Skvere Rebbe Does Not And Has Not Tolerated Violent Behavior, His Attorney Says

"The rabbi has done everything in his power to ensure that New Square has been a safe and peaceful community for decades," [the Skvere Rebbe David Twersky’s attorney Franklin H.] Snitow said in a statement. "Such [violent] behavior has never been nor will every be tolerated," he said. "In addition, we strongly believe that the civil case brought against the grand rebbe has no legal or factual basis."

 

Aron Rottenberg is the victim of a 4 am arson attack that nearly killed him and his entire family. Shaul Spitzer, the 19-year-old butler of the Skvere Rebbe who lived in the Rebbe’s house at the time of the attack, was arrested and charged with several crimes including attempted murder and attempted arson.

The attack took place after months of what Rottenberg and other New Square dissidents say was an officially ordered campaign of harassment and violence that included hurling stones through car windows and house windows, and 3 am threatening phone calls.

Rottenberg filed an $18 million lawsuit that alleges that the Skvere Rebbe was responsible for those months of intimidation that culminated in the May 22 arson attack.

Rottenberg sustained third-degree burns to more than 60 percent of his body in that attack and has undergone two skin graft procedures. He still requires months of physical and occupational therapy.

The Skvere Rebbe and Spitzer are co-defendants in an $18 million lawsuit filed by Rottenberg’s attorney Michael Sussman.

The Rebbe did not speak about the attack for almost one full week and then chose to make an exceedingly brief, unclear statement to yeshiva students that did not mention Rottenberg by name and appeared to equate Rottenberg and his attacker.

After increasing calls for the Rebbe to resign and for the Rebbe to be indicted, a slightly stronger statement was issued that still failed to mention Rottenberg by name.

The Journal News reports that Twersky’s attorney, Franklin H. Snitow, now says the Rebbe condemns all violence:

"The rabbi has done everything in his power to ensure that New Square has been a safe and peaceful community for decades," [the Skvere Rebbe David Twersky’s attorney Franklin H.] Snitow said in a statement.

"Such [violent] behavior has never been nor will every be tolerated," he said. "In addition, we strongly believe that the civil case brought against the grand rebbe has no legal or factual basis."

Rottenberg’s attorney, Michael Sussman, doesn’t buy it:

In an email this evening, Sussman called Snitow's statement "nonsense."

"The grand rabbi has sat by and allowed terror through the community," Sussman wrote. "The Rottenberg case is not isolated and Mr. Snitow should know better than to associate with profound lawlessness.

"I welcome the upcoming legal battle."

Comments

[David]

The butler did it.

[Yonkel Lakes]

Ahhhhh....the lawyers. The Grand Rebbe is suddently tongue tied and needs a lawyer to explain his moral positions? Why do I think we won't find Rebbe Twersky on a list of the great sages of our people?
You think that our sages of old traded votes so their followers could exist on the backs of the goyim?

[Moshe in Israel]

Just as a point of correction, his name is Franklyn H. Snitow. Franklyn as spelled this way, not Franklin. I know him from Forest Hills. His areas of practice include: Complex Commercial, Employment, and Family Law.

My guess as to why he was chosen, was not because he's Brafman or Lewin who are trial attorneys, but because he provides non-litigious representation. He is there to enure that Twersky's and NS's First Amendment rights are not violated. The First Ammendment prohibits "the making of any law "respecting an establishment of religion", impeding the free exercise of religion, infringing on the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances."

Although the FBI and others may see problems with how New Square is being run, Snitow will be there to ensure that NS has the right to operate without government oversight because it is a religious based community.

[Barry]

Moshe, I somehow doubt that Snitow is ever going to argue that inciting the burning alive of dissidents is protected by the first amendment.

The Agudah however might.

[MarkfromShortHills]

"NS has the right to operate without government oversight because it is a religious based community."

Precisely backwards. New Square is a municipality established in accordance with the statutes of New York and must act as such. But, because it is in fact acting as a religious based community, has impeded Rottenberg's free exercise of his religion, has interfered with the right of non-Twerskyites to assemble peaceably, etc., it requires government oversight.

Also, Snitow is a litigator; I believe he has argued (and won) at the Supreme Court. No way will this matter be addressed otherwise than in a hard-fought litigation.

[Leah]

"The rabbi has done everything in his power to ensure that New Square has been a safe and peaceful community for decades,"

I would assume that statistics on crimes committed in New Square over the last couple years (or any other time span) could be gotten from the police and compared with the crime rate of other/neighboring communities. This should be a matter of public record.

[Bench Kvetcher]

The rebbe does not tolerate any violent or exclusionary behavior. He even allows all the gay and lesbian teens, child rapists, wife and child beaters as well as the Mikva gang bangers to remain in square without any fear of reprisal. All is good as long as you agree to daven with the rebbe at all times.

[Moshe in Israel]

++ To Barry and Mark

As a point of clarification, I am not stating that Snitow will argue to legitimize their behavior. I am stating that Snitow is there to ensure that the First Amendment rights of the NS community be protected.

Like any good attorney, he will take his fee regardless of his moral compass.

Mark, I respectfully disagree with you.

Although NS is an established village and as such must conform to New York State law, the residents of NS live within a defined religious community (think Amish), and are therefore protected under the Constitution.

My point is that similar to the Amish who take on a religious obligation to life within their community by choosing to live there, the residents of NS also choose to live there.

The real question is, keeping in mind the separation of Church and State, does religious coercion violate the person's 1st amendment rights?

In other words, does forcing someone to Daven in a particular Shul because he is a member of that religious community violate his rights? Or is this part of his 'religious' obligation, and thereby he is acquiescent in his religious rights.

[Barry]

No, the real question is does a religious community have a right to enforce its internal regulations through arson?

[Moshe in Israel]

Barry, correct.

Again, I am not condoning Spitzer's behavior. I am approaching the issue from the top level.

The issue of Spitzer's guilt is entirely separate from what Snitow is there for. He is not there for Spitzer, he's there for Twersky.

And he is there to represent the Village, and to show that Rottenberg's First Amendment rights were not violated by the decrees and actions of Twersky.

Let me make this very clear, I am not siding with NS. Quite the opposite. I am simply stating what their defense position may be.

[David]

Although NS is an established village and as such must conform to New York State law, the residents of NS live within a defined religious community (think Amish), and are therefore protected under the Constitution.

What does "defined religious community" mean? Does it have a legal definition and if so, how does it apply to NS? Since NS is (I assume) governed under US/NY law, ANYONE is entitled to live there. Is that not the case? If it is not the case, what "religious test" is required to determine who should live there and who administers it? This is scary stuff indeed.

[Robert Wisler]

To Moshe in Israel,
Your analogy falls apart with the Amish. I live in a heavily Amish area of the Midwest US. They live in farms surrounding the town (and unlike the "Skverers", they WORK for a living), but the town is inhabited by both Amish (craftsmen who WORK AT AN HONEST TRADE for a living) and non-Amish who have excellent relations with them. While it's true that "outsiders" aren't invited to their church meetings on Sunday, I've ofttimes been invited into their homes for games, meals, etc. There is no "superiority complex" among the Amish communities of northeast Indiana. So much for your idiotic analogy.

[Moshe in Israel]

++David

Yes, scary indeed.

Please take a look at these links:

Is Religion Considered an Obligation?
http://lifeexaminations.wordpress.com/2011/03/31/is-religion-considered-an-obligation/

This link helps to counter Robert Wisler's point about Amish communities being 'open' communities. "Yes" to the outsiders, but "No" to insiders.

FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment01/05.html

This link is heavy reading, but worth digesting.

[Robert Wisler]

Moshe In Israel,
Again, I point out that the Amish don't incorporate their own towns or cities. They live in towns where they are not even members of the town council, school board or any other public office. Thus, your analogy falls apart! You just can't admit you're wrong, can you?

[The Skvere Rebbe Knew Nothing]

Skver's Goon in Chief claiming ignorance.

Read the Wikipedia entry below. The fall guys go to prison while the Skverer Goon in Chief lives in luxury and is chauffeured in a Cadillac funded by fraud.

David Twersky is a mafia godfather minus the charm of his Italian forebears. Lock him up and throw away the key. Justice, 18th century Ukrainian style. Just like he practices it.

"Four Hasidic men from New Square, Benjamin Berger, Jacob Elbaum, David Goldstein, and Kalmen Stern, created a nonexistent Jewish school to receive $30 million United States dollars of education grants, subsidies, and loans from the U.S. Federal Government. The men were convicted in 1999. In October of that year all four men received prison sentences ranging from 30 months to 78 months. Two other suspects who were indicted left the United States."

[seymour]

Moshe In Israel,
Again, I point out that the Amish don't incorporate their own towns or cities. They live in towns where they are not even members of the town council, school board or any other public office. Thus, your analogy falls apart! You just can't admit you're wrong, can you?

Posted by: Robert Wisler | June 28, 2011 at 07:49 AM

they are just not that sophisticated the Amish in miking the system from the government like the chusids.

The difference the Amish are truly religious
The chusids are pretenders to get away with crime

[Shmarya]

Moshe in Israel –

New Square is a legal village and as such is required to follow US law.

There is no religious exemption and no provision for a religious municipality.

What Snitow will probably argue is that there is a separation between the Skvere kehilla and its Rebbe on one hand, and the village government on the other.

And he will work to protect Skvere's 'right' to punish dissidents.

[Shmarya]

I would assume that statistics on crimes committed in New Square over the last couple years (or any other time span) could be gotten from the police and compared with the crime rate of other/neighboring communities. This should be a matter of public record.

Posted by: Leah | June 28, 2011 at 06:27 AM

The same police that are accused of bias in favor of the Rebbe and village leadership and who did nothing to investigate the attacks against Rottenberg that led up to the arson?

[Morris the Katz]

Mosheleh:

There is no such thing as a "religious based community" in the United States. New Square is incorporated under NY State law, and falls under the protection of the U.S. Constitution regarding religion. And even if it were in an unincorporated area, it would still fall within the aegis of US law. There's no particular protection because all the inhabitants are Skver hasids, just as there's no religious protection granted to the zillions of localities in this country which are 100% Christian.

There is no religious obligation one must take to live in New Square, drive throuh New Square, or walk through New Square. If the POS rebbe won't sell property to a Christian, or a Muslim, or a secular Jew, then the POS rebbe is in violation of the law. Moreover, anyone living in New Square can go to whatever church, synagogue, or mosque he or she wants to, or can stay home. That's the law.

So, Mosheleh, you're talking through the hole in your rectum.

[Moshe in Israel]

Shmarya,

Thanks for your clear point. That is exactly the point that I've been making all along (although more wordy, and therefore maybe not as clearly).

As I stated, "Although NS is an established village and as such must conform to New York State law, the residents of NS live within a defined religious community (think Amish), and are therefore protected under the Constitution."

I am making the distinction, although not explicitly stated like you did, that the Village and the community are two separate entities. And as you mentioned (which I agree), Snitow is there for the community not for the Village.

The "community" is defined here to mean the religious framework of the Village under the direction of GR Twersky, not the legal framework under the direction of the Village government.

[Wondering]

Brafman would never take this case, he would not take a case that he is likely to lose.

Snitow represented HASC at the RCA Din Torah, and did not win.

[seymour]

Posted by: Leah | June 28, 2011 at 06:27 AM

The same police that are accused of bias in favor of the Rebbe and village leadership and who did nothing to investigate the attacks against Rottenberg that led up to the arson?

Posted by: Shmarya | June 28, 2011 at 08:06 AM

in addition if the culprit is a frummie they do not report it.

even fromowitz a dissident did not report that his child was molested by skver chusid in skver and still lives in skveer.

therefore statistics are meaningless

[seymour]

Posted by: Morris the Katz | June 28, 2011 at 08:10 AM

maybe someone should make an offer on a house and see what happens

[Moshe in Israel]

Like any good mafia organization, think The Godfather, who had Tom Hagen as the Consigliere to ensure that they operate within the law, I am sure that there is someone similar within NS.

So NS is not Libya where martial law rules, but is ensuring that every action that Twersky does is within HIS legal right to do. That doesn't mean that he doesn't have his goons do his dirty work, but it will never get back to him. It's a precisely managed operation. Operation being the key word.

[masortiman]

"In other words, does forcing someone to Daven in a particular Shul because he is a member of that religious community violate his rights? Or is this part of his 'religious' obligation, and thereby he is acquiescent in his religious rights."

if its "daven where we say, or the rebbe wont give you a blessing" or even "daven where we say, or the rebbe will tell his followers their kids shouldnt marry your kids" or "daven where we say, or the rebbe will tell all schools that follow him not to enroll your kids" Skver is probably protected.

if its "daven where we say or we will burn down your house" its certainly not.

If its "daven where we say, or we will picket in front of your house" or "daven where we say, or when you decide to move out, we will pressure all would be buyers not to offer more than 50% of what the house is worth" well I am not a lawyer, but my sense is that while its not as obvious as arson, Skver would be on very shaky ground if those were proven.

[Moshe in Israel]

Further to the Mafia anology, here is a link to the standard organizational chart.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/Mafia_family_structure_tree.en.svg

Substitute:

Twersky=Boss
Some unnamed, hidden power-broker/attorney=Consigliere
Main Gabbai=Underboss
Assistant Gabbaim=Caporegime
Askanim=Solders
Spitzer for one=Associates

[devorah]

"I would assume that statistics on crimes committed in New Square over the last couple years (or any other time span) could be gotten from the police and compared with the crime rate of other/neighboring communities. This should be a matter of public record."

The New Squarerers rarely call the local police because everything is handled internally. If they do call, the police generally do not file reports as per St. Lawrence's order. Domestic violence is never reported, but the women are escorted to the local shelter quietly.

[devorah]

"maybe someone should make an offer on a house and see what happens"

Posted by: seymour |

I recall a few years ago a non Chasid family bought a house in NS and the house was constantly vandalized so they left. I believe they were renting. Most of the houses are section 8 (owned of course, by the Chasids.)

I drive through NS when my relatives come to visit from out of town to show them what they read about in their local papers. My car is always followed by at least one dirty, beaten up car until I leave the main street. My relatives are amazed at how many strollers are left outside with babies and small children running around and yet no adults are there to supervise.

[Aleksandr Sigalov]

Yeah, that makes sense. Sorta like in the movie series "Children of the Corn" ? lol

[seymour]

Posted by: devorah | June 28, 2011 at 10:11 AM

i think this week I will walk my dogs in NQ and see what happens

[David]

My relatives are amazed at how many strollers are left outside with babies and small children running around and yet no adults are there to supervise.

This seems typical for frumma everywhere. No problem. If something happens to one baby they just make some another one.

[David]

i think this week I will walk my dogs in NQ and see what happens

Posted by: seymour | June 28, 2011 at 12:38 PM

Please take a small camera. You might be able to report the results to FM.

[jancsipista]

az der rebbe fortzt fortzen ale hassidim translation if the rebbe farts fartzen all the hassidim, he demands of them :) what a joke they are the laughing stock of all rational normanl people who do as the romans do when they are in rome.

[anuran]

Of course he didn't tolerate violent behavior.
He'd never do that.
Suggested, approved or ordered is another matter

[anuran]

Moshe, you make an excellent point.

No. Sorry. That's absolute bullshit.

People may choose to observe religious customs. The town may not force you to follow them, harass you if you don't follow them or say that by living in the town you have agreed to do whatever the head Witch Doctor says. That would run smack into denying someone his civil rights. The penalties for that are horrendous. Under 18 USC they can include the death penalty if the attempt involves kidnapping, attempted murder or arson.

An insider living in an Amish town may not be liked by his neighbors if he breaks the Ordnung. But they have no right to force him to do so, let alone commit crimes in service of that.

[Flatbusher]

These are LAWYERS talking, and their mindset is getting someone off on the technicalities of the law, of which I am clueless.

Nevertheless, to meet a LEGAL requirement of incitement etc. maybe a higher bar than what we consider it in the vernacular would be required.

So while we all know that the Rebbe in NS knows when a NS woman goes to the mikveh, approves his/ her marriage in the first place. requires you to tithe x amount etc. in short NOTHING happens there without HIM knowing.

However this may not meet the legal requirement of INCITING someone to commit a crime. Esp. since this is so far from the mindset of an average non NS HASID, let alone American Jew, let along your average Non Jew, that it is unfathomable in this day & age. Jim Jones WITHOUT the Kool-Aid.

[Moshe in Israel]

++Anuran

You can quote all the law that you want, but the fact is, you have NEVER lived in an Amish community (Am I wrong?), and neither have I. So you have no basis for how they treat those who break the Ordnung.

So you're simply making a supposition about what life MAY be like, with no direct knowledge.

And as I've stated in previous posts, this isn't a Village of NS issue, viz. the village government and how it operates under State and Federal law.

This is a issue of the religious community of NS, and what that means from a civil liberties, First Amendment standpoint, as it applies equally to those who live there and Twersky as the religious community leader.

As I stated earlier, the residents of NS are acquiescent to their personal interests in order to live in the religious community of NS.

[SkepticalYid]

@Moshe: what you're overlooking, or perhaps choosing to overlook in your discussion, is the fact that NS is a chartered religious corporation. As such it has specific legal obligations under NYS law. If NS is in violation of the law as it applies to religious corporations, or is in violation of human rights as similarly applied- NS and the Rebbe are potentially very much liable.

[Moshe in Israel]

++SkepticalYid?

I would like to suggest that the Village of NS, which is an incorporated village according to NY State Law, is in fact by definition a Gated Community. And as such, maintains common interest housing developments (CIDs) which is a form of 'Privatopia'.

Privatopia is to live under the rule of residential private governments.

These governments perform functions for their residents that were once the province of local government, providing, for example, police protection, trash collection, and street maintenance and lighting.

They also place restrictions on ownership of property and enforce rigid and often repressive codes of conduct governing the most private aspects of people's lives.

Although NS is a 'religious' community, there is probably enough precedent from case law of gated communities to show that the Village of NS is in its right to enforce restrictive codes.

Let's put the Davening restriction aside, and focus on a more blatant one: women on one side of the street, and men on the other side of the street. How would you interpret this? Restrictive? Non-restrictive?

So, the situation in NS has reached a 'flash point', and is now under the watch of State and Federal law enforcement. It will be interesting how this plays out from a civil standpoint. From a criminal standpoint, there will be no basis for indicting Twerseky. But there will be a basis in civil law in that Rottenberg's rights were violated, as well as those of others.

[Shmarya]

It is not and does not qualify as a gated community and gated communities can not legally discriminate in religious matters.

[anuran]

Sorry, Moshe. No matter how many times you repeat it and no matter how much you want to burn a few witches the law applies to all.

Everyone has civil rights. There are no exceptions which say you can vandalize, exile, assault or murder people who don't follow your cult's dictates. That's the whole point of freedom of religion, freedom of association, the entire legal history of the United States and on down to the UN Charter on Human Rights.

The Amish may shun someone who breaks the Ordnung. That's their right. They don't have to associate with him. But they can't vandalize his home, destroy his property or murder his family in its beds. It doesn't matter what sort of "religious community" or "independent village" you're part of. As long as you're under the jurisdiction of the United States you are bound by its guarantees of fundamental rights and liberties.

[SkepticalYid]

Moshe- you can pilpul all you want, NS is NOT a gated private community. You keep changing definitons and terminology referring to NS. It doesn't fly. Good try, though.

[Morris the Katz]

Mosheleh you putz:

New Square is a village chartered by the State of New York. It is not some privately held compound like David Koresh's was in Waco, or like some neo-Nazis own in northern Idaho.

There are state and county roads that run through it. I drove it recently, on my way north (it's a shithole, btw). As a legally-chartered entity, it is required by law to follow U.S. laws, which absolutely forbid a state religion, or a municipal religion.

Btw, even if one lives an a gated community, the leaders of that community cannot engage in illegal practices either, such as making men and women walk on separate sides of the street.

Unfortunately, the laws of Israel aren't up to the level of those in the USA, which is why I'm not as big a fan of Israel as I once was. Maybe such communities exist in Israel with legal status; too bad. But not here.

You're blowing smoke out of your rectal orifice.