RESPONSE TO "TWICE THE VICTIM" PART 2

RESPONSE TO "TWICE THE VICTIM" PART 2

On August 28, 2018 the Newark Star Ledger ran a story entitled "Twice the Victim" about the New Jersey Crime Victim Compensation Office (the "VCCO").  This is the second in a series of three blog entries in response to that article.

"Twice the Victim" is an important article.  It calls attention to the failure of an agency that is the payor of last resort for people suffering through no fault of their own.  Mismanagement at the VCCO is not just another example of government inefficiency - it causes unnecessary pain to innocent victims of violent crime.

In order to solve any problem, one must understand its causes.  In order to fix the VCCO, it is important to understand why it is in the state it is in today.

HISTORY OF THE AGENCY

From December, 2005 through July, 2008, the VCCO succeeded.  Victims and those who serve victims were compensated fairly and expeditiously.  This is what victims wanted and it is the way the public wanted it run.  I again refer to the bar graph in the Sherman article.  Payments to victims dropped dramatically following my termination.

I reported the state of the agency and advocated passage of legislation on June 1, 2007 in a correspondence to the Governor and each member of legislature.

https://www.scribd.com/document/391522107/VCCA-Christmas-Tree

As I reported in that letter, the agency was operating beautifully.  We had paid out over $1,300,000 in claims for the most recent reporting month.  Literally every victim and service provider was satisfied.  Looking at those figures and then comparing them to the performance since I was fired makes me proud of what we did and sad for the victims who have been cheated since.

As director of the agency I advocated for the passage of legislation for victims.  In the Christmas Tree Items for Crime  Victims letter I listed several pieces of such legislation. The first was a bill reorganize the agency. of particular importance was the elimination of "do nothing" positions held by politically connected bureaucrats.   I testified in both the Senate and the Assembly for passage of this legislation,  Both times Senator Loretta Weinberg entered  the chamber just before the hearings started, sat next to me and agreed with me that the legislation should pass.  Both times Richard Pompelio was supposed to testify, but he failed to show up.  I was surprised that he  would not testify because he had been so enthusiastically telling me he wanted the bill to pass.  Parenthetically, the bail withholding bill and the CREST account bill I wrote myself.  Those two bills would have generated over ten million dollars ($10,000,000) for crime victims at no cost to taxpayers over the past eight years.  Nobody has done anything on either bill since I was fired.

INSPECTOR GENERAL

Sherman misrepresents my performance.  He writes, "But an inspector general's report later found improper payments and insufficient oversight. In one case thousands in benefits were paid to a person who claimed workplace harassment, a crime not eligible for compensation."

Here Sherman is playing the role of stenographer rather than reporter.  First - what he refers to as "an inspector general" was The Inspector General Mary Jane Cooper.  That office no longer exists.  There was never any report or determinative findings by the Inspector General concerning the VCCO.  The Office of Inspector General had a team of detectives and lawyers investigate the VCCO for eighteen months. Inspector General Mary Jane Cooper then wrote a letter to Attorney General Ann Milgram that listed "preliminary findings".  At no time had either the Inspector General or Attorney General asked me to respond to these "preliminary findings".  One of the "preliminary findings" to which Sherman refers is the payment to a victim of a crime 'not eligible for compensation'.

I am thankful to Sherman for writing the article, but he should have understood, there is no such thing as a crime 'not eligible for compensation', as long as it is a crime of violence to the victim. It is important to note the purpose of the VCCO - that is to compensate innocent victims of violent crime who cooperate with law enforcement.  That is what we did.  The statute governing the agency explicitly states it is for all victims of violent crimes and then lists examples of the types of crimes to be covered.  To do as Sherman suggests - that is to deny claims for unpaid medical expenses, moving expenses for someone who is threatened, or any one of many types of emergency needs a victim may have - on the grounds that the specific charge used by the prosecutor did not fit some preordained list - is to violate the letter and the spirit of the statute.  Sherman should have realized that to deny that claim for the reason he suggests would be to add one more sad story of unnecessary suffering to the ones about which he so eloquently wrote.

RICHARD POMPELIO

Richard Pompelio was the person who recommended me to serve at the agency.  For that opportunity I will always be grateful to him.  On the other hand, as I was serving as the head of the agency he tried to pressure me to do unethical things.  When I refused to do them, he advocated for my dismissal.  He was even bold enough to write a letter to then Governor Corzine asking for me to be removed from office.

https://www.scribd.com/document/390800292/Pompelio-Letter


He is clever. He used the names of people who were serving crime victims to imply these people did not want me as head of the VCCO. I had an excellent relationship with three of those five people and the other two I knew as acquaintances.  They would all attest to my service to them.  Dr Frances Pelliccia for example.  She performed examinations of children victims of sexual abuse in Hudson County.  She did her work in the prosecutor's office building at the request of the prosecutor.  She had been doing these examinations on a volunteer basis.  Rich Pompelio - much to his credit - tried to get approval to pay her a fee for her services from the VCCO.  Unfortunately, when he served as head of the agency, approval for such a payment was subject to a board vote. The other commissioners at the time always voted in opposition to paying Dr, Pelliccia on the grounds that her services were not expressly covered by the statute. Here she was serving some of the most innocent victims of some of the most violent crimes in the state, and those bureaucrats denied her any payment on the grounds that the statute was not meant for her.

I faced the same opposition upon succeeding Richard Pompelio.  I continued Rich Pompelio's  policy of asking Dr Pelliccia to continually send us her bills for her services as she performed them. Our hope was to have the agency changed via statute to rid it of the board members.  I testified on the record with Senator Weinberg by my side in both the Senate and the Assembly requesting passage of the legislation to rid the agency of those board members.  Upon the statute taking effect, with the board gone, one of my first official acts was to authorize the payment to Dr. Pelliccia for her back bills.  It was the kind of thing I was proud to do.  The agency has not done anything like that since I was fired

This brings us back to Richard Pompelio.  No matter how much he complains about that agency he has no right to blame anybody except himself.  As said bar graph shows - the victims were being compensated approximately $16,000,000 per year during my tenure.  There were zero complaints about the agency from those who serve victims or victims themselves.  Richard Pompelio did not like me being in charge because I would  not provide him with confidential information he could use to make money.  He then used his influence to advocate for my dismissal in retribution.

I asked Sherman if Richard Pompelio had informed him of his advocacy for my dismissal.  Sherman told me Pompelio had not.  Richard Pompelio may be able to fool some of the people some of the time, but he cannot fool all of the people all of the time.


RULES AND REGULATIONS

Sherman wrote, "The agency lumbers on, guided by outdated rules and regulations that have scarcely changed in decades, denying more than half its applicants."  Here Sherman wrongly implies the problems with the agency lie in its statute and applicable administrative code.  The statute was written with the intent to provide those running the agency wide latitude.  This interpretation has been conformed in case law.

The problem lies in the failure to have a person who is competent and who cares run the agency.  That problem will not be solved if decisions about whom to choose are left to the old guard.  In the next and final segment, I will suggest changes that need to be made.

                   

RESPONSE TO TED SHERMAN'S ARTICLE "TWICE THE VICTIM"

On August 28, 2018 the Newark Star Ledger ran an article entitled "Twice the Victim" written about the New Jersey Crime Victim's Compensation Office (the "VCCO").  This is the first of three responding blog entries.

The article is a long overdue account of the disgrace and cruelty of the VCCO.  Unfortunately, it misses the real issue.  The VCCO is - and has been for ten years – failing to provide innocent victims of violent crime of the help they need.  The reasons have nothing to do with a shortage of money. The VCCO is funded by fines paid by those who break laws.  Every year millions of dollars flow into the agency from fines paid in New Jersey and to the federal government.  The VCCO has a computer system that is set up to “fail to capture” records of where the money is spent, so its an open invitation for corruption.

I was the head of the agency from December 2005 until July 2008.  The writer – Mr Sherman – referred to the time during which I was in charge, but he neither contacted me nor read my blog – edwerner@blogspot.com.

The bar graph near the end of the article illustrates the problem.  For the year 2007 the paid over Sixteen Million Dollars ($16,000,000) to New Jersey crime victims.  As soon as I was fired - in July 2008 - the agency slashed payments to victims.  In 2009 they paid less than Six Million Dollars ($6,000,000).  Last year it paid out only Eight Million Dollars ($8,000,000).  The agency is funded by a stream of funds from New Jersey and a federal government grant.  Since we know the money is not going to the victims where is it going? This may seam like a simple question, but the answer is never forthcoming.

For example, on May 19, 2008 I wrote a memo to my direct report at the time, James Ridolfino.  The memo explained in detail why an audit was essential.  There is a means of diverting funds through the system that leaves no trace – the catastrophic victims claims.  (See blog entry December 13, 2010 which has both my request to Mr. Ridolfino for an audit and his response).  As I was fired without notice shortly thereafter.   The need for this audit and the cover up by law enforcement is so obvious that there can be no explanation other than the system is hopelessly corrupt.  The Attorney General – the highest law enforcement officer in the state –  actively covered up embezzlement of funds set aside for the express purpose of providing essential help to innocent victims of violent crime.  

Given the dismal performance of the agency over the past ten years, a general audit is more glaringly necessary than ever.  Over the past ten years at least Twenty Million Dollars ($20,000,000) that should have been paid to crime victims is missing.  It is a matter not just of importance to crime victims, but of holding government accountable generally.  Why should any state agency be permitted to spend money without having to disclose where it was spent? 

This is an issue that illustrates several major problems.  In our system, the general rule is that a political group will establish itself by consistently delivering money, votes or some combination of the two to elected officials.  Once that group successfully works the system to get grant money, it’s common practice for that group to control how the grant money is spent.  There is a well organized  group ready to spend the money to its liking.  If anyone outside the group tries to take that money for his own purposes, the group will rise up to oppose him. 

Crime victims have no such organized lobby. In New Jersey they have nobody.  This makes the money allocated for their program attractive to the unscrupulous people who have influence in New Jersey state government.  

The May 19, 2008 memo explains in detail why an audit of the funds supposedly allocated for “catastrophic victims” is essential.  In spite of the fact that the agency was reassigned to the Office of the Attorney General – the highest law enforcement officer in the state – New jersey state government has failed to audit this agency.  

There is only one way for the New Jersey state government to establish a modicum of respectability. Audit the VCCO.  In particular – how much money has been spent for “catastrophic victims” and where has it gone?  Moreover, why was the internal computer system set up the “fail to capture” this information?

The article stated there is now an attempt by some members of the legislature to improve the agency.  Unless they begin with an audit, any such attempts will be futile.     

 

Whistleblower to Comedian in one Podcast

        I recently had the privilege of doing a podcast hosted by J D Lopez.  We spoke of my days as a whistle-blower in New Jersey state government and the past six years in Denver.

        Thank you for listening.



http://lefthandrightbrainpod.com/lhrb-70-comedy-with-a-conscience-w-anthony-crawford-ed-werner/

To Lawyers Who Represent Crime Victims

                 Its been several years since my most recent blog entry.

                During the years 2002 through 2005 I spoke to groups of attorneys in New Jersey who represented victims of violent crime.   Attached is a transcript of the speech.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/301751964/To-Lawyers-who-Represent-Crime-Victims

The Smoking Gun

On May 19, 2008, I wrote a memorandum to Mr. David Ridolfino expressing my concerns about money being stolen from the VCCA. It appears as though Craig Difiore, James Casserly, and Ron Parke, abused their postions in the VCCA to steal money that was supposed to be used to help crime victims. Immediately below are copies of my memo and the response I received from Mr. Ridolfino.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/45176312/Werner-Attachment-1


http://www.scribd.com/doc/45213066/Werner-Attachment-2

Less than two months after submitting this memorandum I was fired. In the two years since was fired James Casserly and Craig Difiore are still employed at that agency (now the "VCCO")
and Ron Parke is retired and enjoying his pension and free health care for life. James Casserly is in charge of the VCCO's finances. All three are politically connected. James Casserly is a Jersey City Democrat (friend of Assemblyman Joe Cryan). Craig Difiore is a friend of former Senate President and Acting Govenor Donald Difrancesco. Ron Parke is a Union County Republican.

The VCCO is now part of the Department of Law and Public Safety. The corruption at the VCCO has been covered up - and continues to be covered up - by New Jersey State law enforcement, i.e. the Office of the Attorney General.

The public deserves to know what has been going on here. The Office of the Attorney General cannot invesigate itself. It is time for an audit by an independent accounting firm and for a special prosecutor be appointed to determine if charges need to be brought. Setting up the internal computer system to "fail to capture" information on catastrophic injury cases is an obvious attempt to hide something. This one act alone represents the potential to embezzle millions of dollars over ten years.

It is time for the Christie administration to put up or shut up on corruption. If they continue to cover up this scandel they will be sending a clear message to all state goverment employees: Be like David Ridolfino and keep your head low, eyes downcast, and cover your ears to corruption and you can keep your cushy job with its great pension and benefits. On the other hand, if you blow the whistle on corruption the Office of the Attorney General will use the tools of law enforcement to punish you.

There is no place like the Soprano State (except maybe the old Soviet Union).


Copyright 2010 Edward Werner all rights resrved

Show Me The Money !

On December 22, 2009, the attached Complaint and Brief (Superior Court of New Jersey Mercer County Court of Equity L-23-10) were filed in Mercer County Superior Court. The State of New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety has diverted approximately FIVE AND ONE HALF MILLION DOLLARS ($5,500,000) that may only be spent to compensate crime victims through the Victims of Crime Compensation Office.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24913322/Complaint-122209

www.scribd.com/doc/24930376/Brief-122209


The Crime Victims Compensation Office is a text book example of good intentions abused by government corruption. The agency is supposed to compensate innocent victims of violent crime for the resultant costs. Unfortunately, the VCCO has been corrupt for many years. In 2005, my predecessor was asked to resign because he was caught using state government employees for his private entity; one in-house lawyer -the sister-in-law of Senator Robert Singer (R) Ocean, Burlington, and Monmouth - had to be fired for falsifying time sheets; the other in-house lawyer was fired for running a house closing business out of the VCCO office; since 2000 the agency had a no-bid construction contract scheme for which their internal computer system has no records; and there were three politically appointed Board Members who received six figure salaries for doing very little work. The agency has been in existence since 1978 and it has never been audited to determine where they are spending the money.

Now it appears the Department of Law and Public Safety has diverted $5,500,000 while making up excuses to deny victims. Diverting that money is more cold hearted than many of the crimes from which the victims originally suffered because they are now being revictimized by law enforcement !

Some say, the government will always find a way to take the money, so why fight it? Why rock the boat? This corruption must be fought .

First and foremost, it must be fought because innocent victims of rapes, muggings, shootings, and murders are suffering without anywhere else to turn;

It must be fought because the government has no right to pilfer funds from crime victims;

It must be fought becuase law enforcement can never be permitted to do the dirty work for political hacks - when the police break the law there is no law;

It must be fought because crime victims - like many other people dependant on government assistance - need and deserve this help, but they do not have the finances to make campaign contributions or hire lobbyists in the halls of power to influence politicians;

It must be fought to challenge to public officials who see public funds as a source of cash for themselves;

It must be fought because this sort of corruption allows others to ridicule New Jersey as "The Soprano State";

It must be fought as an example to the many State Government employees who would come forward to report corruption if they thought it would do any good; and

It must be fought because it is wrong.

If you believe the government should be held accountable then please do something to help. Please contact public officials and tell them the government must account for these funds. The new administartion seems to be sincerely concerned with changing the way things are done in Trenton.

Their response to this lawsuit will provide them with an excellent opportunity to prove it.

Copyright Edward G. Werner, 2010, all rights reserved

New Jersey State Ethics Commission - the Ultimate Hypocrisy

On June 21, 2009 I sent a correspondence to the New Jersey State Ethics Commission. (Please see my earlier blog entry). Attached is a copy of their response.

wiechnik_letter_8_24_09.pdf

In New Jersey, we expect state government bureaucrats to cover their asses at the expense of the public, but the State Ethics Commission should have some shame.

The New Jersey State Ethics Commission is the most vivid example of hypocrisy yet. Even the name is misleading. The attached letter purports to be on behalf of the Ethics Commission, but that is not so. The Ethics Commission is nine individuals who only hear news from one source; Kathleen C. Wiechnik, Esq. Ms. Weichnik is the Executive Director of the agency. She does not actually serve on the Commission. She is in charge of the office and she prepares the agenda for the Ethics Commission’s bimonthly meetings. In short, Ms. Wiechnik decides what information is presented to the Ethics Commission.

In my June 21, 2009 letter, I described what by any reasonable standard is an abuse of office by Mr. Jeffrey Stooleman. Mr. Stooleman – you can’t make this up – is in charge of Compliance at the Ethics Commission. His abuses are explained in the June 21, 2009 blog entry, but to summarize, he had an agenda to concoct an excuse to fire me. The Ethics Commission forced my predecessor, Richard Pompelio, out of his job, and they were now trying to do the same thing to me. Stooleman tried as hard as he could to come up with some violation, no matter how trivial, and over and over again he found I was honest and ethical.

But he had to keep trying. Mr. Stooleman is the longtime friend of Mr. Jacob Toporek, who is very well connected politically. Mr. Toporek filed many complaints against me and not one led to any finding of unethical conduct. In Mr. Stooleman, Toporek had the perfect foil. There is no tactic too cheap for Mr. Stooleman. He stooped to using a forged letter to try to soolicit a complaint against me. He received regular reports from a henchman within the agency. He questioned over thirty people for over three years. He even subpoenaed my computer hard drive. What did he find? He found I ran the agency effectively with no ethical lapses. This represents an abuse of authority not just because Mr. Stooleman used his office for political assassination, but because resources that could have been used to investigate true ethics violations were wasted. New Jersey is the laughing stock of the nation because of our corrupt government, and the Ethics Commission Compliance Director wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions of dollars, to investigate me for three years. According to Ms. Wiechnik, this is “established practice and sound investigative procedure”.

The State Ethics Commission is charged with “enforcing the New Jersey Conflicts of Interest Law”. www.state.nj.us/ethics/ That makes it the perfect tool for political assassination. A political hack, like Mr. Stoolemen, investigates someone until he finds some technicality to use against him. Stooleman is free to harass anyone he wants because his boss will not permit allegations of his wrongdoing to be presented to the Ethics Commission.

Ironically, Ms. Wiechnik does not seem to notice the obvious conflict of interest she had. She decided whether to present this issue to the Ethics Commission. Clearly she has an interest in her own decision because she would risk an unfavorable reflection on herself if Mr. Stooleman’s abuses were investigated by a legitimate authority. If Ms. Wiechnik wanted to legitimately withhold this issue from the Ethics Commission, the ethical thing to do would have been to refer that decision to an independent entity such as an administrative law judge. Of course, the right thing to do would have been to disclose Mr. Stooleman’s conduct to the Ethics Commission and let them investigate it.

Ms. Wiechnik ridiculed my request for an accounting. She writes, “You have indicated the Commission owes you an accounting of the resources utilized in connection with its investigation. I am unaware of any statutory or regulatory authority for your request.” Ms. Wiechnik needed to look no further than the State Ethics Commission’s website. Had she checked she would would have found under the “Procedures” section it states: “The Commission has the power to undertake investigations and hold hearings regarding alleged violations of the Conflicts Law. The Commission also issues advisory opinions concerning whether a given set of facts and circumstances would in the Commission's opinion constitute possible violations of the Conflicts Law or any code, rules or regulations promulgated pursuant thereto.”

If we were to take Ms. Wiechnik’s letter seriously, we would wonder how she could possibly be unaware her agency has the authority to determine if Mr. Stooleman wasted three years’ time and untold amounts of money to conduct a sham investigation and whether the facts of this case represent a conflict of interest. Of course, Ms. Wiechnik is not to be taken seriously. She is content to take paychecks in return for covering up corruption.

In the end, this is just one more sad example of how far corruption has gone in this state government, and one more sad example of why it will continue for a long time to come.

Copyright 2009, Edward G. Werner, all rights reserved