Social Media Claims Jewish Wedding Violated Laws, Ramapo Police Set The Story Straight

by Monsey.info

A family wedding taking place in Wesley Hills became the centerpiece of a Social Media beat down, after Social Media posts claimed that the wedding was over the 50 person limit set by the governor.

Ramapo Police initially responded to the home on Harriet Lane for the report of illegal portable bathrooms. After the police spoke with the residents, the bathrooms were removed, and the family promised to comply with the states 50 person limit.

The events were recorded on social media posts where a person claimed that the wedding celebrations the next day held many more than the allowed limit of guests, and called the event “Criminal”. The post also demonized the family as Jews purposely flouting the law.

The Ramapo Police Department arrived, according to their facebook page “prepared to effect an arrest,” only to discover that the gusts were within the allowed limit.

The police reported the incident on their facebook page, doubling down that there was no criminal activity occurring.

“We interviewed neighbors, none of whom observed more than 50 people. We spoke with the television cameraman on the scene who observed the same thing we did, and stated he had no knowledge that there were more than 50 people. He called in to his television studio, and they did not have any knowledge, reports or evidence that there were more than 50 people. We spoke to a second news reporter who was on the scene, and he also did not observe more than 50 people, nor did he see any evidence of them violating the Executive Order. We even talked to the family of the person who posted on social media that the police aren’t doing anything, and not even one person from that family could tell us that there were more than 50 people at the location.”

The police noted that “People should be socially responsible during this health crisis. While it is not our job to enforce social “responsibility”, it is our responsibility to enforce the law. In this case, no probable cause existed to effect an arrest.”