Comments to Barbara O'Sullivan's burnt house story - the smear tactics by a firefighter's wife and a firefighter's girlfriend tell me this story is on the right track

Overnight I've learnt that the firefighter's wife who initially reported to me that her husband made statements to her about what allegedly happened at the fire site - while the case is still under investigation - recanted and is now claiming that she was making statements to me in comments and on Messenger only based on her "independent thinking", not on her husband's reports to her, as she initially said.

That's why I accepted her message on Messenger (a procedure for messages from people who are not the addressee's Facebook friends).  It was a goldmine of information.

Appears that her husband or his superior worked with Mrs.  Sharon Reichert-Morgan overnight and showed her the error of her ways.

Not quite though, since she has sent me a half-naked picture of herself, looking suggestively, with a request to publish it.

Mrs. Sharon Reichert-Morgan also disclosed to me that she has 3 additional jobs to the County job for the total of 5 (Mrs. Sharon Reichert-Morgan's math, not mine) - which is a good material for a FOIL request to the County for time sheets.

I've also learnt that Mrs. Sharon Reichert-Morgan has a problem with either grammar or truth or her husband.

She claimed that she has to work (present tense) those multiple jobs, because she was (past tense) raising her two children alone, and now she is raising also her stepson.

Mrs. Reichert-Morgan is suggesting, I understand, that despite her marriage, she is the main breadwinner in the family providing for her children.

Which does not mesh very well with Mrs. Reichert-Morgan's statements that she is waiting at home with children for the return of her husband VOLUNTEER firefighter.

Either Mrs. Reichert-Morgan's "additional 3 jobs for a total of 5" are all from home, or her "independent thinking" is fuzzy not only on math.

And, if Mrs. Reichert-Morgan has to work 5 jobs to keep the family afloat, what is her husband doing volunteering instead of working to earn a living so that his wife does not have to work 5 jobs?

Doesn't he have a construction company to run (that's what my sources say)?  

So, doesn't he have an incentive to let a certain house burn - so, maybe, he would get a contract to re-build it?

A volunteer firefighter owning a construction company with financial problems in the family.  Nice.

And, according to at least one source, Josh Morgan the firefighter has been seen driving around without the tech inspection sticker required in New York to drive a vehicle.

I guess, Josh Morgan is allowed to do that because of his status as a "volunteer firefighter", and his wife's status as the employee of the local department of social services.  

That's why he volunteers - to get the special status that allows him to break the law?

There were some other comments, attempting to defame the victims of the house fire, diagnose me as crazy, silly, nuts, etc., and suggesting that I need to go re-learn the law.

A lot of comments were made by a Colleen Church who admitted she was not at the site of the house fire, but allegedly listened to the scanner left at home because her boyfriend is a firefighter.

Here is that last comment with a disclosure about a firefighter boyfriend, scanner and more rumors about the victims' entire large family now ("how the Bracci's operate" - the victim has 7 brothers and sisters, with a lot of nephews, many living in the area, as far as I know, now they are all being bad and smeared by Colleen Church).

My two answers to that comment:

The today's latest statement of Colleen Church posted above (see all comments to that blog here) was interesting from several points:

1) Colleen Church admitted she was not an eyewitness to the house fire or the efforts (or lack thereof) of the Delhi Fire Department to extinguish that fire, and her reports are pure hearsay;

2) Colleen Church most likely lies about listening to the scanner, because, if the scanner is her nameless firefighter boyfriend's scanner, and it was at home, that means her boyfriend was at home, too, and that means that he did not participate in extinguishing that fire - which also says a lot?  Why not?  Why didn't he go there?  And, if he didn't go there, he, most likely didn't listen to the scanner, and neither did Colleen Church, because she had no interest listening to the scanner in the middle of the night while her firefighter boyfriend was not going to the scene;

3) Colleen Church goes out on a limb now smearing not just Barbara and not just her daughter, and not just me and my husband who has nothing to do with the house fire or my reporting of the house fire, but she now attempts to smear the entire Bracci family - a very large clan of siblings and their offspring, many of them residing in the area, many of them occupying prominent positions in the local government (for example, Barbara's brother Peter Bracci was a recent Town Supervisor of the Town of Delhi and a supervisor of the Social Services in the entire Delaware County) and/or businesses.

4) Colleen Church loses her argument because she says she is not going to post any more - but pretends to be brave at losing her argument and throws a challenge at me "to confront her in public, face to face".  I do not know what Colleen Church is expecting from confronting her "face to face", and she knows I am far away and will not come 800+ miles to "confront her in public" - how - by fistfights?  

As to public DEBATES, if that is what Colleen Church meant, I invited people to such public, videotaped and live-streamed debates yesterday, before her "brave" parting challenge of today.  

Which brings me to another question - can Colleen Church read?

Colleen Church is also an author of this message on Google+ made yesterday:

Of course, as the author of this blog, I reserve the right to comment on messages voluntarily sent to me the way I see fit.

As to the claims I am crazy, that's not the first time such claims are made.

I am proud to disclose that at my very first appearance in court (that was a criminal court, and I was arguing an Omnibus motion) when I raised the issue of obvious police and prosecutorial misconduct revealed in the record, the local DA (it was close to the Canadian border) popped up, all red, and claimed that "she (I) is as crazy as her husband".  

That was my very first court appearance, and I perceived that spit-out as a badge of honor, where my performance was equated with that of a pre-eminent and skillful trial criminal defense lawyer whose trials gathered local attorneys as master classes.

My husband later won an acquittal in that case on the main count of the indictment, leaving the scene of a fatal accident.

And the crazy person, me, then won freedom for her client in the same case by my argument at sentencing on the remaining count of lying to the grand jury, where that particular DA argued for jail time in front of a crowd of TV and mainstream journalists in a highly publicized case.

I guess, all individuals who have ever done criminal defense, civil rights litigation - and especially divorces (Sharon Riechert-Morgan was especially bitter as to my husband doing some divorce cases in the future suggesting some personal animosity against my husband driving her, too) - are crazy and must check their heads out.

I also got comments - you can see them all on Google+ and blog articles relating to the house fire story - that I am "dumb", "silly", "crazy", "nuts".  Just to amplify the suggestion that I need to be diagnosed.

Having been born and raised in the Soviet Union, I am not at all surprised by this tactic - if you are criticizing actions of the government, you must absolutely be crazy.

Apparently, the tactic is alive and well on the American soil.

Now Colleen Church, as a mental health expert and a law expert advises me to (1) go get my "head checked" and (2) go relearn the law.

My diligent research of appropriate databases failed to reveal any public information indicating that Colleen Church is either a licensed mental health provider, or a lawyer.  

It is just a gratuitous spit-out of a firefighter's girlfriend. 

Moreover, what does my reporting of a house fire have to do with the law, and why I need to re-learn it because I reported a story about a house fire, I do not know, but I assure both my kind and unkind readers that I am re-learning the law every day - as any legal scholar should.

To sum up my overnight crop of comments, I am satisfied with the results.

The posted comments show that the blog is being read by the Delhi Fire Department employees (as well as their family members), and that DFD is now backtracking and trying to keep the runaway mouths of Sharon Reichert-Morgan and Colleen Church (which hurts their chances to backdate and fabricate incident reports) in check, at least in regards to facts about the fire that neither one of these women witnessed.  

It is already too late, since both women let out valuable information that cannot be taken back.  

The comments also show the caliber of individuals working for the local government at the town and County level in Delhi, New York, and Delaware County, New York.  

What is quite illustrative is that:

• comments about a suspicious house fire and misconduct of public officials involved in extinguishing, investigating and reporting that house fire are not from eyewitnesses;  

• if comments are from alleged eyewitnesses, those eyewitnesses do not dare to post under their own names and instead assume nicknames, like "Archer", or "LifeSaver", with profiles created that same day for the purpose of posting the comments, 

• a commentator claiming she's got her information from her firefighter husband and then, in the middle of the night, recants and claims she is now an "independent thinker" (that would be news to many attorneys in the area - an employee of the Delaware County Social Services Department, an independent thinker), and that's how she learnt (by clairvoyance, I guess) about what has allegedly happened at the fire site she's never been to, and sends me her half-naked picture to support her idea of "independent thinking", and 

• the comments are nothing more than a smear campaign as to the eyewitnesses, victims, victims' entire extended families, the reporter of the events and even the reporter's husband (a material difference here, because my husband did not extinguish the house fire in question and has nothing to do with this story, while the commentator's husband was on that site, according to her own admission) - that says a lot about the caliber of commentators.

It also says that I am on the right track in reporting this story.

Intimidation and smear campaigns are a sure sign that the story is true, and that there is more people are hiding and are trying hard to prevent from being discovered.

So, stay tuned for more coverage of the house fire and its non-investigation and non-reporting.

On the other hand - why keep people waiting. Here it is: a firefighter's wife spits fire - and that fire is pure hearsay

Just received a threat from a firefighter's wife.

She is very transparently hinting to me that if my home in Delhi, NY is on fire, she will hide her firefighter husband's keys so that he wouldn't be available to extinguish it.

I have no doubt about that.

The attempted arson in our home was already ignored by the local police and the DA's office.

The firefighter's wife was not an eyewitness, but who nevertheless believes her husband's statements and calls me and the victim, Barbara, a liar, and accuses her of the death of a dog, and accuses her of starting the fire.

Obviously that is the theory of Delhi FD.

One criminal indictment against Barbara dismissed, they are immediately putting together another, with the help of the noble brave dog-pitying firefighter husband.

Which does not explain why the firefighter husband came home to his wife crying about the dead dog, instead of calling the warden (as he was supposed to) to come and collect the dog's body.

Which does not explain why Barbara was blocked from going back into the house to save that dog, and she did tell them that the dog is in.

She could only do so much.  There were three dogs in the house at the time the fire started.

The first one came out with her.

She went back into the burning building for other dogs.

She took her time - while the fire was raging in the house - to get the second dog out.  He was scared and confused and would not go.

She saved him.

She could not save the third one, she told the firefighters about the 3rd dog, and she was not allowed back into the house, nor did the firefighters do anything to extinguish the fire.

Since the firefighter's wife falsely claimed to me that I allegedly locked my blog for comments (I never did, and comments posted today by the firefighter "Archer" are the proof), I am publishing her fiery messages to me in full.

Apparently, she did that under her real name, and she can be called as a witness in any court proceedings that may ensue.

And, apparently, she or somebody in her family have a problem with my husband, and specifically about divorces my husband has handled, so I wonder whether my husband was on the other side of a divorce of the fire-spitting firefighter's wife or her friend or family member.

And the spitfire person, Sharon Reichert-Morgan, who toils in the Social Services Department of Delaware County, forgot to mention that my "slumlording" husband rented, until 2 months ago, an apartment approved for several years, for different tenants, by Sharon Riechert-Morgan's own employer, Delaware County, as the cleanest living quarters available in Delhi, NY.

And that the contract with Delaware County Department of Social Services ended only because the tenant is not longer there and the new tenants do not need public assistance.

Anyway, here is the spitfire comments that I was claimed to block from posting on my blog - in full:

I asked Mrs. Sharon Riechert-Morgan these two questions, given her fiery speech:

Here is what she answered:

So - a worker supported by my taxes is threatening me to "correct the untruths" of my blog because Sharon Rienhart-Morgan, a social services department employee, believes her firefighter husband more than she does my friend - and victim in the case - Barbara O'Sullivan.

And, if I do not "correct the untruths", she is threatening me to withhold his husband's protection as a firefighter, and with a smear campaign.

Well, the smear campaign I will endure.  Not the first time.

The threat I will forward to Ms. Sharon Rienhart-Morgan's supervisors, with a request to fire her.

And, I will forward her threat to the Delhi Fire Department, Village Police, DA's office and the County Attorney with an indication that if ANYTHING AT ALL happens to my residence in Delhi, New York, I will know where to look for a culprit.

By the way, I did a little research on the Internet about the name of Sharon Riechert-Morgan's husband - since Barbara was denied any names of who was on site.

Here is the baby registry of Sharon Riecher and Josh Morgan, so Josh Morgan was allegedly on Barbara's property at the time of the fire.

Sharon Riechert-Morgan is also, "coincidentally", an employee of Delaware County (an entity much criticized by me on the blog) and specifically an employee of Delaware County Department of Social Services (an entity much criticized and sued by me and opposed in child neglect and abuse lawsuits by me and my husband).

Here is the fire-spitting firefighter's wife's picture:

Sharon Riechert(-Morgan) is also an employee of Delaware County since 2005, and a full-time employee, too:

Which does not prevent Sharon Riechert(-Morgan) to have a business on the side:

That little double-dipping makes me thinking - as a taxpayer in Delaware County - does Sharon Riechert-Morgan do her independent consulting on taxpayer-paid time?

By the way, as we speak, Sharon Reichert-Morgan keeps going on Messenger.

Here are her new spit-outs:

Since the smear campaign against Barbara already started, here are some answers.

No, Barbara did not have money problems.

She is retired and disabled from the NYS Department of Corrections and well cared for by the State of New York.  She had no motive to burn her own house.

I don't know whether Barbara was making any mortgage payments.  In fact, if she would be making any mortgage payments, I would be extremely surprised.

Why?  

Those curious why might check out Barbara O'Sullivan's name in Delaware County Courthouse.

I represented Barbara on a motion to vacate foreclosure on her house - and was successful, because the foreclosing bank did not have standing to sue.  The foreclosure was vacated and the house returned back to Barbara.  In 2010.

Whoever is pretending that they still have a claim on that house (now former house) had no such claim, as of 2010 when the foreclosure was vacated, by Judge Eugene Peckham.  

Check it out, Mrs. Sharon Riechert-Morgan, because what you are spewing about Barbara is ... well... not a little lie, but a big lie.  Like a bad lie.  Like a very bad lie.

And - why a firefighter's wife and an employee of the Department of Social Services interested in Barbara's mortgage payments, unless she is part of the team preparing to frame Barbara for something more?

And, Mrs. Sharon Riechert-Morgan being an employee of the County who persecuted Barbara on false criminal charges (just dismissed) and that lied to Barbara about legitimacy of its alleged Deputy Sheriff, and that is funding the legal defense of Derek Bowie at this time....  Well, makes her an interested witness, doesn't it?

And, as I said above,  Barbara saved two dogs out of three, plus herself, out of a raging fire, a fire that melted her cars - not bad considering that whoever wanted to ignite the house did that in the middle of the night, when the residents were supposed to be asleep.

Taking one dog out - and herself - required opening the door.

Getting back into the house for the 2nd dog - required opening the door.

If Barbara would let the 2nd dog burn to death, she would have been accused now of killing two dogs.

She saved two, now she is accused of killing the third.  By a person who was not on site, but who believes her husband "smelling of sweat and fire". 

Barbara got lucky.  She wasn't asleep.  And that's why she and two dogs (out of three) survived.

And, had Barbara planned to put fire to her house, she would have saved the family heirlooms that perished in the fire.

I understand that those who planned this were upset that Barbara got out unscathed.  Bad for them.  Good for Barbara.

And - there is no statute of limitations for attempted murder, the second one against Barbara since Derek Bowie's in September of 2014.

So, before piling it all up on Barbara - instead of providing an incident report - Delaware County should get to think how to train their employees.  

Or how to hire people of better caliber.  In terms of intellect and integrity.

Oh, and by the way - it was just reported to me that Sharon Riechert-Morgan is the former girlfriend of Judge Yvonne Pagillo's policeman son Richard Pagillo.  Where Yvonne Pagillo and Richard Pagillo spread rumors starting in 2013 that I was disbarred - I never was.

And that Sharon Riechert-Morgan, the paragon of morality, has three children by three different men and only the youngest kid is with her husband, who - my source indicated to me - was divorced and got his kid living with his ex-wife, so it is very likely that a man gets together with a woman who is a social services worker to help the man get his kid back.

So much for three kids "waiting for THEIR" father, Sharon.

Just a little bit of untruth ruins it all, right?

While no incident report is coming as to the fire/explosion at Barbara O'Sullivan's house, the smear campaign is brewing - business as usual in Delaware County

I received a firestorm of messages from an employee of the Department of Social Services and an alleged wife of a firefighter accusing me - and the victim in the recent house fire Barbara O'Sullivan in all sorts of bad behavior.

Barbara O'Sullivan asked local authorities for a police incident report - nothing, fire report - nothing.  But apparently there are a lot of people, especially "wives and mothers of firefighters" - who "know".

They've never been at the site of the fire, but they still "know".

Usually, such a firestorm means that the journalist is onto something good, so thank you, Sharon Reichert-Morgan.

Comments on my blog are not locked, so anyone can publish whatever comments he or she want.

I, on my behalf, will publish any messages of Sharon Reichert-Morgan, with comments, tomorrow.  

Now I need to go sleep in my warm cozy bed - as you accused me of doing at night.

For now, here are comments of Sharon Riechert-Morgan published on Facebook.

One of the "liking" crowd is, by the way, the employee of the Delaware County who may have sent an "unofficial" press-release against Barbara O'Sullivan in 2014.  She was not concerned about falsity of her statements then.

So, we have all good and honorable people making comments.

And laughing that my blog are incomprehensible.

Laughing is beneficial for one's health. 

As to anything here being "incomprehensible"... What can I say...

When somebody does not comprehend some written text, and especially if that somebody toils at Delaware County Department of Social Services, it is not necessarily that the text is to blame.  It is usually the reader.  They are usually hired because they are members of this or that clan, for blood ties, not for smarts.

I experienced encounters, as an attorney, with Delaware County Department of Social Services often on a daily basis.   Once again, they are not known for their smarts.

Here is the comment of Sharon Riechert-Morgan and comments to her comment.

By the way, Sharon Riechert-Morgan is all fired up about this blog article.  

And - after she sent me her first river of fire (she has sent to me two rivers), I asked her whether she was at the fire site together with her husband when she was speaking as to what her husband did or did not do there.  

She answered in the negative.  

She was not there.  

Her spitfire of indignation is pure hearsay.

But - she believes that her husband is not a liar.  Good for her. I am not her husband's wife and do not have to believe him.

At least we now know the name of at least one firefighter who was at the site that night, it will save me a FOIL request.

Josh Morgan.  Husband of Sharon Riechert-Morgan.  Thank you for your effort, Sharon Riechert-Morgan.  You helped me a lot.

Here are the comments.

Riechert-Morgan's river of fire, with personal threats against me, that she's sent me on Messenger will wait until tomorrow - for publishing and for being sent to authorities.

As to my "crazy conspiracy theories"...

Well...

My "crazy" imagination cannot catch up with what is going on in Delaware County.

That Delhi Town judge Richard L. Gumo (or his court clerk Cathy Fletcher) has a rubber-stamp to stamp, instead of sign, arrest warrants.

That he would then lie under oath about it in front of Judge Lambert.

That Judge Lambert would then dismiss a criminal felony case because of lies of a judge.

Who would fathom such a situation?

An arresting police officer Derek Bowie, nephew of Delaware County District Attorney's investigator Jeff Bowie, both uncle and nephew hired without credentials and not out of civil service registry, the nephew is hired without even an application - by an "invitation".

Moreover, Derek Bowie, who goes around assaulting dogs and look-alike women, while Delaware County prosecutes his victims (at least one of them, Barbara O'Sullivan) and pays out of taxpayers' pockets for Derek Bowie's legal defense, claims, under oath, he is a legitimate police officer - yet, he is not, because he lives in Broome County (despite the residency requirement for Deputy Sheriffs in Delaware County), but PARKS HIS POLICE CAR at his mother's house in Delaware County, while keeping by his bed where he sleeps with his girlfriend a more necessary piece of police equipment - handcuffs.

I couldn't have made that up, it is Delaware County.   In full glory. Revealed through a deposition of Derek Bowie, under oath.

By the way, as soon as I posted information about Derek Bowie's serial assaults of look-alike women, Sharon Riechert-Morgan's friend Bridgett Berry started to contact Barbara's daughter to claim that that particular blog will hurt Barbara's case spewing defamatory statements about Kylie Smith that I am not going to repeat here.

So, the smear campaign goes on against both of Derek Bowie's victims.  And is fired up by friends of Delaware County employees and by Delaware County employees themselves.

And - if nobody did anything wrong, why did Barbara O'Sullivan's brother Jim's auto-shop became a confessional for firefighters and police officers who run there to bare their souls and claim that they did not do anything wrong?

Because they did?

What more revelations will happen in this case?

Future will show.

And once again, ladies and gentlemen, my readers, benevolent and hostile, my imagination cannot catch up with the flight of bizarre events in Delaware County.

Coyotes Wait with Archers in the bushes

Periodically, I get comments on my blog.

Very rarely (happened only twice over 2+ years of existence of this blog) I get negative comments.

Both sets of negative comments were given by anonymous commentators - which says a lot about veracity of those commentators.

Both anonymous commentators made negative comments from Google+ accounts that were especially created to make the comment - because they had no profile views at the time comments were made.

Both anonymous commentators chose threatening nicknames.

The first named himself "Coyote Waits", the second - an "Archer".

My policy is not to delete negative comments, but to comment on them and to blog about them, see my blogs about "Coyote Waits"' comments here and here.

Which is what I do with the "Archer"'s comments.

Here is Archer's comments made today on this blog:

With my replies:

Here is Archer's profile views as of today - the 1 view registered is mine. 

 It is good - and interesting - that somebody from Delhi FD even engaging in conversations and comments about the fire.

Because that fire, unlike other fires that Delhi FD extinguished, is not reported ANYWHERE.

And, when the victim asked for an official fire report today, in order to present it where she needed to present it, she was told today, 3 days after the fire, that Tim Buckley of Delaware County Sheriff's Department is still preparing the report.

She called the EMS to speak to the EMS guy who talked to her at the site of the fire, and the EMS told her that the report will not come until 2 to 3 weeks later.

They are comparing notes and trying to concoct a plausible story of an "accidental" fire.

While there are many witnesses stating that the fire department did not take the water hoses out, and did not even go up the long driveway until the house was "fully gone".

And, the house as not even "fully gone" when one of the victims saw it - already without a fire.

When she saw it the next time, there was less of a house, apparently, either somebody gutted it thoroughly, or somebody additionally burnt it, while both victims were kept away by FD.

And, up to today, there is no report in the local press, police blotter, FD blotter about the fire, nobody appears to know anything about anything - but Archer, of course.

He knows everything and shoots at me from the bushes, conveniently covering himself with anonymity.

FD did not take the water hose out.

FD did not even call the dog warden to take away the corpse of the dog that remained on site - which is what a person from the local Humane Society claimed FD are immediately doing in such cases.  She was outraged at this neglect.

Nobody talked to the victims.

Nobody took their written statements.

No efforts to save the house.

No efforts to report the fire.

No efforts to even issue an incident report.

No efforts to report the fire in the local news.

Had I not reported it, the local government would have pretended it did not happen at all.

The victim was promised to be called by Tim Buckley today, with the report.

Tim Buckley did not call.

So - if Tim Buckley issues a report dated today or earlier, know that it is backdated or otherwise forged.

It did not exist today.

What the victims received was this letter from Delhi EMS services:

 

It is obvious that EMS did not even get the name of Barbara's daughter - who was present on site when FD boys were still there.

And - as Barbara was told - the EMS "report" will come only in 2-3 weeks.  

The letter does not say much at all.  It says that the house was "completely destroyed by fire".  That much we already know.

It says nothing about anybody's efforts to extinguish the fire, whether anybody was hurt or if any efforts were undertaken to investigate causes of the fire.

FD boys actually told one of the victims that the fire as intense as melted two vehicles and instantly burned a house started because (1) an electrical problem or (2) the sewer got up in flames.

While one of the victims heard a distinctive sound of window breaking before she went into that room and saw a mattress on fire with something burning on top of it - something that nobody wants to investigate.

I will continue reporting on this case, especially that, according to some experts consulted about the case, there is an indication that it is an arson through explosion and that a certain explosive device was used against the victim's house, and especially that the local press and government  does not believe this fire, especially under the circumstances of the case, is newsworthy.

And, Archer is welcome to make comments - but I ask him to make them under his own name.  

I even invite him to a video conference call on Hangouts that can be streamed to my readers here.

I wonder if the brave Archer will agree to come out of the bushes and participate in a conference - with victims and with experts - sharing his knowledge about the case.

I am sure that his supervisors will tell him to shut up and not speak another word though. 

Or, maybe, Archer actually is a supervisor of the Fire Department.

Who got pissed that his brave men got caught.

I am not sure if these brave men will be brave enough to show their real faces on a video chat recorded by a journalist and streamed live to the public.

It does not require courage to deny protection to a woman, or to forge documents, or even to say nasty things anonymously.

It does require courage - the courage they do not have - to engage in public debate, in real time, on video, live.

The brave Coyote Wait didn't come out of the bushes either, but who knows?

Let's wait if Archer surfaces again and agrees to do a live-streamed video-chat.

Stay tuned.