Loudoun County – Martha Coakley, the Massachusettes version of Sandra Glenney



Unfortunately, Sandra Glenney isn’t the only Sandra Glenney within the legal system.  It is doubtful that she is the only one in Loudoun County.  There is no individual who mirrors Sandra Glenney  more than Martha Coakley of Massachusetts.  Ms. Coakley recently failed to become Governor of Massachusetts, the citizens averted a catastrophe.  However, her notoriety stems from her involvement and handling of the Amirault case.

The Amirault case which is aptly described in an article written by Dorothy Rabinowitz was and is a travesty of justice , a travesty that Martha Coakley participated in and perpetuated .  The only evidence in the Amirault case were the statements of the children. Anyone who is a victim of false accusations is keenly aware that the only evidence presented in Court will be the statements of the child and the statements of the professionals who are hired by the State; key point being hired by the State. Ms. Rabinowitz clearly describes the genesis of the statements by the children in the Amirault case.

“The testimony had been extracted from children, cajoled and led by tireless interrogators.”

This is Sandra Glenney’s expertise , she is adept at generating the statements of the child. She knows exactly which psychologist to select in order to extract the statements from a child. It is curious  that every psychologist she selects always finds abuse, that is very high and suspicious success rate.   She like Martha Coakley is blind to the fallacy of the interview techniques used by investigators and psychologists. Glenney rejects any of the latest research on child interviewing techniques. Once Glenney believes a child abuse , nothing will change her mind; not even the truth.

They both believe absolutely absurd evidence, I am not sure about Martha Coakley but Sandra Glenney does believe in withholding evidence. She may lead Martha Coakley in this area. The evidence in cases that involve false accusations is non-existent.  The pseudo-evidence that will be presented is the testimony of the CPS investigator and the psychologist.  The testimony of a psychologist , especially a psychologist that testifies for CPS is suspect and lacks credibility.    A professional who testifies for CPS and  for Sandra Glenney has to throw their credibility to the wind to take the stand for Glenney.

The accusations and allegations that originate in a therapists office will overwhelmingly be coerced by the therapist. Most therapists are troubled  themselves and really should not be offering any advice to patients. The professionals that are employed by CPS should not be allowed to even speak with children, the same goes for the social workers as well.

To add to this Sandra Glenney should not be allowed to serve as an  Assistant County Attorney in Loudoun County. She is prone to fantastical beliefs , if she remotely believes the testimony of her chosen psychologist she is someone whose judgment must be called into question much like Martha Coakley. Glenney like Coakley presents themselves as crusaders for justice. Glenney also presents herself as a protector of children, she is not.  She is someone who is addicted to the power that her office affords her. She cannot be trusted to exercise good judgment nor can she be trusted to behave ethically in the Courtroom.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>