A Connecticut Superior Court judge has dismissed a defamation lawsuit filed by former Republican congressional candidate Jonathan De Barros, ruling that political speech regarding his criminal history is protected under the First Amendment. The decision, reported by ctmirror.org, concludes a legal challenge brought after four Republicans referred to De Barros as a murderer during his campaign for the state’s 5th Congressional District.
Why It Matters
The ruling reinforces the broad protections afforded to political speech in election campaigns, even when such speech involves harsh characterizations of a candidate’s past. It clarifies that a gubernatorial pardon and expunged record do not legally erase the factual occurrence of violent crimes for the purposes of defamation law.
What Happened
Superior Court Judge John Cordani issued a 10-page decision on Sept. 4 dismissing the suit filed by De Barros against four individuals: Jeff Weiss, Pam Salamone, Steve Pedbereznak, and Dawn Maiorano. De Barros had sought damages and a gag order preventing the defendants from commenting on his criminal record after they labeled him a murderer during the primary campaign.
The legal dispute centered on events from 1996, when De Barros shot two men outside a Waterbury recreation center. One man died and another was wounded. De Barros was initially convicted of murder, attempted murder, and assault with a firearm, receiving a life sentence. However, the state Appellate Court overturned the murder conviction in July 2000 because self-defense evidence had been improperly barred. A second trial ended in a hung jury, leading De Barros to plead guilty to manslaughter under the Alford Doctrine.
De Barros served 19 years in prison before receiving a pardon that expunged his criminal record. Judge Cordani ruled that while the pardon cleared his legal status, it did not negate the factual reality of the killings. The judge determined that referring to De Barros as a murderer constituted protected political speech essential for voters to make informed decisions.
By the Numbers
1996 — Year De Barros shot two men in Waterbury
Four — Number of defendants in the defamation suit
Life — Original prison sentence length before appeal
July 2000 — Date Appellate Court overturned murder conviction
10-page — Length of Judge Cordani’s decision
Sept. 4 — Date of the dismissal ruling
5th — Congressional District number for the election
19 years — Time De Barros served in prison
Zoom Out
The case highlights the tension between criminal justice reforms, such as pardons and record expungements, and the public’s right to know about a candidate’s history. Political campaigns often involve aggressive personal attacks, but courts generally afford wide latitude to speech that touches on matters of public concern. The defendants in this case included convention delegates Weiss and Salamone, former Waterbury police officer Pedbereznak, and former mayoral nominee Maiorano.
De Barros lost the Republican primary for Connecticut’s 5th Congressional District last month. Chris Shea secured the nomination and will face Democrat Jahana Hayes in the general election. The dismissal underscores that candidates cannot use defamation law to silence opponents from discussing factual elements of their past, even if those facts have been legally resolved.
What’s Next
De Barros declined to comment on the ruling Tuesday. With the lawsuit dismissed, attention shifts to the general election between Shea and Hayes. The decision sets a precedent in Connecticut regarding the limits of defamation claims in political contests involving candidates with complex criminal histories.