Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Home RSS

Candidate omits facts about experience

August 28, 2012
The Leader Herald

This letter is in response to Traci DiMezza's letter.

No political candidate has been privy to the contents of this letter prior to its submission to The Leader-Herald. I am writing my own views based on my own research.

The city deserves something much more than a positive campaign; it deserves the truth - even when that truth is negative. The stakes are too high to do otherwise.

I do not think DiMezza provided the "complete facts" in her letter. I'm writing here because DiMezza omitted "important facts that people deserve to know." In her campaign materials, she claims experience at a firm in Westchester County but never gives the name. Perhaps that is because the name of the firm was Friedman & Kwiatkowski - Kwiatkowski being her maiden name. In June 1996, DiMezza entered into a partnership with Steven Friedman, who was not licensed to practice in New York, disbarred in Connecticut and had pending criminal charges. I think it is misleading to refer to yourself as an employee when you entered into a partnership.

The truth - negative or positive - is the truth. DiMezza cannot simply wash it away by blaming another campaign for "negative campaigning." That's not intellectually honest.

DiMezza wrote, "Candidates go negative when they have nothing of value to say." I think candidates criticize those who "go negative" when they have the most to lose in a negative campaign. I think the truth is valuable. DiMezza promises a "positive" and "fair" campaign in the same letter that she "goes negative" against Judge John Clo. That's hardly "positive" or "fair."

Furthermore, DiMezza claims extensive appeal work in her campaign materials, but only has seven appeals reported in the appellate division reporter - none of which she prevailed at in any significant way. In People vs. Maldonado and People vs. Singleton, DiMezza sought to be relieved as counsel, which the court granted; but in Maldonado, the court found that she missed an appealable issue. In the matter of Edward QQ, DiMezza's appeal was dismissed because of a procedural error on her part. The rest of the seven appeals simply resulted in the lower court's judgment being affirmed. Your appellate work is not exactly extensive.

There is a consistent thread throughout DiMezza's statements and campaign materials: a convenient omission of certain facts that would bring to light your past, actual experience and most importantly, the truth.





I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web