21 February 2011

KingCast Black History month continues as he nails Nashua PD's James Hargreaves and John Fisher with Connell v. Hudson, 733 F. Supp. 465 (1990) in KingCast v. Ayotte, GOP and Nashua PD in NH Dist. 2010-CV-501.


Someone told me that Kelly Ayotte's lying erstwhile legal partner Jeff Strelzin once stated with respect to my investigation of the Ayotte/Strelzin lies and coverup in the Franconia shooting tragedy, "King is wasting his talents."

Well Counselor, I can assure you that I didn't attend a top-50 law school to waste my talents. My talents are being put to their highest value use over at Mortgage Movies, helping schoolchildren with BostonBridges and taking these hateful, bigoted police officers and Kelly Ayotte to task for violating my Civil Rights as noted in this KingCast NENPA Black History Month journal entry featuring video of substantial police abuse condoned and encouraged by the Tea Party Freshman Senator Kelly Ayotte, who will join these fine officers as named Defendants Wednesday, 23 February 2010.

When I was in law school Chief District Judge Shane Devine ruled that police cannot chase a freelance reporter away from a public crime or accident scene. As such it also stands to reason that police cannot chase a freelance reporter away from the common areas of a place of public accommodation, i.e. the Crowne Plaza Hotel.

These cats are about to become named Defendants, Fisher is already a named Defendant in Gorsuch v. Fisher et al, 2010-CV-495. For More on him read below the fold.

May it please the Court:

While we are dealing with this case on the Pleadings -- a fact that Defendants seem to forget -- the fact remains that Discovery is the only way to get to the bottom of this. In point of fact in Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration on Magistrate McCafferty's Report and Recommendation, he noted that  Lieutenant John Fisher harassed him on the sidewalk for no reason, and treated him differently than other white people who stood closer to a backing car. Proof of this is seen in the attached video and in the picture.

But there is a pattern and practice of such lies, as I have noted in theMichael Paulhus investigation where Nashua PD and/or Staties destroyed evidence, and Plaintiff Michael Gorsuch will tell you in case no. 2010-CV-495, filed right before my case at 2010-CV-501. The Nashua Telegraph's Andrew Wolfe noted on Friday, 10 Dec. 2010:

Fatal crash passenger sues police for prosecution

"Gorsuch and his lawyers charge that Maloney and other police accident reconstruction investigators ignored other evidence that pointed to his innocence, such as Rodriguez’ shoe found near the gas and brake pedals, and Gorsuch’s Red Sox cap, found pinned within the front passenger side airbag."

“Despite the fact that three technical accident reconstruction experts, each of whom was properly trained to conduct passenger kinematics analysis, all had concluded that Rodriguez was the driver and Gorsuch was the passenger, Fisher, Maloney and the Nashua Police Department procured the institution of further legal process in an attempt to ‘get’ Mr. Gorsuch,” his lawsuit states. “Specifically, they prevailed upon New Hampshire State Trooper Carleen Bowman and Trooper Mark Nash to prosecute Gorsuch in an administrative hearing designed to take away Gorsuch’s right to drive in New Hampshire. Like the criminal prosecution that preceded it, this bad faith attempt to ‘get’ Mr. Gorsuch failed.”

Similarly, Lieutenant Fisher was bound to make up the rules as he went along in Plaintiff's case. He had no right to talk to Plaintiff when Plaintiff was already following his orders, and when Plaintiff asked him "Do you mind if I ask the Candidate a question" he said "No." See "Senator-Elect Kelly Ayotte attacked by Dangerous Black Man from the NAACP"
at 8:22, Exhibit __ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzAXP3DniDY. As such, we can see that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is merely an abusive and baseless attempt to skirt the issues countenanced in this case, while playing on the sympathies of a conservative bench and former colleagues and underlings (i.e. Magistrate Judge Landya McCafferty) as noted in Plaintiff's Motion for Disclosure.

Lastly, on a related note, the testimony of former U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier, who is involved in a Federal lawsuit for lying about Ralph Holder and falsely accusing him of being a fugitive from Justice, was and is suspect. He flat out lied at 6:09 of this video 

"Senator-Elect Kelly Ayotte attacked by Dangerous Black Man from the NAACP"

at Exhibit __ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzAXP3DniDY when he called the police because Plaintiff is on "private property," when in point of fact Plaintiff was standing on the sidewalk. A Jury is entitled to determine his bias, as he works for Ayotte and is her Special Assistant for Veterans, Law Enforcement and First Responder Outreach. May the Court recognize that bias and witness credibility is always at issue.

1 comment:

Christopher King said...

Moreover, Chief Conley is being named because he "exonerated" Hargreaves after I filed a complaint published in this journal.

The Court also rejects defendants' assertion that Chief Brackett is protected by qualified immunity. In federal civil rights actions, gov-ernment officials are entitled to qualified im-munity for their discretionary acts. Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 97 L. Ed. 2d 523, 107 S. Ct. 3034 (1987). To determine if an official is immune from liability, the Court looks at the "'objective reasonableness'" of the official's conduct and determines whether that conduct violated "clearly established [**20] statutory or constitutional rights." Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818, 73 L. Ed. 2d 396, 102 S. Ct. 2727 (1982). "The contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right. Anderson, supra, 483 U.S. at 640. See also Rodriguez v. Comas, 875 F.2d 979 (1st Cir. 1989).
Reasonable police officers understand that their authority has well-defined limits.

Albert Brackett, at the time of this incident the acting chief of Hudson's police department, can be fairly held to the understanding that he could not chase a photographer away from an acci-dent unless that photographer was unreasonably interfering with police activity. The record in the instant case suggests no such interference.

Similarly, Plaintiff was not interfering with the GOP functions nor was he even in their leased area when the Defendants ran him out of the entire Crowne Plaza Hotel.