YONKERS, NY: Andrea Stewart-Cousins and Shelley Mayer Call For Passage Of Civil Confinement Law

Last Thursday, Andrea Stewart-Cousins, candidate for State Senate in the 35th District, and Shelley Mayer running for State Assembly in the 93rd District, held a joint press conference in front of the Westchester County Courthouse to renew their call for immediate passage of a strong Civil Confinement Statute to deal with dangerous sexual offenders.

Former United States Attorney Denise O’Donnell accompanied the candidates, making an introductory statement that the passage of a civil confinement statute, “is not a law enforcement
issue.”

Declaring, “It’s the fault of the Legislature that we do not have the legislation we need,” O’Donnell endorsed Mayer for Assembly and Stewart-Cousins for State Senate, as “the people we need to breakup the gridlock and get the bill passed.”

Repeatedly stressing that the Senate and Assembly versions of the bill are very similar, candidate Mayer, a former Assistant Attorney General, asked, “When we have two bills that are very close, why can’t we get the bill
passed?” Mayer concluded, “We simply need the Assembly and the Senate to get together.”

Andrea Stewart-Cousins, stepping up to the podium, remarked, “Amongst the many bills Governor Pataki will be signing today, there is one bill that is not on the Governor’s desk, the Civil Confinement Law.” She continued,

“Failure to enact that legislation is unacceptable because we must make some Due Process occur for people who pose a danger to our families. They must be processed and assessed.”

Railing against “the dysfunctional Legislature,” and “Albany Gridlock,” Stewart-Cousins opined, “Despite two bills that are very similar we still do not have a bill that can be passed.”

She responded to a reporter who asked “If you’re elected as a Democrat, will you face gridlock given the dominance of Republicans in the State Senate?” Stewart-Cousins observed,

“Change happens when you change the people. When I arrive in Albany, the message will be loud and clear. The People will have spoken, and I will be working closely with a new Democratic Governor, and together we will help bring about change.”

WESCHESTER GUARDIAN: Court Orders Judge To Reunite Jing Kelly And Son Kidnapping Arranged By DA Jeanine Pirro.

Jing Kelly, the Chinese-American mother who fled to China with her six-month-old son Tristram, more than five years ago, will finally be re-united with that child, now six, under a Mandamus issued August 3rd by the Appellate Division, First Department, of New York State Supreme Court. The Mandamus, a rare judicial action, essentially commands New York County Family Court Judge Sara P. Schechter to immediately comply with an order previously issued by the same court on November 17th of last year calling for the immediate commencement of visitation between mother and child.

Jing, who was married to Craig Kelly, a disgraced former assistant district attorney in New York County, was the victim of severe domestic violence at his hands. Testimony at her criminal trial in Westchester County Court, three years ago, revealed in sworn testimony that he had been physically abusive, demanding genital and oral sex from Jing, at gunpoint, the night after she came home from the hospital with their newborn son. It was further revealed that Craig had a serious alcohol addiction, and was frequenting prostitutes.

Craig’s reckless conduct produced a serious vaginal infection that threatened Jing’s health for months, at a time when she needed most to nurture and care for their infant son. However, her fears for her own safety were not nearly as compelling as her concerns for Tristram, who she quickly discovered could not be safely left, even for brief periods, in his father’s care. One incident, brought out at trial, detailed her horror, upon returning from a brief trip to the store, to find Craig passed out from intoxication, and their son, less than two months old, laying unattended, and smelling from beer.

The relationship quickly deteriorated with numerous incidents of physical and psychological injury to Jing, resulting in frequent police visits which were most often distorted and turned around by Craig’s badge and overreaching influence. After several such incidents, over a period of many weeks, Jing and Craig, who had been seen in Family Court, were separated, with Craig moving out of the apartment. However, despite that arrangement, an overzealous, inexperienced ACS worker ripped Tristram from his mother’s arms in the presence of his maternal grandmother despite their tearful pleas.

Family Court Judge Sara P. Schechter then arranged for temporary custody of the infant by Craig’s sister, Tristram’s paternal aunt, Larchmont Attorney Gail Hiler. Under the court order each parent was entitled to supervised visitation, neither permitted to reside with him. However, Gail Hiler and Craig soon violated those terms when Craig moved into Hiler’s home, thus living full-time with the child.

Jing continued to abide by the terms of the court order, traveling to Larchmont from Manhattan by train. As weeks rolled by, according to court testimony, Jing would find her infant son constantly sick, and with progressively more physical injury. Additionally, Gail Hiler repeatedly complained to her that caring for Tristram was working a serious hardship on her marriage and her relationship with her husband Jim, also a lawyer.

Finally, no longer able to tolerate her son’s deteriorating condition, and fearful of his exposure to alcohol and tobacco from constant contact with his father, Jing used the occasion of her last visit to abscond with her son to China.

Enter Jeanine Pirro. Mrs. Pirro, then District Attorney of Westchester County, under a questionable theory of jurisdiction, given the fact that the only criminal act occurred in Queens County, when Jing boarded a plane at John F. Kennedy Airport, proceeded to arrange for the insertion of Jing Kelly into New York State’s Twelve Most Wanted, amongst murderers, rapists, and thieves. The woman who would have us believe that she is a “victim’s advocate,” then circulated the poster on the Internet and in neighborhoods in Manhattan where Jing and her elderly parents were known to frequent,

Jing and Tristram remained in China for eighteen months, during which time Craig Kelly passed away from a gastrointestinal illness. Mrs. Pirro then proceeded to make contact, through the Mamaroneck Police Department, the United States Embassy in China, and Chinese authorities, promising Jing that she would not be arrested if she returned to New York with her son.

Jing who had only fled to China because of her fears for Tristram’s wellbeing, involving his father, realizing that the harm she feared might come to her son was no longer possible, and accepting Mrs. Pirro’s promise at face value, now boarded a plane, with Tristram, bound for New York, by way of Vancouver Canada. However, Mrs. Pirro, who claims to be a victim’s advocate, was busy arranging with authorities everywhere, including Vancouver, to have Jing arrested on sight, detained, and separated from her two-year-old son. That was more than 4 years ago, and Jing and Tristram have been allowed absolutely no contact since, despite the fact that it has never been alleged that Jing had done anything harmful to him.

On the day following her arrest, and forced separation from her son, Jing Kelly’s baby, under arrangements made by DA Jeanine Pirro with Canadian authorities, was taken, literally kidnapped, by Gail Hiler, a person with no legal authority, no parole custody certificate, nothing other than a vindictive desire to keep a Chinese-American woman, who her brother had married, apart from her infant son.

Mrs. Pirro, to insure that Jing would remain out of the picture, knowingly over-charged her with Felony Custodial Interference, and demanded that she be held without bail, on the trumped-up claim that she was a “flight risk.” Mrs. Pirro knew perfectly well that with Tristram held in custody, Jing was not going anywhere. After 14 months in the Westchester County Jail, Jing was tried by a jury of her peers before Judge Barbara Zambelli, and found guilty only of Misdemeanor Custodial Interference.

Immediately released by Zambelli, having served many more months than she could possibly have been sentenced to for a mere misdemeanor, Jing Kelly has been struggling for nearly three years to regain contact with, and ultimately, custody of, her now six-year-old son. The most recent action by the Appellate Division, several days ago, would appear, finally, to signal a major reversal of the injustice and conspiracy that have maliciously kept Jing and Tristram Kelly apart. Hopefully this development will bring to an end the grief and outrageous mistreatment of a loving mother and child by the malicious prosecutorial misconduct and civil rights violations worked against them by DA Jeanine Pirro.

WESTCHESTER GUARDIAN: Judge Charles Brieant: A Profile In Dedication

The Court Report - By Richard Blassberg

Last month, July, marked the 35th anniversary of the appointment of Westchester’s own Federal District Court Judge, Charles Brieant. Appointed by President Richard Nixon, for many years Brieant was the only Federal Judge in the County. Judge Brieant agreed to give the GUARDIAN an interview at 8:00AM, in chambers.

Amongst several portraits of past prominent Jurists and political leaders adorning the walls of Brieant’s chambers, most impressive to this reporter was a large group photo of all of the young law school graduates who had interned over the past thirty-five years with the Judge, nearly three dozen in all. Brieant pointed out several indicating, with a paternal pride, the prominent public and private positions they had attained.

I asked, for openers, “How would you characterize the single most noticeable difference in the types of actions coming before you today, as opposed to when you were first appointed?” Brieant quickly responded, “There’s a tremendous difference in the types of cases. It has become the Court of Working People.” He went on to explain, “Back then we had many maritime and stock fraud cases. Now we see a lot of employment cases, discrimination.”

He went on, “We still get patent cases, employment disputes, civil rights, and criminal cases. Where we were once the Court of High Finance and the High Seas, we’ve become the Court of the People.” To further emphasize his point, Brieant revealed that some thirty percent of filers are pro se, availing themselves of electronic research and filing.

Brieant then turned to another aspect of change, the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, evoking the statement, “Congress attempted to cure a problem they didn’t understand. They tried to make a national sentencing scheme.” He went on to explain that the net result of the guidelines has been more guilty pleas and far fewer trials.

Realizing that he had been in college during World War II, I asked if his schooling had been interrupted. Brieant related that he had entered the Army Air Corps, serving in Guam with the 351st servicing B-29 bombers. Returning from the war he quickly finished up his undergraduate work and made up for lost time completing law school in a remarkable twenty-four months.

Brieant, and both of his parents were born and raised in Ossining. His dad was a physician. Charles, however, was more interested in politics, and the law. At age sixteen he was working in the campaigns of local politicians. And, by twentyeight he ran successfully for Town Justice, defining his career path very early on.

Asked how, if at all, being a federal judge has influenced his private life, the Judge quickly responded, “I had to give up my private practice, and had to work much harder.”

Judge Brieant then recalled the near-fatal consequences to his wife when a disgruntled individual, unhappy with his ruling, sent poisoned chocolates to her. Attempting to turn to more pleasant memories I asked, “Looking back over the years what would you describe as the most gratifying aspect of your life’s work?”

Brieant responded, without hesitation, “helping people resolve their problems.” He went on to say that his work was made easier and more pleasant, “working with young law clerks who brought a modern outlook, and dealing with something different every day.”

With the clock well past 9:00AM, and mindful that the Judge would need to be taking the bench shortly, I dropped one last question on him, asking, “Years from now, when judicial historians reflect upon your many years of service to the citizens of the Southern District of New York, how would you prefer to be remembered?”

Brieant’s first response was, “My work was up to date,” quickly followed by, “due mainly to my loyal conscientious staff.” Then, pausing for a moment to re-flect, he offered, “Remembered that I cared and wanted to help people.”

As one who has sat in his courtroom, and read several of his decisions, I believe the good Judge will get his wish.

WESTCHESTER GUARDIAN: Our Readers Respond - Westchester public affairs

Dear Editor:

After reading Richard Blassberg’s “Pirro’s Internet Sex ‘Stink’” in the August 10th issue of TheWestchester Guardian, all I can say is congratulations to the Appellate Division, Second Department, of the State Supreme Court for their decision. They gave Jeanine Pirro a much-needed slap across the face or, as Mr. Blassberg put it in his article, they “effectively pulled the rug” from under her, “literally tossing her self-promotional career, together with her quest for the State’s Attorney General’s Office, into the wastebasket.” We certainly don’t
need her in that job!

Maybe when we next see Jeanine Pirro she will be on trial for the abuses she allegedly committed while Westchester District Attorney. It’s too bad, though, she can’t be tried for tax fraud, as her husband was,
since the statue of limitations has run out. But then, if the IRS was smart, they’d audit their returns for the past few years. Maybe there’ll be some more surprises!

It’s interesting to note that Jeanine Pirro was my criminal law instructor when I attended the Paralegal Studies Program at Mercy College in the early ‘80s. Even though she was only my instructor for a few weeks, her professionalism and expertise gained my respect. I guess it’s true what they say - first impressions can be very misleading.

Name Withheld

In Our Opinion...

We are calling upon the United States Department of Justice to provide monitors and U.S. Marshals for the upcoming election for State Senate in the 35th Senatorial District, to insure a fair and totally honest outcome. After all, if citizens cannot be absolutely certain that the electoral process, as guaranteed by the Constitution, is alive and well, and uncorrupted, there can be no certainty that any of their Constitutional Rights are guaranteed. The 35th District is comprised of most of the City of Yonkers, and the towns of Greenburgh and Mount Pleasant.

At this time, we are not saying that either Nick Spano or Andrea Stewart-Cousins, or any persons associated with their campaigns, engaged in any unlawful practices before, during, or following their contest in 2004, an election that produced the longest disputed result in New York State history. Nevertheless, there can be no ignoring of the fact that on the first canvass of results, on Election Night, 23 voting machines, all in Yonkers, were all misread in favor of one candidate, NickSpano, to the tune of 1,672 votes that he never received.

The mathematical odds of such an occurrence resulting from mere random chance are 8,388,608 to 1.

Clearly, both Spano, and Stewart-Cousins should welcome such monitoring by the Justice Department if, for no other reason, to avoid the cloud of suspicion that hung over their last ‘go at it.’ Surely, the victor will want to be perceived as having been elected fairly, and squarely. And, given their last marathon debacle, only a sufficient number of monitors and marshals can restore the public’s confidence in the process, especially in light of recent accusations against the Bush administration’s perceived interference with, and influence over, the Justice Department’s handling of alleged serious election fraud issues in Florida, Ohio, Alabama, and elsewhere following the elections of 2000 and 2004.

Specifically, monitors and enforcement personnel will be required to closely observe, and regulate, the activities near, and at, polling places, as regards the conduct of ballot casting, recording, and reporting, of results on both the first, and second, canvass. Additionally, they will be needed to scrutinize the proper handling of voters, and the numerous issues that invariably arise at polling places, particularly in hotly contested races.

Some individuals might question whether the federal government, specifically the Justice Department, can afford to get involved in ensuring the integrity of a local race, that might produce little more than 100,000 votes. We would remind those persons of the axiom “all politics is local,” and suggest that the Justice Department cannot afford to not get involved.

Finally, Joseph Stalin, infamous, iron-handed, ruler of the former Soviet Union once remarked, “Those who vote determine nothing; those who count the vote determine everything.”

YONKERS INSIDER: Spencer Vs. McFarland Debate

Spencer Vs. McFarland Debate.

The Spencer Vs. McFarland debate had two clueless candidates & could not confuse the public with the Lincoln-Douglas debates. Senator Clinton has nothing to worry about with these two candidates. They are attacking each other. These candidates have no issues or substance. They just have throwing mud at each other. Scary, but this is what the State GOP has become. A party that stands for nothing & is more like the State Democratic Party everyday. We need a party & candidates who stand for something & not against somebody personally.

The Yonkers Insider

ATTORNEY GENERAL CANDIDATE ANDREW CUOMO ENDORSED BY COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA.

Praises Cuomo as “Best Qualified Candidate to Succeed Eliot Spitzer”.

Cuomo Seeks AFL-CIO Endorsement at Next Week’s Convention.

New York, NY (August 10, 2006) – New York State Attorney General candidate Andrew Cuomo today received the support of the Communications Workers of America (CWA) District 1 which represents 75,000 workers statewide.

Today’s boost of support from the CWA, part of the AFL-CIO, arrives on the eve of the AFL-CIO convention in Albany at which the 2.3 million-member labor organization will endorse a candidate to succeed Eliot Spitzer as Attorney General. Andrew has fought hard to safeguard worker protections and has said he would put the aggressive enforcement of New York’s labor laws at the top of his agenda. Andrew believes that the AFL-CIO’s support would be critical because it reflects the voices of more than 2 million hard-working and middle class families across the state.

“Andrew Cuomo is far and away the best qualified candidate to succeed Eliot Spitzer as New York's next Attorney General,” said Chris Shelton, Vice President, CWA District 1. “Andrew has been an amazing champion for the rights and dignity of all workers. He has an outstanding record of results standing up for working families against discrimination, predatory banks, mortgage scams and waste, fraud and abuse in government. We look forward to working with Attorney General Cuomo to make New Yorker a better place for workers, consumers and all New Yorkers.”

“I am proud to have the support of the Communications Workers of America (CWA) which represents thousands of hard-working families,” said Andrew Cuomo, candidate for New York State Attorney General. “I would be honored to earn the AFL-CIO endorsement because it speaks for the needs and priorities of millions of working and middle class New Yorkers. As Attorney General, I will work day in and day out to protect workers’ rights and dignity. I will take on the powerful institutions that put profits over people and the federal government when it fails our families. I will be New Yorkers’ toughest advocate.”

NEW YORK STATE: Tasini for US Senate Press Release

Tasini for US Senate Press Release.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

AUGUST 10, 2006

STATEMENT BY SENATE CANDIDATE JONATHAN TASINI REGARDING HILLARY ClINTON'S QUICK MAKE-OVER AND COVER-UP.

New York, NY - Progressive Democratic Senate Candidate Jonathan Tasini released the following statement today at his press conference on the steps of City Hally in Manhattan: The movement to take back the Democratic Party from the Democratic Leadership Council and the leaders of the party who lead us to defeat every election has been underway for a number of years. The DLC has not only failed the party, it has failed the people of this country by advocating policies that have lead to death and destruction in the world, an out-of-control corporate world populated by leaders whose personal greed has destroyed companies and, at times, threatened sectors of the country with instability, and a widening gap between rich and poor.

The election results in Connecticut are another expression of the desire voters have for change. They rejected a three-term Democrat whose support for an immoral war has caused grave damage to our country, diplomatically and economically. That vote had, at its core, a larger message: something is amiss in our country and pro-war, pro-corporate Democrats must be held accountable for their votes and actions. The signs of this movement, though not noticed by the national media, have been around for some time. Earlier this year, my friend Marcy Winograd, an activist and school teacher, took 38 percent of the vote in a three-month primary campaign against the pro-war Democrat Jane Harman.

Marcy’s campaign is the model for my campaign and is a model for the democratic model voters desperately want to see: grassroots, authentic, unafraid to speak the truth even if it isn’t popular and financed by small donations. Hillary Clinton is not telling the truth to the voters of New York. In recent days, Hillary Clinton is performing a quick makeover and cover-up act. And I think it’s clear why. She does not want to be dragged down by the new political pariah of the Democratic Party, Joe Lieberman.

On the war and on other significant issues, Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman are ideological soulmates. Both Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman voted for this immoral war. Both Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman continued to support the war and the occupation that have killed 2,600 of our men and women in uniform and tens of thousands of Iraqis. Both Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman have guaranteed every New Yorker that they will pay more in taxes or suffer cuts in valuable social programs because of their vote for a war that will cost $1 trillion to $2 trillion. Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman both support so-called “free trade.”

They both believe NAFTA was a good thing—a policy which has cost our state thousands of good-paying, unionized jobs. Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman are both major recipients of money from corporate interests. Actually, my opponent outstrips even Lieberman in the amount of money she has pocketed from lobbyists, ranking only behind Rick Santorum for that dubious honor. I agree with Ned Lamont that there are too many lobbyists in Washington—and Hillary Clinton is apparently their best friend. My opponent’s well-orchestrated bit of political theater last week in the Senate should not fool voters. Sen. Clinton’s criticism of Donald Rumsfeld, just before the Connecticut primary, was done for one purpose and one purpose only—to try to fool the voters and cover-up the incumbent’s unconscionable vote for the Iraq War, which has lead to the death of tens of thousands of people. She does not want voters to see that she has continued to support the occupation.

Voters of New York have a choice: do you want to vote for the incumbent, who believes that the problem with the Iraq war is its management? Do you believe that the problem is that we have not run the war efficiently and that we needed to endanger more of our troops and waste more money on this illegal war, as the incumbent apparently believes? Or do you want to vote for someone who believes the war was wrong from the outset, should never have been fought and was an unnecessary waste of human life and valuable economic resources?

That is my view. Voters in New York should be given the chance to choose between two very different visions of where to take our country: one is the path of pre-emptive war that only breeds more hate of the United States, creates more terrorists who want to strike our country and leads to violence and death.

That is the vision of Sen. Clinton, a vision that had made our country less safe and more vulnerable. My vision of our foreign policy is quite different: we should not take military action against countries that pose no threat to us—and Iraq was no threat to our country and had nothing to do with September 11th. You have to be smart in a volatile world when fighting religious, fundamentalist, extremist terrorism: we need a diplomatic, intelligent, forceful campaign that unites the world against extremists.

The Iraq war did the opposite. I renew my August 2nd call to Sen. Clinton to participate in a series of debates between now and September 12th. We have received no response to our proposal. And the incumbent is even snubbing the League of Women Voters, the gold standard for civic, democratic participation. I also renew my call to NY1 to drop its undemocratic criteria that is preventing my participation in the Augusts 22nd Town Hall meeting.

As Newsday editorialized yesterday, “It's too bad NY1 refuses to change its rules for allowing candidates to appear on televised debates. The qualifications - which include raising more money than many insurgents can manage - mean that Sen. Hillary Clinton can duck a debate with anti-war activist Jon Tasini.

He amassed thousands of signatures to get on the ballot, no easy task. Clinton and NY1 should lighten up and let the voters get a look at both candidates - together.”

Let’s have the debate and let the voters decide.

posted by Roundup Newswires.com Editor Brian Harrod 

YONKERS, NY: Delfim Heusler For New York State Senate in the 35th District

Delfim Heusler For New York State Senate in the 35th District.

If elected, candidate Heusler will work toward:

• Tax Reform
• Tougher Immigration laws against Illegal Aliens
• Stop Corporate Welfare
• Provide legislation restricting the governments abuse of Eminent Domain
• Protecting people’s Constitutional Rights
• Court Reform
• Ethics Reform
• Stop taxpayer money used as petty cash (member items) by Legislators
• Open & transparent Albany Government
• Provide legislation limiting the lobbying power of state employee coalitions and special interest groups.
• Return government to its original purpose in representing the people.

If you want to join Heusler's Fight, Email: heuslerforsenate@yahoo.com

WESTCHESTER GUARDIAN: Our Readers Respond

To the Editor:

For more than four years since the death of my nephew, Robert Viscome, those who loved and miss him dearly have endured much pain made the more unbearable by the existence of too many unanswered questions. In breaking my public silence I want to make it clear that I speak for myself only, moved to do so by the words of a campaign spokesperson for Jeanine Pirro.

Replying to a reporter’s question regarding her acceptance of thousands of dollars from beer and alcohol companies, he said, and I quote, “THE LAST TIME I CHECKED, PROHIBITION ENDED.” That was such a cold and callous statement from the camp of the woman who was so quick to try and use teen drinking as another venue to sell herself and her misguided, self-serving crusade against underage drinking.

Robert was left to die like a dog on the side of the road, two doors away from Pirro’s own home while more than 20 young adults made a conscious decision not to call for emergency medical assistance, because of their concern about the alcohol and drug evidence they chose to instead clean up. I want to point out the incredible insensitivity of Mrs. Pirro from that day to this, with regard to our loss.

It was disgraceful enough that she never prosecuted those young adults, not even seeking community service. Most people have come to believe that her daughter played a role in that decision. So now I am asking Mrs. Pirro a simple question seeking a simple yes or no answer. “Was your daughter at the Porzio residence at any time that dreadful afternoon?”

Four years ago, Mrs. Pirro was the CRUSADER against teenage alcohol abuse. Now she accepts their campaign contributions. What kind of message does that send? For an individual who states that she is passionate for crime victims, and that she knows the ethical way to handle a crime, Mrs. Pirro certainly does not appear to understand the difference between two simple words, RIGHT and WRONG.

Shortly after Robert’s passing, Mrs. Pirro began a campaign to rescue her image, not by going after those who played a direct role in his death, but by creating a smokescreen of concern about under-aged drinking with a series of well-circulated, premeditated public relation blitzes. It was not about getting to and exposing the facts.

Everyone involved in Robert’s death, from the young adults to those who were elected to serve the public, Police Chief Dave Hall to Judge John Voetsch, and everyone in between, all walk around haunted by their actions and lack of accountability. There’s no getting even. This was never about getting even. This is about two very simple words that Mrs. Pirro does not seem to understand, RIGHT and WRONG.

Ray Viscome
West Harrison

To the Editor:

Is the recent rotation in the matrimonial part historic or novel? Does anybody know what was contained in the reports of Inspector General Spatz?

Name Withheld

In Our Opinion....

In our opinion, there’s been entirely too much conjecture over the last few years, regarding the ultimate solution, to the crumbling and congested Tappan Zee Bridge. While experts and politicians have weighed in, may of them, numerous times, projected costs have continued to rise and conditions have continued to deteriorate.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to conclude that there is, in fact, a workable solution, one for which there is a model. The site of the Newburgh Beacon Bridges, just 30 miles up river, once posed a similar problem,
throughout the 1970’s. The original span, consisted of one lane of traf-fic in each direction, totally adequate, until the completion of Interstate 84, in 1971, when it quickly became an unbelievable bottleneck.

After years of suffering, it was ultimately determined that a second bridge would have to be constructed adjacent to the original. Upon completion of the new span, a three lane artery from West to East, it became possible to convert the old span to a three lane artery, once the center median was eliminated, with traffic flowing in the opposite direction. The net result was three-fold increase in roadway capacity.

While many of the proposals, to date, including a tunnel, or a new supersized bridge with, a railroad, may appear to offer a solution, they come with totally unacceptable price tags, and with equally unacceptable ecological consequences. Therefore, we believe the time for mulling over the situation has passed. It is equally urgent that we both promptly construct an additional right of way, a new bridge, and perform major rehablitiation on the existing one. That’s our opinion, what’s yours?

as for perennial Sue Kelly

Representative Sue Kelly, Chairwoman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on oversight and investigations, up to four weeks ago, had strongly supported the Bush Administration’s aggressive interdiction
of terrorist financial resources. Declaring that her record would strongly suggest support for a “sophisticated and aggressive program” such as the Administration has been pursuing, she, nevertheless, made an abrupt turn-about when she opened a hearing with, “Many in Congress who should have been briefed by this Administration
were not.”

The Congresswoman would appear to be responding to her changing constituency, and to the very real possibility of a Democratic landslide in New York this fall. She is obviously attempting to re-align herself with Democrats, and some liberal Republicans who have been speaking out against perceived Due Process and Separation of Powers violations under this president. Just how successful this late tactic will prove to be will be discovered come November 7th.

WESTCHESTER GUARDIAN: Investigative Journalism - A Newspaper’s Finest Hour

The Advocate - by Richard Blassberg

In a democracy government has the obligation to conduct its business in accordance with the prevailing rules of lawful conduct. In the United States that set of rules is our Federal Constitution, the contract to which the governed, and those who would govern, have agreed to adhere. In essence, those who would enforce the law, must live by it.

It was no coincidence that the Founding Fathers placed a very high priority on the guaranty of a free and unfettered Press, and, in fact, made that right one of the subjects of the first of ten amendments to the constitution, comprising the Bill of Rights. Under the First Amendment, that established freedom of speech and association, the right to a free and independent press was specifically guaranteed, thus ensuring a perpetual “watchdog” over the activities of government.

It’s the primary responsibility, indeed, the mandate, of a free press, as protected under the First Amendment, to vigilantly observe and report the conduct of government, without favor or exception. Not since Daniel Ellsberg
and the “Pentagon Papers,” in the 1970’s have we seen such controversy over the Times, or any newspaper’s exposure of the federal government’s unconstitutional and illegal activity.

Unfortunately, whether for reasons of rivalry and competition, or simply their failure to perceive the underlying threat to our free society posed by a culpable, muted press, major New York newspapers, The Post, and The
Daily News, have attacked the Old Gray Lady as treasonous and disloyal, for exposing the Administration’s unlawful, covert activities in their attempt to track the finances of persons suspected of supporting terrorism.

Thomas Sowell, a Post columnist who can usually be counted upon for a reasonable approach in such matters, went so far as to refer to “The Times’ Anti-Patriots,” insisting, “Americans may be dying” because of what terrorists have learned from them.

Sowell attacks “the public’s right to know” as a mere hollow excuse, and naively dismisses any notion that terrorist operatives might well have suspected that their money transfers were under American government
surveillance. He cites the revelation during World War II, by the Chicago Tribune that the United States had figured out the Japanese Code, as a comparable betrayal of an important government secret. He then, incredibly
remarks, “Fortunately, for this country, the Japanese didn’t read the Tribune, or didn’t believe it.”

What Thomas Sowell, and others who espouse his position, should know from history, is that in a free society those who represent themselves as observers and reporters of critical newsworthy events, cannot presume
to manage the news, to pick and choose that which they believe their readers have a right, or a need to know. Government at every level, not merely the administration in Washington; police departments, for example can
always be counted upon to attempt to justify their unlawful activities and abuse of power in the name of public safety and security.

Today it’s the War On Terrorism. Thirty years ago, at the time of the Pentagon Papers, it was the Vietnam War. And, thirty years before that, it was the unlawful internment of Japanese-Americans during World War
II. The simple fact is that no enemy of the United States, Japanese, North Vietnamese, or Muslim Terrorist, should ever be vested with the power to deny American citizens their Constitutionally guaranteed right to know, by a free press that would culpably conspire to conceal the unlawful activities of their own government in the name of loyalty or patriotism.

WESTCHESTER GUARDIAN: Menendez Sentenced in Rape, Murder From Tragedy Comes All-Too-Familiar Message

The Court Report By Richard Blassberg

Westchester County Court, White Plains - Judge Barbara Zambelli Presiding

White Plains, July 25- Ariel Menendez, 28, having been found guilty, on May 29th, of the brutal rape and murder of 17-year-old Elizabeth Butler, a year earlier, appeared for sentencing by County Court Judge Barbara Zambelli
before a packed courtroom. More than thirty relatives and friends of the young North Salem High School senior had come seeking closure, and some relief from their grief. However, Menendez, convicted of two counts of Murder, Rape, and Criminal Sexual Act, had come with his own agenda.

When asked by Judge Zambelli if he wished to make a statement, Defendant Menendez, standing beside his Legal Aid Attorney Harvey Loeb, spoke out angrily, “Of course I do.” Wasting no time, he acknowledged
how much he hated his victim’s family, and then proceeded to prove it by torturing them with his version of the circumstances involved in his taking of Elizabeth’s life. Still insisting that they had engaged in consensual sex, declaring, “We both agreed to it,” he went on to describe, in agonizing detail, how they then began arguing, and he proceeded to strangle and stab her to death.

Many in the courtroom, devastated by the stark, matter-of-fact, account began weeping. As Menendez went on, suggesting that he had been mistreated, his victim’s father, no longer able to contain himself, shouted, “Shut up.” At that point the Defendant turned to face the Butler Family cursing repeatedly until court officers succeeded in ushering him from the courtroom. The proceedings were then adjourned for about fifteen minutes.

Prior to Menendez, Patricia Butler, the victim’s mother had delivered a statement in which she shared with the Court the impact that her daughter’s killing had had upon her family. Perhaps more objectively and calmly
than most mothers in her situation might have been able to, Mrs. Butler acknowledged Menendez’ misguided feelings about his own victimization, telling him firmly, “You are a sociopath without a conscience.” And,
following with, “If you can’t have something you destroy it.”

Having used the brief adjournment time to deal with another matter involving the release of a Legal Aid attorney from the case of another defendant, and the assumption of the case by a privately retained counsel, Zambelli called for Menendez to be returned to the courtroom for the resumption of his sentencing. ADAs Perrone and Branca-Santos, who had successfully prosecuted the case, now returned to the Prosecution table as the Defendant rejoined Defense Attorney Loeb.

Declaring, “Mr. Menendez, you raped strangled, and stabbed Elizabeth Butler to death, and have shown no remorse,” Zambelli then proceeded, straight away, to sentence Menendez. “For Count One, First Degree Rape,
I sentence you to a determinate twenty-five years, plus five years of post release supervision, and registration as a sex offender. For Count Two, Second Degree Murder, I sentence you to Life Without Possibility of Parole. For
Count Three, Criminal Sex Act, I sentence you to Twenty-Five Years. And, for the Fourth Count, First Degree Murder, I sentence you to Life Without Possibility of Parole.” The pronouncement of sentence completed, Elizabeth Butler’s family and friends broke into a spontaneous round of applause.

June 5th of last year Ariel Menendez, then 27, who had been dating Elizabeth Butler, a seventeen-year-old North Salem High School senior, enraged that she had attempted to break off her relationship with him, gained entry to the Butler’s SUV and attacked her. The incident occurred in the parking lot near the Hygrade Market, across from the Croton Falls Rail Road station, where Elizabeth worked part-time and where she had met Menendez a year earlier.

Tragically, her lifeless, savaged, body was discovered by her parents. The heinous crime had sent shockwaves
through the normally peaceful Northern Westchester community, the circumstances, perhaps giving brief pause for thought to parents regarding the company kept by their teen-aged children.

Analysis:

If Elizabeth’s life, and her family’s bitter loss, are not to be in vain, we must all give more than brief pause to
consideration of their all-too-common plight. There are those who might ask how it was that someone the likes
of Ariel Menendez could manage to work his way into a seven-month relationship with Elizabeth? And, Mrs. Butler openly admitted that she wished she could have done more to protect her. However, those who have raised a daughter through the teenaged years, and into adulthood, know only too well how vulnerable adolescent girls may truly be.

At sixteen and seventeen girls are physically, hormonally, and emotionally thrust into a very different circumstance than they have ever experienced. For some there is a strong need to receive attention, to love and be loved. 
Often those needs make such young women, particularly vulnerable to older, possibly predatory, males. Just beginning to find their confidence socially, adolescent girls may find the attention of older males, flattering, encouraging, and fun. They are too busy exploring relationships, sex, and sometimes drugs, and/or alcohol to question, or even be aware of, the possible motives of older companions.

As parents we must never lose sight of the fact that our most important role in life is parenting. One cannot be too careful of who it is that our kids are hanging with when they’re not at home. Still, try as we might to be involved,
and yet not too overbearing, it’s a very narrow line that must be walked. Sometimes it’s difficult to make seventeen-year-old girls, in love, see what we see in their boyfriends, and pushing too hard may only make the forbidden fruit appear the more sweet. Given that Elizabeth had already decided that she was no longer interested in Ariel Menendez, to that extent her parents had done all that they might. Unfortunately, nobody could foresee the depth of this predator’s dark side.

WESTCHESTER GUARDIAN: Pirro’s Internet Sex “Stink”

Two weeks ago the Appellate Division, Second Department, of State Supreme Court, effectively pulled the rug from beneath Jeanine Pirro, literally tossing her self-promotional career, together with her quest for the State Attorney General’s Office, into the waste basket. In throwing out the indictment and conviction of Jeffrey Kozlow, Indictment # 01042 of 2004, Justices Crane, Krausman, Rivera, and Dillon were not merely reversing the conviction of one out of more than one hundred men prosecuted through Pirro’s, highly publicized, Internet sting operation, between July of 1999 and December of 2005.

Rather, they were declaring the core theory under which theWestchester District Attorney’s Office had prosecuted the majority of those ensnared in its sting to have been fatally flawed, and Constitutionally deficient.

In stating, “Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the indictment is dismissed,” and remitting the matter back to the Westchester County Court, the Appellate Division, Second Department, which had been historically very easy on Mrs. Pirro, as well as her convicted felon spouse, were now, finally drawing a line in the sand. And, while it might appear at first blush that the overwhelming majority of the cases that were brought to indictment through the sting could be favorably impacted, only a very few actually will be.

In making it’s decision the Court’s finding was that the evidence, upon which County Court Judge Joseph Alessandro, sitting as the trier of fact, had found Mr. Kozlowguilty of five counts of Attempted Disseminating of Indecent Material To Minors in the First Degree, was “legally insufficient.” The Court found that the DA “failed to establish that the Defendant’s Internet communications with an undercover police officer, whom he believed to be a minor, depicted sexual conduct within the meaning of Penal Law Section 235.22(1) since they contained no visual sexual images.”

In truth, very few of the more than one hundred prosecutions generated over 53 months by Pirro’s high-profile sting operation involved the transmission of visual images. However, of those that did not, only a mere handful, were not disposed of by plea bargains. Two such cases that went to trial were Kozlow, case number 100,subject of thepresent decision, and Paul Wicht, case number 96, a highly regarded Bronxville High School science teacher who had taught at Byram Hills High for eight years,

Wicht, from the very beginning has maintained that he was induced and entrapped, and that he is innocent of the charges for which he was tried. He was found guilty, after jury trial, before Supreme Court Justice Lester Adler several months ago, a conviction that is the subject of an appeal application currently before that judge. Wicht’s motion to vacate his conviction is primarily based upon a glaring Brady violation, the intentional withholding of exculpatory information by the Prosecution, in his case, not only from the jury and the Defense, but also from the Court, despite Adler’s specific request for it from the Prosecutor.

Specifically, Wicht’s motion charges that Pirro’s Office lied to the Court when asked if all of the e-mails allegedly sent by the Defendant to the “victim,” had, in fact, been presented in evidence. From amongst scores of e-mails, the first 23 of which were actually exchanged between the socalled victim, and her former teacher, none of which contained any criminally culpable content, followed by many more, actually instigated, and criminalized first, by detectives from the North Castle Police Department, and then, by Pirro’s undercover sting operators, number 23 was intentionally kept from the jury as well as the Court.

During pre-trial hearings before County Court Judge Robert DiBella, Wicht had succeeded in compelling the Prosecution to release a “mirror image” of the hard drive from his seized computer, knowing full-well that his original e-mail correspon-dences with his former student, instigated by the student, had contained nothing inappropriate, and were, in fact, beneficial. Wicht was confident that once the jury was exposed to the last of his e-mails to her, number 23, in which he had specifically suggested that it would be best to end the correspondence, and then proceeded to do precisely that, that the enticement and entrapment by the police and Mrs. Pirro’s operatives would become obvious, and evident.

In short, it was no coincidence that Pirro’s Office omitted the one e-mail correspondence, out of scores of them, that would most likely have established Wicht’s innocence and convinced the jury that he had been induced and entrapped. It is because he and his family had the courage and fortitude to stand up for the truth, and were willing, and able, to pursue justice by rejecting any, and all, plea offers, instead going to trial, that Paul Wicht now stands eligible to benefit from the present Appellate Division Decision.

Unfortunately, there are numerous other men, who under similar circumstances, were unlawfully induced, and entrapped by Pirro’s “slime brigade,” and fell prey to the pressure and intimidation of her extreme prosecutorial misconduct, her Internet Sex Stink. This tactic was designed to distract and deflect attention from her and her husband’s unlawful conduct. For those who knuckled under, and accepted the usual, “no jailtime” plea offer, Kozlow offers no legal remedy.

Nevertheless, for those who stood up for their own innocence, and, in a broader sense, for the community at large, the People of Westchester, indeed, the People of New York State, the Kozlow Decision, represents still further evidence that Jeanine Pirro’s reign of terror is in it’s final fleeting moments. For the issue to involve the “Crown Jewel” of her unending self-promotional propaganda, the Internet Sex Sting, is clearly devastating to her current political effort.

However, of equal importance is the recognition by State and Federal Tribunals of the magnitude and frequency of prosecutorial misconduct perpetrated by the Pirro Regime, not only in her Internet operation, but throughout her practices over twelve years as DA. For the many innocent police officers and civilians, maliciously, and intentionally prosecuted and imprisoned over that time Koslow is the promise of Justice tomorrow.

YONKERS INSIDER: Nick Spano's election year pandering continues

Nick Spano's election year pandering continues.

It is amazing how Senator Spano's election year pandering with the special interests never stops. He is trying to use giveaways to these special interests to gain support. But these giveaways are our money. Nick is a tax & spend liberal & is far from a conservative. He is trying to spend our money like a drunken sailor. There is a candidate who will not disrespect the taxpayer & his name is Delfim Heusler, he is supported by NYTRO - New York Tax Reform Organization. It is disgraceful what Senator Spano does with the misuse of taxpayer money. This kind of elected official conduct should result in impeachment & recall. We need to approve ways that the voters can recall our elected officials, if they violate the law & violate the public trust. Nick Spano should be ashamed of this behavior & be thrown out of office by the people. He is also the king of member items, this is also an illegal act of state legislators as well. We need the ability to stop these illegal practices. Local 1199 endorsement is more of Senator Spano games in his backrooms.

Update: Mike & Nick Spano receive backing of NYSUT union in this year's election. More Spano deals with the unions. Boy is Nicky calling all his favors now. The people have not been heard from yet & they will soundly reject the Spano Brothers.

Delfim Heusler

YONKERS, NY: A message from Shelley Mayer

Shelley Mayer, Democratic and Working Families Party Candidate for the State Assembly 93rd District, Yonkers

I am writing to you to introduce myself and seek your support. My name is Shelley Mayer; I am running as the Democratic and Working Families Party candidate for the 93rd State Assembly District in Yonkers.

I entered this race because I believe that we need new voices in the Democratic Party and a new fighting spirit. We must reject the "business as usual" and "go-along to get along attitude" of too many elected officials. We need representatives that will lead - voting the right way is not enough – we need to lead the right way.

I have been a Democratic activist all my life, starting at PS 26 in Yonkers when I handed out leaflets for my father, running as the Democratic candidate for the State Senate and continuing as a democratic district leader for more than 20 years in White Plains and Yonkers (5th Ward).

I have been fortunate enough to be able to devote my professional life to serving the public interest and to work at the intersection of politics and policy. For 12 years I served as an Assistant Attorney General for one of the great progressive democrats of our State, Attorney General Bob Abrams. I specialized in women's, family and housing issues, including a landmark prosecution of Randall Terry, a key figure in the anti-choice crusade. After leaving the AG's office, I worked on health care issues in Albany and Washington as the VP for government and community affairs for a large not-for-profit hospital system based in Manhattan. After 7 years in the trenches of the health care battle, I joined a New York law firm where I represented a wide array of not-for-profit organizations, including health care, social service, education, and arts groups on their state and federal government issues.

As someone who has more than a decade of experience in Albany, I know how to get things done. As someone who was born and raised in Yonkers, I know this city.

My campaign has attracted early support from leading progressive organizations and elected officials, including the hospital workers union – 1199 SEIU, the Working Families Party, WCLA, NARAL Pro-Choice NY PAC, County Legislator and State Senate Candidate Andrea Stewart-Cousins, County Legislator Jose Alvarado, and City Council President Chuck Lesnick.

I need your help to win this tough election. As you may know, the Republicans "persuaded" the incumbent, Lou Mosiello, to resign in favor of what they think will be a stronger candidate, Mike Spano, the brother of Nick Spano. Yet this political maneuvering so typical of Yonkers politics, treating elected office as just a pawn in a political chess game, is not going down so well this time. There is a new spirit afoot in Yonkers. People want change, not "business as usual", and they want new leaders.

I am heartened by the desire for reform now evident in Yonkers. If we build on it, we can make Yonkers a better place. And, it gives us an opportunity to elect an Assembly member who will represent our Democratic values with integrity and passion.

There are many ways you can help: volunteer: we are running a grass roots campaign and you can help us reach out to voters; contribute: your donation (via mail or our website) will help get our message out; introduce me to your friends/neighbors: host an informal gathering so your friends/neighbors can meet me. I need your help. Call my campaign at 914-613-4851 or send me an email at shelley.mayer@gmail.com

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,
Shelley Mayer
Democratic and Working Families Party candidate for Assembly in the 93rd district, in Yonkers