The murder of 15-year-old Yeshiva student Chaim Weiss on Halloween, October 31/November 1, 1986 is still listed as "unsolved". Chaim had been a student at the Yeshiva School of Long Beach, Long Island, New York for going on three years.
The school was known as Mesivta Torah to students and faculty and is a branch of Beth Medrash Govoha in Lakewood, New Jersey, an affiliate of Agudath Israel of America. Chaim Weiss was raised in Staten Island, NY.
Chaim was hacked to death by a hatchet or similar weapon sometime between 1:25 AM and 8 AM November 1, 1986, when his body was found. He was struck viciously in his face/skull until he was dead.
The last time Chaim was seen alive was the morning of November 1st, when he was seen by classmate Chaim Goldberg, who saw him sitting in their 3rd floor dorm hallway reading a book between 12:45 and 1:25 AM. A religious rule required members to not turn on lights during the Sabbath, Saturday, but fire regulations required hallway lights to be on at all times. Chaim Goldberg also said whoever killed him must have been looking for him as a specific target because the perpetrator had to bypass other 39 other boys, negotiate hallways, 20 dorm rooms and stairs to get to him on the third floor. Chaim's dorm room was at the dead end of the hallway which ran the length of the building.
NYPD concluded he had been attacked while he slept and that there was no break-in at the school. Chaim's room was on the third floor of the school, he had a dorm room to himself, while all other boys, except one other boy, had a roommate. There was no fire escape outside Chaim's window. Strangely, the window in his room was left open after the attack. Chaim was sick, he had a sore throat/flu and would never have left the window open himself. It is believed in Hasidim faith, according to one source, that windows should be left open in a room containing a dead followers body, to allow his soul to escape from from earthly bonds.
The NYPD Detectives, led by Detective Don Daly of the Nassau Police Department, were notified at 8 AM of the crime and arrived within minutes, they determined the Yeshiva had tight security and there were no signs of a break-in. Chaim had been sleeping face up in his bed when he was attacked, leaving a large pool of blood on his pillow. then someone dragged him to the floor, creating a second pool of blood, then his body was moved a third time, his feet and legs were raised and placed on his mattress, while his body remained on the floor, pointing towards the window. At this point, the third pool of blood was much smaller than the other two indicating, Chaim was probably already dead and that a great deal of time had expired since the attack. At some point the assailant opened Chaim's window.
Two odd things, Chaim was a great kid, never got in trouble. He had called his dad from a Hasidic Boys Camp a couple of months prior in July, crying and said he wanted to come home and desperately needed to talk to his dad about something which happened. He said he couldn't talk about it over the phone, he needed to do it in person. Dad may have assumed Chaim was homesick, though at 14, this was less than likely. That conversation never occurred. so his dad did not know what it was about, but he does remember how upset Chaim was.
The first step in any investigation is to look at the victim and his life for a reason for which he might have been killed. Chaim was a good kid, with no known vices, who took his education, at which he excelled, very seriously, spending hours daily studying/reading. He played sports enthusiastically, always displaying good sportsmanship. He was friends with all of his schoolmates, who all had impeccable reputations as well. They all liked him, he had no known enemies and had never been bullied.
Chaim was born September 29, 1971 in Staten Island NY. He had a younger brother, Menachem, who was four years younger and a sister, Rachel, who was 7 years younger. They both adored their older brother who reciprocated the feeling.
In 2017, WPIX NY did an update on the case, talking to Chaim's parents. At the end of camp Chaim visited his grandparents in Europe, who were Holocaust survivors, for several weeks. While he was in Europe, his mom and dad got two calls from Yeshiva head Rabbi Avram Cooper saying he desperately needed to talk to Chaim immediately after he got back. The meeting occured at Rabbi Cooper's home in Brooklyn immediately after Chaim's return, Chaim went into the house to speak to Rabbi Cooper, alone, per Rabbi Cooper's instructions, leaving his father in the car, Chaim spoke to the Rabbi for about 10 minutes. When Chaim came out of the house, his dad could tell Chaim was very upset, but Chaim said he didn't want to talk about it. His parents are heartbroken that they didn't press the issue to find out what was bothering their son.
No one has ever ascertained if anyone, rabbi, counselor, mentor or other boy was both at the camp and at the Yeshiva.
Now, for the second troubling incident, a boy who attended the Yeshiva 3 years after Chaim's death, said he was in the headmaster's office, incidentally, on another matter, when the rabbi had to leave. This boy saw a hat on top of a tall filing cabinet, which put it out of easy reach. Curious about its odd placement, he went to look at it, noticing the name Chaim Weiss was sown into the hat. A curious momento and odd that it was so prominently displayed. While you can't say with certainty that it was some sort of "trophy," it is odd that it was kept in the headmaster office and not, possibly, in some sort of memorial for the boys to their fallen brother.
There is one other possible clue. A hair was found on Chaim which is still in NYPD possession, but they were afraid testing it would destroy it. I hate the idea that someone gets away with a case like this, even if they have passed away the truth needs to come out.
Some relevant facts, which seem paramount, the perpetrator either came from inside of the facility or had a key to the building. Again, NYPD said there were NO signs of a break-in. This building would NOT be a target of sophisticated burglars. It was a Yeshiva occupied by religious high school students and everyone in the neighborhood and surrounding area knew that. There was NO treasure trove in this Yeshiva/School. The perpetrator left no clues, indicating some degree of sophistication and intelligence.
Next, since Chaim was attacked, slashed and hacked viciously in the face while he was SLEEPING, immediately killing him, it is not an unreasonable conclusion that he was the intended and only target. He presented neither an immediate threat or blocked the perpetrator's entry or escape. In fact one boy, Eli Kushner, who was at the school on that night, says you could only end up in Chaim's dorm room if you were looking for it, it was not near the 3rd floor stairs, the fire escape, bathroom and led nowhere. There was no struggle, the attack on Chaim was immediate, vicious and targeted. This was not a burglar discovered in the commission of his crime, who killed to effect his escape. This was a deliberate attack on one particular boy. Boys rooms opened one to another.
One boy living on the third floor remembers waking up a couple of times that night and noticing that his door was not completley shut. He got up and shut it, but noticed that the same thing happened again a few hours later. Closing the door made noise, someone obviously did not want to do that. At the time, he just figured it was his roommate, a Rabbi or dorm monitor checking on the boys.
Since no weapon was found at the scene or on the premises and no one recalled any hatchet being located anywhere at the dorm grounds prior to the attack, the weapon must have been brought to the scene or bought by the perpetrator before hand and disposed of afterwards. This was in all probability a premeditated crime. A hatchet like weapon is an odd choice, hard to hide and yet much more likely to inflict a fatal wound immediately. A knife might require repeated strikes and might have resulted in a struggle with the victim before he succumbed.
I am convinced that someone, possibly more than one person, knew who killed Chaim and made a decision to cover-up the assailant's identity to protect him and/or the school
The FBI Profiler suggested that the murder was an inside job, by someone who knew Chaim well and had been a deliberate, purposeful act. The person who went to Chaim's dorm room that night, did so to kill him. I agree 100% with that conclusion. The profiler suggested that the act had been committed by someone close to Chaim's age, probably under 25-years-old. FBI Senior Profiler John Douglas said on a show on the 100th anniversary Jack the Ripper in 1988, bloody crime scenes almost always exclude perpetrators who are over 30-years-old. I don't know that I necessarily agree with that, considering the strange actions of all the adults involved afterwards. The best that can be said for the adults behavior, including several rabbis, is that they circled the wagons to protect the school, at the same time guaranteeing that the murderer was allowed to get away with his crime.
Police Detectives said the investigation was hampered by the reticence of the boys to provide any, even trivial/incidental information, almost like they were instructed not to cooperate. Just an impression police had.
While not conclusive, Rabbi Cooper's actions are beyond suspicious, if he was not personally involved, an argument can be made that he knows far more, including possibly the actual perpetrator's identity, than he has ever admitted.
Police sources said that the investigation was hampered at every stage by intransigence of the staff and students at the facility to discuss the crime, at best, being minimally cooperative.
Detective Daly had several meetings with the boys and separately with staff and Rabbis, asking if they had noticed any suspicious behavior by anyone. But these questions were met with total silence.
Police suspected that this crime was personal based on how vicious the attack was and that Chaim was struck in the face. Most murderers occur at a distance, using a gun or from behind, during a strangling, for example, because the perpetrator doesn't want to make a personal connection with the victim. Stabbings with a knife and strangulation from the front are deeply personal, you are looking at your victims face as you take their life.
Chaim's Dad Anton and mom at their home on Staten Island still searching for the truth.
Rabbi Cooper told a NY WPIX Reporter "I am NOT interested in speaking". A strange choice of words. Not the far more appropriate response: I do not know anything beyond what I said at the time and I have nothing to add.
Rabbi Cooper told the family in the civil trial over Chaim's death, the family needed to reflect on their and Chaim's bad deeds which may have brought such a fate upon them. I find that appalling. No one, much less a child, deserves to be murdered. A man of faith should comfort the suffering, not make it worse. Contacted in 2017 for the WPIX NY documentary, Rabbi Cooper retired and living in Lakewood New Jersey said "I have no interest in speaking" to you. What an arrogant thing to say. https://youtube.com/watch?=8x_lljAiMvk
A young man of indeterminate age was seen by a jogger on the beach near the pier at about 7AM, 100 yards from the dorm that Saturday morning. There is no way to tell if his presence was connected to the crime or not. The young man/boy was NOT specificially identified as hasidic.
If the staff, rabbis and boys were upset by the murder they may have forgotten anyone missing or acting strangely during the morning before discovering Chaim's body. I am sure there was near hysteria at the dorm afterwards, many turning to fervent prayer, oblivious to anything else. Only at the end of the Sabbath, sundown Saturday were the police allowed to talk to the boys, possible 17 to 20 hours after the murder could the crime be investigated, which was more than enough time for the Chaim's cold-blooded killer to cover-up and get away with his crime.
I want to address one theory which has gotten some play in analysis/reviews of Chaim's murder. Some people seem to believe that Chaim was caught at camp having homosexual sex with a boy/counselor and that was the reason he was so upset at camp, prompting him to call his dad crying in July asking to come home immediately, and again after his meeting with Rabbi Cooper immediately after he came back from visiting his grandparents. If it had been a consensual relationship with another boy or counselor, then why would Chaim need to talk to his dad? He would want to be discrete and keep it secret. Or look for a better time to discuss it calmly with his dad. But if someone older had taken advantage or forced themselves on him? That is the one scenario that fits the facts. Someone was pressuring Chaim to keep quiet. Afraid that he would eventually squeal, then this person would have had to silence him.
First, let me say, if Chaim was gay, it makes no difference to me. But his and Rabbi Cooper's behavior doesn't ring true for a voluntary assignation scenario. One thing is certain, something happened to Chaim at camp. He wanted to talk to his dad about it, but he was scared or ashamed, or both. Boys tend to be ashamed after a sexual assault/hazing in which they are victims and cover it up.
Seeing his mom and dad's devotion and emotional devastation to Chaim's death tells me he wanted to tell his dad and that he was NOT afraid of his dad. But then Rabbi Cooper COMMANDS Chaim to come to his house and see him immediately after his return from his grandparents. Suddenly Chaim drops the matter. Chaim was NOT happy dropping the matter. He wanted to tell his dad, but Rabbi Cooper obviously said something to him which made it clear Rabbi Cooper did not want him telling his dad anything. What did Rabbi Cooper tell him? Was there any threat to Chaim's continued attendance at the Yeshiva, which meant so much to the 15-year-old boy?
Chaim was honored to be at the Yeshiva his lifelong dream and excelled at religious studies, academics and sports and was extremely well liked by his teachers and other boys. It would destroy him to lose the dream that he had worked so hard to achieve.
I would be really curious to see what Rabbi Cooper told police about his conversation with Chaim when he got back from Europe. If Rabbi Cooper was angry/bothered by a possible homosexual relationship involving Chaim discovered at camp, then he would want to get rid of Chaim, not keep him in school. The logical thing would be to send a letter to Chaim's mom/dad telling them Chaim would not be invited back the next year. This did not happen, so I suspect a crisis rising from a voluntary reltionship is the least likely scenario.
Two of the forty boys at the Yeshiva had rooms to themselves. Logic dictates, 38 boys slept in dorm rooms with two boys per room, but two boys, including Chaim, slept in rooms designed for two boys, by themselves. Wouldn't it make more sense that these two boys should share a room together? Unless someone chose to keep these boys alone in a room by themselves by design?
Chaim did NOT want to talk to Rabbi Cooper. And Rabbi Cooper's words during the civil lawsuit could be interpreted as telling the family to shut-up and drop the matter, telling them it was Chaim and/or your fault that your son is dead.
Shomrei Hada Funeral Home where Chaim Weiss Memoria Service was held. 1,000 people turned out for Chaim and his family.
South Brunswick, Middlesex County, New Jersey, USA
2) There was no sign of sexual abuse/attempted rape, the murderous attack was immediate and fatal. There were no signs of defensive wounds on Chaim. He was murdered directly from his sleep. These two facts establish that greed and sex were NOT the motive for the attack. This was an assassination, the pre-planned murder of a 15-year-old boy.
3) Chaim's dorm room, in which he lived alone, was at the front of the building, at the end of the 3rd floor hallway with no exit/fire escape, proving that Chaim was the target of the murderer. The criminal, if an outsider, would have had to risk discovery after the murder by retracing his steps to the back of the building where the fire escape/stairs were. And he had to pass several boys' dorm rooms to get to Chaim and again when exiting after committing the murder.
4) Out of 40 boys living in the dorm which encompassed three floors, only two boys had rooms to themselves, which is odd on its face. If 38 boys lived in 2 bed dorm rooms with roommates, why would Chaim and one other boy live in 2 bed dorm rooms by themselves, instead of bunking together? While Chaim was an excellent student, most of the boys in the dorm excelled in their studies. What made Chaim and this other boy special? The boys themselves were curious as to why these two boys had rooms to themselves. Having a roommate is a good growing up experience for a boy, especially sheltered boys, teaching them how to cohabit with another person, build a possible friendship with a stranger and be more outgoing. Someone chose these two boys to have rooms by themselves, perhaps to isolate them.
5) The fact that the body was moved three times over an extended period of time, as evidenced by the three different pools of Chaim's blood, indicates that the murderer was in Chaim's room for an long period of time. This was not a murderer killing someone and immediately escaping. Something else was going on.
6) The choice of a "hatchet" to attack Chaim indicates the perpetrator wanted to kill him, which he did almost immediately. The savagery of the attack, striking him in the face/head indicates this was personal and done in either extreme anger or fear, because Chaim was a threat to the perpetrator.
7) The use of a hatchet which was apparently brought/purchased for the purpose of killing Chaim, proves premeditation. Police were not able to find the weapon on the dorm campus and no inhabitant had any recollection of such a hatchet. The fact that the dorm is less than 100 yards from the Atlantic Ocean means disposing of the weapon would be incredibly easy.
8) All the support staff were interrogated relentlessly, including lie detector tests. Special police targets were non-Jewish janitors, food delivery service employees, maintenance staff, utility employees who may have visited the dorm in the prior 2 years. The Polish Catholic janitor was interviewed in Poland, he had left the country, because he was in the US on a Green Card, still a Polish citizen. He only left after intense interrogation and passing a lie detector test. Police were satisfied he had little or no contact with Chaim and no reason for any animus directed specifically at him. The boys genuinely liked the janitor and the feeling was reciprocated.
9) Opening the window of Chaim's room after the murderer, indicates the murderer was probably Hasidic as well. We know Chaim was sick, he had the flu and a sore throat, and would have never have opened it himself. The murderer did this. According to a source, a window is left open after a death so the dead can escape his body and earthly bounds, which is a part of their religious tradition.
10) Chaim's body was discovered at just before 8 AM on Saturday. Police were notified almost immediately, but after arriving they were somewhat surprised that they received no cooperation, no interviews, no questions answered, until after sundown that night, per Hasidic religious belief, which required only prayer from sunrise to sundown on the Sabbath. The boys lit a traditional 7 day candle to honor their fallen schoolmate, which police noticed upon their arrival. Immediately after arriving Saturday morning, the police assumed control of Chaim's dorm room, taping it off, preventing anyone from entering. But, somehow, somebody entered Chaim's room after they taped it off and lit a 2nd candle. No one claimed credit or responsibility. When questioned, even after a promise of no repercussions, no one admitted placing and lighting the second candle.
11) A mentally ill man who was familiar to everyone in the neighborhood, including beat cops, was momentarily seen as a possible suspect. But he was never known to be violent or threatening and had never shown any animus to the boys at the Yeshiva. He was observed to be clumsy and disorganized by people in the neighborhood. He was never seen with any sort of weapon, certainly not a hatchet/knife. Since it was not a burglary/robbery and no sexual assault occurred, the only logical alternative, other than a personal attack on Chaim, was a mentally ill well organized killer/serial killer, which this man was not. But even the mentally ill have motives. That didn't make sense. This was a cold-blooded, determined, calculated, well executed crime. Since police suspected some level of competence and intelligence in the commission of this crime, this mentally ill man was quickly dismissed as a suspect.
12) Since this was Halloween night, a community police officer had been assigned to the dorm to prevent any provocative incidents or shenanigans, escorting the boys to and from the facility and its campus until midnight, according to one report. The officer was interviewed as to whether he noticed anything out of the ordinary that night. He did not. He was also asked if he had noticed any strangers in the vicinity. Again, he did not. The officer had been assigned to the dorm and boys because of some mild catcalling by local teens, but never anything more serious than that.
13) The young man/boy spotted by the jogger at 7 AM on a bench near the pier/ocean on the morning of the murder raises one interesting question. Since security was tight at the dorm, heightened because of Halloween, someone, a boy/staff member leaving campus would have had to be readmitted to the building and noticed. No one reported anyone leaving campus and coming back that morning before Chaim's murder was discovered.
14) Police never felt they received full cooperation from religious staff, dorm staff and the boys. Nassau County Detective Daly held meetings with the boys seeking any clue, suspicion, any odd occurrence, strange behavior, no matter how trivial, plus any possible theories the boys themselves might have, but he was always met with total silence. He deduced it may have been based on their religious belief that no accusation can be made without 100% proof. Not that any of the boys may have thought any particular person/boy participated in or had knowledge of the crime, but the staff, including rabbis, may have reinforced this behavior by having told the boys to circle the wagons, to protect their faith and co-religionists. This fog enveloped the investigation, which, of course, protected the murderer, whether incidentally or deliberately.
15) Evidence indicates this was an inside job by someone who worked, lived in or had access to the dorm building currently or at some point in the past. And they quite possibly had a key, either currently issued or their own secretly made copy. Or they were already in the building when the crime occurred. Because of this, police looked to motive, why someone might have murdered Chaim.
16) Some of the School's Rabbis and Administrators have argued for 38 years that the Polish Janitor committed the crime after the murder. No one, staff, rabbis or boys had anything bad to say about the janitor before the murder. His employee evaluations were impeccable. Police however were convinced that he was a convenient suspect for the school administrators to shift blame and focus of the investigation, after the murder. Police logic was the odd positioning of Chaim's body, moved THREE TIMES and opening the window in accordance with Hasidim belief are the things which convinced police that the murderer was a member of the school's faith. If it was deliberate misdirection by the school/staff, does that mean that they know who did it? That question must be asked.
17) A boy had committed suicide inside the dorm boys bathroom a few years before. The school said the boy was depressed and left it at that. There were whispering at the time, and since, that there was more to the story, but that proposition was/is suppressed by the school.
The only thing which should have mattered to everyone involved in this case should have been catching the person who did this to an innocent 15-year-old boy. It is obvious that did not happen. Each and every person who obstructed this case, whatever their motivation, is at least partially responsible for the murderer of Chaim Weiss getting away with murder.
