Attention all connecticut residents...animal protest planned UPDATE 7/22!!!!

[moosmom]

He has been incarcerated since June 27th after being deemed competent. He went in front of Judge Philip Scarpellino today and complained that he wasn't allowed phone calls in jail, and he wants a new lawyer. The judge told him that there was a deal on the table, 6 months suspended after (not sure how long) with time served. The translation boils down to HE'LL WALK!!!!!

He insisted to the judge that he wants to fight the charges and wants a new lawyer. The judge told him he has until next Friday (July 22nd) to find a new attorney. So his @$$ is still in jail till that date.

We were dismayed. Our fear is he'll walk next week. If that happens, I WILL be taken outta there kicking and screaming to get my point across. I will also park my @$$ on a bench outside of the court house for the remainder of the day with a "personal" protest sign just for him!! Stay tuned!!

Oh, and everyone who has been there for the hearings are putting a "doggy" gift basket together for Princess and we're going to present it to her at the Veterinary Hospital!!!! We're going to contact the media. We want them to know she is the REAL reason we're out there every hearing.



I HOPE the deal has been taken off the table since he said he wants to fight the charges, and he gets a jury instead of a bench trial. Maybe then someone will listen to US who know that problem is NOT going away.

[Karen]

Thanks for updating us!

[moosmom]

Steve Alexander, from Examiner.com sent me an email with his notes that he took while listening to the court proceedings of Alexander Bernard, stabber of Princess. Read on:

Notes from courtroom appearance:



Judge Phillip Scarpellino presided, Same Public Defender as last time, identified previously as Thomas Conroy. Routine cases dispensed with and first defendant called from lock-up at 10:50am was Alexander Bernard (wearing same clothes – horizontal striped hoodie, jeans) as last appearance. Bernard was silent at this appearance, his attorney and Judge Scarpellino the only speakers during the proceeding, prosecutor was silent and not called upon by the judge.

Scarpellino began speaking from the bench about a letter he had received previously pertaining to the case. Judge spoke extensively on this letter. Letter written by a State Legislator (not named by the judge) and signed by 23 others, including the districts they represent. Scarpellino repeatedly mentioned that the signers of the letter indicated their district (expressing his feeling that indicating their districts was an attempt at intimidation) and seemed focused on this matter. The judge said it was sent and signed by the 23 members of the General Assembly of CT and dated 6/2/11 and received by him 6/9/11. Scarpellino continued to say that he had called the judicial office of External Affairs in Hartford, and reported to Judge Barbara Quinn on the letter. He said he “just wanted to make Hartford aware of the situation” and that he didn’t feel it necessary to remove himself from the case, unless ‘the attorneys’ felt it necessary.

Although such a letter might alter his view of the defendant’s case in a negative way Scarpellino suggested, he was not affected by this letter and felt qualified to continue on the case. Direct quote: “I’m not worried about the legislature reappointing me.” He clarified this comment by saying that Judges are appointed by the legislature every 8 years and he has 7 left before he is subject to reappointment. Scarpellino emphasized repeatedly that the letter was inappropriate, however would not alter his views on the dispensation of the case. He had particular displeasure that the signers would indicate their districts. He described the letter as having 3 paragraphs. The first cited ‘academic studies’ of incidences of cruelty and FBI stats. He quoted from the next portion of the letter, this is as close to verbatim as I could get: “The shear violence of his attack is enormously worrisome and the fact that the court doesn’t take this seriously” was a concern to the legislators. Scarpellino expressed dismay that the letter writer assumed Mr. Bernard’s guilt and dismay at the Legislature intervening at all in Judiciary proceedings, whether unofficially or officially. He offered the opinion that recent legislation passed by the General Assembly rendered the Connecticut Judiciary a ‘department’ and not a ‘branch’ of government any longer, and expressed his anger at such legislative modifications. He spoke at length about the politics of the legislature and the judiciary.

He introduced the letter as “Exhibit A” in the case, and said that it is now ‘in the file.’ He indicated that he felt himself still qualified to handle the case but offered to disqualify himself if ‘the lawyers’ requested it. He spoke of his personal ‘transparency’ and of how courtrooms in general are more transparent, with cameras allowed in courtrooms and such. He said he revealed the existence of the letter to the defendant and his defender before the appearance that day, and met with the State’s Attorney assigned to the case and with the defendant’s attorney.

Scarpellino said ‘he took all his vacation time all at once’ and that he would not be back until late August, and continued the case until Mr. Bernard’s next appearance on August 29th. Bernard’s attorney then spoke up and indicated that he would accept this date. Scarpellino and the defender spoke about Bernard’s ruling as competent to stand trial in late June following a competency determination by the state. The judge offered the explanation of the difference between having the ability to understand the charges against oneself, as opposed to having the ability to assist ones’ attorney(s) in one’s own defense and ordered a second competency determination.

No mention was made of Bernard’s refusal to allow his attorney to speak on his behalf at his appearance July 12th and his request for a new attorney and the original purpose of the continuance until July 22nd which was to allow Bernard time to find alternate legal representation. It was also revealed that bond was set at $10,000 and Bernard jailed on June 27th due to his removal of an electronic tracking ankle bracelet required by the conditions of his original release upon his arrest.



After court, Donna Ploss and Patty Daponte, two activists who have attended Bernard’s Meriden court appearance in protest of animal cruelty and of the judicial treatment of such cases and Bernard’s offenses in particular, and I went to North Haven Animal Hospital and visited with the victim of the stabbing, Princess the Staffordshire Terrier mix, and met briefly with attending veterinarian Dr. James Wells. Princess appeared healthy, hair beginning to grow back on her left side where major surgery was required, a bit shy and somewhat suspicious, but she warmed up to her visitors and enjoyed our attention and affection. The staff was delighted by our visit, and Princess clearly has a high level of trust with the staff. We visited with her for 15 minutes or so, and Dr. Wells requested that we remain a few minutes, from surgery, so he could greet us personally and tell us of Princess’ status, which is very good medically. We informed him of the latest goings on in court that morning.

[moosmom]

Sorry it's so long. But it's definitely changing my whole outlook on the case AND Judge Scarpellino!

My take is, he's trying to cover his own behind because he didn't reveal the 3 page letter from 24 CT Legislators at the last court appearance.

The GOOD news is this piece of garbage Bernard is locked up for longer than if he had taken the plea at the last appearance.

The BAD news is, since the July 22nd hearing, there have been 3 more animal abuse cases reported!!! One of a dog that was left outside in 100 degree weather in a crate with no food or water. The dog died. Another poodle was stabbed to death, and the police are now looking for who is responsible.

I am getting too damn old to be going to court appearance of these @#$*&%!. This case has me aggravated, pissed off and angry that these judges and prosecutors refuse (yes, REFUSE) to prosecute these cases as a FELONY, not a Class U Misdemeanor. How long and how many more animals will be sacrificed before these professionals start getting it and enforcing the laws????

I've lost all respect for this judge. I'm going to send emails to the legislators who signed the letter, inviting them to the next court appearance and thanking them for their continued support. The letter was written by Diana Urban, D-Stonington. She is a HUGE animal lover.

I'll keep you posted. Oh, one more thing...am I intimidating?? That's what I was called by one of my friends after I asked why the defendant's mother and sister refused to come out of the courthouse. I was out there staring them down, my middle finger twitching in their direction. I even smiled and waved at the douche bags. They wouldn't leave until WE did!!! They knew they had no protection by the court marshalls once they walked outside.

[moosmom]

The "girls"



THIS Beautiful girl is the reason why I do what I do!!

[pomtzu]

I sure as h3ll hope that you intimidate them!!! In cases such as this - the more intimidation - the better! Go for it girl.

[moosmom]

Thanks Ellie!!