The media reports of the victim in connection with the arrest of property owner Joe DaSilva Jr. stretch beyond the borders of this country.
The tragic death of Ecuadorean Luis Encalada Bueno received a deal of media attention in his homeland back in November of last year. The video on top of this post is from a report by TV Telerama Online/Cuenca Al Dia which was published on Nov 2009 (non-translated). For those who only speak English, the images alone tell the story.
Also, with the assistance of the Tribuna, the News-Times did a write-up which includes a translated article from El Tiempo, a newspaper in Ecuador.
The Ecuadorean man who died in November after an apparent beating on Town Hill Avenue in Danbury left behind a wife and nine children in his home country.
Luis Encalada Bueno, 42, was buried by his family Nov. 29 in his native town of Zhidmad, Ecuador, 23 days after his death in Danbury.
Encalada's family said he immigrated to the United States seven years ago, seeking to earn an income that would help improve living conditions for his family, which includes eight children 18 or younger, two of them special needs youths.
Encalada lived in Connecticut for the full seven years and worked in construction. In the last few weeks of his life, he reportedly found himself unemployed and without money.
"He told us he was looking for work, that the things were not good over there, and that his intention was to stay for another three years and to return home," explained his wife, Hortensia.
"He came home dead," she said.
I encourage you to read the entire piece over at the News-Times website.
Residents crate a makeshift memorial at the location where the alleged assault of Luis Encalada took place (58 Town Hill Ave). Photo by ctblogger 03.03.10.
There was rumblings at the Danbury Superior Court House that an plea deal was about to be reached in the Joe DaSilva manslaughter case...and now it's done.
About 20 minutes ago, DaSilva accepted a plea bargain of negligent homicide (from manslaughter) that has the possibility of sending him to jail for up to 7 years (suspended after 2.5 years).
The deal was done under the umbrella of the Alford doctrine which is the following:
Alford Doctrine: A plea in a criminal case in which the defendant does not admit guilt, but agrees that the state has enough evidence against him or her to get a conviction. Allows the defendant to enter into a plea bargain with the state. If the judge accepts the Alford Plea, a guilty finding is made on the record.
After he accepted the plea, Prosecutor Sharmese Hodge gave a recap of the chain of events that led to DaSilva's conviction, which included lying to the Danbury Police Department. In essence, Hodge's recant is identical to the police warrant affidavit which can be read by clicking here.
Although DaSilva accepted the plea, his legal troubles are far from over as can you bet that there will be a civil lawsuit filed on behalf of family members of Luis Encalada Bueno for his death.
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.