James LaMountain PRESS RELEASE
The Holland Blog received a Press Release about a trial that ended today in Superior Court, read more»Edit - Delete
Comments:
Posted on 22 Oct 2009, 22:48 by saw the JudgeI Know
The Judge went to the land.......I saw him
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 23 Oct 2009, 8:02 by just flew over
5 Elmview Terrace
I just flew over 5 Elmwood Terrace in Pittsfield Ma 01201 using the google sattelites. This address is listed as Judge Fords on the Berkshire Bar Association registry.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 23 Oct 2009, 8:26 by Peter Frei
Our Judiciary is a Joke!
In my lawsuit against the Planning Board of Holland, I filed a motion for a default judgment after Debora Benveniste, at that time chairperson of the Planning Board, perjured herself during a deposition (under normal circumstances, this is considered defrauding the court and a default judgement is issued). Judge Constance Sweeney instead fined me $100 for "deliberate violation of Superior Court Rule 9A," and denied the motion. Superior Court Rule 9A requires a movant to serve the motion to the opposing party so they have an opportunity to respond. However, a motion for default judgement is excluded from this requirement. Judge Bertha Josephson eventually presided over the matter during a trial. In her opinion she wrote, "Because the Board failed to notify Frei of its decision not to endorse his ANR submission within twenty-one days as required by s.81P, Frei is entitled to an endorsement of his plan," but decided arbitrarily not to follow the law and deny me my rights. See Memorandum of Decision and Order on Plaintiff's Petition for a writ of Mandamus, page 6, civil action no.02-1196.I was forced to go through the appeals process which took more than six years to get justice.
Power corrupts, judges have absolute power..
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 23 Oct 2009, 9:35 by civilian
Pittsfield address
I worked in Pittsfield for a few years and I know where that address is. These guys must have dug into the arm pit of the earth to find this Judge. Did you know Pittsfield is a gov. super fund area.. I don't know where these high power people get off. This Judge was picked just for you. I bet Good old Jim found this guy on the golf course, I've noticed that's where scum congregates. The Berkshires are a joke! I'm will'n to bet this Judge has a history of dirty business, He might want to try cleaning up the GE. mess before he comes to clean up the "Bad Man" in Holland.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 23 Oct 2009, 11:46 by How Cute
E,Pleasant Street Amherst
Guess what. Is this the same Kerry Strayer that lives on 226 East Pleasant Street amherst ma? 413 459 2022?
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 23 Oct 2009, 14:29 by Old McDonald
Judge on Holland Farm
Too bad I did not find this out about Ford until after the trial as I would never have invited him to the land. Now I have to scrape up all the dirt he walked on and dump it in the pig pen to clean it up.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 23 Oct 2009, 15:59 by OBSERVER
Kerry Strayer..Student of Judge Ford?
Hey.. The first thing LaMountain sent to the DEP & Strayer (the prosecutor that thinks he is able to play "hide the agricultural exemption") was a package of documents with a copy of the flyer wettlaufer and johnson posted around town...and the Reilly affidavit with a request that Holland Officials, Fife, Johnson, Wettlaufer and Vandenberg be investigated for abuse of power in the matter ,
LaMountain filed for criminal charges against Wettlaufer but his plea's fell on deaf ears in the Palmer Court after Kevin Gleason sold Johnson and Wettlaufers story full of lies to the magistrate. WINK WINK...Lets get the registered sex offender ?
So putting the LaMountain case aside lets look at where that type of behavior leads if allowed to continue.
A 19 year old man spent over 20 years in prison because Judge Ford used the same tactics he taught to Student Strayer.
Hiding evidence... The kid goes to Jail.. Which I can say by personal experience.. when you enter the gates of walpole you enter a world I should hope none reading this should ever experience. On a positive note I did get a great recipe for "prison pasta" Linguini and Clam Sauce and I learned there are quite a few diamonds incarcerated by our state for no other reason than proscutorial misconduct. If every witness could be monitered while under oath with brain wave technology then I bet at least 20 percent of our prison cells would be as vacant as the kings inn at the truckstop on ole rt 15. Maybe sometime in the next 20 years......it will come to that.
As I linked to the page for the National Center for reason and Judgment and read some of the cases they represent I feel outrage because I see personally the innerworkings of those responsible for these public lynchings and know in my Heart Karma will visit them all. Perhaps they feel justified because of my status as rso. It is not up to me to Judge Man and I would dread the day I have to carry out such a task.
However there does come a time in every mans life that he will answer to the final Judge. I would like to see some of that perhaps. To be a Court reporter when Judge Daniel Ford answered to His Judge.
How can such people look in the mirror. They should Judge themselves and then take appropriate action to come into compliance with the golden rule.
God save the Commonwealth
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 23 Oct 2009, 19:34 by drug users
trash
Isn't the so called farm the same place that a bunch of drug users spend all there time cutting wood and partying day and night ?O and these same guys live in trashy trailers that are stored on this dump of a farm. We are sick of the partying day and night .
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 23 Oct 2009, 19:42 by There is a difference
Drug Users or Pot Smokers
"When the people fear the government there is tyranny. When the Government fears the people there is Liberty" Thomas Jefferson.
How can you see what you speak off on that land. There is no homes within 300 feet of the area you speak of. You are here to start trouble..I say you should stop having parties on your land then. Where does it end? What parties. Are you referring to Phil as a drug user? Because he and his dad are no longe allowed on our land after they kidnapped and terrorized a little Girl last week and Blackened both her eyes. If you want to be so nosey Mrs Raymond perhaps you should be looking in a diffrent direction.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 9:01 by Part 1
Judge Ford Victim
Going to Prison
David Foley, a New York playwright, is working on a screenplay about the Baran case. I f you’d like more information about this project, you may contact David at davfoleyNY@aol.com or the producer, Justin Tan, at maynoce@hotmail.com.
Thus far, prison authorities have denied David permission to interview Baran with any kind of recording device, or even with a pen and notebook. Foley has, however, visited Baran several times anyway, and also writes to him with questions. Recently, Foley asked Bernard to write a description of Baran’s processing at Walpole. Both have given me permission to put this letter at this web site.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 9:04 by part 2
Baran Letter
Bernard F. Baran
30 Administration Road
Bridgewater MA 02324
May 7, 2001
Dear David,
I’m sorry I haven’t written to you sooner, but I’ve been feeling a little down with my birthday and Mother’s Day coming. I hate the holidays — they can be ever so lonely. I was trying to locate your letter before I came up here to the computer room, but along with my sadness comes a very messy room.
As you know, I don’t believe I’m a good writer, but I’ll give it a go. I think the worst part of going to Walpole is pulling up to the prison and seeing those tall white walls around the side of the building and how your stomach gets so sour and how you notice that your hands are ice-cold with sweat. As you’re taking all this in, you have the cops who are transferring you saying a lot of things and laughing, but for some reason you don’t understand them until you force yourself to listen. Then you hear, “You’re looking kind of scared, boy. Don’t be, because this is your home for the next 20 years.” Then that cruel laugh erupts from their mouths and I jump thinking these are the same men who are paid to protect me. But I don’t have time to listen any more, because this building has got my whole body and soul captured. Captured in a fear I have never felt before, but since then that same fear has become very familiar. (To me, no less intense, mind you, but still familiar.)
As I was getting out of the car, I found my legs not wanting to move. Frozen at that moment, I started to cry. The cop yanked me up out of the car and told me not to let any of the men in there ever see me cry. I stopped crying even before he finished telling me to — at least it seemed like that. We went through the front gate and down a long hallway. I remember the floor being the color of brown, a very dark blood-colored brown. I can feel my body shaking so hard and I’m extremely cold and I want so badly to go home and have my mother’s arms wrapped around me. I want to wake up from this dream because this can’t be happening. At the end of this long hallway is a door. It opens in front of us very slowly with a loud clicking noise and when it opens all the way it makes a bang that I can hear echo. We walk into another hallway, but in the middle of this one is a catwalk that had a guard with a shotgun looking down at you, with the gun pointed right at you. At that moment, I thought I was going to lose it. Then out of nowhere, I hear this voice. “Hold it together, boy, you’re losing it.” The only thing, it wasn’t out of nowhere, it came from the cop who was still holding on to my arm. I had forgotten he was still there. It’s kind of funny how your mind will only allow you to take so much in.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 9:07 by part 3
Baran letter
We went through a small courtyard and into the basement of the H.S.U. [Health Services Unit.] While we were going through this courtyard what still comes to mind is this dead bird I saw. Somewhere thinking in my mind, “This bird is me. I’m never going to make it through this. I will never see anyone I love again. (family).” As I stood at this booking desk, there were cells to my left, a shower area to my left, and the photo-ID room to my right. You walk up to the desk and the officer tells you to take all your clothes off right there and put them in that trash bag. The clothes are no longer yours, they’re trash. The floor is cold and my feet are sticking to it. They make you stand there naked while you are asked all kinds of questions. “Have you any birthmarks? Do you have any scars, boy? Are you really fucking scared right now, boy?” My eyes are so filled with tears I can’t see any more, I can only make out blurred shapes. I wipe them quickly when the guard looks at the paper, not to let a tear fall from my face. I will not let him see me cry tonight. After the 20 minutes of questioning is over, you are told to step away from the desk and open your mouth, run your fingers through your hair, and to bend over and spread your ass cheeks.
Then you are given some stuff to kill lice and told to get in the shower. The water is cold and rusty and the shower floor is so slimy you have to keep in mind to be very careful not to slip. As soon as I get under the water, it was my time to let go and let all the tears and pain out of me, not because of any comfort a shower might bring, but because there under the water, I can hide my tears, my pain, with the running water. To this day, I still cry and allow my pain to release in the shower for the fear. I don’t want to look weak and show emotion in front of other inmates, because you are not allowed to show weakness because you will be taken advantage of.
From the shower you are given some clothing. The clothing I was given was about six sizes too big for me. Then your picture is taken and you are fingerprinted. All along no one talks to you, they talk at you and shout their commands. From there you go back up several flights of stairs and are put in a cell to wait to see the doctor. During your wait, you come to realize this is not a dream and as soon as you do that you want to die. How can they do this to an innocent man?
David, I have to stop. During this letter, I can’t hold back the tears any longer. It’s time for a long hot shower.
Your friend,
Bee
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 16:27 by Ford Questions 4 year old
Salem revisited part 1
The Complete Testimony of Peter Hanes
01/24/85
PETER HANES, Witness (not his real name)
(Witness sworn as follows:)
THE CLERK: Hi, Peter, Can you put your right hand up, please? Do you promise to tell what happened?
PETER HANES: (No response)
THE CLERK: Do you promise to tell what happened?
PETER HANES: (No response)
MR. FORD: You won’t be able to say anything except to reassure Peter that it’s okay to answer questions.
FOSTER MOTHER: Okay, sure.
MR. CONWAY: Excuse me, you honor. May we approach the side bar?
MR. FORD: I object, your Honor.
MR. CONWAY: Your Honor, I didn’t hear the boy’s answer to the abbreviated oath? I think that the oath was: Do you promise to tell what happened and what I heard –
THE COURT: Let’s not — if there’s any question why don’t you readminister it?
THE CLERK: Do you promise to tell what happened, Peter?
PETER HANES: I don’t know.
MR. FORD: Peter, do you promise to tell us what happened? Remember how we talked about it?
THE CLERK: Are you going to tell us what happened?
MR. FORD: Are you going to tell us the truth, Peter?
PETER HANES: Yes.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. FORD: I think the answer was, yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you want to ask him some preliminary questions?
*****
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. FORD:
MR. FORD: What’s your name, Peter?
PETER HANES: (No response)
MR. FORD: How old are you, Peter?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: How old are you, Peter?
PETER HANES: Four.
MR. FORD: Four years old?
PETER HANES: Yup.
MR. FORD: What’s your last name?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: What’s your name, Peter?
PETER HANES: I don’t know.
MR. FORD: What are you looking at, Peter?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Peter, do you see anybody here that you know?
PETER HANES: I don’t know.
MR. FORD: Who are you looking at right now, Peter?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: I know the person you’re looking at right now. What’s his name?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: May I get down lower, your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes, sure.
MR. FORD: Petey, are you afraid, Peter?
PETER HANES: Yes.
MR. FORD: You’re scared?
PETER HANES: Yup.
MR. FORD: Do you want to talk any more?
PETER HANES: No.
MR. FORD: Why not?
PETER HANES: ‘Cause.
MR. FORD: Because why?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Something scare you?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Petey, remember we talked about this before? Remember how you told me some things happened? Can you tell these people what you told me?
PETER HANES: No.
MR. FORD: Why?
PETER HANES: ‘Cause.
MR. FORD: ‘Cause why?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: It’s okay to tell you know.
PETER HANES: (No response)
MR. FORD: Peter, do you know Bernie?
PETER HANES: No.
MR. FORD: You don’t know Bernie?
PETER HANES: No.
MR. FORD: Never saw him before.
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Are you telling the truth, Peter?
PETER HANES: No.
MR. FORD: You do know Bernie, don’t you?
PETER HANES: No, I don’t.
MR. FORD: Never saw him before today?
PETER HANES: No.
MR. FORD: How did you know his name?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Remember when you were at E.C.D.C.?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: You’ve got a cold? Be a big boy, Peter. Peter, I want to ask you a question. Did Bernie ever touch you?
MR. CONWAY: Objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 16:30 by Judge Ford "BIG CASE"
Salem revisited part 2
MR. FORD: Did Bernie ever touch you, Peter?
PETER HANES: No, I don’t want to talk to him.
MR. FORD: You don’t want to talk to these people?
PETER HANES: No.
MR. FORD: They’re nice people. They just want to know what happened. If you don’t tell them they won’t know. It’s okay to talk to them just the way you talked to me.
PETER HANES: I don’t want to.
MR. FORD: You promised to help. I tell you what, Peter, I’m going to show you something. See this fellow right here? Can you show us Where Bernie touched you?
(A doll is handed to the witness)
MR. FORD: Go ahead and show us, Peter, go ahead.
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Can you show us where Bernie touched you, Peter?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Won’t you talk to us?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Are you going to MacDonald’s?
PETER HANES: We were just at MacDonald’s.
MR. FORD: Do you want to go again?
PETER HANES: Yup.
MR. FORD: After you talk with us you can go back to MacDonald’s. Now, show us where Bernie touched you, Peter?
PETER HANES: No.
MR. FORD: Why?
PETER HANES: ‘Cause
MR. FORD: ‘Cause why?
PETER HANES: I don’t like to.
MR. FORD: Is it hard to talk about this?
PETER HANES: Yup.
MR. FORD: Is it scary?
PETER HANES: Yup.
MR. FORD: There’s nothing to be scared of, Peter.
(The child pulls the doll’s zipper down)
MR. FORD: Is that what Bernie did?
MR. CONWAY: Your Honor, I object to this.
THE COURT: Your objection is noted.
MR. FORD: Is that what Bernie did, Peter?
PETER HANES: No.
MR. FORD: What did he do.
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Peter, remember the time you were bleeding from your “P”? What happened to your “P,” Peter?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: What happened to your “P”? Remember you had to go to the doctor?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: May the record show that the witness closed down the doll’s zipper, your Honor?
THE COURT: I can’t see it from here but we’ll let the jurors view whatever they saw.
MR. FORD: Petey, remember the time you were bleeding from your “P”? Remember the time you had to go to the doctor, Petey?
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 16:32 by Bernie seved 22 years for this
salem revisited part 3
[Note: When Mr. Hanes originally called the police he claimed that blood had been found on Peter's penis. This happened several days after Peter's last day at the school. The doctor, who examined Peter the very next day, found no signs of external trauma or internal infection. During the later civil suit, Mrs. Hanes admitted under oath that she hadn't actually seen any blood, "but he said it hurt."]
PETER HANES: I don’t like him.
MR. FORD: You don’t like me? I thought we were friends.
PETER HANES: I’m not your friend any more.
MR. FORD: What did I do? Did I talk about bad things?
PETER HANES: Yes. I ain’t talking to him.
FOSTER MOTHER. You can talk.
MR. FORD: What’s that, Peter? Talk right in here. See how loud it makes your voice? Watch this: My name is Dan. What’s your name?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: You want to try it?
PETER HANES: No.
MR. FORD: It’s fun, try it.
FOSTER MOTHER: Talk to Mr. Ford.
MR. FORD: Petey, did you ever see Bernie’s “P”?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Did you ever see Bernie’s “P”?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Don’t do that, Peter, it makes noise. Did you ever see Bernie’s “P”?
PETER HANES: (No response).
FOSTER MOTHER: Talk to him like a big boy.
PETER HANES: No.
MR. FORD: Peter, these people sitting right here are nice people.
FOSTER MOTHER: Did you look at them?
PETER HANES: No.
MR. FORD: All we want to know is what Bernie did. Unless you tell them — then you can go.
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Show us?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Are you scared?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: May we suspend with this witness, your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. FORD: Do you want to go now? Are you going to talk or do you want to go?
PETER HANES: (No response).
FOSTER MOTHER: Peter, are you going to talk or are we going to go?
PETER HANES: (No response).
MR. FORD: Are you going to talk to us, Petey?
PETER HANES: No.
MR. FORD: I’d like to reserve the right to recall Peter at the appropriate time, your Honor. Perhaps under different circumstances.
MR. CONWAY: May I approach the side bar?
(Peter exits the courtroom)
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 17:15 by 22 years
Salem Revisited part 4
How the Children Were Interviewed
Very early in the investigation, all of the children were interviewed on videotape. The incriminating portions of these interviews were spliced into one edited tape that was shown to the Grand Jury. The unedited tapes were never given to Baran’s trial and appellate counsel, and Baran’s current counsel, John Swomley, had to fight for years before the Berkshire District Attorney finally turned them over. (The tape of Virginia Stone’s interview is still missing.)
I have not been permitted to view the videotapes, but I saw many excerpts at the hearings on the new-trial motion. Having seen these excerpts, it is understandable why the DA would want them kept under wraps.
Fortunately, some excerpts were transcribed in a document filed by Baran’s lawyer. I include these below. Any comments are quoted from the filed doument. I have used the usual pseudonyms for all of the children. Also, I obtained from Baran a transcript of one full interview, which I include here. It’s interesting to compare the actual interview with the police report describing it.
Click here to read about Dr. Maggie Bruck’s comments on the interviewing techniques.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For example, the transcript of Peter’s testimony is over forty-five (45) pages long, yet the edited tape covers roughly two (2) pages. The edited versions omit images such as Peter unable to stay still and answer any questions by the interviewer and the fact that his parents had to come in and try to calm him down. They also omit images of PETER being completely preoccupied with toys, donuts, and soda. Indeed, just before the part of the interview shown to the grand jury, in an example of selective reinforcement deemed problematic by Dr. Bruck, Peter is encouraged to answer through being offered donuts:
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 17:20 by 22 years in prison
Salem revisited part 5
Q: I’m just going to pull this over here, all right? You move it over there. Hold onto it. Well, maybe you better have some good donut to eat, and then we’ll talk about it, okay?
A: Look, it’s [inaudible] some chair?
Q: You want something that’s under the chair? What do you want?
A: More.
Q: You want some more donut? Okay, we’ll get some more donut in a minute. Are you going to go get it now?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay.
Q: Can you bring it back over here?
A: Yeah.
Q: Okay. Oh, my goodness, Peter. That’s a great big box of donuts. Okay. Why don’t you pick one from over here. You want to put it in your bag?
A: Another one in here. I have to–
Q: You have to finish that one first? Okay. I’ll tell you what. You finish that one. I’m going to save these right here. In fact, we’ll have him sit right on top of it. How is that?
A: Um– [inaudible] [more].
Q: That’s okay. We’ll clean it up later, it’s all right.
A: I want this. Where is that, another towel?
Q: I don’t know if we have another one. Let’s see if we can just clean up with this one. That’s a good job. That’s good, Peter. Okay, good. Let’s see. Okay.
A: Which one?
Q: Oh you want that one? Which one?
A: This one.
Q: Okay.
A: Oh God it’s thick.
Q: Um-hum. Can I… Can you hold onto this? There you go.
A: To that chocolate?
Q: Oh yeah, and this is yellow, right? Can you tell me why your daddy took you to the hospital, or do you have to eat first?
A: I have to eat first.
Q: You have to eat first, okay. We’ll let you eat first.
A: What is that stuff on it?
Q: I think it’s, I don’t know. What do you think it is?
A: Peanuts.
Q: I think you’re right, Peter. I think it is peanuts.
A: And now eats it.
Q: I think I’ll let you finish eating your donut first.
A: See that stuff right there?
Q: Yeah, what’s that?
A: It’s spilled beer.
Q: Say that again.
A: It’s beer.
Q: Oh, it’s beer, and that’s the foam on the beer? It is. It’s root beer.
A: Yeah.
Q: Yeah. Taste good?
A: I like root beer. Q Um-hum.
A: Us got some.
Q: Say that again for me?
A: Us got some more. Us got these donuts.
Q: That’s right. You’ve got a whole box full of them, don’t you?
A: Put them right here.
Q: You want them right there? Okay. Okay.
A: Thanks.
Q: You’re welcome. Do you think this guy had to go to the hospital? Yeah. Tell me how come he has to so?
A: I think that girl has to.
Transcripts pg. 6-9.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 17:24 by 22 years in prison
Salem Revisited part 6
37) All the edited versions omit statements of denial and statements indicative of suggestiveness, as demonstrated by the following excerpts:
38) PETER:
Q: Yeah. But if you could tell me a little bit more about what Bernie did to you.
A: He didn’t do nothing.
Q: Yeah. I know, you showed me. You showed me where he pulled down your pee pee stick.
A: He didn’t now.
Q: He didn’t do it now, though. Did he, did he do it more than one time, do you know?
A: No.
Transcripts pg. 14.
DAD: No, you’re a good kid. So can you tell her if Bernie said anything, or if you said anything?
A: I don’t know.
Q: You don’t know. Okay. Maybe you’ll remember some other time and you can tell me. Maybe you don’t remember right now. Maybe it will come back to you, what Bernie said to you. When you went to the doctor yesterday, was your pee pee okay?
A: Yup.
Transcripts pg. 21.
MOM: Peter, you can’t remember anything he said to you? Did he say wake up, or– He didn’t say anything at all?
A: No.
Q: He just went and did what?
A: Nothing.
Q: And after he pulled, after he pulled on your pee pee, did he tell you anything then? Did he give you anything?
A: No.
Q: No. Did he give you a box of donuts?
A: What?
Q: Did he give you a box of donuts?
A: No.
Q: No. Did he give you anything or say anything?
A: He gave us a birthday.
Transcripts pg. 28-29.
DAD: Look for a second. We want to know what you told us.
MOM: We can’t remember everything.
DAD: Remember?
A: No.
DAD: Now, did Bernie touch you?
A: No.
Transcript pg. 32
DAD: Is Bernie bad?
A: No.
Transcript pg. 34.
39) GINA:
Q: [ ] Did you play, did you play a game called “The Touching Game” at ECDC?
A: No. . . .
Q: Yeah. So I was remembering, I know a game that I used to play called “The Touching Game”. I wonder if you ever played that at school.
A: I didn’t.
Q: You don’t remember that game?
A: We didn’t do it.
Q: You didn’t?
A: No.
Transcript pg. 7-8.
Q: Yeah, he just pulled them down. Were some other children around when he did this to you? Were there other kids of other people in the room?
A: Um-hum.
Q: Yes?
A: Just two people.
Q: Two people?
A: Two teachers.
Q: Two teachers? Can you remember their names?
A: Um, no. One was named Bernie.
Q: One was named Bernie
A: But there was no [inaudible]. Mommy, what’s the girl’s name? M: Was it Stephanie or Eileen?
A: Stephanie.
Transcript pg. 16-17.
40) ANNIE:
Q: You’re gonna tell your mommy. Did you tell your mommy?
A: At home I did.
Q: At home you did. Did anybody see Bernie do that, honey? Did anybody see Bernie touch you? Did he do it all by himself?
A: I did it.
Q: Huh?
A: I did.
Q: You seen him? Yeah.
A: We put our legs like that.
Q: You did? Yeah? Did Bernie touch you anywhere else? Just down there? And what do you call down there?
A: Tookoo.
Q: Tookoo. And Bernie touched you there? Did he hurt you?
A: Uh, yeah.
Q: Yeah?
A: No.
Q: No? He just touched you? Did he put his hand inside you?
A: No.
Q: – in your pants?
A: No.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 17:38 by 22 years
Salem revisited part 7
41) JOHNNY:
Q: Okay. We were talking about when you went to ECDC, right, do you remember when you were there a long time ago, [Johnny nods yes] do you remember being touched with bad touch? [Johnny nods yes] Yeah? Who touched you on a bad touch way?
A: Richard.
Q: Richard did? Do you remember any big people, adult people who touched Johnny in a bad way that made him feel kind of funny inside, like that person shouldn’t do that to me?
A: Mary.
Q: Are you sure it was Mary? [Johnny nods yes] Yeah?
Transcripts at 6.
Q: Did Bernie, did Bernie ever touch some of the other little boys in school?
A: No.
Q: Did he go [spitting sound]? He spit it out. What did Bernie do with his weiner?
A: I don’t know.
Q: Huh? Did he put it in Scott’s mouth?
A: [Spitting sound]
Q: Yuck. Huh?
A: I don’t know.
Q: Did Bernie ever do that to Johnny? [Johnny shakes head no] No?
A: Not even.
Q: No, you can’t bring it home ’cause I got other children I got to talk to and they want to see him too. When Bernie touched Johnny, when he touched him on his dinky, where were you? Try to remember. Where were you? Were you in the classroom? Were you taking a nap with Richard? Were you in the bathroom? Do you remember where you were? Is it hard for you to remember?
A: Can I hold that?
Q: Yeah. Sure. Try to think about where you were. Johnny? Ah, you’ve got a cold.
MAN: Richard remembers.
Q: Richard remembers where he was. Do you remember when it happened? Whoops. Do you remember that it happened in the shed one time? Hm? Johnny?
A: Nothing.
Q: Johnny? Can you remember something that happened in the woods that you didn’t like?
A: No.
Transcripts at 34.
42) RICHARD
Q: So what we were talking about that day was private parts and if anybody ever touched your private parts, right?
A: (Nodding)
Q: Right? Okay. So if you can remember way back a long time ago, do you ever remember anybody touching your private parts?
A: My dupy.
Q: Who touched your dupy?
A: Johnny.
Q: Johnny touched your dupy?
A: Yes.
Q: Is Johnny a friend of yours?
A: No (shaking head.)
Transcript pg. 6-7 (found in A-695-696)
Q: Okay. Well, were you playing that game of hide and seek one time in the shed?
A: Uh-huh.
Q: Uh-huh? I know this is kind of hard to talk about; isn’t it?
A: (Slight Nodding)
Q: Kind of embarrassing to talk about things that might be a little bit scary; right?
A: slight (Nodding)
Q: But remember that Mom loves you; right? And nobody’s going to be mad at you if you tell us what happened because we think that maybe something happened. In the shed. And we kind of, I kind of want you to tell me so that I can help you understand why that happened.
Transcript pg. 15 (found in A-704)
Q: Yeah, he does? So what we were talking about was a game you were playing, hide and seek when you were in the shed, right? Can you show me where a person touched Richard when he was in the shed?
A: (Inaudible)
Q: On the dupy?
A: (Nodding)
Q: Okay. Can you just kind of show me on this doll? Can you just point to the area where it is?
A: (Indicates)
Q: Right there on the dupy, right?
A: (Nodding)
Q: Who was the person that touched Richard?
A: Jared.
Transcript pg. 17 (found in A-706)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More Information
Media Coverage
His Own Words
Case Documents
Photos
The Baran Blog
Contact Us
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 17:43 by Honest Folk
Impeach Judge Ford?
A 19 year old young man went to prison for 22 years because the Prosecuter now a Judge Dan Ford witheld the above (salem revisited4 -7) from the evidense he presented to the grand jury. A young man lost his future and his soul because of the actions of Judge Daniel Ford. This is the Judge the Prosecutors for Hollands case wrangled so carefully to seat in the LaMountain Case.
How on earth are people like this put into positions of power in our society. Judge Ford should serve 22 years for what he did to Bernard Baran
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 18:04 by I cry inside for Bernard
Reward for Mis Conduct
While Bernards Young life was being alterd as the first person convicted during the day care witch hunt of the 1980's Assistant District attorney Daniel Ford of Pitsfield Mass was on the fast track to a JudgeShip for his prosecution of Bernard Baran. Judge Ford continues with his practice of hiding evidence from his position on the bench today and He and other's like him have hujacked the constitution of the united states to further the political carreers of thos in their sick circl of Friends and Aquaintances. People like Bertha Josephson, BoB McCollum, Vincent McCauhy, Timothy Jones, Timothy McKenna, .. These are the people who are driving the wheels of Justice which they have prostituted for personal gain.
Our Country is in trouble because people like Judge Ford are the Norm in todays Government and Judiciary.
I do not know how we were fortunate enough to get Gleason ..But he was a sacraficial lamb offered to hide their own mis conduct.
Earl Johnson, James Wettlaufer and Howard Fife, Mary Vandenberg, Lynn Arnold, Kristen LaPlante, Brian Johnson , .. They all fit in with the circle of people that include Judge Ford.
Welcome to Selem 21st century style.
God Have mercy on your souls.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 18:23 by Ashamed you were Jailed
Welcome Home
Bernard Baran Released From Prison
Jim Burroway
July 1st, 2006
Bernard Baran, at age nineteen, was one of the first to be convicted of child sexual abuse in a wave of convictions during the day-care hysteria of the 1980’s. He was released on bail Friday after twenty-one years in prison. His conviction was overturned and he was granted a new trial earlier last week. While free, Bernard will be tracked by GPS, is not allowed to leave the state, and is prohibited unsupervised contact with anyone under the age of sixteen.
While he’s free for now, he could be returned within months. Berkshire District Attorney David F. Capeless is appealing the ruling that overturned Bernard’s conviction, and vows to go forward with a new trial should the appeal be upheld. Bernard’s attorney, on the other hand, is confident:
Baran’s trial was one of several prosecutions surrounding sexual abuse at day-care centers. Since that time, many of the methods used to build those cases have been discredited and the convictions overturned.
Harvey Silverglate, a member of Baran’s defense team, said the country was gripped in a “national sex panic” in the 1980s that led to dozens of inappropriate convictions. As an openly gay man who worked with children, Baran was a likely target. Absent the hysteria, Silverglate said, Baran would never have been convicted.
“If there is a new trial, you will see the curtain pulled back on how these cases happened in the 1980s. The curtain will be pulled back as to why this man spent 20 of his best years in prison for a crime that never happened,” Silverglate said. “I suspect the district attorney will not really want to retry this case.”
See also:
Justice For Bernard
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 18:31 by It must stop
This case is one of many
"What I do know now is that his trial was
grossly unfair for many reasons."
--A Baran Juror
On June 20, 2006 Bernard Baran was granted a new trial. He was released on bond ten days later. But the DA refused to give up for the next three years.
News Flash! (June 9, 2009) DA David Capeless drops all charges against Bernard Baran.
Should Judge Daniel A. Ford Be Impeached?
Posted in the Berkshire Eagle Forum
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 19:27 by Jim LaMountain
Baran was Brutilized
According to Bernard (BEE) he was attacked and raped 30 to 40 times in his first few years of incarceration. Also one of the Children in the case had gonerrea as did her step father . Bernard did not.
So when Ford prosecuted Bee he left the little Girl home with her step daddy whom it was later learned was responsible for her sexual abuse.
Good one Judge Ford really good. You should run for Selectman in Holland
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 20:42 by Famine
"Hide the Exemption"
I should hope to live to see those responsible for this type of conduct be put someplace without a "dunkin donuts or a McDonalds.
Those who interfere with agriculture should not be allowed to eat.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 24 Oct 2009, 20:58 by No Food For U
Government of the People
Impeach Judge Daniel A. Ford - Too Bad He Can't Do Jail Time
by: Ernie Boch, III
Fri Jun 19, 2009 at 10:40:59 AM EDT
( - promoted by Bob)
I call this the "Assination of Bernard Baron by the Coward Daniel Ford"
Daniel A. Ford is a Massachusetts Superior Court Judge. In the 1980s he was an assistant district attorney in Berkshire County working for God and feathering his cap.
At that time he prosecuted a 19 year old man named Bernard Baran for multiple counts of child rape and related charges.
Mr. Baran spent 20 years in jail. Jail is not pleasant for anyone. but for a young gay man convicted of child rape it is hell.
He was released in 2006 after a judge ruled he is entitled to a new trial. Harvey Silverglate and John Swomley should be cheered for their 20 year post conviction appeal.
Ernie Boch, III :: Impeach Judge Daniel A. Ford - Too Bad He Can't Do Jail Time
Since 2006 Mr. Baran has been released on bail but under home confinement. The Superior Court ruling that released him in 2006 was appealed by the Berkshire County District Attorney's office.
The Appeals Court reported its decision on the case last month. The facts as reported show without question that the prosecutor, Judge Ford, manipulated evidence to mislead the grand jury that indicted Baran and did not provide the defense with exculpable evidence.
For instance, the children denied on tape that Baran molested them. Some named another person as molesting them. The tapes also showed the children being coached.
Judge Ford never showed the grand jury that portion of the tapes and did not turn copies over to the defendant. There were also exculpatory police reports and other documents kept from the defense. Ford did turn his complete file over to the victim's attorneys.
Yes Mr. Baran had incompetent counsel, however that does not acquit prosecutor Ford.
Anyone who has seen My Cousin Vinny knows that the D.A. must turn everything over. Very limited exceptions to that rule. If it is exculpatory the D.A. turns it over automatically without being asked.
But for Judge Ford's indifference, narcissism, ambition, or pathological tendencies Bernard Baran would not have spent 20 years in jail for crimes he did not commit.
Massachusetts Superior Court Judge Daneil A Ford is corrupt and should go to jail for this. However the statute of limitations has expired so the best we can do is impeach him.
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Impeach Judge Daniel A. Ford - Too Bad He Can't Do Jail Time | 13 comments
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by: you @ soon
To post this comment click here:
Otherwise click cancel.
You must enter a subject for your comment
What about disbarment? (0.00 / 0)
Also, why didn't this come up at his confirmation to the bench? I disagree on jail time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 25 Oct 2009, 8:15 by skidsee
Free at last
Free at last
I was there the day he was found guilty.I remember someone saying children don't lie,but my dad said,"they don't lie,but they'll say want you want them to say." I knew Dan Ford well,and yes he was very bigoted or slanted in his feelings toward blacks,gays,etal. After the trial some months later I worked for a day at the daycare cnt.where Baran was employed.I hung draperies that day and remember telling my friend that there were no places to hide or secrete children for sexual abuse purposes-Every place seemed opened,no large closets,nothing!!I tried to figure out a place where he could molest,but couldn't come up with any. I also remember the Heath kid who testified against Baran.His parents were later convicted of child molesting.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 25 Oct 2009, 9:47 by Peter Frei
Lawyers' Prosecutors, Judges..
I have personally litigated (pro se, and successful) in Superior Court, Appeals Court of the Commonwealth, Supreme Judicial Court, United States District Court, District of Massachusetts, and First Circuit Court of Appeals, and did so for the better part of the last 15 years. What I learned is that successful lawyers lie, misrepresent the law, and con volute issues to hide the issue in question. Connections are also very important. The most successful lawyers become clerks of judges of one of the appellate courts. It is not about finding the truth, it is all about winning cases, and again, about connections.
The most successful lawyers, the ones that lie, misrepresent the law and convolute issues best/most become prosecutors. Again, it is all about convictions and not about finding the truth and deliver justice. After honing their aforementioned skills to perfection and establish more "connections," guess where the most successful prosecutors go..
NO, no no, the attorneys no one knows, the ones who never lie and don't mind loosing a case if their client is in the wrong, the ones that care about the law and justice, the ones that apply the law the way the legislator wrote it, they are the ones that become judges... Ha, Ha, Ha..
Here is a fact that most people don't know. The legislator included a rule, rule 11 in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to allow sanctions for misconduct. The rule is not rarely applied, it is NEVER applied. The entire judicial system is based on a culture of lies, deception and cronyism. If I would be a lawyer writing this, it would be the end of my carrier...
In most professional carriers, the ones that come up with the best ideas to further science, manufacturing, freedom, literature, art, etc, are the most successful individuals and excel; in the legal system the individuals who win the most cases, "achieve" the most convictions, are the most successful ones, regardless of the destruction of lives, and the indifference, or outright disregard of the rule of law , appalling!
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 26 Oct 2009, 15:46 by Truth Seeker
Bernie
Time to leave Bernard Baran alone"
The Berkshire Eagle, Letters, Tuesday, May 26, 2009
As D.R. Bahlman's column of May 19 (2009) and other accounts clearly spell out, the trial of Bernard Baran in 1985 was nothing short of a farce on all levels. Among the numerous blunders that occurred during the trial, the one that comes to mind for me is the apparent false accusations against Baran from a homophobic mother whose child was diagnosed with gonorrhea of the mouth, and whose abuse pointed toward the mother's live-in boyfriend. This is just one of many aspects of an investigation and trial that in retrospect borders on the bizarre, whether one looks at the prosecution, defense (what there was of it) and the overall conduct of the trial.
Justice was not served in this case, and the consequence was 21 years in state prison for Baran. One has to wonder what motivates District Attorney David F. Capeless to consider a retrial or an appeal of a decision by a Superior Court judge, upheld by the Massachusetts Appeals Court, that depicts accusations as essentially groundless and the trial as a shambles.
Perhaps Mr. Capeless is intent upon assuaging the reputation of a prosecution for which the Appeals Court raised the possibility of misconduct. What the latest rulings reveal, however, is that an injustice was perpetuated against Mr. Baran, and it's time he be left alone to live the rest of his life in peace.
RICHARD T. DELMASTO
Pittsfield, Massachusetts
-
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 26 Oct 2009, 15:51 by Handcuffed Constitution
Free?????
"Bernard Baran free for keeps: Baran's family can put the past finally behind"
By Jack Dew, Berkshire Eagle Staff, Wednesday, June 10, 2009
PITTSFIELD — Just after 3 p.m. on Tuesday, Bernard Baran turned a corner on Wendell Avenue and, holding his mother's hand, walked up the stairs of the Berkshire Superior Court to claim his freedom.
In a plain office on the second floor of the Probation Department, Baran rested his foot on a metal chair while the last remnant of his imprisonment — an electronic monitoring bracelet belted around his ankle — was cut loose. After 21 years in prison and three years under close court supervision, he was free.
Back outside in the damp afternoon, Baran and his small group of friends and family huddled briefly. There were no plans for a celebration, just a trip home.
"I came (to the Berkshires) today because my mother had to watch her innocent son being taken away 24 years ago, and I can't imagine what that was like for her," he said. "I knew today that I had to be here — be here with her — when we got the news, whether it was good or bad."
Baran's older brother, Santo, was turned away on Tuesday morning when he tried to attend the press conference where Berkshire District Attorney David F. Capeless said he would not seek to prosecute Baran on child molestation charges. He waited outside for word and then relayed the news to Baran.
"It's been a long time coming," Santo said. "Too long."
Baran has been living and working in the Boston area since a Superior Court judge overturned his guilty verdict in 2006. For three years, he said, he has lived with the constant threat that he could be returned to prison, perhaps by a ruling from the appeals court or a change in the terms of his bail.
"I never could really enjoy life because I always worried about the what ifs. How close do you get to your family before you get ripped away again?" he said.
"I don't feel glorious in this for the simple fact that there is still a lot of hurt to a lot of different people," he added.
For Baran's mother, Bertha Shaw, Capeless' decision ended 24 years of worrying and praying.
"It feels like it's not real," she said. "I prayed and I never gave up, because I knew from day one, when I asked him, 'If you did this, we can get you help,' and he looked right at me and said, 'Mom, I didn't do this. Don't worry.' So I knew that I would never give up. There were times when I wondered if we would ever see this day, or if I would live long enough to see it, but I never gave up."
Asked what he plans to do now, Baran said he will "take it one day at a time, real slow." He said he knows he can't regain what he lost.
"One thing I have learned is that you can't make up for anything. If you try, you get lost in the pain of realizing how much you missed," he said. "So I've got to start over."
And he said he will never be the person he was before he was imprisoned.
"Everything that I went through will never be over for me, and I am a different guy than I was before. I don't trust. I worry. I'm nervous about everything, and I worry for my family," he said. "I just want to move on and be with my family and embrace the life that I desperately fought to get back."
-
To reach Jack Dew: jdew@berkshireeagle.com, or (413) 496-6241.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 26 Oct 2009, 15:59 by Black Soul of Judge Ford
Part 1..An Important Affidavit
An Important Affidavit
[Note: The unredacted affidavit is part of the public record. I have, however, reason to believe that the maker might suffer severe retaliation should his identity become generally known. Thus I have tried to redact all material that might reveal his identity.]
Affidavit of xxxxx xxxxxxxxxx
I, xxxxx xxxxxxxxxx, depose and say:
I am employed by the xxxxx in the xxxxx. In my twenty years with xxxxx. And its predecessor xxxxx, I have held various positions. My present position is xxxxx.
I met Bernard Baran around 1980 or 1981. For approximately six months (off and on), Bernie lived in my home at xxxxx in Pittsfield, Massachusetts.
In October of 1984, I lived alone. I had just moved into a small apartment on Dartmouth Street, Pittsfield, after completing a business program at Springfield Business School in Springfield, MA during which time I lived with my sister i n Hartford, CT. I had just gotten back after being away for one year.
A few days after returning I learned that Bernard Baran had been accused of sexually abusing children at ECDC. Police officers came to my home. I think their names were McGuire and Danford.
The police officers told me what Bernie was accused of having done and they accused me of being involved. They said Bernie must have had a partner because it took more than one person to do what he did. They said Bernie was driving around with kids in a car. They accused me of going to the school and of bringing children to my house based on things they claim the “kids said.” They accused me of having been inside the school. They told me they had proof that I was in the school. None of their accusations were true and I told them so. I had never been in the school, ever. Nor did I even own a car at that point.
The police officers told me that Bernie had gonorrhea and that I must have had it, too. I told them that I had never had it, but I thought that Bernie had told me that he had it before I met him.
The police officers had pictures of the inside of my Dartmouth Street apartment. I was shocked and surprised because I kept my doors locked. Until then, I did not know that the police had searched my home. I never saw a search warrant.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 26 Oct 2009, 16:01 by Witness to the Dark Side
Important Affidavit
The police took me to talk to Dan Ford at the District Attorney’s Office.
Mr. Ford kept going on about my relationship with Bernie. He called me a “fag” repeatedly. He asked if I was a “homosexual” pronouncing the word in a derogatory way and he demanded to know if I was Bernie’s lover.
Mr. Ford accused me of being involved in sexually abusing children. When I denied that I had ever molested children and said that I had no knowledge that Bernie had molested children, he accused me of lying. He said he would come after me next.
When I said I wanted a lawyer if he was accusing me of being involved, Mr. Ford asked me what I was trying to hide.
At another time, I talked to Mr. Ford in a small room in the basement of the courthouse. Other people were there. A court reporter put me under oath before Mr. Ford asked me questions. I think I was testifying in front of a grand jury, but I don’t remember anyone using that term. I do remember telling Mr. Ford under oath that I had no knowledge of Bernie ever sexually abusing children.
Before the trial, I was followed by the police. I was working in my new job in North Adams and I was followed even there by police officers. Rarely a day went by in my drive from Pittsfield to North Adams when I was not pulled over. Occasionally I was given a citation, sometimes I was given a warning and the rest of the time I was just harassed. They made sure I was in fear. I was later shown pictures of myself going in and out of my apartment. Interestingly, I was never stopped on the days when I was going to court. After the trial I moved out of my apartment to get away from the police always watching me, but they still bothered me from time to time.
Mr. Ford subpoenaed me as a witness for the trial. I was required to report to the courthouse every day for nearly two weeks.
I had just started a new job and my boss told me that I was going to lose my job because I could not explain to him what was going on. I was told by Mr. Ford that I was not to discuss the case, the subpoena, or why I was going to court with anyone or I would be arrested. He kept telling this to me over and over again.
When I had to report to court each day a police officer was assigned to guard me. I was kept in a room in the basement of the courthouse which I was not allowed to leave during the duration of the trial. When I had to use the bathroom the officer escorted me to and from the bathroom. When I inquired as to why this was happening I was told I was a witness for the District Attorney.
Mr. Ford told me not to read the newspapers.
One evening during the trial I talked to Bernie’s mother and she told me that I could talk to Bernie’s lawyer.
Mr. Ford told me that I would be arrested if I talked to Bernie’s defense lawyer, Leonard Conway. Mr. Conway did call me, but I told him that I could not talk to him.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 26 Oct 2009, 16:03 by Why Dan? Why
Important Affidavit Part 3
In January 1989, I was working at a walk-up service at xxxxx in Pittsfield. There was a long line out the door that day. After waiting in line, a man walked up to me. I had no idea who he was but he knew who I was. He identified himself as David Hanes. He was not there to talk about xxxxx. He told me that he wanted to take back the accusations that he had made about Bernie Baran. He said that he had just said what someone else wanted him to say.
For six years from 1996 to 2002, I was teaching at xxxxx to help students classified as “youth at risk” transition to the workforce. My position was xxxxx and my job was to get in and to train teachers and also to present the program to students first hand. I was in charge of xxxxx, xxxxx, and xxxxx. The curriculum was administered by xxxxx. I was tasked to bring on board several teachers to take my place and to present them with the program and teach them how to teach it after I left. Ultimately I hired three coordinators, one for each county. Among my schools in xxxxx was xxxxx in xxxxx. I taught one special class of from 10 to 18 students selected by the principal as “youth at risk” which meant that they were failing or dropping out of school. In the last year of the program, in a class I taught in xxxxx, I was assigned a student by the name of Peter Hanes, who was a special education student who could not read or write. I had no idea at the time he was assigned to my class who he was. One day I came to realize he was Bernie’s first accuser, Peter Hanes, was in my class when the students were doing projects about how to make a living. The assignment was a written one but as Peter Hanes was unable to write he was allowed to present his assignment orally.
Peter Hanes gave his oral presentation in front of the class about suing for money. Another student started asking questions. Peter bragged that his mom got money because he, Peter, had a gay teacher in day care. He said it was easy. All he had to do was say that his teacher did something to him to get the money even though nothing happened. He said the person who really abused him was his father.
The other students were intrigued and began asking him questions about how this worked. Initially I thought he was just making up a story. It clicked in my mind when he actually mentioned the teacher’s name, Baran. I never confronted him in any way.
After hearing him say this, I contacted the District Attorney’s Office and Bernie’s mother, Bertha. I went to her house and she talked to Bernie’s appeals lawyer and I got on the phone and confirmed the story. He asked me questions. Attorneys in both offices told me that they could not do anything with the information.
SIGNED UNDER PAINS AND PENALTIES OF PERJURY this 24 day of March, 2004.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 26 Oct 2009, 16:16 by Bernard Blog
Bernard Baran Is Very Ill
Bee’s Health Problems Becoming More Serious
October 22nd, 2009 Dear Friend of Bee,
Jim D’Entremont and I arrived back from Lisbon just a few minutes ago and I am very jet lagged.
We kept in close touch with Bee while we were away. He was finally allowed to go home from the hospital on the evening of October 12th, the day we left. He seemed a bit better, but then developed a cold near the end of the week. This triggered a severe asthma attack. (Bee has suffered from asthma since childhood.) Finally, last night his partner David took him to the hospital because he was having trouble breathing. He is still there. He has been diagnosed with bronchitis and possibly pneumonia. He will probably be moved into intensive care.
We are all very worried about him.
-Bob Chatelle
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 26 Oct 2009, 16:40 by Something must be done!
Ford Sanctions? #1
Innocent Man Freed, But Shabby Prosecutor Still Works as Judge
Bernard Baran served 22 years on dubious child molestation charges, yet the prosecutor who convicted him isn't even inconvenienced
Radley Balko | August 17, 2009
This June, District Attorney David Capeless of Berkshire County, Massachusetts announced that he was dropping all charges against 44-year-old Bernard Baran, a man who has spent half his life behind bars on child molestation charges that the state no longer has the confidence to retry.
Baran was convicted in January 1985 of molesting six children at a pre-Kindergarten daycare facility in Pittsfield, Massachusetts. He was released on bond in 2006 after an appeals court determined [PDF] that his trial attorney had been incompetent and that the prosecution may have withheld key exculpatory evidence. Baran says that during his jail term he was raped and beaten more than 30 times, necessitating six different transfers to new correctional institutions. Such is the cost the prison system exacts on an openly gay man convicted of molesting children.
Baran was one of the first people in the country to be prosecuted in the daycare sex abuse panic of the 1980s, a bizarre, nationwide hysteria fed by fears of satanism, homophobia, and a wing of child psychology that used unproven interrogation techniques critics say caused children to recount sexual incidents that never took place.
While Baran's case has been covered extensively in Massachusetts, and recently in the national media, one aspect of it still hasn't really been examined. Prosecutor Daniel Ford likely engaged in serious misconduct and open bigotry in winning his conviction of Baran. Yet in 25 years, Ford has never been investigated or disciplined for his role in the case. And since 1989, Ford has sat as a judge on the Massachusetts Superior Court. Ford's career trajectory and lack of accountability is the far too familiar product of the backward incentive structure that prosecutors work under. Convictions produce rewards, while abuse rarely comes with a penalty.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 26 Oct 2009, 16:43 by Something could be be done!!!
Ford Sanctions # 2
The most serious allegation against Ford in this case concerns an edited video interview with the children he presented to the grand jury that indicted Baran. According to court documents, the video shows several children alleging that Baran had sexually abused them. But edited out was footage in which some of the children denied any abuse by Baran, accused other members of the daycare faculty of abuse or of witnessing abuse, and, most importantly, depicted interrogators asking the same questions over and over—even after repeated denials—until a child gave them an affirmative answer. Some children were even given rewards for their answers.
Withholding the unedited video from the grand jury was itself an act of misconduct. And Ford may also have withheld it from Baran's trial attorney. We can only say "may" because there's never been a hearing, and Baran's trial attorney was far from competent. (Judge Ford did not respond to multiple requests for comment.) In granting Baran a new trial in 2006 [PDF], Massachusetts Superior Court Judge Francis Fecteau never moved beyond the inadequacy of Baran's lawyer. Harvey Silverglate, one of Baran's appellate attorneys (and also a Reason contributor), says Fecteau's passing over the misconduct claims was entirely appropriate. "For the purposes of judicial economy, judges only focus on what's necessary to make a ruling," he says. "Judge Fecteau is a hero, here. I don't fault him at all."
When the case reached the state appeals court, the justices there not only upheld Fecteau's ruling [PDF], they looked more closely at Ford's possible misconduct. "While the record does not settle the question whether the unedited videotapes were deliberately withheld by the prosecution," the ruling read, "there are indications in the trial transcript consistent with that contention."
The appellate court further noted that it took years for Baran's appellate lawyers to get prosecutors to turn over the unedited tapes. Baran's attorneys originally filed a motion for the tapes in 2000. For three years, then District Attorney Gerard Downing, who assisted in Baran's original trial, claimed to be unable to locate the tapes. When Downing died of a sudden heart attack in December 2003, David Capeless took over as D.A. When a court ordered Capeless to find the tapes, he was able to produce them within months. The appellate court opinion cited other examples of Ford failing to turn over exculpatory evidence, too, including evidence that two of the children who accused Baran may have suffered prior sexual abuse.
The case against Baran was also awash in homophobia. According to court documents, the first parents to come forward with accusations against Baran in September 1984 had just days earlier registered a complaint with the center upon noticing Baran was "queer" by the way he walked and talked. The boy's mother, who thought gays "shouldn't be allowed out in public" much less permitted to work at daycare centers, said that she "didn't want no homo" watching her son.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 26 Oct 2009, 16:45 by Do Something??
Ford Sanctions # 3
When that child later tested positive for gonorrhea of the throat, Ford used the test against Baran at trial, even though A) the child never accused Baran of forcing him to perform oral sex, B) the child, in fact, specifically denied having sexual contact with Baran on the witness stand, C) Baran tested negative for gonorrhea, D) the boy had told his mother two months prior that his stepfather had orally raped him, and E) on the very day Baran was convicted, charges against the stepfather were turned over to the D.A.'s office for possible prosecution. Baran's counsel was never informed of the allegation against the stepfather. Addressing the gonorrhea issue in his closing arguments, Ford implied that Baran's "lifestyle" made it probable that he contracted gonorrhea at other times and knew how to quickly eradicate it to cover his tracks.
In his closing argment, Ford likened Baran's job at a daycare center to a "chocoholic in a candy store," and hypothesized that in the "five or ten minutes" he was able to be alone with a child without being seen by other staff or children, Baran "could have sodomized and abused those children whenever he felt the primitive urge to satisfy his sexual appetite." The appeals court that eventually overturned the conviction ruled that the incompetence of Baran's counsel "facilitated the speculative, stereotypical, and deeply insidious links between homosexuality, gonorrhea, and child molestation."
An affidavit signed by Baran's boyfriend at the time also paints Ford as a homophobe. According to the document, the D.A. spent an inordinate amount of time asking Baran's boyfriend about his own sex life, employing variations of the word faggot, and a mocking, drawn-out pronunciation of homosexual. The affidavit alleges that in the ensuing months, Baran's boyfriend was pulled over by police officers and further harassed on a daily basis, and that Ford told him, illegally, that if he spoke with Baran or Baran's defense attorney, he would be arrested. This of course is just an accusation. But it's a serious one, particularly against a sitting judge. And it has never been properly investigated.
In upholding the ruling that granted Baran a new trial, the appeals court added in a footnote that if the state wanted to retry him, Baran could file a motion for a hearing on Ford's possible misconduct. By dropping the charges, the D.A. avoided that hearing. "In my opinion, the possibility of an embarrassing hearing into misconduct by a former prosecutor and now sitting Superior Court judge was the main reason, if not the reason, they decided to drop the charges," Silverglate claims. "The appeals court opinion cut a bit too close to the bone for them."
So while Bernard Baran is free after 22 years of incarceration, at the moment there is no plan to look into the actions of the prosecutor, now a sitting judge, responsible for the conviction. In his position on the Massachusetts Superior Court for the last 20 years, Ford has presided over some of the state's most serious criminal trials. He also serves on a committee that helps determine the state's rules and guidelines of criminal procedure
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 26 Oct 2009, 16:47 by SOmething will be done
Ford Sanctions #4
Baran has said he isn't sure he wants to endure a lawsuit, but even if he did such a suit would still be unlikely to get to Ford. Prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity from civil rights lawsuits, even in cases of misconduct that lead to false convictions. And they're rarely disciplined in other ways, either. Appeals courts rarely even mention prosecutors by name when criticizing their conduct. (Ford wasn't named in the Massachusetts appellate court's decision.) Courts and bar associations also rarely hand down professional sanctions. According to a study released earlier this year by the advocacy group The Justice Project, "Despite the prevalence of prosecutorial misconduct all over the country, states have consistently failed to investigate or sanction prosecutors who commit acts of misconduct in order to secure convictions."
The only way Ford's actions in the Baran case could now be examined would be for one of the state's legal ethics boards to open an investigation, either on its own or in response to a complaint. Silverglate says that if there's no action in the coming months, he may file a complaint himself.
Radley Balko is a senior editor at Reason magazine.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 26 Oct 2009, 21:51 by She was there
Courtroom Reporter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZ-fDxfUD58
Dear Jim,
Just got back from a work trip. I wanted to get this out to you.
You are my PRO SE hero, and your closing statement to Judge Ford, well, that was just grand stand, standing ovation, out of the ballpark, superhero, great, stuff to put it mildly.
As I sat in my usual spot, there behind you, and I will add, for the 3 days that I was able to attend, I could not have been more proud you, how you presented your case, top shelf, admirable, stellar, and I am your biggest fan.
I was only scolded once by Ford, and that got my nerves raw, But he DID bully you, he did treat you like you where wasting his precious time, yelling, so disrespectful, unkind, boorish and rude. For that matter the courtroom atmosphere and tone, set by Ford was toxic, but showed more about how THEY are, power loving, unstable, and Godless I would add. He had all his minion under that harshness (except us) . So handling yourself in such a hostile environment, the way you did, never giving up, never losing your cool, getting right back up, (patiently, methodically, keeping your thoughts, and speech controlled, and always remembering the transcript for the appeal), after being punched down by the blows, continually, well, it was just an amazing thing to witness, and behold. I only would have like to have got it all on film. You where like Rocky Balboa, taking the poundings, going back for more, to present your case, to finish the fight, Ford the evil Apollo, being cheered on by his monkeys from the State, and his personal goon, salivating, waiting to take someone out of the courtroom....!
Well, this song (I getted Knocked Down But I get up Again) that I am trying to send by link from youtube) kept coming to my mind, Mike told me to find it and send it to you, and I think it still fits.
Also Remember Mohammad Ali, Danced like a butterfly, sting like a Bee, well, You are that Butterfly, Jim, and your sting, was a beautiful thing to watch! When even the cartoon like Judge Ford, obese, cruel, overlord, was reduced to a bumbling, stumbling flesh-like person, who could not deny the impact of the truth he'd heard at your closing statement, and as proof, came to the Farm.
It was total class that you walked out for Streyers closing. It was a perfect. Strayer was back in his role as the perfect boot licker, praising his co-Horts of the state, at how tolerant and patient they'd been (bull! he was none of that, he was a bullying ox!). But Stayer, the perfect tool of the state, frankly, only sounded exaggerated, and none too convincing .
We don't have anything yet, but I just wanted you to know that in my time ( just over 5 years)of being Mikes wife/assistant, I have never beheld such an honorable presentation.
I only wish a jury had been there listening!!,
Wishing you all the best, just want you to know how proud I am for you.
Sincerely,
Sydney Walsh
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 10 Nov 2009, 11:39 by Grumpy in WB
Disconnect between Officials and the People
I would like to invite Mr. LaMountain to West Boylston to develop a similar project on the Wachusett Reservoir. His pioneering spirit is refreshing in these times of rules and regulations that blot out how we stole this land from the Indians and rose to become the grand stewards of the commonwealth now the commonpoor.
The DCR and MWRA and DEP may be making a la mountain out of a la mole hill for they already have a similar fully sanctioned water front project in West Boylston called Sterling Meadows that has loads of condos with a giant septic system that was under water for most of the past spring and summer.
Better yet the new mandated West Boylston sewer system system is not connected to Sterling Meadows and it is right on top of their sacred water shed. God forbid some tainted water passes the lips of the sacred cod crowd on Beacon Hill.
The LaMountain sandy beach is truly a nice touch and the 11 house lots is pure genius. If only he had thought to name it DiMasi Harbor Estates or maybe the 'The Little Dig' it could have been a fast track turn key project with full state funding.
Hey the project makes for a good laugh and a donut and coffee love in for our state officials and their belabored staffs. Better yet the project was stopped with no leaking tunnels with falling ceilings that third world nations wouldn't even allow.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted on 10 Nov 2009, 12:46 by Paul Harvey
Update Future Headlines.
Remember this headline??
Police Chief Kevin Gleason sentenced to prison.
I went on a vision quest this morning to see future Headlines that only allow truth and this is what I see.
Appeals Court Vacates Ford Ruling against USDA protected Farm.
Johnson LandGate Houses ordered demolished.
Federal Court orders Former Holland Officials to pay damages individually.
Windmills on Holland Farm to provide Green Energy to Holland Community.
Judge Ford resigns from bench under mounting preasure in wake of complaint with Judicial oversight comittee.
Just a few that have been revealed to me.
11 houses? Not a bad Idea but it was 6 ,2 family houses
and it never got started because Holland changed the common driveway zoning in 07 for Earl and his Landgate Scheme.
We actually sold that portion of the land years ago. And the sand in the lake???? I will post the report on where that sand really comes from.
Jim
_________________________________________________________________