Adam Selene

[9thdoctor]

Chris’s sudden death got me wondering again about Adam, who stopped posting on March 19th. We’ve been pretty chummy here on OL. He wouldn’t acknowledge that his name was a pseudonym, though among Heinlein fans his name had a likelihood factor somewhere between Michael Valentine Smith and Lazarus Long. Anyway, I tried a Google search “Adam Selene New Jersey”, and bad news, this turned up: http://www.queensda.org/newpressreleases/2010/march/cappellazzi_cmp_3_19_10.pdf

No judgements, just passing on the finding.

[Brant Gaede]

Chris's sudden death got me wondering again about Adam, who stopped posting on March 19th. We've been pretty chummy here on OL. He wouldn't acknowledge that his name was a pseudonym, though among Heinlein fans his name had a likelihood factor somewhere between Michael Valentine Smith and Lazarus Long. Anyway, I tried a Google search "Adam Selene New Jersey", and bad news, this turned up: http://www.queensda....cmp_3_19_10.pdf

No judgements, just passing on the finding.

I found this out two or three days ago. I decided not to post my information. My concern was what had happened to him. I was afraid he had dropped dead. By cross referencing some information I figured it was 99.99% sure this is OL's Adam Selene. I found an Adam Selene was a member of a NYC Objectivist Club. His town was listed as Hillside, NJ. Googling "Adam Selene Hillside NJ" got me information about his arrest as Adam Cappellazzi on March 19, his last day of posting on OL. Then there was his same age of 63. Googling "Adam Cappellazzi" or "Adam Cappellazzi Hillside NJ" got me some more information. There it stands. Nothing about bail, posted or not.

Since this is now on OL, I doubt if he will ever post here again. He probably wouldn't have anyway. There is no hiding the fact that the allegations do not appertain to inappropriate laws, unlike Ross Levatter now serving three years in New Mexico for his involvement in an escort service.

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

According to the District Attorney's release linked in the opening post of this thread, the accusations are:

... charged with forging the signatures of two Queens Supreme Court Justices on the purported divorce papers of two separate couples. He was arrested today during a sting operation in which an investigator posed as a person seeking his services to help mediate his divorce.

. . .

... one count of third-degree grand larceny, two counts of second-degree forgery, two counts of criminal possession of a forged instrument, two counts of fourth-degree grand larceny, two counts of criminal possession of stolen property, first-degree scheme to defraud, and two counts of unlawful possession of personal identification information. The defendant faces up to seven years in prison if convicted.

Dayaamm!

It also says:

It should be noted that criminal charges are merely an accusation and that a defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

I wish Adam well.

I hope he comes through all this a better man, regardless of whether he is guilty or innocent.

I want to make a quip about staying away from married women, but this looks really serious.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

I hope this isn't the tip of an iceberg like thing.

--Brant

[CNA]

Chris’s sudden death got me wondering again about Adam, who stopped posting on March 19th. We’ve been pretty chummy here on OL. He wouldn’t acknowledge that his name was a pseudonym, though among Heinlein fans his name had a likelihood factor somewhere between Michael Valentine Smith and Lazarus Long. Anyway, I tried a Google search “Adam Selene New Jersey”, and bad news, this turned up: http://www.queensda.org/newpressreleases/2010/march/cappellazzi_cmp_3_19_10.pdf

No judgements, just passing on the finding.

Wow. I was wondering about Adam as well and noticing his absence here on OL and also wondered if he had passed. I spoke to him briefly about some of my own stuff going on with my son and what happened to him at school. He offered some really great suggestions.

These are some very very serious charges against him. I truly hope that what is alleged is not true but doesn't look good on what I've read. Wow. Hopefully he'll be able to find competent enough counsel to defend him if he's innocent.

[Dragonfly]

Now, that's funny, Selene as an Objectivist con man!

So admittedly, I am overly alert to the stereotyping of Italians as mobsters, thugs etc.

I'd already the impression that he did protest too much...

[Philip Coates]

> Now, that's funny, Selene as an Objectivist con man! [DF]

More sad than funny. While I developed a great dislike of Adam's posts and posting style on OL (butted heads with him constantly and was happy when he stopped posting), I would have never thought in a million years that he was literally a "con man". Someone who pretended he could guarantee divorces and created phony legal documents that could damage people's lives for money. How would that square with an alleged interest in Objectivism?

I hope he is innocent of those charges.

Edited May 23, 2010 by Philip Coates

[Brant Gaede]

Now, that's funny, Selene as an Objectivist con man!

So admittedly, I am overly alert to the stereotyping of Italians as mobsters, thugs etc.

I'd already the impression that he did protest too much...

I don't know he claimed to be an Objectivist so much as one who claimed Christianity and Objectivism weren't mutually exclusive. If so, he was that type of Objectivist which doesn't strike me as logical. Regardless, it's not funny at all unless you mean funny strange as opposed to funny ha, ha.

--Brant

Edited May 23, 2010 by Brant Gaede

[Jerry Biggers]

From the posts here, it is assumed that the person named in the indictment, and that the "Adam Selene" who posts here, is the same person. Sounds probable, but not conclusive.

Anyway, being charged with a crime is not the same as actually being guilty of that crime (as we all know, but sometimes forget). This may be the same person, or the charges could be trumped-up, or he may have committed some, but not all, of the allegations.

Personally, I find that what he is being charged with to be confusing. Not having a lot (O.K., none!) of experience with even the type of actions that he is being charged with, I find their description of what he is alleged to have done, to be confusing and bordering on the incoherent. Taken literally, it does not sound like crimes that anyone with any sense at all would believe he could get away with.

Perhaps I am naive and a "media child:" if it's not described on CSI, CIS, Law and Order, etc., I don't know that such a crime even exists.

As to the alleged incongruity of an Objectivist committing an immoral act or crime, please! How many times do we see someone of any particular moral stance, or faith, violate what he or she has pronounced in public or in print - and go out and do the opposite of their professed moral principles? Not just Jimmy Swaggert, Kenneth Haggard, or Catholic Priests, but many others! It is an unfortunate fact of the human condition. Reading or professing belief in the Bible, the Koran, Atlas Shrugged, or (fill-in-the-blank) does not mean that that same person will follow those ethical precepts.

This, of course, is not to excuse such acts of hypocrisy. I am merely pointing out that knowing someone's professed beliefs on moral issues does not necesarily mean that you can accurately predict how that person will behave when confronted in his own life with that issue.

I think that I will reserve any judgement on the case of Adam Selene until a lot more is known about what actually happened. There may be a lot more to it tan meets the eye.

Edited May 24, 2010 by Jerry Biggers

[sbeaulieu]

I hope all goes well for Adam, either way. I really like him. Talk about a distressing weekend on OL

~ Shane

[Dragonfly]

From the posts here, it is assumed that the person named in the indictment, and that the "Adam Selene" who posts here, is the same person. Sounds probable, but not conclusive.

It is what Objectivists call contextually certain... Name, state, Italian origin, age, but the clincher is that from the day of his arrest his posts on OL abruptly stopped (and he was a very prolific poster). Nah, I don't believe in miracles...

[Reidy]

The underlying crime sounds like a rom-com plot. Hugh Grant and Reese Witherspoon today, Cary Grant / Carole Lombard or Tracy / Hepburn in their day.

[Christopher]

I was fond of conversing with Adam on the forum, and his absence was noticed. Although I can obviously make no statement concerning these charges, the continued opportunity to discuss Objectivism with him through this forum would be good.

[Robert Campbell]

I'd started worrying a little about Adam...

This is a different kind of serious loss.

Robert Campbell

[Philip Coates]

> I wish Adam well

> I hope all goes well for Adam

> I find that what he is being charged with to be confusing

> I hope this isn't the tip of an iceberg like thing

> This is a different kind of serious loss

,,,,,,,,,,,

Subject: Looks like two separate crimes - both of which would and should be crimes in a free society. Fraud, embezzlement, forgery...

1.

http://www.lexisone.com/lx1/caselaw/freecaselaw?action=OCLGetCaseDetail&format=FULL&sourceID=gdig&searchTerm=eahH.gNEa.aadi.YcWL&searchFlag=y&l1loc=FCLOW

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 9523

May 8, 2000, Decided

SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court is hereby AFFIRMED.

Allen Cappellazzi appeals from a three-month sentence of imprisonment entered by Judge Spatt pursuant to a plea of guilty to mail fraud...solicit businesses in New York for advertising space that would appear in two anti-drug journals to be produced by AIA. The two journals were never produced by AIA, however. Nevertheless, according to appellant's plea allocution, appellant continued to solicit and sell ad space for the DEANY journals, and reap commissions from these sales, knowing that AIA would not publish them. Appellant further testified at his co-defendants' trial that he did the following for pecuniary gain: (i) posed as a law enforcement agent when soliciting funds; (ii) misrepresented that he solicited funds on behalf of the federal Drug Enforcement Administration, an entity with which DEANY is not affiliated; and (iii) falsely promised [*3] victims that their contributions would help fund certain anti-drug programs....misrepresented to victims that the solicited contributions would fund, among other things, drug education programs...

2.

http://www.queensda.org/newpressreleases/2010/march/cappellazzi_cmp_3_19_10.pdf

MARCH 19, 2010

Queens District Attorney Richard A. Brown announced today that a New Jersey man who

held himself out as a court mediator has been charged with forging the signatures of two Queens

Supreme Court Justices on the purported divorce papers of two separate couples. He was arrested

today during a sting operation in which an investigator posed as a person seeking his services to help

mediate his divorce....“Forging a judge’s signature is a serious offense – especially

in a case like this where the defendant allegedly convinced two separate couples that they were

legally divorced. This kind of scheme has all kinds of ramifications. In fact, one of the victim’s in

this case was set to remarry next month and now must scramble to make sure that will be legally

possible.”

The District Attorney identified the defendant as Allen Cappellazzi, a.k.a., Adam Selene, 63,

of 1392 Norman Street in Hillside, New Jersey. Cappellazzi is presently awaiting arraignment in

Queens Criminal Court on one count of third-degree grand larceny, two counts of second-degree

forgery, two counts of criminal possession of a forged instrument, two counts of fourth-degree grand

larceny, two counts of criminal possession of stolen property, first-degree scheme to defraud, and

two counts of unlawful possession of personal identification information. The defendant faces up

to seven years in prison if convicted.

...On January 17, 2007, the

defendant, using the name Adam Selene, allegedly presented the victim with a contract to mediate

her divorce in exchange for $3,000. He was allegedly paid the $3,000 and also requested, and

received, identifying information, including social security numbers, bank accounts, pension

accounts and authorization to access the accounts. The two were allegedly in frequent contact and

allegedly met on January 19, 2009, at a Forest Hills, Queens, restaurant where the defendant

allegedly gave the victim a document purporting to be a divorce decree bearing an index number and

purportedly signed by Justice Charles Thomas. A law clerk for Justice Thomas has said that the

index number on the document is not an index number for any case associated with Justice Thomas

and that the signature does not belong to the judge.

...a second victim, a man, through a mutual acquaintance, on February 2, 2007, and

presented the victim with a contract to mediate his divorce in exchange for $2,500. The defendant

allegedly received the $2,500, and also asked for, and received, personal identification information

including social security numbers, bank accounts, pension accounts and authorization to access the

accounts. The defendant allegedly met with the victim on January 19, 2009, at a restaurant in Forest

Hills, Queens, and gave the victim a document purporting to be a divorce decree bearing an index

number and purportedly signed by Queens Supreme Court Justice Allan Weiss. A law clerk for

Justice Weiss has said that the index number on the document is not an index number for any case

associated with Justice Weiss and that the signature does not belong to the judge.

The scheme was uncovered after the supposed former husband of the first victim was

addressing an issue related to his pension and discovered that the index number assigned to the case

did not in fact belong to a divorce case.

...It should be noted that criminal charges are merely an accusation and that a defendant is

presumed innocent until proven guilty.

[This sentence would apply to the second crime, but not to the first, the fraudulent seeking of money for phony ads. ]

[anthony]

Adam Selene, the charming rogue?

No, I can't condone what he is accused of doing, but I liked him, and miss his presence.

Sometimes a little charm goes a long way to lubricate the grinding cogs of intellectual debate.

He had a high input on OL, and above all, was usually benevolent and responsive.

Tony

[Dragonfly]

He had a high input on OL,

Yes, like a spammer.

and above all, was usually benevolent and responsive.

He was quite malicious and thin-skinned and it doesn't surprise me at all that he turned out to be an evil crook who swindled people. But sure, as long as someone parrots Objectivists slogans, he can't be too bad, can he?

[Brant Gaede]

He had a high input on OL,

Yes, like a spammer.

and above all, was usually benevolent and responsive.

He was quite malicious and thin-skinned and it doesn't surprise me at all that he turned out to be an evil crook who swindled people. But sure, as long as someone parrots Objectivists slogans, he can't be too bad, can he?

I don't think he made many philosophical postings, even slogans. He seemingly tried to be amusing with his witty little what-do-you-call-thems?

--Brant

[Philip Coates]

Brant, 'accused of doing' is letting him off too lightly.

Note from my post that he was -convicted- in the first of those two cases of criminal activity.

(On other matters, Dragonfly's points are well taken.)

Edited July 13, 2010 by Philip Coates

[Brant Gaede]

Brant, 'accused of doing' is letting him off too lightly.

Note from my post that he was -convicted- in the first of those two cases of criminal activity.

(On other matters, Dragonfly's points are well taken.)

You're quoting me?

--Brant

[anthony]

He had a high input on OL,

Yes, like a spammer.

and above all, was usually benevolent and responsive.

He was quite malicious and thin-skinned and it doesn't surprise me at all that he turned out to be an evil crook who swindled people. But sure, as long as someone parrots Objectivists slogans, he can't be too bad, can he?

Thin-skinned? Speaking as one myself, I've noticed that there's a lot of it going round in O'ist circles.

So, yeah, he hit back when he felt he was being targeted.

But, you've got to admit that he responded prolifically to posts, and some of us (not mentioning names!) enjoy a measure of acknowledgement - even if it's of the "what a load of crap, for reasons,x,y,z"-type.

I think Selene is libertarian, but not Objectivist - though I was amused by his "Ayn said this", and "Ayn did that" comments.

Tony

[9thdoctor]

We don’t know that this conviction from 2000 is the same person, though it does seem likely. It would explain the need for a pseudonym. He can’t defend himself here, even if he has internet access he probably can’t talk about his case, so it’s pretty cheap to be trashing him. Innocent till proven guilty? All we have is the prosecutor’s side. Maybe, and I doubt it, but maybe, he’s up against trumped up charges and a prosecutor with the “soul of a” James Valliant.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Given my own past, it's a good thing I never hooked up with him.

(I like Adam and I hope he comes out of this OK.)

Michael

[Rich Engle]

I've had a few pleasant exchanges with Adam over the time, here and there. But that is not the point.

I think the point was the inappropriate nature of publishing legal documents about him. Whether or not those things appeared to be true, off-the-rip, it just reeks of old-school Objectivist having-court activities.

Is this the standard now? Should we all use the Web and probe into each other? Why was this here in the first place? Is is the world of if you didn't do anything, you shouldn't mind?

I find it reprehensible in almost all cases (least of all in public forums) to publish things like court documents about others.

And no, Sir, I do not buy the argument that it was done out of concern. Yeah, Chris died, so that is a perfect reason to not just inquire as to Adam's status, but to start, off the fucking rip, with a document. You must be proud. Shame on you.

Whatever he did (and surely it does not look good), what was the meddling? Just because one has such capabilities these days? Or, is it back to the old ways. It was, whether meant such or not, mean-spirited.

How would you feel if he dropped dead tomorrow? Good? Did you prove your point that no one can be ever trusted, or loved, or at least read?

I do not defend Adam, because I don't know (and fuck the contextual argument). That is not the point at all. The point is running around like a little bitch and putting up other people's legal documents on a free forum.

See, the only important thing, whether you found out the dirt you did, or not, was to figure out, if you were going to do research (or "snooping," as this more appears) was to tell us whether he was sick, or dead, or not. But no, you had to bring the dirt.

I truly hope you bask in the glory of talking over the hanging laundry-fence, only because that might, in time, make you tired of so-doing. I thought better of you, but now, no trust. Do me next. Please. It makes you look like a gossipy little bitch-- "Oooh~ Look what ~I~ just found!!" (?). Concern, my hairy ass. More like "look at ME." It makes me remember why I almost ran forever from the group of those who study Rand, in the first place.

There is the Reason, there is the Reverence, and there is the Tolerance. Maybe Adam, to your eyes (maybe for sure) does not look good in the third, but the second, and for sure the first, should be considered before you bring it to all of us like a cat does in a trailer park, and dropping it in his Master's shoe.

It sucks. Now go argue the morality, all or most of you. It won't matter what you do to me, I'll be too busy tracking down your traffic tickets, loading up scans to photobucket, and then writing funk-ass essays about that. Or not.

rde

Ashamed of the room he is in.

Edited July 14, 2010 by Rich Engle

[9thdoctor]

And no, Sir, I do not buy the argument that it was done out of concern. Yeah, Chris died, so that is a perfect reason to not just inquire as to Adam's status, but to start, off the fucking rip, with a document. You must be proud. Shame on you.

Whom exactly are you addressing here? I provided a link, MSK summarized what was in it, and Phil posted “a document”. Shame on whom?