Showing posts with label Police Brutality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Police Brutality. Show all posts

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Yonkers Police Commissioner Edmund Hartnett/Police Brutality in Yonkers.

Thursday, April 23, 2009

In Our Opinion...

Yonkers Police Commissioner Hartnett Continues To Ignore Police Brutality

In our April 16th issue, Damon K. Jones, Executive Director of the Westchester Chapter of the National Black Police Association declared, in a press release, “There is hypocrisy in Westchester politics. Why did the County Executive and County Legislators push a Shot Spotter System that
is neither preventative nor a true quality-of-life investment for the residents of Mount Vernon and Yonkers, while residents of Ardsley receive monies for school improvement, road maintenance, and wireless systems for their schools?”


Jones was essentially questioning whether the $3 million that the County had agreed to spend on the state-of-the-art technology to more promptly locate the scene of gunfire and probable violence on the streets of Yonkers and Mount Vernon might not have been spent more effectively on other, more fundamental, police department equipment such as computers and working car cams in squad cars. He further suggested that some of the funds might have been better allocated for preventative measures such as job placement, outreach and educational assistance in coordination
with Operation Protect. Officer Jones also expressed his views in The Journal News to which Yonkers Police Commissioner Edmund Hartnett saw fit to respond on Sunday, April 12th.


Responding to Jones’ position, Hartnett accurately indicated that Jones felt the taxpayer funds “would be better spent on long-term solutions to long-standing problems in both communities,” Mount Vernon and Yonkers. Then Hartnett gave Jones the benefit of the doubt declaring, “Although he is probably well-intended, Mr. Jones is missing the point.”

In Mount Vernon, how can Commissioner Chong have any realistic expectation of cooperation and assistance from law-abiding adults and seniors when their 12- and 13-year-old sons and grandsons are beaten and bitten up by squads of rogue cops bent on racial retaliation and punishment
reminiscent of the South of 50 years ago; missing only the high-pressure hoses?


And then there is the Yonkers Police Department, to whom the Mount Vernon Police turned when their own dog was otherwise occupied. For some two and a half years now, Edmund Hartnett, who authored the response to Officer Jones’ comments, has been heading that department as its commissioner.

Hartnett declares, “Gun violence is an immediate problem that requires using all resources and tools at our disposal,” and, We certainly agree. He goes on to say, “The People, especially the children of Yonkers, and Mount Vernon need our help and protection now.” Again, We couldn’t agree
more.


However, the People, especially the children, shouldn’t need our help and protection from violent rogue cops such as the squad of both Mount Vernon and Yonkers Police who beat up and mauled three young boys found loitering in the A.B. Davis Middle School one Saturday evening several
weeks ago.


Furthermore, perhaps if the cities of Yonkers and Mount Vernon had meaningful civilian complaint review boards, Irma Marquez would not have been brutally body-slammed by Officer Wayne Simoes as a half-dozen other Yonkers officers did nothing to stop or apprehend him; and, Rui Florim would not have been beaten, nearly to death, by six off-duty Yonkers cops in the Town of Greenburgh. Commissioner Hartnett, and the Mayor who hired him, see no need for a civilian complaint review board. Each of them have told The Guardian as much, publicly. They like things
just the way they are; and, so, apparently, does DA Janet DiFiore, who covers up the actions of rogue cops while prosecuting not only their civilian victims, but good cops as well.


Our Readers Respond....

Re: Paul Cote


Dear Editor:

I am writing regarding Paul Cote, the Westchester Correction Officer. I have known this man for a very long time. My sister (who lives in Mount
Vernon) is Paul’s aunt. When I heard of his involvement with the incident at the County Jail I could not believe this was the same Paul Cote I know.


I know Paul to be a family man who is respectful, soft-spoken, loving and kind. My understanding is he went to help his partner, another correction officer, who had a problem with an inmate. How come Paul is the only one charged and convicted? Are young people, familiar with this case, going to believe “it doesn’t pay to help a friend”?

Paul doesn’t deserve this injustice. He has suffered enough. Send him home to his children, his wife and his family.

Catherine Mascali,
Staten Island
.

Thursday, July 10, 2008

Westchester Guardian/Janet Difiore.

Jeff Deskovic

The Irma Marquez Case:
What Should Have Happened


As has been public knowledge for quite some time now, there is a serious problem with police brutality in Yonkers. The Guardian, nearly two years ago, in September of 2006 virtually opened Pandora’s Box with an article about a “Mother, 72, Daughter 49,” the Bostwicks, one of whom was roughed up, and the other brutalized and charged with bogus offenses by Yonkers Police. The police were responding to their call because a teenager who had been beaten up and bloodied by a neighbor of theirs came pleading for help to their door.

Within a week of the appearance of their story, the local chapter of the NAACP, chaired by President Karen Edmonson, held a seminar at the Riverfront Library, which was attended by approximately 125 people, at which 25 to 30 people came forward to describe their personal experiences and that of their families with Yonkers Police brutality. Their information was recorded by law students from Pace Law School under the direction of Randolph McLaughlin and Debra Cohen.

About a year later, at a similar public forum in Sept. 2007, Mayor Amicone was booed and chased out of the auditorium for trying to suggest that there was no problem. I will explore what happened to another Yonkers Police brutality vic-tim, Irma Marquez, and discuss what
should have happened as well as discussing community relations between the public and the police department, which was discussed at a recent public forum held in Mount Vernon at the Grace Baptist Church.

In March 2007, Irma Marquez’ niece was hit with a bottle and knocked unconscious at La Fonda restaurant in Yonkers. EMTs were called, and Marquez, a middle-aged home health aide, who was present, was also trying to tend to her niece, bending over her while the EMTs were working. An officer took Marquez by the arm and backed her up, and she accidentally stepped on the foot of another officer in the process.

At that point Yonkers police officer Wayne Simoes approached and shoved Marquez’ shoulder. Marquez apparently objected to being shoved, and Simoes grabbed her by the waist, lifted her in the air and slammed her face-first into the tile floor, handcuffing her as she lay unconscious.

She suffered a broken jaw and extensive bruising and had to be hospitalized for four days. The whole incident was captured on a concealed
security video camera. Marquez was nonetheless arrested and charged with Obstruction Of Governmental Administration, and an internal
inquiry cleared Simoes of any wrongdoing. After Marquez’s attorney, Gary Certain, viewed the tape, he asked for the charges to be dropped.
Assistant DA Paul Scharf, bureau chief of the local courts and grand jury, responded that he had reviewed the tape with Assistant District
Attorney Mark Garretto, Bureau Chief in Yonkers, and they had decided to follow through on the case against Marquez.

Attorney Certain said he then sent a letter to DiFiore with details of the video and pictures of Marquez’s injuries. She called him and indicated the case would be re-examined. However, he never heard back from her until early May, when her Office said it was proceeding to trial. At some point prior to the jury verdict, the Justice Department informed the City of Yonkers that it was investigating the case. Upon learning that, Yonkers Mayor Phil Amicone held a news conference to praise the department, saying its officers “do their jobs the right way in full accordance with the law.” Marquez was acquitted following a jury trial, and proceeded to file an $11.3 million dollar lawsuit against the police department.

After the trial, Westchester District Attorney Janet DiFiore launched an internal inquiry into how her own office handled the matter. She suggested on Friday, June 27, in a terse written statement that the case was ‘mishandled’. She stated, “Personnel have been disciplined,
operational changes are being made, and enhanced training is being put in place.” Her office declined further comment and wouldn’t say who
was disciplined. However, Mark Garretto, who had been the bureau chief in Yonkers since DiFiore became district attorney in 2006, was reassigned to the Motions And Appeals Bureau. DiFiore’s spokesman, Lucien Chalfen, remained tight-lipped, not willing to say whether
Garretto’s transfer was related to the Marquez case.

On June 27th the FBI arrested Simoes and accused him of violating Marquez’ civil rights. FBI Agent Kristina Norris wrote in a criminal complaint against Simoes filed in U.S. District Court in White Plains that when agents asked police officers about the images from a surveillance videotape that showed Officer Wayne Simoes brutally slamming Irma Marquez facedown to the ground, “Several officers
stated that, based on their training and experience, Simoes’ use of force against Marquez was unreasonable and excessive,” Simoes surrendered to federal authorities at 9 a.m. in White Plains and made a brief court appearance two hours later. He was released on $300,000 bond.

Yonkers Police said in a statement that Commissioner Edmund Hartnett has told the department’s Internal Affairs Division to reopen its investigation. Additionally, Yonkers police released a statement that said Simoes had been placed on modified duty. Here is what should have happened: Firstly, the police officers who were on the scene should have arrested Simoes’ right there on the spot for assault. The fact that a perpetrator draws his paycheck from a law enforcement position does not excuse him. If anything, the fact that he is in a position of public trust and equipped with a gun and a baton, and other equipment, and has the ability to call others for help, and yet nonetheless abuses it, makes it an aggravating circumstance, Aggravated Assault.

When the other officers failed to arrest him, the supervisor should have arrested him, while suspending those officers who were present and did nothing. When that failed, each person up the line in authority should have made the arrest while suspending those under him/her who failed to do so. When the matter ultimately got to the level of the District Attorney’s Office, Assistant District Attorneys Mark Garretto and Paul Scharf should have charged Simoes with assault, while also dismissing the charges against Marquez.

After all, the incident was caught on tape and therefore there was no question as to what happened. When that failed, District Attorney DiFiore should have had Simoes arrested and had the charges dismissed against Marquez. A District Attorney is, I believe, ultimately responsible for everything that goes on in the office. In point of fact, they are there to oversee and supervise everything. While I can see
how it could get difficult to stay on top of every single thing, at all times, while letting nothing escape one’s notice, Attorney Certain stated that he sent a letter to DiFiore with details of the video and pictures of Marquez’s injuries, and upon receipt of which she called him
and indicated the case would be re-examined.

Therefore, she knew precisely what was going on. As I said earlier, when the officers who were present saw Simoes bodyslam Marquez, they should have immediately arrested them. If an ordinary citizen did that to somebody in the presence of police officers, they would
be arrested on the spot. We also see in the Marquez case that the blue wall of silence is very much still alive. Every single one of those officers who maintained that code of silence should be suspended. Lest anyone think that I am anti-cop or overreacting, we are talking about a
crime that was initially covered up, and likely still would be but for release of the videotape.

The covering up that typically goes on when the system covers up for the system, no matter what the facts are, manifested itself in the initial police internal investigation clearing Simoes. Mayor Amicone, making his public statement defending and praising the police when word got out that the Justice Department was investigating Simoes, and the District Attorney’s office not dropping the charges against Marquez and arresting him, represent a repititious conspiracy and scenario in blatant violation of the victim’s civil rights.

That Marquez had to be subjected to the trauma, expense, uncertainty, and risk of being wrongfully convicted that a trial brings for someone that the tape shows was innocent of, is shameful and unlawful. Anyone who believes that the reinvestigation by the Yonkers Police Department would have happened had the FBI not arrested Simoes, is naïve. In support of that thesis, I would like to point out that the tape and photos were around during the first go around. I am convinced that Simoes received preferential treatment from the court system once he was arrested, that only the connected, powerful, political, wealthy, and some law enforcement personnel are accorded: being released
on bail the same day that he was arrested. This two tiered system of justice-one for the poor and common folk, and the other for those on the upper end of the socio economic status, has got to stop if the law is to have any moral authority. I believe that the District Attorney’s Office should have released the names of those employees who were disciplined. Why should it be a private thing? I believe in transparency in government, and that the public has a right to know what is going on, and why. When someone has been transferred or disciplined for wrongdoing, the public should know so that we can have confidence that the same individual will not be able to repeat his or her actions,
and that it will not be tolerated by any other staff member. It would show that everything is above board, nothing is going on behind the scenes, nothing being swept under the rug, and no us v. them mentality. As a citizen of Westchester, I, along with the public, would like to know, without having to draw an inference; but instead being explicitly told, how the people who were disciplined were actually disciplined.

Why is it when ordinary citizens are arrested it is announced to the public; their names and what the charges are, and what the punishment ends up being. Whenever tragedy or misfortunate comes, I believe that we have a moral responsibility to victims to do what we can to see to it that they do not suffer for no reason. We, instead, must learn the lessons of the incident and do what we can to prevent any reccurrence.
The maxim that “Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them in the future,” is true. Accordingly, I have some concrete ideas involving morality and legislation that would, if followed, prevent future cases such as Irma Marquez.

I would call upon the honest, law abiding police officers of Yonkers to take back the police force from the band of rogue cops who are engaging in police brutality, the breaking of the laws, and general corruption. There should be no feelings of solidarity between honest
cops and dishonest ones. Instead, true officer solidarity should come from the observable actions of honest, law-abiding police work that stays within the limits of the law, involves no brutality, cuts no corners, does not violate the rights of any civilians, whether suspects or not; takes no bribes, and engages in no corruption. The maintaining of good relations should be dependent upon the maintaining of those rules.

Prosecutors should pay special attention whenever there are allegations by defendants that they’ve been roughed up by police. In every instance where that has proven to be the case, charges against accused should be dismissed. To do less than that is to allow rogue law
enforcement officers to hijack the legal system and use it to their own ends as a means of covering up their own brutality. It is not unusual for such officers to falsely charge people with “resisting arrest” in order to try to justify their previous unlawful use of force. It also serves
to further punish a defendant who they have previously brutalized. We must enact laws which encourage law enforcement personnel who witness other officers committing crimes, to step forward and press charges; with the failure to do so being grounds not only for dismissal, but also to be charged with the crime of aiding and abetting and acting in concert. The same should apply to any supervisors who witness, or in any way learn of the occurrence of such activity and yet take no action to investigate and arrest where the evidence is secured.

In reality, those who turn their heads are, in fact, assisting the culture to form in which brutality is acceptable. In my book, that is aiding and
abetting. The legislation should be not just on a state level, but also on the federal level, authorizing the FBI and U.S. Attorney to step in whenever state law makers fail to do so. Each time an of-ficer gets away with police brutality, it threatens the safety of us all while setting
the stage for acceptability to set in, thus causing it to happen again. Until such time as legislation is passed to that effect, departments should adopt internal policies requiring officers and supervisors to take action when they witness or otherwise learn of police brutality.

Legislation is absolutely necessary which would establish an independent prosecutor to handle any and all cases involving the police. Police and prosecutors work together, and it is only natural that a certain amount of familiarity or cordiality develops between them, and such personal interaction can often factor into the thought processes with regard to whether to prosecute or not. Someone who has no personal familiarity with the people involved in a case, and can instead look at the facts of a case objectively with no personal consideration; in short, an independent prosecutor is what is needed. An independent prosecutor is not bound by the constraints imposed by the relationship
between district attorneys and police. Additionally, one cannot overemphasize the importance of Civilian Complaint Review Boards. However, such Boards cannot be effective unless they have subpoena power, and the power to suspend and bestow penalties.

Thursday, June 12, 2008

Janet Difiore.

Thursday, June 12, 2008

The Advocate
Richard Blassberg

DiFiore’s Incestuousness With Yonkers
Police Sacrifices Victims Of Police Brutality
Tony Castro Predicts, “It Will Come Back To Haunt Law Enforcement”


Nearly two years ago, in our September 21, 2006 issue, The Guardian blew the lid off years of Yonkers Police brutality, revealing an incident in 2005 in a front-page story entitled Mother, 72, Daughter, 49, Charge Yonkers Police Brutality. That story, which detailed the serious civil rights violations the Yonkers Police Department committed when they roughed up a middle-aged woman and her elderly mother, up behind Saunders High School, opened the floodgate to reports by residents, all over the City, and caused the sudden resignation and retirement of Police Commissioner Robert Taggart.

Within a week of the appearance of that story, President Karen Edmonson and Attorney Mike Sussman, of the Yonkers chapter of the NAACP, held a speak-out session at the Riverfront Library, attended by more than 125 persons, many of whom told about their own, and
their family’s, including mother’s and children’s, brutal encounters with the Yonkers Police, involving little or no provocation or justifi-
cation. Attorneys and law students from Pace Law School’s Criminal Justice Center, recorded their accounts which ultimately came to the attention the United States Attorney’s Office and the FBI.

More than a year ago, the FBI, in response, announced that they were conducting a “formal investigation into allegations of police brutality in Yonkers.” The Guardian is aware of visits by FBI special agents to a number of victim/complainants, including Tina and Mary Bostwick, the mother and daughter subjects of our first report. To date, we are not aware of any reports having been issued, or af-firmative action having been taken by the United States Attorney’s Of-fice, or the FBI, that might impact the continuing, unlawful brutality, and false criminal charges routinely worked against innocent men, women and children by, perhaps, 20 or so rogue, violent police offi-cers out of a force of some 670.

Last fall, a second speak-out was held at the Riverfront Library; this time in the auditorium, a few weeks prior to the mayoral election. Mayor Amicone, who had been campaigning nearby, came in to the auditorium in an ill-advised attempt to whitewash and dilute the concerns of the diverse, but mostly minority, audience. He was quickly booed and jeered, and literally chased from the auditorium.

In case after case, the routine has been the same; Yonkers Police beating up innocent citizens, then charging them with Disorderly Conduct, Obstruction of Governmental Administration, Resisting Arrest, Assault Upon A Police Of-ficer, or any combination thereof, both to cover and provide justifi-cation for their own criminal, civil rights violations, and as “bargaining chips” intended to discourage civilian victims from lodging criminal and/or civil complaints.

The practice has been going on for many years; DA Jeanine Pirro, for the most part, looking the other way. However, DA Janet DiFiore
has literally become a co-conspirator with Police Commissioner Hartnett and Mayor Amicone in case after case, as in the Irma Marquez
case. Marquez, all but killed by a totally unjustified body slam delivered by Yonkers Police Of-ficer Wayne Simoes, on March 3, 2007, was charged and prosecuted by DA DiFiore for Obstruction Of Governmental Administration and Disorderly Conduct, an absolutely absurd response by the DA given the clear, indisputable evidence provided by a security camera videotape at the scene.

Those who might wonder why Janet DiFiore repeatedly abandons her sworn duty to protect innocent citizens in her rush to aid and assist
rogue Yonkers cops, while covering up the Department’s serious civil rights violations, need to understand that she has a deep indebtedness
to the Yonkers Police, given the circumstances surrounding her race for District Attorney against Tony Castro in 2005. In point of fact, Di-
Fiore, whose husband attempted to bribe Right-To-Life candidate Anthony DiCintio off the ballot, was nonetheless publicly endorsed by
the Yonkers Police Department.

They were the host department at the Yonkers Polish Center within days of the election at a rally by police brass from Harrison, Dobbs
Ferry and other departments. But, more importantly, and more suspect, they were the department assigned to secure the warehouse storage
facility on Saw Mill River Road, where more than 300 voting machines were impounded at DiFiore’s request; a request filed three days
before the election was even held. This writer, who was reporting at the time for Martinelli Publications, witnessed the recanvas of those machines.

Having been Tony Castro’s campaign director when, as a total unknown he came close to defeating Jeanine Pirro four years earlier, I quickly recognized the peculiar voting patterns revealed in the 2005 Yonkers recount, not to mention numerous machines with broken seals. Despite the so-called “Non- Aggression Pact” of 2001, where Andy Spano and Larry Schwartz, and Reggie Lafayette, and all their henchmen, were actually part of the “fix” to reelect Jeanine Pirro, I never doubted that she won by six points, actually receiving more votes than my candidate. I have never enjoyed that lack of doubt with respect to Janet DiFiore. Given the totality of the circumstances, what reasonably
intelligent individual could?

Finally, speaking of Tony Castro, exposure of Irma Marquez’ case, less than two weeks ago, with its shocking videotape, brought to mind his client, Rui Florim, now approximately 23, who was beaten by six Yonkers police officers approximately 2 years ago. The facts of his encounter are no less outrageous and egregious.

Florim, who had gotten off work at 10:30pm from O’Porto Restaurant in the Village of Hartsdale, Town of Greenburgh, was being driven home by a female friend, having just crossed Central Avenue when they were pulled over by flashing lights in a dark area of the roadway. Six Yonkers Police Officers, including one female, all dressed in civilian clothing, pulled Florim from his friend’s car. And, forcing him into their unmarked car, four of them beat him about the face and head mercilessly.

He was then taken to St. Joseph’s Hospital, opposite Yonkers Police Headquarters, a hospital repeatedly used as the depository for victims of Yonkers Police brutality. He required 70 stitches and staples and five days in the Intensive Care Unit to recover. While he was in St. Joseph’s, Yonkers Police physically barred his family, and his attorney, from any contact with him.

Tony Castro represents Mr. Florim in State Court because, as with Irma Marquez, DA DiFiore is prosecuting him on trumped-up charges. Florim, will, no doubt, also be bringing an action in Federal Court. Castro told The Guardian, “The District Attorney’s routine response to Yonkers Police brutality is very short-sighted. She is not looking ahead to the long-term implications for juries and verdicts.

Jurors will learn what has been taking place. And, what has happened in The Bronx is what will happen in Yonkers, and all over
Westchester.” Castro went on, “It will come back to haunt law enforcement all across Westchester in the near-future. Their jury service is where citizens express their feelings about what they experience with police.”

Tony Castro, a former Bronx Assistant District Attorney, with 14 years experience, who trained hundreds of prosecutors, and who was
Deputy Bureau Chief of Homicides and the Grand Jury, was referring specifically to the preferential treatment DA DiFiore has repeatedly
shown the Yonkers Police Department at the expense of innocent citizens, as she has consistently been unwilling to investigate and prosecute their brutality against men, women and children. He is concerned that grand juries and trial juries will become so cynical and jaded that they will refuse to indict, or convict, in cases that are dependent upon police accounts.
Powered By Blogger

About Me