|
|
Post by LS on Jun 11, 2007 16:00:08 GMT -5
Slum-lording pays well....  Officer Doug Borst and his Main Squeeze She is "Dr." Liza Fozani, a quack chiropractor in Sea Girt. Now you know how he gets his financing. |
|
|
|
Post by LS on Jun 11, 2007 16:00:54 GMT -5
That is Dr. Forzani.
|
|
|
|
Post by kitty on Jun 14, 2007 8:27:18 GMT -5
Why would they arrest Hernandez for being illegal when they will do anything about the woman who stood up in front of the town meeting stating she has a fake Social Security number? (identity fraud)
|
|
|
|
Post by fiberisgoodforyou on Jun 14, 2007 10:46:00 GMT -5
Why would they arrest Hernandez for being illegal when they will do anything about the woman who stood up in front of the town meeting stating she has a fake Social Security number? (identity fraud) And isn't that a Felony? Identity taker is a term first appearing in U.S. literature in the 1990s, leading to the drafting of the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act.[1] In 1998, The Federal Trade Commission appeared before the Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism and Government Information of the Committee of the Judiciary, United States Senate.[2] The FTC highlighted the concerns of consumers for financial crimes exploiting their credit worthiness to commit loan fraud, mortgage fraud, lines-of-credit fraud, credit card fraud, commodities and services frauds. With the rising awareness of consumers to an international problem, in particular through a proliferation of web sites and the media, the term "identity theft" has since morphed to encompass a much broader range of identification-based crimes. The more traditional crimes range from dead beat dads avoiding their financial obligations, to providing the police with stolen or forged documents thereby avoiding detection, money laundering, trafficking in human beings, stock market manipulation and even to terrorism. According to the non-profit Identity Theft Resource Center, identity theft is " sub-divided into four categories: Financial Identity Theft (using another's name and SSN to obtain goods and services), Criminal Identity Theft (posing as another when apprehended for a crime), Identity Cloning (using another's information to assume his or her identity in daily life) and Business/Commercial Identity Theft (using another's business name to obtain credit)." The Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act (2003)[ITADA] amended the U.S. Code, s. 1028 - " Fraud related to activity in connection with identification documents, authentication features, and information". The Code now makes possession of any "means of identification" to "knowingly transfer, possess, or use without lawful authority" a federal crime, alongside unlawful possession of identification documents. Some people prefer the term "identity fraud" to describe when their means of identification has been exploited for an unlawful purpose. Others believe the thief does deprive the owner of his identity by replacing his reputation with the thief's. Both uses of the term focus on the act of acquiring the legally attributed personal identifiers and other personal information necessary to perpetrate the impersonation.[3] A classic example of consumer-dependent financial crime occurs when Bob obtains a loan from a financial institution impersonating Peter. Bob uses Peter's personal identifiers that he has somehow acquired. These personal identifiers conform with the data retained on Peter by national credit-rating services. The identifiers include surname, given names, date of birth, Social Security number (U.S.), Social Insurance Number (Cda), current and former addresses etc. These data are all part of credit header information retained by credit-rating services. The crimes are self-revealing. When Peter defaults on payments the lenders become aware. With consumers being credit-dependent, the onus shifts to them to re-establish their credit-worthiness with the lending institutions and credit-rating services. Less commonly understood outside criminal intelligence and law enforcement circles is the impact of identification-based concealment crimes. As with credit-dependent consumer financial crimes, criminals acquire legally attributed personal identifiers and then clone someone to them for concealment from authorities. Unlike credit-dependent financial crimes, they are non self-revealing, continuing for an indeterminate amount of time without being detected. The crimes include illegal immigration, terrorism and espionage, to mention a few. It may also be a means of blackmail if activities undertaken by the thief in the name of the victim would have serious consequences for the victim. There are cases of identity cloning to attack payment systems, such as obtaining medical treatment. |
|
|
|
Post by fiberisgoodforyou on Jun 14, 2007 10:51:13 GMT -5
From this information below, Ms. Petra Hernandez is an allege Felon, as are most illegal, undocumented aliens caring bought ID's, using falsified SS# documentation ect.....
In the USA, until 2003, dealing with consumer crimes involving legally attributed personal identifiers was the jurisdictional responsibility of the local and state authorities. Identification documents are a different story, addressed in Title 18 > Part I > Chapter 47 s.1028 of the U.S. Code. The unlawful use of identification documents is historically a federal offense. In response to the consumer issue of "identity theft", the U.S. Congress passed the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act (2003) amending Title 18 > Part I > Chapter 47, s. 1028 to include the unlawful use of a "means of identification" [s,1028 (d)(7)] making it a federal crime alongside identification documents. The title of s.1028 is, "Fraud related to activity in connection with identification documents, authentication features, and information". The Act also provides the Federal Trade Commission with authority to track the number of incidents and the dollar value of losses. There figures relate mainly to consumer financial crimes and not the broader range of all identification-based crimes.[8] Punishments for the unlawful use of a "means of identification" were strengthened in s.1028a, allowing for a consecutive sentence under specific conditions of a felony violation defined in s. 1028c.
If used to commit another crime in the commission of identity theft in the United States (if charged federally) include:
Class B Felony: 6-20 years in Jail and a fine up to $10,000
Class C Felony: 2-8 years in Jail and a fine up to $10,000
If charges are brought by state or local law enforcement agencies, different penalties apply depending on the state.
|
|
|
|
Post by fiberisgoodforyou on Jun 14, 2007 12:00:02 GMT -5
OLDIE BUT GOODIE from last August (See Below) ..But we don't need 287g for second offenders. Welcome to doormate USA! Id wouold be one thing of the slumloards where scummy attournies from out of town "Investing" in rental propertirs, but you expect better from Law Enforcment Home restaurant busted in Freehold Code office follows up on other possible violations in borough BY CLARE MARIE CELANO Staff Writer PHOTOS COURTESY OF FREEHOLD BOROUGH Men dine in the living room of a home on Mechanic Street, Freehold Borough, where the owner and tenant have been cited for operating an illegal restaurant. Photo below shows cases of juice and paper products stacked in the home. A Wall Township police officer who owns at least five properties in Freehold Borough has been cited for having an illegal restaurant operating at one of those properties. The restaurant was being operated by one of his tenants. According to a Freehold Area Health Department report, the property at 58 Mechanic Street, which is owned by Wall Township police officer Douglas Borst, has been used as a retail food establishment and/or a community residential bed-and-breakfast retail food establishment without the approval of the Freehold Board of Health. The report says this is in violation of regulations concerning food and beverage preparation. According to the report, the unlawful conditions must be corrected immediately. Notice from the health department of the violations was sent to Borst and his tenant, Petra Hernandes, on Aug. 30, informing them of the results of a code enforcement inspection that was conducted on Aug. 18. According to the Freehold Borough code enforcement report, an inspection revealed that a refrigerator at the rear of the building was being used to store meat. The report stated that upon inspection of the kitchen area, the inspector noticed the tenant was "running a restaurant out of her home." The inspector noted there was enough food to feed about 100 people. "Inspection of the dining room/living room revealed three separate tables with a cup filled with utensils, paper towels and various sauces in the middle of the table. The dining room/living room also had two mini refrigerators, one stocked with alcohol and one stocked with soda," according to the report. At the time of the inspection, there were about 10 people eating dinner at the tables, according to the report. In addition to what was found on the first floor of the home, one side of the basement was found to be stocked with gallons of oil and salt. Cases of beer and paper products were stacked up to the ceiling. The inspection determined that the basement was also being used for sleeping purposes. After informing Hernandes that she had to remove the bed from the basement and that the house was overcrowded, the inspector notified the Freehold Area Health Department. According to the report, the residence had nine people living in a two-bedroom home. Borst and Dan Mason, who is also a Wall Township police officer, operate Bormas LLC and, in addition to 58 Mechanic Street, own other properties in the borough, according to information provided by borough officials. Jeffrey Palatini, who is the principal registered environmental health specialist with the Freehold Area Health Department, said that although Hernandes and Borst were both given notices of violation on Aug. 30, a second summons was served by Palatini on Sept. 15 to Hernandes, which was received by her sister, Rosabla. Borst was present when the second summons was delivered at the Mechanic Street home. Women prepare meals in a Freehold home that was recently cited as an illegal restaurant. Palatini said he had observed the exterior of the property in the beginning of September and did not see any evidence to indicate that the home was again being used as a restaurant. He said his office was called on Sept. 7 by a person who said the restaurant was again operating from the home. According to Palatini, the first notices that were issued did not carry any fines and did not require an appearance in court. Subsequent violations, however, carry a fine which can range from $5 to $500 and require an appearance in court. Hernandes was issued a second summons and was expected to appear in municipal court on Sept. 26. Borst only received the initial notice of violation because, according to Palatini, he displayed every intention of making certain the restaurant operation would be shut down and that all of the equipment being used would be removed. Palatini said he told Borst his responsibility did not end with those actions, but that as the owner of the home he would still be responsible to monitor the property. Palatini said he told Borst that if there was another occurrence of the restaurant operating, Borst would be subject to legal action. Palatini said he will continue to monitor the property. He said his main concern is for the health and safety of residents who may be subjected to consuming food which, because of improper storage, preparation and handling, may become contaminated. According to the report, Palatini said the preparation and storage of the food being served in the Mechanic Street home was "in question." Hank Stryker III, the borough's code enforcement official, said the illegal restaurant was discovered after someone called the code enforcement office with an anonymous tip. He said the department is following up on several other properties where illegal restaurants may be operating. "We are concerned for our residents. This is not just a health hazard, it is also a safety hazard," Stryker said, noting that private homes are not constructed to operate as food establishments. He said a restaurant in a home is a fire hazard and that cooking a large amount of food without a special exhaust system is dangerous. He said homes do not have the proper exits for many people to escape if a fire occurs. Borough Councilman Marc Le Vine said the idea of running an illegal restaurant in a home was "abysmal and unacceptable behavior on the part of the tenant." "Many of our laws and ordinances were disregarded, which constituted risks to the health and welfare of our entire community," Le Vine said. "There is no way this absentee landlord could not have been aware of what was going on at his property, given the sophisticated restaurant set-up and the huge amount of food and alcohol found on the premises. There were even floral arrangements and condiments on each of the tables set up in the home's living room. All that was missing was a sign out front and a Yellow Pages listing." Le Vine said he was aware that the landlord may be an active police officer in Monmouth County. "Aren't these the people we entrust to protect the public good? If this is true, it becomes a much different kind of investigation, hopefully involving the Monmouth County Prosecutor's Office," he said. "There are obviously some members of our underground community that are out of control and think they can do whatever they want to make a buck. They are quickly finding out they can not. There is no adequate defense for people involved in this sort of illegal activity." Le Vine praised the code enforcement office and health officials who investigated the Mechanic Street operation. According to Borough Administrator Joseph Bellina, at least four Wall Township police officers own a total of 28 properties in town. "We are hopeful that they (the Wall police officers) would respect all of Freehold Borough's codes, ordinances and regulations as any other landlord who owns property in the town." A message left at the administrative offices of the Wall Township Police Department on Monday was not returned by press time. On March 16, 2005, an Institute Street home owned by Wall Township police officer Greg Carpino was cited for overcrowding and for having no operating smoke detectors after a fire broke out in the residence. According to Freehold Borough police, officers responded to the scene after residents reported smoke coming from the upstairs level of the home. The report states the fire was coming out of a heater and smoke was exiting from the wall. Stryker said the cause of the fire was accidental and started under a mattress in the upstairs bedroom. The report said the fire was believed to have been started by an overloaded extension cord. No one was injured in the fire. Officials said there were eight people in the home at the time of the fire. The overcrowding violation resulted from the fact that only six tenants were permitted to be in the home. It would appear that police officers are not the only municipal employees buying property in Freehold Borough. Donald Forgione, who works in the Brick Township Code Enforcement Office as a rental inspector and property maintenance employee, was cited for overcrowding at his property on Haley Street in April 2005 after seven people were found sleeping in an apartment with a maximum capacity of five. A message left on Forgione's answering machine at work on Monday was not returned by press time. |
|
|
|
Post by Marc LeVine on Jun 14, 2007 12:09:14 GMT -5
Thanks Fiber: The Mayor reads this site and I hope he joins me in insisting that we do what we can to make HER ADMISSION OF HOLDING FALSE ID part of the investigation and ultimately part of the proceedings.
Marc
|
|
|
|
Post by fiberisgoodforyou on Jun 14, 2007 12:28:14 GMT -5
Thanks Fiber: The Mayor reads this site and I hope he joins me in insisting that we do what we can to make HER ADMISSION OF HOLDING FALSE ID part of the investigation and ultimately part of the proceedings. Marc I would expect that anyone and everyone involved with the "on going investigation" is not relying on this site to process obvious fact as the a matter of practice for the legal discovery process! Again, this is another reason why we do need to have a few of our officers 287g certified. we do not need to do street sweeps as the Mayor argues in the NT article, but for 2nd offenders, the drug dealers, the gang members, the Prostitutes and their Juan's, the Moving Violations offenders, the Parents who endanger the lives of children by NOT have child restraints in the vehicles. Your gone, we don't need you, you are NOT holding up to your "uncertain immigration" status end of the deal! If you expect FB to welcome you, follow the rules. If not, we will have the mechanism in place to DEPORT YOU! Its call 287g. If we had a pervasive drug problem, like in the 70's and 80's, there would be a Drug Task Force established, if there was (?) a Gang problem, we would have a Gang Task Force established, if there were serious vice issues, we should have an appropriate Vice Squad established! We do have a significant Illegal Alien population here, we should have offices police 287g certified! Rich is correct, we should have an add hock citizens committee established to define how 287g can work as a deterrent here. AND Sorry Petra, you gotta go. You need to set the example of fool me once shame on you, fool me twice ..no soap for you, you gotta go now!!! We have enough repeat offenders and felons living here. This is one import we don't need or want! Hasta Luego, Adios Amigas, Shalom, Guten Nicht, BE-GHA, Zaijian, and ARIBADERCHI Baby!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Marc LeVine on Jun 14, 2007 14:09:20 GMT -5
Fiber, Fiber, Fiber - Spoken like a true Mayoral write in Candidate with 11 votes + 3 misspellings  Just take the compliment that I paid you and leave the investigations that we can't talk about (because then they aren't solid investigations anymore) to the legal folks. If they don't do their job... By the way, we do have a gang task force, as most NJ towns do, even the nicest, suburban ones. 287g or not they'll route out any and all gang activity no matter which ethnic origins are represented. Prison or Mexico? Just as long as they get them off our streets... Bring your call for a 287g fact finding Committee to the next Council meeting with a solid argument and, if you can, some additional support and we'll go from there. I'm not one to turn a deaf ear to our residents. But, I do weigh things against my own knowledge base, common sense and value system before I make any judgments. And, remember that I am ALWAYS only one vote on council. Marc |
|
|
|
Post by Marc LeVine on Jun 14, 2007 14:20:38 GMT -5
We had a pervasive drug problem well into the 90's and it still persists to some degree and we've had a good Drug Task Force all those years, supported by the County. Remember the "Jump Out Boys?" They hit town and nailed their share of drug dealers and users.
We knew it was a force to be reckoned with when the girlfriends, wives and mothers showed up asking for some breathing room for their nasty little darlings. Funny how when people fear the effectiveness of new plans they and their backers come out in full force to oppose them...like the rental recommendations, for example.
Point is. When push comes to shove, we deal with it.
Marc
|
|
|
|
Post by fiberisgoodforyou on Jun 14, 2007 14:26:42 GMT -5
Point is. When push comes to shove, we deal with it. Marc So your saying we are not pushing and shoving hard enough??? |
|
|
|
Post by Marc LeVine on Jun 14, 2007 14:39:39 GMT -5
Fiber:
A couple things you should consider before coming to Council with your views on 287g. Do a little upfront research.
1) Why aren't more of the larger towns, that are in even worse illegal immigrant shape, not jumping on the 287g bandwagon. Towns like Hazleton and Riverside are two good examples. Hazleton, in fact, is basing its entire case (re: renters) on increased major crimes committed by illegals. Where is their 287g consideration?
Manasquan, Long Branch, Asbury Park, Perth Amboy, New Brunswick, Passaic, etc. haven't made a peep about 287g. It's lawful. Why not? Most have much larger police forces than we do.
2) Also, get an impression of what INS commitment is ACTUALLY in detaining and deporting the offenders. How is that going in Hearndon, Rich? Or, are they going to wimp out and decide what constitutes them taking deportation action. In other words will it be Home Invasions, YES - Moving Violations, NO? What other conditions will the consider as factors that they are keeping to themselves? Is there a new found "political will" ingrained with them all of a sudden?
And, will they release the folks, as they usually do, just giving them a letter to appear for a hearing in Newark in 60 days? My neighbor, Peter works for the TSA and tells me that this is what they still often do. Happened here in the Borough around 1992 - took 73 of them away in the Borough Rec bus and brought them and those silly letters back the same day. We don't need an entire committee to make that one phone call. Will they (INS) even be direct and thruthful with us when you call?
Just a couple things to consider upfront.
Marc
|
|
|
|
Post by richardkelsey on Jun 14, 2007 16:08:51 GMT -5
Fiber: Manasquan, Long Branch, Asbury Park, Perth Amboy, New Brunswick, Passaic, etc. haven't made a peep about 287g. It's lawful. Why not? Most have much larger police forces than we do. Marc Why -- because once a town hits critical mass where its politics, demographics, and economics hit the tipping point -- the will to fight is gone. The town actually surrenders through demographic shifts it is unable or unwilling to fight. In some of the towns you have listed -- pure politics plays a HUGE role. Hard left towns are far less likely to take a pro-active stand against illegal aliens. Run off a list of the sanctuary towns and cities nationally -- and tell me who controls them. The answer to that question -- will tell you why those cities, and most listed above have and will do nothing. It is your town -- at least until the surrender is complete, or the invasion is successful. Sometimes it is hard to tell one from the other. But every day people move out -- people from families with roots longer than our oldest tress. Every time one leaves, the will and ability to fight goes with them. Soon -- no one will be left to stand -- and at that point -- it will be determined that the political will does not exist. I have warned of this for five years now. Mayor Wilson wanted to run again because -- as he said -- this is his town and he chose to stay when many others chose to leave. For that -- he gets credit. Staying, however, is only the first component in fighting. Soon -- he may find that too few have stayed with him to mount such a fight. |
|
leelye
Junior Member
Posts: 150
|
Post by leelye on Jun 26, 2007 14:57:23 GMT -5
Defendants in illegal Freehold restaurant case waive arraignment
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 06/26/07
BY NICK PETRUNCIO
FREEHOLD BUREAU
FREEHOLD -- The two defendants accused of operating an illegal restaurant out of a Mechanic Street home have waived their arraignments and pleaded not guilty, according to Municipal Court records.
Douglas Borst of Wall, the landlord of the home at 58 Mechanic St., and Petra Hernandez, his tenant, advised the court, through separate attorneys before their scheduled arraignments Tuesday, that they would forego the procedural hearing. A hearing on the alleged violations has been scheduled for 1 p.m. July 24 in Municipal Court, 38 Jackson St.
Borst, who also is a Wall police officer, was issued 10 summonses by the borough code and health departments. Hernandez, who said in a June 1 Press article that she is in the country illegally, was issued a total of 17 summonses from those departments.
Nick Petruncio: (732) 308-7752 or npetruncio@app.com
|
|
|
|
Post by LS on Jun 26, 2007 15:27:17 GMT -5
Borst, who also is a Wall police officer, was issued 10 summonses by the borough code and health departments. Hernandez, who said in a June 1 Press article that she is in the country illegally, was issued a total of 17 summonses from those departments.
10 summonses for Borst; and 17 for Hernandez... Nice. Very nice.
It should be hard to make a wimpy plea deal out of this. Stand tough code enforcement!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jun 27, 2007 4:45:44 GMT -5
www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070627/NEWS01/706270397/1004Landlord, tenant plead not guilty Charges: 2 ran illegal eatery Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 06/27/07 BY NICK PETRUNCIO FREEHOLD BUREAU FREEHOLD — The two defendants accused of operating an illegal restaurant out of a Mechanic Street home have waived their arraignments and pleaded not guilty, according to Freehold Municipal Court records. Douglas Borst of Wall, the landlord of the home at 58 Mechanic St., and Petra Hernandez, his tenant, advised the court, through separate attorneys before their scheduled arraignments Tuesday, that they would forgo the procedural hearing. A hearing on the alleged violations has been scheduled for 1 p.m. July 24 in Municipal Court, 38 Jackson St. Borst, who is a Wall police officer, was issued 10 summonses by borough code enforcement officials and the borough Health Department. Hernandez, who said in a June 1 Asbury Park Press article that she is in the country illegally, was issued 17 code and health summonses. The alleged violations include: operating a business in a residential zone, operating a business without a permit, overcrowding, failing to provide all tenant names, not having fire extinguishers, having improperly working smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, unsanitary food preparation, failing to document food sources from a regulated facility, failing to provide leak-proof containers for all garbage, failing to store garbage in approved containers, and failing to maintain mechanical and electrical equipment. Three of the summonses, one to Borst and two to Hernandez, were issued by the Health Department May 31. The remaining 24 were issued by Code Enforcement on June 1. "We'll try the case in court," Norman Hobbie, the Eatontown attorney representing Borst, said Tuesday. Mark Anderl, Hernandez's attorney from Perth Amboy, said he did not want to comment. Borst and Hernandez pleaded guilty to similar summonses in the fall after a restaurant was found to be operating out of the home in August 2006. Hobbie said he was unaware of that. The overcrowding summons carries a fine of at least $2,000, and the penalties for the other code violations will be up to the judge, according to borough Administrator Joseph Bellina. This story includes material from previous Press stories.
|
|
|
|
Post by sonofsilencedogood on Jun 27, 2007 6:52:57 GMT -5
www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070627/NEWS01/706270397/1004Landlord, tenant plead not guilty Charges: 2 ran illegal eatery Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 06/27/07 BY NICK PETRUNCIO FREEHOLD BUREAU FREEHOLD — The two defendants accused of operating an illegal restaurant out of a Mechanic Street home have waived their arraignments and pleaded not guilty, according to Freehold Municipal Court records. Douglas Borst of Wall, the landlord of the home at 58 Mechanic St., and Petra Hernandez, his tenant, advised the court, through separate attorneys before their scheduled arraignments Tuesday, that they would forgo the procedural hearing. A hearing on the alleged violations has been scheduled for 1 p.m. July 24 in Municipal Court, 38 Jackson St. Borst, who is a Wall police officer, was issued 10 summonses by borough code enforcement officials and the borough Health Department. Hernandez, who said in a June 1 Asbury Park Press article that she is in the country illegally, was issued 17 code and health summonses. The alleged violations include: operating a business in a residential zone, operating a business without a permit, overcrowding, failing to provide all tenant names, not having fire extinguishers, having improperly working smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, unsanitary food preparation, failing to document food sources from a regulated facility, failing to provide leak-proof containers for all garbage, failing to store garbage in approved containers, and failing to maintain mechanical and electrical equipment. Three of the summonses, one to Borst and two to Hernandez, were issued by the Health Department May 31. The remaining 24 were issued by Code Enforcement on June 1. "We'll try the case in court," Norman Hobbie, the Eatontown attorney representing Borst, said Tuesday. Mark Anderl, Hernandez's attorney from Perth Amboy, said he did not want to comment. Borst and Hernandez pleaded guilty to similar summonses in the fall after a restaurant was found to be operating out of the home in August 2006. Hobbie said he was unaware of that. The overcrowding summons carries a fine of at least $2,000, and the penalties for the other code violations will be up to the judge, according to borough Administrator Joseph Bellina. This story includes material from previous Press stories. It is now up to the town to not work out a plea bargain for any of these violations. Our town has already backed down from one lawsuit, we can not afford to back down again!!! Stand firm, and do not give an inch, otherwise you will open our town to further incidents like this one. I'd like to say that I have faith that the town will do the right thing here, but unfortunately history is forcing me to reserve my judgment. |
|
|
|
Post by sonofsilencedogood on Jun 27, 2007 6:59:37 GMT -5
Thanks Fiber: The Mayor reads this site and I hope he joins me in insisting that we do what we can to make HER ADMISSION OF HOLDING FALSE ID part of the investigation and ultimately part of the proceedings. Marc I have heard before that the town has not looked into the infamous "287g" because it only pertains to felonies...well now that the town knows that identity theft is a felony charge, how about revisiting that idea of getting our officers involved with the program??? |
|
adefonzo
Junior Member
If I can see further than some, it's because I have stood on the shoulders of giants
Posts: 308
|
Post by adefonzo on Jun 27, 2007 8:30:38 GMT -5
Great Town Wall. Try sending an email to the police through their web site. Both the direct e-mail and webmaster links failed. Maybe it didn't like my poison pen letter. In any case, I support going to a Wall Township meeting, by our residents. If it doesn't jeopardize our local case (I'll ask Kerry Higgins), I'll go with you! It's also important that I get a green light from the Mayor and Council to go representing the town., especially since the Mayor has already been in touch with those folks and shared his angst. As you know, I am never in favor of outsiders going to another town's meeting and making a fuss. We didn't like it back in '03 regarding closure of the muster zone. But, in this case, it is entirely proper for us to let Wall know that we are very unhappy about what has taken place in our town and that we won't stand for it. Marc Marc, If you think you can get away with going, let me know. I will round up a posse and we will storm the castle! We will try to bring Nick Petruncio and Claire Celarno to document it. Let me know when we're going...I'm in. One other note...in response to Marc's post on June 14th about things to consider about section 287g of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996...to be completely honest with you, Marc, I think the only question we need to be asking is "what is the cost involved in getting our officers certified into this program". If the costs are minimal, I don't care what other towns are doing, Freehold Boro should be participating in this program. I don't think we should wait around and see what happens in other towns before we act. Our town is suffering on many levels, as you and the rest of us are well aware. I don't think we can continue to have a "wait and see" attitude, we need to do all that we can within the law to deal with these issues, and 287g is certainly a tool that is within the law. Waiting to see what happens in other places just allows those who are breaking the law to gain a stronger foothold in our town. The more time you give to the lawbreakers, the more entrenched they will become, and then the more expensive, and unlikely, it will be that we'll be able to deal with them. As it has been said on here countless times, apathy is our worst enemy...and this "wait and see" attitude is dangerously close to apathy. |
|
|
|
Post by guest 2 on Jun 27, 2007 8:53:17 GMT -5
natives sound restless
|
|
|
|
Post by DonkeyMan on Jun 27, 2007 10:18:18 GMT -5
Ive been reading this site for awhile and first liked that it was all about Freehold boro. There are so many GOP hate-mongers on here it's disgusting. I have news for you republicans -- the Democrats rule in Freehold Boro and that aint likely to change. Get over it. Support your town or shut up already!
DonkeyMan
|
|
|
|
Post by richardkelsey on Jun 27, 2007 10:59:02 GMT -5
Donkeyman
Welcome to the site. Any thoughtful opinions you have are appreciated.
Freehold has been a strongly democratic town since the early 70's -- and probably before. That's not real news to many -- and certainly not to me. I had the great honor of losing an election in 1986 -- even though I was related to half of the town. (I should have dated one of those nice McGakin girls -- perhaps that would have helped!)
Anyway -- I don't see much hate-mongering here -- but if you point to some specific examples -- you may find the dialog a bit more engaging.
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jun 27, 2007 16:30:24 GMT -5
Ive been reading this site for awhile and first liked that it was all about Freehold boro. There are so many GOP hate-mongers on here it's disgusting. I have news for you republicans -- the Democrats rule in Freehold Boro and that aint likely to change. Get over it. Support your town or shut up already! DonkeyMan Donkeyman, I, too, welcome you to the site. And you are correct, the emphasis here is Freehold Borough. I have made it a point to not advertise outside the Borough so that those who live here, or have a legitimate interest here, can have a forum. And you may be surprised, but we do have Dems on board, we are not all right wing nuts. Well, maybe I am. ;D Either way, I hope you will participate some more. Your views are very welcome here, even if they are not held by others. If you care to add your own threads, opinions, emphasis, be my guest. Or even better, sign on as a registered user. All view points are welcome here. Just, please, be respectful. Brian |
|
|
|
Post by unwelcome guest on Jul 23, 2007 16:19:15 GMT -5
www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070627/NEWS01/706270397/1004Landlord, tenant plead not guilty Charges: 2 ran illegal eatery Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 06/27/07 BY NICK PETRUNCIO FREEHOLD BUREAU FREEHOLD — The two defendants accused of operating an illegal restaurant out of a Mechanic Street home have waived their arraignments and pleaded not guilty, according to Freehold Municipal Court records. Douglas Borst of Wall, the landlord of the home at 58 Mechanic St., and Petra Hernandez, his tenant, advised the court, through separate attorneys before their scheduled arraignments Tuesday, that they would forgo the procedural hearing. A hearing on the alleged violations has been scheduled for 1 p.m. July 24 in Municipal Court, 38 Jackson St.
Borst, who is a Wall police officer, was issued 10 summonses by borough code enforcement officials and the borough Health Department. Hernandez, who said in a June 1 Asbury Park Press article that she is in the country illegally, was issued 17 code and health summonses. The alleged violations include: operating a business in a residential zone, operating a business without a permit, overcrowding, failing to provide all tenant names, not having fire extinguishers, having improperly working smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, unsanitary food preparation, failing to document food sources from a regulated facility, failing to provide leak-proof containers for all garbage, failing to store garbage in approved containers, and failing to maintain mechanical and electrical equipment. Three of the summonses, one to Borst and two to Hernandez, were issued by the Health Department May 31. The remaining 24 were issued by Code Enforcement on June 1. "We'll try the case in court," Norman Hobbie, the Eatontown attorney representing Borst, said Tuesday. Mark Anderl, Hernandez's attorney from Perth Amboy, said he did not want to comment. Borst and Hernandez pleaded guilty to similar summonses in the fall after a restaurant was found to be operating out of the home in August 2006. Hobbie said he was unaware of that. The overcrowding summons carries a fine of at least $2,000, and the penalties for the other code violations will be up to the judge, according to borough Administrator Joseph Bellina. This story includes material from previous Press stories. |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jul 23, 2007 16:25:17 GMT -5
Do you know the time?
and thank you for the reminder
|
|
|
|
Post by fiberisgoodforyou on Jul 23, 2007 16:31:31 GMT -5
Do you know the time? and thank you for the reminder Right there in RED... A hearing on the alleged violations has been scheduled for 1 p.m. July 24 in Municipal Court, 38 Jackson St. |
|
|
|
Post by unwelcome guest on Jul 23, 2007 16:33:03 GMT -5
Do you know the time? and thank you for the reminder Per the APP article " A hearing on the alleged violations has been scheduled for 1 p.m. July 24 in Municipal Court, 38 Jackson St. " |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jul 23, 2007 16:36:48 GMT -5
Do you know the time? and thank you for the reminder Right there in RED... A hearing on the alleged violations has been scheduled for 1 p.m. July 24 in Municipal Court, 38 Jackson St.oops!  |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jul 24, 2007 15:42:07 GMT -5
The verdict is in. I received an email from a very credible source and here it is.....
I just came from municipal court. Doug Borst pled guilty to some of his charges and others were merged. He paid over $4000 in fines and got a stern warning from the judge not to return.
Petra Hernandez asked for a postponement to talk to family about what she may have worked out with the Prosecutor. She is due back in Court on Friday at 9 am.
We will have to stay tooned to see what the local papers have to say
|
|
|
|
Post by fiberisgoodforyou on Jul 24, 2007 15:50:06 GMT -5
Petra Hernandez asked for a postponement to talk to family about what she may have worked out with the Prosecutor. She is due back in Court on Friday at 9 am. [/color] [/quote] "postponement to talk to family " Why is this Prosecutor "working anything out?" What happened to "Guilty or not Guilty How do you plea?" |
|
Just take the compliment that I paid you and leave the investigations that we can't talk about (because then they aren't solid investigations anymore) to the legal folks. If they don't do their job...
