New Haven Independent

Tears Shed Both On And Off The Stand

by allison schwartz | August 5, 2009 8:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (11)

The defense grilled her about her dress, about her drinking. The witness kept composed. Then the prosecutor returned with sympathetic questions — and she lost it.

Specifically, the prosecutor was asking the witness, a 21 year-old Quinnipiac University student, why she decided to report to the cops that Officer Anthony Maio (pictured) allegedly groped her in a second-floor bathroom at the nightclub BAR one April evening in 2008.

The witness hesitated. The tears started forming in her eyes.

The state prosecutor, Gene Calistro, asked the question again: Why did you report this to the police?

This time the witness answered.

“You want to trust police officers,” she said. What happened that night to her and her friend at BAR was wrong, she said. “He had a gun.”

Then she dried her eyes.

So did the man she accused: Officer Maio, the New Haven cop whose career is on the line in the trial before Judge William Holden in Connecticut Superior Court on Church Street. Maio’s eyes, too, started welling up as she delivered her answer.

The teary exchange took place Tuesday in the second day of Maio’s trial. The officer is accused of two counts of unlawful restraint and two counts of fourth-degree sexual assault. While working an extra-duty job at BAR, he allegedly took two underaged students upstairs to a bathroom, locked them inside, and fondled them.

The witness was on the stand for her second day. (Click here to read about the first day.) As on Monday, Maio’s attorney, Timothy Pothin (pictured), cross-examined her about decisions about what to wear, what to drink, and where to go with Maio. And why, at first, she told detectives about how Maio had allegedly groped her friend — but didn’t mention her own experience until arriving at the police station.

Pothin said she told one detective she saw her roommate stick her tongue in Maio’s mouth. Pothin also summarized a report which stated she was unsure why her roommate had not resisted. Looking at the witness, Pothin said, “You testified that you didn’t know why she didn’t push back.”

Pothin then questioned her as to why she had made no effort to leave the bathroom.
While Maio was kissing her roommate, she testified, her hand was on the door. Pothin asked her why she made no attempt to escape.

“I was shocked,” she said.

Pothin went over three stories she has given regarding Maio. First, she did not mention him touching her to the initial officers she encountered. The next time she repeated the events, she told detectives he touched her breast. Finally, when she was in court, she claimed he cupped her breast.

The witness responded that touching and cupping are the same thing.

While inside the bathroom, Pothin continued, “He did not force either one of you to stay in the bathroom.”

“Correct,” she answered.

Why hadn’t she gone kicking and screaming from BAR? Calistro asked the witness.

She said Maio was standing at the top of the stairs, asking if they were going to come back. At the time, she said, she thought, “Wow, this guy really doesn’t think he has done anything wrong.” She was not sure how he was going to react, so she wanted to remain calm, she said.

Calistro asked if any of the sexual touching that occurred between her and Maio was consensual. “No,” she answered.

Pothin asked her one final time about the bathroom. She told him that Maio had not pushed the door closed or slammed it.

When he resumed questioning, prosecutor Calistro followed up by asking the witness how the door closed. She told the jury that Maio had locked it.

With no further questions, the witness was excused. She quickly walked out of the courtroom glancing at Maio and Pothin as she exited.

Next, Her Friend

Her roommate was the next witness. She wore a black shirt and a silver bracelet.

Now 22, she just graduated from Quinnipiac with a major in biology.

Calistro immediately began asking her about the night in question.

She described the same events her roommate had told of the day before. The two women drank three shots each while they got ready to go out, then rode the shuttle from the Quinnipiac campus to downtown New Haven.

When asked if she had planned on meeting men, she responded, “no”.

“It wasn’t that crowded,” she said. Before talking to Maio, she was “dancing and hanging out.” She said she had seen Maio during the other nights she had been at BAR.

Calistro inquired about her summer job working as Wonder Woman at Six Flags amusement park. She said she was told not to be flirtatious and smile when children were around. The jury was given a photo of her in costume.

She said her summer job had been a topic between her and Maio that night. She signed his notebook, writing, “Officer Maio I [heart] you.” She autographed it with a heart and a Wonder Woman signature.

After these exchanges over her summer job, her roommate came over. Maio put his arm around them and kissed each of the women.

Like her friend, the woman testified that Maio led them upstairs to to a dark room. Once they entered, Maio switched the light on and locked the door.

As he kissed her, she was “frozen.” “He had a gun,” she added.

When he put his tongue in her mouth, she said, “I think I went along with it … because I was scared.”

She said that Maio (pictured leaving court Tuesday) then put his hand up her skirt. She pushed his hand away, she said; that was when they were able to get out.

The two women tried to remain “calm” as they descended back to the first level, the witness recounted. She said the women left the bar immediately. They wanted to report it to the police. “We knew something wrong had happened,” she stated.

“I was crying,” she said as she described their demeanor outside the bar.

Then came Pothin’s turn to cross-examine. He asked her about Maio’s notebook and if she had been under the influence of alcohol. She said she was not, but was buzzed. For the record, she said, in her mind there is a distinction between being under the influence, which implied she was drunk, and being buzzed.

He further asked her about where she was dancing. She and her roommate were dancing in the backroom and got on a stage at one point, she said.

“I had control of myself,” she responded when Pothin asked again if she was intoxicated.

As to why she put her tongue in Maio’s mouth, she said, she felt “pressured into it.” [She later told Calistro, “I didn’t know what to do, so I just went along.”]

Pothin asked her repeatedly if she was certain that Maio had touched her roommate’s leg. She eventually admitted she was unsure.

Another Cop, & A Cashier

The next witness was Officer Domingo Paul. He was working as a patrolman with another officer on the night of the incident.

He said “two females walked up to us,” and “one was crying.”

Calistro asked Paul if he had detected any alcohol on them. “No,” he answered. The women did not have bloodshot eyes and were “not stumbling,” he remarked.

“Mainly the one that was not crying” told him that a police officer had touched them, the officer said.

Paul said because of the “serious nature” of the claim, he told the two women that they would have to report the incident to the sergeant on duty. Although they were confused, the women eventually walked away, he said.

Paul was excused and the court adjourned for the day.

Tuesday’s first witness was Daniel Brodoff. Brodoff, who’s 21, had known Maio from working at BAR. On the night of April 18, 2008, he was working as a cashier.

He observed the two women that evening, remembering one was wearing a “blue skirt.” He said the women were “kind of loud” and “dancing around.”

Although he could not hear the conversation, he said, the girls were being “flirtatious” with Maio and “touching his chest.”

The two women, with Maio following them, went up the stairs into an employees-only area, Brodoff testified.

About five minutes later, the women came down with Maio trailing behind them, he said. Since it was a year ago, he wasn’t certain of their order as they came down the stairs.

When the two women returned to the first floor, he said, they seemed to “still be having fun.”

Previous coverage of this case:

• Cop’s Alleged Victim Put On Defensive
• Maio Deal On Hold
• Cop Denies Groping Students
• Cop Arrested On Sexual Assault Charges

Share this story

Share |

Comments

Posted by: truthtopower | August 5, 2009 10:17 AM

There's an old saying that women are raped twice: once by the rapist and a second time by the legal system.

All the reports so far focus on what the women were wearing, how intoxicated were they, why did they go with Office Krupke, etc.

We train people to obey authority and then we blame them when authority exploits their trust.

In a society where porn is a multi-billion dollar business and "Girls Gone Wild" is big business, why even bother to pretend that violence and exploitation of women is a concern. It makes money. Thank you US Supreme Court for defending a man's right to a "lap dance".l

These young women were in a business establishment and obviously felt they could trust a hired security man. But they couldn't and won't make that mistake twice.

The defendant was paid to provide security, not have a fling with the patrons. Next!

Posted by: downtown | August 5, 2009 11:24 AM

truthtopower: could not agree more. well said.

Posted by: Paul | August 5, 2009 12:46 PM

And we still think people dont lie on the stand ???
To all of you who think Officer Maio is guilty. Where is the proof???
Credit to the New Haven Register for the following story
By Ann DeMatteo, Register Staff

Click to enlarge

Kenneth Ireland, shown in custody in November 1989, around the time he was on trial on charges he killed Barbara Pelkey of Wallingford. Ireland was freed Wednesday, after DNA evidence showed he was not the killer. He served nearly 21 years in jail. (Register File Photo)

NEW HAVEN - Kenneth Ireland is a free man today following proof that DNA shows he didn't kill and rape Barbara Pelkey of Wallingford.

In prison since 1988, the shackles were taken off Ireland at 10:52 a.m. after Judge Richard Damiani said he was free to go.

Ireland has maintained his innocence since his arrest.

The Connecticut Innocence Project worked with the New Haven state's attorney's office and Wallingford police to clear Ireland, who was convicted of Pelkey's murder and rape, said attorney Karen A. Goodrow, project director.

Ireland was imprisoned for just under 21 years.

Members of his family started to cry as Damiani announced Ireland was free to go, and they hugged him and took pictures outside the courtroom.

Ireland, then 20 was sentenced to 50 years in prison for the 1986 rape and murder of Pelkey, 30, a crime the judge at the time called one of the most horrendous he had ever heard of.

Pelkey, who had four children, was found Sept. 3, 1986, nude and face down, at the former R.S. Moulding and Manufacturing Co., in Wallingford, where she worked alone at night.

Ireland told the New Haven Register in 1990 that he believed the jury would have found him innocent if certain testimony and police statements had been allowed to be heard. The testimony and statements would prove that Pelkey's real murderers were still free, he said at the time.

Ireland said then that the unheard testimony would have cleared him and implicated another man and that two key witnesses lied when they testified that Ireland admitted the crime. Ireland claimed then that lied to gain the $25,000 reward and to protect one of the real murderers.

State's Attorney Michael Dearington said in 1990 that Ireland would not be eligible for probation until he had served about 40 years.

Read more about this story in Thursday's New Haven Register and here at www.nhregister.com.

Posted by: Lesser Evil | August 5, 2009 12:58 PM

The only way to solve that and similar problems is to introduce a system of legally valid sexual-consensus recording system. Cheap version: people exchange a signed, business card size consent personal agreements... More high tech - implanted chips communicating via Bluetooth ... Maybe there would be even a possibility to split consensus for different bases level - like tongue allowed no deeper than teeth or something like that...

Extremely natural and VERY romantic process - thanks God I am loosing the drive with old age... I would not like to be a young man again nowadays...

Posted by: both side are wrong | August 5, 2009 1:07 PM

Yes - I am disgusted that the officer would behave like this while on duty....I can't imagine that the owners of BAR are happy to be paying him for being upstairs....HOWEVER....I may be old but I have a foggy recolection of life in a pick up bar such as this and when I guy ask a girl to come upstairs and then they go into a small room and then he closes the door, its more than a little obvious that they this is not the point where you are going to be served free drinks.

...

Also - isn't it odd that it seems to be no issue that this girl committed fraud (fake ID) to get into this situation?

Posted by: criminal behavior? | August 5, 2009 2:19 PM

Even if I believe every word these girls say, I don't think they've described conduct that justifies criminal conviction and mandatory sex offender registration [because yes, even conduct like this can and does get people on that website]. Whether he should continue as a police officer is a different question, handled by the police department itself - not a criminal court.

It may be true that these girls felt pressured, intimidated, unable to say no, etc. during this brief little rendezvous at this club. Its possible the fact that Maio was a cop made them even more afraid to resist, and led them to return his tongue kiss, follow him upstairs and let him touch them. But how was he supposed to know that? Where is the *criminal law* that says police officers can't flirt and make out with adult women while wearing their uniform?

Bad idea to do it while on the job? sure. Reason to suspend or fire him? sure. But without something like explicit force or resistance, I'm not comfortable calling it a criminal act. And that's an important distinction.

Posted by: downtown | August 5, 2009 2:27 PM

Both Side Are Wrong:
when you were in pick-up bars, date rape and sexual assault was also rampant, under reported, and "slut-shamed" (just as it is now).

not to mention that this cop's off-duty payroll is adding to the city's pension obligation for his retirement to boot while he's busy _________ (insert your opinion of what he was doing).

Posted by: downtown | August 5, 2009 2:36 PM

I think the problem is that the general public does not understand what the law is and what constitutes sexual assault/harassment. It's quite simple really: someone is doing something that is unwanted and/or the person is inebriated and therefor not able to give consent.

criminal behavior:

Sexual Assault is a general term that includes sexual harassment, unwanted sexual contact, child sexual abuse, incest, and rape. Sexual contact becomes assault when a person is unable to or does not consent to an activity.

Additionally, you seem to say that victims are "letting" these things happen.

Some information on sexual assault from the Connecticut Sexual Assault Crisis Services
http://www.connsacs.org/index.htm

FACT: Reported sexual assaults are true, with very few exceptions. FBI crime statistics indicate that only 2% of reported rapes are false. This is the same rate of false reporting as other major crime reports.

FACT: Anytime someone is forced to have sex against their will, they have been sexually assaulted, regardless of whether or not they fought back. There are many reasons why a victim might not physically fight their attacker including shock, fear, threats or the size and strength of the attacker.

FACT: Sexual assault is NEVER the victim's fault. Sexual assault is a violent attack on an individual, not a spontaneous crime of sexual passion. For a victim, it is a humiliating and degrading act. No one "asks" for or deserves this type of attack.

Posted by: Consti2amend | August 5, 2009 7:36 PM

It sure is "funny" how there is SO much enphasis on what the girls were wearing! In Europe, with the "large Muslim" population areas, did you know that rape is an everyday occurance? It IS! AND, the "locals" {NON Muslims} are ALWAYS the victims. Why? Because their defense {Muslim males}is "if they had been wearing a burqa, it would have made them look plain. Because they were dressed the way they were, it is their fault they were raped"!

It still appears that the girls were at fault, by the way they were dressed!

What's the matter here? Can't people "control" their OWN urges? Oh, I've got it, blame the victim!

Maio, are you using the "blue shield of silence"?
Are you doing this {the trial}, to try to get your job back, just to "steal" from the taxpayers of New Haven? Will you "grope" our taxe money too?

Side rant:
Let's STOP the abuse by the LEO's who work "extra duty jobs" for extra income, then claim this time/pay for RETIREMENT benefits! Retirement should be like most everyone else's! Based on BASE SALARY only!
Rant is over. Thanks.

Posted by: kamb | August 6, 2009 6:19 AM

I think if anyone just read the facts to thbis case you would seemore holes in the girls story than in Maios.

The girls said they didnt want to go with Maio to have drinks but later say they followed him upstairs for free drinks.

The girls said they folloed him upstairs after hours after the bar closed?!? Obviously they wanted to do something with him. They could have walked away at any point outside.

Witnesses saud they were flirting with him outside
All night instead of being in the club. And signing his notbook - I heart u.

I think the girls were flirting with him. He took them upstairs consenually, they started making out. They didnt get their free drinks and Boom!

Maio prpbably is only guilty of lying about making out with them.

Posted by: Jim K | August 6, 2009 9:26 AM

Those Quinnipiac University students are friggen stupid. Proof:

"For the record, she said, in her mind there is a distinction between being under the influence, which implied she was drunk, and being buzzed."

Tears Shed Both On And Off The Stand

Comments

Sections

Neighborhood News

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

News Feed