WELCOME GUEST  |  LOG IN
adoption, dog, cat, kitten, puppy, rescue
27east.com

Story - News

Sep 30, 2009 4:42 PMPublication: The Southampton Press

Linda Kabot's DWI case expected to be moved to Riverhead Town Court

Sep 30, 2009 4:42 PM

Southampton Town Supervisor Linda Kabot’s DWI case is expected to be moved to Riverhead Town Court, her lawyer William Keahon said Tuesday.

Ms. Kabot was arrested and charged with DWI in Westhampton Beach on Labor Day. She was scheduled to appear in Westhampton Beach Village Justice Court on Wednesday, September 30, but that meeting was cancelled after two village justices recused themselves from the case. Justice Court Judges Robert Kelly and Gair Betts both know Ms. Kabot personally.

Mr. Keahon received a letter this week from a Suffolk County administrative judge stating that the case will most likely be moved to Riverhead Town Court, although it is not yet official. An administrative judge still has not scheduled Ms. Kabot’s trial date.

Both Mr. Keahon and Ms. Kabot want to conclude the trial before the November 3 election for town supervisor. Ms. Kabot, a Republican, is being challenged by Town Councilwoman Anna Throne-Holst, the Democrats’ candidate. A trial date should be finalized later this week or early next week, Mr. Keahon said.

Mr. Keahon said last week that he has no intention of pursuing a plea bargain, adding that he is confident that Ms. Kabot’s case will go to trial. He also said his client is “innocent” of the DWI charge.

The arrest tape recorded by Westhampton Village Police the night of Ms. Kabot’s arrest is central to the supervisor’s case. Mr. Keahon previously said Ms. Kabot seems sober on the tape even though police officers noted in their arrest report that she failed two field sobriety tests. The report also states that officers observed that Ms. Kabot’s breath “smelled strongly of an alcoholic beverage” and her eyes were “red and glassy.”

The Press has filed a Freedom of Information Act request for a copy of the arrest video with the Westhampton Village Police Department and Suffolk County District Attorney Tom Spota’s office. Both requests were denied.

Westhampton Beach claimed the tape is part of an ongoing investigation. The district attorney’s office denied the request on the grounds that Ms. Kabot’s case is a “pending criminal matter.” The district attorney’s office said the release of the tape would “interfere with law enforcement investigations or judicial proceedings or deprive the person a right to a fair trial.”

The Press has appealed both denials.

Ms. Kabot, who was attending a 40th birthday party at her sister’s home in East Moriches on Sunday, September 6, had one normal-sized glass of wine at around 7 p.m., and a second glass between 9 and 9:15 p.m., Mr. Keahon said.

Ms. Kabot was arrested following a traffic stop at 12:25 a.m. on Monday, September 7, when Westhampton Beach Village Police said they observed her vehicle cross the double-yellow line on Main Street while she was making a left turn from Sunset Avenue onto Main Street. Ms. Kabot refused a breath test at the scene and other chemical tests at Westhampton Beach police headquarters because she believed that the officers were “overzealous” in their approach.

You've read 1 of 7 free articles this month.

Already a subscriber? Sign in

Interesting that the Supervisor's DWI case has to be moved out of the jurisdiction but Anthony Oddone's manslaughter trial of a Suffolk County Corrections officer stays right next to the county seat and Jail. If he has the presumption of innocence then such potential bias should be considered on a significantly more serious charge than DWI.
By Funbeer (247), Southampton on Sep 30, 09 2:48 PM
2 members liked this comment
Clarification: The story above was changed, after our print deadline, to reflect the fact that William Keahon, Ms. Kabot's attorney, received a letter saying the case likely will end up in Riverhead Town Court, but that move is not yet official. The above online story has those changes incorporated.
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (201), Hampton Bays on Sep 30, 09 4:38 PM
Linda Kabot --

Please answer one question:

Did you poke the arresting officer in the chest?

If so, please provide all details.

If not, please indicate that you did NOT make any physical moves in this regard.

Thank you.

PS - It will not suffice to answer this question after the elections.
By PBR (4883), Southampton on Sep 30, 09 5:01 PM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Sep 30, 09 5:17 PM
if she poked him, i'm sure it was an accident -- (she was probably trying to touch her nose during the field sobriety test, and missed by a few feet)
By nicole (96), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 1:11 AM
"The Press has filed a Freedom of Information Act request for a copy of the arrest video with the Westhampton Village Police Department and Suffolk County District Attorney Tom Spota’s office. Both requests were denied."

This continues to be shameful grandstanding for the readership. Mr. Shaw. The Press has no right to such EVIDENCE before a trial, and you know it, so stop puffing up your First Amendment rights.

They exist, but not in this instance.

By Frank Wheeler (1806), Northampton on Sep 30, 09 5:10 PM
"Ms. Kabot, who was attending a 40th birthday party at her sister’s home in East Moriches on Sunday, September 6, had one normal-sized glass of wine at around 7 p.m., and a second glass between 9 and 9:15 p.m., Mr. Keahon said.'

Mr. Keahon's opinion carries less weight than a mosquito's bladder, and the speaking of it is in fact an professional ethical violation. But what would the Press print without him - recent history of drunk driving statistics and fatalities?
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Sep 30, 09 5:23 PM
1 member liked this comment
2 Glasses in 4 hours? Well, then shes definately under the limit! Perhaps we should just do away with brethalyzers and all that, and just have cops ASK drunk drivers if they are drunk-- that will be a great system!

Lawyers... the only people worse than politicians.
By nicole (96), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 1:28 AM
Most politicians are lawyers ...
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 5:57 PM
"Both Mr. Keahon and Ms. Kabot want to conclude the trial before the November 3 election for town supervisor."

Does that mean defense waives all pretrial suppression hearings to move this along?

Is that a jury or a bench trial?

Put the Riverhead Court on notice, I bet they will be glad to move the case right to trial given the exigencies of the impending election.
By Publius (358), Westhampton Beach on Sep 30, 09 8:32 PM
No chance of a trial before Nov 3rd. This is just another grandstand play by the defense which can than claim it was not there fault the trial didn't happen until after election. Let's not forget the election is not about Linda's DWI-its about the millions of dollars that are missing during her watch. One more point-last glass of wine at 9:15pm and arrested around midnight. That's a few missing hours unaccounted for.
By EastEnd68 (888), Westhampton on Sep 30, 09 9:52 PM
"One more point-last glass of wine at 9:15pm and arrested around midnight. That's a few missing hours unaccounted for."

That's just idiotic! Is it beyond your comprehension that someone can socialize for three hours without drinking an alcoholic beverage?
By Frank Wheeler (1806), Northampton on Oct 1, 09 1:53 AM
Not about Linda's DWI arrest? Really? Linda responsible for millions of dollars missing? Really?

Let's be honest for just a second (if that is possible in politics). What, if anything, is Anna Throne Holst going to do to close a massive budget deficit? Fred Thiele called Anna a "uniter" not a "divider" on her radio campaign ad!

Know what that really means? It really means that ATH will not make any politically unpopular decisions and will not say "no" to anyone. It means ...more
By Integrity Party Guy (26), Riverhead on Sep 30, 09 10:16 PM
So what you are saying is:

Kabot will make politically unpopular decisions (like no breathalyzer).
Kabot doesn't owe anybody.
Kabot IS Harry Truman.
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 10:21 PM
Because Linda Kabot did not take a chemical test she was only charged under section 1192-3 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law. The prosecution of this section of law requires the people prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Kabot was intoxicated and the person making this determination is trained and has experience in detecting alcohol intoxication or drug impairment in persons he/she is observing

The defense will most likely subpoena all the police officers prior DWI arrests to see if he ...more
By RonDo (33), Southampton on Sep 30, 09 11:16 PM
1 member liked this comment
Oh... well if Rip Torn wasn't guilty than neither is Linda!
By littleplains (305), olde england on Oct 1, 09 12:10 PM
The point being that if you can afford to pay a lawyer to muck up the works you have a better chance of getting off.

Ah, the American way!
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 10:23 PM
Is this really necessary to report every detail of Kabot's life now??? I.e. sister's birthday party...sitting counting ...and watching her move?!
Where are the articles about the community and their concerns with the politics of all...the school where our children go...the community we live in....the changes with the hospital...I know you have wriiten about them...but I also know you have more reporting on those issues and seem to not delve into them as much as this...
We have laws and ...more
By UNITED states CITIZEN (207), SOUTHAMPTON on Oct 1, 09 6:24 AM
I wrote some of this on an older article, but it applies here too. No mention in the above article of the alleged political interference? Why doesnt the SH Press interview ATH on the questions she has refused to answer? What time was her phone call? If it was at 8am, well there were probably 50 such phone calls that morning, and there's nothing to it. But if it was at 1am, as alleged, and included a gloating statement about the arrest which was still going on at that moment, that's a whole other ...more
By foxnfowl (17), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 10:23 AM
I saw Professor Mustard, in the cloak room, with a candlestick in his hand! he did it!

the so-called "damning pics" of Kabot were supplied by her attorney - who broke every ethical rule in the book by raising his baseless conspiracy theories.
By littleplains (305), olde england on Oct 1, 09 12:12 PM
well, well .... looks like a GOP operative trying to shift the irresponsible behavior of their standard bearer -- Linda Kabot -- to some made up, ridiculous claim of "election fraud" by a Democrat ????? -- yeah, tell the mother and father of a child killed by a drunk driver that election fraud is a crime similar to driving under the influence ... that doggie ain't gonna hunt
By JimmyKBond (155), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 3:08 PM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 10:26 PM
foxnfowl...youa re no doubt someone who works on the Kabot campaign or a family member. You are trying to get Kabots challenger dragged into this thing. Anna Throne-Holst had nothing to do with Kabots DWI...plain and simple.
Your previous rant shows the esperate nature of the Kabot Campaign.
Haven't we had enough of Linda Kabot? It is time for her to go.
By SHNative (554), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 11:17 AM
oh but remember Linda's campaign ad last week with all those supposed dozens of people -- even though not one person actually was named just "initials" used --- the Kabot campaign claims instantly wrote her in support despite her being arrested? Wonder if they are willing to let an independent third party validate those comments ... actually judge those names to be valid people who wrote in ... or are they "made up" comments in her advertisement?
By JimmyKBond (155), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 3:14 PM
SHNative: Can we then infer that you are a campaign worker or family member of ATH's? If there was something fishy about the phone call to your candidate then that is a legitimate concern for all voters. We know that ATH has the police endorsement, so why is it so unbelievable that they would try to help her win the election. I, for one, am not naive enough not to question the whole deal. ATH was dragged into this by whoever called her. We just want to know what time she received the call. Why ...more
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 11:44 AM
Well, if ATH needs to answer a question then maybe Linda does too: such as, why didn't you take a breathalyzer test if you were sober?

here's another one: WHERE THE HELL IS OUR MISSING MONEY AND DO YOU EVER INTEND TO DO ANYTHING TO GET IT BACK?

Those are some real questions. deal with it
By littleplains (305), olde england on Oct 1, 09 12:15 PM
I am neither. You???
All of your claims from an anonymous letter? Please....your claims are transparent and clearly written for the purpose of muddying the waters so that your candidate doesnt look as bad after this DWI.
This smells like Kabot!! She has got to go!
By SHNative (554), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 11:53 AM
Integrity guy. Anybody who thinks ATH is owned, controlled, or owes anybody anything -- they are sadly mistaken, by a long shot.
By number19 (108), Westhampton on Oct 1, 09 11:53 AM
Sorry to disappoint but you couldnt be further from the truth. Don't know her personally, didn't vote for her, and certainly don't work for her. But I do have eyes in my head and a least a smattering of common sense. Dont dismiss reasoned arguments with your partisan nonsense. If only ATH would answer, this would all go away, right? Why wont she answer? She - and you - know how bad this looks for her. So there must be a reason she is willing to risk the political damage...
By foxnfowl (17), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 12:19 PM
"partisan nonsense", spoken by one who knows.

Where's the "ignore" button?
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 10:28 PM
Richard Nixon is alive, or Karl Rove took a position with the Southampton GOP!! Kabot's lawyer mentions a letter, by an unknown author no less, about a mysterious call made to Ms. Kabot's opponent the night of the DWI arrest. All the focus is now off Ms. Kabot and on ATH. Brilliant strategy, shift the focus, right out of the Nixon/Rove dirty tricks book! Smashing really! Now, which GOP operative sent the "letter" to create the smoke and mirrors, stay tuned.................................... ...more
By CommonSense (71), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 1:04 PM
Why is "ATH" even being mentioned in this thread? Did she pour LK a drink?

Kabot refused the breathalyzer. PERIOD. this in itself is a crime.
By Draggerman (840), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 2:24 PM
1 member liked this comment
The use of pseudonyms and anonymous letters is a well-established and honored tradition in American history - indeed the Federalist Papers were largely published with pseudonyms without identifying Madison, Hamilton and Jay as the authors.
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 2:27 PM
ah, yes, the Anonymous letter is clearly on par with the Federalist Papers-- Perhaps we should hang it up next to the Dongan Patent in Town Hall...
By nicole (96), Hampton Bays on Oct 2, 09 9:46 AM
Draggerman_ Refusing a breathalyzer test is not a crime in this country.
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 2:28 PM
WRONG.

Implied consent laws authorize or require the suspension of a driver's license for refusing a breathalyzer or blood test.

New York State Breath Test Refusal Penalties

* First Refusal: Minimum one-year driver's license revocation, $500 civil penalty
* Second Refusal (within 5 years): Minimum 18-month driver's license revocation, $750 civil penalty
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 10:32 PM
Linda needs to resign. Why? Because as an elected official she IS held to a higher standard.

She must not be allowed -- as her defense -- to destroy the good name of local police officers who were doing their job. It is not appropriate to turn her bad conduct into an indictment of the police officers involved nor be allowed in the public arena to refuse to take the breathalizer test. Yes, it may be her "right" but who amongst us doesn't think if she had taken the breathealizer test ... ...more
By JimmyKBond (155), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 2:29 PM
People make mistakes. I don't judge people on their mistakes but on what they do to fix them. Getting caught DWI is not a reason to resign.

Failure to take responsibility for or even honestly address the situation is a clear violation of the public trust and reason for her to resign. Good thing the election is just around the corner and we can give her what she should have given herself: the boot.
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 10:39 PM
You are correct Noah Way and that is the rub with Kabot. She fails to take any responsibility for anything --- not her conduct, not her management of Town Hall and the missing millions, not anything. I agree with you (and thanks for bringing some clarity to this).
By JimmyKBond (155), Hampton Bays on Oct 2, 09 4:19 PM
JimmyKBond: I think Ms. Kabot has behaved quite appropriately in this circumstance. She tried to conduct herself without making comments, willing to wait for her day in court. The "public" demanded that she speak out about the incident, so she has. What has she done wrong? If the police officers are shown to have behaved correctly, this will come out in trial. Ms. Kabot wasn't drunk, so she doesn't owe it to anybody's family to resign. I for one, (amongst us), do not believe she would have failed ...more
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 2:38 PM
hey, treewoman: you say "Ms. Kabot wasn't drunk." How do you know that? Can you prove it? Were you there?

And if you so firmly believe she would have passed the breathalyzer test...then why didn't she just take it? Had she...and passed it....this would all be settled and her claims legitimate. Oh, wait...I'm sure ath and the cops would have rigged the score to show intoxication: at least, that's what I heard was in the other "alleged anonymous letter."
By Joelhassoul (34), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 3:11 PM
treewoman ... your last name isn't Kabot is it?
By JimmyKBond (155), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 3:18 PM
Joelhassoul- No, Joel, I wasn't there and I assume yiu were not either. Only Ms. Kabot knows why she did not take a breathalyzer test, but it is her right and mine not to submit to that test, so I defend her right to refuse. i believe her because there is nothing in her history to suggest otherwise. This town is not big enough that Ms. Kabot could be a "drunk" as people on this blog like to say, and not have everyone know it. Where is the other letter? I have not heard about that. Do you have friends ...more
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 3:24 PM
Jimmykbond- No, my last name is not Kabot. I just hate when the rope comes out, so I defend Ms. Kabot because she is a neighbor to all of us and I think it stinks that all of a sudden she is labeled a "drunk". If she says she was not drunk, who are we to decide that isn't true?
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 3:29 PM
The only rope here is the one Kabot is hanging herself with.
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 10:42 PM
Wait, treewoman: "this town is not big enough that Ms. Kabot could be a drunk...and not have everyone know about it?" You mean..it's a small town and word spreads very quickly and easily? Ok. Understood.

Secondly...you don't have to be a "drunk" to get behind the wheel when you shouldn't....In fact, it is often people who very seldom drink, and are therefore significantly affected by alcohol when they do, who get behind the wheel and pose a danger...

Thirdly... and no, I wasn't ...more
By Joelhassoul (34), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 3:39 PM
WILL EVERYONE JUST GET OVER THE FACT THAT SHE DIDNT HAVE TO TAKE THE TEST B/C IT WAS HER RIGHT NOT TO TAKE IT. PERIOD. GEEEESH!
By Sam (252), Westhampton Beach on Oct 1, 09 3:43 PM
WRONG

The day you obtained your driver’s license you had to fill out paperwork. During the excitement of that day, you signed a statement agreeing that if you were arrested for DWI, you would submit to a chemical test to determine your BAC or blood drug content. As a result, by merely operating a motor vehicle on the public highways of New York State , all motorist are presumed to have given “Implied Consent” for BAC testing. If an officer asks you to take a blood, breath or urine test, ...more
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 10:46 PM
Oh, I see treewoman, you hate it that Ms. Kabot is labeled a drunk...even though she was arrested by cops empowered with the right to pull her over and arrest her....who are conditioned traffic experts by the courts....that angers you.... but anna throne-holst and the cops are accused of conspiring to "get her" based an anonymous letter and second hand info...and you now want to see thier private phone records.....you want them to defend their good name and character based upon this questionable ...more
By Joelhassoul (34), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 3:44 PM
sorry...meant to say considered traffic experts by the courts
By Joelhassoul (34), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 3:50 PM
Sam: You are absolutely right. You have every right to refuse the test...that's true: And it is also true that when you are issued a driver's license in NY....which is a privilege and not a right..... you agree that if you do refuse to take the test should you get pulled over...you give up your license for a year. That's the deal going in.
By Joelhassoul (34), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 3:58 PM
You're right, you don't have to be a drunk to drive drunk. As far as my saying that I believe she would have passed the test, I was answering a blogger who said "who amongst us doesn't think if she had taken the breathealizer test ... it would have convicted her of drunk driving right then and there."
No one is accusing ATH of anything except receiving a phone call. Ms. Kabot gave the letter to her attorney, as anyone would in a similar situation. It was not signed but that doesn't mean ...more
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 3:59 PM
Joelhassoul: Perhaps you missed this study: Dr. Spurgeon Cole of Clemson University conducted a study on the accuracy of roadside field sobriety tests. His staff videotaped individuals performing six common field sobriety tests, then showed the tapes to 14 experienced police officers and asked them to decide whether the suspects had "had too much to drink and drive".
Unknown to the officers, the blood-alcohol concentration of each of the 21 DUI subjects was .00% -- stone sober. Just saying.
The ...more
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 4:08 PM
tell that one to the parents of the boy who was run over in hampton bays.

Amazing how everyone wants to get "tough on crime".. until that means inconveniently charging their favorite politician with DWI.
By littleplains (305), olde england on Oct 1, 09 8:50 PM
right, so Kabot should have taken the breathalyzer, since the cop's judgements are soo inaccurate. is that what you are saying?
By nicole (96), Hampton Bays on Oct 2, 09 9:50 AM
Watch for the high priced lawyers to try and destroy the reputation and training of the local police officers in order to salvage Linda Kabot's political career ... it happens in court every time the facts seem irrefutable: the defense begins to tear down the process, the police, etc etc

I hope Linda has enough honesty and truthfulness not to let that happen. It would be a travesty.
By JimmyKBond (155), Hampton Bays on Oct 2, 09 4:27 PM
Treewoman: I could personally give a rip if she is innocent or guilty.... I hope if she's guilty she's found guilty and if innocent found innocent...

but let me ask you..... do want to be subjected to the same standard as this letter suggests? i.e. "Okay, treewoman... you've been accused of such and such.... now prove this isn't true? Why you ask? becuase someone..we don't know who....said in an anonymous letter that they heard from a friend who heard from someone else that you may have ...more
By Joelhassoul (34), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 4:32 PM
isn't it curious that very soon after Kabot's arrest an anonymous letter accusing the police / ATH to be in a conspiracy surfaces? This is commencement of the riping apart of the local police as a defense strategy ... doesn't anybody see that ....
By JimmyKBond (155), Hampton Bays on Oct 2, 09 4:34 PM
Joelhassoul- I will research the rules of journalism, thanks. As far as the letter is concerned, I guess I am misinformed. The ley=tter that I read says that ATH received a phone call and the caller said "we got her". I don't recall any other issue with regards to ATH. I and other bloggers were just asking what time she received the call. ATH has already corroborated the fact that she did receive a call. She just refuses to say what time she got the call. So what am I accusing her of?
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 4:48 PM
I am well aware, everyone has a right not to blow into a breathalyzer. However, for the life of me, I cannot think of one reason why someone who is innocent of drinking and driving wouldn't choose to blow.

Could someone please tell me why Linda Kabot would want to spend the night in jail, loose her license for a year, deal with what will amount to be an expensive lawyer bill, add a court expense to a township, and get a lot of negative media coverage on an election year instead of simply ...more
By RealLocal (76), Bridgehampton on Oct 1, 09 4:54 PM
my God treewoman: the very fact that the letter is saying she received this phone call from a cop saying "we got her" insinuates a set up and calls her character and the cops' into question... Dont' you realize if that's the case the cops and she engaged in a major crime?....if this ridiculous letter doesn't accuse her, or the cops, of anything, then why the heck even bring up the letter? what's its purpose? I mean, its logical...common sense for crying out loud... I mean, why did kabot bring it ...more
By Joelhassoul (34), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 5:11 PM
REal local: She chose not to blow knowing full well her license would be suspended. Thats her choice to make. Its her license. It doesnt matter what public opinion is. Just b/c you or anyone else WANTED her to blow doesnt mean anything.
By Sam (252), Westhampton Beach on Oct 1, 09 5:32 PM
Joelhassoul: I thought we were having a lively debate but you choose to get a nasty. Please don't tell me to grow up. I never said that the police did nothing wrong, they may be guilty of something, the trial will tell. The videotape was edited and that too will come out in court. What I did say was that ATH admits to getting a phone call but will not say when she received it. if in fact it was during Ms. Kabot's roadside test then that would be unethical on the part of the police. So yes, it might ...more
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 5:44 PM
To joulhassoul:

You continually assert that it is unprofessional for the Southampton Press to have posted the letter from an anonymous author when a simple online search would show you to be quite wrong. First, newspapers run news items from anonymous sources all the time and there is no agreement that to do so is anything other than good journalism. See, www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=159, for just one discussion of many.

Secondly, whereas newspapers generally follow a rule of ...more
By highhatsize (3797), East Quogue on Oct 1, 09 6:09 PM
2 members liked this comment
Right. There is an absolute rash of DWI arrests of people who are not intoxicated, and this needs to be investigated at the highest levels immediately! Why isn't the Press all over this?! Maybe because it's in your imagination?
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 10:52 PM
1 member liked this comment
Right: the right to drive drunk should be a constitutional right! And the right to refuse a breathalyzer should be added in the bill of rights. Only then will our people be free from oppression
By nicole (96), Hampton Bays on Oct 2, 09 9:59 AM
Why is it to save ones political crony, the conduct of the police is thought to be suspect? It is time some folks here focused on the real issue: the arrest of a public official entitled to her "day in court" (the legal side) whose public conduct is rightly in question (the political side)
By JimmyKBond (155), Hampton Bays on Oct 2, 09 4:41 PM
highhatsize: you are dead wrong... newspapers should only use anonymous sources when they can stand behind the credibility of the source... they can keep a source private...but they have to know who that source is to make sure it is credibility... and that's just the fact of the matter.... by simply posting something you ARE gilving it credibility.... Imagine if a male public official was accused of cheating on his wife....and without knowing whether or not it was true... the Press published an ...more
By Joelhassoul (34), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 6:39 PM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By golfbuddy (180), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 6:59 PM
to Joelhassoul:

I posted the link to a discussion of anonymous sources that refutes the notion that you reassert but I guess that you didn't read it.

If the press received an anonymous letter suggesting that a man may have cheated on his wife, its reaction would depend on whether or not the man was a public figure and whether or not the letter was in response to an ongoing story. If he WAS a public figure and the letter WAS relevant to an ongoing story, the newspaper is more ...more
By highhatsize (3797), East Quogue on Oct 1, 09 7:01 PM
The outcome of this trial will depend on how muck Keahon can muck up the works with unethical pre-trial statements contaminating the potential jury pool, etc.
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Oct 1, 09 10:54 PM
I don't give a rip about your link.. you cannot quote, post, use an anonymous source UNLESS you know who that source is... PERIOD. You can withold sources....you can protect sources....and not name them in the story, you can even go to jail like Judy Miller by not outing your source....... but the editors have to know the credibility of the source..... and it doesn't matter who the subject is.... So, if the press receives an anonymous fax stating that this male public figure likes little boys.....it ...more
By Joelhassoul (34), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 7:24 PM
I actually read the paper, golfbuddy: I have an interest in what goes on in my town and with my tax dollars. I dont give a damn who you think I am.
By Joelhassoul (34), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 7:49 PM
Well then maybe the Press should tear this whole website down- the commentary section anyway- because there have been some wild, unfounded, anonymous accusations flying around here as well.
By Sam (252), Westhampton Beach on Oct 1, 09 7:52 PM
Actually Joelhassoul what you are saying is true, but the newspaper did not receive this letter addressed to them, so it is not their property. It is a news item.
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 8:06 PM
Joelhassoul: If the press received an anonymous letter saying that Ms. Kabot was at Magic's downing shots, that would be very easy to investigate. So would this letter if ATH would reveal when she received her phone call. Besides, this letter was not sent to the press so they can report it as a news item. You told me I should grow up and I will tell you to relax a little. It's not as if anything you or I say really amounts to a hill of beans.
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 8:26 PM
oh...so is that the threshold? so long as it wasn't addressed to press its a news item? so a candidate receives anonymous information damaging to his/her opponent and brings it to the attention of the press....then its fair game? no matter what that anonymous information claims?
By Joelhassoul (34), Hampton Bays on Oct 1, 09 8:26 PM
This is news because Ms. Kabot has an upcoming trial. Not because of any election. Don't you think if the police did call ATH, and I don't mean the patrol officers, while Ms. Kabot was being field tested, then that is a bit fishy? If no one called her during that time from the police, then the letter was a lie. No one is accusing ATH of anything except receiving a call. I would be curious to know when she received the call. I really think it would be the police conduct that is in question and that ...more
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 9:01 PM
Are you people insane? A guy on here points out how wrong it is for a newspaper to print an anonymous letter, with completely unsubstantiated, third-hand allegations, admittedly without any idea of who the source is, or whether there's any legitimacy to it. And the best you can do is accuse HIM of being a disgruntled former employee with an axe to grind?

And what do you base that on? His memory and knowledge of Kabot's multiple failings? Enjoy yourselves why you pay more taxes thanks ...more
By littleplains (305), olde england on Oct 1, 09 9:02 PM
Joelhassoul
Ok so now your concerned with your town and your tax dollars. What a bunch of bull. If that were the case you would have come out on one these blogs long before this. As you mentioned we've had plenty to complain about with all those other articles.
Your arguments are one sided, god forbid that anyone should call ATH's character into question.

By golfbuddy (180), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 9:05 PM
What does the refusal to take a breathalyzer test say about Kabot's character?
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Oct 2, 09 11:45 AM
littleplains
I can't believe you would even say something like (are you insane). With some of the thinks that you have said, that really holds a lot of weight coming from you.
LOL
By golfbuddy (180), hampton bays on Oct 1, 09 9:15 PM
To Joelhassoul:

Oddly, I place much more credence in the opinions of journalists whose names I recognize than on that of an anonymous nonentity whose only citation to authority is, "Because I said so".

As to your question, "Yes", and such a letter would have the same credibility as the one about ATH.

Your notion about the proper functioning of journalism in this country is very strange.

By highhatsize (3797), East Quogue on Oct 1, 09 9:21 PM
Why is this thing being turned into a crusade against "overzealous" drunk driving laws?

Some of those commenting here seem to want Kabot to be a sort of Rosa Parks for the rights of alcoholic drivers!
By nicole (96), Hampton Bays on Oct 2, 09 9:56 AM
1 member liked this comment
golfbuddy, treewoman, highhatsize...all of whom are also anonymous on this blog....can believe or think whatever you want.... the fact remains you cannot suggest or imply wrongdoing....based upon an anonymous, second hand source based on hearsay that no one can verify the authenticity of........ and no matter what I say, or what anyone else says, you are not going to change your mind...and neither I am... so, there you have it....i'm done... this is a colossal waste of time
By Joelhassoul (34), Hampton Bays on Oct 2, 09 9:59 AM
I have an anonymous letter here that says highhatsize is a attorney who was disbarred for frivolous actions made in an attempt to get out of a DWI charge and is currently on the payroll of William Keahon, who hired him to sabotage the DA's case against Kabot in the press.

It's gotta be true.
By Noah Way (450), Southampton on Oct 2, 09 11:49 AM
1 member liked this comment
Bye joelhassoul
By treewoman (44), hampton bays on Oct 2, 09 11:07 AM
attorneys can be disbarred for frivolous actions?
By quioguebirder (11), on Oct 2, 09 2:15 PM
geekhampton, holiday, christmas, gift, iphone, laptop, sag harbor, tech support