file photo by Boyd Loving
Reader says Mr. Sedon is not the only wronged party. This was an act against our community, against our clean election system.
The village should initiate an investigation immediately.
This crime was committed against Ridgewood as well as against Mr. Sedon. Our elected officials should have authorized whatever legal fees would be needed to pursue the facts and bring the perpetrator to light. It is two years later, but it is still not too late. Draft a resolution or whatever it is you do, and let’s get on with it. Unless there is some reason that someone on the dais does not wish to pursue this???
There are 2 reasons why the Council have drag their feet. One is the longer it goes the harder it is to investigate. Second is they don’t want the public to know the answer. The answer may not fit in their civility matrix. The three amigos should be just a upset as Councilman Sedon and the public because an investigation show Transparency in the council and something similar could be done to them in the upcoming election. So why are they not pursuing this? I will leave it up to the readers to speculate.
This incident will remain an appalling blot on Ridgewood forever whether it is investigated or not, but especially if it is not. I’m still in shock that the truth has not been pursued avidly. Failure to pursue this points a gigantic finger at those in charge. They are failing in their duty to preserve democracy (forget civility) while making it clear that they are implicit. Developments should be on the front page routinely as they are for the theft of our quarters–which morally and as an insult to the electoral process was LESS bad.
Lawyers say never to ask a question that you don’t want an answer to. Seems like that is the case.
The election system in Ridgewood stopped being clean when our Mayor first showed up on rRdgewood doorstep to restart his political aspirations. An add bonus is that he brought the other two into the fold
Is that true Albert?
mayor Aronsohn,
You invited James Foytlin to one of your civility roundtables. We know that you read this blog. We know you detest anonymity and cherish transparency,
So here is a suggestion, Mr, Mayor : please won’t you post here, on this blog, under your own name, and tell all of the faithful readers what your reasons are for not pursuing the Mike Sedon matter.
Much appreciated.
9:52, does the village council have the power to launch public investigations of this nature? Given the subject matter, it seems as if jurisdiction would lie at the level of county or state government, regardless of the local impact of the alleged wrongdoing. And wasn’t Councilman Sedon working for an out-of-state newspaper at the time? This would seem to complicate things further, or at least indicate that a locally-initiated investigation would quickly run up against large obstacles.
10:51 – I think if the Mayor had even ONCE voiced any outrage over this, and if he had pushed for an investigation, and pursued follow-up, then we would all feel more trusting of him. Yes, it was sent to the Prosecutor’s office, only after certain citizens expressed their anger. Molinelli determined it was not a prosecutable crime, and then it was eventually sent to the Board of Elections (not sure I have the correct name of the agency). Then we heard nothing. Nothing. I am quite certain that if the action had been taken against Mr. Aronsohn, he would have called out all the militia to cross state lines and subpoena the editor at the Staten Island newspaper. This is not such sensitive information that it would be so difficult to obtain. It is disgraceful that this has not been pursued with all possible resources.
what was the “crime again?” Someone called the newspaper where he worked and told them he was running for Council. I am still baffled by how this was such a terrible crime. It was public information that was being relayed.
A suit for tortious interference could be founded on someone urging a person who is in an existing business relationship with someone (such as a newspaper employing a reporter or journalist) to end that relationship.
Tortious interference claims do NOT require a false statement. They are not based on defamation. Perfectly true statements designed to bring a premature end to a business relationship are actionable, and truth is not a defense.
Brian/4:14
It was not as you depict it. The anonymous contact with Mr. Sedon’s employer (a newspaper in Staten Island) informed them that he was a candidate for public office. As such, it was indicated that this was a conflict of interest and I think Mr. Sedon’s employer told him to quit his candidacy or quit his job. The reason the anonymous caller did this was to get Mr. Sedon to quit his candidacy. Instead, he quit his job, and went on to win by a wide margin over the third candidate. If Mr. Sedon had been working for, let’s say The Ridgewood News, then this would have presented a big problem because he could not report on meetings and deliberations of which he was a part. But, this newspaper was in another state, where there could not even be a conceivable problem with him serving on a council in Ridgewood.
You choose to say that it was not such a terrible crime. Well, maybe not. It wasn’t murder or violence. But it most definitely was interference with the election process and someone tried to sabotage his job or his candidacy. Public information that was being relayed – yes, with the express purpose of putting this man off the ballot. It was disgusting.
“It was public information that was being relayed.” Thank Albert for the spin on that.
This was the ultimate NON-TRANSPARENT act, so of course our Mayor and his buddies could not possibly have been involved.
right
Acts that bring civil liability under a theory of tortious interference could also constitute criminal intimidation of a political candidate, potentially violating his civil rights and/or state laws designed to preserve the integrity of the electoral process. If undertaken by two or more individuals in concert, the same acts might be indictable under the RICO (Racketeer-Induced Corrupt Organizagion) act or other anti-conspiracy provisions.
5:18 pm is right. This business stinks to high heaven. And It DOES seem of a piece with the Mayor’s bat-phone style interactions with The Ridgewood News to squelch political opposition. It has done brutal damage to our local political culture, so 5:18’s frustration that no culprit has been tracked down and held to account is perfectly understandable. The fact that this seamy event is seemingly being swept under the rug, or thrown down some kind of 1984-type George Orwell ‘memory hole’, tempts ordinary residents who had nothing to do with any of it to pretend that it never happened, or that the related civic damage is either not real or not lasting. In the end, though, we know this is just a convenient charade, and we are appalled at the absence of forthright leadership at the Village Council level.
Brian – I’ve seen many of your posts. While I don’t always agree with you, you do seem to be reasonably familiar with the issues facing our town. The question you pose here however seems to be intentionally devoid of any insight at all and seems to deliberately overlook the most basic facts of the Mike Sedon matter. I wonder what your agenda might be. Care to clarify?