| In Trial by
Rosario NYC Lawyer Told Judge of Urinal
Threat so Closing with Warrant Redacted
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell
Book
Honduras
- CIA
Trial Book - NY
Mag - VLOG
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
August 9 – Richard Rosario
spend twenty years in prison
for the murder of Jorge
Collazo - and then had his
conviction vacated and was not
re-tried. He sued.
On July 19,
2022 U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of New
York Judge Lorna G. Schofield
held a final pre-trial
conference, before the jury
trial set to begin on July 25.
Inner City Press is covering
the case.
Rosario is
suing for the violation of his
constitutional rights by Irwin
Silverman, Gary Whitaker,
Richard Martinez and Charles
Cruger, who investigated the
1996 murder.
On August
8-9, the NYC Law Department
filed with Judge Schofield a
complaint about threats it
attributed to Rosario at the
courthouse bathroom urinal,
while saying they were not
audio recorded: "I am one of
the attorneys assigned to the
defense of the
above-referenced matter. I
write to inform the
Court about an incident that
occurred in the men’s restroom
this afternoon during
the brief five-minute
break between the cross
examination of Carl “Chip”
Loewenson, Jr., and the
charge conference. During that
five-minute break, the
undersigned went to the
restroom and upon
entering, the plaintiff,
who was without a chaperone
and using one of the urinals,
asked “who just walked
in?” Plaintiff then turned his
head around to look at who had
entered, and, upon seeing
the undersigned,
exclaimed “oh, you fucking
punk.” The undersigned
remained silent and did
not engage with
plaintiff, but plaintiff
nevertheless engaged in
several minutes of insulting
the undersigned,
primarily using multiple
iterations of the sentiment
“fucking punk.” During
this monologue,
plaintiff also made comments
to the effect of “we’ll see if
you can really fight,”
and “you’re lucky I’m
still peeing because I’d throw
your ass through that fucking
toilet.”1 In fairness to
plaintiff, as the undersigned
was walking out, the plaintiff
claimed that he was “talking
to [his] p*nis, not [the
undersigned].” Although this
incident was the peak of
plaintiff’s harassing and
threatening behavior
towards defendants’ counsel
throughout this trial, it was
not the first instance of
such. During today’s
mid-morning break, plaintiff
was pacing in the hallway and
muttered “I smell a p*ssy”
as 1 The undersigned did
not audio record this
incident, so these quotes
represent the best of my
recollection." *'s added by
Inner City Presss; letter on
Patreon here.
On the morning of
August 9, before the jury
entered, Judge Schofield asked
Rosario's lawyers about the
letter. They apologized, and
said he may not be present
during deliberations. Judge
Schofield spoke of chaperoning
while in the courthouse, then
conducted a non-public sidebar
with Rosario and one lawyer
from each side.
At day's end,
Judge Schofield gave each side
10 extra minutes for their
upcoming closing arguments;
the defense spoke of an
exhibit from which they will
redact mention of a bench
warrant. Notably, Judge
Schofield reads her legal
charge before the closings,
leaving only the verdict form
for after.
On July 26, with
Inner City Press in the
gallery, Rosario's lawyer and
the NYC lawyer questioning
witness Ms. Ruiz and Inner
City Press live tweeted it here
and below.
Later on July 26
the City filed a letter that
is Dr. Parker should be
allowed to testify about
Rosario's allegedly
"predatory" behavior including
Facebook posts and videos
regarding Defendant officers,
and a 1994 rape charge. The
City argues that Rosario's
"lack of remorse, in general,
is highly relevant as it is a
'hallmark' of an APSD
diagnosis." Things are getting
nasty. City letter on Patreon
here.
On July 29, with
Courtroom 110 still locked,
things got nastier still. The
City wrote to Judge Schofield
emphasizing that Rosario's
vacatur of conviction had
nothing to do with negligence
by the police officers, or
innocence. They want to tell
the jury it was the criminal
defense lawyer who didn't
investigate the alibis. But
don't police and prosecutors,
and judges, have duties to do
justice? Supposedly it will
resume on August 1.
From July 26 in
court: Ok - now at Richard
Rosario v NYC after he spent
20 years in prison for Bronx
murder on 6/19/96 when 13
people swear he was in Florida
Rosario's lawyer,
to 1 of 13, Ms Ruiz: Did the
NYPD ever reach out to you?
NYPD's counsel:
Objection!
Judge Scholfield
: Overruled.
Cross. NYC
lawyer: Good morning, Ms Ruiz.
Did you ever call the police?
Ruiz: No. NYC
lawyer: You never testified in
the 1998 murder trial? Ruiz: I
did not. NYC lawyer: People
smoke pot in your building
then, right? Ruiz: It was a
social thing that people did.
NYC lawyer:
Why do you remember Richard
Rosario being there? Ruiz:
Because of the crime. NYC
lawyer: But that's looking
back. Did an investigator for
Rosario contact you in 2002?
Ruiz: Yes.
NYC lawyer:
Did Rosario's lawyers pay for
your travel, hotel and room
service? Ruiz: Yes. NYC
lawyer: DId they prepare you
for your 2019 deposition?
Ruiz: Maybe. NYC lawyer: And
you spoke with them last
night? Ruiz: Yes.
NYPD lawyer:
Isn't it true Rosario had a
romantic relationship with
Denise Hernandez? Rosario's
lawyer: Objection! Ruiz: I
don't know. NYPD lawyer: But
you know his wife, right?
Seated NYC lawyer
is passing Post It notes to
colleague who's cross
examining Ruiz. Now she shows
Ruiz print outs of Rosario's
text message to her, that she
can't testify unless she talks
to the lawyers 1st. And that
the trial is "not for
peanuts."
On August 1,
investigating officer Whitaker
was on the witness stand, and
was asked among other things
where he showed the "mug book"
to hotdog vendor Jose Diaz.
Inner City Press live tweeted
here.
On August 2 with
witness Torres testifying
(again) about Rosario being in
his residence in Florida at
the time of the Bronx murder,
the cross examination again
got into money for testimony,
this time zeroing in on his
brother with whom Torres says
he does get along, here
On August 4,
where was action in the
courtroom and outside of it.
Thread here
Rosanio's lawyers
put in a letter arguing to
limit the scope of testimony
of former ADA Jeanne
Petrauskas, under Cameron v.
NYC, 598 F.2d 50 (2d Cir.
2010) - the role of the jury
must not be invaded, the
argument is.
On August 8 as a
plaintiff's damages witness
Morrison Foerster securities
law partner Carl H. Loewenson
was on the stand. On direct
examination he said he
referred his Vanguard
financial advisor to the
plaintiff, who traveled
separate from him to the MoFo
partners' retreated in
Southern California. He
described dark times in 2010,
and a celebratory dinner at
Sparks Steakhouse
post-release, as well as
Yankees game at which the
plaintiff caught a foul ball.
Then came the charging
conference.
Vlog here;
coverage will continue.
The case is
Rosario v. City of New York,
et al., 18-cv-4023
(Schofield)
***
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a
month helps keep us going and grants you
access to exclusive bonus material on our
Patreon page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 20047, Dag
Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2022 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|
,
