Jul 16, 2014
Jul 10, 2014
Jun 26, 2014
Jun 20, 2014
Manchester Crimewatch: Hearing set for 17-year-old accused of arson at school
Sharron Beaule, 17, of 420 Maple St., was arraigned Thursday on a felony arson charge that alleges Beaule set a fire in a school bathroom March 23.
Beaule is accused of using a lighter to set fire to a toilet paper dispenser, burning his fingers in the process, and then asking his teacher for a pass to go to the nurse, claiming he had burned his fingers in hot water while washing his hands.
Court documents show an assistant principal told police that Beaule said, "I like to watch things burn."
Beaule is free on $5,000 personal recognizance bail.
Not behind the wheel?
A woman accused of leaving the scene of an accident and of claiming she wasn't the driver they wanted was arraigned Thursday in Circuit Court-Manchester District Division on charges of conduct after an accident and false report of a motor vehicle accident.
Brittany Hunt, 23, of 51 W. Wilson St., is accused of hitting the back of a woman's car at Hanover and Chestnut streets Feb. 13, causing damage, and leaving the scene without stopping. She's also accused of later denying she was the driver, repeating a story told by her boyfriend that he was the driver.
Court documents show that three witnesses told police that Hunt was the driver of the car, whose front license plate as well as some debris, was found at the scene. Hunt's boyfriend told police that he was driving the car and Hunt was a front seat passenger and her child was in the back and that the couple went to Market Basket right after the crash.
Court documents show that video from Market Basket showed the vehicle entering the parking lot and Hunt, carrying a child, entering the store by herself.
When police spoke with Hunt, she told them the same story as her boyfriend, according to the court documents.
Hunt's criminal record consists of resisting arrest, theft of services, criminal trespass and theft by deception. Trial was set for July 10. Bail is $2,000 personal recognizance.
Denies hitting woman
Pedro Jimenez, 31, pleaded innocent Thursday in Circuit Court-Manchester District Division to a simple assault charge that alleges he struck his longtime girlfriend in the face following an argument at their residence at 228 Karatzas Ave.
Jimenez, who said his address is now 7 Sears Drive, told Judge Gregory Michael, "I been with this girl for 13 years," adding that they have a son. "I've never hit her," he assured Michael.
But court documents show the alleged victim told police that they had been watching a movie when Jimenez decided to go to the store and told her to pause the video. When he returned, he became angry because she hadn't paused the movie and was watching it.
She told police he called her names, slammed doors and went for her purse, to get money and her EBT card. According to the court documents, she grabbed for the purse and he swung, hitting her in the face. Officers responding to the call noted redness on her nose.
Jimenez told officers they had argued, but he said the argument did not become physical. In court, Jimenez told Michael he didn't know where the assault charge came from. "The public is not in danger from me," he said.
Police prosecutors had sought $5,000 cash/surety bail, but Michael set bail at $1,000 cash/surety, with conditions that include no contact with the alleged victim and not going to her residence.
Trial was set for May 22.
Tried to prevent arrest
Katie Rackliff, 31, of 57 Cleveland St., pleaded innocent Thursday in Circuit Court-Manchester District Division to misdemeanor charges of simple assault, obstructing government administration and resisting arrest. Trial was set for June 19. Rackliff is free on $1,000 personal recognizance bail.
Rackliff was arrested April 2. She alleged grabbed at and interfered with an officer attempt to arrest another person, swung her arms and fist hitting an officer in the arm, and pulled away from an officer seeking to arrest her.
Police reported they had gone to the apartment to arrest Rackliff's brother-in-law, but she and other family members, including two of her children became involved in the escalating effort to prevent the arrest.
Judge Gregory Michael told Rackliff she also owed a fee for failing to appear in court in 2010 on dog license and forfeiture matters. Michael noted she was cited on those issues exactly three years ago, on April 18.
"I can't pay it 'til the first," Rackliff said, so Michael put those matters on for June 19, the same day as her trial on the April charges.
READER COMMENTS: 0
- Dover police say cyberstalking victim who committed suicide faced other 'stressors' - 0
- Berlin doctor enters settlement agreement for improperly prescribing drugs - 0
- Londonderry police chief probing online 'CopBlock' allegations - 1
- Exeter man charged in two 2013 burglaries - 0
- Documents say former UNH hockey coach allegedly grabbed player's jersey, helmet, and shouted in her face - 0
- Investigators ask public for help with Hernandez case - 3
- Merrimack man arrested in sexual assaults of juvenile - 0
- Police say boy, 6, found in getaway car - 1
- Keene man charged with June Central Square 'chalking' assault - 0
READER COMMENTS: 0
- Another View -- Gilles Bissonnette: To keep Libertarians off the ballot, NH violates their rights - 0
- Insanity: Obamacare and the rule of law - 1
- Charles Arlinghaus: NH's counterweight to a strong central government - 0
- Tom Woodlock All-Stars primed for success in Babe Ruth tournament - 0
- Manchester waives right to buy Millyard building - 0
- Police search for missing Stratford woman - 0
- Blue Jays cool off Red Sox - 0
- Passers-by, including two active-duty Army soldiers, help rescue mom, daughter in I-93 rollover - 0
- Manchester panel OKs new academic standards, despite Common Core criticism - 0
Passers-by, including two active-duty Army soldiers, help rescue mom, daughter in I-93 rollover
U.S. appeals courts issue conflicting rulings on Obamacare exchange subsidies such as NH's
Insanity: Obamacare and the rule of law
- Mass. Supreme Judicial Court has found upskirt photos taken on a subway aren't illegal. Should such voyeurism be a crime?
- Total Votes: 917