|
|
| |
The Sad, Strange and Terrible Gallagher Affair
By MICHAEL SCHENKLER
This is a column I do not want to write.
I have the privilege and liberty to pick my own topic and within the limits of relative decency and professionalism, do what I want with it. So if it’s easier to avoid subjects I find painful, what the hell am I doing writing about the world caving in on a friend.
Publishing a Queens newspaper for more than a quarter of a century, writing a political column for a good number of those years, consulting with, interviewing and hanging with elected officials over the years, has resulted in many friendships between this writer and the folks he has to write about.
No, I’ve never gone drinking with Dennis Gallagher – I don’t drink. Maybe Dennis shouldn’t either. And although I’ve broken bread with a majority of the Queens elected officials, Dennis and I have never socialized. Once in a while, he stops by the office for a visit. We chat on the phone occasionally. He and I connected. Dennis is one of the good guys — a Republican with conservative leanings who operates well in a liberal Democratic world. We are able to kid each other, compare notes, and once in awhile view the world through the other’s glasses.
He is a bright, concerned, hard-working public servant. He cares. And in spite of vicious attacks by a local group disagreeing with Dennis over an issue or two, this City, this Borough, his community, are better off because of the care and efforts of Councilman Dennis Gallagher.
Last week on the Trib’s front page and in headlined stories across the city, the public learned that the 43-year-old Councilman, had been accused of sexual assault of a woman he met in a bar. The alleged assault which is said to have occurred in an office — referred to as a Gallagher campaign office — above his district office, has led to an investigation and search by the Queens DA. This paper reported that a search warrant was executed at the Gallagher office and police were rummaging for evidence including DNA à la CSI.
God! Innocent or guilty, Dennis Gallagher will forever be haunted by the many stories as well as the Trib front page picturing his headshot inset into a photo of his City Council District Office with the headlined question: “Rape Scene?”
Because of my affection for Dennis, I did not involve myself in the story. I asked Trib editor Brian Rafferty to keep me in the loop because I always do and I cared about Dennis – I guess I was hoping for good news. But Dennis, the facts, the players’ actions, the complaint, the evidence, the police and the DA wrote the story. The Trib and everyone else did their job; and Dennis Gallagher will, til the day he dies, be haunted by this story.
The investigation, potential indictment, prosecution, plea bargaining, or dropping of charges will be decided upon fairly as provided by a pretty effective judicial system and directed by one damn good District Attorney.
In the end there will be a verdict, a plea, an acquittal or nothing. But it will never go away for Dennis or his family. His reportedly troubled marriage can’t be helped by the public spectacle. Even if entirely untrue, the kids are going to suffer. And no matter what, my heart goes out to Dennis. He’s entitled to nothing more than anyone else but his friends are entitled to hope that somewhere there is an explanation that will clear Dennis, provide him his freedom, allow him to address his family’s needs and regain some of his dignity.
If I said prayers, today Dennis would be first on my list.
|
|
|
| |
Albany Accusations Go to Cuomo; Quinn Fires Plummer
By
Henry Stern
Last week we described the Bruno-Spitzer war of words and threats over the misuse of state planes and state troopers, and who blew the whistle on whom. It has become redundant, and the public, which usually enjoys a good fight, is losing interest. Meanwhile, State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo was asked by both sides to look into the controversy.
The Cuomo investigation means that both the Governor and the Senate Leader will be subject to whatever findings the Attorney General and his staff make. The findings are unlikely to be positive, although it is possible to conclude that charges were unproven. The whole matter is an embarrassment to State government, and the impending Cuomo inquiry is likely to prolong the discomfort of the parties and the witnesses.
The Attorney General has no reason to exert exceptional kindness to anyone who is above him on the political food chain. The parties may in the end get more justice than they wanted. Although they may deserve the scrutiny they will receive, it will surely distract from whatever other state business they might have been able to transact. And don’t forget Scooter Libby’s recent experience; if there is no other crime you committed, you can be indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice. No ambitious prosecutor likes to go home empty handed. The lesson for both complainants: Don’t call the cops unless you must. A day’s press release can mean a year’s aggravation.
When squabbles are prolonged and innocents are dragged in, the attitude of bystanders (in this case the general public) can sometimes be expressed by the well-known imprecation, ”A plague on both your houses.”
In 20th century public affairs, the Shakespearean phrase was quoted by President Franklin D. Roosevelt to express disapproval of both the coal mine operators and the United Mine Workers at the time of a bitter strike in 1937. The response to FDR by John L. Lewis, the union president, is remembered for its eloquence: “It ill behooves one who has supped at labor’s table and who has been sheltered in labor’s house to curse with equal fervor and fine impartiality both labor and its adversaries. . .”
In 2007, politicians and labor leaders do not write or speak with the grace of their predecessors. As you have doubtless read, some express their sentiments with threats and obscenities. For example, Viola Plummer reportedly callied for the “assassination” of Councilmember Leroy Comrie. Ms. Plummer said: “If it takes assassination of his ass, he will not be [borough president of Queens].” Of course, such language is unacceptable, particularly from a public servant. What may be more actionable is Ms. Plummer’s behavior at the City Council meeting, where she reportedly screamed ‘Cracker!’ and ‘Liar!’ at Councilmembers as they voted and she ignored the presiding officer’s calls for order.
Plummer, 70, chief of staff to Councilmember Charles Barron, was one of seven black radicals who were acquitted in 1985 in a federal trial in Manhattan of plotting robberies and jailbreaks, but convicted on lesser charges of possessing illegal weapons and using false identifications. The verdicts appear to be a compromise reached by the jury. Her future as a City Council employee is now in the hands of Federal Judge William H. Pauly III, who has so far refused to interfere but made clear she has First Amendment rights in speech not connected with her employment.
I was a City Councilmember for nine years (1974-83). If anyone on my staff had screamed insults at any Councilmember during a meeting or at any other time, that person would not have been given an opportunity to apologize or attend anger management classes. He or she would have been told at once to seek less demanding employment.
But how is Viola Plummer’s conduct different from that of high state officials? For one thing, they are elected and she is appointed, and elected officials have more latitude in speech. They are answerable to the voters alone, unless they are convicted of felonies. Another difference is that the elected officials’ threats of doing physical harm to other are obviously middle-age breast-beating.
However, in view of the actual assassination of the late Councilman James Davis in July 2003, in the balcony of the Council chamber by a political rival, the city legislature is understandably skittish about the word and the prospect of a similar crime. Although Ms. Plummer is highly unlikely to commit the act, her words may inflame others to carry out the threat.
Back to the Empire State: The major food fight is before the State Attorney General, and the sideshow verbal abuse case is before the Federal court in the Southern District of New York. I did not believe that Speaker Quinn would take action against Ms. Plummer on the ground that pursuing her for her threats would give her and Councilman Barron more public attention than they deserved. But by taking the careful legal path that she has followed, Ms. Quinn has tried to maintain the dignity and integrity of the city legislature, and its members’ right not to be threatened or abused by Council staff as they cast their votes in the Council Chamber.
We cannot predict whether Ms. Quinn’s effort will succeed in view of today’s low levels of civil discourse, and double standards of permissible attack, or what now constitutes “fighting words”, but Ms. Quinn deserves credit for defending Councilmembers from intimidation, and for standing up for the rule of law.
StarQuest@NYCivic.org |
|
|
|
|
|
|
