a public defender


The day the law almost died: the David Pollitt story

Posted on October 11, 2007 by Gideon

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Connecticut was fast becoming a scary place to live. As yesterday’s post shows, residents of a small section of Southbury, a suburban town in Connecticut, were becoming increasingly concerned and paranoid with the news that one of their own was about to take in her brother - a convicted sexual offender - upon his release from prison. Mr. David Pollitt is scheduled to be released tomorrow after serving the full length of his sentence and will embark on a torturous journey of five years’ probation.

Residents of that nook of Southbury, rightly concerned and wrongly outraged, embarked on a full-press lobbying of the Governor to keep this from happening. Scarily, she bit. This morning, she wrote a letter to Attorney General Blumenthal asking him if Mr. Pollitt could be confined beyond his legal discharge date.

While recognizing that Mr. Pollitt has served his sentence and that his release and probation are statutorily governed, we also have a duty to ensure that we have left no stone unturned in safeguarding the safety and welfare of the Southbury residents. Numerous children and elderly residents reside in the Fox Run Drive neighborhood. I am asking that you explore immediately the possibility of filing a motion in Superior Court seeking the delay of Mr. Pollitt’s release. This additional time will allow all interested parties to carefully review all possible safety measures that may be implemented to protect the Southbury residents.

There are several, several problems with this request that I intended to outline in full detail, but in light of recent happenings, will only mention briefly:

First, this exhibits a blatant disregard for law in the State of Connecticut and flouts the Constitutions of both the Constitution State and the United States of America. I cannot imagine that Gov. Rell is not adequately advised as to the illegality of her request.

Second, assuming that she is advised as to the illegality of her request, this can be nothing but blatant political pandering. Which is abhorrable abhorrent. You do not play with people’s liberty to further your political goal.

Third, she makes this request of Attorney General Blumenthal, who has zero standing to request changes in the conditions of probation. An appropriate request would have been one made to Chief State’s Attorney Kevin Kane, who I suspect might not have indulged her to the extent the AG did by filing this motion.

Fourth, her request indicates that the State agencies have not had time to evaluate the impact of his release into the community and make adequate preparations to safeguard the community. What, 24 years wasn’t enough to get their act together? [By all accounts, let it be noted, probation has done an excellent job of going out to the community and spending a significant amount of time attempting to assuage the fears of the residents. Paranoia, however, cannot be easily reassured.]

Finally, a half-way house or an in-patient facility is not an alternative form of probation, but an alternative form of incarceration. Mr. Pollitt has fully satisfied his period of incarceration and any such admission to a half-way house or in-patient facility would be the equivalent of keeping him in a correctional facility.

So, as you might know by now, AG Blumenthal did file a motion in New London Superior Court this afternoon, which was, by all accounts, summarily dismissed by Judge Susan Handy. She may not realize it (she probably does), but she has single-handedly saved the rule of law in the “Constitution” state.

Judge Susan Handy told Attorney General Richard Blumenthal that he has no standing to intervene in the case. Blumenthal said he was acting on behalf of Gov. M. Jodi Rell.

[She] said 54-year-old David Pollitt has served his sentence and is entitled to his freedom.

If this motion were granted (or if it is granted on appeal - if they appeal), it will mark the end of the rule of law in Connecticut. What it will signal is that the State has the power to confine individuals beyond their legal sentences for specious reasons.

Gov. Rell has just issued a statement in light of Judge Handy’s ruling:

“I am very disappointed that this reasonable and prudent request was rejected,” she said. “Public safety is our top priority — I empathize completely with the residents of the Fox Run Drive community [in Southbury], and despite this decision I want them to know that everything possible is being done to safeguard their homes and families.

Forgive me if I scoff. I’m sure every community in the State has received such assurances when sex offenders are released to them on a weekly basis.

Sphere: Related Content

RSS feed | Trackback URI

11 Comments »

Comment by Scott Greenfield
2007-10-11 18:23:24

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that this was pure political pandering, all involved knowing that it was unlawful, unconstitutional and doomed to fail. But at least Rell can tell the good people of Southbury that she tried and that evil judge stopped her.

 
Comment by Gideon
2007-10-11 18:25:15

[quote comment="6633"]There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that this was pure political pandering, all involved knowing that it was unlawful, unconstitutional and doomed to fail. But at least Rell can tell the good people of Southbury that she tried and that evil judge stopped her.[/quote]

Which makes it worse, in my opinion. It is almost worthy of being called despicable.

 
Comment by Windypundit
2007-10-11 19:12:12

[quote comment="6633"]…at least Rell can tell the good people of Southbury that she tried and that evil judge stopped her.[/quote]

You meant “evil activist judge” right?

It’s bad enough that zoning boards work this way.

 
Comment by Gideon
2007-10-11 19:14:58

[quote comment="6640"]

You meant “evil activist judge” right?

It’s bad enough that zoning boards work this way.[/quote]
Which is quite ironic, because she isn’t the most defendant friendly judge in the State.

 
Comment by SPO
2007-10-11 20:26:17

Believe it or not, I too share your disgust. The government has an obligation to follow the law. To the extent Rell’s request was not lawful (and it doesn’t seem to this non-Ct-lawyer that it is), then she has no business making it. However, the Governor has to be concerned about serial rapists freed. I don’t know what the answer to that is, but twisting the law is not one of them.

 
Comment by Mark Bennett Subscribed to comments via email
2007-10-11 22:05:24

What kind of chief executive is she? If you’re gonna say “screw the Constitution” you might as well just do it. She’s the one with all the guns; she can just order Mr. Pollitt’s continued detention. Make him file a writ of habeas corpus to try to get released. Then, what the hell, ignore the court’s order granting habeas release.

 
Comment by Gideon
2007-10-12 07:44:56

[quote comment="6657"]What kind of chief executive is she? If you’re gonna say “screw the Constitution” you might as well just do it. She’s the one with all the guns; she can just order Mr. Pollitt’s continued detention. Make him file a writ of habeas corpus to try to get released. Then, what the hell, ignore the court’s order granting habeas release.[/quote]

I’ll forgo the obligatory Texas and Gov. Bush joke here ;)

It’s just damn scary that anyone can think they have the authority to do that and more so when it’s a Governor.

 
Comment by Jan
2007-10-12 09:43:06

[quote post="821"]Second, assuming that she is advised as to the illegality of her request, this can be nothing but blatant political pandering. Which is abhorrable. You do not play with people’s liberty to further your political goal.[/quote]

I think you mean “abhorrent”. I’m not sure that “abhorrable” is a word.

 
Comment by Gideon
2007-10-12 10:19:34

[quote comment="6681"]
I think you mean “abhorrent”. I’m not sure that “abhorrable” is a word.[/quote]
Right you are.

 
Comment by Malum
2007-10-12 16:33:46

I know Florida has a statute which makes politicians individually liable in matters where they illegally obstruct.

 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Subscribe to comments via email
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Readers who viewed this page, also viewed:

  • N/A

Trackback responses to this post


  • link behavior


  • quick comment

    Latest on Tue, 00:31

    Woman in Black: The green thing cracked me up. Thought I got some bad paint fumes.

    Gideon: It is! Only problem is, I seem to have to approve each one

    Marie: I like this "quick comment" thing. It's like a mix of Post-it note, IM & Twitter. Cool!

    prityladybabe: the money being spent to cover the po's gas, hours of doing check-ins that could help county rds , transportation world

    Gideon: Wondering whether to write a new post now or save it for tomorrow

    » Leave a reply



  • syndication

    AddThis Social Bookmark Button
    AddThis Feed Button

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

  • pd blog search

  • terms of use

    Nothing on this blog is legal advice.
    Read the Legal Disclaimer and Privacy Policy.
    For the full comments policy, click here.

    Creative Commons License
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License.
  • Polls

    Please select one

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...
  • stats



  • Meta