Through A Glass Door

Court officers had to remove accused child rapist Rabbi Nechemya Weberman and move him back into a courtroom after he allegedly menaced his alleged victim through the glass door of a courthouse conference room she was sitting in during a scheduled break in the trial.

Rabbi Nechemya Weberman

Joanna Molloy writes in the New York Daily News:

Court officers had to move an accused molester back into a courtroom in Brooklyn Supreme Court Wednesday after he appeared to menacingly stare at his teenage accuser through a glass door.

The 17-year-old girl was having a moment of peace in an interview room during recess in the trial of Nechemya Weberman, whom she has accused of sexually abusing her four times a week for three years starting from the time she was 12.

But when the beautiful teenager looked up, she saw Weberman, staring at her through the glass long enough to set the officers scrambling.

George Farkas, a member of Weberman’s defense team, was quick to call the menacing allegation “pure unadulterated bulls---.”

But Rabbi Yakov Horowitz told the Daily News, “I was there. I saw it.”

She was having none of it, heading calmly back to the witness stand in her Ugg boots and chic outfit, looking nothing like the covered-up daughter of the Satmar sect she once was. Now it was her turn to stare Weberman down, as she coolly answered lawyer Michael Farkas’ questions…

Comments

[EvilEye]

menacingly stare?

WTF?

[jancsibacsi]

Lets not forget in webermans mind he is the hurt party since he never really grew up or matured like a normal child his stunted hassidishe life no one really grows up, thats why we see all theese older monster molesters claiming they were seduced by the child the absolute insanity that theese fanatic hassidim are bought up is beyond anyones wildest imagination, he weberman by his looking at her in an intimadating way means to say you seduced me,so she should feel guilty

[S M L]

Maybe just this once one of these characters will be convicted of his crime. Would be good to see. He had no business going anywhere near this girl nor, had any of the court offices been doing a decent job, would he have had the opportunity to.

[S M L]

"court officers"

[JD]

menacingly stare?

WTF?

Posted by: EvilEye | November 28, 2012 at 08:03 PM

They are all nuts there. I sure hope that the "stare" was caught on camera to see and understand the paranoia that has appeared to grip the court.

[Shmarya]

menacingly stare?

WTF?

Posted by: EvilEye | November 28, 2012 at 08:03 PM

They are all nuts there. I sure hope that the "stare" was caught on camera to see and understand the paranoia that has appeared to grip the court.

Posted by: JD | November 28, 2012 at 08:27 PM

You need to learn the law.

He has a court order against him mandating that he stay away from the alleged victim and not harass her in any way.

Glaring, intently staring, etc., are legally considered to be harassment and, in some cases like this one, menacing.

I know you haredim don't care very much for secular law, but you really need to study it because, like it or not, you have to live under it.

[dd]

@JD,
there is no camera in the court rooms or in the court premises . cameras are not allowed in courts .

[dh]

Don't tell Court TV / In Session.

[Wigmore]

"Glaring, intently staring, etc., are legally considered to be harassment. . ."

I don't believe so at least as far as the New York Penal Law defines Harassment and I am not Hareidi.

[Shmarya]

"Glaring, intently staring, etc., are legally considered to be harassment. . ."

I don't believe so at least as far as the New York Penal Law defines Harassment and I am not Hareidi.

Posted by: Wigmore | November 28, 2012 at 10:29 PM

It's a violation of a court order and menacing.

[Atheodox Jew]

Two comments:

1) My first thought is it sounds like Weberman is getting very nervous about how this trial is going. I can't say I blame him. He should be.

2) The girl is described above as a "beautiful teenager" with "Ugg boots and chic outfit". I'm happy for her, looking confident and put together. My question is this: If she stands out as looking particularly attractive, how might this affect the jury's attitude toward the case? Just asking - I really don't know.

[Yerachmiel Lopin]

I think Weberman is tossing a hail mary (l'havdil...). His defense argument is that she is vengeful and angry. I believe the long intorregation is designed to get her to lose her cool and thus confirm Weberman's claim. They are not just using actual questions. They are trying to wear her down with this exceptionally long cross. I think the menacing look was designed not to intimidate her but to anger her. I hope he does not succeed.

[NYLaw]

Two comments:

1) This jerk sore loser is a walking stalking dead meatball. Let's see him man enough to take the stand.

2) Here is the NY Stalking menacing law, the same applies for all supporters of the victim that are being harassed and their pictures taken by the mobile phones of the X Squad,
giving it over for the "We know who you are", only to later HARASS them by "we know who". You hereby are given fair notice, see what you are in for.

New York State Stalking Laws

Penal Code § 120.14. Menacing in the second degree. 1992. Amended 1998.

A person is guilty of menacing in the second degree when:

1.He or she intentionally places or attempts to place another person in reasonable fear of physical injury, serious physical injury or death by displaying a deadly weapon, dangerous instrument or what appears to be a pistol, revolver, rifle, shotgun, machine gun or other firearm; or
2.He or she repeatedly follows a person or engages in a course of conduct or repeatedly commits acts over a period of time intentionally placing or attempting to place another person in reasonable fear of physical injury, serious physical injury or death; or
3.He or she commits the crime of menacing in the third degree in violation of that part of a duly served order of protection, or such order which the defendant has actual knowledge of because he or she was present in court when such order was issued, pursuant to article eight of the family court act, section 530.12 of the criminal procedure law, or an order of protection issued by a court of competent jurisdiction in another state, territorial or tribal jurisdiction, which directed the respondent or defendant to stay away from the person or persons on whose behalf the order was issued.
Menacing in the second degree is a class A misdemeanor

As far as the jury, they are not beauty peagent judges, their only duty is to give their opinion for what they believe is true beyond of a shadow of a doubt.

[soso]

All this witness intimidation will backfire at him, because it undermines his credibility. it's interesting how the satmarers came in hundereds to support him last summer, but in the big, wide world no-one believes him, everyone believes the "alleged" victim!

It's always the same with bullies and predators: once they are out of their small pond, where they rule like a king, they are nothing.

[splisner]

Without knowing the exact facts of the molestation case and the interaction between the two in the court I think it is unfair to draw conclusions. It is also near impossible for an accused and accuser not to have their paths cross during breaks in the trial. I think that we all owe both parties the benefit of the doubt until at least the jury comes back with a verdict. Has no one been following the large number of innocent people have spent time in prison and then later released because of oops we goofed. this Rabbi may be a real sob but he is entitled to a presumption of innocence both under the halacha and our state and federal constitutions.

[Mindless]

I know you haredim don't care very much for secular law, but you really need to study it because, like it or not, you have to live under it.

Posted by: Shmarya | November 28, 2012 at 08:35 PM

Ah yes, the German defense - "I was only following orders".

[Abracadabra]

this Rabbi may be a real sob but he is entitled to a presumption of innocence both under the halacha and our state and federal constitutions.

Actually, according to halachah he is NOT entitled to a presumption of innocence, and is presumed to be dangerous and halachically people should not allow their children or teenagers near him, or alone with him, male or female. Halachically he is a "Rodef." And THAT is the halachah.

But outside of halachah - would you allow your children or teenagers near him or to be alone with him? Even males? Why not? What about "presuming him innocent"?

The "presumption of innocence" in secular law ONLY means that he cannot be found to be LEGALLY guilty before the verdict. It does NOT mean that you leave murderers on the streets until their trials because they are "presumed innocent." Likewise with sexual predators (even IF they are not put into jail before the trial).

[bas melech]

Why did the attorney permit NW to get close enough to look in the window?

By charedim and molesters, intimidation is an art.

[JessicaR]

Let's see: the girl is 17, has endured a major sexual trauma, and her parents have married her off already? Probably to a young man she barely knew?

Oh, my goodness. This will be nothing but trouble for both of them.

On another note, I too, share the concern about sentencing a man to prison based on one person's testimony. My gut tells me the girl is telling the truth--her testimony does sound authentic--but our legal system is flawed, so I hope the guy is really guilty.

[dh]

"Ah yes, the German defense"

DON'T MENTION THE GERMANS!!!

[Chuck Brown]

I agree nothing but trouble down the road for the two of them. Makes you wonder why the divorce rate is so high in our society these days.... Crazy crazy story! Those must have been some pretty nice clean glass windows! www.retroteckwindow.ca