Saturday, October 20, 2018

A haunted house captured the moment when most people crapped their pants (30 Pics)


  • Nevada Democratic gubernatorial candidate Steve Sisolak’s campaign image as a single father raising two successful daughters is a lie, according to his ex-wife, Dallas Garland.
  • She said Sisolak treated her like “a total prisoner” throughout their 13-year marriage and that he drove a wedge between her and her children.
  • Garland said she was left with a bruised neck after an altercation with Sisolak after she filed for divorce in 2000, according to pictures and a contemporaneous diary entry.
  • Sisolak’s two children dispute Garland’s account in a sworn statement, saying Garland, not Sisolak, was the aggressor.
 Sisolak family photo taken around 1993. Steve Sisolak on the left with Ashley Sisolak on his lap, and Dallas Garland on the right with Carley Sisolak on her lap. 
 Photo Dallas Garland said was taken of her bruised neck the day after the Aug. 24, 2000, incident with Steve Sisolak. 

Nevada Democrat Steve Sisolak has framed his gubernatorial campaign on an image of him raising his two daughters as a single father. But his ex-wife said that claim is “bull,” that he treated her like “a total prisoner,” and that an altercation with Sisolak in 2000 left her with a bruised neck.

Sisolak, who has been at the center of Las Vegas politics for the past decade as a Clark County commissioner, has leveraged his backstory to earn the endorsement of high-profile Democrats like former President Barack Obama and former Vice President Joe Biden, both of whom cited Sisolak’s experience as a single father.

Sisolak’s two daughters, Ashley, 29, and Carley, 27, have been featured throughout his gubernatorial campaign. The two have appeared in two campaign ads with their father, both of which create the impression that Sisolak raised them as a single father.

But Sisolak’s ex-wife, Lori Ann ‘Dallas’ Garland, says her ex-husband is not being truthful.

“He claims he raised those daughters by himself. That’s bull,” Garland, whose legal last name is still Sisolak, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “He did that on purpose. He didn’t raise our daughters by himself. They have a mom.”

Garland and Sisolak shared joint legal custody of their two daughters after their divorce in 2000, according to court documents reviewed by TheDCNF. Garland said it has been 10 years since she has seen either of her children, but said that she had an active role in her children’s lives until they had both had graduated high school.

TheDCNF spoke with Garland and four of her longtime friends who said they observed Sisolak making an effort to drive a wedge between Garland and her children after their divorce. All four friends spoke on condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation against themselves or their family members from Sisolak, the chairman of the Clark County Commission.

“The county commissioners in this town are very powerful,” explained one of Garland’s friends who requested to stay anonymous. “It’s alarming how much power they have and what they can do. Steve has a lot of supporters in this town, and I certainly don’t want a target on my back. I want to stand up for my friend, however I still have to live here.”

Garland also detailed an August 2000 incident that she says left a bruise on her neck and ended with Sisolak threatening to call the police. TheDCNF obtained photographs of Garland’s bruised neck taken the day after the incident and spoke with three individuals who recalled seeing her bruised neck.

Sisolak’s daughters, who were children at the time of the altercation, recently denied that Sisolak was the aggressor and put the blame on Garland.

Garland said she believes Sisolak has harbored vindictiveness against her for nearly 20 years because she “broke his political picture” when she filed for divorce.

“He said, ‘you’re going to get your divorce, but you are never, ever going to get one dime of my money, or my children,'” Garland said. “And he meant it.”

‘It’s like she’s dead’

“I was raising you on my own,” Sisolak said in a campaign ad with his daughters after touting his sub-par cooking abilities.

“Hey, you try raising your kids as a single father,” Sisolak said in another campaign ad with his daughters where he recalled taking his kids to Planned Parenthood so they could get “answers to questions daughters just don’t ask their dad.”

But Garland said she played an active role in her daughters’ lives until they had both graduated high school, and while it has been 10 years since she has seen them, she has stayed in the Las Vegas area away from her family on the East Coast in the hope she can rekindle her relationship with her daughters.

“I text them every birthday, every holiday,” Garland said. “Still do it. Nothing in return.”

“I came to this realization I may never see them again. If I don’t, then that’s OK. Because that means they’re more like him then they are like me, and I wouldn’t be able to handle that.”

Sisolak’s campaign said the gubernatorial candidate received full custody of his children in 2003, but did not provide supporting documentation. The court documents TheDCNF reviewed showed the couple shared joint custody.

TheDCNF spoke with four longtime friends of Garland who spent time with her and her two daughters following her divorce from Sisolak. They were afraid to speak publicly out of fear that Sisolak would use his political position to retaliate.

“He’s very vindictive, and very revengeful. And I don’t trust him. And I’m scared of him,” Garland said of her ex-husband, who is in a tight gubernatorial race with his opponent, Republican Adam Laxalt.

“They were under so much pressure to hate their mother that they couldn’t really show any excitement or love for her because of the ridicule and shame and anger they would face by their father,” one friend said.

“He made it impossible for those girls to ever have a relationship with their mom,” the friend added. “It’s almost like he’s proud of it. In his political ads it makes it seem like they never had a mother. It’s a lie. You guys have a mother, for him to put his girls on there and brag about the fact they went to Planned Parenthood — I don’t give him kudos of that.”

Another friend said, “Those ads are so weird. It’s almost like Dallas has never been there. It’s like she’s dead.”

A third friend told TheDCNF: “I thought he was a complete control freak. There was something wrong with him not wanting his children to have a relationship with their own mother.”

“They had a good time,” the friend added. “The kids had a good time. There was no forcing them to stay there. They would cook together, play games and do regular stuff.”

Sisolak’s political ads “make me sick,” a fourth friend told TheDCNF. “He acts like he’s a single man, and I tell people he’s not a widower. She raised those children too. But people don’t know that. It’s such a misleading ad.”

“People are waiting for this story to drop,” the friend added. “People know he has a wife and helped raise his kids. How come nothing bad has come out? I just think everyone is a little afraid to speak up. So it’s about time. It is about time.”

The Sisolak campaign firmly stated that Garland bears sole responsibility for being alienated from her children based on assessments made by her children’s psychologist, Dr. Louis Mortillaro. The psychologist was assigned to the children by the judge who presided over Garland and Sisolak’s divorce, Judge Steven Jones.

Jones finished serving a two-year prison sentence in 2017 for using his position to further an investment fraud scheme that tricked victims into investing millions in projects that never saw returns. Jones was found guilty of using his position as a judge to help persuade victims to invest in projects.

Mortillaro filed a letter to Jones in June 2003 in which he stated Garland “terminated individual and conjoint counseling with her two daughters” in June 2001 and that her children “fear[ed] that [Dallas] will both emotionally and physically abuse them.”

Mortillaro’s assessment of Garland was a critical factor in Jones awarding Sisolak full custody of his daughters in 2003, according to the Sisolak campaign.

But Garland said she did attend regular counseling sessions with Mortillaro throughout that time frame. She provided bank statements showing bounced checks related to her visits with Mortillaro on four occasions in 2002. She also provided invoices for eight “individual psychotherapy” sessions between November 2003 and August 2004.
Mortillaro died on Sunday.
I was like a total prisoner’

Garland said Sisolak became “very controlling” over her life shortly after their marriage in 1987 following a two-year courtship.
“I had to be home by a certain time. I had time limits to do everything. I couldn’t go out with my friends anymore,” she said. “I was like a total prisoner.”

A longtime personal friend of Garland, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to fear of retaliation by Sisolak, said Garland became increasingly “isolated” as her relationship with Sisolak progressed.
The friend recalled one incident in particular where Sisolak made clear that Garland could only be visited at his home.

“He more or less just let me know that was the place I would be visiting my friend and not to expect really anything else,” her friend said. “The closer they became, the more isolated she became.”

Despite her misgivings, Garland said she tried her best to salvage her marriage with Sisolakfor the sake of her two daughters, Ashley and Carley, who were born in 1988 and 1991, respectively. But Garland said she came to realize during a marriage counseling session in the mid-1990s that her husband viewed her as nothing more than an incubator for his children.

“Steve was never in love with me,” Garland said. “He picked me to have his children. He didn’t deny it either to me. Not even to my face. I was a surrogate but I didn’t know it.”
Garland said she reached her breaking point after 13 years of marriage. She filed for divorce in January 2000 to break away from Sisolak, who she said responded by doing everything within his power to alienate her from her daughters.
“I tried to never have a confrontation with him in front of the kids,” she said. “He always made it in front of the kids. He manipulated those kids into thinking I did all kinds of crazy shit.”

‘Steve would have went to jail’

Garland detailed an incident in August 2000 in which she says Sisolak threatened to call the police on her after he allegedly left her with a bruise on her neck.
Garland provided The Daily Caller News Foundation with pictures she said her lawyer took of her bruised neck, along with entries of her contemporaneous diary detailing the altercation. Three of Garland’s longtime friends told TheDCNF they personally saw her bruised neck after the incident.
The altercation occurred on Aug. 24, 2000, the day after she moved out of their marital home, according to an entry in her contemporaneous diary, which was reviewed by TheDCNF.

Garland wrote in the entry that she returned to the house that evening after picking up her two daughters from the local community center to retrieve her make-up, which she had forgotten to pack the day before.
Garland wrote that she tried to follow her kids as they entered the house through the garage, but Sisolak blocked her at the door. Garland tried to push her way past Sisolak after he told her to provide a list to his lawyers of the things she wanted to collect, the diary entry read.
Garland told TheDCNF there was no court order at the time that prevented her from entering her house.

“I tried to push the door open. I told him I’m not leaving without my makeup, it’s not like I was going to do anything else, I just wanted my makeup,” she said. “He was trying to shut the door. He had his arm out and had it up against my neck pushing me and trying to shut the door.”

Garland said she and Sisolak pushed against each at the door for a few moments until, she charges, her ex-husband suddenly “stumbled back on purpose and fell on the floor,” allegedly claiming to be injured while yelling at their daughter, Carley, that she had to stay away from her “dangerous” mother.

“Our daughter, Carley, was crying hysterically, yelling, ‘Daddy, please just let Mommy have her makeup,'” Garland said.
Garland said she walked over her ex-husband, who she said was groveling, grabbed her makeup from the bedroom and left the house without any further incident.

Garland wrote in her diary that her two daughters begged her not to get their father in trouble by telling their court-ordered psychologist about the incident.

“When I got back to the garage I told Carley I was sorry & that I wouldn’t get her dad in trouble,” the diary entry reads. “I told Steve I was sorry too.”

Garland denies ever forcing Sisolak onto the ground. She claims his fall was nothing more than a theatrical ploy to make her look bad in front of their child. Garland said Sisolak was 6 feet 3 inches tall and weighed over 200 pounds at the time of the incident, over double the weight of Garland, who was about 100 pounds.

“I think what Steve was trying to get me supervised visitation. He was trying to say there was domestic violence — that I hit him,” Garland said.

Garland said she learned through her lawyer the following day that Sisolak was threatening to call the police on her. She said the threats stopped after she had her lawyer send Sisolak a picture of the bruise on the right side of her neck.

“Steve would have went to jail, because he didn’t have a mark on him,” Garland said.
TheDCNF contacted the attorney Garland said took a picture of her bruised neck, Jon Norheim, who declined to say if he recalled taking the photo.
“I’m sure that whatever happened in her life was incredibly important and memorable to her and she would have a really good memory of it, but I did a lot of cases and they were all similar, and my recollection of 18 to 20 years ago is pretty poor,” Norheim told TheDCNF.

The Sisolak campaign did not deny that a physical altercation occurred between Garland and Sisolak in August 2000. The campaign provided sworn statements from Sisolak’s daughters signed Oct. 17, 2018, that, put together, share similarities with the account of the altercation detailed in Garland’s diary, with one key difference — that it was Garland who had injured their father.

The sworn statements of Ashley and Carley Sisolak — who were, respectively, 13 and 10 at the time — detailed a physical altercation that occurred on August 24, 2000, nearly 20 years prior, at 7 p.m. when Garland arrived at their home to retrieve her makeup before Sisolak stopped her at the garage door, just as described in Garland’s diary.

The daughters’ sworn statements differ in that they say it was Garland who was the aggressor against Sisolak. Ashley said Garland “battered” her father, who she said slipped on a rug and fell to the ground after Garland pushed him.

Garland said there couldn’t have been a rug near the garage door for Sisolak to slip on.

“You couldn’t put one there because if you did you couldn’t open the door,” she said. “Believe me, I tried. I lived in that house. There was no way to put a rug in that room.”

Garland said Sisolak wore a neck brace in public for weeks after the alleged assault, while she tried to stay silent about the alleged incident.
TheDCNF spoke with three longtime friends of Garland who saw her bruised neck in the days after the incident.

“There was a nasty bruise on her neck,” one friend said. “She didn’t talk about it. She didn’t say anything. I saw it.”

“And Steve wore a neck brace for six weeks, which, I’m not going to lie, we thought was hysterical,” the friend added. “It was just so farcical that you had a hard time taking it seriously.”

“The guy is huge,” another friend remarked. “If he’s claiming that Dallas, at barely five feet, can do anything to harm his physical body is ridiculous. The difference in those two in their stature is night and day.”
None of the three friends who personally saw Garland’s bruised neck were willing to speak publicly out of fear for their careers or the careers of their family members if they spoke out against Sisolak due to his current position as chairman of the Clark County Commission.

Garland said the bruise on her neck healed after about a week and added that she doesn’t believe the assault has damaged her psychologically. But Garland said being isolated from her children has had a lasting impact.

“Bruises and stuff, that’s no big deal,” Garland said. “That incident was nothing compared to what I lived through without my kids.”
“He’s taken the most important thing in my life, and that was my daughters. I can’t get back that time,” she added.

Politically Incorrect Elizabeth Warren Meme Has Democrats Throwing Fits

The politically incorrect meme below has Democrat Elizabeth Warren fans throwing hysterical hissy fits of rage.

For A Woman Who Accused A Lawyer Of Groping Her, There’s No #MeToo

Luisa Esposito sat quietly as her personal injury lawyer bragged about how lucky she was that that he’d taken her case. He’d dropped a “big case from Oregon, a big case about a matter that involved a big client, corporate client,” to work on hers, a common car crash suit, Allen Isaac told Esposito as they met in his office on the 20th floor of a Manhattan skyscraper.
It was Esposito’s third meeting with Isaac, and unbeknownst to him, she had a recorder hidden in her handbag.
“This is the kind of case you give to a lawyer out of law school that wants to practice, you understand?” Isaac went on, speaking in quick staccato bursts with a heavy New York accent. “You’re not ever going to get a senior partner to try this case. So I said, I don’t want it. Then I saw you. You came in. I don’t know, you have a charming thing for me. I don’t know, maybe you got big tits.”

He complained that he’d become “the laughing stock of this whole goddamn community” for taking on such “a lousy case.” He said she wasn’t a credible plaintiff, that people weren’t going to believe her, and that her case had little chance of success without an experienced attorney like him at the reins.
“I don’t think you appreciate me. I really don’t,” he said, reminding her that in past meetings, she’d turned down his requests for oral sex.
“Like it’s a big deal for 30 seconds,” Isaac said, calling his proposition a “test” that she’d flunked.

“You know what you should have said?” Isaac asked Esposito, then a 47-year-old retired hairdresser from Long Island.
“What?” she replied.
“Of course, of course. Tell me when, how.”
“You put your hand on my breast, you grab my behind, and then you ask me for a blow job?” Esposito said.
“You were my special friend,” Isaac said. “Because you were something special. You think I get involved with every client? You think I ask for things with every client? ... Maybe you should feel complimented ... You should’ve said, ‘Absolutely.’ We have something special going here. That’s the only thing I ever asked you for ... Maybe she'll give me 30 seconds of pleasure, 30 seconds. Big deal.”

"I asked you four times that day, two Fridays ago, think about it," he continued. " 'No, no, no.' I couldn't believe that you said that. She's making me out to be a shyster. Negotiating a prostitute deal here."
As she left his office, Esposito thought she finally had what she needed for prosecutors to charge Isaac with a crime for groping her during their earlier encounters. She filed a criminal complaint, gave police and prosecutors the recording, and waited. But no charges were filed, no grand jury convened, and six months later, the case was closed.
Esposito, prosecutors concluded, was not credible, despite her clean criminal record, the secret audio of Isaac, and statements from two other people describing Isaac’s allegedly lecherous behavior.

Thirteen years later, Esposito is still clamoring for her day in court against Isaac, her case presenting a sterling example of the false hopes raised by the #MeToo movement and its limitations, despite the high-profile men caught in its crosshairs. “When I heard about the #MeToo movement, I thought ‘Wow, that’s outrageous. Finally,’ ” said Esposito, who figured if Harvey Weinstein could be prosecuted for crimes allegedly committed more than a decade ago, why not Isaac? If not for groping her, perhaps for lying about it, she thought.
“I’m thinking, ‘Here I come again.’ It got my hopes up. I finally had faith in the system,” Esposito said.
She emailed activists, sent Twitter messages to Rose McGowan and other celebrities at the center of the movement, and contacted police and prosecutors. Esposito told them about her case, including how she’d hired a private investigator who’d fitted her with that secret recorder to capture Isaac on tape. She consulted with a new lawyer, wrote new letters, and even considered holding a press conference to air her grievances.
But she soon found that, despite the social movement swirling around her, there was little anybody could do. The cases she and countless others have followed closely — the rape charges against Weinstein and the sexual assault convictions of former USA Gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar and comedian Bill Cosby — are outliers. While most states have no statute of limitations for rape and child sexual abuse, the vast majority of sex crimes have strict statutes of limitations, and once they expire, the doors to the justice system shut for good.
“I can’t even begin to tell you how disheartening it is,” Esposito said. “It’s robbed me of years of my life. It’s given me zero trust in the system. This is probably why women don’t come forward.”
Isaac did pay a price for his behavior. Shortly after Esposito filed a sexual abuse complaint to the New York State Supreme Court’s disciplinary committee, Isaac left his position as a senior partner at Gladstein & Isaac, the firm he had cofounded decades earlier. It dropped his name and became Gladstein & Partners. Isaac’s law license was suspended for six months. He is 84 years old now, with a private law practice in upstate New York under his name but no website, listed phone number, or public email address. Google his name and you’ll find little more than the news articles, court filings, and blog posts chronicling his misconduct. “Lusty Lawyer,” the New York Post dubbed him.
He declined an interview request for this story. His trajectory is one that has become increasingly familiar these days: a powerful man losing his job and his standing after reports of abusive behavior.
But to Esposito, Isaac got off easy, protected by a legal system that has too often placed the words of powerful men above the words of the women accusing them of abuse — a system on full display as Republican lawmakers confirmed Brett Kavanaugh’s appointment to the US Supreme Court despite allegations he’d tried to rape a girl when both were teenagers.
“The only solace I would get is if I see him with handcuffs on,” Esposito said of Isaac, even as she acknowledged that there’s virtually no chance of that happening.

Just seven states have no statutes of limitations for felony sex crimes, including those that don’t legally qualify as rape. Most states require charges to be filed within 10 years of an alleged incident, according to a database of state laws compiled by the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, an advocacy group. The statutes are tighter for misdemeanors, which is usually how prosecutors classify groping. In New York, misdemeanor sex offense charges must be filed within two years of the crime having allegedly occurred.
Over the past two decades, though, states across the country have passed laws aiming to hold more people legally liable for sex crimes committed many years earlier. The advent of DNA evidence in the 1990s led 28 states to allow certain cases to be reopened. After the Catholic priest sex abuse scandal in the early 2000s, most states eliminated statutes of limitations for anyone who had been abused as a child. In the two years after the reports about Bill Cosby resurfaced in 2014, six states extended the statute for sexual assault.
“Part of what we’re seeing now is greater receptivity to these allegations,” said Deborah Tuerkheimer, a law professor at Northwestern University and former prosecutor in Manhattan. “There’s a societal movement in the direction of greater willingness to believe that is enabling these cases to bubble up and come to the fore. The question is, what should the criminal justice system do in those instances?”
Most recently, among some advocates and lawmakers, this question has focused on sex crimes other than sexual assault and child abuse. This year, legislators in Connecticut and Washington proposed laws eliminating statutes of limitations for all felony sex offenses. The bills failed amid concerns that they were too expansive, but they picked up substantial support: The Washington proposal made it through the state’s House of Representatives by a 90–8 vote before stalling in the state Senate.
“We’re increasingly seeing lawmakers say, ‘Why is groping any less significant than other forms of sexual violence?” said Rebecca O’Connor, vice president of public policy for RAINN. “These statutes of limitations were crafted when we didn’t know as much as we know now about how [sex crimes are] perpetrated. They are archaic laws that set an artificial time limit on when someone can tell the truth.”
For most people coming forward many years after the fact, the court system will always be closed.
Esposito first met Isaac in July 2005, three years after she’d hurt her back in a car crash. He was representing her in a lawsuit seeking additional payment from an insurance company. It was set to go to trial later that year. Isaac had grown up in the Bronx and had been practicing law in New York since 1958, shortly after graduating from Brooklyn Law School. He boasted to Esposito about winning big verdicts for clients in slip-and-fall cases against major hotels. He’d once secured a $500,000 settlement for the family of a woman killed in a whitewater rafting accident. Until Esposito filed her complaint against him, Isaac’s ethics record was unblemished, according to court documents. She thought she was hiring a top trial lawyer.
During their first meeting in Isaac’s office, she mentioned that the pain in her torso and back had made it difficult to have sex with her boyfriend. In an interview with BuzzFeed News and in her lawsuit, Esposito said the lawyer responded with probing questions about her romantic life, which she found a bit uncomfortable but no cause for concern. At their next meeting two months later, when Esposito described her back pain, she said Isaac suggested she demonstrate her range of movement by showing how she took off and put on her bra. “And then that’s when he put his hands inside my bra and grabbed my breast and said, ‘Great tits,’ ” she said. “I was numb. Blank stare. I was in shock. I just wanted to go home.”
Esposito said that Isaac then asked her to give him a blow job. She joked her way out of the conversation and wrapped up the meeting. In testimony to the state court’s disciplinary committee that dealt with Esposito’s complaint against Isaac, her friend, Faith Wyckoff, said that Esposito called her that night “extremely upset” and said Isaac had groped her.

A few days later, Esposito called another personal injury attorney she knew, Chris McGrath, and they arranged to meet. “She came into my office crying,” he testified to the committee. “Very upset. And she told me that Mr. Isaac had put his hand down her blouse and asked her to give him oral sex.”
Esposito asked if McGrath or another attorney would take the case over from Isaac.
“I explained to her that to get another trial attorney at this late stage would be impossible,” McGrath testified. “I said to her that your case is coming up, stick it out. Go try the case. He’s not going to screw your case. He’s not going to screw himself out of a fee.”
Esposito did as McGrath suggested, but the next time she was alone with Isaac in his office, she said he walked up behind her and grabbed her breasts with both hands. “I just jerked forward, and I was scared, and I said, ‘I gotta go.’ ”
Esposito’s friend Wyckoff and Isaac’s secretary, Ileana Filomeno, were outside in the hallway when Esposito and Isaac emerged. Wyckoff testified that as she and Esposito headed for the door, “Mr. Isaac was close behind us. That was when I saw him touch Ms. Esposito’s buttocks.”
Filomeno told the disciplinary committee that her boss had made inappropriate and unwanted advances toward her too, in the past. She said Isaac sometimes commented on her body and clothes. She recalled an instance in his office when he put his arm around her waist and touched her butt. “He said, ‘You have a beautiful tush and you’re driving me crazy,’ ” she testified. “I was very upset. I was very upset because I didn’t have anyone to complain to that wouldn’t jeopardize my job.”
Even with their corroboration, Esposito doubted authorities would believe her. After all, Isaac was a prominent attorney, a senior partner at a respected firm. Esposito was a self-described “small potato,” struggling to get by and splitting rent on a house on Long Island. That’s when Esposito decided to hire a private investigator to help her collect evidence to pursue a case.
When she walked into Isaac’s office in October 2005, the tape was rolling.
Shortly afterward, Esposito met with prosecutors.
One of them, Lisa Friel, who was the assistant district attorney in charge of sex crimes, later testified in Esposito’s lawsuit against Isaac and the DA’s office. “I recall him telling us that he had what he called a special relationship with Ms. Esposito,” she said of Isaac.

“That is why he thought it was OK to request her to give him a blow job.”
Explaining her decision not to press charges against Isaac, Friel described Esposito as difficult to work with and said she wasn’t honest about some things, including breast enhancement surgery that she’d initially refused to discuss with prosecutors. The surgery was relevant because it formed part of Isaac’s defense. When prosecutors had interviewed Isaac about Esposito’s complaint, he’d said Esposito had told him about the operation and invited him to touch her breasts. But when Friel asked Esposito about the surgery, she said Esposito replied that it was none of her business.
Friel said Isaac also denied groping Esposito’s butt and said he’d merely brushed her rear end to indicate where her pants were too tight to be suitable trial attire.
In March 2006, prosecutors decided not to pursue a case.
A spokesperson for the Manhattan district attorney's office declined to discuss Esposito’s case but said in a statement that “our records show that the complainant’s report was thoroughly investigated.”
The state court’s internal investigation lasted three years. Testimony began in 2007, and Esposito took the stand, but citing health problems, she never finished testifying. Members of the disciplinary committee recommended punishments that ranged from a two-year suspension to stripping Isaac of his law license. The decision fell to the five judges overseeing the proceeding. In their unanimous ruling in June 2010, they noted his “disturbing lack of comprehension as to the depth and extent of his misconduct” but ordered only a six-month suspension — “considering [Isaac]’s age and his long and unblemished record practicing law.”
In 2010, in light of the disciplinary committee’s decision to suspend Isaac, Esposito wrote to newly elected Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance Jr., asking him to take a look at her case. Prosecutors met with Esposito but again declined to file charges. By then, the statute of limitations had expired for any misdemeanor charge that prosecutors could have brought, and they said the allegations didn’t rise to the level of a felony.
In March 2011, Isaac got his license to practice law back.
The years since she made that recording have taken their toll on Esposito, who says she still obsesses over how to get Isaac arrested. She has consulted with more than half a dozen lawyers. She has filed several lawsuits — in federal and state court — against Isaac, the Manhattan district attorney’s office, and the New York state court system, all of which have been dismissed. A series of judges ruled that she didn’t have enough evidence of wrongdoing to sue the DA’s Office and the state court system, and that Isaac couldn’t be found personally liable because he hadn’t been properly served subpoena papers.
She’s spent thousands of dollars pursuing Isaac, and many hours searching for evidence of the favors and deals she is convinced protected him. In the 2005 meeting with Isaac she recorded, he had flaunted his connections to judges he was “very close” to and “powerful” lawyers who owed him favors. “It’s all backroom politics,” Isaac said.
In the close-knit world of Manhattan’s legal circle, there are ties everywhere, some more meaningful than others, some with no impact at all. She’s looked up the names of judges and attorneys involved in some of Isaac’s old cases. She’s kept up with news about corruption in the New York state government. “It’s all fixed,” she said. “This man has got powerful juice. This man has pulled every plug to ruin everything.”
Earlier this year, Esposito began consulting with attorney Peter Gleason, a former cop and firefighter who once ran against Vance for DA and has previously represented women in high-profile sexual abuse cases. In May, shortly after four women accused the then-New York state attorney general, Eric Schneiderman, of physically assaulting them, Gleason revealed in a court filing that two women had come to him with their own stories about Schneiderman years earlier, but he didn’t pass the information to the Manhattan DA’s office because he said local law enforcement would “protect the power elite.”
Gleason shares Esposito’s suspicion that powerful figures shut down the case against Isaac. In a federal court motion laying out his claims of corruption in Manhattan, he cited her case as an example “as to why a victim of a sexual assault, at the hands of someone politically connected, should be forewarned before seeking redress within the channels of the New York criminal justice system.”
The stories about other powerful men who walked free from sexual abuse allegations have only bolstered Esposito’s feeling that Isaac benefitted from connections in high places. In recent years, Vance dropped sexual assault cases against Weinstein, International Monetary Fund director Dominique Strauss-Kahn, and lawyer Sanford Rubenstein, who all were represented by attorneys who’d donated to Vance’s campaign. A doctor represented by a friend and donor of Vance ended up with a plea deal for no jail time after 19 women accused him of sexual abuse.
One of the many lessons learned from the blossoming of #MeToo is that for many survivors, all the justice system has to offer is recognition.
“Just getting the validation that we believe you,” said O’Connor of RAINN. “It’s a frustrating scenario. Saying ‘we believe you’ and acknowledging mistakes were made in the past can go a long way.”
Many don’t even get that.
Despite the newscasts about the power of #MeToo, Esposito still feels weighed down by the thought that the man who abused her has gotten away with it.
“Every single day when I watch and I read, I think, obviously it didn’t matter,” she said. 

'Please! Please! I'm too old!': Horrifying moment a thug grabs a terrified pensioner and hurls him to the ground as he begs the attacker to stop

A yob was filmed attacking a terrified pensioner who begged him: "Please! Please! Please! I'm too old!"
In the distressing clip, a thug grabs the elderly man and violently throws him to the ground so he hits his head on the pavement.
At the end of the video , the old man is left moaning in pain as he lies incapacitated on the street.
The incident was filmed in a suburb of Moseley, Birmingham.
The appalling attack is believed to have taken place on Tuesday and the footage has been shared across social media.
The video - which appears to have been captured by a bystander - begins with the pensioner and the male having an inaudible exchange.
In the video, the thug suddenly grabs the old man's right arm and tries to push him to the ground.
The elderly man loses his balance and begins to stagger. He desperately begs his assailant to stop and pleads: "Please! Please! Please! I'm too old!"
But the yob ignores him and he brutally throws the old man to the ground so that his head hits the pavement with a walloping smash.
Bystanders can be heard gasping in shock as the pensioner forcefully falls to the ground.
The elderly male lies injured on the ground and winces in pain. The thug is heard cursing at the pensioner: "Don't f*** round. So you can't f*** around you d****head".
An onlooker is then heard telling the assailant "That's out of order!" and the assailant angrily replies "Eh?".
The person reproaches him again and repeats: "That was out of order."
Then another child in the background can be heard admonishing the thug and shouts.
Shockingly, the assailant threatens the kid and intimidatingly says: "Do you want some as well?"
The camera then pans to the elderly pensioner's shoes as he lies incapacitated on the pavement. The video then cuts to an end.