Politics and Probate

I am disappointed with Gloria Allred.  I have the utmost respect for Ms. Allred for the years of tremendous advocacy for women.  However, I feel that she has come to Boston with an agenda that is misdirected.

She is an Obama supporter and has traveled to Norfolk Country Probate Court in Canton, Massachusetts, specifically to look at Mitt Romney’s testimony in support of his business associate Tom Stemberg, co-founder of Staples.  In his testimony, Romney allegedly underestimated the value of the company, offering misinformation regarding the value of business to the detriment of the ex-wife, Maureen Stemberg. 

Ms. Allred is trying to reopen a probate issue and, at the same time, ride the political coattails.  It’s a questionable ploy because she is challenging the injustices that have been allowed in Norfolk probate court for years.  Because of the amount of the money involved, this was a high-profile case.  However, why should this case get more notoriety than other cases that were unjustly tried in Norfolk County probate?

I would think that Ms. Allred would have more dignity than to utilize her status of legal advocate for a woman victimized by injustices in our courts, as an opportunity to smear a political candidate as well.  Ms. Allred’s credentials and reputation with the public is more flattering than Donald Trump, who is attempting the same, which makes me all the more disappointed. 

I hope the public would also find difficulty in believing that perjury is not Ms. Allred’s primary agenda.  As a long-time attorney for woman going through high profile, big money divorce cases, Ms. Allred has certainly seen her share of perjury committed in the name of the almighty dollar. 

If Mitt Romney is going to be “punished” for the crime of perjury, will this open the door for other victims?  Will Norfolk County probate now be faced with an onslaught of perjury charges for not challenging fraudulent testimony given by other business owners, claiming their company has no value, just because they are going through a divorce? 

25 years ago, Mitt Romney was called in to testify for a business associate.  Did he blatantly lie, or was he merely parroting what he was told by his colleague?  And why should he be the sole criminal and not Tom Stemberg as well? 

I am all too familiar with the Norfolk Probate court, both personally and through my research as a writer.  This court is known for notoriously unjust decisions, denying due process, and not protecting the victim of abuse.  My book, “…Until You Die”: The Narcissist’s Promise is a true story which documents the Norfolk County judges’ acceptance of the testimony of a narcissistic sociopath stating they have no documentation as to the value of their business because their computer mysteriously crashed the day before trial.  Credibility is given to the man who took meticulous care of his boat, cars and motorcycles yet neglected to back up information regarding his livelihood.  How can a judge not question a man claiming to sell his competition ski boat for $1.00, with the stipulation from the new owner allowing free usage?  Is it because it takes less effort for the judge to simply believe the testimony of a charming sociopath than to challenge the ludicrous claims? 

Any man who goes into court with the specific agenda to withhold monetary information with the clear intent to create hardship for their former wife and mother of their child(ren) is simply despicable, and clearly, not a real man.  Did Mitt Romney commit perjury for Tom Stemberg?  Honestly, I don’t care because the villain in that case is Mr. Stemberg, and Maureen Stemberg is the victim.

Ironically, several years ago, Mrs. Stemberg was complaining of her lack of support as she sat in her $5200.00 a month apartment in Back Bay.  I would like to tell Maureen, “Honey, my ex is living quite comfortably as well, and I really don’t care.  I am happy to live in a modest home, and driving an old car.  My marriage was intolerably abusive and that is why I filed for divorce.  Happiness cannot be measured in money.  I never received anything from my ex, both during and after the marriage.  The best revenge is living well, and living well is not determined by a bank account.”  I feel badly for Maureen because she was never able to let go and find her own happiness.  Did Gloria Allred really fly 3000 miles to Massachusetts just for Maureen Stemberg?  This latest event of reopening her divorce case is not making Maureen look as a woman treated unfairly; it’s turning her into a political pawn. 

And to Ms Allred, I would like to say, “Shame on you, Gloria, for wasting your time, and marring your stellar reputation.  Since you’re in Massachusetts, why not take a look at these other cases where women left their abusers, and ended up losing everything, including their children?” 

Sadly, this won’t happen.  So, I will conclude this blog that touches upon politics, mingling with court injustices by encouraging all victims of our probate courts, those unable to leave their abusers, and those who have found the courage to leave, even though you may have lost everything, to let your voices be heard.  Someday, we won’t need a Gloria Allred to fight our fights, and our judicial battles will be accepted on their own merit and not as a way to promote or smear some political candidate.