Concord Police Officer, Accused Of Assault, Takes The Stand In His Own Defense

CONCORD, NH — Closing statements in the assault trial of a Concord police officer currently on administrative unpaid leave will be held on Friday morning.

Then, the jury will decide the fate of Richard Cobb.

Cobb, 41, is accused of assaulting Blake Andrew Thomas-Haney, 38, a homeless man, on two occasions in April 2023 outside of Sal’s Pizza on Storrs Street, slamming him to the ground after he refused to comply with being handcuffed and pushing him against a police SUV. Cobb pleaded not guilty to the charges and has been on leave since May 2023.

Prosecutors continued their case against Cobb by calling three witnesses to the stand on Thursday morning.

Brendon Daugherty of Sticksville, Missouri, who lived in Concord between 2016 to 2024, happened to be going to Market Basket to get some things for his family and saw police activity outside of Sal’s, activity, he said, he disagreed with. Dan Jimenez, an attorney with the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office, questioned him. Daugherty said he parked near the liquor store and walked to the market. At the time, he saw two officers and a police cruiser with a man who was handcuffed.

Jimenez asked if the man in handcuffs was doing anything with his body.

Also Read

• Witness Confuses Race Of Concord Officer At Sal’s Pizza Arrest Scene
• First Trial Of Concord Cop Accused Of Assaulting Suspects Underway
• Former Concord Police Officer Indicted On Simple Assault Charges
• Pickup Truck Rolls On Iron Works Road In Concord: Watch

“I did not notice anything,” Daugherty said.

While he was walking by, he saw the two officers were moving him toward the cruiser, he said. Both officers, one white and one Black did not have their hands on him, Daugherty said. Out of curiosity, he was watching the incident and witnessed the white officer shove the handcuffed man on the back into the cruiser with enough force that the water bottle on the roof of the cruiser was knocked off, Daugherty said.

“Violent enough, it shook the cruiser,” he said.

Jimenez asked if the suspect was moving or resisting.

“He was walking toward the cruiser; I did not notice any resistance,” he said.

Daugherty went into Market Basket and got his items. When he left the store, he said there were “close to 20 officers” as well as firefighters and police cruisers all at the scene. Daugherty decided to speak to a supervising officer because “it did not sit right with me how hard that gentleman was shoved into the cruiser.” Daugherty talked to a supervisor who told him to come to police headquarters and complete a report, which he did later that evening. Daugherty did not recall the time but it was not long after he was at the Market Basket, he said.

Eric Wilson, of Wilson, Bush & Keefe of Nashua, asked Daugherty how far he was from the incident when he was walking to the store and he said it was about the length of the courtroom. Daugherty said he did not know there was video surveillance at Sal’s and did not know why he was not seen on the footage walking to the store even though he said his car was nearby. He said the incident caught his eye, but it was “hard to recall” how long he watched.

When Daugherty arrived at the sidewalk area, he said he saw the shove occur.

When Wilson asked him how long it was before between the time of the shoving and the bottle rolling off the roof of the police cruiser, he said he could not recall. Daugherty was also asked about the 20 officers since video footage did not show 20 officers at the scene.

Wilson turned to the complaint filing, and Daugherty said he had spoken with the same officer, Sgt. Christopher Lovejoy, at police headquarters later.

Lovejoy was on the defense witness list but was never called to the stand.

Wilson said Daugherty gave a brief narrative in the report but said the suspect appeared to be pushing back.

The prosecution objected to the comment, calling it hearsay, and the objection was sustained.

Did you see him pushing back?, Wilson asked.

No, Daugherty said.

Wilson approached Daugherty to review his written statement, but Jimenez objected. After speaking with Judge Dan St. Hilaire, Wilson reframed the question and asked if he saw Thomas-Haney trying to move or pushing back.

Daugherty said, No.

After Daugherty was dismissed, the attorneys approached the bench again.

Former Police Lieutenant Testifies

Marc McGonagle, a former police lieutenant, was also called to the stand.

While he now works in the private sector as a private investigator for a law firm, he worked for the Concord Police Department for more than 20 years and handled internal affairs at the time of the incident. A deputy police chief informed him of the complaint and he reviewed a packet of information.

Wilson then requested to approach the judge. The jurors were excused, and the witness stepped down from the bench.

The attorneys and the judge argued whether McGonagle could opine about the situation, which was the basis of his report since he was not at the scene. Joe Fincham, speaking for the prosecution, pushed back, citing prior cases.

However, St. Hilaire called it “way beyond” the scope, saying anyone could comment on something from a video or offer an opinion. He compared it to confirming the moon was in the sky and then allowing someone to describe what Neil Armstrong saw when he was on the moon. Wilson also said they had no idea McGonagle would be opining on the video or that he would be allowed to do that. Wilson also raised the issue of internal affairs and disciplinary issues.

Fincham, however, said protective custody and how the inquiry was made.

McGonagle explained he reviewed the packet, which included the call to service, dispatch log, and audio of the dispatch log. He also saw the mention of the video. It was not entered into evidence and so he sought it out.

Fincham questioned McGonagle about the protective custody process and how and why it was done. He was asked about who was responsible for the person in protective custody and McGonagle said the officers were.

Wilson asked him about police standards and training and use of force policy and if the process of making arrests was dangerous for officers. Of course, he answered.

“Subject should be controlled whether they are resisting or not,” he said.

NH AG’s Office Investigator Takes The Stand

The prosecution called Todd Flanagan, a deputy chief investigator with the New Hampshire Department of Justice’s integrity unit to the stand.

Flanagan had been working for the attorney general’s office for 15 years. Prior to that, he was with Concord police for about 20 years. He received a referral call from McGonagle pertaining to the use of force incident. Flanagan and Fincham met with McGonagle, watched the video, and then conducted an investigation, obtaining materials from Concord police, he said.

One thing that seemed odd in the report was the timeline by which Thomas-Haney had received medical treatment. He said the wrong date was put in the report, and there appeared only to be a four-minute treatment window. Flanagan researched and found that the time entered was off by about an hour and 10 minutes.

Wilson then objected, calling it hearsay, and the counselors approached the judge again. After a few minutes, the objection was overruled.

Fincham returned to the report's times and asked Flanagan if it was Cobb’s report. He requested that he read the narrative.

Flanagan was asked about the lack of a second use of force incident involving the cruiser. He said he never saw one.

Fincham asked Flanagan if he had ever encountered interlocking fingers during an incident, and Wilson objected. St. Hilaire sustained the objection, and then, the attorneys approached the bench to discuss the matter. After a few minutes, the objection was confirmed as sustained.

Flanagan was asked about the number of arrests he had made, his history of handcuff usage, and the zoomed video footage from Sal’s.

Part of the breath test administration was missing, so he obtained the full video.

The jury was shown the video, and Flanagan watched it.

After about seven minutes of the jury and others watching the zoomed-in version of the video, Flanagan returned to the stand and was asked about the protective custody process, knowing when a person is impaired, and why a person would be detained.

Fincham asked about leg sweeps and the judge asked the lawyers to approach again. After stepping away, Fincham asked the question again, and Flanagan began to answer.

Wilson, however, attempted to object, saying it was non-responsive, but he was overruled.

Flanagan said during a leg sweep, it was important for the officer to hold onto the arm to control the suspect at all times.

Wilson asked Flanagan about the two hours of video footage obtained from Sal’s and if Daugherty was seen on the video. Flanagan said he said only after Concord fire and rescue teams arrived and when he spoke to Lovejoy, but not before he entered Market Basket.

Wilson asked about speed cuffing and fingers interlocked and whether he, as an officer, could cuff a suspect with his fingers locked.

“I don’t see how … again, I’ve have to try it,” he said, adding he possibly get it done.

When asked if both cuffs could be locked, Flanagan said, “Two at the same time? No, I don’t see that.”

Wilson spoke with Flanagan about police training and standards and “routines” used to keep officers safe. He also asked Flanagan to confirm that officers can also fall into “routines” that keep them from being secure, which he did.

Wilson said during struggles, the officer had to make the suspect comply “so he can go home at night.” Flanagan agreed.

Wilson asked Flanagan to demonstrate how a long arm hold and a leg sweep could be done at the same time, with some laughter from the judge, witness, and jurors, about whether that would be done. Flanagan demonstrated to Wilson how he would perform the move by both holding the arm and a leg sweep, which he did. Wilson then pointed out he had exposed his firearm during the process of the takedown, which is something that is not allowed. Flanagan countered it was only for a few moments.

While discussing the incident, Flanagan said, “This was a trip,” challenging the use of a leg sweep.

Wilson took out some photos from the video surveillance showing Cobb’s right hand on the right shoulder of Thomas-Haney while the leg sweep occurs. Cobb’s right hand, however, was no longer on his right shoulder.

“It appears to be moving to the center of his back,” Wilson said.

Cobb then moves his hand to the suspect’s left wrist. The photos then showed, Wilson said, Thomas-Haney shifting while being forced down, not falling straight down to the ground.

“Clearly, at the end, Mr. Haney lands on his right shoulder, and then hits his head on the way down,” Wilson said. “On the way down, Mr. Haney, for some reason, is doing this (shifting).”

Flanagan, however, challenged the assertion.

Wilson then went to the video to make his point, but Flanagan disagreed and began trying to make points. St. Hilaire, however, told him while he might have a lot of points to offer, that could be done on redirect by the prosecution.

Wilson again tried to clarify that the video showed Cobb controlling Thomas-Haney during the leg sweep, moving his hands to keep him from falling.

“I can’t tell that by the video,” Flanagan countered.

Wilson again asked whether Cobb was trying to keep control of the subject during the fall. He agreed Cobb was possibly trying to control Thomas-Haney but either failed or was incomplete.

Flanagan was then asked if he was telling the jury Cobb let the suspect fall to the ground maliciously, and Flanagan replied, “I can’t say that.”

On redirect, Fincham asked Flanagan to offer his point about the potential exposure of an officer’s service revolver. Flanagan said he kept his gun on the opposite side of the exposure side. On the exposure side, he had his cell phone and other items, he said.

Fincham then asked about leg sweeps and whether officers go down with the subject or are standing. Flanagan said officers fell with the suspects during that move.

Fincham then presented pictures of Cobb standing above Thomas-Haney after he was taken down.

Fincham began questioning Flanagan about training and whether policies had been changed, and Wilson objected, wondering about the relevance and if it was sustained.

Fincham ended questioning, and Wilson requested a redirect and went back to pictures showing Cobb attempting to gain control of Thomas-Haney. After some back-and-forth, Flanagan agreed that that was what the picture showed.

Wilson went back to the officer’s gun being on the right side due to Flanagan being right-handed. He said officers can sometimes get injured either being pushed back or in the front by a resisting suspect, and Flanagan agreed.

Wilson began to question the process of ground fighting with a suspect and Fincham objected. After consultation, Wilson was allowed to continue.

“Training is all about winning the fight,” Flanagan said.

Flanagan was asked again about the 2017 training protocols and said it was always prudent for officers to take someone to the ground.

The state then rested its case without calling two women — one from Concord and another from Arizona, who were on its witness list.

Cobb Is Defense’s Only Witness

Cobb took the stand in his own defense and was the only witness called by the defense despite having a list of four other people.

Cobb reiterated most of the facts of the case while Wilson played a video to make points to the jurors.

Wilson asked Cobb about Tarwo’s quick pat-down. Cobb said police officers were limited in the scope of a search unless there was a known danger or an arrest had already been made. Cobb said he was concerned by Tarwo’s rather incomprehensive search, claiming he missed the small of Thomas-Haney’s back.

Cobb was also questioned why he was moving around the scene while Tarwo, who was in his sector, controlled the case. He did confirm that while Tarwo obtained Thomas-Haney’s ID, he ran the check and found the active warrant.

Did that heighten your concerns?, Wilson asked. Cobb said it was another indicator he had interacted with police before.

There was discussion about the administration of the breath test and, after the four times the legal limit reading, how Cobb told Thomas-Haney there were several indicators that raised concerns, and he needed to be taken into custody. Cobb said subjects could not be forced to take the test. Sometimes, they breathe in or don’t blow hard enough to hide impairment, he said. Thomas-Haney, he said, could not find a sober party and would need to be taken to jail to sober up. Cobb said he repeatedly told Thomas-Haney he was not under arrest, but he resisted anyway.

Wilson asked about Cobb’s movements toward a bag and a liquor bottle nearby. Cobb said he was preparing in case Thomas-Haney made a move for a weapon or something else.

Cobb was asked about Thomas-Haney’s demeanor before being tested for alcohol, and he called him close to respectful.

After the breath test, though, he became hostile, he said.

Wilson asked about handcuffing the suspect, how difficult it was, and whether he offered warnings to cede.

“Officer Tarwo is a strong individual,” Cobb said, claiming Thomas-Haney used both officers as an anchor during the resistance.

Cobb said he then used a leg sweep to take Thomas-Haney down to control his hands since he was a present threat, had not had a thorough search, and was heavily intoxicated.

“Did you intend to hurt him?,” Wilson asked.

“No,” Cobb said.

“What was your intent?,” Wilson asked.

“To get control of him,” Cobb said.

“Did you mean to take him down?”

“Yes.”

“Were you trying to control him to the ground?,” Wilson said.

“The best I could,” Cobb answered.

“Did you lose control of him?,” Wilson asked.

“Yes, I did.”

At one point in the testimony, Wilson pointed to the video and asked what Cobb was doing. Cobb said he was calling for backup since resisting situations can spiral out of control, and there were too many unknowns for just two officers. Cobb said his actions on April 1, 2023, were consistent with the training he received in 2017. He said it might sound crude, but officers cannot lose the fight with a resisting suspect.

When asked about the abrasion, Cobb said he moved his head and was injured when he struck the pavement.

Wilson asked whether he should have used a baton to subdue Thomas-Haney, and Cobb said No. When asked if he used a knee, he said, “Absolutely not.”

Cobb said a glass bottle and other items were in his bag when it was searched.

Fincham cross-examined Cobb about training and whether he was required to take annual use of force training. Cobb said no, it was not combative, and the department limited training. He said firearm training was required.

Fincham asked about the command of the situation and whether backfire noise from a car show had distracted them.

Cobb said he was the safety officer, and the cars sounded like automatic gunfire. He offered a radio warning to others in the field in case it was real and not car noises.

Cobb confirmed Thomas-Haney said, “Take me to the station,” when officers first arrived at the scene.

Fincham asked about the warrant and whether there was a danger due to it being a non-extraditable liquor violation warrant. Cobb was also asked to explain what he meant by Thomas-Haney being unreasonable, and he offered a collection of behaviors to describe officer safety training and strategies.

They also discussed protective custody with Cobb, saying if the officers did not take in drunken people, they could freeze to death, get hit by vehicles, suffer from alcohol poisoning, or many other things that were hazards. Getting hit on the head during a taken down was a lesser hazard, Cobb said.

Fincham asked why Cobb performed the takedown. Cobb said Tarwo was the junior officer, and while it was his jurisdiction, he made the decision after the 40 seconds of struggling that was caught on camera.

Fincham ended his questioning and Wilson did not offer any counter.

The defense then rested without calling four other witnesses to the stand.

Do you have a news tip? Please email it to tony.schinella@patch.com. View videos on Tony Schinella's YouTube.com channel or Rumble.com channel. Follow the NH politics Twitter account @NHPatchPolitics for all our campaign coverage.