Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Barrett Brown In Prison Since 2012 But Evidence Gathered is ALL From 2013 W/ Connection to Hastings

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Let me be the first to say . .. " WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED HERE ? ". .. . ..

As some might know, I have been studying the Michael Hastings case for some time now.

I have been quite surprised at where all of the information has taken me as it has branched out like some Complex Fractal. Looking for any little piece of information I can find to try and figure out what really happened to Michael Hastings, I started reading tweets from Hastings twitter account which, obviously, lead to a million different tweets from different users.

Before I knew it, I stumbled upon a tweet from someone that showed a link to a discovery of evidence regarding Barrett Brown. Unfortunately, I did not think anything of this at the time because, it, to me, was not relevant at the time.

And Then, I stumbled on to this tweet .. .. . .


People's whose phone calls with Barrett used as evidence today: @ageis @vivienweisman @ggreenwald @patrickmcguire @edpilkington @mmhastings

Retweeted by Jesselyn Radack

Expand Jesselyn Radack ?@JesselynRadack 4 Sep


As you can see, Michael Hastings Twitter I.D. has been listed as evidence for phone calls with Barrett Brown. Immediately, I made a connection to the Discovery Of Evidence and have searched frantically for that link to no avail. Today marks 6 days that I had searched for that damn link to the discovery of evidence and finally found it.

HERE is a link to that Discovery Of Evidence.

What follows is an excerpt from that Discovery:



1 - One disk containing selected telephone calls from Brown from Mansfield, from February 2013 through August 2013
2 - One DVD containing audios and videos, Al Jazeera, RT, Democracy Now, Fund Raiser, GorillaRadio.com, KPFA.org, etc.
3 through 6 - reserved
7 - excerpts from freebarrettbrown.org
8 - 7/1/2013 article in The Guardian by Barrett Brown The Cyber-Intelligence Complex and Its Useful Idiots Case 3:12-cr-00317-L Document 91 Filed 09/04/13 Page 1 of 5 PageID 546
Government’s Exhibit List (Hearing 9/2/2013) – Page 2
9 - 8/28/2013 article in Vice by Barrett Brown Reading 'Born Again' in Jail
10 - 9/25/2012 article in DMagazine by Tim Rogers Barrett Brown Writes a Letter From Jail
11 - 2/23/2013 article in WhoWhatWhy by Christian Stork The Saga of Barrett Brown
12 - 3/20/2013 article in The Guardian by Ryan Gallagher How Barrett Brown went from Anonymous PR to Federal Target
13 - 3/21/2013 article in The Guardian by Glenn Greenwald The Persecution of Barrett Brown and How to Fight It
14 - 3/25/2013 article in Huffington Post by Vivien Weisman Weev, the Hacker Who Didn’t Hack
15 - 3/26/2013 article at Vice.com by Patrick McGuire We Spoke to Barrett Brown From Prison
16 - 4/2/2013 article in The Guardian by Glenn Greenwald - follow up
17 - 4/13/2013 article in New York Times by Peter Ludlow Hactivists as Gadflies
18 - 5/2/2013 article in WhoWhatWhy by Christian Stork Barrett Brown Update: New Defense Team, Feds Fish for Activists
19 - 5/14/2013 article in the Dallas Observer Blogs by Eric Nicholson Is Anonymous Hactivist Barrett Brown a Journalist? His Supporters Say So.
Case 3:12-cr-00317-L Document 91 Filed 09/04/13 Page 2 of 5 PageID 547
Government’s Exhibit List (Hearing 9/2/2013) – Page 3
20 - 6/18/2013 article in The Nation by Peter Ludlow The Strange Case of Barrett Brown
21 - 6/21/2013 online transcript of interview of Peter Ludlow at scotthorton.org
22 - 6/24/2013 online transcript of interview of Peter Ludlow at Gorilla Radio
23 - 6/24/2013 article in The Guardian by Arun Bupta How Barrett Brown Shone Light on the Murky World of Security Contractors
24 - 7/11/2013 online transcript of interview of Peter Ludlow at democracynow.org
25 - 7/13/2013 article in The Guardian by Kevin Gallagher Barrett Brown, Political Prisoner of The Information Revolution
26 - 6/23/2013 article in the Huffington Post by Peter Ludlow Barrett Brown vs the Private Intelligence Business
27 - 7/31/2013 article in Huffington Post by Kevin Gallagher Barrett Brown Awaits Trial on Spurious Charges in Texas
28 - 8/7/2013 article in WhoWhatWhy by Christian Stork Connections Between Michael Hastings, Edward Snowden and Barrett Brown
29 - 8/11/2013 article in Huffington Post by Vivien Weisman The Strange Case of Barrett Brown Just Got Stranger
30 - 8/13/2013 article in Salon by Natasha Lennard The Government Wants Media Gag for Barrett Brown
Case 3:12-cr-00317-L Document 91 Filed 09/04/13 Page 3 of 5 PageID 548
Government’s Exhibit List (Hearing 9/2/2013) – Page 4
31 - 8/26/2013 online transcript of interview of Peter Ludlow at KPFA.org
32 - 8/28/2013 project summary of Reality Wars, A Documentary Film by Vivien Weisman from kickstarter.com
33 - 9/29/2013 article in Rolling Stone by Alexander Zaitchik Barrett Brown Faces 105 Years in Jail. But No One Can Figure Out What Law He Broke
34 - 6/27/2013 article in DMagazine by Tim Rogers The One Story You Should Read About Barrett Brown linking to EX#23
34 through 39 - reserved
40 - screen shot ahmed ghappour @amadooooo twitter - retweet on 6/22/2013 6pm (reference EX#20 The Nation article)
41 - screen shot ahmed ghappour @amadooooo twitter - tweet on 6/24/2013 9:16am (reference EX#23 The Guardian article)
42 - screen shot ahmed ghappour @amadooooo twitter - tweet on 6/27/2013 (reference EX#34 DMagazine article)
43 - screen shot ahmed ghappour @amadooooo twitter - retweet on 7/13/2013 1:31pm (reference EX#24 online transcript of interview)
44 - screen shot ahmed ghappour @amadooooo twitter - tweet on 7/13/2013 1:31pm (reference EX#25 The Guardian article)
Case 3:12-cr-00317-L Document 91 Filed 09/04/13 Page 4 of 5 PageID 549
Government’s Exhibit List (Hearing 9/2/2013) – Page 5
45 - screen shot ahmed ghappour @amadooooo twitter - tweeted on 7/16/2013 8:32pm (see attached)
46 - screen shot ahmed ghappour @amadooooo twitter - retweet on 7/18/2013 5:19pm (reference EX#13 The Guardian article)
47 - screen shot ahmed ghappour @amadooooo twitter - tweet 8/12/2013 11:20am (reference EX#9)
48 - screen shot ahmed ghappour @amadooooo twitter - tweet 8/16/2013 9:59pm (reference EX#33)


Though his phone call is not specifically Identified, Michael Hastings is listed as a name in an article connecting Himself with Barrett Brown and Edward Snowden.

Then I Found an article by Dell Cameron that makes this statement .. .



Barrett Brown's contact list read like a who's who of investigative journalism. It included Guardian journalists Glenn Greenwald and Ed Pilkington, filmmaker Vivien Weisman, activist Gregg Housh, the late Michael Hastings, and VICE editor Patrick McGuire. In what became a routine, the prosecutor would ask Agent Smith if he recalled listening to a conversation between Barrett and a specific reporter. Smith would often shuffle through the papers in front of him and then recite certain details.


HERE is a link to that article.


Now, After having said All of that, I make the following statement.. .. . .. .

Barrett Brown has been imprisoned for almost a year now, HOWEVER, ALL of the Evidence cited in the discovery is from 2013.

That leads me to believe that he was indicted on NOTHING and held UNTIL they could find something against him.

Does ANYONE see anything wrong with that?




edit on 19-9-2013 by ShadellacZumbrum because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by ShadellacZumbrum
 


You have certainly been diligent in your search.

To your question, yes this is strange. No doubt they have stuff prior via NSA but aren't allowed to use it so had to find more recent to build a case.

Reading your last link


The only witness that took the stand during the hearing was FBI Agent Robert Smith. His role was to provide the prosecution with details about the defendant's interactions with the press. Smith seemed like an odd choice for this topic given his involvement with other aspects of the case


This is just bizarre that the only witness and the one supposed to give an assessment regarding the information is the one person Brown was angry with for harassing his mother.

So clearly a set up.

Do you have a link to the article that may link snowdon and hasting?



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 02:57 PM
link   
I have made a couple of posts regarding Barrett Brown and his connection to Hastings. I truly think this is an element of Hastings murder that has been overlooked.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is the "bigness" that MH was working on.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by liveandlearn
 


Here is a link to the story that makes the connection ... .

[url=http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/08/07/connections-between-michael-hastings-edward-snowden-and-barrett-brown-the-war-with-the-security-state/]LINK[/url ]
edit on 19-9-2013 by ShadellacZumbrum because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ShadellacZumbrum
 


I don't know why there isn't much interest in your thread. To me it is such a critical event. Especially with the Barrett Brown "gag order", if that is what you want to call it. It is more like a bleaching of the event to keep the general public from knowing about the case. And it has worked. Even on this site you can't generate any interest. Sad. Actually criminal.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 06:26 PM
link   

ShadellacZumbrum
Barrett Brown has been imprisoned for almost a year now, HOWEVER, ALL of the Evidence cited in the discovery is from 2013.

That leads me to believe that he was indicted on NOTHING and held UNTIL they could find something against him.

Does ANYONE see anything wrong with that?


Nope.. Please familiarize yourself with how grand jury indictments work, how charges are laid after an initial grand jury indictment, familiarize yours3elf with the fact he has had additional charges laid by grand juries, and is up to 3 grand juries with a multitude of charges.

Please familiarize yourself with the fact his lawyers are under a gag order when it comes to communicating about this trial to anyone. That is to say you are not going to have all the information that is needed to fully understand how his charges apply and where the PC for those charges came from -


Wikipedia - Barrett Brown - Arrest / Trial info

Arrest and trial[edit source]

On September 12, 2012, Brown was arrested in Dallas County, Texas for threatening an Federal Bureau of Investigation agent.[15] His arrest occurred as he left a computer linked to Tinychat in which the raid could be heard in the background.[16] A judge ruled that he would be denied bail because he was “a danger to the safety of the community and a risk of flight.”[17]

On September 24, 2012, a Pastebin post appeared titled "Barrett Brown – Communiqué from Prison 9/20/12", in which Brown thanked supporters, described the insufficient medical treatment he received after having his ribs injured during his arrest, and acknowledged some past mistakes. The missive concludes, "I will personally thank everyone on the outside who has helped me and this movement particularly at this critical time, when I have regained the freedom that I did nothing to lose. For now, and until that time, it is war, on paper as always, but war."[18]

On October 3, 2012, a federal grand jury indictment was returned against Brown on charges of threats, conspiracy and retaliation against a federal law enforcement officer. Various tweets and comments made by Brown before his arrest were cited as support within the indictment.[19][20] He later entered a plea of not guilty to all three counts.[21]

On December 4, 2012, Brown was indicted on an additional 12 federal charges stemming from the December 25, 2011 hack of Austin-based private intelligence company Stratfor.[22][23] Data from the hack, allegedly committed by Jeremy Hammond, was shared by the hacker collective LulzSec with whistleblower site Wikileaks (main article: 2012 Stratfor email leak). In relation to the most serious of the Stratfor-related charges, Brown faces up to 15 years in federal prison.[24] In an IRC chat room, Brown allegedly shared a URL link to a zip file containing that data. Numerous commentators on internet security issues expressed incredulity at the nature of the charges.[25][26] He has entered a plea of not guilty to all twelve counts.[27]

On January 23, 2013, a third indictment was filed against Brown on two counts of obstruction for concealing evidence during the March 6, 2012 FBI raid of his and his mother's homes.[28] During a brief court hearing a week later, a judge found him mentally competent to stand trial, while Brown again pleaded not guilty to the latest charges.[29]

On May 1, 2013, it was announced that Brown had retained two attorneys, Charles Swift and Ahmed Ghappour to represent him in his legal cases.[30]

As of September 4, 2013,[31] Brown is under a Federal[32] Court-issued gag order; he and his lawyers are not allowed to talk to the media at all, lest it taint a jury.[33][34][35][36]

Brown has been in custody since September 12, 2012.[37][38][39]



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 06:30 PM
link   
double post
edit on 19-9-2013 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I am already familiar with ALL of what you posted.

Familiarize yourself with THIS Thread.

That is where you will find it.

The fact remains that as of September of last year he was incarcerated where he has remained since.

Look at all of the evidence against him. ALL of that evidence was recorded AFTER January 2013.

Another thing you should become familiar with is the fact that Grand Juries indict based on Evidence. Otherwise there would be no need for a Grand Jury.

The point is that He is being held on evidence that was collected AFTER his incarceration.

I do get the point that he threatened an agent and that is what started the whole mess, however that should have been an in and out case.

In addition, how are they able to use evidence that was NOT Even created Until JULY of THIS YEAR.

Doesn't that tell you something?
edit on 19-9-2013 by ShadellacZumbrum because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by GrantedBail
 


I agree that, after finding this, there is a HUGE problem with what is going on.

It makes me even more curious as to the content of Barrett and Hastings conversation that is being used against him.

What else I Find strangely peculiar is the fact that the FBI, and NSA, and the alphabet agencies say that they ONLY Listen in on Conversations of Suspected Terrorists, so why were they listening in to this conversation or any of the others for that matter?

Is there a National Security issue involved?

The more I dig the more I find bizarre things that have gone on.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   

ShadellacZumbrum
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I am already familiar with ALL of what you posted.

Familiarize yourself with THIS Thread.
I read the post and am not sure what your point is for it (respectfully).


ShadellacZumbrum
The fact remains that as of September of last year he was incarcerated where he has remained since.

Correct.. He is still in custody because of the initial grand jury indictment, which occurred in 2012.



ShadellacZumbrum
Look at all of the evidence against him. ALL of that evidence was recorded AFTER January 2013.

Not all evidence. The evidence for the first go around was introduced in 2012.



ShadellacZumbrum
Another thing you should become familiar with is the fact that Grand Juries indict based on Evidence. Otherwise there would be no need for a Grand Jury.

Actually a Grand Jury indicts on preponderance of the evidence (less standard - does not need to be unanimous) where a PA requirement is the higher standard of Probable Cause.



ShadellacZumbrum
The point is that He is being held on evidence that was collected AFTER his incarceration.

No its not.. His first indictment occurred in 2012. The remaining evidence led to two more grand juries resulting in new charges being filed.



ShadellacZumbrum
I do get the point that he threatened an agent and that is what started the whole mess, however that should have been an in and out case.

When a crime occurs where their are multiple violations the charges are grouped together into one case instead of many smaller cases.



ShadellacZumbrum
In addition, how are they able to use evidence that wan NOT Even created Until JULY of THIS YEAR.
Its possible to amend charges when new evidence comes to light. In this case the first indictment occurred in 2012 and continued to evolve, resulting in more charges. The evidence did not come after the indictment.



ShadellacZumbrum
Doesn't that tell you something?


That people who are not completely familiar with the judicial system tend to form their opinion based on a lack of knowledge (again, all due respect) about how the system works.

Remember - a gag order is in place which means we are not always seeing / hearing the entire story.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


If all of the charges are grouped together, how might you explain the lack of ANY evidence from 2012?

Even an assault on the agent should be listed as evidence. .. . wouldn't you think?



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 08:29 PM
link   

ShadellacZumbrum
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


If all of the charges are grouped together, how might you explain the lack of ANY evidence from 2012?

Even an assault on the agent should be listed as evidence. .. . wouldn't you think?



As evidence no.

As elements of a crime yes.

The charge from 2012 is based on the assault of the officer. The time line of events I posted above explains how the investigation progressed.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Just one point: A Grand Jury indicts upon the preponderance of the evidence; this is true. However they only receive the prosecutors story. No defense is allowed.

The saying that you can indict a "ham sandwich", doesn't come from thin air.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


You are correct in that the genesis of his original indictment was out of threats made by the youtube video. However, they loaded him up once he was in custody with inadequate representation. In May of this year he retained superior representation. However, I am concerned in how this last order went down and the judicial justification for such an order. I am worried that Barrett just may be in a situation that the outcome may have already been determined.

It is Texas people and it is the fed.
edit on 19-9-2013 by GrantedBail because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 09:43 PM
link   

GrantedBail
...You are correct in that the genesis of his original indictment was out of threats made by the youtube video. However, they loaded him up once he was in custody with inadequate representation. In May of this year he retained superior representation. However, I am concerned in how this last order went down and the judicial justification for such an order. I am worried that Barrett just may be in a situation that the outcome may have already been determined.
...It is Texas people and it is the fed.

Heeyyyy --- what's this disdain for 'Texas people'?

Well - yeah - I know what you mean. I mean...I know what...you mean.

Have you watched the youtube video?
I have not, yet.
Hope to, tonight...but, honestly, with all the materials that have come of many cryptome.org pages devoted to this matter, I don't know how long it will take to get any kind of handle on BB's situation...
Nonetheless -- what do you think of the charges he made/laid against Agent Smith in that video? Were improprieties inflicted upon Barrett's mother?



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by WanDash
 


Being from Texas, I was distressed myself to see he was being held in the town I was born.

But this is the Fed, not Texas. And the judge, well, who knows, we all have our good and those who are owned.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 10:17 PM
link   

liveandlearn
...Being from Texas, I was distressed myself to see he was being held in the town I was born.
...But this is the Fed, not Texas. And the judge, well, who knows, we all have our good and those who are owned.

I don't know that I would expect any better from our own...but - one could hope.
I've seen judges that I respected almost everything they did...but...well, I'll just leave it at that.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by WanDash
 


Oh for sure he was rousted and they played hardball with his mother. But for sure, the video is threatening and I don't know what he was thinking when he recorded that. He didn't help himself. But that is besides the point.

Wandash, I cannot believe you haven't seen the video yet?? You of all people??



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 11:21 PM
link   

GrantedBail
...Oh for sure he was rousted and they played hardball with his mother. But for sure, the video is threatening and I don't know what he was thinking when he recorded that. He didn't help himself. But that is besides the point.
...Wandash, I cannot believe you haven't seen the video yet?? You of all people??

Do you realize that ShadellacZumbrum has already put 10 million and 1 hours into this?
How could I compete with that?
I'm inching my way through some of the crytome files, now.
My question ---
TH#Y indicted him on essentially posting 12 credit card numbers and CVVs..."stolen" from Stratfor...
TH*Y are pilfering ALL of our online communications (TO INCLUDE usernames & passwords)...
So - HOW can anyone (ANYONE) justify accusing anyone-else...of committing the same act/s as TH#Y...and call it a crime...without indicting TH#Mselves?
Likewise - I do not see the justification in allowing Agent Smith to stand as sole witness in the Gag Order hearing...
How could his testimony not be biased?
How could a Judge even allow this...?
Did the Defense fail to object?
I do not get that!



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by WanDash
 


I know it reeks to high heaven. That order should never have been granted. The prosecution's argument was truly baseless. That is the scary part of the ruling, it makes you wonder if all of the proceedings will be closed. So the lawyers cannot speak about what is going on but that doesn't preclude the press or bloggers or whoever. They would have to seal all the rulings and pre-trial motions to really keep everything from the public. Chilling actually.





new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join