<xmp> <body> </xmp>

Attempt to delay testifying DENIED

Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Time: 7:36 PM

Danbury's last honest man has another setback...
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)).

posted by ctblogger at 7:36 PM | Permalink|


Add a comment

© 2017 Hat City Blog | READ, WATCH, AND LEARN.
No part of the content or the blog may be reproduced without prior written permission.


Lowest Gas Prices in Danbury
Danbury Gas Prices provided by GasBuddy.com

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License

make money online blogger templates

Danbury City Charter
Danbury Code of Ordinances
Robert's Rules of Order


Danbury 2005 election results
Danbury 2007 election results
Danbury 2009 election results
Danbury 2011 election results
Danbury 2013 election results
Danbury 2015 election results
City of Danbury calendar

The Mercurial
Danbury News Times
Danbury Patch
Danbury Daily Voice
Tribuna Newspaper
Danbury El Canillita
(Spanish edition)

Danbury El Canillita
(English translation)

Comunidade News
(Portuguese edition)

Comunidade News
(English translation)

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.



Danbury Area Coalition for the Rights of Immigrants v.
U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security
3:06-cv-01992-RNC ( D. Conn. )

(02.25.08) Court docket

(10.24.07) Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Emergency Motion for Protective Order

(09.26.07) Press Release

(12.14.06) Complaint

Barrera v. Boughton, No. 07-01436
(D. Conn. filed Sept. 26, 2007)

(02.25.08) Court Docket

Amended complaint

Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Defendants' Motion to Dismiss State Law Claims

Plaintiffs' Opposition to Motion to Dismiss

Order on Motion to Dismiss

Defendants' Answer to Amended Complaint

NEW HAVEN REGISTER: Immigrant's 2006 arrest was flawed Danbury mayor testifies

(10.05.07 (VIDEO) Boughton mislead the public about Danbury's involvement in raid

(09.18.07) Yale Law Students expose Danbury involvement in raid

(12.14.06) VIDEO: Interview with Yale Law Students at FOI presser

(12.14.06) VIDEO: Danbury 11 FOI complaint media roundup

City Clerk Jean Natale standing next to skinhead sparks outrage

(10.03.06) VIDEO: Danbury 11 rally

(09.29.06) VIDEO: Danbury 11 case deepens

Word of raid spread across the country

(09/29/06) VIDEO: Danbury 11 protest news conference

(09/29/06) Immigrant newspaper "El Canillita" gives best account of ICE day labor raid at Kennedy Park


Dunkin Donuts logo