#

Lawyers for Associate Supreme Court Justice Anna Barbara Hantz-Marconi say the state’s key witness, former Gov. Chris Sununu, doesn’t think she committed any crime.

Hantz-Marconi is charged with felonies for allegedly trying to get Sununu to end the criminal investigation targeting her husband, Ports Director Geno Marconi, during a June 6 meeting in Sununu’s office. 

But in a bombshell filing made public Monday night, Hantz-Marconi’s lawyers say new evidence demands the criminal charges against the sitting justice be dismissed. According to the transcripts filed with Hantz-Marconi’s motion, Sununu told investigators she never tried to get him to interfere in the criminal investigation.

“No, there was no ask, there was nothing, ‘Governor, I wish you could do this,’ or there was nothing like that,” Sununu said according to the transcript. “She was expressing frustration. Clearly not asking me to do anything.”

Defense lawyers Richard Guerriero and Jonathan Kotlier filed the transcripts Friday in Merrimack Superior Court as part of their effort to have the charges dismissed. The attorneys previously filed a motion to dismiss the charges for lack of a crime, to which the state objected. However, the state provided the transcripts to the defense before a decision on the dismissal was made. Guerriero and Kotlier say the state has essentially now proven there was no crime.

“[N]ow that discovery has been produced, it is clear that the defense was exactly right to ask the court to dismiss the indictments because they do not state any crime and because there is nothing in discovery which would inform a bill of particulars or an amended indictment such that the state could allege a crime,” Guerriero and Kotlier wrote.

Hantz-Marconi is currently on leave from the Supreme Court and has agreed to have her law license suspended pending the outcome of the criminal case. She maintains she never crossed any legal or ethical lines when talking to Sununu, an assertion seemingly backed by Sununu’s own words.

“I, I didn’t get the sense that, I didn’t get the sense that anything was illegal about the conversation,” Sununu told investigators. “No, I mean about halfway through the conversation I kept waiting, is she gonna ask me for something, or for something, or to do something, like and even imply that I should, ‘Governor, you need to dah, dah, dah,’ no, never came. So there’s technically no ask of me.”

Present at the June 6 meeting with Sununu and Hantz-Marconi was Rudy Ogden, Sununu’s then-legal counsel. Ogden also told investigators that the judge never asked Sununu to get involved in her husband’s investigation.

“[T]hat’s why I say in terms of her not asking for anything, it – it never was, it never went more than saying this needs to end quickly…Like it was never, ‘it needs to end quickly, and geez, if you talk to them, you should tell them that, or this needs to end quickly, and I think you can do that.’ It was never anything like that,” Ogden told investigators.

Geno Marconi was placed on leave from his position as Ports Director in April while the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office launched an investigation. That pending investigation forced Hantz-Marconi to recuse herself from hearing cases involving the Department of Justice, a significant part of the caseload for the Supreme Court.

Her frustration at sitting out 20 to 25 percent of the cases led her to speak to Sununu, according to statements filed in court. Hantz-Marconi has previously disclosed she first cleared the potential ethical problems of the meeting with Chief Justice Gordon MacDonald, who told her she had a right to talk to the governor about her concerns.

She is also accused of trying to get Pease Development Authority Chair Steven Duprey to intervene in her husband’s suspension, an accusation Duprey denied when he spoke to investigators, according to the Friday filing.

“According to Duprey, Justice Hantz Marconi ‘was calling, obviously, because I’m a friend.’”

Duprey told the investigators Hantz-Marconi understood he had no say in the investigation, and she never asked him to get involved. Instead she wanted to vent about the difficulties she was facing as a result of her husband’s legal troubles, Duprey said. 

“I think she was very appropriate in not trying to cross the line,” Duprey said.

Geno Marconi was indicted last October along with Brad Cook, the chairman of the Division of Ports and Harbors Advisory Council and a longtime fishing boat captain. They are accused of crimes involving leaking information about an unnamed victim to further an unstated motive.

Marconi illegally provided Cook with the confidential driving records of another person, known in the indictments as N.L., according to the indictments, and believed to be PDA Vice Chair Neil Levesque. 

Marconi also is alleged to have deleted a voicemail in order to hinder any investigation, the indictments state. Cook, for his part, is accused of lying to the grand jury when questioned about N.L.’s driving records.

In a statement, Attorney General John Formella’s office defended the decision to charge Hantz Marconi.

“The Merrimack County Grand Jury heard all of the evidence in this case and determined that there was probable cause to charge the defendant with the crimes for which she was indicted. This case will continue to proceed as required by New Hampshire law, and the defendant will be entitled to the same due process as any other defendant – no more, no less. We will try this case in court based on all of the evidence collected and not in the media using just a portion of that evidence.”

New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella may owe his career to Gov. Chris Sununu, but that doesn’t stop him from prosecuting Associate Supreme Court Justice Anna Barbara Hantz Marconi, according to a ruling released Wednesday.

Merrimack Superior Court Judge Martin Honigberg denied Hantz Marconi’s motion to remove Formella from the case and to dismiss all the charges against her, saying she hasn’t shown evidence that Formella’s conflict of interest is anything other than speculative.

“Even assuming AG Formella owes much of his legal career to Gov.  Sununu, the Court is not convinced that such a history requires disqualification without a factual basis to support a showing that AG Formella has been or will be unable to perform his statutorily mandated duty to remain impartial given his personal relationship with the governor,” Honigberg wrote.

Richard Guerriero, one of Hantz Marconi’s lawyers along with Jonathan Motlier and Oliver Bloom, said they may appeal Honigberg’s ruling. 

“We respectfully disagree with the judge’s decision and we may appeal it at some point. However, this was a preliminary issue arising in the earliest stages of the case. Rest assured, we will continue to fight the attorney general’s accusations on every lawful basis until Justice Hantz Marconi is vindicated,” Guerriero said in a statement.

Hantz Marconi is accused of trying to intervene with Sununu and Pease Development Authority Board Chair Steve Duprey on behalf of her husband, Ports Director Geno Marconi, who is currently under criminal investigation. Marconi is charged with releasing private driver records and destroying evidence in his separate case.

Formella has long been associated with Sununu, working as his private attorney before Sununu ran for governor, serving on his transition team, and later as his counsel in office. Unlike most states where attorneys general are elected by the public, New Hampshire’s is nominated by the governor.

Hantz Marconi’s lawyers argued to the court that Formella’s relationship with Sununu, and Sununu’s role as a key witness in the criminal case against Hantz Marconi, present a disqualifying conflict. They wanted a special prosecutor appointed and the criminal indictments thrown out, since Hantz Marconi claims a potentially biased prosecution team presented evidence to the grand jury. 

But Sununu said during press questions following Wednesday’s Executive Council meeting that Formella goes to the “nth degree” to make sure politics stay out of prosecutions. He also pushed back on an NHPR report showing he was at an April meeting with Formella, Duprey, and other members of the PDA board before Geno Marconi was suspended and the criminal investigation started. Sununu had previously claimed he knew nothing about the case.

“I think that article was complete garbage. I meet with the attorney general all the time. The fact that I had a meeting with the attorney general, (that) it somehow implies that there was something, some other part of the discussion that wasn’t being disclosed, is complete nonsense and awful reporting by (NHPR’s Todd Bookman). It was completely unnecessary and inappropriate,” Sununu said. 

He also made it clear there are two separate cases — Geno Marconi and questions about his actions at Pease, and Hantz Marconi and her alleged actions on her husband’s behalf.

“Justice Marconi is very different from the Geno issue, which is what this (story) was about. I know I’ve never talked to an investigator about that,” Sununu said.

“Put it this way, the attorney general has never questioned me,” he added.

Geno Marconi clashed with the Pease Development Board over a proposed Rye Harbor development that Sununu backed. While the board and Sununu supported spending $1 million in federal money on a raised shopping area at the harbor, Marconi and his co-defendant Brad Cook opposed the plan. The PDA backed off the plan in September following push back from the community. 

Geno Marconi is accused of leaking private information of an individual known as N.L. in the indictments. It’s believed that N.L. is Neil Levesque, PDA vice chair and the executive director of the New Hampshire Institute for Politics at Saint Anselm College.

Levesque was at the April meeting with Formella, Sununu, and the rest of the board.

Soon after Geno Marconi was placed on leave, Hantz Marconi was forced to recuse herself from Supreme Court cases involving the Department of Justice. Frustrated with sitting out important decisions, Hantz Marconi scheduled a meeting with Sununu to discuss the issue, according to court records.

Before she met with Sununu, Hantz Marconi discussed the matter with Chief Justice Gordan MacDonald, who was the attorney general before Formella. MacDonald reportedly told Hantz Marconi there would be nothing illegal or inappropriate in talking to Sununu.

“I think you can do that—You are a constituent and have concerns,” MacDonald told her, according to court records.

The person accusing New Hampshire Supreme Court Justice Anna Barbara Hantz Marconi of potential lawbreaking is Gov. Chris Sununu.

The person prosecuting her alleged wrongdoing, Attorney General John Formella, works for Sununu.

And that, Hantz Marconi’s lawyers argue, is a conflict of interest. So they’re asking Merrimack Superior Court Judge Martin Honigberg to throw out the case as a result.

Prosecutors from the Attorney General’s Office say it’s just her legal team’s attempt to grab a get-out-of-free card.

It’s now up to Merrimack Superior Court Judge Martin Honigberg to decide who’s right.

Hantz Marconi is accused of illegally trying to influence Sununu to intervene in the criminal investigation involving her husband, Ports Director Geno Marconi, during a June meeting. Geno Marconi was indicted three months later on charges he leaked confidential driver’s license records and destroyed evidence.

In Merrimack Superior Court in Concord on Monday, Hantz Marconi’s lawyer, Richard Guerriero, said Formella cannot fairly prosecute the case due to his personal and professional relationship with Sununu. Formella represented Sununu in private practice, worked on Sununu’s original transition team after the 2016 election, served as the governor’s counsel, and now owes his current position as attorney general to Sununu. 

“Every accused person is entitled to a prosecutor who is impartial,” Guerriero said. “I don’t think we can ignore the fact Attorney General Formella has a close relationship with this one very powerful public official.”

Formella is supposed to represent every New Hampshire citizen as attorney general, but he can’t do that fairly given his previous role as Sununu’s attorney and his attorney general duties that require he represent the governor in civil matters.

The case has highlighted a problem that comes from a system where the attorney general is selected by the state’s chief executive. In 43 states and the District of Columbia, the top cop is elected by the voters. Only four other states follow the New Hampshire model.

“A prosecutor cannot serve two masters,” Guerriero said. “He can’t be loyal to his client, and at the same time fairly assess the merits of a possible case against an accused person.”

Assistant Attorney General Joe Fincham countered that the alleged conflict of interest Guerriero is claiming is nothing more than an attempt to derail any criminal charges against Hantz Marconi.

“The defense is asking for immunity. If you commit a crime in front of the governor … you are immune from prosecution in the state of New Hampshire,” Fincham said. “This alleged conflict means no one can prosecute this defendant … which is an absurd result.”

But Guerriero said prosecutors are trying to blame him when they knew for months Formella’s conflict is a live legal issue in the case. He spoke to them before the case against Hantz Marconi was brought to a grand jury, urging them to appoint a special prosecutor. Short of hiring an outside prosecutor, Guerriero said they could have taken steps to remove Formella from the prosecution and shield him from the case to protect Hantz Marconi’s rights and avoid the conflict. But that did not happen.

“This could have been different,” Guerriero said. “But they plowed ahead and now we’re here three months later.”

Guerriero wants the charges dismissed and have the state start over with a new, independent prosecutor. Because grand juries only consider evidence presented by a prosecutor, without any argument from a defense attorney, it’s essential the prosecutor be absolutely fair and impartial, Guerriero said.

“The only protection we have at the grand jury is if the prosecutor is impartial,” Guerriero said.

For his part, Honigberg seemed skeptical of Guerriero’s argument Formella is conflicted due to his role as civil litigator for Sununu and the rest of the executive branch. The judge remarked every attorney general represents every governor in civil matters while also prosecuting every criminal case. 

But things get murky when it comes to the matter of Formella’s prior relationship with Sununu.

Attorney-client ethics rules mean Formella is bound not to disclose information he learned about Sununu in private practice and as the governor’s counsel, even if it is exculpatory for Hantz Marconi, Honigberg noted. 

Guerriero, speaking hypothetically to the judge, suggested that if Formella knew something about Sununu’s statements or actions regarding the Pease Development Authority (PDA).

“Suppose there was some interest of Sununu’s in the Pease Development Authority that [Formella] discussed with Sununu. It’s knows [Sununu’s] taken action at Pease. Suppose something the governor said about Pease becomes an issue, contrary to what he’s saying now,” Guerriero said.

Geno Marconi clashed with the Pease Development Board over a proposed Rye Harbor development. While the board and Sununu supported spending $1 million in federal money on a raised shopping area at the harbor, Marconi and his co-defendant Brad Cook opposed the plan. The PDA backed off the plan in September following a push back from the community. Geno Marconi is accused of leaking private information of an individual known as N.L. in the indictments. It’s believed that N.L. is Neil Levesque, PDA vice chair and the executive director of the New Hampshire Institute for Politics at Saint Anselm College. 

Attorney General John Formella and his entire office need to be dismissed from Associate Supreme Court Justice Anna Barbara Hantz Marconi’s criminal case due to serious conflicts of interest, according to her attorney Richard Guerriero.

“Attorney General Formella and his subordinate attorneys should not have been handling this matter before the grand jury and should not be prosecuting it now,” Guerriero wrote in a motion filed Thursday.

Ultimately, Guerriero wants all of the charges dismissed. Short of that, he wants Formella and his office removed from the case entirely. The concern Guerriero raises is that Formella not only has a long-standing personal and professional relationship with Gov. Chris Sununu, but he considers himself to be the chief executive’s lawyer in his role as attorney general.

Hantz Marconi is charged with felonies for allegedly trying to pressure Sununu to drop the criminal investigation into her husband, New Hampshire Ports Director Geno Marconi. That makes Sununu, Formella’s friend and client, the state’s key witness in the alleged crimes. 

Before becoming attorney general, Formella was a private attorney working for Sununu and his family who worked on the campaign for governor, and then became Sununu’s legal counsel in office. In his role as attorney general, Formella told NHJournal during a podcast interview that he considers himself Sununu’s attorney. 

“As far as the relationship with the governor, for every attorney general, the governor is probably their most important client. So, it’s an attorney-client relationship,” Formella said. 

The attorney general is the state’s chief prosecutor as well as the governor’s attorney in civil matters, according to memos from the Department of Justice.

Formella is tasked with making decisions on criminal prosecutions handled by his office, and he is in charge of directing his staff who handle the day-to-day work. With Hantz Marconi’s case, the prosecution is being handled by the Public Integrity Unit (PIU), which was created by order of Sununu in 2020 and not the legislature. Guerriero wrote that means the PIU can be subject to Sununu’s wishes, and not the work of the public.

“As a result of how it was created, Gov. Sununu has unique power over the PIU. Sununu determines what funding to recommend to the legislature for the PIU. Furthermore, he has the power to unilaterally dissolve the unit by executive order,” Guerriero wrote.

Because of that lack of impartiality, all of the indictments need to be dismissed, Guerriero wrote. The charges were handed up by a grand jury two weeks ago, but because of Formella and his office’s conflict of interest, Guerriero argues the grand jury’s findings should be discounted. Grand jury proceedings happen in secret, and there is no one representing the accused. Instead, prosecutors alone present evidence for the jurors to consider.

“If there is any chance a grand jury will make a fair decision about whether to indict a person, rather than simply signing off on the indictments presented to them, it depends on the impartiality of the prosecutors,” Guerriero wrote. “The prosecutors here are not impartial.”

Four Supreme Court justices, including Chief Justice Gordon MacDonald, have recused themselves from the case. MacDonald, like Sununu, is a witness in the case as he reportedly told Hantz Marconi she had a right to talk about her husband’s investigation with the governor before the June meeting at the heart of the matter.

“I think you can do that. You are a constituent and have concerns,” MacDonald reportedly said.

Hantz Marconi then made an appointment with Sununu through official channels to speak with him on June 6 in his office. Sununu’s current legal counsel, Rudolph Ogden attended the meeting, which was on Sununu’s official calendar.

“The meeting was open and documented in multiple ways — not exactly the usual route to corruption,” Guerriero wrote.

Hantz Marconi and Gereero maintain there was no crime committed, and the state has not alleged any actual criminal acts.

Hantz Marconi allegedly told Sununu there was no merit to any of the allegations against her husband and the case “needed to wrap up quickly because she was rescued from important cases pending or imminently pending before the New Hampshire Supreme Court,” the indictments state.

No threat was made, nor was there any improper request, Guerriero claims. Prosecutors have not yet made their evidence available to the defense, so it is not clear who reported Hantz Marconi to Formella. Earlier this week, a panel of substitute judges sitting for the recused Supreme Court ordered Hantz Marconi’s law license suspended based on the fact she’s been charged with a felony.

Geno Marconi has been on leave from his job directing the ports since April of this year while the criminal investigation into his alleged acts proceeded. Geno Marconi and Bradley Cook, the chairman of the Division of Ports and Harbors Advisory Council and a longtime fishing boat captain, were both indicted the same week as Hantz Marconi. Geno Marconi is accused of giving confidential driving records of an unnamed person to Cook, though the official charges give very little detail about the alleged crime. 

Hantz Marconi is facing charges of Attempt to Commit Improper Influence, Criminal Solicitation of Improper Influence, Official Oppression, Criminal  Solicitation of Official Oppression, Obstructing Government Administration, and Criminal Solicitation of Misuse of Position. Geno Marconi is indicted on felony charges of Tampering with Witnesses and Informants and Falsifying Physical Evidence. He’s also charged with four class A misdemeanors – two counts of Driver Privacy Act Violations and two counts of Obstructing Government Administration.

New Hampshire Ports Director Geno Marconi is formally facing criminal charges a day after his wife, Associate Supreme Court Justice Anna Barbara Hantz Marconi, was indicted for interfering in her husband’s criminal investigation.

A grand jury indicted Marconi on two class B felonies – Tampering with Witnesses and Informants and Falsifying Physical Evidence. He’s also charged with four class A misdemeanors – two counts of Driver Privacy Act Violations and two counts of Obstructing Government Administration.

Also charged on Thursday: Bradley Cook, chairman of the Division of Ports and Harbors Advisory Council and a longtime fishing boat captain. Cook was indicted on one class B felony charge for Perjury as well as two counts of class A misdemeanor False Swearing.

Marconi illegally provided Cook with the confidential driving records of another person, known in the indictments as N.L., according to the indictments. Marconi is also alleged to have deleted a voice mail in order to hinder any investigation, the indictments state. Cook is accused of lying to the grand jury when questioned about N.L.’s driving records.

The purpose of the alleged lying and leaking of confidential records by two public officials is not yet clear. Cook spoke to the press before he was called to testify before the grand jury in September. Cook blamed the whole drama on Gov. Chris Sununu and a development plan for Rye Harbor that both Cook and Marconi opposed.

“I would say all of this is because Geno would not bend a knee to Chris Sununu, wouldn’t do what the governor wanted, and instead supports what is right and fair for other people,” Cook told InDepthNH.

Cook did not respond to a request for comment on Thursday. Marconi’s attorneys also did not respond.

Granite State political circles have been buzzing about the Marconis since Geno was placed on leave from his Ports job in April without explanation. That was followed by the stunning news that Justice Hantz Marconi was put on 90-day administrative leave in July, also without an explanation.

It now appears punitive action was taken after she allegedly approached Sununu in a private meeting. Hantz Marconi had been recusing herself from Supreme Court cases involving the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office for months. The Supreme Court issued a new order Thursday extending Hantz Marconi’s leave indefinitely as she deals with the criminal charges. 

Hantz Marconi, 68, was appointed to the Supreme Court in 2017 after being nominated by Sununu. She is close to the mandatory retirement age of 70 for New Hampshire judges. Her term ends in February 2026.

Cook and Marconi both opposed the Pease Development Authority’s (PDA) $1 million plan to develop a raised platform at Rye Harbor for retail shops and restaurants. Though it had backing from the PDA and Sununu, the plan was amid local opposition shelved in August.

Cook and Marconi are due in Rockingham Superior Court on Nov. 27 for arraignment. Hantz Marconi is due for her arraignment in Merrimack Superior Court on Nov. 21. She’s accused of trying to pressure Sununu to drop the investigation, and she is alleged to have sought private information from PDA Chair Steve Duprey. 

Republicans who spoke to NHJournal on background are split on the matter. Many are friends of Justice Hantz Marconi and find it hard to believe she would intentionally break the law, even on behalf of her husband. Others complain that, once she knew the situation she was in, she should have resigned and allowed another justice to be appointed. And there is widespread criticism of how Formella is handling Justice Hantz Marconi’s part in the scandal.

“If he has enough to charge her, then he should have enough to get her to resign and avoid this mess,” one Republican activist told NHJournal.

Another Republican with close ties to Pease said the information blackout is a problem.

“It’s the biggest mystery out there. Somebody should let us know what the hell is going on. This has been going on forever.”

This isn’t the first time in recent memory a New Hampshire Supreme Court Justice has been in trouble. In 2000, Associate Justice Stephen Thayer’s divorce wound up before the state Supreme Court, forcing two of his fellow members to recuse themselves. That resulted in Chief Justice David Brock appointing two different judges to a panel overseeing the Thayer divorce. 

In the mess that ensued, Thayer was forced to resign to avoid criminal charges and Brock was impeached. He was acquitted in the Senate.

New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella continues his crusade to clean up social media, signing on to a letter this week calling for new health warning labels on social media apps.

“New Hampshire children and their families deserve to know about the harms that social media platforms can cause. Congress should require these platforms to clearly tell their users about those harms as one step to help protect kids from the predatory practices of social media,” Formella said.

Formella and a bipartisan coalition of 41 other attorneys general sent the letter to Washington D.C. lawmakers pushing them to pass a law requiring a U.S. Surgeon General warning on all algorithm-driven social media platforms. The letter comes amidst growing scrutiny of social media companies for their role in generational harm to young people’s mental health.

The attorneys general say in their letter that more action is necessary because “social media platforms have demonstrated an unwillingness to fix the problem on their own.”

They cited growing bodies of research that link young people’s use of these platforms to psychological harm, including depression, anxiety, and even suicidal thoughts in kids and teens. They also note how platforms feature irresistible algorithmic recommendations, infinite scrolling, and a constant stream of notifications designed to keep kids relentlessly engaged on the platforms, even at the expense of taking breaks, engaging in other activities, or sleeping.

In June 2023, the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office solicited stories from parents, teachers, and coaches about the negative impacts of social media. At the same time, Gov. Chris Sununu issued an executive order for state agencies to develop curricula addressing these harms, highlighted by the GoPlayNH initiative.

Around that same time, U. S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy published an op ed in The New York Times supporting the idea of warning labels for social media.

“It is time to require a surgeon general’s warning label on social media platforms, stating that social media is associated with significant mental health harms for adolescents,” Murthy wrote.

“The moral test of any society is how well it protects its children. Now is the time to summon the will to act. Our children’s well-being is at stake.”

In October 2023, the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office filed a lawsuit against Meta alongside 44 other states. In June of this year, New Hampshire became one of the first states in the country to file a lawsuit against TikTok to stop the harmful impacts that the platform has on kids.

“While our investigation into social media companies is ongoing, our findings confirm that these companies have exploited children’s vulnerabilities and misled those responsible for their safety,” Formella said. “We remain committed to holding these companies accountable and ensuring a safer online environment for our children.”

Prosecutors involved in the Andy Sanborn criminal probe may have copies of potentially sensitive attorney-client communications.

Sanborn, a former Republican state senator, is at the center of a legal firestorm that began when New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella accused him of COVID-19 fraud last year. 

Sanborn filed a lawsuit in Merrimack Superior Court against Formella’s office this summer, but the pleadings in the case are almost entirely under seal. However, a recent court order from Judge John Kissinger sheds light on at least one aspect of the dispute.

Kissinger ordered prosecutors to explain how documents from Sanborn’s lawyers considered legally privileged ended up with the state’s investigative team. Among other steps Kissinger ordered, he wants the state to provide to the court “factual affidavits on issues related to the past handling of seized documents and materials (including electronically stored information), as well as how clearly privileged documents may have been missed or not properly screened by the taint team,” Kissinger wrote in an Aug. 23 order.

Interior of Andy Sanborn’s Concord Casino visible from locked entrance.

Kissinger’s order indicated there are close to 6,700 documents as part of the discovery in the ongoing investigation thus far. Some of them in a commercial legal database program called Everlaw. Everlaw gives attorneys and law firms the ability to control and share information in large cases, and is frequently used to share discovery.

The order states that a taint team was handling discovery documents before handing them to prosecutors in the investigation. Prosecutorial taint teams are typically prosecutors not connected to the case that is under investigation. The taint team is supposed to read through and examine discovery, removing information considered privileged before giving the rest to the investigating team, or case team.  

Prosecutors have been instructed to provide Kissinger an audit of the state’s activity in the Sanborn Everlaw documents, showing which prosecutor viewed or downloaded any particular document. Sanborn’s legal team is under orders to provide Kissinger legal arguments for why the information should be privileged. 

Communication between lawyers and clients is privileged, meaning it does not have to be disclosed to police or prosecutors. That protection extends to evidence that can be obtained through discovery requests, subpoenas, and even in what is said in sworn depositions. Clients may waive the privilege protection if they choose.

After accusing Sanborn of making false statements in filing for business COVID relief funds, and then spending the part of the money on luxury sports cars, Formella announced his office would instigate a criminal investigation into Sanborn and his wife, state Rep. Laurie Sanborn (R-Bedford.) Both Andy and Laurie Sanborn are owners of Win Win Win LLC/Concord Casino, the business that received $844,000 in COVID money.

Despite the public and damning allegations Formella made last year, neither Sanborn has yet been charged with a crime. Andy Sanborn’s New Hampshire Gaming License was suspended in December after an administrative hearing on Formella’s allegations.

Administrative Law hearing officer Michael King found Sanborn engaged in deception when he applied for the COVID loans, and that Sanborn spent the money inappropriately, including the purchase of a Porsche and a Ferrari. 

“The misrepresentations on the EIDL [Economic Injury Disaster Loan] application and the subsequent use of the proceeds for expenditures not allowed by that loan constitute ‘conduct by the licensee that undermines the public confidence in charitable gaming,’” King wrote in his order.

In addition to the sports cars, Sanborn allegedly paid himself $240,000 with the COVID funds by raising his own rent.

Sanborn owns the Casino through his Win Win Win LLC and he owns the Main Street building where his Concord Casino is located through an entity called The Best Revenge LLC. 

The original lease agreement between Win Win Win and The Best Revenge LLC was for $500 a month. But records showed Sanborn was making payments to himself ranging from $10,000 to $30,000 a month for rent. 

Sanborn claimed the 40-fold rent increase was due to his casino floor space increasing six and a half percent. While it was alleged Sanborn was diverting COVID money to himself through rent, King found Sanborn’s high rental payments to himself started in 2021 before he received any COVID cash.

Sanborn started making payments in November 2021, ranging from $5,000 to $22,000. Those payments were seen as “wildly excessive” by the state.

Sanborn has until the end of the month under King’s order to sell his Concord Casino or face having the license revoked. Without a license, Sanborn has no casino business to sell. 

He’s accused of COVID fraud and under orders to sell his Concord Casino. But former state Sen. Andy Sanborn just raised the bet.

Sanborn filed a new civil lawsuit against New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella in Merrimack Superior Court in Concord on July 30. Sanborn and his legal team are keeping their cards close to their vests. The complaint, as well as nearly all of the filings in the case, are sealed.

Mark Knights, one of Sanborn’s lawyers, declined to comment when contacted by NHJournal. The New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office did not respond to a request for comment as well.

What is known about the case from the publicly available information is that Sanborn is seeking an injunction of some kind, presumably to block the state from taking a particular action. Additionally, the Attorney General’s Office has prosecutors Dan Jimenez, David Lovejoy, and Alex Kellerman assigned to the case. Jimenez is part of the Public Integrity Unit which investigates wrongdoing by public officials. Lovejoy is part of the Criminal Justice Bureau. Kellerman is a former corporate attorney now working for the attorney general.

Sanborn’s legal drama began a year ago when Formella publicly accused Sanborn and his wife, state Rep. Laurie Sanborn (R-Bedford), of COVID relief fraud. According to Formella, the couple took $844,000 in COVID relief payments for their Concord Casino and used the money to pay themselves via rent and buy themselves sports cars.

The Sanborns deny wrongdoing and have yet to be charged with a crime. However, the state pushed to take away the Concord Casino gambling license based on the alleged fraud. In December 2023, Administrative Law hearing officer Michael King found Sanborn engaged in deception when he applied for the COVID loans and that Sanborn spent the money inappropriately.

“The misrepresentations on the EIDL [Economic Injury Disaster Loan] application and the subsequent use of the proceeds for expenditures not allowed by that loan constitute ‘conduct by the licensee that undermines the public confidence in charitable gaming,’” King wrote in his order.

Aside from using the money to buy a Porsche and a Ferrari, Sanborn allegedly paid himself $240,000 with the COVID funds by raising his own rent.

Sanborn owns the Casino through his Win Win Win LLC and he owns the Main Street building where his Concord Casino is located through an entity called The Best Revenge LLC. 

The original lease agreement between Win Win Win and The Best Revenge LLC was for $500 a month. But records showed Sanborn was making payments to himself ranging from $10,000 to $30,000 a month for rent. 

Sanborn claimed the 40-fold rent increase was due to his casino floor space increasing six and a half percent. While it was alleged Sanborn was diverting COVID money to himself through rent, King found Sanborn’s high rental payments to himself started in 2021 before he received any COVID cash.

Sanborn started making payments in November 2021, ranging from $5,000 to $22,000. Those payments were seen as “wildly excessive” by the state.

Sanborn’s casino license was suspended and he was given six months to sell his business. That deadline has been pushed to the end of September as Sanborn continues to fight with the Attorney General’s Office. 

The state has been trying to exert influence over the sale, according to NH Bulletin reporting, while potential buyers have been scared off by the potential criminal charges. Sanborn’s lawyers have accused the state of trying to stop any sale out of spite. 

If Sanborn is unable to sell his business by the Sept. 30 deadline, his gaming license will expire, and he would not have a casino business to sell.

Andy Sanborn, who ran a failed bid for the GOP nomination in the First Congressional District in 2018, has a troubled past in politics. He was investigated for alleged sexual harassment of a Senate intern in 2013, though he maintains it was a misunderstanding about a joke.

When Sanborn first got his casino license in 2018, the harassment incident came back. That time he was investigated for allegedly bribing one of the witnesses. He was cleared of the bribery accusation, but the New Hampshire Lottery Commission was concerned about his suitability to hold a license. According to Commission records, one of the 2018 witnesses told investigators she was warned not to be alone with Sanborn when she started her job in the State House.

Disgraced Democrat Jeff Woodburn is heading to jail after the New Hampshire Supreme Court rejected the appeal of his criminal mischief convictions.

The court released its decision Tuesday ruling against Woodburn’s quest for a new trial on those convictions, leaving the former state senator to serve the two 30-day sentences connected to the domestic violence case that ended his career.

“Today, the New Hampshire Supreme Court denied Jeffrey Woodburn’s motion for a new trial, leaving in place his sentence of 30 days of incarceration for his prior convictions,” New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella said in a statement. “After a lengthy and challenging legal process, this decision is consistent with our steadfast commitment to justice and our ongoing support for victims of domestic violence. We remain dedicated to upholding the law and advocating for those affected by such crimes.”

Woodburn is still free for now and his attorney, Mark Sisti, is still fighting. Sisti told NHJournal he plans to oppose any state motion to impose the sentence.

“We will be stridently objecting to any incarceration,” Sisti said.

All of the charges stemming from Woodburn’s alleged assaultive conduct against the woman were either dismisses by the state, or a jury, Sisti said. A 30-day jail sentence for criminal mischief is out of proportion to the crime, Sisti noted, especially considering Woodburn has been free on bail for five years without incident.

Woodburn isn’t the only former Democratic state legislator facing jail time. Former Nashua state Rep. Stacie Marie Laughton, 39, of Nashua, N.H., is facing federal charges of sexual exploitation of children and aiding and abetting, and state charges of child pornography. Laughton was elected three times as a Nashua Democrat, always with the endorsement of the state Democratic Party.

The legal drama surrounding Woodburn’s case has been dragging out since 2018, when the former Senate Minority Leader was first arrested for allegedly abusing his then girlfriend. He was convicted on counts of domestic violence, simple assault, and criminal mischief after his first trial in 2021, but a later Supreme Court ruling overturned the domestic violence and simple assault charges, sending them back for a second trial.

That second trial ended with a hung jury earlier this year, and Formella opted to drop the case rather than go for a third trial. All the time, Woodburn has been trying to avoid jail and get the criminal mischief counts overturned.

Woodburn wanted a new trial on the two convictions, claiming his prior defense attorney did not provide effective counsel during the 2021 trial. According to Woodburn’s appeal, his first lawyer should have severed the charges and had the criminal mischief counts before a separate jury. Having all of the counts at one trial resulted in the jury being biased against him, according to the appeal.

But the justices ruled Woodburn failed to show his original lawyer performed in a substandard way that would trigger overturning the convictions. The justices also found that the 2021 jury found Woodburn not guilty on several counts, and therefore he could not show a particular bias. 

“The strength of the evidence related to the criminal mischief charges, in combination with the jury’s multiple not guilty findings as to other related charges, indicate that it was the direct evidence of the underlying conduct, rather than any extraneous relationship information that may have been rendered admissible due to the joinder of multiple charges, that prompted the jury’s guilty findings on the criminal mischief charges,” the justices wrote. 

Amanda Grady Sexton, director of public affairs for the New Hampshire Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence, said Tuesday’s decision shows Woodburn cannot escape the convictions.

“This is a small measure of accountability for an offender who tried to avoid it at all costs. No one should think they are above the law,” Grady Sexton said. 

Woodburn lost political support almost immediately after he was charged in 2018, with Democratic Party leaders calling on him to step aside. Instead, Woodburn ran and won a primary to retain his seat in the Senate. He then lost the general election to a political unknown. Woodburn has been out of politics since.

Court records show Woodburn was planning a run for governor before he was arrested, and that he was grooming the woman to a “first lady.”

The state’s brief filed in the appeal paints a picture of Woodburn as a controlling man with a drinking problem who made his new girlfriend fear for her safety months before he was charged in 2018. According to the brief, the woman, 17 years his junior, worked as the Democratic Party chair for Coos County and helped get Woodburn elected. He started pursuing a romantic relationship with her in 2015 as his marriage was falling apart, according to the filing.

Soon after they got engaged in 2017, the state says, Woodburn began publicizing their relationship to help his political career.

“[Woodburn] posted pictures on social media and told the victim that this was ‘very important to him,’ because dating her would help him with his career,” the filing states. “Although he liked the way that the victim could ‘approach a stranger with a Bernie sticker,’ he also told her that she should ‘behave like a first lady.’ He told her that she was not to criticize  him, ‘especially in public, because he hoped to be governor.’”

The federal court ruling that struck down New Hampshire’s anti-discrimination law is “misguided” and needs to be overturned, New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella said Wednesday.

Formella announced his office is appealing United States District Court Judge Paul Barbadoro’s May ruling that found New Hampshire’s law barring the teaching of discriminatory content in schools is too vague and, therefore, violates the constitutional rights of educators. 

 “Today’s decision to appeal this misguided ruling underscores our commitment to upholding the right of duly elected legislators to enact carefully considered policy and clarity in our state laws,” Formella said. 

The law, misleadingly labeled a “divisive concepts ban” by critics and the left-leaning press, seeks to stop teachers and other government employees from presenting discriminatory ideas as facts. Under the law,  teachers and schools:

• Cannot “teach, advocate, instruct, or train” people that one group is inherently superior or inferior to another.
• Cannot teach that people are inherently racist, sexist, etc., based on the group they’re in.
• Cannot teach that people should be discriminated against based on their group.
• Cannot teach people not to even try to treat people in other groups equally (the “race shouldn’t matter/colorblind” approach.)

As a result, school districts like Manchester, Litchfield and Laconia could no longer use Critical Race Theory-based curriculum in their classrooms. 

Barbadoro’s ruling opened the door for CRT-based lessons to return.

Barbadoro argued the attempt to prevent teachers from telling students they are racist, sexist, etc. crossed the line into viewpoint discrimination due to the vagueness of the law.

“The most obvious vagueness problem is presented by the fourth concept, which prohibits teaching that individuals of one group ‘cannot and should not attempt to treat others without regard to’ their membership in another group. As other courts have observed, this language is ‘bordering on unintelligible’ because it employs the dreaded triple negative form,” Barbadoro wrote.

The anti-discrimination law gave parents the ability to bring complaints when they believed schools and teachers were engaging in discriminatory lessons. Barbadoro’s ruling shuts down the avenue for parents, according to Formella. 

“By appealing this decision, we aim to ensure that our laws are interpreted and applied in a manner that respects both the constitution and the democratic process,” Formella said. “This case is not just about legal technicalities; it’s about safeguarding the integrity of our legislative process and ensuring clarity and stability for our educators, students, and communities across New Hampshire.”

As part of his appeal announcement on Wednesday, Formella also issued new guidelines for the state’s Human Rights Commission, Department of Education, and Department of Labor on handling any parental complaints.

The Human Rights Commission is to accept all complaints but dismiss allegations that teachers or schools violated the anti-discrimination laws. The Department of Labor is to put a halt to any pending whistleblower complaints based on retaliation against people who reported anti-discrimination. The Department of Education is instructed to put a halt on all its investigations into complaints. Any pending matters for DOE adjudication are to be stayed pending the appeal.

Frank Edelblut, New Hampshire’s Education commissioner, did not respond to a request for comment. Barbadoro cited Edelblut’s attempts to clarify the law through newspaper op-eds in his ruling, saying Edelblut only added to general teacher confusion and fear.

“The threat of arbitrary enforcement based on Edelblut’s personal views has impacted teachers even in the absence of a formal complaint,” Barbadoro wrote.