You are on page 1of 7

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

CHANCERY DIVISION, FAMILY PART


CAMDEN COUNTY
WARRANT NUMBER 2013 0002980434
STATE OF NEW JERSEY,
Plaintiff,
vs.
BRUCE ARISTEO,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

TRANSCRIPT
OF
MOTION

Place:

Camden County Hall of Justice


101 South Fifth Street
Camden, New Jersey 08102

Date:

August 1, 2013

BEFORE:
HONORABLE LEE A. SOLOMON, J.S.C.
TRANSCRIPT ORDERED BY:
BRUCE ARISTEO, PRO SE
1640 Nixon Drive, Ste. 272
Moorestown, NJ 08057
APPEARANCES:
TRACY A. COGAN, ESQ. (Assistant Camden County
Prosecutor)
Attorney for the State
ROBERT S. KAIL, ESQ. (Assistant Deputy Public
Defender)
Attorney for the Defendant
Transcriber Anne Yowell
PAT'S TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE
504 Forest Court
Williamstown, NJ
08094
Phone: (856) 728-3151
Fax:
(856) 728-4771
E-mail: typistpat@comcast.net
Sound Recorded By: Kim A. Thomas

2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

I N D E X
Page
BY THE COURT:
Defendants Motion for bail reduction DENIED

Colloquy
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

12

THE COURT: Okay. This is the mater of State


of New Jersey versus Bruce Aristeo, the complaint
Warrant Number 2013 0002980434. Counsel.
MR. KAIL: Good morning, Your Honor, Robert
Kail on behalf of Mr. Aristeo.
MS. COGAN: Thank you, Your Honor. Tracy
Cogan on behalf of the State.
MR. KAIL: Your Honor, if I may. Were
seeking a reduction in bail. Mr. Aristeos bail is
currently $75,000 cash or bond. Mr. Aristeo is charged
with third and fourth degree offenses, one for a
violation of a Restraining Order. And the essence of
this case, Judge, is that it kind of, I think bail was
set at a very high amount because I dont think the
court had -THE COURT: It sure was.
MR. KAIL: Yes it was, Judge, and I dont -THE COURT: I set it. I do remember the
case, yeah.
MR. KAIL: And Ill tell you why, and I
understand why Your Honor set it, but I dont think
Your Honor was fully aware of the circumstances, nor
was the State until we brought it to their attention.
Your Honor, the allegation here is that Mr. Aristeo
posted a number of, according to the State, allegedly

Colloquy
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

inflammatory videos about the alleged victim in the


case, including her name and her identifying features,
her business, et cetera. But what the State wasnt
aware of and we brought it to the States attention was
that the alleged victim also posted what would be
considered by a jury, I would think, a very highly
counter inflammatory video in response. This is a
highly sophisticated person whos in the internet
marketing business. And without the -THE COURT: Meaning your client?
MR. KAIL: No, the victim.
THE COURT: The defendant. Oh.
MR. KAIL: The victim.
MS. COGAN: Both of them, Judge.
MR. KAIL: Both of them, Judge. Both of
them. And what the State was not aware of, nor was
Your Honor aware of, is that this lady, although she
did not mention Mr. Aristeo by name, mentioned the type
of activity, and Im not an internet person per se but
I understand by people showing and teaching me that the
person who is supposedly going around on the internet
looking for things is called a troll and she had a
video -THE COURT: Im very unsophisticated, so go
ahead. I know. I always thought a troll was a little

Colloquy
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

doll with long hair, but okay.


MR. KAIL: Well me too, but anyway Im
learning Judge so, and I have my younger folks teach me
this stuff.
THE COURT: Look for a good ten or twelve
year old and they can usually explain it to you.
MR. KAIL: Anyway, so apparently, and without
being overly graphic what she does is in this very
sophisticated video, which the prosecutor has seen as
well because we brought it to her attention, is she
takes a part of the trolls anatomy and she feeds it to
her dog, Rugar the dog, okay? Rugar was the issue in
Mr. Aristeos video, some of his videos.
So this is a highly sophisticated lady. Now
I realize were dealing with a reasonable person
standard, and I understand the prosecutor is probably
going to say that a reasonable person might consider
this weird and might consider this threatening conduct.
However, I think once a jury sees this, I think a jury
will have great difficulty, at least as to that aspect,
in reaching a conviction against this gentleman.
So, here is a man without a record. I have
been over to the jail to see him. He has been offered
probation and get of jail and he said no, Im innocent,
I want to go to trial. So he is being held, and I know

Colloquy
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

the prosecutor says shes going to indict him next


week, I understand that, but Im asking the court not
to defer to another court a date when the man is
indicted but to say $75,000 on third and fourth degree
offenses for a man who is not, you know, theres no
evidence of anything physically violent that Im aware
of at this point or anything of that nature. There is
a Restraining Order, he does have ties to the
community, he is a businessman. He and the alleged
victim are both in a sense almost running competitive
businesses against each other in their way. And I
think that $75,000, I think the top number, as I heard
Your Honor say just a few minutes ago, is $12,500 cash
or bond. Now, I know the prosecutor made mention that
theres a number -THE COURT: Well the top number is whatever
the judge thinks is reasonable under the circumstances
in light of all the criteria that is set forth.
MR. KAIL: Of course.
THE COURT: And there are some extraordinary
circumstances in various cases. But Ill let Ms. Cogan
-MR. KAIL: There are, but on the other side,
were not dealing with a babe in the woods, Judge.
THE COURT: Okay.

Colloquy
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

MR. KAIL: And I think that a jury will


understand that when they see that, Judge. So hes
going to have -THE COURT: So youre arguing the likelihood
of success is low.
MR. KAIL: The likelihood of success is not
that overwhelming, in my view, okay? And I think that
there are a lot of things that having to do with, that
will have to be researched in the case, and frankly
Judge this is going to take a good long time before
its ready for a trial because theres a lot of things
that have to be researched involving how the Order was
entered and all those different things, that once we
get the full discovery from the State, that well be
able to explore. Thank you.
THE COURT: Ms. Cogan?
MS. COGAN: Thank you, Judge. As Your Honor
is aware, Mr. Kail is referring to bail guidelines.
The bail guidelines for a third degree stalking, it
caps out at $50,000 cash or bond. Your Honor set bail
at $75,000 cash or bond. Mr. Aristeo violated a
Restraining Order that he entered into voluntarily over
176 times from January 1st until May 15, 2013, when the
State, the prosecutors office signed charges against
him for stalking and violating the Restraining Order.

Colloquy
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

In his postings he uses the victims likeness,


he has photographs of her, he references her business,
he disparages her, as Your Honor is aware. The State
provided in the bail, initial bail set, the videos.
Mr. Kail raises one video response that the victim
posted without mentioning the defendants name, she did
not reference the defendants business. She did that
not knowing that the -THE COURT: Are they mutual Restraining
Orders?
MS. COGAN: No, Judge.
THE COURT: Just one against him.
MS. COGAN: She has an indefinite temporary
restraining order.
THE COURT: There is none against her.
MS. COGAN: Correct. And he did try to get a
Restraining Order against the victim which was denied.
This video she also posted prior to her knowing that
the State was undertaking basically a very secret
investigation. It took us a while to get our paperwork
together, to get the search warrant. She was under the
impression that she was not going to get any assistance
from the prosecutors office, law enforcement in her
quest, you know, the stalking. So she posted that
before she even knew we were helping her after she had

Colloquy
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

been subjected to daily, multiple times a day, a


barrage of videos about her, like I said, disparaging
her, questioning her mental status. And the court is
well aware the stalking statute no longer requires a
threat of physical harm or violence. It just requires
to cause someone emotional distress.
THE COURT: It doesnt seem to require that
we wait until somebody is hurt or killed.
MS. COGAN: Correct, Judge.
THE COURT: So I do agree with you on that.
MS. COGAN: And in this particular case the
video postings that the defendant was posting became
increasingly disturbing and increasingly personal.
THE COURT: I think they were part of the
courts, the Certification that was presented to the
court at the time the bail was originally set.
MS. COGAN: Yes. And specifically there was
the one where he pretended to be eating her dog, her
breed of dog sausage patty telling how great they were.
And then he posted a subsequent one where he
interviewed himself regarding their first meeting and
made her out to be, basically a very sexually
provocative video, and it was highly disturbing and
emotionally distressing to any reasonable person. And
the State feels the bail is reasonable as set and the

Colloquy
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

case is scheduled to go before the grand jury on August


7th.
MR. KAIL: Judge if I may just briefly
respond.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. KAIL: What Mr. Aristeos point is, and
there are things that have to be researched in this
case, but what his point is, and I think you heard it
from the prosecutors presentation, is basically the
State is picking and choosing. You have somebody who
Mr. Aristeo has counter allegations, he wasnt given a,
an Order wasnt entered. But there are counter
allegations that are going to be brought out in the
course of this representation which, you know, the
State may take the position now that were there to
protect him, were involved and thats why she posted
it, because she is taking self help.
THE COURT: Hey, Im not here to hear the
case. The jury will be impaneled and theyll hear the
case and theyll make that decision. Im here to
determine whether the bail is appropriate as set and
Ill consider what both of you said with respect to
that, but I attach the greatest weight to the notion
that bail is intended to assure that the defendant will
appear. The defendant has the kind of respect for the

Colloquy
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

10

11

Orders of the court and the requirements of the court


and the subpoenas issued under the courts authority to
be here and respond to the court, and the courts
needs, and the courts Orders, and the courts dates
for hearing.
And in this case we have a defendant who in a
very sophisticated way and in an allegedly very
outrageous way, repeatedly, over and over and over
again, used his level of sophistication to undermine,
circumvent and avoid in his mind the requirements and
Orders of the court. His conduct as alleged in this
case raises an extreme likelihood that he will not
honor and that he would fail to respond to a
requirement that he appear before the court at any
given time. I consider him a high risk of flight and a
high risk not to abide by the Orders and requirements
of the court with respect either to bail or the need
for his appearance in light of the alleged past
conduct.
Secondly, the number of events, each one a
separate violation, the numbers of events over the
period of time that they occurred, and the content of
those events as alleged by the State, and I agree
theyre going to have to prove it, theyre going to
have to put it all together, and the jury will have to

12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

make that determination. But was rises to the level of


seriousness that when coupled with the conduct
indicate, number one, seriousness, number two, a high
risk that he will not abide by the Orders and the
requirements of the court to appear on any given date,
I think the bail is very reasonable. I will not
consider reducing it at all.
I will, however, ask the State, and I think
Ms. Cogan has said so, when do you expect the matter to
be indicted?
MS. COGAN: Its scheduled for grand jury
August 7th, so a week from yesterday.
THE COURT: Okay. So Ill give you an
indictment date, lets say August 16th, okay, to be
indicted. If it is not done by then, you can renew
your application.
MR. KAIL: Thank you, Your Honor, greatly
appreciate it.
THE COURT: Thank you.
MS. COGAN: Thank you, Judge.
(OFF THE RECORD)
*

13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

CERTIFICATION
I, ANNE M. YOWELL, the assigned transcriber, do hereby
certify the foregoing transcript of proceedings dated
8/1/13, index numbers from 10:11:55 to 10:23:40 is
prepared to the best of my ability and in full
compliance with the current Transcript Format for
Judicial Proceedings and is a true and accurate
compressed transcript of the proceedings as recorded.

/s/ Anne M. Yowell


Anne M. Yowell
/s/ Patricia A. Hallman
Patricia A. Hallman
Pats Transcription Service
Agency Name

AD/T 312
AOC Number
1/8/14
Date