#

Former Democratic lawmaker Stacie Marie Laughton, who made history as the nation’s first transgender state representative, is set to make history again as the state’s first legislator to spend decades behind bars on federal child pornography convictions.

Laughton, 41, born Barry Laughton, took a plea deal last week in the sickening case that’s kept him behind bars since 2023. Laughton could now get up to 30 years in prison after pleading guilty to possession of child sex abuse images — images provided by ex-girlfriend and co-defendant Lindsay Groves, 40.

Groves entered into her own plea agreement last month, admitting to sending Laughton explicit photos of children she was supposed to be minding at the Massachusetts daycare where she worked. The couple is now set to be sentenced in February in the federal court in Boston.

Laughton and Groves share a messy history as a couple, along with their horrific sexual tastes. According to court records, Laughton repeatedly tried to get Groves fired from her daycare job during a 2022 breakup, claiming Groves was a pedophile. Laughton reported Groves to the police and additionally used his social media and radio program to accuse Groves of pedophilia, according to court records.

Those 2022 accusations were deemed false and ended up being part of the November 2022 stalking case against Laughton that landed the Nashua politician behind bars weeks after his election to the House. Democrats waited weeks to finally push Laughton to resign his seat that December.

But a year after Laughton’s accusations were seemingly discounted, the pair were arrested for actual pedophilia. According to court records, Groves had been texting Laughton nude photos of children from her daycare in the spring of 2022 as Laughton mused about child rape.

“I just don’t wanna get in trouble. I mean I want to do what we want to do because we like it and we approve of it but others think this is wrong. Lots of parents don’t like people touching their kids and it is against the law …” Laughton texted to Groves.

Laughton and Groves are unlikely to see each other again for some time. Groves is a biological woman and has been held in women’s facilities during the pre-trial incarceration. Laughton, on the other hand, has been held in men’s facilities since his 2023 arrest.

The convictions effectively close the possibility of a third act for the Nashua Democrat. First elected in 2012, Laughton was forced to resign when his criminal past was uncovered. At the time of the 2012 election, Laughton was still on probation for a 2008 felony credit card fraud conviction, and therefore ineligible for office under New Hampshire law.

But Laughton returned to politics in 2019 after finally paying the court-ordered $2,000 restitution in the credit card fraud case, and was again elected to the House in 2020. State Democrats and voters seemed willing to overlook Laughton’s 2015 conviction for making bomb threats against Southern New Hampshire Medical Center. 

Laughton’s second act ended with the 2022 stalking case, which resulted in a suspended jail sentence. 

New Hampshire’s first elected transgender-identifying state House member, Democrat Stacie Marie Laughton of Nashua, won’t have a happy Halloween this year.

Laughton, 41, born Barry Laughton, is set to appear in the United States District Court in Boston on Friday for a change of plea hearing in the child sex abuse image case that’s had him locked up for more than two years.

The Friday court date will likely see Laughton plead guilty to at least one of the three serious felony indictments against him.

The Halloween plea hearing comes weeks after his accomplice and lover, Lindsay Groves, 40, pleaded guilty for her role in the couple’s sick scheme. Groves used her position at a Massachusetts daycare to take explicit photos of the children she was supposed to be watching. Some of the victims were as young as three. Those photos were then shared via text message between the couple, who discussed raping children and hiding their crimes from the parents in thousands of grotesque notes.

Court records give a hint of the horrific Groves and Laughton Laughton relationship. In one text message, Laughton said there is nothing wrong with sexually abusing children.

“Oh, I know, but I just don’t wanna get in trouble. I mean, I want to do what we want to do because we like it and we approve of it, but others think this is wrong. Lots of parents don’t like people touching their kids, and it is against the law …” Laughton wrote in one exchange.

In another message, Laughton seems to admit to raping a child with Groves.

“I was asking because I know we’ve had some back-and-forth, and I know we initially said we do nothing with kids ever again, and you said you were afraid that if we had kids if they would go back and tell the parents the same with the kids you work with,” Laughton texted to Groves.

Earlier this month, Groves pleaded guilty to three counts of sexual exploitation of children and one count of distribution of child pornography. Each count of sexual exploitation of a child carries a possible 15 to 30 years prison sentence. Groves could get another 20 years for the distribution of child pornography charge. Groves has a sentencing hearing set for February. 

Laughton is supposed to go on trial next week on three felony charges of the sexual exploitation of children. If the case does go to a jury, Groves would likely be a prosecution witness under her plea deal.

Groves took the plea deal after failing in her quest to be deemed too incompetent to stand trial. Groves and her legal team fought for more than a year to get her diagnosed as too mentally impaired to understand the charges or help in her own defense. But United States District Court Judge Dennis Saylor rejected that argument after hearing from defense and prosecution mental health experts. While Groves is mentally and emotionally handicapped, she knows what she is doing, Saylor ruled.

“In short, (Groves) has repeatedly shown that despite her many limitations, she is capable of ordered thinking and rational communication, and that she has the ability to navigate reasonably complex situations, including obtaining higher education and holding employment for extended periods. She understands the essential nature and potential consequences of the alleged crime, and can provide meaningful assistance to her defense,” Saylor wrote. 

Though Laughton was accepted by the New Hampshire Democratic Party as transgendered when he ran for office — state party chair Ray Buckley celebrated him as part of “the backbone of New Hampshire” — he does not seem to be living as a female in any other aspect of his life. Away from his political persona as a transgender woman, Laughton was married for many years to biological woman Lisa Laughton, his alleged co-conspirator in a 2008 fraud case. Laughton additionally conducted a long-term sexual relationship with Groves, also a biological woman.

The criminal justice system seems to agree with the gender Laughton maintains in his private life. The Federal Bureau of Prisons lists Laughton as a male who was last in custody at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, N.Y., as of this month. He was also kept with other men inside Valley Street Jail immediately after the June 2023 arrest.

The woman who allegedly sent thousands of child sex abuse photos to her lover, former Democratic State Rep. Stacie Marie Laughton, is set to change her plea in federal court.

Lindsay Groves, 40, is accused of exploiting children at the Tyngsborough, Mass., daycare where she worked for Laughton’s sick gratification. She is scheduled for a change of plea hearing on Oct. 14 in the United States District Court in Boston.

Groves and Laughton, 41, are currently on track for separate November trials. Both Groves and Laughton are indicted on three counts each of sexual exploitation of children. Groves is also charged with one count of distribution of child pornography. 

Former state Rep. Stacie-Marie Laughton (D-Nashua)

Groves’ plea hearing comes after Judge Dennis Saylor ruled in August that the Hudson woman is competent to stand trial on the charges. Her defense lawyers tied up the case for more than a year, trying to prove Groves is not mentally competent to face justice.

Dr. Tina Adams, an independent clinical and forensic psychologist hired by the defense, found Groves is severely limited intellectually, easily manipulated, and unable to understand the charges against her. But Dr. Lauren Schumacher, a forensic psychologist employed by the Bureau of Prisons, reported that despite her limitations, Groves obtained an associate’s degree in early-childhood education from New Hampshire Community College, held down steady jobs, and was able to understand how the court system works. 

After Saylor reviewed the reports from Adams and Schumacher, he ruled that Groves could indeed go on trial.

“In short, (Groves) has repeatedly shown that despite her many limitations, she is capable of ordered thinking and rational communication, and that she has the ability to navigate reasonably complex situations,” Saylor wrote in his August order.

Groves apparently also understands the criminal justice system well enough to know when it’s time to roll on her former lover. If Groves enters into a plea agreement on Oct. 14, as seems likely, she would be required to testify against Laughton.

Laughton and Groves have a long-standing, volatile, and odd relationship. In 2022, Laughton was charged with harassing Groves and her family, costing Laughton a seat in the state legislature.

Laughton has been in and out of jail since at least 2008 after being convicted of credit card fraud. Four years later, Laughton was charged with a crime after calling in a bogus bomb threat at the Southern New Hampshire Medical Center in Nashua. Those charges were later dropped as Laughton claimed to be suffering from a mental health crisis.

On Organization Day in 2022, Laughton was unable to participate due to being incarcerated at the time. Only after Democrats realized Laughton would not help them close the narrow GOP majority did the House Democratic Caucus finally force a resignation.

It came out in the stalking case that Laughton had called police to report Groves was abusing children at the daycare, though that was believed to have been part of the ongoing harassment at that time.

Laughton is alleged to have repeatedly tried to get Groves fired from her job at the daycare, claiming Groves was a pedophile. Laughton reported Groves to police, as well as making the accusation on social media and on Laughton’s radio program, according to court records.

However, according to the federal case, Laughton and Groves were simpatico after the stalking case was resolved without a jail sentence. Groves started sending the sick photos to Laughton, and the two had disturbing conversations via text about the images and their own sexual desires. 

Laughton and Grove discussed raping the children at the daycare facility. In one chilling exchange, they discussed how to get away with the horrific crime. Laughton maintained there was nothing wrong with sexually abusing children.

“Oh, I know, but I just don’t wanna get in trouble. I mean, I want to do what we want to do because we like it and we approve of it, but others think this is wrong. Lots of parents don’t like people touching their kids, and it is against the law …” Laughton wrote in one exchange.

In another message, Laughton appears to admit to raping a child with Groves.

“I was asking because I know we’ve had some back-and-forth, and I know we initially said we do nothing with kids ever again, and you said you were afraid that if we had kids if they would go back and tell the parents the same with the kids you work with,” Laughton texted to Groves.

Born Barry Laughton, the Democrat’s gender identity as a transgender woman has never been straightforward. It was unclear how far Laughton’s medical transition had progressed, if at all. Laughton appears to be balding with many masculine features, though the convicted felon wears makeup and clothing traditionally identified with women. 

Laughton was married for many years to Lisa Laughton, the alleged co-conspirator in the 2008 fraud case that resulted in the felony conviction that temporarily derailed Laughton’s political career. Laughton has also conducted a long-term sexual relationship with Groves. Both Groves and Lisa Laughton are biological women. 

Both Laughton and Groves have been held since their arrests in 2023. Initially, they were kept at the Valley Street jail in Manchester, but have since been transferred into pre-trial federal custody. Federal officials decline to disclose their current location.

For years, Oscar Villacis was seen as a rising star in New Hampshire Democratic politics. A young Latino entrepreneur who turned a viral moment into a media platform won seats on city boards, posed for photos with members of Congress, and even got invited to the White House.

Now, as he launches a bid for the Nashua School Board, Villacis is facing explosive allegations from a former business partner and intern who says she endured years of emotional and financial abuse at his hands.

Oscar Villacis

Jasmine Torres, who once worked side by side with Villacis at his company, First Gen Multimedia, published a Substack essay detailing what she described as three years of verbal attacks, unpaid labor, and mounting personal debt tied to the business.

“I lived in a state of abuse for three years,” Torres told NHJournal. “People are afraid to be called a racist and are afraid of calling him out. When push comes to shove, they know he can pull the race card.”

Villacis launched his media career in 2020 when local Nashua radio host Dianna Ploss was fired after she video-recorded herself verbally harassing Hispanic laborers. Villacis took to social media, crowdfunded thousands in startup cash, and launched a show that focused on the Latino community.

In her essay, The Expose I Didn’t Want to Write,” Torres described being drawn into Villacis’s fledgling Latino-focused radio show in 2020, eventually becoming a full-time partner while still working unpaid. She alleged Villacis pressured her to reinvest revenue back into the company, leaving her unable to pay for heating or child care, and saddled her with more than $20,000 in debt to the firm.

Torres said she was subjected to late-night yelling, public beratings in the studio, and isolation from family and friends. “Because I had never been a part of a startup, I just thought this was normal business partner behavior from the stress, but it wasn’t,” she wrote.

Villacis, in an interview, acknowledged the partnership soured but called Torres’s account “baseless.” He described her as a “disgruntled former business partner” but insisted he empathizes with her pain.

“The pain is real, and it is something I do not dismiss,” Villacis said. “To speak from a place of hurt takes courage, and I want to honor that courage … I’m a champion of women, I’m raising daughters, I have nothing but love and respect.”

As for allegations of yelling, Villacis framed it as cultural. “When it comes to Latino culture and passion, when we talk loud, it might sound like we’re yelling,” he said. “She wasn’t the only one on the receiving end of the yelling; I was, too. What we were doing was for the greater cause.”

He confirmed Torres had signed non-disclosure and noncompete agreements, but said he chose not to enforce them when she left to work at PBS in 2023.

“I didn’t block that. I was happy she was able to move on and provide for her family,” he said.

Torres told NHJournal she initially planned to stay silent, but decided to speak out after Villacis began moving into politics. He was recently appointed to a Nashua city communications committee by Mayor Jim Donchess and is now campaigning for the school board.

“I knew he was going to run for the school board. That’s what really shook me the most,” Torres said.

She added that Democratic officials she confided in declined to intervene, sympathetic but unwilling to confront Villacis. “The Democratic Party abandoned me,” she said.

Villacis complained that large parts of the New Hampshire Democratic Party are biased against assertive Latino men like himself, when it should be embracing them.

“In order for us to succeed, we need to come together. The Democratic Party is set up to tear themselves apart right now,” Villacis said.

Bad news for former state Democratic Rep. Stacie Marie Laughton and romantic partner Lindsay Groves, as a federal judge cleared the way for the pair to go on trial in their shocking child sex abuse images case.

In an order issued last week, Massachusetts District Court Judge Dennis Saylor rejected defense arguments that Groves, 40, is mentally incompetent to stand trial. With questions about Groves’ intelligence and her ability to understand the charges now out of the way, the trials are scheduled for November.

Both Laughton and Groves have been in federal custody since their arrests more than two years ago. Groves is alleged to have used her position as a daycare center employee to take nude photos of young children and text them to Laughton for their shared sexual gratification. 

Groves was deemed incompetent to stand trial last year by Dr. Tina Adams, an independent clinical and forensic psychologist hired by the defense. According to Adams, Groves is severely limited intellectually, easily manipulated, and unable to understand the charges against her to assist in her own defense.

But Dr. Lauren Schumacher, a forensic psychologist employed by the Bureau of Prisons, reports that despite her limitations, Groves obtained an associate’s degree in early-childhood education from New Hampshire Community College, held down steady jobs, and was able to understand how the court system works. 

Schumacher’s report additionally found that Adams scored Groves incorrectly in one of the key assessment exams, which led to her incompetent decision. 

Saylor reviewed the reports done by Adams and Schumacher earlier this year before ruling that Groves can indeed go on trial.

“In short, [Groves] has repeatedly shown that despite her many limitations, she is capable of ordered thinking and rational communication, and that she has the ability to navigate reasonably complex situations, including obtaining higher education and holding employment for extended periods. She understands the essential nature and potential consequences of the alleged crime, and can provide meaningful assistance to her defense. Accordingly … the Court concludes that, notwithstanding her limitations, she is competent to stand trial,” Saylor wrote.

Laughton, 41, of Nashua, became a star attraction in the state Democratic Party as New Hampshire’s first transgender person elected to the legislature. State party chair Ray Buckley even gave Laughton a shoutout as one of the “LGBTQIA+ Democrats who are the backbone of the Granite State,” despite the legislator’s criminal record at the time.

Born Barry Laughton, the historic 2012 election win was short-lived as past criminal convictions soon came to light. Laughton was forced out of office weeks after the 2012 election when it was revealed he was still on probation for a felony theft charge. Laughton was subsequently charged with stalking and making bomb threats.

Laughton’s gender identity as a transgender woman has never been straightforward. It was not clear how far Laughton’s medical transition had progressed. Laughton appears to be balding with many masculine features, though the convicted felon wears makeup and clothing traditionally identified with women. 

Laughton was married for many years to Lisa Laughton, the alleged co-conspirator in the 2008 fraud case that resulted in the felony conviction that temporarily derailed Laughton’s political career. Laughton also conducted a long-term sexual relationship with Groves. Both Groves and Lisa Laughton are biological women. 

Laughton and Groves have a long-standing and volatile relationship. In 2022, Laughton was charged with harassing Groves and her family, costing Laughton a seat in the legislature. Laughton was arrested in November 2022 for stalking Groves, shortly after winning reelection to the House. Laughton was jailed for weeks until the House Democratic Caucus forced a resignation.

It came out in the stalking case that Laughton had called the police to report that Groves was abusing children at the daycare, though that was believed to have been part of the ongoing harassment.

Laughton is alleged to have repeatedly tried to get Groves fired from her job at the daycare, claiming Groves was a pedophile. Laughton reported Groves to police, as well as making the accusation on social media and on Laughton’s radio program, according to court records.

However, according to the federal case, Laughton and Groves were simpatico after the stalking case was resolved without a jail sentence. Groves started sending the photos to Laughton, and the two had disgusting conversations via text about the images and their own sexual desires. 

Laughton and Grove discussed raping the children at the daycare facility. In one chilling exchange, they discussed how to get away with the horrific crime. Laughton maintained there was nothing wrong with sexually abusing children.

GROVES: “You mentioned how I said I was afraid that the kids will run to the parents if we do it with them I wasn’t being serious.”

LAUGHTON: “OK because like I get concerned about that, cause I don’t wanna get caught if we do.”

GROVES: “I was joking anyway, and you took me serious.”

LAUGHTON: “Oh, I know, but I just don’t wanna get in trouble. I mean, I want to do what we want to do because we like it and we approve of it, but others think this is wrong. Lots of parents don’t like people touching their kids, and it is against the law …”

In another exchange, Laughton seems to admit to raping a child with Groves

“I was asking because I know we’ve had some back-and-forth, and I know we initially said we do nothing with kids ever again, and you said you were afraid that if we had kids if they would go back and tell the parents the same with the kids you work with,” Laughton texted to Groves.

Laughton and Groves were being held pre-trial at the Valley Street Jail in Manchester on state charges soon after their original arrests. But the pair have since been moved into federal custody. Representatives with the United States Attorney’s Office in Boston declined to confirm their present location.

Calling herself “the top Dem” in state government, Executive Councilor Karen Liot Hill (D–Lebanon) has been using her official position to recruit plaintiffs for a potential lawsuit against New Hampshire’s newly enacted voter ID law, and directing them to a high-profile Democratic law firm in Washington, D.C.

In emails sent from her official Executive Council account and obtained by NHJournal, Liot Hill refers potential plaintiffs to the Elias Law Firm. That’s the same Marc Elias who helped Hillary Clinton fund the research used in the now-debunked dossier behind the Russia collusion hoax.

While Liot Hill’s actions may or may not be illegal, critics point out that she’s trying to help a Washington, D.C., law firm sue the state of New Hampshire—which could cost the state hundreds of thousands of dollars—while serving as one of New Hampshire’s fiscal watchdogs.

“This is astonishingly bad judgment from a member of what effectively serves as our state’s board of directors, ignoring her fiduciary duty to our citizens and taxpayers in favor of shameless partisan hackery,” a New Hampshire attorney who does business before the Executive Council told NHJournal on background. “Sad.”

The Elias Law Firm that Liot Hill is helping is notorious for its aggressive—and expensive—legal tactics on behalf of Democratic clients and causes, such as opposing voter ID requirements.

“I am writing to ask for your help,” Liot Hill wrote. “SB 287 was recently signed into law. This is a bill that will make it harder for people to vote in New Hampshire by forcing every absentee voter to provide a copy of an acceptable photo ID—or appear in person before a clerk or a notary—each time the voter requests an absentee ballot for any election.

“I am working with some folks who are trying to identify voters who will be impacted by SB 287, and I was thinking that this may affect older folks/mobility-challenged individuals,” she wrote to Chuck Saia, executive director of the Governor’s Commission on Disability.

“Would you be willing to have a call with Tina (copied on this email, contact information below) to talk further?” Liot Hill added.

“Tina” is Tina Meng Morrison, the Elias Law Firm attorney copied on each email. Morrison’s contact information appears immediately above Liot Hill’s official Executive Council email signature.

Other emails obtained by NHJournal had nearly identical messaging and were sent to:

• Lisa Beaudoin, Strategies for Disability Equity

• Donnalee Lozeau, Community Action Partnership of Hillsborough and Rockingham counties

• Isadora Rodríguez Legendre, The Developmental Disabilities Council

• Olivia Zink, Open Democracy

Unanswered in the emails: Liot Hill’s financial relationship with the law firm. Is the Executive Councilor being paid or receiving any remuneration for her work? Has the Democratic law firm donated to her campaign? Neither Liot Hill nor Meng Morrison would say.

In fact, Liot Hill declined to respond to any questions from NHJournal, which she described in her email to Meng Morrison as “a Republican online news source.”

“I’m the top Dem in state govt in NH, and they are always attacking me,” Liot Hill complained. “I’ve stopped responding to them. I am also interested to know who forwarded my email to them.”

Liot Hill sent NHJournal’s request for comment to the attorney, to which Meng Morrison replied, “Thanks for forwarding. If you could ignore this email for any comment, that would be much appreciated.”

If she is getting paid, Liot Hill’s email campaign is ethically murky. Elected officials in New Hampshire are governed by different sets of rules. Members of the executive branch, like Liot Hill, have fewer restrictions than state legislators.

But murky finances are part of Liot Hill’s history.

According to her campaign disclosures, the Lebanon Democrat has spent thousands in campaign cash on meals, clothes, and visits to salons during the 2024 race. Her campaign expenditures included a $190 ferry ride to the Hamptons and $181 to register her car, as well as repairs around her home.

This year, she has already been reimbursed for tens of thousands of dollars in travel and other costs, despite not facing the voters again until next year.

“It should come as no surprise that Karen Liot Hill is involved in another unethical scandal. She previously misused campaign dollars; now we come to learn that she’s electioneering with taxpayer dollars,” New Hampshire GOP Chair Jim MacEachern said. “It’s shameful that she is still in her position. Granite Staters deserve better.”

Elias Law Group founder Marc Elias is a heavy hitter in the Democratic Party. He was the DNC lawyer from 2009 through 2023 and served on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. His firm represented the Democratic mail shop that sent illegal mailers into New Hampshire’s 2nd Congressional District’s GOP primary in 2022. The mail shop eventually agreed to resolve a New Hampshire Attorney General investigation with a three-year agreement that included payment of a $40,000 fine.

Elias told The New Yorker in 2021 that his firm “represents only clients who meet at least one of three criteria: they must be Democrats or an organization that helps Democrats win elections; they are bringing cases that challenge laws that restrict voting; or they are a progressive group that meets the values of our firm.”

Executive Councilors John Stephen and Dave Wheeler, both Republicans, attended an Americans for Prosperity – New Hampshire event Wednesday night discussing the role of Executive Councilors in state government. Neither would comment on their colleague’s actions, but Wheeler did acknowledge that if the state is forced to hire outside counsel to deal with an Elias lawsuit, that contract would come before Liot Hill and the Executive Council for approval.

“I don’t know any of the circumstances,” Stephen said of Liot Hill’s emails. “But I think the law is a great law, and I’m so proud that the legislature passed the law to show proof of identity and citizenship and residency in order to vote.”

Former Strafford County Sheriff Mark Brave earned at least seven years in prison for the multitude of lies he spun out to cover up his thefts and affairs, prosecutors say.

“The truthfulness of law enforcement officers, and the sanctity of their oath to tell the truth in official matters, is central to the concept of ordered liberty in the State of New Hampshire,” Assistant Attorney General Joe Fincham and Assistant Attorney General David Lovejoy wrote in a sentencing memorandum filed Monday.

Brave, New Hampshire’s first elected Black sheriff and a former rising star in the state Democratic Party, torched his career when he was caught stealing taxpayer money to fund multiple extramarital affairs. Brave was given multiple opportunities to show remorse and tell the truth, prosecutors say, but he chose his own path.

“Instead, during the investigation into the defendant’s conduct, the defendant publicly and repeatedly accused the State and other local government officials of conspiring to pervert justice and persecute the defendant without any factual or legal basis – motivated, the defendant claimed, by base political vendettas and racial biases,” Lovejoy and Fincham wrote.

“Throughout the investigation and prosecution, and in an effort to conceal his charged crimes and other frauds he perpetrated upon this Honorable Court, the defendant chose to repeatedly lie to the State, chose to repeatedly lie to the Strafford County Grand Jury, and chose to repeatedly lie to this Honorable Court – all in an effort to avoid and pervert the system of justice that he was sworn to uphold.”

Brave is scheduled to be sentenced this month in Strafford Superior Court on two felony counts of perjury, the only charges in his plea agreement yet to be resolved. Brave pleaded guilty in February to the perjury counts as well as charges of theft by deception, and falsifying physical evidence. 

The plea deal allows Brave to get suspended sentences for the theft and falsifying evidence convictions, but the perjury Brave committed during his testimony before a Grand Jury in 2023 is a different matter. Lovejoy and Fincham argue Brave knew what he was doing when he swore to tell the truth during that testimony.

“The defendant then spent approximately one hour and 45 minutes lying about virtually every aspect of his repeated thefts – sometimes repeating old lies, sometimes telling new ones, and sometimes attempting to reconcile differing lies. A complete accounting of all of the defendant’s material lies to the Grand Jury would be monumental. The aggregated lies in the five perjury indictments in this case provide just a sampling of the contempt for the truth, for the sanctity of the defendant’s oath, and for the authority and solemnity of the Strafford County Grand Jury that so permeated the defendant’s testimony,” they wrote.

Monday’s sentencing memorandum will likely inspire a response from Brave and his attorney, Leif Becker, ahead of the sentencing hearing. The state wants Brave to get 3.5 to 7 years in prison on each perjury conviction, and wants those sentences to run consecutively, not concurrently.

According to Lovejoy and Fincham, Brave is beyond hope of rehabilitation and needs prison to punish his lies, to restore public trust in law enforcement, and to discourage other public officials from following his example.

“The sentence in this case must aid to repair the damage done by the defendant’s crimes to the public perception of the integrity of the criminal justice system and government institutions generally, including assuring the public that law enforcement officials (and other individuals) are sufficiently deterred from undermining the integrity of proceedings by committing Perjury,” the prosecutors wrote.

There were at least three women Brave was romancing with taxpayer funds, according to court records. Monday’s filing makes clear his lies and fraud extended to his paramours. One woman, Kenisha Epp Schmidt, gave Brave $2,300 so he could help her buy a used car. But that deal followed the typical Brave playbook for money and relationships.

“She had given the defendant $2,300.00 to help with purchasing a new car because she trusted him at the time, but the defendant never delivered the car and always had excuses for why there was no car and why he could not give her the money back. Ultimately, Schmidt had to file a police report with the Dover Police Department concerning the defendant’s actions,” Fincham and Lovejoy wrote. 

Love hurts.

Former Strafford County Sheriff Mark Brave pleaded guilty on Thursday to charges he stole $19,000 in taxpayer money to fund his extramarital affairs. It was part of a deal to avoid some prison time.

But the plea agreement Brave reached with prosecutors still leaves him facing up to 14 years behind bars on perjury charges.

Brave’s deal has him pleading guilty to felony charges of theft by deception, falsifying physical evidence, and perjury for lying to a grand jury. In exchange for the guilty pleas, Brave agreed to two suspended terms of three and a half to seven years on the theft and falsifying physical evidence convictions.

But the sentences on the two perjury convictions are still open. Brave faces seven to 14 years for lying to the grand jury. The deal terms leave the question of the perjury sentences for a judge to decide. The sentencing hearing will take place sometime in the next three months, with both defense and prosecutors presenting arguments.

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. 

As part of the deal, the charges based on Brave’s later lies to the court in Rockingham County are being dismissed.

Brave, the Strafford County Democrat who became New Hampshire’s first Black sheriff, faced decades in prison after he got caught maxing out his county credit card for amorous trips and romantic getaways. He compounded his troubles by lying. He lied to the grand jury, he lied to the press claiming he was the target of racial animus from the county commissioners, and he lied to the court.

According to Rockingham Superior Court records, Brave lied about his finances in order to score a free public defense attorney. At the time he was flush with cash from selling his Dover home. He had enough money to buy a classic 1968 Porsche and pay a year’s lease on an apartment in Massachusetts.

The out-of-state apartment was part of another lie to the court. Brave was under orders to stay in New Hampshire, but he had moved to Massachusetts soon after his divorce went through. All the time, he claimed to still be in New Hampshire.

In fact, Brave may have told one recorded truth throughout the saga when he was questioned in front of a grand jury by Allison Vachon, an investigator for the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office. Confronted by surveillance video of himself and the woman he spent a romantic weekend with in Boston, including a harbor dinner cruise, the then-married Brave was unable to come up with her name.

“Her name, her name is … um … Let me see, I forget which one this is. I’ve been dating a lot of people,” Brave testified.

Brave reportedly used his county credit card for out-of-state trips involving multiple women. In many cases, he created a web of easily disproved lies to justify the trips.

Brave claimed many trips were connected to meetings and conferences hosted by an organization called the New England Sheriff’s Association. Vachon reported that despite Brave’s insistence the group is real, she could not find any proof that the New England Sheriff’s Association actually exists. 

In one instance, he went to Maryland on the pretense of meeting with U.S. Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.). Brave told investigators that Pappas canceled the meeting at the last minute but gave the sheriff a flag that flew over the U.S. Capitol by way of apology.

Vachon called the congressman’s office and was told there was no scheduled meeting between Brave and Pappas. Instead, it turned out Brave was meeting with a Maryland woman he met online.

Brave’s once promising career in law enforcement may be coming to a close, but politics may be an option down the line. Brave will be eligible to run for state office again once he serves out his sentences. 

Former Strafford County Sheriff Mark Brave (D) is getting yet another life lesson about consequences as a grand jury in Rockingham Superior Court handed up criminal indictments connected to the lies he allegedly told in order to get a free lawyer.

The 39-year-old disgraced ex-lawman and one-time New Hampshire Democratic Party star is getting two new felonies and three new misdemeanors added to the long list of criminal charges that forced him from office last year. The indictments come after Brave turned down at least two different plea agreement offers earlier this year.

Brave was charged last summer for allegedly stealing $19,000 in taxpayer money in order to fund his love life, and then lying about it when brought before a grand jury. The new indictments allege Brave followed up his arrest in the theft and perjury case by lying to the courts about his income and place of residence.

Brave allegedly hid the fact he cleared a substantial amount of money from the sale of his Dover home in order to qualify for a free public defender. Brave reportedly made enough money from the sale to buy a 1968 Porsche and pay a year’s lease up front on an apartment in Massachusetts.

At the time, however, Brave was under court orders to reside in New Hampshire. The disgraced Democrat got around that order by simply lying, according to the indictments. Brave told court officials he was living in a Dover apartment rather than out of state.

When the alleged lies were discovered late last year, Brave was still Strafford County Sheriff. He was collecting his salary while on administrative leave, despite no longer living in the state. The revelation about the Massachusetts apartment and his income forced Brave into a December deal to finally resign from his post in order to stay out of jail for violating his bail order.

Now the lies have come back to bite Brave in the form of the new indictments. 

Prosecutors said last month, before the indictments were handed up, that any trial in the original case won’t happen until next year. There’s still the opportunity for Brave to seek a plea agreement. But with the new charges it appears he does not have leverage in any possible negotiation.

Elected in 2020 as New Hampshire’s first Black sheriff, Brave promised to reform the police culture within the department. At the time, though, the Strafford County Sheriff’s Department focused less on law enforcement and more on civil process service.

Brave allegedly promoted a woman he took to Florida on the county dime to a “special deputy” position despite the fact she was not a certified police officer. He allegedly maxed out his county credit card on expenses from taking various women on dates and short vacations. Brave wooed so many different women, in fact, that he could not identify a specific woman when questioned by investigators. At the time, Brave was married, though he’s since divorced.

Earlier in the investigation, Brave claimed his fellow Democrats on the Stratford County Commissioners were racists who were out to get him. That’s unlikely to be an effective strategy in court, lawyers tell NHJournal.

Strafford County voters now face the choice between Republican Scott Tingle and Democrat Kathryn Mone. 

Mone’s resume includes her recent stint as the North Hampton Police Chief where she oversaw a mass employee exodus while she micromanaged the staff, according to sources. The town was stuck with a $150,000 tab settling a case overseen by Mone that involved two of her officers improperly arresting a woman for drinking beer at home while watching baseball, after they performed an illegal search.

Karen Liot Hill may serve as the treasurer of Grafton County, but her use of campaign dollars for personal expenses in her Executive Council race is raising eyebrows.

According to her campaign disclosures, the Lebanon Democrat has spent thousands in campaign cash on meals, clothes, and visits to salons. Her campaign expenditures include a $190 ferry ride to the Hamptons and $181 to register her car.

Liot Hill also reports spending $7,004 on gas for her car, $755 for car maintenance, and another $8,330 on meals. 

Gubernatorial candidate Joyce Craig (D-Manchester) ran a bruising statewide primary campaign against Executive Councilor Cinde Warmington (D-District 2) and reports spending just $849 for meals.

“I’ve run a very grassroots campaign,” Liot Hill said.

The detailed reports on Liot Hill’s spending also include unexplained checks totaling $1,350 that appear to correspond to two court cases against her: a violation for driving with a suspended license and another involving a debt collection.

Liot Hill serves on the Lebanon City Council and is the elected Grafton County Treasurer. She’s also a former restaurant owner whose business went under during the COVID pandemic. That hardship is behind the financial difficulties she had earlier this year.

On Dec. 12, 2023, a car financing company filed a motion for contempt against Liot Hill in Lebanon District Court for her failure to comply with a previous payment order. At the time, Liot Hill had not made a payment since June 2023 and had an outstanding balance of $1,061, according to court records. The case was resolved this February after Liot Hill paid $945.

In January of this year, Liot Hill was again in trouble, but this time in a traffic case. She was charged in June 2023 for driving with a suspended license. The case was resolved with Liot Hill pleading no contest and agreeing to pay $620 in fines and court costs. However, court records show that Liot Hill’s first check to cover the fine bounced on Jan. 8.

Contacted Thursday, Liot Hill denied she used campaign funds to cover payments related to her court cases. However, she did not immediately recall why or to whom she paid $600 on Dec. 26, or $750 on Jan. 12. The campaign reports do not give any information about the recipient or purpose of those payments, unlike the thousands of other expense entries.

“They might be reimbursements to me,” Liot Hill said.

Liot Hill called back a short time later after checking her bank accounts to say the two checks were for reimbursements for different subscription services related to the campaign. 

Liot Hill told NHJournal she planned to amend her campaign reports to reflect the correct details on the two checks. But those checks represent a fraction of the $113,000 she has spent on the campaign. Liot Hill won her primary against Mike Liberty despite Liberty’s spending more than $400,000 on his campaign. Instead of television ads or digital ads, Liot Hill said, she put 40,000 miles on her car to meet voters.

“I’ve driven 1,000 miles a week. That’s how I won despite being outspent four to one. A lot of expenses are related to meeting the people and being out on the road,” she said. 

Having the campaign reimburse her for gas ultimately saved money, Liot Hill argued. She could have taken a mileage reimbursement at 75 cents per mile, but that would have driven the cost up to about $30,000 instead of $7,000.

Liot Hill noted that Executive Council District 2 is a large area, going from the Monadnock region and Keene, to north of the Upper Valley, and then out to Concord. But it’s not as large as District 1, where Democrat Emmett Soldati spent just $31,000 of the $106,000 he raised. Those expenditures include $1,500 for gas and $677 for meals.

Unlike Liot Hill, Soldati did not face a competitive primary opponent.

Liot Hill’s unusual campaign spending doesn’t end with dinner and a drive.

Also included is a $250 payment to a Vermont heating oil company. That payment was made in July to a company that performs $250 annual furnace tuneups. Liot Hill denied she used campaign money to service her heating system, but she did not have an immediate explanation for the charge.

Liot Hill also spent $711 on hair and nails, $1,600 on clothes, $330 on books, and $1,230 at grocery stores on “food and flowers.” Additionally, Liot Hill spent $736 on airfare, $453 on hotels, and $1,017 on transportation. Many of those expenses are not out of the ordinary for campaigns, including the out-of-state travel she charged.

Asked about her out-of-state stays, including a trip to Orient Point on the Hamptons in New York, Liot Hill said there were fundraising ventures to her old home turf.

“I grew up on Long Island,” she said.

However, a review of the donations reported by her campaign shows Liot Hill brought in a negligible amount of money from out-of-state donors. Her campaign reports nine donations from New York residents totaling $4,250. Her campaign has raised more than $122,000 as of the Sept. 19 report.

Vincent Liot, a retired Sag Harbor, N.Y. resident, accounts for four of those New York donations. Vincent Liot gave the campaign $3,550 in total, and Carolyn Liot from East Hampton, N.Y., gave another $300. The four New York donors not named Liot gave a total of $400.

At the other end of spectrum, Liot Hill’s opponent in the general election, Republican Kim Strathdee, is reporting zero money raised or spent. Candidates are not required to report any spending if the total is under $1,000.

State Rep. Ross Berry (R-Manchester), who has pushed for campaign finance reforms in the past, said the current law gives candidates a wide berth when it comes to how they spend money. Spending campaign money on personal expenses is prohibited, but defining what’s personal and what’s not gets tricky due to New Hampshire’s citizen legislature and Executive Council.

“That can open a Pandora’s Box, and we don’t want to curtail someone’s First Amendment rights,” Berry said.

Instead, New Hampshire law leaves it to voters and donors to oversee the candidates, he said. Candidates must be transparent in how they spend money, and who they get that money from.

“The point of campaign finance reporting is so the public can suss out if there’s an appearance of impropriety,” he said.

Former House Speaker Donna Sytek, who is a current member of the House Legislative Ethics Committee, said candidates need to make sure they can show donors they are spending donations in an appropriate manner. 

“You have to be able to tie it to the campaign,” Sytek said. “In a campaign, it’s best not to be on the receiving end of questions about possibly unusual expenses.”