It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


New FOIA lawsuit Case that may reveal U.S. Attorney corruption

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 09:07 PM
Updates from RECAP here

Plaintiff Brian just gave objections to U.S. Attorney's answers in his lawsuit. Also filed a Motion for a lawyer.

This is the motion asking for a lawyer

Document 14-1 shows that the Office of the Inspector General is refusing to investigate Brian's allegations of obstruction of Justice and misconduct.

posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 02:49 AM
Bad news.

The Judge ignored his expedition request and set Brian's trial date all the way in January 29-31, 2018.

The Judges order denying Brian's motion is very interesting as the reason it was denied was because of how professional his Pro Se motions had looked. So that means the Judge considers his filings as good as a $10,000-$30,000 attorney for a FOIA lawsuit.

He also filed a motion to extend the time to file pretrial motions.

Document 18 and 19 contain the same Motion to extend the time.

posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 02:52 AM
a reply to: StanleyBolten

Speedy system of justice that has developed...

posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 02:57 AM
a reply to: D8Tee

Hopefully Brian can use like for example the age and health of witnesses to expedite the proceedings but who knows.

Since he has a good case I am sure he will accept any lawyer that wishes to help him in Virginia.

If any lawyer wants to help him then let me know.

posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 07:55 PM
Brian has also filed several motions since the trial notice was sent to him.

Docket info updated here: - Motion denial by Jackson Kiser, whom doesn't want Brian to have an Attorney. - Clerk filed this after denial of Brian's Motion for Counsel - Motion for extension of time to file pretrial motions, which of course the deadline date is tomorrow so Kiser is letting this case hit the pretrial deadline and not even allow the extension of time.

Subpoena #2:

Subpoena #3:

Subpoena #4:

Subpoena #5:

Subpoena #6:

All subpoenas and discovery related motions all go in front of U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert S. Ballou. Those won't go in front of Judge Kiser.

Brian has a better shot at discovery. At least Brian has a chance to get the evidence to try to prove his innocence.

posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 05:27 PM
link - Plaintiff Brian D. Hill's Motion to expedite the trial proceedings. Based on the ground that the witnesses Kenneth Forinash and Stella Forinash are both elderly, one has cancer and is a U.S. Air Force veteran, and the argument that memories fade with time. This motion might actually not be denied by Judge Kiser. Who knows!

The Plaintiff has started getting more smart and documenting things more. In this Motion there is both a certificate of service and a scanned copy of two certified mail receipts proving that both mailings were certified which any court employee can lookup a certified mail tracking number. - The envelope has also been scanned which shows the exact same tracking number as what was on the last page of Document 21. The Plaintiff is learning to be smarter and smarter when dealing with the corrupt U.S. Attorney. Documentation is key to beating those people when they want to label him as delusional. Documentation makes any reasonable person want to start questioning Brian's wrongful criminal conviction, and start to push for trying to prove his innocence. - Judge denies Brian's Motion to extend the time to file pretrial motions because apparently there was no deadline after the pretrial order, and that deadline had only applied to the period of when the Government had the opportunity to file answers or file a pretrial motion to dismiss, motion to change venue or even a motion for changing personal jurisdiction, motion to suppress, or any other applicable pretrial motions.

So that is the latest update for you all since June 23, 2017. It looks like Brian is trying to reschedule the trial date to later this year instead of earlier next year. He isn't pleased that the trial date is set on January 29, 2018, which is 6 to 7 months away. Wow! The amount of wasted time for a guy simply trying to prove his actual innocence and get off of the criminal registry. He is definitely being barred from proving his actual innocence.

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in