Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Did she pull into a garage? Looks like he followed her inside.
"Hey! We left this England place because it was bogus, and if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too!" -- Thomas Jefferson
- raison de arizona
- Posts: 20219
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
- Location: Nothing, Arizona
- Occupation: bit twiddler
- Verified: ✔️ he/him/his
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Looks like he is recording the service. I hope they release that, would love to hear the invective she is hurling at finally being served.
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
- raison de arizona
- Posts: 20219
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
- Location: Nothing, Arizona
- Occupation: bit twiddler
- Verified: ✔️ he/him/his
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Would that be a no-no? I agree that it looks like he followed her into a garage.
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
- bill_g
- Posts: 6883
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:52 pm
- Location: Portland OR
- Occupation: Retired (kind of)
- Verified: ✅ Checked Republic ✓ ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Oh he definitely followed her into an open garage to serve the papers. Whether that constitutes a crime the local prosecutor wants to pursue is another matter. He obviously left as soon as possible, she was unharmed, and certainly not in fear for her life since she followed him back to his car. She even trusted him enough to stand behind his car as he attempted to back out to read his license plate. She was quite sure of herself at that point looking at her walk back to the house.
That was rather dumb of Brooks to release the video. It proves he was served. It also proves no crime was committed.
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
It is an interesting legal question as to whether an attached garage is part of your home.
In my experience, people who evade service of process are dirtbags. All of this, of course, could have been avoided if Mo's lawyer had just accepted service. It still doesn't answer the question, of course.
In my experience, people who evade service of process are dirtbags. All of this, of course, could have been avoided if Mo's lawyer had just accepted service. It still doesn't answer the question, of course.
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
I don’t know about that. The allegation is criminal trespass, no? Under Alabama law, criminal trespass is defined:
Section 13A-7-2. Criminal trespass in the first degree
(a) A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the first degree if he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a dwelling.
(b) Criminal trespass in the first degree is a Class A misdemeanor.
Is an attached garage part of a dwelling in Alabama? I don’t know. Probably. But I don’t think the video proves no crime was committed.
"Hey! We left this England place because it was bogus, and if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too!" -- Thomas Jefferson
- bill_g
- Posts: 6883
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:52 pm
- Location: Portland OR
- Occupation: Retired (kind of)
- Verified: ✅ Checked Republic ✓ ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Granted. I should have said violent crime. Brooks stated his wife was assaulted if I recall correctly. She was not. I also added the caveat of whether a prosecutor would want to follow up on this. Possibly. It may be low hanging fruit, or it may be a nothing burger. We shall see just how much clout Rep they-are-tourists Brooks is in his home district.Maybenaut wrote: ↑Tue Jun 08, 2021 10:50 amI don’t know about that. The allegation is criminal trespass, no? Under Alabama law, criminal trespass is defined:
Section 13A-7-2. Criminal trespass in the first degree
(a) A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the first degree if he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a dwelling.
(b) Criminal trespass in the first degree is a Class A misdemeanor.
Is an attached garage part of a dwelling in Alabama? I don’t know. Probably. But I don’t think the video proves no crime was committed.
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
I think the word he used was 'accosted' rather than 'assaulted'. Which I could kinda see in this video. Strange person speeds up the driveway behind her, jumps out of a car, and follows her into the garage? I could actually imagine that being kinda unsettling/scary and could potentially even get you shot.bill_g wrote: ↑Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:00 am Granted. I should have said violent crime. Brooks stated his wife was assaulted if I recall correctly. She was not. I also added the caveat of whether a prosecutor would want to follow up on this. Possibly. It may be low hanging fruit, or it may be a nothing burger. We shall see just how much clout Rep they-are-tourists Brooks is in his home district.
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
This is important. Doug Jensen's attorney just acknowledged having trouble cutting deal w/ prosecutors
Just yesterday, in court filing, Jensen said he's "languishing" in jail & hopes to resolve case.
You could try to read the tea leaves about what the feds are offering....
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
I don’t know about that, either. She comes home from running an errand and as she’s getting out of her car some random dude comes running into her garage toward her. That would have scared the crap out of me. That she recovered once she realized he was a process server doesn’t matter. By then the assault was complete.bill_g wrote: ↑Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:00 amGranted. I should have said violent crime. Brooks stated his wife was assaulted if I recall correctly. She was not. I also added the caveat of whether a prosecutor would want to follow up on this. Possibly. It may be low hanging fruit, or it may be a nothing burger. We shall see just how much clout Rep they-are-tourists Brooks is in his home district.Maybenaut wrote: ↑Tue Jun 08, 2021 10:50 amI don’t know about that. The allegation is criminal trespass, no? Under Alabama law, criminal trespass is defined:
Section 13A-7-2. Criminal trespass in the first degree
(a) A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the first degree if he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a dwelling.
(b) Criminal trespass in the first degree is a Class A misdemeanor.
Is an attached garage part of a dwelling in Alabama? I don’t know. Probably. But I don’t think the video proves no crime was committed.
That’s my take, anyway, from an academic perspective. As you say, there is a world of difference between what constitutes an offense and what the state will prosecute.
"Hey! We left this England place because it was bogus, and if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too!" -- Thomas Jefferson
- Slim Cognito
- Posts: 7330
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:15 am
- Location: Too close to trump
- Occupation: Hats. I do hats.
- Verified: ✅
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
He wants Biden to step down after acknowledging trump is the true king of the world, then report immediately to the nearest federal prison.
If that's not it, I got nuthin'.
Edited to add this is about Jenson. Been trying not to overuse the quote button but sometimes I is slowz.
If that's not it, I got nuthin'.
Edited to add this is about Jenson. Been trying not to overuse the quote button but sometimes I is slowz.
x5
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
I believe the process server mentioned that she "hid" down the street once she realized a process server was attempting to serve her and he basically tricked her into thinking he was gone and then when she made the dash home he reappeared. She knew precisely who he was when he followed her toward the garage, so I'm not sure I would say from her point of view that a "stranger" all the sudden showed up. She knew he was lurking around and she likely knew exactly who it was (not his name, probably, but she knew it was the process server) once she realized she hadn't fooled him. It's hard to see in the video if he actually went into the garage or he could have stood at the entrance. I don't think the entrance to the garage is actually visible in this video, so I wouldn't be certain he walked into the actual garage.
"It actually doesn't take much to be considered a difficult woman. That's why there are so many of us."
--Jane Goodall
--Jane Goodall
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Not a lawyer, but wouldn't they have to file a complaint with the local police before any charges could be considered?
- Slim Cognito
- Posts: 7330
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:15 am
- Location: Too close to trump
- Occupation: Hats. I do hats.
- Verified: ✅
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
What is a process server allowed, or not allowed, to do? And special circumstances exceptions?
x5
- johnpcapitalist
- Posts: 954
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:59 pm
- Location: NYC Area
- Verified: ✅ Totally legit!
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Not sure what this guy did other than the usual 4 charges, but it wouldn't surprise me if the Feds would only take plea deals involving copping to a felony so No Moar Gunz, and the freedom-loving Trump supporters figure that this is even more humiliating than actual castration.Kendra wrote: ↑Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:06 amThis is important. Doug Jensen's attorney just acknowledged having trouble cutting deal w/ prosecutors
Just yesterday, in court filing, Jensen said he's "languishing" in jail & hopes to resolve case.
You could try to read the tea leaves about what the feds are offering....
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
There are two separate issues: What can the server do, and whether the server's actions invalidate the service.Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Tue Jun 08, 2021 12:10 pm What is a process server allowed, or not allowed, to do? And special circumstances exceptions?
Because service of process is about providing notice (of the underlying lawsuit), there's less concern about how the notice is provided. A server, for example, can't use fraud to lure a defendant into a jurisdiction. But I've never seen a case where service was invalidated because the server trespassed, for example. And there are reasonable policy arguments on both sides: On one hand, the courts shouldn't reward the server's illegal behavior; on the other, delay favors the defendant, and a mini-trial over the legality of service is a form of not-free delay.
Too also: a lot of the "concerns" about a server's behavior would be avoided if the person just accepted service; so there's also a policy argument that you should not be able to complain about a situation you created. Recall Powell complained about how she was served; one of Klayman's clients did the same. Both were avoidable if they had consented, for example, to allow their attorneys to be served.
Process servers have no special authorization or immunity; there's no "licensed to serve." If a server commits a crime, such as burglary, trespass, assault, or battery, the server could be prosecuted. But that the server was, well, serving, may provide a defense if charges were filed. For example, burglary is entry into a dwelling with a felonious or larcenous intent. If a server entered with the intent to serve, there's no burglary because there's no felonious or larcenous intent.
Different states define the crime of trespass differently. Some states, for example, require no ability to access (fences and walls, for example); others require posting "no trespassing" signs; others require affirmatively telling a person to leave. And in some states, an open garage isn't considered part of the dwelling (nothing was "broken" to enter).
But determining whether, in Alabama, entry onto the curtilage (the property surrounding a house) and then into an open garage is trespass would require a dive in Alabama case law.
Which is not the same as whether a prosecutor will exercise discretion to prosecute.
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
NEW: Rep Eric Swalwell's private eye tells court how he served papers on Rep Mo Brooks (R-AL) in civil suit over alleged incitement of Insurrection
Federal court judge refused to allow US Marshals to serve papers.. citing separation of powers
So a P.I. did June 6
(thread)
- northland10
- Posts: 6513
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
- Location: Northeast Illinois
- Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
- Verified: ✅ I'm me.
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Sometimes consent is not enough. Defendants in one of Klayman's cases against the Board of Professional Responsibility consented, without even being asked to, to receive service by mail. Klayman sent a Process server late at night anyway.bob wrote: ↑Tue Jun 08, 2021 1:13 pm Too also: a lot of the "concerns" about a server's behavior would be avoided if the person just accepted service; so there's also a policy argument that you should not be able to complain about a situation you created. Recall Powell complained about how she was served; one of Klayman's clients did the same. Both were avoidable if they had consented, for example, to allow their attorneys to be served.
Granted, GIL most likely did it for the harassment, not the service.
101010
- fierceredpanda
- Posts: 590
- Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:11 pm
- Location: BAR Headquarters - Turn left at the portrait of George III
- Occupation: Criminal defense attorney. I am not your lawyer. My posts != legal advice.
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Given the extent to which Brooks has gone to duck service, I'm hardly sympathetic. Justice is not supposed be depend on whether or not a process server can catch you before you run inside.
"There's no play here. There's no angle. There's no champagne room. I'm not a miracle worker, I'm a janitor. The math on this is simple. The smaller the mess, the easier it is for me to clean up." -Michael Clayton
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Not seeing much of a problem in that video. Was the server devious as all hell? Absolutely. Criminal? Nope.
Hic sunt dracones
- raison de arizona
- Posts: 20219
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
- Location: Nothing, Arizona
- Occupation: bit twiddler
- Verified: ✔️ he/him/his
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Pretending he left and then coming back is devious as all hell? I think you're giving the Brooks too much credit. Although I suppose they did manage to avoid it for quite awhile.
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
I didn't know he pretended to leave and come back. I thought he had been watching the house for her to drive in, then booked it into the driveway, and ran in after her as she got out of the car.
Hic sunt dracones
- raison de arizona
- Posts: 20219
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
- Location: Nothing, Arizona
- Occupation: bit twiddler
- Verified: ✔️ he/him/his
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
I was wrong about that, still not particularly devious though, after all that time and effort.
► Show Spoiler
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Also, there was no need for her to get his license plate. The process server will file an affidavit (or Swalwell's attorney will file it). The affidavit will identify the process server.RVInit wrote: ↑Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:48 am I believe the process server mentioned that she "hid" down the street once she realized a process server was attempting to serve her and he basically tricked her into thinking he was gone and then when she made the dash home he reappeared. She knew precisely who he was when he followed her toward the garage, so I'm not sure I would say from her point of view that a "stranger" all the sudden showed up. She knew he was lurking around and she likely knew exactly who it was (not his name, probably, but she knew it was the process server) once she realized she hadn't fooled him. It's hard to see in the video if he actually went into the garage or he could have stood at the entrance. I don't think the entrance to the garage is actually visible in this video, so I wouldn't be certain he walked into the actual garage.
ETA: I made this comment before I saw the copy of the affidavit. But, yeah, the affidavit is SOP.
"Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try."
--Yoda
--Yoda
- noblepa
- Posts: 2604
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:55 pm
- Location: Bay Village, Ohio
- Occupation: Retired IT Nerd
Re: Assault on the Capitol (DC)
Shouldn't Mrs. Brooks' license plate number be redacted?