In Our Opinion...
Judge Nicolai Makes The Right Call
We believe Administrative Judge, Francis Nicolai has made the right call involving a most contentious Westchester matter, the issuance of pistol permits. For many months Deputy County Executive Larry Schwartz,
notorious for his insatiable appetite for power, has been attempting to wrestle control over the pistol permit application process from elected, accountable, County and Supreme Court Judges.
As things currently stand, applicants for handgun permits must first obtain the necessary forms, and submit them, together with the applicable fee to the County Clerk, Tim Idoni. Once received by the Clerk’s Office they are
processed and turned over to the Pistol Permit Unit of the County Department of Public Safety, an agency headed by Commissioner Tom BelFiore, an appointee under the total control of Larry Schwartz.
Ostensibly, the County Police, through their BCI unit, having access to any criminal and/or other information that might reflect negatively upon an applicant’s suitability to carry a handgun, then proceed to make their report, and possible recommendation, to the court assigned the application. Of late, Mr. Schwartz has brought a great deal of acrimony to the process, whining that some judges were supposedly granting permits without getting information from the County Police, and implying that some individuals with criminal records, and others who lied on their applications, might have been granted licenses.
The County Legislature, several months ago, refused to get behind an effort instigated, and heavily lobbied for, by Schwartz, that sought to put a legislative proposal before the State Legislature essentially designed to shift
the decision-making authority over the issuance of the permits from the Judiciary - accountable and appealable - to appointees under the control of the County Executive’s Office, essentially Larry Schwartz.
Judge Nicolai, to his credit, has shown no reluctance to take on Schwartz, stating recently he was considering the establishment of a special “Pistol Licensing Court” which would streamline the whole procedure and create consistency in decision-making. He indicated that he will be speaking with the judges who would be involved.
At issue here are two very fundamental Constitutional guarantees: Firstly, the right of citizens to bear arms under the Second Amendment, which must not be infringed upon, nor fettered by a politically-motivated machinery
the like of which Schwartz has been advocating. And, secondly, the Separation of Powers Doctrine, that would be clearly violated if the authority to issue the permits, historically vested in the Judiciary, were to be usurped
by the Executive.
Again, We applaud Judge Nicolai’s willingness to go toe-to-toe with Larry Schwartz, in defense of both the County, and State Legislatures’ wisdom in leaving the authority to issue pistol permits in the hands of elected judges. We suspect, however, based upon his past performances, that the last moan has not been heard from
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Monday Morning In Judge Scarpino’s Matrimonial Court
Westchester Supreme Court, Matrimonial Part
Judge Anthony Scarpino Presiding
Last Monday morning The Westchester Guardian was present in what some folks might have called “Tony Scarpino’s Divorce Court.” In all candor, if we visit the County Courthouse on a Monday it is usually to cover one or more of the criminal courts. However, in light of the recent letter from Debra Weissman to Judge Jonathan Lippman, reproduced on our front page a few weeks earlier, we believed that it would be appropriate to attend the next court appearance of the parties involved. As luck would have it, Weissman v Weissman was case number 24 on a calendar with nearly thirty items, and we were afforded a more extended opportunity to witness the Court than we had anticipated.
Booth v Booth
A couple divorced in 1998 involved in an apparent dispute over the financing of their seventeen-year-old son’s tuition to New York University, apparently felt they needed the wisdom and authority of the Court to resolve the matter quickly enough to permit the boy’s entrance in September. Realizing that the parents had virtually thrust their child’s educational prospects into his lap, Scarpino said, “This is your child. For you to come to me to make a decision where he goes, is not something I prefer to do. You are a team with regard to your child, though you’re apart. Remember, he may decide what nursing home you go to one day.”
To another couple each of whom were appearing pro se, and had a tendency to speak over one another Scarpino quipped, “Slow down, I’m not Judge Judy here.” To the attorney for the former wife in a later case that was more than seven years old, who asked almost rhetorically, “When does this process stop?” Scarpino remarked, “When do matrimonials stop? They never stop. They go on for years and years, sometimes fifteen
or twenty years.”
Kramer v Kramer
Predictably, case number 15 brought a quick, “Saw that one,” from the Judge, who then got serious, warning the pro se former husband that his former wife’s contempt proceeding could have incarcerative consequences for him, if successful.
White v White
After listening to the opening remarks of each attorney in what was clearly a ‘tug of war’ scenario, Scarpino attempted to redirect the litigants, coaxing, “You have two quality lawyers. It seems to me it’s more about control than about what’s best for the children.”
Weissman v Weissman
Having sat through most of the card, at last the main event; Debra Weissman, represented by Marcia Kusnetz and Carol Most, opposing Ronald Weissman, represented by Willem Gravett of Bender, Miano & Colangelo. Marcia Kusnetz would do most of the talking, informing Judge Scarpino that their client was before him with two Motions to Show Cause, and a Motion to Re-argue. There followed some discussion about a guardian ad litem, another attorney who had apparently been assigned to Debra Weissman because of cerebral injuries sustained seven years ago. With regard to the Motion to Re-argue, Scarpino said, “If I feel that I’ve made a error I will take corrective action.”
Then, in response to Mr. Gravett’s pulling out of a copy of The Westchester Guardian, featuring the Weissman v Weissman letter, Attorney Kusnetz suggested to Scarpino that the attorneys have a confab in chambers about the matter. The Judge, raising his eyebrows, as well as his voice, remarked, “If you think for one second that I am going to go into a back room to discuss this case, I would wonder what you had in your coffee.”
At one point Scarpino raised the issue of the tapes allegedly implicating judicial personnel that were referenced in Debra Weissman’s letter to Judge Lippman. Kusnetz quickly replied, “That’s between her and the Inspector General’s Office. My Client never accused Your Honor of being involved in any wrongdoing.” Continuing to advocate, and turning more passionate, she went on, “My main concern is that the house, (the marital house) be
finally sold. She cannot carry the expenses of the house for more than two and a half years. She cannot survive in this situation.” In response to another objection by Mr. Gravett to the coverage in The Guardian, Judge Scarpino assured him, “If your client wants to write to the newspaper, he can.” Turning to Debra Weissman, following her comment that she was “working with Sherrill Spatz” (the Inspector Genereal of the State Office Of Court Administration), the Judge asked, “Have the tapes been turned over to the press?” Debra Weissman responded, “No.”
Scarpino then came back with, “It would be fine with me whether Judge Pfau (the newly appointed Chief Administrative Judge of The State Court System) takes over the case or not, it’s fine with me.”
Now, Attorney Gravett, having thus far made no headway, insisted, “Mrs. Weissman is not before this Court with clean hands, Your Honor.” Pressing his point, with reference to her having given a copy of her letter to Judge Lippman to The Guardian for publication, Gravett persisted, “It is a clear and unambiguous violation of the divorce agreement.
Whatever her personal feelings may be, her contempt is egregious and atrocious.” Obviously not wishing to continue Mr. Gravett’s line of discussion, the Judge now declared, “I’m going to mark this Application for Re-argument fully submitted.”
He then addressed an application from Debra Weissman’s attorneys, and turning her way, stated, “Now I must deal with the Application to be relieved from representing you.” He then asked her if she could abide with her attorneys’ request, to which she emphatically responded, “No.”
Scarpino then inquired of her attorneys if “the mere publication of the article in The Guardian” was the reason for their desire to be relieved? Attorney Kusnetz responded, “There’s a process by which such complaints should be
made. We don’t agree with the action she has taken. We do believe that she should prevail. She hasn’t had her day in Court. But, we feel uncomfortable as a law firm.”
Then, in an obvious effort to assist Debra Weissman with a difficult circumstance, made more difficult by the expressed desire of her attorneys to separate from her case, Scarpino, once again addressing her directly, said, “You’ve already stated some very compelling reasons why you do not want your attorneys relieved. I want it in writing.”
Weissman spontaneously declared, “I want to keep these attorneys because they have been fearless, and they understand.” Judge Scarpino, perhaps sensing a need for closure on the subject, remarked, “I don’t take offense with the stuff in the press. It’s part of being a judge. I’m not offended by it; it’s one side of the story.” With that he gave Deborah Weissman two weeks to submit her objections to the relieving of her attorneys, in writing.
Westchester Supreme Court, Matrimonial Part
Judge Anthony Scarpino Presiding
Last Monday morning The Westchester Guardian was present in what some folks might have called “Tony Scarpino’s Divorce Court.” In all candor, if we visit the County Courthouse on a Monday it is usually to cover one or more of the criminal courts. However, in light of the recent letter from Debra Weissman to Judge Jonathan Lippman, reproduced on our front page a few weeks earlier, we believed that it would be appropriate to attend the next court appearance of the parties involved. As luck would have it, Weissman v Weissman was case number 24 on a calendar with nearly thirty items, and we were afforded a more extended opportunity to witness the Court than we had anticipated.
Booth v Booth
A couple divorced in 1998 involved in an apparent dispute over the financing of their seventeen-year-old son’s tuition to New York University, apparently felt they needed the wisdom and authority of the Court to resolve the matter quickly enough to permit the boy’s entrance in September. Realizing that the parents had virtually thrust their child’s educational prospects into his lap, Scarpino said, “This is your child. For you to come to me to make a decision where he goes, is not something I prefer to do. You are a team with regard to your child, though you’re apart. Remember, he may decide what nursing home you go to one day.”
To another couple each of whom were appearing pro se, and had a tendency to speak over one another Scarpino quipped, “Slow down, I’m not Judge Judy here.” To the attorney for the former wife in a later case that was more than seven years old, who asked almost rhetorically, “When does this process stop?” Scarpino remarked, “When do matrimonials stop? They never stop. They go on for years and years, sometimes fifteen
or twenty years.”
Kramer v Kramer
Predictably, case number 15 brought a quick, “Saw that one,” from the Judge, who then got serious, warning the pro se former husband that his former wife’s contempt proceeding could have incarcerative consequences for him, if successful.
White v White
After listening to the opening remarks of each attorney in what was clearly a ‘tug of war’ scenario, Scarpino attempted to redirect the litigants, coaxing, “You have two quality lawyers. It seems to me it’s more about control than about what’s best for the children.”
Weissman v Weissman
Having sat through most of the card, at last the main event; Debra Weissman, represented by Marcia Kusnetz and Carol Most, opposing Ronald Weissman, represented by Willem Gravett of Bender, Miano & Colangelo. Marcia Kusnetz would do most of the talking, informing Judge Scarpino that their client was before him with two Motions to Show Cause, and a Motion to Re-argue. There followed some discussion about a guardian ad litem, another attorney who had apparently been assigned to Debra Weissman because of cerebral injuries sustained seven years ago. With regard to the Motion to Re-argue, Scarpino said, “If I feel that I’ve made a error I will take corrective action.”
Then, in response to Mr. Gravett’s pulling out of a copy of The Westchester Guardian, featuring the Weissman v Weissman letter, Attorney Kusnetz suggested to Scarpino that the attorneys have a confab in chambers about the matter. The Judge, raising his eyebrows, as well as his voice, remarked, “If you think for one second that I am going to go into a back room to discuss this case, I would wonder what you had in your coffee.”
At one point Scarpino raised the issue of the tapes allegedly implicating judicial personnel that were referenced in Debra Weissman’s letter to Judge Lippman. Kusnetz quickly replied, “That’s between her and the Inspector General’s Office. My Client never accused Your Honor of being involved in any wrongdoing.” Continuing to advocate, and turning more passionate, she went on, “My main concern is that the house, (the marital house) be
finally sold. She cannot carry the expenses of the house for more than two and a half years. She cannot survive in this situation.” In response to another objection by Mr. Gravett to the coverage in The Guardian, Judge Scarpino assured him, “If your client wants to write to the newspaper, he can.” Turning to Debra Weissman, following her comment that she was “working with Sherrill Spatz” (the Inspector Genereal of the State Office Of Court Administration), the Judge asked, “Have the tapes been turned over to the press?” Debra Weissman responded, “No.”
Scarpino then came back with, “It would be fine with me whether Judge Pfau (the newly appointed Chief Administrative Judge of The State Court System) takes over the case or not, it’s fine with me.”
Now, Attorney Gravett, having thus far made no headway, insisted, “Mrs. Weissman is not before this Court with clean hands, Your Honor.” Pressing his point, with reference to her having given a copy of her letter to Judge Lippman to The Guardian for publication, Gravett persisted, “It is a clear and unambiguous violation of the divorce agreement.
Whatever her personal feelings may be, her contempt is egregious and atrocious.” Obviously not wishing to continue Mr. Gravett’s line of discussion, the Judge now declared, “I’m going to mark this Application for Re-argument fully submitted.”
He then addressed an application from Debra Weissman’s attorneys, and turning her way, stated, “Now I must deal with the Application to be relieved from representing you.” He then asked her if she could abide with her attorneys’ request, to which she emphatically responded, “No.”
Scarpino then inquired of her attorneys if “the mere publication of the article in The Guardian” was the reason for their desire to be relieved? Attorney Kusnetz responded, “There’s a process by which such complaints should be
made. We don’t agree with the action she has taken. We do believe that she should prevail. She hasn’t had her day in Court. But, we feel uncomfortable as a law firm.”
Then, in an obvious effort to assist Debra Weissman with a difficult circumstance, made more difficult by the expressed desire of her attorneys to separate from her case, Scarpino, once again addressing her directly, said, “You’ve already stated some very compelling reasons why you do not want your attorneys relieved. I want it in writing.”
Weissman spontaneously declared, “I want to keep these attorneys because they have been fearless, and they understand.” Judge Scarpino, perhaps sensing a need for closure on the subject, remarked, “I don’t take offense with the stuff in the press. It’s part of being a judge. I’m not offended by it; it’s one side of the story.” With that he gave Deborah Weissman two weeks to submit her objections to the relieving of her attorneys, in writing.
Article on Mike Gianatasio/Larry Schwartz:
Mike Gianatasio, Independent Candidate For County Legislator, District Three, Rejects Corrupt Larry Schwartz
Schwartz Never Saw An Election He Didn’t think He Could Fix
A little more than a week ago Mike Gianatasio, Independent candidate for County Legislator, from District ree, and resident of Armonk, received a phone call from Peter Fiumefredo, Democratic Chairman from
the Town of Mount Pleasant. Fiumefredo, carrying water for Deputy County Executive Larry Schwartz, informed Gianatasio that Larry was getting John Nonna, his Democratic opponent, the Independence Party line. Fiumefredo advised him to get in contact with Nonna.
Not wishing to have anything to do with the corrupt Deputy County Executive or any of his schemes, Gianatasio said, “Tell Larry he can take a hike.”Mike, President of Michael R. Gianatasio Professional Engineering
Services of Yonkers, resides in Armonk with his wife Penny and their three children, Maria 6, Anthony 4, and Yanna, who will celebrate her - rst birthday on July 4th. Mike calls her his “Independence Baby.”
Mike, a graduate of Manhattan College, told the Guardian that he is running for the County Legislature because he believes he can make a positive difference working with the issues that confront the communities in District
three, North Castle, his own town, Mount Pleasant, West Harrison, Briarcliff Manor and North Greenburgh. He declared, “Certain issues affecting every community in Westchester, including the need for fiscal responsibility, elimination of Medicaid Fraud, cutting down the size of County Government, and many quality-of-life issues, could be dealt with more effectively.”
He acknowledged that each community has specific concerns as well, citing the anxiety of Mount Pleasant residents regarding the Valhalla Campus with its homeless shelter, inadequate neighborhood police patrols, and
traffic problems. Turning to his own town, he expressed his desire to bring about a resolution to the problems of Quarry Heights, with its failed septics, declaring, “We need a compromise, working with the Feds, the State,
and New York City Department of Environmental Protection to create a workable and affordable sewer district.” He went on, “We need to work with the State Highway Department to resolve some of the more serious problems of Route 22, particularly pedestrian and bicycle safety.”
Then, directing his attention to the southern tip of District three, Gianatasio said, “ The single biggest concern in West Harrison involves code enforcement, the many illegal two- and three-family houses, that need to
be reclassified and reassessed.” He went on to point out that in addition to the lost tax revenue that needs to be claimed for the good of the community, there are several safety issues posed by the illegal multi-family units,
needing to be addressed. Mike said that he looks forward, upon election to the County Legislature, to bringing his knowledge and experience as a professional engineer into play in assisting, and working with other legislators
to bring about needed changes and solutions.
Mike Gianatasio, Independent Candidate For County Legislator, District Three, Rejects Corrupt Larry Schwartz
Schwartz Never Saw An Election He Didn’t think He Could Fix
A little more than a week ago Mike Gianatasio, Independent candidate for County Legislator, from District ree, and resident of Armonk, received a phone call from Peter Fiumefredo, Democratic Chairman from
the Town of Mount Pleasant. Fiumefredo, carrying water for Deputy County Executive Larry Schwartz, informed Gianatasio that Larry was getting John Nonna, his Democratic opponent, the Independence Party line. Fiumefredo advised him to get in contact with Nonna.
Not wishing to have anything to do with the corrupt Deputy County Executive or any of his schemes, Gianatasio said, “Tell Larry he can take a hike.”Mike, President of Michael R. Gianatasio Professional Engineering
Services of Yonkers, resides in Armonk with his wife Penny and their three children, Maria 6, Anthony 4, and Yanna, who will celebrate her - rst birthday on July 4th. Mike calls her his “Independence Baby.”
Mike, a graduate of Manhattan College, told the Guardian that he is running for the County Legislature because he believes he can make a positive difference working with the issues that confront the communities in District
three, North Castle, his own town, Mount Pleasant, West Harrison, Briarcliff Manor and North Greenburgh. He declared, “Certain issues affecting every community in Westchester, including the need for fiscal responsibility, elimination of Medicaid Fraud, cutting down the size of County Government, and many quality-of-life issues, could be dealt with more effectively.”
He acknowledged that each community has specific concerns as well, citing the anxiety of Mount Pleasant residents regarding the Valhalla Campus with its homeless shelter, inadequate neighborhood police patrols, and
traffic problems. Turning to his own town, he expressed his desire to bring about a resolution to the problems of Quarry Heights, with its failed septics, declaring, “We need a compromise, working with the Feds, the State,
and New York City Department of Environmental Protection to create a workable and affordable sewer district.” He went on, “We need to work with the State Highway Department to resolve some of the more serious problems of Route 22, particularly pedestrian and bicycle safety.”
Then, directing his attention to the southern tip of District three, Gianatasio said, “ The single biggest concern in West Harrison involves code enforcement, the many illegal two- and three-family houses, that need to
be reclassified and reassessed.” He went on to point out that in addition to the lost tax revenue that needs to be claimed for the good of the community, there are several safety issues posed by the illegal multi-family units,
needing to be addressed. Mike said that he looks forward, upon election to the County Legislature, to bringing his knowledge and experience as a professional engineer into play in assisting, and working with other legislators
to bring about needed changes and solutions.
Thursday, June 7, 2007
Our Readers Respond...
Deepest Pockets Win Over Deepest Heart
Dear Editor:
I am the aggrieved parent of three beautiful children. I have been the residential custodial parent of my children since 2002 when their father left. They were 1, 2 and 6 at that time.
I have been a loving, dedicated and devoted mother and have always put my children first. I became engaged to be remarried in 2004. The children and I were elated. We planned to move from our current apartment in Irvington to a beautiful townhome in Danbury, Connecticut.
I told my ex-spouse of these intentions in February of that year. We would be moving in late August of the same year. The children even took their father to see where their new home was being built in March. The School was notified; my ex received a report from the school stating the impending move, and a certi-fied letter was sent.
I have now lost custody of my three beautiful children. Why?
Was it drugs, abuse, neglect, alcohol? No, it was none of those. It was what happens to so many women who go to the Westchester County Supreme Court and expect the best interests of the children to be the priority.
As I write this I am plagued by warnings from the Coalition for Family Justice, my attorney, and many other sources, not to go ahead with revealing my children’s and my situation, as I will “pay the consequences for going public.” I am concerned about a system that allows a law guardian to play GOD in the lives of children she only knows in passing; a system that says, “Once you are assigned a law guardian you can never get another one
assigned to your case unless the first one dies.”
My children’s law guardian is Therese Malach. She has unilaterally torn apart the only home my children have ever known since birth. The buzz words here for her are parental alienation and personality disorder, neither of which were ever substantiated at trial before Judge William Giacomo. The reality was this law guardian coming to court with my ex-husband and leaving with him; having private meetings with him outside the courtroom; having cigarette breaks with him in the stairwell, acting as if she were his own personal attorney and treating me as the opponent, the enemy, and anything but the mother of these three children we were supposed to all be there to protect.
I have documented scores of unanswered phone calls to her and scores of unanswered emails as well. I made so many attempts at communication with this woman, almost all of which were ignored. In addition, there were clandestine meetings at her home with my ex-spouse and my children during off-business hours. This was not disclosed to the Court, and, when my ex-spouse was questioned about it at trial, he perjured himself and stated that the only place he met with her was at her office. She, in turn, suborned perjury by not correcting this on the record.
During the trial she defended my ex-spouse with more passion and ferociousness than his team of high-powered, high-charging attorneys. It was incredible to watch. She objected to any testimony that could potentially harm
him more than 300 times during the 12-1/2 day trial.
She was appointed by Judge Donovan and she then chose the forensic expert. The Matrimonial Commission clearly stated in its report to Judge Judith Kaye that there is a major need for reform in the courts, especially concerning law guardians and forensic experts. The forensic expert, by law, is to be appointed by the presiding judge, and NOT by the law guardian. This practice goes hand in hand with the ex-parte communication so prevalent with these kinds of litigations.
During my trial Judge Giacomo commented, “These are great kids. They are doing great in school. They are healthy and someone is obviously doing something right with these kids.” They had been living in my custody.
Yet, custody was flipped, and More with that my children were forced to experience what no children should
have to experience, having their lives in the hands of people who could really care less about them.
What is important here is that the law guardian has been paid by my ex-spouse tens of thousands of dollars, and she has never even tried to be impartial. She was so comfortable in her biased behavior that she would resort to such unprofessional and unethical behavior without fear of any consequence. Why don’t I report this to the Grievance Committee that oversees these court-appointed childrens’ advocates? Because I was warned about that as well. If I were to report her “...She could make my life a living nightmare and might seek supervised
visitation or worse...”.
So what can a mother do under these circumstances? She cannot go through the legal system, for that would be an exercise in futility. She cannot try to speak to the law guardian about her childrens’ new set of problems and anxieties because she might as well talk to a wall.
The real question is, how is it that in Westchester County Supreme Court deeper pockets seem to be the one sure thing that decides these issues and deeper hearts are a mere afterthought?
Who really writes these judges’ decisions? Is it the judges themselves or their clerks like Barry Swersky Judge Giacomo’s clerk? Swersky, by the way, is on quite friendly terms with this law guardian.
Who is really running our courts and making the decisions that are affecting our childrens’ lives??? It is not who you might think!
A Loving, Concerned Mother
Another Family Wrecked by Matrimonial Court
Dear Editor:
Bravo for you on the story of Weissman v. Weissman; how similar this case sounds to my own. I was the daughter-in-law of a prominent Supreme Court Judge in Manhattan who had a very long arm of connections. I was married to his son who had ongoing brain cancer and was 100% disabled for seven years following two brain operations.
The disease was heartbreaking by itself, however my husband’s abusive personality became even more profound
as the disease progressed. Although, it was documented that I was his primary caregiver, I lost custody of our three children, one of which was two years old, due to an affidavit from my father-in-law to my matrimonial judge, stating his position in life as a Supreme Court Judge on the bench for 30 years, and claiming his son was primary caregiver.
Along with his affidavit, my brother-in-law, an attorney in the county where we lived, submitted an affidavit that mirrored his father’s. My divorce case was based on a mountain of lies from the beginning. My brother-in-law, who submitted himself as a witness in the case, had a vested nancial interest, and started caring for my then-sick
husband, was admitted as co-council against my attorney’s objections. I never got nancial discovery; my children, abused while in my husband’s care, were used as pawns so that I would settle for almost nothing just to obtain custody and ensure their safety.
I lost custody of them in January of 2000 but got them back in November of 2002. Thereafter, my husband’s misbehavior continued, and he eventually got supervised visitation. I WROTE TO EVERYONE. The medical evidence subpoened to the court was overwhelming. In the end there were 12 judges in my case, and medical evidence had surfaced to my matrimonial judge who suppressed my then-husband’s mental incompetency.
I am still nancially devastated by the vast cost of ve years of litigation my case encumbered by my husband who, it has been medically documented, could not make a rational decision since 1996, since it was that part of his brain which was afflicted with cancer.
I was forced to settle with an incompetent person, who was Plaintiff in the divorce case, and by medical testimony, the divorce should not even be valid. I wrote to Jacqueline Silberman, did a grievance on four of the judges to the Commission on Judicial Conduct; wrote to the Inspector General’s office and sent 20 or more certi-fied letters to Chief Judge Judith Kaye. NOTHING HAS EVER BEEN DONE AND MY BROTHER-
IN-LAW IS STILL A PRACTICING ATTORNEY. THERE IS SO MUCH MORE CORRUPTION,
IT IS TOO MUCH TO LIST.
Debbie Blangiardo
Reader Takes Issue With Clerk Idoni
Dear Editor:
Last week’s press release by Westchester County Clerk Timothy C. Idoni, Need A Legal Record? Westchester County Clerk Idoni Invites Residents to Visit the Legal Division, baffled many of us who are litigants before the Supreme or County Courts. The office of the County Clerk accepts the fee payments for bringing the motion papers before the Court. It is not until the papers are brought to the Chief Clerk of the Westchester Supreme
and County Courts, now on the ninth floor, and stamped with an inked relief, with those exact words from there, that the motion papers are brought before the Court.
The papers are not stamped by the Westchester County Clerk until they are led there which could be soon, or
months, or even years later. A continual melodrama of liti-gants, searching for their motion and attendant papers, are folklore to those who have had the misfortune of tracking “lost” or “missing” documents from their fille.
The premises stated by County Clerk Idoni, that he protects and maintains court records while also making available appropriate court records to those who need them, is a performance of consummate public relations.
The between times, from the Court to the clerk le room or scanned documentation, is the rub.
One Who’s Been There
Court Corruption Got You Down?
Dear Editor:
On June 5, 2007 Supreme Court Justice Gerald P. Garson will be sentenced. ‘His Honor’ was convicted
of three felonies committed in the Matrimonial Part of Brooklyn Supreme Court. Assuredly, Justice Garson is not alone in his misbehavior.
An investigation, initiated by a pregnant mother named Frieda Hanimov through the Brooklyn DA, only verified hat was deemed “a fair assumption in Brooklyn”, for too long, CORRUPTION. For his misdeeds, accepting tens of thousands in cash, lavish dinners, top shelf cigars, Justice Garson’s conviction, 15 years in prison, is the maximum sentence prescribed.
Is Westchester any different than Brooklyn? - ose of us dealing with the Matrimonial Court think not! Many of us will attend the sentencing of Judge Garson. We are intent on bringing court reform to Westchester that is too long overdue, and we will be holding a one-hour demonstration on June 11, 9-10am, at the Westchester County Courthouse.
IF you’re SICK of it, hope you will join our demonstration.
Had E. Nuph
Deepest Pockets Win Over Deepest Heart
Dear Editor:
I am the aggrieved parent of three beautiful children. I have been the residential custodial parent of my children since 2002 when their father left. They were 1, 2 and 6 at that time.
I have been a loving, dedicated and devoted mother and have always put my children first. I became engaged to be remarried in 2004. The children and I were elated. We planned to move from our current apartment in Irvington to a beautiful townhome in Danbury, Connecticut.
I told my ex-spouse of these intentions in February of that year. We would be moving in late August of the same year. The children even took their father to see where their new home was being built in March. The School was notified; my ex received a report from the school stating the impending move, and a certi-fied letter was sent.
I have now lost custody of my three beautiful children. Why?
Was it drugs, abuse, neglect, alcohol? No, it was none of those. It was what happens to so many women who go to the Westchester County Supreme Court and expect the best interests of the children to be the priority.
As I write this I am plagued by warnings from the Coalition for Family Justice, my attorney, and many other sources, not to go ahead with revealing my children’s and my situation, as I will “pay the consequences for going public.” I am concerned about a system that allows a law guardian to play GOD in the lives of children she only knows in passing; a system that says, “Once you are assigned a law guardian you can never get another one
assigned to your case unless the first one dies.”
My children’s law guardian is Therese Malach. She has unilaterally torn apart the only home my children have ever known since birth. The buzz words here for her are parental alienation and personality disorder, neither of which were ever substantiated at trial before Judge William Giacomo. The reality was this law guardian coming to court with my ex-husband and leaving with him; having private meetings with him outside the courtroom; having cigarette breaks with him in the stairwell, acting as if she were his own personal attorney and treating me as the opponent, the enemy, and anything but the mother of these three children we were supposed to all be there to protect.
I have documented scores of unanswered phone calls to her and scores of unanswered emails as well. I made so many attempts at communication with this woman, almost all of which were ignored. In addition, there were clandestine meetings at her home with my ex-spouse and my children during off-business hours. This was not disclosed to the Court, and, when my ex-spouse was questioned about it at trial, he perjured himself and stated that the only place he met with her was at her office. She, in turn, suborned perjury by not correcting this on the record.
During the trial she defended my ex-spouse with more passion and ferociousness than his team of high-powered, high-charging attorneys. It was incredible to watch. She objected to any testimony that could potentially harm
him more than 300 times during the 12-1/2 day trial.
She was appointed by Judge Donovan and she then chose the forensic expert. The Matrimonial Commission clearly stated in its report to Judge Judith Kaye that there is a major need for reform in the courts, especially concerning law guardians and forensic experts. The forensic expert, by law, is to be appointed by the presiding judge, and NOT by the law guardian. This practice goes hand in hand with the ex-parte communication so prevalent with these kinds of litigations.
During my trial Judge Giacomo commented, “These are great kids. They are doing great in school. They are healthy and someone is obviously doing something right with these kids.” They had been living in my custody.
Yet, custody was flipped, and More with that my children were forced to experience what no children should
have to experience, having their lives in the hands of people who could really care less about them.
What is important here is that the law guardian has been paid by my ex-spouse tens of thousands of dollars, and she has never even tried to be impartial. She was so comfortable in her biased behavior that she would resort to such unprofessional and unethical behavior without fear of any consequence. Why don’t I report this to the Grievance Committee that oversees these court-appointed childrens’ advocates? Because I was warned about that as well. If I were to report her “...She could make my life a living nightmare and might seek supervised
visitation or worse...”.
So what can a mother do under these circumstances? She cannot go through the legal system, for that would be an exercise in futility. She cannot try to speak to the law guardian about her childrens’ new set of problems and anxieties because she might as well talk to a wall.
The real question is, how is it that in Westchester County Supreme Court deeper pockets seem to be the one sure thing that decides these issues and deeper hearts are a mere afterthought?
Who really writes these judges’ decisions? Is it the judges themselves or their clerks like Barry Swersky Judge Giacomo’s clerk? Swersky, by the way, is on quite friendly terms with this law guardian.
Who is really running our courts and making the decisions that are affecting our childrens’ lives??? It is not who you might think!
A Loving, Concerned Mother
Another Family Wrecked by Matrimonial Court
Dear Editor:
Bravo for you on the story of Weissman v. Weissman; how similar this case sounds to my own. I was the daughter-in-law of a prominent Supreme Court Judge in Manhattan who had a very long arm of connections. I was married to his son who had ongoing brain cancer and was 100% disabled for seven years following two brain operations.
The disease was heartbreaking by itself, however my husband’s abusive personality became even more profound
as the disease progressed. Although, it was documented that I was his primary caregiver, I lost custody of our three children, one of which was two years old, due to an affidavit from my father-in-law to my matrimonial judge, stating his position in life as a Supreme Court Judge on the bench for 30 years, and claiming his son was primary caregiver.
Along with his affidavit, my brother-in-law, an attorney in the county where we lived, submitted an affidavit that mirrored his father’s. My divorce case was based on a mountain of lies from the beginning. My brother-in-law, who submitted himself as a witness in the case, had a vested nancial interest, and started caring for my then-sick
husband, was admitted as co-council against my attorney’s objections. I never got nancial discovery; my children, abused while in my husband’s care, were used as pawns so that I would settle for almost nothing just to obtain custody and ensure their safety.
I lost custody of them in January of 2000 but got them back in November of 2002. Thereafter, my husband’s misbehavior continued, and he eventually got supervised visitation. I WROTE TO EVERYONE. The medical evidence subpoened to the court was overwhelming. In the end there were 12 judges in my case, and medical evidence had surfaced to my matrimonial judge who suppressed my then-husband’s mental incompetency.
I am still nancially devastated by the vast cost of ve years of litigation my case encumbered by my husband who, it has been medically documented, could not make a rational decision since 1996, since it was that part of his brain which was afflicted with cancer.
I was forced to settle with an incompetent person, who was Plaintiff in the divorce case, and by medical testimony, the divorce should not even be valid. I wrote to Jacqueline Silberman, did a grievance on four of the judges to the Commission on Judicial Conduct; wrote to the Inspector General’s office and sent 20 or more certi-fied letters to Chief Judge Judith Kaye. NOTHING HAS EVER BEEN DONE AND MY BROTHER-
IN-LAW IS STILL A PRACTICING ATTORNEY. THERE IS SO MUCH MORE CORRUPTION,
IT IS TOO MUCH TO LIST.
Debbie Blangiardo
Reader Takes Issue With Clerk Idoni
Dear Editor:
Last week’s press release by Westchester County Clerk Timothy C. Idoni, Need A Legal Record? Westchester County Clerk Idoni Invites Residents to Visit the Legal Division, baffled many of us who are litigants before the Supreme or County Courts. The office of the County Clerk accepts the fee payments for bringing the motion papers before the Court. It is not until the papers are brought to the Chief Clerk of the Westchester Supreme
and County Courts, now on the ninth floor, and stamped with an inked relief, with those exact words from there, that the motion papers are brought before the Court.
The papers are not stamped by the Westchester County Clerk until they are led there which could be soon, or
months, or even years later. A continual melodrama of liti-gants, searching for their motion and attendant papers, are folklore to those who have had the misfortune of tracking “lost” or “missing” documents from their fille.
The premises stated by County Clerk Idoni, that he protects and maintains court records while also making available appropriate court records to those who need them, is a performance of consummate public relations.
The between times, from the Court to the clerk le room or scanned documentation, is the rub.
One Who’s Been There
Court Corruption Got You Down?
Dear Editor:
On June 5, 2007 Supreme Court Justice Gerald P. Garson will be sentenced. ‘His Honor’ was convicted
of three felonies committed in the Matrimonial Part of Brooklyn Supreme Court. Assuredly, Justice Garson is not alone in his misbehavior.
An investigation, initiated by a pregnant mother named Frieda Hanimov through the Brooklyn DA, only verified hat was deemed “a fair assumption in Brooklyn”, for too long, CORRUPTION. For his misdeeds, accepting tens of thousands in cash, lavish dinners, top shelf cigars, Justice Garson’s conviction, 15 years in prison, is the maximum sentence prescribed.
Is Westchester any different than Brooklyn? - ose of us dealing with the Matrimonial Court think not! Many of us will attend the sentencing of Judge Garson. We are intent on bringing court reform to Westchester that is too long overdue, and we will be holding a one-hour demonstration on June 11, 9-10am, at the Westchester County Courthouse.
IF you’re SICK of it, hope you will join our demonstration.
Had E. Nuph
In Our Opinion...
At Last, Something To Feel Good About In The NYS Court System
Last week Governor Spitzer announced a purely political appointment of someone We have never felt too good about, and yet we felt good about the appointment. The governor’s press release reported the appointment of Judge Jonathan Lippman to be the Presiding Judge of the Appellate Division, First Department, State Supreme Court. In actuality, the appointment was a step down, given the fact that Lippman was the Chief Administrative Judge of the entire New York State Court System, a position second only to Chief Judge Judith Kaye.
Nevertheless, it was a welcome reassignment, from Lippman’s point of view, as it was clearly intended to groom him to take over the seat Kaye is only keeping warm for a little more than a year, until her 70th birthday. From where we stand, she’s done little more than keeping that seat warm for the last thirteen years, anyway. But that’s another issue.
In making the appointment, Spitzer said, “Throughout his long career, Justice Lippman has displayed the strength of character and profound respect for the rule of law that make him an outstanding choice for this position.”
Nothing could be further from the truth. Lippman was appointed Chief Administrative Judge in 1996, while sitting on the Court of Claims, the state’s notorious repository for political has-beens.
Two years ago, realizing that he would have to get elected to the State Supreme Court in order to align himself in time to inherit the mantle from Judith Kaye, but realizing as well that election to the Supremes in the Ninth Judicial District as a Democrat, historically wasn’t a given, he entered into a conspiracy with Judge Joseph Alessandro. Alessandro, a Republican Westchester County Court Judge had run for the Supremes the year before, and failed.
Alessandro’s failure, even as a Republican, wasn’t without good cause. When he first ran for County Court, a couple of years earlier, his signs read, “Experience Counts.” The fact was he had no experience. He was a lawyer who never attended law school, and whose legal experience was limited to real estate. The Judiciary
Committee on Credentials had labeled him “Unqualified.” Worse yet, Barbara Battista, the woman who had loaned him $260,000 to run for office, and who served as his campaign treasurer, was suing him for defrauding her by manipulating her lien off of the house he had offered her as collateral on the loan. Furthermore, it was widely suspected that Joe Alessandro wasn’t a Westchester resident, but in fact, continued to reside in the Morris Park section of the Bronx.
Despite all of the above, Jonathan Lippman conspired with Alessandro to cross endorse each other, perverting the electoral process, thus insuring their election.
“Strength of character,” and “profound respect for the rule of law;” We think not! So, why are We feeling so good about Lippman’s appointment? We are gratified because Judge Ann T. Pfau will now be the Chief Administrative Judge Jonathan Lippman never was. She was most actively involved in overseeing the recent corruption probes in the Brooklyn Courts which produced indictments and convictions, notable among them Supreme Court Justice Gerald P. Garson, who sat in the Matrimonial Part, and who was convicted of three felony counts, having accepted cash, and gifts in exchange for decisions favorable to particular litigants.
Sources in Albany believe that Judge Pfau’s elevation to Chief Administrative Judge comes with Eliot Spitzer’s and Andrew Cuomo’s blessings, not to mention Good Government and Court Reform groups throughout the state.
Some observers have speculated that Judith Kaye, increasingly concerned about her legacy, as well she ought to be, also welcomes Judge Pfau’s elevation at this time.
At Last, Something To Feel Good About In The NYS Court System
Last week Governor Spitzer announced a purely political appointment of someone We have never felt too good about, and yet we felt good about the appointment. The governor’s press release reported the appointment of Judge Jonathan Lippman to be the Presiding Judge of the Appellate Division, First Department, State Supreme Court. In actuality, the appointment was a step down, given the fact that Lippman was the Chief Administrative Judge of the entire New York State Court System, a position second only to Chief Judge Judith Kaye.
Nevertheless, it was a welcome reassignment, from Lippman’s point of view, as it was clearly intended to groom him to take over the seat Kaye is only keeping warm for a little more than a year, until her 70th birthday. From where we stand, she’s done little more than keeping that seat warm for the last thirteen years, anyway. But that’s another issue.
In making the appointment, Spitzer said, “Throughout his long career, Justice Lippman has displayed the strength of character and profound respect for the rule of law that make him an outstanding choice for this position.”
Nothing could be further from the truth. Lippman was appointed Chief Administrative Judge in 1996, while sitting on the Court of Claims, the state’s notorious repository for political has-beens.
Two years ago, realizing that he would have to get elected to the State Supreme Court in order to align himself in time to inherit the mantle from Judith Kaye, but realizing as well that election to the Supremes in the Ninth Judicial District as a Democrat, historically wasn’t a given, he entered into a conspiracy with Judge Joseph Alessandro. Alessandro, a Republican Westchester County Court Judge had run for the Supremes the year before, and failed.
Alessandro’s failure, even as a Republican, wasn’t without good cause. When he first ran for County Court, a couple of years earlier, his signs read, “Experience Counts.” The fact was he had no experience. He was a lawyer who never attended law school, and whose legal experience was limited to real estate. The Judiciary
Committee on Credentials had labeled him “Unqualified.” Worse yet, Barbara Battista, the woman who had loaned him $260,000 to run for office, and who served as his campaign treasurer, was suing him for defrauding her by manipulating her lien off of the house he had offered her as collateral on the loan. Furthermore, it was widely suspected that Joe Alessandro wasn’t a Westchester resident, but in fact, continued to reside in the Morris Park section of the Bronx.
Despite all of the above, Jonathan Lippman conspired with Alessandro to cross endorse each other, perverting the electoral process, thus insuring their election.
“Strength of character,” and “profound respect for the rule of law;” We think not! So, why are We feeling so good about Lippman’s appointment? We are gratified because Judge Ann T. Pfau will now be the Chief Administrative Judge Jonathan Lippman never was. She was most actively involved in overseeing the recent corruption probes in the Brooklyn Courts which produced indictments and convictions, notable among them Supreme Court Justice Gerald P. Garson, who sat in the Matrimonial Part, and who was convicted of three felony counts, having accepted cash, and gifts in exchange for decisions favorable to particular litigants.
Sources in Albany believe that Judge Pfau’s elevation to Chief Administrative Judge comes with Eliot Spitzer’s and Andrew Cuomo’s blessings, not to mention Good Government and Court Reform groups throughout the state.
Some observers have speculated that Judith Kaye, increasingly concerned about her legacy, as well she ought to be, also welcomes Judge Pfau’s elevation at this time.
The Court Report
Richard Blassberg
United States Attorney, Working With Agents from The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives,
Interdicts Gun Trafficking Before Reaching The Streets of Westchester
Analysis: The United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Michael J. Garcia, last Wednesday, May 30, announced the indictment of David Gonzalez of the Bronx for the unlicensed dealing in firearms. The “reverse sting” operation, carried out by agents with ATF, to interdict such gun trafficking especially by an offender in an adjacent county, the Bronx, has profound implications for the residents of Westchester, particularly Yonkers, Mount Vernon and New Rochelle which have recently seen numerous incidents involving guns.
The government operation was a “reverse sting” in that ATF agents did not buy from the perpetrator, but instead sold to him for his intended resale. As a consequence, the perpetrator’s statements of prior sales and his intention to sell what he was purchasing, were very crucial to obtaining an indictment and, ultimately, a conviction.
The actual indictment, below, details graphically the activities of the type of perpetrator who must be prevented from putting guns into the hands of our youth.
Richard Blassberg
United States Attorney, Working With Agents from The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives,
Interdicts Gun Trafficking Before Reaching The Streets of Westchester
Analysis: The United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Michael J. Garcia, last Wednesday, May 30, announced the indictment of David Gonzalez of the Bronx for the unlicensed dealing in firearms. The “reverse sting” operation, carried out by agents with ATF, to interdict such gun trafficking especially by an offender in an adjacent county, the Bronx, has profound implications for the residents of Westchester, particularly Yonkers, Mount Vernon and New Rochelle which have recently seen numerous incidents involving guns.
The government operation was a “reverse sting” in that ATF agents did not buy from the perpetrator, but instead sold to him for his intended resale. As a consequence, the perpetrator’s statements of prior sales and his intention to sell what he was purchasing, were very crucial to obtaining an indictment and, ultimately, a conviction.
The actual indictment, below, details graphically the activities of the type of perpetrator who must be prevented from putting guns into the hands of our youth.
Article on Giulio Cavallo:
Cavallo, ‘Missing in Action’, Nevertheless Reappointed To County Public Safety Board
Despite being virtually AWOL from public functions, Giulio Cavallo, embattled former Chairman of
the Westchester Independence Party, was recently re-appointed as a Commissioner to the Westchester
County Public Safety Board by County Executive Andy Spano, and approved by the County Board of
Legislators.
Observers are questioning what credentials Mr. Cavallo possesses to act as an overseer of the County
Police. His relationship with Larry Schwartz and the Pistol Permit Unit have been resurfacing. Some
are asking, “How safe is the public?”
Cavallo, whose financial filings with the State Election Commission have come into question with regard to the legitimacy of expenditures and the shu ing of funds between the Independence Party and the Independence Club, has been avoiding scrutiny and accountability, both publicly and privately. Having attempted to silence The Westchester Guardian with the filing of a $25 million lawsuit several months ago, he has resisted attempts
to depose him, and has been virtually unavailable ever since.
As the result of his failure to submit to deposition, legal counsel for the Guardian has begun sending subpoenas to judges and public officials who received Cavallo’s endorsement over the past several years to determine the circumstances with regard to the exchange of funds.
Cavallo, ‘Missing in Action’, Nevertheless Reappointed To County Public Safety Board
Despite being virtually AWOL from public functions, Giulio Cavallo, embattled former Chairman of
the Westchester Independence Party, was recently re-appointed as a Commissioner to the Westchester
County Public Safety Board by County Executive Andy Spano, and approved by the County Board of
Legislators.
Observers are questioning what credentials Mr. Cavallo possesses to act as an overseer of the County
Police. His relationship with Larry Schwartz and the Pistol Permit Unit have been resurfacing. Some
are asking, “How safe is the public?”
Cavallo, whose financial filings with the State Election Commission have come into question with regard to the legitimacy of expenditures and the shu ing of funds between the Independence Party and the Independence Club, has been avoiding scrutiny and accountability, both publicly and privately. Having attempted to silence The Westchester Guardian with the filing of a $25 million lawsuit several months ago, he has resisted attempts
to depose him, and has been virtually unavailable ever since.
As the result of his failure to submit to deposition, legal counsel for the Guardian has begun sending subpoenas to judges and public officials who received Cavallo’s endorsement over the past several years to determine the circumstances with regard to the exchange of funds.
Janet Difiore.
The Advocate
Richard Blassberg
Police Officer Richard DiGuglielmo Never Had A Chance
Must those still suffering under Pirro-Justice, both in and out of prison, continue to suffer until Jeanine Pirro’s Federal Indictment is announced?
When Charles Campbell, a man about whom a former employer once said affectionately, “Charlie was crazy like that; he would pick a fight with anyone over anything;” decided to pull into the parking lot of the Venice Deli late that afternoon in early October 1996, to run across the street to a pizza shop, that was really a front for a drug operation, the die was cast for a double tragedy. The first tragedy would occur within minutes. Campbell would be dead, the result of three bullets having pierced his heart.
Those “three shots to center mass,” as called for in the New York City Police Department Training Manual, had been fired by New York City Transit Police Officer Richard DiGuglielmo, in response to Campbell’s beating of the officer’s unarmed father with a metal baseball bat, ironically using the service revolver of his grandfather, his father’s father, a Pleasantville Police Officer who had died in the line of duty more than fifty years earlier. The weapon, licensed to the elder DiGuglielmo, was kept under the deli counter for protection in the event of a robbery.
Campbell had insisted upon putting his latemodel Corvette directly in front of the deli, despite Officer DiGuglielmo’s middle-aged father’s request, because of a scarcity of spaces in front of the deli, that he park it in an open area of the lot while he did business across the street. The elder DiGuglielmo could not have imagined just how out of control Charles Campbell, an amateur boxer, and body builder, would become once he placed a “No Parking” sticker on the window of his Corvette, as he had been advised to do in such situations by the Dobbs Ferry Police.
Campbell, prompted by the pizza shop operator, came running across the street, fists flying, at the elder DiGuglielmo, a man with a serious heart condition. Not that it would likely have mattered; he was unaware that the older man’s son Richard, a police officer, and his son-in-law Bobby, a construction worker, were both inside the store, each having stopped by to lend a hand to the father, who was recovering from a recent hospitalization
for his heart. Richard ran out of the deli and, stepping between Campbell and his father, took several blows before he, his father and his brother-inlaw managed to wrestle the incredibly strong assailant to the ground.
Having subdued him and released him, the two younger men went back into the store to clean up, trusting that the incident was over and that Campbell would get in his car and drive off, leaving Richard’s father in the parking lot. As the elder man attempted to hand Campbell his cell phone that had been dropped in the scuffle, Campbell,
still enraged, went to the trunk of the Corvette and, removing a metal baseball bat, began swinging at Richard’s father. Looking back and seeing Campbell striking his father with the bat, and realizing the immediate danger of fatal injury his father faced, Officer DiGuglielmo reached for the gun kept beneath the counter and discharged his
sworn duty to save an innocent life.
No one could know, in that tragic moment, what is now known about DA Jeanine Pirro who, more than two years earlier, had let the confessed murderer of Louis Balancio, Nick Djonovic, escape from the country so that she could invent a more satisfactory, more Organized Crime-sounding perpetrator. No one could imagine that Pirro was about to play the “race card” and send a New York City Police Officer to prison for saving his father’s life from a bat wielding, enraged, body builder with an extensive criminal record.
No one could imagine she would succeed, given the fact that the killing was totally justifiable under two separate New York State statutes. First and foremost, DiGuglielmo was a police officer with a sworn duty to use deadly force to stop a perpetrator using deadly force against an unarmed innocent person. Secondly, even if he had been a civilian, he had the right under the Statute of Self-Defense, Defense of Others, to use deadly force against an assailant using deadly force against an innocent unarmed individual.
Perhaps that was why the jury that tried him, in the trial that never should have occurred, in fact, acquitted him of Intentional Murder, and acquitted him, his father, and his brother-in-law of Assault. But that didn’t stop DA Pirro, a district attorney who would ultimately conceal 376 pages and 52 boxes of exhibits, and numerous tape recordings, all exculpatory to Anthony DiSimone, all Brady material, in the Balancio murder case in order to achieve her self-promotional ends; from obtaining a murder conviction, even one for which there was no evidence, under the ‘turn-about’ theory of Depraved Indifference Murder.
After all, she had spent one whole year in a calculated effort to poison the jury pool, first claiming almost immediately that she had “thirteen witnesses who had heard racial epithets,” even though at trial she couldn’t produce one. To strengthen her lie, she brought in Al Sharpton, who, together with bused-in, paid demonstrators, picketed the DiGuglielmo’s deli every weekend for 52 weeks. Pirro wasn’t going to let a little thing like the truth
stand in her way when she could curry favor with minority voters right up to her fixed re-election bid in November 1997.
To be sure, she had help with her mindless, self-promotional agenda, not merely from corrupted high-level assistants like ADAs Patricia Murphy, Perry Perrone, Clem Patti, and Dobbs Ferry Police Chief George Longworth, but also from Judge Peter Leavitt, whose judicial incompetence was matched only by his obedience to Pirro’s dictates. Leavitt refused a Defense motion for change of venue despite 52 weeks of constant Prosecution media propaganda and jury pool poisoning. He insisted upon using the standard voir dire questionnaire despite the special circumstances attached to a defendant who was a police officer, not to mention a full year of publicity. He delivered a totally flawed instruction to the jury with regard to Justifiable Homicide under the Statute of Self-Defense, Defense of Others. He would not permit the introduction of any evidence regarding Charles Campbell’s long history of arrests, several of which were for violent crimes.
However, despite all of the restrictions and handicaps he imposed on the Defense, Leavitt permitted the Prosecution, once realizing they would not get an Intentional Murder conviction, to change direction 180 degrees,
very late, and argue for Depraved Indifference Murder. What was indifferent about three shots through the heart at close range?
Truth be told, it was never about race. That was a Pirro lie like so many of her lies. Mr. and Mrs. Balancio will both go to their graves insisting that their son Louis was killed by Anthony DiSimone despite a mountain of
evidence that it was Nick Djonovic. Jing Kelly has been kept from her son Tristram, now seven years old, for five years because of Pirro lies. Jeffrey Deskovic spent nearly seven more years in prison than necessary because
of repeated Pirro lies and cruelty.
Richard DiGuglielmo, former New York City Transit Police Officer, has lived in general population, in the State Prison System for more than 10 years, by choice. His fellow inmates, most of whom are people of color,
know who he is. They know he is no racist. For twelve years on the job as a police officer, he was, and still is, a ‘regular guy.’
If Charles Campbell had been White, and was assailing Richard’s father, having broken his hand and severely injured his leg with a metal baseball bat, and was swinging for his head, as originally described by three eyewitnesses, he would be just as dead, only Officer Richard DiGuglielmo would not be in prison for these last ten years. He would never have been charged with Murder in the first place.
The only racist in the equation was Jeanine Pirro who, not only played the “race card”, but years later, in her failed book, spoke of Campbell’s “swagger” and “entitlement,” as though she was present at the incident, as
she continued to defame Officer DiGuglielmo and his family for having saved his father’s life.
What other choice did Officer DiGuglielmo have under the circumstances? Should he have permitted Charles Campbell to “crush his father’s head like a watermelon” as one eyewitness originally stated he was trying to
do? Given the fury with which he had already broken his father’s hand and severely injured his leg with a swing the impact of which another eyewitness had said “could be heard a block away,” should Richard DiGuglielmo
have allowed Campbell to kill his father?
The simple truth is that Richard DiGuglielmo has already done ten years in state prison, and is facing another ten before he can even be considered for parole because he did the right thing! He did the thing he had a sworn duty to do, the only thing any right-minded individual would do under the same circumstances. That was why, immediately following the shooting, eyewitnesses declared, “It was self-defense.” Those eyewitnesses were right, too right for DA Pirro and her self-serving need to turn the incident, already tragic enough, into something it wasn’t.
For many days following the shooting, witnesses, whose original statements did not please the District Attorney, were hounded and harassed, at home and on the job, at all hours, by the Dobbs Ferry Police, who, ultimately
wore them down, and pushed them into signing statements more in keeping with what Jeanine Pirro wanted.
She had done the same to more than two dozen witnesses in the Balancio case for years, as we now know from the incredibly vast amount of Brady material her office kept hidden for 13 years. In the process, she succeeded
in convicting Anthony DiSimone, keeping him in prison for seven of those years for a crime she and her top ADAs knew, very well, had been committed, and confessed to, by Nick Djonovic.
Must those still suffering under Pirro-Justice, both in and out of prison, continue to suffer until Jeanine Pirro’s Federal Indictment is finally announced? How long must it take before State and Federal Courts in New
York open their eyes to the fact that what she did to Anthony DiSimone, she also did to Richard DiGuglielmo, Jing Kelly, Steven Nowicki, Marci Stein, Selwyn Days, and countless other victims of her self-promotional
prosecutorial misconduct? Surely, justice delayed has been justice denied; and that’s the second tragedy.
Richard Blassberg
Police Officer Richard DiGuglielmo Never Had A Chance
Must those still suffering under Pirro-Justice, both in and out of prison, continue to suffer until Jeanine Pirro’s Federal Indictment is announced?
When Charles Campbell, a man about whom a former employer once said affectionately, “Charlie was crazy like that; he would pick a fight with anyone over anything;” decided to pull into the parking lot of the Venice Deli late that afternoon in early October 1996, to run across the street to a pizza shop, that was really a front for a drug operation, the die was cast for a double tragedy. The first tragedy would occur within minutes. Campbell would be dead, the result of three bullets having pierced his heart.
Those “three shots to center mass,” as called for in the New York City Police Department Training Manual, had been fired by New York City Transit Police Officer Richard DiGuglielmo, in response to Campbell’s beating of the officer’s unarmed father with a metal baseball bat, ironically using the service revolver of his grandfather, his father’s father, a Pleasantville Police Officer who had died in the line of duty more than fifty years earlier. The weapon, licensed to the elder DiGuglielmo, was kept under the deli counter for protection in the event of a robbery.
Campbell had insisted upon putting his latemodel Corvette directly in front of the deli, despite Officer DiGuglielmo’s middle-aged father’s request, because of a scarcity of spaces in front of the deli, that he park it in an open area of the lot while he did business across the street. The elder DiGuglielmo could not have imagined just how out of control Charles Campbell, an amateur boxer, and body builder, would become once he placed a “No Parking” sticker on the window of his Corvette, as he had been advised to do in such situations by the Dobbs Ferry Police.
Campbell, prompted by the pizza shop operator, came running across the street, fists flying, at the elder DiGuglielmo, a man with a serious heart condition. Not that it would likely have mattered; he was unaware that the older man’s son Richard, a police officer, and his son-in-law Bobby, a construction worker, were both inside the store, each having stopped by to lend a hand to the father, who was recovering from a recent hospitalization
for his heart. Richard ran out of the deli and, stepping between Campbell and his father, took several blows before he, his father and his brother-inlaw managed to wrestle the incredibly strong assailant to the ground.
Having subdued him and released him, the two younger men went back into the store to clean up, trusting that the incident was over and that Campbell would get in his car and drive off, leaving Richard’s father in the parking lot. As the elder man attempted to hand Campbell his cell phone that had been dropped in the scuffle, Campbell,
still enraged, went to the trunk of the Corvette and, removing a metal baseball bat, began swinging at Richard’s father. Looking back and seeing Campbell striking his father with the bat, and realizing the immediate danger of fatal injury his father faced, Officer DiGuglielmo reached for the gun kept beneath the counter and discharged his
sworn duty to save an innocent life.
No one could know, in that tragic moment, what is now known about DA Jeanine Pirro who, more than two years earlier, had let the confessed murderer of Louis Balancio, Nick Djonovic, escape from the country so that she could invent a more satisfactory, more Organized Crime-sounding perpetrator. No one could imagine that Pirro was about to play the “race card” and send a New York City Police Officer to prison for saving his father’s life from a bat wielding, enraged, body builder with an extensive criminal record.
No one could imagine she would succeed, given the fact that the killing was totally justifiable under two separate New York State statutes. First and foremost, DiGuglielmo was a police officer with a sworn duty to use deadly force to stop a perpetrator using deadly force against an unarmed innocent person. Secondly, even if he had been a civilian, he had the right under the Statute of Self-Defense, Defense of Others, to use deadly force against an assailant using deadly force against an innocent unarmed individual.
Perhaps that was why the jury that tried him, in the trial that never should have occurred, in fact, acquitted him of Intentional Murder, and acquitted him, his father, and his brother-in-law of Assault. But that didn’t stop DA Pirro, a district attorney who would ultimately conceal 376 pages and 52 boxes of exhibits, and numerous tape recordings, all exculpatory to Anthony DiSimone, all Brady material, in the Balancio murder case in order to achieve her self-promotional ends; from obtaining a murder conviction, even one for which there was no evidence, under the ‘turn-about’ theory of Depraved Indifference Murder.
After all, she had spent one whole year in a calculated effort to poison the jury pool, first claiming almost immediately that she had “thirteen witnesses who had heard racial epithets,” even though at trial she couldn’t produce one. To strengthen her lie, she brought in Al Sharpton, who, together with bused-in, paid demonstrators, picketed the DiGuglielmo’s deli every weekend for 52 weeks. Pirro wasn’t going to let a little thing like the truth
stand in her way when she could curry favor with minority voters right up to her fixed re-election bid in November 1997.
To be sure, she had help with her mindless, self-promotional agenda, not merely from corrupted high-level assistants like ADAs Patricia Murphy, Perry Perrone, Clem Patti, and Dobbs Ferry Police Chief George Longworth, but also from Judge Peter Leavitt, whose judicial incompetence was matched only by his obedience to Pirro’s dictates. Leavitt refused a Defense motion for change of venue despite 52 weeks of constant Prosecution media propaganda and jury pool poisoning. He insisted upon using the standard voir dire questionnaire despite the special circumstances attached to a defendant who was a police officer, not to mention a full year of publicity. He delivered a totally flawed instruction to the jury with regard to Justifiable Homicide under the Statute of Self-Defense, Defense of Others. He would not permit the introduction of any evidence regarding Charles Campbell’s long history of arrests, several of which were for violent crimes.
However, despite all of the restrictions and handicaps he imposed on the Defense, Leavitt permitted the Prosecution, once realizing they would not get an Intentional Murder conviction, to change direction 180 degrees,
very late, and argue for Depraved Indifference Murder. What was indifferent about three shots through the heart at close range?
Truth be told, it was never about race. That was a Pirro lie like so many of her lies. Mr. and Mrs. Balancio will both go to their graves insisting that their son Louis was killed by Anthony DiSimone despite a mountain of
evidence that it was Nick Djonovic. Jing Kelly has been kept from her son Tristram, now seven years old, for five years because of Pirro lies. Jeffrey Deskovic spent nearly seven more years in prison than necessary because
of repeated Pirro lies and cruelty.
Richard DiGuglielmo, former New York City Transit Police Officer, has lived in general population, in the State Prison System for more than 10 years, by choice. His fellow inmates, most of whom are people of color,
know who he is. They know he is no racist. For twelve years on the job as a police officer, he was, and still is, a ‘regular guy.’
If Charles Campbell had been White, and was assailing Richard’s father, having broken his hand and severely injured his leg with a metal baseball bat, and was swinging for his head, as originally described by three eyewitnesses, he would be just as dead, only Officer Richard DiGuglielmo would not be in prison for these last ten years. He would never have been charged with Murder in the first place.
The only racist in the equation was Jeanine Pirro who, not only played the “race card”, but years later, in her failed book, spoke of Campbell’s “swagger” and “entitlement,” as though she was present at the incident, as
she continued to defame Officer DiGuglielmo and his family for having saved his father’s life.
What other choice did Officer DiGuglielmo have under the circumstances? Should he have permitted Charles Campbell to “crush his father’s head like a watermelon” as one eyewitness originally stated he was trying to
do? Given the fury with which he had already broken his father’s hand and severely injured his leg with a swing the impact of which another eyewitness had said “could be heard a block away,” should Richard DiGuglielmo
have allowed Campbell to kill his father?
The simple truth is that Richard DiGuglielmo has already done ten years in state prison, and is facing another ten before he can even be considered for parole because he did the right thing! He did the thing he had a sworn duty to do, the only thing any right-minded individual would do under the same circumstances. That was why, immediately following the shooting, eyewitnesses declared, “It was self-defense.” Those eyewitnesses were right, too right for DA Pirro and her self-serving need to turn the incident, already tragic enough, into something it wasn’t.
For many days following the shooting, witnesses, whose original statements did not please the District Attorney, were hounded and harassed, at home and on the job, at all hours, by the Dobbs Ferry Police, who, ultimately
wore them down, and pushed them into signing statements more in keeping with what Jeanine Pirro wanted.
She had done the same to more than two dozen witnesses in the Balancio case for years, as we now know from the incredibly vast amount of Brady material her office kept hidden for 13 years. In the process, she succeeded
in convicting Anthony DiSimone, keeping him in prison for seven of those years for a crime she and her top ADAs knew, very well, had been committed, and confessed to, by Nick Djonovic.
Must those still suffering under Pirro-Justice, both in and out of prison, continue to suffer until Jeanine Pirro’s Federal Indictment is finally announced? How long must it take before State and Federal Courts in New
York open their eyes to the fact that what she did to Anthony DiSimone, she also did to Richard DiGuglielmo, Jing Kelly, Steven Nowicki, Marci Stein, Selwyn Days, and countless other victims of her self-promotional
prosecutorial misconduct? Surely, justice delayed has been justice denied; and that’s the second tragedy.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Our Readers Respond...
On Vines and Lines
Dear Editor,
1. Lila D’Adolf ’s letter (May 17 issue) calls for a program to remove the runaway vines which are choking the trees on the Saw Mill River Parkway. She should be notified that there is such a program. I remember reading several years ago, after a motorist had been killed by a falling branch caused by vines killing trees, that the Dept. of Highways had begun a program to clear vines from the parkway wooded areas. Since then I have occasionally seen crews removing vines. But I would imagine that lately, with the crazy storms having killed, damaged and downed many trees, that other priorities may have pushed this program to the back burner. And the sheer size of the task is in any case daunting.
2. Your paper with its investigative attitude is great. I am glad to see advertisers supporting you in increasing numbers, showing that business people, who might be expected to “go along to get along” and might not want office-holders marking them down for retribution, are not afraid to support a publication dedicated to exposing the widespread rot in public affairs in Westchester. It is a nice partial antidote to the feeling one gets now in this country, watching the Constitution slowly being destroyed while the public is busy lapping up American Idol and its ilk. Thanks, and keep it up.
Charles Zigmund, Pleasantville
Help Youth By Getting Involved
Dear Editor:
As a lifelong resident of Mount Vernon, I would like to point out some facts that were not mentioned in your article. First, the youth of Mount Vernon today have less available to them than the preceding generations. Old-time merchants used to employ young people after school in their businesses whereas today that isn’t the case. Mount Vernon has fewer businesses than it did years ago, car dealerships, factories, supermarkets and the like. Malcolm X once stated to the people of Harlem, New York, “Don’t shop where you can’t work.” This boycott
led to jobs being created for the community.
Secondly, concerning the Hip Hop Museum, if being the case that Mayor Davis failed the youth to have it built, there are alternatives. One being asking rappers such as P Diddy and Henry O, both formerly of Mount Vernon, to contribute funds to having it built. Also people in the community can raise money to create it. Look to Memphis, Tenn. To the Civil Rights Museum or to Cleveland, Ohio, the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame.
Thirdly, concerning youth violence, look to Newark, New Jersey which was shown on Channel 9 (WOR) in the broadcast Scared Straight. The City of Newark, with permission of the New Jersey Department of Corrections, took troubled youth, or young people in general, to state prisons to see what prison life is like. By them interacting with prisoners many of them will have second thoughts about gang life.
Here we have seen how this growing menace can be curtailed without so much taxpayer expense but by everyone getting involved; namely the Chamber of Commerce, the Board of Education, and finally the City of Mount Vernon by extending recreation, Police Athletic League and various programs.
Please don’t give up on these young people, plenty of successful people came from Mount Vernon; Dick Clark, Lynn Brown, P Diddy, Henry O, Denzel Washington, Allan Funt (Candid Camera). These young people need to be shown that they can be one of the aforementioned people too.
Dennis Fishbein, Mount Vernon
Re: “Youthful Violence Taking Over Mount Vernon?” 10th May 2007
Dear Editor:
It is disturbing, indeed, when one hears, as I did last night, of a student and his father being assaulted at Longfellow School (apparently the student was resisting induction into a gang). Disturbing, too, are the incidents noted in your article. I am little surprised, then, when I find that, of all the parents of my acquaintance, not a single one plans to send their children to Mount Vernon High School, where they have the dubious distinction of the lowest SAT scores in the County (Westchester Magazine, April 2007, pages 82-83).
So, what is the solution? I think we first have to look to the home, where children receive their first instruction.
It is of no benefit to a child if their parent(s) are missing in action, AWOL, or somewhere “upstate.” A child requires a parent, preferably parents, who are interested in and dedicated to expanding the horizons of their children through their example of hard work, good character, and way of living.
Education, or the lack thereof, has long-reaching effects on the lives of our children, their future prospects for
gainful employment, and their contribution to the next generation. It should, therefore, be a primary concern of each and every parent to see to it that their child(ren) receive the very best education that they can access.
Unfortunately, for many parents in Mount Vernon, this will mean seeking out a private or parochial school for their child to attend, or else paying tuition for an out of-district placement; or, simply, moving.
Why should parents want to invest 500K in a home, pay enormous property taxes, and, on top of that, pay for
school fees and transportation to a private institution because they do not feel they can reliably count on the safety of their child during school hours?
As regards another matter, I have long wondered why there is no (to my knowledge) trades and technical high
school in Mount Vernon. In Yonkers, NY, where I attended high school (more years ago than I care to count) there were, at that time, four high schools, three of which were on an “academic” or college-bound track, and one which was a trades and technical high school.
I should think that, by the time a student is 12 or 13 it would be possible to discern, through standardized testing
and other measures, such as grades and teacher observations, where abilities and inclinations lie, their strengths as well as their weaknesses.
I would suggest, then, that there be some division made between those students who are college-bound and
those who have demonstrated no obvious inclination towards, or talent, in academic subjects (a few of whom who will, undoubtedly, through sheer boredom, jealousy, or perversity of spirit, deliberately disrupt the efforts of those students who do have college in their sights). Given the salaries many skilled tradesmen (and women) can command, this would seem, to me, to be an attractive option. Established businesses, already part of the community, might offer these young people apprenticeships or internships which might well lead to employment after graduation.
The business and occupation of young men and women should be to educate themselves, to be an active participant in forming their futures through their experiences both in school and in the community. How can
this be accomplished, on either an academic or technical track, if they have to be concerned for their physical safety?
Those misguided young people who do disrupt the education of others, or who threaten the safety of staff or other students, should be dealt with swiftly and firmly. There should be no tolerance of anti-social behavior in or out of the classroom, in the guise of being “sensitive” or “correct” or in order to conceal or downplay chaotic conditions.
How many children have to be assaulted or die before a hard line is taken with these hard cases who are not
working towards college or an honest trade but towards an orange jumpsuit and leg-irons, to live at our expense in another State-run institution?
MaryAnn McCarra-Fitzpatrick,
Mount Vernon
Rose Wallace Hardy Celebrates 100th Birthday!
Mrs. Rose Wallace Hardy celebrated her 100th birthday last Friday afternoon, May 25th, at the Westchester Center for Rehabilitation & Nursing in Mount Vernon.
One of eight children, she was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania where she lived until her family relocated to Manhattan. Her family was extremely musical, which fostered her love of dancing. Three of her brothers were professional musicians, working with Duke Ellington, the Savoy Sultans (the house band for NYC’s Savoy Ballroom), and the Jimmy Lundsford Band. Her sister Dorothy, who currently lives in The Bronx is her only living sibling.
She was married to her first husband, Ernest Wallace, for 36 years, until his death in 1968. She also survived her second husband, Sylvester Hardy, to whom she was married for 23 years.
Mrs. Wallace was employed as a home health aide. A devout Baptist, she loves to knit, to read and to do puzzles. Mrs. Wallace has been a doting aunt to her many nieces and nephews, who are threw the birthday party for her.
Editor’s Note: The staff of the Westchester Guardian take this opportunity to wish Mrs. Rose Wallace Hardy a VERY HAPPY BIRTHDAY and many happy returns.
Reader Takes Issue with Columnist Polvere
Dear Editor:
Someone once said, “But hushed be every thought that springs from out the bitterness of things.” It seems column after column George W. Bush is everpresent on the mind of Fred Polvere. In his latest of Thursday, May 17, “America At War: Fact, Fiction, Bush”, Polvere concludes with these words, “No amount of spin will prevent George W. Bush from being seen as the most incompetent and immoral president in the history of the United States.” It appears Mr. Polvere is a prognosticator.
He knows what the future holds and can say with certainty that Mr. Bush is destined for the scrapheap of history. While the nation is at war, and men and women of the military are in harm’s way, distraught and disillusioned liberals like Polvere, still smarting from the 2000 election, have maligned, wished harm, and accused this resident of lies and deceit, high crimes and misdemeanors, and yes even having foreknowledge and possibly involvement
in the September 11 attack.
Mr. Polvere and those who think like him are capable of cruel and malicious behavior. Their unrestrained and
inflammatory rhetoric goes well beyond the bounds of decency and good taste.
Their unnatural hatred of this President is disturbing, and gives credence to the existence of what is now referred
to as Bush Derangement Syndrome. It is also, I believe, a manifestation of a deep bias toward certain ideologies and beliefs. Love him or hate him, agree or disagree, George W. Bush is the President of the United States, and deserves some measure of respect.
Bob Pascarella
The Bronx
On Vines and Lines
Dear Editor,
1. Lila D’Adolf ’s letter (May 17 issue) calls for a program to remove the runaway vines which are choking the trees on the Saw Mill River Parkway. She should be notified that there is such a program. I remember reading several years ago, after a motorist had been killed by a falling branch caused by vines killing trees, that the Dept. of Highways had begun a program to clear vines from the parkway wooded areas. Since then I have occasionally seen crews removing vines. But I would imagine that lately, with the crazy storms having killed, damaged and downed many trees, that other priorities may have pushed this program to the back burner. And the sheer size of the task is in any case daunting.
2. Your paper with its investigative attitude is great. I am glad to see advertisers supporting you in increasing numbers, showing that business people, who might be expected to “go along to get along” and might not want office-holders marking them down for retribution, are not afraid to support a publication dedicated to exposing the widespread rot in public affairs in Westchester. It is a nice partial antidote to the feeling one gets now in this country, watching the Constitution slowly being destroyed while the public is busy lapping up American Idol and its ilk. Thanks, and keep it up.
Charles Zigmund, Pleasantville
Help Youth By Getting Involved
Dear Editor:
As a lifelong resident of Mount Vernon, I would like to point out some facts that were not mentioned in your article. First, the youth of Mount Vernon today have less available to them than the preceding generations. Old-time merchants used to employ young people after school in their businesses whereas today that isn’t the case. Mount Vernon has fewer businesses than it did years ago, car dealerships, factories, supermarkets and the like. Malcolm X once stated to the people of Harlem, New York, “Don’t shop where you can’t work.” This boycott
led to jobs being created for the community.
Secondly, concerning the Hip Hop Museum, if being the case that Mayor Davis failed the youth to have it built, there are alternatives. One being asking rappers such as P Diddy and Henry O, both formerly of Mount Vernon, to contribute funds to having it built. Also people in the community can raise money to create it. Look to Memphis, Tenn. To the Civil Rights Museum or to Cleveland, Ohio, the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame.
Thirdly, concerning youth violence, look to Newark, New Jersey which was shown on Channel 9 (WOR) in the broadcast Scared Straight. The City of Newark, with permission of the New Jersey Department of Corrections, took troubled youth, or young people in general, to state prisons to see what prison life is like. By them interacting with prisoners many of them will have second thoughts about gang life.
Here we have seen how this growing menace can be curtailed without so much taxpayer expense but by everyone getting involved; namely the Chamber of Commerce, the Board of Education, and finally the City of Mount Vernon by extending recreation, Police Athletic League and various programs.
Please don’t give up on these young people, plenty of successful people came from Mount Vernon; Dick Clark, Lynn Brown, P Diddy, Henry O, Denzel Washington, Allan Funt (Candid Camera). These young people need to be shown that they can be one of the aforementioned people too.
Dennis Fishbein, Mount Vernon
Re: “Youthful Violence Taking Over Mount Vernon?” 10th May 2007
Dear Editor:
It is disturbing, indeed, when one hears, as I did last night, of a student and his father being assaulted at Longfellow School (apparently the student was resisting induction into a gang). Disturbing, too, are the incidents noted in your article. I am little surprised, then, when I find that, of all the parents of my acquaintance, not a single one plans to send their children to Mount Vernon High School, where they have the dubious distinction of the lowest SAT scores in the County (Westchester Magazine, April 2007, pages 82-83).
So, what is the solution? I think we first have to look to the home, where children receive their first instruction.
It is of no benefit to a child if their parent(s) are missing in action, AWOL, or somewhere “upstate.” A child requires a parent, preferably parents, who are interested in and dedicated to expanding the horizons of their children through their example of hard work, good character, and way of living.
Education, or the lack thereof, has long-reaching effects on the lives of our children, their future prospects for
gainful employment, and their contribution to the next generation. It should, therefore, be a primary concern of each and every parent to see to it that their child(ren) receive the very best education that they can access.
Unfortunately, for many parents in Mount Vernon, this will mean seeking out a private or parochial school for their child to attend, or else paying tuition for an out of-district placement; or, simply, moving.
Why should parents want to invest 500K in a home, pay enormous property taxes, and, on top of that, pay for
school fees and transportation to a private institution because they do not feel they can reliably count on the safety of their child during school hours?
As regards another matter, I have long wondered why there is no (to my knowledge) trades and technical high
school in Mount Vernon. In Yonkers, NY, where I attended high school (more years ago than I care to count) there were, at that time, four high schools, three of which were on an “academic” or college-bound track, and one which was a trades and technical high school.
I should think that, by the time a student is 12 or 13 it would be possible to discern, through standardized testing
and other measures, such as grades and teacher observations, where abilities and inclinations lie, their strengths as well as their weaknesses.
I would suggest, then, that there be some division made between those students who are college-bound and
those who have demonstrated no obvious inclination towards, or talent, in academic subjects (a few of whom who will, undoubtedly, through sheer boredom, jealousy, or perversity of spirit, deliberately disrupt the efforts of those students who do have college in their sights). Given the salaries many skilled tradesmen (and women) can command, this would seem, to me, to be an attractive option. Established businesses, already part of the community, might offer these young people apprenticeships or internships which might well lead to employment after graduation.
The business and occupation of young men and women should be to educate themselves, to be an active participant in forming their futures through their experiences both in school and in the community. How can
this be accomplished, on either an academic or technical track, if they have to be concerned for their physical safety?
Those misguided young people who do disrupt the education of others, or who threaten the safety of staff or other students, should be dealt with swiftly and firmly. There should be no tolerance of anti-social behavior in or out of the classroom, in the guise of being “sensitive” or “correct” or in order to conceal or downplay chaotic conditions.
How many children have to be assaulted or die before a hard line is taken with these hard cases who are not
working towards college or an honest trade but towards an orange jumpsuit and leg-irons, to live at our expense in another State-run institution?
MaryAnn McCarra-Fitzpatrick,
Mount Vernon
Rose Wallace Hardy Celebrates 100th Birthday!
Mrs. Rose Wallace Hardy celebrated her 100th birthday last Friday afternoon, May 25th, at the Westchester Center for Rehabilitation & Nursing in Mount Vernon.
One of eight children, she was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania where she lived until her family relocated to Manhattan. Her family was extremely musical, which fostered her love of dancing. Three of her brothers were professional musicians, working with Duke Ellington, the Savoy Sultans (the house band for NYC’s Savoy Ballroom), and the Jimmy Lundsford Band. Her sister Dorothy, who currently lives in The Bronx is her only living sibling.
She was married to her first husband, Ernest Wallace, for 36 years, until his death in 1968. She also survived her second husband, Sylvester Hardy, to whom she was married for 23 years.
Mrs. Wallace was employed as a home health aide. A devout Baptist, she loves to knit, to read and to do puzzles. Mrs. Wallace has been a doting aunt to her many nieces and nephews, who are threw the birthday party for her.
Editor’s Note: The staff of the Westchester Guardian take this opportunity to wish Mrs. Rose Wallace Hardy a VERY HAPPY BIRTHDAY and many happy returns.
Reader Takes Issue with Columnist Polvere
Dear Editor:
Someone once said, “But hushed be every thought that springs from out the bitterness of things.” It seems column after column George W. Bush is everpresent on the mind of Fred Polvere. In his latest of Thursday, May 17, “America At War: Fact, Fiction, Bush”, Polvere concludes with these words, “No amount of spin will prevent George W. Bush from being seen as the most incompetent and immoral president in the history of the United States.” It appears Mr. Polvere is a prognosticator.
He knows what the future holds and can say with certainty that Mr. Bush is destined for the scrapheap of history. While the nation is at war, and men and women of the military are in harm’s way, distraught and disillusioned liberals like Polvere, still smarting from the 2000 election, have maligned, wished harm, and accused this resident of lies and deceit, high crimes and misdemeanors, and yes even having foreknowledge and possibly involvement
in the September 11 attack.
Mr. Polvere and those who think like him are capable of cruel and malicious behavior. Their unrestrained and
inflammatory rhetoric goes well beyond the bounds of decency and good taste.
Their unnatural hatred of this President is disturbing, and gives credence to the existence of what is now referred
to as Bush Derangement Syndrome. It is also, I believe, a manifestation of a deep bias toward certain ideologies and beliefs. Love him or hate him, agree or disagree, George W. Bush is the President of the United States, and deserves some measure of respect.
Bob Pascarella
The Bronx
In Our Opinion...
There Was Nothing Good About The Mission of Monica Goodling
This nation’s, democratically elected, representative form of government has worked over more than two centuries, essentially predicated on a two-party system. And, while those two parties, were not always known as the Republicans and Democrats, the philosophies separating them, for the most part, have defined the bright line between wealthy, and working class, Americans. Put quite simply, Republicans believe that if Big Business is prospering, everyone will be doing well. Democrats, on the other hand, have always held that if farmers and laborers were prospering the nation’s businesses would also prosper.
Come national election time Americans have traditionally laid aside other concerns, and, depending upon the state of the economy, whether we were at war or peace, or some other compelling issue, have gotten involved, many passionately, in the process and debate. Until very recently, both sides however could always find common ground in the Constitutional separation of Church and State. Apparently, not so, the Bush Administration.
In both houses of Congress investigations into the firings of eight United States Attorneys, and the planned firing of many more, have peeled back the cover on one of the uglier political operations instituted under the oppressive regime of Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and George W. Bush. Former United States Attorney, and Deputy Attorney General, James Comey testified two weeks ago before the Senate Judiciary Committee detailing the bald-faced attempt in 2004 by then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales and Chief of Staff Andrew Card to fraudulently get Attorney General John Ashcroft, laying seriously ill in a Washington hospital, to sign off on the National Security Agency’s warrantless eavesdropping activities.
Now, last week, Monica Goodling, only after receiving a grant of immunity from prosecution, after two months of resistance, finally came forward to testify before a House Committee also investigating the firings. Goodling, admitted, “I may have gone too far in asking political questions of applicants for career positions and I may have taken inappropriate political considerations into account.”
Goodling, 33 was the Justice Department’s White House liaison. Ms. Goodling, generally perceived as a tough Conservative, had gone to work at the Justice Department in 2002, having previously worked for the Republican
National Committee as an “opposition researcher,” one whose job it was to gather dirt on the opponent. Although a lawyer, Goodling had absolutely no prosecutorial experience. Nevertheless she quickly moved into a position of power over who would be hired, and promoted, throughout the Justice Department.
Despite the grant of immunity, Ms. Goodling had many memory lapses regarding issues she was particularly uncomfortable about. We find one thing, however, that she did admit, particularly disturbing. Her admission that she weighed the hiring and promotional prospects of Justice Department applicants, and employees, against their political affiliations is the more significant, and alarming, given the fact that Goodling is an avowed Christian Fundamentalist whose probings were not merely into politics but into religious beliefs. She is a disciple of the Religious Right, a movement that persists in wrapping political philosophy with religion, and whose corruptive, covert activities apparently reached far deeper into the workings of government, under the Bush Administration, than mere “Faith Based Initiatives.”
We would encourage Congress to take this investigation wherever it leads. Each and every individual involved, from Alberto Gonzales on down, must be purged from the Department of Justice, if the confidence of the American People is to be restored, and the agency’s name is to be regarded as anything more
than an oxymoron.
There Was Nothing Good About The Mission of Monica Goodling
This nation’s, democratically elected, representative form of government has worked over more than two centuries, essentially predicated on a two-party system. And, while those two parties, were not always known as the Republicans and Democrats, the philosophies separating them, for the most part, have defined the bright line between wealthy, and working class, Americans. Put quite simply, Republicans believe that if Big Business is prospering, everyone will be doing well. Democrats, on the other hand, have always held that if farmers and laborers were prospering the nation’s businesses would also prosper.
Come national election time Americans have traditionally laid aside other concerns, and, depending upon the state of the economy, whether we were at war or peace, or some other compelling issue, have gotten involved, many passionately, in the process and debate. Until very recently, both sides however could always find common ground in the Constitutional separation of Church and State. Apparently, not so, the Bush Administration.
In both houses of Congress investigations into the firings of eight United States Attorneys, and the planned firing of many more, have peeled back the cover on one of the uglier political operations instituted under the oppressive regime of Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and George W. Bush. Former United States Attorney, and Deputy Attorney General, James Comey testified two weeks ago before the Senate Judiciary Committee detailing the bald-faced attempt in 2004 by then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales and Chief of Staff Andrew Card to fraudulently get Attorney General John Ashcroft, laying seriously ill in a Washington hospital, to sign off on the National Security Agency’s warrantless eavesdropping activities.
Now, last week, Monica Goodling, only after receiving a grant of immunity from prosecution, after two months of resistance, finally came forward to testify before a House Committee also investigating the firings. Goodling, admitted, “I may have gone too far in asking political questions of applicants for career positions and I may have taken inappropriate political considerations into account.”
Goodling, 33 was the Justice Department’s White House liaison. Ms. Goodling, generally perceived as a tough Conservative, had gone to work at the Justice Department in 2002, having previously worked for the Republican
National Committee as an “opposition researcher,” one whose job it was to gather dirt on the opponent. Although a lawyer, Goodling had absolutely no prosecutorial experience. Nevertheless she quickly moved into a position of power over who would be hired, and promoted, throughout the Justice Department.
Despite the grant of immunity, Ms. Goodling had many memory lapses regarding issues she was particularly uncomfortable about. We find one thing, however, that she did admit, particularly disturbing. Her admission that she weighed the hiring and promotional prospects of Justice Department applicants, and employees, against their political affiliations is the more significant, and alarming, given the fact that Goodling is an avowed Christian Fundamentalist whose probings were not merely into politics but into religious beliefs. She is a disciple of the Religious Right, a movement that persists in wrapping political philosophy with religion, and whose corruptive, covert activities apparently reached far deeper into the workings of government, under the Bush Administration, than mere “Faith Based Initiatives.”
We would encourage Congress to take this investigation wherever it leads. Each and every individual involved, from Alberto Gonzales on down, must be purged from the Department of Justice, if the confidence of the American People is to be restored, and the agency’s name is to be regarded as anything more
than an oxymoron.
The Court Report
By Richard Blassberg
Guardian Fights Back, Going After Municipalities That Violate First Amendment
Several weeks ago The Westchester Guardian, through its parent corporation, The Guardian News, Inc., began to file civil actions against numerous villages, towns, and cities throughout Westchester County, charging each with various acts, including, but not limited to, their adoption, interpretation, and enforcement of local code provisions governing “Newsracks” on public property in violation of The Guardian’s rights as guaranteed
by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, 42 U.S.C. Section 1983. At this point ten such federal complaints have been filed, the first of which was commenced on April 7, against
the Village of Tuckahoe, and several individuals involved in the administration of that village government.
Complaints have also been filed against the Villages of Bronxville, Pelham, Croton-On-Hudson, Larchmont, Briarcliff Manor, and Dobbs Ferry, as well as the Towns of North Salem and Greenburgh, and the City
of Yonkers. Additional actions are contemplated against numerous other municipalities currently violating the law.
The Westchester Guardian, a weekly newspaper, made its debut appearance August 10, 2006. Circulated throughout Westchester County in some 300 distinctive blue distribution boxes, as well as in newsracks in more than 700 professional offices, supermarkets, stationeries, delis, convenience stores, restaurants and other establishments, its readership has more than doubled while faithful to its mission to serve “The People’s Right To Know.”
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------------------------x
THE GUARDIAN NEWS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
-against-
MICHAEL J. MARTINO, individually,
LUIGI MARCOCCIA, individually,
TONY E. SAYEGH, Jr., individually, 07 Civ. ( )
STEVEN A. ECKLOND, individually,
JOHN FITZPATRICK, individually,
SUSAN CIAMARRA, individually, COMPLAINT
ROBERT MASCIANICA, individually,
JOHN D. CAVALLARO, individually,
and the VILLAGE OF TUCKAHOE, Jury Trial Demanded
New York,
Defendant.
-------------------------------------------------------x
Plaintiff THE GUARDIAN NEWS, INC., by its attorneys Lovett & Gould, LLP, for its complaint respectfully states:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This is an action for compensatory and punitive damages, as well as declaratory and injunctive relief, proximately resulting from the Defendants’ adoption, interpretation, and enforcement of a local code provision governing “Newsracks” in violation of Plaintiff’s rights as guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, 42 U.S.C. §1983.
Port Chester Voting Rights Trial In Federal Court
United States Federal District Court, White Plains - Judge Stephen C. Robinson Presiding
Monday morning, May 21st, the Voting Rights suit brought by the Justice Department through its Civil Rights Division, against the Village of Port Chester for alleged violations in their “at-large election” of village trustees, began in Federal District Court, White Plains.
The Government has contended for some time that the at-large system, as employed by the Village over many years, has effectively prevented the election of any trustee preferred by the Latino population.
The trial is intended to resolve the consolidated claims against the Village of Port Chester, not only of
the Justice Department, represented by the United States Attorney’s Of-fice, but also of Cesar Ruiz, candidate
for trustee in 2001. Mr. Ruiz is represented by attorneys Randolph Mc Laughlin, and Debra Cohen.
The government’s first witness was Dr. Lisa Handley, an election consultant for more than twenty years, and a
recognized expert in racially polarized voting patterns. Dr. Handley was asked to analyze the results in the Village’s recent mayoral election to determine if her prior analysis of voting patterns would change. Handley had analyzed sixteen prior Port Chester elections, and had determined that the candidates preferred by Hispanic voters had been defeated in twelve of the contests.
The government attorney asked, “Have you reached a conclusion?” Dr. Handley responded, “Whites ‘lock-vote’ to defeat Hispanic candidates.” Asked what method she used to draw her conclusions, she indicated that she had analyzed “homogeneous precincts and Spanish-surname registrations.” She declared, “There were special circumstances in the 2007 race for mayor.” She explained there was no Hispanic candidate, and that while
Hispanics voted mostly for Democrat Dennis Pilla, White voters divided between Pilla and his Republican opponent. Additionally, she asserted that because there had been a lot of publicity for the upcoming trial, and the
fact that there was no trustee election, added to the special circumstances.
Judge Robinson broke in, “Let me ask a big picture election question. This election is bad for your thesis, wouldn’t you say?” Handley wasn’t prepared to quite concede the point. The Government offered into evidence the Supplemental Report of Dr. Ronald Gatti, indicating “This is the report commissioned by Defendant
Village of Port Chester.” Mr. Anthony Piscionere, lead attorney for the Village, asked by Judge Robinson if
he had any objection, responded, “I’m in no position to oppose a report we ordered.”
The Government then turned to Dr. Handley and asked, “Do you agree with Dr. Gatti’s conclusion that
Regression Analysis is acceptable for predictive purposes?” Dr. Handley’s response, “Virtually
everyone voted for a candidate,” was quickly ridiculed by Robinson.
The Judge loudly declared, “virtually is a weasel word.” Handley went on to discuss the village election of 2001 in which Cesar Ruiz, a Latino, had run for trustee. She described the voting pattern of Hispanics as having been “single-shot voting.” She explained, “Many Hispanics cast only one vote, when they could have cast two, voting only for Ruiz.”
Attorney McLaughlin, representing Mr. Ruiz, then cross-examined Handley, asking, “Is there any difference between elections that are head-tohead, as opposed to multiple-candidate at-large elections?” Then attempting
to narrow, and clarify his inquiry, McLaughlin asked, “Would it be easier to defeat an Hispanic candidate in a head-to-head, or multiple choice?” Handley responded, “Head-to-head.”
By Richard Blassberg
Guardian Fights Back, Going After Municipalities That Violate First Amendment
Several weeks ago The Westchester Guardian, through its parent corporation, The Guardian News, Inc., began to file civil actions against numerous villages, towns, and cities throughout Westchester County, charging each with various acts, including, but not limited to, their adoption, interpretation, and enforcement of local code provisions governing “Newsracks” on public property in violation of The Guardian’s rights as guaranteed
by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, 42 U.S.C. Section 1983. At this point ten such federal complaints have been filed, the first of which was commenced on April 7, against
the Village of Tuckahoe, and several individuals involved in the administration of that village government.
Complaints have also been filed against the Villages of Bronxville, Pelham, Croton-On-Hudson, Larchmont, Briarcliff Manor, and Dobbs Ferry, as well as the Towns of North Salem and Greenburgh, and the City
of Yonkers. Additional actions are contemplated against numerous other municipalities currently violating the law.
The Westchester Guardian, a weekly newspaper, made its debut appearance August 10, 2006. Circulated throughout Westchester County in some 300 distinctive blue distribution boxes, as well as in newsracks in more than 700 professional offices, supermarkets, stationeries, delis, convenience stores, restaurants and other establishments, its readership has more than doubled while faithful to its mission to serve “The People’s Right To Know.”
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------------------------x
THE GUARDIAN NEWS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
-against-
MICHAEL J. MARTINO, individually,
LUIGI MARCOCCIA, individually,
TONY E. SAYEGH, Jr., individually, 07 Civ. ( )
STEVEN A. ECKLOND, individually,
JOHN FITZPATRICK, individually,
SUSAN CIAMARRA, individually, COMPLAINT
ROBERT MASCIANICA, individually,
JOHN D. CAVALLARO, individually,
and the VILLAGE OF TUCKAHOE, Jury Trial Demanded
New York,
Defendant.
-------------------------------------------------------x
Plaintiff THE GUARDIAN NEWS, INC., by its attorneys Lovett & Gould, LLP, for its complaint respectfully states:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This is an action for compensatory and punitive damages, as well as declaratory and injunctive relief, proximately resulting from the Defendants’ adoption, interpretation, and enforcement of a local code provision governing “Newsracks” in violation of Plaintiff’s rights as guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, 42 U.S.C. §1983.
Port Chester Voting Rights Trial In Federal Court
United States Federal District Court, White Plains - Judge Stephen C. Robinson Presiding
Monday morning, May 21st, the Voting Rights suit brought by the Justice Department through its Civil Rights Division, against the Village of Port Chester for alleged violations in their “at-large election” of village trustees, began in Federal District Court, White Plains.
The Government has contended for some time that the at-large system, as employed by the Village over many years, has effectively prevented the election of any trustee preferred by the Latino population.
The trial is intended to resolve the consolidated claims against the Village of Port Chester, not only of
the Justice Department, represented by the United States Attorney’s Of-fice, but also of Cesar Ruiz, candidate
for trustee in 2001. Mr. Ruiz is represented by attorneys Randolph Mc Laughlin, and Debra Cohen.
The government’s first witness was Dr. Lisa Handley, an election consultant for more than twenty years, and a
recognized expert in racially polarized voting patterns. Dr. Handley was asked to analyze the results in the Village’s recent mayoral election to determine if her prior analysis of voting patterns would change. Handley had analyzed sixteen prior Port Chester elections, and had determined that the candidates preferred by Hispanic voters had been defeated in twelve of the contests.
The government attorney asked, “Have you reached a conclusion?” Dr. Handley responded, “Whites ‘lock-vote’ to defeat Hispanic candidates.” Asked what method she used to draw her conclusions, she indicated that she had analyzed “homogeneous precincts and Spanish-surname registrations.” She declared, “There were special circumstances in the 2007 race for mayor.” She explained there was no Hispanic candidate, and that while
Hispanics voted mostly for Democrat Dennis Pilla, White voters divided between Pilla and his Republican opponent. Additionally, she asserted that because there had been a lot of publicity for the upcoming trial, and the
fact that there was no trustee election, added to the special circumstances.
Judge Robinson broke in, “Let me ask a big picture election question. This election is bad for your thesis, wouldn’t you say?” Handley wasn’t prepared to quite concede the point. The Government offered into evidence the Supplemental Report of Dr. Ronald Gatti, indicating “This is the report commissioned by Defendant
Village of Port Chester.” Mr. Anthony Piscionere, lead attorney for the Village, asked by Judge Robinson if
he had any objection, responded, “I’m in no position to oppose a report we ordered.”
The Government then turned to Dr. Handley and asked, “Do you agree with Dr. Gatti’s conclusion that
Regression Analysis is acceptable for predictive purposes?” Dr. Handley’s response, “Virtually
everyone voted for a candidate,” was quickly ridiculed by Robinson.
The Judge loudly declared, “virtually is a weasel word.” Handley went on to discuss the village election of 2001 in which Cesar Ruiz, a Latino, had run for trustee. She described the voting pattern of Hispanics as having been “single-shot voting.” She explained, “Many Hispanics cast only one vote, when they could have cast two, voting only for Ruiz.”
Attorney McLaughlin, representing Mr. Ruiz, then cross-examined Handley, asking, “Is there any difference between elections that are head-tohead, as opposed to multiple-candidate at-large elections?” Then attempting
to narrow, and clarify his inquiry, McLaughlin asked, “Would it be easier to defeat an Hispanic candidate in a head-to-head, or multiple choice?” Handley responded, “Head-to-head.”
The Advocate:
Statement From United States Attorney Michael J. Garcia Vindicates The Guardian’s Position On Perez Investigation
Two weeks ago The Guardian, in an editorial entitled FBI Must Step Into Perez Case, declared, “In fact, because it is strongly suspected that the injuries sustained by Perez which led to his death only hours later, might very well have been inflicted by police officers acting under Color of Law; and, given the civil rights implications of such suspicions, it is imperative that the FBI get involved and conduct the investigation as early as possible.”
Beginning around May fourteenth, and for several days thereafter, there had been a number of statements from the Westchester County District Attorney’s Office indicating that office had called upon United States Attorney Michael J. Garcia, and the FBI to aid in the investigation into the death by homicide of Rene Perez, a homeless, undocumented, Latino found near death, on the side of the road in Bedford, less than one hour after contact with officers from the Mount Kisco Police Department, late in the evening of April 28. Those statements obviously created some confusion in the media given the obvious civil rights implications attached to the widely held suspicion that Mr. Perez might have been the victim of police brutality, or at the very least, criminal negligence
at the hands of police.
On May 18th, responding to numerous media inquiries, the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York released the following statement:
United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: U.S. ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
MAY 18, 2007 HERBERT HADAD, YUSILL SCRIBNER,
REBEKAH CARMICHAEL
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE
(914) 993-1900, (212) 637-2600
STATEMENT BY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY MICHAEL J. GARCIA REGARDING THE FEDERAL INVESTIGATION INTO THE DEATH OF RENE PEREZ
"We have received media inquiries seeking to clarify the extent of the federal role in the on-going investigation
being conducted by state and local authorities into the death of Rene Perez.
"On May 8, 2007, the FBI opened a civil rights investigation into this matter. Thereafter, the Westchester
County District Attorney asked the United States Attorney's Office and the FBI to join the state investigation.
"At the present time, state and federal authorities are not conducting a joint investigation. State authorities will
continue their homicide investigation. Federal authorities will continue to actively monitor the progress of the state
investigation and to offer assistance as requested. Federal authorities will be reviewing the evidence, including evidence amassed in the state investigation, to determine whether a violation of federal civil rights laws has occurred.
"During the pendency of the state and local investigation, the FBI will remain available to receive information from the public regarding this matter. Anyone with information regarding the circumstances leading to the death of
Rene Perez may contact the FBI at (212) 384-5000. Spanish speaking agents will be available to receive such calls," stated MICHAEL J. GARCIA, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
United States Attorney - Southern District of New York
Statement From United States Attorney Michael J. Garcia Vindicates The Guardian’s Position On Perez Investigation
Two weeks ago The Guardian, in an editorial entitled FBI Must Step Into Perez Case, declared, “In fact, because it is strongly suspected that the injuries sustained by Perez which led to his death only hours later, might very well have been inflicted by police officers acting under Color of Law; and, given the civil rights implications of such suspicions, it is imperative that the FBI get involved and conduct the investigation as early as possible.”
Beginning around May fourteenth, and for several days thereafter, there had been a number of statements from the Westchester County District Attorney’s Office indicating that office had called upon United States Attorney Michael J. Garcia, and the FBI to aid in the investigation into the death by homicide of Rene Perez, a homeless, undocumented, Latino found near death, on the side of the road in Bedford, less than one hour after contact with officers from the Mount Kisco Police Department, late in the evening of April 28. Those statements obviously created some confusion in the media given the obvious civil rights implications attached to the widely held suspicion that Mr. Perez might have been the victim of police brutality, or at the very least, criminal negligence
at the hands of police.
On May 18th, responding to numerous media inquiries, the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York released the following statement:
United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: U.S. ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
MAY 18, 2007 HERBERT HADAD, YUSILL SCRIBNER,
REBEKAH CARMICHAEL
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE
(914) 993-1900, (212) 637-2600
STATEMENT BY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY MICHAEL J. GARCIA REGARDING THE FEDERAL INVESTIGATION INTO THE DEATH OF RENE PEREZ
"We have received media inquiries seeking to clarify the extent of the federal role in the on-going investigation
being conducted by state and local authorities into the death of Rene Perez.
"On May 8, 2007, the FBI opened a civil rights investigation into this matter. Thereafter, the Westchester
County District Attorney asked the United States Attorney's Office and the FBI to join the state investigation.
"At the present time, state and federal authorities are not conducting a joint investigation. State authorities will
continue their homicide investigation. Federal authorities will continue to actively monitor the progress of the state
investigation and to offer assistance as requested. Federal authorities will be reviewing the evidence, including evidence amassed in the state investigation, to determine whether a violation of federal civil rights laws has occurred.
"During the pendency of the state and local investigation, the FBI will remain available to receive information from the public regarding this matter. Anyone with information regarding the circumstances leading to the death of
Rene Perez may contact the FBI at (212) 384-5000. Spanish speaking agents will be available to receive such calls," stated MICHAEL J. GARCIA, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
United States Attorney - Southern District of New York
Mount Vernon Police Announce Two Arrests In Reginald Rogers Killing
In morning press conferences, held last Monday and Tuesday in the Mayor’s conference room, the arrests of Robert Lewis 18, of 425 North Terrace Avenue, Mt. Vernon, on Saturday evening May 19th, and Enric Devers 17, of 347 Huguenot Street, New Rochelle, Monday evening, May 21st, each charged with Second Degree Murder, in the killing April 28th of Reginald Rogers 20, outside his home on East Fourth Street, Mt. Vernon, were announced.
At Monday’s press conference Mayor Ernest Davis acknowledged, “There have been four homicides since the
first of the year.” Declaring, “ This is a sad day, but a good day in many respects,” the Mayor went on to say, “I want to congratulate Police Commissioner Chong and his dedicated staff, his patrol officers, and detectives,
for their excellent work.
Stepping up to the podium, Commissioner Chong told the media and City officials assembled, “I want to thank the community for calling us with tips.”
He went on to state, “We believe it was nothing more than male bravado, gang nonsense; we’ve arrested
one person and the investigation is still ongoing.”
He then fielded questions. The Guardian inquired, “Has ballistics testing revealed that the semi-automatic .380 found on Robert Lewis at the time of his arrest was the only weapon involved, or might there have been others?”
The Commissioner turned the microphone over to Commander of Detectives Angelo Fusillo, at his side, who responded, “There was more than one weapon involved.”
Tuesday morning, following the overnight arrest of Devers, Commissioner Chong told The Guardian, “With this second arrest the investigation is completed. There were no other individuals who fired shots at Reginald
Rogers.” He further informed us, like Lewis, Devers also had a Davis Industries .380 semi-automatic.
If brought to trial, and convicted of Second Degree Murder, each youth will face up to 25-Years-to-Life in prison.
In morning press conferences, held last Monday and Tuesday in the Mayor’s conference room, the arrests of Robert Lewis 18, of 425 North Terrace Avenue, Mt. Vernon, on Saturday evening May 19th, and Enric Devers 17, of 347 Huguenot Street, New Rochelle, Monday evening, May 21st, each charged with Second Degree Murder, in the killing April 28th of Reginald Rogers 20, outside his home on East Fourth Street, Mt. Vernon, were announced.
At Monday’s press conference Mayor Ernest Davis acknowledged, “There have been four homicides since the
first of the year.” Declaring, “ This is a sad day, but a good day in many respects,” the Mayor went on to say, “I want to congratulate Police Commissioner Chong and his dedicated staff, his patrol officers, and detectives,
for their excellent work.
Stepping up to the podium, Commissioner Chong told the media and City officials assembled, “I want to thank the community for calling us with tips.”
He went on to state, “We believe it was nothing more than male bravado, gang nonsense; we’ve arrested
one person and the investigation is still ongoing.”
He then fielded questions. The Guardian inquired, “Has ballistics testing revealed that the semi-automatic .380 found on Robert Lewis at the time of his arrest was the only weapon involved, or might there have been others?”
The Commissioner turned the microphone over to Commander of Detectives Angelo Fusillo, at his side, who responded, “There was more than one weapon involved.”
Tuesday morning, following the overnight arrest of Devers, Commissioner Chong told The Guardian, “With this second arrest the investigation is completed. There were no other individuals who fired shots at Reginald
Rogers.” He further informed us, like Lewis, Devers also had a Davis Industries .380 semi-automatic.
If brought to trial, and convicted of Second Degree Murder, each youth will face up to 25-Years-to-Life in prison.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Why We Should Not Bring The Death Penalty Back In New York.
Part 2
By Jeffrey Deskovic
Appellate Review Is Inadequate To Protect The Innocent.
Part 2
By Jeffrey Deskovic
Appellate Review Is Inadequate To Protect The Innocent.
In many of the wrongful coniction cases, including mine, the person eventually cleared often has had their appeals exhausted. Guess what happens to those who have been sentenced to death whose appeals have run out? The sentence is carried out. As an illustration of how inadequate appellate review is to stop miscarriages of justice, let us recount the following New Yorkers who were wrongfully imprisoned whose convictions the appellate process failed to remedy, starting with those convicted of murder: Roy Brown, 15 years for murder, Dennis Halstead,
16 years for murder, John Kogut, 17 years for murder, Kerry Kotler, 10.5 years for murder, Douglas Warney,
9 years for murder.
Those convicted of charges other than murder: Scott Fapiano, 21 years; Alan Newton, 21 years; Anthony
Capozzi, 20 years; Kharey Wise, 11.5 years; Victor Ortiz, 11 years; Michael Mercer, 10.5 years; Terry Chalmers, of Westchester, 7 years; Charles Dabbs, of Westchester, 7 years; Antron McCray, 6 years;
Kevin Richardson, 5.5 years; Yusef Salaam, 5.5 years; Raymond Santana, 5 years. By the way, the last
four mentioned, along with Kharey Wise, were convicted amid the hype surrounding a brutal rape, referred
to by the media as The Central Park Jogger case, akin to the type of hype which surrounds cop killings.
Doubtlessly the atmosphere played a role in their convictions, as it would in any crime which generateshysteria and outrage, again much as occurs in a cop killing case. The prospect of an innocent person being executed is no mere theoretical possibility. Consider the following excerpt from capital cases, which I borrow from a pamphlet of the magazine Justice Denied: “Hours before Freddie Lee Wright was executed in March 2000, Alabama Supreme Court Justice Johnstone vainly protested ‘…his petition recites persuasive facts that support the conclusion that he is innocent and that his conviction results from lack of a fair trial…the likelihood
[is] that we are sending an innocent man to his death.’”
Let’s look at the lessons of innocence and the death penalty in states that have the death penalty. Consider that Ray Krone was twice wrongfully convicted of murder before being cleared, and spent 4 years on death row. Consider that Earl Washington came within 9 days of being executed. Consider that Ron Williamson came within
5. Nicholas Yarris was nearly executed because at the end he gave up and actually got permission from a judge to give up what was left of his appeals, in effect volunteering to die. Consider the other exonerees who were on death row: Kirk Bloodsworth, Charles Fain, Ronald Jones, Ryan Mathews, and Robert Miller. Consider Frank Smith, who actually died on death row while still undergoing the appeals process, before being post-humously
cleared by DNA.
Consider too how frighteningly close in New York itself, in the short time that the death penalty statute was on the books, we came to senthetencing an innocent person to death, when Douglas Warney, of Rochester, was wrongfully charged and convicted of murder. Prosecutors tried to indict him for first degree murder so that they could seek the death penalty.
But the grand jury only indicted him for second degree murder. I would like to point out that often the circumstance which leads to one murder case being classified as a death penalty case, is being convicted
of another felony along with the murder. Often being convicted of a rape with a murder serves as a basis to classify a murder as a death penalty eligible. If I was eighteen years old as opposed to sixteen, I have no
doubt that I would have been sentenced to death. I was charged with a brutal crime, and there was a lot
of outrage and public pressure. My appeals ran out in 1999. I was not cleared until 2006. There would have
been no 2006 for Jeffrey Deskovic.
Then think about two things which are even more frightening: DNA evidence is only available in 10% of all serious felony cases, and there are nowhere near the legal resources needed in order to work oncases of innocence. The Innocence Project alone receives hundreds of letters each month requesting assistance, and already has a huge pile of cases waiting for representation. Similar organizations also have a tremendous backlog. For those two reasons it is impossible to tell for certain just how many innocent people there are in prison. Against this backdrop, when a person is sentenced to death, there is the added pressure of working against the clock. That is a recipe for disaster.
In any brutal or heinous crime, there is an emotional environment of anger, outrage, and public pressure on the police to solve the crime. When a police officer is killed, that is even more true, with the added feature that the police are now emotionally involved because a colleague was killed, thus setting the stage for mistakes to be made. I believe that life is bestowed by God and should not be taken, including that of law enforcement officers. I am against all murders, whether by street violence, or statesanctioned execution, carrying out the death penalty. I do not believe that the life of a person who chooses a career in the private sector is less valuable than that of a law enforcement officer. Therefore one crime should not carry the death penalty while another does not.
It has been proven through studies and statistics, that African-Americans are disproportionately sentenced to death. If someone who is white is convicted of the same type of crime as a African-American, the African-American is more likely to receive the death penalty. Similarly, an African-American convicted of killing a white man is more likely to be sentenced to death than a White killing a Black.
There is an element of classism also. You will never find a rich person or one with political connections on death row. The reason is that they can afford the best lawyers, helping them to either avoid being arrested in the first place, or to beat the rap. As if those two factors are not enough, I don’t believe that there is a judge alive who will sentence a rich man to death.
Then there are also geographic disparities, wherein what part of the state that one lives in makes it more
likely that one will receive the death penalty. Thus it is arbitrary who receives the death penalty and who
does not. There are moral problems with the existence of death rows. The prisoners are kept in their cells twenty
three hours a day, with the uncertainty of whether they will be executed hanging over their head, often for eight, or nine years, or even decades at a time. That is cruel and inhumane, and certainly enough to make anyone insane. Yet considering how flawed the system is, it is unavoidable since many are cleared after their appeals
have run out, thereby making a speeding up of the process unthinkable.
Thus the whole idea of having a death penalty becomes unworkable in practice. Additionally, there have
been botched executions, in which the condemned suffer.
There are a variety of myths surrounding the death penalty. One of them is that is gives closure to victims families. I have spoken with a woman, Marie Verzulli, whose family member was murdered, who related to me that in the course of her giving lectures against the death penalty, she had spoken to many murder victim family members who said that after the death penalty had been carried out that they had not received any closure. In fact, some
of them who had been public about wanting the murderer to be executed felt badly afterwards, that they had lowered themselves down to the murderers level. Many of them felt also that their pain was kept alive by the inevitable media attention that happens whenever the accused appeals were heard. And yet, the appeals could never be done away with because of the errors in the system. Were it not for the death penalty, the cases would not receive that type of attention.
Another myth is that it serves as a deterrent. There is no evidence which proves that it deters anybody from committing a similar crime. Those who murder in cold blood, after carefully premeditating it, do not believe that they will get caught, so it does not hinder them. Those who murder in the heat of the moment, are consumed with emotion and are not thinking about the consequences either. Thus neither type of murderer is deterred. Still another myth is that the death penalty is necessary to protect society. Prison has served thus far to protect society against two of the most notorious murderers, Charles Manson and David Berkowitz.
Yet another myth is that the death penalty is a cheaper option than imprisonment. According to a news
story out of Texas, entitled “Executions Cost Texas Millions”, reporters determined that it cost Texas two
point three million dollars more per case than a non-death penalty case. In New York, from 1995-2004, when we had the death penalty on the books, we spent $200 million dollars specifi-cally because of the statute’s existence, and executed nobody. Those resources could be better spent on social programs, such as education.
The death penalty does a disservice to us all. It drains financial resources, which could be better spent in other areas. It puts victim families through more agony. The process itself is inhumane, leaving the condemned unsure of whether he will be killed or not. But perhaps the most important one is that innocent people will be executed. The justice system, as it exists today, is much too flawed for us to have a penalty as irreversible as death. At least with
wrongful incarceration, we can free the innocent. With death, there is nothing that we can do. A wrongful conviction can happen to anyone, at anytime. If we have a death penalty, that means that not only are all of us
at risk of being wrongfully convicted, but we are also at risk at being executed as the penalty.
Thus it is for our own individual protection, along with that of our sons and daughters, mothers and fathers, other family members, and friends, that we must not have a reinstatement of the death penalty. It is not about being soft on crime, and we must make our state and federal legislators understand that.
Last week Gov. Spitzer announced his intention to expand the DNA databank, by mandating that those who had been incarcerated for misdemeanors also be required to give DNA samples. I wholeheartedly endorse this latest
legislative initiative by Gov. Spitzer, as I have been actively advocating for laws that will protect the innocent, prevent and overturn wrongful convictions, and make it easier to bring justice to those cases wherein a wrongful conviction has occurred.
Expansion of the DNA Databank means that there will be more samples on file, so that when someone who is innocent receives a DNA test in which crime scene evidence is run through that databank, there will be more samples to check it against. In my case, for example, when DNA was run through the system, it matched someone else whose sample was in the system, thus simultaneously showing his guilt and my innocence.
Had Steven Cunningham only committed a misdemeanor and not a felony, his sample would not have been in the databank, I would still be in prison serving a life sentence. Expanding the databank pool increases the odds that
matches will be found when the innocent request DNA Testing of crime scene materials.
On the other side of the coin, opponents have raised objections, citing privacy issues, and worries as to whether insurance companies and employers will gain access to this information and decline medical coverage and employment opportunities.
With respect to insurance companies and employers, it has not happened yet that anyone has been denied employment or coverage based upon genetic predisposition. There is no reason to think that anyone will, because
those places do not have access to that information. However, to be on the safe side, legislation should be enacted to make it illegal for that information to be accessed either by insurance companies or employers.
With respect to privacy, it is my position and hopefully the position of most reasonable individuals, that when the competing interests of privacy and establishing innocence are weighed out, innocence, and the right to not be imprisoned for crimes one has not committed, certainly must trump any privacy concerns. To hold otherwise is to
say that it is okay for the innocent to sometimes remain in prison, because the DNA pool is not large enough to have potentially included the actual perpetrator of the crime for which they were wrongfully convicted.
I salute Gov. Spitzer for his proactive decision, indicating his concern for innocents caught in the web of the criminal justice system, and the recognition that the innocent are sometimes found guilty.
Janet Difiore.
DA DiFiore Visits Mt. Kisco Seeks Help From Latino Community.
Last Wednesday night, in the wake of a severe thunder and wind storm, which took down trees and power lines in the Mt. Kisco area, Westchester District Attorney Janet DiFiore, nevertheless, made an appearance at a gathering at Mt. Kisco Village Hall before some one hundred, mostly Latino, concerned citizens, there to protest the unsolved recent death of Rene Perez and two other Latinos strangled to death in the area in 2003 and 2004.
Introduced to the crowd by Fernando Mateo, founder of Hispanics Across America, DiFiore, surrounded by Mateo, DA Investigator Glover, and several Guardian Angels, declared, “I have come for a single purpose, to let the people know my office is handling the investigation into the death of Rene Perez.”
DiFiore went on to make an appeal to those gathered, as well as to the community at large, to come forward with any information that might be helpful in determining the exact circumstances leading up to Rene Perez’
death in the early morning hours of April 29. The DA attempted to ease any concerns on the part of undocumented individuals who might fear deportation or other repercussions for coming forward
with information.
Members of the District Attorney’s Office distributed a flyer, in both English and Spanish, displaying a picture of Rene Perez and offering a confi-dential hotline number, 914.995.6247, in the effort to draw out informants.
Last Wednesday night, in the wake of a severe thunder and wind storm, which took down trees and power lines in the Mt. Kisco area, Westchester District Attorney Janet DiFiore, nevertheless, made an appearance at a gathering at Mt. Kisco Village Hall before some one hundred, mostly Latino, concerned citizens, there to protest the unsolved recent death of Rene Perez and two other Latinos strangled to death in the area in 2003 and 2004.
Introduced to the crowd by Fernando Mateo, founder of Hispanics Across America, DiFiore, surrounded by Mateo, DA Investigator Glover, and several Guardian Angels, declared, “I have come for a single purpose, to let the people know my office is handling the investigation into the death of Rene Perez.”
DiFiore went on to make an appeal to those gathered, as well as to the community at large, to come forward with any information that might be helpful in determining the exact circumstances leading up to Rene Perez’
death in the early morning hours of April 29. The DA attempted to ease any concerns on the part of undocumented individuals who might fear deportation or other repercussions for coming forward
with information.
Members of the District Attorney’s Office distributed a flyer, in both English and Spanish, displaying a picture of Rene Perez and offering a confi-dential hotline number, 914.995.6247, in the effort to draw out informants.
Our Readers Respond...
Dear Editor:
As a result of the failure of her office to respond to my repeated requests for a meeting, I have sent the following open letter to Westchester District Attorney Janet DiFiore:
Westchester County District Attorney Janet DiFiore
Westchester County Courthouse
111 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd
White Plains, New York 10601
May 16, 2007
An Open Letter to District Attorney Janet DiFiore
In the past four months, I have called your office 15 times in an effort to arrange a meeting with you to discuss the Oscar Nedd murder case. All these calls were met with your staff indicating they would get back to me, which they never did. Do these people think this is a game or are they instructed to do this?
Oscar Nedd was a human being who was murdered in White Plains in 1975. His family grieves every day and asks what your office is doing to bring his killer, Joe Fluellen, to justice by putting this case before a Grand Jury. This case cannot be shoved under the rug like the one his killer Joe Fluellen used to carry his body in. Your office is bound by law to see that justice is carried out and, to date, you have failed to do so.
I know that Peter Vivano, the former head of the White Plains Police Detective Division, worked for your office for a brief time. I also know that he poisoned your mind on the facts in this case.
The same Peter Vivano who told the reporter with the Star Ledger that the tiny bit of blood found in Nedd’s room was animal blood when, in fact, there was so much blood in that room the head of Westchester County Forensics said no one could survive with the loss of that amount of blood without a transfusion. He also said it
was human blood, Type AB.
I think you are a step above the former DA, Jeanine Pirro, who should be in jail for what she has done while in office. Just because Oscar Nedd is Black, and the White Plains Police have lost or destroyed evidence is no reason to turn your back on this case. The Nedd family deserves the same justice you would give to a White family who lived in Westchester who lost a loved one to a vicious killer.
Joe Fluellen, who has a 393-page criminal file with the Warner Robbins Police Dept. is due to be released in 2011 or sooner. As indicated in the Las Crucas report he is a hardened criminal and will continue with his life of crime once released.
I ask that you put this case before a Grand Jury and give the Nedd family the justice they deserve
Yours Truly,
Austin Avery
Cc:
The Westchester Guardian
The Journal News
News 12, Cablevision
More on Judges Demand For Enhanced Pay
Dear Editor:
Katherine Wilson’s intrepid May 10 letter in response, The Truth About Most Judges, sums up judicial accountability with interesting, in fact, alarming, mathematical equations. Delineated perks of one hundred thousand dollars and counting, underscore the missing items behind this ‘dire digit need’ of Judith Kaye and fellow robed members. But Ms. Wilson’s letter teaches a far greater lesson and exposes a much plainer truth than this hidden index of judicial benefits, or its unsuspected costs to taxpayers. The numbers just don’t add up.
Judges who want pay for a job they don’t do rob the public of priceless con-fidence and trust in a system of justice.
No matter how you figure it, disuse of due process and case law does not meet the bottom line. According to Webster’s Third New International Unabridged Dictionary, the obscure meaning of Bank is “the bench or seat on which the judges of a court of law sit.” Strange isn’t it? To bank on the public confidence in the judiciary, the judges would have to do an honest day’s work; listen to the litigants’ testimony, read the motion papers, know the rules and the laws, and most especially, apply them. Ms. Wilson’s intimations of the behind the-scenes work desks of Westchester’s judiciary can well explain the large number of appeals crowding the Appellate calendar.
The findings of fact, and conclusions of law, rarely comport with courtroom testimony, the expert reports, even oftentimes, the causes of action. How could they? If the writers of the decisions, orders and judgments are
not present in the courtroom, are not in full view and earshot, how can the writers discern what circumstances and facts particular to a case to consider?
Matrimonial attorneys, Marilyn S. Faust and Charna L. Fuchs, decried in their January 1999 article in Women’s
News, the war that is the matrimonial court where “the laws are not applied consistently and the results vary widely from county to county, within the same courthouse and even in different matters before the same judge.”
Should they, the law clerks, do this task anyway? And, if so, for what, then, are the many judges asking the desired enhanced pay?
One year before Judith Kaye was sworn into the office of Chief Judge, in 1993, the Milonas Commission studied
attorney practice after New York State’s Better Business Bureau received many complaints about attorneys’ abusive practices in matrimonial matters.
The result was a report filed by the Committee which established standards for attorney matrimonial practice, especially with regard to retainers. The retainers had to spell out the terms of the exchange and be agreed upon, signed by both parties, sealed, and delivered to the court clerk for filing. This was to protect the public from attorneys who bilk clients of fair representation and fees.
Judith Kaye, as Chief Judge, appointed Sondra Miller, Associate Justice, Appellate Division, 2nd Department, in July 2005, to head a thirty two-member Commission, composed of eight lawyers, thirteen judges, one doctor, and one Certified Public Accountant, to again access the Matrimonial Parts in New York State.
The Commission issued a report recommending sweeping changes: The selection and education of justices that sit on this Part; the rules and laws applicable to Matrimonial litigation; the regulation of law guardians, and the administration of the legal process.
To quote the Commission: “The issues presented in matrimonial and related matters are numerous and diverse,
requiring the Judge to be knowledgeable about statutory and case law relevant to matrimonial proceedings,
as well as areas of tax, bankruptcy law, the appraisal of commercial assets, realty, enhanced earnings and professional license valuations, among other things. Therefore, the timely, accurate, and just disposition of these
cases depends, to a large degree, on the knowledge, character, temperament, professional aptitude and experience of the judge before whom the matter is presented. The public’s confidence in and respect for the court hinges on the proper selection and retention of judges for these Parts.”
If judges do indeed surrender their stipulated obligations to law clerks, fail to meet their contract with the
public, depart from the accepted, promulgated practice of the Bench, should they be rewarded and receive a raise?
A Pro Se Litigant Who Is Still
Dealing With The System
Erosion of Civil Liberties in America
Dear Editor:
I had to respond after reading the letter of May 17th by an anonymous civil servant whose calls to the federal
corruption hot line went unanswered.
A multi-year civil service employee, I also called the hot line, left a message for a call-back, including my
name, address, phone number. No one returned the call.
In the past, I have reported government corruption to the New York State Commission of Investigation (no response), The New York State Attorney General’s White Plains office -Deborah Scalise, Deputy Attorney General for Public Advocacy returned my substantial packet of documentation stating in effect that I should file my complaint with public officials, the very ones I was accusing of corruption. Westchester County District Attorney Jeanine Pirro – Michael Hughes-Assistant District Attorney, Public Integrity Bureau suggested
I contact the Westchester County attorney’s office with my concerns-the same attorneys would be defending the
county officials being charged.
Three weeks ago I traveled to Alexandria, Virginia to meet with attorneys at The Institute for Justice, a nationwide public interest law firm that pursues cutting-edge litigation in the courts of law and in the court of public opinion on behalf of individuals whose most basic rights are denied by government.
They recently defended Brody v. Village of Port Chester to stop abuse of eminent domain. This trip was to discuss the many county projects that run afoul of a “public benefits doctrine” in the law, which raises questions about whether residents of one part of the county can legally be made to pay for a piece of equipment, service or other investment that will only serve taxpayers in a different area.
The Institute for Justice was most accommodating and helpful, but a very interesting comment by one of the attorneys was, “That the New York State Court System is the worst in which to receive justice or fair trials.”
Unfortunately we no longer have government by and for the People or a separation of powers. For an eye-opening view of how we are being deceived by our government, watch the award-winning Aaron Russo film at http://www.freedomtofascism.com/, a startling examination exposing the systemic erosion of civil liberties in America.
Anthony Futia
North White Plains
The Truth About Mt. Vernon City Gov’t
Dear Editor:
As a Mount Vernon resident and a former City employee, I want to thank you for bringing to light the truth about
the corrupt Ernie Davis Administration.
The Mayor is corrupt but he is protected from being indicted because of political connections with the likes of Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer and Elliot Engle who are more interested in him fooling Mount Vernon residents into voting for them than in the good and welfare of Mount Vernonites. It is a shame and a disgrace! Politicians like Eliot Spitzer, when he was Attorney General and now under the new Westchester DA Janet DiFiore would not investigate Davis even though he is stealing the city blind and passing money through insiders and friends. He is crooked! I read in the papers that money is missing from the urban renewal agency and the federal government does not seem to be investigating this. Ask yourself, “Why not?”
I used to work for the City. The corruption is so thick it is unbelievable. Serapher Conn Helevi is the Democratic
Party chairwoman in Mount Vernon. She endorsed the Mayor for reelection because he made her the City Marshall – she gets a payoff. She and her family also run a moving business where she charges tenants for moving them after she evicts them from their apartments as City Marshall – she gets another payoff. The Mayor gave her a no-bid contract to boot cars when people don’t pay parking tickets – she gets another payoff. Her daughter works for the Mount Vernon Recreation Department – she gets another payoff. Her son, who is Deputy City Marshall and also has a no-show job with the county planning department in the Section 8
program – she gets two more payoffs.
As the Mount Vernon Democratic Party Chairwoman she gave herself the nomination for the seat as county legislator to replace Clinton Young – she gets still another payoff. She plans on holding onto all these positions because the words ‘conflict of interest’ and ‘integrity’ don’t mean anything to her.
A Concerned resident
Dear Editor:
As a result of the failure of her office to respond to my repeated requests for a meeting, I have sent the following open letter to Westchester District Attorney Janet DiFiore:
Westchester County District Attorney Janet DiFiore
Westchester County Courthouse
111 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd
White Plains, New York 10601
May 16, 2007
An Open Letter to District Attorney Janet DiFiore
In the past four months, I have called your office 15 times in an effort to arrange a meeting with you to discuss the Oscar Nedd murder case. All these calls were met with your staff indicating they would get back to me, which they never did. Do these people think this is a game or are they instructed to do this?
Oscar Nedd was a human being who was murdered in White Plains in 1975. His family grieves every day and asks what your office is doing to bring his killer, Joe Fluellen, to justice by putting this case before a Grand Jury. This case cannot be shoved under the rug like the one his killer Joe Fluellen used to carry his body in. Your office is bound by law to see that justice is carried out and, to date, you have failed to do so.
I know that Peter Vivano, the former head of the White Plains Police Detective Division, worked for your office for a brief time. I also know that he poisoned your mind on the facts in this case.
The same Peter Vivano who told the reporter with the Star Ledger that the tiny bit of blood found in Nedd’s room was animal blood when, in fact, there was so much blood in that room the head of Westchester County Forensics said no one could survive with the loss of that amount of blood without a transfusion. He also said it
was human blood, Type AB.
I think you are a step above the former DA, Jeanine Pirro, who should be in jail for what she has done while in office. Just because Oscar Nedd is Black, and the White Plains Police have lost or destroyed evidence is no reason to turn your back on this case. The Nedd family deserves the same justice you would give to a White family who lived in Westchester who lost a loved one to a vicious killer.
Joe Fluellen, who has a 393-page criminal file with the Warner Robbins Police Dept. is due to be released in 2011 or sooner. As indicated in the Las Crucas report he is a hardened criminal and will continue with his life of crime once released.
I ask that you put this case before a Grand Jury and give the Nedd family the justice they deserve
Yours Truly,
Austin Avery
Cc:
The Westchester Guardian
The Journal News
News 12, Cablevision
More on Judges Demand For Enhanced Pay
Dear Editor:
Katherine Wilson’s intrepid May 10 letter in response, The Truth About Most Judges, sums up judicial accountability with interesting, in fact, alarming, mathematical equations. Delineated perks of one hundred thousand dollars and counting, underscore the missing items behind this ‘dire digit need’ of Judith Kaye and fellow robed members. But Ms. Wilson’s letter teaches a far greater lesson and exposes a much plainer truth than this hidden index of judicial benefits, or its unsuspected costs to taxpayers. The numbers just don’t add up.
Judges who want pay for a job they don’t do rob the public of priceless con-fidence and trust in a system of justice.
No matter how you figure it, disuse of due process and case law does not meet the bottom line. According to Webster’s Third New International Unabridged Dictionary, the obscure meaning of Bank is “the bench or seat on which the judges of a court of law sit.” Strange isn’t it? To bank on the public confidence in the judiciary, the judges would have to do an honest day’s work; listen to the litigants’ testimony, read the motion papers, know the rules and the laws, and most especially, apply them. Ms. Wilson’s intimations of the behind the-scenes work desks of Westchester’s judiciary can well explain the large number of appeals crowding the Appellate calendar.
The findings of fact, and conclusions of law, rarely comport with courtroom testimony, the expert reports, even oftentimes, the causes of action. How could they? If the writers of the decisions, orders and judgments are
not present in the courtroom, are not in full view and earshot, how can the writers discern what circumstances and facts particular to a case to consider?
Matrimonial attorneys, Marilyn S. Faust and Charna L. Fuchs, decried in their January 1999 article in Women’s
News, the war that is the matrimonial court where “the laws are not applied consistently and the results vary widely from county to county, within the same courthouse and even in different matters before the same judge.”
Should they, the law clerks, do this task anyway? And, if so, for what, then, are the many judges asking the desired enhanced pay?
One year before Judith Kaye was sworn into the office of Chief Judge, in 1993, the Milonas Commission studied
attorney practice after New York State’s Better Business Bureau received many complaints about attorneys’ abusive practices in matrimonial matters.
The result was a report filed by the Committee which established standards for attorney matrimonial practice, especially with regard to retainers. The retainers had to spell out the terms of the exchange and be agreed upon, signed by both parties, sealed, and delivered to the court clerk for filing. This was to protect the public from attorneys who bilk clients of fair representation and fees.
Judith Kaye, as Chief Judge, appointed Sondra Miller, Associate Justice, Appellate Division, 2nd Department, in July 2005, to head a thirty two-member Commission, composed of eight lawyers, thirteen judges, one doctor, and one Certified Public Accountant, to again access the Matrimonial Parts in New York State.
The Commission issued a report recommending sweeping changes: The selection and education of justices that sit on this Part; the rules and laws applicable to Matrimonial litigation; the regulation of law guardians, and the administration of the legal process.
To quote the Commission: “The issues presented in matrimonial and related matters are numerous and diverse,
requiring the Judge to be knowledgeable about statutory and case law relevant to matrimonial proceedings,
as well as areas of tax, bankruptcy law, the appraisal of commercial assets, realty, enhanced earnings and professional license valuations, among other things. Therefore, the timely, accurate, and just disposition of these
cases depends, to a large degree, on the knowledge, character, temperament, professional aptitude and experience of the judge before whom the matter is presented. The public’s confidence in and respect for the court hinges on the proper selection and retention of judges for these Parts.”
If judges do indeed surrender their stipulated obligations to law clerks, fail to meet their contract with the
public, depart from the accepted, promulgated practice of the Bench, should they be rewarded and receive a raise?
A Pro Se Litigant Who Is Still
Dealing With The System
Erosion of Civil Liberties in America
Dear Editor:
I had to respond after reading the letter of May 17th by an anonymous civil servant whose calls to the federal
corruption hot line went unanswered.
A multi-year civil service employee, I also called the hot line, left a message for a call-back, including my
name, address, phone number. No one returned the call.
In the past, I have reported government corruption to the New York State Commission of Investigation (no response), The New York State Attorney General’s White Plains office -Deborah Scalise, Deputy Attorney General for Public Advocacy returned my substantial packet of documentation stating in effect that I should file my complaint with public officials, the very ones I was accusing of corruption. Westchester County District Attorney Jeanine Pirro – Michael Hughes-Assistant District Attorney, Public Integrity Bureau suggested
I contact the Westchester County attorney’s office with my concerns-the same attorneys would be defending the
county officials being charged.
Three weeks ago I traveled to Alexandria, Virginia to meet with attorneys at The Institute for Justice, a nationwide public interest law firm that pursues cutting-edge litigation in the courts of law and in the court of public opinion on behalf of individuals whose most basic rights are denied by government.
They recently defended Brody v. Village of Port Chester to stop abuse of eminent domain. This trip was to discuss the many county projects that run afoul of a “public benefits doctrine” in the law, which raises questions about whether residents of one part of the county can legally be made to pay for a piece of equipment, service or other investment that will only serve taxpayers in a different area.
The Institute for Justice was most accommodating and helpful, but a very interesting comment by one of the attorneys was, “That the New York State Court System is the worst in which to receive justice or fair trials.”
Unfortunately we no longer have government by and for the People or a separation of powers. For an eye-opening view of how we are being deceived by our government, watch the award-winning Aaron Russo film at http://www.freedomtofascism.com/, a startling examination exposing the systemic erosion of civil liberties in America.
Anthony Futia
North White Plains
The Truth About Mt. Vernon City Gov’t
Dear Editor:
As a Mount Vernon resident and a former City employee, I want to thank you for bringing to light the truth about
the corrupt Ernie Davis Administration.
The Mayor is corrupt but he is protected from being indicted because of political connections with the likes of Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer and Elliot Engle who are more interested in him fooling Mount Vernon residents into voting for them than in the good and welfare of Mount Vernonites. It is a shame and a disgrace! Politicians like Eliot Spitzer, when he was Attorney General and now under the new Westchester DA Janet DiFiore would not investigate Davis even though he is stealing the city blind and passing money through insiders and friends. He is crooked! I read in the papers that money is missing from the urban renewal agency and the federal government does not seem to be investigating this. Ask yourself, “Why not?”
I used to work for the City. The corruption is so thick it is unbelievable. Serapher Conn Helevi is the Democratic
Party chairwoman in Mount Vernon. She endorsed the Mayor for reelection because he made her the City Marshall – she gets a payoff. She and her family also run a moving business where she charges tenants for moving them after she evicts them from their apartments as City Marshall – she gets another payoff. The Mayor gave her a no-bid contract to boot cars when people don’t pay parking tickets – she gets another payoff. Her daughter works for the Mount Vernon Recreation Department – she gets another payoff. Her son, who is Deputy City Marshall and also has a no-show job with the county planning department in the Section 8
program – she gets two more payoffs.
As the Mount Vernon Democratic Party Chairwoman she gave herself the nomination for the seat as county legislator to replace Clinton Young – she gets still another payoff. She plans on holding onto all these positions because the words ‘conflict of interest’ and ‘integrity’ don’t mean anything to her.
A Concerned resident
In Our Opinion...
It’s Time Westchester Law Enforcement Enters The 21st Century
Notwithstanding Deputy County Executive Larry Schwartz, who certainly will concur in the recommendation We now make, if for no other reason than to tremendously expand his sphere of influence, the Rene Perez tragedy, for all of the lessons that will surely emerge from it, from its inception, has made yet another cogent argument for a long-needed Westchester Countywide Police Department.
Clearly the ‘border-dumping’ practice employed by both the Bedford Town, and Mount Kisco Village, Police Departments on the evening of April 28th, that appears, at the very least, to have directly contributed to Rene Perez’ death, would immediately be obviated once the 42 city, town, and village police departments that currently carve up the jurisdiction, collectively known as Westchester County, would be consolidated into one countywide police force.
The patchwork of departments, not including the State Police, and the County Police, that now divide the policing of just under one million Westchester residents, is archaic and duplicative to say the least. Additionally, there are “too many Chiefs, and not enough Indians.” No reasonable individual would argue that there wouldn’t be considerable savings to taxpayers with the elimination of multiple-duplication. Nassau County, some seven miles across Long Island Sound, with 1.3 million residents as compared with Westchester’s just under one million, employs approximately 2,700 County Police Officers working from eight precincts. And, while it is true that some 19 village police departments have continued to function, for the most part, all major felonies, and all major emergencies are responded to by the Nassau County Police.
Without question, if all active personnel in all of the police departments in Westchester County were brought under the command of one countywide department, and the County was divided into eight, or possibly ten, precincts, there would immediately be more officers on the street, more on the roads, and in places of public
accommodation and transportation. Emergency equipment, as well as high technology, would be more readily accessible in all parts of the County, and together with manpower, would be more effectively and efficiently deployed than can presently be accomplished.
As importantly, under one command, one standard of training, and performance, the level of professionalism and excellence with which police officers everywhere in the County would deal with citizens would naturally rise, and
the kind of cronyism and local politics presently so pervasive in most existing local departments would be curtailed and ultimately eliminated. Additionally, the District Attorney’s Office would be held to an equal standard across the board, and the chances of bullying one police department or another, as Jeanine Pirro did for twelve years, would be virtually eliminated. There would be fewer Jeffrey Deskovic, Anthony DiSimone, Jing Kelly, and Richard DiGuglielmo cases, fewer malicious prosecutions, as prosecutors would be held to a higher, more uniform, standard as well.
Yes, for every good reason it’s time law enforcement in Westchester County steps into the Twenty-First Century. The residents and taxpayers deserve both the Constitutional, and financial benefits that will accrue. Perhaps the County Legislature will be willing to establish a committee to explore the potential feasibility,
and benefits of such a consolidation in the near future. Surely, an information campaign, and a referendum placed before County residents, might be constructive. In any event, the whole process is likely to take some time, and the likelihood that Larry Schwartz might still be controlling the reins of County government is very remote, indeed.
It’s Time Westchester Law Enforcement Enters The 21st Century
Notwithstanding Deputy County Executive Larry Schwartz, who certainly will concur in the recommendation We now make, if for no other reason than to tremendously expand his sphere of influence, the Rene Perez tragedy, for all of the lessons that will surely emerge from it, from its inception, has made yet another cogent argument for a long-needed Westchester Countywide Police Department.
Clearly the ‘border-dumping’ practice employed by both the Bedford Town, and Mount Kisco Village, Police Departments on the evening of April 28th, that appears, at the very least, to have directly contributed to Rene Perez’ death, would immediately be obviated once the 42 city, town, and village police departments that currently carve up the jurisdiction, collectively known as Westchester County, would be consolidated into one countywide police force.
The patchwork of departments, not including the State Police, and the County Police, that now divide the policing of just under one million Westchester residents, is archaic and duplicative to say the least. Additionally, there are “too many Chiefs, and not enough Indians.” No reasonable individual would argue that there wouldn’t be considerable savings to taxpayers with the elimination of multiple-duplication. Nassau County, some seven miles across Long Island Sound, with 1.3 million residents as compared with Westchester’s just under one million, employs approximately 2,700 County Police Officers working from eight precincts. And, while it is true that some 19 village police departments have continued to function, for the most part, all major felonies, and all major emergencies are responded to by the Nassau County Police.
Without question, if all active personnel in all of the police departments in Westchester County were brought under the command of one countywide department, and the County was divided into eight, or possibly ten, precincts, there would immediately be more officers on the street, more on the roads, and in places of public
accommodation and transportation. Emergency equipment, as well as high technology, would be more readily accessible in all parts of the County, and together with manpower, would be more effectively and efficiently deployed than can presently be accomplished.
As importantly, under one command, one standard of training, and performance, the level of professionalism and excellence with which police officers everywhere in the County would deal with citizens would naturally rise, and
the kind of cronyism and local politics presently so pervasive in most existing local departments would be curtailed and ultimately eliminated. Additionally, the District Attorney’s Office would be held to an equal standard across the board, and the chances of bullying one police department or another, as Jeanine Pirro did for twelve years, would be virtually eliminated. There would be fewer Jeffrey Deskovic, Anthony DiSimone, Jing Kelly, and Richard DiGuglielmo cases, fewer malicious prosecutions, as prosecutors would be held to a higher, more uniform, standard as well.
Yes, for every good reason it’s time law enforcement in Westchester County steps into the Twenty-First Century. The residents and taxpayers deserve both the Constitutional, and financial benefits that will accrue. Perhaps the County Legislature will be willing to establish a committee to explore the potential feasibility,
and benefits of such a consolidation in the near future. Surely, an information campaign, and a referendum placed before County residents, might be constructive. In any event, the whole process is likely to take some time, and the likelihood that Larry Schwartz might still be controlling the reins of County government is very remote, indeed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
