Due process. Whats due process to federal overlords hell-bent on driving a ranching family into the ground. I was standing ion my mother's home office when she began sobbing asking me to come to the computer and look. She showed me Ammon and Ryan Bundy's aunt who we learned later just survived cancer being tossed to the ground by a man in a tan uniform, others with German Shephards. In America. When we learned what was going on my mother looked up at me with tyears in her eyes and said... shall I book you a ticket son? She knew me well.
The first thing I did when I got there was hand Clive the phone so she could say hello. He thanked her for sending me and I remember hearing her say, oh no, thank you for standing up for all of our rights. If we don't use em we will lose em. As for my son, wild horses couldn't keep him away.
I posted it on YouTube. They destroyed it. And my only copy of it as I was in the desert with limited computer storage. I trusted if I followed their guidelines I would be fine. They should be held accountable for that. Destroyed my memory. And of my now deceased mother during a historical moment. I stood with them then. I stood with them in Oregon, and I stand with them now.
This is Oregon Live's news on the recent development:
Federal prosecutor urges appeals court to revive NV conspiracy case against Cliven Bundy, his sons and Ryan Payne
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals took oral arguments via video conference Friday. Bottom row from left to right, Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth White, attorney Amy Cleary and attorney Larry Klayman.
0
shares
By Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive
A federal prosecutor Friday urged an appeals panel to revive a conspiracy case against Cliven Bundy, his two sons and a fourth man, arguing that a Nevada judge’s dismissal was unwarranted.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth White argued that any documents or information prosecutors failed to share with the defendants’ lawyers wasn’t because of any “willfulness or reckless disregard.”
“There’s not a single one of these documents we withheld because we did not want the defense to have it,’’ White told a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals via a video conference hearing.
The government, White said, worked “tirelessly and tried diligently to comply with all of its obligations’’ and reviewed and produced hundreds of thousands of pages of documents, including 400 FBI reports. Prosecutors also kept an 87-page log itemizing tens of thousands of documents that they turned over, she said.
“We missed a few things,’’ White said. “We overlooked a document here or didn’t appreciate the relevance of a document there. What is clear is we fell short.’’
But she said the lapses didn’t warrant the extreme sanction of dismissing with prejudice the entire indictment against the senior Bundy, his two sons and Ryan Payne, ending the case for good.
If anything, the trial judge could have dismissed some of the charges and should have allowed the rest of the case to proceed, she said.
Cliven Bundy, sons Ammon Bundy and Ryan Bundy and Payne, a militia leader from Montana, were indicted on conspiracy and other allegations, accused of rallying armed supporters to stop federal officers from impounding Bundy cattle near Bunkerville.
Government authorities were acting on a court order filed after Cliven Bundy failed to pay grazing fees and fines for two decades. The outnumbered federal contingent retreated and halted the cattle roundup on April 12, 2014.
Their trial in Nevada was closely watched in Oregon, where Cliven Bundy was arrested as he traveled to visit his sons in a separate standoff, this one in January 2016 in eastern Oregon. Ammon and Ryan Bundy had led the armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.
U.S. District Judge Gloria M. Navarro found that prosecutors engaged in a "deliberate attempt to mislead'' and made several misrepresentations to both the defense and the court about evidence related to a surveillance camera and snipers outside the Bundy ranch in early April 2014, as well as FBI threat assessments made in the case.
Attorney Amy Cleary, representing the Bundy brothers and Payne, argued that records disclosing the camera and snipers and a 2012 assessment that found the Bundys weren’t likely to be violent, would have directly bolstered her clients’ defense.
They were surrounded by snipers and afraid, she said, and weren’t providing false messaging to supporters about their fears.
Cleary said the judge gave prosecutors multiple opportunities, all the way through the start of the trial, to produce documents and explain why they hadn’t shared the information.
Attorney Larry Klayman, representing Cliven Bundy, urged the court to uphold the dismissal of the case. “What is absolutely correct is that there was flagrant abuse here,’’ he said. “Judge Navarro made the exact, correct decision.’’
Klayman referred to a report from whistleblower Larry Wooten, a lead Bureau of Land Management agent.
Wooten wrote in a memo that federal prosecutor Steven Myhre had removed him from the case after he raised concerns about far-reaching misconduct, recklessness and unrestrained antipathy by other federal agents toward the Bundy family.
Prosecutors shared the memo with defense lawyers as they were in the midst of the trial.
Had Wooten been called to testify, “That would be the nail in the coffin of this prosecution,’’ Klayman told the appeals panel.
Judge Paul J. Watford cut Klayman off, asking: “Why are you telling us all of this?’’
Watford said the Wooten allegations are “deeply disturbing. I grant you that,’’ but he pointed out the trial judge didn’t address it and it’s irrelevant in this appeal.
In court briefs, White characterized the Wooten memo as containing “lurid accusations of misconduct’’ against the Bureau of Land Management and said prosecutors turned it over to the defense two days after they received it from Associate Deputy Attorney General Andrew Goldsmith.
-- Maxine Bernstein
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
Attorney Amy Cleary, representing the Bundy brothers and Payne, argued that records disclosing the camera and snipers and a 2012 assessment that found the Bundys weren’t likely to be violent, would have directly bolstered her clients’ defense.
They were surrounded by snipers and afraid, she said, and weren’t providing false messaging to supporters about their fears.
Cleary said the judge gave prosecutors multiple opportunities, all the way through the start of the trial, to produce documents and explain why they hadn’t shared the information.
Attorney Larry Klayman, representing Cliven Bundy, urged the court to uphold the dismissal of the case. “What is absolutely correct is that there was flagrant abuse here,’’ he said. “Judge Navarro made the exact, correct decision.’’
Klayman referred to a report from whistleblower Larry Wooten, a lead Bureau of Land Management agent.
Wooten wrote in a memo that federal prosecutor Steven Myhre had removed him from the case after he raised concerns about far-reaching misconduct, recklessness and unrestrained antipathy by other federal agents toward the Bundy family.
Prosecutors shared the memo with defense lawyers as they were in the midst of the trial.
Had Wooten been called to testify, “That would be the nail in the coffin of this prosecution,’’ Klayman told the appeals panel.
Judge Paul J. Watford cut Klayman off, asking: “Why are you telling us all of this?’’
Watford said the Wooten allegations are “deeply disturbing. I grant you that,’’ but he pointed out the trial judge didn’t address it and it’s irrelevant in this appeal.
In court briefs, White characterized the Wooten memo as containing “lurid accusations of misconduct’’ against the Bureau of Land Management and said prosecutors turned it over to the defense two days after they received it from Associate Deputy Attorney General Andrew Goldsmith.
-- Maxine Bernstein
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
No comments:
Post a Comment