A New Jersey Appellate Court has announced Rabbi Osher Eisemann will receive a new trial, after it declared the prosecution held back evidence.
The appeals court affirmed both of the reasons that a new trial was warranted, the discovery of new evidence as well as the prosecution’s Brady Act violation for not disclosing the evidence at trial.
Furthermore, the appeals court ruled that the judge was right for ordering a new trial even without first holding an evidentiary hearing, despite the prosecutors saying otherwise.
“Having considered the parties’ arguments and applicable law, we affirm because the motion judge did not abuse his discretion in granting defendant a new trial,” the 20-page appellate decision reads.
The decision follows the brief oral arguments which were heard last month.
The Appellate Division was asked to decide whether to uphold the decision of Judge Paone, and affirm that Rabbi Eisemann is entitled to a new trial, or they can Ch”v overturn the decision and send the case directly to sentencing.
Prosecutors have previously asked for a 12-year prison term.
In July of 2022, Judge Joseph Paone dismissed Rabbi Eisemann’s convictions and ordered a new trial, saying that new evidence was sufficient to impact the jury and that the prosecutors had violated the Brady Act by withholding that evidence.
Following the decision, the prosecutors were publicly criticized by politicians for the withholding of evidence, with some calling for accountability for corrupt activity.
Weeks later, Deputy Attorney General John Nicodemo, who served as the chief prosecutor during the Eisemann trial, was removed from the case.
The state Attorney General’s Office will be appealing to the state Supreme Court.
However, it is unlikely that the state’s highest court will agree to hear their case, as the Court only hears about five percent of all cases presented to them.
The sole testimony to the alleged criminal activity presented by the state during the initial trial came from a detective who simply read QuickBooks logs and surmised that there was some sort of wrongdoing.
Now, though, that testimony is being challenged by the only eyewitness, a former bookkeeper of SCHI, who entered the QuickBooks entry, which directly debunks the state’s theory of wrongdoing.
The court’s confirmation of the state’s Brady Violation is the latest in a string of scandals facing the Attorney’s General’s Office of Public Integrity and Accountability (OPIA), which is the department of the AG’s office that is prosecuting Rabbi Eisemann.
Rabbi Eisemann’s prosecutors, John Nicodemo and Anthony Robinson, are members of this department, which is directed by Thomas Eicher, and his Deputy Director, Anthony Picione.
Maybe it’s time to plea bargain?? It is standard operating procedure in every sort of court case….. You must take into consideration the millions raised and spent Over the past many years and it has still not ensured a aquital…..
Is that what you would say if it was your son?
if the prosecution had any grounds to stand on then this may be a suggestion but what the defense and many many others are claiming is that the Rabbi is totally innocent so why give in to slander?
Exactly. If we give in to evil prosecutors and don’t call it out the injustice, we’re asking for a lot more trouble R”L. We must continue supporting Rav Osher’s case until the end, for his sake and for the Klal’s sake.
Why in the world would there be a new trial it should be thrown out and we need to go after the prosecutor! This is mind boggling that this is still going on!
Why is the Jewish AG not dissmissing this case and fire the prosecutor for withholding evidence?
It’s blows my mind thinking that this case will go for a new trial with no evidence
Inappropriate actions by the prosecutor doesn’t mean there isn’t a legitimate (in the judge’s eyes) reason to try the case again.
The previous commenters don’t understand how law works. What this means is that the judge and the appeals court threw out the guilty verdict.
He is now innocent.
If the prosecution wants they can now bring an entire new case and present the evidence to a new jury. Until and unless they do, he is innocent until proven guilty.
It is unlikely that they will, now that they have evidence of his innocence. And even if they do he will probably win that case.
This is what the defense was fighting for, they won.
All Because we voted for Murphy. Next election vote straight Republican from top down. We blew the opportunity to have Jack as our Govener.
When 3 different judges have each time overturned the states case ,then it’s not time to plea bargain . It’s your right not to donate money ,but don’t advise others what to do in a case that it’s so obviously biased
And you all voted for Murphy!!!! This should have been make it or break it for Murphy. Unfortunately I guess it wasn’t important enough…. $ad
Many commentators are not understanding what this is. Perhaps the headline was somewhat misleading.
What happened was the the appeals court dismissed the prosecutors attempt to appeal. This is great news.
There no possibility of a plea bargain now, as there is currently no case against him.
Maybe you don’t understand. There WILL be another trial. But keep voting for the Democrats. This is what you get
They don’t know yet if there will be a new trial or not. I personally don’t think the prosecution would try it again.
Either way, that’s not what this court case was about. The appeals court had no right to order that there be no new trial. They simply tossed out the prosecutions appeal.
Btw, did this while case start under Murphy, or Christie?
These prosecutors want so desperately to see this tzadik behind bars. השנאה מקלקלת את השורה . There is no other way to explain it. With all the crimes out there, this is what they are wasting our taxpayers money on.
Prosecutors are all evil and have the unlimited resources from the government to pursue anyone even innocent people. All your lovely Republicans prosecutors are the worst!!
Which republican prosecutor? Who makes the decision? In NYC, for example, Bragg makes the decision to prosecute. But he’s the boss and doesn’t actually prosecute most cases. I don’t know about NJ. Does the state attorney general decide or do ada’s decide? ADA stands for assistant district attorney, meaning the person that has to make the case in front of the jury.
R Osher is from the biggest tzaddikim in Lakewood.
I will continue to contribute until the state is put in its place.
Violating the Brady Act is one of the biggest no nos that a prosecutor can do.
I hope they are held accountable