Hudson, NH Police Commander Sets an Example For Other Police Agencies To Follow

Adam Kokesh of Adam vs. The Man and I went to the Hudson, NH Police Department to file a criminal complaint against former House Speaker and presidental candidate Newt Gingrich’s security agent who assaulted Adam earlier the previous day. When we were there, Adam was filming, and was threatened with arrest.

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.

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.


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


You’re looking really good Chief Lavoie!

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

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


  1. Brad, I have been accused of being entirely negative when I post here. This is because I very seldom see anything truly positive here. With that said, I would like to congratulate YOU on being man enough to apologize for being a rude obnoxious jerk at the beginning of your interaction. Your apology at the end of this video and the group's decision to go ahead with their statements, in a reasonable adult manner (unlike many of the juvenile antics to the West). Congratulations, this is what I imagined to be the difference between "Freestaters" and "FreeKeeners".

  2. Bill,

    Thank you for your kind words. I believe my initial reaction was necessary to "take control" of the situation and prevent Adam's arrest.

    What you saw in my reaction was a result of the training I have… the problem is, the Lieutenant has the same training. We both were trying to "take control" of the situation. We talked about that when we were in his office, us both being trained to escalate. I do need to work on not escalating, though.

    After a long conversation it is my opinion that this Lieutenant truly is a good man and he earned my respect… hence the apology.

    We need more police officers like HIM!

  3. I'm really shocked to see that he admitted he was wrong. It's a good thing when minds can come together.

  4. I'm sorry you have to go through all this Adam Koksh. It is good that you have good people like brad who have your back. Because I know it sure is hard to go back to the "cop shop" when they have done you wrong……THAT take strength … 🙂

  5. It sure its heartening to see a man in charge who seems to sincerely take it seriously (as it should be taken).


    Wonderful vid…thanks guys… It almost gives one hope…

  6. Brad, I passed this to a friend who's lived in Hudson for decades, and he said he'd be writing a letter to them. He's had previous interactions with that same officer which support the premise that he's a cut above the norm.

  7. Shark:

    Excellent, thanks so much! Police who operate like Lt. Dyac deserve all the positive encouragement they can get!

    More like HIM!

  8. Is everyone forgetting that until he took the time to check for himself the Lt. was ready to cage anyone whom didn't comply with his orders? If anything the only thing that was shown was his willingness to correct himself which likely had more to do with the cameras than his conscience.

    What likely happened is while verifying the rules he came to the conclusion that he didn't want to create a problem for the department. The contempt is still present in his voice.

    The only congratulations here should be to Adam, Brad and others whom have the courage to risk being assaulted, caged and/or killed for taking a stand against tyranny.

  9. As a libertarian, I don't care about motives; I care about actions.

    If someone lies, cheats, steals, breaks contracts, assaults others, or whatever, his motivations are meaningless to me, and I will condemn him for those behaviors. If someone refrains from doing so… again, his motivations are meaningless to me, and I will praise him for doing so.

    Eventually, the subject of such condemnation or praise will modify his behavior, if he is given consistent input from those around him.

  10. Thats an interesting point, let me as you something Maineshark;

    Would your practice have applied to say John Brown the abolitionist. His motives were to free humans beinig enslaved by other humans. He assaulted and killed to free slaves?

    What say you?

  11. His motive is irrelevant. He could have done so because he hated slavery, or because he was a hired mercenary who didn't give a hoot about slavery, or whatever; the facts are of interest to history, but not in assigning culpability.

    Some of his killings were directly of slave owners and such, in which case they were justified as acts in defense of another (ie, the slaves). Others were of folks who were supportive of slavery, but who did not directly participate, in which case it becomes much more complex (eg, what level of support makes one an accessory, rather than a bystander).

    Motive is irrelevant. If you shoot a rapist to stop him from raping his intended victim because you hate rapists, your action is justified. If you shoot a rapist to stop him from raping his intended victim because you know she's rich and you hope she'll reward you handsomely, your action is justified. If you shoot a rapist to stop him from raping his intended victim because he's black and his intended victim is white, and you would not have stopped him if his intended victim was black, as well, your action is justified. The facts that he was intending to rape her, and that shooting him was necessary to stop the assault, are the only things that determine whether your action in doing so was justified.

    The reasons may make me label you as a creep in one or two of those cases, and might make me not want to invite you to my home (just as I'm not likely to invite that cop to my home, regardless of his behavior there), but they don't change the justification (or lack thereof) of any action you take.

Care to comment?