Connect with us

New Hampshire

Survivors of YDC abuse call for more state money, as top lawmaker wants audit of fund

Published

11 months ago

on

Survivors of YDC abuse call for more state money, as top lawmaker wants audit of fund


New Hampshire Senate President Sharon Carson is calling for a financial and performance audit of the settlement fund for abuse victims at the state’s youth detention center.

“The financial condition of the YDC fund has sparked deep concern regarding the processes employed to resolve cases and called into doubt whether victims are getting the resources they need,” Carson said in a statement Friday.

Carson’s push for the audit comes as victims of abuse have until June 30 to file claims.

It also followed a vote by top lawmakers Friday to table a request by the YDC fund’s administrator, former Supreme Court Chief Justice John Broderick, to add $10 million to the fund.

Advertisement

The legislature created the settlement fund in 2022, on the advice of New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella. At the time, the fund was seen as a way to help victims while also protecting the state from thousands of potential lawsuits stemming from what has been revealed to be among the biggest youth detention abuse scandals in American history.

The Youth Development Center, an investigative podcast series hosted by Jason Moon that examines how the abuse scandal happened, and how it came to light

To date, the fund has paid out $156 million to around 300 abuse survivors. But hundreds of claims remain outstanding, and Formella has complained recently about how settlements have been paid out.

Survivors call for more state funding

Nearly 30 people whose claims are pending called on lawmakers this week to fully fund the settlement, some saying failing to do so amounts to more abuse from the state. The law firm representing them, Shaheen and Gordon, released the statements ahead of the committee’s meeting Friday.

“It’s another kick in the face,” Joshua Kuhn wrote. “When I was 15-16 years old at YDC, I felt violated like crazy. Now it’s just more violation from the same people who violated me before. They don’t care.”

Advertisement

Several said a settlement is the only justice they will get.

“Everybody should be entitled to equality and equal justice under the law,” wrote Kirk Taylor. “I didn’t get justice with my abuser. He was never criminally charged. He was declared incompetent. He gets to die peacefully at home with his family, but I will never get the justice I deserve.”

One person said they chose a settlement over a lawsuit because it allowed them to remain anonymous.

“I wanted to do different things in life that would have been messed up by this being in the news,” the person wrote. “I was afraid how people would look at me. I would not have come forward if it were not for the settlement fund.”

Several warned lawmakers that retreating from fully supporting the settlement fund would lead to lawsuits that would cost the state even more. A jury awarded one victim $38 million in May, which the state is appealing. Another person settled his lawsuit for $10 million in March but won’t get paid if lawmakers don’t include the money in the budget.

Advertisement

The settlement fund caps awards at $2.5 million, but nearly all have settled for much less, according to Broderick’s latest report.

As of March, nearly 179 of the 296 claims settled for less than $500,000. The report said 115 settled for between $500,000 and $1.5 million. Only two were higher than that.

Most of the newest claims began as lawsuits, Broderick told lawmakers.

“While no amount of compensation could ever undo what happened, I believe some form of restitution or accountability is a small price to pay for a lifetime of suffering,” wrote Robert Hensley, who said he was raped repeatedly while at YDC. He is now in his 70s.

Another person who submitted a statement anonymously warned he will sue if there is no money for a settlement.

Advertisement

“I am a tax payer in this state and it makes no sense to me why the State would instead force us to get even bigger verdicts in court. But if that is what they force me to do then that is what I will do. I’m not going away.”





Source link

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

New Hampshire

Bill to outlaw using student IDs to vote clears NH Legislature

Published

5 hours ago

on

March 9, 2026

By

Bill to outlaw using student IDs to vote clears NH Legislature





Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

New Hampshire

NH cold case solved 40 years after police found man’s skull in woods

Published

17 hours ago

on

March 8, 2026

By

NH cold case solved 40 years after police found man’s skull in woods


Local News

Investigators partnered with a nonprofit genetic genealogy analysis organization to identify the man who the remains belonged to.

Warren Kuchinsky was born in 1952 and last known to be alive in the mid-1970s. New Hampshire Department of Justice

By Darin Zullo

Advertisement

2 minutes to read

After nearly four decades, a man whose skull was discovered in the New Hampshire woods has been identified.

Warren Kuchinsky was born in 1952 and was last known to be alive in the mid-1970s, New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella and New Hampshire State Police Colonel Mark Hall said in a statement. In 1986, his skull was found in a wooded area in the town of Bristol.

Advertisement

At the time, investigators weren’t able to identify whose skull it was, according to officials. Last year, however, the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner partnered with the DNA Doe Project, a nonprofit organization, to solve the case using forensic genetic genealogy techniques.

Kuchinsky’s identity was confirmed through DNA testing of a surviving family member, according to officials. There is no evidence that his death was caused by foul play, according to the statement.

Founded in 2017, the DNA Doe Project partners with law enforcement, medical examiners, and volunteer genealogists to apply investigative genealogy to John and Jane Doe cases. By analyzing DNA profiles and building family trees from publicly available genetic databases and historical records, the organization has helped solve more than 250 cases nationwide.

“We are honored to have partnered with the State of New Hampshire on this case,” DNA Doe Project Team Leader Lisa Ivany said in the statement. “Through the power of investigative genetic genealogy and the dedication of our volunteer genealogists, we were able to develop a critical lead in less than 24 hours. We truly hope that this identification brings long-awaited answers to Mr. Kuchinsky’s family.”

Initial DNA testing turned up only distant matches, so the DNA Doe Project selected the case to be worked on at a virtual retreat in May 2025, according to the organization’s case profile. Over the course of a weekend, more than 40 genealogists from the U.S., Canada, England, and Scotland collaborated virtually to work on the case.

Advertisement

Within hours, the team discovered that the unidentified man had roots in New Hampshire and Quebec, according to the profile. They later zeroed in on Kuchinsky, who had attended school in Plymouth, N.H., but had no official proof of life past 1970.

“This identification reflects the power of partnership and scientific advancement,” Formella said in the statement. “The dedication of the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, the investigative support of the New Hampshire State Police, and the extraordinary work of the DNA Doe Project have restored a name to an individual who had been unidentified for nearly 40 years. We are grateful for their professionalism and commitment.”

Sign up for the Today newsletter

Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

New Hampshire

New Hampshire House Advances One of The Nation’s Most Extreme Transgender Bathroom Bans

Published

1 day ago

on

March 8, 2026

By

New Hampshire House Advances One of The Nation’s Most Extreme Transgender Bathroom Bans


The proposal would fine transgender people up to $5,000 for using bathrooms aligned with their gender identity.

Truthout is an indispensable resource for activists, movement leaders and workers everywhere. Please make this work possible with a quick donation.

Advertisement

Bathroom bans targeting transgender people have been spreading rapidly across the United States. In previous years, adult bathroom bans in public buildings were limited to a handful of states with extreme laws. This year, they have become one of the primary vehicles for anti-trans legislation nationwide. Kansas was the first to act, passing a bathroom bounty hunter system and invalidating transgender people’s IDs. Idaho and Missouri began advancing their own bills. Now, the New Hampshire House of Representatives has passed its own version — one of the most extreme in the United States, which states that a trans person using the bathroom of their gender identity is a crime under the state civil rights act, violations of which carries hefty penalties. The bill passed 181-164 on Wednesday night, just weeks after Governor Kelly Ayotte vetoed a separate bathroom ban. Republicans are now sending her something far more aggressive — raising the question of whether they are trying to move the goalposts or simply daring her to veto again.

“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, with the exception of RSA 21:3, RSA 21:54, and paragraph II below, all multi-user facilities, including bathrooms, restrooms, and locker rooms located in buildings owned, leased, or operated by any municipality shall be used based on the individual’s biological sex,” reads the new bill. This prohibition is expansive: it applies to parks, rest stops, airports, civic buildings, and more, and could leave transgender people struggling to find a public place to use the restroom across the state.

The bill contains a novel enforcement mechanism not seen in any other state. It declares that a transgender person “asserting” that their gender identity allows them to use the bathroom is against the law under the state civil rights act, turning civil rights protections that were meant to be protective of transgender people into a weapon against them. “It shall be unlawful for any person to assert that their gender identity is a sex other than that defined in RSA 21:3 for the purposes of accessing places or services restricted on the basis of sex,” reads the bill. Such violations could result in fines of up to $5,000 per incident and even jail time if a person violates a resulting court injunction by continuing to use the restroom.

The bill also contains provisions for private businesses. It permits any owner or operator of a “place of public accommodation” — a category that under New Hampshire law includes hotels, restaurants, theaters, retail stores, bars, and concert venues — to restrict bathrooms by assigned sex at birth. The bill then immunizes those businesses from discrimination claims: “Adoption or enforcement of a policy pursuant to this section shall not be deemed discrimination under RSA 354-A or any other state law,” it reads.

A separate bill, HB 1217, also passed on Wednesday. That bill permits governmental buildings and businesses to classify bathrooms and locker rooms by assigned sex at birth — similar to the bathroom bans Ayotte has already vetoed. It passed by an even wider margin, 187-163. It contains no enforcement mechanism, but rather, states that bathroom bans and sports bans are not discriminatory towards transgender people under New Hampshire law.

Advertisement

The bills are part of a larger movement towards bathroom bans for transgender people. Just last month, Kansas passed a bathroom ban that allows every citizen in the state to become a bounty hunter, where reporting transgender people in bathrooms can net them $1,000 per trans person caught. This law also invalidated trans people’s drivers licenses in the state. Meanwhile, Idaho and Missouri are both advancing extreme anti-trans bathroom bans of their own, with Idaho’s ban even applying to private businesses, making it against the law for a private business to allow a trans person to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity.

The bills are substantially more extreme than the one vetoed by Governor Ayotte just weeks ago. In a veto statement of a bathroom ban last month, Ayotte stated, “I believe there are important and legitimate privacy and safety concerns raised by biological males using places such as female locker rooms and being placed in female correctional facilities… At the same time, I see that House Bill 148 is overly broad and impractical to enforce, potentially creating an exclusionary environment for some of our citizens.”

It remains unclear why Republicans are pushing an even more extreme version of a bill their own governor has already vetoed three times. The bill still needs to pass the New Hampshire Senate and be signed by Ayotte to become law. One possibility is that the more extreme HB 1442 is designed as cover for HB 1217 — making that bill appear moderate by comparison and improving its chances of earning a signature. Another is that Republicans believe they can pressure Ayotte into signing, or are simply laying the groundwork for an override attempt down the line. Regardless, HB 1442 is one of the most extreme bathroom bans moving through any state legislature in the country, and transgender people across New England will be watching closely as it advances to the Senate.

Media that fights fascism

Truthout is funded almost entirely by readers — that’s why we can speak truth to power and cut against the mainstream narrative. But independent journalists at Truthout face mounting political repression under Trump.

Advertisement

We rely on your support to survive McCarthyist censorship. Please make a tax-deductible one-time or monthly donation.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending