New Castle Police Coverup Continues

Some states prosecute public employees for illegal practices to the full extent allowed by their laws. The ex- Governor of Illinois was sentenced to 6 ½ years in prison for racketeering and fraud on September 6th. Some states will promptly investigate allegations of serious ethical lapses by law enforcement officials. For example, the Attorney General for the State of New Jersey resigned on August 15th due to a serious ethical violation occurring on May 26, 2006.

But everyone is still on the job in Chappaqua - without ever being subjected to any disciplinary actions, in a matter that has churning since 1999, involving another top law enforcement officer. In this case he is New Castle police Lieutenant John Vize,who is accused of keepingt fraudulent payroll records for at least a year in order to help a fellow officer, Dennis Mahoney, obtain a 20 year pension when the officer had in fact only worked 19 years.

According to twenty years’ worth of documents seized from the New Castle Police Department in 2003 by the Public Integrity Section of the office of Westchester District Attorney Jeanine Pirro, Lt.Vize was also involved with arranging shifts under Mahoney’s name, referred to by some of the department’s members as “Mahoney days.” Approximately 25% of the Department’s officers have been reported to have participated in the scheme which was clearly reflected in the Department’s three month work schedules, constantly monitored by the entire staff, that were clearly posted in a glass encased bulletin board prominently displayed behind the Police Department’s front desk.

The State Comptrollers Office, which manages public employee pension funds, has also investigated these allegations. And the office of State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer filed a civil lawsuit on July 27th , 2006, under section 63-c of the New York Executive Law (the “Tweed L a w ” ) against the two New Castle police officers, seeking to recover damages of $ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 and more than $ 1 8 0 , 0 0 0 in pension funds paid out by the state of New York since 2000, and salary and benefits paid to Vize by the Town during the period of breach of fiduciary duty from on or about August 1999 to on or about July 2000, as a result of a “paper trail more than a mile wide” according persons involved with the investigation.

Prosecuting matters of public corruption are increasingly rare in today’s environment. Two Westchester District Attorneys, Jeanine Pirro and Janet DiFiore, have thus far failed to prosecute anyone involved in this public integrity case despite having seized nearly 20 years of records three years ago. DiFiore spokesman, Lucien Chalfen, told this reporter on September 6th, “this is an open case that is active and I’m not able to comment further.”

A spokesman for the office of New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer who asked to remain unnamed, when asked why the public integrity unit of Spitzer’s Criminal Division only filed a civil case and did not pursue any criminal charges in this fraud litigation, said, “ Two avenues were open, and while criminal charges could be brought, the office of the Attorney General determined that only a civil case would be prosecuted at this time.”

The police lieutenant accused in this matter, John Vize, reportedly has not been fired nor disciplined in this matter. In fact, he was the top ranking officer on duty at the end of August when Chief Robert Breen, who is still on the job, was away on vacation. Breen governs a department that has 40 fulltime members and eight other staff althoughthe community which encompasses Chappaqua and Millwood, is noted for its very low crime rate.
Town Administrator Gennaro Faiella is still on the job and has not issued any public reports regarding this matter. No public reports nor demands for any resignations have been made by the town’s supervisor or any members of the town board. As a result, the Town of New Castle has not filed any charges against the officers with the Offices of the Westchester District Attorney nor the New York State Attorney General.

Tension permeates the New Castle Town Hall as a result of this lawsuit and others that have been brought against the town. Their police officers have been working without a contract for 19 months. The New Castle police have conducted informational picketing in Chappaqua’s downtown business district as recently as Wednesday, September 6th in order to draw attention to what the say is the town’s refusal to negotiate in good faith. Lt. Vize, a union trustee, has been quoted as stating “This town is loaded. They know it, we know it.”
Steve Kaufman vs. Town of New Castle et al On June 24th, 2005, a lawsuit was filed in Supreme Court, Westchester County, entitled Steve Kaufman vs. Town of New Castle; New Castle Police Department; Gennaro Faiella; Robert Breen; James Baynes; John Vize; James Tully and Public Employee Risk Management Assn., Index No.05-10178.

Plaintiff Kaufman, who is Jewish, had been employed by New Castle as a Police Officer since August, 1983, receiving good reviews throughout his career. According to the lawsuit, the top five positions in the New Castle Police Department have been held by individuals of Irish national origin including Chief Breen, Lt. James Baynes, Lt. John Vize, Lt. Charles Ferry, Detective Sergeant James Carroll (Ret.), and Detective Sergeant Marc Simmons

Kaufman was the only Jewish police officer employed by the town until approximately 2004. His lawsuit alleges that the Town’s Police Department systematically excluded police officers of non-Irish national origin from top positions in the Department which has also created and perpetrated a hostile work environment against Kaufman because he is Jewish, and as for a second cause of action because Kaufman filed.worker compensation claims.
Kaufman’s suit states that “during the recent past and continuing to the present, plaintiff has been the subject of anti-Semitic remarks on numerous occasions. These anti-Semitic remarks have been made by other Irish police officers in the presence of individual defendants and have been made by the individual defendants. These remarks continued with the acquiescence of the defendant Department’s Administration, who did nothing to prevent them, but, instead, reward those who utter the anti-Semitic remarks.

Defendant Tully, on several occasions, usually at the police muster, made malicious anti-Semitic statements. Defendant Breen and the Administration, instead of disciplining defendant Tully, rewarded him with the title of Administrative Sergeant. Defendant Tully was then given other choice assignments by defendant Breen. Plaintiff was present on many of the occasions.

Police Officer Gary Beaumont, on numerous occasions, made comments about hating Jews. Again, although having knowledge of these comments, defendant Breen and the Department’s Administration rewarded Officer Beaumont by making him Traffic Enforcement Officer, where he would have further opportunity to target and profile Jews and other people he hates. The Department’s Administration also rewarded Officer Beaumont by appointing him as Field Training Officer.

There are two police officers named James Carroll. One was a Detective Sargeant, the other is now a Sergeant. One recent year, both were at the front desk of defendant Department. They had just returned from working at a Jewish Holiday service at Temple Beth El in Chappaqua. In plaintiff ’s presence, they uttered anti-Semite comments such as “Jew bastards” and “fucking Jews.” The also stated that “Jews have too much money.” Plaintiff had to tell both Officers Carroll that he, as a Jewish officer, was offended by their bigoted comments.
The two officers scoffed at plaintiff and laughed at him.

On a prior occasion, a similar incident took place in plaintiff’s presence. On that occasion, then Police Officer Carroll also made malicious, anti-Semitic statements.

The anti-Semitism displayed by both Officers Carroll are well-known to defendant Breen and Department’s Administration. However, defendant Breen, instead of disciplining these individuals, has promoted them and/or given them choice assignments at the expense of more qualified, non-Irish police officers. This favoritism promotes the complained of hostile work environment.

Plaintiff has also learned that, on another occasion, defendant Baynes referred to a civil rights organization named the Southern Poverty Law Center, as a bad organization run by a bunch of “fucking Jews.” Plaintiff has also been informed that defendant Vize has referred to him as “one stupid Jew.”

These types of anti-Semitic remarks have caused plaintiff a great deal of stress and mental anguish. It is not very pleasant going to work every day knowing how your supervisors feel about you because of your religion.”
New Castle’s Insurance Carrier Denies Coverage for Kaufman’s Lawsuit On July 14, 2005, the Town of New Castle’s insurance carrier for matters such as this litigation, informed the Town that they would not cover any expenses associated with matter as they are not covered under the terms of the policy.

New Castle would be well served to look nearby for methods of dealing with serious issues regarding police department management. The Knapp and Mollen Commissions were established to deal with police corruption in New York City. The Knapp Commission issued a report in 1972 and the Mollen Commission report in 1995 raised questions about the New York Police Department’s ability to police itself and recommended an independent panel with subpoena power in order to deal with a culture of corruption.

The latter commission has a $500,000 budget and a permanent staff of four lawyers. It audits and studies the department’s anticorruption strategies. It has been criticized as ineffectual because it has no power to compel the department to provide information. The six commissioners, all lawyers, are appointed by the mayor and serve without pay. The staff is paid by the city and serves at the pleasure of the mayor of New York City.

Prompt resolution of issues regarding police department governance will impact any attempts by New Castle to retain and/or renew its accreditation from the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services according to a source familiar with the process.

Loss of this accreditation could impact the town’s insurance rates.

New Castle attempts to restrict access by residents to the Westchester Guardian newspaper

While the Town of New Castle hasn’t yet disciplined or fired any personnel as a result of the charges laid out in Attorney General Spitzer’s suit, they have nevertheless, been quite busy confiscating The Westchester Guardian’s newspaper’s distribution box that was positioned in downtown Chappaqua next to that of 4 other newspapersoutside of Starbuck’s. The box was released only after payment of a $74.95 ransom. Days later the boxes at the Chappaqua Train Station and near Rite Aid were ordered removed by a representative of New Castle town government.