Gavriel Bodenheimer Trial Starts On May 27th (since delayed to Dec 31)

Rabbi Gavriel Bodenheimer Bais Mikroh, Principal

Rabbi Gavriel Bodenheimer
Bais Mikroh, Principal

UPDATE (6/8/15): Since I posted the trial was delayed to Thursday, December 31, 2015. It is not clear if the prosecution is backlogged, the judge is backlogged, the defense has found ways to delay trial, or the witness is needing time to be ready or is wavering. It would be nice if we could trust the prosecutor to do his best, But alas, Rockland DA Thomas Zugibe is indebted to the Haredi voting block. In the past it was clear he was not going all out in his prosecution efforts. At the same time he is worried about getting hurt like Charles Hynes was in Brooklyn for going easy on Haredi sex offenders.


Rabbi Gavriel (Gabriel) Bodenheimer’s trial on ten felony counts alleging  criminal sexual acts with a child under eleven years of age is now scheduled to start on Wednesday May 27, 2015 (right after Shavuot) in front of Judge R. Thorsen in the Rockland County Courthouse.

Bodenheimer, Principal  of Bais Mikroh elementary school in Monsey, was arrested in August 2014 on charges dating backing to 2009.

See also:


18 thoughts on “Gavriel Bodenheimer Trial Starts On May 27th (since delayed to Dec 31)

  1. will kenny gribetz be wearing a dress when he defends him
    just want to be a court observer

    • How can you be SURE he is innocent? I understand you think he is. I understand you saying you would never suspect him. But how can you be SURE unless you can provide an ironclad alibi for his whereabouts when the crime was alleged or you were continually observing his accuser during that period.

        • No. It is not innocent until proven guilty. It is “presumed innocent” in the eyes of the law for purposes of punishment. Nevertheless, even without a trial, depending on evidence bail can be required or even denied. The main LEGAL significance of the PRESUMPTION is that the prosecution needs to prove it’s case. A jury is always instructed not to assume guilt just because a prosecutor says for but to evaluate the evidence.

          One can be objectively guilty in fact (i.e., one did truly commit the alleged crime) but the law entitles the defendant to to request bail and to force a case at trial. So my question still stands, how can someone know for SURE that someone is innocent unless you were with either the accuser or the accused throughout the entire time the crime was alleged.

          Please do not confuse a legal presumption of innocence with actual innocence.

          Let me present you with a more familiar example: Moshe Finkel was buying treyf chickens and selling them in Monsey as kosher through Shevach. Until he was caught, he had a chezkas kashrus and some of Monsey’s finest families relied on his chickens. But they were treyf and he was guilty whether or not everyone presumed him innocent. The chickens did not become treyf the moment rabbonim announced it. They were treyf all along and people had to do all sorts of things to kasher their keilim.

      • That’s what I meant, I was using hyperbole. But you should also give him the benefit of the doubt and not prejudge him.

  2. Even though I believe all chareidi molester’s should be jailed I have not met a single person who believe’s these charges have any merit. Many say the accused is the victim here as the alleged victim has no credibility and the accused although he is considered the harsh old school type has a impeccable reputation. It will be on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt these charges. And they most likely will end up with egg on there face assuming there is a fair trial

    • “the alleged victim has no credibility”

      That’s what they say about every victim. In order to discredit the victim.

      ” and the accused although he is considered the harsh old school type has a impeccable reputation.”

      That’s what they say about every accused abuser.

      The abuser defense brigade can only cry wolf so many times before no one believes it anymore. In my mind, there is no reason to believe any of these claims, based on historical example. I’m sure many agree with my view.

  3. yerachmiel, if you would ever go to the school building and see this rabbis office and the fact that his door is NEVER closed, and the close proximity to other offices, as well as his HUGE widows with shades that dont close to the playground, you would also be sure that he didnot rape a kid in his office. thank god the kid and his mother made the story wild enough that things will be obvious.

    • I am sure he will have a well paid, well organized defense, as organized as the Yekke he is. I too am awaiting the trial. At that point we will find out if the case you make is indeed the whole story or even half the story. At this point I don’t know where the alleged acts happened, etc. If the acts happened elsewhere or during non-school hours, your points are irrelevant.

      • This is why cases are tried in court. Entire arguments fabricated out of little details or supposed factual details, as Zalmy has done here, are for the defense team’s media soundbites. All the actual details and facts will be revealed and investigated in court and we will see what holds up to scrutiny. Does any common citizen even know the details of the accusation at this point? I doubt it.

        Any info on why Gribetz was replaced? It seems that all the slimeball pedophiles in the orthodox community use him as defense attorney.

        • I have no idea why Bodenheimer chose not to use Gribetz. Perhaps because of Gribetz unsavory reputation arising from the episode that cost him his prosecutor’s job. It involved an adulterous affair, kinky sex and diversion of government money to his mistress, all quite a scandal for an orthodox Jew. Perhaps the very dignified Bodenheimer considered that beneath him. Perhaps Bodenheimer, knowing Gribetz’s reputation as the go-to guy for Monsey’s molesters thought him unseemely or something that would taint him by extension.

          Perhaps he just chose his new attorney because he is an excellent defense attorney.

          The more interesting question is why did he decide to go to trial rather than take the plea bargain. Perhaps he is innocent. Perhaps he is arrogant about his ability to intimidate and prevail. Everyone knows he has always been a bully and he may not realize the tide has turned.

          It is also possible that the prosecutor’s best plea bargain offer was something long like five years. for a 70 year old man, that might feel like a life sentence so he feels like there is no gamble in going to trial. I don’t know his health situation. But if it is poor, there may be little risk in a trial versus a long sentence on a guilty plea.

          Finally, a proud man may be unable to admit his guilt to his family. This way, even if he is convicted he can go on protesting his innocence.

          I suspect the trial will have all sorts of surprises. I don’t think a politically sensitive DA who depends on Jewish votes would have taken this prosecution on against a prestigious orthodox figure unless he was reasonably confident of winning. He knows that if his case stinks at trial it will hurt his reputation in the orthodox community. the prosecutor had to realize that a figure like Bodenheimer will have a well funded defense. And the haredi community is as astute in picking lawyers as they are in picking doctors.

          I expect this to be a battle royale with impressive showings by both sides.

See Commenting policy ( )

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

You are commenting using your 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