Leader Lawsuit Watch Day 13

ArchPundit July 7, 2004 3 Comments

The last we heard the Illinois Leader was still planning to sue for John Kerry’s sealed divorced records even though, the records aren’t sealed.

The Leader has a history of attracting the overly litigious with John Zahm’s rather frequent threats to sue several people on the message boards and, of course, Chris Lauzen has been a contributor, a guy who sued over an argument in the party primary over whether he was indeed a CPA. He then tried to legally change his name to Chris Lauzen, CPA and forever becoming a punchline in state politics.

But Proft is claiming that the impoundment of financial information is the same as unsealing the Ryan custody documents. This might be true, except for the actual details get in the way. The custody battle in the Ryan case was contested. In the Kerry-Thorne divorce the divorce was no-fault and the agreement for custody and child support was seemingly worked out and then kept as a contract. Massachusetts law stipulates this as possible (site chosen because MA Government site was unwieldy):

If the finding is in the affirmative, the court shall approve the agreement and enter a judgment of divorce nisi. The agreement either shall be incorporated and merged into said judgment or by agreement of the parties, it shall be incorporated and not merged, but shall survive and remain as an independent contract.

Thorne then went to court a few years later to increase support payments from Kerry once his financial situation improved. Somehow this is supposed to be juicy.

To make it even better, the Leader published Kevin McCullough’s column this week claiming “Where There’s Smoke, There’s Fire.”

The evidence?

The files are sealed.

Of course, the files aren’t sealed.

Then McCullough goes on to say quote a Washington Times piece that actually appears to be quoting Thorne’s book on divorce and depression.

If McCullough searched a bit harder he might have noticed this and other quotes from Thorne:

From the Boston Globe series profiling Kerry:

But the marriage was beyond repair. “Politics became my husband’s life,” Julia wrote in “A Change of Heart,” her 1996 book about divorce. “I tried to be happy for him, but after 14 years as a political wife I associated politics with anger, fear, and loneliness.”

In an interview, she declined to elaborate on this period, except to say: “The dissolution of the marriage was my doing, not John’s. I wanted something else.”

That gives it a bit different context doesn’t it?

McCullough is not to be deterred though:

What kind of man leaves his wife, but especially when she is in the midst of suicidal depression?

See above again. No one’s marriage, let alone their divorce is easy and certainly he was partially at fault, but to assume that he left her is a paternalistic bit of bullshit.

In addition, there seemed to be a hotly contested issue when Kerry later wished to marry Teresa Heinz over whether or not he should be granted an annulment.

And this part is true. Kerry sought an annullment in the Catholic Church. Given I’m not Catholic, I find the whole dance around divorce strange and this even weirder, but then again, I’m not Catholic.

He pushed ahead for the annulment even though it technically threw his daughters into the bizarre state of illegitimacy. Having recovered from her depression by that point, some 18 years later Thorne fired back with hotly worded letters that she also copied to the Boston Globe.

The timeline is bizarrely off unless he is talking about the beginning of the marriage.

Ultimately, we know this–Kerry’s files are open to the same extent and probably more than Jack!’s. It’s just that Kerry didn’t have a messy divorce, Jack! did. I’ve long held that if Jack! had just released the files it wouldn’t have been a big deal, but Jack! decided to lie repeatedly about the files. Of course, he isn’t the first politician. Ask Bruce Benson in Colorado or Chuck Douglass and others in New Hampshire.

The law assumes that records are public unless there is good reason to seal them. If Jack! had a lawyer that didn’t tell him the records would probably be released, Jack! had a really crappy lawyer. A simple treatment of the issue is available here.

On Jack!’s rehabilitation tour he has been claiming that this is a first in American history. While finding a particular case involving custody documents might be difficult, the judge’s ruling is with precedent and examples can be found in the news where documents were unsealed over both former spouse’s wishes. The question isn’t why was the ruling surprising, but why it wasn’t expected.

If people want to clamor for public disclosure, may I suggest Teresa Heinz Kerry’s tax records are the place to start–that is a real issue and something particularly important.

Ummmm…Have You Heard Your President Lately? Or Anytime?

ArchPundit July 7, 2004 No Comments

The Leader takes on Judy’s incoherent quote about John Edwards:

He?s not from the Midwest. He?s not one of ours. He?s from the South, I mean, okay, fine, probably a southern gentleman. . .

I think when it came down to the great war of independence or whatever they call it down south, we were on the winning side, you know, for just that reason, and we think northernly, we think union, we are a bunch of Yanks. . .*

As the Leader points out, the President is a Southerner too. Well sort of. I guess if Andover and New Haven are Southern. But more importantly, do you really want to make fun of Judy’s mangled statement and then mention the President in the same story? Because if mangled statements disqualify one from holding office, I think it’s time for the President to concede.

Leader Lawsuit Watch Day 9

ArchPundit July 3, 2004 No Comments

To sum up, the Illinois Leader is threatening to sue for John Kerry’s divorce records even though those records are public. Dan Proft claims it changes nothing

Leader Correction Watch Day 8

ArchPundit July 3, 2004 1 Comment

The Leader has still not correct Jill Stanek’s assertion that the custody file was sealed from time it was completed.

And in fact, it appears that Jack Ryan lied directly to her:

I have heard directly from Jack twice that the custody documents were sealed from the get-go. Unless he was lying, there are no unredacted documents sitting on any Dem (or GOP) desks.

What’s funny is the continued attempt to blame this fiasco on the press or Democrats. This was one very stupid Republican’s fault.

I’m Just Saying

ArchPundit July 3, 2004 2 Comments

That if you can’t get action in Chicago, perhaps it’s more you and less your politics.

I might also suggest some house decorations that go beyond the bottom fifty percent of dorm room decorating, but hey, what do I know.

Every Day This Story Keeps Going

ArchPundit July 3, 2004 1 Comment

One has to wonder if the person passing the unredacted file around out there isn’t motivated to point out the last six redacted paragraphs. McCulloch points out that the Daily Herald ran a story saying the judge pulled six paragraphs at the last minute:

Susan Seager said that while some of the information concerning the allegations made by both parties about the others? behavior may be harmful to the child, the public has a right to see the documents, especially since Ryan ?declared himself to be a family values candidate.?

The judge cleared the court of all spectators, including Seager, for about 40 minutes to conduct private arguments with the two lawyers representing Jack Ryan, a millionaire investment banker, and Jeri Ryan, of TV?s ?Boston Public? and ?Star Trek: Voyager.?

When the public session resumed, Schnider said he had reconsidered his earlier inclination to unseal about a half dozen paragraphs contained in the documents.

Schnider said the sections contain ?personal accusations? that don?t refer to the couple?s child or reveal any information about the child.

But he said he agreed with arguments made by the attorney for both parents that ?the publicity that would be generated would become known to the child and will have a significant deleterious effect on the child.?

?This is a child whose development would likely be affected by the release of information regarding his parents that might also be embarrassing to the parents,? Schnider said. ?That?s as clear as I can be.?

Schnider then said he would unseal other sections of the documents that, while likely harmful to the child and embarrassing to Jack Ryan, would be in the public?s best interest to see.

The judge?s ruling closely mirrors a recommendation made earlier this month by a referee appointed by Schnider to examine the 40 or so documents.

The documents were originally sealed by Schnider in 2000 and 2001 and relate to a divorce that was granted in 1995.

McCulloch’s Rebuttal

ArchPundit July 3, 2004 9 Comments

Is largely consistent with what he told me on a previous occasion and what he has said in other venues including WBEZ’s 848. His story hasn’t changed and is generally consistent with everything we know. The issues he addresses are the areas that one can question, but without the full unredacted file no one can answer. And he makes the point he doesn’t know the truth regarding the original claims by Jeri Ryan. None of us do and probably wisely, Jack Ryan and her aren’t discussing their different claims.

And Chuck Goudie reports that he received a similar type of claim before the files were released.

The reality is that someone was lying back in March and it wasn’t Rod McCulloch. Could he be off on some specific details. Yes, but ultimately, Jack Ryan decided to attack McCulloch and his character as have some of Jack’s supporters. Some continue to do so including Jeff Berkowitz and Jill Stanek.

What’s most interesting is that Rod McCulloch also ran Al Salvi’s 1998 race for Secretary of State race in which Salvi attacked the running of the Secretary of State’s office under George Ryan. McCulloch also was pointing out the problems and lost business over that as he did over the release of Jack’s files. Those who taking shots at him might remember that.

McCulloch was trying to stop the Republicans from making a significant mistake. Going back to an early post on this, and as I said, what other reasons did he have to do this:

McCulloch is a veteran Republican operative and pollster and that is why his actions don’t make sense as just your normal dirty trick. It seems likely that regardless of the veracity of the claims, his career working for Illinois Republican candidates is over. Then again, someone who might lie about such claims isn’t likely to be that smart anyway. But mostly, even the dumbest guy realizes Borling isn’t going anywhere.

The last point McCulloch reiterated to me on the Tuesday after the files were released.

The question to me at this point is why do people still think attacking McCulloch makes any sense? He has largely been demonstrated to be accurate to this point and he had nothing to benefit from in releasing the file-and indeed, seems to have lost work and he’s done exactly this kind of thing before with George Ryan. Or perhaps Jack! is still spinning since he seems to think he’s going to make a comeback in a later race.

I Think We All Saw This Coming

ArchPundit July 1, 2004 No Comments

Dan Proft is not to be deterred:

“A separation agreement, which included custody and alimony arrangements, was presented to the judge, but it is not included in the public file. It is within the judge’s discretion to allow the attorneys in the case to hold them in their own files, which they did in this case.”

===

From that same story, so not so fast “former repub”…the contents that are under seal were the subject of a lawsuit Ms. Thorne filed some 4 years after the divorce.

This story changes nothing, the effort moves forward…and you’ll remember from my statement that this is not about nor limited to John Kerry, he’s just the first, obvious choice.

Sorry to burst your balloon.

Regards,

dan proft

Well, it changes nothing besides the entire legal argument. If one notices Massachusetts law puts all financials under seal and custody and alimony arrangements in the hands of the participants if the judge agrees which this one does. What was sued for in the Ryan case was the testimony between parties–a clearly public issue. In this case the arrangements are specific amounts paid and specific custody rules. Big difference and in fact, I don’t believe these matters were included in the files that were unsealed. Pleadings containing specific financial information can be sealed by request of the providing party.

One can make a public policy argument about the wisdom of this policy, but it appears to be consistent within Massacusetts and with California law even and rather irrelevant to the portion of the law that led to the unsealing of the Ryan custody files.

Essentially, this looks like a legal hissy fit now. The reason the Kerry divorce was so unlikely to produce embarrassing information is that it was essentially an amicable divorce. In terms of the appeal that Kerry’s ex-wife sought in 1991 the documents all pertained to specific income changes for Kerry so most if not all of this would be precluded under the same rather narrow exception of the original.

The private anullment in the Catholic Church is said to be heated, but the Church isn’t subject to open records.

Leader Correction Watch Day 6

ArchPundit July 1, 2004 1 Comment

It’s a bad week over in Leader Land–six days and still no correction to Jill Stanek’s column that the Ryan custody files were sealed from the very beginning.

The House Passes an Interim Budget

ArchPundit July 1, 2004 1 Comment

Here.

There’s a lot more to the story of The Blagorgeous attack on Lege members, but most of that is in the Capitol Fax which is doing a bang up job on the story.

As a Democrat, every Democrat should be ready to have the Governor’s scalp on this one.