How Will Musto’s Vote To Release Graphic Images Of Sandy Hook Victims Play With Voters?

Anthony Musto
Anthony Musto

Parents made it clear last year in a direct appeal to state legislators they didn’t want images of their massacred Sandy Hook children splattered all over the Internet. Following that appeal the State Senate and House voted overwhelmingly to block public disclosure of images from the Newtown slaughter. The Senate voted 33-2 to approve the bill. State Senator Anthony Musto was one of two senators to vote no, saying he supports release of images of kids no matter how horrific because “presumption should always be in favor of disclosure.” The bill also passed the house 130-2. This is an election year for Musto who faces an August 12 Democratic primary from Marilyn Moore. The winner will face Republican Trumbull Town Councilman Rick Costantini in the general election.

Musto is acting like an incumbent who faces a tough August 12 primary test and if he survives, a difficult general election in the city-suburban district. He’s more visible than he’s been in the past at various functions and voter outreach. He has come under fire for positions he’s taken against strong public policy protecting taxpayers from government abuse including his support of city employees serving on the City Council approving their own wages and benefits in violation of Bridgeport’s City Charter.

Musto’s campaign handlers will put the best spin on his six-year record in office, but his detractors no doubt will remind his constituents how he voted. Musto’s vote in support of releasing the Sandy Hook images places him at odds with Democratic Governor Dan Malloy and the vast majority of his peers in the legislature.

Malloy supported the wishes of Sandy Hook parents:

“My goal with this legislation was to provide some measure of protection for the families affected by the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School. But the fact is, all families have a right to grieve in private. Those who lose loved ones to violence have a right to protect themselves against further anguish. This is a difficult issue, requiring all of us to balance deeply held beliefs and important public policy values. I commend the legislators on coming to an agreement that respects the privacy of grieving families.”

Republican State Senator John McKinney, who is a candidate for governor, was a chief proponent of the bill:

“The intent of what we’re doing here is very clear–that the public disclosure of an image of the dead body of a brutally murdered child, or spouse, or sibling would cause emotional harm and violate the personal privacy of the parents and other surviving family members. One does not need to see the photos to understand the unwarranted pain and anguish it would cause a parent or other family member to see such photos published and appear on the Internet every time someone searches ‘Sandy Hook’ or ‘school shooting.'” McKinney’s Senate district includes Newtown.

Why did Musto vote no?

“I voted no because I think the presumption should be in favor of the government telling the people what’s going on, no matter how horrific the results,” he told the Connecticut Post.

Several local chief elected officials were critical of Musto’s rationale as well his disregard for the wishes of family members. If you’re a parent constituent of Musto, how do you feel about his vote? Is he obtuse on this issue? Or just out of touch? Maybe both? Or do you agree with his position?

0
Share

35 comments

  1. On the surface, one might just say Anthony Musto was a real ass the way he voted. As a father, how would he feel if G-d forbid it were his child? On the other hand, how insensitive would it be to bring it up again? Well, since you did, on the other hand, perhaps. Musto was only one of two votes that addressed a very real issue. On conservative talk radio and television, supporters of gun rights were actually denying this really happened. There was talk of a conspiracy theory. The anti-Obama rhetoric stated this was the liberal efforts to stop the NRA and curtail gun sales and implement anti-gun legislation. As sensitive as this issue was, from a historical perspective, shouldn’t we have to face the horrors of guns in the wrong hands? Were we wrong for not releasing the photos? The families did not have to look at them. Didn’t 1.5 million children die at the hands of the Nazis and their collaborators? There are those who deny it, even with photos and films documenting the horrors. I wonder what would have happened if the survivors requested all film and photos representing 11 million Jews, Gentiles, children and adults were shuttered in a safe somewhere or just destroyed. Maybe having been forced to see the pictures of Sandy Hook, there would be stronger legislation to stop the violence and better background checks. This would be my argument to support Musto’s vote on this issue. Even thought his foes would like to remind everyone about his vote, it would just stir up the horrors again of Sandy Hook.

    0
    1. If I were a Musto handler, I would get a press release out immediately using my argument because no matter what side of the issue you are on, my argument is indisputable. Sad but true.

      0
    2. Shame on you for bringing the Nazi horrors into this argument. I will not get into the statistics of the Nazi killings but your comparison is way off base. The fact is there was no way to limit the photos of the millions of dead people. Publishing those photos certainly did not stop slaughters around the world. Your favorite word is “maybe,” well that’s not a good enough reason to release these photos.

      0
  2. Steve,
    No doubt your heart is in the right place.

    But should we really be making public policy on the disclosure of (I presume) horrific photos of a madman’s deadly mass atrocities against children–in the near or immediate aftermath of those events–in order to try to better persuade wackos/deniers and “maybe” advance a political agenda (you cite “legislation to stop the violence and better background checks”)?

    Redneck talk radio is the new bar for public policy?

    Instead, how about setting policy in light of a majority of the families of the victims and a majority of the general public?

    Whatever “argument” is used to try to rationalize Musto’s vote in this instance, that argument is not “indisputable.” If it were, people wouldn’t be discussing and questioning it.

    0
    1. Pete, they are only discussing it on this blog where we have pro-Moore supporters. I do not think anyone ever considered the ramifications of what would have happened if we kept the Nazi films locked away. Do you think Jews enjoy watching Holocaust films? Do we get a warm feeling watching mass shootings, gas showers, children being used for scientific experimentation? The answer is no! We watch, everyone watches so we can be a witness to the atrocities and make sure we never allow it to happen again. By keeping these photos under wraps, you remove the emotion from the voting Republicans and keep the NRA strong and the gun holders happy. I think there could have been a benefit to release the horrific pictures. To Andy Fardy, that would be the only benefit. Force people to see the horrors of guns in the wrong hands!

      0
  3. Releasing the photos of the children and educators killed in Sandy Hook would serve no useful purpose. It would put these photos out there in cyberspace forever and thus put the families in jeopardy of seeing these photos.
    No one can tell me what good would come of these photos being published. I will say this, Senator Musto and people who think like him are shitheads.

    0
  4. I actually agree with Steven and he raises a bigger issue. But I think this has to do with certain freedoms as uncomfortable as it may be. If this were passed then five years later other sensitive information will be restricted and so forth. Bills like this usually set a precedent and it is scary to go down that path. I respect him for voting on his own. I also think it is annoying when people sensationalize this and make him seem like a lunatic for voting this way without appreciating the intent behind his vote. You don’t have to agree with his vote but should at least appreciate his rationale because it is a serious issue.

    0
    1. BptPorter, you make some interesting observations that raise questions about how Musto rationalizes his votes. It can be argued he’s more protective of his political alliance supporting city employees serving on the City Council in direct violation of the City Charter than preventing additional anguish for the families of the victims. Do you agree with his support of violating the City Charter as well? What public good is there to release those images? Some people don’t want to discuss this issue because it’s “uncomfortable.” How uncomfortable do you think it would be for the families to see those images?

      0
      1. To be honest, what more pain could it inflict on the parents? They witnessed the horrible scenario up close and personal, and I’m sure that will be embedded in their minds forever. It appears this forum was created for the sole purpose of denouncing Musto and garnering support for his opponent. Some of the people who disagree with this are the same people who are always wanting everything to be “open and transparent” but I guess that is selective depending on the issue.

        0
        1. Here’s what Godiva wrote about Musto’s vote a year ago:

          Godiva2011 // Jun 5, 2013 at 11:18 pm
          I’m stunned at the insensitivity on his part. Not a good way to maintain your voters’ loyalty.

          Has Godiva changed her mind?

          0
          1. After taking the big picture into consideration and the overall ramifications it could cause by denying freedom of the press, yes I have. Not so much because it’s Musto, but because of the precedent it could set.

            0
          2. Godiva,
            I wish the press (at least the local media reps) were as concerned as you are about their freedoms. The paper business model at some point says, if there is inadequate income, we are losing money at the end of the day and we downsize, become even less relevant and ultimately close.

            Another general observation I will offer is persons who have become victims through no fault of their own have a way of closing out those things that trigger the hurtful images and recall the tragedy. Photographs can trigger the entire event and bring it back to mind. That type of recall is neither helpful nor healing, necessarily. In this case it has nothing to do with the public’s right to express themselves freely.

            And if a representative has a right to express and knows his public does as well, why do so few political incumbents and/or candidates look to discuss important subjects like this before the public? People talk. People listen. People become informed about more sides of an issue than they realized were out there. People talk some more, and perhaps do some reading. Minds, some of them, change. People vote. Representatives are elected. A cycle of democracy? What’s missing locally? Time will tell.

            0
  5. Lennie, you seem to be hoping one of these two issues stick. I think it may be a tough race, but I wouldn’t go down the Sandy Hook road and truth be told, voters really aren’t interested in City Charter as a voting issue. It would be wise to have a more substantial platform.

    0
    1. Steve, here’s what you wrote when this story broke last year:
      Steven Auerbach // Jun 5, 2013 at 7:02 pm
      Okay, Musto has got to be a total ass unless his vote was by error. Very disappointing and I would rather not say exactly how I feel. The total lack of respect, empathy and grace. What the hell could Musto have been thinking???

      Have you changed your mind?

      0
      1. Lennie, we often say things before we have really gotten into the guts of what was said. Like everyone else, I was caught up in the emotion of the horrific act. I was at Barnum school at the time and remember watching CNN as it happened. It is one year later. Since I am not a supporter of Moore, I feel I am required to be the voice of balance and reason since the blog has taken on an anti-Musto platform. I do not have egg on my face. What I wrote was under emotion, today I write from a thoughtful what-if perspective. If the families knew these pictures could help bring stricter gun laws than maybe they would reconsider. I used the Nazi scenario to make a point. I could have used the same image of Syrian children being slaughtered by the government or maybe the starving children of Africa. If these horrific images are too painful, too bad. The world is not the rose-colored paradise Andy Fardy imagines I see the world. Sometimes the world is pretty damn horrible. We can not protect all the people all the time. I feel if these photos were released a lot of positive changes could occur. Instead, we are forever on this losing battle. Sorry, but after consideration I support his vote and I think most people would ultimately agree with me. If I were Musto’s opposition I would respectfully not discuss it. But the opposition is not respectful and they do not care about the pain of the families by bringing it up again for cheap applause and a few votes. The rest I leave to Anthony Musto. He can speak for himself. Thank you for going through the archives, Lennie, It makes me feel you listen. I do remember many of my comments, good, bad and ugly. I am not the Messiah and I am definitely not a follower. I like my argument in support of Musto’s vote and that is the message I would take to the streets. Well, I have a sprained ankle so someone else will take it to the streets. Been hopping around for two weeks now. Yes, I have changed my mind.

        0
  6. I think if legislative issues are framed around comfort then this can be dangerous territory. Someone can also make the argument it is uncomfortable to not have the right to information, which also misses the point. We can go in circles about comfort and respect for families if we use it as the basis for legislation, but it all misses the point. The larger issue is this would move us in a direction toward restriction of information. So for example, 10 years later can details of certain crimes be restricted on the basis of respect and comfort of families? This can open a Pandora’s box.

    0
  7. Governance processes need to be TRANSPARENT. Information regarding governance should be OPEN to all, especially using current technology to share (and a City Website to be current and accurate with the details of all Mayoral appointments, Boards and Commissions, meetings, hearings, agendas and minutes) and then elected and appointed need to be ACCOUNTABLE to the people for results and that includes financial results because people pay taxes and they are considerable in Bridgeport.

    Pictures graphically portraying the deceased youth and their adult protectors are not necessary at this moment to prove to most of the public something terrible happened in Sandy Hook. The feelings of the families and that community at large may be reason enough for a decision to withhold photos today.

    However Senator Musto, if he is a proponent of getting all the info out, must know this is not happening in Bridgeport governance activities. With a bit of street wisdom, he might guess it is because of a conflicted group of elected representatives, some of whom are serving illegally on the City Council according to the Bridgeport Charter. But he does nothing about it. He is not a person of principle. And his stand in this instance indicates he does not understand how easy it is for “conflicted behavior” to be tolerated as normal. In a personal legal matter would he be so generous or cavalier?

    Time for a change? Time will tell.

    0
  8. You know people do want the photos of these kids published and my question is WHY??? What good comes of publishing these photos? There are certain things that should not be put on public airways and these photos qualify. There are many, many things the public is not allowed to see and these documents are classified.
    Again I ask WHAT GOOD DOES RELEASING THE PHOTOS ACCOMPLISH? Musto thinks he is smarter than the people who put him in office, it’s time for him to go. It’s too bad he no longer is in my district.

    0
  9. BTW I agree about what was said about Musto and not being open to city transparency. That is loony, he should have supported city transparency. About the pictures. I cannot answer what good the pictures do or do not do. The point is about access to information and all information. And let me be clear, if some idiots take the pictures and post them all over the Internet that is ridiculous in my opinion, but the actions of these people can’t override the freedom of citizen access to information. We also have to be careful about about judgments about ‘what good does it do,’ because on this pretense future information can become restricted on this judgement which is relative and arbitrary. On this basis, in the future, who knows, maybe some printed information can be deemed not useful and so restricted.

    0
  10. Anyone who thinks releasing these photos will lead to stricter gun laws is living in a dream world. These photos would be plastered all over the gossip papers and on right-wing and left-wing blogs. To What End? There is absolutely no reason to have photos of kids torn to pieces and covered in blood released for the sickos of this world to see and publish. The government constantly restricts information from the public and are you any worse from them doing that?
    Steve, I disagree with you and I don’t think people will side with you on releasing these photos. To all, there is not one freaking good thing that would come out of releasing these photos and if you agree with Musto you are as depraved as he is.

    0
    1. Andy, one day I’ll introduce you to my dream world of rose-colored glasses. My partner was murdered over a parking space while I served in the Moran administration. One of Mayor Bucci’s Pizones from Abruzzi. I have always been a realist. I see the world through rose-colored glasses because I am hopeful and spiritual. I got the call at 3 am the first day of summer, June 21 1990. I saw the pictures of a brutal stabbing over 25 times in the head and upper body. He was a body builder and as helpless as those kids at Sandy Hook. Sitting in a car being brutally attached by some alcoholic. I have forgiven him years ago. But you get the visual. It has been 24 years. Andy, I do not see the world through rose-colored glasses. In memory of Phillip Paul Iacozza. Facing a reality and seeing a picture does change everything.

      0
  11. Steve, sorry for your loss; it had to hurt. I am going to ask a hard question. Do you think if the photos of your friend’s body were published in the number of media outlets we have today it would change anything? For you and his loved ones it would, for the rest of the people, NO.

    0
  12. No, because I would not be going on sites looking for it. It was just recently I learned Phil’s case made it into law texts giving very explicit descriptions. If they didn’t show these visuals in movies and commercials, would people be moved to act? No! When people are told about exterminations happening in Syria, five minutes later they are asking for dessert with whipped cream. People have become extremely desensitized. A picture can and would change opinions. The NRA had a good day when this law went in their favor.

    0
  13. I am sorry that happened in your life, Steve. Folks react differently to things and although seeing the photos was helpful to your healing process and created resolve in you to fight the good fight, it’s not that way for everyone.

    These are children. This was not a heinous act of war as in WWII. This was a planned act of utter narcissism. These families deserve a chance to live and grieve and move forward without forever being branded by the actions of a selfish, sick boy.

    0
    1. Bond Girl, thank you. Seeing the pictures did not in any way shape or form help me in my healing process. Showing the pictures would not help the families in their healing process. It might, however, enrage the public and elected officials to do something that has an impact. That was my point.

      0
  14. Sorry Steve, but you are totally wrong on this one.
    I can honestly see the NRA using one of these photos as part of a membership drive.
    A photo of bodies everywhere and there newest slogan, “The only thing that stops a bad man with a gun is a good man with a gun. Don’t let the government leave you unprotected. Maintain YOUR RIGHT to possess a gun.”
    And even if that infuriates some people the NRA would not care. They just want to continuously grow and strengthen their core.

    0
    1. Bob, I have to agree with you. My thought process was to enrage the public and elected officials. You are correct, The NRA has the uncanny ability to twist the facts and their talking head supporters take it to the people via Fox News. Pretty soon people will fear to go anywhere in public for fear of a lunatic with a gun.

      0
  15. My uncle was the editor of the Danbury News Times when newspapers were fighting to create Sunshine legislation. He was invited by Governor Grasso to attend the bill-signing ceremony when it was signed into law and received one of the ceremonial pens.
    But this was a different time. This was when nothing but what the state or city wanted you to see was made available.
    This law continues to change on a regular basis; adding new types of media, changing what and how things are available and what citizens are charged for these copies. It is not a law written in stone.
    Today there remain a ton of documents that are not made public; personnel records, attorney client communications, attorney workpapers, pending legal documents so please do not make this some sacrosanct legal document that can never be changed.
    Musto is totally wrong on this issue. And Musto should do exactly what you did earlier. Apologize. Admit he made a mistake. Move on.
    You said your initial reaction was wrong, and so is Musto’s.

    0

Leave a Reply