Federal prosecutors are asking a judge to impose a prison term of up to 12 years and seven months on Konstantinos "Kosta" Diamantis, Connecticut's former top school construction official, following his conviction on sweeping public corruption and bribery charges.
The substantial prison recommendation stands in sharp contrast to the leniency sought by the defense. The 70-year-old former state lawmaker and attorney has petitioned the court to spare him from any time behind bars, requesting instead that he be sentenced to home detention coupled with the maximum term of probation.
Diamantis is scheduled to be sentenced on Thursday before U.S. District Judge Stefan Underhill at the federal courthouse in Bridgeport. He has remained free on a $500,000 bond since a jury convicted him last October following a nine-day trial that detailed years of illicit kickbacks surrounding municipal school projects.
The jury found Diamantis guilty on 21 federal counts, including bribery, extortion, conspiracy, and making false statements to federal investigators. The criminal conduct took place between 2018 and 2021, while Diamantis oversaw the state agency responsible for distributing hundreds of millions of dollars in school construction financing.
In their sentencing memorandum, Assistant U.S. Attorneys David E. Novick and Jonathan N. Francis described Diamantis as a calculating public official who engaged in a fundamental betrayal of the trust placed in him by the State of Connecticut. Highlighting his greed and lack of integrity, prosecutors argued that his actions warrant a term within the federal advisory guidelines range of 121 to 151 months in prison.
The government argued that the defendant's corrupt behavior was not an isolated lapse in judgment, pointing to the persistence and duration of the enterprise. Prosecutors noted that Diamantis leveraged his administrative power over state funding to coerce contractors and steer critical municipal awards to those willing to enrich him and his family.
According to the prosecution's filings, the structure of the state's school construction funding program left financially vulnerable and urgent-need communities especially exposed to extortion. In several instances, districts were subjected to contractors selected not for their competence, but because they paid bribes to secure the work.
As one prime example, prosecutors detailed how Diamantis compelled officials in Hartford to hire Middlefield-based Acranom Masonry for the fourth phase of the Weaver High School project. That directive was enforced despite the firm's prior masonry work on the facility being so substandard that significant portions had to be dismantled and redone.
Key trial testimony came from executives of the firms involved in the scheme, both of whom had previously pleaded guilty to federal charges. Antonietta Roy, the owner of Construction Advocacy Professionals, testified that fear of losing valuable school administration contracts led her to pay Diamantis $4,500 in cash and checks, as well as employ his daughter in an administrative role paying $45 per hour for minimal work.
Jurors also evaluated evidence from John Duffy, Diamantis’s former brother-in-law and a vice president at Acranom Masonry. Duffy testified that the company’s successful bid on a municipal school project had been intentionally calculated and budgeted to incorporate a $70,000 payoff directly earmarked for Diamantis.
Diamantis testified in his own defense during the trial, claiming that he had merely operated as an off-hours legal consultant for the construction administration and masonry firms while they were engaged in multimillion-dollar school projects across Hartford and Tolland. The jury ultimately rejected his explanations in favor of the testimony and evidence presented by the government.
In asking the court to reject a custodial term, defense attorney Norm Pattis argued that Diamantis does not minimize the jury's guilty verdict or the breach of public trust. However, Pattis contended that a prison sentence is unnecessary when considering the cumulative effect of Diamantis's advanced age, poor financial standing, family circumstances, and absence of physical dangerousness.
The defense emphasized that Diamantis, who resigned from the Connecticut state bar in February, has suffered complete professional and financial ruin. Under the proposed home detention plan, Pattis noted that Diamantis would remain subject to strict financial monitoring, restitution payments, and explicit prohibitions against ever holding future government employment or profiting from his offenses.
The upcoming sentencing hearing will not mark the end of Diamantis's legal difficulties. The former official is scheduled to face a second federal trial early next year on separate public corruption charges stemming from his subsequent tenure at the Connecticut Office of Policy and Management.
In that pending case, federal prosecutors allege that Diamantis accepted $100,000 in illicit payments to intervene in state operations and quash an active regulatory audit into a Bristol eye care practice that was under investigation for healthcare fraud.
(0)