Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Constitutional Law Blogs -> Chris King's 1st Amendment Page

Constitutional Law

: Chris King's 1st Amendment Page

KingCast admits being wrong. There was a ballistics report in the Michael Paulhus case. Now it's time for NH AG Kelly Ayotte to show it per RSA 91-A.

By Christopher King

Dear Kelly:

1. You told me some time ago that the Michael Paulhus case was still under investigation so you declined to give me anything I asked for. Frankly, I think you are a liar because the criminal and civil cases have been adjudicated and/or settled for more than a year now, and Senior AG Simon Brown had this situation well under control and advice 3-1/2 years ago at Item A (document scan forthcoming) when he wrote the Court on 1 March 2005:

"The ballistics report in question was provided to the County Attorney's Office in October 2004. The issue before the Court is whether the ballistics report, as written, provides adequate notice to defense counsel. This issue dos not involve delayed disclosure by the Attorney General's Office."

I'll take a copy of that ballistics report now Kelly, and wonder why it was not provided to Paul Erwin Kish as he noted in his forensic report.

I'm also going to wonder why you never produced a ballistics report in the Franconia shooting tragedy, given that we don't even know if Bruce McKay fired his gun. We don't pay your salary for you to turn around and offer this sort of malfeasance in office.

2. Also please provide me a "copy of the black and white diagram already provided," at Brown item B.

3. Also please provide me copy of the dispatch calls transcript contemplated by Brown item C.

4. As to item F, I note that your office did not possess gun powder residue testing results, which runs counter to the Peter Heed Deadly Force Protocol 9E because we know for CERTAIN that Officer Fateux's clothing was of evidentiary value. I note that you told me the same thing relative to the Franconia investigation, so that makes you a willful policy violator, or law-breaker. On my nickel. Again, We don't pay your salary for you to turn around and offer this sort of malfeasance in office.

5. Attorney Brown didn't like the fact that the Court discovered the AG's Office was intentionally feckless:

"Finally, with regard to the Court's statement that it was 'given no explanation as to the failure ir inability of the Office of the Attorney General to reach a finding with respect to the investigation that is had conducted,' counsel for the Attorney General's Office shall appear, as ordered, at the next hearing and provide a status of its investigation."

Wherefore KingCast respectfully requests any and all documents that reflect the nature and output of any such status update(s).

Kelly: Your office will never find substantial wrongdoing by NH LE. This much we already know. It's all in how you go about torturing the law and abusing our collective notions of common sense that I'm here to document.

PS: I asked for the report back on 12 Nov. 2008 but now I see there's more to be had, so I'm going to have it.

Full post as published by Chris King's 1st Amendment Page on November 23, 2008 (boomark / email).