Blog

By Herbert Lowe A former correction officer’s depression after a serious motorcycle accident ultimately led to his fatally shooting the mother of one of his three children over child support, defense witnesses testified yesterday in Queens. Van Griffin, 38, spent 11 days in a coma after the 1996 accident that killed a woman who was riding with him on his motorcycle, his mother and four lifelong acquaintances said in State Supreme Court in Kew Gardens. ‘He just seemed like he wasn’t the same person that he was prior to the motorcycle accident,’ Colin Richards, 37, a computer technician, testified. Griffin and his attorney said he killed Felicia Cosby, an aspiring model and dancer, in her home in South Jamaica on Nov. 6, 2000, then went to the 105 th Precinct in Queens Village and surrendered. But the attorney, Todd Greenberg, hopes to persuade Justice Evelyn Braun in a non-jury trial that Griffin”s actions fit the legal definition of ‘extreme emotional disturbance.’ If Braun agrees, she could find Griffin guilty of first-degree manslaughter, which is punishable by up to 25 years in prison, instead of second-degree murder, which carries a 25 years to life sentence. ‘We know he’s going to jail,’ Greenberg said of his client, who has been behind bars since Cosby”s death. ‘But is absolutely consistent with loss of self control.’ Assistant District Attorney Steven Antignani sought to show while cross-examining the defense witnesses that Griffin intentionally killed Cosby because he was anger that she wanted more child support. Cosby was the mother of Griffin”s second child, Felisa, now 7 years old. He has two other daughter, now 14 and 3 years old, by two other women.

Newsday By Rocco Parascandola A Queens Catholic school administrator was arrested yesterday for allegedly groping his wife’s 13 year old goddaughter, police said. Jorge Diez, 41 was charged with sexual abuse and endangering the welfare of a child for allegedly fondling the girl inside his Jamaica Estate home Monday. Diez is the religious education administrator at St. Sebastian’s in Woodside. One July 1, 2005, Jorge Diez was acquitted of all charges. Attorney Todd D. Greenberg represented the Defendant.

By Denise Buffa – Staff Writer A cop insisted yesterday he wasn’t driving drunk when he struck and killed a Brooklyn motorcyclist more than a month ago – but prosecutors say they’ll use a controversial field sobriety test to prove his guilt in court. Victor Wilson, a 12-year veteran, pleaded not guilty yesterday in Brooklyn Supreme Court to vehicular manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide and driving while intoxicated in connection with the June 22 crash in Bay Ridge that claimed the life of 21-year-old Stefanos Kiladitis. We emphatically state that Mr. Wilson was not intoxicated,” his lawyer, Todd Greenberg, said after the arraignment. The defense said the victim “unfortunately and tragically” caused the crash at Fort Hamilton Parkway because he was speeding and passed a red light. There are eyewitnesses who confirm our version of events,” Greenberg said. Prosecutors concede the victim was traveling fast, but say he didn’t pass a red light. They charge Wilson slowly passed a light while he was drunk. And they say they plan on proving it by submitting – probably for the first time ever in the city – the results of field sobriety test taken with a portable machine at the scene of a crash. We’re using it – it’s going to be the first,” prosecutor Maureen McCormick said. The field test showed Wilson’s blood-alcohol level was .11 percent – slightly above the .10 legal limit – about two hours after the 8:45 p.m. crash, authorities have said. A test of his blood 61/2 hours after the crash showed his alcohol level was well below the legal limit – possibly as low as .015, prosecutors said. But experts say that reading means his blood-alcohol level was at least .10 at the time of the accident, considering how much alcohol his body had metabolized by then, according to prosecutors. But the defense said prosecutors won’t be able to use the field-test results unless they first prove they are scientifically reliable. Wilson, 43, faces seven years behind bars if convicted.

By Nancie L. Katz – STAFF WRITER An off-duty cop accused of plowing into a Brooklyn motorcyclist while driving drunk pleaded not guilty yesterday to manslaughter charges. If convicted in the death of Stefanos Kiladitis, Officer Victor Wilson, 43, could face up to seven years in prison. Wilson, of Staten Island, was leaving a Bay Ridge bowling alley June 19 when he allegedly ran a red light about a block away and crashed into the motorcycle driven by Kiladitis, 21. Kiladitis, of Brooklyn, died three days later. “Mr. Wilson was not intoxicated,” defense lawyer Todd Greenberg said. “The young man was speeding… . It was the young man who ran the red light.” But prosecutors said Wilson had a blood alcohol level above the legal limit and ran the light.

By Herbert Lowe STAFF WRITER Bail was set at $750,000 yesterday for a man accused of the 1999 beating death of Long Island City community activist Armando Perez. Shaguye Colbert was arraigned on second-degree murder charges in State Supreme Court in Kew Gardens, in a case in which similar charges were dismissed last year against four other young men. Colbert, 26, sat in Justice Robert Hanophy’s courtroom as defense attorney Todd Greenberg entered his plea of not guilty. Colbert, formerly of Long Island City, now lives in Newark. On Wednesday, New York detectives extradited Colbert from Essex County, N.J., where he had finished serving time after pleading guilty to complicity in a robbery. “We look forward to fighting the charges,” Greenberg said after court officers returned Colbert to custody after the arraignment. “Not only did they have four wrong people in the first case, they have the fifth wrong person now.” Perez, 51, was killed in early April 1999, in front of 34-04 24th St., in the Ravenswood Houses in Long Island City, where his wife lived. Perez ran with a street gang for a time before turning to community activism. In 1979, he helped convert a dilapidated school building in Manhattan into Charas/El Bohio, a center for struggling painters, dancers and actors. Assistant District Attorney Richard Schaeffer told Hanophy that Perez was severely beaten in a random dispute that stemmed from someone leaning on his car. Police arrested the four young men based on two witnesses, one who later recanted and the second who was known to be unreliable. Their case never went to a grand jury and prosecutors dismissed the charges after a new witness identified Colbert and another man, Malik Hill, who is in custody in New Jersey, as the suspects. Colbert’s next court date is April 15.

By Robert E. Kessler STAFF WRITER TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 A federal prosecutor began a second trial yesterday against a Queens man charged with defrauding his late wife out of her share of the couple’s $1.2 million in assets. Ali Bessaha, 65, of 43-20 40 th St. in Long Island City, is accused in U.S. District Court in Manhattan of cheating his late wife, Ourida of Hicksville, through mail and wire fraud. He also is accused of obtaining a passport under fraudulent pretenses. The first attempt to prosecute Bessaha on fraud charges ended in a mistrial at U.S. District Court in Central Islip in May when a juror disobeyed a judge’s orders and read a newspaper account of the case. The juror then told another juror that the jury had been deliberately denied a key fact: that Bessaha also is accused of killing his wife. U.S. District Court Judge Leonard Wexler had told jurors not to read any newspaper accounts of Bessaha’s trial, fearing it would prejudice the jury. A date to try the murder case in state court in Nassau County has not been set. Ourida Bessaha was found beaten to death in January 1999 in her Hicksville home. Federal postal inspectors initially gathered evidence of the alleged fraud, resulting in the first charges against her husband. Bessaha’s attorney, Todd Greenberg of Forest Hills, denies his client either killed his wife or cheated her out of any money. As a result of the juror reading an account of the initial Bessaha trial in Newsday, Wexler ordered the second trial transferred from Long Island to Manhattan. During opening remarks yesterday, federal prosecutor Gary Brown said Bessaha used a complicated scheme to illegally transfer his and his wife’s assets overseas amid their divorce so that she would not get her fair share. Brown said Bessaha was ‘not playing by the rules’ and wanted to make sure that his wife would ‘not get anything.’ But Greenberg told jurors that his client was not transferring any of the couple’s joint assets to France. Throughout their marriage, Greenberg said, Bessaha and his wife had always had separate assets, and the money that was transferred overseas belonged to his client. The Bessaha’s were involved in ‘a bitter, bitter divorce action,’ Greenberg said, ‘but the federal government has no business getting involved in it.’

By Robert E. Kessler STAFF WRITER A mistrial was ordered Friday in the fraud case of Long Island City man after a juror acknowledged reading a newspaper story that discussed one fact that the judge had barred jurors from knowing: that the man also had been charged with murdering his wife. U.S. District Court Judge Leonard Wexler ordered the mistrial in the case of Ali Bessaha, 64, of 43-20 40th St. after one juror told him that another juror had read the Newsday story on Wednesday and mentioned it to other jurors at lunch Thursday. Wexler had instructed the jurors in the U.S. District Court in Central Islip not to read or listen to any media account of the case because he considered the separate second-degree murder charge to be too prejudicial. The case at issue accused Bessaha only of defrauding his wife, Ourida, or her share of the couple’s $1.2 million during a contentious divorce. Bessaha also is facing a trial in state court in Nassau County on charges that he murdered Ourida, 54, at her home in Hicksville in January 1999, shortly before he believed a judge would award her a share of the couple’s assets. The two were separated but had been married for 30 years. After questioning the jurors Friday morning, Wexler said he would reschedule the case in the Southern District of New York, which includes Manhattan, the Bronx and Westchester. Wexler normally tries cases in the Eastern District, which includes Long Island, Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island. Federal prosecutor Gary Brown said, “We’re obviously disappointed and are preparing for the next trial at which Mr. Bessaha should be convicted.” Bessaha’s attorney, Todd Greenberg of Forest Hills, said he was “a little disappointed a good chance to win the case.”

November 8, 2000 By Sean Gardiner When Correction Officer Van Griffen went into a coma four years ago after a horrific motorcycle crash, it was his pregnant girlfriend, Felicia Cosby, who helped nurse him back to health. Monday night, it was Griffen who allegedly shot and killed Cosby, the mother of his 4-year-old daughter, in a fight over child support. According to police, Griffen shot Cosby, 26, about 10:00 p.m. at her home on Foch Boulevard in South Jamaica. Griffen, 35, drove to the 105 th Precinct in Queens Village and turned himself in, officials said. “This is just a total tragedy for this family. She was a good person. Everybody loved her, everybody’s going to miss her,” said one of Cosby’s aunts who asked not to be named. “He was in a real bad accident a couple of years ago, and God gave him his life back and he took hers. That’s very messed up, and I hope he rots in hell.” Cosby’s family and Deputy Chief Joseph Reznick, head of Queens detectives, said the killing was the culmination of ongoing tensions between the couple over child support for their daughter. “He confronted Ms. Cosby, and they got into an argument over child-support payments,” Reznick said. “It was a very fast argument that escalated from verbal to gunshots very quickly.” Cosby apparently sensed that the situation was volatile before Griffen arrived at her home. Michelle Cosby, a cousin, said Felicia Cosby had pleaded with her younger sister, who was staying the night there, to keep her door open. “She told her little sister, Shanesha, ÔKeep your door open,’ because he was coming over and he was upset,” Michelle Cosby said. “He came over and shortly after, they heard gunshots.” Michelle Cosby, 24, said family members told her four shots were heard and Griffen dropped the gun and left the house. “At that point, Felicia had the phone in her hand. I don’t know whether she was trying to call the police or what,” Michelle Cosby said. “Her cousin David was upstairs, too. He came down and saw her lying there. He said she looked like she was sleeping.” After surrendering, Griffen, of 223-08 Linden Blvd., was taken to the 113 th Precinct station house and was charged in Cosby’s slaying. Last night, he was awaiting arraignment on murder charges, locked up in the same Queens Criminal Court jail he not so long ago was assigned to guard, police said. Relatives said Griffen, who was out of work with an injury since May, and Cosby’s relationship was under a cloud from the beginning when the couple met five years ago in a diner. “It’s so sad, because I was there when they met,” Michelle Cosby said. “I told her then that he’s not for you, he’s not your type. But all she did was love him; she loved him to the end.” Not long into their relationship, Griffen had the motorcycle accident. As Griffen law in a coma, Cosby’s at by his side all night, ” her cousin said. When he recovered, Cosby helped him with his therapy, Michelle Cosby said. After the birth of their daughter, Felicia, it became apparent that Griffen was not interested in being a parent, Michelle Cosby said. “He didn’t want a relationship and didn’t want to care for a child,” Michelle Cosby said. “Many a night, she cried and would say, “I’ve got to leave him.” The issue of child support became a flash point when Felicia recently quit her job as a lawyer’s secretary to attend business school full time, with the aim of one day opening her own day-care center. “She would always have to tell him, ÔI need this’ or ÔI need that,’ and he would never come through. And he was always complaining about it,” Michelle Cosby said. “She kept telling him, Listen, if I can’t get help from you, I’m going to have to go to court.’ She finally went through with that, and I guess he winded up having to give her more than he ever intended to give her.” Yesterday, as Cosby’s large family gathered to mourn, the irony of her once nursing that man accused of killing her hit home. “She was my best friend,” Michelle Cosby said. “It’s like he stole her. He stole her from my family and he stole her from me. God saved his life, and he took hers.”

By Robert E. Kessler – STAFF WRITER NEWSDAY The very bad news recently for , a Long Island City millionaire, was that a federal judge ruled that he had murdered his wife in Hicksville in 1999. The good news at the same time for was that the judge also decided that the jury hearing the case involving mail fraud would not be told about the homicide ruling. The decisions, which might seem contradictory, were the latest twists in the unusual case of , 63, of 43-20 40 th St., who is not charged with the murder of his wife in a state court, but who is charged in a federal case with defrauding her. case ended up in a federal court because prosecutors say they have enough evidence to charge him under federal law with defrauding his late wife, Ourida, of half of their $1.4 million in joint assets, and also of money laundering, while Nassau detectives are still continuing to investigate her murder. Ourida Bessaha, 54, was found murdered with 20 hammer blows to her skull in January, 1999, in her Hicksville home on Brittle Lane. Federal prosecutor Gary Brown had argued in pre-trial hearings before Federal District Court Judge Leonard Wexler in Hauppauge that the government should be allowed to introduce evidence at fraud trial to show that he had murdered his wife to prevent her from keeping her share of the money. The evidence would include statements she made as part of a messy divorce proceeding the couple was going through. attorney, Todd Greenberg, of Forest Hills, denies his client is guilty of either fraud or the murder. Usually, in fairness during trials, the statements of a dead person cannot be used against a defendant because the witness is not available to be cross-examined by defense attorneys. The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution normally guarantees the right of a defendant to confront an accuser, and court procedures bar the admission of statement made outside of court, so-called hearsay statements. But there is an exception to these constraints on evidence from dead people because of a 1982 federal case, involving a Huntington man named Richard Mastrangelo, who was sentenced to 9 years in prison for smuggling drugs from Columbia. The principal evidence against Mastrangelo was the grand jury testimony of a man who was subsequently murdered before he could testify at trial. The Supreme Court eventually ruled that Mastrangelo was involved in the witness’ murder and criminals should not be allowed to benefit from the killings of such witnesses. To determine if the testimony of the deceased can be allowed at trial, the court established a pre-trial hearing, known as a Mastrangelo hearing. These are exceedingly rare, and prosecutors and defense attorneys could recall only a handful of them in the metropolitan area. Under the procedure, federal prosecutors do not have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, as in homicide cases, to allow the admission of the alleged victim’s testimony, but only on the preponderance of the evidence. After Mastrangelo hearing, Wexler ruled two weeks ago that had ‘procured the unavailability of his wife to testify,’ and, thus, her statement about his fraudulent financial activities will be allowed at trial. Wexler agreed that prosecutors had complied a mountain of evidence pointing to involvement in his wife’s death: He had made threats against her; he had asked his children if the locks on her home had been changed; the murder took place a day before a divorce proceeding in which stood to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars; there was no evidence of forced entry, theft or rape at the crime scene; and ‘there was evidence of a footprint at the crime scene that was consistent with the defendant’s shoe.’ Also making ‘a strong impact on the court,’ Wexler said, was the fact that though was with police for many hours after his wife died, ‘he never asked if his wife’s death was the result of a crime, natural causes or of an accident.’ But while allowing the jury to hear the wife’s testimony in the divorce proceedings, Wexler ruled that the jury will not be told of possible role in his wife’s death because it would be too prejudicial in a fraud trial. Greenberg, attorney, said he disagreed with the judge’s ruling but could appeal it only if his client is convicted. Federal prosecutors declined to comment. Nassau detectives are still conducting an investigation into the murder, sources say. This is because while there is a preponderance of evidence to link to his wife’s murder, there is still the possibility that a jury might not find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt with the evidence gathered so far. But such a local investigation may be beside the point if is convicted of the federal fraud charges. Normally, federal fraud and money laundering charges carry only an 8-year prison sentence. But if convicted, could face as stiff a sentence as if he had been convicted of murder. Under federal sentencing guidelines, a trial judge can impose a life sentence if he believes that fraud and money laundering were related to murder.

NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION This pamphlet, which is based on New York law, is intended to inform, not to advise. No one should attempt to interpret or apply any law without the aid of an attorney. Produced by the New York State Bar Association Committee on Public Relations. Do I need a lawyer? I can buy an automobile or 100 shares of stock without a lawyer. Why not a one or two family home? Buying a home Buying a home may not only be the most significant and largest purchase you will make, it also involves the law of real property, which is unique and has special problems. A lawyer is trained to deal with these problems and often has the most experience to deal with them. This applies to people selling a home or buying a home. In the typical home purchase transaction the seller enters into a brokerage contract with a real estate agent, which is usually in writing. When the broker finds a potential buyer, negotiations are conducted through the broker, most often acting as an intermediary. Once an informal agreement is reached, buyer and seller enter into a formal written agreement. The buyer then obtains a commitment for financing. Title is searched to satisfy the lender and the buyer. And finally, the property is transferred from the seller to the buyer and the seller receives the purchase price bargained for in the contract. Seems simple and uncomplicated, but, without a lawyer, the consequences may be even more disastrous than purchasing a car that turns out to be a lemon, or a stock investment that was unwise. What are some of the reasons why you need a lawyer for a home purchase or sale? 1. Dealing with the Broker. A seller without the advice of a lawyer may sign a brokerage agreement that does not deal with a number of legal problems. The seller may become liable to pay a brokerage commission even if a sale does not occur or to pay more than one brokerage commission. For example, does the agreement offer the seller the right to negotiate on his or her own behalf; what is the effect of multiple listings; what are the broker’s rights if the seller withdraws the property from the market, or can’t deliver good marketable title; how long should an exclusive listing last? The seller should have the advice and guidance of an attorney with respect to a brokerage agreement. Even if the agreement is a so-called “standard form”, its terms should be explained to the seller and revised, if necessary. An attorney is also necessary to determine if the agreement was properly signed. 2. Dealing with tax consequences and other issues. Even though a lawyer may not be needed during the course of negotiations, the buyer and seller each may have to consult with a lawyer to answer important questions, such as the tax consequences of the purchase or sale. To a seller, the tax consequences may be of critical importance. For example, what are the income tax consequences of a sale, particularly if the seller has a large profit … will the seller be able to take advantage of the tax provisions allowing for exclusion of capital gains in certain circumstances? Aside from the tax consequences, the buyer and seller may have questions about the date set for closing, the date of occupancy, the condition of the property, arranging for an inspection and what personal property is included in the sale. These are some of the many questions that may need to be considered during the negotiation stage in order to avoid disputes when a written contract is prepared. 3. Dealing with the contract of sale. The formal written contract for the sale and purchase of a home is the single most important piece of paper in the transaction. Its importance cannot be overestimated. Although printed forms are useful, a lawyer is once again necessary to explain the form and make changes and additions for a particular transaction to reflect the understanding of the buyer and the seller. There are many issues that may need to be addressed in the written contract. For example, how should title be taken: individually, as tenants in common, joint tenants or tenants by the entirety. What happens if someone dies before title is transferred? The answers to these questions require the training and knowledge of a lawyer. There are numerous other legal questions that must be addressed in the contract, including the following. If the property has been altered or there has been an addition to the property, was it done lawfully or may what the buyer plans for the property be done lawfully? What happens if a buyer has an engineer or architect inspects the property that finds termites, asbestos, radon or lead based paint? What is the property is proximate to a hazardous waste dumpsite? What are the legal consequences if the closing does not take place and what happens to the down payment? Will the down payment be held in escrow by a lawyer in accordance with appropriately worded escrow instructions? How is payment to be made? Is the closing appropriately conditioned upon the buyer obtaining financing? These are only a few of the many questions that arise with respect to a contract. 4. Arranging for financing. Most buyers finance a substantial portion of the purchase price for a one or two family home with a mortgage loan from a bank or other lending institutions. The contract should contain a carefully worded provision that is subject to the buyer’s obtaining a commitment for financing. Printed contract forms are generally inadequate to incorporate the real understanding of the buyer and seller without changes being made. In addition, there in now an extensive and often confusing menu of mortgages that may be available. Fixed rate mortgages versus adjustable rate mortgages and the complexities of each require the knowledge of an attorney who is familiar with current mortgages lending practices. Mortgage loan commitments and mortgage loan documents are also complex. Lawyers are necessary to review and explain the importance of these various documents. Buyers should know when and if they can prepay their mortgages; what happens if they make a late payment; how is interest computed; how much insurance does the lender require; how are real estate tax payments computed and collected and the answers to a myriad of other questions that may arise. Moreover, when dealing with the lender, although there is little room for negotiation, there is a need for the general assistance of a lawyer at the very least to explain what is happening and its consequences. 5. Searching and insuring title. After the contract is signed it is necessary to establish the state of the seller’s title to the property to the satisfaction of the buyer as spelled out in the contract. Generally, a title search is ordered from an acceptable abstract or title insurance company. However, in some areas of New York State, title insurance is not obtained. In such cases an attorney is essential to review the status of title and render an opinion of title in lieu of a title policy. Assuming you are in an area where title insurance is customary, who will review the title search and explain the title exceptions as to what is not insured? Are the legal descriptions correct? Are there problems with adjoining owners or prior owners? What is the effect of easements and agreements or restrictions imposed by a prior owner? Can I build a swimming pool or tennis court? Can I conduct a business in a spare room? Will there be any legal restrictions that will impair my ability to sell the property? Can the utility company build a high-tension transmitter in the back yard? It should be clear that the guidance and advice of a lawyer could avoid a very costly mistake. 6. Checking out the zoning. The title search does not tell the buyer or seller anything about existing and prospective zoning. Does zoning prohibit a two family home? Does the deck you are planning violate zoning ordinances? There are invariably some questions that will require you to call upon a lawyer for the most direct and efficient response to your inquiry. 7. Reviewing the survey. Finally, there is the necessity of having a survey map of the property, which is a necessary adjunct to a title search. A lawyer is trained to review this survey, which may give rise to future problems. For example, your neighbors’ fence or driveway may encroach upon your property or vice versa. A garage may have been built on a municipal street. Should you accept title? Will a lender give you mortgage with these encroachments? 8. Conducting the closing. The closing is the event which is the “moment of truth” of the purchase and sale transaction. The deed and other closing papers must be prepared. Title passes from seller to buyer who pays the balance of the purchase price. Frequently, this balance is paid in part from the proceeds of a mortgage loan. A closing statement should be prepared prior to the closing indicating the debits and credits to buyer and seller. An attorney is helpful in explaining the nature and amount of closing costs. Final documents including the deed and mortgage instruments are signed. An attorney is necessary to assure that these documents are appropriately executed and explained to the various parties. The closing process can be confusing and complex to the buyer and seller. Those present at the closing often include the buyer and seller, their respective attorneys, the title closer (representative of the title company), attorney for lending institution and real estate broker. Documents need to be recorded; various transfer taxes need to be paid, and provisions for insurance and other incidents of ownership need to be concluded. There may also be last minute disputes about delivering possession and personal property or the adjustment of various costs, such as fuel and taxes. Here a lawyer’s advice and guidance is essential. 9. Condominiums, cooperatives and HOAS. Special mention needs to be made about condominiums, cooperatives and homeowners associations. These involve forms of ownership that are treated as securities under New York State law and require special documents that are complicated and should be reviewed by an attorney. Condominium declarations, proprietary leases, and by-laws are but a few of the complex documents confronting buyers of these forms of property ownership. The tax deductions and consequences with respect to the purchase of a condominium or cooperative also need to be explained by a professional that is familiar with these common ownership forms. It is obvious that throughout the process the interests of the buyer and seller will conflict. The broker generally serves the seller, and the lender is obtained by the buyer. The respective lawyers for buyer and seller will have no such conflicting loyalties and will serve only their clients’ best interests. A lawyer’s advice and guidance is essential from the time you decide to sell or to buy a home until the actual closing.

By Robert E. Kessler. STAFF WRITER A Long Island City man who was charged with defrauding his estranged wife before she was found murdered in January in her Hicksville home was named as “the prime suspect” in her murder yesterday by a federal prosecutor. Assistant U.S. Attorney Gary Brown said that , 62, of 43-20 40th St., was considered the main suspect in the death of his wife, Ourida, 54, in arguing that the husband should be permanently detained without bail pending trial on the federal fraud charges at a hearing in federal District Court in Hauppauge. Ourida Bessaha was found murdered, in what police described as a violent scene, in her Hicksville home on Brittle Lane. attorney, Todd Greenberg of Forest Hills, however, denied yesterday that his client was involved in the murder of his wife or any fraud against her, and said, “In fact, he has been fully cooperating” with Nassau detectives involved in the homicide investigation. Sources said yesterday that the Nassau County medical examiner had determined that Ourida Bessaha had been killed by a least 20 savage blows to the head from what appeared to be the claw end of a hammer. And the sources said that Nassau County and federal officials are awaiting the outcome of lab tests to determine whether should be charged in the homicide. Brown, in arguing that should be held without bail, said that the murderer had gained access to the house without breaking in, had violently attacked the victim, that robbery or rape was not a motive, and that the estranged husband was engaged in a scheme to defraud her of her share of their more than $1.4 million in assets. Federal officials in arresting last week said that the couple had a violent relationship in which Ourida Bessaha had, at one time, gotten an order of protection against her husband, and they were currently in the midst of a bitter divorce action. The Bessaha case is being jointly investigated by federal postal inspectors, the Nassau Homicide Squad and the Bureau of Diplomatic Security of the U.S. State Department. In addition to Bessaha’s being a suspect in the murder, prosecutor Brown also argued that he should be held without bail as a flight risk because he had substantial assets in his native Algeria, he had apparently illegally obtained several U.S. and Algerian passports, and he had previously ignored orders from state court not to transfer his and his wife’s money overseas. Brown also said had reason to jump bail because he faced up to 9 years in prison if convicted on the federal charges of fraud and money laundering in connection with the shipping of the couple’s joint assets overseas. Defense lawyer Greenberg said that the fraud-related charges were not substantial and that his client faced minimal prison time, even if convicted. But federal Magistrate Arlene Lindsey ruled that, without going into the merits of relation to his wife’s death, there was a substantial risk based on the government’s other claims that might flee, and she ordered him held without bail pending trial.

By Robert E. Kessler. STAFF WRITER A Queens man, whose estranged wife was found murdered in her Hicksville home in January, was arrested yesterday by federal agents in connection with a scheme to defraud her of her share of their more than $1 million in joint assets. An arrest warrant by federal postal inspector Carl Sclafani details the alleged stormy marriage of , 62, of 43-20 40th St., Long Island City, and his wife, Ourida Bessaha, 54, of Brittle Lane, Hicksville, and his complex scheme to defraud her by transferring most of their assets overseas to Swiss and Algerian banks. Ourida Bessaha’s body was found in her home on Jan. 30 in what police described as a violent scene. When asked yesterday whether the husband was a suspect in his wife’s death, Assistant U.S. Attorney Gary Brown said he would not comment on any aspect of the case. attorney, Todd Greenberg of Forest Hills, said his client “absolutely denies” he was involved in any crime, and he doubted that the government even has enough evidence to continue charging his client with fraud. was held pending a bail hearing yesterday in federal district court in Uniondale by Magistrate Viktor Pohorelsky. While Ourida Bessaha had filed for divorce in 1996 in an action that was still in state court at the time of her death, their allegedly rocky relationship dated back to 1979 when she had got an order of protection against her husband from Nassau State Supreme Court “after his beating and attempt to strangle me landed me in the emergency room,” according to Sclafani’s affidavit. Ourida Bessaha had also gotten a court order barring her husband from transferring their assets overseas, but he engaged in an illegal scheme to evade it, the agent said. The couple’s assets included an interest in an unnamed Manhattan restaurant, a Medallion taxi and otherwise undescribed rental property with a total value of $1.3 million and an additional $135,000 in cash. The cash had been illegally transferred overseas according to the affidavit. , an Algerian native who is a naturalized U.S. citizen, was also charged with lying to obtain a second U.S. passport, the affidavit said.