 |
||
| |
| |
|
||
| |
|
The River Reporter
Sign carriers settle for $95,000 in federal court
Trial before U.S. district judge Charles Brieant commenced on November 2, with a jury of four men and three women from Dutchess, Ulster and Orange counties. Although the trial was open to the public, no members of the public attended. "This case was exclusively about the rights of Americans to freely express themselves and to petition government for redress of grievances. The damages that we each suffered from the false arrest were real," said Thomas Rue, a contributing editor for The River Reporter and a clinical mental health counselor. Rue said he believes a few of the officials present on the night of the arrest have learned the importance of speaking up when they see a wrong being committed, rather than sitting by silently or relying on what might be bad legal advice. Marino and Stephenson agreed they felt vindicated by the successful resolution of the case, but asked not to be quoted in the media. Marino is an accountant and Stephenson a retired engineer for ABC television. Pontier is a radio reporter and was not present when the settlement accord was reached. "I feel relieved the case is over," said Carmen Rue, a human rights commissioner and 25-year Monticello resident. "No matter what amount was paid, it can never truly compensate me for the embarrassment, loss of friends, and nights of missed sleep from being treated like a criminal," she added. The civil rights suit, which originally claimed $5 million, was commenced in June 1994 by attorney Jane Bilus Gould of Lovett & Gould, White Plains and asserted that officials tried to "chill" the plaintiffs' right to protest. Former manager James Malloy, police chief Michael Brennan and sergeant Michael Bunce testified on November 2. Former village attorney Mark Schulman, whom Malloy testified advised him that signs could be banned from the board room without the benefit of a local law or public hearing; and mayor Robert Friedland were scheduled for the day the case settled. In a sidebar conference on November 2, after Malloy's testimony, Breiant could be heard throughout the court-room voicing his view that the former village attorney "...wanted to cut corners" when Malloy went to him for advice on how to ban signs from the board room. Breiant said officials had the right to regulate signs in the room if they did so properly by advertising and holding a public hearing and then adopting legislation regulating signs for reasons of safety. But instead, allegedly relying on Schulman's advice, Malloy and Brennan posted a police officer at the door with orders to bar anyone who had a sign in their hands from entering the meeting room. Malloy denied instructing Brennan to arrest anyone and testified that he issued a memo after the five were arrested forbidding any further arrests for sign-carrying. Friedland had already apologized privately on several occasions for not preventing the arrests from taking place, Carmen and Thomas Rue said. They said they accepted Friedland's expression of remorse. But at a village board meeting the night after the court settlement Friedland publicly denied apologizing, stating he was unwilling to shoulder the blame himself since Schulman, Malloy and others never apologized. The village was represented by Monti Rosenstein of Rosenstein & Holhoski of Middletown, on behalf of the village's municipal insurance carrier, National Casualty Co., which agreed to pay the settlement amount. Plaintiffs agreed to release the village of liability from claims arising from the arrests. Before court adjourned, Gould made a notation on the record reserving the right of the plaintiffs to pursue any unrelated legal claims against the village. |
|
|
© 1985-2006, Tom Rue. All rights reserved.
