Monday, March 15, 2010

New York's Secret Political Scandals - Judith S. Kaye - Andrew M. Cuomo -

Open Letter to Andrew Cuomo - and Other New York Political Scandals


Mario Cuomo was forced by President Clinton to withdraw his name from consideration as a US Supreme Court Justice nominee in April 1993. Contrary to Cuomo's claim, he did not voluntarily withdraw and this is provable. His forced withdrawal was a result of a protest of Moynihan's nomination of Patrick Nemoyer to replace Dennis Vacco as US Attorney in Buffalo on the grounds that Buffalo needed an outsider, not another insider, as US Attorney on April 1, 1993.

Cuomo could never be confirmed because he knew about corruption in the NYAG's office (under Robert Abrams) and failed to act upon that knowledge. Both Abrams and then NYS Comptroller Edward Regan resigned their offices (also in 1993) before the completion of their respective terms of office amid allegations, supported by evidence and independent investigation, that state funds were being used to bribe attorneys and judges in lawsuits with potentially large damage awards defended by the OAG.

Edward Regan began his political career in Buffalo/Erie County and even then there were accusations of corruption and unethical behavior, I believe.

Before Abrams resigned, Governor Cuomo had been formally requested in April 1993 to begin the process necessary for initiating Articles of Impeachment against Abrams for violations of civil rights laws, malfeasance of office, and other reasons.

Dennis Vacco was the US Attorney in Buffalo who refused to investigate and prosecute provable corruption charges in the OAG and the US District Court in Buffalo--charges that later resulted in the above political ramifications. This refusal occurred despite recommendations by the FBI that a Grand Jury be convened (allegedly) and despite the fact that defendants, witnesses and attorneys would have been stampeding to his office door seeking immunity from prosecution. The criminality was so extensive and evidence included hard physical evidence that could never be discounted.

Vacco later became NYAG in 1994, replacing Abrams whom he had previously protected while US Attorney (not counting the short interim appointment of Koppell). Governor Pataki, not realizing Vacco's past and pandering to the law and order crowd, made a major political blunder when he sought to remove Bronx DA Robert Johnson and supersede him with Vacco as prosecutor in order to seek the death penalty against Angel Diaz in a cop killing case in 1996. This was NY State's first test case of a recently passed death penalty statute. The legal battle between Johnson and Pataki made national news.

Pataki's removal of a popular black DA who hesitated in seeking the death penalty against a minority member with a white NYAG who protected white cops and white lawyers (as well as a white federal magistrate) would not have played well in the Bronx.

Angel Diaz had unwittingly become a political liability for Dennis Vacco.

Vacco's misconduct as US Attorney was not limited to his failure to prosecute provable courtroom corruption but also included other gross misconduct including slander/libel and malicious prosecution of an American citizen who protested his decision to look the other way as well as other acts. (Verified by a court record).

Lawyers in the OAG and Kelly Sharkey of the CDO, who was defending Angel Diaz, were informed of Vacco's misconduct via telephone in late August 1996. Vacco's office had already been sent a damaging file detailing Vacco's misconduct while US Attorney and the political ramifications that had resulted from his refusal to prosecute on 7/13/96 (via certified mail).

Eric Bjorneby of the OAG obtained the file from Andrew Moss, chief counsel to Vacco, on 8/28/96. Bjorneby, who was working with Vacco on the prosecution of Diaz, was informed that the same damaging file was going to be sent to Sharkey. Sharkey was informed of the existence of this file on 8/27/96 via telephone. She received her copy of the file on the day Diaz was found hanging in his cell, i.e., September 5th--an alleged suicide. Angel Diaz was already dead by the time she received her copy of the Vacco file, having been pronounced dead at approximately 1:00 AM that morning.

This politically fortuitous "alleged suicide" saved the political career of the politically ambitious and ruthless Vacco since it kept his misconduct as US Attorney and the political ramifications that resulted from his refusal to prosecute provable corruption while US Attorney unexposed. Exposure would have ended Vacco's political career.

Facts: Over 125,000 or more persons are processed through NYC's jails each year with an average of four or five suicides per year. Diaz's "alleged" suicide was the 5th and final "suicide" that year. After Diaz's death, I talked to Jacqueline Lee, the medical examiner involved in the Diaz death. She stated that her finding of suicide would also be compatible with a finding of homicide (depending upon the non-medical circumstances surrounding the death).

She was unaware of the political circumstances surrounding Diaz's death at the time of her examination. A determination of homicide was not within her province but was within the province of the police to investigate.

Diaz's family claimed he was not suicidal and, not knowing the political circumstances surrounding Diaz's death, immediately accused correction officers of murdering him. There was no suicide note despite attempts by Pataki and Vacco to insinuate that an unfinished and unsigned 11 page letter (5 and 1/2 sheets) Diaz was in the process of writing constituted a suicide note. Bjorneby, himself, did not consider the unfinished and unsigned letter a suicide note.

During Diaz's entire incarceration, no jail personnel ever considered him suicidal.

The day after Diaz's death, Sarah Saushadofsky, Chief of the Civil Rights Division in the Southern District of New York, was contacted and informed of the political circumstances surrounding Diaz's death. These circumstances included the possible embarrassment for President Clinton due to the Cuomo/Clinton tie in. Saushadofsky acknowledged the embarrassing position Clinton was in. A request was made for a federal investigation into Diaz's death and Vacco's role in it (since he benefited from that death).

Sarah Saushadofsky passed on the information to US Attorney Mary Jo White who may/may not have needed to get approval from the Justice Department (under President Clinton) to proceed with an investigation.

Despite being sent a letter and other information certified mail on 9/9/96, no investigation occurred and any alleged state investigation was a sham, i.e., a cover up--a bad one at that--since all the politicians even remotely involved were aware of the non-medical circumstances surrounding Diaz's death and none of them mentioned these circumstances at any press conference or in the findings of any claimed investigation to the best of my knowledge.

You can add Giuliani's name to the list of Vacco, Pataki and Johnson since Katherine Lapp of the Mayor's office informed Giuliani of the "Vacco problem" prior to Diaz's death. Why Giuliani didn't put Diaz in protective custody is something he may need to eventually explain, especially given his background as a former US attorney most noted for his prosecution of cases against the Mafia. Vacco has long been rumored to have Mafia ties.

At the press conference announcing Diaz's "alleged suicide" Vacco called Diaz a coward and claimed that Diaz had asked the police officers upon his capture the preceding March "to finish him off because he (i.e., Diaz) was not about to spend the rest of his life in jail".

This is the same Vacco, who as US Attorney in Buffalo, told the press that Marlene Rojicek's charges of corruption (in the OAG and District Court) were comical, that she blamed him because she lost her case (a civil rights case he was not involved in), that she sent burnt flags to his home (never did), and that she was a "classic case of an individual attempting to abuse the justice system", etc. None of these statements were true as Vacco knew when he made them and the falsity of these statements is proven by the political fallouts that have occurred, non-controverted evidence, and court records given under oath. (See, Buffalo News Article for proof of slander).

If Vacco can slander and arrest and maliciously prosecute American citizens who only embarrass him locally in a corrupt town like Buffalo (home of the first US Strike Force), one has to question whether his blind ambition and lack of any moral compass led him to murder one of society's "disposables" when his political career and national reputation were threatened.

This is the same Vacco who also obtained a false finding that his declination to prosecute corruption (in the OAG and District Court) was proper by lying to the Justice Department official investigating Vacco's refusal to prosecute the corruption that resulted in the political ramifications mentioned above.

This is the same Vacco who then attempted to use this false finding (ghost written by Vacco) to prevent the appointment of a special prosecutor in his bogus trespassing charge against Rojicek. Incidentally, the Justice Department official (Manual Rodriquez) was a friend of Vacco's. Only Vacco (and perhaps Rodriquez) can explain how correspondence meant for the Office of Professional Responsibility ended up in the Executive Office of the US Justice Department and on the desk of Vacco's friend.

Vacco's bogus trespassing charge against Rojicek was eventually dismissed upon the motion of Vacco's US Attorney's office--no prosecution was ever intended since no crime was committed (as Vacco and everyone knew beforehand). Rojicek was arrested for failing to "obey a lawful order" of a US Marshall to leave the premises (an order given before the flag burning) because burning a flag (the intent to) was a violation of an "alleged" open flame ordinance--an ordinance no one could find. Evidently, one can only exercise a First Amendment right in Buffalo to burn a flag if the flames are a result of spontaneous combustion.

The Order of Dismissal downgraded the original "failure to obey a lawful order" criminal charge to a "failure to obey a reasonable request" claim.

Four other attorneys in the Buffalo US Attorney office (in addition to Vacco) were involved in the prosecution of the bogus trespassing charge--five attorneys who could have better spent their time and taxpayers' monies investigating courtroom corruption instead.

Two of the four other assistant US attorneys were former acting US Attorneys, Roger Williams and Kathleen Mehltretter. Williams wrote the dismissal order and Kathleen Mehltretter was chief of Vacco's criminal division when Vacco refused to prosecute provable charges of public corruption arising out of Rojicek v Cooley, et al.

At the press conference announcing Diaz's "alleged suicide" Vacco declared that "he would continue an aggressive prosecution of Diaz's alleged accomplices, Jesus Mendez and Ricardo Morales" who had already been indicted for second degree murder. No one was seeking the death penalty against them and this is just another example of how Vacco lies. The case should have gone back to Bronx DA Johnson but no one connected to the Diaz prosecution would touch the two remaining defendants with a ten-foot pole.

At this same press conference, Johnson stated "There is nothing that leads us to any suspicion other than he (Diaz) took his own life" despite the fact that Johnson had received a three page fax re: the Vacco problem on 8/15/96. The same morning of Diaz's death (9/5/96), I had a short telephone conversation with Bronx ADA Mascarello (718-590-2000) regarding Vacco. Mascarello immediately transferred me to his supervisor, Michael Cooper, and I had an approximate 35 minute conversation with him regarding Vacco's misconduct as US Attorney and the political ramifications that had occurred. Cooper informed me that he was going to pass on the information to Johnson (even though Johnson had already received a fax). I did not know that Diaz was already dead and it appeared from the conversation that Cooper didn't know either.

The day following Diaz's death (9/6) I again talked to Mascarello who told me that Johnson was a politician who understood political ramifications and that he (Johnson) was considering calling for an independent investigation since he (Johnson) realized that Diaz's death may not have been a suicide. These conversations were documented in my sister's mailing sent certified mail to Sarah Saushadofsky on 9/9/96.

Upon information and belief, that independent investigation never occurred.

In March 1997 Johnson's wife (Dianne Renwick) was appointed to a vacant NYC Housing Court judgeship which is a questionable appointment given Johnson's cover up. Silence is indeed golden.

In an obvious political move meant to prevent any risk of possible exposure/damage to Vacco, Pataki, Johnson, and perhaps Giuliani, the case against the two remaining defendants was transferred to the Federal District Court in the Southern District. They were indicted in that Court on December 5th on federal charges. US Attorney Mary Jo White, who did not investigate whether Diaz was murdered, instead prosecuted Mendez and Morales under the flimsiest RICO case probably ever filed or tried in that district.

While the defendants were convicted by a jury of all the RICO charges and dependent RICO/non-related charges, the US Court of Appeals vacated all the RICO and RICO dependent convictions on the grounds that the government failed to establish a single racketeering enterprise lasting from 1987 to 1996.

Diaz, Morales, and Mendez were street thugs loosely bound together by friendship whose crimes mostly consisted of snatching purses and robbing grocery stores and pedestrians. Police officer Kevin Gillespie was killed in a gun battle after an unsuccessful attempt by the defendants to steal/hijack a car. During almost all of the time between 1987 and 1996 the defendants were incarcerated and not in contact with each other. The Appeals Court remanded the case back to the Federal District Court for re-sentencing .

Very likely they received longer sentences with stricter parole eligibility than they would have received if they had stayed in the Bronx Court system where they belonged. Such is the price defendants have to pay when political careers and covering up political scandals are more important.

The transfer of the State case to the Federal Court also effectively diminished the possibility of the Cuomo/Clinton tie-in being exposed since the other political tie-ins (involving Vacco, Abrams, Cuomo, and Regan) had been eliminated by the transfer.

I am Marlene Rojicek's identical twin sister. Both she and I believe that Dennis Vacco was involved in the murder, not suicide, of Angel Diaz and that we would be found slander/libel free if we were ever sued. We also believe that the other politicians involved in this particular scandal believed the same thing and engaged in a cover up in order to substantiate a false finding of suicide.

In 1997 Pataki refused to supersede Brooklyn DA Robert Morganthau in the murder of NYPD Officer Anthony Sanchez despite public/press outcries to do so. He still had Dennis Vacco as NYAG to contend with and he didn't know how long Vacco would remain as NYAG. Diaz's death was later used in an attempt to convince the Appeals Court not to decide the issue (whether or not the Governor had the right to appoint a special prosecutor to supersede a district attorney in order to seek the death penalty) by claiming the issue was moot (because of Diaz's death). Pataki would later try in early 1997 to rid himself of his "Vacco problem" by floating the idea of Vacco being appointed to a vacant judgeship.

Spitzer's highly criticized settlement of $100 Million with Merrill Lynch in May 2002 is another example of how a cover up of a scandal begets other scandals.

Although spun by former NYAG Eliot Spitzer as a "triumph for investors" his $100 million settlement with ML was universally criticized as "clearly a fine deal for Merrill Lynch" "a slap on the wrist" and as "a mosquito bite", etc. Business reporters and financial analysts alike were asking what caused the tough talking Spitzer to cave.

Spitzer based the strength of his lawsuit in part on alleged incriminating ML emails he had discovered during his investigation. This was the lawsuit that was going to cement his reputation as "The Sheriff of Wall Street", propel him into national prominence, and into higher office.

What Spitzer didn't know when he took on ML was that Merrill Lynch would be sent much more damaging e-mails regarding the Office of Attorneys General-- emails so damaging they called for Spitzer's immediate withdrawal in order to prevent any appearances of impropriety/conflict of interest.

Spitzer's personal ambition and his need to establish his reputation as 'The Sheriff of Wall Street" very likely cost investors/states untold tens of millions of dollars, if not hundreds of millions of dollars.

Both in house and outside counsel for Merrill Lynch were informed of the NY scandals mentioned above and, therefore, were placed in a very advantageous negotiating position. Spitzer, like his predecessors Abrams and Vacco, had refused to motion to set aside the judgment in Rojicek v Cooley, et al even though he was required by law to do so. His refusal to withdraw from the Merrill Lynch lawsuit because of a conflict of interest/appearance of impropriety placed him in a weak negotiating position. He was not in any position to fault the alleged fraud of Merrill Lynch when he, himself, embraced it in the OAG.

The same emails that were sent to various Merrill Lynch executives and their counsels were also sent to Spitzer as well as attorneys in Spitzer's office, i.e., David Nocenti and Eric Dinallo. These emails began 4/27/02 and ended 5/8/02. On 5/13/02, I sent a letter to State Judge Martin Schoenfeld asking him to remove Spitzer because of Spitzer's blatant conflicts of interests/impropriety. I knew beforehand that Spitzer would never withdraw from a high profile case and warned Schoenfeld that Spitzer remaining would result in no criminal charges against Merrill Lynch, no admission of guilt, no restitution fund for investors, and a low dollar settlement. On May 21st, Spitzer announced the settlement and my accurate prediction came true. Merrill Lynch was clearly in the driver's seat.

Since the loss to investors was in billions of dollars, analysts had estimated a settlement of $500 million and upwards. The "Sheriff of Wall Street" claimed that his puny $100 million dollar settlement (to be shared among NY and other states) was a "triumph for investors" although not one penny went to investors.

Again, Spitzer was more interested in hiding the political scandals in NY and promoting himself so he could later seek higher office.

Current NYAG Andrew Cuomo is subject to the same conflicts of interest/appearance of impropriety that Spitzer was subject to and, as "Sheriff of State Street", will most likely be as impotent a sheriff as Spitzer was in those situations where the other side is informed of NY's hidden political scandals. Andrew Cuomo has the additional personal burden of protecting the Cuomo legacy, i.e., keeping the real reason for his father's forced removal from consideration as a US Supreme Court Justice nominee secret.

Corruption is never a singular event but it only takes one case to expose that corruption. That one case was a federal civil rights trial held in Buffalo, NY, i.e., Rojicek v Cooley, Bell, and Buczkowski. In addition to other claims, the case involved a sexual assault by NY State Police Investigator William J. Cooley, who had a history of brutality against women, including an alleged prior arrest for beating up a female in his custody (allegedly putting her in the hospital for three weeks) as well as another alleged sexual assault and countless other charges of brutality. The trial is known in Buffalo legal circles as "The Kitchen Sink Trial" because ANYAG Patrick McCormack, plaintiff's attorney David Jay, and federal magistrate Edmund Maxwell were caught laughing over an actual kitchen sink--a sink brought to court by David Jay when the jury first began deliberations.

David Jay, although privately retained, sat on the Board of Directors of the NYCLU. He is no longer affiliated with that organization, evidently the only consequence he has suffered.

Hillary Clinton may or may not share a bed with Bill Clinton but, rest assured, they share political secrets, strategies, and ambitions. Perception is everything in politics and it is doubtful that anyone would believe she and her husband did not discuss Cuomo's withdrawal from consideration as a US Supreme Court Justice nominee when everyone else was discussing it and pondering the real reasons behind that withdrawal.

By their silence regarding Cuomo, the Clintons chose to protect fellow Democrat politicians rather than those who use the courts in NY and their silence contributed to the additional scandals above.

Despite their knowledge that the NYAG's office was fixing cases and manufacturing evidence against litigants in civil rights trials, they did nothing to help the victim whose information saved President Clinton from another embarrassing Zoe Baird/Kimba Wood situation. Granted, the reasons for Cuomo's withdrawal were much more egregious than those of Baird/Wood--so egregious that there should have been public disclosure and federal intervention.

NY State Democrats owed the Clintons big time for their silence. Is it any wonder that Hillary Clinton, with no ties to NY and no home in NY, was encouraged and promoted to run for US Senator from NY by the Democratic party there?

Politics is all about granting favors and collecting payment later.

Evidently the Clintons believe the scales of justice should be replaced with a kitchen sink. Hillary Clinton can hardly claim that she cares about women and their issues when she doesn't help a sexual assault victim when she has had over six years as US senator to work quietly behind the scenes to do so--forgetting any influence she had with President Clinton while she was First Lady. Nor can the Clintons truthfully claim they care about civil rights. A genuine question exists whether President Clinton nixed any investigation into Angel Diaz's "alleged suicide". Despite her recent and highly visible pandering to illegal Hispanic immigrants in Nevada, I doubt that anyone will see her coming to the aid of Morales and Mendez (in order to reduce their sentences) or asking for an investigation into Angel Diaz's death. Perhaps they were just legal immigrants and not legal persons.

At the minimum, Diaz's death certificate should read undetermined for the sake of his family.

The Clintons and their operatives have known for a long time that Hillary Clinton would make a run for President (since 2004 at least). They know in advance what scandals can come back to haunt them and seek ways to mitigate any possible fallout that may occur at a later date. Hillary Clinton's co-sponsorship of a Flag Desecration Act in 2005 could be viewed as an example of her attempt to mitigate any possible fallout. Unknown to the public, one of the last flag burnings in NY occurred on July 27, 1990 in Buffalo by the very person whose civil rights trial and her subsequent pursuit of justice denied resulted in NY's hidden political scandals.

This dignified burning of a few inches of a small American Flag made in China was dedicated to Dennis Vacco in celebration of his belief that corruption should triumph over the values our flag stands for. With this co-sponsorship (she just can't vote for it--she needs a highly visible role) she can later feign ignorance, i.e., if I had known that the person who saved my husband from an embarrassing nomination while he was President burned a flag, I never would have co-sponsored the Flag Desecration Act.

Prior to this dedication, my sister and I picketed against Dennis Vacco for two days even sending him the picket slogans we used beforehand so he could inform us of any he found inaccurate or offensive.

Hillary might want to compare my sister's impromptu speech (obviously supporting the 1st Amendment right to burn a flag) with the speech she gave trying to prevent/punish others from exercising this right while on federal property.

"Our war dead died for corruption free courtrooms, not so coffins could be covered with flags.
Dennis Vacco has dishonored our war dead by his refusal to investigate charges of courtroom corruption and by his refusal to insure that litigants have fair trials in the Western District of NY.
Flags not only cover coffins but also hang in every corrupt court room, US Attorney's office and back rooms of every brutal police department.

I have fought a long, lonely expensive battle against corruption and have earned the privilege to burn this flag.

This flag is being burned in celebration of the victory of corruption over the values our flag stands for and for Dennis Vacco's belief that corruption should triumph over these values."

Not one word of this speech appears in The Buffalo News which willingly served as a vehicle of libel for Dennis Vacco even though all the TV affiliates and the US Attorney's office video taped and recorded it. Buffalo News reporter, Charles Anzalone, who witnessed the speech and saw much of the evidence Vacco had, began his story by portraying my sister as some crazy loon "who drove eleven hours to burn a flag in the hope of getting arrested." The article was entitled, "Flag Burner Gets Her Wish."

Evidently, protecting the powers that be in Buffalo was more important than possibly winning a Pulitzer Prize.

Hillary did not co-sponsor the Flag Protection Act on behalf of veterans as she claimed, she co-sponsored this act on behalf of herself. Given her limited role on the Watergate Commission and the steps she herself took to thwart justice during Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate, etc., she had to know the difficulty ordinary citizens without any power face when fighting corruption single handedly and how that fight can lead to flag burning.

During her law school years, Hillary could easily have been viewed as a somewhat radicalized liberal and a hippie who flaunted convention by even living with Bill Clinton prior to marriage. She may have softened her image for political reasons but no true liberal changes his/her inner core values.

Hillary is well known to obstruct justice while Marlene Rojicek is still seeking it.

Specific details re: Cuomo's withdrawal and Abrams' and Regan's early resignations are detailed in a separate email (see following email) and you will find out how one victim and her sister used the political arena to fight back. Politicians think ordinary citizens are inconsequential nobodies and, in their arrogance, think they are untouchable. Given the opportunity to do the right thing, they invariably choose to do the wrong thing.

Marilyn Rick (and Marlene Rojicek)

Additional notes:

Just as Cuomo was forced to remove his name from consideration as a US Supreme Court Justice nominee within one week's time after the Senate Judiciary Committee, i.e., Simon and Mosely-Braun, became aware of his knowledge of corruption in the OAG, Angel Diaz would be dead in one week's time after Vacco was notified that Kelley Sharkey would be receiving the same damaging file Vacco had. It's not a coincidence--the file is that damaging to both Vacco and the OAG.

The Vacco file is what it is: A Motive for Murder.

It shows how NYAAG Patrick McCormack, after failing to obtain a zero dollar settlement for the state of NY went to court and manufactured evidence in addition to other felonies. This manufactured evidence consisted of photographs of a non-existent burglary scene that were taken six days prior to trial by him--photographs that were staged in a house remodeled long after the arrest.

He also withheld a photograph proving interior photographs of the house were manufactured since that photograph was in direct conflict with other photographs entered into trial. McCormack also falsified a diagram of the state police barracks by changing the bathroom location (to dispute the sexual assault claim).

He suborned extensive perjury from the defendants and his witnesses, including 116 pages of perjured testimony from a police witness (Michael Poleon) both he and David Jay knew was never present to hide the fact the complainant statements were never notarized. (The State Police in Orchard Park used presigned notary statements).

This enabled McCormack to place another witness in the barracks to falsely claim the plaintiff was never left alone with Cooley and the trial transcript proves that David Jay fully cooperated in this deception. Every court ruling was ignored to impeach the plaintiff without objection from plaintiff's attorney or the trial magistrate.

McCormack repeatedly misrepresented the pretrial and trial record during trial and summation without objection or rebuttal, conspired with witnesses, defendants, plaintiff's attorney and the trial magistrate to obstruct .justice, obtained the working file of plaintiff's attorney after the close of discovery and upon the solicitation/offer of David Jay, presented this privileged communication as evidence during trial, and laughed over an actual kitchen sink with the trial magistrate and plaintiff's attorney--a kitchen sink brought to trial by David Jay when the jury began deliberations.

Obviously, such privileges aren't free.

There's an adage in the law that if you want to find police not guilty or liable you pick the dumbest jury you can find. The first three questions asked by the jury during deliberations were "What's a ballbuster?" followed by "What does conjugal mean?" and What does subsidize mean?" These questions were asked in a trial that would later have political ramifications and could have had guaranteed RICO convictions leading all the way to Albany.

Incidentally, jury selection began behind locked doors--doors locked from the inside of Magistrate Maxwell's courtroom.

To this day the jury believes it rendered justice and doesn't know how the lawyers and court reporter laughed and scoffed at their questions, breaking down in guffaws whenever they looked at each other.

My sister and I knew for sure that she lost her case at that time. A jury that can't ascertain definitions of words used in context doesn't understand circumstantial evidence and doesn't know how to truly examine evidence.

"What's a ballbuster?" has to be one of the most classic and memorable questions ever asked by a jury. I still shudder at that question years later.

Maxwell, McCormack and Jay--all of whom had failed to obtain a zero dollar judgment before trial by deliberately misrepresenting the settlement offer in an unrelated state contract case--got the jury they wanted for trial. Settlement of the state case called for a stipulated dismissal of the federal case.

Maxwell, McCormack, and Jay also made sure to give the most prejudicial definition of ballbuster to the jury, that expletive being hurled consistently against the plaintiff by Cooley, especially during his sexual assault.

All three knew Cooley to be one sick cop with a long history of complaints against him for brutality, especially against women.

According to David Jay, State Judge Samuel Green called him prior to trial to tell him about Cooley's prior arrest record for beating up the woman who spent three weeks in a hospital as a result. A Buffalo police captain, glad that someone was finally holding Cooley accountable, also called David Jay to inform him that Cooley had at least ten complaints against him.

Maxwell, McCormack, and Jay preferred to have a sick cop remain on the street rather than hold him accountable to one of his victims (who, in actuality, spoke for all his victims).

Instead, David Jay sabotaged his client's claims by character assassination of his client during summation, saying that Cooley was a fine officer who, for some inexplicable reason, went bad due to the difficulty he had dealing with Rojicek--a difficulty he shared in common with Cooley.

Incidentally, NYAAG Patrick McCormack died a few hours after finding out about the political ramifications (re: Mario Cuomo, Abrams, Regan) that had occurred as a result of his corruption. He was sent home from work, too upset to work, and died of a fatal heart attack on 2/28/94 at the age of 47.

This same corrupt attorney, when he wasn't fixing court room trials, played the role of Jesus in religious plays he wrote and directed.

When reading his obituary, one would have thought the Pope died. He would still be fixing cases on behalf of the OAG if he were still alive since Andrew Cuomo, like all his predecessors in the OAG dating back to Abrams, sanctions such corruption as proven by his refusal to set aside the judgment in Rojicek v Cooley, et al due to Fraud upon the Court (as required to do by law).

That legal requirement would also require Andrew Cuomo to set aside his personal vendetta against the person he holds responsible for his father's forced removal from consideration as a US Supreme Court Justice nominee though.

Much more criminality exists on the record.

The kitchen sink says it all.

David Jay, the plaintiff's attorney, and Edmund Maxwell, the federal magistrate, also attempted to obtain a zero dollar settlement for the state of NY prior to trial in a lawsuit that Jay sued for $500,000 general and $1,000,000 punitive damages. The manufactured photographs were stipulated (a fabricated stipulation of known false evidence by David Jay) during his cross examination of the first defendant and after a non-requested sidebar called by Magistrate Maxwell (who protected the manufactured evidence both in chambers and during and after trial) .

David Jay's fabricated stipulation occurred despite the plaintiff never seeing or knowing about the manufactured evidence, the fact that the evidence was contrary to plaintiff's own truthful trial testimony, and the fact that there was no burglary scene to photograph as plaintiff's and defendants' own pretrial depositions verify.

Two corrupt attorneys and a corrupt magistrate know the way to get evidence everyone (except the jury) knows is false into a trial. Obviously, the plaintiff was denied any opportunity for rebuttal on her part--she only testified during her case in chief.

In late March 1993, US Senator Daniel Moynihan (D-NY) nominated Patrick NeMoyer for US Attorney for the Western District of NY. In the very early evening of April 1, 1993, I called the Washington, DC offices of Moynihan and my two Illinois US Senators (Paul Simon and Carol Moseley Braun) to protest this nomination on the grounds that Buffalo needed an outsider and not another insider (like Dennis Vacco) as US Attorney. Since all three offices were closed, I left recorded messages.

All three US Senators were informed that the NYAG's office in Buffalo was fixing civil rights cases and manufacturing evidence against litigants and that they should check with both Mario Cuomo and Robert Abrams to verify my claims (since both were well aware of the corruption). I left my name and telephone number so they could contact me for further information. Both Moseley Braun and Simon sat on the Committee on the Judiciary.

After leaving these messages, I called Patrick NeMoyer at his home (716-662-5729) and informed him that I was protesting his nomination. He assured me that he would be different than Vacco--that I should send a file to him (if he became US Attorney) for a possible RICO investigation/prosecution.

I gave NeMoyer the benefit of the doubt and did not follow through on protesting his nomination. NeMoyer was no different than Vacco as far as any investigation/prosecution and never responded despite his receiving info/files on two separate occasions.

I have the telephone bill substantiating these long-distance telephone calls as Cuomo, Abrams, Spitzer and many other politicians and their legal staff are well aware, having already seen this phone bill. The following day, several conversations took place with senatorial aides in both Moseley-Braun's and Simon's offices who were responsible for judicial appointments.

Much of this conversation centered on Mario Cuomo's knowledge of the corruption. I was asked to send my information and documentation to both senators as well as the Committee on the Judiciary at Large.

Before files could be compiled, Mario Cuomo announced his withdrawal from consideration as a US Supreme Court Justice nominee on 4/7/93, claiming he wanted to devote himself to NY issues, i.e., the budget, etc.

This withdrawal was via a 4/5/93 letter to President Clinton--the same day Clinton returned to Washington, DC. Immediately after Cuomo's announcement, the spin machinery went into overload. Both Cuomo and President Clinton have acknowledged a 4/1/93 late night call Clinton made to Cuomo from Air Force One--probably because there is some record of this call. This call was made after my leaving recorded messages and would have been received by Cuomo in the late PM hours of 4/1 or early AM hours of 4/2 in NY since Clinton was flying to Oregon and then Vancouver for some summit meeting.

The spin was that Clinton called Cuomo to let him know that he was still considering nominating Cuomo (not actually nominating Cuomo) and queried whether Cuomo was still interested. Just idle chatter between the man with the most important job in the world and the governor viewed by Clinton as Mafia-like.

At the time of Cuomo's announcement that he was withdrawing his name, unnamed Clinton aides were spinning that they had been unsuccessful in the days immediately prior to 4/1 in contacting Cuomo to find out if Cuomo was still interested--that their repeated failures to contact Cuomo had resulted in Clinton's late night "casual chat" with Cuomo.

This spin is obvious and was designed to protect Clinton from anyone finding out later that he forced Cuomo to withdraw his name from consideration and Clinton's own knowledge of the reasons behind that removal. Nobody lies to the President. I don't doubt that Clinton called Cuomo from Air Force One.

However, that call was not a "casual chat" but was most likely, instead, a profanity-laced conversation by an enraged Clinton demanding both an explanation from Cuomo and demanding that Cuomo remove his name from consideration.

Fact: Of all the numerous government agencies I have been forced to deal with in my quest for justice denied (which are too numerous to mention here) Governor Cuomo ran the most professional office of any agency--which was his downfall and which helped prove Cuomo's knowledge of corruption in Abrams' office. His staff was always professional and courteous, they answered and returned phone calls immediately, and they responded in writing to letters sent to the Governor.

My letters got the full attention of the Governor and either/or Cuomo's Director of Criminal Justice (John Poklemba) and the counsel to the Director of Criminal Justice (Sean Byrne) who responded on behalf of both Cuomo and the then Director of Criminal Justice (Richard Girgenti).

I have no doubt that Cuomo, himself, had his own investigation well before April 1, 1993. The corruption in Abrams' office and Regan's office was no longer confined to the inner sanctums of both offices after I flooded the NY State Democratic Convention (held in May 1992) with proof of that corruption. (See below).

Cuomo, apparently in order to protect himself in any 1994 reelection bid, rid himself of his political liabilities (Abrams and Regan) by forcing their early resignations prior to starting his own bid for reelection. He took political steps to protect himself but did nothing to dismantle the machinery that allows corruption to flourish.Politicians put themselves first, their party second, and their constituency last.

On a 4/11/93 WBBM-TV broadcast, Chicago commentator Irv Kupcinet reported "that contrary to what Mario Cuomo was claiming, a Washington insider had informed him that Cuomo did not voluntarily remove his name but was forced to remove his name". Kupcinet's inside Washington source can be traced to his long-time friend, i.e., Senator Paul Simon. Simon had returned to Illinois for a series of town hall meetings and both he and his wife had socialized with Kupcinet and his wife (having dinner together) after Cuomo's 4/7 announcement and prior to Kupcinet's 4/11 broadcast according to newspaper articles.

Newspapers also reported that Moseley-Braun did not attend the town hall meetings because she stayed in Washington, ill with the flu. Additionally, Simon was a known leaker, having allegedly leaked information during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings .

The spin never stops. In George Stephanopoulos' memoirs of his White House years, he wrote that Andrew Cuomo contacted him repeatedly in June 1993 claiming that his father had possibly changed his mind and wanted to be reconsidered.

Stephanopoulos also wrote that Mario Cuomo called him to inform him that he was declining any nomination just 15 minutes before Clinton was scheduled to call Cuomo to offer him the nomination.

There was no way Cuomo would ask to be reconsidered or that Clinton would ever reconsider nominating Cuomo since both already knew that Cuomo could never be confirmed.

Nothing had changed since April 1993. Clinton nominating Cuomo would only expose the NY scandal both wanted to keep hidden. Andrew Cuomo's calls, if made, were just more spin most likely meant to quell any rumors circulating about his father's removal.

His calls (and I believe they occurred) give credence to any allegation that he, as NYAG, will compromise any future negotiated settlements in lawsuits brought by the state of NY to protect the Cuomo name since his calls, if made, served only as a smokescreen to hide the real reasons for his father's removal from consideration.

One can reasonably surmise that his first priority as NYAG will be in protecting his father's legacy since he has already attempted to do so in the past. Compromised settlements by the OAG would be a natural consequence in any litigation where the other side obtains damaging information re: the OAG and the real reasons behind Mario Cuomo's withdrawal.

Just ask Eliot Spitzer.It's possible that Stephanopoulos didn't know the true reasons for Mario Cuomo's April withdrawal--that he was being used by Andrew Cuomo.

In later questioning by NYT reporter Robert McFadden, Mario Cuomo stated he didn't remember any last minute call to Stephanopoulos declining any nomination but "if George said it happened, it happened."Again, Bill Clinton would never have reconsidered nominating Mario Cuomo just like Hillary Clinton, in the doubtful event that Hillary becomes President, would never consider him (if Cuomo wasn't too old now).

Only a person with a room temperature IQ who believes the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale and wants to buy it would believe that Mario Cuomo--the son of poor Italian immigrants and a man who prides himself on his intellectual gifts--didn't want to be a Supreme Court justice.

The job of Supreme Court Justice was tailor-made for him. With his ego, I'm sure he would have preferred to be Chief Justice though.

In early September 1993, Abrams announced that he was resigning his office effective December 31st to go into private practice.

As with many corrupt politicians forced from office, he claimed he was doing so because of family/financial considerations. In a 9/8/93 NY Times article written by Todd Purdum, Abrams discussed how his elder daughter's future college costs raised questions regarding his economic security and expressed concern about an empty nest and how much (quality) time he had left to spend with his two daughters--concerns that arose out of helping his older daughter fill out college applications over the Labor Day weekend.

These comments occurred despite he and his wife (who is independently wealthy) having wealth most of us can only envy. Abrams could probably afford to send a dozen kids to the most expensive colleges in the country.

His elder daughter still had a year before entering college so he could have finished the last year of his term without worrying about his monthly household budget. His younger daughter was only seven years old. It is doubtful he was going to kick her out of the house in the near future so he and his wife could suffer the anguish of the empty nest syndrome.

Additionally, remaining NYAG would have been much less disruptive to family life than being a US Senator or being a SEC Commissioner--a position that he had tried in vain to obtain prior to his announced resignation. Cuomo didn't want Abrams as NYAG, the voters didn't want Abrams as US Senator, and Clinton (knowing about Abrams' corruption) didn't want Abrams as SEC Commissioner.

Abrams had no choice except to go into private practice--and he accepted a position that most likely required travel to Eastern Europe and the Mideast--a job that caused even more family disruption than being NYAG.I hope he took his family along on his foreign trips since he was allegedly so concerned about them.

The reality is that he wasn't any more concerned about his family than Spitzer was when he was visiting prostitutes. A NYAG who cares about his loved ones would have made sure there were no lingering scandals in his background that could come back to haunt him and embarrass his family and him.

I feel sorry for Spitzer's three daughters just as I would feel sorry for Andrew Cuomo's three daughters. I already feel sorry for Andrew Cuomo's three daughters when they eventually find out about their father's well-publicized charges of adultery against their mother.

How crass.An unbiased reporter would have challenged Abrams' spin but, then, Todd Purdum was dating Dee Dee Myers, Clinton's former press secretary, whom he later married. Myers was still Clinton's press secretary at the time of Cuomo's removal.Maybe Purdum was simply too lazy.In this same article, Mario Cuomo praised Abrams saying Abrams had been the nation's leading state attorney general for years, a political leader of total integrity, complete commitment, and high principle, and that he would be missed for a long time.

A politician of integrity would have said good riddance to Abrams. Period. A politician of limited integrity would have wished Abrams well in his future endeavors. Period. Talk about hypocrisy and lack of any integrity. Only a person with a room temperature IQ who believes the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale and wants to buy it would believe that Robert Abrams resigned his office for financial/family considerations.

Message to Andrew:

Both your father and Abrams (and you) ignored the number one rule of politics. When a problem first comes to your attention, deal with it. One never knows when the problem will come back and bite one in the ass.

Your father was unintentionally caught in the crossfire when I made a few simple calls protesting NeMoyer's nomination. It took less than one hour of my time to end his chances of ever being on the US Supreme Court--something I wasn't even attempting to do.My sister and I had no personal animosity towards your father.

We both wrote in his name for President in the Illinois primary in March 1992 and both of us still think he would have made a fine US Supreme Court Justice where he wouldn't have had to practice what he preached.

Initially, your father's only fault was that he looked the other way although, in retrospect, he did nothing to protect the citizens of NY and others who use the Courts in NY. Nor did he do anything to help me in my attempts to obtain justice denied. At the time of the Illinois primary, I had only written to your father once.

I don't believe he is entitled to the legacy of the "Mario Cuomo Mystique" though. He is just another politician who looked the other way. In my letter to him dated September 15, 1993, I wrote him:"Personally, I find your political usage of your Italian-American heritage manipulative, tiresome, and boring.

If you truly desire to serve the citizens of NY and others beyond your rhetoric, I would suggest that you remove that one foot that's still standing in Italy and place both your feet on American soil so that you can stand up firmly for American values and ideals."

After chasing Abrams for nearly five years--five years during which he ignored me and the charges I was making against the OAG--I flooded the late May 1992 NYS Democratic convention with evidence of his office's corruption--corruption that you have inherited by virtue of your current position. All the US Senatorial candidates, your father, and 60 delegates chosen at random received abbreviated packages re: that corruption (13 pages).

Five county chairpersons (including John Marino, NYS Democratic Party chairman and your family's long-time close personal friend and father's political adviser) received extensive files sent certified mail that contained information and all the evidence the FBI had at its disposal.

By flooding the convention, Abrams' fate as NYAG and Regan's fate as NYS Comptroller were sealed because the corruption in their offices was no longer confined to the inner sanctums of their respective offices. Incidentally, Steve Pagones received the same package the five county chairpersonsreceived before the start of his defamation suit against Al Sharpton, et. al.

He thought the delegate letter was a masterpiece and a brilliant move that must have really pissed off Abrams.

Pagones said that he always knew there was some scandal behind Abrams' early resignation and now he knew what it was. Maybe this delegate letter will someday have an honored place in the state archives where it rightfully deserves to be.

In the cover letter of this mass mailing, I raised the issue of where the money was coming from that allowed NYAAG Patrick McCormack to engage in such extensive felonious conduct without any objections or exposure by either the plaintiff's attorney or the trial magistrate.

I also noted that Illinois FBI agents who visited me at my home had raised the possibility of insurance fraud (in corruption cases one always follows the money). Neither they nor I knew then that payoffs come directly from state funds. In this same letter, I also stated that Abrams was unfit to be NYAG and that it was time for Abrams to resign his office as NYAG.

I also pointed out that Dennis Vacco would have major problems of his own if Rojicek v Cooley, et. al., ever got publicity/exposure outside of Buffalo.Perhaps you can read your father's copy of the delegate letter or examine the entire file John Marino received. Incidentally, the files the five county chairpersons received included my initial letter to your father (Abrams also had received a copy).

Had your father and Abrams had any foresight at all, they would both have realized that I would be coming back to your father at a later date with a valid request for the Initiation of Articles of Impeachment against Abrams if Abrams continued to ignore me. In that first letter, I wrote that I knew that Abrams held a (constitutionally) elected office. Perhaps you should read this last sentence again.Perhaps you should ask your father, too, what he would have done differently if he had another chance.

Hopefully, you can learn from your father's mistakes.In closing, I am again requesting that you motion the District Court in Bufflalo to set aside the judgment in Rojicek v Cooley, et al due to Fraud upon the Court by ANYAG Patrick McCormack and others.

Favorable judgments shouldn't be obtained through bribery of the trial judge and opposing counsel by the OAG. I have been adamant about the OAG motioning for a new trial and not me and I have no intention of ever changing my position about this since it is your side who colluded with my attorney, committed the criminal acts, and paid the bribes.I simply testified truthfully 100% of the time.Believe me when I say that my case was not the only case where the OAG paid off a judge and opposing counsel to win a favorable judgment. I know a lot more now than I used to know. Patrick NeMoyer could have had a RICO prosecution against the OAG as you can verify by checking with him. Dennis Vacco could have also had a RICO prosecution.You may also want to check with Denise Hartman, Assistant Solicitor General in your Albany Law Department, who argued the Appeal and easily recognized the fix that had occurred.

She needed to distance herself ethically from the conduct of the magistrate and two trial attorneys, claiming she couldn't help me too much since the OAG could be sued.

Her paycheck was more important to her, unfortunately, than seeing that justice was done.Since there is no statute of limitations on murder, I am also requesting that you open or call for an independent investigation into the death of Angel Diaz and former NYAG Dennis Vacco's role in that death--there is not one iota of credible evidence that would support a finding of suicide.

You might want to check with Eric Bjorneby and Andrew Moss re: how damaging the file that has become known as "The Vacco File" is beforehand. In an article dated 9/6/96, NYT reporter Rachel Swarms quotes jail officials as saying that Diaz apparently stood on his bed, tying one end of the belt around his neck and the other around the bars and he hung himself by sitting on the bed.

Perhaps Dennis Vacco can demonstrate how a slender man like Diaz (who was approximately 5'8" according to Bjorneby and who very likely would have worn no more than a size 34 belt if he had a belt in his cell) can hang himself with that belt and still be sitting on his bed at the same time.

The length of the belt remaining (after one accounts for the circumference of the neck and the inches needed to tie that belt securely to cell bars) would not allow for any torque or suspension when one is sitting on a bed. It defies the laws of physics.

Both torque and/or suspension are necessary to accomplish the manner of suicide as described by jail officials. Additionally, the body--despite any inclination of the will--naturally fights for survival.

Diaz had the freedom of his arms and legs that would have prevented any suicide. You might want to research other suicides at Rikers Island. I couldn't find any that resulted by using a belt and I checked back years and years.

Diaz was confined to a maximum security unit for high profile inmates. Since politicians and prosecutors make their names on these high profile cases, special precautions are taken so these inmates don't die.

How could they get the publicity they seek otherwise? This need for publicity may even require a policy of no belts in maximum security units. Additionally, Diaz was not on suicide watch or considered suicidal at any time by jail officials.

The Gillespie family complained bitterly about Diaz laughing and obviously enjoying his fame and the limelight during a court appearance. He was a nobody who became somebody as a result of his being a pawn in Pataki's protracted legal battle with Johnson.

Diaz was also a bully and bullies usually don't commit suicide or fit the psychological profile of persons who commit suicide. I am also aware of the contents of the unsigned eleven page letter that authorities refused to reveal the contents of.

A much more reasonable and likely scenario was that Diaz was garroted or strangled by someone while he was unconscious or semiconscious. Jacqueline Lee stated there were no unusual bruises on the body that would indicate a struggle. It's doubtful any toxicology tests were done since Dr. Lee was unaware of the political circumstance surrounding Diaz's death at the time of her examination. Emergency medical technicians would not have had any questions upon their arrival since jail personnel claimed they checked on Diaz every ten minutes and made attempts to resuscitate him, therefore, contaminating any crime scene. While you may conveniently dismiss the above as supposition, there is one undeniable fact. Diaz needed to die to save Vacco's political career. Again, the Vacco File is that damaging.

I would advise against using the NYSP for any investigation into Diaz's death or any investigation of those responsible for a cover up.

I can't begin to count all the crimes they (both defendants and witnesses) committed during my trial (in addition to the charges giving rise to my civil rights suit). Captain Williams and Major Tordy performed the non investigation of my original charges (that led to Rojicek v Cooley, et. al.) and automatically found the charges against the NYSP defendants unwarranted without even talking to me or getting any statement from me.

For those familiar/unfamiliar with the sordid reputation of the NYSP, Captain Henry Williams is infamous for leading the raid on Cell Block D at Attica. The Grand Jury investigating Attica wanted to indict both Williams and Tordy for perjury and obstruction of justice.

How ironic that Captain Williams, who will always be linked to the atrocities committed by the NYSP at Attica and the attempted cover ups of what actually occurred there, will forever be linked to NY's hidden political scandals through his initial cover up of my charges. As you are already aware, your office represents the NYSP and commits crimes on their behalf when they are sued.

I'm not surprised that you have just appointed Sharon McCarthy as special counsel in your investigation of Troopergate. Ms. McCarthy worked under Mary Jo White at the same time the Southern District refused to investigate Diaz's death so it could protect the reputations of various politicians instead. I hope Ms. McCarthy was not involved in the Morales and Mendez prosecution and its politically-motivated transfer to the Federal Court.If you want your investigation to be credible, perhaps you should think about hiring me.In reality, you need not even check with Denise Hartman, Eric Bjorneby, or Andrew Moss.

The political fallouts that have occurred, an "alleged suicide" which could more aptly be described as a "political lynching" and the low ML settlement Spitzer obtained should be sufficient proof of your need to motion to set aside the judgment in Rojicek v Cooley, et. al. Even easier, you only need to recall prior conversations with your father.

Since I emailed you over one year ago regarding much of the enclosed as well as other information, I feel I have given you more than an adequate grace period for you to follow the law. No Illinois resident should have to know the names of the last five NY attorneys general--Abrams, Koppell, Vacco, Spitzer, and Cuomo. The one thread of commonality among them is that none of them deserved/deserve to occupy the office of NY Attorney General.

It's time for someone to bring honor to that office. One cannot even begin to fathom what occurs during a trial where the kitchen sink is the final prop and indignity to our justice system. Like Watergate, New York Gate started with a burglary arrest, albeit a false arrest on planted evidence. Perhaps I should stop seeking justice denied and start looking for a publisher to sell my book rights to. I have so many stories to tell.

Only a person with a room temperature IQ who believes the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale and wants to buy it would believe that there will ever be a Cuomo Dynasty if you continue to fail to perform your responsibilities as NYAG according to law. ""

Send in By a Reader..