I’m on Facebook recently, and I had the following sponsored ad pop up, promoting yet another ridiculous article by former sado/masochism pornography photographer Lee Stranahan, as he continues promoting a campaign against South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley.
This of course came on the heels of a press conference Stranahan held in Washington accusing Jackley of “criminal wrongdoing,” which was ignored with the exact same level of blasé by the Washington DC Area press that South Dakota Reporters previously have had for Stranahan’s silliness.
As you’ll notice in the ad on the left, it talks about how “Marty Jackley’s prosecutors” did this or that. But, that’s not exactly truthful.
In this case, they weren’t “Marty Jackley’s” prosecutors. In any way, shape, or form. They were State Attorneys, elected by the people of their county, and completely independent of the Attorney General.
But that’s pretty typical, and stands as one of the biggest problems with the “news stories” that Lee Stranahan has produced as he throws out stories accusing Jackley. They ignore glaring errors, and play up speculation of things that aren’t known at all.
It’s unclear why exactly Stranahan continues his pursuit, making outlandish accusations against South Dakota state & county prosecutors, and the Judiciary in what he characterizes as a scandal. After serving as a paid Annette Bosworth campaign consultant, and contributing to what most would consider a glorious mucking up of her criminal case, his antics caused at least one of her several attorneys to demand he cease association with Bosworth.
Yet, the silliness continued. And still does.
Stranahan’s storied past, including allegations of scams, cons, and other undesirable acts, don’t exactly paint him as a reliable source of news. Not only that, but as we saw with Bosworth, he has a tendency to harm those he claims to champion. In fact, given that there have been a series of sponsored facebook ads, it leaves one with a sense of wondering who exactly is paying money to promote the messages? And why?
Unfortunately, a lot of Stranahan’s antics do a grave disservice to a lot of things, including the truth.
First and foremost, many of these stories (and I use that term in a couple of definitions) are expressly and specifically directed at the Attorney General Marty Jackley. Despite the fact that Marty is peripheral, at best, to the matter that Stranahan goes on about, and didn’t prosecute the case.
What we do know conclusively is that Marty was one of the people stuck dealing with the aftermath.
As Attorney General, Marty Jackley is in charge of DCI, or the Division of Criminal Investigation. The Division of Criminal Investigation in South Dakota is often called in to provide specific expertise that many local law enforcement agencies aren’t able to supply themselves, and Special Agents conduct investigations on major felony cases, as they did in the case of the matter of the Mette investigation.
The investigation in the matter of the Mette family and the abuse of foster children at some point seems to have taken a sour turn, and while never indicated publicly, it seems that several things happened in the conduct of the investigation. Things that we can guess prosecutors thought could cost them the ability to pursue it.
The investigation involved issues of horrific child abuse, a type of case that is well noted among experts in law enforcement to be among the most difficult kinds of cases to work with. As the FBI notes:
“Traditional law enforcement interviewing methods used in typical adult cases are counterproductive when it comes to child victims or witnesses to crimes,” said Stephanie Knapp, one of the Bureau’s four child forensic interviewers. “Sometimes you see unsuccessful outcomes in cases because of poor interview techniques. In many cases of child abuse, for example, where the victim is the only witness, the interview may be a critical element of the investigation.”
And..
Although they follow time-tested protocols, interviewers acknowledge that working with children is an art as well as a science, requiring experience and intuition. “You have to understand and follow the protocols,” Blackwell said, “but it’s also essential that you connect with the kids so that they trust you.”
Read that here.
Investigators and child advocates came into the case, and after a short time were accused of possibly coaching the children on what to say. Into this scenario came DCI investigator Mark Black, who claimed to both interview the children involved, as well as to investigate accusations of witness tampering. And the ambiguity coming out of what happened here seems to be the focus of much of the rhetoric that Stranahan is trying to twist and gin up in his mindless pursuit of Jackley, because much of “what happened” is not public.
Why? Because it involves underage crime victims. It involves personnel matters. And in either case, there’s not much that’s ever going to come to light.
But once in a while you get a hint dropped along the way like a breadcrumb. As noted by the Argus Leader in 2014 with regards to the 2012 case:
Jackley said he had asked North Dakota investigators to look into Black’s behavior in late February, but that the agent’s questionable behavior extended beyond the high-profile case of former advocate Shirley Schwab and former prosecutor Brandon Taliaferro.
By February, Black was accused of domestic abuse by his ex-wife, who took out a temporary protection order against him early this year. The order was not made permanent, but a hearing outlining accusations from Black’s ex-wife was held March 13. The temporary order was extended for 10 days and dismissed March 24.
By then, Black had been terminated.
“I think it’s fair to say that (the witness tampering investigation) was a factor,” Jackley said Friday. “If you were to ask about the protection order issues, I would say that was a factor, too. It was the totality of the circumstances.”
Read it all here.
In addition to what happened with Mark Black, Michael Moore the Beadle County state’s attorney prosecuting the matter had brought witness tampering charges against others involved in the case, which were later dismissed for lack of evidence.
We have an investigator accused of questionable behavior, partially in connection with the case. We have others whose conduct in the matter which had been brought into question. And on top of it all, the crime involves children who may or may not have been willing to take the stand, as well as possibly being the only witnesses in the case.
That seems to leave prosecutors in the unenviable position of trying to figure out what’s left to build a criminal case from to accomplish the ultimate goal – to put a bad, bad person in jail for as long as they could.
Richard Mette, the perpetrator in the sexual abuse case ended up getting a plea agreement of 15 years in prison, which might seem light to some. But in an investigation that apparently was experiencing evidentiary problems as this one did, sometimes a prosecutor – in this case, Michael Moore – is forced to move forward and procure the best deal they could. And we ended up with the 15-year plea agreement.
What really happened to cause problems with the case is arguably something we’ll never know. But as noted, what we do know is that – far from the wild accusations that Lee Stranahan makes of ridiculous grand conspiracies of abuse of power and corruption – the State’s attorney put the bad guy in jail, as best he could with what he had to work with. And, as the person responsible for DCI, Jackley was left to clean up an ugly mess contributed to by one if it’s agents, which was cited by the AG as part of the reason for the agents termination.
Lacking conclusive proof as to exactly what happened, anything else is just what those with overly fertile imaginations want to plant as their narrative, with sponsored facebook links and all.
It’s especially telling that in all of the weaving of this fairy tale by Lee Stranahan, all along the path, Stranahan’s smearing and false narrative of Marty Jackley doing bad things is constantly tied back to his prosecution of Annette Bosworth for fraudulently attesting to witnessing petition signatures.
It was in the beginning. And it continues to be to this day.
We can only hope that when the Bosworth trial happens in May that the silliness, and the sponsored facebook ads, finally go away.
As Lee Stranahan should.
PIERRE, S.D. – Attorney General Marty Jackley announced today that, on its own motion, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals entered an Order deferring oral argument and consideration of South Dakota’s same sex case Rosenbrahn v. Daugaard. The Eighth Circuit entered similar orders in the Nebraska, Missouri and Arkansas cases. The Eighth Circuit deferred the cases pending the United States Supreme Court’s decision in same sex cases Obergefell, et al. v. Richard Hodges, etc. The Eighth Circuit’s Order was entered one day following the Supreme Court hearing oral argument in the Obergefell same sex cases. It is anticipated that the Supreme Court will decide the cases prior to the Court’s adjournment at the end of June.
I just received a Pro-Annette Bosworth robocall from someone claiming to be