Blanchette charges should stand, prosecutor says

LACONIA — The Belknap County prosecutor is defending the refiling of charges against a former Belknap County Sheriff’s deputy who is accused of sexually assaulting a prisoner.

The charges of aggravated felonious sexual assault and felonious sexual assault against Ernest J. Blanchette are legitimate, the county attorney contends, because Blanchette was for all practical purposes an employee of the Belknap County Corrections facility where the prisoner was being held. Further, the charges were brought within the time allowed under the statute of limitations in sexual assault cases.

Belknap County Attorney Andrew Livernois made the arguments in a formal objection to an earlier motion by Blanchette’s attorney to have the changes against his client dismissed on the grounds that the law Blanchette is accused of breaking is constitutionally vague, and because the delay in bringing the latest charges denied Blanchette his right to a speedy trial and/or indictment.

Blanchette, 41, was indicted by a Belknap County grand jury in October on two charges of aggravated felonious sexual assault, and one charge of felonious sexual assault. All three indictments state that Blanchette coerced a 30-year-old female inmate into various sex acts on Sept. 18, 2014, in Belmont, when he was returning the inmate from a dental appointment in Tilton.

Blanchette was indicted in Hillsborough County in 2015 for allegedly raping an inmate in an abandoned house in Bedford. A jury found him guilty in April 2016 and he was sentenced to serve 10 to 20 years in prison.

But the state Supreme Court reversed Blanchette’s conviction in May 2017, saying there wasn't enough evidence presented at his 2016 trial to prove he was employed by a correctional institution, as was required under state law that existed at the time.

While that ruling did not affect the outstanding charges against Blanchette that stemmed from his alleged actions in Belknap County, in December 2018 the Belknap County charges of aggravated felonious sexual assault were dismissed. However, Superior Court Judge James D. O’Neill III ruled prosecutors were free to bring new charges against Blanchette in the future.

Blanchette was re-arrested on the Belknap County charges last June, and re-indicted five months later.

Although Blanchette was an officer with the Belknap County Sheriff’s Department — and not the Corrections Department — when the alleged crimes occurred, his contact with the alleged victim took place under a “longstanding, informal agreement” between the Sheriff’s Office and the Belknap County House of Corrections, under which the Sheriff’s Department had agreed to allow its deputies to transport inmates to any necessary medical and dental appointments, Livernois wrote.

“In so doing, the deputy sheriffs were given supervisory authority over the inmates in their custody for the period of time during which they were being transported,” Livernois argued in his 10-page objection filed in Belknap Superior Court on Monday.

He further stated that, “... a deputy sheriff, who has been tasked with providing transport services on behalf of inmates, and who has thus been given direct supervisory authority over those inmates for purposes of that transport, should reasonably know that he is at that time being ‘employed’ by the correctional institution as (its) agent, and therefore is prohibited from engaging in sexual relationships with those inmates, even though he technically draws a paycheck from the Belknap County Sheriff’s Department.”

In addition, the prosecutor said the 2017 Supreme Court decision in the Blanchette case cannot be cited as a precedent in the current matter because the ruling was handed down by a three-judge expedited panel, rather than the full five-member court.

Livernois’ filing also disputes the claim by Blanchette’s attorney that his client has been denied the right to a speedy indictment and speedy trial.

The prosecutor notes that the charges against Blanchette were dropped not by his office, but at the request of the defense. Livernois notes that state courts have ruled that prosecutors can re-indict someone even after the initial charges were dropped by the prosecution itself. Furthermore, he said the state Supreme Court has allowed a case to proceed to trial in cases where the amount of time between charges being dropped and the re-indictment was greater than the 2½-year period in the Blanchette case.