New facts raise a serious question about Stare investigation

An Advocate report today gives a new dimension to the role of Newark Law Director Doug Sassen in the charge of solicitation brought against Frank Stare, a city council candidate.

Thanks to the Advocate's aggressive and timely reporting, the hidden facts behind this series of events have been made public. Authorities had these facts in hiding and the paper had to make a public records request to get to a voice stress analysis report, "along with transcripts and recordings made during the investigation," in the words of today's Advocate report.

These records indicate that there was "sufficient stress" on a couple questions asked of the accuser "to indicate possible deception" about whether Stare asked her if she "play(ed) for money" and whether he grabbed her and whether he tried to kiss her.

The Advocate also reported that "Stare can be heard on a taped interview with police saying he is "absolutely" willing to take a polygraph test multiple times but also adding he did not have full faith in their accuracy." Also that Stare "told police ... he would like to consult with an attorney if the case was moving forward."

Nevertheless, Sassen told the Advocate that "the totality of that report in our opinion was supporting of the victim's statement."

Question still to be answered:

Why would none of this information have been provided voluntarily if the goal were not to place Frank Stare in the worst possible light before the election Tuesday?