A memo the Connecticut State Police Union (CSPU) recently circulated to its members raises concerns about the timing and motivation of a recently announced investigation into a high-speed chase in Norwich last November that ended with a state trooper intentionally ramming a stolen vehicle, and also states there will be “consequences” if it appears politically motivated.

Several months after the pursuit, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) announced last week an investigation into Connecticut State Trooper Wilfred J. Blanchette’s use of a “precision immobilization technique” (PIT maneuver) to end the high-speed pursuit of a stolen vehicle. Troopers first noticed erratic high-speed driving around noon on Route 2A in Montville. Troopers pursued the car, which had license plates belonging to another vehicle, along Interstate 395 North and onto Route 2 West. Believing the driver to be intoxicated and the erratic driving to be a threat to the public, a state police supervisor authorized Blanchette to first use stop sticks and then to twice intentionally strike the car’s rear corner.

Blanchette and Sargeant Gordon L. Leslie, who authorized Blanchette’s actions, are under investigation for use of deadly physical force and “subsequent conduct.”

Officer body cam footage from the scene shows both Jesus Santiago, who was driving the car and Tyloine Reddick, a passenger in the car, initially holding their hands up as troopers approach following the crash. Both men are pulled from the car and forced onto the ground by officers before being subdued and arrested.

According to the OIG’s announcement of the investigation, following the crash, “Santiago complied with officer demands to put his hands in the air, and he was placed under arrest without further incident. Reddick was taken into custody after a brief struggle during which a K-9 officer bit Reddick in the left leg.”

The OIG’s announcement also states that the incident, which occurred on November 24, 2025, was reported by CSP to their office on January 23, 2026, and dash cam and body-worn camera footage was provided on February 2.

But information from the CSPU “Union Ammo” publication obtained by Inside Investigator indicates the union is not happy with the investigation or the timing of it being opened months after the incident.

The memo also stated there will be “consequences” for politicians, CSP commanders, and the press if the investigation is not fair.

“For those members of the Governor’s office, the Legislature, State Police Command Staff, or the press, who are improperly reading this confidential communication – We promise you this…If our Troopers are not treated fairly, or you conduct a politically motivated or biased investigation, or you mislead the public and damage the reputations of our Troopers – There will be consequences!” the memo, which appeared in a CSPU “Union Ammo” publication dated February 8, states.

CSPU did not respond to a request for comment about what consequences those listed might face.

The memo defends the actions taken by both Blanchette and Leslie during the chase, noting Leslie authorized the use of stop sticks and the PIT maneuver as the chase unfolded, in accordance with CSP guidelines, and defends the Troopers’ actions.

“The fleeing reckless operator and his passenger were taken into custody without any injuries and neither made any formal complaints against our Troopers, who acted with courage and professionalism.” the memo states. “These Troopers put themselves at risk to protect the public and should be recognized for their commitment to fulfilling their oath of office. Our Troopers deserve to be supported and encouraged to learn from the strengths and weaknesses of every dangerous incident they are exposed to because of the criminal activity of others. Otherwise, Troopers will become less confident in the performance of their duties and will become more reactive than proactive.”

The union also objects to the OIG’s description of the intentional crash as a PIT maneuver and claims that over two months after the incident, Colonel Loughman “without explanation, notified and suspended the police powers of [Blanchette] and [Leslie], and placed them on paid administrative assignment at Headquarters.”

“When the Union learned of this information, we immediately contacted both members, informed them that we were concerned as to why it took over two (2) months to receive notice of the alleged misconduct we just learned from Command, explained their legal and contractual rights, assisted with notifying PORAC and obtaining legal counsel, and discussed filing grievances to make them whole for any lost wages.” the memo states.

CSP’s motor vehicle pursuit policy states that forced stop procedures, including PIT maneuvers, “may be considered when the necessity for an immediate apprehension outweighs the dangers presented to all parties involved and innocent persons” and require prior authorization from a supervisor “absent exigent circumstances.”

“When considering intentional collision of a violator, each police officer and supervisor must be aware that these actions may result in serious physical injury or death and may activate the vehicle airbags or fuel system shut-offs causing the police vehicle to become disabled.” the policy reads.

It also stipulates that pursuits should not be undertaken, even if allowable, unless officers have reasonably determined that allowing a suspect to remain at large creates a greater risk of imminent threat of death or injury to an officer or the public than a pursuit.

CSPU’s memo maintains that Santiago’s high speed and erratic driving, as well as the presence of construction zone equipment, meant the chase presented a danger to the public and warranted ending it by ramming the vehicle.

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.