Five years after the alleged occurrences, charges against four campaign workers for absentee ballot fraud and witness tampering stemming from the 2019 mayoral cycle, once again ignited a Connecticut media frenzy because it’s what they do with the local political demagogues, especially the losers, happy to fan the flames, fawning attention.
Paging mayoral losers John Gomes and Marilyn Moore and a host of their cronies who couch themselves (we were robbed) when actually they ran incompetent campaigns and some of their operatives do the same they rant about.
When the dust settles and defense lawyers examine the details turned over by the state how strong is the government’s case? On the surface it’s thinner than Twiggy.
Why did it take five years? This case was going nowhere, but state investigators needed to show, in the face of all the 2023 ballot howling, something must be done, we must show the flag. At what cost to credibility? We’ve seen this story before, the state does not make cases like the feds.
So, we have Josephine Edmonds, Nilsa Heredia and Wanda Geter-Pataky facing charges of “witness tampering” in addition to, as well, taking an elector’s ballot to process. Edmonds supported Marilyn Moore for mayor, the latter two Joe Ganim. Another Ganim ally, City Councilman Alfredo Castillo, has been charged with alleged absentee misuse, not witness tampering.
For a long time these things have generally been handled civilly by the State Elections Enforcement Commission which levy modest fines for the cause to settle a case. SEEC has no criminal investigative power. They can refer cases to state investigators to review possible criminal acts.
Unlike what we saw in the hullabaloo of the security cameras capturing ballot stuffing in the 2023 primary done on both sides, this case is my word against yours. Now let’s examine the alleged “witness tampering” that reads so mind-baking on the surface unless the soufflé falls flat in the oven.
What does “witness tampering” mean? The government does not allege the tampering was underway during a criminal investigation; it’s based on newspaper articles and SEEC’s civil review to “don’t say anything.”
This is years ago. It’s not like they said: if you say something and I’ll burn your house down during an active criminal investigation.
There’s four defendants. Some lawyers, or public defenders if that’s the case for lack of money, may try to make this go away peacefully on behalf of their clients, perhaps a misdemeanor, a fine, and even something less. The reality is this will take a year or two, maybe longer, to make it’s way through the state’s serpentine judicial process.
During that time, and the time of the alleged misdeeds, memories fade.
Now, I don’t know about the others, but Geter-Pataky is lawyered up with one of the best in the business, John Gulash. He’s the defense lawyer prosecutors don’t like to face. He’s that good. Judges respect him.
I’ve been covering his cases for decades. He’s made a living pointing out vast government overreach. Yes, the government often piles on because of this and that. I know from experience and covering court cases.
Gulash will try to get this thrown out procedurally, if that doesn’t work what do you think he’ll do with the alleged “witness tampering” when he cross examines the government’s witness, if it gets that far?
The witness may feel like they were coerced to say that because they were intimidated by the investigators. It happens. Plus, memories fade. Gulash will trap the witness in prior inconsistent statements. You said that then, but you’re saying this now…
As for someone picking up an absentee ballot – state law confines that largely to immediate family, care taker and police officer – this stuff has always been handled civilly, not criminally. A lot of electors don’t know Connecticut’s strict laws for touching a ballot.
This case is a large outlier from the norm – things handled civilly – now a criminal proceeding.
This case is nothing but state criminal investigators bending to media frenzy fallout from 2023.
oib used to be more impartial, reads like more like a blog for 60-70 year old townies having coffee with Ganim on madison avenue venting gripes more than substance.
Every case is “a thin case” when those in charge want it to be- with the assistance of media and blog sites!!
During the debates Trump made accusations that Biden’s son made millions from China and Ukraine. Biden firmly denied and of course most media supported that.
Now, even CNN’s Jake Trapper admits that“Trump was right”.
Not that long ago and close to home as well, there were accusations of voter fraud involving a Testos bartender and Council Member. That was dismissed as a “fabrication”. How did that turn out?? 😂 😝
Yeah yeah….go on!!! 🖕
Right, and the most serious federal charge was tossed by the judge. So, how much time do you think the bartender will receive, Rich?
Well, well, well, Lennie! I guess your friend won’t like it but now we can name him since you decided to basically defend him. When the case broke against Michael Defilippo after I “fabricated it“, your language, not mine, I wrote here that he would do no time. Yet you seem to feel that all the cheating that did occur is OK because the “most serious” charge was dropped. As other people have opined here, you are a part of the problem. Attitudes like that is why Bridgeport is so corrupt AND a shithole.
Have a nice day. I’m sure Mike is happy to have the conversation continued or maybe you can “ban” me as you did the last time after I fabricated the his voter fraud. It really doesn’t matter does it?
First of all I never banned you. That’s BS, just like when you accused me of banning others when I did not. Secondly, go back and read what I wrote about the indictment. On it’s surface I wrote the indictment is damning. I haven’t spoken to DeFilippo in two years. Your beef with DeFilippo isn’t about ABs, it was about liquor-store competition because you believe everything is rigged against you when it doesn’t go your way. Sound familiar?
You are only slightly right but what was really the case, as everyone found out, was that Mike was using his connections to violate clear rules & regs as they related to liquor control laws. It took him almost 5 years for his sleazy lawyer- Willinger, to finally figure out a way so that the judge would have no choice but to concur. They had the local law changed using Lynn Haig and the ZBA to change the master plan. You are conveniently forgetting that many church , school , and community leaders and others were against it and filled the council room several times to speak against it.
My only crime is that I say what many people think. The real crime is that nothing is done about it.
Cheers!!
I been put in purgatory several times, but never Banmaldied!
Yes I guess Lennie’s right about me not being banned. Let’s call it a supervised suspension! 😂
Wow,haven’t been here in a year or two..Lennie,you used to pretty much impartial regarding this administration,now it reads like you’re on it’s payroll..I mean,are you??
Welcome back Harvey. Not on city payroll. I haven’t been on the municipal payroll since 1992. My opinions here are no more valuable than yours or anyone else. I do tend to point out government and political hypocrisy, especially among those who say this and do that. I don’t assume that the alternative cries are always better. You are free to be critical of this administration. Hope to hear your voice again regularly, Harvey.
I see it the same way!
As Harvey!!
OIB, NEVER Biased, ALWAYS fair!
😂