Bundy Trials - Nevada

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4335
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4476

Post by NMgirl » Wed Jun 28, 2017 2:13 am

Terrastomp wrote:Has anyone seen this yet?
Edit: I wrote a long and boring dissertation on this, but I then decided I hadn't read 2083 with enough care. I'll download the whole document tomorrow. Anyhoo, I deleted my answer to you because it probably sucked.

Terrastomp
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 1:09 am

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4477

Post by Terrastomp » Wed Jun 28, 2017 2:24 am

NMgirl wrote:
Terrastomp wrote:Has anyone seen this yet?
Dephue is probably referring to Document #1983, which you can read here: http://thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... start=4300. I labeled the download "Sugar Pine Mine..."

Prosecutors want to bring up White Hope and Sugar Pine Mine, both of which were attended by Parker, et alia, to demonstrate a pattern of behavior that belies defendants' claims that they just wanted to help out poor old Cliven. And First Amendment! There is no hint in that document that prosecutors are threatening to indict over those two other standoffs. Dephue is merely being inflammatory, is my best guess. I haven't heard a word from anyone else that there is an intention on the Government's part to indict over White Hope and Sugar Pine.

But I could be wrong. Believe it or not, it has happened. Many, many times.
the docs say case filed 6/26/2017?

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4335
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4478

Post by NMgirl » Wed Jun 28, 2017 2:32 am

Terrastomp wrote:
the docs say case filed 6/26/2017?
Sorry, I posted my first comment before I noticed the Document number. Then I wrote another long comment about all three documents. Then I decided I hadn't read 2083 with enough care to comment. See above. Sorry!

User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 3523
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4479

Post by Dan1100 » Wed Jun 28, 2017 2:38 am

Terrastomp wrote:
NMgirl wrote:
Terrastomp wrote:Has anyone seen this yet?
Dephue is probably referring to Document #1983, which you can read here: http://thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... start=4300. I labeled the download "Sugar Pine Mine..."

Prosecutors want to bring up White Hope and Sugar Pine Mine, both of which were attended by Parker, et alia, to demonstrate a pattern of behavior that belies defendants' claims that they just wanted to help out poor old Cliven. And First Amendment! There is no hint in that document that prosecutors are threatening to indict over those two other standoffs. Dephue is merely being inflammatory, is my best guess. I haven't heard a word from anyone else that there is an intention on the Government's part to indict over White Hope and Sugar Pine.

But I could be wrong. Believe it or not, it has happened. Many, many times.
the docs say case filed 6/26/2017?
You mean in blue at the to of each page? That's just when that particular document was filed.

From reading what was on facebook, the poots filed an Emergency Motion in Limine to exclude all evidence of prior pooting. The document on your facebook link is the governments reply saying we should be able to introduce evidence of prior pooting to prove their pootiness was intentional and part of a pattern of pootiness, and that they are in the III% organization which is a pooty organization which engages in a pattern of pooting, thereby refuting the poots defense that they didn't mean to poot.

Nothing about indictments. It is all about whether to admit evidence of prior pooting.
"Devin Nunes is having a cow over this."

-George Takei

User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 8177
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4480

Post by RVInit » Wed Jun 28, 2017 2:46 am

:rotflmao:
"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage

Terrastomp
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 1:09 am

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4481

Post by Terrastomp » Wed Jun 28, 2017 2:51 am

Dan1100 wrote:

You mean in blue at the to of each page? That's just when that particular document was filed.

From reading what was on facebook, the poots filed an Emergency Motion in Limine to exclude all evidence of prior pooting. The document on your facebook link is the governments reply saying we should be able to introduce evidence of prior pooting to prove their pootiness was intentional and part of a pattern of pootiness, and that they are in the III% organization which is a pooty organization which engages in a pattern of pooting, thereby refuting the poots defense that they didn't mean to poot.

Nothing about indictments. It is all about whether to admit evidence of prior pooting.
that was pootiful! :bighug:

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 5670
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4482

Post by Maybenaut » Wed Jun 28, 2017 7:14 am

And, of course, what is routine in any criminal trial -- the introduction of prior acts evidence to show knowledge, intent, motive, plan, or absence of mistake -- is UNCONSTITUTIONAL! UNETHICAL! And I have news for Deb Jordan -- this stuff is admissible whether these defendants testify in their own defense or not.
"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
Foggy
Posts: 28717
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4483

Post by Foggy » Wed Jun 28, 2017 7:18 am

Poot me down for another case of popcorn. :popcorn:
Any time my questions are all fully answered, I know I'm asking the wrong questions. - Bernard Samson

User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 9209
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 Trials - Nevada

#4484

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Wed Jun 28, 2017 7:57 am

Terrastomp wrote:
Dan1100 wrote:

You mean in blue at the to of each page? That's just when that particular document was filed.

From reading what was on facebook, the poots filed an Emergency Motion in Limine to exclude all evidence of prior pooting. The document on your facebook link is the governments reply saying we should be able to introduce evidence of prior pooting to prove their pootiness was intentional and part of a pattern of pootiness, and that they are in the III% organization which is a pooty organization which engages in a pattern of pooting, thereby refuting the poots defense that they didn't mean to poot.

Nothing about indictments. It is all about whether to admit evidence of prior pooting.
that was pootiful! :bighug:
:thumbs: Poot futures are going up!
A 19th Amendment Centennial Moment: Helen Keller supported women’s suffrage and was a co-founder of the American Civil Liberties Union.

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4335
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4485

Post by NMgirl » Wed Jun 28, 2017 8:53 am

Dan1100 wrote:
From reading what was on facebook, the poots filed an Emergency Motion in Limine to exclude all evidence of prior pooting. The document on your facebook link is the governments reply saying we should be able to introduce evidence of prior pooting to prove their pootiness was intentional and part of a pattern of pootiness, and that they are in the III% organization which is a pooty organization which engages in a pattern of pooting, thereby refuting the poots defense that they didn't mean to poot.

Nothing about indictments. It is all about whether to admit evidence of prior pooting.
It isn't "prior pooting." Sugar Pine and White Hope took place after Bunkerville.

User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 14214
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 7:53 am

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4486

Post by Kendra » Wed Jun 28, 2017 8:55 am

After pooting? Post pooting?

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 8432
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4487

Post by Northland10 » Wed Jun 28, 2017 9:00 am

There was a time that poots proclaimed for prosperity their previous pooting. It was their badge of honor, a pooty pin for their uniform.

I guess they forgot their pooty training.
North-land: of the family 10

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 5670
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4488

Post by Maybenaut » Wed Jun 28, 2017 9:52 am

NMgirl wrote:
Dan1100 wrote:
From reading what was on facebook, the poots filed an Emergency Motion in Limine to exclude all evidence of prior pooting. The document on your facebook link is the governments reply saying we should be able to introduce evidence of prior pooting to prove their pootiness was intentional and part of a pattern of pootiness, and that they are in the III% organization which is a pooty organization which engages in a pattern of pooting, thereby refuting the poots defense that they didn't mean to poot.

Nothing about indictments. It is all about whether to admit evidence of prior pooting.
It isn't "prior pooting." Sugar Pine and White Hope took place after Bunkerville.
From an evidentiary perspective, it doesn't have to be "prior," although the shorthand we often use is "prior bad acts." A more accurate description would be "other acts" evidence. You keep doing the same thing over and over again, shows that you weren't mistaken about it the first time.
"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

Tardis2016
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2016 11:29 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4489

Post by Tardis2016 » Wed Jun 28, 2017 2:06 pm


You mean in blue at the to of each page? That's just when that particular document was filed.

From reading what was on facebook, the poots filed an Emergency Motion in Limine to exclude all evidence of prior pooting. The document on your facebook link is the governments reply saying we should be able to introduce evidence of prior pooting to prove their pootiness was intentional and part of a pattern of pootiness, and that they are in the III% organization which is a pooty organization which engages in a pattern of pooting, thereby refuting the poots defense that they didn't mean to poot.

Nothing about indictments. It is all about whether to admit evidence of prior pooting.
That was pootabulous! :rotflmao: :clap:
"Never trust a man, who left alone with a tea cozy...doesn't try it on." ~Billy Connolly

User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 3523
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4490

Post by Dan1100 » Wed Jun 28, 2017 2:07 pm

Maybenaut wrote:
NMgirl wrote:
Dan1100 wrote:
From reading what was on facebook, the poots filed an Emergency Motion in Limine to exclude all evidence of prior pooting. The document on your facebook link is the governments reply saying we should be able to introduce evidence of prior pooting to prove their pootiness was intentional and part of a pattern of pootiness, and that they are in the III% organization which is a pooty organization which engages in a pattern of pooting, thereby refuting the poots defense that they didn't mean to poot.

Nothing about indictments. It is all about whether to admit evidence of prior pooting.
It isn't "prior pooting." Sugar Pine and White Hope took place after Bunkerville.
From an evidentiary perspective, it doesn't have to be "prior," although the shorthand we often use is "prior bad acts." A more accurate description would be "other acts" evidence. You keep doing the same thing over and over again, shows that you weren't mistaken about it the first time.
I stand corrected, I had the order messed up.

Thinking about it, the "prior" probably really means "prior" to the trial, not "prior" to pooting they are charged with, although that makes it somewhat less relevant because the defendant can say, "I didn't mean to poot at Bunkerville, but once I pooted, it felt so good I just had to poot again."
"Devin Nunes is having a cow over this."

-George Takei

boots
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sat May 16, 2015 5:23 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4491

Post by boots » Wed Jun 28, 2017 2:51 pm

Tardis2016 wrote:
This is my worry too. I was flabbergasted and crushed by the Oregon verdicts and my faith in the jury system badly shaken. It all depends on whether poots/poot sympathizers get on the jury. Or one or two dumb, kel-like fanatical "Christian" housewives. Hoping the pros hires a top notch jury selection expert. After the election and Oregon acquittals, I now hope for the best, but am prepared for the worst.
Jury selection experts, some of them at least, are full of beans. A good trial lawyer can do just as well at choosing a jury, IMO.

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

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4492

Post by Hercule Parrot » Thu Jun 29, 2017 4:31 pm

Dan1100 wrote:Thinking about it, the "prior" probably really means "prior" to the trial, not "prior" to pooting they are charged with, although that makes it somewhat less relevant because the defendant can say, "I didn't mean to poot at Bunkerville, but once I pooted, it felt so good I just had to poot again."
Come on let's poot again,
Like we did last summer!
Yeaaah, let's poot again,
Like we did last year!

User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 8177
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4493

Post by RVInit » Thu Jun 29, 2017 9:15 pm

Pootin' in the mornin'
Pootin' in the evenin'
Pootin' at suppertime'

Poot yer arms around me an' swear you'll ne'er go straight
You'll be mine ferever, in the heaven of crime

Pootin' in the mornin'
Pootin' in the evenin'
Pootin' at suppertime

Be my special pooter, and poot me all the time.

Now pootin' time is anytime yer near, and oh, you poot so dear
Now don't go straight, just make some hate, and poot me till all the time.
"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage

User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 9209
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 Trials - Nevada

#4494

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:15 am

RVInit wrote:Pootin' in the mornin'
Pootin' in the evenin'
Pootin' at suppertime'

Poot yer arms around me an' swear you'll ne'er go straight
You'll be mine ferever, in the heaven of crime

Pootin' in the mornin'
Pootin' in the evenin'
Pootin' at suppertime

Be my special pooter, and poot me all the time.

Now pootin' time is anytime yer near, and oh, you poot so dear
Now don't go straight, just make some hate, and poot me till all the time.
Bravo! Encore!
A 19th Amendment Centennial Moment: Helen Keller supported women’s suffrage and was a co-founder of the American Civil Liberties Union.

User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 9209
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 Trials - Nevada

#4495

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:16 am

Hercule Parrot wrote:
Dan1100 wrote:Thinking about it, the "prior" probably really means "prior" to the trial, not "prior" to pooting they are charged with, although that makes it somewhat less relevant because the defendant can say, "I didn't mean to poot at Bunkerville, but once I pooted, it felt so good I just had to poot again."
Come on let's poot again,
Like we did last summer!
Yeaaah, let's poot again,
Like we did last year!
A recording contract is in your future.
A 19th Amendment Centennial Moment: Helen Keller supported women’s suffrage and was a co-founder of the American Civil Liberties Union.

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 28717
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4496

Post by Foggy » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:19 am

Sniff, sniff, those are beeyooteeful! :clap: :dance: :thumbs:

But I have many pooty promises to keep ... and miles to go before I sleep.

Pooty calls!

Poot, what a happy sound
Poot is the happiest sound I've found
You may shoot, toot, scoot, snoot, hoot, or boot, but
Poot ... makes the world go round.

Poot Crackle Pop Rice Krispies!
Any time my questions are all fully answered, I know I'm asking the wrong questions. - Bernard Samson

User avatar
rpenner
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 3:08 pm
Location: Silicon Valley, California
Contact:

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4497

Post by rpenner » Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:00 pm

Poot is done, gone the fun,
Lost the park, lost the ranch, lost the case;
All are jailed, safety reigns, poot is done.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 44878
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4498

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:09 pm

I prefer e.e. cummings:

"A poot is an arse upon which everyone has sat except a man."

User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 9209
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 Trials - Nevada

#4499

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Sun Jul 02, 2017 2:18 pm

Bravo! To the Fogbow lyricists.
A 19th Amendment Centennial Moment: Helen Keller supported women’s suffrage and was a co-founder of the American Civil Liberties Union.

User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 14214
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 7:53 am

Re: Bundy Trials - Nevada

#4500

Post by Kendra » Tue Jul 04, 2017 5:04 pm



Briana does a live phone call with Tod Engle. Anyone with more skills than me wants to embed the video here, please do so. Highlights: some nonsense about a book being written (by him? audio quality poor). Big call out to the poot community to call out to Jeff Sessions, but not sure what it is they think he can do. I can't imagine Jeff there being too concerned considering the Russian problem :lol: :lol:

Oh and after he's convicted (17 years I think he's expecting?), he wants the poot community to help him do research on how presidential pardons work, 'cause there's the hope 45 will do it.

I

Post Reply

Return to “Bundy Ranch/Malheur NWR”