Pauline Braccio Continues Demand For Justice

Pauline Braccio Continues Demand For Justice — Pauline Braccio began accusing Montgomery County (Pa) Commissioner Kenneth Lawrence of rape at the September 2018 county commissioner meeting.

Pauline Braccio Continues Demand For Justice
Kenneth Lawrence

She said the rape occurred in 1990 while they were both students at Montgomery County Community College during a student government retreat in Pike County in the Poconos.

She said Lawrence and another man drugged a drink and egged her on to take it. She said she felt woozy. Lawrence offered to walk her back to her cabin. She passed out and awoke to find Lawrence raping her. You can read the details here, in her sworn affidavit.

Lawrence would have been 18 at the time.

Pauline was inspired to come forth by the MeToo Movement and the Cosby trial which had turned Norristown into a circus that spring.

She pledged to attend every meeting until Lawrence resigned.

And she did for the next several months bringing the matter up during public comments.

In June 2019, Lawrence finally responded saying the allegation was false and the incident never happened. He didn’t offer any details as to why it was false. If he could show, for instance, that he never met Pauline or did not attend MCCC with her or never went on the retreat with her, he would certainly have our sympathy and Pauline’s name would never again appear on these pages.

But he didn’t. He just muttered a lame denial and hoped the matter would disappear, which it would have as he is a Democrat and protected by the establishment media.

Except Pauline was not going to let it disappear. She continued attending the commissioner meetings and speaking forth in public until Oct. 3 2019, when she was manhandled out by a large deputy sheriff and charged with disorderly conduct.

Again not a peep of protest from any media or “women’s advocacy” group.

Pauline fought the charge but was found guilty at hearing on March 4, 2020. Naturally, she appealed. The appeal was finally held last week on Sept. 9. Please note that is a year-and-a-half after the hearing.

Pauline said she was not allowed to directly examine witnesses she had subpoenaed, and that the arresting officer whom she wanted to question was given permission not to attend due to a vacation.

Naturally, the conviction was upheld.

Pauline has now filed a motion for reconsideration to Montco’s Court of Common Pleas.

Granted the charge against her is relatively minor but the injustice being done is not. Really, if she was raped and the guy who did it is sitting there in a position of power smirking as the now infirm and elderly woman is hauled away by a large sheriff, well, that’s kind of wrong don’t you think?

Lawrence should be compelled to treat the matter seriously. Did he know her in college? Did they serve together in student government? Did they go on a retreat together? What did happen that night?

Pauline Braccio Continues Demand For Justice
Silent Joe Gale

A moral society would demand he answer those questions.

The biggest disappointment is Lawrence’s fellow commissioner Joe Gale, the board’s token Republican whom we once admired. He sat silently during Pauline’s rough treatment and has yet to utter a word in her defense.

Hey Joe, you think Lawrence would be quiet if the shoe was on the other foot?

LOL

Can you say cuckservative? We knew you could.

Grow a pair like Nicki Minaj’s cousin’s friend and stand by Pauline.

Pauline’s Motion for Reconsideration

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY,

PENNSYLVANIA

CRIMINAL DIVISION

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA          :​NO. CP-46-SA-0000357-2020

v

PAULINE BRACCIO                                        :

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

TO THE HONORABLE CHERYL L. AUSTIN, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF

MONTGOMERY COUNTY:

​Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration should be granted because the court misconstrued and/or overlooked the following:

1. The arresting deputy, Deputy Sheriff Craig Sisca, was not present for the trial.

2. Defendant was denied Direct Examination of Solicitor Josh Stein and RobertRobbins, Director of Security.

3. Defendant’s subpoenas were quashed.

1. Deputy Sheriff Craig Sisca, the arresting officer, wasn’t present to testify. He was the most important witness for the Court to hear and his testimony would contradict the video and the three witnesses, Stein, Robbins, and Lehmann. On August 24, 2021, ADA Pisarcik emailed to the Court and the Defendant that her witnesses would be the same three county employees that testified in the District Court on March 4, 2020. They were Solicitor Josh Stein, Security Director Robert Robbins, and Deputy Sheriff Craig Sisca. After Stein and Robbins testified, the ADA announced that Sisca was “on vacation” and would not appear. Was this a trick? The Defendant, Ms. Braccio, was not informed of this change prior to the trial. The Courtwould not continue the trial until Sisca could attend. The Court would not allow the law that dictates whether the Deputy had the authority execute a warrantless arrest. PA Title 42 at 8902 (a) and 8902 (b). From the moment Ms. Braccio was grabbed at the podium then brought to the hallway was less than a minute, a mere 56 seconds. This does not constitute “ongoing” behavior. Therefore, the arrest itself was unlawful and the charges should have been thrown out. (See Exhibit A, B)

2. Although Defendant had subpoenaed Stein and Robbins, and those subpoenas had not been quashed, the Court would not allow Defendant to direct examine either of them. By not being allowed direct examination, Defendant was prevented from bringing in new information that would shed more light on the situation that took place on October 3, 2019. Also, she was not allowed to introduce the violation Stein had committed by not following the law, PA Statute 65, also known as the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act, section 710.1.c. (See Exhibits C1, C2, D)

3. The Defendant had only nine days to subpoena any witnesses that were needed for the Defense. Three of those days were over the Labor Day weekend. The subpoenas were delivered by a process server on the morning of Tuesday, September 7, 2021, well before the required 48 hours of the trial that was to begin at 1:00 pm on Thursday the 9th. They were delivered to Commissioners Arkoosh, Lawrence, Gale, COO Soltysiak, Solicitor Stein, and Robert Robbins. This is in accordance with Rule 214 – PA Code 246. However, it took until the morning of the trial for County Solicitor Maureen Calder to request the Court to quash the subpoenas for all but Josh Stein and Robert Robbins. Although Defendant objected, The Court quashed them with an off-hand remark that if Defendant really needed to have one of them appear that maybe that person would be called, even though they had been served properly and in plenty of time. The people who were subpoenaed, with the exception of AG Joshua Shapiro, had direct knowledge of what transpired at the October 3, 2019, Commissioners Meeting. They were present in the boardroom when Commissioner Arkoosh gaveled the meeting, and were together in the room adjacent to the boardroom where the decisions were being made and knew why the public meeting was being held up. Since the process to subpoena law enforcement personnel was more involved, there was not enough time for a subpoena to be approved and served to Deputy Craig Sisca. Defendant had not received the final decision for the trial date until August 31st, and being aware that the ADA had already stated, in writing, he would be there, she did not even for a moment imagine that would not be the case. (See Exhibits E1-4, F)

4. The three witnesses that did testify – Stein, Robbins, and Ms. Lora Lehmann –  all testified that Defendant’s conduct was not consistent with the charges for which the “arrest” took place, according to Title 18, 5503.a.1. Also, while questioning Ms. Lehmann, on direct, the Court would not allow Ms. Lehmann to answer any questions about her contact with the detectives who informed her that Defendant had NOT been arrested that day. In ADA Pisarcik’s email which is attached, she claims the Defendant had received the Citation on the same day as the incident. That is false. The Citation was not issued until December 4, 2019, a full two months later. The key words in Title 18, 5503.a.1 are “with intent.” There was no intent on the Defendant’s part. Ms. Braccio had no control over Commissioner Arkoosh’s action of calling a recess. Any action on the Defendant’s part was reaction to excessive force exerted on her by the Deputy Sheriff and the Security Guard. She repeatedly told them they were hurting her. She did not refuse to leave, she merely wanted her belongings, which they would not allow her to collect.Ms. Braccio was removed from the meeting room and brought to the hallway in only 56 seconds. Once she had her belongings, she should have been allowed to leave. Instead, while she was calmly and quietly standing there is when Sisca decided to handcuff her. (See Exhibits A, G, H)

5. The Defendant’s Right to Know requests were not fulfilled. Lauren Raikowski, the RTK clerk, sent emails acknowledging Defendant’s Right to Know requests, however, she never followed up with a response within 5 days, as is provided by law, either to say they were ready or to say that she needed more time. The Defendant has still not received the items requested. (See Exhibit I)

6. Besides not allowing any discussion on the laws surrounding the conditions for removal and the actual legal conditions for Warrantless Arrest under the charge of Disorderly Conduct, the Court interrupted Defendant’s Closing Argument and did not allow her to finish, while the ADA was provided sufficient time to make a full closing statement.

In Summary, the Defendant was arrested without probable cause, which appears to be malicious prosecution and retaliation on the part of the commissioners because the Defendant commented about Commissioner Ken Lawrence’ raping the Defendant. When the Court allows this many irregularities and violations of the Defendant’s rights, then the miscarriage of justice that happened on October 3, 2019 will simply repeat itself Sept 9, 2021, as was the case. 

Wherefore, for all of the facts and governing law, and in the interest of justice, reconsideration should be granted and the case dismissed with prejudice.

Date: September 15, 2021                                         _____________________________ 

​​​​​                         Pauline Braccio

                                                                                Lansdale, PA 19446

                                                                                Pro se

Pauline Braccio Continues Demand For Justice
Pauline Braccio Continues Demand For Justice

Pauline Braccio Continues Demand For Justice

Pauline Braccio Continues Demand For Justice

One thought on “Pauline Braccio Continues Demand For Justice”

  1. Bill, thank you for continuing to use your website to help my mom shed light on her situation. When somebody is a victim of a crime, it can sometimes be almost as stressful for their immediate family as for the victim herself. It has been difficult to watch my mother endure this type of undeserved injustice; I very much appreciate you being one of the people in our corner these past couple years as we deal with this disaster. Thanks again!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.