Thursday, January 1, 2009
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
Something’s Fundamentally Reckless And
Indifferent In Mayor Amicone’s Calculations
Sunday, December 21st, more than 100 Yonkers residents from the neighborhood surrounding Fire Station 12 on Fortfield Avenue, joined
firefighters to protest Mayor Philip Amicone’s wrongheaded decision to remove Tower Ladder 75 from their firehouse.
In a press release one day earlier, Union President Hugh Fox, Jr. had warned, “The removal of this lifesaving apparatus from the
Fortfield Avenue Firehouse will result in unacceptably increased Fire Department response times for a large section of the City.”
Fox stressed, “In the Fire service, increased response times mean an increase in the likelihood of death, injury and property damage.” In other words, Amicone is increasing the risk of death and/or serious injury to Yonkers families by the foolhardy removal of an essential ladder company supposedly to save money, while, at the same time, giving extraordinary pay raises to 180 of his cronies; raises as high as $20,000 and $30,000 to ‘buddies’ already earning six-figure salaries.
Those who came out Sunday, many carrying signs which read, “Fire Kills: Don’t Cut Yonkers Fire Department,” braved a cold rain and damp, icy conditions to voice their fears and concerns over the latest of the Mayor’s thoughtless miscalculations. Union head Fox told The Guardian, “A fire that burns for more than three minutes gets out of control and can cause loss of life and property.”
Sounding angry and frustrated, he said, “The Mayor says it’s a Union problem. We don’t think so. We believe it’s an administrative problem.” Fox explained, “We worked with him. We took split raises. We negotiated in good faith. Meantime, he gives out raises to 180. That speaks for itself.”
The Union has taken the official position, “The Mayor’s decision to remove Ladder 75 from the Fortfield Avenue Firehouse is a reckless
and ill-thought decision that will jeopardize public safety and result in the unnecessary loss of life.”
We believe that Hugh Fox and his Union members are so very right in their assessment of Amicone’s Draconian approach to the City’s
fire safety. Referring to the Mayor’s, “wildly swinging an axe at the Fire Department’s budget,” the Union asks, “How many lives will be put at risk as a result?”
Sad to say, Amicone’s willingness to risk the safety and well-being of Yonkers citizens with respect to fire emergency is all too consistent
with his approach to systemic Yonkers police brutality; his “public-be-damned” attitude.
The firefighters know only too well that their Union representatives, under President Fox, met with Amicone and members of his staff
over a five-week period in an effort to avoid any significant cuts which would severely limit their ability to fight fires and provide other emergency services. The Union, “provided Mayor Amicone with an alternative plan” which they say, “would have assisted the City of Yonkers in weathering the current economic crisis.” The Union offered to make, “significant financial sacrifices and outlined a number of cost-cutting steps” which could have been taken.
Apparently the Mayor and his advisors believe they know better than the professionals who fight fires every day. They are willing to
play Russian Roulette with the lives of Yonkers families. Clearly, there is something unprincipled and dangerous in the thought processes of a mayor who would remove essential fire protection from hundreds of thousands of City residents in order to give huge pay raises to his cronies. If even one life is lost because of increased response times, will Amicone & Co. be held accountable?
People from all over Yonkers must reject Philip Amicone’s analysis, must call the Mayor’s Office, and their City Council representative,
and make their safety, and their children’s safety, their #1 concern.
Showing posts with label Mayor Amicone. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mayor Amicone. Show all posts
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Westchester Guardian/The Advocate.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
Mayor Amicone Fails To Attend Yonkers Events
Reflecting Community’s Concerns And Priorities
A Workshop On Undoing Racism
Saturday, Oct. 18th
Saturday morning, October 18th, The People’s Institute For Survival And Beyond, under the capable, tutorial leadership of founders David Billings and Ron Chisom, conducted a workshop designed to uncover “solutions to address the impact of institutional/structural racism on our local communities.”
Founders and keynote speakers, Billings and Chisom, opened the session at the Riverfront Library, which was attended by some 100 community activists, educators, and local political figures including Yonkers City Council President Chuck Lesnick, and State Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins. As advertised, the keynoters offered “An Analysis Of The History Of Racism In The United States,” distinguishing between personal prejudice, discrimination, and institutional racism.
Following the initial presentation of more than an hour, and a break for lunch, it was decided that four separate workshops intended to deal with Criminal Justice, Education, Housing, and Immigration Issues as related to institutional racism that were originally scheduled to be presented simultaneously before individual smaller groups dependent upon attendees’ preferred area of interest, would instead be presented in consecutive order before the entire group.
Attorney Mayo Bartlett discusses implications of institutional racism in the Criminal Justice System Attorney Mayo Bartlett, of Young & Bartlett, White Plains, engaged in criminal defense and civil rights law, a former assistant DA in the Westchester County District Attorney’s Office, gave a very revealing account of two cases that he happened to be assigned at the same time involving two young male, one from Mount Vernon, who was Black, and another from Bronxville,who was Caucasion.
Each was eligible for Youthful Offender treatment under the law,and neither had a prior record.Each had committed the same offense under strikingly similar circumstances.In the case of the Black youth, no application had been made to seal the file and/or adjudicate the matter in chambers, ordinarily intended to preserve confidentiality.
The District Attorney’s Office was offeringa felony plea plus five years of probation to the youth from Mount Vernon, but a misdemeanor plea, and three years’ probation, to the Bronxville youth. Bartlett explained that he went to his superior expressing his concerns about the different treatment the youngsters were getting, and that his superior then turned around and made them both plead to felonies, with five years’ probation. Bartlett said, “In order not to have institutional racism, we must apply the Law equally in every community of the County.
Heartbroken Loved Ones Of
Young Men Senselessly Murdered
Mourn And Celebrate Their Lives
Sunday, Oct. 19th
Sunday afternoon, October 19th, a memorial service was held at the YWCA in downtown Yonkers, that was a gathering of family and friends of young males who had been killed in the City over the last couple of years. The lives of four such individuals, their stories, and photos,
were presented as family members and clergy spoke out against violence.
The program was entitled, Week Without Violence. It was a “day of remembrance,” an interdenominational candlelight service. The four decedents remembered were: Tyrone Stephan Bergmann, Charles Anthony Taylor, Martin Antonio Perez, and Oumar Zongo, and,
as the program stated, “Other Community Residents Who Recently Lost Their Lives To Needless And Senseless Acts of Violence.”
Speakers included Yejide Okunrivido, Esq., Yonkers YWCA President, State Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins, City Council President
Chuck Lesnick, Rabbi Gerard Cohen, Father Joseph Espaillat, of St. Peter’s Church, Minister Adrian Holmes of Resurrection Deliverance Church, Pastor E. Vanderpuije of The Divine Revelation Fellowship, and Imam Issa, Misjid Al-Houda, each delivering an obituary and words of comfort for the loved ones of the deceased victims.
Virginia Perez, the sister of Martin Antonio Perez, who is attempting to organize a Neighborhood Watch Program, delivered a particularly impassioned statement.
As the obituaries were presented, images of those who had died by senseless violence were projected on a screen beside the nearly 100 persons in attendance, evoking frequent emotional responses.
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
Mayor Amicone Fails To Attend Yonkers Events
Reflecting Community’s Concerns And Priorities
A Workshop On Undoing Racism
Saturday, Oct. 18th
Saturday morning, October 18th, The People’s Institute For Survival And Beyond, under the capable, tutorial leadership of founders David Billings and Ron Chisom, conducted a workshop designed to uncover “solutions to address the impact of institutional/structural racism on our local communities.”
Founders and keynote speakers, Billings and Chisom, opened the session at the Riverfront Library, which was attended by some 100 community activists, educators, and local political figures including Yonkers City Council President Chuck Lesnick, and State Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins. As advertised, the keynoters offered “An Analysis Of The History Of Racism In The United States,” distinguishing between personal prejudice, discrimination, and institutional racism.
Following the initial presentation of more than an hour, and a break for lunch, it was decided that four separate workshops intended to deal with Criminal Justice, Education, Housing, and Immigration Issues as related to institutional racism that were originally scheduled to be presented simultaneously before individual smaller groups dependent upon attendees’ preferred area of interest, would instead be presented in consecutive order before the entire group.
Attorney Mayo Bartlett discusses implications of institutional racism in the Criminal Justice System Attorney Mayo Bartlett, of Young & Bartlett, White Plains, engaged in criminal defense and civil rights law, a former assistant DA in the Westchester County District Attorney’s Office, gave a very revealing account of two cases that he happened to be assigned at the same time involving two young male, one from Mount Vernon, who was Black, and another from Bronxville,who was Caucasion.
Each was eligible for Youthful Offender treatment under the law,and neither had a prior record.Each had committed the same offense under strikingly similar circumstances.In the case of the Black youth, no application had been made to seal the file and/or adjudicate the matter in chambers, ordinarily intended to preserve confidentiality.
The District Attorney’s Office was offeringa felony plea plus five years of probation to the youth from Mount Vernon, but a misdemeanor plea, and three years’ probation, to the Bronxville youth. Bartlett explained that he went to his superior expressing his concerns about the different treatment the youngsters were getting, and that his superior then turned around and made them both plead to felonies, with five years’ probation. Bartlett said, “In order not to have institutional racism, we must apply the Law equally in every community of the County.
Heartbroken Loved Ones Of
Young Men Senselessly Murdered
Mourn And Celebrate Their Lives
Sunday, Oct. 19th
Sunday afternoon, October 19th, a memorial service was held at the YWCA in downtown Yonkers, that was a gathering of family and friends of young males who had been killed in the City over the last couple of years. The lives of four such individuals, their stories, and photos,
were presented as family members and clergy spoke out against violence.
The program was entitled, Week Without Violence. It was a “day of remembrance,” an interdenominational candlelight service. The four decedents remembered were: Tyrone Stephan Bergmann, Charles Anthony Taylor, Martin Antonio Perez, and Oumar Zongo, and,
as the program stated, “Other Community Residents Who Recently Lost Their Lives To Needless And Senseless Acts of Violence.”
Speakers included Yejide Okunrivido, Esq., Yonkers YWCA President, State Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins, City Council President
Chuck Lesnick, Rabbi Gerard Cohen, Father Joseph Espaillat, of St. Peter’s Church, Minister Adrian Holmes of Resurrection Deliverance Church, Pastor E. Vanderpuije of The Divine Revelation Fellowship, and Imam Issa, Misjid Al-Houda, each delivering an obituary and words of comfort for the loved ones of the deceased victims.
Virginia Perez, the sister of Martin Antonio Perez, who is attempting to organize a Neighborhood Watch Program, delivered a particularly impassioned statement.
As the obituaries were presented, images of those who had died by senseless violence were projected on a screen beside the nearly 100 persons in attendance, evoking frequent emotional responses.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Westchester Guardian/Janet Difiore.
Jeff Deskovic
The Irma Marquez Case:
What Should Have Happened
As has been public knowledge for quite some time now, there is a serious problem with police brutality in Yonkers. The Guardian, nearly two years ago, in September of 2006 virtually opened Pandora’s Box with an article about a “Mother, 72, Daughter 49,” the Bostwicks, one of whom was roughed up, and the other brutalized and charged with bogus offenses by Yonkers Police. The police were responding to their call because a teenager who had been beaten up and bloodied by a neighbor of theirs came pleading for help to their door.
Within a week of the appearance of their story, the local chapter of the NAACP, chaired by President Karen Edmonson, held a seminar at the Riverfront Library, which was attended by approximately 125 people, at which 25 to 30 people came forward to describe their personal experiences and that of their families with Yonkers Police brutality. Their information was recorded by law students from Pace Law School under the direction of Randolph McLaughlin and Debra Cohen.
About a year later, at a similar public forum in Sept. 2007, Mayor Amicone was booed and chased out of the auditorium for trying to suggest that there was no problem. I will explore what happened to another Yonkers Police brutality vic-tim, Irma Marquez, and discuss what
should have happened as well as discussing community relations between the public and the police department, which was discussed at a recent public forum held in Mount Vernon at the Grace Baptist Church.
In March 2007, Irma Marquez’ niece was hit with a bottle and knocked unconscious at La Fonda restaurant in Yonkers. EMTs were called, and Marquez, a middle-aged home health aide, who was present, was also trying to tend to her niece, bending over her while the EMTs were working. An officer took Marquez by the arm and backed her up, and she accidentally stepped on the foot of another officer in the process.
At that point Yonkers police officer Wayne Simoes approached and shoved Marquez’ shoulder. Marquez apparently objected to being shoved, and Simoes grabbed her by the waist, lifted her in the air and slammed her face-first into the tile floor, handcuffing her as she lay unconscious.
She suffered a broken jaw and extensive bruising and had to be hospitalized for four days. The whole incident was captured on a concealed
security video camera. Marquez was nonetheless arrested and charged with Obstruction Of Governmental Administration, and an internal
inquiry cleared Simoes of any wrongdoing. After Marquez’s attorney, Gary Certain, viewed the tape, he asked for the charges to be dropped.
Assistant DA Paul Scharf, bureau chief of the local courts and grand jury, responded that he had reviewed the tape with Assistant District
Attorney Mark Garretto, Bureau Chief in Yonkers, and they had decided to follow through on the case against Marquez.
Attorney Certain said he then sent a letter to DiFiore with details of the video and pictures of Marquez’s injuries. She called him and indicated the case would be re-examined. However, he never heard back from her until early May, when her Office said it was proceeding to trial. At some point prior to the jury verdict, the Justice Department informed the City of Yonkers that it was investigating the case. Upon learning that, Yonkers Mayor Phil Amicone held a news conference to praise the department, saying its officers “do their jobs the right way in full accordance with the law.” Marquez was acquitted following a jury trial, and proceeded to file an $11.3 million dollar lawsuit against the police department.
After the trial, Westchester District Attorney Janet DiFiore launched an internal inquiry into how her own office handled the matter. She suggested on Friday, June 27, in a terse written statement that the case was ‘mishandled’. She stated, “Personnel have been disciplined,
operational changes are being made, and enhanced training is being put in place.” Her office declined further comment and wouldn’t say who
was disciplined. However, Mark Garretto, who had been the bureau chief in Yonkers since DiFiore became district attorney in 2006, was reassigned to the Motions And Appeals Bureau. DiFiore’s spokesman, Lucien Chalfen, remained tight-lipped, not willing to say whether
Garretto’s transfer was related to the Marquez case.
On June 27th the FBI arrested Simoes and accused him of violating Marquez’ civil rights. FBI Agent Kristina Norris wrote in a criminal complaint against Simoes filed in U.S. District Court in White Plains that when agents asked police officers about the images from a surveillance videotape that showed Officer Wayne Simoes brutally slamming Irma Marquez facedown to the ground, “Several officers
stated that, based on their training and experience, Simoes’ use of force against Marquez was unreasonable and excessive,” Simoes surrendered to federal authorities at 9 a.m. in White Plains and made a brief court appearance two hours later. He was released on $300,000 bond.
Yonkers Police said in a statement that Commissioner Edmund Hartnett has told the department’s Internal Affairs Division to reopen its investigation. Additionally, Yonkers police released a statement that said Simoes had been placed on modified duty. Here is what should have happened: Firstly, the police officers who were on the scene should have arrested Simoes’ right there on the spot for assault. The fact that a perpetrator draws his paycheck from a law enforcement position does not excuse him. If anything, the fact that he is in a position of public trust and equipped with a gun and a baton, and other equipment, and has the ability to call others for help, and yet nonetheless abuses it, makes it an aggravating circumstance, Aggravated Assault.
When the other officers failed to arrest him, the supervisor should have arrested him, while suspending those officers who were present and did nothing. When that failed, each person up the line in authority should have made the arrest while suspending those under him/her who failed to do so. When the matter ultimately got to the level of the District Attorney’s Office, Assistant District Attorneys Mark Garretto and Paul Scharf should have charged Simoes with assault, while also dismissing the charges against Marquez.
After all, the incident was caught on tape and therefore there was no question as to what happened. When that failed, District Attorney DiFiore should have had Simoes arrested and had the charges dismissed against Marquez. A District Attorney is, I believe, ultimately responsible for everything that goes on in the office. In point of fact, they are there to oversee and supervise everything. While I can see
how it could get difficult to stay on top of every single thing, at all times, while letting nothing escape one’s notice, Attorney Certain stated that he sent a letter to DiFiore with details of the video and pictures of Marquez’s injuries, and upon receipt of which she called him
and indicated the case would be re-examined.
Therefore, she knew precisely what was going on. As I said earlier, when the officers who were present saw Simoes bodyslam Marquez, they should have immediately arrested them. If an ordinary citizen did that to somebody in the presence of police officers, they would
be arrested on the spot. We also see in the Marquez case that the blue wall of silence is very much still alive. Every single one of those officers who maintained that code of silence should be suspended. Lest anyone think that I am anti-cop or overreacting, we are talking about a
crime that was initially covered up, and likely still would be but for release of the videotape.
The covering up that typically goes on when the system covers up for the system, no matter what the facts are, manifested itself in the initial police internal investigation clearing Simoes. Mayor Amicone, making his public statement defending and praising the police when word got out that the Justice Department was investigating Simoes, and the District Attorney’s office not dropping the charges against Marquez and arresting him, represent a repititious conspiracy and scenario in blatant violation of the victim’s civil rights.
That Marquez had to be subjected to the trauma, expense, uncertainty, and risk of being wrongfully convicted that a trial brings for someone that the tape shows was innocent of, is shameful and unlawful. Anyone who believes that the reinvestigation by the Yonkers Police Department would have happened had the FBI not arrested Simoes, is naïve. In support of that thesis, I would like to point out that the tape and photos were around during the first go around. I am convinced that Simoes received preferential treatment from the court system once he was arrested, that only the connected, powerful, political, wealthy, and some law enforcement personnel are accorded: being released
on bail the same day that he was arrested. This two tiered system of justice-one for the poor and common folk, and the other for those on the upper end of the socio economic status, has got to stop if the law is to have any moral authority. I believe that the District Attorney’s Office should have released the names of those employees who were disciplined. Why should it be a private thing? I believe in transparency in government, and that the public has a right to know what is going on, and why. When someone has been transferred or disciplined for wrongdoing, the public should know so that we can have confidence that the same individual will not be able to repeat his or her actions,
and that it will not be tolerated by any other staff member. It would show that everything is above board, nothing is going on behind the scenes, nothing being swept under the rug, and no us v. them mentality. As a citizen of Westchester, I, along with the public, would like to know, without having to draw an inference; but instead being explicitly told, how the people who were disciplined were actually disciplined.
Why is it when ordinary citizens are arrested it is announced to the public; their names and what the charges are, and what the punishment ends up being. Whenever tragedy or misfortunate comes, I believe that we have a moral responsibility to victims to do what we can to see to it that they do not suffer for no reason. We, instead, must learn the lessons of the incident and do what we can to prevent any reccurrence.
The maxim that “Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them in the future,” is true. Accordingly, I have some concrete ideas involving morality and legislation that would, if followed, prevent future cases such as Irma Marquez.
I would call upon the honest, law abiding police officers of Yonkers to take back the police force from the band of rogue cops who are engaging in police brutality, the breaking of the laws, and general corruption. There should be no feelings of solidarity between honest
cops and dishonest ones. Instead, true officer solidarity should come from the observable actions of honest, law-abiding police work that stays within the limits of the law, involves no brutality, cuts no corners, does not violate the rights of any civilians, whether suspects or not; takes no bribes, and engages in no corruption. The maintaining of good relations should be dependent upon the maintaining of those rules.
Prosecutors should pay special attention whenever there are allegations by defendants that they’ve been roughed up by police. In every instance where that has proven to be the case, charges against accused should be dismissed. To do less than that is to allow rogue law
enforcement officers to hijack the legal system and use it to their own ends as a means of covering up their own brutality. It is not unusual for such officers to falsely charge people with “resisting arrest” in order to try to justify their previous unlawful use of force. It also serves
to further punish a defendant who they have previously brutalized. We must enact laws which encourage law enforcement personnel who witness other officers committing crimes, to step forward and press charges; with the failure to do so being grounds not only for dismissal, but also to be charged with the crime of aiding and abetting and acting in concert. The same should apply to any supervisors who witness, or in any way learn of the occurrence of such activity and yet take no action to investigate and arrest where the evidence is secured.
In reality, those who turn their heads are, in fact, assisting the culture to form in which brutality is acceptable. In my book, that is aiding and
abetting. The legislation should be not just on a state level, but also on the federal level, authorizing the FBI and U.S. Attorney to step in whenever state law makers fail to do so. Each time an of-ficer gets away with police brutality, it threatens the safety of us all while setting
the stage for acceptability to set in, thus causing it to happen again. Until such time as legislation is passed to that effect, departments should adopt internal policies requiring officers and supervisors to take action when they witness or otherwise learn of police brutality.
Legislation is absolutely necessary which would establish an independent prosecutor to handle any and all cases involving the police. Police and prosecutors work together, and it is only natural that a certain amount of familiarity or cordiality develops between them, and such personal interaction can often factor into the thought processes with regard to whether to prosecute or not. Someone who has no personal familiarity with the people involved in a case, and can instead look at the facts of a case objectively with no personal consideration; in short, an independent prosecutor is what is needed. An independent prosecutor is not bound by the constraints imposed by the relationship
between district attorneys and police. Additionally, one cannot overemphasize the importance of Civilian Complaint Review Boards. However, such Boards cannot be effective unless they have subpoena power, and the power to suspend and bestow penalties.
The Irma Marquez Case:
What Should Have Happened
As has been public knowledge for quite some time now, there is a serious problem with police brutality in Yonkers. The Guardian, nearly two years ago, in September of 2006 virtually opened Pandora’s Box with an article about a “Mother, 72, Daughter 49,” the Bostwicks, one of whom was roughed up, and the other brutalized and charged with bogus offenses by Yonkers Police. The police were responding to their call because a teenager who had been beaten up and bloodied by a neighbor of theirs came pleading for help to their door.
Within a week of the appearance of their story, the local chapter of the NAACP, chaired by President Karen Edmonson, held a seminar at the Riverfront Library, which was attended by approximately 125 people, at which 25 to 30 people came forward to describe their personal experiences and that of their families with Yonkers Police brutality. Their information was recorded by law students from Pace Law School under the direction of Randolph McLaughlin and Debra Cohen.
About a year later, at a similar public forum in Sept. 2007, Mayor Amicone was booed and chased out of the auditorium for trying to suggest that there was no problem. I will explore what happened to another Yonkers Police brutality vic-tim, Irma Marquez, and discuss what
should have happened as well as discussing community relations between the public and the police department, which was discussed at a recent public forum held in Mount Vernon at the Grace Baptist Church.
In March 2007, Irma Marquez’ niece was hit with a bottle and knocked unconscious at La Fonda restaurant in Yonkers. EMTs were called, and Marquez, a middle-aged home health aide, who was present, was also trying to tend to her niece, bending over her while the EMTs were working. An officer took Marquez by the arm and backed her up, and she accidentally stepped on the foot of another officer in the process.
At that point Yonkers police officer Wayne Simoes approached and shoved Marquez’ shoulder. Marquez apparently objected to being shoved, and Simoes grabbed her by the waist, lifted her in the air and slammed her face-first into the tile floor, handcuffing her as she lay unconscious.
She suffered a broken jaw and extensive bruising and had to be hospitalized for four days. The whole incident was captured on a concealed
security video camera. Marquez was nonetheless arrested and charged with Obstruction Of Governmental Administration, and an internal
inquiry cleared Simoes of any wrongdoing. After Marquez’s attorney, Gary Certain, viewed the tape, he asked for the charges to be dropped.
Assistant DA Paul Scharf, bureau chief of the local courts and grand jury, responded that he had reviewed the tape with Assistant District
Attorney Mark Garretto, Bureau Chief in Yonkers, and they had decided to follow through on the case against Marquez.
Attorney Certain said he then sent a letter to DiFiore with details of the video and pictures of Marquez’s injuries. She called him and indicated the case would be re-examined. However, he never heard back from her until early May, when her Office said it was proceeding to trial. At some point prior to the jury verdict, the Justice Department informed the City of Yonkers that it was investigating the case. Upon learning that, Yonkers Mayor Phil Amicone held a news conference to praise the department, saying its officers “do their jobs the right way in full accordance with the law.” Marquez was acquitted following a jury trial, and proceeded to file an $11.3 million dollar lawsuit against the police department.
After the trial, Westchester District Attorney Janet DiFiore launched an internal inquiry into how her own office handled the matter. She suggested on Friday, June 27, in a terse written statement that the case was ‘mishandled’. She stated, “Personnel have been disciplined,
operational changes are being made, and enhanced training is being put in place.” Her office declined further comment and wouldn’t say who
was disciplined. However, Mark Garretto, who had been the bureau chief in Yonkers since DiFiore became district attorney in 2006, was reassigned to the Motions And Appeals Bureau. DiFiore’s spokesman, Lucien Chalfen, remained tight-lipped, not willing to say whether
Garretto’s transfer was related to the Marquez case.
On June 27th the FBI arrested Simoes and accused him of violating Marquez’ civil rights. FBI Agent Kristina Norris wrote in a criminal complaint against Simoes filed in U.S. District Court in White Plains that when agents asked police officers about the images from a surveillance videotape that showed Officer Wayne Simoes brutally slamming Irma Marquez facedown to the ground, “Several officers
stated that, based on their training and experience, Simoes’ use of force against Marquez was unreasonable and excessive,” Simoes surrendered to federal authorities at 9 a.m. in White Plains and made a brief court appearance two hours later. He was released on $300,000 bond.
Yonkers Police said in a statement that Commissioner Edmund Hartnett has told the department’s Internal Affairs Division to reopen its investigation. Additionally, Yonkers police released a statement that said Simoes had been placed on modified duty. Here is what should have happened: Firstly, the police officers who were on the scene should have arrested Simoes’ right there on the spot for assault. The fact that a perpetrator draws his paycheck from a law enforcement position does not excuse him. If anything, the fact that he is in a position of public trust and equipped with a gun and a baton, and other equipment, and has the ability to call others for help, and yet nonetheless abuses it, makes it an aggravating circumstance, Aggravated Assault.
When the other officers failed to arrest him, the supervisor should have arrested him, while suspending those officers who were present and did nothing. When that failed, each person up the line in authority should have made the arrest while suspending those under him/her who failed to do so. When the matter ultimately got to the level of the District Attorney’s Office, Assistant District Attorneys Mark Garretto and Paul Scharf should have charged Simoes with assault, while also dismissing the charges against Marquez.
After all, the incident was caught on tape and therefore there was no question as to what happened. When that failed, District Attorney DiFiore should have had Simoes arrested and had the charges dismissed against Marquez. A District Attorney is, I believe, ultimately responsible for everything that goes on in the office. In point of fact, they are there to oversee and supervise everything. While I can see
how it could get difficult to stay on top of every single thing, at all times, while letting nothing escape one’s notice, Attorney Certain stated that he sent a letter to DiFiore with details of the video and pictures of Marquez’s injuries, and upon receipt of which she called him
and indicated the case would be re-examined.
Therefore, she knew precisely what was going on. As I said earlier, when the officers who were present saw Simoes bodyslam Marquez, they should have immediately arrested them. If an ordinary citizen did that to somebody in the presence of police officers, they would
be arrested on the spot. We also see in the Marquez case that the blue wall of silence is very much still alive. Every single one of those officers who maintained that code of silence should be suspended. Lest anyone think that I am anti-cop or overreacting, we are talking about a
crime that was initially covered up, and likely still would be but for release of the videotape.
The covering up that typically goes on when the system covers up for the system, no matter what the facts are, manifested itself in the initial police internal investigation clearing Simoes. Mayor Amicone, making his public statement defending and praising the police when word got out that the Justice Department was investigating Simoes, and the District Attorney’s office not dropping the charges against Marquez and arresting him, represent a repititious conspiracy and scenario in blatant violation of the victim’s civil rights.
That Marquez had to be subjected to the trauma, expense, uncertainty, and risk of being wrongfully convicted that a trial brings for someone that the tape shows was innocent of, is shameful and unlawful. Anyone who believes that the reinvestigation by the Yonkers Police Department would have happened had the FBI not arrested Simoes, is naïve. In support of that thesis, I would like to point out that the tape and photos were around during the first go around. I am convinced that Simoes received preferential treatment from the court system once he was arrested, that only the connected, powerful, political, wealthy, and some law enforcement personnel are accorded: being released
on bail the same day that he was arrested. This two tiered system of justice-one for the poor and common folk, and the other for those on the upper end of the socio economic status, has got to stop if the law is to have any moral authority. I believe that the District Attorney’s Office should have released the names of those employees who were disciplined. Why should it be a private thing? I believe in transparency in government, and that the public has a right to know what is going on, and why. When someone has been transferred or disciplined for wrongdoing, the public should know so that we can have confidence that the same individual will not be able to repeat his or her actions,
and that it will not be tolerated by any other staff member. It would show that everything is above board, nothing is going on behind the scenes, nothing being swept under the rug, and no us v. them mentality. As a citizen of Westchester, I, along with the public, would like to know, without having to draw an inference; but instead being explicitly told, how the people who were disciplined were actually disciplined.
Why is it when ordinary citizens are arrested it is announced to the public; their names and what the charges are, and what the punishment ends up being. Whenever tragedy or misfortunate comes, I believe that we have a moral responsibility to victims to do what we can to see to it that they do not suffer for no reason. We, instead, must learn the lessons of the incident and do what we can to prevent any reccurrence.
The maxim that “Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them in the future,” is true. Accordingly, I have some concrete ideas involving morality and legislation that would, if followed, prevent future cases such as Irma Marquez.
I would call upon the honest, law abiding police officers of Yonkers to take back the police force from the band of rogue cops who are engaging in police brutality, the breaking of the laws, and general corruption. There should be no feelings of solidarity between honest
cops and dishonest ones. Instead, true officer solidarity should come from the observable actions of honest, law-abiding police work that stays within the limits of the law, involves no brutality, cuts no corners, does not violate the rights of any civilians, whether suspects or not; takes no bribes, and engages in no corruption. The maintaining of good relations should be dependent upon the maintaining of those rules.
Prosecutors should pay special attention whenever there are allegations by defendants that they’ve been roughed up by police. In every instance where that has proven to be the case, charges against accused should be dismissed. To do less than that is to allow rogue law
enforcement officers to hijack the legal system and use it to their own ends as a means of covering up their own brutality. It is not unusual for such officers to falsely charge people with “resisting arrest” in order to try to justify their previous unlawful use of force. It also serves
to further punish a defendant who they have previously brutalized. We must enact laws which encourage law enforcement personnel who witness other officers committing crimes, to step forward and press charges; with the failure to do so being grounds not only for dismissal, but also to be charged with the crime of aiding and abetting and acting in concert. The same should apply to any supervisors who witness, or in any way learn of the occurrence of such activity and yet take no action to investigate and arrest where the evidence is secured.
In reality, those who turn their heads are, in fact, assisting the culture to form in which brutality is acceptable. In my book, that is aiding and
abetting. The legislation should be not just on a state level, but also on the federal level, authorizing the FBI and U.S. Attorney to step in whenever state law makers fail to do so. Each time an of-ficer gets away with police brutality, it threatens the safety of us all while setting
the stage for acceptability to set in, thus causing it to happen again. Until such time as legislation is passed to that effect, departments should adopt internal policies requiring officers and supervisors to take action when they witness or otherwise learn of police brutality.
Legislation is absolutely necessary which would establish an independent prosecutor to handle any and all cases involving the police. Police and prosecutors work together, and it is only natural that a certain amount of familiarity or cordiality develops between them, and such personal interaction can often factor into the thought processes with regard to whether to prosecute or not. Someone who has no personal familiarity with the people involved in a case, and can instead look at the facts of a case objectively with no personal consideration; in short, an independent prosecutor is what is needed. An independent prosecutor is not bound by the constraints imposed by the relationship
between district attorneys and police. Additionally, one cannot overemphasize the importance of Civilian Complaint Review Boards. However, such Boards cannot be effective unless they have subpoena power, and the power to suspend and bestow penalties.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Janet Difiore.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
DiFiore’s Incestuousness With Yonkers
Police Sacrifices Victims Of Police Brutality
Tony Castro Predicts, “It Will Come Back To Haunt Law Enforcement”
Nearly two years ago, in our September 21, 2006 issue, The Guardian blew the lid off years of Yonkers Police brutality, revealing an incident in 2005 in a front-page story entitled Mother, 72, Daughter, 49, Charge Yonkers Police Brutality. That story, which detailed the serious civil rights violations the Yonkers Police Department committed when they roughed up a middle-aged woman and her elderly mother, up behind Saunders High School, opened the floodgate to reports by residents, all over the City, and caused the sudden resignation and retirement of Police Commissioner Robert Taggart.
Within a week of the appearance of that story, President Karen Edmonson and Attorney Mike Sussman, of the Yonkers chapter of the NAACP, held a speak-out session at the Riverfront Library, attended by more than 125 persons, many of whom told about their own, and
their family’s, including mother’s and children’s, brutal encounters with the Yonkers Police, involving little or no provocation or justifi-
cation. Attorneys and law students from Pace Law School’s Criminal Justice Center, recorded their accounts which ultimately came to the attention the United States Attorney’s Office and the FBI.
More than a year ago, the FBI, in response, announced that they were conducting a “formal investigation into allegations of police brutality in Yonkers.” The Guardian is aware of visits by FBI special agents to a number of victim/complainants, including Tina and Mary Bostwick, the mother and daughter subjects of our first report. To date, we are not aware of any reports having been issued, or af-firmative action having been taken by the United States Attorney’s Of-fice, or the FBI, that might impact the continuing, unlawful brutality, and false criminal charges routinely worked against innocent men, women and children by, perhaps, 20 or so rogue, violent police offi-cers out of a force of some 670.
Last fall, a second speak-out was held at the Riverfront Library; this time in the auditorium, a few weeks prior to the mayoral election. Mayor Amicone, who had been campaigning nearby, came in to the auditorium in an ill-advised attempt to whitewash and dilute the concerns of the diverse, but mostly minority, audience. He was quickly booed and jeered, and literally chased from the auditorium.
In case after case, the routine has been the same; Yonkers Police beating up innocent citizens, then charging them with Disorderly Conduct, Obstruction of Governmental Administration, Resisting Arrest, Assault Upon A Police Of-ficer, or any combination thereof, both to cover and provide justifi-cation for their own criminal, civil rights violations, and as “bargaining chips” intended to discourage civilian victims from lodging criminal and/or civil complaints.
The practice has been going on for many years; DA Jeanine Pirro, for the most part, looking the other way. However, DA Janet DiFiore
has literally become a co-conspirator with Police Commissioner Hartnett and Mayor Amicone in case after case, as in the Irma Marquez
case. Marquez, all but killed by a totally unjustified body slam delivered by Yonkers Police Of-ficer Wayne Simoes, on March 3, 2007, was charged and prosecuted by DA DiFiore for Obstruction Of Governmental Administration and Disorderly Conduct, an absolutely absurd response by the DA given the clear, indisputable evidence provided by a security camera videotape at the scene.
Those who might wonder why Janet DiFiore repeatedly abandons her sworn duty to protect innocent citizens in her rush to aid and assist
rogue Yonkers cops, while covering up the Department’s serious civil rights violations, need to understand that she has a deep indebtedness
to the Yonkers Police, given the circumstances surrounding her race for District Attorney against Tony Castro in 2005. In point of fact, Di-
Fiore, whose husband attempted to bribe Right-To-Life candidate Anthony DiCintio off the ballot, was nonetheless publicly endorsed by
the Yonkers Police Department.
They were the host department at the Yonkers Polish Center within days of the election at a rally by police brass from Harrison, Dobbs
Ferry and other departments. But, more importantly, and more suspect, they were the department assigned to secure the warehouse storage
facility on Saw Mill River Road, where more than 300 voting machines were impounded at DiFiore’s request; a request filed three days
before the election was even held. This writer, who was reporting at the time for Martinelli Publications, witnessed the recanvas of those machines.
Having been Tony Castro’s campaign director when, as a total unknown he came close to defeating Jeanine Pirro four years earlier, I quickly recognized the peculiar voting patterns revealed in the 2005 Yonkers recount, not to mention numerous machines with broken seals. Despite the so-called “Non- Aggression Pact” of 2001, where Andy Spano and Larry Schwartz, and Reggie Lafayette, and all their henchmen, were actually part of the “fix” to reelect Jeanine Pirro, I never doubted that she won by six points, actually receiving more votes than my candidate. I have never enjoyed that lack of doubt with respect to Janet DiFiore. Given the totality of the circumstances, what reasonably
intelligent individual could?
Finally, speaking of Tony Castro, exposure of Irma Marquez’ case, less than two weeks ago, with its shocking videotape, brought to mind his client, Rui Florim, now approximately 23, who was beaten by six Yonkers police officers approximately 2 years ago. The facts of his encounter are no less outrageous and egregious.
Florim, who had gotten off work at 10:30pm from O’Porto Restaurant in the Village of Hartsdale, Town of Greenburgh, was being driven home by a female friend, having just crossed Central Avenue when they were pulled over by flashing lights in a dark area of the roadway. Six Yonkers Police Officers, including one female, all dressed in civilian clothing, pulled Florim from his friend’s car. And, forcing him into their unmarked car, four of them beat him about the face and head mercilessly.
He was then taken to St. Joseph’s Hospital, opposite Yonkers Police Headquarters, a hospital repeatedly used as the depository for victims of Yonkers Police brutality. He required 70 stitches and staples and five days in the Intensive Care Unit to recover. While he was in St. Joseph’s, Yonkers Police physically barred his family, and his attorney, from any contact with him.
Tony Castro represents Mr. Florim in State Court because, as with Irma Marquez, DA DiFiore is prosecuting him on trumped-up charges. Florim, will, no doubt, also be bringing an action in Federal Court. Castro told The Guardian, “The District Attorney’s routine response to Yonkers Police brutality is very short-sighted. She is not looking ahead to the long-term implications for juries and verdicts.
Jurors will learn what has been taking place. And, what has happened in The Bronx is what will happen in Yonkers, and all over
Westchester.” Castro went on, “It will come back to haunt law enforcement all across Westchester in the near-future. Their jury service is where citizens express their feelings about what they experience with police.”
Tony Castro, a former Bronx Assistant District Attorney, with 14 years experience, who trained hundreds of prosecutors, and who was
Deputy Bureau Chief of Homicides and the Grand Jury, was referring specifically to the preferential treatment DA DiFiore has repeatedly
shown the Yonkers Police Department at the expense of innocent citizens, as she has consistently been unwilling to investigate and prosecute their brutality against men, women and children. He is concerned that grand juries and trial juries will become so cynical and jaded that they will refuse to indict, or convict, in cases that are dependent upon police accounts.
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
DiFiore’s Incestuousness With Yonkers
Police Sacrifices Victims Of Police Brutality
Tony Castro Predicts, “It Will Come Back To Haunt Law Enforcement”
Nearly two years ago, in our September 21, 2006 issue, The Guardian blew the lid off years of Yonkers Police brutality, revealing an incident in 2005 in a front-page story entitled Mother, 72, Daughter, 49, Charge Yonkers Police Brutality. That story, which detailed the serious civil rights violations the Yonkers Police Department committed when they roughed up a middle-aged woman and her elderly mother, up behind Saunders High School, opened the floodgate to reports by residents, all over the City, and caused the sudden resignation and retirement of Police Commissioner Robert Taggart.
Within a week of the appearance of that story, President Karen Edmonson and Attorney Mike Sussman, of the Yonkers chapter of the NAACP, held a speak-out session at the Riverfront Library, attended by more than 125 persons, many of whom told about their own, and
their family’s, including mother’s and children’s, brutal encounters with the Yonkers Police, involving little or no provocation or justifi-
cation. Attorneys and law students from Pace Law School’s Criminal Justice Center, recorded their accounts which ultimately came to the attention the United States Attorney’s Office and the FBI.
More than a year ago, the FBI, in response, announced that they were conducting a “formal investigation into allegations of police brutality in Yonkers.” The Guardian is aware of visits by FBI special agents to a number of victim/complainants, including Tina and Mary Bostwick, the mother and daughter subjects of our first report. To date, we are not aware of any reports having been issued, or af-firmative action having been taken by the United States Attorney’s Of-fice, or the FBI, that might impact the continuing, unlawful brutality, and false criminal charges routinely worked against innocent men, women and children by, perhaps, 20 or so rogue, violent police offi-cers out of a force of some 670.
Last fall, a second speak-out was held at the Riverfront Library; this time in the auditorium, a few weeks prior to the mayoral election. Mayor Amicone, who had been campaigning nearby, came in to the auditorium in an ill-advised attempt to whitewash and dilute the concerns of the diverse, but mostly minority, audience. He was quickly booed and jeered, and literally chased from the auditorium.
In case after case, the routine has been the same; Yonkers Police beating up innocent citizens, then charging them with Disorderly Conduct, Obstruction of Governmental Administration, Resisting Arrest, Assault Upon A Police Of-ficer, or any combination thereof, both to cover and provide justifi-cation for their own criminal, civil rights violations, and as “bargaining chips” intended to discourage civilian victims from lodging criminal and/or civil complaints.
The practice has been going on for many years; DA Jeanine Pirro, for the most part, looking the other way. However, DA Janet DiFiore
has literally become a co-conspirator with Police Commissioner Hartnett and Mayor Amicone in case after case, as in the Irma Marquez
case. Marquez, all but killed by a totally unjustified body slam delivered by Yonkers Police Of-ficer Wayne Simoes, on March 3, 2007, was charged and prosecuted by DA DiFiore for Obstruction Of Governmental Administration and Disorderly Conduct, an absolutely absurd response by the DA given the clear, indisputable evidence provided by a security camera videotape at the scene.
Those who might wonder why Janet DiFiore repeatedly abandons her sworn duty to protect innocent citizens in her rush to aid and assist
rogue Yonkers cops, while covering up the Department’s serious civil rights violations, need to understand that she has a deep indebtedness
to the Yonkers Police, given the circumstances surrounding her race for District Attorney against Tony Castro in 2005. In point of fact, Di-
Fiore, whose husband attempted to bribe Right-To-Life candidate Anthony DiCintio off the ballot, was nonetheless publicly endorsed by
the Yonkers Police Department.
They were the host department at the Yonkers Polish Center within days of the election at a rally by police brass from Harrison, Dobbs
Ferry and other departments. But, more importantly, and more suspect, they were the department assigned to secure the warehouse storage
facility on Saw Mill River Road, where more than 300 voting machines were impounded at DiFiore’s request; a request filed three days
before the election was even held. This writer, who was reporting at the time for Martinelli Publications, witnessed the recanvas of those machines.
Having been Tony Castro’s campaign director when, as a total unknown he came close to defeating Jeanine Pirro four years earlier, I quickly recognized the peculiar voting patterns revealed in the 2005 Yonkers recount, not to mention numerous machines with broken seals. Despite the so-called “Non- Aggression Pact” of 2001, where Andy Spano and Larry Schwartz, and Reggie Lafayette, and all their henchmen, were actually part of the “fix” to reelect Jeanine Pirro, I never doubted that she won by six points, actually receiving more votes than my candidate. I have never enjoyed that lack of doubt with respect to Janet DiFiore. Given the totality of the circumstances, what reasonably
intelligent individual could?
Finally, speaking of Tony Castro, exposure of Irma Marquez’ case, less than two weeks ago, with its shocking videotape, brought to mind his client, Rui Florim, now approximately 23, who was beaten by six Yonkers police officers approximately 2 years ago. The facts of his encounter are no less outrageous and egregious.
Florim, who had gotten off work at 10:30pm from O’Porto Restaurant in the Village of Hartsdale, Town of Greenburgh, was being driven home by a female friend, having just crossed Central Avenue when they were pulled over by flashing lights in a dark area of the roadway. Six Yonkers Police Officers, including one female, all dressed in civilian clothing, pulled Florim from his friend’s car. And, forcing him into their unmarked car, four of them beat him about the face and head mercilessly.
He was then taken to St. Joseph’s Hospital, opposite Yonkers Police Headquarters, a hospital repeatedly used as the depository for victims of Yonkers Police brutality. He required 70 stitches and staples and five days in the Intensive Care Unit to recover. While he was in St. Joseph’s, Yonkers Police physically barred his family, and his attorney, from any contact with him.
Tony Castro represents Mr. Florim in State Court because, as with Irma Marquez, DA DiFiore is prosecuting him on trumped-up charges. Florim, will, no doubt, also be bringing an action in Federal Court. Castro told The Guardian, “The District Attorney’s routine response to Yonkers Police brutality is very short-sighted. She is not looking ahead to the long-term implications for juries and verdicts.
Jurors will learn what has been taking place. And, what has happened in The Bronx is what will happen in Yonkers, and all over
Westchester.” Castro went on, “It will come back to haunt law enforcement all across Westchester in the near-future. Their jury service is where citizens express their feelings about what they experience with police.”
Tony Castro, a former Bronx Assistant District Attorney, with 14 years experience, who trained hundreds of prosecutors, and who was
Deputy Bureau Chief of Homicides and the Grand Jury, was referring specifically to the preferential treatment DA DiFiore has repeatedly
shown the Yonkers Police Department at the expense of innocent citizens, as she has consistently been unwilling to investigate and prosecute their brutality against men, women and children. He is concerned that grand juries and trial juries will become so cynical and jaded that they will refuse to indict, or convict, in cases that are dependent upon police accounts.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Sandy Annabi Strongly Endorses Dennis Robertson
Tells District Two Constituents “If We Elect Dennis As Our Next Mayor,
We Will Finally Get Our Fair Share From the City of Yonkers.”
Dear Friends and Neighbors,
For the past several years, as your City Council Representative, I have steadfastly fought for your best interests.
at is why I am writing to you now, to urge you to go to the polls on Election Day, Tuesday, November 6, and vote for Dennis Robertson for Mayor of Yonkers.
With Dennis Robertson as our Mayor, we, the residents of District Two, will - nally get the level of service from the City of Yonkers we have long deserved. Dennis has demonstrated by his conduct on the City Council, that he has the best interests of the residents of Southwest Yonkers at heart.
Dennis Robertson and I have a great working relationship and share the same views on many issues that effect the quality of life of our residents. Dennis Robertson is hardworking and dedicated. He listens and, most importantly, he will help me to help you. is is a very important election for all of Yonkers, but most important for us, the People of District Two. If we elect Dennis as our next Mayor, we will finally get our fair share from the
City of Yonkers.
Best regards,
Sandy
Tells District Two Constituents “If We Elect Dennis As Our Next Mayor,
We Will Finally Get Our Fair Share From the City of Yonkers.”
Dear Friends and Neighbors,
For the past several years, as your City Council Representative, I have steadfastly fought for your best interests.
at is why I am writing to you now, to urge you to go to the polls on Election Day, Tuesday, November 6, and vote for Dennis Robertson for Mayor of Yonkers.
With Dennis Robertson as our Mayor, we, the residents of District Two, will - nally get the level of service from the City of Yonkers we have long deserved. Dennis has demonstrated by his conduct on the City Council, that he has the best interests of the residents of Southwest Yonkers at heart.
Dennis Robertson and I have a great working relationship and share the same views on many issues that effect the quality of life of our residents. Dennis Robertson is hardworking and dedicated. He listens and, most importantly, he will help me to help you. is is a very important election for all of Yonkers, but most important for us, the People of District Two. If we elect Dennis as our next Mayor, we will finally get our fair share from the
City of Yonkers.
Best regards,
Sandy
Thursday, October 25, 2007
The Court Report
By Richard Blassberg
Amicone “Dodges A Bullet”– For Now
Yonkers City Court, Cacace Justice Center, Yonkers, N.Y.
City Court Judge Charles Wood, Presiding
Last Thursday afternoon, October 18th, Westchester Guardian Publisher Sam Zherka, and several of his employees, were present in Yonkers City Court for a scheduled 1:00 p.m. appearance. At three minutes before 3:00 p.m., after clearing out all of the other items on his calendar, City Court Judge Charles Wood looked up and announced, “Mr. Lovett, please approach.”
Following the exchange of a few comments with the Judge, Attorney Jonathan Lovett, counsel to The Westchester Guardian and Publisher Sam Zherka, motioned Yonkers Assistant Corporate Counsel, Lawrence A. Porcari, to join him at the bench.
Moments later, the Court Clerk proceeded to call up nine employees of The Guardian, from the Circulation Department, by name and case number, as well as Publisher Zherka. Judge Wood, turning to Mr. Lovett, inquired, “Do you have an application?” Mr. Lovett responded, “We are in Federal Court, claiming that the Yonkers City Code, with regard to the distribution of newspapers, is facially in violation of the First Amendment
to the United States Constitution.”
The Judge then responded, “Let’s adjourn this matter to December 6th. Hopefully that will give Judge Brieant enough time to do his work.
Following the adjournment, Mr. Lovett, emerging from the courtroom, told this reporter, “They dodged a bullet.” Upon leaving the courthouse, Publisher Zherka and Attorney Lovett were confronted by reporters. Zherka stated, “I expected to be jailed today. However, the Judge did the right thing postponing the case until the Federal Court deals with it.”
Holding the current issue of The Guardian in his hands, he went on, “This newspaper represents the rights of the People. I am a firm believer in the Constitution and the First Amendment.”
Attorney Lovett then told reporters, “We have seven cases in Federal Court now, three of them name Mr. Porcari, Yonkers Assistant Corporate Counsel, in his individual capacity.” He then reached into his briefcase,
pulling out a copy of the Yonkers City Code, exclaiming, “You’d have to be a moron not to realize this Code violates the Constitution.”
Analysis:
Westchester Guardian Publisher Sam Zherka’s appearance in Yonkers City Court, together with several of his employees, was in answer to charges brought by the Amicone Administration under a City Ordinance
that is plainly un-Constitutional.
Mr. Zherka was prepared to go forward to trial, and to do jail time, if necessary, in defense of the First Amendment and the People’s Right to know. He understood, nevertheless, the Amicone Administration’s unwillingness, prior to Election Day, to bring any further public attention to their wrongful and vindictive actions,
their tyrannical attempt to silence legitimate criticism.
It should be noted that Amicone, and his subordinates, are under a Restraining Order imposed several weeks ago by Federal District Court Judge Charles L. Brieant.
Jonathan Lovett, attorney representing The Guardian and Publisher Zherka, has expressed his con-fidence in the outcome and success of his clients’ Civil Rights actions in Federal Court against Mayor Phil Amicone and several members of his City Administration for their flagrant, ‘content-based’ violations of the First Amendment against The Westchester Guardian, several of its employees, its publisher, and thousands of Yonkers readers, by the confiscation of 56 distribution boxes, as well as the use of harassment and arrest, to interfere with, and halt, the newspaper’s distribution in Yonkers for several weeks. His confidence is based, in part, upon very compelling evidence of the alleged wrongful conduct of City personnel under direct orders from the Mayor’s office; evidence consisting of explicit and damning photos, videos, and recorded statements, of City employees.
By Richard Blassberg
Amicone “Dodges A Bullet”– For Now
Yonkers City Court, Cacace Justice Center, Yonkers, N.Y.
City Court Judge Charles Wood, Presiding
Last Thursday afternoon, October 18th, Westchester Guardian Publisher Sam Zherka, and several of his employees, were present in Yonkers City Court for a scheduled 1:00 p.m. appearance. At three minutes before 3:00 p.m., after clearing out all of the other items on his calendar, City Court Judge Charles Wood looked up and announced, “Mr. Lovett, please approach.”
Following the exchange of a few comments with the Judge, Attorney Jonathan Lovett, counsel to The Westchester Guardian and Publisher Sam Zherka, motioned Yonkers Assistant Corporate Counsel, Lawrence A. Porcari, to join him at the bench.
Moments later, the Court Clerk proceeded to call up nine employees of The Guardian, from the Circulation Department, by name and case number, as well as Publisher Zherka. Judge Wood, turning to Mr. Lovett, inquired, “Do you have an application?” Mr. Lovett responded, “We are in Federal Court, claiming that the Yonkers City Code, with regard to the distribution of newspapers, is facially in violation of the First Amendment
to the United States Constitution.”
The Judge then responded, “Let’s adjourn this matter to December 6th. Hopefully that will give Judge Brieant enough time to do his work.
Following the adjournment, Mr. Lovett, emerging from the courtroom, told this reporter, “They dodged a bullet.” Upon leaving the courthouse, Publisher Zherka and Attorney Lovett were confronted by reporters. Zherka stated, “I expected to be jailed today. However, the Judge did the right thing postponing the case until the Federal Court deals with it.”
Holding the current issue of The Guardian in his hands, he went on, “This newspaper represents the rights of the People. I am a firm believer in the Constitution and the First Amendment.”
Attorney Lovett then told reporters, “We have seven cases in Federal Court now, three of them name Mr. Porcari, Yonkers Assistant Corporate Counsel, in his individual capacity.” He then reached into his briefcase,
pulling out a copy of the Yonkers City Code, exclaiming, “You’d have to be a moron not to realize this Code violates the Constitution.”
Analysis:
Westchester Guardian Publisher Sam Zherka’s appearance in Yonkers City Court, together with several of his employees, was in answer to charges brought by the Amicone Administration under a City Ordinance
that is plainly un-Constitutional.
Mr. Zherka was prepared to go forward to trial, and to do jail time, if necessary, in defense of the First Amendment and the People’s Right to know. He understood, nevertheless, the Amicone Administration’s unwillingness, prior to Election Day, to bring any further public attention to their wrongful and vindictive actions,
their tyrannical attempt to silence legitimate criticism.
It should be noted that Amicone, and his subordinates, are under a Restraining Order imposed several weeks ago by Federal District Court Judge Charles L. Brieant.
Jonathan Lovett, attorney representing The Guardian and Publisher Zherka, has expressed his con-fidence in the outcome and success of his clients’ Civil Rights actions in Federal Court against Mayor Phil Amicone and several members of his City Administration for their flagrant, ‘content-based’ violations of the First Amendment against The Westchester Guardian, several of its employees, its publisher, and thousands of Yonkers readers, by the confiscation of 56 distribution boxes, as well as the use of harassment and arrest, to interfere with, and halt, the newspaper’s distribution in Yonkers for several weeks. His confidence is based, in part, upon very compelling evidence of the alleged wrongful conduct of City personnel under direct orders from the Mayor’s office; evidence consisting of explicit and damning photos, videos, and recorded statements, of City employees.
In Four Years, Under Phil Amicone: In Four Years, Under Phil Amicone:
• Property taxes have risen 30 percent;
• School test scores have gone down;
• Gang violence and shootings are way up;
• Developers have gotten excessive tax breaks;
• The FBI is investigating deals with developers;
• Police brutality complaints swept under the rug;
• U.S. Justice Dept. investigating Yonkers Police Dept.;
• Elections have been monitored by Feds for fraud;
• Police and Fire Unions worked 21/2 years without contract;
• Record deficit spending, possibly $60 million this year;
• Thirty former Spano staff in no-show jobs for $1.3 million;
• Violates First Amendment to keep the truth from you.
• Property taxes have risen 30 percent;
• School test scores have gone down;
• Gang violence and shootings are way up;
• Developers have gotten excessive tax breaks;
• The FBI is investigating deals with developers;
• Police brutality complaints swept under the rug;
• U.S. Justice Dept. investigating Yonkers Police Dept.;
• Elections have been monitored by Feds for fraud;
• Police and Fire Unions worked 21/2 years without contract;
• Record deficit spending, possibly $60 million this year;
• Thirty former Spano staff in no-show jobs for $1.3 million;
• Violates First Amendment to keep the truth from you.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
Tired Of City Hall Denials And Inaction, Victims Of Yonkers Police Brutality Send Amicone Packing
Saturday afternoon, September 29th, Yonkers Mayor Phil Amicone found out, the hard way, what
victims of police brutality, be they Black, White, Latino, or other, felt about his, and his police commissioner’s,
failure to acknowledge and deal with numerous unresolved cases of police brutality. Making an
unscheduled appearance at the Riverfront Public Library, before nearly 200 victims and community spokespersons, the second ‘speak-out’ event at the site in a year, Amicone attempted to tell the assemblage that
his administration “does not ignore police brutality complaints.” That remark was immediately responded
to by a local business operator, who yelled, “We don’t believe you.” There then followed shouts and taunts from
several in the audience as the Mayor beat a hasty retreat from the auditorium, obviously humiliated.
The gathering had been organized by Katrina Phillips, assistant to Al Sharpton, head of the National Action Network, brought into Yonkers by Karen Edmonson, President of the Yonkers Chapter of the NAACP, back in July, when it became obvious to her that conversations with Police Commissioner Edmund Hartnett “were
going nowhere.” Saturday’s forum was intended to accomplish what was not accomplished when the July event, scheduled at the Messiah Baptist Church on Warburton Avenue, was cancelled because of City Hall warnings to the pastor that violence and street clashes might result from the event.
Showing up briefly in July at the African-American Festival that followed the cancelled church event, Sharpton correctly observed that Yonkers Police brutality was “a problem not targeting only the minority community.” He ordered figures demonstrating that nearly fifty percent of complaints over the previous year had come from White complainants.
Mayor Amicone and Edmund Hartnett, his appointed Police Commissioner, had been put on notice a year ago, when the jolting frontpage headline of the September 21st edition of e Westchester Guardian read “Mother 72, Daughter 49, Charge Yonkers Police Brutality.”
The article detailed how Tina and Mary Bostwick, lifelong residents of Yonkers, had been badly mistreated
by Yonkers Police. Mary, the daughter, was roughed-up and arrested by a police officer with a reputation for
violent conduct, after summoning help for a severely injured youth who had been beaten by their neighbor.
Then, six days after the article hit the street, Police Commissioner Robert Taggart mysteriously resigned after forty years on the job. Following that article, literally scores of individuals, previously too frightened and intimidated to speak up, began coming forward. Their cases were detailed and documented. By not responding,
for the most part, and, in fact, stiff-arming the press and denying the longstanding pervasive problem, Amicone and Hartnett have lost the confideence of the community, particularly the City’s African-American community. At the same time they have caused the Federal Government, the Justice Department, through the United States
Attorney’s Office, to open an investigation into the matter, as it is obvious that City Hall has no serious intention of acknowledging the long-standing and pervasive police brutality problem, much less dealing with it.
Richard Blassberg
Tired Of City Hall Denials And Inaction, Victims Of Yonkers Police Brutality Send Amicone Packing
Saturday afternoon, September 29th, Yonkers Mayor Phil Amicone found out, the hard way, what
victims of police brutality, be they Black, White, Latino, or other, felt about his, and his police commissioner’s,
failure to acknowledge and deal with numerous unresolved cases of police brutality. Making an
unscheduled appearance at the Riverfront Public Library, before nearly 200 victims and community spokespersons, the second ‘speak-out’ event at the site in a year, Amicone attempted to tell the assemblage that
his administration “does not ignore police brutality complaints.” That remark was immediately responded
to by a local business operator, who yelled, “We don’t believe you.” There then followed shouts and taunts from
several in the audience as the Mayor beat a hasty retreat from the auditorium, obviously humiliated.
The gathering had been organized by Katrina Phillips, assistant to Al Sharpton, head of the National Action Network, brought into Yonkers by Karen Edmonson, President of the Yonkers Chapter of the NAACP, back in July, when it became obvious to her that conversations with Police Commissioner Edmund Hartnett “were
going nowhere.” Saturday’s forum was intended to accomplish what was not accomplished when the July event, scheduled at the Messiah Baptist Church on Warburton Avenue, was cancelled because of City Hall warnings to the pastor that violence and street clashes might result from the event.
Showing up briefly in July at the African-American Festival that followed the cancelled church event, Sharpton correctly observed that Yonkers Police brutality was “a problem not targeting only the minority community.” He ordered figures demonstrating that nearly fifty percent of complaints over the previous year had come from White complainants.
Mayor Amicone and Edmund Hartnett, his appointed Police Commissioner, had been put on notice a year ago, when the jolting frontpage headline of the September 21st edition of e Westchester Guardian read “Mother 72, Daughter 49, Charge Yonkers Police Brutality.”
The article detailed how Tina and Mary Bostwick, lifelong residents of Yonkers, had been badly mistreated
by Yonkers Police. Mary, the daughter, was roughed-up and arrested by a police officer with a reputation for
violent conduct, after summoning help for a severely injured youth who had been beaten by their neighbor.
Then, six days after the article hit the street, Police Commissioner Robert Taggart mysteriously resigned after forty years on the job. Following that article, literally scores of individuals, previously too frightened and intimidated to speak up, began coming forward. Their cases were detailed and documented. By not responding,
for the most part, and, in fact, stiff-arming the press and denying the longstanding pervasive problem, Amicone and Hartnett have lost the confideence of the community, particularly the City’s African-American community. At the same time they have caused the Federal Government, the Justice Department, through the United States
Attorney’s Office, to open an investigation into the matter, as it is obvious that City Hall has no serious intention of acknowledging the long-standing and pervasive police brutality problem, much less dealing with it.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
The Court Report
By Richard Blassberg
Phil Amicone & Company Discover The First Amendment
United States District Court, White Plains
Judge Charles L. Brieant Presiding
Friday, September 21 Yonkers Mayor Phil Amicone and his regime were jarred from their delusions with respect to the First Amendment to the Constitution, specifically its crystal-clear language with regard to Freedom Of The Press. Apparently Mr. Amicone and his cohorts in city government had been laboring under the false
impression that in this post-9/11 atmosphere of warrantless wiretaps, searches, and seizures, our fundamental Constitutional protections had been watered down to where government, including Yonkers’ Mayor and City Government, could, if they didn’t like what a newspaper was saying about them, simply confiscate and destroy that newspaper’s distribution boxes, and arrest those employed in its distribution.
The hearing before Judge Charles L Brieant, opened with a statement from Attorney for The Westchester Guardian, and numerous aggrieved Yonkers readers of the newspaper, Jonathan Lovett, who declared, “Your Honor, this case is one of nine cases we have filed against the City of Yonkers’ orchestrated theft and destruction of our newsracks. They believe they can suppress a news publication under Section 100-35 of
the City Ordinance. We challenge that provision.”
Attorney Kevin Plunkett, representing Amicone and the City Administration, broke in at that point, citing the “MTA Decision by Judge Knapp, in 1969, involving The Westchester/Rockland Newspapers.”
Mr. Lovett countered, “We are simply asking for a Preliminary Injunction, Your Honor. This is not just a newsrack issue. It is content-based.”
Mr. Plunkett came back with, “The City of Yonkers amended the ordinance to comply, under Section 33 of the
Code.”
Judge Brieant, turning to Plunkett, then declared, “We have a lawsuit here; that’s the problem. I don’t see how you cannot tolerate the racks. Other papers have racks.”
Mr. Plunkett then read the applicable section of the City Ordinance, making pointed references to locations from which Westchester Guardian newsracks had been removed, attempting to justify those removals under the ordinance.
Following that recitation, Brieant asked, “Are there any other newsracks of other publications also there?” He went on, “I have a very strong supportive view as regards First Amendment Rights. I am going to set a schedule for pretrial discovery.”
Attorney Plunkett broke in with, “This paper has created issues.”
Judge Briant now announced in a firm tone, “When I see an opportunity to have a First Amendment issue, that’s what I’m here for.” At the Judge’s urging Mr. Plunkett and his associate retired into conference with Mr. Lovett in an attempt to draw up a stipulation satisfactory to both sides. Following 25 minutes of closed-door negotiation,
Lovett emerged with a proposal from the City that would have banned distribution of The Guardian on the streets of Yonkers, totally unacceptable to the publisher.
Brieant, upon learning of their failure to reach an accord, sent the attorneys back into conference. However they soon re-emerged, Mr. Lovett announcing, “We were not able to reach any agreement, Your Honor.” Mr. Plunkett, quickly countered with, “We came close. We were trying to resolve matters going forward as Your Honor suggested.”
The Judge then advised the attorneys, “I’d rather call you in for a hearing. Go back in there, (referring to the conference room adjacent to the courtroom,) and I’ll join you as soon as I can.” The Judge had been handling numerous other calendar items while Plunkett and Lovett had been in conference for a total of more than half an hour. Upon clearing out all of the other items Brieant left the bench and entered the conference room, remaining for nearly 15 minutes, in an attempt to mediate a temporary agreement.
Returning to the courtroom with the attorneys, Brieant permitted each side to make a statement for the record, whereupon the Judge added, “The Court has reviewed this matter.
The Court orders a Temporary Restraining Order. The Plaintiff may install racks anywhere in the City. This is temporary relief only with the public’s interest in mind. The Plaintiff’s publication will enjoy the same privileges as any other newspaper at City Hall. The City Administration will advise employees that they are not to destroy any of the newsracks. Distribution on sidewalks is to be allowed but not in traffic on the street.” Judge Brieant set November 12th at 9:00am as the trial date.
Analysis:
Judge Charles L. Brieant, appointed to the Federal Bench by former Republican President Richard M. Nixon thirty-six years ago, left no doubt in anyone’s mind concerning the seriousness with which he continues to view violations of First Amendment Rights. Surely, Yonkers Mayor Phil Amicone, and his advisors, must now realize what a grievous miscalculation they made in their oppressive and reckless campaign to prevent truthful, if unfavorable, information regarding the Mayor and the City Administration from reaching the People of Yonkers.
Content-based First Amendment violations are historically regarded as most egregious and intolerable.
By Richard Blassberg
Phil Amicone & Company Discover The First Amendment
United States District Court, White Plains
Judge Charles L. Brieant Presiding
Friday, September 21 Yonkers Mayor Phil Amicone and his regime were jarred from their delusions with respect to the First Amendment to the Constitution, specifically its crystal-clear language with regard to Freedom Of The Press. Apparently Mr. Amicone and his cohorts in city government had been laboring under the false
impression that in this post-9/11 atmosphere of warrantless wiretaps, searches, and seizures, our fundamental Constitutional protections had been watered down to where government, including Yonkers’ Mayor and City Government, could, if they didn’t like what a newspaper was saying about them, simply confiscate and destroy that newspaper’s distribution boxes, and arrest those employed in its distribution.
The hearing before Judge Charles L Brieant, opened with a statement from Attorney for The Westchester Guardian, and numerous aggrieved Yonkers readers of the newspaper, Jonathan Lovett, who declared, “Your Honor, this case is one of nine cases we have filed against the City of Yonkers’ orchestrated theft and destruction of our newsracks. They believe they can suppress a news publication under Section 100-35 of
the City Ordinance. We challenge that provision.”
Attorney Kevin Plunkett, representing Amicone and the City Administration, broke in at that point, citing the “MTA Decision by Judge Knapp, in 1969, involving The Westchester/Rockland Newspapers.”
Mr. Lovett countered, “We are simply asking for a Preliminary Injunction, Your Honor. This is not just a newsrack issue. It is content-based.”
Mr. Plunkett came back with, “The City of Yonkers amended the ordinance to comply, under Section 33 of the
Code.”
Judge Brieant, turning to Plunkett, then declared, “We have a lawsuit here; that’s the problem. I don’t see how you cannot tolerate the racks. Other papers have racks.”
Mr. Plunkett then read the applicable section of the City Ordinance, making pointed references to locations from which Westchester Guardian newsracks had been removed, attempting to justify those removals under the ordinance.
Following that recitation, Brieant asked, “Are there any other newsracks of other publications also there?” He went on, “I have a very strong supportive view as regards First Amendment Rights. I am going to set a schedule for pretrial discovery.”
Attorney Plunkett broke in with, “This paper has created issues.”
Judge Briant now announced in a firm tone, “When I see an opportunity to have a First Amendment issue, that’s what I’m here for.” At the Judge’s urging Mr. Plunkett and his associate retired into conference with Mr. Lovett in an attempt to draw up a stipulation satisfactory to both sides. Following 25 minutes of closed-door negotiation,
Lovett emerged with a proposal from the City that would have banned distribution of The Guardian on the streets of Yonkers, totally unacceptable to the publisher.
Brieant, upon learning of their failure to reach an accord, sent the attorneys back into conference. However they soon re-emerged, Mr. Lovett announcing, “We were not able to reach any agreement, Your Honor.” Mr. Plunkett, quickly countered with, “We came close. We were trying to resolve matters going forward as Your Honor suggested.”
The Judge then advised the attorneys, “I’d rather call you in for a hearing. Go back in there, (referring to the conference room adjacent to the courtroom,) and I’ll join you as soon as I can.” The Judge had been handling numerous other calendar items while Plunkett and Lovett had been in conference for a total of more than half an hour. Upon clearing out all of the other items Brieant left the bench and entered the conference room, remaining for nearly 15 minutes, in an attempt to mediate a temporary agreement.
Returning to the courtroom with the attorneys, Brieant permitted each side to make a statement for the record, whereupon the Judge added, “The Court has reviewed this matter.
The Court orders a Temporary Restraining Order. The Plaintiff may install racks anywhere in the City. This is temporary relief only with the public’s interest in mind. The Plaintiff’s publication will enjoy the same privileges as any other newspaper at City Hall. The City Administration will advise employees that they are not to destroy any of the newsracks. Distribution on sidewalks is to be allowed but not in traffic on the street.” Judge Brieant set November 12th at 9:00am as the trial date.
Analysis:
Judge Charles L. Brieant, appointed to the Federal Bench by former Republican President Richard M. Nixon thirty-six years ago, left no doubt in anyone’s mind concerning the seriousness with which he continues to view violations of First Amendment Rights. Surely, Yonkers Mayor Phil Amicone, and his advisors, must now realize what a grievous miscalculation they made in their oppressive and reckless campaign to prevent truthful, if unfavorable, information regarding the Mayor and the City Administration from reaching the People of Yonkers.
Content-based First Amendment violations are historically regarded as most egregious and intolerable.
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Vinnie Restiano: “Phil Amicone Simply Doesn’t Tell the Truth”
Describing Mayor Philip Amicone as “A bureaucrat who was unable to morph into a leader,” Vinnie
Restiano, for many years president of the Yonkers City Council, who is challenging him in the upcoming
Republican Primary, told the Westchester Guardian that Amicone’s claims have been “all about
smoke and mirrors.” Declaring, “ the reality is, crime is up in Yonkers over the last three and a half years, and so are taxes, by more than 30 percent,” Restiano said, “Amicone has had a stagnant administration.”
She pointed to a “scandalous” decline in tax ratables coupled with tax abatements and “sweetheart deals to developers,” as primary causes of sharply increasing property taxes.
Turning to Yonkers Public Schools, she pointed out that of the five largest cities in New York State,
Yonkers was the only one whose math and English scores were worse than the year before.
Asked how she would remedy the school problems that have dogged the city for several years, should she be elected Mayor, she quickly responded, “I would replace the Superintendent of Schools, for starters.” She
went on to state, “Four years ago, Amicone and I were both in favor of a Department of Education. My
four kids went to Yonkers Public Schools. Unfortunately, Phil has eliminated many of the former advanced education incentives once offered our teachers.
It appears the Mayor is loyal only to the developers and Nick Spano’s people. e residents of Yonkers are paying an enormous price for Nicky’s endorsement. More than $1.3 million taxpayer dollars are funding ‘no-show’ and ‘do-nothing’ jobs for more than 30 of Nick’s relatives and former staff.”
Questioned about police brutality, Restiano said, “I will have to have my own Police Commissioner. The Police need at least one more precinct and satellite precincts. ere are more than 36 gangs in our city, and I intend
to be a hands-on mayor, working to resolve the critical issues that Phil Amicone has neglected.”
Asked how she will achieve victory in the Republican Primary over the incumbent Mayor, she remarked, “Phil has a communication problem. You just can’t take a man out of the bureaucracy and make him a mayor. I’m going to win the Primary because voters understand it’s a matter of our records.
When elected Mayor, I intend to work closely with the City Council and community leaders, most of whom I have worked with before, to resolve the issues confronting our great city.”
Describing Mayor Philip Amicone as “A bureaucrat who was unable to morph into a leader,” Vinnie
Restiano, for many years president of the Yonkers City Council, who is challenging him in the upcoming
Republican Primary, told the Westchester Guardian that Amicone’s claims have been “all about
smoke and mirrors.” Declaring, “ the reality is, crime is up in Yonkers over the last three and a half years, and so are taxes, by more than 30 percent,” Restiano said, “Amicone has had a stagnant administration.”
She pointed to a “scandalous” decline in tax ratables coupled with tax abatements and “sweetheart deals to developers,” as primary causes of sharply increasing property taxes.
Turning to Yonkers Public Schools, she pointed out that of the five largest cities in New York State,
Yonkers was the only one whose math and English scores were worse than the year before.
Asked how she would remedy the school problems that have dogged the city for several years, should she be elected Mayor, she quickly responded, “I would replace the Superintendent of Schools, for starters.” She
went on to state, “Four years ago, Amicone and I were both in favor of a Department of Education. My
four kids went to Yonkers Public Schools. Unfortunately, Phil has eliminated many of the former advanced education incentives once offered our teachers.
It appears the Mayor is loyal only to the developers and Nick Spano’s people. e residents of Yonkers are paying an enormous price for Nicky’s endorsement. More than $1.3 million taxpayer dollars are funding ‘no-show’ and ‘do-nothing’ jobs for more than 30 of Nick’s relatives and former staff.”
Questioned about police brutality, Restiano said, “I will have to have my own Police Commissioner. The Police need at least one more precinct and satellite precincts. ere are more than 36 gangs in our city, and I intend
to be a hands-on mayor, working to resolve the critical issues that Phil Amicone has neglected.”
Asked how she will achieve victory in the Republican Primary over the incumbent Mayor, she remarked, “Phil has a communication problem. You just can’t take a man out of the bureaucracy and make him a mayor. I’m going to win the Primary because voters understand it’s a matter of our records.
When elected Mayor, I intend to work closely with the City Council and community leaders, most of whom I have worked with before, to resolve the issues confronting our great city.”
The Court Report
By Richard Blassberg
Mayor Amicone Imperils City Of Yonkers Recklessly Trashing The First Amendment
United States District Court, White Plains Judge Charles L. Brieant Presiding
Last Wednesday, August 29th, Attorney Jonathan Lovett filed papers in United States District Court, Southern District of New York, White Plains, under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, on behalf of several readers of The Westchester Guardian, residents of Yonkers, Plaintiffs whose Constitutional rights, as guaranteed under the First Amendment, were violated by Philip Amicone, individually, and several Yonkers City employees under his command.
The Plaintiffs, some 23 in all, constitute merely the first wave of hundreds of Yonkers residents who have called, faxed, and e-mailed The Guardian, outraged by the Mayor’s removal of The Guardian’s distribution boxes throughout the City, thereby curtailing their ability to access and read the content of the newspaper for some
three weeks. Also named as Defendants in the suit, in their individual capacities, in addition to Amicone, were Police Commissioner Edmund Hartnett, Commissioner of Public Works, John A Liszewski, Corporation Counsel Lawrence A Porcari, Jr., Police Officer Paul Wood, and numerous “John Doe” police officers and sanitation workers.
The suit essentially charges Mayor Phil Amicone and several Yonkers City employees, with content-based First Amendment violations in that their concerted effort to confiscate and dispose of more than 50 of The Westchester Guardian’s distribution boxes, together with their contents, “intentionally prevented, and/or substantially impaired the dissemination of The Guardian within and throughout the City,” as the result of which Plaintiffs were “unable to obtain/read The Guardian and learn information, ideas and opinions as provided by that publication regarding on-going corruption in the City’s government.”
The complaint further alleges that as the result of Defendants’ actions, “Plaintiffs have been caused to suffer irreparable damage to their rights as guaranteed by the First Amendment; emotional upset; impairment of their otherwise insight into the criminal wrongdoing routinely indulged in by City officials, and persons with whom they associate; fear of the secrecy with respect to which Defendants have deliberately enshrouded their misfeasance, malfeasance and corrupt practices; fear of the blatant abuse of power and authority by the Defendants to support their campaign of terror against The Guardian, and its readers; anxiety attributable to the suppression by
Defendants of The Guardian and the impairment of Plaintiff ’s right to knowledge and information; punishment for exercising their right of free speech; and otherwise rendered sick and sore.”
The suit demands a jury trial and seeks an award from all Defendants in compensatory damages of $10 million, as well as an equal award in punitive damages, for a total of $20 million, “or such additional punitive damages as the jury may impose.”
Many observers have expressed shock over the heavy-handed tactics employed by Mayor Amicone, in his misguided attempt to silence criticism and commentary with regard to the conduct of his administration and the increasingly difficult plight of homeowners and taxpayers in Yonkers under his reign. Many individuals close to City government have recently expressed concern over Amicone’s failure to confront and deal with major issues. In this regard, readers may recall several articles that began to appear in The Guardian, nearly one year ago,
and frequently since, concerning Yonkers Police brutality, and Mayor Amicone’s and Police Commissioner Hartnett’s failure to adequately respond to that long-standing problem. Last week it was announced that
as a result of mounting complaints the United States Justice Department has launched an investigation into the matter.
By Richard Blassberg
Mayor Amicone Imperils City Of Yonkers Recklessly Trashing The First Amendment
United States District Court, White Plains Judge Charles L. Brieant Presiding
Last Wednesday, August 29th, Attorney Jonathan Lovett filed papers in United States District Court, Southern District of New York, White Plains, under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, on behalf of several readers of The Westchester Guardian, residents of Yonkers, Plaintiffs whose Constitutional rights, as guaranteed under the First Amendment, were violated by Philip Amicone, individually, and several Yonkers City employees under his command.
The Plaintiffs, some 23 in all, constitute merely the first wave of hundreds of Yonkers residents who have called, faxed, and e-mailed The Guardian, outraged by the Mayor’s removal of The Guardian’s distribution boxes throughout the City, thereby curtailing their ability to access and read the content of the newspaper for some
three weeks. Also named as Defendants in the suit, in their individual capacities, in addition to Amicone, were Police Commissioner Edmund Hartnett, Commissioner of Public Works, John A Liszewski, Corporation Counsel Lawrence A Porcari, Jr., Police Officer Paul Wood, and numerous “John Doe” police officers and sanitation workers.
The suit essentially charges Mayor Phil Amicone and several Yonkers City employees, with content-based First Amendment violations in that their concerted effort to confiscate and dispose of more than 50 of The Westchester Guardian’s distribution boxes, together with their contents, “intentionally prevented, and/or substantially impaired the dissemination of The Guardian within and throughout the City,” as the result of which Plaintiffs were “unable to obtain/read The Guardian and learn information, ideas and opinions as provided by that publication regarding on-going corruption in the City’s government.”
The complaint further alleges that as the result of Defendants’ actions, “Plaintiffs have been caused to suffer irreparable damage to their rights as guaranteed by the First Amendment; emotional upset; impairment of their otherwise insight into the criminal wrongdoing routinely indulged in by City officials, and persons with whom they associate; fear of the secrecy with respect to which Defendants have deliberately enshrouded their misfeasance, malfeasance and corrupt practices; fear of the blatant abuse of power and authority by the Defendants to support their campaign of terror against The Guardian, and its readers; anxiety attributable to the suppression by
Defendants of The Guardian and the impairment of Plaintiff ’s right to knowledge and information; punishment for exercising their right of free speech; and otherwise rendered sick and sore.”
The suit demands a jury trial and seeks an award from all Defendants in compensatory damages of $10 million, as well as an equal award in punitive damages, for a total of $20 million, “or such additional punitive damages as the jury may impose.”
Many observers have expressed shock over the heavy-handed tactics employed by Mayor Amicone, in his misguided attempt to silence criticism and commentary with regard to the conduct of his administration and the increasingly difficult plight of homeowners and taxpayers in Yonkers under his reign. Many individuals close to City government have recently expressed concern over Amicone’s failure to confront and deal with major issues. In this regard, readers may recall several articles that began to appear in The Guardian, nearly one year ago,
and frequently since, concerning Yonkers Police brutality, and Mayor Amicone’s and Police Commissioner Hartnett’s failure to adequately respond to that long-standing problem. Last week it was announced that
as a result of mounting complaints the United States Justice Department has launched an investigation into the matter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
