The Crime That Never Was

The section titled “The Crime That Never Was” on justicefordizak.com 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.

• 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 (after the fact.) 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 was also overturned by the 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. 
• 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 even after he had already been exposed committing perjury. Even more significant is that for obvious reasons, both are violations of state and federal law. And once again, impermissible under numerous state and federal laws.

Disappearing Evidence, People V. Stuart Dizak

• For some “inexplicable” reason the audio from the alleged conversation between Dizak and jailhouse informant, Donovan A. Forbes, somehow “disappeared” before the trial.
• The two technicians who monitored said recording, for some “Inexplicable” reason, failed to appear at trial in order to back up Forbes replacement testimony for the missing audio. 
• 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, for some “inexplicable” reason, Judge Patricia Marks allowed Forbes “home-spun” replacement testimony. 
• Concealed jury note #1 requesting the trial exhibits 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.
• And as it was obviously intentional, an impeachable offense. However, Judge Marks would sometime later, without any fanfare, announce her retirement, effective at the end of the month. (And four years before the end of her term.)
• Judge Leslie Stein, of the New York Court of Appeals, also for some “inexplicable” reason, denied Dizak’s appeal without explanation and ignoring not only her own court’s prior rulings, but NY statute CPL 310.30 as well.
• 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.  Stuart did not and could not, as he 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.
• What motivated this appalling travesty of justice? Was it perhaps a personal vendetta by those individuals responsible for his prior incarceration?
• Was it a personal vendetta against Dizak by those responsible for his original incarceration?
• A polygraph exam with an accuracy of 99%, confirmed that Stuart 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.  

For further details read the balance of the website, justicefordizak.com.

Part 2 – 

Matthew Dunham who replaced the scheduled prosecutor only a week prior to the trial, opened with, “Dizak kidnapped his ex-wife at gunpoint and held a knife to her throat. He then repeated that kidnapping accusation 8 more times throughout the trial and in his closing argument. Defense counsel, Joseph Damelio, and the trial judge, Patricia Marks, inexplicably failed to correct him. The jury was so confused during deliberations that they sent a note to her requesting the definition of conspiracy, yet for some inexplicable reason, she failed to respond to the note. Of course, leaving one to wonder; what was Dizak convicted of Conspiracy or Kidnapping?

Part 3 – State Prison

While in State Prison Dizak was the subject of many unconscionable acts. Dizak was the oldest inmate held in solitary confinement, in total over 14 months, for charges that were later overturned after the fact. Dizak 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”. 

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

Part 4 – Parole

Numerous despicable incidents occurred both before and after his January 2020 release from prison. In January 2017 his first parole board, after hearing of only a few minutes, instead of rendering their decision via mail as per the usual practice, informed him that he 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 Dizak never committed the crime he was convicted of.

Instead, the following month without the required advance notice, Dizak 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. He was finally released on his C.R date of January 16, 2020.

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

Dizak never brought the above issues together. This was not until late 2021. That was when Dizak 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 former D.A. Green who was responsible for Dizak’s prosecution, later, the malicious treatment while he was in prison by parole, both while he was in prison and after his 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 jailhouse informant who testified the defendant approached him, “a complete stranger” the same day he had arrived at the jail.

4. 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 nycorruptparole.com.)