Thursday, August 21, 2008
Catherine Wilson, Bureau Chief
Northern Westchester
Saving Tax Dollars And Improving efficiency At the County Clerk’s Office!
It can be done! Our local government agencies can protect our environment and save tax dollars while improving service to taxpayers to boot.
A shining example of how this is being accomplished can be found in the Westchester County Clerk’s Office.
The Guardian met with Westchester County Clerk Tim Idoni to discuss developments in his office.
“We are making changes in every area” Idoni told The Guardian. “We are eliminating as much paper as we can and switching to electronic online filings where possible. But because it’s such an overwhelming project, we’ve started with the Tax Certiorari cases.”
Tax Certiorari cases are commercial tax filings to challenge their property tax assessments. “We picked these cases to test first because they are seasonal, half in the Spring and half in the Fall, are only a small volume of cases - there were only 21 cases filed this Spring - and the nature of these cases.
A tax certiorari case can take four years to develop so a delay in testing a glitch in a new computer system will not jeopardize them. Plus, they do not involve individuals so any problems we encounter during testing can be fixed without damage to anyone,” said Idoni.
Idoni is developing a system to accept all tax certiorari cases as “e-filings” – filings that may be done online. “The biggest problem we are having with developing this system is not with the filers, it’s with the individual municipalities who still will not accept service of these notices via e-filings.
They still want this done in hard copy. So we have to amend each of the municipal laws for this. But efilings result in less mistakes
and we currently get quite a few cases thrown out by our office because of mistakes,” Idoni said. Once the municipality’s concerns can be addressed, Idoni hopes to switch all commercial efilings, including torts, to an e-file system.
“In total, commercial efilings represent 16,000 cases with the County Clerk” he noted. “They represent 60 percent of all paper filed with our legal division – four years documentation for a commercial property can result in a lot of paper; over 1.2 million pieces of paper each year. We’re trying to get this worked out for the Fall season,” he said.
Turning to the bigger picture, Idoni told us, “New York State needs to upgrade its systems in order to be able to handle this. We are actually ahead of the state in terms of the modern nature of our IT,” Idoni noted.
“We have to file our papers through the state’s system at this point. What we’d like are systems that talk to each other so we can move these records back and forth.” Idoni noted that the County Clerk’s office is now forced to record some documents twice – once
electronically on their system, and the second time on hard copy papers for the State.
Currently the County captures papers filed in its office on a computerized imaging system for security and easier access. But many state agencies still do not have a system that enables them to access digitally stored records, or the agency, such as the NYS Court
system, still mandates hard copies.
This reporter visited the area Appellate Court in June and witnessed the incredible amount of paper submitted in just one day alone – nine physical copies of each and every record for every case! Paper copies that are not necessary at all since the court records are all on file online in the County Clerk’s office. If the Appellate Court wants to review a copy of the record for the appeal, all the judge has to do is pull it up online – no papers are needed at all. So why are our courts so behind the time and costing local taxpayers so much money on a daily basis for paper that is completely unnecessary?
“My office has four staff members whose sole job is to transfer papers back and forth to the Courts!” Idoni stressed. “They have to man the counter, pull the papers off of the shelves, and run them over to the storage facility,” he said.
One of the significant cost savings of an e-filed system is the elimination of filing cabinets and the space needed for those files, some of which must, by law, be kept indefinitely (such as land records).
Paper files also require security systems, fire-proof and water-proof storage and frequent checks of the integrity of the files (i.e. papers are not misfiled in wrong folders). Plus, papers can be lost in a disaster – records in New Orleans were washed away in Katrina.
Keeping paper records increases the chance of loss and destruction every time those records are moved – if an employee works from home, those papers could be lost in a car crash or a kitchen fire. The Veteran’s Administration almost lost 26 million records, and sensitive personal information, when an employee’s laptop was stolen.
E-files eliminate that risk since the files are accessed from a central data base, not stored on separate computers or file cabinets and subject to an individual’s preferences.
Plus, e-files are easily backed up offsite, eliminating total loss from a disaster like 9/11 or Katrina.
E-files can be recovered immediately following a disaster. New Orleans will be missing records, affecting people’s lives, forever.
Yet despite all of these risks, the New York State Court System has yet to change the NYCRR rules to accept either e-filings or online access to scanned records on the County Clerk systems. The County Clerk has had the ability to provide the Courts with access to scanned records for almost ten years, yet our local Courts have as yet to change their rules to allow this, despite the significant cost savings and efficiency benefits that would accrue to taxpayers.
Other areas of the state have eliminated paperwork already. “We used to have 20,000 pieces of paper being transported down here each year from Albany for tax warrants on delinquent state taxes.” Idoni said. “They now e-file this information to us. Last year we did 23,000 warrants and will probably get 30,000 this year. The e-filings save a tremendous amount of manpower. We had to order over 400 folders just to file these papers alone. Those folders have now been saved – it’s a small expense, but it’s there!’ Idoni said. “We had a data entry clerk that did nothing but this.
And all those papers we used to image, scan into computer storage system, they no longer have to be imaged.” The County Clerk has not only saved money with these system improvements, but is also earning revenues for the County from their use.
“My predecessor, Nick Spano, set up a subscription service for title and property searches for the title insurance companies. We charge $1,200 a year for access to our system. But we had such a demand from individuals for online access that we now offer a 24- hour access for $20”.
A homeowner, assembling information for a local variance request, can pay to access the County Clerk’s system to obtain all the information needed. “Our system will eventually allow the user to access all information like section, lot, and block, as well as names and addresses,” he said.
Not only does this save a tremendous amount of paper for the County Clerk’s office to print this information out, but it also saves the user the cost of their time and gas to drive to the County Clerk’s office. These days, it’s cheaper to do this online! Plus, the user can access this information at any time, at their convenience, including nights and weekends, not just during office hours. Idoni said, “We’re averaging about 46 uses a week from this.
So that’s 46 fewer people coming into the County Clerk’s office and less time spent by the staff accordingly.”
The Clerk’s Office also has online images of County maps, 36,573 local maps can be accessed. Any local resident interested in new developments around the County can pull up the survey maps online, Westchester’s own version of Google Earth!
“The next area where we’re saving money is with Uniform Commercial Code filings,” Idoni said. “This is not a big area, but it represents where we’re going with our land records. UCC’s are co-op filings. Until early June these had to be filed by paper, 9,531 last year.
They generally average about three pages in length so that’s over 27,000 pieces of paper.
In the last two months, we had over 21% of the UCC’s e-filed. Now, this is not scanned documents. This is literally fill-in-the-form online. It goes into the system directly. The state allows for these to be signed electronically, signatures become a big issue when it comes to land records. Since these do not have to be signed, they can be filled in online. Zip it in; our person takes it and looks at it to check it’s the proper form, and simply records it. Nobody has to do any data entry, nobody has to do any copying, no machines getting jammed; people love it! I’m hoping by the end of the year this will be up to 50 percent and eventually everybody will do it,” Idoni said.
These improvements represent a ‘win-win’ from every approach. Individuals can access the information at any time around their schedules, not the County’s; they can save transportation and paper costs. The County saves money, and the environment keeps more trees. Idoni hopes to extend the benefits of the UCC e-filings to the rest of the Land Records Division and eventually to the Legal Division. “We have over four million pieces of paper that go through these areas every year,” Idoni said. “One hundred percent of our Land records are scanned and 100 percent of our Legal records.”
Apart from sensitive records such as Family Court cases, the scanned records can now be accessed online. “We now get fewer write-in requests for records,” Idoni noted. “We save paper, we save postage. We save staff time on research. The Office of Court Administration
may allow for some of these scanned documents to be destroyed so we do not have to keep the paperwork as well. The money being spent now on storage space for filing is outrageous.
Our hope is that certain kinds of cases will be allowed to be destroyed after a certain amount of years. That will save the County a tremendous amount of inventory time and inventory costs.”
Retention time for records varies depending upon the type of record. Inspection reports for municipal buildings must be kept for 21 years, whereas the master schedule for these reports must be kept permanently. The 4,000,000 legal and land records filed each year are added to the millions of records already on file that must be stored for decades and, in some cases, hundreds of years.
By eliminating the paper required for these files, and the storage facilities for their retention, the cost savings will be felt by both current taxpayers and future generations to come.
The papers currently held by the County Clerk’s Office require considerable handling before they are eventually recorded and filed. “Last year we filed 168,962 documents in our Land Records Division,” Idoni said.
These are the documents related to sales and transfers of property. “This equates to over 500,000 pieces of paper. Each of those pieces of paper has to be reviewed by an initial preparation person, they have to be then data-entered by a member of my group; then they
go down the hall where the financial aspects are processed; then over to the processing office who scans it; then all the documents are sent back to the attorneys and the title companies because we don’t keep the paper since we’ve scanned them. Obviously there’s postage, huge amounts of manpower, and finally, the recording papers have to be sent to the local tax assessors”.
The County Clerk’s office has a long-term plan to eliminate this paperwork and the incredible costs to taxpayers. “We’re working with the
title companies to input all of the data before they bring over the papers. This will save the Clerk’s Office about 10 employees.
The County Legislature,last December, authorized a half-million dollar bond to upgrade the soft-ware to get this done. Based on current year’s salaries, I estimate we will save $575,000 a year. And this is only the beginning.
But we need to change the state law to allow us to accept e-filings of these records.
This is something that is already done all over the country; New York State is rated 28th in the country in the way we handle the filing of these records.
The next stage for the Clerk’s Of-fice would be for citizens to be able to scan their documents and send them in and we would accept the scanned documents as opposed to handling all of the paper,” said Idoni.
These proposed new systems are concrete ways for our local and state governments to save money and to benefit everyone while hurting no
one. These are not cutbacks to services but improvements to systems. Idoni stressed that the savings from these systems would not be limited to the government agencies. “Think of the savings to law firms, title companies, and individuals. And that’s just from this first stage of improvements. California is already on their third stage – they don’t even accept deeds anymore.
Everything is put into a computer and they’re literally closing cases based on computerized documents. There’s no paper being signed anymore, they’re enotarizing!” Idoni noted.
In a computerized system, when all of the information on a record is put in up front, there’s only one chance for error and only one opportunity for records to get lost. When paper records are constantly being data-entered into a hodge-podge of systems across government agencies and offices, there are now as many chances for error and loss as there are systems.
So e-filings not only reduce time, manpower, and resources, they reduce the chance of error and loss and the audits and review processes needed to assure the integrity of the systems.
The information now only has to be audited once, not multiple times.
Currently in Westchester County, the information pertaining to a house sale is entered several times, at the title office, the law firm, the County Clerk, the Tax Assessor, the closer, the insurance company, and the bank, each step providing an opportunity for error.
Idoni noted that 20 percent of the paperwork the Clerk’s Office currently receives is incorrect and must be rejected.
The taxes due and other costs at house closings are estimated for an exact date. If those estimates are incorrect, or if the closing is delayed rendering the payments incorrect, the entire file must be rejected. As a result, the Clerk’s Office is not dealing with those filings once, but twice, and maybe multiple times until the final product is correct. E-filings would eliminate such redundant activity and would result in exact, accurate payments since the money due would be calculated at the time of filing.
“The computer system that we are developing would create their financial statement for the filing,” Idoni noted.
“Therefore, they can cut the check for the exact amount right away. So no more estimates of what will be due four days from now, or percentages getting mixed up and the title clerk pays $20 too much or $20 too little so the entire file is rejected for that! And that in turn saves my staff from having to review 20 percent of the documents twice.”
The first phase of this system is being built right now and Idoni expects this to be ready in January 2010. “The second part will be more difficult, the e-filing of the documents. But we have 18 months to prepare for it,” Idoni said.
Idoni noted that staff savings in his of-fice did not mean that people would lose their jobs. Any staff savings in one Division of the Clerk’s office could be used to replace retiring staff in other areas. “I’m freezing any new positions right now based on what we’re doing in Land Records” Idoni acknowledged. “I don’t want to hire someone new when I know we won’t need that person in another year.”
Idoni stressed that the Land Records system would have a tremendous impact on commerce and business in Westchester County. “When you bring
a new business in you usually buy a piece of property,” Idoni said. “This will speed the process along tremendously.”
Unfortunately New York State is delaying the process of changing the document handling systems in other areas. “I was hoping we would have the Corporation Filings System updated by the time you got here!” Idoni said.
“We are required to keep certain corporation filings. Even though corporations go through the New York State Department of State to process their corporation filings, we are required to keep the Westchester corporations records on file in our office. We’re hoping to be able to file those records similar to how we now handle the New York State tax warrants which will save us another 40,000 pieces of paper a year and about ten weeks of staff time a year.” Since most corporations access their filing forms online, allowing them to simply hit “send” when those forms are completed would save local taxpayers money.
The County Clerk’s Office also files all documents related to Workers’ Compensation cases. While these represent a small portion of the Clerk’s total time and work, only 800 cases and 5,000 pieces of paper a year, the information in these files affect the lives of injured and disabled individuals.
“If these were online, the individual could access their information easily. They may need these records to enforce their judgments so they get the money they are entitled to,” Idoni noted.
The County Clerk’s Office is also involved with the Internal Revenue Service to e-file federal tax liens affecting Westchester residents and businesses.
“We review all of the records we e-file, including records we are accepting from other agencies, to make sure sensitive information like social security numbers are not being posted online,” Idoni noted. “That was an issue with the IRS records. So we still need the human element here to review the information.”
“In the three years that I have been here we have had a few cases where a Land Records file never reached our office,” Idoni acknowledged. Idoni suggested that one possible way to eliminate this would be to have all records start at the County Clerk’s level. Lost records are especially a problem for litigants in the court system where all records are still kept in paper files and those files may be initiated at several levels. A court clerk handling multiple paper files could mix the papers up between files and currently there are no state-wide mandates for cross-audits between the courts and the County Clerk’s offices.
The Clerk’s office scans and records every piece of paper that they receive. But under current OCA and state laws, there is no mandate for an audit to compare the number of documents processed by the courts to see if it matches the documents recorded by the Clerks!
This issue of missing paperwork became apparent to this reporter immediately following this interview.
I took advantage of my trip to the County Clerk’s Office to obtain a certified copy of the custody order for my children for insurance purposes. The clerk easily pulled up a list of all of the scanned records in my divorce file (a lengthy list since my ex-husband is an attorney in the White Plains Courthouse and spends his free time papering our divorce case). But a review of this long list revealed that the custody order was never received by the County Clerk’s office at all. This critical document is missing from my file! Apparently no one in the courts verified that they were sending all of the papers related to the case to the Clerk’s Office.
So now I am faced with spending time and money to obtain a critical document that the Court had a responsibility to assure was available to me to begin with. The County Clerk’s systems, while saving the taxpayers incredible amounts of money, will only be as good as the individuals and systems providing the records for those systems.
And currently, the New York State Court system is the weakest link in the chain of document security and retention.
The Guardian encourages our readers to contact the Westchester Court Administration (phone: 914-824-5100, fax: 914-995-4111) to insist
that they update their systems and procedures to assure the integrity and security of our records and to enable the County Clerk to maximize the cost savings of his e-filing systems to the taxpayers.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Westchester Guardian/In Our Opinion/Our Readers Respond.
Thursday. August 21, 2008
In Our Opinion...
Westchester’s “Social Host Law”: Too Little, And 6½ Years Too Late
Last week the Westchester County Board of Legislators enacted a “Social Host Law” described, by them, as “aimed at penalizing adults who create opportunities for minors to drink alcohol.” They were 6½ years too late.
In their press release, the Board declared, “Under the terms of the approved law, an adult who knowingly allows a party, gathering, or event where minors are present and drinking alcohol, or upon becoming aware that minors are drinking on his or her premises, fails to take corrective
action to stop the illegal activity, will be punished by fines; ranging from $250 for a first offense to a fine of $1,000 and/or imprisonment for up to one year for a third offense.”
Under the title, and the terms set down, the legislative intent would seem quite clear; an attempt to curtail teenage drinking parties the likes of which we have become acquainted with all too often in Westchester. Of course, our collective awareness of such events and the potential threat they represent to life and limb, was far too dramatically brought home, to all of us, with the death of Robert Viscome, Jr., in the company of some twenty-five of his 16- and 17-year-old peers, at the Porzio home in Harrison, in April of 2002.
A popular student, and athlete, at Harrison High School, Rob would be sucker-punched by Patrick Rukaj, a classmate, as each was intoxicated, falling over backward, striking his head on a concrete patio, and never regaining consciousness perhaps, in part, because not one of two dozen peers, including then-District Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s daughter, Christine, who arrived shortly after the punch and fall, saw fit to call 911 while evidence of alcohol and drug consumption lay everywhere. Although it was the penultimate incident, and example, of just how terrible the consequences of underaged drinking parties can be, it is doubtful that either Mr. or Mrs. John Porzio, at whose home the tragedy occurred, would be criminally liable under the newly-enacted statute.
We certainly concur with the legislative intent, recognizing that both Nassau and Suffolk Counties, on Long Island, have passed similar laws. Hopefully, its passage will encourage more parents to recognize the potential danger, and thus more diligently guard against the possibility, both on their own premises, and those to which their son or daughter might be going.
However, in the final analysis, beyond the four walls of one’s own home, one cannot expect to control the powerful influence a mere handful of youths might have upon a larger gathering. As importantly, the actions of the local police department, both past and present, is most in-fluential. We cannot emphasize too strongly the horrific counterproductive influence that the unlawful actions taken by the Harrison Town Police Department, in response to the Viscome incident, has had, and will continue to have, for many years to come, with that Town’s youth.
The shredding of witness statements and police interview notes, the sudden release of more than 20 culpable, untruthful youths out the back door of Harrison Police Headquarters by officers, under orders to protect the District Attorney by covering up the presence of her daughter, together with John Porzio, Jr. shortly after the fatal blow; the massive coverup during Christine’s long absence from school; the fabrications of Headmaster Scott Nelson, etc.; all taught not only the two dozen youths directly involved, but all of their peers and siblings, a horribly wrong lesson: “It’s okay to do something very wrong so long as you get away with it.”
That was the deal those kids cut by way of the Harrison Police Department with Jeanine Pirro, so long as they kept their mouths shut about her daughter. And, now, irony of ugly ironies, convicted felon Al Pirro, Esq., has the gall to represent Harrison Police Chief David Hall, and Hall
has the equal gall to retain him. And Jeanine? She gets to play “Judge Jeanine” on television.
The Board of Legislators can pass all the Social Host Laws they please; and Lord knows they have some serious work to do repairing their own awful image. But, all the legislation in the world will never overcome the lies, the hypocrisy, and the awful conduct the kids in Harrison have witnessed from their parents and their police department, as well as from two District Attorneys. No legislation will ever bring closure to the two dozen young adults whose consciences will never grant them peace until they each acknowledge their role in what occurred. And, finally, it’s fair and accurate to state that the Harrison Police Department has never been the same since April 22, 2002, as witness all of the problems and misconduct that continue to plague the Department.
Our Readers Respond....
Reader Gets On Board With Glen Hockley
Dear Editor:
Councilman Glen Hockley approached me, asking for my support in his movement to reform the White Plains Democratic Committee. After careful deliberation, I decided to support him. I am supporting Glen because he is an individual who is not afraid to roll his sleeves up and go
to work on what needs to be done to insure that the Committee works effectively for the success and betterment of our community. Glen has vision, and exciting new ideas which will enhance the Committee and help realize our City’s great potential. Against the odds, he perseveres to
insure a better quality of life for all of our City’s citizens.
Unfortunately, however, he often faces a committee whose process is only open to individuals who totally buy into its agenda; a committee where debate does not take place without reprisal, particularly if the outcome differs from the leadership’s desires. I recall, approximately two years ago, during the election of Committee Officers, that while several District Leaders interviewed for the position of First Vice Chair, it was ultimately given to a member of the Nominating Committee, who just happened to have participated in the interviewing of candidates. That is called
‘conflict of interest’. It is for reasons like that he has embarked on his effort to open up the Committee, and I have chosen to distance myself from the current leadership.
In my past involvement with the Committee, I found that there was a great deal of favoritism. The committee that interviewed potential candidates for District Leader improperly used its discretion in appointing them. If a potential District Leader’s opinions differed from that of the
leadership, he/she was automatically disqualified.
I recall reading in another publication an accusation that Glen was not playing by the rules. I believe it has been those in control of the White Plains Democratic Committee who haven’t been playing by the rules. The Committee engages in the very activities that it accuses Glen of.
Is the Committee simply punishing Glen Hockley for working closely with Mayor Delfino, at times? I would argue that if you want to get things done, it behooves you to work with members from both sides of the aisle. Otherwise, we would have what’s been going on in Washington while
the people suffer with high gas prices, engagement in a war where the costs outweigh the benefits, and an economy that is in worse shape than the media leads us to believe.
As a committee, we should be engaged in open and honest debate about the issues that are affecting White Plains. How often has the Issues Committee met to discuss affordable housing for older adults, working families, college kids and the poor? Little by little these groups are being pushed out of our city. Also, there are many issues concerning the immigrant community that need attention. There may be differences of opinion; but are these issues unworthy of discussion?
I’m throwing my support behind Glen because, so far, he’s the only one who has offered a clear vision for the Committee and for the City of
White Plains. He is someone who is seriously looking at the issues facing our community and attempting to do something about them. I am also
supporting him because he deserves a fair chance. What is the Committee so afraid of? As creatures of habit, we tend to get used to the status quo,
and change sometimes seems threatening.
However, I have always viewed change in a positive way. After all, it is the only thing we can be certain of. I hope that those White Plains
Democrats who read this letter will join me in supporting Glen Hockley and his effort to open up the White Plains Committee.
Eridania Camacho,
White Plains
Rockland DA With Huge Conflict Of Interest Ops For Prosecutorial Misconduct
Dear Editor:
Hello, my name is Michael Kelly. I reside in Rockland County, New York. I am having great difficulty with matrimonial and criminal charges
filed against me within the jurisdiction of the Rockland County District Attorney’s Office.
I had retained the services of Anthony Dellicarri, Esq. and he represented me for approximately 18 months prior to his appointment as
Senior Prosecutor for the District Attorney’s Office where my charges were pending.
Mr. Dellicarri was sworn in to of-fice on January 1, 2008 for the position of Senior Prosecutor. As of late February he was still representing me in Orangetown for a harassment violation, which stemmed from an alleged incident from approximately 12 months ago. I wrote to the new District Attorney, Mr. Zugibe, the Westchester County Bar Association and numerous government agencies regarding these actions, and their legality.
Since that time the Westchester County Bar has responded and wants to conduct an official inquiry into several matters concerning Mr.
Dellicarri. As of June 7, 2008, Justice Paul Phinney wrote in his decision an order that a special prosecutor is needed to continue with my violation
in his Court due to the fact that a once defense attorney is now a Senior Prosecutor in the same office.
Since that order, and the Westchester Bar Association’s inquiry, the Rockland County District Attorney’s Office, as of this week, has now decided
to make my violation a felony, and wants to convene a grand jury, and they are now charging me with Assault 2nd Degree.
These actions are clearly a malicious prosecution against me from the District Attorney’s Office for my letter-writing and exposure of the actions
of one of their own. This matter needs to be exposed, and stopped. This situation needs outside oversight, and help from someone in our government branch in order to stop these egregious actions of an Office that is sworn to protect and serve the citizens of a sovereign society, not prosecute them for their own errors.
I have numerous documents to back my claims, written by Mr. Dellicarri to the Judges, while acting as my defense counsel after he was sworn into office.
Michael Kelly, Piermont
In Our Opinion...
Westchester’s “Social Host Law”: Too Little, And 6½ Years Too Late
Last week the Westchester County Board of Legislators enacted a “Social Host Law” described, by them, as “aimed at penalizing adults who create opportunities for minors to drink alcohol.” They were 6½ years too late.
In their press release, the Board declared, “Under the terms of the approved law, an adult who knowingly allows a party, gathering, or event where minors are present and drinking alcohol, or upon becoming aware that minors are drinking on his or her premises, fails to take corrective
action to stop the illegal activity, will be punished by fines; ranging from $250 for a first offense to a fine of $1,000 and/or imprisonment for up to one year for a third offense.”
Under the title, and the terms set down, the legislative intent would seem quite clear; an attempt to curtail teenage drinking parties the likes of which we have become acquainted with all too often in Westchester. Of course, our collective awareness of such events and the potential threat they represent to life and limb, was far too dramatically brought home, to all of us, with the death of Robert Viscome, Jr., in the company of some twenty-five of his 16- and 17-year-old peers, at the Porzio home in Harrison, in April of 2002.
A popular student, and athlete, at Harrison High School, Rob would be sucker-punched by Patrick Rukaj, a classmate, as each was intoxicated, falling over backward, striking his head on a concrete patio, and never regaining consciousness perhaps, in part, because not one of two dozen peers, including then-District Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s daughter, Christine, who arrived shortly after the punch and fall, saw fit to call 911 while evidence of alcohol and drug consumption lay everywhere. Although it was the penultimate incident, and example, of just how terrible the consequences of underaged drinking parties can be, it is doubtful that either Mr. or Mrs. John Porzio, at whose home the tragedy occurred, would be criminally liable under the newly-enacted statute.
We certainly concur with the legislative intent, recognizing that both Nassau and Suffolk Counties, on Long Island, have passed similar laws. Hopefully, its passage will encourage more parents to recognize the potential danger, and thus more diligently guard against the possibility, both on their own premises, and those to which their son or daughter might be going.
However, in the final analysis, beyond the four walls of one’s own home, one cannot expect to control the powerful influence a mere handful of youths might have upon a larger gathering. As importantly, the actions of the local police department, both past and present, is most in-fluential. We cannot emphasize too strongly the horrific counterproductive influence that the unlawful actions taken by the Harrison Town Police Department, in response to the Viscome incident, has had, and will continue to have, for many years to come, with that Town’s youth.
The shredding of witness statements and police interview notes, the sudden release of more than 20 culpable, untruthful youths out the back door of Harrison Police Headquarters by officers, under orders to protect the District Attorney by covering up the presence of her daughter, together with John Porzio, Jr. shortly after the fatal blow; the massive coverup during Christine’s long absence from school; the fabrications of Headmaster Scott Nelson, etc.; all taught not only the two dozen youths directly involved, but all of their peers and siblings, a horribly wrong lesson: “It’s okay to do something very wrong so long as you get away with it.”
That was the deal those kids cut by way of the Harrison Police Department with Jeanine Pirro, so long as they kept their mouths shut about her daughter. And, now, irony of ugly ironies, convicted felon Al Pirro, Esq., has the gall to represent Harrison Police Chief David Hall, and Hall
has the equal gall to retain him. And Jeanine? She gets to play “Judge Jeanine” on television.
The Board of Legislators can pass all the Social Host Laws they please; and Lord knows they have some serious work to do repairing their own awful image. But, all the legislation in the world will never overcome the lies, the hypocrisy, and the awful conduct the kids in Harrison have witnessed from their parents and their police department, as well as from two District Attorneys. No legislation will ever bring closure to the two dozen young adults whose consciences will never grant them peace until they each acknowledge their role in what occurred. And, finally, it’s fair and accurate to state that the Harrison Police Department has never been the same since April 22, 2002, as witness all of the problems and misconduct that continue to plague the Department.
Our Readers Respond....
Reader Gets On Board With Glen Hockley
Dear Editor:
Councilman Glen Hockley approached me, asking for my support in his movement to reform the White Plains Democratic Committee. After careful deliberation, I decided to support him. I am supporting Glen because he is an individual who is not afraid to roll his sleeves up and go
to work on what needs to be done to insure that the Committee works effectively for the success and betterment of our community. Glen has vision, and exciting new ideas which will enhance the Committee and help realize our City’s great potential. Against the odds, he perseveres to
insure a better quality of life for all of our City’s citizens.
Unfortunately, however, he often faces a committee whose process is only open to individuals who totally buy into its agenda; a committee where debate does not take place without reprisal, particularly if the outcome differs from the leadership’s desires. I recall, approximately two years ago, during the election of Committee Officers, that while several District Leaders interviewed for the position of First Vice Chair, it was ultimately given to a member of the Nominating Committee, who just happened to have participated in the interviewing of candidates. That is called
‘conflict of interest’. It is for reasons like that he has embarked on his effort to open up the Committee, and I have chosen to distance myself from the current leadership.
In my past involvement with the Committee, I found that there was a great deal of favoritism. The committee that interviewed potential candidates for District Leader improperly used its discretion in appointing them. If a potential District Leader’s opinions differed from that of the
leadership, he/she was automatically disqualified.
I recall reading in another publication an accusation that Glen was not playing by the rules. I believe it has been those in control of the White Plains Democratic Committee who haven’t been playing by the rules. The Committee engages in the very activities that it accuses Glen of.
Is the Committee simply punishing Glen Hockley for working closely with Mayor Delfino, at times? I would argue that if you want to get things done, it behooves you to work with members from both sides of the aisle. Otherwise, we would have what’s been going on in Washington while
the people suffer with high gas prices, engagement in a war where the costs outweigh the benefits, and an economy that is in worse shape than the media leads us to believe.
As a committee, we should be engaged in open and honest debate about the issues that are affecting White Plains. How often has the Issues Committee met to discuss affordable housing for older adults, working families, college kids and the poor? Little by little these groups are being pushed out of our city. Also, there are many issues concerning the immigrant community that need attention. There may be differences of opinion; but are these issues unworthy of discussion?
I’m throwing my support behind Glen because, so far, he’s the only one who has offered a clear vision for the Committee and for the City of
White Plains. He is someone who is seriously looking at the issues facing our community and attempting to do something about them. I am also
supporting him because he deserves a fair chance. What is the Committee so afraid of? As creatures of habit, we tend to get used to the status quo,
and change sometimes seems threatening.
However, I have always viewed change in a positive way. After all, it is the only thing we can be certain of. I hope that those White Plains
Democrats who read this letter will join me in supporting Glen Hockley and his effort to open up the White Plains Committee.
Eridania Camacho,
White Plains
Rockland DA With Huge Conflict Of Interest Ops For Prosecutorial Misconduct
Dear Editor:
Hello, my name is Michael Kelly. I reside in Rockland County, New York. I am having great difficulty with matrimonial and criminal charges
filed against me within the jurisdiction of the Rockland County District Attorney’s Office.
I had retained the services of Anthony Dellicarri, Esq. and he represented me for approximately 18 months prior to his appointment as
Senior Prosecutor for the District Attorney’s Office where my charges were pending.
Mr. Dellicarri was sworn in to of-fice on January 1, 2008 for the position of Senior Prosecutor. As of late February he was still representing me in Orangetown for a harassment violation, which stemmed from an alleged incident from approximately 12 months ago. I wrote to the new District Attorney, Mr. Zugibe, the Westchester County Bar Association and numerous government agencies regarding these actions, and their legality.
Since that time the Westchester County Bar has responded and wants to conduct an official inquiry into several matters concerning Mr.
Dellicarri. As of June 7, 2008, Justice Paul Phinney wrote in his decision an order that a special prosecutor is needed to continue with my violation
in his Court due to the fact that a once defense attorney is now a Senior Prosecutor in the same office.
Since that order, and the Westchester Bar Association’s inquiry, the Rockland County District Attorney’s Office, as of this week, has now decided
to make my violation a felony, and wants to convene a grand jury, and they are now charging me with Assault 2nd Degree.
These actions are clearly a malicious prosecution against me from the District Attorney’s Office for my letter-writing and exposure of the actions
of one of their own. This matter needs to be exposed, and stopped. This situation needs outside oversight, and help from someone in our government branch in order to stop these egregious actions of an Office that is sworn to protect and serve the citizens of a sovereign society, not prosecute them for their own errors.
I have numerous documents to back my claims, written by Mr. Dellicarri to the Judges, while acting as my defense counsel after he was sworn into office.
Michael Kelly, Piermont
Westchester Guardian/The Court Report.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
The Court Report
By Richard Blassberg
Aggrieved Citizen Shares Letter To State Supreme
Court, Appellate Division Disciplinary Committee
Analysis:
Of all of the failures that continue to come to light with respect to New York State’s Judicial System, perhaps the most disheartening and disillusioning is the persistent failure by grievance committees and judicial oversight agencies to promptly, and appropriately, deal with the unlawful, and unethical, behavior of attorneys and judges. There is a pervasive attitude of collegiality, and downright protectionism, that works to negate the very mechanisms that are supposed to shield citizens from those who would use the courts, and their influence in those
courts, to abuse their rights.
Agencies specifically mandated and empowered to investigate and rectify improper conduct by misguided, self-serving, and corrupt lawyers and officers of the court, including judges themselves, are too often reluctant, or unwilling, to fulfill their role. Matters that should take weeks to get underway, and perhaps a few months to fully investigate and verify, often take years. Documents mysteriously become lost, and decisions are agonizingly slow to materialise. Even allegations as outrageous as those in the above matter, fully documented and acknowledged, will take long periods of time before being resolved, as all the while those who have misbehaved continue for months, and even years, to negatively and unjustly influence the cases and the lives of innocent, decent citizens.
The Court Report
By Richard Blassberg
Aggrieved Citizen Shares Letter To State Supreme
Court, Appellate Division Disciplinary Committee
Analysis:
Of all of the failures that continue to come to light with respect to New York State’s Judicial System, perhaps the most disheartening and disillusioning is the persistent failure by grievance committees and judicial oversight agencies to promptly, and appropriately, deal with the unlawful, and unethical, behavior of attorneys and judges. There is a pervasive attitude of collegiality, and downright protectionism, that works to negate the very mechanisms that are supposed to shield citizens from those who would use the courts, and their influence in those
courts, to abuse their rights.
Agencies specifically mandated and empowered to investigate and rectify improper conduct by misguided, self-serving, and corrupt lawyers and officers of the court, including judges themselves, are too often reluctant, or unwilling, to fulfill their role. Matters that should take weeks to get underway, and perhaps a few months to fully investigate and verify, often take years. Documents mysteriously become lost, and decisions are agonizingly slow to materialise. Even allegations as outrageous as those in the above matter, fully documented and acknowledged, will take long periods of time before being resolved, as all the while those who have misbehaved continue for months, and even years, to negatively and unjustly influence the cases and the lives of innocent, decent citizens.
Westchester Guardian/Westchester County Government/Janet Difiore.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
Kriss Affair: Something Stinks In the Disconnect Of County Government
There is something fundamentally disconnected about the relationship between taxpayers and Westchester County Government. It has been the situation for many years now. Viewed objectively, there is little that goes on either in the County Executive's Office or the Board of Legislators that is of any great moment to the majority of Westchester residents other than the raising or lowering of their taxes. One simply doesn't get the impression that the organizations on the eighth and ninth floors of the County Office Building are particularly plugged in to the needs, or the concerns, of the nearly one million people who share the county with them.
Many citizens feel the detachment, and are lucky if they can name their local legislator. Certainly, most would be hard-pressed to name half, or even a third, of the seventeen on the Board. Sadly, in concert with Larry Schwartz, mastermind of the County Executive's Office, the Board will spend two thousand dollars this year, of our money, for every man, woman and child who calls Westchester their home; a budget of nearly $2 billion.
If the County Executive and the County Legislators are supposed to exist in a relationship of checks and balances, that notion died nearly 11 years ago when Larry Schwartz, bluntly speaking, took over County Government.
How can there be checks and balances when one diabolical control-freak decides who will run for office, and controls the purse strings of the political party, the Democrats, who have more than 100,000 more registrants than do the Republicans?
And, it doesn't end with the selection and financing of legislators who will be loyal, and beholden, to Schwartz. It reaches its ugly paw into the courthouse, the selection of candidates, and rigging of elections, for judges, for County Clerk, and most importantly, District Attorney.
They've got it all sewn up. After all, they don't want the wrong persons to come along and file nominating petitions without "kissing Larry's ring."
The end product is arrogant, damned insensitive local government. It's tough enough for constituents to deal with that kind of disrespect from Washington and Albany; self-serving career liars and manipulators. But, here, at the local level, so-called public servants trying to milk part-time positions into six-figure annuities, and beyond, seems so out-of-touch, so misguided and crass. Surely, they don't want to be perceived as they truly are.
Consider the Gary Kriss affair: After many months of trying to pass unreasonable and unwarranted pay raises for themselves, the County Legislators, each of whom earn more than $1,000 a week for a part-time job, were pushing a whopping increase for Chairman Bill Ryan, from $89,000 to $125,000. Often, along comes the revelation that Ryan's shadow, his 'Chief Advisor', Gary Kriss, already earning the $150,000 that Ryan got so sullied grabbing for, was also spending taxpayers' Hard-earned dollars, perhaps $12,000 or more, on personal expenses. And, at the same time, he was piling up months and months of vacation time in violation of the rules. But, then, it does appear that the rules that govern County employees somehow didn't apply to him.
At a time when everyone is getting wiped out, with $4-plus gas, milk, and food costs going through the roof, and job layoffs and cutbacks, we learned of Chairman Ryan's best buddy's largess, and possible unlawful use of Taxpayers' funds for his personal enterprise and entertainment, as well as political activity. No doubt, with a wink of an eye from Andy Spano, his favorite DA, Janet DiFiore, announced she was looking into the unusual expenditure of public funds by Kriss for any possible criminal implications. A call by The Guardian to DiFiore's Office last Tuesday con-firmed that Kriss was "still under active investigation."
On Monday, August 11, the "Special Committee On Internal Controls And Procedures" of the County Legislature released the report commissioned by Chairman Ryan. That committee had been established just two months earlier, on June 10, by Ryan, who also named all five of its members; Democrats Ken Jenkins, of Yonkers, named as Committee Chair, William Burton, of Ossining, and Peter Harckham, of Bedford, as well as Republicans Gordon Burrows, of Yonkers, and George Oros, of Cortlandt, legislative Minority Leader.
Questioned last Tuesday by The Guardian as to "Why wasn't Gary Kriss made to testify before the Special Committee with regard to how he spent thousands of dollars of taxpayers' money", Jenkins responded,"Our charge was not to conduct an inquisition, but to review the expenses for adherence to policies and practices." He then paused a moment, and added, "People didn't think it applied to them; their mindset was We don't have to do things that way."
Asked, "Why wouldn't you want him to make a public accounting?" Jenkins responded, "We found $2,695 in reimbursed expenses, and $300 on a County purchase card, for a total of $2,995. We have a list of all these expenses."
Interviewed earlier on Tuesday, Republican George Oros had said, "Kriss has no incentive to provide an explanation or reimbursement." When Oros' remarks were related to Jenkins, the Committee Chair told The Guardian, "We are penalizing Mr. Kriss for use of County equipment on County time at the rate of about two hours a day during the election period for a total penalty of ten days."
Oros had told The Guardian that he was upset with Committee Chairman Jenkins who, he said, had made light of Kriss' conduct, stating, "It was only $12,000 in a $2 billion budget."
When prodded about his comments to Oros, Jenkins said, "The Committee is not trying to protect anybody. They were stupid purchases at best, criminal at worst."
Again, there is such a huge disconnect between those in County Government and those paying the freight. To begin with, the common term for Gary Kriss' misconduct is theft, whether it's a theft of services, as in the case of thousands of dollars in phone calls, or theft of merchandise, as in soft ware, being Chairman Ryan's "buddy" doesn't confer immunity, either from scrutiny or prosecution. Surely, the taxpaying public has a right to know the facts.
District Attorney Janet DiFiore is another story altogether. It's difficult to second-guess what a prosecutor, who goes around prosecuting victims of police brutality with trumped-up charges, is likely to do in any given situation. Given her own fraudulent political activities, her abandonment of the Republican Party, and those who helped her political ambitions for years, not to mention her incestuous relationship with Larry Schwartz and Andy Spano, conspicuous since Election Day 2005, it may well be that Gary Kriss', indeed, perhaps even Bill Ryan's, personal and political futures now rest in the hands of Larry and Andy.
The kinds of issues raised by Kriss' behavior, and possibly Ryan's conduct, after the fact, comes under the heading of Public Integrity, a unit run for many years by Assistant District Attorney Mike Hughes. Just ponder the job Di-Fiore and Hughes did with the killing of Mount Vernon Police Detective Christopher Ridley by three of four Westchester County cops last January 25.
Anywhere other than Westchester, Gary Kriss would have resigned several weeks ago, and written a check to the County for $12,000, or whatever the final total of his malfeasance in office may ultimately total. Bill Ryan would finish out his present term and go quietly to work for that $150,000 job Liz Schollenberger tells us he could have as a lobbyist. Perhaps, another highly ethical guy, Al Pirro, might be willing to help get Bill started. You never know, maybe Al owes him one for one of those deals he slipped into White Plains even after his license to practice law was suspended for three years.
However, because this is Westchester, Gary Kriss continues to be employed, receiving more than $12,000 a month using up week after week of vacation time that nobody else in County Government could have accumulated under the rules.
And, of course, Bill Ryan is back in the saddle, thankfully having recovered from heart surgery, looking a whole lot healthier, and, as if to add insult to injury, frantically putting out press releases such as his July 30 effort, headlined, "Ryan Secures More Assistance, Services For Battered Women: County Board Chairman Arranges $20,000..." or his August 12 dandy, "Scarsdale Teens Get Further Support From Ryan."
Oh, yes, what did this 60-day old Special Committee, formed by one of the subjects whose conduct needed scrutiny, conclude before anything else? One might have guessed it; "Name A Full Time Chief Of Staff." In other words, add still another layer of bureaucracy; someone to oversee the 17-member Board, the 48-person staff, and provide still another layer of insulation between County Government and those footing the bill while trying to make ends meet.
Most disturbing, once again there is the distinct stench of entitlement surrounding the entire Kriss Affair. Somehow, it's not what he is accused of doing, or even, in fact, what he did; it's that he got caught doing it. It's not the stain and the humiliation we, who have been betrayed, would think one must feel, who has been presumed to be a dedicated public servant. Rather, it's the inconvenience, the distraction, disclaimers, and posturing, the whole dance that one's peers are now going through
That upsets and concerns far too many who ought to be feeling indignant, disappointed, and outraged.
Instead, there are far too many Liz Schollenbergers, too many in the supporting cast of the "entitled", all too ready to rush in with the perfume and deodorant of rationalization and excuse to cover up the stench. But our noses have told us, and continue to remind us, "Something stinks about all of this, like rotten fish." And, as we all know, a fish rots from the head down.
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
Kriss Affair: Something Stinks In the Disconnect Of County Government
There is something fundamentally disconnected about the relationship between taxpayers and Westchester County Government. It has been the situation for many years now. Viewed objectively, there is little that goes on either in the County Executive's Office or the Board of Legislators that is of any great moment to the majority of Westchester residents other than the raising or lowering of their taxes. One simply doesn't get the impression that the organizations on the eighth and ninth floors of the County Office Building are particularly plugged in to the needs, or the concerns, of the nearly one million people who share the county with them.
Many citizens feel the detachment, and are lucky if they can name their local legislator. Certainly, most would be hard-pressed to name half, or even a third, of the seventeen on the Board. Sadly, in concert with Larry Schwartz, mastermind of the County Executive's Office, the Board will spend two thousand dollars this year, of our money, for every man, woman and child who calls Westchester their home; a budget of nearly $2 billion.
If the County Executive and the County Legislators are supposed to exist in a relationship of checks and balances, that notion died nearly 11 years ago when Larry Schwartz, bluntly speaking, took over County Government.
How can there be checks and balances when one diabolical control-freak decides who will run for office, and controls the purse strings of the political party, the Democrats, who have more than 100,000 more registrants than do the Republicans?
And, it doesn't end with the selection and financing of legislators who will be loyal, and beholden, to Schwartz. It reaches its ugly paw into the courthouse, the selection of candidates, and rigging of elections, for judges, for County Clerk, and most importantly, District Attorney.
They've got it all sewn up. After all, they don't want the wrong persons to come along and file nominating petitions without "kissing Larry's ring."
The end product is arrogant, damned insensitive local government. It's tough enough for constituents to deal with that kind of disrespect from Washington and Albany; self-serving career liars and manipulators. But, here, at the local level, so-called public servants trying to milk part-time positions into six-figure annuities, and beyond, seems so out-of-touch, so misguided and crass. Surely, they don't want to be perceived as they truly are.
Consider the Gary Kriss affair: After many months of trying to pass unreasonable and unwarranted pay raises for themselves, the County Legislators, each of whom earn more than $1,000 a week for a part-time job, were pushing a whopping increase for Chairman Bill Ryan, from $89,000 to $125,000. Often, along comes the revelation that Ryan's shadow, his 'Chief Advisor', Gary Kriss, already earning the $150,000 that Ryan got so sullied grabbing for, was also spending taxpayers' Hard-earned dollars, perhaps $12,000 or more, on personal expenses. And, at the same time, he was piling up months and months of vacation time in violation of the rules. But, then, it does appear that the rules that govern County employees somehow didn't apply to him.
At a time when everyone is getting wiped out, with $4-plus gas, milk, and food costs going through the roof, and job layoffs and cutbacks, we learned of Chairman Ryan's best buddy's largess, and possible unlawful use of Taxpayers' funds for his personal enterprise and entertainment, as well as political activity. No doubt, with a wink of an eye from Andy Spano, his favorite DA, Janet DiFiore, announced she was looking into the unusual expenditure of public funds by Kriss for any possible criminal implications. A call by The Guardian to DiFiore's Office last Tuesday con-firmed that Kriss was "still under active investigation."
On Monday, August 11, the "Special Committee On Internal Controls And Procedures" of the County Legislature released the report commissioned by Chairman Ryan. That committee had been established just two months earlier, on June 10, by Ryan, who also named all five of its members; Democrats Ken Jenkins, of Yonkers, named as Committee Chair, William Burton, of Ossining, and Peter Harckham, of Bedford, as well as Republicans Gordon Burrows, of Yonkers, and George Oros, of Cortlandt, legislative Minority Leader.
Questioned last Tuesday by The Guardian as to "Why wasn't Gary Kriss made to testify before the Special Committee with regard to how he spent thousands of dollars of taxpayers' money", Jenkins responded,"Our charge was not to conduct an inquisition, but to review the expenses for adherence to policies and practices." He then paused a moment, and added, "People didn't think it applied to them; their mindset was We don't have to do things that way."
Asked, "Why wouldn't you want him to make a public accounting?" Jenkins responded, "We found $2,695 in reimbursed expenses, and $300 on a County purchase card, for a total of $2,995. We have a list of all these expenses."
Interviewed earlier on Tuesday, Republican George Oros had said, "Kriss has no incentive to provide an explanation or reimbursement." When Oros' remarks were related to Jenkins, the Committee Chair told The Guardian, "We are penalizing Mr. Kriss for use of County equipment on County time at the rate of about two hours a day during the election period for a total penalty of ten days."
Oros had told The Guardian that he was upset with Committee Chairman Jenkins who, he said, had made light of Kriss' conduct, stating, "It was only $12,000 in a $2 billion budget."
When prodded about his comments to Oros, Jenkins said, "The Committee is not trying to protect anybody. They were stupid purchases at best, criminal at worst."
Again, there is such a huge disconnect between those in County Government and those paying the freight. To begin with, the common term for Gary Kriss' misconduct is theft, whether it's a theft of services, as in the case of thousands of dollars in phone calls, or theft of merchandise, as in soft ware, being Chairman Ryan's "buddy" doesn't confer immunity, either from scrutiny or prosecution. Surely, the taxpaying public has a right to know the facts.
District Attorney Janet DiFiore is another story altogether. It's difficult to second-guess what a prosecutor, who goes around prosecuting victims of police brutality with trumped-up charges, is likely to do in any given situation. Given her own fraudulent political activities, her abandonment of the Republican Party, and those who helped her political ambitions for years, not to mention her incestuous relationship with Larry Schwartz and Andy Spano, conspicuous since Election Day 2005, it may well be that Gary Kriss', indeed, perhaps even Bill Ryan's, personal and political futures now rest in the hands of Larry and Andy.
The kinds of issues raised by Kriss' behavior, and possibly Ryan's conduct, after the fact, comes under the heading of Public Integrity, a unit run for many years by Assistant District Attorney Mike Hughes. Just ponder the job Di-Fiore and Hughes did with the killing of Mount Vernon Police Detective Christopher Ridley by three of four Westchester County cops last January 25.
Anywhere other than Westchester, Gary Kriss would have resigned several weeks ago, and written a check to the County for $12,000, or whatever the final total of his malfeasance in office may ultimately total. Bill Ryan would finish out his present term and go quietly to work for that $150,000 job Liz Schollenberger tells us he could have as a lobbyist. Perhaps, another highly ethical guy, Al Pirro, might be willing to help get Bill started. You never know, maybe Al owes him one for one of those deals he slipped into White Plains even after his license to practice law was suspended for three years.
However, because this is Westchester, Gary Kriss continues to be employed, receiving more than $12,000 a month using up week after week of vacation time that nobody else in County Government could have accumulated under the rules.
And, of course, Bill Ryan is back in the saddle, thankfully having recovered from heart surgery, looking a whole lot healthier, and, as if to add insult to injury, frantically putting out press releases such as his July 30 effort, headlined, "Ryan Secures More Assistance, Services For Battered Women: County Board Chairman Arranges $20,000..." or his August 12 dandy, "Scarsdale Teens Get Further Support From Ryan."
Oh, yes, what did this 60-day old Special Committee, formed by one of the subjects whose conduct needed scrutiny, conclude before anything else? One might have guessed it; "Name A Full Time Chief Of Staff." In other words, add still another layer of bureaucracy; someone to oversee the 17-member Board, the 48-person staff, and provide still another layer of insulation between County Government and those footing the bill while trying to make ends meet.
Most disturbing, once again there is the distinct stench of entitlement surrounding the entire Kriss Affair. Somehow, it's not what he is accused of doing, or even, in fact, what he did; it's that he got caught doing it. It's not the stain and the humiliation we, who have been betrayed, would think one must feel, who has been presumed to be a dedicated public servant. Rather, it's the inconvenience, the distraction, disclaimers, and posturing, the whole dance that one's peers are now going through
That upsets and concerns far too many who ought to be feeling indignant, disappointed, and outraged.
Instead, there are far too many Liz Schollenbergers, too many in the supporting cast of the "entitled", all too ready to rush in with the perfume and deodorant of rationalization and excuse to cover up the stench. But our noses have told us, and continue to remind us, "Something stinks about all of this, like rotten fish." And, as we all know, a fish rots from the head down.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Westchester Guardian/Jeffrey Deskovic.
Jeff Deskovic
At The Forum On Wrongful Convictions
Held Recently In Buffalo
On July 31, 2008, a forum designed to raise public awareness of wrongful convictions was held at the Pratt Center in Buffalo, New York. In order to illustrate just how widespread wrongful convictions and other inequities in the Criminal Justice system are, the event featured multiple speakers. Since it was only an hour-long event, everybody was given ten minutes to speak, after which a question and answer session was held.
Nathan Hare, the Executive Director of Community Action Organization of Erie County, opened up the discussion by stating that New York has had many wrongful convictions. He said that proactive corrective action was needed on the part of the Legislature in order to make the Criminal Justice System more accurate.
Some reforms that he championed included videotaping of interrogations, improving eyewitness identification procedures, having a unified statewide system of defense attorneys rather than having each county with it’s own localized public defenders office, in order to secure more oversight and quality control. He also gave support to a review apparatus, independent of the appeals process, to both review cases in which a defendant had a colorable claim of innocence, and to have power to grant relief, and to review cases once innocence has been proven.
The idea is to identify what went wrong and what could be done in the future to ensure that it does not happen again; somewhat akin to investigators looking into plane crashes to see what went wrong in order to prevent future ones. I appreciated his mentioning of this reform, since it usually gets overshadowed by others that are championed by advocates who are trying to reform the System.
Hare then tied wrongful convictions to the death penalty by stating that as horrible as being wrongfully imprisoned was, that at least when a mistake was made the person could be released and given back their freedom, whereas once an execution was carried out there was no bringing a person back. He then introduced Jim Michalek, of New Yorkers Against The Death Penalty, who acted as master of ceremonies.
Michalek began by thanking all of the speakers for participating. Setting the tone for the forum, he wasted no time in stating that wrongful convictions were a serious problem, and that no one was safe from having it happen to them. Supporting that theme, he too mentioned that New York was one of the leading states in terms of wrongful convictions, at 23 DNA based exonerations, and that there were many other
injustices present in and around the Criminal Justice System.
One of those issues is racial inequalities in terms of sentencing in that often a Black defendant, convicted of the same crime as a White defendant, often gets a more severe sentence. He also pointed out the role slanted media coverage plays: defendants are frequently tried and convicted in the press prior to even being found guilty in court, defendants running an uphill battle before the trial even gets started. It is naïve, he pointed out, to believe that jurors hadn’t read about sensationalized cases prior to being picked, with the result that a bias in their mind has already occurred.
I was the first speaker Michalek called upon. Given the time constraints, I was only able to give a brief thumbnail sketch, mentioning how, at 16 years of age, I was arrested and convicted based upon a coerced and false confession along with the fabrication of other evidence, despite a
DNA test showing that semen found in the victim did not match me.
I mentioned how the appellate process failed me every step of the way, including the Appellate Division’s having stated that there was “overwhelming evidence of guilt” and ruling five to zero against me; the Court Of Appeals refusing to hear my case on the rationale that “there was no merit in law to justify reviewing my case”, and the federal court, at the urging of then-Westchester DA Jeanine Pirro, urging that I be time barred based upon my petition being four days too late because a court clerk gave incorrect information to my then-lawyer
regarding the filing procedure.
I re-mentioned the reforms that Nathan Hare had spoken about earlier, and added having a standardized evidence preservation system, and giving all prisoners the right to DNA testing. Lightly touching upon the impact that wrongful convictions have upon people, with myself as a case in point, beyond the loss of freedom, I referenced the disruption of my natural life cycle, having to cope with what happened to me and readjusting to being free; the experience of being in a strange planet and in a time warp, being in a very difficult position financially, difficulty
in breaking in socially, family relationships, losing touch with friends, and having to learn technology that the average person is up to speed on.
In response to a question from the audience regarding whether I had been compensated for my ordeal, pain and suffering, and lost wages, and to help me get on my feet, I replied that there was no mechanism in place for that, but that I believed that there should be immediate money given to all wrongfully convicted prisoners upon their being released, of fifteen thousand dollars per year of incarceration, in addition
to that awarded as a result of a lawsuit, to cover expenses that immediately come at a person, such as housing, cost of living, mental health services, as well as education and health insurance.
I pointed out that the court process typically takes between two to seven years, and that often the government exploits the desperate financial condition of such people by dragging the legal proceedings out for as long as they can, and then offering small amounts of money. I further stated that I was ineligible for the services that non-profit organizations offer to those who are on parole, many of whom were guilty.
Gary Beeman spoke next. Beeman had been wrongfully convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Ohio. He spent three and half years in prison on Death Row before being cleared. Incentivized witnessing, which is when a witness receives a reward in exchange for testifying against another person, was the cause of Beeman’s wrongful conviction.
Beeman was in jail for writing bad checks. Another prisoner, who had been sentenced to a prison term of ten to thirty years for selling cocaine, and who had a past record of several assaults and an escape, claimed that Beeman admitted to him, while in jail, that he committed the murder in question. Beeman said that not only was the inmate’s story untrue, but it made no sense, because where the prisoner’s cell
was located, relative to his cell, would have resulted in other prisoners hearing him confess. The prisoner lied and claimed that he did not get a plea bargain agreement in exchange for testifying against Beeman. Yet the day after Beeman was found guilty, the prisoner walked out of prison.
Beeman obtained a reversal of his conviction because the Judge at his trial would not allow one of Beeman’s witnesses to testify who would have stated that the witness admitted to him committing the crime and falsely implicating Beeman. Once he obtained a reversal, the state retried him. During that second trial, the prisoner who testified against Beeman got arrested for drunkness and was sent to a city jail. While
there, drunk, he admitted to four other prisoners that he had gotten away with murder and was pinning it on Beeman.
Based upon this testimony, the jury this time found Beeman not guilty. David Kaczinski, the Executive Director of New Yorkers Against The Death Penalty, told the story of how he came to be involved in his crusade against the death penalty. A suspect known as the Unabomber, had been on the FBI’S Most Wanted List for many years. He was making pipe bombs and sending them through the mail. Three
people were killed, and twenty three people were injured in the process.
The crisis for Kaczinski started when The Washington Post published the Unabomber’s Manifesto, which was a written document containing the Unabomber’s reasoning and rationalization as to why he was sending the bombs. Kaczinski read it and realized that it very much sounded like his estranged, mentally ill brother Ted. He was placed in the terrible position of either remaining silent, and in effect having the blood of future victims of Ted’s on his hands, or turning in his own brother to be likely executed since his crimes were death penalty eligible.
After much soul searching, and consultation with his wife, Kaczinski decided to strike a deal with the FBI: He would tell authorities who he thought the Unabomber was, if they would agree not to seek the death penalty, in light of his obvious mental illness, paranoid schizophrenia. The deal was struck, and Ted, indeed, turned out to be the Unabomber. Several unmailed pipe bombs were discovered in his house.
The FBI reneged on their promise and sought to execute Ted anyway, and they also violated their promise not to reveal his identity to the press. In the end, at least partially because the media realized the injustice of seeking the death penalty against a mentally ill person and gave news coverage, the government ultimately decided to offer the plea bargain of life imprisonment.
That episode is what caused David to take on the cause of ending the death penalty, and subsequent information that he has learned along the way, such as the danger of executing innocent people, and victim family members being forced to relive the crimes due to the increased media
coverage that typically surrounds the legal appeals of condemned inmates.
Kaczinski then told the story of his friend Bill Babbitt, who he had come to know in the course of his cause, who had a very similar story and case, and yet a very different outcome. Babbitt’s brother Manny had fought in the battle of Khe San in Vietnam. Manny returned from combat with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, paranoid schizophrenia, and flashbacks. In addition, he had shrapnel lodged in his head. Based upon these ailments, he had spent three years in a mental institution. He continued to suffer from them even after being released.
Bill Babbitt came to realize that Manny was guilty of breaking into a seventy-year old widow’s house and murdering her. He therefore turned him in, figuring that there was no way that he would be executed given his illnesses. Nonetheless the State of California sought and obtained the death penalty, despite a mental health expert testifying as to his afflictions, as well as stating that based upon the victim having a war
movie on at the time of the crime and tying a leather strap on her ankle- a practice reminiscent of the tagging of the bodies of dead soldiers in Vietnam, he was likely having a flashback when he committed the crime.
Unlike Kaczinski, Bill Babbitt wound up having to watch his own brother’s execution. Kaczinski pointed out some important differences in the two cases, which he believed spoke to the injustice in both the death penalty and the Criminal Justice System in general: race, in that Ted was White and Manny was Black; and the disparity in legal representation, in that three million dollars was spent in Ted’s defense for legal services, whereas Manny had a public defender.
Finishing up his presentation, Kaczinski further drove home the point that the death penalty wastes financial resources. He stated that better, though still inequitable federal standards for public defense, the federal government spent five million dollars prosecuting Ted and three million defending him, for a total eight million dollars to obtain the result that they could have obtained from the beginning without seeking the death penalty, life without parole. Ken Case, who is the leading candidate for the Erie County District Attorney’s of-fice, was also in attendance at the forum.
He arrived a couple of minutes late, and upon his arrival immediately was recognized by Michalek. Case not only shook everybody’s hand, but he also stood up and gave an unexpected short talk. Case emphasized that, as he saw it, it was not simply the job of the district attorney to prosecute but also to prevent wrongful convictions and clear people once their innocence was established. He stated that once it became
clear that Anthony Capozzi, who had been wrongfully convicted of rape in Buffalo and served twenty years before being cleared by DNA, was innocent, “he should not have spent another twenty seconds in prison”, whereas there was hesitation on the part of the current DA in releasing him. As an illustration of his commitment to both functions of a prosecutor, he recounted a story of when he was prosecuting a murder case along with another prosecutor, and he became convinced of the innocence of the defendant. He urged the lead prosecutor
to drop the case, and the response that he got was that the case should proceed anyway, and, “let the jury sort it out.” Unwilling to do that, he went to his superiors and eventually got the charges dismissed. He also stated that Lynn Dejac, whose story was also touched upon, deserved to know what had happened to her deceased child.
Case also cited reasons for his opposition to the death penalty, based upon its uneven application, hurting victims’ family members, the risk of executing innocent people, and the waste of financial resources that could be better spent. John Walker spoke next. In 1976, 16-year-olds Darryl Boyd, Darryn Gibson, and John H. Walker Jr. were all charged and found guilty in a questionable murder conviction in a brutal
beating death. Boyd served 26 years in prison, Walker served 22, and Gibson, who is still in prison, has thus far served 34 years. Walker said that the he has been on a crusade to clear his name since he has been released from prison on parole, not to mention during his whole time in prison.
He stated that although he had been out on parole for years, he was not free. He stated that his ability to participate in forums was limited because of a curfew; that he could not travel past a certain distance, that he had to answer to a parole officer, and that he didn’t even feel free to date women because he had to be inside his house at a certain time. He also expressed that although he was happy at Buffalo locals Anthony Capozzi being cleared and Lynn Dejac being exonerated as well as a host of others across the country he, at the same time, felt frustration at not being able to exonerate himself. He stated that all he wanted was for someone to give his case “an honest look”. He then referenced a previous statement by Judge James A. W. McLeod, who said “They didn’t do it, and I say that without hesitation or reservation, based on the evidence”.
At the time of the original trial McLeod was a defense attorney for a fourth boy who was also initially charged with the murder, Floyd T. Martin, but who was acquitted of all charges thanks to Mcleod’s diligence in pursuing facts and investigating the case. Walker found it both
ironic and frustrating that the State was sending people to prison based on that judge’s saying so but that the state would not clear someone,
or at least look into a case, based upon his expressing that they are innocent.
With tears periodically coming down from his eyes, Walker also spent significant time speaking of his co defendant and friend Darryn Gibson, who remains behind bars and is not likely to be released on parole due to his inability to express remorse for something he didn’t do. He said that Gibson had thus far been denied parole four times based upon this.
Walker then reiterated a statement which he had uttered on previous occasions: “If I had anything to do with the murder, you wouldn’t know anything about me. I would have been quiet somewhere, not having nothing to say about anything. But because I had nothing to do with it, I’m going to scream at the top of my lungs and I’m never going to shut up, until they look at the case, because it would be an injustice
by not even looking at it - just look at it.” He then closed out his presentation by making an appeal to Case to please review his case if he became district attorney. Case responded by pledging to look at it, by saying “On Jan. 2nd, you will be in my office and I will look at your case. All of you here can hold me to that.” He also made a similar promise to another woman in the room who said that her son had been wrongfully convicted.
Michalek next called upon Lynn Dejac, who was in the audience, to add a few comments. In 1994 Dejac was convicted of 2nd Degree Murder and sentenced to 25 years to Life in prison in Buffalo, New York for the murder of her 13-year-old daughter, Cyrstallynn. Lynn, who had just given birth to twin boys, Keith & Douglas, was torn away from her life, her son Eddie, who was 9 years old, her boyfriend the father of her twins whom she married while in prison, and everyone else she held dear. She served 13 ½ years in the prison in Bedford Hills, NY. As The Buffalo News reported, a judge overturned her conviction based upon DNA, showing that bloodstains in the room where the body of her 13-year-old daughter was found belonged to her former boyfriend. But the boyfriend, Dennis Donahue, who in September had been charged with the murder of another woman that he dated, will never be tried for the murder of Dejac’s daughter, despite the DNA match
and even though members of the Buffalo Police Department’s cold case squad suspect him of committing the crime, because prosecutors granted him immunity in exchange for his testifying against Dejac.
After her release, current Erie County District Attorney Frank Clark stated that he intended to retry Dejac despite the DNA, saying: “The question of guilt or innocence still has not been determined. That’s why we have every trial.” On Feb 14, 2008, The New York Times wrote an article, in which the following facts were exposed: That the prosecutor, Frank Clark, said that it had been determined that no one killed
the girl — the medical examiner had erred in his autopsy 15 years ago. She was not strangled, but died of acute cocaine intoxication. After the conviction was reversed, a further review of the autopsy and toxicology reports led to the determination of cocaine poisoning.
“There was sufficient cocaine in her blood to cause death and no other competing cause of death,” said Dr. Michael M. Baden, a former chief medical examiner for New York City, who helped Dr. James J. Woytash, the current Erie County medical examiner, re-examine autopsy and toxicological reports, as well as other evidence. Dr. Baden said that the ruling of death by strangulation arrived at by the medical examiner, Dr. Sung-ook Baik, was made even though there were no typical signs like bruising of the neck or damage to the windpipe. There were bruises found on the girl’s head, he said, although they could have resulted from an attack, or from a fall after an overdose. An overturned table was found in her bedroom, Mr. Clark said.
Sitting in the audience, Dejac stated that even though she was cleared, it was obvious that she was not the only woman who had been wrongfully convicted; it was just that she was one of the fortunate ones who had been cleared, and that she was quite sure other women are currently wrongfully convicted.
At The Forum On Wrongful Convictions
Held Recently In Buffalo
On July 31, 2008, a forum designed to raise public awareness of wrongful convictions was held at the Pratt Center in Buffalo, New York. In order to illustrate just how widespread wrongful convictions and other inequities in the Criminal Justice system are, the event featured multiple speakers. Since it was only an hour-long event, everybody was given ten minutes to speak, after which a question and answer session was held.
Nathan Hare, the Executive Director of Community Action Organization of Erie County, opened up the discussion by stating that New York has had many wrongful convictions. He said that proactive corrective action was needed on the part of the Legislature in order to make the Criminal Justice System more accurate.
Some reforms that he championed included videotaping of interrogations, improving eyewitness identification procedures, having a unified statewide system of defense attorneys rather than having each county with it’s own localized public defenders office, in order to secure more oversight and quality control. He also gave support to a review apparatus, independent of the appeals process, to both review cases in which a defendant had a colorable claim of innocence, and to have power to grant relief, and to review cases once innocence has been proven.
The idea is to identify what went wrong and what could be done in the future to ensure that it does not happen again; somewhat akin to investigators looking into plane crashes to see what went wrong in order to prevent future ones. I appreciated his mentioning of this reform, since it usually gets overshadowed by others that are championed by advocates who are trying to reform the System.
Hare then tied wrongful convictions to the death penalty by stating that as horrible as being wrongfully imprisoned was, that at least when a mistake was made the person could be released and given back their freedom, whereas once an execution was carried out there was no bringing a person back. He then introduced Jim Michalek, of New Yorkers Against The Death Penalty, who acted as master of ceremonies.
Michalek began by thanking all of the speakers for participating. Setting the tone for the forum, he wasted no time in stating that wrongful convictions were a serious problem, and that no one was safe from having it happen to them. Supporting that theme, he too mentioned that New York was one of the leading states in terms of wrongful convictions, at 23 DNA based exonerations, and that there were many other
injustices present in and around the Criminal Justice System.
One of those issues is racial inequalities in terms of sentencing in that often a Black defendant, convicted of the same crime as a White defendant, often gets a more severe sentence. He also pointed out the role slanted media coverage plays: defendants are frequently tried and convicted in the press prior to even being found guilty in court, defendants running an uphill battle before the trial even gets started. It is naïve, he pointed out, to believe that jurors hadn’t read about sensationalized cases prior to being picked, with the result that a bias in their mind has already occurred.
I was the first speaker Michalek called upon. Given the time constraints, I was only able to give a brief thumbnail sketch, mentioning how, at 16 years of age, I was arrested and convicted based upon a coerced and false confession along with the fabrication of other evidence, despite a
DNA test showing that semen found in the victim did not match me.
I mentioned how the appellate process failed me every step of the way, including the Appellate Division’s having stated that there was “overwhelming evidence of guilt” and ruling five to zero against me; the Court Of Appeals refusing to hear my case on the rationale that “there was no merit in law to justify reviewing my case”, and the federal court, at the urging of then-Westchester DA Jeanine Pirro, urging that I be time barred based upon my petition being four days too late because a court clerk gave incorrect information to my then-lawyer
regarding the filing procedure.
I re-mentioned the reforms that Nathan Hare had spoken about earlier, and added having a standardized evidence preservation system, and giving all prisoners the right to DNA testing. Lightly touching upon the impact that wrongful convictions have upon people, with myself as a case in point, beyond the loss of freedom, I referenced the disruption of my natural life cycle, having to cope with what happened to me and readjusting to being free; the experience of being in a strange planet and in a time warp, being in a very difficult position financially, difficulty
in breaking in socially, family relationships, losing touch with friends, and having to learn technology that the average person is up to speed on.
In response to a question from the audience regarding whether I had been compensated for my ordeal, pain and suffering, and lost wages, and to help me get on my feet, I replied that there was no mechanism in place for that, but that I believed that there should be immediate money given to all wrongfully convicted prisoners upon their being released, of fifteen thousand dollars per year of incarceration, in addition
to that awarded as a result of a lawsuit, to cover expenses that immediately come at a person, such as housing, cost of living, mental health services, as well as education and health insurance.
I pointed out that the court process typically takes between two to seven years, and that often the government exploits the desperate financial condition of such people by dragging the legal proceedings out for as long as they can, and then offering small amounts of money. I further stated that I was ineligible for the services that non-profit organizations offer to those who are on parole, many of whom were guilty.
Gary Beeman spoke next. Beeman had been wrongfully convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Ohio. He spent three and half years in prison on Death Row before being cleared. Incentivized witnessing, which is when a witness receives a reward in exchange for testifying against another person, was the cause of Beeman’s wrongful conviction.
Beeman was in jail for writing bad checks. Another prisoner, who had been sentenced to a prison term of ten to thirty years for selling cocaine, and who had a past record of several assaults and an escape, claimed that Beeman admitted to him, while in jail, that he committed the murder in question. Beeman said that not only was the inmate’s story untrue, but it made no sense, because where the prisoner’s cell
was located, relative to his cell, would have resulted in other prisoners hearing him confess. The prisoner lied and claimed that he did not get a plea bargain agreement in exchange for testifying against Beeman. Yet the day after Beeman was found guilty, the prisoner walked out of prison.
Beeman obtained a reversal of his conviction because the Judge at his trial would not allow one of Beeman’s witnesses to testify who would have stated that the witness admitted to him committing the crime and falsely implicating Beeman. Once he obtained a reversal, the state retried him. During that second trial, the prisoner who testified against Beeman got arrested for drunkness and was sent to a city jail. While
there, drunk, he admitted to four other prisoners that he had gotten away with murder and was pinning it on Beeman.
Based upon this testimony, the jury this time found Beeman not guilty. David Kaczinski, the Executive Director of New Yorkers Against The Death Penalty, told the story of how he came to be involved in his crusade against the death penalty. A suspect known as the Unabomber, had been on the FBI’S Most Wanted List for many years. He was making pipe bombs and sending them through the mail. Three
people were killed, and twenty three people were injured in the process.
The crisis for Kaczinski started when The Washington Post published the Unabomber’s Manifesto, which was a written document containing the Unabomber’s reasoning and rationalization as to why he was sending the bombs. Kaczinski read it and realized that it very much sounded like his estranged, mentally ill brother Ted. He was placed in the terrible position of either remaining silent, and in effect having the blood of future victims of Ted’s on his hands, or turning in his own brother to be likely executed since his crimes were death penalty eligible.
After much soul searching, and consultation with his wife, Kaczinski decided to strike a deal with the FBI: He would tell authorities who he thought the Unabomber was, if they would agree not to seek the death penalty, in light of his obvious mental illness, paranoid schizophrenia. The deal was struck, and Ted, indeed, turned out to be the Unabomber. Several unmailed pipe bombs were discovered in his house.
The FBI reneged on their promise and sought to execute Ted anyway, and they also violated their promise not to reveal his identity to the press. In the end, at least partially because the media realized the injustice of seeking the death penalty against a mentally ill person and gave news coverage, the government ultimately decided to offer the plea bargain of life imprisonment.
That episode is what caused David to take on the cause of ending the death penalty, and subsequent information that he has learned along the way, such as the danger of executing innocent people, and victim family members being forced to relive the crimes due to the increased media
coverage that typically surrounds the legal appeals of condemned inmates.
Kaczinski then told the story of his friend Bill Babbitt, who he had come to know in the course of his cause, who had a very similar story and case, and yet a very different outcome. Babbitt’s brother Manny had fought in the battle of Khe San in Vietnam. Manny returned from combat with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, paranoid schizophrenia, and flashbacks. In addition, he had shrapnel lodged in his head. Based upon these ailments, he had spent three years in a mental institution. He continued to suffer from them even after being released.
Bill Babbitt came to realize that Manny was guilty of breaking into a seventy-year old widow’s house and murdering her. He therefore turned him in, figuring that there was no way that he would be executed given his illnesses. Nonetheless the State of California sought and obtained the death penalty, despite a mental health expert testifying as to his afflictions, as well as stating that based upon the victim having a war
movie on at the time of the crime and tying a leather strap on her ankle- a practice reminiscent of the tagging of the bodies of dead soldiers in Vietnam, he was likely having a flashback when he committed the crime.
Unlike Kaczinski, Bill Babbitt wound up having to watch his own brother’s execution. Kaczinski pointed out some important differences in the two cases, which he believed spoke to the injustice in both the death penalty and the Criminal Justice System in general: race, in that Ted was White and Manny was Black; and the disparity in legal representation, in that three million dollars was spent in Ted’s defense for legal services, whereas Manny had a public defender.
Finishing up his presentation, Kaczinski further drove home the point that the death penalty wastes financial resources. He stated that better, though still inequitable federal standards for public defense, the federal government spent five million dollars prosecuting Ted and three million defending him, for a total eight million dollars to obtain the result that they could have obtained from the beginning without seeking the death penalty, life without parole. Ken Case, who is the leading candidate for the Erie County District Attorney’s of-fice, was also in attendance at the forum.
He arrived a couple of minutes late, and upon his arrival immediately was recognized by Michalek. Case not only shook everybody’s hand, but he also stood up and gave an unexpected short talk. Case emphasized that, as he saw it, it was not simply the job of the district attorney to prosecute but also to prevent wrongful convictions and clear people once their innocence was established. He stated that once it became
clear that Anthony Capozzi, who had been wrongfully convicted of rape in Buffalo and served twenty years before being cleared by DNA, was innocent, “he should not have spent another twenty seconds in prison”, whereas there was hesitation on the part of the current DA in releasing him. As an illustration of his commitment to both functions of a prosecutor, he recounted a story of when he was prosecuting a murder case along with another prosecutor, and he became convinced of the innocence of the defendant. He urged the lead prosecutor
to drop the case, and the response that he got was that the case should proceed anyway, and, “let the jury sort it out.” Unwilling to do that, he went to his superiors and eventually got the charges dismissed. He also stated that Lynn Dejac, whose story was also touched upon, deserved to know what had happened to her deceased child.
Case also cited reasons for his opposition to the death penalty, based upon its uneven application, hurting victims’ family members, the risk of executing innocent people, and the waste of financial resources that could be better spent. John Walker spoke next. In 1976, 16-year-olds Darryl Boyd, Darryn Gibson, and John H. Walker Jr. were all charged and found guilty in a questionable murder conviction in a brutal
beating death. Boyd served 26 years in prison, Walker served 22, and Gibson, who is still in prison, has thus far served 34 years. Walker said that the he has been on a crusade to clear his name since he has been released from prison on parole, not to mention during his whole time in prison.
He stated that although he had been out on parole for years, he was not free. He stated that his ability to participate in forums was limited because of a curfew; that he could not travel past a certain distance, that he had to answer to a parole officer, and that he didn’t even feel free to date women because he had to be inside his house at a certain time. He also expressed that although he was happy at Buffalo locals Anthony Capozzi being cleared and Lynn Dejac being exonerated as well as a host of others across the country he, at the same time, felt frustration at not being able to exonerate himself. He stated that all he wanted was for someone to give his case “an honest look”. He then referenced a previous statement by Judge James A. W. McLeod, who said “They didn’t do it, and I say that without hesitation or reservation, based on the evidence”.
At the time of the original trial McLeod was a defense attorney for a fourth boy who was also initially charged with the murder, Floyd T. Martin, but who was acquitted of all charges thanks to Mcleod’s diligence in pursuing facts and investigating the case. Walker found it both
ironic and frustrating that the State was sending people to prison based on that judge’s saying so but that the state would not clear someone,
or at least look into a case, based upon his expressing that they are innocent.
With tears periodically coming down from his eyes, Walker also spent significant time speaking of his co defendant and friend Darryn Gibson, who remains behind bars and is not likely to be released on parole due to his inability to express remorse for something he didn’t do. He said that Gibson had thus far been denied parole four times based upon this.
Walker then reiterated a statement which he had uttered on previous occasions: “If I had anything to do with the murder, you wouldn’t know anything about me. I would have been quiet somewhere, not having nothing to say about anything. But because I had nothing to do with it, I’m going to scream at the top of my lungs and I’m never going to shut up, until they look at the case, because it would be an injustice
by not even looking at it - just look at it.” He then closed out his presentation by making an appeal to Case to please review his case if he became district attorney. Case responded by pledging to look at it, by saying “On Jan. 2nd, you will be in my office and I will look at your case. All of you here can hold me to that.” He also made a similar promise to another woman in the room who said that her son had been wrongfully convicted.
Michalek next called upon Lynn Dejac, who was in the audience, to add a few comments. In 1994 Dejac was convicted of 2nd Degree Murder and sentenced to 25 years to Life in prison in Buffalo, New York for the murder of her 13-year-old daughter, Cyrstallynn. Lynn, who had just given birth to twin boys, Keith & Douglas, was torn away from her life, her son Eddie, who was 9 years old, her boyfriend the father of her twins whom she married while in prison, and everyone else she held dear. She served 13 ½ years in the prison in Bedford Hills, NY. As The Buffalo News reported, a judge overturned her conviction based upon DNA, showing that bloodstains in the room where the body of her 13-year-old daughter was found belonged to her former boyfriend. But the boyfriend, Dennis Donahue, who in September had been charged with the murder of another woman that he dated, will never be tried for the murder of Dejac’s daughter, despite the DNA match
and even though members of the Buffalo Police Department’s cold case squad suspect him of committing the crime, because prosecutors granted him immunity in exchange for his testifying against Dejac.
After her release, current Erie County District Attorney Frank Clark stated that he intended to retry Dejac despite the DNA, saying: “The question of guilt or innocence still has not been determined. That’s why we have every trial.” On Feb 14, 2008, The New York Times wrote an article, in which the following facts were exposed: That the prosecutor, Frank Clark, said that it had been determined that no one killed
the girl — the medical examiner had erred in his autopsy 15 years ago. She was not strangled, but died of acute cocaine intoxication. After the conviction was reversed, a further review of the autopsy and toxicology reports led to the determination of cocaine poisoning.
“There was sufficient cocaine in her blood to cause death and no other competing cause of death,” said Dr. Michael M. Baden, a former chief medical examiner for New York City, who helped Dr. James J. Woytash, the current Erie County medical examiner, re-examine autopsy and toxicological reports, as well as other evidence. Dr. Baden said that the ruling of death by strangulation arrived at by the medical examiner, Dr. Sung-ook Baik, was made even though there were no typical signs like bruising of the neck or damage to the windpipe. There were bruises found on the girl’s head, he said, although they could have resulted from an attack, or from a fall after an overdose. An overturned table was found in her bedroom, Mr. Clark said.
Sitting in the audience, Dejac stated that even though she was cleared, it was obvious that she was not the only woman who had been wrongfully convicted; it was just that she was one of the fortunate ones who had been cleared, and that she was quite sure other women are currently wrongfully convicted.
Westchester Guardian/Catherine Wilson.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Catherine Wilson, Bureau Chief
Northern Westchester
Judicial “Intervention”
A visit to the web site of the New York State Unified Court System these days reveals a significant obstruction of justice and misuse of taxpayers’ funds. Plastered across the top of this website is a banner announcing the “Judicial Compensation Lawsuit”. Our judges are currently embroiled in a battle with the State Legislature over their salaries.
The judges are whining that they should be compensated commensurate to attorneys in private practice. However, a fact blatantly omitted
from the arguments from our judges in support of their pay increases is the part-time nature of their positions, a mere 35, or fewer, hours a week, with six weeks paid vacation time and an additional two weeks of holidays and unlimited sick days, compared to the 70+ hour work week, with limited time off, for most attorneys in private practice.
The part-time nature of judicial employment is clearly evident from the amount of time our judges had on their hands to place volumes of materials related to their personal lawsuit on the Court’s website! Given the fact that Judicial “Intervention” our courts have tremendous backlogs, why are the judges wasting precious court time advertising their lawsuit on taxpayer-funded websites?
The “Judicial Compensation Lawsuit” banner is more than just a notice. It denotes a link to an entire section of the Court’s website dedicated to the judges’ court lings on this matter. The judges kindly provide a scanned copy of their full, 112-page court motion led in July against the State Legislature; not counting the numerous copies needed for each judge and legislator. How many trees were slaughtered for this ling alone?
And, what did it cost the taxpayers?
The judges also provide scanned copies of all 54 pages of the additional lawsuit led by the head of the court system, Judge Judith Kaye. The judges even go so far as to provide copies of four letters they signed related to this issue – another 22 pages worth. No one ever accused the legal mind of being brief; pun intended!
The Courts have spent taxpayers’ funds to file duplicate court motions and lawsuits on this matter. They then spent even more taxpayer funds to set up this section of the Court website and to scan and link all 188 pages onto the taxpayers’ website to publicize their demands at taxpayers’ expense.
Nowhere on this site do the judges reveal the cost to the New York State taxpayers for their personal use of this website. If indeed the judges felt the need to “get the word out” on this issue, why didn’t each judge personally chip in a portion of their current $136,700+ base starting salaries to fund what amounts to nothing more than a onesided campaign smear job?
If the job of the courts is to provide equal access and fair representation to all, then why haven’t the judges provided the legislative response to their lawsuits for the taxpayers’ benefit? Whose benefit does such a one-sided posting really serve here? Why was this skewed posting
done at taxpayers’ expense in defi-ance of the budgetary, contractual, and legislative rules prohibiting the use of taxpayers’ systems for personal benefit?
No one but the judges will benefit from an increase in judicial salaries. Therefore, no one but the judges should bear the burden of the expenses incurred in seeking those increases. And it should not be too much for the taxpayers of New York State to expect our judges to obey the laws that they enforce in the courts; and, to provide us with both sides of the issue, or none at all.
This abuse of New York State taxpayers’ systems becomes even more incredulous when the Judicial Compensation Lawsuit section of the website is compared to the information provided to litigants who must navigate the murky waters of our “justice system” alone, Pro Se litigants. The website for our local Westchester Courts does not provide any information whatsoever for Pro Bono help. The Westchester court site does provide a direct line for criminals to contact the court, 914-995-4323, but no such information is available for law-abiding citizens of our county.
Contrast that to the assistance provided to litigants in other counties: the Syracuse Courts provide a full address, email contact, direct phone number, a toll free number, and both a local and 800 number for TTY lines for speech and hearing-impaired litigants. If Syracuse courts and the surrounding counties upstate can provide full contact information to Pro Se and handicapped litigants, why can’t Westchester? Why isn’t Judge Nicolai, the Administrative Judge of the Ninth Judicial District, providing our residents with at least equal treatment?
The only assistance Westchester Courts will provide a frightened taxpayer facing a legal maze alone is given by their clerk’s office. But that advice is extremely limited. According to the New York State court website: You can find help at the Clerk’s Of-fice at any courthouse.
BUT... Workers in the Clerk’s Office can’t take sides or give legal advice. They can:
• Explain court rules and procedures;
• Explain available options for your case or problem;
• Provide past case rulings;
• Provide cites to, or copies of, the law;
• Explain public court operations and jobs;
• Describe court records and their availability;
• Provide public case information;
• Tell you how to make a complaint;
• Refer you to other offices or persons;
• Provide forms with instructions. But they can’t:
• Suggest the procedures you should follow;
• Provide opinions about which option to choose;
• Predict what the court will do;
• Analyze the law based on the specifics of your case;
• Provide information derived from the decision-making process;
• Provide access to sealed or confi-dential case records;
• Provide confidential case information;
• Give opinions about your complaint;
• Make referrals based on personal preference;
• Provide or suggest the information to enter on forms.
Compare that to the Judicial section on their salary lawsuit which provides full details of the lawsuits and all letters and communications. A law-abiding litigant cannot be shown how to fill out the plethora of convoluted court forms and must struggle on unassisted, but the judges have been provided, at taxpayer expense, with complete scanned copies of the fully-drafted court motions filed by the court administration to ‘cut and paste’ into their own personal lawsuits.
Such preferential treatment is not limited to judges in our courts. Attorneys receive personal benefits at taxpayers’ expense. This reporter made a trip to Surrogate’s Court in White Plains last week and uncovered blatant evidence of the discrimination between attorneys and litigants in our Westchester Courts. Posted on the door of the Surrogate’s Court, for Judge Anthony Scarpino, was a notice inviting the attorneys who practice before the Judge to a free Continuing Education seminar hosted by Scarpino personally. In short, a ‘meet and greet’ to schmooze with the Judge, at taxpayers’ expense.
Attorneys practicing in New York State must complete 24 hours of continuing education every two years. A typical two-credit course offered by Pace Law School in White Plains costs $87.50 for an online course, other offerings are as little as $20 per credit. And unlike other professions who must pay exorbitant prices for their continuing education, many local bar associations, agencies, and law firms offer CLE courses for free. So why are our Westchester Courts offering free CLE credits to attorneys who can obtain similar information, at little cost elsewhere? Since attorneys may not practice in New York State if they do not complete their required CLE training, obtaining this training is essential for them to be able to earn a living.
So why are our courts providing what amounts to a personal benefit to local attorneys at taxpayer expense? Why are tax dollars and court time being used for a seminar that is clearly nothing more than a thinly-disguised opportunity for the Court to schmooze with the attorneys who finance judicial campaigns, and for the attorneys to schmooze in turn with the Judge who decides their cases, an opportunity denied
Pro Se litigants; and therefore, possibly, a violation of ‘equal access’ laws?
Given the backlog of cases in Surrogates’ Court, why is Judge Scarpino dedicating his time, his court, and his staff to this endeavor? What is the cost of his staff’s time to develop, advertise, and host this ‘seminar’; the cost of court computers and copies for the materials needed, the cost of the paper and ink used, the cost for the courthouse and security staff for this event, and the facilities cost for lighting and heating?
Given our budget deficit, why are we taxpayers paying a dime for an event that clearly is not ‘free’ at all, at least not to us? Why are we expected to subsidize overpaid attorneys with our tax dollars for their personal training? And, where can the rest of us sign up to get equal
face time with our local judges? With refreshments! (Judge, I like my coffee with skim milk and one Splenda).
The CLE flyer which was posted in plain sight on the door of the courtroom boasts that it is not only being offered ‘free of charge’ but that the attorneys can also look forward to ‘free refreshments’. The CLE flyer also clearly notes the name of the court staff member assigned
to assist them with this event, Joe Accetta, and his full contact information including his address, fax number, and direct line (914-824-5655).
Contrast that with a flyer posted in an obscure hallway on the Surrogate’s floor for Pro Bono help. This reporter has contacted Judge Frank Nicolai, the Administrative Judge of the Westchester Courts, on several occasions about the lack of Pro Bono assistance available. On
one occasion, this reporter contacted Judge Nicolai to inform him that the Pro Bono phone number provided nothing more to litigants than a recording which said “This number is out of service!” On every occasion, Judge Nicolai refused to address this reporter’s concerns.
Yet on Monday, August 4, while I sat at the end of a hallway, around the corner from Surrogate’s Court and out of the line of sight of both the courtroom and the lobby, I observed Judge Scarpino’s secretary, Janet Siciliano, post a flyer for ‘Pro Bono NY’ on a door facing me, and only on that door. She walked out of her office next to Judge Scarpino’s chambers, dramatically posted the Pro Bono lawyer immediately
in my line of sight, and just as immediately returned to her office.
Why were several flyers for freebies for attorneys posted in the lobby where they could be easily seen, yet only one solitary flyer for Pro Se litigants was posted, and that flyer was displayed in an area where few litigants would dare to tread? And why was that flyer only posted there (and nowhere else) only after I was seen and acknowledged by court employees?
Was that for my benefit? To prove that the court really does provide Pro Bono help? If so, the court failed to convince me. The Pro Bono ‘notice’ was a pathetic attempt at providing information, especially when contrasted with the flyers distributed for the attorneys. Local attorneys who charge between $300 and $450 an hour, thereby earning revenues between $600,000 and $900,000 a year, are provided with free training and free refreshments and complete contact info, yet local taxpayers who cannot afford an attorney and who may be struggling
on $40,000 a year, a fraction of the over-priced attorneys’ earnings, are not even entitled to get a phone number of whom to call for help? Is this a joke? If so, the joke is on us, the taxpayers; for the discrimination practiced by our courts goes even deeper.
I attended Judge Scarpino’s court on August 4th out of curiosity. Judge Scarpino is the Surrogate Judge for Westchester County. Surrogates, as it is commonly called, is a specialized court that handles only cases concerning the distribution of a deceased person’s estate. Surrogate courts hand out judicial appointments to greedy attorneys like candy since the litigants involved, i.e. the dead people, can’t complain.
Anyone familiar with Charles Dickens’ “Bleak House” can readily see the comparisons in Westchester County Surrogate Court’s handling of the Carvel estate. By the time the attorneys are through fighting, there will be nothing left for any family member or charity to inherit. Yet, in addition to his plethora of opportunities for political appointments within Surrogates, Judge Scarpino has also been appointed head of the Matrimonial Courts in Westchester County.
It was a matrimonial case that drew me to his Court. I was curious when I saw that Judge Scarpino was personally handling the divorce of the head of security for Westchester Community College, a divorce case, Allison v Allison, previously handled by disgraced Matrimonial Court
referee James Montagnino.
As Guardian readers’ will recall, the Allison case has a long history. The divorce decree was rendered by disgraced referee James Montagnino whose appointment to this particular case remains the focus of investigative attention since there was never any record of his appointment!
The Appellate Courts have already noted that they found no order appointing Montagnino, in violation of New York State Court Procedures. So, if the referee’s appointment is non-existent, how can any order that referee issued be valid since he had no legal authority to issue the orders to begin with? Upon further investigation, former referee Montagnino resigned under suspicious circumstances
and now resides in Saratoga Springs where he can do no further damage to hard-working Westchester families. In 2007, the New York Post reported that Montagnino gave the following warning in a CLE seminar he was hosting for attorneys at Pace Law School: ‘Beware of the 10583 Syndrome,’ a reference to posh Scarsdale’s ZIP code.
“The 10583 mentality...says that ‘I’m entitled and I ought to be able to get the house, I ought to be able to get support... I ought to be able to live with my son’s drum instructor happily ever after and it all should be on his dime.’”
Such remarks are clear evidence of the influence judges and court referees can have on local attorneys and why such individuals should not be conducting thinly disguised CLE seminars for local attorneys that are nothing more than vehicles for them to influence those attorneys to their way of thinking.
Yet despite the past horrors suffered by Montagnino’s victims, his cases are now being resurrected in Surrogates’ Court by a Judge who is following in Montagnino’s footsteps in more ways than one. One wonders what “advice” Judge Scarpino will be offering local attorneys at his ‘meet and greet’ CLE seminar on September 17.
Will it be more of the ‘Beware the 10583 syndrome’ variety? The mere presence of this reporter in his courtroom apparently made Judge Scarpino nervous since he took the unusual step of asking, on the record, who was in the courtroom?
Nervous judges or not, The Guardian will continue to monitor the behavior of our local courts and their preferential treatment of attorneys and discriminatory treatment of litigants. We will continue to keep an eye on Surrogates and other Courts and the Allison case in particular.
Illegal orders from disgraced court referees should not be resurrected to induce further harm upon innocent victims. And our local judges and courts may not use their positions as an opportunity to intervene with local attorneys and personal issues or to interject their personal agendas.
Catherine Wilson, Bureau Chief
Northern Westchester
Judicial “Intervention”
A visit to the web site of the New York State Unified Court System these days reveals a significant obstruction of justice and misuse of taxpayers’ funds. Plastered across the top of this website is a banner announcing the “Judicial Compensation Lawsuit”. Our judges are currently embroiled in a battle with the State Legislature over their salaries.
The judges are whining that they should be compensated commensurate to attorneys in private practice. However, a fact blatantly omitted
from the arguments from our judges in support of their pay increases is the part-time nature of their positions, a mere 35, or fewer, hours a week, with six weeks paid vacation time and an additional two weeks of holidays and unlimited sick days, compared to the 70+ hour work week, with limited time off, for most attorneys in private practice.
The part-time nature of judicial employment is clearly evident from the amount of time our judges had on their hands to place volumes of materials related to their personal lawsuit on the Court’s website! Given the fact that Judicial “Intervention” our courts have tremendous backlogs, why are the judges wasting precious court time advertising their lawsuit on taxpayer-funded websites?
The “Judicial Compensation Lawsuit” banner is more than just a notice. It denotes a link to an entire section of the Court’s website dedicated to the judges’ court lings on this matter. The judges kindly provide a scanned copy of their full, 112-page court motion led in July against the State Legislature; not counting the numerous copies needed for each judge and legislator. How many trees were slaughtered for this ling alone?
And, what did it cost the taxpayers?
The judges also provide scanned copies of all 54 pages of the additional lawsuit led by the head of the court system, Judge Judith Kaye. The judges even go so far as to provide copies of four letters they signed related to this issue – another 22 pages worth. No one ever accused the legal mind of being brief; pun intended!
The Courts have spent taxpayers’ funds to file duplicate court motions and lawsuits on this matter. They then spent even more taxpayer funds to set up this section of the Court website and to scan and link all 188 pages onto the taxpayers’ website to publicize their demands at taxpayers’ expense.
Nowhere on this site do the judges reveal the cost to the New York State taxpayers for their personal use of this website. If indeed the judges felt the need to “get the word out” on this issue, why didn’t each judge personally chip in a portion of their current $136,700+ base starting salaries to fund what amounts to nothing more than a onesided campaign smear job?
If the job of the courts is to provide equal access and fair representation to all, then why haven’t the judges provided the legislative response to their lawsuits for the taxpayers’ benefit? Whose benefit does such a one-sided posting really serve here? Why was this skewed posting
done at taxpayers’ expense in defi-ance of the budgetary, contractual, and legislative rules prohibiting the use of taxpayers’ systems for personal benefit?
No one but the judges will benefit from an increase in judicial salaries. Therefore, no one but the judges should bear the burden of the expenses incurred in seeking those increases. And it should not be too much for the taxpayers of New York State to expect our judges to obey the laws that they enforce in the courts; and, to provide us with both sides of the issue, or none at all.
This abuse of New York State taxpayers’ systems becomes even more incredulous when the Judicial Compensation Lawsuit section of the website is compared to the information provided to litigants who must navigate the murky waters of our “justice system” alone, Pro Se litigants. The website for our local Westchester Courts does not provide any information whatsoever for Pro Bono help. The Westchester court site does provide a direct line for criminals to contact the court, 914-995-4323, but no such information is available for law-abiding citizens of our county.
Contrast that to the assistance provided to litigants in other counties: the Syracuse Courts provide a full address, email contact, direct phone number, a toll free number, and both a local and 800 number for TTY lines for speech and hearing-impaired litigants. If Syracuse courts and the surrounding counties upstate can provide full contact information to Pro Se and handicapped litigants, why can’t Westchester? Why isn’t Judge Nicolai, the Administrative Judge of the Ninth Judicial District, providing our residents with at least equal treatment?
The only assistance Westchester Courts will provide a frightened taxpayer facing a legal maze alone is given by their clerk’s office. But that advice is extremely limited. According to the New York State court website: You can find help at the Clerk’s Of-fice at any courthouse.
BUT... Workers in the Clerk’s Office can’t take sides or give legal advice. They can:
• Explain court rules and procedures;
• Explain available options for your case or problem;
• Provide past case rulings;
• Provide cites to, or copies of, the law;
• Explain public court operations and jobs;
• Describe court records and their availability;
• Provide public case information;
• Tell you how to make a complaint;
• Refer you to other offices or persons;
• Provide forms with instructions. But they can’t:
• Suggest the procedures you should follow;
• Provide opinions about which option to choose;
• Predict what the court will do;
• Analyze the law based on the specifics of your case;
• Provide information derived from the decision-making process;
• Provide access to sealed or confi-dential case records;
• Provide confidential case information;
• Give opinions about your complaint;
• Make referrals based on personal preference;
• Provide or suggest the information to enter on forms.
Compare that to the Judicial section on their salary lawsuit which provides full details of the lawsuits and all letters and communications. A law-abiding litigant cannot be shown how to fill out the plethora of convoluted court forms and must struggle on unassisted, but the judges have been provided, at taxpayer expense, with complete scanned copies of the fully-drafted court motions filed by the court administration to ‘cut and paste’ into their own personal lawsuits.
Such preferential treatment is not limited to judges in our courts. Attorneys receive personal benefits at taxpayers’ expense. This reporter made a trip to Surrogate’s Court in White Plains last week and uncovered blatant evidence of the discrimination between attorneys and litigants in our Westchester Courts. Posted on the door of the Surrogate’s Court, for Judge Anthony Scarpino, was a notice inviting the attorneys who practice before the Judge to a free Continuing Education seminar hosted by Scarpino personally. In short, a ‘meet and greet’ to schmooze with the Judge, at taxpayers’ expense.
Attorneys practicing in New York State must complete 24 hours of continuing education every two years. A typical two-credit course offered by Pace Law School in White Plains costs $87.50 for an online course, other offerings are as little as $20 per credit. And unlike other professions who must pay exorbitant prices for their continuing education, many local bar associations, agencies, and law firms offer CLE courses for free. So why are our Westchester Courts offering free CLE credits to attorneys who can obtain similar information, at little cost elsewhere? Since attorneys may not practice in New York State if they do not complete their required CLE training, obtaining this training is essential for them to be able to earn a living.
So why are our courts providing what amounts to a personal benefit to local attorneys at taxpayer expense? Why are tax dollars and court time being used for a seminar that is clearly nothing more than a thinly-disguised opportunity for the Court to schmooze with the attorneys who finance judicial campaigns, and for the attorneys to schmooze in turn with the Judge who decides their cases, an opportunity denied
Pro Se litigants; and therefore, possibly, a violation of ‘equal access’ laws?
Given the backlog of cases in Surrogates’ Court, why is Judge Scarpino dedicating his time, his court, and his staff to this endeavor? What is the cost of his staff’s time to develop, advertise, and host this ‘seminar’; the cost of court computers and copies for the materials needed, the cost of the paper and ink used, the cost for the courthouse and security staff for this event, and the facilities cost for lighting and heating?
Given our budget deficit, why are we taxpayers paying a dime for an event that clearly is not ‘free’ at all, at least not to us? Why are we expected to subsidize overpaid attorneys with our tax dollars for their personal training? And, where can the rest of us sign up to get equal
face time with our local judges? With refreshments! (Judge, I like my coffee with skim milk and one Splenda).
The CLE flyer which was posted in plain sight on the door of the courtroom boasts that it is not only being offered ‘free of charge’ but that the attorneys can also look forward to ‘free refreshments’. The CLE flyer also clearly notes the name of the court staff member assigned
to assist them with this event, Joe Accetta, and his full contact information including his address, fax number, and direct line (914-824-5655).
Contrast that with a flyer posted in an obscure hallway on the Surrogate’s floor for Pro Bono help. This reporter has contacted Judge Frank Nicolai, the Administrative Judge of the Westchester Courts, on several occasions about the lack of Pro Bono assistance available. On
one occasion, this reporter contacted Judge Nicolai to inform him that the Pro Bono phone number provided nothing more to litigants than a recording which said “This number is out of service!” On every occasion, Judge Nicolai refused to address this reporter’s concerns.
Yet on Monday, August 4, while I sat at the end of a hallway, around the corner from Surrogate’s Court and out of the line of sight of both the courtroom and the lobby, I observed Judge Scarpino’s secretary, Janet Siciliano, post a flyer for ‘Pro Bono NY’ on a door facing me, and only on that door. She walked out of her office next to Judge Scarpino’s chambers, dramatically posted the Pro Bono lawyer immediately
in my line of sight, and just as immediately returned to her office.
Why were several flyers for freebies for attorneys posted in the lobby where they could be easily seen, yet only one solitary flyer for Pro Se litigants was posted, and that flyer was displayed in an area where few litigants would dare to tread? And why was that flyer only posted there (and nowhere else) only after I was seen and acknowledged by court employees?
Was that for my benefit? To prove that the court really does provide Pro Bono help? If so, the court failed to convince me. The Pro Bono ‘notice’ was a pathetic attempt at providing information, especially when contrasted with the flyers distributed for the attorneys. Local attorneys who charge between $300 and $450 an hour, thereby earning revenues between $600,000 and $900,000 a year, are provided with free training and free refreshments and complete contact info, yet local taxpayers who cannot afford an attorney and who may be struggling
on $40,000 a year, a fraction of the over-priced attorneys’ earnings, are not even entitled to get a phone number of whom to call for help? Is this a joke? If so, the joke is on us, the taxpayers; for the discrimination practiced by our courts goes even deeper.
I attended Judge Scarpino’s court on August 4th out of curiosity. Judge Scarpino is the Surrogate Judge for Westchester County. Surrogates, as it is commonly called, is a specialized court that handles only cases concerning the distribution of a deceased person’s estate. Surrogate courts hand out judicial appointments to greedy attorneys like candy since the litigants involved, i.e. the dead people, can’t complain.
Anyone familiar with Charles Dickens’ “Bleak House” can readily see the comparisons in Westchester County Surrogate Court’s handling of the Carvel estate. By the time the attorneys are through fighting, there will be nothing left for any family member or charity to inherit. Yet, in addition to his plethora of opportunities for political appointments within Surrogates, Judge Scarpino has also been appointed head of the Matrimonial Courts in Westchester County.
It was a matrimonial case that drew me to his Court. I was curious when I saw that Judge Scarpino was personally handling the divorce of the head of security for Westchester Community College, a divorce case, Allison v Allison, previously handled by disgraced Matrimonial Court
referee James Montagnino.
As Guardian readers’ will recall, the Allison case has a long history. The divorce decree was rendered by disgraced referee James Montagnino whose appointment to this particular case remains the focus of investigative attention since there was never any record of his appointment!
The Appellate Courts have already noted that they found no order appointing Montagnino, in violation of New York State Court Procedures. So, if the referee’s appointment is non-existent, how can any order that referee issued be valid since he had no legal authority to issue the orders to begin with? Upon further investigation, former referee Montagnino resigned under suspicious circumstances
and now resides in Saratoga Springs where he can do no further damage to hard-working Westchester families. In 2007, the New York Post reported that Montagnino gave the following warning in a CLE seminar he was hosting for attorneys at Pace Law School: ‘Beware of the 10583 Syndrome,’ a reference to posh Scarsdale’s ZIP code.
“The 10583 mentality...says that ‘I’m entitled and I ought to be able to get the house, I ought to be able to get support... I ought to be able to live with my son’s drum instructor happily ever after and it all should be on his dime.’”
Such remarks are clear evidence of the influence judges and court referees can have on local attorneys and why such individuals should not be conducting thinly disguised CLE seminars for local attorneys that are nothing more than vehicles for them to influence those attorneys to their way of thinking.
Yet despite the past horrors suffered by Montagnino’s victims, his cases are now being resurrected in Surrogates’ Court by a Judge who is following in Montagnino’s footsteps in more ways than one. One wonders what “advice” Judge Scarpino will be offering local attorneys at his ‘meet and greet’ CLE seminar on September 17.
Will it be more of the ‘Beware the 10583 syndrome’ variety? The mere presence of this reporter in his courtroom apparently made Judge Scarpino nervous since he took the unusual step of asking, on the record, who was in the courtroom?
Nervous judges or not, The Guardian will continue to monitor the behavior of our local courts and their preferential treatment of attorneys and discriminatory treatment of litigants. We will continue to keep an eye on Surrogates and other Courts and the Allison case in particular.
Illegal orders from disgraced court referees should not be resurrected to induce further harm upon innocent victims. And our local judges and courts may not use their positions as an opportunity to intervene with local attorneys and personal issues or to interject their personal agendas.
Westchester Guardian/Janet Difiore/Rui Florim.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
FBI And Justice Department
Must Act Now
Recently the Westchester Community has become painfully aware of the fact that all is not right in their District Attorney’s Office. The relationship between District Attorney Janet DiFiore and certain police departments, particularly the Harrison and Yonkers Police Departments, has led to numerous serious miscarriages of justice, and the further abuse of innocent civilian victims of police brutality and harassment, at the hands of DA DiFiore and her staff.
Until last week what appeared to be the ultimate case of prosecutorial misconduct in the handling of a victim of police brutality in Westchester was Irma Marquez, body-slammed, and nearly killed by Yonkers Police Officer Wayne Simoes; then maliciously and mindlessly
prosecuted on trumped-up, totally false, charges by DiFiore and Company.
Unbeknownst to Simoes, and several of-ficers present at the Marquez incident, the entire event was recorded by a concealed video camera, and the tape obtained by her attorneys. Incredibly, that tape was shown to Janet DiFiore, but she proceeded with the bogus prosecution
nevertheless.
DiFiore’s actions have been totally indefensible, not only in the Marquez case, but also in numerous other similar cases as well. And, until last Monday, Marquez represented, perhaps, the most appalling example of justice gone haywire, and criminal, in its application by Westchester’s District Attorney to the criminal acts of violent police officers.
Not surprisingly, Ms. Marquez was acquitted of all charges against her in May, in State Court following a jury trial, and is now suing for $11.3 million in United States District Court, represented by Attorney Gary Certain of New York City. Last Monday, however, Attorney
Jonathan Lovett of White Plains filed a lawsuit in that same Court on behalf of Rui Florim, a 26-year-old Yonkers resident, against several Yonkers police officers, Police Commissioner Hartnett, and the City of Yonkers, seeking $20 million for an unprovoked, ethnically-motivated, violation of his Constitutional rights when he was forcibly abducted in the Town of Greenburgh and repeatedly beaten
into unconsciousness by six Yonkers police officers in plain clothes, using two unmarked Yonkers police cars; a pre-planned, calculated conspiracy and criminal act.
Florim, who was dragged from a car in which he was riding home from work as a passenger in the Village of Hartsdale, was so severely injured that he required 70 stitches and staples to close the wounds to his face and head, spending five days in the intensive care unit of
St. Joseph’s Hospital, Yonkers; barred the entire time by Yonkers Police from being seen by his lawyer or by his family.
Following the filing last Monday morning, August 4, Attorney Lovett and Mr. Florim held a press conference attended by major broadcast and print media. Lovett, responding to a question about his client’s long-term injuries, told reporters, “He continues to suffer from
migraine headaches, episodes of fear and sweat, post-traumatic after-effects, and scars. But, DA DiFiore couldn’t care less.” Florim added, “There is no justice. I’ve been going through this for two and a half years, and I want to get on with my life.”
Lovett then said, “They called him a ‘spic’, apparently believing he was Latino. There was a racial angle.” He went on, “My client was
denied his right to counsel, and was a victim of a conspiracy to violate his civil rights.” Lovett declared, “The DA is affirmatively encouraging
police brutality.”
Jonathan Lovett summarized, saying, “This case is worse than the Marquez case, in a different way. This case was premeditated and calculated. First, Mr. Florim was assaulted by a goon squad that went hunting for him; and then an assault by the district attorney. She wants
to prosecute a man for being beaten.”
As in the Marquez case, and scores of instances of Yonkers police brutality, DA Janet DiFiore, and her top-level assistant, James McCarty, who is prosecuting the Florim case, are very well aware of the fact that Mr. Florim is completely innocent of the bogus charges that have
been brought against him; and that those in need of prosecution are the six Yonkers police officers who nearly killed him. Yet, DiFiore and her Office continue to move forward in co-conspiracy with the dirty cops under a criminally motivated commissioner, Edmund Hartnett, caught up in an incestuously driven relationship.
The Justice Department, and the FBI, must now take a good long look, not only at the actions of DA DiFiore, and her Office, with respect to the crimes perpetrated against Irma Marquez, but also against Rui Florim, and numerous other innocent civilian victims. DiFiore’s deliberate prosecutorial misconduct, in covering up the actionable state and federal crimes by Yonkers Police, are no mere oversights or misjudgments. They are the calculated acts of a totally misguided prosecutor obligated and indebted for “installation” into her position.
What more serious betrayal can any prosecutor work against innocent citizens than wrongfully prosecuting them to cover up criminal acts of violence performed against them by those sworn to protect them? How many more Bureau Chiefs and Assistant DAs under her command, will Janet DiFiore be permitted to sacrifice and jettison for having carried out her orders before federal authorities finally place the responsibility, and the blame, squarely on her shoulders where it most certainly belongs?
How many more innocent men, women and children must suffer under this sick, unjust, scheme before DA Di-Fiore is apprehended and removed? The time for action is now.
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
FBI And Justice Department
Must Act Now
Recently the Westchester Community has become painfully aware of the fact that all is not right in their District Attorney’s Office. The relationship between District Attorney Janet DiFiore and certain police departments, particularly the Harrison and Yonkers Police Departments, has led to numerous serious miscarriages of justice, and the further abuse of innocent civilian victims of police brutality and harassment, at the hands of DA DiFiore and her staff.
Until last week what appeared to be the ultimate case of prosecutorial misconduct in the handling of a victim of police brutality in Westchester was Irma Marquez, body-slammed, and nearly killed by Yonkers Police Officer Wayne Simoes; then maliciously and mindlessly
prosecuted on trumped-up, totally false, charges by DiFiore and Company.
Unbeknownst to Simoes, and several of-ficers present at the Marquez incident, the entire event was recorded by a concealed video camera, and the tape obtained by her attorneys. Incredibly, that tape was shown to Janet DiFiore, but she proceeded with the bogus prosecution
nevertheless.
DiFiore’s actions have been totally indefensible, not only in the Marquez case, but also in numerous other similar cases as well. And, until last Monday, Marquez represented, perhaps, the most appalling example of justice gone haywire, and criminal, in its application by Westchester’s District Attorney to the criminal acts of violent police officers.
Not surprisingly, Ms. Marquez was acquitted of all charges against her in May, in State Court following a jury trial, and is now suing for $11.3 million in United States District Court, represented by Attorney Gary Certain of New York City. Last Monday, however, Attorney
Jonathan Lovett of White Plains filed a lawsuit in that same Court on behalf of Rui Florim, a 26-year-old Yonkers resident, against several Yonkers police officers, Police Commissioner Hartnett, and the City of Yonkers, seeking $20 million for an unprovoked, ethnically-motivated, violation of his Constitutional rights when he was forcibly abducted in the Town of Greenburgh and repeatedly beaten
into unconsciousness by six Yonkers police officers in plain clothes, using two unmarked Yonkers police cars; a pre-planned, calculated conspiracy and criminal act.
Florim, who was dragged from a car in which he was riding home from work as a passenger in the Village of Hartsdale, was so severely injured that he required 70 stitches and staples to close the wounds to his face and head, spending five days in the intensive care unit of
St. Joseph’s Hospital, Yonkers; barred the entire time by Yonkers Police from being seen by his lawyer or by his family.
Following the filing last Monday morning, August 4, Attorney Lovett and Mr. Florim held a press conference attended by major broadcast and print media. Lovett, responding to a question about his client’s long-term injuries, told reporters, “He continues to suffer from
migraine headaches, episodes of fear and sweat, post-traumatic after-effects, and scars. But, DA DiFiore couldn’t care less.” Florim added, “There is no justice. I’ve been going through this for two and a half years, and I want to get on with my life.”
Lovett then said, “They called him a ‘spic’, apparently believing he was Latino. There was a racial angle.” He went on, “My client was
denied his right to counsel, and was a victim of a conspiracy to violate his civil rights.” Lovett declared, “The DA is affirmatively encouraging
police brutality.”
Jonathan Lovett summarized, saying, “This case is worse than the Marquez case, in a different way. This case was premeditated and calculated. First, Mr. Florim was assaulted by a goon squad that went hunting for him; and then an assault by the district attorney. She wants
to prosecute a man for being beaten.”
As in the Marquez case, and scores of instances of Yonkers police brutality, DA Janet DiFiore, and her top-level assistant, James McCarty, who is prosecuting the Florim case, are very well aware of the fact that Mr. Florim is completely innocent of the bogus charges that have
been brought against him; and that those in need of prosecution are the six Yonkers police officers who nearly killed him. Yet, DiFiore and her Office continue to move forward in co-conspiracy with the dirty cops under a criminally motivated commissioner, Edmund Hartnett, caught up in an incestuously driven relationship.
The Justice Department, and the FBI, must now take a good long look, not only at the actions of DA DiFiore, and her Office, with respect to the crimes perpetrated against Irma Marquez, but also against Rui Florim, and numerous other innocent civilian victims. DiFiore’s deliberate prosecutorial misconduct, in covering up the actionable state and federal crimes by Yonkers Police, are no mere oversights or misjudgments. They are the calculated acts of a totally misguided prosecutor obligated and indebted for “installation” into her position.
What more serious betrayal can any prosecutor work against innocent citizens than wrongfully prosecuting them to cover up criminal acts of violence performed against them by those sworn to protect them? How many more Bureau Chiefs and Assistant DAs under her command, will Janet DiFiore be permitted to sacrifice and jettison for having carried out her orders before federal authorities finally place the responsibility, and the blame, squarely on her shoulders where it most certainly belongs?
How many more innocent men, women and children must suffer under this sick, unjust, scheme before DA Di-Fiore is apprehended and removed? The time for action is now.
Westchester Guardian Correction.
CORRECTION:
In last week’s issue, August 7, The Court Report, page 3, in the article entitled, “Carmela Magnetti Abetting Trial Goes Forward”, the fifth paragraph began, “The trial resumed with a single question of cross-examination of the Defendant’s husband.” It should have read, “of the Decedent’s husband.”
In last week’s issue, August 7, The Court Report, page 3, in the article entitled, “Carmela Magnetti Abetting Trial Goes Forward”, the fifth paragraph began, “The trial resumed with a single question of cross-examination of the Defendant’s husband.” It should have read, “of the Decedent’s husband.”
Westchester Guardian/In Our Opinion/Our Readers Repsond.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
In Our Opinion... The Time Is Right To Revamp New York’s Public School Financing Scheme
We believe now is the time for decisive action with respect to the financing of public education in New York State. The notion that the responsibility for educating our state’s children should fall principally on the shoulders of homeowners and other real property holders, much as we tax them for sewer and water districts, lighting, and police protection, was never right; and, has come, over the years, to a point where fairness, and sound financial principles, require a total revamp.
The responsibility for providing a fundamentally sound education to the youth of our state must be shared by every adult individual and corporation that calls New York home, irrespective of real property ownership. Under the present system, there are simply too many who escape contributing their fair share by way of one exemption or another.
For example, over the last 30 years or more, many towns and villages throughout the state have attempted to lure industrial and/or commercial development to their sites by way of tax abatements and deferrals, most for at least 10 years; some for 15 and 20 years or more. Corporations with such property tax breaks, under the present public education funding scheme, contribute nothing to the education of youngsters they will ultimately rely upon to fill the ranks of skilled workers in their enterprise.
Then there are religious organizations, houses of worship, certain not-for-profit organizations, and government property owners, who, under the present system, skip without contributing a dime. And, finally, there are the wealthy who lease their luxury apartments, though one might argue that they pay their share in their rent.
In Our view, all individuals and businesses have a stake in, and therefore, an obligation to support public education. The only equitable scheme involves a tax based upon income, and not ownership of real property. The State of New York must finally abandon its age-old, outmoded Equalization Patchquilt and expand state income tax to cover the cost of providing each school-aged child with a fundamentally sound primary, intermediate, and secondary public education.
No longer can we permit whole segments of our communities to avoid their responsibility to help finance our state’s, and our nation’s, future, so vitally dependent on the education of our children. We must get our priorities straight; and, We can think of no better time to reorganize and guarantee the most fundamental need of future generations than now to solidly underwrite public school education.
Many states already fund their public education program from individual and corporate income taxes, the state’s treasury. The time has come to lift our children’s future, and the future of New York State, to a more fair and more equitable system of financing. Governor Paterson must step up to the plate.
Our Readers Respond....
Reader Dismayed With Mike Spano
Dear Editor:
Kudos to Westchester County Chairman Doug Colety and Yonkers GOP Chairman John Jacono for their support of Jim Faulkner to “challenge” Assemblyman Mike Spano.
As a long time Republican I was quite dismayed when Mike Spano changed his party registration from Republican to Democrat. As a registered voter I want to know what candidates think about issues.
Has Mike Spano switched political parties to win an election? Have his principles changed because he changed from one party to another? What did he stand for before and what does he stand for now? Democrats have done too much flip-flopping with their viewpoints.
His opponent, Jim Faulkner, on the other hand, through his leadership of the Yonkers Third Ward Republicans has not wavered in his dedication to his party’s ideals. In the forthcoming campaign we anticipate that we will learn the “true” viewpoints of the two candidates.
While I don’t live in Faulkner’s district I applaud his dedication to Republican views which I support.
Ines Candrea, New Rochelle
Reader Promotes Tobacco-Free School Project
Dear Editor:
Several Westchester County schools are getting serious about preventing youth from using tobacco and creating healthier environments for thousands of students. These schools have joined a statewide effort of the New York State Department of Health administered locally
by Western Suffolk BOCES through the Tobacco-Free Schools project whose goals are:
• to reduce youth tobacco use
• to prevent initiation
• to reduce exposure to second hand smoke
What’s helping these schools is a strong and comprehensive tobacco policy.
By law, all schools teach about tobacco in their classrooms, and all schools prohibit tobacco to be used in school buildings, on school grounds and in school vehicles. But, studies have shown that a school with a formal written policy that is regularly and strongly enforced reports
lower rates of smoking among adolescents. According to the New York State Department of Health’s 2006 Youth Tobacco Survey over 32% of middle school students and over 70% of high school students report having seen other students smoking cigarettes on school property during the past 30 days, and over 32% of middle school students and over 41% of high school students who are current smokers report having smoked cigarettes on school property during the past 30 days.
Studies show compliance with policies is increased when the ban applies to everyone, not just students. The New York State Department
of Health’s 2006 Youth Tobacco Survey also documents that over 41% of middle school students and 42% of high school students report having seen adults smoking cigarettes on school property during the past 30 days.
An effectively enforced school tobacco policy reduces youth use and exposure to second hand smoke. Second hand smoke exposure leads
to increased student absenteeism due to lower respiratory tract infection, the number and severity of asthma attacks and middle ear infections. It also results in lower reading scores and some reasoning skills. (Youlton, Kimberly et al Environmental Health Perspectives
Jan. 05). Youth who use tobacco show reduced performance on memory and comprehension tests (Jacobsen, Leslie et al).
Westchester’s Tobacco-Free Schools participants receive free trainings, materials and technical assistance. Secondary schools in the
project are reviewing their tobacco policies and are working to make them more comprehensive, implement and enforce them.
For more information about the Tobacco-Free Schools Project, contact:
Kelly Brown
Westchester County
School Tobacco Policy Specialist
Good News About Greenburgh After-School Program
Dear Editor:
I am very pleased to announce that the town of Greenburgh has received a $167,500 grant from the Lanza Family Foundation for a state
of the art a er school program to be run out of the eodore Young Community Center. George Gumina, our philanthropy coordinator, worked
very hard on securing the grant. The after school program will be run by the Xposure Foundation.
The grant has very strict guidelines and mandatory compliance. In the coming weeks Raymond Thomas, Founder/ Executive Director of the
Xposure Foundation, Inc. will do a presentation to the Town Board that will highlight the benefits of the Xposure Greenburgh Program - a state of the art program that will expand the existing Theodore D. Young Community Center After School Program.
The program’s successes have been summarized in a news clip that can be viewed on the Xposurefoundation website: www.xposurefoundationinc.org.
Students learn the basics about savings and investments, deposits and withdrawals, checks and interest and lending as they deposit earnings
into savings accounts on a regular basis. Students also learn fundamentals about the stock market, including ownership, stocks, research and
investing. Parents are encouraged to open their own savings accounts, as well as to open online custodial investment accounts for their children.
Here students can invest money they have earned through Xposure in stocks they have researched and chosen. Carver Federal Savings Bank
has allowed the children to transfer money from their savings accounts into their online account to purchase stocks.
This program will take the community center (Valerie Whitehead is interim commissioner) to the next level. It’s a very exciting initiative.
The program will start in September. The Town of Greenburgh is very fortunate to be able to take advantage of such an exciting program. We are very grateful to the Lanza Family Foundation for this enormous donation.
Paul Feiner
Greenburgh Town Supervisor
Reader Objects To CSEA Proposal
Dear Editor:
Just read your article about the benefits of a 4-day work week for County employees. Leave it to a New York civil service union to steal another workday from the taxpayers of Westchester. Why would County employees, as opposed to private sector workers, be entitled to this? To save gas? Nice try. Its just another attempt to siphon more dollars off-one of the most heavily taxed Counties in the country. I pay $14,000 a year in property tax alone and you guys want to give them a weekly day off?
They should lay off a third of them and they’d be happy to have any job. Tell them to grow up. The work week is Monday through Friday. Give me a frigging break.
Marty Grossman
Reader Airs Out Numerous Complaints With County Government
Dear Editor:
To: Dumb And Dumber:
County Supervisor Spano and
Deputy Supervisor Schwartz.
Fact: Our local Westchester taxes are the highest in the United States; not the second highest or third highest, but of all the many thousands of local government taxes throughout our vast country, Westchester taxes are the highest!
Who is to blame? Our local political representatives and their constituents who elect them, us. The Nation is in the throes of a deep recession. By all previous comparative economic standards, our state, county, town and local governments are in the midst of facing budgetary dilemmas. As per Jay Gallagher, “Property taxes for most communities aren’t elastic. The tax base, or amount of property value the tax is levied on, isn’t growing. The only way to raise more money from taxes is to raise the rate. The real trick is to slow the rate of
spending that drives the higher taxes.”
There have been housing market failures accompanied by steep value declines in both residential and commercial property; coupled with outrageous gasoline and heating fuel price increases. Our sister state, New Jersey’s, gasoline prices are fifty-cents a gallon less than what we are now paying because of outlandish local taxes. And, in New Jersey, it is pumped by an attendant.
With all of these factors, growing unemployment, our huge auto industry, stagnated financial and banking institutions depressed and shaky;
I question the mindset of our local Westchester legislative representatives who recently approved huge expenditures while other local town, county and state governments are taking drastic steps to meet this challenge; freezing all new or replacement positions.
Carpool expenditures have been cut back, tighter controls on usage have greatly reduced the number of vehicles involved. Requesting budgetary forecasts in order to reduce expenditures to the level of the previous fiscal year’s increase; in our own case, town, school and
county increases for the 2008 budgetary period, borders on 25-to-30 percent increases. Our political administrators, as good elected officials, should not be thinking in terms of expansion, but in terms of contraction.
The following “big ticket” items as recently proposed and approved, can hardly be considered, in my book, being in the appropriate mindset to reduce overall spending:
• Salary increases for Westchester County Chairman and other part-time legislators, estimated at $250,000;
• Playland; an $8 million capital expenditure to replace decrepit lockers not in use for the previous 30 years, and to house a children’s museum.
In my book this is hardly the time for such an expenditure. Has any of the Westchester County legislators made inquiry as to why they
were never offered replaced? Were there so many liability claims or incidents they had to be monitored by an armed trooper? Will this new facility take into consideration accommodations for lesbian, homosexual males, and transgender practitioners? At the urgings of the County Supervisor and his assistants, the seven dwarfs times two, have already approved this project;
• Storage Bins and Office Space, 450 Saw Mill River Road, Ardsley: Cost $13,600,000. At the urgings of County Supervisor and Deputy, No Brains Shorts Schwartz, has urged the “seven dwarfs times two” legislature to vote yes on the project.
The Journal News, The Westchester Guardian, Messrs. Reisman, Blassberg, Gallagher and Legislator Abinanti, have furnished numerous
articles and statistics in outright opposition to the said proposition. Facts to be reviewed:
a. Ten million dollar bond cap which requires a voter referendum;
b. To get around a referendum, the County Supervisor’s Office and County Legislature bifurcated the package as the purchase price for $5.6
Readers Respond, continued from the previous page million, and repairs for $7.5 million;
c. The sale of said property will increase Ardsley school taxes by approximately $190,000 annually;
d. The building in question was so valuable a piece of real estate it laid vacant for three to five years;
e. They anticipated a high cost to remove the plentiful amount of asbestos;
f. The building leaks heavily which resulted in leaky, moldy conditions throughout;
g. Halpern, the owner and seller, has reputed to have given some $30,000 to re-elect the County ticket, dwarfs and all;
h. Paul Feiner, Greenburgh Town Supervisor, told the County legislators, “We’re overpaying and this is not the time to spend the People’s money. The owner is seeking a 90 percent reduction in tax assessment. The County shouldn’t spend more than $1.2 million. It smells like a gift!”
i. The New York State Attorney General’s Office to determine whether a referendum is mandated for voters (residents) to decide $13,600,000 is required by law because amount exceeds bond cap.
If it is such a remarkable project for Westchester County residents, by all means place it before the resident taxpayers in a referendum to vote yes or no on the proposition. Should the resident voter agree with the above, so indicate your feelings to the New York State Attorney
General’s Office with a copy to The Westchester Guardian.
W. Bradshaw,
White Plains
Nobody’s Perfect
Dear Editor:
While waiting for my wife’s train to arrive from the city and enjoying the comfort of one of those handsome, sticks-to-the-floor chairs in the Pleasantville station this evening, I picked up a copy of The Guardian from the chair next to mine, and ran across the enclosed article of yours.
In it you said, “...as well as lying to the police regarding her’s and Travato’s whereabouts.” Back about 1932, when I was 10, we were taught that hers was the correct spelling of the possessive. Her’s would seem to be an abbreviation, as in the Union leader’s song in the Pajama Game, which goes something like: “Her is the sweetest gal I ever seen; her is the...”
Even spell check objected when I typed in her’s above, and against just now.
Dawes Potter,
Briarcliff Manor
Editor’s Note: Mr. Potter was absolutely correct. You would think an editor who played Hinesie in a high school production of Pajama
Game would’ve known better.
In Our Opinion... The Time Is Right To Revamp New York’s Public School Financing Scheme
We believe now is the time for decisive action with respect to the financing of public education in New York State. The notion that the responsibility for educating our state’s children should fall principally on the shoulders of homeowners and other real property holders, much as we tax them for sewer and water districts, lighting, and police protection, was never right; and, has come, over the years, to a point where fairness, and sound financial principles, require a total revamp.
The responsibility for providing a fundamentally sound education to the youth of our state must be shared by every adult individual and corporation that calls New York home, irrespective of real property ownership. Under the present system, there are simply too many who escape contributing their fair share by way of one exemption or another.
For example, over the last 30 years or more, many towns and villages throughout the state have attempted to lure industrial and/or commercial development to their sites by way of tax abatements and deferrals, most for at least 10 years; some for 15 and 20 years or more. Corporations with such property tax breaks, under the present public education funding scheme, contribute nothing to the education of youngsters they will ultimately rely upon to fill the ranks of skilled workers in their enterprise.
Then there are religious organizations, houses of worship, certain not-for-profit organizations, and government property owners, who, under the present system, skip without contributing a dime. And, finally, there are the wealthy who lease their luxury apartments, though one might argue that they pay their share in their rent.
In Our view, all individuals and businesses have a stake in, and therefore, an obligation to support public education. The only equitable scheme involves a tax based upon income, and not ownership of real property. The State of New York must finally abandon its age-old, outmoded Equalization Patchquilt and expand state income tax to cover the cost of providing each school-aged child with a fundamentally sound primary, intermediate, and secondary public education.
No longer can we permit whole segments of our communities to avoid their responsibility to help finance our state’s, and our nation’s, future, so vitally dependent on the education of our children. We must get our priorities straight; and, We can think of no better time to reorganize and guarantee the most fundamental need of future generations than now to solidly underwrite public school education.
Many states already fund their public education program from individual and corporate income taxes, the state’s treasury. The time has come to lift our children’s future, and the future of New York State, to a more fair and more equitable system of financing. Governor Paterson must step up to the plate.
Our Readers Respond....
Reader Dismayed With Mike Spano
Dear Editor:
Kudos to Westchester County Chairman Doug Colety and Yonkers GOP Chairman John Jacono for their support of Jim Faulkner to “challenge” Assemblyman Mike Spano.
As a long time Republican I was quite dismayed when Mike Spano changed his party registration from Republican to Democrat. As a registered voter I want to know what candidates think about issues.
Has Mike Spano switched political parties to win an election? Have his principles changed because he changed from one party to another? What did he stand for before and what does he stand for now? Democrats have done too much flip-flopping with their viewpoints.
His opponent, Jim Faulkner, on the other hand, through his leadership of the Yonkers Third Ward Republicans has not wavered in his dedication to his party’s ideals. In the forthcoming campaign we anticipate that we will learn the “true” viewpoints of the two candidates.
While I don’t live in Faulkner’s district I applaud his dedication to Republican views which I support.
Ines Candrea, New Rochelle
Reader Promotes Tobacco-Free School Project
Dear Editor:
Several Westchester County schools are getting serious about preventing youth from using tobacco and creating healthier environments for thousands of students. These schools have joined a statewide effort of the New York State Department of Health administered locally
by Western Suffolk BOCES through the Tobacco-Free Schools project whose goals are:
• to reduce youth tobacco use
• to prevent initiation
• to reduce exposure to second hand smoke
What’s helping these schools is a strong and comprehensive tobacco policy.
By law, all schools teach about tobacco in their classrooms, and all schools prohibit tobacco to be used in school buildings, on school grounds and in school vehicles. But, studies have shown that a school with a formal written policy that is regularly and strongly enforced reports
lower rates of smoking among adolescents. According to the New York State Department of Health’s 2006 Youth Tobacco Survey over 32% of middle school students and over 70% of high school students report having seen other students smoking cigarettes on school property during the past 30 days, and over 32% of middle school students and over 41% of high school students who are current smokers report having smoked cigarettes on school property during the past 30 days.
Studies show compliance with policies is increased when the ban applies to everyone, not just students. The New York State Department
of Health’s 2006 Youth Tobacco Survey also documents that over 41% of middle school students and 42% of high school students report having seen adults smoking cigarettes on school property during the past 30 days.
An effectively enforced school tobacco policy reduces youth use and exposure to second hand smoke. Second hand smoke exposure leads
to increased student absenteeism due to lower respiratory tract infection, the number and severity of asthma attacks and middle ear infections. It also results in lower reading scores and some reasoning skills. (Youlton, Kimberly et al Environmental Health Perspectives
Jan. 05). Youth who use tobacco show reduced performance on memory and comprehension tests (Jacobsen, Leslie et al).
Westchester’s Tobacco-Free Schools participants receive free trainings, materials and technical assistance. Secondary schools in the
project are reviewing their tobacco policies and are working to make them more comprehensive, implement and enforce them.
For more information about the Tobacco-Free Schools Project, contact:
Kelly Brown
Westchester County
School Tobacco Policy Specialist
Good News About Greenburgh After-School Program
Dear Editor:
I am very pleased to announce that the town of Greenburgh has received a $167,500 grant from the Lanza Family Foundation for a state
of the art a er school program to be run out of the eodore Young Community Center. George Gumina, our philanthropy coordinator, worked
very hard on securing the grant. The after school program will be run by the Xposure Foundation.
The grant has very strict guidelines and mandatory compliance. In the coming weeks Raymond Thomas, Founder/ Executive Director of the
Xposure Foundation, Inc. will do a presentation to the Town Board that will highlight the benefits of the Xposure Greenburgh Program - a state of the art program that will expand the existing Theodore D. Young Community Center After School Program.
The program’s successes have been summarized in a news clip that can be viewed on the Xposurefoundation website: www.xposurefoundationinc.org.
Students learn the basics about savings and investments, deposits and withdrawals, checks and interest and lending as they deposit earnings
into savings accounts on a regular basis. Students also learn fundamentals about the stock market, including ownership, stocks, research and
investing. Parents are encouraged to open their own savings accounts, as well as to open online custodial investment accounts for their children.
Here students can invest money they have earned through Xposure in stocks they have researched and chosen. Carver Federal Savings Bank
has allowed the children to transfer money from their savings accounts into their online account to purchase stocks.
This program will take the community center (Valerie Whitehead is interim commissioner) to the next level. It’s a very exciting initiative.
The program will start in September. The Town of Greenburgh is very fortunate to be able to take advantage of such an exciting program. We are very grateful to the Lanza Family Foundation for this enormous donation.
Paul Feiner
Greenburgh Town Supervisor
Reader Objects To CSEA Proposal
Dear Editor:
Just read your article about the benefits of a 4-day work week for County employees. Leave it to a New York civil service union to steal another workday from the taxpayers of Westchester. Why would County employees, as opposed to private sector workers, be entitled to this? To save gas? Nice try. Its just another attempt to siphon more dollars off-one of the most heavily taxed Counties in the country. I pay $14,000 a year in property tax alone and you guys want to give them a weekly day off?
They should lay off a third of them and they’d be happy to have any job. Tell them to grow up. The work week is Monday through Friday. Give me a frigging break.
Marty Grossman
Reader Airs Out Numerous Complaints With County Government
Dear Editor:
To: Dumb And Dumber:
County Supervisor Spano and
Deputy Supervisor Schwartz.
Fact: Our local Westchester taxes are the highest in the United States; not the second highest or third highest, but of all the many thousands of local government taxes throughout our vast country, Westchester taxes are the highest!
Who is to blame? Our local political representatives and their constituents who elect them, us. The Nation is in the throes of a deep recession. By all previous comparative economic standards, our state, county, town and local governments are in the midst of facing budgetary dilemmas. As per Jay Gallagher, “Property taxes for most communities aren’t elastic. The tax base, or amount of property value the tax is levied on, isn’t growing. The only way to raise more money from taxes is to raise the rate. The real trick is to slow the rate of
spending that drives the higher taxes.”
There have been housing market failures accompanied by steep value declines in both residential and commercial property; coupled with outrageous gasoline and heating fuel price increases. Our sister state, New Jersey’s, gasoline prices are fifty-cents a gallon less than what we are now paying because of outlandish local taxes. And, in New Jersey, it is pumped by an attendant.
With all of these factors, growing unemployment, our huge auto industry, stagnated financial and banking institutions depressed and shaky;
I question the mindset of our local Westchester legislative representatives who recently approved huge expenditures while other local town, county and state governments are taking drastic steps to meet this challenge; freezing all new or replacement positions.
Carpool expenditures have been cut back, tighter controls on usage have greatly reduced the number of vehicles involved. Requesting budgetary forecasts in order to reduce expenditures to the level of the previous fiscal year’s increase; in our own case, town, school and
county increases for the 2008 budgetary period, borders on 25-to-30 percent increases. Our political administrators, as good elected officials, should not be thinking in terms of expansion, but in terms of contraction.
The following “big ticket” items as recently proposed and approved, can hardly be considered, in my book, being in the appropriate mindset to reduce overall spending:
• Salary increases for Westchester County Chairman and other part-time legislators, estimated at $250,000;
• Playland; an $8 million capital expenditure to replace decrepit lockers not in use for the previous 30 years, and to house a children’s museum.
In my book this is hardly the time for such an expenditure. Has any of the Westchester County legislators made inquiry as to why they
were never offered replaced? Were there so many liability claims or incidents they had to be monitored by an armed trooper? Will this new facility take into consideration accommodations for lesbian, homosexual males, and transgender practitioners? At the urgings of the County Supervisor and his assistants, the seven dwarfs times two, have already approved this project;
• Storage Bins and Office Space, 450 Saw Mill River Road, Ardsley: Cost $13,600,000. At the urgings of County Supervisor and Deputy, No Brains Shorts Schwartz, has urged the “seven dwarfs times two” legislature to vote yes on the project.
The Journal News, The Westchester Guardian, Messrs. Reisman, Blassberg, Gallagher and Legislator Abinanti, have furnished numerous
articles and statistics in outright opposition to the said proposition. Facts to be reviewed:
a. Ten million dollar bond cap which requires a voter referendum;
b. To get around a referendum, the County Supervisor’s Office and County Legislature bifurcated the package as the purchase price for $5.6
Readers Respond, continued from the previous page million, and repairs for $7.5 million;
c. The sale of said property will increase Ardsley school taxes by approximately $190,000 annually;
d. The building in question was so valuable a piece of real estate it laid vacant for three to five years;
e. They anticipated a high cost to remove the plentiful amount of asbestos;
f. The building leaks heavily which resulted in leaky, moldy conditions throughout;
g. Halpern, the owner and seller, has reputed to have given some $30,000 to re-elect the County ticket, dwarfs and all;
h. Paul Feiner, Greenburgh Town Supervisor, told the County legislators, “We’re overpaying and this is not the time to spend the People’s money. The owner is seeking a 90 percent reduction in tax assessment. The County shouldn’t spend more than $1.2 million. It smells like a gift!”
i. The New York State Attorney General’s Office to determine whether a referendum is mandated for voters (residents) to decide $13,600,000 is required by law because amount exceeds bond cap.
If it is such a remarkable project for Westchester County residents, by all means place it before the resident taxpayers in a referendum to vote yes or no on the proposition. Should the resident voter agree with the above, so indicate your feelings to the New York State Attorney
General’s Office with a copy to The Westchester Guardian.
W. Bradshaw,
White Plains
Nobody’s Perfect
Dear Editor:
While waiting for my wife’s train to arrive from the city and enjoying the comfort of one of those handsome, sticks-to-the-floor chairs in the Pleasantville station this evening, I picked up a copy of The Guardian from the chair next to mine, and ran across the enclosed article of yours.
In it you said, “...as well as lying to the police regarding her’s and Travato’s whereabouts.” Back about 1932, when I was 10, we were taught that hers was the correct spelling of the possessive. Her’s would seem to be an abbreviation, as in the Union leader’s song in the Pajama Game, which goes something like: “Her is the sweetest gal I ever seen; her is the...”
Even spell check objected when I typed in her’s above, and against just now.
Dawes Potter,
Briarcliff Manor
Editor’s Note: Mr. Potter was absolutely correct. You would think an editor who played Hinesie in a high school production of Pajama
Game would’ve known better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
