In this case we were the jury for the co-defendant. Below my summary you
will find an article that I borrowed from one of many sites posting this
story, for those of you that care to read.
In any case co-defendant Rebecca Tharpe was accused of 3 charges:
(wording may be off on the charges)
1. Grand Larceny in the 2nd Degree
2. Possession of Stolen Property in the 2nd Degree
3. Falsifying documents
After 8 days of jury duty, watching the defense and the prosecution present
their cases we went into deliberations.
Now this was a difficult criminal case to try, it wasn’t as clear cut as
someone getting shot or killed and it being as plain as daylight. There
were a lot of grey areas, a lot of unknown items, and a lot, a lot of
paperwork!
I believe the prosecution was powerful, Allison Wright, the prosecuting
Assistant D.A was strong, clear, concise, and very impressive to watch. She
presented quite a bit of physical evidence in way of documents, witnesses,
and stipulations. There is no question that her and her partner (I didn’t
get the partner’s name, I think she’s scared I’ll google her, LOL) were very
prepared with what they had.
The defense was also strong, but in a different way. Unfortunately I didn’t
catch the defense attorney’s name clearly, but he came out strong from the
get go “Buyer and Seller meet in an open Market”. Now with no offense
intended, he was clearly not as prepared or as astute as the prosecution
was, he appeared confused at times, but this was probably due to the fact
that most of the evidence came from the prosecutions end, and he had to
learn about and work from that. All that being said I think he recovered and presented his case as best he
could. One thing I mentioned before was that he is rather fond of the word
“uhm”, which really stood out to me as I studied law, and “uhm” was taboo!!
But he also worked as best he could to try and help his client.
The judge, The Honorable Kenneth C. Holder was an awesome personality. I
enjoyed sitting in his courtroom, “this is my house”. He was really fair
and handled the proceeding with great care and consideration. I tried to
get him to give us 2 more days off, but he wouldn’t “falsily official
documents”. LOL. Our court officer was also really cool, Rich, we will keep in touch and meet
up sometime. The jurors were great too, we all exchanged contact info and
will keep in touch. I was here playing UFC with James on Monday for a few
hours, cool dudes and gals.
Now in so far as the charges, on the 1st charge we ruled not guilty. Though
the argument could be made either way that she “knew” what was going on, the
evidence, the facts which we had to go with, the information that was
presented did not prove to us beyond a reasonable doubt that she knew what
was going on. Personally I cannot condemn someone to a prison term on the
chance that they knew. In order to convict, I was needing to see that solid
piece of evidence that proved to me that she knew there was a crime being
committed, but it never came.
Now this isn’t a knock on the prosecution, they didn’t have much to work
with in way of that particular type of evidence, but they definitely put up
a powerful case, and this charge was strongly debated by the jury, we were
divided for sometime.
On the 2nd charge, pretty much the same as the first applies. After much
debating and going back and forth, we were torn on this, but once we
discussed all the details, and reviewed the law several times, it was
concluded that no evidence was presented that proved that Rebecca knew the
property was being stolen. And based on that fact, we couldn’t convict her
on this. We ruled not guilty on count 2.
On the 3rd charge, falsification of documents, again we were confused and
fought for sometime, I initially ruled not guilty, but after talking and
talking I realized that the fact of the matter was that she signed a
document herself, she knew she wasn’t going to live there, but she signed
knowing this. If any of us sign a document, a legal document, regardless of
the circumstances we will be liable, and based on that fact, and that fact
alone, I had to change sides and accept that she did in fact sign, and as
such she was guilty of falsifying business documents.
This is what jury duty is all about, different minds, different experiences,
difference backgrounds, and all coming together to talk out all these
details and coming to a decision. I believe jury system works, if all
jury’s are as fair and thorough as we were, then I believe this system
works.
I hope Mrs Tharpe has learned a lesson from all this, and I wish her all the
best. Also I wish all the best to all those that were affected by the fraud
and crimes that were committed here, it is our belief that the true criminal
mastermind is paying for their part.
The experience was quite interesting and very educational, rest assured that
when me and Christine buy our place I will thoroughly read all the
associated documentation! Not reading and signing could get you into a lot
of trouble!
What follows is the article about the case.
——
In the following press release Queens District Attorney Richard A. Brown
today announced that a former Long Island resident has pleaded guilty under
New York State’s Hate Crime Law to stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars
from a 93-year-old Queens man suffering from Alzheimer’s disease by
fraudulently refinancing a property that he owned in Bayside to steal its
equity and by using a “straw buyer” to steal his primary residence in
Jamaica, Queens.
District Attorney Brown said, “Under the provisions of New York State’s Hate
Crimes Act of 2000, enhanced charges can be filed when a defendant commits a
larceny and selects his or her victim because of their age which is defined
as being 60 years of age or older. In this particular case, the defendant
befriended and took advantage of an elderly, confused man. Crimes against
the elderly – whether they involve physical or, in this case, financial harm
- are despicable because the victims are often lonely and vulnerable.
Yesterday’s guilty plea is a measure of justice for this victim, who passed
away this past Christmas Eve at age 94.”
The District Attorney identified the defendant as Alexandra Gilmore, 37,
formerly of 14 East Grove Street in Massapequa and presently of 1550 Clark
Street in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. She pleaded guilty yesterday to two
counts of second-degree grand larceny as a hate crime before Queens Supreme
Court Justice Barry Kron. The judge indicated he would sentence the
defendant to 2 to 6 years in prison when she is sentenced on February 26,
2009. The case against Gilmore’s co-defendant, Rebecca Tharpe, 31, of 44
Third Street in Brentwood, Long Island, is still pending. She is also
charged with second-degree grand larceny as a hate crime. Her next court
date is also scheduled for February 26, 2009.
District Attorney Brown said that, according to the charges, between June
14, 2004, and April 10, 2006, Gilmore befriended Artee McKoy, 93, of 146-04
116th Avenue in Jamaica, a retired barber, who had been a good friend of her
deceased father, and took advantage of McKoy’s diminished mental capacity to
twice refinance a property he owned at 209-47 45th Drive in Bayside and to
sell his Jamaica, Queens, home.
The District Attorney said that the scheme began on July 6, 2004, when
Gilmore refinanced the Bayside property with New Century Mortgage for
$150,000. Realizing how much more equity could be drained from the property,
Gilmore orchestrated a second refinancing of the property – this time for
$420,000. In order to carry out her scheme, Gilmore submitted a letter to
New Century Mortgage, falsely claiming that she was McKoy’s daughter and
that he was refinancing the property in order to make cash gifts to his
children.
Thereafter, Gilmore opened an account in her name and – unbeknownst to McKoy
- in his name at Commerce Bank in Massapequa and directed that all account
statements be sent to her house. A review of bank records by the District
Attorney’s Office revealed that Gilmore withdrew more than $100,000 from
the account on July 13, 2005, four days after an unendorsed check for
$129,268 had been deposited into the account and cleared and that, several
months later, she withdrew additional funds from the account after a second
check – this time for $222,160 – had been deposited and cleared.
Furthermore, Gilmore stole McKoy’s Jamaica residence between August 12,
2005, and September 9, 2005, by allegedly soliciting an acquaintance,
Rebecca Tharpe, as a “straw buyer” to purchase the property. McKoy’s
signature was forged on a contract of sale – between him as the seller and
allegedly Tharpe as the buyer – that was then used, along with other false
information, to obtain a mortgage on the property. The house was eventually
sold for $395,000, of which Tharpe allegedly received $102,000 and Gilmore
received more than $200,000 in proceeds, including a $97,000 check that had
been made payable to McKoy and an additional $130,000 which she secured by
setting up a real estate company and falsely claiming to have been owed the
money from a previous mortgage loan on the property.
District Attorney Brown said that, according to bank records, a few initial
monthly mortgage payments were made on the property before payment ceased
all together and the house went into foreclosure.
A civil court case is presently pending before Supreme Court Justice Howard
Lane. The Bayside property has also been forced into foreclosure
proceedings.
The investigation was conducted by Detective Oniel Miller of the NYPD’s
Queens District Attorney’s Squad under the supervision of Sergeant Frank
Horvath and the overall supervision of Captain John M. Zanfardino. Former
Detective Ketty Larco, of the District Attorney’s Detective Squad, also
assisted in the investigation, under the supervision of Sergeant John Kenna,
Lieutenant Robert Burke and the overall
supervision of Chief Lawrence J. Festa and Deputy Chief Albert D. Velardi.
Assistant District Attorney Allison P. Wright, of the District Attorney’s
Economic Crimes Bureau, prosecuted the case under the supervision of Gregory
Pavlides, Bureau Chief, and Christina Hanophy, Deputy Bureau Chief, Kristen
Kane, Chief of the Elder Fraud Unit, and the overall supervision of
Executive Assistant District Attorney Peter Crusco and Deputy Executive
Assistant District Attorney Linda Cantoni of the Investigations Division.
Look at this ridiculous person
October 21st, 2009 at 8:23 pm | No Comments
CLICK HERE TO COMMENT
Question:
I am on probation for 3 years for falsifying business records (bogus, but
went on for over a year couldn’t afford trial) anyways….I was just
arrested for larceny charge(E felony) I have been on probation for a little
over a year, do you know what could happen if I get violated on probation
from my first charge? My PO hates me so Im sure that she is going to try to
get me the max that she can, however I have paid my fees, my fines and
everything else that I had to pay, and I have never missed an appt or given
her a hard time with anything, will that count for anything, or am I just
screwed? –
So this person is on probation for falsifying business records, bogus or
not, then goes ahead and gets brought up on a larceny charge? Are you
kidding me? Your p.o hates you and that’s why you will be screwed?
Ridiculous.
Home 
