PLEASE NOTE: This blog is a bigotry free zone open to all persons, regardless of age, race, religion, color, national origin, sex, political affiliations, marital status, physical or mental disability, age, or sexual orientation. Further, this blog is open to the broad variety of opinions out there and will not delete any comments based upon point of view. However, comments will be deleted if they are worded in an abusive manner and show disrespect for the intellectual process.
Showing posts with label THE HARTFORD COURANT. Show all posts
Showing posts with label THE HARTFORD COURANT. Show all posts

Friday, April 28, 2017

POOR RICHARD DABATE: THERE WERE EASIER WAYS TO GO!

Today, I was at Barnes and Noble ordering my usual cup of tea when I noticed that the two female baristas serving me both wore fit bits.  When I commented on the fit bits and made a link from the high tech gadgets to the Connie Dabate case, each one flashed their fit bit at me and announced, "best investment I ever made."  

In a sense now, wearing a fit bit is becoming somewhat of a radical statement, i.e. One:  I'm going to be the fittest woman out there, just watch me with my fitbit, and Two:  If you try and kill me and lie afterwards, you're going to be in a whole heck of a lot of trouble.  

This is, I guess, what Richard Dabate should have thought of before he killed his wife.  

Seriously, guys, what was he thinking of?

Wednesday, October 5, 2016

CT DCF FINDS 1 YEAR OLD BABY ABUSED AND STARVING, DOES NOTHING!

Josh Kovner of "The Hartford Courant" reports as follows:


"A scathing review by the child advocate of the near-starvation of a baby placed with relatives in Groton reveals "staggering failures and omissions" on the part of the Department of Children and Families, and raises doubts about DCF's decisions on child placements beyond this case.

A DCF social worker visited the boy, identified as Dallas C., on at least five occasions over 102 days between late July and late October 2015, but managed never to see Dallas awake, never roused him and never assessed what others who had contact with the family were calling the child's rapidly deteriorating health, according to the advocate's report, released Tuesday morning.

At one point, the social worker reported that he was "able to confirm that [the child] was indeed breathing," according to state Child Advocate Sarah Eagan's report..."

READ MORE:


http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-foster-care-dcf-child-abuse-1005-20161004-story.html

Friday, September 16, 2016

ANOTHER ATTORNEY BITES THE DUST: ATTORNEY PETER G. KRUZYNSKI CHARGED WITH PORN!

Nicholas Rondinone of "The Hartford Courant" reports as follows: 
"Shelton lawyer charged last month with sexually assaulting a minor now faces federal child porn offense, the U.S. Attorney's office said Friday.
Peter G. Kruzynski, 50, was charged with production and possession of child pornography, the U.S. Attorney's office said.
Federal authorities said that Kruzynski engaged in sexual acts with a male victim from 2009 until last month. During that time, authorities said, he used an iPhone to take photos of the victim, while he was a minor.
Kruzynski was presented in front of a judge Friday. The U.S. Attorney's office said he was released on $250,000 bond and must submit to electronic monitoring..."
READ MORE:

Thursday, August 25, 2016

HARTFORD COURANT WRITER STATES MILLENNIALS LEAVING THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT IN HIGH NUMBERS!

In an article for The Hartford Courant, Eric Kebschull states as follows:
"Scores of former Connecticut residents have fled the state for greener pastures, hoping to improve their quality of life. The ranks of these former Nutmeggers include baby boomers who are nearing retirement and looking for a place to spend their golden years.
But what about millennials? Why are Connecticut's young adults fleeing the state?
As a millennial who left Connecticut twice, allow me to explain why..."
READ MORE:



Monday, May 16, 2016

THE HARTFORD COURANT REPORTS MORE LAYOFFS AT THE CT JUDICIAL BRANCH!

David Owen of The Hartford Courant reports as follows:
"HARTFORD — Judicial Branch officials said Monday that 113 more employees received layoff notices last week. That brings to 239 the total of Judicial Branch employees losing their jobs as a result of state budget woes.
The cuts announced Monday include 10 case flow coordinators, seven family relations counselors, 22 adult probation officers, 15 juvenile probation officers, 53 judicial marshals and five intake, assessment and referral specialists..."
READ MORE:

Thursday, April 14, 2016

JOSH KOVNER OF THE HARTFORD COURANT REPORTS THAT THE OFFICE OF PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY IS HOPELESSLY PARALYZED BY ITS POLITICAL INVOLVEMENTS!

ACCORDING TO JOSH KOVNER OF "THE HARTFORD COURANT":
"HARTFORD — The office charged with protecting the rights of Connecticut residents with disabilities is severely compromised by its ties to state government and politics and could lose its federal funding if it does not take immediate steps toward independence, a federal audit has concluded.
The review of the Office of Protection and Advocacy for Persons With Disabilities noted a series of deeply seated conflicts of interest.
For example, the agency for years has considered requests from building owners to waive handicapped-access requirements in certain circumstances, and grants most of the waivers it sees. Yet, the agency is also charged with representing people who encounter difficulties over access to those same buildings.
The "entanglement with state responsibilities and state hiring and staffing structures undermines" the agency's ability to meet the federal advocacy mandates, the audit said. "The lack of structural safeguards [against political interference] limits its real and perceived abilities to pursue remedies of rights violations..."
READ MORE: 




Friday, October 30, 2015

HE'S BAAACCCCCK, EVERYONE! JUDGE BARRY PINKUS, WHO FAMOUSLY DENIED ADRIANNE OYOLA A PROTECTIVE ORDER, HAS RETURNED TO THE BENCH!

By now we are all familiar with the story. Last July 2015, Tony Moreno tossed his 7 month old little boy, Aaden Moreno off the Arrigoni Bridge, and then jumped himself. Although Moreno survived the jump, his little boy, Aaden did not.  

Later, we learned that the baby's mother, Adrianne Oyola, had applied for a restraining order against Tony Moreno on June 17, 2015 because she feared for her life and that of her baby.  However, despite her pleas and her powerful descriptions of the ways in which Tony Moreno had held her hostage with violence and threats of violence, Judge Barry Pinkus refused to grant the restraining order.  

We also learned that this was not Judge Barry Pinkus' first example of using poor judgment.  It turns out that Judge Pinkus was the very same judge who ordered that killer Joshua Komisarjevsky, the man who raped and murdered the Petit family women, be granted full custody of his then five year old daughter.  

After Baby Aaden's tragic death, "The Hartford Courant" reported State Sen. Dante Bartolomeo of Meriden as stating, "It looks to me as though we need to better understand what the judicial system knew and why there wasn't a permanent restraining ordered issued,"  And further, "(Oyola) appears to have provided enough information for the judge to grant a permanent protective order.  The fact that didn't happen appears to me to be a horrendous failure of the system."  

In a letter to the editor published at the time on the website "My Record Journal.Com", Kathy Castello of Meriden wrote of Judge Barry Pinkus, "The father has mental issues and the judge knew this, yet he denied the right to the mother to be free from his threats and as a result the judge caused this baby's death.  Even though he wasn't on that bridge, he is still responsible because he could have prevented this horrible tragedy from happening.  He needs to resign his position as judge."  

Three months have gone by since then and we have heard very little news regarding this case since the tragedy occurred.  However, "Divorce in Connecticut" would now like to report that, far from resigning from his position, it looks as though Judge Barry Pinkus is right back on the bench happily adjudicating high conflict and complex domestic violence cases as usual.  In fact, it looks as though he has hardly missed a beat!  

I heard this through a friend who contacted me to ask whether a Judge Barry Pinkus would be a good judge to handle her complex domestic violence case in Middletown.  Apparently, family relations officers in the region she was located had recommended to her that she agree to have her case transferred to Middletown with Judge Barry Pinkus appointed to the case as judge. They said Judge Pinkus is really good at handling domestic violence cases.

I responded with incredulity--what in the world is Judge Pinkus doing, let alone our court system.  Here is a man whose insensitivity to the needs of at risk women and children is now more notorious throughout the state than any other judge.  Now he is apparently back on the bench with a chorus line of family court personnel recommending him to unknowing litigants as an expert on domestic violence?  

Since I am a thorough individual, I had one of my assistants contact the Connecticut Judicial Branch for verification of Judge Pinkus' return.  Thus, this blog sent out an email to Ms. Melissa Farley of External Affairs for the CT Judicial Branch, Attorney Martin Libbin, the attorney representing the interests of the CT Judicial Branch, and Judge Chase T. Rogers, the Chief Justice of the CT Judicial Branch asking them to clarify Judge Pinkus' status.  None of these individuals chose to respond to this email, which leads me to conclude that the information regarding the fact that Judge Barry Pinkus has resumed his duties is indeed correct.  

But imagine that the CT Judicial Branch feels that it is impervious to the requests for information that citizens extend to them.  They believe they are simply above such mundane matters as being required to be responsive to any inquiries.  This is not the first time that citizens have asked questions of the CT Judicial Branch and the Branch simply ignores them.  As you can see, this is a group of court personnel whose arrogance rises to extraordinary levels.  

I would also like to add that while I was formulating this particular blog, a woman contacted me with a copy of a Memorandum of Decision that Judge Pinkus wrote this year structured closely around false accusations of Parental Alienation Syndrome and setting this particular woman up for the loss of custody of her children within the near future.  Clearly, Judge Barry Pinkus is incalcitrant--he is a misogynist who has clearly demonstrated his dislike of women for a lengthy period of time and continues to do so in one Memorandum of Decision after another.  

Nonetheless, the CT Judicial Branch has seen fit to return him to the bench really quietly so that there wouldn't be any outcry.  

The news is:  we've noticed!  

I also think it is worth noting the Media silence on this topic.  

I am sure readers would like to know if Judge Barry Pinkus received any supplemental training in domestic violence with an emphasis on the coercive and controlling behaviors perpetrators demonstrate in these abusive relationships.  

I am sure readers would like to know what progress the Task Force is making that was recently established to address the impact of domestic violence on children.  

I am sure readers would like to know how Adrianne Oyola is managing after this terrible tragedy darkened her life.  

I am sure readers would like to know what steps are being taken to hold Mr. Tony Moreno accountable for his crimes.  

I am sure readers would like to know what steps the CT Judicial Branch is taking to eliminate bad judges whose ignorance regarding domestic violence, and whose fatherhood rights stance is wreaking havoc on protective mothers and their children throughout the State.  

If we don't have this information, and there is a news blackout on this information, what more can we say other than "Judicial - Media Committee" to reflect the complete lack of ethics the CT Media have demonstrated in their dealings with the corruption of the CT Judicial Branch whose interests they cannot seem to separate from their own.

Monday, October 5, 2015

THE HARTFORD COURANT REPORTS ON THE WATLEY/HASEMAN CASE WHERE PARENTS WERE FALSELY ACCUSED OF PREDICTIVE NEGLECT AND LOST CUSTODY OF THEIR TWO CHILDREN AT BIRTH!

Josh Kovner of The Hartford Courant reports as follows:
"A Connecticut couple whose children were taken from them at birth after the parents were deemed mentally unsound by child-protection officials have filed a federal appeal, claiming that they were denied rights under the Americans With Disabilities Act.
It has been a grueling struggle for Joseph Watley, 61, who is staying with his ailing mother in Thomaston, and Karin Hasemann, 47, who lives with her mother and father in Watertown.
They lost the boys — Joe Jr. was born in July 2005, and Danny came along in July 2006 — under the doctrine of "predictive neglect." The Department of Children and Families argued that it was more likely than not that Hasemann and Watley would neglect the children if they remained with their parents. So the state took them away.
"How do you defend against that?" said Watley. He's worked a number of factory and machine-shop jobs and now receives disability payments for a back injury suffered in a car accident..."
READ MORE:

Wednesday, September 2, 2015

THE HARTFORD COURANT REPORTS THAT THE HEAD OF THE POLITICAL CORRUPTION TASK FORCE, ATTORNEY CHRISTOPHER MATTEI, HAS DECIDED TO STEP DOWN!


"The young federal prosecutor who won the conviction of former Gov. John Rowland before being named the head of a corruption task force is leaving the U.S. Attorney's office for private practice.

Christopher Mattei, who started in the U.S. Attorney's office in 2007, will join Koskoff, Koskoff and Beider, a Bridgeport law firm that has a reputation among lawyers for being one of the most aggressive personal injury firms in the state. 

"Chris embodies many of the best traits that we hope for in prosecutors. He is passionate but always fair-minded, highly productive, hardworking and masterful in court. Personally, I am deeply grateful for his leadership, guidance and positive energy. It has been wonderful having him on the team," U.S. Attorney Deidre Daly said in a statement Tuesday. Mattei declined to comment..."

For more on this story, please click on the link below:

Monday, August 3, 2015

HARTFORD COURANT REPORTS TIFFANY STEVENS IN MURDER FOR HIRE PLOT CUTS A DEAL!

CHRISTINE DEMPSEY AND DAVID OWEN OF "THE HARTFORD COURANT" REPORT AS FOLLOWS:


"HARTFORD — Tiffany Stevens was sentenced to probation Monday after she pleaded guilty to inciting injury to persons, bringing her murder-for-hire case to an end.


Her plea came in Superior Court shortly before 10:30 a.m. before Judge Edward J. Mullarkey. He then gave her a suspended, 10-year sentence followed by five years of probation. 

She is not to have contact with the person she had targeted, her ex-husband.



Stevens' murder-for-hire trial ended in December with a mistrial after the three men and three women on the jury said they were hopelessly deadlocked.

The former Bloomfield resident was accused by Simsbury police of paying handyman John McDaid $5,000 to kill her former husband, Eric Stevens. Tiffany and Eric Stevens are engaged in a contentious dispute over custody of their daughter, and Eric Stevens told police and, according to trial testimony, McDaid that a large amount of money would go to the custodial parent.

Evidence presented during the trial indicated that the money did not exist..."


READ MORE:

Thursday, July 30, 2015

HARTFORD COURANT REPORTS THAT A SCREENING TOOL DEVELOPED FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ASSISTS IN REDUCING INCIDENTS OF DV!

Christine Dempsey of The Hartford Courant reported as follows on June 22, 2015:

"A tool that experts say will help prevent domestic violence deaths is being used by more than half of the state's law enforcement agencies, advocates say.


The Lethality Assessment Program is a screening process that allows police officers responding to family violence calls to determine the likelihood that the victim might someday be killed by a domestic partner.

The screening was tested as a pilot program in Connecticut in 2012. It was rolled out statewide last year, and by Aug. 31, police agencies were regularly using it..."

READ MORE:

Tuesday, July 21, 2015

KILLER TONY MORENO APPEARS IN COURT TODAY!

Alaine Griffin of "The Hartford Courant" reports as follows:


MIDDLETOWN — Tony Moreno, the Middletown father accused of throwing his infant son Aaden off the Arrigoni Bridge earlier this month made his first appearance Tuesday in Superior Court.

Under tight security and inside a crowded courtroom, Judge David P. Gold continued Moreno's case to Sept. 15. Aaden's mother, Adrianne Oyola, 19, sat in the gallery next to a relative and an inspector from the state's attorney's office. He did not enter a plea.


Members of Moreno's family were also at the hearing as well as a half dozen Middletown police officers who had worked on the case.

Moreno, 21, dressed in a green prison jumpsuit, was escorted into the courtroom. His legs were shackled and his wrists were handcuffed behind his back.

Moreno responded, "Yes sir, I do," when Gold asked him if he understood a request by Moreno's public defender, James McKay, to waive the time limit on a mandated hearing of probable cause.

"He's tremendously distressed and feels horrible about this," McKay said after the court proceeding. "There's no question that this is a bottomless tragedy."


Saturday, July 11, 2015

THE HARTFORD COURANT'S TOTALLY INACCURATE EDITORIAL ON THE DEATH OF BABY AADEN! THE LAW DID SUPPORT A RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST KILLER TONY MORENO ON THE DAY HE THREW AADEN OFF THE BRIDGE!

See below:

Another helpless victim of domestic violence has slipped through the cracks of an imperfect system for protecting the helpless.



The victim was 7-month-old Aaden Moreno, whose body was found in the Connecticut River Tuesday night after a three-day search.

The infant boy may* have been thrown from the Arrigoni Bridge in Middletown by his father, Tony, 21, who jumped from the bridge Sunday but survived.



Judge Unfairly Condemned In Baby's Death

On the surface, the baby's death is even more tragic and poignant in light of the fact that Superior Court Judge Barry C. Pinkus decided not to grant a restraining order to the child's mother, Adrianne Oyola, 19, because he was not convinced that Mr. Moreno posed a continuous physical threat to his girlfriend and their child as required by statute.


Ms. Oyola told the court that she feared for her and her child's safety. The judge observed that she and Mr. Moreno had a chaotic relationship and should not live together.

But, he said in refusing to grant the restraining order to Ms. Oyola, "I'm just not convinced that there's a continuous threat of present physical pain or physical injury."

It should also be noted that later on the day the restraining order was denied, Ms. Oyala and Mr. Moreno followed Judge Pinkus' advice and worked out a custody agreement. They agreed to joint custody of Aaden.

Would little Aaden be alive today if Judge Pinkus had issued the restraining order? Perhaps. But judges can't predict the future with certainty, as Chief Court Administrator Patrick L. Carroll III observed Wednesday.

It would be too easy to blame Judge Pinkus, an experienced family jurist, for Aaden's death. He followed the law. More than nine times out of 10 such a decision would not have produced such a ghastly result.

State Sen. Dante Bartolomeo of Meriden said the judge's failure to issue a restraining order represents a "horrendous failure of the system."

Well, it was a horrendous result. Does the statute need to be loosened to make it easier for judges to grant such orders?


*IS THERE SOME DOUBT WHO THREW THE CHILD OFF THE BRIDGE? [divorce in connection question]

Copyright © 2015, Hartford Courant

LINK:  http://www.courant.com/opinion/editorials/hc-ed-middletown-tragedy-20150708-story.html


Here is the response of the CCADV on this particular question of whether Judge Pinkus considered the law in the Aaden Moreno case:

“I’m just not convinced that there’s a continuous threat of present physical pain or physical injury,” Judge Pinkus said, according to a transcript of the hearing. “I think the two of you don’t have a good relationship.”
Connecticut Coalition Against Domestic Violence Director of Public Policy Liza Andrews says the classic warning signs of domestic violence were present in this case.
“There were very clear indications of both present physical violence as well as threats of physical violence,” she said.
Oyola claimed Moreno “has shoved me, pushed me, forcefully poked my chest and forehead.”
See the link below for the full story and transcript of the hearing:

THE HARTFORD COURANT EXAMINES CONNECTICUT FAMILY COURT'S FAILURE TO HANDLE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES PROPERLY!

Alaine Griffin and Shawn R. Beals of "The Hartford Courant" report as follows:


"Nineteen-year-old Adrianne Oyola walked in to Judge Barry C. Pinkus's courtroom in late June with no legal representation and a daunting task: to convince a judge that she and her infant son needed protection from the child's father.

A civil court judge had previously granted her a temporary restraining order against ex-boyfriend Tony Moreno, now charged with murder in 7-month-old Aaden Moreno's death, after she alleged in an application that Moreno had pushed her around and threatened her life and the child's.

In front of Pinkus, 12 days after the temporary order was granted, and with Moreno also in the courtroom, Oyola said there was some physical violence and that Moreno violated the temporary order. But she said Moreno's abuse was more psychological than physical.


Pinkus denied Oyola's request for a permanent restraining order. On July 5, six days after the restraining order was denied, police said Moreno threw the baby off the Arrigoni Bridge into the Connecticut River. Moreno jumped over the railing and survived, despite suffering serious injuries..."


READ MORE:

HARTFORD COURANT PUBLISHES OP-ED DEFENDING JUDGE BARRY PINKUS WHO FAILED TO PROTECT BABY AADEN!

BERLIN ATTORNEY RICH ROCHLIN ACTS AS APOLOGIST FOR JUDGE PINKUS STATING AS FOLLOWS:


"The tragic death of an infant, apparently thrown by his father, Tony Moreno, from the Arrigoni Bridge in Middletown on Sunday put new focus on the family court system — particularly Judge Barry C. Pinkus' June 29 ruling to deny the permanent restraining order application of Adrianne Oyola, the mother of 7-month-old Aaden Moreno, who was found in the Connecticut River in East Haddam on Tuesday.

As a lawyer who regularly practices in the family system, I have appeared before Judge Pinkus many times. He is fair, professional and thoughtful. He "tells it like it is" and the system would benefit from more jurists like him. Each day, Judge Pinkus (and other family court jurists) must make some of the most difficult decisions required of any judge. People's lives can be and are often changed forever based on their decisions regarding a restraining order, custody and financial support.

Although the public has been quick to condemn Judge Pinkus for his ruling both on social media and in comments to articles in this paper's online editions, people should resist the urge to blame him and do a more thorough analysis of the exceedingly difficult job these jurists have when they are forced to make these decisions..."


READ MORE:


ARTICLES ON ATTORNEY RICH ROCHLIN:




Wednesday, July 8, 2015

FURTHER DETAILS ON AADEN MORENO'S DEATH AND THE ARRAIGNMENT OF KILLER DAD TONY MORENO!

Shawn R. Beals and Alaine Griffin of "The Hartford Courant", along with David Owens and Nicholas Rondinone report as follows:

MIDDLETOWN — Denise Moreno was awakened Sunday night by a frightening phone call from her son Tony, who asked her to come to the Arrigoni Bridge.

She could hear her 7-month-old grandson, Aaden, crying. Tony told her to come collect a phone with pictures of the baby, and to "just tell everyone I'm sorry."

Denise Moreno got in the car with her other son, Aaron, and raced desperately to the bridge as she called 911. Once on the bridge, they saw Tony standing alone near the railing, and within seconds two police officers arrived, according to a police affidavit.

One of the officers shouted to Tony, telling him to stop, but he kept walking. He put both hands onto the bridge railing and hurled himself into the Connecticut River below.
READ MORE

http://www.courant.com/community/middletown/hc-middletown-baby-murder-arrest-0709-20150708-story.html#page=1

TWO MURDERS, A MOTHER, A FATHER, AND TWO SEPARATE STORIES!

Take a look at this June 16, 2015 Hartford Courant report on an East Haven mother who killed her children (See below).  Clearly, there is no problem about stating mother killed the children.

"A pastor cited "evilness" in the world as nearly 200 people gathered Tuesday for the funeral of two young siblings who authorities say were killed by their mother and found dead in a home filled with natural gas."


In contrast, take a look at the June 8, 2015 Hartford Courant report of the Middletown father who killed his child (See below).  We have Tony Moreno on the bridge.  Moreno was with the baby--nobody else in sight!  The 7 month old baby dropped to his death from the bridge.  Who did it?  Kasper the Friendly Ghost? 


"The father who was with his baby when the 7-month-old dropped to his death into the Connecticut River was arraigned Wednesday on murder and capital felony charges at Hartford Hospital."

Note: The Hartford Courant article I took the quotation from immediately above has now been removed and replaced with another article at the identical link.  So I no longer have a copy of the article with the above quotation available. Glad to see The Courant has corrected its mistake.  


HARTFORD COURANT REPORTS TONY MORENO CHARGED WITH CAPITOL MURDER!

Shawn R. Beals and Alaine Griffin of The Hartford Courant, with help from Christine Dempsey, report as follows:


"MIDDLETOWN — The father who was with his baby when the 7-month-old dropped to his death into the Connecticut River was arraigned Wednesday on murder and capital felony charges at Hartford Hospital.

[Sloper observation:  Yup, Moreno just happened to BE WITH the baby when it DROPPED--The Hartford Courant has no idea how, I guess.]

State judicial officials say Tony Moreno was arraigned, but Middletown police declined to say what he's been charged with. Police said they would be holding a press conference later Wednesday.

A source familiar with the investigation said Moreno was arraigned on the charges of murder and capital felony with bail set at $2.1 million. He was also charged with two counts of violation of a restraining order, apparently related to a temporary restraining order that was issued in June. Capital felony can be charged for a murder of a victim under 16.

Moreno, 22, was rescued from the river after jumping Sunday night. He was airlifted to Hartford Hospital..."


Read More:



*This article has some interesting information regarding the CT Judicial Branch response to this case.

Tuesday, July 7, 2015

IN BABY AADEN CASE, THE HARTFORD COURANT WOULD RATHER MANGLE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE THAN TELL THE TRUTH!

"The baby did not plunge; he was thrown!"

We now all know the story.  Last Sunday night, Tony Moreno, 22, made a suicide jump from the Arrigoni Bridge taking his 7 month old little boy--Aaden Moreno--along with him.  

As it turned out, Moreno survived the jump, but not his little boy, Aaden.

While rescue teams search the river for Aaden's body, news reports from "The Hartford Courant", indicate that weeks before this incident the little boy's mother, Adrianne Oyola,  asked a Connecticut Family Court judge, Judge Barry Pinkus, for a restraining order against the child's father because she feared for the safety of the boy and herself.

More specifically, "The Hartford Courant" stated: "Court records indicate there is an open child custody case involving Aaden's parents. The records show the baby's mother, Adrianne Oyola, applied for a restraining order against Moreno on June 17 because she feared for her child's and her own safety. Oyola wrote in the application that she and Moreno were happy until she became pregnant, but he began to verbally abuse, threaten and push her.

"He has told me he could make my son disappear any time of the day," she wrote. "He told me how he could make me disappear told me how he could kill me. I sometimes am scared to sleep. He told me he would put me in the ground and put something on me to make me disintegrate faster."

"I can't bring [the baby] around my family without [Moreno's] approval, but he could do anything he wants without letting me know," she wrote. "I feel that he is a danger to my child and me and would like to leave with my child and get full custody."

Unfortunately, Judge Pinkus refused to grant her a restraining order and now the child is dead.

In the aftermath of this incident, I have been indignant about the coverage that "The Hartford Courant" has provided.  Specifically, in its earlier reports, the Courant failed to indicate the name of the judge who had denied Ms. Oyola a restraining order.  


When I asked Christine Dempsey, one of the lead reporters on this story, what was the name of the Judge, she responded that she did not know.  This is hardly credible granted that it is clear that "Hartford Courant" reporters reviewed the files in the case and quoted from the Motion For a Restraining Order which the judge was required to sign in order to deny it.  

Why would "The Hartford Courant" seek to suppress this information?  Perhaps a little thing called the Judicial - Media Committee, about which this blog has previously reported, played a role?  Who knows! 

It was only upon the report of Mr. Jason Newton of Channel 8 WTNH news that we were finally able to obtain the judge's name.

As it turned out, the name of the judge--Judge Barry Pinkus--was of great interest to the general public because this was the very same judge who ordered that killer Joshua Komisarjevsky, the man who raped and murdered the Petit family women, be granted full custody of his young daughter.  Thus, here is a judge whose decisions have already been called into question, and this should be duly noted.

Not only did "The Hartford Courant" attempt to protect the identity of the notorious judge involved, it also used language in its headlines and elsewhere that appeared to shift responsibility from the perpetrator to the victim, or at the very least imply a neutrality that had no appropriate place in reports of this incident.  

For instance, here is one:  "Mother of Baby Who Plunged Into River Feared For Child's Safety, Records Show!"  If you were casually scanning the newspaper and read that headline, you'd never think that a father was involved in this situation at all!  From the way it is written, it would appear that the mother plunged into the river and now the records show she feared for her baby.  So?

Next, if you look at how the headline is written, it seems as though the baby simply tossed himself into the river -- no father involved.  To understand what I mean, just see the structure of the headline itself: [The] baby...plunged into [the] river.  Right.  Isn't that what the sentence says?  The baby plunged, i.e. subject and verb, the baby took action by plunging; that is fundamental to the meaning of the infinitive "to plunge".  In other words the baby jumped off the bridge of his own volition.  But no, no, no.  This is not an accurate report.  The truth is the baby should have been presented as what he was in any headline and in any report, as the helpless object of his father's wrath.  

This baby did not plunge--subject/verb.

The father threw the baby--subject/verb/object.

Ahhhhh!  Have I said this right?  Do you get what I am saying?  

Again, this baby did not plunge.  On the contrary, he was thrown!  Let me try to say this in the passive voice (which I've been told many times not to use, but in this circumstance is incredibly enlightening)  "The baby was thrown off the bridge by his father."  In other words, the baby was the innocent object of the Father's evil actions.

That is more accurate grammatically and in so many other ways. It puts the blame and the responsibility where it belongs, in the actions of a criminal Father.

Someone please explain to me how any writer or editor at "The Hartford Courant" could mistake who is the victim here?  Who could fail to use the right kind of language to do justice for this little boy.

Now, I did not by any means wish to give folks a grammar lesson.  In fact, even though I've taught writing for many years, grammar was never my strong point as my students can attest.  But even I can see what happens when you massacre the English language to misrepresent the facts of a case while pretending to report on a story.  

My question is, here you have an entire newspaper with highly trained editors whose sole job it is to see that  their employees report on the news truthfully in a way the public can understand. 

How come when it comes to CT Family Court and its abuse of protective mothers and their children, "The Hartford Courant" seems to keep on getting it wrong.

Monday, July 6, 2015

HARTFORD COURANT REPORTS: FATHER FRIENDLY CONNECTICUT FAMILY COURT ALLOWS A CHILD'S DEATH AND IGNORES MOTHER'S PLEAS FOR HELP!

Mother Of Baby Who Plunged Into River Feared For Child's Safety, Records Show!

Reported by Christine Dempsey and Shawn R. Beals with Chris Brodeur and Alaine Griffin assisting, all of The Hartford Courant report as follows:

"MIDDLETOWN — The mother of a baby police say likely died after plunging into the Connecticut River Sunday asked authorities weeks ago for a restraining order against the child's father because she feared for the safety of the boy and herself, court records indicate.

Crews began searching the river for 7-month-old Aaden Moreno late Sunday. The child's father, Tony Moreno, 22, jumped from the Arrigoni Bridge and survived, police said. He has not been charged.

Moreno's family called police about 11:45 p.m. on Sunday to say that he was threatening to commit suicide and that he had the baby with him, said police spokeswoman Lt. Heather Desmond.

Court records indicate there is an open child custody case involving Aaden's parents. The records show the baby's mother, Adrianne Oyola, applied for a restraining order against Moreno on June 17 because she feared for her child's and her own safety. Oyola wrote in the application that she and Moreno were happy until she became pregnant, but he began to verbally abuse, threaten and push her..."

Read more: