I admire Mr. Rangel for his decades of leadership on civil rights and his service in the armed forces and in Congress. But as elected officials, we must live up to the highest ethical standards. Given this admonishment by the Ethics Committee and the other allegations pending against him, I have directed my staff to donate to charity the campaign contributions received from Mr. Rangel.
With Connecticut having one the worse educational achievement gaps in the nation, on Sunday morning, State Rep. Jason Bartlett joined educational advocate Danielle Smith on Fox61′s Stan Simpson show to talk about the efforts underway at Capitol to address the problem.
Cross post from HatCityBLOG On Tuesday, the arrest warrant connected with the case against Tony Grant was unsealed and the document gives graphic details into the charges against the former executive director of Pathways Danbury.
Although News-Times reporter did a write-up on the report already, I’m going to provide more details from the warrant.
NOTE1 : Although it states it in the report, Grant DID NOT work at Pathways Academy but rather Pathways Danbury.
NOTE 2: Portions of the warrant have been redacted.
Here’s are highlights from the report:
The opening paragraph of the warrant sheds more details on Grant’s volunteerism and the origins of the complaint:
On January 19, 2010, the Department of Children and Families (DCF) faxed the Danbury Police Department’s Youth Bureau a Notification of Suspected Abuse (form 737). The narrative in the DCF report provided, in part, the following information: that an anonymous call was made to the DCF hotline regarding Troy Grant (40-years-old), who is a volunteer and mentor at the Pathways Academy (Christian School) and the Harambee Center (community youth center) boys and girls club. The report noted he is also involved as a mentor at a local church (later determined to be the New Hope Baptist Church). The caller reports that for the past couple days he/she has been hearing from a friend that Troy Grant has been asking male boys ages 14-18 to do sexual favors for him and in exchange, Troy Grant allows the boys to live with him and/or gives them material things. The caller reports that Troy Grant selects boys who have a history of abuse and neglect. The caller reports that Troy has a 16- year-old boy named [Doe #1] living with him now.
On January 19, 2010, about one hour after this anonymous caller made the above noted hotline report, XXXXX XXXXX called the DCF hotline and made a similar report. XXXX provided, in part, the following: that in October of 2009 he and Doe #1 met Troy Grant. Since October of 2009, Troy Grant has been performing sex acts on Doe #1 in exchange for material things.
As the warrant continues, an individual who called DCF gave a statement to the police regarding Grant’s alleged involvement with the victims. Here’s a summary
On January 21,2010, XXXX XXXX was interviewed and provided, in part, the following information in a written statement: That he and Doe #1 went to Troy’s house on October 11, 2009, for a little party. There were two other young adult gay males present. Troy bought alcohol for them and they drank the alcohol in his house. XXXXX said he knew that Troy offered money and other material things to males if they allowed him to XXXXXXXX on them and that Troy likes to XXXXXXXXXXXX. Doe #1 said he would be interested in getting money for sex, but the only thing he would do was allow Troy to perform XXXXXXXX on him. Travis and Doe #1 were drinking alcohol that Grant purchased. Troy brought out massage oils and said he gave great massages. The boys took their shirts off and Troy gave them massages. XXXXX said he had sexual relations with the other 2 adult males while Troy was massaging Doe #1. XXXXX saw Troy massage Doe #1 down to his” butt area.” Doe #1 told Travis that Troy asked Doe #1 if he could give him XXXXXXX and he would give him money. XXXXX told Doe #1 not to accept just 20 or 30 dollars, but to ask for more money. Doe #1 told Troy that Troy could give Doe #1 XXXX and they then went into Troy’s bedroom. XXXXX said Doe #1 and Troy were in there for about 45 minutes total, but that during the time XXXXX went in the room to check on Doe #1 and he saw Doe #1 naked from the waist down. XXXXX said said Doe #1 was getting up from the bed to get his clothes on. Troy was on the bed. XXXXX asked Doe #1 how much money Troy gave him and he said he didn’t know and that Troy said he would take him to the mall the next day.
After describing other incidents between Grant and the victims, according to the warrant, the witness assisted the police department by doing the following:
On January 21, 2010, XXXXXXXXX assisted us with this investigation when he made a phone call to Doe #1 and the phone call was recorded by means of a US Hawk device placed on XXXXX’s cell phone. Both ends of the conversation were recorded. The phone call was approximately 16 minutes in length. In part, Doe #1 told XXXX that he “gives it to Troy every now and then” and that when he didn’t “give it” to Troy, Troy would withhold cigarettes or other things from him. He also said Troy would get angry when he didn’t give it to him, but would eventually get over it. Doe #1 said he was upset with Travis for bringing his name out and that he was at fault for having Travis “jumped.” During the conversation, Doe #1 said Troy provides him with alcohol, like Mike’s Hard Lemonade.
The warrant continues with a statement from an individual named as John Doe #1:
On January 25, 2010, Doe #1 provided, in part, the following statement: that he has been living with Troy Grant after meeting him through another friend, XXXXXXXX. Troy Grant provides him with shelter, clothing, food, transportation, etc. He is living with Troy Grant because he needed a place to live and he wants to remain in Danbury. Doe #1 corroborated the party at Troy’s house in October of 2009 when XXXXXX was there with a couple of other gay males. Doe #1 said he and Troy weren’t drinking alcohol, but the others were. Doe #1 said he could hear XXXXXX and the other guys fooling around, but he didn’t see it. Doe #1 said he slept at Troy’s house that night. After that night, Troy offered to help him with place to live, school, and his court proceedings. Troy has provided him with shelter, food, and whatever else he needs. He said that if anything happened to Troy, it would “mess up my situation.” He denies any sexual contact with Troy. Troy brought Doe #1 to the interview and picked him up.
Ultimately, the police interviewed Grant and according to the warrant, he admitted to having sexual relations with one of the victims:
On January 25, 2010, Detective Marino and I interviewed Troy Grant in which he provided, in part, the following: ” [Doe #1] came to my house in October of 2009 with XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, [Doe #3]. They had been drinking alcohol but they didn’t drink at my house. XXXX, XXXXX and XXXXX are openly gay, and I didn’t know if [Doe #1] was. I assumed he was because he was hanging out with the gay guys. That night I was sexual with XXXX and he and I XXXXXXXXX on each other. I heard later on that XXXXXX and XXXX had XXXXXXXXXXX but I didn’t see it. Also on that night, [Doe #1] came to me and told me that he would allow me XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX if I would help him out. I told him that I didn’t have to do anything and then I believed I XXXXXXXXXXXXXX on him. Something happened that night, but I can’t quite remember what it was. I did XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX but I am just not certain of the exact night. The day after this get together, [Doe #1] had a court date. He was sent away for about 40 days detention. When he was released, he came to live with me in Danbury. His aunt allowed me to take care of him when he was released in December of 2009. It was then when he started living with me in Danbury that I am certain I XXXXXXXXXX on him. It occurred in my home and he was willing for me to do it to him. XXXXXXXX is the only thing I have ever done with him.
Around Christmas time, I was able to get [Doe #1] some clothing from funds donated by local organizations for needy kids. I took him to the mall and he bought some things there. [Doe #1] didn’t come to my house with anything, no clothing and he would wear the same clothes all the time. I was able to help him out.
I buy the groceries for the house and I don’t receive any money for taking care of the boys.
I don’t recall any time that I have asked [Doe #4 and Doe #3] for sexual favors.
I believe I have had XXXXXXXX with [Doe #1] about 5 times. This always occurred in my house in Danbury. It started in December of 2009 and he is currently still living with me. The last time it occurred was about 3 weeks ago. I never gave him any money for the sex, but I have given him money for other things that he needs.
I have had XXXXXXXX with Travis and he XXXXXXXXXXXXX two times. I have had XXXXXXXX with XXXXXXXXX about 5-10 times.
I do not consider myself gay. It was more of a release for me because I am engaged to a woman I have not been sexual with yet. We are getting married in August of 2010 and I do not want to have sex before marriage.” This concludes Troy Grant’s statement.
After providing the statement to the police, according to the warrant, Grant refused to sign the warrant before consulting with an attorney.
Troy Grant refused to sign his written statement. After providing us with his statement, he was given the opportunity to read it over. After reading the statement, he said he wanted to consult an attorney before he signed it. I asked him if everything in the statement was true and he said it was, but he didn’t want to sign anything before asking an attorney. Troy asked me what would happen and I told him I wasn’t sure. He stated he never did anything to hurt anyone and he only did what the boys wanted. He denied providing alcohol to anyone and drinking with the boys. Troy stated he is the Executive Director of Mentoring at the Pathways Academy.
According to the warrant, after interviewing the other people who had knowledge of alleged Grant’s activities, the police wrote the following summary:
In sum, this police investigation began when two separate calls (one anonymous, the other made by XXXXXXXX were made to the DCF hotline regarding Troy Grant. XXXXXX stated he was coming forward with this complaint because he felt it was wrong what Troy Grant was doing with young males under his care. XXXXXX said he was also disturbed that Troy Grant is a mentor and is part of a school working with “at-risk” males.
XXXXX also stated he was angry with Troy Grant because Grant was not allowing Doe #1 to be friends with him, and also that Troy Grant wasn’t providing him with material goods he was providing to some of the males mentioned in this investigation. XXXXX stated he witnessed Grant perform at least one act of XXXXXXX on Doe #1 while Doe #1 was in Grant’s home in Danbury. XXXXX stated he has also seen Grant provide alcohol and cigarettes to Doe #1, and other minors. XXXXX stated he knows that Doe #1 is totally dependent on Grant for his shelter, food, clothing, and other means (transportation, alcohol, cell phone, etc.) XXXXX stated Doe #1 is upset with him for telling people about his situation and for exposing the relationship he has been having with Grant. XXXXX made a phone call, that was recorded by the Danbury Police Department, in which Doe #1 corroborates much this information. Verbal and/or written statements were obtained from Doe 2, 3, and 4, in which they also state Troy Grant has offered to perform XXXXXXX on them, and at times, in exchange for goods. When Troy Grant was interviewed, he admitted to performing XXXXXXXX on Doe #1 approximately 5 times while Doe #1 was in his home. Grant initially stated the first time he gave XXXXXXXX to Doe #1 was in October of 2009 (when Doe #1 was 15-years-old) during that party with XXXXXX, but later in the interview he stated the first time may have occurred in late’November or December of 2009. Grant stated he never offered money for sex, but he stated he gave Doe #1 whatever he needed. Grant stated he cannot recall any time he asked Doe #3 or Doe #4 for sexual favors.
In the summary, the police describe an incident involving Grant and a minor back in 2005:
There was a prior police investigation in 2005 (2005-3610) regarding Troy Grant and a 15-year-old male who reported Troy Grant was talking to him about sex, his sex life and other things that made the boy “uncomfortable.” The boy reported to his mother that Troy Grant talked to him about XXXXXXXXX, his virginity, and Troy’s own sexual history. The boy reported that Troy told him he had XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX. When Troy was interviewed by police, he admitted to talking to the boy about sexual issues, but denied the talk about XXXXXXXX or XXXXXXXX. Troy told the investigating officer it was his duty as the boy’s mentor to discuss sexual issues with him. The boy never alleged sexual contact with Troy and the case was closed with a report only. In my interview with Troy, he did talk about his own experience having XXXXXXXXX.
The warrant paints a disturbing picture regarding the alleged activities of the former executive director of a local mentoring program. In response to the unsealing of the court document, Grant’s defense attorney Jim Diamond made the following statement to News-Times reporter John Pirro:
Grant’s attorney, Jim Diamond, said his client is “looking forward to his day in court to tell his side of the story.”
Referring to the informant by name, Diamond said the tipster “has woven quite a web, and when the time is appropriate we will shed more light on what he’s had to say.”
As with the DaSilva case, one must remember that an individual is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, and as Diamond states, a warrant gives one side of the situation. In any event, as with DaSilva’s situation, the media will be on hand when the defense counters the points raised in the affidavit.
RELATED MATERIAL: Police warrant affidavit (REDACTED)
Today, the Danbury Superior Court unsealed Joe DaSilva’s arrest warrant affidavit and it document gives new details regarding the events leading up to the death of Luis Encalada Bueno, which includes what seems to be an attempted cover-up by an employee of DaSilva.
According to court documents, Danbury PD interviewed several people who were with Encalada hours before the incident.
Here’s a summary of what witness number one (CW-1) stated to police (portions of statement redacted):
“On November 5 2009, I met some friends who asked me to go drink with than at an apartment on Town Hill Ave…I stayed overnight with some of the guys. At some point Friday morning (November 6), XXXX had to be taken to the hospital because he drank too much. After he was taken away, some of the guys left and as I woke up, I saw a guy known to be DaSilva grabbing my friend (CW-2) by the neck and shirt yelling stuff in English. I do not understand lot of English but I understood DaSilvsa was saying “Get the fuck out of here!” […] I got out of the apartment before CW-2 was thrown by DaSilva; I was starting to go down the stairs when DaSilva was still yelling and he kicked me in the back, making me slip downtime stairs. […] He yelled something like “If I see you again I’ll kill you!” […] CW-2 and I wan towards the courthouse and Walgreens on Main Street, and CW-2 said something to me about Luis still being in the apartment and we should check on him. […] As we were walking towards the apartment, we saw Luis lying on the ground near a dumpster.
In the testimony, witness one stated that he seen DaSilva before because his office building is next to the witness’ place of employment
I know DaSilva from where I work. I worked at XXXX for about 3 years and DaSilva owns the building I work in and also has an office near there. I have seen DaSilva come into XXXXX and have seen him around a number of times,
The arrest warrant also states that witness one pointed out DaSilva in a police photograph lineup.
Witness two (CW-2) also gaves his account of what happened to the police. Here’s a summary of the statement.
On Friday November 6th, I was with my friends on Town Hill Ave. […] Sometime in the morning, I saw this guy DaSilva come to the apartment. There was also a second guy but I don’t know him. DaSilva owns the house and we were not supposed to be in there. Luis was lying on the couch when DaSilva came in, he (DaSilva) was very angry, he was yelling get the fuck out of here, this is private property, he grabbed me and tried to throw me down the stairs, he hit me in the back and as I was falling I was able to grab the rail and stop myself from falling down the stairs. I think he did the same thing to CW-1 who has behind me. […]When CW-1 and I left, Luis Encalada was still in the apartment sleeping on the couch, I did see DaSilva of back into the apartment that Luis was in as I was leaving. CW-1 and I walked around to Main St., by the Walgreens and the old court building. I then received a call on my cell phone from CW-3. CW-3 told me that he/she found Luis Encalada on the ground outside Town Hill Ave.
CW-2 also stated this to the police:
I was with Luis the night before this and most of that morning, I did not see him fall or fight anyone. He did not complain about his stomach or any other illness. In fact, he was even dancing the night before all of this.
CW-2 also pointed out DaSilva in a police photograph line-up.
After verifying that 58 Town Hill Ave is owned by DaSilva, On Nov 6th, detectives for the DPD interview the owner of the Palace Theatre at his home in New Milford CT.
According to court records, here’s a summary of what transpired (portions in BOLD were done by yours truly for emphasis).
It was explained to DaSilva that detectives were investigating a complaint by two (2) men that he assaulted when while making them leave his property at 58 Town Hill Ave. DaSilva just smiled and shrugged and said, “What do you want me to say?” He was then asked if it was possible that these men got rough with him and maybe he was defending himself. DaSilva stated “No, I wasn’t there at all.” DaSilva stated that about a month prior he had forced several Hispanic males from the second floor apartment, but that was the last time he was there at 58 Town Hill Ave. DaSilva stated one or two of his employees may have been at 58 Town Hill Ave. today around lunch time. DaSilva stated that Rolando DaSilva (no relation) was there to turn on the boiler and that maybe Joe Rodrigues was there also, but he was not sure about the Rodrigues. Joseph DaSilva provided his cellular phone number as (XXX)XXX-XXXX, and stated he is the only person to use this phone.DaSilva was asked if he was made aware that there were persons illegally in the second floor apartment, he stated no he had not. DaSilva was asked if he was in phone contact with Rolando DaSilva at all around the time Rolando DaSilva was to be working at 58 Town Hill Ave. He stated “No”.
After interviewing DaSilva, on Nov 6th, Danbury detectives interviewed Rolando DaSilva. Here’s a summary of what transpired:
Rolando SaSilva was asked if he was at 58 Town Hill Ave., earlier in the day. Rolando DaSilva stated that he was, sometime around lunch time. Rolando DaSilva stated he was only there about 5 minutes and did not see anyone. He stated he parked his white company van out front, entered the building, went to the basement, turned the heating system on, and left. Roland DaSilva stated he did not go to tthe second floor and did not see any Hispanic males. Rolando DaSilva provided his cellular phone number as (XXX)-XXX-XXXX, and stated he alone uses this phone. Rolando DaSilva was asked if he saw Joseph DaSilva at 58 Town Hill Ave., he stated no. When asked if he spoke to him via cell phone just prior to being at 58 Town Hill Ave., while there, or just leaving, Rolando states no.
Detectives then interview Brian Ferguson, the only legal tenant at 58 Town Hill Ave. Here’s a summary of what was reported in the warrant:
Ferguson stated that he had called DaSilva’s office from his cell phone in the morning to report running water in the basement.
Also on Nov 6th, Danbury PD obtained a search and seizure warrant to conduct the crime scene at 58 Town Hill Ave.
Items were located and collected. These items include what appeared to be a blood stain on the wall of the hallway outside the second floor apartment, what appeared to be blood droplet on the stairs leading from the second floor apartment to the front entrance of 58 Town Hill Ave. Also located and photographed were several blood like stains on the ground outside 58 Town HIll Ave., that appear to on the path Encalada would have traveled from 58 Town Hill Ave., to where he was found 2 driveways away.
As the arrest warrant further states, on Nov 9th, detectives interviewed Jose Rodrigues.
Rodrigues stated that he was not at 58 Town Hill Ave., at all on 06 November, but he was there earlier that today along with John Doyle and Fausto Costa to empty and clean out the second floor apartment. Rodrigues stated they were sent there by Joseph DaSilva. Rodrigues provided his cellular phone number as (XXX) XXX-XXXX, and stated he is the only one to use his phone.
Upon further investigation, Danbury PD conducted a voluntary second interview with Rolando DaSilva in which they pressed him on his previous statement:
It was explained to DaSilva that information he had told both detectives on 06 November 2009 was found not to be true, on that date DaSilva stated that he had been at 58 Town Hill Ave., around lunch time, that he was there only a short period of time, that he was alone and his boss Joe DaSilva was not present. Rolando DaSilva also stated that he had not seen any men in the second floor apartment and had not communicated by phone with Joe DaSilva around that time. Some evidence to show these facts not to be true was shown to Rolando DaSilva. He was then told that he could possibly face criminal charges if he continued to lie about this information.
Rolando DaSilva stated that he was afraid and also felt badly about what had happened. Rolando DaSilva then provided the following statement: On Friday Nov. 6, 2009 I went to work at about 7 AM. I work for Joe DaSilva at DaSilva Realty, 288 Main St., Danbury. I do the plumbing and heating for Joe’s properties. Sometime before lunch I got a call on my cell phone from Denise Archiere, who is the office manager. She told me that there was water running in the basement of 58 Town Hill Ave. I knew that I also had to turn the heat on. I told Denise that if there was water running in the basement, there had to be someone on the second floor. I drove right over to 58 Town Hill. When I got to 58 Town Hill, Joe DaSilva had just gotten there. Joe said to me, “Do what you gotta do.” Joe seemed pissed off. I know that he was pissed off about the guys upstairs. There have been drunk, wasted Mexicans illegally squatting in the 2nd floor apt. I assumed that Joe was going upstairs and I planned on staying in the basement. I didn’t want any part of whatever was going to take place.
I went down into the basement to take care of the water and heat. While I was in the basement I heard a commotion on the stairs. I heard footsteps, loud voices, yelling. The footsteps were loud but not fast. I recognized the voice that was yelling. The only person I heard was Joe. He was yelling, “Get the fuck out of my house,” and things like that. It sounded to me that Joe was throwing the guys out of the apt. I had the impression that Joe didn’t even want me there, so I just stayed in the basement. I came out of the basement after it got quiet. This all took about 10 minutes. When I got outside, Joe was already gone. This statement was read by Rolando DaSilva and his wife Susan. Rolando DaSilva then swore to this statement and signed it as Susan DaSilva also signed this document as a witness. During this interview, Rolando DaSilva stated that Joe DaSilva’s white Ford pick up truck was parked in front of his (Rolando’s) van on Town Hill Ave.
Shortly after leaving Rolando DaSilva’s residence, detectives were contacted via cell phone by Rolando DaSilva, who asked both detectives to return to his home as he had more information to provide.
That upon return to Rolando DaSilva’s home, DaSilva stated that he had not been completely honest during the prior statement. DaSilva stated that he is in fear of being fired by Joe DaSilva for cooperating with the investigation. Rolando provided the following in a second statement:
After the detectives left my house, I felt bad because I had not been completely honest. I talked to my wife and told her about the things I hadn’t told the police. I then called Det. Trompetta and asked him to come back to my house. Have felt bad about this whole incident and want to get it off my chest. Everything was correct in my first statement up to the point that I got to 58 Town Hill. Joe did get there right before me. He said to me, “Stay out of my way,” and went upstairs. I didn’t go to the basement. I followed Joe upstairs and I stayed in the hallway outside of the 2nd floor apt. I saw Joe go into the apt., and start throwing people out. Joe was yelling, “Get the fuck out, get out of my house.” There were 3 guys in the apt., maybe 4. Joe was grabbing them and pushing them down the stairs. I didn’t see him punch or hit anybody, just push them out and try to kick them down the stairs. The first or 2nd guy in the bunch was holding onto the railings and holding everyone up. Joe was trying to get them out of the apt. I just stayed out of the way. Once everyone was out of the apt., I went to the basement. When I came out I saw two guys walking south on Town Hill by # 54. I think they were 2 of the guys that were in the apt. I didn’t see anybody lying on the ground out front. Joe had already left. I don’t know where the 3rd guy was. This statement was also read by Rolando DaSilva and his wife Susan. DaSilva swore to the truth and then sign the statement, which was witnessed by his wife. Rolando DaSilva was asked about the portion of his statement where he stated he did not see Joe DaSilva punch or hit anyone while in the hallway, he was also asked if he had entered the apartment with Joe. He stated he had not and does not know what happened in the apartment.
After obtaining the revised statement from DaSilva, the Danbury PD obtained a court order ordering various cell phone companies to provide details records for several cell phone numbers provided by DaSilva and other individuals who were interviewed.
Here’s a summary of their findings:
That a review of Ferguson’s cellular phone (his only phone) records show that on 06 November 2009, Brian Ferguson called (XXX) XXX-XXXX, the office of DaSilva Realty. This was a 27 second call.
That a review of the cellular phone records for the phones of Rolando DaSilva and Joseph DaSilva show that on 06 November 2009, at approximately 11 :55:41 AM, Rolando DaSilva’s. phone received an inbound call from DaSilva Realty, this call lasted 47 seconds. Also the records show that at approximately 11 :58:25 AM Rolando DaSilva’s phone received an inbound “direct connect” call from Joseph DaSilva’s cellular phone. This call lasted 72.2 seconds.
That a review of Rolando DaSilva’s records for 07 November 2009 show an outbound call to the cellular phone of Joseph DaSilva’s cellular phone at approximately 8:56:39 AM This call lasted 238 seconds. At approximately 9:14:37 AM Joseph DaSilva places an outbound call to (XXX) XXX-XXXX, the home phone of Attorney Joseph DaSilva. This call lasted 38 seconds. A second call lasting 50 seconds was placed to Attorney DaSilva at 10:41: 12 AM.
After obtaining this information, Danbury PD requested another interview with DaSilva in which he declined.
The warrant concluded with the following:
That the affiant believes based on the sworn statements of cooperating witness # 1, cooperating witness # 2, cooperating witness # 4, Rolando DaSilva as well as the cellular telephone records of Joseph DaSilva, Brian Ferguson and Rolando DaSilva that; during the late morning of 06 November 2009, Luis Encalada was in the second floor apartment of 58 Town Hill Ave., Danbury, Connecticut with CW-1 and CW-2, That Luis Encalada was sleeping on a couch. That at approximately 11: 25 AM, on 06 November 2009, Brian Ferguson, the resident of the first floor of 58 Town Hill Ave., called the office of Joseph DaSilva to report “running water” in the basement of 58 Town Hill Ave.
That at approximately 11 :25 AM on 06 November 2006, Denise Archieri, the office manager of Joseph DaSilva Realty, called Rolando DaSilva, the companies plumber, on his cellular phone dispatching him to 58 Town Hill Ave., to address the” running water” problem. That at approximately 11 :58 AM, Rolando DaSilva was contacted by Joseph DaSilva using the “direct connect” option of his cellular phone. That shortly after 12:00 PM, Rolando DaSilva arrived at 58 Town Hill Ave., observing that Joseph DaSilva had arrived at that location moments prior. That Joseph DaSilva being aware that persons were illegally in the second floor apartment went upstairs to the second floor of 58 Town Hill Ave., entered the apartment, and confronted CW-1 and CW-2. That Joseph DaSilva physically pulled CW-2 from the apartment into the hallway, then struck CW-2 in the back, causing CW-2 to fall down the stairs. CW-2 was able to grab the rail while falling to stop from falling to the bottom of the stairs. CW-1 ran from the apartment and was kicked in the back by Joseph DaSilva at the top of the stairs causing CW-1 to also fall into the stairwell. Joseph DaSilva was then observed by CW-2 to re enter the second floor apartment where Luis Encalada was sleeping. Joseph DaSilva was alone with Encalada for a short period of time’,· then observed by Rolando DaSilva pulling a third male (Encalada) from the apartment and push him down the stairwell. That according to Danbury Hospital records Luis Encalada was extremely intoxicated. Encalada was most likely unable to stand, balance or defend himself, tumbled down the stairs. That CW-3, CW-4 along with Angel, while walking on Town Hill Ave.,towards number 58, observed Luis Encalada on the ground in the driveway of 66 Town Hill Ave. apparently injured. That CW-3 separated from CW-4 and Angel to find help. That at 12: 30 PM Angel, using Lu’is Encalada’s cellular phone called CW-2 and informed CW-2 of how they found Encalada. That CW-4 asked Encalada what had happened to him and was told by Encalada “Silva hit me.” That at 12:54 PM,· CW-1 and CW-2 arrived at 66 Town Hill Ave., and, using Encalada’s cellular phone, called 911 for help.
That the affiant believes that on 06 November 2009 at 58 Town Hill Ave., Joseph DaSilva struck CW-1 in the back, pushed CW-1 down a flight of stairs, in violation of Connecticut General Statutes. That on 06 November 2009 Joseph DaSilva struck CW-2 in the back, pushed CW-2 down a flight of stairs in violation of Connecticut General Statutes. That on 06 November 2009 Joseph DaSilva pulled the extremely intoxicated Luis Encalada from a second floor apartment at 58 Town Hill Ave., Danbury and pushed him down a flight of stairs. That the reckless actions of Joseph DaSilva Jr., on 06 November 2009 at 58 Town Hill Ave., Danbury, Connecticut caused blunt force injury to the abdomen of Luis Encalada resulting in the death of Luis Encalada. And that these action are in violation of the Connecticut General Statutes.
Although one is presumed innocent until proven guilty, it will be interesting to hear DaSilva’s defense for the alleged inaccuracies in his statement to the police.
That’s the future for motorists on highways crossing into Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New York if state Rep. Tony Guerrera, D- Rocky Hill, wins his campaign to restore tolls in the state.
Guerrera wants Connecticut to install high-tech tolls at seven key spots near its borders. That could bring in hundreds of millions of dollars a year to maintain highways and repair deteriorating bridges, with most of the money coming from out-of-state drivers who pass through Connecticut on a free ride now, he said.
“My plan is we put in tolls, and we cut the gas tax in half,” Guerrera said.Connecticut hits drivers for 25 cents a gallon at the pump to maintain roads and aid mass transit, but state officials have warned that revenue isn’t keeping up with the cost of repairing deteriorating bridges, overpasses and highways. Guerrera proposes cutting the tax to about 12 cents.
That would save $50 a year for a motorist who logs 10,000 miles in a vehicle that gets 25 miles per gallon. Guerrera says all the remaining gas tax income should go solely to mass transit. Highway and bridge work would be funded from toll revenue; Cambridge Systematics, a consultant, last year projected that $3 tolls at seven heavily used state border crossings would generate nearly $600 million a year by 2015.
Okay, I’ll make this quick…this proposal is batshit crazy!
Give the make-up of Danbury, it’s outrageous that the state legislature would consider making commuters shell out 3 dollars each time the enter and exit Danbury. It’s bad enough that traffic is back up on such roads as Mill Plain road during rush hours, could you imagine the traffic nightmares on the roads once they install a border toll?!?
Remember, when it comes to the landscape of Hat City, I-84 is a relative new stretch of road. Here’s a brief history lesson on the major highway in the Greater Danbury area.
Traffic on US 6 and US 6A was already significant before interstate highways started opening in the late 1950s. In 1955, a new four-lane section of US 6/202 in Newtown opened, bypassing the old Church Hill and Glen Road routing. It’s now part of I-84, which was reconstructed in the late 1960s and again in the 1970s.
In 1958, Connecticut Gov. Abraham Ribicoff called building I-84 the “top priority”, and work in the Danbury area began in October of that year. On Dec. 16, 1961, 15 miles of four-lane expressway were opened, from the state line to Sandy Hook. The work included the 3-way interchanges for the proposed US 7 expressway at exits 3 and 7. Opening ceremonies were held at the Lake Avenue overpass in Danbury and the US 6 overpass (exit 10) in Sandy Hook.
Beyond Sandy Hook, the highway narrowed to the undivided four-lane US 6 and 202 bypass built in the 1950s. Around 1967, this was upgraded to a divided highway, but was still substandard between exits 10 and 13, including a narrow Rochambeau Bridge over the Housatonic River, and two small interchanges (exits 11 and 12) west of the riverbank. Both the narrow profile of the highway and the short ramps of the interchanges posed safety problems.
In the early 1970s, the state conducted public hearings to improve the area. A new westbound span of the Rochambeau Bridge would be constructed, allowing six lanes of traffic over the river. Exits 11 and 12 would be eliminated, and exit 13 made safer (but now a partial interchange, only serving traffic to and from the west). Around 1976, all this was done, and a new 3-level interchange (which became exit 11) for the proposed Route 25 expressway was built. (The interchange, at the modern exit 11, currently serves two-lane Route 34 instead.) Exit 12, which served Riverside Road immediately west of the Housatonic, was deleted and not replaced.
The overlap of US 7 and I-84, from exits 3 thru 7 in Danbury, became one of the worst bottlenecks in the state in the 1980s. (US 6 and US 202 also shared the same four lanes of freeway.) Early in the decade the Housatonic Valley Council of Elected Officials (HVCEO) presented a traffic projection to DOT justifying widening the overlap to six lanes. That widening was completed in 1988.
As you can see, it wasn’t that long ago when roads like Route 6 (Mill Plain Road), as well as Route 7 were the major points of travel for those traveling in and out of Danbury. In terms of border tolls, if installed, you can bet that traffic will increase on these roads, as well as other routes such as NY 121, NY 123, NY 22, NY 116, CT 37, and CT 39.
(Here’s a map of the area where the border toll is being proposed. Click and drag the map to see the number of US routes in the area).
…and I’m not even going to bring up the decline in revenue that will be felt at such places as Danbury Mall and Stew Leonard’s.
Last April, State Rep, and Transportation committee chairman, Tony Guerrera came to Danbury to hear our opinion on border tolls…and lets just say that Danbury, public officials, business owners, and residents gave him an earful.
Obviously, Guerrera wasn’t listening…
Why should Danbury residents who are working in Westchester County get slapped with a 6 dollar round trip tab (which works out to 30 dollars per work week)?!?
If we have to re-install tolls, at least install them on the major bridges in the state where they belong (I can think of a few in the Rocky Hill area). Demanding that people cough up 3 dollars per pass on the CT/NY border would be disastrous.
Grant, who’s the Vice President of the Greater Danbury NAACP, and served as executive director Pathways Danbury mentoring program was arrested in January on numerous charges stemming from an alleged sexual assault of minors (note: Grant is presently on administrative leave form the mentoring program).
List of the charges filed against Grant on the day of his arrest are the following (click here to view the court document):
COUNT ONE: Sexual Assault in the Second Degree (on or about 10/2009). Violation: 53a-71(a)(10). COUNT TWO: Risk of Injury Illegal Sexual Contact (on or about 10/2009). Violation:53-21(a)(2). COUNT THREE: Sexual Assault in the Second Degree (on or about 12/2009). Violation 53a-71(a)(10). COUNT FOUR: Risk of Injury Illegal Sexual Contact (on or about 12/2009). Violation:53-21(a)(2). COUNT FIVE: Sexual Assault in the Second Degree (on or about 1/2010). Violation 53a-71(a)(10). COUNT SIX: Risk of Injury Illegal Sexual Contact (on or about 1/2010). Violation:53-21(a)(2). COUNT SEVEN: Risk of Injury (on or about 10/11/2009). Violation 53-21(a)(1). COUNT EIGHT: Providing Alcohol to a Minor (on or about 10/11/2009). Violation 30-86(b)(2). COUNT NINE: Risk of Injury (on or about 11/2009). Violation 53-21(a)(1). COUNT TEN: Providing Alcohol to a Minor (on or about 11/2009). Violation 30-86(b)(2). COUNT ELEVEN: Providing Alcohol to a Minor (on or about 06-08/2009). Violation 30-86(b)(2). COUNT TWELVE: Risk of Injury (on or about 12/2009). Violation 53-21(a)(1).
Although he was free on 250,000 bond, at the start of his first hearing on Tuesday, Assistant State’s Attorney Sharmese Hodge made a request to Judge Robin Pavia that Grant’s bond be increased by 150,000 dollars as a result of five additional charges that were filed on that day.
List of the additional charges filed against Grant as of 02.09.10 are as follows (click here to view the court document):
COUNT THIRTEEN: Sexual Assault in the Second Degree (on or about 05-06/2009 – 01/2010). Violation 53a-71(a)(4). COUNT FOURTEEN: Sexual Assault in the Second Degree (on or about 05-06/2009 – 01/2010). Violation 53a-71(a)(4). COUNT FIFTEEN: Sexual Assault in the Second Degree (on or about 05-06/2009 – 01/2010). Violation 53a-71(a)(4). COUNT SIXTEEN: Sexual Assault in the Fourth Degree (on or about 05-06/2009 – 01/2010). Violation 53a-73(a)(1)(E). COUNT SEVENTEEN: Sexual Assault in the Fourth Degree (on or about 05-06/2009 – 01/2010). Violation 53a-73(a)(1)(E).
In total, as of Tuesday, Grant is charged with six counts of second-degree sexual assault, four counts of risk of injury to a minor, three counts of serving alcohol to a minor, two counts of fourth-degree sexual assault, and two counts of illegal sexual contact.
Since he did not have an attorney at the hearing, Judge Pavia provided Grant an opportunity to apply for a public defender. When his case was recalled later in the afternoon, Grant was notified that he didn’t meet the qualifications to be appointed a state’s attorney (click here to view the court document), and that the judge will hear the argument regarding an increase in his bond on Thursday morning.
NOTE: Due to the number people in the courtroom, the fact that I was seated in the last row, and the poor sound quality in the chambers, it was rather hard to hear the proceedings. The following is a summary of what occurred in court today based off my notes and interviews with the Assistant State’s Attorney and defense attorney.
Thursday morning, accompanied defense attorney Jim Diamond, Grant arrived to court to hear oral arguments regarding his increase bond request by the prosecution.
According to Assistant State’s Attorney Hodge, the rationale behind her increase in bond request were three fold.
The first stems from the fact that there are new charges filed against Grant (on Tuesday, Grant received five additional charges bringing the total charges to seventeen).
The second involves the safety of the community. During the proceedings Attorney Hodge stated that after he posted bail at the police station, Grant allegedly continued to have contact with the victims in the case.
The third involves a concern over flight risk or the opinion of the prosecution that there is possibility that Grant might flee.
Stating that the purpose of bonds is not to punish or incarcerate, in his remarks, defense attorney Diamond rebutted the prosecution’s concerns.
In terms of flight risk, Diamond noted to the judge that Grant has made every court appearance. In terms of contact with victims, Diamond stated that at the time of his release, there was no court order at the time of his arrest stating that he could not have any contact with any minors. Finally, Diamond noted that Grant has long ties to the Danbury community and served in the military (eight years in the Air Force and four years in the Army).
After a brief rebuttal from the prosecution, Judge Pavia ordered that Grant’s bond be increased to 50,000 as opposed to 150,000 dollars. The court also placed restrictions on Grant which include that he has no contact with the victims in this case in any manner (which includes phone calls, emails, text messages, or contact through third parties) nor should he has any contact with anyone under the age of 18.
After the hearing, I had a moment to talk to defense attorney Diamond who stated that Grant will fight these charges.
“Mr Grant has deep ties to Danbury. He has come to court and he is going to fight these charges. He has a record of service to this nation and his community and we look forward to refute each and every allegation.”
The next court hearing is scheduled for March 3rd.
In any case, upwards of a foot of snow may fall statewide. A good 12 hour period of heavy snow will fall, and winds could gust over 40 mph. It should begin during the wee hours of Wednesday. It will be a classic moderate to heavy snowstorm.
Here’s a video clip of Osborne Street as of 3:15 THIS AFTERNOON.
In my opinion, based on what I saw this afternoon, it seems like this storm was more hype than anything else.
When your forecast is wrong you just need to man up and pull back. We try our best but it’s an imperfect science. We understand that people close schools and businesses and money is lost when we’re forecasting a foot of snow. None of us take that responsibility lightly. We messed up on this one, it’s time to admit it and say sorry.
UPDATE 5:20 P.M.: During the 5 o’clock edition of WTNH’s news broadcast, Meteorologist Geoff Foxx stepped up and apologized to the public for providing an incorrect forecast and released an updated snow prediction.
Although the snow was MUCH less than what was predicted yesterday, precaution is always the right approach when dealing with inclimate weather.