Investigation of Ramapo Police Dept. Shouldn’t Be Done by the Ramapo Police Dept.

June 3, 2011 For the second time in 10 days, The Journal News has called for an investigation of the Ramapo Police Department in its handling of the events leading up to the arson attack on Aron Rottenberg and his family in New Square. And now there’s another legal question for the state or federal authorities. Why is an obvious hate crime not being investigated as a hate crime, and why has Shaul Spitzer, the accused arsonist, not been charged with a hate crime? Who made the decision to drop this from the case, and what are the legal consequences for the authorities who decided to ignore state and federal statutes on bias crimes?

Hands Off in New Square
In a strongly worded editorial today ("Troubling Pattern in New Square"), the paper first questions police failures to act to protect the family, and then it offers a possible political reason for the lack of an investigation going back to the fall.

From the editorial: "The pattern of intimidation revealed in Ramapo police reports should pique the interest of federal agencies, including the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division. The freedom to pray where one wants without suffering violence is a civil right." In fact it’s a civil right that’s clearly defined both in New York State and Federal laws.

The editor goes on to explain that the feds should be here investigating what one of Rottenberg’s neighbors called "a terrorist life." The neighbor, in a separate story said that "he had had enough of his family being harassed, his property vandalized, and his children denied an education by the village’s religious leadership." He also had worshipped at a different location and was made to pay a price, and has now been driven out of the community. Along with the crimes against residents’ Civil Rights "The record shows that Ramapo police failed to notice the growing threat to the Rottenbergs, even though police have said that detective investigations are warranted not only for serious crimes, but for patterns of criminal activity." The attacks and threats had gone on for months—reports to the police began last October, and the Rottenbergs were not the only targets—and yet throughout that period, there were no detectives investigating.

With the ultimate threat, the attempt on Aron Rottenberg’s life last week, the editor reminds us, "Ramapo town officials failed further, as Ramapo Town Supervisor Christopher St. Lawrence parroted assurances that the attack was an ‘isolated incident.’"

Why have St. Lawrence and his police department taken a hands-off stance and then tried to pass the crime off as something other than what it was? In the editorial, The Journal offers the following explanation: "Federal law enforcement, which doesn’t rely on the community’s amazing ability to turn out the vote, could launch the clear-eyed investigation that is needed, and that Rottenberg deserves."

That ability "to turn out the vote," a near 100% bloc of robovotes, has effectively muzzled almost every local politician, county and state, as well as Chuck Schumer. We have seen public protests only from County Legislator Joseph Meyers (press release) and Eliot Engel (statement).

Denying Hate Crime Status
The New York State Penal Code clearly defines what constitutes a hate crime.

So, if your motive is to act out in some criminal way against a person because of their religious practices, you have committed a hate crime in New York State. The criminal behavior against Aron Rottenberg and his family by various members of the New Square Community apparently included harassment, trespass, criminal mischief, menacing, reckless endangerment, arson, assault, and attempted murder.

The charges against Shaul Spitzer for his attack on Rottenberg and his family have been listed as: second-degree attempted murder, first-degree attempted arson, and first-degree assault. Yet there are no charges for hate crimes committed against the victim and his family. Why?

Certainly the Town of Ramapo understands the statute. In fact, on Saturday, May 14, just eight days before the attack in New Square, a Jewish teenager was pushed to the ground in Monsey, and Ramapo police initiated an inquiry as to whether this was a hate crime. The Journal reported: "Three 16-year-old boys were walking on Crabapple Court when an orange pickup truck passed them and returned a short while later, according to police. A white man got out of the truck and pushed one of the boys to the ground. The truck then fled west toward Forshay Road." The incident was investigated as a possible hate crime by Ramapo Police with aid from Rockland County Sheriff’s Bureau of Criminal Identification. The article in the paper listed a number for witnesses to call—a number with the Ramapo Police Detective Bureau.

Were the police and detectives correct in investigating a hate crime dimension to the assault in Monsey? Certainly, that’s what the law requires. So why weren’t any detectives involved in the Rottenberg situation for months? Months during which family members were threatened, windows were broken, threatening mobs showed up at the victim’s home, car windows were smashed, a daughter was driven out of school, and so on. Did the New Square bloc vote merit some kind of immunity from State and Federal law? Why were there no investigations of hate crimes?

The accused assailant in New Square is a cousin of the Deputy Mayor. He also is, or was recently, a personal assistant (described as a butler) for the Grand Rabbi. Do either of these circumstances have anything to do with the attempt on the lives of the Rottenbergs? Can the Ramapo Police and District Attorney, who was elected solely on the reversal of the New Square bloc vote, be trusted to this investigation—especially since both seem to have already shelved any hate-crime charges here?

If you’re thinking, well, an attempted murder charge is sufficiently serious, and what difference does it make if someone left off some of the other charges? Hate crimes carry with them additional investigations, additional charges, additional bail, and, most important, additional jail time for convictions. For example, the State Hate Crimes law includes the following:

§ 485.10 "When a person is convicted of a hate crime, and the specified offense is a violent felony offense, the hate crime shall be deemed a violent felony offense."

And: "When a person is convicted of a hate crime and the specified offense is a misdemeanor or a class C, D, or E felony, the hate crime shall be deemed to be one category higher than the specified offense."

Class B felony hate crimes have prescribed minimum sentencing, and if "the specified offense is a class A-1 felony, the minimum period of the indeterminate sentence shall be not less than 20 years."

If Spitzer is convicted of the multiple counts he is charged with, application of hate-crime sentencing could make a significant difference in the punishment he receives.

Usually, you expect bias crimes to be committed against "others"--they aren’t crimes directed by an ethnic, or religious, or national group against one of their own. Mr. Rottenberg, unfortunately, became an outsider, an "other," when he decided, along with some friends to go to a nursing facility to pray with and for an acquaintance who was a patient there.

Where the Road Leads
Not part of the public discussion yet is what are the legal liabilities when you refuse to investigate and include charges in matters as serious as these. Is it possible malfeasance? Do law enforcement, prosecutors, and other public officials have the right to pick and choose among apparent criminal violations with impunity, even if their motives might be crassly political?

State and federal authorities have to take over this investigation and the prosecution of any charges.