PC Hearing Advances Fountain Assault Case

A probable cause hearing was held yesterday in Keene district court in the case of State v James M. Phillips. Phillips stands accused of causing the hospitalization of Matthew “Yankee” Oldershaw after allegedly shoving or tackling him into the jagged granite which comprises the fountain in Central Square. During the hearing, sole witness Benjamin Nugent presented verbal accounts of his interactions with witnesses and analysis of video from the scene, including the only footage which partially captures the assault, as filmed by the currently incarcerated Free Keene blogger Rich Paul. Information presented which would normally be discounted as hearsay was admissible as Nugent recalled the statements of others collected over the course of his investigation into the incident. A public defender cross examined Nugent after direct examination from KPD prosecutor Jean Kilham.

A copy of the paperwork from the case reveals the bail conditions attached to the single charge of 2nd 2014_08_06_courtnugentdegree assault from the June 03 incident. An arrest warrant issued on July 11 was followed with instructions to not be present in Central Square, to have no contact with Matthew Oldershaw, and to refrain from the use of alcohol. A PR bail of $1000 was set on the day of the arrest.

Following yesterday’s hearing, judge Edward Burke found the state’s evidence sufficient to constitute probable cause for advancing the felony case to the superior court, where it will likely be heard before judge John Kissinger. Video from the hearing is available at Fr33manTVraw. Additional written coverage from the court by Martha Shanahan was published today in the Keene Sentinel.

Free State Project Hate Letter / Love Letter

fsp_LF2014A couple of letters to the editor appeared in local papers in NH recently. One was a love letter by Paul Mirski of Enfield that appeared in the Concord Monitor. Mirski praises Free State Project participants as part of New Hampshire’s tradition.

Here’s a hate letter by Ed Lake of Ashuelot that appeared in the Keene Sentinel. Lake claims to be a lover, but yet admits to hating and focuses his letter on his hatred of Free Keene and the Free State Project, likening us to terrorists. Confusingly, Lake claims:

I love my state and do not wish to see some outside force take it away from me, my family or my neighbors.

When Lake says he loves his state, what does he mean by “state”? Is he talking about the geographic area known as New Hampshire? The mountains, lakes, and trees? The wonderful, friendly people of the Shire? If so, he needn’t fear – no Free State Project participant I know of wants to take his land and friends away. Liberty-minded people tend to be very respectful of property rights and the rights of others.

Perhaps by “state”, he’s talking about the criminal organization of men and women whose very existence and legitimacy is threatened by the FSP. If it is the violent monopoly “state” that he means, then he will continue to be more frustrated over time as more people move here.  It is the monopoly, criminal “state” that will be gone someday, left in the dustbin of history, just like chattel slavery.

Regardless of Lake’s actual meaning, these letters again prove the relevance of the Free State Project. FSP participants are having an impact and cannot be ignored. Come join us in the Shire sooner rather than later and help us achieve more liberty in our lifetime!

Here are copies of the letters to the editor for archival purposes: (more…)

Rebel Love Show Episode 16 (7/16/14)

Recorded on July 16th, Neal Connor of the Foundation for New Hampshire Independence comes on to talk about independence rallies, peace, love, and Bitcoin.

WARNING: One of our microphones malfunctioned, so the audio quality can be spotty at times.

Robin Hood Attorney’s Supreme Court Filing

Attorney Jon MeyerIn addition to the NH ACLU filing an amicus brief in the Robin Hood case, Robin Hooders’ free-speech attorney Jon Meyer has also filed his brief in the case. As always, the award-winning attorney excoriates and embarrasses the “city’s” outrageous, dangerous, and illegal positions and demands.

In it, he argues that government workers, including parking enforcers, have no right to be left alone:

Plaintiff’s assertion of a public employee right to be left alone has no legal basis, particularly as applied to political speech on public sidewalks, and does not trump the right of protestors to express their message at close range or from afar.

The demands of the “City” are so dangerous, Meyer argues it’s critical the court reject them: (more…)