"Adjudicated without public scrutiny"
The identity of Talmudic child molesters is protected in New York by the District Attorney
Another outrageous case of preferential treatment
Americans continue to be oblivious to the growing threat of Talmudic law in America and the Zionist supremacy it generates over the rest of us less-than-human gentiles. Here below is another case of the preferential treatment which prosecutors immersed in a Talmudic mentality and ethos evince within law enforcement: one law for the Master Race of Holy People and another for everyone else. Imagine if the identity of Catholic priest-molesters were concealed in this manner? The media outcry would form a sonic boom that would resound from coast to coast.
--Michael Hoffman, author of Judaism's Strange Gods and Judaism Discovered
______________________________________________________________
Orthodox Abuse Suspects Get Exemption
Brooklyn Prosecutors Deny Request for Identity of Sex Suspects
By Paul Berger • berger@forward.com
Forward newspaper (New York)
Published April 24, 2012, issue of May 04, 2012
Orthodox Jews charged with child sex abuse in Brooklyn (New York) should have their identities protected because of the community’s “tight-knit and insular” nature, prosecutors claim in a remarkable response to demands for information about the cases.
Rejecting a Forward request under the state’s Freedom of Information Law, the Brooklyn district attorney made the startling claim that Orthodox Jews deserve a blanket exemption from the usual public disclosure rules. Prosecutors claimed that Orthodox Jews are “unique” in that releasing the names of suspects would allow others in the community to identify their victims.
“The circumstances here are unique,” Assistant District Attorney Morgan Dennehy wrote in an April 16 letter to the Forward. “Because all of the requested defendant names relate to Hasidic men who are alleged to have committed sex crimes against Hasidic victims within a very tight-knit and insular Brooklyn community, there is a significant danger that the disclosure of the defendants’ names would lead members of that community to discern the identities of the victims.”
Although Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes has long resisted requests to identify Orthodox sex suspects, the letter is believed to represent the first time his office spelled out why it specifically singled them out for preferential treatment.
Dennehy cited the state’s civil rights laws in denying the Forward’s request for the names of 85 Orthodox Jews arrested on sex charges during the past three years. The Forward made its request in December 2011 after prosecutors announced that scores of Orthodox Jews had been charged under a special program designed to encourage the community to come forward with information.
He did not explain whether prosecutors had concluded that there was anything specific about each of the 85 suspects that might make it possible for others to determine the identity of their victim from the identity of the suspect.
He also did not explain whether such a blanket exemption might be granted to other similarly “tight-knit” communities in the borough. And there were no details about what criteria prosecutors would use to determine whether a particular group should be granted such preferential status.
Dennehy also claimed that revealing the names of abuse suspects could harm the operation of the DA’s special hotline, Kol Tzedek, or Voice of Justice, which was set up to three years ago to encourage Orthodox abuse victims to come forward. Disclosing suspects’ names could cause victims to lose faith in the hotline, which in turn would “interfere with law enforcement investigations or judicial proceedings,” he claimed.
Marci Hamilton, a law professor at Yeshiva University, said that prosecutors’ refusal to release the suspects’ names or other information about their alleged crimes amounts to “enabling” abusers.
“I think they are complicit in what enables these kinds of perpetrators in these kinds of communities if they are going… to refuse to publish names of any child sex predators,” Hamilton said. “When names of perpetrators are made public, their other victims are empowered to come forward and the whole community is given the power to identify and stop them and other predators.”
Hamilton added: “What the DA’s office is doing, unfortunately, is playing right into the hands of the abusers.”
Daniel Mullkoff, a legal fellow with the New York Civil Liberties Union, said there was no good reason to withhold the names of abuse suspects from the public. “In this case, the public has raised concerns about what the district attorney is doing,” he said. “Withholding of this information is without a legal basis and denies access to just the type of information that the public records law seeks to make public.”
In October 2009, Hynes office redacted the names of 26 Orthodox Jews on a list of those charged with sex crimes. A Freedom of Information Law request submitted by the Forward to see those names was refused.
When Hynes last year trumpeted the arrests of 85 Orthodox Jews on sex crimes charges since 2008, he again refused to release the suspects’ names. He cited the need to protect the identity of victims. Yet that same week, Hynes issued a press release publicizing the name of a non-Jewish man convicted of raping his girlfriend’s daughter. Hynes released the man’s name, the neighborhood where he lived and the victim’s age, enough information for any neighbor to identify the girl.
Hynes even refused to name 14 Orthodox people who were convicted of sex crimes, 10 of whom pleaded guilty. They were sentenced to between one month and 20 years in jail. Although some of those cases were covered in the media, several were adjudicated without public scrutiny.
End quote from Forward
__________________________________________
This On the Contrary column is made possible by your donations and the sale of our books, newsletters and recordings. Tell a friend about us!
__________________________________________
