Federal Jury Selection begins in the Lee Whitnum v. Town of Greenwich search-and-seisure case

Jury selection will begin in the Whitnum v. Town of Greenwich 3:14-CV-01183 case with federal judge Stefan Underhill presiding. Politico Lee Whitnum is claiming violation of her Fourth Amendment and other Constitutional rights as the Town of Greenwich and town employees William Marr and John Valarie seized her property for 70 days in 2012 and then for 43 days in 2014 for allegedly unsafe building violations. Whitnum who had an active building permit at the time of both raids claims it was nothing more that the abuse of power as no other entire household in the history of Greenwich had been rendered homeless.

“I was rendered spontaneously homeless twice. I wasn’t even allowed to go into my own home to get underwear under threat of felony arrest.” Said Whitnum. “I mean seriously the second time it was because they claimed I didn’t have the proper banister and enough smoke detectors. Not only was it not true, why wasn’t I given a few days to placate them.” Whitnum claims it was an abuse of power by William Marr and John Valarie who are also named in the lawsuit which has gone on for five years.

Also named in the lawsuit is the Greenwich Police Department. Who on a separate occasion, October 2, 2014 raided the home tearing doors off hinges. Whitnum claims she still hasn’t gotten an explanation. “On the report of a neighbor the police raided my house. How can people live like this,” said Whitnum. “I came home to the reckless endangerment of my dog sitting on the front step, the front door wide open. The place ransacked. I called to report the vandalism to the police, only to find out that it was the police who did it.”

Jury selection took place on August 14, 2017 but at the last minute Judge Stefan Underhill refused to allow Whitnum to ask Voir Dire question of the jury pool. “He literally denied me just as I stood up to ask my questions which were my right.” To further thwart her judge Underhill refuse to dismiss the larger jury pool, after the first round had been selected, even when Whitnum told him there was a biased juror among those who had already been eliminated. That same juror later stood up and screamed, which tainted the jury pool by alleging that Whitnum was an anti-Semite.

“The jury pool was tainted by a political outburst and Underhill still refused to dismiss. I was put in a terrible situation, go to trial with a tinted jury pool or take their offer. For five years I begged the town’s lawyers for an offer as I have been desperate to get away from federal Judge Underhill. Finally they made an offer after the tainted jury pool and I took it.”

But still that has not resolved the issue. Whitnum claims the town has since refused to provide any signed documents proving the settlement and later John Wayne Fox rescinded the offer. “Games. This is what happens when you are dealing with a town with $32 billion dollars in cash and assets the three layers of lawyers – including two layers of external counsel which are unnecessary - and a biased judge to boot.”

Underhill has since required the Town to put the offer in writing in a letter and that he would take possession of the settlement check. That was a week ago and the Town has failed to provide neither a letter nor the settlement checks.

Underhill also ruled that the litigants have to pay for their own new jury pool. “It is all part of the insanity in this entire matter. Underhill is at fault for the tainted jury and now we have to pay for it. This is exhausting,” said Whitnum. “I just want to be left alone.” The second jury selection will begin in October.

Whitnum had another case against the Town of Greenwich 3:11-CV-1402. Whitnum claimed a violation of the Establishment Clause for the town allowing the Bar Mitzvah of Aner Shofty in the Town Hall while Whitnum was later precluded from holding a Christian Confirmation twice at the same venue. Underhill blindsided with dismissal saying that since Whitnum had not view the Bar Mitzvah she had no standing. Whitnum has claimed that it is an impossible bench mark as the Bar Mitzvah was a private RSVP only event. “I was blindsiding, after six years, by Underhill with an argument never brought up by the other side; an impossible bench mark” said Whitnum. “The Bar Mitzvah was not part of the flag raising but was a separately scheduled event. I couldn’t have viewed it if I wanted to.” Whitnum has since accused federal Judge Underhill of bias in favor of the Jewish Community.

Underhill has refused to step down despite being asked to on more than nine occasions by Whitnum.

###