The Long, Long Eddie Slog

by Categorized: Uncategorized Date:

There’s kind of a standing joke among Connecticut law watchers that when Hubie Santos takes a case, there’s a good chance that many of its interested parties will die of old age before its resolution. Sample joke: “If Hubie had been Benedict Arnold’s lawyer, Benedict would  have had a full life, and his case would be on the Supreme Court calendar this year.” Hubie is the master of Jarndycean delay. In the face of Eddie Perez, he had sort of a reverse running start. This was a very pokey scandal from its very beginning. The story will turn six years old this year, and it still awaits resolution.

And I have to confess that Hubie is working his sleepy enchantment on me.  Reading today’s coverage, I found myself thinking: maybe this has gone on long enough. I know that’s not right, but I feel it. The right thing is for him to do a little time, because otherwise we’ve sent no message at all about corruption. But if  judge ordered a new trial (unlikely) … well the whole prospect seems sad and exhausting.

And before you commenters start assailing me, do understand that I can produce a raft of columns and blog posts spread out over many years urging justice and Eddie’s removal. I even took on my own employer, this newspaper, when it endorsed Eddie in 2007. And, in moments of clarity, I understand why it still matters.


The Courant is using Facebook comments on stories. To comment on articles, sign into Facebook and enter your comment in the field below. Comments will appear in your Facebook News Feed unless you choose otherwise. To report spam or abuse, click the X next to the comment. For guidelines on commenting, click here.

25 thoughts on “The Long, Long Eddie Slog

  1. Todd Zaino

    After you are through patting yourself on your back Colin, will you treat Fast Eddie Perez the same way you have John Rowland?

    Calling Perez out for his crimes…wow Colin, I suppose Alec Baldwin’s latest racial tirade is just a little misunderstanding…right? Don’t you liberals call that professional courtesy?

    It would be kind of funny if five or six years from now if there were such a radio show called The Eddie Perez Show, it was on from say 1 to 2…now that would be must listen to radio!

    1. rally for gun control Feb 14 at 11

      BTW Todd, what makes you think that liberals, progressives, radicals… whatever, the good guys, wouldn’t criticize one of our own when they go bad?

      Do you mean that is the way you circle the wagons when one of yours goes bad like that Larry Craig guy?

      1. Cynical Susan

        Aw c’mon Bill, you’ve got to feel sorry for Todd, being forced to hang around here among people he despises so. What? He’s not being forced to visit this blog? He just does it to show his scorn for people who see things differently? And to insult the host? Hunh….

        1. Cynical Susan

          Yeah yeah, Pete Domenici, Newt Gingrich, the list of political males who behave badly is long and doesn’t respect party lines.

        2. No more guns bill

          Oh, and Mr Weiner only sent shirtless pictures and a picture of him in underwear. Unless you looked into the details and found something more that titillated you.

  2. Todd Zaino

    Leave Colin alone don’t you dare attack
    Show some grace and a little tack
    Fast Eddie did the crime
    He must serve some time
    Look at Colin patting himself on his back

    1. cmcenroe Post author

      Todd, I can produce a long string of articles spread out over years calling for tough action against Eddie. You can produce a long string of pathetic comments in which you lionize Rowland and act tough about Eddie. So which one of us is the sniveling hypocrite?

      1. Rally Against Guns Feb 14 at Capital

        Colin, he suckered you. I guess that he simply needs and wants attention. Perhaps we all do but he has a negative way of trying to get it.

  3. peter brush

    It is tiresome, and it has gone on long enough for me. I’m content to have the sort of dishonesty displayed by Rowland/Perez punished by forcible removal from office. Neither the State nor City lost anything, or, if they did, I’d have Rowland/Perez required to pay back, with penalty, those whose trust they betrayed, and prohibit them from holding office in the future.
    In the Perez case, my question is how is Atty.
    Santos expecting to be compensated? I can’t imagine he’s going to be successful on Eddie’s behalf, except for achieving the wonderful delay. After he’s shot down at the Appelate Court sometime later this decade, he’ll no doubt seek a hearing at the Supreme Court. While I’m not particularly sympathetic with the little gangster, Eddie should probably have cut his losses, and just spent a few months in the can. He’d be out and about by now, Santos would have run up far fewer billable hours, and I wouldn’t have to hear about the tawdry business ad nauseum.

  4. Todd Zaino

    Colin…funny your use of the word lionize…last year you used the word slavish to describe how I look at Governor Rowland. Check out his show this afternoon Colin if you are interested in how a real radio professional runs a drive time show.
    Sniveling hypocrite…why thank you Colin, that’s perhaps the kindest thing I’be ever heard from you.

  5. John R. McCommas

    As abuses of power go, what the mayor did were pretty small potatoes. I think what Secretary of the State did was a lot worse when she exploited her office’s budget to plaster her face all over Connecticut in obvious self-promotion ahead of her re-election bid. I wrote the past (Gayle Slossberg) and present chairman Senator Anthony Musto of the Government Administration & Elections Committee about the abuse. No what I got back? Nothing. We still have one of her billboards up around here last I looked.

    Then there was the bill Merrill stuck in the budget bill when she was Appropriations Chairman that would have force Catholic Hospitals to do prescribe Plan B for rape victims even though it is against the Church’s beliefs. They consider it a chemical abortion. The merits of the bill aside, her committee never voted on that! She as Chairman just stuck it in there among ten thousand pages hoping no one would read it. Someone caught it in time and the State Senate took it out. Merrill was never punished for that either. I wonder what else she has done and has not been caught.

    I don’t think any Chairman should have the power to put things in a bill or take them out unless the whole committee votes on it. That is real abuse. Don’t let anyone talk to you about “reform” when the Chairman still has the power to do that.

    1. Todd Zaino

      The above post by John is a prime example of why I come back to this blog. Excellent job John. You are truly an adult in a room full of the self promoting, the cynical, and the anti-gun children.

      Nice job.

    2. No more guns bill

      John; so you have an infatuation with her, I see. Did she turn you down or something? Anyways, that is the wrong subject. This is about Perez. He did wrong in a big way and he is about to receive his final,medicine.

  6. peter brush

    Neither the State nor City lost anything
    McCommas right; there are plenty of abuses of power that are not only acceptable, but in some cases the pols brag about them. Which executive action was more damaging to the State and its citizens; Rowland’s getting graft from contractors or Malloy’s throwing money at a hedge fund to move from Westport to Stamford? The dishonesty is intrinsically bad, but I’d take a bit more of it if, in exchange, the State or its capital city were well managed.

    1. Richard

      Get into why the state is putting $23,000 into $50,000 a year faculty pensions this year and why health care costs at the state level are increasing at 8.2% annualy despite the Comptroller’s argument to the contrary months earlier in a more ‘political’ press statement somewhat divorced from the advisories that go around to the various agencies and quasis looking to estimate health care costs for budgetary purposes.

Comments are closed.