Federal prosecutors and defense attorneys have presented vastly different visions for the punishment of Konstantinos "Kosta" Diamantis, Connecticut’s former school construction director and former state lawmaker. While the government has called for a sentence of up to 12 years and seven months behind bars, Diamantis is requesting that the court spare him from serving any time in prison.
The conflicting sentencing memorandums come ahead of a scheduled hearing on Thursday before U.S. District Judge Stefan Underhill at the federal courthouse in Bridgeport. The proceeding follows a high-profile trial last autumn that ended with jurors finding Diamantis guilty on 21 counts, including bribery, extortion, conspiracy, and making false statements to federal investigators.
In their formal sentencing submission, Assistant U.S. Attorneys David E. Novick and Jonathan N. Francis argued that the 70-year-old former public official should be sentenced within the federal advisory guidelines range of 121 to 151 months of imprisonment. The prosecution portrayed Diamantis as an unrepentant, calculating actor whose repeated abuse of his official authority constituted an egregious betrayal of the public trust placed in him by the state.
Prosecutors emphasized that Diamantis used his influential post to strong-arm school contractors into paying him illicit cash and securing a high-paying, "low-show" job for his daughter. They argued that a substantial sentence is necessary to penalize his greed, his lack of integrity, and the extended duration of the corruption scheme, which persisted over several years between 2018 and 2021 rather than being an isolated misjudgment.
Conversely, defense attorney Norm Pattis filed a motion imploring the court to reject prison time entirely, urging instead that Diamantis be sentenced to home detention coupled with the maximum allowable term of probation. In his filing, Pattis noted that his client does not seek to minimize the gravity of the jury's verdict or the breach of public faith, but argued that a custodial sentence would serve little additional purpose.
The defense's argument centers on Diamantis’s advanced age, his lack of physical dangerousness, his complete loss of professional standing, and his current financial ruin. Pattis argued that Diamantis has already been stripped of the government position that facilitated the misconduct, has seen his earning power evaporate, and faces heavy familial strains that weigh against incarcerating him for a decade or more.
Under the defense proposal, Diamantis would be subject to stringent post-conviction conditions alongside home confinement. These measures would include total bans on future public employment or government contracting, strict financial oversight and disclosures, court-ordered restitution where appropriate, and legal restrictions preventing him from commercially profiting from his criminal conduct.
The prosecution, however, stressed that Diamantis’s actions inflicted real harm on vulnerable municipalities across Connecticut. Under the state’s school construction financing framework, less-affluent communities and districts in urgent need of facility upgrades were left particularly exposed to his corrupt demands. In several instances, prosecutors stated, local communities were forced to accept contractors chosen not for their competence, but because they agreed to pay kickbacks to Diamantis.
To illustrate this, the government pointed to the Weaver High School renovation project in Hartford. Prosecutors stated that Diamantis compelled city officials to retain Acranom Masonry for the fourth phase of the build, despite the company having previously completed work that was deemed so deficient and shoddy that substantial portions had to be torn out and redone.
During the nine-day trial last October, jurors heard extensive testimony from corporate executives who had already pleaded guilty to federal offenses linked to the scheme. Among them was Antonietta Roy, the owner of Construction Advocacy Professionals, who testified that fear of losing lucrative school project work in Hartford and Tolland compelled her to pay Diamantis $4,500 in cash and checks, while also hiring his daughter for an administrative role paying an inflated rate of $45 per hour.
Witnesses also included John Duffy, who served as vice president of Middlefield-based Acranom Masonry and is Diamantis's former brother-in-law. Duffy testified before the Bridgeport jury that the company’s winning proposal for a school project was intentionally inflated to budget a $70,000 kickback directly earmarked for Diamantis.
Diamantis took the stand during his trial to defend his actions, asserting that his financial dealings were legitimate. He claimed that during his personal off-duty hours, he served as a private legal advisor and consultant to the contractors. Jurors ultimately rejected his narrative, accepting the evidence and witness testimony presented by the government.
The impending sentencing marks a dramatic fall for Diamantis, who once held significant political power as a state representative before rising to oversee the state’s massive school building grants program. Following his convictions in federal court, the long-time attorney formally submitted his resignation from the Connecticut state bar this past February.
Diamantis remains released on a $500,000 bond while awaiting Judge Underhill’s sentencing decision on Thursday. However, his legal battles will not conclude with this case, as federal authorities have prepared a separate public corruption indictment against him set for trial early next year.
That pending second trial involves allegations stemming from Diamantis’s tenure at the Connecticut Office of Policy and Management. In that case, federal prosecutors allege that he accepted $100,000 in illicit payments to halt a state audit into a Bristol-based eye care practice that was under investigation for healthcare fraud.
(0)