Brad Jardis Leaves Law Enforcement

JardisThe Union Leader’s Jason Schreiber reports:

EPPING – A police officer who fought publicly to keep his job has resigned from the police department and has also been given the boot as a member of an international group that wants to legalize drugs.

Leaders of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, which advocates liberalization of drug laws, moved to distance themselves from Officer Bradley Jardis, who suggested in recent online postings that he would not enforce certain drug laws.

Jardis, of Hooksett, quit the police department on Monday, saying he could no longer work there after comments that Police Chief Gregory Dodge made about his job performance when he tried to have him fired recently.

Jardis, 29, has been at the center of controversy over internal disputes with police superiors and his affiliation with LEAP.

The resignation came at the same time that LEAP informed Jardis he was no longer allowed to serve as a member of the group, which includes current and former law enforcement officers who oppose existing drug laws.

In a letter to Jardis, Jack A. Cole, LEAP’s executive director, said the group’s executive board decided at a meeting Saturday that Jardis couldn’t continue to represent LEAP. Jardis made the letter public by posting it in an online forum.

The decision to kick Jardis out was made after the board learned that he had posted a comment in an online forum stating that he would no longer arrest a person who possesses, uses or grows marijuana to treat a medical condition.

Jardis, who has spoken publicly many times on behalf of LEAP, urged other New Hampshire police officers not to make the arrests either, claiming it’s unconstitutional to charge a sick person using marijuana for medicinal purposes.

“This is the opposite of what LEAP requires of our representatives,” Cole said in his letter. “We have always said that we will in no way ask that any law enforcer decline to do his or her duty by refusing to enforce the laws as they are currently recorded. That would be unethical and wrong. What we do call on them for (to) is take action on their off-duty time to help us change those laws.”

Cole added that Jardis’ actions have “caused people to lose respect for our organization, which leads to a loss of our credibility within the public, the media and the policymakers … the very people whom we are trying to convince to change these laws.”

Jardis said yesterday that LEAP “has shown that they support automaton policing in that their representatives are forbidden from coming to a constitutional or moral conclusion that enforcing a law is unconstitutional or unjust. … Just because a law is on the books, it doesn’t mean it is moral or constitutional.”

The dismissal from LEAP came just as Jardis was returning to work in Epping after being suspended and placed on paid leave after a dispute with his sergeant over his handling of a case last summer.

In August, Dodge, the police chief, ordered that Jardis be suspended for insubordination and violating police procedures. Dodge recommended that Jardis be fired.

He fought his suspension and after a public hearing in November, selectmen agreed to let him return to work if he passed a psychological evaluation. He passed that exam earlier this month.

“Brad was cleared to return to work and I was looking forward to moving on,” Dodge said yesterday.

Jardis said that while selectmen allowed him to return, “disparaging comments made by Chief Dodge during his attempt to have me fired made it impossible for me to return and be an effective Epping police officer.”

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


20 Comments

  1. I'm sad to hear this, but I'm sure he had good reasons. The situation must have been untenable.

    I look forward to the great things Jardis will do outside of LE, as a member of the liberty community. And, I look forward to the day when I once again have the freedom to use the fruit of my labor as I choose — when I can fire the local PD, and hire Jardis Security instead.

  2. So what is Jardis going to do for work now? Maybe he can become a private investigator.

  3. “Look, we know they are slaughtering Jewish men, women and children behind those walls. But it is THE LAW. Don’t you dare question and expose the evil system. Now just go on about your life as usual and ignore the smoke coming from behind those walls. Or you can go to the Gestapo and beg them to stop and maybe in time they’ll even turn a listening ear to your pleas. But more than likely they’ll just throw you in with the Jews. It’s your choice because it’s THE LAW!”

  4. From looking from the LAW, the Constitution is the "supreme Law of the Land", and the Supreme Court ruled via Marbury v. Madison that "a law repugnant to the Constitution is void." And there is no mention concerning marijuana or any drug whatsoever in the Constitution. And the 10th Amemndment says, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." And I could be wrong, but I remember New Hampashire law allows possession of marijuana with a doctor's prescription, so Brad Jardis did follow the law after all.

  5. Part of me is sorry to not have him on the force anymore, because he will most likely be replaced by a cop who IS willing to enforce bad laws and make society worse.

    But I was also becoming concerned for his safety from other police officers. Having seen what they are willing to do to harmless people for possessing certain herbs, I can only imagine the brutality and cruelty they would inflict upon somebody they considered a traitor to their cause (wrongfully).

  6. I agree: Relinquishing the way he makes a living has probably saved Brad's life.

  7. Jardis for Sheriff!

  8. Great comment! Sheriffs hold the keys to greater liberty for every locality.

    Brad Jardis as sheriff would probably boot the feds out of his county and stop enforcement of liberty violating laws.

    That's the kind of platform everyone should be able to get behind!

  9. The more honest people learn about the government system, the more they want nothing to do with it.

    There's a better way.

  10. Agreed. Brad Jardis for Sheriff!

  11. I completely concur, peacemaker. In the meantime, let's get some liberty loving sheriffs in there

  12. Unlike what the LEAP guy said, for me I have more respect for Brad after he made his recent declaration that he would not arrest someone for using certain herbs as medicine.

  13. Brad, I think you're one of the greatest and bravest guys I know.

  14. Jesse's so right…Bradley Jardis seems the hero-winner in this story, despite recent events. I hope you have good fortune in the future, Bradley. But isn't it so sad that there is still such a virulent ignorance as shown by Epping's bureaucraps? The swaggering bully childishness of the Chief of Police makes me sad. Chief should have publicly supported his troop, while taking the initiative to re-affirm the Town/Dept. position & policy. This asinine war on drugs has put 1/2 of all cops on the enemy side of the other 1/2…divide & conquer, anyone???…Should *I* quit L.E.A.P.???…Hmmm…TTYL…

  15. I joined L.E.A.P. in Oct. 2008, after seeing Cheshire County House of Collections superintendent Rick Van Wickler give a power-point talk here at Keene State College. For now, I'm not gonna over-react to this little tempest-in-a-teapot…Maybe Jack Cole (LEAP Director…),will also soon be unemployed!?…

  16. I'm confused in that what Jarvis did was admirable but he lost his job and any chance of working in law enforcement. With this economy it made no sense. He could have played a better role by working behind the scenes, anonymity, and remaining employed.

    Does he have a wife? Kid? Bills?Whats he doing now?

  17. An open letter:

    Jack Cole, and the LEAP BoD:

    I just ran across the case of Brad Jardis and LEAP.

    I must say, I am very shocked, saddened, and astonished at LEAP's response.

    I have been a supporter of LEAP thru-out the years when I have had the means.

    It boils down to this:

    there is a clear conflict of morals here between a cop enforcing the law,

    and the enforcing of a clearly immoral law.

    In such a conflict, the refusal to enforce the immoral law wins.

    Take an Reductio ad absurdum case:

    a law that *requires* the cop shoots someone with drugs.

    What is the clear moral choice?

    Refuse to enforce the law.

    Sadly, history shows that type of law has been on the books, except it was killing Jews.

    (Please note I am not invoking Godwin's Law.)

    It *is* a historical fact that, once the Nazis had killed a couple of hundred Jews,

    they realized there was not a law that permitted them to kill Jews.

    They corrected that oversight and passed a law.

    6 million Jews (and at least 12 Million others) later, the Allied finally defeated them.

    Under LEAP's logic, Mr Jardis refusing to shoot a Jewish person would be immoral.

    (It makes no difference, you will admit, between shooting someone and being an accessory.)

    What is the fundamental difference between killing someone,

    vs otherwise destroying a sick person's life with an arrest for MedPot?

    This is a difference in scale, not a difference in kind.

    I would also note there are cases of people dying a painful death after

    being arrested for MedPot, and then being unable to obtain more.

    With the increasing number of laws trashing the Bill of Rights,

    under the War banners of Drugs and Terrorism, what is LEAP going to do?

    At what point does the law become so egregious that y'all speak out

    for LE to take an active moral stand?

    Just look at the differing responses to the orders to the police,

    and the refusal by some, to the harsh crackdown on the Occupy groups.

    Also by LEAP's logic, LEAP should *refuse* to allow any association with the

    (at last count) of the 25% of federal judges that have refused to hear drug cases.

    LEAP is also concerned about cops getting fired for just speaking out against

    the Drug War – and yet these same cops must now feel that LEAP will dump them too.

    LEAP's response to Mr Jardis sends a clear message that LEAP cannot be trusted by those LEOs.

    I sincerely hope that LEAP will re-think its position on this issue,

    because blind obedience (which you are clearly demanding) to a grossly

    immoral law is grossly immoral itself.

    In fact, the blind enforcing of the drug laws, especially against sick people,

    have had a tremendous, corrosive effect on respect for the Law and LE.

    *That* is something LEAP should be greatly concerned about,

    which is one of the reasons I was *shocked* at LEAP's response to Mr Jardis.

    (In fact, I should be one to assume the LEO's I encounter are honest.

    Note that *all* traffic stops in the last 20 years in California

    and Washington State has run thru *my* code for NCIC and DOL checks.

    I wrote that portion of the message switchers in 1991.

    I *want* to respect LE, but I *must* assume that *any* LEO I encounter

    *must* be corrupt, because of the possible consequences.

    This makes me very sad as a citizen.)

    And, while I am unsure if MedPot was legal at that time in the state Mr Jardis was a cop,

    you should clearly know a cop in a state with legal MedPot should obey the law

    which makes it legal, even though it is still illegal under Federal law.

    On a related topic, I would note the war on drugs has been, in the US,

    a "police action" (all references deliberate). Mexico has a Drug War.

    It is only a matter of time, a few years at most, before this war crosses the border

    and US citizens (police and civilians) start getting killed at a rapid rate.

    I say this because it is obvious, and LEAP is one of the organizations with the

    access to those who *can* change the law.

    In short, grow some balls. Time is short. Tens of Thousands have died in Mexico alone.

    This war is coming to the US. I live in Albuquerque, and the border states are going

    to be the first real battlefields in the next phase of this war.

    I do *not* want this. I want this war to *end*.

    And one thing is obvious – if this war does not end, the cartels *will* cross the border,

    and cops are going to be the first to be killed because they are the most obvious targets.

    The consequences of this trend scare the shit out of me.

    Respectfully yours … bandit

    http://freekeene.com/2010/01/27/brad-jardis-leave

    Quote:

    Jardis, who has spoken publicly many times on behalf of LEAP, urged other New Hampshire police officers not to make the arrests either, claiming it’s unconstitutional to charge a sick person using marijuana for medicinal purposes.

    "This is the opposite of what LEAP requires of our representatives," Cole said in his letter. "We have always said that we will in no way ask that any law enforcer decline to do his or her duty by refusing to enforce the laws as they are currently recorded. That would be unethical and wrong. What we do call on them for (to) is take action on their off-duty time to help us change those laws."

  18. Bradley Jardis is 100% in the right in this situation, his critics are 100% in the wrong. I hope that LEAP will reconsider, and reinstate Jardis as a member, drawing inspiration from abolitionist law enforcement in the North that, once in America’s history, refused to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law. Real change comes from those who act on their principles. I hope to see Bradley Jardis in the upcoming documentary by Flex Your Rights (about Jury Nullification of Law), which informs the jury of their true power over the systems of “law enforcement.”

    Those who counsel to keep the gas chambers in full operation while petitioning the nazis to change the law are 100% in the wrong. Those who counsel to keep the plantations in full operation while petitioning the Southern slaveowners to change the laws are 100% in the wrong. Those who counsel to continue the brutal, oppressive, and racist drug war, while fighting to change the laws are wrong. Is LEAP right to encourage officers who do enforce the laws to oppose them on their time off? Sure. But when ineffectuality and submission to illegitimate laws becomes a requirement for membership, then LEAP has institutionalized the problem it seeks to fight. Real people are harmed by the drug war, and the legislatures and police forces full of sociopaths have not, cannot, and will not change that unjust state of affairs. Perverse incentives are aligned against the moral and the just, in this arena of life.

    Illegitimate and unjust laws should be opposed at every opportunity: by policemen of good will, such as Bradley Jardis, by defense attorney of good will, like Clay Conrad, by the citizen jury, such as everyone reading this forum.

    Bradley Jardis’s dedication to duty was grossly-suboptimal, in the eyes of his authoritarian commanders, and apparently, of LEAP. But from my perspective as an empathic human being, and member of the citizen Jury (the fourth and supreme branch of government), he went far and above the call of duty, displaying a heroism that is rarely, if ever, seen in law enforcement. Bradley Jardis did far more than ineffectually oppose illegitimate law enforcment, he not only refused to play a part in it, he took a personal stand against it. He truly acted as an agent who took seriously the idea of “service and protection.”

    That moral police officers like him are run out of “the force” is a stain on the soul of everyone in “law enforcement.” That a man cannot use his mind, to assess whether or not his actions are truly “honoring and upholding the U. S. Constitution,” and still be a police officer, is a stain on the profession. Nay, it’s more than a stain: it’s a culture that is so slimy it’s actually criminal.

    Any police organization that would not have a fine example of humanity like Bradley Jardis on its roster, doesn’t really deserve to exist, and soon wont. Not that I’m making a threat, I just think that evolution will find ways to obviate, defend against, or circumvent the bullying that officer Jardis took a principled stand against. It always does.

    My hat goes off in admiration to officer Jardis, it’s clear who has the balls in this situation. The immortal words of Henry David Thoreau ring true:

    “If the machine of government requires you to be an agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law.” -Henry David Thoreau.

    -Jake Witmer

    701-204-3215
    jake.alfg@yahoo.com

  19. Bradley Jardis for “Private Instigator” …Or the first (maybe second) true oathkeeper sherrif! “Shire reeve!!!” 🙂 LOL

  20. HAhahahahahahahahah every dog gets his day . This cop caused me 4 years of bullshit when the forced me to take a breathalyzer

Care to comment?