The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
Taking A Closer Look At A Piece Of Child Witness Judicial Legislation
Governor Spitzer has signed legislation authored by Assemblyman Adam Bradley (D-White Plains) that will improve the safety and wellbeing of children who testify in court proceedings (Ch. 548 of 2007).
“Sometimes, children must testify in court and that can be a terrifying experience,” said Bradley. “It can cause severe emotional stress and that is why courts in rare circumstances have allowed these children to testify out
of the courtroom. However, I felt that not enough kids were being afforded this opportunity because of a technical requirement in the law.”
Currently, child witnesses can be afforded the right to testify out of the courtroom by a two-way closed circuit television if there is extraordinary circumstances and if testifying in court would cause “severe mental or emotional harm.” However, Bradley noted that this standard does not protect enough children who might suffer substantial emotional or psychological harm if forced to be present in the courtroom. His measure would eliminate the extraordinary circumstances requirement and allow judges more leeway in determining if a child witness should be offered the right to testify out of court through closed circuit television.
“My goal was to provide better safeguards for these vulnerable witnesses while making sure that the testimony remains valid,” continued Bradley.
“This measure does both. By increasing the opportunities for child witnesses to testify out of court through closed circuit television, we are ensuring that they feel safe in a secure environment and that the courts can still obtain vital evidence.”
The legislation will also allow district attorneys to more aggressively prosecute cases. In difficult circumstances where specific charges require children to testify in court, possibly against their abuser, a district attorney may reduce the charges to lessen the emotional stress on a child who has already been traumatized. “In pursuing justice, the DA runs the risk of further victimizing the child by having him or her testify in open court against
the alleged abuser,” said Bradley. “My measure gives the child the emotional safety of testifying in a manner, out of the reach of the perpetrator, while providing the DA the evidence he or she needs to make the case.”
Assemblyman Adam Bradley is quite correct in his observation, “sometimes children must testify in court and that can be a terrifying experience.” However, one must be very careful when attempting to legislate any change in the judicial environment, particularly those changes most likely to influence the protocols and procedures in the criminal court realm as opposed to the civil part.
Bradley asserts that having to testify in court, “can cause severe emotional distress for children.” The first question that must be addressed involves the upper limit, by age, of those minors who are eligible for treatment
under this new legislation. In other words, who is being designated a child? Will the limit be 14, 15 or 16? The second question involves the definition of what Bradley calls, “a technical requirement in the law.”
Now, it’s important to distinguish between the various circumstances under which a child might be called upon to testify in court. Obviously, the most traumatic and emotionally charged situation is that in which the child is a victim/witness; a criminal act has been committed against him/her. A second circumstance, not as traumatic, in most cases, from the standpoint of potential courtroom testimony, involves a criminal act to which he/she was somehow a witness, but not the victim. Of course, the victim may very well be the child’s mother, father, sibling, grandparent, etc.; and such relationships are also capable of producing a strong, emotional reaction from a juvenile observer of violence or, possibly death.
However, a violent enough act against a total stranger can be extremely traumatic for a young witness to recount as well. Children need not be testifying in a criminal court to experience something terrifying in the witness box. Divorce between a child’s parents is a terrifying, emotionally-charged ordeal, even without having to testify
and, in effect, choose sides between the two most important people in his life. Testimony under that scenario is a bad scene that keeps getting worse.
Thus, the matrimonial court is fraught with trauma and sadness for even the strongest of kids. Perhaps the only judicial environment not inherently painful and emotionally loaded for the child witness is civil court in an action where the parties are unrelated and, better yet, unknown to the child. However, that is the rare instance likely to bring a child witness to court. And, it would be foolish to overlook the nervousness of appearing as a witness
in the unusual environment of any courtroom from a child’s perspective regardless of the cause of action.
Contacted, Assemblyman Bradley declared, “The legislation does two things.” He explained, “It protects children as much as we are able to and gives DAs better opportunities so they will not have to substantially reduce charges to levels not commensurate with the crime.”
Specifically, Bradley’s legislation was intended to lower the bar, the threshold of proof, previously adhered to in New York State, required to move a court to permit a child witness to testify from a remote location by way of closed-circuit television. Under the new modifying legislation, a judge need no longer find “extraordinary circumstances,” coupled with “severe emotional or mental harm.” Under the Bradley bill, that comports with the Federal Standard, as enunciated by the Supreme Court, extraordinary circumstances has been totally eliminated, and severe mental or emotional harm has been reduced to “serious harm.”
Of course, under the new standard, while cross-examination is still possible, if somewhat filtered and diluted, confrontation of one’s accuser by the accused, a fundamental Constitutional right, is totally, and intentionally,
eliminated. Perhaps, in a perfect world, where prosecutors are not all about winning at any cost, and where “protecting the innocent” is as respected and pursued as “prosecuting the guilty”; perhaps under those conditions I would be more comfortable about this bill.
However, in the real world, all too often prosecutors could care less about the search for the truth or about serving the ends of justice. For far too many it’s all about winning, and obtaining a conviction by any means.
For such self-serving prosecutors, unfortunately far too many in number these days, any legislation, no matter how well intentioned, that more easily negates or nullifies as fundamental a protection as the Confrontation
Clause, is something to be wary of.
In conversation with Bradley, I raised the question about age, specifically the age beyond which a witness can not be deemed a “child” for purposes of his legislation. The Assemblyman was not certain, without the
legislative package before him.
In the hands of a divisive, manipulative prosecutor, a 14, 15, or 16- year-old boy or girl is capable of delivering a pre-choreographed fiction, particularly if the accused is in another room, and the cross-examination is by remote control. Yes, it is important, very important, to relieve the stress and trauma that many children experience when compelled to testify in court. But, given the frequency of prosecutorial misconduct in both state and federal courts these days, we cannot be too careful when legislating the delicate balance that must be maintained between prosecution and defense.
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Our Readers Respond...
Not So Fast, Ms. Berger
Dear Editor:
Last night in Hastings was the first in a series of debates involving candidates for the Democratic Party nomination, which will be decided in the primary, on September 18th. Ms. Suzanne Berger, the party’s designee, and its Chairperson, was questioned about her involvement in a no-bid contract from her employer, the law firm Bryan, Cave, which was accepted and voted upon by the Greenburgh Town Board, with Supervisor Paul Feiner in dissent. She denied any inappropriate pressure was put on the Board. But in her recent campaign filings, which listed many thousands of dollars, lawyers from her firm contributed a large percentage of those funds. She denied any quid pro quo. She also, as Chairperson of the Greenburgh Democratic Party, engineered a $5000 contribution from the party treasury that she controls to her campaign. Up until a year ago, when the law
was changed, it was illegal for a political party to contribute to any one side in a primary. She talks about supporting the new ethics code in Greenburgh, but before the ink was dry on the paper it was written upon, she has violated its spirit.
This same law that prohibits contributions from developers to incumbents, allow these same developers to contribute to the Democratic Party and then have the party pass the contributions to Suzanne Berger, Eddie Mae Barnes and to Steve Bass. The public should demand an investigation into the Town’s arrangement with Bryan, Cave, its no-bid 6-7 figure contract, and her connection. In the spirit of the new law she should return all those tainted contributions and reimburse the Democratic Party.
Richard J. Garfunkel,
Tarrytown
Taking The Lid Off The Truth
Dear Editor:
The week before last, Westchester County Department of Correction officials were able to stave off a disturbance within the old jail facility. A housing unit/block within the Old Jail staged a hunger strike. The inmates were protesting issues, one being the recent change in the visiting schedule.
An inmate described it as “racially discriminatory because the jail has a predominance of black inmates. The new
schedule is from 9 to 5 daily, as if black families are sitting at home, not working”. Many lawyers are complaining about the new schedule also.
Other issues included the high price of commissary items, recreation equipment; and the newly imposed lockdown procedures which affects the old jail. The lockdown procedures differed between the old jail, new jail and penitentiary. The old jail has or had an 18-hour lock-in of inmates. The new jail and Penitentiary
allow inmates to be unlocked/out from 7:30am until 10:30pm daily with the exception of the population
count. The count takes place between shifts at 2:30pm for the 7-3 shift and the inmates are locked down for the count which takes approximately one hour. Note the population of a housing unit in the Penitentiary could be 60 inmates and in the new jail the count is 44 necessitating the need of a lockdown to count and control movement.
The old jail housing unit handles an average of 30 inmates and only half of the unit is allowed unlocked for dayroom privileges at one time. The day in the old jail starts out with one side utilizing the dayroom from 8:30am
until 11:00am locking down to be served lunch. After lunch a switching of sides occurs at 12:00pm and the other side now comes out for the dayroom. This side would normally remain locked down in the dayroom through the count until 4:00pm which is dinner. The new procedures require all inmates be locked down in their cells for the
count, as a means to instill uniformity of policies and procedures to match those of the Penitentiary and new jail.
The old jail unit is the only unit that locks down for all meals so the 2:30 count which concludes at 3:30 right before the 4:00pm dinner ends the dayroom actually at 2:30pm. The dayroom privileges are now reduced to almost being locked down in a cell all day long Punitive segregation is a 24-hour lockdown with one hour recreation and a half hour hygiene so what’s the difference of three hours. Not well thought out!
Two inmates were held responsible for the action; one was sent to punitive segregation and the other
was shipped out. The following day another housing unit joined the protest planning to flood the jail, but
their efforts were quickly thwarted.
The issue with recreation speaks for itself. The inmates are taken outside to a yard or gymnasium
and thrown one basketball for up to thirty inmates. No other equipment is available for exercising for
the releasing of stress. Where do the funds earned from outrageous commissary commissions go because it
is certainly not funding equipment.
We won’t even begin to discuss the issues of commissary in this letter. All of this comes as a result of
Westchester County’s Department of Correction’s attempt to gain National Accreditation which would
justify Commissioner Joseph Spano’s politically influenced rise to power and fame.
I don’t believe this to be the end of the problems, it’s just the beginning.
Well Informed!!!
Response To Camacho Column
Dear Editor:
I am a software architect working for Westchester County Government for 24 years. I read Eridania
Camacho’s article in the August 30, 2007 edition and I agree with her. Westchester County does not give Hispanics any opportunity for promotion to decision-making positions, for example:
Since I was promoted to my Software Architect position some 8 years ago, and one year later I
received my Masters degree in Information Systems, I have applied and taken 6 promotional tests for
higher positions. Either I got no reply to my requests or just a “maybe next year”, ‘get-around’ replies from
my managers. In those events where I was told that I needed to get bet-ter training in computer programming
and had no chance to be sent by the County to an educational center and learn new computer techniques, I took self-training courses and learned the topics and subjects and proved to others my learned and practical experiences.
However, it was still “not enough to ful ll the positions.” I am currently half-way to completing my Doctorate degree in Management Information Systems. However, it is still “not enough-to-ful- l a position”.
Others, non-Hispanics, more lucky than I and, with much less education, have quali ed for these positions. Maybe we should asked why?
Cesar Sanchez
Reader Calls For Better Guardian Fact Check
Dear Editor:
I write in connection with your article in the August 23rd edition regarding Chief David Hall and Captain Marraccini of the Harrison Police Department. Your article referred to me as the Harrison Town Attorney as well as Jonathan Kraut, the Deputy Village Attorney. The article states that Mr. Kraut and I are receiving “$10,000.00 annual stipends in addition to their salaries, to handle the negotiations with these rms over their commercial vehicle violations” in support of an alleged RICO-type enterprise.
Next time, check your facts before you print such allegations. Mr. Kraut and I, as well as Village Attorney
Fred Castiglia and Deputy Village Attorney Joseph Latwin are receiving $5,000.00 annual stipends from the Town of Harrison. This is not for negotiating with commercial drivers ticketed by the Harrison Police Department, but for plea- bargaining summonses issued only by the New York State Police, which are primarily speeding and other moving violations. The Harrison Police Department prosecutes and plea-bargains their own summonses, including summonses issued to commercial vehicles.
Had Mr. Blassberg checked the actual Town Board Resolution that authorized the annual stipends, or had he attempted to discuss this issue with me, he would have been able to print the truth and not the factual inaccuracies “reportedly” told to him by others.
Frank P. Allegretti
Town Attorney, Town of Harrison
Editor’s Note:
We assume full responsibility for incorrectly stating that attorneys involved in negotiating vehicular summonses were receiving $10,000.00 annual stipends when in fact those stipends are only $5,000.00. It would appear,
however, that the total for such legal services nevertheless amounts to $20,000.00 annually. We regret that inaccuracy and agree with attorney Allegretti that our account would’ve been more accurate had we contacted him or one of the other stipend recipients to verify the facts.
Thank you for bringing the error to our attention.
Not So Fast, Ms. Berger
Dear Editor:
Last night in Hastings was the first in a series of debates involving candidates for the Democratic Party nomination, which will be decided in the primary, on September 18th. Ms. Suzanne Berger, the party’s designee, and its Chairperson, was questioned about her involvement in a no-bid contract from her employer, the law firm Bryan, Cave, which was accepted and voted upon by the Greenburgh Town Board, with Supervisor Paul Feiner in dissent. She denied any inappropriate pressure was put on the Board. But in her recent campaign filings, which listed many thousands of dollars, lawyers from her firm contributed a large percentage of those funds. She denied any quid pro quo. She also, as Chairperson of the Greenburgh Democratic Party, engineered a $5000 contribution from the party treasury that she controls to her campaign. Up until a year ago, when the law
was changed, it was illegal for a political party to contribute to any one side in a primary. She talks about supporting the new ethics code in Greenburgh, but before the ink was dry on the paper it was written upon, she has violated its spirit.
This same law that prohibits contributions from developers to incumbents, allow these same developers to contribute to the Democratic Party and then have the party pass the contributions to Suzanne Berger, Eddie Mae Barnes and to Steve Bass. The public should demand an investigation into the Town’s arrangement with Bryan, Cave, its no-bid 6-7 figure contract, and her connection. In the spirit of the new law she should return all those tainted contributions and reimburse the Democratic Party.
Richard J. Garfunkel,
Tarrytown
Taking The Lid Off The Truth
Dear Editor:
The week before last, Westchester County Department of Correction officials were able to stave off a disturbance within the old jail facility. A housing unit/block within the Old Jail staged a hunger strike. The inmates were protesting issues, one being the recent change in the visiting schedule.
An inmate described it as “racially discriminatory because the jail has a predominance of black inmates. The new
schedule is from 9 to 5 daily, as if black families are sitting at home, not working”. Many lawyers are complaining about the new schedule also.
Other issues included the high price of commissary items, recreation equipment; and the newly imposed lockdown procedures which affects the old jail. The lockdown procedures differed between the old jail, new jail and penitentiary. The old jail has or had an 18-hour lock-in of inmates. The new jail and Penitentiary
allow inmates to be unlocked/out from 7:30am until 10:30pm daily with the exception of the population
count. The count takes place between shifts at 2:30pm for the 7-3 shift and the inmates are locked down for the count which takes approximately one hour. Note the population of a housing unit in the Penitentiary could be 60 inmates and in the new jail the count is 44 necessitating the need of a lockdown to count and control movement.
The old jail housing unit handles an average of 30 inmates and only half of the unit is allowed unlocked for dayroom privileges at one time. The day in the old jail starts out with one side utilizing the dayroom from 8:30am
until 11:00am locking down to be served lunch. After lunch a switching of sides occurs at 12:00pm and the other side now comes out for the dayroom. This side would normally remain locked down in the dayroom through the count until 4:00pm which is dinner. The new procedures require all inmates be locked down in their cells for the
count, as a means to instill uniformity of policies and procedures to match those of the Penitentiary and new jail.
The old jail unit is the only unit that locks down for all meals so the 2:30 count which concludes at 3:30 right before the 4:00pm dinner ends the dayroom actually at 2:30pm. The dayroom privileges are now reduced to almost being locked down in a cell all day long Punitive segregation is a 24-hour lockdown with one hour recreation and a half hour hygiene so what’s the difference of three hours. Not well thought out!
Two inmates were held responsible for the action; one was sent to punitive segregation and the other
was shipped out. The following day another housing unit joined the protest planning to flood the jail, but
their efforts were quickly thwarted.
The issue with recreation speaks for itself. The inmates are taken outside to a yard or gymnasium
and thrown one basketball for up to thirty inmates. No other equipment is available for exercising for
the releasing of stress. Where do the funds earned from outrageous commissary commissions go because it
is certainly not funding equipment.
We won’t even begin to discuss the issues of commissary in this letter. All of this comes as a result of
Westchester County’s Department of Correction’s attempt to gain National Accreditation which would
justify Commissioner Joseph Spano’s politically influenced rise to power and fame.
I don’t believe this to be the end of the problems, it’s just the beginning.
Well Informed!!!
Response To Camacho Column
Dear Editor:
I am a software architect working for Westchester County Government for 24 years. I read Eridania
Camacho’s article in the August 30, 2007 edition and I agree with her. Westchester County does not give Hispanics any opportunity for promotion to decision-making positions, for example:
Since I was promoted to my Software Architect position some 8 years ago, and one year later I
received my Masters degree in Information Systems, I have applied and taken 6 promotional tests for
higher positions. Either I got no reply to my requests or just a “maybe next year”, ‘get-around’ replies from
my managers. In those events where I was told that I needed to get bet-ter training in computer programming
and had no chance to be sent by the County to an educational center and learn new computer techniques, I took self-training courses and learned the topics and subjects and proved to others my learned and practical experiences.
However, it was still “not enough to ful ll the positions.” I am currently half-way to completing my Doctorate degree in Management Information Systems. However, it is still “not enough-to-ful- l a position”.
Others, non-Hispanics, more lucky than I and, with much less education, have quali ed for these positions. Maybe we should asked why?
Cesar Sanchez
Reader Calls For Better Guardian Fact Check
Dear Editor:
I write in connection with your article in the August 23rd edition regarding Chief David Hall and Captain Marraccini of the Harrison Police Department. Your article referred to me as the Harrison Town Attorney as well as Jonathan Kraut, the Deputy Village Attorney. The article states that Mr. Kraut and I are receiving “$10,000.00 annual stipends in addition to their salaries, to handle the negotiations with these rms over their commercial vehicle violations” in support of an alleged RICO-type enterprise.
Next time, check your facts before you print such allegations. Mr. Kraut and I, as well as Village Attorney
Fred Castiglia and Deputy Village Attorney Joseph Latwin are receiving $5,000.00 annual stipends from the Town of Harrison. This is not for negotiating with commercial drivers ticketed by the Harrison Police Department, but for plea- bargaining summonses issued only by the New York State Police, which are primarily speeding and other moving violations. The Harrison Police Department prosecutes and plea-bargains their own summonses, including summonses issued to commercial vehicles.
Had Mr. Blassberg checked the actual Town Board Resolution that authorized the annual stipends, or had he attempted to discuss this issue with me, he would have been able to print the truth and not the factual inaccuracies “reportedly” told to him by others.
Frank P. Allegretti
Town Attorney, Town of Harrison
Editor’s Note:
We assume full responsibility for incorrectly stating that attorneys involved in negotiating vehicular summonses were receiving $10,000.00 annual stipends when in fact those stipends are only $5,000.00. It would appear,
however, that the total for such legal services nevertheless amounts to $20,000.00 annually. We regret that inaccuracy and agree with attorney Allegretti that our account would’ve been more accurate had we contacted him or one of the other stipend recipients to verify the facts.
Thank you for bringing the error to our attention.
In Our Opinion...
It Shouldn’t Have Had To Come To This
We were gratified, but not at all surprised by word from the Justice Department last week, that it had commenced a “full-scale investigation” into persistent allegations of Yonkers Police brutality. For nearly a year since our cover story of September 21, 2006, Mother 72, Daughter 49, Charge Yonkers Police Brutality, we
have continued to cover attempts by the Yonkers chapter of the NAACP and other well-intentioned citizens, to work with the Yonkers Police Department in an effort to rein in an organization whose propensity for brutality is virtually legend throughout Westchester, and matched only by the level of official denial.
Phil Amicone and his newly-appointed Police Commissioner, Edmund Hartnett, during the year since our story surfaced and, some three dozen new complaints were filed, have pursued a policy of foot-dragging and denial.
All the while, a hardcore violent element, perhaps 12 or 15 officers, two percent of a 650-member police
force, continued to brutalize men, women, and teens, alike, sending many to area hospitals, some with life-threatening injuries. One young 21-year-old Portuguese-American man was pulled from his car in the Town of Greenburgh and beaten by four Yonkers police officers in civilian clothing. He required 59 stitches and five days
in the ICU at St. Joseph’s Hospital to survive, as all the while his parents and his attorney were barred from visiting him.
It’s well-known in law enforcement circles that the Yonkers Police have had a bad reputation for brutality for many years. At the County Jail, it’s been a not-so-funny standing joke that Correction Officers can always tell the detainees coming from Yonkers by how badly beaten and bruised they are upon arrival. And, while it is true
that minority residents are often more likely to experience police contact, nevertheless, the problem in Yonkers cannot truly be labeled as one of racial discrimination, as recently acknowledged by Al Sharpton. To the contrary, those complaining of police brutality come from every ethnic and social background.
Commissioner Hartnett, brought to the City by John Fleming, a discredited cop who worked with him in the 46th Precinct, The Bronx, apparently was hired not to resolve and put an end to the long-standing practice of brutality, but rather to cover up and deflect questions and concerns lodged by citizens and press alike. The
Guardian’s experience with him convinced us, many months ago, that he was hired to cover up and deny, deny, deny.
And, so it is, having attended the speak-out at Riverfront Library and other gatherings, witnessing horrific accounts of unprovoked violence against Yonkers residents by the very persons paid and entrusted to protect them, that we express our gratitude and gratification over the fact that the United States Justice Department has finally stepped up to the plate to conduct a full-scale investigation, and hopefully prosecute those responsible, thus bringing down the curtain on a long and disgraceful chapter in Yonkers Police Department history. Surely Mayor Amicone, Commissioner Hartnett, and yes, the Westchester District Attorney’s Office, have made it abundantly clear that their treatment of choice merely involved a broom and a carpet.
Finally, we would recommend that Federal investigators might do well to look into “Mother 72, Daughter 49,” Tina and Mary Bostwick, early on. Their case is virtually a road map, not only regarding police perpetrators, but also the practices of Yonkers judges, prosecutors, and City Hall-connected attorneys who protect rogue cops while re-victimizing the victims of police brutality. Theirs is a system of elevated charging, intimidation, and coercion, all aimed at avoiding exposure of police misconduct and violence while keeping a handle on their victims by way of ACD dispositions; a RICO-type enterprise on a surprisingly large scale that continues to
generate significant revenue for favored attorneys.
It Shouldn’t Have Had To Come To This
We were gratified, but not at all surprised by word from the Justice Department last week, that it had commenced a “full-scale investigation” into persistent allegations of Yonkers Police brutality. For nearly a year since our cover story of September 21, 2006, Mother 72, Daughter 49, Charge Yonkers Police Brutality, we
have continued to cover attempts by the Yonkers chapter of the NAACP and other well-intentioned citizens, to work with the Yonkers Police Department in an effort to rein in an organization whose propensity for brutality is virtually legend throughout Westchester, and matched only by the level of official denial.
Phil Amicone and his newly-appointed Police Commissioner, Edmund Hartnett, during the year since our story surfaced and, some three dozen new complaints were filed, have pursued a policy of foot-dragging and denial.
All the while, a hardcore violent element, perhaps 12 or 15 officers, two percent of a 650-member police
force, continued to brutalize men, women, and teens, alike, sending many to area hospitals, some with life-threatening injuries. One young 21-year-old Portuguese-American man was pulled from his car in the Town of Greenburgh and beaten by four Yonkers police officers in civilian clothing. He required 59 stitches and five days
in the ICU at St. Joseph’s Hospital to survive, as all the while his parents and his attorney were barred from visiting him.
It’s well-known in law enforcement circles that the Yonkers Police have had a bad reputation for brutality for many years. At the County Jail, it’s been a not-so-funny standing joke that Correction Officers can always tell the detainees coming from Yonkers by how badly beaten and bruised they are upon arrival. And, while it is true
that minority residents are often more likely to experience police contact, nevertheless, the problem in Yonkers cannot truly be labeled as one of racial discrimination, as recently acknowledged by Al Sharpton. To the contrary, those complaining of police brutality come from every ethnic and social background.
Commissioner Hartnett, brought to the City by John Fleming, a discredited cop who worked with him in the 46th Precinct, The Bronx, apparently was hired not to resolve and put an end to the long-standing practice of brutality, but rather to cover up and deflect questions and concerns lodged by citizens and press alike. The
Guardian’s experience with him convinced us, many months ago, that he was hired to cover up and deny, deny, deny.
And, so it is, having attended the speak-out at Riverfront Library and other gatherings, witnessing horrific accounts of unprovoked violence against Yonkers residents by the very persons paid and entrusted to protect them, that we express our gratitude and gratification over the fact that the United States Justice Department has finally stepped up to the plate to conduct a full-scale investigation, and hopefully prosecute those responsible, thus bringing down the curtain on a long and disgraceful chapter in Yonkers Police Department history. Surely Mayor Amicone, Commissioner Hartnett, and yes, the Westchester District Attorney’s Office, have made it abundantly clear that their treatment of choice merely involved a broom and a carpet.
Finally, we would recommend that Federal investigators might do well to look into “Mother 72, Daughter 49,” Tina and Mary Bostwick, early on. Their case is virtually a road map, not only regarding police perpetrators, but also the practices of Yonkers judges, prosecutors, and City Hall-connected attorneys who protect rogue cops while re-victimizing the victims of police brutality. Theirs is a system of elevated charging, intimidation, and coercion, all aimed at avoiding exposure of police misconduct and violence while keeping a handle on their victims by way of ACD dispositions; a RICO-type enterprise on a surprisingly large scale that continues to
generate significant revenue for favored attorneys.
The Court Report
By Richard Blassberg
Mayor Amicone Imperils City Of Yonkers Recklessly Trashing The First Amendment
United States District Court, White Plains Judge Charles L. Brieant Presiding
Last Wednesday, August 29th, Attorney Jonathan Lovett filed papers in United States District Court, Southern District of New York, White Plains, under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, on behalf of several readers of The Westchester Guardian, residents of Yonkers, Plaintiffs whose Constitutional rights, as guaranteed under the First Amendment, were violated by Philip Amicone, individually, and several Yonkers City employees under his command.
The Plaintiffs, some 23 in all, constitute merely the first wave of hundreds of Yonkers residents who have called, faxed, and e-mailed The Guardian, outraged by the Mayor’s removal of The Guardian’s distribution boxes throughout the City, thereby curtailing their ability to access and read the content of the newspaper for some
three weeks. Also named as Defendants in the suit, in their individual capacities, in addition to Amicone, were Police Commissioner Edmund Hartnett, Commissioner of Public Works, John A Liszewski, Corporation Counsel Lawrence A Porcari, Jr., Police Officer Paul Wood, and numerous “John Doe” police officers and sanitation workers.
The suit essentially charges Mayor Phil Amicone and several Yonkers City employees, with content-based First Amendment violations in that their concerted effort to confiscate and dispose of more than 50 of The Westchester Guardian’s distribution boxes, together with their contents, “intentionally prevented, and/or substantially impaired the dissemination of The Guardian within and throughout the City,” as the result of which Plaintiffs were “unable to obtain/read The Guardian and learn information, ideas and opinions as provided by that publication regarding on-going corruption in the City’s government.”
The complaint further alleges that as the result of Defendants’ actions, “Plaintiffs have been caused to suffer irreparable damage to their rights as guaranteed by the First Amendment; emotional upset; impairment of their otherwise insight into the criminal wrongdoing routinely indulged in by City officials, and persons with whom they associate; fear of the secrecy with respect to which Defendants have deliberately enshrouded their misfeasance, malfeasance and corrupt practices; fear of the blatant abuse of power and authority by the Defendants to support their campaign of terror against The Guardian, and its readers; anxiety attributable to the suppression by
Defendants of The Guardian and the impairment of Plaintiff ’s right to knowledge and information; punishment for exercising their right of free speech; and otherwise rendered sick and sore.”
The suit demands a jury trial and seeks an award from all Defendants in compensatory damages of $10 million, as well as an equal award in punitive damages, for a total of $20 million, “or such additional punitive damages as the jury may impose.”
Many observers have expressed shock over the heavy-handed tactics employed by Mayor Amicone, in his misguided attempt to silence criticism and commentary with regard to the conduct of his administration and the increasingly difficult plight of homeowners and taxpayers in Yonkers under his reign. Many individuals close to City government have recently expressed concern over Amicone’s failure to confront and deal with major issues. In this regard, readers may recall several articles that began to appear in The Guardian, nearly one year ago,
and frequently since, concerning Yonkers Police brutality, and Mayor Amicone’s and Police Commissioner Hartnett’s failure to adequately respond to that long-standing problem. Last week it was announced that
as a result of mounting complaints the United States Justice Department has launched an investigation into the matter.
By Richard Blassberg
Mayor Amicone Imperils City Of Yonkers Recklessly Trashing The First Amendment
United States District Court, White Plains Judge Charles L. Brieant Presiding
Last Wednesday, August 29th, Attorney Jonathan Lovett filed papers in United States District Court, Southern District of New York, White Plains, under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, on behalf of several readers of The Westchester Guardian, residents of Yonkers, Plaintiffs whose Constitutional rights, as guaranteed under the First Amendment, were violated by Philip Amicone, individually, and several Yonkers City employees under his command.
The Plaintiffs, some 23 in all, constitute merely the first wave of hundreds of Yonkers residents who have called, faxed, and e-mailed The Guardian, outraged by the Mayor’s removal of The Guardian’s distribution boxes throughout the City, thereby curtailing their ability to access and read the content of the newspaper for some
three weeks. Also named as Defendants in the suit, in their individual capacities, in addition to Amicone, were Police Commissioner Edmund Hartnett, Commissioner of Public Works, John A Liszewski, Corporation Counsel Lawrence A Porcari, Jr., Police Officer Paul Wood, and numerous “John Doe” police officers and sanitation workers.
The suit essentially charges Mayor Phil Amicone and several Yonkers City employees, with content-based First Amendment violations in that their concerted effort to confiscate and dispose of more than 50 of The Westchester Guardian’s distribution boxes, together with their contents, “intentionally prevented, and/or substantially impaired the dissemination of The Guardian within and throughout the City,” as the result of which Plaintiffs were “unable to obtain/read The Guardian and learn information, ideas and opinions as provided by that publication regarding on-going corruption in the City’s government.”
The complaint further alleges that as the result of Defendants’ actions, “Plaintiffs have been caused to suffer irreparable damage to their rights as guaranteed by the First Amendment; emotional upset; impairment of their otherwise insight into the criminal wrongdoing routinely indulged in by City officials, and persons with whom they associate; fear of the secrecy with respect to which Defendants have deliberately enshrouded their misfeasance, malfeasance and corrupt practices; fear of the blatant abuse of power and authority by the Defendants to support their campaign of terror against The Guardian, and its readers; anxiety attributable to the suppression by
Defendants of The Guardian and the impairment of Plaintiff ’s right to knowledge and information; punishment for exercising their right of free speech; and otherwise rendered sick and sore.”
The suit demands a jury trial and seeks an award from all Defendants in compensatory damages of $10 million, as well as an equal award in punitive damages, for a total of $20 million, “or such additional punitive damages as the jury may impose.”
Many observers have expressed shock over the heavy-handed tactics employed by Mayor Amicone, in his misguided attempt to silence criticism and commentary with regard to the conduct of his administration and the increasingly difficult plight of homeowners and taxpayers in Yonkers under his reign. Many individuals close to City government have recently expressed concern over Amicone’s failure to confront and deal with major issues. In this regard, readers may recall several articles that began to appear in The Guardian, nearly one year ago,
and frequently since, concerning Yonkers Police brutality, and Mayor Amicone’s and Police Commissioner Hartnett’s failure to adequately respond to that long-standing problem. Last week it was announced that
as a result of mounting complaints the United States Justice Department has launched an investigation into the matter.
Dennis Robertson On Federal Investigation of Yonkers Police:
“Had the Mayor addressed the matter a year ago, when it became an issue, we wouldn’t need an outside
agency in Yonkers to straighten out the problem.”
Dennis Robertson, Democratic Candidate for Mayor of Yonkers, interviewed several weeks ago by the Guardian, when asked how he intended to deal with continuing allegations of police brutality, if elected mayor, responded rmly, “ the key is getting rid of the bad apples. They only give the department a bad name. When I am mayor, there will be more public trust.”
Reached last Wednesday, following the announcement that Federal investigators were engaged in a full-scale investigation of repeated allegations of police brutality by the Yonkers Police Department, Robertson declared, “It’s all about a lack of leadership. is is what happens when you have a weak mayor who lacks the courage to address the difficult issues. I believe the Yonkers Police Department is a good, hard-working department.
However, like any large organization, there are a few who need to be removed for the good of the People and
for the good of the department.”
“Had the Mayor addressed the matter a year ago, when it became an issue, we wouldn’t need an outside
agency in Yonkers to straighten out the problem.”
Dennis Robertson, Democratic Candidate for Mayor of Yonkers, interviewed several weeks ago by the Guardian, when asked how he intended to deal with continuing allegations of police brutality, if elected mayor, responded rmly, “ the key is getting rid of the bad apples. They only give the department a bad name. When I am mayor, there will be more public trust.”
Reached last Wednesday, following the announcement that Federal investigators were engaged in a full-scale investigation of repeated allegations of police brutality by the Yonkers Police Department, Robertson declared, “It’s all about a lack of leadership. is is what happens when you have a weak mayor who lacks the courage to address the difficult issues. I believe the Yonkers Police Department is a good, hard-working department.
However, like any large organization, there are a few who need to be removed for the good of the People and
for the good of the department.”
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Restoring Quality Education To Prisoners Makes Sense
By Jeffrey Deskovic
College In Prison
Having college education available to prisoners was one of the best ideas ever to be put into practice in terms
of rehabilitation. It was truly a case of a win-win scenario. Firstly, the recidivism rate of those who had a college
education was significantly lower than those who had not received one. The reason for that is obvious: It was equipping prisoners with the education that they needed in order to be gainfully employed.
It was also deepening their level of thinking, showing them alternatives to crime, thus making it less likely that
they would return to crime. It made robberies, burglaries and drug dealing less likely, dramatically reducing the number of future victims and the $40,000/yr. cost of re-incarceration. Thus, far from coddling criminals, college education was a powerful crimeprevention program. It also provided the Parole Board with a good indicator
as to which prisoners were committed to rehabilitation. After all, the road to a college degree was both long and arduous.
Only the truly committed would embark upon a journey which would take two years to get an Associates Degree, and four years to a B.A. The participating colleges also benefited. Some professors even brought
their students into the facility for a joint class in which both students behind the prison wall and those who were free were able to conduct dialogue, and enjoy an educational experience. Many teachers expressed their great personal satisfaction from teaching in prison, and often remarked that the students in prison frequently asked the most questions, indicating they were really getting into the material and thinking about it.
My Personal Experience And What I Witnessed
Back in 1993, I was still wrongfully incarcerated. Having obtained my GED a year prior to that, I decided
to avail myself of the college program. My thinking is that I wanted to learn all that I could while I was there, so as to not make my time in prison a total waste. I figured that by obtaining a college degree I could be that much further ahead when I was released, as opposed to starting college from scratch. I was able, to a certain extent, to leave the prison mentality for a few hours. Although this self-delusion did not work all the time and had varying degrees of success, it was better than nothing.
College opened up new worlds to me, broadening my horizons. In a very real sense I learned how to really think.
I picked up the trait of posing questions to myself and really digging deeply for the answers. I learned to think critically. I began to read, opening up my mind. What’s more, I saw that schooling had a similar effect on the other inmates. I could see how their thinking changed by the way they talked and acted. Many inmates went from talking about running the streets, selling drugs, and street life, to discussing school work and hopes for future careers once released and armed with a degree.
We occupied a cell block which was set aside specifically to house those who were in college. This eliminated a lot of the normal noise attendant in the prison, such as blasting radios, and yelling out of the cell bars, because many were studying, and because everyone had respect for their fellow students. Several of the normal prison dynamics were altered to some extent. For example, people who normally would not talk to each other would debate viewpoints in the classroom, and would also help tutor each other. The need to guard oneself was relaxed as learning became the primary concern rather than survival.
One still had to be alert, but it was much less pronounced. I cannot forget the mindset of some of the prisoners that I had talked to, who had not gone to college, but who had expressed to me that they felt no hope they could be able to support themselves and/or their kids, through a lawful job. After all, as they put it, “I have no education. What can I do? Who is going to give me a job which pays me good money?” But, when I saw
some of those very same people in college, their attitude had totally changed.
The civilian college personnel served as exemplars, just by coming to and from work. Many saw them and vocalized the idea that “If he can make it, so can I”- meaning make ends meet by having a career that didn’t involve crime, while remaining free. Others spoke of careers that they hoped to have upon release. In many
instances, it involved diverting people, in one way or another, from going to prison. I was happy for them. For many of those who had come from tragic backgrounds, with such conditions as one or more parents either on drugs or selling drugs, in prison, who had dropped out of school and were running the streets, and in many instances from broken homes, that was all they knew. For them to reach beyond that and see a productive, crime-free future was tremendous, and I vicariously, silently celebrated for them.
I personally did not need the college education in order to be able to lead a crime-free life. I was innocent,
and had not committed a crime in the first place. But I knew that acquiring the education that I did would prove
helpful if and when I were cleared. Now that I am cleared, I am not as far off from graduating as I would have
been if college had not been available to me. I was able to acquire 90 credits while incarcerated.
One of the ways that it has helped me is that I am able to speak and write about things that I have personally experienced and witnessed, and, I can advocate for changes, in a much more articulate way than I could otherwise.
Negative Consequences of College Removal
As I have mentioned in previous articles, when George Pataki became governor in 1995, he cut the funding
for college in prison, and as a result of that the colleges left. There were many bad effects from this. It left prisoners, such as myself, who had completed some college, unable to graduate. In addition, it really killed the motivation of many students to do their best in the classes that they were already enrolled in. Also, the level of prison violence steadily rose. An idle mind, as the saying goes, is the devil’s playground. The greater the level of education, the more clearly consequences of actions could be seen, as could alternative ways of dealing with things other than violently.
The correction officers felt that those prisoners that were in college or were college-educated were more manageable, because the prisoners did not want to get into trouble which would result in missing the college semester. Prisoners could not see where they really had a lot to lose in the short term. The positive environment, in which the prisoners were tutoring and encouraging each other to do well in school, was lost. The prisoners who were formerly housed in the same cell block, were now dispersed, so there were fewer positive people to be around.
Upgrading The Vocational Shops
There are basic vocational classes offered in prison, on a variety of different topics. Some of the classes include
plumbing, carpentry, food service, welding, and general business. The underlying reasoning is that, just as in society, not everybody will want to go to college, and will instead prefer to learn a trade; therefore training is offered to equip prisoners with the skills that they need to get a job upon release so that they have a way to earn a living without returning to crime. To be sure, these are good topics. However, when it comes down to taking the classes themselves, there are a number of problems which render them ineffective.
Firstly, the class materials are outdated. People are taught the basics of how things used to be done years earlier.
This has the effect of being useless to the prisoners once they are released and attempt to enter the workforce. For example, I completed 6 certificates in plumbing; however almost none of my training pertained to PVC pipe, which is the type of piping used today, and only a little bit about copper pipe. Instead, most of it was about metal pipe, which is not used anymore. Therefore, my “training” is useless to me out here. If I attempted to get a job as a plumber, I would have to start at the exact same place that someone else would who had not received any training at all. Therefore, the curriculum in all of the vocational shops should be updated to reflect the latest ways and means in the various trades, and the necessary upto-date equipment should be provided.
Secondly, the instructors themselves are, in general, not very much into what they are teaching. Their attitude
by and large is that they are only there to get a paycheck, and they do very little teaching. It is not uncommon
for them to come to work, and sit in their office in the shop the entire day, and maybe answer a few questions, and other than that actually do no teaching.
We should only hire and keep employed those instructors who really want to do the job they are hired to do:
instruct the prisoners. In addition, to ensure that learning is taking place in the shops, there should be oversight of
the instructors. Lastly, prisoners should be tested monthly to ensure that they are doing their part as well to learn.
Thirdly, there are people in some vocational classes who are only in the class because they were forced into it
by the committee who assigns the assignments.
Since they are not interested in learning the material, they are sometimes disruptive and a distraction to others in the class. The practice of forcing prisoners into vocational shops should end, particularly when it is considered
that there are waiting lists of prisoners waiting to be assigned to vocational classes. Instead, something else should be found for them to do, rather than have them take up space in a class which someone else who wants to learn
could occupy.
Fourthly, many vocational classes have become too prison-orientedmeaning all that the instructors and prison
administration care about is whether the prisoners are able to do tasks that the prison needs to run, rather than focusing on skills needed on the outside. For example, a food service certificate is awarded to those who are working in the kitchen and mess hall. But instead of teaching the prisoners how to prepare meals, “cooks” merely take food which has been prepared in another facility and reheat it. Does that sound as though that would give them training on how to work as a short order cook, or in a restaurant?
As another example, there was a program which was designed to teach prisoners how to clean various surfaces,
like one might if he was working at a cleaning agency. But instead of teaching how to clean a lot of different services, in everyday practice it was limited to just those surfaces found in the prison, with “projects” consisting of making areas of the prison shiny so that when the Albany big wigs showed up, it would appear as though cleanliness standards were being met, although after they left everything would go back to business as usual.
Fifthly, in a process began under the Pataki administration, some vocational shops began to be phased out through attrition. Classes such as typing and masonry simply ceased to be offered. When an instructor would retire or die, the class would close and not be offered anymore, thereby not only preventing others from receiving the training, but also leaving those who had already invested time and effort in the class learning some things, dangling in the wind, unable to complete the class, thus wasting their time and taxpayers money.
Conclusion
Providing quality education to prisoners is an example of a win-win situation for everybody. It provides the prisoners with hope for a crime free future by equipping them with skills needed to get a non-dead-end job through which they can support themselves, kids, and spouses without a return to crime. Secondly, by reducing the temptation to return to crime, it prevents further victimization. Thirdly, it saves taxpayers money: instead of having to pay $40,000 a year to incarcerate a prisoner, the former prisoner instead pays taxes. Fourthly, it sets the stage for some educated minds to return to our society and add to it.
Therefore quality education in prison should be seen as a powerful crime prevention tool. Accordingly, college
education should be returned to prison as an investment in society, and the vocational classes should be overhauled to contain up-to-date curriculum taught by instructors who are motivated, who are overseen, to prisoners who want to receive the training. Vocations that were no longer offered should be reintroduced.
After all, if a former prisoner was living next to you, wouldn’t you want him or her to have all the skills
they possibly could to ensure that they could get a job, or would you want them there with minimal skills, thus making it likely that they will return to crime? We should ask ourselves which would be the safer scenario?
By Jeffrey Deskovic
College In Prison
Having college education available to prisoners was one of the best ideas ever to be put into practice in terms
of rehabilitation. It was truly a case of a win-win scenario. Firstly, the recidivism rate of those who had a college
education was significantly lower than those who had not received one. The reason for that is obvious: It was equipping prisoners with the education that they needed in order to be gainfully employed.
It was also deepening their level of thinking, showing them alternatives to crime, thus making it less likely that
they would return to crime. It made robberies, burglaries and drug dealing less likely, dramatically reducing the number of future victims and the $40,000/yr. cost of re-incarceration. Thus, far from coddling criminals, college education was a powerful crimeprevention program. It also provided the Parole Board with a good indicator
as to which prisoners were committed to rehabilitation. After all, the road to a college degree was both long and arduous.
Only the truly committed would embark upon a journey which would take two years to get an Associates Degree, and four years to a B.A. The participating colleges also benefited. Some professors even brought
their students into the facility for a joint class in which both students behind the prison wall and those who were free were able to conduct dialogue, and enjoy an educational experience. Many teachers expressed their great personal satisfaction from teaching in prison, and often remarked that the students in prison frequently asked the most questions, indicating they were really getting into the material and thinking about it.
My Personal Experience And What I Witnessed
Back in 1993, I was still wrongfully incarcerated. Having obtained my GED a year prior to that, I decided
to avail myself of the college program. My thinking is that I wanted to learn all that I could while I was there, so as to not make my time in prison a total waste. I figured that by obtaining a college degree I could be that much further ahead when I was released, as opposed to starting college from scratch. I was able, to a certain extent, to leave the prison mentality for a few hours. Although this self-delusion did not work all the time and had varying degrees of success, it was better than nothing.
College opened up new worlds to me, broadening my horizons. In a very real sense I learned how to really think.
I picked up the trait of posing questions to myself and really digging deeply for the answers. I learned to think critically. I began to read, opening up my mind. What’s more, I saw that schooling had a similar effect on the other inmates. I could see how their thinking changed by the way they talked and acted. Many inmates went from talking about running the streets, selling drugs, and street life, to discussing school work and hopes for future careers once released and armed with a degree.
We occupied a cell block which was set aside specifically to house those who were in college. This eliminated a lot of the normal noise attendant in the prison, such as blasting radios, and yelling out of the cell bars, because many were studying, and because everyone had respect for their fellow students. Several of the normal prison dynamics were altered to some extent. For example, people who normally would not talk to each other would debate viewpoints in the classroom, and would also help tutor each other. The need to guard oneself was relaxed as learning became the primary concern rather than survival.
One still had to be alert, but it was much less pronounced. I cannot forget the mindset of some of the prisoners that I had talked to, who had not gone to college, but who had expressed to me that they felt no hope they could be able to support themselves and/or their kids, through a lawful job. After all, as they put it, “I have no education. What can I do? Who is going to give me a job which pays me good money?” But, when I saw
some of those very same people in college, their attitude had totally changed.
The civilian college personnel served as exemplars, just by coming to and from work. Many saw them and vocalized the idea that “If he can make it, so can I”- meaning make ends meet by having a career that didn’t involve crime, while remaining free. Others spoke of careers that they hoped to have upon release. In many
instances, it involved diverting people, in one way or another, from going to prison. I was happy for them. For many of those who had come from tragic backgrounds, with such conditions as one or more parents either on drugs or selling drugs, in prison, who had dropped out of school and were running the streets, and in many instances from broken homes, that was all they knew. For them to reach beyond that and see a productive, crime-free future was tremendous, and I vicariously, silently celebrated for them.
I personally did not need the college education in order to be able to lead a crime-free life. I was innocent,
and had not committed a crime in the first place. But I knew that acquiring the education that I did would prove
helpful if and when I were cleared. Now that I am cleared, I am not as far off from graduating as I would have
been if college had not been available to me. I was able to acquire 90 credits while incarcerated.
One of the ways that it has helped me is that I am able to speak and write about things that I have personally experienced and witnessed, and, I can advocate for changes, in a much more articulate way than I could otherwise.
Negative Consequences of College Removal
As I have mentioned in previous articles, when George Pataki became governor in 1995, he cut the funding
for college in prison, and as a result of that the colleges left. There were many bad effects from this. It left prisoners, such as myself, who had completed some college, unable to graduate. In addition, it really killed the motivation of many students to do their best in the classes that they were already enrolled in. Also, the level of prison violence steadily rose. An idle mind, as the saying goes, is the devil’s playground. The greater the level of education, the more clearly consequences of actions could be seen, as could alternative ways of dealing with things other than violently.
The correction officers felt that those prisoners that were in college or were college-educated were more manageable, because the prisoners did not want to get into trouble which would result in missing the college semester. Prisoners could not see where they really had a lot to lose in the short term. The positive environment, in which the prisoners were tutoring and encouraging each other to do well in school, was lost. The prisoners who were formerly housed in the same cell block, were now dispersed, so there were fewer positive people to be around.
Upgrading The Vocational Shops
There are basic vocational classes offered in prison, on a variety of different topics. Some of the classes include
plumbing, carpentry, food service, welding, and general business. The underlying reasoning is that, just as in society, not everybody will want to go to college, and will instead prefer to learn a trade; therefore training is offered to equip prisoners with the skills that they need to get a job upon release so that they have a way to earn a living without returning to crime. To be sure, these are good topics. However, when it comes down to taking the classes themselves, there are a number of problems which render them ineffective.
Firstly, the class materials are outdated. People are taught the basics of how things used to be done years earlier.
This has the effect of being useless to the prisoners once they are released and attempt to enter the workforce. For example, I completed 6 certificates in plumbing; however almost none of my training pertained to PVC pipe, which is the type of piping used today, and only a little bit about copper pipe. Instead, most of it was about metal pipe, which is not used anymore. Therefore, my “training” is useless to me out here. If I attempted to get a job as a plumber, I would have to start at the exact same place that someone else would who had not received any training at all. Therefore, the curriculum in all of the vocational shops should be updated to reflect the latest ways and means in the various trades, and the necessary upto-date equipment should be provided.
Secondly, the instructors themselves are, in general, not very much into what they are teaching. Their attitude
by and large is that they are only there to get a paycheck, and they do very little teaching. It is not uncommon
for them to come to work, and sit in their office in the shop the entire day, and maybe answer a few questions, and other than that actually do no teaching.
We should only hire and keep employed those instructors who really want to do the job they are hired to do:
instruct the prisoners. In addition, to ensure that learning is taking place in the shops, there should be oversight of
the instructors. Lastly, prisoners should be tested monthly to ensure that they are doing their part as well to learn.
Thirdly, there are people in some vocational classes who are only in the class because they were forced into it
by the committee who assigns the assignments.
Since they are not interested in learning the material, they are sometimes disruptive and a distraction to others in the class. The practice of forcing prisoners into vocational shops should end, particularly when it is considered
that there are waiting lists of prisoners waiting to be assigned to vocational classes. Instead, something else should be found for them to do, rather than have them take up space in a class which someone else who wants to learn
could occupy.
Fourthly, many vocational classes have become too prison-orientedmeaning all that the instructors and prison
administration care about is whether the prisoners are able to do tasks that the prison needs to run, rather than focusing on skills needed on the outside. For example, a food service certificate is awarded to those who are working in the kitchen and mess hall. But instead of teaching the prisoners how to prepare meals, “cooks” merely take food which has been prepared in another facility and reheat it. Does that sound as though that would give them training on how to work as a short order cook, or in a restaurant?
As another example, there was a program which was designed to teach prisoners how to clean various surfaces,
like one might if he was working at a cleaning agency. But instead of teaching how to clean a lot of different services, in everyday practice it was limited to just those surfaces found in the prison, with “projects” consisting of making areas of the prison shiny so that when the Albany big wigs showed up, it would appear as though cleanliness standards were being met, although after they left everything would go back to business as usual.
Fifthly, in a process began under the Pataki administration, some vocational shops began to be phased out through attrition. Classes such as typing and masonry simply ceased to be offered. When an instructor would retire or die, the class would close and not be offered anymore, thereby not only preventing others from receiving the training, but also leaving those who had already invested time and effort in the class learning some things, dangling in the wind, unable to complete the class, thus wasting their time and taxpayers money.
Conclusion
Providing quality education to prisoners is an example of a win-win situation for everybody. It provides the prisoners with hope for a crime free future by equipping them with skills needed to get a non-dead-end job through which they can support themselves, kids, and spouses without a return to crime. Secondly, by reducing the temptation to return to crime, it prevents further victimization. Thirdly, it saves taxpayers money: instead of having to pay $40,000 a year to incarcerate a prisoner, the former prisoner instead pays taxes. Fourthly, it sets the stage for some educated minds to return to our society and add to it.
Therefore quality education in prison should be seen as a powerful crime prevention tool. Accordingly, college
education should be returned to prison as an investment in society, and the vocational classes should be overhauled to contain up-to-date curriculum taught by instructors who are motivated, who are overseen, to prisoners who want to receive the training. Vocations that were no longer offered should be reintroduced.
After all, if a former prisoner was living next to you, wouldn’t you want him or her to have all the skills
they possibly could to ensure that they could get a job, or would you want them there with minimal skills, thus making it likely that they will return to crime? We should ask ourselves which would be the safer scenario?
Our Readers Respond...
“I’m With Paul”
Dear Editor:
I’m voting for Paul J. Feiner for Town Supervisor of Greenburgh. I don’t know of a more dedicated local champion, a tireless fighter for everything that’s good in suburban/urban life. Paul J. Feiner has been Town Supervisor of Greenburgh, New York - a two-year, elected position - since 1991. He ran twice for Congress and lost - Greenburgh and America’s loss.
I’ve always voted for Paul Feiner, but got to know him really well last year. Verizon was offering fiber optic service in Greenburgh, and needed Town Council approval to offer television service through the fiber optics. Unsurprisingly, Cablevision, which had a monopoly on cable service in this area, opposed Verizon’s request.
Feiner, with a mostly balky Town Council baying at his every point, stood up and courageously argued for
freedom of choice in television providers in Greenburgh. This might not seem like such a controversial point, but if you’ve ever been to a local Town Council meeting you’ll know that everyone on the council has an opinion, and it’s usually not in favor of getting things done.
I was in favor of giving Greenburgh residents a real option in television, I wrote a few editorials arguing for
that, but it was Paul Feiner’s determination that got this to happen.
And he has been that way on every important local issue. Do you like being woken up all too early on weekend
mornings by someone blowing leaves or mowing the lawn at decibel levels that could split your eardrums? Feiner
doesn’t like that, either, and he’s doing what he can to keep the noise down. He stays on top of utilities like Con Ed to make repairs today, not tomorrow, after storms. He’s advocating wi-fi for a major street in Hartsdale - he wants it for the whole town, every inch of it, and the Hartsdale street would be the start. Paul J. Feiner is on the right side of every issue, be it nature or high-tech, communication to the world-at-large from your laptop or just dozing on your porch on a Saturday morning.
So I’m happily voting for Paul J. Feiner for another term of Town Supervisor. I saw him in front of the A&P
last week. And I told him, hey, I not only hope you win, but give that run for Congress another shot some day.
Paul Levinson, PhD
Professor and Chair
Department of Communication and Media Studies
Fordham University
White Plains
Reader Responds to “Give Us The Real Deal”
Dear Editor:
Obviously you’re part of the Barry Bonds asterisk brigade that would love to see Mr. Bonds brought down in shame. Here is something to ponder before you write your next anti-Bonds editorial. IF Mr. Bonds should be astersized, wouldn’t it be reasonable to place an asterisk next to Babe Ruth’s name because he did not bat against GREAT Negro pitchers like Satchel Page! Mr. Page,one of the great major league pitchers was barred from the majors until the last 8 years of his career.
In fact not only Babe Ruth should have an asterisk next to his name, many other players would not be in the Hall of Shame..(oops I mean Hall of Fame) If Negro players were not barred from the Majors. Furthermore, batters like the GREAT Josh Gibson who hit as many as 962 dingers would have over-shadowed Babe Ruth’s 714 home runs. Finally, I’ve notice the media(print/broadcast) rolled out the Great Henry Aaron when Mr. Bonds was seriously approaching a new home run record. Prior, Mr. Aaron home run feats were never promoted nationally, e.g., national advertisements ,etc…And WHY Mr. Henry Aaron was not made Baseball Commissioner? The Commissioners position is obviously a symbolic position which is supported by many level
of support assistants. You or I could be the MLB commissioner with that level of support, don’t you think!!
This whole thing about Mr. Bonds is about who should be heroes in America and what they should look like!
Would love to hear your response,
Mario Reid, New York
Editor’s Response
Dear Mr Reid:
To some extent you are preaching to the choir as regards the Negro Leagues. Having grown up in the South Bronx, in fact the 41st Precinct, were it not for a great Black New York City Police Officer, Jim McCord, from that precinct, who took a liking to me, I would never have known the privilege of playing Pony League baseball at 14 and 15 years of age, under Coach Al Richards, who had enjoyed a great career in the Negro Leagues.
Officer McCord, or Cordie as he was so affectionately known by his neighbors in Pelham Parkway, could afford, as a New York City Police Officer, to live in middle-income public housing on Mace Avenue in the Bronx. My dad, a laundry driver at the time, wasn’t earning quite enough to qualify our family to live there.
Because of Jim McCord and Al Richards, I had the pleasure of playing baseball in cleats, on grass, as a member of the Red Wings. But, for them, I would’ve been limited to pick-up softball games in the concrete schoolyards of my neighborhood. Having said that, let me assure you that you are correct when you say, “This whole thing about Mr. Bonds is about who should be heros in America,” but you are very mistaken when you finish the sentence with, “and what they should look like.”
My objection to Barry Bonds is the same objection I lodged against Mark McGwire. The use of performance-enhancing drugs by any athlete produces a counterfeit specimen, and achievements by such athletes are clearly separate and distinct from those who were not contaminated.
In short, it’s not about the color of a man’s skin but, rather, what’s coursing through his veins.
In Our Opinion...
David Endorses Goliath
We can only wonder what Lieutenant Governor David Paterson was thinking about last week, other than obedience to Democratic Party Boss Larry Schwartz when he endorsed Ernie Davis for a fourth term as Mayor of Mount Vernon. We know that he knows little or nothing about what is really going on there, because he described that neglected, struggling, violence-scarred city as “the very model of urban development.” We
wonder, indeed, that Mr. Paterson could, in good faith, commend a mayor who in twelve years in office has shown a clear contempt for the public well-being, preferring instead to tend to his own comfort and prosperity, and that of his cronies and political connections.
We would prefer to give David Paterson the benefit of the doubt, and assume that he really doesn’t know the true Ernie Davis. The David Paterson who has always been concerned about police interaction with inner-city civilians would not have endorsed Davis had he known that for years he looked the other way as his police department routinely gathered false confessions from innocent citizens, mostly people of color, in the so-called Conference Room in the basement of Police Headquarters, totally violating their Civil Rights. Selwyn Days is doing consecutive 25-Year to Life sentences for a “Double Homicide” that was really a Murder/Suicide. And, Kareem Bryan is doing 43 years in state prison for Rape and Burglary actually committed by another perpetrator who Mount Vernon Police let slip through their fingers.
Mayor Davis was urged, on his own radio show, nearly a year and a half ago, to put an end to such unlawful practices, but did nothing! It took the independent action of newly appointed Police Commissioner David Chong, informed of the horrific and unlawful police practice by The Guardian, to investigate, and put an end to it, thus protecting the Constitutional, and Miranda Rights of all Mount Vernon citizens, and all who may come in contact with police.
If Mr. Paterson really knew Mayor Davis and his regime he could not ignore the fact that Davis has repeatedly let down the hard-working families of Mount Vernon, driving many back to the Bronx and other surrounding communities, where schools are safer, and taxes are lower. We ask, “Would Mr. Paterson raise his children in Mount Vernon, and send them to Mount Vernon Public Schools?” He would want safer, more achieving schools, and a community with more employment and recreational opportunities for his kids; a community with more hope for the future than one can expect from Ernie Davis’ performance over the past twelve years. Mount Vernon’s parents and children have the right to those same expectations.
We recently interviewed several Mount Vernon High School students. They told a tale of fear in the hallways, fear of weapons and drugs that somehow make it through side doors. They spoke of fear on school buses, and about their parents’ agonizing about whether to move, or send them to private schools, while still paying sky-high property taxes. They spoke about the Hip-Hop Museum that never was, and the total lack of safe recreation in
their city. Many said that they knew someone who’s been a victim of violence, stabbing, or gunplay. Most go directly home, and lock their doors.
Some students we spoke with wondered why there are so many boarded-up stores and littered lots throughout their city, compared with other cities and towns they visit in Westchester. Their observations certainly do not square with David Paterson’s “urban model” statement. But they live in Mount Vernon.
If Mr. Paterson believes that he owes his greatest loyalty to Andy Spano, Larry Schwartz, Reggie LaFayette, and those like them who could care less about the City of Mount Vernon, and those families struggling to exist within its troubled and neglected confines, he is sadly mistaken. By his loyalty to such compatriots he betrays the very people who look up to him, and to whom he owes the greatest allegiance, and solemn duty to be more forthcoming and honest.
“I’m With Paul”
Dear Editor:
I’m voting for Paul J. Feiner for Town Supervisor of Greenburgh. I don’t know of a more dedicated local champion, a tireless fighter for everything that’s good in suburban/urban life. Paul J. Feiner has been Town Supervisor of Greenburgh, New York - a two-year, elected position - since 1991. He ran twice for Congress and lost - Greenburgh and America’s loss.
I’ve always voted for Paul Feiner, but got to know him really well last year. Verizon was offering fiber optic service in Greenburgh, and needed Town Council approval to offer television service through the fiber optics. Unsurprisingly, Cablevision, which had a monopoly on cable service in this area, opposed Verizon’s request.
Feiner, with a mostly balky Town Council baying at his every point, stood up and courageously argued for
freedom of choice in television providers in Greenburgh. This might not seem like such a controversial point, but if you’ve ever been to a local Town Council meeting you’ll know that everyone on the council has an opinion, and it’s usually not in favor of getting things done.
I was in favor of giving Greenburgh residents a real option in television, I wrote a few editorials arguing for
that, but it was Paul Feiner’s determination that got this to happen.
And he has been that way on every important local issue. Do you like being woken up all too early on weekend
mornings by someone blowing leaves or mowing the lawn at decibel levels that could split your eardrums? Feiner
doesn’t like that, either, and he’s doing what he can to keep the noise down. He stays on top of utilities like Con Ed to make repairs today, not tomorrow, after storms. He’s advocating wi-fi for a major street in Hartsdale - he wants it for the whole town, every inch of it, and the Hartsdale street would be the start. Paul J. Feiner is on the right side of every issue, be it nature or high-tech, communication to the world-at-large from your laptop or just dozing on your porch on a Saturday morning.
So I’m happily voting for Paul J. Feiner for another term of Town Supervisor. I saw him in front of the A&P
last week. And I told him, hey, I not only hope you win, but give that run for Congress another shot some day.
Paul Levinson, PhD
Professor and Chair
Department of Communication and Media Studies
Fordham University
White Plains
Reader Responds to “Give Us The Real Deal”
Dear Editor:
Obviously you’re part of the Barry Bonds asterisk brigade that would love to see Mr. Bonds brought down in shame. Here is something to ponder before you write your next anti-Bonds editorial. IF Mr. Bonds should be astersized, wouldn’t it be reasonable to place an asterisk next to Babe Ruth’s name because he did not bat against GREAT Negro pitchers like Satchel Page! Mr. Page,one of the great major league pitchers was barred from the majors until the last 8 years of his career.
In fact not only Babe Ruth should have an asterisk next to his name, many other players would not be in the Hall of Shame..(oops I mean Hall of Fame) If Negro players were not barred from the Majors. Furthermore, batters like the GREAT Josh Gibson who hit as many as 962 dingers would have over-shadowed Babe Ruth’s 714 home runs. Finally, I’ve notice the media(print/broadcast) rolled out the Great Henry Aaron when Mr. Bonds was seriously approaching a new home run record. Prior, Mr. Aaron home run feats were never promoted nationally, e.g., national advertisements ,etc…And WHY Mr. Henry Aaron was not made Baseball Commissioner? The Commissioners position is obviously a symbolic position which is supported by many level
of support assistants. You or I could be the MLB commissioner with that level of support, don’t you think!!
This whole thing about Mr. Bonds is about who should be heroes in America and what they should look like!
Would love to hear your response,
Mario Reid, New York
Editor’s Response
Dear Mr Reid:
To some extent you are preaching to the choir as regards the Negro Leagues. Having grown up in the South Bronx, in fact the 41st Precinct, were it not for a great Black New York City Police Officer, Jim McCord, from that precinct, who took a liking to me, I would never have known the privilege of playing Pony League baseball at 14 and 15 years of age, under Coach Al Richards, who had enjoyed a great career in the Negro Leagues.
Officer McCord, or Cordie as he was so affectionately known by his neighbors in Pelham Parkway, could afford, as a New York City Police Officer, to live in middle-income public housing on Mace Avenue in the Bronx. My dad, a laundry driver at the time, wasn’t earning quite enough to qualify our family to live there.
Because of Jim McCord and Al Richards, I had the pleasure of playing baseball in cleats, on grass, as a member of the Red Wings. But, for them, I would’ve been limited to pick-up softball games in the concrete schoolyards of my neighborhood. Having said that, let me assure you that you are correct when you say, “This whole thing about Mr. Bonds is about who should be heros in America,” but you are very mistaken when you finish the sentence with, “and what they should look like.”
My objection to Barry Bonds is the same objection I lodged against Mark McGwire. The use of performance-enhancing drugs by any athlete produces a counterfeit specimen, and achievements by such athletes are clearly separate and distinct from those who were not contaminated.
In short, it’s not about the color of a man’s skin but, rather, what’s coursing through his veins.
In Our Opinion...
David Endorses Goliath
We can only wonder what Lieutenant Governor David Paterson was thinking about last week, other than obedience to Democratic Party Boss Larry Schwartz when he endorsed Ernie Davis for a fourth term as Mayor of Mount Vernon. We know that he knows little or nothing about what is really going on there, because he described that neglected, struggling, violence-scarred city as “the very model of urban development.” We
wonder, indeed, that Mr. Paterson could, in good faith, commend a mayor who in twelve years in office has shown a clear contempt for the public well-being, preferring instead to tend to his own comfort and prosperity, and that of his cronies and political connections.
We would prefer to give David Paterson the benefit of the doubt, and assume that he really doesn’t know the true Ernie Davis. The David Paterson who has always been concerned about police interaction with inner-city civilians would not have endorsed Davis had he known that for years he looked the other way as his police department routinely gathered false confessions from innocent citizens, mostly people of color, in the so-called Conference Room in the basement of Police Headquarters, totally violating their Civil Rights. Selwyn Days is doing consecutive 25-Year to Life sentences for a “Double Homicide” that was really a Murder/Suicide. And, Kareem Bryan is doing 43 years in state prison for Rape and Burglary actually committed by another perpetrator who Mount Vernon Police let slip through their fingers.
Mayor Davis was urged, on his own radio show, nearly a year and a half ago, to put an end to such unlawful practices, but did nothing! It took the independent action of newly appointed Police Commissioner David Chong, informed of the horrific and unlawful police practice by The Guardian, to investigate, and put an end to it, thus protecting the Constitutional, and Miranda Rights of all Mount Vernon citizens, and all who may come in contact with police.
If Mr. Paterson really knew Mayor Davis and his regime he could not ignore the fact that Davis has repeatedly let down the hard-working families of Mount Vernon, driving many back to the Bronx and other surrounding communities, where schools are safer, and taxes are lower. We ask, “Would Mr. Paterson raise his children in Mount Vernon, and send them to Mount Vernon Public Schools?” He would want safer, more achieving schools, and a community with more employment and recreational opportunities for his kids; a community with more hope for the future than one can expect from Ernie Davis’ performance over the past twelve years. Mount Vernon’s parents and children have the right to those same expectations.
We recently interviewed several Mount Vernon High School students. They told a tale of fear in the hallways, fear of weapons and drugs that somehow make it through side doors. They spoke of fear on school buses, and about their parents’ agonizing about whether to move, or send them to private schools, while still paying sky-high property taxes. They spoke about the Hip-Hop Museum that never was, and the total lack of safe recreation in
their city. Many said that they knew someone who’s been a victim of violence, stabbing, or gunplay. Most go directly home, and lock their doors.
Some students we spoke with wondered why there are so many boarded-up stores and littered lots throughout their city, compared with other cities and towns they visit in Westchester. Their observations certainly do not square with David Paterson’s “urban model” statement. But they live in Mount Vernon.
If Mr. Paterson believes that he owes his greatest loyalty to Andy Spano, Larry Schwartz, Reggie LaFayette, and those like them who could care less about the City of Mount Vernon, and those families struggling to exist within its troubled and neglected confines, he is sadly mistaken. By his loyalty to such compatriots he betrays the very people who look up to him, and to whom he owes the greatest allegiance, and solemn duty to be more forthcoming and honest.
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
“It’s Time For All Good Democrats...”
With primary elections less than three weeks away, and the general election looming in November, the gloves have been coming off , and the battle lines have been drawn. Problem is players have been changing parties, Republicans having afterthoughts, abandoning those who elected them numerous times. Of course, nothing to do with voter registrations; no, it’s all about “deeply personal” principles you understand, so deep they cannot
be articulated.
Westchester voters need to keep a scorecard just to know who is in which party. But, why bother, party
affiliation in Westchester does not guarantee the support that ought to be forthcoming.
In fact, it doesn’t mean a darn thing in a county that has been run by a Cabal. Dennis Robertson, Democratic
Yonkers City Councilman, does not get any support from so-called Democrat Andy Spano, nor from his puppeteer, Larry Schwartz. They are solidly behind Republican Mayor Phil Amicone, just as they were solidly behind his Republican buddy Nick Spano each time Andrea Stewart-Cousins, and Tom Abinanti, both solid
Democrats, challenged him. The reason is simple. Larry and Andy did business with Nick, and they do business with Phil Amicone.
Robertson, a straight shooter, refuses to sell out the interests of the People of Yonkers to a County Government that takes too much in taxes, and delivers too little in services. He believes that County Government, particularly
under the Spano Administration, has grown far too big and costly, and that most services would be more cost-
effectively handled at state and local levels. In his words, “Amicone never questions what the County does that inflicts pain on the People of Yonkers.”
County Legislator Clinton Young, running against three-term mayoral incumbent Ernie Davis at the urging of caring rank and file Democrats who are sick and tired of Davis’ excuses and failures, does not have the support
of Spano or Schwartz either. They know, from past experience, that Young cannot be pushed around and made to sacrifice his constituents’ interests, the way Davis can be. The People of Mount Vernon are no fools. They know that there are good reasons why the FBI and the United States Attorney’s Office are looking over Davis’ books. Three million dollars simply doesn’t disappear into thin air!
“They also know ...”that it’s time for a change, a breath of fresh air around City Hall. For almost 12 years now, they know that the Mayor’s Office has been all about the Mayor, and nobody else, least of all the City’s youth. They know that Davis has failed their children miserably, and failed them, as well, in the process. They know that he merely talks a good game. And, they realize that politicians like Spano and Schwartz, are behind him because
they don’t really care what happens in Mount Vernon.
Paul Feiner, one of the most highly regarded public servants in all of downstate New York, does not have the support of Spanocrats Andy and Larry, because he is not only a dedicated public servant, one who goes
out and asks his constituents how he may be of assistance to them, but also he is a man of his word. He is constantly protecting the People of Greenburgh from abuse by the County Executive’s Office, specifi-cally the schemes of Larry Schwartz.
Feiner cannot be bought o with money or favor, a fact that Schwartz will never understand. When Schwartz thought he could sneak by Feiner, and violate the contract between the Town of Greenburgh and the County of Westchester regarding the placement of homeless shelters, by proposing to build one behind the County Police
Headquarters in Hawthorne, Paul stepped up to the plate, and pointed out the fact that it would be a quarter mile too close to already existing facilities under the contract.
Foolishly miscalculating Feiner’s integrity and his determination to honor and protect the interests of Greenburgh citizens, Andy Spano made a statement, publicly, that he would “work something out” with Supervisor Feiner. When Paul stood firm, announcing that he would not go against the spirit, or the letter, of the agreement binding
the County, thus diminishing the Town’s position in all future contract negotiations, he did so, fully recognizing that Larry would encourage and finance anyone, yes anyone, he could get to run against him.
Supervisor Paul Feiner, County Legislator Clinton Young, and Yonkers City Councilman Dennis Robertson, true Democrats all, are running on their records and on their platforms. They will not be dictated to by the likes of Larry Schwartz and his ilk. Each of these men will be recognized as true Democrats, public servants uncompromised by fear or favor.
Richard Blassberg
“It’s Time For All Good Democrats...”
With primary elections less than three weeks away, and the general election looming in November, the gloves have been coming off , and the battle lines have been drawn. Problem is players have been changing parties, Republicans having afterthoughts, abandoning those who elected them numerous times. Of course, nothing to do with voter registrations; no, it’s all about “deeply personal” principles you understand, so deep they cannot
be articulated.
Westchester voters need to keep a scorecard just to know who is in which party. But, why bother, party
affiliation in Westchester does not guarantee the support that ought to be forthcoming.
In fact, it doesn’t mean a darn thing in a county that has been run by a Cabal. Dennis Robertson, Democratic
Yonkers City Councilman, does not get any support from so-called Democrat Andy Spano, nor from his puppeteer, Larry Schwartz. They are solidly behind Republican Mayor Phil Amicone, just as they were solidly behind his Republican buddy Nick Spano each time Andrea Stewart-Cousins, and Tom Abinanti, both solid
Democrats, challenged him. The reason is simple. Larry and Andy did business with Nick, and they do business with Phil Amicone.
Robertson, a straight shooter, refuses to sell out the interests of the People of Yonkers to a County Government that takes too much in taxes, and delivers too little in services. He believes that County Government, particularly
under the Spano Administration, has grown far too big and costly, and that most services would be more cost-
effectively handled at state and local levels. In his words, “Amicone never questions what the County does that inflicts pain on the People of Yonkers.”
County Legislator Clinton Young, running against three-term mayoral incumbent Ernie Davis at the urging of caring rank and file Democrats who are sick and tired of Davis’ excuses and failures, does not have the support
of Spano or Schwartz either. They know, from past experience, that Young cannot be pushed around and made to sacrifice his constituents’ interests, the way Davis can be. The People of Mount Vernon are no fools. They know that there are good reasons why the FBI and the United States Attorney’s Office are looking over Davis’ books. Three million dollars simply doesn’t disappear into thin air!
“They also know ...”that it’s time for a change, a breath of fresh air around City Hall. For almost 12 years now, they know that the Mayor’s Office has been all about the Mayor, and nobody else, least of all the City’s youth. They know that Davis has failed their children miserably, and failed them, as well, in the process. They know that he merely talks a good game. And, they realize that politicians like Spano and Schwartz, are behind him because
they don’t really care what happens in Mount Vernon.
Paul Feiner, one of the most highly regarded public servants in all of downstate New York, does not have the support of Spanocrats Andy and Larry, because he is not only a dedicated public servant, one who goes
out and asks his constituents how he may be of assistance to them, but also he is a man of his word. He is constantly protecting the People of Greenburgh from abuse by the County Executive’s Office, specifi-cally the schemes of Larry Schwartz.
Feiner cannot be bought o with money or favor, a fact that Schwartz will never understand. When Schwartz thought he could sneak by Feiner, and violate the contract between the Town of Greenburgh and the County of Westchester regarding the placement of homeless shelters, by proposing to build one behind the County Police
Headquarters in Hawthorne, Paul stepped up to the plate, and pointed out the fact that it would be a quarter mile too close to already existing facilities under the contract.
Foolishly miscalculating Feiner’s integrity and his determination to honor and protect the interests of Greenburgh citizens, Andy Spano made a statement, publicly, that he would “work something out” with Supervisor Feiner. When Paul stood firm, announcing that he would not go against the spirit, or the letter, of the agreement binding
the County, thus diminishing the Town’s position in all future contract negotiations, he did so, fully recognizing that Larry would encourage and finance anyone, yes anyone, he could get to run against him.
Supervisor Paul Feiner, County Legislator Clinton Young, and Yonkers City Councilman Dennis Robertson, true Democrats all, are running on their records and on their platforms. They will not be dictated to by the likes of Larry Schwartz and his ilk. Each of these men will be recognized as true Democrats, public servants uncompromised by fear or favor.
The Court Report
By Richard Blassberg
United States Attorney Garcia And State Attorney General Cuomo Announce Indictment Of 15 For Major Theft And Fraud
United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
MICHAEL J. GARCIA, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and ANDREW CUOMO, the Attorney General of the State of New York, announced last Monday, August 20, the unsealing of an Indictment charging 15 individuals with crimes including producing fake identification documents, using those documents to commit various fraud crimes, and selling and transporting stolen vehicles. As alleged in the sixteen-count Indictment returned by the grand jury in Manhattan federal court:
The defendants and their co-conspirators produced false identification documents purporting to have been issued by state and federal government authorities, including driver’s licenses, resident alien cards, social security cards, and tax identification documents. The false identification documents were produced in the names of fraudulent identities, to which the defendants referred as “chickens.”
In order to build financial credit for these fake identities, the defendants, among other things, fraudulently established bank accounts, credit card accounts, apartment leases, and telephone and utility accounts in the names of the “chickens.” The defendants also applied for and obtained lucrative bank loans, home mortgage
loans, increased credit card limits, and other financial benefits in the names of the “chicken” identities or in the names of sham businesses supposedly operated by those fraudulent identities. The defendants and their co-conspirators then defaulted on the loans and credit card debt, causing at least $10 million in losses to numerous financial institutions.
In the course of the scheme, the defendants and their co-conspirators designated certain physical addresses as the mailing addresses for the “chicken” credit card accounts, and regularly monitored the mail at those addresses for incoming credit cards and account statements in the false names. They then used these cards to pay bills, make purchases, and obtain cash advances, often charging the maximum (or above the maximum) amount allowed on the cards and then defaulting on the bill.
Additionally, four of the defendants -- TAHIR ALI KHAN, SYED HASSAN, FRANKLIN RODRIGUEZ, AND BASHARAL JARRAL – are charged with stolen vehicle offenses involving luxury cars such as Hummers and a Porsche Cayenne.
TAHIR ALI KHAN is 30 years old, and resides in Alabama.
FAYYAZ AHMED is 40 years old, and is currently held at Riker’s Island, NY.
ARIE BENSHIMON is 35 years old and resides in Monsey, NY.
NAVEED ALI BHINDAR is 43 years old resides in Valley Stream, NY.
SYED HASSAN is 33 years old and resides in Staten Island, NY.
MUHAMMAD ISHAQ is 34 years old and resides in Brooklyn, NY.
BASHARAT JARRAL is 49 years old and resides in Elmhurst, NY.
NADEEM KHAN is 24 years old and resides in Brooklyn, NY.
GHULAM MEHMOOD is 40 years old and resides in Cartaret, NJ.
SHAHEEN MUKHTAR is 53 years old and resides in Voorhees, NJ.
QAISER QURESHI is 53 years old and resides in Queens, NY.
FRANKLIN RODRIGUEZ is 21 years old and resides in Brooklyn, NY.
SYED SHAH is 23 years old and resides in Brooklyn, NY.
OSCAR SANCHEZ is 37 years old and resides in Brooklyn, NY.
PRADIPT SHARMA is 31 years old and resides in Brooklyn, NY.
The filing of these charges is the culmination of a 16-month investigation conducted by the New York State Attorney General’s Office with the New York City Police Department, New York State Police, the Hoover, Alabama Police Department, and the New York State Banking Department. Valuable assistance was provided by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the United States Postal Inspection Service, the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles, the New York City Department of Probation, the Social Security Administration, and the United States Secret Service.
Mr. GARCIA praised the Attorney General’s Office and the federal, state and local law enforcement agencies for their outstanding work in the investigation. Mr. GARCIA stated: “Through the cooperation of federal and state prosecutors, and the investigative work of federal, state and local agencies, we have dismantled a fraud ring of 15 defendants who used false identities to obtain at least $10 million through a wide variety of scams.”
“These defendants are charged with creating a comprehensive system of fraud for ripping off businesses to satisfy their own greed. One of these individuals is even charged with attempting to purchase $10,000 worth of Lowe’s gift cards using a credit card obtained through a false identity,” said Mr. CUOMO. “Our investigators spent over a year monitoring the conspirators and tirelessly compiling evidence to expose these illegal activities. I applaud their hard work, which was a critical part of this investigation and essential in uncovering these crimes.”
Assistant United States Attorneys LISA ZORNBERG and ELIE HONIG, and Assistant Attorney General MERYL LUTSKY -- who is designated as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney in this case -- are in charge of the prosecution. The charges contained in the Indictment are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
By Richard Blassberg
United States Attorney Garcia And State Attorney General Cuomo Announce Indictment Of 15 For Major Theft And Fraud
United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
MICHAEL J. GARCIA, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and ANDREW CUOMO, the Attorney General of the State of New York, announced last Monday, August 20, the unsealing of an Indictment charging 15 individuals with crimes including producing fake identification documents, using those documents to commit various fraud crimes, and selling and transporting stolen vehicles. As alleged in the sixteen-count Indictment returned by the grand jury in Manhattan federal court:
The defendants and their co-conspirators produced false identification documents purporting to have been issued by state and federal government authorities, including driver’s licenses, resident alien cards, social security cards, and tax identification documents. The false identification documents were produced in the names of fraudulent identities, to which the defendants referred as “chickens.”
In order to build financial credit for these fake identities, the defendants, among other things, fraudulently established bank accounts, credit card accounts, apartment leases, and telephone and utility accounts in the names of the “chickens.” The defendants also applied for and obtained lucrative bank loans, home mortgage
loans, increased credit card limits, and other financial benefits in the names of the “chicken” identities or in the names of sham businesses supposedly operated by those fraudulent identities. The defendants and their co-conspirators then defaulted on the loans and credit card debt, causing at least $10 million in losses to numerous financial institutions.
In the course of the scheme, the defendants and their co-conspirators designated certain physical addresses as the mailing addresses for the “chicken” credit card accounts, and regularly monitored the mail at those addresses for incoming credit cards and account statements in the false names. They then used these cards to pay bills, make purchases, and obtain cash advances, often charging the maximum (or above the maximum) amount allowed on the cards and then defaulting on the bill.
Additionally, four of the defendants -- TAHIR ALI KHAN, SYED HASSAN, FRANKLIN RODRIGUEZ, AND BASHARAL JARRAL – are charged with stolen vehicle offenses involving luxury cars such as Hummers and a Porsche Cayenne.
TAHIR ALI KHAN is 30 years old, and resides in Alabama.
FAYYAZ AHMED is 40 years old, and is currently held at Riker’s Island, NY.
ARIE BENSHIMON is 35 years old and resides in Monsey, NY.
NAVEED ALI BHINDAR is 43 years old resides in Valley Stream, NY.
SYED HASSAN is 33 years old and resides in Staten Island, NY.
MUHAMMAD ISHAQ is 34 years old and resides in Brooklyn, NY.
BASHARAT JARRAL is 49 years old and resides in Elmhurst, NY.
NADEEM KHAN is 24 years old and resides in Brooklyn, NY.
GHULAM MEHMOOD is 40 years old and resides in Cartaret, NJ.
SHAHEEN MUKHTAR is 53 years old and resides in Voorhees, NJ.
QAISER QURESHI is 53 years old and resides in Queens, NY.
FRANKLIN RODRIGUEZ is 21 years old and resides in Brooklyn, NY.
SYED SHAH is 23 years old and resides in Brooklyn, NY.
OSCAR SANCHEZ is 37 years old and resides in Brooklyn, NY.
PRADIPT SHARMA is 31 years old and resides in Brooklyn, NY.
The filing of these charges is the culmination of a 16-month investigation conducted by the New York State Attorney General’s Office with the New York City Police Department, New York State Police, the Hoover, Alabama Police Department, and the New York State Banking Department. Valuable assistance was provided by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the United States Postal Inspection Service, the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles, the New York City Department of Probation, the Social Security Administration, and the United States Secret Service.
Mr. GARCIA praised the Attorney General’s Office and the federal, state and local law enforcement agencies for their outstanding work in the investigation. Mr. GARCIA stated: “Through the cooperation of federal and state prosecutors, and the investigative work of federal, state and local agencies, we have dismantled a fraud ring of 15 defendants who used false identities to obtain at least $10 million through a wide variety of scams.”
“These defendants are charged with creating a comprehensive system of fraud for ripping off businesses to satisfy their own greed. One of these individuals is even charged with attempting to purchase $10,000 worth of Lowe’s gift cards using a credit card obtained through a false identity,” said Mr. CUOMO. “Our investigators spent over a year monitoring the conspirators and tirelessly compiling evidence to expose these illegal activities. I applaud their hard work, which was a critical part of this investigation and essential in uncovering these crimes.”
Assistant United States Attorneys LISA ZORNBERG and ELIE HONIG, and Assistant Attorney General MERYL LUTSKY -- who is designated as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney in this case -- are in charge of the prosecution. The charges contained in the Indictment are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
Vinnie Restiano Tells Phil Amicone: “Return the stolen newspaper boxes. Reimburse the City out of your Campaign Account.”
Upon learning of the un-Constitutional seizure under the orders of Mayor Phil Amicone of 56 Westchester Guardian Newspaper distribution boxes, that had been in place for more than a year throughout the City of Yonkers, Republican Mayoral candidate Vincenza Restiano called upon Amicone to do the right thing. The following is a press release put out last week:
Press Release
YONKERS-Republican Mayoral candidate Vincenza Restiano called on Mayor Phil Amicone to accept responsibility for the removal and the by city workers of 56 Guardian news racks and to immediately return them to the owner. She also demanded that the Mayor foot the cost of litigation over this matter out of his Campaign Account.
“Removal of the news racks violated the First Amendment rights of every Yonkers citizen,” said Restiano. “And the owner and publisher of The Westchester Guardian is rightly livid about the the of the newspaper’s boxes. Clearly, someone ordered DPW employees to remove news racks that contained copies of The Westchester Guardian. And it is equally clear that it was done because Mayor Amicone did not like the editorial content of the newspaper, since news racks containing other publications were not confisscated.”
The owner of The Westchester Guardian has sued the City for $40 million and Amicone’s spokesperson defended the the of the Guardian’s boxes by claiming that it wasn’t a newspaper.
“The Mayor’s campaign should pay for the return of stolen property and for the time that it took the city employees to confiscate the news boxes,” continued Restiano. “ The Mayor should also reimburse the
city for the cost of the litigation, since it is now clear that the reason the boxes were removed is because the Mayor did not like what was being said about him.”
Upon learning of the un-Constitutional seizure under the orders of Mayor Phil Amicone of 56 Westchester Guardian Newspaper distribution boxes, that had been in place for more than a year throughout the City of Yonkers, Republican Mayoral candidate Vincenza Restiano called upon Amicone to do the right thing. The following is a press release put out last week:
Press Release
YONKERS-Republican Mayoral candidate Vincenza Restiano called on Mayor Phil Amicone to accept responsibility for the removal and the by city workers of 56 Guardian news racks and to immediately return them to the owner. She also demanded that the Mayor foot the cost of litigation over this matter out of his Campaign Account.
“Removal of the news racks violated the First Amendment rights of every Yonkers citizen,” said Restiano. “And the owner and publisher of The Westchester Guardian is rightly livid about the the of the newspaper’s boxes. Clearly, someone ordered DPW employees to remove news racks that contained copies of The Westchester Guardian. And it is equally clear that it was done because Mayor Amicone did not like the editorial content of the newspaper, since news racks containing other publications were not confisscated.”
The owner of The Westchester Guardian has sued the City for $40 million and Amicone’s spokesperson defended the the of the Guardian’s boxes by claiming that it wasn’t a newspaper.
“The Mayor’s campaign should pay for the return of stolen property and for the time that it took the city employees to confiscate the news boxes,” continued Restiano. “ The Mayor should also reimburse the
city for the cost of the litigation, since it is now clear that the reason the boxes were removed is because the Mayor did not like what was being said about him.”
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Our Readers Respond...
Push Polling Is Disgraceful
Dear Editor:
It’s no wonder that people are sick and tired of the Greenburgh Town Council. Dirty politics seems to be their stock and trade. First they meet secretly with a developer to try to cut a deal for themselves, now they are
lying about their opponents. I received a telephone “poll” last week and was asked that if I knew that candidate Kevin Morgan supported the policies of President Bush would I be less likely to vote for him for Town Council?
Why would Democratic primary candidates attack their fellow Democrats in such an unfair way? I know Kevin Morgan and I know that he does not support the policies of George Bush - not to mention the fact that national
policies have nothing to do with Greenburgh government.
What is the purpose for these divisive tactics? How will Democrats address such unethical behavior from supposedly Democratic candidates who are really a blight on the party? They are making it up, just like
the last election.
Two years ago the Westchester County Fair Campaign Practices Committee found that Frances Sheehan and Diane Juettner lied when they stated Kevin Morgan didn’t support a woman’s right to choose.
Guess what, they are lying again. I’m voting for Kevin Morgan for Town Council. It looks like the Westchester County Fair Campaign Practices Committee is going to have its work cut out for it again. Greenburgh needs a fair election with fair protection for true Democrats.
Garrett Cronin, White Plains
Fair Campaign Practices Committee Contact Info
Dear Editor:
The Westchester County Fair Campaign Practices Committee will be in operation for the 16th straight year, affording candidates an opportunity to bring charges of unfair campaign practices before our committee for a hearing and ruling. We need your help in alerting candidates about our service.
If you need additional information, please contact Stephanie Sarnoff, chair, at 914-276-0760.
Judy Hamilton
More On Push Polling And Dirty Tricks
Dear Editor:
Kevin Morgan, candidate for Greenburgh Town Council, said that Democrats in Greenburgh are being called by an anonymous “pollster”, whose real purpose is campaigning for his opponents. The poll asks voters what they think about Supervisor Feiner, Morgan, and his running mate Sonja Brown and Clerk candidate Judith Beville.
The poll, which asks a number of questions about each candidate, is actually designed to discourage voters from voting for Morgan and his running mates by fabricating stories about their record and views. Karl Rove would be proud.
Gary Cronin, a registered Democrat in Greenburgh and the recipient of the “poll”, said that he was angered when the “pollster” asked if he would think differently about Morgan if he knew that Morgan supported George Bush’s
policies. “I know Kevin, know that he is not a George Bush supporter and was offended that they would lie about him. This is dirty politics at its worst.”
Morgan attributed his 2005 loss to Francis Sheehan to last-minute mailings claiming that Morgan was not pro choice. The mailings were sent shortly before primary day so that Morgan wouldn’t have a chance to respond. Morgan has always been pro choice. Polly Rothstein, founder of Westchester Coalition for Legal Abortion, verified Morgan’s pro choice views, and even told Sheehan not to go forward with his accusations because they weren’t true. Truth, of course, was not what Sheehan was interested in. After the election the Westchester County Fair Campaign Practices Committee found that Francis Sheehan and Diana Juettner sent out unfair campaign literature. Morgan said, “I don’t want to lose the election again because my opponents are saying things about me that just aren’t true.”
Friends of Kevin Morgan
Former Correction Officer Expresses Concern for Richard DiGuglielmo
Dear Editor:
I would like to start by thanking you for a phenomenal newspaper, which prints an uncensored description of corruption within Westchester County.
I was reading the article in your August 9, 2007 paper regarding Richard DiGuglielmo (The Wheels
of Justice Finally Turn), and would like to give some insight. In 1996 I was employed by the Westchester County Department of Corrections. I clearly remember the incident which took place, and have been very upset with the unjust prosecutorial misconduct brought upon Mr. DiGuglielmo by our former DA, Jeanine Pirro. I remember
watching Richard walk down the long corridor, being escorted by a sergeant, to his housing unit within the institution. ere was a frightened, despondent look on Richard’s face as he approached me. I commented
to him, “Stay strong, my brother, we are here for you.” He glanced up at me and I could see a tear starting to fill his eye.
One day later, I was working the visitation room when Richard entered, only to see his mother and beaten father sitting at a table waiting to greet and console their son. I couldn’t help but notice the casted hand of his father, along with the massive dark bruise on his thigh area because he was wearing shorts.
At this point, I said to myself, “what is this man doing in a cage?” He did not only do what he was trained to as a police officer, but was expected by every son to do to protect their father from a bat-wielding, violent assaulter.
Not only did our DA at the time maliciously prosecute him in order to uphold her 98 percent conviction rate, she sent him to prison. As I understand it, there might be another Constitutional violation which Richard’s defense is concerned about. is is very troubling to the citizens of Westchester County who placed their trust and faith
in the hands of our former DA. She abused her power, not only once with the denial of Jeffrey Deskovic’s
plea for DNA comparison, but with Brady violations involving the DiSimone case. How many other violations did her office commit?
How many other people did she maliciously prosecute and convict? Ninety-eight percent is a big ratio.
Even the New York Yankees can’t win every game.
Mr. Garcia, isn’t it about time you step up to the plate and indict this criminal who instructed her ADAs
to follow her lead like a chorus line, violating the trust and faith of every citizen within this county? Please,
don’t be intimidated by her $400 snake skin shoes or her $200 haircuts ($1.5 million joint tax return).
After all, how would she feel wearing an orange jumpsuit! It was also stated that she had a confidential
hook within your department. You surely have a lot of work ahead of you, Mr. Garcia.
From a concerned law enforcement officer
What A Coinkadink
We would prefer to give everyone, within reason, the benefit of the doubt. And so, we would prefer to think that the reason Mayor Amicone’s payroll swelled by $1.2 million after he accepted Nicky Spano’s endorsement
has nothing to do with the fact that Nicky’s State Senate payroll, before he lost to Andrea Stewart-Cousins, had been, you guessed it, $1.2 million. We would prefer to think that it’s only a coincidence.
Yes, it’s true that there are Nicky People all over Yonkers City Hall, and they’ve been there for many months, some weaving baskets, still others twiddling their thumbs, since about the time of the endorsement. But, We would prefer to think that everyone of those 30 or more new Yonkers City employees were really qualified and very needed to fill the particular essential jobs they now perform. After all, there are certain Civil Service rules and regulations that govern the hiring of public employees you know; something to do with being chosen off a competitive performance list.
Imagine some observers have been going around suggesting that Nicky’s former staff were actually given preferential treatment, in fact, hired to do little, if anything, at their old pay scale. Once again, We prefer to believe that it’s all just a coincidence.
Then again, suppose, just suppose, those observers are on to something, that it’s not merely a coincidence that all those new hires from Spanoville just happen to be costing what they were costing when they worked in the office of the State Senator from the 35th Senatorial District. Why, if that is the case, then the unimaginable might be true, and We would prefer not to think of Phil Amicone and Nick Spano in that light. If that really is the case, then Mr. Amicone would be paying off Nick Spano for his worthless, oops, endorsement with more than a million dollars-worth of jobs for Nicky’s flunkies, with money from the public treasury.
We ask ourselves, “Is Phil Amicone the sort of person who would do such a corrupt and underhanded thing? Would he cut a deal with a tired ‘has-been’ who’s unemployed only because he couldn’t steal another election?”
We consider the Mayor’s conduct in office in weighing our conclusion. Phil Amicone has done absolutely nothing to quell the frightening proclivity for violence of the Yonkers Police Department, a department known for its brutality even amongst other police departments. Phil Amicone is capable of lying about having performed a life-saving maneuver just to make himself look heroic. Phil Amicone cannot tolerate fair, and truthful scrutiny and criticism, as evidenced by his confiscation of 56 distribution boxes of The Westchester Guardian, and the arrest of Guardian employees in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, as well as applicable New York State statutes.
In light of all of the above We must, reluctantly, but reasonably, conclude that yes, Mayor Phil Amicone is quite capable of cutting such a cynical deal with the likes of Nick Spano, and paying it off with taxpayers’ money.
Push Polling Is Disgraceful
Dear Editor:
It’s no wonder that people are sick and tired of the Greenburgh Town Council. Dirty politics seems to be their stock and trade. First they meet secretly with a developer to try to cut a deal for themselves, now they are
lying about their opponents. I received a telephone “poll” last week and was asked that if I knew that candidate Kevin Morgan supported the policies of President Bush would I be less likely to vote for him for Town Council?
Why would Democratic primary candidates attack their fellow Democrats in such an unfair way? I know Kevin Morgan and I know that he does not support the policies of George Bush - not to mention the fact that national
policies have nothing to do with Greenburgh government.
What is the purpose for these divisive tactics? How will Democrats address such unethical behavior from supposedly Democratic candidates who are really a blight on the party? They are making it up, just like
the last election.
Two years ago the Westchester County Fair Campaign Practices Committee found that Frances Sheehan and Diane Juettner lied when they stated Kevin Morgan didn’t support a woman’s right to choose.
Guess what, they are lying again. I’m voting for Kevin Morgan for Town Council. It looks like the Westchester County Fair Campaign Practices Committee is going to have its work cut out for it again. Greenburgh needs a fair election with fair protection for true Democrats.
Garrett Cronin, White Plains
Fair Campaign Practices Committee Contact Info
Dear Editor:
The Westchester County Fair Campaign Practices Committee will be in operation for the 16th straight year, affording candidates an opportunity to bring charges of unfair campaign practices before our committee for a hearing and ruling. We need your help in alerting candidates about our service.
If you need additional information, please contact Stephanie Sarnoff, chair, at 914-276-0760.
Judy Hamilton
More On Push Polling And Dirty Tricks
Dear Editor:
Kevin Morgan, candidate for Greenburgh Town Council, said that Democrats in Greenburgh are being called by an anonymous “pollster”, whose real purpose is campaigning for his opponents. The poll asks voters what they think about Supervisor Feiner, Morgan, and his running mate Sonja Brown and Clerk candidate Judith Beville.
The poll, which asks a number of questions about each candidate, is actually designed to discourage voters from voting for Morgan and his running mates by fabricating stories about their record and views. Karl Rove would be proud.
Gary Cronin, a registered Democrat in Greenburgh and the recipient of the “poll”, said that he was angered when the “pollster” asked if he would think differently about Morgan if he knew that Morgan supported George Bush’s
policies. “I know Kevin, know that he is not a George Bush supporter and was offended that they would lie about him. This is dirty politics at its worst.”
Morgan attributed his 2005 loss to Francis Sheehan to last-minute mailings claiming that Morgan was not pro choice. The mailings were sent shortly before primary day so that Morgan wouldn’t have a chance to respond. Morgan has always been pro choice. Polly Rothstein, founder of Westchester Coalition for Legal Abortion, verified Morgan’s pro choice views, and even told Sheehan not to go forward with his accusations because they weren’t true. Truth, of course, was not what Sheehan was interested in. After the election the Westchester County Fair Campaign Practices Committee found that Francis Sheehan and Diana Juettner sent out unfair campaign literature. Morgan said, “I don’t want to lose the election again because my opponents are saying things about me that just aren’t true.”
Friends of Kevin Morgan
Former Correction Officer Expresses Concern for Richard DiGuglielmo
Dear Editor:
I would like to start by thanking you for a phenomenal newspaper, which prints an uncensored description of corruption within Westchester County.
I was reading the article in your August 9, 2007 paper regarding Richard DiGuglielmo (The Wheels
of Justice Finally Turn), and would like to give some insight. In 1996 I was employed by the Westchester County Department of Corrections. I clearly remember the incident which took place, and have been very upset with the unjust prosecutorial misconduct brought upon Mr. DiGuglielmo by our former DA, Jeanine Pirro. I remember
watching Richard walk down the long corridor, being escorted by a sergeant, to his housing unit within the institution. ere was a frightened, despondent look on Richard’s face as he approached me. I commented
to him, “Stay strong, my brother, we are here for you.” He glanced up at me and I could see a tear starting to fill his eye.
One day later, I was working the visitation room when Richard entered, only to see his mother and beaten father sitting at a table waiting to greet and console their son. I couldn’t help but notice the casted hand of his father, along with the massive dark bruise on his thigh area because he was wearing shorts.
At this point, I said to myself, “what is this man doing in a cage?” He did not only do what he was trained to as a police officer, but was expected by every son to do to protect their father from a bat-wielding, violent assaulter.
Not only did our DA at the time maliciously prosecute him in order to uphold her 98 percent conviction rate, she sent him to prison. As I understand it, there might be another Constitutional violation which Richard’s defense is concerned about. is is very troubling to the citizens of Westchester County who placed their trust and faith
in the hands of our former DA. She abused her power, not only once with the denial of Jeffrey Deskovic’s
plea for DNA comparison, but with Brady violations involving the DiSimone case. How many other violations did her office commit?
How many other people did she maliciously prosecute and convict? Ninety-eight percent is a big ratio.
Even the New York Yankees can’t win every game.
Mr. Garcia, isn’t it about time you step up to the plate and indict this criminal who instructed her ADAs
to follow her lead like a chorus line, violating the trust and faith of every citizen within this county? Please,
don’t be intimidated by her $400 snake skin shoes or her $200 haircuts ($1.5 million joint tax return).
After all, how would she feel wearing an orange jumpsuit! It was also stated that she had a confidential
hook within your department. You surely have a lot of work ahead of you, Mr. Garcia.
From a concerned law enforcement officer
What A Coinkadink
We would prefer to give everyone, within reason, the benefit of the doubt. And so, we would prefer to think that the reason Mayor Amicone’s payroll swelled by $1.2 million after he accepted Nicky Spano’s endorsement
has nothing to do with the fact that Nicky’s State Senate payroll, before he lost to Andrea Stewart-Cousins, had been, you guessed it, $1.2 million. We would prefer to think that it’s only a coincidence.
Yes, it’s true that there are Nicky People all over Yonkers City Hall, and they’ve been there for many months, some weaving baskets, still others twiddling their thumbs, since about the time of the endorsement. But, We would prefer to think that everyone of those 30 or more new Yonkers City employees were really qualified and very needed to fill the particular essential jobs they now perform. After all, there are certain Civil Service rules and regulations that govern the hiring of public employees you know; something to do with being chosen off a competitive performance list.
Imagine some observers have been going around suggesting that Nicky’s former staff were actually given preferential treatment, in fact, hired to do little, if anything, at their old pay scale. Once again, We prefer to believe that it’s all just a coincidence.
Then again, suppose, just suppose, those observers are on to something, that it’s not merely a coincidence that all those new hires from Spanoville just happen to be costing what they were costing when they worked in the office of the State Senator from the 35th Senatorial District. Why, if that is the case, then the unimaginable might be true, and We would prefer not to think of Phil Amicone and Nick Spano in that light. If that really is the case, then Mr. Amicone would be paying off Nick Spano for his worthless, oops, endorsement with more than a million dollars-worth of jobs for Nicky’s flunkies, with money from the public treasury.
We ask ourselves, “Is Phil Amicone the sort of person who would do such a corrupt and underhanded thing? Would he cut a deal with a tired ‘has-been’ who’s unemployed only because he couldn’t steal another election?”
We consider the Mayor’s conduct in office in weighing our conclusion. Phil Amicone has done absolutely nothing to quell the frightening proclivity for violence of the Yonkers Police Department, a department known for its brutality even amongst other police departments. Phil Amicone is capable of lying about having performed a life-saving maneuver just to make himself look heroic. Phil Amicone cannot tolerate fair, and truthful scrutiny and criticism, as evidenced by his confiscation of 56 distribution boxes of The Westchester Guardian, and the arrest of Guardian employees in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, as well as applicable New York State statutes.
In light of all of the above We must, reluctantly, but reasonably, conclude that yes, Mayor Phil Amicone is quite capable of cutting such a cynical deal with the likes of Nick Spano, and paying it off with taxpayers’ money.
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
Chief David Hall And Captain Anthony Marriccini: Two Rogue Cops With Dirty Hands
Harrison Police Chief David Hall and Captain Anthony Marriccini are two police officers unworthy of command or respect. Acting in concert for many years now, they have engaged in, and covered up numerous unlawful acts, their own, and those of others, including former District Attorney Jeanine Pirro, conspiring and executing schemes calculated to deprive decent fellow police officers, innocent citizens, and taxpayers of every stripe, of their Constitutionallyguaranteed right to Due Process and Equal Protection Under Law.
For the most part their crimes against the community are federal in nature, and deserve the utmost attention of federal authorities. Their connivance and lies have known no limit, extending across the boundaries of reasonableness and common decency. In April of 2002 they willingly responded to the dictates of Jeanine Pirro who unlawfully demanded that they destroy their investigation, some four hours in progress, into the assault upon, and willful neglect of a severely injured Harrison High School student, Robert Viscome, Jr. resulting in death from
serious head trauma, and failure to receive immediate emergency attention.
Despite having elicited inculpating statements, and having prepared criminal histories, and arrest reports, from several youths, including John Porzio, Jr., all materials were ordered destroyed, to protect Porzio, at whose house the assault had occurred, a house known to police as a drug “safe-house,” and other youths including Christine Pirro, daughter of Jeanine and Al Pirro.
At Hall’s and Marriccini’s command, lieutenants confiscated the reports and paperwork that had been generated by responding officers, shredding them after releasing nearly two dozen youths through the back door of Police Headquarters. Hall, whose principal function has been to serve as Marriccini’s public spokesperson, then proceeded to disseminate false information to the family and friends of Rob Viscome, and to the media and press, putting in place a huge lie, that to this day has seriously damaged not only every one of the two dozen youths involved, but also the morale, and integrity of the entire Harrison Police Department.
In the five years since the tragic incident, guilt and recrimination have added still further acrimony and tyranny to the environment of a police department already torn by the multi-faceted criminal agenda, and secrecy imposed
by Marriccini and Hall, aided and abetted by the District Attorney’s Office, and local Town Justice John Voetsch.
At times their criminal conduct has commenced upon their own initiative, as with David Hall’s forging and converting of a $2,500 check written as a con-tribution by a local country club to the Harrison Police PBA, but altered and deposited to one of Hall’s membership organizations. Of course, the District Attorney’s Public Integrity Unit found nothing in those facts to bring before a grand jury, nothing to prosecute.
More recently, within the last few weeks, Marriccini and Hall have, once again, been reassured of continuing support of their unlawful activities by the Westchester DA’s Office in the form of affirmative activity to bolster their malicious, and calculated harassment of Harrison Police Officer Ralph Tancredi, 42, a ten-year veteran of the force, and president of the PBA, as well as Police Officer Steven Heisler, 28, a life-long Harrison resident.
In Tancredi’s case, an incident involving the officer in his civilian capacity, in which a young man in his twenties threatened him on the street with a sawedoff baseball bat and placed his hand on the officer’s chest, as if to shove him, while in the company of Tancredi’s former girlfriend, was released by Harrison police brass, despite the fact that the responding police officer had approached the assailant, having taken his bat away, and reported no criminal conduct by Tancredi.
Tancredi, the victim, by any account, including that of the young woman present, incredibly, was detained, arrested, and suspended from work. Additionally, although that young woman insisted to Harrison police that Officer Tancredi did not act hostile, or harass either herself or her companion, and refused to sign any false statement, or complaint against him, the Harrison Police, under orders from Captain Marriccini, without her consent, obtained an Order Of Protection from the District Attorney’s Office against Tancredi.
Police Officer Steven Heisler, on the other hand, has been suspended, and is the subject of disciplinary charges brought by David Hall for supposedly failing to report promptly enough about an earlier incident in which Officer Tancredi, again in his civilian capacity, was wrongfully accosted by a drunken patron at a local bar, who later apologized for his inappropriate conduct. Having been dispatched in response to a call from the bar, Officer Heisler, in fact, proceeded to deal appropriately, and effectively with the rowdy patron, preventing matters
from escalating, and reporting back to his superiors as quickly as possible. The charges against Officer Heisler are as meritless as those against Tancredi, and constitute harassment, and Unconstitutional violations of Due Process.
Perhaps of more urgent concern to Harrison residents and taxpayers is the squandering of enormous amounts of taxpayer dollars by the Harrison Police Department at the direction of Captain Marriccini. For openers, the Captain, the Chief, six Lieutenants, four canine officers, and one Police Academy officer, thirteen individuals in all, take taxpayer-paid-for police vehicles, filled with taxpayerpaid-for gas, home every night, and every weekend, to places as far away from Harrison as Carmel, New York. However, as serious as this taxpayer abuse may be, perhaps involving several hundred thousand dollars each year, it is minor when compared with the $4 million wasted on overtime, and other unnecessary expenses incurred in the so-called Fugasi Gambling Investigation.
The investigation was bogus, intended as a method by which Captain Marriccini could pay out enormous amounts of overtime to four or five executives of the PBA and some 15 other PBA members in his effort to bribe, and win over their support following the filing of a federal lawsuit by some twelve Harrison Police Officers who had been unlawfully subjected to the taping and recording of their locker room activities, in March of last year.
The involvement of some twenty officers in the bogus operation caused normal tours to frequently run short of manpower. Where six officers had normally been on the road three or four were compelled to cover, clearly an unwarranted safety risk for Harrison residents. After many months, and the squandering of four million dollars, only one Harrison resident was arrested. There was one gun arrest, and a number of misdemeanor gambling charges; pitifully little. Furthermore, the huge investment netted less than $800,000 in gambling proceeds.
Seeking to help Hall and Mariccini justify their unwarranted, wasteful scheme, once again the Westchester District Attorney’s Office stepped in seeking to lay blame on Officers Mike and Arty Marinelli, claiming they had somehow tipped off the operators of the gambling operation.
Captain Marriccini has instituted a RICO-type enterprise. In an effort to directly and indirectly support his homebuilding, and other enterprises, by obligating certain businesses, in and around Harrison, he has instructed officers on road patrols to issue thousands of dollars in truck violations to certain companies, routinely passing through Harrison. Town Attorneys Jonathan Kraut, and Frank Allegretti reportedly are each being paid $10,000 annual stipends in addition to their salaries, to handle the negotiations with these firms over their commercial vehicle violations.
Chief Hall is fully aware of all of the above unlawful, and taxpayer-abusive, conduct. In truth he serves at the pleasure of Captain Marriccini and his connections. He is little more than a corrupt front man. Almost laughably, Marriccini is the Internal Affairs Officer. Talk about the ‘fox in the henhouse’!
Having been informed of the unlawful goings-on, the State Investigation Commission has done nothing, as usual. Given that fact, as well as the conspicuous collusion between Hall and Marriccini, and the District Attorney’s Office, the above issues, by all accounts a small fraction of what is known, cry out for the immediate attention of the FBI and the United States Attorney’s Office.
As Chief Hall and his partner in crime, Captain Marriccini will soon discover, the truth speaks for itself, once stated, it stands on its own. But a lie, especially a BIG LIE, such as was told about the conduct of some two dozen young adults, including the daughter of the DA, who made a very bad decision that may very well have cost the life of their friend; that kind of lie needs constant propping and support forever. But still the ugly truth emerges.
Does the Captain and his official mouthpiece, Chief Hall, really believe that there are any intelligent Harrison residents who do not realize what happened to Rob Viscome, five years ago, and what’s happening to Officers Tancredi and Heisler right now? How stupid do they think people are?
They’re not so stupid as to think that a man obtains yachts, ultra-expensive cars, and McMansion homes on an honest policeman’s salary, not even an over-paid Captain’s. They know there have been many lies, and that beneath the silent surface induced by intimidation, rests a willingness everywhere to come forward with the truth, if only to lay down one’s heavy burden, and finally relieve one’s conscience. Many already have begun, and the truth is percolating to the surface everywhere throughout Westchester, including Harrison. People are waking up and smelling the coffee as Hall and Marriccini will soon discover.
At Officer Tancredi's arraignment in Harrison Town Court Friday, Aug. 17, his attorney, Jonathan Lovett, requested a change of venue, as well as the removal of temporary Orders Of Protection from his client. He indicated that he will be going into Federal Court with the matter to address serious violations of his client's Constitutional rights.
Judge Mark Lust adjourned the proceeding until Friday, Aug. 24th and, over the objections of the District Attorney’s Office, refused to continue the Orders of Protection beyond one more week. It was clear to those present in Court that Of-ficer Tancredi has an enormous base of support amongst rank and file police officers and that Captain Marriccini and Chief Hall will not be getting away with it this time.
Richard Blassberg
Chief David Hall And Captain Anthony Marriccini: Two Rogue Cops With Dirty Hands
Harrison Police Chief David Hall and Captain Anthony Marriccini are two police officers unworthy of command or respect. Acting in concert for many years now, they have engaged in, and covered up numerous unlawful acts, their own, and those of others, including former District Attorney Jeanine Pirro, conspiring and executing schemes calculated to deprive decent fellow police officers, innocent citizens, and taxpayers of every stripe, of their Constitutionallyguaranteed right to Due Process and Equal Protection Under Law.
For the most part their crimes against the community are federal in nature, and deserve the utmost attention of federal authorities. Their connivance and lies have known no limit, extending across the boundaries of reasonableness and common decency. In April of 2002 they willingly responded to the dictates of Jeanine Pirro who unlawfully demanded that they destroy their investigation, some four hours in progress, into the assault upon, and willful neglect of a severely injured Harrison High School student, Robert Viscome, Jr. resulting in death from
serious head trauma, and failure to receive immediate emergency attention.
Despite having elicited inculpating statements, and having prepared criminal histories, and arrest reports, from several youths, including John Porzio, Jr., all materials were ordered destroyed, to protect Porzio, at whose house the assault had occurred, a house known to police as a drug “safe-house,” and other youths including Christine Pirro, daughter of Jeanine and Al Pirro.
At Hall’s and Marriccini’s command, lieutenants confiscated the reports and paperwork that had been generated by responding officers, shredding them after releasing nearly two dozen youths through the back door of Police Headquarters. Hall, whose principal function has been to serve as Marriccini’s public spokesperson, then proceeded to disseminate false information to the family and friends of Rob Viscome, and to the media and press, putting in place a huge lie, that to this day has seriously damaged not only every one of the two dozen youths involved, but also the morale, and integrity of the entire Harrison Police Department.
In the five years since the tragic incident, guilt and recrimination have added still further acrimony and tyranny to the environment of a police department already torn by the multi-faceted criminal agenda, and secrecy imposed
by Marriccini and Hall, aided and abetted by the District Attorney’s Office, and local Town Justice John Voetsch.
At times their criminal conduct has commenced upon their own initiative, as with David Hall’s forging and converting of a $2,500 check written as a con-tribution by a local country club to the Harrison Police PBA, but altered and deposited to one of Hall’s membership organizations. Of course, the District Attorney’s Public Integrity Unit found nothing in those facts to bring before a grand jury, nothing to prosecute.
More recently, within the last few weeks, Marriccini and Hall have, once again, been reassured of continuing support of their unlawful activities by the Westchester DA’s Office in the form of affirmative activity to bolster their malicious, and calculated harassment of Harrison Police Officer Ralph Tancredi, 42, a ten-year veteran of the force, and president of the PBA, as well as Police Officer Steven Heisler, 28, a life-long Harrison resident.
In Tancredi’s case, an incident involving the officer in his civilian capacity, in which a young man in his twenties threatened him on the street with a sawedoff baseball bat and placed his hand on the officer’s chest, as if to shove him, while in the company of Tancredi’s former girlfriend, was released by Harrison police brass, despite the fact that the responding police officer had approached the assailant, having taken his bat away, and reported no criminal conduct by Tancredi.
Tancredi, the victim, by any account, including that of the young woman present, incredibly, was detained, arrested, and suspended from work. Additionally, although that young woman insisted to Harrison police that Officer Tancredi did not act hostile, or harass either herself or her companion, and refused to sign any false statement, or complaint against him, the Harrison Police, under orders from Captain Marriccini, without her consent, obtained an Order Of Protection from the District Attorney’s Office against Tancredi.
Police Officer Steven Heisler, on the other hand, has been suspended, and is the subject of disciplinary charges brought by David Hall for supposedly failing to report promptly enough about an earlier incident in which Officer Tancredi, again in his civilian capacity, was wrongfully accosted by a drunken patron at a local bar, who later apologized for his inappropriate conduct. Having been dispatched in response to a call from the bar, Officer Heisler, in fact, proceeded to deal appropriately, and effectively with the rowdy patron, preventing matters
from escalating, and reporting back to his superiors as quickly as possible. The charges against Officer Heisler are as meritless as those against Tancredi, and constitute harassment, and Unconstitutional violations of Due Process.
Perhaps of more urgent concern to Harrison residents and taxpayers is the squandering of enormous amounts of taxpayer dollars by the Harrison Police Department at the direction of Captain Marriccini. For openers, the Captain, the Chief, six Lieutenants, four canine officers, and one Police Academy officer, thirteen individuals in all, take taxpayer-paid-for police vehicles, filled with taxpayerpaid-for gas, home every night, and every weekend, to places as far away from Harrison as Carmel, New York. However, as serious as this taxpayer abuse may be, perhaps involving several hundred thousand dollars each year, it is minor when compared with the $4 million wasted on overtime, and other unnecessary expenses incurred in the so-called Fugasi Gambling Investigation.
The investigation was bogus, intended as a method by which Captain Marriccini could pay out enormous amounts of overtime to four or five executives of the PBA and some 15 other PBA members in his effort to bribe, and win over their support following the filing of a federal lawsuit by some twelve Harrison Police Officers who had been unlawfully subjected to the taping and recording of their locker room activities, in March of last year.
The involvement of some twenty officers in the bogus operation caused normal tours to frequently run short of manpower. Where six officers had normally been on the road three or four were compelled to cover, clearly an unwarranted safety risk for Harrison residents. After many months, and the squandering of four million dollars, only one Harrison resident was arrested. There was one gun arrest, and a number of misdemeanor gambling charges; pitifully little. Furthermore, the huge investment netted less than $800,000 in gambling proceeds.
Seeking to help Hall and Mariccini justify their unwarranted, wasteful scheme, once again the Westchester District Attorney’s Office stepped in seeking to lay blame on Officers Mike and Arty Marinelli, claiming they had somehow tipped off the operators of the gambling operation.
Captain Marriccini has instituted a RICO-type enterprise. In an effort to directly and indirectly support his homebuilding, and other enterprises, by obligating certain businesses, in and around Harrison, he has instructed officers on road patrols to issue thousands of dollars in truck violations to certain companies, routinely passing through Harrison. Town Attorneys Jonathan Kraut, and Frank Allegretti reportedly are each being paid $10,000 annual stipends in addition to their salaries, to handle the negotiations with these firms over their commercial vehicle violations.
Chief Hall is fully aware of all of the above unlawful, and taxpayer-abusive, conduct. In truth he serves at the pleasure of Captain Marriccini and his connections. He is little more than a corrupt front man. Almost laughably, Marriccini is the Internal Affairs Officer. Talk about the ‘fox in the henhouse’!
Having been informed of the unlawful goings-on, the State Investigation Commission has done nothing, as usual. Given that fact, as well as the conspicuous collusion between Hall and Marriccini, and the District Attorney’s Office, the above issues, by all accounts a small fraction of what is known, cry out for the immediate attention of the FBI and the United States Attorney’s Office.
As Chief Hall and his partner in crime, Captain Marriccini will soon discover, the truth speaks for itself, once stated, it stands on its own. But a lie, especially a BIG LIE, such as was told about the conduct of some two dozen young adults, including the daughter of the DA, who made a very bad decision that may very well have cost the life of their friend; that kind of lie needs constant propping and support forever. But still the ugly truth emerges.
Does the Captain and his official mouthpiece, Chief Hall, really believe that there are any intelligent Harrison residents who do not realize what happened to Rob Viscome, five years ago, and what’s happening to Officers Tancredi and Heisler right now? How stupid do they think people are?
They’re not so stupid as to think that a man obtains yachts, ultra-expensive cars, and McMansion homes on an honest policeman’s salary, not even an over-paid Captain’s. They know there have been many lies, and that beneath the silent surface induced by intimidation, rests a willingness everywhere to come forward with the truth, if only to lay down one’s heavy burden, and finally relieve one’s conscience. Many already have begun, and the truth is percolating to the surface everywhere throughout Westchester, including Harrison. People are waking up and smelling the coffee as Hall and Marriccini will soon discover.
At Officer Tancredi's arraignment in Harrison Town Court Friday, Aug. 17, his attorney, Jonathan Lovett, requested a change of venue, as well as the removal of temporary Orders Of Protection from his client. He indicated that he will be going into Federal Court with the matter to address serious violations of his client's Constitutional rights.
Judge Mark Lust adjourned the proceeding until Friday, Aug. 24th and, over the objections of the District Attorney’s Office, refused to continue the Orders of Protection beyond one more week. It was clear to those present in Court that Of-ficer Tancredi has an enormous base of support amongst rank and file police officers and that Captain Marriccini and Chief Hall will not be getting away with it this time.
The Court Report
By Richard Blassberg
Judge Who Should Have Recused Herself Bounces Independence Party Mayoral Hopeful
State Supreme Court, White Plains
Judge Mary H. Smith Presiding
Last Wednesday, following two full days of testimony and under a Court imposed deadline, Supreme Court Justice Mary H. Smith effectively removed Nader Sayegh, Independent candidate for Mayor of Yonkers from the Independence Party Primary Election. Finding for Phil Amicone and three politically insignificant additional
parties, against Sayegh and the Westchester Board of Elections, Judge Smith concluded, “…this Court must find by clear and convincing evidence that respondent Sayegh had engaged in fraud in the procurement of signatures for his designating petition requiring that his petition be invalidated.”
Smith was referring specifi-cally to testimony from two constituents, a young Ms. Said and a middle-aged Mr. Hasow, signers amongst more than 750 who signed petitions to place Sayegh on the Independence Primary ballot. Despite the fact that more than 130 of the signatures collected personally by the candidate, and by his family, came from members of his immediate and extended family, Smith found that he “personally and knowingly
had participated in fraud with respect to the collecting and witnessing of signatures on his designating petition”. She refused, however, to affirm Petitioner’s claim, as presented by Attorney John Ciampoloi, that Sayegh’s
petition was “permeated with fraud.”
Analysis
There are several troubling aspects to Judge Smith’s handling of this case. For one thing, Smith, who had declined to preside over another, concurrent election case involving the Independence Party, specifically
Giulio Cavallo, and parties in opposition to, as well as in litigation against, him, and his political allies, in fact, recusing herself from that matter, should clearly have recused from this matter as well. Most troubling, from this reporter’s standpoint, was that a judge with whom prior contacts had always produced favorable performance reviews, now saw fit, before the commencement of proceedings on Friday August 10th, to call into her chambers counsel for both sides, including the County Attorney, for more than twenty minutes, in the absence of Mr. Sayegh, to apparently reveal, out of the presence of press and interested observers, her several conflicting relationships and circumstances, in spite of which she believed she could fairly fact find, and adjudicate the case.`
The fact is, Judge Smith has, in the past been a substantial contributor to the Independence Party, and Club, reportedly giving as much as $10,000 to Mr. Cavallo’s favorite charity. She is presently under subpoena from Publisher of The Westchester Guardian, Sam Zherka, as are numerous other judges, and Westchester County
politicians who have contributed substantial sums to Mr. Cavallo, apparently in exchange for his “party’s” cross-endorsement. Mr. Zherka is a member of the Integrity Committee, and a known supporter of Nader Sayegh, and was present in Smith’s Court throughout the proceedings.
Judge Smith, a Republican, whose judicial future lies virtually in the hands of the Republican State Committee who dispatch and underwrite the fees of John Ciampoli, legal counsel to Republican Mayor Phil Amicone in the instant case, and to Giulio Cavallo, Zehy Jereis, and other undesirable political operatives a week earlier in their unsuccessful action against Republican City Councilman John Murtagh, before Judge Joan Lefkowitz. Judge Smith knows better than most that even the appearance of impropriety may be fatal to the career of a judge.
As regards the evidence that formed the basis of Smith’s decision, her reliance upon testimony of self-proclaimed handwriting expert Roger Rubin was a stretch at best. The sum total of his education in the field of his so-called expertise, consisted, by his own admission, of having read a book on the subject. Respondent’s expert, Joseph P. Mc Nally, Jr., who is essentially criticized by Smith for having “failed to refute the specific findings of petitioner’s expert,” avoided doing so for the very same reason he criticized Rubin for making comparisons.
McNally, preferring to be known as a Document Authenticator, and possessing vastly more credentials and experience than Rubin, was strongly opposed to the making of signature comparisons from the designating petitions, with a “single exemplar,” voter registration cards, many of which he pointed out to the Court were fifteen and twenty years old.
Finally, legally savvy observers present, including this reporter, understood that Mr. Ciampoli had not made out
a very compelling case. And, realizing this toward the end of his presentation, as a kind of “Hail Mary Pass” raised an old election law case Haas v. Costigan that he had exhumed from 1961, one that even Judge Smith
acknowledged had many “red flags.” The purpose of the citation was to suggest that if Mr. Sayegh avoided testifying, for whatever reason, Haas stood for the proposition that it would impose a negative inference.
Before breaking for lunch Smith insisted that Attorney Harry Kessler produce Nader Sayegh in her Court for the afternoon session. No such requirement was imposed upon Phil Amicone or any other opposing party. And, while his testimony contradicted the testimony relied upon by the Judge, given the circumstances under which signatures were collected and the large numbers of individuals who signed, Sayegh’s responses to cross-examination did not seem “incredible” as claimed by Smith in her decision, but rather left room for reasonable doubt. In any case there was no evidence that would compel a reasonable trier of fact, under the totality of the circumstances, to conclude that there had been an affirmative fraudulent intent on the part of the respondent.
Nader Sayegh had told The Guardian prior to the proceedings, “The opposition, Giulio Cavallo and his team, including Phil Amicone, have brought an action against the Westchester Board of Elections for having validated petitions containing 768 signatures. They are pursuing a strategy of intimidation and harassment of voters. They feel they can use their money and influence to get their way.”
Contacted following release of Smith’s decision, Sayegh told The Guardian that he fully intends to appeal the decision to the Appellate Division, and, if necessary to the Court of Appeals.
By Richard Blassberg
Judge Who Should Have Recused Herself Bounces Independence Party Mayoral Hopeful
State Supreme Court, White Plains
Judge Mary H. Smith Presiding
Last Wednesday, following two full days of testimony and under a Court imposed deadline, Supreme Court Justice Mary H. Smith effectively removed Nader Sayegh, Independent candidate for Mayor of Yonkers from the Independence Party Primary Election. Finding for Phil Amicone and three politically insignificant additional
parties, against Sayegh and the Westchester Board of Elections, Judge Smith concluded, “…this Court must find by clear and convincing evidence that respondent Sayegh had engaged in fraud in the procurement of signatures for his designating petition requiring that his petition be invalidated.”
Smith was referring specifi-cally to testimony from two constituents, a young Ms. Said and a middle-aged Mr. Hasow, signers amongst more than 750 who signed petitions to place Sayegh on the Independence Primary ballot. Despite the fact that more than 130 of the signatures collected personally by the candidate, and by his family, came from members of his immediate and extended family, Smith found that he “personally and knowingly
had participated in fraud with respect to the collecting and witnessing of signatures on his designating petition”. She refused, however, to affirm Petitioner’s claim, as presented by Attorney John Ciampoloi, that Sayegh’s
petition was “permeated with fraud.”
Analysis
There are several troubling aspects to Judge Smith’s handling of this case. For one thing, Smith, who had declined to preside over another, concurrent election case involving the Independence Party, specifically
Giulio Cavallo, and parties in opposition to, as well as in litigation against, him, and his political allies, in fact, recusing herself from that matter, should clearly have recused from this matter as well. Most troubling, from this reporter’s standpoint, was that a judge with whom prior contacts had always produced favorable performance reviews, now saw fit, before the commencement of proceedings on Friday August 10th, to call into her chambers counsel for both sides, including the County Attorney, for more than twenty minutes, in the absence of Mr. Sayegh, to apparently reveal, out of the presence of press and interested observers, her several conflicting relationships and circumstances, in spite of which she believed she could fairly fact find, and adjudicate the case.`
The fact is, Judge Smith has, in the past been a substantial contributor to the Independence Party, and Club, reportedly giving as much as $10,000 to Mr. Cavallo’s favorite charity. She is presently under subpoena from Publisher of The Westchester Guardian, Sam Zherka, as are numerous other judges, and Westchester County
politicians who have contributed substantial sums to Mr. Cavallo, apparently in exchange for his “party’s” cross-endorsement. Mr. Zherka is a member of the Integrity Committee, and a known supporter of Nader Sayegh, and was present in Smith’s Court throughout the proceedings.
Judge Smith, a Republican, whose judicial future lies virtually in the hands of the Republican State Committee who dispatch and underwrite the fees of John Ciampoli, legal counsel to Republican Mayor Phil Amicone in the instant case, and to Giulio Cavallo, Zehy Jereis, and other undesirable political operatives a week earlier in their unsuccessful action against Republican City Councilman John Murtagh, before Judge Joan Lefkowitz. Judge Smith knows better than most that even the appearance of impropriety may be fatal to the career of a judge.
As regards the evidence that formed the basis of Smith’s decision, her reliance upon testimony of self-proclaimed handwriting expert Roger Rubin was a stretch at best. The sum total of his education in the field of his so-called expertise, consisted, by his own admission, of having read a book on the subject. Respondent’s expert, Joseph P. Mc Nally, Jr., who is essentially criticized by Smith for having “failed to refute the specific findings of petitioner’s expert,” avoided doing so for the very same reason he criticized Rubin for making comparisons.
McNally, preferring to be known as a Document Authenticator, and possessing vastly more credentials and experience than Rubin, was strongly opposed to the making of signature comparisons from the designating petitions, with a “single exemplar,” voter registration cards, many of which he pointed out to the Court were fifteen and twenty years old.
Finally, legally savvy observers present, including this reporter, understood that Mr. Ciampoli had not made out
a very compelling case. And, realizing this toward the end of his presentation, as a kind of “Hail Mary Pass” raised an old election law case Haas v. Costigan that he had exhumed from 1961, one that even Judge Smith
acknowledged had many “red flags.” The purpose of the citation was to suggest that if Mr. Sayegh avoided testifying, for whatever reason, Haas stood for the proposition that it would impose a negative inference.
Before breaking for lunch Smith insisted that Attorney Harry Kessler produce Nader Sayegh in her Court for the afternoon session. No such requirement was imposed upon Phil Amicone or any other opposing party. And, while his testimony contradicted the testimony relied upon by the Judge, given the circumstances under which signatures were collected and the large numbers of individuals who signed, Sayegh’s responses to cross-examination did not seem “incredible” as claimed by Smith in her decision, but rather left room for reasonable doubt. In any case there was no evidence that would compel a reasonable trier of fact, under the totality of the circumstances, to conclude that there had been an affirmative fraudulent intent on the part of the respondent.
Nader Sayegh had told The Guardian prior to the proceedings, “The opposition, Giulio Cavallo and his team, including Phil Amicone, have brought an action against the Westchester Board of Elections for having validated petitions containing 768 signatures. They are pursuing a strategy of intimidation and harassment of voters. They feel they can use their money and influence to get their way.”
Contacted following release of Smith’s decision, Sayegh told The Guardian that he fully intends to appeal the decision to the Appellate Division, and, if necessary to the Court of Appeals.
Cross-Endorsement Should Be Abolished in New York
By Mike Edelman
New York is one of only five states in the United States that permits one party to cross-endorse another. The policy is wrong because it allows minor parties with relatively low numbers of enrolled voters to accumulate power and leverage far beyond the number of people actually enrolled in that party. The consequences of cross-endorsement open the door to political extortion and, depending upon which party relies on cross-endorsements, in fact, ends up ultimately emasculating that party which becomes the proverbial dog being wagged by the
cross-endorsement tail.
Here in Westchester we have ex-perienced in recent years the cross-endorsement phenomenon between the
Republican and Conservative Parties, and prior to that experience New York Democrats had the same problem
with the Liberal Party, which they have since rejected out of self-preservation, and because association with Liberalism has, for years, been anathema. Westchester, which used to be a bastion of Republican strength, so
much so that naming a candidate virtually assured his election, has unfortunately succumbed to the bondage of cross-endorsement. First, it was just the Conservative Party at the controls, a Party which for years touted fiscally conservative principles and insisted that the candidates it supported subscribe to those same principles. Initially, this did not present much of a problem to Republicans because they too, were basically more conservative on financial, tax, and foreign policy issues. However, the Republican Party came to rely on
Conservative cross-endorsement year after year in order to elect and re-elect Republican candidates. But, then the dynamic changed drastically. Republican registrations, here in Westchester, began to tumble year after year.
The Conservative Party adopted the socially-conservative anti-abortion, pro-gun, anti-gay positions of the Evangelical Right. And, to add to the mix, there emerged another minor party called the Independence
Party. Being outnumbered, Republicans felt the need to seek not only Conservative Party support, but
also support from the Independence Party as well. This empowered the leaders of those minor parties to not
simply support the candidate chosen by the Republican Party, because he or she happened to be closest to their
own political viewpoint, but more importantly, to dictate to the Republican Party just which candidates it should choose. Those dictates were not based on political philosophy, but rather upon the self-interest of the minor party. Simply put, the minor parties were empowered to literally extort, from the Republican Party, jobs, political contributions, and the very selection of who would run for office.
Witness the last gubernatorial election where Mike Long, Chairman of the State Conservative Party, dictated the Republican Party choice for both Governor and United States Senator. Long announced, early on, that he would not support any candidate for the Senate unless that candidate was pro-life. When Jeanine Pirro announced for the Senate, her nomination was dead on arrival, even before she lost the now-famous page ten at her initial press conference, because Mike Long would not accept her. The same was true for the Republican candidate for Governor.
Little-known former Assemblyman and lobbyist John Faso was prolife, whereas William Weld, former Governor of Massachusetts, was pro-choice. With the blessings of Mike Long, Faso prevailed, receiving the nomination, and, thus the meltdown of the State Republican Organization was etched in stone. Closer to home, the same thing was happening, only it involved the local Independence Party. Down over 100,000 in registration, as compared with the Democrats, the Republican Party needed to cobble together a coalition of minor parties in order to even have a chance of winning. They felt obligated to do business not only with the Conservative Party, but also with the Independence Party, now under the control of Giulio Cavallo.
The Independence Party is a party with relatively slight enrollment, which, because it uses the name Independence, tends to draw substantially more votes on its line than its registration. Why? Because many people who are non-party registered voters, upon seeing the word ‘Independence’ believe that it means Independent. However, it means just the opposite. The Independence Party is a party which began with a Ross Perot candidacy for President in the late 1980s and evolved into a ‘splinter group’ whose sole purpose for many
years has been to benefit themselves, and their friends, by leveraging their disproportionate electoral strength
in order to secure jobs.
Giulio Cavallo, himself, worked in a Republican State Senator’s of-fice on Long Island, raising money to influence the choice of candidates by cross-endorsing Republicans of his liking. The long-term effect of allowing
the cross-endorsement policy has been to diminish the ability of the Westchester Republican Party, as well as the State Republican Party, to select candidates of their own choosing, Republicans who could win the votes of Democrats and non-party registered voters, Republicans who are not beholden to the interests of minor parties as regards philosophy or the distribution of jobs.
It has been very sad to watch Republicans, who, in the bluest of Blue States, can win state-wide, become
the dog wagged by the minor party tail. But, that is precisely what has happened; and the sooner the Republican
Party regains the ability to choose its own candidates, the sooner it will be able to win both statewide, and here in Westchester County.
Realistically, it may take a few election cycles for Republicans to once again be a stand-alone party.
And, and it may require a few more hard losses, but, in the end, it will all be worth it if they take the steps
needed and are no longer dependent upon cross-endorsement. When that day arrives, the parties that cross-endorsed will have withered away. Naturally, it would be helpful if a legislator with the gravitas and insight to recognize the problem, would introduce a bill to ban cross-endorsement. But legislators, I fear, tend to be more concerned about their next election than about the health of the Two Party system. Despite that fact, cross-endorsement must be ended in New York State.
By Mike Edelman
New York is one of only five states in the United States that permits one party to cross-endorse another. The policy is wrong because it allows minor parties with relatively low numbers of enrolled voters to accumulate power and leverage far beyond the number of people actually enrolled in that party. The consequences of cross-endorsement open the door to political extortion and, depending upon which party relies on cross-endorsements, in fact, ends up ultimately emasculating that party which becomes the proverbial dog being wagged by the
cross-endorsement tail.
Here in Westchester we have ex-perienced in recent years the cross-endorsement phenomenon between the
Republican and Conservative Parties, and prior to that experience New York Democrats had the same problem
with the Liberal Party, which they have since rejected out of self-preservation, and because association with Liberalism has, for years, been anathema. Westchester, which used to be a bastion of Republican strength, so
much so that naming a candidate virtually assured his election, has unfortunately succumbed to the bondage of cross-endorsement. First, it was just the Conservative Party at the controls, a Party which for years touted fiscally conservative principles and insisted that the candidates it supported subscribe to those same principles. Initially, this did not present much of a problem to Republicans because they too, were basically more conservative on financial, tax, and foreign policy issues. However, the Republican Party came to rely on
Conservative cross-endorsement year after year in order to elect and re-elect Republican candidates. But, then the dynamic changed drastically. Republican registrations, here in Westchester, began to tumble year after year.
The Conservative Party adopted the socially-conservative anti-abortion, pro-gun, anti-gay positions of the Evangelical Right. And, to add to the mix, there emerged another minor party called the Independence
Party. Being outnumbered, Republicans felt the need to seek not only Conservative Party support, but
also support from the Independence Party as well. This empowered the leaders of those minor parties to not
simply support the candidate chosen by the Republican Party, because he or she happened to be closest to their
own political viewpoint, but more importantly, to dictate to the Republican Party just which candidates it should choose. Those dictates were not based on political philosophy, but rather upon the self-interest of the minor party. Simply put, the minor parties were empowered to literally extort, from the Republican Party, jobs, political contributions, and the very selection of who would run for office.
Witness the last gubernatorial election where Mike Long, Chairman of the State Conservative Party, dictated the Republican Party choice for both Governor and United States Senator. Long announced, early on, that he would not support any candidate for the Senate unless that candidate was pro-life. When Jeanine Pirro announced for the Senate, her nomination was dead on arrival, even before she lost the now-famous page ten at her initial press conference, because Mike Long would not accept her. The same was true for the Republican candidate for Governor.
Little-known former Assemblyman and lobbyist John Faso was prolife, whereas William Weld, former Governor of Massachusetts, was pro-choice. With the blessings of Mike Long, Faso prevailed, receiving the nomination, and, thus the meltdown of the State Republican Organization was etched in stone. Closer to home, the same thing was happening, only it involved the local Independence Party. Down over 100,000 in registration, as compared with the Democrats, the Republican Party needed to cobble together a coalition of minor parties in order to even have a chance of winning. They felt obligated to do business not only with the Conservative Party, but also with the Independence Party, now under the control of Giulio Cavallo.
The Independence Party is a party with relatively slight enrollment, which, because it uses the name Independence, tends to draw substantially more votes on its line than its registration. Why? Because many people who are non-party registered voters, upon seeing the word ‘Independence’ believe that it means Independent. However, it means just the opposite. The Independence Party is a party which began with a Ross Perot candidacy for President in the late 1980s and evolved into a ‘splinter group’ whose sole purpose for many
years has been to benefit themselves, and their friends, by leveraging their disproportionate electoral strength
in order to secure jobs.
Giulio Cavallo, himself, worked in a Republican State Senator’s of-fice on Long Island, raising money to influence the choice of candidates by cross-endorsing Republicans of his liking. The long-term effect of allowing
the cross-endorsement policy has been to diminish the ability of the Westchester Republican Party, as well as the State Republican Party, to select candidates of their own choosing, Republicans who could win the votes of Democrats and non-party registered voters, Republicans who are not beholden to the interests of minor parties as regards philosophy or the distribution of jobs.
It has been very sad to watch Republicans, who, in the bluest of Blue States, can win state-wide, become
the dog wagged by the minor party tail. But, that is precisely what has happened; and the sooner the Republican
Party regains the ability to choose its own candidates, the sooner it will be able to win both statewide, and here in Westchester County.
Realistically, it may take a few election cycles for Republicans to once again be a stand-alone party.
And, and it may require a few more hard losses, but, in the end, it will all be worth it if they take the steps
needed and are no longer dependent upon cross-endorsement. When that day arrives, the parties that cross-endorsed will have withered away. Naturally, it would be helpful if a legislator with the gravitas and insight to recognize the problem, would introduce a bill to ban cross-endorsement. But legislators, I fear, tend to be more concerned about their next election than about the health of the Two Party system. Despite that fact, cross-endorsement must be ended in New York State.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
One Day In The Life Of a Prisoner
By Jeffrey Deskovic
As many are well aware, I was incarcerated from December, 1990 until September, 2006 - a total of 16 years -
for a rape and murder of which I would go on to be proven innocent through DNA. In the course of imprisonment, I would both experience, and witness, the indifference, at best, and inhumanity and abuse, at worst; treatment that the correction officers, civilian staff, and the prison administration doled out to inmates. As I see it, talking respectfully, treating humanely, and recognizing basic human rights, could and should be a part of operating a prison while making sure that inmates do not escape. After all, prisoners are sent to prison as punishment, not for punishment. Yet, that is not the way it works out.
I would like to share an experience One Day In The Life Of a Prisoner which, to this day, bothers me whenever
I think about it, because it was so unnecessary.
In 1996 word reached me that my grandmother was on her deathbed. The chaplain who informed me of the fact
advised me that I could request to go see her. I had two choices: I could either go to the funeral, or I could ask for a deathbed visit, but not both. Once I decided, he would then fill out the request form and submit it to the superintendent, who would then decide if he was willing to allow me to go.
It was a quandary deciding which to do. I could elect to see her in the hospital while she was in a coma, and
therefore unaware that I was there, but nonetheless, still alive. Or, I could go to the church service to be held for her upon her death, thus also seeing family members who I had not seen or heard from in years, and in many cases had not seen at all in the 6 years I had already been in prison.
The thought crossed my mind that this could be my only opportunity to see them. After all, I was serving a life
sentence, and although I always had hope I would be cleared, it was far from certain that that would ever happen. At the same time, I knew that, barring a miracle, those who I had not had any contact with during those six years were not going to come and visit me.
I remember thinking, “Why do I have to make a choice? Would it really kill them to let me go to both events?” It
would be so simple, yet such human consideration was seen as unwarranted. After all, I was a prisoner, not a human being.
Despite the implications of the choice either way, I had to decide pretty quickly, before the decision was taken
from me by her passing away. In the end, I decided that I would rather see her alive one last time.
The day I went to see her did not start out well. It would take about 4 to 4 ½ hours to get from Elmira Prison to
the hospital in Peekskill where she lay in a coma. And so, therefore, we would be leaving in the morning, before the population was served breakfast. The procedure was that the officers were given money to purchase meals for themselves and for me. We stopped at a delicatessen, and they purchased breakfast for themselves, purchasing only coffee for me, however. I am prone to motion sickness, and one of the procedures to prevent yourself from get-ting sick is to eat. The absence of food led to my getting sick in the car. Two or three times they had to stop because I was about to throw up. Yet, it was like dry heaves because there was nothing
in my stomach. In addition, while I was out of the car to throw up, I was left in chains, handcuffs, and leg irons.
I was unable to move my hands more than a inch or two. Considering that if they did take the handcuffs off
that I would still have the leg irons on, and that both officers carried side arms, where could I possibly have gone? What was the security risk?
The car itself was way too hot and stuffy. The windows were not rolled down even an inch, nor was the air conditioner turned on. The air conditioner was turned on in the front of the car but, because there was plexiglass separating the back from the front, none of it reached me. The sun was out, and was beaming through the windows. All of it had the combined effect of making me nauseous for the entire 4 ½ hour ride.
I was used to not being treated humanely by the correction officers, so I did not say anything to them. I knew
from past experience that expressing discomfort could lead to being treated even worse.
When we arrived at the hospital, instead of the officers parking the car near the sidewalk in front of the hospital,
they parked far away. When they got out of the car and opened my door, I looked at them expectantly, waiting for them to take the handcuffs, chain, and leg irons off of me, so I could go into the hospital with some dignity.
However, they did not do that. They did not even throw the thin jacket they had over the cuffs so as to disguise that I had them on, thus giving me some modicum of dignity. Instead, I was paraded through the parking
lot, and the hospital corridors, like some kind of an animal.
The desk attendant did a double-take at the sight of me. Then there was a woman in the hospital who was in the waiting area with her daughter, who could not have been more than 3 or 4 years old. When the child started running in my general direction, the mother quickly grabbed her, bringing her close, as though I might be some kind of monster who would suddenly commit a spontaneous violent act right there on the spot.
I remember feeling both embarrassed, and also thinking how ironic that it was that I would be in all of these
manacles, with 2 guards, and have a child pulled close to her mother out of fear, and yet I was innocent. As we walked by a pay phone, I remarked to one of the officers that I was glad that there was a phone in our path to my grandmothers room, because if my mother was not visiting her, I could call her collect and tell her that I was there, so she could come and see me. However, I was informed that I was not allowed to use the phone
even though if there was someone visiting my grandmother I would be able to talk with them. Fortunately for me, a family friend had briefly stopped to see my grandmother a few minutes before I got there, and called my mother for me enabling me to see her. If he had not, I would have missed an opportunity to see her without her having to travel the 4 ½ hours it took to get from Peekskill to Elmira.
When I reached my grandmother’s room, they left the chain and handcuffs on me for a good 10 minutes, which
resulted in my having the chain on the side of the bed. Finally, they removed them.
After one hour they made me leave. That ridiculous time allotment - doubtlessly arrived at arbitrarily by the rule
makers, meant that we would travel for 9 hours total in order to visit with someone for one hour. Once again they
dressed me up in all of the manacles and paraded me through the hospital and parking lot. I was mortified. On the way back, unlike “breakfast” which had consisted of a cup of coffee, I actually got to eat something. But once again I had to deal with the uncomfortableness of the hot and stuffy car. Since the windows had not been rolled down even a little while I was in the hospital, the car had become even more heated standing in the sun.
During those 10 hours out of the prison, I had adjusted to being in a different environment. It actually had felt
physically different, like freedom was a sensation, and the air somehow was different, and I had adjusted. It felt strange being in prison again, like it was some alternate world I was suddenly in.
In many ways, mentally, I stepped back from all of the routines, expectations, and concepts that the prisoners
and staff buy into which go into everyday life in prison, in just those ten hours away. That night in my cell, as I heard the normal sounds of the prison - the prisoners making noise, yelling, radios blasting, cell doors shutting as prisoners went into their cells and slammed the door which the rules obligated them to do, and I heard the oversized keys jingle, the ones used to open and close the lockboxes containing the levers that open the cells, and I saw guard making their rounds and looking into the cells. It was somewhat reminiscent of people looking at caged animals in a zoo. It struck me, for the first time in a long while, just how bizarre the reality in prison was, and that I did not belong in that strange world; and yet, nonetheless, I was in it because although I was innocent, I had been found guilty and had been unable, to that point, to get any court to side with me, despite having gone through some litigation in the appellate process.
By Jeffrey Deskovic
As many are well aware, I was incarcerated from December, 1990 until September, 2006 - a total of 16 years -
for a rape and murder of which I would go on to be proven innocent through DNA. In the course of imprisonment, I would both experience, and witness, the indifference, at best, and inhumanity and abuse, at worst; treatment that the correction officers, civilian staff, and the prison administration doled out to inmates. As I see it, talking respectfully, treating humanely, and recognizing basic human rights, could and should be a part of operating a prison while making sure that inmates do not escape. After all, prisoners are sent to prison as punishment, not for punishment. Yet, that is not the way it works out.
I would like to share an experience One Day In The Life Of a Prisoner which, to this day, bothers me whenever
I think about it, because it was so unnecessary.
In 1996 word reached me that my grandmother was on her deathbed. The chaplain who informed me of the fact
advised me that I could request to go see her. I had two choices: I could either go to the funeral, or I could ask for a deathbed visit, but not both. Once I decided, he would then fill out the request form and submit it to the superintendent, who would then decide if he was willing to allow me to go.
It was a quandary deciding which to do. I could elect to see her in the hospital while she was in a coma, and
therefore unaware that I was there, but nonetheless, still alive. Or, I could go to the church service to be held for her upon her death, thus also seeing family members who I had not seen or heard from in years, and in many cases had not seen at all in the 6 years I had already been in prison.
The thought crossed my mind that this could be my only opportunity to see them. After all, I was serving a life
sentence, and although I always had hope I would be cleared, it was far from certain that that would ever happen. At the same time, I knew that, barring a miracle, those who I had not had any contact with during those six years were not going to come and visit me.
I remember thinking, “Why do I have to make a choice? Would it really kill them to let me go to both events?” It
would be so simple, yet such human consideration was seen as unwarranted. After all, I was a prisoner, not a human being.
Despite the implications of the choice either way, I had to decide pretty quickly, before the decision was taken
from me by her passing away. In the end, I decided that I would rather see her alive one last time.
The day I went to see her did not start out well. It would take about 4 to 4 ½ hours to get from Elmira Prison to
the hospital in Peekskill where she lay in a coma. And so, therefore, we would be leaving in the morning, before the population was served breakfast. The procedure was that the officers were given money to purchase meals for themselves and for me. We stopped at a delicatessen, and they purchased breakfast for themselves, purchasing only coffee for me, however. I am prone to motion sickness, and one of the procedures to prevent yourself from get-ting sick is to eat. The absence of food led to my getting sick in the car. Two or three times they had to stop because I was about to throw up. Yet, it was like dry heaves because there was nothing
in my stomach. In addition, while I was out of the car to throw up, I was left in chains, handcuffs, and leg irons.
I was unable to move my hands more than a inch or two. Considering that if they did take the handcuffs off
that I would still have the leg irons on, and that both officers carried side arms, where could I possibly have gone? What was the security risk?
The car itself was way too hot and stuffy. The windows were not rolled down even an inch, nor was the air conditioner turned on. The air conditioner was turned on in the front of the car but, because there was plexiglass separating the back from the front, none of it reached me. The sun was out, and was beaming through the windows. All of it had the combined effect of making me nauseous for the entire 4 ½ hour ride.
I was used to not being treated humanely by the correction officers, so I did not say anything to them. I knew
from past experience that expressing discomfort could lead to being treated even worse.
When we arrived at the hospital, instead of the officers parking the car near the sidewalk in front of the hospital,
they parked far away. When they got out of the car and opened my door, I looked at them expectantly, waiting for them to take the handcuffs, chain, and leg irons off of me, so I could go into the hospital with some dignity.
However, they did not do that. They did not even throw the thin jacket they had over the cuffs so as to disguise that I had them on, thus giving me some modicum of dignity. Instead, I was paraded through the parking
lot, and the hospital corridors, like some kind of an animal.
The desk attendant did a double-take at the sight of me. Then there was a woman in the hospital who was in the waiting area with her daughter, who could not have been more than 3 or 4 years old. When the child started running in my general direction, the mother quickly grabbed her, bringing her close, as though I might be some kind of monster who would suddenly commit a spontaneous violent act right there on the spot.
I remember feeling both embarrassed, and also thinking how ironic that it was that I would be in all of these
manacles, with 2 guards, and have a child pulled close to her mother out of fear, and yet I was innocent. As we walked by a pay phone, I remarked to one of the officers that I was glad that there was a phone in our path to my grandmothers room, because if my mother was not visiting her, I could call her collect and tell her that I was there, so she could come and see me. However, I was informed that I was not allowed to use the phone
even though if there was someone visiting my grandmother I would be able to talk with them. Fortunately for me, a family friend had briefly stopped to see my grandmother a few minutes before I got there, and called my mother for me enabling me to see her. If he had not, I would have missed an opportunity to see her without her having to travel the 4 ½ hours it took to get from Peekskill to Elmira.
When I reached my grandmother’s room, they left the chain and handcuffs on me for a good 10 minutes, which
resulted in my having the chain on the side of the bed. Finally, they removed them.
After one hour they made me leave. That ridiculous time allotment - doubtlessly arrived at arbitrarily by the rule
makers, meant that we would travel for 9 hours total in order to visit with someone for one hour. Once again they
dressed me up in all of the manacles and paraded me through the hospital and parking lot. I was mortified. On the way back, unlike “breakfast” which had consisted of a cup of coffee, I actually got to eat something. But once again I had to deal with the uncomfortableness of the hot and stuffy car. Since the windows had not been rolled down even a little while I was in the hospital, the car had become even more heated standing in the sun.
During those 10 hours out of the prison, I had adjusted to being in a different environment. It actually had felt
physically different, like freedom was a sensation, and the air somehow was different, and I had adjusted. It felt strange being in prison again, like it was some alternate world I was suddenly in.
In many ways, mentally, I stepped back from all of the routines, expectations, and concepts that the prisoners
and staff buy into which go into everyday life in prison, in just those ten hours away. That night in my cell, as I heard the normal sounds of the prison - the prisoners making noise, yelling, radios blasting, cell doors shutting as prisoners went into their cells and slammed the door which the rules obligated them to do, and I heard the oversized keys jingle, the ones used to open and close the lockboxes containing the levers that open the cells, and I saw guard making their rounds and looking into the cells. It was somewhat reminiscent of people looking at caged animals in a zoo. It struck me, for the first time in a long while, just how bizarre the reality in prison was, and that I did not belong in that strange world; and yet, nonetheless, I was in it because although I was innocent, I had been found guilty and had been unable, to that point, to get any court to side with me, despite having gone through some litigation in the appellate process.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
