MANCHESTER, NH – The Ashland teen accused of authoring a Facebook post intended to incite a riot last June in the city will have his criminal trespassing case tried in Manchester circuit court, a judge has ruled.
Judge Erin B. McIntyre, presiding in 9th Circuit – District Division – Manchester, rejected the defense’s request that the case of Daniel Zeron, 19, be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction or, in the alternative, transferred to Plymouth circuit court.
Zeron is charged with one misdemeanor count of criminal threatening in connection with a Facebook post in which he invited protesters to riot on June 2 at the Manchester Community Shopping Center on South Willow Street.
The page featured a police car in flames. It stated:
“#Fuck12 Let’s join the other states in protesting blatant racism and police brutality. We cannot stand by and watch. Now is your chance to take action and join a movement that will forever change America for the better.
To start this event we will meet in the masses on Tuesday, June 2nd at 8 PM at The Manchester Commons Shopping Center at 401 S. Willow St. Manchester, NH 03103. We will then march all throughout willow street (sic) and let our voices be heard. Police cars will be tipped. Graffiti is welcome. Bring masks. Take examples from riots in other cities.”
The post cited similar protests in Minneapolis, New York City and Atlanta, all sparked by the May 25, 2020 killing of George Floyd, 46, a black man from Minneapolis who died after Officer Derek Chauvin allegedly knelt on his neck for eight minutes and 46 seconds.
Zeron also allegedly concealed his identity so as not to “be charged with inciting a riot.”
The motion was argued last Thursday. Defense attorneys Kyle Robidas and Jillian L. Rizzo contended the Plymouth court was the proper venue and jurisdiction because that was the location from where the alleged threat was made. They argued the location of the subject of a threat is not relevant for purposes of establishing jurisdiction. Because no element of the alleged crime took place in Manchester, the defense maintained the city lacked prosecutorial authority.
The judge, citing state law, said if parts of an offense are committed in more than one county or judicial district, the defendant may be prosecuted in either county.
She noted that Facebook advised four people had said they would join the June 2 gathering in Manchester, 25 people shared the post and 27 people showed interest in attending.
Assistant city solicitor Jeremy A. Harmon, in his offer of proof, said the New Hampshire Information Bank, operated jointly by N.H. State Police and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, received more than 200 reports concerning the Facebook posts while Manchester police received more than 100 calls concerning the posts.
She said the Facebook post called for police cars to be tipped and encouraged graffiti. “Such damage was to take place at a specific time and place at a specific location in Manchester. Based on the language contained in the Facebook page, it is logical to conclude that Manchester police cars and Manchester property were threatened and thus part of the offense occurred in Manchester,” McIntyre wrote.
The defense also argued that Zeron could not get a fair trial in Manchester and cited statements made by Manchester Police Chief Carlo Capano about the case, the media attention, a “political rippling effect,” the expense of traveling to Manchester and the impact the location would have on his family and community support.
After police arrested Zeron, the department issued a news release in which Capano was quoted as saying:
“We cannot and will not tolerate any suggested riots or acts of violence against our community. The men and women of the Manchester Police Department work tirelessly to keep our community safe and the actions of Daniel Zeron undermine our efforts and leave our citizens in a state of uneasiness. We will work with our prosecutors to make sure Zeron is held accountable for his actions and we will push for the strongest penalties allowed by law.”
McIntyre declined to rule on that issue saying the concern was not pled in the defendant’s motion but raised at the hearing.
“Additionally, the Court finds Mr. Zeron’s argument is premature. If this matter were to be tried, it would be heard by a Justice of the Circuit Court, in the first instance. The defendant could avail himself of a jury trial only upon a conviction,” she wrote.
