I planned to elicit details on the leaks and the DTF failing to follow their own written policies during the trial, but this judge just made it clear he wants no part of actually getting to the bottom of any criminal acts perpetrated by officers of the law. Nope, we'll just let them keep leaking and interfering with investigations.
Attorney Livernois lied on two separate occasions in this case. First, he informed the judge that I "had the right" to raise Outrageous Government Conduct as a defense AT TRIAL. The judge's most recent ruling clearly delineates that was a bold-faced lie. Additionally, when asked in open court if I ever offered a counter-proposal to his suggested plea agreement, Attorney Livernois lied and said I never did. The communications I will be publishing a link to at the conclusion of this article reveal without any "reasonable doubt" that I did, in fact, offer a proposal of my own. Rather than explain that to the judge, Livernois lied and said there was no response.
The problem with this Belknap County Attorney is that he has no respect for the fact that there are certain people who end up trapped in the justice system who simply do not belong there. Rather than recognize that fact and remedy it, he just plugs on blindly, treating the most insignificant crime here like the biggest drug sting in state history. The reality is, law enforcement leaks and corruption made it absolutely impossible for me to cooperate. At the same time, I can certainly make the case that my charges were only ramped up so that the Drug Task Force agents could get closer to the target they wanted me to roll on. When they did finally follow and investigate the true big fish, they couldn't get anything on him because of LEAKS that I was willing to expose in court. Now, I will have to expose those leaks here.
Two law enforcement officers, one from within the Drug Task Force itself, actually gave direct information to the real target to help him avoid prosecution. If I did decide to cooperate, that would mean certain death, because the guy they really wanted carries a gun, and he's not afraid to use it if it means keeping himself out of jail for 30+ years. But the judge on my case doesn't seem to give a crap that this DTF agent and another officer from the County Sheriff's Department both betrayed their duty to protect and serve. This judge literally just does not want to hear anything about it.
That is just unacceptable. These are active officers of the law, and who knows if this is the only criminal enterprise they are protecting? They made it impossible for me to give the DTF and the State of New Hampshire any kind of win in this case. And now this judge is giving them a total pass to keep obstructing justice.
Andrew Livernois does not have the best interests of the citizens of New Hampshire in mind. YOUR TAX DOLLARS are being totally wasted on him prosecuting this useless case. Your hard-earned money is directly supporting active corruption being totally covered up by this abuser of his authority. Belknap County Residents, if you really want to see who you actually elected as your County Attorney, read some of the key communications the jury in my case will never get the chance to see right here:
https://nhdrugtaskforce.blogspot.com/p/andrew-livernois-belknap-county-attorney.html
backup link:
https://www.slideshare.net/fightnewsunlimited/andrew-livernois-belknap-county-nh-county-attorney-email-chain
And here's a few samples of the Livernois emails that are included in the above document:
If you didn't lie, you took the word of the first person you asked. Every attorney, civil or criminal, has a duty to truly investigate the facts of his case. You've failed in that duty.
What you need to remember is I am a reporter and investigator first and a lawyer only by last resort. I have the ability to find information you think it would be impossible for me to acquire. It's called research. Like, for instance, the attached manual. If I can find that manual with no formal authority or license to be given access, don't you think I can get the policies and procedures you and your DTF buddies are hiding?
I know they exist, and if you did your homework, you would know you've been hoodwinked, too. Your friends are lying to you now. They are throwing YOU under the bus.
I am giving you the courtesy of informing you of these facts so you can avoid ruining your reputation and subjecting yourself to years of civil legal wrangling by going to trial. I'm not hoping to work with you at all at this point. As I've said countless times, I don't trust you. You've blown a few chances to end this sensibly, and I will not feel the least bit bad about calling you out for the way you've disrespected me every step of the way. I want a trial. I can win a trial.
Dozens of people I've dealt with in my investigations followed the very same pattern you are following with this case. It was primarily because they all had a great deal to hide that I could easily find if I looked hard enough. Also, it was because I set the correct conditions for them to make mistakes. I made them trip themselves up, and I'm doing that to you here with better results than ever. It's time for you to make your retreat and give up on this useless war you are waging. You will never win.
The only offer you will ever get from here on out is this one:
I will sign a formal agreement that I will not file a civil suit of any kind against you or any representative of the state attorney general's office (including the DTF)...
IF: you drop all charges against me voluntarily with no conditions.
I would also consider giving up any legal right to publicize this case or the events surrounding it if you surrender this senseless effort sooner rather than later.
The day the trial starts, this offer goes away. This is the only "reasonable" offer you will ever receive. I don't give a damn if you think I need to consult with my standby counsel to come up with something you will agree to. This is not about ending the case on YOUR terms. You had the chance to do that, and you blew it.
I know you better than you think I do, and I already know from our email chains that you are a man who values your reputation for integrity, and when the judge sees an accused criminal exhibiting more integrity than you and your DTF buddies it is going to be hard for you to have to confront that you are indeed a documented liar. You are also doing the bidding for liars and not even bothering to check their facts. It's going to be embarrassing to you when a jury hears all about your unethical behavior that all the gutless public defenders you face are too afraid to call you out for.
I told you all this would happen, though, didn't I? You kept right on chugging trying to convict me at all costs, because I needed you to do that. I knew you would do that. Make it a federal case. The bigger the better. Use the whole weight of the government to squash me. I'll only benefit because it will show you are dropping a nuclear bomb to kill an ant. Why would you do that? Because the coverup is worse than the crime. And I need to be punished because I wouldn't kill myself.
I'm not giving you all these opportunities to change your mind about this case and me because I hate you or want to see you suffer, Andrew. Honestly, I'm trying to save your hide and give you a graceful way to stop the madness. It's the only olive branch you will ever get from me. I haven't had the chance to appreciate why Judge O'Neil takes your every word as gospel, but Caroline tells me you are a good guy overall. I just know you haven't been one when it comes to this case, and I know my approach brought that side out of you. It's one of those unfair advantages I have as a self-represented party. I've found out that often the "disadvantages" we have in the way of being discriminated against by the process can be far outweighed by capitalizing on the freedoms enjoyed by a pro-se party that an at-bar attorney does not have.
People hear that I'm representing myself and they expect a blithering idiot making himself look silly for trying. Everybody loves an underdog who steps up and shows he's more than capable of doing the thing nobody expects him to be able to do. No matter what way you think the case is going now, you've already lost this trial. I'm willing to make these concessions purely out of courtesy for the hard work you've put in to get where you are. I know you have a thankless job and sometimes you can get caught in a situation like this when you think it's all for some great purpose and progress toward a genuine goal. Unfortunately, you landed on a dud of a case and it's hopeless to pursue it any further. I know my attitude's made it very hard for you to give me any kind of a win, but you need to remember I'm just doing my job, too. Spending time in a jail cell is not going to help me out at this stage of my life. Probation is useless when I'm already a productive member of society. I run a business. I employ people in this community. I serve the public need. I'm not a dealer by any stretch.
Also, the war on drugs is going to end when it comes to marijuana, and every conviction will be expunged if a democrat gets elected to the presidency next year.
Even Joe Biden:
So, the times are changing. Just like I told you at the beginning of all this. And I know you are a democrat. It will be tough to find someone you can vote for who doesn't want to decriminalize weed.
I plan to seek jury nullification as a vein of my defense as well, the third prong. Do you really want to take your chances at trial with all these potential land mines you could step on?
==================
Mr. Bergeron:
With all due respect, the reason why this case is going to necessarily go to trial is because you will not engage in any meaningful discussions about a possible plea bargain, and instead choose to simply throw around accusations and incendiary language.
I certainly recognize that this case is not one of the most serious that my office handles, but if you are not willing to look at the situation somewhat objectively and dispassionately, and instead insist on an “all or nothing” approach, then there is nothing to do but take it to trial.
You know what you did; you know that you sold marijuana on six different occasions to an undercover police officer. I understand that you think it’s not fair that you were targeted by DTF, and you think you were entrapped. But the fact remains that you did what you did. And so the question is – what is a reasonable punishment for someone who engages in that behavior, given that it is still a crime to sell marijuana in this state.
Until you are willing to have a reasonable conversation about that question, this case will continue toward the inevitable trial.
As for why I do not respond to all of your wild accusations in front of Judge O’Neill – I see no need to respond. I know the truth, that there is no merit to your insults and accusations, and I know that Judge O’Neill does not put any stock in those claims either, as he is able to observe how I run my office and prosecute cases day in and day out. So I choose not to waste the Court’s time in responding. Things will be different in front of the jury, as you will see.
This case is not personal to me, Mr. Bergeron. I am simply doing my job. You were arrested by DTF following a lengthy investigation, and those charges were brought to me to prosecute. I have pursued this case in the same way I would any other drug sale case, and will continue to do so. You have an absolute right to a trial, and if that is what you want, that is what you will get. If you would prefer to resolve this case some other way, then make me a realistic counter-offer. If you have questions about what sort of counter-offer would be “realistic”, you should confer with Attorney Smith on that point.
Yours truly,
Andrew Livernois
I want a trial, Andrew. I want you to have to do the work to try to make this stick. And, it was you who refused the first and only discussion that would have made me a cooperator instead of an adversary. You betrayed any trust I could have had in you when you refused to speak to me unless I had an attorney. Now you know what it's like to want to resolve something without jumping through a bunch of ridiculous hoops, but the other side won't let you.
I have thought this through, and I don't have to or need to sit down with you at this point. I don't trust you, and I don't think you care enough about this case in the first place to really pursue it with any genuine passion. Take it to trial. That's fine with me. I want that more than anything. That is my opportunity to put all the pieces together and show that the DTF is a broken organization that learns nothing from their mistakes, even when lives are lost, or in my case when a life is at risk.
You did offer to allow a continuance with my father's death, but the point is I don't want this hanging over my head. This almost got me killed. Officer Beaulieu doesn't deserve to be able to skip out on his responsibilities to press this case if he thinks he did good work. I want it ended, and the only way to do it without getting killed for cooperating at this stage since you won't lift a finger to eliminate the leaks, is to win my trial. I'll make that case, and you will look back and regret snubbing me when I first wanted to meet. I bet you already do. That was truly the worst mistake you could have made.
Taking it to trial will be the next worst mistake, but I'm looking forward to watching you make it. I have revelations that will come out in cross that will shake the system from the ground up.
