Lauren kidnapped roadside by thugs Oct. 2nd, Part 1

[dan_sayers]

Union Leader just ran with Lauren's story and the YouTube vid

MUCH better than the other article written on it. My only complaint with this one, which is of course no reflection on the journalist, is the following text:

"Judge Martha Crocker determined that Canario's refusal to leave the van signified that she was waiving her right to an arraignment within 24 hours of her arrest, and sent Canario back to jail until the woman is ready to move forward."

Is this a psych test? Are we gazing upon Rorschachs as if we're free to "determine" whatever we'd like to? You locals will have to press this point hard. Judge's have a lot of power, but speaking for others is not one of them. I still contend that they moved her during her arrest and they can move her into court. They seem to choose whatever side of that coin suits them.

@Mr. Craig: Great job showing the irony in what state registration physically gets you

[coffeeseven]

they cannot take Blood before CONVICTION without a court order... (except DUI??)

That Lauren JAIL is out of control... Husband or best friends have to get to work on JAIL REGULATIONS in NEW HAMPSHIRE... this is going all wrong... JAILS have procedures for almost anything that happens..

karenijohnson

/////

(from previous POST)

I inquired and was told that she is technically in quarantine because she has refused to cooperate with normal medical intake procedure.  She has refused to allow medical personnel to draw blood to test for communicable diseases, so they must keep her separate.  I didn't learn anything more specific about how this affects her shower situation.
((end previous))

Can you cite that regulation? I'll throw it at Bonnie whasis if she calls me back. Although I'm sure jails operate under their own set of shape shifting rules.

[Riddler]

"In NH, you have to be able to pay for any damage you do because of a wreck.  You are allowed to do this through insurance or other means, such as the money in your house, or your savings account.  This is fair and how laws should be; otherwise, it will get out of hand. "


There are plenty of people driving around w/out the proverbial pot to piss in...renters w/ no money in the bank, no home (no equity), no seizable assets.., Case in point, a year or so ago, this fool eating pizza while driving sailed through an intersection, broadsiding this chap & his daughter...rolling the car over....this guy's daughter was critically injured...pizza man has no insurance, no means to pay for the victims med. bills (multiple surgeries required), wrecked car..., so much for her getting compensation for 'pain & suffering'.  Lauren's  financial liquidity is certainly the exception to the rule here. The rest don't have insurance cause they can't afford it. They shouldn't be allowed on the road. No ticky, no laundry.

[Riddler]

Point is, protesting a driver's license is a monumental waste of time. You're never going to win. The New London land case? Absolutely. You've got a much better chance to change laws through public opinion. And in terms of importance in anything that matters, the land case obliterates the feet stamping over having to have a piece of paper to drive on a roadway.

[Pat McCotter]

I was gonna tip-toe around this but, no, I have to stomp right on in.

Lauren isn't trying to change driver licensing laws. She is trying to live her life free of government oversight.

Being placed in jail for an otherwise ticketable offense is just showing what the government really is - "Do as I say or else...

[coffeeseven]

Point is, protesting a driver's license is a monumental waste of time. You're never going to win. The New London land case? Absolutely. You've got a much better chance to change laws through public opinion. And in terms of importance in anything that matters, the land case obliterates the feet stamping over having to have a piece of paper to drive on a roadway.

You're repeating yourself.

IRMO: Pizza boy

If the injured girl were in my communityt (or maybe not) I would be delighted to write a check for a portion of her medical bills and pass the hat in my neighborhood rather than concentrate on all of your negative-seeming vitriol.

Just curious - By your line of reasoning should pedestrians be forced to wear helmets or maintain $10,000 in the bank at all times in case they get hit by an uninsured motorist so they're not a burden to "society" or the state? Where exactly does your "poor people shouldn't travel" argument end?

[dalebert]

Thanx Pat. I was just about to say that. People seem to be under the impression that Lauren is doing this expecting to get rid of driver's license requirements. This is making an impression on lots of people about the nature of the police state. She may not change the world with this act, but she's making an impression on a lot of people which is nothing to sneeze at.

It's too bad that most people don't do anything at all unless they believe they're somehow going to get some kind of immediate payoff. We can each take a bit out of the elephant our own way and together and with time, we can chip away at the culture of violence we live in.

[EthanAllen]

Point is, protesting a driver's license is a monumental waste of time. You're never going to win. The New London land case? Absolutely. You've got a much better chance to change laws through public opinion. And in terms of importance in anything that matters, the land case obliterates the feet stamping over having to have a piece of paper to drive on a roadway.

They are trying to press a principle of common right of ways (individual equal rights) that exist within our collectively owned roads and sidewalks.

The problem is that as the potential for bodily and property harm escalate from walking to riding on horses/bicycles to motorized vehicles, the collective owners of the actual roads want the common right of way subsumed in importance to a system of mitigating risks by blanket requirements like licenses, insurance, etc.

It's all about shifting risks and personal responsibility. The argument they are trying to make  is that no victim/no crime and common right of ways. Some folks are making an esoteric argument about the definition of a motor vehicle and commerce.

[EthanAllen]

By your line of reasoning should pedestrians be forced to wear helmets or maintain $10,000 in the bank at all times in case they get hit by an uninsured motorist so they're not a burden to "society" or the state? Where exactly does your "poor people shouldn't travel" argument end?

There is risk in everything we do. The question is to know what the risks are and decide for yourself. In the case of roads, the collective owners of the roads decided thru their elected representatives that the risks are too great. Rather than requiring pedestrians to have $10K in the bank they might instead require drivers to have insurance.

[coffeeseven]

By your line of reasoning should pedestrians be forced to wear helmets or maintain $10,000 in the bank at all times in case they get hit by an uninsured motorist so they're not a burden to "society" or the state? Where exactly does your "poor people shouldn't travel" argument end?

There is risk in everything we do. The question is to know what the risks are and decide for yourself. In the case of roads, the collective owners of the roads decided thru their elected representatives that the risks are too great. Rather than requiring pedestrians to have $10K in the bank they might instead require drivers to have insurance.

Funny every response I get back from my Congresscritter goes to great lengths to explain why he disagrees with my opinion and then thanks me for my letter.

We are not the collective owners of the roads anymore than I am the true owner of my car or house. I don't know if anyone else has noticed but things have been out of our hands for quite a while.

[EthanAllen]

We are not the collective owners of the roads anymore than I am the true owner of my car or house.

The right of way contained within them is an individual equal right but the roads themselves are owned collectively.

[karenijohnson]

Judge "cannot" waive a right without "advising" her of the RIGHT >>

The Judge is "personally" responsible for any "unconstitutional" detention of Lauren(no immunity when without jurisdiction to do what he is doing). The speedy trial and arraignment rights "flow down" from US Supreme Court rulings.  I believe *any* habeas corpus/writ judge would rule that Lauren was not "advised" and "knowingly and intelligently" waived her rights.  The judge also has to inquire as to her "right to counsel" and any waiver BEFORE doing ANYTHING on the case

p.s. if there is a RULING of any kind, then there is a CASE number, and a COMPLAINT/NOTICE to appear filed.  ALSO, i would suggest that THERE IS ANOTHER court DATE most likely already scheduled...ASK the CLERK for the CASE NUMBER, then find the NEXT court date from the COMPUTER or the MINUTE ORDER. you can have that guy that wanted to help that is "just down the road" from the court that was in BOSTON area the day after her arrest keep tabs on things...(see EARLY blog)

karenijohnson
115pm est 10/20/07
//.


Judge Martha Crocker determined that Canario's refusal to leave the van signified that she was waiving her right to an arraignment within 24 hours of her arrest, and sent Canario back to jail until the woman is ready to move forward.
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Woman%27s+videotaped+arrest+protest+appears+on+YouTube&articleId=a525e16b-c72f-45b2-b5d9-92632507d796

[J’raxis 270145]

Union Leader just ran with Lauren's story and the YouTube vid

Awful lot of bad comments in that article now...

[FTL_Ian]

It is sad that many people are taking the position that Lauren is costing taxpayer dollars... apparently it's all Lauren's fault that the government wants to spend the money to imprison her indefinitely.   

[Michael Fisher]

Can someone send me Lauren's mailing address? Thanks.