Sen. Joe Lieberman is the fourth and most prominent elected official to be tied into the scheme that got local trash tycoon James Galante charged with violating state campaign finance laws. A records review by the Hartford Courant indicates that Galante bundled $14,000, bypassing legal limits, to Lieberman's 2004 presidential bid through the friends and family of employees. (Lieberman hasn't been charged with any wrongdoing.)
Meanwhile, State Sen. Louis DeLuca is under intense pressure to resign due to FBI recordings of him asking Galante to send someone to threaten his grandson-in-law. And Danbury mayor Mark Boughton continues to attest he could not have known a third of his PAC's 2003 intake came from Galante, who was well-connected in the city.
State Sen. David Cappiello looks most likely to emerge from this mess with half a halo.
"About five years ago, one of [Galante's] employees gave me a bunch of checks," says Cappiello, a Republican representing Danbury. "I thought it was strange and went to the authorities and they said it was clear."
Investigators would eventually determine that the $15,000 Galante associates gave to Cappiello's PAC was not "clear." Cappiello says he then split the money between the Red Cross, YMCA, St. Jude's Medical Center, Ability Beyond Disability and Newman's Own. He's washed his hands of Galante's money, but says, "When I met him, he seemed like a nice guy, genuinely concerned about Danbury and I'm not sure all of that was a front... He did give some $3 million to my district."
Well, if Cappiello can do it, should Boughton follow his lead? Heck, while Mark's at it, he should just confess to the April 2003 donations to his re-election campaign as well and also give those contributions over to charity.
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.