01 April 2010

KingCast says cool cats (and Plato, Socrates and other smart people) say no to SB154 Bruce McKay Highway.

Note: State Rep Sorg video was lost, but now found. Coming soon.

Sooooo... Last night I met the Director and Principal producer of "If I die tonight," one of the most compelling documentaries I have ever seen. We all agree that there must be a multifaceted approach to these issues, but yet in practice too often when we try to speak up about anything the State finds uncomfortable, we get shut down. Despite Seyi's clearly even-handed approach most municipalities wouldn't even talk with him. This perpetuates an us vs. them mentality, not good.

Be that as it may, I have been called a philosophical orator, in the way that offended State Officials say such a thing. Well undettered, that's what I did again today, and and I'll post that video soon with several interesting photographs. As usual, I was professional throughout, despite being called last and given the shortest amount of time and the proverbial brush-off.

I was not even allowed to contradict an erroneous statement issued by Sharon Davis-McKay about the number of written, documented complaints against Bruce McKay. It's on video uploading now.

In fact, there is a lot of video from a lot of people, so stay tuned throughout Friday, 2 April 2010. Meanwhile read the last post about Failed Warrant Russell Cumbee's little rant. He failed to appear today in the flesh, like a scaredy-cat, or as "Quiet Man" would say, "like a puppy that peed itself."

My friend's cat is awesome,
that's a video capture pic so I'll have to upload that video as well, the David Bowie eyes are the perfect touch :)

As I said in this crucial post, smart folks know what time it is even as the government tries to suppress the full exposition of the Truth. And that's a fact, jack.

KingCast: The Cat in the Hat.

PS: Casey Sherman has been busy. Ask Moody Street Pictures and John Stimpson (The Legend of Lucy Keyes) about that because the screen play is in motion, just wait and see. Whatever turns up, the spotlight is going to stay on this case and I am going to stay right on with it, stating the things I know to be true given the thousands of hours I have spent here.

PPS: Davey Michele, look at the length of my video at 808 LOL.... no such thing as a coincidence.


Jennifer said...

Nice work Mr. King.
and just for the record- I would like to nominate your friend's cat for governor. Very nice cat in the hat.
J. Wolf

Christopher King said...

I come before you not only as a 6-year resident of New Hampshire, but as a former AAG who has represented and sued LE, so I can see both proverbial sides of the fence. Last night I watched a compelling documentary at NE School of Law entitled, “If I die tonight” that showcases several tragic civilian and police deaths that polarized NY and NJ communities, and after discussing things with the director, and in the spirit of that piece I will now address this Committee for the next 5 minutes.

You all have or should have received my 5 point one page letter, and hopefully you have listened to last year’s colloquy between Senator Letourneau and me in which I noted that the House Committee voted 15-0 to table virtually identical legislation until the Community wants it.

At this point we need to examine why that was, and still is, the correct decision.

The simple answer in the first part is to identify the fact that Senators Letourneau and D’Allesandro are not from the Community, and only 73 people in the community felt moved enough to vote in favor of virtually identical legislation set forth in Russell Cumbee’s Warrant ballot initiative earlier this month. It was defeated, 93-73.

The simple answer in the second part is to further note that Senator D’Allesandro has a substantial war chest, funded by outside contributors not even from the State, much less the local communities, as noted in an NPR story that I posted on my blog.

The simple answer in the third part is to correct Senator D’Allesandro when he implies that every fallen LE gets a road named after him; I have not seen any such road pursuant to RSA 4:43 for Joseph Gearty.

But now let’s take this several steps higher on the ladder of abstraction. Even though this is a legislative body, we are assembled here to discuss Justice, and what is a Just result in this instance.
Let’s visit the ancient Greeks for guidance. Specifically, Thrasymachus and Plato.

We all know that LE and Senators like D’Allesandro have a ton of power, and Thrasymachus would say that might makes right, and that whatever they say goes, based on the fact that they have the most political muscle.....

Christopher King said...

But ah, Plato suggests otherwise….. and he noted that the working class people should enjoy more, not fewer, privileges than Law Enforcement.

The role of the State in a Just society must approach true temperance. Just as the individual’s spirit and appetitive nature must be guided by reason, the State’s appetitive nature to thrust the goals of Law Enforcement on everyone else must be guided by fairness and the same sense of temperance.

But Bruce McKay was not a temperate police officer by any measure. He had more run-ins and complaints against him from Civilians and other professionals than any other officer in the North, and probably within the State.

In the last moments of his life he was in fact violating several Pursuit and OC Spray policies, and the Littleton Courier agreed with me on this as I emailed you this morning. Similarly, Joe Gearty was allegedly involved in wrongdoing and SOP violations when he sustained his fatal injuries.
Therefore it would be unjust for this Committee and larger body politic to grant government imprimatur to this sort of activity, in fact it would be the antithesis of what is Just.

Again, this whole roadway effort smacks of continued coverup to keep people from looking at the fact that there was no real investigation. Multiple felon Floyd twice said he never spoke to Liko Kenney before shooting, then changed his story, and that version appeared in the official report.

Floyd’s own son – and the windshield bullet – prove that Floyd shot out the windshield before Liko Kenney’s car ever struck Bruce McKay. The fact that there was allegedly no fingerprint analysis conducted, and the fact that Floyd was never even handcuffed and sauntered home with Liko Kenney’s live round in his shirt pocket is even worse.

Did he put that second clip in to make Liko look still dangerous? What’s worse than that is the fact that there was no official review of Bruce McKay’s actions on 5/11, and no AG with integrity would ever fail to conduct such a review.
And we should remember who asked for backup both in 2003 and in 2007:
Liko Kenney asked for backup “I don’t trust this officer,” he said.

But Bruce McKay falsely told him in 2007 -- for reasons known only to McKay – that he did not and would not call for backup, which only instilled more fear in an already unstable and fragile individual.
And if the State continues on to award a road in the name of Bruce McKay, it will only instill more fear and contempt in the local and general communities of this State. And that does not a Just society make.

Thank you for your time and continued consideration of this matter.

Christopher King, J.D.

Christopher King said...

PS: I nailed that cat photo :)

Is she laughing, threatening, yawning, or just rappin' with me, that is the question.

Fun stuff.


Anonymous said...

I guess Christopher King is not allowed to back up his points in that session. If she were a judge in a case I was trying, I guess I would have to negligently practice law by making bald assertions.

PS: First time poster, long time reader

Anonymous said...

There was nothing professional about your presentation in any way. Like it or not the people you spoke before are elected officials put in office through the democratic way which you like to expound on when it suits your need. You showed the chairperson and the other committee people absolutely no respect. You continually raised your voice everytime the chairperson tried to keep you on topic talking over her requests.
On a personal not you continue to misrepresent my beliefs, opinions and views I held over 2 1/2 years ago, presenting them as my current beliefs, opinions and views.
You insult good people who have responsibilites and jobs unlike you who for all intensive purposes is unemployed.

I was not there either, but my views and opinion was sent via a letter to every member. The letter also addresses the misinformation that you continue to state about my prior beliefs to bolster your cause.

Caleb McCauleys own statement clearly indicates that Liko Kenney in an attempt to flee the stop twice struck Cpl. McKay before Gregory Floyd even picked up Cpl. McKay's weapon. the windshiled bullet would be indicative of firing at a vehicle bearing down on Mr. Floyd and Cpl. McKay who was lying mortally wounded from the 5 shots fired by his murderer.

You always express your views with othing more than innuendos and unsubstantiated facts that is your way to cloud the issue at hand and muddy the water, which you are a master of.

Christopher King said...


Thank you. I was obvious that I was not given the same or even similar latitude given to other speakers, particularly those who favored the legislation.


You are right, there was not much professional about the way in which I was treated.

I performed admirably given the constraints under which I was placed.

The investigation was a complete sham, and Floyd's own son said that Liko's car DID NOT Strike McKay until AFTER his father shot at the car. He specifically said that they stopped short of the officer, you want to read it again dude?


My comments are based on FACT and RESEARCH, my friend.

-The KingCaster.

Now here comes Floyd:

Page 20/1,000:
"Did you say anything before you fired?"
"No, I didn't"

Now here comes Caleb:

Page 11 of official report: "
The man said nothing before he fired."

Now here comes Junior Floyd:

[Floyd Junior also as noted on 91-A pdf page 745]
"They had stopped in front of his arm the first time. They didn't actually hit the officer. Then they backed up to here and at that time my dad got out and tried to pull him to prevent him from running him over again" [KingCast says wait a minute: Run him over again??? There was absolutely nothing to keep Liko from running McKay over the first time -- but he didn't. Liko was just trying to get the hell out of there.] They backed up to here and the car went rushing forward and my dad shot at the driver and it hit him and made him stop. The front end of the car ended up over the officer's chest."

Doesn't sound like there's much time for dialogue there, does it? Also at another point in the bowels of his testimony, I remember reading that Floyd claimed Liko actually ran into McKay twice, striking him the first time while he was standing, which Junior AND Caleb both dispute, point blank. Small wonder I have to compel production of this material in Mandamus but that's what the Right-to-Know is all about, isn't it? That's why Kelly dodged John P's Right to Know request but I asked for a copy of their response because that's also a public record.

Held: As such, there was no discourse at all with first shot, so let's get on to Caleb and the second shot:

II. The second shot through Caleb Macaulay's open or closed window.

Petitioner restates all previous allegations as incorporated herein:


Page 672: "No, no, it was just - it was just pepper spray right away."

Page 700: "When I saw that gun I went down like this and that's all I saw and if I did not do that I wouldn't be, I wouldn't be here today."

Page 701: "He did, did he say anything?" "He said nothing. He started shooting." (Of course later in the interview Caleb is picking glass shards out of his scalp.

Anonymous said...

Wow, I personally feel that King was treated far differently than other speakers. Sharon Davis was allowed to read a letter that was based on Mckay's father's personal opinion about the laws, etc in our country and how ALL of the country was different than when he grew up...how off track is that from the topic, yet it was allowed. Davis spent her time also speaking about "that day" and not the bill!

Christopher King said...


KingCast says: There is no doubt that Madame Chair practiced viewpoint based First Amendment Discrimination.

I hope you lawyers don't need me to explain that, it's obvious.

For you laypeople, Sharon Davis McKay and others were permitted to testify about the quality and quantity of complaints issued against Bruce McKay.

They were also permitted to testify about issues that were the byproduct of Kelly Ayotte's investigation.

But I was not permitted to call any of that into question, which is ludicrous given the emails I have sent to the Committee and my history with this case and the thousands of hours I have spent thoroughly documenting everything I say.

That is a Content-based restriction, which is impermissible in an open forum like this. I have changed law and policy on a similar matter in New Hampshire, read it right here, here is page two and it's part of the reason why Mayor Streeter awarded me a First Amendment Commendation.

Mayor Streeter has the longest tenure of anyone on the Governor's Council.

So I'm not going to tolerate this sort of First Amendment abuse lightly.

Instead I will note it for the record and keep on keepin' on, as Mother Ann would want it.

-The KingCaster.

Anonymous said...

there is no doubt all teh anonymous comments except for one are posted by king columcille.

Christopher King said...

6:03 -- Mr. "I would have shot Bruce McKay as well" -- Bill Christy or whatever your real name is....

I don't get interrupted when I speak before the Massachusetts Senate (Read the bill I conceived, "Robert Taylor's Law" here) so why now.

Bill you crack me up. First you say Columcille is me and we're one in the same. Now you say all the comments are from him or her.

You're wasting bandwidth, dude, run along back to Topix and call me Eunie with Quiet Man, or talk about my balls some more. Or talk about some alleged BBWs I'm shagging in North Country.

Did you know that I'm also State Rep Sorg, and like Eddie Murphy morphs into other characters I'm also all 93 people on the Warrant vote defeat.

I can also double as Dr. Ginny Jeffries and State Rep Horrigan.

So many skills I have.


-The KingCaster

Anonymous said...

Sorry 6:03 and at 7:04,

Your assumption that all the anonymous posters are King would indeed include your posts as well. You don't like that someone pops in and interrupts your personal battle with King by pointing out the obvious in that meeting????

You are so blinded by your own inner rage at this point that you see nothing but black and white.

King and Sorg were shut down repeatedly at this meeting. They let others on both sides speak their piece. Ginny Jeffreys was even allowed to speak of the "03" incident and her personal opinion on Liko's level of fear. She was allowed to speak of "primal defenses", etc. And she should have been able to. Just as King and Sorg should have been allowed their say. People were there to explain why they were against the highway renaming not just, "I am for or against". To suggest the latter is unconstitutional and I, quite frankly found it very unsettling to watch this happen within what is supposed to be a democratic society.

In my opinion, people perceived to be most politically threatening by the committee were "muted". Worse yet, perhaps they just didn't want to be bothered and wanted to make sure they got out of work on time to see their favorite nightly program. There really is no good reason to treat citizens in such a manner - none.

I am not Chris King or someone in close contact with him. You choose to insult and rage on at and with King but there is no need to attack all posters that do not agree with your personal views as being imposters for King.

Christopher King said...

Look at this tool Billy Boy "I would have shot Bruce McKay" and "Try Gregory Floyd for Murder"

He already admitted he has no Civil Practice as a lawyer (if indeed that's what he really is, he won't offer any proof of that), so therefore he had no idea about unlawful viewpoint-based discrimination, which is what Madame Chair was engaging in.

He says to me, he says:

"You insult good people who have responsibilites and jobs unlike you who for all intensive purposes is unemployed."

......Dude you have no idea what I do outside of this arena because I don't tell you. One time you made a reference to unemployment checks but hell if I had unemployment checks large enough to live like I do that means I was working someplace for a while and making a lot of money in corporate America.

You can't win this one Billy Boy, head on back to Topix and call me Eunie, or talk about my purportedly non-descended testicles, or get back to talking about what North Country BBWs I'm allegedly shagging with your good-for-nothing Snowy, whose husband hasn't seen a paycheck or a job since dinosaurs walked the planet.

You are a complete joke and would-be interloper.

-The KingCaster.

Christopher King said...

PS: This guy ain't no lawyer and he never was one. He's an LE shill brought in to try to infiltrate the ranks of righteous dissenters.

Any lawyer would know the phrase is "intents and purposes" and not "intensive purposes."

What a bandwidth waster this person is.

The KingCaster.