CT: Stratford Man Refuses Probation, Wants Jail Instead!

The man is convicted of a sex offense and reportedly believes probation would make him a pariah in the community.

STRATFORD, CT — A 61-year-old Stratford man, who was convicted of a sex offense, was sentenced to 30 months in prison this week on a probation violation, after he told a judge he would break probation again if given such a sentence, reported the Connecticut Post.

Rae was convicted on possession of child pornography charges in 2009 and was released in October of last year. Prior to that sentence, he served more than a decade after being convicted of fatally shooting a woman in Milford.

After his release in connection with the child pornography case, Rea immediatly violated probation, in part because he claims he is innocent of the charge, and reportedly because he believes probation makes him a pariah in the community.

Rea and his public defender requested jail time, and Superior Court Judge Alex Hernandez granted their wish, but the judge also tacked on 25 years of probation after he serves time in prison.

Following Rea’s release from prison in October 2020, a probation officer testified Wednesday that Rea immediately violated his probation. First, he refused to enter the probation office wearing a mask in violation of state COVID-19 requirements and then he refused to comply with sex offense treatment. He was charged with violating his probation.

“I’m making the unusual argument that this court impose the maximum time he owes,” Public Defender Joseph Bruckmann argued during Wednesday’s hearing.

He then put Rea on the witness stand.

“If you were to be placed back on probation for this case would you comply with the conditions of probation?” Bruckmann asked Rea.

“Absolutely not,” Rea responded. “I’ll rot in prison for the rest of my life if I have to.”

“Would you give it even a full day?” Bruckmann asked.

“No,” Rea stated. “I know you are not going to believe this but I am innocent of this crime so I will not be a pariah. I will spend the rest of my life in prison if I have to before I subject myself to that kind of indignity.”

“Mr. Rea violated probation in every way he could think of,” Bruckmann told the judge. “He is not going to comply with probation. We are just going to be going through this again down the road.”

Assistant State’s Attorney Felicia Valentino told the judge that she was requesting Rea serve prison time but added that he also needs supervision when he gets out whether he intends to comply or not.

According to the testimony during the two-week trial in 2009, Rea on Sept. 8, 2008, brought his computer into the Staples store on Ferry Boulevard in Stratford to have the printer repaired.

A store technician turned on the computer in the course of trying to find the source of the problem and allegedly saw images of naked children and others performing sex acts. He reported his discovery to the store manager, who called police.

In April 1993, Rea pleaded guilty to first-degree manslaughter for fatally shooting a woman outside the Devon Motel on June 20, 1991. He was sentenced to 18 years in prison and released Jan. 13, 2005.


Source of story: www.ctpost.com

Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  19. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

My take-away from this amazing article: a murderer is less afraid of paroling after committing murder (no registry for murderers, so he is judged on who he is at that time rather than who he was) than paroling after his CP offense (big, huge registry spotlight)!!!!!!

This is one of the most unusual articles I have ever read, since it is more proof that the registry is punishment and being on the registry is living hell no matter what sex offense you committed!

25 years…Jesus Christ this is insane.

The guy most likely homeless and violating probation is his means of survival.

I did a similar thing in 2011 after my only conviction for FTR. I have been charged with FTR 7 times since 1997. Upon that conviction i was given 3 years probation. I intentionally violated that probation by refusing to register and was locked up in Rock County jail. After about a month there, they (DOC) came into the jail ask asking me to comply or suffer revocation. I said, “No thanks.” and told them the meeting was over. State moved into revocation process which doesn’t happen in court but in a room in the basement of the County Jail. During the revocation hearing I was found guilty of whatever and a court date was set in the court that sentenced me to probation for the purpose of revocation. That court hearing was quite a scene. I got reprimanded by the judge and I reprimanded him right back for ” Convicting a man of prison escape or absconding from P&P without having a prerequisite record the man was supposed to be incarcerated or on probation in the first place. ” I was making an accurate analogy. That was the point where the judge tried to lump me in with those who’d plead guilty to sex crimes and had signed their standardized formal waiver of right. He, not the ADA, tried claim I’d waived my rights to contest in the sex assault case. He was misinformed (more likely he simply presumed) as I had not signed a waiver in 1991 and it was in the record. Judge set another date for the purpose of gathering facts after the ADA admitted it had no signed waiver on file in that sex case. During that interim I was back in county jail and suddenly here comes a lawyer from the public defender office. Which was very strange because I’d already decided to defend myself and had formally gave them (Pub def.) the kiss off, much to the consternation of this same judge! In my mind it makes absolutely no sense to depend on or hire on one socialist group to defend yourself from another socialist group. IMO this is the reason this guy in this story made his choice. I applaud his choice.

I find it a bit more interesting that the court was almost begging him to stay out on probation. In this case at least, the threat of being returned to prison if probation rules aren’t followed is a pretty empty one.

Can’t say I blame the guy. Why go to the “free world” just to be scrutinized, harassed, and discriminated against by the public and probation office? Sometimes, prison life is just easier, and some of our population understandably may not consider the extremely limited freedom on probation to be worth it.

Its almost impossible to survive in society once your labeled a “sex offender”.
This guys got balls of steel for taking his fate into his own hands ether way it’s sad what the federal government is doing to people for committing sex crimes in America 10 -20+ years ago

Good luck 🗣

I find it incredibly petty, vindictive and abusive of this judge to add on an additional 25 years of probation.
The man is already serving out the full term of his original sentence – he simply chooses to do it within the confines of the carceral system.
I don’t comprehend the purpose of the judge’s adding the additional 25 years of probation after – AFTER!! – the man completes the FULL sentence which he previously received for the crime for which he was convicted.
This seems to be nothing more than the petty vindictiveness of a frustrated judge!! He needs to “get a grip” on his excessively emotional response. If the man chooses to serve his time out in prison, so be it! Why is that choice not being allowed as a permissible alternative to probation/parole?
Furthermore, how is it even legal for the judge to enhance an already existing sentence??
How is this not “double jeopardy” – being additionally punished for the same initial crime?? 😡😡😡