08 August 2007

Saabnet helps KingCast host Franconia 5/11 "Investigative" files; meanwhile more niggardly RSA 91-A responses blacken Kelly's horizon.

I had thought it was too large to host, but my buddies over at SAABnet helped me out on that one so here it is.

Clearly public access is paramount.

Now the question is why am I the ONLY media outlet for this information?

Here also is today's response to the letter in yesterday's post from Franconia Attorney Mullen, who among other things admits that his office misplaced or is not sophisticated enought to handle my email and fax requests for 91-A information (The AG's office responded in timely fashion to the same email BTW) and that they have NOT located any sort of use-of-force report to date, and that they will seek the arrest report for Liko's Unconstitutional arrest in Fox Hill Park, probably because McKay had a bonfire with it. I will respond to this letter later this evening, but really the key is wait until I tell you what else I know about McKay soon.

Funny, I thought the client was supposed to learn from the lawyer about responsibility, not vice versa.

Anyway, soon everyone can see what should be placed online by NH AG Kelly Ayotte that conclusively shows the coverups.

Anyway, I'm back from Concord and boy the AG's office has more 'splainin' to do because my trip to Kelly's House (it will be for rent soon) reveals yet more missing information:

They called themselves providing me ALL of the correspondence between John P. and the AG's office on the Right-to-Know request but they failed to provide the one from 7 July 2007 seen at this link

That is just another reason why they cannot be trusted and why the Court should ORDER them to provide the Investigative files online to the same extent that they provided it to the media.

In one of the emails on 11 July 2007 Attorney Strelzin tells John P. that he "can also make an appointment and come into the office to review the written materials without purchasing them."

Niiiice.

What if you don't have a car?

What if you don't feel like driving to Concord?

Then I guess all you get for free is the bogus, apparently unsigned official report, which is chock full of lies.

***********

To my mind (especially knowing what I know now that I will mention next week) that does not comport with the letter or spirit of RSA 91-A and I will also structure in the argument that those of us who paid $10.00 per audio CD are entitled to a $9.00 refund because as John P. wrote:

"You did not AT ALL address my email but instead you have your paralegal send me the below price list letting me know how to order these items as inflated "prices" and not "cost." This can only be taken as an insulting response to my inquiry.....

I expect you to answer my original email as you have been instructed and please also refer me to the proper contact who can explain to me how you are deriving your costs for material.

These documents are supposed to be made available at "cost" and I would like to understand why the state is paying $10 for blank CDs.

These requests have been reasonable but your response has not."


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

Also, they spent 79 hours on their unfounded case against me as NAACP legal chair and 75 on former Jaffrey officer Aaron Deboisbriand's failed case.

I can't find the time sheet pay rate but it's like more than $10,000.00 on each case.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

FREEDOM'S DEATH BY DEGREES

Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court has been a willing accomplice in this depreciation of essential freedoms. High Court opinions are plagued with countless exceptions that pervert the letter and spirit of the Fourth Amendment. Such cases include language the Framers never foresaw nor intended, such as the "protective sweep" exception, the "hot pursuit" exception, the "inevitable discovery" exception, and the "good faith" exception. Worse, the courts use rationales such as police safety, national security and citizen protection to justify these intrusive and corruptive interpretations.

Unlike historical "officers of the peace," many modern police departments act and dress like paramilitary units. Instead of seeking to protect us, they present themselves in a manner to intimidate and coerce us. Many contemporary police units wear black, military-style uniforms and display a host of weapons that some don't hesitate to use.

Consider the story of Malaika Brooks. What began as a routine traffic stop quickly escalated to a nightmarish display of unnecessary police hostility. Brooks, eight months' pregnant, was pulled over by Seattle police for speeding. When she refused to sign the ticket, the officers treated her as a belligerent criminal, using a taser gun to send a 50,000-volt shock of electricity through her child-swollen body.

These officers took advantage of their broad discretion and ignored their responsibility to respect her rights. Instead of handling her as a dangerous criminal, these cops should have approached Malaika Brooks as a citizen whose constitutional rights are valuable and with a commitment to protect those rights.

Incorporating such respect into police encounters with citizens is the only way the Fourth Amendment will keep functioning. Police officers must be trained to know, understand, and discern constitutional rights. After all, the Constitution is the very document they have sworn to honor and uphold.

Finally, we the people are also responsible for protecting our rights. Why do many simply shrug their shoulders at abuses of rights that early Americans not only enjoyed, but demanded?

Thomas Jefferson remarked, "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." He understood quite clearly that once we give our freedoms away, we will never get them back. Jefferson was right. When citizens' Fourth Amendment protections are undermined, our most precious freedoms are not just in jeopardy - they are destroyed.

___

Anonymous said...

I think Im downloadin it now...

Ill get right back..

Anonymous said...

Try this...
On the screen it says 'MEGAUPLOAD' followed by 'please enter' and usually 3 letters..
Enter those colored letters in the box..
It will bring you to the download screen..
Wait for the timer to expire..
And download there..

Open it w/ Adobe..

Holy shit..
Theres alot here..

Hope this helps ya out..

Christopher King said...

Dear Arguswest 3:02

Let me know.

I just got some more stuff back from my trip to Kelly's House (it will be for rent soon) and guess what:

They called themselves providing me ALL of the correspondence between John P. and the AG's office on the Right-to-Know request but they failed to provide the one from 7 July 2007 seen at this link

That is just another reason why they cannot be trusted and why the Court should ORDER them to provide the Investigative files online to the same extent that they provided it to the media.

In one of the emails on 11 July 2007 Attorney Strelzin tells John P. that he "can also make an appointment and come into the office to review the written materials without purchasing them."

Niiiice.

What if you don't have a car?

What if you don't feel like driving to Concord?

Then I guess all you get for free is the bogus, apparently unsigned official report, which is chock full of lies.

***********

To my mind (especially knowing what I know now that I will mention next week) that does not comport with the letter or spirit of RSA 91-A and I will also structure in the argument that those of us who paid $10.00 per audio CD are entitled to a $9.00 refund because as John P. wrote:

"You did not AT ALL address my email but instead you have your paralegal send me the below price list letting me know how to order these items as inflated "prices" and not "cost." This can only be taken as an insulting response to my inquiry.....

I expect you to answer my original email as you have been instructed and please also refer me to the proper contact who can explain to me how you are deriving your costs for material.

These documents are supposed to be made available at "cost" and I would like to understand why the state is paying $10 for blank CDs.

These requests have been reasonable but your response has not."


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

Also, they spent 79 hours on their unfounded case against me as NAACP legal chair and 75 on former Jaffrey officer Aaron Deboisbriand's failed case.

I can't find the time sheet pay rate but it's like more than $10,000.00 on each case.

Christopher King said...

3:12 Arguswest.

Good. I'm glad it works.

Maybe my problem is the Mac?

I'll try it from a PC later.

And next I'll put up the pics.

And my response to you a minute ago on the State's niggardly responses to John P is going into the body of this post.

So Many Roads.....

Anonymous said...

http://www.megavideo.com/?v=4UXG1BFI
6-26-94....

Keep it up Bro..
BTW..
I met a 'lobbyist' (sp) from NY the other night in Franconia..
Says he spent alot of time w/ Cabe..
Not for nothin..
He was one strange fella..

Christopher King said...

Stranger than Strelzin, McKay, Floyd or Ayotte?

BTW could you cut and past that full string for us -- you may have to section it off to make it fit.

-c

Anonymous said...

OK..
Not Fucking INSANE or nothin..
lol

Anonymous said...

Chris, I got it downloaded successfully too. Thanks. Definitely appreciated.

Christopher King said...

5:09 BR

I would say "no problem" but everything in this case has been a problem!

Namaste.

-c

Anonymous said...

There it is, page 261 of the report. Floyd arrested and pleads guilty to selling phencyclidine AKA PCP.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, but we just call it THC up here in the north. (yes, I'm rolling my eyes).

Anonymous said...

New Editorial from Littleton Courier published today:
__ __ __ __ __ __

Seeking truth
August 08, 2007

We know many, if not most, people in Franconia and the surrounding area are sick of hearing about Franconia Police Cpl. Bruce McKay and Liko Kenney, and the incident in which they died May 11. They would like to move on and leave the past in the past. We have not been seeking further information in this case to keep it in the public eye a second longer than it needs to be.

We have been seeking information in the interest of getting to the truth of what happened leading up to that day. When public officials put obstacles in the way of the public receiving information, we get suspicious and wonder what they are hiding.

This quest for more information is not based on any misguided sympathy for Liko Kenney. Kenney was not a misunderstood gentle soul; he proved that when he shot McKay and through his violent actions on many occasions before that.

One friend said it was a long-standing joke among Kenney's friends that if you went "on a hike with Liko, you never knew if you were coming back." He described his friend as a "sociopath who was going to snap," according to interviews conducted by the State Police (available online at the attorney general's Web site).

In March, Kenney nearly ran over a local couple while walking down the road in Easton, turning away with only a foot to spare. Kenney would have faced this charge in court if he hadn't been killed May 11.

In April, Kenney was convicted of assaulting a juvenile who had stolen his gun. He choked the 15-year-old and threatened to break his legs. Later he threatened to kill the youth and his grandmother if he testified.

These are not the actions of a gentle youth. Kenney was a violent person many people in Franconia were afraid of, and he proved they were right to be when he shot McKay May 11.

All that being said, we have continued to seek information about McKay's tactics as a police officer, wondering if something could have been done by the selectmen or police chief to prevent this tragedy.

Did McKay exacerbate the situation by what some have described as his "casual escalation of force" during that stop? Was this a way he regularly handled traffic stops? Some have suggested it was. Did he have a lot more complaints than other officers? Perhaps he did nothing wrong in this case or in situations leading up to it, but the Franconia Police Department's intransigence is not answering these questions, it is only creating more. The ball is in their court.
_________________________

Christopher King said...

That editorial is not exactly fair to Liko because I have spoken with the very people who are quoted and all of that is taken out of context.

Yes Liko could be a handful, but those quotes are taken out of context because the part about "you don't know if you would come back from a hike" is not meant as whether he was going to hurt you -- remember that Caleb said he "would give you the shirt off his back" but they didn't quote that even though it is in the files -- but that it was a damn helluva' adventure, period.

This from the guys with whom I walked DEEP into the woods where Liko used to live and play.

And even though Liko did choke Tristan, he tried to avoid that by calling the police and of course they did..... NOTHING.

Which of course played upon his mental state because remember he told McKay "I am a mental health patient."

So I've never said he was an angel, but have always maintained that the media and government are definitely trying to portray him in the worst light and the government at its best.

And if you look at Liko's actions on his last night on Earth, he tried EVERYTHING to de-escalate.

More on this soon.

Sadly, the government is about to take a header.

A MAJOR header.

Anonymous said...

Chris --

Thanks for posting everything. I'm still working my way thru it ... only a few hundred more pages to go.

Wasn't the guy that said, "you don't know if you would come back from a hike (with Liko)" the same guy who sold him the gun? And if I remember correctly, that guy (Matt) said that he had bought the gun but it kept jamming when he used it so he sold it to Liko.

Don't you need a license to sell a gun in NH? According to the ATF you do! I would imagine that since Matt had bought the gun for his own use, he wasn't a licensed gun dealer. (I could be wrong but I haven't seen anything that would indicate that he was). And isn't selling a gun without a license is a felony in NH? (The ATF says it is)

I can't believe anything that he (Matt) said, because I can't tell if he was just making things up (or exagerating) to cover himself from his own possiblly unlawful activity. And who knows if he was offered some type to deal for that statement.

Another thing that jumped out at me ... don't the police need to mirandize someone when they are first arrested? Liko wasn't mirandized in 2003 until he was at the hospital (it's in the state trooper's statement), and even when they arrested Shooter Floyd for the gun possesion, they didn't try to mirandize him until he was at the police station. Just curious how things really work (as opposed to what you see on TV).

Thanks again.

anon from NJ

Christopher King said...

Anon from NJ:

Thanks for the questions and definitely pass this blawg to everyone you know.

I have been screaming about the potential Miranda violation
long before I even had the Fourth Amendment violation proof in my hand.

Those cop shows always show potential Miranda and other violations so that the American public gets used to the notion of having their Civil Rights violated because America is a Police State.

***********

Matt's comments were indeed taken out of context. I know this from spending a lot of time with Liko's friends. The government started throwing out magic phrases like psychopath and sociopath and making him pick one, and of course he was scared about liability on the gun issue.

And I'll tell you what:

Youth everywhere are being scared of rogue cops and it could happen again at any point in time in this country; hopefully other cops won't try to pull the insane stuff that McKay did.

Anonymous said...

I'd like to know the purpose of this blog... Chris King's 1st Amendment Page? Is it a legal site, a news site or a personal journal?

Anonymous said...

Good question. From my observations I'd say easily fully half self promotion, the legal aspects I don't know enough about to strictly comment on. Though there has been no legal action that I know of, nor anything scheduled in court that I know of, tho we have been advised that Chris is going to "kick ass" with his "mad skills" and would like everyone to come and see him in action in court. Somewhere, someday, sometime, over something.

The news aspects I'd say a good fair quarter of this is important and newsworthy, tho it repeats a lot, rather than archiving the basics in one place and moving forward tangibly.

Christopher King said...

9:24 and 9:38

It's whatever you want it to be.

I should note that just because something is repeated does not mean that it is offered for the same purpose each time.

And there are many, many tangible cases involving the First Amendment in which I have prevailed that are quite instructive as to what is going on in this country even on cases in which I did not participate.

Look at the very first post about the Sneak'n'Peek provisions of the Patriot Act, for example.

I was correct on that, and it was overturned.

At any rate, I also use it as a legal database, because it has a lovely search feature that connects me to documents and comments and news stories that I need.

"we have been advised that Chris is going to "kick ass" with his "mad skills" and would like everyone to come and see him in action in court. Somewhere, someday, sometime, over something."

.....It's called a Motion for Declaratory Judgement under RSA 91-A, Right-to-Know, and some of the cases that will be involved have been well-noted in this post.

Have a great day!