Connecticut house of horrors stepmom whines about GPS monitor while accused of 20-year child abuse case
The woman who is accused of holding her stepson captive for 20 years in her Waterbury, Connecticut, home is appealing a judge's ruling that she must wear a GPS ankle monitor while out on bail.
Attorney Ioannis Kaloidis, who represents Kimberly Sullivan, wrote in an April 7 filing that Sullivan's constitutional right to due process has been violated due to the fact that the ankle monitor was imposed as a further bail requirement after her first bail hearing.
The filing says that on March 12, Waterbury Superior Court Judge Corinne Klatt ordered that bail for Sullivan be set at $300,000 with no other conditions except "intensive pre-trial supervision."
"Noting the Defendant's lack of a criminal history at the age of 56, her lifelong residency in Waterbury, twelve years of education and income, the bail commissioner requested a bond in the amount of $300,000," the filing says. "The Defendant, through counsel, highlighted her work history, residency and absence of a criminal record, and argued for promise to appear with non-monetary conditions."
According to the filing, when Sullivan appeared in court in front of Klatt the next day to post bail, the bail conditions remained the same despite the state asking for the GPS monitor.
After that, the state filed a motion to change Sullivan's bail conditions.
In a March 28 hearing on the motion argued in front of a different judge, Waterbury Superior Court Judge Joseph Schwartz, the state said Sullivan was a flight risk "because she faced significant incarceration," and that "its case had become stronger, as additional witnesses came forward," according to the filing.
Eventually, Schwartz ruled that, based upon new information that Sullivan was receiving mental health treatment and that she was living with one of her stepdaughters, there was enough evidence to order her to wear the GPS monitor.
However, Sullivan's lawyers said that is untrue.
"The trial court's hearing on the State's motion to modify the Defendant's conditions of release did not comport with due process requirements or the procedures directed by the Connecticut Supreme Court," the filing says. "The State did not introduce, nor did the trial court find, by actual evidence, that the Defendant's then-existing conditions of release were not sufficient to ensure her presence in court or protect the safety of the Complainant or the public."
Ultimately, the petition asked the Connecticut Appellate Court to vacate the March 28 decision that Sullivan must wear the GPS monitor.
Pattis and Paz, LLC is the law firm handling the appeal.
"We have been retained to handle a motion for bond review by Ms. Sullivan to the Connecticut Appaellate Court to address the changes made to her conditions of release following her arraignment," attorney Brittany Paz said in a statement. "In our view, there is a strong argument that the modification was made due to public attention and desire for punishment, rather than any real concern regarding her willingness to appear in court."
"We further believe that the state's blatant attempt at a second bite at the apple in front of a different judge violates the principles previously set forth when our office litigated State v. Pan. We look forward to the restoration of the original conditions of Ms. Sullivan's release, based on facts and the law, while the charges pending against her are impartially litigated."
According to an arrest warrant for Sullivan, her stepson, identified as "Male Victim 1," was held in a windowless 8-foot by 9-foot storage closet with no air conditioning or heat and without access to a bathroom for 20 years. He said he was kept inside the closet 22–24 hours per day.
He said he was allowed two sandwiches and two small water bottles each day, one of which he would use for bathing. The man told police he disposed of his waste using water bottles and newspaper. The man weighed less than 70 pounds when first responders found him after the fire.
The allegations came to light after a fire at Sullivan's home. That warrant said that Sullivan's stepson told police he set the fire on purpose because he wanted his freedom.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Arrest warrant issued for Hwy 26 hit-run suspect who removed ankle monitor
PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) — The man accused of deliberately sideswiping a motorcyclist on Hwy 26 last month is on the run after removing his GPS ankle monitor, according to court documents. An arrest warrant for Samir Helio Pazzoto-Filho, who has been charged with attempted murder, was issued on Monday after he skipped bail. of the May 5 incident shows a blue Kia driver sideswiping a motorcyclist, with the rider becoming dislodged from his vehicle and sliding across the concrete ground. The motorcyclist, a young man in his 20s, reportedly slid 250 feet on his stomach, shredding his clothes, cracking his helmet and disintegrating the steel toe of his shoe along the way. Pazzoto-Filho was . Court documents show that a family member of Pazzoto-Filho told the Washington County authorities that when she arrived home on Monday, Pazzoto-Filho was not present at the house and that his ankle monitor was 'on top of the couch.' This is a developing story. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
He Fell Behind on His Taxes. So the Government Seized His Home, Sold It, and Kept the $258,000 Profit.
First the government seized Kenneth Michael Sikorsky's home and all of its equity over a tax debt worth far less than what it took. Now a federal court has ruled that Sikorsky has successfully stated a claim for a taking—an early sign that the legal landscape is shifting since the Supreme Court weighed in on these sorts of seizures two years ago. In 2012, the city of Newburgh, New York, foreclosed on Sikorsky's house after he fell behind on his property taxes. The parties were later able to broker an agreement that allowed him to repurchase the home for the price of his outstanding debt. But he was unable to satisfy those regular installments, prompting the city to cancel the sale. The government later found another buyer who could pay much more than the value of Sikorsky's debt, which with penalties, interest, and fees stood at $92,786.24. The sale went through in June 2021 for $350,500. The city then pocketed the profit: $257,713.76. Sikorsky is far from the first person to experience this nightmare scenario. But his case coincided with a petition that would upend the practice nationwide. Geraldine Tyler argued that the practice was unconstitutional after Hennepin County, Minnesota, seized her Minneapolis condo over a modest tax debt, sold it, and kept the profit. This worked its way through the court system until 2023, when the Supreme Court sided with Tyler. "A taxpayer who loses her $40,000 house to the State to fulfill a $15,000 tax debt has made a far greater contribution to the public fisc than she owed," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts for the unanimous Court. "The taxpayer must render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, but no more." The decision centered around the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment, which says the government cannot take private property without providing "just compensation." So foreclosing on a property to collect a debt is constitutional, but pocketing the profit is not. Sikorsky's suit made it to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York shortly after that ruling. Sounds like perfect timing, yet the court ruled against him. But now the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled that he can, in fact, sue for his equity under the Takings Clause, resuscitating his suit and sending it back to the district court for review. While the high court ruled the practice unconstitutional, several states—including Arizona, Alabama, New Jersey, and Sikorsky's home of New York—responded by passing labyrinthine debt collection statutes that seek to technically comply with the law while simultaneously making it difficult for property owners to collect their surplus equity. Michigander Chelsea Koetter, for example, lost her house in 2021 over a $3,863.40 tax debt. Manistee County, Michigan, then auctioned it off and kept the $102,636 profit. But the state's supreme court had already ruled the practice illegal in 2020—after which the Legislature approved a debt-collection law that sends owners on an obstacle course should they want to get their leftover equity back. Koetter, according to her complaint, submitted a form 8 days late, which the government said justified its decision to keep her six figures of equity. In Sikorsky's case, New York's new statute applies only to people whose properties were sold on or after May 25, 2023, so he will get to proceed under the Takings Clause of the U.S. Constitution instead. But future plaintiffs who lose everything after falling on hard times may find it much harder to recover their money. The post He Fell Behind on His Taxes. So the Government Seized His Home, Sold It, and Kept the $258,000 Profit. appeared first on
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
Defense for Decatur man charged with capital murder in 2018 files to bar death penalty due to ‘intellectual disability'
DECATUR, Ala. (WHNT) — The defense team for a Decatur man charged with capital murder in 2018 has filed a motion for the judge to bar the death penalty because of an intellectual disability, court documents say. Kendall Rashaid Rucker faces seven capital murder charges for the shooting deaths of David Gullatte, 31, and Sharonda Bouldin, 27, as he 'knowingly and unlawfully entered or remained' in their home in 2018. In April, the State filed a motion stating it intended to seek the death penalty because Rucker 'caused the death of two or more persons by one act' and 'the capital offense was committed by the defendant while engaged in the commission of, or attempt to commit, a robbery or burglary.' In March, the court found Rucker competent to stand trial following a court-ordered mental examination and a hearing. However, Rucker's defense has now filed a motion to strike the death penalty as an option. On June 5, the defense said Rucker meets the criteria for intellectual disability because he displays 'significant subaverage intellectual functioning, as demonstrated by his IQ score of 73, lack of academic accomplishment and other related factors,' as well as stating that he suffers from 'significant deficits in adaptive functioning, including substantial deficits in his conceptual, social, and practical skills,' and finally that the deficits 'manifested' during the developmental period. The defense says that, because of his intellectual disability, the State cannot seek the death penalty against Rucker because it violates the Eighth Amendment. Citing Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002), 'the United States Supreme Court found that intellectual disability lessens an individual's 'personal culpability' for a crime because the person has 'diminished capacities to understand and process information, to communicate, to abstract from mistakes and learn from experience, to engage in logical reasoning, to control impulses, and to understand the reactions of others.'' Also cited in this motion to bar the death penalty for Rucker, court documents say, Atkins defined intellectual disability as someone who has 'subaverage intellectual functioning [and] significant limitations in adaptive skills such as communication, self-care, and self-direction that became manifest before age 18.' The American Association of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities says that one way to measure intellectual functioning is an IQ test. 'Generally, an IQ test score of around 70 or as high as 75 indicates a significant limitation in intellectual functioning,' AAIDD says. The organization also says that this condition starts in the developmental period, which is defined as 'before the age of 22.' At the time of this incident in 2018, Rucker was 22, per the Decatur Police Department. Rucker's defense said, according to court documents, Robert Shaffer, Ph.D., a licensed clinical and forensic psychologist and neuropsychologist, evaluated Mr. Rucker to determine whether he suffers from intellectual disability. 'IQ testing that Dr. Shaffer administered reveals Mr. Rucker'sgeneral intelligence falls in the significantly substandard range (Full Scale Score of 73). The lowest cognitive skills involve understanding of verbal information (Verbal Comprehension Index, composite score of 72, in the 3rd percentile) and retaining and applying information (Working Memory Index, composite score of 74, in the 4th percentile). Mr. Rucker's overall score and two of his domain scores are consistent with APA and AIDD guidance on the intellectual functioning criterion.' Court Documents You can read the full motion filed below. yp4yynzqcvk2h1sdhv14sxyb_0676b7e4-2e33-4f78-9c05-4f7cb21fe93aDownload In light of Rucker's intellectual disability, the defense asks the court for the following relief: Schedule an evidentiary at which Mr. Rucker may present evidence in support of this motion. Order the State to provide Mr. Rucker with any discovery that directly or indirectly supports his intellectual disability claim. Grant this motion, find that Mr. Rucker has intellectual disability, and bar the State from seeking or imposing the death penalty in this case. Rucker currently has a hearing set for June 23 and also his jury trial is set for August 18, according to court documents. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
