Special Treatment of New Rochelle Police Brutality Cop Concealed from DA by Judges, Cops, Court Officers

NEW ROCHELLE, NY (October 19, 2022) — The Westchester County District Attorney’s Office was never told of unprecedented special treatment accorded to New Rochelle Detective Michael Vaccaro between July 2021 and July 2022, before and after court proceedings, in his high-profile police brutality case, Talk of the Sound has confirmed.

Rather than enter and exit the courthouse like every other defendant released on their own recognizance, Vaccaro was allowed to use a prisoner elevator used to transport incarcerated defendants between the New Rochelle Police station on the first floor of 475 North Avenue and courtrooms on the second floor.

Using the police station as cover, Vaccaro was able to avoid reporters by sneaking in and out of the building through side doors that connect to a fenced off parking lot.

On July 21, 2022, the last day of the bench trial, when Vaccaro was acquitted on the charge of Attempted Harassment by Judge Matthew J. Costa, Talk of the Sound published a photo of Vaccaro in the hallway outside the courtroom.

The photo was taken the day before, with written permission from the office of then-New York State Chief Judge Janet DeFiore.

The photo — and the aggressive reaction to it by New Rochelle PBA members and court officers over the past three months — bear out the true purpose of the special treatment: to prevent such a photo of Vaccaro being taken at the courthouse.

According to court officials, Costa, the presiding judge, consented to the special treatment. The DA says that Costa did not inform them about his decision to allow Vaccaro to use the prisoner elevator. The failure to disclose this information, denying prosecutors the opportunity to be heard on his decision, raises questions about Costa’s impartiality.

There is “history” between Rocah and Costa, according to political insiders, which predates either of them being elected to public office.

That history manifest itself from before Vaccaro’s arraignment to after his acquittal.

Unredacted Records

At Vaccaro’s arraignment, Costa heard a complaint by Vaccaro’s attorney, Andrew Quinn, about the Westchester County District Attorney providing unredacted Vaccaro case files to Talk of the Sound before the arraignment. This did happen.

Twitter Follow

On October 25, 2021, the day Costa ruled against Vaccaro’s Motion to Dismiss, Costa disclosed that soon after the Vaccaro case was assigned to him, Mimi Rocah followed him on Twitter from her personal Twitter profile. Costa stated that his Decision on Vaccaro’s pre-trial motions were made the week before, and there were no substantive changes in the Decision after Rocah followed him on Twitter.

Article 78

While the Vaccaro case was proceeding, Rocah filed a highly unusual Article 78 complaint against Costa – a rare unicorn of a case. Rocah said Costa’s decisions to toss out vital evidence in two drunk driving cases was an “improper arrogation of power” and brought into question her “future ability to enforce the law in New Rochelle”.

In two written decisions, Costa sanctioned the DA. In one decision, dated January 14, 2022, by “precluding the testimony of the trooper, and “precluding the use of any evidence procured by him”. In another decision, dated April 4, 2022, by precluding any testimony regarding a Datamaster chemical test and a Standard Field Sobriety Test.

On May 13, 2022, Rocah filed the Article 78 against Costa (and the defendants in each case). On the same day, Judge Barry Warhit issued a stay in both drunk driving cases.

On July 1, 2022, Costa filed a Motion to Dismiss the Article 78. On July 12, 2022, Rocah filed Opposition to Costa’s Motion to Dismiss. On July 27, 2022, Costa filed Opposition to Rocah’s Opposition to Costa’s Motion to Dismiss.

The Vaccaro trial ran from July 18, 2022, to July 21, 2022, overlapping with the Article 78 motion practice.

On July 21, 2022, Day Four of the trial, Costa took just minutes to acquit Vaccaro, handing Rocah and her team an embarrassing defeat.

On September 30, 2022, Judge Susan Cacace denied Costa’s Motion to Dismiss. He now has 30 days from the date of the Decision and Order to Answer Rocah’s complaint. She will then have fourteen days to answer, after which Judge Cacace will file a decision within 60 days.

War of Words

The police brutally case stems from an incident on February 15, 2021, when Vaccaro was recorded on cell phone video punching and kicking Malik Fogg of Mount Vernon. In a public statement, the NRPD announced they had determined Vaccaro’s actions were “inappropriate” and referred the matter to the DA for review. On June 17, 2021, District Attorney Mimi Rocah announced that Vaccaro’s actions warranted charges of attempted assault in the third degree, given the repeated physical blows and the fact that other uniformed police officers had the suspect and the situation under control at the time.

In response, New Rochelle PBA President Christopher Greco issued an incendiary statement targeting Rocah personally.

“Mimi Rocah is a threat to Westchester County residents and to police officers and to their families,” said Greco after Vaccaro was charged by the DA. “Mimi Rocah is simply bad for Westchester. Handcuffing good cops and weak on real crime — you are now less safe with her in office.”

Greco accused Rocah of “hunting cops”, prompting a public response from the DA.

“There is no place for the type of inflammatory and irresponsible language used, which crosses a dangerous line,” said Rocah.

Concealment

In the days after this public sniping, members of the New Rochelle Police Department and New York State Court Officers appear to have conspired, with the acquiescence of two New Rochelle City Court judges and the knowledge of the New Rochelle Police Commissioner, to shield Detective Michael Vaccaro from media coverage at the New Rochelle City Court.

The DA’s office was not told that court officials, judges, and police officials secretly agreed to this unprecedented, special treatment of Vaccaro.

By contrast, when Malik Fogg, the man depicted being punched and kicked by Vaccaro in a widely seen mobile phone video, made his own court appearances he went in and out of the front doors of the courthouse.

Judge Costa failed to inform the two ADAs prosecuting the case about the special treatment: Jennifer Sculco, the Deputy Bureau Chief for Law Enforcement Integrity at the Westchester County District Attorney’s Office, and Assistant District Attorney Renée Welker Hassel of the Public Integrity & Law Enforcement Integrity Bureau.

Asked to comment, the Westchester County District Attorney’s Office confirmed they were never told about Vaccaro’s special treatment but declined to elaborate further.

“We were not aware, and we have no comment,” said a spokesperson for the Westchester County District Attorney’s Office.

In response to a September 20, 2022, letter delivered by this reporter to 9th Judicial District of the New York State Administrative Judge Hon. Anne E. Minihan, a letter which raised several concerns about the conduct of court officials in New Rochelle City Court, Chief Lawrence N. Daley of the 9th Judicial District of the New York State convened a September 29 meeting in a jurors’ conference room on the second floor at the Westchester County Courthouse with this reporter and Captain Joseph Ciardiello to discuss the concerns detailed in the letter, including special treatment of Vaccaro.

Court Officials

Captain Joseph Ciardiello, said he received a request for special treatment for Vaccaro from the New Rochelle Police Department, which he says he opposed. He said he met with Judge Costa and Judge Rice, and they agreed to the special treatment of Vaccaro. Ciardiello said he was present on the day of Vaccaro’s arraignment and claimed that Vaccaro only got special treatment on that day. He admitted he was only present on the day of Vaccaro’s arraignment, not any other Vaccaro appearances or trial dates.

As the only reporter present for every Vaccaro appearance, each time seeking to take his photo on the front steps of the courthouse, Vaccaro was accorded special treatment for every appearance up until his trial.

Court, police and city officials have offered a myriad of contradictory, convoluted explanations as to why Vaccaro got special treatment and who made the request.

At the September 29 meeting, Captain Ciardiello said the request for special treatment for Vaccaro was made by the New Rochelle Police Department out of concern for Vaccaro’s safety given the expected large crowd, including reporters, and that the public hallways outside the courtroom are narrow. Ciardiello said he opposed the request out of concern for the optics of giving special treatment to a police officer, especially given the nature of the case, allegations of police brutality by a white police towards a black victim. Ciardiello said he met with Judge Costa and Judge Rice to discuss the request. Ciardiello said Costa and Rice consented to the special treatment, agreeing that using the prisoner elevator was an acceptable “compromise”.

Ciardiello noted that an overflow courtroom was set up for the arraignment on July 1, 2021, and that there was a large crowd including reporters at the arraignment.

Asked for comment from Judges Costa and Rice yesterday, New York State Public Information Officer Lucien Chalfen instead issued a statement both reiterating and contradicting Captain Ciardiello’s previous statements.

While this is a case that is fraught for everyone involved, regarding the defendant, a determination was made during that court date to bring him up via the prisoner elevator into the courtroom as it was a safer option than going through the crowded and volatile public hallway. On the next court date, the defendant went through the public hallway and front courtroom doors. To reiterate the reason for the method of delivery for the defendant during the arraignment, there was no special treatment. The decision was made to mitigate a potential violent situation from occurring while opposing parties were in the hallway.

Judges Rice and Costa have yet to comment on this matter.

Little of the accounts of Ciardiello and Chalfen makes sense: parts of it are simply false, some contradictory to each other, and most perniciously, the idea that the prosecution of a white police for punching a black man in the face requires the mitigation of a “potential violent situation” in the hallways has more than a whiff of racism.

It is worth noting that every person involved from the court system chain of command is white: Judge DeFiore, Lucian Chalfen, Judge Minihan, Chief Daley, Captain Ciardiello, Sergeant Rhodes. This also applies to the Westchester County District Attorney’s Office, the New Rochelle Police Department, the New Rochelle PBA and Judge Costa. Given this it is not surprising that no one saw a problem with giving special treatment to a white cop accused of a crime related to his beating up a black man.

Captain Ciardiello’s claims that he objected to the request for special treatment of Vaccaro given the optics is hardly credible. The decision was his to make. He allowed it. If he had genuine concerns of a security threat to Vaccaro why would his supposed concerns about optics outweigh the safety of the defendant, or anyone else in the building?

There were reporters at the arraignment. Two. This reporter and Nikita Ramos of News12, and as Ramos noted in her report, there were “dozens” of members of PBAs from around the county came to support Vaccaro — perhaps 3 dozen or a bit more.

There were no supporters of Malik Fogg, no BLM protesters, no agitators, no protesters, no “opposing parties” in the hallway or anywhere else. The vaguely worded term, “mitigate a potential violent situation,” reads more like a catch-all phrase used to justify any behavior by law enforcement as every situation is always potentially violent as anyone who rides a subway or walks down a street or drives a car knows full well.

Between PBA members, on-duty NRPD officers and on-duty court officers, the “crowd” in the “volatile public hallway” amounted to Vaccaro family members, two reporters and more than 50 law enforcement officers.

Given the remarks aimed at inciting PBA members and their supporters against DA Rocah by New Rochelle PBA President Christopher Greco, the only people who might have plausibly felt the need for protection at the arraignment would be the two ADAs, Sculco and Hassel.

On the day of the arraignment Vaccaro used the elevator to enter and leave the courtroom as Captain Ciardiello said on September 29 not just enter as Chalfen said on October 18.

Vaccaro was arraigned in Part 2, a small courtroom used primarily for civil matters and landlord-tenant disputes. Part 2 is next door to Part 1, the main criminal courtroom, which is about twice as large as Part 2.

If the larger courtroom had been used for the Vaccaro arraignment — the courtroom where arraignments typically take place — there may well have been room for everyone who wished to view the arraignment, which lasted only a few minutes.

The most recent high-profile court appearance in the New Rochelle City Court prior to Michael Vaccaro was Z’inah Brown following her arrest after the murder of Valaree Schwab on January 18, 2022. Despite a far higher level of media interest and a far larger and more agitated crowd, there was no overflow room with TV monitors set up at the courthouse. The Part 1 courtroom was used. It was full.

City officials have a different account.

They say Vaccaro wanted to use the elevator to meet with representatives of the New Rochelle PBA in the PBA office which is, by the police union contract, housed in police headquarters. They mentioned nothing about crowd control or concerns for Vaccaro’s safety.

The problem with the City’s version is that there are stairs within 475 North that lead from the courtrooms on second floor to the PBA office within police headquarters on the first floor.

There is no logical reason why the New Rochelle Police Commissioner would seek special treatment for Vaccaro, as claimed by Captain Ciardiello. According to subsequent testimony of Captain Neil Reynolds in the Vaccaro trial, then-Deputy Commissioner Robert Gazzola was directly involved in making the criminal referral of Vaccaro to the District Attorney and — as the recently elevated Police Commissioner — filing termination charges against Vaccaro soon after he was acquitted.

“The Police Commissioner did not make any request, nor do I know of anyone from the PD acting on his behalf who may have made any request regarding the Vaccaro criminal proceeding,” said City Manager Charles B. Strome.

“The police department did not object to Vaccaro meeting with his PBA rep in the PBA office and using the elevator into the Court.”

Strome took exception to the claim by court officers that they objected to the special treatment.

“If court officials did, in fact, have any objection regarding the alleged special treatment, they did not make those objections known to the Commissioner or anyone in his office,” said Strome.

Awaiting Answers

The question remains: who specifically made the request for Vaccaro to get special treatment and what reason was given to justify the request.

Based on our reporting over the past 18 months on this matter we believe Christopher Greco, at the time the President of the New Rochelle PBA, did not want this reporter to photograph or video record Vaccaro exiting the front door of the courthouse to avoid a “perp walk” image — and police and court officials went along with Greco’s request, and continued to honor that request even after the PBA President unexpectedly quit his union position and filed for retirement on July 26, 2021, weeks after Vaccaro’s arraignment and the filing of an ethics complaint involving Greco by this reporter.

Every defendant deserves fair treatment. No defendant deserves special treatment.

When it is police officers and courts officers and judges giving that special treatment to a defendant who is a police officer, failing to disclose it to the prosecutors and dissembling or fabricating explanations, it is not fair. When the court system has one story and the police have a different story and neither story jibes with the known facts, it erodes confidence in the justice system.

The community needs straight answers to simple questions;

Who made the request for special treatment for Michael Vaccaro?

Chief Daley and Captain Ciardiello say the request was made by the New Rochelle Police Department. NRPD Commissioner Gazzola denies having made such a request.

What exactly was the request?

Chief Daley, Captain Ciardiello and Lucien Chalfen say the request was to use the prisoner elevator for the protection of Michael Vaccaro. Captain Ciardiello says Vaccaro was brought up and down on the prisoner elevator. Lucien Chalfen says Vaccaro only went up the elevator, then after the arraignment went out the front door. All three say the use of the elevator occurred only on July 1, 2021, the day of the arraignment. Chief Daley and Lucien Chalfen were not at the New Rochelle courthouse on any of the days Vaccaro appeared in court from arraignment to acquittal. Captain Ciardiello says he was only there on the day of the arraignment. All three claim to know that Vaccaro came and went through the front doors of the courthouse on every other appearance date. Unlike them, this reporter was there before, during and after every court appearance by Vaccaro from July 2021 to July 2022, camped out to take his picture, and from arraignment until the trial Vaccaro did not enter or exit through the front doors. I finally got his picture in the hallway on July 20, 2022, day three of his trial.

When was the request made?

Initially, after weeks of our reporting out this story, no time frame was offered but suddenly, at the last minute, Lucien Chalfen suddenly claimed that the request was made the day of the arraignment.

Where was the request made?

Was this request made in person at the courthouse? Over the telephone or email?

Why was the request made?

The courts say that the special treatment was not special, but rather precautionary because of “opposing parties” in the hallway. This was a criminal arrangement. The only “opposing parties” at the courthouse were the two Assistant District Attorneys, and they were not even told about Vaccaro’s use of the prisoner elevator. There was a crowd of people — 100% Vaccaro supporters, the vast majority of them PBA members, most of those from the New Rochelle PBA. The police say they made no such request, but were aware of Vaccaro wanting to use the prisoner elevator to get to and from the New Rochelle PBA offices inside police headquarters and did not object.

How was the request made?

Was this request made in writing? Is there a letter or email or text documenting the request (and by extension the timing, nature and purpose of the request)? If so, why has it not been produced? Was this a verbal request and, if so, who made the request, and who took the request? Captain Joseph Ciardiello says he took the request, and he took it from the New Rochelle Police Department. Commissioner Gazzola flatly denies, in writing, that he or anyone acting on his behalf ever made such a request.

Either court officials or the police are lying or both. Either the request came from the NRPD or it did not, or none of the above. Either Vaccaro used the elevator once, twice or more than twice, Either Vaccaro used the elevator only on the day of the arraignment or that day and other days.

There are powerful forces at work here, including the senior jurist for the 9th Judicial District, the district’s highest-ranking court officers, an official from the office of the Chief Judge of New York State, a Police Commissioner, a City Manager, two judges and a district attorney.

The people responsible are incapable of investigating themselves.

If the community is to have confidence in an official accounting of what transpired, an independent government agency will need to step in to investigate the matter. Short of that, why should any defendant in the 9th Judicial District, which encompasses Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, and Westchester Counties believe they will get fair treatment when certain defendants such as police officers, PBA members, get special treatment.

EDITOR’S NOTE: There is more here, and I aim to get to the bottom of it. I am moving forward this week with our investigation. For now, I am preparing Freedom of Information requests for communications between the various parties, securing disciplinary files and personnel files, filing judicial ethics complaints and complaints to the New York State Courts Inspector General. What I can say for sure at this point is that whatever justifications the various parties offer now, the effect was to deny reporters, including and primarily me — the only reporter who covered the arraignment, all subsequent appearances and all four days of the trial — a photo of Vaccaro at the courthouse. While there is a lot wrong with what went on — and now the attempted coverup — my primary concern is with interference with my news-gathering function as a journalist.

RELATED:

Michael Vaccaro – Malik Fogg Archive