PDA

View Full Version : Jury acquits leaders of all charges in armed standoff at federal reserve in Oregon



joeecho
28th October 2016, 00:05
This is an interesting development.

http://a57.foxnews.com/media2.foxnews.com/BrightCove/694940094001/2016/02/12/876/493/694940094001_4752494016001_c1119523-bbf4-4194-9230-845686330295.jpg?ve=1&tl=1

Published October 27, 2016

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — The leaders of an armed group who seized a national wildlife refuge in rural Oregon were acquitted Thursday in the 41-day standoff that brought new attention to a long-running dispute over control of federal lands in the U.S. West.

A jury found brothers Ammon and Ryan Bundy not guilty a firearm in a federal facility and conspiring to impede federal workers from their jobs at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, 300 miles southeast of Portland where the trial took place. Five co-defendants also were tried one or both of the charges.

Despite the acquittal, the Bundys were expected to stand trial in Nevada early next year on charges stemming from another high-profile standoff with federal agents. Authorities rounding up cattle at their father Cliven Bundy's ranch in 2014 because of unpaid grazing fees released the animals as they faced armed protesters.

The brothers are part of a Nevada ranching family embroiled in a lengthy fight over the use of public range, and their occupation drew an international spotlight to a uniquely American West dispute: federal restrictions on ranching, mining and logging to protect the environment. The U.S. government, which controls much of the land in the West, says it tries to balance industry, recreation and wildlife concerns to benefit all.

The armed occupiers were allowed to come and go for several weeks as authorities tried to avoid bloodshed seen in past standoffs.

The confrontations reignited clashes dating to the so-called Sagebrush Rebellion of the late 1970s, when Western states such as Nevada tried to win more control of vast federal land holdings.

The group began occupying the bird sanctuary in remote southeastern Oregon on Jan. 2. They objected to prison sentences handed down to Dwight and Steven Hammond, two local ranchers convicted of setting fires. They demanded the government free the father and son and relinquish control of public lands to local officials.

Ammon Bundy gave frequent news conferences and the group used social media in a mostly unsuccessful effort to get others to join them.

The Bundys and other key figures were arrested in a Jan. 26 traffic stop outside the refuge that ended with police fatally shooting Robert "LaVoy" Finicum, an occupation spokesman. Most occupiers left after his death, but four holdouts remained until Feb. 11, when they surrendered after a lengthy negotiation.

At trial, the case was seemingly open-and-shut. There was no dispute the group seized the refuge, established armed patrols and vetted those who visited.

"Ladies and gentlemen, this case is not a whodunit," Assistant U.S. Attorney Ethan Knight said in his closing argument, arguing that the group decided to take over a federal workplace that didn't belong to them.

On technical grounds, the defendants said they never discussed stopping individual workers from accessing their offices but merely wanted the land and the buildings. On emotional grounds, Ammon Bundy and other defendants argued that the takeover was an act of civil disobedience against an out-of-control federal government that has crippled the rural West.

Federal prosecutors took two weeks to present their case, finishing with a display of more than 30 guns seized after the standoff. An FBI agent testified that 16,636 live rounds and nearly 1,700 spent casings were found.

Bundy testified in his defense, spending three days amplifying his belief that government overreach is destroying Western communities that rely on the land.

He said the plan was to take ownership of the refuge by occupying it for a period of time and then turn it over to local officials to use as they saw fit.

Bundy also testified that the occupiers carried guns because they would have been arrested immediately otherwise and to protect themselves against possible government attack.

Ryan Bundy, who acted his own attorney, did not testify.

Authorities had charged 26 occupiers with conspiracy. Eleven pleaded guilty, and another had the charge dropped. Seven defendants chose not to be tried at this time. Their trial is scheduled to begin Feb. 14.

(Source) (http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/jury-acquits-leaders-of-oregon-standoff-of-federal-charges/article_de26444d-53aa-55fd-8589-1b25b8717039.html)

heather6thsense
28th October 2016, 00:47
How can we help the Bundy family? Social media used effectively can be a powerful tool.

TargeT
28th October 2016, 01:08
Great to hear, Jury's still have power and are made up of people...

They certainly look happy, too bad not everyone lived to see this
cjTDP4x4ZlU

TrumanCash
28th October 2016, 01:48
"Tumult erupted in the courtroom after the verdicts were read when an attorney for group leader Ammon Bundy demanded his client be immediately released, repeatedly yelling at the judge. U.S. marshals tackled attorney Marcus Mumford to the ground, used a stun gun on him several times and arrested him." (http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/jury-acquits-leaders-of-oregon-standoff-of-federal-charges/article_de26444d-53aa-55fd-8589-1b25b8717039.html)

Your tax dollars at work. The anti-Constitution judge, Anna Brown, used every trick in the book to rig the outcome of this trial. Therefore, the positive outcome is evidence of an awake and aware jury.

"[Ryan] Bundy also mumbled in disagreement when the judge refused to let him hand out pocket Constitutions to jurors during his opening statement and flatly expressed his dismay when he couldn't quote from the Constitution in his closing argument." More.... (http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/10/highlights_from_oregon_standof.html)

Unfortunately, the use of a stun gun on Ammon Bundy's attorney and the murder of Lavoy Finicum reveals who the real terrorists are.

TrumanCash
28th October 2016, 07:05
VERDICT: NOT GUILTY! Malheur 7 (http://redoubtnews.com/2016/10/27/verdict-not-guilty-malheur-7/)
by Shari Dovale

"All 7 defendants in the Malheur Protest Trial were unanimously acquitted of conspiracy and firearms charges.

The jury began their deliberations with an alternate juror stepping in when one of the original jurors was found to be biased from previous employment with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

After about 5 hours of deliberations today, the jury came back with 12 of the 13 charges decided. The final charge is an aiding and abetting charge of theft against Ryan Bundy. The jury did not reach a consensus on this charge.

There was more drama after the verdict was announced. Marcus Mumford, attorney for Ammon Bundy, argued for the release of his client, stating he has not seen any paperwork from Nevada to justify not releasing him after the acquittal.

Mumford got very animated during this legal argument whereas the US Marshals decided it was enough. Judge Brown told the Marshals to back away from the attorney and empty the courtroom. Mumford continued to advocate for his client, and the Marshals moved in.

Witness reports say they saw about 8 US Marshals attack Mumford and wrestle him to the ground. There were shouts heard from him asking for help and yelling in pain. The US Marshals then used a taser on Mr. Mumford after he was on the ground.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5eLeH0ew2c

Mumford was then taken to the Multnomah county jail and booked on ‘failure to comply’ charges. They are claiming that he prevented them from taking Ammon back to the jail cells.

It is unheard of to treat an attorney this way inside a courtroom! The US Marshals seem to have ignored the judge’s orders to back off from him and went rogue! Speaking with another attorney tonight, I understand that Mumford was doing his job by advocating for his client. If he had not made the argument, he could have actually been accuse of malpractice. But, when the government does not get their way, this is what happens.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj75IkYXJj0

Mumford wasn’t the only casualty in today’s verdict. The US Marshals were in rare form, as they had to ‘Rough Up’ David Fry as well. This took place in the courtroom before he was taken to the jail to be processed for release.

But the supporters that have stood by the political prisoners all along were celebrating the Not Guilty verdict." [Source (http://redoubtnews.com/2016/10/27/verdict-not-guilty-malheur-7/)]

Satori
28th October 2016, 17:31
This is outstanding! It's jury verdicts like this that continue to fuel my faith in the jury system in the USA. I've been a trial lawyer for nearly 40 years and I never waive trial by jury in a case of any magnitude, such as this case is/was. Kudos to all involved.

3(C)+me
28th October 2016, 18:09
Most excellent!
:thumbsup:

joeecho
28th October 2016, 20:00
This is outstanding! It's jury verdicts like this that continue to fuel my faith in the jury system in the USA. I've been a trial lawyer for nearly 40 years and I never waive trial by jury in a case of any magnitude, such as this case is/was. Kudos to all involved.

I was thinking along those lines as well, Satori.

I have a side question, is a juror required by law to explain their vote to someone like the judge in a criminal trial during or after?

thunder24
28th October 2016, 20:26
Yet native americans are beaten with batons, maced, concussioin gernades, shot with rubber bullets when they stand peacefully unarmed... just makes me wonder...

TargeT
28th October 2016, 21:18
Yet native americans are beaten with batons, maced, concussioin gernades, shot with rubber bullets when they stand peacefully unarmed... just makes me wonder...

not shot yet ;)

thunder24
28th October 2016, 21:19
Yet native americans are beaten with batons, maced, concussioin gernades, shot with rubber bullets when they stand peacefully unarmed... just makes me wonder...

not shot yet ;)

no just the horse was shot with real bullets, the one they had to put down once returned to camp

Satori
29th October 2016, 00:03
This is outstanding! It's jury verdicts like this that continue to fuel my faith in the jury system in the USA. I've been a trial lawyer for nearly 40 years and I never waive trial by jury in a case of any magnitude, such as this case is/was. Kudos to all involved.

I was thinking along those lines as well, Satori.

I have a side question, is a juror required by law to explain their vote to someone like the judge in a criminal trial during or after?

The short answer is "no." Typically a jury is "polled" after a verdict and asked individually whether they voted for the verdict. In other words whether the verdict is as how they voted. Beyond that it is not typical to require a juror to say anything. However, jurors are free to voluntarily discuss their vote and deliberations with nonjurors after the verdict, but never before. If there is an issue about juror misconduct, then jurors may be required to disclose what occurred during jury deliberations. Thus, if a juror is being told he or she must disclose their vote, be wary. There is either a legitimate inquiry going on or some sort of improper conduct. One needs to know more about each individual case to say more.

Satori
29th October 2016, 00:13
Yet native americans are beaten with batons, maced, concussioin gernades, shot with rubber bullets when they stand peacefully unarmed... just makes me wonder...

Indeed. Very valid point. There remains much unfairness and injustice, especially for the Native peoples. I started my legal career on the Navajo res in Shiprock, New Mexico providing legal services to them under the auspices of DNA People's Legal Services. Interestingly, DNA is one among many legal service corporation funded by Congress. The US spends time, effort and money to oppress native Americans (and others) and more of the same to also extend "relief". Crazy system.

TrumanCash
1st November 2016, 21:47
I have addressed the inherent problems with incorrectly juxtaposing the Bundy situation against the Standing Rock situation. As a native of Turtle Island and a contributor/supporter of the Standing Rock Water Protectors I have concerns that the conflict is being used to promote concepts that are not only political but are also mind control mechanisms of the elitists who are always the enemies of indigenous peoples everywhere around the planet.

Read the rest of my post here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?93274-Dakota-Pipeline-Protests...Who-s-gonna-participate&p=1110028&viewfull=1#post1110028).

TrumanCash
5th November 2016, 10:26
There is even more irony when comparing the plight of the Bundys to the Standing Rock situation. Compare the videos of police attack dogs against peaceful protestors in Nevada with the attacking police dogs in North Dakota:

Bundy protest


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhJ6H9vlEDA

Standing Rock


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDSkkXnTTTs

The similar ways the protestors in each case were attacked by police/guard dogs exposes Amy Goodman's race-baiting, divisive lies on her so-called "news" site: Bundys vs. #NoDAPL: Armed White Militia Leaders Walk Free as Native Americans Face Police Violence (http://www.democracynow.org/2016/10/31/bundys_vs_nodapl_armed_white_militia)

In each case it is energy companies and politicians using violence to enforce their will upon innocent people. In the case of the Bundys it is Harry Reid & Son, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Chinese securing use of land to build solar farms in Nevada (http://www.infowars.com/breaking-sen-harry-reid-behind-blm-land-grab-of-bundy-ranch/), which, by the way, would have devastating consequences on the natural environment--if one wants to make that an issue--so much so that they need Bundy's land to offset the permanent damage that the solar farm would create in having to take huge bulldozers to level it creating massive areas of shade on the desert floor, a permanent violation of the natural order of life there.

In the Standing Rock situation it is the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) taking over land covered by treaty (1851).

TargeT
5th November 2016, 11:06
There is even more irony when comparing the plight of the Bundys to the Standing Rock situation. Compare the videos of police attack dogs against peaceful protestors in Nevada with the attacking police dogs in North Dakota:
.


Apples and oranges.. you cannot compare the two, to do so is folly.

don't fall into that trap.

TrumanCash
5th November 2016, 18:08
There is even more irony when comparing the plight of the Bundys to the Standing Rock situation. Compare the videos of police attack dogs against peaceful protestors in Nevada with the attacking police dogs in North Dakota:
.


Apples and oranges.. you cannot compare the two, to do so is folly.

don't fall into that trap.

I'm not sure what you're saying here, T. I'm just pointing out the irony of it all. And also expose "Democracy Now's Amy Goodman. I've also edited my post to include the use of huge bulldozers to damage the environment in both cases. More irony.

The further irony is that all this hullabaloo is about outdated technologies that adversely impact the environment. The truth is that the secret government (or whatever one may wish to call it) has and has access to incredible alien technology which makes the petroleum/solar panel industry look like stone age technology. Go figger.

I say this because I have seen and experienced this ET technology firsthand, been abducted twice into a very deep underground military/Grays base and have documented it all. I have been off-planet in "flying saucers" many times this lifetime and many more times in past lives and have as part of my memory looking "down" at the planet so my viewpoint is by definition extra-terrestrial. I do not identify myself as an "Earthling" and consider it to be a derogative word. In fact I often mention to my friends that this is the "irony planet" (humor intended). I mention humor because that is, IMO, part of what irony is and often results in one laughing out loud, which I think is a very healthy thing.

Behind all this hullabaloo are aliens without green cards (ETs) who are pitting one side against the other to create chaos and confusion. And they do micromanage. I guess this is the "cowboys vs. indians" ploy. Unfortunately, I know this sh*t firsthand, unlike most Earthlings.

Foxie Loxie
5th November 2016, 21:11
I'm sure I'm not the only one to appreciate your unique take on things, TrumanCash. I, for one, enjoy hearing what you have to say! :star:

TargeT
5th November 2016, 22:36
... expose "Democracy Now's Amy Goodman. I've also edited my post

Makes more sense with the edit, previously it seemed that you were taking Amy Goodman's side.