While observers at the scene estimated the crowd at more than 3,000, mayoral aide Michael McLachlan disputed that, putting the figure at about 1,200 people.
This is bat-shit crazy and anyone who was there knows it. I personally took my video camera and walked the entire protest perimeter that stretched from the lawn between the driveway and sidewalk of City Hall, across Deer Hill Ave, to the First Congregation Church (that blended in with the candlelight vigil), up Deer Hill Ave to the end of the City Hall building where another media crew was conducting interviews.
Like I said earlier, my videotape was bad and I'm still trying to salvage the footage (working with digital is really hard when it goes bad) but again, here's the map and the photographs from Wednesday.
Here's a small slideshow of the crowd.
Now, taking the crowd and counting by blocks of about 50, I easily counted passed 1,500 without breaking a sweat. Idiotic comments like this only increase the anger and heightens the tension in the city.
You would think someone who's running for State Senate would keep his partisan mouth shut and do what he's paid to do as the mayor's aide...like videotaping Boughton's press conferences, warming up the mayor's car, and picking up the mayor's take-out lunch orders. You know, that REALLY HARD POLITICAL work "Sparky" Mike does at City Hall that qualifies him to run for State Senate.
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.
You would think someone who's running for State Senate would keep his partisan mouth shut and do what he's paid to do as the mayor's aide...like videotaping Boughton's press conferences, warming up the mayor's car, and picking up the mayor's take-out lunch orders. You know, that REALLY HARD POLITICAL work 
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.
