#

Former Stafford County Sheriff Mark Brave has a date with destiny. His upcoming sentencing hearing will determine whether the lascivious lawman is locked up for his crimes.

Brave pleaded guilty last month to charges he stole $19,000 in taxpayer money to fund his extramarital escapades, maxing out his county-issued credit card to cover the costs of out-of-town travel to meet his illicit paramours. 

But the deal Brave struck with prosecutors to end the criminal case leaves open another possible trip on the taxpayer’s dime — up the river.

Brave could be sentenced to prison on perjury charges related to the theft. The hearing on whether or not Brave goes to prison is now set for May 19. 

Under the terms of his plea deal, Brave agreed to two suspended terms of three and a half to seven years on the theft and falsifying physical evidence convictions. But he still faces up to 14 years on the perjury charges. That sentence will be argued in court.

Other charges that Brave later lied to the court in Rockingham County are being dismissed as part of the deal. The disgraced lawman agreed to make $18,969 in restitution to Strafford County, surrender all his law enforcement certifications, never seek employment in law enforcement in any jurisdiction, be placed on a national registry of decertified police officers, and not contest his placement on New Hampshire’s Exculpatory Evidence Schedule. 

Brave, the Strafford County Democrat who became New Hampshire’s first Black sheriff, faced decades in prison after he got caught. He compounded his troubles by lying to investigators, the grand jury, the press, and the courts, according to court records.

Those lies have cost Brave his career in law enforcement, his marriage, and his political standing as a rising star in the state Democratic Party.

When it comes to obeying the law, the Kearsarge School District is suffering from legal schizophrenia.

On one hand, district officials claim they can’t stop a convicted sex offender busted for child pornography from walking on campus to attend girls soccer games.

On the other hand, they claim the right to ignore New Hampshire’s state law banning biological males from playing on the girls’ soccer team.

The player is Maelle Jacques, a biological male who identifies as a girl and plays goalie for Kearsarge.

The convicted sex offender, who’s scheduled to report to prison in December but insists on attending games today, is Jacques’ father, Marc.

Kearsarge is scrambling to contain the damage the district’s administration created when it became known that officials were aware that parent Marc Jacques pleaded guilty to distributing child sex abuse images earlier this year. Marc Jacques was never prevented by school officials from going to any girl’s soccer games this year to watch his child Maelle Jacques compete.

“Because these events are open to the public, the district may restrict access only in the case of a prior civil no trespass order, or active court order. In general terms, we cannot selectively determine who may or may not attend any event,” Superintendent John Fortney said in a letter sent to parents this week.

Marc Jacques is back in custody after he allegedly violated the conditions of his pre-incarceration release by possessing a flash drive containing more child sex abuse images.  Marc Jacques was sentenced to five years in prison last month, but given until December to report to prison authorities to begin his sentence. 

It is not unusual for federal defendants to get a few weeks of freedom between the sentencing hearing and the start of their incarceration. That time is meant to allow the defendants to get their affairs in order before going to prison. 

But Marc Jacques was given months of pre-incarceration release after he pleaded with the court that his child, Maelle Jacques, needed him at the soccer games. Marc Jacques said factors like the state law banning biological boys from playing girl’s sports, and potential threats of violence against transgender people, required that he be at the games.

“Maelle is going to need me to be present and in attendance to support [Maelle] and protect [Maelle] in the face of the fears [Maelle] will have of what could happen to [Maelle] on the athletic fields,” Marc Jacques wrote.

But Fortney is also telling parents who are upset that a biological male is on the high school’s girls soccer team that Kearsarge is not going to comply with state law. In New Hampshire, state law requires high school athletes to compete on the team that matches their sex at birth.

But the school district told parents who want the law enforced that it refuses to do so.

“Relative to HB 1205, this bill is a violation of federal law, the U.S. Constitution, and NH’s own Civil Rights Provision,” the district declared, without evidence or any court rulings confirming their statements.

While a federal judge has suspended the enforcement of HB 1205 for two specific students, the law has not been overridden, nor has it been declared unconstitutional.

“Kearsarge is violating the law,” an attorney with knowledge of the case told NHJournal on background.

As for the convicted sex offender, Fortney claims Kearsarge takes the safety of all the students seriously, and consulted with police and attorneys about the matter. Sutton Police Chief Jonathan Korbet told NHJournal he had conversations with Kearsarge about the girl’s soccer games.

“We decided it was necessary to provide police details at JV and varsity girl’s soccer games,” Korbet said.

Under the conditions of the pre-incarceration release, Marc Jacques is to have no unsupervised contact with anyone under the age of 18. Korbet said that condition is vague and difficult to enforce at the soccer games.

“It’s hard to determine what constitutes unsupervised. In a public place, in a public setting, one could argue that’s not unsupervised,” Korbet said.

But Kearsarge knew Marc Jacques was going to away girl’s soccer games as well. Hopkinton Superintendent Michael Flynn said this week officials in his district were unaware of Marc Jacques’ conviction until hours before the Kearsarge team was set to play at Hopkinton on Oct. 7. Flynn also talked to local police and the Hopkinton’s legal team, and put in a safety plan 45 minutes before the game time. Like Fortney, Flynn said he legally could not stop Marc Jacques from attending the game.

“We want to make sure that we, as a school district, follow the laws. I am not able to arrest anybody, and I can’t create court orders,” Flynn said.

At the Oct. 7 Hopkinton game, Marc Jacques was caught on video interacting with a young boy until the child’s mother was alerted. NHJournal has seen the video, but is not sharing it in order to protect the boy’s identity.

The hands-off treatment Marc Jacques received from multiple school districts before he was arrested for violating his release is in stark contrast to the way the Bow School District treated a group of parents who engaged in a silent protest last month.

Kyle Fellers and Anthony “Andy” Foote were slapped with no trespassing orders by Bow school officials for wearing pink “XX” wristbands at the Sept. 17 girl’s soccer game. Bow officials claim they acted out of an obligation to protect a transgender student on the opposing Plymouth High School team from the silent protest. 

Former rising Democratic Party star Mark Brave once thought he could play the race card and beat the rap over his alleged mishandling of taxpayer funds.

After he was arrested, the former Strafford County sheriff appeared to believe he could leverage a sweetheart deal by rejecting plea bargains from prosecutors.

Instead, after delaying the case for months, Brave may now face even more criminal charges if he decides to face a jury.

Brave is currently facing up to 64 years in prison on Stratford County charges for allegedly stealing taxpayer money to pay for his extramarital affairs and then repeatedly lying about it to a grand jury.

Assistant New Hampshire Attorney General Joe Fincham told Rockingham Superior Court Judge Andrew Schulman in a June 12 motion he plans to seek more indictments against Brave if the case does go to trial as scheduled on Aug. 5. 

Brave, who made history when he was elected New Hampshire’s first Black sheriff, could get another record in the books by becoming the state’s first elected sheriff to go to prison. He was a progressive favorite who ran a pro-Black Lives Matter campaign to reform law enforcement before he was caught stealing money to pay for multiple out-of-state liaisons with many different women who were not his wife, according to court records.

These possible new indictments would likely cover Brave’s alleged misdeeds as sheriff in Strafford County and his lies to Rockingham County court officials after he was charged. According to Fincham, Brave knew he could be charged with more by turning down a deal and going to trial.

“During prior hearings in this matter, the state informed the court and counsel for the defendant that in the event a plea agreement was not reached in this matter, the state would consider superseding the Strafford County indictments currently pending in this matter, as well as potentially seeking additional indictments in Rockingham County for conduct that has occurred during the litigation of the Strafford County indictments,” Fincham wrote. 

While he was being investigated last year, Brave accused members of the Strafford County Commission of targeting him because they were racist. All three members of the commission are elected Democrats.

Once he was indicted, Brave’s case was moved to Rockingham County to avoid a conflict of interest. It’s in Rockingham County where Brave is accused of lying to court officials about his income and his place of residence. 

Brave was assigned a free public defense attorney last year when he claimed he was essentially broke following his divorce. However, it came to light Brave was, in fact, flush with cash after the sale of his marital home in Dover. He had enough money to buy a 1968 Porsche and pay a year’s lease on an apartment in Massachusetts, according to court records.

On top of hiding the money from the court, Brave also violated an order from Schulman to live in New Hampshire pending trial. Brave got around that order by telling the court he was living in a Dover apartment while he was really living in Massachusetts. 

When Brave’s lies were discovered, Fincham threatened to charge him with theft for receiving his New Hampshire sheriff’s salary while living out of state and revoke his personal recognizance bail. According to Fincham, Brave is required to live in New Hampshire as an elected official. Brave had been collecting his salary while out on paid administrative leave.

Brave got out of that jam by resigning his position in December in exchange for not going to jail right away.

Brave turned down a plea agreement offered by prosecutors earlier this year, and refused to sign on to a mediated plea agreement reached last month. That forced Schulman to schedule a trial for the first week of August.

Fincham’s motion seeks to hold the trial schedule since there’s still a chance the case can be resolved with a negotiated plea. According to Fincham, talks between prosecutors and Brave’s attorney are ongoing.

If those talks fail and the case goes to trial, Fincham said the new indictments he plans to seek could come weeks before the jury is selected, giving little time for either side to file any necessary motions on the charges.

Fincham notes he will also need more time than Schulman has scheduled to call the numerous out-of-state witnesses he has planned. 

The Rockingham County venue for the trial is another issue that needs to be resolved before trial, according to Fincham. Brave has the constitutional right to have the trial on the original charges held in Strafford County. So far, there’s been no court finding that Brave cannot have a fair trial in Strafford County, and Brave has not formally asked to change the venue from his home county, Fincham wrote.

Arlene Quaratiello wasn’t going to give up when she was fired from her assistant librarian job at Raymond’s Dudley-Tucker Library for supporting conservative political candidates.

“You’ve got to fight,” Quaratiello told NHJournal.

Now, thanks to help from the American Center for Law and Justice, Quaratiello scored a major legal victory. The town of Raymond publicly admits to violating her First Amendment rights when it fired her.

“Somebody else might not fight back, but I knew what they did was wrong,” she said.

Arlene Quaratiello

Quaratiello knew that Library Director Kirsten Rundquist Corbett and Raymond Town Manager Ernest Cartier Creveling were wrong when they fired her last year. A Republican state representative in Atkinson, Quaratiello was told she was terminated for supporting conservative candidates in the Atkinson election for library trustees.

“You have not fulfilled the conditions of employment because of your lack of separation of personal/political values and agendas from DTL policies, procedures, and occurrences,” the termination letter stated. 

Quaratiello’s alleged violation of Dudley-Tucker values was to write a letter to the editor in Carriage Towne News supporting Pam Borisko and Christine Latino in their race for Atkinson library trustee. Both Borisko and Latino supported keeping age-inappropriate material away from children.

“They also believe in protecting our children from the increasing amount of inappropriate material available both in print and online without sacrificing the intellectual freedom that has always characterized public libraries,” Quaratiello wrote in her endorsement letter.

Neither Corbett nor current Town Manager Ken Robichaud responded to a request for comment. 

Quaratiello pushed back and kept her job as she looked for an attorney willing to take the case. After several lawyers declined, the ACLJ stepped up. Executive Director Jordan Sekulow said the lawsuit his organization filed is about protecting everyone’s rights.

“Our lawsuit was about protecting the rights of citizens to speak out about the issues that affect all of us and ensuring a conservative voice can still be heard,” Sekulow said.

The Dudley-Tucker Library in Raymond, N.H.

U.S. District Court Judge Andrea Johnstone issued a consent decree Tuesday requiring Raymond and the Dudley-Tucker Library to admit they wronged Quaratiello. They must also take steps to make sure they don’t repeat this treatment with future employees.

“She now has a court order explaining that her rights were violated and providing her explicit, extensive legal protection in case anything similar happens again,” Sekulow said of Quaratiello.

Quaratiello told NHJournal she was offered a lot of money to settle the case. At one point, the town dangled months of salary in exchange for a quiet resignation. But that was never what Quaratiello wanted.

“No one ever said they did anything wrong,” she said of her treatment by town officials.

The idea of any financial settlement made Quaratiello uneasy, as it would ultimately hurt local taxpayers. Instead, she is pleased with the statement from the town admitting wrongdoing.

A new plea offer is on the table for former Strafford County Sheriff Mark Brave, the lawman charged with stealing taxpayer money to fund his love life.

Brave, who was forced to resign last year after getting caught lying to the court, rejected the original plea agreement dangled by prosecutors in March. His counter proposal was then rejected by the state. But instead of heading to trial, Brave and lawyers with the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office agreed to enter into mediation. 

Mediator Peter Fauver met with both sides this week and issued an order on Wednesday. Fauver’s order is currently sealed. Michael Garrity, spokesman for the New Hampshire Department of Justice, told NHJournal the clock is now ticking.

“The parties were given until May 24 to resolve the matter by plea or the case will return to the trial track,” Garrity said.

Criminal mediation, also known as a felony settlement conference, typically involves a judge not connected to the case working with both sides to reach a consensus. According to New Hampshire Judicial Branch Policy, cases suitable for felony settlement conferences involve defendants who admit wrongdoing. The conferences include input from the alleged crime victims as the judge guides all parties to a deal.

Brave’s saga started last year when county officials became suspicious of his spending habits with the county credit card. According to the investigative report, Brave was using his county card to buy plane tickets, hotel rooms, and meals for his extramarital affairs. While he was under investigation, Brave refused to step down and instead lashed out in the press, claiming he  was the victim of political bullying and accused County Commissioner George Maglaras of racism.

When he was charged last summer on theft and perjury counts, Brave initially refused to go on paid administrative leave, but finally bowed out under pressure from county commissioners.

Brave got in trouble again soon, this time for violating his bail conditions, lying about where he lived, and hiding money in order to qualify for a free defense attorney, according to court records. 

Brave was not supposed to stay living in New Hampshire under the bail order set by the court, an order he ignored when he paid a year’s lease on an apartment in Massachusetts and bought himself a sports car. At the same time, Brave claimed he did not have enough money to pay for a lawyer.

When prosecutors discovered he did not live at the Dover address he used in court, they sought to have his bail revoked. They also accused him of additional theft for taking his sheriff’s salary while living in another state. Brave got out of that jam by agreeing to resign from his position. 

It remains to be seen if the mediated agreement also lets him stay out of jail.

Brave made headlines in 2020 when he became New Hampshire’s first elected Black sheriff. The new Democratic star ran a Black Lives Matter-friendly platform, agreeing to reform police. One of his campaign promises was to end the practice of having cops in schools, a promise he broke when he signed a contract with the Farmington School District for his office to provide a school resource officer. Such contracts bring in needed revenue to the department. 

Accused of using taxpayer money to fund his love life, former Strafford County Sheriff Mark Brave needs more time to go through all the evidence compiled against him.

Brave, who’s facing 64 years in prison if convicted, was due in Rockingham Superior Court this week for a dispositional hearing until his attorney, Leif Becker, got a delay. Becker told Judge Daniel St. Hilaire he needs more to go through the evidence in light of a plea agreement offered by the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office.

Becker told Foster’s Daily Democrat this week there’s no decision yet by Brave to accept the plea.

“As part of weighing all the options and preparing for trial, we are doing a considerable review of the discovery provided. Given the volume of material, we requested more time. A plea deal was offered, but we have not reached any decisions,” Becker said.

Brave is now scheduled to appear on March 26 once he and Becker have had time to consider the deal in light of the evidence. 

Brave was New Hampshire’s first elected Black sheriff and a rising star in the New Hampshire Democratic Party until his romantic side got caught in a scandal that resulted in felony charges, ended his marriage, and forced him out of the job.

Brave allegedly used his county-issued credit card to fly out of state to meet women, book hotel rooms and restaurants in Boston for trysts, and even take dates to an indoor water park. When the criminal investigation into his credit card use became public, Brave accused fellow Democrat and Strafford County Commissioner George Maglaras of being a racist.

Brave agreed to go on administrative leave this summer after he was indicted, but the trouble did not stop. Brave is accused of lying to the court and violating his bail conditions. 

Brave was allegedly less than truthful about how much money he had after his divorce in order to obtain a free public defender. Instead of using his money for a lawyer, Brave reportedly bought a classic 1968 Porsche and paid $50,000 to rent an apartment in Massachusetts.

When Brave moved to his Tewksbury, Mass. apartment, he was under a bail order to live in New Hampshire. Brave allegedly got around that by giving prosecutors and court officials a false address in Dover.

When that house was discovered, prosecutors told the court Brave was essentially stealing money by collecting his sheriff’s salary while living out of state. Prosecutors wanted his bail revoked, but Brave quit his job in December as part of an agreement to stay out of jail. 

According to his attorney, jurors should be ordered to consider biting as self-defense when they deliberate the simple assault and domestic abuse charges against Jeffrey Woodburn.

The disgraced Democratic former state Senate Minority Leader is gearing up for his second trial on allegations he assaulted his former girlfriend on multiple occasions. His arrest six years ago resulted in a trial, conviction, and multiple appeals — not to mention the end of his political career. 

Woodburn continues to fight the charges.

The Coos County Democrat was convicted in 2022, but the state Supreme Court tossed those convictions last year because he was originally barred from making the case he acted in self-defense. That sent the case back to Coos Superior Court for a new trial.

Woodburn’s attorney, Mark Sisti, filed his version of proposed jury instructions ahead of the sequel trial slated to start next week. The jury instructions make it clear Woodburn will try to justify his use of physical violence against his former girlfriend.

“A person has the right to utilize non-deadly force when he can reasonably believe that such force is necessary in order to defend himself. In this case, Jeffrey Woodburn asserts that his act of physical contact, including biting the alleged victim, was necessary as he reasonably believed that the complainant posed an imminent threat of restraining him from exiting the car,” according to the Woodburn defense documents.

According to court records, Woodburn bit the woman during a December 2017 argument as she was driving him back from a party. An intoxicated Woodburn demanded to be let out of the car, and he planned to call a friend for a ride. When the woman reached to take his phone, he allegedly bit her hand, according to the allegations.

While Woodburn was not able to cast blame on the victim at his original trial, the Supreme Court’s ruling means he can now claim the woman’s past aggressiveness when dealing with him, usually when he was intoxicated, to justify his actions. 

According to the proposed jury instructions, Woodburn will argue he was acting out of the “heat of passion” and shouldn’t be judged with hindsight.

“In deciding whether the defendant acted in self-defense, you should consider all of the circumstances surrounding the incident. You should consider how the defendant acted under the circumstances as they were presented to him at the time and not necessarily as they appear upon detached reflection. You should consider whether the defendant’s belief that it was necessary to use non-deadly force was reasonable when he acted in the heat of passion,” the proposed instructions state.

It will ultimately be up to a jury to decide if Woodburn’s self-defense claims are enough to keep him from consequences. His related convictions on charges of criminal mischief were upheld on appeal, but Woodburn has yet to serve any jail time as the 30-day sentences were stayed pending the new trial.

According to court records, Woodburn kicked the door to the woman’s house and she refused to let him inside about a week after the fight in the car. Earlier that year, in August 2017, he reportedly kicked her clothes dryer, breaking the appliance, according to court records.

Woodburn’s tenacity in fighting the charges is similar to his scramble to stay in politics after his arrest in the summer of 2018. Despite calls from state Democrats to resign, Woodburn ran for reelection and won the primary in September 2018. He went on to lose the general election that November.

When the Northwood School Board meets Wednesday night, it won’t be to cover the “three R’s.” Instead, they’ll be dealing with the “N-word” and other racial and obscene comments from one of their own members: outspoken progressive Gary Caron.

Caron has a history of using obscene and sexually explicit language to attack conservatives and Republicans in social posts, and the newest member of Northwood’s School Board hasn’t slowed down since taking office.

When a conservative commentator posted a meme with the message that former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) ought to be sent to the Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp last week, Caron responded with a sexual threat.

“I’d love to see you in GTMO after I [explicit] your ass red raw,” Caron posted.

When another conservative account posted a photo of controversial Republican political candidate Kari Lake around that same time, Caron was quick with a misogynistic response.

“Gfyself lying c—t,” Caron wrote.

Caron posted dozens of obscene, angry, and violent messages on Twitter/X over the past few years, mostly directed at conservative and Republican figures. One post about Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) from January includes an implied racial slur targeting African Americans.

“F**king house N—a sellout coward c***suvker gfyself,” Caron wrote.

After a flurry of complaints over the Presidents Day weekend, Caron’s fellow board members had had enough. Northwood Superintendent Nathaniel Byrne told NHJournal that the board will be addressing Caron’s behavior at the upcoming meeting.

The board will discuss “racist, graphic, and violent social media posts from a current school board member.” Caron plans to be at the meeting, according to Byrne.

Caron was elected to a three-year term on the board last March when he ran unopposed for the seat. The retired engineer worked for the United States Navy on submarine modernization and weapons systems, according to his resume posted on LinkedIn. As part of his work, Caron held a security clearance.

Caron could not be reached for comment as the several phone numbers publicly associated with him, including the cell phone number on his resume, were disconnected or are no longer in service.

According to a questionnaire he filled out prior to last year’s school board election, Caron is concerned with how children are taught history in school.

“Issues of importance are teaching truth, American history, civics, democracy, civil rights, and civil liberties,” Caron wrote.

There is a noticeable lack of advocacy for civil rights — or civility in general — in Caron’s public postings. And he’s made no secret of his partisan leanings, declaring his “hate” for “Trump, his supporters, White men, Christians and Conservatives.”

“This is vile and disgusting. This man makes decisions regarding the materials that will be in the hands of children and public policy,” wrote Manchester politico Victoria Sullivan, one of the Granite Staters who brought Caron’s posts to the school board’s attention.

It’s not clear what Caron will do next or what the board can do about his posts. Byrne has spoken to Caron and told NHJournal he doesn’t know if Caron plans to resign his seat, though the possibility was mentioned.

“I’m not aware of his decision. I do know he will be at the meeting this week,” Byrne said.

Wednesday’s meeting could prove frustrating for anyone hoping the board takes action. Northwood’s school board does not have a policy dealing with social media use by members, Byrne said.

“The board is not allowed to infringe on any other members’ First Amendment rights,” Byrne said.

The board does have a code of ethics policy, however, and Byrne said that will guide Wednesday’s discussion about Caron’s social media posts. But that policy, last updated in 2015, mostly concerns board member interactions with other board members. It does not address how board members conduct themselves with members of the general public.

The UNH staffer charged with threatening to kill Vivek Ramaswamy and at least one other GOP politician was ordered released Thursday.

Tyler Anderson, 30, had been jailed since his arrest Saturday at his Dover apartment after federal agents connected him to the threats to kill Ramaswamy at a Portsmouth event.

According to court records, Ramaswamy’s campaign team sent text invitations to a list of potential voters on the Seacoast on Friday, ahead of the “Breakfast with Vivek” event slated for Monday.

Anderson got an invitation and allegedly responded with grisly and obscene threats.

“‘Great, another opportunity for me to blow his brains out!’ Anderson reportedly replied. He followed up with, ‘I’m going to kill everyone who attends and then f*** their corpses.’”

Ramaswamy isn’t the only GOP official Anderson has threatened, according to court records. Investigators found another series of alarming messages Anderson sent in response to another campaign text from a different candidate.

 “Fantastic, now I know where to go so I can blow that bastard’s head off.” “Thanks, I’ll see you there. Hope you have the stamina for a mass shooting!” “And then I’m gonna f*** (names) corpse.” “And don’t worry, (name), I’ll make sure to f*** yours too.”

The name of the other candidate is not being released. Anderson reportedly told investigators he had sent similar texts to other campaigns.

Anderson had no intention of following through on any of the threats, his attorney Dorothy Graham argued. He had no criminal record prior to the arrest.

Anderson is free on several conditions, including:

• He has no contact with Ramaswamy or members of his campaign staff;
• He stays away from all presidential campaigns;
• He takes medication for mental health conditions;
• His roommates’ guns must be removed from the apartment they share.

A 2018 UNH graduate, Anderson recently started a new job as an administrative assistant at the UNH College of Life Sciences and Agriculture. UNH administrative assistants typically earn between $35,000 and $45,000 a year.

The University did not respond to NHJournal’s request for comment.

The House Ethics Committee ruled Tuesday that state Rep. Alissandra Murray must recuse on votes related to abortion issues and the nonprofit paying the Manchester Democrat’s salary, an indirect rebuke to her questionable actions as a House member.

Murray is a co-founder and employee of the Reproductive Freedom Fund of New Hampshire (RFFNH). NHJournal reported in October that RFFNH lobbyist Josie Pinto was paying Murray’s salary so the progressive could serve in the House and influence legislation. And while Murray had voted on many pieces of legislation related to abortion issues of interest to RFFNH, she had never filed a conflict of interest disclosure.

The bipartisan Ethics Committee ruled the lawmaker’s votes on some abortion bills ran afoul of House conflict of interest rules and ordered Murray to recuse in the future. That was not the ruling Murray, who sought the advisory opinion, wanted to hear.

Rep. Alissandra Murray and attorney William Christie at House Ethics Committee hearing on December 5, 2023.

Murray’s attorney, well-connected Democratic lawyer William Christie, acknowledged the only reason his client sought the opinion was because of NHJournal’s reporting. 

“Because of the article and controversy, Rep. Murray felt this is the best course,” Christie said. Christie is married to Democratic Executive Councilor and candidate for governor Cinde Warmington. 

The committee voted five to one to tell Murray to recuse on all bills on which RFFNH lobbies. The one no vote came from Sen. Cindy Rosenwald (D-Nashua).

House members are required under ethics rules to either recuse themselves from voting on bills that could be seen as a conflict of interest, or to file a declaration of intent to vote in order to publicly disclose the potential conflict of interest. Despite several abortion bills before the legislature in the last session, Murray never filed a declaration of intent to vote. 

Christie told the committee Murray did not think filing a declaration was necessary despite the full-time job with an organization that lobbies on particular abortion-related bills.

“Since this issue came to light, (Murray) reviewed with counsel and others and does not think a declaration of intent to vote is necessary,” Christie said. 

Christie claimed during the hearing that Murray’s job with RFFNH has nothing to do with Murray’s elected position. But Pinto told The Nation magazine that Murray’s salary was part of a plan to get a pro-abortion advocate to be in the House.

“Together, we sort of developed this theory of change, which was like, ‘If we want to see the state we want, we have to get our people to run,’” Pinto told the magazine.

The article spelled out RFFNH’s plan to have a paid activist in the House.

“But there was a major obstacle in their way: New Hampshire’s Legislature pays a salary of just $100 a year. That’s fine for wealthy retirees but not for working-class activists. So Pinto hired Murray at the Reproductive Freedom Fund of New Hampshire, giving [Murray] a salary that would allow [Murray] to work in the Legislature while running the abortion fund’s social media accounts.”

Christie argued that since the RFFNH would not financially benefit from any of the abortion-related proposals considered, and since the organization is not primarily a lobbying group, Murray’s votes do not cross any ethical lines.

Committee Chair Edward Gordon did not appear to buy that argument in light of the fact the RFFNH did lobby for five abortion-related bills that Murray then voted on. 

“I’m looking at it intuitively, and looking at it intuitively, I would say, ‘Geez, don’t I have a conflict here?’ Didn’t Rep. Murray say, ‘This is close; this is something I would have a concern with here if someone else did it’?”

Murray claimed to believe filing an annual financial disclosure form listing the RFFNH employment and salary — a form every House member with a job fills out — was notice enough.

“When I filled out the disclosure form, I thought that was me disclosing,” Murray said. “I didn’t see any clear conflict when I was voting on these bills.”

Pinto did not speak during the hearing but acknowledged to the committee through her attorney that, as RFFNH executive director, she did lobby on five bills, spending about $800 in total on those efforts.

The fact Murray’s employer, RFFNH, lobbied on any bill and spent any money was enough to create a conflict of interest, according to David Hess, a former state representative and committee member.

“The guidelines are pretty clear,” Hess said. “[Murray] is getting income from an organization that is lobbying.”

Christie said RFFPNH would not have been financially impacted by any of the bills for which Pinto lobbied since the organization maintains such a narrow mission. He also said Pinto spent a relatively low amount on only five bills.

But Hess said the fact that the group’s executive director lobbied on the bills showed Pinto considered the legislation important to the RFFNH mission. He also cited a recent committee opinion imposing recusal on a Republican.

Last summer, the committee told Rep. Deborah Hobson (R-East Kingston) that she would have to recuse herself on bills if she took a job with a conservative advocacy group. Hobson sought the advisory opinion while considering a job with Americans for Prosperity. The committee’s answer was Hobson should recuse herself from any bill that AFP lobbies for or against.

Hobson and Murray’s situation are nearly identical, Hess said, and the result should be as well.

“I see no distinction whatsoever between the two situations,” Hess said. “It’s an employee getting income from a firm engaged in lobbying. The money and time amount are irrelevant.”

A complete advisory opinion draft will be voted on at the committee’s next meeting.