By Dave Collins
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Despite “fraud” committed by prosecutors, the Connecticut Supreme Court on Monday upheld the murder of a man who committed the crime of killing his wife because the victim’s Fitbit exercise tracker contradicts a statement to police.
The judge ruled in a 6-0 ruling that Richard Dabate was not taken away from a fair trial due to four failures by prosecutors called “troubled.”
Dabate, 48, was convicted of murder and other charges in the fatal shooting of 39-year-old Connie Dabate at the couple’s home in Ellington two days before Christmas in 2015 while their two young sons were at school. He has been sentenced to 65 years in prison.
Prosecutors said Davete wanted his wife to be dead as he had years of relationship with another woman who was pregnant at the time of the murder and later gave birth to a child.
Davet staged a fake crime scene, including loosely tied up with a zip tie and stabbing himself with a box cutter, and told police that an unknown camouflage intruder broke into their home, killed his wife and assaulted him, authorities said.
State police said Dabate gave them a timeline of events that opposed to his wife’s Fitbit data.
Davete testified in his defense, saying that the murderer was a loud masked man who maintained his innocence and had a voice like actor Vin Diesel.
While some of Dabate’s appeals questioned the reliability of Fitbit’s evidence and whether it was wrong for the judge to allow it to do so, the Supreme Court upheld the data and its use.
Dabate also accused Tolland State of Matthew Gedansky of cross-examination of Dabate of the infamous Cheshire home in 2007. The invaders of the house killed a woman, 11 and 17, and her two daughters, after hours of terrorizing them while the woman’s husband survived the malicious assault.
Gedansky asks Davete if he is about to create a “small mini Cheshire scene” in his own home. The judge supported the objection by Dabate’s lawyers and asked Gedansky to paraphrase the question, but Gedansky asked him about the same question. The Supreme Court found that Gadansky violated the judge’s paraphrasing order.
“When referring to the ‘mini-cheshire’, the prosecutor’s question was unnecessarily inflamed as he compared the accused to other notorious offenders and infamous figures,” Judge Joan Alexander wrote in the decision.
Gedansky did not immediately return an email message Monday seeking comment.
Dabate’s lawyer Trent Lalima said he and his client were disappointed by the court’s decision.
“We believe we have proposed a strong issue that supports Rick Davet’s new trial,” Lalima wrote in an email to the Associated Press. “We appreciate the best next step for Rick, who has been determined to maintain his innocence for nearly a decade.”
The Supreme Court also found that Gadansky committed three other misconduct. This suggested that the ju judge must be ignorant or lazy in order for the judge to agree to the defense theory of the case.
“We hope that the message will be filmed at the greatest severity of the prosecutors, who have disapproved of the fraud committed by the prosecutors on strong and unqualified conditions during the trial of this case,” the decision said.
The court said it agreed with Davete, saying “prosecutors believe they are engaged in multiple misconduct in the trial.”
However, the judge said the state’s case was very strong and Gaedansky’s failure did not overturn the testimony with 130 witnesses and 600 exhibits announced at the five-week trial.
Original issue: March 10th, 2025, 5:08pm EDT
