Auditing Erie County's Daniel Warmus back in Lockport City Court

Oct. 17—Daniel Warmus, operating under the name Auditing Erie County on Youtube.com, appeared in Lockport City Court this week to fight a harassment charge leveled by four city clerks. His attorney listed a string of "discovery" items that the prosecution has not provided for Warmus's defense.

The prosecutor, Niagara County Assistant District Attorney Susan Bjornholm, maintained that she does not have to provide evidentiary documents in the case, since the harassment charge is neither a misdemeanor nor a felony, it's a violation that would attach itself to Warmus's record if he's found guilty. Nonetheless, Bjornholm said, she tried to get everything the defense requested, and much of it did not exist.

The requests included phone recordings in the city clerk's office, and emails showing harassing communications sent to the clerks by Warmus's followers on Youtube. In her complaint, deputy city clerk Carol Edwards stated that more than 250 phone calls were made to her at the clerk's office, in which people called her names and swore at her, after they watched Warmus's video of her speaking to him and a process server delivering notice of Warmus's lawsuit against the city on Aug. 18. The prosecutor said that phone recordings did not exist and emails had been deleted.

Another request was for communications between Lockport Police Department and the U.S. Department of Probation. Warmus, an Alden resident, is currently on federal probation for his participation in the Jan. 6, 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol, after pleading guilty to picketing in a Capitol building and serving 45 days in jail.

Warmus's lawsuit against the city stems from City Clerk Sarah Lanzo's denial of his Feb. 14 Freedom of Information Law request for body-worn camera footage showing Warmus's encounter with LPD officers at the state Department of Labor office at Lockport Plaza earlier that day. Warmus had been filming himself inside the labor office and declined to leave when asked, then two LPD officers turned up to speak with him. He was not thrown out or arrested.

Warmus was accused of harassment by the city clerk and her three deputies after three visits to the city clerk's office, all of which he filmed: When he delivered his FOIL request on Feb. 14; when he filed an appeal of Lanzo's denial on March 23; and when he accompanied the process server on Aug. 18.

In city court on Tuesday, Judge Thomas DiMillo asked what was the relevance of communications between LPD and the U.S. Department of Probation, to which Warmus's attorney John LaDuca replied that Warmus's probation terms were changed after he filed his FOIL appeal. Terms were added, including a bar on incurring non-criminal harassment or disorderly conduct citations — which, LaDuca pointed out, is exactly what Warmus was charged with after his third visit to the city clerk's office.

Warmus received a letter in early September directing him to appear in city court for arraignment on four counts of harassment leveled by Lanzo, Edwards and deputy clerks Emily Stoddard and Jennifer Wochna.

Warmus asserted the timing of the charges — after his probation restrictions were increased — isn't coincidental. He said his behavior on Aug. 18 was no different than in his prior dealings with the city clerk's office — but he was criminally charged only after it would make a difference in his federal probation. This shows that the City of Lockport is "corrupt," he declared.

Warmus also points to the deposition of Lockport Police Chief Steve Abbott, in which Abbott said he notified U.S. Probation about Warmus's interactions with the city clerk's office. Abbott said Warmus's actions at city hall and other government buildings such as the Rath Building in Erie County are to blame for the restrictions on his probation enacted in mid July. Warmus wants a full record of communications between Abbott and U.S. Probation.

Bjornholm, the county prosecutor filling in for city attorneys due to a potential conflict of interest in light of Warmus's lawsuit, said she would try to locate two of the evidentiary documents requested by Warmus: LPD's policy on the use of body-worn cameras by officers, and any surveillance footage showing the clerks' movement from their office to the police station, which also is at city hall.

Two of the clerks stated in their affidavits that immediately after their encounter with Warmus, they felt afraid and went to the police station. Warmus suspects they didn't go to the police right away. He reasons that if there's no surveillance footage showing they did, then their "lie" would be exposed and the court would have to dismiss the charges against him.

"Whether I win or lose, I'll be exposing corruption in government," Warmus said.

Warmus is due back in city court Nov. 30.