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 

As Gold Meir was told (likely by R' Shlomo Lorincz)- as long you go after the chareidim in Yeshivas, She'll never finish with the Yish'maeilim- You could witness it every day!

Politicians and Diapers must be changed often, and for the same reasons- Mark Twain

 

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

If Rabbi Fund is the Issue, then ban the KCL also, as he is the Posek achron for them.


Will Moetzes allow Sholom K. to become a member? MK, will definitely try very hard to keep him out. 

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.

NOT THE BABY CORN, as they don't have the insects- you don't have to de-kernelize baby-corn- eat as is.

Friday, June 20, 2025

Update-Due to the questionable kashrus standards in camps, every camp should be under a recognized reliable Hashgocha?

Just in-A gangster running a certain Bais Yaakov revoked a girl's acceptance after the father asked about the kashrus in the kitchen.

Did you inquire as to your childs camp Kashrus standard?
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?
Are they using any S. American  beef w/Alle/Mealmart or SBD?

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

Are camps safe? Remember Camp Agudas KOLKO (cocoa) club-How many kids were molested?


 

Lakewood day camps kashrus ALERT-Are they using any S. American beef w/Alle/MealMart or SBD?

KCL certified Parve cholent may "not" be eaten with milk









another UPDATE: Camps (Bnos) is not safe for girls- watch the new video הכזונה יעשו אחותינו?ת







The attributes of Camp Aguda; see the following ; https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=B/LKfwohW4GEDUKmYnprTA==&system=prod

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
הכזונה יעשו אחותינו?
- URGENT NEED TO KEEP OUR BNOS YISROEL SAFE
Dear Rabbis, parents and Leaders,
We assume you were not notified of the horrific event which took place at Camp Bnos (Agudas Yisroel) this past summer. It is important for you, as a leader, to be made aware that a camper was raped on the girls’ campus. She was left unsupervised and taken advantage of in the worst possible way. There were 2 boys involved.
AS OF LAST SUMMER. CAMP BNOS IS A MAKOM SAKANA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Originally, Mr. Meir Frischman admitted it happened, he has since changed his tune (obviously he has since received direction and advice from perhaps the Agudah directors, Rabbonim or Attorneys) and now denies all allegations and has completely removed himself from any & all responsibilities surrounding this situation. He has gone so far as to deny it, and refer to the RAPE as a "rumor".
The police were notified, and Mr. Frischman did NOT have them speak with more than a few people from the camp. Directors who have been in the camp for literally decades were not notified until they returned home after camp was over.

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.

2- Ain mivatlin issur, prevents one from pureeing the strawberry unless it has gone through a cleaning process that will leave it in a status of sofek, then one can puree. 

After the video performed washing, they remained as a Muchzak.

3- Any certifiers that claim anything different are factually not correct.



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!

public@president.gov.il

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