Girl says firefighter raped her

Girl says firefighter raped her

There are 988 comments on the Telegram & Gazette/Sunday Telegram story from Aug 4, 2006, titled Girl says firefighter raped her. In it, Telegram & Gazette/Sunday Telegram reports that:

To the woman he allegedly raped, Jeffrey Belmore is a dangerous predator who belongs behind bars.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Telegram & Gazette/Sunday Telegram.

mark

Walpole, MA

#41 Sep 17, 2006
Justice is served wrote:
Women who desire to bring a baby into the world first ask themselves what kind of a life they can offer the child. Is the marriage stable? Will the Dad be around to help raise the child? She's started this kid's life with a black mark against him/her already.
That's not fair.
Am I going to blame the baby? Nope. Would I say Mr. Belmore had a role in creating yet another victim in his unborn child? DEFINITELY.
Would I go so far as to say the wife helped? Well, she didn't keep it from happening...
I would love to be able to tell the future also, Like many Families out there. "is the marriage stable, will the dad be around to help the child"...Hmm... So if the answer is yes, then it is a guarantee?.A Black Mark...Hmmm, So any Child without a father has a black mark? What is a black mark really? It is really not your place to judge why this Woman has chosen to have a baby, nor to presume as to why. She was not on the stand, and did not commit a crime.The fact of the matter is that she is having a baby, and I wish this poor girl well.
Anonymous

Framingham, MA

#42 Sep 17, 2006
"Justice Is Served" is 100% correct. I agree that the pregnancy is more than coincidental with the trial's timing.

How will this poor child have any friends that are allowed to come over and play with a registered sex offender as her father?

The best thing Keri could do is divorce him and attempt some normalcy for this innocent child. Jeff has no job, means of support and one hell of a reputation. If she stays with him then she is endangering the welfare of her own child.
impartial observer

United States

#43 Sep 18, 2006
Hey, Anonymous from Framingham...

Quit pointing out the obvious here, will ya? I mean, we appear to have scores of people who still want to coddle the pedophile and pity the pregnant wife.

I guess one of the common denominators in that marriage is poor foresight....
Anon from Southbridge

Somerville, MA

#44 Sep 18, 2006
What about the other guilty party in this case? Do we just ignore the fact that Chief Harris hired this man, despite knowing about the rape indictment? Where is the outrage in Charlton?
anon

Bedford, MA

#45 Sep 18, 2006
To the best of my knowlege, the father of the victom did not testify at either trial.
Susan

Fall River, MA

#46 Sep 18, 2006
impartial observer wrote:
Hey, Anonymous from Framingham...
Quit pointing out the obvious here, will ya? I mean, we appear to have scores of people who still want to coddle the pedophile and pity the pregnant wife.
I guess one of the common denominators in that marriage is poor foresight....
There's no need to slam somebody for voicing an opinion. That's the point of this forum.
impartial observer

United States

#47 Sep 18, 2006
You misunderstood me. I was trying to tell Anonymous that they were spot on....100% correct.
impartial observer

United States

#48 Sep 18, 2006
anon wrote:
To the best of my knowlege, the father of the victom did not testify at either trial.
He testified in the second trial.
anon from southbridge

Cambridge, MA

#49 Sep 18, 2006
it is really sad that a mess had been made of so many lives
Susan

Fall River, MA

#50 Sep 18, 2006
I hope the victim's mother/father speaks at the sentencing. I know the Judge is giving the 30 days to allow time for people to prepare impact statements.
anon

Bedford, MA

#51 Sep 18, 2006
impartial observer wrote:
<quoted text>
He testified in the second trial.
If you mean the Sept 06 trial which just completed, he did not testify.
mark

Walpole, MA

#52 Sep 18, 2006
anon from southbridge wrote:
it is really sad that a mess had been made of so many lives
Well Said!
impartial observer

United States

#53 Sep 18, 2006
anon wrote:
<quoted text>
If you mean the Sept 06 trial which just completed, he did not testify.
You clearly are out of the loop. He testified. Anyone else here who bothered to pick up a newspaper or watch the news wanna back me up on this one?

You're dead wrong on this one.....
Crystal clear

Worcester, MA

#54 Sep 18, 2006
Anon from Bedford & Impartial Observer:

Actually, both of you are sort of right...the victim's father did not testify at either trial. However, at the second trial, the prosecution attempted to call him as a rebuttle witness, and the judge would not allow it. This is due to the fact that he had been present in the courtroom during testimony, even though it was only up until the comment was made on the stand that he was supposed to rebut.
a friend

AOL

#55 Sep 18, 2006
Impartial observer...A) good job getting your facts straight and B)you are in no way impartial

that being said...anyone of you who have commented in any way on Keri and their child are disgusting human beings who deserve to be shot!

how dare you pass judgement on her?
Im Just Saying

United States

#56 Sep 18, 2006
Personally, I think it would be hard for *anyone* to remain impartial on this one. Especially anyone with kids, double that if they have daughters.

Having an opinion is pretty much impossible....I guess you can call yourself impartial if you don't have blind faith in the party they declared guilty, though...
Who is the Victim

Venus, TX

#57 Sep 18, 2006
Impartial Observer has been spot on, if you ask me.

As to how someone could pass criticism on Keri....get a grip....doesn't make a whole lot of sense to get pregnant when your husband is up on those charges, is it?

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out...
anon

Bedford, MA

#58 Sep 19, 2006
Crystal clear wrote:
Anon from Bedford & Impartial Observer:
Actually, both of you are sort of right...the victim's father did not testify at either trial. However, at the second trial, the prosecution attempted to call him as a rebuttle witness, and the judge would not allow it. This is due to the fact that he had been present in the courtroom during testimony, even though it was only up until the comment was made on the stand that he was supposed to rebut.
I don't know how that makes us both right. He didn't testify. Anyone who was there would know that. Makes you suspect anything else written on this board.
Anon from Framingham

Cambridge, MA

#59 Sep 19, 2006
I've been back & forth on how much sympathy I'm feeling for Keri. At this point, it seems she has two options; she can stay married to a man who will be incarcerated during the first 4 to 6 years of her babies life and then figure out how to tell her daughter why daddy is a convict and a registered sex offender and TRY to make her understand why none of her school friend's parents will let them cover over for a pajama party OR she can cut her losses now, make a life for herself and spend the next 18 years trying to make it up to her daughter
And, let's not forget that Keri made ALL these decisions (to get married and get pregnant) on her own. And I really don't give a crap why she made those decisions. It's just sad that the kid has to pay for them!
Amazed

Gloucester, MA

#60 Sep 19, 2006
Wow...some people just HAVE to have the last word.

Hey "anon from Bedford":

I think what "Crystal clear" was trying to point out is that the father WAS CALLED to testify, but was unable to due to the fact that he had been present in the courtroom during testimony.
Having said that, let me make another quick observation...

Yes, of course anyone who was at the trial knows the above statement to be fact. Furthermore, anyone who was present for Mr. Belmore's testimony would know that statements he made on the stand about the father were the ONLY REASON the father was called to testify AT ALL.

WHY? Because, in reality, the father's testimony was not needed to prove the case! We've learned THAT from the 22 jurors that voted to convict WITHOUT it! What may have been nice, however, is if the judge had allowed the father to testify in regards to Mr. Belmore's untrue statements about him.

Maybe the reason he didn't is that he knew the statements were ridiculous!

Anyway, basically what I'm trying to say is that it doesn't matter whether the father testified or not. What matters, as I've said, is that Mr. Belmore was found guilty in the end.

I can only hope he receives a just sentence.

My prayers go out for Kerry and her unborn child, 2 more victims in this case.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Dedham Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
meds n tar Thu hereinboston 1
thank you ma voters god bless america (Jan '10) Thu dGo mnaDed lyHo i... 4
News Norwood Man Charged with Selling Cocaine Apr 25 Clown by Proxy 1
News Boston man charged with disturbing the peace Apr 23 Just Wondering 1
News Craig F. Walker/Globe Staff Could Boston have a... Apr 22 Jazz 1
News Prince's Boston shows proved just what a talent... Apr 22 Tony Curtz 2
News John Blanding/Globe Staff Putting Tubman on the... Apr 22 Currency Exchanged 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Dedham Mortgages