03 June 2007

KingCast asks, how exactly did Shooter Floyd acquire Bruce McKay's service weapon in the Franconia Notch shooting tragedy?

That's Shooter Floyd's gate there in the pic on the left. Dig his criminal background, including gun threats even to police, and contemplate this: The AG's office said that Shooter Floyd had no clue if McKay was dead or alive. That means that McKay couldn't possibly have handed him the gun. This means it was either on the road and Floyd picked it up, which means that McKay had his gun out already as he accosted (with his ever-present mace/pepper spray) Liko and Caleb MacCauly, a somewhat random passenger. If so, why was his gun out?

And as I've already asked, what if Liko wasn't really speeding? Note that another person who was on that same stretch of road definitely WAS speeding and crossed McKay's path seconds before both men died and McKay -- atypically -- paid no attention, as noted herein. Dig this ABC News story where Attorney Ayotte says something crucial:
On Friday, Ayotte said, Kenney was driving home from his job at an Agway. McKay turned on his sirens and pulled him over. No one seems to know the reason, Ayotte told reporters.

Nice. So then you have Liko scared shitless and pulling the trigger on an abusive cop who had his gun and mace out after he rammed the daylights out of his car, pushing it off the road with a few hundred horsepower and the weight of the State. Was this during McKay's working hours? Was he in full uniform?

Anyway, if his gun wasn't out on the road and Floyd pulled it out of his holster, then that certainly would give Floyd a clue as to whether McKay was alive or not. Obviously he wasn't clearly alive because if he had made a furtive gesture, Floyd would have known he was alive. In any event, Floyd sure as hell was going to make sure that Liko would be dead, but I've got news for him and NH AG Kelly Ayotte:

That could be inexcusable murder of Liko and reckless endangerment toward Caleb.

************

And all of the above of course assumes that it was Officer McKay's weapon that killed Liko, but we haven't heard any verification of that yet.

And remember, it is entirely possible that Liko didn't mean to run McKay over. It's entirely possible that McKay fell as Liko tried to get out of the area after being traumatized by yet another police beat down from a man who had a reputation in the community for beating his wife (one/two) and grabbing you right by the balls whenever he could.

And where are the vehicles? Where are the pictures of the vehicles, i.e. Liko's little Toyota and the Honkin' Police Suburban that McKay drove that day?

Inquiring minds want to know. And inquiring minds will find out, one way or another.

Namaste.

Coming soon: The name-redacted police report from the McKay in-school pepper spray incident.

45 comments:

Christopher King said...

Meanwhile, a quote from another post:

The ugliest quote of the day on Friday was this:

"I figured one day they would find him dead. And if it wasn't from Liko somebody else would have done it."

....followed by four nodding heads, not nodding with glee but sadness at recognizing the Truth.

As noted in this post,

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2007/06/kingcast-quote-of-day-on-franconia.html

nobody said anything like that about Michael Briggs.

Nobody.

Add that to the wife-beating allegations and you've got yourself a D.Q.'d police officer.

Perhaps that's why the locals were 5-600 deep at Liko's funeral, and mostly police at McKay's.

You get to understand things once you go visit.

Namaste.

Anonymous said...

Chris: Ayotte emailed me that there was no way Floyd could have known if McKay was dead or alive, not that Floyd admitted he did not know. Ayotte's admission/spin is more compelling since it means NH's analysis of its "justifiable homicide" statute is that it's OK to kill people to assess whether others are dead or alive, or even regardless of those facts, which is not how the NH statute reads, and is not "justifiable homicide" (defined as a homicide which legally did not occur) by any state or federal statutory definition. NH thus let Floyd go under an "excusable homicide" theory, which is legally different, since it means despite the circumstances the state is making a moral choice that a particular killing is OK, not that it technically was not a crime.

Effectively NH chose not to prosecute Floyd acknowledging Floyd had no idea of whether or not he was "protecting" a corpse. In most states, that's murder. Google this stuff on the net and check some case law.

Also, do you the exact situs of the shooting on Rte 116? A recent blogger claims the situs is not within the National Forest. The Union leader said the situs is within a mile of the Easton-Franconia line, in Franconia. I read a bunch of maps which all put this spot inside the National Forest and my homework clearly concluded the feds have jurisdiciton as 116 is on a federal right of way there. Yes, I checked the law, and the feds have prosecuted murder on federal rights of way over private lands for decades, and guess what; especially inside national forests. You'd be have surprised how many murders occurred in them (sadly).

I still think Caleb should talk to the feds right away. Some post he and his friends are in some danger. The sooner the feds chase the bad guys down the better. This is not a game of "beat the AG'. When the FBI comes to Franconia the bad guy(s) will either split or leave Caleb and friends alone.

Christopher King said...

10:50:

Salient points; and I appreciate the distinction on the justifiable/excusable point, as well as the AG point. The only reason I bang away at that is because that is at this point the head of the fish.

But always looking at bigger fish.

And I can find out by GPS where the situs is. It will take a couple of phone calls, certainly by Tuesday or Wednesday I will know.

Keep in touch.

-c

John said...

I was reading a story at http://abcnews.go.com/US/Story?id=3175234&page=1 and found the following quote /comment…

On Friday, Ayotte said, Kenney was driving home from his job at an Agway. McKay turned on his sirens and pulled him over. No one seems to know the reason, Ayotte told reporters.

I think this lends to your thoughts that Liko may not have been speeding.

I want to pose another question. What if Liko did act in self defense? I understand in most states the requirements are that you are cornered (cannot walkway), that you fear for your life or safety and that you use the force necessary to protect yourself.

Obviously Liko could not walk away from the incident and had already tried that only to be run off the road and maced. Based on statements from Caleb Liko clearly feared for his life. Also based on Caleb’s statements, Mckay had his gun drawn when he maced them both. Ignoring the fact that Mckay wore a badge this would clearly be a case of self defense. What I am also imagining is part of the self defense law is not only must you fear for your life but that a normal person would fear for their life. Although I don’t think anyone can question that Liko feared for his life, the AG and others would say his fear was unfounded and he was disturbed as Mckay was acting as a lawman at the time.

BUT what if the tape showed Mckay out of control and clearly acting outside the realm of normal police officer? Here is a situation where these two have a serious past where somewhere along the lines it appears Liko was given the right to request another officer present when Mckay pulled him over. According to Caleb, Mckay who must have known of this, refused Liko’s numerous requests to have another officer present.

At this time would a reasonable person, especially if not speeding, feel it was a reasonable to drive away at slow speed (the AG has verified it was a slow speed chase) in hopes of attracting more witnesses or a second squad car or possibly even driving to the police station or somewhere else safe? I think at the very minimum a reasonable person would understand this.

Then what if during this low speed chase, where you are driving so slow that you are making your intentions clear that you are not trying to run, that you decide maybe your fears are not justified and you should just pull over to avoid another beating from this cop who has harassed you for years and just moments ago refused to have another officer come to the scene. And then instead of Mckay pulling up behind you, he instead pulls around in front of you and begins to ram your car violently off the road as you sit in it pulled over, as Caleb has stated happened.

At this time does a normal person start to feel like they may not be dealing with a police officer? Maybe not, maybe it is normal police procedure to use deadly force (his vehicle) after a low speed chase that resulted from a request to have another officer present as you had been promised would be the case in situations like this where is a traffic stop for which you did nothing wrong and believe Mckay is once again out to harm you.

But then would a reasonable person still see Mckay as a police officer if he came up to your window (that you obviously have down as one does for officers when pulled over) and then instead of acting as an officer he begins to use chemical agents on you and your passenger as he holds you at gun point (Caleb says Mckay has his gun out).

Now these are just the fact as I have heard them but what if the tape showed Mckay was yelling such things as, “I am going to kill you for this!”

So, my question is; What if Liko acted in Self Defense, where does that put Floyd?

John said...

On other thought you have that may have some truth and that is your comment about Mckay being on duty at the time and if he was wearing his uniform.

An internet search (http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=6566028) provided me with the information I wanted to know and this is that Mckay was issued a vest by the department and though was not required to wear one, I would bet he did when he was on duty.

From what I have read about Mckay, he was not the easy going guy who was loved by the town folk and saw no reason to wear a vest or have his gun ready at all times.

Instead he was a guy who fellow officers say was very into his job and kept up on all the new laws and procedures. He was a guy who knew he made enemies in an area where civilians carrying guns is common place. He was a guy who treated each traffic infraction as if it was a major crime.

Everything tells me that this is a guy who would wear a vest when on duty which makes me wonder if he was on duty. Also might explain why he didn't call for back-up.

Christopher King said...

Dear John:

You and I are in lockstep on this, and so are most of the people in town with whom I have spoken.

Thing is, they are scared shitless, just as Liko was.

The PD needs to come clean so that healing can happen, and if that means some kind of settlement with The Kenneys and Caleb, so be it.

But this ain't going away without real and honest (dis)closure.

Peace, John. Love to meet you some day.

-c

Anonymous said...

John's analysis gets to important criminal law issues of intent and crime classification. Justfiable homicide cases address facts, statutes and case law defintions of whether shooters acted reasonably. Some states and countries permit "reasonable" to be defined in terms of the shooter's perpective alone. The feds have taken pains in recent years to NARROW statutes and regs of when federal agents can kill people, even when officers are down or murderously threatened. The feds, based on their experiences with public safety and deadly force, believe this is in safety interests of the public and policing officers.

NH appears to have no current case law on anything like Liko's case (I used to do child protection administration and have access to legal research tools). If Liko had been arrested and prosecuted for his alleged traffic infraction, or for murder, all of John's questions and facts would be addressed by his defense lawyers, the prosecutor, judges and juries. I've read 50 page jury instrictions exist for "justiable homicide" cases. Liko's case could and perhaps will become a textbook model of how to deal with many of the issues John raised. This is not an easy case, which is why Chris is right in saying the state is covering up when it shut down its investigation in 48 hours.

"Justifiable homicide" is a legal defense of an accused homicide perp, not magic words to make murders go away, by the state or an accused. At trial the accused must prove the defense - that s/he had a right to take life since theirs was immediately threatened and they had NO alternative (retreat, etc). Floyd would clearly offer this defense if tried, and the state would have to prove he did not have this defense beyond a reasonable doubt. NH would argue many facts pro Liko forces have alleged in this blog: that Liko was defending himself from McKay, Liko was under excusable duress due to his history with McKay and events of 5-11; Liko was defending himself from Floyd; Liko was defending Caleb from McKay and/or Floyd; and more. No way NH wanted to to that. Thus it bashed Liko at every turn in the media, and got some media to pile on.

Franconians know differently. Apparently @ 200-300 Franconia votes do not mean much to the politicians involved (est. of likely # of regis. NH voters at Liko's funeral). Over 500 Franconians came to Liko's funeral.
They know the truth. The world waits for them to tell it.

The pattern of denial and coverup is much stronger than the pattern of justice here, no matter how an objective person judges the most likely facts.

Christopher King said...

6:19:

Your post just reminded me to check with the firm; our Lexis-Nexis is back up. I forgot about that because we didn't have it for a while.

I've just been going off of basic legal knowledge, now I'm about to get to the nitty gritty.

You got any case citations for me?

Peace.

Anonymous said...

Re fundamentals of justifiable homicide, see People v Maine, 166 NY 50, 59 NE 696 (early 1900s NY case).

Re federal jurisdiction:

Therefore, in federal criminal prosecutions involving jurisdictional type crimes, the government must prove the existence of federal jurisdiction by showing U.S. ownership of the place where the crime was committed and state cession of jurisdiction. If the government contends for the power to criminally prosecute for an offense committed outside "its jurisdiction," it must prove an extra-territorial application of the statute in question as well as a constitutional foundation supporting the same. Absent this showing, no federal prosecution can be commenced for offenses committed outside "its jurisdiction."

Re state/federal jurisdiciton on federal rights of way/lands/forests see:

Fort Leavenworth R. Co. v Lowe, 114 US 525 (1885) and articles on federal prosectors like Jerry Miller:

The White Oaks Flats Trail will now be called the Jerry Miller Trail, which is located on the Pisgah National Forest's Appalachian Ranger District...During his 18 years of service with the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of North Carolina, Miller prosecuted literally thousands of cases arising on national forest land‹from hunting violations, to driving under the influence, to murder...Miller's efforts for recognition of federal law enforcement jurisdiction in the national forests began in the early 1980's with a homicide case occurring in the national forest in Transylvania County. The suspect was arrested, tried in state court, and acquitted on an evidentiary ruling by the state court.
At the request of the victim's family, Miller researched the law and discovered that while
authorities in Washington disavowed federal jurisdiction in North Carolina's national forests, the law provided for such jurisdiction. Miller then asked the FBI to reopen the homicide investigation and eventually obtained a conviction in federal court. Since that time, national forest law enforcement officers were very successful in establishing a law enforcement presence in North Carolina's national forests..."Although we had been aggressively prosecuting crimes occurring in the national forests in Western North Carolina for over 10 years, I knew the courts would eventually have to resolve the issue if effective federal prosecutions were to continue. I was completely ineffective in convincing the people in Washington of the error of their position."
Shortly after the Styles case, Miller reviewed a case of driving under the influence of alcohol, which was approved for federal prosecution because it occurred in the national forest.
When the defendant's lawyer first met with Miller about the case, Miller explained to the defense lawyer the jurisdictional opinions of Washington authorities and invited the lawyer to challenge federal jurisdiction in the case. In the resulting case. United States v. Raffield, 82 F.3d 611 (4th Cir. 1996), two local federal courts, the court of appeals in Richmond, and eventually the U. S. Supreme Court all confirmed Miller's position of general federal law enforcement jurisdiction in North Carolina's national forests...

US Forest Service confirmed for me Rte 116 is largely on a federal right of way. If jurisdiciton issues above are resolved in Liko's favor, the feds should be pressing his case against Floyd.

Also, if Likos and Calebs friends tell the NH US attorney about facts they heard from Liko firsthand about being sexually assaulted by McKay, I wonder if the feds could prosecute McKay's estate for federal sexual assault under the federal criminal code, where national forest jurisdiction is moot.

As I've said, all the red flags are out there for a child abuse/sex abuse case. What in hell went on up there? If Liko had filed a sex abuse case as a minor in my office, we would have investigated. How did regional PD/courts handle his adult complaints?

Christopher King said...

Thanks for the info. Of course I stopped by the library to check the blawg.

I may be hanging out today with a friend of Bode's (this individual in turn is a friend of Attorney Crnilovic-Phillps, with whom I was sharing this very post over tea this morning, so it is a small World after all) so we will go from there.

I always wanted to meet Bode, but never because of something like this.

This is just bullshit and my heart hurts every day for the brother I never met.

As I told someone from Franconia offline, if Trent is the brother I never had, Liko is the brother I never met:

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2007/05/kingcast-catches-up-with-guitarist.html

Peace.

Anonymous said...

I have friends in the Franconia area and many friends in NH (I am from ME). I take my kids to Cannon(or I did). I did not know Liko, but know people who know the family. Like you, that's one reason why the case stays on my mind.

If attorneys you know want input from me let me know.

Toward justice...

Anonymous said...

From US v Raffield, above:

Whoever within [any lands reserved or acquired for the use

of the United States and under the concurrent jurisdiction

thereof] is guilty of any act or omission which, although not

made punishable by any enactment of Congress, would be

punishable if committed or omitted within the jurisdiction of

the State [ ] in which such place is situated, by the laws

thereof in force at the time of such act or omission, shall be

guilty of a like offense and subject to a like punishment.

18 U.S.C. § 13; see 18 U.S.C. § 7(3). Indeed, the Assimilative Crimes

Act specifically contemplates convictions for "operating a motor

vehicle under the influence of a drug or alcohol" while on federal

lands. 18 U.S.C. § 13(b)(1). Because Raffield committed federal

crimes on "lands reserved or acquired for the use of the United States,

and under the . . . concurrent jurisdiction thereof," 18 U.S.C. § 7(3),

the United States properly exercised its jurisdiction pursuant to 16

U.S.C. § 551.

I believe that NH and the feds have concurrent jurisdiciton over the shootings situs due to the existence of a federal right of way granted to NH at that situs, without which 116 could not have been built or maintained there by NH.

Anonymous said...

PS - Raffield states the feds can prosecute NH's homicide statutes under the Federal Assimilative Crimes Act, which is a new one on me.

At least we are learning some law from all this.

Anonymous said...

Quite a bit of legal talk here. From what I understand the incident happened on private property. Now Route 116 may be a right of way through the National forest. If the incident happened on private property wouldn't the state own the right of way through the private property? Hence not being a Federal Offense by a State Offense.

Anonymous said...

CK:

I see you are getting some more lawyers involved in shining the light! Outstanding!!

Did you happen to read the story over the weekend of the Litchfield selectman, Ray Peeples, who is reviewing the files of his town's police (for upcoming salary negotiations)?

He had a great quote, which is applicable in the Kenney case, I think. He said:


“Why would they not want us to look?” he said. “What’s in there that they’re trying to hide? People only try to block you from seeing something if there’s something they don’t want you to see.”


I had the same questions for AG Ayotte as soon as I saw the initial news conference, bestowing hero status on McKay and Floyd. But I guess a delayed release of the tape is better than nothing. A bit better.

Why the delay? Why was the initial "investigation" wrapped in in 48 hours? Why was Floyd's shooting of Liko ruled justifiable homicide so quickly?

So many whys, and nothing from the AG. As I said before, this thing smacks of a third rate coverup. It has from day one.

Anonymous said...

To 9:42:

According to the US Forest Service, the crime situs is subject to a federal right of way arising from national forest land rights (however acquired, by sale or gift from prior or current abutting owners). This means the feds have at least equal rights to NH state (Ayotte) rights to administer state and federal criminal justice on these lands. Thus the feds can and should begin a federal criminal investigation v Floyd.

Anonymous said...

Just curious: did you ask SPECIFICALLY about that location in FRANCONIA, or just about 116 in general? An earlier post above (yours also? there are too many of us "Anonymous" folks!) said "US Forest Service confirmed for me Rte 116 is largely on a federal right of way". Sure, lots of 116 IS in the National Forest, but no portion within the Town of Franconia is bounded by WMNF. Only the portions in Easton. Route 116 is an ancient road, and at least as of 1929, the oldest map I have available, was already called "State Route 116" (see link below to the 1929 USGS map; if you look on the right side of the map about halfway down, you'll find the Easton/Franconia town line; the site of the incident was on the Franconia side of this town line, near the houses that appear on the map). None of this is National Forest, nor has it ever been. Frankly, I'm still skeptical that the Feds would ever have granted a ROW to the State for land that they have never owned. Further out in Easton? Sure. But I have a hard time believing that that's the case on the Franconia portion.

http://docs.unh.edu/NH/moos29ne.jpg

If the above map appears too small to be legible, hover your cursor over it until a button that will allow enlargement appears.

Anonymous said...

This comment relates only somewhat to the postings here.....but, I have a question that is nagging at me.

If Floyd lives on Hummingbird Lane, that is in Bath, NH. The Chief of Police in Bath is Dennis McKay. Is he related to Bruce McKay?

If Floyd's property is/has been searched in relation to Maura Murray, then it makes me wonder if all of this is tied together. You see, one theory about Maura Murray is that she had an accident PRIOR to her car being discovered in Haverhill jurisdiction.

If this theory is correct, then the first "accident" was in Swiftwater/Bath, NH. Theory is the car was moved out of Bath into Haverhill for jusidictional purposes.

Now we hear that Floyd's property might be involved? And it's in Bath? And the Chief of Police in Bath shares the same last name with Bruce McKay? Is it coincidental? Does anyone know if they are related?

Christopher King said...

Dear 1:19 and all of the lawyers coming into the fold:

I want to see what comes out of the AG's before we plan anything, but obviously we will be getting some affidavits sorted at some point.

We were supposed to hear something from the AG today, BTW.

Also, I'll have an email into my people out there to clarify exactly where Floyd's place is, but I have no reason to doubt it is up the lane from where I was shown.

On the run,

-c

Anonymous said...

I appreciate your input.

I had a several minute talk with USFS and asked whether lands abutting route Rte 116 about one mile north of the Franconia-Easton line were federal lands, to which the speaker said he judged the road at that point to be on a federal right of way. I read the NH White Mountains National Forest map available in PDF format at White Mountain National Forest website, a highly detailed map, and it seems clear that National Forest lands surround Rte 116 at that point. That map cannot show rights of way or how close or not the federal boundary comes to the road, thus my reliance on the USFS rep. I also relied on a Union Leader report that the situs is @ 1 mile from the Easton-Franconia line. If the situs is closer to Franconia, the feds may not have a right of way there. The PDF map shows the forest boundary backing away from 116 the closer to Franconia one gets.

Given the situs is at least very near the Forest, and that the feds have authority to investigate and prosecute crimes arising on even private lands contiguous to fedeal lands (mining, camping, other use violations) I think the feds still have jurisdiciton to investigate and prosecute. I haven't researched the jurisdiction issues of federal gun felonies regardless of whether they occur in National Forests and it seems likely, given Alberto Gonzales huge new anti-gun DOJ policy to protect neighborhoods and other places from gangs and gun crimes generally, that the feds have other jurisdictional options if they want to investigate Floyd. I am curious about the National Forest angle, but it is not an exclusive basis for federal jurisdiciton.

The Forest was established in 1911 by passge of The Weeks Act, permitting federal purchase of private lands east of the Mississippi. This predates your 1929 map by 18 years - plenty of time for the feds to sell off parcels in the region to farmers and others yet retain certain rights in that land by deed forever, including rights to grant NH or others rights of way across what appear to be private lands for roads, including 116. You may be correct that there is no federal right of way at the situs, since the only way to know is to study the deed of the land involved. Neither USFS nor I have access to it.

Anonymous said...

Anon 1:19; Don't think they are related, Bruce McKay, Dennis MacKay.

Christopher King said...

Probably not, but whatever happened with Floyd's criminal menacing case that was dismissed?

Or did that secret die with Bruce McKay?

-c

Geographer fka Anonymous said...

Regarding the situs (um, I'm not a legal mind, I'll just call it the "site"): Yes, it is north of the Easton/Franconia Town line, which places it in Franconia. As anyone who lives around here and spends a lot of time on the trails around here knows, at the area where the incident took place, it is about 0.75 miles from Route 116 to the National Forest Boundary (well-recognized by those of us who enjoy the local woods, as it is marked with both boundary signs and very visible red paint marks and cairns).

Only if you travel south into Easton about 3 miles will you enter the WMNF,right about where the power line crosses just beyond Reel Brook Rd.

The rest of the land is privately owned, and has been for many, many generations, some of it in the hands of the same families. To the best of my knowledge, none of the Forest Service land was ever sold to the general public.

I can't speak to any of the other issues that you are knowledgeable about, as I'm quite ignorant of them, but I CAN speak knowledgably about both the location of the incident and the location of the WMNF.

And if the UL said that the shootings took place a mile from the town line, then the UL was wrong. Simple as that.

Anonymous said...

Thanks 12:44 and 4:04 posters. Nothing like firsthand knowledge. The map cited by 12:44 poster was very good - much better than the WMNF website map. But, it shows the WMNF approaches the site from the east and stops very near 116. There's another theory that the feds may assume jurisdiction of crimes occuring near federal lands. That's not been tested in NH. The site is very near, if not on, federal lands. The deed to this land would show whether there is a right of way. Anyone want to take a look in town land records? 12:44 said this land has never been sold to the feds. Locals usually know, but now I am curious as to 116's pre and post 1911 ownership history. The deed must show a state easement for 116 at least.

Am now curious about federal gun felony jurisdiction requirements. AG Gonzales says he's got a new anti-guns program. Must apply to Franconia too. The feds could still prosecute Floyd.

Anonymous said...

or state purchase...

Anonymous said...

suggestion, quit speculating, go to the town of Franconia tax collector get the site and plot number then go to the registry of deeds in Grafton County and look to see if the the property where the incident took place was ever part of the WMNF. I highly doubt it ever was, but I was not around when the form the WMNF in 1918. The funds for the purchase were made available in 1911.

Anonymous said...

It's probably just as easy as asking the McKenzie's, as it wouldn't surprise me if that property has been in their family for over a century.

Anonymous said...

Net sources on WMNF history are confusing. Some websites say it existed in 1911. The USDA says:

As early as 1810, the state of New Hampshire began selling off its public land. In 1867, Governor Harriaman sold the White Mountains Region. Large logging companies purchased much of the New Hampshire timberland, and by 1890 there were 832 sawmills operating and 17 logging railroads crisscrossing the state.

The Weeks Act enabled the lands cut over and burned over to once again become a part of the public domain. In 1914, the first land parcels were acquired in the White Mountains under the Weeks Act. For just over $13.00 an acre, 7,000 acres were purchased in Benton, NH...

If the MacKenzie farm was in that family before 1914, it probably has no WMNF history, unless they sold chunks which became WMNF and/or 116. Did 116 pre-exist the MacKenzie farm? Is 116 an old logging road, horse/cow path, Indian trail? The deed tells the story, but I do not live in NH and have no records access.

Anonymous said...

to anon 6:30
Deeds are fun to research tells a livid history of the area. Most counties' deads are on on-line but Grafton is a little slow joining the internet age.

Anonymous said...

To address the wife beating charges, there are laws that prevent military or law enforcement officer from having weapons. The Lautenberg act prevents anyone with a conviction of domestioc violence assault or abuse or having a restraining order, from owning or possessing a weapon. This is a federal law, towns have been sued and lost because police officer have not complied by securing all weapons.

Geographer said...

I don't have the ability to get to North Haverhill to the Registry, but honestly, I really feel that it would be a wasted trip. Here's a bit of local history that will give you a taste of that area: Kinsman Lodge, which is right in the area of the accident (I believe it's next door to McKenzies, though I'm not 100% sure), sits on a 350 acre parcel. It's now a B&B/lodge, and was built in the 1850's. I'll eat my hat if it was EVER owned by the feds. I believe that McKenzies also own a large parcel. Neighboring Tamarack sits on about 500 acres.

Yes, this was a very, very old road. I have no idea if it was an old Indian trail or not, but it was surely one of the earliest town roads, later taken over by the State. The Easton Valley was settled very early; one of the earliest homesteads (Applebee) was built in the late 1700's on the site of what is now the Franconia Inn, which is on Route 116, about two or three miles towards town from Tamarack. The McKenzie family owned the Franconia Inn at one point, incidentally, many, many decades ago (1920's or so?).

Anyway, yes, it's an old road, and no, I don't see how the feds ever would have owned any of it. It's been settled for centuries.

Christopher King said...

I've done a couple hundred closings and lots of cell tower deals and yes, deeds are fun.

Writing a letter like this one to Governor Lynch is not:

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2007/06/kingcast-writes-letter-to-nh-governor.html

Peace.

curious george said...

Seeing how the original incident did not start in the NF nor the ending incident occur in the NF how can the Feds take over?

curious george said...

Geographer you did your homework well. thanks for the info

Anonymous said...

Feds can take jurisdciton on a federal land interest theory if 1) there is a federal right of way or other federal interest in the actual land at the site or 2) the feds assert that gun murders proximate to federal lands violate the US criminal code.

Theory 1: Note USDA said the first WMNF parcels were bought in 1914 at Benton, which is less than 8 miles from the shootings site, making it subject to the earliest WMNF actvity. USDA says NH gave up all rights to lands in the WMNF in 1867 when the governor sold them to private business (lumber, etc). This is key to theory 1 since it requires NH to have given up state rights on federal lands for the cleanest federal jurisdiction if in fact federal rights ever existed or exist. Deeds to the land will tell if there is a federal history. Obviously the state acquired an interest to the lands of 116 to build it, so the issues are when, how and from whom, specifically re the McKenzie farm? Sale or grant of right of way? Outright purchase (eminent domain)? If there is any fededal linkage to these transactions the feds could have federal land based jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute Floyd under the US criminal code.

A more imaginative theory could involve the treaty history of these lands between Native Americans, the British king and settlors. In Maine, the Penobscot Nation sued the federal government for ownership of almost all of Maine based on a British treaty which granted Penobscots the land. That was settled favoring the tribe before a court verdict. A Wells, Maine doctor subsequently sued Wells for his British treaty rights to peace and quiet on his beachfront house property which the Maine Supreme Court agreed ran to the low water mark on the beach, based on the original land treaty grant from the king to the first colonial owner. Since all of NH was once under British authority, and if treaty rights to lands thereunder were not completely extinguished by subsequent law or sale, it is remotely possible that the feds have jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute murder on this land if all sovereign rights to it have not been extingushed. Much newer federal rights may and probably do already exist to investigate and prosecute murder on even private lands under the US criminal code, since vehicles and guns were involved(I am checking).

Theory 2: The feds do assert jurisdiction to prosecute certain federal land protection laws when illegal acts arise on private lands abutting federal lands. For example even federal camping law violations have been successfully prosecuted on private lands abutting federal camping areas, on the theory that permitting these violations so close to federal lands places them at risk.

The bottom line is the feds can find jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute a murder without my help. So far they are uninterested, which is tragic. I have come to consider Liko's death a state sanctioned private execution, which violates every human rights standard in the world.

Shame.

Christopher King said...

Dear 7:03

You are correct. This is one of the ugliest things I've ever seen, and even one of my police sources can't get any information.

Read the first comment here as I write policeabuse.org and Graton Dispatch for the radio transmissions:

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2007/06/kingcast-revisits-policeabuseorg-for.html

Also, I knew about the Penobscot deal... my ex fiancee was 1/4 but didn't really take any benefits because she didn't live the lifestyle.

Sit tight. That video and radio stuff has to come out at some point, then things will be a bit more clear -- and if the feds and AG refuse to do anything then, either they will be justified or they will burn in Hell.

Either way I'd love to get out there and do a documentary film to lock this one firmly into the minds of America's conscience as we prepare for the next round of elections.

It won't bring Liko back, but I'm sure he would dig it.

Namaste.

Anonymous said...

Thats funny...considering I saw the Tahoe not 2-3 hrs. after the incident....and not a scratch on it. Get a clue King. You really are shooting from the hip. You don't know AT ALL what you are talking about.

Anonymous said...

1:58PM said...
Thats funny...considering I saw the Tahoe not 2-3 hrs. after the incident....and not a scratch on it. Get a clue King. You really are shooting from the hip. You don't know AT ALL what you are talking about.

By my recogning, that would have put it and you at the crime site and in the dark. Since Caleb recalls the toyota being pushed back with some speed (to parapharase "as if it were flying"), it's entirely within the realm of possibility that the toyota was in neutral and was simply pushed without resistance. That would leave little or no damage to either vehicle, yet still show McKay acted recklessly. The fact that gravel was being strewn does not rely on resistence of the mass being moved, but rather the torque applied. Boy those tapes would sure come in handy right about now.

But anyway, your were there, you tell us.

Anonymous said...

Oh and if the Tahoe was not still at the scene in the timeframe you describe, that's yet another WTF, as to the veracity of the investigation into the incident.

Christopher King said...

Hey 1:58:

What else did you see?

Did you see NH AG Kelly Ayotte say:

On Friday, Ayotte said, Kenney was driving home from his job at an Agway. McKay turned on his sirens and pulled him over. No one seems to know the reason, Ayotte told reporters.

.....Or is it that ABC News got that all wrong, too.

.....Guess the video that conclusively shows no liability to Shooter Floyd, who just "happened on by" the scene at that precise moment, sure would clear things up, as noted by 6:34/6:37.

.....So where were you when you saw the Suburban/Tahoe? Were you at the scene or were the vehicles already moved in that timeframe.

Do tell, since you seem to know so much. I yearn for your wisdom and enlightenment.

Christopher King said...

A word or two from Sage Advice, a local Franconian commenting over at Boston.com:

*******

Misskitty,

I was responding to the guy that thinks Floyd is a hero and how he would ask him for dinner. Doesn't anyone wonder why their isn't a single friend that has stepped forward to say, "Hey Floyd is a great guy. We've been friends for years. He has a strong sense of honor and integrity. He did what he thought was right"?

He doesn't like the cops and he doesn't have any friends. Well, he may have "had" one friend, M-----y. Studies show that very rarely does a person shoot another several times as Floyd did Liko unless there is personal emotion involved (hence, the amount of times Liko shot McKay). This is one of the first things they take in to account in shooting cases. It is usually seen as an indicator that there is some personal connection. Floyd and Liko didn't know each other. Why was Floyd so emotional? Why was he willing to put his child in a situation that would cause him such trauma? Why were the charges dropped when he threatened the life of a meter reader and two state troopers? Who dropped them?The charges are dropped on a guy that literally states that he can give the troopers a "third eye" and that sends his kid (how young would he have been?) in the house to get his gun over the meter reader. This is unbelievable to me and people want to call him a hero?

Meanwhile they portray Liko as a monster for having scuffled and been arrested for grabbing McKay's balls and how McKay went light on him in court. What was the AG's purpose for stating that Liko didn't finish high school? Stereotyping. I am sure Liko made a statement as to what happened in that field with McKay before back up came - why haven't we heard that? Oh yah, I forgot...........the super hero cop McKay was known for being so honest so it wouldn't matter anyway.

I am worried about Floyd's state of mind after being able to threaten the lives of state troopers and get away with it as well as murdering a fellow citizen and walking away so easily. The townspeople already steered clear of him and I am sure they will even more so now.

sageadvice

Christopher King said...

Hi Chris,
I'm a photo editor for a magazine in NY. We are working on a story about this case and may be interested in printing your photo of Floyd's gate. Can you please contact me if you will give permission for usage?

Thank you,

[name withheld for now]
By Blankety-Blank, at 3:29 PM
Dear K******

No way could a former photojournalist say "no" to THAT!

I'll email you shortly.

Photo credit must read "KingCast.net"

Peace.
By Christopher King, at 3:43 PM

keenan1977 said...

i hope i am welcome to comment on this page. i used to live in franconia when i was a kid, and being from outside the area i noticed even back then that the kids in franconia are kinda raised a little differently. people in franconia always seemed different to me. they had more of a mellow, laid back, and anti violent attitude. i had a chance to know bode back in 5th and 6th grade, i didn't know liko. but the family was probably about the same for one as the other. they are mellow people. seems to me like this kid was most likely harrassed into what he did. if franconia cops are anything like haverhill cops they take a kid that might be guilty of smoking a little dope, which is harmless. then they harrass you pull you over and constantly bust your balls till you do something they can nail you with. i don't know all the details here, just what i can find on the internet. i'm in iraq for another 70 days. so i guess my resources are limited on what i can learn here. but i do know small town cops. and thats pretty much how they always treated us. bully you into screwing up. chase you when they should just call it in. like mckay didn't know where liko kenny lived right? couldn't have just followed him home called for a witness then handled his business. its not like the kid was asking for a get out of jail free card here. just another set of eyes so it wouldn't just be his word against a police officer. i live in vermont when i am at home. and i am pretty sure that asking for a witness is not all that much to ask for. especially when this kid had had serious issues with him in the past. mckay should have also wanted a witness. then if he was in the right at the time it wouldn't be up to scrutiny. being where i am at i maybe don't know all i need to know. but i really hope someone from an outside law agency takes a good look at this. its ripping the soul out of one of the coolest towns in NH. hope i didn't piss anyone off.

knjiĹževnik said...

From everything I have read it sounds like this Liko character was asking for it. It seems Liko didn't expect to get in trouble for killing a polic officer because people like you would defend and protect his actions if he was ever caught. Unfortunately for Liko, a third person stepped in and applied swift justice...it must have really surprised him. At least he was facing his death instead of experiencing what he meeted out...shooting someone in the back.

Christopher King said...

5:14

Dud you need to catch a clue. I sued for McKay's personnel file and he was a complete terror, with even his own peers filing complaints that he threatened them and nobody did a damn thing.

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2008/04/kingcast-revisits-state-v-brendlin-with.html

1. Wife Angela took a Restraining/Order on him.
2. He terrorized a woman with a knife near her labia.
3. Defendant Ayotte lied about AG's office not being in receipt of that complaint.
4. He threatened a Franconia firefighter.
5. He filled out a log with inconsistencies.
6. He sped through Lisbon and trolled for tickets.
7. Lisbon kicked him off of their radio system.
8. He flaked/out during a simple bike run at Hillwinds Motor Inn.
9. Attorney Troy Watts filed an ethics complaint on him.
10. He seized Liko Kenney without Probable Cause in 2003.
11. He violated 3 express policies with his Tahoe bashing in 2007.
12. He violated express policies on the use of OC Spray in 2007.
13. He threatened Tim Stephenson with his gun.
14. He tried to give Bode a ticket based on hearsay.
15. He would harass campers whenever he "got a hair across his chest."

And he violated every pursuit policy and OC Spray policy he could find, which led Liko to believe that he was going to kill him, after all what's next?

McKay violated Liko's Constitutional Rights in the 2003 and 2007 stops and Calebs in 2007 as well.

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2008/04/kingcast-epiphany-on-liko-kenneys.html

4:23 has it right. The investigation was bogus and now we see there's allegedly no fingerprint analysis even though Floyd went home with one of Liko's live rounds in his goddamn pocket.

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2008/04/kingcast-says-kelly-ayotte-and-jeffery_24.html

Lastly, Liko wasn't in some kind of killing mood when he left work that day, just a dude waiting on his paycheck so he could bring his car current.

Here's a woman who was one of the last to see him alive.

And I've met another woman who gave Liko a hug just about an hour before he died, and she had specifically told Montminy about a week earlier that he had to do something with McKay because he was out of control.

So there.

Insane.