Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Do we get representation for our taxation?

February 8, 2010

To whom it may concern on the Connecticut Judiciary Committee:

Should citizens who propose legislation to elected officials to reform the courts, to improve police, and improve the quality of life of Connecticut citizens be put under 24 hour surveillance, have their emails read, phones tapped, be threatened and terrorized by police, beaten by police informants, falsely arrested, have their families broken up, lose their homes, jobs, the sum total of their lives, be railroaded to prison, and then told they are kicked out of Connecticut? Are Connecticut citizens getting representation for their taxation? Should my case and others be looked into to improve official Connecticut?

In the mid-1990s I bought a house in Stafford Springs, Connecticut, with my wife. I co-founded a Crime Watch there. I saw teens going bad. I was told by Stafford Officer Frank Prochaska that if I proposed legislation allowing police officers to write youthful offenders who were smoking, riding skateboards on sidewalks, and for other minor offenses, detentions to be served at local schools, that I would be arrested, go to prison, and be kicked out of Connecticut. I was later punched several times in the face and my ear bit into by a drug dealer. Witnesses said they didn’t know who attacked me and fled. Prochaska re-investigated the case, got the witnesses to say I attacked my attacker, and I faced a year and a half in prison, no deals, huge fines for attacking a drug dealer, Peter Panciera, with my face and his teeth with my ear. [pictures and more info, click here]

Prochaska told me that I would be interfering with the revenue collection system of lawyers, police, and the courts, and I was to keep my mouth shut and not propose legislation or talk to elected officials.

I had refused to get a lawyer in that case, so a lawyer couldn’t rig it. I was later mugged, and got a year in prison for that “offense”, and was kicked out of Connecticut upon my release from prison. Should citizens who talk to elected officials about public corruption, police, and judicial misconduct be placed on a secret, arrest on sight, police enemies list?

I found out I was put under 24 surveillance, and that Connecticut State Police were to enforce a “no dating” policy on me after my divorce. [pictures and more info, click here]

Should any citizen in Connecticut be deprived of liberty, life, property, their family, and the pursuit of happiness just for contacting elected officials? [information on Connecticut’s Target List]

Almost ten years later, I can’t own a home, get most jobs or apartments, struggle, and I don’t have any contact with my daughter and most of my family. Because of police and judicial misconduct in Connecticut, I won’t walk my daughter down the isle, hold or even meet my future grandchildren, and went from being a potential millionaire and taxpayer to a pauper. Are you Connecticut legislators anti-small business, anti-justice, and pro-Police State? Well, please prove otherwise and look into remedy of my case and others. Would you like more information?

I am posting this email to you on the Internet [here] with more links and updates. The open letter to you might be word searchable forever.

Thank you,

Steven G. Erickson
[address snipped]
stevengerickson AT yahoo Dot Com

P.S. Should Connecticut Judge Jonathan J. Kaplan be able to get away with [this]?


SENATORS COLEMAN, (Chair), 2nd District; DOYLE, (Vice Chair), 9th; BYE, 5th; GOMES, 23rd; MEYER, 12th.

SENATORS KISSEL, (Ranking Member), 7th District; McLACHLAN, 24th; RORABACK, 30th; WELCH, 31st.

REPRESENTATIVES FOX, (Chair), 146th District; HOLDER-WINFIELD, (Vice Chair), 94th; BARAM, 15th; BERGER, 73rd; CLEMONS, 124th; DILLON, 92nd; FLEXER, 44th; FRITZ, 90th; GODFREY, 110th; GONZALEZ, 3rd; GROGINS, 129th; HAMM, 34th; HEWETT, 39th; MORRIS, 140th; OLSON, 46th; ROLDAN, 4th; SERRA, 33rd; TABORSAK, 109th; TONG, 147th; WALKER, 93rd; WRIGHT, 41st.

REPRESENTATIVES HETHERINGTON, (Ranking Member), 125th District; ADINOLFI, 103rd; CARPINO, 32nd; HOVEY, 112th; KLARIDES, 114th; LABRIOLA, 131st; O’NEILL, 69th; ROWE, 123rd; SAMPSON, 80th; SHABAN, 135th; SIMANSKI, 62nd; SMITH, 108th.

Senior Committee Administrator:
Deborah Blanchard
Room 2500, LOB 860-240-0530
Eric.Coleman@cga.ct.gov, Gerald.Fox@cga.ct.gov, Gary.Holder-Winfield@cga.ct.gov, John.A.Kissel@cga.ct.gov, John.Hetherington@housegop.ct.gov, al.adinolfi@housegop.ct.gov, David.Baram@cga.ct.gov, Jeffrey.Berger@cga.ct.gov, christie.carpino@housegop.ct.gov, Charles.Clemons@cga.ct.gov, Patricia.Dillon@cga.ct.gov, Mae.Flexer@cga.ct.gov, Mary.Fritz@cga.ct.gov, Bob.Godfrey@cga.ct.gov, Minnie.Gonzalez@cga.ct.gov, Auden.Grogins@cga.ct.gov, Gail.Hamm@cga.ct.gov, Ernest.Hewett@cga.ct.gov, DebraLee.Hovey@housegop.ct.gov, Themis.Klarides@housegop.ct.gov, David.Labriola@housegop.ct.gov, Michael.McLachlan@cga.ct.gov, Bruce.Morris@cga.ct.gov, Melissa.Olson@cga.ct.gov, Arthur.ONeill@housegop.ct.gov, Kelvin.Roldan@cga.ct.gov, Andrew.Roraback@cga.ct.gov, TR.Rowe@housegop.ct.gov, rob.sampson@housegop.ct.gov, Joseph.Serra@cga.ct.gov, john.shaban@housegop.ct.gov, bill.simanski@housegop.ct.gov, richard.smith@housegop.ct.gov, Joseph.Taborsak@cga.ct.gov, William.Tong@cga.ct.gov, Toni.Walker@cga.ct.gov, Jason.Welch@cga.ct.gov, Elissa.Wright@cga.ct.gov

* * * *
* * * *

I was emailed this text yesterday:

Monday, February 07, 2011

Citizen Advisory Ethics Board, Plategate And Dickman

Kevin Rennie, a blogger and Hartford Courant columnists, has been ruled out of order by Republican Party Chairman Chris Healy after Mr. Rennie published the names of Friends Of Jodi Rell who received low number license plates. Among the beneficiaries of Mrs. Rell’s largess was “Charles F. Chiusano, a member of the state’s Citizen Advisory Ethic’s Board, registered ‘872’ on December 21st,” according to Mr. Rennie.

Mr. Rennie requested the information from Roy Occhiogrosso, Gov. Dannel Malloy’s communications chief, who passed along the request to Malloy Chief of Staff Tim Bannon, who then queried the Department of Motor Vehicles, which routed the names back to Mr. Bannon, who then passed along the information to Mr. Occhiogrosso, who passed along the information to Mr. Rennie, apparently without scrutinizing the list or asking the gate keeper lawyer for the Malloy administration, Andrew McDonald, whether the release of such information was legal. Mr. Rennie, Mr. Bannon and Mr. McDonald, previously one of the co-chairmen of the Judiciary Committee, are all lawyers, as is the governor. There are some indications in the media that the illegal release of such information may develop into the usual mucky fuss, now provisionally being called "Plategate.”

The whole episode is summed up concisely in Ecclesiastes: “Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity,” including vanity plate numbers.

It has been said by Mr. Rennie that members of the state’s new ethics board should not have been on the receiving end of favors conferred upon them by the executive department because status gifts of this sort represent a conflict of interests, which is true enough.

But barely a week ago, the ethics board sought to violate the interests of virtually every reporter in the state, and yet only Alex Wood of the Journal Inquirer set himself at odds with a board that had attempted to carve out for itself an exception to Freedom of Information laws wide enough to allow passage for all the enemies of transparency and good government in the state.

In the course of an unheard of nine day trial involving Pricilla Dickman, the new ethics board – its older version self destructed -- retreated to a smokeless filled back room before deciding Ms. Dickman’s fate, made no record of its secret proceedings, and later responded to a Freedom of Information request from Mr. Wood and the Journal Inquirer by arguing that the board need not comply with the Freedom of Information law because a superintending judge had allowed the secret meeting.

In other words, the ethics board had subverted the Freedom of Information Law by arguing that the presence of a judge as an advisor to the proceedings rendered it above the law. The Freedom of Information Commission, unwilling to preside over the utter destruction of the statue that called it into being, naturally disagreed and found in favor of Ms. Dickman and the Journal Inquirer – without deciding that the violation of the law rendered the ethics board judgment in the Dickman case invalid.

As a matter of fact, the decision undisturbed by the finding of the Freedom of Information commission is invalid, according to Ms. Dickman’s lawyers, because the board did not have a quorum when it decided her issue in favor of her employer, the UConn Medical Center (UCMC).

Ms. Dickman’s case is one of the oldest of its kind in Connecticut’s history, and the UCMC, short of funds as always, had better hope that journalists in Connecticut continue in their indifference to it. Ironically, the Dickman case may well survive the UConn Medical Center.

The case revolves around imperfect and occasionally manufactured evidence provided by a medical center “investigator” to the attorney general’s office, which passed along the information to the ethics board for disposition and the chief state’s attorney for prosecution.

Ms. Dickman so far has endured 95 hearings of one sort or another, at considerable expense to the state. The fraudulent ethics hearing is but the tip of an iceberg a careful examination of which by journalists would lead to condemnations of the whole alphabet soup of agencies that have been persecuting Ms. Dickman for six harrowing years. So far, she has held out against very nearly alone, much in the manner of a Connecticut Dreyfus awaiting a Victor Hugo to lay her cause before the public.

A more detailed account of the Dickman case may be found at the Connecticut Commentary blog: “Blumenthal, The UConn Heath Center: Defending The Indefensible."
Posted by Don Pesci at 6:01 PM
Labels: Bannon, Chiusano, Dickman, Malloy, McDonald, Rennie, UConn Medical Center, Wood [source of above]


* * * *

Steven G. Erickson's core complaints with the State of Connecticut, Police Misconduct, Judicial Misconduct, Public Corruption, Police Brutality, and living in a US Police State post 9-11:


My case, maybe best explained in short:

* * * *

FreeSpeech.com went down mysteriously after a "power surge" took down its servers. My posts were all gone, and are still gone after the below video aired all over Connecticut.

Steven G. Erickson lets Official Connecticut Have It

Text with video:
SvenVonErick | October 31, 2006 | likes, 1 dislikes

Aug. 1, 2006, Connecticut lets citizen spout off on camera about the Connecticut court system. I let Connecticut have it regarding Police, Prosecutorial, and Judicial Misconduct.

Click here
for information on helping us get a documentary produced on Judicial Misconduct.

No comments: