Ami Magazine does it again. Two weeks after DA Hynes gave Ami an exclusive and explosive interview, George Farkas, the lead attorney for Nechemya Weberman spoke to Ami in his first media interview post conviction. Here is some of what he had to say:
I firmly believed when the case started, as I believe now Nechemya Weberman is innocent. Nothing that happened during the trial convinced me otherwise. In 40 years or so of doing this I’ve been saddled with an innocent client maybe three or four times, and I’ve represented a lot of people. The pressure on a lawyer who represents an innocent guy is tremendous, because he feels for the soul of the person. A guilty guy deserves representation just as much. But if I know the guy really did it, and I can’t convince the jury of a reasonable doubt, I can sleep at night.
I got to know Nechemya. I got to know his family. I saw what happened. I have a number of reasons why I doubted that he did this. Specifically, he never fit the pattern of a child abuser or monster. The entire case began on the say-so of one person, and it ended on the say-so of one person. There wasn’t one shred of physical evidence. All there was, was her testimony. There are others from the same family who came up with other allegations once the case started to germinate that were basically nonsense. It was all rumors and innuendo.
Who spread these rumors and innuendos? Bloggers. In a case of such importance, my feeling is that if you want to tell your story, come forward and tell it in court! If you’re too afraid, don’t tell it to bloggers. I do know that there were allegations made by certain people that we would be ready to defend a moment’s notice. If you’re talking about a guy who’s been doing this to his therapy patients for who knows how long, I would expect an army of victims to come forward, as happened with other cases. It’s a pattern. I’d expect to see something physical, something on his computer, some proof that he’s a monster, and it’s not there.
This was bigger than Weberman. The way [DA Hynes presented] the case, the entire community was put on trial.
Listen, the idea that a Chasidic Jew has the same shot with a jury as anyone else is not true. That’s not sour grapes. That’s just a fact of life. If an average defendant starts out with a presumption of innocence, it’s like a one run lead. A Chasidic Jew is two runs behind even before starting the game. There are preconceptions. There are stories told in a way that make Chasidic Jews look bad, like the story about the separate buses.”