It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
... [Judge] Navarro on Dec. 20 declared a mistrial, finding at least six types of Brady discovery violations and that prosecutors "willfully'' withheld the evidence, resulting in due process violations. She set a hearing for Jan. 8 to determine if the case should be dismissed with prejudice, meaning it can't be retried. The government and defendants have until Friday to file their written arguments.
In a July 5 email, Ryan Payne's lawyers asked prosecutors for copies of all threat assessments prepared before the April 2014 standoff between Cliven Bundy's supporters and federal officers trying to impound Bundy's cattle for years of failing to pay grazing fees and fines.
Prosecutors characterized the defendants' continued push for the assessments as another in their "long list of frivolous and vexatious pleadings.''
Prosecutors didn't turn over the assessments to Payne, Bundy and Bundy's two sons, Ammon and Ryan Bundy, until the four were in the midst of a trial last month and a government witness under cross-examination acknowledged familiarity with one of the reports.
Beyond the threat assessments, other evidence that defendants obtained "piecemeal'' during the trial included information about an FBI surveillance camera on a hill overlooking the Bundy home with a live-feed image viewed in a command center and snipers positioned outside the Bundy ranch.
Those would have bolstered the defense argument that Payne summoned militia members and supporters to Nevada because he feared the Bundys were surrounded by federal officers and isolated before the April 12, 2014, standoff.
The information also directly refutes the federal indictment, which alleges the Bundys and Payne used deceit to draw supporters by falsely claiming snipers were surrounding the Bundy home.
The unsealed motions filed by Payne's lawyers also signal what his lawyers are likely to argue in Friday's legal brief: that prosecutors repeatedly failed to abide by deadlines set to share favorable evidence with the defense, were dismissive of specific requests for evidence, engaged in a "pattern to ridicule and disparage the defense'' requests and then made "brazen proffers'' to the court that specific information sought didn't exist, only to find out later they were mistaken.
The U.S. Attorney's guidelines on sharing evidence in criminal trials state prosecutors' obligations clearly: "It is the obligation of federal prosecutors, in preparing for trial, to seek all exculpatory and impeachment information from all members of the prosecution team. Members of the prosecution team include federal, state, and local law enforcement officers and other government officials participating in the investigation and prosecution of the criminal case against the defendant.''
But, as in the Bunkerville Standoff trial, this case lead to a mistrial due to the prosecution ~ headed by Steven Myhre ~ not disclosing vital exculpatory evidence.
During the mistrial hearing, Chapman’s attorney alerted the court to hundreds of pages of documents that the government had delivered that morning and the previous evening. They totaled some 650 pages and consisted of rap sheets, plea agreements, cooperation agreements, and other information related to numerous government witnesses, including at least three important witnesses whose testimony was already complete.
This case resulted in a dismissal with prejudice. The government prosecutors ~ headed by Steven Myhre ~ attempted to appeal this decision. The appellate court upheld the ruling and stated clearly:
"This is prosecutorial misconduct in its highest form; conduct in flagrant disregard of the United States Constitution; and conduct which should be deterred by the strongest sanction available."
The threat assessments, as well as evidence on a surveillance camera and federal snipers, also wasn't shared with the defendants prosecuted in two earlier Nevada trials this year, Payne's attorneys pointed out.
"It bears reminding that this Court sentenced one of these defendants in the Trial 1 group to 68 years and another one is pending sentencing,'' Weksler and Norwood wrote.
finding no basis for defense claims that prosecutors concealed evidence.
The Bundys said prosecutors had failed to furnish the defense video evidence in violation of pretrial discovery rules.
The government said a surveillance camera was used for a live video feed before the standoff but no recordings or notes were ever made. The judge denied the defense motion to dismiss the case.
However, a day after the judge declared a mistrial, the U.S. Department of Justice released a statement saying Attorney General Jeff Sessions took "this issue very seriously and has personally directed that an expert in the Department's discovery obligations'' be sent to Las Vegas to examine the case and provide advice as to next steps.
“I’ve got to tell you, it’s impressive when you have a tough case, a controversial case, and you’ve got the top guy leading the battle, going to court, standing up and defending the office and the principles of the law,” Sessions said of Nevada’s Acting U.S. Attorney Steven Myhre.
“I’m not taking sides or commenting on the case,” he said. “Just want to say that leadership requires, a lot of times, our people to step up and be accountable.”
*Hypocritical Prosecutors In Bundy Ranch Trial Seek To Ignore Court’s Order
*Corruption Continues in Upcoming Bundy Ranch Trial As Prosecution Asks Judge To Not Allow Defendants to Defend Themselves
*Upcoming Bundy Ranch Trial: Prosecution Files First Documents and They’re Gonna Be Using Facebook & YouTube
*Bundy Ranch Prosecutors Exposed For Withholding Info & It’s All about Protecting BLM Thug Daniel P. Love
*Govt to Use Evidence Against Bundy Ranch Defendants that has Nothing to do with Bundy Ranch
*Judge in Bundy Ranch Case Wants Defendants In Chains For Trial – Attorneys Challenge Rights Infringement
*Feds Plan to Use Participation in III% Militia and Oath Keepers as Evidence of Conspiracy in Bundy Ranch Retrial
*Government Hid Fact That FBI Witness at Bundy Ranch Trial Ended Up in Jail for Impersonating a Journalist/Private Investigator
*Feds Claim they could Hold Bundy Ranch Defendants 5 Years & not violate 6th Amendment’s Protections for Speedy Trial
*Here’s What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn’t Want the Court To See Or Hear (Video & Pictures)
*Did Prosecutors Hide IG Report on BLM Lead Agent’s Misconduct in Bundy Ranch Case?
If you have to cheat to get a conviction.... maybe you don't have a case.
Let them go .
Dirty Harry Reid isn't in the picture any more.
originally posted by: The GUT
Great job once again Boadi.
Definitely should be dismissed with prejudice.
Speaking of Sessions...seems to be the little bastard is a Swamp critter too. Unless he reforms and starts doing his job and working for the American people, we won't have much use for him back here in Alabama. So far he's an effing disgrace.
originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: Boadicea
Great job! I've been trying to catch up on this trial as I was a bit otherwise occupied when the trial was going on. Thanks for more links.
It seems to me that the whole kit & caboodle of them should be fired and prosecuted, prosecutors, investigators and judge.
Perhaps Sessions needs to be reminded that Trump wants the swamp drained, not made into a protected area.
originally posted by: Blueracer
Very informative thread. Thanks. I wonder if the prosecutors do this stuff thinking they won't get caught or do they do it knowing they'll be found out but they just want to make things harder on innocent people until they get caught?
originally posted by: Asktheanimals
Nice work on the thread!
Sessions is increasingly showing himself to be the useless POC like so many others in the Just "us" department.
He and Mhyre need to go and any cases prosecuted by him reexamined for any Brady violations.
Frankly, everything the BLM has done over the last 8 years should be looked at as well.
They have become the legal thugs for corporate interests.
Word from Washington Wednesday January 3rd was that Attorney General Jeff Sessions was using his power to appoint 17 interim US Attorneys across the nation.
Sessions has designated Dayle Elieson as Interim US Attorney for the District of Nevada. She will assume that post Friday January 5th meaning that lead Bunkerville prosecutor Steven Myhre, whom Sessions praised profusely during a Las Vegas visit last July for his "leadership" and "standing for the law" among other things, will no longer be Acting US Attorney.
The announcement says that Mr. Myhre will resume his previous role as First Assistant US Attorney when Elieson takes over Friday.
Now, Steven Myhre, United States Attorney for the District of Nevada (and doesn’t like to have his picture taken), cannot say that he doesn’t know what the consequences are — or claim that he wasn’t aware of his responsibility, since he was involved in the 2006 United States v. Chapman mistrial. True, he wasn’t involved in that case until 6 months after the Mistrial (contrary to what others have reported) and subsequent Dismissal to the Indictment. He came on board to handle the more ministerial aspects of dealing with the plea agreements and guilty pleas that were based on the then Dismissed Indictment. Each one had to have a Motion, a Response, and an Order, to clear the record — which we fully expect to have happen in the current Bundy case, once the Indictment is Dismissed.
It is possible that since he came on after the fact, that he could argue that he wasn’t fully cognizant of what happened that lead to the Mistrial/Dismissal, if it stopped there.
However, that is not the case. The government sought to appeal the Dismissal to the Ninth Circuit. Steven Myhre was the lead attorney in the Appeal. As such, he would have had to bone up on the entire case so as to be able to argue for the Ninth to overturn the lower court decision to Dismiss. As such, he had to know as much, or more, than the attorneys who had botched the trial case. However, the Ninth rightfully upheld the lower court’s Dismissal of the Indictment.