The New Yorker
By Rachel
Aviv
A Reporter at Large
November 10, 2014
Issue
The
Outcast
After a Hasidic man exposed child abuse in
his tight-knit Brooklyn community, he found himself the target of a criminal investigation.
Sam Kellner’s reputation in the Hasidic community of Borough Park,
Brooklyn, began to suffer in 2008, when his teen-age son told him that he had
been molested by a man who had prayed at their synagogue. Kellner’s first
instinct was to run the man over with his van, but he didn’t know if his anger
was justified. Molestation was rarely discussed in the community, and it didn’t
seem to Kellner that any of the prohibitions in the Ten Commandments explicitly
related to it. The most relevant sins—adultery and coveting a neighbor’s
belongings—didn’t capture the depth of the violation. Kellner couldn’t pinpoint
what was lost when a child was sexually abused, since the person looked the
same afterward. But he sensed that molestation was damaging, because he knew a
few victims, and they had gone off the derech, or religious way.
“They became dead-enders, lost souls, outcasts,” he told me.
Kellner, a heavyset man
with hazel eyes and a long, graying beard, never spoke about sexual matters
with his six children. They would take classes about the human body (with a
focus on how to get pregnant) only after their marriages were arranged. Kellner
took his son to a modesty committee, called vaad hatznius, which enforces standards of sexual propriety among Borough
Park’s hundred thousand ultra-Orthodox Jews, the majority of them Hasidic. Vaad hatznius disciplines residents who freely express their sexuality or behave
lewdly. In a community where non-procreative sex is considered shameful,
molestation tends to be regarded in roughly the same light as having an affair.
When children complain about being molested, the council almost never notifies
the police. Instead, it devises its own punishments for offenders: sometimes
they are compelled to apologize, pay restitution, or move to Israel.
Kellner had once been a
top administrator at the Munkacz synagogue and yeshiva, in Borough Park, but he
had fought with other leaders about financial and educational policies. He had
left the job and started a toner business, collecting discarded cartridges and
reselling them. His son’s alleged abuser, Baruch Lebovits, was the descendant
of a rabbinic dynasty, a prominent cantor with twenty-four grandchildren.
Kellner told vaad
hatznius that he wanted to report
his son’s abuse to the police, because he didn’t trust that the issue could be
dealt with internally.
The committee granted
him permission, as long he had the approval of a rabbi. The rabbi would have to
make an exception to the Talmudic prohibition against mesirah, the act of turning over another Jew to civil authorities.
According to some interpretations of Talmudic law, a Jew who informs on another
Jew has committed a capital crime. He is a “wicked man,” who has “blasphemed
and rebelled against the law of Moses,” the twelfth-century Torah scholar
Maimonides wrote. The law was meant to protect the community from anti-Semitic
governments. Kellner said, “The way history tells it is that if a Jew was
arrested he was thrown in jail and never heard of again.”
Hasidim, whose movement
emerged in the eighteenth century as a mystical, populist alternative to
traditional Judaism, are defined in part by their concern for
self-preservation. Kellner is the son of Hungarian Holocaust survivors who
re-created in Brooklyn a community that had been destroyed by the war. Men
dress in black frock coats; married women wear long skirts and hide their hair,
which is considered alluring, under shawls or wigs. They speak Yiddish, and
resist television, the Internet, and other secular forms of entertainment.
Hasidic parents take literally the Lord’s order to “be fruitful and
multiply”—they intend to replenish a culture devastated by the Holocaust—and
Hasidim are now the fastest-growing segment of the Jewish population in New
York City. Sixty per cent of the city’s Jewish children, many of them Hasidic,
live in Orthodox homes.
Kellner, who was a
member of a synagogue that is closely affiliated with the Satmar sect, the
largest Hasidic community in New York, wasn’t sure that the prohibition against
mesirah made sense in a country where, he said, “the justice system is
credible enough.” Although the Satmar community distrusts secular government,
it participates fully in the democratic process. Hasidim typically vote as a
bloc, delivering tens of thousands of votes to the politicians their leaders
endorse. In exchange for the community’s loyalty, politicians have given
Brooklyn’s Hasidim wide latitude to police themselves. They have their own
emergency medical corps, a security patrol, and a rabbinic court system, which
often handles criminal allegations.
Kellner sought counsel
from Rabbi Chaim Flohr, the leader of an institute where rabbinic scholars
study how the teachings of the Torah translate to contemporary dilemmas. After
listening to Kellner’s story, Flohr called the modesty councils in Borough Park
and Williamsburg (where there are sixty thousand Hasidim) to see if other
children had reported being molested by Lebovits. Flohr wrote in an affidavit
that “numerous complaints and allegations of a similar nature had been made
against Baruch Lebovits dating back over a long period of time.” Flohr told
Kellner that he was justified in going to the police, because Lebovits could be
considered a rodef, or pursuer, someone who is endangering the lives of other Jews.
In a letter, Flohr wrote, “Behold I make known in the public arena: to praise
an honest man, namely Mr. Shloma Aron Kellner, may his light shine, that how he
acted in regards to the government was based on a query before a rabbinic court
and was done according to our Holy Torah. . . . It is forbidden to trouble him
or humiliate him.”
With the rabbi’s
approval, Kellner took his son, whom I’ll call Yossel, to the offices of the
Brooklyn Special Victims Unit, in Crown Heights, to speak with Steven Litwin,
the senior detective. A studious and introspective boy, Yossel explained that
Lebovits had offered him a ride home from a school outing late at night, then
reached over to the passenger seat and molested him. He said that Lebovits was
soon moaning and grunting. He told his teacher what had happened, but the
teacher said that Lebovits was a “respected person” and instructed him not to
think about the incident again.
Litwin found the boy’s
“claims to be extremely credible,” he wrote in an affidavit. But he told
Kellner that the crime was a misdemeanor, and that it was unlikely that
Lebovits, a first-time offender, would receive jail time. Disappointed, Kellner
said that Lebovits had molested other boys, too. “O.K., so help me find them,”
Litwin told him.
Kellner went back to the modesty
council and was given the name of another boy, Joshua, who had complained about
Lebovits. (All victims’ names have been changed.) Joshua said that, starting in
2000, when he was twelve, Lebovits sometimes drove alongside him while he was
walking to school, honking his horn and encouraging him to get into the car,
where Lebovits performed oral sex on him. Joshua said that, on other occasions,
Lebovits molested him in the mikvah, a ritual bath that was in the basement of
his synagogue.
Joshua had gone to a
yeshiva for students with developmental disabilities. His family was poor, and
he begged for charity outside synagogues and weddings, a common practice in
Borough Park, where the poorest members of the Hasidic community live and pray
next to the wealthiest. They patronize the same businesses on Thirteenth
Avenue, a commercial strip of kosher restaurants and shops. Although Kellner
had never met Joshua, he drove to his house and offered him work helping to
plan the wedding of a mutual acquaintance. Kellner gradually steered the
conversation toward Baruch Lebovits, and urged Joshua to report his abuse.
Joshua became jittery and hyper. “Listen, unless you go to the authorities,
you’ll never feel relaxed,” Kellner told him. “You’ll never feel unviolated.”
On March 6, 2008, Joshua
told Detective Litwin that he had been molested by Lebovits on more than thirty
occasions over four years. Once, he said, Lebovits had picked him up on his way
to school and anally raped him in a building near his yeshiva. After each
encounter, Lebovits apologized and promised he would never do it again.
Five days later, Baruch
Lebovits was arrested in front of his house. Although Joshua’s name wasn’t
publicly released, everyone in his neighborhood seemed to know that he had gone
to the police. Natalie Hadad, his best friend, said, “People would call him and
say, ‘If you testify, bad things are going to happen to your parents. If you
testify, you’re going to get thrown out of Borough Park.’ ”
A few months later, Kellner spoke
with Dov Hikind, the assemblyman who represents Borough Park. Hikind hosts a
weekly radio program, and he had recently dedicated three shows to the problem
of sex abuse among the ultra-Orthodox. Hikind said that, after the show, more
than a hundred victims had called or visited his office to complain about
multiple offenders. One of the victims was a twenty-year-old named Aron, who
said that Lebovits had repeatedly molested him in his car, beginning when he
was sixteen. A year later, he fell in with a clique of teen-agers who were
known to be O.T.D., or off the derech, and he began using
heroin or cocaine almost every day.
Aron had tried to leave
the Hasidic community, but he struggled to assimilate into the secular world.
Many of the yeshivas in Brooklyn teach in Yiddish and provide less than two
hours of secular education a day. Aron had a heavy Yiddish accent, a
rudimentary grasp of written English, and no diploma. In a video filmed by a
friend, Aron complained about his limited education and social skills. He said
that he didn’t know how to interact with women—he had been forbidden to mingle
with them or look them in the eye—and no one had taught him “what your body is
about.” He had struggled to process what was happening when Lebovits, a pious
man, put his mouth on Aron’s penis. “My head, like, exploded,” he said. “Call
it an epiphany, I guess.”
Aron’s schoolmate Boorey
Deutsch said that he and his friends had known that Aron was molested by
Lebovits. “We saw them together,” Deutsch told me. “And every day we saw Aron
breaking down. He stopped playing with us. He hung out in the corners. Then we
started bullying him. I even recall slapping him once in the face.”
Aron felt that he had
little to lose when Kellner urged him to report his abuse. Ian Christner, a
mental-health advocate who worked with Aron, said that Kellner adopted a
paternal attitude toward Aron, who was often so high that he nodded off in the
middle of conversations. “Sam Kellner saw the way that victims in the community
were suffering,” Christner told me. “He is a real tough guy, and he has got a
sense of fairness. It’s not a high-placed sense of social justice that comes
from being a scholar. It’s simple and straightforward. If he feels like people
have wronged him or his family, he’ll make sure that they hear about it.”
In October, 2008, a second
indictment was brought against Lebovits, naming Aron as a victim. A few weeks
later, Aron was invited to the home of Berel Ashkenazi, the spiritual adviser
of his former yeshiva, who was a colleague of Baruch Lebovits’s son. It was a
Friday afternoon, a few hours before businesses closed for Shabbat. Ashkenazi
served Aron food, made polite conversation, and then, Aron said, offered him
between five and ten thousand dollars to drop out of the case. (Ashkenazi
denied this, and said that Aron came to him seeking compensation.)
Although Aron disliked
Ashkenazi, he was tempted by the offer. He told Kellner that he needed the
money. “Don’t be crazy!” Kellner shouted. “I could get you two hundred thousand
dollars!” Kellner, who barely had enough money to support his family, told me
that he was willing to say anything to keep the case intact. He asked a rabbi,
Yisroel Makevetzky, if he had permission to report Ashkenazi to the police for
tampering with a witness. Makevetzky held a hearing on the matter in a yeshiva
classroom on the edge of Borough Park and concluded that Aron was a moser, an informer. He ruled that Ashkenazi was right to dissuade Aron
from testifying in criminal court, “as this is a serious transgression.” In his
ruling, he wrote that Ashkenazi should “help the young man in following the
just path, and will begin in this after the young man removes himself from the
jurisdiction of the secular courts.”
Aron eventually
described the situation to Detective Litwin, who documented the incident in his
notes, and forbade Aron to accept money from anyone. Aron’s father, Abe, who
owned a kosher Italian frozen-food company, lost several customers because of
the case, but he supported his son’s decision to go to trial. Abe told me that
the Mishnah, the first major work of rabbinic literature, says that it is the
obligation of the community to stop a rodef
from making his next attack. “It’s in the books,” he told critics. “Look it
up!”
Soon, Aron became the
object of intimidation and threats. A Hasidic medical volunteer, who helped
Aron with his addiction, told me that “at some point people started reaching
out to me. The messages were never specific, but it was pretty obvious that I
need to read between the lines: you need to let him relapse. You need to let
him crack.” The medical volunteer (who, like many people I interviewed,
requested anonymity, because he didn’t want to be ostracized by his community)
met with Litwin. “I tried to explain to him that there is no way he’s going to
get the type of coöperation he wants,” he said. “Unless you really understand
how this community works—what tactics are used to intimidate these victims, to
prevent them from coming forward, to manipulate them into feeding the
authorities wrong information—you will never deliver.”
On holidays, it used to take Kellner
an hour to make his way into the synagogue, because he had so many people to
greet. Now only a few people in his prayer group responded when he made
conversation. Some yelled that he was a moser. He began saying his
daily prayers elsewhere. He also let his interest in his toner business lapse.
He was too inflamed. “When it comes to your kid, you overdo it—you lose your
mind,” he said.
He didn’t dwell on the
insults—in response to criticism, he usually shouted that Rabbi Flohr had
approved everything—but he worried about the effect on his children. Yossel
found the case so embarrassing that he denied his participation to his brothers
and sisters. “There was never talk in my house about this whole Lebovits
thing,” Kellner told me. “My other kids heard people talking on the street, and
they used to have to ask my wife, ‘Which one of us was molested?’ ”
Kellner worried that the
psychological dysfunction he saw in Joshua and Aron could eventually afflict
his son. He wondered if it was possible that Lebovits had nothing do with their
fragile mental states; maybe it was just a coincidence that, on top of all
their problems, they had been molested. “I was hoping to wake up one day and
they tell me there’s a new study and we’ve all made a mistake,” he said.
“Molestation doesn’t make any permanent damage. It’s no worse than yelling at
your kid.”
But Yossel already
seemed more cautious and isolated. He was no longer welcome at his yeshiva in
Borough Park. “They ignored me and my son, and, when summer was over and the
new school year started, they gave me a hard time,” Kellner said. “They said,
‘Oh, maybe you need special ed for your child.’ ” In the fall, he sent Yossel
and his younger brother to yeshivas outside the city. Kellner never
contemplated moving, because all the major Hasidic communities—in upstate New
York, Jerusalem, London, Montreal, and Antwerp—were connected, and he assumed
that everyone already knew his story. The idea of moving to a non-Hasidic
neighborhood was too far-fetched to consider. “What are we going to do—give up
our beliefs, our religion, our everything?” he said.
In the fall of 2009, Kellner was
notified of a summons issued by Rabbi Makevetzky to participate in what was
described as the “case of Mr. Shloma Aron Kellner, may his light shine, and the
Lebovits family in the matter of injury of the son.” Kellner assumed that the
hearing was a trap, designed to force his son out of criminal court. He told
the rabbi that he would coöperate only if someone else paid for the hearing—the
rabbi charged a hundred and fifty dollars an hour—and for the cost of being
represented by a secular lawyer. An acquaintance of one of Lebovits’s sons paid
Kellner’s expenses. Then, Kellner said, the man came back with an offer:
Kellner should accept two hundred and fifty thousand dollars to drop the
criminal case. (Lebovits’s oldest son, Chaim, denied that this happened. He
added that Kellner was always looking for money.)
Kellner was insulted by
the offer. “What would I say to my son?” he said. “That I took money so he
could be used as a prostitute?” At a meeting at the district attorney’s office,
he told Detective Litwin and three prosecutors in the sex-crimes division that
people were trying to bribe him. According to one official at the meeting,
Kellner complained that the only victims who were willing to come forward were
already outcasts. He warned, “Stay on top of them, or the other side will buy
them off.”
Not long after, Kellner
drove to the home of one of Lebovits’s sons, Meyer, whom he had known since he
was a child, to complain about an invoice that he had received from Rabbi
Makevetzky. He had been charged eighteen hundred dollars, even though the
negotiations for the rabbinic court had collapsed. Meyer, who surreptitiously
recorded the conversation, didn’t directly address Kellner’s concern about who
would pay for his expenses. Standing on the sidewalk in front of his house in
Borough Park, he began speaking of the shame that his family was enduring, and
he accused Kellner of violating a law in the Torah. “You cannot punish a person
unless you warn him,” he told him.
Kellner insisted that
the modesty council had tried to warn his father and had given him opportunities
to coöperate. “I am not going to justify myself now,” he said. “Perhaps it was
half right. Perhaps it was three-quarters right. Perhaps it was only a quarter
right.”
“Didn’t you put together
an entire case?” Meyer said. “Didn’t you become God’s police?” He said that, if
Kellner had warned him directly, “I would have taken care of the problem. We
would have done everything.”
“I don’t believe that
you will ever understand,” Kellner said. “But I cannot go to a person and tell
the person that his father did it.”
The men began arguing
about whose reputation had been hurt more by the case. They were both upset
that the allegations would prevent their children from marrying well. Kellner
begged Meyer to persuade his father to plead guilty, so that his son wouldn’t
have to testify at a trial. But Meyer said that the prosecution wasn’t offering
his father the plea deal he wanted: no jail time, just probation. He suggested
that, if Kellner didn’t want his son to be exposed, he should pull him out of
the case.
“I cannot drop it,”
Kellner said.
“But you don’t want to
go to trial!”
“But after all my child
was treated unjustly!”
“True.”
“I don’t want to drop
it,” Kellner repeated.
“So you want to settle?”
Meyer asked.
“No!”
Kellner had hoped that all three
victims would testify at the same trial, but a judge ruled that trying the
cases together would prejudice the jury. Joshua’s case was scheduled to go
first. In November, 2009, the prosecutor, Miss Gregory, met with Joshua at her
office, and he seemed ready for trial. Three weeks later, she received a
message from John Lonuzzi, then the president of the Brooklyn Bar Association.
Lonuzzi, a civil attorney, said that Joshua would no longer be coöperating with
the prosecution, because it was causing him “severe stress” and he was
“suffering from a variety of psychological issues.” In an affidavit, Gregory
wrote that she made multiple appointments to meet Lonuzzi and Joshua, but all
the meetings were cancelled. When Joshua didn’t comply with four subpoenas, she
mentioned to the chief assistant to Charles Hynes, the district attorney, that
she was concerned about the possibility of witness tampering, but no one
followed up. After Joshua dropped out of the case, he confided to Detective
Litwin that he had never retained Lonuzzi and didn’t know who had. Litwin wrote
in an affidavit that Joshua said that he was under pressure and was afraid, but
he wouldn’t elaborate. (Lonuzzi denied this account, and said that he had no
involvement in witness tampering.)
Aron’s trial began in
March, 2010. With no material evidence or eyewitnesses, it hinged on Aron’s
credibility. Lebovits’s lawyer, Arthur Aidala, the current president-elect of
the Brooklyn Bar Association, dwelled on Aron’s history of sneaking into
synagogues late at night and stealing cash from charity boxes. Aidala told the
jury that Aron had fabricated a story about being abused so that he could
extort money from the Lebovits family. “He disrespects the court and our
system,” Aidala said. “The whole thing—he made it up to get money. He didn’t
get the money, and now he is stuck.”
The only witness for the
defense was Berel Ashkenazi, the spiritual adviser at Aron’s yeshiva. Ashkenazi
testified that Aron was a “nervous child” who “didn’t have patience.” He told
the jury that Aron was pursuing the charges against Lebovits in order to pay
for his drugs. “It bothers me that he wants to lie about an innocent person,”
he said.
Gregory, the prosecutor,
asked Ashkenazi, “Do you consider Aron to be a traitor for what he is saying
against the defendant?”
“What means the word
‘traitor’?” Ashkenazi asked.
“Let me ask you this,”
Gregory continued. “Do you understand the concept of a mesirah?”
“Mesirah?”
“Maybe I am not
pronouncing it, but isn’t that a Jewish person is not supposed to perform—”
“A Jewish man is not
allowed to go to court without the permission from his rabbi,” Ashkenazi said.
“And if that Jewish
person doesn’t go to his rabbi are there any consequences?”
“I never heard,” he
responded. “I don’t know.”
“Sir, wouldn’t such a
person be stigmatized in your community?”
“The rabbi will talk to
him,” he said.
“Isn’t it possible that
a consequence of that could be that this person would be stigmatized within the
community?”
“It depends.”
“It depends on what?”
“Depends on how he did
it,” he said.
The jury found Lebovits
guilty on eight counts of sexual abuse. In the month between the conviction and
the sentencing, nearly eighty people sent letters to the judge, requesting
mercy for Lebovits. They described him as charitable, kind, blessed with a
beautiful singing voice, and compassionate toward helpless people. Zalman
Teitelbaum, one of the two Grand Rebbes of Satmar, the highest authorities
among the Satmar Hasidim, wrote, “In the name of Almighty God and for the sake
of compassionate justice, I appeal to your God-given wisdom to treat Mr.
Lebovits with the utmost understanding.”
The judge, Patricia
DiMango, sentenced Lebovits to the maximum penalty on eight counts, to run
consecutively, for a total of up to thirty-two years—a harsher sentence than
anyone had expected. The average sentence given to defendants convicted of
similar crimes is two years. She said, “It is imperative for courts to send a
clear and unequivocal message that abusing and harming children will not be
tolerated.”
One of Kellner’s relatives told me
that after the trial “no one talked about the real issue, the victims. Instead,
they talked about the problem of Sam Kellner going on a crusade.” He believed
that the lengthy sentence “triggered everything. Now the Lebovits family would
not let this go down. They were going to spend millions of dollars and fight,
fight, fight.”
Aidala, Lebovits’s
defense attorney, told me that the trial was one of the worst and most
surprising losses of his career. Immediately, he began second-guessing his
strategy. A year before, he had given the district attorney’s office a tape of
a recorded conversation that he thought indicated that his client’s family was
the target of extortion by Kellner. After discussing it with sex-crimes
prosecutors, Aidala had dropped the subject.
Now Aidala wanted to
broach the topic of extortion again. He was comfortable in the district
attorney’s office, where he had begun his career. He was close to the D.A.,
Charles Hynes, who had been in office for twenty years, and to his family, and
to several top officials. He had volunteered on all of Hynes’s reëlection
campaigns and frequently attended his fund-raisers.
On April 27, 2010, six
weeks after the trial ended, Aidala went to the district attorney’s office and
met with the chief of the rackets bureau, Michael Vecchione, who was also a
friend. Initially, Aidala didn’t focus on Kellner. He spoke about a case that
was easier to substantiate: he said that, days before, a friend of Kellner’s named
Simon Taub had extorted the Lebovits family. Taub had said that his son had
been molested and threatened to go to the police unless he was compensated by
the family. A few weeks later, in a sting operation, detectives from the
rackets bureau wired Chaim Lebovits, a businessman who had made a fortune in
oil and diamonds. Chaim went to Taub’s home and caught him on tape accepting
money.
After he was arrested,
Taub said that prosecutors told him, “If you coöperate with us, you will be
home in an hour.” They pushed him to implicate Kellner in an extortion plot.
Taub said that he didn’t have the information that the prosecutors wanted. “To
coöperate, I had to lie,” he told me. Instead, he pleaded guilty to attempted
grand larceny and was sentenced to probation. The alleged abuse of his son was
never investigated.
Chaim told me that the
crime was a “miracle,” because it lent legitimacy to his family’s complaints.
Soon, they insisted that Kellner had been after them, too. They said that
Kellner had offered to “make the case go away,” but they had refused. As
evidence, they gave the rackets bureau the audio recording that the sex-crimes
division had already heard. The recording captured a conversation in Yiddish
between Meyer Lebovits and Kellner about who would pay the costs of the
rabbinic court. The English translation provided to the district attorney’s
office was so laden with emotional outbursts and Talmudic references that it is
possible to miss the context and understand only that Kellner is asking for money.
An assistant district attorney requested that Meyer Lebovits be given a
polygraph test, to see if he was lying about his family being extorted by
Kellner, but Vecchione said no. According to a prosecutor with knowledge of the
case, “There was a strong sense that the investigation was a favor that Mike
Vecchione did for Arty Aidala, a very close friend.” (Vecchione and Aidala deny
that their friendship affected the case. Vecchione disputes many details of
this account.)
The rackets bureau
encouraged the Lebovits family to get information out of Aron. Under the
guidance of Vecchione, who is now retired, the family paid for one of Aron’s
friends, also a drug addict, to take Aron to a rented house in Florida and
question him about the case. (Vecchione denies knowing about the video before
it was made.) The friend pretended to be making a movie of Aron’s life, and
enlisted two young filmmakers (also from Hasidic families) to direct the video.
They urged Aron to open up about his relationship with Kellner. “In order for
me to build the script of your life, I have to know the whole twist,” one of
the filmmakers says, in the footage.
Aron, who was smoking
marijuana for much of the filming, was less interested in talking about the
case than about his sense of estrangement. Sitting on a cream-colored sofa, in
a T-shirt and black jeans, he looks like a patient in his first therapy
session, relieved that someone is finally listening to him. “I feel like an
atheist, but I feel bad feeling like an atheist,” he told the filmmakers. “I
want to live up to the place where I come from, to be Jewish.” He spoke, too,
about his bond with Joshua, who had disappointed him by dropping out of the
case. He said that when Joshua described his abuse to the grand jury, before
the indictment, the court reporter wept while typing. “If you saw [Joshua]
speaking, you’d have cried,” he said.
The filmmakers tried to
direct the conversation away from Aron’s emotions. They seemed confused by the
fact that Aron had risked his reputation by testifying in court, asking what he
had gained. “Kellner told you he was going to give you money?” one of them
said.
“This wasn’t the
thing—no,” Aron said.
“You never got money?”
“No, that’s not true,
that’s bullshit.”
“What could Kellner sell
you?”
“Nothing. That is the
joke, that’s what I want to say.”
The filmmakers seemed
unhappy with his response. One told Aron, “You would never have gone to court
if not for that jackass Kellner [who] wanted money.”
“No, no, no, no,” Aron
said.
“That’s how I want to
make the movie,” the filmmaker persisted. “He’s a crazy man, this Kellner.”
“Do you want to hear the
truth?” Aron continued. “He let me go the truthful way. I proceeded truthfully
and honestly.”
“But why did Kellner
have the power to schlep you?” the filmmakers asked.
“Who didn’t have the
power to schlep me?” he said. “I had such a soft heart.”
Aron was proud that he
had gone through with the trial, unlike Joshua, who he said had been pressured
and offered money. “They terrorized him,” he said. “They took real victims, and
they shot down their lives.” He said that he had expected Lebovits to call him,
beg for forgiveness, and say, “I’m an elderly man, please don’t do this to me.”
He figured that, if Lebovits had apologized, he would have dropped the case.
“I’d say, O.K., I’m sorry. Whatever. And we forgive each other.”
The video did not produce
information useful to the district attorney’s office, but the Lebovits family
was still confident that they could prove that Kellner was an extortionist.
Chaim told me that Hynes specified for his lawyers exactly which kinds of
evidence they would need to arrest Kellner. “They said that, if you can provide
A, B, C, D, E, and F, then we will move in with the indictment,” Chaim said.
(Hynes, through his lawyer, declined to comment for this story.)
The Lebovits family
hired a Hasidic private investigator named Joe Levin, who runs a company called
T.O.T. Consulting—the letters standing for the Yiddish phrase tuchis afn tish, or “put your ass on the table.” Levin said that at his first
meeting with Chaim, at the Plaza Hotel, he was instructed to find anything that
might cast Kellner in a negative light. (He said that he was so troubled by
what he observed that he felt justified in telling me about his work for the
family.)
Beginning in the fall of
2010, Levin bugged Kellner’s van, and he and his employees followed him. He
listened to hours of Kellner’s conversations each week. But he came up with
little related to the case. “It was devastating,” Levin told me. “I really went
nowhere.”
After he had been
working on the case for a few months, he said, he was asked to drive to the
home of a friend of Hynes, where a birthday party was being held. Levin said,
“It was a very fancy house, and people just came in and out.” Meyer Lebovits
attended the party briefly, he said, and was joined by two machers, or “big shots,” who mediate between secular political figures
and the community. Levin stayed within three hundred feet of the house, because
he had been asked to record the machers’
conversations. It is not uncommon for Hasidic power brokers to record
conversations to use as leverage. (Meyer denied going to the party.)
After the party, Levin
said, the relationship between the Lebovits sons and the district attorney’s
office immediately became much warmer. He was surprised by how frequently the
Lebovits family received updates about the investigations. When he overheard
phone conversations, “It did not sound like law enforcement talking to a
criminal’s family. It sounded like two good friends.” Levin said that he can
remember few cases where the pressure on him was higher. The message he got
from the Lebovits sons was “Now we have the O.K., so anything you bring to us,
we are going to be able to do something with it. ”
In late 2010 and early 2011, Aron
was summoned to the district attorney’s office a number of times and
interrogated about his relationship with Kellner. His father, Abe, told me that
Aron, after being the key witness for the prosecution, now felt as if he were
being treated as a criminal. Aron had little information to offer. He
repeatedly insisted, as he had at trial, that he had never accepted money.
Joshua proved a more
forthcoming witness. After failing to communicate with the sex-crimes division
for nearly a year, he reappeared with his lawyer, John Lonuzzi, to say that
Kellner had “brainwashed” him. “Lebovits never molested me,” he said.
“Everything I said was false.” He said that he made up the story because
Kellner gave him a hundred dollars a week and Detective Litwin took him out for
meals.
Lebovits’s cousin Moshe
Friedman, the publisher of an influential Yiddish newspaper, Der Yid, and the adviser to Zalman Teitelbaum, the Grand Rebbe, also
accused Kellner of criminal behavior. Testifying before a grand jury in March,
2011, he said that Kellner came to his office and begged him to persuade the
Lebovits family to hand over two hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Yosef
Blau, the senior spiritual adviser at Yeshiva University, said that he was
amazed that Friedman would testify before a grand jury, given the community’s
rules against informing on other Jews. “It’s extraordinary that this major
figure in the community is willing to be a moser to
get Kellner,” he said. He believed that Friedman got involved because
“Kellner’s behavior was seriously threatening to the community’s power
structure.”
Two weeks after
Friedman’s testimony, Kellner came home after shopping in Williamsburg and
found a tall man in casual clothing standing outside. The man had a companion,
who flashed a police badge and instructed Kellner to get inside his Jeep. The
driver took a circuitous route through Borough Park, and Kellner began to worry
that he was being kidnapped. Yossel, who had watched his father being taken
away, called the police. “An unmarked car just picked up my father,” he told a
sergeant. “There were no lights, no nothing.”
Twenty minutes later,
Kellner arrived at a familiar building, the office of the district attorney, in
downtown Brooklyn. He was placed in a holding cell in a hallway. His wife
brought him his diabetes pills and his prayer book. He fell asleep to the sound
of officers talking about a ring of criminals with stolen credit cards. He
wondered if he was being apprehended for some sort of violation with his toner
business or if he had accidentally got involved in a drug bust.
In the morning, he was
handcuffed and escorted to Kings County Supreme Court, two blocks away. He was
greeted by a crowd of local reporters, who took pictures as he walked down the
hallway to court. Kellner’s lawyer, Israel Fried, said that when he handed
Kellner the indictment he appeared “bewildered and shell-shocked.” The
indictment said that he had made “repeated demands to Meyer Lebovits, the son
of Baruch Lebovits, for payments in excess of $50,000, in return for which the
defendant Kellner would, through the defendant Kellner’s ability to control the
coöperation and the content of the testimony of the complaining victims, cause
the dismissal of criminal charges.” He faced up to twenty-one years in prison.
At a press conference
that morning, Charles Hynes announced the charges while standing beside an
easel with a large photograph of Kellner’s face on it. He told a room full of
reporters that “child abuse has to be prosecuted vigorously, but we also have
to be very, very careful about false complaints.” Later, on a Jewish radio
show, Hynes said, “We’re confident we have the case. . . . I believe there was
a substantial effort by Mr. Kellner to gain money, for his own benefit, by
making up stories.”
A day after Kellner’s
arrest, Lebovits’s appeals lawyers, Alan Dershowitz (the former Harvard law
professor, who worked on the O. J. Simpson case) and his brother, Nathan,
persuaded an appellate judge to free Lebovits on bail, pending the
determination of his appeal. Alan Dershowitz, who grew up in Borough Park, told
me that “the Kellner information put the government in a difficult position: on
the one hand, they are proclaiming that my client was extorted, and, on the
other hand, they are claiming that he is guilty of eight felonies.” Within a
week, Lebovits was released, after thirteen months in prison. He arrived in
Borough Park in time for the first night of Passover and led a Seder at his
home.
Kellner was in jail for about
thirty-two hours, which he saw as punishment for putting Lebovits in prison for
thirty-two years. Although he had acted for what he thought were good reasons,
there was also a part of him that had wanted revenge, and it was this impulse,
he believed, that God was punishing. “When you hurt someone, you better make
sure your motivations are pure,” he told his son. “Because if your intentions
aren’t pure, you are going to pay the price.”
Yossel’s case against
Lebovits had been dismissed six months earlier, without explanation. No one
from the sex-crimes bureau had notified him or his father. Yossel told me that
if he had a friend who was molested he would advise him to avoid the secular
courts. “Why would you report to the police if you’re just going to shame
yourself and open your wounds and be more destroyed?” he said.
Yossel was a “Cadillac
of a boy,” one rabbi told me, but he had reached his twenties and had yet to
marry. Hasidic families typically marry off their children in descending order:
the younger siblings wait for the older ones to be matched, ideally around the
age of eighteen. Kellner’s four youngest children had been stalled since 2008,
when their father first went to the police. Kellner said that his brothers
thought he was crazy for allying himself with loners like Joshua and Aron.
“They tell me, ‘You’ve ruined the family,’ ” he said. “And the truth is I’m
starting to think maybe they are right. If your job is to protect your child,
maybe the best thing to do is keep your mouth shut.”
At night, unable to
sleep, Kellner paced his house, going over all the details of his indictment.
At times, he almost admired the Lebovits sons for spending so much money to
save their father. “They honored their father so much,” he said. “You can’t
take that away from anyone.” He described their activities as if recounting the
chess moves of an opponent. “They masterfully put this thing together,” he
said. “Amazing stuff.” His anger was directed largely toward the district
attorney’s office. “A thug can only go so far on his own,” he told me.
A Hasidic businessman,
who spoke on the condition of anonymity, told me that in parts of the Hasidic
community there was widespread speculation that Kellner had been framed. He
said that Kellner had become the prime example of “how devastated you will be
if you go against the rabbis.” He said that Flohr, the rabbi who had granted
Kellner permission to go to the police, was an outlier in his approach toward
molestation. “He’s not a major power broker,” he told me. “He’s a nobody when
it comes to internal, high-level politics.” The businessman believed that
Kellner had made himself vulnerable as a target, because he had been sloppy and
uninformed in his interactions with law enforcement. “He didn’t understand the
legal system, so he was meddling too much,” he said.
In the spring of 2012, the guilty
verdict against Lebovits was vacated because of a prosecutorial violation: two
pages of Detective Litwin’s notes (about Berel Ashkenazi, the defense witness)
hadn’t been disclosed until halfway through the trial. The district attorney’s
office promised to retry Aron’s case, but Aron, who was now twenty-four, didn’t
want to go through a second trial. “He can’t take the pressure anymore,” his
father, Abe, told me. Aron felt betrayed by the friend who had taken him to
Florida, and now saw conspiracies in daily life. When his car broke down, he
wondered if Lebovits’s sons had hired someone to fill the tank with the wrong
kind of fuel. When he got in a motorcycle accident, he suspected that the
Lebovits family had arranged the collision.
Several weeks after the
conviction was overturned, one of Baruch Lebovits’s in-laws approached Abe
outside his synagogue and said, “Maybe we can make a closing to this case.” Abe
was exhausted by the case, which had hurt his business and restricted the
synagogues where he could pray, so he told the Lebovits family that he would
agree to negotiate a civil settlement. He asked for several hundred thousand
dollars, but they said that was too much. They changed their minds after the
trial of Nechemya Weberman, a Hasidic sex offender who, in early 2013, was
sentenced to more than a hundred years in prison. “When Weberman got a guilty
verdict, all of a sudden it was hot, hot,” Abe said. “They were willing to
agree to my number.”
Abe could not disclose
how much money he received except to say that it was enough for his son to
“build a house, to build a life.” In exchange, Aron sent a letter to the
district attorney’s office stating that he was satisfied with the punishment
that Lebovits had already served. Abe and his son were represented by an
attorney named Michael Ross, who Abe said had been recommended to him by the
Lebovits family and who worked for free. Ross met with Hynes and explained that
Aron did not wish to testify at a second trial. Aron wrote to me on Facebook
(the only medium through which he felt comfortable communicating) that the
Lebovits family, their lawyers, his father, and Ross handled the details of the
civil settlement. “I had no qluo of anything what wuz going on beind closd
doors,” he wrote. (Ross declined to comment, except to say, “Any matter that
I’m involved in, the client will always be fully informed.”)
By the time the civil
settlement was finalized, Hynes was deep into a campaign for reëlection and was
confident that he had the support of the Hasidic community. In early 2013, in
an e-mail to a colleague, he asserted that an opponent’s “threat about my not
getting the Satmar vote is pathetic.” Hynes had been supported by the Hasidic
bloc for two decades and worked diligently to maintain an amicable relationship
with leading rabbis in the community. He had a history of offering unusually
light plea deals to Hasidic offenders, whose names his office kept
confidential—a practice unique to the Hasidic community. Der Yid, published by Lebovits’s cousin, ran a full-page notice
explaining that community leaders had benefitted from an “open door with
Charles Hynes for the past 20 years” and “know firsthand what happens . . .
when they got themselves entangled with the law, how district attorney Hynes
worked very sensitively and mercifully to avoid sending them to jail.” Jews who
supported Hynes’s opponent, Ken Thompson, were “informers and accusers from the
dregs of the Jewish community,” who intended to “toss Jews in jail whenever
it’s possible!”
In less religious circles, the
policies of the Hynes administration came under scrutiny. The links between the
Kellner and Lebovits cases were analyzed by two blogs, Failed Messiah and Frum
Follies, which are written by ultra-Orthodox Jews who became disillusioned, and
by Hella Winston, a contributing editor at Jewish Week, who for
the past several years has investigated the community’s approach to sex abuse.
In the months leading up to the election, other news outlets exposed the Hynes
administration’s record of using unreliable or coerced witnesses to secure
prosecutions: three guilty convictions had been overturned, and a panel was
reviewing dozens of cases handled by a discredited detective. There were also
leaks from within the office, which revealed that Hynes made little distinction
between the work of the office and the goals of his campaign: he used
asset-forfeiture funds to pay for a political consultant and sought political
advice from a judge.
Hynes lost the election,
in November, 2013, by fifty percentage points. Minutes after he gave a
concession speech, Aidala put his arm around him, walked him to his car, and
held the door open for him, according to a privately recorded video.
During Hynes’s last
weeks in office, Abe said, he got calls from the Lebovits sons, who were
concerned that their civil agreement was no longer strong enough. They now
requested a letter stating that Aron was not in good health. “They said they
had some information from the higher guys in the D.A. that they need that
letter to make the case go away,” Abe told me. In exchange for the letter, Abe
said, Baruch Lebovits agreed to apologize to Aron in person—something that Aron
had been asking for since the negotiations began. But on the morning of the
meeting Aron refused to leave his house. “He was never convinced that they were
not scheming,” Abe told me. “He didn’t want to fool around with these people
anymore.”
For almost three years, as Kellner’s
extortion case dragged on, the rabbis in his community urged him to take a plea
deal. They warned him that, as a Hasid, he would never get a fair trial. “They
say you are guilty just by having the big beard,” he said. His rabbi told him,
“If you know you didn’t do it, what do you care? It’s between you and God.”
Kellner had a new
attorney, Niall MacGiollabhuí, who began working on the case in the spring of
2013. An Irish immigrant, MacGiollabhuí was dismayed that the rackets bureau
had relied on evidence with little regard for the culture from which it
emerged. “They are lifting things out of that community, dropping it into the
wider world, and stripping the things of context,” he said. MacGiollabhuí
initially assumed that Kellner was exaggerating when he told stories about
being followed and secretly recorded, but then audio recordings of Kellner’s
private conversations surfaced on a new Web site called Sam Kellner—Alleged
Jewish Mob Ringleader Revealed. MacGiollabhuí discovered that his own calls,
too, were being recorded. He complained to the district attorney’s office that
Kellner’s van was bugged, but no one investigated.
When the new district
attorney, Ken Thompson, took office, last January, MacGiollabhuí warned two
prosecutors in an e-mail, “At the moment, your office is being openly mocked in
his community.”
Eric Gonzalez, the
counsel to Thompson, told me that the new administration was skeptical of the
Kellner indictment. Four prosecutors had asked to be removed from the case,
because they didn’t believe in it. He said that it seemed as if “the decision
had been made to prosecute Kellner, and they were going to go forward with that
prosecution whether it was the right thing or the wrong thing to do. And here
you had multiple senior people saying it was the wrong thing to do.”
A new prosecutor, Kevin
O’Donnell, conducted a review of the case in early 2014 and determined that
Meyer Lebovits was not credible and the recording of him talking to Kellner was
“ambiguous at best.” “There are motives of certain witnesses that go beyond
this case,” he said at a hearing in March. He told the judge that Joshua’s
statements were “wildly inconsistent” and supported by “no credible evidence.”
In one interview, Joshua said that Lebovits might have molested him, but he wasn’t
sure. “Could be a different Lebovits,” he offered. A week later, he said that
he’d never even seen Lebovits. Joshua had recently moved to Israel, and he
acknowledged that whenever he wanted to return to the United States he
requested permission from a man named Zalman Ashkenazi, who paid his airfare.
Records obtained by the prosecution show that Ashkenazi, who is the brother of
the defense witness at Aron’s trial, made monthly payments to Joshua’s father.
(Ashkenazi denied that Joshua needed his permission to travel.)
When O’Donnell signalled
that he would submit a motion to dismiss the case against Kellner,
MacGiollabhuí said that he wanted to go to trial. He didn’t understand how a
case had been brought against Kellner, and he wanted to put people on the
witness stand. “The people in my client’s community are entitled to it,” he
told the judge. “They are entitled to know why it is that victims of pedophiles
in my client’s community don’t get the justice that victims in other
communities get.”
MacGiollabhuí consented
to have the case dismissed only after O’Donnell told him, last March, that the
district attorney’s office would undertake an investigation into the
circumstances surrounding Kellner’s indictment. But an investigation was never
announced. Months later, MacGiollabhuí wrote to the prosecutor, “I now believe
that I was lied to.” (A spokeswoman from the D.A.’s office said that an
investigation was never promised.) Gonzalez would not acknowledge whether or
not there was an ongoing investigation, but he did say that “this district
attorney is very concerned about the amount of money and effort used to prevent
the Baruch Lebovits case from seeing the courtroom.” He said that Aron’s civil
settlement seemed to be a “very calculated way of buying the victim off.”
Two months after
Kellner’s case was dismissed, Lebovits pleaded guilty to molesting Aron and
avoided a second trial. The prosecution was severely compromised by the
settlement. In May, Lebovits was sentenced to two years in prison. “You wanted
to have it your way,” Aron said to Lebovits at the sentencing hearing. “He
still won’t apologize to me in person,” he went on. “He never apologized to me.
That’s it.” Lebovits was released after eighty-three days.
Supporters of both
Lebovits and Kellner continue their efforts at intimidation. Two people told me
they were afraid that I had been hired by the Lebovits family. Others alerted
Kellner that I was a secret agent of the district attorney’s office. When I met
Chaim Lebovits, in a suite at the Plaza, he told me that if I continued to work
on this article I would make a fool out of myself and ruin my career. Chaim
vacillated between lightheartedness—he played the shofar, a musical instrument
made out of a ram’s horn, and encouraged me to have children immediately,
before I was too old—and loud rants about Kellner’s evil strategic
intelligence. He told me that I could not rely on the documents that the
district attorney’s office had compiled, because Kellner “talked a smart
language,” and when it was translated into English his criminal intentions
weren’t as evident as they were in Yiddish.
Not long ago, Kellner and I met near
the office in Crown Heights where Detective Litwin worked before moving to a
new unit. Kellner wanted to talk to me only in public spaces, so that he did
not violate the prohibition in his community against meeting with a woman
alone. As officers walked in and out of the building, they stared at us,
apparently confused that a Hasidic man was chatting with a secular woman.
Kellner was still
consumed by the case. It was as though he believed that if he recited the
details enough times he might figure out exactly what had happened. Since his
case, he said, the rabbis had become even less willing to permit victims to go
to the police. Recently, when a father whose daughter had been molested asked
for advice, Kellner told him, “If you go to the police, you’re probably going
to end up with zero.”
Three officers walked
past us for the third time, and Kellner, who almost never turns down an opportunity
for conversation, asked them if they knew Steve Litwin. “Steve and I worked
together on a case,” he said. “Then the D.A. turned against me. And no one
stood up for me.”
“Really,” one of the
officers said, casually. He suddenly seemed less interested in us.
“Basically, the D.A.
destroyed me.”
“Well, Steve doesn’t
work here anymore,” the officer said.
“Yeah, but the question
is, Who’s going to come here anymore?” Kellner asked.
“None of these guys work
here anymore,” the officer said. “They’re all gone.”
“They ruined me,”
Kellner went on. “This is what is left of me.”
“Well, keep fighting the
fight,” the officer said, as he and his partners walked away.
If this article is true, then by extension The
Israeli Supreme Court has sanctioned the rape of boys by a Jewish pedophile in
the city of New York because of the actions of the Rabbinical Court of New York.
It is
very hypocritical to allow Rabbinical Courts from L.A. to New York and from
Seattle to Atlanta while condemning Sharia Law. Is that why Rush Limbaugh, Michael
Medved, Bill O’Reilly, the Religious Self Righteous and the like have like have
toned down the rhetoric concerning Sharia Law.
Which bring on another question, First, where
does the Israeli Supreme Court get off in sanctioning a shadow court system
here in the United States and Second why has the U.S. Justice System allow this
to happen?