Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 6059
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#26

Post by Maybenaut »

pipistrelle wrote:I wonder how that works when the booking photos are taken by the sheriff's department, as in Oregon, but the charges are federal? The Oregonian ran those booking photos 6 million times (patriot math).
I am aware of a similar issue in a military case. Military member was held in pretrial confinement at a far-away military base, then held in the local hoosegow near the court house for all the pre-trial hearings. Every time they brought him to the local jail, the jail took another mugshot, and posted it online, as required by state law. Then all these "checkoutthesemugshots.com"-type sites picked them up, and you had to pay to get them removed. At the trial level the judge awarded credit for unlawful pretrial punishment (given the power dynamic in the military, unlawful pre-trial punishment is much easier to prove in the military then it is in the civilian world). The military has closed down a lot of its local confinement facilities in favor of contracts with local jails. Until now, the litigation has always focused on "co-mingling" pretrial detainees with convicted prisoners (a no-no in the military). I predict a flurry of litigation seeking credit on the mugshot issue, inside and outside of the military.
"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
NMgirl
Posts: 4537
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#27

Post by NMgirl »

Thanks, Bob, for that interesting info on mugshots and FOIA requests. :thumbs:

Last night I looked at all the Google images of these four defendants. I couldn't discern any tattoos, but...beards. I do wonder why the Government wants to introduce mugshots, though, since there are so many other damning pictures avaialable to them. Why is that :?: One or more of the defendants must sport some kind of interesting facial tattoo, now revealed by lack of facial hair, is all I can come up with. And I really, really would like to see those tattoos!

User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 3754
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#28

Post by Dan1100 »

NMgirl wrote:Thanks, Bob, for that interesting info on mugshots and FOIA requests. :thumbs:

Last night I looked at all the Google images of these four defendants. I couldn't discern any tattoos, but...beards. I do wonder why the Government wants to introduce mugshots, though, since there are so many other damning pictures avaialable to them. Why is that :?: One or more of the defendants must sport some kind of interesting facial tattoo, now revealed by lack of facial hair, is all I can come up with. And I really, really would like to see those tattoos!
I vaguely remember from reading the Government's motion that the reason that the tattoos are relevant is that it says "III%" and I think one said "III% Bundy Ranch" or similar.

"I may have pooted, but I didn't mean to poot. Pooting felt so good and I was so proud of my first unintentional poot that I got a tattoo to help commemorate it and just had to poot 2 more times."

User avatar
pipistrelle
Posts: 7903
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:26 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#29

Post by pipistrelle »

Dan1100 wrote:I vaguely remember from reading the Government's motion that the reason that the tattoos are relevant is that it says "III%" and I think one said "III% Bundy Ranch" or similar.
Gang symbols, then. You know, if they were urban.

Hercule Parrot
Posts: 695
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2015 3:58 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#30

Post by Hercule Parrot »

Dan1100 wrote:I vaguely remember from reading the Government's motion that the reason that the tattoos are relevant is that it says "III%" and I think one said "III% Bundy Ranch" or similar.."
I heard somewhere that Ammon has a huge tat of RuPaul across his shoulders, with the caption "Sagebrush Queen!" beneath in gothic script.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 28061
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#31

Post by bob »

pipistrelle wrote:
Dan1100 wrote:I vaguely remember from reading the Government's motion that the reason that the tattoos are relevant is that it says "III%" and I think one said "III% Bundy Ranch" or similar.
Gang symbols, then. You know, if they were urban.
Evidence of "gang" affiliation is often excluded as unduly prejudicial. But it can sometimes be admitted to prove bias, motive, or other interest. And tattoos that (essentially) say, "I was at the Bundy Ranch and all I got was this stupid t-shirt" are expressive conduct; they are essentially voluntary admissions, from which reasonable inferences may be drawn.
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

boots
Posts: 3287
Joined: Sat May 16, 2015 5:23 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#32

Post by boots »

Dan1100 wrote:
NMgirl wrote:Thanks, Bob, for that interesting info on mugshots and FOIA requests. :thumbs:

Last night I looked at all the Google images of these four defendants. I couldn't discern any tattoos, but...beards. I do wonder why the Government wants to introduce mugshots, though, since there are so many other damning pictures avaialable to them. Why is that :?: One or more of the defendants must sport some kind of interesting facial tattoo, now revealed by lack of facial hair, is all I can come up with. And I really, really would like to see those tattoos!
I vaguely remember from reading the Government's motion that the reason that the tattoos are relevant is that it says "III%" and I think one said "III% Bundy Ranch" or similar.

"I may have pooted, but I didn't mean to poot. Pooting felt so good and I was so proud of my first unintentional poot that I got a tattoo to help commemorate it and just had to poot 2 more times."
:rotflmao: You win the internet Dan

User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 3754
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#33

Post by Dan1100 »

Techno Luddite wrote:
Dan1100 wrote:
NMgirl wrote:Thanks, Bob, for that interesting info on mugshots and FOIA requests. :thumbs:

Last night I looked at all the Google images of these four defendants. I couldn't discern any tattoos, but...beards. I do wonder why the Government wants to introduce mugshots, though, since there are so many other damning pictures avaialable to them. Why is that :?: One or more of the defendants must sport some kind of interesting facial tattoo, now revealed by lack of facial hair, is all I can come up with. And I really, really would like to see those tattoos!
I vaguely remember from reading the Government's motion that the reason that the tattoos are relevant is that it says "III%" and I think one said "III% Bundy Ranch" or similar.

"I may have pooted, but I didn't mean to poot. Pooting felt so good and I was so proud of my first unintentional poot that I got a tattoo to help commemorate it and just had to poot 2 more times."
:rotflmao: You win the internet Dan
Once you realize "Poot" is a noun, an adjective, an adverb and a verb, it just kind of flows.

http://conjugator.reverso.net/force-con ... -poot.html

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4537
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#34

Post by NMgirl »

Dan1100 wrote:
Once you realize "Poot" is a noun, an adjective, an adverb and a verb, it just kind of flows.

http://conjugator.reverso.net/force-con ... -poot.html
Dan can expect a nomination for the Nobel Prize in Literature any day now. Outstanding achievement in the world of contemporary literature, Dan! :cheer1:

User avatar
Estiveo
Posts: 8510
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:31 pm
Location: Trouble's Howse

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#35

Post by Estiveo »

A Pootlitzer Prize, certainly.
Image Image Image Image Image

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 46283
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#36

Post by Sterngard Friegen »

When one of these pootriots dies is he kapoot?

User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 8482
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#37

Post by RoadScholar »

Poot-être.
The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3

User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 9884
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 1 dog, 1 cat, and 1 horse, 4 granddogs, and one grandcat.

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#38

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer »

RoadScholar wrote:Poot-être.
:rotflmao:
A 19th Amendment Centennial Moment:
The 19th Amendment was first introduced to Congress in 1878, yet it was not approved by Congress until 1919 – 41 years later.
- https://legaldictionary.net/19th-amendment/

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 30029
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: District Court of Bun-Dogs
Occupation: Hayseed from North Cackilacki, Space Cadet, and your benevolent Dick Tater

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#39

Post by Foggy »

Hercule Parrot wrote:
Dan1100 wrote:I vaguely remember from reading the Government's motion that the reason that the tattoos are relevant is that it says "III%" and I think one said "III% Bundy Ranch" or similar.."
I heard somewhere that Ammon has a huge tat of RuPaul across his shoulders, with the caption "Sagebrush Queen!" beneath in gothic script.
:shock:


    • :mrgreen:

        • :lol:
We don't know what we don't know.

(Fogbow on PayPal)

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 13606
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#40

Post by Notorial Dissent »

Rude, posilutely rude!!!!! :-D :-D
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4537
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#41

Post by NMgirl »

For a change, this article from the LVRJ offers us some new information and is competently written:

Jury selection crucial in Bunkerville standoff retrial
“Every case is about jury selection, but this one is specifically about jury selection,” said attorney Jess Marchese, who represents defendant Eric Parker. “Either you’re going to be OK with Eric Parker on a bridge with his gun or you’re not. And one thing I will do is embrace that more.”
https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/bund ... f-retrial/

Sounds as though our old buddy and pal, Blaine Cooper, will be testifying against his fellow Poots. How many times will Stanley commit perjury this time around? He was an unattractive witness in the second Oregon trial. I happened to be botg that day and didn't feel he added anything, and perhaps detracted from, the Government's case. Gawd. I would love to be botg in Nevada, but never on a day that Stanley takes the stand. :sick:

User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 16003
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 7:53 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#42

Post by Kendra »

Thanks for the link. Any idea which poot page is best for catching livestreams tomorrow? Have the day off, might as well entertain myself :D

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4537
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#43

Post by NMgirl »

Kendra wrote:Thanks for the link. Any idea which poot page is best for catching livestreams tomorrow? Have the day off, might as well entertain myself :D
Believe it or not, Lambo and Andrea Olson-Parker do the best court updates, especially if Parker can achieve the all-but-impossible silencing of the lamb. He really is, in fact, dumb as a wet sock and makes mistakes on the interpretation of what went on in court. Parker takes reams of notes and, if she's on form, will stick to them and not go off on rants too often. One hopes that BrandNu is not in the vicinity of the camera since he blows hard, both verbally and on that appalling shofar. Some days chickens, some days feathers. Since I'm not on FB, I wait until the court summaries are posted to Youtube. They are long--at least 25 minutes most days--and it takes me forever to transcribe the highlights. (Hint, hint. I have a busy day tomorrow and am traveling all day Tuesday and all day Thursday.) One must listen closely, because Poots do not interpret the courtroom scene as normal people do and you have to be able to separate the wheat (the reality) from the chaff (Poots' version).

If there are reporters at the trial, follow @jennydwilson (LVRJ) or @Vanessa_Murphy on teh Twitter. Vanessa is a super-tweeter, almost as good as our Oregon news tweeters, Max, Conrad and Leah. Oh, how I miss them. :crying:

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 6059
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#44

Post by Maybenaut »

NMgirl wrote:
Kendra wrote:Thanks for the link. Any idea which poot page is best for catching livestreams tomorrow? Have the day off, might as well entertain myself :D
Believe it or not, Lambo and Andrea Olson-Parker do the best court updates, especially if Parker can achieve the all-but-impossible silencing of the lamb. He really is, in fact, dumb as a wet sock and makes mistakes on the interpretation of what went on in court. Parker takes reams of notes and, if she's on form, will stick to them and not go off on rants too often. One hopes that BrandNu is not in the vicinity of the camera since he blows hard, both verbally and on that appalling shofar. Some days chickens, some days feathers. Since I'm not on FB, I wait until the court summaries are posted to Youtube. They are long--at least 25 minutes most days--and it takes me forever to transcribe the highlights. (Hint, hint. I have a busy day tomorrow and am traveling all day Tuesday and all day Thursday.) One must listen closely, because none of the Poots interpret the courtroom scene as normal people do and you have to be able to separate the wheat (the reality) from the chaff (Poots' version).

If there are reporters at the trial, follow @jennydwilson (LVRJ) or @Vanessa_Murphy on teh Twitter. Vanessa is a super-tweeter, almost as good as our Oregon news tweeters, Max, Conrad and Leah. Oh, how I miss them. :crying:
Yeah. They do a pretty good job of reporting what happened. You just have to ignore their interpretatin'.
"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
ElaineSoCal
Posts: 367
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2016 4:20 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy
Occupation: Retired
Contact:

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#45

Post by ElaineSoCal »

The good news is that Lamb won't be there tomorrow according to Moe. As NMgirl said, check Andrea's page for updates.
I'm sure Anthony Thomas DePugh (the one that looks like Bobby Hill) will be there to "help" her.

One more reporter to follow is @taywiles from High Country News. Good stuff.

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4537
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#46

Post by NMgirl »

News report from news3lv.com with a misleading headline:

http://news3lv.com/news/local/feds-to-present-new-evidence-in-retail-of-four-bundy-defendants-that-begins-monday

So far as I know (as of Sunday night), the court has made no decision on whether Sugar Pine and White Hope will be admissible as evidence.

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4537
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#47

Post by NMgirl »

I think we should wait until we have some independent, i.e., reputable, news source for this. I do not consider Olson-Parker to be either independent nor reputable. She has a vid up on FB. I'm not on FB, so haven't seen it.
Goblin Seimen‏ @goblin_seimen
#Oregonstandoff #bundyranch #bundytrial OFF to a GREAT START!! ALL prosecutor's MOTIONS granted. NO poots on steps. No flags attached. YAY!!
Goblin's info comes from Olson-Parker.

User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 16003
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 7:53 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#48

Post by Kendra »

I have the day off, errands accomplished. Off to FB to see what's not happening apparently.

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4537
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#49

Post by NMgirl »

Olson-Parker's update from this morning:



Lots of outrage about new protest rules: no protesters allowed except on the sidewalk, i.e., not on the courthouse steps; no flags or banners can be hung on public utility poles or whatever; can the Poots "even use the bathroom?"

In the courtroom:

No 1st or 2nd Amendment talk from defendants

Threeper affiliation allowed to be brought up by prosecutors

No ruling yet on Brady/Giglio-based motion to dismiss
ABBC3_SPOILER_SHOW
Parker said nothing about admissibility of Sugar Pine, White Hope

An "observer" took up space in the front row which should be, according to Parker, reserved for family. Why not just get to court earlier, Andrea, if you want a good view of what is going on? Anyhoo, outrage expressed by Parker because the front row is for family. Huh.

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4537
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#50

Post by NMgirl »

A source!

07/09/2017-- 2136-- ORDER, as to Eric J. Parker (11), O. Scott Drexler (12), Steven A. Stewart (14), that 2041 Omnibus Motion in Limine is DENIED. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 7/9/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM) (Entered: 07/10/2017)

07/09/2017-- 2137-- ORDER, as to Eric J. Parker (11), O. Scott Drexler (12), Steven A. Stewart (14), that 2059 Motion in Limine regarding 404(b) Evidence is DENIED. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 7/9/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM) (Entered: 07/10/2017)

07/09/2017-- 2138-- ORDER, as to Eric J. Parker (11), O. Scott Drexler (12), Richard R. Lovelien (13), Steven A. Stewart (14), that 2064 the Government's Motion in Limine is GRANTED. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 7/9/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM) (Entered: 07/10/2017)

I'm going to PACER to collect those docs.

Post Reply

Return to “Bundy Ranch/Malheur NWR”