Undercover Narcotics Officer Exposed: Det. Charles I. Newton

Charles I. NewtonThanks first to Bob “Weeda Claus” Constantine for having the courage to take his cannabis growing case to trial. Bob’s courage made what happened today possible. Because Bob took his case to trial, the state had to call its undercover agents to the stand and despite their desperate efforts to keep them away from cameras, they were still all seen personally by those of us in the courtroom. The first to testify against Bob was NH Drug Task Force detective Charles I. Newton, the most undercover-looking of them all. He looks like a pretty cool guy and if only he weren’t engaging in deception for the purposes of caging peaceful people, maybe he would be. We were unable to get a decent picture of him on the day of Bob’s trial. However, here’s what happened today:

We were going to breakfast in Newport after attending a fellow activist’s speeding ticket trial, when I noticed two cars parked drivers’ side-window-to-window in the parking lot of the Country Kitchen restaurant. The driver of the black late model Nissan Altima (we think it’s plate number 297 7758 – the 297 is for sure, not sure about the last four) looked a lot like Charles I. Newton, so I asked Ademo from Liberty on Tour if he thought that was him. He confirmed it and shouted out Charles’ name. Then Charles high-tailed it (complete with screeching tires) out of the parking lot. We consulted the young man in the red car and informed him that he’d been talking to an undercover cop. At least in this instance, we saved the man from going to prison. Newton had already given the young man cash in order to allegedly purchase narcotics, so the deal was almost done when we managed to intervene.

Now, if I’m recalling correctly, Newton testified during Bob’s trial that he lives in Cheshire county. Undercover officers tend to live in one place and work in others so there is a lower chance of them being recognized by locals. Thus far, we know that Newton works in Grafton and Sullivan counties, and maybe elsewhere. If it’s true that Newton lives in Cheshire county, that means there’s a chance you know him. Perhaps you grew up with him? Please post your comments below or send a private message via the Forum or via email copblock at gmail.com

I should have started recording sooner, zoomed the camera, and done better to focus on Newton’s exit, but hindsight is always 20-20. At least we were able to intervene, expose this deception artist, and save a young man from being caged. Special thanks to Pete, Ademo, and Beau from Liberty on Tour for springing into action! Don’t expect him to continue driving the same undercover vehicle, but here’s the brief video from today, for what it’s worth:

Also, here’s a court case where Newton plays a major role in a drug bust, just to give you confirmation of who he is and how he operates. Newton’s middle initial was found in a Keene Sentinel article. What do you know about Charles I. Newton?

UPDATE: Here’s the number for the NH Drug Task Force if you’d like to leave them or Charles a message: 603-271-3291

UPDATE: Here’s a pic of what may be the same Charles Newton from his high school yearbook.

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


60 Comments

  1. "But hey, canoli & zeus, good arguments. Extremely long winded and a bit repetitive, but good."

    Haha thanks…'extremely long winded and a bit repetitive but good' seems to be my MO around here (if I do say so myself….)

  2. PS–as a shameless plug, I'm trying my hand at blogging (getting ready for a travel blog in Uganda this fall). If any of you are interested in hearing what I have to say OTHER than all the rants I go on here, I'd love it if you checked it out!

    Just click on my name and it should bring you to the page….feel free to leave comments and suggestions, I'd love to hear feedback!

    /shameless plug

  3. How is this different than how society is structured today? People certainly still have the right to self defense. And in New Hampshire at least people are easily able to ‘be armed.’

    So what’s the difference?

    The difference is that when "the authorities" and their servants violate the rights of others, they aren't held accountable. I see news stories day after day detailing their heinous crimes. I've witnessed a few myself over the years. Rarely are they ever held to the same standards as the rest of us. And what's worse, defending yourself against them only makes it worse. Because these dominators are perceived as legitimate and unerring (their word is Law, like unto a god), any resistance is met with unmitigated brutality. What might begin as simple theft or assault on your person may end in your murder.

    This is why civil disobedience and non-participation in a system designed to herd human "tax cattle" is growing as a tactic. They can try to silence us. They can torture us. They can cage us. They can take our lives, our freedom, and our property.

    But they will never have our tacit approval, our willing obedience. In fact, we will show them that their actions are unjust, that any subjugation and acquiescence given to their demands regarding that which is ours is not because they are right, moral, just, or superior… but because they are barbarous, crude, violent, and coercive.

    When you allow positions of power over people's lives to exist, those who would abuse them are attracted to them like a moth to a flame.

    In a voluntary society, there is no flame to attract them, no power to grab, no leaders to execute, no political roles to assume. There is only persuasion through rational, convincing arguments… or nothing. You do not get to force your will on others. A voluntary society is just a bunch of people who've chosen to associate together in various ways while respecting each others' rights.

    Not some of the time or when it suits them. Not because they were born on some plot of land or another. Not because they are threatened to do so. Not because the majority of a minority demanded it or because someone on high decreed it… But because they recognize the mutual value of doing so and willingly accept it.

    You have yet to give examples of how voluntary societies ‘quench with great expediency’ violent, coercive behaviors.

    Education (or "deprogramming", if you prefer), for starters. Knowledge is self-empowering. By exposing people to a set of simple, logical principles and promoting rational thinking, informed, principled people can better make their own determinations and see things for what they are.

    The non-aggression principle. Self-ownership. The ethic of reciprocity. Responsibility for one's actions and choices. These are the pillars of a voluntary society. Logical and rational, one can no longer pretend that coercion and violence are legitimate methods of persuasion.

    Those who do not accept these things, who wish to continue pretending that domination and the initiation of force is just, do not have to join such a society and will quickly find that actions contrary to these principles will get them effectively removed from it.

    No, there’s no disconnect here. I understand your logic–despite you having not given any examples to back it up yet. However, you didn’t answer my question: you claimed perviously that getting rid of a violent regime will only result in a power vacuum which will eventually be filled by another form of violence or coercion. You have yet to explain how replacing the current government with a completely voluntary society would be effective in avoiding that power vacuum…seeing as the voluntary society you are describing seems to fit the parameters of a power vacuum quite well.

    And again, I say I don't want to replace current government with a voluntary society. I just want it to stop preventing people from opting out and escaping their domination. This system is already succumbing to its own nature. Unfortunately, it will harm a great many people in its death throes.

    I never said it didn’t ignore the non-aggression principle, at its core at least. I think there are plenty of ways to avoid aggression while still getting people to participate in something which they wouldn’t necessarily participate in, were it left completely up to volunteering, however.

    This statement is unclear. How can you get people to particpate in things they wouldn't normally participate in unless you either use convincing rational discourse and persuasion or the contrary — deception, coercion, and violence?

    So why is it then fair for you to say that people who wish to live in this voluntary society get to completely overtake the ways of life for people who already live in New Hampshire?

    You may perceive it as an invasion and takeover, but it is not. Activists are simply consolidating themselves in one area — an area known to be the least aggressive among the options available and which gives lipservice to supporting at least some of the ideas of liberty — and refusing to submit to further aggression. If there are people already living in New Hampshire who think they can only continue their way of life by aggressing against the basic rights of others and force them to submit to aggression, what does that say about those people and their way of life?

    The majority of people in New Hampshire don’t wish to opt out of the system entirely…how is it operating under the non-aggression principle for Free Staters to then move into the state and try to overturn the wishes of the majority of people who live here?

    How exactly are Free Staters trying to overturn the wishes of the majority? Does the majority wish to control the lives, liberty, labor, and property of others?

    By refusing to participate and submit to aggression, Free Staters are not violating the basic rights of native New Hampshirites. They are not murdering, assaulting, raping, stealing, enslaving, or destroying them or their property. They respect and honor the basic rights of even those who would wish to do those things to them.

    Oh really? It couldn’t be worse? Again, I suggest you take a look at the broader world around you.

    Clearly, I was stating that a voluntary society could not be worse that what we have now. This is, however, a difference in perspective, understanding, and belief between you and I. I'm well aware that there are worse societies than this one.

    The difference between your perspective and mine, however, is that I see this one on the fast-track to becoming just as bad as those others if not worse. This is the way of governments throughout history.

    Please answer my question in your own words…not decontextualized quotes (from someone who qualifies as a statist through your criteria, no less).

    My statement: "I’m not saying you’ll see 100% of everyone in such a society working toward a specific goal, but you certainly don’t see that now either. It is. however, more possible (depending on the goal) in a voluntary society than an involuntary one.”

    Your question: "Why is it more possible in a voluntary society than in the kind I am describing–aka, one in which people are required to contribute, whether or not they would chose to do so completely of their own free will?".

    Because in a voluntary society where people are informed, can make choices for themselves, are more prosperous by default because they keep what they earn and pay what they truly owe, and who live by a simple set of rational, limited rules rather than arbitrary diktats, people have the freedom to work together to solve common problems or champion common causes. Cancer, aids, racism, poverty, etc. These are issues that can unite such a people and the circumstances of a voluntary society make it more possible than those who live in a society composed primarily of poor, uninformed, dependent, and oppressed people ruled by an elite few under the illusion of freedom and nationalist jingoism.

    As for TJ, he had a lot of the right ideas. Much of the liberty movement was birthed by concepts he espoused. Unfortunately, he just wasn't able to take the last step and abandon the monopoly on force concept. Maybe he didn't conceive that a voluntary solution was possible or, like you, was uncertain of its viability. Maybe if Lysander Spooner had been his contemporary, he would have made that last hurdle.

    How is my saying ‘the people’ any different than you saying ‘the people who vote with their dollar’?

    You didn't specify which people or by what mechanism. The mechanisms used in this society are violence and coercion. When people vote with their coin, they put their life, labor, and property on the line. When people vote at the ballot box, the only thing they risk is a few minutes of their time and the results often tend not to be what they wanted, expected, or were promised. The Law of Supply and Demand tends to get better results than faith that politicians won't simply ignore their wishes and bend to the lobbyists or their own vices.

    Free markets still leave room for bribery and HUGELY disproportionate power balances. Just because you use pretty language for your scenario doesn’t mean it’s really any different.

    Can you expand on this statement with an example? Who would be bribed in a voluntary society? What would they provide in return that would result in disproportionate power balances?

    Alright, then as I said earlier….why do you deem it moral for groups of people to move to New Hampshire and claim it should be the breeding grounds for this new, voluntary society when the majority of New Hampshire is resistant to such a revolution?

    Because I do not see people moving from one location to another, purchasing property, and living as free men and women a violation of the anyone else's rights. No one is harmed, enslaved, or robbed by these actions.

    Ah, so you clearly DO know nothing of my ‘training’–as I suspected. I have spent the VAST majority of my years in private schools, I have never had cable television at my house (which means NO television when you live in Keene, New Hampshire) until this past year–the majority of which I spent at college where I had no television either anyways–and I grew up in New Hampshire, which seems to have been deemed the most liberty-minded place I could have grown up by those who are a part of this movement, no? So please, in the future, don’t assume to know anything about my ‘training.’

    Although I was initially speaking generally regarding "training" and not directly referring to you specifically, I stand corrected in my later speculation.

    And just because you have since formed different opinions from what your public school, cable television upbringing taught you, doesn’t mean that everyone who went through the same process and DIDN’T come to the same conclusions you have has been brainwashed. That’s an incredibly haughty stance to take.

    A stance with plenty of evidence to back it up. I suggest researching "Prussian school system" and listening to someone who experienced it first-hand as an educator within it for eleven years:

    http://is.gd/hx2hTU

    Exactly…which is why I get so frustrated when people like Ian, or Sam, or any number of others here act as if they are risking their lives by drinking a beer in a city council meeting.

    If you’re able to recognize that you don’t have it as bad as other people, then you shouldn’t go about your daily lives pretending like you do.

    I can't help how other individuals act or how you perceive their actions, Holy.

  4. AH

  5. Zeus, you have the patience of a saint. 😉

    (offered in the most non-religious sense.)

  6. Thanks mauiguy. Others have described it as "gabby" and "obsessed". I prefer to think of it as "thorough" and "determined".

    The thing is, I think I understand where Holy is coming from. Her primary concern (which is laudable) appears to be about what happens to the weaker members of society when the government safety nets are no longer there. If Peter is no longer robbed to pay Paul, how will Paul survive? Because she cares, she doesn't want Paul to die in abject misery and so she advocates that Peter be forced to pay for him, to participate against his will in this involuntary wealth redistribution by force.

    From my perspective, this is immoral, irrational, and inefficient. In addition, Peter isn't much better off than Paul these days and is getting progressively worse off as government ramps up its aggression against him to also pay for Mary, Sally, Joe, and Tom who've joined Paul in the poorhouse after having been aggressed against themselves.

    These safety nets aren't working and never have. They're an illusion of safety because they offer minimal subsistence but little else. The price? Dependence, obedience, and subservience. Beware of strangers with candy.

    In addition, these programs, such as they are, aren't going to survive the autocannibalism of the system as it hurtles toward inevitable terminus.

    Holy's negative view of humanity understandably makes it difficult for her to believe that in the absence of government pickpocketing those who are better off, those who are not will be left to fend for themselves, that no one will help them. In contrast, I believe that people who are not being aggressed against and who respect the rights of others will be more capable. more caring, and more generous and that a voluntary society has more incentive than government to create alternatives that actually work. The parable about teaching a person to fish vs giving them someone else's fish comes to mind here.

    To abandon these illusions of safety and enter the unknown territory of purely voluntary cooperation can be a frightening prospect.

  7. Well stated, sir. Couldn't have said it better myself. 🙂

    And, it's not gabby and obsessed, It's enlightened and wanting to share. Thank you for that. 😀

    Aloha

  8. …yada, yada, yada, blah, blah, blah……By the time I get thru reading all the posts, I have forgotten the original story from which these posts spring….A story about outing an undercover pig / governmental terrorist……….A few years ago, here in Jumanjiville/keene, KPD sent "narcs" – undercover / plainclothes cops posing as Keene State College kids, into college keg parties, to bust college kids for various alcohol & drug charges…after a flurry of condemnation once the story got press & publicity, the main troublemaker (plainclothes cop) was *OUTED* in the local paper, in a large colour(*grin*) photo…To jump in between "Canoli" & "Zues", we now have a corrupt system which too often allows and sanctions bad behaviour….(funny how that word "sanction" can mean either "allow", or "condemn"…)…Plus, despite all the "rule of law" rhetoric*RHETORIC*, we really don't have "rule of law" any more…How can we? When cops can kill citizens with impunity, but a citizen risks the death penalty for killing a cop, we no longer have a functioning democracy *OR* republic. So, if this guy is a "narc", I'd say his family is also fair game for retaliation & retribution. I oppose both violence of any kind, and of course I also oppose retaliation & retribution. 2 wrongs don't make it right, but, 2 wrongs *DO* make it even. Sometimes. Like the candle light vigils at both Judge Burke & KPD Sgt. Rivera. Burke is still an incompetent jurist, but Rivera is now a KPD Lt., and no longer Police Persecutor. May not be much progress, but at least it is some movement…***TALKING*ABOUT* violence is not the same as "advocating violence", so fuck-off, Ian. Please stop being a dweeb…and a *CENSOR*…There, *I* feel better..(…thnx 4 the blog-link, "Canoli"…I will read it later…~tKoK….

  9. ….and, on a day-to-day basis, Rivera's family is in far more danger from Rivera's out-of-control rage / anger, than they are in danger from us "activists",……… for example…I have yet to see any suggestion of support for *HOME*INVASION* crimes on this blog, *BUT*, the undercover narc *HIMSELF* is support for home invasion crimes…….Let's see you argue against *THAT* truth, "Canoli"…~tKoK.

  10. As a Medical marijuana consumer from MT just moved to TN 4 months ago, I too now face a 6yr felony charge due to "someone" thinking what I was doing was so horrible i should be arrested. Im sorry when these cops start to ignore the lies about cannabis and start protecting the people like they should instead of destroying lives, then i will care about them.

    As a disabled Father of four, just trying to not be bed ridden and avoid suffering daily so I can take care of my kids I dont think they have any right to take my kids away and put me in prison due to a proven medicine, yet that is what will happen. The question i have is why are we still allowing this to happen, dont people know that in a trial or even for a grand jury to indite someone that if the law is more harmful to that person than breaking that law they can vote to let that person free. If the law is wrong and unjust you can vote Not Guilty! As soon as they cant get a jury to convict drug consumers anymore, thats the day this all ends! Will that happen for me, it depends if I get some of the 76% of citizens that believe medical marijuana should be legal on my jury or not, or some of the 52% that just think its should be legal period!

    Oh and when they lock me up and I die in prison and i will, I only hope that I will be the last to do so. When will it be too much, when will people start to stand up and fight this mess and demand they change the laws and when will people stop electing these law makers that keep the law in place? Thats the way we win this, stop electing people that will continue to arrest non violent drug consumers, at some point you have to demand these law makers tell us their view about the drug war and if they like it they need to go, period! This is the single issue that affects more people and affects many more issues than any other single issue out there.

    Billions are spent to arrest, charge, got to trial and then to imprison people, for what, drug use rates havent dropped, drugs are stronger, criminals are making more money than they ever have off of selling them and in turn it funds much more harmful criminal activities. All this costs our country more and this endless circle of the failed drug war is the main reason our nation has declined so much as of late. 74yrs folks marijuana has been illegal, why is there still marijuana if it was working? What other law is there that the majority of citizens dont want, has done more harm to our nation and has failed so badly yet stays in place, not one!

    Oh the kids you say, well I tell you what, they arent peddling beer on every street corner to our kids are they and every teen will tell you its easy to get pot but if they want beer thats hard to do because we control and regulate beer and then make people that sell it card those who want it. You think criminals card our kids?

    All I ask is what have YOU done to help stop this madness? What letters have you written or who have you spoke to explaining the truth about our failed drug polices or better yet who have you NOT voted for that likes the drug war and has let it continue? If you want this to stop its going to take more than posting a few words online, it takes so much more and that is where we lose this battle. So stand up, know that the majority agrees with you, that you have the truth and facts on your side and change this failed policy now!

    lastly, in the near future all this will end no matter what, how many more people lives have to be destroyed before that happens I dont know. I do know history will show that this 74yr war on marijuana was the single most harmful policy ever in this nation, after slavery. History will show that its the prohibitionists, the police that fight to keep the law, the law makers that keep the law in place and the people who wont look at the facts that keep the law makers in office that will be the bad guys and that day we can all look back and blame them for the mess we called the Drug War! War always is followed by War criminals going to jail I can only hope the same will happen to the Drug Warriors too, because by their actions they have fought to keep this law in place and have in turn harmed millions of our own citizens over lies! Over 800,000 a year are arrested for pot, 90% of them are for just having pot, not selling or making/growing, just having it and year after year those 800,000 add up to millions and millions and thats a fact even the justice department cant lie about, its their numbers Im quoting!

    So what will you do to stop this? Sorry, my life and my kids lives are all on the line and Im not happy about it and you shouldnt be either, am I really the criminal here?

Care to comment?