- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -

« News Home

Judge set to unseal case files

Published: Tue, December 7, 2010 @ 12:10 a.m.

By David Skolnick



A judge is expected today to make public documents that have been under seal in the Oakhill Renaissance Place criminal case.

Marion H. Little Jr., an attorney for The Vindicator and 21 WFMJ-TV, told visiting Judge William H. Wolff Jr. at a Monday hearing there is no legal reason to keep the pretrial documents under seal.

To avoid pretrial publicity he said might bias potential jurors, Judge Wolff ordered in September that all nonroutine documents in the case be filed under seal so he can screen them before making all or parts of them public.

The Vindicator and 21 WFMJ-TV objected at a Monday hearing, which started at 9 a.m. and lasted until about 4 p.m.

The judge’s decision came after a private meeting with lawyers representing those accused in the Oakhill case, Little and a special prosecutor.

A decision on whether to make public bills of particulars, documents that detail specific illegal acts prosecutors claim were committed by the accused, for three of the defendants will be made shortly, the judge said.

The bills of particulars were the primary documents discussed at Monday’s hearing.

In open court, Little argued the press and the public’s right to know under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is of equal importance to the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees the right to a fair trial.

Martin G. Weinberg, attorney for Anthony M. Cafaro Sr., one of the seven people indicted in the Oakhill case, along with the Cafaro Co., and two of its subsidiaries, said not providing time to review documents before they were made public would violate his clients’ Sixth Amendment rights.

Cafaro’s attorneys were trying to keep some records from the public, saying The Vindicator’s decision to publish the information could make it difficult to find an unbiased jury.

Several times Monday, Little recommended the judge move the case to another county if there is concern about a fair trial in Mahoning County.

Several times, Weinberg objected, saying having the trial elsewhere would be a hardship on his clients.

The only witness at Monday’s hearing was an Ohio University professor called by Cafaro’s attorneys.

Hugh J. Martin, director of undergraduate studies for the university’s Scripps College of Communications, said The Vindicator has “a virtual monopoly on the print newspaper market” in Mahoning County.

Martin, hired Wednesday by Cafaro’s attorneys as an “expert witness,” said his review of the newspaper’s coverage of Oakhill showed bias against the defendants.

But on cross-examination by Little, Martin admitted most daily newspapers have similar presence in their home counties, and “it is not unusual for newspapers to be criticized for [their] coverage.”

Also, Martin said he did no review of local talk radio or any other media in the area, except for a limited look at some of Youngstown’s TV network affiliates’ news programs.

Martin, who testified for more than two hours, said he has “no idea” if coverage by the newspaper and the TV station would impact potential jurors.

“That’s not my area of expertise,” he said.

In the 73-count Oak- hill indictment, five people and three companies are charged with conspiring criminally to impede the move of the Mahoning County Department of Job and Family Services from Cafaro Co.-owned rented quarters to Oakhill.

Oakhill is the former Forum Health Southside Medical Center, which the county bought in 2006. JFS moved there in 2007.

A motion to dismiss the indictment by Cafaro, the retired president of his family-owned company, as well as the Cafaro Co., and two affiliates, the Ohio Valley Mall Co. and The Marion Plaza Inc., was to be held Monday. Because of the time spent on the sealed records issue, the arguments on dismissal request were postponed and not yet rescheduled.

Besides the companies and Cafaro, facing conspiracy and other charges are Mahoning County Commissioner John A. McNally IV; county Auditor Michael V. Sciortino; former county Treasurer John B. Reardon, and ex-county JFS director John Zachariah.

Among the items still sealed are the bills of particulars detailing the charges against Zachariah, Reardon and Sciortino.

Two defendants, Flora Cafaro, part-owner of the Cafaro Co. and sister of Anthony Cafaro, and attorney Martin Yavorcik, are charged only with one count of money laundering, and not with conspiracy.

The money-laundering charge pertains to an allegedly concealed $15,000 gift from Flora Cafaro to Yavorcik’s unsuccessful 2008 campaign for county prosecutor.


First, Sixth amendments

Here are the First and Sixth amendments to the U.S. Constitution, which are at the core of the free press and fair trial debate over the sealing of documents in the Oakhill Renaissance Place criminal conspiracy case:

First Amendment

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Sixth Amendment

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of Counsel for his defence.”

Source: Bill of Rights


1author50(1121 comments)posted 4 years, 11 months ago

This is a shocker!

Suggest removal:

2Stan(9923 comments)posted 4 years, 11 months ago



Martin G. Weinberg is one of the nation’s most prominent criminal trial and appeals attorneys. Following his graduation from Harvard Law School in 1971, he has been chief trial and appellate counsel in hundreds of cases during his 36 years as a defense attorney. He has defended his clients on charges ranging from money laundering, tax evasion, securities fraud, mail, wire and bank fraud to racketeering, drug smuggling, internet sex offenses, computer theft, and murder. Weinberg’s experience includes, when necessary, his organizing and directing case-specific teams of nationally selected attorneys, skilled forensic and traditional investigators, and specialized experts.


•Successfully argued landmark Fourth Amendment case, United States v Chadwick, in United States Supreme Court
•Principal lawyer in ground-breaking challenge to the Department of Justice’s 20 year history of seizing the content of e-mails through secret subpoenas to Internet Service Providers in circumvention of the Warrant Clause of the Fourth Amendment
•Trial Acquittals in recent federal white collar racketeering conspiracy, tax evasion conspiracy, and money laundering trials for business executives and practicing attorneys
•Appellate reversals in recent federal honest services case involving a hospital CEO accused of bribing a state politician and a business executive charged with mail and wire fraud
•Representation of over 100 attorneys in matters including disqualification challenges, motions to quash grand jury subpoenas, contempt proceedings, and federal criminal prosecution for money laundering and obstruction of justice
•Successful defenses of doctors, trial lawyers, hospital executives, CEOs of companies, and alleged organized crime leaders in a myriad of challenging cases over the past 36 years in 8 federal courts of appeals and over 20 federal district courts from California and Florida to New England and New York

Suggest removal:

3Silence_Dogood(1555 comments)posted 4 years, 11 months ago

To the Vindy

Thank you for fighting the good fight!

Suggest removal:

4jerryvalley(26 comments)posted 4 years, 11 months ago

Let's be honest, the Vindy is indeed biased against the Cafaros. Regardless of your position on this case, it would be great if this paper was more objective.

Suggest removal:

5VincentTBasile(1 comment)posted 4 years, 11 months ago

Dear Sir:
Being a proud native Youngstowner, I have been following the Oak Hill topic for some time.
Journalism demands a unbiased critical investigative pursuit of accurate factual material related to any story.
Half truths do not sum to truth via
hearsay, innuendo, associations and unsubstantiated correlations.
So far you have failed to demonstrate the true grit of a Clingan Jackson and other Vindicator journalists of the past who demonstrated a history of accurate unbaised reporting in the face of mob violence and city government corruption. You clearly have talent. Now let's see if you have the integrity and courage to ignore your editorial staff and pursue the unvarnished truth. That's how you acquire a virtuous reputation and advance your career.
Vincent T. Basile

Suggest removal:

6Stan(9923 comments)posted 4 years, 11 months ago

"Successful defenses of alleged organized crime leaders"

Martin G. Weinberg has what it takes to defend the worst !

Suggest removal:

7HaydenThomas(208 comments)posted 4 years, 11 months ago

I see the Cafaro lackeys are out in full force supporting their masters. Probably Joe Bell. Keep up the good work Vindy and ask McNally how many phone calls were exchanged when the Oakhill sale went through.

Suggest removal:


HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2015 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes