ELLSWORTH, Maine — A misconduct hearing concerning a Hancock County prosecutor originally scheduled for this week has been postponed until this coming fall.
The Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar, which governs the professional conduct of licensed attorneys in the state, had scheduled a hearing on a complaint against Assistant District Attorney Mary Kellett for Aug. 30 and 31.
According to Jacqueline Rogers, executive director of the board, the hearing date has been postponed because of scheduling difficulties with potential witnesses. The hearing now is tentatively expected to take place in late October of this year but a new date has not yet been set, she said Monday.
Vladek Filler, a former rape defendant and Gouldsboro resident, filed a complaint against Kellett with the Board of Overseers in December 2010. After reviewing the matter, the board decided to pursue a disciplinary petition against Kellett with the board’s grievance commission.
In the 18-page disciplinary petition, filed by Bar Counsel J. Scott Davis in April of this year, Kellett is accused of violating nine rules of the Maine Bar with statements she made during her closing arguments at Filler’s January 2009 trial and by withholding evidence and interfering with subpoenas issued by Filler’s defense attorney for that trial. The petition was filed after the board’s legal staff reviewed Filler’s complaint and decided a public inquiry should be held.
Filler was accused by his then-wife of raping her in December 2005 and April 2007. After two trials, he eventually was found guilty only of misdemeanor assault and then sentenced to serve 21 days in jail.
Kellett and her boss, Hancock County District Attorney Carletta Bassano, have declined multiple requests for comment about any aspect of Filler’s case or about the upcoming hearing. Kellett has continued to work and prosecute cases in Hancock County, despite the pending complaint.
According to bar officials and other district attorneys, informal complaints from defendants about unfair prosecutions are fairly common. The Board of Overseers does receive formal grievance complaints about prosecutors from time to time, but the vast majority of them are deemed to be without merit and so are tossed out without being made public.
Formal bar complaints about prosecutors that end up being argued in public hearings before the board’s grievance commission are rare, according to Rogers. She said that when board staff recently looked into the matter, they could find only one complaint against a prosecutor that went to a public hearing over the past 30 or so years.
That hearing was held in 2001 when David Crook, then the district attorney of Kennebec and Somerset counties, was accused of breaking bar rules by filing a grievance complaint against one of his former assistant district attorneys and her husband. That complaint was dismissed and Crook was issued a warning after the commission determined that Crook had no basis for filing the complaint.
Last fall, the board’s grievance commission dismissed a complaint against Aroostook County District Attorney Todd Collins after he agreed to modify a policy his office had about requiring drug defendants to be interviewed by Maine Drug Enforcement Agents without a defense attorney present before they could enter into plea negotiations with his office. That complaint never went to a public hearing and was resolved after Collins agreed to allow defense attorneys to sit in on such interviews with their clients, under certain conditions, Rogers said.
But the unusual circumstances Kellett finds herself in are not just limited to the pending complaint Filler filed with the legal oversight panel. She also has been criticized extensively on the Internet where some blogs, websites and other Web-based entities have mocked her with hyperbolic rhetoric, accused her of unfairly prosecuting men and called for her disbarment.
Among them is www.fillerfund.com, which was set up in the wake of Filler first being charged in the spring of 2007. Other websites or organizations that have singled out Kellett for criticism include National Coalition For Men, Fathersandfamilies.org, and Stop Abusive and Violent Environments, the last of which held a press conference in Bangor in the weeks before Filler’s second trial was held in May 2011.
Other DAs weigh in
Two Maine district attorneys have said this month that the degree to which Kellett has been targeted and criticized on the Internet is unusual.
R. Christopher Almy, district attorney for Penobscot and Piscataquis counties, said recently that criticism is often part of the job of being a prosecutor, but sometimes people react with more than just criticism. He said he and his staff have been subject to comments and even threats from defendants who are unhappy that they are being prosecuted.
Almy said prosecutors tend to stick to evidence in a case, which can include statements by witnesses or physical evidence, but that defendants sometimes take it personally.
“It’s just one those things that come with the job,” Almy said. “They do get carried away sometimes.”
But Almy added that experiencing sustained, highly-visible criticism such as the type Kellett has endured is not that common. He said he has never been targeted by a website or any other campaign seeking disbarment or other disciplinary action.
Almy said prosecutors often decline to prosecute cases that may come down to one person’s word against another. Kellett deserves credit for pursuing cases that other prosecutors might decide are too difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, he said.
“She’s one of those prosecutors that is willing to try cases some of us shy away from,” Almy said. “I admire her for that.”
Stephanie Anderson, district attorney for Cumberland County and president of Maine Prosecutor’s Association, said last week that she herself has been criticized online, on at least one person’s personal website and in readers’ comments posted on news organization websites, but not to the extent Kellett has been.
The online criticism that has been heaped on Kellett is notable because it is so vitriolic, she said.
“It’s unbelievable what people say,” Anderson said. “People can say anything they want.”
Anderson noted that prosecutors do not have the final say in bringing felony charges such as gross sexual assault against defendants. Grand juries, which are comprised of appointed citizens, have to decide there is enough evidence to warrant the charges before a prosecutor can move forward with pursuing a felony case, she said.
As a result, prosecutors are not inclined to take unusually weak cases to grand juries, she said. Most prosecutors have heavy caseloads and tend to prioritize those that are most likely to result in convictions, she said.
“Why would you do that [pursue weak cases], when you have plenty to do?” Anderson said.
Anderson said bar complaints against prosecutors that are sent to the Board of Overseers are not that rare, but most are found to be without merit after just a cursory review. She’s had about a dozen filed against her, she said, and all but one, which was filed before she became a prosecutor, were not pursued further by the Board of Overseers.
The one complaint that did result in a public hearing against Anderson ended in a dismissal. Anderson, while working in private practice, had met in December 1988 with an employee of a company that was involved in a legal dispute that also involved one of Anderson’s clients. None of Anderson’s actions at the urgently called meeting violated any bar rules, according to a 1991 board report on the incident.
Anderson said that, as a prosecutor, she never has been harassed or threatened for pursuing a case but added that informal accusations from defendants about inconsistent or unjust prosecutions are fairly routine.
“You have to be thick-skinned,” she said. “We have to take this stuff and stand there with our hands tied behind our back.”
Filler case
Filler was tried twice on the same rape allegations, in January 2009 and May 2011. He was convicted of gross sexual assault at the end of his first trial but, after a new trial was ordered, was acquitted of rape charges but convicted of misdemeanor assault at the end of his second trial.
Kellett was the prosecutor at Filler’s first trial but, after she was accused of prosecutorial misconduct, First Assistant District Attorney Paul Cavanaugh took over the case for Filler’s second trial. Cavanaugh is not accused of any misconduct in the case.
Filler’s most recent appeal was argued before the Law Court last month. On July 3, the court affirmed Filler’s conviction last year for misdemeanor assault.
Filler has contended since he was first accused of rape that his marriage was deteriorating and that his wife, from whom he is now divorced, fabricated the allegations in order to win custody of their two sons. After his first trial, Filler was granted custody of their sons, who are 15 and 6 years old, in the couple’s subsequent divorce. The boys now live with their father in suburban Atlanta.
Kellett is accused of making inappropriate comments during her closing arguments at Filler’s first trial. Justice Kevin Cuddy, the trial judge, had barred Kellett and Filler’s then-defense attorney, Daniel Pileggi of Ellsworth, from raising the possibility during testimony that the rape allegations may or may not have factored into a pending child custody dispute. Kellett had asked Cuddy to prohibit any such testimony during the trial, saying that allowing it would confuse the jury about what allegations they would pass judgment on.
But Kellett herself alluded to a child custody dispute in her closing arguments.
“The suggestion that Ligia Filler has made all this up just for the purpose of getting ahead in the child custody, where is the evidence of that?” Kellett told the jury, according to the disciplinary petition.
Pileggi and Filler took issue with Kellett’s apparent violation of Cuddy’s ruling and, after the trial, filed an appeal for a new trial, which Cuddy subsequently granted. In September 2010, the Law Court upheld Cuddy’s decision and allowed Filler’s case to be re-tried.
According to the petition, Kellett also said in her closing argument that there was no evidence that indicated that a sexual assault had not taken place, which suggested that Filler had a “duty and burden” to present such evidence.
“Filler clearly had no such burden,” Davis, bar counsel for the Board of Overseers, wrote in the bar’s disciplinary petition.
Kellett also is accused of violating bar rules before and during Filler’s first trial by withholding discovery materials from Pileggi and by interfering with a subpoena issued by the defense attorney.
According to the disciplinary petition, Pileggi repeatedly requested documents and other investigative materials from Kellett such as police audiotape, videotape, photographs, transcripts and reports germane to Filler’s case. Kellett is accused of not responding to some of Pileggi’s requests, of providing limited material or information in response to others, and of advising an Ellsworth police officer not to comply with a subpoena from Pileggi — despite a June 3, 2008, court ruling that ordered Kellett to hand over all requested materials to the defense attorney.
Assistant Attorney General Ronald Lupton, who is representing Kellett in the pending misconduct complaint, has declined to comment on the allegations and upcoming hearing.
Davis also has declined to comment, saying that the board’s policy is not to comment on pending complaints against attorneys beyond what is printed in disciplinary petitions.
Follow BDN reporter Bill Trotter on Twitter at @billtrotter.
Er… do Kellett’s critics have anything to say that you’d care to report about? “[H]yperbolic rhetoric,” while concise, lacks the detail contained in your quotes from, apparently, every prosecutor in the state.
Well stated, PFPorlock. Another fine example of the sham journalism that’s the norm for the BDN nowadays. Shame of you, Bill Trotter, and your editor, for such a flimsy article that fortunately, by the comments posted so far, seems to have only furthered the scrutiny and commentary necessary for bringing additional light, and hopefully eventual accountability, to what’s allegedly transpired in the Hancock County DA’s office. This one-sided, puff piece portraying a potentially ethically corrupt public official as victim is laughable. Next time, do the research, get the quotes from the opposite side, and attempt to write an unbiased and informative article that presents and reports the news, not attempts to shape opinion or outcome. That’s propaganda, not journalism.
this article is totally a waste of print, has nothing to do with the title of the article.
kellett does things that isnt legal is the point i was trying to get across. that is why she is in trouble now. maybe she needs a break from prosecuting. maybe she should try the otherside. i know someone who was public defender in augusta he was a good attorney but now he is a prosecuter. he is much better on the other side
District Attorney Geoffrey Rushlau Under Investigation for Misconduct, Criminal Acts
http://rushlau.blogspot.com
Only when prosecutors return to the pursuit of justice and not convictions will fairness return to the criminal justice system here in Maine.
kellett prosecuted me years ago on a cat case. they used my sister to gather evidence instead of the proper authorities. my sister was their star witness. she used her cellphone to gather pictures and video. my sister gave a copy of the tape to my vet who was my witness. she tampered with my witness and got away with it but when i notified my sister of a canceled court date i was given a tampering with a witness summons. i have to say she played dirty then. i have one cat now never what to go through that ever again
Davida, You have every right to voice your own opinion. It is a great country that we live in that provides us all with this right. But you and I both know the FACTS about the 50+ cats you had in your small house. How they had completely destroyed your house and that the Health Officer was ready to condem the property as it was not fit for human or feline to live in. That the Animal Control Officer spent hundreds of hours trying to help you before any case was sent to the District Attorney’s Office. And you know that it was only done then because everytime the ACO found homes for dozens of the cats you weren’t able to take care of, you’d simply bring more back in.
Don’t just jump on the “beat up Mary Kellett” bangwagon. First off it detracts from any legitimate greivance others may have. And second, you truly know in your heart that you are better off physically and emotionally since a court order (completed by Ms. Kellett) was enacted.
And to others that are reading all of these comments; this is the down side to the internet. Tell me which comments are based on real facts and which ones are based on emotions and biased, self-serving dribble. If Ms. Kellett overstepped her authority, deal with it. If she didn’t, live with it.
there are people involved they know who they are . one being the AC in my town they used my sister . we dont get along she collected evidence for them. she used her cellphone she took pictures and put them on a CD and also she did a video. she was kelletts star witness there are some other things that occured along with this . these people may or may not read this but they know who they are. i am still very angry about those events. it COST me my health. it is refreshing to see kellett is finally getting what is due her. someone stood up . i am not saying she is a bad attorney but when you defend or PROSECUTE you have to go legal. i have had my days in court you got to go legal especially if you prosecute .
one more thing. they should have done their own evidence collecting and not use my sister . she called me and said she wanted some pictures. i thought she wanted some old family pictures . she deceived me when she showed up . i never should have let her in if i knew what she was really up to.
Looks like the District Attorneys got together and put some heat on the BDN, to downplay this story.
Justice is a joke in this country.
Luckily, there are those of us who are unimpressed by attempts to pressure from state functionaries.
The internet has emerged to provide a new kind of check and balance on the power of the state. In this case, a prosecutor wantonly prosecuting anything in pants, with the flimsiest of evidence, misleading juries and interfering with due process has not only been sent up to face the Overseers of the Bar, but her actions have been put under heightened scrutiny because citizens (remember us?) are using the internet to shine a light on her actions.
The day will soon come when prosecutors like R. Christopher Almy will not be so quick to lionize prosecutors like Kellett for being “willing to try cases some of us shy away from.”
Why? Because now anyone with a keyboard and the will to speak truth to power will be here to ask, why, Mr. Almy are you so impressed with the prosecution of flimsy cases? And what is wrong with a legal system where this is to be praised?
Free Vladek Filler.
Mr. Almy who brought up child molesters in the Brownville mother case refuses to consider any action against those who broke the law to cover for a real pedophile. Carlson .
It seems that the mainstream media is becoming less relevant as they continue to parrot those who fear exposure of their (alleged) corruption and abuse of power. It’s an understandable conflict of interest that you rely so much on them as sources.
As the mainstream media continues to decline, the blogging world is growing and where the mainstream media has failed, the blogging world is watching the watchers.
“Kellett deserves credit for pursuing cases that other prosecutors might decide are too difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, he said… She’s one of those prosecutors that is willing to try cases some of us shy away from,” Almy said. “I admire her for that.”
Yikes, isn’t this the definition of harassment? Pursuing cases that are “too difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt”? That is, isn’t it harassment to use the power of the prosecutor’s office to drag someone thru the expense and publicity of a trial while KNOWING that the case is “too difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt”?
problem with kellett is she uses tactics that is illegal . in mycase she had. they used including the animal control officer. they used my sister to collect evidence for them with her cellphone. she made videos . they should have done there own evidence collecting. they told her how to do it . that was a nasty time in my life and it cost me dearly healthwise. combination of being publically humilated and stress from the issue itself . it was kind of ugly you know this is several years later and i am still very angry at the people involved and they know who they are .
“Web-based entities have mocked her with hyperbolic rhetoric, accused her of unfairly prosecuting men and called for her disbarment.
Among them is http://www.fillerfund.com, which was set up in the wake of Filler first being charged in the spring of 2007. Other websites or organizations that have singled out Kellett for criticism include National Coalition For Men, Fathersandfamilies.org, and Stop Abusive and Violent Environments”
This is just dishonest journalism Bill, you didn’t even contact them for this story.
Don’t forget the right-wing, chauvinist bastion Current.com.
It is “outrageous” that people can say anything they want??? What about free speech?
“hyperbolic rhetoric”? Is this really fair journalism?
What about the numerous innocent men who have been dragged through the mud by this prosecutor through the grand jury and trial without any credible evidence? Do they matter? How come no defense attorneys or her victims got interviewed for this article, but just her cronies using BDN to make her a victim and pressure the Bar to let her off? So much for prosecutors seeking truth and justice; not one of them in this article voiced any disgust for WHAT Kellett is actually charged with and exactly WHY Kellett is the only prosecutor in Maine to face such criticism and charges. I guess judge Cuddy, the Law Court, and the Board of Overseers forgot to read this article and are also part of some conspiracy to just “attack” poor little Ms. Kellett for no reason t’all.
Last time I checked, ordering police officers to withhold evidence from defense was a CRIME. Do the prosecutors in this article know that it’s a crime and that criminals need to be held accountable for their crimes? Or does that not apply to other prosecutors?
Mr. Bar Counsel….PLEASE DISBAR THAT CRIMINAL and send a strong message to all her cronies who have gotten away with corrupting the whole justice system with their crimes and immunity.
Lawyers think on a different level. I would like to see BDN publish the
names of the lawyers who will sit on the disciplinary panel in order to see who
will actually be deciding Kellett’s fate and to see if the prosecutors quoted in
this article are now publicly attempting to intimidate or
pressure those lawyers on the panel (who may be practicing in their
districts) to let Kellett off the hook for her crimes.
All the names of disciplinary panel members need to be published for public
disclosure and BDN needs to follow this story of corruption.
DISBAR.
Kellett has railroaded a lot of men over her career and has now been caught abusing the power entrusted to her. I knew she was a bad apple but I thought she was an exception but now I know from reading this article corruption goes a long way in Maine and the prosecutors who defended her and the journalist who got only one side of the story for their fluff piece prove it.
Google “men’s rights blog”.
Kellett has twisted her role from prosecution of crimes to persecution of males, and she is certainly playing fast and loose – I might say ‘Fast And Furious’ – with the rules of evidence and the rule of law. The Vladek Filler case is just one of her many outrages. This corrupt public official belongs not at the Bar – but behind bars.
How’s Jax ?
Why was the post from Dr_Tara_J_Palmaier removed?
I would like to see BDN publish the names of the lawyers who will sit on the disciplinary panel in order to see who will actually be deciding Kellett’s fate and to see if the prosecutors quoted in this article are now publicly attempting to intimidate or pressure those lawyers on the panel to let Kellett off the hook for her crimes.
All the names of disciplinary panel members need to be published for public disclosure and BDN needs to follow this story of corruption.
Hello MothersOpinion,
You may read my comment, which was removed by Mr Will Davis here:
http://www.avoiceformen.com/updates/censorship-alive-and-well-at-bangor-daily-news/
Her comment was removed because she said women who abuse power should be held accountable, just like men who abuse power are held accountable. Saying this goes against the ethical code of the Bangor Daily News.
I suspect that the anti-female vitriol now accepted and encouraged by Republicans has been contributing to the demonizing of this female assistant DA. Their aim is that rape should be taken lightly, and men should be able to do as they please. That includes slandering and sliming Kellett for doing her job.
LizDavies the illegal activities going on in the Hancock County DA’s office have nothing to do with Republicans or Democrats and started LONG BEFORE any of the media blurbs you are choosing to spout in support of Ms. Kellet. The DA’s office in Hancock County was run by a Republican when Ms. Kellet was hired and was a corrupt then as it is now with a Democrat in that office. This is not a matter of Republican vs. Democrat this is a matter of legal vs illegal, competant attorneys vs incompetant attorneys. OH Wait, competant attorneys stay in private practice because they can actually make money legally.
Good show. Lib-tards always like to try and blame stuff like this on the honest working class folks. Go buy your pall malls with your EBT card and shut up LizDavies, we heard the truth and we ain’t buying that cow…
More anti-female slander. I work 40 to 50 hour weeks.
LizDavies,
You can work 100 hrs a week or twenty minutes a year or anything in between.
How does this information, in any way shape or form, make the slightest difference to the events that have transpired in Maine regarding this case? It seems that your timetable, like anybody’s not directly associated with this case, would be similar in it’s complete lack of impact with the events in Maine being discussed on this blog.
The fact you have gone to the effort to write that is quite odd. An expansion on your assertion on this short post would be appreciated. Thank you.
Respectfully.
Eff Doff.
I was responding to an individual who assumed that I am unemployed and use an EBT card. It seems that people who are quick to slander woman are quick to make assumptions of all kinds.
It’s interesting to learn that you are “directly associated with this case.”
LizDavies,
I never mentioned I was involved in the case nor implied it in anyway.
The fact you have suggested I did is intellectually dishonest.
Respectfully.
Eff Doff.
Since you referred to me disparagingly as “not directly associated with this case,” and therefore supposedly disqualified from having and expressing opinions about it, I naturally deduced that, since you offer opinions, you are surely “directly associated with this case.” I accept your denial.
LizDavies,
I said this:
“It seems that your timetable, [like anybody’s] not directly associated with this case, would be similar in it’s complete lack of impact with the events in Maine being discussed on this blog.”
Brackets added now to highlight reference to the issues being discussed, as in right now being discussed, and being directed at everybody – myself included.
With your reply to that you have been dishonest again and here’s how:
You have asserted I have:
1/ Singled you (LizDavies) out. – You dishonestly ignored the [like anybody’s] section.
2/ Expanded on this to suggest that I implied that you (LizDavies) are “disqualified from having and expressing opinions about it”. – You dishonestly ‘hint’ I am singling you (LizDavies) out of discussion. You know I did no such thing.
3/ This comment you made is a lie also: – “I naturally deduced that, since you offer opinions, you are surely “directly associated with this case.” and deserves no further supporting that implication as it is self evident.
4/ You finish with: “I accept your denial.” Which is, by it’s baiting nature and shaming tactic intellectually dishonest.
LizDavies:
You cannot bait, derail, refocus, annoy or shame me. I am well rehearsed with those who who tamper with the truth just as you have done here.
Respectfully.
Eff Doff.
Who cares how long you work?
Shouldn’t you care more about the facts of the case, or would that be too much to ask?
Let me guess you work in the D.A.’s office and this is part of your job, you know making inflammatory statements on articles when a co-worker is exposed for misandry.
Perhaps you might think about going back to school or something, you clearly did learn much the first time around.
@LizDavies:disqus:
“I suspect that the anti-female vitriol now accepted and encouraged by Republicans has been contributing to the demonizing of this female assistant DA.”
I’d say she took pretty good care of that herself.
How much were you paid to write that? Are you ignorant or lying?
Yet more anti-female slander.
Wow, that was pathetic. btw, I AM female, but I have no “gender” loyalty to the likes of Kellett. Female criminals are criminals. Period.
HELLO!!!!!! This is not a MALE FEMALE, REPUBLICAN DEMOCRAT issue this is a legal vs illegal issue. You need to seek some counseling for your hatred of the male race. You do realize that without one of them you would not be here. I get from your posts that you were wronged by some man somewhere but not ALL men are cut from the same cloth. Focus on the issues and not your hate and your life will be much happier.
“The male race”?! LOL.
Um, Liz, dear? How many comments have you made? And not a substantive thought in the entire bunch. You’re out of your league, Cupcake.
May I offer you the First Rule of Holes? “Stop digging.”
LizDavies,
You have been dishonest again and here’s how:
A comment was made and it’s intention and message clear, however an incorrect usage of the word “race” was used. You chose not to address the information relevant in his post, but attempted to bring attention to the error itself. An error of irrelevance that had no impact to his message. His intention, or the meaning he added to the discourse here.
You tried to shame the author by that mistake made by him. This is intellectually untruthful of you to do so.
This is a common ploy used by those that peddle faulty arguing, or dishonest arguing in your case here. I will explain this further.
You have focused on the process of communication itself and not the meaning given. (The meaning you understood)
This indicates the following with singular cause or combinations of:
1/ Genuine ignorance of honest debating skills.
2/ Genuine cognitive diminishment.
3/ A disturbed mind (anger, distrust, unfounded belligerence or personality disorder)
Either or, it also indicates without any doubt the well of relevant information you may have is totally dried.
Please indicate here I am wrong with a reply from you that tells otherwise.
Respectfully.
Eff Doff.
P.S.
Your silence with my above dissection of your earlier dabbling with untruthfulness has I see been unattended by you. I am starting to realise all the more that your presence here is motivated not by wanting to have honest debate, but is because you ‘blew it’ with unsubstantiated soundbites of hostility and are now scrabbling to regain dry land.
Typical response from a woman who thinks that other women, especially in positions of power, should be able to abuse men at will and never be made accountable for their actions.
And please, stop insulting our intelligence by claiming that rape is not taken seriously or that men can do what they want with women. Too many women lie about rape and too many in the legal/prosecution/law enforcement profession, use false allegations of rape to stitch up people they have no real evidence against, which is what we see happening here.
If you have nothing of any real substance to state, please refrain from speaking. Thankyou!
Even more anti-female slander.
Actually, it’s “LizDavies slander”. You don’t represent all women, so get over yourself…and learn a new line, will you? Show that you can do more than cut and paste…
Oh, wait, let me: “More anti-female slander”…
LizDavies,
Stop lying deary your radical feminist colors are showing.
It’s just the internet. Grow a thicker skin.
that is what is great about the internet you can express your self
HAHAHAHA, the Grand Jury process.. you have got to be kidding me. I would like to see some clear statistics in Hancock County in the past 20 years that show the number of cases turned down by the Grand Jury. How about reporting that BDN. Oh wait, I bet there were so few it would look skewed because it is.
Grand Juries by their design are biased. Remember that the Grand Jury only gets to hear the prosecution’s case with no one there to question their facts (other than the Jury themselves). If you can’t get a case by the Grand Jury, you certainly won’t get it past a Trial Jury. Good or bad, that is how it is supposed to be. Your statistics would be the same if you looked at any one of the 16 counties in Maine.
ya and how many cases she prosacuted were here friends.of here and her father. she a man heater to start.
thats what happens when you have a man heater that lets the job go to her head.and how mant cases she did was here friends of her or her father .and her doss is the same way covering up for her friend..she should no even have that job.why dont you think the former D.A got out when he did.he was as corruptas the whole office.
I recall the D.A. was brought up on sexual harassment charges and everything was dismissed because he said the banter in his office was endearment terms….or something to that effect. I also know the person who filed the charges and I can honestly say I do not believe she would do so without truth behind it. I personally had to deal with the D.A. and refused to talk due to the fact his office guy bought drugs from my ex. and I knew this for a fact. My ex also knew who was going to get indited and secretly indited by the grand jury. Oh yes, that is a life I was more than glad to get away from.
The usual anti-female slander.
Shaming Language:
Code Red.
misandry much LizDavies.
No worries society is waking up to your brand of lies
I checked out your website. It’s full of vicious verbal attacks on females. Not persuasive, just nasty.
ITS TIM THAT THE C.L.U. GOT IN TO THE ACT .CILVIL RIGHTS ARE QUESTION.OF HER AND HER BOSS COVER UP TRYING TO BRUSH IT UNDER THE RUG. THAT WHATS HAPPEND WHEN A WOMAN IS PUT IN CHARGE.
Pardon me, but why was my last comment flagged for review? It did not violate your policy guidelines.
Because the whole point of this article is to take a perpetrator, Kellett, and paint her as a victim. Your comment was a dagger straight in the heart of that nasty little bit of yellow journalism on behalf of the good old boys and girls running the show in Maine.
Dr_Tara_J_Palmatier,
Some posts are “more equal than others” and yours was shunted downwards on the list importance.
I’m regretfully letting you know that if you are to have your comments remain on this blog it’s needed in place that your wording is not one of a ‘feather ruffling’ nature.
Feelings can trump truth in sensitive discourse it seems. However, editorial tampering can instigate many to protest and have the truth returning to nag as the screaming wheel.
Respectfully yours.
Eff Doff
Snicker
Hmm, sounds like you should mind your p’s and q’s in Hancock county. You should anyway but this lady is something else. I am going to end the comment there as I occasionally have to travel through Hancock county and don’t need any trumped up charges pressed against me…
“Cavanaugh is not accused of any misconduct in the case.”
But according to this article Cavanaugh engaged in misconduct
http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/government-tyranny/maine-raises-the-bar-on-corruption/
“In the middle of the 2nd trial the judge did not allow Ligia Filler to be confronted on cross examination with her handwritten list of plans and shocking admissions in her letters. With the jury kept out of the courtroom, Ligia Filler admitted she wrote a list in Spanish detailing steps she was planning to take in April 2007 prior to making claims of assault against her husband. As a result of new evidence of her perjury, Vladek Filler was threatened by prosecution with arrest and seizure of all defense documents and exhibits. Prosecution set out to obtain a warrant to seize defense’s trial records during the trial….The retrial of Vladek Filler was reduced to the State telling the jury not to acquit due to absence of evidence but instead “imagine” evidence and emotions to convict him.”
Free Vladek Filler
Unusual criticism? Kellett is being targeted?
I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of citizens under the radar for too long. Now, with the Internet, these individuals can finally be exposed.
Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct. Fortunately, the Ellsworth DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.
Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist Kellett. Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE. Big difference.
Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past, present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny. This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
To Mr Trotter, and the editorial staff at BDN, Dr. Palmatier’s expressed opinion closely matches my own, which, before it was deleted from this comment thread read as follows:
Unusual criticism? Kellett is being targeted?I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of citizens under the radar for too long.
Now, with the Internet, these individuals can finally be exposed.Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct.
Fortunately, the Ellsworth DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist Kellett. Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE. Big difference.Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past, present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny.
This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
Best Regards
JtO
If you believe that Kellett is being targeted than try to be prosecuted by her. Anyone in any public trusted position needs to be watched and accountable for their actions.
The same goes for Mainstream reporters, if your in a position of trust you need to live up to that expectation. Not to be following your own agenda or philosophy.
If any individual whom is breaking any rules of their occupation and expectations of being fair and following justice instead of upping their numbers whether its with convictions or ratings, needs to be held accountable and removed from their position of power.
Doctors, jugdes, lawyers, politicians, and reporters really should watch what they are saying and doing because you are in positions of trust and that makes you accountable.
Is Mr. Trotter a journalist or a spin-doctor in the employ of the Hancock DA’s office?
I am floored by this article given just how much information is readily available to anyone with access to google and 20 spare minutes.
The audio files of Mrs. Ligia Filler not upset, not crying but, raging and making death threats in the presence of a police officer (a threat to cut Mr. Filler into tiny pieces with the aid of her relatives and how much “fun” she would have doing it) is readily available along with Mrs. Filler being coached on how to “look more like a victim”.
I have no doubt that the Filler home was abusive. But, the abuser still walks free and the victim is still being further abused by the rabid, man-hating DA and assistant DA of Hancock.
Worse, Mary Kellett saw nothing wrong with using illegal means to imprison an innocent man because, he is a man. A prosecutor engaging in illegal activities like this should be automatically suspended pending investigation and disbarred if the allegations are proven true.
Instead, her office seems to want “the benefit of the doubt”, a courtesy (and legal obligation) they are quite unwilling to extend to any man.
She is being held ACCOUNTABLE for her actions by the online community nothing more nothing less…
Public officials who abuse what very few rights men do have left need to be put into the spotlight for all to see…..
Unusual criticism?
Kellett is being targeted?
I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of citizens under the radar for too long.
Now, with the Internet, these individuals can finally be exposed.
Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct.
Fortunately, the Ellsworth DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist Kellett.
Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE. Big difference.
Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past, present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny. This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
Unusual criticism? Perhaps that’s the problem, criticism of such egregious malfeasance in office needs to become the norm rather than the exception — and perhaps it would be if reporters like yourself would start doing their jobs.
Unusual criticism? Kellett is being targeted?I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of citizens under the radar for too long. Now, with the Internet, these individuals can finally be exposed.Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct. Fortunately, the Ellsworth DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist Kellett. Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE. Big difference.Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past, present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny. This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
For Dr. T
“Vladek Filler, a former rape defendant and Gouldsboro resident”
Former rape defendant? so proven innocent?? correct? and irrelevant….
This disgusting introduction of the man filing the claim against the prosecutor who filed that rape charge in the first place tells everyone with half a brain about the bias in this article….
Come on pick up the speed or your misandry will be pointed out before it has the desired effect….
Yep. if he had been a member of the club, he would have been identified as “a man cleared of rape charges,” or “a man acquitted of rape charges,” but he has upset them up there in Ellsworth, so he is “a former rape defendant and Gouldsboro resident”….
i will just hope for the day where its “Vladek Filler, a Gouldsboro resident” but hey media isnt know for truth…..
I find it very interesting that the same traits radical feminists adopt when retreating into defense mode after their bad or illegal behaviour has been outed, are also adopted by the criminal element that hides in the judiciary, legal fraternity, police depts and govt enforcement bodies, including in this case, a district attorney’s office.
Another thing I find unbelievable, is that an innocent man who has been terrorised by this abusive assistant DA, is still languishing in darkness.
How can this be, when his abuser and persecutor, is now under question of serious misconduct?
I guess if Mr. Filler was actually Mrs. Filler, then he/she would be free to live out his/her life without being targetted any longer.
Too long have men been unfairly targetted by seething man hating feminists who have found their way into the justice and law enforcement system.
It’s time to clear these depts of all those who operate in their positions with criminal intent, starting with Ms. Kellet.
Disbar this woman immediately and Free Vladek Filler!
Unusual criticism? Kellett is being targeted?
I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new
norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law
enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights
of
citizens under the radar for too long. Now, with the Internet, these
individuals can finally be exposed.
Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your
DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this
article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory
serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have
been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct. Fortunately, the Ellsworth
DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.
Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler
is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist
Kellett. Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE.
Big difference.
Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her
corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past,
present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny.
This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and
Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and
sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the
perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
Unusual criticism? Kellett is being targeted?
I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of citizens under the radar for too long. Now, with the Internet, these individuals can finally be exposed.
Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct. Fortunately, the Ellsworth DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.
Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist Kellett. Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE. Big difference.
Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past, present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny. This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
Echoing the sentiments of Dr. Tara J. Palmatier:
“Unusual criticism? Kellett is being targeted?I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of citizens under the radar for too long. Now, with the Internet, these individuals can finally be exposed.Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct. Fortunately, the Ellsworth DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist Kellett. Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE. Big difference.Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past, present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny. This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.”
Kellett faces disbarment because of her abuse of power and illegal conduct. She has a long track record of assisting women who strategically make false allegations to gain an advantage during divorce. Her office should not be in the business of using false accusations as an intimidation tactic to obtain favorable outcomes in family court. She should have been disbarred long ago.
this should be taken alot further with all men who divorced while under her thumb of abuse asking for a new divorce hearing based on her abuses of them
^^this should cause enuf of a penalty to the prosecutors office that they wont let it happen again..
Unusual criticism? Kellett is being targeted?
I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of citizens under the radar for too long. Now, with the Internet, these individuals can finally be exposed.
Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct. Fortunately, the Ellsworth DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.
Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist Kellett. Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE. Big difference.
Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past, present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny. This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
I can’t understand why Dr. Palmatier’s comments have been censored. I read them before they were summarily removed for “review,” and found them to be right on.
Furthermore, I wholeheartedly believe that but for the “hyperboil rhetoric” of both ADA Kellet and Cavanuagh, Vladek Filler would have been found innocent of all the charges against him instead of guilty of one (misdemeanor) of seven charges. Vladek is a kind, decent man. He (and his children) should not have to any suffer further abuse from a system that is meant to protect victims and hold abusers accountable.
You should be ashamed for yourself Mr. Trotter.
Unusual criticism?
Kellett is being targeted?I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of citizens under the radar for too long.
Now, with the Internet, these individuals can finally be exposed.Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct.
Fortunately, the Ellsworth DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist Kellett.
Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE. Big difference.Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past, present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny. This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
Unusual criticism? Kellett is being targeted?
I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of citizens under the radar for too long. Now, with the Internet, these individuals can finally be exposed.
Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct. Fortunately, the Ellsworth DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.
Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist Kellett. Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE. Big difference.
Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past, present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny. This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
Unusual? Sure it does not happen very often, that the one of the untouchables is held responsibble for anything.
Do these prosecutors say, they are above the law, therefore should not be criticised, no matter what they do???
Wake up, people like Mary Kellett are just humans, not saints. They also make mistakes and sometimes evil, nasty things. The other prosecutors’ opinions are irrelevant in this case.
Zoltán Oláh,
A saint she is not and for that matter who is? I think it’s the general thinking here that she isn’t either.
It doesn’t matter one iota if “these prosecutors say, they are above the law, therefore should not be criticised, no matter what they do” or not. The fact remains this:
In Maine there is an unusual amount of corruption and that activity is being addressed here and many other places in ink print, radio and blogs. This thread is just one more and rightly so don’t you think?
If we were to temper, or abbreviate discourse on injustice where we find it, because the opinions of other prosecutors are “irrelevant” as you say, then I for one would be disturbed by that reaction.
Regardless of the commonality of such corruption or the personalities or ‘goodness’ of the players involved, it is crucial we voice our objections on any platform available.
In this case right here on this blog.
Respectfully yours.
Eff Doff
Unusual criticism? Kellett is being targeted?
I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of citizens under the radar for too long. Now, with the Internet, these individuals can finally be exposed.
Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct. Fortunately, the Ellsworth DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.
Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist Kellett. Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE. Big difference.
Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past, present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny. This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
Unusual criticism? Kellett is being targeted?
I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new
norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law
enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of
citizens under the radar for too long. Now, with the Internet, these
individuals can finally be exposed.
Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your
DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this
article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory
serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have
been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct. Fortunately, the Ellsworth
DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.
Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler
is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist
Kellett. Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE.
Big difference.
Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her
corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past,
present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny.
This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and
Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and
sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the
perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
Unusual criticism? Kellett is being targeted?
I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new
norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law
enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of
citizens under the radar for too long. Now, with the Internet, these
individuals can finally be exposed.
Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your
DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this
article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory
serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have
been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct. Fortunately, the Ellsworth
DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.
Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler
is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist
Kellett. Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE.
Big difference.
Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her
corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past,
present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny.
This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and
Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and
sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the
perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
Unusual criticism? Kellett is being targeted?
I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new
norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law
enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of
citizens under the radar for too long. Now, with the Internet, these
individuals can finally be exposed.
Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your
DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this
article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory
serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have
been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct. Fortunately, the Ellsworth
DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.
Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler
is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist
Kellett. Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE.
Big difference.
Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her
corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past,
present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny.
This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and
Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and
sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the
perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
One suspects that Dr. Palmatier’s comment has been removed because of the moniker attached to her name. Perhaps BND feels her comments will have more sway because of it. In this case they would be right as the multitude of “echo” commentary and upvotes will attest.
“According to the ethical code of the Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar, prosecutors are held to a higher standard because they represent the power of the State. Compared to Michael Nifong, prosecutor in the infamous Duke lacrosse scandal, Mary Kellett engaged in more egregious forms of evidentiary suppression and misrepresentation. For these reasons, she must be disbarred.”
http://www.saveservices.org/2012/08/pr-prosecutorial-misconduct-save-expresses-concern-over-delays-in-resolving-charges-against-ada-mary-kellett/
What was wrong with this comment BND?
Why did you put it under review did it hit too close to the truth? Isn’t it about time Ms Kellett’s actions and prosecutions were displayed for public scrutiny or is BND advocating for closed courts?
I hope exposing corrupt public officials becomes the new norm on the Internet. Corrupt judges, public officials and law enforcement have been able to get away with violating the rights of citizens under the radar for too long. Now, with the Internet, these individuals can finally be exposed.
Welcome to the court of public opinion, Ms Kellet. Your DA cronies can’t cover for you here. Well, they tried to in this article, albeit, rather clumsily. Although, about a year ago, if memory serves, Kellett tried to have a gag order imposed on websites that have been reporting her prosecutorial misconduct. Fortunately, the Ellsworth DA office does not have jurisdiction over the Internet.
Furthermore, Kellett is not being “targeted.” Mr Filler is the one who has been targeted by the criminal, bigoted and sexist Kellett. Kellett is not being targeted; she is being held ACCOUNTABLE. Big difference.
Perhaps Kellett’s DA cronies who are supporting her corrupt and criminal behavior are worried that their possible past, present and future misdeeds will come under similar public scrutiny. This is a classic case of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender), which is a common tactic used by bullies, abusers and sociopaths when their crimes and abuses are exposed. Kellett is the perpetrator in this travesty, not the victim.
Yes welcome to exposing your travesties of justice Ms Kellett a place where you can’t bury or jail everybody for being innocent.