Belknap County Attorney Andrew Livernois has a problem with the truth being in the public eye when it makes him look bad. This motion represents his desperate attempt to silence my exposure of the weaknesses of his case. I am also exposing corruption in law enforcement, the same corruption he refused to acknowledge and do anything about. He even managed to have any mention of leaks I wanted to expose eliminated from being discussed at the trial. The public needs to know this County Attorney is willing to do whatever it takes to bury the truth if it makes law enforcement look bad. Please visit www.nhdrugtaskforce.com for more information.

1. 1
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
BELKNAP, SS SUPERIOR COURT
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
v.
RICHARD E. BERGERON, III.
211-2019-CR-163
STATE’S MOTION FOR A COURT ORDER
PROHIBITING PRE-TRIAL PUBLICITY
NOW COMES the State of New Hampshire, by and through the Office of the Belknap
County Attorney, Keith G. Cormier, Deputy County Attorney, and moves for an order from the
Court prohibiting the Defendant from making any additional extrajudicial public statements in
the media regarding the above-captioned case, stating as follows:
1. The Defendant has been charged with six felony charges for allegedly selling marijuana to an
undercover police officer. This case is currently scheduled for a jury trial in Belknap County
on or about October 5, 2020.
2. The Defendant has chosen to represent himself pro se in this case and is therefore acting as
his own attorney.
3. The Defendant recently submitted a letter-to-the-editor to the Laconia Daily Sun, a
newspaper of general circulation in this County which was published in the May 20, 2020
edition (a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A to this motion) in which he discussed in
great detail the underlying facts related to his case, as well as his belief that his prosecution is
unjust. It is clear from the text of the letter that the Defendant is seeking to sway public
opinion in his favor and influence the potential jury pool in this case.
Filed
File Date: 5/22/2020 9:40 AM
Belknap Superior Court
E-Filed Document

2. 2
4. In a subsequent email to Belknap County Attorney Andrew Livernois (a copy of which is
attached as Exhibit B) the Defendant made clear that he intends to continue to try to use pre-
trial publicity to improperly affect the outcome of this litigation.
5. The Defendant’s behavior in this regard is in clear violation of Rule of Professional Conduct
3.6. Under that rule, a lawyer who is participating in litigation “shall not make an
extrajudicial statement that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know will be
disseminated by means of public communication and will have a substantial likelihood of
materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding in the matter.” N.H. Rule. Prof. Cond.
3.6(a) (emphasis added).
6. The rule goes on to give additional guidance as to the types of statements which are violative
of this provision. The rule makes clear that statements which discuss “any opinion as to the
guilt or innocence of a defendant or a suspect in a criminal case” are prohibited. Id. At
3.6(b)(4). Additionally, any statements which discuss “the character, credibility, [or]
reputation . . . of a party . . . or witness . . . or the expected testimony of a party or witness”
are not allowed. Id. at 3.6(b)(1).
7. The letter-to-the-editor clearly violates this rule, in that it makes brazen statements directly
discussing the reputation and testimony of witnesses and parties and setting forth the
Defendant’s arguments as to why he should be exonerated.
8. The purpose of Rule 3.6 is clear – it is to protect the integrity of the judicial system. Extra-
judicial statements in the media strike at the heart of the fair and impartial administration of
justice and threaten to undermine the integrity of the criminal justice system, and therefore
cannot be allowed to occur.

3. 3
9. The fact that the Defendant is appearing pro se and is not a licensed attorney does not excuse
this behavior. Pro se litigants are expected to be familiar with, and to follow, all rules of
procedure and other court rules. State v. Hofland, 151 N.H. 322, 327 (2004) (pro se litigants
responsible for knowing content of court rules applicable to their actions); DeButts v.
LaRoche, 142 N.H. 845, 847 (1998) (same).
10. Courts have held that so-called “gag orders” prohibiting prejudicial pretrial publicity by
attorneys, parties and witnesses are allowable under the First Amendment and do not
constitute unreasonable prior restraint in circumstances where the extra-
judicial statements are “reasonably likely” to prejudice the proceedings. See, e.g. In re
Application of Dow Jones & Company, Inc., 842 F.2d 603, 610 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 488
U.S. 946, 109 S.Ct. 377, 102 L.Ed.2d 365 (1988); Radio & Television News Ass'n v. United
States District Court, 781 F.2d 1443, 1447 (9th Cir.1986); Pedini v. Bowles, 940 F. Supp.
1020, 1023 (N.D. Tex. 1996).
11. Defendant has demonstrated that he is attempting to use pre-trial publicity to sway the jury in
this case, and that he intends to continue such behavior unless this court puts a stop to it.
WHEREFORE the State respectfully requests that the Honorable Court:
A. Enter an order prohibiting the Defendant from making any additional extrajudicial
public statements in the media regarding the above-captioned case; and
B. Grant such additional relief as is just and proper.

4. 4
Respectfully submitted,
State of New Hampshire
May 22, 2020
_____/s/Keith G. Cormier____________
Keith G. Cormier, Esq., Bar ID # 267681
Deputy Belknap County Attorney
64 Court St., Laconia, NH 03246
Tel. 603-527-5440
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this date a copy of this motion has been forwarded on Richard
Bergeron, pro se, 107 Cotton Hill Road, Belmont, NH 03220, and Carrie Smith, Esq.
_____/s/Keith G. Cormier____________
Keith G. Cormier, Esq.
Deputy County Attorney