The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

User avatar
TheNewSaint
Posts: 2653
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2017 9:05 am

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1501

Post by TheNewSaint »

pipistrelle wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:47 pm
See, doom and gloomy.
Schaeffer didn't win, he just covered the spread. If less than total success makes you gloomy, expect to gloomy. It's not the worst outcome. He's still going away for five more years, and the poots didn't get what they wanted.
This bramble need not be traversed.

User avatar
pipistrelle
Posts: 8387
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:26 am

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1502

Post by pipistrelle »

TheNewSaint wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:02 pm
pipistrelle wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:47 pm
See, doom and gloomy.
Schaeffer didn't win, he just covered the spread. If less than total success makes you gloomy, expect to gloomy. It's not the worst outcome. He's still going away for five more years, and the poots didn't get what they wanted.
True. I’m not sure I get the judge’s feels for him, given his current social media and the fact he hasn’t changed at all.

User avatar
Estiveo
Posts: 8669
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:31 pm
Location: Trouble's Howse

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1503

Post by Estiveo »

I figure that gen pop in a medium security facility gives him an increased chance of beatings or a shiv in the kidney, so I'm okay with it.
Image Image Image Image Image

Dave at Sea
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 6:48 am
Location: Sand Sun Surf
Occupation: Busy

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1504

Post by Dave at Sea »

pipistrelle wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:04 pm
TheNewSaint wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:02 pm
pipistrelle wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:47 pm
See, doom and gloomy.
Schaeffer didn't win, he just covered the spread. If less than total success makes you gloomy, expect to gloomy. It's not the worst outcome. He's still going away for five more years, and the poots didn't get what they wanted.
True. I’m not sure I get the judge’s feels for him, given his current social media and the fact he hasn’t changed at all.
Consistent with current political acceptance of good people on the fascist/anti-social/domestic terrorist side?

Jeffrey
Posts: 2059
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1505

Post by Jeffrey »

The poots are mad. Mission accomplished in my book.

User avatar
TheNewSaint
Posts: 2653
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2017 9:05 am

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1506

Post by TheNewSaint »

pipistrelle wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:04 pm
True. I’m not sure I get the judge’s feels for him, given his current social media and the fact he hasn’t changed at all.
Same here. I thought he'd come down in the middle of the 188-238 range, not the minimum.
This bramble need not be traversed.

User avatar
TheNewSaint
Posts: 2653
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2017 9:05 am

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1507

Post by TheNewSaint »

Estiveo wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:11 pm
I figure that gen pop in a medium security facility gives him an increased chance of beatings or a shiv in the kidney, so I'm okay with it.
Now THAT is the kind of therapy Mr. Cox needs.
This bramble need not be traversed.

Jerry Mander
Posts: 1087
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:06 pm

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1508

Post by Jerry Mander »

Getting moved to a medium security prison is the poot equivalent of a graduation or a job promotion to normal people.

:clap:

User avatar
Indigo
Posts: 127
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 2:21 am
Location: Where the Sewer Meets the Sea

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1509

Post by Indigo »

Jerry Mander wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:36 pm
Getting moved to a medium security prison is the poot equivalent of a graduation or a job promotion to normal people.

:clap:
It also gives Cox expanded abilities to ply his trade as a manipulative con artist upon his fellow inmates, by selling them his bill of goods (his interpretation of the Constitution and why he has all the right answers, why others should support him and become his willingly pliable followers, etc). No doubt Cox will find others he can exploit in person, especially in a more relaxed correctional setting.
"I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." --President George W. Bush

User avatar
ZekeB
Posts: 16833
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:07 pm
Location: Northwest part of Semi Blue State

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1510

Post by ZekeB »

realist wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:08 pm
Judge, Prosecution, and Defense all in agreement with Cox going to a medium security facility. They are discussing FCI Sheridan in Oregon.
I lived 15 miles from FCI Sheridan. From what I gathered it was closer to minimum security.
Trump: Er hat eine größere Ente als ich.

Putin: Du bist kleiner als ich.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 28423
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1511

Post by bob »

ZekeB wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:30 pm
I lived 15 miles from FCI Sheridan. From what I gathered it was closer to minimum security.
It is medium security; there's an adjacent minimum security camp.
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

Jcolvin2
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2017 12:40 am

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1512

Post by Jcolvin2 »

bob wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:33 pm
ZekeB wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:30 pm
I lived 15 miles from FCI Sheridan. From what I gathered it was closer to minimum security.
It is medium security; there's an adjacent minimum security camp.
Having visited clients in both, I can attest that the camp is a completely different world from the medium security prison.

User avatar
Indigo
Posts: 127
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 2:21 am
Location: Where the Sewer Meets the Sea

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1513

Post by Indigo »

ZekeB wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:30 pm
realist wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:08 pm
Judge, Prosecution, and Defense all in agreement with Cox going to a medium security facility. They are discussing FCI Sheridan in Oregon.
I lived 15 miles from FCI Sheridan. From what I gathered it was closer to minimum security.
I don't think that the medium security part of Sheridan can be seen from the highway or surrounding public roads located off of the Sheridan BOP property. While what can be seen from public property looks something like a college campus and very minimal for what most likely think a prison should be, the medium security facility has coiled barbed wire dumped around it (along with chain link fences) so thick that it is difficult to see the buildings behind it in places. There are other enhanced security measures in place there too.

The judge reportedly commented that BOP does its own thing when it comes to inmate classifications and where they get sent to do their time. And that is as it should be, because BOP has ultimate responsibility over inmates and the corrections environment. Not a judge. Checks & balances whether that particular judge approves or not. But the judge's recommendation will be evaluated by BOP along with everything else.

Hope they choose wisely where flatcap goes next.
"I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." --President George W. Bush

User avatar
scirreeve
Posts: 4237
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 12:51 am

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1514

Post by scirreeve »

Flatcap is happy with the result. I won't speculate on his new appeal strategy - better to leave it to people that know stuff like that.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 28423
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1515

Post by bob »

The writ of audita querela was abolished in the federal system decades ago; de minimis.

They mean a rule 60 motion (or habeas relief), likely based the damning evidence that Klayman unearthed. :roll:
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 7751
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1516

Post by Sam the Centipede »

bob wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 9:08 pm
The writ of audita querela was abolished in the federal system decades ago; de minimis.

They mean a rule 60 motion (or habeas relief), likely based the damning evidence that Klayman unearthed. :roll:
According to Wikipedia, abolished for federal civil cases only, but still available for criminal cases.

It's the first time this non-lawyer has heard of audits querela and it wasn't clear to me how that (or sny equivalent motion) could help Cox, but I guess you're right: the poots want re-runs of the original trial until they can bamboozle a judge (and jury?) into buying their lies. Won't happen.

This event has reason demonstrated how appallingly nasty and stupid poots are, rallying to support a completely despicable person.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 46704
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1517

Post by Sterngard Friegen »

Oh, no! "escalpatory evidence."

Well, if you're a poot you're allowed to be illiterate and have no idea how to use spellcheck or look anything up.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 28423
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1518

Post by bob »

This writ still exists to the extent it fills a gap not otherwise available. But Cox has an available remedy: sec. 2255 (habeas corpus).

Ultimately, it is the wrong name but the concept is ultimately correct.

It'll be interesting to see if a lawyer jumps in to help.
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4571
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1519

Post by NMgirl »

bob wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:00 pm
This writ still exists to the extent it fills a gap not otherwise available. But Cox has an available remedy: sec. 2255 (habeas corpus).

Ultimately, it is the wrong name but the concept is ultimately correct.

It'll be interesting to see if a lawyer jumps in to help.
Cox has to find and pay for his very own attorney if he appeals, right? In my crystal ball I see an upcoming Poot Grift Opportunity....

User avatar
pipistrelle
Posts: 8387
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:26 am

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1520

Post by pipistrelle »

If he ends up in Oregon, does that mean conjugal visits with KK?

User avatar
pipistrelle
Posts: 8387
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:26 am

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1521

Post by pipistrelle »

TheNewSaint wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:59 pm
RTH10260 wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:01 pm
TheNewSaint wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 9:01 am
Let us pray. "Dear Lord, we hope you will show the judge what is in Schaeffer's heart; that you will give the judge the discermment to see what Schaeffer would do if freed from prison; and that you will give the judge the clarity to understand and correctly apply the sentencing guidelines. We ask in thy name, please give Schaeffer the amount of freedom he deserves. In thy name we pray, amen."
Hmmm - do they think that "amount of freedom" also includes a certain restriction to circulate in public for a number of years :?:
Eh, I was trying to write a prayer I could post on the poot board without them knowing I wasn't rooting for Schaeffer. Like "show the judge what's in Schaeffer's heart", by which I mean greasy wife-beating but which they would think was positive. I don't think the joke worked.
I got it and thought it was brilliant. They would read it as support, but we'd know what you really meant.

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 6166
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1522

Post by Maybenaut »

NMgirl wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:21 pm
bob wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:00 pm
This writ still exists to the extent it fills a gap not otherwise available. But Cox has an available remedy: sec. 2255 (habeas corpus).

Ultimately, it is the wrong name but the concept is ultimately correct.

It'll be interesting to see if a lawyer jumps in to help.
Cox has to find and pay for his very own attorney if he appeals, right? In my crystal ball I see an upcoming Poot Grift Opportunity....
Don’t they still get public appellate defenders on habeas?

ETA: Wouldn’t this still be direct appeal of the sentence?

I’m a little out of my element with federal appeals. In the military it all comes up on direct appeal - you don’t have to wait for habeas for anything.
"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: 4571
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1523

Post by NMgirl »

pipistrelle wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:23 pm
If he ends up in Oregon, does that mean conjugal visits with KK?
More likely with Moo. Moo practically got married to Jason Patrick while he was in the slammer. Now that that pretend marriage is over, Moo’s gonna be all over Schaefer Cox. (Now there’s a nasty visual.) :sick:

User avatar
scirreeve
Posts: 4237
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 12:51 am

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1524

Post by scirreeve »

The last 2 poots that requested Sheridan ended up in Lompoc (Ehmer and Engel). No guarantee he will end up there and I hope he doesn't cuz it is a 30 minute drive from my house.

User avatar
scirreeve
Posts: 4237
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 12:51 am

Re: The Trial of Schaeffer Cox - GUILTY

#1525

Post by scirreeve »


Post Reply

Return to “Sovereign Citizens, Private Militias, and Citizen Grand Juries”