Former Connecticut Official Calls Payments Fees; Prosecutor Questions Secrecy

The federal corruption trial of former Connecticut school construction chief Konstantinos “Kosta” Diamantis is drawing intense attention across the state.

In court, Diamantis defended receiving tens of thousands of dollars from two contractors. He insisted the transactions were legitimate fees for legal and consulting work.

Find Your Ideal Getaway in Connecticut
Explore top-rated stays with no booking fees and instant confirmation. Your dream trip starts here!
Start Exploring Now

Prosecutors painted a far different picture. They used text messages, financial records, and witness testimony to suggest the payments were tied to his official role overseeing school building projects in towns across Connecticut.

High-Stakes Testimony in a Federal Courtroom

Diamantis once managed multimillion-dollar school construction initiatives in communities such as Tolland, Hartford, New Haven, and Bristol.

He told jurors the contractor payments had nothing to do with his state position. He accused prosecutors of twisting his personal and professional dealings.

The defense says there was no binding business relationship that required disclosure under state ethics laws.

Prosecutors Challenge Legitimacy of Payments

Assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan Francis pressed Diamantis on why he failed to report these payments on his tax filings and state ethics forms.

Francis presented text messages in which Diamantis appeared to pressure contractors into making payments. One message showed him threatening to replace Acranom Masonry on a Tolland school project unless money was provided.

Diamantis admitted to making the threat but claimed it was empty since he didn’t have hiring authority.

Disputed Role and Contractor Testimony

Central to the prosecution’s case is the testimony of contractor Edward D’Amato Jr.

D’Amato flatly denied that Diamantis had performed legal work or brokered any business deals for him. This directly contradicts Diamantis’ claims that the tens of thousands received were rightful compensation for professional services.

Text Messages Raise Red Flags

Among the evidence were messages allegedly sent by Diamantis requesting cash payments. He also advised recipients to delete certain exchanges and discussed payments to his daughter from a contractor involved in school construction.

In towns from Manchester to Norwalk, these revelations have stirred public debates over transparency and accountability in municipal building projects.

Diamantis’ Denials and Courtroom Drama

Diamantis has denied wrongdoing, describing some of the incriminating text messages as jokes or misunderstandings.

His defense team pushed back against the prosecution’s aggressive questioning style, filing a motion for a mistrial. The judge quickly rejected that motion and urged both sides to keep the focus on evidence.

Broader Implications for Connecticut Governance

The trial has implications for cities such as Waterbury, Bridgeport, and Stamford, where large-scale school construction projects are ongoing or planned.

A guilty verdict could trigger reviews of oversight procedures, ethics training, and contractor vetting processes statewide.

Public Reaction Across Connecticut

Residents in communities like Danbury and Tolland are watching closely.

Many worry that alleged misconduct at the state level could impact the cost and quality of local school facilities. Parents and educators have voiced frustration that these controversies can stall much-needed infrastructure improvements.

Key Allegations in Focus

As the trial continues, several focal points dominate the discussion:

Unreported income from contractors allegedly working on projects Diamantis oversaw.
Ethics disclosure gaps despite receiving substantial payments.
Threats to replace contractors if money demands were not met.
Payments involving family members, raising potential nepotism concerns.
Contradictions between Diamantis’ testimony and contractors’ accounts.
Text message instructions to delete communications.
A claimed lack of hiring authority versus apparent influence over contracts.
Tensions between prosecution and defense prompting a judicial warning.

Looking Ahead

The trial isn’t over yet, and more witnesses are expected to testify.

This case will probably keep making headlines in Hartford and beyond for a while. For Connecticut residents, it’s a sharp reminder that transparency and ethical conduct matter—especially when taxpayer dollars are on the line for school projects.

Final Thoughts

Whether Diamantis gets cleared or convicted, the outcome won’t just stay in one place. It’ll ripple out from New Haven all the way to Stamford.

This whole thing highlights how fragile the balance is between professional ties, political power, and public trust. When that balance tips, confidence in state and local government can take a serious hit—and honestly, it might stay shaken for years.

Here is the source article for this story: Ex-CT official accused of bribery: Money he took was ‘fees.’ Prosecutor: then why was it secret?

Discover Your Perfect Stay in Connecticut
Find available hotels and vacation homes instantly. No fees, best rates guaranteed!
Check Availability Now