Bella Vino trial, verdict leaves people asking questions

The contentious, two-week trial between the City of Morganton and Bella Vino owner Emmanuel Manolakas exposed old wounds that were once private, leaving observers to wonder why certain facts were omitted from the trial and what is next for the restaurant.

Two commonly asked questions:

• What’s the status of the Bella Vino lease?

•  Why were the restaurant owner’s previous convictions not included in the trial?

The City has filed several motions in the hopes the jury’s decision will be overturned or, at a minimum, reduce the $705,000 award granted. (See story on page 8A.) Whether Manolakas will file additional lawsuits remains uncertain.

THE BELLA VINO LEASE 

The original 2018 lease agreement stated that the renewal term would commence on Jan. 1, 2023, and expire on Dec. 31, 2027. Morganton’s attorney Louis Vinay said the status of the lease is unclear since it was not specifically determined during the trial.

In his office this week, he provided two options for the lease — either the City and Manolakas operate on a month-to-month rent agreement or the lease is renewed until 2027 with the original provisions.

The lease allowed renewal if the business wasn’t in default. Manolakas attempted renewal, but the City claimed he was in default by being two months behind on rent and utilities. His lease, the City claimed, expired on Dec. 31, 2022. Manolakas said the lease was effectively renewed because the City accepted rent payments from him in 2023.

Those accepted payments reflected an increased renewal rate of $2,550. In 2022, the rent payment was $2,450.

The disputed terms of the lease are still being discussed between each of the parties.

PAST CONVICTIONS 

Before and during the trial, Manolakas’s past legal troubles from his days in Cleveland, Ohio, were a persistent topic of community interest in conversation and social media posts. The topic remains active throughout the community.

Why weren’t Manolaka’s 2004 Ohio convictions mentioned during the Bella Vino trial? Because, state law says that convictions older than 10 years are not relevant (N.C. G.S. 8C-1, Rule 609).

Here is the background. In 2004, Manolakas was found guilty of two counts of gross sexual imposition. He was also indicted for a kidnapping charge but was found not guilty by the court.

From the court records of the Cuyahoga (Ohio) Courthouse, the following information was recorded during his trial.

In July 2004, Manolakas interviewed two female 17-year-old cousins for waitressing positions. The minors were identified in records as S.Y. and L.P.

“During their interview, the owner, Manolakas, asked both victims if they had boyfriends, commented on their pierced tongues, and asked them about oral sex. He asked S.Y. whether L.P. would ‘date’ him and told both victims not to be offended if he patted them on their buttocks, as he did with his other waitresses,” stated in the record.

The two girls had described various incidents with his “inappropriate sexual comments” and fondling, attempting to kiss the girls and touch their breasts and buttocks, and pushing L.P.’s head toward his penis after a comment about oral sex.

The record said that Detective Ciryak testified that both the victim’s written statements were consistent with one another.

“Det. Ciryak testified that Manolakas, although denying the allegations, agreed to ‘admit’ to the crimes if they did not go on his ‘permanent record,’” stated the record.

According to the record, Manolakas was sentenced to a year of probation and was designated a sexually oriented offender due to the victim’s being under the age of 18 years old.