Hicks Denies Allegations To Times Union

In today’s (July 26, 2019) edition of the Times Union, Saratoga Springs Democratic candidate for Commissioner of Public Safety Kendall Hicks denies that he physically abused his girlfriend, Mellisa Gapp. Hicks repeated the defense offered by the spokesperson for his campaign Robert Millis that the incident was a simple misunderstanding. Hicks called the charges “political.”

24 thoughts on “Hicks Denies Allegations To Times Union”

  1. It is not surprising that the typical response by a politician accused of malfeasance is to suggest that the charges were politically motivated, end of story. Unfortunately, the report was filed on 18 March 2013 with a witness statement and evidence of physical battery noted by the police officer. Regrettably, the proverbial political clock would not start ticking for six more years.


    1. Just want to tell you, Jim – your responses are always enjoyable to read – your style is descriptive and your voice is clear .

      And thank you, John Kaufmann, for bringing this information to light. You are ahead of the newspapers!


      1. I appreciate that. I try to add to the discussion, that information benignly overlooked or intentionally disregarded.


  2. It’s illegal for a private employer to ask a potential employee about prior arrests or to use them against the person (see https://www.labor.ny.gov/careerservices/ace/employers.shtm)…but it appears that there is an exception for pistol permits, police, and peace officers – you can ask about prior arrests and you can use that against them in the hiring process, so this would automatically disqualify Kendall Hicks from ever getting a job in the police department that he wishes to oversee.

    “The Human Rights Law provides that the above protections do not apply to applications for a pistol license or in relation to an application for employment as a police or peace officer. For police or peace officer employment, arrests or criminal accusations that are sealed pursuant to CPL 160.50, CPL 160.55, or conditionally sealed pursuant to CPL 160.58 or deemed confidential pursuant to CPL 720.35 may be subject to inquiry, demands for information, or be the basis of adverse action.”

    Kendall obviously berated and humiliated this woman in public…imagine being a witness to some lunatic forcing someone to stop and ‘asking’ them to get out of the car – which is the one part of the police report that he actually admits.

    Any decent person with this in his background should have the good sense to drop out of the race, and his judgement and temperament for the job are questionable. Even if he is innocent of the domestic violence portion, which is doubtful, using a government vehicle to force a person to stop and arguing with them in the public streets, which resulted in someone calling the cops, shows some serious anger management, self control, and judgement issues – not exactly what we want decent people are looking for in a Public Safety Commissioner.

    Not voting for him.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. Mr. Hicks continues to entirely skip the part where the officer who wrote the report noticed “swelling to the right side” of the victim’s face and that she was “limping with noticeable swelling to her right ankle.” Is he calling the police officer a liar, as well as the TWO people who made statements?

    Is he claiming the victim lied about the attack in her first statement and then lied AGAIN when she specifically mentioned her fear of retribution? That fear looks to be understandable given that Hicks admits to a road rage incident where he blocked her path and got into an argument in the middle of the street. How can someone who behaved like this as an adult, and then tries to brush it all aside without any sort of explanation, head the department that protects almost 30,000 residents???

    The hypocrisy of him running on accountability and transparency but responding like this to credible claims of violence against his girlfriend is mind blowing.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Three of the four candidates running for spots on the City Council are stalking horses. None of them have shown much to date, save for what their handlers have written on cue cards for them to recite and excite their base. Our very competent City Council should be rewarded with our support, instead of the perennial baseless attacks against our extremely successful form of government – which is what these chosen three candidates conceal in their messages for those posts they challenge.

      Yes, this history is most certainly an unfortunate irony for someone running for Commissioner of Public Safety.

      Liked by 5 people

  4. Dismissed.
    No plea deal.
    No strong-arm influence (he has none)
    No “it disappears if you stay out of trouble”
    Dismissed. Period.

    Now: does the above NOT play a role in one’s interpretation here on this? (a serious question that doesn’t get dismissed with a “you’re tone deaf” shake-off)

    Or is someone making an accusation vs the local DA +/or Court? If so, let’s hear it.


    1. The initial response said one friend called the police and filed “false charges”. The report has both Hayes and Gapp talking about the incident in a much more violent and extreme manner. Is your position BOTH of them gave false statements?

      Hayes spoke to the police at the scene and at the police station. If his comments are lies, I’m assuming Mr. Hicks took appropriate action against the filing of false charges?

      When asked to provide a statement at the station Gapp “would not cooperate for fear of retribution”. How do you not see that as being a major reason as to why everything was “dismissed”? Or in your view is fear of retribution the same as “nothing to see here”?

      The officer noticed swelling to the right side of her face and ankle. Those injuries just happen to align with being stuck and being dragged. Was the officer filling “false charges” too?

      Seems like a lot of people went out of their way to talk to the police all for what you and your campaign are calling “nothing”. But sure, keep repeating the word “dismissed” as if that somehow clears Mr. Hicks of having to explain what happened despite him running for commissioner of Public Safety, allegedly caring about transparency and accountability, and while glossing over the admitted fact he blocked a car and had a argument in the middle of the street. That is not the behavior of a rational and thoughtful individual, let alone someone who should be trusted with the safety of city residents.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. One point at a time–we can get there
        But start with my query. I await a reply vs all these answers to different questions


    2. Very Fair.

      To answer your questions:

      1. “Does the above NOT play a role in one’s interpretation here on this?”
      Oh, it plays a role indeed. The victim was too scared to go forward – that is well documented – and the way that criminal investigations/charges work is that you need victims and witnesses along with other evidence (such as a police report) to testify.

      2. “Or is someone making an accusation vs the local DA +/or Court?”

      Deflecting is a skill that abusers use – so okay we can dance. We’re all ears – if you have something, please show it. Including an apology from your candidate for his behavior.


    3. Good try DM. Dismissed – Period is a weak and unfounded claim. There can be many reasons a charge is dismissed and not all are because the event did not happen. I can’t ignore the point where the victim would not testify for fear of retribution. This does NOT make the dismissal unconditional – perhaps legally yet not at all ethically. And, someone running for this position needs to be above reproach. It is clear something happened – something that is not a good for Kendall. Perhaps instead of explaining it away and accusing others of wrong doing in the situation, had he taken some responsibility and shown he learned something from the event, he may come across as just a bit more forgivable and relatable. Instead, your myopic defense makes him look worse in my eyes.

      And, I know you are his campaign manager/ coordinator or whatever title. We have yet to hear from the candidate himself. If he were to win this position, he won’t have you or anyone else to speak for him. If he wants transparency and any degree of validity, he’s be speaking to his potential constituents himself.


    4. I can’t remember the last time I commented on this blog, but sorry “RM” an ACOD means that it disappears if you stay out of trouble. That’s factual. The charges were not dismissed outright. That is false and misleading. I find it incredible that his opponent asked him to denounce domestic violence and he has failed to do so. Who is advising this guy?

      Liked by 2 people

      1. “Who is advising this guy?” Well, Ellen Egger-Aimone was his campaign manager and now Rob Millis seems to be in charge. Rumor has it, Sarah, that RM is your cousin. Any truth to that?


  5. RM, not sure what query you’re talking about but if you’d like your prior post directly answered:

    “Does the above NOT play a role in one’s interpretation here on this?” Your citation of a dismissal without making reference to the victim stating to the police that she fears retribution is the problem. I’m not a lawyer but I’d guess it’s hard to get a conviction when the victim refuses to discuss what happened.

    “Or is someone making an accusation vs the local DA +/or Court?” No, because the larger issue is how the Hicks campaign has downplayed the incident, the victim’s stated fear of retribution, the injuries observed by the officer, and the admitted unsafe/unlawful behavior of the candidate. Or is it his platform that anyone can cut another car off and block them in when they want to have a public disagreement?

    Now it’s your turn.


    1. I wasn’t asking “larger issue” — I was simply asking if the dismissal of the charges has ANY role in your (and others’) minds on what happened here?


      1. At a minimum what we know “happened here” is that the candidate used his vehicle to stop another in traffic, that after some sort of incident the alleged victim told police she was hit but then wouldn’t give a statement due to “fear of retribution”, and that the officer on the scene noticed injuries in line with the alleged attack. So no, for me the dismissal plays no “role” as the victim told police she wouldn’t make a statement out of fear. Without a victim’s statement the case is severely damaged, making dismissal much more likely.

        Victims of domestic violence are more likely than victims of other violent crime to recant or refuse to cooperate with prosecution, and both you and the candidate seem to be giving no validity to that.


      2. It’s been a few days since you asked about what impact the “dismissal” has, and you’ve gotten multiple responses since. When do you plan to address the serious questions asked to you that you’ve ignored? Or are you following in the footsteps of the candidate and refusing to explain how his initial comments don’t reflect the actual police report? So much for “transparency” and “accountability”.


      3. OK, DM – The dismissal does have an impact and not a positive one. The fact that the victim did not testify due to fear of retribution has a very big and negative impact on my opinion of what happened here as well as what is tends to say about the candidate in general. Anyone who is thinking he is qualified to manage the police department needs to have a very cool head and ability to be objective. None of this says this about Mr. Hicks. Even the fact that he blocked her car and engaged in a public scene is not the temperament of someone we need managing our police department. Does that answer you query?

        Liked by 1 person

  6. Technically, the charges were withdrawn and there was no conviction of a crime (or collusion), but the jury is out on obstruction of transparency. Given the manipulation of the factual story I would say that the subject has dirty hands and not the best candidate to represent the office of the Commissioner of Public Safety. That will cause some discomfort to those who have stood by this applicant if only for a photo opportunity, to represent party allegiance or worse, in support of one’s suggested subversive covert motives.

    Gentlemen please, a little decorum is expected when requesting another blogger to answer one’s queries.


  7. Holy smokes. Is RM serious? He and his candidate are remarkably tone deaf and fail to understand the complexities, nuances or subtleties of domestic violence. What KH needs is a crisis manager. If RM is wearing that hat, he is failing miserably. Perhaps time for RM to go back full time to Saratoga News Flash where he can hide behind his wit. Can’t see many women (or men for that matter) left, right or indy voting for KH.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. RM
    One point at a time–we can get there
    But start with my query. I await a reply vs all these answers to different questions

    For some reason there was no ability to reply directly to this post. Why do we need to answer anything? It is your candidate who was charged and accused. Trying to turn this around and put the people who are concerned and challenging and put us on the defensive to answer YOUR question is an age old tactic of transferring focus. Not working for me – only making this whole thing look worse and Mr. Hicks look less capable.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: