| Author |
Message |
    
Angie
Citizen
Username: Prism
Post Number: 56
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 7:03 am: | 
|
I recently found out that from the News Record that taxpayer's money is being utilizes inappropriately. Maplewood Township is using taxpayer’s dollars to prosecute youths? A good source revealed the information the Township hired the private firm Bendit Weinstock, 80 Main Street, West Orange NJ 07052. The Maplewood Township attorney is a partner of this firm. What an injustice. As the saying goes, you can’t fight city hall. Residents need to pay attention to how their tax dollars are being spent. |
Fruitcake
Citizen
Username: Fruitcake
Post Number: 245
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 10:43 am: |
|
"Maplewood Township is using taxpayer’s dollars to prosecute youths?"
What dollars would any town use, other than taxpayer's, to fund its prosecutor? That's why taxes are collected, to run the government. Am I missing something here?
|
aquaman
Supporter
Username: Aquaman
Post Number: 618
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 10:59 am: |
|
Angie,
Are you saying that the Township of Maplewood hired the private firm of Bendit Weinstock, the same firm where Township Attorney Roger Desiderio is employed, to prosecute youths?
Roger's job is to counsel and advise the Township in legal matters.
The Township's prosecutor, Pat Roche, is responsible for prosecuting youths. (Why do I keep hearing Joe Pesci?)
Why would Maplewood hire a law firm to prosecute youths? Maybe to provide legal advice, but to prosecute youths?
Are you sure your source is as good as you think? |
greenetree
Supporter
Username: Greenetree
Post Number: 6295
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 11:41 am: |
|
The Township should not be moving forward with any actions against these kids. My understanding (no first hand knowledge) is that the county dismissed the case and the Mayor acknowledged that the incident was not handled correctly.
That said, you can't take anything from the News Record as even remotely beginning to resemble investigative reporting or facts. Aqua is right - I'd dig deeper to find out the truth. |
Angie
Citizen
Username: Prism
Post Number: 58
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 1:55 pm: |
|
Ask the Mayor or any of the Township Committee members about this fact. They could verify provide verification to this fact. There must have been a vote for them to go ahead with this. |
greenetree
Supporter
Username: Greenetree
Post Number: 6302
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 2:33 pm: |
|
Angie - you are the one stating "facts" from the News-Record. Since you are raising the issue, I would think that you have pursued it with the Mayor and TC. Please share what you have found out.
NR is notorious for screwing up the most incredible things. If they were my only source for the correct order of the alphabet, I would question whether A really does come before Z.
Not trying to pick a fight; just asking the the person spear-heading the issue on MOL shares the results of her more reliable research. |
Angie
Citizen
Username: Prism
Post Number: 59
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 2:58 pm: |
|
I saw the actual court documents filed by Bendit Weinstock and signed by Roger Desiderio. I don't have permission from my source to post the documents. If the TC members are honest they will verify this information. It should be public information because the taxpayers are funding this. |
greenetree
Supporter
Username: Greenetree
Post Number: 6304
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 3:37 pm: |
|
I'm not going to argue with you; you have a right to not reveal confidences.
But, if it is a court document that has been filed, isn't it public information? I don't know. I also think that someone will need to call Town Hall and ask directly; I don't see anyone volunteering this info. They may refuse to comment or give details, but if the matter is not closed, the TC must tell us at least that.
So, best case, you can ask "is it true that the Town is filing charges or taking any action in the matter of the incident on mm/dd/yy at MMS? Who is being charged/named in the action? What are those charges/actions? Has an outside attorney been hired by the Town to handle this case in any capacity? Why are existing Town legal resources not sufficient to handle the matter"?
Worst case "Has Maplewood closed the issues concerning the mm/dd/yy incident at MMS? Is there any intent to pursue charges or legal actions of any kind against anyone within the next 180 days? Has an outside attorney/firm been retained by Maplewood in any capacity to handle this situation"?
|
Angie
Citizen
Username: Prism
Post Number: 60
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 4:19 pm: |
|
If you want to ask these questions to the MTC go ahead and do so. If you know any of the families involved you can ask them directly. I don't think they will deny showing you their documentations. This issue was not closed. The court date was Monday, December 12th. Bendit Weinstock was the firm that represented Maplewood. |
greenetree
Supporter
Username: Greenetree
Post Number: 6305
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 4:33 pm: |
|
Well, Angie. Here's the thing. I don't want to. You raised it; you want everyone to get their knickers in a twist and be enraged. And then you tell me to find out for myself what you already know?
Good luck with your issues.
Buh-bye. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 11333
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 5:27 pm: |
|
It's hard to get enraged about -- what? -- something whose facts you can't disclose.
|
Angie
Citizen
Username: Prism
Post Number: 62
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 12:48 pm: |
|
In the court document Township Attorney Roger Desiderio states “We believe it is inappropriate and contrary to the interests of justice to administratively dismiss the matter based on the non-appearance of an officer who was not even properly noticed t o appear at the hearing.” This township can benefit from www.beyondprejudice.com website. Why would Maplewood township officials and the Maplewood police department pursue this youth in this manner? According to Superintendent Peter Horoshack the surveillance camera showed that the youths didn’t enter the school. I just don’t get it. |
aquaman
Supporter
Username: Aquaman
Post Number: 621
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 1:05 pm: |
|
"I just don't get it."
I'll try to explain it.
A complaint was made to Maplewood Police. Allegedly, several individuals who were not supposed to be on Maplewood Middle School grounds were reported. The police arrested and charged the individuals with illegal trespass.
The individuals, as it turned out were Columbia HS freshman. They were not supposed to be on MMS grounds, and the police were protecting the children of Maplewood and the teachers and administration of MMS.
As with any complaint, the accused are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. The accused are entitled to a fair trial.
A fair trial means the correct processes and procedures according to law.
The MPD contends they were not properly noticed in the case, which they claim is why they failed to appear.
Get it so far?
The Township is not picking on the accused. It's proceeding appropriately according to the law.
Now you get it.
Angie, read some of the other threads. There's a huge number of posts calling for the MPD to enforce the laws on the books. It's what Maplewood citizens want.
Let's see what happens after a fair hearing.
|
hch
Citizen
Username: Hch
Post Number: 182
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 2:43 pm: |
|
According to what I have read there were either 3 or 4 kids that were arrested for trespassing. One of the kid's family decided to fight the charges. The kid claims he was visiting a former teacher....
Anyway, why wasn't the kid in school? Why did other kids decide not to fight the charges if this is such an injustice?
I would prefer to know that students are safe in the schools they are supposed to be in, so if someone trespasses on school property then they should probably be prosecuted. |
bdk
Citizen
Username: Bdk23
Post Number: 17
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 4:21 pm: |
|
i'm new to town and i knew what i was getting into re: the extremely high tax rate, but what is the deal with the taxes? it seems like they ding you on everything (permits, taxes, garbage collection) and the services aren't that much better than in other towns. |
Angie
Citizen
Username: Prism
Post Number: 63
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 5:57 pm: |
|
hch,
This happened the last day of school. The students were out half day. Also, according to what Superintendent Horoschak is saying the surveillance camera showed that the students, who were arrested, did not enter the school building? The trespassing charges were dismissed on Monday for this reason. Why was Maplewood police pursuing these students in the first place? If public safety was an issue and concern why was a gun drawn on one of the student? Why was tax money used to pursue this case further? Why is Township Attorney Roger Desiderio prosecuting these students and not the township prosecutor (Mr. Roche)? Could the officials have handled this in a much better way? I would prefer to see my tax dollars spent in a more sensible manner. If the township committee addresses the problem then they would not have to worry about lawsuits. |
aquaman
Supporter
Username: Aquaman
Post Number: 622
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 7:09 pm: |
|
Lemme take another crack at this. Have you read along so far? It doesn't seem so.
Angie, in response to your questions:
Quote:Also, according to what Superintendent Horoschak is saying the surveillance camera showed that the students, who were arrested, did not enter the school building?
Is that a question? I believe what Dr. Horoschak said was that there was no proof positive of them entering the building. That doesn't mean they didn't enter the building, now does it? Kinda like there was no video proof of OJ killing his wife. Lack of video evidence of a crime does not exonerate the accused. Did Horoschak say that there was a video of the youths behaving themselves, acting like gentlemen, minding their own business, legally carrying on? Is there video evidence of that? If so, you better make sure the youth's attorney gets that evidence. I think that would exonerate the accused, don't you?
Quote:The trespassing charges were dismissed on Monday for this reason.
No, that's not true. The charges were dropped because the police (witnesses for the prosecution) failed to appear. You somehow know that, though, don't you.
Quote:Why was tax money used to pursue this case further?
As explained to you already, the only money the township is allowed to use is tax money. Should the prosecutor argue in his spare time?
Quote:Why is Township Attorney Roger Desiderio prosecuting these students and not the township prosecutor (Mr. Roche)?
I don't think that's relevant. Both are already on the payroll. Both are lawyers for the Township of Maplewood. I would rather we got some action out of our lawyers than waste tax-payer money on lawyers who don't do their job, wouldn't you?
Quote:Could the officials have handled this in a much better way?
Could the tresspassers have? Which officials handled this the wrong way?
Quote:I would prefer to see my tax dollars spent in a more sensible manner.
I hear ya there. Like not wasting taxpayer money on phoney-baloney civil right lawsuits, wrongful arrest lawsuits, excessive force lawsuits, etc.
Quote:If the township committee addresses the problem then they would not have to worry about lawsuits.
a) It looks like they are addressing the problem and b) they don't worry about lawsuits. They can always use taxpayer monies to hire Bendit & Weinstock's crack attorneys to defend the Township.
If you have a special interest in this case, I'd suggest you advise this person to hire a good lawyer.
If you're trying to turn us into pitchfork wielding mobs angry at the Township, I'm afraid it's not working.
Thanks, |
Angie
Citizen
Username: Prism
Post Number: 65
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 3:35 am: |
|
Aquaman,
It seems like you know the facts of this case. Where are your sources coming from? It bothers me to know that this township is using my tax dollar to prosecute youths. There is no shame to this because this government preys on black youths. I’ve heard so much lies regarding this case. First the Maplewood police lied about the using their gun then the youths trespassing in the school. The lies go on. The township is willing to spend my taxpayer’s money on this issue as if the money was limitless. I need a tax break because I am not buying into this bias.
|
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 7
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 8:59 am: |
|
Uh oh, everyone duck, the race card came out . A town like Maplewood that prides itself on "diversity" all the sudden is preying on black youths. The only youths that should be preyed upon are those legitimately breaking the law BLACK OR WHITE.
The last time I heard, black kids are just as able to commit crimes as any other...
Angie, can you find something more constructive to pop a nut/ovary over?
THE LIES THE LIES, OH THE LIES!!!! BUSH LIED! CHENEY LIED! THE MAPLEWOOD POLICE LIE!!! THE TOWN OF MAPLEWOOD LIE!!! 
What are we to do...
Face it Angie, your call to arms has failed... |
greenetree
Supporter
Username: Greenetree
Post Number: 6336
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 9:44 am: |
|
I don't think that Angie's questionable manner of framing the issue should be confused with the fact that there are going to be a lot of people who question prosecuting these kids for what was essentially a brain-dead teenaged rule infraction.
The statements I read earlier from officials state that MPD should have handled the matter differently. OK, so the kids should not have been on school property. What's that worth - detention? A couple hours of community service? I can't believe that there isn't a way for kids who break rules to receive some punishment without it becoming a legal issue that sends them on the road of having a record.
If they were perfect and obeyed every rule and used good judgement in every situation, they'd be adults.
Hmmmm. Never mind.
And Bush and Cheney did lie. |
ken (the other one)
Citizen
Username: Ken
Post Number: 364
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 9:57 am: |
|
Quote:Why is Township Attorney Roger Desiderio prosecuting these
students and not the township prosecutor (Mr. Roche)?
From what I'm told juvenile offenders are prosecuted in Family Court In Newark, not in the Township. FAmily Court then decides if the case goes to trial or JCC. FWIW. |
Angie
Citizen
Username: Prism
Post Number: 66
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 11:35 am: |
|
Who pulled out the race card? This situation is what it is. Instead of pulling out the race card phrase I would suggest that you go http://www.beyondprejudice.com so that you can under stand the word prejudice. The people who use oppress other are sometime on aware of their behavior. Maybe the town already realizes the racial problem but is turning a blind eye. Whatever the case racism is like a disease. It just keeps growing. Tax dollars are being used for this terrorist act. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 9
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 5:29 pm: |
|
Angie-
Remember you saying this in an earlier post?
"There is no shame to this because this government preys on }black youths."
And if I understand your most recent post (you have some tricky verbiage going on there), you seem to be saying that sometimes individuals are unaware of their own acts of prejudice...I don't know, let the jury decide...as I quote you...
"The people who use oppress other are sometime on aware of their behavior."
So Angie, how does Maplewood prey on black youths (implying a deliberate act)and not be aware of their own prejudices at the same time???
I don't need you or some website to define prejudice for me, or at least redefine it for me, I have my trusty Dictionary.com for such occasions...
greenetree-peace, even though we probably differ in the political spectrum I was only making a joke and don't wish to turn this into a political debate....debating with liberals is a lost cause anyways! 
Now now just kidding again....} |
Angie
Citizen
Username: Prism
Post Number: 69
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, December 18, 2005 - 5:52 am: |
|
I would like to see this case go to court for trail. What bothers me is the police didn't show up the first time. They were missing in action. Then they came up with a story that they didn't receive the mail. This township has no shame to its modern day lynching of these youth. Remember when some youths were drinking and got drunk on the roof of Maplewood Middle School at 12 AM and one of the youth fell through the glass. NO Arrest occurred. This was trespassing at the Maplewood Middle School after school hours. But the difference was these youths were white. You figure the disparities and the sense of all this. This is a waste of my tax dollars. We need to have a police department that won't embarrass this town and would show up in court on time. They lie in the newspaper about the gun and the trespassing issue. If there is a surveillance video, why didn’t they use it to get facts right? The trespassing charge was dismissed. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 12
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, December 18, 2005 - 3:57 pm: |
|
Angie,
Have fun on your crusade and send a postcard while you are at it because you seem like the only one taking this trip. I don't even know why I continue to engage in this dialogue since you appear to have all the answers anyways.
Many others on this thread tried to show you the logic of why tax monies are involved but you don't seem to want to listen.
I guess black youths are not capable of committing crimes anymore and if one is even accused of a crime the same old race game emerges.
May I give you another perspective? I have heard from more than one reliable source that the Maplewood Police Department is afraid to even deal with racially sensitive matters or confront crimes involving "black youth" out of fear of being branded "racists". How is that for great law enforcement? God forbid the police actually do their job...when will this victim mentality ever end?
I am also waiting for my answer to my question in my earlier post (may I ask again?):
So Angie, how does Maplewood prey on black youths (implying a deliberate act)and not be aware of their own prejudices at the same time???
And by the way, I went on your silly Beyond Prejudice website and have three words...WASTE-OF-TIME. Talk about making a simple issue (prejudice) confusing....try a dictionary the next time. If you really need that many illustrations to define prejudice then maybe...oh, never mind....
I'll shut up now...
Scrotis Lo Knows exits stage right |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page