Cape Cod Crusader

When a Rush to Judgment is an Injustice

 What if the expert or witness testifying is not telling the truth?

We have learned by experience or by watching trials, jurors rely on the testimony of witnesses to base their conclusions.  Jurors are just people, they can make mistakes. They are influenced by their own lives and prejudices. We all have them, every one of us. How we choose to exercise them is up to us.

What if the expert or witness testifying is not telling the truth, or manipulating the facts?

Shouldn’t they be discredited, held accountable? Isn’t that perjury-constituting a jail sentence? What does the jury have besides what is provided to them in the courtroom? Their own convoluted speculations as to how events occurred-- if all facts are not laid out before them? Isn’t that dangerous when deciding a defendant’s fate?

Those of us who have been selected to a jury panel know that it is hard work to listen attentively to lawyers, judge, witnesses and experts who direct all their comments. I often wondered how difficult a task it must have been for those jurors who had to return to their Cape Cod lives after the trials were over. Would they be overcome by fear of the townspeople and how they would view their decision? Had the jurors taken their duty seriously enough when reaching a verdict?

What of the Grand Jury? Are they responsible to challenge a prosecutor if he does not deliver and present all facts of a case they are deciding and whether it should constitute a trial? Is every member of a Grand Jury provided a handbook and required to read it? Are they questioned as to its contents by court officials? Take a look at what is expected of members of a Grand Jury.

What if some on the jury panel do not meet the standards of their civic duty? Determining whether someone found innocent or guilty of the crime accused is an important duty—is it not? Do the majority of jurors understand how important? When the hype is over do they struggle for a lifetime, of whether they made the right decision to put someone behind bars for all eternity or set them free?

A rush to judgment for the sake of appeasing local hysteria?

One juror came forward to state regret at their decision, as I watched the 48 hour broadcast last evening of the sensationalized Fells Acre’s Child Abuse Case, in Malden, Ma., of 1984. (see link to updated story below).  

Was it the same for cases on the Cape?

Should all responsibility rest on the minds of the jurors who have no legal expertise? Isn’t it up to the prosecution to provide the evidence so an informed jury can make an educated decision at the end of a trial?

Isn’t the prosecution working for the people who expect the utmost professionalism? Shouldn’t their primary duty be to investigate the facts of the case and bring the criminals to justice? One would hope that is how it is—but the more I read cases, past and present, it doesn’t seem to be that way at all. Certainly, if the proof is beyond a reasonable doubt and there is no disputing a criminal’s guilt, but what if there isn’t enough proof? Shouldn’t they hunt for it until it’s all there? And if it’s not there, shouldn’t they be forced to disclose that information to the media and make a public apology? Is their main objective career aspirations alone, to sacrifice the truth at the cost of innocent lives?

• Worthington
• Carbone
• Lancaster

We, the citizens of the commonwealth have a duty to ourselves, our children and our fellow citizens to make our system of justice better. The prosecutors should be those we respect, who deserve our loyalty, but also have loyalty to the people who pay their salary, and who will go after real criminals, allow the innocent to get a fair trial, and be set free when found innocent or proven enough reasonable doubt exists—isn’t that how our laws read? Should we all abide by them, including those who work to uphold them?

I arrived to the Cape shortly after Christa Worthington’s death in the summer of 2002. Although, I felt sad for this woman who lost her life, I really had little interest in the story at first.  When inappropriate comments surfaced at my workplace in Wellfleet, I began to question the case. Didn’t I have a right, as you have the right, to ask questions since we were living there full-time, paying taxes for a DA who should have done his very best as prosecutor working for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts? Am I missing something?

After I wrote my first blog about the case, the story seemed to take on a life of its own. With each passing day, more information would surface, some facts, but more hidden truths remain. Comments from locals and those in other places began flooding my blog. Then the trial, and verdict, now pending appeal. Are we any closer to finding out what really happened?

I often wonder, if I hadn’t written that first blog, where would I be today? Would I be better off, or not?  I know now that the world is a much more complicated place than I first thought it to be--that maybe good people can do bad things. It’s part of our human frailty. There are some who are just plain evil; there are some who strive to do only good. How does that apply to this story and others?

As much as I would like to recall my fond memories of the Cape, all I can remember is its ugliness. Maybe that is an unfair characterization. I would have to agree. The place is not all bad, just some of its people and the way they do things. The same can be said for every town across America, and the world.  But I saw the Cape as a fishbowl and I wanted to swim in the great sea.

The case of Christa Worthington will always haunt me because I am not satisfied with the outcome of the trial. Do others feel the same way? Would they openly express their dissatisfaction? Is the door to justice for Christa now closed?  Maybe it’s for the best. Maybe there is just too much ugliness there that no one wishes to be exposed. Does it have anything to do with how many black men have fathered children with white women on Cape Cod? Does anybody care if a black man is imprisoned for the wrong reasons?

I saw a people who are indifferent to the outcomes of trials held in Barnstable County. Why haven’t all the facts been presented in the cases I listed above, and others I know little of,  but have also been disputed?

I left the names of the victims who died to stand alone because I believe their cases remain unsolved. Maybe you can fill in the blanks, but please before you do-- weigh all the facts. Until that day arrives, they must be shelved for another time, when someone has the guts to take on a system that is just not good enough.

It’s taken the Amiraults’ many years to clear their name and find freedom from a system that did not weigh all facts before sentencing them to years in prison. I hope it doesn’t take that long for others who have also been falsely accused and sentenced without consideration of their innocence. Lives in ruin, years stolen they cannot get back. You can’t put a price on freedom—especially when it should have never been taken away.

I’ve learned that injustices go one everywhere, not just on Cape Cod, but it still doesn’t make it right.

• The Fells Acre scandal.
• The Amirault's story.

 In 1995, after eight years in prison, their convictions were overturned on a technicality. It was after the The Wall Street Journal had taken a provocative look at the case, calling it a miscarriage of justice.

“Supporters like Debby Hersey, whose son Ben attended the school, blame hysterical prosecutors, sensationalized news coverage, and panicked parents. "I wanted to say, 'This is crazy; this is crazy," she says. "These are good people, you know? What's motivating you'?"