Tuesday, July 08, 2025
Monday, July 07, 2025
A well‑known civil–rights and police‑brutality lawyer is Thomas J. Mallon at Mallon, Tranger & Budzek. They handle excessive force and police misconduct cases, and their clients have posted strong testimonials about results and compassionate support
If your concern is “overactive” police or excessive force claims, Thomas J. Mallon and his team in Freehold have a strong reputation and track record.
Notable Police‐Misconduct Experience
-
Acted as lead counsel in multiple 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights suits involving excessive force, false arrest, illegal searches, supervisory liability, and Monell claims hudsoncountyview.com.
-
In 2014, represented Ricky Patel in a suit against Union City officers for alleged excessive force, illegal arrest/search, and more tmallonlaw.com+3hudsoncountyview.com+3transparencynj.com+3.
-
Litigated cases against Atlantic City, Ocean County, Borough of Tinton Falls, and Lakewood for police misconduct fr.scribd.com.
💵 Significant Settlements & Verdicts
-
Mallon, Tranger & Budzek recovered over $1 million in police brutality settlements in 2020 alone in Freehold opramachine.com+9tmallonlaw.com+9tmallonlaw.com+9.
-
In 2015, Mallon secured a $200,000 settlement in a Monell excessive force case against Atlantic City PD after trial
Sunday, July 06, 2025
Update: The Bais Havaad challenges
Dear Rabbi ……….,
In response to
your request for clarification of the issues at play in the recent psak by
leading Gedolim and Roshei Beis Din on the status of the Bais Havaad (BHV), I
will attempt to summarize the Bais Havaad’s various justifications and defenses
and address them individually, with my responses:
1. “This was not a Bais Havaad case.”
This appears to be a de lection. The
Bais Havaad has historically been flexible in defining its associations—
referring to various projects, Rabbonim, and psakim as BHV-affiliated. Are we
now to believe that a diyun held at 290 River Avenue, with regular BHV dayanim,
invoiced under BHV's name, does not qualify as a BHV matter?
2. “The BHV dayanim were not matir.”
While technically accurate, it is
misleading. The dayanim initially issued a heter. When faced with opposition,
they formally withdrew—but continued to promote the heter in the shadows, with
intermittent visibility. They (a) shared their portfolio of evidence and
research with other Rabbonim who relied on it l’halacha as factual findings
established by a beis din; (b) reportedly signed the (confidential) heter; (c)
defended it publicly and privately; (d) compiled supportive letters as late as
a year after the wedding; and (e) when calls for a diyun were voiced, canvassed
the globe to solicit further halachic backing for it.
Can the architects of a heter’s
foundation and its most active promoters reasonably claim exemption from
responsibility by mere official withdrawal?
3. “The details of the case are too sensitive to share with the
family.”
This explanation does not withstand
scrutiny. The same dayanim who cite concern for the family’s dignity threatened
to publish the very same information publicly if pressured—via a newly created
blog. This contradiction suggests the concern is more about shielding
themselves than protecting the family.
Moreover, if they truly possess
sensitive information that justifies their conclusions, there is a
straightforward solution: present it to a credible, neutral third party in the
presence of a knowledgeable family representative who can properly assess and
challenge the claims. Had there been anything substantive, this process would
have resolved the matter last year, six months ago, or even yesterday. The
refusal to take this obvious and reasonable step—one that could conclusively
resolve the controversy—lacks any coherent justification.
The claim of secrecy appears more likely
to be a tactic to avoid the embarrassment of being proven wrong.
“Opposition to
the heter is politically motivated by the BHV’s opponents.”
This is demonstrably false. The active
opposition to the marriage predated the BHV’s involvement by several months. If
we are to attribute motives for involvement to petty politics, it would be more
plausible to question the motives behind the BHV’s heter, given the dayanim's
known acrimonious history with the Rosh Beis Din (Rabbi ______h _____z shlita)
who was leading the opposition to the marriage at the time that they got
involved. But why go there? Rather than dismissing critics as politically driven,
it would be more productive— and honest—to engage with the substantive halachic
and factual issues raised.
4. “Revealing details would arm the BHV’s enemies.”
This defensive posture is outdated. In
today’s climate, secrecy breeds suspicion. Following public resignations and
strong criticism from multiple batei din, BHV’s ongoing silence and evasion of
scrutiny only further harmed its credibility, leading it to total denunciation
by leading poskim.
5. “The reasoning is available to sincere Rabbonim, not those with
agendas.”
A circular policy. The BHV smokescreen
can easily fool unsuspecting Rabbonim with only a mild interest in the case,
while Rabbonim familiar with the details of the case or skeptical of the
integrity of the process are easily dismissed as "agenda-driven,"
leaving little room for meaningful oversight.
6.“This is not
a Choshen Mishpat issue. A beis din gave a psak to an individual and they are
not answerable to anyone.”
Irrelevant point, even if correct. The
BHV published letters alleging dishonesty by the family and its supporters; the
family alleges that it is the side of the matirim that has been infiltrated by
forgers and liars. When accusations of forgery and misconduct arise, they must
be addressed in a transparent setting. If a mashgiach accused a storeowner of
selling treif, and the storeowner claims the mashgiach has a personal vendetta
against him, would we clarify this with a hearing, or would we say it’s a Yoreh
De’ah issue? Halachic categorizations
cannot be used to evade responsibility.
“A kuntres will
soon explain everything.” That was
said six months ago. We are still waiting.
7. “There is no one to talk to on the other side.”
Entirely unfounded. Have they tried? The
BHV dayanim have repeatedly refused to engage in dialogue with the family or
their representatives, despite numerous invitations. Notably, one of the
family's most prominent advocates is a former longtime colleague of the dayanim
at the Bais Havaad, further underscoring the baselessness of the alleged
unfeasibility of dialogue. Finally, are we to be convinced that dayanim who
pride themselves on their skill at negotiating and settling the most
contentious disputes have found themselves unable to establish dialogue with
reputable talmidei chachomim and a family of erliche bnei Torah? This claim is another component in the
strategy of the cover-up.
8. “A Rav reviewed both sides and agreed with the heter.”
Initially promising, but inconclusive.
After one Rav originally agreed with the family, the BHV dayanim came to show
him their side. The family cooperated in good faith, hoping for a transparent
exchange. However, they were not given access to the BHV’s claims before the Rav,
making a true response impossible. The Rav eventually withdrew due to the lack
of full information. What resulted was not a diyun, but a lesson in the
necessity of transparency in a diyun.
9. “The Russian letter was certified as authentic.”
The alleged certification must be
scrutinized in the diyun. A private opinion, from unnamed experts with dubious
credentials, funded by one side of a dispute, cannot carry weight unless it’s
open to review, especially when multiple independent experts have declared the
letter to be a fabrication, and practically every native Russian consulted has
echoed this view. No expert is even claimed to have authenticated the letter
after being shown the complete array of angles that prove the letter to be
fraudulent, including the historical impossibility of two people with so many
matching details, the DNA tests, the usage of post-reform Russian in the
pre-reform era, and the insertion of extra paragraphs in the translation.
“A beis din met
the source of the Russian letter.”
This has all the markings of a forgery
backstory. A newly discovered granddaughter of a previously unknown (to anyone
in the extended family for 80 years) family branch appears once, presents a
pristinely preserved 1915 letter and refuses to ever appear again, as she is a
very private person. Her elderly grandmother, the supposed original source, is
unavailable for comment. The letter, translated by someone who inserted oddly
convenient paragraphs, contains exactly the points the matirim needed. Only desperation
would lead intelligent people to uncritically accept this concocted bubbe-meise
produced by an amateur noch-macher of Shloime Yehuda Friedlander.
This story further underscores the need
for transparency.
“The Russian
letter was never used for the psak.”
Untrue and irrelevant. The letter was
used to try to convince the Rav mentioned above, after he failed to be
convinced by all other arguments. Besides, if the forger managed to dupe the Rabbonim,
he likely deceived them with other lies, which is why the forged letter proves
that an independent transparent review of all the evidence is in order.
10.“If you are
not convinced about our history of the alternate Avraham Lashinsky, BHV will
share with you a secret about the family it cannot disclose publicly.”
Bring the secret, too, to the diyun,
where all alleged “secrets” will be easily proven utterly laughable to anybody
familiar with the family's history. Coming from figures already accused of
historical distortions, such claims only deepen the skepticism. Moreover, once
BHV have shifted from asserting an alternative family lineage involving a
second Avraham Lashinsky to relying on vague claims of undisclosed information,
it is only reasonable to pause and ask: who, then, forged the letter allegedly
written by the alternative Avraham Lashinsky—whose very existence you now
implicitly deny?
10. “BHV agreed to a diyun, but it collapsed when the panel
resigned.”
The record is more complicated. For over
a year, BHV refused any form of diyun, despite resignations and pressure from
multiple batei din. Only under an overwhelming threat did they agree to
negotiate terms. The family accepted every condition of the BHV, including that
the panel be selected exclusively from BHV’s preapproved list of 12 Rabbonim
(of which many were connected to the BHV or the dayanim). After finalizing
arrangements, a third-party individual, acting expressly against the family's
wishes, distributed material about the case. A member of the panel “somehow”
found out about this, and used it to withdraw, due to his discomfort with the
surrounding atmosphere. As the members of the panel have recently clarified,
this was not a rejection of the opposition’s arguments or credibility. In the
aftermath of their resignation, calls to continue toward a diyun went
unanswered (to this day).
11. “Why are we being persecuted?”
All the actions the BHV characterizes as
"redifos" are based on a single, widely-accepted principle:
individuals who are unelected and lack experience cannot reasonably expect to
be granted autonomy by Klal Yisrael to issue secretive psakim without oversight
or accountability. Once this is fully understood, it becomes clear that the
heter’s critics have, if anything, treated the individuals involved with
greater patience than the situation warranted.
12. “During the WZO tumult, this issue went to sleep, because the
tumult makers were too busy.”
Why does a fair question deserve a
cynical answer? During the WZO tumult, the two sides were negotiating over the
makeup of the diyun (see above). There was no need to campaign for something
while it was being given a chance.
13. “The leaders of the opposition are kana’im who seek to silence
anyone who disagrees with them.”
Unfounded spin. Typically, those intent
on “canceling” others avoid calls for transparency and instead rely on public
outcry to rally support for their stance. Contrast that with this case, where
the opposition to the BHV since the marriage—primarily a concerned family—has
consistently requested a fair and transparent hearing, while BHV appears to be
doing everything possible to avoid transparency. Rather than framing the issue
as a conflict between kana’im and rationalists, it is far more truthful to
describe it as scrutiny chasing a cover-up.
14. "Matters of this nature are best addressed privately, not
in the public arena."
Every
effort was made to resolve this matter discreetly; however, the BHV
demonstrated no willingness to engage in a sincere or constructive manner.
Furthermore, where rabbinic reputations
are established in the beis hamedrash, discussions of rabbinic reliability
ideally should be con ined to those hallowed halls. But in an age where a beis
din relies on glossy brochures and magazine columns to establish its
reputation, and rabbinic positions are awarded to self-promoters, one must ask:
what alternative remains besides public accountability to restrain unworthy
rabbinic contenders and to root out halachic corruption?
What is the path forward?
The Bais Havaad at its core is
inarguably a respectable mosad, that has done and has the potential to do much
good for Klal Yisrael, in Lakewood and beyond. The beginnings of the Bais
Havaad were filled with idealism, honest dialogue, and aspirations for
transparency and credibility in the beis din system.
But with its material success, ideology
is no longer its guiding force and its idealistic vision is being eroded. Good and reputable institutions are always
vulnerable to being hijacked by those who know how to exploit their structural
weaknesses, often accompanied by a projection of irreplaceability and
invincibility. Over time, unchecked behavior by such individuals tarnishes not
only their own reputations, but that of the mosad as a whole.
Today, the issue is not a halachic
disagreement over איסור
והיתר alone. It is chiefly about the integrity of facts. There are
credible, evidence-backed allegations of forgery and manipulation, and many
honest, serious, unbiased people are deeply concerned.
Which has brought our gedolim to
conclude that the only way to restore trust is through openness: either via
full information sharing with those who’ve studied the case in depth, or
through a proper, mutually agreed upon diyun, with fair representation on both
sides and שמוע בין
אחיכם guiding the process.
Through such a process, the Rabbonim and
gedolim will be able to diagnose where the virus in the Bais Havaad is and
treat it appropriately, so that once again the Bais Havaad can continue to
serve Klal Yisrael with trust and reputability.
ואשיבה שופטיך כבראשונ
ה – אחרי כ ן יקרא לך עיר הצדק קריה נאמנה
בכבוד ובידידו ת
Wednesday, July 02, 2025
GEVALD- EMPIRE chicken- IN Menashe Frankel's- (Matel) Chasunah halls in Lakewood-
Menashe Frankel has them use EMPIRE poultry, etc. that Reb Shnuer, Z"L did not allow in BMG.
You can (hopefully) ask for kosher fish.
From a comment: This caterer has some serious kashrus concerns that are in the areas of chilul Shabbos, Bishul Akum, Bos'ur Shenis'alem, treif utensils, misleading clientele, etc. R"L
We gave them some better choices from a kashrus point and reliability.
Lakewood caterers, restaurants, take-out, pizza stores, food service, etc. establishments do not all have an acceptable kashrus standard.
Some are more reliable from a kashrus standpoint.
Tuesday, July 01, 2025
Update: Per the instructions of the Lakewood establishment & the VAAD- no Lakewood, Rabonim, Dayonim, etc. signed on this kol koreh- (?שחוטי חוץ)
בס"ד
ד' תמוז תשפ"ה לפ"ק
הנה זה זמן ארוך מעת שנתבקשו
הרכב מחברי "בית הוועד דליקוואוד" ע"י גדולי הרבנים
וראשי כמה בתי דין לפרוש את השמלה לפני ב"ד המוסכם על כל
הצדדים בגונע לבירור העובדות שעל פיהם התירו ]או הכשילו אחרים להתיר[ גיורת לכהן,
ועד היום לא התקיים הדיון המבוקש.
לכן הננו לגלות דעתנו, שכעת שחברי ההרכב הנ"ל ממשיכים לשמש
כדיינים בבית דין הנ"ל ,מהיום ועד שיענו לדרישה הנ"ל במלואה, ויציעו כל
הדברים הנוגעים לבירור הנ"ל, באופן
המניח את דעתינו ובלי דחיות ואמתלאות, ביה"ד בית הוועד ד'ליקוואוד אינו בחזקת בית דין כשר , ואין חיוב להענות להזמנה שבא מהביה"ד ד"בית הוועד ליקוואוד", וכן כל שטר המעיד על מעשה ב"ד שיתכן שנעשה ע"י אחד מהדיינים הנ"ל ]כולל היתירי נישואין על פי הגיטין שיסדרו מהיום[ אינו בחזקת מעשה בית דין כשר ]ועי' בחזו"א )חו"מ ליקוטים סי' ב' סק"א וסק"ב.[
וע"ז באנו על החתום בצער רב,
שלמה אליהו מילר אלי' דב וכטפוגל אברהם דוב בהר"ר שריאל רוזנברג
יונה הלוי ברומברג אשר חשואל
שרגא פייבל הלוי זיממערמאן הק'
יצחק שטיין ישראל
שלומוביץ
הנני מצטרף לדברי הרבנים הנ"ל.
והנני להוסיף, שכבר דיברתי עם רבנים חשובים שיש להם השפעה על הועד, שדרכה של
תורה היא שכל אחד מביע את עמדתו בגלוי ואחרי שמלבנים את הדברים מגיעים לעמק השווה
)ועיין תוס'
ע"ז ז. ד"ה הנשבע, ועיין בקונטרס אור הישר בענין הגט מקליווא( ,וידוע
שמו"ר הגרי"ש יצא מגדרו ע"פ הרשב"ש סימן מ"ו אחרי שרב
אחד התיר ממזר במטמוניות. ועל כן בוודאי שיש להיענות לדרישת גדולי הרבנים לבוא
לדיון באופן המוסכם לכל הצדדים..
רב
שכונת נחום מעלות דפנה אייזנשטיין ירושלים
Sunday, June 29, 2025
ALL Corn on the cob (frozen, Fresh, cooked, Microwavable) all infested.
UPDATE: Calif. delight W/ Hisachdus?
Rav Ekstein removed hashgocha.
Why?
Corn on the cob, is known to be infested, including the frozen ones.
Even if it's soaked and salted.
Are the ones from Mexico, Thailand, any better? [No]
Does a Heimish Hashgocha help to eliminate, not just minimize the insects? NO
Bottom line, (fresh & frozen, cooked) Remove the kernels & rinse.
Friday, June 20, 2025
Update-Due to the questionable kashrus standards in camps, every camp should be under a recognized reliable Hashgocha?
Is it acceptable?
Are there written policies for the acceptable hashgochas?
If yes?, obtain a copy.
What should I ask?
1- Who is in charge? Who sets the standards?
Any shailos that arise, who is the final Rabbinical authority?
Is there a Qualified Mashgiach in Charge?
2- Are the using "exclusively" pre-checked vegetables?
If yes?, who's vegetables? not most of them, but all brands that are being used!
If no?, Who is checking them?, is he trained? if yes? by whom?
Is it only being rinsed?
3- How about fruit? e.g. strawberries, blueberries, raspberries? What is the standard being utilized?
4- Bishul Yisroel issues- Convection ovens, steam kettles, etc.
Is bishul-yisroel for sfardim being addressed?
Is a shomer shabbos present in the kitchen at all times? [flames, ovens, etc]
5- Is yoshon, cholov yisroel, pas yisroel being strictly observed?
Hafroshs Chalah- who is responsible?
6- Who is responsible to check "all" deliveries coming in for compliance to the standards established?
7- Is there a properly trained experienced Mashgiach in the kitchen at all times?
8- Is the kitchen locked at night, Friday afternoon, etc? Who are all that have the keys?
9- Are the separate areas for dairy, meat, parve, etc? including sinks, etc?
10- Are all pots, utensils, etc clearly marked for dairy, meat, parve,?
11- Who is responsible for everything requiring seals?
12- ETC.?
Are the Overnight frum camps ripping off the Tzibur-BIG-TIME
Dear Editor,
I am writing to express my deep concern and frustration regarding the exorbitant costs associated with frum summer sleep-away camps.
I have witnessed firsthand how these exorbitant fees place an immense financial burden on parents who are already struggling to make ends meet.
The summer camp experience is undoubtedly a cherished and valuable opportunity for children to grow, learn, and create lasting memories. However, it is disheartening to see how these camps are choking many families due to their astronomical price tags. Are these camps simply money-makers? I have no idea. What I do know is that the cost of sending a child to a frum sleep-away camp has reached such heights that it has become nothing short of a financial nightmare for numerous parents.
The implications of this issue extend far beyond mere financial strain. Parents are forced to make difficult decisions, sometimes sacrificing basic necessities or going into debt just to provide their children with this formative experience. The pursuit of this summer experience should not come at the expense of a family’s financial stability, not to mention its impact on the health and wellbeing of the parents and the accompanying stress.
It is essential for the broader frum community to acknowledge and address this problem. While it is true that running a summer camp costs money, the current situation seems to have spiraled out of control. The alleged “escalating costs” should not be disproportionately transferred onto parents, particularly those who are already grappling with financial hardships.
It is high time for camp organizers, community leaders, and relevant stakeholders to come together and find practical solutions to alleviate the burden on parents.
Does it make sense that I am paying for 4 weeks of camp almost as much as I pay for a year of school?
I kindly request that Matzav.com bring attention to this matter through your esteemed website, as I believe it is crucial to shed light on the profound impact these exorbitant costs have on frum families.
Thank you for considering my perspective on this pressing issue. I hope that together, we can strive towards a more inclusive and affordable summer camp experience for all frum children.
Sincerely,
D. B.
New Jersey
Lakewood day camps kashrus ALERT-Are they using any S. American beef w/Alle/MealMart or SBD?
another UPDATE: Camps (Bnos) is not safe for girls- watch the new video הכזונה יעשו אחותינו?ת
https://dusiznies.blogspot.com/2023/06/gershon-kranczer-faces-brooklyn-judge.html
Another confirmed horific episode at the camp?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viiMrvi0iyk&feature=youtu.be
From An Insider: Meanwhile, a simple observation. We are both familiar with defense mechanisms. I make observations all the time of new mechanisms that are just that, but masquerade as something else. The Agudah position, which we know to be fundamentally flawed, is not really a policy at all. It is a simple effort to cover-up the cover-ups. They cannot do different, because that would be self-incrimination.
Wednesday, June 18, 2025
Baseball Gloves shatnez alert
|
|
Tuesday, June 17, 2025
Alert- Video by Rabbi Daniel Sharratt of the OU "How to wash strawberries"- The thrips watched the video, and learned where to hide-the video is good only for Show-n-tell!
1- Even after following the video, and following it. All strawberries are infested, fresh & frozen.Write to President Herzog to pardon Netanyahu!
I am asking our readers to write a short email to President Herzog to pardon Prime Minister Netanyahu, it takes only 2 minutes and may very well help!
Monday, June 16, 2025
ALERT: The "Beleaves" brand joined the Bowery brand and decided to crawl out of the kosher market.
The Brand name BELEAVES was recently hijacked by Minchas Chinuch Tartikuv and Zichron Shmuel DON'T USE THEM
Alert RE: Shatnez testers
|
|