From the moment my son was arrested he was treated as a criminal of notoriety and placed under the guise (decimator treatment) of protective custody. He has been placed in isolation and spends 23 hours a day in a small cell and is allowed one hour outside. This treatment has caused my son psychological harm and he is now being treated with psychotic and anti depressant medication due to his confinement. This medication seems to impair his thinking and judgment and his ability to participate in his own defense. As his mother, I notice the drastic change in his demeanor and behavior. He seems confused and withdrawn and is not able to clearly and concisely explain to his defense attorney the events that occurred on June 29, 2005. This biased treatment of my son only became necessary due to the mayor’s actions.
   “Serving Time The Worst Way,” by Tome Brune and John Riley, printed in Newsday, page 58, on May 4, 2006, describes the conditions at the maximum security federal prison known as USP Florence ADMAX, located in Colorado, that Zacarious Moussaoui along with shoe bomber Richard Reid, Unabomber Ted Kaczynski and al Qaida terrorist Ramiz Yousef will be subjected to. This includes being confined to their cells for 23 hours a day in solitary confinement with one hour recreation period. These are convicted mass murderers and terrorists, yet my son, not convicted of anything at this time, is subjected to the same conditions and for what? Is this justice?
   From the moment of his arrest, in fact before his arrest, my son has been used as a political football to be kicked and abused for the political gain of the mayor, police department personnel, district attorneys and others. The police, along with the Queens County District Attorney’s Office, conspired to use lies and distortions and provide sweetheart deals to others involved in the incident. This included defendants and so called victims. Upon his arrival in court he was again treated differently than others and was denied bail. This was totally out of the norm for all others charged as my son, without the notoriety. In addition, the District Attorney’s Office, with the consent of Judge Buchter, provided inaccurate information from within sealed records, which had not been unsealed, to the media. Is it the policy of this judiciary to allow judges to disregard current law and allow them to legislate, not litigate, from the bench?
   Initially, I was a lone voice raising concern about overzealous prosecutors. In haste to gain political favor, they turned a blind eye to the facts, and in some cases ignored police improprieties. I have information and a subsequent validation by open coýrt statements, proving a manipulation of the incident to exclude the son (Frankie) of a New York police department detective, from prosecution. However, a recent lawsuit filed against the Queens District Attorney’s Office alleging similar improprietieskwas exposed for all to see the dark underside of political ambition at the expense of individual rights.
   I found it very sad and my heart reached out to the family of 20 year old NYU student John Broderick Hehman, injured in Harlem on April 1, 2006. This innocent white man was going about his business when he was approached by several male blacks, who proceeded to rob and unmercifully beat him, while witnesses reported they used slurs “get the whitey.” After robbing him they chased him onto 125th Street where he was struck by a passing motorist and subsequently died four days later.
   I was horrified when I read that then Police Captain Osgood—now Deputy Inspector Osgood—classified this not as a hate crime, but as a robbery. My son, because he is white and from Howard Beach, is treated differently than people who are black and from Harlem. He is discriminated against due to past unrelated incidents in the area. Where is the justice?
   The judges involved in all the pretrial hearings seemed to separate themselves from the case and ruled in line with political correctness and self preservation and not the facts. Tainted evidence was admitted and used with prejudice and questionable acts were dismissed without investigation. Prejudicial statements were admitted and contradictory facts were omitted. His attorney was stifled and seemed resigned to the one way direction of the proceedings.
   In July of 2005, I was made aware that sources in the court judiciary reported that Judge Buchter had made remarks to the effect that he would get Minucci. When reported to the court on record, Justice Buchter denied the remarks. How was Judge Buchter appointed as trial judge? This procedure appeared improper at best and/or conspired. Not removing Judge Buchter as trial judge seemed a totally inappropriate response to a possible inequity and a poor remedy to assure a fair and just trial. I would like this to be investigated and a response forwarded to me.
   During the trial Judge Buchter has continually assisted witnesses for the prosecution. He leads them and places words in their mouths. Example: a witness, questioned by the prosecution, was not requested by Judge Buchter to clarify their response but was requested to verify his—Judge Buchter’s—statement of events. This is clearly aiding, with prejudice, prosecution witnesses. Contradictory statements of the prosecutor’s case are removed from the record and the defense attorney is regularly stifled by upheld prosecutor’s objections.
   Richard Pope testified that he heard a racial slur, “What are you n s doing in my neighborhood, emanating from my son’s vehicle. He was unable to identify which of the occupants in the vehicle made the statement. Judge Buchter ruled the statement be struck from the record. Please explain how this was allowed a week after the statement was made. The prosecutors were blatant in their lack of compliance to the Rosario Rule and when the defense attempts to present these improprieties to the jury it is blocked at every turn by the upheld objections of the prosecution. On one occasion, the judge ordered subpoenaed medical records—one copy to be distributed directly to the court, untouched, and one to the prosecutor. Instead both copies were distributed to the prosecutor. Again, the law was disregarded by the prosecutor and no action taken. In addition, I would request clarification of the law that allowed a duplicate copy of my son’s taped video statement and transcripts of his written statement to be distributed to the news media, while he is still on trial.
   In conclusion, my frustration with the entire sequence of events and the transpiring consequences to my son’s life leave me with anger and hopelessness in my ability to fight and correct the injustices perpetrated against my son. I also seek truth and justice and let justice prevail but I’m painfully aware that due to the sequence of events started by the mayor, the subsequent discrimination due to politics caused by the location of the incident, without facts, this is no longer possible.
   I will continue to fight for my son and will reach out to everyone and anyone who can assist me. Sir, from you, I request an immediate official investigation and recourse to guarantee the civil rights of my son that are so blatantly being violated. My son is presently on trial and immediate action will be necessary to prevent an unjust outcome to this mockery. (Is there any justice or just us?)

Maria Minucci,

Howard Beach