Nope, terrorists didn’t have anything to do with yesterday’s explosion on E. 62nd Street. (And, from what Purplegirl tells me, the explosion didn’t have anything to do with my delayed commute — that was due to a body on the tracks. I love New York!)
The story is much, much stranger than that.
Seems that the owner of the brownstone, one Dr. Bartha, blew it up himself. But this wasn’t a straight-up suicide. No, this one has creepy MRA overtones with a soupcon of New York real estate lust.
Just as his historic town house, a landmark used more than half a century ago by American spies, was no ordinary building, Dr. Bartha, 66, was embroiled in a marital split that by all accounts was no ordinary divorce. But he would have done anything to keep that house, including stay married, his lawyer said.
Too bad his wife wasn’t on board with that plan. She’d long since fled the house and moved to a small apartment in Washington Heights with her children — which, if you’re at all familiar with New York neighborhoods, you’ll recognize as a distinct step down from a four-story brownstone on E. 62nd.
Dr. Bartha and his wife were immigrants, he from Romania, she from the Netherlands. They met in Rome, where she was just finishing her doctorate and he was studying medicine. They moved to the US, into his parents’ house, and, like so many other women, she worked to support him while he was studying for his medical boards and eventually put her career aside to raise their daughters.
Despite the fact that the couple was married with children at the time that they bought the house with his parents (for $395K!!!), he considered the house his. That’s just one little insight into his character. The divorce papers (and keep in mind that divorce is an adversarial proceeding in New York) contain more:
The divorce papers described a bizarre, markedly unhappy home life. Dr. Bartha put up “swastika-adorned articles” around the house, according to a court decision, “intentionally traumatizing” her because she is of Jewish descent and was born in “Nazi-occupied” Holland. Dr. Bartha became enraged when she took them down, according to the papers, which also said he ignored his wife as she was treated for breast cancer.
A judge granted her the divorce. He was ordered to pay $1.23 million, plus alimony of $2,000 per month for three years. But the referee in the case held that the couple’s home, then valued at $5 million, was not marital property and that Ms. Hahn had no claim to the home.
Nice, huh? Here is where he puts his foot in it while trying to keep control of her and control of the house as well:
Then Dr. Bartha appealed the decision, a move that would ultimately cost him his house. He wanted to stay married, and would have had to sell or mortgage the house to pay the $1.2 million the court said he owed.
“He didn’t love her,” Mr. Garr said. “He was emotionally and constitutionally opposed to divorce. He was a man who worked all the time and couldn’t stand being alone.”
I wouldn’t want to be alone with him either. Dr. Bartha’s thirst for control backfired on him, as an appellate court decided that the house was marital property after all, and thus his wife was awarded a share in it. The house was ordered sold, but that wasn’t the end of things:
In August 2005, Ms. Hahn received a judgment of $3.6 million, plus a property credit and lawyer’s fees, according to court papers. The total of all money judgments in the matrimonial action against Dr. Bartha came to more than $4 million. Ms. Hahn had complained in court papers that he “has fought me every step of the way in the divorce action,” and said she did not expect that he would satisfy the money judgments. The only way to ensure that he complied, she said, was to have the house sold.
“I have no doubt that respondent will ensconce himself in the marital residence and refuse to leave it after the auction is held,” she said. “He has said many times that he intends to ‘die in my house.’ ”
The eviction papers were served Friday, and on Monday, he blew up the house. The blast injured about 15 bystanders. Dr. Bartha was pulled from the wreckage and now has no house, no wife, and is looking at criminal charges.
Fitting.
UPDATE: I would be remiss if I didn’t add this comment by LowerManhattanite over on Gilliard’s blog:
Let’s see…a guy in a fit of pique and spite tries to cut his ex-wife out of her share of the sale of a five-million dollar town house–by blowing it the f*ck up.
Which of course frees up the lot–worth about four/five times the townhouse and will be sold anyway…and she gets even mo’ money.
Oh yeah…he’s goin’ to jail for arson, depraved indifference (blowing up a building in the middle of a busy mid-town street), destruction of public property (street, gas lines, etc.) and will probably be sued by for millions by injured passers-by.
Three words sum this idiot up.
Wile.
E.
Coyote.
What a piece of work – he seems to have particular attachment to everything he considered his “property” which also seems to have included his wife. What a Wilkie Collins type tale of victorian obsession and revenge.
He injured more than a dozen people he didn’t even know just to destroy property that the Court had ordered sold to pay his wife.
I have not heard how seriously he is burned, but I hope it is very bad and that he is totally debilitated and likely to survive indefinitely. Spectacular suicides to hurt others are a cheap escape. This man ought to live with the consequences of what he did.
And, of course, with the process of debriding and wrapping third degree burns.
My heart goes out to the children.
I read another article where he only has like a 20% chance to live so he’s probably going to die ANYWAY. And guess what, she STILL gets the money. He fucked himself. He would have been better off taking some equity out of the house for the ORIGINAL settlement and sending her on her way.
Dumb fuck.
Live, you fucking piece of shit, LIVE! Suffer! Live in a fucking Hubbard tank! Live through thirty seven skin grafts, face a mass of scars and fingers fused stubs! LIVE! You Nazi fuck! You misogynist! Look your children in the eye! Meet the people you hurt! Face criminal charges and spend your days in a prison medical facility! LIVE IN HELL!
I guess I’m wondering if this guy might have been really mentally ill, rather than just an out-of-control misogynist.
He sounds like a textbook abuser to me.
What do you mean terrorists have nothing to do with it?
This guy sounds like he is terrorizing people to me — which makes him a terrorist.
That’s the problem with the “war on terrorism”: defining your enemy in it. In order to win a war, as Sun-tzu reminds us, you need to “know your enemy”. But how do you know your enemy when you’ve got yourself into a war against an enemy including everything from people who want to fly planes into buildings to this kind of evil, twisted jerk? And the people invovled were international, so appending the word “global” to “war on terrorism” doesn’t yet help with the definition.
[...] bout Piny
About Zuzu
Vintage
Advertise
« Love and Real Estate
Home
7.11.2006
Good Lord.
Post [...]
Am I the only one who finds Thomas’ statements disturbing?
Yeah, um… the guy sounded like a dick and everything, but geezus, Thomas, get a grip.
The typical tale of another narcisstic male gone completely unhinged. This, as many others, in proportion to his perceived greatness and of course the power he had to strike his mighty last blow to the forces of evil.
The feminist lesson I hear as in many like this, consists of the narcisstic male who, until his supply of ego-feed turns on him, goes on through life quite successfully and undetected.
Patriarchy assumes that women will assume the role as feeder to the endless demands of the male ego. As the supplier, the women’s role requires constant maintenance of physical and emotional needs, from maid duties to mother-nurturer to live-in whore. All this comes of course with no return of service since the requirement is that such need remain invisible in order to support the lie that such service, given by the woman constitutes a reward in and of itself.
This also serves the dual role of proving that the women is an inferior being since the sphere of serving a man provides all the reason and satisfaction for living. Let her knit his socks in the comfort of the home he provides by fighting with the lions all day.
Therefore, when the women caught in such a relationship bucks this role and demands reciprocation for services rendered and consideration for damages endured, the entire myth comes unhinged.
The cat is out the bag, the lie, so to speak is exposed to the light and the man is caught as the needy one who cannot live without a woman to serve his every need.
Instead of accepting that this paradigm may possibly be flawed and therefore, remedy must be made within himself, he turns outward and blames the noncompliant woman for his inability to adjust to reality as he must now see it.
He put a nickel in the patriarchy jukebox and we all hear the same damn song, “She’s a selfish, gold diggin’ two-timin’, lazy jivin’ ho’ who done me all wrong and now I gonna suffer hard, help me Jesus what’s become of our great society!”
Unfortunately, such relationships hum along just fine and are still held up as the ideal. Of course, the woman’s compliance with the role of selfless provider is essential to keep the lie alive.
When these relationships fall apart, there’s usually a whole friggin’ choir behind the man, with a full orchestra to help him belt out his tune in high style. Oh my ears!
Disturbing? More like informed. Anyone who wants the guy to “live to face the music” — that’s what they’re asking for.
Maybe Thomas is just feeling frustrated by Ken Lay’s easy exit. Well, hey.
Thomas, let me borrow your heart and brain so I can replicate them and plant them in a man of my choosing. I will compensate your wife for her having to suffer your absence for a bit, name the price.
OK, I might have missed something here… but if he dies, doesn’t she get everything that was awarded to her, plus everything that WASN’T awarded to her?
Removal of nose to piss of face, anyone?
Wile E Coyote pretty much sums it up, but let me add two more words: Darwin Award.
RM, that filthy pig killed innocent and injured people in a quest to spite his wife because he didn’t get his way.
No, I don’t find Thomas’s statements distrubing–I completely agree with him. Perhaps we should wish him to die and rot in hell?
I find it disturbing that a spineless pile of roach shit thinks he’s so important that other people should suffer. I find it outrageous that it’s considered cruel for this asshat to live with the consequences of his actions.
Jesus. If my loved ones were the collateral damage of this murderer’s bombing, I’d make that snivelling prick WISH he was dead. I would show up at his fucking hospital bed every day for the rest of his life, and demand he tell me why his ego was worth taking their lives. I would make him own what he did, or at the very least, I’d make him answer for it.
Any compassion for the people this piece of dumpster crust murdered? Or are they not worth your time?
Edit: I meant injured. Any compassion for them? Or are they not worth your time?
Sheelzebub, OF COURSE I have compassion for the people who were injured–and for the children, and anyone else who he might have impacted with this incredibly selfish act. But I don’t wish anyone a slow, painful death and an eternity of “rotting in hell” no matter what they’ve done. No. Matter. What. They’ve. Done.
RM, 15 people were injured, including 10 firefighters who responded to the scene and a number of people who were just walking by, minding their own business, who were hit by flying rubble.
Can’t spare any compassion for them?
That’s where it gets tricky. The house had been ordered sold, though the sale apparently hadn’t taken place yet. So I’m not sure how it affects things.
The other aspect is that the sale was the only way that the ex-wife’s share of the marital property could be paid, since he probably couldn’t afford to take out a mortgage to buy off her share. The house, if I’m not mistaken, was declared to be 25% hers (he got the greater share because it had been half-owned by his parents, he inherited their share, and inheritances generally are not considered marital property). They were already divorced, so his share of the house/property, should he die, would probably go to his daughters. Unless he considered them golddiggers, too, and cut them out of his will. Of course, blowing up your house is the sign of an unsound mind, so even if he did that, they could challenge the will.
Mind you, this thing will be tied up in litigation anyway, since those injured bystanders will be filing lawsuits, and their recovery will be coming out of his share of the property.
If you need any proof that we live in a patriarchy consider that most newsmedia used this as a talking point for “tell your bad divorce story” or head shaking “it’s a shame how upset people get over things like this” while a woman who is merely bitter is likely to receive lecture upon lecture about how unbecoming bitterness is and inspire people to write articles about how SHE should change. Men upset=society needs to change Women upset= women need to change.
But I don’t wish anyone a slow, painful death and an eternity of “rotting in hell” no matter what they’ve done. No. Matter. What. They’ve. Done.
You’ll have to excuse me–here I was reading your and RM’s screeds about how “disturbing” Thomas’s frankly understandable outrage was with nary a word of compassion for the real victims here. This abusive piece of shit brought his injuries on himself, damn skippy he should have to live with them. The firefighters and passersby didn’t plant the bomb, and they have to live with it. Call it poetic justice if you will, but I see no problem with him living with the consequences of his actions.
And BTW, Thomas didn’t say he should rot in hell; I asked if we should rather wish him dead and rot in hell instead of hope that he lives with the consequences of his actions. I see nothing wrong with wanting this worthless piece of shit to live with the results of his actions, and to be held accountable for the harm he’s done. If he lives, he’ll be in a hell of his own making.
Thomas said (and perhaps you and RM missed) that this fuck should live to look his children and his victims in the eye–to answer for what he’s done. I agree with that.
Of course. I hope they all make speedy recoveries. Kinda thought that was a given.
Neither do I. But I do see something wrong with wishing a lifetime of horrible suffering on another person.
If Thomas knew some of the victims, I’d understand his rage. If he didn’t know them, I think he needs therapy.
Do you feel this way about every person who wishes horrible suffering on people who commit horrible crimes, so long as they don’t know the victims? Osama Bin Laden, to pick an extreme example?
Pretty much. When someone commits a horrible crime, I hope they are arrested and put in prison. Not for punishment, but to protect society and to rehabilitate the offender (hopefully). If you feel they should suffer, why not torture them?
If you wish suffering on a stranger who committed a crime against another stranger, well I think you’ve got issues that you should seek help for. Compassion for the victim; perfectly normal. Wishing horrible suffering on the perp; not so much.
As for Bin Laden, I wouldn’t wish suffering on him either. I hope he’s captured in order to help prevent future attacks, but I wouldn’t say I want him to be tortured or anything like that.
I’m Canadian, and we don’t follow the “eye for an eye” philosophy up here. Perhaps that’s where our difference of opinion comes from.
Jenny, do you have anything to add?
RM, I have known some of the victims of patriarchy. I’ve been helping women pick up the pieces from what this system has done to them for as long as I can remember. This guy is Exhibit A of what is wrong. You bet I’m angry. The only kind of therapy that will help me is a better world. I don’t want any more crazy MRAs killing and hurting people to get back at their ex wives, and I don’t want any more women raped. Got a problem with that?
Do we know if he canceled the insurance?
I’m Canadian, and we don’t follow the “eye for an eye” philosophy up here.
Except Thomas wasn’t preaching an eye for an eye. He didn’t advocate torture,didn’t want to set him on fire, and didn’t advocate anyone give him a beat-down. He said he hoped this guy had to live with the consequences of his actions–and one of those consequences was living with the ninety percent of his body being burned, and the painful treatments that went with it, since he had oh, blown up a building. He is going through this because of HIS actions–which hurt innocent people, who got nary a mention in your self-righteous screed–not because some crazed vigilante swooped out of nowhere and inflicted it upon him. What goes around comes around, and I’m not sorry to see it be the case with this thug. If, during a workplace shooting rampage, the shooter was injured from the gun misfiring, I wouldn’t feel that sorry about it, either, since it was because of HIS actions; since he’s suffering as a result of his attempt to kill and maim others, yes, it’s deserved. That’s not the same as advocating torture (if that asshat escaped unscathed I wouldn’t advocate torture, but would hope the victims sued him and he spent the rest of his life in jail for attempted murder), but that was a cute strawman you pulled out.
So yeah, we get it. Thomas’s anger–hell, our anger–at this murderous act is very disturbing. Right-O. You know what I find disturbing? The fact that this asshat thought he was so important that the well-being of innocent people took a back seat to his ego.
Also note that when women get upset they almost never blow up buildings, go on shooting rampages, throw bombs, or even beat up those they are upset with. Yet it is women who are considered “too emotional.”
That’s not emotion, though. That’s manly rage. Unless brown people do it, and then it’s Satan.
Raging Moderate, steepling:
If you wish suffering on a stranger who committed a crime against another stranger…
As my sweet old Grammy Adams used to say: “Wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which one fills up first.”
Hmm, what was the name of that guy who shot all those women in some Canadian university? Yeah, those virtuous peaceable Canadians. Come off it, bub, and stop prescribing “therapy” at a distance; that’s the modern equivalent of the old-school church types announcing from the pulpit that you’re being prayed for because you’re a notorious sinner.
I’ve been trying to frame my thoughts coherently, but whatever I write sounds stilted and pompous, so here’s my last attempt:
What Thomas said disturbed me, too.
Saying, “Person B’s reaction to Person A’s action struck me as over-the-top,” does not equate to, “The consequences of Person A’s action are fine with me!”
It’s absolutely terrible that not only was Bartha determined to ruin his wife, he injured firefighters and innocent passersby. That should go without saying. What Bartha did was horrible, and I honestly imagine that everyone here feels compassion for his victims – - for the firefighters and innocent passersby, and for his wife and children.
That doesn’t change the fact that Thomas’s reaction struck some of us as extreme.
I feel horribly for everyone that this guy hurt. I… already said that. I just don’t get satisfied thinking about someone having to live as a third-degree burn victim or rotting in Hell. Of course he should (and will) have to live with the consequences of his actions. I really don’t see how anything I’ve said so far could possibly imply otherwise. I felt that Thomas’ comments were unnerving and had violent undertones, and I mentioned it because I saw I wasn’t the only one who felt that way– that doesn’t mean I *love* Dr. Bartha or “can’t spare” any compassion for the victims.
And yes, Piny, I feel that way about extreme examples like the one you gave, Osama Bin Laden. I don’t believe that anyone “deserves” to be tortured or in pain for the rest of their lives. I think that wishing that kind of thing will leave a dark imprint on my psyche–so I don’t do it. But in extreme examples like this, Piny, I tend to get extreme reactions, I don’t want Bin Laden dead so I “hate the dead firemen” or some other such crap.
[...] s. Amanda points us to this opinion piece by Maggie Gallagher about Dr. “Boom-Boom” Bartha, who blew up his UES townhouse to keep [...]
How about this, Jenny and RM: drop the fucking strawmen already. No one here ever advocated torture. But no one is going to cry over the injuries this guy suffered–which were self-inflicted. Nope. No sympathy from me. And he goddamn well should answer for what he did. A lot of us have had to put up with some version of abuse, and are fucking angry that we are–yet again–getting shut down by a pack of sanctimonious asshats who’d rather preach and pontificate than hold a would-be murderer accountable.
As for the assertion that golly OF COURSE you feel for the victims–I didn’t see any of that in your original self-righteous lectures to Thomas.
It’s all moot, anyway. He’s dead.