#

Kathy Bossi doesn’t think refusing to wear a face mask at a public meeting is a crime. But New Hampshire’s Supreme Court upheld her trespassing conviction anyway.

The Kingston grandmother and Sunday school teacher lost her appeal when the state Supreme Court ruled late last week that she was, in fact, guilty of trespass at a school board meeting when she protested a mask mandate.

Bossi was arrested at a May 2021 Timberlane Regional School Board meeting when she refused to put on a surgical face mask, which the school required as part of its response to the COVID-19 pandemic raging at the time.

Mask mandates became a cultural hot button as parents across the country responded with protests. The video of police officers pulling the handcuffed Bossi out of the Timberlane High School auditorium went viral.

In her appeal, Bossi argued refusing to wear a mask isn’t a crime, and she cannot be criminally charged for not being masked. The court ruled, however, that Bossi was convicted for entering a space without privilege or license and not for mask refusal.

“The defendant also argues that the case should have been dismissed because ‘[r]efusing to wear a surgical mask as a condition for attending a public meeting at Timberlane Regional School Board is not a crime.’ The school board did condition the license or privilege to enter the auditorium on wearing a mask, and it authorized the Plaistow Police Department to enforce the policy. Because the defendant entered the auditorium without license or privilege, she was arrested for criminal trespass,” the court ruled.

Bossi was part of a group of Timberlane parents protesting the district’s in-school masking policy. When she refused to put on a mask in order to get into the auditorium, she was arrested.

“You are violating my rights right now,” Bossi told police in the video. “Are you seriously doing this, you guys?”

School Board Chair Katie Knutsen did not respond to NHJournal’s request for comment.

The school district had enacted a policy that everyone entering school buildings was required to wear face masks, including the auditorium where board meetings were held. The school board posted signs outside the meeting that said face masks were required, and the face mask requirement was noticed in the meeting agenda. 

Bossi and a few other protesters pushed past police officers with signs to get into the auditorium before they were stopped. According to court records, officers had spoken to Bossi and the mask requirement and told her she could not enter the meeting without a mask. 

Bossi reportedly told police she was going to get into the auditorium without a mask, and they could not stop her. While she did manage to get into the meeting, she was soon arrested. Bossi reportedly refused to give police her name when she was first taken into custody.

The in-person meeting was canceled shortly after Bossi’s arrest, and the board met via Zoom.

Bossi was convicted on the misdemeanor criminal trespassing charge in Salem District Court. One count of disorderly conduct was conditionally dismissed until Bossi’s appeal was heard and decided. 

Bossi represented herself in the appeal and argued that refusing to comply with a mask mandate does not rise to the level of being a crime and that she had every right to be in the public building during a public meeting.

Bossi did not respond to NHJournal’s request for comment.

Part of Bossi’s argument rests on her theory that police officers did not have the right to enforce a mask mandate. However, the court found police were at the meeting by request of the school board. The board was concerned about anti-mask protesters causing a disturbance and asked officers to keep the peace.

Public health authorities, including former White House chief medical advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci, have since acknowledged a lack of data supporting mask mandates as an effective response to the pandemic. 

Earlier this month, Fauci admitted the six-foot rule used to keep classrooms closed during the pandemic was not based on science or data but rather “sort of just appeared.”

The only protestor convicted for protesting COVID-19 lockdowns in front of Gov. Chris Sununu’s home is taking his case to the New Hampshire Supreme Court.

Frank Negus Staples, aka Foot Loose, is appealing his conviction on one count of disorderly conduct for his role in the protests outside the homes of Sununu and Chief Justice Gordon MacDonald. He was among nine people arrested during the protests, and the only one convicted.

“We were all found not guilty of ‘picketing,’” Staples said. “I was found guilty of ‘disorderly conduct.’”

NHJournal reporter Chris Maidment was arrested during the protests and charged with picketing, despite identifying himself to authorities as a journalist on assignment. NHJournal earned a First Amendment award from the New Hampshire Press Association for its work on the story, and the charges were dismissed before the case went to trial.

MacDonald, who was New Hampshire’s Attorney General at the time of the protests, has recused himself from the case according to Staples. MacDonald’s Department of Justice was instrumental in creating the picketing ordinance used to charge the protestors.

“Gordon MacDonald has recused himself from the case due to his direct involvement in the creation of the town ‘picketing’ ordinance and how to enforce it,” Staples said.

The New Hampshire Supreme Court accepted Staples’ appeal as part of the dozens of cases accepted in November. A hearing date has not been set.

After Sununu started conducting government business from his home due to the pandemic, opponents of the governor’s COVID-19 policies started protesting in the street outside. Sununu and his neighbors expressed their unhappiness with the crowds of sign-waving demonstrators in their cul-de-sac, but the protestors were on public property.

In response, the town Board of Selectmen, including Sununu’s brother Michael, drafted an anti-picketing ordinance designed to discourage — if not prevent — the protests. Three members of the Sununu administration, including Department of Safety Commissioner Robert Quinn, testified on behalf of the protest ban at a December 8 select board meeting.

The language for the ordinance came directly from the Attorney General’s Office, according to emails obtained by NHJournal.

Concord attorney Seth Hipple, who represented several of the protesters, including Maidment, told NH Journal last year that the government is holding a losing hand.

“The prosecution’s case was a dumpster fire,” Hipple said.

None of the arresting officers were able to individually identify any of the protesters who were charged, and they were unable to specify what actions the protestors took that violated the law, according to Hipple.

Staples, who told NHJournal people do not like it when he gets loud, was a fixture at anti-COVID lockdown protests throughout the pandemic. He was among several people arrested at an Executive Council Meeting last year who were protesting a federal contract to pay for COVID vaccines.

Staples was also the lead protestor at the September 2021 Executive Council meeting that was shut down because of safety concerns.

Staples made statements to New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services employees that they deemed threatening.The employees were unnerved and subsequently escorted to their cars by New Hampshire State Police Troopers. Staples, who was shouting and acting in an aggressive manner through the meeting denies he meant a threat when he shouted “we know where you live” to the DHHS employees.

Staples and several other protestors at the September 2021 Executive Council meeting were investigated by Attorney General John Formella’s office, but no charges were ever brought.

After 18 months, Newfields Police Prosecutor Michael DiCroce is finally giving up on the case against an NHJournal reporter who was charged with a crime while covering protests outside Gov. Chris Sununu’s house.

DiCroce said he was tired of losing.

“We’ve tried eight or nine of them before Judge (Polly) Hall and she’s found all of them not guilty,” DiCroce said. “I’m not going to waste my time prosecuting the one or two left.”

On December 28, 2020, Newfields police used a controversial new ordinance to ticket protesters gathered outside Sununu’s home. They also ticketed Chris Maidment, a NHJournal reporter at the time who was covering the protest. Maidment repeatedly informed authorities he was a reporter and his coverage of the protest appeared at NHJournal the next day. Still, DiCroce insisted on prosecuting the case and does not concede the police did anything wrong.

“Town officials knew he was a reporter. I spoke to the prosecutor myself,” said NHJournal Managing Editor Michael Graham. “We repeatedly requested they drop this case, and they repeatedly declined. The fact that they still won’t admit that arresting a reporter for doing his job is wrong — particularly when politics are at play — should concern every First Amendment supporter in New Hampshire.”

DiCroce declined to say why he persisted in prosecuting Maidment.

“That’s something you’ll have to ask State Police,” DiCroce said.

New Hampshire State Police were involved in the protests by providing security for Sununu. However, documents obtained by NHJournal through a Right to Know request show Newfields Police coordinated with State Police, sharing information on the anti-picketing ordinance, and coordinating the press release about the original arrests.

“It’s quite obvious this case was without legal merit and a blatant First Amendment violation,” said Maidment, who now works for the New Hampshire chapter of Americans for Prosperity.

Concord attorney Seth Hipple, who represented several people charged that night including Maidment, said the government had a losing hand from the start.

“The prosecution’s case was a dumpster fire,” Hipple said.

None of the arresting officers were able to individually identify any of the protesters who were charged, and they were unable to specify what actions the protestors took that violated the law.

“It seemed really clear to me throughout this case the focus of law enforcement was to shield (Sununu) from seeing anybody protesting in front of his residence,” Hipple said.

After Sununu began conducting government business from his home due to the COVID-19 pandemic, opponents of the governor’s COVID-19 policies shifted their protests to the cul-de-sac outside his home.  Sununu and his neighbors expressed their unhappiness with the crowds of sign-waving demonstrators, but the protestors were on public property.

In response, the town Board of Selectmen, including Sununu’s brother Michael, drafted an anti-picketing ordinance designed to discourage — if not prevent — the protests. Three members of the Sununu administration, including Department of Safety Commissioner Robert Quinn, testified on behalf of the protest ban at a December 8, 2020 select board meeting.

Hipple said the town used legal language that was constitutionally problematic in the ordinance. The way it was enforced and prosecuted by Newfields police was even more problematic.

“The fact they arrested a reporter and continued to prosecute a reporter who identified himself shows it has nothing to do with enforcing the law,” Hipple said. “It’s definitely true that the impetus for passing this ordinance was that they didn’t want to have protests where (Sununu) was conducting state business.

The language for the ordinance came directly from the Attorney General’s Office, according to emails obtained by NHJournal.

The process began with a November 24, 2020 email from Michael Sununu to Newfields Police Chief Nathan Liebenow regarding, “complaints I have received from several residents on Hemlock [Court] regarding the protests this past weekend,” and suggesting existing town ordinances “which we need to consider enforcing.”

Chief Liebenow the next day wrote Senior Assistant Attorney General Matthew Broadhead thanking him for “reaching out and offering your assistance on this matter.” The Attorney General’s Office usually responds to requests from local law enforcement rather than reaching out and offering assistance.

Chief Liebenow told Broadhead he had been “speaking with his Board in Newfields” about town ordinances that “are most relevant/applicable in our situation.”

On November 30, 2020, Broadhead responded by suggesting potential language for an anti-picketing ordinance he believed could pass court muster.

“Chief, FYI, in a U.S. Supreme Court case, Frisby v. Schultz… the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the following ordinance: ‘it is unlawful for any person to engage in picketing before or about the residence or dwelling of any individual in the town of Brookfield.’ The court ruled that this ordinance does not violate the First Amendment,” Broadhead wrote.

That language was eventually adopted word for word by the Newfields select board. 

Sununu’s team has denied the governor had anything to do with the ordinance or its passage.

The New Hampshire Press Association gave NHJournal’s coverage of the story a “Free Speech” award earlier this month.

Maidment said he expects the involved parties to do the right thing.

“I expect a formal written apology from the New Hampshire State Police, Newfields Police, and Prosecutor DiCroce any day now,” Maidment said.