Wednesday, July 29, 2009
HARTFORD'S DUMBEST CRIMINALS
Apparently armed robbers attempted to hold-up the Bowtie's Cinema at 330 New Park Avenue Wednesday night at gunpoint. It seems that the robber couldn't multitask, and during the robbery placed his gun on the counter. A quick thinking employee grabbed the gun and turned it on the robber. The robber quickly fled the Cinema without his gun or the loot
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
PORTIONS OF GRAND JURY REPORT RELEASED
Prior to tomorrow's Supreme Court hearing as to whether the Grand Jury report will be remain sealed or be released to the public, preliminary portions of the report have been released.
FINAL REPORT OF FINDING OF
GRAND JUROR PURSUANT TO
C. G. S. 54-47g
I. BACKGROUND
On October 24, 2007, an Investigatory Grand Jury Panel,
consisting of three Superior Court Judges, found that the
administration of justice required an investigation to determine
whether or not there was probable cause to believe that a crime
or crimes had been committed in the administration of the
government of the City of Hartford in its activities and dealings
with persons or firms doing business with the city. Accordingly,
pursuant to the provisions of Connecticut General Statutes
(hereinafter referred to as C. G. S.) Section 54-47d (a)(1), the
undersigned, on November 6, 2007, was appointed as a Grand
Juror by the Chief Court Administrator for the State of
Connecticut. The scope of the investigation was "to focus on
corruption and the misuse of public funds in the government of
the City of Hartford in its activities and dealings with persons or
firms doing business with the city."
On April 2, 2007, the Grand Juror applied and was granted a
six-month extension which was scheduled to expire on
November 6, 2008. On September 25, 2008, the Grand Juror
applied and was granted another extension which expired on
May 6, 2009. Pursuant to C.G.S. 54-47 g (a) the Grand Juror
has sixty days from the conclusion of the investigation in which
to file the final report.
On January 13, 2009, the Grand Juror issued an Interim
Report in which the undersigned found that probable cause that
crimes had been committed existed with regard to certain
individuals who either worked in city government or had
dealings with officials in the city government of Hartford. For
the purposes of this Final Report, all findings and
recommendations made by the Grand Juror in the Interim Report
are hereby incorporated in this Final Report and made a part
hereof.
In fulfilling its responsibilities, an Investigatory Grand Juror
is limited by the statutes governing the role and function of an
Investigatory Grand Jury, by the specific charge to the Grand
Juror by the Investigatory Grand Jury Panel, and by the
applicable Connecticut Criminal Statutes.
The function of the Investigatory Grand Juror in this matter is
set forth in and is limited by the charge of the Investigatory
Grand Jury Panel. The Grand Juror's function in the
investigation is to determine, on the basis of the evidence
presented to it, whether there is probable cause to believe that
any crime has been committed in connection with the
government of the City of Hartford in its activities and dealings
with persons or firms doing business with the city. Further, the
Grand Juror was also instructed to focus on corruption and the
misuse of public funds in the government of the City of
Hartford.
In conducting its inquiry as to whether there is probable cause
to believe that a crime or crimes may have been committed, the
Grand Juror was limited further by the terms and provisions of
the potentially applicable Connecticut Criminal Statutes. In
connection therewith, the undersigned Grand Juror directed the
Office of the Chief State's Attorney to conduct an analysis of
the Connecticut Criminal Statutes that may apply to any of the
conduct disclosed as a result of the Grand Jury investigation.
The analysis completed by the Office of the Chief State's
Attorney disclosed seven potential statutes and five potential
crimes that may bear upon the Grand Juror's investigation and
ultimate determination as to whether there is probable cause to
bring criminal charges. Those seven statutes and five potential
crimes are:
(1) Fabricating Physical Evidence under C. G. S.
53a-155
(2) Criminal Attempt to Commit Larceny in the First
Degree By Extortion under C. G. S. 53a-49/53a
122a(2) by 53a-119 (5)(h)
(3) Conspiracy to Commit Larceny in the First Degree
By Extortion under C. G. S. 53a-48/53a
122a(2) by 53a-119 (5)(h)
(4) Larceny in the First Degree By
Extortion under C. G. S.53a-8/53a
122a(2) by 53a-119(5)(h)
(5) Fraudulent Voting under C. G. S. 9-360
In conducting its investigation in this matter, the undersigned
Grand Juror scrutinized all of the conduct disclosed in the
investigation to determine if any of the conduct so disclosed
could form the basis of a finding of probable cause to believe
that any one of the foregoing crimes had been committed.
II. SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION
The investigation is now completed. The investigation
conducted by the Grand Jury extended for eighteen months.
There were 32 sessions of the Grand Jury at which testimony
was received from 150 witnesses. 316 items of documentary
evidence were received and marked as exhibits. In conducting
this investigation the Grand Juror has been ably assisted by both
the Chief State's Attorney and Assistant State's Attorneys,
Inspectors from the Office of the Chief State's Attorney, and a
Detective from the Connecticut State Police. In addition to other
tasks they performed at the request of the Grand Juror, those
Assistant State's Attorneys and Inspectors interviewed witnesses
and potential witnesses and reviewed substantial pages of
additional documentary evidence that were either voluntarily
submitted to the Grand Jury or submitted in compliance with
subpoenas issued by the Grand Jury.
III. DISCUSSION *****END OF PORTION RELEASED*****
Hopefully the discussion portion will be unsealed and released to the public after tomorrow's hearing
FINAL REPORT OF FINDING OF
GRAND JUROR PURSUANT TO
C. G. S. 54-47g
I. BACKGROUND
On October 24, 2007, an Investigatory Grand Jury Panel,
consisting of three Superior Court Judges, found that the
administration of justice required an investigation to determine
whether or not there was probable cause to believe that a crime
or crimes had been committed in the administration of the
government of the City of Hartford in its activities and dealings
with persons or firms doing business with the city. Accordingly,
pursuant to the provisions of Connecticut General Statutes
(hereinafter referred to as C. G. S.) Section 54-47d (a)(1), the
undersigned, on November 6, 2007, was appointed as a Grand
Juror by the Chief Court Administrator for the State of
Connecticut. The scope of the investigation was "to focus on
corruption and the misuse of public funds in the government of
the City of Hartford in its activities and dealings with persons or
firms doing business with the city."
On April 2, 2007, the Grand Juror applied and was granted a
six-month extension which was scheduled to expire on
November 6, 2008. On September 25, 2008, the Grand Juror
applied and was granted another extension which expired on
May 6, 2009. Pursuant to C.G.S. 54-47 g (a) the Grand Juror
has sixty days from the conclusion of the investigation in which
to file the final report.
On January 13, 2009, the Grand Juror issued an Interim
Report in which the undersigned found that probable cause that
crimes had been committed existed with regard to certain
individuals who either worked in city government or had
dealings with officials in the city government of Hartford. For
the purposes of this Final Report, all findings and
recommendations made by the Grand Juror in the Interim Report
are hereby incorporated in this Final Report and made a part
hereof.
In fulfilling its responsibilities, an Investigatory Grand Juror
is limited by the statutes governing the role and function of an
Investigatory Grand Jury, by the specific charge to the Grand
Juror by the Investigatory Grand Jury Panel, and by the
applicable Connecticut Criminal Statutes.
The function of the Investigatory Grand Juror in this matter is
set forth in and is limited by the charge of the Investigatory
Grand Jury Panel. The Grand Juror's function in the
investigation is to determine, on the basis of the evidence
presented to it, whether there is probable cause to believe that
any crime has been committed in connection with the
government of the City of Hartford in its activities and dealings
with persons or firms doing business with the city. Further, the
Grand Juror was also instructed to focus on corruption and the
misuse of public funds in the government of the City of
Hartford.
In conducting its inquiry as to whether there is probable cause
to believe that a crime or crimes may have been committed, the
Grand Juror was limited further by the terms and provisions of
the potentially applicable Connecticut Criminal Statutes. In
connection therewith, the undersigned Grand Juror directed the
Office of the Chief State's Attorney to conduct an analysis of
the Connecticut Criminal Statutes that may apply to any of the
conduct disclosed as a result of the Grand Jury investigation.
The analysis completed by the Office of the Chief State's
Attorney disclosed seven potential statutes and five potential
crimes that may bear upon the Grand Juror's investigation and
ultimate determination as to whether there is probable cause to
bring criminal charges. Those seven statutes and five potential
crimes are:
(1) Fabricating Physical Evidence under C. G. S.
53a-155
(2) Criminal Attempt to Commit Larceny in the First
Degree By Extortion under C. G. S. 53a-49/53a
122a(2) by 53a-119 (5)(h)
(3) Conspiracy to Commit Larceny in the First Degree
By Extortion under C. G. S. 53a-48/53a
122a(2) by 53a-119 (5)(h)
(4) Larceny in the First Degree By
Extortion under C. G. S.53a-8/53a
122a(2) by 53a-119(5)(h)
(5) Fraudulent Voting under C. G. S. 9-360
In conducting its investigation in this matter, the undersigned
Grand Juror scrutinized all of the conduct disclosed in the
investigation to determine if any of the conduct so disclosed
could form the basis of a finding of probable cause to believe
that any one of the foregoing crimes had been committed.
II. SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION
The investigation is now completed. The investigation
conducted by the Grand Jury extended for eighteen months.
There were 32 sessions of the Grand Jury at which testimony
was received from 150 witnesses. 316 items of documentary
evidence were received and marked as exhibits. In conducting
this investigation the Grand Juror has been ably assisted by both
the Chief State's Attorney and Assistant State's Attorneys,
Inspectors from the Office of the Chief State's Attorney, and a
Detective from the Connecticut State Police. In addition to other
tasks they performed at the request of the Grand Juror, those
Assistant State's Attorneys and Inspectors interviewed witnesses
and potential witnesses and reviewed substantial pages of
additional documentary evidence that were either voluntarily
submitted to the Grand Jury or submitted in compliance with
subpoenas issued by the Grand Jury.
III. DISCUSSION *****END OF PORTION RELEASED*****
Hopefully the discussion portion will be unsealed and released to the public after tomorrow's hearing
Sunday, July 26, 2009
CITY RECORDS 20TH HOMICIDE TONIGHT
Hartford recorded its 20th homicide victim tonight as the result of a shooting at the intersection of Liberty and Brook Streets shortly before 11:00PM.
Hartford Police sources confirmed the 23 year old male victim was declared dead at 11:26PM at Saint Francis Hospital.
Hartford Police sources confirmed the 23 year old male victim was declared dead at 11:26PM at Saint Francis Hospital.