United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Charges against rancher Cliven Bundy, three others are dismissed ["flagrant prosecutorial misconduct"]
Source:
Fox News
URL Source: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/01/0 ... hree-others-are-dismissed.html
Published: Jan 8, 2018
Author: Steve Kurtz
Post Date: 2018-01-08 14:56:32 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 1404
Comments: 14
A federal judge dismissed all charges against rancher Cliven Bundy, his two sons and another man on Monday. U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro cited "flagrant prosecutorial misconduct" in her decision to dismiss all charges against the Nevada rancher and three others. Navarro on Dec. 20 declared a mistrial in the high-profile Bundy case. It was only the latest, stunning development in the saga of the Nevada rancher, and served as a repudiation of the federal government. Navarro accused prosecutors of willfully withholding evidence from Bundy’s lawyers, in violation of the federal Brady rule. The Brady rule, named after the landmark 1963 Supreme Court case known as Brady v. Maryland, holds that failure to disclose such evidence violates a defendant’s right to due process. “In this case the failures to comply with Brady were exquisite, extraordinary,” said Fox News legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano. “The judge exercised tremendous patience.” The 71-year-old Bundy’s battle with the federal government eventually led to what became known as the Bundy standoff of 2014. But it began long before that. In the early 1990s, the U.S. government limited grazing rights on federal lands in order to protect the desert tortoise habitat. In 1993, Bundy, in protest, refused to renew his permit for cattle grazing, and continued grazing his livestock on these public lands. He didn’t recognize the authority of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) over the sovereign state of Nevada. The federal courts sided with the BLM, and Bundy didn’t seem to have a legal leg to stand on. Nevertheless, the rancher and the government continued this dispute for 20 years, and Bundy ended up owing over $1 million in fees and fines. Things came to a head in 2014, when officials planned to capture and impound cattle trespassing on government land. Protesters, many armed, tried to block the authorities, which led to a standoff. For a time, they even shut down a portion of I-15, the main interstate highway running through Southern Nevada. Tensions escalated until officials, fearing for the general safety, announced they would return Bundy’s cattle and suspend the roundup. Afterward, Bundy continued to graze his cattle and not pay fees. He and his fellow protesters were heroes to some, but criminals to the federal government. Bundy, along with others seen as leaders of the standoff, including sons Ammon and Ryan, were charged with numerous felonies, including conspiracy, assault on a federal officer and using a firearm in a violent crime. They faced many years in prison. The Bundy case finally began in late October, 2017. But just two months later, it ended with Navarro angry, the feds humiliated and Bundy – at least to his supporters – vindicated. In fact, Navarro had suspended the trial earlier and warned of a mistrial when prosecutors released information after a discovery deadline. Overall, the government was late in handing over more than 3,300 pages of documents. Further, some defense requests for information that ultimately came to light had been ridiculed by prosecutors as “fantastical” and a “fishing expedition.” “Either the government lied or [it’s actions were] so grossly negligent as to be tantamount to lying,” Napolitano said. “This happened over and over again.” Poster Comment: I would never have expected this outcome. I had expected the feds to keep re-trying the Bundy Bunch until they got a conviction.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Tooconservative (#0)
But was it dismissed with prejudice, or just dismissed? I can't find any clarification on that. If it's merely "dismissed", then they can be retried. While it's embarrassing for the prosecution, a mere dismissal is hardly more than that. Only dismissing with prejudice provides a real punishment.
Apparently TC is right, the persecution of the Bundy's Nevada cattle case is over. Apparently TC is right, the persecution of the Bundy's Nevada cattle case is over. Indeed it is. Awesome. Thanks.
So,a district judge has ruled the prosecutor broke his oath at a minimum,and most likely state and federal laws in the process,so why aren't we hearing about him being arrested and charged with attempted slavery? In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
There won't be any justice until that judge is put on trial,found guilty and order to pay them damages. Removing an injustice is not justice,it is just relief from fear. There won't be any justice until that judge faces and is forced to pay real penalties,up to and including prison time and fines. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
So,a district judge has ruled the prosecutor broke his oath at a minimum,and most likely state and federal laws in the process,so why aren't we hearing about him being arrested and charged with attempted slavery? FWIW, Sessions has ordered an investigation into the case (what the gov's screw up was). Likely the motivation is to ensure the DOJ is never so humiliated ever again.
I did read allegations previously that this judge was setting up a very one-sided trial against the Bundys. Is that what you are referring to? I could (remotely) see the prosecutors being in legal cross hairs over this, but the judge?
IMO, the most guilty are the DOJ prosecutors, the BLM and other federal gov agencies involved in fraud and lies. It's almost entirely a federal case. Sessions and Trump should be cleaning up the DOJ, FBI, and other federal gov agencies instead of wasting time and resources on pot users/growers. Sessions could just walk down the streets of DC, and start picking them off. They're close, VERY close! I was surprised that this was an 0bama judge. Confirmed 98-0 in 2010. There had to be some really egregious misconduct for this to happen. They had the Bundys dead-to-rights. I bet there is a Nevada federal prosecutor polishing his resume right now. To botch this so badly that they couldn't even re-try the Bundys would indicate a prosecution so reckless or badly prepared that the prosecutor should probably be disbarred for it.
IMO, the most guilty are the DOJ prosecutors, the BLM and other federal gov agencies involved in fraud and lies. It's almost entirely a federal case. Sessions and Trump should be cleaning up the DOJ, FBI, and other federal gov agencies instead of wasting time and resources on pot users/growers. Sessions could just walk down the streets of DC, and start picking them off. They're close, VERY close! I see the Bundy fiasco as just the tip of the iceberg of corruption and unprofessionalism that is completely rampant in the DOJ/FBI. We've seen it at the top with Lynch meeting with Clinton and declining prosecution, and again with Comey and friends, we saw it when Finicum was killed and an FBI agent lying afterward about not shooting at the car. This is something that's been there since at least Waco & Ruby Ridge, only this time it's coming back to bite the FBI in the ass. Well, with Ruby Ridge there was a payout from the feds but nothing more.
I am referring to the purposeful wrong-doing cited by the Federal Court judge. Purposeful obstruction of justice is a federal crime. I want to see charges filed,and see that judge put before a jury. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
The early reporting about the Bundy case outcome just touch the surface on the legal issues. Then I saw over at AoS site a mention by Ace of some posts by Gabriel Malor: Well, that really would be some major misconduct if that is what got the case thrown out. It isn't paranoid if they really are out to get you. You have to wonder if the end game for the feds was to Waco the Bundy Bunch.
Dismissed with prejudice, according to a different article from this morning.
I really think you misunderstand. The prosecutor misconduct was so egregious that even an 0bama judge wouldn't stand for it. We know that 0bama judges will always err on giving every advantage to the feds. It's the prosecutors who should face prosecution and disbarment, not the judge.
#2. To: Pinguinite, Tooconservative (#1)
On Monday, she dismissed the case “with prejudice,” meaning the government cannot retry the defendants. "The court finds that the universal sense of justice has been violated," Navarro said.
#3. To: hondo68 (#2)
#4. To: Tooconservative (#0)
U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro cited "flagrant prosecutorial misconduct" in her decision to dismiss all charges against the Nevada rancher and three others.
#5. To: hondo68, Pinguinite, Tooconservative (#2)
#6. To: sneakypete (#4)
#7. To: sneakypete (#5)
There won't be any justice until that judge faces and is forced to pay real penalties,up to and including prison time and fines.
#8. To: sneakypete (#5)
There won't be any justice until that judge faces and is forced to pay real penalties,up to and including prison time and fines.
#9. To: Pinguinite, sneakypete, hondo68 (#3)
#10. To: hondo68 (#8)
#11. To: Pinguinite (#7)
I did read allegations previously that this judge was setting up a very one-sided trial against the Bundys. Is that what you are referring to?
#12. To: Pinguinite, hondo68, sneakypete (#10)
(Edited)
Gabe was writing about this on Twitter. If I followed his claims correctly, Bundy and his sons had offered a defense that they had only armed up because they feared the government was surveilling them and had snipers posted around them. The evidence the prosecutors deliberately withheld from them was that, indeed, the government had been surveilling them and had snipers posted around them.
#13. To: Pinguinite (#1)
(Edited)
But was it dismissed with prejudice, or just dismissed? I can't find any clarification on that.
It's dead, Jim.
#14. To: sneakypete (#11)
Purposeful obstruction of justice is a federal crime. I want to see charges filed,and see that judge put before a jury.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]