Given former New York governor Eliot Spitzer’s reckless behavior, it was probably inevitable that he was going to get caught at some point. But the New York Times today reports that the federal investigation into his assignations with prostitutes was wildly disproportionate. David Johnston and Philip Shenon write:
The scale and intensity of the investigation of Mr. Spitzer, then the governor of New York, seemed on its face to be a departure for the Justice Department, which aggressively investigates allegations of wrongdoing by public officials, but almost never investigates people who pay prostitutes for sex.
You were surprised?
And while I’m at it, where does Charles Carl [Globe correction TK] McGee go to get his reputation back? McGee, a high-ranking Patrick administration official, was arrested in Florida recently and charged with having sex with a 15-year-old boy. Now prosecutors are saying, oh, never mind.
Discover more from Media Nation
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Here we go again. Hey, everyone — police included — make mistakes. So what’s your point? Never arrest/accuse anyone? Never report an arrest/accusation until the person is found guilty? Until all appeals are exhausted? … ?
I’m surprised no one has picked up on the connection with the US Attorney’s controversy. In light of the politicization of the US Attorneys by Bush/Rove and the prosecution of Don Siegelman, I have to wonder whether the investigation of Spitzer hit a crossroads at some point and went forward only because the target was a Democrat. Doesn’t mean he wasn’t guilty, though I wonder whether this matter might have been dropped if he had an R next to his name.
Yeah Mike, but people only want an echo chamber. Think a Republican would be getting the same benefit of the doubt?
anon 10:37: Yes.
EB3 here.Dan, Yes. What is the story with McGee? Either scenerio is possible, and none more likly than another. Did he not do what he was accused of, or, because the ID was somewhat faulty (but the kid did eventually ID him) was the case dismissed because the prosecutor believed that he could not prove th case beyond a reasonable doubt?If it is the former, I will be first to sign thepetition to get his job back. If latter, then, well, you know.
McGee is not guilty in the eyes of the law. That’s all we know and all we’re going to know. Give him his job back.
EB3 here.Not sure about that Dan. His boss should do an investigation of his own. Review the evidence, which McGee’s lawyer has, and question McGee. Criminal standard is much higher to prove than civil standard.Should OJ get his job back? I mean, if I had to chose right now who to watch my 15 yr old son, OJ or McGee, all things considered, I’ll go with OJ.Unless of course I knew more about the case.People are wrongfully accused ( and convicted) in this country everyday. Likewise, guilty people are let go because of lack of evidence everyday. The serious nature of the charge require a pruudent and reasonable employer to at least do their own investigation before giving the job back.
Newsweek is reporting Spitzer was snared under a part of the Patriot Act used almost exclusively for domestic white-collar crimes.Sure makes me feel safer at home!
Is McGee’s name Charles or Carl? (Or Stan?)Sounds like another classic Globe correction in the offing.
I think it’s Charles….correct me if i’m wrong
Re: Where do you go to retrieve your reputation: If you’re straight, not the Boston Globe. From today’s Globe piece on Mike Macklin’s age discrimination lawsuit:”That same year (1997), he was suspended from his job after police arrested him on charges of assaulting his girlfriend during an argument and then dragging her from his apartment into a hallway.” From THEIR OWN archives:Author(s):Don Aucoin Date: April 10, 1998 Page: C12 Section: Living Reporter Mike Macklin is back on the air at WHDH-Ch. 7.”Macklin was in Lowell last night, reporting a story about drug problems in that city. It was the second story Macklin has done for Channel 7 since charges of assault against him, stemming from an incident involving his girlfriend last summer, were dropped by prosecutors. Channel 7 spokeswoman Ro Dooley said Macklin has been restored to his former role as a regular freelancer.”Funny how they didn’t see fit to mention that THOSE charges had been dropped, (or why it was relevant to an age-discrimination suit in the first place). Guess it didn’t fit their narrative?
McGee gets his reputation back by suing the pants off (oops) the accuser and the accuser’s father for fabricating the story, if that’s what they did. It will be telling if McGee wants the facts coming out in open court.Let’s see, a child on vacation with his family decides to “make up” a rather specific story of homosexual assault and the person accused just happens to be homosexual?Even if you believe the “1 in 10” statistics (I’d guess the numbers are much less at a family resort), this child had a 90% chance of accusing a known straight person and having the charges doubted immediately, but he just happens to accuse a known homosexual?Dan, McGee isn’t NOT GUILTY in the eyes of the law. The case was never adjudicated. Big difference. Sure, he is free and clear in the criminal justice system, but there’s (or there should be) such a thing as conduct unbecoming a Governor’s appointee. Patrick and the Mass. State Police need to investigate what allowed Florida police to form the probable cause needed for arrest, and what facts caused a judge to hold him on $300,000 bond.If the FL cops didn’t have probable cause to arrest, McGee should sue them too. My sympathies to him, Richard Jewell, Willie Bennett et al if these charges are totally false. But if there was any misconduct with a child, he needs to go from the administration. Would that the Herald had the resources to investigate since we know the Globe won’t.
I THOUGHT it seemed a little high….Posted by David Dahl, Regional Editor March 22, 2008 09:38 PM By Robert KnoxGlobe Correspondent”Duxbury voters on Saturday defeated a $1 million tax override to fund design studies for the renovation or reconstruction of the town’s police station and fire stations.The projected tax increase from the new equipment is expected to add $108 to the average homeowner tax bill of $641,300, according to finance director John Madden.”