COUNTY COURT: STATE OF NEW YORK PUTNAM COUNTY X THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIRMATION

IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR AN INQUIRY PURSUANT TO PEOPLE v GOMBERG

-againstReturn Date: November 18, 2013 ALEXANDRU HOSSU aikla ALEX HOSSU, (Adler, J.) Defendant. Putnam County Indictment Number 32-20 13 X STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER

) )

ss.:

WILLIAM C. MILACCIO, an attorney duly admitted to practice before the courts of the State of New York, under penalty of perjury, hereby affirms and states: that he is an Assistant District Attorney of Westchester County and, acting on behalf of Special District Attorney Janet DiFiore in this case, submits this supplemental affirmation and accompanying exhibits in support of the Peoples pending motion for a Gomberg inquiry (People v Goinberg, 38 NY2d 307 [1975]); this affirmation is made upon information and belief, the sources of which are the papers previously filed in this case and recent news reports regarding this case
By notice of motion, dated October 28, 2013, accompanied by an affirmation, exhibits (1-

5) and memorandum of law, the People moved for an on-the-record inquiry of defendant pursuant to People v Goinberg, 38 NY2d 307 (1975). The facts relevant to that motion are

summarized in the previously filed affirmation, dated October 28, 2013, and are respectfully incorporated by reference herein. The following additional facts are also relevant to the motion: After the People filed and served the aforementioned motion for a Gomberg inquiry, more and further disturbing facts were made public in reports by the New York Times and Journal News (lohud.com) which compellingly demonstrate that Putnam County District Attorney Adam B. Levy (hereinafter, DA Levy), the brother-in-law to defendants current attorney, Daniel Mentzer, Esq., is apparently intent on insinuating himself into the defense of this case, despite the court order disqualifying him from participating in this specific matter. DA Levys continued interference with the defense in order to advance his own personal agenda presents a serious conflict of interest between defendant and his new attorney. Moreover, according to the published reports, DA Levy has not only provided defendants original attorney, Robert Y. Altchiler, Esq., with information apparently first obtained in his official role as District Attorney and seemingly intended to tarnish the credibility of the child victim in this rape case, DA Levy has also provided information regarding the grand jury proceedings in this case. DA Levys reported willingness to reveal personal, medical information about the child victim and information about the grand jury proceeding to the defense in utter disregard to his ethical duties as a disqualified prosecutor in this case reflect his personal agenda. Pivotally, the reports indicate that DA Levy has attempted to steer the defense counter to the advice of defendants original attorney. Accordingly, the need to conduct an on-the-record Gomberg inquiry is manifest.

Attached hereto are copies of a New York Times article, dated October 30, 2013, and a Journal News article, dated October31, 2013, as Peoples Exhibits 6 and 7, respectively.

As part of its report, the Journal News published emails from DA Levy to Altchiler which demonstrate that DA Levy had some inside knowledge of the Putnam County grand jury proceedings in this case in June, 2013, notwithstanding the order, dated March 14, 2013, disqualifying him from all matters relating to this case. In one email after defendant had been indicted, DA Levy wrote: Have you considered reaching out to grand jury foreperson and trying to secure an affidavit that 1. GJ was never advised by ADa that the defense proferred witnesses for their consideration, or 2. That GJ was advised but it was at last minute and they did not want to be extended, and 3. hearing from the 4 or 5 defense witnesses would likely have affected the decision (based upon close vote). The Journal News also reported that, according to Altchiler, DA Levy had specifically told him that the grand jury voted to indict by a vote of13-12. DA Levys reported email and conversation with Altchiler, therefore, demonstrate that DA Levy had contravened the disqualification order and grand jury secrecy laws by acquiring and then intentionally disclosing information about the identity of the witnesses who had been called to testify, the substance and timing of advice provided to the grand jury by the prosecutor, who under the law also acts as the grand jurys legal advisor (CPL 190.30[6}), and finally, the alleged vote count of the grand jury. These communications between DA Levy and Altchiler mandate an inquiry from this Court. Grand jury proceedings are secret, and even a district attorney who participated in a grand jury proceeding is prohibited from disclosing the nature or substance of any grand jury testimony, evidence, or any decision, result or other matter attending a grand jury proceeding except in the lawful discharge of his [or her] duties or upon written order of the court (CPL 190.25[41). Furthermore, the intentional disclosure of such information by a public prosecutor,

officer or employee, except in the proper discharge of his [or her] official duties or upon written order of the court, constitutes a class E felony (Penal Law

215.70).

Here, any disclosure of the identity of grand jury witnesses, statements of the prosecutor to the grand jury. or details of the grand jurys vote by a person privy to that information because of his or her participation in the grand jury proceeding (i.e., a grand juror, grand jury stenographer, or clerk having official duties about the grand jury room), and again by DA Levy afler he acquired that confidential information violates these laws. Any disclosure to Aitchiler regarding those proceedings also could not have been made by DA Levy in the lawful discharge of his duties (CPL l90.25[4]), as DA Levy has been disqualified from all matters relating to his case. To be sure, any violation by DA Levy of grand jury secrecy laws, by first soliciting such information and then disclosing it to defendants original attorney is, therefore, a serious, potentially criminal, matter. But, more germane to the Peoples motion for a Gomberg inquiry, it reflects DA Levys compulsion to protect his own interests, which as set forth in the memorandum of law previously filed with the Court, potentially conflict with those of defendant. Nor should the necessity for an on-the-record inquiry by this Court regarding DA Levys manifest fixation on inserting himself into this case and the potential conflict that poses to defendant be obscured by the fact that the total grand jury vote count allegedly revealed by DA Levy is patently inaccurate. It is both legally and factually impossible that 13 grand jurors voted to indict defendant and 12 grand jurors voted to not indict him, as Aitchiler reported DA Levy had told him. There could not have been 25 total votes because a grand jury consists of no more than 23 persons (CPL 190.05). The number of grand jurors who were eligible to vote in this case was 17, as they had attended the presentation of evidence conducted over three separate dates. The number of them voting to indict was in fact 13, as DA Levy allegedly reported to Aitchiler.

How it was suggested that 12 jurors had voted not to indict or that it was a close vote is unknown. But, the fact remains, as demonstrated by the published email from DA Levy to Altchiler, that DA Levy had gained access to some secret grand jury information, thus demonstrating his interest and willingness to intervene in this case, and consequently, the risk to defendant of DA Levy interfering with his defense. To that end, the published email from DA Levy to Altchiler demonstrates that he may have played a part in the choice of claims later raised by Aitchiler in his motion to dismiss the indictment. In addition to raising a claim attacking the Putnam County Sheriff, in harmony with DA Levys civil suit, Altchiler also moved to dismiss the indictment based upon a claim that the grand jury did not hear from individuals whom he had requested appear and testify on his behalf. Of course, as this Court found after its review of the official transcription of the grand jury record, Altchiler s claim that the grand jury proceeding had been unfair or its integrity had been impaired was entirely meritless. Several of the individuals proffered by Altchiler were called to testify by the People and, as in the case of Aitchilers request that the grand jury hear from DA Levy, the grand jury voted not to hear from several witnesses proffered by him. Nonetheless, according to Altchiler, DA Levy thought these witnesses had not been offered, and Aitchiler made a similar allegation as part of the omnibus motion he filed on behalf of defendant. Judged in hindsight, DA Levys email suggests that he had influenced Aitchilers request that the grand jury hear from numerous witnesses to show evidence of improper conduct by the Sheriffs Department (see Altchiler Letter, dated June 6, 2013 as Exhibit to Omnibus Motion), notwithstanding the fact that any alleged bias by the Sheriffs Department was, in all events, largely irrelevant to this case. It was, in fact, disproven by the witnesses who appeared before the grand jury. Without question, the strategy of attacking the Sheriffs Department was aligned

with DA Levys personal interest, as demonstrated by his civil suit seeking millions of dollars in damages against the Sheriff. In addition to demonstrating DA Levys personal interest in this case, his apparent willingness to flout ethical and legal obligations which conflict with that interest, and his past attempts to directly influence defendants original attorney, recent news reports have also revealed that DA Levy surreptitiously counseled the defense. The New York Times reported that DA Levy used his nanny (defendants girlfriend), and her mother as a conduit to offer his own legal advice to defendant and that the advice offered by DA Levy ran counter to the advice given by Altchiler. Mentzer has previously and publicly stated that he had met with defendant at the request of defendants girlfriend (DA Levys nanny) and her mother, apparently at a time when defendant was still represented by Aitchiler. In light of this report, it should be plain that defendant has a potential conflict of interest with his current attorney because DA Levy, with his brother-in-law now advising defendant, no longer has any need to secretly advise defendant, as reported by Altchiler, through third parties. DA Levys personal interest in this case is also evident by the recent news reports revealing how he obtained and disclosed information to Aitchiler about the child victim and her family. For instance, the New York Times reported that DA Levy had revealed to Aitchiler that the child victim had been in a psychiatric ward at Putnam County Hospital and that DA Levy believed, mistakenly so, that the child victim had received treatment there before she reported to the police that she had been raped by defendant. Furthermore, the New York Times reported that a private investigator hired by DA Levy had obtained a report by the Putnam County Sheritis Department (from a source not identified in the article), which related to an incident involving

the mother of the child victim in this case. The victims mother had been defendants girlfriend and died in July, 2012. The information about the child victim revealed by DA Levy, like the alleged vote count of the grand jury disclosed by him, is inaccurate but, nonetheless, was seemingly offered to steer the defense to raising claims consistent with those raised in his civil suit. To reiterate, DA Levy claims in his civil suit that the Sheriffs Department is biased against him and that, as a result of this bias, the Sheriffs Department failed to adequately investigate this case. In offering witnesses for the grand jury and moving to dismiss the indictment, Altchiler mimicked this theory. Any information that the child victim first reported the rape only after speaking to members of the Sheriffs Department could be used to argue that the Sheriffs Department influenced the victim to implicate defendant to get at DA Levy. Here, contrary to what DA Levy had told Altchiler, the child victim had reported the rape to the Sheriffs Department before she went to the hospital and, approximately a year earlier than that report, to a civilian. Also, although the child victim had been examined at the Putnam County Hospital Center, as a matter of protocol, it was also inaccurate that she had been examined at the psychiatric ward. As relevant to this motion, DA Levys apparent feeding of wrong information to the defense which would support his civil suit shows his willingness to hijack the defense to advance his own interests. Notably, on the dates of the incident involving the child victims mother and the child victims later visit to the Putnam County Hospital Center, DA Levy was, as he still is, the District Attorney of Putnam County and was responsible for prosecuting any case arising from those reports. DA Levy has not specifically revealed how he obtained the report regarding the child victims mother, for example, whether it was obtained by a request under the Freedom of

Information Law, assuming it was publicly available as he claims. Moreover, on the date of the child victims visit to the Putnam County Hospital
-

after she had reported the rape by

--

defendant to a member of the Putnam County Sheriffs Department

DA Levy had not been

disqualified from this matter. He was disqualified three days later. Thus, DA Levys disclosure of this information, plainly intended to attack the credibility of the child victim, raises the question of whether he has sought to use information obtained through the auspices of his office for his own personal interests. And, more to the point of the Peoples motion for a Gomberg inquiry, DA Levys disclosure of information regarding the child victim and his reported statements to justify his conduct confirm that DA Levy has an interest in this case, that he has inserted himself into the case under the guise of protecting defendant, and that he is operating under the self-serving fiction that in the midst of this criminal matter pending in Putnam County, he can at one moment act as a private citizen and independent of his elected position, and at the very next moment, he is capable of discharging the duties attendant to his elected position. DA Levy is not the defendant in this case, not a fact witness to the case, and he remains at all times the elected and ranking law enforcement officer in Putnam County. Given that status, he must abide by the order disqualifying him from this matter, and not act to undermine the prosecution and potentially the defense in this case. In sum, recent news reports confirm that DA Levy has a substantial, personal interest in this case, as evidenced by his apparent willingness to violate grand jury secrecy provisions. Furthermore, the reports further demonstrate that DA Levy has taken actions to protect those interests which, at times, have conflicted with the interests of defendant. Accordingly, this Court must conduct an on-the-record inquiry of defendant pursuant to People v Gomberg, supra, to

confirm that defendant is aware of the potential conflict of interest between himself and his new attorney who is none other than DA Levys brother-in-law. WHEREFORE, for the reasons more fully set forth in the previously filed and served Memorandum of Law accompanying the Peoples original affirmation, the People respectfully request that the Court conduct an on-the-record inquiry of defendant pursuant to People v Gorn berg,
supra.

Affirmed to be True. Dated: White Plains, New York November 6, 2013

WILLIAM C. MILACCIO Assistant District Attorney

9 J111h1X3

Putnam Cotnty Prosecutor Immersed Himself in His Friends Defense...

http://www.nytimes.com/20l3/1O/3 1/nyregion/putnam-county-prosecu.

ciu ork imc5

October 30, 2013

Putnam County Prosecutor Immersed Himself in His Friends Defense, Emails Show
By JOSEPH BERG ER

Adam Levy, the district attorney of Putnam County, N.Y., involved himself extensively in the legal defense of his personal trainer and friend against rape allegations, a collection of emails he wrote indicates. Mr. Levy, 45, whose mother is the reality television judge Judy Sheindlin, has not denied that he advised the friend, Alexandru Hossu, about legal tactics. He has acknowlcdged that he contributed money toward Mr. Hossus legal expenses, and he did not object when his brother-in-law Daniel Mentzer was named Mr. Hossus new lawyer. To avoid a conflict of interest, he sent the case early on to the Westchester County district attorney for prosecution. But emails between him and Mr. Hossus former lawyer, Robert Y. Aitchiler, obtained by The New York Times, indicate that he took an aggressive role in trying to shape the defense. Mr. Levy hired a private investigator who unearthed a report by the Putnam County sheriffs office about Mr. Hossus complaint that his girlfriend at the time the mother of the girl he is charged with raping had broken into his apartment last year and was found there using aerosol sprays as stimulants, according to the emails and lawyers familiar with the case.

The report was important because it had details reflecting on the psychological state of the girl, who was 13 when she says she was raped in 2010, and her family. Her mother died of a drug overdose a week after the alleged break-in. Mr. Levy let Mr. Aitchiler know that the girl had been seen by doctors in a psychiatric ward at Putnam County Hospital, though he said, inaccurately, that it was before she reported being raped. He urged the lawyer to contact the grand jury foreman through the court to let him know that certain witnesses had not been called who would have been useful to the defense, the emails indicate. Mr. Levy, who became district attorney in 2008 and will next face election in 2015, also repeatedly disparaged the Westchester County district attorneys office. He called

10/31,2013 930

Putnam Coimty Prosecutor Immersed Himself in His Friends Defense...

http://www.nytimes.com/2O13/l0/3 1/nyregion/putnam-county-prosecu.

prosecutors there dopes for securing the indictment of Mr. Hossu, dismissed the sex-crimes prosecutor as incompetent and said District Attorney Janet DiFiore was unethical and a coward for not releasing exonerating material. All Janet cares about is her political future, Mr. Levy wrote. Asked to explain his involvement in the defense, he issued a statement on Monday blaming his feud with the Putnam County sheriff, Donald B. Smith, for his feeling forced to become involved as a private citizen to clear my name and ensure that Alex Hossu received a full and fair trial. I offered advice and opinions but never did I interfere or cross any ethical or professional lines, he said, contending that all documents he looked at were publicly available. His spokesman, Hank Sheinkopf, added in a later email, Mr. Altchiler who took the money and ran now blames everyone else for his own failures and unethical conduct.

Ms. DiFiore asked Justice Lester B. Adler of State Supreme Court on Monday to demand an inquiry to ascertain potential conflicts of interest between Mr. Hossu and his current lawyer, Mr. Mentzer, Mr. Levys brother-in-law. Ms. DiFiore urged the judge to advise the defendant of the risks attendant to being represented by an attorney with those potential conflicts of interest and to ensure Mr. Hossu was aware of Mr. Levys other unorthodox actions so that he could not cite them as grounds for an appeal should he be found guilty. Bennett L. Gershman, a professor at Pace Law School and an expert on prosecutorial ethics, has called Mr. Levys conduct unprecedented for a prosecutor and bizarre. In an interview, Mr. Gershman cautioned that Mr. Levy could expose himself to a charge of obstruction of justice or could be disciplined by a board of the Appellate Division of State Supreme Court. Its not behavior that any public figure would engage in, he said, but here were talking about a prosecutor whose job it is to protect the safety of victims and enforce the law, not meddle and sabotage a prosecution of his friend. Mr. Mentzer did not return calls seeking comment about possible conflicts in his representation of Mr. Hossu. Mr. Hossu has been in the county jail since his arrest in March, and no trial date has been set. Mr. Hossu, a 35-year-old Romanian who was a personal trainer to a number of affluent county residents, was arrested by the Putnam sheriffs office and charged with twice raping the 13-year-old ifl October 2010, when he was dating her mother. The girl waited two and a half years to report the matter to a school counselor.

l/21/lnl2 O.2A

Putnam Co.unty Prosecutor Immersed Himself in His Friends Defense...

http://www.nytimes.com/2O13/1O/3 1/nyregion/putnam-county-prosecu.

Mr. Levy, at whose house Mr. Hossu had stayed for a time, promptly withdrew from the case and turned it over to Ms. DiFiore, the Westchester district attorney, and a Westchester sex-crimes prosecutor, Fred Green. But he let it be known that he thought Mr. Hossu should never have been charged and is in jail only because of Mr. Levys feud with Sheriff Smith. Mr. Levy is suing Mr. Smith for defamation. Mr. Hossu hired Mr. Aitchiler, a former Brooklyn prosecutor, to defend him. Along the way, Mr. Altchiler received a number of emails from Mr. Levy. At first, Mr. Altchiler said, he did not mind Mr. Levys participation, since Mr. Levy could be helpful as someone who knew the nuances of the law in Putnam County and the personalities involved. Mr. Aitchiler also thought of using him as a character witness and someone who could describe the presence of the girl at a Super Bowl party they both attended in 2011, about three months after the alleged rape. On July 2 of this year, Mr. Levy emailed Mr. Aitchiler from his iPad to let him know that the dopes at the D.A.s office won the indictment of Mr. Hossu on rape charges. Ive never seen anything so completely offensive, Mr. Levy said. Mr. Levy, Mr. Altchiler said, meddled in more than investigative details, and, through Mr. Hossus new girlfriend, Jennifer Bartlett, the Levy family nanny, began offering contrary advice about what kinds of motions to file and when it made the most strategic sense to file them. By September, Mr. Aitchiler realized his client was listening to Mr. Levy, not him, and then learned that Mr. Mentzer was visiting Mr. Hossu in jail. He told the court that he wanted to be dropped as Mr. Hossus lawyer.

10/U /,fl1 Qfl

L IHLIIIXEL

Puthain DA Adam Levy disclosed alleged rape victim info, grand jury

...

http://www.1ohud.com/article/2013l/NEWS04/3 103 10042/Put

Putnam DA Adam Levy disclosed alleged rape victim info, grand jury vote
Written by Shawn Cohen Oct. 31, 2013 9:07AM I

lohud.com

Attempting to clear his personal trainer of child rape charges, Putnam County District Attorney Adam Levy shared insider information about the alleged victims visit to a psych ward, according to a collection of emails obtained by The Journal News. Levy also arranged a secret meeting with the defendants lawyer, sought to review legal papers before they were filed, and lashed out at Westchester prosecutors, calling District Attorney Janet DiFiore a coward and lead prosecutor Fred Green incompetent. Levy also urged the lawyer to contact the grand jury foreman to solicit information that could nullify the indictment, shortly after a grand jury voted in June to indict Alexandru Hossu on charges he twice raped a 13-year-girl. Another email discloses that Levy was scheduled to meet the trainer for a session at 6:30 a.m. Oct. 25, 2010 the morning after the alleged rape.

However, it was one piece of information that wasnt included in the emails that could prove most damaging to Putnams top prosecutor. Levy, who recused himself from the case in March, has come under intense criticism in the last several weeks for revelations about his heavy involvement in supporting the defense. But the lawyer, Robert Aitchiler, told The Journal News that Levy specifically told him how the grand jury voted. Under the law, grand

jury votes are secret. He told me the grand jury vote was 13-12 for indictment, Altchiler said. The elected DA told me the grand jury vote, in a case in which he wants the public to think he remained
uninvolved. Altchiler said he is now aggressively seeking to bury Adam Levy, the wealthy, well-connected son of TV reality judge Judy Sheindlin. The lawyer has called for his resignation. Altchiler, who withdrew from the case last week, said Levy is the one who arranged for his hiring and whose feedback he once welcomed. But Altchiler said Levy has manipulated him for months, and gone behind his back to influence his client, all in an effort to save Hossu and himself.

,-f 1

11)/U/20R Q6 A

Putnaih DA Adam Levy disclosed alleged rape victim info, grand jury

...

http://www.lohud.com/article/20 13 103 1/NEWSO4/3 1031 0042/Pui

Putnam DA Adam Levy disclosed alleged rape victim info, grand jury vote
Written by Shawn Cohen Oct. 31, 2013 9:07AM I

lohud.com

Mr. Levy is desperate because he knows hes on the ropes, Altchiler stated, after Levys camp accused him of leaving Hossu high and dry without a defense and withdrawing only because he wasnt getting paid enough. In a statement released before the latest revelations, Levy said any documents he obtained were all publicly available and part of his research for his defamation lawsuit against Putnam Sheriff Donald Smith. I offered advice and opinions but never at any point did I interfere or cross any ethical or professional lines, Levy said of his involvement in the Hossu case. The Westchester District Attorneys Office, which is handling the prosecution, has already formally requested a court inquiry into potential conflicts of interest issues involving Levy, after his brother-in-law took over as Hossus lawyer. Prosecutors cited numerous instances in which Levy has remained engaged after vowing to stay out of the case involving his former live-in personal trainer. The new information may make matters worse for Levy. Altchiler, who shared the emails with the newspaper, said his relationship with the district attorney broke down in September, when the Putnam DA pressed him to provide an advance copy of a legal brief he had to file with the court. Levys public relations firm had already requested the documents that were being submitted as part of Aitchilers motion to dismiss the case, emails show. Aitchiler said that when he phoned the Manhattan firm to follow up, Levy happened to be there and joined the call. In that call, Levy said the case would definitely be dismissed and tried to tell me what the (court) reply should be, saying it should be how the prosecution shouldnt be allowed to re-present the case to the grand jury, Aitchiler told the paper. He wanted me to send the reply brief to his civil lawyer, Michael Sussman, for him to review it. Sussman is representing Levy in his $5 million defamation suit against the sheriff, whom he said falsely accused him of interfering with the rape investigation.

1nn1i2ni Q7 A

Putnam DA Adam Levy disclosed alleged rape victim info, grand jury

http://www.lohud.com/artic1e/20l3103l/NEWS04/3103 10042/Put

Putnam DA Adam Levy disclosed alleged rape victim info, grand jury vote
Written by Shawn Cohen Oct. 31, 2013 9:07AM

Iohud.com

Altchiler didnt immediately turn over the papers. Later that day, he said, Hossus girlfriend relayed to him that Hossu himself wanted him to turn over the brief to Levy. When I talked to her that night, everything changed because thats when I realized Levy was going to Alex behind my back, Aitchiler said. The next day, Altchiler raised his concerns to Hossu at the Putnam jail. A couple days later, on Sept. 20, Levys brother-in-law, lawyer Daniel Mentzer, paid Hossu a first visit. After the Journal News broke stories about Levy and Mentzers involvement earlier this month, the district attorney admitted he helped fund the defense and later defended his efforts to stand by his friend. The emails show Levys involvement extended to sharing information from law enforcement. On April 24, Levy emailed Altchiler details of a police report from 2012 in which the alleged rape victims mom broke into Hossus apartment, and was arrested after being found with aerosol inhalants, a week before she died of a drug overdose. In another exchange, Altchiler wrote about the alleged victims stay in a psychiatric ward earlier this year and stated that two Putnam County Sheriffs Office deputies accompanied her there. Aitchiler suggested police may have advocated to get the girl to report the rape. I am also told that you have discovered that on March 8, two high-ranking members of the PCSO were in the company of (the victim) at the Putnam County Psych Ward, which would be almost a full week before the (publicly reported) alleged outcry to a school counselor, Altchiler wrote to Levy on May 31. Levy replied that same day. If you would like to meet to discuss the issues mentioned in your email, I can rearrange my schedule and meet you later today, the district attorney wrote, and later expressed concern about meeting him at Pace Law School in White Plains because, he noted, the sheriffs chief investigators daughter attends school there. Levy also got testy, as he railed against police and the prosecution.

1 nfl

10/31/2013 9:37A

Putharn DA Adam Levy disclosed alleged rape victim info, grand jury

...

http://www.lohud.com/article/20131031/NEWS04/3 10310042/Put

Putnam DA Adam Levy disclosed alleged rape victim info, grand jury vOte
Written by Shawn Cohen Oct. 31, 2013 9:07AM I

lohud.com

Clearly, the PCSO did NOT do their job, the WCDAs Office did NOT do theirs, and I can only hope, for Alexs sake, that youve done yours, he wrote to Aitchiler. Clearly, theres a lot that you and your investigators have failed to learn about this case. He also wrote that DiFiore is a coward, if her office hasnt disclosed the mountains of Brady (potentially exonerating) material that exist, shes also unethical.... All Janet cares about is her political future. You have your hands full, Levy continued. Im here to participate, as much or as little as YOU think is appropriate. In another email, Levy shared a link to a blog post accusing DiFiore of sleeping with a mobster. After a grand jury indicted Hossu on charges he twice raped the daughter of his former girlfriend, Levy wrote to Aitchiler, Have you considered reaching out to grand jury foreperson and trying to secure an affidavit that 1. GJ was never advised by ADa that the defense proferred witnesses for their consideration,or 2. That GJ was advised but it was at last minute and they did not want to be extended, and 3. hearing from the 4 or 5 defense witnesses would likely have affected the decision (based upon close vote). Prior to the latest revelations, Levy said he became involved in the Hossu case as a private citizen to clear my name and ensure that Alex Hossu received a full and fair trial. While my actions appear unconventional, it was in response to the extreme nature of an unethical sheriff shrouding the truth and hiding evidence, he said.

10/31/2013 9:38 A

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE STATE OF NEW YORK

)
ss.:

COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER) I, Deborah Jones being duly sworn, deposes and says that on the 4th day of November, 2013 she served one (1) copy of this Supplemental Affirmation in Support of Motion for an Inquiry Pursuant to People v Gomberg (with Exhibits) upon: Daniel Thomas Menizer, Esq., ofMenizer & Sheindlin, LLP, 600 Mamaroneck Avenue, Harrison, New York 10528-1 635; by enclosing one (1) true copy in securely sealed envelope and handed same over to a United Parcel Service Representative for UPS Overnight Air delivery in the City of White Plains, New York and also by facsimile to 914-301-9401. Deponent further says that the party above is the last known attorney for the defendant herein and his last known address appearing from the last papers served by him on this Office is as stated above. Deponent is over the age of 18 years

Sworn to before me this

day of November, 2013
//-

4th

//

1 fr /

I.

Notary Public

Kien Pugliese Notary Public, Statvof New York No. 60-01 PU4770470 Qualified in Westchester County Commission Expires November 30, 2014