the hearing on the woman's motion for a restraining order against
Ellison is scheduled for October 23, fifteen days before the November 7
election.

And, of course, the Strib doesn't think you need to know...

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/015484.php

October 07, 2006

Star Tribune Sucker-Punches Republican Candidate

The Minneapolis Star Tribune has finally done a front-page investigative
report on a Congressional candidate in Minnesota's Sixth District. Aha,
you say, finally! At last, the Strib has gotten around to reporting that
DFLer Keith Ellison was a member of the Nation of Islam for at least nine
years, not 18 months as he has claimed; and they are finally telling their
readers about Ellison's public appearances with a former Vice Lords gang
chieftain in support of Vice Lords members who murdered Minneapolis
policeman Jerry Haaf, and the other instances of Ellison supporting
convicted cop-killers.

No. The Strib still isn't reporting any of that. Instead, it makes a
front-page story of the the fact that in 1995, Republican Alan Fine was
accused by his then-wife of slapping her. She had Fine arrested and he
spent a few hours in the Hennepin County jail. He denied that he had
slapped her, she dropped the charges, and the record of the incident was
later expunged. Nevertheless, the Strib has dredged up this bit of
domestic history in hopes of putting the last nail in Fine's campaign.

It isn't clear how the Strib obtained the expunged records. It says:

The Star Tribune learned of the arrest in a routine records check after
Fine won the Republican endorsement in May. The newspaper obtained the
expunged record detailing the arrest two weeks ago.

How did the Strib "obtain" the record that was supposed to remain
confidential? One possible source, of course, is Amy Klobuchar, the
Hennepin County Attorney who is running for the U.S. Senate. Did Klobuchar
or one of her aides leak the expunged record to the newspaper to help her
fellow Democrat? If so, was a crime committed? We know that the Klobuchar
campaign has already been involved in one dirty trick, which resulted in
her communications director being referred to the FBI for possible
criminal prosecution. Is this another instance where the Klobuchar
campaign may be involved in criminal activity? This whole episode cries
out for an investigation. I don't suppose, though, that the Strib will be
calling for one.

The Strib also makes a point of the fact that between 1995 and 2005, there
were five 911 calls placed from Fine's address. It isn't clear exactly
what the point of this is, since, in three of the four instances where
records survive, it was Fine who placed the call.

The point the Strib wants the reader to take away from its article is
clear, however. This is the last paragraph of the story:

After state Rep. Keith Ellison won the DFL nomination, Fine launched a
persistent attack on his character, focusing on his past ties to the
Nation of Islam. Fine has repeatedly said "character matters."

Touche.

Here's a funny thing, though. If the Strib thinks it's front page news
that a Congressional candidate has been involved in a 911 call -- hey,
even if he made the call himself! -- then it wouldn't have to go back to
1995 for a story. No, it could have reported on a 911 call that a young
woman made on May 16, 2005, saying that she had been assaulted by Keith
Ellison:

CLR RPT'G [Caller reporting] SHE WAS ASL'TD BY ELLISON/KEITH/BM/41/WRG
SUIT LS [last seen] LEAVING APT ...UNK DIR [unknown direction]…NO EMS
[emergency medical services needed]...CLR WANTS TO SEE SQD [police
squad]

Here is an image of the record of the 911 call. Which, by the way, is
publicly available, so we didn't have to break any laws to get it:

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/Ellison911Call32.jpg

I suppose the Strib didn't think that one was relevant because it was so
recent.

One can understand, perhaps, why the Strib thought Alan Fine's encounter
with Hennepin County District Court reflected on his character, even
though it was eleven years ago and the charges were dropped. Of course,
nothing like that could have happened to Keith Ellison; otherwise, surely,
the Strib would report it. No, wait...

Actually, a motion for a restraining order was brought against Ellison in
Hennepin County District Court. It was brought by a woman who alleged that
Ellison punched, shoved, and verbally abused her, placed harassing phone
calls to her, and broke the screen on the door to her apartment. Gosh,
sounds an awful lot like the claim that was made against Fine, only worse.
Maybe the Strib wasn't interested because the incidents were so long ago
that they were ancient history, and thus not relevant to Ellison's
character? Well, not exactly. Actually, the hearing on the woman's motion
for a restraining order against Ellison is scheduled for October 23,
fifteen days before the November 7 election.

It's entirely possible that the charges against Ellison are untrue. (I
heard an Ellison defender on the radio who said that the woman, rumored to
be a former babysitter for Ellison's children, is "crazy.") Likewise, the
charge against Fine -- which, unlike the proceeding against Ellison, was
not pursued -- was very likely false. But is there any conceivable ground
for thinking that an allegation that Fine slapped a woman in 1995 is
front-page news, but the allegation that in 2005 Ellison "punched, shoved
and verbally abused" a woman doesn't need to be mentioned?

Until now, we've said nothing about these charges against Ellison because
we have no way to gauge their reliability, and we think they are a
distraction from the very serious, and indisputable, aspects of Ellison's
record that disqualify him from public office. But if the Star Tribune is
going to slime Ellison's opponent with a front-page story on an unproven,
eleven year old domestic allegation, how on God's green earth can the
paper cover up a more serious claim of the same nature against Ellison,
that was made last month?

UPDATE: I haven't had time for exhaustive research, but expungement of
criminal records is governed by Chapter 609A of the Minnesota Statutes.
Here are some of the relevant provisions. Sec. 609A.01:

The remedy available is limited to a court order sealing the records
and prohibiting the disclosure of their existence or their opening
except under court order or statutory authority.

Sec. 609A.03, Subd. 5(c):

If the court issues an expungement order it may require that the
criminal record be sealed, the existence of the record not be revealed,
and the record not be opened except as required under subdivision 7.

Subd. 7(b)(1):

(b) Notwithstanding the issuance of an expungement order:

(1) an expunged record may be opened for purposes of a criminal
investigation, prosecution, or sentencing, upon an ex parte court
order;

I haven't seen the expungement order, but it is hard to see how the Star
Tribune could have "obtained" the expunged records legally under these
provisions. Again, we don't have all the answers, but an investigation
appears to be in order.

Posted by John at 06:26 PM

--
Jefferson was unquestionably one of our giants. There was more in his
head than there has been in the heads of all the presidents in office
since he went out. He was a man of immense intellectual curiosity,
profound originality, and great daring. His integrity was of doric
massiveness. But was he always right? I don't think many reflective
Americans of today would argue that he was.
- H. L. Mencken