New Haven Independent

DaRos said he was the only one questioned by the police department regarding the finances of the Stony Creek Quarry. As to finding granite on his property, he added: “Isn’t this like finding shoes in a shoe store? ”

A stone mason all his life, DaRos asked police detective Duncan Ayr, who came to inspect the granite (he had photos in hand that Marcus had given him), “what possible charges” could there be against him? He quoted Ayr as saying ’ theft of town services.’ “Needless to say, I was enraged. Because the reason was so transparent.” It was political, he told some 50 citizens who turned out for a hearing at the Canoe Brook Center that took nearly four hours.

He said the Cheryl Morris-Ed Marcus team, for whom he has little respect even though they, too, are Democrats, perceived him as a major threat in the 2007 democratic primary for First Selectman. He said they wanted something out there on him. “They needed a headline. And here is the headline,” he said, pulling out a five column story in the New Haven Register. The headline reads: “Ex-Selectman Questioned about Granite.” He showed it to the four member ad-hoc committee. The date: May 16, 2006.

“It is the oldest trick in the book. It is something you put on the shelf and come about October, of whatever year you want to use it, you pull it out and it says, geez, wasn’t this guy investigated once? Then it appears in a campaign flyer, and the flyers are sent to the citizens of a town. It’s an old political trick.” Unk said he wasn’t going to be intimidated.

That ended part of his talk, but not the theme of intimidation. The very next person to speak was Ed Marcus, current town counsel, master politician and former state democratic chair. And what were his first words? Not an expression of sorrow for perhaps creating grief and misunderstanding, or any sign whatever that the citizens in the room were concerned townspeople. His first words were a threat and a warning that his law firm might sue them over the next two years.

“My belief is that I and the Marcus Law Firm have been slandered and libeled in a deliberate, knowing, malicious fashion,” he said in answer to a question posed by the committee chair, Scott Thayer. Thayer’s question came from Moshe Gai, an outspoken critic of the Morris Administration, who asked that Marcus elaborate on earlier implied threats.

“As I indicated, we reserve the right to take action of our choosing at an appropriate time and in a forum of our choosing. Certainly we would anticipate some job-related criticism. That goes with the territory.” However, he said, criticism had become “invective,” and constituted “false statements.”

Then he laid down the gauntlet: “There is a two-year statute of limitations. That will give us plenty of time to decide how and what to pursue,” he declared, not naming names, of course.

As it turned out, his statements personified what people in town are afraid of, and what the hearings are supposed to investigate: The use of intimidation against a citizen. One couldn’t have asked for a better example of how DaRos felt than to hear Marcus open fire on the people of the town for voicing their concerns.

The room fell silent. If his words were meant to have a chilling effect on speech, they succeeded. Even Cheryl Morris, Marcus’s loyal and passionate defender, blinked slightly. She has refused to fire him or his law firm despite a Democratic Town Committee vote that she do so. You could sense that people in the room were wondering if they were next. “I can only think he might be targeting me and that makes me very nervous,” one woman whispered.

Thayer asked another Gai question: “Are there reasons why citizens should be scared?”

Marcus, who wore an elegant suit and saddle shoes, told the group in a low voice: ” I think when people make reckless statements, notwithstanding what the facts are, they should anticipate they may be personally held responsible for those statements and that others may take appropriate action under the law.”

Thayer’s third question from Gai was: ” Are these actions consistent with your role as town attorney?”

“Yes. I think so,” Marcus said. “It would be no different if a Mayor or a First Selectman or a First Selectwoman was libeled and slandered and had taken appropriate action. As I indicated, this is something we may do down the road. There is a two-year statute of limitations,” he repeated for those who might not have caught it the first time.

John Prete, a Republican committeeman, asked Marcus if he thought DaRos might have a case against him for slander. “Absolutely not,” Marcus declared, even though he has conceded the town’s investigation into royalties on granite sales was largely a civil issue that presumably should have involved savvy auditors. At the hearing Marcus said he asked for police involvement to “to expedite” matters.

As for those royalties, Frank Twohill, another committee member, asked DaRos: “How much would you have to pay to buy the granite in your yard? ” About $400 for all this” Twohill went on: “Tell me the amount of royalty due the town.” Unk said: “$4.20.”

Marcus received photos of Unk’s granite from former Branford Democratic chair Michael Milici, who delivered them to the Marcus Law Firm in New Haven. Marcus now says that although he met alone with Ayr in the First Selectwoman’s office at Town Hall and gave him the photos that initiated the criminal inquiry, he neither directed nor ordered Ayr to act. He claims any contrary views constitute a libel or slander issue.

Here’s what makes no sense. Marcus has apologized to Unk. That means he knows he made a mistake. He has said if he had it to do over again he would not have met with Ayr alone. He assumed he was in a lawyer-client conversation when he was not, as his own legal research later showed. He undoubtedly figured there would be no police report. He concedes now he should first have shown Unk’s granite photos to both Selectwoman Morris, who was not in any part of the loop, and to the police chief. Police Chief Robert Gill has told the Eagle that he and Marcus had agreed that in any future matter “I would make the determination of whether the department” would go forward.

So given all the mistakes and failure of judgment on his part, why is Marcus threatening lawsuits against the public and the press in this town?

The next hearing is scheduled for August 30.
###