New York begins to overturn detective’s many frame jobs
The case is the first of what is expected to be a series of wrongful-conviction claims by men who were sent to prison based on the work of former New York City police detective Louis Scarcella, who has been accused of inventing confessions, coercing witnesses and recycling informers.
The New York Times
NEW YORK —
A man who was framed by a rogue detective and served 23 years in prison for a murder he did not commit will receive $6.4 million from New York City in a settlement that came before a civil-rights lawsuit was even filed, lawyers involved in the case said Thursday.
A $150 million claim filed last year by the man, David Ranta, was settled by the city comptroller’s office without involving the city’s legal department, which lawyers involved in the negotiations described as a “groundbreaking” decision that acknowledged the overwhelming evidence the city faced.
The comptroller’s quick acceptance of liability is also significant because the case is the first of what is expected to be a series of wrongful-conviction claims by men who were sent to prison based on the flawed investigative work of the detective, Louis Scarcella, who has been accused of inventing confessions, coercing witnesses and recycling informers.
“While no amount of money could ever compensate Ranta for the 23 years that were taken from him, this settlement allows him the stability to continue to put his life back together,” Ranta’s lawyer, Pierre Sussman, said. “We are now focusing our efforts on pursuing an unjust-conviction claim with the state of New York.”
Sussman added that Ranta, who had a heart attack the day after he was released in March, “would like everyone to know he is happy to have a chance at recovering his health, taking care of his heart and being there for his family and children.”
Ranta, who declined to talk Thursday, was convicted of the 1990 killing in Brooklyn of a Hasidic rabbi, Chaskel Werzberger, a Holocaust survivor who had stepped into his car at dawn just as a jewelry robbery was taking place across the street. He was shot in the head and his station wagon was used as a getaway car while the jeweler escaped unharmed.
The rabbi’s death shook the Orthodox Jewish community in the Williamsburg section, which was a major voting bloc for the newly elected district attorney at the time, Charles Hynes.
Hynes’ office defended the conviction for decades, fighting off appeals and rejecting evidence that pointed to another killer. But when one witness came forward decades later to say that a detective had told him to pick the man with “the big nose” out of a lineup — Ranta was the only person who fit that description — the district attorney’s Conviction Integrity Unit conducted a yearlong investigation and discovered more serious problems.
When investigators approached two other witnesses in the case, they admitted that they had lied.
The two career criminals who implicated Ranta in the crime used their cooperation in the case as a means to obtain get-out-of-jail excursions provided by Scarcella, who before retiring had been well-regarded for his ability to solve homicides at a time Brooklyn was awash in violence. He has repeatedly denied wrongdoing.
Ranta had always accused the detective of manufacturing his confession. Scarcella said Ranta confessed while handcuffed to a bench at Central Booking. Although the allegation about the confession was never proved, the mounting questions about Scarcella’s methods made it increasingly suspect.
Prosecutors also discovered that Scarcella had followed up on an anonymous telephone call that attributed the killing to a robber named Joseph Astin. Scarcella questioned Astin’s wife and tried to track down a parole officer to collect recent photographs of him. But he dropped that lead when Astin died in a car accident, and the officer never submitted paperwork documenting the time spent investigating him.
Years later, Astin’s widow came forward to say her husband was the real killer, but legal efforts to free Ranta based on that information failed.
Two months after Ranta was released, he filed a notice that he would sue the city. Negotiations took place for several months under Comptroller John Liu. But it was Liu’s successor, Scott Stringer, swayed by the fact that the Brooklyn district attorney’s office had joined in the motion to free Ranta from prison, who ultimately agreed to settle the case.
Ranta is expected to make a separate wrongful-conviction claim against the state. Attorney General Eric Schneiderman proposed legislation Wednesday that would make it easier for people like Ranta to make such claims.
The news of the settlement came as Kenneth Thompson, the Brooklyn district attorney, convened a new three-member panel to review dozens of Scarcella’s cases. The panel is to replace the one appointed by Hynes that was widely criticized for including several people close to him, including campaign donors and the godfather of his children.
Dogged by the fact that the majority of the cases that involved questionable behavior by Scarcella took place under his watch, Hynes was voted out of office in November in a landslide victory for Thompson.
After Ranta’s release, an investigation by The New York Times found that Scarcella had used the same witness in several murder cases and that at least six confessions had included similar phraseology: “You got it right. I was there.” Some confessions did not match the evidence in the case.
One inmate, Sundhe Moses, who had been investigated by the detective, hired lawyers who tracked down a star witness, who said detectives had coached him to lie. The Parole Board released Moses in December after he served 16 years for the murder of a 4-year-old girl.