The State of Connecticut has reached a $3.75 million settlement agreement with the family of a mentally ill man who died in 2019 while being held at the New Haven Correctional Center after being repeatedly pepper sprayed and then piled on by five to six guards in what was ruled a “homicide,” by the state medical examiner.
According to court documentation, unknown individuals within the Department of Correction (DOC) then falsified documents in an attempted cover-up.
The parents of Carl Talbot filed a federal lawsuit against sixteen Department of Correction officers and employees involved in pepper spraying and restraint of Talbot, suing them in both their personal and professional capacities, although several of those individual have since been dismissed from the lawsuit.
Talbot was 30 years old and suffering from bipolar disorder, obesity, obesity-related hyperventilation, and addiction issues when he was incarcerated on a number of charges “prompted by his psychological and substance abuse issues,” according to the initial court complaint.
The day he died, Talbot was experiencing mental distress and had smeared feces on the walls of his cell. Officers repeatedly sprayed Talbot with pepper spray inches from his face in violation of policy, and then forced him into the shower. After the shower, they sprayed him several more times with pepper spray. At one point, an officer kicked Talbot “while lying blinded by OC spray on the floor of the shower.” After being placed back in his cell, five or six officers piled on Talbot – called a “pig pile,” according to court documents – to tie him into restraints. The “pig pile” lasted “nearly four minutes,” according to the court complaint.
Although Talbot had been struggling and crying out after being pepper sprayed, following the pile-on, Talbot ceased moving or responding in any way, even with the pepper spray still on his skin and clothes.
According to the findings of fact included in various court documents and based on video of the incident and its aftermath, inspection reports documenting Talbot’s safety for an hour and half after he was repeatedly pepper sprayed, piled on, and placed in restraints were falsified or “forged by some unknown person,” to reflect that he was alive and well.
The use of force report regarding Talbot’s restraint was also “fabricated completely by some employee of the Department of Correction,” according to a court document releasing Officer Nekengie Brookshire from the lawsuit after it was determined Brookshire’s name was forged onto the use of force report, and she was not even present when Talbot was placed in restraints.
Connecticut State’s Attorney’s office declined to bring charges against all but one of the officers, concluding that “no actions of any individual Department of Corrections official can be determined to be a proximate cause in the death of Mr. Talbot.”
“In addition, no actions of any individual Department of Corrections official give rise to the degree of recklessness, such as would be a prerequisite to any criminal prosecution for the death of Mr. Talbot based upon that state of mind,” the report said. “Moreover, based upon review of all of the investigative materials, there is no basis for criminal prosecution for the death of Mr. Talbot based on intentional conduct. Therefore, no criminal charges will be brought with respect Mr. Talbot’s tragic death.”
No mention was made in the State’s Attorney report regarding the fabrication of documents, and the statute of limitations has already run out.
The State’s Attorney, however, did recommend charges against Officer Carlos Padro, who was shown on video kicking Talbot “in the upper torso,” while he was lying on his back in the shower after having been pepper sprayed again. Court records show Padro was convicted for third-degree assault and given 1 year in jail with execution suspended and three years probation.
Notably, the Office of the Attorney General declined to represent Padro, leaving him to defend himself in court, while defending the remaining officers involved in Talbot’s death who were each sued in both their individual and professional capacity. The Attorney General’s Office explained they were utilizing an exception in Connecticut law allowing them to decline representing an employee if they determine those acts to be “wanton, reckless, or malicious,” according to CT Insider.
However, ranking member on the Judiciary Committee, Rep. Craig Fishbein, R-Wallingford, feels taxpayers, on the other hand, shouldn’t be on the hook for this settlement either, and suggested perhaps those who caused his death should be held liable.
“At the end of the day, this thirty-year-old inmate lost their life and the cause of death is listed as homicide,” Fishbein said. “Why the taxpayers should have to pay for this baffles me. On one hand, there should be compensation, on the other hand those who caused this death should be held responsible.”
“The details in the Lord v. Padro case are deeply disturbing. A man lost his life while in state custody, and to this day, there are still unanswered questions about what happened, why it happened, and how we can be certain that it will not happen again,” ranking member Sen. John Kissell, R-Enfield, said in a press release. “When incidents like this occur, we expect a thorough investigation, clear answers, and meaningful action. Yet, instead of transparency, this case has been clouded with uncertainty.”
Of the ten defendants listed in the settlement agreement, three have retired with a pension, one left state service, and the rest remain employed by DOC, according to state payroll data. Three DOC supervisory officials were released from the lawsuit, along with Brookshire, whose name was forged.
According to the settlement agreement, in addition to the $3.75 million to be paid to Talbot’s family, Colleen Lord will be able to voluntarily give a one-hour presentation to incoming DOC recruits “concerning dealing with mentally ill inmates.”
“During that training she will be allowed to play the video recorded during this incident, discuss Mr. Talbot and what problems he faced in life, and explain how this incident effected (sic) Mr. Talbot’s family,” Exhibit B of the settlement states. “During her presentation, Mrs. Lord shall not make specific allegations of malfeasance directed toward any individual depicted in the video and will not discuss this lawsuit or the settlement.”
The proposed settlement will go before the Judiciary Committee on Friday for approval. It will then require approval by the General Assembly.
“But the real issue is not just the financial cost, it’s the human cost,” Kisssell said. “A failure of the system led to a death, and rather than receiving clear answers, the public is being asked to simply accept a settlement and move on. That is not acceptable.”
**This article was updated with comments by Sen. John Kissell**
Was this article helpful?
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
