The Worldwide Privacy Tour — Chessy Prout’s objection to Michael Delaney’s Judicial Nomination.
Michael Delaney’s nomination will either be derailed by activists with their own credibility issues or it will proceed with serious concerns as to his own professional conduct and possible witness tampering in a criminal trial.
Before South Park’s roasting of Prince Harry & Meghan Markle in the “Worldwide Privacy Tour”
the Senate fell prey to another “World Wide Privacy Tour” — that of Chessy Prout and her family who wrote a letter to several senators demanding they deny Michael Delaney’s admittance to a life-time position as a judge for the First Circuit Court of Appeals.
Chessy Prout claimed, in her letter, that she had wanted to remain an anonymous Jane Doe in a lawsuit her family brought against St Paul’s School, Concord, New Hampshire on June 1, 2016. She claimed that Michael Delaney who was legal counsel for St. Paul’s School, had responded to the suit, demanding that she give up her Jane Doe anonymity.
Republican Senators lapped up the letter, falling hook, line and sinker into the Prout trap.
Michael Delaney’s response to the Senators grilling was lame. He was compromised — not by his duty to his client, St. Paul’s School, but by failures in his duty to his state, New Hampshire: He wouldn’t have had to defend St Paul’s School at all if, when he was an AG (2009–2013), he’d held police accountable for misconduct. Concord Police have a history of paying witnesses for a Grand Jury and the City of Concord Council which approves their budget hasn’t had an ethics meeting since 2012.
He was fully aware of the misconduct of Concord Police in the criminal trial of NH v Owen Labrie which triggered the Prouts’ civil suit against his client — a school that has become a political weapon for Congresswoman Ann Kuster & Senator Jeanne Shaheen who endorsed his nomination.
He was also equally aware of New Hampshire public officials’ and the Prouts’ use of publicity to influence the criminal trial and the lawsuit against St. Paul’s School because it was in the headlines at the time.
Michael Delaney criticized the use of publicity in his response to the Prout suit in August 2016. But instead of criticizing any public official or attorney in his own state for misconduct he pointed the finger at an out of state attorney on the Prouts’ team (who they’d met courtesy of recommendations from New Hampshire police): Steven D Silverman Esq who’d had his license to practice suspended by DC Bar for using media to influence judicial outcome in Doe v Cabrera.
Thus, Michael Delaney, found himself flailing in the wind, hoisted by his own police & victims’ advocacy petard — a candidate who’d received endorsements from victims advocates and the New Hampshire’s Chiefs of Police — torn apart, accused of witness tampering by Senators and the Prout family on their Worldwide Privacy Tour.
Chessy Prout claimed in her letter to the Senators that her father, Alexander Prout, and Amanda Grady Sexton, Director of Public Affairs for the New Hampshire Coalition Against Domestic & Sexual Violence, had alerted the criminal prosecutor, Catherine Ruffle, about witness tampering by Michael Delaney. They claimed they’d seen him talking to students who were witnesses for the State.
If Chessy’s statement is true then New Hampshire’s prosecutor, Catherine Ruffle, should have been disbarred for allowing witness tampering. If that statement is not true then Chessy Prout, Alexander Prout and Amanda Grady Sexton are liars. The Senate Judiciary Committee should ask them about this under oath. Catherine Ruffle has been demoted to Merrimack County Superior Court clerk — why? What does Michael Delaney know?
Chessy Prout’s letter should trigger a full and transparent investigation into New Hampshire v Owen Labrie & Prout/Does v St. Paul’s School.
Do members of the Senate Judiciary Committee care about integrity & independence of the courts or would they prefer to have a court dictated by unchallenged activists?
If there was witness tampering (and other records from the trial record reveal that the State and Police were also involved in witness & evidence tampering) then not only should the entire trial be overturned but the civil suit brought by the Prouts v St Paul’s School investigated for malfeasance.
Who was the “source” that leaked the Prouts’ civil suit to the Concord Monitor, NBC Today Show and Vice Media whose journalists were seeking comment from St. Paul’s school on a suit it hadn’t been served with? According to Michael Delaney’s affidavit, he had to get his copy from the Concord Monitor because the courts were closed. If he knows that the “source” is the Chair of Concord’s Public Safety Committee, Director of Public Affairs, Amanda Grady Sexton, then why didn’t he call her out? Is it because she was also on Senator Jeanne Shaheen’s re-election committee and he needed Senator Jeanne Shaheen’s endorsement for his own ambitions to become a judge?
Susan Zalkind, a journalist for Vice Media, had a particular inside track — working hand in glove with Amanda Grady Sexton/NHCADSV, the Prout family, the police, prosecutor Catherine Ruffle, SurvJustice/Laura L Dunn and the ambulance chasing attorneys Steven J Kelly, Steven D Silverman, Chuck Douglas. She received her copy of the suit against St. Paul’s before Michael Delaney got his.
Had any of these Senators’ offices done an iota of research (such as reading Chessy Prout’s “memoir” — “I Have the Right To” with introduction by Congresswoman Ann Kuster) they would have discovered that using publicity was the Prout family’s, Concord Police’s, Merrimack County Prosecutors’ and Amanda Grady Sexton’s MO. They would have also found that three of her attorneys (she had a gang) are known for their use of smear publicity to steer the course of criminal justice and leverage civil suits. They’ve even documented it themselves.
Concord Police Detective Julie Curtin had recommended Laura L Dunn (who specialized in pretrial and social media publicity) to the Prouts — possibly as early as early June 2014 before they’d even contacted Owen Labrie to question him about an alleged sexual assault. Chessy Prout questioned in her “memoir” why she even needed to go to hospital but according to this account it was there that the police detective mentioned Laura Dunn.
They all started off with a desired conclusion and then went off looking for a story to support it, whether or not it was true. The parts they knew were problematic were covered up in carefully curated news articles to deceive the public and influence the jury. If they didn’t get a win in the criminal trial, there would be no money to extort from St. Paul’s School in the civil suit and thus, a win, became mandatory.
Concord Police Detective Julie Curtin lied about the SANE nurse report on her own affidavit. She reported a “laceration”. The SANE nurse corrected it during the trial.
Public officials were using media to steer the course of justice resulting in rich financial rewards for all who went along with the political coup to frame Owen Labrie in order to get at St. Paul’s School’s money. It would have been impossible for former AG Michael Delaney not to be aware that this was the goal.
I am prone to believe that he too was party to the political coup, creating a conflict of interests with his professional duty to put his client’s, St. Paul’s School’s, interests first.
He’d allowed police officers to get away with cash bribes before and he’s defended a judge for tampering with judicial documents (a felony). Just because he represents a school and used to be an AG doesn’t render him automatically trustworthy.
Laura Dunn introduced Steven J Kelly and Steven D Silverman to the Prouts to strategize on “details” which included a media strategy for the criminal trial of New Hampshire v Owen Labrie later that year in August 2015. Dunn has a history of using media and not telling the truth regarding cases of sexual assault on campus: NPR corrected her own story 5 years after they’d aired it in 2010.
She colluded with Sabrina Erdeley behind the scenes for the article “A Rape on Campus” which led to the defamation suit Eramo v Rolling Stone (see exhibit 15b of the suit). “Jackie” in the story, didn’t even exist. The story was released the same month (November 2014) that Amanda Nguyen founded RISE and Laura L Dunn was featured as a “partner spotlight” for the National Crime Victim’s Law Institute (which published the guide to pretrial publicity) on whose board sat Steven J Kelly Esq — the lead attorney for the Prout’s against whom Delaney was dealing.
Amanda Nguyen lobbied for the Victim’s Bill of Rights, then Steven J Kelly lobbied the Senate for it before Senator Jeanne Shaheen (who’d recommended Delaney to the First Circuit) introduced it in 2016. Evan Rachel Wood spoke to Congress to expand it in 2018. Who to believe of any of these?
Laura L Dunn had won over not only the White House but also New Hampshire public officials and police who were under her influence and took instruction from her. I believe Michael Delaney would have been fully aware of this before the criminal trial. So why didn’t he say something?
Laura L Dunn brought up the team of attorneys from DC for pretrial hearings and worked with local prosecutors, police, victims advocates and journalists to spin the media to line up for the Prout civil suit. Michael Delaney was present during at least a part, if not all, of this.
It is clear from the prosecutors’ sentencing statements that they were already working with the Prouts and their civil attorneys — having told the jury that St. Paul’s School was not on trial, the prosecutors spent more time talking about alleged “rape culture” at the school than it did the defendant who was being sentenced. It was a blatant display of collusion between prosecutors and civil attorneys.
What was the deal that Michael Delaney sorted with the prosecutors that prevented them from taking action when they were alerted by Alexander Prout and Amanda Grady Sexton to witness tampering?
There are signs that there was a covert deal. It is critical to the public interest to know what that arrangement was. Could he be susceptible to such a backdoor deal as a judge?
When it came to sentencing, Chessy’s victim impact statement (canned & edited) seemed awfully similar to Evan Rachel Wood’s statements to Congress in February 2018 (above):
“What he did to me made me feel like I didn’t belong on this planet and that I would be better off dead,” the girl said.
She added: “Without just and right punishment, I really don’t know how I’ll put one foot in front of the other. I don’t want to feel imprisoned for the rest of my life. I want to be safe again. And I want justice.”
Chessy’s “memoir” reveals she was jealous of Owen Labrie for getting all the media attention — media attention that was concocted by her own team who decided on a media ploy years before her family sued St. Paul’s School.
When Owen Labrie’s arrest warrant was broadcast by Concord Police (July 16, 2014), Chessy states (in her memoir) that she was on vacation in Italy with her family and that she had been pouring through news items on line every day waiting for it to hit. So she knew weeks ahead that there was going to be a news splash. Her family had deliberately decided to be out of the country when this was going to happen. Meanwhile the prosecutors didn’t even have the courtesy to let their target know that they were issuing an arrest warrant before he was blindsided by the news. When he turned up to the police department in Concord they told him they were taking two mug shots because he was going to be famous. Who had determined this and why? I believe that Michael Delaney knows. The devil is in what he has not been asked.
Police, prosecutors and the Prout family (already millionaires) knew this was going to be sensationalized while their target, an impoverished scholarship student, did not. They have been adamant over the years that sons of “working class parents” shouldn’t be able to raise the money for a defense while they enjoy the financial rewards that come from celebrity victim-hood.
Hall monitors of victim-hood are worrisome, especially when they are wealthy and their targets are not: The Prouts started working with a Government Affairs PR specialist, Dan Hill, in 2015 — the better part of a year before their suit against St Paul’s School. They solicited a journalist at Vanity Fair to do a story in March 2016 before they gave their lawsuit against the school to NBC Today Show, Vice Media and The Concord Monitor — choosing graduation weekend for maximum publicity. It was a stunt. The suit included the names of multiple students along with their text/email correspondence. These students were not granted anonymity by the Prout family who decided that sharing the suit with mainstream media & shaming bystander students publicly in front of the nation was a noble enterprise. It’s not. It’s a dishonest tactic — the kind that bullies and blackmailers enjoy. These students had been state witnesses — useful for the Prout family in fact. But once their criminal trial testimony was over, the Prouts decided to smear them. Police & prosecutors sided with the Prouts and said they were proud.
In March 2019, Alexander & Chessy Prout gave an interview on Bloomberg Live — as part of an anti-bullying awareness campaign. The interviewer (Jenn Abelson of the Boston Globe & Washington Post) revealed that she had co-authored Chessy’s memoir towards the end. It was a shady move in front of a live audience. Alexander Prout used the opportunity to disseminate more fabricated stories.
But in a 180 degree turn, after 5 years of using Owen Labrie’s face in every news report possible to promote themselves, the Prouts decided they shouldn’t have to see his face when ABC/GMA aired a trailer for an interview with him. Susan Prout complained that the case shouldn’t be retried in the court of public opinion — only the Prout family are allowed to do that. Indeed, they are at it again:
Chessy Prout had equated Owen Labrie to an “Al-Qaeda terrorist” and “Donald Trump” in her memoir for which her Government PR Rep Dan Hill had been the publicist. Anyone who questions this narrative is accused of “victim blaming”.
Had ABC/GMA aired the show on July 18, 2019, the fraud behind the criminal trial and the Prouts’ suit against St. Paul’s School would have been exposed. It wouldn’t have looked so good for Michael Delaney either since he’d negotiated a handsome settlement for the Prouts.
Over the course of the 8+ years since June 2014, Chessy Prout has gone from boasting to her friends that she “thought” she’d had sex with Owen Labrie and telling police that she was laughing and giggling to calling him her “attacker”.
Government PR reps with connections to mainstream media and members of Congress created a narrative for Chessy Prout and her family which yielded millions and helped election campaigns for female Democratic candidates. The Prouts were useful tools for Congresswoman Ann Kuster and Senator Jeanne Shaheen — the very person who endorsed Michael Delaney to be a judge.
The truth has had nothing to do with any of it and still doesn’t even in the latest “op-ed” in the Boston Globe which reads more like a piece of lobbying for various non-profits than anything else — a last gasp to keep these relevant as more and more celebrity survivor stories get exposed for being fake?
I suspect that the Boston Globe op-ed was written for Chessy Prout just as the the Washington Post #MeToo Op-Ed for Amber Heard was written for her. Despite Johnny Depp’s win in his defamation suit against Amber Heard, mainstream media journalists and victims rights non-profits sided with her claiming that this would stop other women from coming forward.
It didn’t stop women coming forward after Crystal Mangum’s accusations against the Duke Lacrosse team which turned out to be false. Crystal Mangum is in prison for murder, the prosecutor went to jail for a very brief period. Roy Cooper who was the AG for North Carolina at the time is now Governor for the State. He stood up to do what was right. Delaney did not.
History is teaching us that the more sensationalized the rape accusations, the more likely they are to be false and the more likely mainstream media is opposed to admitting the truth.
Chessy Prout’s “personal representative” Laura L Dunn, promoted the Rolling Stone UVA “A Rape on Campus” story on TV as though it were true. She was also found to be complicit in the creation and dissemination of it.
Alice Sebold’s novel “Lucky” about her alleged sexual assault garnered universal praise. It took a producer who was considering turning it into a film to suspect something wasn’t right. Only then did her “perpetrator” see justice and his conviction overturned. Decades of his life taken away from him while she framed him and made a name for herself as a “survivor”.
Ashley Smithline admitted that she had been coerced and manipulated into making up accusations of sexual assault against Marilyn Manson by Evan Rachel Wood who spoke to Congress in February 2018 to expand a Victim’s Bill of Rights which Chessy Prout’s attorney Steven J Kelly had lobbied the Senate for in May 2015. Senator Jeanne Shaheen introduced the bill which passed in 2016. Evan Rachel Wood had created a letter on FBI letterhead, impersonating a public official. The level of deceit is mind-blowing but we can’t question the racket because we’d be accused of “victim blaming”.
Just like the “branding” section of the South Park Show, every option for Chessy Prout’s branding includes “victim” aka “survivor”.
Jane Doe aka Chessy Prout never had any intention of remaining Jane Doe. It was all pre-arranged as early as June 2014.
What does Michael Delaney really know and what is he not saying? His law firm, McLane Middleton, opened this company, right before he left public service as Attorney General to join their practice: “McLane Middleton Government & Public Strategies”
