koshergrl
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2011
- 81,131
- 14,035
- 2,190
They've been dropping charges right and left. They got a couple of the guys to plead out...witnesses are backtracking, and the judge has been busy tossing garbage out and releasing the activists.
Pete Santilli was a militia member who is also a gonzo journalist. He was thrown into jail because he dared to report on the events as they were happening..including interviews with the protestors.
They arrested him on a trumped up charge that he was at a "safety meeting" that the feds are pretending was a secretive tete-a-tete conducted for the purpose of discussing plans to *attack* feds or some such nonsense.
As it turns out, Pete wasn't even there. He was in some other state. And the "witness" has reneged on his original *testimony*.
"A key witness in the Government’s case against defendants in the Malhuer Occupation Trial has now claimed he “may have been confused” in his testimony against refuge occupiers."
"Most troubling is the fact that this information was discovered in documents provided in discovery to the defense by the prosecution, documents the prosecution fought to not disclose. This reveals that Federal Prosecutors were fully aware Pete Santilli was not present at the Committee of Safety meeting but decided to move ahead with an indictment and prosecution based on witness testimony they knew to be categorically false. Presented with this discrepancy and evidence of potential perjury the Government witness now claims “he may have been confused” and “I may have been wrong about Pete being there. I may have gotten the meeting confused with the “public” meeting I saw him at in January, after the takeover.” This explosive admission calls into question not only the testimony of this witness against Pete Santilli but also his testimony against any of the alleged Mahluer Occupiers. Paired with Prosecutors full willingness to knowingly ignore false testimony from witnesses to move forward with indictments, this represents a potentially massive blow to the Government’s case.
"These findings come on the heels of Judge Anna Brown’s dismissal of charges alleging use of and carrying firearms in the course of a crime of violence against Ammon Bundy and seven co-defendants, finding the underlying conspiracy charge doesn’t meet the legal definition of a “crime of violence.” The ruling was viewed by many as the first major victory for the defendants in the Occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Defense lawyers had argued for dismissal of the charge on as no statute exists that qualifies the circumstances of the occupation as a crime as defined by the charge. Defense lawyers presented evidence to the court that the government had wrongly applied a definition of “intimidation” from a federal bank robbery charge to the conspiracy charge. Essentially the Prosecutors had parsed different statutes and spliced them together in a non-existent statute to meet the definition of the crime. The defense argued that prosecutors can’t “lift a definition” from another statute and “shoehorn it” into this charge without any case law to base it on. Judge Anna Brown concurred by striking the charge. Assistant U.S. Attorney Ethan Knight had conceded in a hearing that Count 3 presented “a close call” for the court."
Meanwhile, the feds are still riding roughshod over the non-government dependent residents of Harney County.
Government Case Against Malhuer Occupiers Continues to Come Undone
Pete Santilli was a militia member who is also a gonzo journalist. He was thrown into jail because he dared to report on the events as they were happening..including interviews with the protestors.
They arrested him on a trumped up charge that he was at a "safety meeting" that the feds are pretending was a secretive tete-a-tete conducted for the purpose of discussing plans to *attack* feds or some such nonsense.
As it turns out, Pete wasn't even there. He was in some other state. And the "witness" has reneged on his original *testimony*.
"A key witness in the Government’s case against defendants in the Malhuer Occupation Trial has now claimed he “may have been confused” in his testimony against refuge occupiers."
"Most troubling is the fact that this information was discovered in documents provided in discovery to the defense by the prosecution, documents the prosecution fought to not disclose. This reveals that Federal Prosecutors were fully aware Pete Santilli was not present at the Committee of Safety meeting but decided to move ahead with an indictment and prosecution based on witness testimony they knew to be categorically false. Presented with this discrepancy and evidence of potential perjury the Government witness now claims “he may have been confused” and “I may have been wrong about Pete being there. I may have gotten the meeting confused with the “public” meeting I saw him at in January, after the takeover.” This explosive admission calls into question not only the testimony of this witness against Pete Santilli but also his testimony against any of the alleged Mahluer Occupiers. Paired with Prosecutors full willingness to knowingly ignore false testimony from witnesses to move forward with indictments, this represents a potentially massive blow to the Government’s case.
"These findings come on the heels of Judge Anna Brown’s dismissal of charges alleging use of and carrying firearms in the course of a crime of violence against Ammon Bundy and seven co-defendants, finding the underlying conspiracy charge doesn’t meet the legal definition of a “crime of violence.” The ruling was viewed by many as the first major victory for the defendants in the Occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Defense lawyers had argued for dismissal of the charge on as no statute exists that qualifies the circumstances of the occupation as a crime as defined by the charge. Defense lawyers presented evidence to the court that the government had wrongly applied a definition of “intimidation” from a federal bank robbery charge to the conspiracy charge. Essentially the Prosecutors had parsed different statutes and spliced them together in a non-existent statute to meet the definition of the crime. The defense argued that prosecutors can’t “lift a definition” from another statute and “shoehorn it” into this charge without any case law to base it on. Judge Anna Brown concurred by striking the charge. Assistant U.S. Attorney Ethan Knight had conceded in a hearing that Count 3 presented “a close call” for the court."
Meanwhile, the feds are still riding roughshod over the non-government dependent residents of Harney County.
Government Case Against Malhuer Occupiers Continues to Come Undone