*** NOT GUILTY *** Bunkerville Retrial



34 OF 40 CHARGES WERE NOT GUILTY. THE REMAINING 6 CHARGES WERE DEADLOCKED BY THE JURY.


by Shari Dovale

Celebrations are dominant throughout the Patriot community tonight. The four men on trial for the second time in Las Vegas, Nevada are being released.

Eric Parker, Scott Drexler, Steven Stewart and Ricky Lovelein heard the jury return 34 Not Guilty verdicts today, out of 40 charges.

Each Defendant was charged with 10 separate charges, with 3 possibilities of additional enhancements. They were facing possibilities of spending the rest of their lives in prison.

For the past several weeks, the prosecution painted as damaging a picture as they could, aided by Judge Gloria Navarro. She shut down these men from putting on any kind of a defense.

They were not allowed to call witnesses on their own behalf. They were not allowed to talk about why they went to Nevada. They were not allowed to mention the bad acts from the BLM or FBI agents.

The only witness allowed to testify was a single defendant, Scott Drexler. He was sharply curtailed by Judge Navarro in what he was allowed to say.

Yet, the jury was paying attention. They saw the favoritism from the judge. They saw the defense get frustrated. They even had the judge tell them not to ask certain questions. Navarro specifically told the jurors they did not need to know why the FBI was involved in this protest. She told them not to ask about the Bill of Rights.

The jury came back on Monday with complaints of biased jurors. Yet, the judge made no changes in the jury. They indicated today that they were deadlocked on certain charges. Judge Navarro was open to giving them an “Allen Charge”, or sending them back to try harder to reach an agreement.

The jury was told they could come back with partial verdicts and they jumped on that option.

The most serious charges were Count 1: Conspiracy against the USA. The jury found each defendant Not Guilty, and Count 2: Conspiracy to Impede/Injure, also a Not Guilty across the board.

Steven Stewart and Ricky Lovelein had Not Guilty verdicts on all 10 charges. Scott Drexler was found Not Guilty on 8 of 10 charges. The 2 charges that were deadlocked were Count 5: Assault on a Federal Officer and Count 6: Use and Carry of a Firearm (with Count 5)

Eric Parker was found Not Guilty on 6 of 10 charges. The deadlocked charges for Parker were Counts 5 & 6, as with Drexler, Count 8: Threatening a Federal officer and Count 9: Use and Carry of a Firearm (with Count 8).

Stewart and Lovelein are expected to be released this evening. Parker and Drexler are anticipating being sent to a halfway house in preparation for release. They will be back in court tomorrow morning for a detention release hearing with Judge Navarro.

Bundy Ranch standoff trial ends with zero guilty verdicts

Robert Anglen, The Republic | azcentral.com

A federal jury in Las Vegas did not return any guilty verdicts Tuesday against four men accused of taking up arms against federal agents during the Bundy Ranch standoff in 2014.

Jurors dealt government prosecutors a stinging defeat in the case when, after four days of deliberations, they returned not-guilty verdicts on the most serious charges and deadlocked on a handful of others.

Richard Lovelien of Oklahoma and Steven Stewart of Idaho were acquitted on all counts and walked out of court Tuesday night free after spending more than a year in prison.

"Both Ricky and I were teary-eyed," Las Vegas defense lawyer Shawn Perez said of the verdict, "I was shaking ... I have gotten not-guilty verdicts before, but this was really special to me."

Two other defendants, Eric Parker and O. Scott Drexler, both of Idaho, were acquitted on the most serious charges of conspiracy and extortion, but jurors failed to reach unanimous verdicts on weapons and assault charges.

Both men could be allowed to go free after a detention hearing scheduled Wednesday morning. The court ordered both defendants to be released to a halfway house until Wednesday's hearing.

"(Parker) is getting released as we speak," Las Vegas defense lawyer Jess Marchese said Tuesday night. "He's ecstatic."

After the jury's decision, U.S. District Court Judge Gloria Navarro called for the hearing without any motions from the defense, Marchese said. "We didn't bring it up," he said.

Federal prosecutors had little to say about the verdicts.

“While we are disappointed with the verdicts, we thank the jurors for their service," Trisha Young, spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Las Vegas, said in a statement Tuesday. "At this time, the government has not announced its decision regarding the retrial of Eric Parker and O. Scott Drexler.”

Congrats to the Bundys. They stood up to the thieves of the @BLMNational@BLMOregon and were victorious.

#Bundytrial#bundyranchhttps://t.co/lBo15a36Eg
— MagaWarrior (@trumpinternet) August 23, 2017

https://t.co/LPlIH6alAY "Deep State Utterly Broken: No guilty verdicts reached in Cliven Bundy Bunkerville ranch standoff! American People…
— 🇺🇸ChristianPatriot (@SavetheUSNation) August 23, 2017

Government loses 2nd case

This marks the second time a jury failed to convict the defendants on charges related to the standoff, which pitted armed ranchers and militia members against Bureau of Land Management agents in a dusty wash below Interstate 15 about 70 miles north of Las Vegas.

Social media exploded with posts on Twitter and Facebook from Bundy supporters, many of whom have maintained a sidewalk rally since the first trial of these defendants opened in February.

Jurors in the second trial notified Navarro on Tuesday they had reached an impasse on several counts. The defendants were called into court at 2 p.m. when the verdicts were announced.

The men were being retried on conspiracy, extortion, assault and obstruction charges for helping Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy fend off a government roundup of his cattle in what became known as the Battle of Bunkerville.

A jury in April deadlocked on charges against the four men. It convicted two other defendants on multiple counts. But it could not agree on conspiracy charges — a key component of the government's case — against any of the six.

The government launched its second prosecution last month. The case climaxed Aug. 11 when Navarro abruptly ended court by ordering Parker off the stand and striking his testimony from the record as jurors watched.

The defendant was attempting to tell jurors what he saw during the standoff over a barrage of objections from prosecutors. Navarro ruled Parker violated court orders by discussing prohibited topics. Parker returned to the defense table and started crying while Navarro dismissed the jurors.

Marchese said jurors told him Tuesday the incident was a factor in their verdicts.

"That weighed heavily in their decision," Marchese said. "They wanted to hear him speak. It was very bothersome to them. They felt like they weren't getting the whole story."

Marchese said jurors were sympathetic to the defendants and their inability to mount a cogent defense in light of restrictions that prevented them from talking about why they participated in the standoff and what they were thinking while they were there.

"It wasn't one thing," Marchese said about what led to their verdicts. "They (jurors) said it didn't make sense."

The case went to the jury Tuesday after lawyers for all four defendants waived closing arguments as part of a protest about court proceedings and restrictive legal rulings.

"The jurors knew our hands were tied," Perez said. "By the time the government laid it all out for them, they had already made up their minds ... They knew there was no reason for us to go farther."

Perez said the government's string of witnesses, largely composed of local, state and federal law-enforcement officers, became both repetitive and contradictory, according to jurors.

"They were bored to death," Perez said.
Judge's restrictions on the defense

Navarro's rulings, aimed at trying to avoid jury nullification, severely limited defense arguments. Jury nullification occurs when a jury returns a verdict based on its shared belief rather than on the evidence in a case.

Navarro barred defendants from discussing why they traveled thousands of miles to join protesters at the Bundy Ranch. She did not allow them to testify about perceived abuses by federal authorities during the cattle roundup that might have motivated them to participate.

Navarro also restricted defendants from raising constitutional arguments, or mounting any defense based on their First Amendment rights to free speech and their Second Amendment rights to bear arms. In her rulings, Navarro said those were not applicable arguments in the case.

Federal officials did not face the same restrictions. To show defendants were part of a conspiracy, they referenced events that happened months, or years, after the standoff.

Federal prosecutors, led by Acting Nevada U.S. Attorney Steven Myhre, argued in court the case wasn't about the First or Second Amendments; that the Constitution doesn't give people the right to threaten federal officers.

They said the Bundys' dispute with the BLM was adjudicated and the court issued a lawful order to round up the cattle. When ranchers and the militia conspired to force the release of the cattle, they broke the law, prosecutors argued.
Battle over federal land use

The Bundy Ranch standoff is one of the most high-profile land-use cases in modern Western history, pitting cattle ranchers, anti-government protesters and militia members against the Bureau of Land Management.

For decades, the BLM repeatedly ordered Bundy to remove his cattle from federal lands and in 2014 obtained a court order to seize his cattle as payment for more than $1 million in unpaid grazing fees.

Hundreds of supporters from every state in the union, including members of several militia groups, converged on his ranch about 70 miles north of Las Vegas.

The standoff was hailed as a victory by militia members. Cliven Bundy's sons, Ammon and Ryan Bundy, cited their success at Bundy Ranch in their run-up to the siege of an Oregon wildlife refuge in 2016, also in protest of BLM policies. An Oregon federal jury acquitted Ammon, Ryan and five others in October.

No arrests were made in the Bundy Ranch case until after the Oregon siege ended.

Last year, the government charged 19 people for their roles in the Nevada standoff. Two men took plea deals. Trials for the remaining defendants were broken into three tiers based on their alleged levels of culpability in the standoff.

Although defendants in the first trial and the retrial were considered the least culpable, all 17 defendants face the same charges. Those convicted could spend the rest of their lives in prison.

The second trial will include Cliven Bundy and his sons, Ammon and Ryan Bundy, who are considered ringleaders.
Weapons charges outstanding

All four defendants in the retrial admitted bringing guns to the standoff. But pictures of Parker and Drexler aiming their weapons went viral.

An image of Parker has come to epitomize the 2014 protest. He is pictured lying prone on an overpass and sighting a long rifle at BLM agents in the wash below. The image galvanized the public and brought international awareness to the feud over public lands and the potential consequences of such a dispute.

Drexler took the stand and delivered the only defense testimony that jurors were allowed to consider.

He testified that even though he brought weapons to the standoff, he had no intention of threatening or assaulting law-enforcement officers.

Marchese said if the government decides to retry Parker and Drexler on the outstanding charges, it will likely be after all the standoff trials are concluded. For now, Parker plans on returning to Idaho and to go back to work as an electrician.

Marchese said despite the unresolved charges, he and his client are satisfied with the outcome.

"Any not guiltys are always good, right?" he said.

BUNDY RANCH STANDOFF TRIALSBundy Ranch trial: Carol Bundy speaks | 2:29

Carol Bundy, in an interview with The Republic, said her husband, sons and others are really being tried for making federal authorities look bad and forcing them to back down in the face of a citizen uprising.

There was one brief mention about it on Faux News last night, and that's it. I'm not surprised.

Onward and upward,
airforce

When the government can\'t take "not guilty" for an answer. A new article by J. D. Tuccille.

Onward and upward,
airforce

I can't help but to think of Lysander Spooner's "Trial by Jury".

All of this is great news. I am a huge believer in jury nullification. I believe a good defense lawyer can get there. And with enough good defense lawyers around, things like this will go our way if taken to trial and not pled.

Do you know how rare it is to find someone else who has read " Trial by Jury ?" If you tell me it was assigned reading in your law school, I'll be ecstatic.

Onward and upward,
airforce

I wish. I did find it in the law school library, though. First semester of first year I went into the database and found everything that responded to the query "lysander spooner". They had no treason and the unconstitutionality of slavery as well.

"Natural Law" and "Vices Are Not Crimes" are two more "must reads." They're all available for free in a Kindle format, and I think Ipad as well.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Why is Sessions Allowing Obama Holdovers to Prosecute Bundys?

Two Bundy Ranch defendants to face third trial

Jerome Corsi | Infowars.com - September 5, 2017

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Recent developments have caused Trump supporters to ask why Attorney General Jeff Sessions is allowing Obama holdovers in the Department of Justice to continue prosecuting Bundy ranch cases, despite continuing set-backs.

On Thursday, Aug. 22, the Obama administration holdovers in the Department of Justice suffered a huge set-back in the trial of four defendants accused of various federal criminal charges over the 2014 Bundy ranch standoff ended with no convictions.

Two of the defendants were acquitted of all charges, while the remaining two defendants were acquitted of most charges.

With the “not guilty” verdict, the defendants Richard R. Lovelien and Stewart A. Stewart were acquitted of all charges, and released from federal prison in Nevada, after having been incarcerated without bail for some 18 months in federal prison awaiting trial.

The remaining two defendants, Eric Parker and Scott Drexler will be forced to endure yet a third trial, as the Obama administration holdover prosecutors decided to retry them yet a third trial on the remaining weapons charges on which no verdict was declared, reportedly because one of the 12 jurors in the second trial would not agree to a “not guilty” verdict.

In a move that has disappointed many of President Trump’s core base of conservative and libertarian supporters, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced in a speech in Las Vegas on July 11, 2017, that he would not take sides or intervene to end any of the federal prosecutions brought by the Obama Justice Department over the 2014 Bundy Ranch standoff.

At the trial, U.S. District Judge Gloria M. Navarro had refused to allow attorneys for the defendants to present arguments regarding First Amendment free speech rights or Second Amendment rights to bear arms, ruling both lines of argumentation were not relevant to the criminal charges the four defendants faced.

Even more outrageous, Gerald “Jerry DeLemus of Rochester, New Hampshire, was sentenced to five years imprisonment after U.S. District Judge Gloria M. Navarro refused to allow him to change his guilty plea to “not guilty.”

In denying DeLemus the right to change his plea, Judge Navarro ruled DeLemus had failed to display sufficient remorse for his actions, rejecting the argument his Sixth Amendment rights had been violated because DeLemus lacked adequate legal counsel capable of apprising him of the legal charges and assisting him in pleading with full knowledge of the facts and the law.

Sources close to the DeLemus family told Infowars.com that DeLemus wanted to change his plea and face trial because he came to the conclusion he would be acquitted on charges virtually identical to the charges all Lovelien, Steward, Parker, and Drexler successfully defended to be found “not guilty” in the jury verdict handed down Aug. 22.

In a pre-sentencing memorandum filed with Judge Navarro on May 27, 2017, defense attorneys argued that DeLemus, a 62-year-old resident of New Hampshire, had endured a difficult childhood growing up in abject poverty, but he had never broken the law.

DeLemus moved out and began living on his own at the age of 16, while still attending high school.

After graduation, he joined the Marine Corps, where he achieved the rank of Sergeant, earning two Good Conduct Medals, a Meritorious Mast, and a National Defense Service Medal.

“For the last forty-five years, DeLemus has supported himself and his family as a builder and contractor,” his attorneys pleaded. “He is devout in his faith and in support of his church. DeLemus regularly donates to charity, volunteers to assist the homeless, and sponsors needy families in foreign countries.”

While in custody, DeLemus was nominated for an award, along with a correctional officer, for administering CPR in an attempt to save the life of a fellow inmate.

The defense attorneys argued DeLemus should receive a minimum sentence because: (1.) he did not point a gun at anyone; (2.) he did not threaten anyone; (3.) he did not intimidate anyone; (4.) he was not present during the incident on April 12, 2014, from which most of the weapons charges emanated; (5.) he had no knowledge or involvement with the events of April 12, 2014; and (6) he did no harm to person or property.

In their pre-sentencing plea DeLemus’ attorneys argued as follows:

DeLemus believes in Government, but as is required of all conscientious men, there is an obligation to do what you consider to be morally right. By its very nature, civil disobedience is an affront to civilized society. However, it is sometimes an absolute necessity for the individual to exercise his conscience and morality to reconfigure the relationship between the Individual and the State in a peaceful manner. In this case, DeLemus was under the mistaken but justifiable belief that an injustice was occurring and that law enforcement, the Bundy family, and their children, were in danger of harm if he did not act.

DeLemus decided to go to the Bundy Ranch after reading in early April 2014 a headline from the Drudge Report that read: “Heavily-Armed Feds Surround Nevada Ranch.”

His attorneys noted DeLemus “was surprised to see BLM agents in full tactical gear, carrying M-16’s, and holding snarling attack dogs while other agents tasered protesters and forcefully arrested members of the Bundy family.”

Defense attorneys further argued DeLeumus went to Nevada not to “fight” the BLM, but because he believed an injustice was being done by the federal government’s refusal to recognize ancestral and historical claims to the Bunkerville Allotment.

Formerly the co-chairman of the 2016 New Hampshire veterans coalition for Trump, DeLemus received a more harsh prison sentence than prosecutors requested, after Judge Navarro, sentencing DeLemus on May 31, 2017, characterized him as a “bully vigilante.”

Today seventeen people remain in federal custody awaiting trial over the Bundy Ranch standoff, including Clive Bundy himself and sons, Ammon and Ryan.

As Roger Stone has pointed out, an underlying factor in the Bundy Ranch case is that former Democratic Party Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wanted the Bundy Ranch land to install Chinese solar panels in a deal where the Chinese company seeking to build the solar panel plant had employed lawyer Rory Reid, the son of Sen. Reid, to be the primary representative for the U.S. corporation fronting the deal.

Now serving out the remaining six-years of his prison term, DeLemus was permanently moved in August to the federal prison at Fort Devens in Ayers, Massachusetts, some 90-minutes away from his home and his wife.

On Dec. 24, 2009, President Obama nominated Navarro to serve as a judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. Navarro was the hand-picked choice of former Sen. Harry Reid to fill the vacancy created by Judge Brian Sandoval.

Mainly because all the foot dragging has not allowed the Trump administration to clear out the crap of the Obamanation administration!