.
Feedback

Aaron Hess Sues Briarcliff Liquor Store

His attorney said it is believed Henry bought booze at the store the night before his death.

Officer Aaron Hess has filed a lawsuit against , the establishment he believes knowingly sold alcohol to underage student Danroy "DJ" Henry on Oct. 16, 2010, the night before he was shot and killed by Hess in Thornwood.

"We have done our own investigation," said Mitchell Baker, the White Plains attorney representing Hess. "We determined Mr. Henry obtained the liquor from this liquor store."

According to Baker, the suit is based on the Dram Shop Act, which provides "that if you sell liquor to someone illegally and that person who is later intoxicated creates injury to someone else, the person who was injured can bring a lawsuit against the person who sold the liquor."

He said he believes the night's events could have turned out differently if Henry had not been intoxicated and holds the Briarcliff Manor store accountable for the night's tragic outcome.

While initial lab results at the time of his death (above the legal limit of .02 for anyone under age 21), Henry family attorney and have claimed they do not believe he was drunk.

"If this suit is about DJ is being drunk, that is where you get a false premise," said Danroy Henry Sr., DJ's father. "We know the autopsy confirmed that DJ wasn’t drunk. If they’re filing this suit based on some false premise that DJ was drunk, it’s really a non-starter because DJ wasn’t drunk—the autopsy confirmed it."

Baker went on to explain the lawsuit is directed at Briarcliff Wines & Liquors rather than Finnegan's Bar & Grill—the now defunct establishment where Henry spent his last hours—because he believes Henry did not drink at Finnegan's, but rather sporadically went outside to his car during his time at the bar and ingested alcohol there before returning inside.

However, after the shooting, Henry family attorney Michael Sussman said in DJ Henry's Nissan and continued to refute the claim Henry was intoxicated.

"Those are the two pieces that are the least forgeable, they’re the least changeable," Henry Sr. said. "You can write whatever number you want, but in theory you can’t add content to the stomach and you can’t add content to the digestive system. There was no alcohol in the digestive system—zero—trace amount of it in his stomach—which is consistent with what people said they saw him do. He had a part of a drink in the evening  and didn’t drink anything after that because he was driving."

Hess was hit by the car driven by Henry at the scene and suffered several broken bones in his knee as a result, said Baker. His kneecap also "went into his femur" as a result of the hit, which has prevented him from returning to work in Pleasantville.

"It does not look at the present time he will be able to return to police work," Baker revealed, adding Hess has been rehabilitating at his Chappaqua home since being released from the hospital.

Pleasantville and Mount Pleasant police officers responded to the Thornwood Shopping Center in the early morning hours of Oct. 17, 2010 to aid Finnegan's in dispersing a crowd. Henry while behind the wheel of a car.

Earlier this year, a Westchester County Hess on a murder charge in the case, while Sussman has . He later announced the Henry family is suing Hess and the Village of Pleasantville for $120 million.

Pleasantville Mayor Peter Scherer previously stated the village finds the lawsuit "is without merit."

"We intend to vigorously defend the Village and Officer Aaron Hess," his statement in response to the lawsuit reads.

Hess by members of the Pleasantville Police Benevolent Association.

Baker said the lawsuit against Briarcliff Wine & Liquors, which does not list a specific amount of damages sought, was filed through the New York secretary of state on Friday afternoon and was served this morning.

No one was available for comment at Briarcliff Wine & Liquors, which is closed on Mondays. Henry family attorney Michael Sussman was not available for comment.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Pleasantville-Briarcliff Manor Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Sonny (Louis) Linder May 18, 2013 at 05:07 pm
CORRECTION TO LAST POST: The last sentence should read: "Let's continue to share, butRead More face-to-face." Thx - Sonny
Sonny (Louis) Linder May 18, 2013 at 06:06 am
Thanks, Jon - you raise important considerations and in a calm, dispassionate way, which IRead More appreciate. As for alternative funding mechanisms, in hindsight I believe they should have been examined and addressed this earlier this year had the decision-making been opened up to the public in a completely bidirectional manner much earlier in this year's budget cycle. A real take-away from this situation, in my opinion, is that we in the community were not given the opportunity to sit down together with sharpened pencils in a public forum and allowed to vet and actually challenge the Administration's assumptions in order to arrive at budget alternatives with the Administration and Board. The comparison you make with Washington is indeed apt in that it reflects the way decisions have slid back to being made in a vacuum and handed down to the voters instead of in a democratic fashion based on budget-to-actuals instead of budget-to-budget figures combined with the practice of over-reserving for expense items while under-estimating revenues. Although the Board did indeed reach out to me and 2 others asking for suggestions, when we re-iterated our request for an open meeting format to include other financially savvy community members, these requests were consistently ignored. Which is why we are in the current position we are in having to decide on Tues on a tax levy cap-busting budget requiring 60% super-majority. Which the public will decide, of course, and we will live with the consequences: either it passes, or the Board and Administration will be forced to rein in the excesses. And much as I love open debate, I restate that online posting leaves does leave a lot to be desired. Let's continue to share, but not face-to-face. Respectfully - Sonny
Jon Satran May 18, 2013 at 12:16 am
Sonny, I like the idea of brainstorming together, thinking outside of the box, but there are someRead More major obstacles that I think you need to consider: 1) A Bond referendum requires a 45 days’ notice period. It cannot be presented for a vote before this year's budget process is concluded. 2) To release reserves based on the hope that a future bond vote would be successful is reckless. What happens if reserves are released and then the bond referendum fails? You would not risk your home finances with this type of risk, would you really risk your school’s financial health? 3) Our tax certiorari reserve was just recently reviewed in consultation with our attorneys and we are appropriately reserved for today’s commercial real estate market. 4) Most importantly, this proposal would create a larger and tougher tax increase next year. In other words, adding $1,000,000 of revenue this year through a loan would require replacing that revenue with an additional $1,000,000 again next year and the year after. Borrow and spend economics does not work as we have seen from the national level. Deficit spending, which has been suggested may or may not work in Washington, but it certainly does not in Briarcliff Manor. When the school’s reserves are exhausted, we will face impactful program cuts or much larger tax levy increases. Respectfully - Jon Satran
JanFisher May 17, 2013 at 10:55 pm
It is so wonderful that, recognizing the importance of STEM and following the recommendation of ourRead More educators, Sal Maglietta and Jon Satran agreed to bring on the district's first director of instructional technology.
McKey Rivers May 10, 2013 at 07:36 pm
Thank you Dr. Sternberg for your thoughtful letter. You hit on an important facet of this electionRead More few if any others have stated: electing Mr. Wasserman and/or Mr. Linder will provide the added benefit of diversity of thought as the Board continues to address difficult, ongoing educational and financial issues. There is a woeful absence of synergy produced by articulation of different views among the current Board members. The absence of a “check and balance” on the current Board is reflected in the inexplicable decision to cancel the May 13 BOE meeting (scheduled since last summer), which is the last meeting prior to the May 21 budget vote and board election. Is there no business for the Board to conduct at this critical juncture or could it be that the Board does not want Briarcliff residents to hear members of the community question the Board about the proposed budget right before the election? Electing either Mr. Linder and/or Mr. Wasserman will immediately benefit the public as the highest vote getter will be seated on May 22 and thus participate in formulating a second budget for public vote that, notwithstanding current BOE scare tactics, can be tax levy compliant and not involve additional program elimination or reduction. There is no doubt that electing Mr. Wasserman and/or Mr. Linder to the Briarcliff School Board will substantially benefit the entire Briarcliff community and provide a much needed check on Board decision making.
Herman Sexton May 10, 2013 at 03:48 pm
Electing Paul Wasserman alone would add a diversity of thought. The guy hears at least a dozenRead More voices in his head. Have you ever spoken to him? Did you pay attention when he was running for Congress for a few weeks? Ugh.
W Obermeyer May 10, 2013 at 03:41 pm
Not too diffiicult to play with figures. Look at the budget decrease and the increase in state aid,Read More then claim the budget is actually less.
Mike Valenti May 1, 2013 at 04:50 pm
Second, Mr. Sternberg comments “The previous Board reversed that trend but now a new schoolRead More Board reversed that and we are back to square one.” This is without question factually and ideologically incorrect. The previous Board, populated by Janet Marinaccio, Guy Rotundo, Eric Bashford and Rosella Ranno, were sponsored by the folks in our District who are of the fiscal conservative/tea-party-like taxation ideology. Yes, they aggressively cut the school budget over the course of their term. However, this year’s school budget is actually lower than last years. So, to suggest that the current Board has reversed tack on this issue is factually incorrect.
Mike Valenti May 1, 2013 at 04:49 pm
I commend Mr. Sternberg for his thoughtful, well written letter. However, I must take issue withRead More several of his points. First, he offers an analysis of various interests in our District and their motives regarding our school budget. If I may, here is another more simplified viewpoint. The predominance of District residents moved here for the school district (whether for its value to their children or its value for their real estate). These folks have a very supportive ideology with respect to taxation in support of the District. On the other side of the ledger stands a group who has a fiscal conservative, tea-party-like taxation ideology. They seek to cut, cut, cut with disregard to the integrity and depth of the educational program and resources. (continued)...