Mass Arrests Make Front Page of Keene Sentinel
Here’s the article. Thanks to reporter Anika Clark and photojournalist Michael Moore for covering yesterday’s oppression:
A bit of commotion is nothing new in the courtroom.
But on Monday, the action was in the Keene District Court lobby, where five people were arrested and two were handed summonses on charges of disorderly conduct.
The hubbub started shortly before the arraignment of Dave Ridley, who was arrested in March, accused of refusing to turn off his video camera in the court lobby before attending the arraignment of a marijuana activist.
According to Ian “Freeman” Bernard of the Free State Project — a movement that bills itself on its Web site as a push to recruit 20,000 “liberty-loving people” to New Hampshire — about 15-20 activists had flocked to the court to attend Ridley’s arraignment.
Among them, said Bernard and others on the scene, was Samuel Dodson, who was arrested after allegedly refusing to turn off a video camera in the lobby.
Throughout the process, Keene police Sgt. Eliezer Rivera said, Dodson declined to give police his name — or even to stand up — and was booked as John Doe.
But when he started yelling from behind closed doors, activists demanded to know what was happening. Dodson was lying on the floor in what Rivera described as “passive resistance.”
“(Dodson) was screaming and we had no idea what was going on,” said 18-year-old Patrick S. Shields of Keene.
Standing between the crowd and the conference room door, Rivera told the activists they needed to leave or they’d be given summonses.
Some complied. Others lingered and within minutes, additional police had arrived in the lobby.
People who gave their names, such as 55-year-old Richard T. Onley and Nicholas Ryder, 27, were issued summonses. Others who declined, like Shields, were handcuffed and taken to the Keene police station.
As Dodson reportedly did, Shields went limp during his arrest and had to be carried out of the building. He later told The Sentinel he thought this was the only way he could refrain from complying with the police’s orders without actively resisting.
As for refusing to give his name to the officer, Shields said, “If I’d said my name without thinking of the consequences, then that would just be obeying authority without questioning it.”
One thing Shields did question, however, was how he could be charged with disorderly conduct when, he said, he was simply sitting on a lobby bench when he was arrested.
“I’m trying to send a message to the city of Keene that violence against peaceful people is unacceptable,” Shields said of his actions Monday.
Also arrested and brought to the Keene police station were Nicholas D. Krouse, 27, Kurt W. Hoffman, 38, and Timothy Danforth, 23.
“This is the first time I’ve been arrested and what (police) do is uncalled for,” Krouse said. “They’re going behind closed doors and then expecting us to just accept their answers as proof positive that everything’s (okay).”
Hoffman — who said he was was one of a slew of people who stood with protest signs outside the Cheshire County jail in Westmoreland, where Dodson was being held Monday afternoon — echoed him.
While Dodson was sequestered in the district court conference room, “I wanted to go see him and see if he was all right. It sounded like he was being abused,” Hoffman said. “(Police) wouldn’t let us know anything.”
But Rivera said isolating Dodson from the rest of the crowd represented a “safety” measure.
“I didn’t have a choice but to tell people … ‘you need to leave,’ ” he said, adding that as police were arresting Dodson, “We don’t want them on top of us.”
In reference to what was happening in the court conference room, he said, “As soon as (Dodson) was touched by a police (officer), he would start yelling.
“In my opinion, he was trying to get attention,” Rivera said, while saying that a certain amount of police force is necessary to deal with someone who is lying, dead weighted, on the floor.
Regardless of whether Shields was sitting or standing at the time of his arrest, Rivera said, “he did not leave.”
And as for filming in the lobby, he said that this space is an extension of the courtroom — and is filled, at times, by people attending to other business in city hall or by children and victims of rape or domestic violence.
“The last thing a … victim of domestic violence wants is someone with a camera recording them,” Rivera said.
While not specifically outlined in N.H. district court rules — which allow media, in most cases, to videotape or record public court proceedings — state judicial branch spokeswoman Laura A. Kiernan said it’s general practice not to allow videotaping in court hallways.
“We’ve talked about this at length and the Free Staters know that,” she said. “We’re doing the best we can to maintain civility, security and orderly behavior in our courthouses.”
But, according to Rivera, the commotion on Monday was anything but.
“Basically, it brought the court process to a halt,” he said.
Still, Krouse pointed his finger back at law enforcement.
“We did not represent a threat,” he said. “The waste of police resources was entirely the fault of the police.”
Dodson was scheduled to be arraigned this morning in Keene District Court.
Comments
30 Comments on Mass Arrests Make Front Page of Keene Sentinel
“The last thing a … victim of domestic violence wants is someone with a camera recording them,” Rivera said.
The truth:
The last thing a power mad judge wants is someone recording him.
Oh yes Rivera the standard “women and children” argument, how very clever.
The photo is a real winner. I hope Patrick was not hurt.
Looks like Rivera will get the next recruitment award… He’s not very smart because if he thinks he had his hands full now, just wait another few months, a year–activists will be flocking to Keene like flies on a ribroast. Apparently, he gets his rocks off by treating people like children–finish your plate or you’re gonna get timeout.
Hi Guys,
Wow, what a ridiculous show of force by the cops. What is really enlightening about all of this is the fact that the cops seem to think that they are going waaaayyy out of their way to be nice to the activists. It’s like the moral circuitry in their brain is badly damaged. That said, they seem like nice people as individuals and they also seem like much better than average cops.
I have submitted the Keene story to Drudge. Lets hope he posts it!
JTP
Fair and balanced story, but they need more and bigger pictures.
Did anyone else get a laught at the comments posted by “Arch” ??
Gotta love one-size-fits-all government “services”. How long would it take in the marketplace to figure out how to allow video taping for clients who wish it and not for those who don’t?
Yes, what a clever little tyrant.
Spew the cliched lines about how some child rape victim will be filmed.
What a douche.
No intelligent person buys such crap.
The judge and all those bureaucrats are just trying to hide behind thier curtains like the Wizard of Oz.
Big Thanks to Officer/Prosecutor Rivera! Without question, he has speeded up this Liberty Movement Big time!
And what a load of Crap about him saying he didn’t want “domestic violence” victims being recorded in the hallway. Is that the best BS story he could come up with? Guess so. Well Let it be an indicator of his “genuis.”
It looks like every peaceful interaction with this Cop/Prosecutor (who’s really wound tight), is going to be an invaluable tool for sending the recruitment new mover numbers over the top! 
Some food for thought:
Whether a large number of Cheshire County citizens would read the Sentinel story/see the attached pictures and come to the conclusion that a symbolic and important demonstration of the “tyrannical and violent nature of government” occurred is questionable. In that sense, sites like this one aren’t all that relevant, as it tends to be an echo chamber. It is just as likely that the majority of people reading the story would jump to the conclusion “Oh yeah, it’s those nuts carrying on again”. And it’s also quite possible that many people don’t view the situation through the rigid lens of so many posting here. For instance, there is a necessity to have a significant degree of transparency in our legal system; at the same time, an environment in which the issues under consideration can be examined soberly and rationally is important, and it is reasonable for those who have been given the responsibility to create and maintain such an environment to take reasonable steps to do so. Who disturbed that environment at the Keene District Court, a reactionary official or a small group of people desperate for attention? Maybe a bit of both; the official has to meet a higher standard of restraint, but if a group is determined to physically infringe upon the rights of others to have their day in court in a non-chaotic setting, then more forceful measures might have to be used. Ultimately, the polity will make judgements over time as to whether the right balance is being struck, in a process that is decidedly imperfect. Alternatives?
Amazed,
The chaos was not caused by activists, who were peaceably videotaping, but by the prosecutor and police, who made the scene chaotic. The activists were not infringing on anyone’s rights, nor reducing the sobriety or rationality of the court environment — merely exercising their right to an open, public trial, and of the freedom of the press. There is no reason that a public trial can’t be reasoned, sober, and recorded for maximum transparency.
By the way, I responded to your questions on the thread here, and would be interested in your thoughts, as well as your response to my question: http://freekeene.com/2009/04/12/keene-police-take-car-off-private-property/#comments
I do appreciate your more reasoned tone.
“The chaos was not caused by activists, who were peaceably videotaping, but by the prosecutor and police, who made the scene chaotic.”
Paul,
Probably a matter of opinion, wouldn’t you say? Can’t we reasonably assume the prosecutor and police saw it otherwise? I’ve looked at the tape, and it looked to me like a situation in which both entities were doing that tango, and both could claim provocation.
“The activists were not infringing on anyone’s rights, nor reducing the sobriety or rationality of the court environment — merely exercising their right to an open, public trial, and of the freedom of the press. ”
Again, this is a subjective assessment. The environment the protesters ended up creating seemed quite chaotic to me, and honestly it seems to me that that was the point. I mean, look at all the excited rhetoric on this site today – “Fascism Explodes at Keene Court”, references to “Mass Arrests” and “Torture” – it’s all so overblown that it smacks of having achieved a goal. On the other hand, I wish the court officials wouldn’t take the bait so easily. It may be that the movement is such a minimal element that when the officials are confronted by it, they forget how to best deal with it.
In terms of what meets the standard of a public trial, I would be very surprised if a majority of constitutional scholars (and case law) found that allowing individual citizens to videotape a trial was a requirement for meeting that standard. In terms of cameras in the courtroom generally, I am ambivalent. I would agree that the more power is cloistered, the more easily it can be used abusively. At the same time, human behavior can be profoundly affected by the presence of cameras, and not always in a positive direction. In my view, many of these celebrity trials have become travesties of justice because of judges and lawyers playing to the cameras. Imagine being Ron Goldman’s father; a guy slits your beloved son’s throat, and yet when the case comes to trial, it becomes the hottest show on cable, a complete human circus. I would think this would be much less of a hazard in non-celebrity cases. Then again, what if it’s a case involving sexual assault, and the defendant really did do the deed? The woman has been raped once, and now the whole world gets to see her and know about it.
Sorry, but I guess I see these as judgement calls in which absolutes have limited relevance.
AnAmazedReader
If I remember correctly the person whom is the victim in cases with a sexual nature can ask for cameras to be removed from the courtroom.
Question please answer: If you don’t believe that normal people should have the right to video tape the court what about the media?
Amazed,
To my knowledge, there is no videotape of the incident in the courthouse — only the subsequent arrests, so what were you watching?
To say, “The environment the protesters ended up creating” is incredibly disingenuous, as if the police and prosecutor are not humans with moral responsibility, but rather a force of nature who bear no responsibility for their actions. No matter your opinion of the activism, it’s obviously clear the eventual environment was almost entirely due to the actions of the prosecutor and police. The activists, as best I can tell, were only recording — and many were not even doing that. The eventual environment was obviously most directly caused by the arrests.
I do agree that “torture” may be overblown. I would like to hear Sam’s account before forming a judgment on that. It is unnecessary to carry a person by their arms held behind their back, however, especially with the personnel available. I myself don’t use the word “Fascism” , because I think it is easily misunderstood. I think the term “Mass Arrests” is appropriate though, especially for Keene.
I would not describe the rhetoric as having achieved a goal, I think it is more shock and outrage than anything. I think few would be surprised had something similar to what had happened to Ridley happened to Sam. To arrest bystanders, however, and to go so much further against Sam, was both surprising and disappointing.
NH law is reasonable on this point, I think, and says that cameras should be allowed unless there are extenuating circumstances, like perhaps celebrities or rape victims. There was absolutely no justifiable reason to exclude cameras in this case, nor did the court follow the legally required procedure to do so.
As I said elsewhere:
To broadly disalow cameras in the courtroom is a gross violation of Rule 1.4 (a): The presiding judge should permit the media to photograph, record and broadcast all courtroom proceedings that are open to the public. The presiding judge may limit electronic media coverage if there is a substantial likelihood of harm to any person or other harmful consequence.
Furthermore, in Keene Sentinel 136 N.H. 121, it was ruled court records and proceedings are open by default, and that the “burden of proof rests with the party seeking disclosure or non disclosure of court records to demonstrate some overriding consideration that outweighs the public’s right of access”
You are right that in general, openness is preferable, but there could be extreme circumstances where the privacy of the victim should be protected. The thing is, the court demonstrated no such circumstance in this case, nor were there any other cases at that time.
It’s a simple case of abuse of power, as we have seen many times, on all levels of government. To assign blame for the situation to those peacefully video recording, instead of those who responded with force and violence, is absurd, in my view. You only do so because you have a strong bias for government.
Reverse the roles, and perhaps this would be clear to you. Suppose the prosecutor was videotaping the activists, at which point they dragged him off in handcuffs and put him in a cage.
Of course they would not do so, because as best I know none of them support this kind of violence — but you would be rightfully outraged, as would I.
P.S. Also, please respond to my post on the other thread, when you get a chance. Thanks
With the jump from hyperbole to outright lies (“torture”) you guys are coming off as a bunch of punks looking for attention rather than adults with a serious purpose.
If your friend was screaming in pain in another room and his captors refused to allow you to verify his well being, you might fairly conclude torture as well.
Vix,
“If I remember correctly the person whom is the victim in cases with a sexual nature can ask for cameras to be removed from the courtroom.”
This is a policy I agree with on humanitarian grounds, but I could easily craft an argument that such an exception is arbitrary. For instance, what if you are a defendant in a sex case, you’ve been falsely accused, and the victim has asked for cameras to be removed from the courtroom, even as you feel that your chances of rightful acquittal (or at least a fair trial) are increased if the judge and the prosecutor know that the public is looking over their shoulders? Rights in conflict.
“Question please answer: If you don’t believe that normal people should have the right to video tape the court what about the media?”
I know of no inherent right for a citizen to videotape court proceedings, and I would imagine there is all sorts of case law confirming a judge’s prerogative regarding preserving the sobriety and dignity of his/her courtroom (whether he/she actually does so is another question). The need for a “public trial” may be satisfied simply by allowing people to attend, even as they might be subject to various restrictions. For instance, I’m assuming that a judge wouldn’t allow a live telecast of the proceedings with a commentator giving a live, blow-by-blow description of the festivities from within the courtroom; it would obviously disrupt the proceedings, so the hypothetical reporter’s free-speech rights in that instance are squelched and an opportunity for transparency is lost, all in the name of hopefully running a fair and coherent trial. All of which is to say that I see both the public and the media having certain rights in terms of access to court proceedings, but these rights don’t exist in a vacuum, and as such might be compromised in order to acknowledge rights in other areas.
Oliver, I see you and a couple other keep referring to liberty activists as “childish”.
Now, the way I was raised, the childish thing to do is to threaten people (or hurt them) when you don’t get your way. We called it “bullying” back then.
Whereas the adult thing to do is to try to convince and persuade people using reason, rather than threats.
It seems to me that it is the government that is childish. They are so bereft of ideas that they have to result to hurting people to get their way. The folks that were arrested today were doing nothing more than helping to keep our courts open and honest, and were willing to risk arrest and imprisonment to do so. A secretive court system is anathema to a free society.
Incidentally, isn’t it great to see how wisely the City of Keene is using tax victim money? I guess there aren’t any unsolved violent crimes left in Keene huh?
Comment by MKYORDJ
April 14, 2009 @ 4:27 pm
Big Thanks to Officer/Prosecutor Rivera! Without question, he has speeded up this Liberty Movement Big time!
And what a load of Crap about him saying he didn’t want “domestic violence” victims being recorded in the hallway. Is that the best BS story he could come up with? Guess so. Well Let it be an indicator of his “genuis.”
—
I supposed the “established” media (who are allowed to move freely throughout the building and film anywhere they like), would have some “magical” sort of filter on their camera lenses that would block out any images of said domestic violence victims.
If they don’t have such a device, then the whole crew needs to explain themselves as to just why it is only the freedom activist media that has to follow such unsigned and absurd diktat.
Dan
Amazed,
The City of Keene broke the law by Not allowing a memeber of the Press (SamIam) to record.
And on top of that, The Government illegally put him in a Cage, when they, the Government, were the only ones who broke the law.
Can you not see this? And are you OK with the your Government following only the laws they want to, when the want to?
Amazed,
Rights do not conflict. If two rights seem to conflict, one is not a right. Put another way, you never have a right to infringe on the rights of others.
You are right to note that sometimes these issues can become somewhat complicated. I think it was quite clear in this case, however, that no rights were being trampled by recording, as no objection by a plantiff was even filed. As NH law says, there must be a clear and overriding reason to prohibit cameras in the court. Furthermore, the degree of force used in this incedent was completely uncalled for. As I say, reverse the roles and see what you think of it.
Really, I think part of the difficulty comes because a court situation, even in a free market, implies that someone’s rights are already being violated. If the defendant is innocent, his/her rights have been violated, and if the defendent is guilty, he/she has already violated the rights of the victim.
In most cases, however, the non agression principle makes one’s rights fairly obvious.
Slavery continues to exist because of horizontal abuse from within the slave masses. The people in government don’t have enough guns or bodies to enforce taxes or any other coercive measure; the people in government rely on the enslaved to punish their own for speaking out against the slavery. This is as true for statists as it is for minarchists. If a person supports the use of coercion, he supports slavery and is helping the slave masters.
“We’re not slaves; now stop thinking and obey!”
Pretty disgusting behavior by the cops and the (ahem!) elected (and hopefully, soon to be unelected) sheriff.
Want to really get back at them and prevent this from happening again? Get a majority on the City Council and then the porcupines will be controlling their purse strings.
Best… solution… ever!
eagle, you’re saying we should respond to their initiation of force with another initiation of force. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. I don’t think that’s an effective way to promote the voluntary society.
George,
I know many on this site don’t approve of working within government to change it, and there are some understandable arguments for such a stance.
However, working within government in order to reduce its power and scope is not an initiation of force. One could argue that it’s perhaps an acknowledgement of legitimacy, but it’s not the same as an initiation of force.
Those who care about liberty should be encouraged to do anything they can to reduce the tyranny of government, so long as they’re being peaceful.
Given that everything government does is an initiation of force, how can you work within it and keep your hands clean?
Even in the best case scenario you’re just wasting your time.
George I think collectivism may be taking its toll on you =) Not all individuals within the government are Nazi foot soldiers. While Government as an institution requires the initiation of force in order to operate, if a man can act to prevent it from operating, he is, perhaps by definition, preventing the initiation of force.
If one can use the government’s own rules and processes to dismantle it, not only will I defend that person but I will applaud him.
Erik, what do the Nazis have to do with this?
So your plan is to subvert government by going undercover? Why not just let it collapse under the weight of its own contradictions?
Govt rewrites its own rules when it suits it.
Please don’t waste your time. I’m certain you have better things to do.
Post your comment below. Login in the far right column to get rid of CAPTCHA. If you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
Want to discuss rather than just comment? Visit the Free Keene Forum.
Supporters of FK
Recent Forum Topics- Keene City Council Contact Info February 8, 2012
- Pledged Free-stater heading to "The Shire" later this year February 8, 2012
- FBI is watching February 7, 2012
- New February 7, 2012
- Free Minds Radio 02/05/2012 February 5, 2012
- HELP . . . Still unable to access . . . February 5, 2012
- Marijuana decrim bills up for vote February 5, 2012
- Episode 35 - Anarch-Elitism February 5, 2012
- HB 1533 -- fines for hurting legislators' feelings February 4, 2012
- HB 1494 -- "Your papers, please" February 4, 2012
- Recent Forum Posts
- Re: Keene City Council Contact Info February 9, 2012
- Re: What I wrote to the Chief of Police in town of Weare February 9, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam Dodson February 9, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam Dodson February 9, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam Dodson February 8, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam and New angle on trolling? Hmm. February 8, 2012
- Re: Bearcat petition at city council meeting February 8, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam Dodson February 8, 2012
- Re: Keene City Council Contact Info February 8, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam and New angle on trolling? Hmm. February 8, 2012