Thread: Trustee says he did not call Westchester day laborers locust

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ ... -apnewyork

Trustee says he did not call Westchester day laborers `locusts'

By JIM FITZGERALD
Associated Press Writer

September 14, 2006, 6:37 PM EDT

WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. -- A village trustee who used the term "locusts" in connection with day laborers testified Thursday that "It was an analogy, not a characterization."

Trustee Joseph Angilletta took the stand as a defense witness in a lawsuit filed by six Hispanic immigrant day laborers seeking an injunction against what they call harassment, selective law enforcement and discrimination that prevents them from finding work on the streets of Mamaroneck.

Angilletta testified that he voted at a January meeting to close down a laborers' pickup site because other communities had failed to establish such sites and day laborers from beyond Mamaroneck, in Westchester County, were straining the village's resources.

On cross-examination, he was asked about a statement he reportedly made at the meeting, referring to the workers from out of town.

"These are not residents of the village," the newspaper quote said. "They are locusts. They are takers. They come in here and take, and they won't ever give back to the community."

Angilletta testified that he actually said, "They are like locusts," and that he meant "day laborers from New Rochelle swarmed Mamaroneck like locusts."

"I never called anyone locusts," he said.

He noted that he had apologized for the remark and said it was not aimed at any particular ethnic group.

Mayor Philip Trifiletti testified that the increased police presence that the workers complain about "is important for the community" and should be continued.

He said the drop in the number of laborers that followed the closing of the site "could have been an end-product" of the intensified enforcement of village laws but the laborers' ethnicity had nothing to do with it.

"Our intention was to bring control to an out-of-control situation," he said, claiming the increase in laborers had produced an increase of quality-of-life complaints from residents.

Some of those residents also testified Thursday, including the owner of a day care center who said the extra police scrutiny had made Columbus Park safer for the children and for the "pretty girls" she employed.

Earlier, village police Officer Matthew DiRuzza, who has been named by several plaintiffs as an especially intimidating figure who forces them to abandon the sidewalks where they solicit work, testified that he did not recall any such encounters.

However, on cross-examination the plaintiffs' lawyers played a short video that appeared to show DiRuzza standing close to a few laborers, his arms crossed in front of him, staring at them from behind sunglasses _ just as some of the plaintiffs alleged.

DiRuzza said the video showed he was "observing for quality-of-life issues in the area."

He also testified that because he wears sunglasses on patrol, he did not understand how anyone could tell if he was looking at him or her. Judge Colleen McMahon had DiRuzza put his sunglasses on and look at her.

Two plaintiffs have alleged that DiRuzza intimidates them into moving by placing his hand on his gun; DiRuzza testified, "I do sometimes rest my hand in the area of my weapon." He said he had never asked anyone to move because of his or her race.

The plaintiffs' names and immigration status are not being made public because they say they fear retaliation.

They are like locusts

I personally agree with this analogy, but then it is just my opinion.

However, on cross-examination the plaintiffs' lawyers played a short video that appeared to show DiRuzza standing close to a few laborers, his arms crossed in front of him, staring at them from behind sunglasses _ just as some of the plaintiffs alleged.

Is there some law that says this is illegal....you can't stand a certain way. This is gotten totally ludicrous. What a bunch of whiners...They are worse than locusts. Again, so what if he called them locusts. What a insane lawsuit over poor illegal street laborers getting offended. These kind of actions just strengthens people's resolve to do something about this. We are fed-up!!

http://www.thejournalnews.com/apps/pbcs ... 50355/1018


[b]Mamaroneck officials deny they targeted Hispanic day laborers[b/]
By CANDICE FERRETTE
THE JOURNAL NEWS
Speak out

(Original publication: September 15, 2006)



The Mamaroneck village trustee who in January compared day laborers to "locusts" testified in federal court yesterday that the remark was not a slap at Hispanics.

Trustee Joseph Angilletta made the locusts remark in an interview with The Journal News and days later publicly apologized. Yesterday, he further clarified his comment for the court.

"It was an analogy, not a characterization," said Angilletta. "What I meant by that is they take and won't give back. The day laborers in our community were for the most part from our community. These were people from outside our community who were coming in larger numbers."

The village's attorney, Kevin Plunkett of Thatcher, Profitt and Wood, asked if the statement had been directed at any particular ethnic group, and Angilletta said, "No."

Angilletta was among the eight witnesses called by the defense in a case accusing the village of harassing Hispanic day laborers because of their ethnicity. The federal trial before U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon was expected to conclude yesterday but instead will continue this afternoon because of a schedule change earlier in the week.

The lawsuit focuses on the village's closing of a longtime day laborer hiring site at Columbus Park in February and police monitoring of groups of laborers, some of them in this country illegally, who gather in hope that contractors will hire them for the day.

The Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, a national advocacy organization that filed the suit, says the village's actions — increasing police presence in the area where laborers stand and making comments that might single them out as a group — constitute harassment of the laborers, violating the 14th Amendment.

Mayor Phil Trifiletti, Trustee Thomas Murphy, two village police officers and two local business owners also testified yesterday.

During a lengthy cross-examination, Alan Levine, a lawyer for the laborers, tried several times to find out whether the mayor and the police chief made a coordinated effort to diminish the number of day laborers who gathered in the area.

Each time, Trifiletti responded by telling the court they wanted to bring "an out-of-control situation back under control."

The plaintiffs' lawyers then introduced a video of a meeting held after the closing of the site, in which Trifiletti told officials in neighboring communities that he had met with the police chief and "put a plan in place where we started enforcing everyday laws that get enforced in our village, everywhere in our village, not just at the park, and we put five police officers in and around the park enforcing the laws of our village."

Earlier this week, the plaintiffs in the case, identified only as John Doe Nos. 1 through 4 and 6 through 8, testified that they had been victims of selective enforcement by the police, resulting in intimidation and harassment. The laborers' names and whether they are in the country legally have been withheld from the court for fear of retaliation by the police.

McMahon has said their names and immigration status are irrelevant to the case because the laborers are seeking protection under the 14th Amendment. The U.S. Constitution offers equal protection to individuals regardless of their status, as long as they are in this country.

However, she would not permit anonymous testimonies in the original lawsuit, which alleged that the village also violated the laborers' freedoms of speech and assembly.