Press Upset at Early Release
By Little-Known Commission
Of Senator Who Took Bribes

By Henry J. Stern
October 1, 2004

October 1 is the third day of coverage of the early release of Senator Velella. We are sending you links to the widespread coverage the event has received, rather than recapitulating each story.That makes it more important for you to read the links to keep abreast of events.

Mayor Bloomberg, whose administration has been particularly clean, has asked his Commissioner of Investigation, Rose Gill Hearn, to look into the events that led to the senator's release after serving just three months of a twelve-month sentence which had been agreed to in a plea bargain.
 
Here are a number of issues that deserve particular attention:

• What procedures does the Release Commission follow in its deliberations, if any?

• Was anyone from the law enforcement community heard on the matter?

• Is there a written decision, or summary of the proceedings?

• Will all the communications received by the board be made public?

• What oral communications did the board or its chair receive from other individuals?

• Did any other of the 7000 prisoners on Rikers Island make similar appeals? If so, what level of consideration did they receive?

• Who are the four members of the commission? What are their professional qualifications? Do they receive a salary, or expenses? How often does the group meet? Where? Is the public informed of these meetings?

• Are the members appointed for fixed terms? If so, when do they expire? Can the members be removed?

We await answers to these questions, and we believe there are many other questions to explore.
 
It is possible that the DOI review may be self-limited to the search for criminal activity or improper influence.   We believe the entire operation of the commission should be scrutinized, and, if it is outside DOI's scope, others should pursue the matter.
 
Although the commission exists under a temporary state law, passed in 1989 and extended biennially, the question arises as to whether the mayor is required to appoint members to it, or provide it with a staff.  Just what are his options here?

The situation suggests to us a problem in New Jersey, where the state's poet laureate wrote an anti-Semitic poem, asserting that the Jews had prior notice of the 9/11 attack, and did not go to work that day. In response to this outrageous libel, the governor tried to remove the propagandist as poet laureate. Since there was no procedure from removing someone from such a basically honorific position, the Legislature then abolished the office.

Here are the editorials published so far:

• Post: "Bruno's Buddy Walks," editorial, 9/30, p38

• News: "Fire the guy who freed Guy," editorial, 9/30, p42

And the news articles of the last two days:

• Post: "Velella had Koch, Egan in his corner," by Tom Topousis, Kenneth Lovett and David Seifman, 10/1, p10

• News:"Guy boohooed to freedom," by David Saltonstall, 10/1, p13

• Times: "Release of Velella Pushes Panel Into the Spotlight," by Mike McIntire and Kevin Flynn, 9/30, pB3; "Mayor Seeks Investigation in Velella Case," by Jennifer Steinhauer and Mike McIntire, 10/1, ppB1, B6

• Newsday: "Velella freed under program he once opposed," by Dan Janison and Stephanie Saul, 9/30, pA20; "Friends in high places," by Mr. Janison and Ms. Saul, 10/1, pA8

• Sun: "Council Members Demand Answers on Velella Release," by Jill Gardiner, 9/30, p3