Posted by: Patricia Kane | January 5, 2007 12:01 PM

This is a clear abuse of power by the police. If someone can be arrested for taking a photo, or for being an activist and taking a photo, then the Constitution is truly dead.
Living in an age when President Bush, already deluded in his attempts to remake the Middle East, now believe he can open citizen's mail, we cannot ignore the government's increasing war against the citizens and the diminishment of civil rights.
Krayeske should not accept any deal, but should get representation from the CT Civil Liberties Union to vindicate his right to take a picture of a public event without police intrusion.
Shame on the City of Hartford and the bullies in uniform who obviously had a grudge.
patricia Kane, Esq.

Posted by: Shawn Lang | January 5, 2007 2:01 PM

You've GOT to be KIDDING me!! Big brother (or big sister in this case) is indeed watching. I agree with the other two posts; the erosion of our civil liberties (since when is taking pictures an act of terrorism?) his readched a new low. The Governor herself ought to apologize to Ken.

Posted by: Alan Pursell | January 5, 2007 2:01 PM

Oh my god they arrested Kenny!

Posted by: Gail Merrill | January 5, 2007 2:01 PM

How pathetic of Jodi Rell and her staff!

Posted by: dan levine | January 5, 2007 3:01 PM

Anyone ever heard of the "Connecticut Intelligence Center"? I never had, before today. I guess they're the outfit that circulated the photo of Ken, pre-parade. Here's a few tidbits:

from a 2005 olr report:
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2005/rpt/2005-R-0765.htm
CTIC is a regional intelligence center that works with local and state entities, bordering agencies, and federal agencies. In practice, it functions as a clearing house to ensure that all criminal and terrorism-related information is gathered, analyzed, and shared efficiently with law enforcement and homeland security entities and officials. It also tries to identify emerging threats or crime trends. Part of its mission is to develop reporting procedures to decrease duplication among various agencies. A short-term goal is to set up regional representatives to monitor specific jurisdictional representatives and help gather raw information. A long-term goal is to host quarterly meetings of intelligence liaison officers to exchange information and share problems within their jurisdictions and to establish a more efficient web-based information exchange.
CTIC works closely with the FBI's field intelligence office in New Haven. The FBI Office of Intelligence, created in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks, created field intelligence groups (FIGS) in all the states to sort terrorism information in order to predict future attacks. The FIGs must manage, execute, and coordinate local intelligence resources consistent with national priorities.

from a 2005 US State News clip:

More extensive use of communications through the Connecticut Intelligence Center can ensure that all law enforcement and emergency response agencies in Connecticut are notified of so-called intermediate-level threats. Governor Rell asked Commissioners Boyle and Thomas to streamline these communications, in cooperation with the FBI, through the intelligence center. The objective is to ensure that all threats are considered for dissemination through the intelligence center - not just the highest-level potential threats - so that all levels of law enforcement and emergency response are on the same page.

"Part of the difficulty comes from evaluating the actual level of the threat," said Commissioner Boyle. "The issue here is determining how to best notify local and state agencies when a threat is not immediately perceived as rising to the level of the highest emergency. This is a judgment call. The threats on Friday and Monday turned out to be hoaxes, but the next one may not. The Governor's direction is to make additional use of the Connecticut Intelligence Center for real-time communication to public safety agencies throughout the state for a greater range of reported threats. This makes a lot of sense, and will be implemented immediately."

Posted by: Joe Barber | January 5, 2007 3:01 PM

Okay, so being a "political activist" makes one suspicious of bad, illegal, and dangerous behavior.

Are these folks serious!?! If someon is a "political activist" they are not allowed to attend a PUBLIC EVENT!?! Because someone has spoken out at various times, s/he is seen as a THREAT!

I thought living in the United States of America mattered. I thought that the first amendment to the U.S. Constitution stated,

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Perhaps the Governor's staff needs a tutorial. I realize nobody is perfect but the Governor's staff and all enablers of this action ought to be ashamed of themselves.

When someone get arrested for being at a public event and taking pictures, we all need to be very concerned. Gale Courey Toensing is right, if there needs to be a legal defense one we need to set one up. This goes way beyond Ken; it's about the rights of all of us.

Posted by: Gale Courey Toensing | January 5, 2007 3:01 PM

We (the people) need to find out if Ken needs a Legal Defense Fund set up for him.

Posted by: Alan Pursell | January 5, 2007 4:01 PM

Here's the question though, how were the cops breifed? If they were told then he was a threat, then yeah, a person who you've been told to look out for rapidly advancing on the Governor should be taken out. It's not like they had subtlety or nuance to go by.

And why was Ken on that list? I presume it was for violence and even with his record, he shouldn't have been earmarked as a Sara Jane Moore. That's the question I would like to see asked as well, how'd he get on the list.

Posted by: Jim Brewer | January 5, 2007 4:01 PM

I haven't seen everything on all this yet. But is anyone really that surprised. My lawyer, Norm Pattis represents me in a case against West Hartford and, inter alia, it's Corporation Counsel and Chief of Police, Joe O'Brien and James Strillacci of violating my constitutional rights by manufacturing police reports to present to a judge to get me disbarred. I was a lawyer with many previous cases against the Town of West Hurtful.

Strillacci testified in another case that he kept a list of all lawyers and the clients they represented that had cases or claims against the Town of West Hartford.

That a government official kept such a list, of which I had the honor of making, is only diminished by the apathetic response of the populace to such tyranny.

Connecticut needs to clean house on all its totalitarian practices and leave the black lists and watch lists to history. J. Edgar Hoover used such lists to only wreck havoc on our nation.

I hope the legislature does their job and launches a real investigation of not only this accusation but such practices that are found throughout this state.

I only wish I bothered to go to Rell's parade so I could have photographed the arrest!!

This stuff will continue until the public gets involved and demands that the wimps in our legislature do their jobs.

CAUTION: Don't hold your breath!

Posted by: Aldon Hynes | January 5, 2007 4:01 PM

Ken is a serious threat! He wants elected officials to defend their record and their viewpoints. If Gov. Rell won't attend a debate, at least she can get a lively debate created about what sort of rights freelance journalists really have in our state these days.

Posted by: No Justice | January 5, 2007 4:01 PM

The governor's staff does not need a tutorial. It needs jail time. The same with any politician who goes after people on public streets because it THINKS they might do something. That's like attacking a country because you THINK they might not like you. There was a time when this country was better than that, but what will happen now -- after Big Brother has put someone out of sight until after the parade -- is that they'll come back and apologize and point fingers at someone low-level. "They were just overly zealous," don't you know? Use the legal fund and sue them to high heaven.

Posted by: Donny Lo | January 5, 2007 5:01 PM

He looks pretty dangerous to me. Green tie. Chipmunk cheeks. Bangs. Definitely sinister. Good call by the HPD!

Posted by: Jay Leebermann | January 5, 2007 5:01 PM

The confusion in this instance is understandable. Ken Krayeske is a professional photographer and knew that without his specially constructed camera lens that looking directly at Jodi rell would turn anyone to stone let alone accidentally getting her in close up. Clearly it was the increased size and weight of lens that made him conspicuous to the eagle eyes of the security detail.

Would it be overstretching to suggest that Hartford is not Mayberry and that these officers would have been better employed getting violence off of the streets, closing crack houses, and investigating the long list unsolved murders and violent crime?

Posted by: Rubi McGrory | January 5, 2007 5:01 PM

Why aren't our government officials and law enforcement officers as efficient in ferreting out violent criminals, sex offenders and hypocrites as they are with "political activists"?

Am I now officially on the political activist list by publicly questioning Big Brother?

Posted by: Lothar | January 5, 2007 5:01 PM

These appear to be the same tactics used in NYC during the Republican convention two years ago. We probably all should have been more vocal back then. If memory serves, hundreds of people were jailed.

Posted by: ctkeith | January 5, 2007 6:01 PM

Someone needs to file a FOIA request to see who else was on Jodi Rells enemies List.

We all knew Rell was a moron we just didn't realize just how close she was to the moron in cheif.

Posted by: revolutionarysoul | January 5, 2007 7:01 PM

Can he sue for wrongful arrest? If he can, I would support him 100%. And if he can't, then from one 'political activist' to another - VIVA LA REVOLUCION!

Posted by: fuzzyturtle | January 5, 2007 7:01 PM

wow. I had DeStefano signs on my front yard.. better take up the bridge and not feed the 'gators in the moat for a few days.
:(

Posted by: questions | January 5, 2007 8:01 PM

Not being one who ever takes anything at face value, I am left with several questions. First, what else does that police report say? Being skeptical of everything, I have to wonder what the entire narrative contains.

If Ken was arrested ONLY because he was on some ridiculous list, then it makes sense to be outraged. But again, this story poses more questions than answers for me.

Perhaps my biggest question has to do with the second charge Ken is reported to have been charged with. Sec. 53a-167a of the Connecticut Penal Code states that one is guilty of interfering with an officer when that person "obstructs, resists, hinders or endangers any peace officer... in the performance of... [his/her] duties." Merely taking a picture hardly counts as obstructing, resisting, hindering, or endangering.

Lest the critics point out that Ken's arrest was unlawful, I must point out that it's against the law in Connecticut to resist an unlawful arrest. Does that law suck? Absolutely. It's a dreadful piece of legislation. But it's still out there, and if Ken did anything that constitutes the aforementioned obstructing, resisting, hindering, or endagering, then he really IS guilty of something.

I suppose my point is that instead of accepting everything at face value, it may be more fair to garner all the facts before reaching a decision regarding just how reprehensible this incident was.

(As an afterthought, I feel compelled to point out that violent criminals and sex offenders have as many rights as the rest of us. The rights of a liberal, activist journalist are not superior to the rights of a sex offender.)

Posted by: Joe | January 5, 2007 8:01 PM

I have known Ken for a while and he can get obsessed with things. Some of his actions, in a large crowd, could be suspicious. I can see some justification for an officer at the scene to talk to him and assess his motives. That being said the arrest was totally out of line. His large bail appears to have been set up so he couldn't go near the Ball. This whole thing stinks.

Posted by: Connecticut Man1 | January 5, 2007 8:01 PM

OK... The guy was arrested... That is a syptom... The real problem here?

They have a list of political activists. And they will spy on them.

Sometimes you just have to use the F word:

Fascism

Posted by: fuzzyturtle | January 5, 2007 9:01 PM

that is so wrong for so many reasons. DON'T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH THIS!!!

Posted by: Richard Duffee | January 5, 2007 9:01 PM

This is a clear case of political repression; the transparent intent is to chill constitutionally protected freedom of speech. The police should be required to prove that Krayeske was not on the list of people who could be arrested because he was Clifford Thornton's campaign manager when Thornton ran on the Green Party ticket against Rell for governor. Rell is misusing the Connecticut police for partisan political purposes. The Connecticut Civil Liberties Union has a mandate to defend anyone in Krayeske's position because, in defending him, it is defending the rights of all Americans.

Posted by: Kathy | January 5, 2007 9:01 PM

I did a FOIA request to Governor Rell, and I did not receive all the documents within the scope of my request. This does not surprise me because I problaby am on this same list. Over a year of researching the politcal influence involving the reversal of the Schaghticoke Tribal Nations Federal Recognition desicion has made me distrust my government even more.

If someone does a FOIA please publish it, so I can see if I'm on it. Sue and sue bigtime!!!!!

Posted by: lothar | January 5, 2007 10:01 PM

He was rushing to get a photo. That's what photographers do. If you've ever been to a parade, or a marathon, or any kind of public event that attacts crowds, photographers often step out into the street, or down front, or near a podium, to get an angle for a good photo. The election is over, and there was no threat. However, it's clear that cops who disagree with his politics -- and were familiar with his politics -- found it easy to give themselves a pretense to detain and harass him. If people can't ride their bikes on public streets, or shoot photographs on public streets, then it's not worth having public streets. Also, the report says he was refusing to be interviewed, as if that is a crime. It is not. I'm fairly sure that it is a crime to fail to provide access to a lawyer for a person in lockup. If it's not a crime, it's definitely against the rules police are supposed to follow.

Posted by: Dissenter | January 5, 2007 10:01 PM

Here's the Hartford Police Incident Report and the Associated Press story.

Posted by: Visitor | January 5, 2007 11:01 PM

I'm sure the governor will appoint a committee to look into this.

Posted by: Orient Lodge | January 6, 2007 9:01 AM

Freelance Journalist Arrested, will the Judiciary committee investigate?(Below is the email I have sent to Sen. Andrew McDonald, chair of the Senate Judiciary committee, concerning the arrest of Ken Krayeske.)
Sen. McDonald,
I am not sure if you are aware of the issue surrounding the arrest of Ken Krayeske, a freelance jou

Posted by: Charlie | January 6, 2007 10:01 AM

While they shouldn't be keeping a list of political adversaries and distributing to police, the police were entirely correct for arresting you. They saw you as a threat to the Governor who, like her or not, was elected by the people. Now that they know your actions were entirely non-threatening they should let you off the hook.

Posted by: Holly Krayeske | January 6, 2007 11:01 AM

How much of our tax dollars were spend on creating this "list"? This so called "list" that no one in the CT State Police knows about.

Our tax dollars can be used for better things (such as education and ending youth violence) instead of 'black listing' someone who doesn't conform their opinions to the administration?

Good luck Kenny. You're civil rights were violated

Posted by: B12 Partners Solipsism | January 6, 2007 12:01 PM

Photography should always be legalKen Krayeske, who worked on Green Party candidate Cliff Thornton's campaign for governor against Rell, was near the corner of Ford and Pearl Street photographing Rell's inaugural parade when, according to the police report, he was identified as a ‰...

Posted by: Dave | January 7, 2007 1:01 PM

So if taking a pic of the guv is threatening behavior, why not a charge for each photo he took of everyone else? Don't those regular folks of CT deserve equally zealous efforts to protect their lives & limbs from those harmful death rays emanting from a digital camera?
I'm glad I moved from CT 8 years ago, what with such crazed photogs running around loose. Lord only knows what other dangers I might've faced if I still lived there. Apparently any stories I've read in the past of crime in CT are now moot as it's been cleaned up to the point that John Law has little to worry about other then felonious rampant photography being committed.

Posted by: Steven G. Erickson | January 7, 2007 3:01 PM

I disagree with Rell VERY openly. I am probably on the list. Try doing a word search on Steven G. Erickson. If I was there taking pictures or standing watching, I, too probably would have been arrested. Former Attorney Jim Brewer would probably been arrested too, just for being there. Brewer is among the few lawyers that actually served his (or her) clients.

Having the Hartford Capitol Guards follow me around and report my whereabouts openly over their radios, I perceived as threatening and abusive.

I was there to testify in front of the Judicial Reform Committee.

Rell and her goons should not get away with blocking our rights to access our government and our rights to Free Speech.

We the people should see that Rell, former Chief Justice William Sullivan, former Connecticut State Police Commissioner Arthur L. Spada, and others are carted off in handcuffs to stand trial in legitimate and honest courts which do not currently exist in Connecticut.

Posted by: Charlene LaVoie | January 8, 2007 10:01 AM

Way to go, Ken!!! We need more arrests of upstanding citizens (political activists) under the guise of "homeland security" to get the legislatures (CT & Fed) to take notice.

We'll see if the Democrats deserved all those votes in November by the way they tackle the USA PATRIOT Act and other executive attacks on our liberties. Shame on you Grandmother Rell...

P.S. Who heads the CT Intelligence Center and when can we get the list?

Posted by: Ned | January 8, 2007 3:01 PM

I'm guessing that, at one time or another, most of the posters here have voted for the expansion of government power - usually to regulate something like sex, or drugs, or "safety", or to pick your pocket for some ill conceived project, then you wake up and find out that politicians are exercising all the power you've ceded to them - duh! Politicians work to keep themselves in power and you, their sheep, bleeting. Wow, big surprise - the government can do anything to anyone, anytime it wants to. Ken Krayeske, JosŽ Padilla are examples of the system functioning as designed, not an anomaly, they're a warning to the rest of the population: this could be you, and there's nothing you can do about it. Thanks for the power - suckers.

Posted by: Lothar | January 8, 2007 5:01 PM

Point taken, Ned. You must have known better and voted against the candidates who supported the Patriot Act before anyone knew the Patriot Act was coming... What do you propose we do now? It doesn't seem like there are a lot of options available. The anti-establishment, told-you-so attitude does no one any good.

Are you writing your senators and representatives about the Patriot Act, or anything at all?

Are you attending town meetings locally?

Do you vote on the budget that sets your property tax rate?

Have you asked your school board to negotiate harder to keep union wages in line with the cost of living, so that local budgets don't exceed it without special circumstances?

Are you checking the responsible newspapers on Saturdays to see the weekly wrap-up of how your reps and senators voted in Washington during the week? (A few still carry that info.)

Do you subscribe to a newspaper? (The last real gov't watchdogs left in America).

Did you donate to the campaign of a candidate who stood for something you believe in?

It's counter productive to complain about the rampant lack of public participation if all you're doing is watching the TV news once in a while.

Certainly there's been some bad legislation passed, some bad budgets. But the issue we're looking at here is more local. The "Big Brother" thing is overhyped. It's the training of law enforcement in crowd control and intelligence gathering, and how it's applied. If there was an act of political violence at a parade here in CT, people would all be blaming the police for allowing it to happen.

The governor probably wasn't involved in this mess, but if she or any of her staff took part in the decision to arrest Krayeske, shame on them. They should be held accountible through participation in the process. Don't just write it off to members of the boomer generation who lost track of the gov't after they got cable TV in 1982.

Posted by: Hawkins | January 8, 2007 6:01 PM

Shouldn't the police who arrested him be arrested themselves for an official misconduct criminal offense? How about the judge who set ridiculous bail? Does Conn. have a judicial commission that oversees judges?

Posted by: Christine | January 8, 2007 7:01 PM

Hawkins,
My understanding from Lawlor's statements at the press conference today is that Ken met with the bail commissioner at 4:30 p.m. and by 8 p.m. the bail commissioner had lowered his bail, to the promise to appear. But Ken had already been taken to state lockup on Lafayette Street where prisoners can't be released into the residential neighborhood. So it took HPD another 5 hours to get him back to Jennings Road where he was released without his bike. My understanding is he picked his belongings up the following day. Ken was known for awhile as the "bike reporter" because he showed up at interviews all sweaty from the bike ride. This apparently made an impression on those he interviewed, for better or worse. More importantly, he's a friend of the environment and didn't believe in polluting the air with emissions from his car.

Posted by: Tony Cherolis | January 15, 2007 7:01 PM

I find it especially humorous (and disconcerting) that riding his bike was included in the police report as if that made him more suspicious. It would obviously make him stand out, but it is pathetic that riding your bike in Hartford might be one of the factors that gets you onto the blacklist of political activists.

Someone needs to put me on that list! I've even ridden my bike past the Capitol Building on occasion. Where are the handcuffs?

Posted by: Shawn Lang | January 16, 2007 7:01 PM

I hope I'm on the list, too. Otherwise, I mustn't be doing enough to contribute to social change.

Posted by: Blair Anderson | January 17, 2007 2:01 PM

Ooo.... I rang Ken from the other-side of the world during the Clifford For Governor campaign.

I said the word "Greens". It is entirely plausible I said "republican" "Rell" and 'debate' as well.

Might have even said "drugs" and "Iraq" and "bombings", in the same conversation.

THe MildGreens have even been to Waihopai. (Google that word alongside 'intelligence' and 'dictionary')

In 1975 NZ adopted the Misuse of Drug Act. The Minister of Health, on its adoption had grave concerns that this gave Police "powers to which they were not entitled".

[It was also 1975 they spied on Margaret Trudeau, the Canadian Prime Minster Pierre Trudeau's wife - on suspicion she might be involved in the use of marijuana.]

Wasn't it Rummy who said homeland security required "absolute global information transparency" ?

In 1969, people thought to be involved in "subversive" domestic activities were organized into "watch lists" under an operation called MINARET. The watch lists were determined to be of "questionable legality" in October 1973 by the Assistant Attorney General Henry Petersen and Attorney General Elliot Richardson. / ECHELON AND THE NSA
By D. Webb, Encyclopedia of Cyber Warfare and Cyber Terrorism
Editors: J. Janczewski, PhD and Andrew M. Colarik, PhD

What is it about Ken, Green Party, Thornton and the policy base that threatens the status quo? (Free education?, not likely) What common thread could be so threatening?

The War on Terror... War on Drugs intersect? Is Kreyeski, Ken 'seen looking in the window of a *communist bookshop' a contemporary nexus... and will that conversation ever be held?

* Long Live McCarthyism!

What happened to Ken wasn't an administrative error.. a glitch, an indiscretion. It was a milestone.

If we don't collectively care about how the state came to take Ken aside, I'm screwed. And so are you.