Mass. DCF seeks to block names of lawyers, others in Harmony Montgomery custody hearing
A Massachusetts agency aimed at keeping children safe from abuse and neglect has asked for a 'minor amendment' in the decision by that state's highest court to allow a documentary filmmaker access to audio recordings of a hearing after which Harmony Montgomery ended up in the custody of her father.
The requested amendment is to require the redaction of all names, including those of lawyers, social workers and court personnel, 'due to safety concerns,' according to court documents obtained by the Union Leader. Several documents have been impounded.
Harmony's father, Adam Montgomery, was convicted last year of beating the little girl to death about 10 months after he gained custody in February 2019.
SJC Montgomery request
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court granted journalist Bill Lichtenstein of LC Media access to the audio of these hearings from February 2019, but the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families has since requested the court amend its order to redact the names.
The court's original order only called for redaction of the names of other children, according to the ruling.
Lichtenstein is working on a documentary called 'Broken,' a feature-length documentary on the failed child welfare, foster care and family court systems in Massachusetts and nationally.
Limited information on what happened in the hearing, held in Essex Juvenile Court, has been released in multiple reports. The hearing focused on Adam Montgomery's fitness as a parent, the ruling read.
Montgomery had a violent past and was incarcerated at the time of Harmony's birth.
In her request for further redactions, Kristin Braithwaite, assistant general counsel for the Mass. DCF, said interest in the case had presented itself 'in the form of anger and threats,' and the key participants did not willingly accept publicity.
'The juvenile court judge who presided over the hearing in question has attested to receiving multiple threats upon his identity being learned of by the public,' she said.
The Committee for Public Counsel Services has filed a similar request, which is impounded.
Braithwaite argued the release of the names will not provide information to help prevent a future tragedy.
'Impounding these names will not limit the impact or efficacy of this court's order,' Braithwaite said
Lichtenstein's attorney, Jennifer Lamanna, said the request should have been 'briefed and argued as part of earlier filings and oral arguments."
'With regard to the redaction of the names of counsel, attorneys and judges in high profile cases are regularly named in the press and, of course, in non-impounded proceedings, identifiable from the court's public records,' Lamanna said in opposition.
The court ruled Lichtenstein 'met the standard for relief from impoundment as to all information contained in the audio,' except the privacy interest of other children.
Lamanna called any threat 'speculative and remote,' in her filing.
Adam Montgomery was convicted in February 2024 of second-degree murder, abuse of a corpse and other charges related to Harmony's death. He was sentenced to 56 years to life to be served on top of a minimum 32-year sentence for prior firearms convictions.
Harmony's remains have yet to be found.
jphelps@unionleader.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Tommy Robinson ‘harassed journalists' families on X', court hears
Tommy Robinson, the far-Right activist, harassed two journalists and members of their families on social media, a court has heard. The 42-year-old, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, pleaded not guilty to two counts of harassment causing fear of violence at Westminster magistrates' court on Thursday, before being released on bail. He is alleged to have harassed Andrew Young and Jacob Dirnhuber, MailOnline journalists, through his X account between Aug 5 and Aug 7 last year. During the hearing, which lasted around 20 minutes, Robinson was told that his case could be heard at a magistrates' court but instead the defendant chose a jury trial at a Crown Court. Addressing Robinson, Senior District Judge Paul Goldspring said: 'Mr Lennon, I have decided that if you wanted, you can have your case at this court as the powers are sufficient but you have elected to have a jury trial as is your right. 'Your case is sent to the Crown Court sitting at Southwark where you must appear for a plea and trial preparation hearing on July 3. You are free to go, Mr Lennon.' Robinson, wearing a cream Stone Island jacket and blue jeans, smiled after he was bailed. Earlier in the hearing, he spoke to confirm his date of birth and his name, giving it as 'Stephen Lennon'. Of the charges, prosecutor Ben Holt told the court: 'It is alleged that the defendant has harassed two journalists and their family members through the use of a Twitter or X account.' He added that none of the harassment contained 'direct threats of violence'. Robinson arrived at the court to a group of photographers and reporters, with dozens of his supporters also present. Some of those outside the building sported Union flags, while others held purple placards that read: 'Stephen Yaxley-Lennon is the man. Tommy Robinson is the movement.' Many of his supporters were also present in the court's public gallery, including a man wearing a Union flag suit. Robinson was again surrounded by supporters and media as he left the court building in the pouring rain to chants of 'Tommy, Tommy', with some of his followers wearing 'Make England Great Again' hats. Speaking outside court after the hearing, Robinson said: 'I've been given now the opportunity to have a jury trial. I've never had that. 'I want to be tried by 12 members of the British public. I want them to hear the evidence in this case.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
Ali Velshi: How Americans can defend our democracy against Trump
This is an adapted excerpt from the May 24 episode of 'Velshi.' In the wake of Donald Trump's second term, more and more Americans are asking a critical question: 'What can I do to defend democracy in America?' That question marks a shift away from the comforting illusion that courts, politicians or institutions will save America's democracy on their own. They won't. Institutions have failed us repeatedly, as we have learned that what we thought were guardrails are merely suggestions, reliant on goodwill, decency and the honor system. Real political change in America doesn't come from the top; it never has. It comes from the bottom, from ordinary people resisting in big and small ways. That's the legacy of the Civil Rights Movement. The political scientist Gene Sharp, nicknamed the 'dictator slayer,' wrote something of a playbook for resisting authoritarian regimes. He didn't invent these strategies, but he observed them. For decades, Sharp studied how ordinary people challenged brutal regimes around the world, and what he found was simple, yet powerful: All rulers — even the most oppressive — rely on the cooperation of the people. Through fear, apathy or consent, they maintain power. But when people refuse to cooperate, when they disobey, that's when authoritarian systems begin to crack. That's why historian Timothy Snyder begins his book titled 'On Tyranny' with this warning: 'Do not obey in advance.' Because it's in those first, often invisible, acts of surrender that authoritarianism takes root. As we face creeping authoritarianism here at home, Snyder's advice stands as a call to action for Americans confronting Trump. History shows that the courage to stand up to authority and hold power to account has helped sustain our democracy and other democracies around the world. The historian Drew Gilpin Faust, a former president of Harvard University, captured that spirit in a powerful essay for The New York Times about the Union soldiers of the Civil War. She wrote: I have read dozens of these men's letters and diaries, windows into why they fought, into what and whom they loved and what they hoped for at the end of a war they knew they might not survive. Together they did save the Union … These men made our lives possible. They were impelled to risk all by a sense of obligation to the future. We possess a reciprocal obligation to the past. We must not squander what they bequeathed to us. We owe it to them, and every generation that came after them: women who won the right to vote, students who walked into newly desegregated schools under armed guard, trade unionists who faced violence for fighting for the rights of workers, those who fought for voting rights, reproductive freedom and LGBTQ+ dignity. They didn't wait for permission. They disobeyed in advance. They withdrew their cooperation from injustice. Oftentimes, they blatantly and openly broke the law, as TV cameras rolled. Which brings us back to Sharp's basic premise, a very Gandhian premise. He believed that noncooperation, the deliberate refusal to obey or comply, is one of the most powerful ways to disrupt oppressive systems. Because when enough people stop participating in the machinery of control, that very system begins to break down. So, if you're wondering what you can do, here are some ideas that draw from proven strategies of resistance — adapted for today's world. In Missouri, a government-run tip line targeting the trans community was flooded with thousands of fake reports, including the entire movie script of 'The Bee Movie' submitted over and over again. The result? Total system collapse. Utah and Texas faced similar backlashes, with Utah shutting down its own surveillance hotline under the weight of memes and mass trolling. This, of course, is what undergirded the Civil Rights Movement in America, but here's a more recent example: In Idaho, a middle school teacher refused to remove a sign that read 'Everyone Is Welcome Here.' It didn't mention politics, race or gender, but was still deemed too controversial. After a monthslong battle, she resigned two weeks ago in protest. This can include using the opposition's own tools against them. In 2024, Oklahoma's Republican-controlled Legislature passed a law allowing parents to opt their children out of 'harmful' educational material. Now, a group of parents has turned that law on its head. In response to Superintendent of Public Education Ryan Walters' new curriculum, which includes conspiracy theories about the 2020 election and Christian nationalist ideology, a parent group called We're Oklahoma Education, or WOKE, is fighting back. They've created an opt-out form allowing families to withdraw their children from lessons on 'Judeo-Christian concepts of ethics and government' and 'discrepancies in 2020 election results.' Their approach is not only bold but legally savvy since the group is using the very law that conservatives passed, which was designed to shield students from so-called progressive content. The opt-out letter warns schools that failure to comply could result in legal action. This one, of course, is close to my heart. When Target pulled Pride merchandise and scaled back diversity, equity and inclusion commitments, thousands of Americans launched a boycott campaign on TikTok, Facebook and other platforms. The result? Target's quarterly profits dropped and the company admitted that backlash from both sides had harmed its bottom line. In Worcester, Massachusetts, viral footage of an aggressive U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement raid showed federal agents detaining a woman as her daughters clung to the car, one of them holding a baby. Bystanders, including a city councilor and a school board candidate, intervened. The video sparked immediate outrage and protests across the state. In response, Worcester officials released bodycam footage and then took action: The city issued an executive order barring city employees from cooperating with ICE or inquiring about immigration status. This is the final, and perhaps my favorite, form of disruption. Civil rights activist Bruce Hartford noted that humor and audacity go hand in hand: 'You can weaken, unbalance, and ultimately overthrow the king quicker by laughing at him than by futilely screaming fury at him.' Groups like the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and The Satanic Temple have used satire to expose religious favoritism in public institutions. The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, whose adherents refer to themselves as 'Pastafarians,' mocked efforts to teach intelligent design in public schools by proposing a noodle-based deity, highlighting the dangers of blurring church and state. The Satanic Temple, which is not to be confused with the Church of Satan and does not promote devil worship, took similar action, demanding equal representation when governments promoted religious symbols like Ten Commandments monuments or sanctioned prayer in public schools. Their logic forced officials to either accommodate all religions or retract their policies altogether. So if you're asking yourself what one person can do, these are ideas to hopefully get you thinking. And remember this final piece of advice from Snyder: 'Be as courageous as you can. If none of us is prepared to die for freedom, then all of us will die under tyranny.' This article was originally published on
Time Magazine
3 days ago
- Time Magazine
The History of the Capital Jewish Museum Offers a Template for Fighting Antisemitism
On May 21, Sarah Milgram and Yaron Lischinsky were brutally murdered in an antisemitic attack outside the Capital Jewish Museum, where the American Jewish Committee was hosting an event for young professionals, diplomats, and advocates. For many Americans, that may have been the first time they've heard of the museum, where I served as an educator a from 2011 to 2019. And while the Capital Jewish Museum is only a few years old, the organization has a deep backstory that makes it is an essential institution for understanding the flourishing of individual and American Jewish identity in the face of antisemitism. The museum's history also illuminates the advocacy efforts that have defined Washington's Jewish community for over two centuries as they found their place within American democracy. On Dec. 17, 1862, during the Civil War, Union General Ulysses S. Grant issued and signed General Order No. 11, which stated that 'the Jews, as a class violating every regulation of trade established by the Treasury Department and also department orders, are hereby expelled from the Department within twenty-four hours from the receipt of this order.' The order applied to all Jews (men, women, and children) in the war zone under Grant's command known as the Department of the Tennessee, which stretched from Northern Mississippi to Southern Illinois, and from the Mississippi to Tennessee Rivers. Frustrated with cotton traders and merchants who were smuggling goods to the Confederacy and profiting from the war, the general weaponized ancient stereotypes and antisemitic tropes about Jews and money to fabricate a scapegoat. What happened next offered a template for combatting antisemitism with the specific tools American democracy offered. The leaders of of B'nai B'rith, ('Sons of the Covenant')—a Jewish organization founded by immigrants in 1843 to promote the quality of life for Jews in America—met with President Abraham Lincoln to voice concerns about the antisemitic order, and the president rescinded it immediately. Additionally, representatives from Jewish organizations and synagogues, as well as prominent rabbis, each met with Grant to explain the offensive nature of the order, and to educate the general on the error of his ways. In the mid 19 th century, this represented a radical approach to handling antisemitism—one that reflected how, unlike the way they had been treated historically in Europe, Jews enjoyed full citizenship rights in the U.S. In Washington, many members of the Jewish community not only thrived, but also chose to engage in the civic process, advocating for themselves and others. This culture meant that, rather than wait for Grant's order to take effect, Jewish Washingtonians had no hesitancy about requesting meetings with the president, writing to their representatives, or trying to educate Grant to prevent any repeat of the order. The Jewish community's commitment to advocating for themselves, as well as educating and building a relationship with Grant proved to be transformative. When the general became president in 1869, he appointed more Jews to federal positions than any of his predecessors and became an outspoken supporter of Jewish refugees from Russia, and elsewhere, seeking American citizenship to escape pogroms and persecution. In 1876, thanks to a personal invitation from Adolphus Solomons, a prominent Jewish Washingtonian, philanthropist, and co-founder of the American Red Cross, Grant attended the dedication of the city's first purpose-built synagogue—and made history as the first sitting U.S. president to attend a synagogue service. Grant even gave Tzedakah (a righteous contribution) to the synagogue and sat for the entirety of the hours long traditional Jewish service, most of which was in Yiddish and Hebrew, during a hot D.C. summer day. Officially dedicated, the synagogue became home to Adas Israel—a traditional congregation of predominantly German immigrant families who had come to Washington from neighboring cities and ports like Baltimore and New York during the boom years of the Civil War, when the city grew exponentially. The growth of the Jewish community in the American capital city was historic. For centuries, Jewish communities across Europe had confronted antisemitic expulsions from capitals and major cities. While antisemitism still existed in Washington, and in America more broadly, many Jews felt safer than they ever had. This sense of safety empowered them not only to advocate for themselves, but to think about ways they could partner with their non-Jewish neighbors to improve life for all Americans. Anchoring these actions were Jewish values such as Tikkun Olam ('repairing the world') and Tzedek ('justice'). These principles continued to shape Jewish life in Washington in the 20th century. In 1943, Jewish Washingtonians participated as prop managers and extras in playwright Ben Hecht's musical stage pageant ' We Will Never Die,' which aimed to bring awareness to the Holocaust and the murder of millions of Jews in Europe. They wanted to inspire action among lawmakers, many of whom attended the performance at Constitution Hall. The audience included First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt, who wrote about the powerful experience in her nationally syndicated newspaper column. She urged awareness and action to save Jews. The episode demonstrated how local actions by Jewish Washingtonians could create national headlines. This kind of activism reached new heights in the second half of the 20 th century, as Jewish Washingtonians took active roles in fighting for a range of causes. Their advocacy included championing DC statehood, participating in and helping on-the-ground organizing efforts for the March on Washington in 1963, and founding the Washington Committee for Soviet Jewry in 1968, among others. This final example demonstrated how Washington's Jewish community made use of their physical location to enact international change. While many Jewish communities across the U.S. held rallies and advocated for the release of Soviet Jews denied the right to leave the USSR, only Washington's Jewish community could bring such efforts to the Soviet Embassy itself. Every afternoon for 20 years (1970-1991), a rotating group of Jewish Washingtonians took turns holding a vigil outside the embassy, often singing and dancing the hora. Their message was clear: in America, Jews could openly and safely identify as Jews. They demanded the same for Jews globally. Public awareness campaigns like this compelled actions from politicians, who applied pressure to the Soviet Union. Eventually, after decades of activism, this enabled Soviet Jews to immigrate. Some of them moved to Washington where community members were ready to lend a helping hand. While some of their advocacy focused globally, Washington Jews also worked locally. In 1969, they sprung into action upon learning that the synagogue Grant had helped to dedicate faced demolition. A direct result of Washington's growth and the move of communities (including Jewish congregations) to the suburbs, the former synagogue building was to be replaced with a new headquarters for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. The Jewish Historical Society of Greater Washington argued that the former president's visit made the synagogue a historic building and they launched a campaign to save it, working swiftly to raise the funds and secure permission from the local and national government to move the building. Again, the campaign reflected how activism was embedded at the core of American Jewish identity. The move would prove to be the first of three over the next half century. When the 1876 Adas Israel synagogue finally found its permanent home in 2018, the synagogue became something broader: the Jewish Historical Society helped to transform it into the largest artifact held by a new Capital Jewish Museum. Its leaders invited many voices into the planning for the new museum adjacent to the historic synagogue, including Jewish educators and scholars, rabbis from many denominations, and historically underrepresented voices such as Jews of Color and the LGBTQ+ Jewish community. A neon sign donated to the Museum's collection said it all: 'If It's Jewish, We Have It.' Today, the museum collects and display buttons, posters, and political cartoons representing Jewish civic engagement, from the 1868 presidential election to the present. Stories often featured in the Capital Jewish Museum's core exhibition are about generations of Jewish people who either grew up in Washington or moved to the city filled with ideals and dreams for a brighter future. Milgram and Lischinsky are part of this tradition and legacy. This history that the Capital Jewish Museum represents—of using education, advocacy, and allyship to address antisemitism head on—offers a roadmap for responding to the challenges posed by increasing antisemitism in 2025. Samantha Abramson is the executive director of the Nathan and Esther Pelz Holocaust Education Resource Center and spearheads K-12 initiatives at the Milwaukee Jewish Federation. She has worked at several Jewish and American museums, including the Jewish Historical Society of Greater Washington/Capital Jewish Museum from 2011-2019.
