Home Tags Posts tagged with "Open Government"
Tag:

Open Government

Blog

In Newspeak: “Transparent” Means “Secret” When It Comes to Police Accountability

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

Yesterday, several bills relating to police accountability and YOUR right-to-know what your government is up to were heard remotely via Zoom before the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Sharon Carson of District 14, who is rated a C+ by the NHLA.

I sat in on on more than four hours of testimony on three bill, which I will break down for you below. Fair warning, don’t freak out at the summary headings. I pulled these from the bills themselves, and they are framed to improve the chances of a bill passing (know your audience–statists–as they say).

You can read RTKNH’s positions HERE, my submitted written testimony HERE, which I summarized in my oral remarks, while also trying to address some of the issues and questions the committee raised, while also trying to comply with the arbitrarily imposed “three minute” rule, which was not equally applied to state agents and the public.

Guess which side was consistently given more time? Hint: Public hearings about government transparency and openness where the public is marginalized at the expense of the state. Say it isn’t so!?! To be fair, I have attended other committee meetings that were even more egregious with their time allocations, so hopefully, if we continue with these kind of remote sessions, we can actually just apply the rule equally to all… with a timer. Easy-peasy!

SB40: This bill permits a warrantless search of a motor vehicle with the informed consent of the motor vehicle operator

Currently, LEOs will trick unsuspecting drivers into “consenting” to searches where they don’t have probable cause or a warrant, thus allowing them to go on fishing expeditions which often end up with an arrest for non-violent, recreational drug use that had NOTHING to do with the original traffic stop. This bill aims to rectify this subterfuge by compelling officers to “expressly inform the operator of the motor vehicle that:

(a) The operator has the right to refuse to consent to a search;

(b) Any refusal to consent to a search shall not constitute a basis either for probable cause to arrest the operator or reasonable suspicion to detain the operator;

(c) The operator cannot be charged with any crime or violation for refusing to consent to a search; and

(d) The operator cannot be further detained for refusing to consent to a search.

II. If the operator of a motor vehicle refuses to consent to a search, the law enforcement officer shall cease any further questioning concerning consent to a search.”

Introduced by Senator French (B rating from the NHLA, the best we can do in the Senate until you elect better candidates, ahem :P) and followed by testimony in support from the ACLU-NH, Rights & Democracy, defense attorney Penny Dean, law professor Buzz Scherr, State Representative Leah Cushman, and others. Everyone from the private sector spoke in support of this bill, many commenting on the fear and nervousness most people feel when they get pulled over.

Several law enforcement officers also testified (Joseph Ebert, Marc Beaudoin, David Goldstein), claiming to be “neutral” or “take no position,” but also making several suggestions to change the bill in various ways. One of proposals is to add the word “solely” in the sentence, “The operator cannot be [solely] further detained for refusing to consent to a search.”

Another suggestions was to create a standard form that must be signed before a roadside search without a warrant can take place. A concern raised in response is that non-English speakers are often advised by legal assistance organizations to not sign forms they cannot read, understand, and thus provide “informed consent” to, so it is possible that some people will be negatively impacted, whether through signing something they didn’t fully understand (probably an issue for a large portion of folks in such a frightening situation), or by refusing to sign the form.

My take: There seems to be an appetite to pass something, codifying what appears to be general practice already. Some towns in New Hampshire already have forms like this. Promoting informed consent is always a good idea, but we’ll have to see if that is really the result.

SB41: This bill provides that a party may petition to close a portion of a police disciplinary hearing

Again, don’t have a brain-melt at that summary. These proceedings are currently ALL SECRET, so this bill will actually improve transparency and accountability by setting the default to “open,” with the option to “close” some parts. The bill language: “Police Standards and Training Council; Powers.  Amend RSA 106-L:5, III to read as follows:

III.  For the purposes of a disciplinary hearing, subpoena and examine witnesses under oath, take oaths or affirmations, and reduce to writing testimony given at any hearing[. Any] provided that any person whose rights or privileges may be affected at such a disciplinary hearing may appear with witnesses and be represented by counsel, and further provided that any disciplinary hearing shall be public, but a party may petition to close a portion of the hearing to the public if the party seeking closure proves that such portion of the hearing would disclose confidential information and that the disclosure creates a compelling interest outweighing the public right of access.

2  Effective Date.  This act shall take effect 60 days after its passage.”

Senator French introduced the bill. Afterwards, Senator Carson rightfully asked who gets to decide about “the compelling interest” that “outweighs” the public right to access. I agree there is a problem with the current wording, and that it should be clarified. Some suggested “the hearing officer,” “a neutral party,” and “the council.”

Several people brought up the especially egregious case of MPD racist cop, Aaron Brown, who was ordered under arbitration to be reinstated, and, after Chief Capano rightly refused, Manchester taxpayers got saddled with a $200,000 settlement payment. (<— And people wonder why there is no trust?!? LOL)

My take: This bill is long overdue and a crucial step to maaaaaaaaaybe restoring trust in law enforcement. The default should be for more openness and transparency. In order to close down any portion of the hearings under this bill, I’d like to suggest the determinations should be part of the Right-to-Know Ombudsman’s duties. The RTK Ombudsman bill (which is a bill that RTKNH has been championing for several years, since Sununu’s last “Let’s Pretend to Do Something Task Force”) is again up to be heard this year. Maybe tying some of these issues together will give the Ombudsman Bill a better chance of finally passing?

SB39: This bill exempts information and records contained in personnel files, internal investigations, and pre-employment background investigations of any state or local law enforcement officer from public access or disclosure under the right-to-know law

I can’t lie, I was deeply disappointed that Senator Carson would introduce what must be the most galling, in-your-face, fuck-you-guys, anti-liberty, anti-transparency bill that I have seen in a long time. Frankly, it’s shocking to me, given the current climate regarding much-needed police reform, and given the fact that it took twenty-seven years to overturn the wrongly decided Fenniman decision (during which time Granite Staters have purposely been kept in the dark about state agents’ malfeasance, compounding problems that will take years to reform) that Senator Carson would attempt to pass this bill, which did not have any co-sponsors.

This bill flies directly in the face of the police reform measures suggested by the LEACT Commission, which, go figure, was made up 50% of law enforcement, so you know those recommendations are already pretty watered down. During SB39’s hearing, LEOs gave confusing and contradictory testimony about whether this bill would actually support the LEACT Commission’s recommendations or not (it sounded to me like it did not but that they didn’t want to admit that, even when Senator Whitley asked in different ways several times).

In my oral testimony, I pointed out that police reforms is happening because we are now able to record police officers (in part due to my landmark 1st Amendment court case affirming the right to film police officers in the execution of their public duties). Video recordings mean there is finally PROOF of bad cops. Beforehand, LEOs would just lie, deny the truth, falsify reports, etc. and the courts and the Regime would play along, nothing to see here, until you start to SEE it. Seriously, do yourself a (dis)favor… spend an hour on Youtube clicking through police brutality videos. You may come away with the right impression that there is an “epidemic of isolated incidences.”

I tried to address some of the red herrings proffered by Carson, including:
1. Not hiding police personnel records would result in a “chilling effect” on hiring and retaining officers. How about this: If you’re concerned about that, maybe don’t become a police officer in 2021. We want honest, good cops, thanks.
2. Concerns about “doxxing” or exposing private information like “blood types,” “home addresses,” and “medical records.” This is an absurd example, and can easily be dealt with through redactions of the portions of private information not needed to be shared publicly.
3. Officers will get swept up in “unfounded or unfair” accusations… Well, let’s see, your jobs are literally to investigate shit, so either you are competent at your job and we can dispel with this concern, or you are incompetent at your job, in which case more transparency is 100% warranted.

I also pointed out that as written, this bill violates several provisions of the NH Constitution (including Article 10, by creating a special “class of men,” and Article 8, our Right-to-Know) and that it would not stand up to legal scrutiny. I ended with an impassioned plea to not push New Hampshire back thirty years again by returning to darkness. Instead, let’s choose sunlight, openness, and love.

ACTIVIST ALERT! We need to KILL THIS BILL. Based on the testimony in support of this bill, all from state agents, they’re taking the “oh-so-reasonable approach” of, “well, of course we need to address your concerns, and carve out a few exceptions for you,” and “oh, we should totally make this apply to all government agents and municipalities, not just police” but that is THE EXACT OPPOSITE of what needs to happen. This bill MUST die if transparency is to live.

I will post some suggestions about what we can do, but it starts with informing the public that the NH Senate is trying to reverse progress on police reforms by writing a law to hide ONLY law enforcement personnel records, internal investigations (you know, literally, their disciplinary stuff) and pre-employment info (where it might tell you a cop got fired from his previous gig). So, tell people you know, track the bill, sign up to testify at future hearings, write your senators now to demand they kill this bill, write local Letters-to-the-Editor, call radio shows, etc. Together, Granite Staters from all walks can say, NO! This is NOT good enough!

Other News Coverage

Union Leader: “Secrecy with respect to law enforcement decisions and agencies is no longer acceptable,” Sullivan said. More…

NHPR: “At a state Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday, members of the public testified on Senate Bill 39, which would bar public access to police officers’ personnel files.

Senate Bill 39 would directly exempt any information in an officer’s personnel file from becoming public under the New Hampshire right-to-know law, which allows citizens to request and receive government documents. Currently, police personnel files can only be disclosed if there is a compelling public interest, a determination that can only be made by a judge.” More…

InDepth NH: “But opponents of the bill, which outnumbered supporters two-to-one, said it would harm the state’s push for greater transparency and accountability for law enforcement after George Floyd was killed last year by a police officer in Minnesota.

“This would be a perfect avenue for bad cops to be protected,” said Ronelle Tshiela, founder of Black Lives Matter Manchester and a member of the governor’s Commission on Law Enforcement Accountability, Community and Transparency. “This bill is an enemy to both accountability and transparency.”

The bill could negate a recent state Supreme Court decision that the Laurie List for police officers with a history of dishonesty, excessive force or instability is a public document.” More…



0 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Senate Police Accountability Bills: My Testimony

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

Below is my testimony for two Senate bills regarding police accountability being heard later today.

OPPOSE SB39:

Dear Judiciary Committee Members:

My name is Carla Gericke, former Republican state Senate candidate in District 20. I live in Manchester, NH, am an attorney, and serve on several nonprofit boards, including Right-to-Know NH, a nonpartisan, statewide citizens’ coalition that works to improve government transparency and accountability. 

Today, I’m submitting my written testimony in my personal capacity, and ask that you OPPOSE SB39. I have also signed up to testify orally, but I ask that this email testimony be submitted into the permanent record for this bill.

I also ask that today’s Union Leader editorial, Assaulting your right to know, be formally submitted into the record.  

For more than a decade now, I have been working on police accountability issues in New Hampshire, starting with my own arrest in 2010 for filming police officers during a routine traffic stop. After all charges were dropped against me, I filed and, four years later, won a landmark First Circuit, 1st Amendment court case affirming the right to film police officers in public (Gericke vs. Begin et al).

Thanks to my determination to create a binding legal precedent to ensure citizens can (and one may argue, should) record police officers in the execution of their public duties, more than 13 million people in the First Circuit can now legally record police officers. Indeed, the Court found that the right to film police officers was so clearly established, they can no longer invoke qualified immunity as a defense.  

It is undeniable that recordings of police brutality and excessive force have highlighted a very serious problem in our country, and that we need more, not less, transparency and accountability.

Therefore, this proposed bill, SB39, which reduces transparency and codifies hiding ONLY police officers “personnel files, internal investigations, and pre-employment background investigations of any state and local law enforcement officer,” is an affront to police accountability activists everywhere, and is, frankly, an insult to all decent Granite Staters.  

Why? Because it took TWENTY SEVEN YEARS to overturn the wrongly decided Fenniman vs. Union Leader decision that originally created an exception saying that government employees’ personnel files are exempt from RSA 91-A.

That’s twenty seven years of secrets, unaccountability, and actively, purposefully hiding abuses, leading to the distrust of law enforcement we see today.

Yet, here is Senator Carson, endorsed in the past by several law enforcement agencies, introducing a bill to again shield police officers’ malfeasance from the public it purports to serve.

This anti-accountability bill also tramples on the NH Constitution by creating a special, separate, protected class solely for law enforcement, in direct violation of Article 10 of the NH Constitution that states: “Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men…”

Then there is the Laurie’s List/Exculpatory Evidence Schedule issue. If you have been following along, you will know this is a secret list of bad cops that is actively being kept secret from the public despite now two court cases ordering that it be made public. Even the stacked Law Enforcement Accountability Task Force recommended the EES should be disclosed. 

A reminder: The EES is a list of New Hampshire law enforcement officers with sustained findings of misconduct for credibility or trustworthiness, for things like lying, falsifying reports, stealing, and excessive force.

In a court order dated April 23, 2019, Judge Charles Temple ruled the EES is “not confidential,” and “is not exempt from disclosure under RSA 91-A,” and “that it should be made public”.

Judge Temple ruled there was a compelling public interest in knowing which law enforcement officers have been deemed by their own police chiefs, after a 20-page process, to be so untrustworthy that they cannot testify in court.  

Let’s repeat that for the folks in the back: There is a secret list of about 270 New Hampshire law enforcement agents that are deemed so untrustworthy they cannot take the stand in court, that your Attorney General has spent several extra years now, despite court orders to the contrary, fighting to continue to keep secret from you. I also remind you, we saw last summer what happens when you create an institutional process that protects “bad apples,” exactly what SB39 wants to do. 

The NH Constitution says: [Art.] 8. [Accountability of Magistrates and Officers; Public’s Right to Know.] All power residing originally in, and being derived from, the people, all the magistrates and officers of government are their substitutes and agents, and at all times accountable to them.Government, therefore, should be open, accessible, accountable and responsive. To that end, the public’s right of access to governmental proceedings and records shall not be unreasonably restricted. The public also has a right to an orderly, lawful, and accountable government.”  

Hiding police personnel files and disciplinary actions is NOT “open, accessible, accountable or responsive” government. Everyone knows, police reform, with more accountability and transparency is needed, not less. In order to institute reforms, we must know what is going on. It starts here today, with you. Please OPPOSE SB39. 

Thank you for your time. 

Sincerely,
Carla Gericke
West Manchester 

***

SUPPORT SB41

My name is Carla Gericke, former Republican state Senate candidate in District 20. I live in Manchester, NH, am an attorney, and serve on several nonprofit boards, including Right-to-Know NH, a nonpartisan citizens’ coalition that works to improve government transparency, a crucial component to maintaining public trust in our institutions. 

Today, I’m submitting my written testimony in my personal capacity, and ask that you SUPPORT SB41 in order to increase police accountability by opening police disciplinary hearings to the public. Even though I have also signed up to testify orally, I ask that this email testimony be submitted into the permanent record for this bill.  

Last summer, during the nationwide protests, we saw quite clearly that without trust in the people enforcing our laws, everything starts to break down. For years now, law enforcement officials have been overly protected at the expense of your constituents. Today, you have an opportunity to start to right that wrong. 

More transparency leads to faster reforms. You can’t fix what you don’t know is broken, and you can’t know what’s broken when you hide the truth. Opening disciplinary actions to public scrutiny must happen in order to restore trust. 

Police officers do not have a privacy interest when acting in their official capacities. Other professions have public disciplinary hearings… why not police officers, especially when considering the nature of their work? 

Any disciplinary action before the Police Standards and Training Council, of course, creates a significant and compelling public interest, both with regard to the officer and the Council that is supposed to be providing the oversight.

Based on the number of officers that are being hidden from the public on the Laurie’s List/Exculpatory Evidence Schedule (more than 270 at one time), there is an immediate and urgent need for more public scrutiny of this entire process.    
The New Hampshire Commission on Law Enforcement Accountability, Community, and Transparency, concurs, recommending under #22 in its Final Report to “Make the existing Exculpatory Evidence Schedule (EES)” a public record. Both the ACLU-NH and the NH Press Association also support this bill to increase transparency and accountability. 

Public scrutiny is our best check and balance to hold law enforcement officials accountable. It starts with this bill, and your appetite to do what is right in the name of restoring public trust. Without trust, everything will crumble… Don’t let this happen on your watch. 

Thank you for your time. 

Sincerely,
Carla Gericke
West Manchester 

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Please DO NOT Confirm AG MacDonald as Chief Justice

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

Following please find the letter I sent to the Executive Council regarding the potential appointment of Gordon MacDonald as New Hampshire’s Supreme Court Judge. If you’re interested, you can participate in this process in three ways, sent to me from ReBuildNH: “1) Go to the meeting on the 21st in person (they’ll probably make you wear a mask—resist if you are so inclined), 2) attend the meeting using their call-in number, or 3) email the Executive Councilors (gcweb@nh.gov) and give them your reasons why Gordon MacDonald should not be trusted with the highest judicial office in New Hampshire.”

***

Dear Councilors,

I ask that this email be read into and form part of the official record. I, Carla Gericke, former Republican State Senate candidate in District 20, ask you to vote AGAINST Gordon MacDonald’s nomination as New Hampshire’s Supreme Court Justice. 

On top of the fiasco created by Sununu’s unConstitutional Emergency Orders, fully supported and enforced by the AG, for which there is NO LEGAL JUSTIFICATION, you should NOT confirm MacDonald based on his appeal of Judge Temple’s 2019 order to release the secret list of bad cops, aka, the Laurie’s List.

If, as MacDonald claimed by filing the appeal, he believes Granite Staters have no right to know which law enforcement officers have been found by their own police chiefs after a 20+ page process to be too corrupt to testify in court–officers who lie, cheat, falsify police reports, and use excessive force–then what sort of Supreme Court judge will he be? MacDonald’s misreading of this issue is so egregious, the NH Supreme Court late last year remanded the case back to the lower court, saying this information is, of course, in the public interest and must be disclosed. Due to MacDonald’s decision to file the appeal, his actions directly protected known bad actors for several extra years, years during which we have seen massive social unrest due to lack of police accountability or any appetite for real policing reform. This lack of judgement has wasted tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars in unnecessary legal fees, and, rightfully, led to a deep mistrust in the justice system. 

I remind you, the NH Constitution says: 

[Art.] 8. [Accountability of Magistrates and Officers; Public’s Right to Know.] All power residing originally in, and being derived from, the people, all the magistrates and officers of government are their substitutes and agents, and at all times accountable to them. Government, therefore, should be open, accessible, accountable and responsive. To that end, the public’s right of access to governmental proceedings and records shall not be unreasonably restricted.  The public also has a right to an orderly, lawful, and accountable government.

MacDonald has proven time and time again, he will protect the Establishment at the expense of the people he purports to serve. In fact, thinking people might argue it is a de facto conflict of interest for a former Attorney General to become a Supreme Court Justice because he will be incapable of protecting New Hampshire’s citizens against Constitutional overreaches by the state. We need a bench with judges who serve the law, not politicians, their cronies, and unions. MacDonald, through his own actions, has proven he is not up to the task. 

I ask you to vote AGAINST Gordon MacDonald as New Hampshire’s Supreme Court Justice.

Thank you for your time. 

Sincerely, 
Carla Gericke 
Former Republican State Senate Candidate, District 20

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Laurie’s List Hearing at the NH Supreme Court

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke


I staged a protest of one at today’s Supreme Court hearing about the Laurie’s List, a secret list of bad cops protected by the AG’s office at the expense of the taxpayer.

“Shining the light of public scrutiny on law enforcement only improves the quality of law enforcement over time,” Sullivan said after the hearing.” Gregory Sullivan, Lead Attorney for the Union Leader.

Read Mark Hayward’s coverage of the court case HERE.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Notes from Six Feet Away #1

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

From the start of this lockup, I’ve been meaning to write a weekly column titled “Notes from Six Feet Away,” and, for years, I have wanted to do a weekly round up of my activism, and thoughts on the news and my related social media posts, so here we are. This column will become the Friday feature on The Art of Independence.

Police Brutality and Open Government

Back in 2014, I settled my wiretapping lawsuit against the Town of Weare, having prevailed in the First Circuit Court of Appeals (the one right under the Supreme Court). This landmark First Amendment case, Gericke vs. Begin et al, protects YOUR right to record every police encounter you see. And you should. Every damn time! Especially since I learned last week that even though police departments across NH are now spending tens of thousands of dollars buying body cams, these recordings are NOT generally subject to public disclosure under our Right to Know NH laws. Shocking! And as YOUR Senator, I will work ?% to increase government transparency and accountability for YOU.

Hell, if y’all want, I’ll wear a Go Pro to the Senate daily, and live-stream “How the Sausage is Made”! Love this idea? Donate to my District 20 Senate race today!

Right-to-Know Victories: Fenniman Overturned

The NH Supreme Court decided three vital Right-to-Know cases this week, and overturned Fenniman, a huge victory for open government proponents. Fenniman was a terrible case that shielded “internal personnel practices” from scrutiny and was much abused by the authorities to hide malfeasance and deflect from oversight or reform.

From Right-to-Know NH: “The NH Supreme Court issued 2 rulings today in the other 2 cases tried the same day as the Salcetti v. Keene case.  In those rulings, they overturned the earlier Fenniman ruling, interpreting “internal personnel practices” more narrowly and eliminating the categorical denial of public access to records subject to the “internal personnel practices” exemption.  Here are links to the rulings:

This is a big step forward for RTK in NH.  In particular, it means that personnel investigations are no longer categorically exempt from public disclosure and instead a balancing of the public interest with the privacy interests of the parties will be done by the courts.”

Says David Taylor, one of the lawyers from Right-to-Know NH about the third RTK case heard this week, 2019-0217, Marianne Salcetti & a. v. City of Keene: “This morning the NH Supreme Court released a less formal opinion in the Salcetti v. Keene case.  While it is mixed – partly affirmed, partly reversed, partly vacated, partly remanded – there are some good wins in there.  Mostly, the students requests were ruled to have been improperly read too narrowly as ‘lists’ when they should have not been.  Perhaps the biggest win was a ruling that the $300 charge to access email records was improper and that those records should be free to inspect!  The redacted police officers’ names ruling was remanded to the superior court.  Lost on the need for a written and signed request formally, but they hinted a more proper case might win in the future.  Similarly for the delays.  In the end they reprimanded Keene, mostly, for wasting all the time and energy in this case.  Overall, I’m happy with the ruling.

Questions for Mayor about Militarized Police Response to Peaceful Protests

Read more here, but these were the main questions that, of course, were flatly ignored by Mayor Joyce Craig, who pretends to care, but is unwilling to exercise the leadership necessary for reform.

1. Will the MPD un-encrypt their police scanners so we can hear what is happening real-time (like it used to be until 2016 when, without any public input, they hid this important citizen’s oversight tool from us)? 
2. Will the BEARCAT be brought out? 
3. What other agencies, other than MPD, are being used? You mention “federal.” Which ones? Under what authority/law?
4. Will the MPD’s body cameras be switched on? Will this footage be made available to the public upon request, as Chief Capano is on the record saying BWC footage would be? 
5. Are any MPD officers working tonight also on the secret Laurie’s List (EES) of bad cops? If so, how many?
6. What use of force has been authorized? E.g. tear gas, rubber bullets, tazers, etc.
7. How much is this costing the taxpayers? Where is it accounted for (line item/budget)?

My point being, we need to end police militarization and policing in secret in order to restore public trust. You can start by answering my questions. I hope everyone is safe tonight. Thank you. #NHPolitics#NoPoliceStateNH

End Qualified Immunity as a Start to Ending Bad Apples Spoiling the Bunch

Want to understand more about solutions to the problems with policing in America? Start with eliminating Qualified Immunity, which is *literally* a “get out of jail free” card for cops. Yes, law enforcement is held to A LOWER STANDARD OF CARE than you or I. I have been advocating for the elimination of qualified immunity for more than a decade, and am very proud of the fact that in my First Amendment civil rights case, the First Circuit Court of Appeals found that police officers have NO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY if they arrest you for filming them or if they take your camera or phone. This means you can sue them in their personal capacity! (You’re welcome! :-))

Police Unions Protect Rotten Cops and This Must End

Here in NH, I have personally seen police union representatives testify against bills designed to help rein in bad cops.

I have even ended up in childish staring contests because they’ve tried to intimidate me when I testify in favor of more open, accessible, accountable and responsive government. One time in the chamber, I had to loudly reprimand a beefy dude looming over me with his arms folded who was trying to stare me down, with a “Really??? Are we doing this now!?!” Another time, I had two of my four car tires spiked with identical nails the same week as I testified. Coinkidink, right???

“This is what police unions do: defend the narrow interests of police at the expense of public safety. They exist to demand that taxpayers pay for dangerous, and even deadly, negligence. And although they are not the only pathology that affects American policing, they are a key internal influence on police culture, a locus of resistance to improvements designed to reduce police violence. To stop bad cops and police abuse, we must tackle police unions.” Read more…

Also, don’t miss this oldie but goodie from Radley Balko about the mentality of killer cops, and how they are trained.

Choose “dangerous” freedom

If you only read one thing today, let it be this brilliant article by John W. Whitehead, This Is Not a Revolution. It’s a Blueprint for Locking Down the Nation.

“Let’s not lose sight of what started all of this in the first place: the U.S. government. More than terrorism, more than domestic extremism, more than gun violence and organized crime, the systemic violence being perpetrated by agents of the government constitutes a greater menace to the life, liberty and property of its citizens than any of the so-called dangers from which the government claims to protect us.”

Nonessential For What Again, Manchester City Hall?

I was pissed at having received at parking ticket last Thursday after 6pm on a semi-deserted street in downtown Manchester. As I stated then: “Yes, I broke “the parking rule.” I just assumed they would cut us ‘nonessentials’ some slack while they collected their bonuses and destroyed our livelihoods, but no, they needed to go out and extort $10 from someone trying to support downtown businesses… you know, the ones that DID have to fire and furlough people, unlike the City of Manchester who gave themselves raises and didn’t furlough ONE PERSON, yet also closed the frigging dump for no explicable reason and built a disgusting Hooverville camp that has its own police escort while I had to put out literal fires. But sure, you’re right, my bad.” I appealed the ticket based on the following reasoning:

Explanation of Appeal:
As I was declared “nonessential” by order of His Excellency, the Governor of NH, I, being nonessential, am unable and unwilling to pay this parking ticket. 

Thank you for your prompt voiding of this ticket. 

Sincerely, 
Carla Gericke

NH Governor’s Response Still (Even More So) Wrong

Chris Sununu continues to double, even triple, down on his bad decisions, which I have criticized from the start. Free people move freely, the government does not own you, and no matter what happens, the government is NOT authorized to lockup its citizens and still pretend that we live in a free society. (We don’t.)

This was my response to one of his recent posts, opening with a quote from “His Excellency’s God King Sununu”: “less than 5% of available hospital beds have been occupied by COVID-19 patients”… so there was no real “pandemic” in any sense of the actual definitional meaning of that word, but there is, and will continue to be a “government manufactured economic crisis,” including almost 20% of Granite Staters now being unemployed, a myriad of our businesses that are closing, and more hardship to come, correct?

Crickets on Double Standard Between ReOpen Rallies and Police Brutality Protests

This week, I wrote in to NHPR’s The Exchange (and called in too but alas, the phone just rang and rang, which seems sort of odd for a call-in show, but m’kay) to ask Laura Knoy to explain the difference in the media’s response between people they like (police brutality protestors) and people they don’t like (people concerned about the destruction of our liberties). Since I fall squarely into BOTH camps, I find it fascinating to see how the Karens and snitches and mask shamers and “YOU’RE A MURDERER FOR GOING OUTSIDE, CARLA” people have suddenly faded into oblivion now that it no longer serves their narrative.

Here’s what I said:

“I would like you to address the clear difference in how the media is reporting on concerns about the virus/social distancing and mask wearing depending on whom is doing the protesting… Liberty and police accountability are two of my core issues, so I’m familiar with both sets of protests, and I am shocked at how silent the social distancing- and mask shamers are suddenly, now that they “approve” of the protests… I would also point out that these are the same people, let’s call them “Karen,” who like to call the police on people, and I wonder whether they see the inherent problem with their way of thinking? They want MORE state to “fix” the state, instead of seeing that the state IS the problem… #HypocrisyMuch #NoPoliceStateNH“

And, if you want to be truly astounded, read this article, which cites more than 1,000 “health experts” who are now saying:

“But when it comes to the protests against police brutality, many medical experts think there should be an exemption to the COVID-19 lockdown logic.

More than a thousand public health experts signed an open letter specifically stating that “we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States.”

The letter conceded that mass protests carried the risk of spreading coronavirus, and offered some good—if naive—advice for people who are going out anyway: wear masks, stay home if sick, attempt to maintain six feet of distance from other protesters. Many protesters are wearing masks, but others are not. And while we can blame the police for forcefully corralling people into close quarters, it’s a bit rich for public health experts to endorse protesting under conditions that they know are impossible for protesters to meet.

Indeed, for the purposes of offering health care advice, the only thing that should matter to doctors is whether their harm-reduction recommendations are being followed: how big is the event, is it outdoors, are masks being worn, etc. However, the letter distinguishes police violence protesters from “white protesters resisting stay-home orders,” as if the virus could distinguish between the two types of events. While I am not a doctor, my understanding is that it cannot.”

Freedom is Contagious, Too

Watch as thousands in Hong Kong defy a ban to stage a mass vigil in honor of those who died at Tiananmen Square in 1989.

And Lastly… LFOD in the “Yankee Hong Kong”

Buy my book, The Ecstatic Pessimist now on Kindle with paperback coming soon. RSVP to my book launch at the illest event of the year (oh yes I did): PorcFest XVII taking place June 22-28, 2020 at Roger’s Campground in the beautiful White Mountains of the Free(ish) State. Learn more about this year’s event here. Buy your tickets or show your support by getting an In Spirit tix even if you can’t make it this year!

0 comments
2 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Questions for Mayor about Militarized Policing and Unnamed Federal Agents Operating in Manchester

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

Yesterday, Mayor Joyce Craig posted this:

I stand with all those who are peacefully protesting the unjust killing of George Floyd, and the racism and violence directed at Black Americans across our country. We know we must do better, and I remain committed to listening to and supporting our community during this time of mourning and outrage.

Peaceful protest to bring attention to systemic racism is right, but causing destruction to our communities is not.

The Manchester Police Department has heard of potential threats to our City and are taking them extremely seriously. Our Emergency Operations Center will be open and operating this evening, and while we are hoping for a peaceful night in Manchester, the City is prepared for any scenario. We are working with our state and federal partners to ensure the safety of our City, and I am thankful to all of our first responders for all that they have done to keep Manchester safe and treat the people of our community with respect and compassion.

In response, I posted the following questions for Mayor Joyce Craig:

1. Will the MPD un-encrypt their police scanners so we can hear what is happening real-time (like it used to be until 2016 when, without any public input, they hid this important citizen’s oversight tool from us)? 
2. Will the BEARCAT be brought out? 
3. What other agencies, other than MPD, are being used? You mention “federal.” Which ones? Under what authority/law?
4. Will the MPD’s body cameras be switched on? Will this footage be made available to the public upon request, as Chief Capano is on the record saying BWC footage would be? 
5. Are any MPD officers working tonight also on the secret Laurie’s List (EES) of bad cops? If so, how many?
6. What use of force has been authorized? E.g. tear gas, rubber bullets, tazers, etc.
7. How much is this costing the taxpayers? Where is it accounted for (line item/budget)?

My point being, we need to end police militarization and policing in secret in order to restore public trust. You can start by answering my questions. I hope everyone is safe tonight. Thank you. #NHPolitics #NoPoliceStateNH

And followed up this morning with these additional comments:

If you are genuine in your desire to fix problems in Manchester, you need to address these questions. The MPD has been getting away with too much in the dark for too long… 

Did you know body cam footage is apparently NOT subject to Right-to-Know… why would this be the case other than to hide things? 

Why are the police scanners encrypted? Do the militarized police see ordinary citizens as the enemy? 

Remember this case? Look at the shocking lack of oversight we can expect from the AG’s office… the same individuals who are keeping a list of bad cops secret from the public even after a judge ruled in April last year that it should be disclosed because it is in the public interest to know who officers with “sustained findings of misconduct” are… 

I wonder if any MPD officers are on that list? Or, are any of these officers still employed in NH? 

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

“Nonessential” Neighbors Battle and Extinguish Dangerous Brush Fire in Densely Populated Manchester Neighborhood Before “Essential Responders” Show Up

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

If that headline sounds melodramatic, it’s simply mimicking press releases from the media in similar situations, except I’ve used the government’s new designations regarding who they think are “essential” and “nonessential.” I think we proved we’re essential to ourselves, no matter what anyone who claims they’re more “essential” says.

Yesterday, my husband, one of my neighbors, and I battled and extinguished a dangerous in-town brush fire. Below is my first-person account of the events (as posted to Facebook within the hour), as well as my Right-to-Know/91-A Request filed with the Manchester Police Department today to get copies of the body camera footage that was recorded by some of the officers at the scene.

I am very grateful we were able to take care of the immediate danger before anyone got hurt or any real property was destroyed. I hope the City makes a better effort to clear-out Gossler Park’s brush. A few years ago, kids were regularly setting small fires back there, but this was the first one I’ve seen in years. Glad it worked out!

***
From our kitchen, I spot Louis running past the living room windows towards our garage. I open the door and stick out my head, “Where you running to?” He’s already grabbing a couple of shovels. “There’s a fire at Brinck’s house!” 
The minute he says it, I smell it.
Fuck.

“OK, I’ll grab our extinguishers and meet you there.” I race around the house, collecting extinguishers from my kitchen and basement, and an extra one I keep stashed. I’m in house PJs and an apron, but I grab my belt and click on my gun. I have no idea what’s waiting out there. Proper preparation, what what.

The fire is burning behind Brinck’s house, on the school’s property, a couple of feet from the wooden fence, which, since it’s old and dry, would light up like a matchbox. The brush is burning maybe a couple of feet, one foot, from the fence. It is TINDER back there, with overgrown brush, fallen trees, piles and piles of leaves. Two tween boys are throwing sand on the burning leaves. One yells, “We didn’t do it! We just saw the smoke.”

Louis is tossing sand on the flames with his shovel. Matt is using the sprinkler hose over the fence to try to dose some of the spreading flames. I pull the pin on one of the extinguishers and start spraying the base of the flames. (I was trained as a fire fighter in high school.) The smoke and white stuff blinds me, but I keep going. After a while, the kid grabs the extinguisher, and, as I am alarmed at how much the fire is now spreading, and how little defenses we have, I run back to our garage to grab two 5 gallon spring mountain water jugs and run back (I definitely got my workout today).

The fire is dead in several zones, but rekindling is several others. One particular pile of dead trees looks like a natural pyre, and so I use the other extinguisher on that.

Somewhere on one of my runs between the houses, an unmarked police car shows up. The officer in jeans and a black shirt with his badge on a thick chain around his neck starts walking onto Brinck’s property through the back gate.

“Excuse me, I don’t think you should do that. I don’t think the property owner would consent to that.” At this stage, I do not know that Brinck is actually at Whole Foods. “The fire isn’t on the property, it’s behind, on the school’s side.” He keeps walking down, almost behind the building. Loudly, I say, “Hey! You’d need to ask him first.” He comes back to the street.

“Why… does he have a gun?” I don’t respond. I am clearly opening carrying, so I just shrug. “Look, I don’t have time, I’ll ask him to come out.”

We fight the fire. A uniformed cop comes out back, and helps. The fire truck shows up just as the fire turns and is heading back down the hill, away from our properties. 3 more squad cars show up. The fire fighters head out back, pulling their hose past the pool area, but the police just mill around on the cul de sac.

The fire near Brinck’s fence is dead, the rest is under control, heading down the hill, where, I believe another fire truck is stationed. An officer starts asking me questions. I tell him I live next door. We chit chat a bit, then after I swear while recounting the situation, he says, “Oh, I need to let you know I’m wearing a body cam.”

“Yeah, you are,” I say with the cheekiest of grins. He looks confused. “That’s because of me,” I explain and stick out my hand. He’s wearing a mask. “I’m Carla Gericke.” He doesn’t take my hand but we half-heartedly elbow bump.

I ask the firefighters if there’s a way to get my personal extinguishers replaced, “You know, now that we’re just giving away free shit wily-nilly.” He is not amused, but says, “We don’t do that.”

When I head home, 4 officers are standing around near their cars on the street in front of my house. I walked over to say hi, introduce myself, and say, “It’s all under control now, we put out the fire, y’all can scoot on out of here.” The senior-seeming guy doesn’t really know what to do with that. The firemen unleash the fire hydrant at the end of the street and the road starts flooding with water. At least we now know it works! “It’s going to get wet here,” the officer says. “Yeah,” I say, “I’m heading home. Bye now!”

What can I say? Everyone was professional. They seemed amazed that we knew what to do and took care of it ourselves. When one started fronting about showing up to save us, I gave him a look, and he said, “Yeah, okay, you guys really took care of it before we got here.”

And that we did. Essentially.

I can still taste the soot, and I smell like a chimney, but all is well that ends well. Now, let’s end this bullshit lockdown, and let liberty rise!  

***

Dear Manchester Police Department,

RE: Right to Know Request per RSA-91A

Pursuant to the Right to Know Law (RSA. 91-A), I am requesting public access or emailed electronic files of, within 5 business days, the governmental records reasonably described as follows:

All Manchester PD body cam footage from police officers as captured on May 14th, 2020 between approximately 13:30-15:00 at a brush fire event on Gossler School property, which was accesses from Durette Court, Manchester.

The following emergency vehicles were parked on Durette Court during that time: one black unmarked vehicle with two un-uniformed police officers (male and female), and three SUV cruisers. One firetruck was present.

I’m only seeking footage involving interactions between police officers and civilians during that time frame.

If you deny any portion of this request, please cite the specific exemption used to justify the denial to make each record, or part thereof, available for inspection.

Please let me know when these records are available for inspection or, preferably, you may email the records to: carlagericke@gmail.com. I will also submit this request via email directly.

Thank you for your lawful attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
Carla Gericke
[Phone number and email redacted]

Per RSA 91-A, governmental records means “any information created, accepted, or obtained by, or on behalf of, any public body, or a quorum or majority thereof, or any public agency in furtherance of its official function. Without limiting the foregoing, the term “governmental records” includes any written communication or other information, whether in paper, electronic, or other physical form, received by a quorum or majority of a public body in furtherance of its official function, whether at a meeting or outside a meeting of the body. The term “governmental records” shall also include the term “public records.”

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Emergency Meeting Tonight to Ratified New Teachers’ Contract

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

UPDATE 4/2: The contract with the Manchester Education Association was ratified last night without any public input. According to this Union Leader article, the contract includes salary increases of 1.5 percent in the first year and 3 percent pay hikes in years two and three, resulting in increases to teacher salary costs of $2,479,821 in school year 2021, and $2,217,380 in school year 2022. The total cost of the new contract to the district is pegged at $5,099,128 in school year 2021 and $2,812,977. Hopefully, in return, we will see a reduction in “excessive absenteeism.” 

This chart is also informative for people who want to better understand why your property taxes WILL be going up in Manchester during this panic…

On Monday, I learned that the Manchester School Board will hold an emergency meeting tonight, Wednesday, April 1, 2020 to ratified the teachers’ contract that has been outstanding for more than 2 years. Tonight. Amidst everything else that is going on. Amidst many of us being forced to not work or get paid ourselves.

This “emergency meeting” will not be open to public comment. Given how much strain taxpayers are under right now, approving a contract that gives teachers raises without any community input seems… pretty tone-deaf to me.

Since the City is apparently applying the logic of Big Bad Gov, you know, the “you have to pass the contract to know what’s in the contract,” upon learning of the secret weekend negotiations, I immediately filed a Right-to-Know request with Superintendent Goldhardt and Mayor Craig.

Today, I received a response from the Superintendent, including the contract below. Impressive! WTG for open and transparent government. But then…

I had also found a copy of the Tentative Agreement online, but when I went back to use that link for this blog post, I noticed it is no longer available. So much for transparency to the public at large! Boo!

In any event, looks like there’s nothing we can do but sit back and take it. While you’re sitting at home and taking it, you might want to ponder how long that’s going to work for you!

TA contractDownload

0 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

AG Spends Our Money to Keep Us in the Dark

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

Today’s Union Leader included my Letter to the Editor relating to the secret list of bad cops. Read it online or copied below in full.

Dear Editor, 

It’s Sunshine Week when we typically celebrate government transparency and openness. Given the government’s COVID-reaction, our rights are at risk. Before law enforcement knocks on your door, wouldn’t you like to know who to trust?

The Attorney General keeps a list of officers who have been identified by their own police chiefs as having “sustained findings of misconduct.” This list is kept secret from the public.

Yes, you read that right.

The AG keeps a list of suspect LEOs called the Exculpatory Evidence Schedule (formerly the “Laurie’s List”) with about 260 officers’ names on it, all blacked out, with only their departments and misdeeds viewable: falsification of records or evidence; lying in court; egregious dereliction of duty; and excessive use of force.

In April 2019, a judge ordered the list’s disclosure, stating it was “not confidential,” “not exempt from disclosure under RSA 91-A,” and that it is in the public interest to know who these officers are. Doh! Instead of releasing the list, the AG appealed at our expense to maintain its secrecy. Double doh!

Secrecy creates distrust and suspicion, undermining faith and confidence in government and law enforcement. As today’s paper stated: “Trust in public institutions relies on our ability to shine sunlight wherever we find shadows.” 

Almost 1,000 Granite Staters signed an online petition started by Right-to-Know NH, a statewide nonpartisan coalition of open government advocates, asking Governor Sununu to end the appeal and release the uncensored list. Banish the shadows, Governor, and help us restore trust!

Yours sincerely, 
Carla Gericke
Hooksett Road, Manchester



0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Close