her office used to prosecute day care operators and charge them with rape when some 2 year olds made claims that the day care workers had 'magic wands' and 'secret rooms' where they were forced to drink urine? Now of course, there were obviously no magic wands - because magic wands do not exist. And there were no secret rooms, because they didn't exist either. But it never stopped Marcia Coakley from keeping an entire family in jail for what was, in at least one case, the 'rest of their lives'.
I remember the good old days when two of the people, Cheryl and Violet were freed on successful appeal, only to have the state supreme court send them back to prison. Violet later died in prison waiting for justice.
The landmark case now known as the 'Fells Acre Day Care' case become legendary not for a Prosecutor's sharp skills and keen insights, but because the interrogators led the children toward false accusations, misleading testimony and the wrongful accusation of now seemingly innocent people. It should be noted that Marcia Coakley did NOT prosecute the case, but she did personally prevent every effort to have them freed when it was realized the Amiraults were likely not guilty of anything other than local hysteria about day care centers..
Marcia lobbied to keep the innocent people in jail. She lobbied to refuse them a retrial. she lobbied to refuse them justice. She lobbied to allow bogus testimony to be admitted in court. She lobbied for everything except what is now known to be the truth - innocence.
Marcia Coakley and Cheryl Amirault eventually reached an agreement by which Cheryl would be released from prison with 'time served', but promising never to make a nickel of profit from the case. Marcia Coakley did not have to make such a promise and is now a candidate for the highest office in the state.
More about Marcia Coakley and Fells Acres Day Care below:
Now this whole mess is not to be confused with Marcia Coakley's other dirty legal work about a trailer park murder in Ayer, Massachusetts. The guy she convicted in that one was not guilty either, but alas it became the subject of a Hillary Swank movie named 'Conviction'.
What will state government be like under Marcia Coakley? A woman blind to so many truths. A woman so selfishly determined to make a name for herself that she puts innocent people in jail and distorts the testimony of children for her own advancement. She uses people. She manipulates people. she sends people to jail forever to die, and doesn't care when it is found out that she was wrong.
MassFiscal in the News Rick Green, the founder and chairman of Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, explains our comprehensive voter education program in today's Salem News. Read Rick's op-ed in which he explains in detail the reasons for our efforts. Click here to read the op-ed.
Events This Week Please join Rick Green and Paul D. Craney, who will be speaking as guests of Stonehill College's Martin Institute for Law and Society on Wednesday, October 15th at 1pm. Green and Craney will discuss their role as heads of a non-profit organization that participates in important policy debates. They will also share their perspective on state politics. Click here to read more about this event.
Please join Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, American Future Foundation and the Institute for Humane Studies for a happy hour to toast the free markets and limited government! This is a great opportunity to network with like-minded individuals in Boston on Thursday at 6pm at Lir. Click here to read more about this event.
Yesterday, Barack Obama supporter and former Governor Bil Weld (?-MA/NY/Mexico) endorsed a Democrat in a winnable open seat in metro north.
Caroline Colarusso, a solid conservative who once told me should would vote against the Democratic budget like Lyons and Lombardo, is running in the 31st Middlesex District to replace the ultra moonbat Jason Lewis, who is now a State Senator. She is a solid conservative.
Democrat Michael Day, a candidate for state representative for the 31st Middlesex District, has been endorsed by former Massachusetts Gov. William Weld.
"I am pleased to endorse my good friend Michael Day for State Representative," Weld said in a campaign news release. "I know Mike's entire family, and they are quality all the way. He is the sort of person who will work effectively across party lines in the State House, which is a good way to get things done."
Weld was governor from 1991 to 1997.
The 31st Middlesex District covers Stoneham and Winchester. Day is running against Republican Caroline Colarusso. Both are from Stoneham.
Weld, knows Day because they are both lobbyists. Of course we could all sit here and kvetch about how awful Bill Weld is to have done this... Or....
We could all meet his endorsement by sending Caroline a few dollars. I just donated $50.00 to Caroline's campaign via her Piryx Account, which is also embedded after the jump.
This district is winnable. Scott Brown won the district in 2010 by 11 points, and Charlie Baker won the district by 7 points. It is an R+5 District. Caroline needs your help to bring it home.
While all the focus and attention of many Republicans to win a congressional seat in Massachusetts for the first time since 1994 have focused North on the Tisei-Tierney...uh, sorry...Moulton race in the 6th Congressional District, perhaps it's time more GOP eyes turned South for our best hope. As the Boston Globe Reports something's brewing in the 9th Congressional District:
For months, political handicappers have been following one Congressional race in Massachusetts as the marquee contest, the North Shore campaign that has already toppled the incumbent and now pits Republican Richard Tisei against Democrat Seth Moulton.
Increasingly, however, strategists in both parties are focusing attention on a previously quiet race in the 9th District of southeastern Massachusetts, where little-known Republican attorney John Chapman is waging a tightening fight against two-term incumbent Democrat William Keating.
Keating visited Democratic lobbying firms in Boston last week "letting people know that he needs help," his campaign co-chair said, and some Republican strategists have quietly urged the party to shift resources from Tisei and toward Chapman.
"I think people are starting to have a greater understanding of the dynamics at play in the 9th, and they're more beneficial than those in the [Tisei-Moulton race], and for that reason they're urging people to take another look at the 9th," said David Tamasi, a Washington-based GOP lobbyist and fundraiser with Cape Cod ties.
In 2013, when Gabe Gomez was losing statewide by 10%, he won the 9th Congressional by 7% (perhaps if he hadn't self-immolated after, he could have run for the seat himself!). In 2012, when Scott Brown was losing state-wide by 8%, he won the 9th by 1%. So the voters, and more importantly, the votes, are there for a Chapman victory.
Has Moulton's Primary victory taken the wind out of Tisei's sail, or is he just riding a temporary headwind? Should the NRCC and RNC Look South to the 9th Congressional district, were, in it's prior configuration, they invested heavily in 2010? Or should they be bold and Invest in Both?
The wheels are coming off the Democrat wagon across the country, even here in Massachusetts
Today, John Miller released his first T.V. ad of the general election entitled "A Fresh Approach." The ad highlights Miller's experience as a nationally recognized lawyer and his commitment to being an independent, non-political Attorney General.
"From the very beginning our campaign's focus has been about bringing a fresh, non-political approach to the Attorney General's Office," said John Miller. "For too long, politics and positioning for the next job has dominated the Attorney General's Office. That ends when I am elected in November. To me, AG means Attorney General, not aspiring governor.
Miller continued, "As Attorney General I will relentlessly pursue corruption, fraud and abuse; fight crime with 21st century technology; and protect the civil rights of all Massachusetts citizens. Most importantly, I will bring a fresh, professional approach to the Attorney General's office."
(A good question - promoted by Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno)
One could assume that the Federal government was, and perhaps remains, unprepared for an outbreak of the deadly Ebola Virus. The feds did not make any timely closure of borders in order to prevent the travel of people from Ebola troubled areas of the globe into the United States. But then again......
"Lakeland stands ready to join the fight against the spread of Ebola," said Christopher J. Ryan, President and Chief Executive Officer of Lakeland Industries. "We understand the difficulty of getting appropriate products through a procurement system that in times of crisis favors availability over specification, and we hope our added capacity will help alleviate that problem. With the U.S. State Department alone putting out a bid for 160,000 suits, we encourage all protective apparel companies to increase their manufacturing capacity for sealed seam garments so that our industry can do its part in addressing this threat to global health.
So here is the timeline folks, on September 7th The Hill reports that Obama believes Ebola is not a short term worry for US citizens. Yet, less than one week later Lakeland Industries had already received an order from the federal government for 160,000 hazmat suits. Is it a problem or not?
Oh V3PN those suits were probably for the people the feds were sending over to help with Ebola. Perhaps 3,000 to 5,000 suits were for that reason because that is the number of people the feds are sending. But who would the other 155,000 suits be for?
160,000 hazmat suits are a lot of hazmat suits. How big a problem does the federal government think this will be? And why is it buying hazmat suits and then telling people 'Nothing to worry about here folks, go back to watching Chelsea Clinton have her baby'.
On August 6th Lakeland Industries stock was trading at $6.50, now it is at $8.70 per share. Don't think for one minute that Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren haven't already bought a few shares in order to insulate themselves a bit more from the working class stiffs that they represent..
(Rubin is the insiders insider
- promoted by Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno)
Just saw Martha's ad that says she is not supported by the Beacon Hill insiders. Really? Her campaign manager is Doug Rubin the head of lobbying firm Northwind Strategies. Yesterday a bunch of Democratic "consultants." or should I say high powered lobbyist held a meeting to advise Martha on her faltering campaign. The meeting was held at Mintz Levin home to lobbying powerhouse ML Strategies. Also attending were lobbyists Chuck Campion, Susan Tracy, Dan Cence, Connor Yunitz, and David Guarino, among others. These lobbyist combined lobby on every major policy issue that will face our next Governor. Martha Coakley has a lot of gall to run an add to say that she is opposed by the Beacon Hill insiders.
We are pleased to learn that Christian Whiton over at Fox News has thought one of our long-standing research agenda items (reforming the Davis Bacon Act and prevailing wages in general) was a good enough of an idea to place in any New Contract with America that the GOP might want to present to the American public up to November. In the context of rebuilding our infrastructure (an issue close to home) and increasing our competitiveness, Whiton writes:
Americans waste an average of 38 hours per year in traffic jams according to researchers at Texas A&M. Most U.S. airports are also in terrible shape. Antiquated laws and regulations that needlessly elevate the cost of new infrastructure are to blame. The worst offender is the Davis-Bacon law. Originally passed in part to suppress black labor, the law today is used by unions to eliminate the cost advantages of their non-union competitors. A study by the Beacon Hill Institute estimated that Davis-Bacon requirements increase the cost of infrastructure-related labor by 22% over the market rate. The law should go.
Read more at http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/10/02/nine-ideas-for-new-contract-with-america/
The sentiment carries over to state Democratic Party as a whole when it comes to BHI's State Competitiveness Index which usually finds the Bay State at the top according to a variety of indicators of economic growth that we've assembled since 2001. (We guess our friends at the Democratic Party are using our index since most are not so favorable.)
A friendly reminder to Chairman McGee, MA was also on top when a Republican occupied the corner office on Beacon Hill.
- promoted by Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno)
From the report entitled Fiscal Policy Report Card on America's Governors 2014
"Governor Patrick's low score results mainly from his record of proposed and enacted tax increases. In 2012 he proposed higher taxes on cigarettes and corporations. In 2013 he signed into law increases in sales taxes, cigarette taxes, and gas taxes. The cigarette tax was increased by $1 per pack. The same year, he proposed a large income tax increase, which would have raised the individual rate from 5.25 to 6.25 percent. The plan would have reduced the sales tax, but would have been a large tax increase overall. Luckily for Massachusetts taxpayers, the plan did not pass. In 2014 Patrick proposed higher taxes on corporations and applying the sales tax to candy and soda."
The embattled Kansas governor Republican Sam Brownback received an "A". Unfortunately the media is playing up his political troubles, repeating a left wing talking point about the evils of tax cuts.
In Massachusetts few will really care since the state is "doing alright" economically or so it seems.
You have heard the expression 'Run for your life'? Well now we need to hear someone say 'Vote for your life'.
Never has it been so obvious the destructive possibilities of picking government officials that are not qualified. As we speak there are multiple deadly viruses and illnesses spreading across the country with little or no concern by public officials. To hear this week that a man in Dallas Texas has not only contracted the deadly Ebola Virus, but was allowed to leave a hospital and socialize among children that may pass it on to a number of public schools is horrifying. We were told, by a seemingly uninformed President that there is nothing to worry about. 'We got this'. Even Mike Barnicle, perhaps the President's strongest supporter has now come to question his skills at handling difficult situations. The net result is that more Americans WILL die. That is a fact.
Furthermore, the same US President Barack Obama seemed so uninterested in the growth and development of ISIS/ISIL that he was incensed at being pulled off the golf course and labeled them JayVee. Again, he tells us there is nothing to worry about. 'We got this'. Now ISIS is making direct threats to the US homeland and laughing in our faces. The net result is that more Americans WILL die. That is a fact.
Our economy is in shambles, and no matter how hard the President twists the numbers the truth is that there are more Americans suffering with the Obama economy that can be imagined. Healthcare is in a chaotic frenzy with millions uninsured who formerly had insurance. As many as 5 million Americans have left the job market giving up on the American dream. Seniors are forced out of retirement to get part time jobs in order to supplement their dwindling income. College students who spent fortunes on education are lucky to find jobs at fast food restaurants. it is insulting to them and sad for the American people.
Our foreign policy seems to be a patchwork of misguided attempts to save face. We won't go to war - yet we are in war. We won't commit boots on the ground, yet we have boots on the ground. We hate Syria, yet we now support Syrian rebels. What the hell is the world to think when we are lead by a man who formulates important policy only after 4 putting? How can the world take us seriously?
Closer to home, we have a Governor Deval Patrick who terminates the employment of people who try and uphold the law against the Governor's own family. 'Register my brother-in-law as a sex offender and lose a job'. Or how about Deval's inability to be concerned about children such that they are dying in the state's custody? Or that drug labs are infested with criminals? Or that the roads he promised to repair are crumbling and the schools he promised to improve are failing, or the property taxes he promise to lower are increasing? Failure after failure after failure.
Politics is important, and in this country we are blessed to be able to sustain a Democratic process that should result in competent leaders and efficient systems. Yet, we end up with lax attitudes, self-righteous indignant people who neither care for the general public or are sickened at the sight of us. Sadly, we see it and do nothing about it.
The price to be paid for the voting record of Americans is dead Americans. Americans will die because party politics came before leadership. Race came before leadership. Diversity came before leadership. Americans have died at the hands of terrorists who are more than happy to behead us in the name of Jihad. Americans will die because Obama couldn't care less about Ebola because the issue conflicts with his view of Obamacare - how can a pandemic happen with Obamacare? It doesn't jive with him.. How can children die when they are in state custody? It doesn't jive with Deval Patrick either.
The next time you vote, remember that your life may very well depend on it. I honestly don;t care which party rules as long as we are not disregarded for political purposes. I want government to take our lives seriously. I want them to be as concerned about my welfare as with their own.
This past week was a perfect testimony to Barack Obama's attitude problem. A wall-jumping intruder made it past security and into the White House. A serious threat had the President been home. Suddenly it gets Obama's attention. 'How dare he threaten the President's safety'? Well every day there are millions of Americans living in border towns who face the very same threat. Border jumping thugs with weapons and the intent to hurt people, yet Obama cares not. He can't be bothered. In fact, he uses the sad plight of these border crossers to sway political opinion in his favor. You can bet that for the next several weeks the White House will be on high alert. But there will not be a single person added to the payroll to help stop border crossers on the Mexico border. The borders are porous not only to criminals and welfare cheats, but also to terrorists and disease. Americans WILL die.
How do you respond to an academic/journalist who states on a popular website, "So as Charlie Baker courts female support, and is rightfully called out on the sweetheart comment, let's not lose sight of his dog-whistle politics and what it means for women of color in the Bay State. When he talks about "requiring work for welfare" he is talking about "getting tough" on black women."
Simple, with facts. Kudos to Charlie Baker for taking on such an important policy issue while running for Governor. My column from last November explains that if we continue to throw more funding into anti-poverty programs without looking at the results of the programs, we risk only exacerbating the problem.
That column begins as follows:
There are 126 federal anti-poverty programs. There are 33 housing programs, run by four different cabinet departments, which strangely includes the Department of Energy. There are currently 21 different programs providing food or food purchasing assistance. These programs are administered by three different federal departments and one independent agency.
There are eight different health care programs, administered by five separate agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services. And six cabinet departments and five independent agencies oversee 27 cash or general assistance programs. Altogether, seven different cabinet agencies and six independent agencies administer at least one anti-poverty program.
The states and the federal government spend approximately $1 trillion annually on anti-poverty programs. The federal poverty line is $11,490 and taxpayers on average spend $20,989 in total welfare spending per person in poverty every year. That means, we could write large enough checks to every person in poverty, which would get people out of poverty and still save taxpayers over $9,000 per person.
It's important that when we study anti-poverty programs, we judge them not by how much money we spend, but rather how successfully they lift people out of poverty. If we continue to throw more funding into anti-poverty programs without looking at the results of the programs, we are only exacerbating the problem and making poverty more comfortable.
The first Suffolk poll of the general election is out, and Baker and Coakley are virtually tied. Coakley is at 43.8 percent and Baker is at 43.2 percent. You can read about the poll at The Boston Herald who sponsored it.
Baker and Democrat Martha Coakley are in a virtual tie, with the Attorney General at 44 percent with Baker at 43 percent, according to the Suffolk-Herald poll of 500 very likely voters. The poll shows eight percent are undecided, indicating voters are starting to make up their minds.
But Baker also holds a lead over Coakley among those following the race closely.
Nearly half of those polled said they trust Baker to stand up for "women's rights" while 34 percent said they don't trust Baker, the poll shows.
The poll shows even though 39 percent of voters say Baker's "sweetheart" comment to a reporter was condescending, just 34 percent say they don't trust Baker on women's issues. Nearly half of voters say they do trust Baker to stand up for women, the poll shows.
Coakley holds an 11 point lead among women voters over Baker, a solid but not overwhelming number. Baker leads by 11 points among men, the poll shows.
Sure, it's one thing for the GOP to have focused all their energies on Charlie Baker and his quest to capture the governor's office. He is their best bet, and he's looking pretty strong. But the party should have been paying some attention to the races for attorney general, treasurer, auditor and secretary of state. All of those contests will be won handily by the Democratic nominees. GOP officials can counter that they have a strong slate of candidates all they want, but the reality is that if the casinos were open here, the surest bet in the house would be on a Democratic sweep of all the lower ballot offices.
Losing the undercard to the Democrats isn't the end of the world to the GOP. If they can take the Corner Office, it won't matter at all. But a failure to have more serious Republican vote-getters on the ballot with Baker hurts his chances against Martha Coakley. Viable Republican contenders for AG and treasurer hailing from strategic geographical locations or with ideologies that supplement Baker's policies could have helped a lot. Although Maura Healey, the Democratic nominee for attorney general, might be the most popular and unbeatable candidate on the ballot, a serious opponent might have drawn out some more GOP-leaning voters in areas where Baker will need help. None of this would change the numbers much, but in what looks like such a tight race it wouldn't take much.
Instead of this boilerplate column, it would have been nice if Nucci took the time to get to know the candidates. Because his help in promoting them, would help them break through the false wall he has set up. All of our statewide candidates are solid. Will they all win, no, could some of them. Absolutely.
If the media were paying more attention, the news that Patricia Saint Aubin and David D'Arcangelo have been generating would be more known.
Saint Aubin for instance got Auditor Suzanne Bump to acknowledge that under her management audits have precipitously fallen to only around 35 per year, for 2014. Think of that, ony 32 audits in a state budget of over $30billion.
D'Arcangelo has been highlighting the Secretary of State's stonewalling of public records requests.
Instead of downplaying the chances, Nucci should give the candidates a little love.
Earlier this week, Governor Deval Patrick reacted strongly to federal officials designation of Boston as a terror pipeline. Here's the Channel 5 report.
First off, the 9/11 terrorists used Boston as a base from which to launch their attacks. Second the marathon bombers were radicalized while attending the Islamic Society of Boston, which was founded by a jihadist imam. And now the jihadist beheader in Oklahoma is reported to have ties to the Islamic Society of Boston.
Suhaib Webb, an Imam with ties to former Al Qaeda mastermind Anwar al-Awlaki, had also previously been the leader of the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City, which had been attended by Alton Nolen -- the man who on Thursday beheaded a former coworker after recently converting to Islam, Breitbart News has learned. Webb now serves as Imam of the sister organization of the mosque attended by Boston Marathon bombers Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev.
Imam Suhaib Webb has a history of ties to radicalism. FBI surveillance documents found that he was a known confidant of Al Qaeda mastermind Anwar al-Awlaki. Just two days before the September 11, 2001 attacks on America, Webb spoke at a fundraiser with Awlaki with hopes to raise funds for Atlanta-based H. Rap Brown, a man that shot and killed two police officers. The FBI documents also found that "Webb and Awlaki may be associated with the Muslim American Society," which is a group described by the Investigative Project on Terrorism as being "founded as the United States Chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood."
Nolen took a picture of himself (above) September 5th, just three weeks before he brutally murdered an innocent woman, standing in front of the gates of the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City.
Radical Islam is in America, Radical Islam has a center in Cambridge. For Governor Patrick to say otherwise is a lie. It is time for the Coexist crowd to understand what the stakes are.
We may not want to admit that we are in a multigenerational war with Radical Islam, but the radical Islamists have declared war on us. And one of the centers of the radical Islamic Movement is in the East Cambridge neighborhood.
(Alan is a true friend. He will be sorely missed. My thoughts are with Lori and the rest of his family. - promoted by Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno)
I have to say that on September 23rd a very opinionated passionate man who loved talking politics and was a poster on this site passed away. Alan was one of a kind and was at times controversial and could even be a jerk. With that being said he loved his family and friends and loved posting here.
Last week, Martha Coakley was quick to jump on Charlie Baker, when Baker said he would have to research the Roger Goodell handling of the NFL crisis more in depth before calling for Goodell's resignation. She even put a video out about it.
Charlie got caught in the trap he has multiple times this campaign, where he says he will look at a situation and then come up with an answer. This is a counterintuitive way to campaign, but is exactly what we need in a governor. Enough about Charlie. Let's get to Martha Coakley and today.
While she was quick to jump all over Baker, she has been conspicuously silent on Deval Patrick's firing of two members of the Sex Offender Registry Board who dared suggest that Patrick's convicted rapist brother-in-law should register as a sex offender. She has been silent.
In today's Boston Herald we learn why the iniitial determination was made, that Patrick's brother-in-law didn't have to register. It is because in Massachusetts spousal rape isn't rape.
Gov. Deval Patrick's brother-in-law did not have to register as a sex offender because his hearing officer ruled that spousal rape is not considered rape in Massachusetts - a decision that has outraged victims' advocates calling on the governor to disavow the claim and apologize.
"It's insulting to all women," said victims' lawyer Wendy Murphy. "Gov. Deval Patrick knew this man was fighting to give his brother-in-law a discount for violence against women. You don't get a discount from rape to a pat on the rear end because the victim was your wife."
Patrick said he fired Sex Offender Registry Board (SORB) Chairwoman Saundra Edwards and put executive director Jeanne L. Holmes on leave last week in part because they pressured a hearing officer to keep the governor's brother-in-law, Bernard Sigh, on the registry. The hearing officer, Atillio "A.J." Paglia, refused, quit and filed a lawsuit against the state in 2008.
Are you kidding me. Who would have thought that in Massachusetts, the land of the supermajority Democratic Legislature for all but two years of the last half century, would not consider spousal rape, rape. And that a progressive governor would fire two people who believed it was.
Where is Martha Coakley. Last week she said how different she was than Charlie Baker because she has prosecuted domestic violence and crimes against women and understands the issues. She attacked Baker for saying he'd take a measured approach with Goodell, looking at all the evidence. Yet she has been silent on this egregious behavior by the Governor.
You can't tell me she is just interested in scoring political points and not actually standing up for women, are you? No that can't be.
A major flaw of the Deval Patrick governorship has been his stubborn defense of his appointees in the face of overwhelming evidence that they were incapable of leading. The most recent example is Jean Yang, the head of the beleaguered Health Connector Authority. Yesterday we learned that the Governor can act decisively when he wants. Especially when the action is in part based on familial revenge.
In a bizarre set of firings at the Sex Offender Registry Board, Patrick made it known that you "never go against the family." The Boston Herald has the story:
Gov. Deval Patrick said he fired the chairwoman of the state's Sex Offender Registry Board and put its executive director on leave last week, in part, because they tried to pressure a hearing officer to change a decision involving Patrick's brother-in-law.
The case "involved some inappropriate at least, maybe unlawful pressuring by the chair and the executive director of a hearing fficer to change an outcome of a case" and resulted in a lawsuit, which the state settled last year - and was the "final straw," Patrick told reporters today,
The brother-in-law, Bernard Sigh, was convicted in 1993 of raping his wife, who is Patrick's sister. The Herald first reported Sigh's failure to register as a sex offender in Massachusetts in 2006, during Patrick's first campaign for governor, setting off a firestorm that Patrick said today "nearly destroyed" his sister and brother-in-law's lives.
Yes you read that right, Patrick fired two people who wanted to ensure a convicted rapist registered as a sex offender. That convicted rapist, just happens to be Patrick's brother-in-law who raped his sister. The family has made amends, and Patrick doesn't believe his family member should have to register.