison.  This was a small store.  Its not like someone asked Bill Gates who his employees were.  When someone takes two weeks to answer a question, can you take any stock in it?

Perry made this into the game changer it is.  Michael Graham made an excellent point.  If Perry had held a press conference months ago.  Apologized to all affected.  Told people what he learned from the ordeal, then it would have been put to bed.  His deflection and arrogance is probably what brought Ms. Allen to the tipping point.

Dislcosure:  I was, and am, a Malone supporter and will NOT be voting Perry.  Giving serious thought to casting my first Dem vote for Keating.  Although I find Van Nes just hilarious.

---

by: TeddySalad @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 14:19:28 PM UTC

We can agree (0.00 / 0)

Perry has handled the situation horribly.  He should have done exactly what Graham suggests.  Unlike you however I don't think it disqualifies him for higher public office.  He has done nothing wrong he just hasn't effectively communicated what happened 19 years ago.

Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 14:22:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hogwash (0.00 / 0)

You are just another troll who only shows up here to bash a Republican nominee.  You never comment on anything other than your empty Perry bashing.

Bob Hedlund for Minority Leader.

---

by: Mike "DD4RP" Rossettie @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 18:49:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Keating Lets Two Off With No Jail Time! One Indecent Assault, Second one, Two Counts of Rape. (0.00 / 0)

I wonder if all the Perry smashers will have the same comments on what Keating has done as a DA.

In one case, Robert D. Shapiro, 73, pleaded guilty to 14 counts of indecent assault on a mentally retarded person in 2006, according to a story in the Boston Herald cited by the NRCC. Shapiro was sentenced to one year of house arrest and 10 years probation, according to the Herald.

14 Counts and he gets no jail time.

The second case was a Brookline High School choir director accused of raping a former student, according to a Herald story cited by the NRCC. Geoffrey Dana Hicks, 49, of Newton pleaded guilty to two counts of statutory rape in exchange for prosecutors recommending a sentence of no jail time, the Herald reported at the time in 2004.

Two counts of Rape and again No Jail Time?

Keating is running on trust, would trust him to prosecute a case if someone in your family was assaulted and the other raped and then he lets them go. It's no wonder Keating has never prosecuted a case in a court room. It also stands for reason on why the State Police who work in Keating's office have endorsed Jeff Perry along with their Union.

Bill Keating, Where are you. Come out from Hiding!!!

---

by: Cape Republican @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 14:43:05 PM UTC

This is as irrelevant as the criticism of Perry. (5.00 / 1)

Jeff won't be arresting anyone.  Keating won't be taking plea bargains.

By falling into the trap of playing gotcha with the Democrats, you just obscure the most importatnt fact - the one that could define the election.

Perry is right on the issues.

Yr. Obedient Servant, Peter Porcupine, Republican

---

by: Peter Porcupine @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 15:02:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Jeff Perry Never Hired Flanagan!! (5.00 / 1)

TeddySalad: If you listened to Howie Carr yesterday, Jeff Perry answered the question if he hired Flanagan. The answer was NO!!!

He also challenged Keating to go on the show and debate him. I doubt Keating has the guts. He now has gone into hiding after Allen supposedly released her statement to her Democratic Party and Keating supporter lawyer.

Why are you hiding Mr. Keating?

---

by: Cape Republican @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 15:00:07 PM UTC

Howie first asked him weeks ago (0.00 / 0)

Howie has had him on numerous times.  He keeps throwing him a life raft, but Perry keeps insisting he can swim.

In my mind, what makes the GOP different is that we (usually) call out our elected officials and candidates when they are wrong, instead of blindly following them over the cliff like the Dems do (Teddy K, Bawnhey, Liveshot).

---

by: TeddySalad @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 15:08:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Due Diligence (0.00 / 0)

Perry was in Florida for a time while he owned the store and had no recollection of who might have been hired by others while he was away.

Upon checking the employee records and talking with the past manager, he was able to definitively state that Flannagan NEVER worked there.

Had Flannagan been hired by another, unbeknownst to Perry while he was in Florida, and had he given Carr the wrong answer, you people would have further crucified him.

Unsurprisingly, you are wrong and/or lying about yet another fact in this smear campaign.

 

---

by: geo999 @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 17:32:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oh (0.00 / 0)

let's not muddy with waters with alot of facts :)

What I'm wondering is for the new shills (not the usual suspects that post regularly here....maybe 3-4 who are here and likely will remain after Nov 2nd) is how the payment arrangement works out?  

Do they get paid by the comment or the amount of time they stay logged in?....I'm curious because I never answered one of the OFA listings on craigslist.  But hey, at least they have to get a 1099 now thanks to their boss.

Follow me on twitter @garyrlake

---

by: garyrlake @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 17:40:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So any Republican (0.00 / 0)

who does not snap to attention and follow the nominated candidate without question is a "shill"?  Isn't that type of mentality what created guys like Teddy K., Studds, Livehsot Kerry and Barney?

Geo:  Didn't Perry say all of this was "vetted" numerous times when he ran for State Rep?  This comes as a shocker that he has to investigate almost a year into the campaign?  Are Martha Coakley's ex advisors working for Perry?

---

by: TeddySalad @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 19:47:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It wasn't asked. (5.00 / 2)

No one asked him back then if he had employed Flannagan at his store.

And frankly, the only reason that Carr needed to ask the question recently was because people such as yourself were making sh*t up and claiming that he had hired Flannagan.

---

by: geo999 @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 20:14:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Howie Carr @ Jeff Perry Fundraiser (0.00 / 0)

Howie Carr was at a Jeff Perry fundraiser just a couple of nights ago.  We know where Howie Carr stands, and it's proudly with Jeff Perry.

Bob Hedlund for Minority Leader.

---

by: Mike "DD4RP" Rossettie @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 20:14:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

My question is this: (0.00 / 0)

Why weren't the other two cops at the scene scrutinized? I assume if 2 cruisers arrived, they were carrying 4 officers. We know of two of them--Perry and Flanagan.
What about the other two? If Perry was supervising, I'd guess the other 3 cops were much closer to the events than he was.
We've never heard that those 2 nameless cops "did nothing while the girl screamed." I'd say the lack of scrutiny on them exculpates Perry.

What I really want to know is: when will the media start asking the candidates about their views on the issues that affect us all today?
I'm much more interested in what goes on in Washington now than what went on in Wareham 20 years ago.

---

by: swami7774 @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 18:01:43 PM UTC

Point of Fact (0.00 / 0)

There were actually three officers present that night.

However, the question you pose is still quite valid.

---

by: geo999 @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 at 19:46:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Okay, there were 3. (0.00 / 0)

That still leaves one cop unaccounted for as far as hearing/seeing or not hearing/seeing anything.

Of course, I'll say it again: I am much more interested in what goes on in Washington now than what went on in Wareham 20 years ago.

---

by: swami7774 @ Sun Oct 24, 2010 at 00:51:15 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

question (0.00 / 0)

what time of night did this happen?  And why didn't her parents know where she was?

Everyone seems to be blaming everyone else but first and foremost the responsibility for a childs behavior belongs to the partent.  After all we teach them values, and work ethic and how they should try to be a productive member of society.  

To often we live in the age of not my child when it's their child who is the ring leader.  

---

by: Millie @ Sun Oct 24, 2010 at 02:57:31 AM UTC

Can't think too highly (0.00 / 0)

...of the kid's parents. Though that doesn't mitigate Flannagan's depraved actions one bit.

But yeah, a 14 yr old girl doing drugs late at night in a dark bog with three older males doesn't speak well of the whole parental involvement thing.

Add to that the fact that they didn't pursue the issue until 1993. One ha$ to wonder why.

---

by: geo999 @ Sun Oct 24, 2010 at 03:44:20 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Where would Libertarians be (0.00 / 0)

without parents to blame for everything?

---

by: John Howard @ Sun Oct 24, 2010 at 08:19:35 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Criticism does not equal Blame (0.00 / 0)

The parents are not to blame for the acts committed by Flannagan.

But to have allowed their children to be in the situations these girls were in constitutes neglect - and leaves them open to criticism.

---

by: geo999 @ Sun Oct 24, 2010 at 20:45:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]