RAYMOND – In a late October filing with the U.S. District Court in Portland, former Raymond selectman Dana Desjardins’ friends characterize him as an upstanding, sober, “civic leader” targeted by town officials and local law enforcement because of his political convictions.

The affidavits, filed on Oct. 24, represent Desjardins’ latest attempt to bring his lawsuit against Town Manager Don Willard and Town Selectman Mike Reynolds to trial.

Desjardins has accused Willard and Reynolds of defamation of character, negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and invasion of privacy, among other claims. Desjardins is seeking undetermined damages.

The lawsuit is the result of nearly a year of alleged “harassment” by Willard and Reynolds, beginning with an incident on Jan. 8, when a Cumberland County sheriff’s deputy pulled over Desjardins on his way to a selectmen’s meeting for speeding 5 mph over the limit.

Willard and Reynolds’ attorney, Daniel J. Murphy of Bernstein Shur, has filed two motions to dismiss the case. Murphy’s second motion to dismiss cites Maine’s statute barring strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) expensive lawsuits designed to bully a party into silence.

In the Oct. 24 filing, Desjardin’s attorney, John Campbell, argued that the state’s anti-SLAPP statute, enacted in 1995, does not apply to federal law claims, and that the case should not be dismissed.

“Applying the statute to preclude those claims against two government officials such as these two defendants would unconstitutionally impinge on the right of access to the courts, the right to equal protection of the laws and the right to challenge through the court’s such wrongs by government officials,” Campbell wrote.

According to Campbell, the testimonies submitted by Raymond citizens Charles Leavitt, Peter Leavitt, Julie Southerland, and John Russo demonstrate the “sham nature of the supposed concerns for public safety that the defendants have espoused as their defense.”

In the affidavits, the witnesses, occasionally testifying in identical language, rebut the allegation that Desjardins was drunk at a Dec. 11, 2012, Raymond Select Board meeting. Desjardins has argued that Willard and Reynolds used the Dec. 11 meeting – and the allegation that he had attended drunk – as a false pretext to ask the sheriff’s officer to pull him over on Jan. 8.

Southerland, an animal rights advocate, cited her experience with alcoholic animal abusers in her defense of Desjardins, claiming that he was clearly sober at the December meeting.

“I attended the meeting of the Raymond Selectman on Dec. 11, 2012, and spoke face to face with Dana Desjardins at that time,” Southerland testified. “John [Russo] and I were sitting with Dana. I did not sense any smell of alcohol on Dana. He did not exhibit any signs suggesting to me that he was intoxicated. He seemed in complete control of his faculties. I did not hear any screech of tires after Dana left at the end of the meeting. Nor did I observe or hear anyone express any concerns about Dana after he left. I observed no behavior by Dana (nor sensed anything about Dana) that would give anyone at the meeting reason to report anything about Dana to law enforcement.”

Peter Leavitt, who served nearly 27 years on the Raymond Zoning Board of Appeals until his resignation in October, testified that Desjardins is not an alcoholic.

“I have seen Dana Desjardins many times over the past 12 to 15 years and have never seen him intoxicated or presenting any danger on the road,” Leavitt testified. “I never observed or sensed in any way that Dana has any alcohol problem. I am trained in looking for signs of intoxication and have never observed those signs during any of my many encounters with Dana.”

Leavitt’s brother, Charles, who has served on the Select Board, testified that Willard and Reynolds’ allegedly “false and defamatory statements” were meant to humiliate and harass Desjardins and “deter him” from publicly expressing his concerns “about financial waste, mismanagement, corrupt practices, and a lack of accountability in the town government.” Leavitt argued that the Dec. 11 meeting represented the “culmination of several actions taken over an extended period of time by the Town Administrator and certain selectmen to squelch debate and to silence me and Dana.”

In his own affidavit, Desjardins attempted to turn the table on Reynolds.

“I seldom drink alcohol and once, when I was picking up my son from Defendant Reynolds’ home, I turned down an offer from Defendant Reynolds to have a beer with him – telling him that I was driving,” Desjardins said.

Reynolds and Willard declined to comment on the affidavits, citing the pending litigation.

The District Court in Portland has not yet ruled on the most recent motion to dismiss.