13 February 2010

KingCast presents: RSA 91-A Public Records request for Concord NH cops who used loaded guns at a "training exercise" and shot each other.

The actual RSA 91-A public records request is at the bottom of this post regarding this ridiculous coverup:

Consider this first: Officer Deadly Force Policy IV B(f):
“Ensure that guns are not opened, loaded, unloaded, shell casings removed, or in any other way tampered with….”

Now dammit how hard is that to remember? Was there a stammer somewhere up in there? Well apparently it is very hard for some LE in NH and in MA as we are about to see:

How NH AG's office covered up for LE who entered and remained on the premises of a private credit union in the wee hours of the morning of 1 May 2008 and conducted "training exercises" there without any authorization, and with loaded guns, causing a cop to get shot. If you are a civilian and accidentally shoot your friend in New Hampshire, you're getting charged. See 17 Dec. 2009 Nashua Telegraph story about the Millford Charges against Derrick Shippee. Reckless Conduct, Class B felony every day.

Similarly, in Londonderry Andrew Dadian was charged in the November, 2009 accidental shooting of his brother even though the police say it appeared accidental.
Reckless Conduct, Class B felony every day.

Anyway, the Officer in charge (Sergeant Steven Smagula) who has had "extensive training" (AG Official Report p. 13) -- and who should be held to a higher standard than some kids in a car -- picked up the damn shell casing before any photographs were taken of the potential crime scene (AG Official Report pp 6, 7, 8), thereby destroying the integrity of the investigative process.

Sound familiar?

Well that's because some LE in the Revere Dan Talbot murder trial 99.9% assuredly picked up a spent Glock 22 .40 cal casing and placed it atop a Gatorade bottle, which appears 100% unscathed by the heat that would have partially melted it had the casing really landed directly on it.

The pictures and video don't lie -- but some LE might have.

Cracks me up, there is some tool named "Quiet Man" a/k/a Chief Jay Strongbow (Strongblow) who says on Topix that I seem to think I can do whatever I want to do.Well that's not true, but if it were true, it would be because I learned it from NH and MA LE like Revere's William Soto -- even picking up guns and spiriting them away from crime scenes despite explicit warning from former LE and current Homeland Security personnel.

Watch the trial video, it don't lie -- but some LE might have.

And listen to Attorney Krupp's closing argument in the first two videos on this post. An argument could be made that William Soto should be fired for his post-shooting actions (carrying guns away from the scene and possibly placing casings wherever he wants to, destroying the integrity of a crime scene) in addition to drinking while driving, drinking in public, drinking in public with his firearm, etc. etc.

Anyway, I know the NH AG's office is claiming they won't show the diagrams to the public because of a privacy issue, citing Lodge v. Knowlton 118 NH 574 (1978), but that's complete rubbish and I will sue over it. Read the comments to see the relevant criteria that drawings or photographs of the crime scene do not meet.

UPDATE: A KingCast Affiliate has provided Professional Firefighters of NH v. Local Gov't Center 2009-215 (29 Jan 2010), holding that salary information is not private. If salary information is not private, surely crime scene photographs of a bank -- not showing anyone's family or morgue picures -- are not private, either.

-The KingCaster. I'm just sayin'..... ask WBZ's Karen Anderson, she wrote about this case and we discussed it, she knows it's BS too. Read her story right here in my 4 May 2008 post -- in which I also presciently called for Revere Sergeant Evan Franklin's termination, that's why they call me Negrodamus. Pictured: Anderson, Your Humble Narrator, Slim Shady. Not intoxicated this time.



Christopher King said...

As RSA 91-A is interpreted under FOIA:

[2, 3] At the federal level, the Freedom of Information Act now exempts:

(7) investigatory records compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such records would (A) interfere with enforcement proceedings, (B) deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication, (C) constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy, (D) disclose the identity of a confidential source, and in the case of a record compiled by a law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation, or by any agency conducting a lawful national security investigation, confidential information furnished only by a confidential source, (E) disclose investigative techniques and procedures, or (F) endanger the life or physical safety of law enforcement personnel.


I'm sorry guys but crime scene photographs or drawings of where an officer was shot do not meet those criteria, and I have a specific problem with the fact that Sergeant Steven Smagula, a man trained in the preservation of evidence and crime scenes, spirited away the spent casing.

So what the State has done by virtue of these actions (Smagula's and the denial) is to effectively remove the public's Right to Know where these State Actors -- paid with taxpayer monies -- really were standing when this event transpired.

As that is antithetical to the purpose of the act, there will be litigation if I don't receive the photographs and/or drawings.

-The KingCaster.

Christopher King said...

More: Remember the key is to provide the utmost information, not the least information.


....Even national security information is at least reviewable by a judge in camera to determine if it should be exempt from public inspection. Bell v. United States, 563 F.2d 484 (1st Cir. 1977).

The trial court should also in this case, and in future cases, require in camera review to decide whether there will be total or partial nondisclosure. This decision should be made in accordance with the guidelines discussed in this opinion and with our previously stated "intention to resolve questions `with a view to providing the utmost information.'" 113 N.H. at 537, 311 A.2d at 118.

Christopher King said...

Back in it again I see?

Didn't get enough back on 9 Feb 2010 when you downloaded the immaculate reception Gatorade bottle?

9th February 2010 14:31:23 Download http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_PQbVMfpHJBg/S3Gcm3sFKdI/AAAAAAAACGk/Scp0SAwkfxk/s1600-h/trash_can_bullshit.jpg

33 visits from someone who "doesn't care" what I have to say.

Referrer No referring link
Host Name c-76-119-132-185.hsd1.ma.comcast.net
IP Address Haverhill hater [Edit Label]
Country United States
Region Massachusetts
City Haverhill
ISP Comcast Cable
Returning Visits 33
Visit Length Multiple visits spread over more than one day

14th February 2010 16:13:30 Page View www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=13h&oq=&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADRA_enUS343US343&q=chris king

14th February 2010 16:13:59 Exit Link https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=13439084&postID=3723078134552862049

14th February 2010 16:14:12 Page View www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=13h&oq=&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADRA_enUS343US343&q=chris king

14th February 2010 16:14:22 Exit Link https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=13439084&postID=8393632325152343939

14th February 2010 16:14:30 Page View www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=13h&oq=&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADRA_enUS343US343&q=chris king

14th February 2010 16:14:38 Exit Link https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=13439084&postID=8406185288534071950

Glad to have you as such an ardent fan!

-The KingCaster.