.
Feedback

Updated: Hess, Pleasantville Named in Lawsuit Filed by Henrys Today

Mount Pleasant is no longer named in the action.

The family of Danroy "DJ" Henry, the 20-year-old Pace University student shot to to death outside of Finnegan's Grill in Thornwood last October, is suing the Village of Pleasantville and Pleasantville Police Officer Aaron Hess, their attorney announced today.

"It has been filed," Michael Sussman, the family's attorney, told reporters outside of the U.S. District Courthouse in White Plains this afternoon, stating the next step will be a conference "with a couple of months" involving the presiding justice, who will then set a timetable for discovery.

While Sussman said this type of lawsuit is typically dismissed, he asserted he does not believe this complaint will be.

The family first in the amount of $120 million in January with the village, as well as the Town of Mount Pleasant.

The Henrys said outside of their Easton, MA, home Wednesday afternoon that the purpose of the lawsuit was to bring accountability to Hess and his municipality.

In a statement released today, Pleasantville Mayor Peter Scherer said, "...we believe the suit is without merit and that neither the Village nor Officer Aaron Hess violated any laws or rules of conduct. We intend to vigorously defend the Village and Officer Aaron Hess."

"There needs to be punishment," Angella Henry, DJ Henry's mother said. "We would pay money to have our son back. There is no dollar amount that would fill the void."

In a press release today, Sussman, the family's attorney, stated,

"...it is apparent that others acted in grossly irresponsible manners on October 17, 2010. These parties should be held to account for their failures. However, the Henrys are convinced that these actions did NOT CAUSE the death of their son and that Aaron Hess, as an agent of the Village of Pleasantville, did so. For this reason, their suit names these, and only these defendants."

Henry's father, Danroy Sr., said the purpose of the claim was to fulfuill New York state requirements. He said the dollar amount of the lawsuit would be "at the mercy of the jurors."

In a statement from the Henrys affixed to the complaint, Danroy and Angella Henry address the recent news that Hess r by the Pleasantville Police Benevolent Association.

According to a statement released by Matthew Listwan, president of the union, "The PBA membership unanimously voted to present the Award of to Officer Hess as an expression of the memberships' support for Officer Hess."

Listwan added the award was given to Hess at a "private dinner party on one of the first occasions Officer Hess has been physically able to attend such an event."

He added, "The PBA did not seek to create a public spectacle of this Award or to offend the Henry family, whose continuing grief is obvious and understandable. The source of disclosure of this award remains unknown to us."

While Danroy Henry Sr. said the lawsuit was not a reaction to Hess' recent honor of "Officer of the Year," the award did "speak to the arrogance" the family had been facing since the beginning.

"The PBA's choice to celebrate our son's death was a poor one and further energizes our fight for truth and answers to simple but relevant questions," they wrote. "We look forward to revealing essential evidence that will further support the true events from the tragic morning of October 17th, 2010. These include 911 audiotapes, store surveillance video and the testimony and the police report filed by Aaron Hess, who has yet to reconcile his actions that evening with contradictions between his statement, multiple eyewitnesses' and the physical evidence from the scene."

Listwan said Hess, who has yet to return to work, "has conducted himself throughout this ordeal, and most particularly, the very difficult aftermath of this tragic incident," in a "dignified and professional manner."

However, the complaint to be filed on behalf of the Henrys states, "This shooting occurred under circumstances evincing a reckless disregard for human life, most specifically the life of Danroy Henry, Jr." and "Defendant Aaron Hess had no reasonable basis to stop or seize or jump in front of the vehicle being driven by Danroy Henry, Jr."

Further, the lawsuit says, "Defendant Hess' blatant violations of stated departmental policy demonstrate that the Village of Pleasantville failed to properly train and supervise defendant Hess, contributing to the deprivation of decedent's rights and his wrongful death," by violating his 14th amendment rights.

Danroy Henry Sr. also said that filing a lawsuit should make evidence public the family said had been withheld previously, including audio evidence, video evidence and Hess' personal files.

"We look forward to having more access to information that is relevant and is important to further strengthen the view that our son was wrongfully killed that night," he said.

After filing the lawsuit this afternoon, Sussman said he hopes the action and ongoing federal investigation will shed light on unanswered questions.

"We haven't been able to get all the facts of the case," he said. "There's a certain salvation to telling the truth."

The federal lawsuit is in addition to a criminal investigation being conducted by the Department of Justice, which was taken over by the federal government after a Westchester County grand jury against Hess.

Danroy Sr. said he is hopeful that the federal government's investigation will be "more thorough" than the county's investigation.

Sussman said the "perfect ending" to the case would be "for the truth to emerge from [Hess'] own mouth."

Scherer, however, on behalf of the village, wrote, "We look forward to vindicating the Village and Officer Hess and to moving forward from this tragic event."

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)...