24 March 2008

Franconia Defendants nailed for costs and Angela McKay's Restraining Order information against Bruce McKay in KingCast v. Ayotte et al.

I'm reading Judge Vaughn's Decision Part 2: Franconia Defendants are nailed for my filing costs and expenses in the Right to Know litigation, and among other things releasing information on Angela McKay's Restraining Order on Bruce.
And those documents are due to me by today, actually or five (5) days after notice of the 19 March 2008 ORDER of the Court. More quotes from the decision are in the comments.

Judge Vaughn In-Camera Decision Page one, two, three, four, five and six.

"Vaughn index #P is, or concerns, a privileged medical record." [KingCast says 'wonder if that has to do with the medication McKay was on?'] The disclosable two pages of the document represent a public record, specifically a record of the Littleton Family Division. Those two pages, representing Angela McKay's withdrawal of a restraining order, are a public record...." [KingCast says good. Now I will know the case number I can get the rest of it].

See also "Behind the Blue Wall" blog for Domestic violence with police as perps.
"A police officer's training and professional status add extra levels of sophistication to his style of psychological and physical battering," according to [Diane] Wetendorf's handbook. "In addition to his personal power, he has institutional power - the badge, the gun and the support of the police department - and he constantly threatens to use them all against you."
"The Court finds that the present lawsuit was necessary in order for the plaintiff to obtain the documents.... the Franconia Defendants are responsible for the plaintiff's cost in bringing suit to obtain the records.....the Court reserves judgment on the proportion of an award of costs to be paid by each of the Defendants to the plaintiff until after the Court has conducted its in camera review of the documents to be provided by the Attorney General."

KingCast: There you go, here we are.

5 comments:

Christopher King said...

"Vaughn index #P is, or concerns, a privileged medical record." [KingCast says 'wonder if that has to do with the medication McKay was on'] The disclosable two pages of the document represent a public record, specifically a record of the Littleton Family Division. Those two pages, representing Angela McKay's withdrawal of a restraining order, are a public record...." [KingCast says good. Now I know the case number to get the rest of it].

"The following documents [of Vaughn Index TT and UU] are disclosable.

TT: Documents E (Complaint received by Chief Montminy 10/6/00), F (Officer McKay's report containing incident report and radio log with Grafton County Sheriff, J (Letter from original complainant regarding status of original complaint dated 11/17/00) and L (Letter of complaint dated 10/30/00 are not exempt from disclosure.

UU: Documents O (Dispatch radar transcript), Q (Grafton County Sheriff's radio log), R (Incident Report), S (Officer McKay's narrative report), T (Witness account), V (Responding officer account), W (Responding officer account), X (Witness Account), Y (Responding Officer Account), and Z (Copy of two policies of the Franconia Police Department) are to be disclosed to the petitioner."

"The Court finds that the present lawsuit was necessary in order for the plaintiff to obtain the documents.... the Franconia Defendants are responsible for the plaintiff's cost in bringing suit to obtain the records..... the Court reserves judgment on the proportion of an award of costs to be paid by each of the Defendants to the plaintiff until after the Court has conducted its in camera review of the documents to be provided by the Attorney General."

KingCast: There you go, here we are.

Christopher King said...

Query, How are you going to be a police officer with a Restraining Order against you from your wife? No reprimand in the file?

Unbelievable.

There's a whole lot of important information about to come forward, unless they appeal. But why appeal? What are you hiding?

And Defendant Ayotte has STILL not provided me a list of dates and times to review that Dash Cam video.

Rut-ro. Not looking good for the Big Team, is it.

Christopher King said...

One other point of concern:

The Affidavits from Franconia that the Court ordered to be produced because the searches for things like Attorney Troy Watt's Complaint "lacked indicia of reasonableness."

I have not seen any of them yet; not sure how that factors in to His Honor's Decision.

Christopher King said...

Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 20:57:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Christopher King" kingjurisdoctor@yahoo.com
Subject: A startling New Hampshire case from a former Clevelander
To: ljohnsto@plaind.com
CC: kingjurisdoctor@yahoo.com

Dear Reporter Johnston:

I almost worked for the PD but instead kept to my
rebel roots and dig the Edition, then the Call-Post
and Indy Star before returning home to law school at Case 1990-1993.

I came across your blog and linked it today in this
post.

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2008/03/franconia-defendants-nailed-for-costs.html

Involving some very dirty facts in a double homicide case up here in NH.

In addition to the link above, note that the video from the shooting itself is suspect as all get out:

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2008/03/kingcast-explains-why-original-bruce.html

Local media's not covering it. I've spoken with John
Ettore about it and turn to you because you are out of the jurisdiction and not beholden to the power's that be, i.e. WMUR/Union Leader.

Peace.

Christopher King, J.D.
KingCast.net
Justiceforkids.net

PS: Forgot about the knife-near labia stunt McKay pulled:

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2007/11/nh-ag-kelly-ayotte-lies-again-we-dont.html

Peace.

Anonymous said...

Good news!!! Progress.