Professional Documents
Culture Documents
This Court held a hearing on Defendant’s Motion to Disqualify Judicial Authority and
Request for New Trial on April 7, 2008. Defendant files this Addendum to further support said
discussion occurring prior to potential juror Roseanne McWaid (“McWaid”) entering the
ATTORNEY DOW: The next one is the Realtor, your buddy. The one who knows your
wife.
ATTORNEY ZENTNER: Said – said your wife was – said she was big –
THE COURT: My wife is coming for lunch so maybe they can bond.
ATTORNEY DOW: They can share a commission. Maybe they can sell a house. She
Any objective person familiar with this portion of the record would arguably be very
concerned - by the assertion that the Trial Judge is a “buddy” of a potential juror; 1 by the
possibility of the sitting Judge’s wife and a potential juror in the case before him “bonding” at
lunch as friends or becoming business associates by sharing a commission, (particularly from the
sale of “big house” earlier viewed by Ray Allen); by the assertion that someone associated with
this case is “hiding money”. Yet, far from immediately and forcefully rejecting these notions
and foreclosing any further such communications, the Trial Court arguably adopts these
propositions by its own words – e.g., that McWaid and the Judge’s wife “can have lunch
1
It is important to realize that, at this point, it had not yet been jury, decided whether or not this juror would be
seated in this case. Ultimately, she does serve in this but apparently is not disqualified the facts of her association
with the Judge.
together” and maybe “bond.” Respectfully, it is astonishing that the Trial court can be party to
in-court dialogue such personal and financial involvement with a potential juror in the case
before it! (Also, see the more extended discussions contained at Oct. 24 TR. at pp. 71-75 as
covered in Defendant’s Memorandum at pp. 11-13). Such conduct by the sitting Judge by its
very nature, strikes directly at the core of the public’s perception of a fair, impartial judiciary in
Connecticut. Judges are duty bound to govern what they say, and what is said and done by
others, in their courtrooms. Regrettably, that did not occur here and the confidence of the public
in its judiciary will be undermined should the Defendant’s requested relief not be granted.
Respectfully submitted,
The Defendant
By his Attorneys,
Certificate of Service
I, Lori Leavitt, attorney for the Defendant, hereby certify that on the 7th day of April,
2008, a copy of the foregoing Defendant’s Addendum to Supplemental Memorandum in
Support of Motion to Disqualify Judicial Authority and Request for New Trial was served
upon the attorney(s) of record by hand a copy of same to:
RUSSELL ZENTNER
STATE’S ATTORNEYS OFFICE
1 COURT STREET
MIDDLETOWN, CT 06457
_____________________
Lori Leavitt