#

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.

The four remaining New Hampshire Supreme Court justices won’t hear any arguments related to Associate Supreme Court Justice Anna Barbara Hantz Marconi after they ordered themselves off the case.

“Resolving it would require us to adjudicate the conduct of a current colleague, Anna Barbara Hantz Marconi,” the justices wrote in the order.

The order comes Wednesday hours after Hantz Marconi’s legal team filed a motion to boot Chief Justice Gordon MacDonald from the case, naming him as a material witness in her alleged crime. Hantz Marconi is charged with trying to pressure Gov. Chris Sununu to stop the criminal probe into her husband, New Hampshire Ports Director Geno Marconi.

Justice Barbara Hantz Marconi listens to oral arguments during a 2023 hearing.

According to the indictments handed down last week, Hantz Marconi met with Sununu in June and tried to get him to stop the investigation into Geno Marconi. She 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 recused from important cases pending or imminently pending before the New Hampshire Supreme Court,” the indictments state.

But, according to the motion filed Wednesday, MacDonald encouraged her to talk to Sununu about her husband’s investigation, and told her it would not be illegal for her to do so.

“Justice Hantz Marconi did meet with Governor Sununu on June  6, 2024. The meeting was entirely lawful and proper. One of the key facts demonstrating that the meeting was lawful and proper is that Justice Hantz Marconi communicated with Chief Justice MacDonald prior to meeting with Governor Sununu. Justice Hantz Marconi explained to Chief Justice MacDonald that she was considering requesting a meeting with the Governor. The Chief Justice’s response was, ‘I think you can do that – You  are a constituent and have concerns.’ Justice Hantz Marconi understood this comment to confirm her view that she had the right to seek to address the Governor, just as any other citizen would have that right,” her motion states.

Supreme Court Chief Justice Gordon MacDonald

Hantz Marconi was placed on administrative leave soon after that June 6 meeting. Geno Marconi has been on leave from his job directing the ports since April of this year. Both were indicted last week.

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.

Geno Marconi is accused of giving confidential driving records of an unnamed person to Brad Cook, chairman of the Division of Ports and Harbors Advisory Council and a longtime fishing boat captain. Cook is charged with one count class B felony Perjury as well as two counts of class A misdemeanor False Swearing.

In the meantime, Hantz Marconi agreed to a suspension of her law license as the case against her is proceeding. The New Hampshire Attorney Discipline Office planned to open up a formal proceeding to get Hantz Marconi suspended, but the justice agreed to the suspension.

If she were to fight the Attorney Discipline process, Hantz Marconi’s law license case would eventually end up before the Supreme Court and MacDonald. The Supreme Court’s total recusal effects that process, as well any challenges she brings during her criminal trial in Merrimack Superior Court.

Rather than merely having MacDonald remove himself from the case, Associate Justices James Bassett, Patrick Donovan, and Melissa Countway are also stepping aside. If a full slate of alternates cannot be found, however, at least some of the justices will take their seats.

“Our recusal is conditioned upon the availability of substitute justices to participate in this case. In the event that substitute justices are not available, the ‘rule of necessity’ may compel our participation,” the order states. 

Under state law, the courts will randomly pick substitutes from a pool of retired Supreme Court and Superior Court justices. If there are not enough retired justices available, a random selection will be made from active Superior Court Justices, and then District Court justices if the need arises.

Embattled Strafford County Sheriff Mark Brave, who is already the subject of a criminal investigation for alleged theft and abuse of office, could face another investigation into his tenure.

Brave denies any wrongdoing related to the New Hampshire Attorney General’s criminal investigation, which began last month. It is the second investigation into Brave’s conduct as sheriff this year after the Strafford County Commission hired an outside firm for an inquiry in January.

Now a well-placed source tells NHJournal that members of Strafford County’s State House delegation are considering getting involved. There is an effort to organize a delegation meeting to discuss and possibly vote to begin its own investigation.

“(They are) in the process of organizing a request for a delegation meeting to discuss opening a statutorily authorized investigation into any potential misdoings by elected or employed county officials,” the source said.

Under New Hampshire law, county delegations made up of state lawmakers have the authority to investigate the conduct of county officials. Under the provisions of RSA 24:17, the delegation can create an investigative committee that can summon witnesses and have them testify under oath.

Even without the headache of multiple investigations, Brave’s leadership as Strafford County Sheriff is running into difficulties. According to his department’s most recent budget report, Brave spent nearly 60 percent of his total $3.3 million annual budget in the first six months of the fiscal year. Brave has spent close to $2 million of his total in the first six months.

That included $244,000 for overtime pay, or 94 percent of the budget, in the first half of the year alone. The department is budgeted for $260,000 annually, leaving Brave with about $15,000 for the next six months. 

Brave has also spent 84 percent, or $388,000, of his budgeted $475,000 for retirement and $1,300 of $2,000 for unemployment, using 67 percent of the budget. Those expenses point to trouble keeping staff on the job.

In recent weeks, Brave made the criminal investigation public by telling reporters it is part of an escalation on the part of Commissioners George Maglaras, Robert Watson, and Deanna Rollo. Brave accused the trio of bullying him for political reasons. Brave even accused Maglaras of calling him a “token.”

Brave is reportedly under investigation by the Attorney General’s Public Integrity Unit for taking a female employee who is not his wife on a trip to Florida using taxpayer funds. Brave denied the accusation.

“They say I am abusing the travel budget, also not true,” Brave told the Foster’s Daily Democrat. “I have $18,000 a year for travel in the budget, and I have been using it to travel to other states where the sheriff’s departments are more progressive than here, to learn how to better involve us in the community.”

Commissioners hired Municipal Resources Inc. in January, a few weeks after Brave’s wife, Jamie Brave, was arrested for DUI in Portsmouth in December. The MRI report has not been made public, though Brave has used it to attack the commissioners, saying it was evidence his fellow Democrats were out to get him.

The commissioners pushed back in recent days, accusing Brave of leaking confidential information from the MRI in an effort to mislead the public.

“We are disheartened that Sheriff Brave would choose to go on a publicity tour using parts of the MRI report to defend himself in the totally separate Attorney General criminal investigation,” the commissioners said in a letter.

Maybe he should have stayed in Florida.

House Speaker Sherman Packard is calling on New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella to investigate the possible attempted bribery of Democratic state Rep. Robin Vogt (D-Portsmouth) by left-wing activist groups.

Packard (R-Londonderry) sent Formella a letter Friday asking for an investigation into Vogt, making the case that either the progressive activists who offered Vogt a free plane ticket violated state bribery laws or Vogt did by failing to report it to authorities.

“The purpose of this letter, therefore, is to not only bring this matter to your attention for review of a potential violation of the law but also to ensure that it has been properly reported to law enforcement as required by the statute,” Packard wrote.

Formella’s spokesman, Michael Garrity, told NH Journal that the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office is looking into Packard’s allegations.

“At this time, the New Hampshire Department of Justice is reviewing a referral from the House Speaker’s office and will respond as appropriate in due course,” Garrity said.

The offer was made as a vote on the GOP’s Parents Bill of Rights approached. Vogt was vacationing in Florida on a long-planned trip. With the House nearly evenly split along partisan lines, progressive opponents of parents’ rights feared the bill could pass by as little as one vote. Left-wing activist Linds Jakows told Vogt he had no excuse to miss the session, as money was available to fly him back to New Hampshire.

“No. It is a luxury to actively choose to be in Florida for nearly a week now when there are funds to fly you to New Hampshire and back,” Jakows wrote to Vogt in a now-deleted tweet.

A free plane ticket would have been a clear violation of state law regarding gifts to legislators. The question before the attorney general is whether the offer of an illegal gift is itself against the law.

Vogt continues to reap the whirlwind from his decision to stay in Florida rather than return to Concord. Because he wouldn’t climb on a plane, his progressive allies are throwing him under the bus.

The leftist group New Hampshire Youth Movement (NHYM) revoked its endorsement of Vogt.

“This decision was not made lightly or out of spite,” NHYM’s Erika Perez wrote in a letter to House members. “NH Youth Movement is committed to having our base of young people be a huge part of decision-making, and after Rep. Vogt failed to show up to one of the most important floor votes of the year due to a vacation, our base was asking what we planned on doing to hold him accountable.”

Perez is a co-founder of Black Lives Matter Manchester and is a registered lobbyist. According to a source, Perez has links to Linds Jakows, head of 603 Equity. It was Jakows who took to Twitter in the days before the Parents Bill of Rights vote to tell Vogt that there were “funds available” to cover his travel costs. After being questioned about the legality of those funds, Jakows claimed that “community members” were crowd-funding money for Vogt’s trip.

It was unclear who was raising money for Vogt, but in announcing its decision to revoke the endorsement, NHYM acknowledged on Twitter that it had taken part in communications to bring Vogt back to New Hampshire.

“Robin, despite all of our best direct efforts, did not show up in a way that NHYM can uphold as allyship. Because of that, we are revoking his endorsement, effective immediately,” the organization’s Twitter account stated.

New Hampshire Youth Movement is a registered 501 (c) 4 non-profit. 

Ultimately, Vogt stayed on vacation, and the Parents Bill of Rights (SB 272) was “indefinitely postponed” by a vote of 195-190, meaning the topic is dead under House rules for the rest of the current two-year legislative session.

Neither Jakows, Perez, nor Vogt responded to requests for comment. 

Packard’s letter cites RSA 640:2, Bribery in Official and Political Matters, which states it is a class B felony if a person “promises, offers, or gives any pecuniary benefit to another with the purpose of influencing the other’s action, decision, opinion, recommendation, vote, nomination, or other exercise of discretion as a public servant.”

Packard’s letter also noted it is a potential felony for the public servant not to report the attempted bribe; “Being a public servant, party official, candidate for electoral office, or voter, he solicits, accepts or agrees to accept any pecuniary benefit from another knowing or believing the other’s purpose to be as described in subparagraph I(a), or fails to report to a law enforcement officer that he has been offered or promised a pecuniary benefit in violation of subparagraph I(a).”

New Hampshire House Speaker Sherm Packard (R-Londonderry) has ordered an investigation into tactics being used by House Democrats to pressure members over Thursday’s vote on parental rights legislation. Some of those tactics, including offering to pay for a member’s plane ticket for a flight from Florida, appear to violate House rules and, possibly, state law.

“We are looking into the matter, and we are concerned about the appearance of impropriety. Should there be evidence of a statutory or ethical violation, it will be referred to the appropriate enforcement authority,” Packard’s office said in a statement. 

At the center of the controversy is SB272, also known as the Parents Bill of Rights, which would force some public schools to end their current policy of refusing to answer parents’ questions about their children’s behavior regarding sex and gender.

“It says that schools and school employees cannot lie to parents,” said state Sen. Tim Lang (R-Sanbornton) when the bill passed the upper chamber in a 14-10 vote.

Now the bill is coming to the House, setting off a round of fear and loathing in Concord with Democrats offering carrots (in the form of a free plane ticket) and sticks: threatening a primary challenge if a House member supports the parents’ rights bill or fails to show up for the vote.

When Rep. Robin Vogt (D-Portsmouth) took to Twitter to say he was on a long-planned family vacation and won’t be in Concord to vote against SB272, Granite State progressives responded angrily.

“There is no one who supports a work/life balance more than me — but real allies show up,” tweeted Monica Venzke, until recently a spokesperson for the state Democratic Party. “Session ends in June. When you were elected, you knew that. These are the responsibilities you take on as a legislator; clearly, you cannot handle them.”

And progressive activist Linds Jakows told Vogt he had no excuse to miss Thursday’s session, as money is available to fly him back to New Hampshire in time to vote.

“No. It is a luxury to actively choose to be in Florida for nearly a week now when there are funds to fly you to New Hampshire and back,” Jakows wrote to Vogt in a now-deleted tweet.

Jakows is head of 603Equality, an LGBTQ nonprofit which is not registered as a lobbyist with the New Hampshire Secretary of State’s Office, and it appears she’s offering something of value to a lawmaker to encourage him to vote. Not surprisingly, 603Equality’s behavior sparked concerns.

“I am outraged that an unregistered Democrat lobbying organization would offer to fund travel expenses for a legislator in order to influence the outcome of a vote,” said House Majority Leader Jason Osborne (R-Auburn). “The ease at which this was offered leads us to believe that offers like Jakows’ seem to be the norm on the other side of the aisle.

“This is an example of Washington-style politics at its worst and does not represent Granite State values,” Osborne added.

It could also be a crime. Legal sources pointed NHJournal to New Hampshire’s criminal codes 640:2 “Bribery in Official and Political Matters;” and 640:5 “Gifts to Public Servants.”

Jakows declined to respond to questions from NHJournal regarding the source of these “funds” to pay for legislators’ travel or whether other lawmakers are getting funding as well. In a follow-up tweet, Jakows claimed a group of concerned community members was crowdfunding the money, though Jakows would not say who those people were.

“How many members of the New Hampshire House Democrats will be there tomorrow to vote against parental rights because a lobbying group paid for them to be there?” asked Rep. Ross Berry (R-Manchester). “Probably worth finding out.”

Thus far, the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office is staying out of the drama, saying Wednesday it is currently a matter of the Speaker’s Office.

Meanwhile, House Democrats are also being threatened by a representative of one of the state’s largest teacher’s unions, who warned not showing up or voting the wrong way could result in a primary challenge.

“ANY @NHSenateDems and @NHHouseDems who do not make a point to show up to vote NO on #SB272 and stand UP for young #queer lives on the line do not deserve our support,” tweeted Ryan Richman, vice president of the state chapter of the American Federation of Teachers. “Especially if they primaried out @NHDems that showed up to protect Granite Staters from evil.”

Vogt pushed out long-time Democratic Rep. Jacqueline Cali-Pitts in last year’s Democratic primary and won favor with the AFT. The union endorsed him in the general election.

Vogt now faces the prospect of being pushed to take dark money plane tickets, which may or may not be legal, and could be made an example of by his union benefactors and see his political career cut short.

What is unique about Vogt’s drama is the public display of the pressure brought to bear on one representative, leaving voters to guess how many other representatives were being threatened and offered financial benefits behind closed doors. Or at least off Twitter.

Vogt, still vacationing, did not respond to a request for comment.

Hundreds of Barrington residents showed up Saturday for a special deliberative session designed to fire Town Administrator Conner MacIver and Town Treasurer Peter Royce and instead opted to support the two officials. 

The man behind the deliberative session, owner of 2A Tactical Rob Russell, wanted to get rid of MacIver and Royce, saying Royce improperly used his town potion to target his business with MacIver’s knowledge.

Barrington uses a two-step process for town meetings. The first is a deliberative session in which the articles are debated and can be changed. It is followed by a ballot vote. Russell spent months gathering signatures for a special town meeting with a single warrant article, firing MacIver and Royce.

At Saturday’s deliberative session, Select Board member Joyce Cappiello successfully pulled a 180 on Russell, amending the article to support the two town employees instead of removing them. The re-worded article now reads, “To see if the town will vote to encourage the select board to continue the employment of Conner MacIver and Peter Royce in their current positions with the town of Barrington and to recognize the many contributions the two have made to the town throughout their tenures.”

It was a major reversal just months after the town attorney reprimanded Royce for improperly using his town email to target the local small business and its owner.

Russell said Sunday he was gratified that so many voters showed up to hear out his arguments, even if he didn’t get his desired result.

“Yes, having my warrant article re-written was disheartening. But it’s part of the process,” Russell said. “And seeing 250 people show up for a deliberative session that I am told normally has less than 50 people was inspiring.”

Russell still plans to run for a seat on the select board in the spring.

Russell is a retired military veteran who runs 2A Tactical out of his Tolend Road home. He started the effort to oust MacIver and Royce after discovering Royce was orchestrating a campaign to shut down his business.

Russell originally opened it as a home business.  But as it took off, so did the traffic in his residential neighborhood, and so did the complaints. 

Russell soon found himself embroiled in a lawsuit as the town alleged zoning ordinance violations. However, after Russell prevailed during two zoning board of adjustment hearings, the town dropped the lawsuit last spring.

Royce is the part-time town treasurer and lives near 2A Tactical. Royce used his position and knowledge of town operations to actively lobby against Russell’s business, according to documents Russell uncovered. At one point, Royce used his town email to communicate with MacIver about the case. After prodding, MacIver told Royce that people could be encouraged to file complaints against Russell if they have concerns.

Royce allegedly organized people throughout the neighborhood to file complaints against Russell’s business, landing Russell before the ZBA, the select board, and the courts.

According to a letter from the town’s law firm to MacIver, Royce’s use of his official town email crossed the line.

“Mr. Royce is the town’s appointed treasurer. Of course, he does not lose his rights as a citizen by assuming such a position. He may contact code enforcement with concerns just as any other citizen may, and code enforcement treats his complaints no differently than those of other citizens. I agree that Mr. Royce should not be using his town email for any communications in his personal capacity, and he has been so counseled,” wrote attorney Laura Spector-Morgan to town officials.

Select Board Chair Dan Mannschreck told NHJournal that Royce got a talking to about his improper use of town email. Royce is paid about $7,000 a year for his job. MacIver was paid more than $78,000 last year.