In Plea Bargain, Sex Offender Agrees To Move Out Of Newtown

By Andrew Gorosko

A local sex offender, who had been jailed for the past two months on $250,000 bail on a violation of probation charge, has reached a plea bargain agreement, which frees him from jail, provided that he not live in Newtown, or even visit here, among other restrictions.

In Danbury Superior Court on August 20, Judge Patrick L. Carroll sanctioned that agreement between defendant Kenneth J. Northrop, 33, formerly of 25 Maltbie Road, and the state prosecutor.

Mr Northrop’s residence in the Maltbie Road neighborhood in May and June had raised the concerns of his neighbors, who expressed fears that their children would be the victims of child sex crimes, such as those that Mr Northrop committed in the Riverside neighborhood when he lived there in the late 1990s. Maltbie Road area residents formed a Neighborhood Crime Watch as a result of Mr Northrop’s residence there.

During the summers of 1997 and 1998, in bizarre burglaries, Mr Northrop entered private properties in Riverside late at night intending to secretly massage small children with vegetable oil. Mr Northrop had admitted to authorities that he was intoxicated during those incidents. Those nighttime incidents frightened Riverside residents and led Newtown police to conduct surveillance and perform door-to-door interviews in a lengthy investigation, which included help from state police and the FBI. Riverside is a densely built community situated along Lake Zoar, near the Rochambeau Bridge on Interstate 84.

For the Riverside crimes, Mr Northrop had served four years in prison until his release on May 9.

Judge Barbara N. Bellis had conducted a violation of probation hearing on Mr Northrop’s case on August 14 and 15. Judge Carroll then intervened in the matter.

Judge Carroll had sentenced Mr Northrop for the Riverside sex crimes, in which he had pleaded guilty to burglary and risk of injury charges.

In the August 20 plea bargain, Mr Northrop pleaded guilty to one count of violation of probation for violating his overnight curfew in three separate instances on June 18–19. Based on electronic monitoring information, his probation officer sought and obtained an arrest warrant, which Newtown police served on June 20. Had Mr Northrop been found guilty of violation of probation by a judge, he could have been sentenced to up to 16 years in prison.

In court, Judge Carroll told Mr Northrop, “The matter has been resolved by a matter of admission [of guilt].”

Attorney Ralph C. Crozier, representing Mr Northrop, said of his client, “He’s just thankful the whole thing is over.”

Judge Carroll said his main concern in the case is the safety of residents who live near Mr Northrop. Measures must be taken to ensure the safety of children living in a neighborhood, he said.

Plea Bargain

As a result of the plea bargain, Judge Carroll ordered Mr Northrop not live in or to visit Newtown. Otherwise, he would face the prospect of spending 16 years in prison, the judge said. Judge Carroll, however, said Mr Northrop could use the local road network while passing through Newtown.

Mr Northrop initially objected to his exclusion from Newtown, but then agreed to it after conferring with his lawyer.

Judge Carroll explicitly ordered Mr Northrop to participate in electronic monitoring to keep probation officials apprised of his whereabouts. Probation officials will create a practical curfew for the defendant that would allow him to hold employment, the judge said.

During the violation of probation hearing, Mr Crozier had contended that when he originally sentenced Mr Northrop, Judge Carroll did not specifically require electronic monitoring as a condition of probation. Mr Crozier thus questioned the legitimacy of that monitoring, which had led to the violation of probation charge.

Assistant State’s Attorney Warren Murray, however, maintained that probation officials implicitly have the authority to require such electronic monitoring.

Also, Judge Carroll reinstated the terms of Mr Northrop’s strict probation, which had been in force until he was arrested on June 20.  

Those probation conditions include that Mr Northrop: be evaluated as a sex offender; be registered with the state sex offender registry for at least 20 years; have no contact with the victims of the crimes or their families; comply with AIDS testing; have no unsupervised contact with persons under age 18; have no possession or use of pornographic materials; have no employment requiring that he enter residences alone and have anyone who hires him be informed of why Mr Northrop must be supervised by a co-employee while he is in residences; submit to a psychiatric examination and follow all recommendations for treatment and medication; and abstain from the use of alcohol and drugs, among various other conditions.

Aftermath

Following the August 20 court session, a freed Mr Northrop, who was still wearing Bridgeport Correctional Center prison garb, socialized with his relatives in the late afternoon sunshine in front of the White Street courthouse.

Mr Crozier said Mr Northrop will temporarily be living in Southbury, after which he expects that he will move to Waterbury.

Mr Crozier said there was the prospect that the state might lose its case against Mr Northrop based on his court questioning, which aggressively attacked the reliability of the electronic monitoring device that was worn by Mr Northrop. Consequently, Judge Carroll intervened in the matter and leveraged a plea bargain agreement, Mr Crozier said.

Mr Crozier termed the outcome of the case a “Pyrrhic victory” for Mr Northrop.

“We agreed to it [plea bargain] because it’s the way to end something of this nature,” the lawyer said.

The attorney, however, said that the probation restriction that prevents his client for living in or visiting Newtown is “unconstitutional,” but is not being appealed.

At court on August 20, Ray Ruzek of 17 Maltbie Road said, “The guy [Northrop] has to be in an environment where he has an opportunity to succeed…He needs to be in an adult environment.”

Mr Ruzek observed that while Mr Crozier has said that Mr Northrop has a right to live where he chooses, people’s children also have a right to sleep safely in their beds.

Mr Ruzek has been outspoken about Maltbie Road area residents’ fears about the presence of Mr Northrop in their neighborhood. Maltbie Road is a dead-end side street off Castle Meadow Road, near the Monroe town line.

Following an August 14 court session, Bob Kneen of 32 Maltbie Road said he was very concerned about the safety of his 11/2-year-old daughter, considering Mr Northrop’s residence in the neighborhood. The presence of a sex offender in a neighborhood changes the way that people live, Mr Kneen said.

Ed Hoffman of 14 Maltbie Road said he was concerned about the safety of his two sons, ages 10 and 12.

Another Maltbie Road area resident, who declined to identify himself, said he has four children and is very concerned for their safety.

Yet another man, who preferred to remain anonymous, said he has three small children. “The only reason I’m here [at court] is to protect my children,” he said.