Connecticut Police Seek Arrest of Judge After She Refuses To Sign Warrant

There is a bizarre confrontation in Salisbury, Connecticut where state police have applied for a warrant to arrest Superior Court judge Corinne L. Klatt after refusing to sign a prior arrest warrant. Salisbury Resident Trooper Mark Lauretano charges that Klatt is guilty of coercion and hindering a criminal investigation by refusing to sign the warrant.

The warrant was for an attack on a man for a fight in a cafe. Lauretano indicates that Klatt would not sign the warrant “unless she receives an arrest warrant for the victim” in the fight. Now, Lauretano wants Klatt arrested.

It is highly unusual and problematic for a judge to insist on the charging of an individual as a condition for the signing of a warrant against another individual, if the allegations are true. Indeed, there may be valid basis for review by other judges for possible misconduct. However, whatever the merits of Klatts’ position on the warrant, it is abusive to seek the arrest of a judge for declining to sign a warrant. The police have the option to seeking judicial charges and even removal for misconduct. The mere fact that a judge refuses to sign a warrant is not a criminal matter.

The judge has previously questioned claims of probable cause on arrests to the anger of police and prosecutors.

We have seen other recent cases of prosecutors and police seeking criminal charges in disagreements with judges.

Source: ABC40 found on Reddit

Jonathan Turley

14 thoughts on “Connecticut Police Seek Arrest of Judge After She Refuses To Sign Warrant”

  1. Trooper Lauretano had a history of spectacular foolishness and was disciplined for corruption and dishonesty. The judge was correct in questioning his competence.
    Lauretano’s wife gave him $300 to help an ‘investigation’ (pg 10). He lied to internal investigators, claiming it was an anonymous donation (pg 10). He then fabricated a spectacular whopper that the $300 arrived “in a blank envelope slipped under his office door …” (pg 22). The judge was correct in questioning his competence.

  2. Same over charges happened to me and ruined my life. Really hurt my family too. Found this link to Jane Bennett’s coached ex parte testimony. I had posted it myself but the Pilot deleted it until recently, probably because of my “aggressive blogging”.

    She did get me criminally charged because my landscaper trimmed without a trimming permit, a permit never ever issued to anyone. I had to sell her land for $1 or they would have prosecuted me in municipal court where the judge reported to Kevin Bennett, the city council president / convicted drug dealer.

    “she started jumping up and down and screaming at me and saying that just because I was the wife of the City Council President didn’t mean that I could obey-disobey the law and the Constitution” That was an exaggeration — I seldom jump. “she stayed on the street and didn’t come over to my-onto my driveway”. The next year the judge’s girlfriend was arrested by the DEA.

    The police didn’t sign a criminal summons, nor did the D.A. There was no warrant. The criminal summons was signed only by Jane Bennett, the drug dealer’s wife. (possible ex drug dealer)

  3. rafflaw
    1, March 28, 2011 at 11:47 am
    Blouise and AY,
    It is interesting that this judge is in trouble with the police because she may actually want to have all the facts. If this police force is successful, maybe we can use this tactic on the Supreme Court! How about a citizens arrest??


    I really like that idea … perhaps in the form of a “taxpayers lawsuit”? Hell, it’d be worth it just for the irritant factor.

  4. Blouise and AY,
    It is interesting that this judge is in trouble with the police because she may actually want to have all the facts. If this police force is successful, maybe we can use this tactic on the Supreme Court! How about a citizens arrest??

  5. Tom D
    “However low a man sinks, he never reaches the level of the police”…Quentin Crisp

  6. If you read the article….They were getting a divorce….living in the same house….the wife was making dinner….he was in the attic where he apparently kept more weapons…and the the wife became fearful…..

    EXCUSE ME….. Were you cooking dinner for the man or just yourself? Why did you feel safe enough to stay in the house while the man was drinking and cocking a shotgun…..You called the police you say…..FROM the house…..sounds like a ploy to get exclusive use of the marital home…..

    From the article……

    “There’s nothing in this police report that indicates threatening,” Judge Klatt said. “I’m not going to make a probable cause finding.”

    Peck initially asked for a dismissal, however the judge said they will continue the case and refer it to family relations.

    Also Judge Klatt placed a partial protective order against Hoffman, ordering him to not threaten his wife. She also ordered that any weapons he has in the attic be seized while the case is pending.


    This is kind of screwy with these type of facts….I probably would not have issued it either…..

    It an over charge on the part of the Prosecutor….. This is the type of case where if found innocent the Defendant should be able to reap from the charging officer, the prosecutors office and put the Victim of potential notice…

  7. I think the lesson everyone should learn is that just because one actor is acting badly that doesn’t mean the other isn’t.
    I’ll let you choose if I’m talking about the fight or the legal Ourosboros.

  8. Back in 2004 this Trooper won a case against his department … in his complaint he alleged that his superiors violated his right to free speech by preventing him from speaking about a sexual-assault case he investigated.

    But in reading the limited material thus far available on this incident it would seem that he only wanted to arrest the one man and not the other. Although the Judge is not commenting, those familiar with the case are speculating that the Judge is concerned about selective prosecution and that she needs to see all the facts. Not just the ones that the Trooper wants to collect with a single warrant.

    It is also being speculated that there is an alleged relationship between the Trooper and the other subject involved in the fight. (The one for whom no warrant was issued). If this speculation has any basis in fact then it seems reasonable that the Judge, the trier of facts, would want to see more from the Trooper, the gatherer of facts.

  9. What’s next? Police seek arrest of jury for failure to convict.

    Hey, the police would not want to arrest someone if they were not guilty, right?

  10. What is a “fight” in a bar, or an “assault” in a bar? If two people were involved, she does have a point about the other party. There is also a crime called “taunting”.

  11. Why not? We’ve already given federal agents the power to write their own warrants.

  12. Police think they are MILITARY..LOL! Most of these pussys would no make it throgh basic training. If the JUDGE does not sign the warrant there probably is a very good reason. Judges are Immune from the public and the cops. I know how corrupt cops can be.
    See Police burtality on YOUTUBE
    Cops are out of control in this country.

Comments are closed.