Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Ammon Bundy's lawyer tackled, Tasered by U.S. Marshals in a surreal ending to the Ore
#1
And in news other than Trump v Clinton, this sort of stuff happens.

I have another story related to the Bundy case, and will post it soon, for those interested.  Either here or elsewhere.

ETA - video at the source

Quote:Moments after the Oregon standoff defendants' acquittals were announced in court Thursday, Ammon Bundy's lawyer Marcus Mumford stood before the judge, and argued that his client should be released from custody immediately and allowed to walk out of the courtroom a free man.

Ammon Bundy, who chose to wear blue jails scrubs throughout the trial, was dressed in a gray suit Thursday.

U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown told him that there was a U.S. Marshal's hold on him from a pending federal indictment in Nevada.
"No, he's released on these charges. He's acquitted. Nevada doesn't have jurisdiction,'' Mumford yelled, standing before the judge. "If there's a detainer, show me.''

"Mr. Mumford, you really need to never yell at me now or never again,'' the judge responded.

Brown told Mumford that she's releasing Bundy on all federal holds in the Oregon case, but he'll have to take up any questions about the federal holds from the Nevada case with the U.S. Marshals Service.

"If they want him, they know where to find him,'' Mumford told the judge. "I don't see any paper proving their authority to hold him.''
Suddenly, a group of about six to seven U.S. Marshals, who had been either standing or seated around the perimeter of the courtroom, slowly moved in and surrounded Mumford at his defense table. The judge directed them to move back but moments later, the marshals grabbed onto him.
"What are you doing?'' Mumford yelled, as he struggled and was taken down to the floor.
As deputy marshals yelled, "Stop resisting,'' the judge demanded, "Everybody out of the courtroom now!''

Mumford was taken into custody by the Federal Protective Services.

He was cited for failure to comply with a federal lawful order and disturbance and released with a Jan. 6 date to return to federal court, said Eric Wahlstrom, supervising deputy of the U.S. Marshals Service.

According to Wahlstrom, Mumford was shocked with a stun gun in what's called a dry-stun mode, meaning no probes were fired into his body but a Taser was placed up against his body.

Wahlstrom, who was not in the courtroom, said the actions were taken because Mumford was resisting and preventing marshals from taking Ammon Bundy out of the courtroom and back into custody.

Wahlstrom said the stun gun was used because deputy U.S. marshals "attempted to handcuff him and he continued to resist.''

But observers who were close to the arrest decried the use of force against a lawyer in court.

"What happened at the end is symbolic of the improper use of force by the federal government,'' Mumford's co-counsel J. Morgan Philpot said. Philpot explained that Mumford was attempting to point out that since the judge previously had said in court that she had no authority over detention orders made by the court in Nevada, she couldn't now maintain the right to order his client held.

"I grew up on a dairy farm, so am I used to some rough treatment, sure?'' Mumford told reporters, after his release. But he said the actions of the U.S. marshals were uncalled for.

"All I was asking for was papers. Just show me you have the authority to take Mr. Bundy into custody,'' Mumford said.

http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standof...ne_le.html
[Image: attachment.php?aid=944]
Reply
#2
If all the lawyer was doing, was arguing his case to have his defendant released (which is his duty BTW as a lawyer), why the hell did they have to rush him?

And it never fails, the minute they go to grab someone, then they holler "stop resisting us". LOL

Wonder if the judge panicked to soon or maybe didn't want to hear the lawyer's argument.
Sounds like a scene that was totally uncalled for.
Of course, I wasn't there so really do not know what led up to that commotion.

a.k.a. 'snarky412'
 
        

Reply
#3
Update:



https://youtu.be/yF1q6ytfFo0



Reply
#4
Who are the terrorists in this country REALLY?




https://youtu.be/vasE4Ogas1Y



Reply
#5
(10-29-2016, 04:25 PM)1984hasarrived Wrote:
Quote:U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown told him that there was a U.S. Marshal's hold on him from a pending federal indictment in Nevada.
"No, he's released on these charges. He's acquitted. Nevada doesn't have jurisdiction,'' Mumford yelled, standing before the judge. "If there's a detainer, show me.''

"Mr. Mumford, you really need to never yell at me now or never again,'' the judge responded.

Sounds like this Bundy character needs another lawyer - this one doesn't appear to be all that bright, or know much about the law.

First, it's a very, very bad idea to yell at a judge in the judge's own courtroom. Nasty, nasty things can happen if the judge has no sense of humor... and most of them don't.

Second, it doesn't matter if Nevada or Iran or Antarctica doesn't have jurisdiction in Oregon. It's a Federal hold, and the Federal government claims jurisdiction everywhere in the U.S. Oregon, as it happens, is in the U.S. It doesn't matter who else DOESN'T have jurisdiction there, the Feds DO - and U.S. Marshals have the authority to snatch one up by his scruff and drag him out by his heels, watching his head thump on the steps as they go, if they have proper custody papers.

Is this the same Bundy jackass that was grazing his cattle on MY land and not giving me a proper cut of his profits for the privilege? Or is this a different Bundy?

His lawyer should have filed right then and there for a writ of Habeus Corpus, and forced the marshals to produce the custody papers, instead of squealing and grandstanding.


Quote:"If they want him, they know where to find him,'' Mumford told the judge. "I don't see any paper proving their authority to hold him.''
Suddenly, a group of about six to seven U.S. Marshals, who had been either standing or seated around the perimeter of the courtroom, slowly moved in and surrounded Mumford at his defense table. The judge directed them to move back but moments later, the marshals grabbed onto him.
"What are you doing?'' Mumford yelled, as he struggled and was taken down to the floor.
As deputy marshals yelled, "Stop resisting,'' the judge demanded, "Everybody out of the courtroom now!''

Mumford was taken into custody by the Federal Protective Services.

Now, to be fair, they DO need paper, and if they had it, they should have shown it. With that said, if 6 or 7 U.S. Marshals attempt to latch on to me for just speaking my mind, and they DON'T have paper, a good time will not be had by all. That ain't how it's done, properly, and a man has every right to defend himself if assaulted by ANYONE who neglects to demonstrate that they have the proper authority to assault him. He has a good case for a lawsuit against the federal government for improper use of force, but sadly I don't believe he's lawyer enough to pursue it successfully - he just doesn't seem that bright.

If he was struggling and yelling on the way down, as the report states, then he WAS resisting, which explains why they yelled "stop resisting, stop resisting!". As I said before, however, he has every right to resist if they aren't using proper protocol. if you're intending to lay hands on me, you'd better show that paper first - and watch how you chose to lay hands on me. Otherwise, that taser better be made out of chocolate, so it tastes good when you eat it.

Just standing up and assaulting a citizen in a courtroom, if he's done no more than is being reported here, can put you in a world of legal hurt. IF this report is accurate and complete - and I really have my doubts that it is, but it could be - then I'd own these 6 or 7 marshals, and their houses and lands, cars and yachts, within a year.

Especially since the judge, according to this report, ordered them to move back. I can't think of a lawman who EVER kept his job after disobeying a judge in that judge's own courtroom. Good cops KNOW that''s a bad, bad idea.

Taken into custody by "Federal Protective Services"? Who the hell were they "protecting"? That's kinda messed up, and more than a little Orwellian - why don't they just rechristen themselves "The Ministry of Love"?

Quote:Wahlstrom, who was not in the courtroom, said the actions were taken because Mumford was resisting and preventing marshals from taking Ammon Bundy out of the courtroom and back into custody.

Wahlstrom said the stun gun was used because deputy U.S. marshals "attempted to handcuff him and he continued to resist.''

See, that there might be the part that was left out - just HOW was he preventing marshals from taking Bundy out of the court room? If he wasn't resisting with physical force, then physical force in response was unwarranted. See what I did there? "Unwarranted"? Tee-hee, yuk-yuk-yuk!

Quote:"What happened at the end is symbolic of the improper use of force by the federal government,'' Mumford's co-counsel J. Morgan Philpot said. Philpot explained that Mumford was attempting to point out that since the judge previously had said in court that she had no authority over detention orders made by the court in Nevada, she couldn't now maintain the right to order his client held.

That judge didn't need to "maintain the right to order his client held" - the order, if one exists, was issued by another judge in another circuit, and if it was, then the U.S. Marshals were the ones with the authority to hold his client, not the judge.
" I don't mind killin' a man in a fair fight... or if I think he's gonna start a fair fight... or if there's money involved... or a woman... "

 - Jayne Cobb, Hero of Canton
Reply
#6

Quote:A federal judge declared a mistrial Wednesday in the case of a Nevada rancher accused of leading an armed standoff against the government in 2014, blaming prosecutors for withholding key evidence from defense lawyers, including records about the conduct of FBI and Bureau of Land Management agents.

Chief U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro in Las Vegas dismissed a jury seated last month for the long-awaited trial of Cliven Bundy, his sons Ryan and Ammon Bundy and self-styled Montana militia leader Ryan Payne.

The decision is the latest in a string of failed prosecutions in Nevada and Oregon against those who have opposed federal control of vast swaths of land in Western states.

Read more and watch a video at the source article.



Reply
#7
(12-21-2017, 03:45 PM)Mystic Wanderer Wrote:
Quote:A federal judge declared a mistrial Wednesday in the case of a Nevada rancher accused of leading an armed standoff against the government in 2014, blaming prosecutors for withholding key evidence from defense lawyers, including records about the conduct of FBI and Bureau of Land Management agents.

Chief U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro in Las Vegas dismissed a jury seated last month for the long-awaited trial of Cliven Bundy, his sons Ryan and Ammon Bundy and self-styled Montana militia leader Ryan Payne.

The decision is the latest in a string of failed prosecutions in Nevada and Oregon against those who have opposed federal control of vast swaths of land in Western states.

Read more and watch a video at the source article.
GOOD! 
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]
Reply
#8
I have to disagree. When the Bundys want to buy their grazing land, or pay for grazing rights, we can talk. If they just want to run their cattle on MY land roughshod, I have no problem at all with killing their cattle and shooting their cow dogs.

Nothing I ain't done before to protect what's mine... except killing the dog. It was a good dog, and it took up with me in the end. The cattle were tasty, though.
" I don't mind killin' a man in a fair fight... or if I think he's gonna start a fair fight... or if there's money involved... or a woman... "

 - Jayne Cobb, Hero of Canton
Reply
#9
The trial is over and they won!   smallgreenbananadancer 



Quote:A federal judge dismissed all charges against Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, his two sons and another man on Monday after accusing prosecutors of willfully withholding evidence from Bundy’s lawyers.

U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro cited "flagrant prosecutorial misconduct" in her decision to dismiss all charges against the Nevada rancher and three others.

"The court finds that the universal sense of justice has been violated," Navarro said.

Quote:“Either the government lied or [it’s actions were] so grossly negligent as to be tantamount to lying."
- Judge Andrew Napolitano

Bundy's supporters cheered as he walked out of court a free man, hugging his wife. He said he'd been jailed for 700 days as a "political prisoner" for refusing to acknowledge federal authority over the land around his cattle ranch.

On Dec. 20, Navarro declared a mistrial in the high-profile Bundy case. It was only the latest, stunning development in the saga of the Nevada rancher, who led a tense, armed standoff with federal officials trying to take over his land. The clash served as a public repudiation of the federal government. 

The Brady rule, named after the landmark 1963 Supreme Court case known as Brady vs. Maryland, holds that failure to disclose such evidence violates a defendant’s right to due process.

“In this case the failures to comply with Brady were exquisite, extraordinary,” said Fox News legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano. “The judge exercised tremendous patience.”

[Image: 1515183824803.jpg?ve=1&tl=1]
To many, Bundy is a folk hero who stood up to the federal government  (Associated Press)

The 71-year-old Bundy’s battle with the federal government eventually led to what became known as the Bundy standoff of 2014. But it began long before that.

In the early 1990s, the U.S. government limited grazing rights on federal lands in order to protect the desert tortoise habitat. In 1993, Bundy, in protest, refused to renew his permit for cattle grazing, and continued grazing his livestock on these public lands. He didn’t recognize the authority of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) over the sovereign state of Nevada.

The federal courts sided with the BLM, and Bundy didn’t seem to have a legal leg to stand on. Nevertheless, the rancher and the government continued this dispute for 20 years, and Bundy ended up owing over $1 million in fees and fines.

Things came to a head in 2014, when officials planned to capture and impound cattle trespassing on government land. Protesters, many armed, tried to block the authorities, which led to a standoff. For a time, they even shut down a portion of I-15, the main interstate highway running through Southern Nevada.

Tensions escalated until officials, fearing for the general safety, announced they would return Bundy’s cattle and suspend the roundup.
Afterward, Bundy continued to graze his cattle and not pay fees. He and his fellow protesters were heroes to some, but criminals to the federal government. Bundy, along with others seen as leaders of the standoff, including sons Ammon and Ryan and militia member Ryan Payne, were charged with numerous felonies, including conspiracy, assault on a federal officer and using a firearm in a violent crime. They faced many years in prison.

The Bundy case finally went to trial last October. But just two months later, it ended with Navarro angry, the feds humiliated and Bundy – at least to his supporters – vindicated.

Navarro had suspended the trial earlier and warned of a mistrial when prosecutors released information after a discovery deadline. Overall, the government was late in handing over more than 3,300 pages of documents. Further, some defense requests for information that ultimately came to light had been ridiculed by prosecutors as “fantastical” and a “fishing expedition.”

“Either the government lied or [its actions were] so grossly negligent as to be tantamount to lying,” Napolitano said. “This happened over and over again.”

Navarro said Monday it was clear the FBI was involved in the prosecution and it was not a coincidence that most of the evidence that was held back – which would have worked in Bundy’s favor – came from the FBI, AZCentral reported.

The newspaper said after the courtroom doors opened following Navarro’s ruling, a huge cheer went up from a crowd of spectators that had gathered outside.

Fox News’ Greg Norman and The Associated Press contributed to this report.



Reply
#10
Hmmm... isn't this interesting?   Read the bottom part of this post.   This came from a compilation of Qanons on 8chan here: https://media.8ch.net/file_store/52395df...eaa680.jpg


[Image: attachment.php?aid=3323]


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   



Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)