Archives for category: Lowell Sun
New York Post, front page, 5-19-22

$64,000 Question: Why can’t great daily Newspapers of about 25 years ago — like the Boston Globe, NH Union-Leader, or even, the Lowell Sun — ever publish on its Front Page, THE TRUTH OF WHAT’S REALLY HAPPENING RIGHT NOW IN AMERICA!!!

Ya know, sort of like the New York Post did in its publication this morning. Instead, we get all these once great newspapers tell us day-after-day, year-after-year that these BLATANT LIES like that Joe Biden is the “greatest President in U.S. History”, when truth be told, nothing could be further from the truth!!!

#FakeNews

TubOfLardMilliard

Atty. Roland L. Milliard

Question: Why don’t sharks ever attack Lawyers?
Answer: Professional courtesy.
— Boston personal injury lawyer James Sokolove in a TV commercial
__________________________________________________


Question: Why did God create snakes before He created Lawyers?
Answer: He needed the practice.
— a scene from the popular AMC TV show, ‘Better Call Saul’

First of all, I respect Internet forums which solicit opinions from various people, even the ones that adhere to rules which I might happen to disagree with. They’re certainly entitled to their First Amendment right of Free Speech so even though I may not agree with their setup, I can certainly respect them. Hence, we have the words of a great philosopher who once said, “That’s why God created both chocolate and vanilla ice cream.”

Heck, there are probably a fair number of web surfers who have come here on, One Bad Decision Away from Homelessness, only to shake their heads and say, “Why is this Moderator running his site THIS way when he ought to be running it THAT way?” To those particular folks, I would just suggest that they click on the option titled, ABOUT, and read the part that states, “If this particular website is not to your liking, please feel free to do your web surfing elsewhere.” The items that you happen to see posted on this blog are ones that I happen to have an interest in, and I’m definitely not trying to compete in some type of Internet popularity contest.

The reason I bring this up is that while I was recently posting comments on a lawyer-related site, AVVO.com, specifically about my former attorney, Roland “Conflict of Interest” Milliard, whose office is located in Dracut MA, I noticed that this forum not only solicited comments from current and former clients, but it also wanted to hear from fellow lawyers, as well.

Needless to say, I don’t know why this site does that. My former lawyer in question, Atty. Milliard, got an outstanding review on this site from another attorney whose office is about 25 miles from Milliard’s and does most of their practice in the Boston area, while Milliard mostly works out of the Lowell MA area. So they’re not really in direct competition with each other.

But what positive outcome could another lawyer have by publicly trashing Milliard on a site like that? Let’s say, for example, a lawyer who had just publicly criticized Milliard on that forum is approached by a guy who’s faced with a Divorce and a Child Support situation. Then Milliard, ironically, is approached by that guy’s wife for representation on the same legal matter. The lawyer who just trashed Milliard on the Internet now finds himself with a Conflict of Interest of sorts because much of the husband’s case is contingent upon being able to amicably negotiate with the opposing counsel (in this case Milliard) to at least settle somewhat for what they were hoping for. Not only does Milliard have the proverbial upper hand by representing a Wife in a Massachusetts Family Court situation, he’s probably going to be less inclined to openly negotiate with an attorney who publicly criticized him on an Internet blog.

It should be noted here too that Milliard also served as President for the Greater Lowell Bar Association, an organization comprised of a couple hundred local attorneys, about 5-6 years ago. Yet, all this guy could get was one (1) fellow lawyer to post a review on that rather popular Internet site on his behalf? The one lawyer who posted a review on Milliard, for example, received approximately a dozen outstanding evaluations them self on the same site. So why not show the same type of love and respect for a former President of the Greater Lowell Bar Association? Could it perhaps be that those couple hundred lawyers didn’t want to compromise their credibility or reputations by claiming that Milliard was a tremendous attorney when they realized, in their heart of hearts, that nothing could be further from the truth?

Most of the reviews I found on AVVO by attorneys evaluating other attorneys were absolutely outstanding. It’s as if they’re all “good buddies” with each other outside the courtroom and they have no qualms about submitting positive reviews on behalf of their rivals, even if they’re engaging in some type of impropriety and actually deserve to be publicly called out on their shortcomings. But let’s get real – other lawyers honestly don’t have the same “skin in the game”, (i.e., paying their outrageous fees) as current and former clients do when retaining attorneys for their services. And with all the criticism and jokes about shady lawyers – how often do you hear about them actually being prosecuted in court for some type of impropriety?

If something like mismanaging clients’ Retainer fees get blatantly out-of-control, you might hear about them getting either suspended or disbarred, but not really that often. There seems to be more stuff in the media trashing dishonest auto mechanics than dishonest lawyers, although I think the percentages are basically about the same. It seems like more people are intimidated by confronting lawyers probably because they’re often worth a lot more money than most people, along with their usual ability to play semantics (a.k.a. bullCRAP) with just about every argument they make.

Intelligence, Confidentiality, Assertiveness & Courtroom Savvy

One of the compliments that lawyer gave Milliard in their review was that he’s very smart. So what the heck does that really mean? Milliard, Alan Dershowitz, and F. Lee Bailey all successfully passed the Massachusetts Bar Exam to become “bonafide” lawyers. Maybe Milliard scored a number of points higher on that exam than either Dershowitz or Bailey. If so, what the heck does that prove? If you’re paying one of these “professionals” in the neighborhood of about $300 per hour to successfully represent you in a Court of Law, are you more concerned about your attorney’s “intelligence” or their “courtroom savvy”, a.k.a. their ability to possibly sway a Judge or a Jury into their way of thinking?

And since we’re talking about Atty. Milliard here, what would you gauge as a higher priority when selecting a Lawyer to possibly represent you in Court: Confidentiality or Courtroom Savvy? My basic beef with Milliard is that he chose to ignore Massachusetts Rules for Attorneys by backstabbing me and representing a client who sued me – all without first getting my permission. Besides that, Milliard has an absolute piss-poor losing record on representing high-profile cases throughout his nearly 30 year legal career. In the great words of disgraced comedian, Bill Cosby, “the proof is in the pudding.”

In the half dozen or so postings I’ve done on this forum regarding Atty. Milliard, I’ve never referred to this guy as being stupid, and I would agree with that lawyer on their Internet review that he’s probably got a higher I.Q. than the average schmuck on the street.

Another great myth a lot of people usually get screwed on when choosing a lawyer to represent them, is going with someone perceived to either be a Pitbull or an s.o.b. – Milliard, incidentally, fits both of these descriptions – inside or outside of a courtroom. But again, how the heck does “assertiveness” supersede “courtroom savvy” when going with someone to represent your best interests in a lawsuit? Granted, with all other factors being equal, I would just assume go with a lawyer who’s more aggressive in their approach than one who’s passive because I would tend to feel more comfortable on my chances of winning. But if my attorney is cut from the same cloth as Mahatma Gandhi, for example, and he’s got a passive, uncanny knack for constantly convincing the Judge and Jury into his way of thinking, then that might be the right way to go in Court.

Mixed reviews here when it comes to ‘Relatives’

One fascinating comment that lawyer posted on Milliard’s Internet review was that they’d have no qualms whatsoever, on having one of their relatives represented by Milliard. After reading that line, I couldn’t help but think of the community Milliard’s office is situated in, Dracut Massachusetts, which the main activity involving its Police department is in regards to, Domestic violence issues – especially on the Thanksgiving Day holiday, when relatives are usually all together.

So I doubt the lawyer posting that statement could successfully pass a Polygraph (Lie Detector) test making the same comment – unless, of course, they were thinking of a relative that they truly hate or dislike. But I think I can easily pose a few questions here, based on Milliard’s own previous testimony, that that lawyer would NOT want to be asked about while being attached to one of these machines:

On November 2012, Milliard was quoted in the Lowell Sun that he had about eight (8) convicted sex offender clients who visit his office on a regular basis. So if you had a young nephew or niece about 5-6 years old, would you want them to accompany either your brother or sister into Milliard’s waiting room, and then see a strange looking individual who says to them, what a beautiful boy or girl they’ve got there. Do you see a potential problem with that scenario already? And what exactly is the restroom situation in Milliard’s office? Can only one person use it at a time, or can a few people use it simultaneously?

If you had a brother or a male cousin who needed a lawyer for an upcoming Divorce and Child Custody battle, would you honestly want them to watch Milliard’s YouTube video on how EASY and SIMPLE it is for husbands to get custody of their kids after a Massachusetts Divorce case? Heck, as a Massachusetts lawyer yourself, DO YOU honestly think it’s EASY and SIMPLE for a husband to win custody of their kids after a Massachusetts Divorce? It’s obvious that Milliard was just preying on vulnerable, desperate husbands grasping for some semblance of hope to retain a normal relationship with their kids again.

Last and by all means Least, if you had a relative who was facing either an ‘Operating Under the Influence’, or a, ‘Driving Under the Influence’ conviction, why the heck would YOU want a complete Shyster like Milliard to represent them when he couldn’t even defend himself of that same charge back in ’99??? At that point in time, Milliard already had about eight (8) years of experience as a lawyer – he was probably well aware of what he was facing from a Defendant’s perspective. It’s sort of like Milliard is just taking his client’s money to build his own bank account, and then going through the motions of pretending to be a Lawyer and representing them in court. If you think I’m wrong here, let’s see Milliard’s “success” rate on representing clients facing DUI or OUI situations. Somehow I think if Milliard was ever pressed on the issue, he’d probably claim those types of files are “confidential” and nobody else’s business.

Milliard avoids mentioning ‘Legal Case’ experience on AVVO resume

On promoting himself and his law practice on the AVVO website, Milliard came off as extremely dull, boring and lackluster — especially for an attorney who’s been involved in that profession for almost three decades and is currently 60-something. Milliard isn’t exactly viewed as a “rising star” at this point in his career, he’s more like someone who’s “rounding Third and heading for Home”, professionally speaking.

When submitting reviews for a couple other local lawyers, Milliard referred to himself as a, “Speeding and traffic ticket attorney” — as if to indicate that’s his specialty. Dude…seriously? Way back, when I was on friendlier terms with Milliard, I specifically asked him for advice on challenging a Speeding ticket, which I wound up failing miserably. This begs the question though, what is his clients’ success rate on fighting (and actually winning) Speeding ticket hearings in Court? If they’re like most cases Milliard represents, I would assume the final verdicts must really suck on his clients’ behalf.

I distinctly remember him telling me that one of the best ways an individual can beat a speeding ticket in Court is if the actual Officer who gave you that Citation didn’t show up for the hearing — that’s how the law goes in Massachusetts anyway. So if Milliard does have any high-ranking contacts with that community’s Police Department, or maybe an influential politician in that town or city, I can see that scumbag exploiting this option to try to ensure that that particular Officer failed to show up for that hearing at that time and date. However, if the Officer did show up for that hearing, I would bet my money for the Speeding Ticket to still be upheld over Milliard’s client at least 99.9 percent of the time. Hence, it’s worth demanding Milliard to substantiate his “success” rate in these types of cases, otherwise, just go elsewhere for your legal representation.

Can you imagine if popular, successful lawyers like Alan Dershowitz or F. Lee Bailey suddenly referred to themselves as, “Speeding and traffic ticket attorneys”? It would be absolutely hysterical, as well as the proverbial end of their respective careers for all intents and purposes. But then again, when we’re talking about Atty. Milliard, who still promotes a ‘Free Initial Consultation’, appears to frequently represent Court Appointed clients, and posted a YouTube video claiming just how EASY and SIMPLE it is for divorced husbands to win custodial rights of their kids, then calling yourself a “Speeding and traffic ticket attorney” makes about as much sense as anything else all in a vain attempt to dupe vulnerable clients to avail themselves with his rather poor excuse of a Law practice.

Milliard starts off by talking about his stint in the U.S. Navy, and ending it by stating that he was staunchly involved with both the American Legion and AMVETS. Words like: “successful” and “winning” were no where to be found in this self-initiated Resume. So citing one’s military experience, along with any subsequent involvement they may have with veterans’ groups, might be valuable for a person running for public office, or maybe seeking a government job like with the Internal Revenue Service, Homeland Security, etc., but again, if you’re paying an attorney about $300 per hour you basically just want to retain a lawyer capable and qualified of winning your case. Who really cares about all this patriotic military crap?

It should be noted here too, I happen to be an honorably-discharged military veteran (U.S. Air Force) and Milliard still chose to represent an individual who never served in the military to sue me in Court. So aside being in blatant conflict of interest between a lawyer and his client, where was Milliard’s military veteran allegiance to me six years ago?

Milliard’s explanation of which part of his Navy tenure was spent in the Reserves (one weekend a month and two weeks in the Summer) versus Active Duty (contractual full-time obligation usually for at least two years) is vague and ambiguous at best. In the ‘Work Experience’ section of his AVVO resume, Milliard claims he served as a ‘Legal Officer’ during his Navy stint, yet he didn’t actually attend law school till the year after he left the military. Are we to believe that the Navy prosecutes, convicts, and incarcerates its own members with a justice system which its Legal Officers are not required to hold law degrees?

Quick, can somebody please get me the phone number to, Ripley’s Believe it or Not.

For some strange reason, Milliard stated, “In the time I have been practicing, I have handled well over a thousand cases, both Civil and Criminal.” As the great Philosopher once said, So What? Since we’re talking about Atty. Milliard here: Did he win most of those “well over a thousand cases”? I seriously doubt it.

As far as Atty. Milliard touting his stint(s) as the President of the Greater Lowell Bar Association, lets not kid ourselves here — he wasn’t exactly elected to that post because of his savvy and successful courtroom reputation. While about 99.9 percent of the lawyers practicing in the Greater Lowell area are too busy representing and “actually winning” for their clients, Milliard instead chose to plan wine and cheese social gatherings for his fellow rival attorneys. Why would any would-be client — with at least a half of a brain in their head — even remotely consider this as a viable qualification to retain Milliard to represent them in a lawsuit?

The thing most disturbing about Atty Milliard’s blurb on AVVO were the items he chose to ignore. Unlike many other attorneys, Milliard had nothing posted under the categories of “Speaking Engagements” or “Publications”. Not surprisingly, Milliard also chose not to submit AVVO a photo of himself to help promote this particular section — but maybe that was a good thing since Milliard sort of looks (and acts) like the Second Coming of the late great actor Chris Farley in the movie, Tommy Boy.

But even more than that, why didn’t Milliard cite anything on his AVVO resume about his ‘Legal Cases’? Out of supposedly, “more than a thousand cases”, Milliard couldn’t even pick out at least a dozen successful verdicts? Seriously? That might, arguably, be the ONLY relevant part of AVVO resumes. What better way to gauge the actual effectiveness of an attorney than researching several of their previous successful cases?

Another point that’s definitely worth mentioning here — for those who are not familiar with Dracut Massachusetts, it happens to be a “border town” to the state of New Hampshire. Most attorneys who have offices in Dracut, not only have licenses to practice Law in Massachusetts but neighboring New Hampshire as well. A lot of the lawyers situated in Dracut even have licenses to practice in Florida, where many of the local residents go “wintering” every year. Atty. Milliard, on the other hand, is only licensed to practice Law in Massachusetts — that probably concedes a lot of potential clients away to rival attorneys due to Milliard’s own laziness and lack of versatility.

In summary here, I guess a lawyer can socialize with other lawyers to have lunch or maybe a few drinks somewhere, but a client has a heck of a lot more at stake whenever they’re faced with a lawsuit or a court case. I would highly suggest that if you’re looking for a good lawyer to represent you, and you’re familiar with AVVO or avvo.com, please take other lawyers’ comments with a grain of salt – in the long run, they’re probably not going to help you.

As for more information on Atty. Roland Milliard, please check out some of the other postings on this site I’ve done on this guy. Do an Archive search on LowellSun.com to look up some of this guy’s high profile cases. Why not go to the Lowell (MA) District Court to investigate his own OUI conviction back in ’99? That should give you a pretty good start to figure out what Atty. Milliard is all about. In other words, if life were fair — which it obviously is not — Roland Milliard should’ve been DISBARRED from ever practicing Law again in Massachusetts (or anywhere else in this country), a long, long, long time ago. Before giving Milliard some type of ridiculous Retainer fee, just remember the great statement in the Biblical book of 1 Corinthians – “If a man (or woman) be Ignorant, let him (or her) be Ignorant.”

P.S. I would’ve loved to have posted all these aforementioned comments on the AVVO website itself, unfortunately, some bimbo representative there named, Anna chose to ban me from that forum stating that she/it didn’t actually think I was ever represented by Atty. Milliard and I needed to substantiate my claims against him. When I mentioned that it should investigate Lowell Sun newspaper Archive files, or look into the Lowell (MA) District Court for Milliard’s OUI arrest in ’99 yourself, Anna stated that the onus wasn’t on AVVO to investigate any adverse claims made against lawyers. So instead, AVVO relegates itself to posting a whole bunch of false information (a.k.a., Lies) on attorney reviews due to its own laziness and professional incompetence.

File Under: Even More, Very Very Fake News.

I stumbled across this short YouTube video of my former attorney, Roland Milliard of Dracut MA — the one who I refer to elsewhere on this same blog as, Atty. Conflict of Interest.

In this clip, which Atty. Milliard appears to be addressing the jury, take a good look at his tie in relation to his belt buckle. The thing is literally hanging about 6-7 inches below his waist. If I didn’t know better, I’d swear that perhaps Milliard might have embarrassed himself a couple times in his life by forgetting to, “zip up his fly” — thus, the unusual extended length of the tie could conveniently “cover up” that area on his pants and prevent anyone from ever noticing that again in the future.

Now I’m not exactly a disciple of GQ Magazine and I’m fully aware that Atty. Milliard is about 200 lbs. over his ideal weight, but don’t you think as a “professional” attorney, charging his client about $200-$300 per hour, the guy should have a little bit of concern on the way he publicly presents himself in front of a judge or a jury? Also, isn’t it proper when a guy is wearing a suit, that he’s supposed to at least button the top button on his suit coat whenever he’s standing up? Milliard just seems to come off here like the consummate fat slob, who really doesn’t care too much about his outward appearance.

Compare and contrast: New Jersey Governor and former Presidential candidate (as well as a former attorney) Chris Christie is approximately the same size and weight as Milliard (give or take an ounce or two), YET Christie constantly conducts himself in public as a consummate professional lawyer and could amply pose for GQ Magazine despite being considerably overweight.

But even more than Atty. Milliard’s wardrobe selection in this scene, what do you think of this guy’s “passion” and “enthusiasm” compared with other lawyers you’ve seen during their opening and closing statements? Specifically, Milliard is arguing on behalf of his client, a 20-something year old Dracut woman named Melissa Rich who allegedly drove a special-needs van into a Billerica MA home back in 2011. The approximate one minute video was posted on the Lowell Sun daily newspaper’s website almost three years ago, supposedly showing the “highlight” of the trial — if that was the “highlight” of that trial, I’d sure hate to see the “low light” of this court case.

Also, did I mention that Atty. Roland Milliard served at least one term as, President for the Greater Lowell Bar Association just a few years ago? I can only assume the lawyers of Greater Lowell needed a great “role model” to look up to, so they voted Milliard to its highest elected post to have someone serve as its “standard bearer”.

Was it a TV commercial for either a dandruff shampoo or a mouthwash in the 60’s that stated, “You never get a second chance to make a first impression”. As they say in the courtroom, I rest my case.

Buyer Beware: You might really want to think twice before choosing to retain Milliard as your attorney.

Image

Lowell Sun editor Jim Campanini

 [The following Lowell Sun editorial was published last week urging the Dracut school system to reconsider its decision on terminating high school English teacher Rob Moulton for insubordination earlier that week.

The question here I’ve got for the Lowell Sun, specifically its editor James Campanini – Would YOU actually hire Mr. Moulton to your own newspaper staff? Come to think of it, there really isn’t that much difference between creative writing and newspaper reporting – why not give the newly-unemployed Mouton a chance to “prove himself” at The Sun???

Truth be told, The Sun – along with about 99.9 percent of would-be employers out there – wouldn’t touch Mr. Moulton with a 10-foot pole. I respect Free Speech and every person’s right to express themselves, HOWEVER, just about every organization in the world has established some semblance of decorum and protocol.

I don’t believe it was just the reading of his vulgar-filled short story on rock singer Bob Dylan, “A Song to Bob” to his class last April. Moulton had a vulgar nickname for his own boss, Dracut (Mass.) High principal Richard Manley, which The Sun stated it couldn’t publish because it was a family newspaper. That doesn’t bode too well if Dracut High students started to refer to their teachers as: Mr. BLEEP or Ms. BLEEP because they were just following Moulton’s example of free expression.

Then in another Sun article, Moulton referred to Principal Manley like the teacher on the Peanuts’ cartoons, basically just saying, “wha, wha, wha, wha…”. I think people need to show a little more respect to their superiors at work than what Moulton has displayed to the Dracut High principal.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot — in one of The Sun articles regarding this whole controversy, some anonymous unnamed source — supposedly very close to the situation — was quoted as saying that Manley and Stone were NOT going to win in the termination hearing against Moulton since there was blatant evidence that Moulton was being “singled out” on teachers being required to submit weekly lesson plans for their classes. So, what exactly happened to that “brilliant prediction” made by that “brilliant anonymous source” — eh, Mr. Campanini???

Are there any questions here as to why more and more people use the Internet, as opposed to mainstream media sources like the Lowell Sun, for most of their news and information these days?

Lets get real here: an average manager at a place like Wal-Mart or McDonald’s would terminate one of their employees for a lot less disrespect than that. The Lowell Sun is DEFINITELY lying to its readership here by insinuating that it would welcome a “loose cannon” like Moulton to its “newspaper family” in a New York minute.

Also, speaking about journalistic ethics, has the Lowell Sun witnessed any concrete evidence that Moulton has, in fact, retained famed Boston attorney Alan Dershowitz, or is this just a blind threat by The Sun (or perhaps Moulton)?  If Dershowitz was not willing to represent Moulton “pro bono” (or, for FREE), what would you guestimate that man’s regular hourly rate would cost his client? $500? $1000? I realize that Moulton was grossing $75K per year before he was terminated by the Dracut school system, but could he actually afford an attorney like Dershowitz, especially at this point in his life, if their arrangement was anything other than “pro bono”? I seriously doubt it. Somehow, I think if Moulton had retained Dershowitz in some type of wrongful termination lawsuit against the Dracut school system, he’d promptly tell Moulton to keep his mouth shut to the media because it just seems with each interview published in The Sun, Moulton is just digging himself deeper and deeper into his termination.

Hypothetically speaking, if a recently-fired Reporter or Columnist retained Alan Dershowitz to represent them in a wrongful termination lawsuit, why would the Lowell Sun (or any reputable newspaper) “flip-flop” on its decision to end its Employer-Employee relationship with a very vulgar and insubordinate individual? What the heck difference should it make whether the recently terminated employee hires Dershowitz to represent them in Court, or, one of the zillion other attorneys listed in the local Yellow Pages directory? To insinuate otherwise, The Sun is obviously “lying through its proverbial teeth” in this particular editorial.

If the Dracut school system reconsidered its decision to terminate Moulton and gave him his job back – what message would that be sending to all his students?]

http://www.lowellsun.com/opinion/ci_24377383/dont-close-book-until-full-story-is-told

The Lowell Sun

10/24/2013 —  07:13:46 AM EDT

Rob Moulton’s creative-writing skills would be hard pressed to produce a story with the tragic turns currently playing out at DracutHigh School.

Moulton, an accomplished English teacher and devoted Bob Dylan fan, was suspended on Oct. 3 and then fired on Monday in the fallout from reading his vulgarity-laced article in class last April.

According to School Superintendent Steven Stone, Moulton was terminated for “conduct unbecoming a teacher and insubordination.” The “insubordination” refers to Moulton’s refusal to submit lesson plans to high-school Principal Richard Manley a week in advance, a condition placed on him last May at the conclusion of a seven-day suspension.

These events have stoked emotions, particularly among Moulton’s current and former students. Close to 700 of them have signed an online petition seeking his reinstatement. This was followed by an orderly two-hour protest of approximately 30 students in his classroom on Tuesday.

Superintendent Stone and high-school Principal Manley have been portrayed as the heavies — at least by many students — for firing Moulton before he could make his case before the superintendent. That meeting is still scheduled for Friday.

Moulton, meanwhile, seems perceived as the victim of an overzealous administration intent on quashing academic freedom and in doing so, robbing students of a valued teacher.

We see a more a complicated situation.

When it comes to discipline and adherence to school policy, the buck stops with Stone. While he can weigh student sentiment, ultimately his decision can’t be the reflection of a popularity contest.

Moulton, who previously read his article to a senior Advanced Placement class, certainly must have known he was playing with fire, and should have shown better judgment.

So what’s to be done?

If Moulton’s firing stands, an ugly lawsuit seeking his reinstatement — with perhaps monetary damages — is sure to follow.

And we certainly don’t need to insert media-driven lawyer Alan Dershowitz — as Moulton threatened — into this already incendiary situation.

We urge Superintendent Stone to table Moulton’s termination, and for both parties to seek a solution through mediation.

Whether that returns Moulton to the classroom or sustains the administration’s decision remains to be seen.

But at least both sides of this story will be told.

WCAP would be much better served if it officially changed its call letters to, W-CRAP. Here are some of the reasons why:

1) Quarterly Arbitron ratings have consistently and constantly sucked since Day One – Most legitimate and reputable radio stations would either juggle their programming lineup or just outright TERMINATE incompetent on-air personalities for piss-poor ratings, but not WCAP. It seems to ASS-U-ME that it has the radio market cornered in the Merrimack Valley. What the head honchos over at ‘CAP fail to realize is that the residents of the Lowell, Lawrence and Haverhill areas can get the Boston stations just as clear – if not even clearer – than they can WCAP. Are the Merrimack Valley residents supposed to be so naive and gullible to think that tuning into a Boston radio station is on the same reception level plateau as tuning into, let’s say for example, Radio-Free Europe? But hey, don’t just take my word for it — please check out the local area ratings for yourselves. WCAP is so pathetic, it can’t even register on the “radar screen” for the top 29 local area radio stations. Also note while you’re reading through these ratings, a lot of these particular lower-tier radio stations TERMINATE its on-air personalities, general managers, etc., in an effort to spruce up ratings. With WCAP, it apparently wants people to assume that the vast majority of radio listeners in the Merrimack Valley love its crappy product:

http://ratings.radio-online.com/cgi-bin/rol.exe/arb013

2 ) The Biggest Lie in the Merrimack Valley: “WCAP – Everybody Gets It!”  – Re-read Item #1 again. This was supposedly the “brain child” of one of ‘CAP’s former owners, who just a few years ago got whacked with a Restraining Order by the current owner because he continued going to the station still pretending to run that operation. Can you say, “dysfunctional family”? The current owner can claim legal rights to that cliche due to, “intellectual property”, but the problem here is, it’s just a blatant lie. So why do they insist on perpetrating this lie? On-air ‘CAP personalities spew this lie out at least a couple dozen times an hour. If these people were honest, they’d change their radio station’s motto to either: “WCAP – Nobody Gets It!” or “WCAP – Everybody DOESN’T Get It!”. Incidentally, a now former on-air personality coined the phrase, Beatles and Beyond, which is still the name of ‘CAP’s nostalgia music show, and again, that station’s management chose to keep that name because of, “intellectual property” but in the long run, was it worth the hassle to keep that name when it wasn’t exactly helping improve its historic pathetic ratings and just further pissed off that former employee? I don’t think so.

2a ) Second Biggest Lie in the Merrimack Valley: WCAP serves the communities of Lawrence MA, Haverhill MA, Nashua NH, and Salem NH — The signal for this radio station may reach these communities, but it offers ZERO programs (with the exception of a two hour show on late Saturday morning for Lawrence MA) for this particular area. One can only assume this is nothing but an advertising ploy to dupe businesses to purchase ad time from WCAP despite the fact that none of the residents of these communities would have any vested interest to even listen to that station.

3) WCAP Management is Certainly Getting What It’s Paying for with it’s On-Air Personalities – I don’t believe any of its on-air personalities have any formal broadcasting or journalism experience. These on-air talk show hosts are all either business owners or former local politicians. Most of these people allegedly “barter” their services to ‘CAP in lieu of receiving a salary. They get to either promote their business and/or political agenda for free while on-air.  How the heck are these folks supposed to professionally compete with their Boston radio counterparts? A couple years back, ‘CAP had nationally-known comedian Jimmy Tingle for a grand total of about three months and it buried him on a Saturday morning time slot but on the flip-side of that, being a comedian doesn’t exactly qualify somebody to be either a journalist or a broadcaster. Tingle was rumored to have left ‘CAP because they weren’t paying him anything. ‘CAP probably could’ve hired Jay Severin after he got fired from ‘TKK several years ago, but I don’t think a guy like that would’ve worked for free. Heck, as of this posting,  Severin has become available yet again as he was just let go, along with station talk show host colleague Jeff Katz, from 1200 AM. Since this would require owner Sam Poulten to literally sweep the cobwebs off his wallet to actually lure one of these two guys, I can’t vision either Severin nor Katz ever coming to work for WCAP. When it comes to the Arbitron ratings on the weekday morning and afternoon rush hour time slots, I can’t see how ‘CAP is even on the proverbial radar screen against its Boston competition. That radio station must be lying to its own advertisers stating it’s doing so great – when it’s definitely NOT – just to stay afloat in this dog-eat-dog media market.

4) WCAP’s incestuous relationship with its “competition(?)”, the Lowell Sun – After reading last month’s issue of, The Valley Patriot – whose Publisher, incidentally, is a weekly ‘CAP talk show host – it was pee-in-your-pants hysterical to read how ‘CAP owner, Colonel Sam Poulten accused the Lowell City Solicitor of taking a whack at his radio station after giving an interview and divulging a ‘CAP tax delinquent problem to Lowell Sun columnist, Chris Scott. Poulten insinuated in the article that it might have been a little unethical for the City Solicitor to talk with Mr. Scott since, according to Poulten, The Sun is a “competitor” of WCAP. Really?? Since when?? In the past year, how often has Chris Scott been a guest on a ‘CAP talk show?? How about Sun editor Jim Campanini – that guy’s certainly no stranger to being a periodic guest on a certain ‘CAP talk show. As ‘CAP owner, why doesn’t Colonel Poulten immediately initiate an anti-fraternization policy to prevent Lowell Sun bigwigs from doing any further “guest  appearances” on ‘CAP talk shows? But what about all the reported news items broadcasted on ‘CAP in the morning – aren’t they 100 percent lifted from the early edition of the Lowell Sun? I believe they are. So this is why most Merrimack Valley residents turn to either the Internet, or the Boston media for all their news and information. It’s obvious that the head honchos from both WCAP and the Lowell Sun have their heads so far up each others’ rear ends, that they can’t see the forest for the trees.