As Rabbi Osher Eisemann's case finally closed, Rav Chaim's words prevailed 

Photos: Family archives

Under cross-examination, a detective for the prosecution finally admitted that there was no evidence, no crime, and that he had “no idea why any of us are here.” After eight years of what some in the community termed a “modern-day blood libel,” Rabbi Osher Eisemann, founder of SCHI for children with a range of disabilities, was finally acquitted, the judge throwing out the case and locking the door on it, in fulfillment of Rav Chaim’s promise all along

IN

a dramatic turn of events last Wednesday, New Jersey Superior Court Judge Joseph Paone dismissed the state’s indictment against Rabbi Osher Eisemann, ending a prosecution that has lasted more than eight years. The judge’s action cannot be appealed, which means the case is closed.

Rabbi Eisemann, who founded the School for Children with Hidden Intelligence (SCHI), a school catering to children with a range of disabilities, was first indicted in March 2017. He was accused by New Jersey’s attorney general and the Office of Public Integrity and Accountability (OPIA) of misappropriating state funds paid to his school. He went to trial in February 2019 and was acquitted on the charge of theft of state funds, but was convicted of two additional charges.

Appeals followed that trial, and Rabbi Eisemann’s legal counsel, Chiesa Shahinian & Giantomasi PC (CSG Law), discovered that the state attorney general’s office withheld evidence from the defense that showed he was innocent. His convictions were vacated, and he was granted a new trial that started on July 9. Judge Paone, who was presiding over the new trial, completely dismissed the state charges, saying the attorney general’s office had failed to make any case that Rabbi Eisemann had ever committed a crime.

Community members termed Rabbi Eisemann’s prosecution a modern-day “blood libel.” The state doggedly tried to frame the SCHI founder for taking public funds allotted to his school for his own benefit. But his determined defense fought back every step of the way, ultimately prevailing in what can only be described as open siyata d’Shmaya.

Frum Jews the world over had been davening for Rav Osher ben Chana Frumet, and news of his acquittal spread like wildfire. Last Wednesday night, more than 8,000 people packed Lakewood’s Bais Faiga hall to celebrate in a public seudas hoda’ah. Rabbi Eisemann addressed the gathering, as did his family members, rabbanim, and the lead defense attorney, Lee Vartan.

What follows is a timeline of the whole sorry, eight-year saga, upon which the curtain was finally drawn last week.

June 2016

The New Jersey attorney general’s financial crimes bureau and the OPIA raid the Lakewood offices of SCHI and seize financial records. In March 2017, the state convenes a grand jury and returns two indictments containing five counts: three counts of misuse of public funds allocated to the school; a fourth count alleging that Rabbi Eisemann erased a loan to himself from the SCHI Foundation, an independent entity that facilitates donations to the school for supplemental services; and a fifth count of misconduct by a corporate official. The SCHI Foundation is also named on the first four counts.

Rabbi Eisemann and his family face a stark choice — enter a plea bargain, which would entail an admission of guilt, or begin an costly public trial, which still could result in a guilty verdict.

“Pleading guilty would entail a light sentence, while going to trial is expensive, traumatic, and dangerous, as the sentence could have been up to 60 years if he were found guilty on all charges,” explains Rabbi Boruch Kaluszyner, a son-in-law of Rabbi Eisemann.

Entering a guilty plea would also engender a tremendous chillul Hashem and losses to the school. Rabbi Eisemann flies to Israel to present the question to Rav Chaim Kanievsky, who advises him to go to trial.

“Er vet zein potur — he will be found innocent,” says Rav Chaim.

February 2019

Rabbi Eisemann’s first trial gets underway. The prosecution presents its case that Rabbi Eisemann committed five crimes, four of which also involve the SCHI Foundation: 1) corruption of public resources; 2) theft by unlawful taking; 3) financial facilitation of a crime (i.e., money laundering); 4) misapplication of entrusted property; and 5) misconduct by a corporate official.

During the three-week trial, the prosecution focuses on counts 1, 2, and 4. Count 3, financial facilitation, requires two acts of criminal behavior. The prosecution alleges that the first act is covered in counts 1, 2, and 4, meaning that a conviction on those counts would automatically cover count 3. The fifth count is also predicated on the conviction on any additional charge, and would fall away with an acquittal on the other charges.

On the last day of the trial, after the defense rests its case, an unpleasant surprise crops up. At the request of the prosecution, the judge changes the rules to allow for a conviction on count 3, financial facilitation, even without a conviction on any of the predicate crimes. But the defense has never been given a chance to make a case against count 3. This change proves to be pivotal.

After deliberations, the jury clears Rabbi Eisemann of three out of five counts, and acquits the foundation of all the charges. But the jury finds him guilty on count 3, financial facilitation of a crime (money laundering), based on supposed evidence that Rabbi Eisemann moved $200,000 of school money through private accounts, and then back to the school, to make it appear he was repaying a debt he owed to the school. That in turn triggers a conviction on count 5, misconduct by a corporate official.

The defense begins work on an appeal. The full acquittal of the foundation, as well as acquittal of Rabbi Eisemann on three out of the five counts, is seen as a victory, despite his conviction on two other charges. Lead defense attorney Lee Vartan explains that the jury’s decision vitiates the government’s opening argument that there had been theft of public funds —a significant win for “the truth, for justice and for Rabbi Eisemann.”

Vartan explains that the third count, on which Rabbi Eisemann was convicted, was “legally indefensible”; the jury had cleared him of theft of public funds, and private funds are unrestricted.

“We’ll show that to a judge in the Appellate Division,” Vartan promises. “And once count 3 falls away, count 5 can’t stand either. In the end, Rabbi Eisemann will be fully vindicated.”

Meanwhile, the state begins sentencing proceedings.

Rabbi Kaluszyner, who has assumed a lead role in keeping the public informed of the proceedings, gets a call from a disheartened askan involved in the fundraising efforts for the staggering legal costs.

“What should I tell people about Rav Chaim’s havtachah?” the askan wants to know.

“Have patience,” says Rabbi Kaluszyner. “We’re going to get there.”

April 2019

At the sentencing hearing, the prosecution requests that Judge Benjamin Bucca give Rabbi Eisemann, who is 62 at this point, 12 years in prison.

The Middlesex courtroom is packed with the Eisemann family; rabbanim, including Beth Medrash Govoha Rosh Yeshivah Rav Yeruchem Olshin; community members; and parents of special-needs children who want to show gratitude to Rabbi Eisemann. The case has also attracted the attention of the secular media.

Judge Bucca begins by expressing his doubts that there is any wrongdoing here. He characterizes the evidence of the loan as “rather slim,” and wonders aloud if the entire matter could have been handled administratively rather than treated as a criminal matter. He adds that Rabbi Eisemann is needed back at SCHI and that the character letters he has received are overwhelming: “In all my years, I have never seen such support.” He then addresses the defendant directly, telling him, “It’s my hope that you get back to the school.”

Judge Bucca says he is bound by the jury’s verdict of guilt on two accounts. But in an unconventional move, he invokes a state law that allows him to account for mitigating factors and skirt official sentencing guidelines, and sentences Rabbi Eisemann to two years’ probation, including 60 days in a county jail.

The relatively mild sentence is cause for celebration. A secular reporter on scene writes that several in the courtroom gallery “have tears streaming from their eyes” and that Rabbi Eisemann leaves the courtroom “giving hugs and kisses to supporters who packed the benches, buoyed by a show of support from the judge himself.” A huge banner hangs from the modest Eisemann home on Monmouth Street in Lakewood, reading “Hodu Lashem ki tov, ki l’olam chasdo.”

The joy is cut short when the prosecution appeals to the Superior Court of the Appellate Division, asking that Rabbi Eisemann be re-sentenced in line with traditional guidelines. But the defense promptly submits its own 65-page brief arguing that the convictions should be tossed all together, pointing out that the investigation was botched from the very start and that convictions were secured only by feeding the jury inaccuracies and inconsistencies. Furthermore, attorney Vartan argued, the jury was given the wrong instructions.

December 2020

At a 20-minute virtual hearing held under Covid restrictions, the appeals court deals a double blow to Rabbi Eisemann, upholding the two convictions. The ruling shocks community members but also legal experts and scholars. The third count, which was predicated on convictions on counts 1, 2, and 4, never warranted a defense of its own. The judge gave the jury 11th-hour instructions that completely upended the case — yet the appeals court doesn’t seem to grasp the significance of that action.

The worst, though, is yet to come. The appeals court finds that Judge Bucca improperly relied on the mitigating factors of the case, going so far as to say that he was “biased” toward the defendant, citing as proof the praises he heaped on Rabbi Eisemann — not realizing that the platitudes were themselves mitigating factors, not just the judge’s own personal feelings. The appeals court orders that Rabbi Eisemann be re-sentenced by a different judge. The prosecution’s goal of a 12-year prison term for the SCHI founder seems dangerously plausible.

But the community doesn’t give up, confident in the havtachah from Rav Chaim. More fundraising calls go out, and more tefillos gatherings are organized. The defense team works on a long-shot bid to have the State Supreme Court — notorious for its selectiveness in the cases it chooses to review — and also begins an in-depth review of the facts of the case. Several years have passed since the allegations first began to swirl, and some new information has come to light.

May 2021

In the course of its intensive review, the defense team discovers an astounding fact. A bookkeeper who worked at the school at the time of the initial investigation tells Lee Vartan that a certain ledger entry that became the linchpin of the prosecution’s case was in fact an innocent mistake.

The ledger entry that allegedly showed Rabbi Eisemann covering up for a loan he owed the school — the slender reed of evidence on which the whole prosecution case rested — was the result of a simple accounting error that she had made in 2015. Rabbi Eisemann had not made the entry, and no books were cooked. She certifies that she made the entry when she didn’t know how to classify a certain transaction.

She further testifies that Rabbi Eisemann, who was admittedly computer illiterate, wasn’t even aware of her accounting entry until he was charged with crimes. Thus, the evidence on which the prosecution hinged its entire case turns out to be illusory.

When Vartan makes a motion for a retrial based on the new evidence, the prosecution forcefully argues that the evidence isn’t new at all, and in fact declares that prosecutors knew all along that the bookkeeper made the entry.

This in itself is a startling admission. Vartan now cries foul, stating that not only had the state misled the jury, the judge, and the defense, but it had violated the US Supreme Court’s Brady Rule, which requires that prosecutors disclose exculpatory evidence to the other side. This, they had glaringly failed to do. Had the prosecution disclosed the source of the ledger entry, it would have been clear to all that there was no loan, Rabbi Eisemann had never tampered with the books, and he certainly hadn’t been “money laundering.”

Vartan immediately files for a new hearing on the basis of this discovery, convincingly dismembering the prosecution’s case and implicating their conduct, making a compelling argument that the new evidence clearly exonerates Rabbi Eisemann.

July 2022

The case now comes before Superior Court Judge Joseph Paone. The prosecution denies the charges, but the court has heard enough: Judge Paone rules that the discovery passes the Carter Test, a three-pronged benchmark for determining whether new evidence warrants a new trial. Additionally, he finds that had the new evidence not been hidden by prosecutors in the 2019 trial, the jury would have found Rabbi Eisemann not guilty.

“It does more than merely contradict the evidence adduced at trial; it goes to the central issue of defendant’s guilt and has the probable effect of exonerating the defendant,” Judge Paone writes in his ten-page ruling. “In the most literal sense… there can be no doubt that if [the bookkeeper] is believed by a jury, the verdict will be different.”

In addition, Paone rules that the prosecution did indeed violate the Brady Rule by not sharing that evidence with the defense. In an opinion that causes jubilation in the streets of Lakewood, Judge Paone vacates Rabbi Eisemann’s convictions.

May 2023

The prosecution’s appeal of the judge’s ruling is unanimously rejected by the Appeals Court, which fully concurs with Paone. The prosecution’s follow-up appeal to the State Supreme Court is rejected as well. Rabbi Eisemann is technically a free man. But the prosecution still has an indictment, and elects not to drop the charges but to go to trial a second time, this time with the new — and exonerating — evidence on full display.

The state’s lead prosecutor is reassigned to an administrative job after the disclosure of the Brady Rule violation.

January 2024

The state announces its intention to go to a second trial, arguing in a 30-page brief submitted in the wee hours of the morning after the filing deadline that Rabbi Eisemann’s ledger entry was never relevant to the case, and advancing new theories supporting Rabbi Eisemann’s guilt. Defense lawyers pounce on that motion, pointing out that the state’s case until now has hinged on an assertion that is now debunked. Judge Paone orders the case to go to a second trial.

July 2024

The new trial begins on July 9. The prosecution brings in the lead investigating detective to testify, but it quickly backfires. Under cross-examination, the detective admits that there is no evidence, there is no crime, and he has “no idea why any of us are here.” This time, the judge loses his patience.

On Wednesday morning, July 31, Judge Paone declares: “The easiest course of action for me today would be to just let this case go to the jury. I’m sure they would come to the same conclusion. But I have a professional and ethical obligation to rule when called upon. The evidence presented to the state’s case in chief is insufficient to warrant a conviction. Accordingly, I hereby enter a judgment of acquittal.”

Throughout the long ordeal, Rabbi Eiseman hasn’t displayed a scintilla of emotion. In the courtroom, he has constantly had a Gemara open in front of him. Between hearings, he’s gone about his daily activities, helping Lakewood’s neediest children, going on fundraising missions — not for his own legal fees, but for Camp SCHI for Boys and Girls. Now, just outside the courtroom, he breaks down crying. He takes out a siddur and recites Nishmas, surrounded by his family.

Thirty miles away in Lakewood, it is well into the Three Weeks, but the mood is ecstatic nonetheless. At that evening’s seudas hoda’ah, Rav Yitzchok Sorotzkin thanks Rabbi Eisemann for being the “shaliach tzibbur” for personifying emunah, which, as Rav Aharon Leib Steinman, said is the mitzvah of our dor.

Rabbi Eisemann himself speaks at length, focusing not on his personal ordeal but on midrashim and divrei Chazal. He then introduces the legal team that has stood by his side for the past seven years, and they are greeted with rounds of thunderous applause.

Attorney Lee Vartan takes the podium to thank his client and the community, vowing to continue the fight against a “travesty of justice” in the state of New Jersey. He acknowledges the presence of state senator Joe Cryan, a Democrat from Union who has championed Rabbi Eisemann’s case in the political arena and promised to ramp up the fight against unjust prosecution.

After the prosecution admitted to withholding exculpatory evidence from Rabbi Eisemann, an infuriated Senator Cryan introduced Bill S3039, which eliminates immunity for any prosecutors who fail to disclose exculpatory evidence in criminal cases.

“Thank for your support,” says Vartan, “and thank you for your prayers. This man is a pillar of your community. This is a man that I love — and thank you for the opportunity.”

(Originally featured in Mishpacha, Issue 1023)