Skip to main content

Hartford Mayor Perez Arrested A Second Time


Another politician, this time Mayor of Hartford Eddie Perez, has been arrested – for a second time – for having commited what would have been considered in the age of Tammany Hall politics as usual.

The mayor has been arrested under RICO statutes, for trading his influence at city hall for discounted work on his Bloomfield Avenue home and attempting to extort money from a private developer for the benefit of Abraham L. Giles, once an influential North End politico.

RICO legislation was designed to prosecute drug lords and criminals connected with the Mafia, but it has been applied for the past few decades by aggressive prosecutors to political crimes. The college professor who drafted the legislation said it should never be used to prosecute politicians.

Mr. Perez's lawyer, Huber Santos claims the charges leading to the second the second arrest were filed “intentionally to defeat our ability to have a jury trial and vindicate the mayor of the charges that are pending.”

He is asking for a contempt citation against prosecutors for having release the warrant when the grand jury’s report was yet under seal.

The prosecution should be held in contempt, Mr. Santos charges, for “thumbing its nose at the Connecticut Supreme Court. For that it should be held in contempt.”
Labels:

Comments

mccommas said…
To be honest I have not followed Hartford Politics in quite some time but a headline the other day caught my notice.

I actually bought the newspaper, the first time I had done so in years.

Check it out: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_3OkrY9S0tSQ/SqJ5WAuUR3I/AAAAAAAAAck/u2nwe3RXbqc/s1600-h/Bias+Alert.jpg

See anything odd in the captions below the pics of the people accused? There are four pols there and only one has her political affiliation listed BEFORE her name.

The Mayor is not identified as a Democrat until the ninth paragraph which in on the following page. The party of the others are not mentioned. Democrats when they get into trouble seem to shed their party yet when Republicans get into trouble, there first name is "Republican".

In the same story we have the Democrats and the sole Republican treated distinctly differently.
I sent a letter on that today to the Commie Courant. Lets see if they have the stones to print it.
4:56 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."
17 comments
Read more

Taking The Fifth, After Esty

Whether or not U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty will serve the remainder of her term or resign immediately is very much an open question. But, in any case, the battle for Connecticut’s 5 th U.S. Congressional District has begun with a show of unexpected fireworks. For many years, the 5 th District was a toss-up proposition; both Republicans and Democrats have held and surrendered the seat. Geographically the 5 th District touches the border of New York from Connecticut’s northern-most point to Danbury in the southern quadrant and includes much of Litchfield county and parts of Fairfield, Hartford and New Haven counties. Party affiliation is competitive, in round figures, 30 percent Democrat, 25 percent Republican and 45 percent unaffiliated. Over the years, the Democrat Party in Connecticut has moved from the center to the left, but the 5 th District has been a moderate preserve. During the Obama presidential election, Republican moderates within Connecticut's U.S. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

PCBs, GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH

By Gerald and Natalie Sirkin c2007 A front-page story on PCBs in the March 9 News-Times is just wrong. The first thing to know about PCBs is that they never killed a single person nor did they ever cause cancer. The second is that although they are invariably called “cancer-causing,” that designation comes chiefly from a single rat study. The third thing is that the subject rats were exposed daily for 21 months to 100 parts per million (ppm) of PCBs containing 60% chlorine. (The 100 ppm was about 5,000 times the tolerable daily intake of PCBs set by FDA in 1973.) When rats were exposed to PCBs containing less chlorine, they developed no cancers. The fourth, that when the exposed rats were allowed to live out their lives, they had fewer cancers and lived longer than the unexposed rats. PCBs is a family of chemicals known as polychlorinated biphenyls. PCBs contain chlorine ranging from 12% to 70%. They were used in two General Electric plants that manufactured electrical equipmen...
Post a Comment
Read more