Friends of Justice

Dear Friend of Justice,

On December 13^th Jim D’Entremont and I attended the Massachusetts Governor’s Council hearing on Governor Baker’s request for pardons for Cheryl and Gerald Amirault. The experience was most unpleasant. I remain saddened and angry by the way it was conducted.

You may not know what the Governor’s Council is, even if you live in Massachusetts. If you asked a random Massachusetts citizen who their Governor’s Councilor is, most would ask, “What is that?” Perhaps one in twenty could accurately answer the question. Every four years the office appears on the ballot. Except in rare instances, one is only given the choice of voting for the incumbent or writing in a name. (In the future, I will do the latter.)

The Governor’s Council is a holdover from the time the Governor of Massachusetts was appointed by the British Crown and exercised arbitrary and unwelcome authority. The Governor’s Council, which had to authorize things such as appointments and pardons, was created as a concession to the colonists. It is an expensive anachronism that serves no useful purpose. But is capable of achieving great mischief.

At the start of the hearing, I was optimistic. Massachusetts’ Courts had obstinately refused to acknowledge error and provide any relief to the Amirault family. A pardon by the Governor was the sole remaining recourse. Surely reasonable men and women would agree.

My optimism was short lived. It soon became obvious that four members of the eight-member Council had no intention of granting the pardons. Two more were harder to read but seemed definitely leaning towards denial. The two most likely to vote in favor were experienced trial lawyers, well aware of the failings of the Massachusetts Judicial System.

The most annoying Councilor was Marilyn Pettito Devaney. She stated that the mother of one of the accusers was a friend. Councilor Duff later pointed out that if she knew a victim of sexual assault, she would have recused herself.

Four members of the Council behaved professionally, without grandstanding or hostility: Jubinville, Kennedy, Duff, and DePalo,

Facing certain defeat, Governor Baker withdrew the request for the pardons.

James Sultan, the Amiraults’ attorney for many years, has been criticized for emphasizing the Amirault’s innocence at the hearing. I will not be a Monday Morning Quarterback. For one thing, I am not a lawyer, and Mr. Sultan is a very good one, and also a very good human being. Moreover, he was responding to gross misinformation from prosecutor Larry Hardoon. Sultan was soundly criticized by the Council for “retrying the case.” Hardoon was not. He had the Council in his pocket.

The Amiraults are innocent. But as certain Councilors (including Christopher Iannella, who represents me) emphasized ad nauseum, innocent people are ineligible for pardons. And the Amiraults have never expressed remorse for their “crimes.” Innocent people are also ineligible for parole. But these rules are sometimes overlooked for considerations of human decency.

These Councilors also emphasized ad nauseum that the Amiraults were guilty because the courts had upheld the convictions. They may believe that Massachusetts’ courts, by Divine Right, have the power to rewrite reality. Rational people do not.

I have little hope that incoming Governor Maura Healey will do anything to remedy the situation. She is an alumna of the Middlesex District Attorney’s Office, which is responsible for this mess. And a protégé of former Attorney General Martha Coakley, who fanatically defended the convictions.

I have a few general comments about the case:

1. The current overwhelming consensus in the scientific and legal community is that no abuse occurred during the famous daycare cases of the 80’s. Because of the way the accusations were obtained, the testimony of the children was unreliable This was the case for McMartin, Little Rascals, Kelley Michaels, Bernard Baran, and several others. No convictions were obtained in McMartin; the other convictions were overturned. The Amiraults were not so fortunate. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that “finality” trumps the U.S. and Massachusetts’ Constitutions.
2. The Amiraults had no opportunity to do these despicable acts. Fells Acres was an open daycare center. Parents visited unannounced all the time. They knew they were welcome to do so. Several of these parents had themselves attended Fells Acres as children.
3. The Amiraults had no motive. If you put the bizarre accusations aside, there is zero evidence that any of them has ever had the slightest sexual interest in children. (This was true for the other cases as well.) These people are not pedophiles.Because of my work with the National Center for Reason and Justice over the past 20 years, I have learned something about pedophilia and how real pedophiles behave. Many, maybe even most, never act on their impulses. Among those who do, the usual behavior is fondling.Some years ago, there was a case in Bridgewater, Massachusetts. The caregiver was a very young man, perhaps still a teenager.One day one of the children in his care asked a parent to (and I paraphrase) “Tickle my butt the way “Tommy” [not his real name] does.” The upset parents reported the incident. After he was confronted, I believe the boy fairly quickly admitted the behavior.While it certainly is not acceptable for a childcare worker to tickle or caress the butt or genitals of a child, this is a far cry from what the Amiraults were accused of doing. “Tommy” did not dress up as a clown. He did not insert anything into the boy’s anus. And he certainly did not threaten to kill the boy’s parents if he told.

   Another theory of their motives is even more bizarre: The Amiraults are not pedophiles. But they engaged in this behavior in order to produce and sell child pornography so that Gerald could buy drugs.

   It’s hard to know where to begin with this one. Gerald has long acknowledged that he once had a substance abuse problem. I am a recovering alcoholic myself. (I have not had a drink or a drug for over 40 years.) I have had discussions with Gerald about our problem. He was nearly a year clean and sober when he was arrested. He was not buying any drugs during the time he allegedly committed these acts.

   Pedophiles, by definition, are sexually attracted to prepubescent children. Very few have any interest in children as young as the ones at Fells Acres. Of these, few would be interested in photos of the children being tortured. And of these, few would be wealthy enough to pay huge amounts of money for the pornography.Almost any other way of raising money would be easier and safer. And Gerald’s mother and sister would never have aided Gerald in supporting a drug habit.

   Finally, no such images of any of the Fells Acres children have ever been found.

4. The accusers are not liars. A liar intentionally tells falsehoods in order to deceive. But the alleged victims and their parents obviously believe that these horrific events actually happened. That is tragic. They are indeed victims – not of the Amiraults but of a criminal-justice system that failed them miserably.
5. This fight is not over. The Governor’s Council was given the chance to bring about a measure of closure to this nightmare. They chose not to. The Amirault family and those who support them, including the National Center for Reason and Justice, are not giving up.

Finally, I would like to express my appreciation and deep respect for the unsung heroine of this tragedy: Patti McGonagle Amirault.

When Gerald was arrested, he and Patti had two young daughters. A few days later, their son P.J. was born. While she about to be wheeled into the delivery room, she saw a television account of Gerald’s arrest. A friend of mine asked her what she was feeling at that moment. She replied “Pain. I was in labor.”

Gerald was sent to prison in 1986 and remained there until he was paroled in 2004. For eighteen years, she had three young children to raise as a single parent. Many would have felt utterly defeated by the situation. But Patti has great strength and courage.

She was determined that the children would have a relationship with their father and that Gerald would have an active role in raising those children. When they were old enough, she brought them with when she visited her husband. They spoke frequently by telephone. She made sure events such as birthday parties and First Communions were captured on film, and that the photos were sent to Gerald.

To support this family, Patti worked as a fourth-grade teacher within the Malden public schools. She was loved, respected, and ultimately promoted as an administrator.

And she continued to fight for justice for her family.

In January of 1997, I met Patti at an event about the Amirault case and others like it, that took place in Salem, Massachusetts. At that time, we were hopeful that the latest appeals in the case would be successful. But on March 24^th of that year, the Supreme Judicial Court turned them down. I was devastated and helped organize a rally in support.

I here quote from something I wrote at that time:

I got the Amiraults’ telephone numbers from the attendees list at the Salem conference. I helped organize a support rally for the Amiraults, which took place 6 April 1997 at the Unitarian Church, Harvard Square, Cambridge. I phoned Patti the night before Easter. One of the daughters answered and told me that Patti was out buying things for Easter baskets. I was an emotional wreck and Patti — at the eye of this storm for 13 years — was tending to the ordinary things necessary to being alive and part of a family. Patti is a fourth-grade teacher, a softball coach, and a devoted hockey mother. She fed and entertained a mob of teenagers after her eldest daughter’s prom. She has fought this battle long and hard without stinting her duties as a mom. In a lifetime, one meets few true heroes or heroines. Patti is a true heroine.

I will close by quoting something I wrote while I was attending the new-trial hearings:

Before the hearing one day, I also heard one of Gerald and Patti’s daughters telling a friend all about Titanic, which she’d seen three times. Another typical teenager in love with Leonardo DiCaprio, I thought. And then I thought about how typical, how ordinary these people are. I remember the reception following Violet’s funeral. It was a beautiful September day (Massachusetts may have terrible justice but it has excellent fall weather), and the uncles and aunts cousins and neighbors and friends were all gathered. Just like my family, I thought. Just like almost any family. Such ordinary people. And yet how extraordinary they all are. History has thrust an unbearable burden upon them, and they bear it with strength, courage, and dignity. If the Amiraults are expendable, then we all are expendable.

What happened to the Amiraults could happen to any one of us.