Correspondence from Whelan to Lado Re: Lost Diskette and Robert Crain Study
Correspondence
August 13, 1992

2 pages
Cite this item
-
Connecticut, Case Files, Sheff v. O'Neill Hardbacks. Correspondence from Whelan to Lado Re: Lost Diskette and Robert Crain Study, 1992. 4e2211a5-a246-f011-877a-002248226c06. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/013c4391-e479-404f-9a66-89202191fa16/correspondence-from-whelan-to-lado-re-lost-diskette-and-robert-crain-study. Accessed September 18, 2025.
Copied!
“od } i % " 2 Ll n \ | MacKenzie Hall 110 Sherman Street Hartford, CT 06105 RICHARD BLUMENTHAL ATTORNEY GENERAL FAX (203) 523-5536 Office of The Attorney General % ; Tal: 566-7173 State of Connecticut August 13, 1992 Marianne Engelman Lado, Esq. NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. 99 Hudson Street New York, NY 10013 RE: SHEFF v. O'NEILL/LOST DISKETTE, ROBERT CRAIN STUDY RE - I I I ET I TT LP II IH Dear Marianne: On July 16, 1992 I copied you on letter to Phil Tegeler and Martha Stone in which I explained that the diskette containing the data used by Dr. Robert Crain in his studies was missing. I asked that we be provided with another copy of the diskette. By a letter dated July 21, 1992, Phil Tegeler advised me that you would be in touch with me regarding the diskette. As of this writing, I have not heard from you nor has Dr. Armour received another copy of the diskette. our search for the original diskette has not been successful. We can only speculate it was erroneously discarded. Obviously, we are in need of your cooperation in securing another COpY. The delay in the analysis of the data on the diskette caused by our having lost the item will mean that Dr. Armour will not be able to address questions relating to his review of the data during his upcoming deposition. Unless the plaintiffs wish to forego the opportunity to question Dr. Armour on these matters prior to trial, another date for his deposition will need to be set. This date would have to be set in consideration of the amount of time it will take Dr. Armour to develop an understanding of the data file, decide upon appropriate analyses, and conduct such analyses. Your cooperation in providing us with another copy of the diskette is absolutely essential to the timely completion of the work that needs to be done before the trial. Marianne Engelman Lado, Esq. August 13, 1992 Page 2 1f, for some reason, the plaintiffs have decided not to provide us with another copy of this diskette, please let me know right away. At. that point 1.will be forced to bring ‘this matter to the attention of the court and secure a resolution of whatever issues need to be decided in order to obtain the diskette. Of course, this will further delay necessary trial preparations. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, RIC HERP BLUMENTHAL ATTO REY pe NEBAL BY & oka R. Whelan Asgistant Attorney General JRW: ac cc: "Philip Tegeler, Esq. Martha Stone, Esq. Martha M. Watts, Asst. Atty. Gen. Dr. David Armour