Alton town government critic Jeffrey Clay to court: Think again

By MICHAEL MORTENSEN, LACONIA DAILY SUN

LACONIA — Jeffrey Clay, a sharp and unrelenting critic of Alton town officials, especially the Board of Selectmen, is asking a court to set aside its verdicts finding him guilty of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest over his behavior at a 2017 selectmen's meeting.

In the motion sent Tuesday to the Fourth Circuit Court, District Division-Laconia, Clay's attorney Jared Bedrick said that the Jan. 17 verdict should be set aside because his client's actions did not amount to a violation of criminal law.

The motion came just two days before Clay was scheduled to be sentenced.

In his filing, Bedrick stated in issuing the guilty verdicts against Clay, Judge Michael Garner found that "Clay had violated the (the selectmen's rules regarding the public's participation in its meetings) which do not appear in the disorderly conduct statute, the criminal code, or public safety laws."

As to finding Clay guilty of resisting arrest, the attorney argues that the arresting officer did not sufficiently inform Clay that he was about to be arrested and therefore needed to leave the meeting room. "There is no legally sufficient resistance because there is only verbal resistance (by Clay) and natural gesticulations incident to speech," the attorney wrote.

Clay appeared at the selectmen's meeting Feb. 22, 2017, to criticize the town for not having a written policy for ambulance billing. When Clay failed to comply with Selectmen Chairman Cydney Johnson's request to confine his remarks to items posted on the agenda, she said she could have him removed from the meeting. After a five-minute recess, Clay resumed his attacks on selectmen and, when he again failed to address an agenda item, Johnson directed Clay be removed from the room. When he hindered a police officer's attempt to escort him from the room, he was charged with resisting arrest, and was later charged with two counts of disorderly conduct, but was found guilty just one of the disorderly conduct charges.

Clay, for his part, maintains that the town is violating his right of free speech by obstructing his ability to criticize them and their actions.

When the verdicts against him were announced Clay vowed to appeal his case. Bedrick said that if the Circuit Court does not set aside the verdict the next step would be to appeal the case to the state Supreme Court.

The attorney added that if Clay should lose his appeal he has agreed to pay a $600 fine ($300 on each charge), plus $144 penalty assessment.

This is the second time Clay has been in legal trouble for disrupting a selectmen's meeting. In 2015, the selectmen directed police to remove Clay from a meeting after he claimed the board repeatedly violated the Right-To-Know law, statements the selectmen claimed represented "character assassination." He was removed and charged with disorderly conduct.

When the case reached the court, Circuit Court Judge Jim Carroll dismissed the charge, ruling that "the silencing is nothing less than censorship of the defendant's criticism given at a time and place designated by the board itself for public input."

Clay then sued the town in federal court, alleging that the town violated his freedom of speech and received a settlement of $42,500.