I got railroaded: A sorry day for the NH courts

Published May 9

It took 261 days to get this...

So the Brattleboro Reformer called me today to congratulate me on getting NH the boardwalk replaced. What a nice surprise! OK, we are even now. They are writing a story on it. Lets see, $1200 for the fine and another $1200 for the public defender...according to the Reformer the NHDOT says the new boardwalk cost $24,000.
 
I would have pissed my pants if the state said I got to pay back $24,000 instead of $1200. My analysis with the amount of damage they could say I did was $5000 to $10,000. I was bracing myself for $5000.  

He asked me, do you think your actions will get the state to replace the bridge. I said I am not big enough, but if you keep putting articles about the bridge in the newspaper with your big fat Brattleboro Reformer's mouth you might!

Brattleboro Reformer Clears The Air Over Court Plea Deal by"Angel Guy"

NHDOT Inspection of Hinsdale's Rt 119 bridge

April 29:

The state might have realized replacing the bridges would be decades away...

April 23, 2014: This is the Anna Hunt Marsh Bridge. So they are reboarding the Brattleboro Bridge...both bridges. I hope they reboard all the way to the Vermont shore. I got them to re-board both bridges...

 

 A pile of old boards...

 

Note...I continuously up date this.Especially in the first week after I put it up.

But what about our bridges and roada? It just goes to show how fragile we are. No Hinsdale bridge for 59 years. Can you imgine it, taxing our hospitals keeps the ship afloat.

N.H.’s bond outlook falls from ‘stable’ to ‘negative’

By KATHLEEN RONAYNE
Monitor staff

Wednesday, April 23, 2014     
        

Standard & Poor’s downgraded the state’s outlook on general obligation and state-guaranteed bonds from “stable” to “negative” yesterday, based largely on a recent court ruling that said a state tax on hospitals that brings in significant revenue is illegal. That ruling, combined with the state’s low reserve fund and unfunded pension liability, puts New Hampshire in a “thin financial position,” the report from the credit rating agency said.  

My 2013 campaign  was cut short by a arrest and a felony charge for littering with a "Build New Bridge" sign. The shovel is my symbol for lets start digging on the new bridge right now!

At the end of the day, I met my initial objective. (My objective with pulling up the boards was replacing the walkway like they did last week. My ultimate objective is replacing both bridges.)

 The came at great family and personal sacrifice and tension. The court and legal system broke my heart.

I said from day one, there are powerful, cohesive political and operative local forces going on under this.

The picture of the below is the condition last July 31, 2013...

Obviously the state and everyone knew the walkway was dangerous. This is the section I tried to repair. They didn’t repair anything on the Anna Hunt Marsh side. This new repair activity was keyed to my activity last summer.

Note: Look at that right side walkway railing. Why isn't the railing smooth instead of bumpy. You think they built it that way? Is the bridge settling or shifting in some way causing it? The walkway is a add on built in about mid 1995 brought to you by WalMart.

About 260 days later, a newly re-boarded walkway.  

I told my public defender once we ask for discovery there will be a response out of the state. Wouldn’t be surprised if we got a NHDOT move on the bridge. I found it suspicious as hell I got a recent inspection report talking about the condition of the walkway two days after I plead guilty. He just mailed me the report without even putting a context on when he got it.

I got railroaded! This case was always about higher principles and whistle blowing activities...

My lawyer said they are going to find me guilty...you gave them the evidence against you. There is a very large chance of a heavy fine and jail time if they wanted to make an example out of you. I reminded him you are going to have to hire civil engineer specializing in bridge design to counteract the state’s position. I bet you he was worried about the cost of the case i wanted to present. I wanted to get on the stand a bridge expert and the high officials in the NHDOT. I certainly wanted to talk about bigger bridge issues than the walkway...  

My take was I had to force them to repair the dangerous walkway through my activities. Surely the court and jurors would understand I was trying to protect them and the community. Mike, they are going to only go by what laws says, my lawyer said...not have a bigger thought about what justice and fairness means. He didn't think the jurors in this area had it in them to be decent citizens.



I think this repair last week is evidence the walkway was dangerous. They knew the condition of those boards were wrong as they inspected the walkway over the boards I pulled up last summer. Did they not do the repair looking forward to the possibility of my court case...I would get off. Fundamentally everyone withheld information from me and I had no way to enforce getting the available information that was necessary for my defense...or all the information I needed to make the final determination if i should take the plea.  



Did the debacle over the follow up Reformer article get their attention?

Was it  the legal disclosure over the NHDOT inspection report?

Me pleading guilty to my charges.

Like I said, it is all about how much money you have with getting justice. It's never about principle and doing the higher good! 

My lawyer said they got you dead to right...you will have no better chance if you go to court. He never opened the door a crack with we can get them to see the bigger societal benefit. My lawyer never even came down to the bridge and inspect it with me. I offered to do this and I thought it important.

I would have been satisfied with the deal if they didn't repair the walkway so quickly after I plead guilty. I now feel I got a unjust criminal conviction on my record. Before the repair last week, I felt I had an acceptable deal considering my limited options.  I always thought I could win if I could get the defense I wanted...better to the point , if I was convicted, all the activity would have pushed the NHDOT to do the right thing.

The police and the courts should have always been on my side if the true condition of that walkway was put on the table!  

I was intimidated by the police throwing at me a host serous classes A misdemeanor charges and the fictitious felony.   

I was intimidated by the gaming of the prosecutor into forcing me to accept her deal...she even came back with making me accept a stricter deal than the one she first proffered.

So they seriously overcharged me and they all played on it.

Right, I was told we can’t consider my little sin versus the bigger sins of the police department, the courts and the NHDOT...

It all got focused on their perception of what went on at bridge: disorderly conduct, one felony reckless conduct, two criminal mischiefs and a littering...I never could contradict the behavior of anyone else. They were the gods and I was an indigent nobody...

The injustice emanated from the extreme overcharging of the police department against me ...everything followed from that.  It would have been a different situation if all I got charged with is criminal mischief...the right charge. Everyone is playing rule-zies and throwing around their weight without a counteracting force of mine... none of this is justice!

The rule of law is not about following the extreme interpretation of laws.Or throwing a host of not justified complaints by the police to the prosecutor to set up the plea deal. It is about having a transparant, a fair and just system above the laws...it not about inflecting laws on everyone so we can pay the wages of the court employees and other government figures.

Basically, we never had a hearing over if the initial charges against me were fair...would overcharging me later lead to injustice....

Could they charge me with terrorism  just to give the prosecutor leverage over a potential deal or sentence down the road. Oh, we talked about that...

Right, 99% of these cases go to a plea. Does the police align the charges so it enhances a future plea deal...    

(Michael Mulligan, 60, was cited with reckless conduct, disorderly conduct, criminal mischief and littering, according to Hinsdale Police Lt. David Eldridge. Reckless conduct is a felony.)

OK, my behavior was trying to highlight the negligence of the NHDOT who should have long ago re-boarded that dangerous bridge. More to the larger point, that bridge should have been replaced decades ago. It’s a threat to Hinsdale’s economy...it is a safety threat to everyone who crosses that bridge.

If the police, prosecutor, courts and citizens (jurors) couldn't can’t weight my behavior on July 31, 2013 against the bigger picture of walkway safety and the wider issues of the safety of the bridge...then I am living really in Russia! I am not living in a “just” democracy! Generally our state management of the NHDOT is spinning out of control...the courts and me don't have the power to straightening out this mess.  

And the whole aim of all this selectman, police, prosecutor and court activity has been to prohibit or limiting me from my Constitutional rights with protesting about bad government at these bridges and informing the community at large.  

I leave you with one final thought. If you can’t trust the state (NHDOT) to do the right thing (replace and re-nail the boards) in the heat of my activities surrounding last July 31, 2013, how can you trust the state to do the right thing and make accurate bridge inspections (Hinsdale) during the intense political heat surrounding the NHDOT budgets? 

The response from my lawyer..he certainly can argue a case. 

I find your post to be very unfair and inaccurate. I always told you I would argue on your behalf at trial if that was what you wanted, and we did a substantial amount of investigation for you and would have continued to do so if that’s what you wanted to do. I never said people didn’t care about larger issues of justice, just that I did not believe people would condone removing the boards as your manner of protest. I still believe you almost certainly would have been convicted at trial. I find it very disappointing that I spent many hours discussing your case and fine philosophical and legal points with you and made clear that it was your decision and then you portray me as some uncaring lawyer who “railroaded” you into a plea bargain that you chose to enter. You received one document after the plea because my investigator didn't receive it until after the plea.

(I'd seen the police disclosures...I never seen any of the investigator or other results.)  

(I frame it as the courts railroaded me.) 

My response

There is a difference betwen arguing a case on nothing and my ability to gain factual information and gaining professionale expertise- engineer witness.

So why wasn't I appraised of the investigative results...

Looking in hindsight, I never fully trusted you and the system.

Look it, you were a very minor player here really at fault...i was more speaking of the whole. (The system set you up for this is how I see this)

I should have taken you more seriously when you told me you thought I was guilty, or other people would consider me guilty, even as all the possible evidence couldn't or wouldn't get seen. (You never understood the case or the principles.) 

I was just trying to throw you a constructive criticism I am sure you don't very often...you can take parts of it at heart or discount everything I say.

Mike

Remember there is two sides to every story...I wasn't inexperienced with managing a legal case. I'd do a lot better the next time in 45 years...my last run in with the law. I am not asking you to discount his side.

...Remember, I watched a young bartender get away with a DUI at district court. His blood level was above the legal limit. He got off because of burping before two blow test, after the statie told him not to burp bother time...It was a improper stop, the officer tried intimidating him on the stop and got angry over the burping and won't give him a legitimate test. He told the staties after the second test, it was positive...I burped again and I was afraid of you because I knew were getting irritated with me. He also gave a bad and inaccurate field test. I'd seen how the sins of the obviously guilty could be overridden by the sins of the police and system...I'd seen the works of a amazingly talented lawyer. Ultimately the case gave feedback to the state police...how to preform a correct DUI intervention. It question if this state police officer needed more training.

Right, if that bridge collapses and many people get hurt, damages our economy….everyone and the system is going argue I am still guilty with lifting up them unattached boards. Mike, you received the best justice there is in New Hampshire. I though when I done this I would get convicted…my eyes were wide open…the outcome was solely my choice.

I don't care if this is the rules...then the rule and laws should be changed...

Unfair…what is unfair is my conscience would not let me walk past this.

But I know the majority of the people in the 10,000 cars per day going down route 119 near the bridges would agree with me the bridges are unsafe and needs to be replaced decades ago. But mike, nothing ever changes in Hinsdale and New Hampshire. Just accept it!

I know there is no such thing as a claw back, do over or reset on on my court case…

And I harbor no ill wind against anyone. My spiritual beliefs require me to forgive everyone who i perceive as harmed me. Cause they never really harmed me...it is my poor thinking that I think I was harmed. I am only expected to morally act...the outcome in this world have no meaning to me when I think at my highest level. I am required to be non violent...not hurt people.  I am required to state my opinion and get it on the record so people can make up their own minds.

To put this in perspective, it was only a little fine and it was only a class B misdemeanor and a $1000 dollar fine. My activities have been restricted at the bridge based on the phony rationale I was obstructing traffic. Do they have any proof I was obstructing traffic. It was explained to me, this is a agreement between you and the prosecutor...the agreement need not be based on the facts, evidence or truthfulness. The procicutor and police can make up I was obstructing traffic. It doesn't even have to be moral or ethical...it is just a agreement. 

It was very little harm…like a mosquito bite. But nobody can really hurt me except my incorrect thinking.

　
By the way, they assign you a lawyer. You don’t get a choice of what lawyer is best for you. They never discuss a process if you are uncomfortable…you can choose another public defender. Like, interview three of our lawyers, choose what one you want.

I can hear my lawyer now, a plea or agreement doesn’t need your understanding of the pertinent facts. Nobody owes you the truth!!!