Friday, November 10, 2006

My Open Letter to the Former Governor John G. Rowland of Connecticut

October 02, 2003

Dear Governor Rowland,

(update to this piece: Supreme Court: Rowland must testify, June 19, 2004, found here.)


_______________________________________

October 2, 2003:

(an open letter to the Governor, entertainment for the rest of you)

I want to ask you what is the logic of Connecticut's police doing virtually nothing to protect and serve those that need this vital, supposedly, tax supported public service?

Is this why it seems that drug dealers, frauds, prostitutes, alcoholics, drug addicts, and career criminal parasites seem to be Connecticut's preferred, downtown citizens, not productive citizens and those that choose to invest in the American Dream, which is a NIGHTMARE in Connecticut.

Connecticut taxes its citizen far beyond what most other states charge. Should Connecticut's police act merely as ARMED REVENUE COLLECTORS targeting purses and wallets of mostly honest, hardworking, taxpayers?

Do you think this has something to do with Connecticut's recent net loss of 65,000 citizens where other States are gaining citizens?

Why is it okay for a drug dealer ('Jaybone' Drice) to pull a gun on me on my property when I asked him not to use my yard to deal drugs? I doubt police even talked to 'Jaybone' about the incident.

Why would drug dealer, David Drice, be able to sell drugs off my front lawn telling me if I give him a problem police will go after ME not HIM?

I had to argue with the police dispatcher to even send a police officer after telling him, I had been threatened by drug dealers and teens drinking on my front lawn.

Why it is okay for Brian Oulette to assemble pipe bombs under my tenants and children, setting devices in and around my property with police seemingly not do anything?

Why is okay for Stanley Sibonis to sell drugs, vandalize, break in property, pass out on sidewalks drunk and high, and be a general pain in the ass from a young youth to an adult in Stafford, Connecticut, with seemingly little done?

Why is okay for allegedly AIDS infected, Vicky T (still active doing her 'business' as of June 2004), downtown Stafford Springs, CT, on W Main St), able to prostitute herself in Stafford for drugs and money, to just move in apartments and not pay rent over and over, ripping off local stores, elderly, and whomever she can?

Why was it okay for James Hogancamp to move in various places, not pay rent, sell crack and marijuana, fence stolen items including elderly heirlooms and pain medication, not pay support for his 6 children? He has been known to drive a Volvo and seems to live a live of carefree luxury probably living his whole life as criminal parasite.

Why was it okay for crackhead, Dennis Perier, to offer items out of my house he had not yet stolen to others at a local Stafford Springs, CT, bar, with little, if anything done by police?

Why was it okay for Gary Baker to destroy my house over and over, break in, sell crack off my front lawn over years?

Gary allegedly shot a man's eye out during a driveby using a air rifle, was caught with stolen items, drugs, and was allegedly preparing to flee the State to avoid prosecution, allegedly is only to spend 2 months in jail.

Why was it okay for Ken and Robin Pelc to sell marijuana, crack, and heroine out of one of my apartments all hours?

Why didn't the fire personnel that saw drugs lying around their apartment lead to arrests?

Fire personnel had evacuated the house as a drunk had tried to run over another man, possibly over a bad drug deal, smashing into my house with a SUV banging into the electric meters.

Police had refused to do anything about the Pelcs. It wasn't until I called DSS when they left their children unattended without food, while the Ken and Robin were out drugging and drinking that anything was done. The Pelcs took off to avoid any legal or financial obligations, and probably received no punishment.

Why is okay for alleged prostitute, Lana Thompson, to move into apartments without permission, destroy them, and bilk whomever she can over and over, being evicted over and over?

Why was I told, while a member of the Crime Watch, told by police I was not allowed downtown unless I was involved with drugs?

I was told to stay out of their way as they, the police, were after big fish to confiscate a business, home, and assets in just one investigation. It seems collecting booty is more important than offering downtown citizens any quality of life.

After complaining about crime, the bias of police and courts against the self employed and landlords in newspapers and to politicians, after trying to have a prosecutor and judge (my sentencing judge) removed for bias, lodging complaints against police officers, why was I arrested for pepper spraying a man that had been harassing me for weeks, had demanded money from me, after jumping from behind, beating me, is not even arrested?

Brian Caldwell allegedly had an altercation with another person who had a Clash of the Titan egos with Connecticut State Police and was the only one arrested after fighting with Caldwell. Caldwell continues to drink heavily daily, use drugs, attack people, harass the elderly, pass out on sidewalks, and urinate in public. He can be seen intoxicated leaning against the Resident State Trooper office frequently.

Police had allegedly been bragging that Big Mouth was going to be run out of town and taught a lesson. I had no previous record, but police were allegedly bragging that I was going to go to prison before I even went to trial!

My charges should have been dropped when I was declared the victim when I finally got police to do an investigation or at minimum, Prosecutor, John Panone, should have offered me AR, to avoid a trial at taxpayer expense.

AR, for a $100 fee, would have resulted in my charges being erased in as little as 3 months, a program that is offered to ALL others with charges such as mine when they have no criminal record.

Do Connecticut authorities prefer the non-productive, parasites, and criminals downtown?

Is it normal for a crime victim to be sentenced to a year in prison, 3 years probation for being forced to defend him/herself (during a robbery attempt) because police had refused to?

Attorney Agranoff, who charged me over a $17,000 fee seemed too intimidated by police, the prosecutor, and the judge to call witnesses, to put up any kind of defense, nor to even to challenge obvious false statements and perjury, of Troopers Langlais and Ameral to get me railroaded to prison for being a Big Mouth.

It seems Free Speech in Connecticut is not free.

It is common knowledge that I would not have lost my retirement, credit, family, pets, home, 3 apartment houses, business, etc, the sum total of all that I had built up over a lifetime, had I not complained about police, crime, drugs, and the bias of the Connecticut court system in newspapers.

I think Connecticut is a poor choice of a place to live, given the crime, lack of quality of life, high taxes, limited services, and the seemingly corrupt way the State of Connecticut is run.

-Steven G. Erickson (Vikingas)

P.S. I was so upset with police not doing anything about drugs being sold off my front yard and how the bias of police and courts hurt property investors and small business, I wrote Bush, and received a response from the SBA and HUD. I wrote the letter BEFORE being railroaded to prison by police and being sentenced in a Kangaroo Connecticut Court.

* * * *
added June 19, 2004:

I complained to my U.S. Congressman, both Connecticut U.S. Senators, and State Senator, Kissel of Enfield, CT, in this letter.

(Honest Citizens) Getting Tarred and Feathered

Posted by Vikingas at October 2, 2003 06:41 AM | TrackBack
Comments

From MrLandlord.com:

Landlord Rights (by Steven G. Erickson[CT])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 7:52 PM
Message: I had trouble getting 'equal protection and service' from police because I was a landlord. I was considered more sleezy than drug dealers and other criminal. Police were rude and offered no helf with property damage and other crimes.

A Stafford, Connecticut, selectman told me when I was a single family home owner, that the riffraff could be removed from town by squeezing landlords. By taking away street parking, sicking the building inspector of landlords, and investigating and harassing landlords, the selectman felt he could have less of the the undesirable people in town. Our rights are not protected.


I went to prison after being nearly robbed and beaten, as the robber was an alleged police informant. I was declared the 'victim' and had used pepper spray to end the attack on in my dark driveway.


Another landlord was harassed by phone by a tenant and then attacked on his yard. The police came and arrested the landlord and the woman is being used to prosecute the landlord.


We get the harshest treatment possible by police and are treated very unfairly in the courts. We should sue States and the police for civil rights class action, possibly under the 14th Amendement.


your thoughts?

Steven G. Erickson

PO Box 730

Enfield, CT 06083

sge@hotmail.com --65.204.211.10


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Deb[Tx])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 7:58 PM
Message: Thank God I am in Texas,Our police in my town are Great! --65.154.224.114


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by tyler[nc])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 8:18 PM
Message: Steve...while i sympathize with your story..., it seems rather hard to believe (and remember this is just my opinion) and one sided...another LL gets arrested for not making harrassing calls...I'll bet your stories never end....If you want to convince me...give me proof; otherwise this LL is skeptical of your stories....remember i've got a bridge for sale...you don't know me anymore than i you...so until otherwise...this smells of bs.

Why don't you post the police reports, any news articles, proof via the public that shows two sides...


I don't have those problems here as long as i respect and work within the law...sure people don't like landlords..., our city works at citing more code violations to ll's then home owners...but ll's obeying, respecting the law don't get beaten up and thrown into jail without reason....


maybe you should start a local LL association.


What is your point of the post? what do you want from me? --64.12.96.40


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Carolyn[MO])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 8:39 PM
Message: This person posted his story a couple of weeks ago. --152.163.253.8


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Gulfman[Fl])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 8:39 PM
Message: Good points Tyler as something is just not right here. --64.58.217.40


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Sean[CA])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 9:35 PM
Message: Thank you Tyler. --66.122.184.201


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by ALDO[WI])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 10:19 PM
Message: I've always said, and I'll say again, when I grow up I want to be just like Steven Erickson. Afterall, there are many slumlords in this world, but only a few whiney slimelords, so that must be somethng to aspire to.
Those cops weren't picking on you because you are allegedly a landlord. It was because you were seen wearing green socks. --24.94.252.131


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Sean[CA])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 10:48 PM
Message: And ALDO joins the group that owes me a beer... --63.207.227.12


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by CAW[OR])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 10:59 PM
Message: I get treated just fine out here on the left coast. My landlord experience doesn't bear out what you claim and my police experience makes your stories ring my bull**** meter. Get us the officers. I'd like to hear the other side of the story.

It sounds suspiciously like your problem might be drunk in public, not landlording. --206.163.168.11


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Brad[Mo])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 11:10 PM
Message: Jeffery and Rick: Are you guys out there? I thought we covered all this on September 5th.

Sorry Steve, I've already given my closing arguments previously.


Sean: How's the ankle doing? --66.143.34.223


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Kriver[IL])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 11:19 PM
Message: I am a Chicago Police Officer and an owner of several properties throughout Chicago. Not only do I totally side with landlords on calls (as to the law), when I call the police, I get prompt action and full cooperation. The police think deadbeat tenants are scum also. --64.12.96.40


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Dan[MD])
Posted on: Oct 2, 2003 1:30 AM
Message: I didn't believe this three weeks ago when it was first posted, and I don't believe it now.
Where's the Rest OF The Story? --141.157.17.160


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Chris[MD])
Posted on: Oct 2, 2003 3:46 AM
Message: here we go again..... can I get this delivered to my garden to till in for next spring? --165.247.105.70


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by David[fl])
Posted on: Oct 2, 2003 6:45 AM
Message: Last I knew being a landlord was not aginst the law so you can't get arrested for that. I have a great relationship with the local P.D. they know I screen to keep undesribles out and they help me do it. If I call them for help they know I have all ready tried to work tings out and I'm not the problem. I'd bet that you violated someone else's rights or you would'nt have gone to prison. --152.163.253.8


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Tom[CT])
Posted on: Oct 2, 2003 1:33 PM
Message: I know Steve and its a true story. I went to court for him because I had run ins with his assailant. He got railroaded because he spoke out. --12.242.228.187


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by tw[nj])
Posted on: Oct 2, 2003 1:38 PM
Message: I had a Police Officer come to my property once. I had called bcause while showing the building to a buyer, some "squatter" jumped out the window when we entered. The PO's didn't want to do anything. I insisted we at least file a report, all this dilly-dallying allowed a supervisior to respond. He looked at the PO's like they were rookies-or worse. Report filed.

I guess it depends on what cop you get. A cop that does not live in that town doesn't have any incentives to do anything but collect a weekly check. Maybe Steve got one of these type cops and rubbed him the wrong way. --67.82.5.32


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Lynn[CT])
Posted on: Oct 2, 2003 4:05 PM
Message: That is a crazy story. I have not heard about it. I have had no problems with the police in my area. During our evicition my husband and I called the police in CT (Meriden) to escort us into our property 3 times to check on things we told them our situation. Yeah we were being pain in the #$sses. They were great! they helped us look around to make sure we were going to be safe that no one was going to attack us and vise versa. I would love to read the article if you have one or tell me the dates and I will look it up? What newspaper was it in?
I am not saying that I don't believe you with all the coruption in CT, (Waterbury Mayor and Bridgport most recent)


I am not sure what it is your asking us to do I am a little confused? Is anybody else confused? I am a new LL maybe thats my confusion?

Lynn --65.141.139.241

Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at October 2, 2003 09:13 PM

From MrLandlord.com:

Landlord Rights (by Steven G. Erickson[CT])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 7:52 PM
Message: I had trouble getting 'equal protection and service' from police because I was a landlord. I was considered more sleezy than drug dealers and other criminal. Police were rude and offered no helf with property damage and other crimes.

A Stafford, Connecticut, selectman told me when I was a single family home owner, that the riffraff could be removed from town by squeezing landlords. By taking away street parking, sicking the building inspector of landlords, and investigating and harassing landlords, the selectman felt he could have less of the the undesirable people in town. Our rights are not protected.


I went to prison after being nearly robbed and beaten, as the robber was an alleged police informant. I was declared the 'victim' and had used pepper spray to end the attack on in my dark driveway.


Another landlord was harassed by phone by a tenant and then attacked on his yard. The police came and arrested the landlord and the woman is being used to prosecute the landlord.


We get the harshest treatment possible by police and are treated very unfairly in the courts. We should sue States and the police for civil rights class action, possibly under the 14th Amendement.


your thoughts?

Steven G. Erickson

PO Box 730

Enfield, CT 06083

sge@hotmail.com --65.204.211.10


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Deb[Tx])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 7:58 PM
Message: Thank God I am in Texas,Our police in my town are Great! --65.154.224.114


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by tyler[nc])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 8:18 PM
Message: Steve...while i sympathize with your story..., it seems rather hard to believe (and remember this is just my opinion) and one sided...another LL gets arrested for not making harrassing calls...I'll bet your stories never end....If you want to convince me...give me proof; otherwise this LL is skeptical of your stories....remember i've got a bridge for sale...you don't know me anymore than i you...so until otherwise...this smells of bs.

Why don't you post the police reports, any news articles, proof via the public that shows two sides...


I don't have those problems here as long as i respect and work within the law...sure people don't like landlords..., our city works at citing more code violations to ll's then home owners...but ll's obeying, respecting the law don't get beaten up and thrown into jail without reason....


maybe you should start a local LL association.


What is your point of the post? what do you want from me? --64.12.96.40


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Carolyn[MO])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 8:39 PM
Message: This person posted his story a couple of weeks ago. --152.163.253.8


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Gulfman[Fl])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 8:39 PM
Message: Good points Tyler as something is just not right here. --64.58.217.40


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Sean[CA])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 9:35 PM
Message: Thank you Tyler. --66.122.184.201


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by ALDO[WI])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 10:19 PM
Message: I've always said, and I'll say again, when I grow up I want to be just like Steven Erickson. Afterall, there are many slumlords in this world, but only a few whiney slimelords, so that must be somethng to aspire to.
Those cops weren't picking on you because you are allegedly a landlord. It was because you were seen wearing green socks. --24.94.252.131


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Sean[CA])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 10:48 PM
Message: And ALDO joins the group that owes me a beer... --63.207.227.12


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by CAW[OR])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 10:59 PM
Message: I get treated just fine out here on the left coast. My landlord experience doesn't bear out what you claim and my police experience makes your stories ring my bull**** meter. Get us the officers. I'd like to hear the other side of the story.

It sounds suspiciously like your problem might be drunk in public, not landlording. --206.163.168.11


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Brad[Mo])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 11:10 PM
Message: Jeffery and Rick: Are you guys out there? I thought we covered all this on September 5th.

Sorry Steve, I've already given my closing arguments previously.


Sean: How's the ankle doing? --66.143.34.223


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Kriver[IL])
Posted on: Oct 1, 2003 11:19 PM
Message: I am a Chicago Police Officer and an owner of several properties throughout Chicago. Not only do I totally side with landlords on calls (as to the law), when I call the police, I get prompt action and full cooperation. The police think deadbeat tenants are scum also. --64.12.96.40


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Dan[MD])
Posted on: Oct 2, 2003 1:30 AM
Message: I didn't believe this three weeks ago when it was first posted, and I don't believe it now.
Where's the Rest OF The Story? --141.157.17.160


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Chris[MD])
Posted on: Oct 2, 2003 3:46 AM
Message: here we go again..... can I get this delivered to my garden to till in for next spring? --165.247.105.70


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by David[fl])
Posted on: Oct 2, 2003 6:45 AM
Message: Last I knew being a landlord was not aginst the law so you can't get arrested for that. I have a great relationship with the local P.D. they know I screen to keep undesribles out and they help me do it. If I call them for help they know I have all ready tried to work tings out and I'm not the problem. I'd bet that you violated someone else's rights or you would'nt have gone to prison. --152.163.253.8


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Tom[CT])
Posted on: Oct 2, 2003 1:33 PM
Message: I know Steve and its a true story. I went to court for him because I had run ins with his assailant. He got railroaded because he spoke out. --12.242.228.187


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by tw[nj])
Posted on: Oct 2, 2003 1:38 PM
Message: I had a Police Officer come to my property once. I had called bcause while showing the building to a buyer, some "squatter" jumped out the window when we entered. The PO's didn't want to do anything. I insisted we at least file a report, all this dilly-dallying allowed a supervisior to respond. He looked at the PO's like they were rookies-or worse. Report filed.

I guess it depends on what cop you get. A cop that does not live in that town doesn't have any incentives to do anything but collect a weekly check. Maybe Steve got one of these type cops and rubbed him the wrong way. --67.82.5.32


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Landlord Rights (by Lynn[CT])
Posted on: Oct 2, 2003 4:05 PM
Message: That is a crazy story. I have not heard about it. I have had no problems with the police in my area. During our evicition my husband and I called the police in CT (Meriden) to escort us into our property 3 times to check on things we told them our situation. Yeah we were being pain in the #$sses. They were great! they helped us look around to make sure we were going to be safe that no one was going to attack us and vise versa. I would love to read the article if you have one or tell me the dates and I will look it up? What newspaper was it in?
I am not saying that I don't believe you with all the coruption in CT, (Waterbury Mayor and Bridgport most recent)


I am not sure what it is your asking us to do I am a little confused? Is anybody else confused? I am a new LL maybe thats my confusion?

Lynn --65.141.139.241

Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at October 2, 2003 09:13 PM

Connecticut State Police Internal Affairs refused to take nor deny these complaints:


Steven G. Erickson February 14, 2003
PO Box 730
Enfield, CT 06083-0730 860-749-xxxx

To whom it may concern at Connecticut State Police Internal Affairs:
(fax to 203-238-6447, tel 238-6390)

I belief Troopers Ameral and Langlais of Connecticut State Police, Troop C,
Tolland Connecticut, committed perjury in my criminal trial at Rockville GA#19,
20 Park St, Connecticut on 10-22-02, to get me convicted on 2 misdemeanor
charges. I would like to formerly lodge a complaint against Trooper Ameral
and Langlais as I believe they perjured themselves.
Trooper Ameral seemed to turn red and choke over his words as he
testified that when asked whether or not I had asked to make a statement
and identified myself 10-11-01, after I was nearly robbed, beaten, and
threatened on my own property at night after arriving home with Clayton Varno
in my van.
Troopers Ameral and Langlais refused to listen to the taped threats on Sue
xxxx answering machine against me, 10-11-01, before I was assaulted,
to take Sue xxxx statement, Apt x, 5 Church St., Stafford Springs, CT
06076 (860-684-xxxx). The pair also refused to take my statement, refused
to listen to the threats against me from my assailant made from 1:00 PM that
day against me. I had identified myself as a crime victim, my name, and
that I wished to make a complained. Both officers denied me this.
Trooper Ameral refused to take my statement during processing 10-12-01,
and refused to listen to my voicemail with the threats against me. My assailant
was not arrested. I asked Trooper Ameral more than once to make a complaint
and wanted my statement taken.
I called out while being held, and asked to make a complaint against my
assailant for attempted robbery, assault, and the threatening of me, Sgt Sticca
refused to take my statement, 10-12-01.
I called Troop C, when I arrived home in the morning after being held at
Troop C, Trooper Decker listened to my entire account of the previous events
from the late evening before. I believe he interviewed tenants that had heard
my assailant threaten my life and were aware of my assailant going back and
forth from the local bar all day looking for me, each time saying he was going
to hurt or kill me when I got home. Trooper Decker politely refused my 2 or
more requests to take my written statement regarding the events from the
previous day.
My assailant continued to harass and threaten me and attempted to beat
me again, Oct 18, 2001. I called the State Police and I believe it was Trooper
Colleen Anuszewski, who responded to the call maybe sometime between
8PM and 9PM. She listened to the threats on my voicemail and listened to my
account of the threats made against me and that I had just nearly escaped a
2nd beating by locking myself in my office in my other multi family house,
3 Church St, Stafford Springs, CT.
My assailant came after me 7 times in the time before my trial. 4 of the times
I reported the incidents to police. There was a follow up investigation that calls
me the victim of the assault in which I have included. This tells me that if my
statement was taken before I was arrested that I would never have been
arrested, and at the time of the 2nd report, I think my charges should have
been dropped.
Sgt Izzarelli took my statement and interviewed Sue xxxx,
possibly Clayton Varno, and others. Sgt Izzarelli came calling on me
and in the presence of Sue xxxx, seemed surprised that my assailant
was not arrested and with my case in general, in my opinion.
I believe I had previous arguments with Trooper Langlais, over teens
drinking, fighting, and selling drugs off my front lawn, and my displeasure
over losing sleep and with the lack of anything being done. Langlais may
have been one of the officers on a previous occasion to Oct 11, 2001, that
were chanting, "Oh Stevie, Oh Stevie, Oh Stevie!" outside my office door
waking me up maybe 2AM or 3AM in the morning maybe an hour or so
after I had called in and complained about intoxicated teenagers, banging
into my house, and being so loud they were keeping me awake.
The contents of this letter are to my best belief and knowlege.

Thank you,

Steven G. Erickson

Steven G. Erickson April 16, 2003
xxx
xxxx

To Whom It May Concern at the Connecticut State Police Internal Affairs Unit (fax to 203-238-6447, tel 238-6390.

Subject: Trooper Mulcahey’s possible violation of my (Steven G. Erickson) 1st and 14th Amendment rights, civil rights violations, and improper conduct unbecoming of a State Law Official

I believe Trooper Mulcahey acted improperly in telling me I would be arrested if I pursued any charges or allegations against anyone and did not leave the State of Connecticut. I had brought a tape that Trooper Mulcahey took possession of threats against my daughter, her life, by a man who was sexually obsessed with my then 14 year old daughter and her friend Leann. The tape also had threats against me, possibly 15 to 20 involving Peter Coukos. Please look into my allegations and take my complaint.
From statements made by Peter Coukos, before I was harassed by him telling me that the Stafford Resident Trooper and Stafford Police Officers did not like him (Peter Coukos) getting along with me and encouraged him to harass me and get rid of me. After making this statement, Peter Coukos, told me that if I did not write him a check for $30,000 he would make up a false police report, report me to the building inspector for possible code violations, and would try and say I had committed fraud in some way or another fabricating a complaint. I was also told I was evicted from the property by Peter Coukos, when I believe only a court order could bar me from 3 and 5 Church St. Stafford Springs, CT, and that it was entirely illegal that I could be told I was barred from Stafford Springs and/or Connecticut, by someone saying they are speaking on behalf of the police.
I asked Trooper Mulcahey to take my complaint against Peter Coukos more than once and over time from as early as February 2002 into the Summer of 2002, regarding Peter Coukos threatening me, assaulting me, locking me of my apartment, blocking my vehicles in the driveway, breaking into my apartment, stealing my van seats and pick up truck cap, etc. I believe it was an admission to these crimes by Peter Coukos when he signed an agreement not to harass me and to settle my Small Claims suit I brought against him regarding the stolen property.
I do not think it honorable and legal for a State Trooper to threaten me with arrest for being the victim of crimes, not the perpetrator, if I pursued matters taken in police reports, and if I did not leave Stafford Springs and/or Connecticut as soon as was possible. I find it disturbing that Peter Coukos, claimed to me that the Resident State Trooper had told him, “Big Mouth is going to be shut up,” “Big Mouth is going to be run out of town,” and “Big Mouth is going to be taught a lesson,” before the harassment began, telling me it was encouraged and condoned possibly violating federal and Connecticut laws by police officers and Peter Coukos.

What is contained in this letter is to my best belief and knowledge. Please look into my allegations and take my complaint.

Thank you,

Steven G. Erickson

P.S. the address of some of the violation is 3 and 5 Church St., Stafford Springs, CT 06076


October 2, 2003

Heard from a former tenant today and was informed that Peter Coukos called police in Stafford Connecticut today to 5 Church St, Stafford Springs, CT, and they met with him at the address to discuss his allegations that I broke into his basement, kicking in the door, leaving my picture, and a note saying “Fuck the Police.” Peter later was overheard saying he had a gun permit, could carry a gun if I were to come around the property.

I hope Peter Coukos does not have a gun permit as he allegedly ran a woman off the road hitting her car repeatedly getting a DUI, takes large amounts of pain killers, is known to smoke marijuana daily, and allegedly attended NA after James Hogancamp and Vicky Tamaro supplied and smoked crack with him, getting him addicted. Peter Coukos is also known to drink large amounts of alcohol daily.


Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at October 2, 2003 09:57 PM

Connecticut State Police Internal Affairs refused to take nor deny these complaints:


Steven G. Erickson February 14, 2003
PO Box 730
Enfield, CT 06083-0730 860-749-xxxx

To whom it may concern at Connecticut State Police Internal Affairs:
(fax to 203-238-6447, tel 238-6390)

I belief Troopers Ameral and Langlais of Connecticut State Police, Troop C,
Tolland Connecticut, committed perjury in my criminal trial at Rockville GA#19,
20 Park St, Connecticut on 10-22-02, to get me convicted on 2 misdemeanor
charges. I would like to formerly lodge a complaint against Trooper Ameral
and Langlais as I believe they perjured themselves.
Trooper Ameral seemed to turn red and choke over his words as he
testified that when asked whether or not I had asked to make a statement
and identified myself 10-11-01, after I was nearly robbed, beaten, and
threatened on my own property at night after arriving home with Clayton Varno
in my van.
Troopers Ameral and Langlais refused to listen to the taped threats on Sue
xxxx answering machine against me, 10-11-01, before I was assaulted,
to take Sue xxxx statement, Apt x, 5 Church St., Stafford Springs, CT
06076 (860-684-xxxx). The pair also refused to take my statement, refused
to listen to the threats against me from my assailant made from 1:00 PM that
day against me. I had identified myself as a crime victim, my name, and
that I wished to make a complained. Both officers denied me this.
Trooper Ameral refused to take my statement during processing 10-12-01,
and refused to listen to my voicemail with the threats against me. My assailant
was not arrested. I asked Trooper Ameral more than once to make a complaint
and wanted my statement taken.
I called out while being held, and asked to make a complaint against my
assailant for attempted robbery, assault, and the threatening of me, Sgt Sticca
refused to take my statement, 10-12-01.
I called Troop C, when I arrived home in the morning after being held at
Troop C, Trooper Decker listened to my entire account of the previous events
from the late evening before. I believe he interviewed tenants that had heard
my assailant threaten my life and were aware of my assailant going back and
forth from the local bar all day looking for me, each time saying he was going
to hurt or kill me when I got home. Trooper Decker politely refused my 2 or
more requests to take my written statement regarding the events from the
previous day.
My assailant continued to harass and threaten me and attempted to beat
me again, Oct 18, 2001. I called the State Police and I believe it was Trooper
Colleen Anuszewski, who responded to the call maybe sometime between
8PM and 9PM. She listened to the threats on my voicemail and listened to my
account of the threats made against me and that I had just nearly escaped a
2nd beating by locking myself in my office in my other multi family house,
3 Church St, Stafford Springs, CT.
My assailant came after me 7 times in the time before my trial. 4 of the times
I reported the incidents to police. There was a follow up investigation that calls
me the victim of the assault in which I have included. This tells me that if my
statement was taken before I was arrested that I would never have been
arrested, and at the time of the 2nd report, I think my charges should have
been dropped.
Sgt Izzarelli took my statement and interviewed Sue xxxx,
possibly Clayton Varno, and others. Sgt Izzarelli came calling on me
and in the presence of Sue xxxx, seemed surprised that my assailant
was not arrested and with my case in general, in my opinion.
I believe I had previous arguments with Trooper Langlais, over teens
drinking, fighting, and selling drugs off my front lawn, and my displeasure
over losing sleep and with the lack of anything being done. Langlais may
have been one of the officers on a previous occasion to Oct 11, 2001, that
were chanting, "Oh Stevie, Oh Stevie, Oh Stevie!" outside my office door
waking me up maybe 2AM or 3AM in the morning maybe an hour or so
after I had called in and complained about intoxicated teenagers, banging
into my house, and being so loud they were keeping me awake.
The contents of this letter are to my best belief and knowlege.

Thank you,

Steven G. Erickson

Steven G. Erickson April 16, 2003
xxx
xxxx

To Whom It May Concern at the Connecticut State Police Internal Affairs Unit (fax to 203-238-6447, tel 238-6390.

Subject: Trooper Mulcahey’s possible violation of my (Steven G. Erickson) 1st and 14th Amendment rights, civil rights violations, and improper conduct unbecoming of a State Law Official

I believe Trooper Mulcahey acted improperly in telling me I would be arrested if I pursued any charges or allegations against anyone and did not leave the State of Connecticut. I had brought a tape that Trooper Mulcahey took possession of threats against my daughter, her life, by a man who was sexually obsessed with my then 14 year old daughter and her friend Leann. The tape also had threats against me, possibly 15 to 20 involving Peter Coukos. Please look into my allegations and take my complaint.
From statements made by Peter Coukos, before I was harassed by him telling me that the Stafford Resident Trooper and Stafford Police Officers did not like him (Peter Coukos) getting along with me and encouraged him to harass me and get rid of me. After making this statement, Peter Coukos, told me that if I did not write him a check for $30,000 he would make up a false police report, report me to the building inspector for possible code violations, and would try and say I had committed fraud in some way or another fabricating a complaint. I was also told I was evicted from the property by Peter Coukos, when I believe only a court order could bar me from 3 and 5 Church St. Stafford Springs, CT, and that it was entirely illegal that I could be told I was barred from Stafford Springs and/or Connecticut, by someone saying they are speaking on behalf of the police.
I asked Trooper Mulcahey to take my complaint against Peter Coukos more than once and over time from as early as February 2002 into the Summer of 2002, regarding Peter Coukos threatening me, assaulting me, locking me of my apartment, blocking my vehicles in the driveway, breaking into my apartment, stealing my van seats and pick up truck cap, etc. I believe it was an admission to these crimes by Peter Coukos when he signed an agreement not to harass me and to settle my Small Claims suit I brought against him regarding the stolen property.
I do not think it honorable and legal for a State Trooper to threaten me with arrest for being the victim of crimes, not the perpetrator, if I pursued matters taken in police reports, and if I did not leave Stafford Springs and/or Connecticut as soon as was possible. I find it disturbing that Peter Coukos, claimed to me that the Resident State Trooper had told him, “Big Mouth is going to be shut up,” “Big Mouth is going to be run out of town,” and “Big Mouth is going to be taught a lesson,” before the harassment began, telling me it was encouraged and condoned possibly violating federal and Connecticut laws by police officers and Peter Coukos.

What is contained in this letter is to my best belief and knowledge. Please look into my allegations and take my complaint.

Thank you,

Steven G. Erickson

P.S. the address of some of the violation is 3 and 5 Church St., Stafford Springs, CT 06076


October 2, 2003

Heard from a former tenant today and was informed that Peter Coukos called police in Stafford Connecticut today to 5 Church St, Stafford Springs, CT, and they met with him at the address to discuss his allegations that I broke into his basement, kicking in the door, leaving my picture, and a note saying “Fuck the Police.” Peter later was overheard saying he had a gun permit, could carry a gun if I were to come around the property.

I hope Peter Coukos does not have a gun permit as he allegedly ran a woman off the road hitting her car repeatedly getting a DUI, takes large amounts of pain killers, is known to smoke marijuana daily, and allegedly attended NA after James Hogancamp and Vicky Tamaro supplied and smoked crack with him, getting him addicted. Peter Coukos is also known to drink large amounts of alcohol daily.


Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at October 2, 2003 09:58 PM

From the Manchester, CT, Journal Inquirer:

Pioneer probe finds surprises




By Don Michak, Journal Inquirer October 03, 2003




Mob link stronger than suspected at company that lost $9 million in state pension money

HARTFORD - The link between a Windsor-based investment partnership backed with state pension money and a convicted stock swindler tied to organized crime is stronger than had been suspected by the state treasurer, who last week asked federal investigators to probe the connection.
The partnership known as Pioneer Ventures Associates, which included friends and campaign contributors of Gov. John G. Rowland, pumped more than $9 million from the state pension fund into a now-defunct company called America's Shopping Mall Inc.
The investment, which consultants hired by state Treasurer Denise L. Nappier now value at just $178, represents the single-biggest loss among the companies in the Pioneer portfolio.
A report that America's Shopping Mall filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission four years ago - months after Pioneer made its initial investment in the business - reveals that the company's stockholders included the convicted stock promoter, Abraham Salaman of New Jersey, as well as several members of his family and a firm said to be under Salaman's control.
The majority of the common stock in America's Shopping Mall was owned by its senior executives and their families, according to the company's report to the federal regulatory agency, called an SB-2.
Nevertheless, the Salamans held thousands of shares and stood to benefit from a proposed stock sale the company was "registering" with the report.
Nappier had learned that Pioneer had an indirect link to Salaman, her spokesman, Bernard Kavaler said this week.
But he added that Nappier hadn't been aware Salaman and his family owned stakes in America's Shopping Mall.
Salaman, of Cherry Hill, N.J., was one of 19 people indicted by a federal grand jury three years ago in a stock-manipulation scheme that The New York Times described as "Goodfellas meets Boiler Room."
Prosecutors in the U.S. attorney's office in Brooklyn, N.Y., alleged it was a "pump and dump" ploy in which partners secretly bought big blocks of stock in four companies, boosted the stocks' value by spreading false information, and then quickly sold out.
The gangsters, who included the brother-in-law of Mafia hitman-turned-informer Salvatore "Sammy the Bull'' Gravano, furnished protection from irate stockholders not in on the scheme, they added.
Authorities also said $60 million in profits was skimmed from the illegal stock sales from 1993 to 1996 and then laundered, often though offshore bank accounts, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported.
Salaman, then 65, was charged with three counts of racketeering conspiracy and securities fraud.
He pleaded guilty in 2001 to "knowingly and willfully conspiring to defraud the United States."
Salaman was sentenced to a year in home confinement to be followed by five years' probation and ordered to have no further involvement in the securities industry "in any way."
He also was fined $25,000 and required to pay restitution of $25 million over his probationary period, but the government later agreed to having the restitution order vacated.
Salaman reportedly also was associated with a 1970s stock fraud scandal involving the former New Jersey-based Magic Marker Corp. The value of that company's shares had been inflated in an illegal scheme said to be orchestrated by Harry Blumenfeld, a business associate of legendary Mafia financier Meyer Lansky.
America's Shopping Mall, which was based in New Jersey but incorporated in Nevada, had an unusual corporate history, in which Pioneer often played a significant role.
Another company incorporated in Nevada, Initio Inc., had used money from Pioneer in 1998 to buy the "Deerskin Trading Post" and "Joan Cook" catalog operations, which sold leather items, housewares, jewelry, and gift items.
That purchase caused Initio's stock price to spike, a development that allowed one of Pioneer's founders, Robert A. Lerman of West Hartford, to do some profitable insider trading on the day after its announcement by selling 6,400 of the Initio shares he held personally.
Initio, however, soon decided sell its new mail-order division to a company incorporated in Virginia called Advanced Medical Services, which purported to manufacture blood drugs before abandoning the health-care business in 1996.
Advanced Medical Services in the sale also assumed about $2 million of Initio's debt to Pioneer.
Advanced Medical Services subsequently incorporated America's Shopping Mall as a new subsidiary and sold $4.2 million in preferred stock to Pioneer.
By July 1999, Advanced Medical Services had changed its name and actually merged itself into America's Shopping Mall. It also put the second of Pioneer's founders, John F. Ferraro of Southwick, Mass., on its board of directors.
That panel also included several individuals who had been associated with either Advanced Medical Services or its catalog businesses, along with a man the company described to the SEC as the owner and manager of "a sandwich shop'' who "also manages a real-estate partnership.''
America's Shopping Mall identified Salaman as a shareholder when it informed the SEC of a proposed sale of $5 million in common stock in December 1999.
That was seven months after Pioneer became the owner of all of the preferred shares in America's Shopping Mall through its initial $4.2 million investment.
Pioneer put another $2.7 million in state pension money into the company in 2000, when America's Shopping Mall also confessed in another report to the SEC that it had taken $1 million from the proceeds of its sale of preferred stock to Pioneer, opened an account with a brokerage firm, and began buying and selling and putting call options on common stocks.
It admitted that the move violated its agreement with Pioneer but added that one of the companies in which it invested was Initio, where Ferraro is also a director.
America's Shopping Mall lost a total of $441,006 on its securities trading that year, according to the report.
The company's former chief executive officer, Irwin Schneidmill, last year told a trade publication, Catalog Age, that it had been "foreclosed by its secured creditors and liquidated by outside sources.''
The state pension fund is the sole limited partner in Pioneer, which is owned equally by two entities, Pioneer Ventures Corp. of Windsor and Allied Management Partners of West Hartford.
Lerman and Ferraro run the former group while principals in the latter include lawyer Jon C. Peters of Hartford, real-estate developer William B. Collins of West Hartford, Meriden lawyer and former state prosecutor Thomas P. Cadden, and James Mengacci, a Naugatuck funeral director whose sister-in-law is Rowland's executive secretary.
Pioneer has focused on privately traded preferred shares and convertible securities in a curious clutch of companies, rather than on common stocks bought and sold on the stock exchanges.
Overall, the Pioneer portfolio has performed very poorly, according to the treasurer's consultants, who say the partnership's total investment of $50,666,330 in state pension funds is now worth $31,633,730 - a $19,043,600 loss.
The partnership, however, was controversial before Silvester committed first $50 million, then another $25 million to it - the latter as a lame duck - because Rowland had forwarded a Pioneer "offering memorandum" to Silvester's predecessor, former state Treasurer Christopher Burnham.
Burnham ignored the proposal, but Silvester - whom Rowland named treasurer after Burnham acquit to take a private-sector job - has said he was "pressured" to make the deal because Pioneer's backers promised to contribute to the governor's 1998 re-election campaign.
Rowand, Lerman, and Peters have adamantly denied that there was such a scheme.
But state campaign-finance records show 13 people linked to Pioneer gave Rowland $34,000 in that campaign, including Lerman and Ferraro, Lerman's wife and son-in-law, and investors like Geoffrey C. Rowntree of West Hartford.
Meanwhile, Silvester, who was convicted on federal racketeering and money-laundering charges in 1999, testified in a corruption trial last summer that Pioneer was the only "bad deal" he did.
Nappier, who as treasurer oversees the pension fund, demanded that Pioneer return the $25 million Silvester authorized after she defeated him in the 1998 election, She also has tangled repeatedly with Pioneer over its valuation of "unrealized" assets and at one point formally forbade the partnership from making more investments.
Nappier last week asked Connecticut's U.S. attorney and the SEC's regional director in New York to investigate the circumstances surrounding "at least one investment" Salaman was said to have brought to Pioneer.
The treasurer also said she wanted prosecutors and the SEC to check out a New York Post business columnist's claims about criminal connections between Pioneer, Salaman, and Michael Lauer's Connecticut-based Lancer Management Group, a purported billion-dollar group of hedge funds that was shut down in July by the SEC, which said they were essentially worthless.
Nappier's call drew a quick rebuke from Rowland, who said the treasurer "shouldn't be impugning people's reputations and, you know, slurring people who haven't done anything wrong."
Rowland also suggested that Nappier's comments were politically motivated since she had said in a Journal Inquirer interview two weeks before that she was considering running for governor.
Kavaler, Nappier's spokesman, responded that she had a responsibility to bring to the appropriate authorities "information of serious concern." He also noted Lerman had confirmed that the partnership had "business relationships" with firms and individuals linked to organized crime.

�Journal Inquirer 2003

Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at October 4, 2003 01:51 PM

From the Manchester, CT, Journal Inquirer:

Pioneer probe finds surprises




By Don Michak, Journal Inquirer October 03, 2003




Mob link stronger than suspected at company that lost $9 million in state pension money

HARTFORD - The link between a Windsor-based investment partnership backed with state pension money and a convicted stock swindler tied to organized crime is stronger than had been suspected by the state treasurer, who last week asked federal investigators to probe the connection.
The partnership known as Pioneer Ventures Associates, which included friends and campaign contributors of Gov. John G. Rowland, pumped more than $9 million from the state pension fund into a now-defunct company called America's Shopping Mall Inc.
The investment, which consultants hired by state Treasurer Denise L. Nappier now value at just $178, represents the single-biggest loss among the companies in the Pioneer portfolio.
A report that America's Shopping Mall filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission four years ago - months after Pioneer made its initial investment in the business - reveals that the company's stockholders included the convicted stock promoter, Abraham Salaman of New Jersey, as well as several members of his family and a firm said to be under Salaman's control.
The majority of the common stock in America's Shopping Mall was owned by its senior executives and their families, according to the company's report to the federal regulatory agency, called an SB-2.
Nevertheless, the Salamans held thousands of shares and stood to benefit from a proposed stock sale the company was "registering" with the report.
Nappier had learned that Pioneer had an indirect link to Salaman, her spokesman, Bernard Kavaler said this week.
But he added that Nappier hadn't been aware Salaman and his family owned stakes in America's Shopping Mall.
Salaman, of Cherry Hill, N.J., was one of 19 people indicted by a federal grand jury three years ago in a stock-manipulation scheme that The New York Times described as "Goodfellas meets Boiler Room."
Prosecutors in the U.S. attorney's office in Brooklyn, N.Y., alleged it was a "pump and dump" ploy in which partners secretly bought big blocks of stock in four companies, boosted the stocks' value by spreading false information, and then quickly sold out.
The gangsters, who included the brother-in-law of Mafia hitman-turned-informer Salvatore "Sammy the Bull'' Gravano, furnished protection from irate stockholders not in on the scheme, they added.
Authorities also said $60 million in profits was skimmed from the illegal stock sales from 1993 to 1996 and then laundered, often though offshore bank accounts, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported.
Salaman, then 65, was charged with three counts of racketeering conspiracy and securities fraud.
He pleaded guilty in 2001 to "knowingly and willfully conspiring to defraud the United States."
Salaman was sentenced to a year in home confinement to be followed by five years' probation and ordered to have no further involvement in the securities industry "in any way."
He also was fined $25,000 and required to pay restitution of $25 million over his probationary period, but the government later agreed to having the restitution order vacated.
Salaman reportedly also was associated with a 1970s stock fraud scandal involving the former New Jersey-based Magic Marker Corp. The value of that company's shares had been inflated in an illegal scheme said to be orchestrated by Harry Blumenfeld, a business associate of legendary Mafia financier Meyer Lansky.
America's Shopping Mall, which was based in New Jersey but incorporated in Nevada, had an unusual corporate history, in which Pioneer often played a significant role.
Another company incorporated in Nevada, Initio Inc., had used money from Pioneer in 1998 to buy the "Deerskin Trading Post" and "Joan Cook" catalog operations, which sold leather items, housewares, jewelry, and gift items.
That purchase caused Initio's stock price to spike, a development that allowed one of Pioneer's founders, Robert A. Lerman of West Hartford, to do some profitable insider trading on the day after its announcement by selling 6,400 of the Initio shares he held personally.
Initio, however, soon decided sell its new mail-order division to a company incorporated in Virginia called Advanced Medical Services, which purported to manufacture blood drugs before abandoning the health-care business in 1996.
Advanced Medical Services in the sale also assumed about $2 million of Initio's debt to Pioneer.
Advanced Medical Services subsequently incorporated America's Shopping Mall as a new subsidiary and sold $4.2 million in preferred stock to Pioneer.
By July 1999, Advanced Medical Services had changed its name and actually merged itself into America's Shopping Mall. It also put the second of Pioneer's founders, John F. Ferraro of Southwick, Mass., on its board of directors.
That panel also included several individuals who had been associated with either Advanced Medical Services or its catalog businesses, along with a man the company described to the SEC as the owner and manager of "a sandwich shop'' who "also manages a real-estate partnership.''
America's Shopping Mall identified Salaman as a shareholder when it informed the SEC of a proposed sale of $5 million in common stock in December 1999.
That was seven months after Pioneer became the owner of all of the preferred shares in America's Shopping Mall through its initial $4.2 million investment.
Pioneer put another $2.7 million in state pension money into the company in 2000, when America's Shopping Mall also confessed in another report to the SEC that it had taken $1 million from the proceeds of its sale of preferred stock to Pioneer, opened an account with a brokerage firm, and began buying and selling and putting call options on common stocks.
It admitted that the move violated its agreement with Pioneer but added that one of the companies in which it invested was Initio, where Ferraro is also a director.
America's Shopping Mall lost a total of $441,006 on its securities trading that year, according to the report.
The company's former chief executive officer, Irwin Schneidmill, last year told a trade publication, Catalog Age, that it had been "foreclosed by its secured creditors and liquidated by outside sources.''
The state pension fund is the sole limited partner in Pioneer, which is owned equally by two entities, Pioneer Ventures Corp. of Windsor and Allied Management Partners of West Hartford.
Lerman and Ferraro run the former group while principals in the latter include lawyer Jon C. Peters of Hartford, real-estate developer William B. Collins of West Hartford, Meriden lawyer and former state prosecutor Thomas P. Cadden, and James Mengacci, a Naugatuck funeral director whose sister-in-law is Rowland's executive secretary.
Pioneer has focused on privately traded preferred shares and convertible securities in a curious clutch of companies, rather than on common stocks bought and sold on the stock exchanges.
Overall, the Pioneer portfolio has performed very poorly, according to the treasurer's consultants, who say the partnership's total investment of $50,666,330 in state pension funds is now worth $31,633,730 - a $19,043,600 loss.
The partnership, however, was controversial before Silvester committed first $50 million, then another $25 million to it - the latter as a lame duck - because Rowland had forwarded a Pioneer "offering memorandum" to Silvester's predecessor, former state Treasurer Christopher Burnham.
Burnham ignored the proposal, but Silvester - whom Rowland named treasurer after Burnham acquit to take a private-sector job - has said he was "pressured" to make the deal because Pioneer's backers promised to contribute to the governor's 1998 re-election campaign.
Rowand, Lerman, and Peters have adamantly denied that there was such a scheme.
But state campaign-finance records show 13 people linked to Pioneer gave Rowland $34,000 in that campaign, including Lerman and Ferraro, Lerman's wife and son-in-law, and investors like Geoffrey C. Rowntree of West Hartford.
Meanwhile, Silvester, who was convicted on federal racketeering and money-laundering charges in 1999, testified in a corruption trial last summer that Pioneer was the only "bad deal" he did.
Nappier, who as treasurer oversees the pension fund, demanded that Pioneer return the $25 million Silvester authorized after she defeated him in the 1998 election, She also has tangled repeatedly with Pioneer over its valuation of "unrealized" assets and at one point formally forbade the partnership from making more investments.
Nappier last week asked Connecticut's U.S. attorney and the SEC's regional director in New York to investigate the circumstances surrounding "at least one investment" Salaman was said to have brought to Pioneer.
The treasurer also said she wanted prosecutors and the SEC to check out a New York Post business columnist's claims about criminal connections between Pioneer, Salaman, and Michael Lauer's Connecticut-based Lancer Management Group, a purported billion-dollar group of hedge funds that was shut down in July by the SEC, which said they were essentially worthless.
Nappier's call drew a quick rebuke from Rowland, who said the treasurer "shouldn't be impugning people's reputations and, you know, slurring people who haven't done anything wrong."
Rowland also suggested that Nappier's comments were politically motivated since she had said in a Journal Inquirer interview two weeks before that she was considering running for governor.
Kavaler, Nappier's spokesman, responded that she had a responsibility to bring to the appropriate authorities "information of serious concern." He also noted Lerman had confirmed that the partnership had "business relationships" with firms and individuals linked to organized crime.

�Journal Inquirer 2003

Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at October 4, 2003 01:51 PM

From http://www.ccag.net/Democracy/call_to_accountability.htm
Calls for a legislative investigation into corruption in the Rowland administration continue to grow. The legislature has not issued a single subpoena into the loss and misuse of millions of dollars of public funds. During these difficult budget times we must be vigilant in how public funds are used.
Please contact you legislators and legislative leadership to demand a public inquiry into corruption in Connecticut.
Summary of selected (far from all) Rowland scandals:
1998 DEP selective enforcement. Appointee Vito Santosiero quits DEP after charges surface. They say he "fixed" environmental violations for those who gave, usually through major campaign contributions.
1999 Paul Silvester. Rowland appoints him Treasurer in '97, runs on ticket and raises funds with him in '98. Then Silvester pleads guilty to money-laundering and racketeering. The trials in this complex case are just beginning again.
2001 Illegal payback to nursing homes bosses. Rowland sends $30M to nursing homes, later ruled in court as an illegal attempt to take away union rights. Nursing home owners have been heavy Rowland contributors.
2001 Fired DEP whistleblower. Chief DEP Counsel Anne Rapkin was too honest in her professional assessments and was fired. CT has spent over $2M in litigation.
2001 Mark Trinkley. Former DECD official plead guilty of taking $35,000 in home improvements in exchange for awarding a $6.5M Connecticut grant to the same company.
2002 Enron and Peter Ellef. Rowland's Chief of Staff resigned after losing $220M to Enron in an "illegal loan". FBI is still investigating.
2003 Lawrence Alibozek. Former Deputy Chief of Staff plead guilty of taking gold and cash for steering big state contracts. $12,000 in gold dug up by investigators in his backyard.
2003 Tomasso. Rowland grossly underpays for use of Tomasso vacation estate. Tomasso gets over $217M in state contracts since 1995. They include $1600 a month to "cut grass and shovel snow" at State Lottery headquarters, says George Wandrak, Lottery Board Chair. (All Tomasso state contracts are under federal investigation.) In a bid to the Naugatuck Valley quasi-public development agency, Tomasso won the contract even though they were the HIGHEST-paid bidder, asking about a $5M fee. A second competent company had figured in a $3.5M fee, while a third gave themselves about $4M for the same work! Talk about the cost of doing business.
2003 GOP Gold Card. CCAG asks the Election Enforcement Commission to investigate after Rowland's illegal personal use of GOP Gold Card comes to light. Their investigation is still underway.
2003 Arthur Diedrick and Bob Matthews. Diedrick was Rowland's Chair of the CT Development Authority, a quasi-public agency like CRRA, where public money makes the transition to private hands. In 1995, Diedrick awarded his own company a $300,000 contract. Cooler heads later re-bid it. Rowland moved him to a like agency, CT Innovations. Now it becomes public that Diedrick's wife invested in a company, Pinnacle Food, that Diedrick's new agency was considering for a big low-interest loan of your money. Shadowy friend Bob Matthews, a professional political buddy and donor, had a fat contract riding on Pinnacle getting the loan and coming to CT. He was also a major shareholder. He had his buddy John call Pinnacle from the golf course to express his "support" for the loan. Alas, the deal fell apart because Pinnacle found even sweeter meat elsewhere. By the way, appointee Diedrick is also President of a local land trust, which, under his leadership, conveyed a North Litchfield lakefront house to John Rowland for $105,000. Gee, do you think it ever went on the market? As if that weren't smelly enough, the land trust loaned John the money to close the contract!
The Rowland Administration is the most consistently corrupt in the country. Let's demand that it be held to account.

Posted by: at October 4, 2003 10:05 PM

Who is a worse criminal, Governor Rowland or Martha Stewart? Click on the word 'worse' for story.

Posted by: Worse at November 15, 2003 10:15 PM

click on 'Repeal Patriot Act' for story

Posted by: Repeal Patriot Act at November 16, 2003 07:59 PM

Fuck Connecticut!!!!!

I'd never live there with a dishonest fuck like Rowland!!!!

Posted by: Rowland can Eat ME at November 18, 2003 11:29 AM

Rowland Hires New Lawyer For Himself
November 20, 2003
By JON LENDER And DAVE ALTIMARI, Hartford Courant Staff Writers (ctnow.com)

At a time when a federal corruption investigation swirls around his administration, Gov. John G. Rowland has retained a new personal lawyer - a prominent criminal defense attorney from New Haven, William F. Dow III, sources said Wednesday.

Rowland's office would not comment and Dow could not be reached, but the move by Rowland appears to have happened quietly - weeks or even months ago.

Present and former members of Rowland's administration are under grand jury scrutiny, and the governor's former deputy chief of staff, Lawrence Alibozek, pleaded guilty in March to receiving bribes in exchange for helping to steer lucrative state contracts to a contractor. Sources have identified the contractor as a firm affiliated with the New Britain-area Tomasso family, members of whom Rowland counts as his friends.

Rowland has repeatedly denied personal wrongdoing and has said he has no reason to believe he will be charged with any crimes.

Why retain a criminal lawyer, then? For one, Rowland recently named his longtime personal lawyer, James Robertson, to a state judgeship.

Sources also said that Rowland may be more concerned about the probe than he lets on.

Another possibility is that even if Rowland truly believes he faces no personal jeopardy, he still would be prudent to have a personal attorney experienced in criminal matters in the event that criminal investigators ever want to ask him questions about people in his administration.

Dow certainly has that experience - and has more of a criminal focus than Robertson.

Dow is a partner in the law firm Jacobs, Grudberg, Belt & Dow, which handles a full range of civil and criminal legal services, but his focus is on criminal law. The law firm's website mentions that he was a federal prosecutor from 1974 to 1976 and says, "Mr. Dow is included in The Best Lawyers in America in connection with criminal defense representation."

It adds that "Mr. Dow is heavily involved in the trial and appeal of cases in both state and federal courts, including homicide and other crimes of violence, drug offenses and theft, as well as personal injury claims and other civil matters."

Dow has made his name primarily by handling criminal cases from murders to white collar offenses, a number of them high-profile cases.

He currently is representing Jennifer O'Connor, a Branford woman accused of killing her 7-year-old daughter last year in their condominium. Dow is trying to get the woman, who has a history of educational and emotional difficulties, found not guilty by reason of insanity.

He also represents Polish priest Roman Kramek, 41, charged with sexually assaulting a New Britain girl when he visited her home to give her spiritual counseling.

One of his most prominent clients was former Yale Professor Antonio Lasaga, who was arrested after federal authorities found hundreds of thousands of images of child pornography on his computer as well as videotapes of sexual encounters with a Cheshire boy. Lasaga is now in jail, having pleaded guilty to federal charges that called for 20 years in prison and state charges for which he was sentenced to 110 years.

Dow also represented Robert H. Haines III of Avon, a millionaire who eventually pleaded guilty in federal court to bank fraud. Haines was president of the Richard Roberts Group and was accused of altering documents and misleading a Florida bank into letting him fraudulently draw $325,583 on two real estate loans.

Posted by: Steven G. Erickson at November 20, 2003 05:46 AM

Feds Eyeing Lake House
Rowland Cottage Is Subject Of Subpoenas

December 2, 2003
By DAVE ALTIMARI And JON LENDER, Hartford Courant Staff Writers

Federal investigators have contacted several contractors who renovated Gov. John G. Rowland's Litchfield cottage - and at least three of them have been subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury to answer questions about what they did at the lakeside home, how much they were paid, and by whom.

The moves by the FBI and federal prosecutors are the first public indication that U.S. authorities are focusing on a matter involving the governor personally - in this case, work done directly for Rowland on his private vacation residence.

Federal authorities have spent the past year investigating whether state officials in Rowland's administration steered millions in state contracts to The Tomasso Group in exchange for bribes. One of Rowland's top staff members has pleaded guilty to participating in the bid-rigging scheme.

Rowland's chief of staff, Dean Pagani, said Monday night that "the governor has not been interviewed" - or contacted - "by the FBI or anyone in law enforcement in connection with work done at the cottage or any other subject matter."

Later Monday night, Pagani called The Courant back with a statement from Rowland.

"Over the past year, we have cooperated fully with the government's investigation," the statement reads. "We have turned over thousands and thousands of pages of documents. I have instructed everyone in my administration to cooperate. I stand willing to continue to cooperate."

The new subpoenas were issued just days after a Nov. 25 story in The Courant raised questions about renovations beginning in 1997 that transformed Rowland's Bantam Lake cottage from virtually "uninhabitable" condition into a comfortable retreat with a cathedral ceiling, custom pine cabinets, propane heat, a stone patio and a waterside hot tub.

Building permits filed in Litchfield indicate all of the work cost about $13,500, while sources familiar with the condition of the cottage before Rowland bought it estimated the renovations might have cost at least three times that amount.

Rowland won't answer any questions about the matter because it relates to his personal life, Pagani has said.

At least three contractors or subcontractors on the job were visited or called by FBI agents late last week and subpoenaed to appear in the near future before the federal grand jury sitting in Hartford, according to sources familiar with the probe.

The office of the U.S. Attorney would not confirm or deny that it is investigating the cottage renovations.

Two of the workmen said they were told if they did work at a reduced rate on the governor's cottage, it could lead to state work in the future - which never materialized.

One contractor who worked on the cottage, Christopher Link, owner of Link Mechanical Services in New Britain, has ties to The Tomasso Group, having done work for Tunxis Management, the company's property management operation, on a state project. He calls the Tomasso family "wonderful customers" and says they have referred his company to many jobs.

Link - who took out a permit to do $4,000 worth of propane heating work on Rowland's cottage - also has worked on the house of Peter Ellef, Rowland's former co-chief of staff who also is under federal investigation. In addition, he worked on the new home of Scott Boos, the project manager for Tomasso on the juvenile school project in Middletown that is part of the federal probe.

Link said Monday that "legally, I can't say anything" when he was asked whether he had been contacted by FBI agents or received a subpoena.

Two subcontractors, Robert Bilodeau Jr. of Bristol and Glenn Lauzier of Winsted, both were contacted in recent days by federal authorities. They both said previously that they were hired by Brian Baker, a contractor from Southington, who is a personal friend of the governor's.

Baker's family runs a religious goods store called Patrick Baker & Sons in Southington. The family also has a construction company, run by Brian Baker, which specializes in church renovations. The company has done work at the Cathedral of St. Patrick in New York City, among others.

Baker took out a license to do regular home renovations just weeks before starting on Rowland's cottage, according to state records. It is unclear whether he has ever done any home renovation work other than for the governor.

Bilodeau and Lauzier told The Courant that Baker indicated that if they did the work cheaply at the Rowland's cottage they would get other state jobs down the road, possibly even at the governor's mansion in Hartford. Both said they have not gotten any state work.

Lauzier built custom pine cabinets for the kitchen and installed a green Formica top, breakfast bar and a new kitchen floor. He was paid about $4,500. Bilodeau did all of the sheet rocking and painting and estimated it cost about $3,500.

The $8,000 for those two jobs matches the amount on the building permit that the governor filed with Litchfield officials indicating what that part of the renovation job, including the new raised ceiling, would cost.

But there were several other expenses, including the cathedral ceilings installed by Baker, new windows and a stone patio out in back.

Baker is not listed as the contractor on the building permit. Last week, he acknowledged he did the work but refused to comment further - saying that "people" had told him not to say anything. He could not be reached Monday for comment.

In addition to how much Rowland paid for the work listed on the permits, there also are questions about work done without permits. A local official said a building permit was required for the outdoor electrical line running down to the hot tub spa, which sits on a wooden deck built near the lake. Also, such spas typically require approval from the Torrington Area Health District, an official there said.

Neither approval was obtained - and because town records indicate no permits were ever taken out, it is unknown who built the deck, installed the hot tub, or put in the outdoor electrical line.

In addition to the $4,000 value listed by Link on the town permit for his work, and the $8,000 listed on the building permit for the work by Baker and others, there was a permit for $1,500 worth of indoor electrical work by Ron Shortell of Astro Electric in Rowland's hometown of Waterbury. Shortell could not be reached Monday night on the question of whether he had been contacted by federal authorities.

A Waterbury-based engineer, Joseph Calabrese, said Monday he had not heard from federal authorities concerning plans he drew for the renovations, including the cathedral ceiling.

Calabrese also had done a drawing in recent years for former state public works commissioner Theodore Anson, in connection with an addition on Anson's Bridgewater home. Rowland forced Anson to resign in September after it was disclosed that Anson accepted a free set of plans for that addition from the architectural firm Kaestle Boos Associates of New Britain, a major state subcontractor. Calabrese has a long acquaintance with Rowland and state public works officials, and contributed $2,500 to Rowland's 2002 re-election campaign.

A discussion of this story with Courant Staff Writer Dave Altimari is scheduled to be shown on New England Cable News each half-hour today between 9 a.m. and noon.

Posted by: at December 2, 2003 08:33 PM

Rowland Cottage Bill Just Paid
Years After Work Was Done, And With Questions Swirling, Contractor Receives `Substantial' Compensation

December 10, 2003
By JON LENDER, DAVE ALTIMARI, And EDMUND H. MAHONY Courant Staff Writers

A substantial portion of the cost of renovations to Gov. John G. Rowland's Litchfield cottage was not paid until recently, sources say, years after the work was done and as questions about the improvements began circulating in political and law enforcement circles.

All the governor has said on the subject came at a press conference last week, when he insisted that he spent more than $30,000 for the work and took out bank loans to finance the renovations. Rowland would not provide details on whom he paid, how much he paid them or when he made the payments.






But several sources told The Courant that sometime this fall contractor Brian Baker, a longtime Rowland friend and political supporter, received payment for work he supervised at Rowland's cottage starting in 1997.

The amount paid could not be obtained Tuesday, but two sources said it was "substantial."

Baker, of Patrick Baker & Sons of Southington, could not be reached for comment. A spokesman for Rowland's office, when asked Tuesday night about the situation, said the matter needed to be researched further before a detailed response could be issued.

The belated payment to Baker follows a series of reimbursements by Rowland for benefits he has received from others.

In November 2002, Rowland reimbursed former co-chief of staff Peter Ellef $858 that Ellef had paid for Rowland's trips to vacation homes owned by the Tomasso family of New Britain. The payment was made two weeks after federal authorities subpoenaed Ellef's records for an investigation believed to involve allegations of bid-rigging on state contracts awarded to Tomasso firms.

Earlier this year, Rowland paid nearly $9,000 to settle a State Ethics Commission complaint that the Tomasso houses had been rented to him at a steep discount. The complaint also covered a free vacation from another wealthy friend.

And in August Rowland agreed to pay more than $6,000 to settle charges of improper use of a Republican Party credit card for personal expenses nationwide, including kayaking in Idaho, golf in an affluent San Diego suburb and restaurant meals in Fort Lauderdale.

Federal criminal investigators have taken a keen interest in the governor and his renovations to the waterside cottage at Bantam Lake since Nov. 25, when The Courant published a story raising questions of who did the work and what it cost.

The investigators have subpoenaed several contractors or subcontractors who worked on the cottage and have been checking to see if any present or former workers for companies controlled by the Tomasso family were involved in the renovations.

The Tomassos have refused comment. So has the office of the U.S. attorney, which is supervising the grand jury probe.

At his Dec. 2 press conference about the cottage, Rowland refused to provide details of the renovations saying it was a private matter involving his family. "I'm not going to provide anything to you," he said, because it is "none of your business."

The renovations included new kitchen cabinets, countertops, and floor; a cathedral ceiling in the living room; a propane heating system; a stone outdoor patio; and a lakeside deck with a hot tub.

A building permit filed in Litchfield estimated the cost of the work at $13,500, while a source said the renovations may have cost three times that.

Baker was not listed as the contractor on the permit but subcontractors who worked on the job have said he hired them. Two said Baker told them if they did the job at reduced prices they might get state work, which never materialized.

Most of the work appears to have been done in the summer of 1997, shortly after the Rowlands bought the cottage from the White Memorial Foundation for $110,000.

But some work also was done in 1999, including the installation of the propane tank and a heating system by Link Mechanical Services of New Britain, a company that also has done work for the Tomassos.

Owner Christopher Link would not comment on who sent him to work on the cottage or who paid him. Sources have said that Link is one of several contractors who have been interviewed by federal authorities.

When asked how he came to hire Link, Rowland did not answer the question at his press conference.

Tale Of The Tub

In the eight days since that press conference, several of Rowland's statements have turned out to be inaccurate.

In the latest example, Rowland Tuesday retracted his earlier account of how he obtained a hot tub spa that sits on a deck in the backyard of the cottage next to the water.

On Dec. 2, the governor said he had personally bought the hot tub in Torrington seven or eight years ago. He said the tub had been installed at the governor's residence in Hartford and later moved to the lake.

"We put the hot tub from the residence out at the cabin," Rowland said.

However, The Courant learned that the spa was purchased from a dealer in Watertown, not Torrington, and only in 2001. The Courant also learned that the purchaser was not Rowland, but Christine Corey, a longtime scheduling aide in the governor's office, and her husband, Paul Corey, a lawyer and Rowland appointee as the chairman of the Connecticut Lottery Corp.

Neither returned phone calls Tuesday. As recently as 2001 Paul Corey was receiving a $104,000 salary at the Department of Public Utilities Control, according to state records. He is currently in private practice.

Confronted with The Courant's discoveries, Rowland's office issued a statement in which the governor said the Coreys had given him the hot tub as a birthday gift in 2001. He said they were "longtime friends" who were "married at the governor's residence."

"It is my understanding that they purchased the hot tub after receiving a large sum of money when a relative passed away," Rowland said. Dealers have told The Courant that the hot tub would have cost several thousand dollars.

"I did not disclose this information earlier," Rowland said, "in an effort to protect my privacy and the privacy of my friends."

A discussion of this story with Courant Staff Writer Jon Lender is scheduled to be shown on New England Cable News each half-hour today between 9 a.m. and noon.

Posted by: at December 10, 2003 10:56 AM

Self-imposed ignorance should disgust everyone.

Posted by: Max Courtney at December 10, 2003 05:17 PM

Landlord guy: As a former Connecticut resident (Ridgefield) I have some empathy for you regarding inept police. Anyone ever driven on rt. 7 through ridgefield??!! My suggestion to you is to join the Libertarian Party, and for god sakes get the hell out of Connecticut! I am one of the 65,000 people who annually leave CT. I am now a VERY happy resident of Louisville, KY. Low taxes, cheap food+power, and no bullshit alcohol blue laws!! (at least in jefferson county)

Posted by: larry T at December 17, 2003 11:48 PM

I hate governor rowland. And i hope he leaves office you hypocrite. You stupid idiot. You are the worst ever dog. Peace out my homie. Fo shizzel dizzel my nizzle.
Lata dog.

Posted by: Snoop Dog at December 19, 2003 11:34 AM

This is one piece of verification of your story, but not verifiable:

RE: Landlord Rights (by Tom[CT])
Posted on: Oct 2, 2003 1:33 PM
Message: I know Steve and its a true story. I went to court for him because I had run ins with his assailant. He got railroaded because he spoke out. --12.242.228.187

This was within the post. Can you post the police reports and excerpts of your court transcripts?

Posted by: Let Rowland Burn at December 20, 2003 06:08 AM


Recall Governor John G. Rowland

Posted by: Piss on Rowland at December 20, 2003 09:45 PM

Rowland needs to be dumped.

Posted by: Scott at December 22, 2003 09:28 PM

Go to Connecticut, invest in a business or downtown property and go to prison. That is whacked. There are too many reasons to live in other States.

Posted by: CT No Good at December 29, 2003 11:13 PM

I posted my picture and the most up to date links. Click on 'Picture and Jan 4 Post' for link.
-Steven G. Erickson (Vikingas- VeeKingGaas)

Posted by: Picture and Jan 4 Post at January 7, 2004 11:00 PM

As a hard working poor person i never see the need to vote, because no matter what the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. The day that the poor means
something in this state is the day i will vote.Until then i know us poor people still wouldn't matter.

Posted by: POOR WORKING WOMEN at January 12, 2004 07:53 PM

your dum

Posted by: at April 16, 2004 02:25 PM

Love can damage more than you can heal with drinking.

Posted by: Kramer Kim Terry at April 28, 2004 10:58 AM

Who laughs first, does not alway laugh the loudest.

Posted by: at June 10, 2004 10:51 PM

2 Comments:

Blogger BrookfieldCT said...

Request for financing
http://biosbuildingtechnologies.com/ButtonFactory/Plan/index.htm

Total cost is projected between $1,200,000 - $1,300,000

Total sales are expected between $2,400,000 - $2,500,000

Attention Investors!

Cash flow spreadsheet maximizes equity to investors!

This information is intended only for residents of Connecticut and is not a Public Offering Statement to purchase real estate. It is for informational purposes only to present an overview of the project
Now you can live, work and play in the historic district of New Milford, half a block from where Adam Sandler filmed Mr. Deeds! Walk to fine dining, night clubs, coffee shops, shopping, and one of the states most beautiful greens. Best of all your new home will have no heating, cooling or electricity expense!

Fri Nov 17, 01:01:00 AM 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

www.freespeech.com links in above post no longer go to posts intended.

Tue Sep 11, 01:59:00 PM 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Hit Counter