Special Prosecutor Eric Nelson Lies to NYS Supreme Court Justice Marina C. Mundy's Face; Commits New Perjury in Court-Filed Affidavit
Will Justice Mundy Let Eric Nelson Play Her For a Fool?
Luthmann’s recently filed court documents detailed that Eric Nelson is a corrupt Staten Island Special Prosecutor.
Luthmann laid out his case in a 264-page motion in New York State Supreme Court, calling on Justice Marina C. Mundy, who sentenced him in the Facebook case, to throw out the case against him.
Nelson engaged and consulted Perry Reich, a disbarred attorney and convicted felon who did jail time, as Nelson’s “legal advisor.”
In his Affirmation (an Affidavit filed by an attorney sworn to “under the penalties of perjury”), Eric Nelson confirmed he did indeed engage Perry Reich and that he wrote the Nelson-Reich email of August 12, 2018:
Nelson and Reich committed several felonies, including the unauthorized practice of law. Nelson’s client as Special Prosecutor was and is the People of the State of New York.
LUTHMANN’S REPLY
“This Court would not only be remiss if it did not address this issue [of Eric Nelson’s perjury] swiftly and immediately, but the undersigned believes the Court’s reputation would be immediately, irreparably, and forever harmed.” - Reply of Richard Luthmann
In his Reply, Luthmann eviscerates Eric Nelson’s filed papers:
“Throughout his entire Affirmation, Nelson ‘whistles past the graveyard’ on his knowing introduction of false testimony by Ronald Castorina, Jr., a New York State Supreme Court Justice. By failing to raise or answer on the issue, Nelson has waived and conceded the serious perjury and subornation of perjury infecting the entire grand jury process. These were the People’s witnesses and the People’s grand jury presentation, mired in dishonesty, falsity, fraud, and perjury.”
Luthmann compares Special Prosecutor Eric Nelson to Marine Colonel Nathan R. Jessup, the Jack Nicholson character in the Rob Reiner and Aaron Sorkin film, A Few Good Men.
Luthmann’s filed papers say:
3. Public perceptions of the criminal justice system are driven, in large part, by how lawyers and judges are depicted in the mass media. And these perceptions can be both positive and negative. The perception that a prosecutor may be dirty or dealing foul blows undermines the entire process, the same way a smart, honest, and diligent prosecutor elevates the administration of justice.
4. One indelible example of the popular perception of the justice system is presented in Rob Reiner and Aaron Sorkin’s 1993 classic A Few Good Men. The climax of the movie is the showdown between the Tom Cruise character, a JAG, and Jack Nicholson’s portrayal of a fictional marine, Colonel Nathan R. Jessup, a man who had abused his position of trust and violated the rights of a man placed in his charge, resulting in his death. Through a vigorous cross-examination, the Tom Cruise character gets the Marine Colonel to admit his serious criminal culpability in open court. At that moment, the Tom Cruise character steps back from the witness box, approaches the bench, and tells the judge, “Your Honor, the witness has rights,” throwing the Nicholson character from confrontation to confusion.
5. In the same way, I say to you, Justice Mundy, the Special Prosecutor, Mr. Nelson, has rights. In his sworn papers in opposition to this motion, Mr. Nelson admitted to very serious criminal activity. Irrespective of how this motion or any further proceedings play out, it is clear Mr. Nelson lied to the Court and perjured himself. Mr. Nelson has abused the confidence of the People of the State of New York and this Court. (Matter of Soares v Herrick, 20 NY3d 139, 146 [2012]).
6. This Court would not only be remiss if it did not address this issue swiftly and immediately, but the undersigned believes the Court’s reputation would be immediately, irreparably, and forever harmed. Luthmann asks the Court to consider addressing the issues raised by Mr. Nelson’s conduct at the outset because there is actual prejudice that warrants this Court to act. Mr. Nelson should be disqualified and removed as Special Prosecutor, censured and reprimanded by the Court, and referred to the proper disciplinary and/or prosecutorial authorities.
7. It may be in Mr. Nelson’s best interests if the Court cuts him off as quickly as possible; the man is very confused. The more Mr. Nelson speaks, the more he appears to compound the legal and ethical predicament, not only for himself but for the system of justice to which he took an oath of attorney to protect and defend. He has actually and irreparably undermined any ability he may have to continue as a special prosecutor in this matter and has lost the confidence of the People of the State of New York, based not only upon the appearance of impropriety, but also based upon actual dishonesty, unethical activity, and apparent criminality.
8. Mr. Nelson’s actions have already been reported to the Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts. The Committee is awaiting Your Honor’s resolution of the pending motion prior to acting. See the attached EXHIBIT “A.” All eyes are on the Court.
The filed EXHIBIT “A” is a letter from the Grievance Committee stating that they will address Eric Nelson’s ethical issues after Justice Marina C. Mundy has had a chance to do so:
Luthmann pinpointed Nelson’s perjury:
11. Mr. Nelson has admitted legal consultations with his (and consequently the People’s) “Legal Advisor” - Disbarred Felon Perry Reich. (Matter of Reich, 25 AD3d 1063 [3d Dept 2006]). Nelson Aff, at ¶ 16. Mr. Nelson swore to the Court:
Regarding his claim that the indictment should be dismissed or the Special District Attorney removed, defendant references an e-mail conversation with Mr. Reich, which merely sought interpretation of decisions posed in a hypothetical setting. This had no effect on the Grand Jury, was not presented to the Grand Jury during the presentation. Defendant's claim does not rise to an unauthorized practice of law.
12. Mr. Nelson sought out disbarred lawyer Perry Reich to “guide” him on avoiding communicating to the Grand Jury that the First Amendment protected Luthmann’s activities.
Nelson concedes that if his prosecutorial activity was criminal, then Luthmann’s Indictment should be dismissed.
Nelson admits the email between him and Reich is genuine and claims he “merely sought interpretation of decisions posed in a hypothetical setting.”
Nelson further claims the email conversation with Reich “had no effect on the Grand Jury, was not presented to the Grand Jury...[and] does not rise to an unauthorized practice of law.”
NELSON’S LIES EXPOSED
Eric Nelson lies to Justice Mundy “unashamedly and unabashedly.”
Nelson swears his discussions with Reich are “hypothetical.” The “smoking gun” Nelson-Reich email proves Nelson is a liar. Nelson clearly referenced Luthmann’s case and discussed it with Reich, the disbarred attorney.
As Luthmann so artfully puts it:
Nelson’s “hypothetical case” argument is a line of bullshit. Nelson tells Reich in the email, “I am also going to include a misdemeanor false reporting an incident and stalking on a candidate.” Anyone who can read the “smoking gun” email can see that.
Nelson’s email to Reich was about Luthmann’s case. If there is any question, ask Mr. Nelson to bring to the Court’s attention another case in the history of the State of New York (or anywhere else for that matter) with any semblance of the facts he and his “legal advisor” Mr. Reich discussed.
Eric Nelson lied to Your Honor in his papers.
The Appellate Division ordered Perry Reich disbarred, commanding him to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form, or to give any legal opinion or advice. Eric Nelson knew all about the Appellate Division Order when he made Perry Reich his legal advisor.
Only one case in the State of New York’s history has these facts: false reporting, stalking a political candidate, First Amendment/Free Speech questions, etc.
In April 2020, Frank Donnelly of the Staten Island Advance wrote that Luthmann’s case was the “first of its kind”:
In November 2018, Luthmann was arraigned on a 17-count indictment accusing him of multiple felony charges of falsifying business records and identity theft. The charges stemmed from his alleged activities on Facebook.
It was believed the be the first case of its kind in New York.
He was also charged with criminal impersonation, election law violations, stalking and falsely reporting an incident to the NYPD.
Eric Nelson also clearly violated the Order of the Appellate Division and Rule 22 NYCRR 806.9 governing the conduct of disbarred attorneys when Nelson knowingly solicited the advice and legal counsel of Reich:
29. Nelson’s communications with his legal advisor, Perry Reich, were prohibited legal opinion. Why? Because the New York State Supreme Court, Second Department ORDERED it so in Perry Reich’s disbarment:
ORDERED that respondent is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; respondent is forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority, or to give to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice with relation thereto. . (Matter of Reich, 25 AD3d 1063 [3d Dept 2006])
Special Prosecutor Eric Nelson’s entire attitude is utter disrespect for the Orders of the Appellate Division and the intelligence of this Court. Luthmann takes Nelson to task:
39. In Nelson’s recently-filed Affirmation, he has his own opinions about the Appellate Division’s language “give to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice with relation thereto.” In fact, Nelson totally disregarded the Appellate Division’s command:
The practice of law it embraces the preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and special proceedings and the management of such actions and proceedings on behalf of clients before judges and courts, and in addition conveyancing, the preparation of legal instruments of all kinds, and in general all advice to clients and all action taken for them in matters connected with the law...An e-mail communication from an attorney asking a former attorney regarding a question about the meaning of a case cannot be deemed the practice of law. Nelson Aff. at ¶ 16.
40. Nelson’s case wasn’t in Moot Court at community college, and Reich and Nelson both knew it. Nelson needed advice on how to “Get Luthmann.” His continued usefulness to his masters (and thus his continued fees), depended upon it. Nelson, Castorina, and their colluders could not let Luthmann slip away on a technicality like the US Constitution. The legal and political fallout would be too great.
41. Perry Reich is not a “former attorney.” He didn’t retire or become an investment banker. Perry Reich is a disbarred attorney whose conduct is regulated by Appellate Division Rules.
42. Nelson is not a mere attorney in this instance. Nelson is a Special Prosecutor, the People’s representative.
Luthmann asks the Court, in the strongest of terms, to hold Nelson accountable:
44. Given Mr. Nelson’s disregard for the Appellate Division’s Order and rulings, on top of his outright lies in Your Honor’s courtroom, the Court has but one choice: to look askance at Nelson’s collusion with Reich, his shady co-conspirator and “legal advisor,” who combined to circumvent Luthmann’s constitutional rights in an indictment fundamentally flawed by criminality.
Luthmann believes Nelson should be punished. An attorney, let alone a prosecutor, cannot invite, solicit, and engage in criminal activity without severe consequences.
Unless the Court acts, it conveys that Eric Nelson’s and Perry Reich’s conduct is acceptable. This means that disbarment has no consequence concerning the ability to practice law in the State of New York.
If the Court fails to act, even Luthmann toys with the idea of doing legal work:
43. If the Supreme Court ignores Mr. Nelson and Mr. Reich’s activity, then Luthmann will understand it to mean that 22 NYCRR 806.9 no longer applies, either to him or to any other disbarred attorney. Luthmann will seek to perform legal work because there evidently is no proscription in so doing. And if anyone says anything, I will point to Mr. Reich’s activity, blessed by a Special Prosecutor, to show that it is a reasonable interpretation to believe the Appellate Division’s Rules concerning Disbarred attorneys no longer apply, and Luthmann is free to do just about anything he wants without impunity.
If the Court does nothing, how long before Luthmann rents office space in St. George and hangs out a shingle? Doing so would be A-Okay.
LUTHMANN’S INDICTMENT WAS TAINTED BY FRUITS FROM THE POISONOUS TREE OF LIES, PERJURY, THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW, AND DERELICTION OF PROSECUTORIAL DUTY
Why did Nelson need to ask Perry Reich what to do? Because Nelson didn’t know what to do himself. He was an incompetent Special Prosecutor. And Luthmann makes this point:
45. The Appellate Division is clear that Nelson’s performance before the grand jury was deficient:
A New York district attorney is required to instruct the grand jury on the law with respect to matters before it, N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 190.25(6). If the district attorney fails to instruct the grand jury on a defense that would eliminate a needless or unfounded prosecution, the proceeding is defective, mandating dismissal of the indictment, N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 210.35(5). (People v Samuels, 12 AD3d 695, 696 [2d Dept 2004])
46. Nelson was obligated to be a “legal advisor” to the grand jury and instruct them on the law. Nelson responded, “I’m not going to give a course on Freedom of Speech.”
47. Eric Nelson brought this case to Your Honor’s court. Nelson represented himself and this case as genuine and forthright, as a Special Prosecutor on behalf of the People of New York. In actuality, Nelson sold a web of deceit spun with perjury, collusion, lies, and other criminal behavior - and his dishonesty before this Court continues, unashamedly and unabashed.
48. Mr. Nelson has miserably failed in his role as special prosecutor and cannot, by any stretch, have the continued confidence of the Supreme Court or the People of the State of New York. Mr. Nelson should be given his walking papers, in part for his own good. Mr. Nelson should be disqualified and removed from this case.
Luthmann asks Justice Mundy to give Eric Nelson his “walking papers” and disqualify him as Special Prosecutor because his performance has been deficient and, given his panoply lies, dishonesty, violations, and crimes, Nelson cannot hold the confidence of the People of the State of New York.
As one might expect on a “first of its kind case,” there were questions about Luthmann and the First Amendment posed by grand jurors. Nelson’s goal wasn’t to serve as an advisor to the grand jury. Nelson’s job was to “Get Luthmann.” Nelson’s livelihood depended on it. Nelson could not have something as pesky as the US Constitution get in his way:
GRAND JUROR: Can you state what freedom of speech, what is -- the second amendment?
GRAND JURY FOREPERSON: First Amendment.
MR. NELSON: First Amendment
GRAND JUROR: Can you tell us what the whole thing --
MR. NELSON: I'm not going to give a course on freedom of speech.
GRAND JUROR: I can look it up though?
MR. NELSON: You could look it up in terms of what freedom of speech means, but not in the context of this case.
GRAND JUROR: No, just --
MR. NELSON: You have a right to go on the Internet and look at anything as long as it doesn't pertain to this particular case.
GRAND JUROR: Okay.
LUTHMANN DEMANDS JUSTICE MUNDY ADDRESS THE CRUCIAL ISSUES RAISED
Luthmann put these issues before the Court last May, and Justice Mundy “punted” at that time. Now, Luthmann demands the Court act:
The instant issues with Mr. Nelson are well beyond sloppiness. The Court must act or give damn good reasons why the Court fails to exercise judgment and assumes the posture of an ostrich.
Luthmann says the People of the State of New York deserve competence and honesty and that Eric Nelson should be removed as Special Prosecutor immediately.
Luthmann asks the Court that the remaining issues - hybrid or pro se representation, vacating the judgment of conviction, and dismissal and vacatur of the indictment- are taken up by a new prosecutor.
WHAT WILL JUSTICE MUNDY DO?
The Court will hear Luthmann’s motion on February 28. We called the Supreme Court Criminal Term Clerk’s Office, who said the 28th was a “submission date,” and there was no oral argument. It is unclear whether Justice Mundy will call the parties into court to address Luthmann’s request to represent himself (requiring an express waiver under Faretta v. California) and hear Special Prosecutor Eric Nelson’s side of apparent new perjury made in his Affirmation recently filed with the Court.
Luthmann also called on Justice Mundy to refer attorney Nelson to the Attorney Grievance Committee. Luthmann alleges Nelson encouraged Castorina to commit perjury in the 2018 grand jury proceeding, resulting in Luthmann’s indictment.
Luthmann also asked Justice Mundy to refer Castorina and Nelson’s potential perjury to New York State Attorney General Letitia James for criminal charges.
What will Justice Mundy do? All eyes are on the Court.
NOVEMBER IS COMING
November is Coming. Who will survive? Eric Nelson and Perry Reich look like toast.
Keep Smiling.
WHAT’S NEXT?
Is there more? Of course, there is more.
Remember, Mr. Luthmann is now a LAW ABIDING CITIZEN. He is also a writer, commentator, satirist, investigative journalist, and a proud member of the National Writers Union.
There will be many more Enemies to receive their comeuppance. What new Enemies will show their faces and then be shown the Luthmann Inquisition followed by the legal and political Death Chamber? Which members of the Swamp should be worried? What other persons may become collateral damage in this story? And who exactly is on “THE LIST” Luthmann spent the past four years making?
Stay tuned—much more to come.
We welcome all comments.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. We can shine a light on Pirates and Scallyags, and watch the cockroaches scurry in every direction. Also, drop me a line if you are a victim of The Swamp of corrupt politicians, lawyers, judges, or corrupt courts. We are especially looking for stories about the Staten Island Swamp. Corrupt lawyers, judges, and government officials are all within bounds. Let us know.
"Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.” (Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.) ~ Marcus Tullius Cicero
Tips or Help: richard.luthmann@protonmail.com or call 239-287-6352.
The news media is a critical check on the powerful, serving as a watchdog to hold elected officials and other public figures accountable for their actions. The media was first called the fourth estate in 1821 by Edmund Burke, who wanted to point out the power of the press. The press plays a crucial role in providing citizens with access to information about what is happening in government, as well as shining a light on corruption, abuse of power, and other forms of wrongdoing.