In 2014 Deval Patrick fired leaders of his state's Sex Offender Registry for trying to force his...

[demmiblue]

In 2014 Deval Patrick fired leaders of his state's Sex Offender Registry for trying to force his brother in law to register due to being convicted of rape in California in 1993.

In 2019, that same rapist was sentenced to 6 years for another rape. 1/

Link to tweet

In 2014 Deval Patrick fired leaders of his state's Sex Offender Registry for trying to force his brother in law to register due to being convicted of rape in California in 1993.

In 2019, that same rapist was sentenced to 6 years for another rape. 1/

The victim in the most recent rape said that she came home and found Patrick's brother in law hiding in the closet. He stalking, kidnapped, and raped her. She said that she hoped for a long sentence because she would spend her life in fear if he was out.

But Patrick didn't want his family member to register as a sex offender. It was a "family matter", and thus only "marital" rape. Deval fired the head of the state bureau who tried to require registration. 10 years before the rapist's latest conviction.

This is disqualifying.

I have known Deval a long time. We clerked for the same judge. I admired him for many years. But his conduct in this matter is reprehensible and fails to respect women and survivors.

Rape is rape. It doesn't matter if the offender is married to the victim.

Indeed, so-called "marital rape" should be treated as if it is more serious, not less, given the betrayal of trust involved. In addition, it is likely to result in the murder of the victim given what we know of spousal abuse.

Rape is rape. Even if your brother in law does it.

It gives me no joy to come out against my Judge's favorite clerk. But the facts are the facts Deval. You shouldn't have gone after the registry officials. In fact, you should have stayed as far away from them as you could get given your personal issues.

Women deserve better.

[George II]

1. This is not good.

[madaboutharry]

2. Does he really think this isn't going to end things before they begin?

I am supporting Pete Buttigieg, but if I were an undecided voter this information would prevent me from taking even a first look.

He is not responsible for his brother-in-law's behavior, but he is responsible for his own. Interfering with protocol, firing someone tasked with following protocol, and trying to protect a family member from the consequences of criminal behavior demonstrates a lack of character. And that is true even if Barack Obama is your friend.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

29. Just as bad, and disqualifying, is Deval Patrick's work for Bain Capital... double trouble!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[50 Shades Of Blue]

3. That is disqualifying.

[Demsrule86]

5. It is disqualifying...we agree on that if not who the nominee should be.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

6. Yup! I'm guessing neither of us will have to vote for *this* candidate -

If this doesn't sink him right out of the gate, I don't know what would!

[Demsrule86]

30. I agree...and of course I would vote for you candidate!

[50 Shades Of Blue]

53. Ditto yours!!!

Voted for him for VP twice.

[Demsrule86]

64. Very true for most of us...hadn't thought of that.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

20. It is. You'll both get your minds right some day.

[Demsrule86]

31. More importantly...is this disqualifying!

I await your reply! I would vote for your candidate too.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

35. Yes it is! I was agreeing!

[Demsrule86]

45. Good to know...

I was waiting for...'this is disqualifying'

[NurseJackie]

23. Yep.

[nycbos]

4. I have always had a very high opinion of Governor Patrick.

This is extremely disappointing.

[dware]

7. Did Patrick think this wouldn't come out?

How could it not come out?
Yeah, this is disqualifying.

[smb]

17. Or, Worse, Did He Think It Would Just Blow Over? nt

[dware]

19. If that was his thinking,

then he's a fool to boot and double disqualified.

[nycbos]

75. He probably did.

In todays world everything comes out, including insignificant details about what their preferred lunch order is.

Either way it is disqualifying.

[StarfishSaver]

26. This didn't just come out. It's been known since before he was elected governor

the story is more complicated than the tweet in the OP suggests.

[dware]

27. I read your post of just a few minutes ago,

you're correct, it's something he'll have to address if he wants to survive the primaries.

[ritapria]

8. What a horrible story

[evertonfc]

9. time to tear down

fellow Democrats. Par for course. Democrats are notorious for eating thier own. So be it.

[demmiblue]

12. Go away. n/t

[dware]

13. So we're supposed to just ignore this?

Isn't that what repigs are doing right now with the Criminal in Chief?

[BeyondGeography]

16. It's called vetting

Get used to it.

[Demsrule86]

33. So happy to agree with members of my DU 'family' when we have been on different sides.

[BeyondGeography]

37. Yes, believe it or not

My favorite pastime is not with fellow Democrats.

[Demsrule86]

44. I agree...even though I come across as a 'real bitch' sometimes....I like everyone here and will

vote for any nominee that emerges.

[Thekaspervote]

59. This!!

[Demsrule86]

65. We are in this together.

[LanternWaste]

22. I used to pretend due diligence was destructive as well.

Then I became an adult, and realized "time to grow up..."

[mudpuddle]

10. Beware of these late entries...

They are obviously circumventing the anal exam of the primary process!

[FloridaBlues]

11. This little known horrible story right out of the gate.

[Jewls2]

14. If he so profoundly lacked integrity here?

Bold to get in the way of a BIL being put on list, with firings. Yesterday I was reading up on Deval to find out what kind of politician he is and today I hear this.

[smb]

57. If We Want That Kind Of Corruption, We'd Give Napoleon Boneyspurs Four More Years nt

[Blue_true]

84. And buy him a white horse to ride around the golf course on.

And he would love that the horse is white. Err, maybe a blond horse would satisfy him more.

[obamanut2012]

15. Beyond disqualifying for any public office

Or position with any real authority. What a terrible, terrible story.

[sop]

18. I guess being a managing partner at Bain Capital wasn't disqualifying enough,

now this?

[Demsrule86]

43. I despise Bain Capital...as do most in Ohio...I despise all equity vulture firms.

[Saviolo]

21. The Onion once again prescient:

Link to tweet

?s=09

The Onion
@TheOnion

DNC Leaders Bury Heads In Hands After New Moderate Presidential Recruit Immediately Walks Into Oncoming Traffic https://trib.al/JYB3c0c

[Demsrule86]

34. Haha...so funny...needed it today!

[StarfishSaver]

24. This story was more complicated than that

Among other things, the official wasn't fired for "questioning" the decision not to have him register but because she illegally pressured the hearing officer to change his ruling that the law did not require him to register, and retaliated against him when he refused - and engaged in similar conduct in other cases.

A hearing officer, Attilio Paglia, determined that Sigh was not obligated to register, ruling that he posed no danger to the public, according to court records.

But Edwards, Holmes, and other top officials at the board pressured Paglia to reverse his decision, according to the governor and to a lawsuit Paglia filed in December 2008, alleging improper interference in the case and others.

In his lawsuit, Paglia alleged that board officials sent him a revised ruling that concluded that Sigh was obligated to register and asked Paglia to sign it.

Paglia refused and then began to receive “unprecedented criticisms” of other pending decisions he had drafted as well as poor performance reviews, according to his lawsuit. He left work on a medical leave in June 2008, citing emotional distress and anxiety, and resigned six months later.

Paglia settled his lawsuit for $60,000 this April, a month before the case was set to go to trial...

“The system was rigged,” Paglia's attorney said. “When they didn’t like the decisions that would come down, they would order them changed.”

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/09/22/governor-patrick-says-sex-offender-officials-were-removed-for-mishandling-his-brother-law-case/gzVgQJcuHWBzlWyrQawXhO/story.html?_sp=311e28ee-22aa-4516-8a52-cd89bfef706e.1573757906450&hootPostID=6c8570ab97cfe7879ff18c1acccfa9ea&_sp=311e28ee-22aa-4516-8a52-cd89bfef706e.1573757906450&hootPostID=6c8570ab97cfe7879ff18c1acccfa9ea

This was all known in 2006 before Patrick was elected governor.

This is something that Patrick will definitely need to address in the presidential campaign, but it's important to know that the story is not as cut and dried as it first may seem.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

25. The fact the guy just got convicted of another rape sure ain't gonna help matters.

A hearing officer, Attilio Paglia, determined that Sigh was not obligated to register, ruling that he posed no danger to the public, according to court records.

[dware]

28. Yeah, that's gonna hurt him.

[StarfishSaver]

32. The hearing officer, not Patrick

there was a process for these things, and the officials violated it repeatedly. 0Patrick fired the officials for, among other things, interfering with the hearing officer's decision which, even if people thought the decision was wrong, was inappropriate for them to do.

If you're going to use this incident to argue that Patrick is unfit for the presidency, at least make sure the story is accurate.

[Demsrule86]

39. This is what I found...he could never never be our nominee.

"The Dec. 9 attack was “very similar,” police said, to the circumstances surrounding the California rape, a longtime source of controversy that re-emerged in 2014, when Patrick fired the head of the Sex Offender Registry Board after she pushed to classify Sigh as a sex offender."

https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/06/13/deval-patricks-brother-in-law-found-guilty-in-kidnapping-rape-case/

[StarfishSaver]

42. Of course, you're free to vote as you choose

but he didn't fire her for "pushing." He fired her for a pattern of inappropriately interfering in decisions, culminating in an attempt to force a hearing officer to change his decision and retaliating against him when he refused.

[obamanut2012]

48. That included HIS RELATIVE -- that is unethical and overreaching

That he did this after HIS RELATIVE was dinged was, at best, extremely bad optics and very poor decision making. At best.

[Demsrule86]

51. +1000

[StarfishSaver]

61. It was a brother-in-law who raped his sister

If he had allowed the official to interfere and force the hearing officer to change his ruling, he'd have been accused of using his position to force a harsher punishment on the man who'd raped his sister.

As I said, it was complicated.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

67. They were reconciled and married at the time.

So it can also look like he was protecting his sister’s family.

https://heavy.com/news/2019/11/deval-patrick-brother-in-law-bernard-sigh/

The Boston Herald reported in 2006 that Sigh had failed to register as a sex offender. This occurred during Deval Patrick’s first campaign for governor. A campaign spokesman told the newspaper at the time that the Sigh family were “very upset and distressed that they have been dragged into this campaign of negative attacks.” That spokesperson added, “For someone to now try to drag a family member, a private citizen, who turned his life around, and reconciled with his wife, into the middle of a political campaign is disgusting.” Patrick added that Sigh’s children had been unaware of the charges their father had faced until the media reports.

The Herald described Sigh and his wife as being “avid churchgoers who counsel couples crises.” The same article said that the couple had donated $1,600 to Patrick’s gubernatorial campaign. One of their children also donated $250.

[StarfishSaver]

69. He's still the guy who raped his sister

No matter what he did, he would have been criticized.

But that said, do you think it's appropriate for political appointees to try to force non-political career employee hearing examiners to change their legal rulings because they don't like the outcomes and when they refuse, to retaliate against them?

[Demsrule86]

49. Look the Deval appointees should not have tried to stop this guy from remaining on the sex offender

list. It was a mistake and shows poor judgement...another woman was raped...this might not have happened had he been on this list...I don't care about the ins and outs of this...the guy should have been on the list. I read several articles...and I say this is bad news. The brother in law was taken off the list and when some objected (turns out with good reason) they were fired...and one of them later won a lawsuit I believe. We don't need this shit. He should not run.

[StarfishSaver]

68. You have the facts wrong

The brother-in-law wasn't "taken off the list" and Patrick appointees didn't "try to stop this guy from remaining on the sex offender list."

A hearing examiner - not a Patrick appointee - ruled that the law did not require him to register. These officials tried to force him to change his ruling, which was completely inappropriate and illegal, and when he refused to bow to their pressure, they harassed and retaliated against him and eventually drove him out of his job, which is also illegal and inappropriate.

If you're going to use this incident to judge Patrick, the "one and outs" of it certainly do matter - because facts. And a they say, you're entitled to your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts.

[Demsrule86]

40. Sure that will work well ...another woman was raped...you do know that right?

He should not even get in period.

[StarfishSaver]

71. The woman was his second wife

Putting him on the sex offender registry, even if the law required it, wouldn't have prevented that.

[Demsrule86]

76. She might have avoided him...sorry he is a bad guy and Patrick should not have done anything to help

him.

[stopdiggin]

47. no it won't

but it also doesn't detract from the statement that this story was both well known .. and more involved than the OP would suggest. OR .. that there was significant misconduct by the board alleged, that probably warranted firing or removal.

[AncientGeezer]

55. Being Managing Director of Bain Capital isn't complicated...

[StarfishSaver]

70. Perhaps. But that's not the issue being discussed here

[AncientGeezer]

74. But it's strike 2

[58Sunliner]

72. It's pretty cut and dried.

Paglia determined that he thought he (the rapist), posed no threat-wrong. The two fired wanted a revised ruling. The governor fired them years later-right before he leaves office. The ex-gov tried to shield a rapist, one that was married to his sister. Who would then go on to ruin someone's life with the same violent crime along with stalking, etc...

[Thekaspervote]

36. Amazing how they think their past won't catch up with them

[Act_of_Reparation]

38. Yeah... I don't think Deval Patrick protected the guy who raped his sister.

Looks like those two clowns got fired because they got their unit sued to the tune of $60K.

[Skya Rhen]

41. Ok - Deval needs to get on a debate stage with Kamala so that she can prosecute him on live TV...

[Green Line]

52. Maybe she can ask him about the $12,000 damask drapes

Purchased with taxpayer money for his new office and the Cadillac he ordered for $1100 a month also on the taxpayers. He ended up paying for the drapes and and the difference in the lease payment from the car he got rid of. This guy has some chutzpah.

[Skya Rhen]

56. True - there is no way Obama gave him his blessings. Obama knows good people - Joe is one of them...

[Jose Garcia]

46. Willie Horton 2.0

[stopdiggin]

50. oooooooohhh.

I HOPE you meant that you thought this was a smear?

[Jose Garcia]

60. Willie Horton was a legitimate issue, first raised by Al Gore, but

then given racist overtones by Bush's campaign.

[stopdiggin]

62. And .. that was what I was kind of hoping you DIDN'T mean -(nt)

[Jose Garcia]

63. You don't think that giving weekend passes to convicted murders

serving life sentences isn't a legitimate issue?

[loyalsister]

81. That's would only be true if there were no white repeat offenders in this world

We know that isn't the case, though.

[Peacetrain]

54. Ruh Roh... I did not know that... always liked Deval... this puts a whole new spin on it

I thought his jumping in this late was ill advised, but with a background like that.. he is going no where

[Thekaspervote]

58. IMAGINE the field day the reupukes would have with this!!

Bad optics or no... this would kill any chance of us winning

[tblue37]

66. I agree: "This is disqualifying." nt

[58Sunliner]

73. He should have stayed out of it.

Years later he was still upset about what he should have anticipated. The BIL was convicted in 1996.-"had been convicted of raping his wife, Patrick’s sister, more than a decade earlier in California"-1993. He served some time and they reunited-then in 2017 they separate, supposedly, and in Dec 2017 he attacks what is reported as his estranged wife. He is arrested in June 2018.

[mr_lebowski]

77. Sex Offender Registries are a concept I fundamentally disagree with ...

And no I've never been on one, but I have a great friend who ended up on one for a bullshit reason. He's never done anything remotely like what got him on the list again, 20+ years ago. Not because it was so horrible, but because it was a total accident.

AFAIC, there's a legal process when you commit crimes, it involves things like trials and jails and probation/parole.

You do the crime, you do the time, and your debt is paid.

To me it's garbage that the law has carved out this method of basically endlessly punishing people just because 'sex' (which can just involve nudity) was involved in their crime.

And don't give me a BS about how recidivism is SO much higher with these people ... it's not. People who do or deal illegal drugs, rob banks, beat (not rape) their wives, or murder someone ... they are ALL likely to commit similar crimes in the future.

But none of them have to 'register as a drug dealer' or whatever ... and be punished basically forever. You can't get a job, you're publicly shunned, it's a friggin' scarlet letter from hell. And it doesn't take much ... public urination if some kid saw you ... can get you on the list.

The whole idea very much rubs me the wrong way.

JMHO.

[Chemisse]

79. I disagree with the concept also.

If someone is considered a danger beyond his captivity, he should have been given a longer sentence.

In addition, many offenses, such as those involving teenaged romances, can land someone on such a list, and the resulting stigma can ruin their lives.

Finally, anyone can be a sex offender. Having a list offers a false sense of security.

[Jake Stern]

82. In principle

I support registration for sexual predators but not for some drunk guy caught pissing in an alley at 2AM or a 19 year old who had sex with his 15 year old girlfriend.

That being said seeing how these registries are currently run causes me to oppose them.

[ForEverGlades]

88. Rape is violence

Agree that Sex Offender registries can be very misleading--others have mentioned the " high school romance " situations. No way these offenders should be treated as child rapists and many others.

But to the situation here--rape is a crime of violence.
Convicted rapists should be required to register as Violent Offenders anyway.

Mr. Patrick knew or absolutely should have known of the ethical quagmire here and should have recused himself from any involvement with this individual.

Surely a mechanism exists by which another Mass. State official could have reviewed the mattter if such review was needed.

[mr_lebowski]

93. I'd be a bit more comfortable with a 'violent offenders' list ... but still generally opposed on the

principle that I don't agree with making people pay basically endlessly for crimes.

You're assuming that mechanism exists ... what if it doesn't?

From what Starfish has been saying, the BIL was one of many abuses by these political appointees in interfering with the work of career civil servants whose job it was/is to determine things like who belongs on S.O. list (and presumably other decisions).

It also sounds like the people weren't fired until long after the decision was made by the hearing officer to NOT put the BIL on the S.O. list.

These facts contribute to the proposition that their interference was punished NOT directly because of the situation w/the BIL ... which is mitigating for Patrick IMHO.

[Grey]

78. Let me get this straight.....?

He was working on behalf of the man that Raped his Sister? If he refers to it as only "marital" rape."
I just can't wrap my brain around this. Women deserve better.

[redqueen]

86. Yep. But people are using this thread to argue how unfair the idea of

sex offender registration is.

And other threads about this guy show people are still considering him as a worthwhile candidate.

Things really haven't changed around here all that much

[StarfishSaver]

90. That's not what happened. The OP and many of the responses are misleading

He didn't fight to keep his brother-in-law off the list and didn't fire anyone for trying to get him to register.

After a state board ruled that his brother-in-law was not required by law to register as a sex offender because marital rape did not fall within the category of offenses to be included on the registry, a career hearing examiner upheld the decision, agreeing that the law did not require his registration.

Political appointees working for Patrick didn't like the decision and tried to force the hearing examiner to change it, an inappropriate and illegal interference in the legal process. When he refused, they retaliated against him and eventually pressured him to resign. The hearing examiner sued the state and received a settlement before the case went to trial.

This was not the first time that these appointees had engaged in such behavior. They had a long history of abusing their positions and violating law and procedure to try to force outcomes they wanted.

This was not an instance of Patrick intervening to help his family member or punish people for trying to enforce the law, as some people are claiming falsely. Patrick fired these political appointees, not because they tried to get his brother-in-law to register, but because they abused their positions and violated the law by trying to illegally pressure a hearing examiner to ignore the law.

[gopiscrap]

80. he's also in too tight with business

[TexasBushwhacker]

83. Yeah, he lost me when he went to Bain. N/t

[gopiscrap]

85. me too

[oasis]

87. This is way too messy. Gotta pass on Deval.

[cwydro]

89. Yikes.

I really don’t know much about him, but have been trying to catch up.

Didn’t know this.

[StarfishSaver]

91. This headline is false

He didn't fire anyone for trying to "force his brother-in-law to register." He fired them for violating the law by trying to force a hearing examiner to overturn a state board's decision that the law didn't require the brother-in-law to register.

That's a big difference.

If anyone is going to base an opinion of Patrick on his actions in that matter, it's important they have the facts straight. And if what he actually did was wrong, there's no need to mischaracterize his actions.

[cwydro]

92. Thanks, I appreciate the info.

Like I said, I know very little about him.

What I’ve read seems mostly positive.

[CTyankee]

94. That's terrible. I'll ask her about it.

Women do deserve better.