S.P.A.R.C.

Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center
crazy gamesriddles and jokesfunny picturesdeath psychic!mad triviafunny & odd!pregnancy testshape testwin custodyrecipes

Author Topic: 48 Hours, did anyone see this?  (Read 2476 times)

MYSONSDAD

  • Sr. Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1730
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
48 Hours, did anyone see this?
« on: Feb 21, 2005, 07:43:04 PM »
60 Minutes Correspondent Lesley Stahl reports for
48 Hours Mystery in "Chamber of Secrets," Saturday,
Feb. 19, at 10 p.m. ET/PT.

'Frieda Hanimov was a woman in desperate fear of losing
custody of her kids because she believed the judge ruling
on her case was corrupt. Panicked and pregnant, she told
authorities of her suspicions and agreed to go undercover.
Wearing a wire, she went alone into a warehouse to try
to prove that New York State Supreme Court
Judge Gerald Garson was corrupt.

Hanimov's undercover work, recorded on audiotape, has
the man she met at the warehouse bragging that he had
Judge Garson in his pocket and that if Hanimov gave the
man at the warehouse a large sum of money that he
would guarantee that she would get custody of her
young children.

This taped conversation was enough evidence to have
the Brooklyn district attorney grant permission to place
a hidden camera in Judge Garson's chambers. Prosecutors
catch Judge Garson on videotape, they say, taking a gift
for legal advice, giving a lawyer advice on how to
write a legal memo on a case before him and accepting
a $1,000 referral fee.

Judge Garson's lawyer, Ronald Fischetti, explains to
Stahl that the judge's behavior may look bad, but there's
nothing illegal about it.

"He never fixed a case. He never accepted any money
on any cases whatsoever," says Fischetti. "The $1,000
was a referral fee that Paul Siminovsky [a lawyer in
Garson's court] said, 'You referred me a case. I
received a fee and here's the $1,000.'"

"Are judges supposed to take referral fees," asks Stahl.

"Absolutely not, and he tried to give it back three times,"
says Fischetti.

"He ended up taking it," says Stahl.

"You've heard of the law of entrapment, I'm sure,"
says Fischetti.

Judge Garson goes on trial this fall, and the alleged
gatekeeper to Garson's court, Nissim Elmann, faces trial
next week.

Judge Garson has been charged with bribe receiving in
connection with free meals he accepted from a lawyer
who appeared before him, and Elmann is accused of
conspiring to bribe the judge and the judge's staff.

Hanimov's case has been a catalyst for a major reform
in divorce court and she is being hailed as the new
Erin Brockovich. In fact, Judge Garson's arrest led a
new commission to reform divorce court, with none
other than TV's Judge Judy as one of its major supporters.

Judge Judy Sheindlin, who was a family court judge in
Brooklyn for 25 years, tells Stahl: "I don't know all
the facts. I only know what I read in the paper, but
certainly here is a man [Garson] who has brought the
judiciary into disrepute because of, at least,
his stupidity." '


Source:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/18/48hours/main674950.shtml
Chamber Of Secrets -- Feb. 18, 2005






"Children learn what they live"


Brent

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 969
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
    • http://www.deltabravo.net
RE: 48 Hours, did anyone see this?
« Reply #1 on: Feb 22, 2005, 08:19:24 AM »

>"He never fixed a case. He never accepted any money
>on any cases whatsoever," says Fischetti. "The $1,000
>was a referral fee that Paul Siminovsky [a lawyer in
>Garson's court] said, 'You referred me a case. I
>received a fee and here's the $1,000.'"

LOL, calling it a "referral fee" instead of "bribe money" is soooooooooooo clever! Like that makes it okay.

It's like saying "I didn't stab him, I merely "over-penetrated" his skin with this steel blade!"

kitten

  • Guest
Did not see it, however...
« Reply #2 on: Feb 22, 2005, 09:01:15 AM »
This does not surprise me at all.  These people all work together daily, the lawyers, the judges, mediators, GAL's, court clerks.
These people get together for drinks after work!  Majority rules as far as your case is concerned.  It's decided way before the ruling comes down.

joni

  • Sr. Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1011
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
I wonder if....
« Reply #3 on: Feb 22, 2005, 03:07:26 PM »

(the circumstances and players were slightly changes and)

.....panicked HE would lose custody of HIS children, Frieda Hanimov soon to be Ex husband believed the judge ruling on HIS case was corrupt.

If Frida Hamimov's Ex husband told the told authorities of HIS suspicions ....would the authorities believe HIM and offer HIM to go undercover to catch this judge?

Highly unlikely......men aren't expected to win child custody cases anyway so Mr. Hanimov might as well quick while he's ahead.

Hawkeye

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 212
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
RE: I wonder if....
« Reply #4 on: Feb 24, 2005, 02:13:50 AM »
the so called "authorities"  don't care, they don't give a rats ass about you, me or anyone else....I'm just about convinced... but not about to give up.


MixedBag

  • Global Moderator
  • SuperHero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3049
  • Karma: 155
  • That's Me...MixedBag
    • View Profile
    • http://www.doilyboutique.com
Yes, I watched it
« Reply #5 on: Feb 24, 2005, 05:37:06 PM »
I was watching with total interest...because DH has his own story that's worth sharing with the world.

I'm surprised that the Mom showed so many pictures of her children through out the show.  But at the end, If I caught it right, this all happened years ago and she now has custody of her son and it's all over.  And THEN 48-hours did the show.

anybody have a clue if the trial for the judge was this fall or already happened?

I also got a chuckle out of how everything got totally turned around by the guilty parties.  I think that's something that many of us, here at the site, have experienced in our own situation.  EXs seem to have a tendency to turn around everything we (as NCPs) do to make US look bad -- when they are the guilty party.

I know that DH is very interested in exposing what has happened to him since he filed for a divorce from his EX.  Found a web site last week to indicate that the original presiding judge is -- well -- I'll leave that to your imagination.  Add that to the mess that's been going on in NV.

Maybe he'll wait until 2011 when SS is emancipated, maybe not.  Only DH knows what he's gonna do.  Right now, his situation is still pending with the NV Supreme Court.

I just know that whenever I share his story or even my story, people keep saying "You've got to be $hitting me."

 

Copyright © SPARC - A Parenting Advocacy Group
Use of this website does not constitute a client/attorney relationship and this site does not provide legal advice.
If you need legal assistance for divorce, child custody, or child support issues, seek advice from a divorce lawyer.