U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34518
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#1

Post by realist » Wed Mar 09, 2016 8:14 am

Whatever4 requested as an aid to the wiki being worked on that a separate thread for the Hammonds and a few of the representative documents of their case be posted here.

I will also make it a sticky.

Because I live to serve. :-D

5-17-12 ECF 104 - U.S.A. v STEVEN and DWIGHT HAMMOND - Superseding Indictment

11-2-12 ECF 219 - U.S.A. v STEVEN and DWIGHT HAMMOND - Transcript of Proceedings - Judge Ruling

12-3-13 - U.S.A. v STEVEN and DWIGHT HAMMOND - US Ct. of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Opinion

2-14-14 - HAMMOND RANCHES INC - Notice of Final Decision to Deny Application for Grazing Permit Renewal

6-17-14 STEVEN and DWIGHT HAMMOND v U.S.A. - Petition for Writ of Certiorari to SCOTUS

STEVEN and DWIGHT HAMMOND - U.S. Supreme Court Docket


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Whatever4
Posts: 11520
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:36 am
Location: Mainely in the plain
Occupation: Visiting doctors.

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#2

Post by Whatever4 » Wed Mar 09, 2016 8:41 pm

realist wrote:Whatever4 requested as an aid to the wiki being worked on that a separate thread for the Hammonds and a few of the representative documents of their case be posted here.

I will also make it a sticky.

Because I live to serve. :-D

5-17-12 ECF 104 - U.S.A. v STEVEN and DWIGHT HAMMOND - Superseding Indictment

11-2-12 ECF 219 - U.S.A. v STEVEN and DWIGHT HAMMOND - Transcript of Proceedings - Judge Ruling

12-3-13 - U.S.A. v STEVEN and DWIGHT HAMMOND - US Ct. of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Opinion

2-14-14 - HAMMOND RANCHES INC - Notice of Final Decision to Deny Application for Grazing Permit Renewal

6-17-14 STEVEN and DWIGHT HAMMOND v U.S.A. - Petition for Writ of Certiorari to SCOTUS

STEVEN and DWIGHT HAMMOND - U.S. Supreme Court Docket
:lovestruck:


"[Moderate] doesn't mean you don't have views. It just means your views aren't predictable ideologically one way or the other, and you're trying to follow the facts where they lead and reach your own conclusions."
-- Sen. King (R-ME)

User avatar
spiduh
Posts: 2002
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2016 1:00 pm
Location: Zuckerman farm

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#3

Post by spiduh » Fri Mar 11, 2016 9:32 am

I ran across these docs they dumped:



User avatar
TsuDhoNimh
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2016 1:31 pm

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#4

Post by TsuDhoNimh » Thu Mar 17, 2016 1:05 pm

Here's what appears to be the entire case, starting with the indictment, with links to PACER.

Some docs are available as PDF from plainsite

http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/mmnu03 ... ond-et-al/



User avatar
spiduh
Posts: 2002
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2016 1:00 pm
Location: Zuckerman farm

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#5

Post by spiduh » Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:57 pm

Two press releases from the US Attorney here, refuting a lot of the SovCit misinformation on these cases.
http://kval.com/news/local/background-u ... r-december


“If they kill me, grab my phone.” –Ammon Bundy (Reuters)
"Yes, I Did Turn the Flying Monkeys Loose!" -Anna von Reitz (FB)
"I 'Self Identify' as a female" -Jon Ritzheimer (FB)

User avatar
Flatpointhigh
Posts: 7621
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:05 pm
Location: Hotel California, PH23
Occupation: Voice Actor, Podcaster, I hold a Ph.D in Procrastination.
Contact:

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#6

Post by Flatpointhigh » Mon Mar 28, 2016 10:27 am

spiduh wrote:Two press releases from the US Attorney here, refuting a lot of the SovCit misinformation on these cases.
http://kval.com/news/local/background-u ... r-december
But it's all about misinfo.



"It is wrong to say God made rich and poor; He only made male and female, and He gave them the Earth as their inheritance."- Thomas Paine, Forward to Agrarian Justice
Cancer broke me

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 26658
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#7

Post by Foggy » Mon Mar 28, 2016 10:48 am

The level of dishonesty of birthers, SovCits, and other RWNJs is just shocking to me. It's almost like you can't be a right winger if you don't tell lies. :?


In my defense, I was left unsupervised.

EmilyS
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 1:36 pm
Location: Brigadoon
Occupation: retired haha

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#8

Post by EmilyS » Tue Mar 29, 2016 5:58 pm

Image

how to free a federal prisoner? https://www.justice.gov/pardon/pardon-i ... structions

Guess what the waiting period is? "Five-year waiting period required"

Guess what the Hammonds' sentence is? :winner:



User avatar
spiduh
Posts: 2002
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2016 1:00 pm
Location: Zuckerman farm

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#9

Post by spiduh » Tue Mar 29, 2016 8:37 pm

Yeah, right.
Two witness have come forward and provided recorded eye witness accounts of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), using drip torches, lighting fire along the boundary of the Hammond Ranch. One BLM crew started at the south end of the ranch and the second BLM crew started on the east side of the ranch creating a horseshoe of fire around the Hammond ranch. The Hammond’s responded with lighting back burns to prevent fire spread onto their ranch, protecting their private property. The witness was interview by Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) Frank Papagni, Jr.. AUSA Papagni never called on this witness, nor in pre-trial discovery reported to the defense the existence of these witnesses.
https://www.oathkeepers.org/new-informa ... mond-case/


“If they kill me, grab my phone.” –Ammon Bundy (Reuters)
"Yes, I Did Turn the Flying Monkeys Loose!" -Anna von Reitz (FB)
"I 'Self Identify' as a female" -Jon Ritzheimer (FB)

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 6980
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#10

Post by Northland10 » Tue Mar 29, 2016 8:49 pm

EmilyS wrote:Image

how to free a federal prisoner? https://www.justice.gov/pardon/pardon-i ... structions

Guess what the waiting period is? "Five-year waiting period required"

Guess what the Hammonds' sentence is? :winner:
FCI Terminal Island is way out at the end of Terminal Island. The only ones to see them by the front gate would be employees of the prison, members of the Coast Guard and maybe some visitors for inmates. It's rather a limited impact.


North-land: of the family 10
UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
phelana
Posts: 2131
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:05 pm
Location: In the psych ward

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#11

Post by phelana » Sun Apr 24, 2016 9:21 pm

Here are the documents that were allegedly scanned at Malheur Wildlife Refuge by Gary Hunt and Todd ?.

http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/docum ... Part_I.pdf

http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/docum ... art_II.pdf

The first document of part one shows the lack of understanding of the 'overgrazing' concept. Hammond offers to pay the AUM $ out of his pocket for stay cattle on his allotment. BLM says it's not the AUM they are concerned about but the fact that there are extra cattle on the allotment.


Beatrice: Sigh no more, ladies, sigh no more. Men were deceivers ever. One foot in sea and one on shore, to one thing constant never. Then sigh not so but let them go and be you blithe and bonny, converting all your sounds of woe into hey nonny nonny.

User avatar
Chilidog
Posts: 8828
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 11:36 am

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#12

Post by Chilidog » Mon Apr 25, 2016 11:26 am

Ok, I took a super fast look at Vol 2 and didn't see much.

Possibly some Privleges work product, I'll let the lawyers figure that one out.

The only thing I personally found interesting is that the name of what is now referred to as the "Donner und Blitzen River," was on the 1878 township map properly spelled as the "Donder und Blitzen" river.



User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 9402
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#13

Post by Mikedunford » Mon Apr 25, 2016 12:16 pm

I took a skim though the papers this morning. No massive revelations. Lots of preliminary drafts of stuff, a fair amount of material that would probably be exempt from FOIA release for various reasons, but nothing very revolutionary.


"I don't give a fuck whether we're peers or not."
--Lord Thomas Henry Bingham to Boris Johnson, on being asked whether he would miss being in "the best club in London" if the Law Lords moved from Parliament to a Supreme Court.

User avatar
Butterfly Bilderberg
Posts: 7646
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:26 pm

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#14

Post by Butterfly Bilderberg » Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:43 pm

Shawna was looking for documentation of harassment and she found it. This documents a history of intimidation and threats against BLM employees.


"Pity the nation that acclaims the bully as hero,
and that deems the glittering conqueror bountiful."
- Kahlil Gibran, The Garden of The Prophet

User avatar
Burn'em Down
Posts: 413
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 9:20 pm

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#15

Post by Burn'em Down » Mon Apr 25, 2016 2:01 pm

Butterfly Bilderberg wrote:Shawna was looking for documentation of harassment and she found it. This documents a history of intimidation and threats against BLM employees.

There was a scrbd link on Santillis site at one time w something like 600 pages of stolen paperwork from the Hammond files the refuge had. The USFWS arrested Deight in the 90s for interference.



User avatar
spiduh
Posts: 2002
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2016 1:00 pm
Location: Zuckerman farm

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#16

Post by spiduh » Mon Apr 25, 2016 2:08 pm

Burn'em Down wrote:There was a scrbd link on Santillis site at one time w something like 600 pages of stolen paperwork from the Hammond files the refuge had. The USFWS arrested Deight in the 90s for interference.
http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopi ... 23#p746266


“If they kill me, grab my phone.” –Ammon Bundy (Reuters)
"Yes, I Did Turn the Flying Monkeys Loose!" -Anna von Reitz (FB)
"I 'Self Identify' as a female" -Jon Ritzheimer (FB)

User avatar
Burn'em Down
Posts: 413
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 9:20 pm

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#17

Post by Burn'em Down » Mon Apr 25, 2016 2:10 pm

spiduh wrote:
Burn'em Down wrote:There was a scrbd link on Santillis site at one time w something like 600 pages of stolen paperwork from the Hammond files the refuge had. The USFWS arrested Deight in the 90s for interference.
http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopi ... 23#p746266

Thanks spiduh.



User avatar
TsuDhoNimh
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2016 1:31 pm

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#18

Post by TsuDhoNimh » Fri Apr 29, 2016 1:04 pm

Here's a Harney County Committee of Safety economic analysis of what opening the BLM land up to their idea of "sustainable use" would do.

I note that if they clear-cut the forests and grazed the county down to the dirt, they might equal the income derived from visitors to the refuge. For a short while, until the accessible timber ran out and the cows starved.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.



User avatar
spiduh
Posts: 2002
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2016 1:00 pm
Location: Zuckerman farm

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#19

Post by spiduh » Fri Apr 29, 2016 1:08 pm

They are proposing cutting down National Forest, nice! Also, this is a bit scary:
NOTE: The economic case given here will also require common sense changes in environmental laws that apply to non federal lands including the Endangered Species Act, NEPA and the Equal Access to Justice Act.


“If they kill me, grab my phone.” –Ammon Bundy (Reuters)
"Yes, I Did Turn the Flying Monkeys Loose!" -Anna von Reitz (FB)
"I 'Self Identify' as a female" -Jon Ritzheimer (FB)

User avatar
Flatpointhigh
Posts: 7621
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:05 pm
Location: Hotel California, PH23
Occupation: Voice Actor, Podcaster, I hold a Ph.D in Procrastination.
Contact:

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#20

Post by Flatpointhigh » Fri Apr 29, 2016 1:35 pm

TsuDhoNimh wrote:Here's a Harney County Committee of Safety economic analysis of what opening the BLM land up to their idea of "sustainable use" would do.

I note that if they clear-cut the forests and grazed the county down to the dirt, they might equal the income derived from visitors to the refuge. For a short while, until the accessible timber ran out and the cows starved.
These are fake cowboys - real cowboys & ranchers are Conservationists. They understand the ramifications of grazing to mineral earth. :madguy:



"It is wrong to say God made rich and poor; He only made male and female, and He gave them the Earth as their inheritance."- Thomas Paine, Forward to Agrarian Justice
Cancer broke me

User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 18269
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2013 4:44 pm
Location: Texas Gulf Coast and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired Mechanical Engineer

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#21

Post by Volkonski » Fri Apr 29, 2016 1:51 pm

spiduh wrote:They are proposing cutting down National Forest, nice! Also, this is a bit scary:
NOTE: The economic case given here will also require common sense changes in environmental laws that apply to non federal lands including the Endangered Species Act, NEPA and the Equal Access to Justice Act.
This plan overlooks the fact that one of the reasons that East Oregon logging declined was competition from Canadian fir and US southern yellow pine. Once the old growth forests were cut it took too long for new trees to grow in east Oregon compared to other locations. East Oregon logging will never be able to compete without what is in effect a Federal subsidy.

As to the cattle, beef consumption is declining in the base case. Cheaper beef from Texas and points east would push east Oregon beef out of the market without what is in effect a Federal subsidy.

Also, if the Harney County Federal lands are no longer Federal a lot of good paying BLM and USFWS jobs will go away.


Image“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.”
― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

User avatar
Flatpointhigh
Posts: 7621
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:05 pm
Location: Hotel California, PH23
Occupation: Voice Actor, Podcaster, I hold a Ph.D in Procrastination.
Contact:

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#22

Post by Flatpointhigh » Fri Apr 29, 2016 3:34 pm

Volkonski wrote:
spiduh wrote:They are proposing cutting down National Forest, nice! Also, this is a bit scary:
NOTE: The economic case given here will also require common sense changes in environmental laws that apply to non federal lands including the Endangered Species Act, NEPA and the Equal Access to Justice Act.
:snippity:

Also, if the Harney County Federal lands are no longer Federal a lot of good paying BLM and USFWS jobs will go away.
That's exactly what they want. Remember, the object is to destroy the government



"It is wrong to say God made rich and poor; He only made male and female, and He gave them the Earth as their inheritance."- Thomas Paine, Forward to Agrarian Justice
Cancer broke me

User avatar
esseff44
Posts: 12507
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:40 am

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#23

Post by esseff44 » Fri Apr 29, 2016 4:15 pm

The object is satisfying greed and getting the government off the backs of the greedy. The goal is to enjoy unlimited access to what's left of natural resources while socializing the costs and privatizing the profits.



User avatar
Flatpointhigh
Posts: 7621
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:05 pm
Location: Hotel California, PH23
Occupation: Voice Actor, Podcaster, I hold a Ph.D in Procrastination.
Contact:

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#24

Post by Flatpointhigh » Sat Apr 30, 2016 11:09 am

esseff44 wrote:The object is satisfying greed and getting the government off the backs of the greedy. The goal is to enjoy unlimited access to what's left of natural resources while socializing the costs and privatizing the profits.
Same thing.



"It is wrong to say God made rich and poor; He only made male and female, and He gave them the Earth as their inheritance."- Thomas Paine, Forward to Agrarian Justice
Cancer broke me

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 17307
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: U.S.A. v STEVEN & DWIGHT HAMMOND

#25

Post by RTH10260 » Sat Apr 30, 2016 3:17 pm

TsuDhoNimh wrote:Here's a Harney County Committee of Safety economic analysis of what opening the BLM land up to their idea of "sustainable use" would do.

I note that if they clear-cut the forests and grazed the county down to the dirt, theymight equal the income derived from visitors to the refuge. For a short while, until the accessible timber ran out and the cows starved.
At which point no tourist will see a point in visiting a moonlike landscape with a refuge museum telling of the good old days...



Post Reply

Return to “Other Fringe Groups & Individuals”