When I first wrote the “Brooklyn Story”, I figured that two parts would take care of this issue (residency), this time around: I was wrong. The story painfully continues. I talked about three individuals (and others by association and implication) whose residencies have been questioned by many in Brooklyn. I hoped to show that residency laws are ambiguous and nebulous, and that in political races both the spirit and letter of the law are usually violated; especially when applied against those not connected to the powers that be. Especially when used against insurgents challenging elected officials. I have always been outraged by this; it’s unfair and unjust.
Last week, the court challenge against Judge Shawndya Simpson’s residency started in a Brooklyn court. It was hastily moved to a court in Queens. For those who came into the room late, Ms. Simpson is running against Judge Diana Johnson, in a contest for the second Brooklyn Surrogate spot. Judge Margarita Lopez holds the other. Last Friday 17th August, 2007, Judge Peter O’Donoghue ruled that Ms. Simpson did in fact live in Brooklyn; tomorrow however, her opponents are going to the Appellate Court in order to reverse that ruling. Please remember that Ms. Simpson is the candidate being backed by the Brooklyn Democrat’s county organization. Note also that the same organization has in the past, backed surrogate judges who have been convicted- or removed under clouds of suspicion and corruption- over the last 30 years plus. Please remember also, that it was NYC Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia who called the Surrogate Court: “the piggy bank for elected officials and politicians.” They all see it as a cookie jar of sorts.
Judge Johnson’s supporters believe that Judge O’Donoghue’s decision was in no way a fair interpretation of the evidence discussed in court; they also believe that the heart of his decision was based on testimony that never happened. The judge said, “Ms. Simpson has convinced me by beyond a reasonable doubt that it was her intention to establish Kings County as her residence since 2003 or 2004. She resides in Kings County. But I will go even further than that; I am impressed by her testimony that it was not even until February of this year (2007) that she thought about running for the position of Surrogate of Kings County. (Since) Four of five months earlier she delivered a child, (and) at that time she had no intentions of moving up the ladder, so to speak.”
Judge Johnson’s lawyers are saying that nothing in the testimony, or in the moving the papers of this case, say anything about when Shawndya Simpson was contemplating running for Surrogate (at anytime). They claim that there was no vacancy in the Surrogate until May of 2007. They want to know where Judge O’ Donoghue got this information that he used in his decision.
Yesterday, Attorney Mitch Alter said; “A judge is only permitted to use the evidence placed before him. O’Donoghue uses this imaginary testimony as the basis of his decision that Simpson lives in Brooklyn; he has erred”.
Gary Tildzer, the campaign manager for the Johnson campaign said; “Whoever gave Judge O’Donoghue the information of about Ms. Simpson running for Surrogate in February, failed to tell him that she has attended political dinners for the last several years, trying to build political support for a Supreme Court seat”. As can be expected, Tildzer is livid about this decision.
Tildzer believes that Ms. Simpson’s legal team spent precious time challenging Judge Johnson’s lawyer (Mitch Alter), in a claim that he wasn’t fit to represent the judge, since Alter once represented Ms. Simpson four years before. That motion was eventually decided in Alter’s favor. Tildzer said that Marty Connor (Simpson’s lawyer) knew that delay was his best weapon in this case, so he wasted a lot of time. “To him it’s all tactical; frustrate the opponent because election trials held less then a month before the primaries must be done quickly. The motion to remove Alter was all part of his delay game plan that worked”.
Simpson’s legal team then challenged Alter’s attempts to obtain the documents he had subpoenaed from Judge Simpson. Simpson lawyer Izzy Goldberg sent a letter to the Hudson County Saving Bank saying that he was going to quash or stop Johnson’s subpoena of the requested Simpson deed and mortgage applications on the New Jersey home in which she shared ownership with her husband. He instructed the bank not to supply the documents. After Alter questioned Goldberg about the letter he sent the bank, Goldberg sent an additional letter to the bank telling them to turn over the requested documents to the court, a method that was previously agreed to by both parties. The Hudson Bank documents were never sent. Judge O’Donoghue told Mr. Goldberg to call the bank during lunch and have them fax the requested documents. After lunch O’Donoghue told Alter that the information was faxed and that the mortgages did list Shawndya Simpson’s residence as New Jersey. O’Donoughue also told Alter he could not see the documents because they had “too much information in them for him.”
By the time the judge hastily ended the trial (and by his admission, he was being pushed by a higher court to speed-up); many of the other subpoenaed documents which Alter requested, were never produced by the Simpson team. Judge O’Donoghue never said a word in his decision about a sitting judge not producing subpoenaed evidence.
Last week Monday, this said judge (O’Donoghue) had allowed Judge Johnson’s lead lawyer Mitch Alter, the authority to set up a New Jersey commission in order to subpoena mortgages, banks records, other relevant and pertinent information, school contact information and the like, which could not be obtained through a New York issued subpoena. Judge O’Donoghue signed the papers the next day and Alter’s New Jersey lawyer promptly filed them. Alter received information on Thursday August 16th that the NJ courts would hold a hearing on his request, four days later, on Monday 20th August. Judge O’Donoghue made a decision in this matter three days before said hearing, leaving much speculation as to why was he in such a hurry.
The judge also refused to rule on Alter’s motion to find Ms. Simpson in contempt of court for delaying and/or refusing to produce the subpoenaed documents that had been legally requested eons before. The motion was never signed or denied.
Simpson’s opponents believe that they didn’t get a fair trial. They also believe that they have presented enough evidence- despite all the delays, setbacks, stalling tactics, deception, court violations, quasi-perjury, trickery and the like- to show that Ms. Simpson actually lives in New Jersey. They bemoan the fact that Ms. Simpson failed to produce many pieces of evidence that were subpoenaed; like her EZ pass records, which could show her traveling to the New Jersey house that both she and her husband purchased in 1998. Ms. Simpson testified that she did not use it much; however it surely would have put to rest speculation as to the number of times she drove to and from NJ, and also questions as to how long she stayed there, etcetera. It could have brought some closure to this case.
They are also amazed at the fact that the judge ruled in Simpson’s favor, given that her 5 children have lived in this NJ home all this time. This was admitted to on the stand by both Simpson and her husband. This means that Ms. Simpson hasn’t lived in the same home with her kids, for the past four years; even though one was born (in New Jersey) only 10 months ago; and said kid also lives there presently. One of Ms. Johnson’s supporters call that “an immaculate conception of sorts.” Please note that the children‘s ages are 12,11,8 and 7(not including the infant).
To the amazement of many in court, Ms. Simpson testified under oath that she didn’t know the contact information for her kids at their various schools in New Jersey. In a post 9-11 world, a judge makes this incredible statement. Plus, her own obstetrician is in NJ; her kid’s doctors, dentists, and such, are all in NJ.
Even more amazing (as reported by a Johnson supporter) was that both Ms. Simpson and her husband (Jacob Walthour), could not even agree as to where their 10 month-old infant lives. Shawndya Simpson testified that her infant lives in Brooklyn with her, and that her mother-in-law takes care of the kid during the day. Simpson’s husband Jacob testified that all the children- including the infant- live with him and his mother in New Jersey.
There is even more strange testimony. At another point on the witness stand Ms. Simpson said that all the children live in New Jersey. Can anyone really believe that a mother does not live with her 10 mother old infant? Queens Judge Peter O’Donoghue did.
Judge O’ Donoghue said in his decision that he was impressed that Ms. Simpson placed her Brooklyn address on her infant’s birth certificate (though it was born in New Jersey). He was not impressed that Ms. Simpson failed to produce information that was under subpoena, or that she said under oath that when she signed and had notarized, mortgages and leases that listed her primary residence as New Jersey, she didn’t read (nor understand) the fine print on those documents. She claimed to have just signed where her husband told her to. Even Judge O’Donoghue had to ask Ms. Simpson’s lawyer (Marty Connor) why a sitting judge would not read documents she swears to by signature. Can you believe that Judge O’ Donoghue called Ms. Simpson his example of a modern woman, in his decision that she lives in Brooklyn?
Husband Jacob Walthour said in a recent Village Voice article, that “mortgages were meaningless legal boilerplates.” He additionally said, “What does principal residence mean? I don’t even know what that means.” Section 1-104 of the New York State Election Law says a primary residency is where one intends to return. Are we to believe that Ms. Simpson does not intend to return to her children and husband? We know the banks where she borrowed 1.25 million dollars know she will return to New Jersey (if they ever did leave); since that is what they both swore to.
At various stages over the past four years, Ms. Simpson gave her contact info as being at the NJ address. The same address she used to apply for, and sign off on, equity loans, mortgages and such, for various property and other purchases, that she and her husband made over the years. The problem for the Simpson folks is that even if Shawndya is eventually ruled to be living in Brooklyn, she could still face penalties and or sanctions for these infractions. I am being told that some of these papers on which she and her husband signed, they were affirming that the things specified in the fine print were true.
In 2003, Ms. Simpson and her husband rented a small apartment in Brooklyn, in order to prepare for a run at a Brooklyn civil court judgeship position-which she eventually won.
In an attempt to move to another place in Brooklyn one year later (which she secured), Ms. Simpson entered on her application that she had been residing at her NJ residence (same) for “the past 51/2 years”. Her opponents contended that she thus never moved out of the NJ home- which she and her husband purchased in 1998. This is the same home her kids have always lived in since. Her opponents posit that she never sold the NJ home, nor did she ever relocate the kids, separate from or divorce her hubby, nor did she ever actually move out. They believe that Ms. Simpson and her husband have set up a sham residence in Brooklyn in order to dupe the voters of Brooklyn, and in order to retain her judgeship- in violation of the NY State Constitution. They now call her “Shamdya”.
Mitch Alter says that the judge in this matter, based his ruling in part on Simpson driver’s license, car registration, electric bill, bank and voter registration form all addressed in Brooklyn. But if you examine some of these documents they tell another story. For example, he says that the Con Edison bill was around $25 to $30 monthly, and that it is laughable if anyone (unless they are Amish) would have such a low bill, in this day and age. And she testified that her children live with her from time to time, and that she has cable TV. Alter says that she must use a lot of candles. It appears that to Judge O’Donoghue, this modern woman- as he calls Ms. Simpson in his decision- who lives apart from her children does not use much electricity. A further look at another document- a bank account that is also listed at her Brooklyn address- shows most of its transactions being done near her New Jersey address, on almost a daily basis; some coincidence no?
On the witness stand, both Ms. Simpson and her husband admitted to having jointly lived in the same Brooklyn apartment at some time or other, essentially leaving the kids with a care-giver in NJ for two years. If you believe their sworn testimony, then for about two years they were in violation of the of the residency requirements in NJ, that mandates that one parent must live in the public school district their children attend. But first you have to get by their incredible story that both parents would live in a different state to their children for 2 years; especially a neighboring state that is so close. All this strange testimony coming from coming from a sitting judge- who by law is held to a higher standard than you or I- is rather disturbing to many political observers in the city. Some are saying that this matter isn’t closed.
Amazingly again, Shanwdya Simpson-a sitting judge- during her testimony, was unable to recall when her husband moved out of her Brooklyn apartment and back to their original New Jersey home, which they never sold after she won a seat on Brooklyn’s courts. Shanwdya Simpson- a sitting judge- testifies that she does not know the emergency contract number(s), kept by the schools in which her kids attend, in order to contact her in the event of an emergency.
A sitting judge was not able to produce her own signed legal documents securing loans in 2003, 2006 and 2007 on their NJ home; at least one of which was apparently used to purchase another home in Massachusetts. Loans in which they both affirmed that the NJ home was/ and is: their principal residence. A sitting judge does not read or produce the subpoenaed documents and Judge O’Donoghue says nothing about this in his decision. O’Donoghue says in his decision that he is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Ms. Simpson resides in Kings County. By the way, I have been told that Judge O’Donoghue is legally blind.
When this story was first bought to my attention, it was because of my writings on the blogs about the “residency” issue. I was a bit reluctant to pick it up and I even cautioned the Johnson team that they may not prevail on this, despite the mounds of evidence they have built up. They didn’t agree with me then, but I am sure that they now see what I have been trying to say for a while: residency laws are nebulous and ambiguous.
After the story broke in various other mediums, I decided to put my take to all this on the blogs: of course I was chastised and castigated by many (surprise, surprise). Maybe they never understood my points. Even now people may think that I am beating up on the Simpson team; truth be told: this is way bigger than Shawndya Simpson. It is really about blatant power-abuses, cynicism, double-standards of justice, selective-prosecution, selective-interpretation of the residency laws, tampering, cronyism, nepotism, impropriety, manipulation and the like. It’s about some of the many of the things wrong in Brooklyn’s contemporary political climate. I think too many people deliberately miss my points.
I remember pointing out to a caller one day, about the case of former Brooklyn county leader Clarence Norman, who was once in court after being challenged on “residency”. In that case the evidence questionably pointed to many people sharing the (mother’s) apartment. The question to him was: where do you sleep sir? Clarence said that he slept on the couch; this from a man who once declared publicly that he had made millions of dollars from successfully investing in the stock market. Of course he won his case. He remained on the ballot and won re-election to the State Assembly.
I also cited the case of Wellington Sharpe last year. Sharpe challenged an incumbent assembly member, and although Sharpe owned many properties in Brooklyn (at least five), he lost his ballot status. The reason was that since he had moved out from the property in which he had lived for over twenty consecutive years (just s a few months before the election), to another a few blocks away, he had essentially moved out from one district to another. In that case I asked what ever happened to the “residence that you intend to return to” standard?
Then there was Maurice Gumbs; he kept his old apartment for his college–graduating daughter. In his court papers he claimed that since it was relatively inexpensive to maintain, and since his daughter had told him she would take it over once she returns to the city, he was keeping and maintaining both places for a short period. He lost his case and was knocked off the ballot.
Then of course there is the infamous “John O’Hara” story- which I will not go into here. Plus there are many other stories and aspects to this issue of “residency”.
I believe that it is time that lawmakers take up this issue again, especially after what happened with City councilmember Mathieu Eugene, earlier this year. I believe that residency laws should be re-examined for consistency in its application and interpretation. I believe that we should al be subject to the “dunk” test /lol.
And now, Judge Simpson- who in essence, is saying that Brooklyn isn’t good enough a place for her kids to be raised in- is running to be the guardian of orphan children in Kings County; what do you think about that? The Surrogate Court is the place where people who die intestate (without a will), have their estates laid out to bare, and laid out to be regularly looted by judges, lawyers, administrators, corrupt-politicans and the like.
Without the abusive commentary, you can tell Cousin Rocky in the comments section of this blog, exactly what you think about this painful on-going Brooklyn story.
So stay tuned-in my friends; let’s see what the Appellate Court in Brooklyn does with all this in the upcoming week.