What Is The Brooklyn DA Hiding?

A judge finds Charles Hynes must release all information related to the Avrohom Mondrowitz extradition proceedings – but Hynes won't do it.

Michael Lesher writes:

Some good news -- and some bad news.

    The good news: I won my Article 78 lawsuit against Brooklyn D.A. Charles Hynes; Supreme Court, Kings County has ordered his office to provide me with copies of all documents relating to the extradition of Avrohom Mondrowitz since September 1993 to the present in response to my October 207 FOIL request.

    The bad news: his office is determined to fight on to keep this information out of public hands.

    As you know, I've been fighting to get Avrohom Mondrowitz finally tried for his heinous crimes against children for years, which has meant fighting Orthodox rabbis -- and Hynes, who works so closely with them -- all the way.

     I've now got the court's decision from the mail. As I wrote above, I won my lawsuit against Hynes' office, which had refused to answer my FOIL request seeking information about the attempted extradition of Mondrowitz (which the D.A. renewed under pressure in October 2007).

     As you probably know, the D.A. has been publicly claiming to have been pressing for Mondrowitz's extradition all along, and in fact to have persuaded the State Dept. to have rewritten its extradition treaty with Israel for the purpose of bringing Mondrowitz back. My FOIL request (made over two years ago) was intended primarily to get the evidence to show whether those claims are true or false. Did the D.A. seek Mondrowitz's extradition immediately after the new treaty went into effect (as he claims) or only when the pressure on him built up 9 months later? Did he actually encourage the State Dept. to secure a different extradition treaty to bring Mondrowitz within reach (as he claims) or is lying about that to conceal his inaction?

    Because Hynes' office (after a full year of prevarications and excuses) refused to turn over a single document to me, claiming a FOIL exemption, I was forced to make first an administrative appeal and then to file a lawsuit in May of this year -- all on my own time and at my own expense, by the way. Justice David Vaughan of Supreme Court, Kings County has ruled in my favor, ordering the D.A. to turn over to me all extradition-related documents about Mondrowitz from September 1993 to the present.

    Unfortunately, the office has informed me that they will file a motion to reargue AND a notice of appeal. This means that Hynes is ready to tie up the resources of his office (and taxpayer money) to try to keep the public from knowing his real record in the Mondrowitz case.

    I think that's something the public ought to know -- especially since he's been claiming to have such a good record on this case, and on child sex abuse prosecutions in the Orthodox community generally.

Here is the judge's decision as a PDF file:

Download Mondrowitz.foil.new.article 78.decision

Comments

[Sam]

If he files a motion to reargue, assuming you prevail, it will delay the matter by only a few months, and he will be precluded from appealing the decision as per CPLR.

[OMG]

We need to know if Michael Lesher needs funds to keep up the fight.

[Shmarya]

I'm sure he could use some financial help.

[Michael Lesher]

Those of you who read through the court's decision will get a sampling of my (justified) complaints about the D.A.'s less-than-honest behavior throughout this lawsuit.

However, at one point the court's language is misleading. It quotes me as apparently saying that Hynes made every effort to extradite Mondrowitz until September 1993, when he told the federal government to close its case. Actually, my position is that although Hynes' predecessor did work hard to have Mondrowitz returned, Hynes himself did nothing -- and as of September 1993, less than nothing.

Here's the (one) sentence the court is quoting from:

"I learned that from the time that Avrohom Mondrowitz entered Israel as a fugitive from justice until Hynes was elected District Attorney in 1989, every effort was made by the Kings County District Attorney’s office to seek Mondrowitz’s extradition or deportation so that he could stand trial in Brooklyn for his heinous crimes against children. However, in September 1993, Hynes and his staff – upon information and belief, responding to pressure from the Orthodox Jewish community – instructed the federal government to close its case on Mondrowitz and to cease efforts to return him for trial so long as he remained in Israel."

'Nuff said.

Incidentally, the poster who says an appeal will be foreclosed by a motion to reargue is not quite correct. Assuming the motion to reargue is denied, the denial of the motion can then be appealed, just as the original decision could have been. An appeal is precluded only between the time the motion is filed and the court's decision on the motion.

Finally -- I wouldn't normally use this blog to ask for money, but since another poster raised the point, I'll be blunt. Quite apart from the dedication of my time and effort to writing all the papers and making all appearances in this lawsuit, it has cost me considerable out-of-pocket expenses: filing fees, process server charges, overnighting documents to meet deadlines, etc. And with another motion and an appeal in the offing, there will be more, not to mention the time away from other work to write my briefs. So... yes, any contributions people would like to make to me would be appreciated.

My mailing address is available on my web site, www.MichaelLesher.com, or you can email me for it at michaellesher@optonline.net.

What is MOST important to me is that people who care about this issue make sure that law enforcement officials like Hynes know they are being watched. If Hynes is afraid of the truth, it means that an informed public is a force he cannot scorn. Please help to form that public -- and let those in power know it. It was for this purpose that I filed the lawsuit. It costs little or nothing to write the D.A., to call his office, to demonstrate outside 350 Jay Street... to let him know his constituents are fed up with a D.A. who coddles serial child sex offenders, lies about his record, and then covers up the evidence so he can get away with more of the same.

Yes, I know Charles Hynes is only part of the problem. Believe me, I know. But if we use the information we have, we can change that part -- and more: if we make the D.A.'s office do its job, it's a safe bet the Mondrowitz trial, when it comes, will not end like Kolko's...

[Michael Lesher]

P.S.: I may be wrong about not being able to make an appeal before the denial of a motion to reargue... but I'm sure you can make the motion AND appeal... just not sure exactly how the timing works.

[Yerachmiel Lopin]

Michael,

Congratulations on getting this ruling. With all the discouraging news, I just want to strike a celebratory note.

Even if it drags out and even if you eventually lose you have done something that will keep the pressure on Hynes to do at least a little better and will also help others search for more of the evidence of Hynes corrupt sell out of victims of Orthodox molesters.

Yasher koach for this accomplishment. Hatzlachah for speedy accomplishment of the next stage

[Sam]

++Incidentally, the poster who says an appeal will be foreclosed by a motion to reargue is not quite correct. Assuming the motion to reargue is denied, the denial of the motion can then be appealed, just as the original decision could have been. An appeal is precluded only between the time the motion is filed and the court's decision on the motion.++

Michael, respectfully, you are wrong. The Order denying a motion to reargue is not appealable. See Crawn v Sayah, 31 AD3d 367 [2006]; Salgado v Ring, 21 AD3d 363 [2005]; Rivera v Toruno, 19 AD3d 473, 474 [2005]; Koehler v Town of Smithtown, 305 AD2d 550, 551 [2003]; Sallusti v Jones, 273 AD2d 293, 294 [2000]).

[Kalman Ernst]

Mr. Lesher,

Please tell us what we can do to help.

Send emails to whom?
Call whom?

You should not have to do this alone.

the louder the voices the better.

Kalman

[Sarah K]

Did anyone see this in any of the NY newspapers? I didn't but I certainly think it is newsworthy and truly shows what the D.A. is.

[Yakira]

Thank goodness for Michael Lesher! I am certain that justice will eventually prevail. Hopefully, more individuals like Lesher will stand up for the victims within the Orthodox community in the future and help bring the corruption of the DA's office to public notice.