#

A middle-aged man buying a sports car while going through a divorce might not be a crime, but Strafford County Sheriff Mark Brave could end up in jail after treating himself to a 1968 Porsche, according to court records.

The first-term Democrat is already facing eight felonies for stealing taxpayer money to fund his love life. Now prosecutors say Brave lied to court officials about being too poor to pay for a lawyer ten days after he bought the classic car.

The new allegations against Brave, laid out in motions filed in the Rockingham Superior Court on Friday, are that the Sheriff lied under oath about where he lived, lied in his written application for a free public defender, lied to the judge when questioned about his finances, and lied again to Strafford County taxpayers when he collected $10,000 in salary despite no longer living in New Hampshire. 

Prosecutors want to revoke Brave’s bail, saying he committed at least one count each of felony theft and perjury since being arraigned in the original case on Sept. 28. They are seeking a bail hearing as soon as possible.

Brave’s already had his free public defender canceled when the state raised questions about the truthfulness of his financial disclosures this week. It was those disclosures and his prior sworn testimony about his living situation that could send him behind bars.

According to the motions filed by Assistant Attorneys General Joe Fincham and David Lovejoy, days after he was released on bail, Brave paid more than $50,000 to a Tewksbury, Mass. couple for a year’s rent on an apartment in the Bay State. The couple would tell investigators Brave does, in fact, live in Massachusetts. That’s the location where Brave had his Porsche delivered on Oct. 17, according to photos he posted on his Instagram account, Fincham and Lovejoy write.

“LOOK WHAT FINALLY ARRIVED THIS MORNING FINALLY!” Brave posted with photos of the 1968 Porsche 356 soft-top convertible. 

Brave has since taken his account private, and the photos were not included in the filing. Porsche 356s from the 1960s can range in price from about $100,000 to much more depending on the model year and features.

For Brave, living outside New Hampshire isn’t just a violation of his bail order. It’s also against state law for elected officials to live outside the state while serving, and getting paid to serve. Brave, who is on paid administrative leave, has collected more than $10,000 in salary since he signed the Massachusetts lease.

Brave is also accused of being less than forthcoming about his living situation. During a status of counsel hearing on Oct. 26, he told Judge Dan. St. Hilaire said he could not afford the $75,000 to $100,000 retainer for legal representation from Shaheen & Gordon. When questioned about his living situation, Brave swore under oath that he lived in an apartment in Dover. 

What Brave didn’t know during the Oct. 26 status hearing where he allegedly perjured himself is that investigators had already been to the Dover apartment and spoken to his soon-to-be ex-wife, Jamie Brave. 

Jamie Brave told the investigators Mark Brave lived in Massachusetts and she lived in the Dover apartment. She would later tell investigators Mark Brave had much more money than he claimed in court.

According to Jamie Brave, both she and her husband walked away from the sale of their home with $240,000 apiece. Brave also got the couple’s Mercedes SUV. And while Brave has claimed he’s paying tuition for two of his three children, Jamie Brave told the investigators he’s paying for one child’s tuition. 

On the application for a public defender, Mark Brave claimed he got $190,000 from the house sale and ended up with $3,500 as he used his money to pay off debt. 

Jamie Brave told the investigators that her husband had his mail forwarded to the Dover apartment, and at one point asked her to put his name on the lease. She declined.

Brave seems to have a poor relationship with the truth. He’s already charged with perjury for allegedly lying to a grand jury about who he was traveling to Florida with on the County dime. It was a woman not his wife.

This week, the County released an internal report about Jamie Brave’s December 2022 driving under the influence arrest. According to the report, Mark Brave lied to county officials and his deputies about the arrest. Mark Brave went with a story that he was home with his children when his wife was arrested. 

“She should have called an Uber,” Brave reportedly said.

In truth, he was also in the car at the time and he was too drunk to drive, according to police reports. The Sheriff was taken into protective custody after blowing a 0.15 percent blood alcohol content, almost twice the legal limit. He was released into the custody of a friend, who is also a part-time deputy, according to the report. 

He’s reportedly lied about his college degrees and law enforcement experience, as well. 

Former state Sen. Andy Sanborn said he is eager to defend against accusations he used his Concord Casino to engage in COVID relief fraud.

Just not yet.

“We are very much looking forward to meeting these allegations head-on in a fair proceeding … but not in a rigged proceeding,” said Zachary Hafer, one of Sanborn’s lawyers.

Merrimack Superior Court Judge Amy Ignatius

Hafer appeared in Merrimack Superior Court on Monday to ask Judge Amy Ignatius for an order forcing the New Hampshire Lottery Commission to treat his client fairly.

Sanborn was not in court. Hafer said Sanborn was dealing with serious medical issues. 

Sanborn isn’t actually due in any court – yet — over charges he misused $844,000 in COVID relief funds to buy himself two Porsches and a Ferrari for his wife, state Rep. Laurie Sanborn (R-Bedford), among other accusations. New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella has opened a criminal investigation into the alleged fraud, and he has referred the case to the United States Attorney’s Office.

While Sanborn has not been charged with any crime, he still faces the loss of his casino license over the allegations. Sanborn was scheduled for an Oct. 13 hearing before the New Hampshire Lottery Commission after Formella declared Sanborn was “not suitable to be associated with charitable gaming in New Hampshire due to evidence of COVID-19 relief fraud involving Concord Casino’s charitable gaming business.”

But Sanborn and his team have stalled, making demands about the evidence, the rules of the hearing, even who the presiding officer will be, said the attorney representing the Lottery Commission, Assistant Attorney General Christine Wilson.

“We’ve offered them pretty much everything they want. I think they’re trying to drag out this process,” Wilson said.

On Oct. 12, Sanborn’s legal team got a temporary court injunction to stop the Oct. 13 hearing, claiming they did not have enough time to mount a proper defense and requesting a delay until Dec. 3. On Monday, Hafer and his team requested an additional delay to Dec 11.

Wilson said pushing the decision on Sanborn’s license to next year could be a net positive for the embattled owner.

“Running out the clock is a real possibility,” Wilson said.

Sanborn’s casino license expires on Dec. 31, as a matter of course. Wilson said that allowing it to expire without getting revoked could make it easier for Sanborn to transfer ownership.

Hafer took umbrage at the suggestion that he and his team are stalling.

“The idea we’re operating in bad faith and trying to run out the clock is nonsense,” Hafer said.

Judge Ignatius seemed skeptical that there was a role for her in this drama. The casino industry already has a body for complaints, rulings, and appeals — the Lottery Commission. 

“Why is this in the superior court?” Ignatius asked.

Hafer argued court intervention was needed because the Lottery Commission is playing games like “heads we win, tails you lose.” He said he wants Igantius to order the Lottery Commission hearing for December, require the Lottery Commission to follow one set of fair administrative rules, pick a fair, qualified independent professional to oversee the hearing and prohibit any surprises from the commission.

The commission initially said it would not call witnesses for the Oct. 13 hearing but then gave Hafer and his team three different sets of witness lists. The commission also gave inconclusive answers when asked about the burden of proof that will be used at the hearing. The burden of proof being on the plaintiff or on the defendant depends on which set of administrative hearing rules are used, and the commission indicated it would use different sets of rules at different points, Hafer claimed.

Wilson acknowledged the commission could have handled things better. “Nobody is saying the process and how we got here is perfect,” Wilson said.

Hafer also worried the commission would bring up old accusations against Sanborn as part of the hearing on his license.

Sanborn’s history includes accusations of stiffing creditors in a 2000s business bankruptcy case. There is also a history of sexual harassment allegations from his time as a state senator, which resulted in a New Hampshire Department of Justice investigation. Sanborn was cleared in 2018 of bribing a Senate intern in connection to those allegations.

As for the current accusation, the commission and the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office aren’t professional accountants, Hafer said. The state investigation is riddled with errors and is based on incomplete and unaudited financial records.

“At best, this investigation was sloppy. At best,” Hafer said.

Ignatius said she would release a written order laying out the role she sees for the court in this dispute, but she made it clear that her goal is to get this case “back in the hands of the Lottery Commission.”