While a motion to continue is hardy any indicator, Robin Hood and friends’ legal conflict is off to a promising start as the first disagreement in the city’s lawsuit against the Merry (wo)Men was found in the light most favorable to the defense. Having first received the foundational paperwork of the lawsuit on May 9, last week the six defendants received notice of a preliminary hearing scheduled in superior court for Monday, June 10. I had been scheduled to be out of town for a few days leading up to and on the hearing date, so I filed a motion to continue, asking for either all parties’ hearings to be rescheduled, or to have a hearing scheduled solely for myself. No stranger to courtrooms myself, I have filed countless motions to continue with courts across New Hampshire, and have not yet had one denied. It was not surprising that the city attorney might object, and reading his objection, you would think that the situation was dire.
As stated in the City’s Verified Petition for Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief, the seriousness of the situation warrants immediate consideration and action by the Court; the City and its Parking Enforcement Officers would be prejudiced by any delay in this proceeding.
What exactly will ‘the city’ present as damages in this case? They have yet to cite a specific claim against Robin Hooders other than vague allegations of ‘harassment’. Attorney Mullins seems so convinced that Robin Hooders pose such a potential threat that even delaying their preliminary hearing one day could mean chaos in the streets of Keene. Mullins’ objection was denied, the continuance granted, and a new hearing date has been set for June 11 at 2:30pm.
We’re only three episodes into the hottest new weekly variety series on Cheshire TV’s local access channel 8, and already AKPF #1 has received a scathing denunciation from the anonymous editorial board of the Keene Sentinel! AKPF is allegedly tied to the devious Robin Hooding ‘campaign’, and the nameless author alleges all sorts of terrifyingly vague safety concerns that may come about as a result of filling meters. First sensationalizing the material, the author attempts to marginalize the Robin Hooding footage selected by referring to it as ‘mundane’. Clearly, they have not watched much of the hundreds of hours of footage at Fr33manTVraw if they think that a riveting discussion that myself and James Cleaveland had with parking enforcer Jane exemplifies mundane footage.
Before the conclusion of the editorial, there’s a video cited which, based on facts referenced, likely is this months-old video, which was produced by Chris Cantwell, a comedian from New York who is not affiliated with Robin Hood of Keene nor is named in the lawsuit. Though it would not take much investigating on the part of the Slantinel, it was apparently too much work to figure out the names of the individuals they make broad allegations against, not so much alleging crime as they are “childish behavior playing out in the streets”. Despite a functioning website, and presence on the internet for several years, the Slantinel also fails to link to the video they absorbed so much knowledge from. It is almost as though they would rather you just take their word for it. (more…)
Today I took the initiative to do what lawyers do before taking cases before the court — discussing the matter with the opposition. After passing through district court security at City Hall, I headed upstairs to see if city attorney Thomas Mullins was available. We scheduled a time to meet tomorrow morning to discuss the world-famous Robin Hooding lawsuit. While not open carrying my camera at the time, Mullins laid down a non-negotiable prohibition on electronic recording as the condition under which he would be willing to have a dialogue. I find it unfortunate that city officials are not willing to be objectively accountable in dialogues regarding public matters, but I will be permitted to take at least written notes.
It’s worth considering that City Manager Prince John MacLean has regarded Robin Hooding as inherently “harassing” since he made public statements collectively deriding its participants in a Keene Sentinel cover story dated 11 April 2013. Prior to and after this, not once did any representative of the city raise concerns about “harassment and intimidation” to the accused directly as is alleged in the six-defendant lawsuit.
The condition upon which I enter the dialogue tomorrow is that I represent no person except for myself, and that no person represents I but myself. Mullins informed myself that if I were to have paid a lawyer to field the case for me, that he would then be prohibited from having communication with me in any manner but through my attorney.
Prince John, on behalf of his court jesters and their enforcement units, has penned a desperate response to the global outpouring of support received by Robin Hood and the Merry Men following the royalty’s frivolous lawsuit against us. Through a royal proclamation published in Saturday’s Sentinel, the Prince builds upon his deceitful characterization of individuals that he first perpetuated in a Keene Sentinel cover story over a month ago. Prince John continues to demonize those who participate in Robin Hooding, conflating our actions to ‘intimidation’ and ‘harassment’.
Court Jester Thomas Mullins
Considering the amount of self-righteous fluff sandwiching the Prince’s sentences, royalty seems to understand the extent to which they have dug themselves into a hole with a baseless lawsuit against six activists. Whatever the city’s true motives, we can trust in our leaders that this action had “nothing to do” with revenue. “The city has no interest in whether or not these or other individuals wish to pay the parking meters, and no claim about this practice is made in the legal action…This is definitely not about parking meter money. On behalf of your mayor, Kendall Lane, your elected city councilor, and your dedicated city employees, we are all honored to work for you and this wonderful community,” MacLean assures. Fancying himself an omniscient ruler of his subjects, the Prince even alleges that he can peer into the minds of those he sues. Weaving two different interpretations of the motives of the Merry Men, the Prince begins, (more…)
On Thursday, six individuals associated with activities related to Robin Hood of Keene were delivered a stack of legal documents from Cheshire sheriff’s deputies. While responses are being crafted, independent media begins to disseminate information regarding this escalation by the royal forces against the merry men. Derrick J reports through his daily newscast Peace News Now with excerpts from the case file.
Just as police attempted following the Chalking 8 case, by attributing negative actions not to any individual but to an amorphous group, the police and city bureaucrats shirk the task of properly placing responsibility for whatever allegation they are attempting to advance.
In other Keene happenings, the newest variety program from the Aqua Keene Parking Force premieres in under 24 hours. AKPF #1 will broadcast at Free Concord and Free Keene at midnight on the morning of May 13, and at 7:00pm on Cheshire TV.
Sundays at 4pm, join us on 101 across from the jail in Keene for a rally to support Rich Paul, jury nullification, and the release of all peaceful prisoners. Bring your own signs, or you can use ours.
Rich Paul also called in to Sunday night’s live edition of “Free Talk Live”. You can listen to that here.
While a motion to continue is hardy any indicator, Robin Hood and friends’ legal conflict is off to a promising start as the first disagreement in the city’s lawsuit against the Merry (wo)Men was found in the light most favorable to the defense. Having first received the foundational paperwork of the lawsuit on May 9, last week the six defendants received notice of a preliminary hearing scheduled in superior court for Monday, June 10. I had been scheduled to be out of town for a few days leading up to and on the hearing date, so I filed a motion to continue, asking for either all parties’ hearings to be rescheduled, or to have a hearing scheduled solely for myself. No stranger to courtrooms myself, I have filed countless motions to continue with courts across New Hampshire, and have not yet had one denied. It was not surprising that the city attorney might object, and reading his objection, you would think that the situation was dire.
