Che Sera, Sera–For Judge Stevens A Barry Slow Process, Election Calendar Snubbed In State House Court Challenge

Maybe sometime before 2023 Superior Court Judge Barry Stevens will render a decision in the Democratic State House primary between incumbent Jack Hennessy and City Councilman Marcus Brown who leads by two votes.

Who knows, maybe his preferred method of decision is via rowboat against the tide. No wait, pony express from the continental divide.

State election officials have advised Stevens on several occasions of the implications of a dragged-out court case that cuts against the election calendar so that ballots be issued on time reflecting the names of candidates. His response: yawn, wave of hand, che sera, sera.

So much for not disenfranchising voters.

It’s not like Stevens hasn’t had time to figure this thing out be it on the Hennessy side, Brown side or ruling for a new primary.

Way back on August 9 the two political warriors battled it out. As a result of Stevens’ delay, now only the name of the Republican candidate Anthony Puccio will appear on absentee ballots that are due for printing in advance of the November general election.

From Dan Tepfer, CT Post:

The Secretary of the State’s office could not wait for a winner to be declared in the Democratic primary seat for the district after more than two weeks of court hearings. So absentee ballot voters will instead see Puccio’s name and “Nominee Not Declared” on their ballots.

Superior Court Judge Barry Stevens granted the change in the absentee ballots at the request of the Secretary of the State Mark Kohler, who stated in a motion he was concerned there is not enough time to revise the ballots.

The ballots will also state: “The Democratic Party candidate for the 127th Assembly District has not yet been determined. If you wish to vote for a Democrat for this office, please write Democrat in the appropriate space on the ballot.”

Full story here.



  1. Perhaps you need to post a picture of Anthony Puccio for the benefit of your overall audience?

    Are there about 5,000 voters more or less in City districts for local Council races, so there should be thousands more voters in the State House Districts? At the moment candidates to earn a nod from a newly bordered State District has not been able to come to a conclusion. A minority of voters, less than 20%, from the Democratic Party and in the District has such a close result that it is contested and fought in the courts.

    Lennie, you have used the words ” disenfranchising voters” yet in light of numbers just referenced above, it is the registered but NO-SHOW voters who can only blame themselves for any and all issues and grievances that they may have. A legitimate candidate will admit attention to and perhaps provide answers when they secure two years in office by winning. Gerrymandering of District lines, poor communications in spite of availability of State funds, and regular, local absentee ballot infractions are partly reasons for voting weakness. Is there more to it than that? Were enough doors knocked on? Time will tell.

    1. JML, Lennie, ( Shillie) doesn’t want to talk about Gerrymandering of District lines, poor communications in spite of availability of State funds, and regular, local absentee ballot infractions are partly reasons for voting weakness, or the week long missing bag of AB’s that Judge Stevens will have to attest authoritatively.

      Jack is still the voice for the 127th!

  2. I suspect that Judge Stevens is taking a well-considered legal approach toward fulfilling the appropriate application of the law to the legal absurdities generated from the inanities of yet another farcical Bridgeport political contest. He’s thinking in terms of honoring the obligations of his court to due process and right outcome (of which there really can’t be one, in the latter case) even as he his does his professional best to prevent the further waste of court time, energy, and money on Bridgeport’s no-win (tail-chasing) political situation — should his decision fall short of a final resolution… He’s going for the Solomon Decision in a situation involving the Keystone Cops vs. the Gang that Couldn’t Shoot Straight — all coming at him from the political Twilight Zone…

    Two things are evident about Judge Stevens from his handling of this case thus far — he’s patient, and eminently circumspect…


Leave a Reply