THE FLYNN DOCTRINE — AND THE MAN NOW CAUGHT IN IT

By Frank Parlato

Two cases center on former Erie County District Attorney John Flynn. In one, Flynn brought the accusation. In the other, he is the accused.

He set the rule. Believe the accuser. Act fast. Don’t wait.

Now the rule comes back to him.

RYAN FLYNN — THE ACCUSER THEY CANNOT EASILY EXPLAIN AWAY

Ryan Flynn, 32, the younger cousin of John Flynn, alleges that the former DA sexually abused him twice when he was around 10 years old during visits to his father’s home.

Ryan Flynn alleges the first incident occurred when he awoke to find John Flynn lying across his legs and touching him. The second time, he says, Flynn exposed himself and asked him to perform sexual acts. He said no. 

He told no one then.

Years later, he went to the Buffalo police in the South Buffalo police district, where it allegedly happened. Not long after reporting the alleged abuse, Ryan Flynn was jailed at the Erie County Holding Center after prosecutors cited an anonymous online post they said placed John Flynn’s wife “in fear.” He was not accused of violence but of an anonymous online threat. The account that posted the message, “NeedMoreHaters1,” continued posting after Ryan Flynn had already been jailed, undermining the allegation. Despite that, he is currently being held without bail.

INSIDE THE HOLDING CENTER — WHERE THE MESSAGE IS CLEAR

During a recorded call, Ryan described conditions that would not pass inspection at a modern correctional facility: rusted fixtures, broken sinks, and cells “grandfathered in” despite being unfit for human housing.

The physical conditions were not the primary concern. More troubling was the message circulating inside the jail—that because of whom Ryan Flynn accused, he was considered fair game.

Ryan says an inmate named Chico Garcia sucker punched him in the head — a blow that left him with a concussion. He filed a police report. No charges were filed against the attacker. Garcia, he said, admitted he got $1000 for the attack.

Another inmate told this reporter, on the record, that a guard offered commissary rewards to anyone who would “take Ryan Flynn out.” Those were the words. Loud enough for men along the corridor to hear.

 THE CHARGE AGAINST RYAN — A CASE WITHOUT AN ACCUSER

According to Ryan:

• Tonawanda police told him they discovered the post.
• A sworn deposition from Deborah Flynn says she discovered it.
  Both cannot be true.

The message came from an anonymous account — not from Ryan’s phone, not from any device tied to him. The account continued posting about Flynn even after Ryan was jailed, when he had no access to the internet or social media. Still, prosecutors elevated the matter to a violent felony, citing Mrs. Flynn’s fear. Fear alone cannot justify holding a man without bail under New York law. They have to prove he is behind the threats – not just claim it.

Ryan is being held in general population while officials claim he is too mentally unstable to be released. In New York, if a defendant were truly incompetent, he could not legally remain in a county jail, let alone general population. He would have to be transferred immediately to a secure psychiatric hospital under CPL § 730.

If authorities genuinely believed he was mentally unfit, the current arrangement would be illegal. If they do not believe it, the justification collapses entirely. There is no middle interpretation.

THE DOCTRINE JOHN FLYNN CREATED — AND APPLIED TO PIGEON

To understand the hypocrisy, we return briefly to the Pigeon case — not for Pigeon, but for Flynn, the prosecutor.

First, one must understand the background.

Flynn was not a stranger to G. Steven Pigeon.  Flynn and Pigeon, a political consultant, had been adversaries for years. In 2007, Pigeon arranged minor-party endorsements that helped Frank Sedita secure the Democratic nomination for District Attorney instead of Flynn, forcing Flynn to drop out despite being the frontrunner. 

Eight years later, when Flynn finally got the chance to run again, Pigeon backed his opponent. In a bitterly contested race, Flynn actually used Pigeon, not the candidate, as his foil, saying that Pigeon was pulling the strings for the candidate, referring to his role as a former party boss.

G. Steven Pigeon (above) was charged by then-District Attorney John Flynn for a rape based on the uncorroborated word of a mentally-troubled teenager.

In December 2021, Flynn charged Pigeon with predatory sexual assault, an offense carrying a potential life sentence and the highest child-sex charge New York offers. The allegation was stark: a 9-year-old child, one Christmas Eve, one drive home. No grooming. No pattern. No prior claims of sexual misconduct against Pigeon in decades of public life.

Flynn stood at the podium at the press conference and delivered the doctrine that governs him still:

“This is a he-said, she-said case… and I believe the child.”
“I stand with the child.”
“I do not need corroborating evidence.”

When a reporter asked whether he had more than the girl’s word, Flynn refused to answer. He admitted he never spoke to Pigeon before charging him.

Later, as the trial approached, the charges collapsed. The life sentence evaporated.

What began as “big-boy rape” (as Flynn himself called it at the press conference) ended with one molestation charge and eight months in jail (and no probation).  That is not how prosecutors behave when they trust their evidence. That is how they behave when they need an exit.

But it was an offer Pigeon could not refuse, not willing to gamble life in prison in Attica, against an uncertain jury, an uncertain judge, and a proscution that was willing to cheat to win, he said. 

But that exit almost destroyed Pigeon’s life — the registry, the stigma, the ruin.

Flynn achieved what he wanted.

WHAT WASN’T DISCLOSED IN THAT CASE

At the time of charging, Flynn did not tell the public:

• The girl – Pigeon’s niece – had a documented history of fabrications.
• It is undisputed that Pigeon was never alone with the child except once in their entire lives, during a restaurant outing. It was not at his request, but her mother’s. He had never tried to groom her beforehand or be with her again.
• Her mother had a long record of making false accusations — even against family.
• The accuser’s outcry came five years later, when she was a teenager, following a confrontation with her older brother’s girlfriend about a video with sexualized lyrics directed at her brother.

According to Rita Gralike, the aunt of both Pigeon and the mother of the accuser, Flynn’s files contained suicide notes written before the outcry, but after the alleged incident. In them, the accuser addressed her older brother, writing that they had entered a “very special relationship” months earlier. She expressed distress that her brother had moved out and was living with his girlfriend, writing that he had promised their “special relationship” would continue. She never mentioned Pigeon.

None of that information reached the podium at the press conference when Flynn announced Pigeon’s arrest and declared himself the champion who “stands with the child.”

All of it mattered.

Flynn didn’t reveal it.

Because for Flynn, belief was not a conclusion. It was a weapon. 

APPLY THE DOCTRINE TO RYAN

The question is simple:

If Flynn believed an uncorroborated allegation in a case against his political enemy, why does he reject an uncorroborated allegation now, when it names him?

Ryan’s story is no more implausible than Pigeon’s accuser’s.
In many ways, it is more consistent:

• Ryan voluntarily disclosed as an adult, not as a child, and not under any pressure.
• He named specific locations, dates, and conduct.
• He made a sworn police report.
• He gained nothing — and lost everything — by speaking.

Under Flynn’s own rule, Ryan is the voice to be believed. Under Flynn’s own standard, the investigation should have begun the moment the allegation was made.

Instead, the accuser sits in a violent jail module.
Without bail.
Attacked.
Threatened.
Isolated.
 

Held on stalking charges that appear to collapse under minimal scrutiny.

WHERE THIS LEADS

Ryan Flynn remains in the Erie County Holding Center. If anything happens to him — if he is harmed, silenced, or worse — no one can claim ignorance. 

He reported his own cousin, one of the most powerful prosecutors Erie County has produced. He did what prosecutors tell victims to do: he came forward.

The question now is whether the system he entered protects victims—or protects its former district attorney.

Note: Under the Flynn doctrine, I did not call Flynn first. One of the most shocking aspects of Steve Pigeon’s arrest was that Flynn ordered that none of his investigators interview Pigeon. Pigeon did not even know what the charges were or who the accuser was until Flynn unsealed the indictment. When a reporter asked why his office did not seek to get Pigeon’s side of the story, Flynn replied, “I don’t need to talk to him. I know what he’ll say. He’ll deny it, of course.”

This series will investigate both allegations on the evidence, not on doctrine. We will try to determine whether Pigeon was wrongly convicted and whether Flynn’s accuser is credible, applying the same standard to both cases that Flynn failed to apply as prosecutor. The facts will speak. The doctrine will not.

Frank Parlato

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist, media strategist, publisher, and legal consultant.

Frank Parlato

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist, media strategist, publisher, and legal consultant.

See Full Bio