Justice for John O’Hara

Happy 100th birthday to Brooklyn Federal Judge Leo Glasser, who hits the century mark today. The former dean of Brooklyn Law School, Glasser has been on the federal bench since 1981 and has on his docket an important and unique case, about John O’Hara. Everyone deserves their day in court and O’Hara has had a lot of days in court. In fact, he’s had years in court, first as a criminal defendant in an unjust prosecution perpetrated by disgraced, defeated and deceased Brooklyn District Attorney Joe Hynes that included three trials (the only time Hynes did a three-peat against anyone).

O’Hara’s alleged “offense” was voting from one address (47th St.) instead of another (61st St.), making him the first New Yorker criminally tried for illegally voting since Susan B. Anthony in 1873.

But unlike suffragette Anthony, who had a twoday trial (after which she correctly refused to pay the $100 unjust fine) Democratic Party activist O’Hara has suffered for decades from Hynes’ vendetta, from his 1996 arrest to his 2017 full exoneration by current Brooklyn DA Eric Gonzalez.

And for the last seven years, O’Hara has been a plaintiff in Glasser’s courtroom suing the city and state for Hynes’ malicious and selective prosecution and for conspiring to violate O’Hara’s constitutional rights and to deprive him of his civil liberties.

It was Jan. 12, 2017, when on a motion from Gonzalez, the bogus conviction was vacated and O’Hara was declared by state court to be not guilty and the case was sealed. In July of that year, O’Hara brought this present civil lawsuit.

Seven years is a very long time since O’Hara was completely cleared and he sought recompense for being arrested, tried (three times), found guilty of seven felonies, being a convicted felon for 20 years, losing his law license for 12 years, losing his right to vote for 10 years, being on probation for five years, performing 1,500 hours of community service, paying $20,000 in fines and having to absorb $450,000 in legal expenses.

Like anyone else — as we said at the outset — O’Hara is due his day in court, but he is not getting justice as the case drags on. This should not become the Brooklyn version of Jarndyce vs. Jarndyce.

The fault lies not with Glasser, who knows the case intimately and already issued favorable rulings for O’Hara. Still, movement has been slow and there haven’t been any depositions. While DA Gonzalez is not a party to the case, his office was the scene of Hynes’ crimes and the DA’s office has vital information that is needed for O’Hara to make his claim.

O’Hara and his lawyers have filed a motion to compel the DA’s office to produce documents that O’Hara should have gotten for his criminal defense in 1997.

To his credit, it was Gonzalez who had the office’s Conviction Review Unit look at the O’Hara matter. That CRU report, from November 2016, led directly to O’Hara’s exoneration. O’Hara has a copy of that critical report, but it is filled with redactions. While the DA contends some of the info must remain hidden, the best outcome would be to give the full unredacted report to Glasser or his magistrate judge. Rather than the DA making this call, let the court decide.

Don’t waste any more time. At 100, Glasser isn’t getting any younger.