Sunday, May 18, 2008

State ethics office redemption?

The Courant's Jon Lender reports:

A mysterious, unsigned letter — which triggered the downfall of state ethics chief Alan S. Plofsky and helped to destroy the State Ethics Commission — was a forgery and a fraud, court documents show.

It's been nearly four years since local headlines were dominated by the melodrama of the good-government watchdog agency's public implosion — and, until now, there's been no evidence of the identity or motivation of the person who launched the missive that helped demolish the 24-year career of the ethics director.

I haven't finished the article yet, but it seems to be a fascinating read... with multiple points of interest for me. For instance, it discusses the value of information that's been offered "anonymously."

That's relevant to this blog as almost all of the comments are anonymous. Being made anonymously, I think they should be taken with a grain of salt... although some anonymous comments are quite useful because they include links that substantiate the points that people are trying to make.

And here's another point that interested me:

Duggan (an ethics staffer) dropped a bombshell of an admission concerning the letter during a Jan. 15 deposition:

"I drafted this," she admitted under oath.

"But you had intentionally disguised it so that it would appear that it wasn't written by you?" Plofsky's lawyer, Gregg Adler, asked later.

"That's true," said Duggan

So I guess putting someone under oath can have value. But more interesting to me was that a lawyer is allowed to question intentions.

That is fascinating. And I'm glad our legal system allows for it, though I'm not sure if this case is before a grand jury or just a regular courtroom.

Tim White

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

While the letter was sent under false pretenses, no one has suggested Plofsky didn't run his office into the ground by his self-indulgence.

The whole lot of them are poor pitiful excuses for "public servants"