HYNES NABS A JUDGE In another embarrassing blow to the Brooklyn judiciary, Supreme Court Judge Gerald Garson has been caught on video with his hand in the cookie jar by Brooklyn District Attorney Joe Hynes. Garson, who presides over divorce cases, allegedly accepted illegal gifts from the lawyers who appeared before him, and committed other misdeeds as well, Newsday reported on April 23. Garson's conversations were reportedly captured on tape in his robing room as part of a wider Hynes investigation. We'd heard about the impending indictment earlier in the day, along with every politically connected person in Brooklyn, as the wags burned up the phone lines. The news of Garson going down seemed to be met with glee in some quarters. Garson surrendered that night, along with a court clerk, court officer, and lawyer. More arrests were expected.

The judge comes from one of Brooklyn's most politically connected families. He was for years the law partner of former Brooklyn Borough President Howard Golden. His wife, Robin Garson, was elected to the Brooklyn Civil Court last year thanks to the Democratic machine, which now might want to distance itself from the family. And Gerald' cousin is Brooklyn Supreme Court Judge Mike Garson, the husband of Sheepshead Bay district leader Laurie Garson. Another cousin is School Board 22 member Joel Garson, a former Assembly candidate.

For all of these people, the name Garson has suddenly become a label of shame. Why would Gerald Garson, a septuagenarian earning $136,700 per year, have allegedly accepted free meals from attorneys appearing before him and up to $1,000 for giving an attorney a court appointment? "The level of stupidity," marveled one observer. "It is amazing." Indeed, Garson and his wife pull in over $260,000 between them. Even for Upper East Side residents, that's more than enough to get by. But the reason could be more than stupidity, or even greed. Garson might have come to believe that as a judge, he was entitled to goodies under the table. After all, when he was practicing law, he buttered up judges as well.

According to the AP, as a private attorney in the 1970s, Garson was accused of putting up a state judge and his wife at Kutsher's Country Club, where they were registered under the name of Garson's law partner. Garson was also censured in 1984 for slipping gifts and gratuities to a Civil Court judge and his wife, according to court records. Did the "rewards" Garson allegedly received-free restaurant meals, boxes of cigars, etc.-influence his decisions? Only he knows for sure. But it was a disgruntled litigant who tipped off authorities, sparking the investigation.

We also found one man who appeared before Garson seeking a simple divorce to end a 20-month childless marriage with no property involved, only to be flummoxed by Garson at every turn. Though the wife didn't show up in court and was in the U.S. illegally, according to the man, Garson denied the divorce and ordered him to pay $1,100 per month, causing the man to suspect his wife's attorney was conspiring with the judge. "You tend to wonder, how did she outwit four attorneys?" the man wrote on his home page. We can only guess.

Despite his failings, Garson was capable of courageous rulings, notably one in which he sided with a 22-year-old Orthodox Syrian woman whose ex-husband, from whom she'd fled after just four months and obtained a civil divorce, refused to give her a "get," a religious divorce, which would allow her to remarry in the Orthodox community. In April 2001 Garson ordered the recalcitrant husband to pay the woman $500 per week and give her 75 percent of the marital property. Suddenly, the husband was willing to grant the "get." The judge's landmark decision was cheered by the International Council of Jewish Women in its Human Rights Watch newsletter. Nobody's cheering Gerald Garson now.

Meanwhile, Hynes's investigation of county courts could help him shed criticism that he plays favorites with friends of the Brooklyn Democratic organization. Not long ago, Hynes was paying Golden $125,000 a year to be his civic affairs director. Today he is prosecuting Golden's former law partner. Garson was also treasurer of the county organization when Golden was its chairman and continued in that role under Clarence Norman until the mid 1990s. Garson's wife's campaign was backed by County last year.

BACK UP THE VANN Is Al Vann a serious candidate for speaker of the City Council? And is Assemblyman Clarence Norman, the Brooklyn Democratic leader, considering backing him? That rumor's been bandied about since Norman recently commented about a Vann speakership to a group of black elected officials in Albany. Chances are, Norman was just making nice with his fellow black lawmakers, who'd likely prefer a black speaker like Vann over Brooklyn's two leading speaker hopefuls, Lew Fidler and Bill deBlasio, who are white. Lest we forget, as one observer noted, Vann's previous bid for speaker was D.O.A.

"The last time Al was running he had one supporter: Charles Barron," our source said. "Why people would think him a frontline player for speaker, I can't imagine. I can't imagine why even Clarence would think so." But the source added, "I could see why Clarence would be backed into a situation where he'd have to pacify Al."

Vann was upset with Norman when the county leader backed former Councilman Angel Rodriguez as Brooklyn's speaker candidate the last time around. Vann, having spent two decades as an assemblyman, is better known than most councilmembers. But he hasn't done much to position himself as a contender for the speakership, which Gifford Miller will relinquish this year or in 2005, depending on the fate of term limits legislation being challenged in court. "Al isn't the most committed councilmember in the world," our source claimed. "He's not around all that much, he's not deeply involved in the black and Hispanic caucus of the council, which would be his only angle. Because he's certainly not coming in with 12 votes from Brooklyn."

We called Vann's district office a few weeks ago, but he didn't call back, so we didn't bother this time. However, we continue to include our phone number, e-mail address, and fax number at the end of every column, should he decide to respond.

YASSKY SAYS OFF-DUTY COPS WOULD ACT City Councilman David Yassky, who has proposed that off-duty officers be allowed to wear their uniforms when working for bars, didn't buy our scenario of a cop staying at his post rather than chase after a mugger in the street. "Hard to imagine," Yassky said. "I've got to believe that 99 times out of 100, the police officer would chase after the mugger."

And what if an off-duty, uniformed cop beat up a nightclub patron while working as a bouncer? Could the NYPD get sued? The answer is yes, Yassky told us. But he added, "The city does not pay out a lot in judgments currently to people who get into fights with police officers." The councilman noted, "It's not uncommon for bar patrons to pick a fight with the bouncer. I think you'd see a lot less of that if the bouncer wore a police uniform. Or if there were a police officer outside."

TALES FROM THE CRYPT, ER, COURT With two and a half million people, Brooklyn shouldn't have any difficulty finding residents to run for its Civil Court. Yet once again, out-of-towners have infiltrated the race.

Last year, Manhattanites Karen Yellen and Robin Garson ran against three Brooklynites for three countywide seats. This year, with one countywide seat open, two of the three candidates are not from Kings County. Housing Court Judge Dawn Jimenez hails from Manhattan, while Shawndya Simpson seems to have property all over the place-New Jersey, upstate-and only recently established a residence in Brooklyn. But we hear she will be challenged on it, perhaps by the lone Brooklynite in the race, Theresa Ciccotto. Candidates have to live in New York City and be registered to vote from their primary residence.

Contrary to our report last week, April Neubauer and Linda Atlas don't appear to be running this year. Rather, they are building contacts to run next year. (Civil Court terms are 10 years with a starting salary of $125,000, so it's never too early to plan a campaign.)

Jimenez has a nice résumé (Princeton, Temple Law School, partner at a Manhattan law firm, then a judge), so we're not sure why she needs to partake in, ahem, carpetbagging. There are plenty of Civil Court seats in her home borough. "In the largest county in the state, I think we should come up with qualified people," commented Democratic district leader Ralph Perfetto. Rest assured, Jimenez will be asked about this when she seeks the endorsement of Brooklyn Democratic clubs.

Simpson has already faced some tough questions. We're told she was grilled by Bay Ridge district leader Delia Schack at a meeting of the new female district leaders' caucus, chaired by Lori Knipel of Flatbush. Before we continue, a disclaimer: This is one of those stories that was likely embellished by the time it reached us. Knipel tells us it's inaccurate. But we heard it from two sources, it's interesting, and it reveals some of the agendas at work in this race, so we'll repeat it. Schack reportedly asked Simpson if she'd ever been fired. Simpson said she hadn't. Schack might have been expecting a different answer, and a tense scene developed.

The story gets wilder: Democratic county leader Assemblyman Clarence Norman, who's behind Simpson (as is Rep. Ed Towns), allegedly called Schack the next day and read her the riot act. The rumor-mongerers went so far as to report that Norman told Schack that if she didn't back off Simpson, Schack's husband Arthur Schack would never be elevated from Civil Court to Supreme. It's a sexy story, but the last part is likely untrue. People who know Norman well say he's far too careful to make such a threat. Especially when he doesn't have to.

Delia Schack knows full well that Norman essentially determines who sits on Brooklyn's Supreme Court, and that crossing Norman wouldn't do her husband any favors. A Supreme Court term is 14 years with a salary of $136,700, and Arthur Schack covets the job, so there's a lot at stake for the Schacks. We called their house and left a message, but didn't hear back. Big shock there. Norman's sidekick, Jeff Feldman, also didn't return our call. Was it something we said?

It's also disappointing that, according to Knipel, the female district leaders' interviews of the judicial candidates is confidential. Why? These people shouldn't have anything to hide. After all, they're running for judge. Knipel tried to reassure us, noting that "it's just the interview process that's confidential. Once it's over, everything will be for the public view." To us, everything means everything. Voters should be entitled to the same information the district leaders got.

GAY GOP'ERS SOUGHT We never thought of gay Republicans as a particularly large constituency. And Republicans are certainly hard to come by in Brownstone Brooklyn. So Prospect Heights was a curious choice of venue for a May 3 recruitment meeting of the Log Cabin Republicans, the nation's largest gay GOP organization.

We've been getting press releases from the group's New York chapter of late, which seems to spend most of its time trying to cure fellow Republicans of homophobia (Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania being the latest target). Last winter, Log Cabin Republicans of New York got the cold shoulder from Bay Ridge candidate Rosemary O'Keefe, who ended up losing a nail-biter for City Council to Vinny Gentile.

Group members obviously figured they'd be better off recruiting members in the brownstone neighborhoods, where there are lots of gays but few Republicans, than in Bay Ridge, where there are lots of Republicans but few gays. For information on the May 3 noontime brunch at New Prospect Cafe, visit www.lcrny.org and click on Events Calendar.

PETITION CHANGES UPHELD New rules allowing any state resident to witness petition signatures for a candidate of his same political party have been upheld by a federal judge. It used to be that a candidate in a given district needed fellow party members who lived in that district to collect signatures to put him on the ballot. But the rule was expanded by a successful court challenge in 2000. The county Democratic organization, which reflexively opposes easier ballot access because it gives insurgent candidates a chance, appealed the court ruling.

The appeal was rejected by federal Judge Nina Gershon, which surely pleased Councilman David Yassky of Brooklyn Heights, one of the 2001 candidates who challenged the restrictive policy. Yassky defeated the organization's candidate, district leader Steve Cohn, to win the seat formerly held by Ken Fisher.

Borough Politics Archive

2003
April 28 column.
April 21 column.
April 14 column.
April 7 column.
March 31 column.
March 24 column.
March 10 column.
March 3 column.
February 24 column.
February 17 column.
February 10 column.
February 3 column.
January 27 column.
January 20 column.
January 13 column.
January 6 column.

2002
December 30 column.
December 23 column.
December 16 column.
December 9 column.
December 2 column.
Novemer 25 column.
Novemer 18 column.
November 11 column.
November 4 column.
October 28 column.
October 21 column.
October 14 column.
October 7 column.
September 30 column.
September 23 column.
September 16 column.
September 9 column.
September 2 column.
August 26 column.
August 19 column.
August 12 column.
August 5 column.
July 29 column.
July 22 column.
July 8 column.
July 1 column.
June 17 column.
June 10 column.
June 3 column.
May 27 column.
May 20 column.
May 13 column.
May 6 column.
April 29 column.
April 22 column.
April 15 column.
April 8 column.
April 1 column.
March 25 column.
March 18 column.
March 11 column.
March 4 column.
February 25 column.
February 18 column.
February 11 column.
February 4 column.
January 28 column.
January 21 column.
January 7 column.

2001
December 10 column.
December 3 column.
November 19 column.
November 12 column.
November 5 column.
October 22 column.
October 1 column.
September 6 column.
September 4 column.
August 30 column.
July 23 column.
July 2 column.
June 25 column.
June 11 column.
May 28 column.
May 21 column.
May 14 column.
May 7 column.
April 30 column.
April 23 column.
April 9 column.
April 2 column.
March 26 column.
March 19 column.
March 12 column.
March 5 column.
February 26 column.
February 19 column.
February 12 column.
February 5 column.
January 29 column.
January 22 column.
January 15 column.
January 8 column.
January 1 column.

2000
December 25 column.
December 18 column.
December 11 column.
December 4 column.
November 27 column.
November 20 column.
November 13 column.
November 6 column.
October 30 column.
October 23 column.
October 16 column.
October 9 column.
October 2 column.
September 25 column.
September 18 column.
September 11 column.
September 4 column.
August 28 column.
August 21 column.
August 7 column.
July 31 column.
July 24 column.
July 17 column.
July 10 column.
June 26 column.
June 19 column.
June 12 column.
May 15 column.
May 8 column.
April 24 column.
April 10 column.
March 13 column.
March 7 column.
February 21 column.
February 14 column.
February 7 column.
January 31 column.
January 24 column.
January 17 column.

1999
December 16 column.
December 9 column.
December 2 column.
November 25 column.
November 18 column.
November 11 column.
November 4 column.