Levitt's piece on Adrian Schoolcraft I believe beat the media to the punch -- although it appears main stream media isn't reporting this major story. I am glad The Chief picked up this mega NYPD scandal and politely gives the Queens DA Richard Brown hell.
How ever -- when Huffington picked Leonard Levitt's breaking news on Adrian Schoolcraft and the shocking DA ruling --- the editor for this piece on huffington added a correction or challenge to a Serpico quote! See bottom of this post....
Levitt hasn't added it to his blog but Huffington has...interesting huh. Is Levitt just a little bias in favor of Serpico because his reporting on David Durk sure seemed like it.
Serpico got challenged by the lawyer from the Knapp Commission --see below.
Leonard Levitt's piece on Schoolcraft good work but his piece on David Durk and NYPD Whistle Blower dying awful and it was as if Serpico was his editor. http://nypdconfidential.com/columns/2012/121119.html
Levitt's piece that should have been a tribute to David Durk an whistle blower that wanted to stay in the NYPD and effect change as usual became all about Serpico's ego to be the star -- the true hero -- Serpico a true hero who denied paternity of his child until he was finally confronted with a DNA test has a lot of to be jealous of because David Durk was a family man.
Durk stayed married to one woman his entire life and his family got how dedicated Durk was to trying to help others. By the way Durk married a beautiful and intelligent woman and most men don't like that combination at all let alone stay married.
I wrote Levitt and suggested that perhaps David Durk's daughter said stop harassing her father to Schoolcraft's father because she knew how gravely ill David Durk was but did not share that? Durk was probably dying of cancer and that was perhaps maybe why she responded the way she did to Adrian Schoolcraft's father?
I understand the power of some of Levitt's work but I always have issues like him reporting about Jack Maple trimming his nasal hairs. Are you kidding me?
Levitt's piece on Durk is so offensive that Serpico comes off as a man with a serious inferiority complex, possibly anti-Semitic, deeply jealous of David Durk. David Durk was not seeking the lime light like Serpico is and was.
Serpico helping Adrian Schoolcraft is excellent but Serpico is about limelight and far more a Hollywood wannabe celebrity than Durk any day of the week.
Serpico did good and was courageous exposing corruption but he is very flawed and the way he misrepresents and trashes Durk is awful. I won't read Serpico but I read the bio on Durk and I will take Durk any day over Serpico.
If Durk wanted to be a star he could have spent his feverish energy doing so but instead David Durk fought every battle -- like me he did not chose his battles. I wrote David Durk asking him for help. I scrawled a brief note on a scrap of paper from the Bronx Botanical Garden. I did not know he was dying. http://nypdstatcreativestatfixing.blogspot.com I wanted his help with Det. John Vergona and the First Precinct Det Squad members involved in making me being assaulted go away. Shortly after I wrote Durk died. I did not know he was dying of cancer. Read this --- way better than Levitt's nasty piece thanks to a very jealous Serpico who really has issues especially about "sharing" maybe anything remember the baby he didn't want to own up to but most of all that Durk was vital and courageous and stayed to effect change not for limelight.
I bet it just grates Serpico that Durk is right next to him honored in The Italian American Museum next to my favorite NYPD Lt. Joe Petrosino.
http://nypdconfidential.com/columns/2012/121203.htm Huffington editor adds emendation -- Michael Armstrong challenges statement by Serpico --- that Serpico was set-up to be shot. Read more below....
EMENDATION. Two weeks ago this column reported that Serpico maintained that his having been shot months before the Knapp Commission began hearings in 1971 was the result of the police department's "setting him up." Michael Armstrong, the counsel to the Knapp Commission and currently the head of the mayor's Commission to Combat Police Corruption, took exception to that sentence and wrote:: "Frank, at the time, emphatically and repeatedly denied to me that he had any belief that he had been set up to be shot by anyone, much less by the "department" as part of some sort of official revenge. He was angry that his fellow cops didn't come to his aid fast enough, but specifically rejected the idea that they had deliberately put him in harm's way."
With editing from Donald Forst
