EXCLUSIVE: Attorney Breaks Silence on Case That Cost Borough $$$

Lou Hornstine, the attorney who represented Bristol Borough police officer Ritchie Webb in the federal action settled in August for $440,000, met with LevittownNow.com exclusively Saturday afternoon.

Recently he invited two other media outlets to take part in an open forum for reporters to ask questions that many borough residents have demanded answers to and for, he said, but  LevittownNow.com was the only news outlet  to accept the invitation.

Over the next week, LevittownNow.com will present a multi-part series on our interview with Hornstine. This is part one.

A meeting was held August 4, 2011 at  the Radcliffe Street office of borough solicitor Bill Salerno. The meeting was attended by Mayor Bob Lebo, Police Chief Arnold Porter, Hornstine, and Webb.

According to Hornstine, he asked “the powers that be” for the meeting to investigate and offer a solution to officials.

“The Webb family wanted two things for Ritchie: First, safe passage for him to testify in the Joanne Cipressi case truthfully; and secondly, the letter that was placed in his police employee file removed and everyone could go home.”

As history shows, this wasn’t case.

That single decision, Hornstine explained, is what led to the borough ultimately paying  close to a half-million dollars to Webb, and further supported the Cipressi matter moving forward. Her suit was settled in July for $385,000 according to court records.

Horstine addressed recent events and public statements made by council, the borough’s attorney and legal representatives for them.

“First off, I want to make clear that in a sense of fairness to everybody to have equal access LevittowNow was the only media organization to accept my invitation to be here today (Saturday). But for the recent comments of Bristol leadership, I wouldn’t be sitting here today,” he said. “It’s just a sense of fairness that people need to know procedurally the truth as to what has occurred.”

Hornstine pointed to a photocopy of a Bucks County Courier Times article from January 13, 2013 and took the position that as a state judge he strongly disapproves of attorneys taking cases to the press during the litigation process. Moreover, he explained the same holds true for his legal practice, illustrating his silence about the Webb case even though he had been asked to comment a number of times.

Similarly, Hornstine did pay close and careful attention to public statements made to the press by borough officials and their representatives. Asked specifically about remarks made about the removal of the defendants, he said, “I invite you to ask any civil litigator who does this type of work  customarily when a settlement has been reached the defense gets to choose who takes the hit and everything else is dismissed against other entities”

Once a settlement was reached, Hornstine said, it was the borough’s request  to be the identified body responsible and for all other entitles to be dismissed from the case.

“From my perspective, rarely if at all does a plaintiff’s attorney care about who the identified responsible party is. All that matters, at that point, is are the terms and conditions of the agreement being met.”

“To characterize the claims we made, in the suit as ‘bogus’ or to say there are or were no problems in the police department, is patently false,” he said.  “Common sense dictates that no entity pays a substantial amount like they did unless there were problems.”

“I would invite Mr. DiGuiessppe and Mr. Salerno or  any borough representative to sit down with you and me, where you could  ask the tough questions of both of us,” Hornstine offered.

The next set of statements Hornstine dealt with related to Bucks County District Attorney David Heckler memo cited, now refuted, as evidence of the police department being  exonerated of criminal activities. Hornstine is handed the  memo, reads it and says, “this was an important moment for us in the case. We received this memo dated May 24, 2011 during discovery from Heckler,” he said. The attorney then read the letter aloud.

“It’s pretty clear to me what this says. Here is the importance they (borough representatives) avoided to speak about and unfair to the citizens of Bristol who are being misled by that type of comment. This is the important sentence: ‘This does not reflect our satisfaction that no criminal activity ever occurred but rather the circumstances that a sufficient amount of evidence has not been uncovered at this time to enable us to proceed,’” Hornstine said.

“Bristol Borough, the police department and council could have avoided this entire melee with Patrolman Webb if only they gave him safe passage. Let him testify truthfully in the Cipressi matter. Remove the disciplinary letter that was in his employment file for two years and lets move forward.”

According to Hornstine, the letter was removed from Webb’s file shortly around the same time  the ink on the settlement with the Bristol was dry.

Hornstine went on to say he found the conduct of Bristol Borough to be appalling that a good cop with no prior disciplinary issues before was being reprimanded for being “truthful.”

The Webb family, he said, didn’t want the issue to move forward, they sought a resolution in order for the “intimidation and harassment,” according to court papers, to stop.

“It wasn’t a matter of money, it was a matter of principle and it was the borough – and the arrogance of its representatives”  that put the wheels in motion for the actual filing of the federal suit,” Hornstine said.

Its been estimated that the  Webb and Cipressi matters including attorney fees, officer testimony and settlements will come close to costing  1.2 million dollars.

Borough officials were contacted for comment  and they declined.

In part two on Wednesday, Hornstine talks about the Loudermill hearing, transcripts that reportedly disappeared, Lebo and the discredited allegations of two Bristol officers.

Publisher/Editor Tom Sofield contributed to this report.