Bundy Trial Oregon Part I (Ammon et. al.)

gshevlin
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:05 pm
Location: Dallas TX
Contact:

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13401

Post by gshevlin »

froggy wrote:After Bundy's display of crocodile tears yesterday, I really hope that the prosecution will point out to the jury that Bundy's so-called family land is LEASED from the federal government. They. Don't. Own. The. Land. They have some piece of it that is the Bundy Family Ranch. Good on them. They own that part. The leased land from the BLM is not owned. And the BLM leasing contracts are not sacred. They are not owned. They are not passed down through a family like an heirloom. They are not part of the Bundy's "homestead." It's leased land that they stopped paying their fair share for Twenty. Years. Ago. The Bundy family is nothing more than a bunch of tax cheats. How would the jury feel about someone who didn't pay their taxes for twenty years?

The Hammonds, likewise, don't own the land that is in contention. And they have a long history as local arsonists. Now that this Pandora's Box of evidence is open, I really hope that the prosecution can point this out. This conflict in Bunkerville is over cows on leased land, not owned. And the Hammonds are not nice people, and they were convicted of arson by a jury of their peers, in Pendleton, OR, in a rural venue. They are not good ranchers. They are arsonists with a 20-year history of tangling with the BLM.
I think that the Closing argument from the prosecution is going to need to remind the jurors that most of this week's defense testimony is irrelevant bibble-babble.

User avatar
realist
Posts: 35106
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13402

Post by realist »

New article up:
Ammon Bundy testifies how Bunkerville shaped his views in Harney County

Just as the local sheriff and police intervened to protect his family's ranch and cattle at Bunkerville, Nevada in 2014, Ammon Bundy said he wanted the local Harney County sheriff to step up and stand for the family of ranchers Dwight Hammond Jr. and Steve Hammond.

Bundy described how the help of local law enforcement in brokering a deal in the standoff in Bunkerville, allowing Bundy's father to reclaim his cattle while federal U.S. Bureau of Land Management agents backed off the property, was "significant'' for him.

[...]

Flipping through The Doctrine and Covenants of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints' on the witness stand, Bundy explained to jurors that among his church teaching is this:

"It is our duty to go to the judge. It is our duty to go to the representative. It is our duty to go to the president and plead with them to stand up for what is wrong,'' he said. Further, it's a duty to give each of these officials the opportunity to do what is right.

"We are not to act until that has been done,'' he said.

U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown, more than once, warned Bundy not to read to jurors from the Scriptures, after Bundy's lawyer asked him to turn to a particular passage.
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-stando ... ut_ho.html
ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Mink
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:46 pm
Location: Mink's Den

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13403

Post by Mink »

Lunch Time Tweet Sheet 05 October 2016

All extraneous stuff removed. Times approximate.

Early morning Tweet Sheet: http://thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 15#p826615
Midmorning Tweet Sheet: http://thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 85#p826685

Maxine (Oregonian)
begin 12:16pm pst

1. After Bundy stepped from stand for lunch break, Neil Wampler stood to applaud:'We all love you Ammon. Thank you for everything you've done.'
2. Judge warned Bundy to not read Scripture to jurors

Conrad Wilson (OPB)
begin 12:13pm pst

1. Outside jury, just before lunch break as Ammon Bundy was coming off the stand, Neil Wampler shouted and clapped in support.
2. "We all love you Ammon. Thank you so much for what you're doing," Wampler said, some in the public gallery applauded too.
3. The jury was not present. Judge Anna Brown looked up but did not respond to Wampler.
4. Bundy's testimony made clear he believed he was following the Lord's plan in standing up for the Hammond's and going to Harney County
5. On a Jan. 1st video, Bundy asked people to join him in Burns.
6. Bundy said at that time he was not working with anyone else and he had not decided to occupy the refuge
7. Bundy also said he was not aware of efforts to stop fed employees from working.

Leah Sottile (independent print journalist)
begin 12:02pm pst

1. Ammon Bundy and Marcus Mumford, still on the stand. Bundy discussing that elected officials ignored redress of grievances.
2. Said they were asking Ward to get the fed govt to "hold off a little bit" in taking the Hammonds until they got "to the bottom of this"
3. Showed the jury the redress of grievances, with 29 pages of signatures (my question is: are they signatures if they're just typed in?)
4. Bundy, of non-response: "What are we to do?...That's how the ranching & agricultural communities have felt for decades. What are we to do?"
5. Bundy referred to Declar of Indepence & pulled out pocket Constitution."May I read?" Judge:"No." Man in gallery:"Is this an American court?"
6. Woman next to the man in gallery said of judge: "That woman has got to go" (Mind you: this is in the overflow room)
7. Mumford establishes him as LDS, asks about intersection of relig beliefs & Constit.Bundy says LDS call Constitution "inspired document"
8. Bundy: "Our forefathers were inspired by the creator of this world to draft that charter for the benefit of mankind"
9. Mumford directs Bundy to open Doctrine of Covenant book on stand. Knight objects. Brown: "The obj is sustained to the reading of scripture"
10. Knight: "This is not relevant." Mumford: "He doesn't know if it is relevant or not." Wild cheers, laughter and clapping in the overflow room
11. Edit: Mumford directs Bundy to open Doctrine&Covenant book on stand. Knight objects.Brown:"The obj is sustained to the reading of scripture"
12. Sitting right in with the Patriots was...interesting! They stare a lot at you when you're taking notes. And they pass around mints and gum
13. Also: lots of perfume in the courtroom. And bedazzled purses and intricate back pockets on jeans. And buckles the size of platters. Boots.

ANON BOG (an attorney)
begin 12:11 pm pst

1. This morning in the overflow room the watching the trial; it veered between comedict and the surreal
2. Mumford is trying to place the overall narrative as AB a simple man of faith who has been victim of gov overreach trying to help others
3. Challenging CT's rulings. JAB told him many times to sit down.
4. MM wanted AB to read LDS scripture. Objection sustained
5. AB testified that he doesn't get info. In the dark. Said he was in his little dark sell.
6. Def showed video of Bunkerville minus the sniper on the bridge. I don't understand why. The Patriots looked like aggressors
7. MM tried to get in quadruple heresy. No go.
8. Yes to impound the cattle. And then proceeded to explain how they stood up to overreaching Feds [context: refers to court order for BLM to impound cattle as mentioned in a midmorning tweet by Karina Brown]
9. AB told about how much he has sacrificed to help the Hammonds and E OR ranchers
10. in offer of proof AB said Hammond thought that he might be shot in back of the head. Warned AB might be too
11. Haha. cell* [edited from "sell" by ANON]
12. in offer of proof AB also said Hammonds threatened with early detention and less favorable prison if he talked to AB.
13. Also said Feds did this to everyone.

Scott Klatt (Hecktow/cartoonist)
begin 12:20pm pst

1. Oh it is on! !! [link to graphic:
2. Mumford going off his nut at times. Big fight over hear say on video regarding who felt threatened by fbi tactics/Hammonds
3. Mumford questions bundy on LDS beliefs regarding constitution being inspired document
4. More of the same [link to graphic:
5. Mumford asked bundy how many people took part in bunkerlville stand off the first 5 days. He said thousands
6.

Steve Dubois (AP)
begin 12:16pm pst

1. Most good stuff away from jury; fights over allowable testimony. Judge: 'Mr. Mumford please calm down and don't yell at me'

Karina Brown (Courthouse News)
begin 1:02pm pst

1. Ammon's version of events is reminiscent of Mumford's exchanges w judge: she keeps reminding him that her rulings are final

Chris Liedle (KATU)
begin 12:14pm pst

1. Just before lunch recess Neil Wampler stands up, yells: "We all love you Ammon!" Followed by clapping.
2. Bundy: After redress of grievances went unanswered-> "Do we just go home and forget about it. We couldn't."

Michael McLaughlin (McLaughlin News)
begin 12:42pm pst

1. Before lunch break, Ammon Bundy attempted to read from the Declaration of Independence and Mormon scripture but judge stopped him
2. Bundy's testified that he didn't communicate with co-defendants before Jan. 1 about planning action in Burns, Ore.
3. Bundy said he wanted to "make a hard stand" in Burns but did not have Malheur refuge in mind

end 1:12pm pst
###
______________________
Newest OregonLive article regarding Bundy testimony: http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-stando ... ut_ho.html
[for more articles on yesterday's hearing, see the early morning Tweet Sheet at bottom]
Quite Sane

User avatar
realist
Posts: 35106
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13404

Post by realist »

Bundy Court Sketches ‏@hecktow 11m11 minutes ago

Mumford asked bundy how many people took part in bunkerlville stand off the first 5 days. He said thousands #Oregonstandoff

@lizard51 If anything, he's made relations between ranchers & govt worse. Things were working in Harney Cty before he showed up.

Ammon's version of events is reminiscent of Mumford's exchanges w judge: she keeps reminding him that her rulings are final #Oregonstandoff
ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 26769
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2013 4:44 pm
Location: Texas Gulf Coast and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired Mechanical Engineer

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13405

Post by Volkonski »

Ammon Bundy testifies how Bunkerville shaped his views in Harney County

http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-stando ... ut_ho.html
"I did exactly what the Lord asked me to do. I did the best I could with the direction that he gave me,'' Bundy was heard on a Jan. 1 video he made called, "My Dear Friends'' video.
"I was to call all these people together and unite together and we were to create a defense for the people of Harney County so they could begin to use their lands and their resources again,'' Bundy said on the video played in court.
Mumford asked what Bundy had in mind at that point.
"I had in mind we would go to Burns and we could make a hard stand then,'' he testified.
A lot of interesting stuff in that article. Mumford is a piece of work. :roll:
Image“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.”
― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

User avatar
Jim
Posts: 3426
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 4:05 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13406

Post by Jim »

"Quadrupal heresy"? Did she accuse 4 of the jurors of being Muslim?

laboreducator
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 2:35 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13407

Post by laboreducator »

From latest Olive story "Bundy described how the help of local law enforcement in brokering a deal in the standoff in Bunkerville, allowing Bundy's father to reclaim his cattle while federal U.S. Bureau of Land Management agents backed off the property, was "significant'' for him.
"I was able to see rights restored,'' Bundy testified Wednesday morning, his second day on the witness stand in the federal conspiracy trial in federal court. "I was able to see our local government stand up for the people and restore their rights and protect them.''

Isn't this direct evidence that can now be used in the NV trials to prove Cliven took possession of the cattle that were no longer legally his and that (forget the lack of any 'deal') threat of force was used? Ammon ensuring Cliven will never get out of jail/prison again?

chancery
Posts: 1634
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 5:51 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13408

Post by chancery »

IANACrL, JAB is an experienced trial judge, and maybe I haven't thought this through carefully enough, but to me this trial is going off the rails.

User avatar
Mink
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:46 pm
Location: Mink's Den

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13409

Post by Mink »

In reference to JAB, ANON BOG twittered this: She's very smart. Knows her stuff and MM is just trying to goad her.
Quite Sane

rifleman1635
Posts: 467
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 12:09 am

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13410

Post by rifleman1635 »

realist wrote:New article up:
Ammon Bundy testifies how Bunkerville shaped his views in Harney County

Just as the local sheriff and police intervened to protect his family's ranch and cattle at Bunkerville, Nevada in 2014, Ammon Bundy said he wanted the local Harney County sheriff to step up and stand for the family of ranchers Dwight Hammond Jr. and Steve Hammond.

Bundy described how the help of local law enforcement in brokering a deal in the standoff in Bunkerville, allowing Bundy's father to reclaim his cattle while federal U.S. Bureau of Land Management agents backed off the property, was "significant'' for him.

[...]

Flipping through The Doctrine and Covenants of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints' on the witness stand, Bundy explained to jurors that among his church teaching is this:

"It is our duty to go to the judge.It is our duty to go to the representative. It is our duty to go to the president and plead with them to stand up for what is wrong,'' he said. Further, it's a duty to give each of these officials the opportunity to do what is right.

"We are not to act until that has been done,'' he said.

U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown, more than once, warned Bundy not to read to jurors from the Scriptures, after Bundy's lawyer asked him to turn to a particular passage.
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-stando ... ut_ho.html
And the question on Cross to ask is "When did you contact the Federal Court which handled the Hammond case?"

User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 26769
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2013 4:44 pm
Location: Texas Gulf Coast and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired Mechanical Engineer

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13411

Post by Volkonski »

OneEyedJacksMom ‏@OneEyedJacksMom 25m
25 minutes ago

Interesting, not a single solitary Eastern Oregon rancher is at the trial. Hmmmm #oregonstandoff
Good point.

Well, there was the one that testified for the prosecution.
Image“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.”
― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

User avatar
maydijo
Posts: 2764
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:23 pm
Location: where women glow and men plunder
Occupation: harassing marsupials

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13412

Post by maydijo »

realist wrote:New article up:
Ammon Bundy testifies how Bunkerville shaped his views in Harney County

Just as the local sheriff and police intervened to protect his family's ranch and cattle at Bunkerville, Nevada in 2014, Ammon Bundy said he wanted the local Harney County sheriff to step up and stand for the family of ranchers Dwight Hammond Jr. and Steve Hammond.

Bundy described how the help of local law enforcement in brokering a deal in the standoff in Bunkerville, allowing Bundy's father to reclaim his cattle while federal U.S. Bureau of Land Management agents backed off the property, was "significant'' for him.

[...]

Flipping through The Doctrine and Covenants of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints' on the witness stand, Bundy explained to jurors that among his church teaching is this:

"It is our duty to go to the judge. It is our duty to go to the representative. It is our duty to go to the president and plead with them to stand up for what is wrong,'' he said. Further, it's a duty to give each of these officials the opportunity to do what is right.

"We are not to act until that has been done,'' he said.

U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown, more than once, warned Bundy not to read to jurors from the Scriptures, after Bundy's lawyer asked him to turn to a particular passage.
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-stando ... ut_ho.html[/quot
rifleman1635 wrote:
And the question on Cross to ask is "When did you contact the Federal Court which handled the Hammond case?"
I'm a sixth generation Mormon. It is NEVER our duty to stage an insurrection against a government, especially one that is democratically elected and has a robust and established procedure for the redress of grievances. I resent the hell out of this family hiding behind religion as they repeatedly break the law.

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 6018
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13413

Post by Maybenaut »

chancery wrote:IANACrL, JAB is an experienced trial judge, and maybe I haven't thought this through carefully enough, but to me this trial is going off the rails.
I don't think so. The defense is entitled to put on a case, and JAB is keeping in reined in, I think.

Just from the tweets it appears to me that Ammon Bundy is hanging himself wrt the conspiracy charge (admitting going to Burns to "take a hard stand" against the federal government, then ultimately ending up at the refuge with guns (even if his purpose in having the guns is to protect himself from the FBI). How does one "take a hard stand" against the federal government from within a federal facility and not think he's impeding federal officers from doing their jobs?

And the prosecution is going to get a chance to refocus the jury on cross-examination.
"Hey! You know, we left this England place because it was bogus. So if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too." - Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Mink
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:46 pm
Location: Mink's Den

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13414

Post by Mink »

I can't help but think that the jury will just think Ammon is nuts. There is one LDS member on the jury, but most LDS do not align with Bundy's LDS/Constitutional psychobabble.

In reading through the tweets from yesterday and today, and the various articles, it sounds like this to me: My family has had issues with the government for decades. So, we had to do something for the Hammonds after successfully driving the federal government off THEIR property that we claim to own in Nevada. The sheriff in Harney wouldn't turn on the government. So, we failed. So we took over a bird sanctuary and wouldn't give it back. We said we were going to make it a place for militia to stay. We told people to come and bring their guns. God told me to do this. I did my best. I failed and now I'm in jail because the sheriff wouldn't convene a common law jury over the Hammonds. Oh an boo hoo hoo.

Translation: Thanks, dad. Your sons are now America's biggest FUps. We can't do anything right. Boo hoo hoo hoo.
Quite Sane

HumbleScribe
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 7:48 pm
Location: Zzyzx Road
Occupation: Green eye-shade wearing bean counter

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13415

Post by HumbleScribe »

Maybenaut wrote:
chancery wrote:IANACrL, JAB is an experienced trial judge, and maybe I haven't thought this through carefully enough, but to me this trial is going off the rails.
I don't think so. The defense is entitled to put on a case, and JAB is keeping in reined in, I think.

Just from the tweets it appears to me that Ammon Bundy is hanging himself wrt the conspiracy charge (admitting going to Burns to "take a hard stand" against the federal government, then ultimately ending up at the refuge with guns (even if his purpose in having the guns is to protect himself from the FBI). How does one "take a hard stand" against the federal government from within a federal facility and not think he's impeding federal officers from doing their jobs?

And the prosecution is going to get a chance to refocus the jury on cross-examination.
I really appreciate the perspective from experienced trial attorneys (especially with criminal experience, Maybenaut) who can bring things back down to earth. You know how the system works unlike the rest of us. Thank you and :thumbs:

HighPlainsDrifter
Posts: 89
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 8:49 am

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13416

Post by HighPlainsDrifter »

Scario wrote:
rpenner wrote:
Volkonski wrote:
I thought the Hammonds plead guilty. Perhaps after the trial began, but it seems awkward to call a witness in a matter that was decided by plea bargain.
During the trial, the jury found them guilty of 2 of the 9 charges. While they were still figuring out the verdict of the other 7 charges, the Hammond's took the plea deal and the other 7 charges were dropped. They did sign a deal stating they would do the 5 years. The judge erred in giving them less than the mandatory minimum.
He erred not. He was going to retire and felt that this was his (last) chance to put his own thoughts about justice above the law.

User avatar
Plutodog
Posts: 11952
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:11 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13417

Post by Plutodog »

HighPlainsDrifter wrote:
Scario wrote:
rpenner wrote:
I thought the Hammonds plead guilty. Perhaps after the trial began, but it seems awkward to call a witness in a matter that was decided by plea bargain.
During the trial, the jury found them guilty of 2 of the 9 charges. While they were still figuring out the verdict of the other 7 charges, the Hammond's took the plea deal and the other 7 charges were dropped. They did sign a deal stating they would do the 5 years. The judge erred in giving them less than the mandatory minimum.
He erred not. He was going to retire and felt that this was his (last) chance to put his own thoughts about justice above the law.
He erred indeed. He decided to ignore law and precedent and act out. He was rightly overturned on appeal.
The only good Bundy is an Al Bundy.

Beautiful Leaf
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 8:13 pm
Location: Corvallis OR
Occupation: Attorney

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13418

Post by Beautiful Leaf »

I came back onto this thread in order to address the short amount of time the prosecution has estimated for the cross-examination. I will keep my fingers crossed that the prosecution keeps its eyes on the prize.

Throughout my 25 years of active practice, I saw numerous cases lost when one side would lose track of what their burden of proof was to be. This is a fairly straightforward case, and probably the best thing the prosecution could do would be to ask by way of verbal bullet form cross-examination questions that lead Ammon and the jury straight through the morass. We are not here to put Ammon Bundy's religious beliefs on trial, nor are we trying to paint him as a monster. Nor however should he be allowed to paint himself as David versus the Goliath of government .

By asking Sheriff Ward to make a stand on behalf of the Hammonds, there is no debate that Ammon was expecting the sheriff to be willing to contravene the efforts of federal employees, backed up by weapons if need be, to comply with the federal courts order returning the Hammonds for the remainder of the sentence to which they agreed to serve.

By bringing a considerable amount of weapons and ammo to the refuge, they not only created an intimidating and threatening environment in which the federal employees of the refuge would likely find impossible to work within, they were there to make a hard stand against any who try to run them out of there by interfering with the federal and possibly state LEOs whose job it is to resolve the situation of getting the property back to where belongs in the eyes of the majority of American citizens.

One of the hardest tasks faced by attorneys in every court situation whether criminal or civil state or federal is overcoming the inherent drive to obliterate the opposition, in order to establish that they, the attorney, represent the force of Good. The instinct to strike back with equal force to every and accuracy, lie, or misrepresentation is a an absolute recipe for disaster.

It is not the jury's job to adjudicate the question of whether Ammon is a "real" rancher, a Sovcit or a visionary – it is for the jury to decide whether the actions taken by Bundy et al constituted an intentional interference with the ability of federal employees to do their jobs by way of threats intimidation etc. That is why the prosecution can say they only need a half an hour to elicit enough yes\No answers establishing the conspiracy to perform said acts of interference, initiated by him.
I watched a County DA lose a simple assault case (consisting of little more to prove than this person touched someone else without their permission) by allowing himself to get distracted by the "victim's" desire to put the defendant's character on trial in order to get leverage in the divorce case between the defendant and the "victim." The DA began attacking witnesses about superfluous questions, causing the judge to admonish him. A two day trial, the jury deliberated such a short amount of time they turned down having a free lunch and rendered a not guilty verdict within 14 minutes. Let me make this perfectly clear: the defendant was actually guilty of having touched the victim without her permission during a heated row, striking back where the victim hit the defendant first, leaving marks where his glasses bent from the force of her strike. By losing track, which should've been an easy win, turned into a total rout because the jury felt the whole interaction was overblown and exaggerated And really nothing more than both individuals behaving badly while arguing over the demise of a long marriage exactly as the very low-key defense attorney so eloquently stated in his closing argument. Hence the love of my life and my then future husband was extricated from criminal charges he had every expectation of losing. No I was not his attorney, that role was played by his future best man who was and still is the criminal defense attorney I would ever call if I am ever arrested. I was actually a subpoenaed witness.
Blessed are they who can laugh at themselves for they shall never lack amusement.

User avatar
Scario
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 9:02 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13419

Post by Scario »

HighPlainsDrifter wrote:
Scario wrote:
rpenner wrote:
I thought the Hammonds plead guilty. Perhaps after the trial began, but it seems awkward to call a witness in a matter that was decided by plea bargain.
During the trial, the jury found them guilty of 2 of the 9 charges. While they were still figuring out the verdict of the other 7 charges, the Hammond's took the plea deal and the other 7 charges were dropped. They did sign a deal stating they would do the 5 years. The judge erred in giving them less than the mandatory minimum.
He erred not. He was going to retire and felt that this was his (last) chance to put his own thoughts about justice above the law.
That is not how the law works, so he did err. I've been through a lawsuit. The judge during my trial explained to everyone, it is not about personal feelings, it is about the letter of the law.

User avatar
realist
Posts: 35106
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13420

Post by realist »

chancery wrote:IANACrL, JAB is an experienced trial judge, and maybe I haven't thought this through carefully enough, but to me this trial is going off the rails.
Concur.
ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Sugar Magnolia
Posts: 10835
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 6:44 am

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13421

Post by Sugar Magnolia »

realist wrote:
chancery wrote:IANACrL, JAB is an experienced trial judge, and maybe I haven't thought this through carefully enough, but to me this trial is going off the rails.
Concur.
Where do you (either or both of you) see the Judge allowing it to go off the rails?

HighPlainsDrifter
Posts: 89
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 8:49 am

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13422

Post by HighPlainsDrifter »

Plutodog wrote:
HighPlainsDrifter wrote:
Scario wrote:
During the trial, the jury found them guilty of 2 of the 9 charges. While they were still figuring out the verdict of the other 7 charges, the Hammond's took the plea deal and the other 7 charges were dropped. They did sign a deal stating they would do the 5 years. The judge erred in giving them less than the mandatory minimum.
He erred not. He was going to retire and felt that this was his (last) chance to put his own thoughts about justice above the law.
He erred indeed. He decided to ignore law and precedent and act out. He was rightly overturned on appeal.
/offtopic
For me as a non native English speaker to "err " means to make a "nonvoluntary " mistake and not breaking the law with open eyes. But I may be wrong.

User avatar
jmj
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 11:01 am

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13423

Post by jmj »

HighPlainsDrifter wrote:/offtopic
For me as a non native English speaker to "err " means to make a "nonvoluntary " mistake and not breaking the law with open eyes. But I may be wrong.
It does often have that connotation, but not always.

User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 3734
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13424

Post by Dan1100 »

HighPlainsDrifter wrote:
Scario wrote:
rpenner wrote:
I thought the Hammonds plead guilty. Perhaps after the trial began, but it seems awkward to call a witness in a matter that was decided by plea bargain.
During the trial, the jury found them guilty of 2 of the 9 charges. While they were still figuring out the verdict of the other 7 charges, the Hammond's took the plea deal and the other 7 charges were dropped. They did sign a deal stating they would do the 5 years. The judge erred in giving them less than the mandatory minimum.
He erred not. He was going to retire and felt that this was his (last) chance to put his own thoughts about justice above the law.
Well, as explained above, he did err.

His personal thoughts about justice were bullshit. These two guys were convicted of setting a fire during what was basically a fire emergency, downhill from active fire fighters. I'm against mandatory minimums on principle. But what the Hammonds did was dangerous and stupid and could have gotten fire fighters killed. They deserved more than 5 years on the merits. They didn't deserve to be treated any differently than someone who burns their business for the insurance money (and more than 5 years isn't unusual for that). They set an illegal fire, risking lives in an already very dangerous situation, and they did it for financial gain.
edit:
As for as I am concerned, the government never should have plea bargained and 5 years was an undeserved gift.

User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 26769
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2013 4:44 pm
Location: Texas Gulf Coast and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired Mechanical Engineer

Re: Bundy Trials - Oregon

#13425

Post by Volkonski »

KOIN News
Verified account
‏@KOINNews 1m
1 minute ago

If they weren't armed, Bundy said they'd have been rounded up and taken off refuge right away, w/o getting message out.
So the end justifies the means? ;)
Image“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.”
― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

Post Reply

Return to “Bundy Ranch/Malheur NWR”