Our Readers Respond...
Editor’s Note: The following letter from the Executive Director of Child Find of America is in answer to a letter
from reader Ann Coleman in our October 25th edition.
Director of Child Find Disputes Reader’s Assertion
Dear Editor:
A letter that appeared in last week’s Westchester Guardian implied that Child Find of America’s Parent Help program ignores domestic violence issues. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is important for your readers to know that the Parent Help program is deeply concerned about a violence survivor’s rights and safety. In fact, the services at Parent Help work in many ways to problem solve many of the challenges facing moms and dads living apart. However, Parent Help case workers have a diligent eye on safety at all times and have undergone extensive training to identify when our caller is either a domestic abuser or a victim of domestic abuse.
Our domestic violence training and consultancy is provided by Battered Women’s Services in Dutchess County, one of the state’s foremost domestic violence service providers. Parent Help contracts with Battered Women’s Services, to provide 24-hour, free and confidential assistance to our callers, as well as providing their case conferencing expertise in collaboration with the Parent Help program.
While we have mediators and social workers on staff, Parent Help DOES NOT directly or indirectly increase the
level of danger to an adult or child - or violate a protective order. Mediation, encouraging contact, and passing messages between parties is not a service we offer when domestic violence presents in a situation. We do, however, provide victims of domestic abuse the opportunity to reach out to Battered Women’s Services for help, if they choose to do so.
For more than 25 years Child Find of America has been protecting children, preventing and resolving parental child abduction, and locating missing, runaway and kidnapped children. All of our efforts are to keep kids and families safe.
Donna Linder, Executive Director
Peekskill Parent Takes Community Services Director To Task
Dear Editor:
I read this statement to the Mayor, and the Peekskill Common Council, and nothing transpired. Right now with
all of the young adults shooting at each other it is a time for our community to come together and get them more time in our recreation programs rather than taking what time they have and giving it to a MEN’S SEMI-PRO FOR-PROFIT BASKETBALL TEAM, even if it is only 2 days a week for 3 or 4 hours.
I, as a member of this community, am appalled at the idea that a SEMI PROFESSIONAL FOR PROFIT MEN’S BASKETBALL TEAM (Westchester Phantoms) is allowed to oust our children out of their recreation
schedule. Our children do not have other options for recreation, as do these grown men. For Daisy Brandt (aka Elton Brandt’s mother) to come back into our community and demand that we give the Westchester Phantoms the prime time hours of our children’s recreation to a semi-professional for profit men’s basketball team (which by the way, she owns) is outrageous. Even more outrageous is the fact that Francis X.
Brunelle (FRAN) approved it. Ms. Brandt raised Elton Brandt here. She knows the struggle that we have
gone through to get and keep what little recreation our children have. The recreation staff at the KILEY
YOUTH CENTER that makes the schedule for the season was quite willing to work with her team and
allow them to come in at the times that our children didn’t have scheduled programs. Fran still insisted on giving our prime time spot between 8:00 and 10:00pm, which is the exact time that we are trying to keep our children off the streets. In this day and time of gangs and street violence we are doing our best as a community to keep our children occupied with recreational programs so they won‘t be “just” hanging in the streets! Staff tried to compromise, and protect most of our children’s scheduled activities, and told him she could even possibly have the KILEY YOUTH CENTER from 9:30 until 11:00pm or possibly 12:00 midnight (in which a staff member would volunteer his time).
What is so disturbing to me is that the Kiley Youth Center had four traveling basketball teams that played throughout the county and were forced to stop this program. This was keeping our children off the
street and at the same time teaching them various skills like learning to work together as a team, building
self-esteem, sportsmanship, obedience and giving them the physical fitness that children need. The center
was informed by the Department of Community Services, (where Francis X. Brunelle is the director) which runs the Dept of Parks & Recreation, that they would no longer pay for, sponsor, insure, or allow any traveling basketball teams to be run out of KILEY YOUTH CENTER, under the budget of the Dept of Parks & Recreation. The staff was told that the Peekskill Housing Authority owned the building and they would have to take it up with Mr. Thankachan, the director of Peekskill Housing Authority.
They were then informed under the directions of Fran that they could not even play basketball there because of insurance reasons. So the children started selling candy and other snacks (with the help of The Friends of KILEY) to raise insurance money so that they would be allowed to play basketball in their gym. CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHY THIS SEMI PROFESSIONAL FOR PROFIT MEN’S BASKETBALL
TEAM IS ALLOWED to practice in the KILEY YOUTH CENTER, taking away our children’s prime time recreational hours and utilizing the advantages of the money they raised on their own for the insurance. WHY IS HE TREATING OUR CHILDREN LIKE SECOND CLASS CITIZENS AGAIN?
WHERE AND WHAT ARE OUR CHILDREN TO DO DURING THIS PRIME TIME SPOT? WHY
IS FRAN ALLOWING THIS MEN’S FOR PROFIT BASKETBALL TEAM PERMISSION TO USE THE KILEY YOUTH CENTER? WHO’S MAKING THE DECISIONS ABOUT THE RECREATIONAL NEEDSOF OUR CHILDREN, THE DEPT. OF RECREATION UNDER THE DIRECTION OF FRANCIS X. BRUNELLE, THE MAYOR JOHN TESTA, TAXPAYERS, OR SEMIPROFESSIONAL FOR PROFIT
MEN’S BASKETBALL TEAM (owned by Daisy Brandt)?
As a community we have tried over and over to acquire the benefits that most communities are afforded
through city programs that are paid by taxpayers. Time and time again we ask Fran for little and still get less.
When faced with obstacles concerning our children’s recreational needs, we are trying to teach our children
that if you have a plan and can’t get help from those who should give it you need to help yourself to accomplish
whatever it is that you need. THE IRONY OF THIS SITUATION IS THAT THEY KEEP SLAPPING
OUR CHILDREN IN THE FACE, TREATING OUR CHILDREN LIKE SECOND CLASS CITIZENS.
IN SPITE OF THESE OBSTACLES, OUR CHILDREN KEEP PUSHING FORWARD. JUST WANTING TO KNOW, ONCE AGAIN, WHO’S MAKING THESE DECISIONS? WHO ARE THE
WESTCHESTER PHANTOMS? WHY IS FRAN ALLOWING THEM ACCESS TO OUR COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER, TAKING AWAY FROM OUR CHILDREN’S RECREATIONAL NEEDS?
WHAT IS THE MESSAGE THEY ARE SENDING TO OUR CHILDREN? AGAIN, WHO’S MAKING
THESE DECISIONS?
Denise Davis, Peekskill
Another Vicki Mayfield Fan
Dear Editor:
Unlike someone who recently wrote you, I enjoy Vicki Mayfield’s columns. The vignettes and reminiscences
are interesting and sometimes emotion-provoking. Mayfield’s columns took a while getting used to. Rather than viewing each entire column as a unified essay, one must expect a series of vignettes and observations, rambling
across, and jumping between, several decades and places. The topic a column begins with does not indicate
the topic it will end with. The title does not indicate what most of the column will be about. The editors could help by assigning a title that listed more of the column’s top-ics (e.g. “Of A, B, and C”) Mayfield’s column-writing style isn’t for everybody all the time. But in the setting it’s in, it’s fine.
Jeanette Wolfberg, Mt. Kisco
Supervisor Feiner and Chief Kapica Go Trick-or-Treating
Dear Editor:
This Halloween evening I spent some of my time driving around town with Police Chief Kapica. We’ve been patrolling the streets of Greenburgh for 16 years on Halloween night - monitoring the police calls (there were over 60 calls to the police department) and checking up on problem areas.
The town assigned 31 police, 6 auxiliary officers to patrol unincorporated Greenburgh on Halloween. Eleven officers were on overtime. The approximate overtime cost: $4,000. It was a busy evening. The good news: no significant reports of property damage as of 11:30 PM. We did experience some incidents of Halloween pranks/mischief. I stopped by and spoke to a couple who experienced the typical shaving cream/egg problems some people expect on Halloween. The police caught some students who were involved in the incident and required them to clean up the mess they caused.
Good, Solomon-like punishment! There were some fights among students. The police put a stop to the fighting. A few students were taken into police headquarters. Although it was a busy night, Halloween, 2007 was mild compared to 16 or 17 years ago when cars were vandalized and when there was significant property damage. I feel that providing the police with the funding they require to adequately patrol the town is money well spent.
Paul Feiner,
Greenburgh Town Supervisor
In Our Opinion ...
In The Matter Of Government/Media Incest
Westchester is a place where, for many years, it has often been difficult to clearly distinguish any bold line, any clear separation between County Government and certain members of the media. Clearly, during the twelve-year tenure of former DA Jeanine Pirro, the fact that the President/Publisher of The Journal News was Gary Sherlock, a business partner of Al Pirro, had a decisive impact on precisely which news stories, even remotely
connected either to the DA’s Office, or any of a million issues involving the “Power Couple”, ever made it into print.
There was a blanket of protection, one that even extended to others, tightly connected to the DA as well, state senators, county executives, police chiefs, etc. And, even when a story had to be acknowledged because it was receiving inescapably strong regional media play, there was always the issue of placement, and headlines that were manipulated to soften any damage. Consider Al’s federal trial in June, 2000, for ten years of massive joint tax fraud.
What did appear in Westchester’s only daily newspaper was completely void of transcript. And, it wasn’t as though there was any lack of sensational testimony. Of course, the incestuousness between Sherlock’s paper and the DA’s Office with regard to criminal prosecution included an all-too-willingness to participate in “trials in the press,” having strong reporting of convictions and scant coverage of acquittals. Not to mention headlines that injected a certain favorable spin. To some extent, twelve years of misguided conditioning has unfortunately outlived both Pirro’s and Sherlock’s tenure, and continues, albeit to a lesser extent, today. So much for the daily newspaper spin. On the broadcast side, We are fully aware that the Fairness Doctrine, the rule under which
ordinary FCC Licensed, broadcast networks, and stations, are compelled to give ‘equal time’ to competing political and/or, in some instances, commercial interests, does not apply to franchised cable networks such as Cablevision. Having said that, We, nevertheless, believe that NEWS12’s accommodation of Jeanine Pirro, both in her capacity as DA, as well as in her private life, was obnoxious and complicit. Who can forget her almost weekly Internet Stink, oops, Sting, public hangings? Who could forget her constant appearances, two, three, and four times a week, on whatever pretext?
However, as incestuous as NEWS12 might have been with Pirro, their relationship with, and commitment to, County Executive Andy Spano, front-man for Larry Schwartz, is far and away more intensely so; and, not without just cause. In March, 2000 the County Executive’s Office granted Lightpath, a wholely-owned subsidiary of Cablevision, a five–year $22.5 million, NO-BID contract to set up a communication system for the County. That system has been an abysmal failure. And one can only ask why Verizon, or a host of other
companies, were not given the opportunity to bid?
Apparently the incestuousness of the County’s relationship with Cablevision has reached a new level. As We discovered last week, now County-owned automobiles, and perhaps other vehicles, for all We know, are riding around advertising programming on Cablevision. How cozy, indeed! When was the last time anybody remembers NEWS12 seriously questioning or investigating any activity of the Westchester County Executive’s Office?
Thursday, November 8, 2007
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
At Long Last, Reasonableness And Constitutionality In ADA!
Readers of this column know that one subject about which we have repeatedly displayed much passion, and expended considerable effort, is the need for state and federal legislation to combat prosecutorial misconduct, the single greatest contributor to wrongful convictions. And, so it was with great interest and expectation that I
attended the breakfast event at the Harvard Club in Manhattan last Monday morning, Oct. 29th, featuring the District Attorney of Dallas Texas, Craig Watkins. Sponsored by the Drum Major Institute, a progressive think tank, the title of the presentation was “Preventing Wrongful Convictions And Exonerating The Innocent.”
In addition to DA Watkins, there was a panel that included Barry Scheck, Co-Founder of The Innocence Project, State Senator Eric Schneiderman, advocate for reform legislation, and Westchester DA Janet DiFiore. Watkins, a good-looking mountain of a man, soft-spoken, with a gentle, unassuming demeanor, was, from the outset, strikingly different from what we have seen in district attorneys over more than forty years of involvement in criminal justice.
As a former Probation Officer for the County of Westchester, more than four decades ago, Watkins immediately caught my attention when he told the more than one hundred and twenty gathered in the room, that his office had put in place an “Open File Policy” allowing defense attorneys full access. That opening remark was especially meaningful to one who has been monitoring the Westchester Criminal Courts for many years reporting on case after case where exculpatory information, Brady material, has been consistently withheld in order to obtain wrongful convictions. In point of fact, the most frequently voiced objection by criminal defense attorneys in Westchester to the practices of the DA’s Office over the years has been the withholding of information.
Watkins said, “It’s unfortunate that DAs are elected.” He explained that the process tends to encourage the rhetoric, the “Tough On Crime” flawed ideology, that contributes to wrongful convictions and recidivism. He declared, “Just building prisons is not the answer. If you punish someone without rehabilitation you just make the problem worse.” He explained, “Not only do we have innocent individuals who are being convicted, but we have recidivism.”
Declaring “Tough On Crime policy is reactive,” Watkins spoke of the Conviction Integrity Unit that he established to review hundreds of convictions achieved by his predecessors in light of the increasing numbers of wrongful convictions that have been coming to light through DNA comparisons, and enlightened investigatory
techniques in recent years. Having already said that it was unfortunate that DAs are elected, he now suggested that term limits be placed on district attorneys to enhance the possibility of conviction reviews, pointing out that one would be more likely to scrutinize someone else’s wrongful conviction rather than their own.
Watkins, a Democrat, won election to the District Attorney’s Office in Dallas County, Texas, almost two years ago, a feat most thought impossible, given that he was Black, and the office had been controlled by Republicans for several decades.
He attributed his victory to the fact that Dallas had the highest crime rate in the nation, and sending more people to prison was not curing the problem. He told the audience, “I think my role is more than a prosecutor, but an advocate. What we are doing is larger than innocence. I believe we can rehabilitate the vast majority of offenders.” Barry Scheck, whose Innocence Project travels all over the country working to exonerate innocent, incarcerated individuals through the use of DNA technology, and has established branches in Texas, and other states, told the audience, “What is going on here is a phenomenon, nation-wide. These are ‘Smart On Crime’ issues.
We are on the eve of a criminal justice reform that rivals any judicial reform ever.” Watkins reinforced Scheck’s comments declaring, “It’s larger than innocence. What we need are DAs who can think larger than the norm.” State Senator Schneiderman, who, together with Assemblyman Joe Lentol, also present, and seated at my table, have been spearheading the effort in Albany to enact progressive legislation, spoke up about the need for an “Innocence Commission”, an independent body that would review all reasonable claims of wrongful conviction.
Scheck rejoined the discussion, referencing 208 DNA exonerations achieved by the Innocence Project to date, and asking, “The point is, what do we learn from all of this?” Then, noting those critics who have expressed their doubts that the problems of prosecutorial misconduct, poor eye-witnesses, false confessions and the like could be as pervasive as they are, Scheck declared, “DNA has changed everything because it’s such a hard and robust science.”
State Senator Bill Perkins of Manhattan, previously acknowledged by Schneiderman, rose from the audience to observe, “Eric doesn’t think there is much resistance to expansion of the DNA data base.” That comment was followed by a reminder that there are still problems with “rogue DNA labs” by Scheck, who explained
the difficulties created by former Governor Pataki who “rammed through legislation creating private DNA banks for the storage of elimination samples.”
Returning to the central theme of his presentation DA Watkins remarked, “In the majority of cases in which someone was wrongfully convicted there was an element of prosecutorial misconduct.” He went on, “I tell my assistant district attorneys, ‘This may be a bad guy, but we want to be sure that we’ve got the right guy.’ ”
Senator Schneiderman then volunteered, “Perhaps term limits are needed for DAs, because if it was your work, you might not be as willing to review.” Asked whether, in light of so many wrongful convictions, he was for, or against the Death Penalty, Watkins candidly admitted, “That’s hard to answer.” Then he quipped, “If you catch me coming out of court I might be for it. But if you get me coming out of church, I’m against it.”
On the subject of the relationship between his office and the police, an issue of particular interest in Westchester where the District Attorney’s Office has traditionally treated police reports as though they were the Synoptic Gospel, DA Watkins said, “We don’t rubber-stamp the police department. We are there to make sure they do it right. And, if what we get from the police is incomplete, we kick it back to them.”
Craig Watkins, District Attorney of Dallas County Texas has, in the nearly two years he’s been in office, not only instituted many much-needed changes in procedure, but has begun to make significant progress in serious crime reduction and recidivism, as well as uncovering numerous wrongful convictions. It is obvious that, unlike most DAs, neither his ego, nor his political ambition, has interfered with his fundamental belief in, and commitment to, Due Process, and the Constitutional rights of those with whom his office has contact. It is obvious, as well, that what distinguishes him from most other DAs is that he not only talks the talk, but walks the walk.
Richard Blassberg
At Long Last, Reasonableness And Constitutionality In ADA!
Readers of this column know that one subject about which we have repeatedly displayed much passion, and expended considerable effort, is the need for state and federal legislation to combat prosecutorial misconduct, the single greatest contributor to wrongful convictions. And, so it was with great interest and expectation that I
attended the breakfast event at the Harvard Club in Manhattan last Monday morning, Oct. 29th, featuring the District Attorney of Dallas Texas, Craig Watkins. Sponsored by the Drum Major Institute, a progressive think tank, the title of the presentation was “Preventing Wrongful Convictions And Exonerating The Innocent.”
In addition to DA Watkins, there was a panel that included Barry Scheck, Co-Founder of The Innocence Project, State Senator Eric Schneiderman, advocate for reform legislation, and Westchester DA Janet DiFiore. Watkins, a good-looking mountain of a man, soft-spoken, with a gentle, unassuming demeanor, was, from the outset, strikingly different from what we have seen in district attorneys over more than forty years of involvement in criminal justice.
As a former Probation Officer for the County of Westchester, more than four decades ago, Watkins immediately caught my attention when he told the more than one hundred and twenty gathered in the room, that his office had put in place an “Open File Policy” allowing defense attorneys full access. That opening remark was especially meaningful to one who has been monitoring the Westchester Criminal Courts for many years reporting on case after case where exculpatory information, Brady material, has been consistently withheld in order to obtain wrongful convictions. In point of fact, the most frequently voiced objection by criminal defense attorneys in Westchester to the practices of the DA’s Office over the years has been the withholding of information.
Watkins said, “It’s unfortunate that DAs are elected.” He explained that the process tends to encourage the rhetoric, the “Tough On Crime” flawed ideology, that contributes to wrongful convictions and recidivism. He declared, “Just building prisons is not the answer. If you punish someone without rehabilitation you just make the problem worse.” He explained, “Not only do we have innocent individuals who are being convicted, but we have recidivism.”
Declaring “Tough On Crime policy is reactive,” Watkins spoke of the Conviction Integrity Unit that he established to review hundreds of convictions achieved by his predecessors in light of the increasing numbers of wrongful convictions that have been coming to light through DNA comparisons, and enlightened investigatory
techniques in recent years. Having already said that it was unfortunate that DAs are elected, he now suggested that term limits be placed on district attorneys to enhance the possibility of conviction reviews, pointing out that one would be more likely to scrutinize someone else’s wrongful conviction rather than their own.
Watkins, a Democrat, won election to the District Attorney’s Office in Dallas County, Texas, almost two years ago, a feat most thought impossible, given that he was Black, and the office had been controlled by Republicans for several decades.
He attributed his victory to the fact that Dallas had the highest crime rate in the nation, and sending more people to prison was not curing the problem. He told the audience, “I think my role is more than a prosecutor, but an advocate. What we are doing is larger than innocence. I believe we can rehabilitate the vast majority of offenders.” Barry Scheck, whose Innocence Project travels all over the country working to exonerate innocent, incarcerated individuals through the use of DNA technology, and has established branches in Texas, and other states, told the audience, “What is going on here is a phenomenon, nation-wide. These are ‘Smart On Crime’ issues.
We are on the eve of a criminal justice reform that rivals any judicial reform ever.” Watkins reinforced Scheck’s comments declaring, “It’s larger than innocence. What we need are DAs who can think larger than the norm.” State Senator Schneiderman, who, together with Assemblyman Joe Lentol, also present, and seated at my table, have been spearheading the effort in Albany to enact progressive legislation, spoke up about the need for an “Innocence Commission”, an independent body that would review all reasonable claims of wrongful conviction.
Scheck rejoined the discussion, referencing 208 DNA exonerations achieved by the Innocence Project to date, and asking, “The point is, what do we learn from all of this?” Then, noting those critics who have expressed their doubts that the problems of prosecutorial misconduct, poor eye-witnesses, false confessions and the like could be as pervasive as they are, Scheck declared, “DNA has changed everything because it’s such a hard and robust science.”
State Senator Bill Perkins of Manhattan, previously acknowledged by Schneiderman, rose from the audience to observe, “Eric doesn’t think there is much resistance to expansion of the DNA data base.” That comment was followed by a reminder that there are still problems with “rogue DNA labs” by Scheck, who explained
the difficulties created by former Governor Pataki who “rammed through legislation creating private DNA banks for the storage of elimination samples.”
Returning to the central theme of his presentation DA Watkins remarked, “In the majority of cases in which someone was wrongfully convicted there was an element of prosecutorial misconduct.” He went on, “I tell my assistant district attorneys, ‘This may be a bad guy, but we want to be sure that we’ve got the right guy.’ ”
Senator Schneiderman then volunteered, “Perhaps term limits are needed for DAs, because if it was your work, you might not be as willing to review.” Asked whether, in light of so many wrongful convictions, he was for, or against the Death Penalty, Watkins candidly admitted, “That’s hard to answer.” Then he quipped, “If you catch me coming out of court I might be for it. But if you get me coming out of church, I’m against it.”
On the subject of the relationship between his office and the police, an issue of particular interest in Westchester where the District Attorney’s Office has traditionally treated police reports as though they were the Synoptic Gospel, DA Watkins said, “We don’t rubber-stamp the police department. We are there to make sure they do it right. And, if what we get from the police is incomplete, we kick it back to them.”
Craig Watkins, District Attorney of Dallas County Texas has, in the nearly two years he’s been in office, not only instituted many much-needed changes in procedure, but has begun to make significant progress in serious crime reduction and recidivism, as well as uncovering numerous wrongful convictions. It is obvious that, unlike most DAs, neither his ego, nor his political ambition, has interfered with his fundamental belief in, and commitment to, Due Process, and the Constitutional rights of those with whom his office has contact. It is obvious, as well, that what distinguishes him from most other DAs is that he not only talks the talk, but walks the walk.
The Court Report
By Richard Blassberg
“His Immunity Is Not Going To Shield Him From This Claim.”
United States Federal District Court, White Plains Judge Charles L. Brieant, Presiding
White Plains, N.Y., October 26 – Last Friday morning, Jonathan Lovett, counsel to Plaintiffs, numerous readers of The Westchester Guardian newspaper, publisher Sam Zherka, and several employees, appeared in Federal District Court, together with attorneys for Defendants Phil Amicone and several members of his Administration,
Kevin Plunkett and his associate, Darius Chafizadeh, for a pre-trial hearing in the first of seven lawsuits lodged, charging numerous First Amendment violations. Three of those actions specifically name Lawrence Porcari, Yonkers Assistant Corporate Counsel.
Opening the hearing, attorney Chafizadeh stepped up to the podium, advising the Court, “Our motion is based upon absolute and complete immunity, Your Honor.” Judge Charles Brieant responded, “Your client was pretending to be a police officer, showing a badge, and threatening to arrest.” He continued, “I have a complaint here, filed under stricture of Rule 11.” The judge was making reference to the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
subjecting counsel to sanction and severe fine for bringing any action in Federal Court that is not predicated upon truthful allegations.
Mr. Chafizadeh remarked, “It’s impossible to believe that his activities (Yonkers Corporate Counsel Porcari) would limit others’ ability to read the paper.” Brieant shot right back, “If you’re talking standing, you’re
right up against the Spargo case.
Chafizadeh began, “We believe,...” when Brieant cut him off with, “His immunity is not going to shield him against this claim. These claims are not being made for money, but to prevent it from happening again.” At that point, Chafizadeh again attempted to proffer the theory that Porcari was acting in his capacity as a prosecutor and was therefore immune from the actions being brought against him. Brieant then demanded, “What is his job?”
Jonathan Lovett then interjected, “He committed three New York State crimes. He had led my clients to believe he was a cop. He flashed a badge. And, he threatened to arrest them.” Defense Counsel then made a formal motion to dismiss the charges against Mr. Porcari. Judge Brieant immediately came back with, “The Court has concluded that the Plaintiffs have standing. The Plaintiffs are recipients of speech, and the paper has a right to issue that speech.”
Then Brieant reminded Chafizadeh, “Defendant Porcari is not being charged with prosecutorial misconduct.” Turning somewhat more stern, he went on, “The Court finds that there is no absolute immunity, no qualified immunity, no immunity under any theory.” He then explained to Defense Counsel, “Qualified immunity is only for engaging in the initial phase of the judicial process.”
Reviewing the allegations, Brieant reminded Defense Counsel, “He pretended to be a member of the Police Department; displayed a badge, and threatened to arrest them.” Once again, clarifying for the benefit of Defense Counsel, he then stated, “These are not activities contemplated as part of the ordinary functions of a prosecutor in the judicial process. There is a factual dispute that must be resolved at trial. Brieant then held, “The Defense motion for dismissal, based upon absolute, or qualified, immunity is denied.”
Analysis:
The Court’s holding is all the more significant in that Yonkers Corporate Counsel, Lawrence A. Porcari, is named in three separate actions, of seven, that comprise The Westchester Guardian’s case against Mayor Phil Amicone and the City of Yonkers. Having defeated Defense arguments for prosecutorial immunity in fully three of those cases, the defendants, as a result, have been rendered very vulnerable at trial.
By Richard Blassberg
“His Immunity Is Not Going To Shield Him From This Claim.”
United States Federal District Court, White Plains Judge Charles L. Brieant, Presiding
White Plains, N.Y., October 26 – Last Friday morning, Jonathan Lovett, counsel to Plaintiffs, numerous readers of The Westchester Guardian newspaper, publisher Sam Zherka, and several employees, appeared in Federal District Court, together with attorneys for Defendants Phil Amicone and several members of his Administration,
Kevin Plunkett and his associate, Darius Chafizadeh, for a pre-trial hearing in the first of seven lawsuits lodged, charging numerous First Amendment violations. Three of those actions specifically name Lawrence Porcari, Yonkers Assistant Corporate Counsel.
Opening the hearing, attorney Chafizadeh stepped up to the podium, advising the Court, “Our motion is based upon absolute and complete immunity, Your Honor.” Judge Charles Brieant responded, “Your client was pretending to be a police officer, showing a badge, and threatening to arrest.” He continued, “I have a complaint here, filed under stricture of Rule 11.” The judge was making reference to the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
subjecting counsel to sanction and severe fine for bringing any action in Federal Court that is not predicated upon truthful allegations.
Mr. Chafizadeh remarked, “It’s impossible to believe that his activities (Yonkers Corporate Counsel Porcari) would limit others’ ability to read the paper.” Brieant shot right back, “If you’re talking standing, you’re
right up against the Spargo case.
Chafizadeh began, “We believe,...” when Brieant cut him off with, “His immunity is not going to shield him against this claim. These claims are not being made for money, but to prevent it from happening again.” At that point, Chafizadeh again attempted to proffer the theory that Porcari was acting in his capacity as a prosecutor and was therefore immune from the actions being brought against him. Brieant then demanded, “What is his job?”
Jonathan Lovett then interjected, “He committed three New York State crimes. He had led my clients to believe he was a cop. He flashed a badge. And, he threatened to arrest them.” Defense Counsel then made a formal motion to dismiss the charges against Mr. Porcari. Judge Brieant immediately came back with, “The Court has concluded that the Plaintiffs have standing. The Plaintiffs are recipients of speech, and the paper has a right to issue that speech.”
Then Brieant reminded Chafizadeh, “Defendant Porcari is not being charged with prosecutorial misconduct.” Turning somewhat more stern, he went on, “The Court finds that there is no absolute immunity, no qualified immunity, no immunity under any theory.” He then explained to Defense Counsel, “Qualified immunity is only for engaging in the initial phase of the judicial process.”
Reviewing the allegations, Brieant reminded Defense Counsel, “He pretended to be a member of the Police Department; displayed a badge, and threatened to arrest them.” Once again, clarifying for the benefit of Defense Counsel, he then stated, “These are not activities contemplated as part of the ordinary functions of a prosecutor in the judicial process. There is a factual dispute that must be resolved at trial. Brieant then held, “The Defense motion for dismissal, based upon absolute, or qualified, immunity is denied.”
Analysis:
The Court’s holding is all the more significant in that Yonkers Corporate Counsel, Lawrence A. Porcari, is named in three separate actions, of seven, that comprise The Westchester Guardian’s case against Mayor Phil Amicone and the City of Yonkers. Having defeated Defense arguments for prosecutorial immunity in fully three of those cases, the defendants, as a result, have been rendered very vulnerable at trial.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Our Readers Respond...
‘Diesel from Peekskill’ Draws A Strong Response
Dear Editor,
It’s very unfortunate that in 2007 we still have people like Diesel of Peekskill, ranting their blatant ignorance and racial bigotry. Last week I read, with great dismay, a Letter to the Editor titled, “Man With A Grudge Takes It Out On Columnist Mayfield,” in which Diesel proceeded to criticize Vicki Mayfield’s grammar, writing technique, opinions on the subjects she writes about, and, to add insult to injury, he implied that she’s a racist. In conclusion he lets us know he’s a “White man” with a disability, and has just as many problems, if not more, than any “minority.”
First of all I would like to say, I know Vicki Mayfield. Vicki is a proud, strong African-American woman, extremely intelligent, who takes on subjects that most likely would not be printed in mainstream media, making her very unique. When she writes a story, it usually involves her life experiences, often her community
of Mt Vernon, which is dear to her heart, and yes, she writes about racism. She is passionate about those subjects and that’s why I look forward to reading her column. I can relate to many of her columns, because, I too, am a “proud, strong African-American woman”, who has experienced some of the same life experiences that she has. But being a “White man” such as yourself, with strong bigoted and ignorant views, I wouldn’t expect you to write otherwise.
Maybe if you were more educated in the English language, more open-minded and took the time to read about our history and, by the way, we have a rich history, you might understand what you’re reading. It’s because of people such as yourself and others that some are encouraged to scroll racist and anti-Semitic graffiti, as well as place nooses in our communities and our schools.
Speaking of showing true colors, your letter epitomizes yours. Your problem, Diesel, is that you happen to be not just a “White man”, but a “privileged angry White man” with some serious issues. Let me explain what I mean by a “privileged White man.” First of all, it was your ancestors that brought Vicki’s family here in chains as slaves from Africa. they stripped us of our identity, our culture, our language, our family ties, our religion and
our motherland. they beat us, raped our women, broke up families, worked us until some of us died and sold us.
Once we were so-called emancipated we were promised 40 acres and a mule, that was a joke, denied us an education and the right to vote. I know you’ll say, “I’m not responsible for what happened back in the day
because slavery didn’t exist in the north.” News Flash! I suggest you read Complicity: How the North Profited From Slavery.
Up until 1946, not only her male ancestors but mine, as well, were recruited into a segregated U.S. Armed Forces. President Harry S. Truman integrated the armed forces in 1946 and my father, a proud “African-American man”, went into one of the first integrated Navy units. However proudly my father, Vicki’s father, uncles, grandfathers and cousins served their country, they could not vote in certain parts of the country, namely the South, and could not live where they wanted to live because of the color of their skin. They couldn’t even eat in certain restaurants much less use a restroom.
In the 1940’s African-American men were being lynched at an alarming rate in this country. They were the targets of hate groups like the Ku Klux Klan, because of their skin color. It wasn’t until the mid-1960’s that we got the Civil Rights Bill, Voting Rights Act and a Fair Housing Law. But that wasn’t just given to us; many men,
women and children lost their lives in the struggle to gain those rights.
Now that you’ve gotten a little history lesson on “my people” and their struggle in a world of “the privileged
White man” with his many problems, I would trust that you would take stock of yourself, as well as others, who think like you. Tell me one “White man” in this country who has endured what the Black man has. Tell me if you’ve ever been denied the right to vote because of the color of your skin, or told to ride in the back of a bus, or would ever get lynched because you dared to look at a woman other than one of your race, or not be able to get a loan to buy the home of your choice in a nice neighborhood.
The list can go on and on. You also stated in your letter that Ms. Mayfield is blaming George Bush for creating the diversion in this country so as not to get impeached. There’s all the lies he told about getting us into Iraq, the so-called “Surge” that’s supposedly working, raising “Terror Alert Levels” when he’s down in the polls and
now his foray into Iran.
As far as “living, eating, breathing, walking, cooking, driving, sleeping, shopping, working, reading, suing, Latino,
get used to it. Eridania Camacho has just as much right to write and express herself about “her people” as Vicki
Mayfield. That’s right. Diesel, I got that message; you’re fed up with Latinos too.
But I do agree with you on one thing, you are a “White man” with a disability and many problems. But your
disability is a mental, racist and hateful disability. And, guess what, unfortunately there are many other ignorant
and racist people just like yourself. It’s very tragic, but as long as you harbor these feelings, you’ll soon find, “Freedom Isn’t Free.”
Renee Smith, Peekskill
Reader Exposes Amicone Financial Foibles
Dear Editor:
nValley Tech is a perfect example of the incompetance of the Amicone administration. A $21-million-plus fi-
asco started by Mayor Spencer who was smart enough to annoint his Deputy Mayor, Mr. Amicone, as the “day to day administrator of the city”.
Now this white elephant has been sold to I Park at a knockdown price, still occupied by the same city agencies
and the politically connected. Has the city realized one penny of revenue from this building?
Add this to the Philipsburg Hall screwup; to 11-23 St. Casimir, which went bankrupt; to Diam International
which used the city, got tax breaks and then basically took off to the former Alexander Street Oil Terminal which is now a school bus terminal; to the ball park that still is to be built, years behind schedule, and you have a record
to run away from, not to run on.
To piss away HUD funds on nValley is a disgrace and the alphabet list of loans and grants this project received is
just mindboggling. In my opinion, this Mayor should be blown out to sea, maybe on his ferry to Hoboken.
Readers can confirm most of this information by talking to McLoin, although Murtagh is playing with Phil
Amicone for now, he was tossed out of the building by Ed Sheeran and had some strong words to say about this building. I am sure Vinnie Restiano could be very helpful in confirming this.
Readers may also call Joseph Fiore, Chief investigator in the NYS Comptrollers office, 1-212-383-2594 or Ass’t Comptroller Steven J. Hancox at 1-518-474-4037, or Carrie H. Cohen, Chief PIU Unit, NYS AG @ 1-518-402-2472.
“The Facility Is Safe; So Was The Titanic!”
Dear Editor:
Let me get right to the point, Indian Point, that is. The current evacuation plan that is in place right now for
New York City, Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties is enormously flawed, and will not work, period!
I am beginning to think that the NRC stands for Nobody Really Cares, instead of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. I am not against nuclear power to provide much-needed electricity. Until an alternative is found, this seems to be the way to go. However, we cannot let politicians and businessmen jeopardize the lives of innocent citizens in the area of these facilities. Indian Point should be relocated to a more rural, desolate location. If we are going to work with the deadly brew we cannot miss a single beat when it comes to safety. We already made a huge mistake allowing a nuclear power plant to be built so close to the most vibrant city in the world.
Now we are being told to accept Entergy’s bogus evacuation plan! Listen, I was born and raised in Westchester and I can honestly tell you that it is impossible to get to a beach on a hot, summer day with all the traffic and river crossings!
Can you imagine what it would be like during a catastrophe? I know, I know, the facility is safe; so was the Titanic! They can’t even provide a stable, working warning system! If Entergy’s evacuation plan is really a good one, then why isn’t it being distributed to the citizens of the region? Everyone should have a copy of the plan hanging on their fridge!
I did my own poll by asking 200 people who ride the Metro North Railroad if they knew of Entergy’s plan to
evacuate the area if an accident or a criminal act was to release radioactive material from Indian Point. Well, not
one person knew the details and they all had their own plan of getting away.
Sounds like chaos to me! Heck, even if some did make it out of the deadly area, where would they go?
Now is the time to confront Entergy before their license is renewed for another 20 years. Remember that your life and your children’s future may depend on it. He who hesitates is lost, but in this case it might mean death.
Dom Nanni, Scarsdale
‘Diesel from Peekskill’ Draws A Strong Response
Dear Editor,
It’s very unfortunate that in 2007 we still have people like Diesel of Peekskill, ranting their blatant ignorance and racial bigotry. Last week I read, with great dismay, a Letter to the Editor titled, “Man With A Grudge Takes It Out On Columnist Mayfield,” in which Diesel proceeded to criticize Vicki Mayfield’s grammar, writing technique, opinions on the subjects she writes about, and, to add insult to injury, he implied that she’s a racist. In conclusion he lets us know he’s a “White man” with a disability, and has just as many problems, if not more, than any “minority.”
First of all I would like to say, I know Vicki Mayfield. Vicki is a proud, strong African-American woman, extremely intelligent, who takes on subjects that most likely would not be printed in mainstream media, making her very unique. When she writes a story, it usually involves her life experiences, often her community
of Mt Vernon, which is dear to her heart, and yes, she writes about racism. She is passionate about those subjects and that’s why I look forward to reading her column. I can relate to many of her columns, because, I too, am a “proud, strong African-American woman”, who has experienced some of the same life experiences that she has. But being a “White man” such as yourself, with strong bigoted and ignorant views, I wouldn’t expect you to write otherwise.
Maybe if you were more educated in the English language, more open-minded and took the time to read about our history and, by the way, we have a rich history, you might understand what you’re reading. It’s because of people such as yourself and others that some are encouraged to scroll racist and anti-Semitic graffiti, as well as place nooses in our communities and our schools.
Speaking of showing true colors, your letter epitomizes yours. Your problem, Diesel, is that you happen to be not just a “White man”, but a “privileged angry White man” with some serious issues. Let me explain what I mean by a “privileged White man.” First of all, it was your ancestors that brought Vicki’s family here in chains as slaves from Africa. they stripped us of our identity, our culture, our language, our family ties, our religion and
our motherland. they beat us, raped our women, broke up families, worked us until some of us died and sold us.
Once we were so-called emancipated we were promised 40 acres and a mule, that was a joke, denied us an education and the right to vote. I know you’ll say, “I’m not responsible for what happened back in the day
because slavery didn’t exist in the north.” News Flash! I suggest you read Complicity: How the North Profited From Slavery.
Up until 1946, not only her male ancestors but mine, as well, were recruited into a segregated U.S. Armed Forces. President Harry S. Truman integrated the armed forces in 1946 and my father, a proud “African-American man”, went into one of the first integrated Navy units. However proudly my father, Vicki’s father, uncles, grandfathers and cousins served their country, they could not vote in certain parts of the country, namely the South, and could not live where they wanted to live because of the color of their skin. They couldn’t even eat in certain restaurants much less use a restroom.
In the 1940’s African-American men were being lynched at an alarming rate in this country. They were the targets of hate groups like the Ku Klux Klan, because of their skin color. It wasn’t until the mid-1960’s that we got the Civil Rights Bill, Voting Rights Act and a Fair Housing Law. But that wasn’t just given to us; many men,
women and children lost their lives in the struggle to gain those rights.
Now that you’ve gotten a little history lesson on “my people” and their struggle in a world of “the privileged
White man” with his many problems, I would trust that you would take stock of yourself, as well as others, who think like you. Tell me one “White man” in this country who has endured what the Black man has. Tell me if you’ve ever been denied the right to vote because of the color of your skin, or told to ride in the back of a bus, or would ever get lynched because you dared to look at a woman other than one of your race, or not be able to get a loan to buy the home of your choice in a nice neighborhood.
The list can go on and on. You also stated in your letter that Ms. Mayfield is blaming George Bush for creating the diversion in this country so as not to get impeached. There’s all the lies he told about getting us into Iraq, the so-called “Surge” that’s supposedly working, raising “Terror Alert Levels” when he’s down in the polls and
now his foray into Iran.
As far as “living, eating, breathing, walking, cooking, driving, sleeping, shopping, working, reading, suing, Latino,
get used to it. Eridania Camacho has just as much right to write and express herself about “her people” as Vicki
Mayfield. That’s right. Diesel, I got that message; you’re fed up with Latinos too.
But I do agree with you on one thing, you are a “White man” with a disability and many problems. But your
disability is a mental, racist and hateful disability. And, guess what, unfortunately there are many other ignorant
and racist people just like yourself. It’s very tragic, but as long as you harbor these feelings, you’ll soon find, “Freedom Isn’t Free.”
Renee Smith, Peekskill
Reader Exposes Amicone Financial Foibles
Dear Editor:
nValley Tech is a perfect example of the incompetance of the Amicone administration. A $21-million-plus fi-
asco started by Mayor Spencer who was smart enough to annoint his Deputy Mayor, Mr. Amicone, as the “day to day administrator of the city”.
Now this white elephant has been sold to I Park at a knockdown price, still occupied by the same city agencies
and the politically connected. Has the city realized one penny of revenue from this building?
Add this to the Philipsburg Hall screwup; to 11-23 St. Casimir, which went bankrupt; to Diam International
which used the city, got tax breaks and then basically took off to the former Alexander Street Oil Terminal which is now a school bus terminal; to the ball park that still is to be built, years behind schedule, and you have a record
to run away from, not to run on.
To piss away HUD funds on nValley is a disgrace and the alphabet list of loans and grants this project received is
just mindboggling. In my opinion, this Mayor should be blown out to sea, maybe on his ferry to Hoboken.
Readers can confirm most of this information by talking to McLoin, although Murtagh is playing with Phil
Amicone for now, he was tossed out of the building by Ed Sheeran and had some strong words to say about this building. I am sure Vinnie Restiano could be very helpful in confirming this.
Readers may also call Joseph Fiore, Chief investigator in the NYS Comptrollers office, 1-212-383-2594 or Ass’t Comptroller Steven J. Hancox at 1-518-474-4037, or Carrie H. Cohen, Chief PIU Unit, NYS AG @ 1-518-402-2472.
“The Facility Is Safe; So Was The Titanic!”
Dear Editor:
Let me get right to the point, Indian Point, that is. The current evacuation plan that is in place right now for
New York City, Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties is enormously flawed, and will not work, period!
I am beginning to think that the NRC stands for Nobody Really Cares, instead of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. I am not against nuclear power to provide much-needed electricity. Until an alternative is found, this seems to be the way to go. However, we cannot let politicians and businessmen jeopardize the lives of innocent citizens in the area of these facilities. Indian Point should be relocated to a more rural, desolate location. If we are going to work with the deadly brew we cannot miss a single beat when it comes to safety. We already made a huge mistake allowing a nuclear power plant to be built so close to the most vibrant city in the world.
Now we are being told to accept Entergy’s bogus evacuation plan! Listen, I was born and raised in Westchester and I can honestly tell you that it is impossible to get to a beach on a hot, summer day with all the traffic and river crossings!
Can you imagine what it would be like during a catastrophe? I know, I know, the facility is safe; so was the Titanic! They can’t even provide a stable, working warning system! If Entergy’s evacuation plan is really a good one, then why isn’t it being distributed to the citizens of the region? Everyone should have a copy of the plan hanging on their fridge!
I did my own poll by asking 200 people who ride the Metro North Railroad if they knew of Entergy’s plan to
evacuate the area if an accident or a criminal act was to release radioactive material from Indian Point. Well, not
one person knew the details and they all had their own plan of getting away.
Sounds like chaos to me! Heck, even if some did make it out of the deadly area, where would they go?
Now is the time to confront Entergy before their license is renewed for another 20 years. Remember that your life and your children’s future may depend on it. He who hesitates is lost, but in this case it might mean death.
Dom Nanni, Scarsdale
In Our Opinion...
The Old Grey Lady Has Become Irrelevant
We are saddened by the further decline of the New York Times as evidenced by its recent, totally mindless, endorsements of two incumbent mayors, each of whose administrations are currently under federal investigation
for irregularities and unlawful conduct. One has to seriously question whether the newspaper’s editorial board has had any meaningful contact with the reality on the ground either in Yonkers or Mount Vernon.
As for their endorsement of Ernie Davis, We wonder what the Times was thinking about, and if they had any awareness of the fact that Mr. Davis, and members of his administration are presently under three separate federal investigations. Perhaps they buy into the notion that the “affable man,” as they are quick to refer to him, is without fault, or sin, and that somehow the United States Attorney’s Office, and the FBI, have nothing better to do than to waste their time, and taxpayers’ money, picking on an innocent man.
Perhaps if the Times had taken the trouble to visit the City of Mount Vernon, and had actually spoken with real people, those who work hard for a living, and are struggling to raise their families in a city where gunshots ring out as steady background noise; a city where kids must rush home, and lock their doors, having no recreation or employment opportunities to speak of, despite years of worthless promises from Mayor Davis; perhaps then they
might have understood why Clinton Young’s under nanced ‘grass roots’ effort succeeded despite being outspent nearly ten to one. Everybody knows, and have grown weary of the fact, that what few camps and employment
possibilities there have been have repeatedly gone to the children and grandchildren of Ernie’s cronies.
As for their endorsement of Phil Amicone, We wonder just how much commitment the Times has to the First Amendment. We wonder if perhaps their editorial sta , those who are supposed to interview and scrutinize candidates for public office, even realized that the “person” they would “entrust with Yonkers’ hopes for a brighter future,” is someone who stomps on, and stiffles the Constitutional Rights of the City’s citizens to a Free and Unfettered Press; a person whose content-based violations of civil rights, included the confiscation and destruction of a newspaper’s distribution boxes, as well as the arrest and harassment of its employees because of unfavorable, but truthful, comments about his conduct in public office.
Yes, We are saddened, indeed, but not surprised by the depths to which the newspaper that once published the Pentagon Papers, and staunchly defended their own right and the right of reporter Neil Sheehan to publish information leaked by Daniel Ellsberg in recognition of their obligation to serve the People’s Right To Know, would sink in the betrayal of readers’ interests for the commercial connections incumbents often bring to the table. We have watched their slow, but steady decline, with respect to objectivity and credibility in their coverage of Westchester.
We would have hoped, following the Blair Affair, and the housecleaning, and reshuffling that followed, that more attention to objectivity and credibility would have become a high priority at the Times, if only to maintain their
relevance. These mindless endorsements suggest that is not the case.
The Old Grey Lady Has Become Irrelevant
We are saddened by the further decline of the New York Times as evidenced by its recent, totally mindless, endorsements of two incumbent mayors, each of whose administrations are currently under federal investigation
for irregularities and unlawful conduct. One has to seriously question whether the newspaper’s editorial board has had any meaningful contact with the reality on the ground either in Yonkers or Mount Vernon.
As for their endorsement of Ernie Davis, We wonder what the Times was thinking about, and if they had any awareness of the fact that Mr. Davis, and members of his administration are presently under three separate federal investigations. Perhaps they buy into the notion that the “affable man,” as they are quick to refer to him, is without fault, or sin, and that somehow the United States Attorney’s Office, and the FBI, have nothing better to do than to waste their time, and taxpayers’ money, picking on an innocent man.
Perhaps if the Times had taken the trouble to visit the City of Mount Vernon, and had actually spoken with real people, those who work hard for a living, and are struggling to raise their families in a city where gunshots ring out as steady background noise; a city where kids must rush home, and lock their doors, having no recreation or employment opportunities to speak of, despite years of worthless promises from Mayor Davis; perhaps then they
might have understood why Clinton Young’s under nanced ‘grass roots’ effort succeeded despite being outspent nearly ten to one. Everybody knows, and have grown weary of the fact, that what few camps and employment
possibilities there have been have repeatedly gone to the children and grandchildren of Ernie’s cronies.
As for their endorsement of Phil Amicone, We wonder just how much commitment the Times has to the First Amendment. We wonder if perhaps their editorial sta , those who are supposed to interview and scrutinize candidates for public office, even realized that the “person” they would “entrust with Yonkers’ hopes for a brighter future,” is someone who stomps on, and stiffles the Constitutional Rights of the City’s citizens to a Free and Unfettered Press; a person whose content-based violations of civil rights, included the confiscation and destruction of a newspaper’s distribution boxes, as well as the arrest and harassment of its employees because of unfavorable, but truthful, comments about his conduct in public office.
Yes, We are saddened, indeed, but not surprised by the depths to which the newspaper that once published the Pentagon Papers, and staunchly defended their own right and the right of reporter Neil Sheehan to publish information leaked by Daniel Ellsberg in recognition of their obligation to serve the People’s Right To Know, would sink in the betrayal of readers’ interests for the commercial connections incumbents often bring to the table. We have watched their slow, but steady decline, with respect to objectivity and credibility in their coverage of Westchester.
We would have hoped, following the Blair Affair, and the housecleaning, and reshuffling that followed, that more attention to objectivity and credibility would have become a high priority at the Times, if only to maintain their
relevance. These mindless endorsements suggest that is not the case.
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
It’s Still A Tale Of Two Cities... Seriously In Need of Change!
It’s all about me
Ernie Davis is a very tired act. the truth is, he is very frightened to give up control for fear that he will be more vulnerable to criminal apprehension.
Ernie has long ago stopped caring about what is best for the families of Mount Vernon; and, now, his poor judgment, his self-serving conduct, and his broken promises, have caught up with him.
Things have grown so bad in many areas of the city, crime so rampant, taxes so high, the quality of life so desperate, that some families have moved back to the Bronx.
It is time for positive change; it’s time for Clinton Young.
Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde
He is no friend of the city’s public employees. He called Yonkers teachers “terrorists” for picketing for higher wages. He refused new police and fire department contracts for 2 1/2 years.
He is a huge hypocrite. Pretending to be “holier than thou”, he actually frequents strip clubs; even had a
“lap dance” from a girl by the name of Sassy.
People now realize that Phil Amicone is a real tyrant, an oppressive politician who cannot accept criticism.
It’s time for honesty and integrity; it’s time for Dennis Robertson.
Richard Blassberg
It’s Still A Tale Of Two Cities... Seriously In Need of Change!
It’s all about me
Ernie Davis is a very tired act. the truth is, he is very frightened to give up control for fear that he will be more vulnerable to criminal apprehension.
Ernie has long ago stopped caring about what is best for the families of Mount Vernon; and, now, his poor judgment, his self-serving conduct, and his broken promises, have caught up with him.
Things have grown so bad in many areas of the city, crime so rampant, taxes so high, the quality of life so desperate, that some families have moved back to the Bronx.
It is time for positive change; it’s time for Clinton Young.
Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde
He is no friend of the city’s public employees. He called Yonkers teachers “terrorists” for picketing for higher wages. He refused new police and fire department contracts for 2 1/2 years.
He is a huge hypocrite. Pretending to be “holier than thou”, he actually frequents strip clubs; even had a
“lap dance” from a girl by the name of Sassy.
People now realize that Phil Amicone is a real tyrant, an oppressive politician who cannot accept criticism.
It’s time for honesty and integrity; it’s time for Dennis Robertson.
The Court Report
By Richard Blassberg
What Injustice One Judge Signs Off On Let No Other Set Aside
Suzanne Stephans v. Marc Warnock
Westchester County Family Court, White Plains
Family Court Judge Charles Devlin Presiding
Last Thursday morning, October 25, Suzanne Stephans, of Irvington, appeared in the Family Court of Judge Charles Devlin. She last appeared before Judge Devlin on September 17th, little more than a month earlier. Ms. Stephans, the mother of three children - a daughter nearly 12 years, and two younger sons, all attending Irvington Public Schools - was attempting to modify two conditions of visitation, and seeking to remove and replace her children’s Law Guardian, Therese Malach.
With regard to the conditions of visitation, it is important to note that until April of this year, Ms. Stephans, the children’s natural mother, had had residential custody. That custody was transferred to the father in April by Supreme Court Justice William Giacomo, one of four Supreme Court, Matrimonial Part, judges transferred nearly a year earlier, out of Westchester, by Administrative Judge Frances Nicolai, in an “Historic Rotation” called for by Chief Judge Judith Kaye, in response to a deluge of complaints by Westchester litigants.
Giacomo, dealing with the custody issue, brought on five years after their divorce, by Stephans’ former spouse, Marc Warnock, also of Irvington, had commented, after meeting with the children, as to how well-mannered and obviously well-raised they were under the care of Ms. Stephans, but seemed to have no compunction about taking custody from that same mother, under the pressure and influence of Marc Warnock’s attorney, Clifford Kleinbaum, and appointed Law Guardian Therese Malach.
At the September appearance before Devlin, the judge, in response to statements from Kleinbaum opposing Devlin’s involvement in motions brought by Stephans, had said, “You know that I understand that the judges in Supreme Court are far more knowledgeable than us judges here in Family Court, but Ms. Stephans has every right to be in Family Court.” That statement had given hope, perhaps false hope, to Ms. Stephans and her attorney, Sandra Mattessich, of Legal Services Of The Hudson Valley, that perhaps some avenue of at least partial relief from Judge Giacomo’s counter-intuitive, very destructive, but conspiracy-compliant decision might be modified, if not reversed.
Specifically, Stephans was seeking to remove Therese Malach, who was originally appointed by Supreme Court Justice Donovan. Stephans alleges that Malach has already been paid more than $43,500 by Warnock and has conducted a onesided involvement with, and for, that parent, that has brought about complaints by the children to their therapist and to Ms. Stephans, following Malach’s unorthodox social engagements with them and with their father.
Additionally, Stephans was seeking to reinstate a five-day vacation with the children as well as an adjustment to her alternate-weekend visitations that would permit her to bring the children to school on Monday mornings following such visitations rather than having to bring them to their father at 7pm on Sunday night.
Following a 40-minute “attorneys only” conference in chambers, Devlin addressed the parties in open court with, “Ms. Mattessich has filed an amended petition with respect to an order of Supreme Court by Judge Giacomo.
That decision of Judge Giacomo was a post-judgment in a divorce proceeding. That is what we discussed in the attorneys-only conference. There is an 80-page decision by Judge Giacomo. I must say I was impressed.”
He went on, “There was an access schedule, a very detailed one.” Devlin then alluded to the fact that the 80-page decision by Giacomo, actually drawn up by Giacomo’s law clerk, Barry Swersky, a tight associate of Therese Malach, provided no specificity with regard to an alleged personality disorder of Ms. Stephans.
Devlin declared, “I have not found a finding by Judge Giacomo as to what the personality disorder is, and that puts me in a very funny position. One way or another, this case must go back to Judge Giacomo. I should grant a stay of these proceedings and they should be removed by Judge Giacomo.”
Attorney Mattessich then spoke up, “Obviously, I am not consenting to that. Based upon complaints and grievances by my client, it is not possible for me to proceed.”
Attorney Kleinbaum then offered, “I believe that this matter should go back to Judge Giacomo. I believe there is forum-shopping here. She uses the children.”
Then Therese Malach weighed in, “I have already met with my clients. I have a very real relationship with them.”
Then, moments later, responding to a comment by Attorney Mattessich regarding complaints against Malach by the children, Malach contradicted herself, saying, “I haven’t seen those children since May or June. So I believe there has been some prompting by the mother.”
Returning to the issue of an alleged personality disorder, the judge then said, “Mother’s access is conditioned upon dealing with her personality disorder.” Then, looking directly at Ms. Stephans, he said, “If I were the litigant, I would be saying ‘So what is it; what am I supposed to be doing?’ “
Then, turning 180 degrees, Devlin declared, “I rarely remove law guardians, but, I have. In those cases I have appointed a guardian ad litem, and in those cases, I have interviewed the children in the guardian’s presence.”
Analysis:
It was obvious that Judge Devlin was all too keenly aware that this mother was up against a well-practiced team of high-priced ‘matrimonial parasites’. However, despite his empathy and compassion for the plight of this mother, and more importantly her three young children, he felt powerless, in the final analysis, unwilling to step into the situation in a meaningful way, even to make relatively minor adjustments to visitation procedures, given the freshness (April 2007) of Judge Giacomo’s ‘ruling’.
If Warnock has paid her $43,500 as reported, then, from his standpoint, Therese Malach, so-called Law Guardian whose activity, both in and out of Court, suggests she is far more concerned about his needs and objectives than she is about the welfare and well-being of her “clients”, the children, has been well worth it.
By Richard Blassberg
What Injustice One Judge Signs Off On Let No Other Set Aside
Suzanne Stephans v. Marc Warnock
Westchester County Family Court, White Plains
Family Court Judge Charles Devlin Presiding
Last Thursday morning, October 25, Suzanne Stephans, of Irvington, appeared in the Family Court of Judge Charles Devlin. She last appeared before Judge Devlin on September 17th, little more than a month earlier. Ms. Stephans, the mother of three children - a daughter nearly 12 years, and two younger sons, all attending Irvington Public Schools - was attempting to modify two conditions of visitation, and seeking to remove and replace her children’s Law Guardian, Therese Malach.
With regard to the conditions of visitation, it is important to note that until April of this year, Ms. Stephans, the children’s natural mother, had had residential custody. That custody was transferred to the father in April by Supreme Court Justice William Giacomo, one of four Supreme Court, Matrimonial Part, judges transferred nearly a year earlier, out of Westchester, by Administrative Judge Frances Nicolai, in an “Historic Rotation” called for by Chief Judge Judith Kaye, in response to a deluge of complaints by Westchester litigants.
Giacomo, dealing with the custody issue, brought on five years after their divorce, by Stephans’ former spouse, Marc Warnock, also of Irvington, had commented, after meeting with the children, as to how well-mannered and obviously well-raised they were under the care of Ms. Stephans, but seemed to have no compunction about taking custody from that same mother, under the pressure and influence of Marc Warnock’s attorney, Clifford Kleinbaum, and appointed Law Guardian Therese Malach.
At the September appearance before Devlin, the judge, in response to statements from Kleinbaum opposing Devlin’s involvement in motions brought by Stephans, had said, “You know that I understand that the judges in Supreme Court are far more knowledgeable than us judges here in Family Court, but Ms. Stephans has every right to be in Family Court.” That statement had given hope, perhaps false hope, to Ms. Stephans and her attorney, Sandra Mattessich, of Legal Services Of The Hudson Valley, that perhaps some avenue of at least partial relief from Judge Giacomo’s counter-intuitive, very destructive, but conspiracy-compliant decision might be modified, if not reversed.
Specifically, Stephans was seeking to remove Therese Malach, who was originally appointed by Supreme Court Justice Donovan. Stephans alleges that Malach has already been paid more than $43,500 by Warnock and has conducted a onesided involvement with, and for, that parent, that has brought about complaints by the children to their therapist and to Ms. Stephans, following Malach’s unorthodox social engagements with them and with their father.
Additionally, Stephans was seeking to reinstate a five-day vacation with the children as well as an adjustment to her alternate-weekend visitations that would permit her to bring the children to school on Monday mornings following such visitations rather than having to bring them to their father at 7pm on Sunday night.
Following a 40-minute “attorneys only” conference in chambers, Devlin addressed the parties in open court with, “Ms. Mattessich has filed an amended petition with respect to an order of Supreme Court by Judge Giacomo.
That decision of Judge Giacomo was a post-judgment in a divorce proceeding. That is what we discussed in the attorneys-only conference. There is an 80-page decision by Judge Giacomo. I must say I was impressed.”
He went on, “There was an access schedule, a very detailed one.” Devlin then alluded to the fact that the 80-page decision by Giacomo, actually drawn up by Giacomo’s law clerk, Barry Swersky, a tight associate of Therese Malach, provided no specificity with regard to an alleged personality disorder of Ms. Stephans.
Devlin declared, “I have not found a finding by Judge Giacomo as to what the personality disorder is, and that puts me in a very funny position. One way or another, this case must go back to Judge Giacomo. I should grant a stay of these proceedings and they should be removed by Judge Giacomo.”
Attorney Mattessich then spoke up, “Obviously, I am not consenting to that. Based upon complaints and grievances by my client, it is not possible for me to proceed.”
Attorney Kleinbaum then offered, “I believe that this matter should go back to Judge Giacomo. I believe there is forum-shopping here. She uses the children.”
Then Therese Malach weighed in, “I have already met with my clients. I have a very real relationship with them.”
Then, moments later, responding to a comment by Attorney Mattessich regarding complaints against Malach by the children, Malach contradicted herself, saying, “I haven’t seen those children since May or June. So I believe there has been some prompting by the mother.”
Returning to the issue of an alleged personality disorder, the judge then said, “Mother’s access is conditioned upon dealing with her personality disorder.” Then, looking directly at Ms. Stephans, he said, “If I were the litigant, I would be saying ‘So what is it; what am I supposed to be doing?’ “
Then, turning 180 degrees, Devlin declared, “I rarely remove law guardians, but, I have. In those cases I have appointed a guardian ad litem, and in those cases, I have interviewed the children in the guardian’s presence.”
Analysis:
It was obvious that Judge Devlin was all too keenly aware that this mother was up against a well-practiced team of high-priced ‘matrimonial parasites’. However, despite his empathy and compassion for the plight of this mother, and more importantly her three young children, he felt powerless, in the final analysis, unwilling to step into the situation in a meaningful way, even to make relatively minor adjustments to visitation procedures, given the freshness (April 2007) of Judge Giacomo’s ‘ruling’.
If Warnock has paid her $43,500 as reported, then, from his standpoint, Therese Malach, so-called Law Guardian whose activity, both in and out of Court, suggests she is far more concerned about his needs and objectives than she is about the welfare and well-being of her “clients”, the children, has been well worth it.
Sandy Annabi Strongly Endorses Dennis Robertson
Tells District Two Constituents “If We Elect Dennis As Our Next Mayor,
We Will Finally Get Our Fair Share From the City of Yonkers.”
Dear Friends and Neighbors,
For the past several years, as your City Council Representative, I have steadfastly fought for your best interests.
at is why I am writing to you now, to urge you to go to the polls on Election Day, Tuesday, November 6, and vote for Dennis Robertson for Mayor of Yonkers.
With Dennis Robertson as our Mayor, we, the residents of District Two, will - nally get the level of service from the City of Yonkers we have long deserved. Dennis has demonstrated by his conduct on the City Council, that he has the best interests of the residents of Southwest Yonkers at heart.
Dennis Robertson and I have a great working relationship and share the same views on many issues that effect the quality of life of our residents. Dennis Robertson is hardworking and dedicated. He listens and, most importantly, he will help me to help you. is is a very important election for all of Yonkers, but most important for us, the People of District Two. If we elect Dennis as our next Mayor, we will finally get our fair share from the
City of Yonkers.
Best regards,
Sandy
Tells District Two Constituents “If We Elect Dennis As Our Next Mayor,
We Will Finally Get Our Fair Share From the City of Yonkers.”
Dear Friends and Neighbors,
For the past several years, as your City Council Representative, I have steadfastly fought for your best interests.
at is why I am writing to you now, to urge you to go to the polls on Election Day, Tuesday, November 6, and vote for Dennis Robertson for Mayor of Yonkers.
With Dennis Robertson as our Mayor, we, the residents of District Two, will - nally get the level of service from the City of Yonkers we have long deserved. Dennis has demonstrated by his conduct on the City Council, that he has the best interests of the residents of Southwest Yonkers at heart.
Dennis Robertson and I have a great working relationship and share the same views on many issues that effect the quality of life of our residents. Dennis Robertson is hardworking and dedicated. He listens and, most importantly, he will help me to help you. is is a very important election for all of Yonkers, but most important for us, the People of District Two. If we elect Dennis as our next Mayor, we will finally get our fair share from the
City of Yonkers.
Best regards,
Sandy
Thursday, October 25, 2007
In Our Opinion...
Larry Schwartz’ Ruthless Hard-Heartedness Knows No Limit
We say God bless the clergy of Westchester who are standing up to a bureaucratic tyrant whose “My Way, Or The Highway” attitude hurts us all. Nobody in the County Executive’s Office ever explained just why it was that the Homeless Assessment Center and the Drop-In Shelter that had been functioning on the grounds of the County Airport needed to be shut down, and its 75, or so, inhabitants moved into the basement of 85 Court Street in downtown White Plains.
Of course, that basement on Court Street was essentially an overnight jail, a lockup from which those homeless, unwilling to sign up for, and attend, a variety of County-operated programs, would be sprung, returning to the streets at 6am each day, and retrieved some twelve hours later.
Whether housed at the airport, or in the basement across from the County Of-fice Building, the Drop-In accommodations were ‘no-frills’ at best, by comparison with traditional shelters; the County’s on the Valhalla Campus, Open Arms on Post Road in White Plains, or any of more than a dozen, municipal, charitable,
and clergy-operated facilities scattered mostly across the lower part of the County.
The Drop-In was, for the most part, a place to clean up, and lie down for the night without needing to subscribe to vocational, social, and medical programs. Very fundamental, it allowed homeless, single individuals, even the most difficult and disagreeable, to come in from the street, in from the cold, to relieve themselves, wash up, and lie down to sleep.
Naturally, the traditional, long-term shelters were not without their problems. In a series of investigative reports, about a year ago, The Guardian exposed drug dealing and Food Stamp scandals at the Valhalla and Open Arms installations. As a result, several known drug-dealing residents were shifted around, some thrown out.
Following a two-year struggle between White Plains Mayor Joe Delfino and the County Executive’s Office, a/k/a Larry Schwartz, there came an announcement in July that within weeks, in early August, the Drop-In Shelter on Court Street wouldbe closing permanently, and those individuals, “disproportionately too many” in his city, according to Delfino, would be needing to find other accommodations.
Once again the County Executive’s Office, Larry Schwartz, acting unilaterally, and with no regard for consequences, said “Like it or lump it.”
In all fairness, Larry had had another site in mind for the construction of a replacement drop-in shelter, the property directly behind the County Department of Public Safety Headquarters in Hawthorne, on the Saw Mill River Parkway, at Route 100; a dreadful, totally inappropriate site, given that there are no sidewalks, nor any pedestrian access to the property whatsoever. And, additionally, construction of any homeless shelter at that location would have been in violation of the existing contract between the County and the Town of Greenburgh, establishing a minimum two-mile buffer between such facilities.
Now it’s been two months since the fellow who goes around trying to intimidate senior citizens by telling them he’s “the most powerful person in Westchester,” dispossessed some 70 or so non-compliant homeless individuals from the Court Street site. And, now the air is growing chilly at night, and soon will be downright
cold. And now, that “most powerful person in Westchester” has sent forth the word to the County’s churches, synagogues, and charitable organizations that they are to offer chairs, but not cots to those displaced homeless who may show up at their door seeking shelter from the elements, and a place to rest.
We believe that the edict issued by Westchester’s most powerful figure, Larry Schwartz, is both cruel, and manipulative, but completely defining of who he is.
Larry Schwartz’ Ruthless Hard-Heartedness Knows No Limit
We say God bless the clergy of Westchester who are standing up to a bureaucratic tyrant whose “My Way, Or The Highway” attitude hurts us all. Nobody in the County Executive’s Office ever explained just why it was that the Homeless Assessment Center and the Drop-In Shelter that had been functioning on the grounds of the County Airport needed to be shut down, and its 75, or so, inhabitants moved into the basement of 85 Court Street in downtown White Plains.
Of course, that basement on Court Street was essentially an overnight jail, a lockup from which those homeless, unwilling to sign up for, and attend, a variety of County-operated programs, would be sprung, returning to the streets at 6am each day, and retrieved some twelve hours later.
Whether housed at the airport, or in the basement across from the County Of-fice Building, the Drop-In accommodations were ‘no-frills’ at best, by comparison with traditional shelters; the County’s on the Valhalla Campus, Open Arms on Post Road in White Plains, or any of more than a dozen, municipal, charitable,
and clergy-operated facilities scattered mostly across the lower part of the County.
The Drop-In was, for the most part, a place to clean up, and lie down for the night without needing to subscribe to vocational, social, and medical programs. Very fundamental, it allowed homeless, single individuals, even the most difficult and disagreeable, to come in from the street, in from the cold, to relieve themselves, wash up, and lie down to sleep.
Naturally, the traditional, long-term shelters were not without their problems. In a series of investigative reports, about a year ago, The Guardian exposed drug dealing and Food Stamp scandals at the Valhalla and Open Arms installations. As a result, several known drug-dealing residents were shifted around, some thrown out.
Following a two-year struggle between White Plains Mayor Joe Delfino and the County Executive’s Office, a/k/a Larry Schwartz, there came an announcement in July that within weeks, in early August, the Drop-In Shelter on Court Street wouldbe closing permanently, and those individuals, “disproportionately too many” in his city, according to Delfino, would be needing to find other accommodations.
Once again the County Executive’s Office, Larry Schwartz, acting unilaterally, and with no regard for consequences, said “Like it or lump it.”
In all fairness, Larry had had another site in mind for the construction of a replacement drop-in shelter, the property directly behind the County Department of Public Safety Headquarters in Hawthorne, on the Saw Mill River Parkway, at Route 100; a dreadful, totally inappropriate site, given that there are no sidewalks, nor any pedestrian access to the property whatsoever. And, additionally, construction of any homeless shelter at that location would have been in violation of the existing contract between the County and the Town of Greenburgh, establishing a minimum two-mile buffer between such facilities.
Now it’s been two months since the fellow who goes around trying to intimidate senior citizens by telling them he’s “the most powerful person in Westchester,” dispossessed some 70 or so non-compliant homeless individuals from the Court Street site. And, now the air is growing chilly at night, and soon will be downright
cold. And now, that “most powerful person in Westchester” has sent forth the word to the County’s churches, synagogues, and charitable organizations that they are to offer chairs, but not cots to those displaced homeless who may show up at their door seeking shelter from the elements, and a place to rest.
We believe that the edict issued by Westchester’s most powerful figure, Larry Schwartz, is both cruel, and manipulative, but completely defining of who he is.
Our Readers Respond...
Reader Points Up Malfitano’s Poor Fiscal Management
Dear Editor:
Harrisonites are in a disastrous financial position now and in the foreseeable future, and Harrison could possibly be in a state of bankruptcy if Malfitano is reelected. Standard and Poor, the unbiased, non-political financial analyst, reports the following about Harrison:
1. Deteriorated financial position;
2. Financial reserves diminished;
3. Unbalanced budget, and overall debt burden;
4. Insufficient structural balance;
5. $400,000.00 operating deficit;
6. Failed to cover the 2004-2005 Village Budget deficit, and overspent the budget by $800,000 in spite of selling $2,391,000 of Village property;
7. The 2006 Budget was balanced with $600,000 of fund balance plus $1,000,000 sold assets;
8. Projected Police Department at $840,000 over budget due to insufficient funding of police overtime and general operations, and Public Works projected $300,000 over budget.
Interest and bonding fees included, Harrison’s 8,500 taxpayers are indebted for $91,530,000 now. Malfitano has spent our present. If reelected, Malfitano has $40,000,000 more indebtedness planned. Malfitano claims to “Put Harrison First”. Yes, “Harrison First” for reduction of Harrison’s rating!
Yes, “Harrison First” for such gigantic expenditures! Yes, “Harrison First” with such enormous borrowing!
And, yes, if Malfitano is reelected, this can be “Harrison First” in bankruptcy.
Lucille Held, Harrison
Bemoaning Sad State Of Westchester’s Courts And DA’s Office
Dear Editor
I have written to your newspaper about the political and judicial corruption in the family courts of White Plains, NY and Stamford, Ct. The family courts are failing to protect abused women and children and many times the failure is due to political corruption.
Corrupt judges, corrupt DA’s, corrupt lawyers and corrupt law guardians. A domestic violence activist would refer to these individuals as “private contractors” who financially benefit from covering up child abuse, spousal abuse and judicial corruption.
Big business in NY and Ct with the many “state actors” in the courts reeping the financial rewards. Corrupt DA’s like Janet Difiore that do not return child abuse alert phone calls to a protective mother if she is aware the protective mother supported the canidate that ran against her when she was a Republican.
Janet Difiore has now switched parties, she has big plans for her political career here in Westchester County. Family court judges that know their reelection campaign is tied to influential attorneys and fail to protect an abused mother and her children. Abused protective mothers and their abused children certainly do not have those important political connections. Family court lawyers who lie in court and cover up child abuse and medical neglect.
Law guardians who are swayed by all the political pressure who fail to advocate for children, my children.
The suggestion of this group “Parent Help” demonstrates to domestic violence activists the little you know about domestic violence survivors. Domestic violence survivors should not negotiate with abusers and your lack of knowledge and understanding in this area should be of great concern for all domestic violence survivors. Abused women and children do not negotiate with abusers in New York and Connecticut.
Ann Coleman
Man With A Grudge Takes It Out On Columnist Mayfield
Dear Editor:
O.K. That’s it. Whatever planet you got Vicki Mayfield from, please send her back, as soon as possible. Your publication is great, however, she is a blemish on your paper. I cringe every time I get to her articles, but some sadistic part of me makes me read them.
Does she know what a paragraph is? How about the run-on sentences, not even considering the content. Her articles are a disjointed documentation of her own experiences which would be better off published in a book of her memoirs. There is no common thread to any of the topics she discusses.
Now she’s taking on religion with “envy”. Biblically-speaking, God has provided everyone with talents and opportunities, your situation is based on whether or not you choose to take advantage of them. The kid who shows off and flashes his Nikes is the one who is wrong. Not the poor kid who can’t afford them but wishes he had them. I was taught to work for what you want. “Envy” is for those who want something for nothing.
She goes on to write about “freed” slaves had back yards and trees, and didn’t want what the “White man” had. Congratulations, I am a “White man” and take her comment as a racial statement. I figured this out a long time ago, and this just proves that if you give someone enough time, their true colors will be revealed.
And what did the “White man” have? Yards and trees. You moron. She also uses the term “Rednecks”, not in a joking way, but a condemning way. I have lived outside several cities, choosing a slower, simpler lifestyle. I could be considered a “Redneck” and am offended that she would use a “geographical” slur to include racism. But it seems every time she opens her mouth, she shows how stupid and ignorant she actually is. Go ahead, Vicki. Now write an article on how “your people” can’t be racist. And then, for whatever reason, (I don’t think anyone could or want to figure out what goes on in her mind) she uses “we Americans” to make a point.
Lastly, she seems to make some sort of point that George Bush, and George Bush alone, is creating a diversion so as to avoid impeachment. I believe she may have seen “Wag the Dog” a few too many times.
A while back, in one of her articles, she wrote, “Who would have thought I would be writing for a paper.” My guess? Nobody. Please, leave the writing to the writers.
P.S. I am also getting a little sick of living, eating, breathing, walking, cooking, driving, sleeping, shopping, working, reading, suing, Latino. I am a “White man” with a disability, and have just as many problems, if not more, than any “minority”.
Diesel, Peekskill
Reader Claims Downside In Separation of Church and State
Dear Editor:
These days you hear words bandied about such as “separation of church and state.” To the ears of many people they sound good and they are what our constitution and democracy are about. Our Constitution guarantees us the right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It also states that we should not establish a state religion.
Today, however, separation of church and state has lost its meaning. Those who purportedly possess the intelligence to interpret our Constitution want to separate you from God. What church does God belong to? Please let me know.
Let’s take a quick look at “pro-choice.” What it really means is killing a child in the mother’s womb. That being said, the abortion providers do not provide all the facts about abortion or what can result from it in the future. These facts must be emphasized strongly to anyone who is thinking of getting one.
Only after all the facts are known and understood can one make an intelligent choice. We must open the doors to our minds and hearts if we want to make progress in becoming a more intelligent society.
George Imburgia, New Rochelle
Reader Points Up Malfitano’s Poor Fiscal Management
Dear Editor:
Harrisonites are in a disastrous financial position now and in the foreseeable future, and Harrison could possibly be in a state of bankruptcy if Malfitano is reelected. Standard and Poor, the unbiased, non-political financial analyst, reports the following about Harrison:
1. Deteriorated financial position;
2. Financial reserves diminished;
3. Unbalanced budget, and overall debt burden;
4. Insufficient structural balance;
5. $400,000.00 operating deficit;
6. Failed to cover the 2004-2005 Village Budget deficit, and overspent the budget by $800,000 in spite of selling $2,391,000 of Village property;
7. The 2006 Budget was balanced with $600,000 of fund balance plus $1,000,000 sold assets;
8. Projected Police Department at $840,000 over budget due to insufficient funding of police overtime and general operations, and Public Works projected $300,000 over budget.
Interest and bonding fees included, Harrison’s 8,500 taxpayers are indebted for $91,530,000 now. Malfitano has spent our present. If reelected, Malfitano has $40,000,000 more indebtedness planned. Malfitano claims to “Put Harrison First”. Yes, “Harrison First” for reduction of Harrison’s rating!
Yes, “Harrison First” for such gigantic expenditures! Yes, “Harrison First” with such enormous borrowing!
And, yes, if Malfitano is reelected, this can be “Harrison First” in bankruptcy.
Lucille Held, Harrison
Bemoaning Sad State Of Westchester’s Courts And DA’s Office
Dear Editor
I have written to your newspaper about the political and judicial corruption in the family courts of White Plains, NY and Stamford, Ct. The family courts are failing to protect abused women and children and many times the failure is due to political corruption.
Corrupt judges, corrupt DA’s, corrupt lawyers and corrupt law guardians. A domestic violence activist would refer to these individuals as “private contractors” who financially benefit from covering up child abuse, spousal abuse and judicial corruption.
Big business in NY and Ct with the many “state actors” in the courts reeping the financial rewards. Corrupt DA’s like Janet Difiore that do not return child abuse alert phone calls to a protective mother if she is aware the protective mother supported the canidate that ran against her when she was a Republican.
Janet Difiore has now switched parties, she has big plans for her political career here in Westchester County. Family court judges that know their reelection campaign is tied to influential attorneys and fail to protect an abused mother and her children. Abused protective mothers and their abused children certainly do not have those important political connections. Family court lawyers who lie in court and cover up child abuse and medical neglect.
Law guardians who are swayed by all the political pressure who fail to advocate for children, my children.
The suggestion of this group “Parent Help” demonstrates to domestic violence activists the little you know about domestic violence survivors. Domestic violence survivors should not negotiate with abusers and your lack of knowledge and understanding in this area should be of great concern for all domestic violence survivors. Abused women and children do not negotiate with abusers in New York and Connecticut.
Ann Coleman
Man With A Grudge Takes It Out On Columnist Mayfield
Dear Editor:
O.K. That’s it. Whatever planet you got Vicki Mayfield from, please send her back, as soon as possible. Your publication is great, however, she is a blemish on your paper. I cringe every time I get to her articles, but some sadistic part of me makes me read them.
Does she know what a paragraph is? How about the run-on sentences, not even considering the content. Her articles are a disjointed documentation of her own experiences which would be better off published in a book of her memoirs. There is no common thread to any of the topics she discusses.
Now she’s taking on religion with “envy”. Biblically-speaking, God has provided everyone with talents and opportunities, your situation is based on whether or not you choose to take advantage of them. The kid who shows off and flashes his Nikes is the one who is wrong. Not the poor kid who can’t afford them but wishes he had them. I was taught to work for what you want. “Envy” is for those who want something for nothing.
She goes on to write about “freed” slaves had back yards and trees, and didn’t want what the “White man” had. Congratulations, I am a “White man” and take her comment as a racial statement. I figured this out a long time ago, and this just proves that if you give someone enough time, their true colors will be revealed.
And what did the “White man” have? Yards and trees. You moron. She also uses the term “Rednecks”, not in a joking way, but a condemning way. I have lived outside several cities, choosing a slower, simpler lifestyle. I could be considered a “Redneck” and am offended that she would use a “geographical” slur to include racism. But it seems every time she opens her mouth, she shows how stupid and ignorant she actually is. Go ahead, Vicki. Now write an article on how “your people” can’t be racist. And then, for whatever reason, (I don’t think anyone could or want to figure out what goes on in her mind) she uses “we Americans” to make a point.
Lastly, she seems to make some sort of point that George Bush, and George Bush alone, is creating a diversion so as to avoid impeachment. I believe she may have seen “Wag the Dog” a few too many times.
A while back, in one of her articles, she wrote, “Who would have thought I would be writing for a paper.” My guess? Nobody. Please, leave the writing to the writers.
P.S. I am also getting a little sick of living, eating, breathing, walking, cooking, driving, sleeping, shopping, working, reading, suing, Latino. I am a “White man” with a disability, and have just as many problems, if not more, than any “minority”.
Diesel, Peekskill
Reader Claims Downside In Separation of Church and State
Dear Editor:
These days you hear words bandied about such as “separation of church and state.” To the ears of many people they sound good and they are what our constitution and democracy are about. Our Constitution guarantees us the right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It also states that we should not establish a state religion.
Today, however, separation of church and state has lost its meaning. Those who purportedly possess the intelligence to interpret our Constitution want to separate you from God. What church does God belong to? Please let me know.
Let’s take a quick look at “pro-choice.” What it really means is killing a child in the mother’s womb. That being said, the abortion providers do not provide all the facts about abortion or what can result from it in the future. These facts must be emphasized strongly to anyone who is thinking of getting one.
Only after all the facts are known and understood can one make an intelligent choice. We must open the doors to our minds and hearts if we want to make progress in becoming a more intelligent society.
George Imburgia, New Rochelle
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
The Legislature Must Restore Dignity And Constitutionality To New York’s Courts
New York State’s Courts are largely out of control, and rapidly reaching the point of no return. Not even the beginnings of federal intervention, in the selection and nomination of Supreme Court Judges, nearly two years ago, with the ruling by Federal District Judge John Gleeson in the case of Brooklyn Surrogate Judge Margarita Lopez-Torres, who had been denied the opportunity to run for State Supreme Court, has made any impact on the corrupt, Patronage-Driven Monster run amuck.
Judge Gleeson rightly recognized the crux of the problem, as illustrated by the facts in the Lopez-Torres complaint, resides in the selection process, nominations to run for State Supreme Court conducted virtually
out of contact with, and against the interests of, the voting public.
Gleeson not only recognized the injury to the Plaintiff ’s Constitutional Rights, but also to all of those voters in her judicial district whose First Amendment rights of political association were likewise compromised by her exclusion without lawful cause, or Due Process. Judge Lopez-Torres was merely a victim of her own high morality, having refused to make patronage appointments sought by party bosses.
We believe Judge Gleeson got it right the first time when he ruled that the existing Judicial Convention System, under which candidates for State Supreme Court are nominated, denies voters the opportunity for input, and any say in who will be on the ballot. Here in the Ninth Judicial District, consisting of Westchester, Rockland, Putnam, Dutchess, and Orange Counties, we have seen repeated examples of just how corrupt and deteriorated the State’s Courts have become, like a fish rotting from the head down.
Consider a slimeball, Giulio Cavallo, recently re-instated to chairmanship of the Westchester Independence Party by the State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, many of whose members were elected to the Supreme Court with that party’s paid-for cross endorsement.
That’s correct; many of those justices sitting in the Appellate Division, once described by the Village Voice as “The Whores Who Became Madams,” paid between $10,000 and $20,000 to buy the Independence Party’s cross-endorsement.
Now it is one thing when a corrupt creature such as Cavallo is permitted to sell cross-endorsements for cash to those running for County Executive, Mayor, or Dog Catcher. Unfortunately, we have come to accept a little larceny in our Dog Catchers. But even the most jaded among us are reluctant to accept the notion that the individual cloaked in a black robe, and sitting in a position to send us to prison for a crime we haven’t committed, or separate us from our children at the whim of a former spouse, or deny us the benefit of our own labor, is somebody who never attended law school, bought his way onto the Westchester County Court with funds that he swindled from his campaign treasurer, paying for the cross-endorsement of the Independence Party, and then onto the State Supreme Court as a Republican, by cross-endorsing Democrat Jonathan Lippman, a bastard scheme worked out and approved under the current Judicial Convention System. That somebody is State Supreme Court Justice Joseph Alessandro, found “unqualified” by the Committee on Judicial Credentials.
Yes, Judge Gleeson had it right when he proposed that Supreme Court Judge Candidates be selected by a primary process, thus permitting those who might wish to, and are qualified, to run without interference by party bosses. Here in Westchester, recent primary elections have demonstrated that only the primary process is capable of breaking the stranglehold that party bosses such as Larry Schwartz, Giulio Cavallo, and their ilk have had over the election process for years. Paul Feiner and his team in Greenburgh, and Clinton Young and Lyndon Williams in Mt. Vernon clearly established that fact. And, contrary to the notion that a primary system might be unwieldy or too costly for selecting candidates for State Supreme Court, in reality no other method
should be employed.
Judge Kaye’s ill-conceived bandaid put forth earlier this year, her so-called Independent Judicial Election Qualification Commissions will not resolve the existing problems because those serving on the commissions were selected by Kaye, a Chief Judge with no prior judicial experience, the four presiding judges of the Appellate Division, including Jonathan Lippman, a fox in the henhouse, and state and local bar associations. In other words, largely the same corrupt crowd.
What the State Legislature must do to restore dignity and Constitutionality to our courts, and some measure of credibility to most public offices, is really quite straight-forward and uncomplicated. The State Senate and Assembly must abolish cross-endorsement thereby putting creeps and fraudsters like Giulio Cavallo, Zehy Jereis, and others throughout the state, out of the “election for sale” business. And, they must put the nomination and election of Supreme Court Judges out of the reach of party bosses by establishing a primary-driven process, with strict campaign controls, free of patronage, and underwritten with public funds, both in the primary process and the general election.
Only after such legislative changes have been enacted, and many more honest, dedicated, public servants are elected to our courts and to other public office over time, will we witness the restoration of dignity and Constitutionality.
Richard Blassberg
The Legislature Must Restore Dignity And Constitutionality To New York’s Courts
New York State’s Courts are largely out of control, and rapidly reaching the point of no return. Not even the beginnings of federal intervention, in the selection and nomination of Supreme Court Judges, nearly two years ago, with the ruling by Federal District Judge John Gleeson in the case of Brooklyn Surrogate Judge Margarita Lopez-Torres, who had been denied the opportunity to run for State Supreme Court, has made any impact on the corrupt, Patronage-Driven Monster run amuck.
Judge Gleeson rightly recognized the crux of the problem, as illustrated by the facts in the Lopez-Torres complaint, resides in the selection process, nominations to run for State Supreme Court conducted virtually
out of contact with, and against the interests of, the voting public.
Gleeson not only recognized the injury to the Plaintiff ’s Constitutional Rights, but also to all of those voters in her judicial district whose First Amendment rights of political association were likewise compromised by her exclusion without lawful cause, or Due Process. Judge Lopez-Torres was merely a victim of her own high morality, having refused to make patronage appointments sought by party bosses.
We believe Judge Gleeson got it right the first time when he ruled that the existing Judicial Convention System, under which candidates for State Supreme Court are nominated, denies voters the opportunity for input, and any say in who will be on the ballot. Here in the Ninth Judicial District, consisting of Westchester, Rockland, Putnam, Dutchess, and Orange Counties, we have seen repeated examples of just how corrupt and deteriorated the State’s Courts have become, like a fish rotting from the head down.
Consider a slimeball, Giulio Cavallo, recently re-instated to chairmanship of the Westchester Independence Party by the State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, many of whose members were elected to the Supreme Court with that party’s paid-for cross endorsement.
That’s correct; many of those justices sitting in the Appellate Division, once described by the Village Voice as “The Whores Who Became Madams,” paid between $10,000 and $20,000 to buy the Independence Party’s cross-endorsement.
Now it is one thing when a corrupt creature such as Cavallo is permitted to sell cross-endorsements for cash to those running for County Executive, Mayor, or Dog Catcher. Unfortunately, we have come to accept a little larceny in our Dog Catchers. But even the most jaded among us are reluctant to accept the notion that the individual cloaked in a black robe, and sitting in a position to send us to prison for a crime we haven’t committed, or separate us from our children at the whim of a former spouse, or deny us the benefit of our own labor, is somebody who never attended law school, bought his way onto the Westchester County Court with funds that he swindled from his campaign treasurer, paying for the cross-endorsement of the Independence Party, and then onto the State Supreme Court as a Republican, by cross-endorsing Democrat Jonathan Lippman, a bastard scheme worked out and approved under the current Judicial Convention System. That somebody is State Supreme Court Justice Joseph Alessandro, found “unqualified” by the Committee on Judicial Credentials.
Yes, Judge Gleeson had it right when he proposed that Supreme Court Judge Candidates be selected by a primary process, thus permitting those who might wish to, and are qualified, to run without interference by party bosses. Here in Westchester, recent primary elections have demonstrated that only the primary process is capable of breaking the stranglehold that party bosses such as Larry Schwartz, Giulio Cavallo, and their ilk have had over the election process for years. Paul Feiner and his team in Greenburgh, and Clinton Young and Lyndon Williams in Mt. Vernon clearly established that fact. And, contrary to the notion that a primary system might be unwieldy or too costly for selecting candidates for State Supreme Court, in reality no other method
should be employed.
Judge Kaye’s ill-conceived bandaid put forth earlier this year, her so-called Independent Judicial Election Qualification Commissions will not resolve the existing problems because those serving on the commissions were selected by Kaye, a Chief Judge with no prior judicial experience, the four presiding judges of the Appellate Division, including Jonathan Lippman, a fox in the henhouse, and state and local bar associations. In other words, largely the same corrupt crowd.
What the State Legislature must do to restore dignity and Constitutionality to our courts, and some measure of credibility to most public offices, is really quite straight-forward and uncomplicated. The State Senate and Assembly must abolish cross-endorsement thereby putting creeps and fraudsters like Giulio Cavallo, Zehy Jereis, and others throughout the state, out of the “election for sale” business. And, they must put the nomination and election of Supreme Court Judges out of the reach of party bosses by establishing a primary-driven process, with strict campaign controls, free of patronage, and underwritten with public funds, both in the primary process and the general election.
Only after such legislative changes have been enacted, and many more honest, dedicated, public servants are elected to our courts and to other public office over time, will we witness the restoration of dignity and Constitutionality.
The Court Report
By Richard Blassberg
Amicone “Dodges A Bullet”– For Now
Yonkers City Court, Cacace Justice Center, Yonkers, N.Y.
City Court Judge Charles Wood, Presiding
Last Thursday afternoon, October 18th, Westchester Guardian Publisher Sam Zherka, and several of his employees, were present in Yonkers City Court for a scheduled 1:00 p.m. appearance. At three minutes before 3:00 p.m., after clearing out all of the other items on his calendar, City Court Judge Charles Wood looked up and announced, “Mr. Lovett, please approach.”
Following the exchange of a few comments with the Judge, Attorney Jonathan Lovett, counsel to The Westchester Guardian and Publisher Sam Zherka, motioned Yonkers Assistant Corporate Counsel, Lawrence A. Porcari, to join him at the bench.
Moments later, the Court Clerk proceeded to call up nine employees of The Guardian, from the Circulation Department, by name and case number, as well as Publisher Zherka. Judge Wood, turning to Mr. Lovett, inquired, “Do you have an application?” Mr. Lovett responded, “We are in Federal Court, claiming that the Yonkers City Code, with regard to the distribution of newspapers, is facially in violation of the First Amendment
to the United States Constitution.”
The Judge then responded, “Let’s adjourn this matter to December 6th. Hopefully that will give Judge Brieant enough time to do his work.
Following the adjournment, Mr. Lovett, emerging from the courtroom, told this reporter, “They dodged a bullet.” Upon leaving the courthouse, Publisher Zherka and Attorney Lovett were confronted by reporters. Zherka stated, “I expected to be jailed today. However, the Judge did the right thing postponing the case until the Federal Court deals with it.”
Holding the current issue of The Guardian in his hands, he went on, “This newspaper represents the rights of the People. I am a firm believer in the Constitution and the First Amendment.”
Attorney Lovett then told reporters, “We have seven cases in Federal Court now, three of them name Mr. Porcari, Yonkers Assistant Corporate Counsel, in his individual capacity.” He then reached into his briefcase,
pulling out a copy of the Yonkers City Code, exclaiming, “You’d have to be a moron not to realize this Code violates the Constitution.”
Analysis:
Westchester Guardian Publisher Sam Zherka’s appearance in Yonkers City Court, together with several of his employees, was in answer to charges brought by the Amicone Administration under a City Ordinance
that is plainly un-Constitutional.
Mr. Zherka was prepared to go forward to trial, and to do jail time, if necessary, in defense of the First Amendment and the People’s Right to know. He understood, nevertheless, the Amicone Administration’s unwillingness, prior to Election Day, to bring any further public attention to their wrongful and vindictive actions,
their tyrannical attempt to silence legitimate criticism.
It should be noted that Amicone, and his subordinates, are under a Restraining Order imposed several weeks ago by Federal District Court Judge Charles L. Brieant.
Jonathan Lovett, attorney representing The Guardian and Publisher Zherka, has expressed his con-fidence in the outcome and success of his clients’ Civil Rights actions in Federal Court against Mayor Phil Amicone and several members of his City Administration for their flagrant, ‘content-based’ violations of the First Amendment against The Westchester Guardian, several of its employees, its publisher, and thousands of Yonkers readers, by the confiscation of 56 distribution boxes, as well as the use of harassment and arrest, to interfere with, and halt, the newspaper’s distribution in Yonkers for several weeks. His confidence is based, in part, upon very compelling evidence of the alleged wrongful conduct of City personnel under direct orders from the Mayor’s office; evidence consisting of explicit and damning photos, videos, and recorded statements, of City employees.
By Richard Blassberg
Amicone “Dodges A Bullet”– For Now
Yonkers City Court, Cacace Justice Center, Yonkers, N.Y.
City Court Judge Charles Wood, Presiding
Last Thursday afternoon, October 18th, Westchester Guardian Publisher Sam Zherka, and several of his employees, were present in Yonkers City Court for a scheduled 1:00 p.m. appearance. At three minutes before 3:00 p.m., after clearing out all of the other items on his calendar, City Court Judge Charles Wood looked up and announced, “Mr. Lovett, please approach.”
Following the exchange of a few comments with the Judge, Attorney Jonathan Lovett, counsel to The Westchester Guardian and Publisher Sam Zherka, motioned Yonkers Assistant Corporate Counsel, Lawrence A. Porcari, to join him at the bench.
Moments later, the Court Clerk proceeded to call up nine employees of The Guardian, from the Circulation Department, by name and case number, as well as Publisher Zherka. Judge Wood, turning to Mr. Lovett, inquired, “Do you have an application?” Mr. Lovett responded, “We are in Federal Court, claiming that the Yonkers City Code, with regard to the distribution of newspapers, is facially in violation of the First Amendment
to the United States Constitution.”
The Judge then responded, “Let’s adjourn this matter to December 6th. Hopefully that will give Judge Brieant enough time to do his work.
Following the adjournment, Mr. Lovett, emerging from the courtroom, told this reporter, “They dodged a bullet.” Upon leaving the courthouse, Publisher Zherka and Attorney Lovett were confronted by reporters. Zherka stated, “I expected to be jailed today. However, the Judge did the right thing postponing the case until the Federal Court deals with it.”
Holding the current issue of The Guardian in his hands, he went on, “This newspaper represents the rights of the People. I am a firm believer in the Constitution and the First Amendment.”
Attorney Lovett then told reporters, “We have seven cases in Federal Court now, three of them name Mr. Porcari, Yonkers Assistant Corporate Counsel, in his individual capacity.” He then reached into his briefcase,
pulling out a copy of the Yonkers City Code, exclaiming, “You’d have to be a moron not to realize this Code violates the Constitution.”
Analysis:
Westchester Guardian Publisher Sam Zherka’s appearance in Yonkers City Court, together with several of his employees, was in answer to charges brought by the Amicone Administration under a City Ordinance
that is plainly un-Constitutional.
Mr. Zherka was prepared to go forward to trial, and to do jail time, if necessary, in defense of the First Amendment and the People’s Right to know. He understood, nevertheless, the Amicone Administration’s unwillingness, prior to Election Day, to bring any further public attention to their wrongful and vindictive actions,
their tyrannical attempt to silence legitimate criticism.
It should be noted that Amicone, and his subordinates, are under a Restraining Order imposed several weeks ago by Federal District Court Judge Charles L. Brieant.
Jonathan Lovett, attorney representing The Guardian and Publisher Zherka, has expressed his con-fidence in the outcome and success of his clients’ Civil Rights actions in Federal Court against Mayor Phil Amicone and several members of his City Administration for their flagrant, ‘content-based’ violations of the First Amendment against The Westchester Guardian, several of its employees, its publisher, and thousands of Yonkers readers, by the confiscation of 56 distribution boxes, as well as the use of harassment and arrest, to interfere with, and halt, the newspaper’s distribution in Yonkers for several weeks. His confidence is based, in part, upon very compelling evidence of the alleged wrongful conduct of City personnel under direct orders from the Mayor’s office; evidence consisting of explicit and damning photos, videos, and recorded statements, of City employees.
In Four Years, Under Phil Amicone: In Four Years, Under Phil Amicone:
• Property taxes have risen 30 percent;
• School test scores have gone down;
• Gang violence and shootings are way up;
• Developers have gotten excessive tax breaks;
• The FBI is investigating deals with developers;
• Police brutality complaints swept under the rug;
• U.S. Justice Dept. investigating Yonkers Police Dept.;
• Elections have been monitored by Feds for fraud;
• Police and Fire Unions worked 21/2 years without contract;
• Record deficit spending, possibly $60 million this year;
• Thirty former Spano staff in no-show jobs for $1.3 million;
• Violates First Amendment to keep the truth from you.
• Property taxes have risen 30 percent;
• School test scores have gone down;
• Gang violence and shootings are way up;
• Developers have gotten excessive tax breaks;
• The FBI is investigating deals with developers;
• Police brutality complaints swept under the rug;
• U.S. Justice Dept. investigating Yonkers Police Dept.;
• Elections have been monitored by Feds for fraud;
• Police and Fire Unions worked 21/2 years without contract;
• Record deficit spending, possibly $60 million this year;
• Thirty former Spano staff in no-show jobs for $1.3 million;
• Violates First Amendment to keep the truth from you.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
In Our Opinion...
Driver’s License Debate Rolls On
Last week on this page We cautioned “Not So Fast, Governor Spitzer,” suggesting that perhaps in the “wake of the Bruno debacle” the Governor really didn’t need to borrow any more controversy for a while, least of all, a half-thought-out plan to issue driver’s licenses to undocumented aliens. We acknowledged that there was some merit in proponents’ arguments that such a program might significantly cut down on the number of unlicensed and uninsured drivers on New York roads, and, that it would also help in getting a handle on the identity of tens of thousands of ‘illegals’ throughout the state.
Weighing the arguments on both sides of the issue that had already been lodged in the first two weeks since the proposal, We inserted two additional concerns of our own: firstly, that the possession of a driver’s license was not a right, not even for citizens, but rather a privilege, subject to compliance with a very specific set of conditions; and, secondly, that such a proposal needed to take into account not only the impact it would have on illegal aliens already living in the United States, and specifically in New York State, but also those outside of the country contemplating an illegal entry. We asked whether we really wanted to add more incentive to breaking our Immigration Laws, suggesting that perhaps the program would be better timed once the United States had made significant progress toward sealing our borders.
The New York Post, not exactly the Governor’s biggest fan, offered the notion that perhaps he came out with the proposal as a distraction from his other problems in Albany in their October 9th editorial Take a U-Turn, Eliot. One day earlier they branded it a License To Kill. Several major daily newspapers from all over the state reported county clerks up in arms over the proposal. Having a longstanding relationship with Putnam County Clerk, Republican, Dennis Sant, as well as a good working relationship with Westchester County Clerk, Democrat, Tim Idoni, We called upon each of them for their comments.
Dennis Sant, who was, in fact, the Putnam County Commissioner of Motor Vehicles for many years as he served as Deputy County Clerk, stated, “My position is that I feel pressured by the Governor to disobey the laws of
this land, and violate my oath of office. The Vehicle and Traffic Laws of New York State clearly state we will not issue licenses to persons without Social Security Cards.”
Tim Idoni told us, “In Westchester I am not an agent for the State Department of Motor Vehicles, though I do collect mortgage taxes and passport fees. Having said that, I must acknowledge the complexity and difficulty of
the debate over the issuance of driver’s licenses to undocumented aliens. On the one hand, I’m sympathetic to Governor Spitzer’s need to resolve a problem we cannot ignore, but that has not been addressed by the federal government.
On the other hand, I understand the passion with which my fellow County Clerks throughout the state are trying to protect the integrity of the Driver’s License System. We need to sit down and reconcile the two sides.”
Driver’s License Debate Rolls On
Last week on this page We cautioned “Not So Fast, Governor Spitzer,” suggesting that perhaps in the “wake of the Bruno debacle” the Governor really didn’t need to borrow any more controversy for a while, least of all, a half-thought-out plan to issue driver’s licenses to undocumented aliens. We acknowledged that there was some merit in proponents’ arguments that such a program might significantly cut down on the number of unlicensed and uninsured drivers on New York roads, and, that it would also help in getting a handle on the identity of tens of thousands of ‘illegals’ throughout the state.
Weighing the arguments on both sides of the issue that had already been lodged in the first two weeks since the proposal, We inserted two additional concerns of our own: firstly, that the possession of a driver’s license was not a right, not even for citizens, but rather a privilege, subject to compliance with a very specific set of conditions; and, secondly, that such a proposal needed to take into account not only the impact it would have on illegal aliens already living in the United States, and specifically in New York State, but also those outside of the country contemplating an illegal entry. We asked whether we really wanted to add more incentive to breaking our Immigration Laws, suggesting that perhaps the program would be better timed once the United States had made significant progress toward sealing our borders.
The New York Post, not exactly the Governor’s biggest fan, offered the notion that perhaps he came out with the proposal as a distraction from his other problems in Albany in their October 9th editorial Take a U-Turn, Eliot. One day earlier they branded it a License To Kill. Several major daily newspapers from all over the state reported county clerks up in arms over the proposal. Having a longstanding relationship with Putnam County Clerk, Republican, Dennis Sant, as well as a good working relationship with Westchester County Clerk, Democrat, Tim Idoni, We called upon each of them for their comments.
Dennis Sant, who was, in fact, the Putnam County Commissioner of Motor Vehicles for many years as he served as Deputy County Clerk, stated, “My position is that I feel pressured by the Governor to disobey the laws of
this land, and violate my oath of office. The Vehicle and Traffic Laws of New York State clearly state we will not issue licenses to persons without Social Security Cards.”
Tim Idoni told us, “In Westchester I am not an agent for the State Department of Motor Vehicles, though I do collect mortgage taxes and passport fees. Having said that, I must acknowledge the complexity and difficulty of
the debate over the issuance of driver’s licenses to undocumented aliens. On the one hand, I’m sympathetic to Governor Spitzer’s need to resolve a problem we cannot ignore, but that has not been addressed by the federal government.
On the other hand, I understand the passion with which my fellow County Clerks throughout the state are trying to protect the integrity of the Driver’s License System. We need to sit down and reconcile the two sides.”
Our Readers Respond...
Tony Castro Writes In Defense of Client Eugene Tumolo
Dear Editor:
As counsel to Peekskill Police Chief Eugene Tumolo, it is with great dismay that I have been reading your series of articles personally attacking him for what you perceive to have been his alleged role in the Jeffrey Deskovic
case. Contrary to your erroneous allegations, the incontrovertible documentary evidence categorically shows that it was through Chief Tumolo’s conscientious and diligent efforts that the DNA results were obtained – the same
DNA results that ultimately exonerated Jeffrey Deskovic.
Rather than acknowledging the facts, you prefer to publicly persecute Chief Tumolo. You have prejudged and attempted to disparage a law enforcement official who has served his community with distinction for decades. Chief Tumolo has always been held in high esteem and boasts an impeccable record, earning many commendations for his unswerving commitment to public safety. In his forty years of public service, he does not have a single blemish on his record.
Instead of incorrectly blaming him for the arrest and false prosecution of Jeffrey Deskovic, you should be commending him for what he in fact did. Eugene Tumolo’s determined efforts in obtaining the DNA evidence
tests was by far the single most important reason Jeffrey Deskovic was exonerated. Had it not been for Eugene Tumolo’s perseverance, Jeffrey Deskovic would still be in jail today.
In his quest to find young Angela Correa’s killer and his desire to search for the truth, Eugene Tumolo went through great lengths to obtain the DNA results. In 1989, DNA testing was not as readily available as it is
today. It was relatively difficult and expensive to obtain. The last eighteen years have seen gigantic strides in the science of DNA, specifically the ease with which it is obtained, tested and kept on file (CODIS database).
Despite those difficulties, then detective lieutenant Eugene Tumolo made every effort to preserve the DNA evidence and obtain its results. He wanted to be sure that no stone was left unturned in attempting to bring Angela’s killer to justice. The Westchester County Department of Laboratories and Research was contacted, however, it performed only serology tests and not DNA tests. The Westchester County lab then suggested
the Analytical Genetic Test Center in Denver, Colorado. The DNA samples were sent to the Colorado lab but, unfortunately, the tests from the Colorado lab were inconclusive for racial/ethnic background.
The frustrating experiences with both the Westchester and the Colorado labs serve as proof of the difficulties in obtaining DNA results at the time. Nonetheless, Eugene Tumolo remained undeterred and appealed to the FBI laboratory in Washington D.C. Despite the countless requests received nationally by the FBI laboratory, many of which had to go unfulfilled due to the lab’s relative limitations, Eugene Tumolo successfully advocated and convinced the FBI lab to take on Angela Correa’s case. Having convinced the FBI, he felt a sense of accomplishment knowing that the results would be instrumental in either “incriminating or exonerating” Jeffrey Deskovic.
Merely one month after Deskovic’s arrest, the results of the FBI tests became available. The results excluded Jeffrey Deskovic. Eugene Tumolo followed the proper protocol and immediately presented the DNA results
to the chief law enforcement agency in the County, The District Attorney’s Office. He expressed his concerns that the DNA evidence found on the victim did not match Jeffrey Deskovic’s DNA. To suggest as you did that
Eugene Tumolo should have disclosed to the media and others the DNA evidence obtained during a homicide investigation, as well as his concerns and thoughts, ignores the fact that he did follow protocol. Besides, during
the trial such information was revealed to the public, including everyone you suggested Eugene Tumolo should have approached.
The decision of whether or not to prosecute the case and Jeffrey Deskovic did not rest with then detective lieutenant Eugene Tumolo. It did not even rest with the City of Peekskill Police Department, but rather the District Attorney’s Office.
As the chief law enforcement agency in the County, the District Attorney’s Office has a great responsibility in overseeing criminal cases. It has sole discretion in deciding whether or not there is enough legally sufficient and reliable evidence to prosecute. The decision of going forward with a homicide prosecution belongs to the District Attorney’s Office, not the local police department. In the Jeffrey Deskovic case, it was no different.
Sadly, in the face of compelling and exonerating evidence, the District Attorney’s Office forged ahead with the prosecution and Jeffrey Deskovic was wrongfully convicted. The conviction was based in large part on the false and baseless theories put forth by the prosecution, such as that the DNA belonged to Angela Correa’s boyfriend as a result of consensual sex.
Years later, Jeffrey Deskovic reportedly pled with the District Attorney’s Office to have his case reviewed, but his pleas went unheeded. There was no downside in reviewing the case. Any first year law student would have had the common sense to allow the crime scene DNA to be run against the growing CODIS DNA database for a possible match, but inexplicably, it was not done. Had it been done, Jeffrey Deskovic would have had a second chance to be freed by the District Attorney’s Office sooner. The DNA of Steven Cunningham,
the real killer, entered the CODIS database upon his conviction for a second murder a few years later. The DNA samples from the crime scene would have matched Cunningham’s, conclusively inculpating him and exonerating Deskovic.
There are many questions that remain to be answered by those who controlled Jeffrey Deskovic’s fate. However, the all important question as to who was responsible for obtaining the DNA results that ultimately resulted in Deskovic’s freedom, has been answered --- it was none other than detective lieutenant Eugene Tumolo. Notwithstanding that fact, you continue to persecute him.
Ironically, your persecution defies some of the very principles that Jeffrey Deskovic has so eloquently advocated. It fails to provide Chief Tumolo with the principles of justice, fairness, and balanced reporting that he deserves. Instead, it passes judgment on Chief Tumolo without ever mentioning his role in obtaining the DNA results that ultimately resulted in Jeffrey Deskovic’s exoneration and release from prison. You have ignored his commendable efforts, ironically in the same way that the District Attorney’s Office ignored the exculpatory DNA evidence and, much like Deskovic’s prosecutors, continue to press your persecution. Your readers deserve to know more than just opinion – they deserve to know the facts.
Facts will triumph. As the public becomes increasingly aware of Chief Tumolo’s role in successfully obtaining the DNA results, he will not only prevail in the realm of public opinion, but he will most certainly prevail in a court of law.
When the details of the Jeffrey Deskovic case unravel, the one incontrovertible fact involving Eugene Tumolo will be that, but for then detective lieutenant Tumolo and his conscientious and diligent efforts in seeking the truth, an innocent man would still sadly be languishing in a state penitentiary today.
Tony Castro, Esq.
Editor’s Note: A detailed response to Mr. Castro’s letter appears in The Advocate, p5.
Long-Time Mount Vernon Democratic District Leader Calls For Conn-Halevi Resignation
Dear Editor:
Serapher Conn-Halevi should resign as Mount Vernon Democratic Party Chairwoman. After her devastating defeat in the September 18th Democratic Primary elections, Ms. Conn-Halevi should resign. It is not only because she lost both Democratic Primaries but because she displayed a serious lack of leadership after the Primary by failing to embrace and welcome the victorious candidates who are now the Democratic Party standard bearers for the general election. She also went out for the Conservative and Independence
lines. How could the Chair of a major party seek two minor party lines for herself? It is unheard of. Is she a Democrat or a Conservative? How could she convince voters or future candidates to stick with the Democratic Party when she does not?
Some people say that she is being trained by David Ford. That is hard to believe. I was a long-time Democratic district leader under David Ford’s leadership in the party and one thing that I know is that when the Primary was over he would embrace the Democratic candidates and move forward. We had our battles back then but we pulled together. You might not agree with Ford about many things but his loyalty to the Democratic Party
was never divided or never a question. He would rally his district leaders behind victori-ous Democratic candidates. That’s more than I could say for Ms. Conn-Halevi. When the Chair has doubts about who she should support after a Democratic Primary, the decent thing for her to do is to resign. She made a statement in The Journal News that she would support Clinton Young, the Democratic voters’ choice, and the next evening her daughter, her sons, her husband, her best friends, were all at Ernie Davis’ rally supporting him as the Conservative candidate for Mayor in the November general election. If she can’t bring her own family and friends in line then how could she bring others together behind the candidates? Or, has she made a side deal with Ernie? That stinks. She should resign. Our Party deserves a person who believes in its principles, not a political opportunist.
And another thing, that performance by City Clerk Lisa Copeland on television at the recanvassing of the voting machines was disgraceful. She is an embarrassment to the City of Mount Vernon.
Former David Ford District Leader
Mount Vernon Democratic Party
Mount Vernon Resident Takes Davis To Task
Dear Editor:
On October 9th The Journal News reported that the U.S. Attorney’s Office empanelled a grand jury to investigate and take testimony of a Mount Vernon Urban Renewal Agency employee, Lou Albano, about possible corruption of Ernie Davis’ administration. Davis, who says, “I’m not a crook”… “I meant I’m not a cook” immediately lawyered up by hiring Ravi Batra who, along with Davis, accused the U.S. Attorney’s Office of a political witch hunt. This is typical Ernie. He takes no responsibility. He blames everyone else. He makes
excuses. He makes very bad judgments. Take a look at who he hired as his lawyer – Ravi Batra – a political operative, well known for shady tactics. Read more about Batra at http://www.lawyerfraud.com/ and search Ravi Batra, you’ll get the picture of this character. Also check out www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics to learn more about Ernie’s friend Ravi. As the saying goes, “birds of a feather flock together”, Ernie and Ravi a perfect match. Ernie’s ankle bracelet will soon be permanent. Maybe he could join Ravi on the Bombay Express and avoid the embarrassment of an indictment. Ravi knows nothing about Mount Vernon but he is acting a spokesman – what a joke.
Mount Vernon Resident for Uncorrupted Government
Tony Castro Writes In Defense of Client Eugene Tumolo
Dear Editor:
As counsel to Peekskill Police Chief Eugene Tumolo, it is with great dismay that I have been reading your series of articles personally attacking him for what you perceive to have been his alleged role in the Jeffrey Deskovic
case. Contrary to your erroneous allegations, the incontrovertible documentary evidence categorically shows that it was through Chief Tumolo’s conscientious and diligent efforts that the DNA results were obtained – the same
DNA results that ultimately exonerated Jeffrey Deskovic.
Rather than acknowledging the facts, you prefer to publicly persecute Chief Tumolo. You have prejudged and attempted to disparage a law enforcement official who has served his community with distinction for decades. Chief Tumolo has always been held in high esteem and boasts an impeccable record, earning many commendations for his unswerving commitment to public safety. In his forty years of public service, he does not have a single blemish on his record.
Instead of incorrectly blaming him for the arrest and false prosecution of Jeffrey Deskovic, you should be commending him for what he in fact did. Eugene Tumolo’s determined efforts in obtaining the DNA evidence
tests was by far the single most important reason Jeffrey Deskovic was exonerated. Had it not been for Eugene Tumolo’s perseverance, Jeffrey Deskovic would still be in jail today.
In his quest to find young Angela Correa’s killer and his desire to search for the truth, Eugene Tumolo went through great lengths to obtain the DNA results. In 1989, DNA testing was not as readily available as it is
today. It was relatively difficult and expensive to obtain. The last eighteen years have seen gigantic strides in the science of DNA, specifically the ease with which it is obtained, tested and kept on file (CODIS database).
Despite those difficulties, then detective lieutenant Eugene Tumolo made every effort to preserve the DNA evidence and obtain its results. He wanted to be sure that no stone was left unturned in attempting to bring Angela’s killer to justice. The Westchester County Department of Laboratories and Research was contacted, however, it performed only serology tests and not DNA tests. The Westchester County lab then suggested
the Analytical Genetic Test Center in Denver, Colorado. The DNA samples were sent to the Colorado lab but, unfortunately, the tests from the Colorado lab were inconclusive for racial/ethnic background.
The frustrating experiences with both the Westchester and the Colorado labs serve as proof of the difficulties in obtaining DNA results at the time. Nonetheless, Eugene Tumolo remained undeterred and appealed to the FBI laboratory in Washington D.C. Despite the countless requests received nationally by the FBI laboratory, many of which had to go unfulfilled due to the lab’s relative limitations, Eugene Tumolo successfully advocated and convinced the FBI lab to take on Angela Correa’s case. Having convinced the FBI, he felt a sense of accomplishment knowing that the results would be instrumental in either “incriminating or exonerating” Jeffrey Deskovic.
Merely one month after Deskovic’s arrest, the results of the FBI tests became available. The results excluded Jeffrey Deskovic. Eugene Tumolo followed the proper protocol and immediately presented the DNA results
to the chief law enforcement agency in the County, The District Attorney’s Office. He expressed his concerns that the DNA evidence found on the victim did not match Jeffrey Deskovic’s DNA. To suggest as you did that
Eugene Tumolo should have disclosed to the media and others the DNA evidence obtained during a homicide investigation, as well as his concerns and thoughts, ignores the fact that he did follow protocol. Besides, during
the trial such information was revealed to the public, including everyone you suggested Eugene Tumolo should have approached.
The decision of whether or not to prosecute the case and Jeffrey Deskovic did not rest with then detective lieutenant Eugene Tumolo. It did not even rest with the City of Peekskill Police Department, but rather the District Attorney’s Office.
As the chief law enforcement agency in the County, the District Attorney’s Office has a great responsibility in overseeing criminal cases. It has sole discretion in deciding whether or not there is enough legally sufficient and reliable evidence to prosecute. The decision of going forward with a homicide prosecution belongs to the District Attorney’s Office, not the local police department. In the Jeffrey Deskovic case, it was no different.
Sadly, in the face of compelling and exonerating evidence, the District Attorney’s Office forged ahead with the prosecution and Jeffrey Deskovic was wrongfully convicted. The conviction was based in large part on the false and baseless theories put forth by the prosecution, such as that the DNA belonged to Angela Correa’s boyfriend as a result of consensual sex.
Years later, Jeffrey Deskovic reportedly pled with the District Attorney’s Office to have his case reviewed, but his pleas went unheeded. There was no downside in reviewing the case. Any first year law student would have had the common sense to allow the crime scene DNA to be run against the growing CODIS DNA database for a possible match, but inexplicably, it was not done. Had it been done, Jeffrey Deskovic would have had a second chance to be freed by the District Attorney’s Office sooner. The DNA of Steven Cunningham,
the real killer, entered the CODIS database upon his conviction for a second murder a few years later. The DNA samples from the crime scene would have matched Cunningham’s, conclusively inculpating him and exonerating Deskovic.
There are many questions that remain to be answered by those who controlled Jeffrey Deskovic’s fate. However, the all important question as to who was responsible for obtaining the DNA results that ultimately resulted in Deskovic’s freedom, has been answered --- it was none other than detective lieutenant Eugene Tumolo. Notwithstanding that fact, you continue to persecute him.
Ironically, your persecution defies some of the very principles that Jeffrey Deskovic has so eloquently advocated. It fails to provide Chief Tumolo with the principles of justice, fairness, and balanced reporting that he deserves. Instead, it passes judgment on Chief Tumolo without ever mentioning his role in obtaining the DNA results that ultimately resulted in Jeffrey Deskovic’s exoneration and release from prison. You have ignored his commendable efforts, ironically in the same way that the District Attorney’s Office ignored the exculpatory DNA evidence and, much like Deskovic’s prosecutors, continue to press your persecution. Your readers deserve to know more than just opinion – they deserve to know the facts.
Facts will triumph. As the public becomes increasingly aware of Chief Tumolo’s role in successfully obtaining the DNA results, he will not only prevail in the realm of public opinion, but he will most certainly prevail in a court of law.
When the details of the Jeffrey Deskovic case unravel, the one incontrovertible fact involving Eugene Tumolo will be that, but for then detective lieutenant Tumolo and his conscientious and diligent efforts in seeking the truth, an innocent man would still sadly be languishing in a state penitentiary today.
Tony Castro, Esq.
Editor’s Note: A detailed response to Mr. Castro’s letter appears in The Advocate, p5.
Long-Time Mount Vernon Democratic District Leader Calls For Conn-Halevi Resignation
Dear Editor:
Serapher Conn-Halevi should resign as Mount Vernon Democratic Party Chairwoman. After her devastating defeat in the September 18th Democratic Primary elections, Ms. Conn-Halevi should resign. It is not only because she lost both Democratic Primaries but because she displayed a serious lack of leadership after the Primary by failing to embrace and welcome the victorious candidates who are now the Democratic Party standard bearers for the general election. She also went out for the Conservative and Independence
lines. How could the Chair of a major party seek two minor party lines for herself? It is unheard of. Is she a Democrat or a Conservative? How could she convince voters or future candidates to stick with the Democratic Party when she does not?
Some people say that she is being trained by David Ford. That is hard to believe. I was a long-time Democratic district leader under David Ford’s leadership in the party and one thing that I know is that when the Primary was over he would embrace the Democratic candidates and move forward. We had our battles back then but we pulled together. You might not agree with Ford about many things but his loyalty to the Democratic Party
was never divided or never a question. He would rally his district leaders behind victori-ous Democratic candidates. That’s more than I could say for Ms. Conn-Halevi. When the Chair has doubts about who she should support after a Democratic Primary, the decent thing for her to do is to resign. She made a statement in The Journal News that she would support Clinton Young, the Democratic voters’ choice, and the next evening her daughter, her sons, her husband, her best friends, were all at Ernie Davis’ rally supporting him as the Conservative candidate for Mayor in the November general election. If she can’t bring her own family and friends in line then how could she bring others together behind the candidates? Or, has she made a side deal with Ernie? That stinks. She should resign. Our Party deserves a person who believes in its principles, not a political opportunist.
And another thing, that performance by City Clerk Lisa Copeland on television at the recanvassing of the voting machines was disgraceful. She is an embarrassment to the City of Mount Vernon.
Former David Ford District Leader
Mount Vernon Democratic Party
Mount Vernon Resident Takes Davis To Task
Dear Editor:
On October 9th The Journal News reported that the U.S. Attorney’s Office empanelled a grand jury to investigate and take testimony of a Mount Vernon Urban Renewal Agency employee, Lou Albano, about possible corruption of Ernie Davis’ administration. Davis, who says, “I’m not a crook”… “I meant I’m not a cook” immediately lawyered up by hiring Ravi Batra who, along with Davis, accused the U.S. Attorney’s Office of a political witch hunt. This is typical Ernie. He takes no responsibility. He blames everyone else. He makes
excuses. He makes very bad judgments. Take a look at who he hired as his lawyer – Ravi Batra – a political operative, well known for shady tactics. Read more about Batra at http://www.lawyerfraud.com/ and search Ravi Batra, you’ll get the picture of this character. Also check out www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics to learn more about Ernie’s friend Ravi. As the saying goes, “birds of a feather flock together”, Ernie and Ravi a perfect match. Ernie’s ankle bracelet will soon be permanent. Maybe he could join Ravi on the Bombay Express and avoid the embarrassment of an indictment. Ravi knows nothing about Mount Vernon but he is acting a spokesman – what a joke.
Mount Vernon Resident for Uncorrupted Government
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
No Rhetoric Of Counsel Can Alter The Ugly Facts
Let’s begin by saying that you, Mr. Castro, deserve a big thank you from your client, Chief of Police, City of Peekskill, Eugene Tumolo, firstly, for your willingness to take on such an unpopular defense and, secondly, for giving it “the old college try” even before going to trial. However, all of the effort to characterize former Detective
Lieutenant Tumolo’s conduct, with respect to Jeffrey Deskovic at any time over the past 18 years, as having been beneficially and conscientiously intentioned, is both misguided and very wide of the truth.
More to the point, your repeated assertions, with respect to the DNA retrieved from the rape-kit swabbings of victim Angela Correa’s vagina, in nearly every one of your 15 paragraphs in Chief Tumolo’s defense, plays a bit like “Johnny One-Note”.
In point of fact, then-Detective Tumolo urgently needed some material evidence, something tangible, connecting young 16-year-old Jeffrey Deskovic to the heinous rape and murder of a 15-year-old schoolmate who he barely knew.
Truth be told, Detective Tumolo, who headed up the investigation, assisted by Detectives Levine and McIntyre, had absolutely nothing that even remotely resembled a connection between Mr. Deskovic and the scene of the crime, much less even a hint of a relationship, or a motive connecting him to poor Angela.
Perhaps, that was why, on January 25, 1990, knowing full well that Miranda Attorney Rights had already attached, Lieutenant Tumolo and his two henchmen, Levine and McIntyre, once again, without his mother’s knowledge, and clearly in violation of his Constitutional rights, literally abducted young Jeffrey. Keeping him
from school, they transported him to Brewster, New York, in Putnam County, many miles from Peekskill where, in conspiracy with Sheriff ’s Deputy Daniel Stephens, concealing the fact that he was a police officer, helped extract a false confession from a 16-year-old boy by wiring him to a polygraph machine for more than five hours,
repeatedly lying to him and intimidating and threatening him until he would say anything to stop the torture.
In fact, Jeffrey Deskovic, scared out of his mind, lay down on the floor in a fetal position, crying profusely and saying whatever his tormentors wanted to hear. As pertains specifically to your client, Mr. Castro, Eugene Tumolo, who had engineered the event, was in the next room in touch with and steering the whole operation as
Stephens and Detectives Levine and McIntyre, playing “bad cop/good cop” respectively, took turns lying to and tormenting Jeffrey until he “confessed”.
Mr. Castro, you need to know that once the youth was broken down, crying and saying whatever they wanted him to say, Eugene Tumolo burst into the room, demanding that he say it again for him, whereupon he was placed under arrest. Of course, once he realized that he had been lied to and that he wasn’t “going home”, Jeffrey
refused to write or sign any statement. Lacking any basis for an arrest, other than a false confession, tortured from a 16-year-old kid, Detective Lieutenant Tumolo had his own very selfish need to obtain a DNA confirmation. The diligence that you, Mr. Castro, speak of with regard to your client’s pursuit of DNA testing, had nothing whatsoever to do with good faith, or beneficial intentions. It was all about trying to confirm the legitimacy of an arrest that was based, to that point, solely on a torturously extracted false confession. It was not about any “desire to search for the truth” as you so wrongly state.
Motivated as he was to produce some material forensic link to the 16-yearold boy he had extracted a false confession from, in violation of his Constitutional Rights, naturally, Officer Tumolo did everything he could to obtain possible DNA support. However, once that DNA result established that the semen found in victim Angela Correa’s vagina conclusively excluded Jeffrey Deskovic, Eugene Tumolo, who had engineered that brutal false confession, had a moral, ethical, and professional obligation to derail the horrific chain of events he had selfishly and maliciously set in motion.
Your phrase, Mr. Castro, “Eugene Tumolo followed the proper protocol and immediately presented the DNA results to the Chief Law Enforcement Agency in the County, the District Attorney’s Office,” would almost be laughable had the consequences of his prior deliberate failure to “follow the proper protocol” in obtaining that false confession, not been so devastating to poor Jeffrey.
Your comment, with regard to disclosure of the DNA results to the media, was very misleading. In point of fact, The Guardian had recently observed that if Detective Tumolo actually went to Assistant District Attorney George Bolen to express his concern over the DNA mismatch, only to be rebuffed by the equally over-zealous prosecutor, and informed that the prosecution would go forward; Eugene Tumolo, if he was truly concerned for the fate of an innocent 16-year-old boy who he had placed in harm’s way, could have gone to Bolen’s boss, DA Carl Vergari. And, if that appeal, with compelling scientific evidence, failed, he could have gone to the State Attorney General. And, if that failed, he could’ve gone to the United States Attorney’s Office. And, in the unlikely event that all of them conspired to prosecute an obviously innocent boy, then he could have gone to the media. The truth is, your client, Officer Tumolo, made none of those appeals, armed as he was with “compelling scientific evidence”.
The fact is, Eugene Tumolo didn’t even need the DNA to realize that Jeffrey Deskovic was innocent. He knew that the hair follicles found on Angela Correa’s body didn’t match Jeffrey either; her killer was Steven Cunningham, a Black man. No, Eugene Tumolo was content to be rebuffed by George Bolen, an equally evil, self-servant; content to watch Jeffrey get convicted, and content to let him rot in prison for 16 years, knowing full well the kid was innocent and he, Tumolo, had set in motion, and left in motion, the cruel process that robbed the best years of Jeffrey’s life.
Worse yet, Officer Tumolo was never coaxed by conscience from his silence, not even when Angela’s killer, Steven Cunningham, struck again in his city, in a similar fashion, just three and a half years later, killing Pat Morrison. After all, it wouldn’t be in Officer Tumolo’s self-interest if it was discovered he had arrested an innocent boy for rape and murder with nothing but a false confession, and then watched that boy go to prison for Life knowing full well he was innocent, and that the real murderer was free to kill again.
Incidentally, a newspaper is not “persecuting” a public official, as you repeatedly suggest, by disclosing information from appellate documents that were sworn to, and that are part of the public record. Chief Tumolo knows very well what cruel and unlawful conduct he manifested towards Jeffrey Deskovic in concert with other selfserving individuals. And, as you say, Mr. Castro, “facts will triumph.”
In the final analysis, yes, Assistant District Attorney George Bolen was a cruel self-serving imposter for proceeding with the prosecution of Jeffrey Deskovic despite the compelling scientific evidence of his innocence, as was former District Attorney Jeanine Pirro for, no fewer than six times, fighting Jeffrey’s appeals for DNA comparison with the data bank. But, so, too, is your client, Eugene Tumolo, for having put him in their harm’s way. And, of course, all three of them, and others, have the blood of Pat Morrison on their hands.
Richard Blassberg
No Rhetoric Of Counsel Can Alter The Ugly Facts
Let’s begin by saying that you, Mr. Castro, deserve a big thank you from your client, Chief of Police, City of Peekskill, Eugene Tumolo, firstly, for your willingness to take on such an unpopular defense and, secondly, for giving it “the old college try” even before going to trial. However, all of the effort to characterize former Detective
Lieutenant Tumolo’s conduct, with respect to Jeffrey Deskovic at any time over the past 18 years, as having been beneficially and conscientiously intentioned, is both misguided and very wide of the truth.
More to the point, your repeated assertions, with respect to the DNA retrieved from the rape-kit swabbings of victim Angela Correa’s vagina, in nearly every one of your 15 paragraphs in Chief Tumolo’s defense, plays a bit like “Johnny One-Note”.
In point of fact, then-Detective Tumolo urgently needed some material evidence, something tangible, connecting young 16-year-old Jeffrey Deskovic to the heinous rape and murder of a 15-year-old schoolmate who he barely knew.
Truth be told, Detective Tumolo, who headed up the investigation, assisted by Detectives Levine and McIntyre, had absolutely nothing that even remotely resembled a connection between Mr. Deskovic and the scene of the crime, much less even a hint of a relationship, or a motive connecting him to poor Angela.
Perhaps, that was why, on January 25, 1990, knowing full well that Miranda Attorney Rights had already attached, Lieutenant Tumolo and his two henchmen, Levine and McIntyre, once again, without his mother’s knowledge, and clearly in violation of his Constitutional rights, literally abducted young Jeffrey. Keeping him
from school, they transported him to Brewster, New York, in Putnam County, many miles from Peekskill where, in conspiracy with Sheriff ’s Deputy Daniel Stephens, concealing the fact that he was a police officer, helped extract a false confession from a 16-year-old boy by wiring him to a polygraph machine for more than five hours,
repeatedly lying to him and intimidating and threatening him until he would say anything to stop the torture.
In fact, Jeffrey Deskovic, scared out of his mind, lay down on the floor in a fetal position, crying profusely and saying whatever his tormentors wanted to hear. As pertains specifically to your client, Mr. Castro, Eugene Tumolo, who had engineered the event, was in the next room in touch with and steering the whole operation as
Stephens and Detectives Levine and McIntyre, playing “bad cop/good cop” respectively, took turns lying to and tormenting Jeffrey until he “confessed”.
Mr. Castro, you need to know that once the youth was broken down, crying and saying whatever they wanted him to say, Eugene Tumolo burst into the room, demanding that he say it again for him, whereupon he was placed under arrest. Of course, once he realized that he had been lied to and that he wasn’t “going home”, Jeffrey
refused to write or sign any statement. Lacking any basis for an arrest, other than a false confession, tortured from a 16-year-old kid, Detective Lieutenant Tumolo had his own very selfish need to obtain a DNA confirmation. The diligence that you, Mr. Castro, speak of with regard to your client’s pursuit of DNA testing, had nothing whatsoever to do with good faith, or beneficial intentions. It was all about trying to confirm the legitimacy of an arrest that was based, to that point, solely on a torturously extracted false confession. It was not about any “desire to search for the truth” as you so wrongly state.
Motivated as he was to produce some material forensic link to the 16-yearold boy he had extracted a false confession from, in violation of his Constitutional Rights, naturally, Officer Tumolo did everything he could to obtain possible DNA support. However, once that DNA result established that the semen found in victim Angela Correa’s vagina conclusively excluded Jeffrey Deskovic, Eugene Tumolo, who had engineered that brutal false confession, had a moral, ethical, and professional obligation to derail the horrific chain of events he had selfishly and maliciously set in motion.
Your phrase, Mr. Castro, “Eugene Tumolo followed the proper protocol and immediately presented the DNA results to the Chief Law Enforcement Agency in the County, the District Attorney’s Office,” would almost be laughable had the consequences of his prior deliberate failure to “follow the proper protocol” in obtaining that false confession, not been so devastating to poor Jeffrey.
Your comment, with regard to disclosure of the DNA results to the media, was very misleading. In point of fact, The Guardian had recently observed that if Detective Tumolo actually went to Assistant District Attorney George Bolen to express his concern over the DNA mismatch, only to be rebuffed by the equally over-zealous prosecutor, and informed that the prosecution would go forward; Eugene Tumolo, if he was truly concerned for the fate of an innocent 16-year-old boy who he had placed in harm’s way, could have gone to Bolen’s boss, DA Carl Vergari. And, if that appeal, with compelling scientific evidence, failed, he could have gone to the State Attorney General. And, if that failed, he could’ve gone to the United States Attorney’s Office. And, in the unlikely event that all of them conspired to prosecute an obviously innocent boy, then he could have gone to the media. The truth is, your client, Officer Tumolo, made none of those appeals, armed as he was with “compelling scientific evidence”.
The fact is, Eugene Tumolo didn’t even need the DNA to realize that Jeffrey Deskovic was innocent. He knew that the hair follicles found on Angela Correa’s body didn’t match Jeffrey either; her killer was Steven Cunningham, a Black man. No, Eugene Tumolo was content to be rebuffed by George Bolen, an equally evil, self-servant; content to watch Jeffrey get convicted, and content to let him rot in prison for 16 years, knowing full well the kid was innocent and he, Tumolo, had set in motion, and left in motion, the cruel process that robbed the best years of Jeffrey’s life.
Worse yet, Officer Tumolo was never coaxed by conscience from his silence, not even when Angela’s killer, Steven Cunningham, struck again in his city, in a similar fashion, just three and a half years later, killing Pat Morrison. After all, it wouldn’t be in Officer Tumolo’s self-interest if it was discovered he had arrested an innocent boy for rape and murder with nothing but a false confession, and then watched that boy go to prison for Life knowing full well he was innocent, and that the real murderer was free to kill again.
Incidentally, a newspaper is not “persecuting” a public official, as you repeatedly suggest, by disclosing information from appellate documents that were sworn to, and that are part of the public record. Chief Tumolo knows very well what cruel and unlawful conduct he manifested towards Jeffrey Deskovic in concert with other selfserving individuals. And, as you say, Mr. Castro, “facts will triumph.”
In the final analysis, yes, Assistant District Attorney George Bolen was a cruel self-serving imposter for proceeding with the prosecution of Jeffrey Deskovic despite the compelling scientific evidence of his innocence, as was former District Attorney Jeanine Pirro for, no fewer than six times, fighting Jeffrey’s appeals for DNA comparison with the data bank. But, so, too, is your client, Eugene Tumolo, for having put him in their harm’s way. And, of course, all three of them, and others, have the blood of Pat Morrison on their hands.
FBI Probe Into Mt. Vernon Mob Trash Deals Renews Questions About County Trash Contracts, And Arm-Twisting of Legislators By Larry Schwartz
By Richard Blassberg
Last Thursday’s raid on Mount Vernon City Hall by some half dozen FBI agents, armed with a search warrant
for trash-hauling contracts and related documents, in the Department of Public Works and the Department
of Finance, netted eight large boxes of vouchers, canceled checks, contracts and other correspondence.
Following the raid some in White Plains, and throughout the County, were wondering if it was only a matter of time before the probe is widened, given lingering questions regarding the County’s dealings with certain carters over the past few years.
Questions continue regarding the trash-hauling contract between Westchester County and City Carting of Danbury, Connecticut. Approximately two years ago the County permitted a ve-year, $70 million contract with an existing hauler, that could have been renewed at the same cost, to run out, despite Environmental Facilities
Commissioner Anthony M. Landi’s admission that the hauler had been doing a good job and there really wasn’t any reason to discontinue his services. When asked at a meeting of the Solid Waste Committee of the County Legislature, chaired by Tom Abinanti, why it was that the County Executive’s Office would fail to renew the contract with the existing hauler at the same cost, for five more years; especially given the collusive and choreographed nature of competitive bidding with that industry, Commissioner Landi responded, “We wanted to test the waters.”
That response seemed both glib and ill-advised to this reporter, given the fact that County taxpayers would now be paying $87 million, a figure that has since substantially increased, for what they could continue to have had for $70 million. Additionally, concerns were raised at the time that the company the County was now entering into contract with, City Carting, was one that New York City had placed on its “Do Not Do Business With” list, because of the owner’s reported prior association with Tommy Milo and James Galante.
As my unexpected line of questioning continued, Larry Schwartz, who had been summoned from the ninth floor, suddenly appeared in the corridor at the door to the Legislature’s Committee Room and, one by one, pointed to legislators engaged in the meeting, motioning them into the hall and lobbying (to use a polite term) each and every one of them to support the deal with City Carting.
By Richard Blassberg
Last Thursday’s raid on Mount Vernon City Hall by some half dozen FBI agents, armed with a search warrant
for trash-hauling contracts and related documents, in the Department of Public Works and the Department
of Finance, netted eight large boxes of vouchers, canceled checks, contracts and other correspondence.
Following the raid some in White Plains, and throughout the County, were wondering if it was only a matter of time before the probe is widened, given lingering questions regarding the County’s dealings with certain carters over the past few years.
Questions continue regarding the trash-hauling contract between Westchester County and City Carting of Danbury, Connecticut. Approximately two years ago the County permitted a ve-year, $70 million contract with an existing hauler, that could have been renewed at the same cost, to run out, despite Environmental Facilities
Commissioner Anthony M. Landi’s admission that the hauler had been doing a good job and there really wasn’t any reason to discontinue his services. When asked at a meeting of the Solid Waste Committee of the County Legislature, chaired by Tom Abinanti, why it was that the County Executive’s Office would fail to renew the contract with the existing hauler at the same cost, for five more years; especially given the collusive and choreographed nature of competitive bidding with that industry, Commissioner Landi responded, “We wanted to test the waters.”
That response seemed both glib and ill-advised to this reporter, given the fact that County taxpayers would now be paying $87 million, a figure that has since substantially increased, for what they could continue to have had for $70 million. Additionally, concerns were raised at the time that the company the County was now entering into contract with, City Carting, was one that New York City had placed on its “Do Not Do Business With” list, because of the owner’s reported prior association with Tommy Milo and James Galante.
As my unexpected line of questioning continued, Larry Schwartz, who had been summoned from the ninth floor, suddenly appeared in the corridor at the door to the Legislature’s Committee Room and, one by one, pointed to legislators engaged in the meeting, motioning them into the hall and lobbying (to use a polite term) each and every one of them to support the deal with City Carting.
The Court Report
By Richard Blassberg
Port Chester Man, 26, Charged With Kidnap and Rape, Denied Bail in Sex Offender Court
Westchester County Court, White Plains
County Court Judge Rory J. Bellantoni Presiding
Last Thursday morning, Oct. 11, Federico Ordaz-Cejia, was arraigned in Sex Offender Court before Westchester County Judge Rory Bellantoni. Accused of kidnapping, raping and robbing, at knifepoint, a
21-year-old woman who had stopped at a gas station for a pack of cigarettes, by hiding in the back of her car and forcing her at knifepoint to a secluded area where he allegedly raped and sodomized her.
The defendant, who was charged in a 12- count indictment, was represented by Legal Aid Attorney Deborah Cassidy, who, when called upon by Judge Bellantoni, told the Court, “My client enters a plea of not guilty to each and every count.”
Assistant District Attorney Fred Green, prompted by the Judge, then responded, “The People are ready for trial, Your Honor.” Judge Bellantoni then inquired, “What is his current bail status?” to which Attorney Cassidy
responded, “He was remanded without bail.”
She then further offered, “I will be looking to establish a reasonable bail, Your Honor.” At that point, the Judge turned to ADA Green, who declared, “I’m going to be asking for a remand. The facts of this case are horrific
and nightmarish.” Green then went on to describe, in detail, the circumstances under which the Defendant snuck into the back of the victim’s car and compelled her to drive to a secluded area at knifepoint.
Green told the Court, “He raped her twice at knifepoint, and put his penis inside her anus. He then ran off with her car and house keys, leaving her destitute. He then fled New York State and went to Chicago, intending
to go to Mexico.”
The Prosecutor, attempting to impress upon the Court not only the heinous nature of the crime but the strength of the case, offered, “He was tied to the scene by a number of witnesses.” Then, wishing to further impress the Court with the potential risk of flight, Green stated, “He told United States Marshals, and Chicago Police, that he wasn’t too worried about his arrest because as soon as he would get out he would go to Mexico.”
Continuing, Mr. Green declared, “Although he was identified by the victim, there is DNA from vaginal and anal swabbings, and although there is a bail application, I am making an application for a DNA Exemplar, given
that he has been indicted.”
At this point, Judge Bellantoni directed the Prosecutor, “File that Motion today and serve it on the Court and Counsel.”
Defense Attorney Cassidy then broke in, “I acknowledge that we were contacted, but he is not going to consent to the DNA sample today.”
Upon those words, Mr. Green asked, “Back to the bail, Judge?” to which Bellantoni answered in the affirmative.
Attempting to give further support to the People’s request for a remand, Mr. Green stated, “He had a prior case and he was ordered to return to Court, but failed to. I doubt that he can live with his family. I doubt that they want him to live with them. He is homeless and he has no connection to Westchester. Furthermore, he could be facing upwards of 25-50 years. He only came back to New York because three Police Agencies combined to
bring him back.”
Once again, Defense Attorney Cassidy offered, “We are asking for reasonable bail. He has a minor prior record.”
Judge Bellantoni, having weighed Defense and Prosecution statements, then announced, “The Defendant is entitled to bail status. Remand is a bail status. The Court agrees with the People that he should be remanded.”
By Richard Blassberg
Port Chester Man, 26, Charged With Kidnap and Rape, Denied Bail in Sex Offender Court
Westchester County Court, White Plains
County Court Judge Rory J. Bellantoni Presiding
Last Thursday morning, Oct. 11, Federico Ordaz-Cejia, was arraigned in Sex Offender Court before Westchester County Judge Rory Bellantoni. Accused of kidnapping, raping and robbing, at knifepoint, a
21-year-old woman who had stopped at a gas station for a pack of cigarettes, by hiding in the back of her car and forcing her at knifepoint to a secluded area where he allegedly raped and sodomized her.
The defendant, who was charged in a 12- count indictment, was represented by Legal Aid Attorney Deborah Cassidy, who, when called upon by Judge Bellantoni, told the Court, “My client enters a plea of not guilty to each and every count.”
Assistant District Attorney Fred Green, prompted by the Judge, then responded, “The People are ready for trial, Your Honor.” Judge Bellantoni then inquired, “What is his current bail status?” to which Attorney Cassidy
responded, “He was remanded without bail.”
She then further offered, “I will be looking to establish a reasonable bail, Your Honor.” At that point, the Judge turned to ADA Green, who declared, “I’m going to be asking for a remand. The facts of this case are horrific
and nightmarish.” Green then went on to describe, in detail, the circumstances under which the Defendant snuck into the back of the victim’s car and compelled her to drive to a secluded area at knifepoint.
Green told the Court, “He raped her twice at knifepoint, and put his penis inside her anus. He then ran off with her car and house keys, leaving her destitute. He then fled New York State and went to Chicago, intending
to go to Mexico.”
The Prosecutor, attempting to impress upon the Court not only the heinous nature of the crime but the strength of the case, offered, “He was tied to the scene by a number of witnesses.” Then, wishing to further impress the Court with the potential risk of flight, Green stated, “He told United States Marshals, and Chicago Police, that he wasn’t too worried about his arrest because as soon as he would get out he would go to Mexico.”
Continuing, Mr. Green declared, “Although he was identified by the victim, there is DNA from vaginal and anal swabbings, and although there is a bail application, I am making an application for a DNA Exemplar, given
that he has been indicted.”
At this point, Judge Bellantoni directed the Prosecutor, “File that Motion today and serve it on the Court and Counsel.”
Defense Attorney Cassidy then broke in, “I acknowledge that we were contacted, but he is not going to consent to the DNA sample today.”
Upon those words, Mr. Green asked, “Back to the bail, Judge?” to which Bellantoni answered in the affirmative.
Attempting to give further support to the People’s request for a remand, Mr. Green stated, “He had a prior case and he was ordered to return to Court, but failed to. I doubt that he can live with his family. I doubt that they want him to live with them. He is homeless and he has no connection to Westchester. Furthermore, he could be facing upwards of 25-50 years. He only came back to New York because three Police Agencies combined to
bring him back.”
Once again, Defense Attorney Cassidy offered, “We are asking for reasonable bail. He has a minor prior record.”
Judge Bellantoni, having weighed Defense and Prosecution statements, then announced, “The Defendant is entitled to bail status. Remand is a bail status. The Court agrees with the People that he should be remanded.”
The Reid Technique: Strong Risk of False Confessions And Wrongful Convictions
By Jeffrey Deskovic
The American Psychological Association, together with the University of Ohio, recently sponsored a conference in El Paso, Texas, on False Confessions, featuring a virtual Who’s Who in the field. It was a diverse crowd including false confession experts, clinicians and researchers, defense attorneys, police officers, The Texas
Innocence Project, The Justice Project, and a representative from a local Texas District Attorney’s office. I was invited as the Keynote Speaker.
Allison Redlich gave a presentation on the relationship between false confessions, false guilty pleas, and the mentally ill. She also discussed some of the reasons that the entally ill plead guilty to crimes that they are innocent of involving the fact that their stay in jail tended to be longer than that of other people since few cared enough about them to bail them out. And wanting to get out of jail, some figure that they have served most of the time already anyway.
Still others reason that their public defender is inept and that they would likely be convicted anyway, given the reality of the current state of many public defender offices, including the built-in handicap of often being assigned too many cases at the same time, and the extreme budgetary differences between public defender offices and
prosecutors. And, given that eight out of ten people who confess are found guilty, I would say that that is a pretty accurate perception.
Redlich also mentioned that states in which there is a “three strikes and you’re out” law, some of the mentally ill plead guilty to crimes they are innocent of in order to protect a friend. In those cases, a conviction would result in their friend being convicted of their third strike, and therefore going away for life, whereas they would only get a few years.
Solomon Fulero is a False Confession Expert, who spoke of the process of getting False Confession Expert testimony admitted into the court. He mentioned that in order to get the testimony into court, it must pass the Daubert and Frye Tests, legal cases establishing the standards through which new scientific methods must pass before being allowed into the courtroom and put before a jury. Two of the more important standards involved
are whether or not there is a consensus within the scientific community regarding the science and methodology, and whether the research involved has been peer-reviewed.
Fulero mentioned that in those states in which False Confession Expert testimony had not been allowed into the
courtroom, it was because inept lawyers had not asked sufficient questions of the expert, thus failing to lay a proper foundation.
He stated that another problem occurred when defense attorneys did not have enough money to hire an expert and would, out of desperation, hire smalltown psychologists who did not fully understand the science. As an example, he detailed a case in which the psychologist told the court that the literature was not peer-reviewed. Fulero encouraged the lawyers at the conference not to use as experts those who are not truly knowledgeable,
because to do so only makes it more difficult for expert testimony to get admitted in other cases.
He stated that False Confession Experts are allowed to testify as to the characteristics of false confessions, and then whether those characteristics are present in the confession at issue. But they are not allowed to go beyond
that. They may not give a direct opinion as to whether they considered a particular confession false or not.
He went on to illustrate some cheap tricks that prosecutors have used during cross examination. One tactic that he mentioned was that prosecutors often ask whether the expert is being paid for his testimony, as if an expert is not paid for their services. For answering that question Fulero said, “No, I am being paid for my time, the same as you are.” Another tactic exposed involves when prosecutors ask how often the expert has testified for the
prosecution; an attempt to show that they are biased. That question is inappropriate because prosecutors know very well that they are not allowed to call a false confession expert as a witness because it would constitute evidence-bolstering. Fulero suggested the right answer to that question is, “As often as I am asked.”
I delivered two presentations in El Paso. The first one was an ‘at-large’ presentation, meaning that it was open to students at the school as well as to anybody in the community who wished to attend, without charge. There were about 50 people in the auditorium for my first presentation. I told my story of being arrested and the circumstances involved, as well as the judicial history of my case, and my prison experience. I then went on to discuss various reforms that I have been advocating for. I mentioned, amongst those reforms, the need to upgrade the quality of defense the poor receive by leveling the playing field economically, and talent-wise, between prosecutors’ offices and public defenders. I also advocated limiting the number of cases that a public defender must handle simultaneously.
I mentioned ending the tactics which lead to false confessions, such as lying by police, claiming to have evidence that they do not have, the use of the polygraph and lengthly questioning for hours on end, as well as false promises and threats. I emphasized the need for videotaping all police interrogations. I then spoke of overhauling
all the identification procedures, creating a standardized evidence preservation system, and also of how there
needs to be criminal penalties for police and prosecutors who deliberately withhold evidence from the defense.
Then, right there, in Texas, which is an “execution machine”, I launched into an impassioned plea against the death penalty, mentioning how its existence will result in the continued execution of innocent people; how it is a waste of resources, explaining that, in New York, we spent over $200 million over a nine-year period while executing nobody.
I explained how it prevents victims’ family members from healing and coming to closure by constantly reminding them with the attendant publicity that appeals generate.
I referred to how, just two months earlier, the Governor of Alabama, Bob Riley, had gone ahead and executed Darryl Grayson while not allowing him to have a DNA test performed in his case, even though there was semen available to test, in addition to a witness’s affidavit that Grayson was in their company, passed out from alcohol at the time of the incident.
I then informed the audience that the Governor was planning to do the same thing to Thomas Arthur, who was scheduled to be executed the next day, Sept. 27, without having allowed him access to a DNA test. I made
brief mention of the facts of the case, including that the victim’s wife had told police that a stranger broke into her house, raped her, and then killed her husband.
I further explained that the police did not believe her, and arrested her. And, after she was found guilty, they offered her reduced time in prison in exchange for implicating Mr. Arthur. I further detailed that there was a rape kit with DNA in it, hairs found in the victim’s wife’s car, and blood-soaked pants of the victim’s wife, all of which could be tested to determine whether Arthur was guilty or innocent, but that the Governor was refusing to allow
those tests. I gave them the Governor’s phone number, listed on the website and invited them to call him and tell him that they wanted him to allow the testing. I was happy to learn that a stay of execution was granted the next day for 45 days, but it was only on the issue of the method of execution, so that the state might change its execution protocol. I encourage people to call the Governor, at 334-242-7100, and demand DNA Testing for Thomas Arthur.
The next day marked the official beginning of the conference. I made a point of attending the lectures of the other presenters, allowing time before lunch to prepare myself for delivery of the keynote speech. Because the subject of this event was False Confessions, and given that the organizers wanted there to be plenty of time for questions, I had to tailor my presentation accordingly. I spoke about the circumstances of my arrest, trial, post-conviction
struggle, and included a bit about my prison experience. I lightly touched upon a few needed reforms, then segued into the causes of false confessions, based upon my experience. I referenced the tactics which
resulted in false confessions that other presenters had noted, and indicated how those tactics contributed to my false confession.
The Reid Technique
The Reid Technique is an interrogation methodology which is utilized by law enforcement agents across America.
Nationwide, false confessions have been the cause of wrongful convictions in 25% of the 208 DNA-based exonerations to date. The technique I am about to describe is the methodology that is employed by the law enforcement of-ficers in the process of obtaining those false confessions. In his presentation, Joseph P. Buckley, author of Essentials of the Reid Technique: Criminal Interrogation and Confessions revealed that he holds over 600 contracts to teach this technique to law enforcement agencies all over the country. He claimed that his
system does not lead to false confessions.
I will outline the process, and let readers decide for themselves whether or not the method is coercive and likely to lead to false confessions.
As I mention the techniques in his presentation, readers may recall the circumstances of my false confession, and
come to their own conclusions with regard to those who were involved with the planning, coordination, and oversight of what happened to me. I would like to point out, that according to his own testimony, which is in my trial transcripts, as well as in the Appellate Division Brief, Chief Eugene Tumolo knew that the terms of employment of polygrapher Daniel Stephens was to execute a procedure known as “gtc”- an acronym
for “get the confession”.
He, Tumolo, drove to the interrogation site in Brewster, which proves that he knew that I, a 16-year-old youth of Peekskill, was being driven to the Village of Brewster. Trial testimony stated that there were listening devices in the interrogation room and in the next room, where he, Tumolo, Detectives Levine and McIntyre, listened to what was happening to me next door. Stephens testified that at times he left the room to consult with Tumolo
and the other officers. Further, he testified that at the end, after the false confession had been obtained, he, Tumolo, entered the room and proceeded to interrogate me even further.
Of course, the presence of Joseph Buckley at a conference on False Confessions seemed a bit strange to me. However, as one of the pioneers of the method known as the Reid Technique, along with Reid and Imbau, his input was valuable. My review of the technique is based upon information that he presented, as well as material written by Saul Kassin, entitled, A Critical Appraisal Of The Reid Technique.
The technique is employed by a majority of law enforcement agencies in their interrogation procedures. The conversation between suspect and police is divided into two parts: Interview, and Interrogation.
The colloquy begins as an interview, characterized by open-ended questions, in which there is an even-keeled discussion between the police and the one they are questioning. It is only when the police have a hunch that the suspect is lying that it switches to interrogation.
The determination as to whether a suspect is lying is based upon a checklist of fifteen characteristics, out of which, if the police check off any four of them, it is taken to infer guilt, and the mode then switches to interrogation.
The problem, however, as prominent False Confession Expert Saul Kassin points out, is that “nervousness, fear,
confusion, hostility, story changes or contradictions, are all signs that a man in an interrogation room is lying, particularly in the eyes of someone as naturally suspicious as a detective. Unfortunately, these are also signs of a human being in a state of high stress.” Kassin points out that the training that Buckley gives out, despite its
claim to place police in a position to attain high levels of accuracy, has been shown to place police in no better a position to detect truth from lies than chance. Once that determination has been made within the mind of the interrogator, however, the communication switches to interrogation mode, which he described as “a monologue,
of 80/20, wherein the police talk 80% of the time and the suspect 20%, and innocence is taken off of the table.”
Any protestations of innocence are not accepted and are, instead, swept past and ignored with a renewed sense of energy and vigor, as the interrogation continues.
There are three processes involved:
Isolation for some period of time, which increases stress and the incentive to relieve that stress; Confrontation, in which the interrogator accuses the suspect of the crime, expresses certainty in that opinion, and blocks all denials, sometimes citing real or manufactured evidence to support the charge; and Minimization in which the sympathetic interrogator morally justi-fies the crime in the form of an alternative version of events, such as that it was spontaneous, accidental, provoked, or the result of peer pressure.
Studies by False Confession expert Dr. Gudjohnson have shown that in the interrogation room some people are more vulnerable than others, particularly if they are characteristically prone to exhibit social compliance or interrogative suggestibility.
Youth, naiveté, a lack of intelligence, cultural upbringing, and social anxiety as well as various psychological
disorders, present unique vulnerabilities to watch for. There are problems within each component.
Problems with isolation
I would like to again quote False Confession expert Kassin, who indicates, “Prolonged isolation is likely to be accompanied by fatigue, feelings of helplessness, and deprivation of sleep, food and other biological needs; mental states that impair complex decision-making.” Yet, there are no limits taught within the Reid Technique
as to the length of isolation which would acknowledge these realities. Problems with Confrontation (and
“Taking Innocence Off Of The Table”) It is one thing to confront someone with the truth, but it is quite another to
confront suspects with non-existent evidence.
The presentation of false evidence is implicated in the vast majority of false confessions. The problem is that the idea is conveyed to a innocent suspect that “no matter what, you are going to be arrested for this; it is just a matter of whether you are going to make it worse on yourself by lying, maintaining your innocence.” Additionally,
Kassin references studies that he and other researchers have done which show that innocent people sometimes internalize guilt for outcomes they did not produce.
Problems With Minimization
The problem with minimization is that when a suspect is worn down and frightened, in desperation they look for
an out. And, when it is suggested that a criminal act is understandable, that implies that there will be no consequences for making an admission, and so confessing falsely is seen as a way out of the situation. Then, once the false admission is made with the belief that that is how it will be understood, what follows is something
altogether different.
Whereas an understandable reaction/act is not a crime and would therefore not be prosecuted or punished,
the person now finds him or herself arrested and charged with a crime by a prosecutor who is not presenting events as understandable.
Instead, even as a police officer testifies as to an “admission” to something understandable, a prosecutor uses that as proof that a “cold-hearted crime” has been committed and therefore the defendant should be sent to prison, often for a life sentence.Yet this incongruence is allowed to stand.
Conclusion
Buckley claimed that his Technique, when done properly, does not result in false confessions, despite many cases
which show that is exactly what is produced. As I see it, his Technique amounts to nothing more than psychological coercion, which, in addition to being a violation of the Fifth Amendment, has a penchant for resulting in false confessions.
Many of the experts present at the conference severely attacked his statements both during the questioning phase
of his presentation, and during their own presentations, frequently offering scientific studies and arguments against
him. By the time everybody was done, his methods had been professionally and thoroughly discredited.
In a paragraph that captures the technique in a nutshell, Kassin states “the Technique is to remove suspects from
familiar surroundings and place them in a small, barely furnished room housed within the police station. Against this physical backdrop, a nine-step process begins with positive confrontation and the development of alternative themes, and ends with a full written or oral confession.
Conceptually this approach is designed to get suspects to incriminate themselves by increasing the anxiety associated with denial, plunging them into a state of despair and minimizing the perceived consequences
of confession.”
Is there anybody out there, who does not believe that the methods described above are coercive, and lead to false confessions?
By Jeffrey Deskovic
The American Psychological Association, together with the University of Ohio, recently sponsored a conference in El Paso, Texas, on False Confessions, featuring a virtual Who’s Who in the field. It was a diverse crowd including false confession experts, clinicians and researchers, defense attorneys, police officers, The Texas
Innocence Project, The Justice Project, and a representative from a local Texas District Attorney’s office. I was invited as the Keynote Speaker.
Allison Redlich gave a presentation on the relationship between false confessions, false guilty pleas, and the mentally ill. She also discussed some of the reasons that the entally ill plead guilty to crimes that they are innocent of involving the fact that their stay in jail tended to be longer than that of other people since few cared enough about them to bail them out. And wanting to get out of jail, some figure that they have served most of the time already anyway.
Still others reason that their public defender is inept and that they would likely be convicted anyway, given the reality of the current state of many public defender offices, including the built-in handicap of often being assigned too many cases at the same time, and the extreme budgetary differences between public defender offices and
prosecutors. And, given that eight out of ten people who confess are found guilty, I would say that that is a pretty accurate perception.
Redlich also mentioned that states in which there is a “three strikes and you’re out” law, some of the mentally ill plead guilty to crimes they are innocent of in order to protect a friend. In those cases, a conviction would result in their friend being convicted of their third strike, and therefore going away for life, whereas they would only get a few years.
Solomon Fulero is a False Confession Expert, who spoke of the process of getting False Confession Expert testimony admitted into the court. He mentioned that in order to get the testimony into court, it must pass the Daubert and Frye Tests, legal cases establishing the standards through which new scientific methods must pass before being allowed into the courtroom and put before a jury. Two of the more important standards involved
are whether or not there is a consensus within the scientific community regarding the science and methodology, and whether the research involved has been peer-reviewed.
Fulero mentioned that in those states in which False Confession Expert testimony had not been allowed into the
courtroom, it was because inept lawyers had not asked sufficient questions of the expert, thus failing to lay a proper foundation.
He stated that another problem occurred when defense attorneys did not have enough money to hire an expert and would, out of desperation, hire smalltown psychologists who did not fully understand the science. As an example, he detailed a case in which the psychologist told the court that the literature was not peer-reviewed. Fulero encouraged the lawyers at the conference not to use as experts those who are not truly knowledgeable,
because to do so only makes it more difficult for expert testimony to get admitted in other cases.
He stated that False Confession Experts are allowed to testify as to the characteristics of false confessions, and then whether those characteristics are present in the confession at issue. But they are not allowed to go beyond
that. They may not give a direct opinion as to whether they considered a particular confession false or not.
He went on to illustrate some cheap tricks that prosecutors have used during cross examination. One tactic that he mentioned was that prosecutors often ask whether the expert is being paid for his testimony, as if an expert is not paid for their services. For answering that question Fulero said, “No, I am being paid for my time, the same as you are.” Another tactic exposed involves when prosecutors ask how often the expert has testified for the
prosecution; an attempt to show that they are biased. That question is inappropriate because prosecutors know very well that they are not allowed to call a false confession expert as a witness because it would constitute evidence-bolstering. Fulero suggested the right answer to that question is, “As often as I am asked.”
I delivered two presentations in El Paso. The first one was an ‘at-large’ presentation, meaning that it was open to students at the school as well as to anybody in the community who wished to attend, without charge. There were about 50 people in the auditorium for my first presentation. I told my story of being arrested and the circumstances involved, as well as the judicial history of my case, and my prison experience. I then went on to discuss various reforms that I have been advocating for. I mentioned, amongst those reforms, the need to upgrade the quality of defense the poor receive by leveling the playing field economically, and talent-wise, between prosecutors’ offices and public defenders. I also advocated limiting the number of cases that a public defender must handle simultaneously.
I mentioned ending the tactics which lead to false confessions, such as lying by police, claiming to have evidence that they do not have, the use of the polygraph and lengthly questioning for hours on end, as well as false promises and threats. I emphasized the need for videotaping all police interrogations. I then spoke of overhauling
all the identification procedures, creating a standardized evidence preservation system, and also of how there
needs to be criminal penalties for police and prosecutors who deliberately withhold evidence from the defense.
Then, right there, in Texas, which is an “execution machine”, I launched into an impassioned plea against the death penalty, mentioning how its existence will result in the continued execution of innocent people; how it is a waste of resources, explaining that, in New York, we spent over $200 million over a nine-year period while executing nobody.
I explained how it prevents victims’ family members from healing and coming to closure by constantly reminding them with the attendant publicity that appeals generate.
I referred to how, just two months earlier, the Governor of Alabama, Bob Riley, had gone ahead and executed Darryl Grayson while not allowing him to have a DNA test performed in his case, even though there was semen available to test, in addition to a witness’s affidavit that Grayson was in their company, passed out from alcohol at the time of the incident.
I then informed the audience that the Governor was planning to do the same thing to Thomas Arthur, who was scheduled to be executed the next day, Sept. 27, without having allowed him access to a DNA test. I made
brief mention of the facts of the case, including that the victim’s wife had told police that a stranger broke into her house, raped her, and then killed her husband.
I further explained that the police did not believe her, and arrested her. And, after she was found guilty, they offered her reduced time in prison in exchange for implicating Mr. Arthur. I further detailed that there was a rape kit with DNA in it, hairs found in the victim’s wife’s car, and blood-soaked pants of the victim’s wife, all of which could be tested to determine whether Arthur was guilty or innocent, but that the Governor was refusing to allow
those tests. I gave them the Governor’s phone number, listed on the website and invited them to call him and tell him that they wanted him to allow the testing. I was happy to learn that a stay of execution was granted the next day for 45 days, but it was only on the issue of the method of execution, so that the state might change its execution protocol. I encourage people to call the Governor, at 334-242-7100, and demand DNA Testing for Thomas Arthur.
The next day marked the official beginning of the conference. I made a point of attending the lectures of the other presenters, allowing time before lunch to prepare myself for delivery of the keynote speech. Because the subject of this event was False Confessions, and given that the organizers wanted there to be plenty of time for questions, I had to tailor my presentation accordingly. I spoke about the circumstances of my arrest, trial, post-conviction
struggle, and included a bit about my prison experience. I lightly touched upon a few needed reforms, then segued into the causes of false confessions, based upon my experience. I referenced the tactics which
resulted in false confessions that other presenters had noted, and indicated how those tactics contributed to my false confession.
The Reid Technique
The Reid Technique is an interrogation methodology which is utilized by law enforcement agents across America.
Nationwide, false confessions have been the cause of wrongful convictions in 25% of the 208 DNA-based exonerations to date. The technique I am about to describe is the methodology that is employed by the law enforcement of-ficers in the process of obtaining those false confessions. In his presentation, Joseph P. Buckley, author of Essentials of the Reid Technique: Criminal Interrogation and Confessions revealed that he holds over 600 contracts to teach this technique to law enforcement agencies all over the country. He claimed that his
system does not lead to false confessions.
I will outline the process, and let readers decide for themselves whether or not the method is coercive and likely to lead to false confessions.
As I mention the techniques in his presentation, readers may recall the circumstances of my false confession, and
come to their own conclusions with regard to those who were involved with the planning, coordination, and oversight of what happened to me. I would like to point out, that according to his own testimony, which is in my trial transcripts, as well as in the Appellate Division Brief, Chief Eugene Tumolo knew that the terms of employment of polygrapher Daniel Stephens was to execute a procedure known as “gtc”- an acronym
for “get the confession”.
He, Tumolo, drove to the interrogation site in Brewster, which proves that he knew that I, a 16-year-old youth of Peekskill, was being driven to the Village of Brewster. Trial testimony stated that there were listening devices in the interrogation room and in the next room, where he, Tumolo, Detectives Levine and McIntyre, listened to what was happening to me next door. Stephens testified that at times he left the room to consult with Tumolo
and the other officers. Further, he testified that at the end, after the false confession had been obtained, he, Tumolo, entered the room and proceeded to interrogate me even further.
Of course, the presence of Joseph Buckley at a conference on False Confessions seemed a bit strange to me. However, as one of the pioneers of the method known as the Reid Technique, along with Reid and Imbau, his input was valuable. My review of the technique is based upon information that he presented, as well as material written by Saul Kassin, entitled, A Critical Appraisal Of The Reid Technique.
The technique is employed by a majority of law enforcement agencies in their interrogation procedures. The conversation between suspect and police is divided into two parts: Interview, and Interrogation.
The colloquy begins as an interview, characterized by open-ended questions, in which there is an even-keeled discussion between the police and the one they are questioning. It is only when the police have a hunch that the suspect is lying that it switches to interrogation.
The determination as to whether a suspect is lying is based upon a checklist of fifteen characteristics, out of which, if the police check off any four of them, it is taken to infer guilt, and the mode then switches to interrogation.
The problem, however, as prominent False Confession Expert Saul Kassin points out, is that “nervousness, fear,
confusion, hostility, story changes or contradictions, are all signs that a man in an interrogation room is lying, particularly in the eyes of someone as naturally suspicious as a detective. Unfortunately, these are also signs of a human being in a state of high stress.” Kassin points out that the training that Buckley gives out, despite its
claim to place police in a position to attain high levels of accuracy, has been shown to place police in no better a position to detect truth from lies than chance. Once that determination has been made within the mind of the interrogator, however, the communication switches to interrogation mode, which he described as “a monologue,
of 80/20, wherein the police talk 80% of the time and the suspect 20%, and innocence is taken off of the table.”
Any protestations of innocence are not accepted and are, instead, swept past and ignored with a renewed sense of energy and vigor, as the interrogation continues.
There are three processes involved:
Isolation for some period of time, which increases stress and the incentive to relieve that stress; Confrontation, in which the interrogator accuses the suspect of the crime, expresses certainty in that opinion, and blocks all denials, sometimes citing real or manufactured evidence to support the charge; and Minimization in which the sympathetic interrogator morally justi-fies the crime in the form of an alternative version of events, such as that it was spontaneous, accidental, provoked, or the result of peer pressure.
Studies by False Confession expert Dr. Gudjohnson have shown that in the interrogation room some people are more vulnerable than others, particularly if they are characteristically prone to exhibit social compliance or interrogative suggestibility.
Youth, naiveté, a lack of intelligence, cultural upbringing, and social anxiety as well as various psychological
disorders, present unique vulnerabilities to watch for. There are problems within each component.
Problems with isolation
I would like to again quote False Confession expert Kassin, who indicates, “Prolonged isolation is likely to be accompanied by fatigue, feelings of helplessness, and deprivation of sleep, food and other biological needs; mental states that impair complex decision-making.” Yet, there are no limits taught within the Reid Technique
as to the length of isolation which would acknowledge these realities. Problems with Confrontation (and
“Taking Innocence Off Of The Table”) It is one thing to confront someone with the truth, but it is quite another to
confront suspects with non-existent evidence.
The presentation of false evidence is implicated in the vast majority of false confessions. The problem is that the idea is conveyed to a innocent suspect that “no matter what, you are going to be arrested for this; it is just a matter of whether you are going to make it worse on yourself by lying, maintaining your innocence.” Additionally,
Kassin references studies that he and other researchers have done which show that innocent people sometimes internalize guilt for outcomes they did not produce.
Problems With Minimization
The problem with minimization is that when a suspect is worn down and frightened, in desperation they look for
an out. And, when it is suggested that a criminal act is understandable, that implies that there will be no consequences for making an admission, and so confessing falsely is seen as a way out of the situation. Then, once the false admission is made with the belief that that is how it will be understood, what follows is something
altogether different.
Whereas an understandable reaction/act is not a crime and would therefore not be prosecuted or punished,
the person now finds him or herself arrested and charged with a crime by a prosecutor who is not presenting events as understandable.
Instead, even as a police officer testifies as to an “admission” to something understandable, a prosecutor uses that as proof that a “cold-hearted crime” has been committed and therefore the defendant should be sent to prison, often for a life sentence.Yet this incongruence is allowed to stand.
Conclusion
Buckley claimed that his Technique, when done properly, does not result in false confessions, despite many cases
which show that is exactly what is produced. As I see it, his Technique amounts to nothing more than psychological coercion, which, in addition to being a violation of the Fifth Amendment, has a penchant for resulting in false confessions.
Many of the experts present at the conference severely attacked his statements both during the questioning phase
of his presentation, and during their own presentations, frequently offering scientific studies and arguments against
him. By the time everybody was done, his methods had been professionally and thoroughly discredited.
In a paragraph that captures the technique in a nutshell, Kassin states “the Technique is to remove suspects from
familiar surroundings and place them in a small, barely furnished room housed within the police station. Against this physical backdrop, a nine-step process begins with positive confrontation and the development of alternative themes, and ends with a full written or oral confession.
Conceptually this approach is designed to get suspects to incriminate themselves by increasing the anxiety associated with denial, plunging them into a state of despair and minimizing the perceived consequences
of confession.”
Is there anybody out there, who does not believe that the methods described above are coercive, and lead to false confessions?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
