New Released Documents From Hicks Campaign Fail To Resolve What Happened

[JK: This is a revised post from one I put up earlier this evening. When I originally read the Hicks website, I failed to notice the buttons beside their text. These were links to two affidavits from witnesses to the original incident that led to charges. The original post was badly tainted by my ignorance and required me to rewrite the post. While it was only up briefly I felt an urgency to correct the record with all speed. My editor is in Europe on holiday so I am sure this version will suffer but that is the price I must pay for my sloppiness.]

Kendall Hicks’ campaign has posted a document that purports to have “cleared [him] of false allegations” in the Gloversville incident which resulted in his arrest for allegedly assaulting a woman he was associated with.

The reality is that the Hicks Campaign made a series of claims for which they provided inadequate documentation. This new documents they have posted not only fail to establish with any definitiveness what happened, they contribute further to raising questions about the events that led to his arrest.

A Little Background

Mr. Hicks has asserted on a number of occasions that he had documents that absolved him of any wrongdoing in this police incident. At the recent forum on immigration, he told the audience that he had the papers to prove his innocence in his car.

With that in mind I emailed Mr. Hicks and his campaign manager, Ellen Egger- Aimone asking him to provide the documents to me. I suggested that if they were unwilling to provide me with the documents, that they post them on their website and Facebook page. While they did not respond to my email, on the following day they posted a number of documents on their website along with a link to them on their Facebook page.

Along with the document they posted a narrative of what they say happened in the incident and made a series of claims.

They claimed that :

* there are “multiple sworn statements negating the charge, including the victim, herself…”.

* “the allegations were proven to be false…”

* an investigation by the army (he was driving an army vehicle when the incident occurred) cleared him of all charges.

* “Though Hicks’s girlfriend disputed the allegations, the Gloversville officer filed a misdemeanor anyway, which was reported in Gloversville’s Leader-Herald’s daily police blotter.

* That the victim of the assault provided a sworn statement withdrawing her original allegations.

* That the victim disputed the charges against Mr. Hicks.

* “His girlfriend [the victim] remained with the other two passengers” [JK:They never left the original site of the incident]

What The Documents Reveal

* Mr. Hicks was charged with misdemeanor assault in the third degree

* Mr. Hicks was charged with misdemeanor reckless endangerment in the second degree

* In a plea agreement with the Fulton County District Attorney, Mr. Hicks accepted an Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal (ACOD).

* Mister Hicks’ misdemeanors were dismissed six months after his hearing having complied with the terms of the ACOD

* Two persons who witnessed the event signed affidavits defending Mr. Hicks and challenging the narrative in the police report. One of the witnesses was in the military vehicle driving with Mr. Hicks to Syracuse.

* One of the affidavits was signed by a person riding with the victim in Mr. Hicks’ car. Her statement asserts that she never saw Mr. Hicks physically abuse the victim and when the victim returned, the victim told her that all she and Mr. Hicks did was yell at each other.

* In contradiction to the narrative offered by the Hicks Campaign which asserted that the victim remained at the original scene of the incident, the two affidavits state that the victim climbed into the back of Mr. Hicks car when he drove off.

What is an ACOD?

Wikipedia describes an ACOD as follows:

In criminal procedure, an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal (ACD or ACOD) allows a court to defer the disposition of a defendant’s case, with the potential that the defendant’s charge will be dismissed if the defendant does not engage in additional criminal conduct or other acts prohibited by the court as a condition of the ACD [JK: My emphasis added]. 

It should be clear that ACOD does not address whatever criminal conduct may have occurred precipitating the arrest. It is, as the first document shows, a plea agreement. It sets as its condition that if the defendant does not violate its terms that after a certain period of time (in this case six months) the charges will be dismissed.

What The Documents Do Not Tell Us

1. Mr. Hicks did not provide the terms of the ACOD. We do not know what he was required to do to meet the terms of the agreement. It could have been as broad as requiring that he not participate in any unlawful behavior that would bring him before the court again. It could have been more specific and related to what precipitated the original arrest. Without the terms, we do not know.

2. Mr. Hicks does not provide the affidavit of the victim exonerating him as asserted in the campaign’s narrative.

3. Mr. Hicks campaign claim that the victim “disputed the charges” against Mr. Hicks are contradicted by the police report in which the victim declined to pursue charges expressing a fear of retribution from Mr. Hicks.

3. Mr. Hicks alleges that the army cleared him of any culpability in the incident. He provides no documentation for this.

What Do We Now Know As A Result Of The Newly Released Document?

Two witnesses disputed the charges in signed affidavits

The campaign provided no affidavit from the person who brought the criminal complaint that withdrew the charges.

There is no affidavit from the victim exonerating Mr. Hicks as claimed by his campaign.

For some odd reason, the narrative from the campaign claims that Mr. Hicks drove off leaving the victim at the site of the incident while the affidavits state that she jumped into his vehicle as he drove away.

While the affidavits appear credible, they conflict with other witnesses and with the police report. Unfortunately for Mr. Hicks, the conflicting statements make any definitive determination of what occurred problematic.

The fact that the Fulton County district attorney did not dismiss the case but insisted on a plea agreement for an ACOD raises concerns.

We know that the charges were indeed dismissed but only after he had complied with the terms of the ACOD. We know that Mr. Hicks has not provided the documentation for the terms of the ACOD.

Without More Information, The Public Is In No Position To Determine Mr. Hicks Culpability

The release of the terms of the ACOD might help us better understand what happened. It would be helpful if Mr. Hicks would release this very important document. It is unclear why he has not but there is time before the election in November.

It would also have been helpful to learn from the victim the full history of her relationship with Mr. Hicks.

In fairness to Mr. Hicks, his agreement to a plea deal with an ACOD is not an admission of guilt. Assuming that the requirements of the ACOD were not onerous, it makes sense that he would agree to it. A trial would have been very expensive and the result of the ACOD while less determinative than a trial still resulted in the dismissal of his charges.

The Folly Of Running For Office

In the end, I fully admit that I do not know what happened. What I do know is that it was ill advised for Mr. Hicks to run for Commissioner of Public Safety. Was it naïveté or poor judgement that he did not realize that in the age of the internet the story of his arrest would become public? Did he think that the documents he had would really convince the voters that nothing happened? Did people try to dissuade him from running and he ignored their advice?

As the old saying goes, life is not fair. The fact remains that there is a cloud over Mr. Hicks that, at least based on his documents, he is unable to free himself of. If he is innocent of the original charges it is very sad, but his decision to run for Public Safety Commissioner knowing that the charges would become public demonstrates a lack of judgement in itself that I do not believe he can overcome.


Here are images from their website with their narrative and a court document (Link To actual web page)


Court Related Documents

Here is a fuller set of court documents (the document on their website displays the page labeled “Certificate of Disposition.”)

The first document is from the Fulton County District Attorney’s office recommending to the judge a reduced plea. The third documents establishes that Mr. Hicks adhered to the terms of the “Adjournment In Contemplation of Dismissal” and on August 14, 2013 the charges were dismissed.

10 thoughts on “New Released Documents From Hicks Campaign Fail To Resolve What Happened”

  1. To win this election, your name need not be Kendall Hicks. The released documents make things look even worse for him.

    Domestic violence and patterns of abusive behavior are inexcusable, and certainly not a reason to be elected to a position of Public Safety.

    This is a small town – and survivors are amongst the constituents. The polls are a great place to exercise your right to defend the vulnerable.

    Like

  2. One question always asked by a defense lawyer is. “tell me everything”, much in the same way that vetting candidates for public office requires honesty to avoid surprises such as this one. Contrary to popular belief, departments do not run themselves and those with the experience of successfully addressing their posts over time will be difficult to challenge with little more than myopic magnified nitpicking. A challenged open seat demands honesty and the ability to convince the electorate that they have what it takes. This candidate does not pass the smell test given the obfuscation that we have seen thus far. I have to go with her.

    Like

    1. Pronouns, James?
      Go with “her?”

      A bit disrespectful (albeit, in the least insulting degree); are we not?
      All those years of academia and we get “obfuscational” ambiguity.

      Ha-ha-ha.
      Oh, and you forgot the semicolon before your quote.
      Don’t ya just hate English academic-types?

      Just another Funky Winkerbean,

      JC 😉

      Like

      1. It should have been a comma not a semicolon; my typing was fast, and I apparently hit the wrong key. I never use people’s names if I can avoid it. With a him and a her, I state my support of the latter. I would say, that there is no need to be an (_*_) over punctuation given your choice of John Hancock.

        Like

  3. One point Jim made, “departments do not run themselves” is spot on.
    I wonder if the person who will be our next Comm. of Public Safety realizes that. I hear it said so often that “we have a police chief and a fire chief and they can run their own departments.” This thinking, which has been practiced by PS Commissioners for three decades, at least, needs to change. Rampant overtime, abuse of vacation-personal-sick time, for example. If the PS Comm. gets tough, then there is the worry about retaliation against family and friends and supporters. Believe it or not.

    Like

  4. James Hancock! (lol)

    What say, old chum?
    It’s good to know we can count on you for a good retort!

    Always enjoy previewing your jousts,

    JC 😉

    Like

  5. Mr Hicks has a 5 yr son w the woman in question. For the sake of a child they both accept personal responsibility, have reconciled & coparent their child. As a Conservative, a constituent, devout Catholic + woman. I believe him!
    I have been a listener of MeToo + survivor. Its very easy to destroy a career w these reports. We have had serial predators in media, now in the WH. Yet the Black man is getting scrutiny even though the charges were dismissed. Its an insult to my intelligence to believe this is not racially motivated. Accusations of this calibre are done to ruin opportunities. Esp in a community where race relations is less than stellar. The optics presented here speak volumes. The smearing of a Veteran who served a tour in Afghanistan who is Black + a resident in an area that has race relations in order to support the network of cronyism that embeds our politics locally + nationally is shameless.
    Luke 23:34

    Like

  6. Hey kids!

    Guess what came in the ol’ mail box yesterday?

    A Kendal Hicks for Public Safety over-sized post card!
    Yippie.

    On an incredibly dreary photo of smog infested sky we read this:
    “This is Kabul, Afghanistan. After equipping and managing logistics for the troops who patrolled these streets (for big pharma), I’m ready to serve here at home to keep our neighborhoods safe and make Saratoga Springs an even better place to live.”

    I think he means: to make Saratoga a better place IN WHICH to live.
    But hey…grammer-schmammer. It’s all about candle wicks.
    We wonder how reliable the electric grid must be in such a place.

    So, we’ve been over there, some 18 years. Ya think, maybe our boys might have been able to wrap that up by now? Just wondering (old Move-on dot org thingy; sorry).

    So, are we to expect armed patrols? ARs? MREs?
    (Clam down–just some over the top, snarky stuff.)
    From exactly where, did this fellow come?

    Do we really need a COMBAT INFANTRYMAN to run public safety?
    Maybe. One of the last guys was a dentist.
    Holy cavities and root canals Batman!

    But seriously, this fellow is endorsed by the newly funded “Capital Women PAC.”
    Wow! That’s got us going, now (utter sarcasm).
    So, capital chics like the guy

    Silly question: Does anybody know this guy?
    Did he graduate Saratoga Springs High School?
    Where’s the accountability, the history; the old flames?
    Sounds like that other guy; Barry what’s-his-name.

    The mailer proclaims (in all caps) that the candidate is a:
    Decorated Veteran • Dedicated Coach • Committed Father.
    And it states he’s a leader with the local Elks Club.
    (Big smirk here…it IS a drinking club; fraternally speaking that is.)

    Yeah, okay.

    Got the vet part.
    Coached what, exactly? And Elks obviously made us laugh.
    Committed father…and where exactly is the “mother?”
    Must be one of the two women on the post card.
    We’re still grinning about the Elks.

    Just wondering.
    This “Candle Wicks” is gonna light the place up alright.
    Just think; “30 years in the Army.”

    Schenectady can sure use such talent.

    Just sayin.’

    -JC 😉
    PS– Go get ’em Kendall — and good luck!

    Like

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 )

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s