The Bradley Case: The Fix Was In By Nancy King

eHezi Archives 8 Comments

Bradley_Adam Today, Judge Susan Capeci rendered her verdict in the domestic violence trial of White Plains mayor Adam Bradley.  While being acquitted of witness tampering and assault, Mayor Bradley was convicted of criminal contempt and harassment. A split verdict in this case isn’t surprising however it was surprising to see how many people in attendance this morning, appeared to have prior knowledge of the renderings.



As of 9:15 am, the corridor outside Judge Capeci’s courtroom was crowded with media, courthouse staff, representatives from women’s’ groups and others. Rather than being the serious matter that it was, it had taken on an almost circus like atmosphere from the beginning.   As a matter of fact, it appeared jovial.  By the time ADA’s Audrey Stone and Amy Puerto rolled their boxes of paper down the hallway, it was apparent the fix was in.  Their step was strident and their small smiles indicated that they knew they had somehow proved their case.As the judge read the verdicts, it was interesting to watch the faces and body language of those in attendance.   In the court of public opinion, Adam Bradley was already a guilty man and Judge Capeci was merely validating that opinion. It was an amazing sight to see so many smiles during the verdict reading.  Though respectful of any Judge’s decision, one must wonder how those verdicts were reached, when this trial was chock full of witness intimidation and witness suppression.  Amazingly enough, most of the mayor’s witnesses were either not allowed to testify or had their testimony abbreviated so that it’s relevance was skewed. While this little misdemeanor trial lasted far longer that it should have, perhaps there should have been testimony that we all should have heard.  Why weren’t the marriage counselor’s notes allowed?  Why weren’t the Ballan’s testimony allowed?   Why didn’t Bonnie Hagan take the stand? Why was Yuko Wanatabe’s testimony so limited?   Was it perhaps because, their testimony may have been favorable for the Mayor?  Who knows.

Mayor Bradley’s team has promised to appeal today’s verdict and hopes to go to trial sometime in early spring.  Bradley himself stated that he will not only prove his innocence to his children but to the residents of The City of White Plains. He will also be facing pending ethics charges and subsequently divorce proceedings.   One must wonder that in the face of this tangled legal mess, if Bradley will be able to steer the City of White Plains into 2011. Already Common Council members are asking for his resignation and have a replacement waiting in the wings in the form of Tom Roach now that he has been defeated in his bid for an Assembly seat by Robert Castelli.

Whether you like Adam Bradley or not isn’t the question here.  The question that remains is whether Adam Bradley was not afforded his due process rights and did he get caught up in political maneuvering that he just didn’t see coming.  Unless he makes the decision on his own to resign as Mayor of White Plains he can only be removed from office by the Governor of the State of New York.  If that indeed turns out to be the case, then we’ll all know that it wasn’t just the case of domestic abuse but a case of political posturing.  If that ends up being the case, then we’ll know for sure that the fix was in.  The Guardian will take a closer look at the Bradley case in the coming weeks. 

 

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

eHeziThe Bradley Case: The Fix Was In By Nancy King

Comments 8

  1. the most serious charge that bradley was convicted
    of had nothing to do with which witnesses were excluded
    and everything to do with his oath of office..when
    you are sworn to uphold the new york state constitution
    which he was as mayor and when you are a member of
    the bar you have certain standards to uphold…in his
    case it is to not flout the law..the conviction on
    criminal contempt eg which is in essence an attempt
    by bradley to fix the outcome of the case in contravention of what the court had ordered him to do
    is aviolation of his oath of office..thatwill not
    be reversed on appeal…regardless of the outcome
    of the other issues…and who should or should not
    have testified…an elected official cannot show
    contempt for a court order period

  2. I thoroughly agree with respect to Burrows, who, however, along with 15 other county legislators, is also guilty of enabling and abetting an even more offensive legislator, Chairman Ken Jenkins. Jenkins who lives on Bushie Avenue, Yonkers, clearly in the 15th Legislative District, (Burrows’ district) continues to claim that he lives half a mile west of there on Moultrie, which is in the 16th District that he purports to represent.
    When raised at the budget hearing at the County Center Jenkins tried once again to laugh it off. However, it is no laughing matter. It is Election Fraud, a felony punishable by 4 years in State Prison, and a $5,000 fine for each count, of which we believe he is guilty of four.
    The arrogance of these creatures is mind-boggling. Each legislator pulls down a thousand dollars per week of our tax dollars for a part-time job; Jenkins, the chairman, more like two thousand. And, it doesn’t end there. Stay tuned.

  3. Do you think the same applies to Gordon Burrows? Don’t you think he should have been forced to resign after being caught with cocaine?
    We are in a sick world, where elected officials commit serious crimes, then continue on in office, with impugnity, confident in the belief of the simplicity of the electorate.
    Mr. Burrows actuallt believes that he is significant and all is forgotten, trying desperately to get his buggy eyed mug in front of the TV camera in order to reassure himself that the voters still love him.
    Could this delusion be a result of years of cocaine use?
    Fall of the Roman Empire?

  4. Anyone who truly knows Adam knows he’s a control freak. Consider the way he bought himself into the Mayor’s Office. That was no election. In a fair one-on-one affair, Bradley v. Hockley, there is good reason to believe Bradley might have lost. Even he thought so.
    It was his choice to go for a bench trial, believing he would have a better chance than he would have had he faced a jury of non-politicos. That strategy did not pan out, so now he complains over Capeci’s conduct of the trial. Most observers seem to feel she was fair, and did a fine job, all things considered.
    Keep in mind he is a lawyer with considerable election law knowledge, surely politically savvy. He made his bed and now must lay in it. Obviously, he must have taken into his calculations the possibility of guilty findings, and the risk of being tried by the very judge who was handling his divorce, a questionable arrangement at that.
    He should step down now. He may think he does, but he has no divine right to the mayor’s throne.

  5. The Kids Are the ones who suffer.
    No one knows what the truth is when your in a bad relationship you have your view they have there view and the truth just gets lost.
    PRAY for the Kids

  6. Im sorry, this is the YONKERS TRIBUNE. Who cares about this silly case. We have enough problems here in Yonkers to deal with then to worry about this. Stir up this controvery elsewhere.

Leave a Reply

This comment will be displayed anonymously. Your name and email address will not be published.

Comments that are off topic will be removed. If you want a topic to be covered, email me at: ehezi@hush.com

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.