Connect with us

Connecticut

Face the Facts: Discussing how clemency is granted in the US

Published

on

Face the Facts: Discussing how clemency is granted in the US


Earlier this week, a man convicted in the killing of an 8-year-old boy and his mother in Bridgeport in 1999 has been granted clemency by now former president Joe Biden.

Senator Richard Blumenthal was our state attorney general at the time. He was one of many lawmakers shocked by this pardon.

He spoke with NBC Connecticut’s Mike Hydeck about his take on the pardon.

Mike Hydeck: Senator, welcome back. Earlier this week, you talked about how you were attorney general back in 1999 when this case was tried. You said this case actually changed Connecticut laws. How?

Advertisement

Richard Blumenthal: This case changed Connecticut laws because the victims here, an 8-year-old boy and his mom, Karen Clarke, were potential witnesses in a very serious crime. They were murdered so that they could not testify in court, and as a result, Connecticut adopted a witness protection program named after BJ Brown and his mom, Karen Clarke. And I was shocked and appalled that clemency was accorded to the culprit in this case, who was convicted in state court of conspiracy to murder and then in federal court of federal drug crimes, and that’s why I am pushing again for reforms to the pardon system, which led to clemency to Adrian Peeler, the convicted murderer here.

Mike Hydeck: How do we go about changing the pardon power of the president so this doesn’t happen again? It’s clear that he had served time for the state charge and he was still in prison on the federal drug charge, but it seems like, is there a pardon board that overlooks these or does President Biden just get handed one and then he signs it? It seems as if somebody read past the headline, we would have figured this out.

Richard Blumenthal: That’s really the question of the moment, and a very important question. You know, the pardon power in our federal government is accorded absolutely without any checks and balances, to the president of the United States. It is a relic, in a sense, of the pardon power exercised by the monarchy in England, and the founders gave it to the president without any requirements for transparency or accountability. In the state of Connecticut, we have a Board of Pardons and Paroles, 10 people working full time with set criteria relating to the impact on the victim and the opinion of the prosecutors and the severity of the offense. There’s no such board at the federal level, and so it is completely within the discretion of the president whether to accord clemency, commutation of sentences, reprieve for fines. And that’s why I am proposing that we actually impose some guardrails on the president of the United States, requiring an explanation, at the very least, some explanation for why pardon has been accorded, and some notice to the prosecutors. For example, in the Peeler case, the Department of Justice had an opportunity for the victims, the Clarke family, to come forward and present their opinion, their views, on whether there ought to be clemency. So providing some guardrails at the federal level, as we do in Connecticut and other states do at the state level is really critical, and in the long run, I’m proposing a constitutional amendment that would curb or cut this absolute power of the president. It has to be a constitutional amendment because the pardon power is part of our federal Constitution. But I think the time has come for this absolute power on the part of the president of the United States to be eliminated.

Mike Hydeck: Senator, is there any way to revisit the Peeler case now that Biden is out of office? Or is that pretty much a done deal because of the power of the pardon?

Richard Blumenthal: We probably should look into why there was this pardon for Adrian Peeler. But we also should keep in mind that President Trump granted pardons to some 1,500 convicted or accused rioters who assaulted police officers, many of them injuring severely those police officers, and in some cases actually killing, causing their deaths. So the pardon power used to grant clemency to those rioters who cause those kinds of injuries and death is also part of the picture here, and we should move forward to restrict and cut and curb the presidential powers. And at the same time, perhaps look at why the pardon for Peeler was granted. But the answer to your question is, there’s probably nothing to do right now, actually, to reverse that decision, because it has already been made and there’s no review, which again, points the need for reform here.

Advertisement

Mike Hydeck: Senator Blumenthal, we have to leave it there. We’re looking forward to when that legislation is drafted. We’d like to have you back on when it is.



Source link

Connecticut

Connecticut moves to crack down on bottle redemption fraud

Published

on

Connecticut moves to crack down on bottle redemption fraud


It’s a scheme made famous by a nearly 30-year-old episode of the sitcom Seinfeld.

Hoping to earn a quick buck, two characters load a mail truck full of soda bottles and beer cans purchased with a redeemable 5-cent deposit in New York, before traveling to Michigan, where they can be recycled for 10 cents apiece. With few thousand cans, they calculate, the trip will earn a decent profit. In the end, the plan fell apart.

But after Connecticut raised the value of its own bottle deposits to 10 cents in 2024, officials say, they were caught off guard by a flood of such fraudulent returns coming in from out of state. Redemption rates have reached 97%, and some beverage distributors have reported millions of dollars in losses as a result of having to pay out for excess returns of their products.

On Thursday, state lawmakers passed an emergency bill to crack down on illegal returns by increasing fines, requiring redemption centers to keep track of bulk drop-offs and allowing local police to go after out-of-state violators.

Advertisement

“I’m heartbroken,” said House Speaker Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, who supported the effort to increase deposits to 10 cents and expand the number of items eligible for redemption. “I spent a lot of political capital to get the bottle bill passed in 2021, and never in a million years did I think that New York, New Jersey and Rhode Island residents would return so many bottles.”

The legislation, Senate Bill 299, would increase fines for violating the bottle bill law from $50 to $500 on a first offense. For third and subsequent offenses, the penalty would increase from $250 to $2,000 and misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in prison.

In addition, it requires redemption centers to be licensed by the state’s Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (previously, those businesses were only required to register with DEEP). As a condition of their license, redemption centers must keep records of anyone seeking to redeem more than 1,000 bottles and cans in a single day.

Anyone not affiliated with a qualified nonprofit would be prohibited from redeeming more than 4,000 bottles a day, down from the previous limit of 5,000.

The bill also seeks to pressure some larger redemption centers into adopting automated scanning technologies, such as reverse vending machines, by temporarily lowering the handling fee that is paid on each beverage container processed by those centers.

Advertisement

The bill easily passed the Senate on Wednesday and the House on Thursday on its way to Gov. Ned Lamont.

While the bill drew bipartisan support, Republicans described it as a temporary fix to a growing problem.

House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford, called the switch to 10-cent deposits an “unmitigated disaster” and said he believed out-of-state redemption centers were offloading much of their inventory within Connecticut.

“The sheer quantity that is being redeemed in the state of Connecticut, this isn’t two people putting cans into a post office truck,” Candelora said. “This is far more organized than that.”

The impact of those excess returns is felt mostly by the state’s wholesale beverage distributors, who initiate the redemption process by collecting an additional 10 cents on every eligible bottle and can they sell to supermarkets, liquor stores and other retailers within Connecticut. The distributors are required to pay that money back — plus a handling fee — once the containers are returned to the store or a redemption center.

Advertisement

According to the state’s Department of Revenue Services, nearly 12% of wholesalers reported having to pay out more redemptions than they collected in deposits in 2025. Those losses totaled $11.3 million.

Peter Gallo, the vice president of Star Distributors in West Haven, said his company’s losses alone have totaled more than $2 million since the increase on deposits went into effect two years ago. As time goes on, he said, the deficit has only grown.

“We’re hoping we can get something fixed here, because it’s a tough pill to be holding on to debt that we should get paid for,” Gallo said.

Still, officials say they have no way of tracking precisely how many of the roughly 2 billion containers that were redeemed in the state last year were illegally brought in from other states. That’s because most products lack any kind of identifiable marking indicating where they were sold.

“There’s no way to tell right now. That’s one of the core issues here,” said state Rep. John-Michael Parker, D-Madison, who co-chairs the legislature’s Environment Committee.

Advertisement

Parker said the issue could be solved if product labels were printed with a specific barcode or other feature that would be unique to Connecticut. Such a solution, for now, has faced technological challenges and pushback from the beverage industry, he said.

Not everyone involved in the handling, sorting and redemption of bottles is happy about the upcoming changes — or the process by which they were approved.

Francis Bartolomeo, the owner of a Fran’s Cans and Bart’s Bottles in Watertown, said he was only made aware of the legislation on Monday from a fellow redemption center owner. Since then, he said, he’s been contacting his legislators to oppose the bill and was frustrated by the lack of a public hearing.

“I know other people are as flabbergasted as I am because they don’t know where it comes out of,” Bartolomeo said “It’s a one sided affair, really.”

Bartolomeo said one of his biggest concerns with the bill is the $2,500 annual licensing fee that it would place on redemption centers. While he agreed that out-of-state redemptions are a problem, he said it should be up to the state to improve enforcement.

Advertisement

“We’re cleaning up the mess, and we’re going to end up being penalized,” Bartolomeo said. “Get rid of it and go back to 5 cents if it’s that big of a hindrance, but don’t penalize the redemption centers for what you imposed.”

Lynn Little of New Milford Redemption Center supports the increased penalties but believes the solution ultimately lies with better labeling by the distributors. She is also frustrated by the volume caps after the state initially gave grants to residents looking to open their own bottle redemption businesses.

“They’re taking a volume business, because any business where you make 3 cents per unit (the average handling fee) is a volume business, and limiting the volume we can take in, you’re crushing small businesses,” Little said.

Ritter said that he opposed a move back to the 5-cent deposit, which he noted was increased to encourage recycling. However, he said the current situation has become politically untenable and puts the state at risk of a lawsuit from distributors.

“We’re getting to a point where we’re going to lose the bottle bill,” Ritter said. “If we got sued in court, I think we’d lose.”

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Connecticut

Stanley Black & Decker To Shutter New Britain Manufacturing Facility

Published

on

Stanley Black & Decker To Shutter New Britain Manufacturing Facility


NEW BRITAIN, CT — Stanley Black & Decker on Thursday said it has decided to close its manufacturing facility in New Britain.

Debora Raymond, vice president of external communications for the manufacturer, said the decision is a result of a “structural decline in demand for single-sided tape measures.”

The New Britain facility predominantly makes these products, according to Raymond.

“These products are quickly becoming obsolete in the markets we serve,” Raymond said, via an emailed statement Thursday.

Advertisement

The decision is expected to impact approximately 300 employees, according to Raymond.

“We are focused on supporting impacted employees through this transition, including providing options for employment at other facilities, severance, and job placement support services for both salaried and hourly employees,” Raymond said.

As of Thursday at 4:30 p.m., no Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act notice had been filed with the state Department of Labor.

The company’s corporate headquarters remains at 1000 Stanley Dr., New Britain.

Gov. Ned Lamont released the following statement on the decision:

Advertisement

“Although Stanley has made the decision to discontinue operations for manufacturing outdated products, a change in workforce opportunities is difficult for employees, their families, and any community.,” Lamont said. “However, I am hopeful that these skilled workers will be repurposed with the help of Stanley Black & Decker, a company that will still proudly be headquartered here in Connecticut. My administration is working closely with local and state leaders to support affected workers and to reimagine the factory site so it can continue to create opportunity and strengthen New Britain’s economic future.”

New Britain Mayor Bobby Sanchez said he is “deeply disappointed” the company will be closing its Myrtle Street operations.

“For generations, Stanley Works has been part of the fabric of our city, providing good-paying jobs, supporting families, and helping build New Britain’s proud reputation as the ‘Hardware City,’” Sanchez said.

According to the mayor, his office’s immediate focus is on helping affected workers and their families. The mayor has been in contact with Lamont’s office, and they will be working closely to make sure employees have access to job placement services, retraining opportunities and support, Sanchez said.

“We will continue aggressively pursuing economic development opportunities and attracting businesses that are looking for a true community partner, a city ready to collaborate, innovate and grow alongside them,” Sanchez said. “New Britain has reinvented itself before, and we will do so again.”

Advertisement

Stanley Black & Decker, founded in 1843, operates manufacturing facilities worldwide, according to its website. It reports having 43,500 employees globally, and makes an array of products, such as power tools and equipment, hand tools, and fasteners.





Source link

Continue Reading

Connecticut

Police video shows Vince McMahon’s 100 mph car crash in Connecticut

Published

on

Police video shows Vince McMahon’s 100 mph car crash in Connecticut


Newly released police video shows former WWE executive Vince McMahon ram his luxury sports car into the rear end of another vehicle on a Connecticut highway last summer as he was being followed by a state trooper.

McMahon, now 80, was driving his 2024 Bentley Continental GT at more than 100 mph on the Merritt Parkway when he crashed in the town of Westport, according to state police.

A trooper’s dashcam video shows McMahon accelerating away, then braking too late to avoid crashing into the back of a BMW. The Bentley then swerves into a guardrail and careens back across the highway, creating a cloud of dirt and car parts.

“Why were you driving all over 100 mph?” state police Detective Maxwell Robins asked McMahon after catching up to the wrecked Bentley, which can cost over $300,000.

Advertisement

News Roundups

Catch up on the day’s news you need to know.

By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

“I got my granddaughter’s birthday” McMahon replied, explaining he was on his way to see her. The encounter was recorded on police bodycam video.

No one was seriously injured in the July 24 crash, which happened the same day that WWE legend Hulk Hogan died of a heart attack in Florida.

Advertisement

Besides damage to the rear of the BMW, another vehicle driving on the opposite side of the parkway was struck by flying debris. The driver of that third car happened to be wearing a WWE shirt, according to the police video.

McMahon was cited for reckless driving and following too closely. A state judge in October allowed McMahon to enter a pretrial probation program that will result in the charges being erased from his record next October if he successfully completes the program. He was also ordered to make a $1,000 charitable contribution.

McMahon’s lawyer, Mark Sherman, said the crash was just an accident.

“Not every car accident is a crime,” Sherman said. “Vince’s primary concern during this case was for the other drivers and is appreciative that the court saw this more of an accident than a crime that needed to be prosecuted.”

State police said Robins was trying to catch up to McMahon on the parkway and clock his speed before pulling him over. They said the incident was not a pursuit, which happens when police chase someone trying to flee officers. They also said it did not appear McMahon was trying to escape — though in the video the detective suggests otherwise.

Advertisement

“I’m trying to catch up to you and you keep taking off,” Robins says.

“No, no no. I’m not trying to outrun you,” McMahon says.

An accident information summary provided to the media shortly after the crash did not mention that a trooper was following McMahon.

The Associated Press obtained the videos Wednesday through a public records request. They were first obtained by The Sun newspaper.

The trooper’s bodycam video also shows him asking McMahon whether he was looking at his phone when the crash happened. McMahon said he was not and adds that he hadn’t driven his car in a long time.

Advertisement

After Robins tells McMahon that his car is fast, McMahon replies, “Yeah, too (expletive) fast.”

The videos also show McMahon talking to the driver he rear-ended. Barbara Doran, of New York City, told the AP last summer that McMahon expressed his concern for her and was glad she was OK. She said she was heading to a ferry to Martha’s Vineyard at the time of the crash.

After McMahon was given the traffic summons, he shook hands with Robins and another trooper and they wished him well.

McMahon stepped down as WWE’s CEO in 2022 amid a company investigation into sexual misconduct allegations. He also resigned as executive chairman of the board of directors of TKO Group Holdings, the parent company of WWE, in 2024, a day after a former WWE employee filed a sexual abuse lawsuit against him. McMahon has denied the allegations. The lawsuit remains pending.

McMahon bought what was then the World Wrestling Federation in 1982 and transformed it from a regional wrestling company into a worldwide phenomenon. Besides running the company with his wife, Linda, who is now the U.S. education secretary, he also performed at WWE events as himself.

Advertisement
1-on-1 with Lash Legend: Former Texas A&M basketball star turned WWE’s next big thing

Legend, alongside Nia Jax, will compete for the WWE women’s tag team titles against Rhea Ripley and Iyo Sky on Friday at American Airlines Center.

Wrestling legend Kevin Von Erich flashes the ‘claw’ as he’s photographed in the studio,...
After iconic wrestling career, why Kevin Von Erich calls right now ‘the best part of life’

The legendary Texan has seen every up and down of professional wrestling. Now, he enjoys the fruits of his labor through family.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending