Prosecutors investigating group home accused in lawsuit of abusing Queens autistic man
The Suffolk County district attorney's office confirmed Thursday, one day after the nonverbal autistic man's mother filed a federal lawsuit, that it has an 'open investigation' into allegations of abuse at the Life's WORC group home in East Islip.
The Daily News was first to report about the lawsuit, which was filed in Brooklyn Federal Court Wednesday. It alleges that group home staff subjected a now 26-year-old resident, J.P., to two years of physical abuse, mistreatment and overmedication — even after video of one staffer kicking J.P. made television news in 2023.
Tania Lopez, a spokeswoman for Suffolk DA Raymond Tierney, said Thursday that the investigation predates the lawsuit.
Representatives of Life's WORC did not return messages seeking comment Thursday.
According to the lawsuit, which cites three named whistleblowers, staff repeatedly punched and kicked J.P. and invented incidents in which he'd hit himself in the head so they could keep him in a drugged, 'zombie-like' state.
Staff would tie his shirt sleeves to restrain him like he was wearing a straitjacket, gripped him so tightly he bruised, and didn't keep him properly dressed and groomed, the suit alleges, and in one instance doctors found a metal object in his colon after he was hospitalized in February 2024.
The suit also alleges that administrators forced staff to delete a video from February 2023 showing one of the group home's autism support professionals, Bryan Amegah, kicking J.P. in the torso. The video got out anyway, and was aired in a News 12 Long Island story that June.
'We welcome the Suffolk County district attorney's investigation into Life's WORC,' said J.P.'s lawyer, Ilann Maazel of Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP. 'This case involves the systemic abuse, neglect and overmedication of one of the most vulnerable members of our community. We stand ready to cooperate fully if the DA seeks to hold individuals accountable — because justice for J.P. is essential to ensuring this never happens to anyone else.'
In 2019, another staffer at the group home, Richard Garnett, forced one resident there to walk naked on a treadmill until he fell and fractured his neck, according to a now-settled lawsuit. Garnett was charged, and pleaded guilty to endangering the welfare of an incompetent person and was sentenced to three years' probation, Lopez said.
'I want justice and accountability,' J.P.'s mother, who goes by her initials, V.T., to protect her son's identity, told The News. 'My son is a human being. No one should be treated that way, or spoken to [that way]. No one should raise their hand to anyone. He's a disabled man.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
Blake Lively Gets Deposition Cut From Court Docket As Judge Thwacks Baldoni Lawyers: Served 'Their Own Public-Relations Purposes'
Blake Lively's deposition in her sexual harassment and retaliation suit against Justin Baldoni has been cut from the court record today under the order of a federal judge. Already fighting this week with his insurance companies over legal fees in the It Ends with Us sexual harassment and retaliation battle with Lively, Baldoni, his Wayfarer Studios execs and lawyers also just got their knuckles very publicly rapped for overplaying their hand. More from Deadline Billionaire-Backed Justin Baldoni Now Suing Insurance Companies For Denied Legal Fees In Blake Lively Battle Justin Baldoni's Insurer Sues Him & Wayfarer Saying Its Policies Don't Cover Blake Lively Harassment Suit Blake Lively Slams & Shames Justin Baldoni's Lawyers Over Making Her Deposition Public, Leaking Details Of Last Week's Sit-Down For "Media Campaign" 'The Wayfarer Parties' attachment of the entire, nearly 300-page deposition—after citing only two pages of it in the Letter—served no proper litigation purpose and instead appears to have been intended to burden Lively (and as a result, the Court) and to invite public speculation and scandal,' admonished Judge Lewis Liman on Friday in a stinging order agreeing with Lively's motion to strike to keep her July 31 deposition sealed, out of the court docket and out of the headlines and posts. Offering nothing yet on the Another Simple Favor star's attorneys additional recent request for sanctions against Baldoni lawyer Bryan Freedman for allegedly 'publicly slandering' Lively, Judge Liman today was responding to the actress' August 4 filing to strike after her IEWU director/co-star's team sent a letter with a small portion of her well-publicized depo in it and an accompanying sealed and uncertified transcript. On August 6, after also taking the slings and arrows of accusations of leaks to tabloids and others about the actual deposition and who was there (Ryan Reynolds and on the other side of the table, most of Baldoni's inner circle and fellow defendants), attorney Kevin Fritz essentially countered that the lady doth protest too much. 'The deposition transcript records Ms. Lively's own words,' the Meister, Seelig & Finn partner pointed out in a filed letter of his own to Judge Liman, mocking the use of the term 'rough draft' in the initial filing, among other things. 'Ms. Lively contends that the transcript must be stricken based on her speculation that it was filed for the 'purpose of the transcript into the public domain as fodder for [their] media campaign.' The transcript, however, was filed under seal and Ms. Lively has the option of moving to keep the document sealed; although it is puzzling why she seeks to conceal her own testimony in an action in which she is the plaintiff.' Less than eight months before the high wire trial in this high profile matter kicks off in New York City in federal court, Judge Liman today really wasn't picking up what Fritz and Team Baldoni were trying to put down. 'Even if the cited deposition portions were relevant or provided support for the Wayfarer Parties' arguments—both of which are far from clear—the Wayfarer Parties have not even attempted to argue that the entire deposition was relevant,' he wrote in Friday's four-page order to strike the attachment 'Nor could they,' Judge Liman went on to say. 'The conclusion is inescapable that the Wayfarer Parties filed gratuitous amounts of irrelevant pages so that, if Lively moved for continued sealing of the irrelevant pages, the Wayfarer Parties could then use Lively's response for their own public-relations purposes,' Then there's the subtext kicker: 'The Court has not only the power but also the responsibility to step in.' Perhaps out in the August sun, neither reps for Lively or Baldoni responded to Deadline's request for comment on today's order. Then again, with nothing from the court yet on the sanctions move by Lively's side against Baldoni's top lawyer, maybe everyone being circumspect in anticipation of what's next in a case that since December last year always seems to provided more gristle at every turn – with more likely to come. Best of Deadline Everything We Know About Lady Gaga's 'Wednesday' Season 2 Role So Far 2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery 2025 TV Cancellations: Photo Gallery Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
Justice Department and FBI sued for access to records on Jeffrey Epstein probe
An advocacy group has sued the Justice Department and the FBI for records detailing their handling of the sex-trafficking investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. The legal organisation Democracy Forward is seeking records related to senior administration officials' communication about Epstein documents and any regarding correspondence between Epstein and President Donald Trump. The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington, appears to the be first of its kind. The group says it submitted requests under the Freedom of Information Act for the records related to communications about the case in late July that have not yet been fulfilled. 'The court should intervene urgently to ensure the public has access to the information they need about this extraordinary situation,' said Skye Perryman, the president and chief executive of the Democratic-aligned group. The federal government often shields records related to criminal investigations from public view. Democracy Forward has filed dozens of lawsuits against Mr Trump's Republican administration, challenging a range of policies and the president's executive orders. The case has been subject to heightened public focus since the Justice Department said last month it would not release additional documents from the case. The decision sparked frustration and anger among online sleuths, conspiracy theorists and elements of Mr Trump's base who had hoped to see proof of a government cover-up. The Trump administration has sought to unseal grand jury transcripts, though that has been denied by a judge in Florida. US District Judge Robin Rosenberg said the request to release grand jury documents from 2005 and 2007 did not meet any of the exceptions under federal law that could make them public. A similar request for the work of a different grand jury is pending in New York. The House Oversight Committee has also subpoenaed the Justice Department for files on the investigation, part of a congressional probe that legislators believe may show links to Mr Trump and other former top officials. Since Epstein's 2019 death in a New York jail cell as he awaited trial on sex-trafficking charges, conservative conspiracists have stoked theories about what information investigators gathered on Epstein and who else knew about his sexual abuse of teenage girls. Mr Trump has denied prior knowledge of Epstein's crimes and claimed he cut off their relationship long ago, and he has repeatedly tried to move past the Justice Department's decision not to release a full accounting of the investigation, but legislators from both major political parties have refused to let it go.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
‘Funding crisis' means private attorneys who take federal public defense cases won't be paid for months
SPRINGFIELD — As the state grapples with a work stoppage over pay for private attorneys who represent indigent defendants, the system that ensures representation for those in federal court is also in crisis. The program that pays private attorneys to represent those who can't afford a lawyer in federal court ran out of money last month and won't be able to pay lawyers until the new federal fiscal year in October, according to a statement from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. 'Not only are lawyers not getting paid, but the investigators and experts we use won't get paid either,' said Peter Alexander Slepchuk, a Springfield lawyer who is on the panel of private attorneys who takes the cases. 'It does create a problem.' Across the country, about 40% of indigent people in federal court are represented by private attorneys who are part of a court district's Criminal Justice Act Panel, according the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. The rest of the low-income defendants are represented by staff from federal public defender offices that employ lawyers full time, similar to the Committee for Public Counsel in Massachusetts. The courts ran out of money to pay the private attorneys for cases in July. 'The continuing resolution to fund the government for fiscal year 2025 passed by Congress in March froze all Judicial Branch funding at the FY 2024 level, which resulted in panel attorney funding running out unusually early,' the administrative court office said in a statement. 'CJA lawyers are performing constitutionally required legal work on behalf of defendants,' said Daniel Cloherty, a Boston attorney who is chair of the District of Massachusetts CJA panel. 'They are critical to the operation of the system and they are no longer getting paid for their work,' Cloherty said. 'Many of them, not all but many, are in small firms or solo practitioners. They are small businesses that are being forced to go through a pause in payments.' Lawyers are still continuing to take cases, Cloherty said. 'My concern is that it will become increasingly difficult to attract lawyers to do this work if this becomes a persistent problem.' The funding pause impacts the attorneys, and also people like translators and experts paid by the court for an indigent defendant's case, Cloherty said. 'Lawyers are in a position of trying to hire vendors to assist them in the cases but I can't tell them when they are going to get paid,' he said. 'That can be a challenge.' There's been funding issues in the past, but this is a particularly long period, the U.S. Courts statement said. 'Payments to panel attorneys have been suspended during previous congressional budget crises, but rarely for more than a few weeks in a single fiscal year,' the statement said. While Slepchuk takes federal cases as a panel member, his law practice is diverse and he does not rely on them. He said he knows other attorneys, however, who do depend on the cases. 'I know it's a pressing problem for them,' he said. Some attorneys are not taking cases because they don't want to 'essentially give the government an interest free loan for however many months,' Slepchuk said. Read the original article on MassLive. Solve the daily Crossword
