MLK said: "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere"

End Corruption in the Courts!

Court employee, judge or citizen - Report Corruption in any Court Today !! As of June 15, 2016, we've received over 142,500 tips...KEEP THEM COMING !! Email:

Friday, January 7, 2011

Judge Throws Out 5.6 Million Verdict

Judge throws out 5.6M verdict against Transit Authority - says clerk didn't have to help cops
The New York Daily News by Jose Martinez - January 7, 2011

The Transit Authority won't have to fork over $5.6 million to two cops who were manhandled in the Times Square subway station while a token booth clerk didn't lift a finger. Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Lottie Wilkins junked the jury's verdict, saying clerk Sean Corbin was under no obligation to call for help - even after Officers Jannett Velez and Camille San Filippo pleaded with him to phone for backup. "This guy did nothing but sit in his booth from 25 feet away," said Brian O'Connor, a lawyer for the two cops. "It's an outrage." Velez and San Filippo were on the lookout for drug-dealing in June 2002 when they caught a couple in a sex act on the street. They chased a man dressed as a woman into the station, while his companion - believed to be a woman - escaped. The frisky fellow then brawled with the cops for 10 minutes, with Velez getting heaved down a stairwell and San Filippo suffering a strained ankle and shoulder. "All he had to do was press a button," O'Connor said. Corbin testified that he saw no need to use his booth's emergency call system since cops were already on the scene. Velez, 34, retired from the NYPD in 2004 with shoulder injuries suffered in the fight. San Filippo, 46, retired with chronic pain in her right ankle, O'Connor said.


wondering said...

Why have jurors or a jury if a judge can simply throw out their verdict? I don't understand.

Anonymous said...

I was wondering the same thing.

How come they make so many people go through all the appeals and appellate courts, when a judge can just do the right thing to begin with?

There are certain decisions that a judge is supposed to be allowed to make regardless of what another judge has already ruled, (like lack of jurisdiction or or proceedings which violate constitutional rights), but just throw out a final decision?

I guess it just goes to show what a sham this whole legal process really is. They are just going to do whatever they like anyway.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Clearly the DOJ has more important investigations on it's hands.

Like reading texts from sanitation workers in NYC who don't know how to use a snow plow.

Blog Archive

See Video of Senator John L. Sampson's 1st Hearing on Court 'Ethics' Corruption

The first hearing, held in Albany on June 8, 2009 hearing is on two videos:

               Video of 1st Hearing on Court 'Ethics' Corruption
               The June 8, 2009 hearing is on two videos:
               CLICK HERE TO SEE Part 1
               CLICK HERE TO SEE Part 2