Christopher Peak file photo
Rabbi Greer.
Incarcerated sex offender Rabbi Daniel Greer left his prison cell Wednesday to come to a New Haven courtroom — where one of his alleged victims testified that Greer had indeed had sex with a former student … but waited until the boy was over the age of 16 years.
Greer was the one who arranged to have the witness come say that, in the hopes of obtaining a new trial.
That was the focus of a four-hour hearing held in Room 6C in New Haven’s Church Street state courthouse.
Greer is petitioning the court for a new trial based on what he claims is “new evidence” provided by Aviad “Avi” Hack. Greer is arguing that the 2019 criminal case in which he was convicted on four counts of risk of injury to a minor was based on an incorrect assessment of the victim’s age.
He is currently serving 20 years in prison for the attack on a former student at his Elm Street yeshiva, Eliyahu Mirlis, who was supposedly between 14 and 15 years old at the time.
Since then, on Oct. 29, 2021, Hack — a former student and then a former employee at the yeshiva who has also described having had a sexual relationship with Greer — signed an affidavit stating that, to his knowledge, Greer did not have sex with Mirlis until Mirlis was 16 years old.
The statute defines a minor as being under 16.
Hack, now 47, testified in court on Wednesday, and asserted that based on his close relationship with Greer, he believed the “truth” was that Greer did not have sex with Mirlis until the boy turned 16. Just as Hack said he himself did not have sex with Greer until he was 16.
After hearing the testimony, state Judge Jon Blue continued the proceedings until Sept. 23, when Greer may choose to testify.
Hack’s newly submitted “evidence” relied primarily on observations and exchanges that he had with Greer back in the early 2000s, a time during which he was both serving as an assistant dean of the yeshiva while maintaining a sexual relationship with Greer.
Hack said that around that period, he spoke “basically every day” to Greer.
During both a 2017 civil and 2019 criminal case concerning Greer’s relationship with Mirlis, Hack, in his own words, “vanished,” to avoid appearing in court or speaking publicly about Greer’s behavior, with the exception of participating in a deposition in advance of the civil case. (Mirlis was awarded over $20 million in compensatory damages for Rabbi Greer’s actions in that civil case. Greer has been fighting paying most of that money in repeated court actions since then.)
On Wednesday, Hack claimed that he had not thought critically about the importance of identifying Mirlis’ age during that deposition, given that it was not relevant to the civil case in the same way it was to the criminal prosecution. (Click here to read a previous story about that deposition.)
Rather, he claimed that in recent years, after pouring “thousands of dollars into therapy” and consulting with his rabbinic mentor, Hack spent more time reflecting on the timeline of Greer’s abuse as well as his obligation to tell “the truth” in court.
“Because it’s the right thing to do. Because the truth is that Mirlis was over 16.”
Hack said he thought Mirlis could not have been under 16 when Greer first had sex with him for several reasons.
First, he argued, Rabbi Greer “detested” Mirlis when the student enrolled in the yeshiva as a freshman.
“The student will never succeed … he has too many issues … he’s just not a nice person,” Hack recalled Greer saying.
“He really didn’t like him. He wanted him out of school.”
That all changed when Mirlis entered tenth grade, Hack said. Greer then had a “much, much warmer and friendlier relationship” with Mirlis, Hack said.
Mirlis’ birthday is on Oct. 27. He was born in 1987.
That means that he would have turned 16 roughly three months into his sophomore year at yeshiva.
Hack said that the beginning of the school year is a “deeply solemn time,” as September and October are full of holy days including Rosh Hashana, Yom Kippur, and Sukkot.
“It’s not a time to commence a sexual relationship,” he asserted.
He said that even Greer abided by that rule. Although he and Greer were involved sexually, they would not have sexual contact, he said, around high holidays.
Rather, Hack suggested, Greer probably began his sexual relationship with Mirlis around November or December.
He stated that it was also around the late fall and winter that Greer began to confirm Hack’s suspicions that he was having sex with Mirlis.
Once, on a day when it was especially “chilly outside,” Hack said, Greer proposed that they meet up in one of the properties he controlled on West Park Avenue, which was directly adjacent to Greer’s home.
Hack asked Greer whether he was not concerned about his wife, who was right next door, finding out about them.
“I was here with Mirlis; everything was fine,” Greer said to try to console him, according to Hack.
Among other soft observations, Hack remembered Greer had once said that “one of the hardest things he ever had to do was wait to have a sexual relationship with me until I turned 16.” He could not remember exactly when Greer said that to him — it “wasn’t early on in the relationship,” Hack said — but perhaps it suggested that Greer likewise waited to have sex with Mirlis until he reached the legal age of consent.
As Greer’s attorney, David Grudberg, questioned Hack, State Attorney Craig Nowak consistently objected, chalking up that “new evidence” to utter speculation.
“I’d follow his chain of reasoning,” Judge Blue usually responded. But, he added, “I’m not saying it’s compelling.”
“But it’s in the interest of justice that I hear the witness out.”
Nowak further questioned Hack’s reasoning for deciding to sign an affidavit and offer testimony now, following Greer’s incarceration, after consistently refusing to participate in past trials.
“At that point I was psychologically in a different place,” Hack insisted. “The whole subject was and remains traumatic to me. I didn’t want to have to air this again, especially in a public forum,” he added, specifically noting why he refused to speak during the criminal case.
“I don’t know if you’ve noticed – I can’t look at him,” he said of Greer. “I’m that angry.”
The fact that Hack is an uncle to Greer’s grandchildren did not impact his decision to come forward with new information that could work to Greer’s favor? Nowak asked.
It had no effect “whatsoever,” Hack responded.
A Deal, & Rabbinical Court
During cross examination, Nowak also brought up that Greer summoned Hack to a Din Torah/ Beit Din, or rabbinical court. Greer summoned him with the claim that Hack was responsible for Greer’s “suffering” in prison and that Hack should be “liable for the civil judgment against him” because the “cause of that judgement was [Hack’s] deposition.”
Through that process, Hack struck an agreement that Greer would drop those legal pressures if Hack agreed to appear in court to testify about the affidavit.
That was “contingent on my appearance in court, not what I say in court,” Hack asserted.
Rather, Hack said, he had decided before the Din Torah summons that he would show up in court to assert information he previously had not considered key in the case.
He said had gotten a better grip through consistent consultations with his rabbinic mentor that “we do the right thing even when it’s tough. And it is tough.”