do you mean the one where the judge said matt's testimony was "garbage" and where it was revealed that beth mason possibly violates IRS laws by funneling payment to political operatives through a non-profit "civic" organization?

While Hoboken PATCH has not covered the story of Councilwoman Mason's political op, who alledegedly harassed an elected BOE official and her daughter.

The Hoboken Reporter had it on the front page last week and will do a follow up story this week.

It was also covered on Hoboken Grafix Avenger and Hudson Mile Square View.

Claire/Tom will you now cover the story ?

I think if you email claire about it rather than post publicly it might get done. As a writer, when you ask for stories publicly its seen as a personal attack and news sources hate that. Patch is a news source and provides news worthy content it feels is worthy to its readers, it doesn't like to post stories that favor one sect of people, the national inquirer does that.

Sunday night isn't the 3rd night. Friday morning, aka Thursday night, is the 3rd night.

I think you fix it because it wasn't what was intended or debated. If the community is interested in having a third night with an extra evening hour the code can be changed after debate and community input.

Reporters calling out politicians on their misdeeds isn't political, it is a public service.

welcome to the internets. ;)

I have never asked Patch to cover the story. I was pointing out to you there is nothing political about news organizations covering the activities of politicians or their paid political operatives. Though I must say I am not surprised and how much news organizations like Patch tend to ignore Mason's activities. She spends enough on advertising to encourage the advertiser supported media to not cover the most embarrassing of her antics.

Red

Everything your mentioning is a matter of personal opinion, this is patch not politicker.

Concerning the Minutillo attack, I welcome the full transcript being made public if at all possible. Interested people will clearly see that the judge saw the political nature of the case in totality...on one side, the alleged harassing. On the other, Minutillo's exaggerated charges and related character assassinations of a young man (not much different than Minutillo's exaggerated charges against another political opponent a few years ago- It's been a standard operating procedure for her that has now backfired twice). Both times her child was made center stage in her legal-political drama.

In the end, the judge ruled that the defendant was NOT GUILTY. So called moral victory's are subjective and full of the usual spin, self promotion, and public relations. A person trained in law, trained to be objective, and experienced in Hudson County antics saw right through this and called it for what it was- political in nature. The result? Not guilty.

I agree with others who wish Minutillo was required to pay the lawyer bills for the defendant. There should be some sort of penalty for wrongfully accusing someone of criminal harassment and criminal abuse. At the very least, she should issue an apology to women who are REALLY criminally abused and harassed and not just who have thin political skin (paraphrased from the judge's statement).

Why should she pay the defendants legal fees? Had the judge thrown this out then maybe that would be the case. The judge found there to be sufficient evidence to take the matter further and when all was said and done, a ruling of not guilty was given. Therefore you'll have trouble getting those funds back. The defendants lawyer was obviously not very good to get this thrown out too. Dead in the water idea.

Interesting fact that when Lane Bajardi (Mrs. Mason's self declared "friend") went to court after his incident at a BOE meeting he was defended by Elise Nardo. Matt Callichio Mrs. Mason's employee was also defended in his BOE related case by Elise Nardo.

I can only assume Elise Nardo's service did not come cheap. :-)

Thinks that make you go hmmmm. :-)

Curious Kim - you are LYING as ALWAYS.

The judge tore Calicchio and fellow phony witness Garcia a new one. Called Matt a fool and dishonest. Further stated that board members should NOT have to deal with this kind of "incivility" and "bullying".

Yes the transcript will come out. You'll need a whole box of twinkies for that one.

Start coming up with some new LIES in the meantime.

You can agree with your husband CuriousGal as you wish but as I've said one Beth Mason political operative supporting his colleague Matt Calicchio who is another paid Beth Mason political operative shouldn't be given much credence.

The judge did not have sufficient evidence to convict as the sole witness appeared on behalf of Matt Calicchio. From the judge's remarks, he concludes not only did Matt Callichiio commit perjury but so did his witness.

It's also a matter of public record, an undeniable fact that the witness Tania Garcia is another confirmed paid employee of Beth Mason. The judge described both Calicchio and Garcia as "political people" paid to do so.

The judge's comments are very important and your straining to color them in a way they don't faintly have any accurate context.

It's appalling you would attack a woman who is an elected official after the judge called Matt Calicchio "a fool who is being used" by Beth Mason.

What's your excuse? Have you and/or others in your family ever been paid by Beth Mason or this shadowy Beth Mason Civic Association?

Lots of CuriousFolks want to know.

i'll meet you at 2:45 am for a nightcap!

No harm at all. But let me leave you with this thought, how much better off would we all be if Mason and her money stopped poisoning the political atmosphere in this town? No more minions, no more ghost writers, no more 411, no stalking of parents at schools, no more stalking people at their homes or on city streets, no more push polls, no more attack ads even when there it isn't election season & far less money for buying votes when there are elections. I would even bet that both GA & MSV's sites would be far less hard hitting and far more focused on puff pieces.

She doesn't need to actually go waste an entire day at court. Reading the transcript should be more than enough to give her an idea what happened in the courtroom. I am sure if Claire wants that, she can get a copy. And tell her it would be real nice if she could post it online for everyone else to read too!

two things, tom:

- in addition to getting and reviewing the court transcript to see what happened, claire can also call the parties involved -- matt, minutillo, beth mason -- and get their perspective and feedback. call it a "second-day" follow up to news that the town is obviously talking about and very interested in.

-- it's more than just the judgment in this court case. the trial opened a can of worms about whether beth mason violated IRS rules by funneling payment to her political operatives through the back door of a non-profit "civic league". might that be a good story, you think?

Tom - very few of Claire's stories involve events she has personally witnessed. While I agree that it is unfair to criticize Claire for not having written a story yet, it appears from your comment that Patch has made the editorial choice not to cover the story itself at all. If that is the case, given the high profile nature of all the parties involved, the decision is pretty indefensible. Linking to the hoboken reporter just doesn't cut it.

As you well know, editorial bias does not come only in the form of biased content in the body of stories. It also comes in the headlines used to introduce the stories and in the choices made about which stories to cover.

When Mike Russo was exposed in the Jersey Sting as having a greed to accept a bribe, Claire's headline was something like "Hoboken Councilman responds to mention in new book." This was not a defensible journalistic choice.

Likewise, failing to cover this story, while covering a legislative mistake of little consequence, is not a defensible journalistic choice.

Like any media outlet, you are entitled to have your biases. But don't be surprised when those biases are publicly identified. And quite frankly, lame excuses like Claire just doesn't have the time to leave hoboken make you appear either disconnected from reality or dishonest.

That Patch hasn't covered the story yet is fine and excusable. That Patch has no intention of covering the story is not and there is no plausible explanation other than that an extraordinarily newsworthy story does not fit in with Claire's editorial biases. its a shame because Hoboken is desperately in need of an objective online news source and Patch is best positioned to be that.

Note that I am not suggesting that the story should be written from any particular angle - only that it should be researched and written objectively. Wait for the transcript to become available. Give all the parties, including Mrs. Mason, a chance to comment. Then write a story based on the facts.

If she asks Beth for comment on the behavior of her employee and whether Beth believes that an elected representative should employ people who conduct themselves the way Calicchio has on A NUMBER of OCCASIONS - she will have a leg-up on the HobokenReporter. They didn't bother to ask the employer about the employee.

actually, the request is for patch to review the transcript, interview the parties involved and write a story. no one is "asking" patch to take a side and favor any one side. i'm confident that beth mason's on-the record denial will, as always, be both entertaining and informative ("until i see proof, i'm gonna say i haven't seen those emails.")

Claire puts Claire in an uncomfortable position when she spends time on this complete non-story that nobody cares about on a ordinance the city is going to fix anyway but fails to report on things that people actually care about and pay attention to. Claire should be reporting about what people want to read about and based on how far off topic this thread of comments, my guess is the people reading this article and commenting here and elsewhere probably wished she had covered that court case. IMO, She misallocated her time and energy and should keep that in mind the next time she has to pick & choose where to focus her energies. But it is her choice if she wants to focus on what people care about or take the safe route and just cover non-stories that won't offend anyone b/c most people will just read the headline and move on to the next story..

for the last month there have been about 100 references to why patch isn't covering this. Now asking them to reference it is another way of asking them to take action. It's similar to a previous request. While I am all for the truth and as a writer knowing the "people have a right to know", the way its being called for hasn't been the right way. When you say something like "How come you're not doing this" you're inadvertently making Patch look bad. Demands are being made and they're not being met. I think its a lost cause and in the future , email Patch with your requests and included factors as to why it should be made in to news.

Red

I'm not defending Claire. Patch is a community news site. Its purpose is to provide news to its readers that the readers will find enjoyable and interesting. Patch has since inception been a newsworthy site that provides stories about local politics, shopping, dining, sports, local happenings. Every story I see is a story that has been generated by Patch and not by the readers. Red, you and the others may think this is news, and in a way it is but if I was an editor, as juicy as it is, its not proper for a site like this. I feel bad for the victim in this case, I know her well and I assume she was hurt by this. I had a similar situation too. But its all he said she said and involves certain political sects. There was no verdict and a judge had a few choice words about testimony. His words are his thoughts and have no legal standing. The charges were dropped and the case is over. What is there to write about? Its here say at best and here say is not journalism. Had a verdict of guilty been rendered then there would be a means for the story. If I worked for Patch, on this type of case I would wait for a verdict. It's a not guilty case right now, if wrote it would be worded to show the defendant prevailing and wouldn't have much juice in it.

We write for the entirety of Hoboken, not the very small (but extremely vocal) number of people who live and breathe hometown politics.

There is way more to this city than what happens in government. And before anyone trashes my Hoboken creds, know that my grandmother was born here in 1917, my grandfather came here from Italy in 1932. They lived here for decades, and my grandfather owned a bar called "Two Steps Up" on the corner of Second and Adams. My girlfriend and I lived in an apartment on Monroe and Observer for 5 years before buying a house in Bergen County.

I miss Favia and deliveries from Hoboken Cottage. I can't believe Frankie and Johnnie's is gone. I love that they now American craft beer on tap at Pilsener House. I miss summers on the pier, and hearing music pouring out of Maxwells.

That's Hoboken to me.

The people who I ran into every day in Hoboken talked about property values, crime, noise, restaurants, parking, festivals, parks and overall quality of life. City politics, to most people, is not front-of-mind.

At the end of the day, this was a civil complaint. I agree with you that there could be some interesting tidbits in the transcripts, and that's why we are going to get them.

But not because an anonymous Internet poster says we should. Politics is, and will remain, a small part of the larger whole.

Seems to me as if it isn't at all a lost cause. Clearly Tom pays attention to the comments and seems to me as if he might at least think about looking into covering stories like this that people care about. And he doesn't live in town so he probably is far less worried abut bruising egos and stepping on a few toes when reporting on facts that some people probably don't want brought out publicly b/c they might be embarrassing.

"The people who I ran into every day in Hoboken talked about property values, crime, noise, restaurants, parking, festivals, parks and overall quality of life. City politics, to most people, is not front-of-mind."

tom, i'd say "crime" and "city politics" oftentimes overlap in this town. ;)

A known Hoboken politico allegedly harassing a 5 year old girl and her single Mom because she is on the oppostite side of the fence politically seems like a big deal to me. Considering this same person has a history of harassing political enemies and of stealing campaign signs of opponents from store windows, saying it was a "city ordinance" you might want to rethink this.

A reporter giving a fair and unbiased summary of this case and history would seem like a story worth covering.

@rtux Touché

@Tom T

Did your grandparents ever find parking back in the 30's??

@Rory -- I never asked about that. I do know that my grandfather owned a horse and a fruit and vegetable cart, which he kept in a stable in Hoboken. He got through the Depression by taking the horse on the ferry across the river every day and selling fruits and vegetables on the street in Lower Manhattan. Between that and working in his cousin's pizzeria, he saved enough money to buy an 8 family building on the corner of Second and Adams with a bar he ran on the ground floor.

The entire extended family lived in the 8 apartments above, and they would get together and have dinner every night, all of them. My grandmother forced him to sell the bar and the apartment building in the 1950s because she didn't like all of the hookers and wiseguys who came in every night. He sold the whole building for -- gasp! -- $5000 in like 1955 and bought a house in Paterson.

My grandmother was born on Monroe Street and grew up with Sinatra. She used to tell me the stories about when he was a kid, and would play piano in the basement of the building and all the neighborhood kids would look in the window and laugh at him. Then he got in with some wiseguys, she said, who paid girls to go to Radio City Music Hall and scream for him. The papers picked up on the craze over this kid from Hoboken that the girls were screaming for and the rest is history.

Lots of great old stories from those days.

Steve Sternberg/Tom- it can also be a story about an elected political figure with city hall backing who uses alleged harassment charges against her political opponents ...always with babe in arms (this is at least the second time it has happened-last time it was thrown out of court). This time, an objective judge knowing the politics of this situation saw it for what it was from BOTH sides (read: including Minutillo's trumped up charges) and correctly decided the defendant was NOT GUILTY of criminal harassment and abuse. To say nothing of the harm Minutillo does to every woman who is ACTUALLY abused and harassed.

But an objective decision by a judge is not enough for the partisan bullies who continue to drag the defendant's name around and continue the charade of trying to use the legal system for political intimidation.

"To say nothing of the harm Minutillo does to every woman who is ACTUALLY abused and harassed." This coming from the hubby and wife team who advise Beth Mason, and write her statements, to compare herself to Gabby Giffords, or a Holocaust victim. You really take the cake Kimmie. And we know your hubby takes the Pizza too when he is upset. Remember that meeting? The little general stormed out but demanded his fair share of the Pizza first. What a pair you 2 are

I challenge anyone to sit within 15 feet Callichio at a city council or BOE meeting and determine for yourself whether he is a thug or not. It will take you 10 minutes to arrive at a conclusion

Steve Sternberg- fair enough. I agree with you very much.

Steve I agree except that much of the work has been done more reliably than the press could do it. The actual parties to the incident have testified under oath. Their testimony together with the judge's comments are the story. The only interviews that need be conducted are with non-witnesses or for the purpose of clarifying questions raised by the testimony or not covered by the testimony. This is not a he said/she said story starting from scratch.

I do agree that both Mr. Calliccios and Ms. Minutilo's histories are fair game and should be explored. With all due respect to curiousgal, I don't think a focus on those histories would give much credence to curiousgal's imaginative theory.

If that's really a discussion you'd like to have let's bring it on. Patch would be doing a huge service to the community if it chose to explore the entirety of Ms. Minutilo and Mr. Callicchios histories in our community so that readers could evaluate for themselves the credibility of the parties.

Do you actually think people would go on record with any of this stuff? We'd need credible -- credible -- sources either with direct knowledge or hard evidence to be able to print anything. One of the most difficult positions to be in as a journalist is a flashpoint between opposing sides, especially in a city like Hoboken, and even more-so when there are two people who offer disparate narratives of the event. Sure, you can -- to quote one of our now-erstwhile editors, Myles Ma of Paramus -- use contextual clues, but printing something requires more than that. It has to.

Look, in all seriousness, if some of you want to lose the aliases and blog for us about the "politics" side of politics, we'd be open to the idea. We're going to continue to focus on taxes, development, the business community, public safety, open space and the school system. And, yeah, the occasional "whoops, bars are going to be open an extra hour because of some ambiguous language in an ordinance" talker. My question is, "did anyone read read it first, or just vote?"

Tom

I would like to blog about local business in town. If there is any interest please let me know. Lots of great places to eat drink and shop in town and they should have a voice.

There is a record Tom. its called a trial transcript and the Judge's decision. You have sworn testimony and a Judge's ruling. Read it and write the story (or have Claire do it). Give people like Mason who may be implicated by the testimony but did not testify themselves a chance to comment. Its not rocket science - its journalism and journalists do it every day. I haven't read the transcript and don't know what the testimony really was. Neither do most of your readers. We rely on the press to bring us this information but all I'm reading from you sadly are cop out excuses.

Right, professor, transcripts that I said we were going to get twice in this thread.

Completely understandable that getting people to say things on the record can be tough in this town especially when so much of the juicy stuff you want to report on involves unethical behavior and potential criminal behavior that those in the know don't want anyone to uncover. But that is also why court proceedings and other public events are fertile grounds for a reporter to attend. Everything that gets said in front of the camera, the court reporter or at a public venue in front of witnesses IMO is fair game for a reporter to report on.

BTW, thanks for the comments and for agreeing to look at those transcripts.

actually, tom seems to be calling out phony partisans like you.

hey einstein, why don't you check the VERY FIRST COMMENT on this story? :)

BINGO !

:-)

I knew it might take a few weeks to get the transcripts but that price tag is outrageous! I hope everyone pools their resources to buy just 1 copy and share it.

true, but for a newspaper or other journalistic enterprise, isn't that just the cost of doing business?