A federal magistrate has ruled that the depositions of Mayor Mark Boughton and state Sen. Michael McLachlan as part of the Danbury 11 civil rights lawsuit will go forward.
The decision by Magistrate Donna Martinez Wednesday states that the city did not make "the requisite legal showing" necessary to delay the depositions until after the fall election.
[...]
The response the plaintiffs filed late last week to the city's request for a delay stated that prior depositions in the case by federal agents indicated that Boughton "put pressure" on the city's police department to do something about the day laborers at Kennedy Park.
The plaintiffs also stated in their response that despite claims by Boughton that the city did not order the raid, agents said they became involved only after several requests were made by the city.
[...]
Joel Cohen, a partner with the Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher law firm that is providing pro bono services to the day laborers, said his clients were happy with the court's decision Wednesday that allows the depositions to proceed.
"Our clients are gratified that the court swiftly denied the defendants motion to further delay the case and look forward to deposing Mayor Boughton and Senator McLachlan about their involvement in the events underlying this important civil rights action," Wilson said.
McLachlan is scheduled to be deposed on Friday, while Boughton's deposition is scheduled for Wednesday.
The last of Boughton's stalling tactics have failed and close to four years, the mayor will have to testify UNDER OATH and answer for the statements he made to the press when he stated that the city of Danbury placed NO PART in the raid (something he repeatedly claimed from the time of the arrest (Sept 2006) until it was discovered that DanburyPD drive the van that picked up the eleven day laborers (aprox. 10 months later)).
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.
