"There are a lot of people, including some prominent people, who are breathing easier today because Mr. Galante has disposed of this case," Galante lawyer Hugh Keefe said at the conclusion of the plea hearing Monday in state Superior Court.
Keefe declined to elaborate, but political sources said that Galante had created anxiety when his lawyers served subpoenas notifying more than a dozen candidates, lobbyists and donors that they faced the possibility of being grilled as defense witnesses.
Among those receiving subpoenas, the sources said, were Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton, state senator and Republican congressional candidate David Cappiello, ex-state Sen. Louis DeLuca and lobbyists Joseph Walkovich and Patrick Sullivan.
Prosecutors said they could prove that Galante used straw donors in 2002 to exceed contribution limits to political action committees run by Cappiello, DeLuca and Boughton.
The prosecutors said that Galante used friends, employees and associates of employees to deliver about $40,000 in contributions to the committees. Campaign finance laws limit the amount that any one person can give a political action committee to $1,000 a year.
Let's take a look at what Cappiello did once questioned by the FBI.
State prosecutor Christopher Alexy said in court Monday that Cappiello and Galante first discussed a contribution in the summer of 2002. That fall, Alexy said that Galante gave $15,000 to an employee with instructions to break it into 15 separate $1,000 donations to Cappiello's political action committee.
Alexy said that Cappiello initially did not tell the whole story when questioned by FBI agents about the discussions that led to the contribution. He later clarified the sequence of conversations that resulted in the contribution, Alexy said.
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.
