STATE OF VERMONT
SUPERIOR COURT – BENNINGTON UNIT
CIVIL DIVISION
Case No. 22-ST-00891
Lauren Ronan v. Justin-Ames Gamache

 
AFFIDAVIT OF JUSTIN-AMES GAMACHE

I, Justin-Ames Gamache, being duly sworn under oath, hereby declare and affirm the following to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief:

 
1. Background and Purpose

I submit this affidavit in support of the Memorandum of Law filed in connection with the civil stalking petition previously brought by Lauren Ronan and denied by the Honorable Judge John W. Valente on September 7, 2022. The Court concluded that my actions did not meet the statutory definition of stalking under 12 V.S.A. §§ 5131 and 5133, and that the communications at issue were constitutionally protected.

As such, I assert that I am legally protected from further civil stalking allegations based on the same or similar conduct, under Vermont statutory law and applicable constitutional provisions.

 
2. Mischaracterization by State Authorities

Over the past several years, I have faced a series of unfounded allegations and misrepresentations propagated by individuals within the Vermont justice system. These allegations are not supported by admissible evidence, such as verifiable video, photographic, or forensic documentation.

Aside from a single nonviolent misdemeanor conviction for Impersonation of an Officer (13 V.S.A. § 3002), fully suspended with no incarceration, I have never been convicted of any criminal offense. No credible evidence links me to any other alleged incident.

Furthermore, speculative or defamatory claims appearing in media, internet forums, or unofficial databases are not legally admissible and cannot be used as a substitute for verified evidence in any legal proceeding.

 
3. Ongoing Legal Accountability and Procedural Safeguards

I have pursued formal legal channels to seek redress for government misconduct. This includes over 100 documented filings, including:

Motions for judicial recusals;
Claims of prosecutorial and investigative misconduct;
Challenges to conflicts of interest involving Judge Cortland Corsones, Judge John W. Valente, State’s Attorney Alexander N. Burke, Officer Thomas Mozzer, and Officer Lauren Ronan.
To date, all such matters are proceeding without prejudice, preserving my constitutional right to a fair and impartial process under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

 
4. Constitutional and Statutory Protections

My actions are further protected by the following legal provisions:

12 V.S.A. § 5131(1)(B) – The Vermont civil stalking statute excludes “constitutionally protected activity” from its definition of stalking. The Court has already found that my communications, while possibly distressing to the Plaintiff, fall within First Amendment protections.
U.S. CONST. amend. I – I have the right to freedom of speech and protest, including criticisms of government officials and peaceful expressions of dissent.
U.S. CONST. amend. XIV, § 1 – I am entitled to equal protection under the law and due process before any deprivation of liberty or reputation.
5 U.S.C. § 552a(b) (Privacy Act of 1974) – Prohibits unauthorized disclosure of personal records without my written consent. Any disclosure of my personal data without legal basis is a violation of federal law.
13 V.S.A. §§ 7602 and 7606 – Establishes the right to expungement of qualifying misdemeanor convictions, including mine. I have petitioned for expungement in Bennington Docket No. 1127-10-13 Bncr, and the Vermont Supreme Court (Docket No. 23-AP-019) has acknowledged possible error in the original classification of that offense, thereby affirming my right to relief.
42 U.S.C. § 1983 – Creates a federal civil remedy for violations of constitutional rights committed under color of state law. I reserve the right to pursue remedies under this statute in response to any ongoing civil rights violations.
Res Judicata and Collateral Estoppel – The denial of the stalking petition in this case constitutes a final judgment on the merits, barring re-litigation of the same issues or facts.
 
5. Civil Disobedience and Protected Privacy Measures

For more than a decade, I have engaged in a peaceful and lawful protest against overreach by state agencies and violations of privacy. This includes:

Withholding my personal address from state agencies such as the DMV;
Refusing to participate in commercial data tracking by third-party brokers;
Advocating for institutional reform without resorting to threats or violence.
These actions are protected exercises of civil liberties, not criminal conduct.

 
6. Conclusion

The legal record in this matter confirms that I have not committed any act of stalking, threat, or unlawful behavior as defined under Vermont law. My speech and actions fall within the protection of constitutional and statutory frameworks. Any continued effort to reassert similar claims without new evidence should be viewed as legally precluded, retaliatory, or frivolous.

I respectfully assert my continued right to protection under the law and ask the Court and any reviewing agencies to acknowledge that the matter has already been decided in my favor.