Andrew Livernois, Belknap County, NH, County Attorney Email Chain

Mr. Livernois,
I was arrested in Belmont on February 28th, 2019 at the direction of the NH Drug Task
Force. This arrest was executed wholly to put pressure on me to give up actionable
information about a higher level suspect. I have since learned that if I had cooperated
with the task force that day, I could have put myself at risk of imminent harm. Upon
information and belief, I am aware that the suspect in question has law enforcement
officials feeding him information, possibly representing a leak that comes from within the
task force itself. I will sign an affidavit that attests to that fact.
This case has since taken on a whole new meaning for me. I am forced to fight for my
good name as well as work to make sure there is no hint that I am cooperating in any
way with any law enforcement officials.
I have extensive experience with the tactics of litigating cases, and I have successfully
represented myself in both criminal and civil actions in multiple jurisdictions, including:
Indiana, Massachusetts, Nevada and New Hampshire. I also brought matters before the
7th Circuit Court of Appeals related to an Indiana case where I was named in an
injunction (to prevent me from writing a book about the defendant) but not as a party to
the case.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1558147.html
I know there are fundamental problems and fatal flaws with this case at hand, and I will
set about exposing these during the March 21st hearing. The most prevalent of issues
is a clear violation of my 4th and 14th Amendment rights and a host of issues that
illustrated to me that my arrest was never meant to be permanent. I was expected to
immediately cooperate, but I thankfully did not in light of what I've learned since. Once I
cooperated the arrest would have likely been made to look like it never even happened.
I have yet to be given any formal documents listing my exact charges, as if it REALLY
NEVER HAPPENED anyway. The bail bondsman had more information on my case
than I had, and he wasn't even under arrest for the crime, or made to believe he was.
I would appreciate your urgent attention in providing the following original materials, or
official true and correct copies of these materials. This shall be considered a formal
request for discovery, and I can pick everything up at your office on Monday if
everything can be compiled by then.
1. The full police report on the actual arrest produced by the Belmont Police Department
2. All official reports, notes, photos/videos, and surveillance logs related to the task
force investigation against me as a whole, all records relating to my subsequent arrest
and the names of the two arresting officers who came to my residence on the morning
of February 28th.

3. All accounting materials detailing the total taxpayer/State of NH costs of this
particular investigation by the task force, up to and including the day of my arrest.
4. A true, correct and complete sufficient copy of the video/audio recording of the
discussions I had with the Drug Task Force Officers on the day of my arrest.
5. Official charging documents that outline the exact wording of my charges, how many
counts I am facing, and what the minimum and maximum sentence for the offense(s)
would be.
6. Any materials/documentation relating to formal or informal disciplinary actions taken
against any of the officers/agents who participated in my investigation. This includes
verbal reprimands for improper behavior or unprofessional behavior in the execution of
their official duties.
7. The full names of all officers/agents and those who acted in any official capacity in
the investigation of my case.
8. A full accounting of any and all officially designated "evidence" materials that will be
utilized to press the state's case which are not named among the above requests.
If there is anything in the above material you refuse to provide, I will remind the judge
assigned to the case of the following:
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87 (1963). This bedrock principle of the criminal
justice system forms the basis of a prosecutor's obligation to inform criminal defendants
of any exculpatory and/or impeachment evidence which relates to their case.
Exculpatory evidence is evidence that is favorable to the accused. This includes
evidence that is material to the guilt, innocence, or punishment of the accused or that
may impact the credibility of a government witness, including a police officer. It is
paramount that this obligation is scrupulously complied with in order to maintain the
public's confidence in the criminal justice system.
Please let me know when I can obtain all this material. I look forward to hearing your
response.
Mr. Livernois,

I am attaching a recording of a phone call I had with the two co-CEOs of Xyience,
Incorporated from my first legal adventure in Las Vegas. These two highly educated
individuals were put in place to purposely bankrupt the company on behalf of the
billionaire Fertittta family. I was the only one trying to stop their giant, sophisticated con
job at the time. They were suing me for $25 million for defaming the company even
while these two monkeys were going to my site to figure out the company's actual
history.
Bankrupting Xyience would be the practice run for their bankrupting of an entire casino
chain. If Donald Trump just "took advantage of" the federal bankruptcy laws, the
Fertittas raped those laws to get where they are today.
I spent over 6 years on the Xyience case. I cultivated inside sources at the company
who gave me my most damning evidence of the corruption. I even called into a
conference call once where the opening topic of conversation was a company-wide
email I sent out from outside their system.
I do not have so much as a parking ticket in this state on my criminal record and not a
whisper of any drug crimes in Massachusetts or anything significant from my years in
Massachusetts. When the police play their games and are allowed to lie and set people
up, they must use a qualified player in the system to play those games with. They can't
literally find a random guy on the side of the road stuck in a uhaul truck in a snowstorm.
No more than the Red Sox can find a bum in a cardboard box on Yawkey Way and
dress him for a game that night to play first base.
The police can't pretend to help an innocent guy when they have no capability of
actually helping, and they can't target a person with no history of the criminal act in
question to manufacture and then prosecute a series of felonies out of thin air. I was
induced to help out who I thought was a fellow logger. I gave him my business card not
to offer to get him drugs but to supply him with work close to home that was too far from
where I lived. I wanted to give him business and customers. It was all his idea for me to
sell drugs to the State of NH. I gave two people my business card that night. One of
them actually helped and I offered to get him firewood. He never contacted me again
and he wouldn't take the $10 I offered him. That guy pulled me out with a chain and
went on his way after taking a bunch of incessant honking from the traffic. TWO cops
saw me that night. One tried to get me to PAY for a wrecker, which I know provides
kickbacks to the department. The other cop set me up on a bunch of felonies. A private
citizen ends up being the real hero, and the system just sucks in this picture, and I'm
going to paint it perfectly for the judge and the jury.
When balancing the legal concern of whether entrapment is an absolute defense, the
two sides you must examine are whether the police acted inappropriately AND whether
or not the target is a legitimate one who qualifies for the operation even before officers

come on the scene. My record shows I am not only a law abiding citizen, but I've gone
out of my way to help the government in the past voluntarily. I even agreed with you
before meeting to cooperate on the leaks in this investigation. I haven't and will not ask
for anything in return for that cooperation.
The difference between your side and mine is I don't play games with the truth and
never will. While you guys are explaining all the lies that shape your effort to prosecute
me, I will be using your own evidence against you to show I was always truthful and
forthcoming. I was trying to HELP someone, and that person in turn did nothing but
manufacture a weak, tainted case against me.
On the government behavior side, this case is a train wreck for you. The fact that I
legitimately promised to take a polygraph test and give you exclusive information as to
where the leaks are coming from and you've done absolutely nothing to get a law
enforcement official to talk with me is now paramount to my defense as well. I COULD
BE DEAD because you didn't find this leak and eliminate it. I no longer trust you for that
reason and others to have my best interests in mind and to adequately help the state
police itself. If I have to find and expose the leaks myself, I will.
The bottom line is I am going to rake you over the coals in court with your own so-called
facts and evidence, because this case personally pisses me off like no other. I am an
inherently good person who went through four years of military school and learned to
live by an honor code. The Xyience case taught me the truth always shines through in
the end. The fact that the state would ruin a man like me over less than a half pound of
weed is disgusting and needs to be addressed in a very serious manner whereby the
State will have to suffer financially in the long run. It's just not right no matter what way
you slice it.
The problem with your task force's war on weed is that it's too ingrained in our society to
stop now. It's too late for all this bullshit they are doing to mean anything. Meanwhile I
think every day of my father's best friend, a man who gave over 40 years of his life to
law enforcement. That man's son died with a needle in his arm sitting in a damn porta-
potty. Opioids and heroin need to be stopped. Weed just can't be and it's a waste of
state resources that you would even assemble a case like mine to try to stop it that way.
Again, I am eager to read the indictment. If you proceed with it, maybe the court will go
along for a little while, but the truth and the facts will mandate that this case be thrown
out. The vein of entrapment law it qualifies for actually bars the state from proceeding
with prosecution since the legislative intent was never to prosecute an entrapped
individual.

As I have said to many other former adversaries in civil court, please go ahead and
bring me into court. I welcome this opportunity to defend myself. I also look forward to
exposing the state's multiple failures and mistakes in my case. I will show you what no
law school can teach, and the judge will simply have to appreciate the fact that you
picked on the wrong guy to fight your war on.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uzschr5gj1b0966/frankandsanford.mp3?dl=0
Notice & Request for Inquiry Into NH Attorney General
Drug Task Force Leaks
Mr. Livernois,
As I recently expressed to you in a prior email, I believe the NH AG's Drug Task Force,
or at least one person within that unit, could have put my life and safety in danger in
attempting to get me to cooperate against their main suspect attached to my case. I
have reason to believe their task force's real target has access to sources in law
enforcement and within the task force itself. While I am not willing to participate any
further in helping them in any fashion with their investigation, I also would be equally
unwilling to cooperate with them on what I know about the leaks.
However, I remain concerned that I may be targeted by this potential rogue officer or
multiple officers who may feel they have to silence me to save themselves. I honestly
have no idea how far up this operation goes, and I legitimately fear for my safety at this
point from higher up sources than the target in question here. I would request that
special consideration be granted this case as far as the publication in the newspaper of
my arrest, which would normally include my address. This development would most
likely put me at much greater risk to anyone who is waiting for that police log to find out
my address if they don't know it already.
I realize that my prior email does not take into consideration the timetable laid out in the
local criminal rules of procedure for discovery. I apologize for that and will be more
timely with those requests in the future. I am under a tremendous amount of pressure
and stress due to these manufactured criminal accusations against me.
I would like to formally request a meeting with another independent investigative unit or
representative thereof where I can discuss only the aspects of the case dealing with the
law enforcement leaks. I will cooperate fully with any investigation on that subject. I
would like to also inform you that I am not an enemy of the state and have cooperated

in the past (without being coerced in any fashion or threatened with charges) with
investigations by the FBI, SEC and IRS regarding casino operations, bankruptcy
fraud,money laundering and tax evasion cases in Las Vegas and California. If you are
really interested in weeding out officers of the law who are feeding targets of
investigation information, effectively making entire investigations like this absolutely
useless, please take this matter seriously. I am willing to take a polygraph test to prove
that I am telling the truth about these leaks and legitimately have fears for my safety.
Please confirm receipt of this email at your earliest convenience.
Dear Mr. Bergeron:
I am in receipt of your two previous emails, in which you have asked for, among other things, discovery
materials and a meeting to discuss your concerns with how the investigation into your case is being
handled.
I am not familiar with your individual case. But, given that you have been arrested, and presumably
have been charged with a crime by the police, it would not be appropriate for me to engage in these
sorts of communications with you at this time. You have a right to counsel, and at your arraignment will
be provided with a lawyer. As a result, I cannot engage directly with you about these matters.
What I would recommend is that you speak with your attorney at your earliest convenience and discuss
your concerns initially with him or her. That lawyer can then communicate directly with me about any
of your concerns. If your counsel feels like it is in your interests to speak directly with me, I would be
open to further discussions about that.
As the chief law enforcement official in the County, I take allegations of police misconduct very
seriously, and would follow up diligently on any credible allegations about misconduct. But I cannot
deal with you directly on these issues unless and until you speak first with your counsel.
Yours,
Andrew Livernois
/s/ Andrew B. Livernois
Andrew B. Livernois, Esq.
Belknap County Attorney
64 Court Street
Laconia, NH 03246
603-527-5440
alivernois@belknapcounty.org

Mr. Livernois,
Let me save you the trouble of waiting for me to find an attorney. I hereby waive my
right to legal counsel, as I intend to represent myself in these matters.
I am fully capable of doing so and look forward to the opportunity to clear my name.
I am not only experienced in working as my own attorney, I also wrote a book on the
subject:
https://www.amazon.com/Representing-Yourself-Court-Rewards-
Practicing/dp/1511715464
So I assure you I do not need any legal assistance.
Thanks for your prompt response,
Dear Mr. Bergeron:
If you have been arrested, then I presume you have a date scheduled for your arraignment. At your
arraignment, you can file an appearance seeking to represent yourself pro se. Assuming that the judge
accepts your appearance and allows you to go forward pro se, then at that point I will be free to speak
with you directly about the facts related to your case. But until that point in time, I do not feel
comfortable doing so.
I don't feel comfortable waiting that long on an issue that could impact my safety. Is there
another investigative unit that can deal with my concerns without your direct involvement?
Mr. Bergeron:
You are free to voluntarily speak with any law enforcement agency (federal, state, local, or county) that
you feel is appropriate to deal with your concerns. Given the limited information that I have at this
point, I can’t really recommend a particular law enforcement agency. I work regularly with members of
the Belmont Police Department and the members of the NH Attorney General’s Task Force. Therefore,
if I had concerns about a member of one of those agencies engaging in misconduct, then I would
normally refer that to the Belknap County Sheriff’s Office or the N.H. State Police.
Again, I would be happy to discuss these things in much greater detail with you after you have been
arraigned on March 21st
.

Yours,
Andrew
64 Court Street
Laconia, NH 03246
603-527-5440
ARE YOU TRYING TO GET ME KILLED
NOW????????????????
Andrew,
Let's cut the bullshit. I told you a while back that I am representing myself here. There is
no excuse for you to fail to ever even explain to me what my official charges are. We
need some questions answered now, and when a judge hears what went on here, he or
she is going to be just as angry as I am.
First, what kind of justice system allows for someone to be arrested and not find out
exactly what they are officially charged with until they see the police log published in the
paper?
Second, did you think I would be assuaged by the fact that the charge is now
possession instead of a felony level offense with 6-counts compounding it like I was told
in my illegal interrogation?
The fact is the state just outright violated my rights to equal protection under the law
through the police and now through your office with these reduced charges published in
the paper. I expressly told you publishing my name and address in the paper at all could
endanger my life. Now to add insult to injury, the charges being reduced makes me
appear like a cooperating witness to anyone who knew what I was really facing.
Are you seriously thinking you can get away with this? I know your history, too. I have
records of questionable behavior on your part that throws this whole case into doubt.
Don't think I can't find all the skeletons in your closet that make you look like a co-
conspirator trying to frame me for this bullshit. The judge is going to hear all about the
misconduct in this case and the thick thread of corruption that runs through it. Before

this hearing even takes place there will be ample documentation proving the state is in a
legal mess that's going to have a lot of people, including yourself, wrapped up in civil
court for years.
I am done playing your games. The games are over. The bullshit stops when the real
facts hit the docket. I will not stand for having my rights violated, my life put at risk, and
then you trying to cover it all up by hitting me with the least possible charge like it's an
olive branch of some sort. It's garbage, and the worst part is YOU KNOW IT and you
are still trying to serve it to me.
You know the problem with lies and cover ups???????
Every situation where they arise the person who just tells the truth the whole time ends
up not having to make things up and is less likely to foul up on what's supposed to be
the official line and the government's story that they are sticking to even if it's wrong.
Your conduct in all this will not be forgotten.
I told you not to pursue this. I warned you that the facts would come out and they will.
No judge in any jurisdiction in this free country would stand for the treatment I've
experienced at the hands of the JUSTICE SYSTEM here. This is absolutely outrageous
and you should be ashamed you have any part in it.
Mr. Bergeron,
As I explained to you, I am not able to discuss the case against you until you have been
arraigned next week. At that time, you will receive copies of the charging documents and will
know exactly what you are charged with. Thereafter, your counsel will. E provided with copies of
the discovery information.
I do not control what information the Belmont Police Department shares with the newspapers
regarding arrests. Nor did I provide any information about your case to the press.
Sent from my iPhone
Even if the defendant exercises his right to self representation to his detriment, the Constitution
ordinarily guarantees him the opportunity to do so. A defendant who represents himself cannot
thereafter complain that the quality of his defense denied him effective assistance of counsel. 422
U.S. at 834–35 n.46
I may not take a traditional approach to legal work, but you are dealing with someone who had a Writ
of Mandamus before the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. I know you can appreciate the amount of
complex paperwork and detail that goes into that kind of effort. I am also on record defending myself

and earning an acquittal on a criminal assault charge here in New Hampshire. The prosecutor in that
case wanted me to pay $1200 in fines. I refused and conducted a mini trial. The judge ruled in my
favor.
All you have to do is type my name into the little Party Name window on PACER, and you will know I
have more extensive legal experience than any other pro-se party you faced who was not an actual
lawyer himself. So there is absolutely no excuse for you to refuse to meet with me and take care of
my concerns and issues as if I was an attorney myself.
I want you to know that I've done this before. It's what I've practiced and perfected over years of
investigative reporting on the kind of serious subjects that had people suing to silence me. They lost
when I learned how to be my own attorney and beat them at their own game. I had adversaries who
were billionaires and spent millions on lawyers just to deal with ME. I had partners of major Las
Vegas law firms working on paperwork to try to make me submit and give up my writing. I
persevered through even the rigors of bankruptcy court.
Here, you are falling into the same pattern I've seen before out of the people I faced in court and the
people I exposed as an investigative journalist. You are making mistakes I knew you would make,
because I've been underestimated, and nobody bothered to check me out in the slightest bit before
they tried to railroad me for this. Do your homework, and do your job, and stop insisting that I need a
lawyer. You can make these mistakes and get away with them with common crooks and two bit
thugs, but I know how the system works. It's supposed to be much better and more professional than
what's unfolded in this case.
The fact is, you did not respect my rights just like the Belmont Police and the Task Force didn't. I had
to find out what the warrants were about from the newspaper, and now you personally have told me
that if I had official court-appointed legal or private legal counsel, you would talk to me and we could
begin to resolve my safety concerns and your leak issues. To be told that I will find out what's in the
charging documents through the discovery process and to be kept in the dark about what these
charges are for so long is just plain wrong. It won't take me long to find the 4th, 6th and 14th
Amendment concerns associated with that reality. My own father was a police officer for 40 years,
rising all the way to the level of police chief in Webster, Massachusetts, and he's never heard of
such a thing.
It also won't take me long to show your actions, or more so complete lack of action, put my life and
safety in danger. When someone comes to you with real, genuine fears of being assaulted or killed
due to leaks in law enforcement, then you go and tell that person you are the top law enforcement
officer while doing NOTHING to follow up on information he has about those leaks, how is the judge
and the general public going to see that as being a competent attorney deserving of the public trust?
Sounds to me like this whole case shows beyond any reasonable doubt that whether you help out
the state government or not, they will get you killed if they can. At the very least my case is an
illustration that the state and local law enforcement won't take any safety concerns you might have
seriously and they have no real interest in getting to the bottom of leaks in the system. I understand
that mentality is one that you think protects you, but you're wrong.

At the end of the day, you will regret not taking me seriously as a self-represented party. A simple
meeting and a little respect for my history as a pro-se party could have gone a long way in resolving
this the smart way and taking care of any concerns I had that the system really is corrupt.
Unfortunately, you chose to insist I need to have a stooge attorney that you could play your legal
games with and force him to convince me to take some bogus deal.
You had your chance to do this the right way, and you chose to go the crooked route. I'll expose that
to the judge on the case right out of the gate. I have other crucial evidence that will be brought to
bear against your past unprofessional conduct as well. You have more of a record of corrupt
behavior than I do.
Mr. Bergeron,
As I explained to you before, given that you have been arrested and are facing charges
in the Superior Court, there are ethical considerations raised by my communicating
directly with you, since you are not represented by counsel.
You have a right to counsel and anything you say to me could potentially be used
against you in court.
For that reason (as I explained before) I would prefer to wait until after you are
arraigned, and have filed a pro se appearance that the court has accepted before
engaging in any substantive discussions about your case.
After that point, I would be happy to sit down with you and listen carefully to all of your
concerns. And if you have evidence that the police behaved inappropriately, I will take
that very seriously.
I can assure you that the fact that you have not received a copy of the charging
documents is neither unusual or inappropriate. That is how all felony arrests are
handled in this county -- the defendant normally does not receive a copy of the criminal
complaint until he or she appears at the walk-in arraignment. Defendants are normally
just given the bail notice telling them where and when to appear.
I can assure you, your case is being handled by my office in the normal way that all
such cases are handled.
Yours,
Andrew Livernois
Belknap County Attorney.

Well, look at that, the first person in law enforcement to actually mention that I have a
right to remain silent...congratulations. It would be nice if I was read those and the rest
of my rights on the day of my arrest. Unfortunately, in citing my right to counsel you
neglect to account for the fact that I sent you, IN WRITING, my waiver of counsel and
informed you of my express intent to represent myself. A right to counsel does not mean
you have to hire or accept court-appointed counsel that is from a law school. You can
be your own counsel. There are just as many protections for pro-se parties as there are
pitfalls, and I am not going to have trouble convincing a judge I can handle this. It's
obvious you've never encountered this situation before, but no matter how you justify
denying me my rights that is exactly what you and the state are doing.
There was CRITICAL timing involved in my intent to cooperate with you on the leaks.
The opportunity to capitalize on the information I had was when I shared it with you, and
you dropped the ball. You showed me you cannot and should not be trusted to act
immediately on issues that could impact MY LIFE. It is irresponsible and shortsighted
behavior on your part to insist that waiting for a hearing was more important than
closing leaks that could affect my immediate health and safety. If this is routine for you,
that's a bigger problem than I realized.
Attorney Livernois, this is your absolute last chance to do the right thing and
listen to reason. I am attaching my existing draft for my motion to dismiss. It contains
the key paragraph below and fully details your unprofessional and unethical conduct in
this matter so far.
The gravamen of the objective view of entrapment is whether the police conduct
“falls below standards, to which common feelings respond, for the proper use of
governmental power.” Sherman v. United States, 356 U.S. 369, 382 (1958) (Frankfurter,
J., concurring). According to this test, which is also known as the “reasonable law-
abiding person approach,” (ROBINSON, supra note 13, at 520-21) if the government’s
method of inducement was likely to induce an ordinarily law-abiding citizen to break the
law, then the charges should be dismissed even if the accused was ready and willing
to commit the offense. See Sherman, 356 U.S. at 383-84 (emphasis added). Unlike
the subjective inquiry, which is an issue of fact for the jury, the objective determination is
an issue of law decided by the judge. See Sorrells, 287 U.S. at 45
The law is on my side, and the evidence was entirely fabricated by the task force
and then trumped up in an unholy crusade by you. WHY? What is the purpose of this
monumental effort to ruin MY life when everyone knows I was just the tiniest bait fish

the task force could find to put on their hook? And now you all want to mount this tiny
fish on your wall like you caught the great white whale. I think I know why you are doing
all this, why you have to do it to save yourself. ARE YOU WORTH SAVING? That's the
most important question I have now. Because I have the power to make sure you are
beyond saving if I take full advantage of my rights.
I think I will let the judge know exactly why you are engaging in this behavior.
Actually I won't, because you will be the one testifying to that at the hearing. I will lead
you through your own ruin on the stand.
Unlike any private attorney, the local prosecutor—be he district
attorney, county attorney, or criminal district attorney—is an elected official
whose office is constitutionally mandated and protected. Prosecutors are
still subject to the Rules of Professional Responsibility, but they must
police themselves at the trial court level because of their status as
independent members of the judicial branch of government. Such a holding
is not tantamount to making the fox guardian of the henhouse or letting the
wolf keep watch on the flock, because a prosecutor who violates ethical
rules is subject to the disciplining authority of the State Bar like any other
attorney. Perhaps even more importantly, as mentioned above, his
violation of the rules will subject his cases to reversal on appeal when his
unprofessional conduct results in a denial of due process to a defendant.
I know you covered up scandals as a private lawyer. I know there are cases that
represent absolute land mines for your future ability to carry out your duties as the
county prosecutor. I will walk you right over those legal land mines in open court, in
what you think is YOUR element. I will carry it all through to what you and your clerk
pulled on the judge Thursday. That is the most disrespectful thing a prosecutor can do,
insulting the judge's intelligence like that and trying to play games with him on top of
already demonstrating that you're playing them with my life.
I don't need any depositions or help with formulating questions. I know what road
to lead you down and where I will trip you up. I know this because the truth is on my
side and always will be.

Take a look at the attachment and understand I will only accept one alternative to
filing this with another supporting affidavit:
Dismiss this case of your own accord.
I will be forced to re-think my bar complaint if you confront the truth now and
come to your senses. The alternative for you is an ugly, nasty road to nowhere fun. I
have the equipment for the battle and the stomach to handle the destruction that will
ensue. This effort to expose you at your worst could literally end your career, and I
really don't want to have to do that to you. This is not a game to me like it seems to be
to you. Unfortunately, your actions make me think I have no other choice. Your case
isn't worth the paper it's printed on. You've literally risked my life by refusing to talk to
me.
I know what it's like to ruin someone's life. I helped put Russell Pike in prison for
the longest stretch of that career con man's life. The amount of content I had on the
Internet about his cons made it impossible for him to solicit more funds when he was at
the end of his financial rope and had to confront his imminent downfall.
I honestly think you're a closed-minded asshole who treats every defendant like
the scum of the earth instead of understanding the gray areas, understanding there are
exceptions to every rule. I think if I don't press you to your limits and expose you for
what you are, you'll just do the same thing to more innocent and self-represented
people down the line. I never do anything like this for myself alone. I couldn't have the
passion I bring to this if it were just for me. I'm doing this for every entrapped defendant
denied justice anywhere in the United States. I will take this to the appeals court level if I
have to, and I will WIN.
Now, while I don't necessarily like you or think you are doing your job properly,
the one thing you have going for you is I don't think you are a crook or someone who
can't learn from their mistakes. I'm not going to report you to the FBI. I'm not going to
expose you like I did the Fertittas and Russell Pike. I am just going to let you destroy
yourself, like all the liars and dirty lawyers I've ever faced do every time they wind up
with me as an opposing party.
My indignity toward you is not something I'm using as a strategy or a legal tactic.
It is real. Anyone who would press this garbage case as far as you have deserves
exactly what you'll get if you keep pushing it.
I told you this would happen. I warned you what you were getting into. You did all
this anyway, thinking you would crush me like a cockroach. The shoe is on the other
foot now.
It will only get worse the longer you try to obscure the record and stall dismissal.
Enjoy your reading, and you will get your final copies of all my motion material tomorrow
morning if I don't hear from you sooner.
Rich

Unfortunately for you and your task force officers, they did not read my criminal record
properly and completely lied about it in these documents.
I have no convictions for assault whatsoever. I was acquitted of that charge. I was also
not convicted of the bank note offense, as it was continued without a finding and I
served probation only. Also the task force officer is leaving out the fact that I gave him
my business card and offered to give him customerslooking for firewood. He told me
he was from the Tuftonboro area where he worked in logging. I told him I had
customers in that area looking for firewood. Also, they didn't even have a chain to help
me with and didn't really help at all. Some other guy showed up with a chain who didn't
set me up for 6 felonies.
The task force officer also doesn't mention any of the exact actual content of most of the
text messages, either. He only quotes his own language on the day of the final
transaction from one text message. When you see all the texts it's a whole different
story. I welcome the opportunity to defend myself against these charges.
It's very nice to know now that all it takes is ONE YELLOW FORM to file an appearance
in a case. You were going to let a one-page form get in the way of acquiring key
information about leaks within law enforcement? You were going to let that tiny formality
put my life at risk????? You are suspect, Mr. Livernois, and I will prove it to ANY
JUDGE this case winds up in front of. If I end up with a corrupt judge, I will appeal his
bogus decisions. Your behavior is unforgivable and despicable, but why should I be
surprised? After all, you've done this kind of thing before, and I will expose that corrupt
past for not only the judge to see but the general public as well.
I gave you a chance to come to your senses and work this out sensibly, but you
persisted and thought you could manufacture your own case against me, just like the
task force tried to do. This case is about more than defending my good name at this
point, as you've now made it about getting justice for the fact that you would rather see
me murdered than deal with me face to face as my own counsel.
Good luck today, Andrew.
This song is dedicated to you and the drug task force
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90WD_ats6eE
You really do suck at your job.

You wasted your reply by filling it with unsupported arguments and did not include any
affidavit of your own or anyone else to dispute any of the facts in my 2 affidavits. All you
have to say for yourself is in a lousy footnote saying my claims of misconduct are not
worth addressing. I've got news for you: you will have to confront those claims of
misconduct sooner or later. You can't just say deny deny deny with no basis to prove
you didn't act in an inappropriate and unethical manner to screw me over and deny my
rights. Right now my testimony is the only SWORN testimony on the record attesting to
the fact that you fucked up big time.
As I told you, discovery is not needed here. I can sniff out the fact that this whole thing
is bullshit in 10 minutes of questioning all the key witnesses I asked to cross examine in
my motion. You already know it's bullshit but you think you can make it stick. I don't
need depositions or production of documents. Just the facts, sir. That's all I need, and
your side's already given me all the facts and evidence to show I'm being framed and
railroaded in this case by an overzealous and irresponsible officer of the law who is too
stubborn and pigheaded to listen to reason and see the forest through the trees.
You'll have my response on Monday, and if you didn't like the last one you will hate the
next one.
Dear Mr. Bergeron:
I am writing in regards to the upcoming hearing on your motion to dismiss which is scheduled for April
10, 2019 and to address what I believe are some misperceptions on your part. In several of your recent
emails you have made statements which suggest that you expect to cross examine numerous witnesses
at that hearing.
First, I want to make clear that I disagree that there is any need for live testimony at a hearing on a
motion to dismiss of the type you have filed. Live testimony is neither necessary nor appropriate for
resolving the issues before the Court at this stage of the proceedings. I believe that the scope of the
hearing should be limited to oral argument from the attorneys in support of their respective pleadings.
For that reason, I have absolutely no intention of calling any police officers or other witnesses to testify
at the hearing on April 10th
and I do not plan on arranging to have them present at the hearing.
Second, I will not assent to your calling me as a witness at this hearing. I was not involved in any of the
events which led to your arrest or the charges that were filed in this case, and therefore do not have any
material or relevant testimony to provide with regard to this case. Thus, you have no legitimate basis
for seeking to call me as a witness in this case, and I will object to any such attempt on your part.
Yours truly,
Andrew Livernois

64 Court Street
Laconia, NH 03246
603-527-5440
Mr. Bergeron:
You may want to take a look at RSA 517:13,II which governs the use of depositions in criminal cases.
That statute states that depositions of non-expert witnesses are only allowed “upon a finding by a
preponderance of the evidence that such deposition is necessary . . . to ensure a fair trial, avoid surprise,
or for other good cause shown.”
In deciding that issue, the court is required to examine “the complexity of the issues involved, other
opportunities or information available to discover the information sought by the deposition, and any
other special or exceptional circumstances which may exist.”
I will not assent to depositions of these witnesses in this case, as I do not believe you can meet that
standard. There is nothing particularly complex or unusual about the facts of your case, and you have
been provided with numerous written statements from the witnesses that the State intends to call at
trial. So I do not believe you are entitled to take depositions. You will need to file a motion to get
permission to take the depositions, and I will be objecting thereto.
I should also point out that, even if the Court were to allow you permission to take depositions in this
case (which I doubt the Court will), you would be responsible for obtaining and paying for the
stenographer.
Yours,
Andrew Livernois
64 Court Street
Laconia, NH 03246
603-527-5440
Hello,

Do I have to file a formal motion to get you to produce the interrogation room tape and
any other video taped content from the Belmont Police station on the day of my arrest? I
will be getting standby counsel today, so if we have to file a subpoena for the tape, we
will.
Also, These are the witnesses I will request to cross-examine and the order I plan to call
them in
1. Detective Beaulieu
2. Detective Swift
3. MPO Patrick Riley
4. Vinnie Baiocchetti
5. Task Force Male Interrogator
6.Task Force Female Interrogator
7. YOU
I am going to request at least an hour for the hearing as I don't think 30 minutes is
enough to fully expose the abuses of process and convenient "mistakes" involved in this
prosecution. I hope you are prepared. It's going to be a difficult day for you all around,
and I'm saving your lies for last to target and expose.
Judge O'Neill will not be impressed with you, I'm thinking.
Dear Mr. Bergeron:
The short answer to your question is no, you do not need to file a formal motion for discovery. As
outlined in the Rules of Procedure, we generally provide defense counsel with copies of all relevant
discovery (e.g. police reports, expert reports, statements we intend to introduce, etc.) as we receive it.
Motions are normally only needed in cases where this is some dispute over whether something will be
produced.
In regards to your specific request, I do not know whether any video or audio tapes exist relating to your
arrest on February 28th
, 2019. I have called the Belmont Police Department and asked them to provide
me with whatever recordings they have. As soon as I have them, I will provide them to you.
Yours truly,
Andrew Livernois

64 Court Street
Laconia, NH 03246
603-527-5440
One of the packets on the discovery disc you sent me is supposed to have MPO Patrick
Riley's narrative, and it cuts off after half a sentence, just blank page after that. Could
you possibly email that un-redacted document to me? Also, where are the audio
recordings from the wiretaps and personal recording devices worn by the detectives?
When will I receive copies of those? I also formally request any and all disciplinary
reports on all involved officers for any verbal or written reprimands on their records. I
also notice Detective Beaulieu selectively chose only a handful of our texts back and
forth to highlight in his affidavits. I formally request copies of each and every text in the
narrative between Detective Beaulieu and I.
These officers lied about the character of our conversations during the day of my arrest,
lied about the initial contact when I was stuck in the snowbank, lie after lie after lie in
these affidavits through the whole case. This will be relatively easy to expose. As I've
told you before, your case is built on a foundation of lies. Also, where is the evidence of
any other "illegal" sales to show I'm any danger to the community? All your guys did
was drum up their own sales and call it good. This is not good law enforcement. There
are failures at every possible level.
You just have a bunch of manufactured sales. That's all you have. Manufactured sales
your cops induced a random guy on the side of the road to commit. They did no
investigation to find out if I was predisposed, by THEIR OWN ADMISSION.
On top of this, you have sworn affidavits chock full of provable lies. I have all kinds of
ways to bring it all out on the stand. And guess what...through all this evidence there is
not one shred of justification for any of it. Not one. Where is the predisposition
investigation? All these cops focused on one random guy struggling to get by as a hard-
working, honest man. They couldn't keep their shit straight and do it right. They had to
lie to get me in their sworn affidavits. They had to lie to make me look like the villain. It's
sad, because I can appreciate how hard they worked to get me. I really can appreciate
all the paperwork and the hours that go into something like this. The sad part is they got
the wrong guy and they did nothing with the guy in the Tundra except to follow him
home and leave. And once that license plate made it into an official investigation report
and his name came up in the system, someone in the system must have ratted the
DTF's whole operation. Maybe they didn't believe in the mission, I don't know, but I
know there are leaks. I could have helped you catch them, but you blew your only
opportunity.

I see some other glaring holes, too, but we'll get to those at the hearing. You should
have researched the facts a lot better than you did. These task force guys (and girl) are
lying just as bad as you did in a lot of their sworn statements. I will get them to reveal
those lies on the stand.
All your evidence is tainted. Every single bit of it. I'll explain why in my closing
statements after I get the majority of my witnesses to tell their own story to the judge
about how this investigation was a complete disaster, and I'll even give you a crash
course on the state law you hope to stand by at this hearing. It's junk law because it has
no comparison to my case.
Also, in ALL THAT MESS you sent me, where is there any mention of leaks???? Where
is the message I emailed the Drug Task force myself about leaks? I smell a cover up,
and it all starts and ends on your desk. I know your history, and I know what you have to
do this for, but the judge doesn't know yet. I will be happy to let you tell him all about
your biased motives on the stand.
Just remind all your witnesses that perjury has real consequences, just like
prosecutorial misconduct does. I am eager to face you and court and prove this
unmitigated disaster of a case doesn't belong in any courtroom in the United States.
Dear Mr. Bergeron:
1. In regards to Officer Riley’s report, could you please identify the page number(s) that you
would like me to re-send. All of the discovery we send is normally Bates-stamped on the
bottom right corner, and if you can identify which pages you feel are lacking, I will re-send them.
2. With regards to the audio tapes of the controlled buys – we just received the disks with
those recordings a few days ago. My staff is in the process of copying them and will get them to
you shortly.
3. With regards to the text messages between you and Det. Beaulieu, I am not aware if there
are any other text messages which were not included in his reports. I will make inquiries of him
and get you copies of any text messages you do not already have.
Yours,
Andrew Livernois
64 Court Street
Laconia, NH 03246
603-527-5440

Mr. Livernois,
I just want to take a moment to thank you for finally getting me the paperwork that will
exonerate me. This pile of evidence supports only my case. At the end of the day on
April 10th the only convictions that will be worth seeking are convictions for perjury
against just about everyone who wrote a sworn statement in this case. I want to
interview everyone in the government who made a mistake here, so I will also request
that the Belmont Police Chief be present.
I want each of the witnesses to be isolated from each other and outside of the
courtroom before, during and and after all cross examination of witnesses, but only after
opening statements, because they need to hear what I have to say before they do get
on the stand.
Remember I have told you many things, but I have my own aces in the hole to prove
you are all no good liars. The only honest man in the whole mess is MPO Riley, and you
won't give me his statement.
I don't know how this case doesn't give you a crisis of conscience. You yourself called it
"the so-called drug war" and blamed it for incarcerating too many people in this country.
This is a war on an innocent man you are waging, and you'll fall flat and lose badly. I
truly never wanted to do that to you, but you are leaving me no other choice but to
embarrass the living shit out of you in front of your peers. I know you probably do mean
well, but at some point you have to realize this is a giant waste of everyone's time and
money. There are better things we could all be doing to change the world for the better.
But, hey, less a half a pound of medical-grade weed off the street is a great triumph,
and 58 years in jail will straighten me right out.
Every moment you continue to pretend this case has merit is another step deeper you
take into never in your life being able to escape this case.
And you can't say I didn't warn you.
Mr. Bergeron,
I placed a call to the Belmont P.D. and asked them to get me a copy of the video and/or audio tape from
the interview room for the date you were arrested. I was told they are going back to look for it. As soon
as I know more, I will tell you.
I have also asked them to get me a copy of P.O. Riley’s report. As soon as I get that, I will forward it to
you.
Yours,

Andrew
64 Court Street
Laconia, NH 03246
603-527-5440
Andrew,
I may not even be successful with the motion to dismiss, but it's what the judge told me
to do, and I'm doing it to the best of my ability. It's come to my attention recently that a
motion to suppress would be a more powerful opportunity for me to confront the
witnesses I want to get on the stand. That will most certainly come next if I can't piece
together the legal framework it will take for the judge to grant me the relief I ask for on
the 10th.
I will at the very least make a very earnest and hard-fought attempt to get you on the
witness stand. Twigg might not seem like an applicable case, but it actually is. Your
conduct alone is worse than what transpired in that case. You could have killed me.
State v. Little and State v. Bacon are not applicable at all. One dealt with jury
instructions (Little) on entrapment predisposition issues that the defendant didn't want to
be discussed for some reason. I want entrapment to be discussed. Bacon dealt with
cops who actually investigated before they set up the defendant. They actually talked to
a third person to find out if the suspect sold drugs. The task force officers in my case
never talked to anyone but ME. They didn't even glean from talking to me when they
first came on the scene whether or not I was prone or pre-disposed to selling marijuana.
They just had a mere suspicion that I smoked it.
I have a novel legal theory and believe my case is unique to the standard of outrageous
government conduct since YOU made it unique by denying my 6th Amendment right to
counsel and putting my life in jeopardy with your pre-arraignment behavior. Outrageous
government conduct is by no means limited to the police, and I've shown that already
with the other example I put in my reply of the prosecutor working hand in hand with the
defense counsel to screw over the defendant. Instead of screwing me over in this case,
you did one better and tried to get me killed. Also, you completely ignored the issue of
these charges being manufactured (i.e. the government played a crucial part in
committing the crimes in question and also prosecuting those charges on the other
side).

Keep up the good work, Andrew. You are building my case nicely for me. I appreciate
your sly attempts to bullshit the judge with legal maneuvers and junk law, but I'll find
more applicable cases for my supplemental brief that you can't get around.
By the way, do you happen to know the last time the NH Attorney General's Drug Task
Force was sued in civil court?
I know. I know all about that case. I wrote about the town of Gilford for the Laconia
Citizen in 2004 when the original King's Grant Inn case against the town was settled. I
know Will Drew personally.
Guess who had integral roles in the charges at the heart of that civil claim you tried to
save the town of Gilford from?
DETECTIVE FRANK CASSIDY
AND
KIRK HART
And you swept it all under the rug to "buy peace" at the cost of $118,000 that you
somehow managed to convince the town's insurance to pay for.
So, you are capable of covering up and/or excusing the task force's abuses of process
on behalf of the town of Gilford. You will most certainly do the same and "get their
backs" however you can in this case as the County Attorney.
That will all come to light in this case one way or another. I will expose you for the
corruption you are taking part in here and the unholy alliance you've made with the task
force.
But you go right on ahead with what you think is right. I can't stop you from being stupid
enough to ruin your own reputation here. That's going to be on you in the long run, not
on me. I gave you every opportunity to understand what you were getting into here. You
kept right on backing the lies told to you and furthering misrepresentations of the case.
You should have just met with me in the beginning and there would be none of this
negative energy and animosity here. We could have had a constructive conversation
and dealt with this in a much more peaceful and meaningful fashion. You might have
realized then that we probably have a lot more in common than you'll ever know now.
Progress could have been made where now all you are doing is wasting the court's time
and hurting your own career in the process.

If I truly hated you, Andrew, I'd never be able to beat you at this legal game you are
playing with my life. I understand why you are doing this, but I also need you to
understand that at the end of the day it is all just plain wrong. You can't treat people like
this and expect the system to work in your favor. It is all going to backfire on you in
spectacular fashion. I don't want to be there when it happens, but I have to be, because
I'll be the one making it happen.
I have beaten more trained and prepared adversaries than you before. I don't see a
shred of dignity or truth in your prosecution effort at this point, and I don't think any
judge will be able to see any of that either when I finish my remarks on the 10th. But you
keep your nose in those law books and you keep looking for escape clauses.
Best of Luck,
Mr. Bergeron,
Enclosed is a copy of the supplemental report which was written by Det. Beaulieau
memorializing all of the text messages between you and him. I am sending you this
now so you will have it for the hearing tomorrow, but I will ask my assistant Brenda to
Bates-stamp it and add it to the formal discovery and then send you a paginated copy
as well, so that we have a record of providing it to you.
Yours,
Andrew Livernois
64 Court Street
Laconia, NH 03246
603-527-5440
Andrew,
This is the quote that will lead the complaint I am crafting for the NH Bar Association:
“Each year, thousands of Americans are victimized by prosecutors who overcharge, withhold key
evidence, and engage in a myriad of other forms of professional misconduct,” the Center for
Prosecutor Integrity stated in a 2013 report. “When these persons later seek redress, they encounter
denial, resistance, and delays. More often than not, their efforts to receive even an apology end in
futile exasperation.”

You've hit all those above nails on the head in this case and a few more they did not mention. You've
looked the other way when the truth hit you right in the face, and you've avoided putting together
any facts on your own. The very fact that I had to be the one to make sure you received an accurate
statement from MPO Riley will not go over well, whether this case continues or not.
You tried to treat an innocent man who was willing to try to help you out in the beginning like a
crook who deserved 58 years in jail. This will never be something I could ever possibly forgive and
forget. This will have serious, meaningful consequences for you that will all emerge in courts of law,
where you supposedly reign supreme.
I will go into your sacred realm and beat you at your own games, and you will detest every minute of
it. I went easy on you in open court Thursday, because I listened to the judge and didn't re-visit
anything in my pleadings. You tried selling the idea that Twigg doesn't apply, the same stale bullshit
you raised in your last objection. My final brief already eviscerated that argument on your part. If
Judge O'Neill denies my motion, I can make the case on appeal that the judge denied my due process
rights by refusing me the opportunity to cross examine you. We'll go back and do that hearing over if
we need to.
I didn't mention your history with the task force, either, something I am sure the judge will consider
relevant and potentially rising to the level of you needing to recuse yourself.
Then there is what happens post-dismissal, which I will keep very close to the vest, but let's just say I
will probably be forcing you to go back into private practice for a spell. Among other guilty parties
here. Then it will be time for me to tell you that you need a lawyer, or I can't talk to YOU. You told
the voting public you wouldn't engage in any private practice work while you were the County
Attorney. Guess that's going to be another lie that emerges out of all this unless you actually do have
to hire an attorney.
Andrew, you can try to throw a bunch of shitty law at the wall and see if it sticks. You can stack the
evidence you think is valid all the way up to the ceiling. You can put all the resources you can
possibly arrange to work directly on this case and at the end of the day you will still have nothing
worth taking to trial. You don't even have anything worth indicting me for at this stage of your game.
I can tell you if this motion is not a success, the next one will be. I will stand up in court and make
better arguments in that courtroom every time we go in there and face each other. I will not give up
and run from this like you are going to have to do in the long run, whether you like it or not. You
have too much to hide and you addressed absolutely nothing at that hearing in regard to your own
personal conduct that denied me my rights and potentially could have cost me my life.
And if this is all over for you as far as criminal court, that is just the beginning of the next journey we
will take down the legal highway. Through that whole adventure I will remind you constantly that
you did this to yourself. You had a chance, multiple chances, to make this right. You persisted on
junk law and evidence collected by shady law enforcement officers who need to go back to school and

learn about Miranda Rights and Entrapment laws. Oh, and maybe they should also learn how to
check and verify a criminal record accurately, because nobody at the Attorney General's office seems
to know how to do that.
NEGLIGENCE, ABUSE OF PROCESS, INCOMPETENCE, SYSTEMIC FAILURES, MISCONDUCT
These are the words that will permeate the aftermath of this criminal case for you and the law
enforcement officers who randomly targeted me without doing any adequate investigation. These are
the words that represent everything you stood for and embraced to press this case.
No matter what happens in the future, I hope you realize now that I was perfectly capable of sitting
down with you and having a civil conversation when this all started.
Because you refused that opportunity, you are moving down that dark road I told you about already.
You are going to put yourself in a position where you will never be able to escape this case that you
never should have pursued in the first place.
I'm sorry in advance. I know what I am capable of, and I know that this will be one of my last semi-
cordial communications with you. I know that this case will become a tormenting force in your life
that will distract you from other important work you should be doing. It's unfortunate, really. You
probably will grow to truly hate me and wish you never met me. You will get madder and madder as
each thing I told you would happen comes true.
I'll always remind you that you did this to yourself. You created this mess you could have cleaned up
on day one. There are so many better ways you could have handled this, and I have all the email
communications to show that I tried to get you to listen to reason every step of the way. You ignored
every warning I gave you. What's worse, you persisted relentlessly while knowing all the real,
genuine flaws of this case. You sealed your own fate.
Either way the judge decides on this motion, I will see you in court.
I look forward to writing the appeal and taking the next steps to prove this case is full of
corruption and abuse of the system.
I also want to inform you that I recently discovered more information about the leaks (I
confirmed there are two), which will be utilized during cross examination of witnesses.
You have a leak in the Drug Task Force who alerted the main suspect, and you have
another one in the Sheriff's office, where you told me to go to report the problem, if not
the Belmont Police.

I have proof I sought help from the Belmont police through two different attempts, and
nothing was done to investigate these leaks, even though I was willing to provide
information to help you address the situation.
Now it will be blown up in public and in the courts for all to see, and you could have
avoided it all by meeting with me. The judge obviously doesn't see the implications of
life and death here, but an appeals court will.
Mr. Bergeron:
As I have told you repeatedly, now that you are representing yourself, I am more than happy to
meet with you and discuss any concerns you have about leaks or any other issues.
But when I offered to meet with you after your arraignment you refused.
Yours
Andrew Livernois
Sent from my iPhone
I refused to meet with you because you had your opportunity to respond and do the
right thing repeatedly before the arraignment, and instead you ensured that nobody
would talk to me about the leaks, not even the people you told me to report them to.
This kind of corruption, waste, abuse, fraudulent representation of the facts and sloppy
police work is now being represented as a great, solid case. You've put it to a grand jury
that way and probably didn't even tell them about the fact that there are false claims in
the arrest warrant affidavit.
The whole investigation was approved, signed off on and executed based on LIES
about my record. Every stage of the process is poisoned and compromised as a result.
You have brought the full force of the law down on me and treated me like I am in need
of a long jail stint and huge fines because you obviously think I am some scumbag who
needs to be off the streets. I could have and would have helped you if you took
definitive steps to help me when I truly needed it. You squandered those opportunities,
and you executed a massive effort to make me pay for multiple crimes no jury will ever
convict me of.
I have decided in light of the judge's recent order to forego writing any bar complaint
about you, as it is obvious from his perceptions of the case that he is favoring your side
and thinking he is protecting the sacredness of the system with his ruling. The bar will
do the same. An appeal of this ruling and a full defense of my case with no compromise
discussions whatsoever is my only option. I refuse to speak with you in any fashion and

will actually be requesting your recusal. You put my life at risk without a thought. I do
not forget things like that.
The only way to expose what happened in this case is to use the strategies in my book
to shine a real spotlight on the injustice. You will see and read about the fruits of my
efforts in the coming weeks leading up to trial. As I file motions in the ongoing case and
work on the appeal, the court of public opinion will also come into play. You think you
can use the system to screw me over and there is nothing I can do about it, but there is
no limit to what kind of attention I can bring to this case. I have been absolutely
respectful of the process and the system thus far, wanting to give it a chance to work
itself out.
Judge O'Neil obviously sympathizes with you. I no longer do. I have no problem
exposing your history and your overzealous approach to trying to put me in prison for a
manufactured crime. YOU have put me in this position, and you can claim you had to
jump through certain hoops all you want but this was a specially urgent case and your
treatment of it betrayed justice and let leakers escape with not even the hint of an
investigation when I alerted three agencies. I've found out more about the leaks than
your office has, because you and the Belmont Police just wanted to sweep it all under
the rug to convict me.
My fight has to be meaningful, and it's about showing the system you can't do this to an
honest man who works hard and contributes to society. You can't claim a whole
investigation based on a false record is legitimate. You can't use the weight of the
system to stick it to me because I would not cooperate with a compromised
investigation. I faced potentially fatal risks for turning on both the main suspect and the
police involved in leaking to him. I had no knowledge and still don't really have a way of
knowing how deep this organization and coordination goes. How do I ever trust you
when you obviously had something to do with Belmont Police not making any effort to
talk to me despite clear attempts to get their attention? The judge's order makes NO
MENTION of leaks and the compromised investigation. I'm sure you did not tell the
grand jury about any of that either.
You are friendly with the DTF and have obviously gone to bat for them in the King's
Grant case. I would be ignoring my best instincts in dealing with corruption if I sat down
across the table from you and discussed any matter of this case. I have no faith that you
will ever do the right thing, especially since the judge actually waited for you to secure
your indictment before submitting his ruling. That represents a certain level of active
coordination and unspoken support of dragging out this process for me unfairly instead
of kicking it out of the courts because it will never result in any convictions and will wind
up being a black eye for the state.
Even the judge knows I have a case on entrapment, however.

He thinks, and you probably think that this latest ruling protects all of you, and the
system will be safe as a result. You are both wrong if that's your angle here. It only gets
worse when people take the stand and get caught in lies, when the information I've
uncovered gets used to expose these people who made it impossible for me to
cooperate. How is it going to look when it comes out in open court that my own
investigation pinpointed the leaks because your people never lifted a finger to help me?
I made two definitive, documented attempts to contact and alert Belmont Police to the
leaks that compromised this whole investigation. I told them I was willing to cooperate
FOR NO CONSIDERATION ON MY CASE. The only explanation that makes any sense
as to why they didn't talk to me is that YOU told them not to.
It's obvious now what's really going on here, as the judge making no mention of leaks
proves he is trying to hide the fact that they exist and are a major concern in this case. If
you actually gave a shit about justice and finding those leaks, you would have acted
more responsibly and helped me when it actually mattered. You don't want justice here,
you want to try to justify the cost of a tainted investigation. You want to pass the buck to
me to pay in jail time and ridiculous fines.
Meanwhile I am busting my ass trying to run a responsible business, dealing with my
father dying of congenital heart failure, and I represent absolutely no danger or threat to
the community. The main suspect you were after is forced to live with his father now,
because I hear he overdosed on much harder drugs (heroin and meth) and destroyed
his brain. So he ruined himself. He didn't need your help with that. Maybe if the people
that blew my case did some more responsible investigation of the guy they would have
found out he had a connection to more dangerous drugs and more meaningful crimes to
investigate and forward to you for prosecution.
You put me in fight mode, Andrew, and this is how I fight back. I will publish my
accounting of this for the world to see. Your name will forever be associated with this
case. Any time anyone does a search on Google for your name, this case will come up
all over the first page of results. The legal system is not a game to me. It is important for
me to establish that abuse of the courts should not be accepted, and not having a
lawyer is the only way I can do this, because any systemized lawyer will stop at bucking
the system. I will not. There is nothing you can do if I publish the truth. Are you truly
proud of this case and your conduct thus far? I highly doubt it.
This is no longer about any anger or animosity I have toward you. This is about making
sure it never happens again to another person like me. I do not deserve to have to go
through this, and anybody in the same position I was when arrested could say the same
thing. If I make some kind of deal with you or talk to you about the leaks and the case is
still ongoing, I lose any thunder I have to bring it out at trial or even before then. I need
all the thunder I can get. This will not be easy, but I have never had an easy case
before. They are always difficult, stressful and daunting for a layman like me, but I have
more motivation here, because this is wrong all around. Any jury will agree with me

when they hear the facts, and the appeals court will know when they review the record
that the judge's ruling skipped over multiple key points relating to your conduct.
You will destroy yourself. The corrupt ones always do. Your term as County Attorney
will not be a long one. Judge O'Neil's opinion of you will change when I subpoena the
Chief of the Belmont Police and Officer Riley. When I expose the leaks in open court
that you did nothing to help me prosecute or pursue, he will know he should have
mentioned that aspect of my case when he wrote his ruling in your favor. The only
responsible thing for you to do is dismiss your case. I know you won't do that. I know
you probably think you can't, but in reality you can't afford to pursue it. It will blow up
right in your face, and I will not be as nice as I have been so far. I've barely scratched
the surface of alerting the general public to this situation. Residents of this state need to
know how the law enforcement agencies they pay for really operate. National funding is
being provided for the opioid crisis and is likely being wasted on cases like mine.
More importantly, you have much better cases to pursue that will have a much more
meaningful impact on real crimes. You can try to nail me to the wall. I welcome it. That
works for me. Try as hard as you can, and please do continue to use the full force of the
law. The more overbearing the system is, the better for the story of how I fought back
and won.
I will be delivering my notice of intent to appeal early next week. My motion to suppress
will follow that very closely. The appeal will let everyone know that I am not going to let
any setback discourage me, because I know my rights were violated and I know judges
and lawyers are all the same to a certain extent, even the ones you think will do the
right thing and listen to reason. The only way to ensure the checks and balances work
properly is to appeal. I know how, and I will make this a landmark case.
So keep up the good work, and I'll see you at the next hearing.
Dear Mr. Bergeron:
I am writing to communicate my offer in regards to a disposition of your case.
If you desire to plead guilty, I would offer the following as a negotiated plea:
• 12 months in the house of corrections with six months suspended, 2 years’ probation and
restitution for one count of sale of a controlled substance
• 1 ½ to 3 years in NHSP fully suspended for 3 years on two other felonies; those sentences
would be consecutive to the first one, but concurrent with each other
• Nol pros the remaining 3 charges
I know that you are not very familiar with the criminal process, so I will try to explain
what this means. It means you would plead guilty to three of the six charges, and I

would agree to dismiss the other three. On one of the three charges, you would be
sentenced to 12 months in the HOC, but you would only have to serve six months of
that in jail, the other six months would be suspended. That means as long as you don’t
commit any new crimes in the next 3 years, you wouldn’t serve any additional time.
With regards to the six months in jail, under the DOC rules, you get “good time” credit
for 1/3 off if you remain of good behavior. So in actuality, if you accepted this plea, you
would only end up serving four months in jail if you were a good inmate.
Understand that with probation, if you violate the terms of probation you could be re-
sentenced to anything up to the maximum sentence at the court’s discretion. So it is
important to comply with the terms of probation.
For the other two sentences, you would not have to serve any actual time – it would be
1 1/2 to 3 years in prison, fully suspended. So again, if you remain of good behavior for
three years, you would not have to serve any of that time. But if you violated your good
behavior, the 1 ½ to 3 years would be consecutive to (i.e. in addition to) the sentence
you received on the first case.
Those are the terms I am willing to agree to if you are interested in disposing of this
case without a trial.
Please understand that: (a) this offer will only remain open up until the time of the final
pre-trial conference or any hearings on motions to suppress evidence (whichever
comes first); (b) I reserve my right to withdraw this offer at any point if I learn of
additional crimes you have committed or any other wrongdoing that I am not currently
aware of.
If you are interested in pleading guilty in accordance with these terms, or if you have a
counteroffer, please let me know. Also, if you have any additional questions, please do
not hesitate to contact me.
Yours truly,
Andrew Livernois
Not a chance. I have no record. I will take it to trial if this is your best offer. This was a
manufactured case, and I was only prosecuted because I would not cooperate with a
compromised investigation.
That is your right. If you have a counterproposal, please feel free to let me know. Otherwise I will see
you at the dispositional conference in August.

No jail time whatsoever, no fines, limited probation, and I give you information that will lead to
the prosecution of individuals to from the Drug Task Force and the Sheriff's Office who
purposely leaked knowledge of an investigation to XXXXXXXX.
Or we fight through some motions, weaken your case and then see each other at a very
contentious trial where people will get embarrassed, careers will be ruined, and all your
witnesses will have to commit perjury to back up their original bogus statements.
I find it fascinating that you and your cronies would rather drag me over the coals
because I wouldn't cooperate instead of doing ACTUAL POLICE WORK and eliminating
the people within law enforcement who are responsible for alerting the main suspect in
this investigation. Two rats are in your midst and you don't even want to put out traps.
You'll just let them infest local law enforcement channels and warn other friends and
relatives of oncoming trouble.
I have definitive proof that will be brought to bear at the trial and in sworn affidavits
attached to the coming motions I will be filing.Proof that I came to you repeatedly asking
for help and offering to cooperate with law enforcement and provide actionable
information on the individuals who leaked knowledge of the investigation to XXXXXXX. I
already filed proof that my life was at risk if I cooperated because the suspect was
armed and upon my knowledge and information, was capable of killing someone that
could set him up for the kind of time my cooperation would have guaranteed he would
have to serve.
Nobody lifted a finger to go after the leakers, and I alerted the Belmont Police just as
you suggested. I reached out to both the CHIEF OF POLICE AND OFFICER RILEY.
Why was nothing done?
I'll be asking you that at the stand at my trial. You won't be prosecuting it yourself. I
hope you have a good assistant.
Mr. Bergeron:
My recommendation to you would be that you consider utilizing your stand-by counsel for
purposes of negotiating a disposition in this case (if you are interested in trying to do that). I
think that would be the more fruitful approach.
Yours truly,
Andrew Livernois
Sent from my iPhone

You have done nothing to advance true justice in this case, Andrew, and you are using your
position to make an example out of someone who absolutely never deserved it. I will not ever in
my life forget the way you handled this case, and if by some miracle I should win the case I will
certainly see to it that you pay financially for your refusal to pursue these leaks and bring real
people doing damage to key investigations to justice. You have been a cover up artist from the
start, since before you ever came to the county attorney's office, and I will expose that for the
public and the court. You don't care about applying the law fairly. You just want your conviction
for a bogus, bullshit, never should have happened entrapment scheme. I'm not scared, Andrew.
Bring it on!
Andrew,
I would just like to clarify and expand on my discovery request.
I am requesting any and all: Procedures, protocols, guidelines and standing orders
regarding the following:
How controlled buy targets are acquired and how DTF agents are instructed in this
regard to find appropriate targets
Cautionary measures to prevent entrapment issues from arising, and any instruction
materials in this regard or evidence of formal training received by officers involved in
this case in regard to entrapment specifically.
How investigations are approved to engage in controlled buys with targets, what steps
are taken to verify criminal records as reported by officers requesting approval for
investigations.
Additionally:
How many people are involved in the signing off of investigations, warrants, etc. and in
this case what are the full names and ranks/positions of everyone involved in
reviewing/approving all investigative actions in my case, up to and including the arrest
warrant?
What criteria are police officers who join the DTF given to be eligible to apply and/or
coordinate with the DTF?
I would like all general information/guidelines/recruiting methods regarding how these
local police officers end up working with the DTF and whether they ever receive
additional or specialized training as a result of their entry onto the DTF.

Thank You,
Rich Bergeron
Andrew,
Are you going to comply with my discovery request, or do I need to file the formal
motion for discovery on this? I have no problem doing so.
You seem awfully quiet since I filed my recent affidavit. I hope you lie just as poorly on
the stand as you did in court the other day.
I look forward to facing you where it really matters, in front of a jury of regular people
who don't assume people are "most-likely guilty." I thought you knew defendants are
"presumed innocent until proven guilty." Maybe they skipped that lesson in your criminal
law training.
Mr. Bergeron:
I am still in the process of reviewing your discovery request to ascertain: (a) whether the
items you have requested actually exist or not, and (b) whether you are entitled to
receive them.
I anticipate that you will receive a response from me next week sometime, providing you
with those materials which exist which you are entitled to receive, and an explanation as
to what you are not being provided.
Yours,
Andrew Livernois
64 Court Street
Laconia, NH 03246
603-527-5440
Mr. Bergeron:

I am writing in response to the discovery request which you provided to me via email on
August 31, 2019.
As an initial matter, I would point out that your final three requests for discovery (i.e. the
three paragraphs which follow the word “Additionally”) are not requests for documents
or things, but appear to be questions which you are posing regarding how DTF
operates. New Hampshire Rules of Criminal Procedure do not allow for the use of
interrogatories as a form of discovery. Therefore, the State objects to those requests,
and will not provide you a response to those questions.
With regard to your first three requests for discovery, those involve requests for copies
of DTF “procedures, protocols, guidelines and standing orders.” The State objects to
your request on the following grounds. First, your request is outside of the scope of
both RSA 592-B:6 and Rule 12 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure. Those two
provisions delimit the scope of discovery in criminal cases. Second, the State objects to
turning over DTF procedures, policies or orders on the ground that the public
dissemination of those confidential materials could adversely impact the ability of the
DTF to carry out its mission and could interfere with law enforcement operations.
Thirdly, based upon my conversations with DTF, I do not believe that they have any
policies or directives that specifically deal with the issues you have identified (e.g. how
targets for controlled buys are obtained, or for avoiding entrapment, etc.).
Finally, I object to all of your requests on the ground that the information you are
requesting is not relevant or material to any of the issues in this case, is not exculpatory,
and is overly broad and unduly burdensome.
For all of the foregoing reasons, your discovery request is being denied at this time.
Yours truly,
Andrew Livernois
64 Court Street
Laconia, NH 03246
603-527-5440

Then you lied to the judge when you promised to cooperate with my request, and you lied again
on the 14th when you said you'd have it in a week. You never intended to comply with my
requests at all, and you could have very well told me what you just told me well within the time
frame you gave me, but I agreed not to do a formal motion within the deadline period only
because you said you'd comply.
No, Mr. Bergeron, I did not lie. I told the judge that I would review your request and
would give you those items that we determined were appropriate to be turned over.
After consultation with the supervisors at the Drug Task Force, we made the
determination that you are not entitled to any of the information that you requested.
If you would like to file a formal motion seeking the discovery, you are certainly welcome
to do so. I will waive any issues with regard to the formal deadline for discovery
motions, since it took me longer than expected to get you a response. I don’t expect
that the deadline will be an issue, since the judge routinely allows late filings. If it did
become an issue, I would be happy to explain to the judge that your motion is late
because I took extra time to respond to your email discovery request.
Yours,
64 Court Street
Laconia, NH 03246
603-527-5440
You can call it whatever you want to if it makes you feel better, but you lied, and you continue to
lie to support this garbage case. The jury will hear about all these lies and all your attempts to
avoid admitting all the mistakes that were made with this case from the very beginning. Two
juries will hear all about it if you lose, so make sure you figure out a way to explain how lies
aren't really lies when the evidence shows that's exactly what they are. I am going to love
hearing how you explain that to a criminal jury. You keep telling lies and framing them as
innocent misunderstandings. It's guaranteed to help that jury see that you don't care at all about
justice in this case. You never did.
Also, on a side note, if the DTF isn't comfortable revealing the information I'm asking for,
how can they be comfortable with a rat in their midst telling targets of investigations that
they better watch out? Keeping a couple policies and procedures secret is going to
seem pointless when I get these people on the stand. I will publicly reveal the names of
the leakers and ask about their associations with law enforcement involved in this case.

If you want to comply with the discovery request and keep the information under seal, I
have no problem with that. I will agree that I could be fined if I reveal or disseminate it in
any way. Then what would be your excuse?
Just remember, I gave you a chance to catch the leakers, multiple chances in fact. You
didn't want any part of it. How do you think the jury is going to rule when they find out
that you absolutely do not want to do anything in your power to catch people who are
compromising investigations? All the legal tricks and maneuvers you can muster up will
not overshadow the truth. The truth ruins your case, your credibility, two law
enforcement careers at least, and your bank account when all the dust settles and I take
YOU to court. All you get by winning is to be able to put a good, hard working guy in
prison for no justifiable reason. What happens when you lose, though? Have you
thought about that? Is it worth spending more time in civil court with me? You have no
idea what kind of dedication I have and what kind of drive I have to make you personally
accountable for your actions.
Mr. Bergeron:
With all due respect, the reason why this case is going to necessarily go to trial is
because you will not engage in any meaningful discussions about a possible plea
bargain, and instead choose to simply throw around accusations and incendiary
language.
I certainly recognize that this case is not one of the most serious that my office handles,
but if you are not willing to look at the situation somewhat objectively and
dispassionately, and instead insist on an “all or nothing” approach, then there is nothing
to do but take it to trial.
You know what you did; you know that you sold marijuana on six different occasions to
an undercover police officer. I understand that you think it’s not fair that you were
targeted by DTF, and you think you were entrapped. But the fact remains that you did
what you did. And so the question is – what is a reasonable punishment for someone
who engages in that behavior, given that it is still a crime to sell marijuana in this state.
Until you are willing to have a reasonable conversation about that question, this case
will continue toward the inevitable trial.
As for why I do not respond to all of your wild accusations in front of Judge O’Neill – I
see no need to respond. I know the truth, that there is no merit to your insults and
accusations, and I know that Judge O’Neill does not put any stock in those claims
either, as he is able to observe how I run my office and prosecute cases day in and day
out. So I choose not to waste the Court’s time in responding. Things will be different in
front of the jury, as you will see.

This case is not personal to me, Mr. Bergeron. I am simply doing my job. You were
arrested by DTF following a lengthy investigation, and those charges were brought to
me to prosecute. I have pursued this case in the same way I would any other drug sale
case, and will continue to do so. You have an absolute right to a trial, and if that is what
you want, that is what you will get. If you would prefer to resolve this case some other
way, then make me a realistic counter-offer. If you have questions about what sort of
counter-offer would be “realistic”, you should confer with Attorney Smith on that point.
Yours truly,
Andrew Livernois
I want a trial, Andrew. I want you to have to do the work to try to make this stick. And, it
was you who refused the first and only discussion that would have made me a
cooperator instead of an adversary. You betrayed any trust I could have had in you
when you refused to speak to me unless I had an attorney. Now you know what it's like
to want to resolve something without jumping through a bunch of ridiculous hoops, but
the other side won't let you.
I have thought this through, and I don't have to or need to sit down with you at this point.
I don't trust you, and I don't think you care enough about this case in the first place to
really pursue it with any genuine passion. Take it to trial. That's fine with me. I want that
more than anything. That is my opportunity to put all the pieces together and show that
the DTF is a broken organization that learns nothing from their mistakes, even when
lives are lost, or in my case when a life is at risk.
You did offer to allow a continuance with my father's death, but the point is I don't want
this hanging over my head. This almost got me killed. Officer Beaulieu doesn't deserve
to be able to skip out on his responsibilities to press this case if he thinks he did good
work. I want it ended, and the only way to do it without getting killed for cooperating at
this stage since you won't lift a finger to eliminate the leaks, is to win my trial. I'll make
that case, and you will look back and regret snubbing me when I first wanted to meet. I
bet you already do. That was truly the worst mistake you could have made.
Taking it to trial will be the next worst mistake, but I'm looking forward to watching you
make it. I have revelations that will come out in cross that will shake the system from the
ground up.
I honestly think I need to report you to the FBI for obstruction of justice at this point,
Andrew.
It's bad enough that you turned a blind eye to the leaks, but now you want no mention of
them at the trial. That is indicative as to how far you will go to protect your friends in law
enforcement, no matter how unethical or even illegal their approach is.

These motions are a desperation move on your part. You can't bury the truth, though. It
will emerge one way or another.
Mr. Bergeron:
As I have told you repeatedly, I am willing to sit down with you any time you wish to
discuss your claims about leaks. It was you who flatly refused to discuss it with me after
your arraignment, and who has continued to refuse to discuss those matters with me to
this day.
As a result, I have no evidence of any leaks, other than your vague and completely
uncorroborated claims.
Moreover, none of that changes the fact that your allegations of “leaks” from law
enforcement have absolutely no bearing on the question of whether you are guilty or not
guilty of selling marijuana to an undercover police officer.
Yours truly,
Andrew Livernois
64 Court Street
Laconia, NH 03246
603-527-5440
You forget it was YOU who told Judge O'Neil in open court that I could argue
outrageous government conduct at trial. I was also entrapped, which makes all your so-
called evidence of sales absolutely moot. YOU are responsible for the government
conduct that made it impossible for me to trust you and cooperate in any fashion. YOU
had an opportunity to meet with me and prove you aren't corrupt and dishonest. YOU
squandered it. Both your refusal to meet with me when it counted and your actions to
prevent law enforcement officials from speaking with me about leaks gave me all the
evidence I needed that you cannot be trusted and I cannot get any hep from you. You
are a liar, plain and simple, and you want your communications out because they prove
that beyond any reasonable doubt that you lied to the judge. You continue to think that I
should make a plea deal, because you NEED one to make this nightmare go away. It's
not going away, and your recent motions make a civil case even more likely because
you are truly acting like the guilty party already. No jury will believe your bullshit,

Andrew. This case is going to fail in the worst possible way for you and the Drug Task
Force, and you should end it before it gets any uglier for your career. By the way,
Outrageous Government Conduct is decided by the judge, so there is no chance of
confusing the jury if they are instructed properly that all the evidence they hear in that
regard is for the judge to consider and only for background in their deliberations on the
sales charges.
Also, I am not alleging a conspiracy of any kind. What is happening, and what you are
furthering with your recent motions is another C word. It's a coverup. You are the main
architect of that, and you will pay for violating my rights when I win this case and take
you and the DTF to civil court.
Your unquestionable loyalty to the Drug Task Force is telling. Why would I have any
reason to trust you at this stage, honestly? You are literally in their back pocket. You
betrayed your willingness to toe their line when you sought to exclude the review board
findings so quickly. My record, as false as it was when officers first looked it up can be
fair game but the Drug Task Force's record is irrelevant? Good luck telling that to the
judge. You haven't acted out of any semblance of fairness and justice and you keep
harping on this bullshit that I need to be punished for my crimes. These were victimless
crimes that I was entrapped to commit. The only thing you gain by convicting me is
making your buddies at the DTF look good and adding another statistic to the conviction
column for yourself. You'll sell your soul and your integrity to get that conviction, but I'll
stand on the truth through the whole trial. Even though it's wrong and offends any notion
of real justice, you will continue to railroad me and try to make my life a living Hell for a
complete farce of a cause. What are you winning? Who are you saving or helping? It's a
hollow victory if you do get one, and if you don't it will be an easy civil case, so it's on
you. I don't feel the slightest bit of regret for not trusting you. You earned my mistrust
from the jump. If it's been no problem for you to meet with me after arraignment when
my name had already been dragged through the mud, you shouldn't have had any issue
meeting with me before arraignment when something tangible could have been done to
avoid this whole mess. That's not going to be on my conscience that I didn't give you a
fair chance when I take you to civil court. It's the other way around. You disrespected
me from the start of this case, and I gave you an honest chance to salvage something
worth pursuing. Now it will be pursued at trial, because I had to do my own investigation
without your help, and what I found is going to lead to an easy acquittal. Take your
chances. You will never be able to say I didn't warn you, even if you do get all our
communications excluded.
Either you or Scott Sweet lied about my discovery request. Or whoever you talked to at the Drug
Task Force gave you bogus information. I have "smoking gun" evidence to bring to the next
hearing. You ought to use this time off you have now to figure out how you can gracefully drop
this case. I might have to file a motion for contempt to find out which one of you lied. Maybe
both of you are lying in coordination. I wouldn't put it past you. We know you are a proven liar.

Mr. Bergeron:
I have certainly never lied to you. If you have information about additional discovery that exists
that I am unaware of, please tell me and I will be happy to look into whether it exists and
whether we can disclose it to you.
Yours,
Andrew Livernois
If you didn't lie, you took the word of the first person you asked. Every attorney, civil or
criminal, has a duty to truly investigate the facts of his case. You've failed in that duty.
What you need to remember is I am a reporter and investigator first and a lawyer only
by last resort. I have the ability to find information you think it would be impossible for
me to acquire. It's called research. Like, for instance, the attached manual. If I can find
that manual with no formal authority or license to be given access, don't you think I can
get the policies and procedures you and your DTF buddies are hiding?
I know they exist, and if you did your homework, you would know you've been
hoodwinked, too. Your friends are lying to you now. They are throwing YOU under the
bus.
I am giving you the courtesy of informing you of these facts so you can avoid ruining
your reputation and subjecting yourself to years of civil legal wrangling by going to trial.
I'm not hoping to work with you at all at this point. As I've said countless times, I don't
trust you. You've blown a few chances to end this sensibly, and I will not feel the least
bit bad about calling you out for the way you've disrespected me every step of the way. I
want a trial. I can win a trial.
Dozens of people I've dealt with in my investigations followed the very same pattern you
are following with this case. It was primarily because they all had a great deal to hide
that I could easily find if I looked hard enough. Also, it was because I set the correct
conditions for them to make mistakes. I made them trip themselves up, and I'm doing
that to you here with better results than ever. It's time for you to make your retreat and
give up on this useless war you are waging. You will never win.
The only offer you will ever get from here on out is this one:
I will sign a formal agreement that I will not file a civil suit of any kind against you or any
representative of the state attorney general's office (including the DTF)...
IF: you drop all charges against me voluntarily with no conditions.

Andrew Livernois, Belknap County, NH, County Attorney Email Chain

Andrew Livernois, Belknap County, NH, County Attorney Email Chain

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Plus de Rich Bergeron

Plus de Rich Bergeron (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Andrew Livernois, Belknap County, NH, County Attorney Email Chain