On Thursday of this week, I was getting ready to leave for the Manchester Airport with Kelly when “code enforcer” Fred Parcells was spotted pulling out of my next-door-neighbor’s driveway. Then I realized that I had a ticket on my windshield, and so did Kelly!

Fred had sneakily pulled up into my neighbor’s driveway, and somehow plopped tickets on our two cars while we were outside in plain view. I say that he did it sneakily because despite the fact that we were outside about 20 feet away from our cars, he didn’t use his words to talk to us or make his presence apparent.

Over the last year, Fred has victimized me with a handful of tickets for crimes involving no victim. It’s part of his modus operandi to remain silent while dispensing state violence in the form of tickets. It seems he has forgotten how to deal with issues like a human being and instead resorts to threats of force in response to petty issues and made-up charges like this one. He has no obligation to ticket anyone, so he is pursuing these interactions intentionally despite what some may say about him “just doing his job.”

Last time I received a ticket from Fred, it was for the same charge: he claimed that my car was impeding the path of the sidewalk, which was untrue. It appears he just likes to boss people around and not stand behind his claims because the tickets that have been levied against me have all been dropped when I inform the court that I demand a trial.

It’s as simple as that. Hate paying tickets? Refuse to pay. Take the aggressors to court and make them PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) there is a victim, and 2) they can produce bulletproof evidence of the crime. Police can almost never do either of these things. That doesn’t mean you will win in court, but it does increase the likelihood that law enforcement will drop the charges.

Despite the fact that many jurisdictions reward the state aggressor with overtime (1.5x) hourly pay for testifying in court, many agents back down from those situations. They are, for the time being, unused to their victims standing up for themselves.

You can change that by clicking the banner ad above.

I was pulled over while driving 50 mph in a 55 mph zone. The officer alleges I was going 72. That is impossible because I was stuck behind a slow-moving pickup truck for about 20 miles, and that truck was keeping me slowed at a pace of 50 mph.

To learn more about why I take the time and energy to fight arbitrarily-written tickets, click below:

I was driving from Keene to Manchester with Luthor Kingsley of the Shire. We were about halfway there when I passed a cop. Luthor pointed him out; he was hiding on the side of the highway with his lights off. I checked my speed and was relieved to notice that I was going 50mph. I almost certainly would have been going faster if not for the truck in front of me holding me up in the single lane of traffic. Then I saw the blue lights behind me. I fired up my camera and asked Luthor to record.

The cop told me I couldn’t see the radar, that Luthor had to turn off the audio on the camera, that Luthor had to give the cop his ID, and that it was illegal wiretapping to record audio of him without his permission. We gave him a bit of a schooling in the law with polite refusal to comply with his demands. He returned with a ticket for $103.33.

I’ll be seeing him in court. I would rather be left alone. I don’t enjoy giving up my valuable time and energy and resources to defend myself against being extorted by agents of the state. I’ve already spent about 24 hours in filming, editing, researching law, and posting about this event. Now I’ll have a day in court, travel expenses, plus the opportunity costs of a day’s work in order to attend court, or I will have a warrant out for my arrest. Then, in court, if I am found guilty, I will likely face 2 days in jail to pay off the fine at $50 a day.

Some stranger with a badge is incentivized by a quota system to spend his time pulling over people like me who haven’t victimized anyone. For him, it’s 15 minutes and he can wash his hands of the situation and collect his paycheck–unless someone takes the issue to court rather than paying the fine. In that case, he is rewarded for his victimization by being paid time and a half for his appearance in court. The taxpayers of his town will be forced to foot the bill for that expense. As a result of his actions, I could be put in a cage (again at the expense of the taxpayer) for what was a non-situation.

The absurdity makes my head spin. If you’d like to help me meet expenses to handle this case successfully and document the process with video, please donate at LiveFreeOrDance.com

(Please write to the city council at 3 Washington St. and encourage them to refuse the fed’s corrupt offer of the Bearcat.)

The recent flurry of letters regarding the City Council vote to approve the “free” offer of a BearCat assault vehicle shows the unease many of us are feeling these days about both the growing militarization of our local communities and the budgetary choices being made by our leaders at the national, state and local levels during these tight fiscal times.

Perhaps this issue has galvanized such a community response because it symbolizes the increasing emphasis on guns, so-called security and the “fear factor” that has occurred in this country in recent years, including the Monadnock region.

I have lived twice in countries that were dictatorships (Uruguay in 1975 and Chile from 1984-1989) and the truth is that as an average law-abiding citizen I feel the security apparatus presence more strongly in Keene than I ever did in Uruguay or Chile.

From the loud alarm in Central Square that rings out to jar the senses each time there is an incident that involves fire or police, to the flashing blue lights the police use to pull over car that used to set my young son into panic, to the prison perched high on the hill to the entrance to Keene from the east, and more, I concur with what a German friend of mine who lives in Keene once said to me, “Keene sometimes feels like a police state.”

And now we will soon have an assault vehicle for local use.

This issue also shows the power we each have to say “no,” even when we think our one voice does not make a difference.

Councilor Terry Clark exhibited this courage in his recent vote, and his comment about not wanting to further encourage the “culture of war,” and his courage is to be commended.

We have lived for such a long time in a “culture of war,” that it can be hard to envision what a society based upon a “culture of peace” would be like.

But many people and communities in the United States and around the world are trying to do just this, right now.

On Saturday, March 3, the Fourth annual New Hampshire Culture of Peace conference will be held at Keene State College. This year’s theme will focus on “advancing understanding, tolerance and solidarity.”

SKYE STEPHENSON

14 Barrett Ave.

Keene

Let voters decide on truck

Is it possible that the City Council has been duped by such a deal too good to turn down once again?

Let’s ask for a full disclosure of the fine-print lawyer’s contract they signed with the feds. I’ll bet there is a skunk in the BearCat trunk that will make all of us smell bad before this foolish, rash “super deal ” by the City Council is nullified.

Return this war tank now during the 30-day trial warranty period.

Or, let’s put it on the next ballot for a public vote and let the city voters decide.

All agreed?

STUART CARSWELL

P.O. Box 331

Keene

Kudos to those citizens urging the Keene City Council reconsideration of the Lenco BearCat.

By now, most readers know this military assault vehicle has been offered to the city by the Department of Homeland Security, paid for by we the people of the U.S.

While the BearCat name may conjure fur and claws, the acronym is less fuzzy: Ballistic Engineered Armored Response Counter Attack Truck.

Is this really what Keene needs?

Other recent letters have raised important points about better uses for this money in a time of need, and the unnecessary militarization of the Keene police force. My contribution is to remind the City Council of another important and ultimately successful about-face it took several years ago.

In 2000, the city was fully committed to accepting the Department of Transportation’s supersized plan for a $66 million Keene bypass.

Part of the justification was that the feds would pick up 80 percent of the cost. Then, a growing wave of concerned citizens showed the City and the DOT a solution that was a better fit for Keene and, at less than $10 million, a huge savings to the taxpayer.

The council was resistant at first but eventually realized it was time to back away from the DOT’s plan and embrace the citizens’ plan.

Today, it is time for the City Council to similarly reverse itself on the Lenco BearCat. If you agree, write or call City Hall.

I also plan on copying this letter to Senators Shaheen and Ayotte and Congressman Bass to let them know there are many who do not agree with spending our scarce federal resources in this manner.

BOB KING

42 Hurricane Road

Keene

Liberty Activist Cecelia Freechild is pulled over near the Keene Activism Center. Six Keene activists roll up with cameras to investigate the situation, hold the police accountable, and discourage aggression against peaceful people. Cecelia received a ticket but will NOT be taking a plea deal. She’ll contest the ticket and take it all the way in court, making the state prove its case beyond a shadow of a doubt. To find out why an average young woman like Cecelia would do something like this, click below to find out more.

I told the shift commander that he was absolutely incorrect about New Hampshire law due to a 1st Circuit Court of Appeals decision that denied qualified immunity to Boston, MA Police for making a similar arrest.

It is okay to be wrong… every human is wrong about stuff all the time. It does take, however, a big man to admit that he was wrong, and Lieuteant Dyac of the Hudson, NH Police proved to be a big man. Of course, it would have been preferred that he knew the law ahead of time, but we all know that ignorance of the law isn’t an excuse for US, but IS for state agents.

Click here to view the embedded video.

I am going to write a letter to Hudson, NH Police Chief Jason Lavoie praising his commander for his willingness to admit a mistake. I’d respectfully ask you all either do the same or call to quickly ask that the Chief be told that his Lieutenant is a step above many law enforcers we’ve encountered being wrong about the law. By taking the time to research the issue before taking action, Lieuteant Dyac saved his department from civil liability. He clearly is an asset to that agency.

YouTube commenters seem to agree:

These guys are good Officers, it’s obvious? they genuinely care about people and the constitution and they where very professional. Good on them.

LibertyNowRP2012

Wow. The? last minute just blew my mind. This is exactly the kind of cop we need. Wow.

WhatsReallyGoingOnUS

You’re looking really good Chief Lavoie!

Chief Jason Lavoie
1 Constitution Drive – Hudson, New Hampshire 03051
Business line: 603-886-6011

After the hat and false arrest issues in Keene, NH then on or about July of 2011 and thereinafter, I was harassed at the Cheshire Superior Court in Keene near the District Court. The security guard would interrogate me and tell me that I was not allowed to bring a cellular phone, videocamera, or recorder of any type and prohibited from bringing into the courthouse.

On August 3, 2010, I filed a medical malpractice case which included for failure to diagnose my cancer in Cheshire Superior Court in Keene NH vs. Donald Wilson, MD, Pamela Deberghes MD and the other Dartmouth Health Care system doctors, etc. I suffered tremendous inhumane civil rights violations repeatedly. I claim that there was affirmative perjury done by Elaine Michaud, Esq. and thereafter tampering with the file to correct the affirmative perjury.

The clerk will not allow me to check out the file, make copies from the file, and will not allow the employees in the clerk’s office to make copies for me. I would appreciate it if persons would go to the Cheshire Superior Court 12 Court St. Keene NH 03431 and request the case number 10-c-0092 file Lisa Jacobs vs. Donald Wilson, MD, Pamela Deberghes, MD et al. and see if they are allowed to check out the file. If you are then I would like copies from the file of index #210 and #281. I would appreciate your getting me copies of the documents with those index numbers. If they won’t give you the file then ask them to make certified copies of those document index numbered pleadings. They have refused to do so for me and my Mom. Then, put your findings into an affidavit and mail to me at the below address for use in my appeal.

Lisa Jacobs
PO Box 488
Weston MA 02493

Here is the format for an appeal affidavit:

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
SUPREME COURT
No.2011-CV0892
Lisa Jacobs MD MPH and Real Estate Broker
v.
DONALD WILSON, MD, PAMELA DEBERGHES, MD ET. AL.
AFFIDAVIT
I, __________________ being duly sworn, hereby depose and state as follows: I am over the age of 18 and I make this affidavit based on my personal knowledge. I understand that I make this statement under oath and that I am as a result obligated to tell the truth.

The statements contained in this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NOT.
DATED: December ____, 2011
___________________________________________________

STATE OF ________________________
COUNTY OF ______________________

The foregoing affidavit was acknowledged before me this ______ day of December 2011 by _______________________________________..

 

Thank you.
Lisa Jacobs
MD MPH and Real Estate Broker

They must want to be sued for a slew of things.

Stalking (without an issued stalking order) (RSA 633:3-a) is one of the most difficult criminal charges to prove in New Hampshire. To be guilty of the crime, one must engage in a course of conduct involving two instances (over any period of time) of doing the following:

(1) Threatening the safety of the targeted person or an immediate family member.

(2) Following, approaching, or confronting that person, or a member of that person’s immediate family.

(3) Appearing in close proximity to, or entering the person’s residence, place of employment, school, or other place where the person can be found, or the residence, place of employment or school of a member of that person’s immediate family.

(4) Causing damage to the person’s residence or property or that of a member of the person’s immediate family.

(5) Placing an object on the person’s property, either directly or through a third person, or that of an immediate family member.

(6) Causing injury to that person’s pet, or to a pet belonging to a member of that person’s immediate family.

The combination of any of the two things above have to be done in one of two ways:

1. Purposely, knowingly, or recklessly engages in a course of conduct targeted at a specific person which would cause a reasonable person to fear for his or her personal safety or the safety of a member of that person’s immediate family, and the person is actually placed in such fear; or

2. Purposely or knowingly engages in a course of conduct targeted at a specific individual, which the actor knows will place that individual in fear for his or her personal safety or the safety of a member of that individual’s immediate family(.)

Leaving the press related constitutional arguments aside… to say that provably peaceful members of the media are “caus(ing) a reasonable person to fear for his or her personal safety or the safety” or “target(ing) … a specific individual, which the actor knows will place that individual in fear for his or her personal safety” is downright ridiculous. I’d say they have two of the “course of conduct” prongs met (2 & 3), but I’d love to hear them argue how they placed this violent little man in fear of his personal safety.

Nice try CSO Tebo and Cheshire County Sheriffs.

Oh wait… the law refers to “a reasonable person.” I guess Tebo doesn’t qualify, considering he is proven to be quite sadistic.

Maybe they’ll have a case after-all.