By DAMIEN FISHER, InDepthNH.org
Fired after his bosses reportedly covered up evidence in a use of force investigation, Department of Corrections Lt. Thomas Macholl continues to be stalled in his search for truth.
But DOC administrators are now under order to explain why they haven’t provided the emails Macholl has been seeking through an RSA 91a request for more than a year. At a hearing last week, the state’s right-to-know Ombudsman Thomas Kehr gave DOC lawyer Michael Grandy until the end of the month to support why the information hasn’t been provided, and to justify the extensive redactions in what has been turned over.
“It’s amazing how much they let these guys string it out,” Macholl told InDepthNH.org.
Macholl was fired in the spring of 2023, won his appeal to get his job back in April of this year, and won the May appeal of the appeal. But he’s still not back at DOC as the department is going to the state Supreme Court to appeal its double losses.
After he was fired and before he won his job back, Macholl filed an RSA 91a request in October of last year seeking all forms of communication between DOC Commissioner Helen Hanks, Assistant Commissioner Paul D. Raymond Jr., Warden Corey Riendeau, Human Resources Director Eileen Meaney and others from 04/05/2022 through 10/31/2023.
But the department has used every tactic available to slow the release of the documents, and almost totally redacted what little it has released, according to Macholl’s complaint with the Ombudsman. Macholl contends the records will further show the DOC acted improperly in his termination.
“(Macholl) believes that the Department of Corrections illegally represented that all communications requested by (him) were directly related to personnel matters, and would constitute an invasion of privacy. Firstly, and most directly because it would be (his) own privacy that the department was referring to, and would therefore be impossible to violate, and secondly, (Macholl) believes that there is evidence in the communications of a conspiracy to withhold exculpatory evidence. (Macholl) further believes that there are nefarious communications regarding swiftness of the termination, and lack of a complete investigative process,” his complaint states.
The DOC initially claimed in November of 2023 that all of the records Macholl requested could not be released since they dealt with personnel matters, namely Macholl’s. After he won the right to his job back, Macholl persisted in his right-to-know request, and DOC was granted a 90-day stay to find and redact the records.
Of the more than 1,900 pages of records found by the end of that 90-day stay, DOC has handed over barely a fraction, according to Macholl’s complaint. And most of those are still effectively unreleased thanks to the redactions DOC’s lawyers made.
“Of the 57 documents provided by (DOC) Attorney (Mary) Triick on July 19, 2024, 26 of them are entirely redacted, or so redacted as to render her providing them pointless, with no indications of what exceptions to RSA 91-a allows for the redactions. Of the 31 documents not redacted, 14 of them were from my attorney and the personnel appeals board,” Macholl wrote in a filing with the Ombudsman.
Grandy asked Kehr for more time to produce and redact the requested records, saying the department’s legal unit has a lot of right-to-know requests pending.
“Workloads and other significant right-to-know requests at NHDOJ and NH DOC have prevented production within a hoped-for 90-day timeframe. Significant work has been undertaken in regards to this matter. Additional time is necessary to sift through a large volume of documents, appropriately identify responsive materials, and evaluate exemptions and redactions in addition to all other responsibilities,” Grandy wrote.
But instead of extending the stay further or dismissing the complaint, as DOC requested, Kehr wants Grandy to explain the near-total redactions.
Macholl was fired in 2023 for allegedly using an illegal chokehold on an inmate. But Macholl disputed that allegation, saying his bosses were retaliating after he filed a public complaint against Meaney.
The Personnel Appeal Board’s April ruling called the DOC use of force investigation “disturbing.” According to the evidence presented, Macholl’s bosses knew there was no illegal chokehold, but hid that fact from investigators with the Public Integrity Unit of the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office. The DOC even reportedly tried to prevent a key witness, Captain Scott Towers, from talking to PIU investigators for more than a month.
“PIU Investigators find it troubling that, within a day of the incident, Assistant DOC Commissioner (Paul) Raymond specifically asked Capt. Towers to review the video footage and render a professional/expert opinion. … It was Capt. Towers’ opinion that the video did not support that a chokehold was used, yet when he asked Assistant Commissioner Raymond if he wanted this documented he was told no. As a result, nowhere in the file, is there any record of this information, which is, without question, exculpatory in nature,” the PIU report states.
