Disgraced former youth counselor Troy Grant will have find another lawyer to defend him against sexual assault charges if a judge allows his current attorney to quit.
James Diamond, of Danbury, who has represented the 41-year-old Grant since shortly after his arrest, filed a motion in state Superior Court in Danbury seeking permission to withdraw from the case.
In the two-page document, Diamond said the "attorney-client relationship has broken down irretrievably," and Grant "failed to honor the retainer agreement" signed when Grant hired him in early February.
Grant was arrested and charged with numerous sexual assault and risk of injury to minor counts.
In September, Grant rejected two plea deals (one from the prosecutor and the other from the judge) and opted for a jury trial. If convicted, Grant could be sentenced for 100 years in prison.
He's scheduled to appear at Danbury Superior Court tomorrow.
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.
News-Times reporter John Pirro has the latest on this disturbing case.
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.
