From SI Live:The New York Civil Liberties Union is suing the city and two police officers after what the group claims was an unlawful arrest of a Staten Island environmental activist because he publicly criticized Borough President James Molinaro's economic development policies and opposed his re-election.
The suit was filed in Brooklyn federal court on behalf of Natural Resources Protective Association executive director Edward Kerry Sullivan, a Rosebank resident.
In early August, Sullivan mailed letters to numerous public officials about development plans of the Stapleton home port and wrote a letter to the editor published in the Advance calling on residents to express their dissatisfaction over the issue when they vote.
Several days later, Sullivan was arrested and handcuffed outside his home, allegedly for writing "The Jerk" on the corner of a campaign sign the group claims Molinaro's campaign posted illegally. Molinaro was never cited by the Sanitation Department for posting illegal signs.
Court papers say the sign was posted on a construction fence abutting a public sidewalk on Hylan Boulevard and Tompkins Avenue in Rosebank.
The officers who arrested him said they had been following Sullivan for several days and that he had made "enemies upstairs," the group contends.
"The right to criticize the government is one of our most important constitutional guarantees," said NYCLU Associate Legal Director Christopher Dunn, who is lead counsel on the case. "It is intolerable for elected officials to recruit the police to intimidate and silence their critics."
22 comments:
because he publicly criticized Borough President James Molinaro's economic development policies and opposed his re-election.
-------------------------------------------------
Hey Gross, better watch your back!
Police followed him for days??? I am sure the republic is safer for it.
Molinaro and the two cops, their supervisors and the Commissar need to be in jail themselves.
Suing the city and police is a great idea, but, then it will be the taxpaying citizens who pay for Molinaro's and his cronies' crime, not the actual guilty ones.
Violation of any citizen's civil rights must be codified as a major felony (treason?), and the violators must pay with confinement, property and permanent loss of pension and a permanent ban on ever being on any public payroll in any capacity.
Perhaps the political party that supports the violators need to be included as targets of the lawsuit.
Police followed him for days??? I am sure the republic is safer for it.
------------------------------------------
I did not know that Nazis still exist in the U.S.
I did not know that Nazis still exist in the U.S.
------------------------------------------
I did!
Police followed him for days??? It amazes me that the cops can follow this dude but when ya need the cops, they never come. Nice how our money is spent.
Police followed him for days??? I am sure the republic is safer for it.
------------------------------------------
"I did not know that Nazis still exist in the U.S."
I did not know that people without a molecule of sarcasm still exist in the U.S.
While I applaud the efforts of Mr. Sullivan and his organization to advocate his and the community's concerns for shore and waters restoration/maintenance etc., I can't condone his illegal means of expressing his frustrations (the petty arrest for marring Mr. Molinaro's campaign sign). Mr. Sillivan's complaint for judicial review is unwarranted and way overreaching in its perceived effects of hindering the continuation of his cause.
I would make a conjecture that Mr. Sullivan was not only frightened by the attention he had received from the local politician and law enforcement, but also hindered by compounded health issues, hence backed off his thrust in advocating residents to defeat Mr. Molinaro at the polls. He may also have been too ill to continue his fight. He's battled paralysis from Guillian-Barre Syndrome, continues to suffer from a non-compacting left ventricle and has been recently diagnosed with liver cancer and is awaiting a liver donor.
None of Mr. Sullivan's Constitutional rights were impinged upon here that I can see.
How was what he did illegal? The sign itself was posted illegally.
I understand the campaign sign itself was placed illegally, however defacing city property is still illegal. It's a petty charge yes, but getting a summons for it was warranted. Having been arrested is somewhat over the top I think, but what do we actually know in what had transpired when he was confronted by the police before the arrest? Anyway, the charges were dropped.
The issue isn't about Mr. Sullivan defacing a sign or having been arrested, it's his claims to having several of his Constitutional rights impinged upon. From what's known to us of the issue, I would say his suit is baseless and will be thrown out of court.
Klink,
It does not disturb you that the police were trailing a guy for days because he may deface an illegally posted sign with his Sharpie? Look at it this way - the ultimate cost of this prosecution (police work, court costs and all) could probably feed a family of four for a couple of years. Just my thumbnail math, but I dont think I am far off base.
As a NYC resident that regularly sees young punks vandalize and steal, that PISSES ME OFF.
"defacing city property is still illegal."
It wasn't city property, it was a campaign sign.
Why is that assumed to be fact? That second hand statement is hearsay evidence. It rings nicely for the paranoid among us though.
Having the "attention" of law enforcement would disturb me if Mr. Sullivan was just some honest working Joe Shmoe, but he's not. Essentially he's a professional advocate. Although presumably, he's never been paid by his advocacy group. I don't mean to disparage the man or what he's trying to achieve. He choose to do this full time and for some years. Play in the filthy game of politics. If you're going to play, expect some less than honest retorts from your advisories. That's the reality of politics today.
What bothers me personally about this whole issue is when I get the whiff of people riding the coattail of our Constitution on bogus grounds. That's my little pet peeve and why I felt compelled to post. It's a means to fostering this litigious society we've become which I find reprehensible. It cheapens our Constitution and I can't be quiet about it anymore.
Let's bring this somewhere further down the road...
I may go so far to say, Mr. Sullivan could feasibly be looking for a payoff to help with his outstanding and upcoming medical bills. All conjecture on my end. Just going by what I know about human nature and given what little facts we do know here.
Campaign signs being city property...
I believe they can be construed as such under local campaigning laws, but don't quote me on that. Feel free to investigate yourself though. I don't think that particular issue can be persuasive. Police usually know the laws very well.
Again, the issue isn't about the sign or its defacement. It's all about the lawsuit and the contained grievances.
"What bothers me personally about this whole issue is when I get the whiff of people riding the coattail of our Constitution on bogus grounds."
What bothers me personally is that people arent more concerned about the police riding the coatail of people whose ideas dont conform with those of the politicians.
"Police usually know the laws very well."
That cuts both ways. It also means that cops can go pretty far to curb our rights without fear of retribution.
Campaign signs are not city property. Furthermore, I had campaigners for Peter Vallone erect a sawhorse with Vallone signs feet from the door of a polling place in Astoria in violation of the rule that no electioneering is allowed within 100 feet of a poll site.
How do people from 3 generations of professional politicians not know that this is illegal intimidation? I personally demanded its removal and don't know how long it was there.
As a taxpayer and a potential crime victim I hope everyone involved is either fired or broken in rank.
The Anon(s)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"What bothers me personally is that people arent more concerned about the police riding the coatail of people whose ideas dont conform with those of the politicians."
===============================
It's hearsay evidence at this point. But I'm not naïve enough to think that if a person starts some waves, he's not going to be scrutinized at all levels by his adversaries.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"That cuts both ways. It also means that cops can go pretty far to curb our rights without fear of retribution."
===============================
Sure it can if there are no checks and balances. That's why we have a judiciary branch. And Mr. Sullivan will have his day in court should his complaints be deemed warranted by a judge.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Campaign signs are not city property..."
===============================
I assume you found the local law on the issue. Or are you just posting to keep venting? Again, it's really a non issue. First, the charges have been dropped. So why do we keep harping on this point? Second, it's a minor issue regarding the complaints of the lawsuit (the real issue that has a potential to cost us heaps as taxpayers).
On your point about the Vallone sawhorse...
What did we see happen at the State Justice level when the Black Panthers were intimidating voters in Chicago in 2008? That's an injustice.
Klink, first off, your intimate detailing of Kerry Sullivan's medical problems in this forum are way out of line. Secondly, this case has absolutly nothing to do with the organization that Kerry represents, so please don't mix apples in with oranges.
This is a case about someone writing the word "jerk" on a campaign poster. Campaign posters are not city property and they are frequently posted, illegally, on both private and public property. By the way, if you are involved with a political campaign, it is standard practice to rip down your opponent's posters anywhere you see them. Come election time, every candidate is driving around with a trunk full of their opponent's posters & literature.
As an advocate myself, I can tell you from personal experience that the city plays fast and loose with First Amendment rights. We are fighting a major project planned for a park in my area and when we attempted to give out flyers in the park asking people to attend a public meeting, NYPD would not let us do so. Why? Because we were doing so at an outdoor, public event sponsored by the very polticos who are sponsoring the project! We had to get the NYCLU involved and they straightened it out with NYPD.
We are guaranteed certain freedoms and rights by the Constitution. But sadly, we have to continue to fight for those rights.
Irina said...
"Klink, first off,... Secondly, ..."
===============================
Mr. Sullivan made those intimate details public offering via his official registered complaint. Look under the "Facts" heading of the complaint. They could be an instrumental aspect in his lawsuit as well as his advocating missions. The environmental organization is mentioned in statement #3 of the complaint. It's relevant.
Read the formal complaint in its entirety for yourself here...
http://www.nyclu.org/files/releases/Sullivanv.CityofNewYork_12-16-09.pdf
It should be clear what the issues in fact are.
Klink, thanks for the link to the complaint. That really makes Molinaro look like a rat!!! It was nice of those kind officers to allow him to get his cancer medicine.
I do not need to have a law to tell me what city property is, only a dictionary.
City property is property of the muncipality of New York. This means that political posters by definition are not city property. They cannot be because they are partisan in nature and the city represents all citizens who live in it.
So far as what happened in Chicago goes, I don't give a hoot since I am an election worker charged with protecting the poll site where I work. I also threw out a Vallone opponent who wore a T-shirt into the poll site.
This is a free country and will remain so regardless of what political goons on all sides of the equation try.
Post a Comment