-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Judge Brown's order silencing Gary Hunt
Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 1691 Page 1 – 5
Share this:
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Maxine Bernstein, The Oregonion report on Judge Anna Brown's protective order
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-sta...ia_man_24.html
http://image.oregonlive.com/home/oli...atars/4406.pngBy Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on January 11, 2017 at 4:12 PM, updated January 11, 2017 at 11:46 PM
Judge gives California man 24 hours to remove online posts about FBI informants in refuge case
http://image.oregonlive.com/home/oli...4f1ed2befd.jpg
U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown, in a written order issued Wednesday, gave Gary Hunt 24 hours to remove all posts he shared online that contained information from sensitive FBI reports on informants used during the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.
The judge also ordered Hunt, a California man with ties to a network of militia groups who has posted articles about the informants and quoted excerpts of the FBI records on his Outpost of Freedom website, to stop doing so immediately.
If Hunt fails to comply with the judge's order once he is personally served with it by the FBI, prosecutors may pursue a contempt of court or other enforcement proceeding in the appropriate court jurisdiction, Brown wrote.
The judge said she did not rule on which federal court would be appropriate to bring such a sanction since she wasn't asked that question.
Should prosecutors figure out who provided the protected FBI reports to Hunt, the judge instructed them to seek appropriate enforcement steps "without delay,'' her ruling said.
While the judge acknowledged that the protective order she issued in March for the 246 pages of FBI reports on informants does not specifically say that it applies to people who are not party to the federal conspiracy case against refuge occupiers or their defense teams, she said it's well-established in case law that the court may prohibit a third party from violating a court order when he or she actively "aids or abets'' in the violation of the order.
Since the reports that prosecutors shared with the defendants and their lawyers did not identify the informants, yet Hunt has identified a handful by name based on his review of the documents, the judge concluded that Hunt has "aided and abetted the dissemination of materials covered by the Protective Order.''
Hunt was visited by an FBI agent on Jan. 5 and handed a "cease and desist order'' from a federal prosecutor to remove the posts on the informants and turn back the documents to the government. After that visit, Hunt said he did not believe the protective order applied to him because he's not a defendant nor a member of the defense team.
He said he was posting the material on his website because he believes it could help defendants who are set for trial next month. Ammon Bundy and six co-defendants were acquitted in late October of federal conspiracy, weapons and other charges. Seven other defendants are set for trial on Feb. 14. Eleven pleaded guilty to federal conspiracy and await sentencing.
On Wednesday, Hunt, who described himself as a journalist, said he received a call again from an FBI agent who wanted to meet him at a local restaurant to serve him with the judge's order. Hunt said he wouldn't even know how to remove the posts that he already placed online, if he decided to do so. He said he'll be consulting with lawyers.
"They insist I have the right to be heard, and they don't give me a right to be heard,'' he said.
And, he wrote in his latest online article, "For the record, I have never spoken with any of the defense attorneys or investigators in this case. The closest I have come to that is speaking with some of the defendants. However, I have heard that the defense attorneys do like my work, and some even look forward to my next article.''
The judge noted that she ruled previously that the government wasn't obligated to share the identities of the informants with the defendants. "Thus, the information in Hunt's postings should not be publicly available,'' Brown wrote.
Brown also issued additional language in the protective order to make sure there's no further questions about whether people who are not parties to the refuge case are covered by it.
It now says: "Any individual or entity that obtains materials protected by the Court's Protective Order is prohibited from disseminating those materials or any information derived therefrom to any other individual or entity by any means,'' Brown wrote.
-- Maxine Bernstein
mbernstein@oregonian.com
503-221-8212
@maxoregonian
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Free Range Report has an article on Ammon Bundy's attorney Marcus Mumford's treatment by the US Marshal's Service
http://freerangereport.com/index.php...er-acquittals/
https://i2.wp.com/freerangereport.co...size=840%2C200Ammon Bundy’s attorney dogged by federal prosecutors following October acquittals
January 11, 2017 editor Leave a comment
Moments after the stunning Oct. 27 acquittal of Bundy and his co-defendants, Mumford argued that Bundy should be immediately released to walk freely out of the courtroom. Half a dozen U.S. Marshals quickly closed in as Judge Anna J. Brown explained that Bundy was still under a custody hold over his pending charges in Nevada, related to the 2014 standoff at his father’s Bunkerville ranch.
Federal Prosecutors Plow Forward With Criminal Charges Against Bundy Lawyer Tased in the Courtroom
Other lawyers outraged by the U.S. Attorney for Western Washington pursuing the charges
Federal prosecutors pressed forward Friday with charges against lawyer Marcus Mumford that back up the claims of a handful of U.S. Marshals who tackled and Tased Mumford as he argued in court for the release of his client, Ammon Bundy.
Moments after the stunning Oct. 27 acquittal of Bundy and his co-defendants, Mumford argued that Bundy should be immediately released to walk freely out of the courtroom. Half a dozen U.S. Marshals quickly closed in as Judge Anna J. Brown explained that Bundy was still under a custody hold over his pending charges in Nevada, related to the 2014 standoff at his father’s Bunkerville ranch.
But Mumford grew increasingly impassioned, and the marshals ended up piling atop him and shocking him with a stun gun. They arrested him and charged him with failure to comply with a federal police officer and impeding government employees.
Some observers had expected the government to drop the charges. But prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney for Western Washington today plowed ahead on misdemeanor charges that could make them look ridiculous.
It’s a strategy of doubling down by federal prosecutors. The office of U.S. Attorney for Oregon Billy Williams was humiliated by the October acquittals of protesters who occupied Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Yet the U.S. Attorney for Western Washington—who took over the Mumford case from Williams—continues to pursue the prosecution.
That tack is also reflected in prosecutors’ plan to march forward in February with the conspiracy charges against the second round of Malheur occupiers—the same that they were unable to prove last fall.
Mumford today pleaded not guilty to the charges of disrupting government duties and failing to comply with a lawful order. His lawyer, Michael Levine, said he’d never heard of a similar courtroom situation.
“I truly believe it’s unprecedented and I’ve been practicing law for almost 40 years,” Levine said after the hearing. “I can’t recall an incident where an attorney in the midst of an argument on behalf of his client is tackled and Tased twice, surrounded by the force of the state.”
The U.S. Attorney’s Office did not respond to requests for comment.
The packed courtroom on Friday included most of the defense attorneys in the Bundy case, some of whom wore pins that said “Free Marcus Mumford.”
Defense attorney Matt Schindler, who represented Ken Medenbach in the Bundy trial and was standing about 10 feet from the scuffle on the day of the verdict, said after Friday’s hearing that no one from the U.S. Attorney’s office had contacted him or the other defense attorneys who observed the incident to hear their version of events.
“I’m embarrassed that no one from their offices has contacted me,” Schindler said. “They should contact all the witnesses before they make their charging decision. What the f***? That’s their job. To take the officer’s version of events and evaluate whether to pursue a charge.”
Schindler said he planned to directly challenge the marshals’ version of events outlined in the statement of probable cause issued with Mumford’s citation.
In the statement, U.S. Marshal Colin Fawcett describes Mumford yelling and taking up a “boxer’s stance,” which he called a “pre-assault indicator.” And the statement makes no mention of Tasing Mumford.
Schindler called that version of events “bulls***.”
Schindler said he introduced himself to Assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy Ohms after Friday’s hearing and offered to testify in the trial scheduled for April.
“I explained that it might make sense for someone in his office to contact me about what I witnessed in the courtroom before I’m a witness and calling all of his witnesses liars,” Schindler said.
“To the extent that someone says that Marcus Mumford took a boxer’s stance and attempted some kind of aggressive or violent action, they’re lying,” Schindler said after the hearing. “That’s just a fact. The guy was trying to make a f***ing legal argument to a judge. So that’s what I’ll say.”
After the hearing, several lawyers stood clustered in the hallway, discussing their surprise that the government didn’t drop the case.
“That’s what I was expecting to have happen and I’m stunned that it didn’t,” Schindler said. “Again, it’s a demonstration of poor judgment on the part of this office. They have made a series of these kinds of decisions and this is another one.”
Correction: This story originally stated the prosecution is being pursued by the U.S. Attorney for Oregon. In fact, the case has been handed to the U.S. Attorney for Western Washington.
Karina Brown
Willamette Week
Free Range Report
Related
Ammon Bundy's attorney tasered, tackled following Oregon standoff acquittalsOctober 28, 2016In "Government Run Amok"
"Very biased" former BLM employee on Oregon standoff jury gets called outOctober 26, 2016In "Bureau of Land Management"
Bundys acquitted in Oregon, face Nevada trialNovember 19, 2016In "Bureau of Land Management"
Share
Tweet
Share
Share
Share
Government Run Amok, Human Rights, In the Courts acquittals, Ammon Bundy, Federal courts, Malheur Refuge, Marcus Mumford, Oregon Standoff, the Hammonds
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Gary Hunt, Outpost of Freedom Freedom of the Press #4, The Order
« Freedom of the Press #3 – “Contemptuous Postings”
Freedom of the Press #4 – The Order
January 12, 2017, 2:23 pm
Freedom of the Press #4
The Order
http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/w...lr-w-crown.jpg
Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
January 12, 2017
I got a call from FBI Special Agent Matthew Catalano, earlier today, January 11, 2017. He told me that he had an Order to serve. We made the same arrangements to meet at the restaurant in Los Molinos. The restaurant only serves breakfast and lunch, so it was closed, but I figured that this wouldn’t take very long.I arrived at about 4:15 pm, and he said that he had to serve me. He handed me the Order, I looked at it and said, “I refuse this service, it is for the District of Oregon, and I am not within that jurisdiction.” I held the paperwork out toward him, but he did not take it, so, I said, “I will keep this, but I want you to tell Judge Anna Brown that I refuse service, as I am not subject to the Oregon District’s jurisdiction.” He agreed to convey the message, and then he proceeded to read certain portions of the Order to me. When he was finished, I reminded him that I wanted Brown to receive my message, and he assured me that he would pass it on. I feel certain that he will. After all, that is his job. We shook hands, and we departed.
Though I had already received two copies of the Order from other sources, I hadn’t read it. The news traveled so rapidly that my phone was in near constant use. However, between calls, I read portions of the Order. As I did so, a smile crept across my face. Now, you may wonder why I would smile after receiving the Order, but my first thought was that Judge Brown had not had an opportunity to read my article, that had gone out just a few hours before. The Order had been docketed, and I received copies just minutes after posting my article. Judge Brown had not had the opportunity to read my response to the Memorandum that had refuted most, if not all, of what she was provided by the US Attorney in the form of the Memorandum to prepare the Order.
Quite frankly, when Brown filed the Minute Order (See Freedom of the Press Update – A Grateful Thank You), there were two possibilities. First, that she really was holding the government’s feet to the fire, seeking real legal justification for issuing an Order. The other, that she simply wanted the government to give her the paperwork she needed, in the form of a Memorandum, to provide justification to issue such an Order. I decided to act on the former. I had said many things about Anna Brown in the past, few of them complimentary, but if she had turned to the right side, she was deserving of the benefit of the doubt. Her actions, in the past, had been nigh onto dictatorial, and had no foundation in law or justice.
So, let’s look at her Order, and I will comment, as we go. It is dated January 11, 2017.
This matter comes before the Court on the government’s Motion (#1680) to Enforce Protective Order in which the government seeks to enjoin a third party, Gary Hunt, from further dissemination of discovery materials that are protected by the Court’s Protective Order (#342) issued March 24, 2016.Through the Affidavits (#1681, #1690) of FBI Special Agent Ronnie Walker, the government asserts Hunt published excerpts from protected discovery materials on his website beginning on November 15, 2016, and continuing through the present. In particular, the government contends the postings on Hunt’s website identify some of the confidential human sources (CHSs) that the government used during the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. This information is not only protected by the Protective Order (#342), but the Court also found in its Order (#1453) issued October 18, 2016, that the government had provided to Defendants all information regarding CHSs that was relevant and helpful to the defense and, in particular, that the government was not obligated to disclose to Defendants the identities of the CHSs. Thus, the information in Hunt’s postings should not be publicly available.
Well, that is cute. Have I not said, from the beginning, that I was not subject to the Protective Order? Now, she says that the “information is protected by the Protective Order.” That means that those subject to the Protective Order have an obligation to protect the information. She is right in line with my thinking. But, that will change a little later.
Then, she finds that “the government had provided to Defendants all information regarding CHSs that was relevant and helpful to the defense.” That information was relayed to the defense on October 18, about ten days before the jury returned the not guilty verdict. She also stated, “that the government was not obligated to disclose to Defendants the identities of the CHSs.”
So, let’s get real. The government gave out redacted copies of the 1023 forms. The defense could not call any witnesses who had been informants. Obviously the information the government, and Judge Anna Brown, were willing to allow the defense to have was totally insufficient for them to prepare their defenses, especially with regard to possible exculpatory testimony those informants might have provided. The Judge, well let’s just go with Brown, from this point on, disregarded the fact that two of the government’s informants testified. Terri Linnell came forward voluntarily, against the wishes of the Prosecution, and testified for the defense. A diligent effort by the defense teams in tracking down Fabio Monoggio, another informant, whose testimony also was beneficial to the defense. Both gave testimony, which may well have turned the tide on the jury’s verdict. This testimony would have been denied the defense under the enforcement of the Protective Order and the subsequent statement on October 18.
This is absolutely contrary to the right protected by the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, which says that the accused has the right, “to be confronted by the witnesses against him“. Now, some have claimed that informants, unless they testify, are not witness. However, that is not what the Protective Order (March 24, 2016) says. That Protective Order clearly states what the prohibitions are, to wit:IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Protective Order applies only to
(1) Statements by witnesses and defendants to government officials;
(2) Sealed documents; and
(3) Evidence received from searches of electronic media.
Now, there are only two human objects in the Protective Order. It applies to “witnesses” and “defendants”. Well, I am not exposing defendants, so if the informants are not witnesses, then I am not in violation of the Protective Order. Ergo, the informants are witnesses, so saith Brown.Therefore, Brown has denied the constitutionally protected right of the defendants to confront those witnesses.
The record reflects FBI Special Agent Matthew Catalano met Hunt, who resides in Los Molinos, California, on January 5, 2017, and personally served him with a cease-and-desist letter from the government that demanded Hunt remove all discovery materials from his website. Special Agent Catalano also provided Hunt with a copy of this Court’s Protective Order (#342). According to SA Walker, Hunt stated he did not intend to comply with the cease- and-desist letter and did not believe that the Protective Order applied to him. It appears Hunt has not removed the protected discovery materials from his website.
Now, SA Ronnie Walker is quite a character. In the Affidavit upon which the government based the current Order, he uses a Facebook post to allege facts. Well, the fact that something was said is not really a fact, unless what was said was really a statement of a fact (See Freedom of the Press #3 – “Contemptuous Postings”.) Now, SA Walker does the same. I have never spoken with SA Walker, so, how could SA Walker know that I “[I]stated that did not intend to comply with the cease and desist letter…” At best, that is hearsay, and he probably heard it from Matthew Catalano. However, unlike the Facebook comment in the Affidavit, which was attributed to a source, albeit the fact was not verified, Now, he states a fact, but provides no attribution. And, Brown perpetuates that absolutely arbitrary method of creating facts out of thin air. I doubt, seriously, that the defense could ever get away with such an outrageous approach to evidence.
To the knowledge of the government, Hunt is not a member of the staff of any defense counsel representing any Defendant in this case.The Court issued the Protective Order in order to obviate “a risk of harm and intimidation to some witnesses and other individuals referenced in discovery.” Order (#285) issued Mar. 9, 2016, at 2. The Protective Order (#342) states defense counsel may only provide copies of the discovery in this case to
(1) The defendants in this case;
(2) Persons employed by the attorney of record who are necessary to assist counsel of record in preparation for trial or other proceedings in this case; and
(3) Persons who defense counsel deems necessary to further legitimate investigation and preparation of this case.
Here, clearly stated, is Brown’s argument to deny the names of the informants to the defense, “a risk of harm and intimidation to some witnesses and other individuals referenced in discovery.”
This brings to mind a couple of things. First, the Protective Order only addresses witnesses and defendants. Now, we have “other individual” added to this list. And, I suppose, rewritten, without hesitation. What gives? What is the fact about who is protected, and who is not?
This leads us to the most significant of these very duplicitous statements that have been advanced by Brown. If a risk of harm or intimidation really does exist, why did the government expose Mark McConnell as an informant back in September? The government set the stage for exposing informants, and now they tell me that I cannot expose informants. What sort of judicial double standard is this? It reeks of hypocrisy and extinguishes any concept of equal justice, under the law.Protective Order (#342) at 1. The Protective Order requires any person who receives a copy of the discovery to “use the discovery only to assist the defense in the investigation and preparation of this case and shall not reproduce or disseminate the discovery material to any other person or entity.” Id. (emphasis added). Defense counsel are further required to “provide a copy of this Protective Order to any person above who receives copies of discovery.”
Id.The Court notes although the literal terms of the Protective Order do not apply to third parties who obtain protected materials from a source other than defense counsel, it is well-settled that the Court may, nonetheless, prohibit a third party from violating a court order when that third party “‘actively aid[s] and abet[s]’” a violation of such an order. Reebok Int’l Ltd. v. McLaughlin, 49 F.3d 1387, 1391 (9th Cir. 1995)(quoting Waffenschmidt v. MacKay, 763 F.2d 711, 714 (5th Cir. 1985)). Moreover, the Court has jurisdiction to enforce its orders within the jurisdiction of the United States. Reebok Int’l, 49 F.3d at 1391.
Well, that is what I have been saying, all along. Thank you, Brown, for pointing out that the Protective Order does not apply to third parties. Since that is what is written, I have pursued my efforts, in total compliance with what was written — by you, Judge Brown, I might add. After all, we are a nation of laws, and we cannot be expected to live by house rules that can be changed at any time. If it is not written, how can one understand what he can, or cannot, do? I went into my efforts based upon what was written. Now, you sort of say that, “well, I didn’t mean what I said (wrote), now, here is what I mean, but failed to say.” It don’t work that way, Brown.
Now, as far as “it is well-settled“, let me suggest that it is only in your mind, and, further, that well-settled only came into existence in your mind when you realized that you screwed up. Your dictatorial highness still has the obligation to be honest, forthright, and to take responsibility for your actions. You are nothing more than a citizen of this country with a job that holds you to a higher standard than it holds me, as you work for the people. You may think that you have a higher privilege; however, really, you have a higher responsibility, especially to the defendants.
Let’s jump in to a little history. Back in the early 19th century, in a country, which lived under a government created by a new concept and a Constitution, it was rightfully stated that judges were the arbiters that the people could rely upon to keep the government within the government’s constitutional limits. They were considered the protectors of the people’s rights. Perhaps a bit more history and a little less arrogance might make you a decent judge. However, as explained above, I have lost hope in you.
In order to make clear in the public record that the Protective Order prohibits even third parties from disseminating protected materials and information, the Court is filing a Supplement to the Protective Order together with this Order.
Perhaps this should have been made clear in the first Protective Order. I believe that the legal term is estoppel. So, I had reliance from the wording of the Protective Order, and a pursued a course of action. Subsequently, as my efforts yielded results, I began, in October, writing articles that contained the information developed from documents I had received. There is no doubt that the US Attorney’s Office and most likely, nearly every judge and clerk in your courthouse, were aware of my articles, and I have that on good authority, should the need arise to establish the veracity of what I just said.
At the time, I received no notice from the Court or the US Attorney. That absence of action from October to January can be described three ways:
1) Silence;
2) Acquiescence;
3) Estoppel.
To more fully understand the implications and ramifications of this inactivity and subsequent activity, you have proven my point by, at this late date, after understanding my challenge to the recent activities of the Court and the US Attorney’s Office, decide that you had screwed up, and now you have now decided to file “a Supplement to the Protective Order“. Sorry, Brown, there are no “do‑overs”, you don’t even get a “participation award”. The Framers of the Constitution foresaw that possibility when they forestalled both legislative and judicial tyranny by incorporating Article I, § 9, clause 3, into the Constitution. And, if the legislative branch cannot enact ex post facto laws, then surely, a Court with limited jurisdiction has no less a prohibition.
Here is a rather interesting statement, “the Court may, nonetheless, prohibit a third party from violating a court order when that third party ‘actively aid[s] and abet[s]’.” Now, I will have to refer the reader to my previous article, Freedom of the Press #3 – “Contemptuous Postings”, where I addressed this whole matter of allegations of “aiding and abetting“. This also extends to the cases cited in Brown’s Order. As explained in the above linked article, the US Attorney simply grabbed stuff, threw it in, and hoped that nobody would pay attention to the fact that the cases cited do not lead to the conclusions that have been suggested. Apparently, even Brown and her clerks, have fallen prey to the devious deception. However, I didn’t, as I pulled all but the obscure District Court citations, and have seen that they have no relevance to the subject at hand.
On this record, therefore, the Court concludes the government has sufficiently demonstrated that Hunt has aided and abetted the dissemination of materials covered by the Protective Order, and, therefore, the Court GRANTS in part the government’s Motion (#1680) to Enforce Protective Order as follows:
Once again, the words flow wantonly. Aiding and abetting is a potential criminal charge, and, thusly, must be proven. Merely writing those words does not make it true, and cannot provide justification to imply that such an act occurred in order to impose punishment as a result of an activity that has not been tried, only applied. I’m going to toss out a phrase, where, there should be fair warning to the more astute players on the government’s side of the aisle. That phrase, simply put, is “prior restraint”.
1. The Court DIRECTS Hunt to remove all protected material and/or information derived from material covered by the Protective Order from his website(s) within 24 hours of the service of this Order;
2. The Court ENJOINS Hunt from further dissemination of material covered by the Protective Order or information derived therefrom to any person or entity.
3. The Court DIRECTS the government to serve Hunt personally with a copy of this Order together with a copy of the Protective Order (#342) and the Supplement (#1692) thereto as soon as possible and to file immediately in the record a certificate stating it has effectuated such personal service or otherwise ensured Hunt has personal knowledge of the contents thereof.
4. In the event that Hunt fails to comply with this Order after he is served, the government may initiate contempt or other enforcement proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction.
1Here, we are getting some rather interesting insight. Does She, or Doesn’t She? And, I am not talking about hair coloring, rather, jurisdiction. This will be discussed more, shortly.
5. In the event that the government obtains reliable evidence regarding the source from which Hunt obtained the protected materials, the Court trusts the government will seek appropriate relief from the Court without delay.Now, this appears to be a disguised attempt to intimidate me into providing the source of the information, because they really have nothing on me. The Cease & Desist Letter had no effect; this Order has no effect, in my pursuit of bringing to the public, through the Freedom of the Press, their right to know the workings of their own government. This might be an appropriate place to quote from John Adams:
“[W]e have nothing to expect from their justice but everything to hope from their fears."
Adams to James Warren, July 17, 1774, “Papers of John Adams”
[Footnote]1 Because the question is not presently before it, the Court does not express any opinion regarding which United States District Court would have jurisdiction to require Hunt to appear personally in such enforcement proceedings.
I have made my case before you, the public. My case has not been lost on only you, since both the defense and the prosecution await my scribblings. The former with anticipation, the latter with dread. So, there can be little doubt that this sudden concession to the jurisdictional issue is a consequence of their dread.
Now, we can move to another aspect of my writings, that being as to whether the Protective Order extends to me, or stops at those named. This is the ex post facto violation. This is where the Court has now determined, at this late date, to incorporate, and I hate to say it, anybody and everybody that has read any of my articles and/or simply posted or shared them on Facebook. What follows is the Supplement to the Order:
BROWN, Judge.
For the reasons stated in the Court’s Order (#1691) Granting in Part the Government’s Motion to Enforce Protective Order, the Court supplements the Protective Order (#342) issued March 23, 2016, as follows:
Any individual or entity that obtains materials protected by the Court’s Protective Order(#342) is prohibited from disseminating those materials or any information derived therefrom to any other individual or entity by any means.
IT IS SO ORDERED.DATED this 11th day of January, 2017.
Now is the time to refresh your memory to what John Adams said, and I will repeat at the end of this article. We must decide not to be civilly disobedient, rather we need to stand strong and be civilly defiant — to challenge the presumed authority of the Court in their efforts to quash me, but, more importantly, to defend, at whatever cost, your absolute right, under the First Amendment to the Constitution, specifically the Freedom the Press, and your right to know the workings of YOUR government.“[W]e have nothing to expect from their justice but everything to hope from their fears.”
Adams to James Warren, July 17, 1774, “Papers of John Adams”
Share this:
Like this:
Tags: administrative agencies, Burns Oregon, Constitution, courts, demonization, Department of Justice, FBI, government, Harney County, history, Honor, informants, jury, law, Moral Values, patriots, US Attormey
Category: Articles | Comment (RSS) | Trackback
Leave a Reply
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Marcus Mumford's attorney wants all personell files on deputy U.S. marshalls who tackled, Tased his client
https://www.itmattershowyoustand.com...ed-his-client/
Marcus Mumford’s lawyer seeks personnel files of deputy U.S. marshals who tackled, Tased his client
Posted on January 12, 2017 by Doug Knowles
http://youtu.be/9JBIZN4ndUw
By Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive
Marcus Mumford's attorney wants to review the personnel files of each deputy U.S. marshal who tackled his client and then stunned him with a Taser in the courtroom after the acquittal of refuge occupation leader Ammon Bundy.
The attorney also wants all emails between the marshals that mention Mumford during last fall's trial.
The requests are part of a wide-ranging motion by attorney Michael Levine for evidence as Mumford prepares to challenge charges that he didn't follow the lawful direction of a federal police officer and disrupted official government duties, both misdemeanors.
Mumford is expected to argue that there was a "pattern of overreaction'' by marshals who "initiated conflict unnecessarily'' during the case, according to court documents.
A hearing on pretrial motions is set for 9 a.m. Feb. 15.
Mumford, who represented Bundy during a five-week trial, was arrested Oct. 27 in U.S. District Court in Portland shortly after the judge announced the jury's verdict acquitting Bundy and six co-defendants of conspiring to prevent federal employees from doing their work at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Bundy and armed followers took over the refuge Jan. 2, 2016, in a protest of federal management of the land.
Marshals tackled Mumford as he questioned the government's authority to continue to hold Bundy on federal charges pending in Nevada and demanded to see paperwork to back it up. Once he was down on the courtroom floor, he was stunned with a Taser, he and his lawyer said.
According to a probable cause statement, the marshals said they moved to escort Bundy out of the courtroom when Mumford positioned his body to block them and began yelling in protest. When Mumford became more agitated, "flailing his arms and raising his voice even louder'' and exhibiting "pre-assault indicators,'' they moved in.
In his motion, Levine has asked for any photo taken of Mumford by the marshals after his arrest, all policies of the U.S. Marshals Service concerning use of force and the use of Tasers in the courtroom, all reports or memos relating to the use of the Taser against Mumford and courtroom security policies and procedures in place during Bundy's trial.
In his request for the marshals' personnel files, Levine asked for any information relevant to bias or previous reports of excessive use of force or lack of honesty.
The motion identified the marshals in the courtroom at the time and involved in Mumford's arrest as: Barbara Alfano, Brian Kelly, Troy Gangwisch, Erik Helsing, Luis Lopez, Timothy Barnard, Robert Endresen, Chad Myers and Colin Fawcett.
Mumford and his lawyer are also seeking any video or audio recording of the courtroom encounter as well as marshals' reports or emails in an earlier encounter on Oct. 17 during a break in the Bundy trial when marshals accused Mumford of "threatening them."
They're also seeking any records related to a meeting that U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown had with jurors after Mumford's arrest and the end of Bundy's trial "wherein Judge Brown described the events in the courtroom leading to Mr. Mumford's arrest.''
-- Maxine Bernstein
mbernstein@oregonian.com
503-221-8212
@maxoregonian
source
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Published on itmattershowyoustand.com The Scourge of the Patriot Community
https://www.itmattershowyoustand.com...iot-community/
http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/informants.htm
The scourge of the Patriot Community
Informants
I have written a number of articles, under the heading of "Burns Chronicles" the have exposed informants that participate with the FBI in obtaining information about the goings on, both inside and outside, during the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, near Burns, Oregon. https://i2.wp.com/www.itmattershowyo...51%2C442&ssl=1
The government has, with a revised "Protective Order", made it near criminal to read or share some of those articles, as the may contain what the Court has deemed "illegal materials".
Warning: downloading these files may subject you to "Contempt of Court" or "other" legal proceedings. Download at your own risk and peril.
Informant articles as of January 5, 2017 (pdf format)
Informant articles as of January 5, 2017 (Kindle format)
I have also begun a series dealing with the Oregon District Court's efforts to silence information that you, the Public, have a right to know.
Warning: downloading these files may cause you to understand that the government doesn't want you to know some things about how they deal with those who don't comply. Reading this articles may cause serious risk and peril to the government.
Freedom of the Press articles from the first "Statement" through "Freedom of the Press #4" (pdf format)
Freedom of the Press articles from the first "Statement" through "Freedom of the Press #4" (Kindle format)
Freedom Of Speech (Gary Hunt) Defense Fund
If you can, please support Gary in this Important Battle
https://i1.wp.com/www.paypalobjects....ze=1%2C1&ssl=1
| Freedom of Speech - Gary Hunt |
| Option 1 : $5.00 USD - monthlyOption 2 : $10.00 USD - monthlyOption 3 : $15.00 USD - monthlyOption 4 : $20.00 USD - monthly |
https://i1.wp.com/www.paypalobjects....ze=1%2C1&ssl=1
Share this:
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Gary Hunt cease and desit order radio interview archived on Kate Dalley show
https://soundcloud.com/user-45749150...edom-of-speech
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
The investigative team that is turning over reports to the Trump Organization apparently contacted Gary Hunt
https://s19.postimg.org/pi09whxnn/IMG_1462.png
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
LaVoy Finicum's widow carries on his mission
http://www.tribtown.com/2017/01/15/u...idows-mission/
Widow of slain Oregon standoff leader carries on his mission
1/15/17 12:45 PM
SALEM, Ore. — Leaders of an armed occupation of a federal wildlife refuge in rural Oregon were driving to a public meeting a year ago when police shot and killed one of them at a roadblock.
Now, LaVoy Finicum’s widow and their children are planning to hold that meeting later this month in the same town, John Day. Speakers are slated to talk about the Constitution, property rights and other issues.
“It is the anniversary of my husband’s death. We want to continue with his mission,” Jeanette Finicum told The Associated Press. “The people within counties and states should decide how to use those properties, not the federal government.”
LaVoy Finicum was the spokesman for several dozen occupiers during the 41-day takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge and has become a martyr for the movement to transfer ownership of federal lands to local entities. The U.S. government owns nearly half of all land in the West, compared with 4 percent in other states, according to the Congressional Overview of Federal Land Ownership.
Finicum’s cattle brand, an L connected to a V with a floating bar, adorns bumper stickers, black flags and T-shirts seen at conservative gatherings.
Jeanette Finicum has become something of a cause celebre in the year since her husband’s death. She spoke at a rally on the steps of Utah’s capitol. The Tri-State Livestock News, based in South Dakota, recently ran a story describing her dispute with the Bureau of Land Management over grazing fees. The agency administers 245 million acres of public lands and manages livestock grazing on 155 million acres of those lands.
“It’s been a horrific year,” Jeanette Finicum said in a phone interview from her Cane Beds, Arizona, home. “There’s been so much going on that most people don’t have to deal with when they lose a loved one, like we did.”
She met LaVoy at a barn dance. He told her he was a bad dancer.
“He was right. He had no rhythm,” Jeanette Finicum said with a laugh. They got married 14 days later.
“There isn’t anyone like him that I met in my lifetime, and I don’t expect there will be anyone else who will measure up,” she said, choking up with emotion.
She was a stay-at-home mom all 23 years they were married.
“With him gone, all of the responsibilities have fallen to me,” she said. “I spent the year rounding up, branding and calving.”
Oregon State Police shot LaVoy Finicum three times on Jan. 26, 2016, after he exited a vehicle at a police roadblock in the snowy Malheur National Forest, held up his hands and then reached toward his jacket.
Authorities concluded the officers were justified because they thought Finicum was going for his pistol. But at least one FBI Hostage Rescue Team operator fired two shots at Finicum’s vehicle — shots that were not disclosed during the investigation.
In March, the inspector general of the U.S. Justice Department began investigating possible FBI misconduct and whether there was a cover-up. The inspector general’s office declined to discuss the investigation last week. The U.S. attorney’s office in Portland said it was ongoing.
Jeanette Finicum insists her husband was not a threat and that he was murdered. Her lawyer has said the family plans a wrongful-death lawsuit, and Finicum said she will release more details during the Jan. 28 meeting.
It’s being held at the fairgrounds in Grant County, which neighbors the county containing the refuge.
Public lands make up 66 percent of Grant County’s 4,529 square miles. Jeanette Finicum bristled when asked if those attending the meeting might be inspired to take over federal sites.
“That’s a ridiculous question,” she said. “We will peacefully demonstrate, peacefully teach and stand for liberty.”
Fairgrounds manager Mindy Winegar said local logger Tad Haupt rented a pavilion for the meeting that seats up to 500 people. Haupt, a vocal opponent of U.S. Forest Service management practices, is the one who invited the occupation leaders to speak in John Day, a town of about 1,700, on Jan. 26, 2016.
The FBI expressed no concern about the upcoming meeting.
“Everyone has a constitutional right to assemble, and to free speech,” spokeswoman Beth Anne Steele said.
Grant County Judge Scott Myers granted permission for the fairgrounds, a county facility, to be used for the event, saying rejecting the request could have had more repercussions than allowing it to happen.
Myers said he doubts it will pose a threat but then added, “I have steadfastly tried to convince myself that over the past few months.”
Follow Andrew Selsky on Twitter at https://twitter.com/andrewselsky .
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Penalties for federal officials who violate their own rules
https://scontent.fbog2-2.fna.fbcdn.n...7f&oe=590B0335
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Defendants in second Malheur Protest trial want Ammon Bundy and Ryan Payne to testify
https://www.itmattershowyoustand.com...y-for-defense/
Defendants in second Oregon standoff trial want Ammon Bundy, Ryan Payne to testify for defense
Posted on January 16, 2017 by Doug Knowles
By Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive
January 16, 2017
The second wave of defendants set for trial next month in the armed seizure of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge want occupation leaders Ammon Bundy and Ryan Payne to testify in their defense.
Bundy and Payne are both in custody in Nevada, scheduled to face trial themselves this spring in another federal case.
The seven defendants in the second Oregon standoff trial have proposed that Bundy and Payne be transferred to Oregon to testify sometime in March and then return to Nevada by April for their trial in the 2014 standoff with federal land management agents near Bunkerville, Nevada.
They anticipate Bundy, who testified over three days last fall and was acquitted of all charges in the refuge takeover case, would take the stand on two trial days.
"In my opinion, his testimony cannot be replicated by any other witness or even group of witnesses. Mr. Bundy also has personal knowledge of facts related to the misdemeanor charges presently facing these defendants that were not at issue in the first trial and to which Mr. Bundy's prior testimony did not apply,'' wrote defense lawyer Andrew Kohlmetz, standby lawyer for defendant Jason Patrick. "It is the unanimous judgment of all defense counsel that Ammon Bundy is a critical witness for the defendants in this case.''
Twenty-six people faced federal conspiracy charges stemming from the 41-day occupation of the federal bird sanctuary in southeastern Oregon. Bundy and six co-defendants were found not guilty of conspiracy, weapons and other charges after a five-week trial last fall. Eleven others pleaded guilty to the conspiracy charge. Prosecutors dismissed charges against another.
The rest will go to trial on Feb. 14, on both felony conspiracy and weapons charges and additional misdemeanor charges, including trespass, tampering with equipment and destruction of property.
The defense lawyers for Bundy and Payne in Nevada don't object to their clients testifying in the Oregon case, yet Payne wants to talk to Patrick's defense investigator before deciding if he would. He's set to meet with the investigator on Feb. 16.
"Mr. Patrick recognizes that Mr. Payne has a 5th Amendment privilege not to testify,'' Kohlmetz wrote. If Payne chooses to invoke his right not to testify, Patrick will withdraw the request to call him as a witness.
Prosecutors will argue that no mention of the acquittal of Ammon Bundy and his six co-defendants be allowed during the second trial, saying it would be irrelevant and prejudicial.
Defendants want the court to allow evidence that the seven defendants tried last fall were acquitted on the federal conspiracy charge.
"It's probably fair to say that the initial default rule is Jury 2 doesn't hear about what Jury 1 decided, but there are situations where that does happen,'' said criminal defense lawyer Kevin Sali, who is not involved in this case.
While prosecutors can't prevent Bundy or Payne from taking the stand for the defense, the court could instruct them not to discuss the prior verdicts in their Oregon case.
"Mr. Patrick contends that the failure of the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the first seven defendants tried were members of the conspiracy charged herein, has at least some tendency to make the existence of the conspiracy itself, and these defendants' participation in it, less probable,'' his lawyer Kohlmetz wrote in a motion. "This is particularly true when the government seek to introduce the statements and actions of acquitted defendants as made in furtherance of said conspiracy.''
In a flurry of other pretrial motions, the defendants also urged the court to dismiss the trespass charge against them, saying it's too broad and arbitrarily enforced.
"Hundreds of people traveled to and from the refuge during the protest. Of that group of individuals, only 27 people were arrested, and only 7 of the arrested individuals were charged with trespass...despite the fact that the majority of the people who came to the refuge engaged in similar, if not identical, conduct,'' wrote defense lawyer Matthew McHenry, who represents Sean Anderson.
To prove trespassing, prosecutors said they must show only that the defendants entered the refuge without authorization and "should have reasonably recognized that their conduct would cause an invasion of an interest of another,'' Assistant U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Barrow wrote in a response.
The defense also shouldn't be allowed to argue that the refuge isn't federal property, Barrow said.
"Defendants have asserted that the federal government cannot permanently own property or that the state of Oregon did not consent to the transfer of the land to the federal government. If such beliefs were a cognizable defense to trespass on federal lands, it would render the charge unenforceable,'' Barrow wrote. "Finally, as this Court has noted, there is no genuine dispute that the federal government owns the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge and that it owned and controlled the property at the time of the occupation.''
If the misdemeanor charges stand, the defense teams also argue for the right to a jury trial on those charges. Prosecutors counter that federal law says a judge decides the lesser charges.
Prosecutors would prefer to hold a jury trial on the federal conspiracy and weapons charges, and while the jury is deliberating, present further evidence on the misdemeanor charges solely to the judge.
The next status hearing in the case is set for Friday. Several of the defendants will be formally arraigned on the new misdemeanor charges.
-- Maxine Bernstein
mbernstein@oregonian.com
503-221-8212
@maxoregonian
source
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Jeanette Finicum continues to carry on her husband's message
http://freerangereport.com/index.php...slain-husband/
https://i1.wp.com/freerangereport.co...size=601%2C190
Jeanette Finicum continues fight for property rights in behalf of slain husband
January 17, 2017 editor Leave a comment
“It is the anniversary of my husband’s death. We want to continue with his mission. The people within counties and states should decide how to use those properties, not the federal government.”
LaVoy Finicum’s widow wants to ‘continue his mission’
Associated Press
Leaders of an armed occupation of a federal wildlife refuge in rural Oregon were driving to a public meeting a year ago when police shot and killed one of them at a roadblock.
Now, LaVoy Finicum’s widow and their children are planning to hold that meeting later this month in the same town, John Day. Speakers are slated talk about the Constitution, property rights and other issues.
“It is the anniversary of my husband’s death. We want to continue with his mission,” Jeanette Finicum told The Associated Press. “The people within counties and states should decide how to use those properties, not the federal government.”
LaVoy Finicum was the spokesman for several dozen occupiers during the 41-day takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge and has become a martyr for the movement to transfer ownership of federal lands to local entities. The U.S. government owns nearly half of all land in the West, compared with 4 percent in other states, according to the Congressional Overview of Federal Land Ownership.
Finicum’s cattle brand, an L connected to a V with a floating bar, adorns bumper stickers, black flags and T-shirts seen at conservative gatherings.
Susie Hammond, whose husband and son became the oft-cited reason for Ammon Bundy’s armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge last Jan. 2, says the family didn’t want anything to do with the occupation but came to appreciate the attention brought to their fight with the federal government.
Jeanette Finicum has become something of a cause celebre in the year since her husband’s death. She spoke at a rally on the steps of Utah’s capitol. The Tri-State Livestock News, based in South Dakota, recently ran a story describing her dispute with the Bureau of Land Management over grazing fees. The agency administers 245 million acres of public lands and manages livestock grazing on 155 million acres of those lands.
“It’s been a horrific year,” Jeanette Finicum said in a phone interview from her Cane Beds, Arizona, home. “There’s been so much going on that most people don’t have to deal with when they lose a loved one, like we did.”
She was a stay-at-home mom all 23 years they were married.
“With him gone, all of the responsibilities have fallen to me,” she said. “I spent the year rounding up, branding and calving.”
Oregon State Police shot LaVoy Finicum three times on Jan. 26, 2016, after he exited a vehicle at a police roadblock in the snowy Malheur National Forest, held up his hands and then reached toward his jacket.
Authorities concluded the officers were justified because they thought Finicum was going for his pistol. But at least one FBI Hostage Rescue Team operator fired two shots at Finicum’s vehicle — shots that were not disclosed during the investigation.
In March, the inspector general of the U.S. Justice Department began investigating possible FBI misconduct and whether there was a cover-up. The inspector general’s office declined to discuss the investigation last week. The U.S. attorney’s office in Portland said it was ongoing.
Jeanette Finicum insists her husband was not a threat and that he was murdered. Her lawyer has said the family plans a wrongful-death lawsuit, and Finicum said she will release more details during the Jan. 28 meeting.
It’s being held at the fairgrounds in Grant County, which neighbors the county containing the refuge.
Public lands make up 66 percent of Grant County’s 4,529 square miles. Jeanette Finicum bristled when asked if those attending the meeting might be inspired to take over federal sites.
“That’s a ridiculous question,” she said. “We will peacefully demonstrate, peacefully teach and stand for liberty.”
The FBI expressed no concern about the upcoming meeting.
“Everyone has a constitutional right to assemble, and to free speech,” spokeswoman Beth Anne Steele said.
Grant County Judge Scott Myers granted permission for the fairgrounds, a county facility, to be used for the event, saying rejecting the request could have had more repercussions than allowing it to happen.
Myers said he doubts it will pose a threat but then added, “I have steadfastly tried to convince myself that over the past few months.”
Free Range Report
Related
BLM still harassing Jeanette Finicum a year following her husband's killing by government agents
December 28, 2016In "Bureau of Land Management"
Bundys acquitted in Oregon, face Nevada trial
November 19, 2016In "Bureau of Land Management"
What's behind media smears of ranchers victimized by federal actions?
Sebtember 8, 2016In "Media Bias"
Share
Tweet
Share
Share
Share
Bureau of Land Management, Land Disputes, Property Rights anniversary, BLM, livestock, Malheur protesters, murder, Oregon Standoff, ranching, the Hammonds
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Federal persecutor files 3 charges against Attorney Marcus Mumford
https://www.itmattershowyoustand.com...arcus-mumford/
Prosecutor files formal criminal information, lodging three charges against Marcus Mumford
Posted on January 18, 2017 by Doug Knowles
[pdf-embedder url="https://www.itmattershowyoustand.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Case-3-17cr-00008-HZ-Document-1-Filed-011317-Pages-1-3.pdf" title="Case 3-17cr-00008-HZ Document 1 Filed 01:13:17 Pages 1 - 3"]
By Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive
A federal prosecutor has filed a formal criminal information charging Marcus Mumford, who U.S. marshals tackled and stunned with a Taser in federal court on the day his client Ammon Bundy was acquitted, with three misdemeanor charges.
It accuses Mumford of creating a disturbance by impeding or disrupting the official government duties by "verbally and physically interfering with" marshals in their "transportation of a person in their custody.''
The second charge is failure to comply with signs that prohibit the disruption of official government duties. The third charge is failure to comply with lawful direction of a federal police officer.
The information replaces the initial citations that were given to Mumford after he was taken into custody and arrested on Oct. 27. It was filed by Timothy J. Ohms, a special attorney assigned from Washington state, after prosecutors and federal judges recused themselves from the case.
Mumford and his lawyer Michael Levine have both said they intend to vigorously challenge the charges. For example, Levine has filed a motion, requesting the personnel files of all the deputy U.S. marshals who were involved in the incident.
A pre-trial hearing is set for Feb. 15.
The maximum penalty for each offense is 30 days in custody and a $5,000 fine.
A criminal case in federal court formally begins with the filing of an indictment, which is returned by a grand jury, or a criminal information. The information is usually filed in misdemeanor cases and represents a formal accusation of the alleged crime.
Mumford's lawyer earlier this month entered not guilty pleas on Mumford's behalf to charges of failing to comply with the lawful direction of a federal police officer and impeding or disrupting official government duties.
Mumford was arrested Oct. 27 shortly after the judge announced the jury's verdict acquitting Bundy and six co-defendants of conspiring to prevent federal employees from doing their work at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Bundy and armed followers took over the refuge Jan. 2, 2016.
Deputy marshals tackled Mumford as he questioned the government's authority to continue to hold Bundy on federal charges pending in Nevada and demanded to see paperwork to back it up.
Mumford's lawyer Michael Levine called the arrest an "unprecedented attack on the defense bar,'' during his first appearance with Mumford in court earlier this month.
Levine called the use of a stun gun and Mumford's arrest "outrageous,'' saying Mumford was doing nothing more than engaging in zealous advocacy for his client.
According to a probable cause statement, the marshals said they moved forward to escort Bundy out of the courtroom when Mumford positioned his body to block them and began yelling in protest. When Mumford became more agitated, "flailing his arms and raising his voice even louder,'' and exhibiting "pre-assault indicators,'' they moved in.
-- Maxine Bernstein
mbernstein@oregonian.com
503-221-8212
@maxoregonian
source
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Feds estimate $108,000.00 to repair damage caused by digging 2 trenches at Malheur Reserve
https://www.itmattershowyoustand.com...e-than-100000/
Repair of two trenches, road dug at Mahleur National Wildlife Refuge cost more than $100,000
Posted on January 18, 2017 by Doug Knowles
By Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive
The cost of repairing two trenches and a road, dug last winter on a part of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge that's considered an archaeological site, was slightly more than $108,000, according to federal authorities.
Two of the seven defendants set for trial next month, Jake Ryan and Duane Ehmer, are accused of digging the trenches and charged with depredation of government property, considered a felony when damage and repair is more than $1,000.
Ryan and Ehmer want the court to restrict prosecutors from telling jurors about any archeologically significant sites that may have been threatened on the refuge or the government's funding of an archeological exploration of the dirt moved and its cost to repair.
Defense lawyers argue the evidence is irrelevant and would be prejudicial. They also contend Ryan and Ehmer had no idea the location held any archeological significance, and that's why they have not been charged with violations of the Archeological Resources Protections Act.
The act prohibits excavation of such sites that a defendant knows to be an archeological resource and the removal of objects without a permit.
"If the government does not have any evidence to demonstrate that the defendants intended to threaten the archeological integrity of the MNWR, then it is not relevant whether or not that integrity was in fact threatened,'' wrote Jesse Merrithew, Ryan's defense lawyer. "Mr. Ryan had no knowledge, nor any reason to know that when he dug the trench next to the parking lot on a functioning government complex, there could be buried archaeological resources present, especially considering the parking lot and all the surrounding buildings had required considerable excavation when they were built.''
The FBI hired an expert to help assess the damage to the refuge headquarters and coordinate repair because federal agents suspected the digging of trenches at the refuge during its occupation may have violated the Archeological Resources Protection Act.
Timothy W. Canaday, forest archaeologist and tribal coordinator for the Salmon-Challis National Forest in Salmon, Idaho, calculated the cost of repair at $108,172, according to his report.
The cost included stabilizing the trenches to allow a survey of any archeological objects that may have been disturbed, field work to determine if any archaeological artifacts or Native American human remains were damaged, consultation with the Burns Paiute Tribe, preparation for a "cleansing and healing'' ceremony held by the tribe at the site, and the cleaning and replacing of soil that had been excavated, according to federal prosecutors.
To be guilty of depredation of government property, the defendants don't have to know the site disturbed was an archeological resource, only that their conduct was unlawful.
According to Canaday's report, no human bones or associated Native American items were located in the damaged areas, except for a single human talus bone discovered next to the all-terrain vehicle trails area. The human bone was reburied in place.
Refuge archeologist Carla Burnside testified during the trial last fall of Ammon Bundy and six co-defendants that no archeological artifacts were disturbed at the refuge. She also testified that the 187,000 acres of the refuge contained more than 400 prehistoric and historic sites. One encompasses the entire refuge headquarters.
Her testimony prompted defense lawyer Matthew Schindler to ask during trial whether the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service built the refuge headquarters on top of an archeological site?
"Yes, before it was not legal to do that,'' Burnside responded.
After the 41-day occupation ended and a survey of the site was completed, Burns Paiute tribal elders were brought to the refuge to conduct a traditional healing and cleansing ceremony as part of the repair and restoration, Canaday's report said. Protective fencing was installed around the trenches, with tarps placed over them for the ceremonies, partly to preserve the area for examination by the defense teams in the case.
The trenches were ultimately filled in. Topsoil was spread over the them and the excavated road to the refuge bunkhouse. Native seeds and sagebrush plugs were planted for vegetation growth.
The cost of repairs to the archeological site are relevant to support the underlying charge, prosecutors argue. They plan to call an expert witness to testify about the steps taken to repair the property.
Because of the archeological nature of the sites, federal authorities needed to ensure significant repairs were done "beyond merely 'pushing the dirt back into the trench(es) and compacting it down using the equipment ... onsite,' '' as defendants suggest would have been more reasonable.
source
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
John Lamb with the Jan. 20 Malheur Protest trial update from Portland, Oregon
http://youtu.be/U_jOTLqdUi0
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Obama backs off of Owyhee National Monument - Could it be because of the Malheur Protest?
http://freerangereport.com/index.php...andoff-be-why/
https://i0.wp.com/freerangereport.co...size=601%2C168
Obama backs off Owyhee designation, could Oregon Standoff be why?
January 21, 2017 editor Leave a comment
Despite the fact that mainstream media and left-wing environmentalist launched a smear campaign against the ranchers and their supporters, the Administration and its political allies, worried about the repercussions of the Oregon Standoff. WikiLeaks published an email exchange between Mike Matz of PEW Environmental and Hillary Clinton’s campaign chief, John Podesta, indicating just that. Matz mentioned the Malheur ‘occupation’ twice in his email to Podesta.
After a gluttonous spree of land-gobbling by the Obama Administration using the Antiquities Act as a fort and knife, one previously targeted region was spared, leaving Americans to wonder whether volatile bad press was a factor in its exception, or if the clock just ran out.
Pushed by outdoor recreation corporations and left-wing environmentalists, the Administration was eyeing a rugged and resource-rich area of southeastern Oregon to be designated as the Owyhee Canyonlands National Monument. The Conservation Alliance, a syndicate of global outdoor recreation corporations–looking to expand their markets in the United States and abroad–lobbied Obama heavily to lock up Owyhee Canyonlands, but in this case their efforts fell short.
https://i0.wp.com/freerangereport.co...size=297%2C711
On January 19, Capital Press reported:
Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley told OPB Sunday that Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewel told him the proposed Owyhee Canyonlands National Monument in Eastern Oregon’s Malheur County has been shelved.
Merkley says he doubts President Obama will make the proclamation before leaving office Friday.
That’s encouraging, but at this writing Obama still has time to make the proclamation.
Backed by the Oregon Natural Desert Association and Portland’s Keen Shoes, the proposed Owyhee Canyonlands wilderness and conservation area would cover 40 percent of Malheur County — about 2.5 million acres of what is now controlled by the Bureau of Land Management.
Residents believe the designation would be accompanied by restrictions and regulations that would prohibit or severely complicate grazing, mining, hunting and recreation.
While proponents say traditional uses of the land will be allowed, local opponents don’t believe them. When the locals put it to a non-binding vote — because locals really don’t get a vote — 90 percent of Malheur County voters opposed the monument proposal.
We don’t know why the proposal has been shelved, or if it really has been shelved. It could be the administration thinks the designation would be too inflammatory, given the area’s proximity to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, the site of last year’s armed occupation by followers of the Bundy clan.
It could be Obama chose an easier target, instead expanding the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument in Southern Oregon earlier this month.
About 2 years ago, locals in southeastern Oregon; ranchers, community leaders, foresters, and others, mounted a campaign called Our Land Our Voice to stop the federal designation of an area in Malheur County as a national monument. And of this writing–following the exit of Obama and his Interior department–history must conclude that the people of Malheur County won against great odds. But other regions of the country, California, Arizona, New Mexico, and most notably, Utah, have had millions of acres seized by the Obama monument-making machine, where grassroots efforts to protect locals and resource-based economies apparently failed. The question remains, why?
Last years, locals, including ranchers, small business owners, and the Navajo and Ute tribes in southeastern Utah mounted a campaign similar to Our Land Our Voice, titled Protect the Bears Ears, a rallying point for those opposing a proposed 1.9 million acre monument that would cover most of San Juan County. On January 28, while in Hawaii on vacation, Obama announced that 1.35 million acres in San Juan County would forever be controlled by the National Park Service, and Bears Ears National Monument was born.* With the help of alliances between big outdoor rec, radical environmentalists, and Obama’s Interior chief, Sally Jewell–the literal embodiment of both big outdoor rec corporatism and radical environmental ideology–hundreds of millions of acres have seized by D.C. and cut off from economic development, effectively frozen in time.
The folks behind Our Land Our Voice, and thousands of people from small communities in southeastern Oregon, held their breaths until the very last minute. But more than a mere omission, their reprieve may have had everything to do with events which took place a year ago in their very backyard. On January 2, 2016, ranchers led by Ammon and Ryan Bundy gathered at the Malheur Refuge, near Burns, Oregon, to protest what they believed was the unjust imprisonment of the Hammonds. Father and son ranchers, Dwight and Steven Hammond, were convicted months earlier on terrorism charges stemming from prescriptive burns on their own property, and continue to languish behind bars today. Although peaceful, the protest at the Malheur Refuge whipped up a firestorm of controversy, which climaxed with the killing of Arizona rancher, LaVoy Finicum by government agents, and the arrests of the leaders of the protests.
Despite the fact that mainstream media and left-wing environmentalists launched a smear campaign against the ranchers and their supporters, the Administration and its political allies worried about the repercussions of the Oregon Standoff. WikiLeaks published an email exchange between Mike Matz of PEW Environmental and Hillary Clinton’s campaign chief, John Podesta, indicating just that. Matz mentioned the Malheur ‘occupation’ twice in his email to Podesta:
The three monuments in southern California that Sen. Feinstein supports have been teed up for the President’s signature since December. The situation in the Malheur Refuge has now caused understandable delay. However, we believe it should occur as soon as possible after the denouement of that occupation. There is significant local support for these designations and the conservation community and other stakeholders locally and nationally are prepared to amplify that positive reaction.
The Owyhee Canyons in southeastern Oregon had been percolating along until the Malheur occupation caused a major hiccup. However, we hope the Administration doesn’t lose sight of this one. It’s biologically very important, and is a nice complement to the Idaho portion of the canyonland that was protected in the 2009 omnibus lands bill that Obama signed into law. We recognize that Sen. Wyden is not the most popular member, and that it will take movement by him and Sen. Merkley to introduce a bill and be more forceful advocates, and we’re working on that.
In the months following the Oregon Standoff, the arrests of the protesters and the killing of LaVoy Finicum, friends, family members and supporters of the protesters began to make their voices heard. Jeanette Finicum, LaVoy’s widow, and several of his children, made public appearances across the country to tell his story, and share their views about constitutional property rights, and the importance of ranching to the West. The killing of LaVoy by Oregon State Troopers and the FBI remains controversial to this day, with various analyses of the timeline concluding that the killing was, at worst, a set up, and at best, an overreaction.
The biggest blow to the Administration’s case against the Malheur protesters came in October last year when the first wave of defendants, including Ammon and Ryan Bundy, were acquitted of all charges by a Portland jury.
Despite the fact that mainstream media reporting about the Oregon Standoff cast the ranchers in a largely negative light, it set off a disquieting feeling across the nation that government had become the persecutor of its citizens, and not their protector.
After being acquitted in Oregon, the Bundy brothers, and their father Cliven, were set to be tried in Nevada on charges related to the Bunkerville Standoff in the spring of 2014. The results of that trial are anyone’s guess at this point. But there’s no question that national eyes are watching, and an increasing number of Americans–especially those from the heartland who amassed to elect Donald Trump as president–are disgusted with the treatment by the Obama Administration of ranchers and landowners in the West.
It is possible that the activities and personal sacrifices, primarily by LaVoy Finicum, the Bundy family and others imprisoned by the feds over protests against aggressive federal agencies, ultimately saved the folks of southeastern Oregon from having their lands and resources ripped from them via presidential proclamation.
*Utah leaders and locals in San Juan County have called upon President Trump to reversethe 1.35 million acre Bears Ears designation.
https://i0.wp.com/freerangereport.co...size=714%2C428
Free Range Report
Related
Podesta PEW pen-pal goes whole hog with monuments pushDecember 6, 2016In "Elections"
WikiLeaks exposes Podesta/PEW collusion behind Obama monuments pushNovember 6, 2016In "Elections"
Locals fear Owyhee monument would 'inflame' deep wounds in Oregon communitiesOctober 30, 2016In "Federal Overreach"
Share
Tweet
Share
Share
Share
Federal Overreach, National Parks, Property Rights Bundys, LaVoy Finicum, Malheur Refuge, Obama monuments, Oregon Standoff, Our Land Our Voice, Oywhee Canyonlands
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
John Lamb is on the road, was contacted a few minutes ago
Justin Yingling I just talked to John. It's all legit as far as he knows. Whether or not the guy talking to John is legit may be another story but John feels the guy is straight up as far as he can tell. Anyhow he's gonna do an update when he can. He's driving and knows this post has blown up. https://www.facebook.com/images/emoj...2/16/1f642.png:-)
1 · 12 mins · Edited
https://scontent.fbog2-2.fna.fbcdn.n...c3&oe=5915560A
James Madison TYVM Justin Yingling...I got hustled by Dolly Singer. I c&p'ed the comment. Did not mean any harm.
Just now
John Lamb posted on his facebook he is part of a small group contacted to meet with the Trump administration.
Edit: It appears this Mathew Hauser has fed Joohn Lamb a line of pure bullshit. I should have read the comments before posting this
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater
https://scontent.fbog2-2.fna.fbcdn.n...df&oe=59192970
John Lamb20 hrs ·
Very Important Update
01/21/17
BREAKING NEWS
Still working out the details. I was contacted to be part of a small group to go meet President Donald Trump to discuss the release of all our political prisoners and present evidence of the corruption of this tyrannical court system we've been experiencing.
Will keep you posted on this progress as I know more . Don't forget to remember all us in your prayer .
j. Lamb
BREAKING NEWS
John Lamb
Gary Hunt
Political Prisoners
LaVoy Finicum ----- Assassination-----01/26/16
Judge Anna Brown --- Misconduct
Retired Civil Rights Investigator Matthews and the Investigative team states, that after making some calls, this week they were requested to move forward. Mr. Matthews spoke with Mr.John Lamb and Mr.Gary Hunt today. Mr. Matthews states he is planning a trip to see President Donald Trump or meet with a President Donald Trump Organization Administrative Agent. To turn over investigation reports and evidence to all cases as stated above in about 4 to 6 weeks if all goes well for the plan. ( President Donald Trump is very busy at this time Mr.Matthews was told today) Mr. Matthews states that only 6 to 8 can be present at the meeting and Mr. John Lamb and Mr. Gary Hunt will also be going. Mr. Matthews says he will keep his Facebook friends and others posted all this week.
Thank you
God Bless
Lets Get all the Political Prisoners Home
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
From Gary Hunt's post it sounds like . . . . You be the judge.
https://scontent.fbog2-2.fna.fbcdn.n...33&oe=59153788
Bobby Payne Gary Hunt
1 hr ·
RE: "Dolly Singer"
There has been a bit (understatement) of controversy over Dolly Singer (Matthew Houser). He contacted me nearly two weeks ago with the story of his access to the Trump Team. He had this editing story about his direct contact with President Donald Trump. It sounded interesting; however, I have many interesting things sent to me. So, I don't get excited. I decided that until we met, in person, that I would not go public with my evaluation of the claims he has made.
We were supposed to meet in person, a week ago last Friday. He never called to confirm time and location (he is in Chico, California, about 25 miles away) or a time.
He contacted me that weekend to say that we would meet last week. When no contact was made with regard to that meeting, I called him and he had a handful of reasons why he was unable to make the meeting, but assured me that the meeting would take place this coming week. This morning, I called him to set and firm up a meeting, but he explained that he couldn't make it until Thursday or Friday.
Due to the obvious controversy, and the many private messages I have received on the subject, it began seriously eroding my writing. I called him this afternoon and said that we would have to meet today, or at least tomorrow, that I could hold off no longer and would have to go public.
He claims that he has ties with Trump, in person. If that were true, it would seem that he also had financial resources to pursue his investigation. He claims to have no money. That doesn't fit.
He has been irresponsible with regard to commitments, such as the meetings. However, he never calls to cancel. I only find out when I call him. That is not the degree of responsibility I would expect from a legitimate investigator, and more so from one who claims association with President Trump. To put that in quite understandable terms, President Trump would have said, "You're Fired!" by now.
Over the last twenty-four years, I have had many people try to feed me bogus stories, or create an apparent association -- each of which might bring into question my credibility. I have managed to avoid such associations, though this one, lasting nearly two weeks, is the longest time that I have stood guilty of not coming forward to set the record straight.
I do so, now. "Dolly Singer" aka Matthew Hauser, is not legitimate, at least in terms of what he professes. From this point on, I disassociate with him, and will no longer allow my name to be associated with his "venture", whatever it may be.
Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
January 22, 2017
2 · 1 hr
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
This lady Stacy has compiled volumes on federal overreach and land grabs her youtune channel is MrsB Stacy.
This is an hour long video, Sheriff Gilbertson and Sheriff Glenn Palmer both Oregon sheriffs on federal lack jurisdiction and abuses on public land Source: http://www.defendruralamerica.com/DRA/Public_Lands.html
http://youtu.be/nnUiadMjaFk
https://youtu.be/nnUiadMjaFk
Edit: This video makes it very obvious the western states addmitted after the California Gold Rush were not granted title to the unapproptiated public land. Powerful interests in the northeast (Jewish Bankers) . . . You get the idea.
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Quote:
Originally Posted by
monty
This lady Stacy has compiled volumes on federal overreach and land grabs her youtune channel is MrsB Stacy.
This is an hour long video, Sheriff Gilbertson and Sheriff Glenn Palmer both Oregon sheriffs on federal lack jurisdiction and abuses on public land Source:
http://www.defendruralamerica.com/DRA/Public_Lands.html
http://youtu.be/nnUiadMjaFk
https://youtu.be/nnUiadMjaFk
Edit: This video makes it very obvious the western states addmitted after the California Gold Rush were not granted title to the unapproptiated public land. Powerful interests in the northeast (Jewish Bankers) . . . You get the idea.
The video is from 2011, is MacKenzie still active?
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bigjon
The video is from 2011, is MacKenzie still active?
I knew it was an old video. I don't know if he is still active. I haven't cheked his website recently.
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bigjon
The video is from 2011, is MacKenzie still active?
I don't think he has been active since 2013.
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Second Malheur Protest trial update RangeFire
http://rangefire.us/2017/01/22/orego...-trial-update/
Oregon Standoff Trial Update
January 22, 2017 - Oregon Standoff - Tagged: Bundy, Oregon, Range, RANGEfire, Standoff, trial - no comments
The Second Phase Oregon Standoff Trial is now right around the corner, scheduled to begin on February 14, 2017.
For those interested, there have been significant new developments in the case.
On Friday, January 20th, the seven defendants scheduled for trial in February were charged with a number of new charges, primarily misdemeanors, including trespassing and criminal mischief, which the Federal
Government hopes that it can have an easier http://rangefire.us/wp-content/uploa...na-Brown-1.jpg
time of securing convictions for that it did the last round when all of the first round defendants, including Ammon & Ryan Bundy were acquitted of all federal conspiracy and firearms charges.
The most significant development, however, was Judge Brown’s ruling that she is denying the defendants the opportunity to have a jury trial on the new charges, and she will be trying those charges herself — in an obvious attempt to ensure convictions, without the possibility of having a jury mess things up. This is a very troubling development.In related developments,
The Bundy trial(s) in Nevada have now been split into three trials too, with the first trial scheduled to begin on February 7th. The Bundys themselves, however, will not be tried until the second trial later in the Spring. And as compared to the Oregon defendants, most of whom were eventually released from custody pending trial, every single one of the 17 Nevada defendants is still being held in custody pending trial. Many consider these defendants to be political prisoners, whose continued pre-trial incarceration is nothing more than a political statement by the federal government, without any legitimate basis, based on the defendants being flight risks or posing any genuine threat to public safety.
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Gary Hunt expose another informant Outpost of Freedom
« Burns Chronicles No 54 – To Jury, or, Not To Jury
Burns Chronicles No 55 – Marshall Spring & Ben
January 23, 2017, 1:47 pm
Burns Chronicles No 55
Marshall Spring & Ben
http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/w...ng-and-Ben.jpg
Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
January 23, 2017
Marshall Sawyer Spring served as a Marine in Iraq with one of the defendants. He received a Purple Heart, but his honor stopped there. His and Ben’s betrayal, of patriots and fellow Marines, as informants includes not only informing, but goes well beyond, as you will see.
Spring and his partner, known only as “Ben”, live in Loveland, Colorado. Spring is a “Marshal” appointed such by Bruce Doucette, self-appointed “United States Superior Court Judge”. This would, according to the “appointment”, make Spring’s title “Marshal Marshall Spring”. Doucette arranged to meet Spring and “Ben” in Burns, to set up a Common Law Grand Jury. Spring and Ben’s visit to Burns coincides with the two FBI form 1023 (CHS Reporting Document) reports, and it is quite apparent that the reports are tracking Doucette as much as they are the events in Burns.
Doucette, on January 14, 2017, confronted Spring with the information I had. Of course, Spring denied that he was an informant, however, even though a subsequent meeting was scheduled, it seems that Spring has given up his phone, as it is no longer in service.
Efforts to contact “Ben” have been futile, and even his last name is unknown. He had red hair and was around the Refuge by January 12 until, at least, January 15, 2016. He was about 5′ 7″ or 5′ 8″ and weighed about 175 pounds. He sported a Fu Manchu goatee and moustache.
Whether Spring or Ben filed the respective reports is unknown. However, by some of the information contained within the reports, it appears that Spring is CHS #12.
January 12, 2016[heavily redacted]
Later in the day, Doucette met other individuals involved with the standoff including Pete Santillli and Joseph O’Shaughnessy aka “Captain O”. O’Shaughnessy claims to be part of a militia group from Arizona and part of the Pacific Patriot Network. O’Shaughnessy is attempting to get a helicopter to come to the area to conduct counter surveillance. O’Shaughnessy does not like how the holding of the refuge compound is being handled. He believes that a very limited number of Federal Agents could take back the refuge.
Doucette also met with individuals that claim to be part of the press covering the standoff named Mike LNU of the TVOI News Network, Vicki Davis, Chuck Greenwood, telephone: [omitted] and Tim Davis. Mike LNU says they have a “brother” in the Sheriff’s Department and if this comes to a fire fight it will be between the cops.
Doucette's plan in Burns is to convene two common law grand juries in the area. A common law grand jury consists of 25 jurors and 1 Grand Jury administrator. It takes 25 jurors to indict and 12 to decide on a presented case. The starting point of forming a grand jury will be to discuss the idea with the Safety Committee [Harney County Committee of Safety] on Friday at a party that is planned to take place in town. Roger with the Grand Jury in Florida is assisting remotely with writing all of Bruce Doucette’s decisions and indictments.
Doucette believes that if Bundy gets what he wants (return of the land to the ranchers) that in 6 months it will be taken back by the Federal Government. Accordingly, Doucette stated that, “we can’t leave here until a new Sheriff has been appointed and a new government is installed.” Doucette believes that a sheriff can be appointed because the current sheriff, his department and local government are all corrupt..
January 13, 2016
On the afternoon of 1/13/2016, Bruce Doucette met with Ammon Bundy, Ryan Payne and Jon LNU. Jon LNU is a former marine that drives a silver F-150 with a “rogue infidel” bumper sticker. The purpose of the meeting was for Doucette and the other three individuals to see if they were all on the same page regarding the refuge stand off. At the conclusion of the meeting, Doucette and his bodyguards were invited to move onto the refuge. Doucette’s group returned to their hotel and started packing their gear.
While he is in town, Doucette attempts to engage local residents and persuade them that what the individuals occupying the refuge are doing is just. Doucette had some success in this regard.
The individuals occupying the refuge appear to have plenty of provisions and are in good spirits. The group has no intention of leaving the refuge until the Hammonds are released and ownership of the refuge is turned over from the Federal Government.
The occupation leadership’s plan moving forward is to try and duplicate the occupation at another federal facility in another county. The Payne is in contact with a local Sheriff in another county that is friendly to their cause. This county would be the likely location of the next facility. Payne will be meeting with the friendly Sheriff again in the near future.
Doucette is going to provide Payne with copies of some of the legal process he created in the past. Payne will review these documents and determine if Doucette methodology meets with his approval. (Please note: Doucette’s legal process is all fictitious).
Yes, even though Spring appears to be a follower of Doucette, that comment was included in the report. This is suggestive of the fact that Doucette is Spring’s assigned target, and that the Refuge incident is simply a target of opportunity.
January 15, 2016
Reporting from [redacted] on 1/14/2016 at 1:30 PCT
The meeting being held by the Pacific Patriot Network on Friday, 1/15/16 will be attended by Bruce Doucette, and Joe O’Shaughnessy.
Bruce Doucette’s invitation to Grant County was allegedly made by the town’s people.
The occupants of the refuge are considering targets in Grant County and Mahler County for their next occupations. The number of people at the refuge is approximately 10 Women and 30 men 24 hours a day Bruce Doucette occupies a small house called the Coyote Hollow Volunteer Building on the south side centrally located, to the west of the chow hall.
Reporting from [redacted] on 1/14/2016 at 8:15 PCT
Some of the occupants of the refuge attended a meeting in town tonight at a private residence with members of the public. The general consensus of the public at the conclusion of the meeting was favorable of the militia groups. The refuge occupants left the meeting in a hurry because there was a report of three white SUV’s approaching the refuge.
Occupants of the refuge are reinforcing the town with four foot land fence posts. They are also reinforcing the gate with fire trucks, fire hose and calops.
So, we can see the detail of the goings on at the Refuge as well as some tactical information. One word, if spelled correctly in the report, is “calops”. If anybody has an idea what “calops” means, that information would be appreciated.
Red-haired “Ben” has evaded identification, though, hopefully, someone can help to fill in these gaps. Apparently, Ben and Spring have tried to start a business that utilizes waste from medical marijuana processing to develop a going business.
These are probably Ben’s CHS #8 reportsJanuary 14, 2016 – Ben
The CHS advised that Ryan Payne was out well into the morning of 1/14/2016 attempting to locate pole cameras on the roads near the refuge. Payne still planned to destroy the cameras, but the prior sense of urgency is not present. It was unclear of who would actually destroy the equipment, and further speculated that Payne would likely ask someone else to conduct the act to avoid any illegal activity on his part.
Payne and Ammon Bundy (Ammon) seemed to have bonded on a spiritual level. They both claim to be had visions from a higher power to support their actions in this matter and feel their current actions are based on direction from God. The fact that Ammon is Mormon and Payne is a Jewish Kabalist seems to have no ill effect on their relationship. Payne and Ammon appear to be interchangeable in the role of leaders of the others involved in the standoff. Payne and Ammon seem to complement each other in their dealings with those involved under them. Payne espoused a religious type view of the current event and their participation as being just the thoughts in the mind of a higher power. Given the fact that Payne and Ammon feel they are acting in the will of God, they seem to not be concerned if they live or die in this matter. The CHS speculated that if Payne and Ammon were removed, the group would fold due to a lack of leadership. Jon Rizheimer is not the type of leadership material to be able to control the group in the event Payne and Ammon were removed.
The current standoff has been planned by Amon and Payne since late November of 2015. They were not aware of the Hammond conflict but planned for the takeover and standoff for the next event that satisfied their agenda. Ammon stated that the ideal number of personnel within the refuge was 75. The group expects the number within the facility to expand to 75 over the weekend of 1/16/2016. There is general talk of taking over a second location north of Burns, Oregon near Grant County or northern Malheur County. No specific plan for a location has been announced, nor has any time frame been provided. Speculation within the refuge was that if they were to take over a second facility that would happen over the weekend.
Ammon further told the group that he planned to hold the standoff until the Spring comes so he can have the group provide security for his transfer of the family cattle into the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) range. Ammon is afraid the BLM will take the cattle if militia security is not present.
There does not appear to be any intention of or attempts to provide disinformation to the members within the compound or the outside world on the part of Payne or Ammon. All of the information appears to be somewhat compartmentalized for dissemination to the members within the refuge.The members of the group had a strong negative reaction to having been denied access to the fairground for an event that had been scheduled for 1/15/2016.The CHS was not aware of any overt cache of weapons, but had not seen all areas of the facility to date. The food pantry is located near the back gate in the fire bunkhouse. That location is also where the majority of the members are sleeping. Payne, Ritzheimer and others are bunking in the building furthest away from the hill. Ammon sleeps in the office.
Meals are served military style at 7:00 am, noon and 7:00 pm. They are cooked by 5-6 women and are typical meals rather than dehydrated or field type rations. There is no shortage of food. Requests for food are routinely dropped off. Donations are being provided by those coming into the facility and from unidentified individuals from the outside. It is unclear how much actual cash is on hand but Ammon seems to control it and have no shortage.
January 15, 2016
The CHS was aware of meeting that took place on the evening of 1/14/2016 at a residence near the refuge. The home was located nearest to the intersection of highways 78 and 205. The meeting was attended by several local ranchers, Bruce Doucette and Jon Ritzheimer. Ryan Payne and Ammon Bundy were not present for the meeting. The local ranchers, Doucette and Ritzheimer spoke to the group. The ranchers expressed anger that the fairground had been denied for their use from their standpoint of being members of Harney County. They felt the issue at hand was being filtered by the media and the government and wanted to get the sides out to the public straight from the sources. The ranchers were encouraged by the militia to cut the locks and access the facility. The second alternative for today’s meeting was to invite all of Harney County onto the refuge for the meeting. The firehouse was being cleaned out for the meeting place on the refuge.
Payne has expressed that he feels the local ranchers are in support of the occupation and the militia because they may have access to a “land grab” if the federal government concedes and gives the land back to the state. He (Payne) believes the ranchers are supportive of the occupation for purely personal gain.
Ammon has requested transport back to his residence near Boise, Idaho. The plan is to depart the Burns area at approximately 12:30 pm local. There are reported to be three vehicles carrying Ammon and others, including 3% members for Ammon’s security. Ammon planned to handle family matters and potentially return to Burns on Sunday or Monday. The travel for Ammon was delayed until approximately 3:30 pm.
At approximately 1:55 pm, the CHS advised that a group was gearing up to go and destroy what they thought was a pole camera outside of the refuge.
That concludes what are probably Ben’s reports, since they both left the Refuge on either Friday, January 15, or Saturday, January 16, 2016. However, they were to return shortly after LaVoy Finicum was murdered on the side of Highway 395.
Bruce Doucette, being concerned for the safety of the “grand jurors”, contacted Marshal Spring and arranged for him to go back to Oregon to provide protection for the “grand jurors”. He gave Spring $5,000.00 cash to cover the expense of that task.
Spring decided to include Darryl Thorn among those he would “protect”. He arranged for Thorn to stay in room 203, at the Super Eight Motel in Redmond, Oregon. Spring paid the motel bill, gave Thorn gift meal cards for a restaurant, and some cash. This kept Thorn away from his home, and in a place much safer for the FBI to make an arrest.
February 10, FBI confirmed with desk clerk that Thorn was, in fact, still staying at the Motel. On February 12, a number of officers entered the hallway on both sides of room 203, knocked on the door, and arrested Darryl Thorn based upon the Superseding Indictment.
That day, February 12, 2016, was a clean sweep for the FBI. Jeff Banta, David Fry, Sean Anderson, Sandy Anderson, Geoffery Stanek, and Darryl Thorn were all arrested and then transported to Portland.
In an interview with Darryl Thorn, only Spring and Ben knew exactly where Thorn was staying. Well, and the FBI.
In an effort to contact Spring, I found that his phone had been “changed, disconnected, or no longer in service”. This is indicative of the expected reaction after Doucette confronted Spring.
Share this:
Like this:
Tags: Bundy, Burns Oregon, cops, courts, demonization, FBI, Harney County, Honor, informants, patriots
Category: Articles | Comment (RSS) | Trackback
2 Comments
Leave a Reply
Name (required)
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Website
Notify me of follow-up comments by email.
Notify me of new posts by email.
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Judge Gloria Navarro cements Magistate Peggy Leen's recommendations by denying two motions
https://bundyranchstandoff.info/nava...commendations/
Navarro Adopts Two Leen Denial Recommendations
Motions to dismiss from Santilli and Payne officially denied…
https://bundyranchstandoff.info/wp-c...ed-300x150.jpgGloria Navarro Adopts Two Leen Denial Recommendations. Defendant Ryan Payne sought dismissal of four 924(c) charges that, as a result, would lessen maximum potential prison sentences. Santilli sought dismissal of the charges against himself on the grounds that his actions in Bunkerville were within the scope of rights under the First Amendment. Navarro adopted both of Leen’s recommendations therefore formally denying both.
Navarro Adopts Two Leen Denial Recommendations
These denials are little more than milestones on a predictable trajectory. The Government opposes every motion brought forth by defendants. Subsequently, the Court, with striking predictability, almost always rules in favor of the Government. The Court does so despite compelling legal arguments and similar decisions in the 9th Circuit and elsewhere.
More denials to come?
ECF No. 710 remains outstanding. In this motion, Payne put forth a motion to dismiss 924(c) charges on the basis that the charges are void for vagueness. Leen’s ruling recommends that the court deny the motion. A minute order filed on the docket requests that the Government submit a brief regarding Count 2 (Conspiracy to Impede or Injure a Federal Officer 18 USC § 372). Likewise, defendants will have time to submit a response brief.
It is unclear what the Court expects the Government to address, other than “the elements of the crime”. Count 2, like three other counts, has a 924(c) enhancement. Unlike the other counts, the District of Oregon dismissed an identical count in the Malheur Occupation Trial. Asking the Government to file a brief related to the elements of the crime may (or may not) indicate that the Court could consider dropping the 924(c) enhancement for Count 2.
To what end?
Since Count 3 is just one of four 924(c) enhancements, the benefit is negligible in a conviction scenario. The Court will (probably) view each 924(c) as a second or subsequent conviction under § 924(c)(1)(C). This means that the first 924(c) would carry a ten year minimum under § 924(c)(1)(B)(i). Each subsequent conviction would rise to 25 years. Therefore, even if Count 3 is dismissed under categorical scrutiny, defendants would face a minimum of 60 years in prison (10 + 25 + 25). This is because a 924(c) sentence applies consecutively to any other sentence. In addition to 924(c) sentences, incarceration for predicate offenses would pile up as well. Hence, effective life sentence.
https://bundyranchstandoff.info/wp-c...4/facebook.pnghttps://bundyranchstandoff.info/wp-c...64/twitter.png
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Tomorrow will be the one year anniversary of the murder of LaVoy Finicum, a sad day for America.
One Quiet Man's Fight for Freedom
by JUSTIN O. SMITHJanuary 25, 2017
"Destroyers are they who lay snares for many, and call it the state ... " -- Nietzsche
Americans should pause and take some time to recall and celebrate the life of Robert LaVoy Finicum, an American patriot, who loved his family, God and country. He placed his life on the line in defense of all Americans' right to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness', joining the ranks of thousands of other ranchers who have been fighting the overreaches of the federal government and the tyranny of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for the past forty years. Robert LaVoy Finicum died on January 26th, 2016, one day before his 55th birthday, defending the U.S. Constitution and this America he loved so well.
By all accounts, LaVoy Finicum was "a quiet man who worked his to-do list from sun-up to sundown" (The Oregonian) and had a "light reading" list that included many history books, the U.S. Constitution and Alexis de Tocqueville's 'Democracy in America'. He also thoroughly enjoyed his big family -his wife and eleven children- and their evening discussions on the Scriptures, the Constitution and the Founding Fathers' ideas on freedom.
Although Finicum had generally viewed his interaction with the BLM to be "very good" over the years, he became active in opposing them in 2014, after the BLM fined him $12,000 and claimed his cattle had grazed on federal lands past his allotted permit time. He was also heavily influenced by his own research into the BLM nd the high-handed tactics he witnessed the BLM employ against the Bundy family in 2014.
Finicum rode with Cliven and Ammon Bundy on their Nevada Ranch in April of 2014, along with hundreds of other supporters, in order to reinforce the fact that Bundy's grazing and water rights, documented in an 1878 title,
predated any BLM claims and had to be honored by the BLM. And when the BLM moved along Interstate 15 to confiscate Bundy's cattle on April 5th, Finicum, the Bundy family members and well-armed supporters stopped them cold where they stood; this would become a sore-point for the FBI that carried over to the Malheur Wildlife Reserve occupation in 2016 and the stand-off near Burns, Oregon.
After the Bundy Ranch Stand-Off, LaVoy Finicum said: "I had to do a lot of soul searching. I realized that Cliven Bundy was standing on a very strong constitutional principle, and yet, here I was continuing to pay a grazing fee to the BLM."
Finicum and the Bundy clan understood that the Enclave Clause [Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution] did not allow government bureaucrats to act like kings and ignore the 9th and 10th Amendments, and it did not authorize the BLM to arbitrarily seize the water rights, cattle and property of ranchers and arrogantly nullify 200 years of constitutional history. They understood, much like the U.S. Supreme Court (New York v. U.S.), that the Constitution is not a tool to protect the sovereignty of the State or for the benefit of government officials, but rather, the Constitution secures all Americans' liberties through the diffusion of sovereign power.
However, the BLM sees things differently. Many cases spanning the years can be found, that are similar to Raymond Yowell's experience. The BLM garnished the $200 Social Security check of this former chief of the Shoshone Indian Tribe and seized 132 head of his cattle in 2002, for grazing "unlawfully" on government lands. The BLM sold Yowell's cattle at auction and pocketed the money.
Between 2006 and 2012, the BLM had intimidated and finally charged Steven and Dwight Hammond with nine federal counts of arson for setting backfires on their own lands that supposedly spread to federal land. The Hammonds were subsequently imprisoned, released and then sent back to prison, even though the facts illuminated that some of those out-of-control backfires actually originated with BLM employees, in an attempt to stop several lightning strike fires such as the Granddad fire that burned 46,000 acres.
Politics played heavily in the cases regarding Steven and Dwight Hammond, because the BLM wanted the Hammond ranch. Gold mining companies like Calico Resource USA out of Vancouver, Canada and uranium mining concerns like Australian owned Oregon Energy LLC had their eyes on the area, and the BLM was hoping to profit and grow more powerful through the General Mining Law of 1872.
All the great ideas and principles that shaped America went with LaVoy Finicum, as he and many other American Patriots occupied Oregon's Malheur [French for "misfortune" or "tragedy"] National Wildlife Refuge, about 30 miles from Burns, Oregon, in order to force the return of 188,000 acres to local control and the release of the Hammond brothers from prison. They acted through peaceful, political protest, even though they were armed to ensure the security of their protest, and they advocated for property and states' rights, as they took a hard stand against federal ownership of 250 million acres in America and years of oppression by the BLM and several other government agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency.
Twenty-five days into the protest, Robert LaVoy Finicum, Ammon and Ryan Bundy, Shawna Cox, Ryan Payne and Virginia Sharp headed to John Day, Oregon for a "singing" and a meeting with Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer to discuss their demands, explain their views to local people and seek a peaceful end to the stand-off. But they were ambushed along the way by the Oregon State Patrol and the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team, which used combat-grade operation protocols rather than "civilian" deadly force standards, firing once without warning at the initial stop, according to many witnesses, and numerous times at the second roadblock using concussion and live rounds.
Does this remind anyone else of Ruby Ridge and the murders of Randy Weaver's wife and son by the FBI?
If the federal authorities had been serious about desiring a peaceful resolution to this conflict, they could have coordinated with Sheriff Palmer to arrest Finicum, if just cause existed for an arrest [they knew Finicum's destination]. Instead they chose to shoot him numerous times and refuse him medical attention from Virginia Sharp, a trained EMT and his friend, as he lay on the snowy ground dying. They murdered LaVoy on a lonely, desolate stretch of Highway 395.
If the FBI had negotiated LaVoy Finicum's peaceful surrender, as they certainly could have, he would simply have been taken into custody and released after his acquittal by a jury, just in the same manner that a jury acquitted his so-called "co-conspirators" in October 2016, including Ammon Bundy and a friend and activist, Shawna Cox. And, it should alarm everyone that the HRT agents initially concealed the fact they had fired their weapons during the stop.
Upon her release, Shawna Cox made a plea before a mass of TV cameras and supporters, imploring: "We have to be vigilant people. Wake up America, and help us restore the Constitution. Don't sleep with your head in the sand.
Isn't it odd that FBI agents , who are sworn to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution -- lawyers all -- regularly side with government imposed tyranny against U.S. citizens?
Arianna Finicum Brown, LaVoy's 27 year old daughter, stated shortly after his death: "My Dad was such a good man, through and through. He would never want to hurt somebody, but he does believe in defending freedom and he knew the risks involved.
During LaVoy's funeral, his brother, Guy Finicum remarked on LaVoy's deep faith in God, adding: "He has absolute confidence that he will be with his family again. He believes that as much as he believes the sun will rise. And that's what gave him the ability to do what he did. He always looked at a higher goal."
When any government, including ours, puts forth its strength on the side of injustice and murders fine men like LaVoy Finicum, it reveals itself as a mere brute force, and it becomes apparent more than ever that tyranny rules. And other patriots are served warning to desist their opposition or meet the same fate.
And what are Americans to think of a government to which all the truly brave and just men in the land are enemies, standing between it and those whom it oppresses?
Robert LaVoy Finicum did not recognize unjust human laws, and he persistently stood for the dignity of human nature, knowing himself for a man, the equal of any government. He regularly fought against established injustices and the hypocrites of bureaucracies who seemed to ask, "Why do you assault us". And LaVoy's death -- the death of an American hero -- was like the planting of a good seed, and it is giving rise to a new crop of American heroes.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org...nsmithc150.jpg
Justin O. Smith has lived in Tennessee off and on most of his adult life. He graduated from Middle Tennessee State University in 1980, with a B.S. and a double major in International Relations and Cultural Geography - minors in Military Science and English, for what its worth. His real education started from that point on. Smith worked 8 years for the LaVergne Fire Dept - two years as their clean-up boy - and became a working fireman at age 16, working his way through college and subsequently joining the U.S. Army. Since then he primarily has contracted construction and traveled - spending quite a bit of time up and down the Columbia River Gorge, in the Puget Sound on Whidby Island and down around Ft. Lauderdale and South Beach. Justin currently writes a weekly column for The Rutherford Reader in Murfreesboro, TN, which he calls home, and he spends as much time as possible with his two beautiful and intelligent daughters and five grandchildren. He also Loves God, Family and Our Magestic and Wonderful America, and considers himself to be a Son of Liberty.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/img/icon09.gif
Read more: Family Security Matters http://www.familysecuritymatters.org...#ixzz4Wp2Vr0QF
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
The Oregonian youtube video LaVoy Finicum's Role During the Oregon Standoff, Highlights published January 25, 2017
http://youtu.be/wX7K8_qR8Sw
https://youtu.be/wX7K8_qR8Sw
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Will this change Judge Anna Brown's choice to allow the stacking of misdemeanor charges onto the previous indictment?
Based on what Dr. Trowbridge exposed about oath US District Court judges now take since 1991 she doesn't have to obey the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. You are a 14th amendment US Citizen with civil rights in her court, subject to the laws of Congress and do not have a right to trial by jury on misdemeanor charges unless mandadted by federal statutes.
She will ignore this just like she ignored Ammon Bundy's motion for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the Malheur Headquarters were previously private property and jurisdiction was never ceded to the federal government.
But forcing the arguments to preserve the appelate rights is a valid and important point.
https://scontent.fbog2-2.fna.fbcdn.n...91&oe=59005C1D
Robin W. Tong shared a link.
10 hrs
Everyone Please Forward the following case information to the several defendants and defense attorneys so that they are aware of the fact that the Supreme Court of the United States has a Double Jeopardy case before it, so that the Burns / Malhuer Wildlife Defendants may force these same arguments at trial and preserve their appellate rights to have any Bench Trial misdemeanor convictions overturned upon appeal. Judge Brown's and the U.S. Attorney's malicious error, malfeasance, and malicious prosecution attempting to secure a conviction by any means is a violation of defendant's rights to a TRIAL BY JURY and in violation of DOUBLE JEOPARDY:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~
Note: These are the legal arguments laid forth in WRIT OF CERTIORARI in the case of WALKER V. TEXAS presently pending before the Supreme Court asking the Court to strike down the "Sovereign Exception" to the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Constitution.
In presenting arguments for the exception to be stricken, Mr. Walker's legal counsel underwent great pains in reviewing the common law and constitutional law meaning of Double Jeopardy as the Founders of our Constitution understood and intended it. These same arguments offer a brilliant illustration as to why Judge Brown's mandating of a misdemeanor bench trial at the conclusion of a felony jury trial is nothing but a ruse and a violation of DOUBLE JEOPARDY intending to ensure the conviction of defendants by any means. Our Founders intent with the Double Jeopardy Clause was that the federal government had no authority whatsoever to twice try a defendant based on substantially the same act(s), transaction(s), or transgression(s).
Essentially, per the Double Jeopardy Clause, regardless of the outcome of the Jury Trial its Verdict should BAR AND PROHIBIT any further prosecution at Bench Trial facing misdemeanor charges for essentially the same act(s), transaction(s), or transgression(s). To do so would be the infliction of Double Jeopardy to secure a conviction or double conviction despite the outcome of the Jury's verdict, and to have done so to ensure the conviction gave legitimacy to the government's malicious prosecution.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~
Excerpts of common law and case law, as argued in the WRIT OF CERTIORARI in the case of WALKER V. TEXAS presently pending before the Supreme Court asking it to strike down violations of Double Jeopardy:
The Double Jeopardy Clause “protect[s] an individual from being subjected to the hazards of trial and possible conviction more than once for an alleged offense.” Green v. United States, 355 U.S. 184, 187 (1957); see also Ex parte Lange, 85 U.S. (18 Wall.) 163, 169 (1874). This rule against forcing a defendant to “‘run the gauntlet’ a second time,” Abney v. United 10 States, 431 U.S. 651, 662 (1977), “represents a constitutional policy of finality for the defendant’s benefit,” United States v. Jorn, 400 U.S. 470, 479 (1971) (plurality opinion). “The underlying idea, one that is deeply ingrained in at least the AngloAmerican system of jurisprudence, is that the State with all its resources and power should not be allowed to make repeated attempts to convict an individual for an alleged offense, thereby subjecting him to embarrassment, expense and ordeal and compelling him to live in a continuing state of anxiety and insecurity.”
Green, 355 U.S. at 187-88.
...
The Double Jeporday Clause was specifically designed to prohibit successive prosecutions “so far as the common law gave that protection.” Ex parte Lange, 85 U.S. (18 Wall.) at 170; see also 3 Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution § 1781 (1833) (recognizing the Double Jeopardy Clause codifies the common law right); 1 Annals of Congress 781-82 (Aug. 17, 1789) (relating that, in the debates during the First Congress over the Bill of Rights, representatives appealed to the “universal practice in Great Britain” and sought to ensure that the Double Jeopardy Clause would be “declaratory of the law as it [then] stood”).
...
Authoritative common law treatises recognized “the universal maxim of the common law of England, that no man is to be brought into jeopardy of his life, more than once, for the same offence.” 4 William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England *335-36 (1768); see also 2 William Hawkins, A Treatise of the Pleas of the Crown 515, 526 (John Curwood ed., 8th ed. 1824). And this protection against double jeopardy was triggered by a prior prosecution “in any court whatsoever.” 2 Hawkins, Pleas of the Crown 522 (emphasis added); accord 4 Blackstone, Commentaries *335.
...
In Blockburger, the Court explained that two provisions constitute the same “offence” for double jeopardy purposes when neither “requires proof of a fact which the other does not.” Id. at 304. Put another way, the “violation of two distinct statutory provisions” can still constitute one “offence” under the Double Jeopardy Clause. Id. Blockburger’s element-by-element approach to defining “offence”—rarely pertinent when criminal codes were thinner than today, but a vital precept of double jeopardy law now—cannot be squared with Bartkus’s crabbed construction of the term as a mere “transgression of a law.” There would be no need to conduct Blockburger’s element-by-element analysis if each violation of a distinct statute were, by definition, a separate “offence.”
...
And more recently, this Court has insisted that where the Constitution codified a common law criminal procedure guarantee, the Court must preserve the level of protection “that existed when [the guarantee] was adopted.” Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 34 (2001) (Fourth Amendment); see also, e.g., Giles v. California, 554 U.S. 353, 375 (2008) (plurality opinion) (Sixth Amendment); Carmell v. Texas, 529 U.S. 513, 521-42 (2000) (Ex Post Facto Clause).
...
Federal criminal laws now reach many matters traditionally addressed only by the states, touching everything from odometer tampering to carjacking to garden-variety drug crimes. See 49 U.S.C. § 32704; 18 U.S.C. § 2119; 21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.; see also Yates v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 1074, 1100-01 (2015) (Kagan, J., dissenting) (noting that all Justices agree there is a modern “pathology” towards overcriminalization and excessive punishment in the U.S. Code”).
...
A second prosecution forces the accused to endure double the anxiety; double the expense of defending himself; and double the disruption to his family and professional life. See Green, 355 U.S. at 187. And when the defendant is in fact innocent, the second prosecution enhances “the possibility that [he nonetheless] may be found guilty.” Id. at 188. The record from the first prosecution gives the government a window into the defense strategy and allows its own witnesses to be “better prepared for the rigors of cross-examination” during the second trial. Crist v. Bretz, 437 U.S. 28, 52 (1978) (Powell, J., dissenting). Where an initial trial resulted in a conviction, the Double Jeopardy Clause is likewise thwarted when the defendant is forced to stand trial and endure punishment a second time.
...
... the mere threat of double prosecution forces multitudes who have already endured one prosecution to “live in a continuing state of anxiety and insecurity.” Green, 355 U.S. at 187.
...
... the U.S. Department of Justice formulated an internal policy—later termed the Petite Policy—“to limit the exercise of the power to bring successive prosecutions for the same offense.” Rinaldi v. United States, 434 U.S. 22, 28-29 (1977) (per curiam). The Policy establishes certain criteria that must be met before a U.S. Attorney may initiate a prosecution “following a prior state . . . prosecution based on substantially the same act(s),” and it requires that any such prosecution “be approved by the appropriate Assistant Attorney General.” U.S. Dep’t of Justice, U.S. Attorneys’ Manual § 9-2.031 (2009).
...
More fundamentally, the Court has recently stressed that the guarantees enshrined in the Bill of Rights should not depend on the exercise of prosecutorial self-restraint. See, e.g., United States v. Stevens, 559 U.S. 460, 480 (2010) (“We would not uphold an unconstitutional statute merely because the Government promised to use it responsibly.”). This Court should not entrust the protection of the Double Jeopardy Clause—any more than any other constitutional right— to “the mercy of noblesse oblige.” Id. “[T]he Founders did not fight a revolution to gain the right to government agency protocols.” Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473, 2491 (2014).
Ref: http://www.scotusblog.com/…/2016/11/16-636-cert-petition.pdf
P.S. Here is the tracking sheet for all the Brief's filed with SCOTUS on this pending case regarding arguments over Double Jeopardy (and the issue of Sovereign Exception which has no application to the Burns / Malhuer cases.)
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/walker-v-texas/
Best Wishes
20 Likes5 Comments14 Shares
LikeCommentShare
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
LaVoy Finicum 01/27/1961 - 01/26/2016
http://youtu.be/Gr1P4lnQeeU
For a Year We have Missed this Man
Challice Lee Finicum Finch 67 views
SUBSCRIBE
145
10
0
Published on Jan 26, 2017 You might know him as many thing, but we knew him as daddy.
Music rights and everything are Tim McGraw's. I do not own it.
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
The Cowboy Who Loved Too Much by Amy J. Farley
https://www.facebook.com/groups/2373...&__tn__=%2C%3B
The Cowboy Who Loved Too Much
By Amy J. Farley
There once was a cowboy who loved too much
He raised his children in the Lord's loving touch
But his heart not full, his bounds uncontained
Raised hurt boys others wouldn't claim
His life was good yet his heart still wasn't full
So he adopted us all, and in Oregon he stood
He taught us to be free and to stand up to wrong
To take up for the weak and be the one strong
His voice was soft, gentle and kind
Every word was true, is what we would find
So making a stand with more cowboys in tow
For the People's Rights he wanted to show
But some folks didn't like this soft-spoken rebel
"He wants to change things!" And they began to meddle
And so, as the Cowboy rode to save the day
Those bad folks had found a way
To silence the gentle cowboy they hated to their soul
"Kill him!", they whispered so no one would know
As he rode to town they planned their attack
They shot him three times, all in the back
The corrupt cheered for they had silenced the man
With a quick smile and a hat in his hand
Oh, but no! You've only fueled our fire
For now we know who are the liars
The Cowboy's heart is finally full
As he nestles deep in the Lamb's wool
And we shall struggle to prove to them all
What the truth is and how to stand tall
"And now abideth faith, hope, *charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity." I Corinthians 13:13
*Love*
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Kelli Stewart say she just herard court for tomorrow turned into an emergency meeting today,
Kelli Stewart
1 hr ·
I just found out the court hearing for tomorrow turned into an emergency meeting that was held today instead...if I'm understanding correctly, there will not be any court tomorrow now in Portland. It sounds like this was regarding the new charges and the right to a jury trial. If anyone has updates please let me know and I'll share them so people don't show up tomorrow expecting court. All I've heard so far is that a 13 page rebuttal from the defense was submitted and the prosecution was playing very dirty.
thanks! Sandy Anderson III Lindsay Brewster Szymanski John Lamb Sage Templar Ehmer Roxsanna Ryan
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Jeannette Finicum's wrongful deat lawsuit will claim excessive force and improper police procedures
https://www.itmattershowyoustand.com...it-will-claim/
Excessive force, improper police procedures led to LaVoy Finicum’s death, lawsuit will claim
Posted on January 26, 2017 by Doug Knowles
A federal civil rights lawsuit in the death of Robert "LaVoy" Finicum will allege that Oregon State Police and the FBI used excessive force in a confrontation that could have ended peacefully, the Finicum family's lawyer says.The family also will contend that improper police procedures and lack of communication between state police and FBI agents at the scene contributed to Finicum's shooting death, said attorney Brian Claypool.
The Jan. 26, 2016 police stop of Finicum, 54, a leader of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge occupation, was an "unnecessary escalation,'' Claypool said.
https://i0.wp.com/i.ytimg.com/vi/kma...=2&w=720&ssl=1
Robert 'LaVoy' Finicum's widow returns to Oregon a year after he was shot
Jeanette Finicum plans to hold a community meeting in John Day, the town her husband was going to speak at when he was killed. His family wants to share LaVoy's concerns about mismanagement of public lands by the federal government
Finicum, a rancher from Canes Bed, Arizona, raced away from a police stop on U.S. 395 as he was on his way to a community meeting in John Day. He crashed into the side of a snowbank to avoid a police roadblock.
The suit will allege that the FBI fired at Finicum "when he's getting out of his car to surrender," Claypool said. "What's critical is he's not even out of his door and there are gunshots blowing through his windows. That's excessive force 101.''
Slow-motion video of gunshot FBI allegedly lied about in LaVoy Finicum confrontation
The FBI shots didn't strike Finicum. Two state troopers moments later fired shots at Finicum as police said he reached at least twice into the inside of his jacket to grab for his loaded handgun. He died from three shots to the back.
The attorney must send one more notice - to the FBI -- before the wrongful death suit can be filed in federal court, he said. He expects to do so by Friday or early next week. He already has filed a notice of the family's intent to sue with state police. Once the FBI notice is denied as anticipated, the family can move forward with the suit, he said.
The lawsuit will likely ask for about $5 million in damages for Finicum's widow and each of their 12 children, Claypool said.
Oregon authorities found the state police shooting justified. The FBI's shots and alleged coverup remain under investigation.
"Mr. Finicum repeatedly and knowingly made choices that put him in this situation," said Harney County District Attorney Tim Colahan last March. "It was not the outcome that any of us wanted but one he, alone, is responsible for."
-- Maxine Bernstein
mbernstein@oregonian.com
503-221-8212
@maxoregonian
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Anniversary of a Patriot's Murder - call it what it is
http://libertynewsdaily.com/blog-348...y-of-a-patriot
Anniversary of a Patriot’s Passing
Jan 26, 2017
January 26 marks the anniversary of the shooting death of Utah rancher Robert LaVoy Finicum, who was killed by operators from the FBI’s Hostage Rescue Team and Oregon State Police troopers in an ambush on Oregon’s Highway 395. A member of an activist group called Citizens for Constitutional Freedom, Finicum had participated in the month-long protest occupation of Oregon’s Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Harney County. At the time of the ambush, he was part of a convoy of vehicles ferrying activists to John Day, the seat of Grant County. They planned to meet with Sheriff Grant Palmer and conduct a town hall meeting.
If the objective had been to arrange the peaceful arrest of Finicum – along with Ammon and Aaron Bundy and their colleagues – Sheriff Palmer should have been informed, and tasked to take them into custody. However, Oregon’s ultra-liberal Governor Kate Brown and the FBI deliberately withheld that information from Sheriff Palmer, whom they regarded as a “security risk” because of his critical posture toward federal overreach within his jurisdiction.
After Finicum refused to stop at a checkpoint, his vehicle was illegally fired upon by FBI snipers as it approached a second barrier. At least one shot was fired at him as he emerged from the vehicle, and he was gunned down in a cross-fire seconds later. His killers claim that he was reaching for a handgun.
An investigation by former Malheur County DA Dan Norris ruled that the shooting by Oregon State Police officers was justified – but he pointedly did not clear the FBI’s HRT operators of wrongdoing.
Copyright 2017 - Liberty News Daily
http://libertynewsdaily.com/content/...icons/twit.svghttp://libertynewsdaily.com/content/media/icons/fb.svg
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Cope Reynold's tribute to LaVoy Finicum
https://www.facebook.com/Desertscout...08659762038135
Cope Reynolds
4 hrs ·
Well, it's still 26 January 2017 where I am and I feel the need to get a statement out on this, the first anniversary of LaVoy Finicum's murder.
LaVoy was one of the very finest men I have ever known. "Finest" meaning he was compassionate, spiritual, fair, firm, articulate, patient, loving and fiercely patriotic.
I believe with all my heart that LaVoy has educated more people in the ways of the Constitution and caused more patriots to sit back take a hard look at their individual attitudes and activities than probably any other one man. LaVoy Finicum's name was and is probably as well known in the patriot community across the country and, in fact, around the world as George Washington's.
LaVoy did his best to emulate Christ in everything he did and it showed. He had that glow about him that is only present on exceedingly righteous and spiritual people. LaVoy was loved by everyone that knew him and is now loved by many thousands of people that have never even met him. LaVoy's teachings, personality and attitude manifest themselves in his amazing wife and family. Watching this family should make most all of us sit back and reflect on our relationships with our own families. I know it sure has had that effect on me.
Comparatively speaking, I didn't really know LaVoy that long but I was incredibly fortunate to be able spend quite a bit time in his home with him and his family and a good bit of one-on-one time with him both at my home and his and out at his ranch.
All that being said, I also have to tell you that LaVoy had his faults. He was guilty of sharing his unrivaled knowledge of the Constitution and all that goes along with it. Particularly on land rights. He was caught red-handed spending countless hours educating all that would listen to him. Be assured that many, many people listened to LaVoy. For that, my friend and brother was sentenced to death.
LaVoy was executed because he was capturing people's hearts and minds. He was making multitudes of people aware of their rights. Enlightening them about the uncontrolled overreach of certain federal agencies. The powers that be could not and would not tolerate that. LaVoy Finicum HAD to be stopped! An illegal, inescapable road block was implemented on a lonely stretch of remote highway and LaVoy, while drawing fire away from other innocents in his vehicle, was shot in the back three times by cowards. Murdered by those that have sworn to "protect and serve". Shot down in cold blood with his hands in the air in surrender.
And so the teachings of LaVoy Finicum came to an abrupt halt on a cold, snowy morning in Oregon with LaVoy face down in the snow. Or did they?
No, not even close! In fact it was just the opposite. The message of liberty and truth spread like wildfire across the fruited plains. LaVoy's name became a household word from border to border and coast to coast. They should have left him alone. The people of these united States, we the people, are on fire now. LaVoy got just what he wanted.
Few men have ever had more to live for than LaVoy Finicum. A lovely, caring wife, beautiful family and a small ranch in northern Arizona. What more could a man ask for? But a rogue, power-hungry, out of control government agency would have none of it. It all began when LaVoy rode with the Bundys then it escalated when the BLM started taking his water and trying to push him off his ranch. They awakened a sleeping giant. They pushed LaVoy into making hard decisions that would affect every aspect of his life and ultimately bring it to an end.
Be assured that myself and many, many, many others like me will NEVER forget and never forgive what was done to my dear friend, my brother in arms and my brother in Christ and his family. I loved LaVoy like a blood brother and love his family as my own.
This is not the final chapter. The people will continue LaVoy's fight and continue to spread his message.
They should have just left him alone.
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Anna J. Brown rules lesser charges won't be heard by a jury
Quote:
"The Court notes Congress explicitly intended the trial of petty offenses to be tried to the court, and expressly permitted magistrate judges to conduct such trials in order to facilitate their efficient resolution without the process associated with a jury trial,” Brown wrote in her ruling.
Here it is Folks, Per Dr. Trowbridge, her oath is to Congress and its statutes, not to the Constitution.
http://www.opb.org/news/series/burns...emeanor-judge/
News | Local | Nation | An Occupation In Eastern Oregon
In Blow To Prosecutors, Judge Rules Jury Won't Hear Lesser Charges In 2nd Malheur Trial
by Conrad Wilson Follow OPB | Jan. 26, 2017 5:22 p.m. | Portland
U.S. District Court Judge Anna Brown ruled Thursday the misdemeanor charges defendants face in the second Malheur National Wildlife Refuge trial won’t be heard by the jury, but rather in a separate trial before a judge.
“The Court notes Congress explicitly intended the trial of petty offenses to be tried to the court, and expressly permitted magistrate judges to conduct such trials in order to facilitate their efficient resolution without the process associated with a jury trial,” Brown wrote in her ruling.
The ruling is a blow to prosecutors who will effectively litigate the same case using the same felony charges on which they lost last fall, when a jury acquitted Ammon Bundy and six others.
Prosecutors announced in December they were not only moving forward with a second trial slated for February, but they would add misdemeanor charges, such as trespassing and destruction of property. Prosecutors wanted to give the jury more charges to consider as they weigh the evidence and try and prevent a repeat of last fall’s stunning acquittal.
In addition to the misdemeanors, the seven remaining defendants are facing the original felony charges: conspiracy to impede federal employees from doing their jobs at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Some of the defendants have also been charged with carrying a weapon in a federal facility.
http://www.opb.org/images/upload/c_f...-14_ueiexf.jpg
US Attorney Billy Williams: Occupation Verdict 'Disappointing, Bitterly So.'
“In light of the fact that 18 citizen jurors will already be devoting an extraordinary amount of time to their jury service, the Court finds adding unnecessary duties to their service is not warranted,” Brown wrote in her order.
She said she plans to oversee the misdemeanor trial at the same time as the felony trial.
In a separate ruling Thursday, Brown said she would not be allowing evidence concerning the acquittals to be presented at the second trial.
“Admitting evidence related to the verdicts following the September 7, 2016, trial would be confusing and necessarily would require the jury to consider (and likely to guess) which evidence or aspect of the government’s case the jury in the prior trial found insufficient,” Brown wrote.
While evidence about the acquittals is now unlikely to come up at trial, Brown did rule last week that Ammon Bundy would be allowed to testify on behalf of the defense at the second trial.
Bundy is currently being held at a federal detention center in Nevada as he awaits a trial there for his role in the 2014 armed standoff near his father Cliven Bundy’s ranch.
The occupation of the Malheur refuge near Burns lasted 41 days. Jury selection in the second trial is scheduled to begin Feb. 14.
Subscribe To 'This Land Is Our Land'
Subscribe to “This Land Is Our Land” on NPR One, iTunes or wherever you find your podcasts. Find comprehensive trial coverage at OPB.org/ThisLand.
Share your thoughts on the trial with us on Facebook and Twitter, or by emailing us directly at thisland@opb.org.
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Robert LaVoy Finicum's widow returns to Oregon a year after he was shot.
Maxine Bernstein article with her left wing spin
https://www.itmattershowyoustand.com...r-he-was-shot/
Robert ‘LaVoy’ Finicum’s widow returns to Oregon a year after he was shot
Posted on January 26, 2017 by Doug Knowles
http://youtu.be/kmaJkt-pyqc
By Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive
A year ago, Jeanette Finicum was watching her daughter's basketball game at Fredonia High School when she overheard something about a shooting in Oregon.
She had just returned to Arizona from a weekend visit with her husband at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, where Robert "LaVoy" Finicum had become the spokesman for the armed takeover.
She grabbed her cellphone, dialed her husband's number but didn't get an answer. A short time later, she got a call from Lisa Bundy, the wife of refuge occupation leader Ammon Bundy.
"She told me LaVoy had been killed,'' Jeanette Finicum recalled this week. "It was horrific. They stopped the game. His mother and father and brother, my daughter were all there.''
The family left the gym and gathered in a school hallway. Local officers at the game to watch their own daughters play accompanied the Finicums to the police station to try to learn what had happened.
Oregon State Police had shot and killed LaVoy Finicum, 54, after he sped away from a police stop on snow-covered U.S. 395 about 20 miles north of Burns as he and others left the refuge on Jan. 26, 2016.
Jeanette Finicum has returned to Oregon this week to gather supporters in John Day - the city where her husband was headed to speak at a town hall about the refuge seizure and the protest against federal control of public land when he died.
Saturday's meeting comes as questions remain a year later about the FBI's role in the confrontation. Jeanette Finicum said she intends to file a wrongful death lawsuit. In a notice of her intention to sue the Oregon State Police, FBI and other law enforcement agencies, she alleges negligence and violation of her husband's civil rights.
"I don't know if they'll hold anyone accountable unless we pursue that,'' she said.
http://youtu.be/Qwo1MEYfUsc
That day, LaVoy Finicum swerved into a snowbank to avoid a police roadblock. He emerged from his white truck, stumbled on top of the snowbank and was shot three times in the back as investigators said he tried to reach into his jacket at least two times to grab a loaded 9mm pistol.
The fatal shooting of Finicum and arrest of Ammon Bundy and other key occupation figures marked the beginning of the end of the refuge seizure.
Officers fired eight gunshots that night. The district attorney in neighboring Malheur County, charged with overseeing the investigation, found that state police fired six times, including three shots that struck Finicum. He ruled the state police shooting was justified.
https://i1.wp.com/media.oregonlive.c...g?zoom=2&w=720
Excessive force, improper police procedures led to LaVoy Finicum's death, lawsuit will claim
The Finicum family attorney, Brian Claypool, plans to send a notice of the claim to the FBI by Friday or early next week. Once the FBI notice is denied as anticipated, the family can file the lawsuit in federal court.
A federal investigation continues into two shots fired by an FBI agent the moment Finicum emerged from his truck - one hit the roof of the truck and one went astray. Oregon investigators believe that members of the FBI Hostage Rescue Team at the scene picked up shell casings to hide the shots and have lied about what happened, according to court records, investigative reports and law enforcement sources.
A federal grand jury has convened as part of the federal inquiry. Part of the challenge has been determining which of the FBI agents fired the shots.
Oregon investigators continue to interview members of the Hostage Rescue Team and potential witnesses, according to the Deschutes County Sheriff. The U.S. Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General, along with the U.S. Attorney's Office, are leading the inquiry.
http://youtu.be/_CN90dAbC5Y
Jeanette Finicum said the John Day gathering will serve to honor her husband. She'll introduce her children, she said, but added, "This isn't about us, the Finicum family. This is about our liberties that are being lost in lots of different ways.''
Among the speakers are one of Ammon Bundy's lawyers, J. Morgan Philpot, who's now representing Jeanette Finicum in a dispute over grazing fees with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Also invited is KrisAnne Hall, a radio talk show host and prominent Tea Party figure, and Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer, but it's not clear if Palmer will show.
Grant County logger Tad Houpt, who met Jeanette Finicum last year at the makeshift memorial that sprung up at the site where her husband was killed, rented out the pavilion at the John Day Fairgrounds for the gathering.
Houpt owns about 400 acres near Canyon City, just south of John Day. He said he's still cleaning up from the 2015 Canyon Creek Fire that destroyed two of his homes and decimated much of his timber.
He visited the refuge during last winter's occupation to find out for himself what was going on and invited Ammon Bundy, his brother, Ryan Bundy, and others to John Day for the community meeting.
Houpt said he's angry over what he calls government's mismanagement of forestlands that he believes helped fuel the Canyon Creek Fire. He also was disturbed by the return to federal prison of Harney County ranchers Dwight Hammond Jr. and his son, Steven Hammond, last year to serve out five-year mandatory minimum sentences for setting fire to public land.
"The federal government is a very poor neighbor in eastern Oregon,'' Houpt said.
About 450 tickets have been sold for Saturday's event. The Pavilion has a 999-person capacity, Fairgrounds Manager Mindy Winegar said. Grant County Judge Scott W. Myers signed off on the rental.
"We have no intention of interfering with someone's right to assemble and their right to free speech,'' Myers said.
Jeanette Finicum testified for the defense at last year's trial of the Bundy brothers and five others - all acquitted on federal conspiracy charges in the occupation.
She maintains her husband "wasn't trying to avoid authorities" when he fled in his truck on Jan. 26, 2016, but simply wanted to make it to John Day to see Grant County's sheriff.
She said she's thankful for the support her family has received in the past year.
"I hope people are inspired in their own ways to move forward the cause of liberty in a positive, respectful peaceful manner,'' she said.
-- Maxine Bernstein
mbernstein@oregonian.com
503-221-8212
@maxoregonian
source
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
-
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Judge Anna Brown denies Darryl Thorn motion to suppress his statements to FBI Agents - - Don't talk to cops.
https://www.itmattershowyoustand.com...super-8-motel/
FBI agent testifies about arrest of Oregon standoff defendant Darryl Thorn at Redmond Super 8 Motel
Posted on January 27, 2017 by Doug Knowles
https://i1.wp.com/www.itmattershowyo...20%2C479&ssl=1
By Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive
Oregon standoff defendant Darryl Thorn, arrested by a team of FBI SWAT officers in the breakfast bar of a Redmond Super 8 Motel, claimed the agents used excessive force by slapping the coffee cup out of his hand and taking him to the ground.Thorn also wanted a judge to suppress statements he made to agents on the drive to their Bend office.
During the ride, Thorn said he could have fought off the agents with his training from Russian special forces if he hadn't been outnumbered, FBI agents noted in their reports.
On Friday, FBI Special Agent Troy Nicoll testified about the arrest.
Nicoll was riding in an FBI surveillance van that pulled up to the front of the motel when the agents got word Thorn was in the lobby about 9:05 a.m. on Feb. 11, the day that the final four holdouts at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge surrendered to authorities after a 41-day occupation.
"Darryl?'' Nicoll asked as he approached Thorn in the continental breakfast area. Five other agents entered the lobby as well.
Thorn looked at Nicoll. "FBI, you're under arrest,'' Nicoll told him.
Thorn turned around holding a cup of coffee in his right hand.
Nicoll grabbed Thorn's left arm while FBI agent Jason Newport slapped the coffee cup out of Thorn's hand for "officer safety,'' Nicoll testified.
Asked by federal prosecutor Geoffrey Barrow why, Nicoll explained that coffee is a hot drink and could be thrown in the agents' direction.
"Like into my face,'' blurted Thorn, who was listening to the hearing by phone from Washington state.
Thorn was scheduled to fly to Portland for the hearing but missed a ride to the airport, his lawyer, Marc Friedman, told the judge.
At the motel, the agents tried to gain control of Thorns arms, but he reached toward his waistband, Nicoll testified. They took Thorn to the ground. One agent put a knee into his back to handcuff his hands behind his back.
Agents searched Thorn and found no weapon.
They raised Thorn to his feet, and he was bleeding from a 1-inch cut to his left eyebrow. Friedman presented FBI photos of the injury to the court.
Nicoll testified that he was surprised to see the injury but suspected it occurred when the agents took Thorn to the floor.
Thorn was placed against a wall and claimed his arrest was illegal and that the FBI "only had jurisdiction within ten square miles of Washington, D.C,'' according to FBI agent Daniel Baringer's report.
During the approximately 15-minute ride in a six-passenger van to the FBI Bend office, Thorn told agents there are thousands of members of his movement who are educated to rise up and replace each other, according to the agents' reports.
"You guys are going to have your hands full,'' the FBI reports quoted Thorn saying.
Thorn made some remark about "an eye for any eye'' and claimed the agents "took one of ours.'' Thorn said he was trained by a member of the Russian Spetsnaz and could have fought them off if it hadn't been six against one, the FBI said.
FBI agents had medical workers respond to their Bend office, but Thorn declined any treatment for his injury, Nicoll said.
Thorn, who is out of custody on pretrial release and living in the Spokane area, is one of seven defendants set for trial next month. He's pleaded not guilty to the felony charges of conspiracy to impede federal employees at the wildlife refuge in eastern Oregon through intimidation, threats or force, and possession of a firearm in a federal facility.
He's also pleaded not guilty to misdemeanor charges of trespass and two counts of tampering with vehicles and equipment at the refuge, including a government front-end loader and an all-terrain vehicle.
Thorn's lawyer argued that the agents' actions were excessive and intended to "incite a reaction'' from his client, and that's exactly what they achieved.
Barrow countered that agents acted appropriately. Thorn was defiant from the start, questioning the agents' authority and reached with his hands toward his waistband, Barrow said.
U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown agreed with the government, finding no facts to support Thorn's position and denied his motion to suppress his statements.
She noted that even during Friday's court proceeding, Thorn "is one to speak up'' without any prodding.
-- Maxine Bernstein
mbernstein@oregonian.com
503-221-8212
@maxoregonian
source
Share this:
