Mayor Mark Boughton and state Sen. Michael McLachlan have asked the courts to delay their depositions under oath in the Danbury 11 case until after the fall elections.
Boughton, a Republican candidate for lieutenant governor, and McLachlan, a Republican who is running for re-election to the legislature, were scheduled to speak under oath about the case later this month.
According to a motion recently filed in federal court, the politicians believe both campaigns will require "intensive preparation over the next several months" and "respectfully ask the courts indulgence to allow Mayor Boughton and Senator McLachlan to be deposed after the election is over."
I call bullshit and this is why.
Boughton and McLachlan scheduled deposition has been well know for months...in fact, the date has been known since late last year. Both lying politicians had PLENTY of time to get their facts together so their latest excuse doesn't even pass the smell test. This whole extension is only a tactic Boughton is using in order to have more time to offer another settlement to the plaintiffs before having to admit to the public that he LIED.
Those who have closely followed this case KNOW that Boughton and McLachlan LIED to the residents of Danbury in regards to several facts in this out besides stating from Dec 2006 to Sept 2007 that Danbury PD played NO PART IN THE RAID. Now that Boughton is attempting to become Lt. Gov, he's doing everything in his power to avoid having this case (and his LIES regarding details of the case) blow up in his face...and that goes DOUBLE for McLachlan.
At this point, this case is beyond money or even the plaintiffs in this case. This whole matter goes beyond Danbury and the state of Connecticut. This case is now a national matter which will pick up national attention as the issue of immigration picks up steam. In short, there is EVERY indication that Boughton overstepped his bounds of mayor in the 2006 raid and his story about Danbury's role in the matter has changed significantly over time. After all of his lip service and tough talking to the Yale Law Students and those who are on the side of the plaintiffs, when it come time for Boughton to face the music, he folds like a cheap suit.
Regardless on how the judge ruled in Boughton's latest delaying tactic, although I know that plaintiffs have been though a lot waiting for justice to be served, I hope they have the patience to reject any offer from the city and force Boughton and McLachlan to be sworn under oath and be forced to finally tell the truth.
Those who know Boughton and his ilk were lying since day one about this case waited over three and a half years for this moment, and regardless of his delaying tactics, if the plaintiffs hold strong, Boughton's lies will eventually be exposed to the public.
If Boughton is so confident about his day in court, I'm sure he'll be open to allowing the public to see his entire deposition...hell, I sure he wouldn't object to having his deposition videotaped for the city/state/nation to view.
...come on Mark back up your cowboy talk and with something we can believe in for a change and make your deposition public...I dare you tough guy.
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.
