HARFORD COUNTY CORRUPTION
I. Background Information
Harford County and Joseph Cassilly Became More Powerful Than Ever Under the Trump Administration
In 1983, 32-year-old Republican Joseph Cassilly became the youngest State's Attorney in Harford County history. 36 consecutive years later, in 2019, Cassilly retired as the longest sitting State's Attorney in Maryland history. But be clear, Cassilly was far more than just Harford County's State's Attorney. Joseph Cassilly is a political machine that has changed the landscape of the Maryland legal system. But NOT for the better. Over the years, Harford County, Maryland has become ground zero for what some have termed the American Holocaust.
Angered by the Obama Administrations demands that Harford County adhere to the United States Constitution, according to the Baltimore Sun Cassilly was going to retire from his position as State’s Attorney before his term was up. However, when Donald Trump was elected in 2016 Cassilly, a Trump ally and political mentor, realized that with Hogan as Governor and Trump as president he would have full reign in Maryland. He no longer had to concern himself with requests to follow the Constitution.
In June 2019, a complainant who had been directly impacted by the corruption in Harford County met with Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) Harry Gruber in Baltimore. After the meeting, Mr. Gruber agreed to launch an investigation. However, no investigation took place because Robert Hur, then United States Attorney for the District of Maryland appointed by President Trump stepped in and thwarted Gruber’s investigation into Cassilly’s corrupt administration.
Although his title was Harford County State’s Attorney, Joseph Cassilly was Commander in Chief of Harford County. And although Albert Peisinger became the new Harford County State’s Attorney in 2019, Joseph Cassilly remained the most powerful politician in Harford County and the State of Maryland.
2. Stacking the Courts with Cassilly Foot Soldiers
Joseph Cassilly graduated from the University of Baltimore School of Law (University of Baltimore). The State of Maryland has two (2) law schools. For years, University of Maryland School of Law (University of Maryland) alumni outshined their lower tier University of Baltimore counterparts. Upon becoming Harford County State’s Attorney, Cassilly vowed to make the University of Baltimore School of Law and its alumni a force to be reckoned with. He hired mostly University of Baltimore alumni for Assistant State’s Attorney positions. He used his political capital to have University of Baltimore graduates, qualified or not, elevated to judgeships.
Today, approximately one-third (1/3) of all sitting judges in Maryland are University of Baltimore graduates. There are more judges who are University of Baltimore alumni in Maryland than University of Maryland or any other law school in the country. This makes little sense when the ranking of the University of Baltimore over the years is considered. Arguably, approximately 75% of these judges owe their judgeships to Joseph Cassilly, making them loyal to Cassilly not the United States Constitution.
3. Harford County District Court Judge Mimi Cooper and Her Years of Corruption
Judge Mimi Cooper graduated from the University of Baltimore School of Law in 1987, which at the time “may” have been a third-tier law school, at best. After failing the Maryland Bar Examination during her first sitting, Cooper was finally barred in 1988. Cooper went on to have an unremarkable career as an Assistant State’s Attorney in Baltimore City. She later became an Assistant State’s Attorney in Harford County. Joseph Cassilly recommended her to the Harford County District Court bench. In only 12 years, as a licensed attorney, the mediocre student (who failed the bar in her first sitting) became a judge.
Most attorneys would ask how is this possible. In the house that Joseph Cassilly built it is called creating loyalty. Cooper knows her career as a judge would not exist in a world without the political giant that is Cassilly. Cooper now and will always be a loyal foot soldier in Cassilly’s army, which has waged war on people of color.
In 2016, Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh stated that the excessive bail set by Judge Cooper and some of her Harford County counterparts was unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution. In 2014, Cooper put an 81-year-old great grandmother with no criminal record, who could not afford her few hundred dollars bail, in jail for tickets regarding her dogs roaming. It is rumored that this was to have her home foreclosed on so it could be bought and sold by wealthy realtors.
In 2018, Cooper was asked by a criminal the defendant to close the courtroom or go into chambers to discuss the dispute between the criminal defendant and the defendant’s attorney. Cooper refused. The attorney made a comment, which could have him called as a witness against his then client. When the defendant ordered the audio of the hearing the recording had been altered. In September 2018, Cooper had to recuse herself from the defendant’s case.
In February 2019, the defendant’s new attorney, Virginia Tehrani, received a promotion. In July 2019, the defendant found out that attorney’s new supervisor was Judge Mimi Cooper’s classmate. The Supervisor had access to every email sent between the defendant and the attorney. When the defendant asked the attorney to remove herself from the case, spyware was sent to the defendant via email by the attorney. In 1987, the University of Baltimore School of Law was a small school. The likelihood that Cooper’s classmate would become the defendant’s attorney’s supervisor at that Washington D.C. firm was unlikely.
Cooper has been associated with a significant amount of corruption. Unfortunately, the depth of her unconstitutional, illegal, and criminal acts will never be known because she is far too protected by the powers that be in Harford County. Judge Cooper was also protected by former Senator and Chairperson of the Judicial Proceedings Committee Robert Zirkin.
4. Baltimore City Associate Judge Erik Atas, Former Maryland State Senator Robert Zirkin & Governor Larry Hogan
In 2020, Erik Atas was appointed by Governor Larry Hogan to the Baltimore City bench. Governor Hogan’s appointment was a little more than two (2) years after Atas was involved in a matter that should have made him the subject of a criminal investigation. Instead, it appears as though the judgeship is a reward for his criminal actions.
In an August 2018 email, Atas solicited a Black Harford County criminal defendant for representation. This criminal defendant had spoken out about being beaten by police on the night of her arrest, being profiled and wrongfully stopped, arrested, and charged. She spoke out about corruption by the judge and altered court recordings. Atas was hired and provided a retainer, but refused to do the job he was hired to do. Although he was paid in full, he also refused to provide the defendant with discovery obtained in the case including the Aberdeen Police Department Precinct Video. It took over three (3) years for the defendant to finally obtain a copy of the video. The video showed: (1) an Aberdeen Police Officer attacking the defendant without provocation; (2) that although the defendant was charged with assault on the officer the defendant had not assaulted the officer. In fact, the officer assaulted her; (3) that contrary to the police report stating the defendant was so intoxicated she could not walk, stand or complete a field sobriety test, the defendant defendant was standing and walking in four (4) inch heels without issue.; (4) that an officer removed the defendant defendant’s cell phone from the booking area, took the phone to an area where video surveillance was not provided for 22 minutes and returned with the phone to the booking area within a minute of the defendant being released from the cell. The phone, which was dead prior to entering the police station was charged and the defendant defendant was able to use it to place calls to her husband.
It appears that Atas intentionally solicitated the defendant to sabotage her case. At the time of his appointment by Governor Hogan to the Baltimore City bench, Atas had been barred for merely 14 years. He attended a mediocre law school, University of Baltimore and had a mediocre legal career. As you learn more about Atas from what is documented below, it will appear obvious that Governor Hogan’s appointment of Atas appears to be Casilly’s payment to Atas for destroying the above-mentioned Harford County defendant’s case.
Please note that a year before Atas’ appointment Joseph Cassilly’s brother, Andrew Cassilly, was appointed by Governor Hogan to one of the highest positions in the State of Maryland. In December 2019, he became Senior Advisor to the Governor. Yet, Andrew Cassilly did not appear be qualified serve as Senior Advisor to the Governor.
5. The Harford County DUI Attorney Scam
The Code of Professional Conduct does not make it easy for an attorney to simply remove him/herself from a client’s case without the client’s permission or some impropriety on the part of the client. But in Harford County these rules have not been adhered to. Certain attorneys practicing in Harford County have been given a pass to withdraw from their client’s cases without their client’s knowledge or consent. These attorneys are allowed take all or part of their client’s money and escape any scrutiny by being stricken from their client’s court record. No matter how much damage that attorney may have done to the case s/he is shielded because their name is no longer a part of the client’s court record.
This scam is being perpetrated by and lining the pockets of some of the most powerful people in Maryland State Government. In December 2019, Robert Zirkin, a Democratic member of the Maryland State Senate representing District 11 from 2007 to 2020 announced that he would be resigning before the Maryland General Assembly session begins on January 8, 2020. Zirkin won re-election in the general election on November 6, 2018. From 2015 to his retirement, Zirkin served in the powerful position as Judicial Proceedings Committee Chairperson.
Zirkin claims he left office on January 2, 2020 to "focus on his law practice and a new venture helping professional athletes with their charitable work, as well as spend more time with his wife and two daughters." But after running to maintain his seat, winning that election and talk about him taking his political show on the road to Washington D.C., why would Zirkin resign a year after being reelected to the position he has held for 13 years? The answer is simple: Robert Zirkin was avoiding a scandal that could not only destroy his political career, it could destroy his legal career and have him facing criminal charges.
Members of the Maryland State Senate and the House of Delegates became aware of Zirkin’s firm’s involvement in Harford County corruption in the winter of 2019. A criminal defendant and several individuals supporting the defendant’s cause began emailing Senate and House of Delegate members copies of a Motion to Compel the Production of Evidence. The defendant had demanded that Zirkin, Atas and the firm produce discovery in her case, namely an Aberdeen Police Precinct video from the evening of February 15, 2018, which would provide proof that Officers Baust and Pietrogiacomo lied in the Statement of Charges. Not only did Zirkin’s firm not provide the discovery, they did not answer the motion and refused to sign for the documents when it was hand delivered to the law office. The firm was withholding evidence that could proof their former client was innocent of the charges and they had the evidence in their possession for months but refused to provide it to vindicate the client.
This leverage was likely used to force Zirkin’s resignation. But it was NOT used to help that defendant obtain her discovery, stop the case from continuing for another two years, stop Harford County Circuit Court Clerk James Reilly from falsifying that criminal defendants’ court records or not filing the defendants’ motions, responses, and correspondences for review by judges.
So how was Zirkin and his firm, which represents individuals charged with DUI/DWI crimes, involved in Harford County’s DUI scam and corruption? In May 2018, Harford County District Court Judge Mimi Cooper violated a criminal defendant’s constitutional rights. It appears Judge Cooper was engaging in the coverup of police misconduct. This defendant, a professional woman of color, alleged that she was racially profiled by Aberdeen Police, assaulted by a police officer, refused medical attention, made to sit in her own blood for hours and six hours into her stay at the Aberdeen Police Station taken to the emergency room via ambulance in a neck brace due to the acts of Aberdeen Police.
During the hearing, the defendant asked Judge Cooper to have the court proceeding held in chambers or the courtroom closed. Judge Cooper refused. In open court, the defendant’s attorney made comments which implied that the defendant was violent. The defendant was being charged with DUI as well as assault on a police officer. Judge Cooper’s actions during this Withdrawal of Appearance hearing opened the door for The Harford County State’s Attorney’s Office to call the defendant’s now former attorney as a witness against her in the upcoming criminal trial.
After her attorney’s withdrawal, the defendant was in search of an attorney to argue a Motion to Dismiss based on Judge Cooper’s actions. In Harford County you do not speak out against a judge. The powers that be in Harford County did not want this Motion to Dismiss to become public record. So, they sent an attorney to gain information regarding the defendant’s case as well as to sabotage the case. This may sound farfetched to some. But on August 23, 2018 Erik Atas, an attorney for Zirkin & Schmerling Law, solicitated this the defendant via email.
So how does the DUI/DWI scam work? It is quite simple. It merely requires an attorney to represent the defendant/client for a few months, withdraw from the case (due to conflict of interest) and postpone the case with or without their client’s knowledge. This scam has made Harford County and criminal attorneys a lot of money at the expense of the criminal the defendant. This lines the firm’s pockets without attorneys having to do any work. It prolongs the case, depletes the defendant’s funds, and often leads to the defendant having little choice but to plead out. Harford County became third in the State of Maryland in DUI/DWI convictions as a result of this scam.
In August 2018, Erik Atas represented the above noted defendant in both Harford County District and Circuit Court. The District Court case was closed in September 2018, with Mr. Atas as the attorney of record. True to the methodology of the scheme, in October 2018 Erik Atas filed a Motion to Withdraw from that client’s case due to conflict of interest. Also true to the methodology of this DUI/DWI scam, a Harford County judge granted Mr. Atas’ Motion to Withdraw and he was stricken from this the defendant’s record. A judge may be able to come up with a reason as to why s/he is justified in striking Atas from the client’s circuit court record. But how does s/he find a legal explanation for Atas being stricken from the defendant’s district court record?
Atas was stricken from both his client’s Harford County Circuit Court and District Court cases. However, the District Court case had been closed for over a month and Atas was the attorney of record when it closed. He could not have been stricken from the district court record when he was removed from the Circuit Court case. In fact, Erik Atas represented the same client in her Motor Vehicle Administration case in Howard County, Maryland. When he withdrew from that case, Mr. Atas was not stricken from the record. The Howard County court record properly indicates the date of withdrawal, which was November 1, 2018. This is the correct way to preserve a court record. Why are court records preserved in such a different way in Harford County? The answer is simple: Harford County does not abide by the law. But why should they? Even with evidence there is never consequences for these illegal acts.
Prior to August 23, 2018, the defendant had never heard of Erik Atas or Zirkin & Schmerling Law or the female referenced in said email. However, after seeing that a Maryland State Senator who serves as the Chairperson of the Judicial Proceedings Committee was at the helm of the law firm, the individual believed there would be no corruption on the part of Atas. However, it was Zirkin’s powerful position that aided in the coverup of Atas’ acts.
Atas and Zirkin & Schmerling Law went far beyond the normal role of the defense attorney in the Harford County DUI/DWI scheme. Everything Atas did was to sabotage the defendant’s criminal and MVA cases. Atas refused to provide the defendant with discovery in her case including the video at the Aberdeen Police Department. Atas refused to argue the very Motion to Dismiss he was hired to argue.
In March 2019, the defendant filed a Motion to Compel production of the discovery. Although Zirkin & Schmerling Law was paid in full for their services, they refused to provide the defendant with the discovery needed for her hearing scheduled for April 2019. Zirkin, Schmerling and Atas contended that the only way they would provide the defendant with said discovery was if they could speak to an attorney representing the defendant. The defendant told them she wanted them to have no contact with anyone representing her. There was no legal basis for withholding the discovery she paid them hundreds of dollars to obtain. There was no legal basis for Zirkin & Schmerling Law demanding a discussion with anyone representing the defendant. The only basis Atas and Zirkin & Schmerling Law would have for speaking with the defendant’s new counsel is to attempt to influence that attorney’s behavior. To date, Zirkin & Schmerling Law has never provided the defendant with the discovery in her case.
Atas recently stated that he sent the defendant a box of discovery. This is true. However, the items in that box only related to the defendant’s MVA case. It included the transcript of the MVA administrative hearing, etc. But there was no precinct video or anything obtained from the Harford County State’s Attorney’s Office. In an email copied to Lydia Lawless, Named Bar Counsel for the Attorney Grievance Commission, Atas states that he would provide discovery to the defendant’s counsel not that he provided said precinct video and discovery already.
Attorneys are being weaponized against their clients for profit. To see how grave the problem is one only needs to find out how many attorneys have been stricken from their clients’ cases over the last several years. Criminal defendants are losing their freedom, jobs, and lives in this game of fraud and the DOJ has refused to step in to fight this abuse. And the State government appears to be making too much money on DUI/DWI cases to care what happens to these people.
The above noted defendant spoke out so loudly that after two years of having his name removed from her Harford County District and Circuit Court record in 2020, approximately two (2) months before Governor Hogan appointed him to the Baltimore City bench, Erik Atas’ name reinstated as an attorney of record on the defendant’s Harford County Criminal Court record.
There are rumors that her letter writing and speaking out made it impossible for the Attorney Grievance Commission to refuse to pursue a complaint filed against Joseph Cassilly when a defendant from his earlier years in the Harford County State’s Attorney’s Office came forward. And it led to Cassilly’s recent disbarment. Cassilly was recently disbarred for lying about withholding exculpatory evidence in a double murder from the early 1980s.
Over the years one of the men convicted was granted two new trials after the credibility of FBI Agent Michael Malone came under question. The DOJ determined that Malone, who worked in the FBI laboratory’s Hairs and Fibers Unit, provided “faulty analysis and scientifically unsupported testimony” in a separate wrongful conviction, and demanded that all his cases be reviewed. The FBI terminated Malone from his position in 2014. In November 2017, three months before the above-mentioned defendant’s case was brought to the Harford County State’s Attorney’s Office by the Aberdeen Police Department, Cassilly allowed Huffington to enter an Alford Plea in exchange for time served.
After being asked about being disbarred, Cassilly said “Do I care? I don’t give a damn. I wouldn’t do anything to engage in the practice of law right now because it is such a screwed-up obscenity. Cassilly maintained he “fell into the whole anti-criminal justice movement where the cops are the bad guys. And the prosecutors are the bad guys.” But no investigation into the Harford County State’s Attorney’s Office has taken place.
II. Harford County State’s Attorney’s Office
Assistant State’s Attorney Gabriella Vazzana
Assistant State’s Attorney (ASA) Gabriella Vazzana started her prosecutorial career under Joseph Cassilly. She was the lead prosecutor in the above-noted defendant’s case. This woman has lost everything because of her encounter with Vazzana and Joseph Cassilly. Vazzana should be disbarred and prosecuted. Instead, today, she continues to prosecute and destroy the lives of people of color and the poor in Harford County. This is her story with the above-noted defendant
When the defendant arrived on November 30, 2018 in Courtroom 3-01 of the Circuit Court for Harford County, she approached the ASA sitting at the prosecution’s table. The defendant told said ASA she was here for a scheduling conference. The ASA was not familiar with the terminology used by the defendant. She checked her list and found that the defendant was scheduled for a “pretrial hearing.” As the ASA pointed to her list The defendant saw Alison Healey listed as the prosecuting attorney. During the interaction between the two, ASA Vazzana approached the defendant. The defendant knew who ASA Vazzana was because she was the ASA during the beginning of the district court process. Vazzana informed the defendant she was prepared to make the following plea offer: (1) All charges dismissed except two: DUI and Assault 2; (2) Three (3) years for the Assault 2 charge. All three (3) years suspended; (3) One (1) year for DUI charge. All but 45 days suspended. The defendant declined Vazzana’s plea offer.
The defendant proceeded to ask about scheduling dates for the pending Motion to Dismiss. The defendant had filed a Motion to Dismiss on October 26, 2018. Vazzana appeared surprised that the defendant had mentioned the Motion to Dismiss. She paused and looked away from the defendant. The ASA sitting at the prosecution’s table blurted out somewhat loudly, “what motion to dismiss?” Vazzana immediately put her finger up motioning for her to stop speaking. Vazzana then turned to the defendant and simply said, “Motions to Dismiss are usually scheduled on the same day of trial.” The defendant then said, “so we will deal with that when the hearing begins?” Vazzana said, “yes.” The two then parted ways. Sometime later the defendant approached Vazzana and provided her with the contact information for the out-of-state firm she was securing. The defendant informed ASA Vazzana that said firm is simply working through the Pro Hac Vice process.
Vazzana was sitting with two other Assistant State’s Attorneys, whose identities remain unknown. There was a tall, darkhaired male and a blonde-haired woman. The three (3) ASAs sat in the front row of the jury box. After the defendant provided Vazzana with the firm’s information the three ASAs crowded together and began to look at the unknown male ASA’s cellular telephone. The male ASA began to make calls and the trio spoke both quietly and intently. The male ASA left the courtroom and returned minutes later.
During this time ASA Vazzana called out to the defendant. She asked if the defendant would speak with her. The defendant complied and walked over to her. Vazzana stated, “Judge Kent denied your Motion to Dismiss on November 26th.” The defendant asked her how is that possible when as of Seven o’clock that morning Maryland Judiciary Case Search (Maryland Judiciary) stated the file on the motion was closed on November 13, 2018. However, no ruling was documented on Maryland Judiciary and no notice had been received by the defendant. Vazzana said, “I don’t know.” The defendant said repeat the judge’s name please.” ASA Vazzana said, “Judge Kent.” During this conversation the two remaining ASAs were watching and appeared to be listening carefully. The defendant went back to her seat and documented the judge’s name Vazzana provided.
On the record the defendant informed the sitting Judge Paul Ishak of what had taken place regarding the denial of the Motion to Dismiss. Vazzana said nothing. The defendant also stated her Response to Defense Counsel’s Motion to Strike Appearance filed on October 12, 2018, was never ruled on either. The defendant expressed great concern regarding the Court’s disregard for her constitutional right to be heard. Upon leaving court the defendant looked up every judge in Harford County and found there is NO Judge Kent. A hearing for the Motion to Dismiss was not scheduled because Vazzana lied to the defendant making her believe that no hearing could be scheduled because the motion had been denied by fictitious Judge Kent. The Motion to Dismiss was not denied. In fact, it was never docketed for review by a judge.
On December 3, 2018, the defendant called the Circuit Court Division of the Harford County State’s Attorney’s Office to inquire about the following:
The contact information for the ASA assigned to the circuit court case.
The correct spelling of ASA Vazzana’s name as the defendant was going to file a grievance based on what had occurred in court on November 30, 2018. 22.
Upon answering the telephone, the individual was very pleasant until the defendant inquired about her case. When asked about her role in the case, the defendant stated she was the defendant. The women became hostile. She told the defendant to call ASA Vazzana. The defendant said she believes ASA Healey is now the ASA on the case. The person said you need to call ASA Vazzana. The defendant asked for the correct spelling of ASA Vazzana’s first and last name, as well as her email address. The person spelled the name so fast the defendant could not write it down. When The defendant asked her to slow down and to repeat the spelling, she did the same thing. The defendant gave up on getting the correct spelling of ASA Vazzana’s name. She simply asked the woman for Vazzana’s telephone number. Instead of answering, she said something to the effect that the notes in the system say you need to speak directly with ASA Vazzana. Suddenly, the woman stopped speaking in a normal tone. She began raising her voice loudly. Immediately, a man took the telephone. He claimed to not know the spelling of ASA Vazzana’s first or last name. He also stated he did not know her number. He then hung up on the defendant. The above noted call was made to telephone number (410)638-3500 on December 3, 2018, at 9:01am.
When the defendant called to inquire about her case she was treated with overt disrespect. The defendant decided to look up ASA Healey’s telephone number. The defendant called that number and was told Ms. Healey had just left for court. The woman informed the defendant that although it appears that ASA Healey is going to be the ASA on the case, for now the system notes indicate that everything regarding the case must go through ASA Vazzana. The above noted call to ASA Healey was made to telephone number (410)638- 3113 on December 3, 2018, at 9:12am. The defendant later emailed and sent a letter to Ms. Healey. She never responded to the defendant and no one from the Office responded via mail or otherwise. The defendant was currently a Pro Se Defendant but it was impossible for the defendant to discuss her case with anyone other than ASA Vazzana. And after her statements in court on November 30, 2018, were found to be untruthful, the defendant did not feel comfortable speaking with her. Vazzana lied about the outcome of the Motion to Dismiss after offering the defendant a plea agreement that the defendant refused. It appears Vazzana thought that the defendant would agree to the plea if she believed there was no longer a chance at a dismissal.
When discovery was requested, Vazzana provided the defendant with either a blank discovery video or deliberately did not provide the defendant with the required instructions to gain access to the footage on the DVD provided. The defendant later learned that the video footage from the Aberdeen Police Department in her case could not be accessed without detailed instructions and could not be accessed on a standard DVD player. In April 2019, ASA Vazzana deliberately provided the defendant with a discovery video she knew the defendant could not access.
In 2018 after leaving a district court hearing, a Harford County ASA told the defendant she would not receive a fair trial in Harford County because then State’s Attorney Joseph Cassilly is going to make sure she is convicted for speaking out against corruption in the Harford County State’s Attorney’s Office. For years the defendant was unable to obtain a copy of the precinct video recorded on the evening of her arrest. It has now been made public that Cassilly had a history of corruption and withholding evidence. Vazzana’s conduct was the way business was done in Harford County particularly when a defendant was representing him or herself.
In 2019, the same ASA told the defendant that the newly elected Harford County State’s Attorney (SA) Albert Peisinger read the grievance the defendant filed with the Attorney Grievance Commission. Said ASA told the defendant Vazzana and the four others involved in the November 30, 2018, and December 3, 2018, above noted incidents were fired based on their conduct in the defendant’s case. Said ASA directed the defendant to the Baltimore Sun’s February 6, 2019 Article, “New State’s Attorney Hopes to Create ‘Effective. Efficient, Smart Prosecution in 8 Harford” where the article states: Three assistant state’s attorneys and two administrative staff were asked to leave as Peisinger reorganized, “based on the vision I have for the office, moving forward in the office.”
In an email to Harford County Circuit Court Clerk James Reilly dated April 17, 2019, based on the information provided by the above noted ASA, The defendant notes ASA Vazzana’s departure from the Harford County State’s Attorney’s Office. Said ASA informed the defendant that SA Peisinger rehired ASA Vazzana after political pressure from former Harford County State’s Attorney Joseph Cassilly and others. There was fear of a federal investigation into the Harford County courts, law enforcement agencies and State’s Attorney’s Office as well as civil rights lawsuits.
After almost three years of violating the defendant’s constitutional rights by refusing to allow the defendant to file motions or docket her motions once filed, in 2021 after years of speaking out and a new president entering office, the defendant was allowed to file motions in her criminal case. The defendant filed motions: to change the venue, dismiss the case and for the prosecution to produce discovery. Without regard for her constitutional rights and the years of abuse the defendant withstood, Administrative Judge Angela Eaves denied each motion.
During this time the defendant was dealing with a level of retaliation that was so outrageous. Her home was burglarized, evidence was stolen and damaged, all of her property was rifled through including but not limited to her identification, financial, professional and personal documents, unknown substances were placed on items throughout her home, her locks and doors were damaged, her laptop and devices were tampered with, spyware was placed on her devices, false claims were made against her, her car was damaged, her bank account was tampered with, without hearings she lost her professional license and driver’s license, she was harassed, stalked, cyberstalked, cyberbullied and that was just a portion of what she, family and friends were subjected to.
After over three years of being denied access to the precinct video, the defendant through the assistance of an NAACP executive officer finally gained access to the precinct video. The Harford County State’s Attorney’s Office could no longer claim there was an assault on the officer by the defendant. After almost four (4) years of fighting and calling out for justice in Harford County, although she was not guilty the defendant agreed to an Alford Plea of 18 months for DUI. The defendant was convinced that she would not get a fair trial in Harford County. She prayed that with the plea the harassment, stalking, etc. would end and that her and her family and friends could have peace. But nothing has changed and law enforcement will not help.
III. Harford County Circuit Court Clerk James Reilly
A criminal defendant has a constitutional right to a fair trial. A fair trial cannot be had be a defendant when his/her right to be heard is being denied. In 2018, while running for reelection, Harford County Circuit Court Clerk James Reilly and his employees were forging a criminal defendant’s Harford County Circuit Court file. This defendant’s court record was transferred from the Harford County District Court to the Harford County Circuit Court in September 2018. Reilly began tampering with the defendant’s record in October 2018. To date, there is evidence that Reilly has forged at least one criminal defendant’s court record, failed to provide judges with documents submitted by this criminal defendant and stole mail sent to the courthouse for the Administrative Judge and the Harford County State’s Attorney. Reilly’s list of illegal activities in office is shocking. Yet, Reilly continues to control the records of criminal defendants, civil parties as well as children and families in the Harford County Circuit Court.
Riley used his office as a roadblock against the defendant filing motions, responses and/or sending documents to those whose offices are in the Circuit Court. Without a reason the defendant’s documents were simply returned. The two items the defendant was able to file with the Court on October 12, 2018, and October 26, 2018, were never docketed by Mr. Riley’s office for review by a judge. However, while the defendant was denied access, her then attorney Erik Atas was not. On October 3, 2018, and October 20, 2018, Atas filed motions with the Court. These motions were docketed for review by Riley’s office and ruled on by judges. On October 3, 2018, Mr. Atas filed a Motion to Strike Appearance. On October 20, 2018, without the defendant’s knowledge or approval, Mr. Atas filed a Motion to Postpone the defendant’s scheduled October 26, 2018, Pre-Trial Conference. On October 22, 2018, Atas’ Motion to Postpone was granted. On October 24, 2018, Atas’ Motion to Strike Appearance was granted.
The defendant filed a Response to Mr. Atas’ Motion to Strike Appearance on October 12, 2018. Although the defendant asked for it and paid for it, she had not received discovery including but not limited to the Aberdeen Police Department Precinct video. To obtain her discovery, The defendant’s Response asked the Court to schedule a hearing. The Response was never docketed for review by a judge. To date, the defendant has not received the discovery in Mr. Atas’ possession.
Unaware that Atas filed a Motion to Postpone, and it was granted, the defendant was present at the courthouse for the scheduled October 26, 2018, Pre-Trial Conference. The defendant became aware that Mr. Atas filed a Motion to Postpone, and it was granted after every effort was made to find the location of the proceeding. A sheriff’s deputy directed the defendant to the Criminal Court Clerk’s Office, where she was informed that her new Pre-Trial Conference date was November 30, 2018. Later that day the defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss. This motion too was never docketed for review by a judge.
However, on April 18, 2019, Judge Curtin stated that she reviewed and ruled on the motion. She recessed stating her ruling must be in the record. But there was nothing. To date, the defendant never received a ruling on the motion which was filed more than three (3) years ago.
James Reilly also falsified the defendant’s Harford County Circuit Court record. The defendant’s record states that she signed for summonses on both March 8, 2019, and July 17, 2019. On March 8, 2019, the defendant saw “Sheriff Return” listed on her record. The defendant knew she had not signed for a summons or anything else.
On March 10, 2019, the defendant went to the Harford County Sheriff’s Department. The defendant spoke with Deputy Zach Beyer. Deputy Beyer went through their system. When his search proved unsuccessful, he contacted his supervisors. They were unable to locate a summons for the defendant. Deputy Beyer provided the defendant with his badge number and a note indicating that no summons was found.
The defendant, realizing the March 8, 2019, Sheriff Return was a falsification of her record, sent a certified letter with return receipt to Harford County Circuit Court Administrative Judge Angela Eaves. Mr. Reilly returned the letter to the defendant. There is no indication that Judge Eaves ever received it. It was clear that Mr. Reilly read the letter because on March 18, 2019, the defendant was contacted by a Howard County Sheriff. The Deputy said he received a summons for the defendant via faxed on March 15, 2019. On or about March 20, 2019, the defendant went to the Howard County Sheriff’s Department and signed for the summons. The defendant’s Harford County Circuit Court record shows no record of this. It continues to falsely state that there was a “Sheriff Return” on March 8, 2019.
On July 17, 2019, the defendant saw that her record was once again falsified. There was another “Sheriff Return” noted. The defendant had not and could not have signed that summons. The defendant’s father was in the hospital in Florida. The defendant and spouse had been in Florida since July 14, 2019. The defendant contacted the Howard County Sheriff’s Department and was told no summons for her had been received. To date, the defendant’s court record states there was a “Sheriff Return” on July 17, 2019.
All correspondence with the Clerk’s Office must be documented in the court record. However, the defendant has had email correspondences with Mr. Reilly’s office, regarding her case. Yet not one has been documented in her court file.
James Reilly’s is likely running for reelection in 2022. However, the defendant being alive and well possesses a problem for his reelection. The same is true for the other government officials on her case. Therefore, it makes sense that the harassment, stalking, etc. continues. These politicians need to make her look unbelievable, incapacitate her, or kill her to prevent their criminal acts from being exposed.
IV. Neil Jacobs, The Motor Vehicle Administration (MVA) and The Medical Advisory Board (MAB): Using the MVA and its Counterpart the MAB to Penalize Those Who Speak Out Against Injustice
When a person complains about the injustice, they faced in Harford County, another tool used to silence him/her is the suspension of their MVA privileges. This has been a valuable tool used by bad actors in Harford County government. It gives Harford County government the upper hand because a person is more likely to conform if their ability to live and work is hindered.
For example, an individual had an MVA administrative hearing in August 2018. her driving privileges were not suspended; installation and enrollment in the Ignition Interlock Program was required for 12 months. In November, she questioned Erik Atas and Zirkin & Schmerling Law’s involvement with Harford County District Court Judge Mimi Cooper. 15 days later her driving privileges were suspended. The person was secretly referred to the Medical Advisory Board (MAB), but her hearing information was “coincidentally” not sent to her mailing address, which was the address on her driver’s license and the address MVA correspondences had been sent.
This individual was informed that in order to possibly have her privileges reinstated she needed to provide unfettered access to all medical records for the past two years and for at least a year in the future. She would also need to be examined by MAB doctors. MVA attorney, Neil Jacobs refused to provide her with any information. She finally decided to sit in the MVA office for hours until someone agreed to provide her with her file and a reason for her license being suspended. Finally, she was told her file would be provided in approximately seven days. Her record was provided and after months of inquiries, Jacobs told her that her driving privileges were suspended and she needed to provide the above stated medical records because an administrative assistant at the Office of Administrative Hearings saw a document in September 2018 that made her alert the MAB.
Jacobs' logic means that an administrative assistant's judgement trumps that of an administrative judge. The document Jacobs claims was reported by the secretary was reviewed by the administrative judge in July 2018 prior to the August 2, 2018 MVA hearing. The judge reviewed the document prior to deciding not to give the individual a postponement to obtain an attorney. He told her he believed she was fit to represent herself. He did not suspend that individuals license after reviewing the document and her sitting before him representing herself in that August 2, 2018 hearing.
Because this woman would not provide Jacobs, the MVA and MAB with unfettered access to her personal medical history based on the inquiries of an administrative assistant who never met or spoke with her, this woman’s Driver’s License has been suspended for more than three (3) years now. This has created significant financial hardship. And in the mist of a pandemic, it required that she place herself at significant risk using Uber and public transportation.
There are numerous stories of individuals forced to provide medical records, which the Harford County State’s Attorney’s Office intended to later subpoena to aid in their criminal prosecution, simply to be able to drive to work to provide for their families. Criminal defendants in Harford County can lose their right to medical privacy if they want to maintain their driver’s license.
The DOJ and Maryland State Government are failing to protect criminal defendants’ right to medical privacy. Individual’s driving privileges are being held hostage to allow corrupt government officials to rifle through private medical records.
V. Lydia Lawless and Erin Risch
Coming Soon