A recent records request reveals a startling level of communication and coordination between Brattleboro Police and Hank Poitras, a right-wing video blogger. The documents from that request also suggest Police Chief Norma Hardy may have altered records on at least one occasion.
Over the last year, Brattleboro has witnessed the growth of what appears to many to be a mutually beneficial relationship between content creator Hank Poitras and the town’s police.
Poitras’ content — an almost single-minded focus on highlighting local crimes large and small and recording police interactions and arrests — has furthered the perception of a public safety crisis and framed more policing as the central solution.
The Brattleboro Selectboard seems to agree with Poitras’ prescription. It has poured over $700,000 into a downtown police substation, along with nine new police officer and staff positions at the cost of $675,000 for this year, which will near one million for the next. Prioritizing police expansion is deepening a tax crisis that has put many other town services on the chopping block.
Like his more famous counterparts in shows like Cops and Live PD, Poitras is much more than a mere observer of the police. Obtained records and his own admissions show a deep and symbiotic relationship between him and the department he films.
Speaking in a video on his YouTube channel, Poitras said the following about Brattleboro Police Sgt. Jason Hamilton. After mentioning that Hamilton is often willing to provide statements for his show, Poitras said, “He made a deal with me and was like ‘Listen, don’t catch my officers doing stupid shit, you know what I mean like, let’s make sure the younger officers don’t get put on the spot and get in trouble.’”
This admission helps explain the motivations, impacts, and power dynamics involved in Poitras’ choices to film and publicize police interactions. It goes beyond non-consensually recording people during difficult moments – which can be traumatic to not just people being arrested, but also survivors of harm and the friends and families of those being filmed – it presents a warped and deferential view of police in Brattleboro. With this “deal,” Poitras gets content and views, while the police receive favorable coverage.
An Attempt to Transform Views into Votes
Poitras has ridden this crime narrative to accrue views for his content and to position himself as an increasingly influential local political actor. Casting himself as a “radical moderate,” Poitras launched a political group Real Progress earlier this year, with a January 10th “Real Solutions” forum focused on crime. He has endorsed three candidates for Brattleboro Selectboard: Amanda Ellis-Thurber, Jill Stahl Taylor, and Tim Wessel. Stahl Taylor and Wessel were speakers at the Real Solutions forum.
Brattleboro Selectboard members will be elected on Town Meeting Day, Tuesday, March 4. Town residents will also vote that day for representatives to Brattleboro’s Representative Town Meeting, which will be held March 22. It’s those representatives, 138 in all, who will deliberate and vote on the town’s budget and any other matters on the agenda.
The Keene Sentinel reported earlier this month that Poitras claimed roughly 50 candidates affiliated with Real Progress were running to be town representatives. That number includes Poitras himself.
Poitras’ rising star caught a snag on February 8th. In the Facebook group Brattleboro Chat, a compilation of 78 screenshots of bigoted, racist, misogynist, and transphobic Twitter posts attributed to him were published. (You can also view the collection here in a Google Drive folder.)
Poitras has posted a slew of far right sentiments, including “No man likes a woman who talks back,” “Liberals want to fuck little kids, they are all in on it. Liberal = pedophile,” calling a Patriot Front march “a false flag,” and “Black people hate all white people, this is why we carry weapons.” The tweets also suggest an obsession with insulting single mothers, an interest in carrying out acts of violence, and vaccine conspiracism.
Poitras later claimed that the posts were, somehow, taken out of context.
This revelation over the full scope of Poitras’ views ignited a political firestorm. At least one of his endorsed Selectboard candidates condemned the posts and rejected his endorsement. In a statement to the Rake, Tim Wessel wrote, “I was appalled, and condemned them. I’ve also spoken out against his recent trashing of other candidates. I’ve asked him not to endorse me, but Hank does what he wants.” Despite the disavowal, Wessel’s political positions that Poitras found so commendable have not changed. The other two endorsed candidates did not respond to a request for comment.
One of the local business sponsors of Poitras’ show, Vermont Roadworks LLC, has withdrawn its support, writing, “Vermont Roadworks does not want to be aligned with a company or person that has made very hateful remarks about black people, woman, rape victims, the police, the LGTBQ community and people who’s ideologies are not right wing.”
Most significant of all, on February 10, the Brattleboro Police Department responded with a Facebook statement condemning Poitras’ posts and suggesting that they treat Poitras as they would any other journalist. They wrote unequivocally, “To clarify, the Brattleboro PD does not collaborate with Mr Poitras.”
How Extensive is Poitras’ Relationship with Brattleboro Police and its Leadership?
Later that week, Brattleboro resident Robin Morgan submitted a public records request for records of any communication between Poitras and members of the Brattleboro Police Department, as well as between town employees about Poitras. The response to this request reveals, contrary to BPD’s statement, evidence of a deeper relationship between the police and Poitras. Perhaps even more importantly, there is also evidence of attempts by police leadership to alter these records.
From these documents, it is evident that much of Poitras’ email communication with the Department goes through Assistant Chief Jeremy Evans. While many of these are mundane exchanges about public statements for Poitras’ show, several make clear a greater sense of camaraderie and collaboration. Below are some of these more significant messages in chronological order, beginning last summer.
On June 14th, Poitras sent Evans multiple questions, including if Evans had heard back “from the state’s attorney about that drug video?” In reply, Evans wrote “I did hear back, I have some ideas for you with that next time we catch up.” (Page 13)
Both the offering of ideas from Evans to Poitras, as well as the insinuation that they catch up on somewhat of a frequent basis, suggest a more significant relationship than what BPD has tried to claim.
On the night of Saturday, August 3rd, Evans sent a standalone email to Poitras — who neither replied to nor initiated the conversation — with the subject line “Thursday live stream.” The entire text of the message reads, “Scallywags… i like it lol”. (Page 42)
This word appears towards the end of Poitras’ August 1st Livestream when he suggests placing food trucks at the transportation center so that the police would have a reason to give people no trespass orders from that space. In Poitras’ words, “that would be a way to clear out some of the scallywag and some of the drug users and some of the nonsense that goes on over there.” Evans’ email reveals that he is a fan of Poitras’ show and enjoys Poitras’ use of demeaning language to support the deployment of greater police power to clear people from public space.
The next weekend, Evans again reached out to Poitras, this time highlighting a WCAX article in which a Burlington pastor described their church as “under siege” due to drug use and homelessness. Evans sent the link, along with the mocking quotation “Jesus loves it when we do drugs,” to which Poitras replied that “Vermont can’t keep going in this direction.” In response, Evans wrote “Tell me about it. Don’t forget they wanted to put a “safe” injection site here. That will be brought up again.” (Page 49)
Once more, Evans’ communication evidences a closer, more collaborative relationship with Poitras than that which the police have tried to claim, as well as foretelling the wave of resistance to the perceived threat of an Overdose Prevention Center in Brattleboro — despite no such proposal existing.
Later that month, Poitras and Evans began to exchange emails during and after selectboard meetings. The Selectboard meeting on August 20th, 2024 involved a long, contested conversation with various proposals relating to the Downtown Safety Action Plan.
At 9:29 that evening — while the meeting was still underway — Evans once again initiated the conversation, telling Poitras, “Thanks for coming! This is off the rails but I think it’ll be ending in a positive way.” (Page 51)
The pair also exchanged messages during the Selectboard meeting on February 4th, when the police shared updates on their downtown initiatives. Poitras told Evans “This is a slam dunk” to which Evans replied — at 7:19, while actively presenting to the Selectboard — “Damn right!” After speaking himself, Poitras then closed the conversation with the exclamation “I smoked them for you!” (Page 97)
These exchanges — sharing ideas, praising each other’s work, thanking each other for their contributions during public meetings — read much more like allies expressing mutual grievances, concerns, and hopes than as professional exchanges with a journalist. The police may claim that they do not “collaborate with Mr. Poitras,” but the evidence of correspondence between Poitras and Evans reveals a close, familiar, and collaborative relationship.
Also included in the released records are email and text exchanges between Poitras and Brattleboro Police Chief Norma Hardy. In his texts to Hardy, Poitras displays a surprisingly casual, even chummy tone in both content and ornamentation for someone communicating with a head law enforcement officer. For example, on July 9, Poitras asked for footage of an arrest (second file, page 14):
And a similar request on September 18 (second file, pages 24-25):
Altered Records from Brattleboro Police
The records produced by the town not only show evidence of friendly communication and collaboration, they also suggest that Chief Norma Hardy altered information to hide this relationship.
On August 7th, the day after the Selectboard held a heated discussion on “Downtown Safety Zones” — a precursor to the introduction of the Acceptable Community Conduct Ordinance — Poitras wrote to five officers with a series of requests. After asking for statements on various stories, he concluded his email by writing, “Also maybe a discussion about some of the plans the select board discussed and we can ‘Shop talk’ about how to respond about those topics.”
There are three copies of this email in the records sent by Town Attorney Bob Fisher: one from Evans (page 44), one from Hardy (page 147), and one from Lt. Adam Petlock (second file, page 2). None of the copies show an officer directly replying to the email so, with the information currently available, it cannot be said conclusively whether this “shop talk” happened.
The email as forwarded by Petlock and Evans were identical.
So is the email as forwarded by Hardy, until the final sentence. In the copy she submitted, Hank’s suggestion that “we can ‘Shop talk’ about how to respond about those topics” has been inexplicably deleted.
Certain information can be redacted in responses to public records requests. When something is redacted, it is crossed out with black ink and the law says that an explanation needs to be given.
This is not that. There is nothing crossed out and there is no explanation.
The deletion of a particular phrase from an otherwise unchanged email extends beyond the bounds of a possible typo, especially when that phrase carries significant weight toward the collaboration the police have sought to deny.
This obviously raises grave questions about the extent of the Police Department’s relationship with Poitras. Why would Hardy delete the line about “Shop talk” if that conversation didn’t go anywhere?
Chief Hardy did not respond to a request for comment.
Questions Facing Every Brattleboro Resident
Since the revelations of Poitras’ bigoted posts, many previous collaborators and supporters have tried to distance themselves while maintaining the same platforms and policies he has promoted – with increasing investment, support, and power for the police at the heart of these proposals. And the police, themselves, have aided this shift by claiming that they only engage with Poitras as they would any other journalist.
But as Cal Glover-Wessel wrote in The Commons last week, it is impossible to truly untangle the connections between Poitras’ bigotry and his politics, leading to unavoidable questions as to what those politics ultimately seek to achieve.
There has long been a structural link between insurgent far right extremism and the more palatable mainstream conservatism that comfortably resides in official institutions and respectable lines of work. Having supported Poitras’ anti-crime fervor and popularity, politicians and police can now disassociate themselves from him while preserving and benefiting from whatever rightward shift in politics he instigated.
The Brattleboro Police Department appears not only willing to misrepresent the nature of their relationship with Poitras, but their response to the request raises questions of alteration of official records, a violation of Vermont’s public records access law.
And, more broadly, if the Chief of Police would alter evidence which she knew was going to be scrutinized by concerned citizens, what else are the police willing to lie about? If this is how the head of the force acts when under the public spotlight, what do the rest of these armed agents do when they are able to move in relative darkness?
While there is much that remains to be learned, what is clear right now is that this strategic deletion calls into question the legitimacy of the entire record. In one of the most contested political moments in the town’s recent history, the Brattleboro Police have given people ample reason to question their integrity and be wary of the movement that seeks to expand their power.
Jonathan Elwell is an educator, organizer, and writer from Brattleboro.
