Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont did something rare for a politician: he admitted the system is fallible. He issued a formal proclamation that admits the system is fallible.
Lamont declared September 9, 2025, International Falsely Accused Awareness Day in Connecticut. The statement called on citizens to reflect on “fairness, truth, and justice in the legal system.”

He proclaimed in part:
“WHEREAS, the justice system of the State of Connecticut and the United States is founded on the principles of truth, fairness, and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty…
“WHEREAS, national surveys indicate that a significant portion of Americans have either experienced or know someone who has experienced a false accusation…”
The word that matters is ‘significant’—Lamont’s term for how often false accusations touch Americans. Lamont says “significant,” not “rare.” That’s an admission this problem touches millions.

Lamont went on to proclaim:
“WHEREAS, International Falsely Accused Awareness Day serves to recognize the importance of due process, strengthen protection for the wrongly accused, and promote justice for all.”
THEREFORE, I, …urge all citizens to reflect on the importance of fairness, truth, and justice in our legal system.”
He asks the public to “reflect.” That’s a comfortable verb—no vote, no budget, no change—while others still face false accusations and, too often, false convictions.
Still, what Lamont has done is to admit that America convicts the innocent often enough to justify a state holiday.
So how does this incredible injustice pass in the name of justice, or rather, our criminal justice system?
The Vanishing Trial
It began with the extinction of the American trial—or at best, its endangerment.
In federal court, fewer than 3% of cases ever reach a jury. Ninety percent end in plea bargains—agreements struck under pressure, often with threats of longer sentences if defendants refuse. Prosecutors make you a plea offer: five years if you plead, fifty if you lose at trial.
And people fold—guilty or not.
Careers Built on Convictions
Try to understand the prosecutor’s position. Careers do not advance through dismissed charges of an innocent person or measured restraint. Promotions are won on conviction rates, headlines, and years added to sentences.
The structure of incentives has created a profession where success is not measured by justice, but by body count.
Tilted Stage
Then, the trial itself is slanted in favor of the prosecutor. This, in itself, encourages the innocent to take plea bargains.
Courtrooms tilt toward the state: prosecutors sit closest to the jury, open first, and close last—bookending the defense and shaping first and final impressions.
Juries That Don’t Know Their Power
Then, the last defense—the juries—are woefully uninformed.
Few jurors know they may refuse a judge’s instructions if they think the law is unjust. You want the proof – a judge or the prosecutor cannot punish a jury. If you cannot punish, you cannot compel.
This is designed to allow jurors to vote according to their conscience.
In colonial America, jurors knew that judges were not above them.
Jurors nullified prosecutions under the Crown. In the age of slavery, jurors refused to convict abolitionists under the Fugitive Slave Act.
Today, judges instruct jurors to follow the judge’s directions without question. Many are intimidated by the bench, cowed by prosecutors, or fearful that if they defy the prosecutor’s narratives, they will somehow be punished.
American juries retain the power to acquit as a matter of conscience—often called jury nullification—yet courts generally forbid instructing jurors about it. The power exists; most jurors never hear about it.
Jurors are supposed to be an independent and constitutionally equal body, as much as the judiciary, and to repeat: a judge cannot punish a juror for voting according to their conscience, even if it is in direct defiance of the instructions of the court.
Power and Corruption
Still, the problem lies in the power of the prosecutor. They have way too much.
Lord Acton warned, “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Prosecutors wield extraordinary power. Rarely are they punished for misconduct. Sanctions for Brady/Giglio violations are rare; bar discipline and reversals seldom reach the individual prosecutor.
The result is the inversion of Blackstone’s principle—the idea that “it is better for ten guilty men to go free than for one innocent to suffer.” In practice, the American system prefers the maxim “better that innocents be destroyed than prosecutors lose.”
Breaking the Silence
By naming the falsely accused, Lamont broke the unwritten lines of solidarity among the police, the judges, and the prosecutors.
A governor recognizes that innocence is not always protected, and due process is being forgotten.
Toward September 9
On September 9th, advocates and families of the falsely accused will gather at the Legislative Office Building in Hartford. They will share stories of wrongful convictions.
There it was, simple as rain: the governor said the state was not infallible. That admission was made. He proclaimed a day for the bruised and broken by-products of a prosecutor’s system of justice.
The result is clear: many who were called guilty were not. Lamont said it. And wasn’t that something?
If we want action instead of “reflection,” start here:
Connecticut could adopt reforms, such as mandatory jury education on nullification, to ensure jurors understand their constitutional right to judge both facts and law. Independent oversight boards could review prosecutorial misconduct, such as withholding exculpatory evidence, with public reports to ensure transparency and accountability. Capping sentencing disparities between plea deals and trial convictions—say, no more than a 20% difference—could reduce the likelihood of coercion. Finally, a clear legal standard for prosecuting malicious false accusations, requiring proof of intent, would deter lies while protecting legitimate claims.
Lamont can do more than reflect. He can take action by proposing laws that punish proven lies with the same enthusiasm it brings to press conferences.
Create criminal liability for knowingly making false allegations and for willfully suppressing exculpatory evidence—paired with safe harbors for timely recantation—to punish lies without chilling good-faith reports.
An 8-point “do-this-now” agenda
-
Open-file discovery by statute (criminal + juvenile). Automatic, continuous, with enforceable sanctions for late or hidden exculpatory evidence.
-
Trial-penalty cap: Limit sentencing exposure post-trial to, say, ≤20% above the best good-faith plea offer on the table (with written plea records preserved).
-
Independent Prosecutorial Oversight: A watchdog outside the AG’s chain with subpoena power, public reports, and authority to refer for discipline or charges.
-
Jury rights orientation (plain English): Before evidence, instruct that jurors decide the case, cannot be punished for a verdict, and must judge credibility independently. (Courts can keep their law-application instruction; the point is juror independence and anti-intimidation.)
-
Mandatory video of all custodial interrogations and eyewitness ID reforms (double-blind, confidence statements).
-
Brady/Giglio tracking: A statewide do-not-call list for witnesses and attorneys with sustained honesty violations; disclosure to defense mandatory.
-
Parity measures for the defense: Fund investigators and experts at rates comparable to the state; require early access to forensics.
-
False-accusation deterrent with safe harbors: Create a specific offense for knowingly false criminal allegations (proved by clear evidence of intent), paired with a recantation safe harbor to protect good-faith corrections.

In this courtroom I rule I am the prosecutor Pay no attention to that tiny man in the black robes I am in charge 
The courtroom has lost its relative proportions The prosecutor commands the judges obey Convictions are required
Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist, media strategist, publisher, and legal consultant.







Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
They are all a bunch of pigs starting from lamonte down to the cesspool filled “divorce attorneys”, all in between.
This is nothing more than an article to help the criminals your friends with. We are awaiting prosecution of Lutherman. Lock the bastard up already
What did Rich not do for you?
I don’t think most people who don’t appreciate Mr. Luthmann want him to do anything for them.. Rich is a paid perpetrator. With a criminal record of holding a gun to someone’s head. His writing is not much different. His association of projects have nothing to do with children. They are a group of individuals who want their way at all costs. Rich is being paid to accomplish this. His behavior is not professional journalism it the same behavior we have seen from the some of the parents he writes for. No accountability and continue to support people have conducted themselves in controlling, manipulative fashion. He aligned himself with people who appear defrauding the public. Reported to take money with empty promises. Some of the parents are broken from the system and some are where they are because of their own actions and conduct. These people are not in it for the greater good. These are people including criminals who feel their actions are justified. Have been harming children in the process. I think Richard has hoodwinked some of these people and pretends he’s helping them. The project he continues has little to do with brave advocating through journalism. It’s gained income, notoriety and done like to help the people who need it the most. It’s a cherry picking adventure that is not for children. Rich knows it and doesn’t care who’s children get harmed in the process.
I applaud Lamont’s proclamation. Yes, Connecticut could do more. But other jurisdictions won’t even acknowledge the problem, much less address it.
Bar associations and individual attorneys are also falling far short of their duties to police attorney and judicial misconduct. Rule 8.3 of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct requires attorneys to report misconduct. Failure to do so is in itself a violation of the Rules.
And then you have people like Jeanine Pirro – the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia – publicly blaming a grand jury for thrice not returning a true bill for felony indictment. She is surely not “maintaining the integrity of the profession” by making such statements.
Lamont is allowing the CT lawyers and judges to get away with violations of due process and misconduct There is no oversight and Lamont and Tong CHOOSE to look away
“Acknowledging” the outcomes of his failed leadership without owning his role does nothing except to mislead the public into thinking his ethics and integrity is superior to other “leaders.”
AG Tong is also big of public proclamations without ownership nor action. He announced in CT no one is above the Constitution while he permits the CT Bar Association to disregard nearly all grievances filed and supports CT Judiciary Committee they stamp judicial appointments while in possession of evidence and hearing testimony of those victimized by these very court actors.
Words without action is more CT propaganda.. the most corrupt state in our nation- our Constitution state, Corrupticut.
Lamont declares a day off instead of committing a full day to assign cases for investigation of those with questionable convictions.
Another paid holiday for state employees as those wrongly convicted remain wrongly convicted and those currently incarcerated and held on trumped up charges continue to be silenced and held in “mental health facilities aka jails” where they are medicated and traumatized on a daily basis and denied access to family, friends and media
Let’s start with John Flynn… who dared to believe in government conspiracies – these thought crimes are now a crime in the state of CT – let’s have Lamont release John’s Flynn wherever they have him medicated, silenced, and waiting for him to die or be so tripped out on the psychiatric medication he does not require that he no longer knows his name
He became unhinged because he was aware of the overwhelming curruption in Connecticut. The legal system is weaponized in Connecticut.
Connecticut has made little to no effort to combat crime in Connecticut. Over the last several decades there has been significant cost savings to the prison system. Under Michael Lawlor’s criminal justice reform. There are a ton more public defenders than prosecutors. The state of Connecticut was going bankrupt in the 80s over prison cost. The plea bargaining and nullying of cases is for cost savings not justice. Crime statistics are down because the system is built around cost savings. Victims are not assisted but punished for coming forward. The public defenders office is absolutely currupt
The crime statistics are also “down” because CT criminalize the innocent while allowing the true criminals to operate with impunity because the criminal enterprises operate within the judicial system and kickbacks and blatant fraud fuels Connecticut leadership They’re all in it together including the CT media – where there’s actually a judicial media committee that meets regularly – not to answer questions from journalistic investigators but to reward, mislead, align and silence all media outlets in Connecticut. Racketeering is alive and well with Lamont leading the way- appointing the most corrupt attorneys to positions of leaderships so they have the rulings in their pockets.
Which political office are the phone calls coming from that are leading a judicial system? Lamont, Tong or one of the senators?
False allegations: an international scourge as old as the hills
“Rosie O’Donnell apologizes for calling trans Minneapolis Catholic school shooter a MAGA supporter …”
https://nypost.com/2025/09/01/us-news/rosie-odonnell-apologizes-for-calling-trans-minneapolis-catholic-school-shooter-a-maga-supporter-i-messed-up/
Frank, you need to start writing more about important topics like milkshakes, cheeseburgers, french fries, pizza, hot dogs and soda. You are a FUCKING ASSHOLE!
FOR CHRISTS SAKE, I WAS A CONTRIBUTOR TO GIRLS BY DESIGN, A CHILD SEX GROOMING ORGANIZATION DIRECTED BY RANIERE!! I WAS IMPORTANT TO KRISTIN KREUK AND ALLISON MACK! I WAS FRIENDS WITH CELEBRITIES!! YOU WERE NEVER FRIENDS WITH CELEBRITIES!
Lamont needs to clean up family court where family court judges criminalize parents in violation of all due process only after violating their constitutional rights to bring up their children
They don’t even get the benefit of having a jury and are incarcerated by sadistic family court judges and virtually stripped of their children
He needs to prosecute and oversee family court judges and attorneys He’s well aware of family court racketeering
Don’t be the hypocrite that AG Tong chooses to be when he suggests that no one in CT is above the law when he turns a blind eye to abusive judges who facilitate violations of due process and court order trauma and child abuse
He should start with Stamford cases and specific corrupt lawyers and GALs that operate there with impunity to their open corruption and ex parte contacts with judges.
There is not even the benefit of evidencary hearing.
Before Connecticut’s “Falsely Accused Awareness Day”, Connecticut went after the good cops with a special office to do just that. Connecticut’s Jennifer’s Law was to protect us from “coercive control” and before that, courts were on the lookout for “Parental Alienation Syndrome”.
Connecticut’s all talk, no action and the same ol’ creepy secret politics.
Connecticut protects criminals.
It feels like the #MeToo campaign was just yesterday!
I disagree with Frank, and with Blackstone.
Blackstone can kiss my ass, whoever that asshole is, LOL.
An occasional innocent person going to prison is the price humans must pay to have ANY justice system at all.
Why? Because ‘perfect’ justice (100% perfect justice) is a fairy tale that could never happen.
Why? Because humans are IMPERFECT.
Frank is an ignoramus for suggesting otherwise, LOL.
Frank’s proposed ‘justice reforms’ are a joke that would not eliminate innocent people getting convicted.
Truth is, Frank honestly believes that it’s better to set 100 guilty men free (not just 10) — if it helps to prevent one innocent person from going to prison.
But if 100 guilty men keep going free (in order to protect the 1 innocent person) — then society will be destroyed by rampant and violent crime.
Thus, I fully accept that an occasional innocent person will be convicted and go to jail.
Would I have the same attitude if the innocent person happened to be one of my own family members or friends? Of course not, LOL.
Am I being hypocritical by admitting that? Yes, because ALL HUMAN BEINGS are hypocritical when it comes to their own family and friends.
The main difference between myself and other people is that I freely admit this truth, while most others will deny that they’re hypocritical. LOL.
Yes, every person reading this comment is a HYPOCRITE just like me. Including Frank.
Convicting an occasional innocent person is simply the price we must pay for having an imperfect justice system managed by imperfect human beings.
If we can’t cure world hunger then we can’t have perfect justice either.
People are starving right now — yet every person reading this is likely doing NOTHING to help donate extra money or food to help save a few extra lives. Why?
Oh… And the REAL problem isn’t plea deals. Frank is wrong there.
The REAL PROBLEM is that the ‘maximum’ penalties (set by congress) are way too high for most simple crimes (non-violent crimes) in the United States.
I agree that maximum sentences are too high for many non-violent crimes, especially compared to Europe. We should be reducing the maximum sentences for non-violent crimes rather than altering plea deal percentages.
For example, most non-violent federal crimes (with a 20-year max sentence) should be lowered to a 5-year max sentence.
Then, fairer plea deals could be made (i.e., 12 months if you plead guilty, or 5 years if you go to trial.
But it will not eliminate the occasional innocent person going to prison. That can never happen.
Have a good day. 🙂