The Crime That Never Was

The Most Corrupt Prosecutorial/Judicial Proceeding in American History

“Charged with a non-existent conspiracy. But convicted of a non-existent kidnapping.” Everything is now coming together.

The section titled “The Crime That Never Was” on presents a critical view of the legal proceedings against Stuart Dizak. It asserts that he was charged with a non-existent conspiracy, but for all intent and purpose, convicted of a non-existent kidnapping, describing the situation as “The Most Corrupt Prosecutorial/Judicial Proceedings in American History.” The arrest, prosecution, and conviction, carefully planned to frame an innocent man. Here are some key points from the website.

    • Media Event: On May 27, 2009, The Monroe County District Attorney’s office held a media event which was quite unusual for a relatively minor charge.  However, highlighted was a statement that Dizak had previously kidnapped his ex-wife. This despite him never even being charged with such a crime.
    • In October of 2009, in his opening the prosecutor replaced the actual charge of conspiracy with kidnapping and continued that theme throughout the trial as well using fabricated evidence and knowingly suborning perjury. All this without correction by the judge or defense counsel.
    • As a result of the above Dizak was found guilty and sentenced to 8-16 years in state prison. Over 14 months were spent in solitary confinement  for charges that were later overturned. He was also subjected to a severe beating by two officers, in broad daylight in front of numerous inmates. Their excuse was, “He was trying to escape.”  That charge was later overturned by an appeals court.
    • Parole issues:  In January of 2017, after a noticeably short hearing of only a few minutes he was granted parole effective two months later. However, he was not released until January 2020, three years later. The last 14 months were spent in a facility for inmates with serious mental problems. However, the Mental Health Unit found he had no such problems.
  • Trial Errors:  The primary evidence, a wire CD of the alleged conversation between Dizak and the jailhouse informant, suddenly became inaudible.  However, for some inexplicable reason, Judge Patricia Marks allowed the CD as well as replacement   testimony by the informant. This was even after been exposed committing perjury.  Even more significant is that for obvious reasons, both are violations of both state and federal law.  In fact, there were more egregious errors than any other NY criminal case, a web of contradictions, incompetence, and misconduct.

Note: April 25, 2024, Harvey Weinstein conviction reversed. The Accused can only be held to account for the crime charged, not alleged uncharged prior crimes. The purpose being to eliminate the danger of a jury convicting  based upon the human propensity to believe in the guilt of the accused more readily.  

Disappearing Evidence, People V. Stuart Dizak

    • The audio from the wire CD of the alleged conversation with primary witness, jailhouse informant, Donovan F. Forbes, which allegedly detailed the murder for hire plans. Curiously, all copies of the CD had become inaudible prior to the trial.
    • The prosecutions two expert witnesses, the technicians who monitored the recorded conversation with Forbes, for some inexplicable reason, failed to appear at the trial to back up Forbes testimony.
    • Forbes was exposed lying after he testified, he was not promised anything in return for his testimony.  After Dizak’s conviction Forbes six open charges including three felonies, mysteriously “disappeared” from his record.
    • Yet after all of the above, Judge Patricia Marks allowed Forbes to provide “home-spun” replacement testimony.  This even though for obvious reasons all of the above is impermissible  by numerous state and federal laws.
  • Concealed jury note #1 requesting the definition of conspiracy was complied with by Judge Marks, but concealed from not only the defendant and counsel, but also from the trial transcript, and even the court’s own internal record…A grave offense mandating automatic reversal of conviction and possible impeachment.
  • Alleged letters to Ex-Wife:  She testified that she could identify Stuart’s handwriting as the result of the many, many letters he had sent her. The prosecutor failed to provide copies of those letters to back up her testimony.  He did not and could not, as I had never written her a single letter, before, during or after our marriage. 

Yet her testimony was accepted without objection by defense counsel.


Motive and Questions:

  • Why did Judge Marks even allow the inaudible CD into evidence and jailhouse informant Forbes replacement testimony even though both were of a dubious nature?
  • What motivated this appalling travesty of justice?
  • Was it a personal vendetta against Dizak by those responsible for his original incarceration?
  • A polygraph exam, within an accuracy of 1%, confirmed that Dizak had never asked anyone to harm his ex-wife.

The case of the People v. Stuart Dizak raises fundamental questions as to the integrity of the entire legal process and the role of key witnesses.

Last Updated: May 2024

Part 1:

On May 27, 2009, the day I was charged with conspiracy, the Monroe County District Attorney; Michael Green goes far beyond a press conference, holding a “Media Event”. The first time ever for a comparatively minor crime. However, the result becomes the top headline on TV News for the next 36 hours. For example, WHEC T.V. spends over 10 minutes on the topic, and another 10 minutes the following day as well. Going as far as interviewing my neighbors of many years earlier; more coverage than most murders.

The most likely reason for all this attention and coverage being the A.D.A tells the assembled media “I’ll have you know, Mr. Dizak previously kidnapped his ex-wife.” The statement was made with the full knowledge that I had never even been charged with such a crime. If my conviction is overturned, this highly prejudicial statement makes the D.A’s office fully liable for a lawsuit.

Part 2 – 

In his opening statement, at my October 2009 trial, prosecutor, Matthew Dunham, replaces the actual charge,  conspiracy 2nd to a far greater and violent crime, kidnapping, a crime so vile that it is punishable by life prison. Dunham then continues with that accusation throughout the trial. Assigned defense counsel, Joseph Damelio instead of correcting, Dunham also uses the term kidnapping. Even Judge Marks, for some inexplicable reason fails to correct him (People v Ashwell).

Only after my conviction, at a CPL 330.30 hearing, does she finally admit, “no such conviction or charge”.

Of course, this would leave one to wonder; what was I convicted of? Conspiracy or Kidnapping? This especially so when during deliberations, the jury sent out a note to Judge Marks, requesting the definition of conspiracy. (cpl 310.30).

Part 3 – State Prison

While in State Prison I was the subject of many unconscionable acts. In my 70’s I was the oldest inmate held in solitary confinement, in total over 14 months, for charges that were later overturned after the fact. I was severely beaten and hospitalized as a result of an attack by 2 officers that occurred in front of numerous inmates in broad daylight. Their excuse was “he was trying to escape”.

I was intentionally kept in the northernmost prisons of the state. Making it extremely difficult for my elderly family and friends to visit me. During my final 2 years I was held in Mid State C.F.  a facility for inmates with serious class 1 mental disabilities. At my exit interview, my counselor informed me that I was rated #6 – no mental health problems whatsoever! Adding that I should never have been in that facility!

Part 4 – Parole

Numerous despicable incidents occurred both before and after my January 2020 release from prison. In January 2017 my first parole board, after hearing of only a few minutes, instead of rendering their decision via mail as per the usual practice, informed me that I was granted parole; effective May 2017. Immediately afterwards a Lt came out and told me “Dizak I feel bad for you. If it was up to me, I would leave you out of here tonight.”. Further indicating that the board had convincing evidence that I never committed the crime I was convicted of.

Instead, the following month without the required advance notice, I was called before a 2nd board, reversing the decision of the prior board. They, as well as two more boards in the following 24 months, using the same “Boiler Plate” excuse: we still consider you a threat to society. I was finally released on my C.R date of January 16, 2020 at the age of 78.

At the 2nd hearing the same L.T. told me “Dizak, I feel sorry for you, but if I tried to help you I would be putting my job at risk”.

Part 5 – Bringing It All Together

I never brought the above issues together. This was not until late 2021. That was when I was informed by then Governor Cuomo’s office that former Monroe County district attorney Michael Green, after failing to obtain an expected appointment as a federal judge was appointed commissioner of the entire New York justice system including both the Department of Corrections and parole.

This explains why all 3 former D.A. Green who was responsible for my prosecution, later, the malicious treatment while I was in prison by parole, both while I was in prison and after my release. One of the first acts by Governor Hochul after her inauguration was to terminate commissioner Green’s employment.

And Deputy Parole Commissioner Anna Enright, retired shortly thereafter.

And to quote noted author/lawyer, John Grisham:

1. The arrest, prosecution, and conviction, were all carefully planned to frame an innocent man. What followed was a thorough framing involving several conspirators, most of them members of the Court.

2. A dirty business, witnesses who have lied, a prosecutor who fabricated evidence and suborned perjury.

3. The stakes are too high. The mistakes too egregious for any judge to admit they were wrong.

For detailed information please continue reading the additional links at the top of the page. 

Of great current significance, none of the individuals named herein has ever taken any legal actions opposing any of the content.

(Also see