Senator slams ‘unethical behavior’ by Nicodemo

A Democratic lawmaker says he’s concerned over new allegations that embattled Deputy Attorney General John Nicodemo deliberately failed to disclose key evidence in the trial of a Lakewood Rabbi twice.

Nicodemo was the state’s prosecutor during the 2016 indictment and 2019 trial of Rabbi Osher Eisemann, the founder of a school for special needs children charged with money laundering.

“This ongoing unethical behavior is a pattern, and someone needs to be held accountable,” said State Sen. Joseph Cryan (D-Union).  “The details on the latest Rabbi brief should frighten every New Jersey citizen, and the lack of action from leadership certainly implies the New Jersey’s Office of the Attorney General’s approval.  It’s an underreported scandal.”

Eisemann’s attorney, Lee Vartan, is seeking a dismissal of the indictment, claiming that Nicodemo intentionally held back material evidence that would have exonerated his client – and then did it again to fight a reversal of the Rabbi’s conviction.

“The state committed a Brady violation in defending against a Brady violation,” Vartan said in court filings.  “No more evidence of intentionality is needed.”

Senate Assistant Minority Leader Robert Singer (R-Lakewood) asked the attorney general’s office to review the charges against Eisemann and decide if it’s in the state’s best interests to continue the case.

Based on Nicodemo’s Brady violation, Superior Court Judge Joseph Paone granted Eisemann a new trial.  The attorney general’s office lost an appeal to the New Jersey Supreme Court earlier this month.

Since his Brady violation, Nicodemo has been moved out of his role as a prosecutor;  he is now working as a diversity officer at a higher salary.  Nicodemo has not responded to multiple calls seeking comment.

Eisemann, the founder of the School for Hidden Intelligence, was accused of misappropriating over $200,00 in school funds as part of a scheme to create the effect that he used personal funds to repay funds he owed the school.

Vartan sought a new trial after discovering Nicodemo and the state attorney general’s office sat on evidence they were required to provide to the defense, namely the audit trail that led to Rochel Janowski, the former school bookkeeper.

Janowski certified that an entry she made into a QuickBooks ledger account “was never intended to erase a debt” owed by Eisemann, “nor did it.”  She said the particular ledger item was used when she didn’t know how to attribute a transaction.

Vartan argued that Nicodemo and other prosecutors knew the entry was made by Janowski and kept from him, a violation of the Brady Rule that requires exculpatory evidence to be turned over.

“In the most literal sense, however, there can be no doubt that if Janowski is believed by a jury,  the verdict will be different,” Paone wrote.  “It goes does more that merely contradict the evidence adduced at trial; it goes to the central issue of defendant’s guilt and has the probable effect of exonerating the defendant.”

Prosecutors argued they did not suppress evidence because QuickBooks data was produced before the trial.  But Paone determined that the entry was “merely one line buried in a thumb drive of presumably countless pages of journal entries, and which was key to the state’s case.”