IMPOSTER RABBI MUCHAEL STREICER Is Sentenced To 1 to 3 Years

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the sentencing of MUCHAEL STREICER, who conned his victim out of $36,000 by posing as a rabbi promising to buy her a Torah from Israel in 2005, then fleeing the country with her money. STREICER was sentenced on June 29, 2010, to 1 to 3 years in state prison. He made restitution to the victim in the amount of $36,000.

"The defendant took advantage of someone's religious faith for personal gain," said District Attorney Vance. "The defendant's conduct was unethical and, in this case, criminal. This conviction and sentencing bring a measure of justice to a victim whose trust was exploited."

In April of 2010, a jury found STREICER guilty of one count each of Grand Larceny in the Third Degree, Aggravated Harassment in the Second Degree, and Harassment in the Second Degree.

The District Attorney thanked Assistant District Attorney Stacey Cheser, who handled the prosecution under the supervision of Bureau Chief Kerry O'Connell and Deputy Chief of the Trial Division John Irwin.

Defendant Information:

MUCHAEL STREICER, D.O.B. 10/08/1960
Brooklyn, N.Y.

CONVICTED:

* Grand Larceny in the Third Degree, 1 count, Class D felony
* Aggravated Harassment in the Second Degree, 1 count, Class A felony
* Harassment in the Second Degree, 1 count, violation

SENTENCE:

* 1 to 3 years in state prison
* $36,000 restitution

Comments

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...

New York Paralegal Blog

Search This Blog