Family of missing Billy Smolinski argues posters protected by First Amendment Supreme Court hears appeal of defamation verdict

PETER CASOLINO — NEW HAVEN REGISTER FILE PHOTO Jan and Bill Smolinski of Cheshire are still looking for answers in the disappearance of their son, Billy. PETER CASOLINO — NEW HAVEN REGISTER FILE PHOTO Jan and Bill Smolinski of Cheshire are still looking for answers in the disappearance of their son, Billy. Photo: Journal Register Co. Photo: Journal Register Co. Image 1 of / 3 Caption Close Family of missing Billy Smolinski argues posters protected by First Amendment 1 / 3 Back to Gallery

HARTFORD >> The state Supreme Court heard arguments Monday in a civil case related to the disappearance of William “Billy” Smolinski Jr. of Waterbury, whose relatives hope the court will overturn a ruling that ordered them to pay $52,666 to Smolinski’s former girlfriend.

Madeleine Gleason of Woodbridge, who dated Smolinski until they broke up just prior to his Aug. 24, 2004, disappearance, sued his mother, Janice Smolinski of Cheshire, and his sister, Paula Bell, in 2006, claiming they harassed, defamed and falsely accused her of involvement in his disappearance.

In 2012, Superior Court Judge Thomas Corradino awarded the money to Gleason for intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation and punitive damages.

In March 2014, the state Appellate Court upheld Corradino’s ruling, prompting the Smolinski family’s current appeal to the state Supreme Court.

A decision isn’t expected for a few months.

Gleason, a school bus driver, claimed the Smolinski family harassed her, such as by putting missing person posters about Billy along her school bus route and near her home, over a long period of time.

The Smolinski family said they put up missing person posters throughout the state, solely to try to find Billy, and they argued on appeal that doing so is protected under the First Amendment.

Attorney Steven Kelly of Maryland, who represents Janice Smolinski and Bell, noted in his argument Monday the missing person posters do not make any reference to Gleason, and they were posted in public places. The family noticed their posters were disappearing, and they were shocked to learn Gleason was removing them, according to Kelly.

Kelly urged the Supreme Court to read all the police reports related to Billy’s disappearance.

“These reports show Madeleine Gleason was one of the last people to see Billy Smolinski alive,” Kelly said.

Kelly noted one of Billy Smolinski’s last actions before his disappearance was to threaten Chris Sorensen of Woodbridge. According to police reports, Sorensen was also seeing Gleason, and Billy Smolinski had just learned about their relationship. Sorensen received a phone message from Billy Smolinski on Aug. 24, 2004, saying, “Chris, you better watch your back at all times,” police reports show.

Gleason admitted during the civil trial that she ripped down posters because they were “saturating” areas where she lived and worked.

Kelly said Monday Gleason injected herself into the controversy when she ripped down posters and defaced them.

“These posters were all over the place, including in other states,” Kelly said. “My client was trying to put up posters to find her son, and Madeleine Gleason was trying to shut her down.”

In his brief to the court, Kelly said missing person campaigns serve a vital purpose to society, and are deserving of First Amendment protection.

“The missing person posters have yielded, and continue to yield, tips concerning Billy’s whereabouts,” he wrote.

In its ruling, the Appellate Court indicated, “the court concluded, and we agree, that the context and placement of the posters was designed to ‘hound’ (Gleason) into providing the defendants with information about the disappearance of Bill Smolinski, rather than to raise a matter of public concern.”

At Monday’s court proceeding, attorney John Williams of New Haven, who represents Gleason, asserted the Smolinski family intentionally put posters up near where his client lived and worked to cause her emotional distress.

“We are not alleging that the content of the posters was tortious,” Williams said. “At issue, is that they were plastered where (my client) lived and worked.”

In his brief, Williams wrote, “The posters were strategically placed to have maximum effect on the plaintiff. Whenever she moved to a new house, posters would saturate the area immediately adjacent. If the plaintiff removed them, they would reappear the following day.”

Williams said the evidence is sufficient to establish his client has “no knowledge whatsoever concerning the disappearance of Billy Smolinski.”

Williams asserted to the Supreme Court there is “no evidence in this case there has been a murder or even a death.”

Billy Smolinski’s body has never been found.

Police have said they believe the 31-year-old was murdered. Police have indicated they believe Gleason’s son, Shaun Karpiuk, killed Smolinski. Karpiuk died in 2005 of a drug overdose.

Chad Hanson, 35, who has been identified in court documents as a suspect in Smolinski’s disappearance, has led police to conduct unsuccessful searches for Smolinski’s body in Seymour, Oxford and the Naugatuck State Forest. Hanson is incarcerated, following his conviction for making a false statement for lying to police about the location of Smolinski’s body. Hanson is due to be released in March 2017, according to the state Department of Correction.

According to an arrest warrant affidavit, Hanson told police he helped Karpiuk bury Smolinski, and told police he “knows for a fact that Shaun killed Billy with a 16 oz. hammer.”

In May 2014, two cadaver detection dogs alerted at a location in Beacon Falls, which the Smolinskis chose to check based on a prison tip that seemed credible. Police were not involved in the Beacon Falls search. The family told police about the tip and the dogs’ reaction.

Janice Smolinski said Monday police still haven’t searched where the dogs alerted.

“We are still looking for police participation,” she said.