Know The State Your Raising Your Children In
Update: November 26, 2018
FACT: "This November in 2018, Microsoft News is putting a focus on Poverty in America with a 2-week series examining the root causes of poverty, what poverty really means to the many different kinds of people affected, and what we can do to contribute to the most meaningful solutions. We teamed up with some of our most trusted news partners to bring you custom content and highlight quality journalism that helps us understand these issues."
"Tariffs stemming from President Donald Trump's trade conflicts could cost Americans $915 each, or $2,400 per household, in the form of higher prices, lower wages and lower investment returns in 2019, according to a new study."
Many articles are published on different subjects affecting the state of New Hampshire. But apparently they are presented just as a singular issue at a time. Information that is here today and apparently just completely forgotten and gone tomorrow, before another is presented. Just exactly how NH's government prefers it. Who relies heavily on the one fact that news will always be constantly bringing more news on daily basis. But when each remaining issue is viewed together as a growing incomplete laundry list of unresolved problems in New Hampshire, it begins to only tell a dimmer future that is only growing from even an already dim past. Now, even other countries such as Russia, United Arab Emirates, UK, Canada, and France, are now regularly watchful of one little New England blog. Particularly about one little state that is only in the USA.
Sadly, New Hampshire's past, present, and future, have become a hamster wheel repeating the same problems and issues year after year, after year. That only continue to grow and only still remain unresolved. Proving just how delusional the state's government really is, when it now comes down to actually falsely claiming, that"NH HAS NEVER BEEN BETTER!", while even entering another year with growing decades of unresolved matters going into 2019.
Well, insulting the intelligence of voters who are now living year after year with the affects inflicted on them daily by New Hampshire's government itself, is a far cry and anything but, "NH HAS NEVER BEEN BETTER!"
Sadly, New Hampshire's past, present, and future, have become a hamster wheel repeating the same problems and issues year after year, after year. That only continue to grow and only still remain unresolved. Proving just how delusional the state's government really is, when it now comes down to actually falsely claiming, that"NH HAS NEVER BEEN BETTER!", while even entering another year with growing decades of unresolved matters going into 2019.
Well, insulting the intelligence of voters who are now living year after year with the affects inflicted on them daily by New Hampshire's government itself, is a far cry and anything but, "NH HAS NEVER BEEN BETTER!"
If NH government can remain nothing but a broken record for 2 centuries now, then so can I. However, I NOW remain with a brain injury inflicted for life by the NH government itself. So exactly what the hell is their excuse?
The strong difference is that mine remains continually proven as reality on a daily basis where theirs remain as nothing but seeded delusions that are hopefully believed. Somebody needs to seriouely explain very clearly that a government is suppose to serve the people, not kill them!
FACT: In New Hampshire, there are now only an increasing number of 26,896 children ages 0-17 living in poverty.
FACT: "Now Among adults served in New Hampshire’s public mental health system in 2015, actually 45.0% of those aged 18–20, 27.1% of those aged 21–64, were not in the labor force."
EAMPLE: In fact, the 2006 10 year plan defining how NH would end homelessness there were already 1,500 homeless people in Manchester alone, for which 400 were actually children. Then actually 10 years later there was actually over 1,700 people that now actually had to be treated by the city of Manchester's $1.5 million healthcare program just for the homeless alone. Once again, only does a NH plan fail.
FACT: It's just like the New Hampshire government to now be the state that would actually vote and pass an illegal unconstitutional law decades ago that only enforces an actual unconstitutional cap on school funding for education, that the state was court ordered 3 times now to remove and change it. Now it is forcing NH schools to actually loose their required credentials.
FACT: It's just like the NH government to now have not only just 1 or 2, nor just even 3 governors, but now has actually 4 New Hampshire state governors along with their state house representatives, ignored and fail to adhere to not just one or just two, but now 3 Judicial Court Orders. Demanding that the unconstitutional educational state cap be removed and changed to a legal constitutional funding system that is implemented and distributed as needed throughout the state. Rightfully paying the money required by all schools. Yet, that even today, is only still remaining only unconstitutional and in effect and enforced in 2018.
FACT: NH residents owe a great deal to all NH school teachers who are even WILLING TO WORK FOR THE STATE OF NH. Who have been paying $375 to even up to a $1000 per school year, out of their own income to properly educate our children each year.
"In fiscal years 2009 and 2010, the state's law directed the state Department of Education to illegally not "distribute a total education grant on behalf of all pupils who reside in a municipality that exceeds that municipality’s total education grant for the 2009 fiscal year by 15 percent."
FACT: In 2018 the New Hampshire median household income is now 70,986.
FACT: However, according to a recent Purdue study published in the journal Nature Human Behavior, "income can correlate with emotional well-being and life satisfaction. They concluded that the minimum yearly salary required just to even actually just be happy in the state of New Hampshire now, would require an annual income of $117,600."
FACT: TAX FREE New Hampshire's regional price parity is 105, so locals actually pay about 5% more for the things they buy. Housing costs in New Hampshire are much higher, as is the cost of food, utilities, and transportation.
FACT: An older study also had already ranked New Hampshire as one of the most expensive places in the country to raise kids thanks to their high costs of childcare and due to educational expenditures still remaining illegal and unconstitutionally capped and enforced by NH government for decades.
FACT: Now 1 of the 4 smallest states in the country, NH's economic cost of living, is now ranking No.44 in the United States of America while having one of the highest property taxes in the country.
FACT: As of 2017, two-thirds of all American workers earning the minimum wage or less were in service occupations. The current federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour, which, assuming a 40-hour work week, would not be enough to bring an individual with no dependents above the poverty level. Many states and municipalities have already passed, or are currently considering passing, legislation to increase the local minimum wage to even $15 an hour now.
FACT: However, New Hampshire's government prefers the hourly minimum wage strongly remains at $7.25. So just a minimum 2 bedroom apartment in NH now requires a minimum wage income individual to work at least a minimum of 123 hours just to pay the rent alone. while all other surrounding states continually clearly prove very capable to increase their state's minimum wages on a yearly basis for the past 10 years. This is why NH will remain having 26,896 children ages 0-17 living in poverty, that continues to only increase each year.
STATE 2008 Minimum Wage 2018 Minimum Wage 2019 Minimum Wage
MAINE $7.25 $10.00 $11.00
VERMONT $7.68 $10.50 $10.78
MASSACHUSSETTS $8.00 $11.00 $12.00
NEW HAMPSHIRE $7.25 $ 7.25 $ 7.25
FACT: In 2017, This Republican-controlled Senate, yet only once again, killed another bill along party lines to create a state minimum wage in New Hampshire. Currently the state firmly continues to only adhere to the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. The bill sought to even boost the minimum wage to $12 an hour by September 2018 to just equal surrounding states, but only once again was shot down.
FACT: According to Citizens Count Editor:
"New Hampshire’s minimum wage is set to match the federal minimum, currently $7.25 per hour.
There are exceptions for tipped employees, some students and trainees, and workers in a handful of other occupations, who may be paid a lower rate.
- Recent attempts to raise the minimum wage in New Hampshire have only failed.
- Pro: The current minimum is effectively lower in buying power than it was in the past and is not enough for a full-time worker to pay for basic expenses such as food, housing and healthcare.
- Con: The minimum wage is intended for entry-level jobs. Raising it will force up other pay rates, increasing costs for businesses which could lead them to cut jobs or refrain from new hires.
Detailed Summary:
The minimum wage is the lowest hourly rate that employers can legally pay their employees.Minimum wages can be set at the federal, state, or local level, and debates about raising or lowering them are often contentious because of different views as to how they will impact employment rates, tax revenues and economic growth.
Minimum wage in NH
New Hampshire state law currently requires the state minimum wage to be the same as the federal minimum wage. This means that in New Hampshire, the minimum wage is $7.25 per hour.
There are some exceptions: (of course it would NOT be NH if there wasn't!)
- Workers who get more than $30 per month in tips can be paid as low as $3.27 per hour. (However, if a worker can show that their pay plus tips ads up to less than the minimum wage for the hours they worked, their employer must make up the difference.)
- Workers with less than six months of experience in a job can be paid as low as $5.44 per hour, if their employer gets approval from the New Hampshire Department of Labor.
- Workers who are also full-time high school or college students can be paid a lower minimum wage—or even no wages at all— if they’re being employed to gain professional experience and their school or employer gets permission from the state.
- Disabled workers may be paid at less than minimum wage, but only as part of an approved work training program.
- Certain professions are exempt from the minimum wage law: household and domestic labor, summer camp employees, newsboys, golf caddies, outside salesmen and some ski area employees. Children working for parents or grandparents are also exempt, as are spouses who work in support of their spouse’s business.
Overtime pay
All hourly employees in New Hampshire are entitled to overtime pay if they work more than 40 hours per week, at a rate of time and a half.
All hourly employees in New Hampshire are entitled to overtime pay if they work more than 40 hours per week, at a rate of time and a half.
The only exception to this rule is for employees of some seasonal businesses.
History of minimum wage in NH
New Hampshire passed its first minimum wage law in 1933.
Since then, the minimum wage here has equaled the federal minimum at some times, and exceeded it at others.
However, in 2011, a bill eliminated all references to the state minimum wage from New Hampshire’s state laws, leaving only language that states employees are to be paid at least the federal minimum.
Attempts since then to set a higher minimum wage in New Hampshire have all failed.
Federal minimum wage law
The federal minimum wage is set at $7.25 per hour. No state can enforce a minimum wage law lower than this rate.However, federal law does allow for some exceptions, like those allowed under New Hampshire’s minimum wage laws for work training or for tipped employees.
Cities and towns
In other areas of the United States, towns and cities unhappy with low state minimum wages have set their own higher minimum hourly rates.There is nothing in New Hampshire state law that clearly prohibits municipalities from setting a minimum wage of their own—but nothing in state law necessarily allows it, either. For example, regulating wages isn’t listed in state statues governing the sort of bylaws towns can set.
The matter hasn’t yet been put to the test in New Hampshire, as no town or city here has tried to set its own minimum wage.
Policies in other states
New Hampshire is one of 21 states that tie their minimum wage to the federal level. There are also five states with no minimum wage. In those states, the federal minimum also applies.Several states have minimum wages set higher than the federal level, ranging from $7.50 in New Mexico to $12.50 in Washington, D.C.
Finally, there are two states, Wyoming and Georgia, where the state minimum wage is set lower than the federal minimum. This wage would only apply to workers exempted from the federal minimum, such as casual babysitters or newsboys.
Currently, New Hampshire is the only state in New England to use the federal minimum wage, with all other states in the region setting a higher rate.
Other areas of controversy
Indexing minimum wage increasesIn eighteen states, increases in the minimum wage are tied to one or more indexes, such as the statewide median wage, the regional consumer price index, or other measures of inflation.
- Supporters argue that indexing helps ensure that minimum wages continue to have the same buying power.
- Opponents argue that automatic indexing could make wages get out of hand.
Only eight states require tipped employees to be paid the same minimum wage as other workers. Some states set their own tipped employee minimum, while others use the federal minimum of $2.13 per hour.
- Supporters of continuing to pay tipped employees a lower minimum wage argue that tips more than make up for the lower hourly rate, and that paying servers the same minimum would be unfair to non-tipped workers like kitchen staff.
- Opponents argue that tipped workers are more likely to live in poverty, and that tipped workers rarely call out their employers when their tips and pay don’t add up to the regular minimum rate.
In New Hampshire, students, young people and the disabled can be paid lower wages only as part of approved work training programs.
- Supporters of continuing or expanding this policy argue that it encourages employers to give younger or less able workers a chance to gain experience.
- Opponents argue the lower wages are a form of exploitation"
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Killed in the House
Establishes a committee to study business tax credits for companies that pay a liveable wage and provide adequate benefits to their employees.
Killed in the Senate
Prohibits an employer from requiring an employee who earns less than $15 per hour to enter a noncompete agreement.
Killed in the House
Gradually increases the minimum wage for tipped employees to the state or federal minimum wage, whichever is higher, starting January 1, 2020.
Killed in the Senate
Increases the minimum wage for employers that do not offer health benefits to the employee. This bill also gradually raises the minimum wage for all employees.
Killed in the House
Raises the minimum wage to $9.50 in 2018 and $12 in 2019, with annual cost of living adjustments starting in 2020. The bill also establishes a training wage that is one dollar less than the minimum wage for the first three months of employment for someone sixteen or seventeen years-old.
Killed in the Senate
Raises the minimum wage to $8.50 On September 1, 2017, $10 on March 1, 2018, and $12 on September 1, 2018.
Killed in the House
Gradually increases the minimum hourly rate for tipped employees to the full federal minimum wage by 2020.
Killed in the House
Raises the minimum wage to $8.25 in 2017, $9 in 2018, and $9.50 in 2019.
Killed in the House
Establishes a state minimum hourly wage to be adjusted by the cost of living index, starting at $8.25 in 2016.
Tabled in the Senate
Prohibits employers from employing individuals with disabilities at an hourly rate lower than the federal minimum wage except for practical experience or training programs.
Signed by Governor
Prohibits employers from employing individuals with disabilities at an hourly rate lower than the federal minimum wage except for practical experience or training programs and family businesses.
Killed in the House
Raises the minimum wage to $9.10 in 2016, $11.40 in 2017, and $14.25 in 2018. Starting in 2019, the minimum wage is adjusted according to cost of living.
Killed in the Senate
Raises the minimum wage to $8.25 in 2016, $9.00 in 2017, and $10.00 in 2018.
Killed in the House
Enables counties and municipalities to establish minimum wage rates for all individuals employed within such county or town.
Signed by Governor
Creates a committee to study ending the payment of sub-minimum wages to persons with disabilities.
Killed in the Senate
Sets the state minimum wage at $7.25, in place of federal minimum wage.
FACT: Though when it comes to the state of New Hampshire desperately needing allot more additional state income, the Republican-controlled Senate along with it's Republican Governor wont mess around, and even will LITERALLY kill two birds with one stone if they have to. The state did work diligently for nine years just to now lower the drinking age to 20 years old after building and opening the largest state liquor store in New England.
BUT ONLY WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY BEING AWARDED IN 2016, $150 million over five years, by federal Medicaid officials just to expand already much needed access to mental health and substance abuse treatment services now, that already have been desperately required for years.
Clearly NH government felt it more important to increase state liquor sales just for revenue alone. NH will now have even more younger voter's now legally capable to numb all their state's problem's away. And only to increase the state's income alone. Even if it is at our children's e expense. The following shows just how diligent and desperate NH state can be just for income no matter how high the cost is to pay for it.
BUT ONLY WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY BEING AWARDED IN 2016, $150 million over five years, by federal Medicaid officials just to expand already much needed access to mental health and substance abuse treatment services now, that already have been desperately required for years.
Clearly NH government felt it more important to increase state liquor sales just for revenue alone. NH will now have even more younger voter's now legally capable to numb all their state's problem's away. And only to increase the state's income alone. Even if it is at our children's e expense. The following shows just how diligent and desperate NH state can be just for income no matter how high the cost is to pay for it.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Signed by Governor
Lowers the drinking age to twenty years-old. The House amended the bill to instead allow minors to transport alcoholic beverages in a vehicle when accompanied by an expanded list of family members.
HB 228 (2017)
HB 228 (2017)
Died in Conference Committee
Allows minors to transport alcoholic beverages in a vehicle or boat when accompanied by a stepparent, grandparent, domestic partner, or sibling of legal age.
HB 545 (2017)
HB 545 (2017)
Signed by Governor
If a person seeks medical assistance for someone experiencing an alcohol overdose, this bill protects the person from prosecution for any charges related to underage drinking, if the evidence for the charge was obtained as a result of the person seeking medical assistance.
HB 1321 (2016)
HB 1321 (2016)
Killed in the House
Allows minors to transport alcoholic beverages in a vehicle or boat when accompanied by a legal age family member.
HB 1606 (2016)
HB 1606 (2016)
Killed in the House
Makes some changes to the laws against underage drinking and states, "It is the intention of the general court that minors between the age of 18 and 20 be permitted to consume only beer or wine while in the presence of responsible adults who are over 21 so that younger people will no longer be initiated to alcohol consumption in the absence of adult supervision."
SB 147 (2015)
SB 147 (2015)
Interim Study
Provides limited immunity for a person who seeks medical assistance for someone who is experiencing a drug or alcohol overdose or for themselves.
HB 585 (2015)
HB 585 (2015)
Killed in the House
Imposes a penalty assessment of $5 or 10%, whichever is greater, on all fines or penalties imposed by a court or the liquor commission for violations to the alcohol beverage laws. (The most common violation is for underage drinking, which carries a minimum fine of $300; the penalty assessment for that would then be $30). The penalty assessments would be divided equally among the Victims’ Assistance Fund, the Special Fund for Domestic Violence Programs, and the Alcohol Abuse Prevention and Treatment Fund.
Killed in the House
Decreases the fine for underage drinking from $300 to $100 on first offense and from $600 to $300 on a subsequent offense.
Tabled in the House
Exempts certain individuals under age 21 from the law against unlawful possession (not consumption) of alcohol: individuals possessing alcohol for medical or religious reasons, and individuals between 18 and 21 in a place where alcohol is not sold.
HB 588 (2009)
HB 588 (2009)
Killed in the House
Lowers the legal drinking age to 18.
FACT: It is just like New Hampshire's government to already ignore the fact that there already was about 2 in 3 (66.4%) adolescents aged 12–17 in 2013–2014 who now perceived no great risk from having five or more drinks once or even twice a week—Once again, only a percentage that is now always higher than the national average percent of (60.9).
FACT: The percentage of adolescents aged 12–17 in New Hampshire who perceived no great risk from having five or more drinks once or twice a week, and also only once again, did not even change significantly from 2010–2011 to even 2013–2014.
FACT: It is just like New Hampshire's government to already ignore the fact that there already was "an annual average of about 82,000 individuals aged 12 or older (7.2% of all individuals in this age group) in 2014–2015 alone, who already now had an alcohol use disorder in the past year.
The annual average percentage, once again, in 2014–2015 was also only once again, (yep, you got it) not significantly any different from the annual average percentage in 2011–2012. In fact in 2016, that number only increased now to 87,000 and only continues to rise even more so since then."
FACT: It is just like New Hampshire's government to already ignore the fact that there already was about 2 in 3 (66.4%) adolescents aged 12–17 in 2013–2014 who now perceived no great risk from having five or more drinks once or even twice a week—Once again, only a percentage that is now always higher than the national average percent of (60.9).
FACT: The percentage of adolescents aged 12–17 in New Hampshire who perceived no great risk from having five or more drinks once or twice a week, and also only once again, did not even change significantly from 2010–2011 to even 2013–2014.
FACT: It is just like New Hampshire's government to already ignore the fact that there already was "an annual average of about 82,000 individuals aged 12 or older (7.2% of all individuals in this age group) in 2014–2015 alone, who already now had an alcohol use disorder in the past year.
The annual average percentage, once again, in 2014–2015 was also only once again, (yep, you got it) not significantly any different from the annual average percentage in 2011–2012. In fact in 2016, that number only increased now to 87,000 and only continues to rise even more so since then."
Affordable housing in New Hampshire
FACT: In 2018, "Elissa Margolin of Housing Action NH contends that the state needs to do so much more to increase the supply of affordable housing."
New Hampshire in 2018, still is now only the No.1 New England state to be incapable of safe affordable housing. "According to Margolin, Vermont has bonded $35 million in addition to another $10 million a year later. Maine bonded $50 million in 2010, and every year had committed between $6 million and $12 million to affordable housing. And Massachusetts bonded $1 billion over 5 years. But when little NH came in with the chamber of commerce and asked for $25 million, they were only granted a whopping total of just $2.5 million dollars. What else could anyone expect from a state always running on empty and nothing but fumes that apparently only NH's government prefers to only continually inhale.
FACT: Reported also once again, on December 17, 2017 in NH, “Increasing rents compounded by extremely low vacancy rates make it almost impossible for those with the lowest incomes to secure stable housing,” wrote Cathy Kuhn, a coalition director, in the report."
“Service providers report an increasing number of families who find themselves without a roof over their heads and, due to a lack of housing and an insufficient number of emergency shelter units (0nly due to NH government closing those too), are forced to reside in their cars, in tents or in other unsafe environments.”
FACT: New Hampshire wages have now also declined 1.2% between August 2017 and August 2018.
FACT: New Hampshire state, as of 2018 is now also rated the third-worst rated economy among the 50 states and DC.
healthcare in New Hampshire
FACT: For the past 5 years now the No.1 leading cause of death in New Hampshire has been only cancer but apparently no one knows why that is. The Granite State now ranks No. 1 for the most new diagnosed numbers of breast cancer in the nation with a total of 8,670 new cases and 170 deaths reported just in 2017 alone. The cause is claimed to be from the population being 94% white.
FACT: Breast cancer has been also claimed to be most prevalent in white women. New Hampshire is currently ranking fourth in the nation for all cancer-sites now diagnosed, with now 490 cases per 100,000. According to claims, "The state’s high rate may be due, in part, to a push for early detection of breast cancer, which may also be why New Hampshire’s cancer death rate is also right at the national average of 166 per 100.000 according to NH."
FACT: Also a new study has now just been released in July 2018 now by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC found that pediatric cancer rates are now the highest especially in New Hampshire, once again, having the highest rate now of pediatric cancer in the country. And still only once again, are not able to specify a specific reason why this is happening throughout the state.
FACT: The study now shows that there were 816 pediatric cancer cases recorded in New Hampshire between 2003 and 2014. That's a rate of more than 205 per one million, which is the highest rate in the United States. New Hampshire only has a total population that is a little over 1,300,000 people living on a land mass that is only 50 miles wide by 190 miles long. There are only 3 other states that are smaller than NH in the U.S. of A.
FACT: Overall, there were about 174 pediatric cancer cases per one million children and teens alone throughout New Hampshire, and the rate was higher in males compared to females. When broken down by age group, the rates were higher in children between the ages of 0-4 and teens between the ages of 15-19, as compared to kids between the ages of 5-9 and 10-14.
FACT: In 2018, New Hampshire has also now become known as ground zero for the nations opioid crisis when the state already was awarded in 2016, $150 million over five years, by federal Medicaid officials, to expand access to mental health and substance abuse treatment services.
FACT: In May 2018, The state’s Public Health Division issued an alert, now to care providers around the state, describing a notable increase in the number of new HIV and Hepatitis C virus (HCV) cases in Hillsborough County.
Of recent concern, NH DPHS has been investigating a report of a homeless individual in Manchester who shares injection drug equipment, and has been diagnosed with acute HIV infection with a very high HIV viral load, which increases risk of transmission.
The alert was issued to physicians, health care providers, hospitals and health clinics.
New Hampshire’s annual number of new HIV cases has been stable (approximately 30-40 cases per year); however, Hillsborough County is experiencing a significant increase in the number of new HIV cases among those who report injection drug use as a risk factor.
FACT: In 2018, it's just like New Hampshire now to also be in contempt of court for years, continually having no resources to pay 10 hospitals a long overdue $250+ million dollar debt that the state has been completely aware of, now owing delinquent payments due for over the past 10 years. That is now severely needed for hospital rooms, ER expansions, beds, doctors, nurses, medical equipment and supplies, now required throughout the entire state.
NEW HAMPSHIRES FINAL OUTCOME
FACT: Its just like New Hampshire in 2018 to still only simply continue to illegally kidnap mentally ill patients admitted of their own free will for mental illness, from their hospital room, to only be placed in a jail cell for 23 hours a day, in a men's penitentiary. That now has been only illegally substituting for the state's asylum for over the past 30 years. With no credentials or proper treatment methods, or even a psychologist, therapist or nurses available on site 24/7. Civilian patients have been given 3 times the dose of prescribed medications just to subdue them, AND worse, have even killed some of them. More and More NH people now have been turning to Massachusetts for their medical needs.
This is all still happening even after the fact that New Hampshire was already awarded in 2016, $150 million over five years by federal Medicaid officials. And still NH is desperately looking for even more aid just 2 years later. Clearly explaining why NH is now "Ground Zero For Americas Opioid Crisis" in 2018.
FACT: For the past 5 years now the No.1 leading cause of death in New Hampshire has been only cancer but apparently no one knows why that is. The Granite State now ranks No. 1 for the most new diagnosed numbers of breast cancer in the nation with a total of 8,670 new cases and 170 deaths reported just in 2017 alone. The cause is claimed to be from the population being 94% white.
FACT: Breast cancer has been also claimed to be most prevalent in white women. New Hampshire is currently ranking fourth in the nation for all cancer-sites now diagnosed, with now 490 cases per 100,000. According to claims, "The state’s high rate may be due, in part, to a push for early detection of breast cancer, which may also be why New Hampshire’s cancer death rate is also right at the national average of 166 per 100.000 according to NH."
FACT: Also a new study has now just been released in July 2018 now by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC found that pediatric cancer rates are now the highest especially in New Hampshire, once again, having the highest rate now of pediatric cancer in the country. And still only once again, are not able to specify a specific reason why this is happening throughout the state.
FACT: The study now shows that there were 816 pediatric cancer cases recorded in New Hampshire between 2003 and 2014. That's a rate of more than 205 per one million, which is the highest rate in the United States. New Hampshire only has a total population that is a little over 1,300,000 people living on a land mass that is only 50 miles wide by 190 miles long. There are only 3 other states that are smaller than NH in the U.S. of A.
FACT: Overall, there were about 174 pediatric cancer cases per one million children and teens alone throughout New Hampshire, and the rate was higher in males compared to females. When broken down by age group, the rates were higher in children between the ages of 0-4 and teens between the ages of 15-19, as compared to kids between the ages of 5-9 and 10-14.
FACT: In 2018, New Hampshire has also now become known as ground zero for the nations opioid crisis when the state already was awarded in 2016, $150 million over five years, by federal Medicaid officials, to expand access to mental health and substance abuse treatment services.
FACT: In May 2018, The state’s Public Health Division issued an alert, now to care providers around the state, describing a notable increase in the number of new HIV and Hepatitis C virus (HCV) cases in Hillsborough County.
Of recent concern, NH DPHS has been investigating a report of a homeless individual in Manchester who shares injection drug equipment, and has been diagnosed with acute HIV infection with a very high HIV viral load, which increases risk of transmission.
The alert was issued to physicians, health care providers, hospitals and health clinics.
New Hampshire’s annual number of new HIV cases has been stable (approximately 30-40 cases per year); however, Hillsborough County is experiencing a significant increase in the number of new HIV cases among those who report injection drug use as a risk factor.
DPHS is continuing to investigate and identify contacts who may be at risk. HCV infection is also a major risk for individuals who inject or use intranasal drugs. New diagnoses of HCV infection were made provider reportable to the NH DPHS in 2016. Of all the new diagnoses of HCV infection in New Hampshire residents from November 1, 2016 to present, 85 percent reported ever injecting drugs (current or former), and almost 65 percent report current injection drug use as a risk factor.
Because new diagnoses of HCV infection are only reported to the NH DPHS by providers (no laboratory reporting of positive test results is performed), there has been significant underreporting of new HCV infections. We are asking providers, both primary and referral providers, to report new cases of HCV infection to the NH DPHS using the appropriate case report form.
Because new diagnoses of HCV infection are only reported to the NH DPHS by providers (no laboratory reporting of positive test results is performed), there has been significant underreporting of new HCV infections. We are asking providers, both primary and referral providers, to report new cases of HCV infection to the NH DPHS using the appropriate case report form.
FACT : In 2018, New Hampshire still has no necessary financial resources to update the state's drinking water systems with over one hundred year old pipes, presently now inflicting class action lawsuits towards NH's increasing rate of now 490,000 per 100,000 cancer cases that are now currently throughout the state.
FACT: In 2016, New Hampshire had an outbreak of Gonorrhea showing that the number of cases became significantly higher by 250% in just one year.
FACT: In 2018, it's just like New Hampshire now to also be in contempt of court for years, continually having no resources to pay 10 hospitals a long overdue $250+ million dollar debt that the state has been completely aware of, now owing delinquent payments due for over the past 10 years. That is now severely needed for hospital rooms, ER expansions, beds, doctors, nurses, medical equipment and supplies, now required throughout the entire state.
NEW HAMPSHIRES FINAL OUTCOME
FACT: Its just like New Hampshire in 2018 to still only simply continue to illegally kidnap mentally ill patients admitted of their own free will for mental illness, from their hospital room, to only be placed in a jail cell for 23 hours a day, in a men's penitentiary. That now has been only illegally substituting for the state's asylum for over the past 30 years. With no credentials or proper treatment methods, or even a psychologist, therapist or nurses available on site 24/7. Civilian patients have been given 3 times the dose of prescribed medications just to subdue them, AND worse, have even killed some of them. More and More NH people now have been turning to Massachusetts for their medical needs.
This is all still happening even after the fact that New Hampshire was already awarded in 2016, $150 million over five years by federal Medicaid officials. And still NH is desperately looking for even more aid just 2 years later. Clearly explaining why NH is now "Ground Zero For Americas Opioid Crisis" in 2018.
FACT: Yet even 2 years later, after being awarded $150 million over five years by federal Medicaid officials in January 2016, NH is now the second state only to Maine in the percentage of the population receiving Social Security Disability Income just for Mental Illness alone, according to the latest research from the Urban Institute.
FACT: Only 1.76 percent of the total population in the United States is receiving a monthly check for disability related to conditions like schizophrenia, mood disorders or depression.
FACT: Yet only once again in New Hampshire, the rate is nearly double at 3.18 percent, topped only by Maine, at 3.41 percent, according to Urban Institute researcher Jon Schwabish, who relied on data from the Social Security Administration, the U.S. Census Bureau and other sources.
FACT: “It was shocking to me,” said Schwabish. “It’s not just that it’s higher; it’s much higher than elsewhere in the country!”
FACT: Only 1.76 percent of the total population in the United States is receiving a monthly check for disability related to conditions like schizophrenia, mood disorders or depression.
FACT: Yet only once again in New Hampshire, the rate is nearly double at 3.18 percent, topped only by Maine, at 3.41 percent, according to Urban Institute researcher Jon Schwabish, who relied on data from the Social Security Administration, the U.S. Census Bureau and other sources.
FACT: “It was shocking to me,” said Schwabish. “It’s not just that it’s higher; it’s much higher than elsewhere in the country!”
What New Hampshire proudly claims as judicial justice only behind the judicial benches of NH for centuries
NH DISTRICT COURT JUDGE MICHEAL JONES
FACT: Jones was a part-time Special Justice investigated by the Judiciary Conduct Committee when police Chief Paul Donovan filed a grievance asking the committee to review 8 cases.
After hearing a direct examination of the defendant's spouse and victim in a domestic assault giving testimony, Jones said that he, "was more like a marriage counselor than a judge." Then after Jones had listened to the defendants testimony, who was a Caribbean man charged with marijuana possession, and worked on a catamaran sailboat, Jones' only response was, "The state doesn't get this, but this is all part of your culture, this stuff." the committee said that furthermore, Jones proceeded to then begin to tell a story of another case he presided over where the suspect is from Jamaica who was also charged with marijuana possession."
Jones' conduct was also called into question when he accused prosecutor Grosky of undermining his authority when Grosky only simply asked to move forward with the trial. Jones suddenly told Grosky to "Be quiet, be quiet, ok? Hey, when you sit up here you can decide. All right?" Jones furthermore accused Grosky of even "stepping over the line" and threatened "One more time and I'm going to have these folks take you out of here."
According to documents with the JCC, Jones also allowed a reputed member of the Hells Angels to be given a concealed handgun permit over chief Donovan's objections. He overruled the chief's authority and within months later that member threatened a Londonderry couple driving along interstate 93 by pointing a handgun at them. That member was then arrested and found guilty of reckless conduct and threatening behavior and served roughly 2 years in the state prison.
NH CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE WILLIAM LYONS
FACT: Lyons was suspended for 60 days without pay after an angry outburst towards a Deputy Sheriff. The JCC found that Lyons lost his temper when the deputy refused to remove restraints from a suicidal 48 year old woman who became the focus of the emergency room Involuntary Commitment petition.
Lyons suddenly just dismissed the case without it ever being heard, possibly causing potential harm to the woman who was already in danger of hurting herself. Dismissing the petition was enormous, according to the JCC Referee, Paul Fauver, and according to a petition from a mental health worker handling the woman's case. The commitment hearing was held May 31, 2013.
When Deputy Sheriff Matthew Poulicakos refused to remove the woman's wrist and leg restraints, he cited security reasons and department policy. The JCC Referee Fauver determined that Lyons "continued his impatient, discourteous, demeaning behavior" towards Deputy Sheriff Poulicakos in the courtroom and also in his orders written days later.
When Deputy Sheriff Matthew Poulicakos refused to remove the woman's wrist and leg restraints, he cited security reasons and department policy. The JCC Referee Fauver determined that Lyons "continued his impatient, discourteous, demeaning behavior" towards Deputy Sheriff Poulicakos in the courtroom and also in his orders written days later.
Lyons argued that the woman and her lawyer had no right to be heard, "because the hearing could not be conducted in a lawful manner given the refusal of the deputy to remove the restraints."
The Supreme Court orders affirmed what the committee had found. That Lyons violated the code of judicial conduct by not controlling his temper.
NH CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE SHARON DEVRIES
FACT: DeVries was reprimanded by the JCC based on the complaints made by the state police pertaining to her manner for which she presides over a series of criminal cases. The case was initiated and brought to the committee by Kevin O'Brien, former Assistant Commissioner of the NH Dept. of Safety. Complaints and Resolution were outlined in a 15 page decision, with a 25 page addendum attached by the JCC.
12 cases were brought to the committee by the Dept. of Safety and were dismissed. DeVries refused to accept plea deals negotiated by a state police prosecutor, describing them as a "Global Resolution" on Drugs. The JCC found DeVries failed to make reasonable efforts to allow the prosecutor to be "fairly heard."
In one case the JCC found DeVries made an "offense charging decision", for which "should be left to the prosecutor."
"once the prosecutor objected to the reduction of the offense from a misdemeanor to a violation, the case should have been allowed to proceed to trial." According to the JCC
In another case, she reported giving a defendant the benefit of the doubt because she knew a court clerk was under investigation for taking court fines that had later found to be totaling around $147,000 for personal use.
In another case, she refused to order a defendant to obtain an interlock for driving while intoxicated conviction because it was not mandated. The state police argued that the DWI was reduced from an aggravated DWI for which the device is mandatory for.
Another case involved DeVries dismissing a domestic violence charge because the plea was made by state police prosecutor who sent a trooper to see it through. In this case the JCC found that it was common practice to have police surrogates appear when cases are previously negotiated, and the victim was deprived of having the defendant even attend an anger management program.
Another case, DeVries was cautioned about hearing a case with someone without legal representation, who negotiated a plea deal for charges of Driving After Suspension and Marijuana Possesion. DeVries denied the deal because she thought the fine was too high, The state complained.
DeVries was also reprimanded in 2009 for making an after hours call to a superior court judge to ask that a juvenile be held at a youth detention center, according to the reprimand order. Because she became concerned for the juvenile, his family and community.
NH Superior Criminal Court Judge William Groff
FACT: Judge Groff, is only one of many NH judges like the entire NH Supreme Court, who only proves to be incapable of their duty pertaining to actually being knowledgeable in state legislative law.
FACT:"French kissing doesn't amount to sexual contact under New Hampshire law, according to Hillsborough County Superior Criminal Court Judge William Groff. Judge Groff dismissed a felony sexual assault charge against a city teen-ager, finding that sexual assault laws don't cover kissing with the tongue. The young man faced a charge of felonious sexual assault, involving a 6-year-old girl.
State law defines sexual contact as intentional touching of sexual or intimate parts. The tongue, Judge Groff ruled, is neither sexual nor intimate. He reasoned that the tongue is neither sexual nor intimate and wrote, "A tongue is not related to sexual relations, nor is it private. A tongue is displayed daily by the average person in speech and other conduct."
"To accept the state's definition of tongue as an 'intimate part," Groff wrote, "would result in a person potentially committing a felonious sexual assault by touching a person's tongue with a finger."
The judge further reasoned that French kissing (a 6 year old girl mind you!) can't be considered sexual contact under state law "even if done without consent and even if done for the purpose of sexual gratification."
FACT: "In 1989, Groff also overturned a convictions of a Lowell, Mass., man, who was found guilty of sexually assaulting a young boy in Nashua because the boy used the word “bum” rather than “anus” in his testimony. Because of the potential ambiguity of the word “bum,” Groff found that the boy’s testimony wasn’t enough to prove sexual penetration. Months later, that same man plead guilty to sexual assault charges involving the same boy, but only now it was in Massachusetts."
FACT: In 1991, even the NH Supreme Court actually still upheld Judge Groff's decision to overturn this same conviction of a Lowell, Mass man, who was already now found guilty of sexually assaulting a young boy in Nashua and again now in Massachusetts. All because the boy used the word "bum" rather than "anus" in his testimony. Groff found that the boy's testimony wasn't enough to prove sexual penetration and the NH Supreme Court agreed even after he was charged again in massachusetts.
Massachusetts isn't the only state having to protect and save NH residents while cleaning up after NH's so called form of justice served. There have been other states having to do so too.
Massachusetts isn't the only state having to protect and save NH residents while cleaning up after NH's so called form of justice served. There have been other states having to do so too.
FACT: "In fact, in 2012, it was a top GOP lawmaker who called for a special House committee to investigate potential wrongdoing within the NH Liquor Commission, including how it handles large cash purchases.
"That committee's final report included two anecdotes of out-of-state residents arrested in Massachusetts with large hauls of New Hampshire-purchased booze. One of those arrests included 1,676 bottles of Hennessy, bought at multiple locations. The driver was charged with possessing untaxed liquor and unlawfully transporting liquor.
Liquor enforcement officials in Vermont have made two arrests, one involving an estimated $40,000 worth of New Hampshire-purchased liquor in the back of an SUV, the other with an estimated $28,000 worth. Both suspects were charged with crossing state lines in possession of more than 9 liters of alcohol, Vermont's current legal limit."
"The product that was the most prominent in both of these cases was Hennessy cognac," says Patrick Delaney, Vermont's commissioner of liquor control, who backs increasing the financial penalties for those caught illegally importing large quantities of liquor. He adds that "by using cash, there is obviously no paper trail, if an authority were to investigate it, The activity itself is basically tax evasion."
“From our perspective, this is organized criminal activity,” says Gary Kessler, deputy commissioner at the Vermont Department of Liquor Control."
"Along with New York, court records show Kessler’s agency has also sent investigators to stake out New Hampshire liquor store parking lots in recent months, including in Peterborough and Keene. When the customers crossed back into Vermont with trucks full of booze, they were arrested for violating that state’s liquor laws.
“Clearly, these guys aren’t just randomly deciding that they are going to come up and buy some cases of alcohol,” Kessler says. “They are coming up here with shopping lists, these guys had a notebook, they have the money and the gift cards.”
"These operations by other states are happening without the assistance or knowledge of New Hampshire officials. The New Hampshire Liquor Commission, which oversees 79 retail stores statewide, says it wasn't notified. Neither was the attorney general’s office or New Hampshire State Police." The NH Attorney General's office finally got around to warranting an investigation 6 years later in 2018.
NH CIRCUIT (Circus) COURT JUDGE PAMELA ALBEE
The Zillow Ruling Judge
The Zillow Ruling Judge
FACT: Albee was investigated by the JCC only after the State Supreme Court issued their opinion finding "Irreversable Error" in the September 11, 2015 case involving Tammy Rokowski and Shane Rokowski. Albee entered and agreement to avoid facing formal disapline by the State Supreme Court.
The agreement said she had multiple cases on the overdue orders list in 2013 and 2014. The list is kept by administrators in order to make sure circuit court orders are completed within 30 days. According to records Albee had anywhere between 7 - 21 delinquent cases per month.
"Delays in rendering a judicial decision have negative consequences not only for the parties but for the overall administration of justice and must be avoided in the future." The committee said.
Albee was also found to be using independent online sites like Zillow to research her decision-making in marital cases instead of using the actual evidence submitted that only actually applies to the case.
The Judicial Conduct Committee made a finding that Albee violated Canon 2, Rule 2.9C of the Code of Judicial Conduct for using evidence outside of the record, but said this was not serious enough to warrant formal discipline by the Supreme Court. Instead, only with the consent of Albee first, “the Committee issues this Reprimand”, and immediately placed Albee behind the bench to continue.
"The committee urges that judge Albee refrain from concluding factual investigations outside the evidentiary record of the hearing or utilizing that information in her decision making process." The committee said.
"The committee determines that a clear violation of Canon 2, Rule 25A is not found but that the judge acted in a manner which requires attention and Judge Albee stipulates and consents to resolution of that code provision by it's dismissal with the issuance in the future."
Timothy Rioux believes the conduct committee should have investigated all of Albee’s cases. He didn’t receive due process as a result of her actions, he said. The people whose cases were on the overdue orders list were cheated of their rights as well, Rioux said.
“They didn’t get a timely hearing. I suggested that the JCC investigate further,” Rioux said.
Rioux, an outspoken critic of the court system, said “These people need to be held accountable. There is no system of accountability for judges. The system protects them,”
“The more digging you do, the more you realize it is corrupt at the core.” said Rioux
Albee sustained serious injury from a fall in June of 2015 and had been on medical leave. She did not return to work fulltime, but did finally clear her overdue orders, the agreement said.
The Head Of Circuit Court, Judge Edwin Kelly, had this to say. "She served really ably in Carroll County and rarely was on the overdue list."
7 - 21 overdue cases per month is not considered as being rarely on the list! Someone should know his employees better.
EX - NH CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE PAUL MOORE
FACT: In October 2017, Moore was suddenly quietly place on paid leave of absence. Then in March 2018, the Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Conduct, came to a conclusion and filed formal charges against Moore stating, "The committee is persuaded that the probable exists to believe that Judge Moore abused the prestige of his judicial office to advance his personal or economic interests."
Only after authorities became suspicious of Moore's perfect scores on his job evaluations, that are submitted supposedly by only the public and lawyers, Moore suddenly resigned. His scores were way above all other judges.
In January 2018, Moore applied for disability benefits and claimed his health had been deteriorating for the past 15 months. Yet nine months earlier he submitted his application to be considered for a supreme court appointment with no mention of poor health.
Moore was charged with 1 count of fraud "For making false statement'(s) in an attempt to defraud the NH Judicial Retirement Plan," and plead guilty to attempt to secure a disability pension. He will not face any criminal charges as a result of fraudulent evaluations that were submitted. He also was only sentence to a suspended 12 month prison term. He now walks free as a known felon!
If Moore had succeeded he would of stolen over a million dollars in his lifetime from NH taxpayers hard earned paid tax dollars.
NOW THIS TRULY EXPLAINS WHAT THE NH SUPREME COURT IS TRULY MADE UP OFF.
NH SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE JOHN M. LEWIS RETIRES DURING JCC INVESTIGATION
FACT: While in a meeting with the county attorney's office and the public defenders office, Lewis made sexist remarks saying people are loosing respect for the legal profession because so many women are becoming lawyers. It's hurting the teaching profession. Another alleged comment made by Lewis was mentioned. He allegedly said there is more respect in the business world because it is dominated by men.
He was place on a paid administrative leave, then suddenly submitted his retirement letter within the following 2 weeks. He was also accused of not being sympathetic enough to crime victims and allegedly had said that the aggressive product of child sexual assault may do more harm than good to the families and communities.
The Judiciary Conduct Committee said that Lewis at least gave the appearance of being bias against women therefore he violated the code of conduct.
He was place on a paid administrative leave, then suddenly submitted his retirement letter within the following 2 weeks. He was also accused of not being sympathetic enough to crime victims and allegedly had said that the aggressive product of child sexual assault may do more harm than good to the families and communities.
The Judiciary Conduct Committee said that Lewis at least gave the appearance of being bias against women therefore he violated the code of conduct.
NH DISTRICT COURT JUDGE MICHEAL JONES
FACT: Jones was a part-time Special Justice investigated by the JCC when police Chief Paul Donovan filed a grievance asking the committee to review 8 cases.
After hearing a direct examination of the defendant's spouse and victim in a domestic assault giving testimony, Jones said that he "was more like a marriage counselor than a judge." Then after Jones had listened to the defendants testimony, who was a Caribbean man charged with marijuana possession, and worked on a catamaran sailboat, Jones' only response was, "The state doesn't get this, but this is all part of your culture, this stuff." the committee said that he then furthermore proceeded to tell a story of another case he presided over where the suspect is from Jamaica who was also charged with marijuana possession."
Jones' conduct was also called into question when he accused prosecutor Grosky of undermining his authority when Grosky only simply asked to move forward with the trial. Jones suddenly told Grosky to "Be quiet, be quiet, ok? Hey, when you sit up here you can decide. All right?" Jones furthermore accused Grosky of even "stepping over the line" and threatened "One more time and I'm going to have these folks take you out of here."
According to documents with the JCC, Jones also allowed a reputed member of the Hells Angels to be given a concealed handgun permit over chief Donovan's objections. He overruled the chief's authority and within months later that member threatened a Londonderry couple driving along interstate 93 by pointing a handgun at them. That member was then arrested and found guilty of reckless conduct and threatening behavior and served roughly 2 years in the state prison.
NH COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE EDWARD FITZGERALD INVESTIGATED
FACT: In 2007, Merrimack County Superior Court Judge Edward Fitzgerald had presided over a murder case. He had been dating a courtroom employee named Corcoran, then they had stopped. Corcoran then began dating the defendant's Attorney Ted Barnes. The defendant was George Knickerbocker, a former NH man that was accused of killing a baby years ago who was now going to trial for a murder. according to the JCC, there was no evidence proving this was the reason Knickerbocker received a lesser charge of manslaughter, and there was no reason this case nor any other case was affected by Judge Fitzgerald's conduct.
The ENTIRE NH Supreme Court Who Should Be Investigated
FACT: In 2010, NH State Supreme Court had written a much needed well overdue mandatory family court rule. It demands that all debts, property deeds, bank statements, retirement plan statements, investment statements, all life insurance statements and medical coverage policies, with a specific time period required for each, to all be submitted to the courts within 45 days of the filing. But only 'IF' it is even actually requested by the court first.
FACT: This very same rule, also very clearly but suddenly states now that, "2. The parties may redact all but the last four (4) digits of any account numbers and social security numbers that appear on any statements or documents." Not only does this sentence defeat the purpose of the entire rule to begin with, but it most certainly breaks even more than just one NH state law, along with the United States Codes for the entire country. Gee, how long did it actually take them to come up with this BS. This is nothing but more reckless lazy careless illegal so-called judicial justice in the state of NH.
FACT: Title LXII - CRIMINAL CODE
Chapter 641 - FALSIFICATION IN OFFICIAL MATTERS
Section 641:7 - Tampering With Public Records or Information.
Chapter 641 - FALSIFICATION IN OFFICIAL MATTERS
Section 641:7 - Tampering With Public Records or Information.
Universal Citation: NH Rev Stat § 641:7 (2015)
641:7 Tampering With Public Records or Information. – A person is guilty of a misdemeanor if he:
I. Knowingly makes a false entry in or false alteration of any thing belonging to, received, or kept by the government for information or record, or required by law to be kept for information of the government; or
II. Presents or uses any thing knowing it to be false, and with a purpose that it be taken as a genuine part of information or records referred to in paragraph I; or
III. Purposely and unlawfully destroys, conceals, removes or otherwise impairs the verity or availability of any such thing.
Source. 1971, 518:1, eff. Nov. 1, 1973.
FACT 48: Title LXII - CRIMINAL CODE
Chapter 638 - FRAUD
Section 638:2 - Fraudulent Handling of Recordable Writings.
Universal Citation: NH Rev Stat § 638:2 (2015)
638:2 Fraudulent Handling of Recordable Writings. – A person is guilty of a class B felony if, with a purpose to deceive or injure anyone, he falsifies, destroys, removes or conceals any will, deed, mortgage, security instrument or other writing for which the law provides public recording.
Source. 1971, 518:1, eff. Nov. 1, 1973.
FACT: 18 U.S.C. § 1505 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 1505. Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees
Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so; or Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress--Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331 ), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.
Blanchflower v Blanchflower
FACT: In 2003 The famously known adultery case of Blanchflower v Blanchflower went before the NH State Supreme Court.
This was their Final Ruling:
"The record supports the following facts. The petitioner filed for divorce from the respondent on grounds of irreconcilable differences. He subsequently moved to amend the petition to assert the fault ground of adultery under RSA 458:7, II. Specifically, the petitioner alleged that the respondent has been involved in a “continuing adulterous affair” with the co-respondent, a woman, resulting in the irremediable breakdown of the parties' marriage. The co-respondent sought to dismiss the amended petition, contending that a homosexual relationship between two people, one of whom is married, does not constitute adultery under RSA 458:7, II. The trial court disagreed, and the co-respondent brought this appeal.
Before addressing the merits, we note this appeal is not about the status of homosexual relationships in our society or the formal recognition of homosexual unions. The narrow question before us is whether a homosexual sexual relationship between a married person and another constitutes adultery within the meaning of RSA 458:7, II.
RSA 458:7 provides, in part: “A divorce from the bonds of matrimony shall be decreed in favor of the innocent party for any of the following causes: ․ II. Adultery of either party.” The statute does not define adultery. Id. Accordingly, we must discern its meaning according to our rules of statutory construction.
(So basically screw the laws!)
“In matters of statutory interpretation, this court is the final arbiter of the intent of the legislature as expressed in the words of a statute considered as a whole.” Wegner v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 148 N.H. 107, 108, 803 A.2d 598 (2002) (quotation omitted). We first look to the language of the statute itself and, where terms are not defined therein, “we ascribe to them their plain and ordinary meanings.” Id.
The plain and ordinary meaning of adultery is “voluntary sexual intercourse between a married man and someone other than his wife or between a married woman and someone other than her husband.” Webster's Third New International Dictionary 30 (unabridged ed.1961). Although the definition does not specifically state that the “someone” with whom one commits adultery must be of the opposite gender, it does require sexual intercourse.
The plain and ordinary meaning of sexual intercourse is “sexual connection esp. between humans: COITUS, COPULATION.” Webster's Third New International Dictionary 2082. Coitus is defined to require “insertion of the penis in the vagina[ ],” Webster's Third New International Dictionary 441, which clearly can only take place between persons of the opposite gender.
We also note that “[a] law means what it meant to its framers and its mere repassage does not alter that meaning.” Appeal of Naswa Motor Inn, 144 N.H. 89, 91, 738 A.2d 349 (1999) (quotation omitted). The statutory compilation in which the provision now codified as RSA 458:7 first appeared is the Revised Statutes of 1842. See RS 148:3 (1842). No definition of adultery was contained in that statute. See id. Our cases from that approximate time period, however, support the inference that adultery meant intercourse. See Adams v. Adams, 20 N.H. 299, 301 (1850); Burns v. Burns, 68 N.H. 33, 34, 44 A. 76 (1894).
Cases from this period also indicate that adultery as a ground for divorce was equated with the crime of adultery and was alleged as such in libels for divorce. See, e.g., Sheafe v. Sheafe, 24 N.H. 564, 564 (1852); White v. White, 45 N.H. 121, 121 (1863). Although the criminal adultery statute in the 1842 compilation also did not define adultery, see RS 219:1 (1842), roughly contemporaneous case law is instructive: “Adultery is committed whenever there is an intercourse from which spurious issue may arise․” State v. Wallace, 9 N.H. 515, 517 (1838); see also State v. Taylor, 58 N.H. 331, 331 (1878) (same). As “spurious issue” can only arise from intercourse between a man and a woman, criminal adultery could only be committed with a person of the opposite gender.
We note that the current criminal adultery statute still requires sexual intercourse: “A person is guilty of a class B misdemeanor if, being a married person, he engages in sexual intercourse with another not his spouse or, being unmarried, engages in sexual intercourse with another known by him to be married.” RSA 645:3 (1996). Based upon the foregoing, we conclude that adultery under RSA 458:7, II does not include homosexual relationships." (This is false)
Instead of being so fixated on looking up definitions for "sexual intercourse, coitus, copulation" which actually had nothing to do with this case, the courts once again, chose to completely ignore the specifics of "the words of a statute (itself) considered as a whole.”
A.Therefore, The "definition of adultery was contained in that statute", because of one very clear important WORD in that statute. That was in plain english. "Engages in sexual intercourse with another." The word "Another" is clearly defined in the English dictionary (had they even bothered to look that word up too) as, "someone or something different and in addition to."
B. Therefore, a homosexual affair is simply something different that is in addition to sexual intercourse at the time the law was in effect.
C. Therefore it simply did constitute adultery because the terms were clearly "defined within the meaning of the law", plain and simple.
D. So therefore and finally, "the definition does not (actually thoroughly) specifically state that the “someone” with whom one commits adultery must be of the opposite gender, it does (DID NOT) require sexual intercourse."
E.The NH Supreme Court and the entire judicial branch of government will never even do what their even actually stating they did, which was, "this court is the final arbiter of the intent of the legislature as expressed in the words of a statute considered as a whole.”
But they will "discern its meaning according to our rules of statutory construction."
(So basically screw any laws made actually by legislative statutory construction.)
Ross v Ross
FACT: Another case to be a famously known adultery case now in NH is Ross v Ross. That went before the NH State Supreme Court in 2016. Kysa Crusco, a NH Family Law Attorney and Guardian Ad Litem out of Bedford NH, clearly summarized this case in a nutshell through a blog.
The Facts
Husband and wife met in dental school and later married. Husband, who had his own endodontist practice, helped his wife open and build her orthodontist practice. Considerable money was put into the venture. The couple separated the day that husband discovered wife was having an affair with another dentist. Wife filed for divorce 5 days after the parties separated alleging both fault and irreconcilable differences as grounds. Husband cross-petitioned for divorce on fault-based grounds, due to the wife’s alleged adultery and irreconcilable differences. The parties had been married for 9 years at the time they filed for divorce.
Approximately 11 months after the divorce was file, husband began a sexual relationship with the ex-wife of the dentist that the wife was dating. Wife filed a motion to dismiss the adultery grounds pled against her. She argued the defense of recrimination, or in other words that the husband was no longer an “innocent spouse” because of his own adultery. The trial court agreed with wife and dismissed the husband’s fault grounds. The trial court issued a decree of divorce based on irreconcilable differences that divided the property with an intent to split it equally.
The Appeal
Husband appealed the dismissal of the fault-based ground in his cross-petition for divorce, arguing that his sexual relationship, which occurred eleven months after the parties’ separation, could not be used as a basis for the defense of recrimination. Husband asserted that such a holding would require parties to remain celibate during years of litigation in a contentious divorce. Wife argued the trial court did not err in granting the motion to dismiss because the respondent was not an “innocent party” within the meaning of the statute. RSA 458:7 (2004).
The Court examined RSA 458:7, which states that a divorce “shall be decreed in favor of the innocent party.” The statute requires that one be an “innocent party” at the time of the decree. The statute makes no exception for fault based grounds that arise prior to the final decree, regardless of whether they arise before or after the filing of the divorce petition. Therefore, the trial court correctly considered Husband’s post-petition conduct when deciding the motion to dismiss.
The Court further stated the fact that Husband’s adultery did not lead to the breakdown of the marriage does not bar recrimination as a defense, stating “Causation is not an element of the defense of recrimination.” The Court affirmed the trial court’s decision to dismiss the fault grounds and grant a divorce on irreconcilable differences.
The Takeaway
The conclusion of husband’s brief, artfully written by Attorney Joshua Gordon, argues: “It is not reasonable to suggest, in these times of protracted discovery and litigation, that a party to a divorce must remain celibate for the duration of the proceedings – here already longer than four years.” I happen to agree with him. Litigation can be a long and arduous process. While most divorces will settle within 6 months to 1 year, a small percentage can drag on. The longest divorce I have seen from start to finish has been 5 years. That is a long time to wait to date.
Why pursue the adultery grounds in the first place? It appears in this case that there was some significant bad blood between the parties. Husband had helped wife open her orthodontic practice and contributed financially and emotionally to that endeavor. In return, wife carried on an affair with a colleague for approximately five years. Wife changed the locks to the house two days after husband left. Husband may have been pursuing the emotional victory of a fault based divorce for wife’s cheating.
Husband may also have been pursuing the adultery grounds for the financial benefit. RSA 458:16-a, II provides that a court may divide property unequally when it would be appropriate and equitable to do so after considering one more of the statutory factors. One of the factors reads: “The fault of either party as specified in RSA 458:7 if said fault caused the breakdown of the marriage and: (1) Caused substantial physical or mental pain and suffering; or (2) Resulted in substantial economic loss to the marital estate or the injured party.” With the dental practices, marital home and savings and investments on the line, an uneven split make a substantial difference in the outcome."
When there even was a NH adultery law in effect:
Husband and wife met in dental school and later married. Husband, who had his own endodontist practice, helped his wife open and build her orthodontist practice. Considerable money was put into the venture. The couple separated the day that husband discovered wife was having an affair with another dentist. Wife filed for divorce 5 days after the parties separated alleging both fault and irreconcilable differences as grounds. Husband cross-petitioned for divorce on fault-based grounds, due to the wife’s alleged adultery and irreconcilable differences. The parties had been married for 9 years at the time they filed for divorce.
Approximately 11 months after the divorce was file, husband began a sexual relationship with the ex-wife of the dentist that the wife was dating. Wife filed a motion to dismiss the adultery grounds pled against her. She argued the defense of recrimination, or in other words that the husband was no longer an “innocent spouse” because of his own adultery. The trial court agreed with wife and dismissed the husband’s fault grounds. The trial court issued a decree of divorce based on irreconcilable differences that divided the property with an intent to split it equally.
The Appeal
Husband appealed the dismissal of the fault-based ground in his cross-petition for divorce, arguing that his sexual relationship, which occurred eleven months after the parties’ separation, could not be used as a basis for the defense of recrimination. Husband asserted that such a holding would require parties to remain celibate during years of litigation in a contentious divorce. Wife argued the trial court did not err in granting the motion to dismiss because the respondent was not an “innocent party” within the meaning of the statute. RSA 458:7 (2004).
The Court examined RSA 458:7, which states that a divorce “shall be decreed in favor of the innocent party.” The statute requires that one be an “innocent party” at the time of the decree. The statute makes no exception for fault based grounds that arise prior to the final decree, regardless of whether they arise before or after the filing of the divorce petition. Therefore, the trial court correctly considered Husband’s post-petition conduct when deciding the motion to dismiss.
The Court further stated the fact that Husband’s adultery did not lead to the breakdown of the marriage does not bar recrimination as a defense, stating “Causation is not an element of the defense of recrimination.” The Court affirmed the trial court’s decision to dismiss the fault grounds and grant a divorce on irreconcilable differences.
The Takeaway
The conclusion of husband’s brief, artfully written by Attorney Joshua Gordon, argues: “It is not reasonable to suggest, in these times of protracted discovery and litigation, that a party to a divorce must remain celibate for the duration of the proceedings – here already longer than four years.” I happen to agree with him. Litigation can be a long and arduous process. While most divorces will settle within 6 months to 1 year, a small percentage can drag on. The longest divorce I have seen from start to finish has been 5 years. That is a long time to wait to date.
Why pursue the adultery grounds in the first place? It appears in this case that there was some significant bad blood between the parties. Husband had helped wife open her orthodontic practice and contributed financially and emotionally to that endeavor. In return, wife carried on an affair with a colleague for approximately five years. Wife changed the locks to the house two days after husband left. Husband may have been pursuing the emotional victory of a fault based divorce for wife’s cheating.
Husband may also have been pursuing the adultery grounds for the financial benefit. RSA 458:16-a, II provides that a court may divide property unequally when it would be appropriate and equitable to do so after considering one more of the statutory factors. One of the factors reads: “The fault of either party as specified in RSA 458:7 if said fault caused the breakdown of the marriage and: (1) Caused substantial physical or mental pain and suffering; or (2) Resulted in substantial economic loss to the marital estate or the injured party.” With the dental practices, marital home and savings and investments on the line, an uneven split make a substantial difference in the outcome."
When there even was a NH adultery law in effect:
FACT: "The New Hampshire Supreme Court still ruled that sexual intercourse does not include all types of sexual contact. The Court states that sexual intercourse is limited to sexual acts that could lead to the conception of a baby.
Accordingly, a homosexual affair does not rise to the level of adultery under New Hampshire law. (FALSE) Equally, an emotional affair does not constitute adultery for purposes of obtaining a divorce. (FALSE)
However, an emotional affair which causes significant emotional distress to the innocent spouse may result in a separate fault ground known as “conduct to injure health and reason."
FACT: In 1978 The NH Supreme Court wrote Article 73A which was voted in by both NH's politicians and NH voters. This is what was written as article 73A on the ballot in 1978.
Article 73-a (1978)
"[Art.] 73-a. [Supreme Court, Administration.] The chief justice of the supreme court shall be the administrative head of all the courts. He shall, with the concurrence of a majority of the supreme court justices, make rules governing the administration of all courts in the state and the practice and procedure to be followed in all such courts."
"[Art.] 73-a. [Supreme Court, Administration.] The chief justice of the supreme court shall be the administrative head of all the courts. He shall, with the concurrence of a majority of the supreme court justices, make rules governing the administration of all courts in the state and the practice and procedure to be followed in all such courts."
However, this is what mysteriously appears on the books to this day in the year of 2018, and is strongly still enforced by all NH justices. As you will see, it suddenly appears with 1 additional sentence added at the end of the paragraph that was never seen nor voted on because it was never on the ballot.
Article 73-a (1978)
"[Art.] 73-a. [Supreme Court, Administration.] The chief justice of the supreme court shall be the administrative head of all the courts. He shall, with the concurrence of a majority of the supreme court justices, make rules governing the administration of all courts in the state and the practice and procedure to be followed in all such courts. The rules so promulgated shall have the force and effect of law."
"[Art.] 73-a. [Supreme Court, Administration.] The chief justice of the supreme court shall be the administrative head of all the courts. He shall, with the concurrence of a majority of the supreme court justices, make rules governing the administration of all courts in the state and the practice and procedure to be followed in all such courts. The rules so promulgated shall have the force and effect of law."
No NH Supreme Court rules have ever been voted on nor passed by legislators, that "shall have the force and effect of law", let alone was actually signed in as a law by a NH governor.
FACT: And above all, we cannot leave out the NH Judicial Conduct Committee for clearly aiding and being one of the main causes to the state's entire mess.
FACT: Congress has impeached and removed only a total of seven judges in American history of the federal judiciary. But the one and only very first chosen judge to actually go was only once again, from one little New England state called New Hampshire. When John Pickering, a NH district court judge was convicted 214 years ago in 1804.
And according to information from the federal judiciary records themselves, he was removed on charges, even 214 years ago, For mental instability and for being a drunk on the bench
In over 2 centuries, clearly a hell of allot has never changed, nor ever will, much in the state of NH.
Since I can clearly see the state's demise with a brain injury only inflicted by government alone, than can somebody please explain what the hell the NH government's excuse is now?
I have to give the NH government CUDOS because they were actually right when they FINALLY SAID, "NH HAS NEVER BEEN BETTER!"
BECAUSE THE REAL TRUTH IS THAT IT TRUELY WILL NEVER GET ANY BETTER THAN THIS!
No comments:
Post a Comment