Case Explained: Misconduct alleged at Niagara County Forensics Lab : Investigative Post – Legal Perspective

Lawsuit and depositions involving management of the Niagara County Forensics Lab include claims that the former director — the sister of a prominent state senator — engaged in harassment, unprofessional behavior and conduct that could compromise criminal cases.

Niagara County Sheriff’s Office. Photo: Niagara Gazette.

In a lawsuit, two former employees of the Niagara County Forensics Lab have accused a former director of mismanagement and misconduct that legal experts say could compromise criminal convictions that relied on the lab’s analysis.

The plaintiffs, a father and daughter, claim Kori Ortt-Gawrys — the sister of state Senate Minority Leader Robert Ortt —  harassed and defamed them over a two-year period, compelling one to quit and the other to retire early. The father, Thomas DiFonzo, claims Ortt-Gawrys turned on him after she pushed him to certify a lab chemist to do forensic drug analysis for criminal cases. DiFonzo refused because he believed the chemist lacked sufficient training at the time.

She was cleared to do the work anyway, according to DiFonzo. He said he alerted his superiors in the sheriff’s office to the analyst’s certification issue as early as March 2020, but nothing was done.

That revelation, if true, could compromise hundreds, perhaps thousands, of local drug cases, according to legal experts.

“This could certainly affect the criminal convictions of a large number of defendants, especially those who went to trial,” Anthony O’Rourke, a University at Buffalo law professor who specializes in criminal procedure, told Investigative Post.

Ortt-Gawrys is also accused of engaging in sexual relationships with one or more law enforcement officers who brought casework to the lab, as well as an Erie County forensics expert, according to depositions taken for the lawsuit. DiFonzo claims Ortt-Gawrys ordered him to expedite work for those officers.

Attorneys for the defendants — Ortt-Gawrys, Niagara County, and the Niagara County Sheriff’s Office — have denied any wrongdoing and inappropriate relationships.

One judge has already recused himself from hearing the case, based on the allegations made in the lawsuit and depositions.

The plaintiffs’ attorney, Christen Civiletto, says in court papers that her clients’ allegations are supported by depositions taken as part of the lawsuit and by audio recordings of meetings between lab employees and their superiors in the sheriff’s office. 

The plaintiffs also point to text messages between Ortt-Gawrys and lab employees in which the lab director said she would “make sure [DiFonzo] gets forced into retirement” and describes her brother’s political clout and friendship with Niagara County Sheriff Michael Filicetti.

Text from Ortt-Gawrys (on left) to another lab employee about DiFonzo.

Much of that material has been under seal, labeled “attorneys eyes only,” a designation the plaintiffs are challenging in court this month, citing “the highest considerations of public interest” in the integrity of the lab’s work.

“Plaintiffs contend that they were asked to rush cases for officers with whom Defendant Ortt Gawrys was having a sexual relationship,” Civiletto wrote in a brief supporting declassification of evidence in the case. 

“Sheriff Filicetti admitted in his deposition that the Laboratory has been compromised,” Civiletto continued. “That fact alone is the public’s business; none of this information can be kept confidential.”

State Supreme Court Justice Mario Giacobbe in October recused himself from hearing the case. He cited the plaintiffs’ allegation that Ortt-Gawrys engaged in “an interpersonal relationship of a nonforensic nature with officers submitting evidence.” He said some of those officers have appeared, and likely would continue to appear, to give testimony in his courtroom.  The judge also noted that Orrt-Gawrys is alleged to have had an “intimate relationship” with a member of Erie County’s crime lab, with whom Giacobbe had a professional relationship before becoming a judge, when he was an Erie County prosecutor. Orrt-Gawrys and defense counsel have denied any impropriety.

The lawsuit is now before state Supreme Court Justice Frank Sedita, a former Erie County district attorney. Sedita is slated to hear arguments on Jan. 27 about unsealing the depositions and other evidence that so far have been kept from public view. 

Civiletto said Sedita has indicated he will not consider recusing himself on the same grounds as Giacobbe. The plaintiffs previously asked that the case be moved to a court outside Niagara and Erie counties. That request was denied.

Sedita also will consider whether Civiletto can depose Ortt-Gawrys’ brother, the state senator, whose political protection she invoked during her tenure as lab director. Civiletto subpoenaed Ortt in September. The defendants’ attorneys last month moved to quash the subpoena.

“Unrelenting and malicious”

Ortt, the state senator, refused an interview request.

“We maintain that the Senator’s office has no involvement in this matter. And have no further comment,” a spokesperson from Ortt’s office told Investigative Post in an email.

Harvey Sanders, Ortt-Gawrys’ attorney, told Investigative Post his client was “not interested” in an interview and would have no comment beyond the arguments presented in court papers.

Attorneys representing Niagara County and Sheriff Filicetti, also defendants in the lawsuit, said their clients “do not agree to an interview and generally do not comment on the specifics of active litigation.”

“I think we will prevail in this case based on the facts that will become apparent,” Filicetti told Investigative Post. “And I’ll leave it at that.”

Kori Ortt-Gawrys. Photo: Niagara County Sheriff’s Office.

That leaves the court papers. Though much is under seal or heavily redacted, the available documents tell a troubling story.

DiFonzo had worked 20 years as a forensic drug chemist for the Niagara County Forensics Lab when Ortt-Gawrys was hired as director in May 2017. 

Lauren Rogers, DiFonzo’s daughter, was hired as a firearms expert and drug chemist the same month as Ortt-Gawrys, who previously worked for the Erie County Crime Analysis Center doing DNA analysis.

DiFonzo, in court papers, said he and his daughter got along well with the new director until July 2019, when Ortt-Gawrys asked DiFonzo to sign off on the training certification for Lindsay Klubek, a lab chemist. The certification would permit Klubek to analyze and identify controlled substances — cocaine, fentanyl, marijuana and the like.

He refused, maintaining that Klubek was not adequately trained in the discipline. Her training binder comprised “three pages of documented training cases,” whereas Rogers — already certified as a drug chemist — “had more than five hundred pages in her training binder.”

The relationship immediately went south. For the next two years, according to the lawsuit, Ortt-Gawrys “waged an unrelenting and malicious campaign of harassment directed” at DiFonzo and Rogers.

According to the DiFonzo and Rogers, Ortt-Gawrys:

• Set unreasonable deadlines for work assigned to them, but not for other employees.
• Gave them conflicting directives verbally and by email, then held them accountable to whichever of the contradictory directives they failed to meet.
• Sought opportunities to criticize or embarrass them in front of other staff members.
• Enlisted lab staff to “spy” on DiFonzo and try to catch him doing something wrong. 
• Told female employees that DiFonzo “hated women” and “opposed their hiring,” and had claimed “a female lieutenant was promoted to captain only because she provided sexual favors to the management.” 
• “Regularly referred to Plaintiff DiFonzo as ‘the asshole,’ and Plaintiff Rogers as ‘the entitled little bitch.’ ”

Klubek and another lab employee, Michelle Scotland, would later corroborate DiFonzo and Rogers’ harassment complaints — first in statements given to sheriffs’ officials, then in depositions for the lawsuit.

Along the way, Ortt-Gawrys bad-mouthed DiFonzo and Rogers to coworkers — often in person, but also in “hundreds, perhaps thousands” of text messages, according to the lawsuit. In those texts, the lab director conveyed her disdain for them.

Texts between Ortt-Gawrys (on left) and another lab employee about Rogers and DiFonzo.

Ortt-Gawrys would later delete texts like these from her phone. But Scotland and Klubek kept them and provided them to DiFonzo and Rogers for their lawsuit.

According to the complaint, Ortt-Gawrys “frequently announced that she was untouchable” because of her brother’s political clout and friendship with the sheriff. She told staff her brother would direct state money to the lab “and may run for governor, so the administration, including defendants, would do what she wanted.”

In March 2020, DiFonzo met with Niagara County Sheriff Deputy Chief Patrick Weidel to discuss his “problems” with Ortt-Gawrys. DiFonzo told Weidel about the issue with Klubek’s certification. Weidel “dismissed DiFonzo’s concerns” as “a difference of opinions … and told him to try to get along” with Ortt-Gawrys.

That fall, Ortt-Gawrys gave DiFonzo the first negative job performance review of his career. This prompted another meeting with Weidel and other officials, this time with Ortt-Gawrys in attendance. According to the complaint, the lab director admitted in that September 2020 meeting  she had lied in her written reprimand of DiFonzo.

In May 2021, “Ortt-Gawrys began requesting that certain officers’ drug cases be given priority over the rest of the Sheriff’s Forensic Laboratory’s caseload,” according to the complaint. 

After DiFonzo asked why Ortt-Gawrys was accepting drug evidence directly from those officers in her office — a departure from past practice — the lab director “installed paper over the windows to her office so that nobody could see inside when she had a visitor.” 

Banished to the gun range

In June 2021, Ortt-Gawrys gave Rogers her first negative job performance review, citing a failure to meet a work deadline.

Her punishment: Ortt-Gawrys moved Rogers’ desk into the firearms room, where guns are fired to perform ballistics tests, creating “a toxic environment” with “lead in the walls, ceilings and floors.”

Sheriff Filicetti, Undersheriff Michael Dunn and Weidel, the deputy chief, all “reviewed and approved the recommended punitive action,” according to the complaint.

Rogers gave her two weeks’ notice on Aug. 9, 2021. 

Before she left, according to the complaint, an angered Ortt-Gawrys “threw files” at Rogers and told her “that if she ever became pregnant, she would force her to stay in the firearms room and continue to fire weapons,” continuing her exposure to lead and noise. 

Shortly thereafter, DiFonzo filed his retirement papers. He told coworkers he’d planned to work another five years. 

“DiFonzo did not want to retire early and leave a long and distinguished career, but he had been driven to the point where no reasonable person could withstand the abuse and harassment,” according to the complaint.

On Sep. 3, 2021, Klubek and Scotland met with their superiors in the sheriff’s office, along with a union representative and labor attorney for the county. In the recorded conversation, they confirmed Ortt-Gawrys’ two-year campaign of harassment against DiFonzo and Rogers, described the dysfunctional atmosphere she’d fomented in the lab. They also told their bosses about Ortt-Gawrys expediting casework for select law enforcement officers.

The sheriff’s office then launched an internal investigation, interviewing other lab employees and Ortt-Gawrys. On Sep. 17, facing the possibility of misconduct charges, Ortt-Gawrys resigned.

In July 2022, DiFonzo and and Rogers filed a lawsuit in federal court, alleging they’d been punished “for speaking up about serious improprieties that threaten the integrity of the criminal justice system in Niagara County.” That First Amendment-based complaint was dismissed in February 2023. 

The current lawsuit was filed in state court that July, this time arguing workplace harassment and defamation.

Attorneys for Ortt-Gawrys, the sheriff and Niagara County issued blanket denials of nearly every allegation made against their clients, according to a Niagara Gazette report. Sanders, Ortt-Gawrys’s attorney, described the plaintiffs’ claims about his client as “nothing more than conjecture and imagined motives.” 

Much of the action in the case for the past year-and-a-half has related to the confidentiality of audio recordings and transcripts, as well as the text messages between Ortt-Gawrys and other lab employees. As previously reported in the Gazette, Niagara County officials maintain some of the material should remain confidential because they were obtained as part of an internal investigation into a personnel matter.

The aftermath

Mark Shaw, a veteran forensic scientist with expertise in chemical and ballistics analysis, came out of retirement to serve as interim lab director after Ortt-Gawrys resigned. Klubek was named supervisor of the lab’s controlled substances section after DiFonzo retired. 

Shaw wrote a letter in November 2021, addressed “to whom it may concern,” saying he’d reviewed Klubek’s training binder and was satisfied she had “completed the necessary criteria to analyze seized drugs.”

But questions remain about the lab’s operations under Ortt-Gawrys’ tenure.

In March 2023 — a year-and-a-half after Ortt-Gawrys resigned — the New York State Commission on Forensic Science notified the lab of “eight violations, including misrepresentation of information, fabricating and backdating training documents and ‘conduct unbecoming of a laboratory,’” according to a Niagara Gazette report.

The following month, DiFonzo gave testimony at a special hearing of the commission, which oversees forensic labs across the state. DiFonzo, in an affidavit, said he told the commission he “never signed off on [Klubek’s] training binder because she was not trained.” He told them he was the only person in the lab at the time who had the credentials to sign off on her certification.

After that hearing, the commission sanctioned the lab for various failures, including poor record-keeping and failure “to operate independently, particularly in the instance where a lab’s administration is also a customer of the lab.” The sanctions letter offered a corrective action plan that included hiring a quality assurance manager and an outside consultant to review the lab’s casework, as well as ethics training for “all relevant parties.”

In court papers, DiFonzo said he reached out to Klubek when he refused to sign off on her training binder to explain why. He said she replied that the matter had been “taken care of.”

A copy of Klubek’s training schedule, submitted to the court, shows beginning and end dates for the drug training in question, but no initials from a supervisor verifying she’d completed the work. All the other training fields in the schedule have been initialed.

O’Rourke, the UB law professor, said he worked on cases as a federal defense attorney in which questions about lab work led to acquittals. Here, he said, the quality of Klubek’s work might not matter. What matters is whether prosecutors at the time told the court she had professional qualifications that might not have been properly awarded.

“If that person doesn’t have the expertise that they have held themselves out to have in court, then that would certainly allow a reasonable juror to doubt the strength of their testimony,” he said.

Whether convictions might be reopened — or even reversed — depends on how critical the analyst’s lab work and testimony were to the guilty verdict, Christine Bartholomew, a UB law professor with expertise in evidence handling, told Investigative Post. 

She said a defense attorney informed of the certification issue “would have had a field day on cross-examination,” sowing doubt about the reliability of the analyst’s testimony and lab work.

“It’s logical that in some of those cases that testimony was really pivotal, and you’ve now foreclosed a line of questioning that a defense attorney would have been entitled to have,” she said.

“If you and I were standing trial for a crime, these are questions we would want our attorney to be asking about somebody who generated a report that’s being used against us. Right?”

posted 45 minutes ago – January 22, 2026