Saturday, April 17, 2021
When disbarred lawyer Gustavo Vila admitted to stealing $900,000 in World Trade Center compensation owed to a retired cop and friend, he faced more than just federal prison time.
He also lost contact with his son, an NYPD officer he claims broke off their relationship over the betrayal.
Vila will be sentenced Monday in federal court in White Plains and his lawyer has asked for a 3-year prison term. In seeking leniency, Vila cites all that he has lost already — with his wife divorcing him and his son wanting nothing to do with him — and his past police service that included helping out at Ground Zero.
Prosecutors want him sentenced to 4 years and three months in prison. They argue that he didn’t learn from a prior conviction and should have known better than to defraud a fellow ex-cop who he knew needed the financial assistance.
|Gustavo Vila leaves federal courthouse after pleading guilty|
The victim, ex-NYPD traffic cop John Ferreyra, suffered health problems including cancer as a result of the 12-16 hour days he spent searching for and recovering victims of the Twin Tower bombings.
Ferreyra and his wife were friends with Vila, who lived in Yorktown, had a law practice in Westchester County and was also a retired cop.
In 2012, Vila was retained by Ferreyra and applied to the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund on his behalf.
|John Ferreyra and President George W. Bush|
Three years later, the lawyer was disbarred after being charged with grand larceny for keeping a woman’s down payment for a home. He was put on probation the following year after pleading guilty and paying restitution.
Vila never told Ferreyra any of that.
In 2016, the fund sent over $1.03 million to Vila for Ferreyra. Vila would have been entitled to 10 percent. Instead, the $103,000 was the amount he gave Ferreyra, insisting for three years that the rest of the money was never paid out.
He was confronted last year after Ferreyra learned of the disbarment and contacted Fund administrators, who told him the money had been paid. Vila asked Ferreyra not to report him to law enforcement.
Defense lawyer Susanne Brody’s request for a 3-year prison term is below the sentencing guidelines of 41-51 months that U.S. District Judge Vincent Briccetti must consider.
Ferreyra contends the guidelines mark the only leniency Vila deserves, as the maximum sentence he faces is 10 years. One of his current lawyers, Bruce Kaye, called it an "an exceptionally serious crime by a predicate felon against a 9/11 hero cop" and that anything less than a 51-month prison term "would promote disrespect for the law."
In an interview Friday, Ferreyra said he felt bad for Vila and the "stupid decisions" he made. But he was struck by his former friend's failure to learn from his earlier crime. He said "the better man" would have taken the fee to which he was entitled and been satisfied with that.
"He was just waiting for my money so he could pay off his debt," Ferreyra said..
But Brody argued that Vila’s good qualities should outweigh “the past few years where he has spun out of control.”
Vila, 62, was a lieutenant in the NYPD and served as special counsel to the police commissioner before retiring in 2002 to become a lawyer full time. By 2010 his law practice was run into the ground by his partner, who declared bankruptcy after Vila claims he spent the firm’s money on vacations and personal expenses.
In a letter to the judge, Vila wrote of overcoming an abusive father and becoming a cop always committed to helping others. He said he had lost his moral compass after facing insurmountable debt when the partnership dissolved. He had to borrow from friends and family but could never catch up.
He recalled how as an undercover narcotics officer he often had guns put to his head. “(I) always took that moment of pause to make the right decision. But yet here I failed to do so.”
He suggested the shorter time he is incarcerated the quicker he can find employment that will allow him to pay Ferreyra back.
“I am not remorseful because I was caught,” he wrote. “I am repentant because I have had time to reflect and look deep inside my soul contemplating my actions and speaking with others who know me and know of the despicable act and situation that I have put myself in but most of all, the terrible pain and damage I have caused John Ferreyra and his family.”
Ferreyra is worried that no amount of employment will allow Vila to make full restitution.
has received about $60,000 from Vila and the maximum allowed $400,000
from the state Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection. Once Vila repays the
more than $450,000 Ferreyra is still owed, anything more Vila comes up
with would reimburse the lawyers' fund.
Friday, April 16, 2021
Have you ever watched a dark comedy thriller where a lesbian couple plays a game of cat-and-mouse with the Russian mafia? Me neither, that is until I watched “I Care A Lot”.
The movie is set around Rosamund Pike’s character, the ruthless Marla Grayson, who along with her business and love partner Fran, created a business that involves taking advantage of elderly people, especially wealthy retirees, for profit. That’s why when Marla received a call from Sam Rice, the manager of the Berkshire Oaks Senior Living Facility, and was made aware of her unethical occupation that one of her clients died, she remarked, “I thought he’d last us at least another five years.” The lack of remorse was present when Marla threw away the headshot of her client, previously pinned in her wall gallery of her victims located in her office.
The lost mini stream of her hefty income results in her pristine operation to kick off. It begins with a consultation with Dr. Amos, who picks one of her patients, Jennifer Peterson to become Marla’s new client. According to the physician, Jennifer was a “cherry”, an elder with a fat bank account and no records of the family, a prime candidate for exploitation that was to come soon.
In a montage, Marla convinced the judge that Jennifer was unable to take care of themselves because her physician falsely accused her patient of showing symptoms of the beginning stage of dementia. Soon enough, Marla was granted the consent and documents to be the legal guardian of Jennifer. Strutting with power and confidence in her yellow monochromatic suit, Marla whisks away the confused Jennifer to the Berkshire Oaks Senior Living facility, where she will stay helplessly as the shady lesbian couple liquidates her assets.
Ideally, Marla and Fran would milk Jessica until her death, that is until it is discovered that their wealthy retiree has ties with the Russian mafia, led by Peter Dinklage’s character, Roman Lunyov. Without giving too much away, everyone encounters violent and humiliating blows over an elder woman, who wasn’t as sweet and innocent as she appeared before getting trapped in the senior living facility.
The movie overall was engaging and kept me on the edge through the twists and turns that I didn’t see coming despite the ending is unsatisfactory. In fact, Marla justifies her profession and view of elder people as transactions as a way to become rich, “Well, to make it in this country, you need to be brave. And stupid and ruthless and focused. Because playing fair, being scared, that gets you nowhere. That gets you beat.” Hearing this made the movie more chilling because it explores the lives of people who live with low morale that will abuse the system (and people) to achieve a better lifestyle. It also opens the conversation of guardianship abuse particularly in elders, an age group that some of the younger generations blatantly disrespect or forget about.
Director Jonathan Blakeson’s decision in casting Rosamund Pike as Marla helped the filmland its rightful spot as a psychological thriller; this may be in part because of Pike’s role in “Gone Girl” (2014), another thriller that was adapted from a novel of the same title. Pike’s ability to play yet again as a vicious and cunning character is something that I respect because not every actor can do so.
However, the main criticism I have about this movie is the decision to soften Roman, the leader of the Russian mafia instead of the ruthless characteristics that a leader of a criminal organization should have. If we are being honest here, Marla qualifies as a crime lord more than the boss himself. The representation of the mafia in “I Care A Lot” as opposed to the traditional mafia movies makes the particular scenes with the criminal group a bit cringe.
“I Care A Lot” is rooted in exploring the lives of people with low
morals who would go to the dark side to achieve their “American Dream”.
So if you were expecting this movie to be about a good-story female
character with a heart of gold, this movie isn’t for you. However, for
those interested, the movie is currently available on Netflix and Amazon
Prime in select regions.
The judge has agreed to a 60-day suspension without pay and a $30,000 fine, based on days he was absent without leave, after his assistant complained she and a bailiff were required to run personal tasks for their boss.
Dixie Dent says she expected working for Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Martin Zilber was going to be a challenge, one she welcomed.
But within weeks of being hired as his judicial assistant, she told NBC 6 Investigators, she sensed the judge was acting inappropriately.
Over the next 18 months, she would later tell the state Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC), she witnessed him not showing up for work, requiring her and a bailiff to do personal tasks and endure what she said was a rant from the judge after she informed him she was pregnant.
Having had previous miscarriages, she said she needed the job's health benefits and endured his behavior - even when he required her to wheel his heavy chair up several floors to his courtroom bench while she was pregnant, which Zilber admitted doing.
"I had to put up with it," she said in an exclusive interview, "but what I saw, (was) injustice to the constituents of Miami-Dade County."
In the end, the JQC found probable cause to support most of her allegations and Zilber last week entered into a stipulation where he admitted his behavior was “intemperate, inappropriate and damaged the public’s perception of the judiciary.”
A call to the judge's chambers seeking his comment on the matter was not returned. But attorney Deborah Baker, who said she spoke to Zilber's lawyer after NBC 6 inquired of the judge, volunteered that she had "never seen him treat a woman any different than a man" and, as far as she could tell from years of practicing before him, there "wasn't a sexist bone in his body."
In recommending the discipline to the Florida Supreme Court, the JQC notes Zilber "immediately accepted responsibility (and) expressed remorse for his intemperate treatment and misuse of his court staff."
He admitted requiring his staff to do more than help run the courtroom, including at times doing his online shopping, registering his car, working on his scrap book and picking up his Art Basel tickets.
Dent said it did not take her long to realize "he wasn’t being honest with his time sheet. It was made very clear to me that the most important thing was to hold up the appearance that he was there, but in reality that wasn’t happening."
Not there on many Mondays and Fridays, she said, and not there for a week last August when he vacationed in Malibu without taking leave, the judge subsequently admitted, though he said he did do some work while in California.
"There’s a lot of good judges on the bench who don't behave this way, and it’s guys like this that are abusing their power, taking advantage of people like Dixie," said attorney Bruce Jacobs, who has his own long-running beef with the judge over contentious foreclosure litigation.
He is helping Dent challenge the deal Zilber reached with the JQC, which only recommends discipline to the state Supreme Court, which has final say.
"We’re asking that the Florida Supreme Court reject the JQC’s recommendation, which we think is a slap on the wrist, and we want him removed from the bench and disbarred," Jacobs said.
Dent said she is glad he is accepting responsibility, but one personal attack, she said, still hurts.
"The moment I told him I was pregnant, he said, 'Oh geez. This is such an inconvenience. This is going to ruin all my plans. This is the worst possible time for you to be pregnant,'" she recalled.
Soon after, Zilber was "requiring his pregnant JA to wheel his chair up several floors to the courtroom and then lift it onto the dais prior to hearings," the JQC found and Zilber admitted, later telling an investigator he made other arrangements "once the issue was brought to his attention."
"I simply could not do it because it was so heavy and I wasn’t going to risk the baby," Dent said.
After having her daughter and returning from leave, Dent said the final straw came in August when Zilber berated her over a Zoom session witnessed by her other children.
Her family, she said, told her, "'You know, we're going to figure it out. We’re going to figure it out together, but you’re going to resign because you should not be subjected to this and the kids should not continue seeing this.'"
She submitted her resignation the next day.
Thursday, April 15, 2021
Under Senate Enrolled Act 276 — which Holcomb signed Thursday — adult guardians may now make decisions about a ward’s final disposition if no family members or powers of attorney are available to make those decisions.
The legislation was the brainchild of the WINGS Adult Guardianship State Task Force, which presented the concept last fall to the Indiana Probate Code Study Commission. Becky Pryor, a longtime guardian and guardianship advocate, said the need to give guardians this decision-making authority became more pronounced during the COVID-19 pandemic, which had a pronounced effect on the elderly and those in nursing homes.
Pryor worked with Sen. Tim Lanane, D-Anderson, to write the bill, and the original language would have placed guardians above powers of attorney and family members on the statutory list of disposition decision-makers, founds in Chapters 23 and 29 of Indiana Code. However, Lanane agreed to amend the bill to move guardians lower on the list after sharp debate in the Senate.
The legislation had the support of the Indiana Association of Area Agencies on Aging, the WINGS Task Force and the AARP.
SEA 276 will take effect July 1.
Understandably, some people may be confused by the terms conservatorship and guardianship, which can be used to describe authority over two different things. However, in the U.S., there is no uniform federally mandated definition for the two terms. States determine how they choose to use these terms, and who gets described as either a conservator or a guardian. In Tennessee, the terms used to describe a person who has been appointed by the Court to have authority for an adult person deemed to have a disability is called “conservator of the person,” “conservator of the property (or estate)” or “conservator of the person and property.” In Tennessee, the term “guardianship” is used to describe persons under the age of 18. Additionally, the law specifies who is eligible to serve as a conservator and who can file to establish one.
Currently, in order to establish a conservatorship, you must prove that an individual is disabled by a clear and convincing legal standard, which is usually accomplished through a sworn statement by a physician, psychologist, or senior psychological examiner. In other words, evidence must be presented to the Probate Court and verified by a medical professional.
The TN Court of Appeals case In re Conservatorship of Groves, lays the foundation for judges to use when determining an individual’s disability or incapacity. An individual with a “disability” for purposes of a conservatorship is one for whom autonomy has become either partially or totally impaired. In other words, the individual lacks the ability to absorb information, to understand its implications, to correctly perceive the environment, or to understand the relationship between his or her desires and actions. When a person’s autonomy becomes impaired, others step in to make choices on the person’s behalf, to promote the person’s best interests and to protect the person from harm. This process is called a “Conservatorship.”
With over 2,400 conservatorships, Davidson County has more conservatorships than any other county in Tennessee. Tennessee laws provide the framework for courts to determine how to provide oversight of conservatorship cases. This includes mandatory reporting requirements such as the Report of Physician and an annual status report. Other reporting requirements, determined on a case by case basis, may include the appointment of a guardian ad litem or attorney ad litem, an inventory, an annual accounting, and a bond.
The Office of Conservatorship Management (OCM) was created to provide additional oversight and protection for adult persons with a disability subject to a conservatorship. In addition to an assessment of health, safety, and welfare, the OCM also help to identify and refer conservators to resources available, based upon the needs and circumstances of each person. The OCM maintains a database of all conservators appointed by the Probate Courts of Davidson County for efficient management of the cases. The OCM also conducts a yearly financial review of each conservatorship of the property that require annual accountings. Upon completion of an investigation, the OCM may need to file a report to alert the Probate Court.
The OCM wants the citizens of Davidson County to know that
conservators are expected to follow a code of ethics and we strive to
preserve the dignity of people with disabilities. Please visit the OCM
website for FAQ’s and a wealth of information on conservatorships:
Greg Fox, Reporter
|Click to Watch Video|
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. —
Orange County Mayor Jerry Demings announced he'll schedule a full commission review of the Guardian program to try and resolve a dispute between county comptroller Phil Diamond Clerk of Courts, Tiffany Moore Russell.
Moore Russell oversees guardians, who manage the financial and medical affairs of the incapacitated.
It concluded the Clerk's Office was not adequately supervising the program.
According to the audit, it reviewed 3,300 cases, many of them mishandled, by former professional guardian Rebecca Fierle who will head to trial for felony abuse and neglect of one of her wards.
In just 14 cases involving Fierle and others, the audit uncovered unsupported expenses of $1.25 million for living facilities, medical expenses and other unexplained expenses.
"Who is going to improve it? Who is going to be accountable and who are we going to make answer to this and make a change," Uribe asked.
Commissioner Emily Bonilla sent her own memo expressing disappointment in the county's Commission on Aging, writing that on the "county government's guide to senior services, there are no resources available for those who have been victimized by guardianship programs."
She found the audit shocking.
"I was really surprised by the amount of work that was not being done by the Clerk's Office that should have been done," Bonilla said.
In a memo to the county, the clerk wrote that program "improvements were being implemented during the audit period" including "adding more deputy clerks to the guardianship team."
Even before Demings sets a time and a date for a discussion of how the Guardian program works, Uribe has an appointment next week with Moore Russell to get a first-hand look at how it operates.
Wednesday, April 14, 2021
The drawn-out case against Maria Moore underscores the complexity of prosecuting someone who’s severely mentally ill, pitting criminal justice, psychiatry and conservatorships against one another. Moore’s situation also speaks to a shortage of psychiatric beds in California.
|Inside Las Colinas Detention and Re-entry Facility / Photo courtesy of the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department|
Maria Moore has spent almost five years in a San Diego County jail without having been convicted of a crime.
More than a decade ago, the district attorney’s office charged the 81-year-old in the beating death of another elderly woman in South Bay. Moore is one of the longest-serving prisoners in San Diego County who’s yet to go on trial. And she might never.
Moore’s case attracted media attention at the time, with headlines describing her as the victim’s caretaker. That turned out to be untrue. A prosecutor later told the Superior Court that the victim, Charmian Antaramian, had met Moore a few months prior and allowed her to move in. Court records suggest that Moore had once scalded Antaramian with hot water, sold herself as the trustee of the victim’s estate and isolated her from friends.
After a concerned relative requested a welfare check, an SDPD officer crawled through a window in the house, located in the Palm City neighborhood, and found Antaramian’s body, the Star News reported. A prosecutor said police arrested Moore at a neighbor’s house while she was in the process of purchasing a Greyhound bus ticket. Moore later claimed to be a lay nun.
It was a sensational case. But its drawn-out history underscores the complexity of prosecuting someone who’s severely mentally ill, pitting criminal justice, psychiatry and conservatorships against one another. Moore’s situation also speaks to a shortage of psychiatric beds in California.
The criminal proceedings were immediately suspended so that the Superior Court could determine whether Moore was fit to stand trial. Judges waffled on this question for years, as attorneys dug up new information and medical professionals offered one opinion after another. Moore was removed from the courtroom for her outbursts on several occasions.
In 2011, a judge concluded that Moore was mentally incompetent, then changed his mind a few months later. By the following year, he was back to his original position. In 2014, a different judge came to a different conclusion and set a new arraignment date, allowing criminal proceedings to resume. Those efforts were short-lived, though.
The issue of mental competency was put to rest in 2015, when a third judge determined, at least for the time being, that Moore was unfit to participate in her criminal defense.
To keep the murder case alive, prosecutors had relied on the testimony of a psychiatrist who said Moore was “malingering with the objective of avoiding criminal prosecution.” The psychiatrist found it “extremely unlikely,” he said, that Moore has a delusional disorder because the onset is usually 40 years of age, but she had no recorded history of psychiatric problems until her arrest.
Public defenders, however, produced mental health and criminal records from New Mexico showing that Moore had been diagnosed much earlier in life as a paranoid schizophrenic. She’d also been evaluated in the late 1980s as a result of criminal proceedings at the time.
Following her arrest in 2010, Moore was mostly confined to a state psychiatric hospital in Patton, Calif., outside San Bernardino. But in 2016, after being declared unfit for trial once again, Moore was booked in jail.
For nearly the last five years, she’s lived at the Las Colinas Detention and Re-entry Facility in Santee, the primary point of intake for women prisoners in San Diego County, which is home to a psychiatric security unit.
The facility has a better reputation these days — the Washington Post Magazine called it “a gold standard for gender responsive-corrections” in 2019 — but it wasn’t always that way. The San Diego County Grand Jury visited Las Colinas in 2006 and expressed surprise at the appalling conditions — “the floor of at least one dorm was caving in,” the group wrote. A new version of the facility opened in 2014 under design principles intended to reduce “physical and psychological barriers and promote direct and constructive communication among staff and inmates,” according to one architectural firm.
Moore is not eligible for release. It’s still possible she could one day go on trial, but only under a limited set of circumstances.
After the murder case against her stalled, the county became legally responsible for Moore’s well-being. The court agreed to place her in the care of the public conservator under what’s known as an LPS conservatorship, a civil program for Californians who suffer from biological brain disorders. It’s meant to protect gravely disabled people from civil rights abuses while at the same time involuntarily committing them to treatment.
At the request of prosecutors, Moore was later placed into what’s known as a Murphy conservatorship, which is set aside for people facing an outstanding felony charge. It’s a different legal standard than, say, being found not guilty by reason of insanity and has the goal of restoring one’s mental competency.
The conservatorship undergoes regular reviews, which is why Moore appears in the sheriff’s inmate database for “mental comp” and not murder. If there is a change in her status, that could trigger a new round of criminal hearings. The idea, in other words, is to get her well enough so she can participate in her own defense.
“If the defendant becomes mentally competent after a Murphy conservatorship has been established, the conservator must certify that fact to the sheriff and the district attorney, the defendant’s attorney and the committing court,” wrote DA spokesperson Steve Walker in an email.
In the meantime, the Sheriff’s Department confirmed that Moore is waiting for an available bed at a state hospital but couldn’t immediately say for how long. “I’m sure COVID delayed the hospitals being able to receive new clients/inmates,” Lt. Amber Baggs, a department spokesperson, wrote in an email.
A state audit in 2020 took issue with how Californians with serious mental illnesses are cared for. It noted that people in conservatorships have limited treatment options because the wait time to get into a state hospital can take a year on average.
“California does have an extreme shortage of beds,” said Lisa Dailey, acting executive director of the Treatment Advocacy Center, a nonprofit based in Virginia, “and a lot of that is because something like 95 percent of beds are taken up with forensic patients, people who are facing charges or otherwise in the criminal justice system.”
Still, the amount of time Moore has spent in jail as opposed to a state hospital seems extreme, Dailey said. “I’ve never heard of a case lasting five years.”
There are a number of outstanding questions in Moore’s case, like whether her legal representatives have tried to get her into a state psychiatric hospital and for how long they’ve been pushing. It’s hard to tell from the outside, because the records from Moore’s mental health hearings are not publicly available. One of the San Diego County deputy public defenders who represented Moore and the Public Conservator’s Office did not respond to requests for comment.
Moore’s case may be an extreme one, but she’s not necessarily alone.
CalMatters recently found that 44,241 people languishing in a county jail
across the state — three quarters of all inmates — haven’t been
convicted of, or sentenced for, a crime. San Diego County was home to
more than 2,300 such people, including, KPBS reported, 380 who’ve been in jail for more than a year and 20 who’ve been in jail for three years and counting.
PHOENIX — A Valley caregiver is facing abuse charges for allegedly leaving a vulnerable adult in a hot vehicle in the parking lot of a shopping center near 44th Street and Thomas Road Saturday.
Officials say Yasmin Abdulle left the victim, who is diagnosed as a non-verbal autistic adult with severe cognitive disorder and a mental capacity of a 4-year-old child, in a van for about 40 minutes.
According to court documents, Abdulle left the victim in a locked vehicle with all windows rolled up with the engine shut off before going into a Burlington Coat Factory.
At the time of the incident, outside temperatures were about 93 degrees and the inside of the van was calculated to be between 128 and 133 degrees. Officials say the vehicle was facing north in the direct sunlight and did not have tinted windows.
At around 12:28 p.m. officials were able to help the victim out of the van by smashing in the windows after a concerned citizen called the police. Officers say the victim was in the backseat of the vehicle with her seatbelt on and was unable to follow directions on how to open the doors herself.
The victim was "soaking wet with sweat," and also was shaking and warm to the touch.
She was transported to a nearby hospital with severe dehydration.
After Abdulle did not return to the vehicle for a while, officers went inside the store to find her.
Abdulle told officers she was a caregiver and had been working for group homes for three to five years on and off. She also stated she left the victim in the van because she did not want to get out of the vehicle to go inside to shop and that the weather was "nice outside and it was not 100 degrees," according to court documents.
Abdulle is now facing
charges of reckless vulnerable adult abuse for placing the victim in a
situation likely to cause death or serious physical injury.
HARTFORD, Conn. (WTNH) — Long-term care workers demanding more protection on the job stormed the State of Connecticut’s Office of the Policy & Management (OPM) building in Hartford Thursday afternoon.
“Do you know what’s in the budget for nursing home workers? Do you know what’s in the budget for home care workers? Do you know what’s in the budget for group home workers?Nothing. There’s nothing for you in the budget,” said Union President Rob Baril. “Long-term care workers should not have to work late into their 70s to pay their bills. Everyone deserves to have a pension so we can retire with dignity and respect. We’re just fighting for basic human rights.”
Police say the protest involved around 100 participants. About 20 individuals entered the building and were subsequently arrested. They are all charged with criminal trespass and were released on a $1,000 non-surety bond. They are scheduled to appear in court Monday, April 12.
Connecticut State Police said, “It should be noted that this demonstration was peaceful and there were no reports of any injuries of those arrested or the involved Troopers. There was no use of force by the Connecticut State Police. The Connecticut State Police support peaceful protest and will work to protect the safety of all those involved.”
Tuesday, April 13, 2021
Francisco Cosme, 52, was ecstatic when he booked an appointment for the one-dose Johnson & Johnson vaccine at the Javits Center on March 6.
After Cosme was vaccinated, he continued to wear a mask and follow social distancing guidelines but he became “very confused and began doing things that were not normal,” his daughter, Michelle Torres, told The Post.
“April 1 was the very first day he started to have symptoms,” Torres said. “He had a cough, fever, chills, everything.”
The 31-year-old drove her father to a clinic where he tested positive
for COVID-19 and he was instructed to quarantine for 10 days.
After giving Cosme oxygen, the ambulance crew rushed him to John F. Kennedy Medical Center, where he is in critical condition and is also being treated for pneumonia.
“I’m trying to hold it together, every day you don’t know what is happening,” said a tearful Torres.
“The doctor said they did all they can do it and it’s up to him to fight and up to God.”
Torres told The Post her mother, husband and children ended up testing positive for COVID and are in quarantine until next Sunday.
“We survived the whole year without it [vaccine] doing all the things we are supposed to so do — social distancing, washing hands and masking up,” she explained.
“It’s crazy and we need answers,” Torres concluded.
The Post also reported that a Brooklyn woman who got the Johnson & Johnson vaccine at the Javits Center on March 10 contracted COVID-19.
Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez. Eagle file photo by Rob Abruzzese
An East Flatbush man has been indicted by the Brooklyn District Attorney’s Office on a grand larceny charge for allegedly stealing the down payment for the purchase of a Brownsville home whose seller he represented. The defendant also allegedly separately borrowed $14,000 from the client and never paid it back.
Gonzalez identified the defendant as Gerald Douglas, 52, of East Flatbush. He was arraigned today before Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice Sharen Hudson on an indictment in which he is charged with second-degree grand larceny. He was released without bail and ordered to return to court on May 12, 2021.
According to the DA’s Office, the defendant represented a 76-year-old woman in the sale of her Brownsville home, negotiating the contract for her in September 2018. A down payment of $71,700 was allegedly deposited into the defendant’s escrow account.
The closing occurred in August 2019,
by which time the defendant had allegedly stopped returning his client’s
phone calls, and she was forced to retain new counsel to close the
transaction. The client received the sale proceeds at the closing but
not the down payment, despite repeated requests to the defendant,
according to the charges.
It is further alleged that in June and July 2018, Douglas asked the same client if she would loan him money, first $6,000 and then $8,000. He allegedly told her he was expecting a rental payment for a property he owned in Flatbush, although in fact the property had gone into foreclosure five years earlier and he was no longer the owner.
Gonzalez commented, “The victim in
this case was allegedly defrauded of a large sum of money by her own
attorney, who had a legal duty to protect her interests. I would like to
thank my Public Integrity Bureau for its hard work in seeking to hold
the defendant accountable for his alleged criminal act and betrayal of
Douglas was disbarred by the Appellate Division Second Department in 2019.
The case is being prosecuted by Senior Assistant District Attorney Adam Libove of the District Attorney’s Public Integrity Bureau, under the supervision of Assistant District Attorney Laura Neubauer, bureau chief, and Assistant District Attorney Michel Spanakos, deputy chief of the District Attorney’s Investigations Division.
|Click to Watch Video|
By: Sabirah Rayford
BOCA RATON, Fla. — A Palm Beach County healthcare agency is seeing a new demand for a different type of home care: professional companions.
Henry and September are great pals.
“She’s got a very nice nature,” Henry said.
The 95-year-old Holocaust survivor says they have a lot in common.
“Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune,” Henry said.
September is a professional companion.
“Companion care are services provided to seniors who are semi-independent, but they may need someone to be like a buddy or an assistant to them,” Marissa Gordon said.
Gordon is an administrator at JFS at Home, a licensed private duty home health agency serving Palm Beach County.
“We always knew there was a tremendous need for this, but families were reaching out to us expressing the need for someone to get their eyes on their loved one because they were unable to travel,” she said.
With 160 clients, she says seniors in isolation also increased the demand for companions.
"Increased loneliness and depression,” Gordon said. “I think that the pandemic opened the door a little wider for senior to accept help.”
Creating new bonds in a new world.
“We know each other, basically like we are best friends,” September said.
If you'd like to apply to be a professional companion, visit ralesjfs.org/
Monday, April 12, 2021
The state police are asking for the public’s help in finding a home health aide suspected in the beating death of a 75-year-old Rocky Hill man this week.
Melissa Feliciano, 31, is wanted for arrest on charges of felony murder, murder, first-degree robbery and sixth-degree larceny in the death of Robert Iacobucci.
Her mugshot, from June 2020, is the most recent picture police have of Feliciano, they said.
State police said Feliciano has moved around a lot, with various addresses on file, but is known to frequent the Hartford and Manchester area.
Feliciano, a native to Delaware, may have left the state, police added. “It’s always a concern,” they said Thursday afternoon.
The 31-year-old has two pending cases in community court in Hartford, according to online court records. She was arrested in Rocky Hill on Dec. 28, 2019, and charged with second-degree criminal trespass. A second-degree failure to appear charge was added to the case Feb. 4, 2020.
In the second case, Feliciano was charged by West Hartford police with interfering with an officer on Nov. 11, 2020. She’s due back in court on May 27 in both cases.
|Melissa Feliciano is a murder suspect in the beating death of 75-year-old Robert Iacobucci of Rocky Hill, state police say.|
Feliciano is one of three people who police believe were involved in the homicide earlier this week. Franklyn Cruz, 42, and Madeline Dickey, 35, were arrested after a witness alerted police to what had happened in Iacobucci’s house on Pondside Lane, state police said.
Iacobucci was found dead on the second floor of his home Monday, with his hands tied and injuries to his face and head, state police said.
A police report released Tuesday recounted the series of events that led to Iacobucci’s murder, including interviews from the witness and Dickey and Cruz themselves.
Cruz and Dickey told police that Feliciano was Iacobucci’s home health aide, but they haven’t been able to verify that information yet, state police said.
Dickey also told police that the attack began when Feliciano complained about how she was treated poorly by Iacobbuci and convinced her and Cruz to “scare him” into giving them money. The trio went to Rocky Hill around 1 a.m. Monday, and Cruz and Feliciano tied up and beat the 75-year-old, while Dickey waited in the garage and played with his dog, she said.
Following the attack, the couple said they dropped off Feliciano in Hartford. She hasn’t been seen since.
Police interviewed the acquaintance Monday, and he added that he recently met with the couple again that day and that they were planning to go home, change clothing, change the license plate on the stolen vehicle then dispose of Iacobucci’s body, the police report said.
Police arrested Dickey and Cruz outside their New Britain residence. Inside the home, they also found Iacobucci’s dog, who is safe, healthy and with Iacobucci’s family members, Brian Foley, a spokesman for the state police, said Thursday afternoon.
Cruz’s bail was set at $2 million and his next court date is scheduled
for April 28. Dickey’s was set at $1 million; she is due in court April
Embattled Cleveland Municipal Court Judge Pinkey Carr accused of more inappropriate behavior in new disciplinary complaint
By Cory Shaffer
CLEVELAND, Ohio — A state disciplinary attorney issued a 118-page complaint against a Cleveland Municipal Court judge who, in spring 2020, ignored a directive to stop holding hearings because of the pandemic.
The new complaint filed Friday against Judge Pinkey Carr says she routinely flouted court rules and antagonized defendants, lawyers and court staff from the bench. It accuses the former city and county prosecutor of making inappropriate jokes about fictional strip clubs and says she issued arrest warrants for people who did not show up to court hearings that she scheduled without telling them.
Carr ran afoul of rules that require judges to conduct themselves fair and impartially, uphold the public’s confidence in the judiciary and maintain proper courtroom decorum.
The sweeping complaint comes as Carr is already facing disciplinary proceedings for violating an administrative order limiting court hearings due to the coronavirus. She also made false statements to a TV station and another judge denying that she issued warrants for people who did not show up for hearings after the court announced it was postponing them.
Other findings in the complaint say Carr:
- Negotiated plea deals with defendants without a prosecutor or defense attorney present
- Cracked jokes at the expense of defendants
- Waived court costs and fines without asking whether they could afford to pay them and filing fictitious paperwork with the court
over court hearings in workout clothes and no robe, prompting one
defendant to ask court staff if a judge planned to attend the hearing
Assistant disciplinary counsel Michell Hall wrote that Carr’s conduct violated multiple rules of professional conduct. Hall requested that the Board of Professional Conduct and the Ohio Supreme Court sanction Carr.
A request for comment from Carr sent to court spokesman Ed “Flash” Ferenc was not immediately returned Friday evening.
Friday’s complaint says Carr conducted several improper hearings with defendants charged with low-level misdemeanor charges who appeared without an attorney. She quizzed them about the facts of their cases, the complaint says.
Many of the cases involved people charged with alcohol-related offenses. She mocked one man charged with violating open-container laws for drinking cheap beer and joked in the courtroom about how long it would take him to pay a $25 fine.
She also prevented defendants from leaving her courtroom so she could continue to joke about them with her staff, the complaint says. One man was accused of violating a protection order for texting a woman that a man she was with was a “f--k boy.” After he left, Carr joked with her bailiff about asking him what that term meant. She then directed someone from the court to get the man from the hallway and bring him back so she could ask him. When he returned, she asked him what it meant, then told him not to bother answering and told him to leave again. She then laughed with her staff and continued talking about the case while the next defendant waited for their hearing, the complaint said.
Carr also made jokes from the bench about P-Valley, the name of a Starz TV show about a strip-club in Mississipi, the complaint said. She joked about taking a court bailiff there and then asked about a female attorney who appeared in her courtroom who she referred to as “cute.”
The complaint also said that Carr once yelled at an assistant public defender when he told a man charged in connection with a shootout that he didn’t have to answer when Carr asked what the word “firefight” meant. Carr chastised the attorney and said she could ask any question she wanted to.
The attorney asked Carr to wear her mask if she was going to yell. The next day when the same attorney was in her courtroom, Carr wore her mask below her chin and asked her bailiff to use a tape measure to count the number of feet the attorney was away, then continuously mocked the attorney for his concern over the coronavirus.
She routinely berates defendants who call her “ma’am” by referring to them as “little boy” and “little girl.” One elderly defendant repeatedly answered Carr’s questions with “yes ma’am” and “no ma’am.” As the woman walked out of the courtroom, Carr muttered loud enough for people in the courtroom to hear about how she wanted to punch the woman in the face.
The complaint also criticizes Carr for abusing the capias process in cases where she ordered people to pay fines without going through the clerk of court’s office. She regularly orders defendants to pay fines by a specific date, then schedules a hearing on their ability to pay a few days later if they fail to meet the deadline. If the defendants don’t show up to the hearing, she issues an arrest warrant that also includes an order barring them from qualifying for programs that allow them to pay their fines through community service, guaranteeing their arrest, the complaint said. In at least one case, Carr never told the defendant that she set the hearing, the complaint said.
When he didn’t show up, she issued the warrant, and he spent a total of five days in jail because he didn’t pay a fine for a misdemeanor traffic case, the complaint said.
Friday’s complaint is in addition to disciplinary counsel Joseph Caligiuri’s complaint recommending Carr be disciplined for violating six rules of judicial and professional conduct. Among other things, those rules require judges to promote public confidence in the judiciary and bar attorneys from engaging in “conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.”
Cleveland.com reported last March that Carr held court hearings in violation of the order that Administrative Judge Michelle Earley issued order postponing all court hearings for defendants who were not already in jail to prevent the spread of COVID-19. The March 13 order was posted on the court’s website and distributed to media outlets, who reported that the court hearings had been closed.
Cleveland.com reported on March 17 that Carr had held hearings that did not follow Earley’s order on the previous two days and issued capiases -- or arrest warrants -- for people who did not show up.
Carr, who did not return requests for comment from cleveland.com at the time, granted an interview to WJW Channel 8 reporter Peggy Gallek and said while on the bench in her courtroom that cleveland.com’s report was false and that she worried it would make people think they had to come to court or else she would issue arrest warrants for them.
After the interview concluded, courtroom video obtained by cleveland.com showed Carr went on to issue arrest warrants for 17 people who did not show up to her courtroom and issuing bonds for their eventual arrest. The video also showed Carr mocked an assistant public defender who had asked if he could tell his clients they didn’t need to come to court the next day in keeping with Earley’s order. Carr rejected his requested, and after the lawyer left the room, Carr turned to a member of her staff and referred to him as “little idiot.”
Cleveland.com later reported on the videos, and Carr, who again did not return cleveland.com’s requests for comments, told WJW Channel 8 that she did not know that when she marked a defendant’s failure to appear that a warrant would be issued for that person’s arrest.
Caligiuri’s complaint also included a text message exchange between Carr and Earley later that day. Carr again called cleveland.com’s reporting “reckless” and “inaccurate.” Earley asked Carr if she issued arrest warrants, and Carr responded that her journal entries clearly stated “no warrant to issue,” according to the complaint.
When Rita Meredith was younger, she had earned the distinction of being the first woman to serve as a mounted police officer in the United Kingdom. But clearly, working alongside horses was something far more than just a job.
And decades later, her love for those animals never faded. And it showed.
Meredith, who later moved to Australia, passed away earlier this month at a New South Wales hospice facility. But her final days were among her most joyous, thanks to a very special surprise visit she received.
"Her main wish before she passed was to smell/see a horse for one more time," Sykes wrote.
Meredith's final wish was fulfilled.
Learning of Meredith's desire to be in the company of horses one last time, members of the NSW mounted police decided to drop by the hospice facility for a meet and greet.
"They travelled all the way to Newcastle today to see Rita and make her wish come true," Sykes wrote. "Police officers Graham and Nicole were accompanied by the very handsome Hollywood and Don, and they sure made Rita’s day."
According to Sykes, Meredith gave the horses apples and plenty of pets. It was a chance for her to reconnect with animals she'd long held dear.
"There were plenty of tears shed and beautiful memories made," Sykes wrote.
Meredith reportedly passed away two days after that special surprise. The legacy of her lifetime of love for horses, however, lives on in the hearts of all who knew her. And to see her final with fulfilled is something Meredith's family won't soon forget.
"I cannot thank the NSW police for
making this happen," Sykes wrote. "You have made this lovely lady's wish
come true, and did it with such professionalism, respect and grace. On
behalf of Rita’s family and friends, THANK YOU!"
Sunday, April 11, 2021
New Mexico’s governor on Thursday signed a bill legalizing assisted suicide in the state.
Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) signed the “Elizabeth Whitefield End of Life Options Act,” named for a late state district court judge who died of cancer in 2018, and who became an advocate for assisted-suicide in her final years.
The bill allows licensed physicians, osteopathic physicians, nurses, and physician assistants to prescribe a lethal dose of medication for terminally-ill patients who are deemed capable of self-administering the dose.
New Mexico is now the eighth state to have legalized physician-assisted suicide, along with California, Colorado, Hawaii, Montana, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. The District of Columbia has also legalized the practice.
The state’s Catholic bishops had strongly opposed the bill, which was passed by the House in February and by the Senate in March, largely along a party-line vote.
Archbishop John Wester of Santa Fe stated on March 3 that the legislation was “the worst in the nation.”
“God’s law calls us all to recognize and protect the life and dignity of each and every human being, especially the most vulnerable. This includes unborn children and those at the end of life,” he stated. “We are promised that God’s law will ultimately bring peace and new life, especially to those who are suffering.”
The bill requires two licensed health care providers, one of them a doctor, to determine a patient’s terminal illness. Patients in hospice do not require a second confirmation.
If the patient has a history of a mental health disorder or intellectual disability – or if the providers believe they have a disorder – they must be referred for a mental health assessment before a prescription is filled.
For the request for a lethal dose of medication, two witnesses must be present, and only one may be a relative of the patient. The bill requires a 48-hour waiting period between the prescription being written and it being filed.
Some amendments in the bill were struck before it passed the state Senate. Amendments allowing for insurance collection and waiving liability for health care providers were removed, AP reported.
The bill still contains a state residency requirement, which a 2019 version of the legislation did not include. Some critics warned that the previous bill would have enabled “suicide tourism” where patients would travel from out-of-state to receive a lethal prescription. That bill also allowed for lethal prescriptions to be issued remotely through telemedicine.
The 2021 bill does include a conscience exemption for health care
providers who refuse to provide a lethal prescription, but it requires
them to inform the patient and refer them to another provider who will
provide the prescription.