Talk:Cyrus Vance Jr.
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Archives: 1 |
Abacus Bank case
editI recently acquired a book, "The Divide" by Matt Taibbi. He is sharply critical of Cyrus Vance Jr. for his prosecution of Abacus Federal Savings Bank. This looks to me like an issue that deserves attention, with some good independent references. Scott Tillinghast, Houston TX (talk) 01:06, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
I agree. Gross injustice was done in this case. I didn't even know about this case until watching "Abacus: Small Enough to Jail" on PBS Frontline last night. I have expanded this case with what I hope even Mr. Vance will find fair -- he himself said on camera that "There are security issues behind the decision" to parade non-violent ex-employees in a chain.
One has to wonder what other injustices were also done in his office because of other blatant mistakes. One "chief" attorney from his office stated on camera (at 1:18) that "Exoneration is when a person is proven innocent." However, it is basic knowledge that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The accused never needs to be proven innocent. Rather, because his office cannot prove guilt, the accused is innocent by presumption. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.207.91 (talk) 01:02, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
The sentence (or, more precisely, the first five words of it) "In an effort at grandstanding, Vance's office orchestrated a show by parading ex-employees of the bank in a chain, handcuffed to each other, in front of reporters." is definitely POV. I don't doubt it's true that Vance was grandstanding; I don't doubt that many people hold that view; but I think that phrase could be deleted. Cross Reference (talk) 17:45, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Why isn't Ivanka Trump's purchase of favorable treatment from Junior Vance mentioned in this article?
editApparently Ivanka and her brother were signing off on untrue attestations, in order to inflate the value of condos that they were offering for sale. Apparently The Office of the District Attorney for Manhattan was considering Ivanka and brother for prosecution for this. Then a Trump attorney named Mark Kasowitz gave Junior Vance a huge campaign donation on condition that the case against Ivanka and brother disappear. Junior Vance took the money, and the case disappeared. Then Junior Vance gave the money back, a tacit admission that it was bribe (because otherwise there would be no need to give it back). Later on Junior Vance accepted a LARGER amount of money from Kasowitz. My paragraph here is sketchy on details. THAT is because I don't KNOW them. When I don't KNOW something, I come to Wikipedia, as I did in this instance, only to find Wikipedia suppressing this entire incident. You can't fault ME for not having knowledge, because if I knew everything why would I be reading Wikipedia? It's YOUR job to know what I'm talking about even when I don't know what I am talking about and came here to FIND OUT what I am talking about.2604:2000:C682:2D00:C5E1:831F:E4D0:80F7 (talk) 22:48, 8 October 2017 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson
- I was adding that to the Marc Kasowitz article, although it was reverted and we are still discussing it https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marc_Kasowitz&action=historysubmit&type=revision&diff=803955858&oldid=803952847 Here's what I wrote [with an error about the date corrected]:
- In 2012, Kasowitz convinced Manhattan prosecutors to drop a case against the Trumps. Prosecutors in the office of Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. had been building a criminal case against Donald Trump's children, Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump Jr., for misleading prospective buyers of units in the Trump SoHo hotel and condo. Prosecutors told reporters that the Trumps had discussed, in emails, making false statements to prospective buyers. Ivanka said that 60% of the units had sold, when actually only 15.8% had been sold. The prosecutors said that the false statements were criminal misconduct, but Trump Organization lawyers said they were mere "puffery." In 2012, Kasowitz, who had donated $25,000 to Vance's relection campaign, asked Vance to drop the investigation. Three months later, Vance overruled his prosecutors and dropped the case. Kasowitz and Vance said there was no quid pro quo. Other lawyers said that it was "curious."[1] --Nbauman (talk) 23:19, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
- ^ Ivanka and Donald Trump Jr. Were Close to Being Charged With Felony Fraud. New York prosecutors were preparing a case. Then the D.A. overruled his staff after a visit from a top donor: Trump attorney Marc Kasowitz. by Jesse Eisinger and Justin Elliott, ProPublica, and Andrea Bernstein and Ilya Marritz, WNYC. Oct. 4, 2017
- This story isn't mentioned in the article because no one has added it yet. This is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit! Why don't you be bold and add it yourself? Make try to make sure that any additions are neutral and supported by reliable sources. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:04, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
- Christopher Simpson (above) "It's YOUR job to know what I'm talking about even when I don't know what I am talking about and came here to FIND OUT what I am talking about." Christopher I think you're missing the point of Wikipedia. If you come here and find that something is not covered to your satisfaction you can do one of several things. Doing nothing is always an option; you could research it yourself and add the information, suitably referenced; or you could come here to the talk page and plead for someone else, who might have the relevant knowledge (and time and skills) to add the information. What you can't do is come here and bitch about people not doing their jobs: that's not the way it works. Cross Reference (talk) 17:56, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Why isn't Harvey Weinstein's purchase of favorable treatment from Junior Vance mentioned in this article?
editThere seems to be a pattern emerging here... Xardox (talk) 12:15, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
https://www.salon.com/2017/10/06/harvey-weinstein-cyrus-vance-jr-david-boies/
Weinstein lawyer paid Manhattan D.A. $10,000 days after he waived assault charges against producer
Reportedly, David Boies donated $10,000 to Cyrus Vance Jr. after he declined to prosecute the case
Now, The International Business Times is reporting that one of Weinstein's lawyers at the time, David Boies, gave the Vance election campaign some $10,000 mere days after the D.A. declined to prosecute the case. As the IBT notes "That contribution from attorney David Boies — who previously headlined a fundraiser for Vance — was a fraction of the more than $182,000 that Boies, his son and his law partners have delivered to the Democrat during his political career."
Harvey Weinstein's Lawyer Gave $10,000 To Manhattan DA After He Declined To File Sexual Assault Charges
Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein’s lawyer delivered $10,000 to Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. in 2015, in the months after Vance’s office decided not to prosecute Weinstein over sexual assault allegations, according to an International Business Times review of campaign finance documents. That contribution from attorney David Boies — who previously headlined a fundraiser for Vance — was a fraction of the more than $182,000 that Boies, his son and his law partners have delivered to the Democrat during his political career.
The revelations about the dropped Weinstein investigation come on the heels of a recent report documenting how Vance declined to prosecute Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump, Jr. after Trump’s attorney Marc Kasowitz gave Vance’s campaign $25,000. According to a report by ProPublica, WNYC and The New Yorker, Kasowitz made the donation, then met with Vance directly and then Vance dropped the case, overruling his own prosecutors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xardox (talk • contribs) 05:15, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
- This story isn't mentioned in the article because no one has added it yet. This is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit! Why don't you be bold and add it yourself? Make try to make sure that any additions are neutral and supported by reliable sources. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:05, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
_small.jpg){kind=link}
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:37, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:07, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:38, 22 April 2023 (UTC)