(*Note* The date on this video mistakenly shows 1.04.2012 when it should actually read 1.14.2012, which is the day after the incident occurred.)
Ryan will NOT be taking a plea deal for the outrageous charges that followed this incident:

To learn his charges, continue reading…

In the words of the state agents who arrested him, Ryan did “purposely exercise unauthorized
control over the property of another, to wit, a $4.00 parking fee, which was owed to the Manchester-Boston regional Airport with the purpose to deprive the owner thereof, AGAINST THE PEACE AND DIGNITY OF THE STATE.”

This is a Class B Misdemeanor, which means it is punishable by a fine of up to $1,000.

The charges continue:

The agents claim Ryan “recklessly created a risk thereof, by disrupting the orderly conduct of the business, Manchester-Boston Regional Airport, by refusing to pay his fee and block traffic, AGAINST THE PEACE AND DIGNITY OF THE STATE.”

This is a Class A Misdemeanor, which is punishable by up to a year in jail AND a $1,000 fine. This second charge seems to contradict the first. If he was being a thief, then he wouldn’t block up traffic; he would escape. This charge seems to suggest that he was having a conversation with the toll collector, as he states in his video testimony. This language is flowery and severely written by an agent who was not present at the scene of the alleged “crimes.”

The charges continue…

A 3rd charge, another Class A Misdemeanor, “Placing others in Danger” “The defendant did recklessly engage in conduct, by quickly accelerating his vehicle forward and backwards, causing the tires to spin, while in a confined area where people and other vehicles were located, which placed, or may have placed, the public in danger of serious bodily injury, AGAINST THE PEACE AND DIGNITY OF THE STATE.”

This seems highly unlikely to me, seeing as I know Ryan and spend a great deal of time with him. I know him to be a peaceful person who is level-headed and calm as a buddha. There’s no way he went on a crazy spin-out like some hot-headed redneck.

To add insult to injury, agents of the state charged Ryan with a 4th crime, “Resisting Arrest.” In the words of the state agents, “the defendant did knowingly physically interfere with a person he recognized to be a law enforcement officer, to wit Police Officer Kevin M Mulcahy of the Keene Police Department, by clasping his hands in front of his chest and twisting his body in an effort to resist being handcuffed, while said officer was seeking to arrest Ryan Maddox, AGAINST THE PEACE AND DIGNITY OF THE STATE.”

I can’t be sure of the intention of any particular law, but do you the reader think that the intention of the “Resisting Arrest” charge was for actions like those described above? Call me crazy, but that sounds like a pretty typical arrest to me. What law enforcement officer doesn’t expect the people they come after to struggle? Are free people supposed to just freeze and stick out their wrists whenever a man in uniform comes by? I would imagine that if the people who wrote the “Resisting Arrest” law had any good intentions whatsoever, it was to give justice to those law enforcement officers who had been beaten and seriously injured as a result of them carrying out the course of their duties (arresting people). Someone “clasping his hands” and “twisting” should be easily overcome by any officer, especially when the person being apprehended is Ryan, who is a pretty small guy.

Why is Ryan coming forward to the public with all of this information about his case? Because he hasn’t done anything wrong, he hasn’t hurt anyone, and if anyone is committing wrongdoing, it is the agents of the state! So… will he be taking a plea deal? No way in Hades!

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.

Sign the online petition to keep Keene Bearcat-free!

The public will have an opportunity next week to speak about the Keene Police Department’s acquisition of a new grant-funded armored vehicle.

Last month, the Keene City Council approved the acceptance of a $285,933 federal Homeland Security grant to purchase a LENCO BearCat Special Missions Vehicle. But some residents questioned whether such a vehicle is necessary in a community of Keene’s size, and a petition signed by more than 100 residents asked the council to reconsider accepting the grant.

Councilor Terry M. Clark submitted a letter to the council requesting the issue be sent back to the council’s finance committee to allow the public to speak on it, and the full council approved the request, supported by the committee’s chairman, Mitchell H. Greenwald, Thursday night.

“I think it’s good they decided to do that (open the topic for public discussion), but it’s unfortunate that it took Terry Clark to do that when we had a petition with over 140 signatures,” said Ian Bernard, a member of the Free Keene group who signed the petition and goes by the name Ian Freeman. He and other members of Free Keene attended Thursday’s council meeting, some holding signs that read “No Bearcat,” and “Thanks, But No Tanks.”

The vehicle comes with thermal imaging and off-road capabilities, as well as hazardous gas detection equipment, and police said the vehicle would be valuable when responding to extreme weather events, suspects with weapons and suspicious packages, among other situations.

u The finance, organization and personnel committee meets Thursday, Feb. 9, at 5:30 p.m. in City Hall.

Here’s a facebook event for the upcoming meeting.

We laugh only because the joke rings so true.

The corrupt system of corporatism (fascism) that we have on our hands in America today is making it quite difficult for me, as an American, to do the right thing.  Tomorrow morning, I face the possibility of being tossed in a cage for peacefully exercising my so-called Constitutional right to proper redress of grievance, standing up for the rights of myself and others, and doing the right thing.

Perhaps fairness and equality are no longer the laws of the land, but they are still the laws of the universe and of nature.  I am quite certain that the scales of justice will tip even in the end.  I’m not hurting anyone and I’m doing the right thing, thus my conscience is clear.

Kelly

The public will likely get a second chance to weigh in on a new armored vehicle for the Keene Police Department.

Last month, the City Council approved a $285,933 federal Homeland Security grant to buy a LENCO BearCat Special Missions Public Safety Vehicle. But some voiced concerns about whether such a vehicle was necessary for a small community, and a 144-signature petition was brought before councilors asking for an additional public hearing.

Mayor Kendall W. Lane accepted the petition as informational — meaning the council didn’t take action on the request — because “it didn’t ask the council to do anything.

“It asked for a public hearing before the full council, but that’s not an appropriate subject for the council to hold a hearing on,” he said.

Now, two councilors say they plan to ask for a hearing, this time at the committee level, which Lane says is an appropriate request that he plans to grant.

The vehicle would be the first of its kind in this part of the state; the closest such vehicle is at least an hour away, Keene police said.

They said the vehicle, which comes equipped with thermal imaging, hazardous gas detection and off-road capabilities, would help the department in numerous situations, such as extreme weather events, inspecting suspicious packages, and incidents involving suspects with weapons, police said.

At Thursday night’s meeting of the City Council’s finance committee, a handful of members of the group Free Keene attended, one holding a sign reading “NO BEARCAT.”

During a break in the action, finance committee Chairman Mitchell H. Greenwald informed the Free Keene members that Councilor Terry M. Clark, who cast the only vote in opposition to accepting the grant in December, had requested a public hearing on the matter before the committee and Greenwald said he would support that request.

Clark, who was unsure of how many residents supported his opposition to the vehicle, said he received more than a hundred phone calls and emails from people sharing his opinion after his initial opposition.

“We really should have a hearing because people genuinely feel they were left out of the process,” Clark said Friday.

Greenwald, who still supports purchasing the vehicle, said it’s important the public has a chance to be heard.

“I didn’t think this would be so controversial,” he said. “But if the public wants to be heard, let’s do it.”

Lane isn’t sure there’s a need for a public hearing, but doesn’t mind deferring to the committee on the matter.

“I don’t think it warrants it (a public hearing), but everyone can form their own opinion,” Lane said. “There’s nothing special about this particular vehicle; it’s an ordinary pickup truck with oversized tires and armor.”

Clark said he was surprised when Lane accepted the petition as informational, and by the time he had wrapped his head around it, the item had passed for discussion.

“It started to really bother me that I didn’t speak up,” he said, explaining what led to his written request for a hearing.

u The finance, organization and personnel committee will meet Thursday, Feb. 9, at 5:30 p.m. in City Hall.

Kyle Jarvis can be reached at 352-1234, extension 1433, or kjarvis@keenesentinel.com.

Van Wickler:

Bob “Weeda Claus” Constantine, Nurse Patricia Smith, and more:

You can download the edition for this week here. Topics covered include Kelly Voluntaryist’s TSA lingerie protest/outreach, the Keene city council’s blowoff of the 144 petitions regarding the Bearcat, and the Londonderry cops’ bust of two Keene men for allegedly receiving hashish.

You can add Radio Free Keene News to your podcast client via this RSS feed.

As we’ve seen with the case of Brad Jardis, any cop that actually speaks out in favor of more freedom is targeted by “the brotherhood” of the “thin blue line” for retaliation, including firing. So, any “good” cops stay silent for fear of losing their job and pension. Therefore, tyranny continues unabated. Here’s the piece from the UL:

The law enforcement community turned out Tuesday to oppose several bills to remove gun restrictions, including one that would allow non-violent felons to possess and carry firearms.

Two of the bills are nearly identical to bills proposed last year that either were killed or included in some fashion a bill expanding the use of deadly force that was approved over Gov. John Lynch’s veto.

House Bill 1375 would allow felons to own firearms if the person was not convicted of a violent crime, which include such crimes as murder, manslaughter, negligent homicide, assault, sexual assault, kidnapping, armed robbery, incest, possessing child pornography and witness tampering.

The bill’s prime sponsor, Rep. Andrew Manuse, R-Derry, said that once someone is punished for a crime, that person is considered to have paid their debt to society.

“Punishment is to reform,” Manuse said. “But that’s not how it works.”

He noted a felon loses the right to vote and to possess a firearm. The person can petition to vote after the sentenced is served, he added.

“They can ask for the right to vote back,” he said. “We ought to allow a non-violent felon who has served his time in prison to regain the right to bear arms to protect himself, his family and his property.”

But retired Henniker Police Chief Timothy Russell asked whether the bill would make citizens and communities feel safer.

“Why do we want to afford convicted felons the right to purchase and own firearms?” he asked. “This legislation would allow convicted thieves and drug dealers to purchase and possess firearms.”

He said the annulment process is in place for convicted felons to regain their rights after they show they can live a crime free and productive life.

State Police Maj. Russell Conte said a non-violent felon can be just as dangerous as a violent one. He noted someone convicted of selling drugs is just as dangerous to society, but would be allowed to possess a firearm under the bill.

One of the bill’s sponsors, Rep. George Lambert, R-Litchfield, told the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee Tuesday, if Martha Stewart came to his house for dinner with him and his wife, Stewart could not go out into his backyard and shoot a gun with them because she is convicted felon. Stewart was involved in insider trading and served time in federal prison.

Law enforcement also opposed HB 1341, which would repeal the prohibition against firing a gun in a city or town’s compact zone.

Dean told the committee the opposition used scare tactics against the bill, noting it is impossible to legislate responsible behavior on everyone’s part.

The current law restricts a person’s right to shoot in a compact zone for no rational reason, she said. “There is no basis in safety,” she noted, adding no police chief would give written permission for a firing range within a compact zone because of liability.

Committee member Rep. Phil Greazzo, R-Manchester, asked her, “are you saying anyone in the city of Manchester could have a shooting range in their backyard as long as it is set up safely?”

Dean said a shooting range could not be set up safely on small lots in any city because a backstop cannot be high enough or deep enough under zoning ordinances.

The committee also had a public hearing on HB 1318, which was identical to a bill that was not approved last session, to do away with any licensing requirement to carry a firearm.

The bill would not change current law forbidding felons and others from possessing guns, but does do away with the registration process to carry a concealed weapon.

The committee did not make any recommendations on the bills Tuesday.

What did the petitions say? They merely asked the council to schedule a public hearing on the matter of reconsidering the Bearcat. Apparently the council would prefer that people not be able to speak on this matter. The Bearcat was quietly approved without public input and now the council is protecting the Keene police and their buddies in the federal government by refusing to even allow a hearing on the matter.

Does anyone really think these “councilors” represent “the people”?