Cheshire County Superior Court Decisions in State v. Jason Talley

February 19, 2012 by Bradley Jardis
Filed under: Court, Update

This blog is made pursuant to NH Rules of Professional Conduct 3.6 (c) (2) as the documents below are public records with the Cheshire County Superior Court.

- Court order regarding defendant’s “Motion To Extend Filing Deadline” .PDF
(Motion Granted)

- Court order regarding defendant’s “Motion To Refrain From Authorizing Physical Force To Demand Respect” .PDF
(Motion DENIED)

- Court order regarding defendant’s “Motion To Dismiss” .PDF
(Motion Denied)

Bob Constantine

Does the right to "exercise a right" (the right of conscience) get trumped by a court order? If a right can be taken away, isn't it then a revocable privelege?
theKINGofKEENE

Hey, Brad, where's the REST of these motions / orders…???….

There is only the first page of each of these…

Where's the rest of the pages?…
Brad

tKoK Good Sir,

The court only sent the first page of the motions signed with their relevant information.

I'm making sure to scan every document about this case for public consumption. Anything I get or receive I post here.

Thank you for following the case so closely!
Pingback: A Reminder to the New Hampshire Supreme Court | FreeConcord.org
enslave keene

Bob,

You have a right to motion, not a right to impose that motion.

"To refrain from physical force" Are you kidding me?

I think courts should provide free coffee, I want free coffee.
Bob Constantine

Enslave,

The motion was based in the free exercise of a right. That right being the right of conscience. I believe it is appropriate to act "civil" in court, but that cuts both ways. It is in't "civil" for the court to use force to demand respect.

To keep a person from speaking loudly out of turn throwing stuff etc. is appropriate. But to force somebody to "rise on demand" is really about the same thing as saying "kneel and kiss my ring". It is not appropriate to force a person to show "respect" if there actions are neutral, ie they do not want to "rise" or stand when a judge enters a room. In that regard it is no longer respect, but forced submission. That's what rapists do…force people to submit.

Besides, what if a person really DOES hold the court in contempt? What if a person's religion says that no man is above another? Is it appropriate for the court to violate that right too, simply to prove they are the "authority" ?
name

brad,

It's great to see that all the major problems in the world, or at least this country, have been resolved, and that now someone with as much knowledge, intelligence and experience as you can spend so much time and energy on whether or not any idiot should have to stand for a judge.

In time, when you look back on your life's footsteps, I'm sure this will be one of your most treasured and proud moments.
Bradley Jardis

Name,

This is about being forced to stand for people who are breaking the law, covering for each other, and hoping you don't figure it out.

I do appreciate your compliments though, thank you
david

I dont "appreciate" enslaves comments ;I think he's a idiot..
david

Oh you said "complements" …lol
name

brad,

Say what you want, but this is about whether or not someone can be required to stand for a judge. Don't mix other issues from other cases with this one. I know it must be confusing, what with all the high profile, complicated legal issues af hand. And they are all SO important to society. In fact, if humankind is to survive, it may hinge on these pivotal and crucial cases.

Fight on, legal eagle!
name

@ david,

I understand you think enslave is 'a idiot'[sic]. But brad was thanking me for the 'complements'[sic], not enslave.

Idiot.

Oops, I didn't mean to type that. It just slipped out.