Sam is in Jail - updates, planning, and discussion thread

[J’raxis 270145]

It will be awesome to co-coordinate efforts.  It seems co-posting may be tedious and redundant, no?  It'll be great to work it all out together tho - maybe sister sites or something.  Right now we'll be using NHTeaParty for anything needing to be discussed on a forum because of it's high security features etc.  I've been also hoping to get Sam involved in the NHCLOG site.  Let's talk more about this later! 

I agree it's redundant but LA.info is intended to be all things liberty activism related in one place and it's not feasible to do anything else but gather the data from other sources. Where reasonable I pull live from a canonical source but data usually needs to massaged. I wouldn't expect the data to change much anyway so it shouldn't be a big deal.

Drupal, the CMS we’re using, does RSS feeds, so you can probably import a lot of the contact that way. There are going to be blog-like entries cataloguing our adventures through the court system, and also ordinary pages (like the /about and /contact pages) collecting together useful information for other people to use—how to video, a glossary of terms to know, an outline of the procedure(s) they use, explanation of objections and potential rebuttals, links to all the rules and RSAs, &c..

I’d advise against copying the motion form blanks we’re going to upload to the site—those would be periodically updated in-place and if you distribute your own copies of them instead of just link to ours, people might end up with out-of-date copies.

[RidleyReport]

Sent to
news at Keene Sentinel dot com

---


Jailed for videotaping in Keene court lobby

Dear folks at the Sentinel: 

A thought regarding Sam Dodson, the man jailed for trying to videotape authorities near Keene District Court and declining to give his name. 

If you don't approve of his actions, no sweat:  He's not forcing you to pay for them, or advocating that you should be so forced.   The government, however, *is* forcing you to pay for its efforts to detain him.  And unlike Sam, it will eventually take your house if you stop.

Assuming you still support the government's actions and are happy to pay up for those actions....

Please consider your loved ones and closest friends.  Are any of them perhaps not so glad to have their money used this way?  Do you think *they* should be forced to help detain Sam with their tax dollars?

If you advocate detaining Sam, is it possible you are inadvertently advocating a sort of aggression against people you care about?

Dave Ridley
(Former Keene resident)
Grafton

[RidleyReport]

Sent to

writeus at union leader dot com


New Hampshire videographer jailed, fasting

Dear folks at the Union Leader:

Thanks for your coverage of the U.S. reporter jailed in Iran.  However there is an American reporter *still* jailed right here in New Hampshire, for arguably even less.  He's not accused of spying; he's accused of simply refusing to turn his camera off in a court lobby.  He might not be considered "mainstream" press, but he produces serious and interesting work.  His documentaries on ObscuredTruth.com chronicle the court system.

He has refused to give his name, arguing that he has a right to remain silent.  So authorities at Keene District Court have orded him held indefinitely.  In protest, he has refused to eat solid food since his arrest April 13.  If you are going to cover the heroic Saberi half a world away, is it appropraite to ignore the equally heroic Dodson, who is right here in state?

Dave Ridley
Grafton

[Coconut]

Sarah just called me from the Boston Globe to get more information about local activism, so she's still writing the story.

[TackleTheWorld]

By the way, I video'd the lobby and courtroom today without asking permission.  Why is Sam in jail?

[ivyleague28477]

By the way, I video'd the lobby and courtroom today without asking permission.  Why is Sam in jail?

oohhh you bad bad girl!  hehehe

Ah yes, at this point we'd all like to know that.  I'll be down in the morning and hopefully have more details then.

[Sams Dad]

By the way, I video'd the lobby and courtroom today without asking permission.  Why is Sam in jail?

Was Judge Burke's proverbial no video recording order still up on the wall?

[smeg]

i was thinking about the reasoning the judge has given for holding sam indefinitely without trial, and while i think it's insane and illogical, it's basically a "his ideas of logic vs. ours" situation.  but then i thought of this:

if sam had committed an act of violence (i know he never would, this is just an example), like say, punched the city prosecutor in the face and broke his nose... then refused to give his name after arrest, would he be held indefinitely without trial?  i HIGHLY doubt it.  they wouldn't care if he gave his name or not, they would bring him into court and make sure he was sentenced to jail.

but then, would there be an added charge (and possible conviction) of 'not giving his name', which would result in permanent detention beyond the sentence given for the original crime?

if the answer is no, then the judge cannot say that his current ruling to hold sam without trial till he gives his name is logical.

[cyberdoo78]

Smeg,

You are attempting to apply logic where there exists none. Burke's orders are arbitrary, changing from time to time. Sam is arrested for not obeying a notice on the wall, Richard a month later records without incident. I see no logic. There appears no uniformity. Of course Richard's video recording occurred after Sam's arrest for failing to following Burke's 'order'. Perhaps Burke is not ready yet to throw another individual in jail indefinitely at this point. Who knows really, so I don't see how you can apply logic here.

[LibertyTiger]

Award winning [L]ibertarian blogger Radley Balko mentioned Sam today:
http://www.theagitator.com/2009/05/14/lunch-links-38/
Refers to this article in the Civil Liberties Examiner
http://www.examiner.com/x-536-Civil-Liberties-Examiner~y2009m5d13-New-Hamphire-man-jailed-for-legally-photographing-courthouse-lobby

[smeg]

Smeg,

You are attempting to apply logic where there exists none. Burke's orders are arbitrary, changing from time to time. Sam is arrested for not obeying a notice on the wall, Richard a month later records without incident. I see no logic. There appears no uniformity. Of course Richard's video recording occurred after Sam's arrest for failing to following Burke's 'order'. Perhaps Burke is not ready yet to throw another individual in jail indefinitely at this point. Who knows really, so I don't see how you can apply logic here.

i'm not attempting to apply logic (i clearly don't feel there is any).  i'm merely attempting to ask a question pertaining to the judge's support for his own actions if the situation was different.  ie. if sam had committed an act of violence where there was a victim:
1. would he be left in jail indefinitely without trial till he gave his name?
2. if he did not give his name, but was tried/convicted/sentenced anyway, would there be an added sentence of 'indefinitely jailed until he gave his name'?
3. how could they convict him (in this example) without knowing his name, but still claim he is required to say his name out loud?

and i guess you could even throw in:

4. if he committed an act of violence where there was a victim, was arrested, given $10,000 bail (or higher in that case), then refused to give his name so the judge refused to hold the trial till he gave them his name (like he is now)... but then sam just posted bail without giving his name...

... couldn't it be possible for him to avoid trial all together by doing that?  because the judge made clear the trial would not occur until he gave his name (which, in this example, he didn't).

if that's true, the judge is setting a dangerous precedent.  violent criminals can just get arrested, not give their names, then walk away free by simply posting bail.

[mport1]

Sarah just called me from the Boston Globe to get more information about local activism, so she's still writing the story.

I really hope they actually run the story.

[ivyleague28477]

Update for today:

I had a very very pleasing day today in my travels around Keene.

First stop was Cheshire County Superior Court.  Wednesday (yesterday) at 4pm was the deadline for VanWickler to file a response to the latest writ I had filed, and specifically the court wanted a response to the "allegation" that Keene District Court was refusing to set a trial date.

He, through his attorney, County Attorney John Webb, filed their response, which basically said Yep, that's right. Keene District Court's not setting a trial.

There was no other argument or objection to the petition or writ - their entire filing was simply that what I had said was accurate. 

This tells me the petition has a very very good chance of getting approved - keep your fingers crossed.

The judge who is assigned to this docket (Judge Brian Tucker) according to the clerk is the kind of judge that will weigh heavily the case before making a decision.  This is good, in my opinion, however it means he won't just make a quick ruling either.  She said his docket was fairly heavy today, and he is out of the office tomorrow, but he will be in on Monday and she expects he will make a ruling then.



Next stop was Keene District Court.  There I discovered the prosecutor in the case is no longer Eliezer Rivera, but rather a Chris McLaughlin has taken over this case.  I discovered they have dropped the charges of "Disorderly Conduct" and "Possession of Property Without a Serial Number" charges.  All three of these actions seem in response to the Demurrers I had filed. 




Next stop was Keene Police Department.  There I discovered they plan on entering a new charge of "Criminal Contempt" against Sam.  The prosecutor said something about contempt of the court order to not film in the lobby.



  This is great - now I get to challenge the "order" directly.   

[penguinsscareme]

Next stop was Keene Police Department.  There I discovered they plan on entering a new charge of "Criminal Contempt" against Sam.  The prosecutor said something about contempt of the court order to not film in the lobby.



This is great - now I get to challenge the "order" directly.

That's really great news, Ivy, particularly the above quoted excerpt.  Give 'em hell!

[Lance]

their response, which basically said Yep, that's right. Keene District Court's not setting a trial.

I'd love to read it.  Are these case documents being uploaded somewhere?