This case is the most telling and horrific example of injustice in the court system. The deliberate inattention to rectifying the injustice has made the family decide to publically post it on the internet. The family would like for your unit to review the case and restore the name and position of a dedicated Police Officer. We as a family have Spoken to Rabbi Gluck who sent the case to Governor Patterson, Senator Sampson, Assemblyman Joe Lentol and Assemblywoman Jenny Fields who have attempted to assist us in our plight. . Assemblywoman has written a letter on behalf of Officer Mike R and Jurors have written letters. We have brought this case to the attention of your office and the results are contradictory to statements delineating your position. We have a letter from your office stating that the case was reviewed and there will be no further action in the case. I must continue to alert you to the manipulation of the entire case to ensure the conviction of a dedicated person and Public Servant known as a Police Officer. We have the up most respect for the strides you have made in restoring the reputation of innocent people and continue to support you in your attempts. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A MEETING AND THE TIME TO SHOW HOW THIS CASE WAS MANIPULATED TO CONVICT THIS INNOCENT OFFICER OF A CRIME.
The Manhattan District Attorney's office under the previous administration maliciously prosecuted Michael Rosato. Some of the Highlights of the case include: All of the Judges motions were made off the record without permission of the Defense Attorney , The DA became an unsworn witness, Missing and altered Rosario material presented at trial, Complainants statements did not match the videotape,
The investigating officers reports did not match the complainants statements. The appeal for ineffective counsel was denied on its face. The initial hand written report by the Police administrative aide was not presented at trial (Rosario material). The investigating officer’s report times preceded the arrival time of the complainants on the Police administrative aide’ reports.
The investigating officer is now the senior investigator in the DOI which falls under the Mayor. The investigating officer retained the case after the Inspector from IAB designated the case to the proper unit. The investigating officer had only two months left to retire and stated in court that he took it upon himself to keep the case. The Supervisor then sent the case to IAB after the detective retired because his unit did not handle these cases in his unit. Jurors sent letters stating that the case was over prosecuted and that no crimes were committed and it was a waste of taxpayers money.
The video tape presented at trial no longer had the IAB lieutenant’s and the investigating officers initials and date on the Rosario material, the burglary was supported by official misconduct, the complaint’s testimony to IAB was that he delivered the original tape to the detective on the date the complaint was made however, the detectives reports indicate the detective did not receive the tape for five days, the detective solved the case without viewing the tape or responding to the building, the Judge would not allow evidence that the DA had produced in his opening statements at trial, no crime delineated on the original complainant, the witnesses testimony was contradictory to the evidence(video) report and so much more.
IF THERE IS ANY VALIDITY TO RECTIFYING AND RESTORING PEOPLES LIVES WITHIN YOUR ESTABLISHMENT. THIS IS THE CASE. ANY ASSISTANCE FROM YOU WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.