The Connecticut General Assembly Judiciary Committee voted to approve resolutions authorizing a $3,750,000 settlement in the federal lawsuit brought by the estate of Carl Talbot against state correctional staff and others, the committee heard at a Feb. 14, 2025 public meeting.

Deputy Attorney General Eileen Meskell told the committee the settlement was the office’s recommendation after reviewing video and deposition evidence in Colleen Lord, administratrix of the estate of Carl Talbot v. Carlos Padro et al. “We appreciate the opportunity to testify today in support of our recommendation to settle the case,” Meskell said during opening remarks.

The lawsuit stems from Talbot’s arrest and incarceration at the New Haven Correctional Facility in March 2019. According to testimony and the record the committee reviewed, Talbot was agitated inside a housing unit, was sprayed three times with oleoresin capsicum (OC) spray by correctional staff, and was restrained. Staff attempted periodic checks; about an hour later Talbot was found unresponsive and later pronounced dead at a hospital. The department’s materials and testimony said Talbot was 30 years old at the time and that the medical examiner listed atherosclerotic and hypertensive cardiovascular disease, morbid obesity and asthma among findings noted in the death certificate.

The settlement package presented to the committee includes nonmonetary components. The attorney general’s office said the plaintiff, Colleen Lord, will participate in correctional training: she will deliver an in-person presentation and provide a training video for supervisors as part of the agreement. The Department of Correction’s witness told the committee the agency will reopen an internal probe into alleged falsified incident reports and will pursue policy and training changes, including expanded review of investigations that reach the commissioner’s office and consideration of body-worn cameras.

Committee members pressed the attorney general and Department of Correction officials on several issues: whether medical records had been checked before OC spray was used (witnesses said that check was not performed), whether decontamination procedures were followed (they were not), the proximity and duration of the OC discharges (witnesses said some sprays were discharged at about six inches and not as the one-second bursts required by policy), and why falsified documents were not identified earlier in the agency’s review. The committee heard that some incident checklists and reports had been falsified and that internal investigators could not determine who authored some false entries.

The committee also discussed criminal proceedings. Witnesses said Lieutenant Carlos Padro pleaded guilty to an assault charge related to the incident, was suspended on the day of the event and retired shortly thereafter. The attorney general’s office stated it does not represent Lt. Padro in this litigation and that the proposed settlement includes broad release language to prevent further exposure to the state from any remaining claims tied to the incident.

Several lawmakers voiced deep dissatisfaction with including a state employee alleged to have committed serious wrongdoing within the scope of a taxpayer-funded settlement; Representative Craig Fishbein said, “I can’t support this.” Other members said a jury verdict could exceed the settlement amount and voted to approve the resolutions to avoid that litigation risk while pressing for stronger accountability and policy changes.

The committee voted to recommend both a senate resolution (SR 13) and a house resolution (HR 14) approving the settlement and release agreement. The meeting transcript records the motions, discussion and roll-call roll calls begun for SR 13 and HR 14; the committee recessed for a caucus before completing separate roll calls for each chamber.