Follow @TurtleboyNews on Twitter by clicking here.
Follow Turtleboy on Instagram by clicking here.
Want to advertise with Turtleboy? Email us at Turtleboysports@gmail.com for more information.
If you like free speech and want to support what we’re doing, feel free to donate to the Turtle fund:
Usually the Turtlegram and Gazette steals our stories without crediting our work. But today they actually stole our hot take and are calling for District Attorney Joe Early to resign for his role in Biblowgate. It started last week after the AG’s office investigated and determined that Joe Early had repeatedly asked State Police Colonel Richard McKeon to alter Alli Bibaud’s October 16 arrest report in order to get rid of embarrassing lines such as, “Do you know how many guys I had to blow to get that (heroin)?” A story that we broke, and which has led to the resignation of four of the highest ranking members of the MSP.
Yet Early remains on the job, and flat out denied the AG’s findings last week:
Instead he repeatedly talks about the “campaign” because this guy is nothing more than a professional politician who’s only good at raising money and getting idiots to vote for him.
Why wouldn’t he though? This comment from a recent article says it all:
Criag Polewaczyk is voting for him anyway. Why? Because there was “no wrong doing.” Even though the wrong doing is specifically listed in the AG’s report. Because facts don’t matter to sheep. Plus this:
Joe Early made him feel special one time. Now he’s gonna vote for him for life. Nothing else matters. This is why democracy is a sham. We should take the 20 smartest people and put their names in a hat and pick who gets to run what.
In the video above he mentioned several times “91” cases where his office has redacted arrest reports:
“We impound and we redact,” Mr. Early said as cameras rolled. “We have 91 instances where we could give you, where we’ve done this in the past, and this is something we do. Nobody was treated any differently.”
And to their credit, the Turtlegram did some research into these 91 cases and found out that once again he was lying:
Of the 91 cases Mr. Early referenced Monday, 89 were labeled as impoundments, not redactions, and those requests mostly pertained not to police reports but to search warrants and criminal records in cases involving violent crime.
Eighty-four of the 91 cases in which documents were shielded involved murder, death, arson, sexual assault or criminal records pertaining to allegedly dangerous individuals. Most of the documents impounded were either search warrants or “privileged” criminal records.
The other seven fell outside the categories outlined above. Three of the motions had to do with protecting victim, witness or grand jury information, while another was to impound a search warrant whose target had not been charged.
Translation – they only impound arrest reports for violent crimes when public information could put other people in danger. But they never order redactions. Especially for a couple sentences where the worst thing that could happen is a judge’s daughter gets a little embarrassed by the dumb things she said while driving around all fucked up.
In other words, Joe Early lied to the media once again, assuming they’d be too lazy to follow up on his lie that what he did with her arrest report was commonplace.
Everyone they interviewed seems to agree – what he did NEVER happens:
Mentioned in many of the 91 cases is the desire to avoid pretrial publicity, which is one reason Mr. Early has given for his actions in the Bibaud case. But Peter Elikann, a Boston defense attorney and former chair of the Massachusetts Bar Association’s Criminal Justice Section, pointed out that if the desire is to avoid pretrial publicity, impounding a document before trial is sufficient, and redaction would not be needed.
Mr. Elikann said that comparing redaction to impoundments is like mixing apples and oranges. A fairer comparison, he agreed, would be if the DA had examples of where prosecutors redacted police reports in other DUI cases, something he said he had not personally seen in his years in court.
It only happened this time because he’s good friends with Tim Bibaud.
DA Early with Judge Timothy M. Bibaud at his swearing in as the presiding judge in Dudley District Court. pic.twitter.com/fQRkt4VUZ3
— Joseph D. Early Jr. (@worcesterda) December 6, 2013
A retired judge name Robert Barton straight out calls him out on his bullshit:
Robert A. Barton, a retired Middlesex Superior Court judge, said in an interview in February that it would be interesting to see how the DA’s office would answer a query as to how many times they moved to redact a DUI report.
“When they don’t answer,” he said, “it’s because it doesn’t happen.”
Then there’s the fact that Alli Bibaud’s lawyer didn’t know any of this was going on:
Mr. Elikann said he had not been involved with a case in which a prosecutor moved to redact something in court without him being present as defense counsel. That is what happened in the case of Ms. Bibaud, as her attorney was not present when a Worcester prosecutor moved to redact her police report.
Think about that. Normally the defense attorney would be the one asking for shit to be redacted in order to help his case. The prosecution is supposed to be pushing back against these requests. Not in Joe Early’s office though. In his office they go out of their way to protect certain criminals from being embarrassed by the things they did while under arrest. Actually, just one criminal – Alli Bibaud. No one else was afforded this protection.
Oh, and when they asked about any other redacted DUI reports, Joe Early refused to answer and referred them to this campaign team, who also refused to answer:
Asked Thursday whether the office could produce any redacted DUI police reports, Mr. Early’s office referred comment to Mr. Early’s campaign, which did not answer on the record other than resending a prior campaign statement. Neither Mr. Early’s office nor the campaign answered a question about whether Mr. Early’s apparent use of the 91 cases to bolster his defense could be seen as misleading.
Oh yea, this guy is totally NOT a professional liar and con-artist. And he’s totally NOT treating us all like we’re very, very stupid. Then again, there’s this:
He CAN treat us like we are stupid. Because stupid people will vote for him anyway.
Meanwhile the lawyer for the troopers who are suing him is getting a pants tent over these free lunches that Early keeps feeding him:
Leonard H. Kesten, who is representing the two troopers suing their bosses over the orders to revise the report, said that, based on a reporter’s description of the documents, it appeared that the DA’s statement was misleading.
“It proves our point – these 91 (cases) prove our point – that the district attorney has never done anything that we know of (like this),” he said. “How many criminal defendants do they protect by taking out embarrassing details from police reports?”
So now that the Turtlegram and Gazette is demanding that he resign, will it change anything? It’s one thing when we demand he resigns. They can dismiss us as right wing fake news. But these people LOVE the mainstream media, and when a left leaning newspaper and a far left Attorney General are calling for the left leaning DA to step down, it carries a lot more weight.
My guess is he just doubles down. This is a lucky sperm son of a Congressman who started on third base and acts like he hit a triple (cite – PJ). He thinks being the DA is something that is his God-given birthright. And he’s not gonna give it up without a fight. Luckily for us there is an election in November and we have a candidate (Blake Rubin) to rally behind.
Your move Joe. Resign now or we’re gonna be forced to overthrow you in November. Whatever way you’d prefer.