The Crumbie Report is Unprofessional, Blue Injustice: The Defamation of Erin Stewart (5)

The Report prepared by the Crumbie Law Group is a clusterfuck of libelous accusations based on circumstantial evidence.

Let's unpack it.

They were hired to:

"On January 14, 2026, this firm was engaged by the City of New Britain, CT (the “city”) to conduct a comprehensive review of certain city operations with the goal of identifying opportunities to improve efficiency and fiscal sustainability. An initial review of internal city records revealed documented reports that raised concerns about the Revenue Collector’s Office. As a result of these findings, our review was expanded to include an investigation into the city’s Purchasing Card Program, which began in June 2016. "

This is called scope creep. The fact that this "investigation" isolates one of  ninety three such cards is curious in and of itself. But okay, P-Card spending and compliance across the board might be a place where the City could benefit from improving its policies or practices (that *is* the point of this partisan report, correct?)

So what about the other 92 cards? The exercise of analyzing the entire range of P-Card spending is important because the pattern that a legitimate law firm engaged in a legitimate concern for systemic recalibration would be looking for.

For example, expenses listed as office supplies. A decade or two ago, office supplies amounted to paper, paper clips, ink, pencils and pens. In State office buildings where State employees held birthday parties, well..., paper plates, balloons, and some noise makers occasionally slipped their way in.

But in digital times and now AI times, a lot of that stuff is obsolete. In fact, technical obsolescence is a way of life for anyone and certainly every office. Floppy disks, CDs, speakers, microphones, and junk drawers full of wires, connectors, and technically ancient junk plague our society. Yet, the Inspector Clueseau apparatchiks at Crumbie Law Firm spare no quarter in examining these fine details to conclude that the disappearance of this stuff into somebody's junk drawer is a sure sign of malicious theft.

And what do P-Cards have to do with efficiency and fiscal sustainability?

The answer is that they can be used to establish a continuously updating metric of what's important and what's not.

Instead of attacking individuals a report like this might suggest that the 'office supply' expense category needs to be reimagined and in the case of the audits of 93 P-Cards will expose many, many dubiously listed expense that need attention.

There already existed a procedure for ensuring correct usage of these cards, The fact that nobody in charge of that responsibility did their jobs *is* the opportunity crony Crumbie's law firm is looking for even as its stuck to its nose.

In fact, the report itself admits that "Given the role of the Director of Finance, particularly as it relates to oversight responsibilities of the P-Card Program, the various Directors of Finance that served in the role during the period covered in this investigation should have known of the abuse that was ongoing with Ms. Stewart’s P-Card; however, there is no record indicating Ms. Stewart’s P-Card use was ever suspended nor restricted in any way."

Wow. No foul, no harm. Furthermore, the City itself seems to have no documentation of who and how much was reimbursed, "There is no evidence that Ms. Stewart reimbursed the city for this or any other expenditure referenced herein. See Exhibit C [Hartford Club Statement 10/31/2017]. "

This document which should read like an investigatory set of unbiased facts in fact reads like a defamatory, prosecutorial narrative. Instead of referring to questionable purchases, lack of receipts, and erroneous multiple choice checkbox characterizations of purchases (falsely documented), this -cough- report is laced with libelous allegations.

This report that has no business being an accusatory or prosecutorial exercise is the first instance of exposing Erin Stewart to double jeopardy by polluting any jury pool that will need to determine whether or not the spending anomalies were criminally motivated or simply administrative oversights.

The libel and defamation doesn't end there. This report opened the door to both the mainstream media and the rabid social media outlets to legitimize the idea that Erin Stewart exercised nothing but criminal intent. The double jeopardy was amplified exponentially. The lesson here might be that DEI legal firms have no interest in the ethical pursuit of justice at all. Blue justice is sado-masochistic.

The Hartford Club

Crumbie claims that the Hartford Club membership is an illegitimate expense. It was during the Stewart administration that the long debated and finally completed Hartford-New Britain Busway opened. Given the cost, risks, and responsibilities involved, the participation of Erin Stewart in the Hartford Club has a perfectly legitimate justification. The Club which was formerly all male represents an important footprint for New Britain to have representation in. Attracting business, improving neighboring community involvement, and so on in a highly professional environment makes plenty of sense.

Rather than provide this context, CLF who seems to think their job is to mug the politicians they are there to provide better guidance to chooses the low road of asserting criminal intent.

Food and Drink

In reports like this I would expect that baseline expenditures would be compared to the expenditures that they are reporting on and calling "fraud". That's apparently too much work.

Regardless of where the goods were delivered during work at home conditions (oh, they fail to mention that as well), Stewart's expenses are ballpark average under the circumstances.

Gotcha!

The report goes on to speculate that Facebook family pictures illustrate the items they have decided are ineligible to be carded. Again, this has nothing to do with efficiency and better management of City finances, this is a targeted, very personalized and invasive attack on family privacy.

What the report should be doing is to say that the City's Financial Officers need to review questionable purchases carded to the City's card and create a restitution plan for anything that should have been caught earlier.

The fact that this so-called report, reads like a vicious and highly speculative, partisan paid attack on a mayor who was never given due process regarding these purchases in real-time  calls into question whether this material should be reviewed by the State Bar.