Why a New Hampshire Lawmaker’s Speeding Stop Is Sparking a Big Talk About Police Cameras

What Happened in New Hampshire?

Imagine you are a state lawmaker (someone who helps make laws) driving to work. A police deputy pulls you over and says you were going 107 miles per hour — super fast! That is what happened to Ellen Read, a Democratic lawmaker in New Hampshire.

Because Fox News Digital confirmed the sheriff’s office that pulled her over does not use body cameras or dashboard cameras, people are now arguing again about whether police should always record traffic stops.

• Read is fighting charges from two Rockingham County traffic stops.
• In one stop, a deputy said she was driving 107 mph.
• Read says a part of the New Hampshire Constitution protects lawmakers while traveling to and from lawmaking duties, so the stops were not allowed.

Important Point: Without body or dashboard camera footage, there is no official video or recording of the stop that started this constitutional fight.

Why No Cameras?

A leader in the Rockingham County Sheriff’s Office, Major Christopher Bashaw, told Fox News Digital the agency does not use body-worn cameras or dashboard cameras.

• He said they do not have them because they lack funding (money) to buy them.
• He said, “We don’t have that either,” when asked about the cameras.
• The office would like to give deputies this technology.

New Hampshire’s Camera Help Program

In 2021, New Hampshire lawmakers made a special pot of money called the Body-Worn and Dashboard Camera Fund.

• It gives matching grants (shared money) to local law enforcement agencies.
• Agencies can use it to buy cameras and pay for upkeep, replacement, and storage.
• All local law enforcement agencies can apply.

Also, state law says:

• If an agency chooses to use body cameras, it must have rules about when officers record things like traffic stops.
• But the law does not force agencies to buy or use body cameras.

It is unclear if the Rockingham County Sheriff’s Office applied for this state grant money.

What Does the Lawmaker Say?

Ellen Read told Fox News Digital:

• She has always supported laws and funding for body-worn cameras.
• She would help the Rockingham County Sheriff’s Office get camera funding in the next state budget.
• She supports camera funding even though she questions other police spending like military-style gear and fancy vehicles.

Read also pushed back on the sheriff’s office claim that she recorded part of the stop on her phone.

• She said, “They are incorrect, I wish I had.”
• She said the officers not wearing cameras is why she is now buying her own dash cam.
• A witness on a cellphone call later talked in court about what happened; Read says she did not record the encounter.

Read admitted in court she was going about 85 mph, not 107, and was okay with a speeding ticket but not the reckless driving claim.

The Constitution Argument, Explained Simply

Read says the New Hampshire Constitution protects lawmakers from being delayed while going to lawmaking work — not from being charged with a crime.

Law expert Lawrence Friedman, a professor at New England Law, explained:

• This rule is very old, from centuries ago.
• It was meant to stop lawmakers from being delayed during their job.
• It was not meant to give total freedom from traffic stops or arrests.

He said the court probably will not say a lawmaker is “absolutely immune” from a normal speeding ticket just for being a legislator.

Important Point: The New Hampshire Supreme Court did not say Read is wrong. They just said they want to wait and see what the lower trial court decides first.

Major Bashaw agrees the rule was to stop police from messing with legislative work, not to let lawmakers avoid blame for dangerous driving. He gave an extreme example: if the immunity were total, someone could cause a deadly crash and avoid accountability just for driving to session.

Read also noted the constitutional rule was written before cars even existed, so the language could be updated while keeping its original meaning.

White House and ICE Side Note

In a related national story, the White House now requires ICE (a federal immigration agency) agents to wear body cameras during traffic stops after some fatal shootings. Former Acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf discussed this on Fox News. This shows the camera debate is happening at many levels of government.

Summary

A New Hampshire lawmaker’s very fast traffic stop — with no police camera footage — has brought back the debate about body and dashboard cameras. The sheriff’s office says it lacks money for cameras, even though state grant help exists. The lawmaker supports camera funding and says the Constitution protects lawmakers from delay, not from all tickets. Experts say total immunity is unlikely, and the state’s top court has not ruled on the case yet.

FAQ

1. What is a body-worn camera?
It is a small video camera clipped to a police officer’s chest that records what happens during their work, like a traffic stop.

2. Why does the Rockingham County Sheriff’s Office not have cameras?
They say they do not have enough money to buy body cameras or dashboard cameras.

3. Does New Hampshire require police to use cameras?
No. The state helps pay for them through a fund, and if an agency uses them it must have rules, but agencies are not forced to buy them.

4. What does the lawmaker say about the 107 mph claim?
She says she was going about 85 mph, would take a ticket for that, but disputes going 107 mph or driving recklessly.

5. Did the Supreme Court say she is wrong?
No. They chose not to hear her case right away and will wait for the trial court to handle it first.