Connecticut still does not seem to beable to develop an Office of State Ethics that is Ethical. Governor Rell replaced former Gov.Rowland, campaigning on ethical standards- her new Citizens Ethics Advisory Board/OSE violates constitutional rights.

The State of Connecticut’s Office of State Ethics conducted a nine day trial under its new structure and fined a former employee, Priscilla Dickman $15,000.00. They failed to prove their case but they did bring attention to the myriad of failures inherent in a process Connecticut now plans to utilize with its new Citizens Ethics Advisory Board. Other states certainly need not look to Connecticut as a model to emulate less they want to face the same scrutiny this Board will face for some time. The Office of State Ethics and the Citizens Ethics Advisory have caused more questions to be raised which require answers before this fine against Ms. Dickman can be imposed. For that reason an appeal will ensue even though the OSE feels one can not appeal the decisions of their Board. Ms.Dickman plans to go forward and challenge the findings of the CT. Office of State Ethics even challenging Ethics Enforcement Officer Thomas (T.J. ) Jones statements which Jones made during the August 13, 2010 probable cause hearing. Here Jones’ statement is taken directly from that Probable Cause Hearing transcript page 53: ” I-81-A-3 is the provision of the code that says the board shall interpret the code, and when it interprets the code nobody appeals it. The board, which is the trier of fact in this case, is bound by the law. That means they are the end all and be all until some other body tells them otherwise.” The CEAB of Connecticut is a seven member body made up of the following individuals, Chairman G.Kenneth Bernhard,Thomas H. Dooley, Vice Chairman, Denis J.Riley, Ernest N. Abate, Rebecca M.Doty, Kathleen Bornhorst and Attorney Shawn T. Wooden.

As this is the first Citizens Advisory Board of its kind in the country and Connecticut hoped it would be a model for others to follow where the members are asked to sit as Judge and Jury it is important to show the constitutional violations that occurred during this nine day procedure utilizing a board such as this one and statutes being redefined by Jones daily. A citizen of Connecticut going thru this process has no chance of a fair and impartial trial. As a matter created with the record here, this very body, its makeup and procedural violations actually strip one of their very Constitutional Rights. For those reasons this issue must be reviewed thru appeals to be brought before the Appellate Court and quite possibly the Supreme Court. The ramifications for other States to look to Connecticut as having developed a model for a Office of State Ethics that should be copied or admired would be a grave mistake. Governor Jodi Rell evidently thought this time she had gotten it right but instead she has allowed this new OSE and its Ethics Enforcement Officer T.J. Jones to assume he can dictate his interpretations of statutes and redefine them at his whim. The transcripts detail the numerous times Jones has quoted statutes and interpreted them to his liking when it was clear he was manipulating and misleading in his interpretations.The same manner in which he manufactured evidence, misled when he advanced exhibits he knew to be false and allowed witnesses to commit perjury. Again the State of Connecticut still just cannot seem to get it right with Ethics and Governor Jodi Rell certainly should not be touring the country and insisting Connecticut has the perfect model now in place to demonstrate how an Ethics Agency should operate. The videos are available on CT.N for all dates of the first trial held under this new office for review and record making.The very actions under taken by the Connecticut Office of State Ethics since they began their investigation along with procedural mistakes of grave constitutional magnitude made by this new Citizens Advisory Board calls into question whether thesefolks actually understand the very meaning of ethics and what they are charged by the citizens of this state to do.

Prior to the trial beginning an appeal already was pending on the issue that the CEAB/OSE allowed Chairman G.Kenneth Bernhard to be seated illegally on the Citizens Ethics Advisory Board-the time limits for his appointment were incorrect but the CEAB decided to waive them and allow him to be seated as Chairman anyway. In addition the CEAB refused to have an open deliberation on the issue. Manchester Journal Inquirer write Alex Woods has filed a complaint with the Freedom of Information requesting the release of minutes from those deliberations. OSE thru its Attorney Barbara Housen has refused. It will be appealed. It would be hard to imagine a body that would allow this first of its kind proceeding/trial to go forward when such an important question as to the makeup of the Board was pending. That in itself requires one to ask if anyone could get a fair trial in Connecticut with its Office of State Ethics. I think not.

When Jones of OSE misled in his interpretation of the purchases of tax exempt items for future sales in discussing sales tax figures of Ms.Dickmans as evidence of a business, Jones commenced to mislead in his advance that these were indeed sales. These actions in themselves immediately called into question his violating the Professional Rules of Conduct. Jones knew these were not sales as early as May 2009 when he deposed Ms.Dickman May 19th 2009. In addition Jones knew in August 2009 at the probable cause hearing for the defendant that “Exhibit 33″ which Jones entered into evidence on November 10th 2009 and then withdrew on November 12, 2009 was a manufactured and misleading document. This “Exhibit 33″ that became the core of Jones evidence resulted from his investigator Michael Morrissey along with Jones’ assistance blatantly manufacturing evidence and misleading the Judge and Jury- again he was violating the Professional Rules of Conduct for an attorney functioning as a prosecutor in this venue. He has wasted the states time and the states money. Jones was willing in December 2008 to accept a “slap on the wrist or $250.00 fine against Priscilla Dickman-stating he wanted a moral victory and to send a message to state employees. Jones stated in December 2008 there was minimal email use for travel business by Priscilla and then on January 12, 2010 Jones asks the CEAB to fine her $5000.00 and refer her to the Attorney Generals Office.

What has Jones been up to the last few years on this investigation - assisting the University of Connecticut and the players up there in continuing their retaliation against a former employee? Dickman has had a Civil suit pending for sometime against her former employer on a number of issues including violation of the American with Disabilties Act in failing to offer reasonable accommodations. Jones had the defendants supervisor Feliciano Dias, named in the civil suit, as a witness. Yet Jones failed to mention that Dias in 2008 had been found to have violated the use of the States internet for more than an hour per day and was disciplined after an investigation by the Office of Public Auditors. The significance here is that the State of Connecticut had educated its employees in May 2006 with its Computer Usage Policy as to what was expected of them now that all agencies were online. Dickman retired in 2005. University of Connecticut Health Center , the employer ,in September 2009 finally has decided it needs to clarify computer, email, internet use for its employees as violations to the May 2006 Department of Administrative Services Policy continue to be recorded, especially in the defendants department, Laboratory Medicine. Jones as well had been found thru evidence provided via a Freedom of Information request in 2008 to have spent a great part of his own work time online for personal use-selling Girls Scout cookies, tickets for banquets, scheduling lawn maintenance. The hypocrisy is overwhelming when Jones went on to waste the tax payers of the state of Connecticuts money in advancing his case with this defendant when he himself violated a policy in place since May 2006.

The employer , UCHC , had investigated Ms.Dickman twice in 2005 and testimony by Labor Relations Director stated there was not found to be a violation to their University policy. Incidental usage was allowed for employees. The investigation began with supposedly a few anonymous tips one from a coworker, Denise Conderino. Conderino’s testimony raises an issue of whether this witness understands the serious nature of giving false testimony while under oath and that if found to have committed perjury she could be subject to criminal charges. Testimony and evidence given supported the University allowed use of the computers, emails etc for personal use. Conderino herself was found to have spent an enormous amount of time utilizing state equipment for personal use.

Jones attempted to instill in the Board that Ms. Dickman did not have a hobby but rather a “business” yet after he subpoenaed the tax returns and found no evidence of a busines and after deposing the defendant in May 2009 and finding the University allowed incidental use of its equipment (maybe to Jones dismay) he still continued to advance his agenda-that to fine Dickman for a violation of the Code of Ethics. Had their been a violation Ms.Dickman would have been counseled via the contractual disciplinary process. Since no violation occured , no discipline took place. As a matter of record, Ms.Dickman retired with an exemplary service record for all of her 27 years of employement at University of Connecticut Health Center.

The issue of retaliation began in earnest in 2005 when Priscilla filed a Commission on Human Rights and Oppertunity complaint against individuals at UCHC. She testified as well in Senate Hearings concerning Whistle blower actions and retaliation in February 2009. Ms. Dickman had been aware of altered employment authorizations and timecard fraud during her tenure at UConn. Once Jones was hired as the Ethics Enforcement Officer with Governor Jodi Rells’ ” New Improved Office of State Ethics” he was enlisted to help continue the retaliation. When Hartford Courant writer, Jon Lender, stated that this is a more complicated story he was correct, it is one that has taken years to write and the ending has yet to be written.

The ending should be written by the Connecticut State Legislative Branch-do they have the courage to put politics aside and help write the final chapter here? Governor Rells office refused to address the unethical actions of her new Office of State Ethics under Director Carol Carson and T.J. Jones. Maybe our elected officials will decide to address what has taken place here

TO: The Connecticut Judiciary Review Committee
RE: Office of State Ethics/Citizens Advisory Board
Date: 1/18/2010
From: Priscilla Dickman

We are very much going to go forward and challenge the findings of the
CT. Office of State Ethics. Since this is the first Board in the
country that a state has asked to sit as jury in this venue, I felt it
important to show that with the implementation of Office of State
Ethics and a Citizens Advisory Board of this makeup that a citizen of
the state has no chance of a fair and impartial trial. As a matter
created with the record here, this very body, its makeup and
procedural violations actually strip one of their very Constitutional
Rights. For those reasons we will go forward to appeal the decision
thru the Appellate and quite possibly the Supreme Court. The
ramifications for other States to look to Connecticut as having
developed a model for a Office of State Ethics that should be copied
or admired would be a grave mistake. Governor Jodi Rell evidently
thought this time she had gotten it right but instead she has allowed
Ethics Enforcment Officer T.J. Jones to assume he can dictate his
interpretations of statutes and redefine them at his whim. The
transcripts detail the numerous times Jones has quoted statutes and
interpreted them to his liking when it was clear he was manipulating
and misleading in his interpretations in the same manner he
manufactured evidence, misled when he advanced exhibits he knew to be
false and allowed witnesses to commit perjury. Again the State of
Connecticut still just cannot seem to get it right with Ethics and we
certainly should not be touring the country and insisting we have the
perfect model now in place to demonstrate how an Ethics Agency should
operate. The videos are available on CT.N for the hearing dates
inorder for review and record making.The very actions under taken by
the CT. Office of State Ethics since they began their investigation
along with procedural mistakes of grave constitutional magnitude made
by this new Citizens Advisory Board calls into question whether these
folks actually understand the very meaning of t
We do have an appeal already pending that the CEAB/OSE allowed the
Chairman Kenneth G.Bernhard to be seated illegally on the Board-the
time limits for his appointment were incorrect but the CEAB decided to
waive them and allow him to be seated as Chairman anyway. Now can you
imagine that with a body that would be a part of such a decision
anyone could get a fair trial. I think not.

When Jones of OSE misled in his interpretation of the sales tax
figures of Priscilla’s which Jones so proudly had displayed on a large
screen and commenced to advance that these were even sales immediately
called into question his violating the Professional Rules of Conduct.
Jones knew these were not sales as early as May 2009 when he deposed
Priscilla, May 19th 2009. In addition Jones knew in August 2009 at the
probable cause hearing for Priscilla ” Exhibit 33″ that Jones entered
into evidence on November 10th 2009 and then withdrew on November 12,
2009 was a document that resulted from his investigator Michael
Morrissey along with Jones assistance was a blatant example of these
individuals manufacturing evidence- again he was violating the
Professional Rules of Conduct for an attorney functioning as a
prosecutor in this venue. He has wasted the states time and the states
money when he was willing in December 2008 to accept a “slap on the
wrist or $250.00 fine against Priscilla-stating he wanted a moral
victory and to send a message to state employees. He in December 2008
stated there was minimal email use for travel business by Priscilla
and then on January 12, 2010 Jones asks the CEAB to fine her $5000.00
and refer her to the Attorney Generals Office.

What has Jones been up to the last few years on this investigation -
assisting UCHC and the players up there in continuing their
retaliation against a former employee? In addition thru several
Freedom of Information requests, Director Carol Carson, Attorney
Barbara Housen-OSE and Thomas K. “TJ” Jones, stated they read about
Priscilla in the newspaper-they provided no file, documents, emails to
support how their investigation began. Jones fails to remember he had
already acknowledged in documentation( 2008) that OSE in 2005 and
later Jones in 2007 received a complaint from the UCHC to pursue
Priscilla to assist in advancing their retaliation against her. The
retaliation began in earnest in 2005 when Priscilla filed a Commission
on Human Rights and Oppertunity complaint against individuals at UCHC.
By the time Jones was in place with the New Improved Office of State
Ethics he was enlisted to help continue the retaliation. When Courant
writer, Jon Lender, stated that this is a more complicated story he
was correct, it is one that has taken years to write and the ending
has yet to be written.

The ending should be written by the Connecticut State Legislative
Branch-do they have the courage to put politics aside and help write
the final chapter here?

I am aware that war can change a person, and some people will make excuses for him because of that, but he was always this way, and even if that is the cause, why should an unstable person be a cop?

What kind of person drives around with that much ammunition and fire arms in their vehicle on a daily basis? I would think if anyone knows about laws, a police officer would.

If the town of Willimantic and the police department even think that rehiring this man is a good idea, they are WRONG. A situation like this will happen again and maybe someone will be seriously hurt next time…then what?