Quoted Text

Keeping Raucci in jail without bail is unconstitutional

    Re July 28 editorial, “Right bail decision regarding Raucci”: Recently retired as a court stenographer in Schenectady County, I would like to express my disappointment and sadness in the manner in which a man who is supposed to be deemed innocent until proven guilty by the Constitution finds it impossible to be granted bail — which is his most basic and inherent right.
    I believe this injustice is partly due to media coverage and overreaching allegations of terrorism and arson (merely allegations) which have influenced the judicial system in believing that Steve Raucci is a dangerous monster and should be compared to Osama bin Laden, Timothy McVeigh or Mohammed Atta. I can certainly appreciate why judges would be hard pressed to grant bail to Mr. Raucci when he is constantly referred to as a terrorist or arsonist in the newspapers and court papers, and would hurt someone if released on bail.
    This case has been influenced by the media and other interested parties that have everything to gain by Mr. Raucci’s incarceration. How can this decorated Vietnam veteran with no prior criminal history defend himself while in a jail cell? He has had all of his hard-earned money taken away from him, once again based on mere allegations. Does anyone think that this hard-working Italian-American can receive a fair and impartial trial in this county, now that future jurors have been overwhelmingly prejudiced by the media?
    In my many years of working in the criminal justice system, I recall many cases where defendants with prior criminal histories — violent criminal histories — have been granted bail or released under the supervision of probation, or have worn an ankle bracelet to determine their whereabouts, ordered to live with a suitable adult or family member. Why not Steve Raucci?
    I always thought that bail was to assure a defendant’s presence in court, and for no other reason. I guess I was wrong. Mr. Raucci has lived here all his life. He has family ties. He doesn’t have a passport. He doesn’t have any money. These are all arguments I’ve heard in the past, and guess what? Bail has been granted to many of these defendants, as it should have been.
    Why can’t Mr. Raucci get bail with protective measures being implemented? Many people who have worked with him have terrific things to say about him and the many good things that he has accomplished. We’ve never heard about that in the newspapers and probably never will. His wife and daughter love him deeply. Is he this great family man cleverly disguised as a city worker during the day who then switches to his terrorist cape and becomes a terrorist and arsonist by night?
    I believe we have the greatest judicial system in the world. We have the right to face our accusers and question our accusers and implement any other defenses provided us by law.
    Please don’t misconstrue my feelings about this case. My argument and observations only deal with the constant and unfair denial of bail. If these allegations occurred, I certainly don’t condone them, and Mr. Raucci should pay his debt to society. His basic, fundamental right to defend himself cannot happen while Mr. Raucci sits in jail. As a result, he will probably spend the rest of his life in jail if convicted. It will be interesting to see what the Appellate Division decides with regard to this man’s liberty.

    UGO STEGAGNO
    Rotterdam

Quoted Text

School board member resigns

By LAUREN STANFORTH, Staff writer
Last updated: 1:40 p.m., Tuesday, August 11, 2009

SCHENECTADY -- A newly elected city school board member who vowed to make the district more transparent has resigned.

     
Joyce Wachala e-mailed other school board members this morning to let them know she's leaving the post she won in May. Her election was a signal of city voters' discontent, as Wacahala and another newcomer, Diane Herrmann, defeated two candidates endorsed by Jeff Janiszewski, who was president at the time and was succeed in that post by Maxine Brisport. Janiszewski remains on the board, serving in a term that runs through May.

Wachala, who co-owns Arthur's Market in the Stockade, said she must now focus on her 3-year-old son, who was recently diagnosed with Type I diabetes.

"I fought so hard to get on the ballot. I wouldn't have simply given up," said Wachala, whose residency was questioned by the district before officials validated her nominating petition. "But I have to fight for what I have to do with my son."

She said the board has three choices: it can appoint a replacement who would serve until next May, hold a special election within 90 days, or keep the seat vacant until May.

Quoted Text

Raucci conversations were taped
Defense releases papers in bid to get search warrants tossed
Thursday, August 20, 2009
By Steven Cook (Contact)
Gazette Reporter

SCHENECTADY — Inside Steven Raucci’s Mont Pleasant Middle School office in December, the conversation turned to the Rotterdam Police Department.
The department, Raucci told the person in front of him, knew him. In fact, Raucci allegedly said, he himself was the main suspect in an incident in which an explosive device was detonated on a house, an apparent reference to an August 2001 bombing at a Rotterdam apartment.
“Raucci explained how he ‘did it for a friend,’ and that he didn’t even know the guy,” according to an investigator’s synopsis of the alleged conversation that is contained in new defense filings in the criminal case against Raucci.
The person Raucci was speaking with that December day was a police informant wearing a wire, according to the court papers.
The information was used by police to get search warrants in February for Raucci’s school office and his Niskayuna residence. Raucci’s defense attorney, Ronald DeAngelus, filed copies of the warrants as part of his bid to have them thrown out, along with the evidence gained from them, arguing the warrants were improper.
The papers provided new insights into the prosecution’s case against Raucci, the background of the unidentified informant that helped take him down and exactly how long Raucci had been on the radar of investigators.
The filing includes a two-page, single-spaced letter allegedly written by Raucci to his wife for her to read when “I’m no longer with you.” DeAngelus argues the letter accompanied $120,000 in cash — which DeAngelus says is the Rauccis’ life savings — and explained to her how to best make use of the money in the event of Raucci’s death. The state police “completely overlooked” the letter, DeAngelus argues.
Raucci has been indicted on more than two dozen counts, including a 1993 bombing in Glenville, the 2001 Rotterdam bombing and attempted bombings in Clifton Park and Schodack. No one was injured in any of the incidents attributed to Raucci.
DeAngelus is arguing that charges should either be dismissed, tried separately or tried in the counties where the incidents occurred.
Schenectady County District Attorney Robert Carney noted Wednesday his office is preparing its response to DeAngelus’ motions. That response is due later this month.
Raucci remains in jail without bail................>>>>..................>>>>..........http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2009/aug/20/0820_raucci/

Quoted Text

Raucci’s bail appeal moved up
Friday, August 28, 2009
By Steven Cook (Contact)
Gazette Reporter


SCHENECTADY — Steven Raucci will get to make his case for bail to the Appellate Division of the state Supreme Court — sooner rather than later.
The Appellate Division this week accepted Raucci’s bid for his bail case to be given preference, setting arguments for October.
The decision moves up what can be a six month or longer wait for arguments before the appeals court.
Raucci attorney Ronald DeAngelus Thursday noted that the longer the appeals process plays out, the closer the criminal case gets to trial and the more the bail issue becomes moot.
DeAngelus is expected to argue that lower courts misapplied the law when deciding to hold Raucci without bail pending trial.
DeAngelus reiterated Thursday that he believes the bail issue has implications beyond Raucci’s situation.
“I believe this will wind up being one of the leading cases on bail and whether you have the right to confront opposition witnesses,” DeAngelus said.............>>>>>................>>>>...........http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2009/aug/28/0828_raucci/

Quoted Text

E-mails show Raucci was cozy with Ely
Saturday, September 5, 2009
By Carl Strock, Gazette columnist

What kind of relationship did Steve Raucci, bad boy of the Schenectady City School District, have with Superintendent Eric Ely?
A few small indicators have come my way in the form of e-mails exchanged between the two at the beginning of this year, just a month before Raucci was arrested on charges of arson and terrorism.
Raucci, you will remember, was in effect supervisor of buildings and grounds, though he held the humble title of head utility worker, a title that allowed him to avoid a Civil Service test. He is accused of vandalizing the homes and cars of employees and others who crossed him and is currently in jail without bail, awaiting trial.
In the e-mails I have obtained, he comes across as a barely-under-control hothead who is palsy-walsy with Ely, defiant of another nominal superior, and menacing to inferiors.
The e-mail I really like is one he wrote to Ely on Jan. 24 of this year, regarding disagreement over the construction of a new artificial-turf field and fence at the high school.
He complains that school board member Gary Farkas, whom he refers to as “Mr. Stupid,” has secretly opposed the project while pretending to support it, and he tells Ely, “I’m livid right now … I’m primed for battle … [Farkas] needs to be knocked back down a few pegs where he belongs.”
But then he concludes reassuringly, “Relax Eric, I’m under control and will not damage your trust in sending me blind copies. Love ya, Steve.”
The next day Ely responds, “Let’s take some time to strategize this tomorrow. I see a battle coming. I told you this was coming. You can’t trust Farkas about anything.”
Which is revealing enough as far as the coziness between the two is concerned, but what really fascinates me is that Superintendent Ely was apparently writing e-mails to other people and sending blind copies to Raucci, that is, copies that the nominal recipient would not be aware of.
And Raucci tells him, Don’t worry, Eric, I won’t betray your trust.
As for Jeff Janiszewski, whom I think of as the godfather of the school district, “he is smart enough not to [BS] or lie to me,” Raucci wrote to Ely.
Farkas, on the other hand, has two defects that “are not Jeff traits.” Those are “being stupid and lying,” according to Raucci.
“Being stupid is his problem,” he wrote to Ely. “Lying to me is a cardinal sin which I won’t forget.”
Real tough guy, which he made no secret of but rather flaunted..................>>>>.................................>>>>.............................http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2009/sep/05/0906_strock906/

Quoted from senders

The gangsta gumbas are loosing their pants.....and keep climbing the paper ladder,,,,it certainly doesn't stop at the school board....

Quoted Text

SCHENECTADY
Release of Raucci findings is urged
BY MICHAEL GOOT Gazette Reporter

    An advisory opinion from the state Committee on Open Government says that Schenectady City School District officials should not have withheld release of the entire report into former facilities director Steven Raucci’s alleged workplace misconduct.
    The Daily Gazette in June had filed a Freedom of Information Law request seeking access to the report of Rachel Rissetto, who the Board of Education hired at a fee of $100 per hour to investigate whether Raucci harassed and abused colleagues and whether administrators knew of his behavior and did nothing.
    This is separate from the criminal case against Raucci, who is facing a 26-count indictment alleging that he planted explosive devices at the homes of his enemies and did other damage.
    The Schenectady County district attorney has alleged that school offi - cials were “beholden” to Raucci, who retired from his position in April. The investigation took 2 1 /2 months and cost nearly $13,000.
    School officials denied the FOIL request in a letter dated June 30 and also denied an appeal on July 17. They claimed that there would be an “unwarranted invasion of personal privacy” if the report were disclosed and that it is an intra-agency report and not a final agency policy or determination.
    The district does not have the authority to withhold the entire contents of the report, according to an opinion dated Sept. 1 by Committee on Open Government Executive Director Robert Freeman.
    Freeman wrote that the Freedom of Information Law “imposes an obligation on an agency to review the records sought, in their entirety, to determine which portions, if any, might properly be withheld or deleted prior to disclosing the remainder.”
    Copies of the opinion were sent to the Board of Education and Superintendent Eric Ely.
    Contacted for comment on Tuesday, Ely said, “It is not appropriate for me to comment on a board decision or to comment if that decision is being questioned.”
    School board President Maxine Brisport also declined to comment “on advice of our legal counsel.”
    But Vice President Diane Herrmann believes the report should be released. She said Tuesday that the board should discuss the matter again with its legal counsel. She has pressed the issue but has not heard back from other members.
    Gazette Managing Editor Judith S. Patrick said the newspaper is waiting for the school district to review the advisory opinion and make a decision on whether it would change its position on releasing the report.
    “We very strongly believe that....................>>>>...............>>>>..............http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....1&Continuation=1