28 October 2007

KingCast has a few RSA 91-A questions for NH AG Homicide Chief Jeffery Strelzin in the Franconia shooting tragedy "investigation" of Gregory Floyd.

Dear Attorney Strelzin:

In response to this Homeland Security inquiry of 22 October 2007 you wrote that you had provided all "releasable" materials from the State Department of Safety on Gregory W. Floyd, who clearly shot at Liko Kenney before his car hit Bruce McKay and who shot Liko Kenney without saying a word on 11 May 2007 -- contrary to what your office's official report claims.

Provide a copy of any documents or statutes on which you rely for your contention that the following documents were not "releasable" in your investigation:

1. Floyd was a military AWOL liarhead.
2. Assault and disturbing the peace?
3. In violation of Mass and Federal Law?
4. Held guns in Mass.
5. Search warrant signed by Judge Cyr.
6. Stole the Virgin Mary #1.
7. Stole the Virgin Mary #2.
8. Newspapers scared of Floyd.

Also, I already know you told me your office has no paperwork relative to my inquiry as to what research you did about Floyd's claim of killing 43 people, but now I find that you lied to me because you did in fact have a copy of Floyd was a military AWOL liarhead. As Floyd was never overseas he sure as hell didn't kill 43 people here on American soil, so what you and Kelly did was you two and State Rep. Martha McLeod (married to Franconia Defendant Rich McLeod as selectman) obviously coddled a deranged lunatic with a fascination with guns and a predisposition for slinging marijuana and PCP and stealing the Virgin Mary. Nice. Shall the taxpayers inscribe that on your tombstone?

As a taxpayer and journalist I am disgusted by that as well as your statements to me regarding the purported lack of any more audio interviews when I knew perfectly well you weren't speaking the Truth because of my Franconia sources, which prompted me to posit the ethics complaint that coughed up the documents where Floyd (again) lied to Sam Stephenson, telling him about his "2, 3 tours of Vietnam."

Now then, in addition to the concerns noted above for the numbered items please:

1. Produce a copy of any and all documents that demonstrate proof that your office investigated Gregory W. Floyd's arrest and conviction for disorderly conduct, and any and all documents, including relevant statutes, that explain what the predicate behaviour was.

2. Produce a copy of any and all documents, including relevant statutes, that explain why your office never told the public about that arrest and conviction.

3. Produce a copy of any and all documents that demonstrate proof that your office investigated Gregory W. Floyd's arrest for assault with a dangerous weapon, and any and all documents, including relevant statutes, that explain what the alleged predicate behaviour was.

4. Produce a copy of any and all documents, including any relevant statutes, that explain why your office never told the public about that arrest.

As a side note, I bet there was no 2006 Right-to-Know Annual Report as required by Law but I think I have figured that out now, still waiting for your office's response to my inquiry about that. Read the comments.

As noted by last week's story, on this issue, the Littleton Courier and I will be awaiting your principled response. As Bruce McKay would say..... GOTCHA!

5 comments:

Christopher King said...

See, it is a tale of two Commissions:

KingCast, in information and belief, finds that the Right-to-Know Study Commission -- which was charged with producing legislation -- was disbanded in 2005 and as such, there may not be a 2006 report produced by law.

See HB 41.

But note that Section 15 does not obviate the requirement for an annual report.

Section 91-A:15

[RSA 91-A:15 repealed by 2005, 3:2 effective Nov. 1, 2010.]

91-A:15 Report. -
The commission shall make an annual report beginning on November 1, 2005, together with its findings and any recommendations for proposed legislation to the speaker of the house of representatives, the senate president, and the governor.
Source. 2005, 3:1, eff. May 3, 2005.


The new Commission is called the Oversight Commission, and it is tasked with the following duties (I will try to find the old sections 11-15 for comparison):

Section 91-A:13

[RSA 91-A:13 repealed by 2005, 3:2 effective Nov. 1, 2010.]

91-A:13 Duties. -

The commission shall study:
I. The need for disclosure requirements or guidelines for email and other electronic communication occurring between and among state, county, and local government appointed and elected officials and employees of governmental entities.

II. The need for disclosure requirements or guidelines for electronic communications with constituents of state, county, and local government appointed and elected officials and employees of governmental entities.

III. Archival requirements for electronic documents.

IV. The status of proprietary data within the definitions of the right-to-know law.

V. The ability to recover costs relative to the retrieval of electronic files and communications.

VI. Issues relative to public records posted to web sites of governmental entities.

VII. Whether a member of a body subject to the right-to-know law may participate in a meeting by teleconference or other electronic means.

VIII. The extent to which the public will be provided access to stored computer data under the right-to-know law.

IX. Any other matter deemed relevant by the commission.

Source. 2005, 3:1, eff. May 3, 2005.


[Note: Many of the issues in the pending case of KingCast v. NH AG Kelly Ayotte et al, Grafton Cty. 07-E-268 are contemplated within the duties of the Commission. If only the Commission had issued a report as required by Law in 2006 some of this litigation might not be necessary]

It's funny like that: One minute they think they have a simple murder cover up they can run past some of the luddites in Franconia, then the next minute folks stand up strong and then you have strong and principled citizen inquiry into the inner workings of government.

Boston Barristah' Wendell Phillips, Esq. would be proud, because "Eternal Vigilance is indeed the price of liberty."

*******

Help on effective and proper use of the English language:

*******

FWIW the language in the 2007 Draft report reads, in part:

The Right-to-Know Study Commission was comprised of public officials and private citizens appointed by the Governor and Council, the House and Senate, and by several organizations concerned with access to the workings of government at all levels.

[KingCast will help them by informing them that the use of the word "comprise" is improper in this context. The proper phrase is "composed of," but it is correct to say that "public officials and private citizens comprise the commission."]

Anonymous said...

BINGO! - "91-A:15 Report. The commission shall make an annual report beginning on November 1, 2005, together with its findings and any recommendations for proposed legislation to the speaker of the house of representatives, the senate president, and the governor.

3:2 Repeal. RSA 91-A:11 – RSA 91-A:15, relative to the right-to-know oversight commission, are repealed.

3:3 Effective Date.

I. Section 2 of this act shall take effect November 1, 2010"


no one expected you to show up....the 5/11 story touched on a nerve, and it vibrates throughout the valley and beyond.

Christopher King said...

It's just not a party without KingCast!

However, there are some serious questions I'll need to be addressed, because I have to believe that's a typo on the repeal language and that rather than reading "Right to Know Oversight Commission" it should have read "Right to Know Study Commission."

This legislation is anything but clear, and stands as (in)eloquent testimony as to why RSA 91-A needs to be vigorously applied and supported in and of itself.

Phone calls to the State House tomorrow you bet.

Anonymous said...

This bill changes the name of the right-to-know study commission to the right-to-know oversight commission, and extends the commission for 5 years.

i read it...but didn't look as closely as you did on 3:2.

Anonymous said...

Shoutout To Quebec! Montreal rocks!