Friday, March 18, 2016

How To Collect $5 Million From The Archdiocese Of Philadelphia

Ready For Your Close-Up Mr. Gallagher?
By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

He shaved his wispy beard.

He wore a suit and tie.

And he was pretty damn forgetful.

During a deposition in his civil case against the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, as first disclosed on newsweek.com, Daniel Gallagher, AKA Billy Doe, the amazingly rape-prone altar boy, claimed he couldn't remember more than 130 times.

Gallagher's two full days of depositions were conducted on May 30, 2014, and June 20, 2014. The event was attended by a dozen lawyers and a videographer. The official transcript ran 572 pages, and, thanks to a deal between the archdiocese and Billy's lawyers, it was supposed to remain secret. The transcript has "Confidential" stamped on the top of every page.

One witness at the confidential deposition said it was obvious to everybody in the room that Gallagher was "a professional liar." Another witness went a step further, describing the plaintiff as "a fucking liar." But it didn't hurt Gallagher on his way to the bank. Philadelphia Archbishop Charles J. Chaput settled the case last August, a month before the Pope came to town, by paying Gallagher $5 million. Oh, they didn't want that disclosed either.

That's quite a payday for a guy who testified that he makes $11 an hour working for his grandfather's landscaping business down in Florida. At his deposition, Gallagher stated he put in "anywhere from 50 to 60 hours a week" working for Grandpop, earning "between 500 and $600 a week," or $20,000 a year.

Nick Centrella: Confronted Con Man
The deposition began with Nick Centrella, the lawyer for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, asking the questions.

Centrella asked Gallagher if he recalled reading an article by this writer that discussed Gallagher's medical records and the many false claims that Gallagher had made over the years to his many doctors and drug counselors about allegations of sex abuse.

"Yes, I do," Gallagher said.

"And do you remember seeing in there that -- at least he claimed that your medical records said that you had told medical providers that you had been abused by a friend at one point, a neighbor at one point," Centrella asked.

"I don't remember everything he wrote," Gallagher testified. "I don't try to pay attention to what he writes."

"Ok," Centrella said. "Regardless of when you knew it, is it -- would you agree with me that -- have you ever tried to contact him and say it's inaccurate?"

"No," Gallagher said.

There you have it folks, a personal endorsement from Danny Gallagher. I've written many stories about Gallagher/Billy Doe over the years. And not once has he or his lawyers ever called or written, to ask for a correction.

Although they did, however, send over a subpoena, trying to figure out where all those confidential records came from. But that little fishing expedition didn't go anywhere, thanks to Pennsylvania's Shield Law.

At his deposition, as first disclosed in Newsweek, Gallagher stated he didn't remember claiming he'd been: sexually abused by a friend at 6; sexually abused by a neighbor at 6; sexually abused by a teacher at age 7; sexually molested at 6 or 8 by an unknown assailant; and sexually abused at 9 by a 14-year-old boy.

"Checkbook Charlie" Chaput: Won't Talk About Secret $5 Million Payoff
He did admit, however, under oath, that all of those previous accusations recorded by his doctors and drug counselors on medical records subpoenaed from some 28 different hospitals, drug clinics and doctors' offices weren't true, and never happened.

"Is it fair to say you never recall telling somebody that you were abused by a  friend, correct?" Centrella asked.

"Right," Gallagher said.

"All right. So you -- you don't remember ever saying that, do you?"

"No," Gallagher said.

"However, if we see such things in your medical records, and this is one example of them, do you have any explanation for how those things wound up in your medical records?"

"They could have written it down wrong," Gallagher replied. "I don't know . . ."

"Do you know if you told them this?"

"I honestly don't remember," Gallagher said.

"Ok, were you were you ever sexually assaulted by a friend?"

"No," Gallagher said.

". . . OK, Do you remember ever telling anybody that you were assaulted at the age of 9 by someone who was 14 years old?"

"No," Gallagher said.

"Ok, did that ever happen?"

"No, it did not," Gallagher said.

"And again, you don't remember ever specifically lying to Northeast Treatment Center about your manner of abuse, do you?" Centrella asked.

"Not that I can remember," Gallagher said. "Not that I can recall. At that point in my life, I was high on drugs."

Gallagher also couldn't remember giving a lengthy statement to Louise Hagner, a social worker for the archdiocese, where he claimed he was: anally raped in the church sacristy for five hours by Father Engelhardt; knocked unconscious by Father Avery; tied up naked by Father Avery with altar sashes; and forced by Father Avery to suck blood off the priest's penis.
Unscrupulous DA: Set Billy Up For A Big Pay Day

"Have you ever met Miss Hagner?" Centrella asked.

"Not that I can recall, no," Gallagher said.

At his deposition, Gallagher stated he also couldn't remember what he told the cops.

"In the notes of Detective [Drew] Snyder, he records that 'The fourth encounter . . occurs around July,' " Centrella said, reading from the records. " 'Danny is serving a funeral mass with Father [Edward] Avery.' Do you recall ever telling any detectives, Detective Snyder in particular, at the District Attorney's office . .. that one of the encounters with Father Avery was after a funeral Mass?"

The problem here was that the church kept a register of funeral Masses. And the register showed that during the year Gallagher claimed to have been raped as a 10-year-old fifth grader at St. Jerome's after a funeral Mass, that during that entire year, Avery had never officiated at a funeral Mass.

"I might have," Gallagher said. " I can't say for sure. I don't really know."

"Ok," Centrella said, "Well, was it at a funeral mass?"

"No, it was not," Gallagher said.

"Was there any point in time at which you thought it was a funeral Mass?"

"I can't really be sure," Gallagher said. "I don't know."

At his deposition, Gallagher was asked about a bunch of other stories that he told his doctors and drug counselors.

Thomas Hurd, a lawyer who represented the estate of the late Father Charles Engelhardt, asked Gallager about a line on a mental status exam that stated Gallagher's weight as 148 pounds.

"There is a notation here in the chart that he [Gallagher] had weighed 220 pounds," Hurd said. Then he asked disbelievingly, "Did you ever weigh 220 pounds?"

"I don't know if I ever got that high up," Gallagher replied. "But when I was in jail, I did gain a lot of weight, and I lost it as soon as I came out."

"Let's go down to the social history," Hurd said. "It says, 'He did work for three-and-a-half years as a paramedic with the private ambulance company.' Is that true?"

"Not entirely, no," Gallagher said.

"Well, you never were a paramedic, right?"

"No," Gallagher said.

"And you never worked for any ambulance company for more than a couple months, is that correct?"

The $5 Million Altar Boy
"That is correct," Gallagher said.

In the medical records of another clinic, it stated, "Patient was a paramedic and professional surfer before having to stop working due to addiction."

"Did you give them that history," Hurd asked.

"I might have," Gallagher said. "I don't really remember."

Gallagher told the lawyer he was an EMT.

"Ok," Hurd said. "You didn't tell them you were a paramedic, did you?"

"Not that I remember, no."

Did you tell them you were a professional surfer?"

"Not that I remember."

"Were you a professional surfer?"

Gallagher responded by claiming that he was sponsored as a professional surfer by some local surf shops down at the Jersey shore "when I was younger," but surprisingly, he couldn't remember the names of any of those surf shops.

"Did you ever earn any income as a surfer?"

"Not really, no."

"Did you have to stop surfing because of your addiction?"

"I -- hmm, honestly, I really don't know," Gallagher said. "My addiction kind of put a damper on my surfing."

"Why?"

"Because I was too busy wanting to get high rather than surf."

During his deposition with Hurd, when he wasn't being forgetful, Gallagher stubbornly stuck to his script.

"Were you molested at age 6 or 8?" Hurd asked, reading from Gallagher's medical records from Eagleville Hospital.

"No," I was not," Gallagher said. "I was molested at ages 10 and 11. One was by your client."

"Turn to the next page," Hurd said. " 'Patient does have a past history of sexual abuse by a neighbor and has not addressed the issue.' Did you tell them that?"

"Not that I remember, no," Gallagher said.

"Were you sexually abused by a neighbor?"

"No, I was not," Gallagher said. "I was sexually abused by your client, Father Avery, and Mr. Shero."

At his 2014 deposition, Gallagher was also asked about whether he had ever taken a polygraph test before.  It was something that his lawyer would claim a year later in a 2015 interview with the Legal Intelligencer, a polygraph test that Gallagher supposedly passed, according to his lawyer, with "flying colors."

"Mr. Gallagher, have you ever taken a lie detector test about your allegations?" Hurd asked.

"No," Gallagher replied.

"Have you ever been asked to take one?"

"No, I have not," Gallagher said.

So, listen up, all of you convicts out there sitting in jail. It doesn't matter if you've got a long rap sheet for drug dealing and/or any other crimes. Here's how to get out of jail and make millions of dollars.

See No Evil: Editorial Writers Here Saw 'Spotlight' Too Many Times
Especially if the state legislature listens to the wisdom of The Philadelphia Inquirer's editorial page, and does away with the statute of limitations for sex abuse victims.

Tell your lawyer you just remembered you were raped by a Catholic priest a couple of decades ago. Or better yet, you were raped by a bunch of Catholic priests.

As Danny Gallagher has proven, it really doesn't matter how ridiculous your story is. Or whether you get all your facts straight the first, second, third or even fourth time around.

When it comes to putting Catholic priests in jail, our District Attorney, Seth Williams, has proven he will run with any old crazy story. And our archbishop, Checkbook Charlie, is ready to roll over too, even if it means throwing his own guys under the bus.

Once you hoist the flag of victimhood, the lunatics from SNAP will rally behind you. On this blog, even though they've never met you, and you may be a total freaking liar, goofballs like Dennis Ecker and Jim Robertson will back you up in the comments section with plenty of support. The Philadelphia Inquirer, a Pulitzer Prize winning newspaper, can also be counted on to write news stories and editorials on your behalf, without ever questioning your veracity.

Just think. Instead of being a junkie criminal loser, you too, can become a rich and famous victim like Danny Gallagher.

And if you get as far as a deposition in your civil case, just remember what to say whenever one of those smart-ass defense lawyers tries to trip you up on your way to the bank.

Be like Danny:

"I don't remember."

"I really don't remember."

"I honestly don't remember."

Ralph Cipriano can be reached at ralph@bigtrial.net.

34 comments:

  1. Well, hold up, don't these seekers of $5 million also need a few other things? Like don't they need a Monsignor Lynn admitting that he made a list of 35 priests who molested children in Philadelphia and admitting that he did absolutely nothing about them and didn't call police or social services or anyone about these child molesters he supervised and moved around to hide them? Isn't that reason enough for Chaput to have to write that $5 million check?

    Don't these seekers of $5 million need a scenario like Avery admitting he molested them and taking a plea deal and then un-admitting that he molested them on the witness stand of someone else's trial?

    Don't these seekers of $5 million need some kind of scenario where a teacher lives in a house where children threw stones at him to drive him out of the neighborhood and then when police came to arrest him he attempts suicide leaving a note that does NOT claim he is innocent of this molesting?

    Don't these seekers of $5 million need a scenario of priests bringing boys to their rooms when they're constantly warned by their superiors to stop doing that and bringing boys into their beds and showing them pornography and spooning them, whatever that is, when they're supposed to be celibate priests and men of God?

    C'mon, Ralph, tell the whole story. What does it take to get a $5 million check from Chaput? It takes a village.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sarah - i thought you knew your facts. Who are you referring to with Avery admitting he molested them? Who is them?

      If you are talking Danny Gallagher that is singular. And avery never admitted to abusing danny because he was never asked the question when the plea deal was accepted in court. So in the second trail how could he recant something he never admitted to in the first place?

      Please enlighten me, you have brought such great knowledge to the conversation these last few years.

      Delete
    2. A plea deal is an admission of guilt. Are you saying that Avery thought he was taking a plea deal for some other crime?

      Delete
  2. If I may Anonymous if you go to TheMediaReport.com site (side kick of Bigtrial)dated January 17, 2013 I quote to you what Dave Pierre had written "Edward Avery had pleaded guilty to sexually violating a 10 year old boy:. That boy was Billy Doe. You can also go to philly.com dated January 19, 2013 and read Joe Slobodzian article and his quotes "Avery began serving a sentence of 2 1/2 to 5 years after pleading guilty to sexually molesting a 10 year old altar boy from the northeast." CBS Philly writes A former priest who admitted sexually assaulting a 5th grade boy" Once again that 5th grade boy was Billy Doe.

    So Sarah TX is very correct. Edward Avery admitted to raping Billy Doe.

    ReplyDelete
  3. http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Ex-Philly-Priest-Pleads-Guilty-to-Sex-Abuse-Charges-143853926.html

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sorry, Denny, I was there for all of it. As I have previously reported, Avery was never asked whether he actually did the deed. That's because his lawyer had already warned the prosecutors that if they asked if he did it, he would have told them he not only didn't rape Billy, but he never met Billy or even laid eyes on him.

    http://www.bigtrial.net/2013/02/billy-does-junkie-hustle.html

    Sorry, but nobody has covered the archdiocese sex abuse trials at the depth that Big Trial has. Another example of Ecker believing what he wants to believe.

    ReplyDelete
  5. So are you saying all these other major news outlets and reporters are LYING ?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oh wait a minute. What you are saying the judge did not ask him if he abused Billy ? Avery came forward and admitted he raped Billy Doe of his own volition. That's even worse.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Read the story I wrote. At his plea bargain, neither the judge nor the prosecutors asked whether he did it.

    Nobody else in the media talked to his lawyer and got those details. Again, you are seeing what you want to see and believing what you want to believe. Shallow reporting works for you. In-depth reporting presents a problem, especially when it goes against your preconceived notions.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The transcript backs up the defense lawyer's story.

    Pardon my french, but wake the fuck up.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I have to ask you this. What do YOU hope to succeed in trashing Billy. Every blog you have written on this case has gone nowhere. Your attempt to bad mouth judges, juries, DA's, ADA's has gone nowhere. Those 20 factual errors you bring up are ignored. Not one defense attorney has attempted to use them in freeing their client, and your Newsweek articles have failed too. I showed my therapist part of the latest article to her regarding the report by this Harvard doc and his comments. She is willing to challenge him regarding his report that drug addiction and alcohol abuse plays no part in victims who have been sexually abused. Our own government believes that also by printing out signs and symptoms for those who have been sexually abused. As she has mentioned though if you have organizations such as the catholic church who has big pockets you can buy someone to say anything you like.

    How many more times must you hear the word DENIED when it comes to parole or appeals to those convicted ?

    This one is over.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dennis,
      Yes, I agree. It is over. Will this blog ever stop beating this dead horse? It's been going on and on, and I believe it will continue to do so forever. Is there nothing else to talk about re: Clergy sexual abuse? Does it only exist in this one instance? That's what this blog seems to indicate. If we move on, maybe many other victims can be helped by discussing the problem. I just don't see where saying over and over that Danny is a liar helps, do you?

      Delete
    2. It's not over if the people in jail keep filing appeals and the courts keep ordering retrials.

      It's not over when the Catholics of Philadelphia don't know their archbishop just gave away $5 million of their money to a con man.

      It's not over when confidential documents that both the archdiocese and Billy's lawyers would like to remain secret forever are obtained and their contents can be divulged.

      It's called news. If you don't want to read any more about it, pick up the Inquirer or go to philly.com. Your sleep will not be disturbed.

      Delete
  10. Won't respond to your comment with additional vulgarity but want your readers to picture you speaking to a victims mother and she slaps you in the face and screams "SNAP OUT OF IT"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's not a victim. My job is to dig out the unpleasant facts and put them out there for public consumption. What happens after that is out of my control. But I've done my job.

      Delete
    2. James, do you actually think the Catholic Church including Chaput will answer any of your questions ? Cipriano has a better chance of getting respected and his questions answered by the DA's office. You will ask your questions here hoping for a answer by some reporter because you and other Catholics don't have the balls enough to march down to 17th street and demand that answer.You probably don't even know before Chaput writing that check for 5 million to Danny for the abuse he had to endure Chaput wrote three other checks to survivors for a undisclosed amount of money. Your asking questions now but why ? You never cared enough before to ask questions. Like why does a church have all these accusations about priests and did nothing about it ? Why did the church hide or move abusive priests ? You don't have the right to ask any questions now its to late for that. Your only right is to go to mass on Saturday night or Sunday morning dig deep into those pockets and put your hard earned money into the collection plate. So there I answered your question how the church found 5. While you had your hand in one pocket the catholic church had there hand in the other.

      Delete
  11. That is your OPINION he is not a victim. However my belief he is a victim is backed by DA's, ADA's, judges, courts, parole boards and most important a jury of the abusers peers. It would be safe to say the Archdiocese of Philadelphia shares my same belief by paying Mr. Gallagher a reported $5,000,000 without a fight for the abuse he had to endure.

    ENOUGH SAID.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Certainly on your end, enough has been said. Because you have nothing to say except I don't believe what you're saying, that doesn't prove anything.

      On my end, the evidence is stacked quite high that this guy is a liar.

      A guy who repeatedly lies about being sexually abused at 6, 7, 8, and 9, and tells a different story every time, should not get the benefit of the doubt when he says he was raped at 10 and 11.

      A 148-pound guy who lies about weighing 220 pounds, being a paramedic, and being a professional surfer should not be believed. A guy who says he can't remember what he told his doctors, drug counselors and social workers more than 130 times shouldn't be believed either.

      Any normal person can see that. But not crazed ideologues like yourself.

      Delete
  12. Why did Chaput pay 5M to a lying junkie after being told by the best lawyers not to pay? Because the Pope told him to do so. Chaput wanted to wear a Cardinal's cap and the Pope told him to pay off victims. Pope is not a streetwise Delta Force trooper and does not consider the possibility of a hustler conning the Church out of 5M that could be used to help the deserving. Instead of manning up and declining to pay off this hustler, forgetting about becoming a Cardinal , he chose to cut a check. He threw 3 priests and a teacher under the bus.

    Want to know how the church found 5 in its ledgers to pay off this junkie? Billionaire source?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Sex abuse is only a small portion of RCC crimes against humanity -- the RCC maims and murders millions of women every year with forced deadly and impoverishing breeding for pedophile priests and it commits Munchausen by Proxy medical abuse against millions in its pro-suffering "hospitals." It also supported Hitler and ran and funded Nazi Ustasha death camps in Croatia. Most priests lead double lives with secret male and female lovers and sex tourism in Catholic poverty pits like Central America and the Philippines. The RCC's mother-killing ban on contraception forced Munchausen by Proxy perp Marie Noe of Philly to smother all nine of her unwanted infants.
    --Mary

    ReplyDelete
  14. Instead of paying a "Billy Doe", 5 mil., deserving...NO. I am a grown adult, which still cannot "move-on", from my MENTAL & SEXUAL abuse by a Priest. (Harrisburg Diocese, former Priest, thank you)! Just think about it...1st, I ask, was this ✔️ really written because "The Papacy", was coming to town? Think about this, if he had written a ✔️ to Billy, for $100,000.00, told him to go away, then...justice...would be to find credible priestly sexual abuse victims...&, for the name of Jesus, 1st, & 2nd, spread this "benefit for Billy", & find 50 VALID VICTIMS, & allow the SIMPLE GROWTH of 50 victims, to not ONLY feel justice-served, but also, allow the credible victims a chance TO FINALLY FEEL HOPE & frankly, allow all those VICTIMS, TO MOVE FORWARD, By the Grace of God.
    ( btw that is a lot of $1.00 bills ) Very Sad, & very sorry I read ALL of this. BTW, Billy, smoke it up, remember, I am a VICTIM, unable to move on & Billy, you certainly did get very lucky.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anonymous 3:47

      You sound like another 'empty well', to me.

      Delete
  15. Seems to me there is only one person who is stopping you from moving forward. If I said it once I said it a thousand times the catholic church and its clergy turned us into victims it is up to us to turn ourselves into survivors.

    I do ask this question though what is more important to you getting the help you need you seem like you want or showered with a couple of dollars hoping that takes the pain away ?

    You should know that settlement Billy Doe had received is far from what abuse victims receive. $100,000.00 is far from what clergy abuse victims receive. The normal amount of what victims receive is a big fat zero and a apology saying we are so sorry this has happened to you. Am I saying it is right ? Hell no ! A number that someone I know put out there is less then 15% of clergy abuse victims ever receive any type of monetary award.

    There are hurdles that have to be jumped and laws that have to change to see that 15% increase.

    But to hold some type of animosity toward Billy Doe because the wealth he received was not thrown around is wrong.

    You want some help to receive the peace we all deserve I can help you do that. But if you feel a couple of dollars is all you need then hire an attorney.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry Ralph. You know I don't hide behind some a unknown or anonymous title.Just to let you know I authored the comment on 3/21 at 9:02. Must have hit the wrong button. Dennis Ecker

      Delete
  16. That's one thing we can't accuse you of.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Speaking of the Inquirer, its the same for anyone else the editorial page deems guilty, the Police Narcotics Offers are still guilty according to the editors even though the jury acquitted them. The Philadelphia Traffic Court Judges were acquitted but of course the Inquirer has professed they are all guilty. Too bad the Inquirer lets prosecutors write the copy.

    Influencing public opinion to drive home the fact the prosecution was not happy with the juries verdict is harmful to say the least. Without question the media portrays all politicians and anyone associated with a union as an untrustworthy scheming racketeer.

    Its amazing that with all the recent exonerations and most recently the US Supreme Court case on Ex-Chief Justice Ronald Castile , that more is not written about prosecutors that hide evidence, use jailhouse informants to say a defendant confessed for a lighter sentence for themselves, not to mention the exculpatory evidence that goes missing. Nothing is written unless its on the national stage and it cant be ignored.

    What happened to the type of journalism that was meant to show both side of an argument, not just the prosecution side. Can the media be held responsible for printing an article about a defendant, even if they do not have the entire facts of the case excepts one side, with a script handed to them by a prosecutor, if later the true facts come out and it was found the prosecutor lied. Does the media shoulder any responsibility for the defendants ruination ?

    If we bought a defective toaster and were injured by the defective toaster we have rights through the Consumer Protection Agency and we would be compensated for out loss or injury, but if a prosecutor made intentional misrepresentation to a media outlet to strengthen their case, sway public opinion and ultimately gain a fraudulent conviction, there is no recourse.

    We have more rights with almost every other federal or state agency designed to protect the public from fraud and discrimination that we do with the justice department.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In this town, the prosecution and the city's paper of record work as one united task force. Any target of a major investigation can expect a flood of leaks and prejudicial publicity. And when they get it wrong, say, in the case of the rogue cops case, and the jury completely repudiates them, they still kill you in the news columns and editorials. There seems to be no penalty for any of it, with both the prosecution and the newspaper. Hence, the task force will continue operations.

      Delete
    2. Seems we need an equal force to counter team prosecution, another newspaper that gives the defense side, exactly what you do, but on a larger scale. Lets call it " Our Voice" . Where defendants get to tell their side of their outrage or at least after the trial, relating how the prosecution erred, or what "expert witnesses" or the FBI said on the stand . There is nowhere for a defendant to share their side of the facts. Having a defense attorney does not seem to be enough to rebuke the evil empire.
      Info leaked to the press as well others prior to a raid or an indictment is common.
      Wonder if its possible, in addition to Congress working on reducing prison population and amending the much needed mandatory sentencing laws, lets create an organization that supports the defendants, prior to trail.
      P.S. Most judges in my estimation are just bobble heads, doing what the prosecution asks, sitting there waiting for the jury to do their civic duty and side with the prosecution as well.
      We need more mediation less prosecution, and juries that have been made aware of the acts of prosecutors misconduct and their misrepresentations of facts from say the Innocence Project. Have a jury watch a short video of exonerations and the reason for the exoneration, from junk science , jailhouse informants, faulty eye witnesses to "Official Misconduct" would do the trick, or stocking the jury with people that have had an unfavorable experience with a prosecutor.
      One organization bringing the Innocence Project and ever other group that works for justice under one umbrella, would be a good start, having it funded by the government would eventually stop the wasteful and needless trails that now are commonplace.


      Delete
    3. It really is a set of serious problems that have not been addressed. In the past fews years covering the courts, I have been amazed at how out of balance the system is. And how the media overwhelmingly favors one side. And how that side can leak with impunity.

      Delete
    4. The general population as no idea how justice is being manipulated, unless it happens to them. We as Americans have such a high regard for our government, not wanting to believe there could ever be a problem with the white knights of justice. No other government department has less accountability than the justice department, exposing the flaws will stop the injustice, we need to have better documented case histories on prosecutors that bend the truth.

      Still cant believe their how the press did not report that an FBI agent was caught lying to a grand jury and then again at the Traffic Court Trail, that smacks of the injustices that are carried out every day.
      There has to be censorship at the INKY, that news should have been a national scandal.
      We need a justice department to protect us from crime, not just protect themselves from fault.

      Delete
  18. Time for the sheep in Checkbook Charlie's pasture to start asking questions. Like what are you doing with our money.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Instead of "Our Voice" you can call it "I didn't do it" or I'm Innocent". Will be required reading inside the prisons.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't remember, I don't remember, I really don't remember

      then again, since nothing happened to Danny gallagher back in that sacristy, church closet and Shero's car, no truer words were spoken by the lying scumbag drug addict
      just ask his brother, James gallagher JR, ....he knows the truth about his brother Danny....


      Delete
  20. For a guy overflowing with compassion for victims, you sure have a different attitude toward prisoners.

    ReplyDelete

Thoughtful commentary welcome. Trolling, harassing, and defaming not welcome. Consistent with 47 U.S.C. 230, we have the right to delete without warning any comments we believe are obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.

 

Big Trial | Philadelphia Trial Blog Copyright © 2016 BigTrial.net

Privacy Policy: BigTrial.net does not distribute, share or sell email addresses, or any other personal information received from this website.