Superior Court Clerk Admits No Speedy Trial Reports Have Been Created During Pandemic, Trial Gets Scheduled Again

     It turns out the Freedom of Information Act somehow does not cover the judicial branch at all in New Hampshire, so you have to rely on the New Hampshire Constitution instead: 

Mary Ann Dempsey <MDempsey@courts.state.nh.us>
Thu, Dec 30, 2021, 3:34 PM to me, Mary

Mr. Bergeron,

 

I am responding to your communications to Chief Justice Nadeau requesting speedy trial reports for Belknap County from November 1, 2020 to present.  You cite RSA 91-A as the basis for your request.  Please be advised that the New Hampshire Judicial Branch is not subject to RSA 91-A, but rather responds to request for information in accordance with Part I, Article 8 of the New Hampshire Constitution.  There are no documents responsive to your request as reports have not been prepared during the period that the COVID-19 pandemic has been ongoing.

 

Mary Ann

      I had to send a certified letter to get that response, and I included a bumper sticker for this very site in the envelope.  Both asking Judge O'Neill for a trial to be scheduled and asking Judge Tina Nadeau for documentation regarding the speedy trial calendar appears to be ruffling the right feathers so far. My response to the above admission probably greased the wheels of justice more than any other factor: 

From: Rich Bergeron <rich.bergeron@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 11:00 AM
Subject: Re: Right to Know Request
To: Mary Ann Dempsey <MDempsey@courts.state.nh.us>

Please remind Judge Nadeau that there is no precedent or stipulation in the policy itself for fully suspending this policy, pausing it, or refusing to honor the rights it is designed to protect. She and the State of New Hampshire are opening themselves up to serious civil legal action on a class action scale if this attitude persists and monitoring continues to be unlawfully suspended. Please read the policy itself as it pertains to monitoring:

Monitoring System for the Speedy Trial Policy

To implement the Superior Court policy on speedy trial, the Chief Justice of the Superior Court shall require the clerks to prepare and maintain a speedy trial report. In addition, the Chief Justice shall annually designate a justice to be the criminal case monitoring justice to oversee the policy in each court as of April 1 of each year. The Chief Justice as well as the criminal case monitoring justice will receive a copy of the monthly speedy trial report by the seventh day of each month. In consultation with the clerk of that court, the criminal case monitoring justice shall be responsible to see that the speedy trial policy is being adhered to and in addition to see that the criminal docket is arranged so as to avoid the 4 month and 9 month “show cause” hearings to the maximum extent possible through the case scheduling process. The monthly monitoring reports shall list in numerical sequence all active criminal cases pending for longer than 3 months, that is those not dismissed, nol prossed or in which sentences have not been imposed. The clerk of each court shall provide the senior presiding justice in that court with copies of the monthly monitoring reports.


On a quarterly basis the Chief Justice of the Superior Court shall ensure that the speedy trial reports from all ten counties are available electronically to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to assist the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in determining what changes, if any, may be necessary in the monitoring process.


Does this mean the judiciary in this state is using the Pandemic as an excuse to deny countless people awaiting trial their civil rights? The underlined portion above stipulates the monitoring process can be changed, but there is no language in the policy that allows for suspension of the policy for any reason. This policy is codified by the Supreme Court case it cites. A local court should not be able to ignore established Supreme Court precedent law for any reason, and the state is opening itself up to countless "violation of civil rights" lawsuits if this attitude persists. The moment an effective 1st Circuit Court appeal is granted on a case involving this unconstitutional blanket denial of speedy trial rights, the floodgates for civil lawsuits will open.

I look forward to publishing this information and alerting citizens of this state to the fact that Judges refuse to do their jobs and enforce the law in this state and choose to blame the pandemic for their complete failure to fix their internal problems. Judge Introcaso is just the tip of the iceberg. Judge O'Neill is a complete travesty and never should have been appointed. Now we have evidence that Judge Nadeau is abandoning her responsibilities to enforce speedy trial rights in this state. The perfect legal storm my case has become is still gaining strength. You can't deny me my day in court forever, and the civil suit will follow. 

Blame the pandemic all you want, but this is flat out dereliction of duty.  

Rich Bergeron

     It only took about a week after sending this message, but I finally have an idea of when my trial will be thanks to a January 6th Notice of Jury Trial. The final pretrial hearing will be April 19th. That happens to be after Judge O'Neill's mandatory retirement date, so my prediction from my last recusal motion came true there. Judge O'Neill will not be presiding over my trial, which is currently scheduled for the weeks of May 9th and May 16th, 2022. 

     It is often said that sunlight is the best disinfectant. I eagerly await my chance to shed some serious light on how truly screwed up my local justice system is. The Covid-19 delays have only made the glaring holes in the process more apparent. The sad part is that the evidence will show the state of New Hampshire wasted a whole lot of taxpayer dollars on this case. There's no return on investment for that. There is in fact more damaging information that will come out at trial which will make this a lose/lose situation all around for this state. 

     The weight and force of the system itself bearing down on me will betray the fact that marijuana prohibition has no future and makes no sense for our state. The botched investigation at the center of the case against me shows how easy it is to corrupt a small-town law enforcement system like ours. This case is dead on arrival, and any halfway intelligent jury will see through the prosecutor's bullshit. Then a new chapter begins where I hold the state and the main players in this mess accountable in civil court. STAY TUNED. 

State Orders Scheduling of Trial, Balks at Requests For Speedy Trial Reports

The State of New Hampshire continues to drag out my case despite Judge O'Neill recently ordering that a trial be scheduled. It turned out to be the fastest order the judge ever filed in response to a motion I filed. It came the very next day after the prosecution filed a limited objection to the initial motion to schedule the trial. 

That motion to schedule my trial reiterated the fact that my Speedy Trial rights are actively being violated. I also used very specific language in the motion to explain that I was asking the judge to decide my request on an either/or basis. Either schedule a trial promptly or dismiss the case. 

I don't always plan for things to work out perfectly in scenarios like this, but if this was a fishing expedition, Judge O'Neill's response was akin to a big fat fish jumping in the boat before you even bait a hook. Not only did he provide the most timely order possible for me, but he also wrote his order as if he only read the limited objection to any possible dismissal that Deputy Grafton County Attorney Tara Heater filed. It was written in a way that screams BIAS! I guess he forgot what the actual motion proposed as a prayer for relief and revealed his ultimate, unwavering loyalties to whatever the State suggests in any given scenario. 

Essentially the language of my motion meant granting the request to schedule the trial would negate the need to deny the conditional request to dismiss. This concept completely escaped Judge O'Neill thanks to the way Attorney Heater wrote her objection. His order just made it clear that he would never dismiss this case voluntarily. He also confirmed he is eating out of the prosecutor's hand here. He purposely provided a ruling based only on her limited objection rather than taking the time to properly analyze the actual relevant choice I asked him to make in this scenario. He's like the proverbial horse with blinders on. That's how prosecutors use him to get whatever they want. They lead him to water and he drinks, even if it's a puddle of oil. 

Judge O'Neill filed his order on November 19th. There is still no trial scheduled as of today, December 6th, 2021. He additionally decided not to hold any hearings on the last few motions despite religiously holding them for every other motion. If Judge O'Neill remains on this case I will have a guaranteed appeal should a jury convict me of the charges. It is truly a no-win situation for the state, but they will press on anyway. It's just another huge issue with the system as we know it. There is no mechanism for the state admitting to a prosecution being misguided and abandoning all charges. They would rather try to make these bad charges stick than figure out where things went wrong and make sure it never happens again. Everyone involved on behalf of the prosecution will look like morons when the smoke of the trial clears. So it appears the name of their game is delay, delay, delay. 

Meanwhile, my speedy trial rights continue to be violated. Stay tuned to find out if I will be able to secure crucial evidence for my case. I have filed a Freedom of Information Act request for all materials regarding speedy trial calendars for Belknap County Superior Court beginning 9 months from my only waiver up to the present day. So far just asking for these documents to be delivered by either the prosecution or the Chief Justice has been a wasted effort. Their reluctance to cooperate tells me they have something to hide. 

At trial, I will be highlighting the fact that Marijuana prohibition is a waste of time and money. The real problem is opioids, and people are dying as a result of our state spending too much time pretending Marijuana use is somehow a greater threat to public safety. If you want my opinion, our state is chasing the wrong dragon. 

Second Motion For Sanctions Hearing Audio

     

Friday, March 5th, 2021 was a day I planned meticulously for, and how my new sanctions motion ultimately shakes out now depends on a Superior Court Judge. The prosecution, led by Deputy Grafton County Attorney Tara Heater, decided to cling to technicalities, as lawyers often do when trying to bury the truth. Saying anything more on this subject will only mean backing herself further into a corner she shouldn't even be in. Belknap County's finest, Andrew Livernois and Keith Cormier, are the real people to blame for Attorney Heater's predicament, but she can't even say it out loud without totally embarrassing her county and the state. The coverup really is worse than the crime. 

A surprising little scandal seems to be emerging in these two counties now that we have Attorney Heater on the record here saying that her supervisor has nothing to do with this litigation. This argument's also been tried to explain away Attorney Cormier's sloppy gag order request. What is the definition of supervisor in these counties? It sounds to me like nobody's doing any real supervising at all. If Attorney Hornick is not involved in the litigation but is also supervising it at the same time, that sounds very contradictory. 

Listen to "Bergeron Sanctions Motion Against Keith Cormier, Andrew Livernois, Tara Heater and Martha Ann Hornick" on Spreaker.

          My patience for this whole ridiculous process is wearing thin. It is bad enough being a pro-se party in a civil case, but in the criminal courts I'm lumped in with some of the worst practitioners of the pro-se moniker in all of human history. I'm considered a lost cause, even if I have real talent as a litigator and even if the truth is on my side. Nothing I can say can penetrate through the thick walls of bias surrounding me. I fully expect to lose this motion on some bogus technicality or legal loophole, which will not slow me down one single bit. I have planned for each and every possible outcome. I've grown used to not being able to trust the system to be honest. Most often you cannot effectively represent yourself, even if you have a solid case, if you have no way to make absolutely sure the system MUST be honest. 

     I have a strategy in this case to make sure there is no possible way for me to truly lose this motion. It is the judge himself and the system itself that will lose if Judge James D. O'Neill III decides to do absolutely nothing to punish these prosecutors. "Attorney Bergeron" will not be discouraged in the event of a denial. I will only be emboldened. The path to acquittal is much easier in the face of a denial of this motion than it will be if this motion is granted. I'll be thrilled no matter which way it goes. I can work effectively and efficiently with either development. 

    The sad part about the road to victory if there is a denial of this motion is that reputational damage is not by any means reversible. Secrets will be revealed and truths will be told that may actually change careers, and not for the better. Legacies will be destroyed. The true character of public officials will be exposed, and there will be emotional wreckage that might never be repaired. Yet, that will be a level I must go to at that point. It will be my reaction to a system that backed me into a corner. And it will be a beautiful but tragic tale of self-destruction for this judge and these prosecutors. 

     Stay tuned to our site here and follow the case as it inches slowly toward trial. The moral of this story will be: the truth matters. Attorney Andrew Livernois at least pretends to subscribe to that sentiment, but his actions prove otherwise. I recently discovered his GoodReads profile, where he insists this is his favorite book quote: 

“Things come apart so easily when they have been held together with lies.”
― Dorothy Allison, Bastard Out of Carolina

     This prosecution is coincidentally held together by lies, some of which Andrew perpetrated shamelessly. Karma is coming, and justice in the court of public opinion will be much more swift than any justice provided by the local courts. 

NH Attorney Discipline Committee Refuses to Docket Grievance Against Belknap County Attorney Andrew Livernois and Deputy County Attorney Keith Cormier

When an accused criminal has more integrity than the people prosecuting him, the local justice system is clearly broken. Worse than the fact that Andrew Livernois and Keith Cormier lied and abused their positions to silence me with a bogus gag order request is that they made others in the system stoop to their low level. 

It is truly amazing and astounding what this group of poster children for patronism were willing to go to bat for and assume blindly to be a good faith effort. The filing that triggered all this would have received a failing grade from even the most lenient law professor. Yet people lined up to say it was all on the level, impugning their own character in the process. 

Even the "replacement killer" from another county defended the indefensible, hastily written motion to prohibit pretrial publicity that came out of the Belknap County Attorney's Office. Oh, I forgot to mention the turmoil surrounding this motion led to Livernois and Cormier removing themselves from my case and the Attorney General assigning the prosecution to another county. Deputy Grafton County Attorney Tara Heater took over and acted immediately to save Livernois and Cormier. She on one hand withdrew the motion (citing strategic reasons) before a hearing could be held, but on the other hand she defended the merits of the motion when I filed for sanctions. The problem she knew she had going into her defense of that motion was that I warned her it would subject her to sanctions herself for misrepresenting the facts and trying to make a trash pile of junk law smell like a bed of roses. 

It's not so much the collective corruption executed by the original prosecutors that disturbs me. It's the fact that these other attorneys saw this fiasco and jumped into the raging rapids of unethical behavior without a life jacket to save a couple guys they watched jump in with cement blocks tied to their feet. Colleagues were all too willing to look the other way or even back up the behavior that resulted in my recent motion for sanctions. They abandoned their principles to pursue and promote a farce. The sad fact is the pubic pays these people to be the front line on maintaining the integrity of the justice system in this state. Yet, they are nothing but glorified janitors sweeping all the corruption under the rug. It's pathetic.

I made an earnest attempt to report Livernois and Cormier for violating the very set of rules they accused me of breaking (despite the fact that I am not bound by those rules at all as a pro-se party). Brian Moushegian, the spineless general counsel of the New Hampshire Attorney Discipline Committee, covered for his colleague and did a good job of wiping the state's ass on this shit show.

Attorney Moushegian made all the excuses in the world to absolve Attorneys Cormier and Livernois without making any discernible effort to actually investigate the allegations or make any meaningful inquiry at all into the matter. There was not one single word filed in response to my complaint by either accused attorney. Moushegian's rambling responses pretty much confirmed what I already knew: this committee is toothless and will never act against any prosecutor even if a clear report of rule violations comes before them. 

I had one avenue to ask for an appeal of sorts, and I took that road, too. My letter asking for reconsideration made no difference. The whole committee backed the blind loyalty shown by their general counsel. The lies and the lazy motion practice that started this mess just gets compounded when nobody is held accountable for their abuses of the public trust. I jumped through every hoop and followed all the right procedures, even reporting myself to the committee to determine their rules of professional conduct could never apply to me. 

  

The judge in my case might still set everyone straight on this subject by ruling in my favor on my motion for sanctions. I'm hopeful on that front, but there's a real chance he could  actually endorse this kind of egregious behavior out of his own sense of blind loyalty to the institution. I'm prepared for both outcomes. 

Either way this crazy chain of events works out, I'm not about to let this grievance become dust in the wind. The taxpayers of this community ought to know about what happened here and how so many attorneys came together to cover up this unethical mess. If I can't convince the busted justice system around here that something's wrong with this picture, I'll just have to convince the people paying for it.

Cannabis and Hemp Expert Witness/Author/Activist Chris Conrad Interview

 

Chris Conrad is a human encyclopedia when it comes to the history of hemp and cannabis. Rich delves into Conrad's illustrious background as an expert in cultivation who became a champion for reform. This wide ranging discussion covers every angle of why federal legalization is long overdue in the United States:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8xomaxvrx8ywk0m/chrisconradinterview.mp3?dl=0 

Learn more about Chris at:

http://chrisconrad.com/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Conrad_(author)

https://oaksterdamuniversity.com/chris-conrad/

Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss; Deputy Grafton County Attorney Tara Heater Defends the Indefensible to Protect Livernois and Cormier

Nearly all of my pleadings in my criminal case pending in Belknap Superior Court have been accompanied by sworn affidavit. I've received only one order in my favor thus far, for a motion to suppress that went unopposed. Yet, the original prosecutor has somehow been able to get every request he's ever asked for from the judge with no such affidavits attached to his requests. The new prosecutor, Tara J. Heater from Grafton County, hasn't asked for anything yet.

Rule 35 (i) of the New Hampshire Rules of Criminal Procedure outlines the requirements related to motions filed in Superior Court. Subsection (1) reads as follows:

“The court will not hear any motion grounded upon facts, unless they are verified by affidavit, or are apparent from the record or from the papers on file in the case, or are agreed to and stated in writing signed by the parties or their attorneys; and the same rule will be applied as to all facts relied on in opposing any motion..."

These rules are made to be broken, and it happens all the time. Attorneys are part of an exclusive club. Judges used to be part of the same club. People who represent themselves are fools, whether the evidence supports that conclusion or not. It's just sort of a known judicial fact with the majority of judges I dealt with in my writing career. It turns out that every time they think that old token wisecrack is true with me, they find out they are sadly mistaken.

The legal profession is in enough hot water as it is without the "defund the police" movement putting such a white hot spotlight on abuses of the justice system. The perfect legal storm that this case was already just joined up with a tornado, even despite the fact that the prosecution decided to withdraw their gag order request. Even without the support of the ACLU lawyers who wrote their brief on my behalf, I filed a sanctions motion, and I'm waiting to find out when the hearing will be and whether there will be witnesses allowed.

Despite my earlier promise to publish the entire sanctions motion, I've changed my thought process on that. There are sensitive matters contained in the motion and the response. Some of them have already been published elsewhere. The last thing I want is to have any member of the press put out information that is not accurate. The pleading and supporting evidence was somewhat complex. It's tough to break down into a typical newspaper article and get all the details correct.

The reason I have to be cautious is the most recent newspaper report on this subject left out a great deal of much-needed context. I am trying to be as fair as possible to the judicial process at this point.

My motion and reply also deal with some very basic principles and circumstances I will discuss here. The cover up is worse than the crime. It is the way they did all this legal maneuvering that's really suspicious. There was a little bit more detail about the Grafton County takeover revealed in the latest filing from Attorney Heater. Attorney Livernois apparently took himself off the case on July 7th. Heater admits in her opposition filing that Rule 3.6 of the NH Rules of Professional Conduct for New Hampshire Attorneys does not apply to me. Still, she persists that Cormier was only using the motion for a gag order to try to change existing law or make new law. She also insists that since my "vitriol" was focused directly against Livernois, it was a mere strategy to withdraw the gag order request and had nothing to do with the motion's lack of good faith.

The contradictions in Heater's objection to my motion for sanctions are not few and far between. One bombshell she drops is her insistence that only the Attorney Discipline Committee has the authority to do anything about violations of the Rule of Professional Conduct for NH Attorneys. Yet I have it in writing that this committee would be more comfortable acting on my grievance if the judge admonished the attorney first for the same behavior. Nuff said.

Attorney Heater adds a new level to this saga by extending the fraud upon the court. She uses the same tired cases and arguments that were already debunked. She insists this is suddenly a case of prosecutors trying to make new law at the Superior Court level when the real basis for their motion was not a law at all. They would need to change a rule to make their argument legitimate. This is not about changing or making law. This is about hiding from the truth.

Livernois and Cormier engaged in a CYA (Cover Your Ass) campaign here. Attorney Heater got recruited to play the new girl, "good cop" role and failed miserably thus far. These prosecutors were so confident that they thought they could print lies and have the judge sign off on them and give them a gag order against me that was not supported by any viable legal framework. Blind loyalty and lack of accountability are also symptoms of a virus that can be as deadly to justice as Covid-19 is to humans.

Deputy Grafton County Attorney Tara Heater just proved beyond any reasonable doubt that this "misconduct virus" is highly contagious.    

The Attorney Discipline Committee is still weighing the prospect of docketing my formal grievance against Livernois and Cormier. I will definitely publish those materials once a docketing decision has been made. I will also publish the full audio of the upcoming hearing here when I get a certified copy. Stay tuned!

Andrew Livernois and his Deputy County Attorney Reported to NH Supreme Court Attorney Discipline Office for Misconduct...Will Justice Prevail?

Belknap County Attorney Andrew Livernois and his Deputy Keith Cormier are the subject of a detailed complaint I recently filed with the New Hampshire Supreme Court Attorney Discipline Office.

Most traditional defense "lawyers" would never take such a drastic step against their brethren, especially if they anticipate having to make future deals for their clients in criminal court with the County Attorney's Office.

I am not a lawyer. I represent myself. The legal term is Pro-Se, which in Latin means "for oneself." I come into every court with this status having to instantly overcome the "fool for a client" stigma attached to self-represented people. It's a deep hole to dig out of in most cases, because judges are very harsh and unwilling to listen to anyone who didn't pass the bar.

Criminal courts are often the most difficult environment to practice law in if you're doing so on your own behalf. You've been arrested and put on the defensive. All judges expect self represented parties to fall flat on their faces if they were never actual lawyers and don't know how things really work. You have to force criminal judges to listen. Show them the facts. Show them the lies told by the prosecutors in their haste to win your conviction. More often than not, obstinate judges will form an instant bias against you and will continuously rule against you. I know this because I've lived it. The only motion I've won so far in my current case is the only one that was unopposed.

No matter how many merits all my past civil cases had at the outset, just about every single judge I appeared before in civil court ruled against me until I put in the work to prove I was right all along. Only one judge ever broke that trend in nearly a half dozen major cases I've been involved in over the years (more about him later).

It all started with a plastic surgery patient who appeared on the HBO documentary Plastic Disasters. The victim of a botched facelift wanted me to write a book about her experience. She started a blog and wrote detailed reviews about what the surgeon did to her. The surgeon sued her to silence her writing and her criticism, using the legal logic that he'd trademarked his name so nobody could insult his practice. It is perhaps the most egregious example of using the civil courts and other means to violate a person's First Amendment rights. The judge's consistent rulings in favor of the doctor without giving any fair consideration to the victim served to ultimately promote corporate greed and minimize the public's ability to hold negligent medical professionals accountable through "name and shame" efforts when justice fails to solve the problem. Throughout the case I was named in various injunctions preventing me from writing about the proceedings or the victim's painful ordeal. A thoroughly biased judge connected to a local health care conglomerate gave the plaintiff everything his law firm asked for. Eventually, even the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals failed me when I asked for the judge to be forcefully recused from the case. Basically the panel of superior judges came back at me with lies and blind ignorance, somehow maintaining that the judge was "done with" the very active case and the bias was "too attenuated" to warrant any do over.

https://www.theindianalawyer.com/articles/25903-7th-circuit-denies-petition-to-remove-judge


The true victims of all this lazy, reckless legal work to change the system for the worse were Lucille Iacovelli and the many injured patients impacted by medical negligence she helped create a support community for. She committed suicide at the end of a long and painful road of being made out to be a crazed lunatic who was somehow imagining her intense struggle to survive. She persisted amid serious physical damage done to her by a botched facial surgery performed by Dr. Barry Eppley. She simply wanted to share her experience and allow people to see her daily suffering to warn other people of the risks of going under the knife. He just wanted everybody searching for his name to never have to stumble upon her tragic story of what she endured because she trusted him to operate on her. This is how doctors maintain perfect images in the public eye. They use their practice insurance to pay lawyers to crush their outspoken opposition. They get orders LIKE THIS ONE from extremely biased and sympathetic judges.

That one judge who ruled my way right away (No, not Judge King, he sucked) was none other than Christopher J. Muse. Judge Muse heard the case when Lucille's sister hired a lawyer to sue Luicille's estate and I in a Cape Cod, Massachusetts area court just 6 days after her suicide. He refused to OK an order to shut down a Web-site I created to protest all the injustices in that whole saga.

The Judge Muses of the world are few and far between. I researched his background and discovered that when he was a lawyer he helped get a wrongfully convicted man out of prison in a landmark legal case. The wrongfully convicted client also sued the state and won a judgment for his time behind bars. He's the kind of person you know will be fair because he's been there and done it all, and he's truly seen all sides of every issue.

The point is, there has to be an equalizer for people like me to give me any fair shot against a judge who is prematurely convinced just because he's used to believing everything the local prosecutor tells him to and nothing a self represented party attests to. Even if nothing the County Attorney claims is sworn by way of any affidavits and I've presented over a dozen affidavits at this point, Judge O'Neil believes Livernois every time. I don't have to ask why. The County Attorney told me why.

This is a passage from my lengthy grievance:


"Livernois personally sent me an email about the case in which he specifically mentioned that he knew Judge O’Neil did not believe any of my claims. His exact words were: '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.'"



Right there the Belknap County Attorney is telling me one of his main advantages in the proceedings: he basically has the judge eating out of his hand. (hence the above comic parody of my adversary)

Criminal court is not a pleasant place for a pro-se party to operate. Even when it appears a judge may be protecting your rights it may be more of an effort to avoid any meaningful appeal rather than a genuine attempt to listen to your story. I've faced an uphill battle all the way in this case. From here on out that landscape changes. That's because I'm embracing one of my own most powerful advantages: my chance to tell my true story to all the judges in the court of public opinion. 

July 21, 2020 will be the day Judge O'Neil sits in on the most important hearing of these proceedings. Then he will decide on a motion that will finally put the prosecutors in this case in the spotlight. Are they serving the public good or engaged in a wild goose chase at taxpayer expense? 

This commonwealth and this country face two very magnanimous crises at the same time: a rapidly spreading virus stressing the health care system to the max and a growing fomentation of protest caused by generations of piss poor police work coming home to roost. A lack of accountability from the powers that be who did not prepare us to face these problems is becoming readily apparent in both these cases. It's the root cause of both the pandemic and the protest wave. Law Enforcement and Health Care in the United States are two systems in dire need of more significant and meaningful regulation and oversight. I hope this case and the transgressions of these public officials trying to silence me hammers home the point that we need not waste another moment. The time to act to stop these dangerous trends is right now. 

It's time to bring integrity back to the legal profession and stop electing lawyers to public office who refuse to follow their own professional rules of responsibility. 

 

Andrew Livernois Doesn't Want any Publicity About His Misconduct

    Belknap County Attorney Andrew Livernois is doing his best impersonation of Forrest Gump, constantly running. He is running as hard as he can from the inconvenient truths that arose from a case against me that never should have been filed. He is so incredibly scared of the truth that he had his assistant file a motion for a court order to prohibit pre-trial publicity. 

     I think it had something to do with this Letter to the Editor I wrote in the Laconia Daily Sun. I sent it to Livernois on Wednesday morning (May 20th), and it was no surprise he had a motion before the court by Friday before 10 in the morning. 

     Let the battle begin, I say. This is First Amendment law. I've been working within those parameters for my entire career as a self-represented party. I've been subjected to injunctions in multiple jurisdictions. My published work is still in place, all over the Internet. 

     The most laughable aspect of this latest motion by the prosecution team is the thin legal argument it is based on. Attorney Livernois refused to meet with me prior to my arraignment, because he felt not being represented by counsel would complicate matters. He suggested the only way we could meet would be to wait for arraignment or get a lawyer. Now, although I have not attended law school and did not take a single legal class anywhere, suddenly I am expected to follow the rules of professional conduct for New Hampshire attorneys in regard to generating publicity for my case. 

     I am being treated as if I am a full-fledged attorney who passed the bar and swore an oath. Why did my standing change so drastically in just a few hearings? Also, when can I take on new clients?

     What's worse is the County Attorney and his young lackey Keith Cormier couldn't even come up with a single thread of applicable law to use as precedent cases. Cormier only cited two pro-se cases which had to do with those self-represented parties being required to abide by rules of procedure and motion practice. He does not have a single case in his pleading where a pro-se attorney was held to the same rules of professional conduct that a licensed attorney is bound to follow. The three First Amendment cases cited to supposedly prove a prior restraint is proper in this scenario are all relating to people who had practicing, licensed attorneys. There is no commonality, no similarly situated parties. 

    The most important question to ask here is why would a professional attorney like Andrew be all bent out of shape about a Letter to the Editor in the local newspaper? Why would he twist the law and seek to squelch the press if he had nothing to hide? Also, it is very interesting that the assistant county attorney refused to characterize my letter in negative terms.The most dismissive word he can find to use about my message is that it contained "brazen" claims. Well, excuse me for being brazen when I have 53 years of potential prison time hanging over my head. 

     The fact is, the truth is a very powerful force. I know from experience. I've ruined reputations and destroyed the credibility of financial criminals in my prior work as an investigative reporter. There are certain truths people are desperate to keep quiet. Some are just inconvenient patterns of thought or habits that people don't want their friends or relatives to know about. Other truths are deeper, more systematic, and more connected to waste, fraud and abuse. 

    The truth is coming out. Fact by fact, motion by motion, despite the delays and in spite of a biased and corrupt system of justice in this community. Stay tuned.  

The Crooked, Corrupt Law Enforcement Officers of Belknap County, NH EXPOSED!

   

County Attorney Andrew Livernois (left) is a liar. He lied to a judge in my case, in open court TWICE. Yet, the judge keeps right on ruling in his favor, just about ignoring every good point or statute or precedent case I bring up. What's worse, the judge just filed an order excluding all evidence of law enforcement corruption and leaks who were feeding information directly to the target the Drug Task Force wanted me to roll on.Since I didn't cooperate, they brought the full force of the law down on me even though I was only targeted to help them get a bigger fish who proved "untouchable." Now the state of New Hampshire is prosecuting a pawn and acting like I'm a kingpin.

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: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzXg2JASFfU

https://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20191121/NEWS08/912331786/House-committee-clears-marijuana-legalization-bill

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? 

I know it's going to suck for you, but do the right thing and end this. Blame the task force. They honestly fucked up on this one, and you just tried to pick up the pieces and make a case where there wasn't one to make. I can forgive and forget all that if you just step up and admit it and walk away now, before it's too late and you destroy yourself. I really don't want to see that, but I'll make it happen if you force me to. 


==================

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. 

Where are Your Taxes Going? The Cost of Arresting the Wrong Guy

Imagine you are stranded on the side of a busy road, just far enough off the shoulder to not be in the way of any traffic. First, a police officer stops and talks to you. You have help coming but he keeps insisting you get a wrecker. You tell him you can't afford that. The next people who stop say they'd love to help but they don't have any chains. They have a nice truck though, and they claim to be loggers after you tell them that's what you do. They look the part, beards and flannel jackets, so it makes sense.

So, this all happened to me last winter. I gave these two fellow "loggers" business cards and tell them if they ever need firewood customers in their area (outside my range) I would refer the outliers to them.

Finally the third time is the charm. One selfless hero in a lifted old POS truck comes along and parks right in the middle of the road after the police officer left me to deal with another incident. Only one impatient A-hole decides to lay on the horn but eventually drives around. The random stranger throws one end of a chain to me and it's around an anchor point on my vehicle in 2 minutes. He connects the other end to his truck and I drive right out of that ditch with ease. I give him a business card and get a random text a couple weeks later from a guy I think is him. It's not, and it turns out to be one of the guys who didn't have chains.

Next thing you know, despite having not a single criminal conviction on my record, I wind up being set up for 6 Special Felonies for allegedly selling less than a half pound of marijuana over 6 different occasions. Then I find out it's all been designed to infiltrate the operation of someone they think I will give up on a silver platter. I don't cooperate once they arrest me a month after the last transaction. Then I find out the real target has two leaks in law enforcement. One is in the Sheriff's Office and the other is right in the Drug Task Force itself. So, now I'm the target, framed as being a drug dealer who should spend over 20 years in prison for a set of crimes the government manufactured against me without doing any investigation into my background.

Your tax dollars paid for a massive investigation that produced zero results. You employed multiple law enforcement agents to waste their time on an investigation that was always doomed from the start due to pervasive leaks within their own ranks. You paid for these officers to purchase these "drugs," have them shipped to a lab and tested by paid professional experts, and put into evidence in the form of written statements confirming that it was pure Cannabis, a plant that is changing the face of medicine and legal in half the country as a recreational product.

Before this "investigation" even started, Officer Jared Beaulieu lied about my record in a sworn affidavit. You would think he would be up on perjury charges or at least be subject to my cross examination and be asked to explain how this lie made it onto the court's official paperwork presented at arraignment. Beaulieu insisted the record showed I had two convictions on my record, one in the state of New Hampshire that was ACTUALLY an acquittal for an assault that occurred because a former business partner stole my wood splitter.

The judge in the assault case ruled that I had the right to use "reasonable force" to retrieve stolen property. There are zero convictions on my criminal record. I have never spent more than an overnight stint in jail for youthful indiscretions that had NOTHING TO DO WITH DRUGS. It is entrapment all the way, and YOU will be paying for the trial in August if you let the madness continue. The reputations of the leakers and the officers who turned a blind eye to them will be raked across the coals. The system will be crucified, as it should be for building and sustaining and then capitalizing on a ridiculous amount of tainted, wasted evidence to prosecute meaningless crimes and ruin an honorable man who contributes positively to his community. Meanwhile people die every day of overdoses from much harder, much more dangerous drugs.

NH taxpayers need to stop paying for this madness and to tell the county attorney to stop wasting so many of his resources on prosecuting people that never should have been set up in the first place. Call Belknap County Attorney Andrew Livernois at 603-527-5440 or email him at: alivernois@belknapcounty.org and tell him to stop wasting your tax dollars on good people like me and start cleaning up the Opioid crisis.