The NHMA, a group that represents the big-government interests of the various cities and towns in New Hampshire, argues in their 16-page amicus that the superior court erred by dismissing the cases against the Robin Hooders. They say the court did not weigh the “significant governmental interest” in parking enforcement against the right to free speech. In addition, they claim the bureaucrats should be protected from speech they don’t wish to hear and that “reasonable” restrictions can be placed on your free speech, to protect the government agents precious’ ears and egos.
The brief by attorney Charles Bauer filed on behalf of the city is 49 pages and argues that Robin Hooders’ conduct is not protected speech and that their employees will suffer “irreparable harm” if Robin Hooding is allowed to continue. The filing includes basically the same arguments made at superior court, just in appeal form.
This week, liberty activist Graham Colson was tried for a “contempt of court” charge that he received while out on bail after being arrested on a later-determined-unconstitutional no trespass notice from the “city of Keene”. In legal land there is a concept known as the doctrine of the “fruit of the poisoned tree”. My understanding of this is that if, for instance, the police raid your home on a bad warrant (say they lied to the judge to get the warrant), that any evidence collected based on that warrant cannot be used against you. It’s the “fruit of the poisoned tree”, and so charges must be dropped.
However, this doctrine appears to not apply to the “orders” of the judge. In Graham’s case, he was arrested for violating the no trespass notice from the city that banned him from Central Square. He was let out on bail conditions that included no contact with a couple of parking enforcers. He was later arrested for walking through Central Square and talking to a parking enforcer. For this act he was charged with “contempt of court”. Then, last summer, the district court’s judge Edward Burke threw out the no trespass letter as unconstitutional and illegal. Since the no trespass letter was illegal, shouldn’t the contempt case be thrown out too, since the bail conditions were originally issued on a case based on an illegal no trespass notice? Maybe in a system actually oriented towards justice – not this one.
So, the contempt charge went to court this week and Graham was found guilty, despite a valiant attempt to defend the charge by Garret Ean. Graham will be turning himself into the Keene Spiritual Retreat, aka the county jail to serve 60 days. He will have five months suspended over his head for two years. All because the city police were handing out illegal no trespass orders. Yeah, justice! Here’s the full video of the trial:
Hero Rich Paul is behind bars again! He is currently wearing orange and being held in D-Block. (That’s where they keep prisoners who haven’t yet been sentenced.) He can accept visitors, but not phone calls. The best way to write to him is using a free service called http://MailtoJail.com. He might be in there for a while, so please write him often, as it is his only connection to the outside world.
Except one. The Jail Sign-Wave is an activism event where people bring banners, posters, and flags outside the jail, and they wave up at the prisoners caged inside. Word quickly spreads around the cell block, and soon everyone is at their windows waving back. Many of them will never have a single visitor for months or years. There’s a reason they come to the windows and wave every week. Humans need connection.
“fundamental to the continuing vitality of our democracy, for ‘time out of mind, [sidewalks] have been used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions.’”
“[a]s a general matter, we have indicated that in public debate our own citizens must tolerate insulting, and even outrageous, speech in order to provide adequate breathing space to the freedoms protected by the First Amendment.”
Bissonnette also encourages police to investigate and prosecute the perpetrators of violence and says that the city should be encouraging free expression rather than suppressing it. It’s an excellent legal opinion and the city council should read it carefully before they screw up and pass an unconstitutional suppression of free speech. Stay tuned to Free Keene for the latest on the ridiculous-to-the-max War on Chalk.
In late 2013, the people calling themselves the “City of Keene” filed an appeal with the NH supreme court after they lost the Robin Hood cases. Now, six months later, (the wheels of ‘justice’ move slowly) the city’s expensive private attorneys have filed their brief, an appendix, and the NH Municipal Association has weighed in with an “amicus curiae“.
