Accused Oregon refuge occupier cites devil, demands damages from U.S.

Accused Oregon refuge occupier cites devil, demands damages from U.S.

By Sharon Bernstein

(Reuters) - A woman charged with conspiracy in the takeover of an Oregon wildlife refuge last month has filed a rambling counter-complaint in which she accuses the federal government of working for the devil and demands $666,666,666,666.66 in damages.

Shawna Cox, who made headlines by challenging the FBI's version of the events leading up to the death Robert "LaVoy" Finicum, another of the occupants, said she and the other occupiers were victims of numerous crimes committed by mercenaries and foreign agents.

"I claim I and the others involved in these actions have suffered damages from the works of the devil in excess of $666,666,666,666.66," Cox wrote in a complaint filed in federal court in Oregon on Wednesday. The number "666" comes from the Book of Revelation in the New Testament, and is believed by some fundamentalist Christians to signify the "beast" or the anti-Christ.

Cox's complaint, which was not signed by a lawyer, is the latest twist in a case that is far from over, as 16 of the occupiers face conspiracy charges, while Finicum's family demands the release of the state's autopsy of his body after he was shot by Oregon State Police and authorities attempt to determine how much the nearly six-week long occupation really cost.

Me thinks she should observe her rights and stop talking.. Its only going to make things worse for her while painting her supporters as, well, hitching their wagons to a loon... Certainly calls her observations during the standoff into question...

Mercenaries and foreign agents are to blame now... Should we wager on how long it takes before a psyche eval is ordered? Her complaint was self filed and her lawyer did not sign it.

Cox's lawyer, Tiffany Harris, said Wednesday that she had no comment on her client's counter-complaint.

Thoughts?

a reply to: Xcathdra

She probably said 666 a bunch of times, and they recorded it accurately to a dollar amount haha.

Stupid is as stupid does.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Only dangerous people belong in jail. Shawna Cox is not dangerous. Therefore, Shawna Cox does not belong in jail. It did take a whole team of psychopaths to execute Finicum. Compared to the accused, each of the cops who conducted the execution are far more mentally ill than Shawna Cox will ever be. The cops who executed Finicum are dangerous people. Dangerous people belong in jail.

Since she isn't seeking damages against the devil, she's defeating herself in court by placing the blame on a 3rd party. She also makes herself appear crazy, which may affect her case negatively. That said, those involved in her persecution may as well have been working for the devil. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, but I'm really not sure the cops involved in the case had any such (good) intentions.

The irrational insane people are the ones who are imprisoning Shawna Cox. Unless Cox made a physical threat against someone, then there is no crime to speak of and only civil court. Since damages were likely next to nothing, small claims court would be the proper venue. Any insanity on Cox's part is minor and of no significance.

Because Shawna Cox was so unfairly treated, those involved in keeping her in prison do them selves actually belong there. The kind of people who shot at her while she was in the vehicle as well as the prosecutor are dangerous people who belong in jail. Only dangerous people belong in jail, and certainly the kind of people who put their resources into persecuting Cox are dangerous.

a reply to: Xcathdra

This individual is not doing herself, or that of the "occupiers" any favours with such rhetoric - for sure the media propaganda will run with this and within a week or so any person even remotely affiliated with her cause will also be labeled as an anti-government right wing fundamental Christian extremist fruit-loop.

any person even remotely affiliated with her cause will also be labeled as an anti-government right wing fundamental Christian extremist fruit-loop.

If it quacks like a duck,,,

K~

a reply to: Xcathdra

I think "someone" has been working with her to file this complaint and, of course, it wasn't her lawyer.

I don't think it will help her to have done this.

She's probably feeling extreme distress right now after all she went through. She's probably under surveillance as well.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Accused Oregon refuge occupier cites devil, demands damages from U.S.

By Sharon Bernstein

(Reuters) - A woman charged with conspiracy in the takeover of an Oregon wildlife refuge last month has filed a rambling counter-complaint in which she accuses the federal government of working for the devil and demands $666,666,666,666.66 in damages.

Shawna Cox, who made headlines by challenging the FBI's version of the events leading up to the death Robert "LaVoy" Finicum, another of the occupants, said she and the other occupiers were victims of numerous crimes committed by mercenaries and foreign agents.

"I claim I and the others involved in these actions have suffered damages from the works of the devil in excess of $666,666,666,666.66," Cox wrote in a complaint filed in federal court in Oregon on Wednesday. The number "666" comes from the Book of Revelation in the New Testament, and is believed by some fundamentalist Christians to signify the "beast" or the anti-Christ.

Cox's complaint, which was not signed by a lawyer, is the latest twist in a case that is far from over, as 16 of the occupiers face conspiracy charges, while Finicum's family demands the release of the state's autopsy of his body after he was shot by Oregon State Police and authorities attempt to determine how much the nearly six-week long occupation really cost.

Me thinks she should observe her rights and stop talking.. Its only going to make things worse for her while painting her supporters as, well, hitching their wagons to a loon... Certainly calls her observations during the standoff into question...

Mercenaries and foreign agents are to blame now... Should we wager on how long it takes before a psyche eval is ordered? Her complaint was self filed and her lawyer did not sign it.

Cox's lawyer, Tiffany Harris, said Wednesday that she had no comment on her client's counter-complaint.

Thoughts?

ok i am a satanist or something like it, but i just have to this is fcktarded. btch the devil didn't make you do it, she made a chose and and now trying a way to BS her way out. my feeling is if you made the decision to do it then you also need to own it. its part of the luciferian creed. your mistakes are yours alone she chose it blaming the devil an excuse to buy her way out

a reply to: malevolent

So you think this might be the groundwork for some type of insanity defense?

An interesting thought.

a reply to: Xcathdra

yeah in a way but i don't think thats the case she's just trying to point the finger somewhere away from herself. so it really isn't that but that she can't accept her own actions or is trying to place the blame of it on another

a reply to: malevolent

Sorry that is what I meant. Putting on a show.

Secondly my comment about her mental status was not meant as a slight towards Satanism. My apologies if it came across that way.

Let's forget for a moment that her "testimony" changed as the story developed.

I'm sure that babbling about the Devil doesn't hinder her credibility as a witness ... at all.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Methinks somebody is going for the longshot insanity plea. Good luck with that one!

a reply to: centarix

It's fine to have the opinion that only dangerous people belong in jail, but the reality is, in the USA, we have many laws prohibiting acts which don't involve over being a danger to others which can land you in jail if broken. She broke probably several of those laws. Most of the people in jail are not "dangerous people."

You might be babbling too about the devil if you'd been shot at, watched a good friend be shot down like a dog on the side of the road, handcuffed, your property (that would prove your story) confiscated, handcuffed, shuffled into a van and jailed. Anybody want to volunteer to undergo that and predict with certainty how you would react?
There's a reason for the old saying, "I feel like I've been shot at and missed then spit at and hit."
The sociopaths shooting at the truck didn't manage to hit her but the culturally correct media will do the spitting for them.

a reply to: Xcathdra

LoLo

Someone call 999

,,, or, you might be babbling about the devil because you're a fundamentalist religious nut already unhinged from reality who had joined an erstwhile but illegal gang one of which chose, while being apprehended for his crimes, to flee justice and place himself, his passengers and law enforcement officers in deadly jeopardy, and who sadly chose to sacrifice himself for the "cause" instead of complying with commands and surrendering to arrest.

The LEOs defending themselves deserve commendations, and those in the truck with Finicum, along with Pa and the Bros Bundy, need to be charged with accessory to suicide by cop.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
,,, or, you might be babbling about the devil because you're a fundamentalist religious nut already unhinged from reality who had joined an erstwhile but illegal gang one of which chose, while being apprehended for his crimes, to flee justice and place himself, his passengers and law enforcement officers in deadly jeopardy, and who sadly chose to sacrifice himself for the "cause" instead of complying with commands and surrendering to arrest.

The LEOs defending themselves deserve commendations, and those in the truck with Finicum, along with Pa and the Bros Bundy, need to be charged with accessory to suicide by cop.

Or you might be babbling on about how wonderful governments are who use force against citizens attempting to have their grievances redressed in a peaceful assembly. But only if you are a member in good standing of the Cult of Authority who thinks that the Constitution is a one-sided document, something that compels the people rather than the government. There are obligations on both sides and in this case the governments, federal, state, and local failed to meet their obligation. Please show me one response to the petitions filed by these groups.

a reply to: diggindirt

so ... the response is a long-winded equivalent of "I know you are but what am I" then?

Classic.

As far as your irrational litany of things I've never once said, thought, or believed ... you're either mistaken or overtly lying.

Show me the petitions filed by these groups. (or are you still laboring under the misunderstanding that the First Amendment right "to petition" only means to get a list of signatures. Hoo boy.)

Petition in the First means the right to have a just hearing before a court or other appropriate tribunal. Good god.

But fair enough ... please cite where and to whom these Bundy Gang members submitted their "petition."

Was it before or after they illegally broke into the bird sanctuary, trespassing, committing several other felonies?

a reply to: Gryphon66
They didn't file the petitions with me. To see what they say, you'll have to do a bit of research. I'm sure they have them online or you can listen to them read off the list of abuses in their initial press conference.
Maybe you should do a bit more reading on what redress means. Our right to petition for redress of grievances comes from the Magna Carta. The King allowed himself 40 days to respond. Our government didn't see fit to put a limit on their response time.

1215 - Magna Carta “If we, our chief justice, our officials, or any of our servants offend in any respect against any man, or transgress any of the articlesof the peace or of this security, and the offence is made known to four of the said twenty-five barons, they shall come to us - or in our absence from the kingdom to the chief justice - to declare it and claim immediate redress.
If we, or in our absence abroad the chief justice, make no redress within forty days, reckoning from the day on which the offence was declared to us or to him, the four barons shall refer the matter to therest of the twenty-five barons, who may distrain upon and assail us in every way possible, with the support of the whole communityof the land, by seizing our castles, lands, possessions, or anything else saving only our own person and those of the queen and our children, until they have secured such redress as they have determined upon.
Having secured the redress, they may then resume their normal obedience to us.” Section 61, Magna Carta (1215

Nor did they lay out an exact method except petition. It does not say petition the courts.
Do a bit of reading on the matter, educate yourself on the basics of civics and bring sensible questions and we can have a discussion. Your hyperbole is frankly quite boring. It's the same every time, just disparaging the citizens and acting as though people who don't agree with you have no rights. They have the same rights as all other citizens no matter what their religious beliefs might be when they are peaceably assembled, as they were at the refuge.

a reply to: diggindirt

Peaceful assembly?

wtf?