Share and Follow
The riddle of the day poses an intriguing question: When is deed theft not actually deed theft?
The punchline: When New York’s Attorney General Tish James attempts to navigate both sides of the issue. This puzzling scenario unfolded last Friday when Attorney General James faced questions regarding the arrest of Brooklyn Councilman Chi Ossé.
Earlier in the week, on Wednesday, Councilman Ossé found himself in handcuffs after he intervened in an eviction proceeding. Ossé claimed his actions were justified, asserting the eviction was the result of “deed theft.”
In response to this incident, Attorney General James’ office issued a statement at the time, firmly denying that the situation involved any form of deed theft.
At the time, James’ office issued a statement denying the case involved any such thing.
It said the matter involved a property dispute between heirs and relatives of the home’s former co-owners.
Yet on Friday, James sang a different tune.
“Technically it wasn’t a deed theft,” but it “emanated from deed theft,” she clarified — for anyone who speaks double-talk.
Ossé claims he suffered a concussion during his arrest, but it was James who sounded more like the one with the concussion.
Why the backtrack? The AG had shown up for Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s presser announcing his new office on deed-theft prevention, and she had to race to get with the program.
Suddenly, you see, lefties have a new cause: deed theft (i.e., when someone steals the title to a house through fraud).
Complaints of it have tripled in New York.
And apparently it’s a major issue for minorities — even if this particular crime has nothing to do (per the AG on Wednesday, anyway) with the left’s showcase eviction, which Ossé was trying to stop.
As we said after the arrest, James has never met a leftist cause she wouldn’t bend the law for.
Seems it didn’t take her very long to start bending.
Heck, James even thanked the councilman for shedding light on the issue. Never mind that he used a case that failed to highlight it.
Look, deed-theft may have real victims, who may indeed be disproportionately poor and minority.
But it shouldn’t be used to prevent a rightful owner from reclaiming property from someone pretending to be a victim.
And disputes over who is the rightful owner need to be adjudicated in courts of law, following legal procedures.
Blocking a lawful eviction and disobeying cops is not a legal procedure. And changing your finding on “deed-theft” based on the political winds doesn’t help the cause.
Nor, if you’re the AG, the state’s top lawyer, does it help you.