A U.S. District Court judge released Danbury trash kingpin James Galante from federal detention Friday and let him go home to New Fairfield, where he must stay under strict conditions while his racketeering case is pending.
Judge Ellen Bree Burns warned Galante, owner of Automated Waste Disposal and other companies, that she would not hesitate to order him back to prison if he doesn't follow her conditions.
After putting up his $1.6 million house and two adjacent properties as collateral to post $2 million bail, a smiling but guarded Galante left the courthouse with his wife, Roseanne.
Galante must wear an electronic bracelet and is confined to his house except for emergencies, court appearances and religious reasons.
[...]
Since the indictment, Galante has been in custody at a federal detention center in Rhode Island. Lawyer Hugh Keefe had argued he couldn't prepare a defense because his contact with his client was limited.
In a court document made available Friday, prosecutors call Galante "ill-tempered," "volatile," and a "bully," and say they are concerned he will tamper with witnesses or "obstruct justice."
Before making her decision, Burns said she understood the government's concerns.
"But I think I'm going to take that chance," Burns said.
[...]
Burns ordered Galante to stay away from any co-defendants in the case or potential witnesses or targets of the investigation. She said he can't possess or have access to a cell phone or computer. A device called a "pen register" should be installed to monitor calls.
Burns said she was worried about the potential for calls from cell phones, which cannot be traced as easily.
Keefe said Galante will have to be responsible for not using any cell phones.
"How are we going to know?" Burns asked.
"There are some things you are going to have to take on faith," Keefe said.
His wife, Roseanne, said she would not keep or allow their children to keep a cell phone in the home. Burns also ordered her to stop any visitors from bringing a cell phone into the house.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
