Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Article--and more questions.

I am posting here a recent article that was sent out to members of Elsa's on-line support group. Included in the first version below are many questions which the article raised in my mind. I have left the text of the article as it was, but added my own comments in brackets and red print.

For the benefit of those who might prefer to read the article without my interruptions, I have printed it in its original form just below the version that contains my bracketed comments and questions.

This is about Elsa Newman, a graduate with highest honors of Goucher College and the University of Maryland School of Law, with an impressive C.V. including a listing in Who’s Who in American Law. She allegedly concocted allegations of sexual abuse and then allegedly tried to murder the man, her ex and father of her children.

These are two open, joyous, brilliant, good children with the confidence of kittens. The children went to Elsa to confide about their father’s abuse. They had no expectation of being hurt or that their mother would be horribly punished because she spoke out for them. Although Elsa had successive protective orders, the children had to visit this abusive father during their divorce.

A family friend named Margery Landry broke into the father’s home. She was charged and found guilty of assault and is serving a 20 year sentence. Repeatedly she’s written, testified and refused the prosecutor’s offer of a sentence reduction. She says Elsa didn’t know of her plans and [Elsa had] warned her to stay away from the ex. [Excuse please the interruption here. but I have a serious question: If Margery Landry repeatedly states—both orally and in writing—that Elsa knew nothing about Margery Landry’s venture into the father’s home; and if Margery Landry refused repeated offers of a sentence reduction for herself, determined to hold to the truth, whatever the cost to herself—why is she not credible????] Elsa was at her niece’s wedding when this happened. Landry found the ex in bed nude with his younger child. [Pardon me—another question: If a man is in bed, naked, with one of his sons—also naked—isn’t this situation indicative of a little something wrong? No…that’s not the real question. The real question is not whether there was “a little” something wrong. The real question was why didn’t somebody see that there was a whole lot wrong with that!] She pulled them apart. He beat her and bit off her finger. The gun she brought to protect herself discharged into his leg at such close range, the bullet went through his leg. [I’ve read in other accounts that there were no bullet holes in the man’s pajama bottoms, despite the fact that the bullet went clear through his leg. I don’t think I’ll even bother asking this question. You can figure it out.]

Over a year earlier, Elsa told her divorce lawyer’s secretary she wished the ex were dead. [Wait a minute here. Haven’t many of us entertained--in a moment of deep pain--the fervent wish that some person who had horribly injured us or someone we love would depart this earth immediately and forthwith? And haven’t many of us even said so—out loud? So what does that prove?] Elsa was convicted of conspiracy for attempted murder, attempted murder and other charges.

Elsa’s conviction was vacated after Maryland’s highest court found no evidence connecting her to any criminal activity. [So this court declared her innocent? She was, in essence, acquitted when the decision of the lower court was vacated? Or wasn’t she? I thought there was something called “double jeopardy. I am a schoolteacher, not an attorney, but this seems to me like an unforgiveable miscarriage of justice and the double jeopardy question just keeps ringing around in my head. If the highest court in Maryland said there was no evidence connecting her to any criminal activity. If Margery Landry said Elsa had nothing to do with it. If Elsa agrees that she had nothing to do with it. Then who else in the world had the legal or moral right to say anything??? I don’t get it.] Despite the absence of evidence—no DNA, no emails, no letters, no calls, no manuals, no nothing, no circumstantial evidence in any of the file cabinets, boxes of documents or computer, the prosecutors, Doug Gansler, State’s Attorney who was running for Attorney General of the State of Maryland, and Katherine Winfree, his deputy, pursued Elsa.

Gansler was quoted by the press after the conviction was vacated as claiming Elsa wanted to kill her kids. This, like the rest, came out of thin air. [OK—here’s another question: if the highest court in Maryland said there was no evidence of any kind against Elsa; if the highest court in Marlyland released Elsa after her hearing there, then how in the world could the lower court have the brutish audacity to go after her again????] After her release, the prosecutors continued to retry her and added a death penalty to punish her for winning an appeal. [Huh? Where did this death penalty idea suddenly come from? If it wasn’t needed in the previous trial, why in this one? Might it actually have been “punishment” for winning an appeal? OMG!] There was no evidence, nothing new. Elsa’s ex was the chief prosecution witness. [This is a man to whom I have more than once heard the term “puppetmaster” applied. Was this man in fact “pulling strings” and controlling movements of everyone in the courtroom?”] He connected Elsa to Margery Landry by spinning a “twisted sisters” link. [Was there any other person to support this “twisted testimony”—or was it merely the father’s word against the mother’s, and the father ‘s word being accepted against the mother’s???] Elsa’s divorce attorney’s secretary was called again to distort Elsa’s wish expressed over a year earlier confidentially. [Whoa! Haven't I heard that the question of attorney-client privilege also carries over to the employees of the attorney? How then can an attorney’s secretary be a witness against Elsa? What am I missing here?]

Every single expert, and the best professionals were involved, opined over and over that the kids were molested and their mother was not coaching them to say it. [Here we are again. Experts and professionals of the finest quality available spoke to the children. After speaking to the children, said experts and professions declared that the children were being sexually abused. Why did no one listen to this? Why were the children left in his hands?] Their father, a pedophile, needed to be investigated thoroughly and supervised (see, e.g. Dr. Michael Lamb’s (NIH) report of Nov. 20, 2001, Dr. Leon Rosenberg’s (John’s Hopkins University) report of Sept. 20, 2000, Russell Brown’s (LCSW, D.C. Children’s Hospital) report of June 2000, Dr. Jill Scharff’s reports of 2000, 2001, and 2002). [Why was this documentation ignored? I am looking for these reports online, and will publish them here, if I can obtain permission—or if they are a matter of public record.] There were documented behavioral and physical manifestations of child sexual abuse (bruises, bloodied rings around the anus and symmetrical lesions, severe sexually transmitted rashes on penis and buttocks, bite marks) reported by teachers, court personnel and doctors not to mention 3 years of disclosures by the children [What? You are telling me that the children themselves complained of sexual abuse—and possibly other forms of abuse—and nobody would listen to them, let alone believe them? And this despite the number of different people, as well as the number of different types if people—i.e. teachers, doctors and court personnel. You can’t be telling me that! You are telling me that, aren’t you?] (during the period of the prosecutor’s Montgomery County Maryland’s involvement). Dr. Newberger in 2006 wrote an extensive report establishing that the children suffered severe sadistic abuse throughout the term of Elsa’s prosecution, and before, and that Elsa’s ex can be clearly expected to continue to abuse the kids. Dr. Newberger called Maryland’s investigation well below the national standard. [This last goes in larger type and bold type, to be sure you won’t miss it. Please…you won’t miss it, will you?”]

Elsa’s prosecutors were responsible for the below standard child abuse investigation. At the trials, they touted their closed investigations as proof Elsa supposedly accused her ex of sexually abusing their children in a deliberate attempt to “get him”. Because they closed the so-called investigation, Elsa was now conspiring to murder her ex. The jury deliberated over 2 days, and it was, unfortunately, Elsa’s lawyer who asked to press them to a verdict. They convicted just before a long holiday weekend.

Elsa was convicted long before either trial, however. All along her prosecutors fed the media distorted facts to make her look guilty. [In fact, I just finished reading a lengthy selection on the net, from washingtonian.com. In case you are interested, the web site is http://wasingtonian.com/articles/6517.html. The article is entitled. “Deadly Triangle” and was written by Harry Jaffe and Cindy Rich. I was absolutely appalled by the article and its anti-Elsa bias. She was convicted in the media long before she was ever convicted in court—the article was written before the first trial even began, as witnessed by the statement from the article, “The women…are in the Montgomery County Detention Center awaiting trials expected to be held later this summer.” Elsa was tried as a “twisted sister” to Landry. Articles were on the front pages of newspapers coast to coast where they remain via the internet.

[More questions for the jurors and the court]:Jurors decided Elsa was guilty before the trial started. A deputy sheriff and a prospective juror notified the judge of these illegal conversations. The judge did not excuse the panel. At the conclusion of the trial, the jury foreman proudly boasted to Channel 9 news reporter Bruce LeShan that he knew Elsa was guilty from the start. [Why did the judge not act on the report from the deputy sheriff? Why did the judge not act on the report from the prospective juror who apparently noted in his report that other jurors were illegally discussing the subject of the trial—Elsa Newman—and had already stated their belief that she was guilty? What am I to think of a jury foreman who boasts on TV news that he “knew Elsa was guilty from the start?”

The jury never knew the ex sadistically abused the children but when their suffering mother privately expressed a wish the molester were dead to her divorce lawyer’s secretary, that was viciously and crudely exploited and distorted to stick Elsa with a crime. [My favorite
“junk food reading” is mystery and suspense. Over and over I read the words, “ Don’t talk to anybody without your attorney present.”
Now I’m wondering if—once charged with or being interviewed about a crime, we woudn’t be better off not to talk to anybody at all—including our attorneys?


Doug Gansler and Katherine Winfree are now the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General of the State of Maryland, respectively. [Now, one more time, please take note of this anguished ending from one of Elsa’s firmest supporters]: In 2002 they silenced Elsa’s children. Now they silenced Elsa.

THE ORIGINAL VERSION:

This is about Elsa Newman, a graduate with highest honors of Goucher College and the University of Maryland School of Law, with an impressive C.V. including a listing in Who’s Who in American Law. She allegedly concocted allegations of sexual abuse and then allegedly tried to murder the man, her ex and father of her children.

These are two open, joyous, brilliant, good children with the confidence of kittens. The children went to Elsa to confide about their father’s abuse. They had no expectation of being hurt or that their mother would be horribly punished because she spoke out for them. Although Elsa had successive protective orders, the children had to visit this abusive father during their divorce.

A family friend named Margery Landry broke into the father’s home. She was charged and found guilty of assault and is serving a 20 year sentence. Repeatedly she’s written, testified and refused the prosecutor’s offer of a sentence reduction. She says Elsa didn’t know of her plans and warned her to stay away from the ex. Elsa was at her niece’s wedding when this happened. Landry found the ex in bed nude with his younger child. She pulled them apart. He beat her and bit off her finger. The gun she brought to protect herself discharged into his leg at such close range, the bullet went through his leg.

Over a year earlier, Elsa told her divorce lawyer’s secretary she wished the ex were dead. Elsa was convicted of conspiracy for attempted murder, attempted murder and other charges.

Elsa’s conviction was vacated after Maryland’s highest court found no evidence connecting her to any criminal activity. Despite the absence of evidence—no DNA, no emails, no letters, no calls, no manuals, no nothing, no circumstantial evidence in any of the file cabinets, boxes of documents or computer, the prosecutors, Doug Gansler, State’s Attorney who was running for Attorney General of the State of Maryland, and Katherine Winfree, his deputy, pursued Elsa.

Gansler was quoted by the press after the conviction was vacated as claiming Elsa wanted to kill her kids. This, like the rest, came out of thin air. After her release, the prosecutors continued to retry her and added a death penalty to punish her for winning an appeal. There was no evidence, nothing new. Elsa’s ex was the chief prosecution witness. He connected Elsa to Margery Landry by spinning a “twisted sisters” link. Elsa’s divorce attorney’s secretary was called again to distort Elsa’s wish expressed over a year earlier confidentially.

Every single expert, and the best professionals were involved, opined over and over that the kids were molested and their mother was not coaching them to say it. Their father, a pedophile, needed to be investigated thoroughly and supervised (see, e.g. Dr. Michael Lamb’s (NIH) report of Nov. 20, 2001, Dr. Leon Rosenberg’s (John’s Hopkins University) report of Sept. 20, 2000, Russell Brown’s (LCSW, D.C. Children’s Hospital) report of June 2000, Dr. Jill Scharff’s reports of 2000, 2001, and 2002). There were documented behavioral and physical manifestations of child sexual abuse (bruises, bloodied rings around the anus and symmetrical lesions, severe sexually transmitted rashes on penis and buttocks, bite marks) reported by teachers, court personnel and doctors not to mention 3 years of disclosures by the children (during the period of the prosecutor’s Montgomery County Maryland’s involvement). Dr. Newberger in 2006 wrote an extensive report establishing that the children suffered severe sadistic abuse throughout the term of Elsa’s prosecution, and before, and that Elsa’s ex can be clearly expected to continue to abuse the kids. Dr. Newberger called Maryland’s investigation well below the national standard.

Elsa’s prosecutors were responsible for the below standard child abuse investigation. At the trials, they touted their closed investigations as proof Elsa supposedly accused her ex of sexually abusing their children in a deliberate attempt to “get him”. Because they closed the so-called investigation, Elsa was now conspiring to murder her ex. The jury deliberated over 2 days, and it was, unfortunately, Elsa’s lawyer who asked to press them to a verdict. They convicted just before a long holiday weekend.

Elsa was convicted long before either trial, however. All along her prosecutors fed the media distorted facts to make her look guilty. Elsa was tried as a “twisted sister” to Landry. Articles were on the front pages of newspapers coast to coast where they remain via the internet.

Jurors decided Elsa was guilty before the trial started. A deputy sheriff and a prospective juror notified the judge of these illegal conversations. The judge did not excuse the panel. At the conclusion of the trial, the jury foreman proudly boasted to Channel 9 news reporter Bruce LeShan that he knew Elsa was guilty from the start.

The jury never knew the ex sadistically abused the children but when their suffering mother privately expressed a wish the molester were dead to her divorce lawyer’s secretary, that was viciously and crudely exploited and distorted to stick Elsa with a crime.

Doug Gansler and Katherine Winfree are now the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General of the State of Maryland, respectively. In 2002 they silenced Elsa’s children. Now they silenced Elsa.

No comments: