New Hampshire law enforcement stop of 107 mph and missing body camera footage

A New Hampshire Democrat's 107 mph stop has sparked a debate over police body cameras and dashboard cameras after Fox News Digital confirmed the sheriff's office involved in the stop did not have them.

The lack of body camera and dashboard camera footage has become the focus of a legal battle involving Rep. Ellen Read, who is fighting charges stemming from two Rockingham County traffic stops, including one where a deputy charged her with driving 107 mph. Read argues that both positions violated a provision of the New Hampshire Constitution that protects lawmakers while traveling to and from legislative duties.

Without a body camera or dashboard camera, there is no official recording of the traffic stop that has sparked a constitutional battle over legal immunity.

Rockingham County Sheriff's Office Major Christopher Bashaw told Fox News Digital that the agency does not use body-worn cameras or dashboard cameras because it does not have the money to buy them.

DEM LAW SAYS THE CONSTITUTION FORBIDDEN POLICE FROM STOPPING HIM AFTER ALLEGEDLY HE WAS SPEEDING 100 MPH.

“We don't have that either,” Bashaw said when asked if deputies use body cameras or dashboard cameras, adding that the sheriff's office would like to equip deputies with the technology.

New Hampshire lawmakers established the Body-Worn and Dashboard Camera Fund in 2021 to provide matching grants to local law enforcement agencies to purchase cameras and cover the costs of maintenance, replacement and data storage. All local law enforcement agencies are eligible to apply.

State law also requires agencies that choose to use body cameras to implement policies governing when officers must record law enforcement encounters, including traffic stops. The law, however, does not require agencies to purchase or use body cameras.

ICE RETURNS ON TRAFFIC CONDITIONS NATIONWIDE UNDER NEW POLICY REQUIRING BODY CAMERAS

(Stock)

It is unclear whether the Rockingham County Sheriff's Office has applied for funding through the grant program.

Read told Fox News Digital that he has always supported legislation regulating body-worn cameras, as well as funding to help law enforcement agencies purchase them. He also said he would be willing to work with the Rockingham County Sheriff's Office to help secure funding for body cameras in the next state budget.

Read said he supports funding body cameras, although he is skeptical of other ways to use the law, including military equipment and expensive vehicles.

SUBSCRIBE FOR THE LATEST TRUE CRIME NEWS

He also disputed claims by the sheriff's office that he filmed part of the train on his cell phone.

The officer is wearing a body-worn camera attached to his uniform. New Hampshire established a similar grant program in 2021 to help law enforcement agencies purchase body-worn and dashboard cameras. (AP Photo/Lynne Sladky)

“They're not good, I wish I had them,” said Read. “Police not wearing/using body cameras is why I'm investing in a dash cam.”

FOLLOW THE FOX TRUE CRIME TEAM ON X

According to Read's report, the sheriff's office did not understand what happened during the stop. He said he did not record his meeting with the witness who was listening when he received a call on his cell phone and then gave evidence in court.

Read said the constitutional provision protects lawmakers from being delayed while attending to law enforcement duties — not prosecutions.

LIKE YOU'RE READING? CLICK HERE TO DO MORE

“I admitted to the officer and in court that I was going 85 mph on the highway,” he said, adding that he was willing to accept a speeding ticket but disputed his deputy's allegations that he was going 107 mph and driving recklessly.

The New Hampshire State House, the state capitol building of New Hampshire, is seen on February 16, 2023 in Concord, New Hampshire. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

Lawrence Friedman, a professor at New England Law, said the constitutional provision dates back centuries and is intended to prevent lawmakers from being delayed while performing their legal duties — not to provide immunity from traffic jams or criminal prosecution.

GOT ADVICE?

“I think it's probably not the case that this arrangement provides some kind of absolute immunity,” Friedman told Fox News Digital. “It's not possible for a court to say, 'No, you're immune from being arrested for a moving violation that anyone can be arrested for just because you're a legislator.'

Friedman also said the New Hampshire Supreme Court's refusal to quickly hear Read's constitutional challenge should not be interpreted as a ruling on the merits of his argument.

LISTEN TO THE NEW 'CRIME AND JUSTICE PODCAST WITH DONNA ROTUNNO'

“My understanding is that it's not that his request was denied,” Friedman said. “The Supreme Court said no because they want to see how it goes in court.”

Bashaw said the constitutional provision is intended to prevent law enforcement from interfering with legitimate business, not to protect law enforcement from responding to dangerous driving.

GET NEWS VIA EMAIL

“The allegation that you're immune to all kinds of arrests … that would be like saying you can drive at those speeds, kill a car, and you're not allowed to answer for yourself because you're going to and from the appointment,” Bashaw said.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS PROGRAM

Read agreed that constitutional language can be modernized while preserving its original intent.

“I did not write this section of the constitution… it was written before there were cars,” he said.