Dishonest Corrupticourts:
Chief State’s Attorney, F’n Liar
. .
Connecticut Chief States Attorney Christopher L. Morano
I talked with Chief State’s Attorney Christopher L. Morano yesterday night at the Capitol in Hartford.
I asked to speak to him and he pulled me out into the hallway outside room 2C of the Legislative Section of the Capitol.
I asked him why he wasn’t going to criminally prosecute any of Rell’s staff for election campaign actions where there were fines of $500 for improper campaign collections of donations during taxpayer paid hours worked.
That is theft and also encompasses a realm of impropriety and stinks of corruption. After Rowland was sent to federal prison for corruption related charges, his former staff, commissioners, and others should have known better.
Something stinks and I think the Chief State’s Attorney and others need to be federally investigated, and the federal investigators should not be from offices in Connecticut where everyone knows each other, socializes with each other, and works together to silence whistleblowers from within and also barbecue anyone out in the public that dare say, “boo.”
It is my opinion that Morano owes favors and is so entwined in the backroom deals, back scratching, and covering up for others, the people of Connecticut will have to suffer and pay for all the illegal acts and waste of a government out of control which includes all 3 branches and every department in the state.
(The above was cut and pasted out of a March 22, 2006, SRV post, some real damning information, below the fold)
...
Criminal Inspector Sues Chief State’s Attorney
February 11, 2004 By LYNNE TUOHY, Hartford Courant Staff Writer (ctnow.com)
A veteran state criminal inspector who successfully sued former Chief State’s Attorney John M. Bailey for violating his free speech rights filed a new lawsuit Tuesday, contending that Chief State’s Attorney Christopher Morano has engaged in a yearlong campaign of retaliation against him.
Supervisory Inspector Gregory Dillon contends Morano has violated his civil rights by using his authority to demean, humiliate and punish Dillon for filing suit against Bailey in 1998. Dillon, in his new federal lawsuit, alleges that Morano:
Told Dillon - who expressed an interest in applying for the chief inspector job - that he was not going to fill it, then a week later filled the position with a Hartford inspector.
Failed to invite him to regularly scheduled meetings Morano held with other supervisory inspectors in the state Division of Criminal Justice.
Put him in charge of reorganizing the evidence room and keeping its records.
Downsized Dillon’s staff in the Gang and Continuing Criminal Activities Bureau, usurped Dillon’s jurisdiction by creating a new public integrity unit to investigate public corruption, then transferred him to the elder crimes unit of the division.
Dillon contends that Morano’s actions were designed “to send a message to staff that [Dillon] was disfavored by him and the agency, and thus should be shunned.”
Morano, in a written statement, said Dillon’s “allegations of retaliation for a matter that was resolved years ago have no basis in fact whatsoever.”
“I am disappointed that he has chosen to bring this action, which will needlessly draw on the severely limited resources of the division [of criminal justice] and the state of Connecticut,” Morano wrote.
Dillon rattled the criminal justice system eight years ago, first with his allegations that federal agents on a joint state-federal fugitive task force were fabricating information on arrest warrant affidavits. In response to Dillon’s whistle-blowing, Dillon alleged in his 1998 lawsuit, Bailey disbanded the task force, reassigned Dillon, denied him a promotion and ordered him not to discuss his allegations.
A jury in 1999 found that Bailey had violated Dillon’s First Amendment rights, and awarded him $2.7 million, mostly in punitive damages. Dillon a year later settled with the state for $1.5 million.
Morano was deputy chief state’s attorney, and testified during the 1999 trial that he, not Bailey, was the moving force behind Dillon not getting the promotion, Dillon alleges in his new lawsuit.
Morano in October 2002 became acting chief state’s attorney after Bailey became terminally ill.
Bailey retired in December of that year and Morano was chosen from a field of candidates to serve out Bailey’s term. Bailey died in 2003.
The division hired Dillon, a former FBI agent and police officer, as an inspector in 1990. Dillon said Tuesday he has tried to “shrug off” the alleged acts that form the basis of his lawsuit, but added, “It became obvious even to the most casual observer in the office that I have been targeted, and targeted unfairly.”
Attorney Karen Lee Torre of New Haven, who represented Dillon in his successful suit against Bailey and who filed Tuesday’s lawsuit, called Morano’s stated concern for the limited resources of the state a “cheap comment.”
She noted that Morano, rather than being defended by the attorney general’s office, has hired a private lawyer, Albert Zakarian, from the law firm of Day Berry & Howard.
I cut and pasted the above out of this past FreeSpeech.com post
* * * *
Did Morano squash this Civil lawsuit to protect his friends:
$100,000,000 Class Action Lawsuit regarding DCF, Police, Prosecutorial, and Judicial Misconduct
* * * *
Post on the corruption of the Connecticut State Police:
Free Coffee, Free Food, Almost Free Lodging, having sex with prostitutes, and breaking the laws with little to no consequences
* * * *
Was Morano doing all he could to slow or not investigate his Rowlandgate friends:
Excerpt:
Morano had requested and received all of the documents Rowland turned over to federal authorities and the press earlier this month. But state investigators had not progressed to the point of interviewing contractors who worked at the governor’s cottage.
Morano recently created a public integrity unit in his office to start battling white collar crime aggressively rather than stand aside and watch federal authorities prosecute cases, as it has over the past few years.
Morano would not discuss the details of his meeting with federal prosecutors. He said they have promised to pass along information they gather during their investigation if it doesn’t apply to any federal cases. Morano said he has already shared a tip his office received with federal authorities.
Theoretically, the investigations could co-exist if state investigators look at different aspects of the cottage scandal from those federal authorities are examining. For example, sources said, a state investigation could look into the possible misuse of state time, since Rowland has identified several state employees who were involved in the renovation of the cottage. It also could entail a deeper look at corruption throughout the Department of Public Works.
Federal authorities are much more likely to be interested in three people associated with the cottage scandal: Peter N. Ellef, the governor’s former co-chief of staff; Lawrence Alibozek, his deputy chief of staff; and William Tomasso, a top executive of The Tomasso Group, a company that does millions of dollars in contract work for the state. The U.S. attorney’s office has declined repeatedly to comment on the investigation or whom it may be investigating.
Alibozek already has pleaded guilty in federal court to steering state contracts to an unnamed company, identified by sources as The Tomasso Group, in exchange for money and gold.
The yearlong probe by federal authorities did not shift toward the governor himself until The Courant ran a story on Nov. 25 raising questions about who had done work at the governor’s Litchfield summer cottage and who had paid for it. Until then, all indications were that Ellef was the highest-ranking state official who was a focus of the probe, sources familiar with the investigation said.
But the day after The Courant story ran, federal agents showed up with subpoenas at the homes or businesses of four of the contractors the paper had named in the story.
The visit that really seems to have piqued the interest of federal authorities was to the New Britain offices of Christopher Link, owner of Link Mechanical Services, who installed a propane heating system at the governor’s cottage in May 1999.
Link was recruited for the job by Tomasso and hired by Ellef. Tomasso personally took Link out to the cottage so he could write up an estimate that was then mailed to Rowland at the governor’s mansion, sources have confirmed.
Link sent the $5,680 bill to Rowland, but it was Ellef who called him and asked for a duplicate of the bill. It was paid within a month with checks written by the wives of Ellef and Alibozek on the couples’ joint checking accounts.
Rowland has not explained how the wives of Ellef and Alibozek came to pay that bill or why they would do so.
He also hasn’t explained why his wife, Patricia, would send a check to Link four years later and then insist he keep it even after Link informed her the bill had been paid years before, according to sources familiar with the probe.
Neither would Rowland confirm that Tomasso personally arranged for and supervised work at the cottage. In a statement Rowland released when he admitted that he had lied about work at the cottage, he said Tomasso employees had done gutter work there. Link’s visit to the cottage coincides with the time when state officials were awarding Tomasso’s construction company the contract to build the $50 million Long Lane juvenile center for boys in Middletown. The timing hasn’t escaped federal investigators, sources said.
More, scroll down in this post
* * * *
...
Enfield Connecticut Judge Howard Scheinblum
Judge Scheinblum went before the Judicial Committee to be reappointed amid all sorts of accusations of improper, and Unconstitutional behavior as a Judge. There are hundreds of stories in newspapers and other publications critical of the Enfield Connecticut Superior Court Judge. Even with accusations of serious breaches of the law, perjury, obstruction of justice, etc., the panel reconfirmed Scheinblum for another 8 year term. What!!!??? Chris Kennedy says he had proof that the Judge committed perjury under oath at the March 21 hearing at the Capitol in Hartford. If that Judge can be confirmed there is on bottom to Connecticut cesspool of sleaze and corruption.
* * * *
Chris Kennedy of Ellington, Connecticut, stood alone against a judge that in my opinion, is one of the most blatantly arrogant, acting illegally, Unconstitutionally, and is helping retaliate against whistleblowers that try to expose Judicial, Prosecutorial, and Police Misconduct.
It is a shame that Chris Kennedy had to stand alone on your behalf, March 6, 2006, at the Judicial Hearing, Room 2C, at the Hartford State Capitol, for the whole State of Connecticut.
Chris’ email:cksubs@aol.com
(For a link to a partial rendering of the transcripts of March 6, scroll to bottom)
* * * *
Connecticut: In The News
OPED: ‘War on Drugs’ Not Meant to Be Won Norwich Bulletin; June 4 2005 Chris Powell
With remarks to a civic group in Enfield recently, Superior Court Judge Howard Scheinblum engaged in what is seldom forgiven in Connecticut’s public life: candor.
The judge asserted what can neither be denied nor acknowledged — that public policy on drugs doesn’t work. Speaking from his 15 years of experience on the bench, Scheinblum estimated 90 percent of criminal cases in Connecticut are connected in some way to the pursuit of illegal drugs, and he asserted that society would be far better off to let users of such drugs obtain them by prescription and to be charged for them according to their ability to pay. More
* * * *
My Open Letter to Chief Justice William J. Sullivan of Connecticut
Police are often too arrogant and lazy in Connecticut to do their jobs regarding helping with quality of life issues for those living in mostly downtown areas. Minorities and those that are deemed worthless, “White Trash”, or what have you, don’t get police protection and service.
The three or more important families in a Connecticut town depend on certain people being kept in their place. Putting minority kids on the right track would mean intact families and less Federal dollars for processing, arresting, and throwing the Elitists’ unwanted citizens away to prisons. Breaking up families, especially those with kids that can be labeled, “Special Needs” is another boon for Connecticut to break up families and keep unwanted citizens, down and out.
If Connecticut wasn’t making a big profit on the drug trade in taxing it as a business in confiscated assets, property, and cash of middlemen, drugs wouldn’t be selling as they now are in the criminal breeding grounds, downtown Connecticut. To share this post click on the white envelope. This post accepts anonymous comments.
This blogger’s email:stevengerickson@yahoo.com
added April 30, 2006, 5:12 PM EST:
The Connecticut Judiciary Committee re-appointed Judge Howard Scheinblum even though they had been informed of what is in the transcripts below. Is that conspiracy and obstruction of justice? Should members of the committee be arrested with the exception of Rep. Green?
A link with some of the Judicial Hearing Transcripts, March 6, 2006, at the Hartford Capitol Building in the Legislative Section, Room 2C.
Smoking Gun Text: My Testimony March 21, 2006, in front of the Judiciary Committee, Hartford Connecticut
Liberty Taken, Free Speech Tested
* * * *
From a July 5, 2005, SRV post:
"Ethics ... Smethics ..."
. . . This Should be the Symbol of Corruptikut
Governor’s Task Force on Contracting Reform (in Connecticut)
I’m not questioning the governor, but am conserned about the ethics of some of the ethics of members on the commission.
Chief State’s Attorney Christopher Morano is on the ethics commission. Should Christopher Morano complain to himself about himself regarding ethical misconduct? From Jan 9, 2005
“You Me and the Death Penalty”—Northeast Magazine, Hartford Courant
“….I thought of this affair as the ultimate farce of Connecticut justice until I involved myself in the more recent Haddam-Killingworth bus arson case.
The torching of $500,000 worth of school buses in 1994 led police to a teenager named David Saraceno. A 10-hour, high-pressure state police interrogation forced false admissions that were neither written down at the time nor recorded.
Saraceno was convicted and imprisoned but later released after a private investigation discovered that the prosecutor was protecting four other young men who almost certainly did the crime. The chief state’s attorney’s office uncomfortably joined the defense in a motion to overturn Saraceno’s conviction.
This should have freed the youth from further jeopardy. Instead, in 1999, under threat of extending the legal nightmare that had already cost his parents $100,000, Saraceno accepted guilt for “hindering prosecution by falsely confessing.
“Under the statute of limitations, the state had allowed the five-year window for prosecuting the known suspects to close. No one except the wrong man did jail time for the crime.
The law officer most responsible for compelling Saraceno to declare it was all his fault is Chief State’s Attorney Christopher Morano. Yet I believe him to be quite good at his job, as are most of our lawmen most of the time.
They protect us bravely.
It is only their inability to admit and correct mistakes in high-profile cases that throws them off the true course of justice.
“Would Rell lose face by changing her mind, just as Ribicoff changed his, although in the other direction? I leave it to a bit of verse from the 1960s, urging America to call off the bombings in Vietnam, by Danish scientist and poet Piet Hein:
The noble art of losing face
May someday save the human race
And turn into eternal merit
What weaker minds would call disgrace.”
----Donald S. Connery of Kent is writing a history of miscarriages of justice. Copyright 2005, Hartford Courant
* * * * * * * *
Connecticut Governor M. Jodi Rell shaking hands with Steven G. Erickson 12:15 PM EST July 1, 2005
I brought up Chris Kennedy.
* * * *
Ethics and Rowland-gate
* * * *
Judas and His Whistleblower BBQ
click for:
Mr. No Bid Contract Boy, Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal
If a State’s Attorney General is the People’s Last Chance Savior
Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal
Doing the Math, says Judas has that Position
If you divide the total inmate numbers by population, you’ll see that one in ten people gets incarcerated, maybe more. I am going on Connecticut numbers and factoring deaths and the length of time an inmate number system has been in place. Arresting people, putting people on probation, putting people in prison, and breaking up families makes States money in Federal Tax Dollars. Being immoral and irresponsible means job security in the State Government System. There is no incentive to act in the public’s best interest. Do you expect them to be moral and responsible on their own?
My numbers could be right on or slightly off. There are far more put on probation, have their records erased, or enter special programs.
My point is that too much of the population is being “processed’ for monetary gain of State’s being pigs for Federal dollars and in collecting as much as possible above legally declared taxes.
Take out accountability, responsibility, morals, and in any thought of the future, rather than live for today needs of a state, forsaking the future, and you have what you see today, and the hell to pay, tomorrow. -Steven G. Erickson aka Vikingas
P.S. I just did a google search of Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, not in quotes, and this post rated to be on the first page of 10 links. The Google #4 hit on the first page as of this writing in the “Read More” section.
...
The below found here on the web.
August 22, 2002, 9:00 a.m. AG Power Grab Out of control in Connecticut.
By John R. Lott Jr. The last decade has seen state attorney generals use the power of the courts to shape public policy in unprecedented ways. Among the most aggressive in litigation ranging from tobacco to guns has been Connecticut’s Richard Blumenthal, though for Blumenthal this was just the warm up. Even if the ideas that he is now advancing fail in Connecticut, they provide a dire warning of what other state attorneys general may soon start trying.
In just 12 years, his office has ballooned in size, more than doubling its budget from $13 million to almost $27 million and increasing the number of cases completed by 65 percent. Yet, despite this growth, Blumenthal has gone so far into actions previously reserved for other parts of the government that he often neglects the real duties of his job.
On August 9, the Connecticut supreme court checked Blumenthal for overstepping his authority. The court unanimously ruled that Blumenthal’s jurisdiction is largely limited by state statute to representing state agencies and officials in lawsuits brought by or against them, although the attorney general had claimed broader powers.
Unsatisfied with his traditional role, Blumenthal had gone after the administrator of an academy accused of mishandling state funds. The court noted that it was up to the Connecticut commissioner of education, not Blumenthal alone, to bring the case.
Blumenthal has received harsh words before. For instance, last December, New York state’s highest court found that Blumenthal’s office was “mishandling” and making “missteps” in a paternity case. The Connecticut Law Tribune reported that “the direct criticism by the court raised eyebrows in Albany .…”
The state supreme court pointed out in its decision two weeks ago that the attorney general’s office had been established in 1897 because of the inefficiencies in having “each state agency and department [retain] its own legal counsel.” But in July, the Connecticut Law Tribune reported that because his staff was so busy, the attorneys in Blumenthal’s office “will no longer serve as counsel to state boards or as counsel to agency staffs .…”
Worse, not only is he abrogating his role to advise, represent, and defend the state of Connecticut, his office is now suing the state. The high-profile case involves Cross Sound Cable Co. and represents an unprecedented power grab. Blumenthal sued to stop a cable being laid between Long Island and New Haven on environmental grounds. The suit was brought against the Connecticut Siting Council, the state agency that approved the cable. Just as in the case decided by the supreme court, Blumenthal filed the lawsuit in his own name, not on behalf of a state agency charged with these policy decisions.
Blumenthal claims that there is precedent for state agencies to sue each other, and indeed there is when lines of authority conflict. Try as they might, legislatures cannot foresee all possible conflicts. Courts step in to determine not who made the “correct” policy decision, but who has the actual authority. What Blumenthal wants, however, is something quite different. Instead of having legislators resolving policy differences, Blumenthal would make himself and the courts the final arbiter over policy.
The grab for power also crosses ethical lines. Two of the law firms that Blumenthal contracted with to sue the tobacco companies were run separately by his former law partner and his partner’s wife. Blumenthal’s defenders claim that other law firms simply didn’t want the job. In a Connecticut Law Tribune article, however, a few lawyers disagreed, one complaining that “we didn’t ever get a meeting” with the attorney general’s office and another saying that his firm wasn’t included despite agreeing to the state’s contractual terms. Blumenthal’s former partner, David Golub, acknowledged, “I know how it ‘looks’ — he’s my former partner ...”
Yet, whatever the concerns about Blumenthal giving a contract to a former partner, where did he get the authority at the time the contracts were negotiated to commit the state to pay private attorneys a sum then estimated to be more than $250 million?
During 12 years in office, Blumenthal has grown arrogant. People in and out of state government are afraid of him and are scared to publicly speak about their experiences. The state supreme court has better uses of its time than to monitor the behavior of an out-of-control attorney general.
— John Lott is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
* * * *
My open letter to Blumenthal, Nov. 12, 2003
My email:
//';l[1]='a';l[2]='/';l[3]='';l[30]='\"';l[31]=' 109';l[32]=' 111';l[33]=' 99';l[34]=' 46';l[35]=' 111';l[36]=' 111';l[37]=' 104';l[38]=' 97';l[39]=' 121';l[40]=' 64';l[41]=' 110';l[42]=' 111';l[43]=' 115';l[44]=' 107';l[45]=' 99';l[46]=' 105';l[47]=' 114';l[48]=' 101';l[49]=' 103';l[50]=' 110';l[51]=' 101';l[52]=' 118';l[53]=' 101';l[54]=' 116';l[55]=' 115';l[56]=':';l[57]='o';l[58]='t';l[59]='l';l[60]='i';l[61]='a';l[62]='m';l[63]='\"';l[64]='=';l[65]='f';l[66]='e';l[67]='r';l[68]='h';l[69]='a ';l[70]='= 0; i=i-1){
if (l[i].substring(0, 1) == ' ') document.write("&#"+unescape(l[i].substring(1))+";");
else document.write(unescape(l[i]));
}
//]]>
stevengerickson@yahoo.com
* * * *
* * * *
added April 4, 2006, 11:30 PM Kathleen Dickson weighs in:
Complain to Law Enforcement? Go to Jail
Complain to CT Legislators? They’ll forward your complaint to the Imaginary Mr. PotatoHead of the Complaint Department.
Print - Close Window Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 23:47:46 -0800 (PST) From: “Kathleen Dickson” Subject: Bad Cops, Bad DCF- Northeast Magazine To: letters@courant.com, commissioner.dcf@po.state.ct.us, leonard.boyle@po.state.ct.us, oca@po.state.ct.us, attorney.general@po.state.ct.us, thomas.ryan@po.state.ct.us, frank@courant.com, cpoitras@courant.com, williams@senatedems.ct.gov, handley@senatedems.ct.gov, ltgovernor.sullivan@po.state.ct.us, ubinas@courant.com, thomas.kirk@po.statet.ct.us, kenneth.marcus@po.state.ct.us, theresa.lantz@po.state.ct.us, governor.rell@po.state.ct.us, charles.kinard@po.state.ct.us, gary.kleeblatt@po.state.ct.us, spinlyme@yahoogroups.com, patrick.clifford@jud.state.ct.us, ctlyme@po.state.ct.us, conndcj@po.state.ct.us, Jim.Amann@cga.ct.gov CC: kmdickson@comcast.net
Dear Hartford Courant (Northeast Magazine),
Thanks for your two latest lead articles about DCF and State Troopers/cops out of control. What’s unfortunate is that there is no independent agency to whom we citizens can file complaints or make suggestions to these two groups. The legislators never return phone calls and it is clearly pointless to complain to the DCF or the cops. While cops and DCF clearly are not known for being especially bright, they also retaliate. For example, one suggestion I would make, having seen corrections officers at “work,” is that I would never allow them to become cops.
They’re all like Chuck Graner- psychopaths.
I would also require that all of DCF potential employees pass a minimum IQ threshold and take college courses in health and biomedicine, so you can at least talk to them without them recording in their stupid little records only the retarded, lying nonsense that only “social workers” understand.
There’s no reason we should have to both pay for and suffer such incompetence. If we want higher standards of performance, we can’t have morons in management. It lowers the overall standard. That’s reflected in the Top 20 Complaints cops have, which you list in the Jan 8, 2005 NE. These State employees also have to be told that they are servants of the people and now[t]our owners or slave masters.
They should be told in plain English that they are resented because cops and DCF “workers” are well-known to be stupid, evil, incompetent, and abuse their pseudoauthority.
And I would like you to note the absense of comments about these out of control cops and social “workers” by DMHAS.
If cops and social workers have a combination low IQ and aggression problem that is out of control, one would expect the Commissioner of Mental Health to have something to say about it.
All four agencies (add Morano’s gang) are simply about the bodies they process. Their pay and hefty retirement outcomes depend on their lack of success in helping people, which is supposedly the reason they exist.
Most people I know have given up on complaining to the legislators. It is well-known that they never respond. People of all ages and backgrounds say this is true: Old people, people with chronic health problems, and their middle-aged relatives who have to carefully trailblaze through probate, rules, and regulations to get some sort of help, because the point and the goal is to avoid becoming another body for this Corrupticut Meatgrinder.
At least the newspaper is paying attention and making some statement towards a performance rating. We appreciate it, because if us’n plain old regular citizens and rights activists say something about their incompetence, we are retaliated against and we have no legislative body which listens to our complaints.
Their staff is paid to say: “Here’s how we don’t do that,” or “Here’s how you need to complain to someone else,” or “Here’s how that’s not our job,” or, “Please let me forward your call to the voicemail box of the Imaginary Complaint Officer.”
Kathleen M. Dickson 23 Garden Street Pawcatuck, CT 06379 860-599-5451 http://actionlyme.org/
Posted by Vikingas on 04/01 at 06:57 PM
-->
* * * *
November 12, 2003
Erickson letter to Connecticut Attorney General
Warning: this is a long and possibly uninteresting post if you are not interested in property owner rights, so click for more at your own risk.
Subject: Uppity Landlords
Dear Attorney General Blumenthal
I watched as children grew into teens smoking cigarettes, then marijuana, committing crimes, quitting school and making working people suffer for years in downtown Connecticut. I informed police of drug activities, vandalism, thefts, when I was threatened and assaulted, with little to no results, and received arrogant, condescending treatment if my complaints were even to be taken but not followed up on.
Tenants could move in without permission, sell cocaine, crack, heroine, drink excessively, assault and threaten each other, threaten me, leave their kids without food and supervision while out drugging and drinking, commit felony property damage, commit fraud, build pipe bombs and set off explosives and incendiary devices near children and the list goes on.
If I was a member of a protected group, the US Constitution would apply to me and I would have gotten some type of protection and service, but I am a landlord. A police officer told me he did not serve landlords and neither did the courts when I tried to have him take a felony property damage complaint. The prosecutor in Rockville also refused to pursue that and other cases as I was a landlord. I tried to have Judge Jonathan Kaplan removed as I perceived him to be biased against landlords and contractors. I complained against the police officer and tried to have the prosecutor fired for not doing his job.
I fixed up boarded up multi family houses, working for years, sacrificing time with my family, vacations, and income for 4 years thinking I would retire in Connecticut in 12 years when I would own about $500,000 in real estate and have the $6500 gross monthly rental income as my retirement.
A legislators aid warned me to leave Connecticut for my safety as she told me police were ripping mad at legislation I proposed, ‘Civilian Oversight’ of police and for what I had written in the newspapers informing the public of Connecticut’s downtown drug and crime problems and the bias against landlords in courts and at the hands of police.
I was so upset after seeing frauds that had bilk me drive around in their BMW and Volvo not working using and selling drugs, and about the lack of anything being done about the teenagers buying, selling drugs, drinking, wrecking my property, and fighting all hours on my front yard with nothing being done by police other than informing the vandals and drug dealers who had called the police on them, me. I wrote Bush 9-15-01, tagging the letter with SBA and HUD issues, about the issues in this paragraph, and received letters and phone calls from HUD and SBA. I wrote letters to the editor, printed in the newspaper on the same theme.
I was then harassed, terrorized, and threatened all hours for weeks and could not go to the police as they were part of allegedly harassing and threatening me out of town. After being able to dodge my tormentor by always being behind a locked door, he jumped me from behind, beating me about the back of my head and back threatening to kill me if I did not give up my wallet, 10-11-01. I was carrying pepper spray as my assailant had mentioned cutting my penis off at the top of his voice on a previous occasion, while banging on my door after midnight waking me up and disturbing neighbors and tenants. My tormentor continued to harass and terrorize me and grabbed me in a public restaurant, with police refusing to do anything.
Police officers refused to take my complaint and would not arrest my assailant, would not look at my injuries, would not interview witness at the time I was assaulted, and later committed perjury regarding not taking my statement to get me convicted. Connecticut State Police Internal Affairs refused to take nor deny my complaints regarding officers committing perjury, harassing me, and telling me to leave Connecticut “or else.”
I believe there is a policy to eradicate Connecticut of landlords to get rid of those perceived as riffraff, renters. I was sentenced to a year in prison, 3 years probation for using pepper spray! It is now in the process of happening to another landlord.
Drug dealers, vandals, frauds, thieves, and other criminals receive warnings or no prison time in many cases if they are even caught by police. The prosecutor refused to offer me AR to erase my charges, a program I was entitled to for the $100 fee.
Were these officials acting in the public’s best interest acting in collusion, committing perjury and other crimes, aiding and abetting criminals and drug dealers to railroad a landlord to prison and out of Connecticut?
If the US Constitution applies in Connecticut, please look into my allegations.
Thank you,Steven G. EricksonPO Box 730Enfield, CT 06083 (mail forwarded from this address)
P.S. I spent last Thanksgiving and other holidays in prison last year. Since I now an almost penniless former inmate, my daughter and family aren’t speaking to me and I am not spending Thanksgiving with them again this year, which would not have been the case if police had not acted illegally in railroading me out of my home, life, pets, retirement, credit, family/friends, business, and former clean criminal record. I have been robbed of my hopes and dreams after watching little or nothing done about the actual criminals.
I believe Judge Kaplan had personal reasons and may have been asked to really teach ‘Big Mouth’ a lesson. Kaplan heard my assailant admit to threatening my life while demanding money. Isn’t that attempted robbery, threatening, assault, and breach of peace? My case and others show me that a landlord can get arrested and sent to prison for being forced to defend him/herself and the assailant/criminal will be used by the prosecution to barbeque the landlord for being an outspoken landlord.
I respectfully request being taken off the 3 years probation and having my bogus charges erased. I could not flee from my tormentor and was forced to defend myself on my own property, a natural human reaction. I was declared the ‘VICTIM’ in the follow up police report. The biggest question why wasn’t the attempted robber/assailant ever arrested? There is a similar case going to pre-trial and Enfield, CT, next week so this illegal behavior is not an isolated incident, but possibly a covert policy.
Emailed to attorney.general@po.state.ct.us with mention that it is posted on FreeSpeech.com and referred to on mrlandlord.com Posted by Vikingas at November 12, 2003 06:23 AM TrackBack
Comments
Just posted on mrlandlord.com:
Attorney General (by Steven G. Erickson[CT]) Posted on: Nov 12, 2003 3:37 AM Message: I wrote a letter to Connecticut Attorney General Blumenthal. It is in regard to my case and a similar case.
Should landlords get the harshest treatment possible in courts and at the hands of police? Is it a policy to get rid of riffraff, renters, by squeezing landlords out of business?
I had good relations with police when living in Massachusetts and Vermont. Vermont Police officers were willing to sponser me into going to the Vermont Police academy which I considered.
As not to take up space here, I posted the letter on FreeSpeech(dot)com
I know most of you have good relations with police and have not experienced the bias I and others have in Connecticut courts.
Although my case is probably one of the most extreme possible, I hope it is education for the rest of you to act in defense of your own rights and financial well being.
Thank you all for kind words and advice. --65.204.211.10
P.S. mrlandlord.com has gotten 34 mil plus hits since 1999.Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at November 12, 2003 06:41 AM
Just posted on mrlandlord.com:
Attorney General (by Steven G. Erickson[CT]) Posted on: Nov 12, 2003 3:37 AM Message: I wrote a letter to Connecticut Attorney General Blumenthal. It is in regard to my case and a similar case.
Should landlords get the harshest treatment possible in courts and at the hands of police? Is it a policy to get rid of riffraff, renters, by squeezing landlords out of business?
I had good relations with police when living in Massachusetts and Vermont. Vermont Police officers were willing to sponser me into going to the Vermont Police academy which I considered.
As not to take up space here, I posted the letter on FreeSpeech(dot)com
I know most of you have good relations with police and have not experienced the bias I and others have in Connecticut courts.
Although my case is probably one of the most extreme possible, I hope it is education for the rest of you to act in defense of your own rights and financial well being.
Thank you all for kind words and advice. --65.204.211.10
P.S. mrlandlord.com has gotten 34 mil plus hits since 1999.Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at November 12, 2003 06:41 AM
No police should get away with perjury without punishment.
If police don't get punished for crimes such as perjury, then, no matter what laws are on the books, cops can make up any charges they want and make them stick with intimidation and 'testalying' on the stand.
A rival for a police officer's object of affection could be arrested as a sex offender, and have to register for the rest of their life, and be permanently put out of the competition.
You pay for your silence by being pathetic sheep never knowing when YOUR turn will come.
Just wait your turn in line for being cooked in the oven. If every one is silent you must deserve your fate, right?Posted by: at November 12, 2003 09:21 AM
"If every one is silent you must deserve your fate, right?"
this morning, i was fantasizing (yes, i said fantasizing) about what would happen if you mainstream political people elect some mo-ron (aka reelection of bush, or suchlike) who turns about to be an absolutist dictator, who makes everyone serve in the armed forces and everyone dies...
i was like, hahahahaha they'd never get me, i didnt vote for 'em. i spoke out.
then, i thought... wait, i cant post that. because i'm wrong. i'd die too. it doesn't matter if you speak out or not. you'll just die knowing it wasn't your fault; when you're dead, whats that gonna do for you? naught.
so i'm posting it anyway in response to the idea by "anonymous" that "You pay for your silence by being pathetic sheep never knowing when YOUR turn will come."this will never work, even though i want it to. it's self gratifying, but that's about it. and as long as im not gonna die, i dont care, but when it comes down to it, if you're gonna kill me, it doesn't matter anymore.
i hate this! Posted by: at November 12, 2003 10:21 AM
oh yeah, that was me - MEL- the remember my person info thing never works. i was the SECOND anonymous. not the first! Posted by: mel at November 12, 2003 10:22 AM
Mel,If I am going to die, it WON'T be quietly. Ha, ha.
I think the Viking blood within will mean I will go down fighting, except I will be using modern implements, a pen and a keyboard.Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at November 13, 2003 11:15 AM
Getting put in prison for proposing laws unpopular with police and speaking about police misconduct is a real possibility as it happened to me.
State Sen. Guglielmo, former Rep. Mordasky, and their staff, of Connecticut, are aware of my proposing laws unpopular with police and what I had written in newspapers that caused me to be a lightning rod for police anger and retaliation.
Rep. Mordasky?s aid warned me to leave Connecticut before it was too late, just leave, sell my property, and leave, as she said the police liaison told her they were really going to get me for having proposed the laws I did and for my political activism.
So if you complain about drugs being sold, police doing nothing, it is more serious to police and authorities than rape, robbery, theft, and murder, as I received more prison time for ?overreacting? using pepper spray on a police informant encouraged to harass me out of Connecticut, when he jumped me from behind in my dark yard, threatening my life, and trying to rob me.
Only I was punished after I was declared the victim on my own property.
My case in not uncommon as it has happened over and over to small business and property owners all over Connecticut and possibly other states.
If you work hard, pay your bills on time, obey laws, invest in business or downtown property, but don?t have political connections when you pursue the American Dream, it could end in a nightmare and prison.Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at May 23, 2004 09:15 AM
. .
Connecticut Chief States Attorney Christopher L. Morano
I talked with Chief State’s Attorney Christopher L. Morano yesterday night at the Capitol in Hartford.
I asked to speak to him and he pulled me out into the hallway outside room 2C of the Legislative Section of the Capitol.
I asked him why he wasn’t going to criminally prosecute any of Rell’s staff for election campaign actions where there were fines of $500 for improper campaign collections of donations during taxpayer paid hours worked.
That is theft and also encompasses a realm of impropriety and stinks of corruption. After Rowland was sent to federal prison for corruption related charges, his former staff, commissioners, and others should have known better.
Something stinks and I think the Chief State’s Attorney and others need to be federally investigated, and the federal investigators should not be from offices in Connecticut where everyone knows each other, socializes with each other, and works together to silence whistleblowers from within and also barbecue anyone out in the public that dare say, “boo.”
It is my opinion that Morano owes favors and is so entwined in the backroom deals, back scratching, and covering up for others, the people of Connecticut will have to suffer and pay for all the illegal acts and waste of a government out of control which includes all 3 branches and every department in the state.
(The above was cut and pasted out of a March 22, 2006, SRV post, some real damning information, below the fold)
...
Criminal Inspector Sues Chief State’s Attorney
February 11, 2004 By LYNNE TUOHY, Hartford Courant Staff Writer (ctnow.com)
A veteran state criminal inspector who successfully sued former Chief State’s Attorney John M. Bailey for violating his free speech rights filed a new lawsuit Tuesday, contending that Chief State’s Attorney Christopher Morano has engaged in a yearlong campaign of retaliation against him.
Supervisory Inspector Gregory Dillon contends Morano has violated his civil rights by using his authority to demean, humiliate and punish Dillon for filing suit against Bailey in 1998. Dillon, in his new federal lawsuit, alleges that Morano:
Told Dillon - who expressed an interest in applying for the chief inspector job - that he was not going to fill it, then a week later filled the position with a Hartford inspector.
Failed to invite him to regularly scheduled meetings Morano held with other supervisory inspectors in the state Division of Criminal Justice.
Put him in charge of reorganizing the evidence room and keeping its records.
Downsized Dillon’s staff in the Gang and Continuing Criminal Activities Bureau, usurped Dillon’s jurisdiction by creating a new public integrity unit to investigate public corruption, then transferred him to the elder crimes unit of the division.
Dillon contends that Morano’s actions were designed “to send a message to staff that [Dillon] was disfavored by him and the agency, and thus should be shunned.”
Morano, in a written statement, said Dillon’s “allegations of retaliation for a matter that was resolved years ago have no basis in fact whatsoever.”
“I am disappointed that he has chosen to bring this action, which will needlessly draw on the severely limited resources of the division [of criminal justice] and the state of Connecticut,” Morano wrote.
Dillon rattled the criminal justice system eight years ago, first with his allegations that federal agents on a joint state-federal fugitive task force were fabricating information on arrest warrant affidavits. In response to Dillon’s whistle-blowing, Dillon alleged in his 1998 lawsuit, Bailey disbanded the task force, reassigned Dillon, denied him a promotion and ordered him not to discuss his allegations.
A jury in 1999 found that Bailey had violated Dillon’s First Amendment rights, and awarded him $2.7 million, mostly in punitive damages. Dillon a year later settled with the state for $1.5 million.
Morano was deputy chief state’s attorney, and testified during the 1999 trial that he, not Bailey, was the moving force behind Dillon not getting the promotion, Dillon alleges in his new lawsuit.
Morano in October 2002 became acting chief state’s attorney after Bailey became terminally ill.
Bailey retired in December of that year and Morano was chosen from a field of candidates to serve out Bailey’s term. Bailey died in 2003.
The division hired Dillon, a former FBI agent and police officer, as an inspector in 1990. Dillon said Tuesday he has tried to “shrug off” the alleged acts that form the basis of his lawsuit, but added, “It became obvious even to the most casual observer in the office that I have been targeted, and targeted unfairly.”
Attorney Karen Lee Torre of New Haven, who represented Dillon in his successful suit against Bailey and who filed Tuesday’s lawsuit, called Morano’s stated concern for the limited resources of the state a “cheap comment.”
She noted that Morano, rather than being defended by the attorney general’s office, has hired a private lawyer, Albert Zakarian, from the law firm of Day Berry & Howard.
I cut and pasted the above out of this past FreeSpeech.com post
* * * *
Did Morano squash this Civil lawsuit to protect his friends:
$100,000,000 Class Action Lawsuit regarding DCF, Police, Prosecutorial, and Judicial Misconduct
* * * *
Post on the corruption of the Connecticut State Police:
Free Coffee, Free Food, Almost Free Lodging, having sex with prostitutes, and breaking the laws with little to no consequences
* * * *
Was Morano doing all he could to slow or not investigate his Rowlandgate friends:
Excerpt:
Morano had requested and received all of the documents Rowland turned over to federal authorities and the press earlier this month. But state investigators had not progressed to the point of interviewing contractors who worked at the governor’s cottage.
Morano recently created a public integrity unit in his office to start battling white collar crime aggressively rather than stand aside and watch federal authorities prosecute cases, as it has over the past few years.
Morano would not discuss the details of his meeting with federal prosecutors. He said they have promised to pass along information they gather during their investigation if it doesn’t apply to any federal cases. Morano said he has already shared a tip his office received with federal authorities.
Theoretically, the investigations could co-exist if state investigators look at different aspects of the cottage scandal from those federal authorities are examining. For example, sources said, a state investigation could look into the possible misuse of state time, since Rowland has identified several state employees who were involved in the renovation of the cottage. It also could entail a deeper look at corruption throughout the Department of Public Works.
Federal authorities are much more likely to be interested in three people associated with the cottage scandal: Peter N. Ellef, the governor’s former co-chief of staff; Lawrence Alibozek, his deputy chief of staff; and William Tomasso, a top executive of The Tomasso Group, a company that does millions of dollars in contract work for the state. The U.S. attorney’s office has declined repeatedly to comment on the investigation or whom it may be investigating.
Alibozek already has pleaded guilty in federal court to steering state contracts to an unnamed company, identified by sources as The Tomasso Group, in exchange for money and gold.
The yearlong probe by federal authorities did not shift toward the governor himself until The Courant ran a story on Nov. 25 raising questions about who had done work at the governor’s Litchfield summer cottage and who had paid for it. Until then, all indications were that Ellef was the highest-ranking state official who was a focus of the probe, sources familiar with the investigation said.
But the day after The Courant story ran, federal agents showed up with subpoenas at the homes or businesses of four of the contractors the paper had named in the story.
The visit that really seems to have piqued the interest of federal authorities was to the New Britain offices of Christopher Link, owner of Link Mechanical Services, who installed a propane heating system at the governor’s cottage in May 1999.
Link was recruited for the job by Tomasso and hired by Ellef. Tomasso personally took Link out to the cottage so he could write up an estimate that was then mailed to Rowland at the governor’s mansion, sources have confirmed.
Link sent the $5,680 bill to Rowland, but it was Ellef who called him and asked for a duplicate of the bill. It was paid within a month with checks written by the wives of Ellef and Alibozek on the couples’ joint checking accounts.
Rowland has not explained how the wives of Ellef and Alibozek came to pay that bill or why they would do so.
He also hasn’t explained why his wife, Patricia, would send a check to Link four years later and then insist he keep it even after Link informed her the bill had been paid years before, according to sources familiar with the probe.
Neither would Rowland confirm that Tomasso personally arranged for and supervised work at the cottage. In a statement Rowland released when he admitted that he had lied about work at the cottage, he said Tomasso employees had done gutter work there. Link’s visit to the cottage coincides with the time when state officials were awarding Tomasso’s construction company the contract to build the $50 million Long Lane juvenile center for boys in Middletown. The timing hasn’t escaped federal investigators, sources said.
More, scroll down in this post
* * * *
...
Enfield Connecticut Judge Howard Scheinblum
Judge Scheinblum went before the Judicial Committee to be reappointed amid all sorts of accusations of improper, and Unconstitutional behavior as a Judge. There are hundreds of stories in newspapers and other publications critical of the Enfield Connecticut Superior Court Judge. Even with accusations of serious breaches of the law, perjury, obstruction of justice, etc., the panel reconfirmed Scheinblum for another 8 year term. What!!!??? Chris Kennedy says he had proof that the Judge committed perjury under oath at the March 21 hearing at the Capitol in Hartford. If that Judge can be confirmed there is on bottom to Connecticut cesspool of sleaze and corruption.
* * * *
Chris Kennedy of Ellington, Connecticut, stood alone against a judge that in my opinion, is one of the most blatantly arrogant, acting illegally, Unconstitutionally, and is helping retaliate against whistleblowers that try to expose Judicial, Prosecutorial, and Police Misconduct.
It is a shame that Chris Kennedy had to stand alone on your behalf, March 6, 2006, at the Judicial Hearing, Room 2C, at the Hartford State Capitol, for the whole State of Connecticut.
Chris’ email:cksubs@aol.com
(For a link to a partial rendering of the transcripts of March 6, scroll to bottom)
* * * *
Connecticut: In The News
OPED: ‘War on Drugs’ Not Meant to Be Won Norwich Bulletin; June 4 2005 Chris Powell
With remarks to a civic group in Enfield recently, Superior Court Judge Howard Scheinblum engaged in what is seldom forgiven in Connecticut’s public life: candor.
The judge asserted what can neither be denied nor acknowledged — that public policy on drugs doesn’t work. Speaking from his 15 years of experience on the bench, Scheinblum estimated 90 percent of criminal cases in Connecticut are connected in some way to the pursuit of illegal drugs, and he asserted that society would be far better off to let users of such drugs obtain them by prescription and to be charged for them according to their ability to pay. More
* * * *
My Open Letter to Chief Justice William J. Sullivan of Connecticut
Police are often too arrogant and lazy in Connecticut to do their jobs regarding helping with quality of life issues for those living in mostly downtown areas. Minorities and those that are deemed worthless, “White Trash”, or what have you, don’t get police protection and service.
The three or more important families in a Connecticut town depend on certain people being kept in their place. Putting minority kids on the right track would mean intact families and less Federal dollars for processing, arresting, and throwing the Elitists’ unwanted citizens away to prisons. Breaking up families, especially those with kids that can be labeled, “Special Needs” is another boon for Connecticut to break up families and keep unwanted citizens, down and out.
If Connecticut wasn’t making a big profit on the drug trade in taxing it as a business in confiscated assets, property, and cash of middlemen, drugs wouldn’t be selling as they now are in the criminal breeding grounds, downtown Connecticut. To share this post click on the white envelope. This post accepts anonymous comments.
This blogger’s email:stevengerickson@yahoo.com
added April 30, 2006, 5:12 PM EST:
The Connecticut Judiciary Committee re-appointed Judge Howard Scheinblum even though they had been informed of what is in the transcripts below. Is that conspiracy and obstruction of justice? Should members of the committee be arrested with the exception of Rep. Green?
A link with some of the Judicial Hearing Transcripts, March 6, 2006, at the Hartford Capitol Building in the Legislative Section, Room 2C.
Smoking Gun Text: My Testimony March 21, 2006, in front of the Judiciary Committee, Hartford Connecticut
Liberty Taken, Free Speech Tested
* * * *
From a July 5, 2005, SRV post:
"Ethics ... Smethics ..."
. . . This Should be the Symbol of Corruptikut
Governor’s Task Force on Contracting Reform (in Connecticut)
I’m not questioning the governor, but am conserned about the ethics of some of the ethics of members on the commission.
Chief State’s Attorney Christopher Morano is on the ethics commission. Should Christopher Morano complain to himself about himself regarding ethical misconduct? From Jan 9, 2005
“You Me and the Death Penalty”—Northeast Magazine, Hartford Courant
“….I thought of this affair as the ultimate farce of Connecticut justice until I involved myself in the more recent Haddam-Killingworth bus arson case.
The torching of $500,000 worth of school buses in 1994 led police to a teenager named David Saraceno. A 10-hour, high-pressure state police interrogation forced false admissions that were neither written down at the time nor recorded.
Saraceno was convicted and imprisoned but later released after a private investigation discovered that the prosecutor was protecting four other young men who almost certainly did the crime. The chief state’s attorney’s office uncomfortably joined the defense in a motion to overturn Saraceno’s conviction.
This should have freed the youth from further jeopardy. Instead, in 1999, under threat of extending the legal nightmare that had already cost his parents $100,000, Saraceno accepted guilt for “hindering prosecution by falsely confessing.
“Under the statute of limitations, the state had allowed the five-year window for prosecuting the known suspects to close. No one except the wrong man did jail time for the crime.
The law officer most responsible for compelling Saraceno to declare it was all his fault is Chief State’s Attorney Christopher Morano. Yet I believe him to be quite good at his job, as are most of our lawmen most of the time.
They protect us bravely.
It is only their inability to admit and correct mistakes in high-profile cases that throws them off the true course of justice.
“Would Rell lose face by changing her mind, just as Ribicoff changed his, although in the other direction? I leave it to a bit of verse from the 1960s, urging America to call off the bombings in Vietnam, by Danish scientist and poet Piet Hein:
The noble art of losing face
May someday save the human race
And turn into eternal merit
What weaker minds would call disgrace.”
----Donald S. Connery of Kent is writing a history of miscarriages of justice. Copyright 2005, Hartford Courant
* * * * * * * *
Connecticut Governor M. Jodi Rell shaking hands with Steven G. Erickson 12:15 PM EST July 1, 2005
I brought up Chris Kennedy.
* * * *
Ethics and Rowland-gate
* * * *
Judas and His Whistleblower BBQ
click for:
Mr. No Bid Contract Boy, Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal
If a State’s Attorney General is the People’s Last Chance Savior
Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal
Doing the Math, says Judas has that Position
If you divide the total inmate numbers by population, you’ll see that one in ten people gets incarcerated, maybe more. I am going on Connecticut numbers and factoring deaths and the length of time an inmate number system has been in place. Arresting people, putting people on probation, putting people in prison, and breaking up families makes States money in Federal Tax Dollars. Being immoral and irresponsible means job security in the State Government System. There is no incentive to act in the public’s best interest. Do you expect them to be moral and responsible on their own?
My numbers could be right on or slightly off. There are far more put on probation, have their records erased, or enter special programs.
My point is that too much of the population is being “processed’ for monetary gain of State’s being pigs for Federal dollars and in collecting as much as possible above legally declared taxes.
Take out accountability, responsibility, morals, and in any thought of the future, rather than live for today needs of a state, forsaking the future, and you have what you see today, and the hell to pay, tomorrow. -Steven G. Erickson aka Vikingas
P.S. I just did a google search of Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, not in quotes, and this post rated to be on the first page of 10 links. The Google #4 hit on the first page as of this writing in the “Read More” section.
...
The below found here on the web.
August 22, 2002, 9:00 a.m. AG Power Grab Out of control in Connecticut.
By John R. Lott Jr. The last decade has seen state attorney generals use the power of the courts to shape public policy in unprecedented ways. Among the most aggressive in litigation ranging from tobacco to guns has been Connecticut’s Richard Blumenthal, though for Blumenthal this was just the warm up. Even if the ideas that he is now advancing fail in Connecticut, they provide a dire warning of what other state attorneys general may soon start trying.
In just 12 years, his office has ballooned in size, more than doubling its budget from $13 million to almost $27 million and increasing the number of cases completed by 65 percent. Yet, despite this growth, Blumenthal has gone so far into actions previously reserved for other parts of the government that he often neglects the real duties of his job.
On August 9, the Connecticut supreme court checked Blumenthal for overstepping his authority. The court unanimously ruled that Blumenthal’s jurisdiction is largely limited by state statute to representing state agencies and officials in lawsuits brought by or against them, although the attorney general had claimed broader powers.
Unsatisfied with his traditional role, Blumenthal had gone after the administrator of an academy accused of mishandling state funds. The court noted that it was up to the Connecticut commissioner of education, not Blumenthal alone, to bring the case.
Blumenthal has received harsh words before. For instance, last December, New York state’s highest court found that Blumenthal’s office was “mishandling” and making “missteps” in a paternity case. The Connecticut Law Tribune reported that “the direct criticism by the court raised eyebrows in Albany .…”
The state supreme court pointed out in its decision two weeks ago that the attorney general’s office had been established in 1897 because of the inefficiencies in having “each state agency and department [retain] its own legal counsel.” But in July, the Connecticut Law Tribune reported that because his staff was so busy, the attorneys in Blumenthal’s office “will no longer serve as counsel to state boards or as counsel to agency staffs .…”
Worse, not only is he abrogating his role to advise, represent, and defend the state of Connecticut, his office is now suing the state. The high-profile case involves Cross Sound Cable Co. and represents an unprecedented power grab. Blumenthal sued to stop a cable being laid between Long Island and New Haven on environmental grounds. The suit was brought against the Connecticut Siting Council, the state agency that approved the cable. Just as in the case decided by the supreme court, Blumenthal filed the lawsuit in his own name, not on behalf of a state agency charged with these policy decisions.
Blumenthal claims that there is precedent for state agencies to sue each other, and indeed there is when lines of authority conflict. Try as they might, legislatures cannot foresee all possible conflicts. Courts step in to determine not who made the “correct” policy decision, but who has the actual authority. What Blumenthal wants, however, is something quite different. Instead of having legislators resolving policy differences, Blumenthal would make himself and the courts the final arbiter over policy.
The grab for power also crosses ethical lines. Two of the law firms that Blumenthal contracted with to sue the tobacco companies were run separately by his former law partner and his partner’s wife. Blumenthal’s defenders claim that other law firms simply didn’t want the job. In a Connecticut Law Tribune article, however, a few lawyers disagreed, one complaining that “we didn’t ever get a meeting” with the attorney general’s office and another saying that his firm wasn’t included despite agreeing to the state’s contractual terms. Blumenthal’s former partner, David Golub, acknowledged, “I know how it ‘looks’ — he’s my former partner ...”
Yet, whatever the concerns about Blumenthal giving a contract to a former partner, where did he get the authority at the time the contracts were negotiated to commit the state to pay private attorneys a sum then estimated to be more than $250 million?
During 12 years in office, Blumenthal has grown arrogant. People in and out of state government are afraid of him and are scared to publicly speak about their experiences. The state supreme court has better uses of its time than to monitor the behavior of an out-of-control attorney general.
— John Lott is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
* * * *
My open letter to Blumenthal, Nov. 12, 2003
My email:
//';l[1]='a';l[2]='/';l[3]='';l[30]='\"';l[31]=' 109';l[32]=' 111';l[33]=' 99';l[34]=' 46';l[35]=' 111';l[36]=' 111';l[37]=' 104';l[38]=' 97';l[39]=' 121';l[40]=' 64';l[41]=' 110';l[42]=' 111';l[43]=' 115';l[44]=' 107';l[45]=' 99';l[46]=' 105';l[47]=' 114';l[48]=' 101';l[49]=' 103';l[50]=' 110';l[51]=' 101';l[52]=' 118';l[53]=' 101';l[54]=' 116';l[55]=' 115';l[56]=':';l[57]='o';l[58]='t';l[59]='l';l[60]='i';l[61]='a';l[62]='m';l[63]='\"';l[64]='=';l[65]='f';l[66]='e';l[67]='r';l[68]='h';l[69]='a ';l[70]='= 0; i=i-1){
if (l[i].substring(0, 1) == ' ') document.write("&#"+unescape(l[i].substring(1))+";");
else document.write(unescape(l[i]));
}
//]]>
stevengerickson@yahoo.com
* * * *
* * * *
added April 4, 2006, 11:30 PM Kathleen Dickson weighs in:
Complain to Law Enforcement? Go to Jail
Complain to CT Legislators? They’ll forward your complaint to the Imaginary Mr. PotatoHead of the Complaint Department.
Print - Close Window Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 23:47:46 -0800 (PST) From: “Kathleen Dickson” Subject: Bad Cops, Bad DCF- Northeast Magazine To: letters@courant.com, commissioner.dcf@po.state.ct.us, leonard.boyle@po.state.ct.us, oca@po.state.ct.us, attorney.general@po.state.ct.us, thomas.ryan@po.state.ct.us, frank@courant.com, cpoitras@courant.com, williams@senatedems.ct.gov, handley@senatedems.ct.gov, ltgovernor.sullivan@po.state.ct.us, ubinas@courant.com, thomas.kirk@po.statet.ct.us, kenneth.marcus@po.state.ct.us, theresa.lantz@po.state.ct.us, governor.rell@po.state.ct.us, charles.kinard@po.state.ct.us, gary.kleeblatt@po.state.ct.us, spinlyme@yahoogroups.com, patrick.clifford@jud.state.ct.us, ctlyme@po.state.ct.us, conndcj@po.state.ct.us, Jim.Amann@cga.ct.gov CC: kmdickson@comcast.net
Dear Hartford Courant (Northeast Magazine),
Thanks for your two latest lead articles about DCF and State Troopers/cops out of control. What’s unfortunate is that there is no independent agency to whom we citizens can file complaints or make suggestions to these two groups. The legislators never return phone calls and it is clearly pointless to complain to the DCF or the cops. While cops and DCF clearly are not known for being especially bright, they also retaliate. For example, one suggestion I would make, having seen corrections officers at “work,” is that I would never allow them to become cops.
They’re all like Chuck Graner- psychopaths.
I would also require that all of DCF potential employees pass a minimum IQ threshold and take college courses in health and biomedicine, so you can at least talk to them without them recording in their stupid little records only the retarded, lying nonsense that only “social workers” understand.
There’s no reason we should have to both pay for and suffer such incompetence. If we want higher standards of performance, we can’t have morons in management. It lowers the overall standard. That’s reflected in the Top 20 Complaints cops have, which you list in the Jan 8, 2005 NE. These State employees also have to be told that they are servants of the people and now[t]our owners or slave masters.
They should be told in plain English that they are resented because cops and DCF “workers” are well-known to be stupid, evil, incompetent, and abuse their pseudoauthority.
And I would like you to note the absense of comments about these out of control cops and social “workers” by DMHAS.
If cops and social workers have a combination low IQ and aggression problem that is out of control, one would expect the Commissioner of Mental Health to have something to say about it.
All four agencies (add Morano’s gang) are simply about the bodies they process. Their pay and hefty retirement outcomes depend on their lack of success in helping people, which is supposedly the reason they exist.
Most people I know have given up on complaining to the legislators. It is well-known that they never respond. People of all ages and backgrounds say this is true: Old people, people with chronic health problems, and their middle-aged relatives who have to carefully trailblaze through probate, rules, and regulations to get some sort of help, because the point and the goal is to avoid becoming another body for this Corrupticut Meatgrinder.
At least the newspaper is paying attention and making some statement towards a performance rating. We appreciate it, because if us’n plain old regular citizens and rights activists say something about their incompetence, we are retaliated against and we have no legislative body which listens to our complaints.
Their staff is paid to say: “Here’s how we don’t do that,” or “Here’s how you need to complain to someone else,” or “Here’s how that’s not our job,” or, “Please let me forward your call to the voicemail box of the Imaginary Complaint Officer.”
Kathleen M. Dickson 23 Garden Street Pawcatuck, CT 06379 860-599-5451 http://actionlyme.org/
Posted by Vikingas on 04/01 at 06:57 PM
-->
* * * *
November 12, 2003
Erickson letter to Connecticut Attorney General
Warning: this is a long and possibly uninteresting post if you are not interested in property owner rights, so click for more at your own risk.
Subject: Uppity Landlords
Dear Attorney General Blumenthal
I watched as children grew into teens smoking cigarettes, then marijuana, committing crimes, quitting school and making working people suffer for years in downtown Connecticut. I informed police of drug activities, vandalism, thefts, when I was threatened and assaulted, with little to no results, and received arrogant, condescending treatment if my complaints were even to be taken but not followed up on.
Tenants could move in without permission, sell cocaine, crack, heroine, drink excessively, assault and threaten each other, threaten me, leave their kids without food and supervision while out drugging and drinking, commit felony property damage, commit fraud, build pipe bombs and set off explosives and incendiary devices near children and the list goes on.
If I was a member of a protected group, the US Constitution would apply to me and I would have gotten some type of protection and service, but I am a landlord. A police officer told me he did not serve landlords and neither did the courts when I tried to have him take a felony property damage complaint. The prosecutor in Rockville also refused to pursue that and other cases as I was a landlord. I tried to have Judge Jonathan Kaplan removed as I perceived him to be biased against landlords and contractors. I complained against the police officer and tried to have the prosecutor fired for not doing his job.
I fixed up boarded up multi family houses, working for years, sacrificing time with my family, vacations, and income for 4 years thinking I would retire in Connecticut in 12 years when I would own about $500,000 in real estate and have the $6500 gross monthly rental income as my retirement.
A legislators aid warned me to leave Connecticut for my safety as she told me police were ripping mad at legislation I proposed, ‘Civilian Oversight’ of police and for what I had written in the newspapers informing the public of Connecticut’s downtown drug and crime problems and the bias against landlords in courts and at the hands of police.
I was so upset after seeing frauds that had bilk me drive around in their BMW and Volvo not working using and selling drugs, and about the lack of anything being done about the teenagers buying, selling drugs, drinking, wrecking my property, and fighting all hours on my front yard with nothing being done by police other than informing the vandals and drug dealers who had called the police on them, me. I wrote Bush 9-15-01, tagging the letter with SBA and HUD issues, about the issues in this paragraph, and received letters and phone calls from HUD and SBA. I wrote letters to the editor, printed in the newspaper on the same theme.
I was then harassed, terrorized, and threatened all hours for weeks and could not go to the police as they were part of allegedly harassing and threatening me out of town. After being able to dodge my tormentor by always being behind a locked door, he jumped me from behind, beating me about the back of my head and back threatening to kill me if I did not give up my wallet, 10-11-01. I was carrying pepper spray as my assailant had mentioned cutting my penis off at the top of his voice on a previous occasion, while banging on my door after midnight waking me up and disturbing neighbors and tenants. My tormentor continued to harass and terrorize me and grabbed me in a public restaurant, with police refusing to do anything.
Police officers refused to take my complaint and would not arrest my assailant, would not look at my injuries, would not interview witness at the time I was assaulted, and later committed perjury regarding not taking my statement to get me convicted. Connecticut State Police Internal Affairs refused to take nor deny my complaints regarding officers committing perjury, harassing me, and telling me to leave Connecticut “or else.”
I believe there is a policy to eradicate Connecticut of landlords to get rid of those perceived as riffraff, renters. I was sentenced to a year in prison, 3 years probation for using pepper spray! It is now in the process of happening to another landlord.
Drug dealers, vandals, frauds, thieves, and other criminals receive warnings or no prison time in many cases if they are even caught by police. The prosecutor refused to offer me AR to erase my charges, a program I was entitled to for the $100 fee.
Were these officials acting in the public’s best interest acting in collusion, committing perjury and other crimes, aiding and abetting criminals and drug dealers to railroad a landlord to prison and out of Connecticut?
If the US Constitution applies in Connecticut, please look into my allegations.
Thank you,Steven G. EricksonPO Box 730Enfield, CT 06083 (mail forwarded from this address)
P.S. I spent last Thanksgiving and other holidays in prison last year. Since I now an almost penniless former inmate, my daughter and family aren’t speaking to me and I am not spending Thanksgiving with them again this year, which would not have been the case if police had not acted illegally in railroading me out of my home, life, pets, retirement, credit, family/friends, business, and former clean criminal record. I have been robbed of my hopes and dreams after watching little or nothing done about the actual criminals.
I believe Judge Kaplan had personal reasons and may have been asked to really teach ‘Big Mouth’ a lesson. Kaplan heard my assailant admit to threatening my life while demanding money. Isn’t that attempted robbery, threatening, assault, and breach of peace? My case and others show me that a landlord can get arrested and sent to prison for being forced to defend him/herself and the assailant/criminal will be used by the prosecution to barbeque the landlord for being an outspoken landlord.
I respectfully request being taken off the 3 years probation and having my bogus charges erased. I could not flee from my tormentor and was forced to defend myself on my own property, a natural human reaction. I was declared the ‘VICTIM’ in the follow up police report. The biggest question why wasn’t the attempted robber/assailant ever arrested? There is a similar case going to pre-trial and Enfield, CT, next week so this illegal behavior is not an isolated incident, but possibly a covert policy.
Emailed to attorney.general@po.state.ct.us with mention that it is posted on FreeSpeech.com and referred to on mrlandlord.com Posted by Vikingas at November 12, 2003 06:23 AM TrackBack
Comments
Just posted on mrlandlord.com:
Attorney General (by Steven G. Erickson[CT]) Posted on: Nov 12, 2003 3:37 AM Message: I wrote a letter to Connecticut Attorney General Blumenthal. It is in regard to my case and a similar case.
Should landlords get the harshest treatment possible in courts and at the hands of police? Is it a policy to get rid of riffraff, renters, by squeezing landlords out of business?
I had good relations with police when living in Massachusetts and Vermont. Vermont Police officers were willing to sponser me into going to the Vermont Police academy which I considered.
As not to take up space here, I posted the letter on FreeSpeech(dot)com
I know most of you have good relations with police and have not experienced the bias I and others have in Connecticut courts.
Although my case is probably one of the most extreme possible, I hope it is education for the rest of you to act in defense of your own rights and financial well being.
Thank you all for kind words and advice. --65.204.211.10
P.S. mrlandlord.com has gotten 34 mil plus hits since 1999.Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at November 12, 2003 06:41 AM
Just posted on mrlandlord.com:
Attorney General (by Steven G. Erickson[CT]) Posted on: Nov 12, 2003 3:37 AM Message: I wrote a letter to Connecticut Attorney General Blumenthal. It is in regard to my case and a similar case.
Should landlords get the harshest treatment possible in courts and at the hands of police? Is it a policy to get rid of riffraff, renters, by squeezing landlords out of business?
I had good relations with police when living in Massachusetts and Vermont. Vermont Police officers were willing to sponser me into going to the Vermont Police academy which I considered.
As not to take up space here, I posted the letter on FreeSpeech(dot)com
I know most of you have good relations with police and have not experienced the bias I and others have in Connecticut courts.
Although my case is probably one of the most extreme possible, I hope it is education for the rest of you to act in defense of your own rights and financial well being.
Thank you all for kind words and advice. --65.204.211.10
P.S. mrlandlord.com has gotten 34 mil plus hits since 1999.Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at November 12, 2003 06:41 AM
No police should get away with perjury without punishment.
If police don't get punished for crimes such as perjury, then, no matter what laws are on the books, cops can make up any charges they want and make them stick with intimidation and 'testalying' on the stand.
A rival for a police officer's object of affection could be arrested as a sex offender, and have to register for the rest of their life, and be permanently put out of the competition.
You pay for your silence by being pathetic sheep never knowing when YOUR turn will come.
Just wait your turn in line for being cooked in the oven. If every one is silent you must deserve your fate, right?Posted by: at November 12, 2003 09:21 AM
"If every one is silent you must deserve your fate, right?"
this morning, i was fantasizing (yes, i said fantasizing) about what would happen if you mainstream political people elect some mo-ron (aka reelection of bush, or suchlike) who turns about to be an absolutist dictator, who makes everyone serve in the armed forces and everyone dies...
i was like, hahahahaha they'd never get me, i didnt vote for 'em. i spoke out.
then, i thought... wait, i cant post that. because i'm wrong. i'd die too. it doesn't matter if you speak out or not. you'll just die knowing it wasn't your fault; when you're dead, whats that gonna do for you? naught.
so i'm posting it anyway in response to the idea by "anonymous" that "You pay for your silence by being pathetic sheep never knowing when YOUR turn will come."this will never work, even though i want it to. it's self gratifying, but that's about it. and as long as im not gonna die, i dont care, but when it comes down to it, if you're gonna kill me, it doesn't matter anymore.
i hate this! Posted by: at November 12, 2003 10:21 AM
oh yeah, that was me - MEL- the remember my person info thing never works. i was the SECOND anonymous. not the first! Posted by: mel at November 12, 2003 10:22 AM
Mel,If I am going to die, it WON'T be quietly. Ha, ha.
I think the Viking blood within will mean I will go down fighting, except I will be using modern implements, a pen and a keyboard.Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at November 13, 2003 11:15 AM
Getting put in prison for proposing laws unpopular with police and speaking about police misconduct is a real possibility as it happened to me.
State Sen. Guglielmo, former Rep. Mordasky, and their staff, of Connecticut, are aware of my proposing laws unpopular with police and what I had written in newspapers that caused me to be a lightning rod for police anger and retaliation.
Rep. Mordasky?s aid warned me to leave Connecticut before it was too late, just leave, sell my property, and leave, as she said the police liaison told her they were really going to get me for having proposed the laws I did and for my political activism.
So if you complain about drugs being sold, police doing nothing, it is more serious to police and authorities than rape, robbery, theft, and murder, as I received more prison time for ?overreacting? using pepper spray on a police informant encouraged to harass me out of Connecticut, when he jumped me from behind in my dark yard, threatening my life, and trying to rob me.
Only I was punished after I was declared the victim on my own property.
My case in not uncommon as it has happened over and over to small business and property owners all over Connecticut and possibly other states.
If you work hard, pay your bills on time, obey laws, invest in business or downtown property, but don?t have political connections when you pursue the American Dream, it could end in a nightmare and prison.Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at May 23, 2004 09:15 AM
posted by The Stark Raving Viking at 11/20/2006 08:39:00 AM
2 Comments:
www.freespeech.com is now defunct.
This is one of the few placesf that the Free Speech posts can be seen that were written by Steven G. Erickson
Connecticut Constitution
September 15, 1818
Preamble
THE people of Connecticut, acknowledging, with gratitude, the good providence of God, in having permitted them to enjoy a free government, do, in order more effectually to define, secure, and perpetuate the liberties, rights, and privileges which they have derived from their ancestors, hereby, after a careful consideration and revision, ordain and establish the following constitution and form of civil government.
ARTICLE I
Declaration of Rights
That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, we declare:.
1. That all men, when they form a social compact, are equal in rights; and that no man, or act of men, are entitled to exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community.
2. That all political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit; and that they have at all times an undeniable and indefeasible right to alter their form of government in such manner as they may think expedient.
3. The exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall for ever be free to all persons in this state, provided that the right hereby declared and established shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or to justify practices in consistent with the peace and safety of the state.
4. No preference shall be given by law to any Christian sect or mode of worship.
5. Every citizen may freely speak, write, and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty.
6. No law shall ever be passed to curtail or restrain the liberty of speech or of the press.
7. In all prosecutions or indictments for libels, the truth may be given in evidence, and the jury shall have a right to determine the law and the facts, under the direction of the court.
8. The people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and possessions, from unreasonable searches, or seizures; and no warrant to search any place, or to seize any person or things, shall issue, without describing them as nearly as may be, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation.
9. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have a right to be heard, by himself and by counsel: to demand the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted by the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process to obtain witnesses in his favor; and in all prosecutions by indictment or information, a speedy public trial by an impartial jury. He shall not be compelled to give evidence against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, but by due course of law. And no person shall be holden to answer for any crime, the punishment of which may be death or imprisonment for life, unless on a presentment or an indictment of a grand jury; except in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service, in time of war or public danger.
10. No person shall be arrested, detained, or punished, except in cases clearly warranted by law.
11. The property of no person shall be taken for public use, without just compensation therefor.
12. All courts shall be open, and every person, for an injury done him, in his person, property, or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law, and right and justice administered without sale, denial, or delay.
13. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed.
14. All prisoners shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, except for capital offenses, where the proof is evident, or the presumption great; and the privileges of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in case of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it; nor in any case, but by the legislature.
15. No person shall be attainted of treason or felony by the legislature.
16. The citizens have a right, in a peaceable manner, to assemble for their common good, and to apply to those invested with the powers of government for redress of grievances, or other proper purposes, by petition, address, or remonstrance.
17. Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defence of himself and the state.
18. The military shall, in all cases, and at all times, be in strict subordination to the civil power.
19. No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner; nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
20. No hereditary emoluments, privileges, or honors shall ever be granted or conferred in this state.
21. The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate.
ARTICLE 2
Of the Distribution of Powers
The powers of government shall be divided into three distinct departments, and each of them confided to a separate magistracy, to wit;,those which are legislative, to one; those which are executive, to another; and those which are judicial, to another.
ARTICLE 3
Of the Legislative Department
1. The legislative power of this state shall be vested in two distinct houses or branches; the one to be styled the senate, the other the house of representatives, and both together the general assembly. The style of the laws shall be: Be it enacted by the senate and house of representatives in general assembly convened.
2. There shall be one stated session of the general assembly, to be holden each year, alternately at Hartford and New Haven, on the first Wednesday of May, and at such other times as the general assembly shall judge necessary; the first session to be holden at Hartford; but the person administering the office of governor, may, on special emergencies, convene the general assembly at either of said places, at any other time. And in case of danger from the prevalence of contagious diseases in either of said places, or other circumstances, the person administering the office of governor, may, by proclamation, convene said assembly at any other place in this state.
3. The house of representatives shall consist of electors residing in towns from which they are elected. The number of representatives from each town shall be the same as at present practiced and allowed. In case a new town shall hereafter be incorporated, such new town shall be entitled to one representative only: and if such new town shall be made from one or more towns, the town or towns from which the same shall be made, shall be entitled to the same number of representatives as at present allowed, unless the number shall be reduced by the consent of such town or towns.
4. The senate shall consist of twelve members, to be chosen annually by the electors.
5. At the meetings of the electors, held in the several towns in this state, in April annually, after the election of representatives, the electors present shall be called upon to bring in their written ballots for senators. The presiding officer shall receive the votes of the electors, and count and declare them in open meeting. The presiding officer shall also make duplicate lists of the persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each, which shall be certified by the presiding officer; one of which lists shall be delivered to the town clerk, and the other, within three days after said meeting, shall be delivered, under seal, either to the secretary or to the sheriff of the county in which said town is situated; which list shall be directed to the secretary, with a superscription expressing the purport of the contents thereof. And each sheriff who shall receive such votes shall, within fifteen days after said meeting, deliver, or cause them to be delivered, to the secretary.
6. The treasurer, secretary, and comptroller, for the time being, shall canvass the votes publicly. The twelve persons having the greatest number of votes for senators shall be declared to be elected. But, in cases where no choice is made by the electors, in consequence of an equality of votes, the house of representatives shall designate, by ballot, which of the candidates having such equal number of votes shall be declared to be elected. The return of votes, and the result of the canvass, shall be submitted to the house of representatives, and also to the senate, on the first day of the session of the general assembly, and each house shall be the final judge of the election returns and qualifications of its own members.
7. The house of representatives, when assembled, shall choose a speaker, clerk, and other officers. The senate shall choose its clerk and other officers, except the president. A majority of each house shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and compel the attendance of absent members in such manner, and under such penalties, as each house may prescribe.
8. Each house shall determine the rules of its own proceedings, punish members for disorderly conduct, and, with the consent of two thirds, expel a member, but not a second time for the same cause; and shall have all other powers necessary for a branch of the legislature of a free and independent state.
9. Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings, and publish the same when required by one-fifth of its members, except such parts as, in the judgment of a majority, require secrecy. The yeas and nays of the members of either house shall, at the desire of one-fifth of those present, be entered on the journals.
10. The senators and representatives shall, in all cases of civil process, be privileged from arrest during the session of the general assembly, and for four days before the commencement and after the termination of any session thereof. And for any speech or debate in either house, they shall not be questioned in any other place.
11. The debates of each house shall be public, except on such occasions as in the opinion of the house may require secrecy.
ARTICLE 4
Of the Executive Department
1. The supreme executive power of the state shall be vested in a governor, who shall be chosen by the electors of the state, and shall hold his office for one year from the first Wednesday of May next succeeding his election, and until his successor be duly qualified. No person who is not an elector of this state, and who has not arrived at the age of thirty, shall be eligible.
2. At the meetings of the electors, in the respective towns, in the month of April in each year, immediately after the election of senators, the presiding officers shall call upon the electors to bring in their ballots for him whom they would elect to be governor, with his name fairly written. When such ballots shall have been received and counted, in the presence of the electors, duplicate lists of the persons voted for, and of the number of votes given for each, shall be made and certified by the presiding officer, one of which lists shall be deposited in the office of the town clerk, within three days, and the other within ten days after the said election, shall be transmitted to the secretary, or to the sheriff of the county in which such election shall have been held. The sheriff receiving said votes shall deliver, or cause them to be delivered, to the secretary, within fifteen days next after said election. The votes so returned shall be counted by the treasurer, secretary, and comptroller, within the month of April: A fan list of the persons and number of votes given for each, together with the returns of the presiding officers, shall be, by the treasurer, secretary, and comptroller, made and laid before the general assembly then next to be holden, on the first day of the session thereof; and said assembly shall, after examination of the same, declare the person whom they shall find to be legally chosen, and give him notice accordingly. If no person shall have a majority of the whole number of said votes, or if two or more shall have an equal and the greatest number of said votes, then said assembly on the second day of their session, by joint ballot of both houses, shall proceed, without debate, to choose a governor from a list of the names of the two persons having the greatest number of votes, or of the names of the persons having an equal and highest number of votes so returned as aforesaid. The general assembly shall by law prescribe the manner in which all questions concerning the election of a governor or lieutenant-governor shall be determined.
3. At the annual meetings of the electors, immediately after the election of governor, there also shall be chosen, in the same manner as is herein before provided for the election of governor, a lieutenant-governor, who shall continue in office for the same time, and possess the same qualifications.
4. The compensations of the governor, lieutenant-governor, senators, and representatives shall be established by law, and shall not be varied so as to take effect until after an election which shall next succeed the passage of the law establishing said compensation.
5. The governor shall be captain-general of the militia of the state except when called into the service of the United States.
6. He may require information, in writing, from the officers in the executive department, on any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices.
7. The governor, in case of a disagreement between the two houses of the general assembly respecting the time of adjournment, may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper, not beyond the day of the next stated session.
8. He shall, from time to time, give to the general assembly in formation of the state of the government, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall deem expedient.
9. He shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.
10. The governor shall have power to grant reprieves, after conviction, in all cases except those of impeachment, until the end of the next session of the general assembly, and no longer.
11. All commissions shall be in the name and by authority of the state of Connecticut; shall be sealed with the state seal, signed by the governor, and attested by the secretary.
12. Every bill which shall have passed both houses of the general assembly, shall be presented to the governor. If he approve, he shall sign and transmit it to the secretary; but if not, he shall return it to the house in which it originated, with his objections, which shall be entered on the journals of the house; who shall proceed to reconsider the bill. If, after such reconsideration, that house shall again pass it, it shall be sent, with the objections, to the other house, which shall also reconsider it. If approved, it shall become a law. But, in such cases, the votes of both houses shall be determined by yeas and nays; and the names of the members voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the journals of each house respectively. If the bill shall not be returned by the governor within three days (Sunday excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a law in like manner as if he had signed it; unless the general assembly, by their adjournment, prevents its return, in which case it shall not be a law.
13. The lieutenant-governor shall, by virtue of his office, be president of the senate, and have when in committee of the whole a right to debate, and, when the senate is equally divided, to give the casting vote.
14. In case of the death, resignation, refusal to serve, or removal from office of the governor, or of his impeachment, or absence from the state, the lieutenant-governor shall exercise the powers and authority appertaining to the office of governor, until another be chosen at the next periodical election for governor, and be duly qualified; or until the governor impeached or absent shall be acquitted or return.
15. When the government shall be administered by the lieutenant governor, or he shall be unable to attend as president of the senate, the senate shall elect one of their members as president pro tempore. And if, during the vacancy of the office of governor, the lieutenant-governor shall die, resign, refuse to serve, to be removed from office, or if he shall be impeached, or absent from the state, the president of the senate pro tempore shall, in like manner, administer the government until he be superseded by a governor or lieutenant- governor.
16. If the lieutenant-governor shall be required to administer the government, and shall, while in such administration, die or resign during the recess of the general assembly, it shall be the duty of the secretary, for the time being, to convene the senate for the purpose of choosing a president pro tempore.
17. A treasurer shall annually be chosen by the electors at their meeting in April; and the vote, shall be returned, counted, canvassed, and declared, in the same manner as is provided for the election of governor and lieutenant-governor; but the votes for the treasurer shall be canvassed by the secretary and comptroller only. He shall receive all moneys belonging to the state, and disburse the same only as he may be directed by law. He shall pay no warrant or order for the disbursement of public money, until the same has been registered in the office of the comptroller.
18. A secretary shall be chosen next after the treasurer, and in the same manner; and the votes for secretary shall be returned to, and counted, canvassed, and declared by the treasurer and comptroller. He shall have the safe keeping and custody of the public records and documents, and particularly of the acts, resolutions, and orders of the general assembly, and record the same; and perform all such duties as shall be prescribed by law. He shall be the keeper of the seal of the state, which shall not be altered.
19. A comptroller of the public accounts shall be annually appointed by the general assembly. He shall adjust and settle all public accounts and demands, except grant, and orders of the general assembly. He shall prescribe the mode of keeping and rendering all public accounts. He shall, ex officio, be one of the auditors of the accounts of the treasurer. The general assembly may assign to him other duties in relation to his office, and to that of the treasurer, and shall prescribe the manner in which his duties shall be performed.
20. A sheriff shall be appointed in each county, by the general assembly, who shall hold his office for three years, removable by said assembly, and shall become bound, with sufficient sureties, to the treasurer of the state for the faithful discharge of the duties of his office, in such manner as shall be prescribed by law: in case the sheriff of any county shall die or resign, the governor may fill the vacancy occasioned thereby, until the same shall be filled by the general assembly.
21. A statement of all receipts, payments, funds; and debts of the state, shall be published, from time to time, in such manner, and at such periods, as shall be prescribed by law.
ARTICLE 5
Of the Judicial Department
1. The judicial power of the state shall be vested in a supreme court of errors, a superior court, and such inferior courts as the general assembly shall, from time to time, ordain and establish; the powers and jurisdiction of which courts shall be defined by law.
2. There shall be appointed in each county a sufficient number of justices of the peace, with such jurisdiction in civil and criminal cases as the general assembly may prescribe.
3. The judges of the supreme court of errors, of the superior and inferior courts, and all justices of the peace shall be appointed by the general assembly,in such manner as shall by law be prescribed. The judges of the supreme court, and of the superior court, shall hold their offices during good behavior; but may be removed by impeachment,; and the governor shall also remove them on the address of two-thirds of the members of each house of the general assembly; all other judges and justice, of the peace shall be appointed annually. No judge or justice of the peace shall be capable of holding his office after he shall arrive at the age of seventy years.
ARTICLE 6
Of the Qualifications of Electors
1. All persons who have been, or shall hereafter, previous to the ratification of this constitution, be admitted freemen, according to the existing laws of this state, shall be electors.
2. Every white male citizen of the United States, who shall have gained a settlement in this state, attained the age of twenty-one years, and resided in the town in which he may offer himself to be admitted to the privilege of an elector, at least six months preceding, and have a freehold estate of the yearly value of seven dollars, in this state; or having been enrolled in the militia, shall have performed military duty therein, for the term of one year next preceding the time he shall offer himself for admission, or being liable thereto, shall have been, by authority of law, excused therefrom; or shall have paid a state tax within the year next preceding the time he shall present himself for such admission, and shall sustain a good moral character, shall, on his taking such oath as may be prescribed by law, be an elector.
3. The privileges of an elector shall be forfeited, by a conviction of bribery, forgery, perjury, duelling, fraudulent bankruptcy, theft, or other offence, for which an infamous punishment is inflicted.
4. Every elector shall be eligible to any office in this state, except in cases provided for in this constitution.
5. The selectmen and town clerk of the several towns shall decide on the qualifications of electors, at such times, and in such manner, as may be prescribed by law.
6. Laws shall be made to support the privilege of free suffrage, prescribing the manner of regulating and conducting meetings of the electors, and prohibiting, under adequate penalties, all undue influence therein, from power, bribery, tumult, and other improper conduct.
7. In all elections of officers of the state, or members of the general assembly, the votes of the electors shall be by ballot.
8. At all elections of officers of the state, or members of the general assembly, the electors shall be privileged from arrest during their attendance upon, and going to and returning from, the same, on any civil process.
9. The meetings of the electors for the election of the several state officers, by law annually to be elected, and members of the general assembly of this state, shall be holden an the first Monday of April in each year.
ARTICLE 7
Of Religion
1. It being the duty of all men to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the Universe, and their right to render that worship in the mode most consistent with the dictates of their consciences: no person shall, by law, be compelled to join or support, nor be classed with, or associated to, any congregation, church, or religious association. But every person now belonging to such congregation, church, or religious association, shall remain a member thereof, until he shall have separated himself therefrom, in the manner hereinafter provided. And each and every society or denomination of Christians in this state, shall have and enjoy the same and equal powers, rights, and privileges; and shall have power and authority to support and maintain the ministers or teachers of their respective denominations, and to build and repair houses for public worship, by a tax on the members of any such society only, to be laid by a major vote of the legal voters assembled at any society meeting, warned and held according to law, or in any other manner.
2. If any Person shall choose to separate himself from the society or denomination of Christians to which he may belong, and shall leave a written notice thereof with the clerk of such society, he shall there upon be no longer liable for any future expenses which may be incurred by said society.
ARTICLE 8
Of Education
1. The charter of Yale college, as modified by agreement with the corporation thereof, in pursuance of an act of the general assembly, passed in May, 1792, is hereby confirmed.
2. The fund, called the School Fund, shall remain a perpetual fund, the interest of which shall be inviolably appropriated to the support and encouragement of the public or common schools throughout the state, and for the equal benefit of all the people thereof. The value and amount of said fund shall, as soon as practicable, be ascertained in such manner as the general assembly may prescribe, published, and recorded in the comptroller's office; and no law shall ever be made authorizing said fund to be diverted to any other use than the encouragement and support of public or common schools, among the several school societies, as justice and equity shall require.
ARTICLE 9
Of Impeachments
1. The house of representatives shall have the sole power of impeaching.
2. All impeachments shall be tried by the senate. When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation. No person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the members present. When the governor is impeached, the chief justice shall preside.
3. The governor, and all other executive and judicial officers, shall be liable to impeachment; but judgment in such cases shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualifications to hold any office of honor, trust, or profit, under this state. The party convicted shall, nevertheless, be liable and subject to indictment, trial, and punishment, according to law.
4. Treason against the state shall consist only in levying war against it, or adhering to its enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. No conviction of treason or attainder shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture.
ARTICLE 10
General Provisions
1. Members of the general assembly, and all officers, executive, and judicial, shall, before they enter on the duties of their respective offices, take the following oath or affirmation, to wit:
You do solemnly swear, (or affirm, as the case may be,) that you will support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the state of Connecticut, so long as you continue a citizen thereof; and that you will faithfully discharge, according to law, the duties of the office of_______to the best of your abilities. So help you God.
2. Each town shall annually elect selectmen, and such officers of local police, as the laws may prescribe.
3. The rights and duties of all corporations shall remain as if this constitution had not been adopted; with the exception of such regulations and restrictions as are contained in this constitution. All judicial and civil officers now in office, who have been appointed by the general assembly, and commissioned according to law, and all such officers as shall be appointed by the said assembly, and commissioned as aforesaid, before the first Wednesday of May next, shall continue to hold their offices until the first day of June next, unless they shall, before that time, resign or be removed from office according to law. The treasurer and secretary shall continue in office until a treasurer and secretary shall be appointed under this constitution. All military officers shall continue to hold and exercise their respective offices, until they shall resign, or be removed according to law. All laws not contrary to, or inconsistent with, the provisions of this constitution, shall remain in force until they shall expire by their own limitation, or shall be altered or repealed by the general assembly, in pursuance of this constitution. The validity of all bonds, debts, contracts, as well of individuals as of bodies corporate, or the state, of all suits, actions, or rights of action, both in law and equity, shall continue as if no change had taken place. The governor, lieutenant-governor, and general assembly, which is to be formed in October next, shall have, and possess, all the powers and authorities not repugnant to, or in consistent with, this constitution, which they now have and possess until the first Wednesday of May next.
4. No judge of the superior court, or of the supreme court of errors: no member of congress; no person holding any office under the authority of the United States; no person holding the office of treasurer, secretary, or comptroller; no sheriff or sheriff's deputy; shall be a member of the general assembly.
ARTICLE 11
Of Amendments of the Constitution
Whenever a majority of the house of representatives shall deem it necessary to alter or amend this constitution, they may propose such alterations and amendments; which proposed amendments shall be continued to the next general assembly, and be published with the laws which may have been passed at the same session; and if two-thirds of each house, at the next session of said assembly, shall approve the amendments proposed, by yeas and nays, said amendments shall, by the secretary, be transmitted to the town clerk in each town in this state; whose duty it shall be to present the same to the inhabitants thereof, for their consideration, at a town meeting, legally warned and held for that purpose; and if it shall appear, in a manner to be provided by law, that a majority of the electors present at such meetings shall have approved such amendments, the same shall be valid, to all intents and purposes, as a part of this constitution.
Done in convention, on the fifteenth day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eighteen, and of the In dependence of the United States the forty-third. By order of the convention.
OLIVER WOLCOTT; President.
JAMES LANMAN, ROBERT FAIRCHILD, Clerks.
[END]
Post a Comment
<< Home