Attempts to portray Mayor Mark Boughton and state Sen. Michael McLachlan as being "fearful" of being deposed in Danbury 11 civil rights case couldn't be "further from the truth," according to federal court documents filed Tuesday.
[...]
Attorneys for the plaintiffs in the case, a group of day laborers known as the Danbury 11 who were arrested in the city four years ago, filed a response to the delay request that claimed Boughton had been "putting pressure" on local police to do something about day laborers at Kennedy Park, a downtown location where they gathered.
The filing also suggests that depositions from federal immigration agents involved in the raid dispute claims made in the past by Boughton that it was a federal operation and that he had no knowledge of the raid until after it happened.
[...]
Dan Casagrande, an attorney representing the city in the case, stressed in his response filed Tuesday that statements from the federal agents were drawn from "inadmissible hearsay deposition testimony" and that the plaintiffs "virtually trip over themselves" in their filing to create another event to draw media attention.
"Citing inadmissible hearsay deposition testimony and innuendo references to the mayor's perfectly appropriate acts as mayor -- none of which amounts to a scintilla of relevant or admissible evidence of any wrongdoing -- plaintiffs' counsel attempt to create an impression that the mayor and Sen. McLachlan are fearful of presenting themselves for their depositions," the filing says. "Nothing could be further from the truth."
Casagrande also notes in the filing that "the mayor has maintained from the outset that neither he nor the city engaged in any actionable conduct in this matter," and that both officials look forward to the opportunity to answer questions in the case.
Looks like the mayor's spin machine is at full speed.
Look Mark, after all your attempts to weasel out of giving a deposition in this case, it's time to put up for shut up. A quick look at your comments to the media clearly show that YOU LIED when you said that the city of Danbury played NO PART IN THE RAID at Kennedy Park.
Let me REPEAT...at the time of the raid BOUGHTON STATED that the CITY OF DANBURY PLAYED NO PART IN THE RAID. Boughton didn't say that the city offered "logistic" support until MONTHS LATER when the Yale Law Students disclosed that a Danbury Police officer drove the van used in the raid.
As someone who has followed this case from day one and attended just about every single new conference on the case, without a shadow of a doubt, Boughton LIED to the residents of Danbury regarding the city's involvement in the raid as well as his knowledge of the raid. Bougthton has had PLENTY of time to prepare for this case so his lame excuse in trying to delay his testimony until after the election is a joke.
The time for talk is over Mark...it's time to face the music. If you're so confident that you did nothing wrong, why the continued delaying tactics...it's not like you learned that you were being deposed last week?
Heck, I just want to see if you have the nerve to lie under oath in the same manner that you've lied to the people of Danbury during your tenure as mayor.
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.
