10 November 2007

KingCast asks who is Dan Mullen to think he can just ignore an RSA 91-A request?

At no time has he responded to these requests. Small wonder he got his ass handed to him in not one, but two RSA 91-A Right-to-Know trials (Murray and Union Leader) as noted herein. And the town of Franconia actually told Jeffery Jesseman to write to Mullen with his requests for information. Why bother, he'll just ignore it until I make the court make him stop.

It's patently absurd.


Christopher King said...

Utter lawlessnes.

Anonymous said...

Wouldn't Connecticut be responsible for Connecticut?

Christopher King said...

Well, yes and no.

If there was any sort of activity on the level that I believe it to have occurred it should be in his personnel file, natch.

As to the other issues, his job application and whatnot, how can the State honestly tell us that we're not entitled to that information?

I specifically told Mullen in a letter I preserved that I'm not looking for social security numbers or home addresses, anything like that.

As for CT, I've got other methods I'm working on to go with what I already have but I had better not find what I'm looking for there and not see it from the State.

That would be Bad News.


Christopher King said...

Also, he has to answer my requests, even if he just says "Go pound salt," he still needs to give me a reason for telling me "go pound salt."

These guys are bloody ridiculous and I'm not going to stand for it.